Total Posts:54|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

NRA v.s Obama

Rosalie
Posts: 4,605
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/21/2016 3:20:03 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
"National Rifle Association President Wayne LaPierre on Wednesday challenged President Barack Obama to a debate on guns, even though the organization declined a White House invitation to participate in a town hall discussion that aired last week on CNN."

My family whom is very Pro-guns, and owns multiple firearms have been talking about this non-sop.

Do you think Obama will actually take on the debate, or do you think he will decline to "save his face"?

If he does accept, how do you predict the debate will go?

Will any good come out of it?
" We need more videos of cat's playing the piano on the internet" - My art professor.

"Criticism is easier to take when you realize that the only people who aren't criticized are those who don't take risks." - Donald Trump

Officially Mrs. 16Kadams 8-30-16
imabench
Posts: 21,206
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/21/2016 3:26:08 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/21/2016 3:20:03 PM, Rosalie wrote:
"National Rifle Association President Wayne LaPierre on Wednesday challenged President Barack Obama to a debate on guns, even though the organization declined a White House invitation to participate in a town hall discussion that aired last week on CNN."

My family whom is very Pro-guns, and owns multiple firearms have been talking about this non-sop.

Do you think Obama will actually take on the debate, or do you think he will decline to "save his face"?

He probably wont just because 1) It would open the door to other hooligans calling out for Obama to debate them on something, which the president would then have to refuse, which will cause those people to criticize him further, and 2) So close to the end of his term Obama probably wants to use what time he still has as president to take care of a few things rather than blow time on debating some no-named wannabe

If he does accept, how do you predict the debate will go?

Knowing Wayne he will probably just preach a bunch of bs the way you would expect Ted Cruz to say in similar scenarios, Obama would remain calm and rebuff him, and both sides would say that the person they were rooting for won.

Will any good come out of it?

Nope
Kevin24018 : "He's just so mean it makes me want to ball up my fists and stamp on the ground"

7/14/16 = The Presidency Dies

DDO: THE MOVIE = http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...

VP of DDO from Dec 14th 2014 to Jan 1st 2015
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/21/2016 3:53:58 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/21/2016 3:20:03 PM, Rosalie wrote:
"National Rifle Association President Wayne LaPierre on Wednesday challenged President Barack Obama to a debate on guns, even though the organization declined a White House invitation to participate in a town hall discussion that aired last week on CNN."

My family whom is very Pro-guns, and owns multiple firearms have been talking about this non-sop.

Do you think Obama will actually take on the debate, or do you think he will decline to "save his face"?

If he does accept, how do you predict the debate will go?

Will any good come out of it?

Lets see... LaPierre holds his breath like a child until he gets the POTUS on stage? Exactly who does this guy think he is? No, the president should not give in to "look at me! look at me!!!" tactics.
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/21/2016 3:56:06 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/21/2016 3:20:03 PM, Rosalie wrote:
"National Rifle Association President Wayne LaPierre on Wednesday challenged President Barack Obama to a debate on guns, even though the organization declined a White House invitation to participate in a town hall discussion that aired last week on CNN."

My family whom is very Pro-guns, and owns multiple firearms have been talking about this non-sop.

Do you think Obama will actually take on the debate, or do you think he will decline to "save his face"?

If he does accept, how do you predict the debate will go?

Will any good come out of it?

I guess if Obama wants to send a underling. Perhaps assistant to WH urinal cake inspector, I would be OK with it.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,212
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/21/2016 3:57:53 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/21/2016 3:53:58 PM, TBR wrote:
At 1/21/2016 3:20:03 PM, Rosalie wrote:
"National Rifle Association President Wayne LaPierre on Wednesday challenged President Barack Obama to a debate on guns, even though the organization declined a White House invitation to participate in a town hall discussion that aired last week on CNN."

My family whom is very Pro-guns, and owns multiple firearms have been talking about this non-sop.

Do you think Obama will actually take on the debate, or do you think he will decline to "save his face"?

If he does accept, how do you predict the debate will go?

