Since he has been president everything has collapsed .. from our economy to foreign affairs ... I often wonder who is more dangerous to our country... them (the terrorists) or the enemy from within (Obama) ....

|
|
|||||
|
608 votes
|
|
63% | |||
|
254 votes
|
|
26% | |||
|
97 votes
|
|
10% | |||
William Bennett says the administration insists it was an inane anti-Islam film that provoked violent protests, but the story is more complex.

Read More: http://www.cnn.com/2012/09/20/opinion/bennett-midd...

UNFORTUNATELY!!!!
But, I don't think it is clueless, I think they are following an agenda and it's not good for America.
Some of it is for the better and some of it is for the worse...while what is happening is a progression towards change...some of it for the better and some of it for the worse.
What is revealing is how many US citizens think that the " awfull governments" over there in the Middle East should be eliminated and replaced with the "opposition"....but really they are now realising that the reasons the previous governments were so hard on the citizens is because the "other" people and "other" political movements that would replace them are, all too often, worse than what the previous governments were like in many aspects.
Meantime it is only a very small percent of the citizens that are protesting as many of those protesters are the most zealous of the religious radicals and many are unemployed having a lot of idle time on their hands and more than likely being paid or encouraged by the Muslim Clerics to go out and protest ......violently.
Give the situation a few weeks and they will all be back to their poverty stricken religious ways that they seem to love so much to the point of willingness to "die" for their poverty stricken religious ways and the small minded mentality that comes with it.
Remember, in those countries they live in a...
Some of it is for the better and some of it is for the worse...while what is happening is a progression towards change...some of it for the better and some of it for the worse.
What is revealing is how many US citizens think that the " awfull governments" over there in the Middle East should be eliminated and replaced with the "opposition"....but really they are now realising that the reasons the previous governments were so hard on the citizens is because the "other" people and "other" political movements that would replace them are, all too often, worse than what the previous governments were like in many aspects.
Meantime it is only a very small percent of the citizens that are protesting as many of those protesters are the most zealous of the religious radicals and many are unemployed having a lot of idle time on their hands and more than likely being paid or encouraged by the Muslim Clerics to go out and protest ......violently.
Give the situation a few weeks and they will all be back to their poverty stricken religious ways that they seem to love so much to the point of willingness to "die" for their poverty stricken religious ways and the small minded mentality that comes with it.
Remember, in those countries they live in a religious social environment that is more or less bound by all consuming and ever pressing religious values that result in: "Monkey see", "Monkey do" religious mentality that nearly all of them are continually subjected to while they stay there and live within their own close knit strict religious environments.
Once they get out of those countries and come to places like America they loosen up a whole lot and live a far more balanced life while religious values are not practised with so much blind zealotry.
However, in some parts of the U.S. where there are signifiant numbers of Muslims it is the religious clerics that once again will draw them into the fold of the church and guide them while more or less compelling them to adhere to their inheritied religious values no matter where they live while raising their Muslim families.
It is like they can not get away from the religion that they were born to and stuck with. When you meet many of them, outside their hard core religious communities, you learn fast enough that they really would rather be living life and enjoying themselves rather than "always" be obligated to practice the religious values that they inherited by way of history and family.
These factors and others are all part of how the Muslim religion gains its strength around the world while many of the Muslims do well and many do very well by being totally immersed in the Muslim religious practices and the many benefits that they are afforded while the masses of devout Muslims support the whole affair, more or less like a pyramid scheme of sorts.
When the clerics call upon the devout believers to make a show of "bravado", there are more than enough of them that will eagerly go out there and protest and rant and chant and let the world know that the Muslims are offended while letting the world know that anything negative said about their religion and their religious values are not to be tolerated.
But how many of them are out there angrily protesting???........0.001 percent of them.
When tens of millions of enraged Muslims are on the street fighting and rampaging and destroying everything....... then it is time to leave!
Nationally we've been pretty clueless historically for a long time now. We've angered people for decades, and you seriously think Obama should have fixed this -- along with the economy -- in less than 4 years? That's REALLY clueless.
Regarding the economy. Reagan inherited a worse situation than Obama did (and you never heard him blame Carter, rather he fixed the problems) and by the way, every president inherits something from the previous administration, but we have never heard a president and his administration blame like this group do...
