A Can of Man
Je suis aware
With an economic climate like this, I don't know if I could ever invest in anyone!
Obama Worries Liberals
Duty Honor Country
Active member
After the fanfare of the last 24 hours, it is safe to say Obama is going to have a tough time with in the ranks.
The way gay right groups are flipping out over [SIZE=-1]Rev. Rick Warren is insane. There is no way Obama can appease every far left faction of the liberals.
[/SIZE]
The way gay right groups are flipping out over [SIZE=-1]Rev. Rick Warren is insane. There is no way Obama can appease every far left faction of the liberals.
[/SIZE]
mmarsh
Active member
Which is exactly why he nominated Rohmn Emmanuel as Chief of Staff, as he has a great deal of experiance of keeping the radical right and left at bay.
This wasnt a surprise to me, Obama was saying all along that he would offer a hand to the rightwing, many people on the left were hoping Obama would punish the right after the nasty way Bush and the radical right treated the left when they were in power. And while I sympathize with the left for wanting revenge I ask myself: how would it help the country? There is no doubt that the rightwing was downright nasty to anyone who disagreed with it over the past 8 years, but our problems are deeper than settling old scores.
So I applaud this gesture by Obama, but I would issue with it a word of warning that if the right attempted to undermine (not disagree, that they are entitled to) the president by a 'Monica' or 'Swiftboat' fiasco the response would be immediate and severe.
DTop
Active member
mmarsh said:
What would he do, strong arm and stifle all opposition? Kerry and Clinton deserved to have the light of day brought to bear on their actions. Obama's pleasing very few people thus far, as I see it. His attempts to straddle the middle of the road are a continuation of his non-committal, "I vote present on any controversial issue" method of surviving Chicago politics will not hold up on the bigger stage. Of course time will tell and we all hope that the bird of paradise doesn't fly up his nose. Well, maybe not all of us. But I guess we'll just have to wait and see. I agree that he's got a rough road ahead of him.
HokieMSG
Active member
My concern is Hillary and her husbands ability to raise money.
I suspect that we are going to hear about this again.
Bill Clinton has been raising money for his foundation and has many donors from all over the world. I forsee that foreigners will donate to Bills foundation and Hillary as sec state will see that what they want is granted.
Current rules published by the Obama administration require state department approval for all donations to Bill's foundation. Interesting how his wife will be the approval authority for them?
I suspect that we are going to hear about this again.
Bill Clinton has been raising money for his foundation and has many donors from all over the world. I forsee that foreigners will donate to Bills foundation and Hillary as sec state will see that what they want is granted.
Current rules published by the Obama administration require state department approval for all donations to Bill's foundation. Interesting how his wife will be the approval authority for them?
mmarsh
Active member
Using strong arm tactics didnt seem to bother Bush and the GOP in Congress much over the past 8 years? And Obama would not have to be as overt about it either. There are a billion ways a President can make someones life miserable. The same goes for the leftwing if they try and bully him. But again, I would prefer he would not have to use such tactics as its not in the countries best interest. But attempts to disrupt the presidency like they did to Clinton should not be tolerated either.
I think you are wrong about Obama. His popularity is the highest for any president-elect in US History. A few weeks ago it was at 79% popularity (I saw that figure on CNN TV and may now be out of date) but if it still holds that means that even some on the right approve of him, espicially on his cabinet choices. I have heard many Republicans admit that his picks are based on ability than ideology. The editorial of the WSJ was glowing at the Gates and Rhomn Emmanuel pick. Believe me Obama could have picked hardcore leftists if he wanted and based on the Majority they have in Congress he would have easily gotten them confirmed. The right would have gone absolutely ballistic had he done so...
Last edited:
DTop
Active member
Oh sure, alienating the majority of congress is a great way to get things done. If he misbehaves or is guilty of wrongdoing, outing him is not undermining the presidency. No pres. should be allowed to act outside of the law, not that he has. Of course, he hasn't even taken office yet.
