All the conservatives crying about

[bane]

Those people aren't exactly filing taxes anyway Juggs. I wondered about that. Seeing as how we'll be mandated that everyone legally in the country will be insured, do we still have to pay for their emergency care?

That's what I wondered. That's amazingly disturbing.

Sounds like a pretty good deal for them. They still get free medical care, only now with less waiting room lines! Viva La Raza!

[bane]

... Obama's "broken promises." What are you going to do, not vote for him again next time?

I find it baffling that you aren't concerned by it.

Well you have to put it into context. Some of them aren't broken promises at all... they're things he attempted to address and didn't get his way with Congress. Or they're things like not publicly broadcasting the reconciliation negotiations, which I think is a very good idea, because last time he let the public get involved it turned into a farce. The "broken promise" that bothers me the most is how he abandoned the public option. But then I can somewhat understand it - it wasn't going to get through Congress anyway what with several Dems and all 40 Republicans opposing it, so it was either abandon it or futilely support it and likely end up not getting any health care reform bill passed at all.

But most of all I view it from the perspective that anyone who takes candidates' campaign promises at face value is a fool anyway. Candidates will say anything to get elected. On the major issues he hasn't done much I didn't expect him to do, so I'm not going to get bent out of shape about minor about-faces and flip-flops.

The thing I remember libs making the most noise about prior to Obama's presidency was the war. It's been over shadowed by the health care issue, but I'm baffled by the fact that you seem completely unconcerned that not only has Obama not scaled back or ended the war, he's increased it. The opinion seems to be, "Well, he's pulling out of Iraq and focusing on Afghanistan" which personally I don't have a problem with because I think it's necessary, but then again, I wasn't one of the people screaming about ending the war. Additionally, how much has he REALLY pulled out of Iraq? I'm just absolutely baffled by the lack of concern on the part of liberals over this.

[Ugmo]

The thing I remember libs making the most noise about prior to Obama's presidency was the war. It's been over shadowed by the health care issue, but I'm baffled by the fact that you seem completely unconcerned that not only has Obama not scaled back or ended the war, he's increased it. The opinion seems to be, "Well, he's pulling out of Iraq and focusing on Afghanistan" which personally I don't have a problem with because I think it's necessary, but then again, I wasn't one of the people screaming about ending the war. Additionally, how much has he REALLY pulled out of Iraq? I'm just absolutely baffled by the lack of concern on the part of liberals over this.

I won't speak for anyone else, but I've always been in favor of ramping up the war effort in Afghanistan (easy for me to say from the comfort of my office of course). He's also drawing down the war effort in Iraq, but not too quickly to leave a vacuum there. He's doing exactly what I thought he should - and for that matter, did he ever suggest during the campaign that he was going to withdraw from Afghanistan? Maybe my memory is faulty or selective, but seem to remember him saying more resources should be focused on Afghanistan.

[VinnieKulick]

Lets not forget that Bush had us on a course to be out of Iraq as well.

[Ugmo]

It's weird... I just did a search on candidate Obama's comments on Afghanistan and found this site accusing him of flip-flopping:

http://www.youdecidepolitics.com/2009/1 ... ghanistan/

But the video there shows he hasn't flip-flopped at all. What he said during the campaign is what he has done as president - draw down the effort in Iraq and concentrate on Afghanistan:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ga859Trv ... r_embedded#

[bane]

Ugmo - How much has he really drawn down the effort in Iraq? His course of action seems to be pretty much what Bush's was, and as I recall, Bush was some evil warmongerer in your eyes.

[Ugmo]

Ugmo - How much has he really drawn down the effort in Iraq? His course of action seems to be pretty much what Bush's was, and as I recall, Bush was some evil warmongerer in your eyes.

I'm not arguing that. It's not even the point - you were asking about Afghanistan, and he is doing in Afghanistan what he said he was going to do. And I never considered Bush an evil war-monger for going into Afghanistan. That was clearly the right move at the time, and it's a shame he diverted resources from that operation to invade Iraq.

