Utilizador: Password:
Registo de novo utilizador
Moderador: Vikings 
 Politics

Forum for discussing local and world politics and issues. All views are welcomed. Let your opinions be heard on current news and politics.


All standard guidelines apply to this board, No Flaming, No Taunting, No Foul Language,No sexual innuendos,etc..

As politics can be a volatile subject, please consider how you would feel if your comment were directed toward yourself.

Any post deemed to be in violation of guidelines will be deleted or edited without warning or notification. Any continued misbehavior will result in a ban or hidden status, so please play nice!!!


*"Moderators are here for a reason. If a moderator (or Global Moderator or Fencer) requests that a discussion on a certain subject to cease - for whatever reason - please respect these wishes. Failure to do so may result in being hidden, or banned."


Mensagens por página:
Lista de Fóruns
Não pode escrever mensagens neste fórum. O nível mínimo de inscrição para o fazer neste fórum é Nível Peão.
Modo de acesso: Qualquer um pode escrever
Procurar nas mensagens:  

<< <   231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240   > >>
18. Junho 2010, 07:48:02
The Col 
Assunto: Re: How is he playing politics?
Artful Dodger: I'm not impressed by the Obama era to this point,he has not fulfilled his promises in many areas.Basically has turned off his base,and been met by the cold shoulder from the right, not a recipe for a 2nd term

18. Junho 2010, 07:40:12
Papa Zoom 
Assunto: Re: How is he playing politics?
Jim Dandy: nonsense. It ALL has to do with the oil spill. Either directly or indirectly.

My last response was to your general comments post. Since you didn't address the oil spill, I simply responded to your general comments.

When Rachel maddox criticizes obama, you know he's in trouble.

18. Junho 2010, 07:33:30
The Col 
Assunto: Re: How is he playing politics?
Modificado por The Col (18. Junho 2010, 07:34:25)
Artful Dodger: 3/4 of your comments have nothing to do with the oil spill, that's playing politics.What's with that Barton guy calling the 20 billion a shakedown slush fund?
People need concrete action just to put food on the table, he did achieve that for the time being.I think pretty much everybody agreed that BP were the best people to handle the situation early on, hindsight is 20/20

18. Junho 2010, 07:16:53
Papa Zoom 
Assunto: Re: How is he playing politics?
Jim Dandy: People want solutions not speeches. Where was he at the beginning of this oil spill? He was not dealing with it. His administration was basically ignoring it. It took Obama 2 months to approve Jindal's requests. That's playing politics.

Obama is the first President to use foul language when addressing the public. Not very Presidential.

And why are many on the left talking about buyers remorse? Clearly, Obama's honeymoon is over. More and more people are disappointed with his policies and lack of leadership.

Wait until they see their taxes go up. Another promise broken. We will all see that. No, Obama didn't "raise" our taxes. He authored policies that will increase taxes through new regulations/laws and changes.

When the Bush tax cuts expire, we will all see an increase. Obama could extend the cuts but he won't. As we head into November we will see more and more voting against the Democrats. Thanks to Obama.

18. Junho 2010, 07:10:29
The Col 
Assunto: Re: How is he playing politics?
Artful Dodger: Poor Obama, he can't win from losing.I am pretty confident that if he had not expressed the very real frustration of the nation by saying he wanted to find out "who's ass to kick" he would be denounced by the right for being soft on big oil.

18. Junho 2010, 06:51:13
Papa Zoom 
Assunto: And
Obama is receiving bipartisan criticism for using this oil spill for political means. He's attempting to use the spill as a way to revive his energy regulation bill. That bill has been tabled since last year. Clearly the "cap-and-trade" package does absolutely nothing in stopping the leak or aiding in the cleanup. But Obama never met a crisis that he's not willing to exploit politically.

18. Junho 2010, 06:42:58
Papa Zoom 
Assunto: Another example of Obama playing politics with the oil spill
From his speech:

We've approved the construction of new barrier islands in Louisiana to try and stop the oil before it reaches the shore."

Of course Louisiana's governor has been asking for those islands and berms for two months not and FINALLY Obama approves. Now that's quick. Keep in mind, they've not been built yet but they are approved.

What was Obama waiting for? Oh yeah, for things to get worse.

Real leadership gets things done. Obama is over his head. We are seeing the Peter Principle at work here.

