PDA

View Full Version : Obama cannot make up his mind...



eg8r
10-07-2011, 10:51 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Hereís just one example from his stop in Cannon Falls, Minnesota. Obama told the crowd gathered for a townhall:

Patent reform is something that a lot of folks donít talk about, but our entrepreneurs, when they come up with a good idea, if we could reform how that system works and cut some of the red tape, we could have entrepreneurs creating businesses like Google and Microsoft right now, all across the country. But weíve got to make this investment, and Congress could make that decision to make it happen. So there is no shortage of ideas to put people to work right now.

Another idea he touted for months were three trade deals Ö

Trade deals. You know, trade deals havenít always been good for America. There have been times where we havenít gotten a fair deal out of our trade deals. But weíve put together a package that is going to allow us to start selling some Chevys and some Fords to Korea so that -- we donít mind having Hyundais and Kias here, but we want some ďMade in AmericaĒ stuff in other countries. (Applause.) Thatís something that Congress could do right now.
</div></div>OK, so those are two things on his list that Congress could start doing right now to get people back in their jobs. It was a few months ago when he stated this.

Fast forward to what Obama said yesterday...<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">And at a time when so many people are having such a hard time, we have to have an approach, we have to take action, that is big enough to meet the moment. And what Iíve heard from Republicans is, well, weíre agreeing to do these trade bills. Thatís great. Iím in favor of those trade bills and Iím glad theyíre passing, but thatís not going to do enough to deal with the huge problems we have right now with respect to unemployment.

We passed patent legislation. That was bipartisan work. Iím thrilled that we were able to get Republicans and Democrats to work together on that. But that is a long-term issue for our economic competitiveness. Itís not putting Americans to work right now.
</div></div>There you have it. Obama tells the people one thing and then reverses course a few months later.

EDIT: Quotes came from Boortz

eg8r

LWW
10-07-2011, 11:02 AM
It's all good ... Obamatrons can believe both sides of a story, as long as both sides are spoon fed to them by dear leader.

Soflasnapper
10-07-2011, 11:26 AM
This is reaching to find him supposedly disagreeing with his prior positions.

He wanted the patent reform and trade deals because they indeed will have benefits for creating more business and jobs here. So he said that at the time in talking them up, to gain their passage, emphasizing their positive aspects.

However, while these will have salutary effects, those are more in prospect, eventually, than immediate effects. Still obviously desirable to have passed, but not enough.

Now that he continues to want additional steps to be taken, he pivots to remind us what had been glossed over in touting these steps before: that they are inadequate in their very short term effects to do the whole job of moving the UE number any time soon. So he chides the GOP if they are saying they've done enough, by doing those two other areas, and urges additional and more immediately effective steps.

If you find this hard to follow, you are not really trying to think about it very much.

He's taking back a bit of an oversell he did in the first place, to a more accurate statement now, to continue to sell an on-going agenda and stop any effort of the GOP to claim they've done all he said was necessary.

These are rhetorical tactics of advocacy, and not examples of a changing of mind. People may find this a normal salesmanship tactic, or horrible lying, or the sign of an inconstant mind, but it is the former, whatever one thinks of that.

LWW
10-07-2011, 11:28 AM
What did I tell you.

