Heard on the radio that Obama has been throwing around the slogan "Yes We Did" since BP supposedly found a fix for containing the oil (of course in reference to his campaign's "Yes We Can"). So...
Before BP fix: BP must pay all costs, countless speeches pressuring BP to find fix (BP it's your responsibility)
After BP fix: "Yes We Did" (everyone the government and I saved the world!)
Am I missing something?
| +87 | GF doesn’t care about her looks | 56 | 32m | |
| +59 | Affair with my Associate… In Desperate Need for Advice | 23 | 19h | |
| +49 | How to sound more eloquent? | 17 | 6h | |
| +38 | 400k/year in HVAC sales? | 26 | 1d | |
| +33 | Would you rather live alone in an outer borough or with roommates in Manhattan? | 23 | 2d | |
| +29 | WSO Ranking On Resume??? | 7 | 4h | |
| +27 | Why do people listen to Jim Cramer Investing Advice? | 10 | 21h | |
| +26 | Carnivore Diet | 9 | 21h | |
| +26 | Is my boss gaslighting me? | 3 | 19h | |
| +23 | Chaotic Insane investment banker who passed away in the 90s or 2000s | 12 | 1d |
Career Resources
Get instant access to lessons taught by experienced private equity pros and bulge bracket investment bankers including financial statement modeling, DCF, M&A, LBO, Comps and Excel Modeling.
What a douche bag
This is what happens with popularist voting and slogans
I hate that son of a bitch.
Pat Riley, the Cubans, and all of South Beach have been saying the same thing in regards to their new trio in town. I think Obama's just trying to get in on the action since he fucked up at recruiting LBJ to Chi city.
-
If that's true, it's just another straw in the haystack of hypocrisy and populist rhetoric he's been slinging around since day 1 of the presidential campaign. What scares me even more is that America seems endlessly willing to gobble as much bullshit has be can shill.
Obama literally amazes me. Now I was not naturally against this guy. I support health care REFORM (not socialization), but he is just acting stupid now. Now I think this radio ad is not directly sponsored by him since everything I have read says that the cap is not on until this coming week. If this is sponsored by Obama then he is a fool. People in the gulf think he is doing a shit job and now he is taking credit like some victor.
I just read that the 1st oil drilling platform has left the gulf. I am going to assume that this is just the beginning. Each platform employs about 100 people and then you have to factor in the support community. Way to go Obama. The Fed is preparing to fight the fact that their ban was overturned by the courts. Nothing like kicking the gulf in the balls again. I completely support green initiatives, but the reality is we will be an oil base society for the near future. I would rather have us drilling for US oil than becoming more dependent on the Middle East.
I didn't hate Bill Clinton like this and he was pretty liberal. I dislike Hillary, but nothing like Obama. I just really think this guy doesn't have a clue.
That sums it up better than anything else I have read. My dad and I often talk about this jack-hole and the bottom line is we always come back to one single phrase..."this guy just doesn't have a clue."
He has no idea what is really going on. Middle America is pissed off, hence the Tea Party movement. Does this concern him...no, not at all, in fact, he actually ridicules and slanders them.
What an idiot.
Regards
I never really liked Obama (pure rhetoric BS and nothing more) but the more I see him, hear him, and read about him the more I dispise him.
Addition to thread: What do you guys think? Do you think there is a weak or strong chance that he will get a second presidency?
ahahahah what a tool..in the words of Gordon Gekkko, "this turkey is completely brain-dead"
I'd like to thank the uneducated voters for allowing us the opportunity to watch a clown run this nation...
Unfortunately, as much as I'm troubled by "populist" and big government rhetoric of the Obama government, saying "uneducated voters" elected him is pretty fucking ridiculous. I'd dare say educated people; academics, average white collar workers etc. are much more likely to be in favor of this kind of BS.
"Voters ages 18 to 29 favored Obama over Republican opponent John McCain by double-digit figures, 66 percent to 32 percent, according to national exit polls studied by a group that tracks youth voting. Other age groups had an 8-percentage-point difference, at most, between the two candidates.
Read more: http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/news/articles/2008/11/06/20081…"
According to exit polls, over 95% of African Americans voted for Barack Obama.
Thats not to say African Americans arent uneducated but the hood is saying WE CAN
No surprise coming from the guy who "represents his fellow common man". Well shucks, when a nation has a "common man" with a multimillion dollar net worth, sign me up.
Good point
When a "common man" represents the people, all the country gets is common BS..........Ralph Nader for President 2012
Also, I would argue G.Dubyah Bush is far below the common man's intelligence and he is well worth more than a million -> but that's cause Daddy led the way
I'm sorry, but this particular post is absolutely absurd.
First, you assert that the President is a common man. I'm sure its quite UNcommon to be president of the Harvard Law Review. This is a tremendous accomplishment for any individual, and upon achieving this feat, I would no longer consider this person to be 'common'.
You then claim that Bush is far below the common man's intelligence, and that he has only got to where he is because of his father. First off, your father can't get you into HBS. The man must have some intelligence Second, this completely negates your prior statement that Obama has led the country to shit because he is a common man. If you think that a common man can't run the country, you certainly must agree that a man born of privilege and whose father has groomed him well would certainly be able to. Unless of course you don't think any individual is qualified to run this country.
That brings me to my third point... the meat in this sandwich of absurdity is the fact that you then encourage us to vote for Ralph Nader.
Please feel free to provide some sort of realistic evidence that proves Bush was some sort of ignoramus. I hear it all the time, but other then his lack of public speaking abilities, there is not much else. In fact, I have heard/read that many people who know him and worked/advised him say exactly the opposite.
Please come back when you have something of value to add.
We don't need a "common man" in the White House, we need someone with common values...someone that understands what problems and issues middle America faces and wants to address them. This of course, should go hand-and-hand with a sense of national pride and admiration for the troops/individuals that allow us to be free. He should also have a decent handle on economic concepts and actually care about this country and its future more then himself/his own.
