Bombing runs can only accomplish so much.

Now, I don't think we ever should have been in the wars we're in currently, but we wouldn't have accomplished anything in them at all if all we did was bomb them.

ptown_trojans_1;746456 wrote:The President is about implementing policy and offering guidance to that policy. Sure it is organization and business, but that is more a Chief of Staff. The President himself should be a policy wonk, know the issues and have indepth abilities to offer solutions.

Say what you want about Obama, but he is a policy wonk, he knows issues-like nukes, like Europe, like Pakistan, etc.

Trump in no way shape or form has demonstrated anything close to policy solutions.

Your infatuation with Obama's foreign policy "skills" is amusing. I bet he'll be judged as average to below average -- at best -- when he's done.

I Wear Pants;746446 wrote:Yeah we need a dude that inherited millions to run the country.

Seriously? You just eliminated about half the people who've been elected, including JFK, the Roosevelts and probably more than a few others.

Is this some deep-seated hated of the rich showing up?

Ha ha ha ha ha, so we can't have anyone rich running for President? That pretty much eliminates everyone. You have to be either filthy rich or have rich friends to get elected anymore, it's all about the money. Obama is going to have 1 Billion dollars for his reelection campaign, which is outrageous.

Writerbuckeye;746558 wrote:Seriously? You just eliminated about half the people who've been elected, including JFK, the Roosevelts and probably more than a few others.

Is this some deep-seated hated of the rich showing up?

No. Some of my favorite famous people are rich as fuck. Gates, Buffett.

Anyway, I meant to question his business skills not his being wealthy. IE: I don't think he gets to where he is on his own. I think his business acumen is greatly exaggerated.

For the love of God folks. Rich dudes are not a problem and I'm fine with them being president or sitting at home or whatever. I have to say this far too often here. I do not have a problem with rich people or people/companies making enormous profits. I would like to be one and do that someday myself. What I do have a problem with is Donald Trump being the POTUS.

Writerbuckeye;746554 wrote:Your infatuation with Obama's foreign policy "skills" is amusing. I bet he'll be judged as average to below average -- at best -- when he's done.

He knows alot more on the subject you were discussing than you do writer...you may want to listen to him

Ty Webb;746644 wrote:He knows alot more on the subject you were discussing than you do writer...you may want to listen to him

While I usually don't agree with Writer, he does not have to have better foreign policy skills to say that Obama's are below average.

Let's see....

Ptown works in the foreign policy field..Writer does not

I'm more inclined to go with ptown on this one

Believe who you will, Ty, I don't give a shit. Fact is, Obama MAY have better skills in foreign policy but that's not saying much since he totally sucks ASS at domestic policy.

What bothers me is this: Our country is coming to a breaking point financially and if we don't get the right leadership to get through this, it won't matter one whit how good our foreign policy maker is, because we'll be so crippled by the mess here at home we won't be looked at seriously by anyone else in the world.

I was waiting patiently for someone to whine about Trump's treatment in the media. Part of the problem with an interview with Trump is that when it doesn't go his way, he interrupts ("excuse me", "excuse me") and tries to badger the interviewer. It comes across as a hostile interview largely because Trump turns the interview that way.

We've been hearing about the "mainstream media" (dittohead term by the way, kinda gives away your objectivity) ever since Obama declared his candidacy some years ago. It's as tired as those of us who blame Bush for some of the economic and foreign policy disasters of the last 10 years. You say it enough times and it loses its meaning. More so, it makes you look like a chronic whiner.

As for Trump, I don't think he's an idiot of any kind. On the contrary, he didn't get where he is by being stupid. He's sharp as a tack and it's because of his intelligence that I believe he isn't serious about running. Once it gets to the point where he has to make some financial disclosures I'll bet we see The Don hit the road. I must admit, though, he's been interesting theater. The "leaders" of the GOP probably wish he would go quietly away. I think he's refreshing (other than that stubborn birther trait), but he won't last.

It is still 2011. If the Donald wants to run, sure, go ahead. I would just want more in terms of policy prescriptions and how he would handle the White House before I jump on the bandwagon. Saying he wants to be tough on China and OPEC is one thing, but explaining how he would do it is another. He has time to do it, so I hope he does.

I'd also say the media is so desperate for someone to run against the President that since Donald is really the only one in mass availability, they are flocking to him.


And I still stand by my long term premise that President's are judged by foreign policy, not domestic policy.

That's why Richard Nixon was a better President than history shows. His domestic policy completely undermined his greatest strength, foreign policy.

"And I still stand by my long term premise that President's are judged by foreign policy, not domestic policy. "

An interesting premise, given that our domestic policy is the worst since the Great Depression. The long-term (pun intended) outlook on the U.S. = bad. Unsustainable isn't just a word, there will be ramifications. I'm not sure what Obama-bots expect, perhaps all of a sudden for real estate prices to rise, the dollar to stabilize and unemployment to magically erase? Trump is a buffoon and a sideshow, but the last two years of experimentation with an unqualifed HLS graduate isn't much better. F the media. I'll register Democrat to vote for Hillary in '12, we've made an incredibly poor choice and it will affect our quality of life going forward. Inflation is going to hit (it has already hit gas and grocery prices) - the Chinese pressure on wages is a daily movement, and it will certainly affect prices for Americans for every day goods.

At what point do people in the U.S. realize that the current administration is an absolute disaster?

If we crash and burn financially -- Obama's name will be mentioned alongside Herbert Hoover's.

