NationStates Jolt Archive

"Change." That was the mantra that Obama preached and I feel, slowly but surely, he will practice what he preached. However the election and Obama's character throws up the question of whether there are other politicians like him or in the making or if Obama will be that rare charismatic leader that many hope for, a leader who naturally emits confidence and has a solid set of policies that seem a lot more viable for the 21st century world.

Over here in the UK I find myself wondering, Where's Our Obama? Will we ever have a Prime Ministerial candidate that shares the passion that ignited the US Election. Looking at current politicians I just can't see that happening. I can't see large street parties erupting if Gordon Brown is elected, if David Cameron is elected or if Nick Clegg is elected. Though they all may have policies that will benefit society I can't see the confidence in them or the charisma that Obama and even to a certain extent McCain have. Is it any surprise that voter apathy is increasing here? Will a new leader emerge with both the policies and the confidence to pull it off? All I can say is that on Tuesday Night I almost wished I was an American citizen, taking part in history and not just watching from the sidelines.

What are your views NSG? Do you think the UK or the country you live in (bar America because they have Obama) will have a Presidential/Prime Ministerial candidate that reignites the passion for politics?

Not really. I think British politics is on a downspiral to disaster. The leaders are getting more and more obsessed with reforms, despite the fact nothing was broken to begin with. :(

We got our Obama a year early. His name is Kevin Rudd. He's on course to be one of the worst.

We got our Obama a year early. His name is Kevin Rudd. He's on course to be one of the worst.

Could you elaborate further? I'm not really clued up on Rudd's policies.

British people don't get Presidents, silly.
Although, if I may be serious here for a moment, how much chance could a relative outsider (someone with only a few years in Parliament) have of getting support from the majority of the House of Commons?

There'll never be a British Obama-"There will always be an England". One lousy time-serving grafter can't destroy that, surely.

British people don't get Presidents, silly.
Although, if I may be serious here for a moment, how much chance could a relative outsider (someone with only a few years in Parliament) have of getting support from the majority of the House of Commons?


At the moment, very little. However I believe it could happen. Someone who sticks to their principles, gives off confidence and really believes they can change things for the better and they have worked with people from the ground up.

I still believe that an outsider will get a shot at the Prime Minister position, it just all depends on who and when.

British people don't get Presidents, silly.
Although, if I may be serious here for a moment, how much chance could a relative outsider (someone with only a few years in Parliament) have of getting support from the majority of the House of Commons?

Well, David Cameron, the leader of the Conservatives, took his position (Leader of the Opposition) four years after first becoming an MP.

There's a chance he will win the next election, although that would probably be nine years after his first becoming an MP.

gosh this Obama stuff is getting annoying, its like the Russians haven't just gone into cold war mode or something

but anyway no I quite like our British politics we had thatcher and that was shit and whilst Brown is as exciting as bran flakes he has actually made the (mostly) right choices which is what matters

There are many reasons but the most important one is this: the cost of an Obama is George Bush. We had no Bush, we can have no Obama.

He's over there!

*Points*

Could you elaborate further? I'm not really clued up on Rudd's policies.

He promised all sorts of things, then tried to pay for it with blatantly unfair taxes, which were rejected, which means he's spent the past year doing pretty much nothing. Except for trying to censor the Internet.

Over here in the UK I find myself wondering, Where's Our Obama? Will we ever have a Prime Ministerial candidate that shares the passion that ignited the US Election.

Charles will be king AND prime minister. Rejoice ;)

Charles will be king AND prime minister. Rejoice ;)

*flees*

I'm in the position where I'm wondering to myself if the Queen is always thinking "You'll never get this Charles! Never!"

*flees*

I'm in the position where I'm wondering to myself if the Queen is always thinking "You'll never get this Charles! Never!"

Maybe there's been a "Weekend at Bernie's" situation been going on for the past decade now, pertupated by the royal staff, for no reason other than to really annoy Charles.

I've always considered Canadian politicians to be the ideal sort - they may not have world changing policies or do anything radical, but they don't tend to make a huge mess of things either. Right now, that seems like a pretty good balance to me, even if it's not too exciting.

Infact, I have a suspicion that Obama will have more of an effect on Canada than some of our PMs have...

He promised all sorts of things, then tried to pay for it with blatantly unfair taxes, which were rejected, which means he's spent the past year doing pretty much nothing. Except for trying to censor the Internet.

It must make you sad that Rudd has such high approval ratings.