Not every joker (read: common man) off the street even possesses 10% of what would be needed to run this country, much less a decent size company. The country is being run by someone who attended two of the very best schools this country has to offer and look at the world-of-hurt the future of America is in for. He is supposed to be some super intellectual with great public speaking abilities (a far cry from the common man) and he can't even figure out that he should cancel his round of golf and attend to the environmental disaster occurring off-shore.
Regards
I mean common guys u shuld all know that Master Obama just needed to snap his fingers... of course he waited this long to vilify bp.....dick
.
^^^^
agreed
.
Any time you bring up race someone will get sand in their vagina. Plain fact.
rofl
Minna-no-to (Everyone's/Your party) in Japan just jumped from 1 seat to 11 over the weekend election on a purely libertarian, free market, small government platform. Also check out Poland's recent election. U.S. is blindly going down a path opposite of the world.
The common man should not be running the country. On the flip side having someone who is absolutely out of touch with how the world runs is bad also. There has to be a happy medium. Obama is obviously very intelligent, but that dude has no clue outside of his little bubble.
Israel is uneasy with him because of his middle eastern middle name. Ummm, how about the fact that Obama carried the Jewish vote, but has be one of the most apathetic Presidents towards Israel. Your name means Jack shit.
Oil keep spilling into the gulf and Obama is golfing YET again. I know it isn't his fault, but he should try and hide the fact that he is living it up while the rest of the country suffers. Bush gave up golf out of respect to the troops, Obama should do it out of respect to the gulf.
Stop using the rich as scape goats. Stop h bashing wall street. Especially considering the sizable donations both gave Obamas campaign.
The killing that this man will make in the private sector once he is ousted in 2012 will be sickening
YES HE WILL be swimming in cash and talking about his "heroic winds of change" while ignoring the decades of ruin cast unto our fortunes
To say that Obama/Biden and McCain/Palin in 2008 were the 4 most qualified individuals to contest for the White House should be absolutely frightening to any American that values the fortune of this nation.
Let me add this. Bush might have started 2 wars, but I honestly think Bush feels very deeply for every soldier killed. Maybe I am a fool, but I have no problem with a President sending people into harms way as long as they understand and feel the pain that is being inflicted.
I do not think Obama gives a flying shit about the people dying in Afghanistan. I don't think he could even carry on a conversation with a guy who has lost his legs serving this nation. Obama is the boy in a bubble and has surrounded himself with people who will keep him in that bubble. People called Bush a puppet, but Obama has that title now.
So many intelligent and experienced minorities to pick to run for President and we get this tool. How about Powell. The man has standards and is a decorated veteran. He didn't like the way Bush was doing things so he stepped down. That shows more sack than any of these politicians we have currently.
I am so glad to know that as long as someone speaks exceptionally well and talks about a mysterious word he can be elected. I am still waiting to see this change I have been hearing about. Just shows how gullible and lemming like the majority of people in this country can be.
Change my ass. Rammed through Health Care which is still incredibly controversial in this country. Pardon me, but I don't want the government running anything else. The post office is the best run arm of the government and thats because it is only a quasi arm and it has stiff competition. Everything else is a cluster fuck. Could someone please name something the government runs that is not full of cost overruns and inefficiencies.
We think insurance companies are evil. I guess you have never had a run in with the IRS. Oh, thats right, the people who love the government taking care of them are the ones who don't pay taxes. Thanks losers for drowning the man saving you some more. Puke.
Stopping Dont as Dont tell. Wow. Holy Shit. Keep your sexuality to yourself. I cannot believe how hard that is.
Thanks Obama. The military, whose job it is to defend this nation and die if necessary has now become your own social soap box. I guess being gay in 2010 means shoving your sex life down the throat of every single person. I think a man and a woman dry humping in public is classless. Same goes for gay people. I am happy you are gay, now go be gay in your house, we don't need raw sex in public places. Wait until we elect Caligula and then you can do what you want.
I remember growing up and developing a thick skin. Kids who couldn't grow a thick skin were called pussies. Welcome to 2010 people, a nation being ruled by little pussies.
I hear the Presidential payroll is a smooth as butter, lol.
Seriously though, the saddest part about your statement is its true...the Post Office is the best run arm of the government yet it still manages to lose billions of dollars every year.
Only a government agency could service while running with so many inefficiencies.
http://www.usps.com/communications/newsroom/2009/pr09_066.htm
Regards
Government-funded science has an annual rate of return of 20-60% based on several studies. Admittedly, the data are not the best.
http://www.nature.com/news/2010/100609/full/465682a.html
Anthony, I usually like your posts but this one really bothered me. First and foremost, how in the world can you say that Bush cared for the American soldier or marine? Bush's actions directly lead to the untimely demise of at least 4500 of them. He sent them to a war zone without enough body armor: http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2004-03-26-body-armor_x.htm
The lack of body armor was so pervasive that 80 percent of all marines killed by torso wounds could have survived had Bush sent them there with adequate body armor. This was after Congress literally gave him Carte Blanche to invade a country. A literal blank check.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2004-03-26-body-armor_x.htm
Anthony, time after time, Bush showed severe nonchalance when talking about the deaths of American military personnel .
.
People like you drive me nuts. Do you remember 9/11? Was that Bush's fault too? Did he email the terrorist the plan he devised so he could get some Americans killed? You act like Bush was sitting around one day when some Col. came into the room and told him that we don't have enough body armor for every soldier and Bush demanded we go to war so that people could die. Bush retaliated for an unspeakable horror and should be commended. Bush actually kept this country safe following the events of 9/11 through actionable intelligence. Obama is too busy trying to squeeze him and his ego into the same golf cart to take action after potential terrorist attacks. The only reason there haven't been 2 additional (besides the recruiters office and the military installation), horrific attacks that took hundreds, possible thousands of lives is because the perpetrators were idiots. Twice lives were saved simply because of screw-ups. Sadly the Obama administration has the audacity to come out and say that the system worked?!?! Your system is to hope that a guy fucks up and lights his penis on fire and then gets wrestled to the ground by the adjacent airline passengers?!? What a field day the media would have had with this story had Bush been in office.