As for the WHINING above about my analysis of the interview, a couple things. First, mainstream media is the correct term for the media most accessible to most Americans. If it was coined by some conservative...does dittohead mean it was Limbaugh? I honestly don't know. Regardless, it's an accurate term.

Second, what happened with Obama and the media (or rather what didn't happen) was groundbreaking and historical in its scope. Nothing like it had ever happened before and, honestly, I'll be surprised if they go all in like that again on a candidate. This was media wanting desperately to have the first black president (and be a part of it) and they got their wish.

Otherwise, you'd have never seen someone basically come out of nowhere, with little experience, and win the race like he did. It took a lot of media help -- first and foremost to eliminate Hillary -- and he got it.

So as a media junkie (in the sense that it has basically been my living for the past 35 years) I am going to remark on this phenomenon as long as it goes on. So if you don't want to read it -- don't open the thread.

Manhattan Buckeye;746750 wrote:"And I still stand by my long term premise that President's are judged by foreign policy, not domestic policy. "

An interesting premise, given that our domestic policy is the worst since the Great Depression. The long-term (pun intended) outlook on the U.S. = bad. Unsustainable isn't just a word, there will be ramifications. I'm not sure what Obama-bots expect, perhaps all of a sudden for real estate prices to rise, the dollar to stabilize and unemployment to magically erase? Trump is a buffoon and a sideshow, but the last two years of experimentation with an unqualifed HLS graduate isn't much better. F the media. I'll register Democrat to vote for Hillary in '12, we've made an incredibly poor choice and it will affect our quality of life going forward. Inflation is going to hit (it has already hit gas and grocery prices) - the Chinese pressure on wages is a daily movement, and it will certainly affect prices for Americans for every day goods.

At what point do people in the U.S. realize that the current administration is an absolute disaster?

Higher prices do not automatically mean inflation.

So does two instances of quantitative easing and the dollar devaluating not mean inflation? What do you think is going to happen with all of this printing of money? I will tell you what will happen, interest rates on bonds (read, U.S. debt) will soar because our credit capabilities, or lack thereof. We've effectively become a debtor nation.

That was the only part I was contesting.

tk421;746566 wrote:Ha ha ha ha ha, so we can't have anyone rich running for President? That pretty much eliminates everyone. You have to be either filthy rich or have rich friends to get elected anymore, it's all about the money. Obama is going to have 1 Billion dollars for his reelection campaign, which is outrageous.

Outrageous that supporters would be duped a second time even after 3-4 years to observe performance.

If you don't like Obama you better pray and pray hard that Trump isn't the best candidate for the GOP.

I Wear Pants;746779 wrote:If you don't like Obama you better pray and pray hard that Trump isn't the best candidate for the GOP.

Trump will NOT be the GOP candidate. Palin will NOT be the GOP candidate.

We need pray and pray hard that the media's arrogant and clueless Chosen One does not get 4 more years to play golf and spend our money.

believer;746807 wrote:Trump will NOT be the GOP candidate. Palin will NOT be the GOP candidate.

We need pray and pray hard that the media's arrogant and clueless Chosen One does not get 4 more years to play golf and spend our money.

'

Not that I'm a fan of Romney, but he'll probably run and will easily beat out either of those two schmucks. I don't know how Trump's name even gets thrown into the mix - no way he'd run because he'd never win and he wouldn't make such a move, especially when his carefully crafted image would come under attack.

I will note vote for Obama in '12. There's nobody I'd vote for in the R slot either, unless Palin gets it

Since I WILL vote regardless, it will probably be for a Paul or some other schmuck who I don't know much about, which will likely help to give Obama an automatic win.

#$%@!!!!

believer;746807 wrote:Trump will NOT be the GOP candidate. Palin will NOT be the GOP candidate.

We need pray and pray hard that the media's arrogant and clueless Chosen One does not get 4 more years to play golf and spend our money.

Spend money = something you can be reasonable about and not like.

The golf/vacation thing is bullshit and you know it. Every president has gone on just as many and pretending like presidents shouldn't take any time off at all (even though they're never completely taking time off) is ridiculous.

stlouiedipalma;746742 wrote:That's why Richard Nixon was a better President than history shows. His domestic policy completely undermined his greatest strength, foreign policy.

He allowed Vietnam to continue....his foreign policy sucked

Writerbuckeye;746753 wrote:If we crash and burn financially -- Obama's name will be mentioned alongside Herbert Hoover's.

As for the WHINING above about my analysis of the interview, a couple things. First, mainstream media is the correct term for the media most accessible to most Americans. If it was coined by some conservative...does dittohead mean it was Limbaugh? I honestly don't know. Regardless, it's an accurate term.

Second, what happened with Obama and the media (or rather what didn't happen) was groundbreaking and historical in its scope. Nothing like it had ever happened before and, honestly, I'll be surprised if they go all in like that again on a candidate. This was media wanting desperately to have the first black president (and be a part of it) and they got their wish.

Otherwise, you'd have never seen someone basically come out of nowhere, with little experience, and win the race like he did. It took a lot of media help -- first and foremost to eliminate Hillary -- and he got it.

So as a media junkie (in the sense that it has basically been my living for the past 35 years) I am going to remark on this phenomenon as long as it goes on. So if you don't want to read it -- don't open the thread.

So there was never been a President "handed" an election like President Obama was?

Do you not remember the 2000 election,when an entity with real power (Supreme Court) actually handed a President the election and his office(Bush)