It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Cotton Candy Words, Gumdrop Dreams, and Rainbow Smiles : Mr Obama's Sugar High

page: 1

log in


posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 02:36 PM
For those who know me, know I am neither a Republican nor a Democrat, neither a Conservative nor a Liberal, so before people who do not know me start crying and whining I am against President Obama for his party stance or pure party doctrine, you will be incorrect.

Left-Wing, Right-Wing, This Turkey, Knows How To Soar Like An Eagle

You can read some of my political stances there if you so choose to do so.

I am getting tired of hearing President Obama speaking in generalities, high morally sounding language, and as well hopes and dreams type speeches, without an content, intent, or actual facts whatsoever.

If you listen to his speeches they are totally oblivious of actual facts, they lack any kind of "meat and potatoes" so to speak in that they are only created for sound bytes and to smother the populace in the fact that we are poor right now "but we will endure" which is nothing less than hypocrisy to say the least, because that is an empty statement, devoid of an actual message.

If I wanted to listen to hopes and dreams type speeches I would go listen to, well I have no clue, because I do not want to listen to empty, vascillating, and meaningless talk.

After listening to the man speak for fourty-five minutes last night all I wanted was my lost time back.

You see, I say this because I hear, understand, and can speak in double-speak if I so choose to.

This means I heard right through to the bottom line of what he was really saying, a whole lot of nothing.

And, it is not only this speech, but every one of them while the man was running for office as well.

When political speakers, no matter what office, speak with absolutely no content, intent, or actual substance is when we as citizens need to watch the Hell out because we're about to get screwed and screwed hard.

[edit on 10-9-2009 by SpartanKingLeonidas]

posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 03:00 PM
And this is different in what way from previous administrations? Are you troubled becasue he has replaced fear and loathing in America with his brand of hope and encouragement? Or replaced fraudulent and manufactured 'facts' with generalities? I didn't vote for the man either and am not a Democrat. But in my humble opinion, given the fact that people can't seem to be able to distinguish between facts and right-wing generated hysteria and hyperbole, he would be wasting his time if he tried.

Look, I'm far from happy with the way things are going. But in my 57yrs on the planet there is nothing that Obama is doing that is any more egregious than that done by his predecessors. And in many respects he's far removed from much of the BS that preceeded him. He's a politician. They're all politicians. A large pecentage of the attacks directed at his Administration are poltically motivated. It's abundantly clear.

We were wholly screwed by the last Administration. The wars, the Patriot Acts, torture, and the abdication of their fiduciary duty of oversight to the markets and banking industry that led to the collapse of the economy that cost us little guys everything we've worked for. Every politicain needs to be watched. The whole system is screwed. But what the hell, why not one more Obama-bashing thread. That will help.

posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 03:13 PM
reply to post by jtma508

Well, I do not see this as very different from many of the previous Adminstrations, really.

This is not an Obama trashing thread, it is a declaration of being tired of hearing no content in a speech whatsoever, because it is filled with meaningless garbage.

Sugar-coated words, sugar-coated meanings, and sugar-coated doctrine.

I do not sugar-coat the things I discuss, although I will use diplomacy, I still give out facts.

I railed hard as Hell against Bush, and I have not even started in on Obama, yet.

Political Collusion of a President and Congress in Collapsing America, The Fall of the New Rome

I will give him the benefit of the doubt before I begin going hardcore on the man.

[edit on 10-9-2009 by SpartanKingLeonidas]

posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 03:27 PM
reply to post by jtma508

With all due respect, I think you a re twisting the point.

If one were to subject the speeches of many 'selected' career-politicians to symbolic logic, you would find them mostly devoid of anything other than a sympathy sound-bite or two to evoke a response from his or her directed audience.

It is what the Madison Avenue psychologist train them to do. It is a game theory approach to achieving a desired goal. That goal is most likely not about serving the community.

But once the brass ring is in the hands of the "winner" - our president - I think it is far from unreasonable to expect a no-bull direct manner of communication from the holder of the seat of 'buck-stoppage'.

