Originally Posted by AZ_Infantry

He's another ass warming the same chair. The same exact paper tiger that all US presidents have been since Reagan.

The problem with our screwed up political system is that we never know if the president is doing a good job or a bad job, as we never get all the information. Hell, most of the time we just get outright lied to.

I love some of the directions he's taking, and I hate others. I have very few shrugs of the shoulder when it comes to leading the most powerful nation on Earth. I don't think he's the right man for the job, but since I haven't a better alternative, I've no right to suggest that he be replaced. At this point, I'm not sure we HAVE a better man for the job. If we do, he's likely strayed far away from politics.

He'd be getting a higher grade from me if he'd start listening to the majority vote of his peoples' wishes. Even those things I vehemently detest I will agree on if that's the will of the majority of the citizenship.

But there has been no "change." The government is still beyond the rules, still untouchable and unaccountable to all the checks and balances we the citizens are held to. They still do what they want regardless of the majority vote, and they still cater to special interests and line their pockets while pretending to give a crap about what we're going through trying to pay the rent so our kids don't become yet another homeless statistic.

Until we get a president that puts his or her foot down on all of that, I'll never be satisfied with anyone we elect.

Very good post AZ. The best person for the job is someone you`ll never know. They have all the attributes desirable for the position, and would actually do their best to represent the best wishes of the citizens. They are in touch with reality, intelligent, and pragmatic. This person obviously has no shot at ever becoming president.

And probably hates politics because of his values, anyway.

This country took a wrong turn about 60 years ago, and the momentum is simply too much going too fast for any president, regardless of the political moniker behind their name, to stop and turn around the decline of the government answerable to the people.

When the SCOTUS started ruling on state laws versus sticking to purely federal ones, the special interest lobbyists won and the majority of us lost. But the legal precedent was now set; the unpopularity of changing it, much less even getting to a position where you can change it thanks to life terms, and again not even considering the support you'd need, is a politician's stop sign.

All I can do is raise my kids to be prepared for the worst, to strive for the best, and to consider those that have not what they so often take for granted.

If I can do that, then I can die with a full and happy life. No politics necessary.

Doesn't mean I am apathetic about our government running ramshackle over its people - but the vast majority of Americans ARE, making my voice so inconsequential that I am tired of the sore throat trying to scream over the masses that don't give a brick what I have to say, anyway.

Too right AZ. I have tried to raise my kids to love their country and keep their eyes open when looking at their government. I cannot believe that we as a country have allowed the federal governement to get as powerful as it has. I have long advocated scrapping much of the federal code and returning to the 10th ammendment. Federal agencies, while necessary, are becoming too bloated and too bureaucratic.

my $0.02

The Second Amendment: keeping the government accountable to you!

Amen to that. Was it Warren Zevon who said?
"Send Lawyers, guns and money."

Back on topic.

While I agree that GEN McCrystal was NOT getting the support he needed, I think Obama did the right thing to remove him. He stepped on it with golf shoes by allowing himself to be quoted saying what he said. Frustrated or not, you NEVER break ranks like that.

McChrystal was wrong in his execution, no doubt. But he was vital to the advisory council and, as such, should have been reprimanded behind the scenes and sent back to do the job he excels at.

This is the problem with political bickering: McChrystal was fired, and how many 18-year old American boys and girls with suffer injury or death as a direct result of his termination? His Vietnam experiences, not to even to begin to mention his roles in Panama, Grenada and Desert Storm, are crucial to the type of wars we are involved in today.

Granted, you can be assured that any officer worth his or her salt will still turn to the man for his advice and input.

But all I saw in his termination was that political manipulation stemming from honest embarrassment outweigh any thought of those on the ground behind the triggers. That's what the White House, and thus President Obama, showed me as their priority: reputation at the possible cost of the lives of others.

And that is not something I can support.

McChrystal is a highly decorated, highly respected war veteran. Our "Commander in Chief" never served a single day in his entire life.

McChrystal had every right to call the president on his lack of official support for his efforts. He did it at the wrong time and in the wrong venue, in front of the wrong audience. But if anyone deserved to be terminated over the entire fiasco, it was Mr. Obama for his lack of understanding and refusal to listen to the been there, done that's.

It really upsets me when the entire JCOS goes virtually ignored because some suit in some office wants some vote from some corporation somewhere...

Disagree. Not political at all. You do not get to where he was by breaking the rules. He knowingly broke the rules. Why does not matter. If all he got was a reprimand, it would set a dangerous precident in his command. Do not forget that his aides were also quoted to have made disparaging remarks about the VP too. If he allows that type of behavior in his command at his level, I can only image what it was like at the company level. This type of conduct is detrimental to good order and discipline. No matter how frustrated he got there are ways to express your displeasure. Bottom line is he stepped over the line and got smacked.

