Politics

I see sarcasm just fine. If that was your attempt at sarcasm I would suggest you looking the word up in a dictionary, because you missed that mark by a good country mile. If it were because of the votes then he would probably go. That's not sarcasm. He would actually do it if that were the case. The previous conversations and mention of the term "racism" even made by you in your previous statement contradict your entire argument. So please get it straight if you're actually going to argue a position at any point. You guys are hilarious. You talk about Obama as if everything that is happening or happened recently in this country that is so bad somehow only occurred while he is President. Yet you fail to recognize the fact that most of all these bad things that have happened with the economy, jobs, etc. were a direct result of a previous administration for which you barely raised an eyebrow much less a voice. Suddenly now it’s just a deplorable situation you simply must argue against and “be heard”. I believe you said something like “I'm an American who is fed up with unfathomable government spending, a multitude of able bodied welfare recipients who are sucking our country dry, illegal aliens who break our laws and drain our economy, and people like you who honestly believe we should get out of the way and let our country "move forward." Though you may have felt this way before, and may very well have been upset about the situation, I’ve NEVER seen you type anywhere on this website where you freely admitted that Bush had anything to do with the current state of this country, when you know VERY well he did. Where was your contempt then when Mr. Bush was still President? When unemployment rose by over 2 million people, household incomes dropped over a $1,000 per household, 5.4 million more people who fell below the poverty line, and the five largest yearly deficits were all under his administration. Well? Where was your disbelief and discontent? Nowhere. Because now you have Mr. Obama to blame all of the woes and troubles of this nation. You look to Obama to blame for all of this which he inherited from the man who is likely more responsible than any other President before him. You constantly say “I will fight with my last breath”. Well you let some idiot republican take office again like Bush, perhaps Palin, McCain, or Romney. You won’t have to worry too long about that last breath. It’s just a few more Patriot Acts away. For a group who says they don’t like big government they sure don’t mind introducing legislation that violates our AMERICAN rights. I’ll take a democrat any day that will stand there and tell me I’m about to get screwed than some hypocritical republican who will just wait until our backs are turned long enough to jam a knife in as far as it will go! The only thing a conservative is good for in this country any more is to show us all the wrong ways to go about doing something so we might make the right decision instead. So, by all means, show us the way!!!

Source: http://budget.house.gov/doc-library/fy2009/7.31.08_Bush_economic_and_fiscal_record.pdf

You are absolutely right Mama Kaz. I didn’t criticize him for not running off to New Orleans because it wouldn’t have accomplished much of anything. The only thing he needed to do as a responsible President was to declare the entire city of New Orleans a disaster area. He did, and they received help. It unfortunately was not enough in the beginning, but was that his fault? No, it was not. It was the fault of the incompetent leadership of Michael Brown (Director of F.E.MA.), which is why he was later replaced. George Bush did all he could do. I was not one of the many idiots who complained about Bush’s performance because unlike the rest of the “sheep” I have the amazing ability to use my brain to process thoughts on my own without the help of someone else. It’s an extraordinary gift. It’s really quite exhilarating to use one’s mind to separate fact from fiction. I suggest you try it some time. Nashville was not swept under any rug. It was handled exactly the way it should have been handled from a Presidential stance. It was declared a disaster area and government assistance sent to help the local and state agencies as needed. If you weren’t just complaining just to complain because Barack Obama is President of the United States you would see that. Whether or not the people had any warning of the impending flood had no bearing on the situation from a governmental point of view. Relief was sent as it should have been by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, and that’s all that was required of the government or this President.

Whether or not President Obama would visit the state of California in the event of a catastrophic event like an earthquake is not relevant. Not to mention the fact that it has no basis for racism? What race did you even mention? None. Common sense would not even allow for even the slightest assumption of racism considering the fact that over 75% of the state of California’s population are Caucasians. With that in mind why would he even show up with that being the case? What? Californians are suddenly a different breed of humans now? No, they are not. What a ridiculous analogy. If you are going to make an argument at least make it an intelligent one. To be perfectly honest I would much rather be an educated, open-minded, arrogant liberal than some backward, narrow-minded, arrogant conservative. I’ll tell you what you call people who don’t like arrogant liberals. Conservatives. Because all they know how to do is dislike and hate others for no good reason other than they don’t agree with their ideas, and continue to push this country back instead of allowing it to go forward. I also know, considering how you like to misuse the word liberal so much, what you call an arrogant liberal. For now you can call him Mr. President!! So why don’t you stick that on a t-shirt and wear it!!

