The President has failed us

The President has failed us

There are 413094 comments on the Times News story from Jun 9, 2012, titled The President has failed us. In it, Times News reports that:

This week, I decided to list the reasons I would not vote for Barack Obama in the next election.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Times News.

“Try Reuters.”

Since: Mar 07

Location hidden

#101823 Feb 11, 2013
Rico from East Los II wrote:
<quoted text>
Yups... and the only time he "gets tough" is when he's drunk". Liquid courage!!!!!
If that wasn't him also posting from Lakeland, Florida, he wasn't the only one who was inebriated.;-)

“Rico's Are Everywhere”

Since: Dec 09

Gangland, North America

#101824 Feb 11, 2013
NTRPRNR1 wrote:
The Ignorance Caucus
By PAUL KRUGMAN
Published: February 10, 2013 236 Comments
Last week Eric Cantor, the House majority leader, gave what his office told us would be a major policy speech....To be sure, Mr. Cantor tried to sound interested in serious policy discussion. But he didn’t succeed — and that was no accident. For these days his party dislikes the whole idea of applying critical thinking and evidence to policy questions. And no, that’s not a caricature: Last year the Texas G.O.P. explicitly condemned efforts to teach “critical thinking skills,” because, it said, such efforts “have the purpose of challenging the student’s fixed beliefs and undermining parental authority.”(cont.)
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/11/opinion/kru...
As Hillary Clinton commented about Republicans upon leaving her post:
“They just will not live in an evidence-based world.”
If any Republicans of conscience still exist, all they have to do is read this thread to know exactly how true were Clinton's words and the views expressed by Krugman in the article - backed by specific incidents that make ya' go "Huh?".
My gosh... these baboons want American's to get stuck on stupid.

“Rico's Are Everywhere”

Since: Dec 09

Gangland, North America

#101825 Feb 11, 2013
American Lady wrote:
<quoted text>
you look at Article One, Section 8 of the federal constitution, you can ... the federal courts are required to if at all possible not trump state law.
http://askville.amazon.com/Federal-law-trump-...
Article 1, Section 8, Clause 1
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/tocs/...
Document 19
House of Representatives, Amendment to Article 1, SEC. 8, CL. 1
22 Aug. 1789Annals 1:773--77
The House resumed the consideration of the amendments to the constitution.
Now, what is the consequence of the amendment? Either the States will or will not comply with the requisitions. If they comply, they voluntarily surrender their means of support; if they refuse, the arms of Congress are raised to compel them, which, in all probability, may lay the foundation for civil war. What umbrage must it give every individual to have two sets of collectors and tax-gatherers surrounding his doors; the people then soured, and a direct refusal by the Legislature, will be the occasion of perpetual discord. He wished to alter this proposition in such a manner as to secure the support of the Federal Government and the State Governments likewise, and therefore wished the amendment referred to a Committee of the whole House.
Mr. Tucker.--I do not see the arguments in favor of giving Congress this power in so forcible a light as some gentlemen do. It will be to erect an imperium in imperio, which is generally considered to be subversive of all Government. At any time that Congress shall exercise this power, it will raise commotions in the States; whereas, the mode of requisitions will operate in so easy a way, by being consonant to the habits of the people, that the supplies will be sooner realized in the treasury by this means than by any other.
http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/docum...
Translation:

So whatcha trying to say here Mrs Salutatorian?

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#101826 Feb 11, 2013
X -Man- wrote:
<quoted text>
A little "strange" huh? Well, let's see if I can't familiarize them just for you.
As you can see by the reading the full comment below, the poster I was posting to was, in my opinion " brooding around this forum putting people down and calling them names", names like, "indolent idiot", "fool", etc.
The irony of it all, as implied in my comment below, is that this poster didn't even know the difference between "here" and "hear", just a curious mistake for someone going around calling others "idiots" wouldn't you think? lol
Now, to answer YOUR question, in an attempt to make it less "strange" for you, I definitely feel it's worse to "treat others as if they're were ignorant" when it involves berating them with insulting terms like "idiot", which is clearly the situation with the poster I was posting to.
To assess someone's ignorance is one thing, to berate them with insults terms like "idiot" and treat them like they're ignorant when they are clearly not is another. Wouldn't you say?
<quoted text>
Hopefully that helps to familiarize my comments for you. I guess in a way, I'm again trying to remedy your "ignorance" on something. ;)
As usual you find it necessary to provide a dissertation on a simple question. Does it make you feel smarter? More powerful?

