State of the Union

Vaclav_sl said:

But dude, if someone gets the car to 90 with the brakes cut and bails, it's totally the new drivers fault if he doesn't immediately halt things magically.

Click to expand...

He's closing in on the halfway point of his second term. His 6th year correct? Is is safe to say he's not the "new driver" anymore? "Blame Bush" got old during his 3rd year in office.

Everyone is aware that it can be difficult to clean up the predecessor's mess and that Congress can pose problems, but Obama is such a political dodger that it's hard for shit to gain traction. Hurrr, I don't support gay marriage. Oh wait, Yes I do. I support marijuana legalization *proceeds to launch raids*. Even if he truly were a progressive, I doubt very highly that he engages in honest debate with Congress.

Hoss_sl said:

sounds like you have no clue what I think it does. I think it trumps the constitution if its ratified by the senate and once it's ratified, it can be amended without senate approval, even without the US agreeing to the amendment. If you paid attention to the people who championed this treaty (IANSA), you'd see why we should be worried. Also, I think that it could sit for 100 years before we get a senate that will ratify it and it would still be in full effect. I'm not sure if there's a way for us to un sign it (other than pulling out of the UN completely, which would tickle me pink)

Oh and please show me where ronnie and poppa bush were ever in favor of this. Maybe you're thinking of nuclear disarmament? I admit I was kinda young when those 2 ruled the earth, barely paying attention to politics, but I'm pretty sure the ATT was started during the clinton administration.

Also, what do you mean by re-up?

Click to expand...

Hardly anyone can figure out what the fuck you say half the time and that is because not only are you retarded you are also divorced from reality, about the only people that can follow your ignorant ass train of thought is Lumie and Tad and guess what category they fall into.

Merlin_sl said:

He's closing in on the halfway point of his second term. His 6th year correct? Is is safe to say he's not the "new driver" anymore? "Blame Bush" got old during his 3rd year in office.

Click to expand...

Normally I would explain this to you in a very simple way like addition or subtraction so that you could understand but you have proven even that is too complicated for you. Obama is completely at fault for not being able/wanting to fix the complete cluster fuck that Bush left behind, it's just funny as fuck that you transfer the blame to Obama for shit BUSH CREATED. You truly are fucking ignorant.

supertouch_sl said:

Everyone is aware that it can be difficult to clean up the predecessor's mess and that Congress can pose problems, but Obama is such a political dodger that it's hard for shit to gain traction. Hurrr, I don't support gay marriage. Oh wait, Yes I do. I support marijuana legalization *proceeds to launch raids*. Even if he truly were a progressive, I doubt very highly that he engages in honest debate with Congress.

Click to expand...

I and a lot of the other democrats on this board absolutely fucking hate that Obama hasn't did half the shit we wanted him to do, NSA/Prism/TSA/Gitmo/Gay Marriage (though he did start to take the right steps towards that) and even health care. Some of it has been republicans willing to hate oxygen if Obama came out for it but you can't blame all of it on that. Republicans have no right being this fucking angry when democrats arent even remotely fucking happy with Obama, we just understand what would have happened with another 8 years with dumb fuck republicans leading shit.

Bush fucked this country, Obama hasn't did anywhere enough to fucking fix it and republicans have did their part to make sure the black guy would never do it. Democrats wanted Obama to be like Bush and tell people to fuck off and do what he wants, but like you said he is a dodger and hasn't.

Big Phoenix_sl said:

this thread is gayer than richard simmons tossing buck angels salad while getting fucked in the ass by neil patrick harris

Click to expand...

You should come out of the closet.

Jesus, what a trainwreck of a thread. People actually arguing that Obama's comments weren't racially motivated about Trayvon? Every news organization that covered it took him to be doing exactly that. You don't have to be right-wing at all to see that. In fact, you have to be a complete idiot or outright deluded not to see it.

Definitely, news organizations are the standard I should use when analyzing that situation. The same news organizations that caused the ZimZam to get flim flammed in the first place.

It's bs.

BurnemWizfyre_sl said:

I and a lot of the other democrats on this board absolutely fucking hate that Obama hasn't did half the shit we wanted him to do, NSA/Prism/TSA/Gitmo/Gay Marriage (though he did start to take the right steps towards that) and even health care. Some of it has been republicans willing to hate oxygen if Obama came out for it but you can't blame all of it on that. Republicans have no right being this fucking angry when democrats arent even remotely fucking happy with Obama, we just understand what would have happened with another 8 years with dumb fuck republicans leading shit.

Click to expand...

Obama has truly let me down big time(I voted for him in 2008, gave up by 2012) but that's how I feel too. I'd rather have O in office over RobotRomney or Palin, if it weren't for the fact that he was black, he would have almost no mention in the history books. Far cry from the campaign of hope and change.

chaos_sl said:

It's bs.

Click to expand...

What is bs is people so set on defending Obama that they are forced to argue that Obama didn't say what he blatantly said. Obama might as well have just come out and said he thought Trayvon was shot for being black, that was certainly the obvious subtext and how everyone read it at the time.

Anyway, back to the SOTU. Did he address the NSA shit at all? Or did he ignore that completely with his "call to action" crap.

fifey_sl said:

Obama has truly let me down big time

Click to expand...