Obama will be just like Reagan fix things. Then for next 30 years the opposing side will spend a large part of its energy trying to convince everyone he made things worse instead of trying to fix things themselves.

It must make you sad that Rudd has such high approval ratings.

The people who actually brought him to power, the youth, are now realising that he was a BAD idea. Basically, because he hates young people. The polls are high because no PM is ever ousted after only one term; Australians give them one whole term of leeway, then they'll get kicked out if nothing happens.

Also, I get the feeling people still feel the effects of that "Kevin 07" rubbish.

The people who actually brought him to power, the youth, are now realising that he was a BAD idea. Basically, because he hates young people. The polls are high because no PM is ever ousted after only one term; Australians give them one whole term of leeway, then they'll get kicked out if nothing happens.

Also, I get the feeling people still feel the effects of that "Kevin 07" rubbish.

He's already been in office longer than half a dozen historical PMs, and his approval ratings are some of the highest in history. We shall see. Most of the international press has been positive towards him.

We've had an Obama politician... ol' Tony "Things Can Only Get Better" Blair.

A charismatic, young politician, skilled at oratory and rhetoric, who campaigned on woolly, vague slogans against a long-standing socially/fiscal conservative government. Let's just see what we all think of Obama in ten years time.

What are your views NSG? Do you think the UK or the country you live in (bar America because they have Obama) will have a Presidential/Prime Ministerial candidate that reignites the passion for politics?

I'd be thrillrd to see a Japanese Obama with a realistic chance of being PM and effecting real political change here. It'll be a long time coming tho....

We've had an Obama politician... ol' Tony "Things Can Only Get Better" Blair.

A charismatic, young politician, skilled at oratory and rhetoric, who campaigned on woolly, vague slogans against a long-standing socially/fiscal conservative government. Let's just see what we all think of Obama in ten years time.

Obama will either be a Reagan or a Carter. Reagan in that he will have fixed things but the other side will expend most of their energy trying to claim otherwise. Or a carter so much hope so little produced.

Reagan in that he will have fixed things but the other side will expend most of their energy trying to claim otherwise.
Aye, I find it hard to think of an Obama presidency as a 'non-partisan', 'across the aisle' presidency, as his campaign seemed to be pushing; especially with the Dems having control of Congress.

I imagine Obama's going to be seen as an awfully divisive president; indeed, he'll have to be if he's going to get those policy changes into legislation.

History repeats itself. We are plunging back to 1976. Carter, the congress, all under liberal control.

1980 was four years away. But we all know what happens after 4 years of liberalism... The fairy tale ends.

:)

History repeats itself. We are plunging back to 1976. Carter, the congress, all under liberal control.

1980 was four years away. But we all know what happens after 4 years of liberalism... The fairy tale ends.

:)

does that means we are getting 4 years of 10% inflation yearly and massive unemployment ???

History repeats itself. We are plunging back to 1976. Carter, the congress, all under liberal control.

1980 was four years away. But we all know what happens after 4 years of liberalism... The fairy tale ends.

:)

So in 2012 we're going to elect the worst President of the century?

So in 2012 we're going to elect the Best President of the century?

Fixed

"Change." That was the mantra that Obama preached and I feel, slowly but surely, he will practice what he preached. However the election and Obama's character throws up the question of whether there are other politicians like him or in the making or if Obama will be that rare charismatic leader that many hope for, a leader who naturally emits confidence and has a solid set of policies that seem a lot more viable for the 21st century world.

Over here in the UK I find myself wondering, Where's Our Obama? Will we ever have a Prime Ministerial candidate that shares the passion that ignited the US Election. Looking at current politicians I just can't see that happening. I can't see large street parties erupting if Gordon Brown is elected, if David Cameron is elected or if Nick Clegg is elected. Though they all may have policies that will benefit society I can't see the confidence in them or the charisma that Obama and even to a certain extent McCain have. Is it any surprise that voter apathy is increasing here? Will a new leader emerge with both the policies and the confidence to pull it off? All I can say is that on Tuesday Night I almost wished I was an American citizen, taking part in history and not just watching from the sidelines.

What are your views NSG? Do you think the UK or the country you live in (bar America because they have Obama) will have a Presidential/Prime Ministerial candidate that reignites the passion for politics?
back in '97 there were street parties at Blair being elected... he was charismatic and enthusiatic about change, but i'm sure many of the parties were also for the end of Thatcher's evil rule....
(edit: ok, it was Major between Thatcher and Blair, but still >.>)

I imagine Obama's going to be seen as an awfully divisive president...