Your condescending comments are no different than the poster you were referring to. Don't ever feel you need to "remedy" anything for me. I fully understand that you believe you are superior to most posters especially those who are conservative.

Too bad you cannot see you do the exact same thing you accuse the other poster of doing.

"To assess someone's ignorance is one thing, to berate them with insults terms like "idiot" and treat them like they're ignorant when they are clearly not is another. Wouldn't you say?"

"Hopefully that helps to familiarize my comments for you. I guess in a way, I'm again trying to remedy your "ignorance" on something."

I do not need another dissertation to explain why you believe your comments are not condescending. I am not "ignorant". I totally understand your intentions.

“Rico's Are Everywhere”

Since: Dec 09

Gangland, North America

#101827 Feb 11, 2013
NTRPRNR1 wrote:
<quoted text>If that wasn't him also posting from Lakeland, Florida, he wasn't the only one who was inebriated.;-)
Q-cumber was on a good one last night and was forgetting to change his ISP with his name changes.

http://www.topix.com/forum/news/immigration/T...
http://www.topix.com/forum/news/immigration/T...
http://www.topix.com/forum/news/immigration/T...
American Lady

Danville, KY

#101828 Feb 11, 2013
NTRPRNR1 wrote:
The Ignorance Caucus
By PAUL KRUGMAN
Published: February 10, 2013 236 Comments
Last week Eric Cantor, the House majority leader, gave what his office told us would be a major policy speech....To be sure, Mr. Cantor tried to sound interested in serious policy discussion. But he didn’t succeed — and that was no accident. For these days his party dislikes the whole idea of applying critical thinking and evidence to policy questions. And no, that’s not a caricature: Last year the Texas G.O.P. explicitly condemned efforts to teach “critical thinking skills,” because, it said, such efforts “have the purpose of challenging the student’s fixed beliefs and undermining parental authority.”(cont.)
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/11/opinion/kru...
As Hillary Clinton commented about Republicans upon leaving her post:
“They just will not live in an evidence-based world.”
If any Republicans of conscience still exist, all they have to do is read this thread to know exactly how true were Clinton's words and the views expressed by Krugman in the article - backed by specific incidents that make ya' go "Huh?".
~~~~~~~~~~OPED NEWS~~~~~~~~~~
----Progressive-----TOUGH----- -Liberal---------

Hillary Clinton's Record of Failure as Secretary of State

Although many commentators have mentioned that Hillary Clinton leaves behind no major achievement as the U.S. Secretary of State, the reality is that she does, several --

and all of them are <harms> to the U.S.

... or non-decisions in Washington, such as the failure to establish standards for Benghazi and to meet them, or the lack of a cohesive staffing plan, essentially set up Benghazi."

That's failure at the very top.
It's not in Libya.
It's not even in Africa.
It's in "Washington."

http://www.opednews.com/articles/Hillary-Clin...

Huuummmm, guess THAT means Krugman IS a 'failure' to.
American Lady

Danville, KY

#101829 Feb 11, 2013
Rico from East Los II wrote:
<quoted text>
Translation:
So whatcha trying to say here Mrs Salutatorian?
You mean to TELL me, "you" don't 'understand'... ;0)
American Lady

Danville, KY

#101830 Feb 11, 2013
WoW !!!
American Lady

Danville, KY

#101831 Feb 11, 2013
Rico from East Los II wrote:
<quoted text>
Looks like you'll fall for anything... which is why you stand for nothing.
How's come 'you' ain't over THERE, then ...???
Where the 'smart' people are ???
United American Eagles

United States

#101832 Feb 11, 2013
Rico from East Los II wrote:
<quoted text>
Statistically speaking.. he probably got caught molesting a child and the church is once again upholding their morals & values by hiding the crime.
Boy howdie!, now you are speaking statistics, Rico?, how bi-lingual and unfair?,(can you say religous bigotry?).

The homies found a quote for you (i think they are Catholic).

Oliver Wendell Holmes, Sr.-- "The mind of a bigot is like the pupil of the eye; the more light you pour upon it, the more it will contract."
higgans

Avon, IN

#101833 Feb 11, 2013
Rico from East Los II wrote:
<quoted text>
The conservative ideology on drones is that so long as it's a muslim getting bombed... who cares!!
But the buck stops there when those bombs begin dropping on domestic terrorist who happen to share that al ameriKLAN ideology of hate.
