Rooting For the President to Fail

[Sofiyya 1,687]

I believe he just got the stimulus package enacted. You might want to whine and flat out spew venom if it fails or find something else to whine about if it works.

Are you denying that we are debating the limits of free speech when it comes to criticising Obama's policies and acts? Or, as I asked before, has he done nothing so far, and that is the objection to criticism?

Like I said... feel free to whine as much as you like. Even if there isn't much to whine about.

No whining from me. But, the more you say it the more true it seems to be (in your own mind) I suppose.

Criticism of the stimulus package is allowed, btw.

By all means... criticize as much as it makes you happy to do so. Line by line, issue by issue.

Whine, rant, criticize, disagree, etc. Do as you will. You don't need special permission nor clearance to voice your opinion.

Voicing one's opinion re matters of social policy in a civil manner is not only one's right, it's one's duty as a citizen. That's hardly whining.

[HAL 9000 96]

I believe he just got the stimulus package enacted. You might want to whine and flat out spew venom if it fails or find something else to whine about if it works.

Are you denying that we are debating the limits of free speech when it comes to criticising Obama's policies and acts? Or, as I asked before, has he done nothing so far, and that is the objection to criticism?

Like I said... feel free to whine as much as you like. Even if there isn't much to whine about.

No whining from me. But, the more you say it the more true it seems to be (in your own mind) I suppose.

Criticism of the stimulus package is allowed, btw.

By all means... criticize as much as it makes you happy to do so. Line by line, issue by issue.

Whine, rant, criticize, disagree, etc. Do as you will. You don't need special permission nor clearance to voice your opinion.

Voicing one's opinion re matters of social policy in a civil manner is not only one's right, it's one's duty as a citizen. That's hardly whining.

Correct. Making blanket statements based on inaccurate and biased assessments, while in a civil manner, is.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

I believe he just got the stimulus package enacted. You might want to whine and flat out spew venom if it fails or find something else to whine about if it works.

Are you denying that we are debating the limits of free speech when it comes to criticising Obama's policies and acts? Or, as I asked before, has he done nothing so far, and that is the objection to criticism?

Like I said... feel free to whine as much as you like. Even if there isn't much to whine about.

No whining from me. But, the more you say it the more true it seems to be (in your own mind) I suppose.

Criticism of the stimulus package is allowed, btw.

By all means... criticize as much as it makes you happy to do so. Line by line, issue by issue.

Whine, rant, criticize, disagree, etc. Do as you will. You don't need special permission nor clearance to voice your opinion.

Voicing one's opinion re matters of social policy in a civil manner is not only one's right, it's one's duty as a citizen. That's hardly whining.

Correct. Making blanket statements based on inaccurate and biased assessments, while in a civil manner, is.

Ah, but there is the remaining problem of what constitutes inaccurate and biased assessments. I wouldn't accept the same sources as many libs do because I consider them to be biased, and vice versa. For example, as a conservative, I enjoy listening to Rush, Sean Hannity and Laura Ingraham, others who are not like-minded would be repulsed by them, as I am by liberal sources.

[HAL 9000 96]

Those are assessments.

Facts are not.

http://www.recovery.gov/

[Sofiyya 1,687]

If it's on an Obama website, it must be fact, eh? Sorry, I will continue to assess independently, thank you.

BTW, isn't that the website that Joe is in charge of? The one he didn't know the URL of, and asked for its "number" on national tv? Yea, now my confidence in the admin is raised. Um hum.

Edited March 2, 2009 by Virtual wife

[HAL 9000 96]

If it's on an Obama website, it must be fact, eh? Sorry, I will continue to assess independently, thank you.

BTW, isn't that the website that Joe is in charge of? The one he didn't know the URL of, and asked for its "number" on national tv? Yea, now my confidence in the admin is raised. Um hum.

No. Read the actual bill, VW. Then give us here your actual, VW assessment. Not Rush's or Hannity's or anyone else's. Line by line, issue by issue. Show us why improving this country is a bad thing.