eg8r
10-07-2011, 12:20 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">This is reaching to find him supposedly disagreeing with his prior positions.
</div></div>During the summer he says that if these are passed they will put people back to work. He holds on to the bill for a couple months which surely didn't help anything but then when it is put in place it doesn't exactly put anyone back to work. He tells us, thanks for the bipartisanship effort but that isn't enough.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> So he said that at the time in talking them up, to gain their passage, emphasizing their positive aspects.
</div></div>Quit sugar coating it. He said it would put people to work right away and now he is telling us it is a long term idea and not actually putting people to work right now.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">However, while these will have salutary effects, those are more in prospect, eventually, than immediate effects.</div></div>Instead of defending him why don't you drop the apologist attitude and look at what he said...Pass the patent legislation and it will put people to work right away. Patent legislation is passed and then he tells us that is a long-term positive but it is not putting people to work right now. It is what it is.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Now that he continues to want additional steps to be taken, he pivots to remind us </div></div>Before you go and try to change the subject let me stop you right there. He pivots to remind us that he lied on the "bus tour" and that those bills would do nothing to put people to work.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If you find this hard to follow, you are not really trying to think about it very much.
</div></div>By being an apologist you want to attack my intelligence? Sorry but you are in the wrong position. He lied (if he knew they would not put people to work right away) or he has no clue what he is talking about.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">He's taking back a bit of an oversell he did in the first place,</div></div>That is a horrible interpretation of what is going on. At this point in the game you surely can admit that it would be detrimental to Obama's chances of re-election if he starts saying ooops, I "oversold" the bills and they are not exactly turning out as expected. Heck, no he did not do that. He completely ignored what he said before and instead sort of mocks the Reps. What he is doing now is hoping the people forget what he said on the bus tour and instead trying to get them to think the Reps are only agreeing on simple things that will not make a difference and that they are blocking his "real" job creation bill. The fact is though they aren't. They tried to get a vote on it quickly and Reid blocked it.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">These are rhetorical tactics of advocacy, and not examples of a changing of mind.</div></div>Sugarcoat it all you want but the fact of the matter is that these are examples of LIES. He knew they would not create jobs right away and he knew that if someone did actually remember his lies there would be people like you to try and blow them over.

eg8r

Soflasnapper
10-07-2011, 02:42 PM
You are overly parsimonious with your parsing.

The answers to why it isn't lying is right there in the very quotes you've cited.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><span style='font-size: 14pt'>we have to have an approach, we have to take action, <u>that is big enough to meet the moment.</u></span> And what Iíve heard from Republicans is, well, weíre agreeing to do these trade bills. Thatís great. <span style='font-size: 14pt'>Iím in favor of those trade bills and Iím glad theyíre passing, but <u>thatís not going to do enough to deal with the huge problems</u> we have right now with respect to unemployment. </span></div></div>

So, even IF these things are able to create jobs, and right now, their total effect is still inadequate to the huge number of jobs that need to be created, so further measures are also required.


Quote (me):
If you find this hard to follow, you are not really trying to think about it very much.

You: By being an apologist you want to attack my intelligence? Sorry but you are in the wrong position. He lied (if he knew they would not put people to work right away) or he has no clue what he is talking about.

No, I am APPEALING TO your intelligence, which you have safely put away in this matter.

Think of it this way.

If the JCS come to Congress and say, we need to upgrade our ICBM force to continue to assure our TRIAD deterrent capability, and then some time afterwards, come back and mention enhancements to our SLBMs for the same purpose, does that make their first statement a lie?

Or just that BEYOND the first thing, which they asked for, which DID have the effect they said it would if done, it's also the case that the second thing they mention also is required.

Obama said there were many things Congress could do to help create jobs, soon. You evidently think that if he pushes for more of these after getting some that he said could help provide jobs, it means that the first ask was a lie, untrue, and that those are NOT helping create jobs?

Or just that the first proposal was not adequate to fully address the issue, and that more is needed?

When it comes to 'necessary and sufficient,' some things that are necessary are not sufficient.

For instance, WHEN do the patent reforms and trade agreements come into effect as law?

eg8r
10-07-2011, 09:50 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If the JCS come to Congress and say, we need to upgrade our ICBM force to continue to assure our TRIAD deterrent capability, and then some time afterwards, come back and mention enhancements to our SLBMs for the same purpose, does that make their first statement a lie?
</div></div>That analogy doesn't work. First your start with upgrading ICBM and then you want to upgrade SLBM but you never stated the upgrades to the ICBM upgrades were good but they were not working, which is exactly what Obama did. He said if you pass these bills then people will be going back to work. Then he comes back and says, great job but that isn't working. If he was just guessing back then and hoping the passage of those bills would work then it would be different but you and I both know that he KNEW they wouldn't amount to anything. He needed something to say then and now he needed to say something else knowing most people would not have caught on to what actually happen compared to what he said would happen.