Will any good come out of it?

Lets see... LaPierre holds his breath like a child until he gets the POTUS on stage? Exactly who does this guy think he is? No, the president should not give in to "look at me! look at me!!!" tactics.

Plus the time he would have to spend redoing his makeup after a massive crying session for a handful of children among almost a half billion people. Not gonna happen.
TheFlex
Posts: 1,745
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/21/2016 4:01:27 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/21/2016 3:56:06 PM, TBR wrote:
At 1/21/2016 3:20:03 PM, Rosalie wrote:
"National Rifle Association President Wayne LaPierre on Wednesday challenged President Barack Obama to a debate on guns, even though the organization declined a White House invitation to participate in a town hall discussion that aired last week on CNN."

My family whom is very Pro-guns, and owns multiple firearms have been talking about this non-sop.

Do you think Obama will actually take on the debate, or do you think he will decline to "save his face"?

If he does accept, how do you predict the debate will go?

Will any good come out of it?

I guess if Obama wants to send a underling. Perhaps assistant to WH urinal cake inspector, I would be OK with it.

If you've seen Ted 2 you'd know just how important that job title is, sir.

Also, nothing good comes out of this. I'd expect him to decline because it's honestly not a "save his face" but a waste of time. More people would criticize him for wasting time on something this petty than the actual outcome of the debate.
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/21/2016 4:02:21 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/21/2016 3:57:53 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 1/21/2016 3:53:58 PM, TBR wrote:
At 1/21/2016 3:20:03 PM, Rosalie wrote:
"National Rifle Association President Wayne LaPierre on Wednesday challenged President Barack Obama to a debate on guns, even though the organization declined a White House invitation to participate in a town hall discussion that aired last week on CNN."

My family whom is very Pro-guns, and owns multiple firearms have been talking about this non-sop.

Do you think Obama will actually take on the debate, or do you think he will decline to "save his face"?

If he does accept, how do you predict the debate will go?

Will any good come out of it?

Lets see... LaPierre holds his breath like a child until he gets the POTUS on stage? Exactly who does this guy think he is? No, the president should not give in to "look at me! look at me!!!" tactics.

Plus the time he would have to spend redoing his makeup after a massive crying session for a handful of children among almost a half billion people. Not gonna happen.

That is incredibly jaded and seemingly misleading.

Not that close to half a billion, and much much smaller percentage are childeren. Whatever, go hug a gun.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,212
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/21/2016 4:04:55 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/21/2016 4:02:21 PM, TBR wrote:

Not that close to half a billion, and much much smaller percentage are childeren. Whatever, go hug a gun.

I detest any leader that makes policy decisions based on emotion, be it true or false emotion, or Obama or Boenher.
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/21/2016 4:06:29 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/21/2016 4:01:27 PM, TheFlex wrote:
At 1/21/2016 3:56:06 PM, TBR wrote:
At 1/21/2016 3:20:03 PM, Rosalie wrote:
"National Rifle Association President Wayne LaPierre on Wednesday challenged President Barack Obama to a debate on guns, even though the organization declined a White House invitation to participate in a town hall discussion that aired last week on CNN."

My family whom is very Pro-guns, and owns multiple firearms have been talking about this non-sop.

Do you think Obama will actually take on the debate, or do you think he will decline to "save his face"?

If he does accept, how do you predict the debate will go?

Will any good come out of it?

I guess if Obama wants to send a underling. Perhaps assistant to WH urinal cake inspector, I would be OK with it.

If you've seen Ted 2 you'd know just how important that job title is, sir.

Also, nothing good comes out of this. I'd expect him to decline because it's honestly not a "save his face" but a waste of time. More people would criticize him for wasting time on something this petty than the actual outcome of the debate.

It is a waste of time. No minds would be changed, and regardless of how trounced LaPierre got, you would see endless defense from the same voices.

