Is President Obama insane?

[MisterNi]

What a horrible sequence of events this thread's turned into.

To give my 2 cents on the title of the thread, no, President Obama is not insane.

Case closed, lets move on.

[krieger]

Obama is a representative of the Wall Street insider faction within the Democratic party. he is getting his campaign contributors exactly what they want.

[Absurd]

I can't tell if you're being serious absurd but I will address you as if you were

Haha, no of course I'm not, I'm never serious.

Completely incorrect is a huge assertion obviously there is at least one source out there that begs to differ [...] My education was somewhat in line with this approach, perhaps you should take the time to correct these sources if there is some I and they should know about how they are wrong.

It was based around a book written by a prominent Menshevik. ****** was fascinated and in possession of this particular book, even ordered it to be read by his close circle comrades. Mein Kampf is a rip off.

I'm sure your education and wikipedia articles enable you to concede that German General Staff attempted to form an alliance with the Soviet Army in early 1937 that is, top men in the German General Staff were at that time involved in trying to form an alliance with the Soviet military. I can provide you with names.

As for proving them wrong, hey archives are open.

What typhon I think is referring to is there economic policy...

Poor Typhon never heard of the 4 Year Plan I guess. Typical beta

They considered Jews a parasitic race and so on [..]

I'm not even going to comment on this.

That's more like it, Gilly.

[Creepy-male]

Obama is a representative of the Wall Street insider faction within the Democratic party. he is getting his campaign contributors exactly what they want.

I will agree he is a corporatist, but its unclear his motives -- is he a corporatist because he thinks its his job to fix the economy using networking with corporations, or is he a corporatist because it is good for his power/campaigning, or even still is it some muddy combination of both that he may not even realize himself?

Doesn't matter, he is still a corporatist.

[tcaudilllg]

Krig I know you don't want to believe ****** developed from your basic ideology taken to ridiculous extremes, but the guy simply has nothing in common with McCain other than positivism.

[Kim]

Why did the man win, in the first place? Oh right, roaring hearts and watering eyes lol. Sad thing really.

.

Right-winged hearts are roaring and eyes are watering at the prospect of a Perry or Bachmann presidency that will bring America back to its Christian fundamentalist roots (of course they invented those, but nevermind that). Rejoice!

[Creepy-male]

I think the next election should be exciting.... but it also looks grim

You have three groups generally

obama loyalists that argue obama is trying to help the nation but can't because of republicans sabatoguing the economy, instead of kicking him out of office, we should give him time to fix the problem.

libertarians who dislike obama's economic policies on the basis that they are corporatist and because he has no reduced the overseas interventionalism but stepped it up with libya

and republicans who dislike obama's economic policies as well, preferring to have the government lower taxes on businesses/capitalists in fear of it trickling down to the working man, preferring to spend the budget on republican interests rather than liberal ones, and criticizing his liberal disposition towards social issues.

I personally feel like libertarians have the strongest case
then the liberals backing obama
then finally the republicans

the problem is the republicans have done a better job cooperating with the libertarians than the liberals... although republicans are major bullshiters when it comes to their "free economics" and bipartisanship wants to squeeze out libertarians from having a voice, which imo are the only party true to the cause of a free economy.

Regardless this election is actually about something more than the last election imo, last election it was pretty clear people were dissatisfied with bush and the whole palin thing stuck the stake in the coffin for the mccain campaign early on.

[Kim]

wha...?? whe...??? i don't know watcha saying, kim. have you noticed this person's extreme incompetence, his constant shifting, his 'cannot do a thing', his lying etc etc...

I have also noticed an opposition that will oppose for the sake of opposing.

Just doing the thing here, you know!?

[redbaron]

I think the next election should be exciting.... but it also looks grim

I can't stand this country anymore. but I don't know where to go.

[xerx]

Canada, Norway and Australia are all good options. Brazil and Nigeria if you're more adventurous.

[Kim]

Canada, Norway and Australia are all good options. Brazil and Nigeria if you're more adventurous.

Nigeria only if you have A LOT of money.

[Creepy-male]

I think the next election should be exciting.... but it also looks grim

I can't stand this country anymore. but I don't know where to go.

lol, I feel the same, I'm from Texas.... so think about how I feel, I live in the same city as Mr. Adios Mofos!

