What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

Obama XV: Now, with 20% more rage

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Obama XV: Now, with 20% more rage

I wouldn't be shocked if Gingrich had said that but remember, 1) Gingrich says things to establish solidarity with conservatives, 2) there is more than one issue at GZ... the original memorial plan was to construct an entire center which would be dedicated to the sins of war and hate... and the sins of the US would be center stage.

There's always the possibility of future screwing around with the GZ site (the hole and anything built above it) for other matters in terms of inappropriate memorials and museums. Making it a "war memorial" is equally inappropriate... but it would certain change the focus.
 
Re: Obama XV: Now, with 20% more rage

St. Clown said:
I don't follow the man's career closely, but I don't think his stance is genuine. This is the man who wants to legally limit your sodium intake. I agree with what he's saying on this issue - the group has the right to build, they have the permits. But I think he's taking the stance as a method to positioning himself for something else.
Click to expand...

What is he positioning himself for? How does taking the unpopular stance help a politician?

And it's rather obvious that you don't follow his career closely. On this issue, I believe Bloomberg is completely genuine.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/13/nyregion/13bloomberg.html

Michael R. Bloomberg is a former Wall Street mogul with a passion for the rights of a private property owner. He is a Jew whose parents asked their Christian lawyer to buy a house and then sell it back to them to hide their identity in an unwelcoming Massachusetts suburb. And he is a politician who regards his independence as his greatest virtue.

That potent combination of beliefs and history, those closest to Mayor Bloomberg say, has fueled his defense of the proposed Muslim community center in Lower Manhattan — a defense he has mounted with emotion, with strikingly strong language and in the face of polls suggesting that most New Yorkers disagree with him.
Click to expand...

Old Pio said:
It's an implicit argument. When the rich dwarf has spoken on this issue he has framed it exclusively as an expression of the first amendment rights of the backers of this Islamist county fair. No mention whatsoever of the rights of others to oppose it for whatever reason.
Click to expand...

Why should he have to mention the right to oppose it? I'll let you in on a little secret, but there are plenty of protests in New York. They have that right, so long as they get the proper permits. Sounds kinda similar to another controversy, actually.
 
Re: Obama XV: Now, with 20% more rage

blockski said:
What is he positioning himself for? How does taking the unpopular stance help a politician?

And it's rather obvious that you don't follow his career closely. On this issue, I believe Bloomberg is completely genuine.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/13/nyregion/13bloomberg.html





Why should he have to mention the right to oppose it? I'll let you in on a little secret, but there are plenty of protests in New York. They have that right, so long as they get the proper permits. Sounds kinda similar to another controversy, actually.
Click to expand...

No reason to mention it. He did exactly the right thing, disrespecting the feelings of 70% of the people of NYC, and talking down to them like children. The message is clear: everyone who opposes this Jihad U. needs a lecture on the First Amendment and I'm just the guy to deliver it. No arrogance there.

What was it Orwell said at the end of "Animal Farm?" "All animals are created equal, except some animals are more equal than others."
 
Last edited:
Re: Obama XV: Now, with 20% more rage

blockski said:
What is he positioning himself for? How does taking the unpopular stance help a politician?
Click to expand...

Bloomberg is a businessman... it helps him in certain parts of the world where he happens to hold interests. It'd be bad to his interest to be bad to Islam.
 
Re: Obama XV: Now, with 20% more rage

amherstblackbear said:
This makes his stance disingenuous how, exactly? Just curious.
Click to expand...
Well, if Bloomberg has business interests in Muslim parts of the world to protect, suddenly his stance on the Mosque issue doesn't strike me as being particularly principled - he's simply protecting profits. That's all well and good, and it's his right to do that, but it doesn't make his stance particularly courageous (if it's true - I don't know what his business interests are; I'm simply following the logic to its obvious conclusion here).
 
Re: Obama XV: Now, with 20% more rage

Kepler said:
Kind of hard to take seriously after the first sentence.
Click to expand...

the first page is written like a 5 year olds summary of sarah palins tweets from the past year. after that, i skimmed the paragraphs of every page, i saw nothing mentioning anti-business. i guess they dont teach the concept of topic sentence in india

i did find these

The oddities go on and on. Obama's Administration has declared that even banks that want to repay their bailout money may be refused permission to do so. Only after the Obama team cleared a bank through the Fed's "stress test" was it eligible to give taxpayers their money back. Even then, declared Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner, the Administration might force banks to keep the money.
Click to expand...

Obama has shown no intention to nationalize the investment banks or the health sector.
Click to expand...

so anti business! thanks, minnfan; for declaring yourself certifiably insane so i didnt have to.
 
Re: Obama XV: Now, with 20% more rage

Bakunin said:
Well, if Bloomberg has business interests in Muslim parts of the world to protect, suddenly his stance on the Mosque issue doesn't strike me as being particularly principled - he's simply protecting profits. That's all well and good, and it's his right to do that, but it doesn't make his stance particularly courageous (if it's true - I don't know what his business interests are; I'm simply following the logic to its obvious conclusion here).
Click to expand...

I don't know his personal business either. My point was that, barring Iran-Contra style shenanigans, there's nothing wrong with commerce. In fact, it's a much better principle than what the neocons were selling.

Truth is, I'm not a very good liberal. I could even be a Republican, if I lived up north in elitist rich dwarfland. But I live in Virginia. Nice state, crappy Republicans. What can you do? :)
 
Re: Obama XV: Now, with 20% more rage

Kepler said:
Kind of hard to take seriously after the first sentence.
Click to expand...

Most anti-business in a generation. That is a strange way to start. How long is a generation? Twenty years? That'd be Bush, Clinton, and Bush. He's the most anti-business president of the last four!
 
Re: Obama XV: Now, with 20% more rage

Patman said:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100908/ap_on_re_la_am_ca/cb_cuba_fidel_castro

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/2010090...anisraelcastropoliticsreligion_20100908180307

Something is going on... I want to know what... yeah, I have no means to find out... but something is going here... I don't know if its an anti-Chavez pushback or something else... but Cuba doesn't exactly open up like this.
Click to expand...

Castro: "Did I say Cuban system? I meant capitalist system.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/39102590

Common mistake I guess.
 
Re: Obama XV: Now, with 20% more rage

Not letting banks pay back TARP money ahead of time is a matter of maintaining control over the institution...that the government didn't want to be paid back gives us an idea of the motives behind lending it in the first place.
 
Re: Obama XV: Now, with 20% more rage

MinnFan said:
How Obama Thinks

Long, but very good article on how Obama has an anticolonial mindset that guides his policies.
Click to expand...

Putting aside the question of whether a 'colonial mindset' is good or not...

We're stuck in the middle of the worst recession in generations much of which hinged on risky lending habits, securitization of mortgages and other private sector moves with little oversight from the govt. Its not surprising that a basic reevaluation of oversight might be warranted.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top