Anyone see Obama with his dancing shoes on today?
-
2quik4uhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/01/28/obama-asked-why-us-doesnt_n_440816.html
Finally good to see someone ask Obama a tough question but of course like the politician he is, he sidesteps the question. -
ptown_trojans_11. Foreign policy was gutted from the speech. No mention of the peace process, no real indepth substance on Afghanistan, Iraq, China, Russia, nukes, Sudan, Yemen, Somalia, Europe, etc. The speech was mainly domestic, with some broad foreign policy issues that, from what I've heard, most staffers did not know was in there till the night of the speech.
2. Anytime a politician is asked about Israel they immediately go into broad, general talk as to not offend either side. It is usually the same talk as before. Besides, the peace talks are on life support and really he has to be careful what he says. It would have been nice to get a real answer, but with the talks as fragile as they are, no need to stir the pot. Remember, he tried and crashed and burned before. -
2quik4u
I understand what you are saying but lets be honest here talks have always been on life support. It would be nice to see Obama come out and speak against the way Israel has treated Palestinian people.ptown_trojans_1 wrote: 1. Foreign policy was gutted from the speech. No mention of the peace process, no real indepth substance on Afghanistan, Iraq, China, Russia, nukes, Sudan, Yemen, Somalia, Europe, etc. The speech was mainly domestic, with some broad foreign policy issues that, from what I've heard, most staffers did not know was in there till the night of the speech.
2. Anytime a politician is asked about Israel they immediately go into broad, general talk as to not offend either side. It is usually the same talk as before. Besides, the peace talks are on life support and really he has to be careful what he says. It would have been nice to get a real answer, but with the talks as fragile as they are, no need to stir the pot. Remember, he tried and crashed and burned before. -
ptown_trojans_1
Agreed, but he got burned when he came out against the settlements. I'm guessing he learned his lesson and is wary of what he says in public. Plus, i'm sure it completely caught him off guard.2quik4u wrote:
I understand what you are saying but lets be honest here talks have always been on life support. It would be nice to see Obama come out and speak against the way Israel has treated Palestinian people. -
2quik4uI would bet cutting off the money supply to Israel's military would change a few things. But then I guess everyone would label Obama as anti-jewish.
-
WriterbuckeyeThe term is anti-Semite -- and I have absolutely zero doubt he is one down deep in his I'd-love-to-really-be-a-Marxist heart.
-
2quik4u
yes thank you, I understand thatWriterbuckeye wrote: The term is anti-Semite -- and I have absolutely zero doubt he is one down deep in his I'd-love-to-really-be-a-Marxist heart. -
IggyPride00
Yeah, that's it. I am sure the fact his 2 closest advisers (top political adviser and chief of staff) are Jews is not indicative of a person that holds no animosity towards Jews, but in fact is nothing more than an attempt to cover up those feelings so no one else can see them.I have absolutely zero doubt he is one down deep
Thank goodness you were able to point that out for everyone, because we might not otherwise have known. -
eersandbeersptown_trojans_1 wrote:
Agreed, but he got burned when he came out against the settlements. I'm guessing he learned his lesson and is wary of what he says in public. Plus, i'm sure it completely caught him off guard.2quik4u wrote:
I understand what you are saying but lets be honest here talks have always been on life support. It would be nice to see Obama come out and speak against the way Israel has treated Palestinian people.
Include the fact that Israel has snubbed their nose at any attempt Obama has tried to reign in the settlements. Including their latest statements saying they will never give back certain parts of the West Bank.
IggyPride00 wrote:
Yeah, that's it. I am sure the fact his 2 closest advisers (top political adviser and chief of staff) are Jews is not indicative of a person that holds no animosity towards Jews, but in fact is nothing more than an attempt to cover up those feelings so no one else can see them.I have absolutely zero doubt he is one down deep
Thank goodness you were able to point that out for everyone, because we might not otherwise have known.
That's the problem with the internet. It's hard to tell when someone is trolling and when they have a genuinely stupid opinion. -
WriterbuckeyeObama is like most liberals when it comes to Jews -- they talk a good game but when push REALLY comes to shove...