If you have so many better things to do than read my "book" why are you in such an uproar about it? Let's see, because you read it? As I stated before I never assumed that you meant the comment to be racist, but anyone with the least bit of intelligence could see the undertone of the remark. By the way, if you had understood my remarks concerning having spoken to my friends about this matter you would see this. I neither asked them before or after if they thought the comment was racist. I simply interjected it into the conversation without much warning. It was all of them that asked what I had meant by it, because they thought it sounded either completely or a little racist. It was only then that I explained the situation. There was never any pretense to the question, and neither did I ask “was that a bit racist?” after the statement. I did however give you the benefit of the doubt by allowing you to explain yourself, which was the honest and fair thing to do, but so far all you’ve done since really is scream “I’m not a racist! I have black friends!” What kind of response is that? Is that really supposed to qualify your remarks? A simple apology for the mistake would have sufficed, but instead you went on an attack as if you need to hide something. I’ve argued with a couple of people on this website who don’t like Obama, and none so far whom I would say don’t like him because of his race, but because of his policies. You were the only one who threw out a comment that without qualification not only sounded racist to me, but several others who don’t need to “know” someone in order to detect a racist tone. And the ridiculous argument that “I can’t be a racist ‘cause I have black friends” is quite possibly the worst excuse you’ve ever used. Don Imus, the radio personality has many African-American friends, but it didn’t stop him from making a clearly racist comment on-air.

Now, let me be perfectly clear on this. I never assumed you were a racist, but your previous comment did sound racist, so I asked you to explain yourself. You did, and I appreciated that. Now, if you felt insulted by what you “assumed” was an implication, even though I told you it was not, then you should have stated so. Even though you would have been incorrect. I could have explained, but instead you simply went on the offensive like most people who truly don’t understand how to get their point across in an argument. They just simply argue because they have felt attacked and only want to fire back. If you wish to behave in the fashion of a child then so be it, but I simply won’t lower myself to those standards. And your comment concerning being the only one on my side. I’m well aware of this. Considering the fact that this website was practically created by your husband who is a conservative is it really that big of a surprise that I’m the only one on my side most of the time? No, and common sense would dictate that I would be. That’s just an awful display of childish behavior once again on your part. So my only advice to you on this matter is simply to “grow up”, and a reminder that so far in this rivalry my conjectures have been summarily introduced with facts, sources, and with subtlety so that egos need not be bruised. So if anyone in this rivalry has made an ass out of themselves I’m afraid you need look no further than the nearest mirror to find the guilty party.

Actually yes it did sound racist cutie, and you didn’t have to point out the fact that President Obama is African-American because we both have functioning pairs of eyes. You would almost have to be blind or ignorant not to know it. Now did I believe you meant it that way. I had hoped not, but without any justification for the comment itself you left yourself wide open to ANY interpretation. In fact I ran this comment by several friends to get their own assessments, and to no surprise they all, not a few or several, but all of them said it sounded racist to them. And before you assume, no, not all of them are democrats. In fact the majority of them range from moderately conservative to very conservative. By the way, neither did I ask them if it sounded racist. That was every single person’s initial reaction without the pretense that I would say something I believed to sound racist.

As to your assumption that you somehow got my “blood boiling”? The only person who seems to be irritated by this is you. I always try never to assume, which is why I allowed you to qualify your remarks, because I had hoped and believed that you had simply made a mistake. Which you admit you did. I’m not upset in the least, but again you should be careful of what you “say” on here. Without qualifying certain remarks like your previous one about the President you open yourself up to these types of situations. If you do not, then that unfortunately is your own fault, and I hope in the future you realize this and use better judgment.

Pandering to your base is just as rampant among Republicans as it is Democrats and has no real bearing on this conversation. So please don’t try distracting from the actual argument by using this trivial political jargon and material.

Now, pay close attention, because I’m about to qualify further remarks by introducing facts that show how ridiculous your arguments are concerning the non-visitation of our President to the flooded areas of Nashville, TN. Not only will I qualify my remarks, but I will also show your hypocrisy concerning this matter as well.

On June 6th through June 7th of 2008 storms across much of the Midwestern states of the U.S. caused horrible flooding and the deaths of almost 30 people. Where was President George W. Bush? He was busy visiting several nations across Europe. It wasn’t until the death toll rose above 20 persons and the damage surveyed by FEMA, that President Bush realized that with a 29% approval rating that he might want to show a little compassion by declaring the entire Midwest a disaster area. Almost two weeks after the initial flooding did he actually show up just long enough for a few photo ops beside the sandbagged banks of the rivers that overflowed, and of course a few photos with then Presidential hopeful John McCain. After only a couple of cities he was back to his normal schedule. Never mind that there were so many others affected by the flooding, like Columbus, Indiana where millions of dollars of damage had been caused and two people died as a result. He had to get back to supporting his party by visiting Jackson, Mississippi on June 27th to help campaign for Senator Wicker, and don’t forget the all important “Ball on the South Lawn” on June 30th supporting Latino baseball.