1) LaPierre knew there wasn't a chance in he11 that this would happen, otherwise he could have contacted the WH to attempt to set it up without publicizing it.
2) The POTUS has no obligation to "debate" some special interest group. What if anti-war people insisted on a one-on-one with Bush? Preposterous.
3) LaPierre needs to let some air out of his over inflated ego either way. Obama would wipe the floor with the fool.
v3nesl
Posts: 4,460
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/21/2016 4:06:36 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/21/2016 3:53:58 PM, TBR wrote:
At 1/21/2016 3:20:03 PM, Rosalie wrote:
"National Rifle Association President Wayne LaPierre on Wednesday challenged President Barack Obama to a debate on guns, even though the organization declined a White House invitation to participate in a town hall discussion that aired last week on CNN."

My family whom is very Pro-guns, and owns multiple firearms have been talking about this non-sop.

Do you think Obama will actually take on the debate, or do you think he will decline to "save his face"?

If he does accept, how do you predict the debate will go?

Will any good come out of it?

Lets see... LaPierre holds his breath like a child until he gets the POTUS on stage? Exactly who does this guy think he is? No, the president should not give in to "look at me! look at me!!!" tactics.

Well... Sure, it's a stunt, the POTUS isn't going to do debates with anybody, that would be silly.

On the other hand, Obama, and the left in general, claims that the NRA is the 800 pound source of all gun evil in America. So "who does he think he is" doesn't quite work, because Obama has already acknowledged his importance. Obama started with "Look at the NRA", in other words. And the last thing he wants is for an open minded leftie to actually take a serious look at the NRA.
This space for rent.
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/21/2016 4:09:25 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/21/2016 4:06:36 PM, v3nesl wrote:
At 1/21/2016 3:53:58 PM, TBR wrote:
At 1/21/2016 3:20:03 PM, Rosalie wrote:
"National Rifle Association President Wayne LaPierre on Wednesday challenged President Barack Obama to a debate on guns, even though the organization declined a White House invitation to participate in a town hall discussion that aired last week on CNN."

My family whom is very Pro-guns, and owns multiple firearms have been talking about this non-sop.

Do you think Obama will actually take on the debate, or do you think he will decline to "save his face"?

If he does accept, how do you predict the debate will go?

Will any good come out of it?

Lets see... LaPierre holds his breath like a child until he gets the POTUS on stage? Exactly who does this guy think he is? No, the president should not give in to "look at me! look at me!!!" tactics.

Well... Sure, it's a stunt, the POTUS isn't going to do debates with anybody, that would be silly.

On the other hand, Obama, and the left in general, claims that the NRA is the 800 pound source of all gun evil in America. So "who does he think he is" doesn't quite work, because Obama has already acknowledged his importance. Obama started with "Look at the NRA", in other words. And the last thing he wants is for an open minded leftie to actually take a serious look at the NRA.

I stand firmly by "just who in the he11 does he think he is". No special interest group can taunt the POTUS into a debate.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,212
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/21/2016 4:13:44 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/21/2016 4:09:25 PM, TBR wrote:

I stand firmly by "just who in the he11 does he think he is". No special interest group can taunt the POTUS into a debate.

Important enough that his organization takes up a huge chunk of the Dem primary debates; and Sanders gets slammed for ONLY having a D-minus rating.
v3nesl
Posts: 4,460
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/21/2016 4:15:28 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/21/2016 4:06:29 PM, TBR wrote:
.... Obama would wipe the floor with the fool.

No, I'm quite sure it would be the other way around.

And I really don't think this is a matter of my political position (I'm a constitutionalist, in short). There's no serious debate that the left has demonized the NRA, and profoundly misstated their positions, so a real debate would be a major embarrassment.

It may come as a shock to lefties, but the NRA doesn't want innocent people to get killed by guns. They actually have a strong interest in preventing that kind of thing, since it's such a black eye for legitimate gun ownership.

But we have a constitution, and it clearly lays out the right to be armed. It's right up there with the right of a free press. Same same. The constitution is an annoyance to Barack Obama, but this country is a lot more than her president, so maybe the real question is "Who does Barack think he is?".
This space for rent.
v3nesl
Posts: 4,460
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/21/2016 4:19:16 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/21/2016 4:09:25 PM, TBR wrote:
...