This whole administration is inept...from the President and Vice President to the Press Secretary to the freaking Secretary of Homeland Security...who has less experience in the intelligence field then I did when I was 22 years old!! If this was 1872, P. T. Barnum would be charging everyone a nickel to see this side show in the tent we are calling the White House.
You sound foolish and you only further provide evidence of this by even placing Obama's name in the same sentence with Bush when it comes to the deaths of soldiers. I was a solider and I can tell you that I felt rather reassured that if something would have gone south while I was in Iraq that the Bush administration would have done something about it...not some Black Hawk Down shit that Clinton had. I wouldn't even feel comfortable in the Army marching band with Obama "in charge". This jackhole has a F'n war going on and he can't even be bothered to meet with the commanding general...what does that tell you?
Bush just never did anything right...he spent too much money but didn't buy enough body armor...soliders needlessly died because he didn't send enough troops but you complain that we should be bringing our boys home. Pick a damn side and stick with it.
This is real shit, this is war and there will be casualties. This isn't your Xbox 360 and you can't dashboard every time some 12 year is beating your ass at Modern Warfare 2.
Maybe it's time to stop point fingers and man up.
Regards
How has no one asked for a source yet?
Haha, the emotional, and childish drivel I have seen posted in this topic looks like something off a yahoo blog. You know, the one where the masses argue back and forth, screaming generalities that say nothing. Black people always vote democrat, Obama might have gotten a small bump but not enough to win him that campaign. Sarah Palin lost McCain that campaign, no doubt about it. If any educated person can vote for a candidate with that woman as the candidate's running mate, I have to question your education, Harvard or CC. She is an embarrassment to the GOP, and the fact she got as far as a VP slot is a statement to how misguided that party truly is. Anyway, I think we should give the guy more than two years to unravel the mess handed to him by the GOP, and dubya. All the while he is trying to be partisan with a bunch of kids (the GOP) that will never respect him, will never negotiate with him, and will never agree with him, even if its something THEY suggested.... and that is ridiculous to say the least.
I agree with you on Palin. She is an idiot. Perhaps this is the type of GOP you are talking about:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB100014240527487035144045745887928343128…
Dems controlled congress for a good portion of Bush's 2nd term so they share in the blame. The GOP went for a woman to balance out the Dems pushing an unqualified black candidate. I don't think they should of done it, but having two old white guys was a sure way to lose. Blacks predominately vote dem, but not like the out pouring for this election. The fact that they overwhelmingly voted for someone who is a rookie at best shows me that race is a bigger issue than being experienced. The fact that blacks still overwhelmingly support Obama while the rest of the country has normalized in their support tells me they are still supporting him because of his race.
Obama has been hostile to the Republicans and you know what, thank god they have been fighting back. I am sorry, but Obama is a Dem on steroids. You know what, I nail Obama to the cross a lot more than previous presidents and you know why. When you over promise and under deliver you should expect to be highly criticized. He sold the people on he being the answer to everything and has proven to be pretty sub par.
What president doesn't sell people on being the answer to everything, the only difference is his oratory ability is the best we have seen in a while. Hostile?... my friend you are delusional on that statement. I have not seen such hostility and immaturity from a political party like the republicans in these two years Obama has been president in my whole, short life. Disagreeing is one thing, but the GOP does not even have solutions, and if they do they're not suggesting it. They would rather play politics and hope to steal enough seats in 2010 to stalemate Obama towards any progress all the way till 2012. Maybe then Palin will get on the ballot based on her "guns" and "mama grizzlies" platform.
You guys just keep crawling out of the wood work. It's a shame.
It's not like things are getting a little better it just needs to be given more time...the damn country is unraveling and Obama is doing the unwinding. The republicans dragging their feet (if you can call it that) has nothing to do with them trying to be mean...that's what liberals, like yourself, can't comprehend. Life isn't about feelings, fairness and trophies-all-around. There are tough decisions to be made and someone is going to be on the losing end. Generally, when a Republican has a point of view/stance on an issue, they typically believe in it and they stand by it...it doesn't change as the wind blows, unlike Obama. This isn't a game of kickball...there are serious consequences for shitty decisions and I am thankful that the Republicans who are playing hardball.
Obama, no doubt, walked into a mess...but basic economic reading could have, at the very least, slowed the fallout and maybe bandaged some of the wounds. He is so worried about converting the US to a welfare nation that he can't even take the time to focus on the things that are most important...like the war in the middle east and our own economy. Instead, he focuses on talk shows, interviews, golf outings, romps to NYC for dinner with the wife, NCAA brackets, friends birthday parties...meanwhile the unemployment numbers are in double digits and are only as low as they are because they are artificially deflated because so many people have just stopped looking for work.
I'm not claiming to be a genius on the topic, but it certainly doesn't take one to see what his policies, and potential policies, are doing to this country via the economic repercussions. Businesses are sitting with record setting amounts of cash on their balance sheets!
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB100014240527487043121045752986525679882…
Why? Well it isn't because they like to play Scrooge McDuck and swim around in it. It's because this simpleton sitting in office wants to focus on the healthcare overhaul and raising taxes for people drying out their skin in tanning beds. There has to be priorities and he doesn't seem to understand that. If they scrapped this whole healthcare issue for the time being, the economy would start to move. Businesses would spend money and start hiring people in an effort to gain market share, etc.
Obama brings nothing but arrogance and uncertainty to the table. There hasn't been much "change" and what does exists isn't of the good variety. Obama wrote up a wish list of things the uneducated, lower class people wanted to hear and just feed it to all the sheep. There has been no positive change, there has been less transparency, the list goes on and on and on.
The media and democratic party epitomized the word vitriol when it came to covering/speaking of Bush. It turns my stomach to think of how he was lambasted year after year and that it was somehow perceived as acceptable. It's speaks volumes of just how far the media has fallen in this country. If you can't see that then you must have sat next to Stevie Wonder and Ray Charles in reading class...if you can't admit it, well, then you are living in a state of self denial.