18. Junho 2010, 04:00:02
Papa Zoom 
Assunto: Re: How is he playing politics?
Jim Dandy: The Obama administration's response to the oil spill was slow. Even when he did begin to get involved, the efforts of the feds has been disorganized and inefficient. The politics he's playing has to do with the clean up and NOT the spill. It's OUR shores and OUR fishing waters and OUR recreational waters that are affected. So it's up the US (as in the Federal Government) to be sure things are being done aggressively to contain this disaster.

Obama and company did NOT do that. They are just now taking aggressive action. And at every opportunity, Obama is vilifying BP. That is not to say BP isn't at fault here. I think they clearly are. But grandstanding and making promises to kick someone's ass is a political move and not a move of a leader trying to offer viable solutions.

Obama is moving toward passage of some of his energy policies and he's doing so on the back of this oil spill. There is speculation that he and his administration have deliberately allowed the spill to get worse so that it would yield more political advantage. I think this is true. The evidence of this is Obama's current pressure on legislators to pass some of his more controversial legislation.

Obama has never been a fan of huge oil companies. And clearly he's using this crisis to his political advantage. I'm not saying Republicans don't do the same. They do. But Obama is president now and he's the man in charge so ultimately he's the only one that matters at the moment.

18. Junho 2010, 02:12:48
Papa Zoom 
Assunto: Re: Gratzel cells
(V): It's a step but as I correctly pointed out, we're not there yet. We've a LOOOOOOOOOOOOOONG way to go. A very long way.

18. Junho 2010, 00:33:29
Mort 
The inventor of a low-cost solar cell that could be used to build electricity generating windows has been awarded this year's Millennium Technology Prize. Professor Michael Gratzel of the Lausanne Federal Technology Institute received the €800,000 (£660,000) prize at a ceremony in Helsinki.

Professor Gratzel's innovation mimics the way plants turn light into energy. Two British inventors also won prizes of €150,000 (£124,000) each.

..... Explaining his inspiration, he said: "I was always intrigued by the way plants capture sunlight and turn it into fuels like sugar. "Natural photosynthesis was the inspiration, and our solar cell is the only one that mimics the natural photosynthetic process."

Gratzel cells rely on nanotechnology to produce power from sunlight. "We are using nanocrystal films in which the particles are so small, they don't scatter light," said Professor Gratzel.

"You can imagine using those cells as electricity producing windows. "What's very exciting is that you collect light from all sides, so can capture electricity from the inside as well as the outside. "You could think that the glass of all high-rises in New York would be electricity generating panels," he said.

Gratzel cells have recently been launched in consumer products, including as battery charging backpacks, and Professor Gratzel said that the €800,000 prize would benefit his research and go back into science.

17. Junho 2010, 23:20:37
Mort 
Assunto: Re: Obama will go down as the worst President in history.
Artful Dodger: I didn't know you bugged the Oval office!!

17. Junho 2010, 23:19:02
Papa Zoom 
Assunto: Re: Obama will go down as the worst President in history.
(V): I'm not ignoring that fact. I've know BP caused the accident through negligence from the start. But Obama did nothing in the first 60 days.

17. Junho 2010, 23:16:13
Mort 
Assunto: Re: Obama will go down as the worst President in history.
Tuesday: I don't get parts of the mess over that event.. over here if there is a natural disaster then county (state to you guys) lines vanish.

17. Junho 2010, 23:14:01
Mort 
Assunto: Re: Obama will go down as the worst President in history.
Artful Dodger: You are still ignoting the point that BP caused the accident by ignoring safety advice by their experts

... this is not a mistake by government but by a private sector company who cut costs. Is there documentation that Obama told them to cut costs... no.

17. Junho 2010, 23:11:01
Papa Zoom 
Assunto: Re: Obama will go down as the worst President in history.
(V): There was PLENTY Obama could have done AFTER the spill but he did NOTHING. I'll list them later. I'll also get specific on Jim's question.

17. Junho 2010, 23:09:24
Mort 
Assunto: Re: Obama will go down as the worst President in history.
Artful Dodger: OMG... If BP had not corners then there would be NO accident. You cannot blame Obama for BP trying to do the job on the cheap. BP ignored safety warnings from their own engineers, they ignored safety warnings from their contractors.

17. Junho 2010, 19:26:31
The Col 
Assunto: Re: Obama will go down as the worst President in history.
Artful Dodger: How is he playing politics?

17. Junho 2010, 19:08:07
Papa Zoom 
Assunto: Re: Obama will go down as the worst President in history.
Jim Dandy: Obama shirked his responsibility early on in this whole mess. There were things he could do but his administration sat on their hands. That part is clear. Now he's acting (playing politics) all though. Even Chris Matthews is critical of him.