He never even offered an apology or anything for being absolutely, flat out wrong. Even if he would have said in the beginning that these were first steps and long term fixes then it would be completely different. He KNEW then that they were long term fixes but he chose to withhold that info and just stated they would send people back to work. It was a blatant lie.

eg8r

Soflasnapper
10-08-2011, 05:42 PM
Hate to bring up the nuance, as very few handle it well here.

But clearly, in these quotes, Obama did not say they didn't work to make jobs. He said they didn't work to do all that needed to be done in order to create a lot of new jobs, sufficient to get us to a better UE situation.

Put it this way. Assume the two prior actions now create 10,000 new jobs a month. Quite a success they'd be. However much that would be a success story, though, we need more like 250,000 new jobs a month for many months in a row to substantially bring down the UE rate. By your theory, acknowledging that latter truth means that the first steps didn't create ANY jobs. Which wouldn't be the case-- they WOULD have created jobs, in substantial numbers, just not enough to move the chains, so to speak. Like a run play for 8 yards on first down. Still don't have the first down, however much that was indeed a valuable positive play.

Gayle in MD
10-08-2011, 05:59 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Hate to bring up the nuance, as very few handle it well here.

But clearly, in these quotes, Obama did not say they didn't work to make jobs. He said they didn't work to do all that needed to be done in order to create a lot of new jobs, sufficient to get us to a better UE situation.

Put it this way. Assume the two prior actions now create 10,000 new jobs a month. Quite a success they'd be. However much that would be a success story, though, we need more like 250,000 new jobs a month for many months in a row to substantially bring down the UE rate. By your theory, acknowledging that latter truth means that the first steps didn't create ANY jobs. Which wouldn't be the case-- they WOULD have created jobs, in substantial numbers, just not enough to move the chains, so to speak. Like a run play for 8 yards on first down. Still don't have the first down, however much that was indeed a valuable positive play.

</div></div>

Excellent Post.

eg8r
10-08-2011, 11:20 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Hate to bring up the nuance, as very few handle it well here.

But clearly, in these quotes, Obama did not say they didn't work to make jobs. He said they didn't work to do all that needed to be done in order to create a lot of new jobs, sufficient to get us to a better UE situation.
</div></div>No, what you are trying to do is be his apologist. Let him speak for himself...<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Obama in the summer referring to patent reform</div><div class="ubbcode-body">But weíve got to make this investment, and Congress could make that decision to make it happen. So there is no shortage of ideas to put people to work right now...
</div></div><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Obama this week referring to patent reform</div><div class="ubbcode-body">We passed patent legislation. That was bipartisan work. Iím thrilled that we were able to get Republicans and Democrats to work together on that. But that is a long-term issue for our economic competitiveness. Itís not putting Americans to work right now.
</div></div>I refuse to allow you to twist this into something it is not. What he was doing this summer was lying to the ignorant and what you are trying to do is cover up the lie.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Put it this way. Assume </div></div>I see you are going to attempt another anology. The first one did not work, I am not interested in hearing a second. He lied, you are trying to cover it up, plain and simple.

eg8r

Qtec
10-09-2011, 03:17 AM
Its called nitpicking. Another word would be pathetic.
Is this all you got?
Is this your big beef with Obama.

Wow. Call the cops.

Q

Qtec
10-09-2011, 03:29 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Sugarcoat it all you want but the fact of the matter is that these are examples of LIES. </div></div>

Boy! You are bitter.

Here is a lie that cost 6,000 American lives, 20,000 casualties and 100,000s of Iraqi civilian lives.