And... ummm... its a US government website. Obama is the elected President.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

If it's on an Obama website, it must be fact, eh? Sorry, I will continue to assess independently, thank you.

BTW, isn't that the website that Joe is in charge of? The one he didn't know the URL of, and asked for its "number" on national tv? Yea, now my confidence in the admin is raised. Um hum.

No. Read the actual bill, VW. Then give us here your actual, VW assessment. Not Rush's or Hannity's or anyone else's. Line by line, issue by issue. Show us why improving this country is a bad thing.

And... ummm... its a US government website. Obama is the elected President.

I have read the bill. I don't believe that or other actions Obama has taken will do anything to improve the country, and am not sure what Obama's debt and deficits are more attractive than Bush's debts and deficits. Can you explain that?

[HAL 9000 96]

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/ge...cid=f:h1enr.pdf

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/ge...cid=f:h1enr.pdf

407 pages of it. So go ahead, line by line, issue by issue. Not blanket VW statements, but fact by fact. Since you've read it, of course. That means you know it.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/ge...cid=f:h1enr.pdf

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/ge...cid=f:h1enr.pdf

407 pages of it. So go ahead, line by line, issue by issue. Not blanket VW statements, but fact by fact. Since you've read it, of course. That means you know it.

Have you read it? If you haven't, then you wouldn't be able to discuss it in substance.

[HAL 9000 96]

What I can totally mention is that these expenditures have constructive, domestic tasks affixed to them. Not unlike the international fiasco most of Bush's follies were directed at. And that will likely be the end of it I presume.

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/ge...cid=f:h1enr.pdf

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/ge...cid=f:h1enr.pdf

407 pages of it. So go ahead, line by line, issue by issue. Not blanket VW statements, but fact by fact. Since you've read it, of course. That means you know it.

Have you read it? If you haven't, then you wouldn't be able to discuss it in substance.

No, I have not read all 407 pages of it like you claim you have.

But the question is on you to show us, line by line, since you know it... why its bad.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

What I can totally mention is that these expenditures have constructive, domestic tasks affixed to them. Not unlike the international fiasco most of Bush's follies were directed at. And that will likely be the end of it I presume.

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/ge...cid=f:h1enr.pdf

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/ge...cid=f:h1enr.pdf

407 pages of it. So go ahead, line by line, issue by issue. Not blanket VW statements, but fact by fact. Since you've read it, of course. That means you know it.

Have you read it? If you haven't, then you wouldn't be able to discuss it in substance.

No, I have not read all 407 pages of it like you claim you have.

But the question is on you to show us, line by line, since you know it... why its bad.

I have read it and believe it to be harmful. You believe it's good, but you don't know it, and haven't read it. Approach me again when you're ready for a decent pro and con discussion.

[HAL 9000 96]

What I can totally mention is that these expenditures have constructive, domestic tasks affixed to them. Not unlike the international fiasco most of Bush's follies were directed at. And that will likely be the end of it I presume.

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/ge...cid=f:h1enr.pdf

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/ge...cid=f:h1enr.pdf

407 pages of it. So go ahead, line by line, issue by issue. Not blanket VW statements, but fact by fact. Since you've read it, of course. That means you know it.

Have you read it? If you haven't, then you wouldn't be able to discuss it in substance.

No, I have not read all 407 pages of it like you claim you have.

But the question is on you to show us, line by line, since you know it... why its bad.

I have read it and believe it to be harmful. You believe it's good, but you don't know it, and haven't read it. Approach me again when you're ready for a decent pro and con discussion.

I can take your word for it. Teach me how its bad, and allow me to look up the pertinent details. After all, the information is there. Otherwise, you are merely preaching to the wrong choir. Since you have read it, of course.

And no- I have not stated anything specific about the bill, so there again you are making a false assessment. Please, stay on task or don't play.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

What I can totally mention is that these expenditures have constructive, domestic tasks affixed to them. Not unlike the international fiasco most of Bush's follies were directed at. And that will likely be the end of it I presume.