BTW, both Republicans and Dems are quite adept at sniping a sitting pres. so please don't even try to lay one that solely on the Republicans' doorstep.
By appointing conservatives to his cabinet positions, I feel he's alienating many of the same libs who put him in office. I still maintain that PEBO (pres.- elect Barak Obama) has one rough row to hoe ahead of him.
BTW, both Republicans and Dems are quite adept at sniping a sitting pres. so please don't even try to lay one that solely on the Republicans' doorstep.
By appointing conservatives to his cabinet positions, I feel he's alienating many of the same libs who put him in office. I still maintain that PEBO (pres.- elect Barak Obama) has one rough row to hoe ahead of him.
mmarsh
Active member
The majority of Congress is on Obama's side, DTOP. He has a very large majority in the House and just needs a single GOP vote or two (depending on the MN recount) to be filibuster proof. He is going to pass his agenda no matter what the GOP does. So he wont be alienating anyone, as a matter of fact I suspect most GOP will be trying to make a deal, rather than obstruct him.
As for a President acting outside the law, how about starting with the one we are currently stuck with. I don't think it would be in the GOP best interest right now to criticize the legality of a presidents actions, Bush has broken new ground on that score.
Sniping is one thing, but attempting to bring down the government on some BS witch hunt that did more harm to the country than good is quite something else. Remember the Dems did NOT go after Bush's job, and there was far more grounds to impeach Bush then there was to impeach Clinton.
I understand the GOP didn't like Clinton, personally or as president. But they had no right to launch a public persecution of him. Clinton wasn't born into office, it was the American people that elected him, and what they did was just short of a coup d'etat and it was for POLITICAL reasons, not because he was grossly abusing the office. Thats a much different scenario than partisan sniping, and it would be wrong if the Dems tried to do the same to Bush.
I do agree that Obama is in for a rough, ride, but I think it will comes from the left whom will demand alot and not the right.
HokieMSG
Active member
If he tries to jam his agenda through it is likely that the only people he will alienate are the general public.
Come On marsh, admit you hate Bush and will never give him ANY credit.
ARE YOU SERIOUS. Clinton LIED under oath. And the worst part about it was that he got caught red handed. He should have been impeached but since he was the DEM's golden boy they vote their party and didn;t even come close. BTW I could give a damn about what he did with Monica. Not my business, my issue is that he LIED under oath. We should expect a higher standard of conduct from our elected officials PERIOD.
DTop
Active member
Come on mmarsh, we're talking about PEBO here. You're hatred for anything conservative or Republican or especially Bush clouds your ability to stay on topic.
We're not talking about anyone but Obama, his cabinet appointees and how they may or may not alienate some of his strongest supporters during the election.
We're not talking about anyone but Obama, his cabinet appointees and how they may or may not alienate some of his strongest supporters during the election.
mmarsh
Active member
Hokie
Put yourself in his place. Your're POTUS and you are about to have to tell 8 Billion People that you cheated on your wife. Don't try telling me you wouldn't try and weasel your out of being made a fool of in front of the world. What you are accusing him of is of being Human. I think everyone here would have at least been tempted to do the same. Clinton's error was that he allowed himself to be put in that position, not that he lied. And so he told a small white lie about an affair...big deal. How many people died because of it? Most people in America didn't give a damn, the only ones who cared were the media circus and those on the far-right who were trying to kick him out of office.
But DTOP is correct we are drifting off topic, since that is partly my doing I will attempt to get back on target.
Obama has the Public's view too, over 79% agree with what he is doing. So whatever he chooses to pass will be done with much opposition at least for the next 1-2 years. After that it will be based on his performance. I see no evidence that Obama is losing support amongst his strongest supporters. These accusations of him alienating those in his party, his supporters, etc, are being made by those people who didn't vote for him to begin with. So the gays are unhappy about an evangelical at the ceremony, they will survive. Its a ceramonial role only. Just because they voted for him doesnt mean they get want. And if its gay marriage, they are going to be dissappointed because Obama has already said he opposes it. The gays are a tiny minority. Obama strongest base are middle class working families especially those in the swing states. And what they care about is food on the table, and so far there is no indication that they are upset yet.
