Obama Campaigned On Transparency, Let's Be Honest, How Is He Doing So Far?

page: 2
10
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 6 2013 @ 05:46 PM
link   
Regarding the topic of racism within this topic
www.abovetopsecret.com...

In the full scope of things unfortunately race may very well be an issue
I can challenge anyone on this topic!




posted on Apr, 6 2013 @ 05:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
reply to post by neo96
 


Would Romney's administration been more transparent than Obama's Neo? Putting aside your fixation on race and racism.


Yep

Because of media like MSNBC Romney would actually be accountable instead of defending him everyday.
edit on 6-4-2013 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 6 2013 @ 05:57 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 



Originally posted by neo96

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
reply to post by neo96
 


Would Romney's administration been more transparent than Obama's Neo? Putting aside your fixation on race and racism.


Yep

Because of media like MSNBC Romney would actually be accountable instead of defending him everyday.


So you actually believe he would have lead a more transparent government? This was all I needed from you, thank you for finally responding. Was that so hard? I obviously disagree, not sure in which areas he'd be more transparent, I just can't see any.



posted on Apr, 6 2013 @ 06:02 PM
link   
I know many people on the left have a very defeatist attitude.
I hate your party but my party is slightly better than yours????

How can you hate republicans but allow them to define the baseline of what's acceptable or not in national events/decisions?

It's such an insanely ridiculous approach to the topic.
It's like watching a pedophile go free right before your eyes!!!

Stop this nonsense please
edit on 6-4-2013 by ModernAcademia because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 6 2013 @ 06:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Southern Guardian
 


So tell me?

How does the nonstop 24/7 left wing attack machine(like MSNBC) doing everything in their power to destroy a right winger so hard to understand?

That would make him more "transparent" because unlike the current one they would not be doing everything in their "power" to defend" and cover up for him.
edit on 6-4-2013 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 6 2013 @ 06:13 PM
link   
reply to post by ModernAcademia
 



Originally posted by ModernAcademia
Do you not know how much of a defeatist response this is?

I hate your party but my party is slightly better than yours?


I see you took offense to the fact I stated that Romney's administration wouldn't have been any different. Maybe you disagree? Maybe you feel Romney would have been more a transparent president and this is why you decided to take great offense to my previous response? Am I right ModernAcademia? Or is this not you?

Do you want to really talk about being defeatist? This idea that Romney and Obama were the only choices in the last elections, this idea that Romney would have been the 'lesser evil', that is defeatist. From what I can take from you taking offense there to my response, this certainly sounds like you.



posted on Apr, 6 2013 @ 06:15 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 



So tell me?

How does the nonstop 24/7 left wing attack machine(like MSNBC)


Or 24/7 rightwing attach dogs like Fox news, or online attack dogs like The Blaze, or the Drudge report. Yea.



posted on Apr, 6 2013 @ 06:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Southern Guardian
 





Or 24/7 rightwing attach dogs like Fox news, or online attack dogs like The Blaze, or the Drudge report. Yea.


Who is the current sitting Potus?

I really do love how people give them so much power where their opposite's just cheer lead for him.



posted on Apr, 6 2013 @ 06:23 PM
link   
reply to post by ModernAcademia
 


reply to post by neo96
 


It's evident that neither of you are all concerned about transparency in government so much as whether we're discussing a Obama or not. It seems as though criticizing Obama and the Democrats over transparency is completely right and justified, but discussing other Republicans as well, well this is 'defeatist' and 'partisan', so we must only focus on Obama. It's apparent that neither of you are all too concerned about government transparency, only Obama.

Yep.



posted on Apr, 6 2013 @ 06:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Southern Guardian
 





It's evident that neither of you are all concerned about transparency in government s


That was hilarious considering all someone wanted to talk about was Romney,Republican's,,Fox News,Blaze etc.

That was transparent most people just call it deflection because they really don't want to discuss the topic.
edit on 6-4-2013 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 6 2013 @ 06:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Southern Guardian
 


No you are completely wrong.
You talk about another member bringing up race, but then you bring up Romney.

Tell me, voting white or voting black
Voting left or voting right, how far apart are they?



posted on Apr, 6 2013 @ 06:37 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 


You see Neo, the difference with me here is that I first acknowledged that Obama's administration was lacking transparency. Your first post involved justifying why people voted for Romney (who got around 61 million votes mind you). Not once did either of you acknowledge or recognize that Republicans like Romney are no different when it comes to transparency, both of you got 'offended' when I brought this to light. It's fairly apparent that this is a partisan issue to you two rather than that of transparent government.



posted on Apr, 6 2013 @ 06:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Southern Guardian
 


You still don't understand
You bringing up Romney is the same as bringing up race

Partisanship and skin color, how different are they?



posted on Apr, 6 2013 @ 06:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Southern Guardian
 


Sorry



Fret not there are 61 million Americans saw right through the guy which is why they voted for someone else in 2012.


How was that a partisan post?

That is about Apolitical as a person can get.



posted on Apr, 6 2013 @ 06:47 PM
link   
reply to post by ModernAcademia
 



You talk about another member bringing up race, but then you bring up Romney.


Had you bothered to pay attention to your own thread Modern, you would have noticed that Neo was the first one to bring up Romney by justifying why 61 million people voted the other way. I responded likewise, to which Neo decided to make this about "race and racism".


Voting left or voting right, how far apart are they?


Don't give me that "left vs right" nonsense Modern, considering how defensive you got the minute I brought up Romney and the Republicans. If you want to discuss partisanship and divide and conquer tactics, maybe you should start with your own biased views and how you can learn to overcome them.



posted on Apr, 6 2013 @ 06:54 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 


Well let's see here Neo. The thread is about lack of transparency in Obama's government, your first post is about how voters supposedly saw right through Obama on this issue by voting for Romney, implying that his administration would have been far more transparent (because it's the Republican party and it's Romney). So I fail to see how this wasn't a partisan response Neo? What do you take me for?

I know I know, the intention of this thread was to bash Obama, not really to discuss the growing concerns surrounding government transparency. I apologize for messing this up for you two.



posted on Apr, 6 2013 @ 07:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Southern Guardian
 





The thread is about lack of transparency in Obama's government,


Yeah it is




your first post is about how voters supposedly saw right through Obama on this issue by voting for Romney, implying that his administration would have been far more transparent (because it's the Republican party and it's Romney). So I fail to see how this wasn't a partisan response


Guess not since that has nothing to do with this comment:




. The thread is about lack of transparency in Obama's government,





What do you take me for?


Someone political trolling.



posted on Apr, 6 2013 @ 07:31 PM
link   
Yes, Obama did campaign on transparency. This is a fact, he did say this.

If you bought this to be true, you are gullible and I have some ocean front property in Arizona and a bridge in Brooklyn I would like to sell you.

I voted for Obama the first time around and I didn't buy that campaign promise at all. I knew it was complete twaddle. But for some reason this is the one issue you all are thinking he would be honest about, even when you think that he lied about every single other thing he has ever done including his name and place of birth.



posted on Apr, 6 2013 @ 07:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Southern Guardian
 


I do understand where you are coming from
And perhaps in another thread I would have posted what you posted.

However did you see the link to the other thread I posted?



posted on Apr, 6 2013 @ 08:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer

The Obama administration is as transparent as the lead-based paint chips I used to eat as a child.
Well that explains a lot, ... j/k.

Politicans say what they think People want to Hear , say anything to get Elected.
Is Obama Transparent?
Hell No.
Are any Congressmen, Senators Transparent?
Hell No.





new topics
top topics
 
10
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join