Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

State of the UnionFollow

#277 Jan 29 2010 at 10:52 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Sir Xsarus wrote:
gbaji wrote:
Apparently, Obama should have stayed on the teleprompter...
Is this in reference to the Q&A session? Did you watch it? Obama was pretty solid.


Ah. My mistake. I was only half paying attention and mixed up the talk at the GOP thingie in Baltimore with the town hall meeting he held (apparently the same day?) in Tampa. He bungled a question about Israel and the Middle East pretty amazingly. I'm reasonably certain that most news agencies didn't carry video of that though...
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#278ThiefX, Posted: Jan 29 2010 at 11:19 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) I see you've been reading the talking points.
#279 Jan 30 2010 at 2:45 AM Rating: Decent
ThiefX wrote:
I watched the entire thing and some of his answers were solid but the majority of his answers were nothing more than political double speak and him speaking for several minutes without ever really answering the question.

My favorite part was when he was asked about lobbyist in his administration and he rambled on for like 5 minutes before admitting without admitting that he has lobbyist in his administration.


That's Washington for ya. The rhetoric hasn't changed in 40 years, what makes you think it would with Barry?
#280 Jan 30 2010 at 8:26 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Hehehe... if ThiefX is giving him even partial credit then you know he did great Smiley: laugh

He didn't "ramble for five minutes" about lobbyists unless you were under the influence of some time-perspective influencing drugs.
President Obama wrote:
In terms of lobbyists, I can stand here unequivocally and say that there has not been an administration who was tougher on making sure that lobbyists weren't participating in the administration than any administration that's come before us.

Now, what we did was, if there were lobbyists who were on boards and commissions that were carryovers and their term hadn't been completed, we didn't kick them off. We simply said that moving forward any time a new slot opens, they're being replaced.

So we've actually been very consistent in making sure that we are eliminating the impact of lobbyists, day in, day out, on how this administration operates. There have been a handful of waivers where somebody is highly skilled -- for example, a doctor who ran Tobacco-Free Kids technically is a registered lobbyist; on the other end, has more experience than anybody in figuring out how kids don't get hooked on cigarettes.

So there have been a couple of instances like that, but generally we've been very consistent on that front.

That's a pretty straight forward answer: Many have been grandfathered in but will be removed as they leave their positions and a few have broken the rule via waiver because of their unique qualifications. I don't know any of them well enough to pass judgement on how uniquely skilled they are but there was nothing babbling about the answer.

I suppose you might be addressing the fact that he talked about other points from the questioner before getting to lobbyists but, given that Rep. Chaffetz asked about five points (obstructionists, health care on C-Span, lobbyists, health care "line-by-line" and earmarks) I can't see what's "rambling" about it.

Great that you watched it though.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#281 Jan 30 2010 at 8:48 AM Rating: Excellent
*****
18,463 posts
gbaji wrote:
Ah. My mistake. I was only half paying attention and mixed up the talk at the GOP thingie in Baltimore with the town hall meeting he held (apparently the same day?) in Tampa. He bungled a question about Israel and the Middle East pretty amazingly. I'm reasonably certain that most news agencies didn't carry video of that though...

Quote:
Q: My question is, last night in your State of the Union address you spoke of America's support for human rights. Then why have we not condemned Israel and Egypt's human rights violations against the occupied Palestinian people and yet we continue to support financially with billions of dollars coming from our tax dollars?

AUDIENCE: Booo!

THE PRESIDENT: Okay, now, everybody has got to be courteous, everybody is answering the question.

Let me just talk about the Middle East generally. Look -- all right, everybody, come on, come on, hold on. Hold on one second, I've got to answer my question first, sir. Okay. I know you got -- what, you got some beads on -- are those New Orleans beads? Okay.

Look, look, look, the Middle East is obviously an issue that has plagued the region for centuries. And it's an issue that elicits a lot of passions, as you heard.

Here's my view. Israel is one of our strongest allies. It has -- (applause.) Let me just play this out. It is a vibrant democracy. It shares links with us in all sorts of ways. It is critical for us and I will never waver from ensuring Israel's security and helping them secure themselves in what is a very hostile region. (Applause.) So I make no apologies for that.