And what excuses do we have for President Barack Obama not visiting the flooded areas of Nashville, TN? Although he had already declared the city a disaster area so FEMA could help the state and local agencies. Nothing minor. Just a terrorist attempt to blow up a car bomb in New York’s Time Square. Oh, and yeah, that thing in the Gulf of Mexico. You know. The one where 11 people were killed by an explosion aboard an oil drilling platform, the platform itself sank, and 5,000 feet below sea level a gaping hole that is currently spilling hundreds of thousands of gallons of oil into the sea. Nothing big. I mean what do we have to worry about? It should only kill a few million sea animals and birds, disrupt the entire balance of nature along the gulf seaboard, and affect the financial welfare of those who depend on the fishing industry among Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, and Florida. No biggie.

If you wish to argue the compassion of President Obama, fine, but you should remember that the man who represented you for the last eight years prior to this administration has performed similar acts. Where was your criticism then? I never heard it. In fact I never criticized him because I realized that with his declaring the Midwest a disaster area the President really did all that he could as President. Making visitations are nothing more than photo ops and really cause nothing more than a distraction anyway. Not to mention the hardships for the Secret Service and their attempt to keep the President safe among areas as unpredictable as those recently devastated like the Midwest. There are many reasons why Presidents do not often visit immediately these types of areas or even at all. It is however highly hypocritical to chastise this President when you never said a word about the prior actions, or lack thereof by the previous President. I believe the only reason why you and others are making such a big deal about this is simply because it is our state in question. Otherwise I doubt you would have made nearly the effort to criticize him if this had happened elsewhere.

And what in God’s name does Kenny Chesney have to do with this? Who cares? I don’t. And you want to talk about publicity, and clamoring for the spotlight? Sounds like Mr. Chesney got his fair share. So kudos to him.

The fact is that what happened in Nashville, TN is horrible, and my prayers and thoughts are with all of them, but the President has done exactly what he should have done. Could he have shown up to show his support? Perhaps, but what would that have physically accomplished for the people of Nashville? Not a lot. I am just appreciative that FEMA has finally learned a lesson and seems to be performing to the best of their ability. That is all the citizens of Nashville should be concerned about, and not whether the President can get a few photo ops in before heading back to the White House.

If the conservative base of this country and their elected officials would spend less time behaving like a bunch of spoiled brats who didn’t get their way and truly show some semblance of bipartisanship, perhaps this country could make greater strides and accomplish something for the better of the people. Instead, most conservatives are usually under the assumption “if you’re not with me, then you’re against me” type attitude, which affords nothing but the usual partisan politics.

“The strongest democracies flourish from frequent and lively debate, but they endure when people of every background and belief find a way to set aside smaller differences in service of a greater purpose.”

President Barack H. Obama

Sources:
http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/teeball/2008/06302008/index.html

http://cottonmouthblog.blogspot.com/2008/06/george-w-bush-and-roger-wicker-in.html

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/06/19/national/main4193737.shtml

http://www.sprol.com/2008/08/columbus-indiana-2008-flood-of-the-century/

Oh come on Are you really serious? He is the "President" for crying out loud and should visit Nashville. Unfortunately though this president doesn't give a #!!$ and I think he has made that perfectly clear. I guarantee you if he was President during hurricane Katrina he would be there in a heart beat. Unfortunately we are not a liberal state so we are not top priority. Stop giving him Excuses!

While I tend to agree with you cutie I do want to correct you on one thing; it is NOT unfortunate that we aren't a liberal state. We are VERY lucky. Take a look at how the liberal states are doing; California, Michigan, New York, New Jersey, etc...

One of the reasons I moved to Tennessee from California (liberal breeding ground) was to escape the rule by taxation and regulation policies embraced by liberal leaders.

It continually amazes me that people seem to think a President can be everywhere, anywhere, whenever he wants. In actuality he is a man of extreme responsibilities that none of us could even begin to comprehend. When George W. Bush neglected to show up in New Orleans within the first week I did not shout to the rafters that he was an awful human being. I understand that as a President he has certain responsibilities. It may have taken a while, but at the very least he did show up just as I know Obama will do the same for Nashville. As long as whatever can be done by FEMA and other organizations to help the people of a disaster area, does it really matter when the President visits? No, it does not. This is just an excuse to make him look bad as democrats did the same back during Katrina to George Bush. People need to quit worrying so much about when a President visits, and be a little more thankful that FEMA actually did their job this time.