Not all presidents do have a gathering
Posted By: AnnuderMT on 2009-05-06
In Reply to: Wow....you're watching too many movies hon! - sm
Just because they served the Kool-Aid in the Bush white house for the last 8 years, doesn't mean that's what is supposed to happen. Obama signed a national proclamation honoring the day, which is what many presidents have done since Truman created it 50 some years ago. Not everyone needs to drape themselves in their religion to honor it.
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
Presidents have been "slandered" since there's been presidents
President Bush took a beating. And you think Obama is somehow above being criticized???? Funny...
Some preliminary fact gathering on Sara who?
Early political experience:
1. Sat on city council for Wasilla, Alaska, a town with a whopping population of 5470 in 2000, for 4 years (1992-1996)
2. Mayor of Wasilla 1996-2002(?). Information on her tenure as mayor is murky at best.
3. Unsuccessful bid for Lt Gov 2002.
4. Governor Murkowski appointed her Commissioner of the Alaska Oil and Gas
Conservation Commission 2003-2004, a decision he soon came to regret.
5. Murkowski ignored her ethics whistleblowing and in response, she launched what appears to be a personal vendetta against him. Oh, the power of a woman scorned.
6. Sued her own party chairman and state atty general for lack of ethics (legal violations and conflict of interests).
7. Govt corruption clean up politically advantageous. Elected governor Dec 2006 but has served less than 2 years.
So what were her accomplishments in those 2 years?
1. Celebrity: First woman gov, youngest gov, first gov born after statehood.
2. More ethics housecleaning. Spent much of her time doing party clean up.
3. Promoted conservative agendas to keep federal dollars out of Alaska.
4. Rescinded (count 'em) 35 of Gov Murkowski's appointees.
5. AGIA Act for new gas pipeline.
6. Tried unsuccessfully to block closure of a diary.
7. Reversed Mukowski gravel road program connecting Juneau with a mine.
8. Signed 2nd largest cuts to construction programs budget in state's history. Cut funding to 300 local constrction projects.
9. Here's a good one. Fired commissioner of public safety because he refused to fire one of his employees who was involved in a divorce/custody battle with her sister, for which she is under investigation by the Alaska State legislature for abuse of power.
Positions on social issues:
1. Pro-life/pro death penalty.
2. Opposes same-sex marriages. Alaska was the first state to ban same-sex marriage.
3. Disagreed (with) but begrudgingly complied with Supreme Court Order for same-sex benefits.
No further information available on first pass research. Why? Just not that much to report, I guess. So, for all that hoopty-do over that lack of experience card playing McCain has been engaged in, this is who he wants us to accept as being "ready to lead the nation" should the occasion arise? Careful, McCain, your lack of judgment is showing. One needs to ask why then would he choose her as his running mate? Here's a hint. Ask what's in it for him? More comment forthcoming on what this selection means.
Obviously, this means we are tired of gathering facts, ,
dissecting, proving, reproving, etc, only to be met with pathological fear of fact, having the fruits of our labor lifted out of context, miscontrued, slammed, belittled, discounted, ignored. A good example might be the automatic dismissal you have expressed in this current post. Like it or not, these liberal rags as you like to depict them represent at least half of the population of the US...and according to the latests polls released today, a majority of your fellow citizens. When you show respect for this, you get it in return. But you would not know that because you have rarely tried this approach. What is obvious here is that we like to see you do your own research. That why you get no soup today.
Comparing the two presidents
is a little like comparing a bass (Bush) to a great white shark (Iranian president). 
Presidents do not yield
to political blackmail -- Obama did the right thing. He believes his time is better spent letting the entire bleppin' congress work the on the issue and then vote when they come up with a plan. McCain is just making another grandstand attempt that has fallen embarrassingly flat.
I was not talking about 16 other presidents...... sm
I am talking about Obama.
I thought the general consensus of this board, or at least the Obama supporters here, was that we were to not look at history but rather to the future. (At least that is what I was told when I posted that those who refuse to learn from history are doomed to repeat their mistakes.)
