for the SOTU...

User avatar
BigCliff
Posts: 5925
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 10:59 am
Location: SanAntonyo

Re: for the SOTU...

Post by BigCliff » Thu Jan 28, 2010 8:26 am

m.b. wrote: i'd think that most presidents would want the court on their side and would not use a setting like that to humiliate them.
You think the current court is ever going to be on his side? Alito is no O'Connor, and that was quite intentional.

"m.b." simply dudn't get it.
Buy better hooks and bourbon.

Image

User avatar
LTD
Posts: 4955
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2008 7:37 pm
Location: All over rover.........
Contact:

Re: for the SOTU...

Post by LTD » Thu Jan 28, 2010 10:00 am

BigCliff wrote:
m.b. wrote: i'd think that most presidents would want the court on their side and would not use a setting like that to humiliate them.
You think the current court is ever going to be on his side? Alito is no O'Connor, and that was quite intentional.

"m.b." simply dudn't get it.
Cliff...I think if you take the time to look at the faces of the other SCJ's you'll find they most of them were not at all pleased with "o"s show either. Pretty obvious.
"At some point reasonable people have to accept certain changes our presence has brought about, learn to not make similar mistakes in the future and appreciate and enjoy what we have while lamenting what we've lost"~~~~~ Muddled Duck

http://www.keywesttarponguides.com

Fish every fish like it's your last!!!

User avatar
Plow
Posts: 5059
Joined: Sun Dec 10, 2006 1:01 am
Location: Deep South Everywhere

Re: for the SOTU...

Post by Plow » Thu Jan 28, 2010 10:31 am

My favorate part:
But to create more of these clean energy jobs, we need more production, more efficiency, more incentives. And that means building a new generation of safe, clean nuclear power plants in this country. (Applause.) It means making tough decisions about opening new offshore areas for oil and gas development. (Applause.) It means continued investment in advanced biofuels and clean coal technologies. (Applause.) And, yes, it means passing a comprehensive energy and climate bill with incentives that will finally make clean energy the profitable kind of energy in America. (Applause.)
What he really said was cap tax and trade will make oil, coal and nuclear so damn expensive that clean energy will be a viable option. Before energy prices get high enough for that there will be a revolt.

Obama need to add “mediocre one term president” to his list of options of how he will be remembered.
Better Reds than dead...

User avatar
FlyFishNut
Posts: 598
Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2006 1:01 am

Re: for the SOTU...

Post by FlyFishNut » Thu Jan 28, 2010 12:47 pm

m.b. wrote:so you think it was arrogance, or that he simply doesn't understand that wasn't appropriate?
Hmmmmm.. Tough one. I would be inclined to say arrogance b/c he isn't a dimbulb. One might chalk it up to lack of EQ or lack of ettiquette possibly. My personal opinion is that while he has this facade of humble friendliness, deep down he is arrogant and stubborn. His true colors are showing themselves by him not accepting his strategy/policy needs changing in the face of his own party's dissent.
"You are one of the more annoying people on this board" (Woolybug25)

User avatar
m.b.
Posts: 5567
Joined: Sun Dec 10, 2006 1:01 am
Location: U.S.-occupied Texas

Re: for the SOTU...

Post by m.b. » Thu Jan 28, 2010 12:48 pm

BigCliff wrote:
m.b. wrote: i'd think that most presidents would want the court on their side and would not use a setting like that to humiliate them.
You think the current court is ever going to be on his side? Alito is no O'Connor, and that was quite intentional.

"m.b." simply dudn't get it.

nah, you're right. what obama did was a good thing. i just don't get it.


dude, you'll defend your man-crush like nothing i've ever seen. it's pretty comical... when bush and republicans were screwing the pooch, no one was defending them. some of us were actually calling them out on it. your boy, no matter what kind of stupid shit he pulls, gets a stroke from good ol' cliffy... :cheer

you're one of the guys Galganov was talking about...
III

User avatar
Mattb
Posts: 864
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2007 1:01 am
Location: Maine
Contact:

Re: for the SOTU...

Post by Mattb » Thu Jan 28, 2010 1:11 pm

m.b. wrote: uh, yeah, you did. we heard it loud and clear and it's been rejected across the country. if an (R) being elected to Mary Jo's killer's seat healthcare champ Teddy K's seat doesn't say exactly that, i don't know what does.

but i love how he calls the American people stupid by saying he needs to "explain it" better to us. if he actually "got it," he'd see that the majority don't want his plan. that's why he's failed at delivering his #1 promise by the three deadlines that were set for it.
Actually, M.B. - the polling shows that folks are against the proposed bill in large part because of all the lies that've been told about it. If you actually explain what's in the plan, there's a marked shift in opinion in favor of the bill. Sure, there's stuff in there that nobody likes, due mainly to the fact that Repubs decided not to participate at all, allowing a handful of hostage takers to demand some pretty outrageous stuff, but on balance, most folks support the broader bill once they understand what's actually in it.

