Obama Is Toast -- Caves In To The Media Not Republicans

Got that right!

Runner99

#2- Really doesn't take a set of them to lie to the American people, It only takes a lack of being honest and total disregard of our system of government to do that..

...people are saying he's the same as Bush.

Only the tragically uninformed, the willfully ignorant and the galactically stupid.

Only the tragically uninformed, the willfully ignorant and the galactically stupid.

Why are you talking about Obama voters that way?

LOL..it ain't so!!

Bush had a set.

... of brain cells?

yep, unlike what we have now in the WH. zero.

owlsview

#2.9 - And you still haven't seen a switch, apparently you are not bright enough to realize I was talking about the 43rd President of the United States not the 44th, nice try but it was very very lame, if that is the best you can do, it ain't saying too much..

Well, it did sound like you were describing President Jellyfish @ 2.3.

I know who I was describing, you guys can try to spin it anyway you want doesn' t matter. As for Bush, he was both a screw up and a liar, he screwed up our economy and his lies cost people their lives.. This is fact, non conjecture... owlsview, maybe you should take the advise of dwillie in #3 and try to be "remotely accurate" with your criticism.

PoliticoMan-1635309

I know who I was describing, you guys can try to spin it anyway you want doesn' t matter. As for Bush, he was both a screw up and a liar, he screwed up our economy and his lies cost people their lives.. This is fact, non conjecture... owlsview, maybe you should take the advise of dwillie in #3 and try to be "remotely accurate" with your criticism.

Since we're still in Afghanistan and Iraq, and Obama has been caught in many lies, and he is also keeping Bush policies in place, I would say Obama is not only a screw up and a liar he is also a traitor to the very people who voted him in! When they voted for change they weren't expecting a president that is a Marxist/socialist/Muslim sympathizer to try and undermine our constitution! And nothing has changed! It has only gotten worse!

Extraterrestrial

I'm military 34 years and still serving and you are truly not of this world. Everyone in the military knows we will not just pull up stakes. Withdrawal is a slow process. If you've noticed there are fewer troops in Iraq than when the President first took office and there will be fewer by the end of the year. Camp Victory in Iraq is in the process of closing, during hostilities it was a major embarkation point. The draw down in Afganistan will happen but not as fast as you or any person like yourself viewing international politics unrealistically. As far as being a traitor to those who voted him in, President Obama took an oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States of America not his electorate so that statment made no sense or you just don't know what you are talking about. This Marxist/socialist/Muslim crap is ridiculous, I guess you still want to see his birth certificate.. Undermine our constitution? now I invite you to put up proof of that accusation... Not all things have changed for the better but there has been improvement, what has help to make things worst as you say is continuous republican obstructionism...

I would say Obama....

That and a dollar equals.....

....a dollar.

Owlsview, the headline for your article begins with:

Obama Is Toast...

In what way is an incumbent president "toast" at the beginning of an election season? Re-election prospects is the clear supposition. But I'm all eyes, owlsview. In what way were YOU referring to an incumbent president being "toast" at the start of election season?

You put the words there, owlsview, not me. You wrote an article claiming that the President caved in to the networks, with specific reference to the pre-game show. As my reference proves, it was the networks that responded to the President's schedule, not the other way around as you asserted in your article.

You attempting to somehow back away from the absurdly nonsensical assertions in your article is flat out laughable. The reasonable approach would be to simply take it down as the article is a flat out prevarication on at least two levels. But go ahead and keep spinning. You make me chuckle.

...why wasn't he on Wednesday instead of Thursday?

Because the Speaker of the House said that they couldn't do it on Wednesday. You clearly haven't been paying attention.

If the President has been toast since the 2010 mid-terms (yet another inane position given the number of times the incumbent President went on to re-election after his party was hammered in mid-term balloting), then his being "toast" has nothing to do with the speech scheduling eventhough the title of your article makes that connection. Thus you've just admitted what any thinking person already knows - that the premise of the article above is flat out stupid. You just said that the President's tribulations have been in place for at least a year so linking them to the speech scheduling issue was nonsense at the very start.