[Kim]

[quote=he died with a felafel;803755]

Oh, you mean YOU're doing the opposition thing just for the sake of it?

Well, I do hate the tea party and the likes of Rick Perry.

Have a cookie!

[Creepy-male]

Coogies?

Have a Sausage

[Kim]

Coogies?

Have a Sausage

Well thanks, darling!

[mu4]

Tax cuts expire in 2012. Obama will let it expire, republicans won't. Most of the country are pro-tax cut. You figure it out.

There are only 1-2 serious republican candidates and libertarians are a bunch of hypocritical extremists who pretty much will never do anything important other then sabotage their own benefit in the name of ideological purity.

Republicans think they won the debt debate, imo they lost the center.

Who's in charge only matters in one way. Who will support the system until it collapses or until future innovation buys us another boom period. The extremist conservatives want a reset with a return to traditional backwards values which will gut progress, the moderate conservatives want to have progress but eat their cake too, the extremist liberals want to help everyone and protect the environment at the cost of progress and the moderate liberals want to have progress along with some sustainability. Ultimately the extremists will gain more traction as energy resources dwindle and a sense of pervasive despair catches on in depleted areas, either way, the extreme solutions are recipes for a disaster.

The rich need to pay their share so the tax cuts need to go, innovation needs to occur so the poor can be employed with the newfound efficiencies and energy resources. America will be nice for a long time to come compared to quite a few places in the world, but it may not be the nicest places for everyone. It sucks but every place in the world has undergone collapse and revolution many times over, America's had it easy, they'll figure out that peace is worth not getting everything you want after they have a couple of hundred years of humiliation.

The world's only ever had one solution to it's energy problems and that's progress and sustainability, it's the only path thru the darkness we've ever had. Deal with it.

[MisterNi]

Tax cuts expire in 2012. Obama will let it expire, republicans won't. Most of the country are pro-tax cut. You figure it out.

There are only 1-2 serious republican candidates and libertarians are a bunch of hypocritical extremists who pretty much will never do anything important other then sabotage their own benefit in the name of ideological purity.

Republicans think they won the debt debate, imo they lost the center.

Who's in charge only matters in one way. Who will support the system until it collapses or until future innovation buys us another boom period. The extremist conservatives want a reset with a return to traditional backwards values which will gut progress, the moderate conservatives want to have progress but eat their cake too, the extremist liberals want to help everyone and protect the environment at the cost of progress and the moderate liberals want to have progress along with some sustainability. Ultimately the extremists will gain more traction as energy resources dwindle and a sense of pervasive despair catches on in depleted areas, either way, the extreme solutions are recipes for a disaster.

The rich need to pay their share so the tax cuts need to go, innovation needs to occur so the poor can be employed with the newfound efficiencies and energy resources. America will be nice for a long time to come compared to quite a few places in the world, but it may not be the nicest places for everyone. It sucks but every place in the world has undergone collapse and revolution many times over, America's had it easy, they'll figure out that peace is worth not getting everything you want after they have a couple of hundred years of humiliation.

The world's only ever had one solution to it's energy problems and that's progress and sustainability, it's the only path thru the darkness we've ever had. Deal with it.

Bravo.

[Creepy-male]

Tax cuts expire in 2012. Obama will let it expire, republicans won't. Most of the country are pro-tax cut. You figure it out.

There are only 1-2 serious republican candidates and libertarians are a bunch of hypocritical extremists who pretty much will never do anything important other then sabotage their own benefit in the name of ideological purity.

Republicans think they won the debt debate, imo they lost the center.

Who's in charge only matters in one way. Who will support the system until it collapses or until future innovation buys us another boom period. The extremist conservatives want a reset with a return to traditional backwards values which will gut progress, the moderate conservatives want to have progress but eat their cake too, the extremist liberals want to help everyone and protect the environment at the cost of progress and the moderate liberals want to have progress along with some sustainability. Ultimately the extremists will gain more traction as energy resources dwindle and a sense of pervasive despair catches on in depleted areas, either way, the extreme solutions are recipes for a disaster.

The rich need to pay their share so the tax cuts need to go, innovation needs to occur so the poor can be employed with the newfound efficiencies and energy resources. America will be nice for a long time to come compared to quite a few places in the world, but it may not be the nicest places for everyone. It sucks but every place in the world has undergone collapse and revolution many times over, America's had it easy, they'll figure out that peace is worth not getting everything you want after they have a couple of hundred years of humiliation.