I stand firmly by "just who in the he11 does he think he is". No special interest group can taunt the POTUS into a debate.

Yeah, but your side is making a big deal out of the fact that the NRA didn't come to Barack's town hall. So you can't have it both ways - either you want the POTUS to mano a mano the NRA or you don't. Don't call somebody out and then whine when they say "Ok, let's step out back where we can do this without your security detail"
This space for rent.
EndarkenedRationalist
Posts: 14,201
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/21/2016 4:37:17 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
Anyone who says something along the lines of "this isn't about my political position...but Obama hates the Constitution..." can safely be ignored for their overwhelming political bias, not to mention the warped contortions they have to leap through to even make that claim.
imabench
Posts: 21,206
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/21/2016 4:59:37 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/21/2016 4:37:17 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
Anyone who says something along the lines of "this isn't about my political position...but Obama hates the Constitution..." can safely be ignored for their overwhelming political bias, not to mention the warped contortions they have to leap through to even make that claim.

+1
Kevin24018 : "He's just so mean it makes me want to ball up my fists and stamp on the ground"

7/14/16 = The Presidency Dies

DDO: THE MOVIE = http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...

VP of DDO from Dec 14th 2014 to Jan 1st 2015
v3nesl
Posts: 4,460
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/21/2016 5:02:44 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/21/2016 4:37:17 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
Anyone who says something along the lines of "this isn't about my political position...but Obama hates the Constitution..." can safely be ignored for their overwhelming political bias, not to mention the warped contortions they have to leap through to even make that claim.

Obama hates the constitution.

I think it's quite the opposite - you have to have your head a long way up a dark canal not to see Obama's dislike for the constitution, and democracy in general. Obama is a utopianist, and a global utopian at that. You are probably on his side of the aisle, so you don't see his naked contempt for anyone who disagrees with him. And if you believe in a republic, which is what the constitution spells out, then you believe in disagreement. It would be nice if we all agreed on everything, but we don't. The differences in forms of government are all about what we do when people have different interests. Barack does not believe in the Constitutional way of handling disagreements, which is, as far as possible, to let people live their own lives on their own terms. "Congress shall make no law regarding... " Limited government. That, in a nutshell, is the America experiment in self government. It's all but lost at this point in time - we are fast becoming just another country where the government runs people's lives.
This space for rent.
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/21/2016 5:43:13 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/21/2016 4:19:16 PM, v3nesl wrote:
At 1/21/2016 4:09:25 PM, TBR wrote:
...

I stand firmly by "just who in the he11 does he think he is". No special interest group can taunt the POTUS into a debate.

Yeah, but your side is making a big deal out of the fact that the NRA didn't come to Barack's town hall. So you can't have it both ways - either you want the POTUS to mano a mano the NRA or you don't. Don't call somebody out and then whine when they say "Ok, let's step out back where we can do this without your security detail"

Well... "My side"... But sure. He was invited to the town hall. He choose not to come - like the childish jerk. Obama has invited the NRA to the WH several times, each time they refuse.

Spin how you like. They were granted an audience several times, were too cowardly to take it, no demand something? F**k them.
kevin24018
Posts: 1,804
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/21/2016 6:26:57 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/21/2016 4:15:28 PM, v3nesl wrote:
At 1/21/2016 4:06:29 PM, TBR wrote:
.... Obama would wipe the floor with the fool.

No, I'm quite sure it would be the other way around.

And I really don't think this is a matter of my political position (I'm a constitutionalist, in short). There's no serious debate that the left has demonized the NRA, and profoundly misstated their positions, so a real debate would be a major embarrassment.

It may come as a shock to lefties, but the NRA doesn't want innocent people to get killed by guns. They actually have a strong interest in preventing that kind of thing, since it's such a black eye for legitimate gun ownership.