Mr. Obama, (pardon me, President Obama) has hardly ever been anything other than a pretty face and a charming speaker. You can do that without saying anything, as many of us know all too well from Presidents past.

It is not bashing, it is a call to recognize when you're not being told anything.

I wager I could distill the speech down to a single page - a 5 minute affair.

The rest is for the purpose of arming his political supporters with fodder to display proudly, while eliminating those elements to which his opponents can be compelled to object.

Let's face it. Every time a president fails to lead, we cover this ground. Every time a critic of Bush, or Clinton, or Bush, or ANY president speaks, we see the tirades of the partisan maligning the person who dared offer up an opposing opinion, or worse yet, an observation that doesn't flatter the 'celebrity' President in office (and yes they are ALL celebrities - just like Brittany, Paris, and Hanna - or is it Miley?)

I agree with SKL - I expect substance from the person who we (generally speaking) were "sold" as Presidential material.

When someone called out "You lie!" - he SHOULD HAVE RESPONDED.

That he didn't tells me something. Something about people who care more about the decorum of office, pomp, and circumstance, than a critical national issue. The time for babbling leaders is over. ENOUGH CAMPAIGNING ALREADY. The Congress and Senate don't NEED inspiration; they NEED a kick in the butt - and a stern reminder that they are not IN CHARGE of ANYTHING.

The people needed to hear what the President has in mind when he speaks of Health Care overhaul, Not half-truths and fuzzy facts.

When was the last time a presidential candidate INCLUDING THIS ONE was ever able to deliver on his "THIS IS WHAT WE WILL DO FOR YOU" message?

They've done plenty for themselves and their friends... and I mean PLENTY.

What is our 'gain' in this equation.... because all I keep hearing is about sacrifice and giving.... I need to know that he will actually do something FOR OUR BENEFIT - not his cohorts, his party, his political affiliates, and his czar-cronies.

[edit on 10-9-2009 by Maxmars]

posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 03:32 PM
reply to post by Maxmars

Thank you, MM.

You got my point in and understood exactly where I was coming from.

U.N.S.C. and 2012 : Political Ideologies, Nations United, and Views on Terrorism : Conflict Earth

That thread there, if given as a political speech, and I can give it as a speech, would be what I would consider a "meat and potatoes" speech, there's evidence, credibility, research you can fact-check, and as well room for arguement if you disagree.

I want people to disagree with me, if they do, it gives me room to come back with a declarative statement, or to re-direct, or even to correct if someone misinterpreted something I said or they are misrepresenting something I said, or even distorting it.

Giving speeches is about actually carrying a message, and Obama's "messages" carry nothing but light and frivilous meanings to me because I see through the feint.

posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 03:33 PM
Hmm one thing that strikes me as telling...

It seems almost universal that when someone defends Mr. Obama they always seem to do so by comparing him to Bush and his administration. Which I guess seems natural enough. But what does that prove? Being able to say you were better than an absolute disaster ... isn't saying very much.

Hey our brand of BS is chemical free and not tested on animals!! ...

Big deal.. it's still BS... and it still stinks.

posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 03:35 PM

Originally posted by Resinveins
Hmm one thing that strikes me as telling...

It seems almost universal that when someone defends Mr. Obama they always seem to do so by comparing him to Bush and his administration. Which I guess seems natural enough. But what does that prove? Being able to say you were better than an absolute disaster ... isn't saying very much.

Hey our brand of BS is chemical free and not tested on animals!! ...

Big deal.. it's still BS... and it still stinks.

Well, I have to say I appreciate the comment.

I have not once compared Obama to Bush, I hated Bush with a passion, but at least his speeches had some facts to check in them, even if they were erroneous facts about WMD in Iraq, at least there was substance, even if it was a lack of credible substance, it was still something in which we could check on.

posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 04:09 PM
I have no doubt that if President Obama presented the speech he gave last night, in the way back time when I was in 9th grade speech class, Mr. Richie would have gotten wee-weed up and awarded a grade of D-. F's were reserved for students who not only said nothing of substance, but did so without being eloquent.

posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 04:21 PM
reply to post by SpartanKingLeonidas

I do so very much agree with you about his addiction to promising everything but the actual impending disappointment...he is always "eat all you want, and never get fat...have sex with everybody and it will cure your herpes..." When people praised his DNC acceptance speech, all I thought was, these promises won't all fit in the refrigerator at once, somebody's going to be surprised when they eat their treat rotten...

