Democratic National Convention Discussion

Clinton's speech was so good it looked lke it had Obama freaked out a bit, almost jealous or something.

Originally posted by Deetermined
reply to post by queenannie38

 

According to the transcript of Bill's speech last night, available here :

"But it could have been because, as the Senate Republican leader said, in a remarkable moment of candor, two full years before the election, their number-one priority was not to put America back to work. It was to put the president out of work."

Could part of that have been because Obama started campaigning two years before the election?

That works both ways too. Obama wasted at least a year-and-a-half pushing Obamacare before he ever attempted to address the jobs issue after he took office.

edit on 6-9-2012 by Deetermined because: (no reason given)

Well, that's just it.

I don't think Obama has done anything at all.

He goofed off on the golf course and went on vacations every few weeks.

He was a disaster overseas. Obama got caught bowing to everyone. The trade agreements

were amateur hour failures. Pelosi and Reid pushed through ObamaCare.

Dodd / Frank was created by Dodd & Frank.

Obama did put on a few small business Dog & Pony Shows. ( PR Stunts)

The Stimulus was wasted on Solyndra and other green energy failures.

The trillion dollar deficits were by design and not an accident.

Obama is in way over his head and incompetent.

--------------
The worst part was that Obama lied by omission. He failed to inform us that he intended

to wrap a wet blanket around Free Market Capitalism. - Unending Regulations -

- America tried on a socialist suit and it didn't fit. -

Originally posted by NewAgeMan
Clinton's speech was so good it looked lke it had Obama freaked out a bit, almost jealous or something.

Clinton gave a few helpful words to Obama but then went on and on about - compromise -.

That's something Obama never does.

Obama wants to be the king not president.

Originally posted by queenannie38
reply to post by Deetermined

 

Yes, I'd already read that a few weeks back.

But today I went to the website of the job council and actually read the minutes of the last meeting and watched enough of the video to see that the room was full of important-looking people.

Scheduling meetings that everyone can attend must be a logistical nightmare.
Not an excuse...just an observation.
The minutes of the public portion of the meeting are very interesting, imo.
They can be read here.

Well, I think the President said it for himself during that meeting in January...

THE PRESIDENT: Well, I just, again, want to thank all of you for the seriousness and effort that you’ve put into this Jobs Council. We’re going to continue to gather recommendations from you and are going to continue to try to implement them as quickly as we can. Those where we think there’s an issue, we’ll get back to you, and there will be an iterative process where we’ll be in discussions in terms of how we can achieve some of the goals that have been set.

I want you to know that obviously this year is an election year, and so getting Congress focused on some of these issues may be difficult.

Well, we know from Obama's 106 fundraisers who's having trouble staying "focused" because of it being an election year. Who cares about the 10 rounds of golf in the last six months when you're busy campaigning. We already know he reached his 100th round of golf since taking office as of last Father's Day.

I got the feeling Clinton was both praising and chastising Obama. He's a master at diplomacy and that's why he was able to work with a Republican congress during his administration and get things done.

Obama strikes me as narcissistic and not one that takes direct advice easily. Clinton seemed, in his own personal style, to be counseling Obama a little about learning to work and play well with others a little better.....like a teacher to a spoiled kindergartner.

Originally posted by queenofswords

I got the feeling Clinton was both praising and chastising Obama.

I got that feeling too.

On one hand he appeared to be lecturing the Republicans on all of their hatred for Obama, while still reminding all of the Democrats just how hated he really is! How much did that help? If anyone was unsure of whether or not the Republicans hate Obama, they sure knew it after Clinton's speech! LOL!

Originally posted by queenofswords
I got the feeling Clinton was both praising and chastising Obama. He's a master at diplomacy and that's why he was able to work with a Republican congress during his administration and get things done.

Obama strikes me as narcissistic and not one that takes direct advice easily. Clinton seemed, in his own personal style, to be counseling Obama a little about learning to work and play well with others a little better.....like a teacher to a spoiled kindergartner.

edit on 6-9-2012 by queenofswords because: (no reason given)

That's probably the best description of Obama - narcissistic - elitist.

I would also throw in Radical Marxist masquerading as a moderate to get elected.

Birds of a feather flock together.

Obama hired Van Jones. Glenn Beck busted Van Jones with his own words.

Van Jones quit in the middle of the night. I wonder why?

Anyway, Obama does NOT enjoy the company of fellow democrats in congress.