the 'conservative' ideology that I subscribe to is based on pure Constitutionality.

under THAT conservative thought, there would be NO UNdeclared wars and, hence, NO drone strikes... ANYWHERE.

still, using drones on our 'enemies' IS preferred to boots on the ground... like air strikes, missles, 16-inch, off-shore guns, etc...

LIMITED punitive military action on KNOWN 'enemy' sites, okay, too.

what our foreign policiy has been since 1964 is BS, period. keeping Communism/Marxism OUT of OUR hemisphere is one thing. being the rest of the world's policeman or 'nation builder' has PROVED to be impossible AND COSTLY.

yet, Admin after Admin, FG after FG has continued ALL failed policies, to some degree, for decades.... both foreign and DOMESTIC.

I ask YOU: IS THIS ACCIDENTAL?

simply assigning blame to one Pres or Congress or another does NOT answer the question, does it? did not Obama, more or less, CONTINUE Bush's Wars? did not Reagan allow Carter's illegal Dept of Ed stand? has not BOTH Parties politicized appointments to the SC to the extent that ideology trumps REAL Constitutional scholarship and a sense of History?

why has NEITHER side been able to put forth AND articulate a workable economics policy? have YOU noticed that both sides of the aisle mince words over the SAME dead carcasses and BOTH avoid the hard questions AND answers?

why do posters like YOU keep going back to outdated, NON-relevant names like conservative and liberal or Dem or Rep?

the 'game' HAS MOVED ON. it has become good old American INDIVIDUAL CAN-D0 versus GOVERNMENT MUST DO.

people like YOU say 'don't panic. nothing BIG has happened to our Freedoms.'. do YOU honestly think that corruption and major ideological CHNAGE happens in Big Giant Steps? or little, painless baby steps?

until, one day, YOU wake up and say 'WHAT HAPPENED?'!

well, Mr. Frog-in-the-Pot, while YOU were enjoying the soothing effects of the ever warming water, YOUR ARSE GOT COOKED.

just like TOO many posters on here don't know WHAT Freedoms/Liberties they have lost because they NEVER experienced them, third and fourth gen 'welfare/poor' kids don't know a different or BETTER way because they have NEVER been exposed to them.

idiots...
American Lady

Danville, KY

#101834 Feb 11, 2013
A people cannot simultaneously live free and be bound to any human master or man-made institution, especially to politicians, judges, bureaucrats and faceless government agencies.

The Second Amendment along with the other nine amendments of the Bill of Rights was designed to prevent individuals’ enslavement to government,

not

just to guarantee people the right to hunt squirrels or sport shoot at targets,

nor

was it included in the Bill of Rights just to guarantee individuals the right to defend themselves against robbers, rapers and lunatics, or to make sure the states could raise a militia quick, on the cheap to

defend against a foreign invader or
domestic unrest.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/lawrencehunter/20...

Do any of "you" libTARDS happen to KNOW ..
WHAT
domestic unrest
IS ...???

It's US - We the people
against THEM - The US government ...

OR it could be what IS happening NOW ...
ALL across our nation ...

Does Dorner RING a bell ...???
Chicago DEAD ...
ANY unrest on our own shores!

“Try Reuters.”

Since: Mar 07

Location hidden

#101835 Feb 11, 2013
American Lady wrote:
<quoted text>
~~~~~~~~~~OPED NEWS~~~~~~~~~~
----Progressive-----TOUGH----- -Liberal---------
Hillary Clinton's Record of Failure as Secretary of State
Although many commentators have mentioned that Hillary Clinton leaves behind no major achievement as the U.S. Secretary of State, the reality is that she does, several --
and all of them are <harms> to the U.S.
... or non-decisions in Washington, such as the failure to establish standards for Benghazi and to meet them, or the lack of a cohesive staffing plan, essentially set up Benghazi."
That's failure at the very top.
It's not in Libya.
It's not even in Africa.
It's in "Washington."
http://www.opednews.com/articles/Hillary-Clin...
Huuummmm, guess THAT means Krugman IS a 'failure' to.
Where are your critical thinking skills? No, the opinion of Eric Zuesse doesn't mean that Paul Krugman is a failure. It simply indicates that Eric Zuesse holds a minority view of Hillary Clinton's service to this country as Secretary of State. In fact, the majority public opinion by polls is that she has been a most excellent Secretary of State, so much so, that if she decides to run for President in 2016, she has a clear path to the nomination.

