Obama Our Leader

[Revmitchell]

"A show" was more than was reciprocated from the other side of the isle.

That's it? That is your argument?

 

[LeBuick]

Who is "most of us"?

The majority of American's polled... We are one which makes us us so when the majority of US agree it is "most of us"... :thumbsup:

 

[LeBuick]

That's it? That is your argument?

No rebuttal?

Why lay down all the cards when one does the job? And it's a big one called "they didn't try".

 

[steaver]

I don't have faith and them getting anything done, or maybe as one user suggested and may be a better think, they don't have the ability to get anything done worth while, but they are not alone. It's just the way it's played in Washington sadly.

The rub is, Obama was elected because he promised this would CHANGE!

He either lied or has given up changing anything.

 

[saturneptune]

Obama didn't push it through. Pelosi and Reid did.

It is good to see you give your liberal friends credit.

 

[Pastor Larry]

President Obama attempted to be bipartisan by extending is hand to the Republicans and except for 3 Republicans they slapped his hand away. From now on I think that President Obama and the Democrats in the Congress should work with only those 3 Republicans and ignore the rest of them.

Having people over for drinks isn't bipartisanship. And Obama didn't attempt to be bipartisan. He went and listened to them, and then didn't take their advice. That is a major failure on his part. These are people who represent the people at a much closer level than Obama does, and Obama didn't listen.

 

[Pastor Larry]

That's a play on words... Any one smart enough to know better knows that Obama will say stuff to get elected and then turn around and not follow through.

Usually, we call that lying.

That is different that ANY other POTUS how?

It's not.

Why the hard standard towards Obama, where were you when Bush did similar things?

Criticizing him.

Also, even though we all know there isn't such a thing as true bipartisanship, at least Obama is attempting.. Maybe not as much as he is saying, or as mush as we would like, but he has, in my opinion done more than other POTUS's have.

He has not done nearly as much as Bush did early on.

 

[Pastor Larry]

Most of us think Obama extended his hand of bipartisanship and invited the GOP to the table of discussion but it was refused. Because he is only part of the equation he should receive partial credit for it's failure.

You think wrongly. He had drinks, and listened to the Republicans although he claimed "I won" as a tool to essentially say their ideas didn't count. Then he pushed through a bill without them.

Where was Obama demanding that Pelosi and Reid include Republicans in conference? Where was Obama demanding that Pelosi and Reid listen to and incorporate Republican ideas?

You see, when it was time to lead, Obama was silent. That is a failure by any measure. Not once did I hear Obama telling Pelosi and Reid to include Republicans and Republican ideas. Again, that's simply a failure of leadership on Obama's part.

Even though you have a great love for Obama, you should be objective enough to admit that so far, he has failed. There is still hope that he can repair this, but he has to change the way he does business.

 

[KenH]

He either lied or has given up changing anything.

Maybe you should give the president more than 26 days in office before making such a statement.

 

[dragonfly]

The rub is, Obama was elected because he promised this would CHANGE!

He either lied or has given up changing anything.

I remember that President Bush said something to the effect that once President Obama learns all the classified information, he will see some things differently.

If this is the case, I would expect Obama to alter a campaign promise if he finds out information that shows this to be the prudent thing to do.

 

[dragonfly]

Having people over for drinks isn't bipartisanship. And Obama didn't attempt to be bipartisan. He went and listened to them, and then didn't take their advice. That is a major failure on his part. These are people who represent the people at a much closer level than Obama does, and Obama didn't listen.

President Obama was acting bipartisan. Like you said, he listened. In fact, the Stimulus Bill does include tax cuts, which is something the republicans wanted. The republicans wanted tax cuts only, and this was rejected.

Just because the republicans didn't get everything they wanted doesn't mean that President Obama and the democratic Congress didn't listen to them and take some of their advise.

 

[just-want-peace]

I remember that President Bush said something to the effect that once President Obama learns all the classified information, he will see some things differently.

All well & good, but this has no bearing on this abomination of a "drunken sailor" spending spree by the majority party! Bush was referring to national security matters, not economics.

And before you ask, I classify this bill exactly as the "bailout" ram-rodded thru by Bush.

No difference 'cept initiators.

 

[Pastor Larry]

I remember that President Bush said something to the effect that once President Obama learns all the classified information, he will see some things differently.

If this is the case, I would expect Obama to alter a campaign promise if he finds out information that shows this to be the prudent thing to do.

That's the difference between me and you. I expect people to admit that they don't know it all upfront, rather than make promises when they are ignorant. It's a character issue, and that's big with me.

Obama during the campaign should have had enough character and integrity to say then that he didn't know it all, and would have to see what the situation really was. But he was pandering for votes.

President Obama was acting bipartisan. Like you said, he listened. In fact, the Stimulus Bill does include tax cuts, which is something the republicans wanted. The republicans wanted tax cuts only, and this was rejected.

That's simply not true, although it would have been better. Obama already had tax cuts in there. Remember that was a campaign promise. It wasn't an act of bipartisanship or compromise.

Just because the republicans didn't get everything they wanted doesn't mean that President Obama and the democratic Congress didn't listen to them and take some of their advise.

They didn't listen to them. They weren't even in the room during conference.

Don't you even read the news? Or do you just repeat your daily email talking points?