17. Junho 2010, 18:40:11
The Col 
Assunto: Re: Obama will go down as the worst President in history.
Modificado por The Col (17. Junho 2010, 18:40:35)
Artful Dodger: This kinda reminds me of why I don't like someone buying me dinner.You feel inhibited from ordering what might be the best, but most pricey items on the menu,and can't really complain if you don't enjoy the meal.........Obama has traded the right to call the shots for BP paying the tab on the fixit job and clean up, no matter how lousy a job they do.

17. Junho 2010, 16:21:59
Papa Zoom 
Assunto: Re: Obama will go down as the worst President in history.
Bernice: Obama sat on his hands for nearly 60 days. I think he let this disaster get as bad as it could get so he could play the tough guy and then pass some of his controversial ideas.

17. Junho 2010, 14:42:16
Mort 
Assunto: Re:it can stop our dependence on oil.
Artful Dodger: The technology is now that you do not need high levels of sunlight to make solar power, even at the current tech levels micro generation can lead with small windmills to enable the average joe to be able to sell electric to the grid.

... The new tech coming out is able to use every inch of a building including windows (with windows both internal and external light) for solar electric production.

It's a myth that you need bright sunlight. Wind and wave farms are now operational in the UK..... sunshine is not the only free energy available.

... The new batteries coming in R&D ..... powerful enough to replace and give the range of a combustion engine.

Maybe it's just the BBC provide more coverage then in this news area.

17. Junho 2010, 09:15:08
Bernice 
Assunto: Re: Obama will go down as the worst President in history.
Artful Dodger: oh he will probably take it out of the 30billion he is asking/getting/or has been offered from BP....

17. Junho 2010, 07:24:20
Papa Zoom 
Assunto: Obama will go down as the worst President in history.
June 17, 2010
Charity begins at home
Moshe Dann
President Obama has announced that he intends to give $400 million more to the Palestinian Authority and Hamas terrorists in the Gaza Strip without conditions, or oversight.

This is in addition to $900 million America pledged for Gaza and the PA in March, 2009.

President Obama said: "...the United States -- which is already the biggest humanitarian aid donor in Gaza -- is going to be announcing an additional $400 million in assistance for housing, school construction, business development -- not only in Gaza, but also in the West Bank ... the status quo with respect to Gaza [is] unsustainable, the status quo with respect to the Middle East is unsustainable. It is time for us to go ahead and move forward on a two-state solution..."

Yet, Israeli soldier, Gilad Shalit, has been held in Gaza for four years without even minimal human rights, even a visit from the Red Cross. And Hamas terrorists, who are in control of Gaza, continue to attack Israel.

And a few days ago, terrorists connected to Fatah, the ruling party in the PA, murdered a policeman and wounded two others. PA policemen have been involved in other murders of Jews traveling on roads in Judea and Samaria.

17. Junho 2010, 00:06:25
Papa Zoom 
Assunto: Re:it can stop our dependence on oil.
(V): Of course I never said it was "just a theory." That part you made up. I said the technology isn't adequate. It can't produce the needed energy to complete with fossil fuels. And I said that we've a long way to go before we get to that place.

You see, I read the news and what I've said is what has been in the news. It's not that green energy doesn't offer promises. Perhaps it does. But at this moment in time, the technology IS NOT THERE. It's like a battery vrs nuclear energy. Sure the battery can run small things. But it cannot even begin to address the huge energy needs of a single city. A house? Yeah. People had tons of equiptment and get their energy from the sun. But they live in Arizona. Try that here. In many parts of the world the sunshine is not sufficient to power much of anything.

16. Junho 2010, 23:38:56
Mort 
Assunto: Re:it can stop our dependence on oil.
Artful Dodger: It's no longer a theory. The tech to replace petrol has been found and is in development. A nanotech battery.

You should read the news!!

16. Junho 2010, 23:22:58
Papa Zoom 
Assunto: Re: T Boone Pickens says.....
Jim Dandy: I agree that we should get the jump on green energy. But it's only a promise at this moment in time and it may turn out to just be a pipe dream.

16. Junho 2010, 23:22:01
Papa Zoom 
Assunto: Re:it can stop our dependence on oil.
(V): This is not true. It can potentially stop it but that's theory. In practice, it can't because as I said, we don't currently have the adequate technology.

16. Junho 2010, 23:01:55
The Col 
Assunto: T Boone Pickens says.....
The USA should be exploiting their vast reserves of natural gas, he has a point.