DTOP
Let me be clear, Its true I am bias; as you correctly stated I don't like (neo)conservative ideology and that I especially don't like Bush. I also don't like extremists left or right. I don't deny I am bias. But what you said about me while true, equally applies back to you. You have never shown much sympathy to liberals and especially not to the Clinton's, Obama or any other recent leftwing politician. The fact is you and I are nothing more than opposite sides of the same coin.
You are wrong on a single point. I am neither liberal nor a democrat, although I tend to sympathize with them more recently due to recent events. Its not that I don't like Republicans, its that I dont like what Republicans have become. If the GOP would go back to its original centrist platform and not the far right they would find me (and others) much more willing to listen. I haven't voted GOP in Presidential elections for years, but I am still registered a Republican.
Put yourself in his place. Your're POTUS and you are about to have to tell 8 Billion People that you cheated on your wife. Don't try telling me you wouldn't try and weasel your out of being made a fool of in front of the world. What you are accusing him of is of being Human. I think everyone here would have at least been tempted to do the same. Clinton's error was that he allowed himself to be put in that position, not that he lied. And so he told a small white lie about an affair...big deal. How many people died because of it? Most people in America didn't give a damn, the only ones who cared were the media circus and those on the far-right who were trying to kick him out of office.
But DTOP is correct we are drifting off topic, since that is partly my doing I will attempt to get back on target.
Obama has the Public's view too, over 79% agree with what he is doing. So whatever he chooses to pass will be done with much opposition at least for the next 1-2 years. After that it will be based on his performance. I see no evidence that Obama is losing support amongst his strongest supporters. These accusations of him alienating those in his party, his supporters, etc, are being made by those people who didn't vote for him to begin with. So the gays are unhappy about an evangelical at the ceremony, they will survive. Its a ceramonial role only. Just because they voted for him doesnt mean they get want. And if its gay marriage, they are going to be dissappointed because Obama has already said he opposes it. The gays are a tiny minority. Obama strongest base are middle class working families especially those in the swing states. And what they care about is food on the table, and so far there is no indication that they are upset yet.
DTOP
Let me be clear, Its true I am bias; as you correctly stated I don't like (neo)conservative ideology and that I especially don't like Bush. I also don't like extremists left or right. I don't deny I am bias. But what you said about me while true, equally applies back to you. You have never shown much sympathy to liberals and especially not to the Clinton's, Obama or any other recent leftwing politician. The fact is you and I are nothing more than opposite sides of the same coin.
You are wrong on a single point. I am neither liberal nor a democrat, although I tend to sympathize with them more recently due to recent events. Its not that I don't like Republicans, its that I dont like what Republicans have become. If the GOP would go back to its original centrist platform and not the far right they would find me (and others) much more willing to listen. I haven't voted GOP in Presidential elections for years, but I am still registered a Republican.
Last edited:
DTop
Active member
As I've said before, I wish PEBO no ill. Surprise perhaps, but I'm not a Republican. It has been many years since I've had enough faith in the Demoratic party to vote for it though. I didn't even vote for Regean in his first run for Pres. (I think I wrote my own name on that ballot).mmarsh said:
When you say gays will get over their unhappiness, you can say the same about any most but the most extreme factions. We'll all survive whatever comes it's just a matter of whether we'll be happy about it or not. I mean we survived Clinton, Carter, Reagan and Bush didin't we?
You're right, we may very well be two sides of the same coin but since when did that ever stop two New Yorkers?
HokieMSG
Active member
marsh. I won;t continue the "discussion off topic".