Yeah, it is really hard to believe that he campaigned so much against shit like NSA, TSA, Gay marriage and Gitmo, only to pretty much completely ignore that shit. Only very recently did he do anything about gay marriage, which was more following what was happening in the state courts and not at all taking the lead. The TSA and NSA, he has continued the course from Bush, without any sign of changing. The snowden shit would have been a perfect time too, except he just dug his heels in. Immigration reform he hasn't done shit for either.

Just really disappointing. I can't imagine Hilary would have been worse at this point.

khalid_sl said:

What is bs is people so set on defending Obama that they are forced to argue that Obama didn't say what he blatantly said. Obama might as well have just come out and said he thought Trayvon was shot for being black, that was certainly the obvious subtext and how everyone read it at the time.

Click to expand...

I think he stopped just short of that, and basically called for an examination to determine whether or not that was the case. I thought his comments were completely reasonable at the time. I still do not understand why my team is so defensive about it, or why the other team thinks his comments are somehow damning. I mean, I guess fanaskin thinks the comments somehow "fueled" the arguments (whatever this means) of the NAACP and other minority organizations, but that's bullshit.

Hoss_sl said:

sounds like you have no clue what I think it does. I think it trumps the constitution if its ratified by the senate and once it's ratified, it can be amended without senate approval, even without the US agreeing to the amendment. If you paid attention to the people who championed this treaty (IANSA), you'd see why we should be worried. Also, I think that it could sit for 100 years before we get a senate that will ratify it and it would still be in full effect. I'm not sure if there's a way for us to un sign it (other than pulling out of the UN completely, which would tickle me pink)

Click to expand...

Nothing the UN does trumps the Constitution EVER - that's even in the fucking articles that incorporated UN rules into anything - they're a guideline and if ignored the UN may censure a nation that ignores them, but censuring generally means "doesn't get military and financial support from the US and the EU" which we never get support from the EU, and I think we'll be fine with still supporting ourselves regardless. [And voting members, like we are often can even ignore censure - remember a censure vote was considered for Iraq? How did that turn out with how massive of a FUBAR that was?]

It's literally Glenn Beck masturbatory fiction that has no basis in reality - we're closer to the reality of Star Trek occurring than that case - it's FICTION.

Oh and please show me where ronnie and poppa bush were ever in favor of this. Maybe you're thinking of nuclear disarmament? I admit I was kinda young when those 2 ruled the earth, barely paying attention to politics, but I'm pretty sure the ATT was started during the clinton administration.

Click to expand...

The initial drafts that went through the UN but never passed were started under direction of John Bolton back during George HW Bush as a response to Reagan's requests that arms sales be more restricted and controlled (shortly after Iran-Contra started becoming a thing is when this draft started - likely as an attempt to spin "Hey, we want guns out of bad hands" back into their favor) - it however never gained full traction back then and got put on the back burner after failing during Clinton's timeframe. And nuke disarmament started shortly before this, might have been part of the same drafting timeframe even, but this saw the light of day shortly after before it failed. I wouldn't be surprised with their timing if it wasn't planned to be part of the same and got spun off on it's own though.

Once Bolton became ambassador himself a similar bill started up again that he put his weight behind the new bill and got it adjusted to something remarkably similar to the old bill. The bill is about controlling arms sales to dissident nations and otherwise influencing international issues with arms sales to "unkind nations". Any other interpretations are nonsensical fantasy created by twisting the words into something that they're not. Watching the UN discussion on it if you care to (which you no doubt won't - frankly I couldn't stomach most of it and it's HOURS of discussion) actually hear how it's to be used and applied. [PS - Even the nations that follow the UN in lockstep that are gun friendly (many voting nations still are in fact) and don't have a "gun rights" part to their laws would telegraph it very far in advance if it ever happened - not that it's ever going to.

Also, what do you mean by re-up?

Click to expand...

Make a second go at something. It's a pretty common term in my experience although more often used towards things like subscriptions. i.e. "I'm going to reup to Sports Illustrated in June"

khalid_sl said:

Only very recently did he do anything about gay marriage, which was more following what was happening in the state courts and not at all taking the lead.

Click to expand...

If you frame it as gay rights as a whole (not just marriage), he's been making positive changes throughout basically his entire time in office. I mean, the President can't just wave his hand and make gay marriage legal in every state by himself. What should he have done that he hasn't done already?

Merlin_sl said:

He's closing in on the halfway point of his second term. His 6th year correct? Is is safe to say he's not the "new driver" anymore? "Blame Bush" got old during his 3rd year in office.

Click to expand...

Ever try to stop a car that has it's brakes cut? All you can do is take your foot off the accelerator and dodge obstacles, braking doesn't work without brakes.

If you were talking about a minor issue (equivalent to going 5-10 mph) I'd agree those things should be rectified. Even the 20 mphish stuff like Gitmo is annoying to not be dealt with yet. But when you're dealing with a complete clusterfuck (90 mph) that's a long time of coasting to get it back down to normal. [and he's been making headway in many cases - although some do seem to be sidelined - probably from juggling so much...]

Sebudai_sl said:

If you frame it as gay rights as a whole (not just marriage), he's been making positive changes throughout basically his entire time in office. I mean, the President can't just wave his hand and make gay marriage legal in every state by himself. What should he have done that he hasn't done already?

Click to expand...

Apparently with the "instant fix" mentality that many in the thread have - they do expect just that. (Irony being these same people will be quick to quote that "Congress isn't designed to move quickly" - and most changes involve some level of Congressional involvement....)