He is both tastes-great and less-filling, as seen on TV, at least. I almost want to disagree with people who say he lies, though his statements do not seem at all intended to be factually correct in the normal sense, because...

I myself am a big-time liar, it is one of my deepest subjects of special interest, and there is a state which I can access (or call it a set of rules of self-discipline in self-presentation), which reminds me of Obama's work...I call it being "stylized", and when one is all "stylized", you are not saying what you mean, but you are also not saying the opposite of what you mean (it's like, by analogy, the liar is a shoplifter, and the stylized fella is like a mime WHO WITH BIG GESTURES is playing the role of a shoplifter (but at the end the mime still winds up with the same candy bar in his pocket that the shoplifter, if noticed stealing it, would have gotten arrested for)).

A good sign that you're in the "stylized" zone is that, when you tell the plain truth, nobody believes you...That is the best way to lie (or at least an artsily terse way), is to tell the truth in a way that's not believed...but up until this minute I have not considered whether Obama tells the plain truth in a way that's overlooked and discounted (I guess I'd have to read his books, to have an opinion on that one, maybe, huh).

posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 04:27 PM
reply to post by kyred

President Obama would have gotten an A for oratory skills from my 7th/8th grade teacher for English.

She would then have given him an F for content, intent, and actual facts.

Then, she would have averaged those two grades, and given him a C- for it.

posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 04:31 PM
reply to post by nine-eyed-eel

I could not agree with you more as it seems that Mr Obama is the conductor, waiving his schtick (purposeful misspelling there) around in the air, and when the band begins to play they look at him for direction, but he has his eyes closed and is humming his own tune.

I thought the music reference was apropos there.

A whole lot of nothing was said last night, and in every speech since.

You will notice I am not bashing those who support the man, let them think what they want.

I refuse to buy into complete garbage though.

posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 06:31 PM
I thought to be fair to President Obama I would provide a direct link to his speech.

White House : Obama's Speech Before Congress 09/09/09

I would copy and paste it here as a quote and comment on each part of it, but I would be wasting my time.

You can see through the entire speech because of his choice of careful words.

It holds no water as to containing anything of actual merit.

posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 07:34 AM
reply to post by nine-eyed-eel

After re-reading your post today, I have a few more points I should have mentioned in the OP.

What I am speaking about with Obama, is he is good at saying a whole lot of nothing.

The meaning there is simple enough, by sugar-coating his words and only picking "uplifting" words, and talking around in circles, he is artfully dodging any and all responsibility for being held accountable for anything he says, so that when his promises are not fulfilled either because the Republican Party makes him a lame-duck President, or because he never had the intentions to fulfill the promises to begin with, no one can truly get pissed off with him.

I have explained this in person to people and they seem to understand it better.

It also works for explanation because I demonstrate for them what he or any other politician is doing.

Quote by SKL : I see the issues of today as something we have to fix and come together towards a better destiny with a cooperation of all of the people within the entire body of citizens, because if we do not, our children will fail to understand that we could not assist them in being prepared for the needs of tomorrow.

See? Now, there's a small example, by my example, of the exact same thing Obama is doing.

The difference is I do not do that, while I do know diplomacy, I do not use it as smoke and mirrors.

I am a public speaker, have been practicing since I was a teenager, my mother was the home school field trip coordinator and always picked on me to speak about what event we were about to go on a field trip for because she usually set it around something I was interested without my advanced knowledge, and put me on the spot as a public speaker, as well I have been studying warfare, politics, and Government since I was a boy of six, because someday I am going to be a world leader, my stepfather having been a Marine during Vietnam thought it was important to know all things political as well as what was going on it the world so that I had the option to make choices.

new topics

top topics


log in