Printable View
Where do you get this stuff, Breitbart?Quote:
Originally Posted by onmyknees
KO, Rachel and Ed regularly voice their disappointment with Obama. Cenk (who was a repub before he saw the light) calls Obama out daily, both on MSNBC and his TYT show on the net.
YouTube - TheYoungTurks's Channel
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cuchulain
Perhaps a little Buyers Remorse?? Because that crew did everything except parade around the set with "Yes we can" Signs to get him elected....You might say they do it regularly, but I'd say it was ocassionally !!!!!!!!!!!
You can sat whatever you want. It's still a semi-free country. However, you're saying it doesn't make it so. The various MSNBC hosts have never been shy about criticizing Obama. The first line of this TYT vid is Cenk saying "Our President continues to be a milquetoast".Quote:
Originally Posted by onmyknees
YouTube - TheYoungTurks's Channel
The MSNBC crew supported Obama for the same reason I did - he wasn't as bad as the alternative. That pretty much sums up my feelings about every Dem I vote for.
Man...one guy got a tingle up his leg, and then told Joe Scarborough "Yes it is my job to help Obama succeed", and he's the moderate of the group !!!!!!!! With all due respect...that's revisionist history. They weren't saying he was the lesser or 2 evils in Sept and Oct. of '08...they were in full campagin mode ! I think thier ever so mild scorn for him is new found to be honest....ever since he started to move towards the center in preperation of the 2012 campaign.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cuchulain
Change the argument as you go, eh? You said Cenk didn't get the memo to not chide Obama EVER. I correctly pointed out that they do it regularly, so now you say that they didn't do it during the campaign. Not the same thing, is it?Quote:
Originally Posted by onmyknees
I don't remember every word of every MSNBC broadcast, but I'm pretty sure KO, Rachel and probably Ed had some misgivings about Obama prior to his election. I know Cenk did. Still, anyone who watched the Bush years closely would have given their right arm to get Obama elected. Even Purgatory would be a welcome relief after Hell. Rachel and Cenk's (I'm less familiar with the others) current 'mild scorn' for Barry O has been far from mild in many instances. Imo, despite his in some cases Liberal campaign rhetoric, the Pres has always been in the middle and is now moving frighteningly to the right - witness today's sucking up to the clowns at the Chamber of Commerce.
Witness too how modern conservativism is reluctantly drawn to the Obama perspective on foreign affairs; e.g. Douthat says,
“his foreign policy has owed far more to conservative realpolitik than to any left-wing vision of international affairs.
Many Republicans have been loath to admit this. In the first year of the Obama presidency, conservatives rushed to portray the president as a weak-kneed liberal who would rather appease terrorists than fight. They accused him of abandoning the Bush administration’s counterterrorism policies, taking the pressure off Iran, and playing at being president of the world while giving his own country’s interests short shrift. They insisted that his distrust of American power and doubts about American exceptionalism were making the country steadily less safe.
But this narrative never really fit the facts. On nearly every anti-terror front, from detainee policy to drone strikes, the Obama administration has been what The Washington Times’s Eli Lake calls a “9/14 presidency,” maintaining or even expanding the powers that George W. Bush claimed in the aftermath of 9/11. (Dick Cheney himself admitted as much last month[ http://www.nbcuniversal.presscentre....5&NewsAreaId=2 ], effectively retracting his 2009 claim that Obama’s terrorism policies were undermining national security.) Time and again, this president has proved himself a careful custodian of both American and presidential prerogatives — and the most perceptive critics of his policies, tellingly, have been civil libertarians rather than Republican partisans.”
Reference: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/07/op...07douthat.html
So is this vindication of Bush's War on terror ????? That's not what Douthat and others were screaming around the time of the Patriot Act !Quote:
Originally Posted by trish
I'll conceed Obama's left some Bush Policies in place , no doubt. But what choice does he have really? He's committed in Afghanastan, NYC won't allow terror trials, nobody wants the Gitmo detainees, and the war was essentially over in Iraq when he took office. What other major foreign policy victories can you sight for this adminastration? And hold the applause for the START Treaty.
One huge difference that I'll bet the NYT omits was at the moment of truth in Iran last year when young students took to the streets in protest, Obama folded. Silent....yet he's made 3 speeches already encouranging the protestors in Egypt. Strange. Compare that to what Reagan did in Poland, and the results.
You guys tickle me....you smashed Bush every day all day on foreign and domestic policy, nothing, and I mean nothing he did was right..yet Douthat laments how we're loath to give credit to Obama, as if we're obligated to give him some credit for leaving the same policies you despised in place....What short memories, and wonderful irony you really have. Remember this gem....???
"The War is Lost" !!!!!!!!!!!!!
Hey, don't complain to me, I just posted what the conservative wonder-boy is writing these days. The issue, if you read the last several posts of the thread, is not whether the wars were or continue to be justified or that Obama should or shouldn't be given credit for continuing them. The issue is whether Obama is a wild-eyed, radical socialist...a far left liberal...or merely a left leaning centrist. I offered the above article by a conservative centrist columnist as evidence that Obama is centrist.
My vote goes to wild-eyed radical socialist.. or if you want to save some carbon "communist".
What's he done to make him a wild-eyed radical socialist or a communist? Not health care reform certainly. He didn't even try for a Single Payer program, nor did he put any real effort into a public option, both of which would only be mildly socialistic. America's only socialized Medical program is the VA, and Barry O certainly didn't start that. You could say that ol' John Adams laid the groundwork for the VA when he signed the Act for the relief of Sick and Disabled Seamen, which created the Marine Hospital Service, a series of hospitals built and operated by the federal government. Was Adams a wild-eyed radical socialist?Quote:
Originally Posted by Faldur