[Drunk Kennedy]

according to vinniekullick's obama by the numbers thread:

139,500—U.S. troops in Iraq in January 2009.

111,000—U.S. troops in Iraq as of Jan. 12, 2010.

[Ugmo]

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE5270XI20090308

According to this link they will all be out by August 31, 2010.

Iraq was a fucked-up place before the invasion and it was an even more-fucked up place after the invasion. My position is that since we invaded it we have a responsiblity to make sure we don't leave it too quickly and allow all hell to break loose.

[bane]

according to vinniekullick's obama by the numbers thread:

139,500—U.S. troops in Iraq in January 2009.

111,000—U.S. troops in Iraq as of Jan. 12, 2010.

Exactly. When you factor in the increase in Afghanistan, the result is a large increase in the US war effort. That is the opposite of what most libs said they wanted. I recall plenty of chatter over Bush's war spending bankrupting us etc. There appears to be very little of that coming from the left now. That's my point. Are those guys so determined to defend their guy that they just dump their principles, or was all the screaming at Bush just partisan bullshit designed to bring him down?

[bane]

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE5270XI20090308

According to this link they will all be out by August 31, 2010.

Iraq was a fucked-up place before the invasion and it was an even more-fucked up place after the invasion. My position is that since we invaded it we have a responsiblity to make sure we don't leave it too quickly and allow all hell to break loose.

I don't dispute that, but how is that any different than what Bush (or McCain) said he was going to do?

[thejuggernaut]

according to vinniekullick's obama by the numbers thread:

139,500—U.S. troops in Iraq in January 2009.

111,000—U.S. troops in Iraq as of Jan. 12, 2010.

Exactly. When you factor in the increase in Afghanistan, the result is a large increase in the US war effort. That is the opposite of what most libs said they wanted. I recall plenty of chatter over Bush's war spending bankrupting us etc. There appears to be very little of that coming from the left now. That's my point. Are those guys so determined to defend their guy that they just dump their principles, or was all the screaming at Bush just partisan bullshit designed to bring him down?

While I know you're a reasonable middle of the roader, let's not forget that the Bushies thought Dubya's diarrhea smelled like a strawberry milkshake.

[Ugmo]

I don't dispute that, but how is that any different than what Bush (or McCain) said he was going to do?

I don't really remember what Bush or McCain said they were going to do, and I don't see how it's relevant. You are asking why I'm not disappointed in the way Obama has handled things; the answer is because he's doing exactly what I think he should do: slowly withdraw from Iraq and finally concentrate fully on Afghanistan.

[bane]

according to vinniekullick's obama by the numbers thread:

139,500—U.S. troops in Iraq in January 2009.

111,000—U.S. troops in Iraq as of Jan. 12, 2010.

Exactly. When you factor in the increase in Afghanistan, the result is a large increase in the US war effort. That is the opposite of what most libs said they wanted. I recall plenty of chatter over Bush's war spending bankrupting us etc. There appears to be very little of that coming from the left now. That's my point. Are those guys so determined to defend their guy that they just dump their principles, or was all the screaming at Bush just partisan bullshit designed to bring him down?

While I know you're a reasonable middle of the roader, let's not forget that the Bushies thought Dubya's diarrhea smelled like a strawberry milkshake.

Sure. I'm not trying to defend Bush or the right here. God knows the right is full of whack jobs that buy whatever the propaganda machine sells them. I'm just trying to understand why something that seemingly was such a big issue to the left appears to be such a non issue now that their guy is in the big chair.

[thejuggernaut]

While I know you're a reasonable middle of the roader, let's not forget that the Bushies thought Dubya's diarrhea smelled like a strawberry milkshake.

Sure. I'm not trying to defend Bush or the right here. God knows the right is full of whack jobs that buy whatever the propaganda machine sells them. I'm just trying to understand why something that seemingly was such a big issue to the left appears to be such a non issue now that their guy is in the big chair.

LOL

The same reason why they don't mind their privacy being thrown away so long as it's THEIR guy.

It's actually hilarious, really.