Think it's stupid all you like, but it's pretty obvious. -
Ghmothwdwhso
Include the fact that Israel has snubbed their nose at any attempt Obama has tried to reign in the settlements. Including their latest statements saying they will never give back certain parts of the West Bank.eersandbeers wrote:ptown_trojans_1 wrote:
Agreed, but he got burned when he came out against the settlements. I'm guessing he learned his lesson and is wary of what he says in public. Plus, i'm sure it completely caught him off guard.2quik4u wrote:
I understand what you are saying but lets be honest here talks have always been on life support. It would be nice to see Obama come out and speak against the way Israel has treated Palestinian people.
Include the fact that Israel has snubbed their nose at any attempt Obama has tried to reign in the settlements. Including their latest statements saying they will never give back certain parts of the West Bank.
IggyPride00 wrote:
Yeah, that's it. I am sure the fact his 2 closest advisers (top political adviser and chief of staff) are Jews is not indicative of a person that holds no animosity towards Jews, but in fact is nothing more than an attempt to cover up those feelings so no one else can see them.I have absolutely zero doubt he is one down deep
Thank goodness you were able to point that out for everyone, because we might not otherwise have known.
That's the problem with the internet. It's hard to tell when someone is trolling and when they have a genuinely stupid opinion.
GIVE BACK is always under debate, let's not go there, or we could argue for another XXXX (name your's) years.
And like that is different from any former U.S President. Same Old story, with a different U.S. President. Let them fight it out and may the best, worst win.[/i] -
ptown_trojans_1
Right, cause Carter and Clinton never cared for Jews. :rolleyes:Writerbuckeye wrote: Obama is like most liberals when it comes to Jews -- they talk a good game but when push REALLY comes to shove...
Think it's stupid all you like, but it's pretty obvious.
Geesh. Liberals do not have a bias against Israel. It is generally a more level opinion of them than the general view held by the right. -
Ghmothwdwhso
I don't see a problem, It's clear to see that your opinions are genuinely stupid.eersandbeers wrote:ptown_trojans_1 wrote:
Agreed, but he got burned when he came out against the settlements. I'm guessing he learned his lesson and is wary of what he says in public. Plus, i'm sure it completely caught him off guard.2quik4u wrote:
I understand what you are saying but lets be honest here talks have always been on life support. It would be nice to see Obama come out and speak against the way Israel has treated Palestinian people.
Include the fact that Israel has snubbed their nose at any attempt Obama has tried to reign in the settlements. Including their latest statements saying they will never give back certain parts of the West Bank.
IggyPride00 wrote:
Yeah, that's it. I am sure the fact his 2 closest advisers (top political adviser and chief of staff) are Jews is not indicative of a person that holds no animosity towards Jews, but in fact is nothing more than an attempt to cover up those feelings so no one else can see them.I have absolutely zero doubt he is one down deep
Thank goodness you were able to point that out for everyone, because we might not otherwise have known.
That's the problem with the internet. It's hard to tell when someone is trolling and when they have a genuinely stupid opinion. -
majorspark
As I have stated many times this world is governed by the aggressive use of force. You can go back thousands of years and find lands now possessed by palestinians in the West Bank, in the past posessions of the Jews/Romans/British/Ottoman Empire just to name a few of the major players.eersandbeers wrote: Include the fact that Israel has snubbed their nose at any attempt Obama has tried to reign in the settlements. Including their latest statements saying they will never give back certain parts of the West Bank.
There is a reason why they will never give up certain parts of the West Bank. The same reason the USA will not give up the southwest to Mexico. The same reason you would not give up your home to an inferior power's ancestors (native Americans) that once possessed it. It is now your home and only the agressive use of a greater force would drive you from it. That is all the Isreali government is stating.