The world's only ever had one solution to it's energy problems and that's progress and sustainability, it's the only path thru the darkness we've ever had. Deal with it.

If people were more educated/informed there wouldn't be any need to run around all mopey and cynical about things.

That's basically what I read into what you posted, you're criticizing all these groups, then saying realistically this group (which you've criticized) will take power. That seems extremely cynical, almost fatalistic. If you have such a masterful solution to all these problems and such keen insight why don't you actually spend some effort attempting to improve things or educate people?

I don't get that... its like you enjoy sitting back and criticizing everyone while observing instead of actually participating or proposing solutions, which would be nice because that actually opens you up to criticism yourself. I mean in all fairness you did say energy problems can be solved through progress and sustainability, but that's so vague and universally accepted that its hard to be taken as a solution you can work with on a grounded level and its hard to criticize.

I agree with you and your incredibly vague solution, but I just feel it neccesary to point out how annoying I find you (standing back criticizing people and giving generic vague solutions with a sort of haughty cynical attitude).

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

I agree with you and your incredibly vague solution, but I just feel it neccesary to point out how annoying I find you (standing back criticizing people and giving generic vague solutions with a sort of haughty cynical attitude).

lmao so many people on this board have snotty attitudes. When you take a break from it and then come back you can really feel it. They are just sooo insecure. I used to want to help people like that but it's pointless. When anybody is negative, for any reason, they become their own worst enemy. I need to just remember that and let it go. Sinking to their level and fighting with them is just what they want.

[mu4]

If people were more educated/informed there wouldn't be any need to run around all mopey and cynical about things.

That's basically what I read into what you posted, you're criticizing all these groups, then saying realistically this group (which you've criticized) will take power. That seems extremely cynical, almost fatalistic. If you have such a masterful solution to all these problems and such keen insight why don't you actually spend some effort attempting to improve things or educate people?

I don't get that... its like you enjoy sitting back and criticizing everyone while observing instead of actually participating or proposing solutions, which would be nice because that actually opens you up to criticism yourself. I mean in all fairness you did say energy problems can be solved through progress and sustainability, but that's so vague and universally accepted that its hard to be taken as a solution you can work with on a grounded level and its hard to criticize.

I agree with you and your incredibly vague solution, but I just feel it neccesary to point out how annoying I find you (standing back criticizing people and giving generic vague solutions with a sort of haughty cynical attitude).

First off, you don't understand what I said, you don't know me, and you are wrong.

You don't understand what I said.

I'm going to start off by attempting to educate and improve you.

The "reality" is that people have different priorities in life and even if they accept something as "universal" they may do something totally against that. There are plenty of well meaning people and not so well meaning people who advocate a agenda that would turn whatever "universally" accepted value they hold into dust.

The "reality" is that people sometimes don't even hold these "universally" accepted values as universal. You figure that one out.

The "reality" is that people sometimes who ware well-meaning, accept these "universally" accepted values but are in situations where they are prevented from acting on them, or fail because they have yet to discover the necessary means to achieve their result.

By no means should any of these "realities" prevent one from follow one's conscience, whatever that might be. If progress and sustainability is the value you prioritize over progress and profit, traditional values, social welfare and environmentalism, it should be very clear who you should vote for. If you want your vote to actually matter instead of going towards a group of extremist hypocrites who sabotage themselves constantly or a group of backwards extremists and greedy con-artists, it should be very clear who you should vote for. You get some baggage with that, but I'm willing to take that compromise.

Now I'm going to fist of fucking fury on your assumptions about me.