Keep posting owlsview. You've already been forced to admit that the networks moved their pre-game shows because of the President's speech scheduling. Now you admit that - contrary to the stated premise of the article - the President's political predicament has nothing to do with the speech scheduling. By all means owlsview, please keep posting. With each post you yourself further admit both the idiocy and mendacity of your article.

I believe that their is much you can teach me about mendacity.

The above article and your subsequent posts already demonstrate Jedi-level mendacity, owlsview, though the same apparently cannot be said for spelling. Your mirror is clearly the best place for further study in prevarication.

I haven't forced anything. Unlike your posts, i merely posted facts - supported by references - that reveal the inanity of your posted assertion. Your meandering obfuscations provide confirmation. In spite of your best efforts to the contrary, your fallacious responses are themselves revealing.

The President will become the third in a row to be re-elected.

Your believing my words to be "big and fancy" says far more about you than it does about me. But we do agree on the futility of dead horse-flogging.

We shall have many opportunities to continue our studies in mendacity.

I look forward to observing your mastery in that regard - and exercising the option of bustin' the truth across your screen in response.

Be good or discrete. Your choice.

The last time such an argument was advanced, Ralph Nader siphoned off enough Florida votes from Gore to put George Bush into the White House. Does anyone in their right mind believe that Gore would have:

1. Put Roberts and Alito on SCOTUS?
2. Invaded Iraq?
3. Increased our dependence on fossil fuels?
4. Cut taxes for the rich?
5. Cut taxes while we were at war?
6. Abdicated regulation of the financial services and energy sectors?
7. Abdicated environmental efforts?
8. Abdicated alternative energy efforts?
9. Abdicated investment in infrastructure?

Your position only helps guarantee the worst of all worlds, VI. You're the RNC's most effective weapon.

If Gore was prez when 9-11 occurred, he'd be hiding under his mama's skirt.

But when he DID come out, he would have asked those mean 'ol terrorists what we did to make them mad, and if we promise not to do it again, he'd be begging them to never attack us again.

Of course, I am assuming that you'd be able to understand him through that girly lisp.

If Gore was prez when 9-11 occurred, he'd be hiding under his mama's skirt.

No, he would have listened to the warnings from our intelligence agencies and would have taken the appropriate steps to avert the attack.

Lisp???

The "asterisk" was an exaggeration but I'll bet the history books will note the events of that election, including the SCOTUS decision. If that's not the case we will have lost this country and everything it stands for.

Dear Willie:

Your position only helps guarantee the worst of all worlds, VI. You're the RNC's most effective weapon.

The two parties function in the manner of two wings in a single party. Nothing you say redresses that. You identify a key difference between so-called social democrats and democratic socialists.

_______________

Put 100 social democrats and 100 democratic socialists in separate prisons and condemn them all to death. To the very last minute, all 100 democrats will spend their last days and hours debating which form of execution is least painless -- lethal injection or firing squad.

In the other prison, all 100 democratic socialists will reach another conclusion. They will escape! Ninety-nine times out of one hundred, the socialists will be shot in the escape attempt. But they WILL not acquiesce to the status quo. And so with that said -- Go Socialist Party USA!

_______________

Think this through.

I am decidedly NOT feeling you, VI.

Though they can make for unique situational alliances, I've never been afraid of facts, logic and cogency, owlsview. VI's divergence notwithstanding, we remain at loggerheads on the article and it's premise, as you've no doubt by now have noticed in 3.4.

If the article actually had a sense if logic, veracity, reliance on facts and cogency, I would have been delighted to vote it up. But, alas...

Out Of Curiosity, Has Anyone Else Noticed ...

How ironic it is that, having endured that 'deficit limit' fiasco, these same ‘cut and spending’ issues arise for renegotiation in a current bill! Did the ‘jobs’ proposal arises from a vacuum? Had not one of these smart folk with advanced degrees in political economy the foresight to discern such a thing? Should policy initiatives be taken seriously when our masters themselves approach them with all the civic solemnity of an exercise in political vaudeville?