I wasn't all that impressed with the speech overall, he needed a homerun, and I don't think he got it done.
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.”
-Daniel Patrick Moynihan

User avatar
Upsetter
Posts: 2251
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 1:53 pm

Re: for the SOTU...

Post by Upsetter » Thu Jan 28, 2010 2:52 pm

its ronry in the middle, dipshits to the right of me, whiners to the left, here i am, stuck in the middle again

User avatar
BigCliff
Posts: 5925
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 10:59 am
Location: SanAntonyo

Re: for the SOTU...

Post by BigCliff » Thu Jan 28, 2010 3:56 pm

m.b. wrote:
BigCliff wrote:
m.b. wrote: i'd think that most presidents would want the court on their side and would not use a setting like that to humiliate them.
You think the current court is ever going to be on his side? Alito is no O'Connor, and that was quite intentional.

"m.b." simply dudn't get it.

nah, you're right. what obama did was a good thing. i just don't get it.


dude, you'll defend your man-crush like nothing i've ever seen. it's pretty comical... when bush and republicans were screwing the pooch, no one was defending them. some of us were actually calling them out on it. your boy, no matter what kind of stupid shit he pulls, gets a stroke from good ol' cliffy... :cheer

you're one of the guys Galganov was talking about...
Nothing in that comment of mine was defending him. I simply said that getting the current court on his side was not going to be possible.

For the record, I care nothing about what Quebeckistani Russians think.
Buy better hooks and bourbon.

Image

User avatar
m.b.
Posts: 5567
Joined: Sun Dec 10, 2006 1:01 am
Location: U.S.-occupied Texas

Re: for the SOTU...

Post by m.b. » Thu Jan 28, 2010 4:14 pm

Mattb wrote:
m.b. wrote:Actually, M.B. - the polling shows that folks are against the proposed bill in large part because of all the lies that've been told about it. If you actually explain what's in the plan, there's a marked shift in opinion in favor of the bill. Sure, there's stuff in there that nobody likes, due mainly to the fact that Repubs decided not to participate at all, allowing a handful of hostage takers to demand some pretty outrageous stuff, but on balance, most folks support the broader bill once they understand what's actually in it.

uh huh, yeah. that's why it passed before all 3 deadlines and has been put on the backburner.

yeap...it just needs to be explained to us again... cuz you know, we're too dumb to understand what he really wants to do.
III

User avatar
West Chester
Posts: 4820
Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2008 7:13 pm

Re: for the SOTU...

Post by West Chester » Thu Jan 28, 2010 4:26 pm

BigCliff wrote:
Are you saying that you don't want the president to do an end-around to fix something that liberal senators refuse to fix because they're afraid of offending somebody wanting a hand-out?
Yes, I am saying I don't want the president to do an end around the Legislative branch or Judicial branch to "fix" something.
If said posting of nude women includes her holding fish AND a large set of antlers (Non-photoshopped), then it can stay. Otherwise, No nudity on the Drake board. Skimpy? OK. Side-boob? Approved. -nemo

User avatar
Mattb
Posts: 864
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2007 1:01 am
Location: Maine
Contact:

Re: for the SOTU...

Post by Mattb » Thu Jan 28, 2010 4:29 pm

m.b. wrote: yeap...it just needs to be explained to us again... cuz you know, we're too dumb to understand what he really wants to do.
Well, that's what the polling indicates. Of course, when the public has consistently been lied to by opponents of the bill, it's probably unfair to say that they're dumb- I'd say misinformed would be a better word.

Edit: Note: I'm not saying that everyone who's against the bill is misinformed - there are certainly plenty of people out there (and in here) that are well informed and still against the bill, but the polling indicates that a majority of Americans support the ideas behind the bill when it's explained to them.
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.”
-Daniel Patrick Moynihan

User avatar
West Chester
Posts: 4820
Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2008 7:13 pm

Re: for the SOTU...

Post by West Chester » Thu Jan 28, 2010 4:43 pm

Matt- if the 2000+ page healthcare bill is so great why do votes for it need to be bribed and why is it negotiated behind closed doors? Why not SHOW the people what is so great about it, how hard is it to upload onto the internet?
If said posting of nude women includes her holding fish AND a large set of antlers (Non-photoshopped), then it can stay. Otherwise, No nudity on the Drake board. Skimpy? OK. Side-boob? Approved. -nemo

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider] and 16 guests