Whoever gets the jump in "green energy" will be the leader of the next century.A whole economy and workforce would be energized by becoming the leader in this area.

16. Junho 2010, 22:15:30
Mort 
Assunto: Re:The US may have the resources for "Green Energy" but the technology just isn't there. There is likely potential, but the actual technology to produce the vast quantities of energy needed just isn't possible technologically at this point.
Artful Dodger: I think you'll find we are in the 21st and although green cannot produce all the energy it can stop our dependence on oil. The tech is such that one can make enough power from solar and wind to be able to sell back to the grid.

The USA is already at the mercy of others oil wise. It has been for decades and unless the American people are willing to pay a big hike in oil prices will stay so.

"Exploring green energy sources is one thing. But we cannot talk ahead of the game. "

The games is that we can now burn 90%+ of landfill rubbish and turn it into power, wind farms, wave farms, solar heating and electric, old oil from fast food joints turned into bio fuel.......

.. if it wasn't for green technology power wise, you'd not had the A-bomb in 1945.

16. Junho 2010, 20:47:32
Papa Zoom 
Assunto: Re:
(V):   The US may have the resources for "Green Energy" but the technology just isn't there.  There is likely potential, but the actual technology to produce the vast quantities of energy needed just isn't possible technologically at this point.  One oil well can supply far more than a multitude of green energy sources.  It's not my opinion on the matter, it's just the facts we are currently facing.  There is no possible way to replace fossel fuels with green energy.  We are still in the very early stages of discovery.  Yes we have found green energy sources, but the output is limited.  And in the meanwhile, other countries around the world will continue to produce oil based products and unless the US does too, it will be at the mercy of others.  Exploring green energy sources is one thing.  But we cannot talk ahead of the game.  We are not at a point where green energy can sustain people's energy needs on larger scales.  In theory perhaps, but in practice, no.

15. Junho 2010, 10:18:05
Mort 
Assunto: Re:
Artful Dodger: I don't think Obama wants to me noted as Nixon and Raygun have been for being lackeys of the private sector. With respect.. the USA has the potential of a great deal of green energy. It'd be a shame to waste those renewable resources.

And for the right wing to take this disaster and turn it into a point scorer is disgusting.

15. Junho 2010, 09:17:06
The Col 
Assunto: Re:
(V): Oil reaps more rewards than Jaffa oranges.Without the support of the USA, Israel would have been obliterated just for existing.I'm pretty sure Israel would prefer to live peacefully, with no threats to their right to exist.

15. Junho 2010, 05:29:49
Papa Zoom 
Assunto: So the question is: How long before Holder is "fired?"
Make room under the bus for Eric Holder
Clarice Feldman
One of my favorite national security mavens, Gabriel Schoenfeld, says in the Weekly Standard that Attorney General Eric Holder's likely to be thrown under the Obama bus. I can't find a thing wrong with that prediction:

Eric Holder has been a disastrous attorney general. "Classic 101 Boobery" was how one Democratic operative memorably called his decision, now on hold, to try Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in a civilian court in lower Manhattan. Other blunders have piled up and the White House has been repeatedly embarrassed by his string of ill-considered decisions and gaffes. With the midterm elections approaching, it would not be surprising if Holder soon finds himself under the Obama bus, lying next to former Director of National Intelligence Dennis Blair.

15. Junho 2010, 05:27:28
Papa Zoom 
That would answer the question as to why the administration waited so long and why they held back on needed efforts to stop the disaster before it got worse.

15. Junho 2010, 05:25:49
Papa Zoom 
June 14, 2010
Obama will use Oval Office speech to politicize the Gulf oil disaster
Bill Weckesser
Has the Obama administration willfully been scuttling clean up efforts in the Gulf so that the oil could make its way to shore and onto the beaches and birds for maximum political leverage? Now Politico is reporting that the President will use his oval office address for a full court, no hold-bars, assault on the oil and energy industries. Mike Allen writes in http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0610/38488.html

14. Junho 2010, 08:52:57
Mort 
Assunto: Re:
Jim Dandy: I would think in some regards Israel has turned into a pawn of sorts.. They couldn't keep up the military without help.

14. Junho 2010, 01:43:37
The Col 
Assunto: Re:
Tuesday: the syncronicity was intentional

13. Junho 2010, 22:58:06
The Col 
Assunto: Re:
(V): Peace has been made with Jordan, Egypt.........Jordan had control of the Gaza from 1948- 1967,why did they not give statehood to the Palestinians? Many middle east countries fall over each other in support of the Palestinian issue,they are used as pawns.