1. I spend most of my life "improving things" and doing you know, "real stuff".
2. There is no masterful solution that could be described in the content of a forum post. There are people working on specific solutions to specific problems, and there are people working against it. The are people working on breakthroughs that hopefully will expand our ability to efficiently transform natural resources to energy. Politically, there are people on both sides of the divide which impede the progress I wish to see. In that political discussion, I'm going to work on the side of the people I see most capable of creating this progress, and compromise with the ones who want to see it happen but are perhaps unwilling to share because they're just greedy.
3. I'm not really a sit back sort of person, I spend a lot of time on research but when I want to get something done and have the resources to do it. I can get it done. On the political issue, I'm not a politician, but I vote, I donate and I advocate the people I see as being the best for my vision of the world.
4. There are many talented people working on the energy problem, like Steven Chu and others, I'm not one of them. I don't pretend to be a expert nor do I want to be. I am good at other things which provide value to the world. Obama is a president that has put a scientist and Nobel Prize winner in charge of the energy situation instead of a energy industry puppet. Fucking FTW.
5. I'm don't care if agree with my solution, because you seem to not understand it. It's not about agreeing it's about prioritizing. As I said, it's mankind's one road thru the darkness and it has always been this way. The other movements in the world will only lead it to what happens when systems collapse, enough people will die that the resource situation is once again in favor of progress and people will be sick of all the fighting and misery and cooperate again despite not getting everything they want. It can take a long time and sometimes, due to things like desertification, the energy situation is simply hopeless.

I wrote a very tiny forum post about something I've talked with people about in much greater detail. It wasn't even cynical or critical and I'm these days a very optimistic and confidant person who goes out and do "real things", improve the world with my little actions and do what I can. I know the world can turn to shit because assholes ruin it with their ignorance, but I try to have fun and enjoy my life.

You seem to think I'm criticizing you. I'm sorry to hurt your feelings, but I wasn't really talking to you, I don't really view what you wrote as being that important to my political opinion. If I was going to criticize you, I would have quoted you, like now. Next time for your reference, if I didn't quote you, I probably wasn't talking to you.

Obama 2012... vote...

[mu4]

I agree with you and your incredibly vague solution, but I just feel it neccesary to point out how annoying I find you (standing back criticizing people and giving generic vague solutions with a sort of haughty cynical attitude).

lmao so many people on this board have snotty attitudes. When you take a break from it and then come back you can really feel it. They are just sooo insecure. I used to want to help people like that but it's pointless. When anybody is negative, for any reason, they become their own worst enemy. I need to just remember that and let it go. Sinking to their level and fighting with them is just what they want.

I'm pretty insecure about a ton of stuff, but I wasn't even being negative and cynical or critical of HLD. It's wierd when people get offended by me expressing my opinions and think it's about them.

Obama 2012, energy baby, yea, energy!

[tcaudilllg]

After careful reflection and consideration of the evidence, I have concluded that Obama is not insane, only really, really stupid.

[Reuben]

Is he stupid or simply cowardly?

[Creepy-male]

First off, you don't understand what I said, you don't know me, and you are wrong.

You don't understand what I said.

I'm going to start off by attempting to educate and improve you.

Lmao, I'll read your entire post a little later but I want to address the head first.

1) I'm not claiming to know you or anything, or be the supreme intellectual authority on what you mean, I'm just giving you my impression of what you said, so you can relax on account of that.

2) Don't bother trying to "improve" me, all I'm saying is I find your attitude annoying, its not a big deal, it happens from time to time with people.

but I wasn't even being negative and cynical or critical of HLD. It's wierd when people get offended by me expressing my opinions and think it's about them.

Lol it's not about the post but you as a person and my perception of that. Hence why I made a point to say... "I agree with you and your incredibly vague solution, but I just feel it neccesary to point out how annoying I find you"

Also I'm not doing this unprovoked, we've had some debates before that you have instigated, so I'm not doing this to make your life difficult, I'm doing it because you are a major part of this forum and I need to get this off my chest if I am going to have to be around you. I'd actually like to discuss the content of what you wrote in more detail, however I'm almost positive it will end the same way it always does -- very unproductive, you criticizing everyone else and never proposing counter-solutions or points in enough detail to allow for any meaningful two way criticism.

[mu4]

Lol it's not about the post but you as a person and my perception of that. Hence why I made a point to say... "I agree with you and your incredibly vague solution, but I just feel it neccesary to point out how annoying I find you"

Also I'm not doing this unprovoked, we've had some debates before that you have instigated, so I'm not doing this to make your life difficult, I'm doing it because you are a major part of this forum and I need to get this off my chest if I am going to have to be around you. I'd actually like to discuss the content of what you wrote in more detail, however I'm almost positive it will end the same way it always does -- very unproductive, you criticizing everyone else and never proposing counter-solutions or points in enough detail to allow for any meaningful two way criticism.