So in 2012 we're going to elect the worst President of the century?Fixed
I rest my case, m'lud.


back in '97 there were street parties at Blair being elected... he was charismatic and enthusiatic about change, but i'm sure many of the parties were also for the end of Thatcher's evil rule....
Aye, as I said (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=14177363&postcount=24), hindsight's a great thing...

the '84 election tends to disagree.

the '84 election tends to disagree.

get with the times man you're living in the past.

the '84 election tends to disagree.get with the times man you're living in the past.
You guys seemed to have missed the memo: you're the United States of America now.

Unite, biatches.

You guys seemed to have missed the memo: you're the United States of America now.

Unite, biatches.

does this mean when i go to the toilet i...oh god the horror the horror. i don't want to be USA anymore, can't i be Australia for a while?

get with the times man you're living in the past.

just seems strange that those then saw the times as a boom how is it that now history is re written to say it was a horrendous time???

just seems strange that those then saw the times as a boom how is it that now history is re written to say it was a horrendous time???

who says it was a boom time?

who says it was a boom time?

60% of the people who lived at that time.
As opposed to people now rewriting history to make things look bad.

So in 2012 we're going to elect the worst President of the century?

I am pretty sure that it would be hard to find a more liberal president than the obamanation.

60% of the people who lived at that time.
As opposed to people now rewriting history to make things look bad.

I think the 40% of people who weren't experienceing the boom are more into writing now.

I think the 40% of people who weren't experienceing the boom are more into writing now.

the other 40% divided into two camps.
half thought times were good but not good enough to vote republican. and the other half never left the sixties and were still on so much acid they wouldn't know a good economy even if it bit them in the ass.

The biggest issue we face in the USA now is if 4 years of obamanate will destroy us. Raising taxes in a recession (perpetuated by congress to try and deflect to bush) will have the same effect as when Hoover did it... That and his assinine lack of cohesive strategy in foreign relations... taxes go to pre 1980 levels and healthcare is destroyed, coal prices become insane so electricity will be unaffordable....He is going to hurt us very badly. Our economy may never recover. Combine it with the white flag of surrender, we may be doomed.

The biggest issue we face in the USA now is if 4 years of obamanate will destroy us. Raising taxes in a recession (perpetuated by congress to try and deflect to bush) will have the same effect as when Hoover did it... That and his assinine lack of cohesive strategy in foreign relations... taxes go to pre 1980 levels and healthcare is destroyed, coal prices become insane so electricity will be unaffordable....He is going to hurt us very badly. Our economy may never recover. Combine it with the white flag of surrender, we may be doomed.

so are you always this cheerful after a good election result or is this just denial?

BS. Total, utter, BS. Destroy healthcare? Have you actually read either of the candidates plans? McCain's plan would have royally screwed healthcare (It's bought and paid for by the insurance companies) over, and cost more than Obama's. In fact, Obama's taxes will be lower on every group than Reagan's were from 1981-1986. They aren't anywhere near pre-Reagan levels, try Clinton levels. Your seriously arguing OBAMA doesn't have a cohesive strategy in foreign relations?! McCain's strategy, if you can call it that, was restarting the effing Cold War, and keeping us bogged down in Iraq indefinitely rather than switch focus to the real threats in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and seems to have been based on the tenet that diplomacy was bad, and military action, good. McCain's entire economic plan was a massive extension of Bush's failed plan. How was that going to be good for the economy?

You guys seemed to have missed the memo: you're the United States of America now.

Unite, biatches.

But I don't like the other states...

I am pretty sure that it would be hard to find a more liberal president than the obamanation.

Firstly, whoosh, secondly, not even remotely. Obama's pretty conservative.

Firstly, whoosh, secondly, not even remotely. Obama's pretty conservative.

Probably true when you compare him to say Chairman Mao, Karl Marx.

Probably true when you compare him to say Chairman Mao, Karl Marx.Or Hillary Clinton. Or Nancy Pelosi. He is not even leftist within the context of the Democratic Party, which is right of center as any country except the US would measure things.

a Conservative black president who is good friends with an anti-white preacher

sounds like a major power shift towards blacks, and whites get left out in the cold
The only good thing that could come out of this, is if Obama is one of those religious, family values-orientated black guys, then hopefully the idea of special rights to gays will go back down the toilet it crawled out of

BS. Total, utter, BS. Destroy healthcare? Are you mad? Have you actually read either of the candidates plans? McCain's plan would have royally screwed healthcare over, and cost more than Obama's. In fact, Obama's taxes will be lower on every group than Reagan's were from 1981-1986. They aren't anywhere near pre-Reagan levels, try Clinton levels. Your seriously arguing OBAMA doesn't have a cohesive strategy in foreign relations?! McCain's strategy, if you can call it that, was restarting the effing Cold War, and keeping us bogged down in Iraq indefinitely rather than switch focus to the real threats in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and seems to have been based on the tenet that diplomacy was bad, and military action, good. McCain's entire economic plan was a massive extension of Bush's failed plan. How was that going to be good for the economy?

