Politics First, National Security Second

So…..I'm guessing that you're not satisfied with Obama's first 100 days then?

I couldn't find one legitimate point that wasn't either biased or based on errors. The post was a cross-fusing of Michelle Bachmann and Rush Limbaugh-like rhetoric.

Obama is basically doing what he campaigned on. Almost 70% of Americans like what he's doing.

Can't actually refute even one point, Reverend?

Rev, you're always good for a chuckle. I love the "no sir !" argument. Very persuasive. Almost as good as the "huh-uh !" argument. When my daughter was 11, she used to say "neener-neener" whenever I said somethig she didn't like. Maybe you should try that.

The USA has been living high on the hog, king of the hill for too long now and somebody has got to teach them a lesson. BHO is just the man to do it and he's off to a smokin start.

Yup. It's time for that failed idea of American exceptionalism to go. It makes me feel like singing…

We are the (third) world,
We are the (starving) children,
We are the ones who make a better (socialist) day,
So let's start giving (our incomes away).

Yeah time to walk around ashamed, embarrassed and with our tails between our legs. Whose gonna be the UN's whore if not the people of the USA? China? Russia? Canada? You are right Chris, Obama is the one to take it all away and ruin it and it is exactly what he is doing.

When looking into a mirror, do you guys simply ignore what you see…..or do you go so far as to deny that the reflection is accurate?

The Rev has gotten to the essence of the problem. When liberals look at America, they see something terrible that needs to be fixed. When conservatives look at America, they see something great that needs to be preserved.

I'm with the conservatives. I can't think of a single better country in the history of the world than the United States of America.

Exactly King.

Silly talk.

When you raise children, do you simply ignore their mistakes, deny that they exist? Or worse yet, try to make them look like positive achievements?

The very evidence that you love your children, greatly, is in the fact that you try to correct their mistakes or bad habits.

To carry the analogy forward……if I use the same "reasoning" about your children as you do for America…..whenever children do bad or wrong things, your answer would be to sweep those things under the rug to keep it secret. Shhh….don't tell anyone.

While America is a great country…..it can't stay that way if it's citizens insist on shielding their eyes from pre-meditated national crimes.

Rev,
You'd have a stronger argument if not for the fact that liberals want to dismantle capitalism, free markets, the 1st amendment, 2nd amendment, 4th amendment, 5th amendment, and 10th amendment. Liberals don't believe in the idea that all men are created equal, nor do they believe in life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

They throw all the above over in favor of the nebulous concepts like social justice, class warfare, identity politics, eugenics, political correctness, and socialist institutions. They want government to dominate every facet of society, but then have the audacity to claim they are the party of civil rights.

Liberalism is a condescending philosophy that assumes the citizenry is a bunch of children who can't wipe their own butts without assistance from Big Brother. Ironically, the more the citizens accept such a second-rate and elitist philosophy, the more they DO become like children unable to wipe their own butts. Modern liberalism, or more accurately, 20th century progressivism, will always consume itself in the end. It cannot stand as a permanent way of government without slavery and poverty being the inevitable result. It is the philosophy of weakness, and you know what Darwin said about the weak.

And you can stop weeping for Khalid Shaikh Mohammed anytime now too. My God, man, he was trying to KILL us. That includes you and the other liberals as well. I know this might be a foreign concept to the appeasers and pacifists, but when someone is trying to kill you, you fight back. You do what is necessary, and you don't slash your own wrists over it later. I hope to God that Obama doesn't end up learning that lesson the hard way.

Okay, now you can give me your 'there was no threat from Al Qaeda' and 'King, you LOVE torture' speech. Neither one will be the least bit true, but go on, let me have it.

Let's release KSM on the Revs neighborhood and wait and see if he has anymore comments to post. God help him if he gets to Daniel Pearl treatment. Note: God bless Daniel Pearl, no one should be subjected to that, not even the Rev.

We disagree about what liberals have accomplished. I see the progrssive movement in America as responsible for many, if not all, of society's movement towards true equality. Women's rights, minority rights, voting rights for all, worker's rights….etc. Democrats have led the "more perfect union" charge for a long time. Republicans believe the union is already perfect, or was, back in the 1950's.