If Palin was such a joke, how come the media spent hours everyday with her name falling out of their month. Why all the probes and investigatory stories, etc? Why would the media spend some much time covering someone so insignificant who only cares about "guns" and "mama grizzlies"? The saddest part is the media lampooned Palin day-in and day-out yet she is far more qualified to be in an executive position than Obama could hope to be.
Good luck with this guy Anthony.
Regards
I don't know. Whenever I respond I try and be calm and pretty even. I have mentioned many times who I didn't hate Obama right away. I have mentioned how I support reforming health care (just like Bush did), how I am a libertarian, how I support environmental issues, womens rights. I am by far some radical, right wing Republican. How come the Obama defenders coming onto these threads attack the GOP or make fun of Sarah Palin, yet never really support anything Obama has done.
Lets get something straight. Palin is a politician. She is all about guns and drilling because she is pandering to her base. I love how people instantly pick on the fact that she went to a community college vs Obama's Ivy league education. Sad that people are so naive when you look at the fact that a large majority of Presidents and politicians have had rather modest educational backgrounds. Having an Ivy league education tends to be the luxury of the privileged.
As far as political experience goes I think Palin and Obama are about par. She ran a state, he was a junior state rep. She was governor of one of the most oil rich states (or at least used to be) in the country. Obama went to great schools. People attack her personally all the time, but she seems like a fine lady to me. I loved how Hollywood was up in arms about Sarah being so close to the "nuclear button". Yeah, like those morons who make movies are such amazing judges of character.
Hey Matt Damon, stick to what you know best, being a fucking movie character. I don't want you anywhere near a nuclear button also, tool.
There is promising the world and running as if you are the second coming. Anyone on here read The Economist? It is pretty Euro centric, a good balance from the WSJ or Business Week I think most people will say. They have a couple articles about Obama. One basically sums up what we are saying in on the board about his base being blacks and young people. Second, how Obama is pandering to the Hispanic vote. Go read the articles from what I consider a solid source.
Yes, Republicans are pretty hostile. Dems are not sunshine and buttercups either my friend. Welcome to Democracy. People fight, people argue, consensus is made. I am not defending everything Bush did, I am against the government getting bigger, I think the budget needs to be cut, I think taxes need to be reduced, etc. I am just sick and tired of hearing everything blamed on Bush. The dems controlled Congress for the last 2 years of Bush. They control it now. Stop blaming Bush.
I think all politicians suck. The ones who suck less want the government to be smaller. I am sorry, but I didn't like my damn parents telling me what to do, I don't need Uncle Sam giving me orders. The USA is about freedom. For some reason people have forgotten this. All this nanny state bullshit is making us weaker.
I think SSI is fine. Supporting older people is good for the economy. SS unfortunately is horribly administered.
I think medical insurance for the very poor or very old is fine. It benefits us all having a generally healthy population. I think the program is run like shit.
I support medical reform. I think if someone is laid off or looking to switch jobs it would be nice to pay a couple hundred bucks to the govt and have a medicaid + type of program. I think heath insurance should be private, but there should also be some regulation. I DO NOT think the government should be forcing people to be insured or trying to move towards socialized health care. I have read the bill and it is not a full take over, but it is a step in that direction. If not for the intense fighting the Republicans put up Obama would of pushed for making the USA just like Europe.
I think Afghanistan is a shit hole. I think we should focus on controlling and building up the major cities. Let the outskirts be the outskirts. As business expands and the cities grow people will come from the country side. Look at China. Iraq is the real war. That country was civilized and has a semi functional democracy installed. The fact that we are ONCE AGAIN leaving that country half fixed is a travesty.
.
Nobama, you did not present an argument. I am not saying that my post was fitting of a pulitzer, but please, make an attempt to refute what I said.
Do I think Obama would tear up? No, I don't think so. Obama has shown a propensity to coolness and thought over action that Bush never had.
And Nobama88, I don't cry.
.
November cant come soon enough so all this nonsense stops. Sick and tired of this democrat bullshit. The poor are poor for a reason, they don't hustle like we do! enough of my money gets taken away by uncle sam to feed the rats. Now i have to pay for their healthcare too... UGHHH I hate this socialist bullshit
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/dec/22/bush-cheney-comforted-t…
Listen, in WW2, when we landed in France, the 1st wave of troops were loaded to the gills. The generals knew they were going to die, but if they could bring enough gear close to the shore follow up troops could fight with it. That is the cold hard fact of war. People die.
Frankly, Rumsfeld said it the best. You go to war with the military you have, not the one you would like to have. It is cold hearted and people do not want to hear it, but it is just the facts. Look at the advancements in almost everything since the war(s) have started. This is a living organism, we are learning about the enemy, changing tactics, altering plans. Thats how things are.
Yes, I think Bush cared deeply for each troop that died. He was put in a tough place after 9/11 and made some tough decisions. I think Bush deeply believed in everything he did. He might of made mistakes, but I would gladly break bread with him. Considering how much Obama shits on him I also think Bush is incredibly graceful in the way he doesn't criticize or take the spotlight away from the current President. Obama could learn a thing or two from Bush about that.
I personally know many soldiers who have fought in Iraq and Afghanistan, my best friend having done 2 tours. Everyone of them have kind things to say about Bush. Not so much for Obama. This is coming out of the mouths of people who have been sent to fight and in some cases die by GWB.
I also want to punch in the face every liberal who uses the deaths in Iraq and Afghanistan as a weapon. These are human being fighting for this country. Just because you don't want to serve or don't have the sack to serve doesn't give you the fight to fake indignation about young men and women dying.
Anthony, the administration was given a blank check by congress to wage war. There is absolutely no reason for a lack of life saving and sustaining equipment. Maybe an Eastern European country goes to war without the army that it wants, not the richest country on earth in a pointless war.