I'm afraid that you have it all wrong marsh. Republicans were NEVER centrist. The GOP has hijacked the ideas and ideals of the conservative movement. Too many republicans say they are conservative when in fact they are NOT. Conservatism (Regan Rupublicanism) is rooted in some very basic ideas that have far reaching implications. One reason that Regan had such support was that he made Americans proud to be American, he belived in the basic goodness of humanity, he believed that free markets worked, he believed that taxation while necessary only serves to stifle innovation and growth, and he NEVER backed down.
Too many times our politicans worry about what the world thinks. I say tough. We worry about what is good for America and her allies ONLY. If anyone has a problem they can either do something about it, or sit down.
This economic crisis is a perfect example of why America is so important. When we have trouble, so does everyone else.
Chukpike
Banned
Obama's official recommendation on Proposition 8 to Ban Gay Marriage in California was to vote NO. (Meaning to allow Gay Marriage) Obama appealed to the homosexual vote on this stance and overwhelming received their support. (And not just in California) So it would be reasonable to expect Obama to listen to their concerns.
He said what the Gay's wanted to hear, so got their support. Now they get to see what their support was worth. So this topic is right on, liberals should be worried.
mmarsh
Active member
That doesn't mean he supports gay marriage. It just mean he opposes any legislation that seeks to deny civil rights. He has repeated said that he views marriage between a man and a women.
Which is exactly my sentiments on the matter. I am opposed to any legislation that persecutes any type minority unless their was a verifiable negative influence on the majority as a whole. Being offended and have something not in accordance with someone's religious or social views is insufficient proof. I find Neo-Nazis to be offensive but I don't try and pass laws to get them banned. As long as they keep it to themselves I don't give a damn. That doesn't mean I automatically support Nazis. I just don't support a ban of them either...tempting as it may be. If however they start physically assaulting people because of their color, that's that becomes a reason to consider legislation against such groups.
You see the difference?
As for the gays, they might not get everything they want but whats the alternative? Join the GOP? I don't think so. The fact is gays are a small minority, and their political influence is small. There largest political strength is in NY, SF, and Seattle which are, unsurprisingly, Democrat strong points. Even if they were to switch, it would have no impact those areas are as Democratic as Kansas is Republican. Obama never promised them he would legalize gay marriage, although perhaps thats what a few militants imagined he said.
Last edited:
Chukpike
Banned
Aaah, yes it does mean he supports Gay marriage. As this topic suggests he got support from the Gay liberal minority no matter their size. Liberals who supported his election have every reason to expect his support after the election. If they do not get it they have a very good reason to be worried.
He either believes marriage is between a man and women or he doesn't. To get the gay vote he was saying it was not only a man and women.
Who believes you can have it both ways?
This topic is not about gays. It is about now that he has been elected, will he will be responsive to the ones that got him to the dance? He did not get there with a conservative majority.
mmarsh
Active member
Once again, just because he got their support doesn't mean he's pro-gay marriage. Take it from me, I am against gay marriage and against prop 8, because I don't think the government has any reason to stick its nose into peoples business without warrent. At issue isnt about gays, its about the limits of government power.
Obama is very clear (Chicago Tribune article) he states:
"I'm a Christian. And so, although I try not to have my religious beliefs dominate or determine my political views on this issue, I do believe that tradition, and my religious beliefs say that marriage is something sanctified between a man and a woman."
You cannot really argue this point as its crystal clear. He does not support it.
There were probably more conservatives voting for him than gays. Conservative Democrats on the West and Northwest carry far more power than the tiny gay minority you keep mentioning. Obama has promised to help the gays in other ways like Civil Unions, Don't Ask, anti-descrimination legislation, but on the marriage issue he is pretty consistant.
A Can of Man
Je suis aware
I really think we should be giving Obama a chance. So far what he's been doing seems encouraging. He's not banking on the far left as many feared. If you love your country, you'll want this man to do a great job for the next four years.