Should Obama resign?

[myrtlebee]

Originally Posted by zioxide

I didn't like George W. Bush. I wouldn't have voted for him (I was 12/16 in 00/04). But you know what? Once he won, and was inaugurated as President, I respected that. Any true American should respect the office and institution regardless of if your guy won or not. THAT is the American way.

If Romney wins, this will be an incredible feat for me to attempt to achieve. I do not respect him as a person, nor will I ever. The problem is -- where does one draw the line of "respect for the office" vs. "respect for the individual"?

[rdowns]

Rudy Giuliani is a ****ing tool. He exists solely to be a Republican attack dog. New York state voters rejected his ass as did national voters.

[NewbieCanada]

Originally Posted by zioxide

Disgusting and extremely un-American.


I didn't like George W. Bush. I wouldn't have voted for him (I was 12/16 in 00/04). But you know what? Once he won, and was inaugurated as President, I respected that. Any true American should respect the office and institution regardless of if your guy won or not. THAT is the American way.

Or in Bush's case, stole it.

[Renzatic]

Originally Posted by myrtlebee

If Romney wins, this will be an incredible feat for me to attempt to achieve. I do not respect him as a person, nor will I ever. The problem is -- where does one draw the line of "respect for the office" vs. "respect for the individual"?

They way I see it, your average citizen should view the president as the guy we hired to get a job done. If he doesn't live up to his promises, we have every right to bitch, moan, and groan.

Then you have congress, the house, SCOTUS, ect. who should respect the office a little more than they currently are. They don't have to agree with the president 100% on every issue, but they also shouldn't view him as "the enemy" and refuse to work with him simply because he's in the opposing party. They all have a job to do, a job that shouldn't be gridlocked due to petty politics.

[citizenzen]

Originally Posted by tshrimp

Curious about your thoughts on what Rudy Giuliani had to say about Obama's commitment to resign if.....

My thoughts?

Giuliani is a twit.

Although I had a different vowel in mind for that description.

[zioxide]

Originally Posted by NewbieCanada

Or in Bush's case, stole it.

And yet we STILL respected him as the President. Take note, tea party.

[Peace]

Originally Posted by zioxide

And yet we STILL respected him as the President. Take note, tea party.

Speak for yourself. I never respected Bush. As President or as a human being.

[tshrimp]

Originally Posted by NewbieCanada

Or in Bush's case, stole it.

Confused here. Maybe because you are from Canada, but here in the United States of America whoever gets the most Electoral College votes becomes the president.

[zioxide]

Originally Posted by tshrimp

Confused here. Maybe because you are from Canada, but here in the United States of America whoever gets the most Electoral Collage votes becomes the president.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_..._Florida,_2000

[tshrimp]

Originally Posted by zioxide

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_..._Florida,_2000

Thanks for the link, and as you see in the link Bush also won Florida, but was very close.

[APlotdevice]

You know this doesn't seem like a very effective strategy on Rudy's part. It makes it sound like he isn't confident that his candidate can win the election.

[Grey Beard]

Originally Posted by tshrimp

Confused here. Here in the United States of America whoever gets the most Electoral Collage votes becomes the president.

Down here, a collage is a paste up job. Oh I see what you were implying.

KGB

[zioxide]

Originally Posted by tshrimp

Thanks for the link, and as you see in the link Bush also won Florida, but was very close.

Yes, if you just look at the heading on the page.

Take a read over the pages and pages detailing all of the controversy surrounding Bush's "win" and you'll see why many people still remain skeptical that he actually won that election.

[tshrimp]

Originally Posted by Grey Beard

Down here, a collage is a paste up job. Oh I see what you were implying.

KGB

Good catch...fixed

----------

Originally Posted by zioxide

Yes, if you just look at the heading on the page.

Take a read over the pages and pages detailing all of the controversy surrounding Bush's "win" and you'll see why many people still remain skeptical that he actually won that election.

I did read it and lived it at the time. Bush by all measures won that race. No matter how hard the Democrats tried to steal this race it didn't happen and the process prevailed.

http://www.fraudfactor.com/ffef2kcountways.html

Also the "confusing" ballot issue in Palm Beach was another reach for the Dems. My wife gave the exact ballot to her Elementary School classes and guess what...they were able to vote as they were instructed with 100% accuracy. She at least expected a mistake of some kind, but there were none.

[SlasherDuff]

Yes

[Moyank24]

Originally Posted by tshrimp

Also the "confusing" ballot issue in Palm Beach was another reach for the Dems. My wife gave the exact ballot to her Elementary School classes and guess what...they were able to vote as they were instructed with 100% accuracy. She at least expected a mistake of some kind, but there were none.

So, basically, your wife has proven that elementary school children are smarter than the senior citizens (ahem "adult population") of Palm Beach.

[tshrimp]

Originally Posted by Moyank24

So, basically, your wife has proven that elementary school children are smarter than the senior citizens (ahem "adult population") of Palm Beach.

Nope. What I am saying is that the argument was very weak as I think the people of Florida are intelligent, and that the confusing ballot argument was contrived.

[zioxide]

Originally Posted by tshrimp

Nope. What I am saying is that the argument was very weak as I think the people of Florida are intelligent, and that the confusing ballot argument was contrived.

Confusing ballots was 1 of about 10 problems Florida had with that election.