Anthony, your last paragraph was particularly indignant. I care deeply about the lives of Americans and irks me when I know that 4500 of my compatriots had their lives snuffed out by 925 LIES by an incompetent administration.
http://projects.publicintegrity.org/WarCard/?gclid=CIjh7ovw6aICFSFN5Qod…
When adults debate, they talk about the costs and benefits of the action. The untimely deaths are the costs and thus should be used to further any argument against similar military action.
Oh, one more thing. In Bush's 8 years there wasn't any type of personal scandal. The man overcame alcohol and drug addiction and was loyal as can be to his wife. He was deeply religious and struck me as a pretty nice guy. The venomous hate people had for him is beyond me. Americans sat at home and bought TV's while the war went on. Never in our history has 2 wars been fought with so little inconvenience at home, yet all this fake outrage. A war fought entirely by volunteers.
Oh the housing crisis was his fault. Yeah, I am sure if Bush started to stop people from owning homes everyone would have loved him. Get real.
You know, the day after 9/11 I said people would forget. No doubt in my mind. This nation has neither the stomach or the backbone to finish anything. Sure enough, the indignation and rage which sent troops to Afghanistan soon vanished to the point where people didn't care. Now it is a couple moments of silence. Now all we do is bitch because we have to take our shoes off at the airport. A nation of ingrates.
This nation is going to shit and you know who is to blame. Take a look in the mirror.
cphbravo, I'd just give up trying to refute what bigbucks and eokpar say. They are dumbass college kids with 0 real world experience and just regurgitate what their liberal professors tell them.
Ha, you make an excellent point. I suppose I fight-the-good-fight with these kids because I just hope they will open their eyes. Just a little awareness can make a world of difference. Though, I do imagine I am wasting my time it just irritates me to no end when people ramble on about how Bush killed these troops.
He was the President of the United States of America...he had an obligation to protect us using the assets at his disposal. This would include the armed forces and any intelligence assets we, or someone else, had in place overseas. If Bush had no regard for human life, how come we didn't just level everything? We could have turned the middle east into a pile of rubble (not that we would be able to tell the difference), made our point. Although thousands of foreign civilians would have perished, no Americans would have died.
Their arguments are weak and obviously a bullet stolen from their professor's power point presentation.
Regards
Yes, im regurgitating what my super liberal professors tell me, in conservativeville, Texas. I brought up Palin, not because of her education but because of her prominent status in YOUR misguided party. You want to know what I support that Obama has passed?... healthcare reform (till the republicans gutted it, and Obama agreed hoping to be bipartisan). I supported more troops in afghanistan (Bush, who loves soldiers so much, neglected them in that region). I support financial reform (Goldman was allowed to sell shitty securities to their clients, while shorting those same securities that they drove the price up on in their hedge fund side, that shouldn't be allowed to happen). Im not speaking emotions, all you conservatives are. How about you give me any good ideas the republican party has had in the last 10 years and we can talk about it. 2 wars (1 a product of lies), no child left behind (a failed program that has done nothing but shut down inner-city public schools), a pharmaceutical bill that is a direct cause to the skyrocketing price of pharmaceuticals, tax cuts while increasing spending (deficit anyone?). If anyone can defend these policies, they are obviously looking after their pockets (tax cuts), or too emotionally entwined in these subjects.
p.s. the issue isnt the death of troops in an essential war, rather the death of troops ina war he strongarmed congress into agreeing to, knowing the information he gave them was false...
Huh. Watch what you say? This is a wall street forum. We care a lot about this shit.
First off, are you somehow suggesting that if Wall Street Reform were passed as Obama wanted it, it would somehow change the deal that went down in 2007, two years before he even took office?!?
On top of that, do you even understand how selling something works. When Walmart sells something, it is essentially short that product, and long cash. It values the cash more than the product, hence the reason to sell. The same thing happened with the Goldman deal. Goldman sold a security to investors, thus essentially, they were short (technically in this deal, if I remember correctly, they were long a piece of it an lost money on the actual position). Don't you realize the whole ordeal was a political sideshow to keep the proles happy, and to push through finreg without thinking about it.
Not to mention, the finreg that was discussed won't do anything to prevent another crisis. Its hubris at best to think that the ivory elite in DC believe they have all the answers to all the problems. You can't solve every problem.
How come every time Obama wants to pass a bill, he has to have a deadline for it? Why is it, that last summer, healthcare reform 'HAD TO' be passed before the August recess? Its because he doesn't want people to look at what is in the bill before it becomes law (which he managed to do anyway when healthcare reform eventually passed).
Finally, you tell me what Obama has actually done. I've said this many times: Obama is the president that doesn't do but says he did. Nothing he has done has lived up to what he has said. So I don't understand why you so adamantly support him (btw please don't bring up Bush in your retort... I am a concerned citizen an equally dislike every president that attempts to increase executive power)
Whats worse is this crap you conservatives are telling me that Sarah Palin with her extremely short stint as governor of ALASKA makes her more qualified than Obama. Does experience mean competence?... the woman is absolutely incompetent, if you attempt to deceive yourself into believing otherwise, well that just tells me there is no point debating with you.
p.s. I agree the uncertainty Obama has caused in the business world is counter-productive.
How dare you speak ill of the messiah.
And Palin is the incompetent one? This guy is the POTUS and he is actively causing problems with the economy...which you readily admit...but he still manages to be some sort of saving grace?
Quick, put the computer down and get back to your flock! If the shepherd catches you using the internet he may hit you with his staff.
Regards
I dont "adamantly support" any politician. Im just smart enough to know when the other side is trying to fuck us all. If Goldman knew those securities were terrible then they shouldn't have sold them as awesome, plain and simple. the healthcare bill was not the bill Obama wanted, it is a shell of itself, thanks to republicans. It will be the same with finreg, I don't even know why wall street is worried.