What is also true is that the plight of the Palestinians is something that we have to pay attention to, because it is not good for our security and it is not good for Israel's security if you've got millions of individuals who feel hopeless, who don't have an opportunity to get an education or get a job or what have you.

Now, the history of there is long and I don't have time to go through the grievances of both sides in the issue. What I have said and what we did from the beginning when I came into office is to say we are seeking a two-state solution in which Israel and the Palestinians can live side by side in peace and security. (Applause.) In order to do that both sides are going to have to make compromises. (Applause.)

As a first step, the Palestinians have to unequivocally renounce violence and recognize Israel. (Applause.) And Israel has to acknowledge legitimate grievances and interests of the Palestinians. We know what a solution could look like in the region, but here's the problem that we're confronting right now, is that both in Israel and within the Palestinian Territories, the politics are difficult; they're divided.

The Israel government came in based on the support of a lot of folks who don't want to make a lot of concessions. I think Prime Minister Netanyahu is actually making some effort to try to move a little bit further than his coalition wants him to go. On the other hand, President Abbas of the Palestinian Authority, who I think genuinely wants peace, has to deal with Hamas, an organization that has not recognized Israel and has not disavowed violence.

And so we are working to try to strengthen the ability of both parties to sit down across the table and to begin serious negotiations. And I think that it's important when we're talking about this issue to make sure that we don't just knee-jerk, use language that is inflammatory or in some fashion discourages the possibility of negotiation. We've got to recognize that both the Palestinian people and Israelis have legitimate aspirations and they can be best served if the United States is helping them understand each other, as opposed to demonizing each other.
Oh yeah, he bungled that something awful. Jesus, I bet he can't even chew with his mouth closed. Smiley: rolleyes


Maybe next time pay attention.
#282ThiefX, Posted: Jan 30 2010 at 8:52 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) You seriously think that was a straight forward answer? Go online and listen to it don't just post a transcript actually listen to him and tell me again how he didn't ramble on and use some political double speak.
#283 Jan 30 2010 at 9:03 AM Rating: Good
It's moves like this that make me feel sorry for underestimating Obama.
#284 Jan 30 2010 at 9:15 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
ThiefX wrote:
You seriously think that was a straight forward answer? Go online and listen to it don't just post a transcript actually listen to him and tell me again how he didn't ramble on and use some political double speak.

I watched all 85 minutes of it last night.

Quote:
"We didn't just kick them off we let them finish their terms" So I guess it's ok that their are lobbyist in his administration cause he didn't want to just let them go.... that would would be mean.

So you're looking for what? He openly admitted that he had lobbyists in positions and was explaining why. The bulk of them are on panels and commissions and rather than kick them off halfway through the job they're doing, they can complete their task before being replaced. I don't think that's the same as "Kicking them off would be mean! Smiley: frown" I guess you can ***** and moan that he didn't expel 100% of them but let's be honest: you don't give a shit about lobbyists, you just want to whine about the president.

Quote:
He talks about the tobacco free doctor who is technically not a lobbyist in one sentence and then in the very next admits that's been just a couple of instances where one of the lobbyist was "technically" not a lobbyist.

Ummm.... what?? Smiley: laugh
He openly states that the doctor is a registered lobbyist and thus should be disallowed. Due to the doctor's (presumably unique) skillset he has received a waiver so that he, a registered lobbyist, can work in the administration. He never once says the guy is "technically not a lobbyist". He says the exact opposite: "a doctor who ran Tobacco-Free Kids technically is a registered lobbyist"

Erm... learn to both watch and read, I guess.

Edited, Jan 30th 2010 9:20am by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#285ThiefX, Posted: Jan 30 2010 at 9:31 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Actually I do give a **** about lobbyist but I admit that the reason for my post that you missed once again was to point out that Obama rambled on and used a bunch of double speak to cover his ***.
#286 Jan 30 2010 at 9:41 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
ThiefX wrote:
I admit that the reason for my post that you missed once again was to point out that Obama rambled on and used a bunch of double speak to cover his ***.

