|
Random Politics & Religion #19
Bahamut.Ravael
Server: Bahamut
Game: FFXI
Posts: 13640
By Bahamut.Ravael 2017-02-17 00:00:24
So much for raising the bar.
Show us how it is done, Master.
Cerberus.Pleebo
Server: Cerberus
Game: FFXI
Posts: 9720
By Cerberus.Pleebo 2017-02-17 00:31:45
Yeah... Trump isn't playing some esoteric game of n-th dimensional chess. I can't imagine any world leaders watching today's presser being intimidated by his bumbling incoherence today. It was painful and disturbing to watch to most anyone with a vested interest in anything other than watching their side "win".
He knew he was going to get questions concerning Flynn and Russia so it's beyond me how that wasn't part of his prepared statements where he could at least get the ahead of the situation. No one attacked him. No one asked any unfair or even unexpected questions. Nobody at that conference made Trump look more foolish than himself.
And if anyone wants to spout some ignorant comments, I challenge them to demonstrate their superior capability and win public office of at least a state level. If they refuse then their just hypocrites. lol ok we'll get on that.
Asura.Vyre
Forum Moderator
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 15710
By Asura.Vyre 2017-02-17 01:47:36
Bismarck.Josiahfk said: »This is still a democracy. Despite what we feel about his behavior trump still deserves more respect than you provide him Jackie
Don't forget he is still a human being. Not because he "deserves" it (being human alone doesn't warrant respect; respect is earned blah blah), but rather, because the position demands it. Because painting your country's president as an imbecile makes the whole country look like one. I always found this weird since Bush days.
That, of course, doesn't mean they can't criticize him. Ah, it's what happens when the majority of the media is owned by one side of the aisle. Fair/objective coverage of events vanished long ago, and it's been news with a leftist slant for as long as my memory goes. I mean, there is Fox for a right wing slant, but uhh, much like my fellow Republicans, they don't really do it with much tact. Sometimes it's downright embarrassing. Other times, it's the only place you hear certain stories.
But then on top of that, there's this internet age that we live in. A lot of young people, my age and younger, perhaps even people a few years older than myself, have all become addicted to the internet and their online social groups. Most people don't actually give a rats *** about politics, but if one of their favorite internet personalities does, then you can bet your *** that they'll start thinking/commenting about it, generally towards the same direction, just to be more included in said group. And I'm not even talking Youtube personalities. Plenty of people shift due to webcomics, artists, blogs, and forums like this one(though maybe not in its current era). For a long time, particularly in the Bush era, this pushed many people more and more to the left. I mean, I don't have a statistic to back this up, but I sure as heck don't remember very many pro-bush/right wing web personas from then.
It got to a point though, where it wasn't about Bush or Republicans, but more about social issues. People like to do what makes them feel good, and more liberal ideals and norms are generally in line with what is right on a personal level(gay rights, equality, etc). Of course, these things don't mesh with the antiquated beliefs of Christianity, which is a main staple of many Republicans/Conservative minded folks. By refusing to accept progress(societal flux) for so long, Republicans and conservatives alienated quite a lot of young people, simply because more and more people do not keep with religion, because so often, religion(moreso religious zealots) does not advocate for what is right or rather, what is true.
Of course, once you start identifying a political ideology with, "This is what's right; this is what's true." The other side can only seem to be full of imbeciles or charlatans. This line of thinking, never conscious of itself, is in my opinion, what lead to identity politics. Identity politics isn't something I really like to talk about or think about, mainly because it is as dogmatic and problematic as the antiquated system it unwittingly replaced in the hearts and minds of people.
I mean, imagine for a moment the average IQ of the individual. Most people aren't really all the dumb, but most people aren't really all that bright either. In the words of George Carlin, "then half of them are dumber than that!" Religion is in the process of being replaced in our culture, and those mindless enough to become religious sycophants are the same sort of people becoming mindlessly enthralled by identity politics.
So anything outside of their identity and the party that protects it, is intolerable. Of course, it's not only this. It's the fact that Trump is not a gifted public speaker. He's the kind of guy that lets money do the talking for him. He sounds like an idiot every time he speaks publicly, whether or not he's right or whether or not he's stalling/trolling. This leads us to the intelligent side of those with liberal ideals.
There are plenty of intelligent people in this world, if average is kinda dumb and half of'em are dumber than that, the other half are kinda smart and smarter than that. They don't respect/listen to people who time and again prove that they cannot or will not at least seem coherent. These people need a leader who speaks well, who does not hold antiquated beliefs, and is somewhat humble. If there's someone for them to look better by comparison to, then it enhances their liking of said person. Until the politician demonstrates intelligence to them, then they will not respect him/her. Until he does this more than the times he has proven to be unintelligent, they hold their first notion about the character.
ANYWHO, phew, that was long winded. Back on point. All of these things that I've listed/described sweep together in such a way that for many younger people, 18~32(off the top of my head), they've never had a Republican president that has displayed a great deal of intelligence or tact. They've also never been told to respect one or had any reason to respect one. They've only been given reason after reason to think of them as dumb or unworthy or draconic. Time and time again, for about two decades, liberal presidents showcase more tact, better speeches, and are glorified in large by all forms of media. When you view it from this perspective, it's not hard to understand why Trump isn't getting any respect. Even if he had tact, spoke intelligibly, and presented admirable qualities, he would still be vilified. It's just, it's even easier because of the way that he is, but one thing I do find respectable about him, is that he keeps on trucking. He knows what he's facing, and he's determined.