I don't think you understand how a synthetic CDO works. Each one has a winner or a loser. In this case, the loser cried. No one held a gun to their head and said 'buy this'. In 06 and 07, everyone wanted to get their hands on the housing market. The smartest guys knew what was going down and bought protection. These investors bought this security hoping to make a lot of money for themselves. They didn't. Its life. No one should blame Goldman for selling something that both sides of the transaction wanted. They were just providing a service. You don't blame the funeral home director for your loved one dieing...
Aggreed. This is really a," don't hate the player" moment. GS was just the middle man. Someone wanted to sell it and someone wanted to buy it, GS just made money by introducing the two. Nobody that made money is complaining, just the people that were left standing when the music stopped.
Normally, I'd say "Don't feed the trolls. No die-hards are going to change their point of view based on what you write here."
But screw it, let me get in on this big political wank and----aahhhhhh Healthcare reform was a joke and will only drive up costssssssssssssssssssssssss!
Wew! Damn, now how to clean all this political ejaculate off my keyboard?
:: ew sticky::
Palin was going to be the VP. It is obvious she was chosen simply because 2 white guys could not of won. I don't see anyone saying how Palin was the best damn candidate. I think race was a main issue and the Republicans knew this and had to pull a hail marry. Sarah energized women and the conservatives so it was probably the best and smartest move they could make.
As far as her being an idiot, well I don't think anyone could trump Dan Quayle. She was a strategic move to counter balance the farce the Dems promoted. Are you telling me there wasn't anyone else in the Democratic party a little better qualified that Obama? Get real.
Healthcare was gutted? Thank god. I am sorry that you don't like how the political system works. I mean Obama knows all and is all so he should be able to do anything he wants without compromise. Plain fact is I am very happy it was a mild version. I do not want Canadian or European style heath care. If you follow the subject or read about it you will see how Canadian costs are skyrocketing as well as in Europe. At the time we want to be more like them they are cutting their budgets and reducing benefits.
Oh BTW, you can thank Bush for trying to pass health care reform in the first place. He also wanted to reform SS, but that got killed.
No child left behind act.
Could you please substantiate your attack? Considering that you use it as a way to attack Bush you should also know that Ted Kennedy was a co author and it was supported on both sides of the isle.
So you think Afghanistan is a war we can win? Please tell me what you envision Afghanistan to look like in 20 years. Is it going to be a bastion of industry? Freedom? Afghanistan is a desolate place. There is zero chance we can control every square foot of that place. Even if we did it would take generations to bring everyone to even the basic standards we enjoy.
Iraq on the other hand has resources, industry, infrastructure, a chance. We mis planed what would happen after the war, but the country is slowing getting on the right track. You are starting to see foreign investment and elections, albeit slow moving. If money can start flowing into Iraq and people get employed I could see that country growing by leaps and bounds.
What country do you think has a better chance of standing on their feet.
Oh, Obama never said he was going to focus on Afghanistan during the campaign. Just because he is doing it now doesn't mean you should be on your knees supporting it. Afghanistan is his mess now. Bush's surge in Iraq worked, this surge in Afghanistan will not.
I will also point out that Joe Biden, the current VP (yeah, depressing), is one of the biggest idiots I have ever seen. Go on YouTube and look around and you will find dozen of videos of him opening his mouth and stupid words just come pouring out. He is a gaffe machine. I wish people would just stop pulling his string already. Are Biden's screw-ups plastered all over the news like Bush's were...hell no they aren't. If you want to hear about them you have to search for them on the internet.
Here are a few, so you don't have to go too far out of your way:
Regards
CPH, I really don't know why you write so much. Being concise it much better than writing a million unconnected things.
The first paragraph was complete unrelated slabber. CPH, 9/11 had absolutely nothing to do with the Iraq War. (I think you are talking about the Iraq war because I was talking about the Iraq War in my post..) I would advise you read Thomas E. Ricks Fiasco so you could learn maybe a little bit about the invasion of Iraq. To even call the invasion of Iraq a retaliation for 9/11 is asinine. First and foremost, there is a time issue. Saddam Hussein was toppling started in March 2003, one and a half years after the 9/11 attacks. Secondly, to his credit, Bush at every turn said that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11.
Your attempt to conflate the two reaches the apex of dishonesty and is extremely embarrassing.
The lack of adequate body armor was emblematic of the the administration's sheer incompetence. Congress gave Bush carte Blanche to declare and wage war in Iraq. There was absolutely no reason, economically, for a lack armor or armored vehicles. Bush simply rushed to war, and a significant portion of troops paid the blood price of this poor decision.
I mostly write to raise money for the Derek Zoolander Center For Kids Who Can't Read Good And Wanna Learn To Do Other Stuff Good Too, so that you too can get an education and stop making a fool out of yourself on the internet.
I write a lot because I have a lot to say and I typically respond to several posts at once. Additionally, I write because I appreciate the support that I receive from the various members of this forum who have expressed to me that they enjoy reading what I post and like to hear my opinion. Also, just because you lack the required skills to follow along (sorry, no pop-up pictures in this book) doesn't mean my posts are unconnected.
Tell you what, instead of reading someone's opinion about the invasion into Iraq, how about I provide some first hand knowledge...give me a second here while I shut my eyes and recall rolling across the berm in a HMMWV. You are such a clown. You have the audacity to tell a veteran of the United States military to who served his country overseas during 2 conflicts to pick up some ass hat's book to learn about the topic? You are truly fortunate the umbrella of freedom protects all US citizens and are rather lucky the people who sacrificed so much for this country can't pick and chose who it applies too. When I was in Iraq I drove my Col., by ourselves, in a soft sided HMMWV with a M16 and a M9 wearing a flak jacket and a Kevlar helmet. That's right, no convoys, no crew served weapons, no up-armored trucks and we regularly pulled over on the side of the road to hand out candy, food and water. Things changed in a matter of weeks over there, so there was no "right way" to have done it. You think an NFL coach shows up on Sunday with an exact list of plays he will run? I doubt it. I would bet that he has hundreds upon hundreds that he could use but he has to run a few and see how things go.