You really should have watched the "YouTube bites." It was Obama himself saying that he did not believe a person that is unqualified for a job should apply for it and that was his reasoning for saying that he did not see himself running for a national office in 2008. Since you didn't watch the video, I believe you are unqualified to comment on it.
They do that with ALL presidents. Usually, initially
nm
Oh, so you don't care if this has been done before with other presidents, . . . sm
but you do care if it has not been done before. Why? Either way, the naysayers will have something to whine about. The only reason there is such a big deal being made is because there has not been a president in recent history that has had been under so much scrutiny in his first 100 days. Even if he were to solve world peace, find a cure for cancer AND turn water into wine, they would still complain and find fault. 
So have all the other Christian presidents, nm
x
All presidents have done things....(sm)
in secret. It's never caused such a problem before. I'm not trying to slam Bush, but look at all the stuff we're finding out about his administration (i.e. torture memos, etc). And to top that off, Bush was the one who initially stopped access to the guest list to the WH. When Bush did it the news covered it, but there wasn't a wide spread panic about it....so what's the big deal about Obama doing it?
I'm not saying that I agree with blocking the lists, because I don't, but the point is that both Bush and Obama have done it, so why the panic about just one of them? My guess is that right wing media is pushing the issue and using it as a talking point; basically making the media being the ones who are instilling fear, not Obama.
My point is that prior presidents have had their day..sm
and time when they were covered in mud and IMHO none of it is right, except to say in most cases the apple doesn't fall far from the tree.
But, to answer Jeb's and Bush's family mishaps with the what about the Kennedy's line is dodging the point to me.
Bringing up the Lynch and Dean ordeal that's something worth listening to, but you guys just can't let go of old democratic presidents. It's like a thorn still sticking in your side. Everytime something comes up with Bush, you talk about Clinton, or even the Kennedy's, as if that dismisses Bush somehow. Whatever gets you though.
Maybe it's time to dump the presidents and
X
16 presidents with less experience than Obama...
http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2008/Info/experience.html
1. Abraham Lincoln,
2. FDR
3. Theodore Roosevelt
4. Woodrow Wilson
5. John Adams
6. Grover Cleveland
7. Ronald Reagan
8. Howard Taft
9. Bill Clinton
10. George Bush
11. Chester A. Arthur
12. Herbert Hoover
13. Jimmy Carter
14. Benjamin Harrison
15. Ulysses S. Grant
16. William Harrison
BTW, I do not make such important decisions as selecting a president based on YouTube sound bytes, so no, I did not bother with the video. My vote is between me and my candidate, based on exactly the things I listed in the previous post, which I stand by 100%.
Hogwash. See 16 presidents post above.
x
Haven't all the other Christian presidents? nm
x
No you were not - it's obvious you were talking about the presidents
because you said so in your message! Sheesh - this is about as good as David Letterman saying he was talking about the "other" Palin girl.
Democratic presidents 'suck' in the eyes
of Reps, and Republican presidents 'suck' in the eyes of Dems.....and round and round it goes...
There were assassination attempts on WHITE Presidents. Did the assassinators
think they might not really be white? or that they were too young to run a country?
much ado about nothing...reporter posed question as, "had he spoken to any *living* presidents?..
i agree the reporter's question was absolutely LAME..."has he spoken to any LIVING past presidents?" um...as opposed to talking to dead ones? I thought his response was quick-witted considering the idiocy of the question--at least he didn't put the reporter on the spot and embarrass her...instead he made his first gaffe as POTUSE and already apologized. let's hope the reporters ask SMARTER questions at the next conference.
I love democrats! I love most of the past democratic presidents (sm)
I would love for there to be a good democrat I could vote for. I want good leadership and I want change. But I truly believe to purposely ignore a symbol speaks volumes. He is not just asking the symbol to wait, he is ignoring it on purpose. Avoiding it on purpose. Why do you think that is? There is a reason. Can you not see it?
|