But we have a constitution, and it clearly lays out the right to be armed. It's right up there with the right of a free press. Same same. The constitution is an annoyance to Barack Obama, but this country is a lot more than her president, so maybe the real question is "Who does Barack think he is?".

+1

Remember Mr. Obama is a lawyer so he wouldn't answer any questions anyway, he would use lawyer speak 90% of them do, regardless of political leanings.
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/21/2016 6:38:57 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/21/2016 4:15:28 PM, v3nesl wrote:
At 1/21/2016 4:06:29 PM, TBR wrote:
.... Obama would wipe the floor with the fool.

No, I'm quite sure it would be the other way around.

And I really don't think this is a matter of my political position (I'm a constitutionalist, in short). There's no serious debate that the left has demonized the NRA, and profoundly misstated their positions, so a real debate would be a major embarrassment.

It may come as a shock to lefties, but the NRA doesn't want innocent people to get killed by guns. They actually have a strong interest in preventing that kind of thing, since it's such a black eye for legitimate gun ownership.

But we have a constitution, and it clearly lays out the right to be armed. It's right up there with the right of a free press. Same same. The constitution is an annoyance to Barack Obama, but this country is a lot more than her president, so maybe the real question is "Who does Barack think he is?".

1) I don't propose "banning" guns, neither do the left (generally) or Obama
2) The right is not without limmits
3) The NRA is concerned by the deaths, that is why they have a hard time talk about them
4) Yea, I am fairly sure Obama would take him to town.

After he leaves office, if the NRA wants to do a debate, OK. This stunt is beneath the office.
kevin24018
Posts: 1,804
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/21/2016 6:41:19 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/21/2016 5:43:13 PM, TBR wrote:
At 1/21/2016 4:19:16 PM, v3nesl wrote:
At 1/21/2016 4:09:25 PM, TBR wrote:
...

I stand firmly by "just who in the he11 does he think he is". No special interest group can taunt the POTUS into a debate.

Yeah, but your side is making a big deal out of the fact that the NRA didn't come to Barack's town hall. So you can't have it both ways - either you want the POTUS to mano a mano the NRA or you don't. Don't call somebody out and then whine when they say "Ok, let's step out back where we can do this without your security detail"

Well... "My side"... But sure. He was invited to the town hall. He choose not to come - like the childish jerk. Obama has invited the NRA to the WH several times, each time they refuse.

Spin how you like. They were granted an audience several times, were too cowardly to take it, no demand something? F**k them.

well I dunno about that......never heard the white house say it wasn't true so
"We were offered one pre-screened question. Megyn, I know that you don't send your questions over to the White House, so I'd rather have a conversation with you that's intellectually honest than sit through a lecture and get one opportunity to ask a pre-screened question."
http://cnsnews.com...
v3nesl
Posts: 4,460
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/21/2016 6:56:12 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/21/2016 6:41:19 PM, kevin24018 wrote:
At 1/21/2016 5:43:13 PM, TBR wrote:
At 1/21/2016 4:19:16 PM, v3nesl wrote:
At 1/21/2016 4:09:25 PM, TBR wrote:
...

I stand firmly by "just who in the he11 does he think he is". No special interest group can taunt the POTUS into a debate.

Yeah, but your side is making a big deal out of the fact that the NRA didn't come to Barack's town hall. So you can't have it both ways - either you want the POTUS to mano a mano the NRA or you don't. Don't call somebody out and then whine when they say "Ok, let's step out back where we can do this without your security detail"

Well... "My side"... But sure. He was invited to the town hall. He choose not to come - like the childish jerk. Obama has invited the NRA to the WH several times, each time they refuse.

Spin how you like. They were granted an audience several times, were too cowardly to take it, no demand something? F**k them.

well I dunno about that......never heard the white house say it wasn't true so
"We were offered one pre-screened question. Megyn, I know that you don't send your questions over to the White House, so I'd rather have a conversation with you that's intellectually honest than sit through a lecture and get one opportunity to ask a pre-screened question."
http://cnsnews.com...