Chris Matthews is alarmed. He has heard stories.

reply to post by queenofswords


So clearly English isn't your first language if that was what you took from him directly saying, Hey this guy has done everything he can to do to cooperate with every rival he has. Even pointing out that even though he and Hillary waged a fierce fight in an impossibly close primary and still appointed some of her backers and Hillary herself to positions in his cabinet. Sounds an awful lot like the child that need to be told to work with others. This President has done nothing but attempt to work with a Congress that acts like a two year old who just discovered how to say No. It doesn't matter what policy it is, no matter how much sense it makes, no matter how good it may or may not be they just say No. And that wouldn't be so awful if when they were saying No they had a plan of their own.

Unlike certain other posters I don't think the Republican Party consists of low IQ's they are just intentionally thick headed living in lala land.

Originally posted by KeliOnyx
reply to post by queenofswords

 

So clearly English isn't your first language if that was what you took from him directly saying, Hey this guy has done everything he can to do to cooperate with every rival he has. Even pointing out that even though he and Hillary waged a fierce fight in an impossibly close primary and still appointed some of her backers and Hillary herself to positions in his cabinet. Sounds an awful lot like the child that need to be told to work with others. This President has done nothing but attempt to work with a Congress that acts like a two year old who just discovered how to say No. It doesn't matter what policy it is, no matter how much sense it makes, no matter how good it may or may not be they just say No. And that wouldn't be so awful if when they were saying No they had a plan of their own.

Unlike certain other posters I don't think the Republican Party consists of low IQ's they are just intentionally thick headed living in lala land.

You are living in lala land if you think the Keystone Pipeline won't be built.

Obama just delayed the inevitable. That's the 1 thing Obama did do.

He actively lobbied on the phone with senators to kill the Keystone Pipeline!

The GOP passed many bills to help the economy. They are jammed in

Harry Reids desk drawer. - Obstructionist -

Originally posted by Eurisko2012

Originally posted by KeliOnyx
reply to post by queenofswords

 

So clearly English isn't your first language if that was what you took from him directly saying, Hey this guy has done everything he can to do to cooperate with every rival he has. Even pointing out that even though he and Hillary waged a fierce fight in an impossibly close primary and still appointed some of her backers and Hillary herself to positions in his cabinet. Sounds an awful lot like the child that need to be told to work with others. This President has done nothing but attempt to work with a Congress that acts like a two year old who just discovered how to say No. It doesn't matter what policy it is, no matter how much sense it makes, no matter how good it may or may not be they just say No. And that wouldn't be so awful if when they were saying No they had a plan of their own.

Unlike certain other posters I don't think the Republican Party consists of low IQ's they are just intentionally thick headed living in lala land.

You are living in lala land if you think the Keystone Pipeline won't be built.

Obama just delayed the inevitable. That's the 1 thing Obama did do.

He actively lobbied on the phone with senators to kill the Keystone Pipeline!

The GOP passed many bills to help the economy. They are jammed in

Harry Reids desk drawer. - Obstructionist -

Don't forget, Obama took credit for approving the Southern half of the pipeline from Oklahoma to the Gulf. He just forgot to mention that the permits had already been approved. He also failed to mention that until the Northern portion gets approved (you are right that it is a matter of when not if), that the Southern half will be a pipeline to no where.

For too many of us the political equality we once had won was meaningless in the face of economic inequality. A small group had concentrated into their own hands an almost complete control over other people's property, other people's money, other people's labor - other people's lives. For too many of us life was no longer free; liberty no longer real; men could no longer follow the pursuit of happiness.

Against economic tyranny such as this, the American citizen could appeal only to the organized power of government. The collapse of 1929 showed up the despotism for what it was. The election of 1932 was the people's mandate to end it. Under that mandate it is being ended.

The royalists of the economic order have conceded that political freedom was the business of the government, but they have maintained that economic slavery was nobody's business. They granted that the government could protect the citizen in his right to vote, but they denied that the government could do anything to protect the citizen in his right to work and his right to live.

Today we stand committed to the proposition that freedom is no half-and-half affair. If the average citizen is guaranteed equal opportunity in the polling place, he must have equal opportunity in the market place.

These economic royalists complain that we seek to overthrow the institutions of America. What they really complain of is that we seek to take away their power. Our allegiance to American institutions requires the overthrow of this kind of power. In vain they seek to hide behind the flag and the Constitution. In their blindness they forget what the flag and the Constitution stand for. Now, as always, they stand for democracy, not tyranny; for freedom, not subjection; and against a dictatorship by mob rule and the over-privileged alike.

The brave and clear platform adopted by this convention, to which I heartily subscribe, sets forth that government in a modern civilization has certain inescapable obligations to its citizens, among which are protection of the family and the home, the establishment of a democracy of opportunity, and aid to those overtaken by disaster.

But the resolute enemy within our gates is ever ready to beat down our words unless in greater courage we will fight for them.

From FDR's speech at the 1936 DNC, a year that many have compared to 2012 with an incumbent running after four years of federal spending in response to severe economic downturn.