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/ge...cid=f:h1enr.pdf

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/ge...cid=f:h1enr.pdf

407 pages of it. So go ahead, line by line, issue by issue. Not blanket VW statements, but fact by fact. Since you've read it, of course. That means you know it.

Have you read it? If you haven't, then you wouldn't be able to discuss it in substance.

No, I have not read all 407 pages of it like you claim you have.

But the question is on you to show us, line by line, since you know it... why its bad.

I have read it and believe it to be harmful. You believe it's good, but you don't know it, and haven't read it. Approach me again when you're ready for a decent pro and con discussion.

I can take your word for it. Teach me how its bad, and allow me to look up the pertinent details. After all, the information is there. Otherwise, you are merely preaching to the wrong choir. Since you have read it, of course.

And no- I have not stated anything specific about the bill, so there again you are making a false assessment. Please, stay on task or don't play.

In this thread, you have explicitly shown your irritation with anyone who disagrees with Obama's plans and actions, repeatedly calling them whiners. You are not unbiased. So, your credibility to judge my bias is weak, at best. Play when you have the means. Read the bill, and build your credibility on the basis that you know what Barry and the Dims are proposing, not just the spin they offer.

[HAL 9000 96]

What I can totally mention is that these expenditures have constructive, domestic tasks affixed to them. Not unlike the international fiasco most of Bush's follies were directed at. And that will likely be the end of it I presume.

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/ge...cid=f:h1enr.pdf

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/ge...cid=f:h1enr.pdf

407 pages of it. So go ahead, line by line, issue by issue. Not blanket VW statements, but fact by fact. Since you've read it, of course. That means you know it.

Have you read it? If you haven't, then you wouldn't be able to discuss it in substance.

No, I have not read all 407 pages of it like you claim you have.

But the question is on you to show us, line by line, since you know it... why its bad.

I have read it and believe it to be harmful. You believe it's good, but you don't know it, and haven't read it. Approach me again when you're ready for a decent pro and con discussion.

I can take your word for it. Teach me how its bad, and allow me to look up the pertinent details. After all, the information is there. Otherwise, you are merely preaching to the wrong choir. Since you have read it, of course.

And no- I have not stated anything specific about the bill, so there again you are making a false assessment. Please, stay on task or don't play.

In this thread, you have explicitly shown your irritation with anyone who disagrees with Obama's plans and actions, repeatedly calling them whiners. You are not unbiased. So, your credibility to judge my bias is weak, at best. Play when you have the means. Read the bill, and build your credibility on the basis that you know what Barry and the Dims are proposing, not just the spin they offer.

That has nothing to do with the issue at hand. This is the issue at hand which you are evading:

Teach me all about all of those 407 pages. The facts are in there. I could trust your word, like I said. I am even willing to give you the benefit of the doubt in pointing to the specific areas of the bill that are susceptible, as you imply, to Democratic bias. So please, if you will- surely since passage on 19 February you have had enough time to read it as you say. I can read, so give me, issue by issue, page number, and your perspective. Since you have read it of course.

[Ban Hammer 13,360]

I believe he just got the stimulus package enacted. You might want to whine and flat out spew venom if it fails or find something else to whine about if it works.

Are you denying that we are debating the limits of free speech when it comes to criticising Obama's policies and acts? Or, as I asked before, has he done nothing so far, and that is the objection to criticism?

Like I said... feel free to whine as much as you like. Even if there isn't much to whine about.

No whining from me. But, the more you say it the more true it seems to be (in your own mind) I suppose.

Criticism of the stimulus package is allowed, btw.

By all means... criticize as much as it makes you happy to do so. Line by line, issue by issue.

Whine, rant, criticize, disagree, etc. Do as you will. You don't need special permission nor clearance to voice your opinion.

strange how that stringent a requirement wasn't around when gwb was in office.........