Yes read them cover to cover. healthcare quality will be in the toilet. obama will drive us into debt faster than a speeding bullet. McCains plan was very realistic.

As to the rest of your post, I would say historically you are a bit bass ackwards. With a strong president we would not be fighting the battles here are home. Under a weak one, such is obamanation, we may have to fight our way tot he grocery store.

As to the economy, congress was more to blame but you can live in your fantasy.

If any president is going to get us into a world of trouble, it is a pascifist. Kennedy - Johnson as recent examples. Carter was so weak we had the Iranian hostages. Under clinton he did nothing and that gave us bin laden.

So go ahead and bloviate. The problem is we need to consider a better option in 2012. A stronger president. Much stronger.

Maybe we should have just left the office open. Probably would be preferable to the crap in store for us.

I am no republican, but pelosi, reid, and others are a much worse problem now with an unexperienced bought and sold politician in the white house.

Simple solution, change every member of congress after two terms. We should change them all for the same reason we change diapers.

a Conservative black president who is good friends with an anti-white preacher

sounds like a major power shift towards blacks, and whites get left out in the cold
The only good thing that could come out of this, is if Obama is one of those religious, family values-orientated black guys, then hopefully the idea of special rights to gays will go back down the toilet it crawled out of

His skin color is irrelevent.

As to his liberalism, different story.

Now then, maybe we get lucky and he starts campaigning for emperor and votes 'present'.

probably be an absentee president anyway.

Or Hillary Clinton. Or Nancy Pelosi. He is not even leftist within the context of the Democratic Party, which is right of center as any country except the US would measure things.

Chuckle. Hillary and Pelosi more liberal than obamanation.

Whereas clintoon is obviosly more conservative than he is, pelosi might be a close match.

...such is obamanation..
Holy Christ on a stick, if you're going to use a tired nutjob (racial) slur, at least spell it right.

Otherwise you might come off as some poor sod who doesn't understand what he's typing.

so are you always this cheerful after a good election result or is this just denial?


Just a realist. Not gloomy at all, quite cheerful. Denial is a liberal emotion. I am a conservative libertarian.

Holy Christ on a stick, if you're going to use a tired nutjob (racial) slur, at least spell it right.

Otherwise you might come off as some poor sod who doesn't understand what he's typing.

Has nothing to do with race. Are you a racist?

a Conservative black president who is good friends with an anti-white preacher

sounds like a major power shift towards blacks, and whites get left out in the cold
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/images/2008/08/02/20080802_a04.jpg

The only good thing that could come out of this, is if Obama is one of those religious, family values-orientated black guys, then hopefully the idea of special rights to gays will go back down the toilet it crawled out of
Exactly what kind of 'special rights' are you talking about? All I see is same sex couples wanting the right to have a loving family just like the rest of us, nothing else.

Has nothing to do with race.
Whatever it is, it has two i's in it.

If you're going to cast yourself as someone with a poor grasp of political terminology, woeful knowledge of political theory, and an apparent lack of any clear independent thought, the least you could do would be to learn how to spell.

And one might suggest that you have a good think as to whether rhyming a black man's name with a word meaning 'disgusting and loathsome monster' is, after all, in rather poor taste.

Whatever it is, it has two i's in it.

If you're going to cast yourself as someone with a poor grasp of political terminology, woeful knowledge of political theory, and an apparent lack of any clear independent thought, the least you could do would be to learn how to spell.

And one might suggest that you have a good think as to whether rhyming a black man's name with a word meaning 'disgusting and loathsome monster' is, after all, in rather poor taste.

Take away their slogans, and what else do they have?

Whatever it is, it has two i's in it.

If you're going to cast yourself as someone with a poor grasp of political terminology, woeful knowledge of political theory, and an apparent lack of any clear independent thought, the least you could do would be to learn how to spell.