So, what do we have here? Eric Zuesse = minority opinion.
Paul Krugman = majority opinion.

There you have it. You failed at using critical thinking skills once again. Frankly, I have come to expect that of you, a woman who has posted fringer site articles promoting the unbelievable contention that Sandy Hook was all a hoax....<rolling eyes>.
higgans

Avon, IN

#101836 Feb 11, 2013
Jaxxon wrote:
<quoted text>
"My own...
I'd blame the parents.
too bad the Powers That Be don't take that SAME attitude!

ever ask 'Why'?

“Rico's Are Everywhere”

Since: Dec 09

Gangland, North America

#101837 Feb 11, 2013
American Lady wrote:
<quoted text>
You mean to TELL me, "you" don't 'understand'... ;0)
Educate me O great and wise Salutatorian.
American Lady

Danville, KY

#101838 Feb 11, 2013
NTRPRNR1 wrote:
<quoted text>Where are your critical thinking skills? No, the opinion of Eric Zuesse doesn't mean that Paul Krugman is a failure. It simply indicates that Eric Zuesse holds a minority view of Hillary Clinton's service to this country as Secretary of State. In fact, the majority public opinion by polls is that she has been a most excellent Secretary of State, so much so, that if she decides to run for President in 2016, she has a clear path to the nomination.
So, what do we have here? Eric Zuesse = minority opinion.
Paul Krugman = majority opinion.
There you have it. You failed at using critical thinking skills once again. Frankly, I have come to expect that of you, a woman who has posted fringer site articles promoting the unbelievable contention that Sandy Hook was all a hoax....<rolling eyes>.
I'm NOT saying no one was KILLED!
Get with the program ... idiot!

The Newtown Bee
December 14, 2012

Sandy Hook School Principal Dawn Hochsprung told The Bee that a masked man entered the school with a rifle and started shooting multiple shots – more than she could count – that went “on and on.”

How could the principal have survived to give this statement to local press describing what happened … if she was one of the first to be killed? Incidentally, The Newtown Bee‘s article was taken down on Monday December 17th. Of course, a plausible explanation is that a reporter mistook another teacher for the principal.

http://anewworldsociety.ning.com/profiles/blo...

January 28, 2013
An Inquisitive Couple’s Visit to Newtown, Connecticut

The female sergeant told me that the man detained was the uncle of a student at the school who had gone to get his niece. I asked about the police scanner audio where the dispatcher reports that a caller from inside the school saw “two shadows” run by the gym at the back of the school.

Additionally, an officer apparently arriving at the scene stated

“I’ve got ‘em (sic). They are running at me down Crestwood.”

Crestwood Drive borders that backside of the school beyond some woods. The sergeant told me that this was the confusion of the day and that there were not two individuals.“It was just someone that went crazy, killed a bunch of people and then killed himself,” she said consolingly.

“You have nothing to worry about. You are safe.”

Mr. Clark told me that there was a number of “conspiracy theories floating around” and “some of them even suggest that the shooting didn’t even happen.” Furthermore,“Snopes.com debunks many of these conspiracy theories.”

I told Clark I was familiar with Snopes, but it was The Bee that reported that this was an off duty officer prancing about in the woods on the day of the shooting. Clark would not address this report and became very agitated with me “interrogating” him.“I don’t intend to discuss this any further with you,” he said. Mr. Clark then referred me to the Newtown Police for any additional questions. As I was walking out of the office I overheard a lady on the phone explaining to a caller that “there is an ongoing investigation,” and referring the caller to Snopes.com .

http://memoryholeblog.com/2013/01/28/an-inqui...