I wonder what the response would be if Obama so brazenly attacked the systemic abusers of the private sector?

I wrote a thread this morning, spent some time on it, noones replied so far. Thought some here might want to read it. 2012 and 1936 Parallel, 76 year pattern

Originally posted by MidnightTide
reply to post by Indigo5

 

She became the first chairwoman of the Bexar County Raza Unida Party....so what is their to dispute?

You do your self a dis-service when you pretend to be stupid.

I concisely explained in my last post that your claim that it was 'factual" that La Raza Unida was " a radical, anti-white, socialist " organization was OPINION...NOT FACT.

I never disputed her membership and the post that you responded to was clear...Honesty matters...facts matter...I am always eager to debate those of other opinions...but folks without integrity?? Why bother?

Originally posted by MidnightTide
Said Rosie Castro of The Alamo:

“When I grew up I learned that the ‘heroes’ of the Alamo were a bunch of drunks and crooks and slaveholding imperialists who conquered land that didn’t belong to them. But as a little girl I got the message — we were losers. I can truly say that I hate that place and everything it stands for.”…

and yes, even before replying I know you are going to question my source.....but there seems to be a common theme of the Democrat Party these days, a hate for America.

Yes..your source is to be expected given the character of your posts...and the legitimacy of your source or the qoute aside...You just leaped from one Latino woman's conflicted feelings about the battle at the Alamo to claiming that anyone who is Democrat hates America.

Your posts lack integrity, honesty or logic and seem fueled by vitriol, not actual thought.

Not interested in discussions with such folks.

Originally posted by SheopleNation

Originally posted by Indigo5
I think you confused this with the RNC convention thread....

Must have took some brain power to come up with that eh?

Given the grade-school level of the post that I was responding to...I thought it appropriate. I avoid big words when speaking to small children.

Your post..

Originally posted by SheopleNation
This Convention was exactly what I expected. A bunch of mentally deranged lunatics foaming at the mouth while shooting off their pie-holes.

reply to post by Indigo5


So does that mean you wouldn't want to go out for a few brews later? Damn I am disappointed.

I am starting to want to cheer Romney on, because if he does win, you and the rest of the Democratic Party can go back to being disappointed in America.

Here is another FACT CHECK.
Steelworker Featured at DNC Didn't Work for Bain By Jonathan Karl | ABC OTUS
news.yahoo.com...

John Kerry, on Romney: "He doesn't know much about foreign policy, but he has all of these neo-con advisers who know all the wrong things about foreign policy."

Could be wrong, but that's the first time I've heard the term "neo-con" here. I've missed a good amount so it may have come up, but that is a very strong negative connotation.

The Republicans say Obama bows to foreign nations, Democrats say the other side are neo-con interventionist war mongerers. Reality is surely somewhere in the middle for both.


Seeing John Kerry got me thinking where is Al Gore?

He spoke at the 08 DNC, but apparently this year,

He isn’t coming to the Democratic National Convention but is spending the week in New York City, anchoring coverage of the event for his network Current TV.

I'd never watched Current, and didn't know it is largely led by Gore.

Watching Chris Matthews turn on his one true love like a lover spurned almost caused me to feel that certain thing go up my leg. Keep that up Chris, keep it up, you'll see the light after awhile.

The clinton speech eh the guy who didn't get bin laden the guy who said that one man could not fix this countries problems in 1 term.

Democrats cheered that and agree with that and guess what guess who owes Bush an apology.

Originally posted by PatrickGarrow17
John Kerry, on Romney: "He doesn't know much about foreign policy, but he has all of these neo-con advisers who know all the wrong things about foreign policy."

Could be wrong, but that's the first time I've heard the term "neo-con" here. I've missed a good amount so it may have come up, but that is a very strong negative connotation.

The Republicans say Obama bows to foreign nations, Democrats say the other side are neo-cons. Reality is surely somewhere in the middle for both.

Kerry unrolled a real diss-reel of barbs at Romney. He was really fired up, and he absolutely skewered him.

Obama's got bigger problems than Romney. Just FACT checking.

Originally posted by QueSeraSera

Originally posted by PatrickGarrow17
John Kerry, on Romney: "He doesn't know much about foreign policy, but he has all of these neo-con advisers who know all the wrong things about foreign policy."

Could be wrong, but that's the first time I've heard the term "neo-con" here. I've missed a good amount so it may have come up, but that is a very strong negative connotation.

The Republicans say Obama bows to foreign nations, Democrats say the other side are neo-cons. Reality is surely somewhere in the middle for both.

Kerry unrolled a real diss-reel of barbs at Romney. He was really fired up, and he absolutely skewered him.