Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Barack Obama is our duly elected president, one who has done nothing what so ever that rises to the level of an impeachable offense. Sorry, you'll have to wait until the next election to maybe be as happy as those of us who support him are happy now.
The fact that he understands the mindset of other cultures on earth and gives them respect does nothing but help the U.S.A.'s image in the world. We are a far safer nation with him as president than we would have been with warmongers McCain and Palin in charge.
As for the meaningless phrase, "war on terror" Hillary Clinton was asked about this back in March and she said the phrase "was widely disliked in Europe and elsewhere overseas, where even close U.S. allies suggested it was overly militaristic and perhaps counterproductive."
Location: The Land Mass Between NOLA and Mobile, AL
1,796 posts, read 1,662,818 times
Reputation: 1411
Quote:
Originally Posted by Old Gringo
Prove it.
Prove it.
Because it's a stupid phrase and he's no dummy. His predecessor insisted on speaking of the "the war on terr." That probably appealed to you.
I don't doubt it.
Good ol' Old Gringo, you are such a man after my own sweet heart. Every time I see your posts, they are pithy and oh, so smart.
OK, enough of that. I see no evidence--other than accidents of naming and early childhood living conditions--that Obama is anything other than he appears to be. He is a star graduate of one of America's top law schools, which, to me any way, means that he thinks deeply about words and what they mean. (It also means a whole lot of other things, but let's just start there).
He hasn't abandoned the idea of the war on terror, but he has perhaps moved to a more useful phrase to describe it. "The war on terror" as a phrase is imprecise and stupid, really. You can't win a war on an abstraction. I could declare a "war on jealousy" or a "war on ugliness" and you could smile at me while knowing I would lose. How would one possibly go about eliminating every example of an abstraction? Even if one could, someone would always be able to expand or contract the definition of the abstraction, thereby quite literally changing the field of war.
More precise language is good for all of us. It seems ambiguous to some of us, and that is too bad. George Orwell wrote about this right after WWII in a classic essay that bears rereading:
B.O. is whoever the media wants him to be. He in my eyes is a biracial man who won the POTUS. Now the media can make him whatever...a black man and even a white man if they so desire. "insert eyeroll"
Barrack easily goes down as the worst president in history!
He has made sooooooo many mistakes, lies, his radical activity,
his carelessness, over spending, and far leftness!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Well Wellness, if all of this were true, where were your politicians of choice during the elections?
Where were your "White Knights"?
Why didn't your politicians of choice run for office? Why did no one vote for them?
Why haven't your politicians of choice come up with solutions for the war in Iraq, terrorism, healthcare, jobs, the economy, etc?
Why do you and your politicians criticize without providing solutions. It's very easy to stand by and critique others who are making the effort while you and yours have done nothing for years.
((((silence))))
Exactly.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.