• Hello!

    Either you have not registered on this site yet, or you are registered but have not logged in. In either case, you will not be able to use the full functionality of this site until you have registered, and then logged in after your registration has been approved.

    Registration is FREE, so please register so you can participate instead of remaining a lurker....

    Please be certain that the location field is correctly filled out when you register. All registrations that appear to be bogus will be rejected. Which means that if your location field does NOT match the actual location of your registration IP address, then your registration will be rejected.

    Sorry about the strictness of this requirement, but it is necessary to block spammers and scammers at the door as much as possible.

President May be in Trouble

 
I'm actually not sure how it's relevant. Who cares who'd Chavez vote for? Why does it matter? And why do you insist that it reflects anything of any kind on Obama?
 
Well what I believe Tsst was trying to show is that some of the most horrible "dictators" are supporting Obama and his policies. (I could be wrong)
 
beautifullywild77 said:
Well what I believe Tsst was trying to show is that some of the most horrible "dictators" are supporting Obama and his policies. (I could be wrong)
Click to expand...

Well, Chavez makes one.

And so what? If I can point to a terrible person supporting the exact same policies that you do, does that make you a terrible person?

The very notion is ridiculous.
 
Derp, missed a few posts!

But there are correlations that matter and those that don't. Saying that 95% of serial killers prefer ketchup on their fries doesn't make someone who eats ketchup a suspect. But when a dictator supports a US presidential candidate, it is somewhat more valid -not important, but more valid than the ketchup analogy. Agree or not, I'm SURE that Obama doesn't appreciate the endorsement!
 
Perhaps, although it seems awfully more like guilt by association. It was like earlier in the thread when Madonna endorsed Obama, Tsst (I believe) again used that as some kind of black mark against Obama.

Going by that logic: Chavez supports Obama, therefore, supporters of Obama are like Chavez?
 
Chavez is a socialist, and people accuse the President of being one, or at least a sympathizer. It's a much, much worse endorsement than Madonna! No matter how you spin it, a loudmouth idiot singer (at worst) is not the same as a man who has been denounced for crimes against humanity.
 
elrojo said:
Chavez is a socialist, and people accuse the President of being one, or at least a sympathizer. It's a much, much worse endorsement than Madonna! No matter how you spin it, a loudmouth idiot singer (at worst) is not the same as a man who has been denounced for crimes against humanity.
Click to expand...

Chip you put in it word that escaped me today. Thank you. I can't rep you anymore til I spread some more! silly thing. ;)
 
Chavez has been denounced for crimes against humanity?

What crimes? I've been reading about him because, I hate to admit, I knew little of his actual presidency.

He was elected with 63% of the popular vote in an election verified by the Organization of American States and the Carter Center. So definitely not a dictator.

He rewrote the Venezuelan constitution with more protections for human rights (Though he has been criticized for attempting to undermine the judiciary in Venezuela, lessening the impact of those protections).

He was deposed in a military coup and the people flipped and protested until he was re-instated.

He definitely does not sound like a dictator.
 
elrojo said:
Displacement, torture, and murder. I'd post links, but you can Google it as well as I can.
Click to expand...

The only think I've been able to find was the former Ambassador making the accusations, but no charges have actually been brought to bear.

Human Rights Watch talks about the undermining of the democratic process, but while that is certainly a bad thing, it doesn't qualify for a crime against humanity or Harper and Bush should both be charged.
 
Check your sources. He certainly didn't "bring it back."
 
Nova_C said:
Perhaps, although it seems awfully more like guilt by association. It was like earlier in the thread when Madonna endorsed Obama, Tsst (I believe) again used that as some kind of black mark against Obama.
Click to expand...

I think that is exactly what it does. Like it or not in Canada or here in the US, I could care less. Obama is terrible for this country. I do not know of one single change he has affected that has benifited this Country. He complained that Bush had us 4 trillion in debt when he left, Obama has us over 6 trillion in debt but he doesn't bring that up and when he IS cornered on it, it is Bush's fault. On a related note, I have often wondered if a paternity test were performed, would those even be Obama's kids? Afterall, he so far hasn't been responsible for anything else in his life, so surely he can't have been responsible for the act that produce the children right?

He promised the American public that his "obamacare" would come with a price tag of approximately $950 billion and now it comes with a price tag of $approximately $1.5 trillion. That does not include additional spending not included to carry out the mandates over the years. He has had 3 years to make changes he promised and hasn't and now that there is an election coming, suddenly it is apparent that the problems he inherited are much worse than he ever thought. SO, is he too incompetent to have made that distinction sooner or is he to incompetent to have started making real changes?

He touts he has created 4.5 million private sector jobs. Well, in tuth he has, but at the expense of our hard earned tax dollars via his "stimulous". The danged stimulous isn't free, someone has to pay for it right? His "shovel ready jobs is nothing short of a falsehood laid upon the Americans dumb enough to believe him and believe there is such a thing as a free lunch. If I hurt Obama voters and supporter, oh well, I don't plan to apologize. So, his "shovel ready" jobs seem to be shovels ready to scoop his loads of crap. Here is the original cost and how it has moved....brace yourself, it hasn't went down any. So those jobs were created at the expense of other hard working Americans to help stimulate the economy. Even after the stimulous, unemployement has not dipped below 8%. I am not sure I can afford more of his great ecomonic ideas.

February 2009 - $787 billion
January 2010 - $862 billion
August 2010 - $814 billion
February 2011 - $821 billion
May 2011 - $830 billion
August 2011 - $825 billion
February 2012 - $831 billion
August 2012 - $833 billion
​

I work as a project manager in construction. Insert that title in any manager position and guess what would happen if we couldn't project costs better than that? I am betting I would be fired before 4 years were up.


Nova_C said:
Going by that logic: Chavez supports Obama, therefore, supporters of Obama are like Chavez?
Click to expand...

He IS like Chavez, given the chance I am certain Obama would centralize as much as he could. I am sorry but I can't believe people still support him. He has done nothing benificial for this country, only cost us more and more taxes. You may sit in Canada and see no problems with it, but when my children are born saddled with more debt than we can hope to repay (will happen very soon), I have a problem with that. I blame him AND Bush for it. Both were idiots in my opinion. I am betting Romney will not be any better, HOWEVER, he is a succesful business man so maybe there is a chance. He at least understands the simple economic principals that obama can not grasp.

Like Chip and the others said, these fringe leaders and dictators like him because a multitude of reasons, two of the most important are he thinks like them governmentally and he is a weak leader. He has devalued our country both economically and "physically". The man lies constantly, he couldn't meet with one of our valued allies at a certain time of crisis but has the time to make tv show appearance and fundraise. C'mon, that shows the world what he thinks of Isreal, he doesn't care.

Sorry to get riled up I just don't like a condesending tone directed at this issue when you have no true vseted interest. Unless you want to argue that our politics affect you, but obviously you have no issues with Obabmas policies since you seem to try and stir the pot to his defense so much. So ultimately, you seem to be happy with him.

Sorry for any errors, but I am genuienly irritated by your flippant attitude towards our countries demise. If others agree with you, then guess what, I am irritated with them also. Not that it matters to them, but it is the way I feel. Unfortunately, we are likely saddled with this imbacile for another 4 years because people think we need to give him "a little more time" to see his changes. It didn't take Reagan and Clinton 2 terms to correct the economy did it? So why should it take him that long?

dc
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top