And one might suggest that you have a good think as to whether rhyming a black man's name with a word meaning 'disgusting and loathsome monster' is, after all, in rather poor taste.

Your lack of political savvy is noted. Please continue on your fantasy. Don't let any facts come to your attention. Please ignore these posts you have nothing to contribute to.

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/images/2008/08/02/20080802_a04.jpg


Exactly what kind of 'special rights' are you talking about? All I see is same sex couples wanting the right to have a loving family just like the rest of us, nothing else.

It seems to be a common thread that they want to deny same sex couples the right to marry for religious reasons. Personally I think you should be allowed to marry or divorce anyone you want. There would be about as much impact as when Microsoft was forced to 'unintegrate' Internet Explorer.

Don't let any facts come to your attention.
'Facts'?

Would that would be your 'facts' that JFK, Lyndon Johnson or (implicitly) Obama are pacifists? Or simply your 'facts' that "we may have to fight our way tot he [sic] grocery store"?

Educate thyself.

You just revealed how much of a idiot you are. McCain's plan was projected to add at least a trillion more to the debt than Obama's is. And you preach about facts? And don't try and preach McCain's health care plan to me, as my mother would be one of the many people totally screwed over by it. Not a single serious study I've read has preached McCain's health care plan effectively over Obama's (Which if you had read you would know wasn't socialist) It was seriously flawed (Paid for by the insurance companies basically), and furthermore, more costly than Obama's plan, and he was also very erratic and unclear about how he was going to fund it.

As for weak Presidents, your examples seem to fail. Carter could have stopped the Iranian hostage crisis how? And furthermore, it was Carter who resolved the crisis, not Reagan. Would you care to explain how Kennedy was weak? So weak, that if he been any more aggressive during the Cuban Missile Crisis, nuclear war would have erupted? And LBJ was such a pacifist he escalated the Vietnam War?

And would you care to explain your total BSing on taxes, which you didn't respond to when I pointed it out?

Calling Kennedy and Johnson "pacifists" was my particular favorite.

rotflmao

As for weak Presidents, your examples seem to fail. Carter could have stopped the Iranian hostage crisis how?

Had more to do with the Death of the Shah then either of them.

Yeah, I liked that line too. I could buy the Carter and Clinton were weak rhetoric, almost, but that line was a killer. LBJ's lack of "Pacifism" is my biggest issue with him.

As for the hostage crisis, greed and death raises a good point there. Something a lot of people don't seem to know is that Carter did authorize a rescue operation, which failed, he then eventually managed to negotiate their release. They returned on Reagan's inauguration day though, and he got the credit.

Over here in the UK I find myself wondering, Where's Our Obama? Will we ever have a Prime Ministerial candidate that shares the passion that ignited the US Election. Looking at current politicians I just can't see that happening. I can't see large street parties erupting if Gordon Brown is elected, if David Cameron is elected or if Nick Clegg is elected. Though they all may have policies that will benefit society I can't see the confidence in them or the charisma that Obama and even to a certain extent McCain have. Is it any surprise that voter apathy is increasing here? Will a new leader emerge with both the policies and the confidence to pull it off? All I can say is that on Tuesday Night I almost wished I was an American citizen, taking part in history and not just watching from the sidelines.

It is quite possible remember Obama was a political unkown who was expected to get trounced by Hilary Clinton in the primaries.

At last, some entertaining political debate!

http://www.clipartof.com/images/emoticons/xsmall2/1947_eating_popcorn_and_drinking_beer.gif

At last, some entertaining political debate!

http://www.clipartof.com/images/emoticons/xsmall2/1947_eating_popcorn_and_drinking_beer.gif

I would ask you for some of that pop corn but I must go to bed.:(

I would ask you for some of that pop corn but I must go to bed.:(

Yes, go! Recharge your batteries Yuki-Chan! :D

Yes read them cover to cover. healthcare quality will be in the toilet. obama will drive us into debt faster than a speeding bullet. McCains plan was very realistic.

As to the rest of your post, I would say historically you are a bit bass ackwards. With a strong president we would not be fighting the battles here are home. Under a weak one, such is obamanation, we may have to fight our way tot he grocery store.

As to the economy, congress was more to blame but you can live in your fantasy.

If any president is going to get us into a world of trouble, it is a pascifist. Kennedy - Johnson as recent examples. Carter was so weak we had the Iranian hostages. Under clinton he did nothing and that gave us bin laden.

So go ahead and bloviate. The problem is we need to consider a better option in 2012. A stronger president. Much stronger.