Referring people to snopes.com ...

HUH???

“Work hard at work worth doing.”

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#101839 Feb 11, 2013
American Lady

Danville, KY

#101840 Feb 11, 2013
Rico from East Los II wrote:
<quoted text>
Educate me O great and wise Salutatorian.
NOT wasting MY time on you ...

“Rico's Are Everywhere”

Since: Dec 09

Gangland, North America

#101841 Feb 11, 2013
NTRPRNR1 wrote:
<quoted text>Where are your critical thinking skills? No, the opinion of Eric Zuesse doesn't mean that Paul Krugman is a failure. It simply indicates that Eric Zuesse holds a minority view of Hillary Clinton's service to this country as Secretary of State. In fact, the majority public opinion by polls is that she has been a most excellent Secretary of State, so much so, that if she decides to run for President in 2016, she has a clear path to the nomination.
So, what do we have here? Eric Zuesse = minority opinion.
Paul Krugman = majority opinion.
There you have it. You failed at using critical thinking skills once again. Frankly, I have come to expect that of you, a woman who has posted fringer site articles promoting the unbelievable contention that Sandy Hook was all a hoax....<rolling eyes>.
Had Hillary been a Republican... AL would demand sainthood for her.

“Rico's Are Everywhere”

Since: Dec 09

Gangland, North America

#101842 Feb 11, 2013
What founding father said that the USA was a Christian Nation?

Answer: NONE

The Christian Nation Myth

Whenever the Supreme Court makes a decision that in any way restricts the intrusion of religion into the affairs of government, a flood of editorials, articles, and letters protesting the ruling is sure to appear in the newspapers. Many protesters decry these decisions on the grounds that they conflict with the wishes and intents of the "founding fathers."

Such a view of American history is completely contrary to known facts. The primary leaders of the so-called founding fathers of our nation were not Bible-believing Christians; they were deists. Deism was a philosophical belief that was widely accepted by the colonial intelligentsia at the time of the American Revolution. Its major tenets included belief in human reason as a reliable means of solving social and political problems and belief in a supreme deity who created the universe to operate solely by natural laws. The supreme God of the Deists removed himself entirely from the universe after creating it. They believed that he assumed no control over it, exerted no influence on natural phenomena, and gave no supernatural revelation to man. A necessary consequence of these beliefs was a rejection of many doctrines central to the Christian religion. Deists did not believe in the virgin birth, divinity, or resurrection of Jesus, the efficacy of prayer, the miracles of the Bible, or even the divine inspiration of the Bible.

These beliefs were forcefully articulated by Thomas Paine in Age of Reason, a book that so outraged his contemporaries that he died rejected and despised by the nation that had once revered him as "the father of the American Revolution." To this day, many mistakenly consider him an atheist, even though he was an out spoken defender of the Deistic view of God. Other important founding fathers who espoused Deism were George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, Ethan Allen, James Madison, and James Monroe.

Fundamentalist Christians are currently working overtime to convince the American public that the founding fathers intended to establish this country on "biblical principles," but history simply does not support their view. The men mentioned above and others who were instrumental in the founding of our nation were in no sense Bible-believing Christians. Thomas Jefferson, in fact, was fiercely anti-cleric. In a letter to Horatio Spafford in 1814, Jefferson said..........

read more @ http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/farrel...

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

US Politics Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Trump supporters cheer his combative stance wit... 3 min jonjedi 487
News Yes, Mass Deportations Are Coming. And We Know ... 5 min USA 74
News Thousands of demonstrators protest Trump in Atl... 6 min American Independent 1,511
News Global warming 'undeniable,' scientists say (Jul '10) 6 min chazmo 36,515
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 6 min Cheech the Conser... 1,497,867
News BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 11 min Dr Phil 237,689
News Former House speaker predicts 'Obamacare' won't... 12 min ITS OK 32
News Trump's repeated claim that he won a 'landslide... 19 min Trump your President 6,033
Election 'Fox News Sunday' to Host Kentucky Senate Debate (Oct '10) 24 min i was 259,051
More from around the web