The generation of Irsealis born in the West Bank would no sooner give up their only known home to the Palestinians than you would give yours to the native Americans. It would take the force of arms to remove them from where they grew up just as the force of arms would be needed to remove you from the land you grew up in. -
2kool4skool
You have "zero doubt" about what someone you've never meant really thinks... You must be quite intelligent, if only your posts on this thread reflected that.Writerbuckeye wrote: The term is anti-Semite -- and I have absolutely zero doubt he is one down deep in his I'd-love-to-really-be-a-Marxist heart. -
believer
"Generally" a more level opinion? What do you base that on; your own personal opinion or do you have facts to back that up?ptown_trojans_1 wrote:Geesh. Liberals do not have a bias against Israel. It is generally a more level opinion of them than the general view held by the right. -
Writerbuckeye
If you're going to call out my intelligence, at least be smart enough to use the proper word. :rolleyes:2kool4skool wrote:
You have "zero doubt" about what someone you've never meant really thinks... You must be quite intelligent, if only your posts on this thread reflected that.Writerbuckeye wrote: The term is anti-Semite -- and I have absolutely zero doubt he is one down deep in his I'd-love-to-really-be-a-Marxist heart. -
CinciX12
You meant to say it would be nice if Obama said 'screw you Israel you have done nothing to help us and we are tired of dealing with your BS.'2quik4u wrote:
I understand what you are saying but lets be honest here talks have always been on life support. It would be nice to see Obama come out and speak against the way Israel has treated Palestinian people.ptown_trojans_1 wrote: 1. Foreign policy was gutted from the speech. No mention of the peace process, no real indepth substance on Afghanistan, Iraq, China, Russia, nukes, Sudan, Yemen, Somalia, Europe, etc. The speech was mainly domestic, with some broad foreign policy issues that, from what I've heard, most staffers did not know was in there till the night of the speech.
2. Anytime a politician is asked about Israel they immediately go into broad, general talk as to not offend either side. It is usually the same talk as before. Besides, the peace talks are on life support and really he has to be careful what he says. It would have been nice to get a real answer, but with the talks as fragile as they are, no need to stir the pot. Remember, he tried and crashed and burned before.
At least thats what I hope someone someday thinks and says. -
2kool4skool
You're right, it was late, spaced it. Now, stop deflecting and address your hatred for Obama that borders on insanity. I'm sure you loved to call the liberals that had this over-the-top hatred for Bush stupid/crazy/whatever, and now look at yourself. Pounding away at your keyboard all day about evil Obama, without a rational or intelligent post in the bunch.Writerbuckeye wrote:
If you're going to call out my intelligence, at least be smart enough to use the proper word. :rolleyes:2kool4skool wrote:
You have "zero doubt" about what someone you've never meant really thinks... You must be quite intelligent, if only your posts on this thread reflected that.Writerbuckeye wrote: The term is anti-Semite -- and I have absolutely zero doubt he is one down deep in his I'd-love-to-really-be-a-Marxist heart. -
Writerbuckeye
You need glasses.2kool4skool wrote:
You're right, it was late, spaced it. Now, stop deflecting and address your hatred for Obama that borders on insanity. I'm sure you loved to call the liberals that had this over-the-top hatred for Bush stupid/crazy/whatever, and now look at yourself. Pounding away at your keyboard all day about evil Obama, without a rational or intelligent post in the bunch.Writerbuckeye wrote:
If you're going to call out my intelligence, at least be smart enough to use the proper word. :rolleyes:2kool4skool wrote:
You have "zero doubt" about what someone you've never meant really thinks... You must be quite intelligent, if only your posts on this thread reflected that.Writerbuckeye wrote: The term is anti-Semite -- and I have absolutely zero doubt he is one down deep in his I'd-love-to-really-be-a-Marxist heart.
I've provided plenty of reasons, rationale and links to opinions/factual articles that show why I have such deep, deep disgust for the policies of this administration.
You may not LIKE why I feel this way, but those feelings are based on (1) where Obama comes from (2) his lack of real experience (3) who he surrounded himself with after he entered public life (4) and the continual LIES he has been caught in since he began taking stances on issues.
The man is virtually schizophrenic when it comes to many of these issues, and waffles on too many others.
Mr. Obama has provided plenty of fodder in a very short time as to why he is the most inept, incompetent man to hold the office of President since Jimmy Carter. -
ptown_trojans_1
Just my observations from my experiences in and around DC, on this board, and around Ohio and my reading of Presidential history.believer wrote:
"Generally" a more level opinion? What do you base that on; your own personal opinion or do you have facts to back that up?ptown_trojans_1 wrote:Geesh. Liberals do not have a bias against Israel. It is generally a more level opinion of them than the general view held by the right.
Also, note Truman was the first President to acknowledge Israel.
Notice I said generally. -
majorspark
I think you meant Truman was president and the US was the first nation to recognize Israel. Truman was not a liberal by todays standards.ptown_trojans_1 wrote:
Just my observations from my experiences in and around DC, on this board, and around Ohio and my reading of Presidential history.believer wrote:
"Generally" a more level opinion? What do you base that on; your own personal opinion or do you have facts to back that up?ptown_trojans_1 wrote:Geesh. Liberals do not have a bias against Israel. It is generally a more level opinion of them than the general view held by the right.