Maybe we should have just left the office open. Probably would be preferable to the crap in store for us.
I can sum this up with one thing!
http://www.hazzardnet.com/images/tees/A-Team_Mr-T_Shut_Up_Fool-T-link.jpg
Mr. T said so. :D



*Not serous.

If any president is going to get us into a world of trouble, it is a pascifist. Kennedy - Johnson as recent examples. Carter was so weak we had the Iranian hostages. Under clinton he did nothing and that gave us bin laden.

What absolute hilarity.

Under Kennedy, you nearly had nuclear apocalypse, with that Bay of Pigs fiasco, and the Cuban Missile Crisis.

Under Johnson, well, he escalated the Vietnam War by carpet bombing North Vietnam to such a degree that unexploded bombs are still being found to day. Have ye not heard of:
"LBJ, LBJ,
How many kids have you killed today?"

Originally Posted by CthulhuFhtagn
Firstly, whoosh, secondly, not even remotely. Obama's pretty conservative.
Probably true when you compare him to say Chairman Mao, Karl Marx.

Or Gordon Brown, Sarkozy, or, well, pretty much any other leader in Europe, or, well, most of the free world. The fact you compare Obama to Chairman Mao is laughable. Next it'll be Lenin, won't it?

Has nothing to do with race. Are you a racist?

I know the difference between a white man and a black man, i.e, they have different ancestral roots. But I don't think that makes me racist.

Your lack of political savvy is noted. Please continue on your fantasy. Don't let any facts come to your attention. Please ignore these posts you have nothing to contribute to.

Stopped taking you seriously there.

I am pretty sure that it would be hard to find a more liberal president than the obamanation.

Maybe in America, in the Democratic/Republican parties. Not anywhere else in the world. Except the Congo.

Raising taxes in a recession

UK tax on VAT is 17.5%
UK tax in general is 15%, 25% or 40% of what you earn goes to the Governement. Wow, the UK's obviously much more economically crippled then America, who owes trillions to China in debt.

healthcare is destroyed

NHS never hurt anyone in the UK

Our economy may never recover

That's because you're currently in a reccesion, as bad as since The Great Depression. Wait til you do a bail-out plan like the rest of Europe. It seems to have blunted the blow a little.

coal prices become insane so electricity will be unaffordable

lol, Margaret Thatcher. Read up on her, you might learn something.

Combine it with the white flag of surrender

Strategic withdrawal from Iraq to focus on Afghanistan and Pakistan (two massive hotbeds of terrorist activity) makes you akin to the French? Oh dear.

It was Blair, didn't turn out so well.

Where's our Obama?

It depends on what kind of change you want and what kind of change you actually get.

"Change." That was the mantra that Obama preached and I feel, slowly but surely, he will practice what he preached. However the election and Obama's character throws up the question of whether there are other politicians like him or in the making or if Obama will be that rare charismatic leader that many hope for, a leader who naturally emits confidence and has a solid set of policies that seem a lot more viable for the 21st century world.

Over here in the UK I find myself wondering, Where's Our Obama? Will we ever have a Prime Ministerial candidate that shares the passion that ignited the US Election. Looking at current politicians I just can't see that happening. I can't see large street parties erupting if Gordon Brown is elected, if David Cameron is elected or if Nick Clegg is elected. Though they all may have policies that will benefit society I can't see the confidence in them or the charisma that Obama and even to a certain extent McCain have. Is it any surprise that voter apathy is increasing here? Will a new leader emerge with both the policies and the confidence to pull it off? All I can say is that on Tuesday Night I almost wished I was an American citizen, taking part in history and not just watching from the sidelines.

What are your views NSG? Do you think the UK or the country you live in (bar America because they have Obama) will have a Presidential/Prime Ministerial candidate that reignites the passion for politics?

If you live under a leader as utterly and completely worthless as George W. Bush for eight years, there will be street parties when the opposing party's candidate gets elected.

Just a realist. Not gloomy at all, quite cheerful. Denial is a liberal emotion. I am a conservative libertarian.

Ehm, i wouldn't consider denial as an emotion, and even if it were i think it can apply to anyone.
I really think Obama was a far better choice for President than McCain, have you seen McCain's foreign policy? basically restart the cold war and increase military spending. I don't think it would be wise for anyone to increase military spening in an economic fall. (i hesitate to use the term 'credit crunch' because the media bang on about it constantly)
While Obama would at least talk to the other world leaders, and has some idea for helping America from a healthcare and education front.
I'm not saying he'l be able to walk on water, because he has a tough job ahead of him, but at the moment it's all you USA guys have.