When radical Republican presidents and/or Governors arise, backlash happens. Just ask Walker. Enter Obama. He feigns left but slides right. The progressive/liberal contingent becomes disheartened, makes noises about contesting him, talks Libertarianism, and so it continues. Obama is the consummate politician. Are there any compelling reasons ought why we not believe that this is part of Obama’s act?

However one decides on taxation policy, the current measure and its antecedent only weeks ago evidence the profound disrespect and brazen insult that both parties routinely deal to the population at large.

Dear Owl:

Yes Socialist Party, you go, please as far away as possible.

Alas, Owl – as much as you might wish otherwise, Marx’ work is too important to be ignored. The crisis which is endemic to Capitalism will ensure that socialism remains relevant across time. Marx may have been wrong about Communism, but he was right about Capitalism.

A scepter indeed haunts the world. We might call it Capito-Barbarism.

Freedom And Welfare ...

Yet the right rejects both. It peddles fear in place of freedom and embraces devastation in place of the greater welfare of society.

the greater welfare of society.

That's funny.

Since the law organizes justice, the socialists ask why the law should not also organize labor, education, and religion.

Why should not law be used for these purposes? Because it could not organize labor, education, and religion without destroying justice...

...The sincerity of those who advocate protectionism, socialism, and communism is not here questioned. Any writer who would do that must be influenced by a political spirit or a political fear. It is to be pointed out, however, that protectionism, socialism, and communism are basically the same plant in three different stages of its growth. All that can be said is that legal plunder is more visible in communism because it is complete plunder; and in protectionism because the plunder is limited to specific groups and industries. ^[4] Thus it follows that, of the three systems, socialism is the vaguest, the most indecisive, and, consequently, the most sincere stage of development.

But sincere or insincere, the intentions of persons are not here under question. In fact, I have already said that legal plunder is based partially on philanthropy, even though it is a false philanthropy....

...You say: "There are persons who have no money," and you turn to the law. But the law is not a breast that fills itself with milk. Nor are the lacteal veins of the law supplied with milk from a source outside the society. Nothing can enter the public treasury for the benefit of one citizen or one class unless other citizens and other classes have been forced to send it in. If every person draws from the treasury the amount that he has put in it, it is true that the law then plunders nobody. But this procedure does nothing for the persons who have no money. It does not promote equality of income. The law can be an instrument of equalization only as it takes from some persons and gives to other persons. When the law does this, it is an instrument of plunder.

With this in mind, examine the protective tariffs, subsidies, guaranteed profits,guaranteed jobs, relief and welfare schemes, public education, progressive taxation,free credit, and public works. You will find that they are always based on legal plunder, organized injustice...

...Socialists desire to practice legal plunder, not illegal plunder. Socialists, like all other monopolists, desire to make the law their own weapon...

http://bastiat.org/en/the_law.html

VI. While the left is trying to move forward with a socialist government designed to control the population and eliminate the constitution.

Embraces devastation? Really? Then what is Obama doing? Isn't he just continuing Bush's policies? Sounds like a hypocrite to me! I don't think this is the change that people thought Obama meant! Nobody in their right mind would want a Marxist/socialist/closet Muslim running this country!

Obama is toast in 2012! One and done!

Yeah, 31.4 million watched (supposedly). This gives credence to the saying that came out right after that obama guy was (s)elected.

"Never underestimate the power of stupid people voting in large groups".

Just think - 31.4 millio people could have been doing something productive. I used that time myself to watch paint dry.

FAR more entertaining.

31.4 million watched

That's what, about 10% of the total population?

Had E Nuf,

Exactly right...every time he opens his yap, I turn it off. I can't stand for someone to lie to my face! Watching paint fry, does sound like a good alternative and much more productive...

obama guy was (s)elected

You're confusing Obama with GWB who was selected by our esteemed SCOTUS in 2000. The Bush presidency will always have an asterisk next to it's entries in the history books because of that fiasco.

Gee--I was not one of the 31 million that watched that comedy hour WAITING FOR THE FOOTBALL GAME TO COME ON, figured I'd get the recap on the news and I was right--pass it now, pass it now, pass it now...etc. etc..part 2 next week..no thanks, I'm busy,.