While it's true that some Republicans also voted for those progressive advancements….the Republican Party was never the catalyst for those accomplishments.

The Republican Party is the party that favors big business and the wealthy. They are the party of the military industrial complex and Big Oil, not exclusively, but primarily. This has been true my entire lifetime.

The Democratic Party, warts and all, is the party of the people. You say the Democrats enslave the people into dependency. You may believe it….but I don't see any evidence that you are correct.

Did Democrats sign on to welfare to work so that poor people would be more dependent on them?

Did Democrats balance the budget because they wanted to run up dependency costs for political reasons? It's senseless to even suggest that.

Rev,
Except Democrats were the anti-civil rights party when it really mattered. Republicans were the real civil rights party.

The Democrats WERE the party of the people at one time, but that time is long gone. Now they're mostly just the party of government control.

Clinton's welfare to work bill came from Republicans. Obama was against that bill, as he has openly stated, and he is unraveling it. Obama is increasing entitlements, spending, taxes, government, you name it. Liberal Democrats are the party of the welfare state, and if you can't see the negative societal effects of the last 40 years of that policy, then I feel sorry for you.

Clinton's couple balanced budget came with a Republican Congress. Congress controls the purse strings, not the President. Obama even said as much in yesterday's press conference. Every time you bring up Clinton's balanced budget, you are giving Republicans credit, even though you NEVER admit that.

Your statement that Republicans are the party of the wealthy has been stated about every other minute by some Democrat somewhere for decades. And after all this time, I still don't know what the hell that statement means.

"… if you can't see the negative societal effects of the last 40 years of that policy, then I feel sorry for you."

The "negative societal effects" that I see are a result of Big Capital run amok, outsourcing, killing unions, stripping benefits, stealing pensions and 401K's, etc.

These "negative societal effects"….the ones I see, not the ones you, apparently, see…….bring about the need for a governmental safety net.

When the poor have reasonable jobs, they don't need government help so much. But Big Capital could care less about any of that….it's profits they are after, and here in America….profits are God. Big Capital would be just foolish to be concerned about the American workers. American workers are just like any other product, you know, in a box. You can pick 'em up anywhere.

You changed the subject, but okay, I'll go along. When I spoke about the negative effects of the welfare state, that wasn't intended to be an exhaustive list of every problem ever encountered in the history of the United States, so your shot about me not being able to see certain negative societal effects is dishonest, but I'm used to that. I'll address your issues, even though you didn't adress mine, not at all.

Unions killed themselves. Unions killed my hometown. They are no longer operative in a world-wide economy. Unions cause job losses by artificially raising wages and benefits above what the market will bear. That's why Detroit is going down the tubes. It has nothing to do with Republicans.

Outsourcing is a problem, but are you implying it's happening because of Republicans ??? If so, that's more dishonesty. Clinton passed NAFTA, and Obama isn't changing it (and Obama lied on the campaign trail about it).

Stealing pensions and 401K's is happening as the result of the financial collapse. I assume you blame that all on the GOP too, even though there is ample proof to the contrary.

As for jobs, do you think Big Capital, as you call it, creates jobs or loses jobs ? I'm going with – creates jobs. What loses jobs is the loss of big capital, as we are seeing with this recession.

Mr. King,
I can't let your comments about unions killing your hometown to pass. First of all, much of Akron's problems stem from the loss of high paying union jobs. What you are witnessing is what Akron would have been like all along without those jobs. A large factor in Akron's job losses was that the rubber companies production facilities were in multi story buildings. I remember building tire machines and having to split them in half so they could be lowered five stories. For building tires, these buildings were even more of an impediment. When the southern states offered incentives to build single story factories, the rubber companies jumped at the offers. Then came the age of leveraged buyouts with Goodyear being nearly destroyed to thwart Sir James Goldsmith and the rest of the rubber companies sold to foreign companies who had no loyalty to the area. Plus, quality improvements in tire design actually cut demand for the product.