Except you've failed to show that. At all. You misquoted him ("not a lobbyist" vs "a registered lobbyist") and showed some strange tempus fugit perception but that's about it.

But, whatever. I'd fall over in shock if someone in your usual camp actually gave any unqualified praise. I think, sincerely, that it's great that you watched it at all.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#287 Jan 30 2010 at 1:08 PM Rating: Good
*****
10,601 posts
Quote:
Go online and listen to it don't just post a transcript
You do understand what a transcript is right? It's not a paraphrase, it's what he actually said.

Jophiel wrote:
Maybe next time pay attention.
They get confused when he thinks about his answer and doesn't immediately launch into Rhetoric.

Edited, Jan 30th 2010 1:11pm by Xsarus
____________________________
01001001 00100000 01001100 01001001 01001011 01000101 00100000 01000011 01000001 01001011 01000101
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ
#288REDACTED, Posted: Feb 01 2010 at 8:49 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Jophed,
#289 Feb 01 2010 at 9:00 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
I'm sure you are. If I was you, watching the GOP talking points get hammered for an hour and a half would make me sorry as well Smiley: smile
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#290REDACTED, Posted: Feb 01 2010 at 10:13 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Joph,
#291 Feb 01 2010 at 10:18 AM Rating: Good
*****
10,601 posts
publiusvarus wrote:
lmao...more like obama going on and on about hope and dreams all while blaming last year on W.
Actually it was Obama doing a very good job of cutting through the rhetoric and talking points in the questions asked, and showing pretty clearly what in fact was actually going on. Of course I actually watched the session.
____________________________
01001001 00100000 01001100 01001001 01001011 01000101 00100000 01000011 01000001 01001011 01000101
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ
#292 Feb 01 2010 at 10:23 AM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
29,360 posts
This is the sum total of what he had to say about Bush:

Quote:
So I supported the last administration's efforts to create the financial rescue program.


____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#293 Feb 01 2010 at 10:28 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Sir Xsarus wrote:
Actually it was Obama...

Come on now. Varus didn't watch it. He has no idea what was said apart from what he's gleaned from Fox over the weekend.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#294REDACTED, Posted: Feb 01 2010 at 10:50 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Joph,
#295 Feb 01 2010 at 11:02 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
publiusvarus wrote:
Actually you're right, I didn't watch

It was obvious.

However, Fox News had to cut away from the retreat a half hour early so they could begin spinning their damage control so it stands to reason that you'd only catch a half hour in broken increments and then start talking about it as though you had a clue.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#296 Feb 01 2010 at 11:03 AM Rating: Good
*****
10,601 posts
Why don't you point out a lie that he made in the session then? You have the transcript.
____________________________
01001001 00100000 01001100 01001001 01001011 01000101 00100000 01000011 01000001 01001011 01000101
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ
#297REDACTED, Posted: Feb 01 2010 at 1:23 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Obama lies;
#298 Feb 01 2010 at 1:25 PM Rating: Decent
Edited by bsphil
******
21,739 posts
publiusvarus wrote:
List of state of the Union lies provided by stateoftheunionlies.com
I'm sure they're an unbiased source of facts.
____________________________
His Excellency Aethien wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
If no one debated with me, then I wouldn't post here anymore.
Take the hint guys, please take the hint.
gbaji wrote:
I'm not getting my news from anywhere Joph.
#299 Feb 01 2010 at 1:34 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
We weren't discussing the SotU address any more, anyway.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#300REDACTED, Posted: Feb 01 2010 at 1:34 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) bsphil,
#301 Feb 01 2010 at 1:43 PM Rating: Decent
Edited by bsphil
******
21,739 posts
publiusvarus wrote:
You know there are quite a few sites out there that point out Obama's obvious lies.
Can you at least TRY to find a legitimate one?
____________________________
His Excellency Aethien wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
If no one debated with me, then I wouldn't post here anymore.
Take the hint guys, please take the hint.
gbaji wrote:
I'm not getting my news from anywhere Joph.
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 241 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (241)