.I find it really comical that NBC didn't want it to interfere with the football PREGAME show...and last time no one wanted his speech to interfere with an episode of LOST --LOL--talk about irrelevant and loosing his star status..

The Bush presidency will always have an asterisk next to it's entries in the history books because of that fiasco.

Wanna bet?

I have heard more intellectual conversations between my kids discussing which is better, Jimmy Neutron or the Fairly Odd Parents. If given the buck, would anyone know where to buy the clue? Now that you have wasted your 10 seconds or 10 minutes reading these few sentences you can go back to your spoon fed thoughts.

I prefer Star Blazers. :)

Spongebob square pants gets my vote.

snot!

lovemyplanet-400560

31.4 million watched

That's what, about 10% of the total population?

Considering its only 10% of the population, does that mean that 90% of the population does not find him worthy of watching? And out of that 10% of the population I would venture a guess that 50% of those either watched out of boredom, or watched just for the comedy! His comical antics have gotten so predictable he is becoming just like the rocky horror picture show where people tune him in so they can say his lines as he says them. Obama is Rocky!

http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=The+rocky+horror+picture+show&mid=74281DAD955DE9A6DC5874281DAD955DE9A6DC58&view=detail&FORM=VIRE5

Pay attention to what the girl coming down the stairs tells Obam......Rocky!

Extraterrestrial,

does that mean that 90% of the population does not find him worthy of watching?

Yes.

"or watched just for the comedy"

lovemyplanet-400560

That last link made me fall over in my chair! That was excellent! ROFLMAO!!!!!

"Well, Hi..." :)

Hi LMP! I don't usually see you around very much! It's nice to know another person who has a really good sense of humor! And a high level of common sense! I am sending a can of blue spray paint, I hope you will accept! :-]

I do like blue. :)

Blue is such a nice color! It looks good on you! :-]

I half agree. I watched because I wanted to hear what he had to say....kind of a benefit of the doubt thing. Didn't matter when it was broadcast, would've still watched it. Wanted to see if the plan was anything new from previous speeches/plans. It wasn't.

lifeisgood43

How can Pres Obama be toasted when 31 million people watched his speech.

see post#5.14 for the possible reasons! :-] 10% of the poulation is nothing to brag about! that means 90% of the population couldn't care less what he had to say!

No

....and also a rehash of his problem solving skills.....or lack of.

shame it was just a rehash of so many other great speeches he has already given.

....and also a rehash of his problem solving skills.....or lack of.

Or better yet a rehash of jalousy in many of you.

Toast.

Or better yet a rehash of jalousy in many of you.

Owls...I wonder if Truth Be Told is refering to toast when talking about "jalousy"? I prefer mine to be strawberry "jalousy" on my toast.

Wouldn't that be jamousy? I'll have grape.

Look folks, I surely have no objection to you not liking Obama. I myself can't say I admire him 100%. However I give him credit for what he did right and criticize what he did wrong or could have done better. And that's what make you an honestl person. And he so far has been much more effective and transparent than many before him. . He's calm, tenacious and hard to be intimidated or made angry. This is what scares you, guys. many of you downgrade his good deeds and over dramatize the least thing he did wrong. If this not jealousy, then it has to be immature hatred. Shame, shame, shame!

Truth you have your opinion I have mine and yes I am scared of him.

Yes, I know many are scared of him, but why? He has done better than was expected of him, why not give him at least this credit instead of downgrading him at every occasion?

Who are you to judge me or anyone else as being immature because we disagree with you?

First of all, I didn't judge you or anyone else as being immature, but rather the mentality of people to degrade someone without good cause regardless of his/her goodwill.
And secondly, you and every else did not disagree with me, but rather with fact and reality.

Who are you to place the burden of shame on anyone? God?

Who am I? I'm someone who tries to rescue "sense" from "nonsense." I ain't placing the burden of shame of anyone, they have already done so to themselves. And rest assure, I'm not God, but if I were, God knows that this corrupted senseless world wouldn't be any more. That is why I'm not God. So enjoy a peaceful life.

Truth be told-1349420

And he so far has been much more effective and transparent than many before him.

On this I agree with! He is very effective at being transparent, we see a right through him!