Like Anthony said before, you go to war with the military you have, not the military you want....this is a simple fact. We don't go to war to conquer and rule, we go to fight a cause...you can't postpone a cause until everyone is ready because the fact of the matter is, you will never hear a general say, "hey I have way to many troops for this mission, send some home" and the weapons systems could always be a little bit better and the soldiers could always be a little better trained. This has very little to do with how much money a country has. And this isn't North Korea...we can't arm every person with a pitchfork and tell them they are a soldier just so we can have more boots on the ground.
There was literally no conventional fighting in Iraq...it was mostly IEDs and small insurgent cells...there was no way to prepare for that. Every liberal wants to sit around and Monday morning quarterback the war...You should have done this, you should have done that....blah blah blah. You can't sit on your hands and wait. There is a fine line between too little information and too much information and the more information you gather the longer it takes and the longer it takes the less useful the information you have becomes. If all of the traders on Wall Street thought like eokpar02 no one would ever sell anything...they would just wait one more day to see what will happen and then one more day after that just to make sure yesterday wasn't an anomaly, etc. You make the best out of what you have...that's life...that's war. If you had ever been in a situation where you had to sacrifice something you might just understand that.
That reminds me...is every free October 14, 2033? I think we should invade a country for no good reason what so ever...so mark it on your calendar kids. Make sure you put in your orders for your ray guns and blast shield so we will all be ready to go. At least I gave you fair warning, there should be no excuse this time.
Regards
Monekyinhumansuit, please refute a single thing that I have posted on this website. Since I am a dumbass college kid, than this must be easy. I am serious, I will actually even provide an economic incentive of 10 dollars via paypal to refute the body armor claim.
I love how only Anthony refutes arguments with facts.
I am curious about this advanced body armor. Can you post a link? Not being sarcastic, just curious.
I am familiar with the standard issue Kevlar vest with optional ceramic plate. It is rather heavy and cumbersome. Recently Dragon Skin has come out. Off the top of my head I remember it being better for blast protection, but the overlapping plates made it weaker for gun shots. Could be visa versa. Regardless, here is an article I found. I am sure the DoD might be biased, but they could have valid tests.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18790506/
As for the Humvee's. I think your argument is unfair. The US military invaded Iraq preparing for a ground assault. The Hummer is not designed to protect against the type of blasts that IED's produce. Granted, this was known rather quickly, but "up armoring" takes time. We are seeing the limitations of the Humvee system in the fact that they are breaking down because of the increased load from additional armor.
I totally agree with you that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. Plain fact is that just like babies, the American public needs to hide their medicine in apple sauce. Iraq was a non stop problem as soon as the 1st war ended. We were going to push to Baghdad and get rid of Saddam, but pressure from our European partners made us stop. We let the Kurds down as well as all the people who had wanted to get rid of Saddam.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highway_of_Death
This action caused outrage which in turn pretty much killed any momentum we might have had to get rid of Saddam.
Right after the 1st Gulf war Saddam repeatedly violated no fly zones, sanctions and weapons inspections.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/inatl/longterm/iraq/timeline/06279…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraqi_no-fly_zones
Iraq was something we should have done. Mind you I am not saying that had weapons of mass destruction or terrorists. That was a lie or a manipulation of the truth.
Anthony, http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/07/politics/07armor.html
Given, a significant portion of these torso wounds were to the side. Inadequate was how the Pentagon described the armor given to our troops.
Interesting article. While I agree that more protection could have "possibly" saved those lives, it is not a guarantee. The main goal of body armor is to protect the vital organs in the event of attack. This has to be weighed against the fatigue factor as well as weight related injuries.
I am not giving the Pentagon a free pass, but there are a lot of things to consider. I mean the effects of road side bombs were not seen until after the "cease fire". Yes, the military can move slowly at times, but that is the nature of war. I provide a couple articles talking about the testing of body armor as well as the side effects of increased tropp weight. Mind you this is no trivial matter when you are performing foot patrols in incredible heat.
http://www.captainsjournal.com/category/body-armor/
This is a good artice/blog on the NYT article you posted
http://defensetech.org/2006/01/06/usmc-armor-gaps-prove-fatal/
Apparently the US is not the only military with the armor issues you mention
http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200601/s1541968.htm
eokpar02,
I've been following this conversation. As a Marine, who deployed to Iraq and wore the side armor, there are other considerations involved with deploying and utilizing side armor. Interceptor and MTVs that utilize side armor are extraordinarily cumbersome and limit mobility. In my unit, less than 10% utilized the side SAPI plates, despite their availability. This concern was expressed right after their release to the fleet Marine Corps.
http://www.leatherneck.com/forums/showthread.php?t=25380 (2 articles embedded in post because they are not available in the archive) http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,333154,00.html
Additionally, until about mid-2008 the #1 cause of casualties in the Iraq theater were IEDs (http://www.history.navy.mil/library/online/ied.htm --- article from around the same time as your article from nytimes), targeting personnel and vehicles. Up-armored HMMMVs and MRAPs have doors that weigh upwards of 100 lbs. The ability to maneuver through and escape potential blast areas should not be discounted. Side SAPI plates make a quick entry/exit out of a tactical vehicle nearly impossible because of dramatic decreases in side flexion and mobility.
The DOD made a calculated decision to sit with pre-existing configurations to allow military men and women the best possible chance to escape the leading cause of injury and death, at that time. Since then, the introduction of the MRAP and the drop in casualties from IEDs has led to a higher usage of side SAPI protection than when they were first introduced.
That's funny, I recently read that the #1 cause of casualties in the Iraq theater was President Bush.
See...
Thank you for your service redrock. Semper Fi.
Regards
CPH, I really do not understand the point of purporting things over the internet. If you were to follow my posts, you would see that I don't talk about myself. It is not because I do not exist; it is because no one cares about what you claim you are on the internet. Oh the internet, a place where a man can become a soldier, a doctor, an executive, Harvard grad and billionaire with a few keystrokes.