Regarding the economy. Reagan inherited a worse situation than Obama did (and you never heard him blame Carter, rather he fixed the problems) and by the way, every president inherits something from the previous administration, but we have never heard a president and his administration blame like this group does) and Reagan was able to turn it around his first 4 years. Obama doesn't want to listen to anyone. He thinks he can spend his way out of this and its like giving someone a credit card and they run it up until they are past their limit and then ask their aunt for money to pay it off. But then they keep using it and eventually the aunt stops giving them money or she runs out of money to give. And the only one that benefits is the credit card company. And in our case, China is benefiting since we are borrowing from them. You can not tax people if they don't have money to give; hence no jobs. When people are working they are stimulating the economy. And lastly, stop spending. Don't we all budget ourselves, so shouldn't the government?
Also, if Obama would invest in drilling in our country that would create thousands of jobs. Instead he has given Brazil two billion dollars to drill in Brazil for oil to give to China, not us. And guess who is the largest individual stockholder of this Brazilian Oil Company and who would benefit most from this? It is Billionaire, George Soros, Liberal businessman who is a radical left wing supporter, finances MoveOn.org as well as other liberal programs and was President Obama's largest and most generous supporter during his campaign. Obama's agenda is not to make this country great, but appears to bring it down. We can't go another fours years like the past four years. Why would you give someone four more years if he couldn't figure it out this past four years. Any CEO that ran a business like he's been running the country would either bankrupt the company or get fired.
We are not in charge of how another sovereign country behaves. This isn't you telling a 5-yo child to wash his hands before dinner. This is you telling your ADULT neighbor to wash his hands, and his saying "No." Now what do you do? Refuse to serve him dinner? Send him home? Tell him he's a dolt? Shoot him?
You can't FORCE adults to respect your boundaries. How the hell do you think a lot of wars start in the first place?
No, NOT "regarding the economy." I mentioned it because so many people think Obama should have fixed 8 years of slop in as many months, I didn't discuss it, and I'm not going to. This question is about mideast policy, not the economy.
P.S. If you have a reading problem, you can get help for it.
Sure, you don't want to talk about the economy, because, obama has spENT FIVE TIMES THE AMOUNT IN 3 YEARS, THAT bUSH SPENT IN 8 YEARS TOTAL. (COMPUTER PROBLEMS/SPELLING)
Besides, I don't have any more time to waste on idiots today. Tomorrow doesn't look good for you either.
The only reason your savior Bill Clinton was so loved was because he had a Republican congress (house and senate) to work with that gave the government a surplus as the dims like...
The only reason your savior Bill Clinton was so loved was because he had a Republican congress (house and senate) to work with that gave the government a surplus as the dims like to say, they made him balance the budget, but the Republicans are never mentioned or given credit, only Clinton gets the credit and he proudly accepts it. And if you looked, Bush didn't leave 8 years of a mess. That's just what the dims keep telling you since they are the ones that screw everything up and you people believe them. As we are seeing, even with four years the dims can't make things better; only worse. I'm sure you've never bothered to check out the facts. That's right, you people don't believe in facts, only lies. And when you find out a dem is to blame, the standard canned answer...."so what". Why was Reagan able to get us out of the mess (his first four years) he inherited from Carter and it was worse.
"Many leading Democrats in Washington these days like to point to the fact that the federal budget was balanced for part of the time that President Bill Clinton was in office. What they do not mention is that those balanced budgets occurred only when Republicans controlled both houses of Congress. In fact, according to the historical data published by the Office of Management and Budget in the Obama White House, no Congress in which the Democrats controlled both the House and Senate has balanced the federal budget since fiscal 1969--more than 40 years ago. More recently, the federal budget was balanced in fiscal years 1998, 1999, 2000 and 2001. A Republican-controlled Congress approved the appropriations for each one of those years and Democratic President Bill Clinton signed them. In fiscal years 1994 and 1995, when President Clinton governed with a Democrat-controlled Congress, the federal government ran deficits of $203.2 billion and $163.9 billion respectively. In the November 2006 elections, Democrats won back the majority in both the House and Senate, and in the three fiscal years that have started since then (2008, 2009, 2010), they have run record deficits of $458.6 billion, $1.41 trillion and $1.55 trillion" Source: CBSNEWS
Gasoline prices, the rate of poverty, food stamp use and the federal debt are worse today than when the president took office. The unemployment rate, personal income and the stock market turned worse under Obama. The stock market only goes up when Bernanke prints money to help out Obama.
Here are some facts: Bush 2008 Obama 2012
Unemployement Rate 5% 8.2%
People that stopped looking, but still unemployed 9.2% 14.8%
White Unemployment Rate 4.4% 7.4%
Black Unemployment Rate 9.1% 13.6%
Hispanic Unemployment Rate 6.5% 11%
Median Weeks Unemployed 9% 20.1%
source:
Sorry if my chart looks messy. Numbers are correct.
Actually Bush was successful under his presidency despite the 9/11 terror attack, but you would never know that since you listen to the lies that are constantly repeated about him. Check out the youtube videos (2001-2008) proving that the dems created the financial and housing messes and then like clockwork turned around and blamed the Republicans.
Out of curiousity, what part of "No, NOT regarding the economy" was too tough for you to understand? I really thought it was obvious even to an idiot that I'm not going off into a different topic here. It's not that I object to having provided you with the platform to state your views (which are pretty mundane and hardly original), it's just that I'm not wasting my time engaging with you over your opinions which don't interest me in the least.
Have a nice day.