I love TBR's "they were granted an audience". I guess Obama held out his scepter so Queen Esther wouldn't be killed for her presumption of coming uninvited before the POTUS.

The left is suffering from Stockholm Syndrome. On steroids. The whole idea of electing somebody to represent the people who hold power - foggetaboudit. Might as well be talking about the dark side of the moon.
This space for rent.
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/21/2016 7:01:06 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/21/2016 6:56:12 PM, v3nesl wrote:
At 1/21/2016 6:41:19 PM, kevin24018 wrote:
At 1/21/2016 5:43:13 PM, TBR wrote:
At 1/21/2016 4:19:16 PM, v3nesl wrote:
At 1/21/2016 4:09:25 PM, TBR wrote:
...

I stand firmly by "just who in the he11 does he think he is". No special interest group can taunt the POTUS into a debate.

Yeah, but your side is making a big deal out of the fact that the NRA didn't come to Barack's town hall. So you can't have it both ways - either you want the POTUS to mano a mano the NRA or you don't. Don't call somebody out and then whine when they say "Ok, let's step out back where we can do this without your security detail"

Well... "My side"... But sure. He was invited to the town hall. He choose not to come - like the childish jerk. Obama has invited the NRA to the WH several times, each time they refuse.

Spin how you like. They were granted an audience several times, were too cowardly to take it, no demand something? F**k them.

well I dunno about that......never heard the white house say it wasn't true so
"We were offered one pre-screened question. Megyn, I know that you don't send your questions over to the White House, so I'd rather have a conversation with you that's intellectually honest than sit through a lecture and get one opportunity to ask a pre-screened question."
http://cnsnews.com...

I love TBR's "they were granted an audience". I guess Obama held out his scepter so Queen Esther wouldn't be killed for her presumption of coming uninvited before the POTUS.

The left is suffering from Stockholm Syndrome. On steroids. The whole idea of electing somebody to represent the people who hold power - foggetaboudit. Might as well be talking about the dark side of the moon.

That is incredibly common verbiage, and yea, it is not a good idea for the POTUS (Republican, or Democratic) to be taunted into a debate with a special interest group. He grants (and did) invitations to the WH to discuss policy.

The only reason you stick-up for this nonsense in this case is because, the right hates all things Obama, and likes the NRA. Flip the script any you would have none of it.
FaustianJustice
Posts: 6,205
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/21/2016 7:05:19 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/21/2016 5:02:44 PM, v3nesl wrote:
At 1/21/2016 4:37:17 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
Anyone who says something along the lines of "this isn't about my political position...but Obama hates the Constitution..." can safely be ignored for their overwhelming political bias, not to mention the warped contortions they have to leap through to even make that claim.

Obama hates the constitution.

I think it's quite the opposite - you have to have your head a long way up a dark canal not to see Obama's dislike for the constitution, and democracy in general. Obama is a utopianist, and a global utopian at that. You are probably on his side of the aisle, so you don't see his naked contempt for anyone who disagrees with him. And if you believe in a republic, which is what the constitution spells out, then you believe in disagreement. It would be nice if we all agreed on everything, but we don't. The differences in forms of government are all about what we do when people have different interests. Barack does not believe in the Constitutional way of handling disagreements, which is, as far as possible, to let people live their own lives on their own terms. "Congress shall make no law regarding... " Limited government. That, in a nutshell, is the America experiment in self government. It's all but lost at this point in time - we are fast becoming just another country where the government runs people's lives.

Well, that is one point of view. The other point of view is that he was elected to do something. With a record numbers of filibusters, appointment challenges, and gridlock in general, it stands to reason that he will make use of whatever power he can in which to "do something", lest he be called a "do nothing" president... which of course he was/is called.

The air strikes in Libya/Syria come to mind. The first strikes in Libya were essentially done by EO, so of course the War powers/Obama is violating the Constitution line gets trotted out. Fine. So the Syrian Chem WMD issue comes about as to whether or not we should involve ourselves with troops for security of them. US sentiment is that something should be done, but to avoid that whole War Powers/violating the constitution thing, its of course put up for a vote to the legislature... and they punt. Putin eventually steps in to oversee the weapon's containment and destruction, then some how Obama is to blame for looking powerless to Putin on the world stage.