CPH, it is fine when you post. I actually like reading your posts because you show what is wrong with American discourse. You don't even attempt to refute anything in my posts. You are almost acting like the adminstration did not have time to plan the Iraq war. It is my understanding that they started planning the War in Iraq in 2001. For example, on Decmber 21st, 2001, General Franks gave Bush a report that an occupation of Iraq would require 275 thousand troops. Note, this well over a year before the invasion.
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB214/index.htm
Secondly, CPH, Bush received major criticism from generals after and prior to the invasion. For example (same link), General Bernard Trainor said, "Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Tommy Franks spent most of their time and energy on the least demanding task - defeating Saddam's weakened conventional forces - and the least amount on the most demanding - rehabilitation of and security for the new Iraq. The result was a surprising contradiction. The United States did not have nearly enough troops to secure the hundreds of suspected WMD sites that had supposedly been identified in Iraq or to secure the nation's long, porous borders. Had the Iraqis possessed WMD and terrorist groups been prevalent in Iraq as the Bush administration so loudly asserted, U.S. forces might well have failed to prevent the WMD from being spirited out of the country and falling into the hands of the dark forces the administration had declared war against."
This is almost like debating the color of sky.
You really need to read about the run-up the invasion. You obviously have time to write your long babbling posts, use that time to actually learn about the invasion. Hell, I will even buy Fiasco for you!!!
Well EOK in all fairness you are changing the points that you are arguing about. You started with the body armor issue which has been debated. I personally think the Pentagon made a cost-benefit analysis and went with what they thought was best. You disagree. Thats fine, but as you have read there are many different opinions on the subject, all having valid points.
Yes, I will agree that the victory was not planed for. That being said, the level of looting and insurgency could not of been predicted. We had fought Iraq once as a conventional war and we planed to fight them again as such. Bush went in with a pretty large force and we routed the enemy. A lot of time and effort was spent looking for the different generals and figure heads. Lets give a little break to the military. They had a lot on their plate and nothing goes perfectly as planed. This is no excuse, just saying that even the greatest military minds cannot see everything that might happen.
CPH was talking about his personal experience when it pertains to body armor. I posted a link echoing the same experiences and feelings. Iraq is a tough place to conduct a war and every pound of armor you slap on a troop reduces their combat effectiveness. A balance must be made.
Can someone please answer me this. Was getting rid of a dictator and his horrible sons that big a deal? 10,000 soldiers (I don't know the precise number) died to eliminate a man that gassed innocent people. I think that is pretty noble. A semi functional democracy is in place and the country has a small, but functional military. Power is still sparse, but that is because it is being used throughout the country rather than just in Baghdad. There is still a lot of violence, but one can only point a finger at the murderous individuals who think blowing themselves up in a crowded market of innocent people is a holy thing to do. Trust me, the US Military doesn't want to be there one second more than they have to.
Our large standing military is a huge cost to this nation. Unfortunately, it's benefit is felt far past the boundaries of this country. The fact is the rest of the world enjoys the stability and safety that the US military provides, yet does not pay anything for. I could only imagine a world where NATO shouldered full responsibility for keeping things in order.
Ad sed laboriosam quasi sunt est eligendi facere. Excepturi aut voluptas corporis iusto. Consequatur ut non culpa expedita. Quae qui saepe ducimus ducimus. Esse laborum itaque quo et et.
Perspiciatis eveniet qui labore quia. Maiores deserunt commodi autem error.
Est autem est reprehenderit eligendi voluptas doloribus. Explicabo iure velit repudiandae officia. Modi repudiandae et sunt quia eaque aperiam distinctio.
Ut aut rerum cupiditate ratione quo sed aliquid. Et quibusdam enim sequi ratione et omnis quis. Dicta distinctio eum praesentium molestiae quos et. Dignissimos blanditiis saepe ut autem eaque nesciunt minima. Deserunt explicabo aut odio nobis nihil deserunt officiis. In ullam ut earum provident placeat deleniti.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...
Ut non dolorem ut nobis. Voluptatem voluptatum sed quia at. Necessitatibus velit et quia sed eum. Dolores beatae temporibus nemo.
Qui culpa sed magnam ea cum. Neque deleniti quo saepe officia quaerat non. Et et fugit ut odit. Eum molestiae aut laudantium sed beatae consequatur. Tempore et sequi quia et eveniet.
Dolorem quas magnam aut suscipit nostrum. Sunt quia incidunt alias.
Unde provident repudiandae quia eos. Tempora eum et possimus maiores dolorem. Rerum consequatur explicabo libero autem esse. Dolore ex rem voluptatem labore vitae dicta. Porro sequi alias ducimus libero. Ut veritatis voluptas officiis dignissimos.
Non excepturi ab non repudiandae consequatur eaque. Molestiae accusamus aperiam nesciunt voluptas ab alias voluptates aspernatur. Sapiente consequuntur repudiandae sapiente iusto. Odit est mollitia deserunt rerum quia omnis. Est ut voluptates quia quo natus dolorem.
Enim quae error esse non cupiditate. Cumque optio ut quod nam quo nam illum. Aperiam enim et quisquam odio vitae. Esse incidunt recusandae nostrum dolore unde. Et quibusdam nesciunt sapiente voluptas dolores officia nesciunt nihil. Iusto explicabo nam quia quod.
Ut laboriosam dolor officiis non. Consequuntur et laboriosam non laudantium. Eum veritatis natus et. Quas qui veniam quod commodi aspernatur officiis accusantium non.
Nihil eveniet officia minima in sit necessitatibus facere. Beatae quidem eligendi dicta aspernatur. Cumque dignissimos voluptatem illum voluptas. Corrupti unde minima velit adipisci praesentium earum soluta. Nihil nulla corrupti blanditiis ut porro vel.
Expedita aliquam error mollitia vel nemo deserunt expedita. Voluptatem debitis rem ipsam et.
Et accusantium voluptas sit dolor mollitia beatae nemo. Nisi ut est saepe porro nemo. Et fugiat quia error distinctio dolores. Dolores aperiam dolores dolores et corrupti.