There were also votes that weren't counted, etc.


Either way, the Democrats have long since moved on from here. Just pointing out that even though we got screwed in 2000, we still accepted Bush as President once he was inaugurated.

[hulugu]

It's the kind of typical fiery red-meat speech you'd expect in the closing days of an election, but to give it any kind of seriousness, as if this was a thoughtful politician describing why the President should resign, is ridiculous and at this point completely disingenuous.

First, lots of Presidents have had to shift on their policies, George H.W. Bush famously said "read my lips, no new taxes" and then had to react to changing circumstances.

And, his son said of Bin Laden "I want justice. There is an old poster out west, as I recall, that said, 'Wanted dead or alive'" and then a few years later said, "I don't know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don't care. It's not that important. It's not our priority."

The idea that Obama should resign because of one errant quote is silly. And, it's simply fascinating how various conservative apparatchiks have hammered the president on the consulate attack when from 2000-2008 there were 64 individual attacks on US diplomatic targets.

Yeah, 64.

In one incident alone in 2008, 10 were killed by a car bomb in Yemen.

In another in 2002, 10 died when gunman assaulted the consulate in Karachi, Pakistan.

In 2004, 8 died when the US consulate in Saudi Arabia was hit.

And, yet Republicans took this as a sign of the deadliness of the war on terror, but now it's a great crime that the President apparently "allowed" men in Benghazi to attack the facility.

The reality is consulate work is dangerous, especially in a country that has just endured a civil war and is caught between the forces of modernity and fundamentalism.

Politics has allowed this to become a circular firing squad, rather than a nod to the hard reality that Libya is in flux and unless we act accordingly, the country may become mired in civil war and become a new training ground for fighters like Iraq was.

Here's a chart. Being a diplomat today is safer than it's been in twenty years:



Note: yes the link is from Mother Jones, but the data is from the National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism and the State Department. And MJ was kind enough to provide a color-coded chart.

[zioxide]

Originally Posted by hulugu

And, yet Republicans took this as a sign of the deadliness of the war on terror, but now it's a great crime that the President apparently "allowed" men in Benghazi to attack the facility.

Yep. He "allowed" them to attack. He personally opened the gates, opened up a case of beer, and got on a megaphone saying "FREE BEER TO ANYONE WHO ATTACKS OUR EMBASSY".

See, I can make up **** that's just as ridiculous and untrue as the right.

[hulugu]

Originally Posted by zioxide

Yep. He "allowed" them to attack. He personally opened the gates, opened up a case of beer, and got on a megaphone saying "FREE BEER TO ANYONE WHO ATTACKS OUR EMBASSY".

See, I can make up **** that's just as ridiculous and untrue as the right.

That's essentially the argument, though, isn't it?

Everything else is an attempt to put some spin on this ideology, whether the president was too busy campaigning, going to bed, or telling the CIA to stand down, the whole lie has been built around this idea.

It's a pernicious lie from people who should know better.

[Sydde]

Originally Posted by hulugu

That's essentially the argument, though, isn't it?

Everything else is an attempt to put some spin on this ideology, whether the president was too busy campaigning, going to bed, or telling the CIA to stand down, the whole lie has been built around this idea.

It's a pernicious lie from people who should know better.

Well, you know, General Ham was fired because he wanted to provide more protection to the diplomats. Heinous, I tell you, just despicable.

Let me see, Carter F. Ham, commander of American operations in Africa. Hmm, that is a funny way to get fired. I wonder who made that claim. Oh, here it is, our old friend the Moonie Times ran a story that they got from Tiger Droppings, a publication devoted to LSU sports.

Did the left reach this much when attacking the previous president?

[hulugu]

Originally Posted by Sydde

Well, you know, General Ham was fired because he wanted to provide more protection to the diplomats. Heinous, I tell you, just despicable.

Let me see, Carter F. Ham, commander of American operations in Africa. Hmm, that is a funny way to get fired. I wonder who made that claim. Oh, here it is, our old friend the Moonie Times ran a story that they got from Tiger Droppings, a publication devoted to LSU sports.

Did the left reach this much when attacking the previous president?

This is interesting, if I understand the WT article's scenario, the White House didn't want Gen. Ham to send in a contingent of troops because they feared a "Blackhawk Down" scenario. So, since Ham tried to ignore the stand-down order, he's being rotated out?

That's the big conspiracy?

So, a military officer wanted to send in his own forces despite orders from the White House—which knew that CIA officers were already on the scene and by that point the consulate was compromised—and he's going to face the consequences?

Look, peeps. The military follows civilian orders. That's the chain of command. A major military officer who goes all Gene Hackman knows that he's breaking that chain. The White House may have been wrong about the situation and they might have saved the two CIA officers, but Ham's action might also have put more men into Benghazi and stirred up a hornet's nest, getting more people killed and even more people who would claim that Pres. Obama should "retire."

[iJohnHenry]

Originally Posted by hulugu

Look, peeps. The military follows civilian orders. That's the chain of command. A major military officer who goes all Gene Hackman knows that he's breaking that chain.

I was thinking along the lines of Burt Lancaster in Seven Days In May, but it's the same concept.

[Sydde]

Originally Posted by hulugu

Look, peeps. The military follows civilian orders. That's the chain of command.

Well, your name could also be Salvador Allende Gossens.