Another was the recess appointment flap. The legislature appears to be in recess, but NOPE! Not really, in actuality a few general members were kept in session for the sole purpose of not being in recess so Obama couldn't appoint anyone. Har dee har!

Were I Obama, probably around year six, you couldn't peel me out of a golf course if that were the sentiment. "Call me when you genuinely want to do something..." would be my voice mail, as clearly partisan politics was ruling the day.
Here we have an advocate for Islamic arranged marriages demonstrating that children can consent to sex.
http://www.debate.org...
v3nesl
Posts: 4,460
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/21/2016 7:25:28 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/21/2016 7:01:06 PM, TBR wrote:
...

That is incredibly common verbiage, and yea, it is not a good idea for the POTUS (Republican, or Democratic) to be taunted into a debate with a special interest group. He grants (and did) invitations to the WH to discuss policy.

The only reason you stick-up for this nonsense in this case is because, the right hates all things Obama, and likes the NRA. Flip the script any you would have none of it.

I granted in my first post that it's a stunt. I'm only pointing out that it's a stunt in response to Obama's town hall stunt. He just pretended to do a debate, now you want to say a debate is beneath him?
This space for rent.
v3nesl
Posts: 4,460
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/21/2016 7:29:36 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/21/2016 7:05:19 PM, FaustianJustice wrote:
At 1/21/2016 5:02:44 PM, v3nesl wrote:
At 1/21/2016 4:37:17 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
Anyone who says something along the lines of "this isn't about my political position...but Obama hates the Constitution..." can safely be ignored for their overwhelming political bias, not to mention the warped contortions they have to leap through to even make that claim.

Obama hates the constitution.

I think it's quite the opposite - you have to have your head a long way up a dark canal not to see Obama's dislike for the constitution, and democracy in general. Obama is a utopianist, and a global utopian at that. You are probably on his side of the aisle, so you don't see his naked contempt for anyone who disagrees with him. And if you believe in a republic, which is what the constitution spells out, then you believe in disagreement. It would be nice if we all agreed on everything, but we don't. The differences in forms of government are all about what we do when people have different interests. Barack does not believe in the Constitutional way of handling disagreements, which is, as far as possible, to let people live their own lives on their own terms. "Congress shall make no law regarding... " Limited government. That, in a nutshell, is the America experiment in self government. It's all but lost at this point in time - we are fast becoming just another country where the government runs people's lives.

Well, that is one point of view. The other point of view is that he was elected to do something.

He's done plenty. Obamacare. Undercut the police (remember "the police acted stupidly"). A shovel ready stimulus that didn't stimulate. Snatched defeat from the jaws of victory in Iraq, and generally make a royal mess of the region. Freed up $150B for the world's premier sponsor of terrorism.

Obama's done plenty. He just doesn't have any obvious successes.
This space for rent.
FaustianJustice
Posts: 6,205
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/21/2016 7:34:46 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/21/2016 7:29:36 PM, v3nesl wrote:
At 1/21/2016 7:05:19 PM, FaustianJustice wrote:
At 1/21/2016 5:02:44 PM, v3nesl wrote:
At 1/21/2016 4:37:17 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
Anyone who says something along the lines of "this isn't about my political position...but Obama hates the Constitution..." can safely be ignored for their overwhelming political bias, not to mention the warped contortions they have to leap through to even make that claim.

Obama hates the constitution.

I think it's quite the opposite - you have to have your head a long way up a dark canal not to see Obama's dislike for the constitution, and democracy in general. Obama is a utopianist, and a global utopian at that. You are probably on his side of the aisle, so you don't see his naked contempt for anyone who disagrees with him. And if you believe in a republic, which is what the constitution spells out, then you believe in disagreement. It would be nice if we all agreed on everything, but we don't. The differences in forms of government are all about what we do when people have different interests. Barack does not believe in the Constitutional way of handling disagreements, which is, as far as possible, to let people live their own lives on their own terms. "Congress shall make no law regarding... " Limited government. That, in a nutshell, is the America experiment in self government. It's all but lost at this point in time - we are fast becoming just another country where the government runs people's lives.