 

[steaver]

Ken; Maybe you should give the president more than 26 days in office before making such a statement.

Maybe I missed the "wait until I am President for awhile speech".

As I recall, I believe his speeches said "WHEN I am President" change will take place.

Obama had the PERFECT opportunity to practice what he had preached with this first bill...CHANGE! We got same old political crap.

I did not vote for the man because of his antichrist pro-death values, which he proved out in his signing of the executive order to increase abortions world-wide, however I had some hope that the man was serious when he said he was going to change business as usual between the parties. How sad to see him as just more of the same.

 

[dragonfly]

That's the difference between me and you. I expect people to admit that they don't know it all upfront, rather than make promises when they are ignorant. It's a character issue, and that's big with me.

Obama during the campaign should have had enough character and integrity to say then that he didn't know it all, and would have to see what the situation really was. But he was pandering for votes.

That's simply not true, although it would have been better. Obama already had tax cuts in there. Remember that was a campaign promise. It wasn't an act of bipartisanship or compromise.

They didn't listen to them. They weren't even in the room during conference.

Don't you even read the news? Or do you just repeat your daily email talking points?

I remember now why I don't talk to you much. Like your twin Carpro, arrogance and superiority drips off every word you type.

 

[Pastor Larry]

I remember now why I don't talk to you much....arrogance and superiority drips off every word you type.

Nicely done. When you run out of substance, make a personal attack.

It is a strange world where being honest and knowing what you are talking about becomes "arrogance and superiority." The truth is that everything I have said is common knowledge if you even remotely keep up with the news.

I care about character and honesty, and Obama has demonstrated very little and the Obama supporters in this forum are scarcely doing better.

You are like the Bush supporters. It doesn't matter what Obama does, you will defend it, and you will get upset when someone points out that it isn't what it was claimed to be.

Hopefully we won't have to do this for four more years.

 

[LeBuick]

You think wrongly. He had drinks, and listened to the Republicans although he claimed "I won" as a tool to essentially say their ideas didn't count. Then he pushed through a bill without them.

Correct, he invited them over for drinks and he went to the capitol and met with their caucus. He listened to their ideas, however there were some who wanted to do nothing and others who only supported more tax cuts. Do nothing is not an option the people want and tax cuts are in the plan. Why won't the Republican's acknowledge that tax cuts are in this plan?

He said "I won" when Eric Cantor came to the table with the attitude of "it's our way or no way". Obama had to remind him who won the election which means the people had a chance to choose your tax cuts but opted for a different plan. We cut taxes the last 8 years and got here. How can more tax cuts get us out? Listen, America had a chance to choose tax cuts in the last election. That philosophical point of view lost. What is it about this last election you guys just don't get? We've heard the tax cut suggestion. They were rejected so lets move on.

It is not bipartisan to keep saying, "but what about my idea of more tax cuts?" The answer is we heard you and it was rejected in the last election.

Where was Obama demanding that Pelosi and Reid include Republicans in conference? Where was Obama demanding that Pelosi and Reid listen to and incorporate Republican ideas?

The Republican's were listened to. They came with the idea of more tax cuts or to be more correct, 100% tax cuts or they wouldn't vote. Ok, they kept their word, they didn't vote... But we heard them. We all heard them yelling into the mic about how no one was listening. I kept trying to tell them, I can hear you and I am sure everyone else can also. We just don't like your suggestions.

Even though you have a great love for Obama, you should be objective enough to admit that so far, he has failed. There is still hope that he can repair this, but he has to change the way he does business.

I was thinking the same thing PL, even though you have this hatred for Obama you should be objective enough to admit his administration has done more in 3 weeks passing this legislation than most have done in their entire administration. He got the biggest legislation in history through the congress in record time. Why won't you be objective enough to give credit where it is due?

And the fact that he couldn't make the rocks cry out (the republican's get on board) is not a reflection of his bad leadership, in fact, it dispels another GOP rumor. He's not the Messiah...

 

[LeBuick]

Maybe you should give the president more than 26 days in office before making such a statement.

Not even a month Ken and the only question they have is, "where is this promised change". I see the largest legislation in history getting through the congress in 3 weeks change. And change you can believe in. That is darn right incredible and something I've never seen anyone else come close to...

Regan got his plan through in July.
Clinton August.
At this stage of the Bush administration he was just outlining his $1.3 Trillion tax cut plan. You remember, the one that took us from the budget surplus and 3.4% unemployment to where we are today...

 

[LeBuick]

President Obama was acting bipartisan. Like you said, he listened. In fact, the Stimulus Bill does include tax cuts, which is something the republicans wanted. The republicans wanted tax cuts only, and this was rejected..

Do you think anyone wants to know the transparency website http://financialstability.gov/ was suggested by a republican?

Didn't listen to us = this is not the plan we wanted. You have to learn how to listen to the party of victims and skewed facts.

 

[LeBuick]

That's simply not true, although it would have been better. Obama already had tax cuts in there. Remember that was a campaign promise. It wasn't an act of bipartisanship or compromise.

You are right, and to counter your previous words he admitted this was a mistake. He should have left the tax cuts out so the Republican's would have felt like they did something when we added them in. I forget that it's only a good idea if the GOP thinks of it. We can patronize you guys if that helps...