Under clinton he did nothing and that gave us bin laden.


Hey guys, remember when the right was bitching about Clinton for trying to go after Bin Laden?

The biggest issue we face in the USA now is if 4 years of obamanate will destroy us. Raising taxes in a recession (perpetuated by congress to try and deflect to bush) will have the same effect as when Hoover did it... That and his assinine lack of cohesive strategy in foreign relations... taxes go to pre 1980 levels and healthcare is destroyed, coal prices become insane so electricity will be unaffordable....He is going to hurt us very badly. Our economy may never recover. Combine it with the white flag of surrender, we may be doomed.

If Obama's "bankrupt the coal industry" plan goes through, your country is fucked. And with good cause.

If Obama's "bankrupt the coal industry" plan goes through, your country is fucked. And with good cause.

I never hear that line before, Ferrous!

I doubt if any government would bankrupt the coal industry in the short term but in the long term coal does need to be phased out and replaced with cleaner energy.

Back to the thread..... Obama has plenty of charisma but fortunately he has other qualities as well. Sarah Palin has charisma but I don't want to see that hockey mum with lipstick again! No Sarah! Get out of my bed! No! Go back to Alaska where you belong!
Oh, did I just make a Freudian slip? Oh I meant, "Sarah get out of my head!"
Phew! I think I got away with it!

Back to the English and charisma. Hey! If you want charisma in your PM, why not elect David and Victoria Beckham? But seriously now, Tony Blair had charisma - if the British Labor Party begged him to return to lead it to an historic victory, he might just charm the electorate and pull it off. I doubt it though - he was the one who helped create all this mess. Blair was charisma without a conscience. He turned the Dr Jeckyll of Labour into the Mr Hyde of New Labour....semi-privatising British education, Iraq etc.
As they said of Lex Luthor "If only he could have used his powers for good rather than evil."
He did broker a peace in Northern Ireland though. He was not totally bad. But what a waste of talent! Why did British Labor let Blair and others drag them so far up shit creek without a paddle?:confused:

Hey guys, remember when the right was bitching about Clinton for trying to go after Bin Laden?

I especially liked the part about how the Bush administration ignored the warnings about al Qaeda in order to make a missile shield the top national security priority.

If you live under a leader as utterly and completely worthless as George W. Bush for eight years, there will be street parties when the opposing party's candidate gets elected.

Bush was a step up from the clintoon era. So we faltered in our recovery, but we should be able to fix it in 4 years. Maybe the repubs will put someone up worth voting for. After 4 years of failed liberal policies, the euphoria in the streets of 'anyone but the obamanation' will be rampant.

Hey guys, remember when the right was bitching about Clinton for trying to go after Bin Laden?

Revisionist history is amazing. clintoon suddenly was a crusader! LOL, sucks for him to not have a legacy so his lap dogs will do anything to create one.

If Obama's "bankrupt the coal industry" plan goes through, your country is fucked. And with good cause.

Yep, unfortunately he will screw us on many levels.

I especially liked the part about how the Bush administration ignored the warnings about al Qaeda in order to make a missile shield the top national security priority.

We especially enjoyed that Clintoon was offerred Bin laden on a platter 3 times and he did not want to get involved. Embassies bombed, WTC, Federal buildings, USS Cole, no responses. Yep, that clintoon, what a guy. Too busy lying and obstructing justice.

Where's our Obama?

Take ours, we don't need him.

I'm sorry, if you want laughably vague statements followed by disappointment, look to Cameron. Otherwise, just be happy with the current situation and vote New Labour.

Revisionist history is amazing. clintoon suddenly was a crusader! LOL, sucks for him to not have a legacy so his lap dogs will do anything to create one.

It must be nice to live in a place were you can call reality "revisionist history".

I guess that would be called "conservative land". Its probably the only place were laughablly pitiful conservative policies work.

It must be nice to live in a place were you can call reality "revisionist history".

I guess that would be called "conservative land". Its probably the only place were laughablly pitiful conservative policies work.

Well if thats your opinion, no one here will do anything but cheerlead for you.

You must not be old enough to know the difference between media fed history and reality.

You must not be old enough to know the difference between media fed history and reality.

Nah, see, thats the problem. Im old enough to remember a lot of these things and to have learned real history, rather then learned "conservatve history" from people like Limbaugh.

I'm sorry, if you want laughably vague statements followed by disappointment, look to Cameron. Otherwise, just be happy with the current situation and vote New Labour.