Understand that IMHO he was conducting this conflict the WRONG way. He pulled everyone back to protect the population. Wrong answer. When we were actively going after the Taliban, there were a lot fewer attacks on US and Afghan forces. All this has done is give the Taliban time to rest and refit. That is why we lost the Korengal Valley. That is why we will continue to face challenges.

Originally Posted by AZ_Infantry

But there has been no "change." The government is still beyond the rules, still untouchable and unaccountable to all the checks and balances we the citizens are held to. They still do what they want regardless of the majority vote, and they still cater to special interests and line their pockets while pretending to give a crap about what we're going through trying to pay the rent so our kids don't become yet another homeless statistic.

Until we get a president that puts his or her foot down on all of that, I'll never be satisfied with anyone we elect.

Obama never defined "Change" he just threw an empty undefined phrase out there & let everybody assume Change for the better. Evereyone was so wrapped up in Obamamania & his "coolness" no one really asked. From his comments in his books, appiontments of self admitted Communists & Socialists to high level jobs, ect his Change is to take the Country in an anti-Capitalist direction. Maybe the recession is a good thing inthat it has slowed his agenda.

There's a rumor that the Winter Oplympic Commitee is going to offer a slot to Obama, seems he's going downhill faster than any skier on the team.

Originally Posted by George

Obama never defined "Change" he just threw an empty undefined phrase out there & let everybody assume Change for the better. Evereyone was so wrapped up in Obamamania & his "coolness" no one really asked. From his comments in his books, appiontments of self admitted Communists & Socialists to high level jobs, ect his Change is to take the Country in an anti-Capitalist direction. Maybe the recession is a good thing inthat it has slowed his agenda.

There's a rumor that the Winter Oplympic Commitee is going to offer a slot to Obama, seems he's going downhill faster than any skier on the team.

I'm not going to disagree with you on this. However, I would appreciate a voice to offer a differing opinion, one that meets yours in agreement but that takes a different trail to get there.

MR. (or President, capital "P" when used in conjunction with his name) Obama--he is still entitled to the proper title as our CIC, in my opinion and according to the oath I personally took 20 yeas ago--was not necessarily elected due to his ability to convince anyone that he was a better choice than his running mate, Senator John McCain.

The decision as to the political party offering an acceptance speech was a given due to events on Mr. Bush's watch - events that he most likely could not have foreseen, but that he undoubtedly dealt with much more poorly than any free nation ruler should have. He failed to recognized where his limitations and popularity superseded his ability to make law that affected every American. Unconstitutional laws. And he sent us to war in a very unpopular place that, invariably, was bound for nothing but disapproval ratings from the get-go: why the hell are we chasing Al-Queda in IRAQ?

The HSA was all that was needed to make Americans quit their anger at being attacked and turn it to a domestic anger. The deficit soared while the economy began its collapse. And individual rights, the very decree of the Republican, Conservative platform, dissipated under the Liberal concept of "needs of the masses."

While these issues were bad, they were solidified as the losing end of the polls when our government attempted to justify what was clearly not justifiable.

In year 6 of Mr. Bush's term of presidency, the Democrats and Liberal lobbyists solidified their platform's now-guaranteed victory.

The previous election had nothing at all to do with Mr. Obama.

It had everything to do with anyone OTHER than a Republican, another Mr. Bush; and the topping on the cake was the glass ceiling of racial divide in its most powerful fruition of destruction. Sarah Palin, the puppet meant to combat this tactic, simply could not get away from the (R) moniker to espouse her true, Conservative values. Not that she had the experience to fully conduct her duties in office, anyway, but that is yet again another thread for another time.

The result of this?

Simple:

As was foreseen, the Democratic Party got control of the Congress (and, in return, the Senate Seat majority and House Floor) for two years to pass their agendas under the noses of the people. And they knew that President Obama was destined to fail - he could not, cannot and never will be the "change" the average idiot voted for. His popularity decreases as his status as a pawn on the political chessboard becomes more and more obvious.



That Mr. Obama was used is quite in evidence. He has been, albeit subtly, already thrown under the bus. The true benefactors are the Cabinet members establishing ever-expanding harnesses of personal power to increase personal wealth.

Mr. Bush got the same.

And we voted it all into perfectly acceptable machinations of a government we trust without question.

The shame isn't on any president. It is on us.

Good joke about Skiing.
I disagree about the economy. I think the president would rather have an economic crisis. You will remember the amount of money he and his toadies in congress are spending. National Debt hovering over 13.1Trillion Dollars thats a 13 with 12 zero's behind it. Unsustainable IMHO. Wonder who/how this will be paid for.