Condi.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">BLITZER: Based on what you know right now, how close is Saddam
Hussein's government -- how close is that government to
developing a nuclear capability?
RICE: You will get different estimates about precisely how close he is. <span style='font-size: 17pt'>We do know that he is actively pursuing a nuclear weapon. We do know that there have been shipments going into Iran, for
instance -- into Iraq, for instance, of aluminum tubes that really are only suited to -- high-quality aluminum tools <u>that are only really suited for nuclear weapons programs, centrifuge program</u>s</span> </div></div>

A blatant lie.

Q

Gayle in MD
10-09-2011, 11:52 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Sugarcoat it all you want but the fact of the matter is that these are examples of LIES. </div></div>

Boy! You are bitter.

Here is a lie that cost 6,000 American lives, 20,000 casualties and 100,000s of Iraqi civilian lives.


Condi.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">BLITZER: Based on what you know right now, how close is Saddam
Hussein's government -- how close is that government to
developing a nuclear capability?
RICE: You will get different estimates about precisely how close he is. <span style='font-size: 17pt'>We do know that he is actively pursuing a nuclear weapon. We do know that there have been shipments going into Iran, for
instance -- into Iraq, for instance, of aluminum tubes that really are only suited to -- high-quality aluminum tools <u>that are only really suited for nuclear weapons programs, centrifuge program</u>s</span> </div></div>

A blatant lie.

Q </div></div>

And just one of many of the Bush administration lies, they repeated over and over again, but with no outrage from Ed, or any of the other righties on here....

As Sofla once clued me in:

IIARIOK!

These righties on here are nothing but nasty, smelly little sheep, lol...you can reduce everything they write down to a simple....

Bah, Bah, Bah.....
Been that way since the country got scammed into the REagan Administration, and it's been economically all down hill, except for the top one or two percent, since then, except for the Clinton years, and the Obama Years, diverting the Bush Depression....and creating more jobs under this recesion, than Bush did in eight years....

Kills 'em....

Facts are their enemies.
Lies, their only recourse.


/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/crazy.gif

Soflasnapper
10-09-2011, 12:02 PM
I see you are going to attempt another anology. The first one did not work, I am not interested in hearing a second. He lied, you are trying to cover it up, plain and simple.

I understand that is your view. Please understand that your view is based on twisting the words he actually said to words he didn't say, which are instead only your interpretation.

The words you quoted do not support your take on this. Clearly, some actions may be helpful, desirable, useful, and yet not be SUFFICIENT to do ALL the large job that needs to be done, and that is the statement he's made.

eg8r
10-09-2011, 02:52 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I understand that is your view.</div></div>And I understand that directly after you say this you are going to twist the actual words the President said. I didn't twist anything and posted his words exactly as he said them. You can bow down to him but I refuse to. I will just listen to what he said and hold him to that not what you "think" he means.

eg8r

eg8r
10-09-2011, 02:53 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Boy! You are bitter.
</div></div>So you are saying I am successfully mimicking you?

eg8r

Qtec
10-11-2011, 04:25 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">During the summer he says that if these are passed they will put people back to work. </div></div>

No he doesn't.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">if we could reform how that system works and cut some of the red tape, <u>we could have</u> entrepreneurs creating businesses like Google and Microsoft right now, all across the country. </div></div>

All he is saying that the system is too slow and if it was speeded up, more people could get their inventions to market quicker.

What's the big deal?

GW took America to war, on false pretences, at a cost of 7,000 dead and 20,000 soldiers missing arms and legs and then he said, "I THOUGHT he had WMDs.


Lets keep things into perspective.


Q


Q

eg8r
10-11-2011, 08:17 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">No he doesn't.
</div></div>Now why would you go and prove your comprehension levels are that of a preschooler? Let me see if I can help you out...Here is the sentence that you chose to ignore which explains why you are lost and cannot follow the discussion with the adults.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">But weíve got to make this investment, and Congress could make that decision to make it happen. So there is no shortage of ideas to put people to work right now.
</div></div>

eg8r