Also, note Truman was the first President to acknowledge Israel.
Notice I said generally. -
ptown_trojans_1
Yeah, thanks.majorspark wrote:
I think you meant Truman was president and the US was the first nation to recognize Israel. Truman was not a liberal by todays standards.ptown_trojans_1 wrote:
Just my observations from my experiences in and around DC, on this board, and around Ohio and my reading of Presidential history.believer wrote:
"Generally" a more level opinion? What do you base that on; your own personal opinion or do you have facts to back that up?ptown_trojans_1 wrote:Geesh. Liberals do not have a bias against Israel. It is generally a more level opinion of them than the general view held by the right.
Also, note Truman was the first President to acknowledge Israel.
Notice I said generally.
Yes, Truman was not a liberal by today's standards, but he was a Democrat. -
dwccrew
I think this is a great post, however, I do think there is a bit of difference between how the earliest American settlers stole land from the natives of this region and how Israel was basically setup by the Allied powers.majorspark wrote:
As I have stated many times this world is governed by the aggressive use of force. You can go back thousands of years and find lands now possessed by palestinians in the West Bank, in the past posessions of the Jews/Romans/British/Ottoman Empire just to name a few of the major players.eersandbeers wrote: Include the fact that Israel has snubbed their nose at any attempt Obama has tried to reign in the settlements. Including their latest statements saying they will never give back certain parts of the West Bank.
There is a reason why they will never give up certain parts of the West Bank. The same reason the USA will not give up the southwest to Mexico. The same reason you would not give up your home to an inferior power's ancestors (native Americans) that once possessed it. It is now your home and only the agressive use of a greater force would drive you from it. That is all the Isreali government is stating.
The generation of Irsealis born in the West Bank would no sooner give up their only known home to the Palestinians than you would give yours to the native Americans. It would take the force of arms to remove them from where they grew up just as the force of arms would be needed to remove you from the land you grew up in.
The founders of this country stole the land for themselves from the natives. The Allied powers stole land from the Palestineans to setup Israel. Granted long ago the land the Palestineans had belonged to Jews long ago and to someone before that and before that, but as you stated and aggressive force overtook the occupiers of that land. In the case of Isreal, the Allied powers put them there, not the jes themselves.
That is all fine and good, but you are stating your opinion about how you feel Obama views jews, so why are you saying you have brought up factual argument when it doesn't apply to this situation that some are calling you out on?Writerbuckeye wrote:
You need glasses.2kool4skool wrote:
You're right, it was late, spaced it. Now, stop deflecting and address your hatred for Obama that borders on insanity. I'm sure you loved to call the liberals that had this over-the-top hatred for Bush stupid/crazy/whatever, and now look at yourself. Pounding away at your keyboard all day about evil Obama, without a rational or intelligent post in the bunch.Writerbuckeye wrote:
If you're going to call out my intelligence, at least be smart enough to use the proper word. :rolleyes:2kool4skool wrote:
You have "zero doubt" about what someone you've never meant really thinks... You must be quite intelligent, if only your posts on this thread reflected that.Writerbuckeye wrote: The term is anti-Semite -- and I have absolutely zero doubt he is one down deep in his I'd-love-to-really-be-a-Marxist heart.
I've provided plenty of reasons, rationale and links to opinions/factual articles that show why I have such deep, deep disgust for the policies of this administration.
You may not LIKE why I feel this way, but those feelings are based on (1) where Obama comes from (2) his lack of real experience (3) who he surrounded himself with after he entered public life (4) and the continual LIES he has been caught in since he began taking stances on issues.
The man is virtually schizophrenic when it comes to many of these issues, and waffles on too many others.
Mr. Obama has provided plenty of fodder in a very short time as to why he is the most inept, incompetent man to hold the office of President since Jimmy Carter. -
cbus4lifeAll liberals hate jews.
Obama hates Jews. It is clear as day, i don't know how you guys don't see this. Writer is, obviously, spot on. All of us liberals, deep down in our hearts, hate Jews, even if we might not know it right now.
We're also all closet Muslim extremists.
I was just trying to figure out the other day why i had a wet dream about Hamas, didn't seem to make sense at the time...but now i understand.