*makes standard mention of the Lib Dems*

Y'know, the only party with someone who knows what they're talking about speaking on the economy.

Nah, see, thats the problem. Im old enough to remember a lot of these things and to have learned real history, rather then learned "conservatve history" from people like Limbaugh.

I always thought that Limbaugh was a political commentator. I certainly would never promote him to historian. Perhaps you should dig deeper than media?

We especially enjoyed that Clintoon was offerred Bin laden on a platter 3 times and he did not want to get involved. Embassies bombed, WTC, Federal buildings, USS Cole, no responses. Yep, that clintoon, what a guy. Too busy lying and obstructing justice.

You're not very good at spelling, are you? It's Clinton. I'm sure he's sad that his counter-terrorism policies are only praised by Richard Clarke and dozens of other senior CIA and counter-terrorism officers. I'm sure he wishes that instead of responding to terrorism through intelligence and covert action, he'd ignored the threat and then invaded an unrelated nation, just so he could have Naughty Slave Girls' approval.

You're not very good at spelling, are you? It's Clinton. I'm sure he's sad that his counter-terrorism policies are only praised by Richard Clarke and dozens of other senior CIA and counter-terrorism officers. I'm sure he wishes that instead of responding to terrorism through intelligence and covert action, he'd ignored the threat and then invaded an unrelated nation, just so he could have Naughty Slave Girls' approval.

Ahhh. When you cannot debate, attack spelling and the poster.

Ahhh. When you cannot debate, attack spelling and the poster.

You've not attempted to actually debate. You've said multiple untrue things while deliberately misspelling President Clinton's name just to be irritating.

You guys are still taking Naughty seriously after all the lies and bullcrap Naughty just got called on? Note that there was no response to being called on it either. I guess those posts are part of Fake America now?

Ahhh. When you cannot debate, attack spelling and the poster.

Why dont you read all the points he made in the post you quoted.

Just be honost. Youre not old enough to remember, and mommy and daddy are far right who got all their information from Rush, and this is the story they told you.

Why dont you read all the points he made in the post you quoted.

Just be honost. Youre not old enough to remember, and mommy and daddy are far right who got all their information from Rush, and this is the story they told you.

Feel better? I bet it took you an hour to come up with that.

Feel better? I bet it took you an hour to come up with that.

Who resorts to attacking the poster when they cant debate?


Why dont you respond to the fact that many, many counter terrorism experts and CIA leaders have said that Clinton did a bang up job?

So how long, on average, does it take you to come up with your unsupported BS arguments, and how long does it take to make condescending posts that fail to note said arguments being thoroughly debunked?

So how long, on average, does it take you to come up with your unsupported BS arguments, and how long does it take to make condescending posts that fail to note said arguments being thoroughly debunked?

Me or Naughty Slave Girls?

Me or Naughty Slave Girls?

Naughty Slave Girls. Must quote more in the future.

Naughty Slave Girls. Must quote more in the future.

s'all good.

Lol. I still want to see a response on calling Kennedy and LBJ pacifists, and on BSing about Obama's tax levels.

Lol. I still want to see a response on calling Kennedy and LBJ pacifists, and on BSing about Obama's tax levels.

You wont. He/she will make some lame 12 year old insult and move on.

Naughty Slave Girls. Must quote more in the future.

There's a little button on the bottom right of a given post. It's standard practice here from the days when time-stamping issues would result in posts appearing above the posts they were replying to, every now and then.

OT: Ro?

There's a little button on the bottom right of a given post. It's standard practice here from the days when time-stamping issues would result in posts appearing above the posts they were replying to, every now and then.

OT: Ro?

I know that actually, I just carried over my habits from other forums of not quoting, since at most other forums I go to there's not nearly this much activity, and it's obvious who your addressing.

I know that actually, I just carried over my habits from other forums of not quoting, since at most other forums I go to there's not nearly this much activity, and it's obvious who your addressing.

Yeah. When you're in a situation where a hot thread can have a full page of replies while you're banging out a post, it pays to quote. Not knocking you, just pointing out why we do it pretty much as a force of habit.

There are many reasons but the most important one is this: the cost of an Obama is George Bush. We had no Bush, we can have no Obama.

That's very true. I'd like to think of George W. Bush as a sort of Purgatory. It was awful, but necessary to purge our sins so that we could live in an Obama Administration.

Mind you, I don't think this way, as it makes no sense. But I'd like to.