"I don't care if I get denied employment or get made a suspect in a crime or discredited as a witness because the government has access to my medical history. That's fine as long as they aren't listening to me tell the story about the huge joint I smoked after having a bisexual 3 some Saturday".

[lerxstcat]

The thing I remember libs making the most noise about prior to Obama's presidency was the war. It's been over shadowed by the health care issue, but I'm baffled by the fact that you seem completely unconcerned that not only has Obama not scaled back or ended the war, he's increased it. The opinion seems to be, "Well, he's pulling out of Iraq and focusing on Afghanistan" which personally I don't have a problem with because I think it's necessary, but then again, I wasn't one of the people screaming about ending the war. Additionally, how much has he REALLY pulled out of Iraq? I'm just absolutely baffled by the lack of concern on the part of liberals over this.

I recall the IRAQ war being the big foreign policy issue, because it was seen as Dubya's personal revenge on Saddam for trying to kill his daddy. I don't think anyone really disputed going into Afghanistan after 9/11, Bane. But national healthcare was ALWAYs a big issue for the Dems domestically. It has been since the Clintons tried to do it.

[bane]

While I know you're a reasonable middle of the roader, let's not forget that the Bushies thought Dubya's diarrhea smelled like a strawberry milkshake.

Sure. I'm not trying to defend Bush or the right here. God knows the right is full of whack jobs that buy whatever the propaganda machine sells them. I'm just trying to understand why something that seemingly was such a big issue to the left appears to be such a non issue now that their guy is in the big chair.

LOL

The same reason why they don't mind their privacy being thrown away so long as it's THEIR guy.

It's actually hilarious, really.

"I don't care if I get denied employment or get made a suspect in a crime or discredited as a witness because the government has access to my medical history. That's fine as long as they aren't listening to me tell the story about the huge joint I smoked after having a bisexual 3 some Saturday".

Heh. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss huh?

[thejuggernaut]

Sure. I'm not trying to defend Bush or the right here. God knows the right is full of whack jobs that buy whatever the propaganda machine sells them. I'm just trying to understand why something that seemingly was such a big issue to the left appears to be such a non issue now that their guy is in the big chair.

LOL

The same reason why they don't mind their privacy being thrown away so long as it's THEIR guy.

It's actually hilarious, really.

"I don't care if I get denied employment or get made a suspect in a crime or discredited as a witness because the government has access to my medical history. That's fine as long as they aren't listening to me tell the story about the huge joint I smoked after having a bisexual 3 some Saturday".

Heh. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss huh?

[MCSmallDink_]

... Obama's "broken promises." What are you going to do, not vote for him again next time?

You mean like liberals crying about Bush "spending like a drunken sailor'"?

[Ugmo]

... Obama's "broken promises." What are you going to do, not vote for him again next time?

You mean like liberals crying about Bush "spending like a drunken sailor'"?

No, that's not remotely the same thing. Conservatives can criticize Obama for whatever they want, that's fine. Whining about broken promises makes it seem like they've been personally disappointed by him, when they never voted for him in the first place.

[SmokeyRamone]

... Obama's "broken promises." What are you going to do, not vote for him again next time?

You mean like liberals crying about Bush "spending like a drunken sailor'"?

No, that's not remotely the same thing. Conservatives can criticize Obama for whatever they want, that's fine. Whining about broken promises makes it seem like they've been personally disappointed by him, when they never voted for him in the first place.

just because someone doesn't vote for a certian candidate, that doesn't mean they can hope said candidate doesn't keep their word, I didn't vote for Obama, I voted libertarian, but I was cautiously optimistic when he was elected and hoped he'd be a man of his word and enact some real change, voting here usually consists of picking the lesser of two evils, or voting third party and essentially throwing your vote away, but when the people you vote for don't win, it doesn't mean that you want the guy who did win to fail, and despite of the impression people sometimes get from Fox news and idiot pundits like Limbaugh, most of us love this country and want it to succeed even when the people we vote for don't win (I'm not saying you've gotten that impression Ugmo, just saying in general, we're not as polarized and divisive as the far right and left would have people believe)