I think you're the one being negative without producing any sort of "solution", and are you attacking me personally for stuff that's totally unrelated to my post? I find this confusing. I think my post was the first post that described the problem I am interested in. Politically voting is what you should do in the US and you can become a volunteer/staff in a political organization, which isn't out of the question. You can also donate. I don't see it a definitive solution and I don't have a definitive solution as I am not a energy expert. However, there are quite a few people who agree with me, including you it seems.

My original post was not a negative post, it was one which advocate a clear direction for political sympathies, it is a summary of how I see the current system as well as areas of deficiency and failure within that system. The only area of criticism and negativity was reserved for extremist organizations who would rather block cooperation rather than work towards progress. There is a time and places for such organizations, in my opinion, this is not the time or place.

My original post was not directed towards you. I hope you don't take anything I said in my original post personally but I know my strong opinions can be seen as somewhat offensive. However, I stand by my vision of the world, and the direction I wish to take in promoting that.

In relation to other posts in the thread, compromise and being a moderate is not stupidity or cowardice. It's called working together with people for who they are even if you don't agree with them. It is of great benefit to society and is cooperating without getting everything you want which is something that is losing popularity in the US.

A discussion is not about calling me annoying, or saying that I'm being critical. Ultimately being critical is something I value in people and is expected in a discussion. It's not much of a discussion if you're just expression your frustration at me personally rather then discuss what I've said. I wish you would be critical, because then there could be a real discussion. Since you agree with me, I hope you will inform me of what any details you know about how to address energy and sustainability issues.

Let's focus back on energy policy and things like that, because I am looking for the next break thru in energy, since it would be wise for me to invest in that. However, I haven't found it yet.

I'm not looking forward to a Texan/another republican putting a industry puppet as the head of the energy department so my vote is naturally not going to go in that direction.

[Creepy-male]

A discussion doesn't have to be dictated by your requirements -- I don't have to curtail what I say to your requirements on what you think is the proper thing to discuss.

Further there is no way in hell I'm discussing politics with someone who gets bent out of shape for calling them annoying -- its not a matter of being afraid to, its just not worth the energy I can tell by the vibe of how this is going. The way I see it, in political discussion, some things get said that press the other person's buttons, so if there isn't a good relationship in terms of dealing with that, most discussion will likely divulge into unproductive bickering or being overly polite as to not disturb things. The bickering will overshadow any productive discussion and the over politeness will put any polemic or interesting thought processes into a deep freeze. I'd rather find someone I can speak freely with, so that if I do possibly offend them, I at least know there is a quick recovery, rather than a long drawn out conflict.

[mu4]

A discussion doesn't have to be dictated by your requirements -- I don't have to curtail what I say to your requirements on what you think is the proper thing to discuss.

Further there is no way in hell I'm discussing politics with someone who gets bent out of shape for calling them annoying -- its not a matter of being afraid to, its just not worth the energy I can tell by the vibe of how this is going. The way I see it, in political discussion, some things get said that press the other person's buttons, so if there isn't a good relationship in terms of dealing with that, most discussion will likely divulge into unproductive bickering or being overly polite as to not disturb things. The bickering will overshadow any productive discussion and the over politeness will put any polemic or interesting thought processes into a deep freeze. I'd rather find someone I can speak freely with, so that if I do possibly offend them, I at least know there is a quick recovery, rather than a long drawn out conflict.

You just spent 3 posts just to get to tell me why you can't have a discussion with me or that I'm annoying/critical/negative/something or the other. I haven't been that way and I never wanted a discussion with you either.

I'm not bent out of shape because you called me annoying, I'm kinda of annoyed you haven't said a single thing other than your personal problem with me.

Are you serious?

I'm just trying to express my political opinion.

It's cool tho, no discussion with you, just the way I wanted it to begin with.

[Creepy-male]

no discussion with you, just the way I wanted it to begin with.

Great then why did you respond? That's a bit confusing. But regardless let's just tell ourselves we are fulfilling out your master plan.

[tcaudilllg]

Is he stupid or simply cowardly?

That is a good question.

[krieger]

Mitt Romney will be prez. he has the most presidential face. and people want to kick the bums out. lol this election prediction thing is EZ!