Well, that is one point of view. The other point of view is that he was elected to do something.

He's done plenty. Obamacare.

Yeah, we call that "a platform" that his campaign was placed on, and look how much immediate scrutiny its gotten.

Undercut the police (remember "the police acted stupidly").

I am pretty confident that undercut specifically those police, as he was asked specifically about that particular instance, and if I recall the circumstance, it was a bit of an over-reaction.

A shovel ready stimulus that didn't stimulate.

What part of our economy is worse than when he started, exactly?

Snatched defeat from the jaws of victory in Iraq, and generally make a royal mess of the region.

If you mean "following a time table for exit", you would be correct. We were not welcome their anymore, the new government found American occupiers to be a nuisance, and withdrew the SoFA. They made their bed.

Freed up $150B for the world's premier sponsor of terrorism.

Please be more specific to which you are referring to.

Obama's done plenty. He just doesn't have any obvious successes.

Were to just as equally vaguely allude, Osama is dead, right? Is that a success or no?
Here we have an advocate for Islamic arranged marriages demonstrating that children can consent to sex.
http://www.debate.org...
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/21/2016 7:38:08 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/21/2016 7:25:28 PM, v3nesl wrote:
At 1/21/2016 7:01:06 PM, TBR wrote:
...

That is incredibly common verbiage, and yea, it is not a good idea for the POTUS (Republican, or Democratic) to be taunted into a debate with a special interest group. He grants (and did) invitations to the WH to discuss policy.

The only reason you stick-up for this nonsense in this case is because, the right hates all things Obama, and likes the NRA. Flip the script any you would have none of it.

I granted in my first post that it's a stunt. I'm only pointing out that it's a stunt in response to Obama's town hall stunt. He just pretended to do a debate, now you want to say a debate is beneath him?

I am saying that when the POTUS (office of) offers a stage to a special interest group they can't first reject, then demand a new forum based on their own terms. It is beneath the office, and very bad precedent.
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/21/2016 7:39:31 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/21/2016 7:29:36 PM, v3nesl wrote:
At 1/21/2016 7:05:19 PM, FaustianJustice wrote:
At 1/21/2016 5:02:44 PM, v3nesl wrote:
At 1/21/2016 4:37:17 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
Anyone who says something along the lines of "this isn't about my political position...but Obama hates the Constitution..." can safely be ignored for their overwhelming political bias, not to mention the warped contortions they have to leap through to even make that claim.

Obama hates the constitution.

I think it's quite the opposite - you have to have your head a long way up a dark canal not to see Obama's dislike for the constitution, and democracy in general. Obama is a utopianist, and a global utopian at that. You are probably on his side of the aisle, so you don't see his naked contempt for anyone who disagrees with him. And if you believe in a republic, which is what the constitution spells out, then you believe in disagreement. It would be nice if we all agreed on everything, but we don't. The differences in forms of government are all about what we do when people have different interests. Barack does not believe in the Constitutional way of handling disagreements, which is, as far as possible, to let people live their own lives on their own terms. "Congress shall make no law regarding... " Limited government. That, in a nutshell, is the America experiment in self government. It's all but lost at this point in time - we are fast becoming just another country where the government runs people's lives.

Well, that is one point of view. The other point of view is that he was elected to do something.

He's done plenty. Obamacare. Undercut the police (remember "the police acted stupidly"). A shovel ready stimulus that didn't stimulate. Snatched defeat from the jaws of victory in Iraq, and generally make a royal mess of the region. Freed up $150B for the world's premier sponsor of terrorism.

Obama's done plenty. He just doesn't have any obvious successes.

Wow, you couldn't offer a more "spin" induced list.

I think I have seen enough.