13. Junho 2010, 16:55:39
Papa Zoom 
June 13, 2010
Obama's alternate history musings on the oil spill
Rick Moran
What do you do if you're president and the American people think you're handling of an environmental disaster is incompetent?

If you're Obama, you make up an alternate history scenario where you place the blame on what your opponents would have done if you had tried to prevent it:

In an interview with POLITICO, the president said: "I think it's fair to say, if six months ago, before this spill had happened, I had gone up to Congress and I had said we need to crack down a lot harder on oil companies and we need to spend more money on technology to respond in case of a catastrophic spill, there are folks up there, who will not be named, who would have said this is classic, big-government overregulation and wasteful spending."

The president also implied that anti-big government types such as tea party activists were being hypocritical on the issue.

"Some of the same folks who have been hollering and saying ‘do something' are the same folks who, just two or three months ago, were suggesting that government needs to stop doing so much," Obama said. "Some of the same people who are saying the president needs to show leadership and solve this problem are some of the same folks who, just a few months ago, were saying this guy is trying to engineer a takeover of our society through the federal government that is going to restrict our freedoms."

The excuse here has the benefit that it is absolutely unsupported by the facts, while creating an alternate universe where the president was prevented from doing something when he had 60 sitting Democratic senators and a huge majority in the House.

And the canard that the tea party folks are "anti-government" is a nice touch, don't you think? There is a huge difference between being "anti-statist" and "anti-government" and Obama knows it. He just finds it convenient to raise a straw man argument as he desperately tries to spread the blame for his administration's towering incompetence on the oil spill.

13. Junho 2010, 16:48:42
Papa Zoom 
Assunto: Obama losing lots of ground.
The results show a president struggling. On the oil spill, 28% approve and 42% disapprove of his performance. On taxes, government spending, immigration, gun control, national defense, and terrorism the respondents say they are closer to the Republican Party than the Democratic Party. On gun control and national defense there is a double-digit gap. Democrats do better on regulating business (but within the margin of error), the environment, abortion (also within the margin of error), gay marriage, health care (by four points) and energy policy. In an enormous turnaround since Obama took office, the parties tie on the economy.
38 percent support the goals of the Tea Party movement; 27 percent do not. In a slew of areas (the Middle East, Afghanistan, energy policy, the environment, the economy, job security, health-care coverage, education, entitlement programs, the financial system, and Wall Street) the public thinks we are worse off than two years ago. There is no area in which the public thinks things have improved. They disapprove of Obama's performance on Iraq, the economy (39 percent strongly so), immigration (41 percent strongly so), the environment, terrorism, gay rights, social security, the deficit ( 57 percent strongly or somewhat), Afghanistan, and taxes. On education they approve, but within the margin of error. Overall 44 percent approve of his performance and 49 percent do not.
With the exception of education and health care, the areas respondents are most concerned about (the economy, terrorism, social security, the budget deficit, and taxes) are ones on which Obama is doing very poorly and which most respondents believe have gotten worse in the last two years.

Not looking good for Joe Cool.  It just gets worse and worse for the guy.  Still, the GOP hasn't found anyone that could beat him in an election today.  It's very difficult to beat an incumbent prez even an unpopular one.  Obama is slowly becoming very unpopular.  Even among Democrats.  Most interesting is that one now hears Democrats speak of buyer's remorse.  That can't be a good thing.

13. Junho 2010, 11:57:02
Mort 
Assunto: Re:
Jim Dandy: Sometimes I think it would be good if Someone went to the Israeli gov and talked about 'ghettos' ... Not to be nasty, but to try and knock some sense over the whole middle east situation. I'm wondering if she was trying to get that point across.

13. Junho 2010, 06:47:48
Papa Zoom 
Assunto: Re:
Jim Dandy: That sums it up well.

13. Junho 2010, 06:45:54
The Col 
Assunto: Re:
Artful Dodger: No argument here,it seems many woulld like to throw Israel under the bus, to appease known terrorist groups who populate boats with well intentioned bleeding hearts as human shields to break down their passage for weapon reinforcements............say that 10 times fast

13. Junho 2010, 06:07:43
Papa Zoom 
Assunto: Re:
Jim Dandy: Doesn't matter. Clearly a huge majority of people on your forums consider Thomas to be a hero. That doesn't speak well of them.

<< <   231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240   > >>
Data e hora
Amigos online
Fóruns favoritos
Clubes
Dica do dia
Copyright © 2002 - 2024 Filip Rachunek, todos os direitos reservados.
Voltar para o topo