I mean, honestly he makes my head hurt most of the time, but push comes to shove, he's the leader of the United States. I'd serve under him just as willingly as I served under Obama. A lot of people can't see it that way though, if not for the reasons I think, then for something similar. I don't think I'm too far off the mark, though I got kinda word soupy and ramble-y.
Valefor.Sehachan
Server: Valefor
Game: FFXI
Posts: 24219
By Valefor.Sehachan 2017-02-17 04:29:23
He knows what he's facing, and he's determined. He is also very insecure. There's only so many times you can talk about your big win numbers and your crowd(lying about it no less) until it becomes pathetic.
So far he mentioned his crowd to all world leaders he met/called. What kind of message do you think that sends to other countries? Certainly not fear like Saevel implies.
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 34187
By Asura.Kingnobody 2017-02-17 06:18:04
I know you gotta do the partisan thing where you claim Obama was some big joke, but the idea that we weren't more respected globally with him at the helm vs. Cheeto Commander is demonstrably false. A) Trump hasn't been in command for a month yet. It is too early to tell what level of respect our allies may or may not have, other than what the media portrays him to be. Unless you are saying that the level of snark with Trump is the same for Obama in regards to media coverage.
B) When it comes to foreign affairs and perception, Obama has done worse than his predecessor. Bush's mistakes involve mainly the Middle East. Obama has extended that to Europe, Asia, and some parts of Central America.
Will Trump make it even worse? Possibly. But so far his blunders are directed at 2 countries (Mexico and Australia). Obama has failed the US in more countries than that.
[+]
By fonewear 2017-02-17 06:28:15
As an aside - and speaking via the real admin account so there's no confusion - I'm pretty disappointed with the level of discourse P+R has been reduced to.
Not that it's ever been Masterpiece Theatre or anything, but there used to at least be an attempt to engage on issues. Now it's just name-calling and rooting for laundry, and it's dumb.
Raise the bar or this goes away. Shitty posts belong on reddit, not here.
Define shitty ?
Lakshmi.Zerowone
Server: Lakshmi
Game: FFXI
Posts: 6949
By Lakshmi.Zerowone 2017-02-17 06:28:55
Not like the British Parliament spent a day or two debating (if you can call it that) whether he was an asshat or a *** asshat that doesn't deserve respect or their time.
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 34187
By Asura.Kingnobody 2017-02-17 06:30:28
There is a difference between acknowledging his position Problem is, half the country hasn't even done that.
Respect went out the window as soon as Clinton conceded. Now it's all about the Resistance.
Resistance against the bogymen the people in the Resistance portrays. In some cases, they are the ones causing the mayhem and discord they are supposed to cherish, and in the Resistance to maintain! Berkeley is a prime example of that!
[+]
By fonewear 2017-02-17 06:33:44
You want to know why this section seems silly it's a freaking video game forum. This isn't a college course. What do you expect amateurs to sound like on the internet ?
[+]
Valefor.Sehachan
Server: Valefor
Game: FFXI
Posts: 24219
By Valefor.Sehachan 2017-02-17 06:40:49
Probably like they're his little ***. The UK right now can hardly dictate anything with anyone in terms of trade.
Lakshmi.Zerowone
Server: Lakshmi
Game: FFXI
Posts: 6949
By Lakshmi.Zerowone 2017-02-17 07:15:56
Not like the British Parliament spent a day or two debating (if you can call it that) whether he was an asshat or a *** asshat that doesn't deserve respect or their time. did they ever reach any kind of conclusion on how they want to treat him?
They cancelled his visit.
Ragnarok.Zeig
Server: Ragnarok
Game: FFXI
Posts: 1619
By Ragnarok.Zeig 2017-02-17 07:26:20
Bismarck.Josiahfk said: »This is still a democracy. Despite what we feel about his behavior trump still deserves more respect than you provide him Jackie
Don't forget he is still a human being. Not because he "deserves" it (being human alone doesn't warrant respect; respect is earned blah blah), but rather, because the position demands it. Because painting your country's president as an imbecile makes the whole country look like one. I always found this weird since Bush days.
That, of course, doesn't mean they can't criticize him.
He's not their President, they are world citizens and will not recognize any authority that isn't already approved by the obviously better European Progressive collective. I wanted an answer (did I?) that gives a better insight into this, rather than this bipartisan rant.
Bismarck.Josiahfk said: »This is still a democracy. Despite what we feel about his behavior trump still deserves more respect than you provide him Jackie
Don't forget he is still a human being. Not because he "deserves" it (being human alone doesn't warrant respect; respect is earned blah blah), but rather, because the position demands it. Because painting your country's president as an imbecile makes the whole country look like one. I always found this weird since Bush days.
That, of course, doesn't mean they can't criticize him. Ah, it's what happens when the majority of the media is owned by one side of the aisle. Fair/objective coverage of events vanished long ago, and it's been news with a leftist slant for as long as my memory goes. I mean, there is Fox for a right wing slant, but uhh, much like my fellow Republicans, they don't really do it with much tact. Sometimes it's downright embarrassing. Other times, it's the only place you hear certain stories.
But then on top of that, there's this internet age that we live in. A lot of young people, my age and younger, perhaps even people a few years older than myself, have all become addicted to the internet and their online social groups. Most people don't actually give a rats *** about politics, but if one of their favorite internet personalities does, then you can bet your *** that they'll start thinking/commenting about it, generally towards the same direction, just to be more included in said group. And I'm not even talking Youtube personalities. Plenty of people shift due to webcomics, artists, blogs, and forums like this one(though maybe not in its current era). For a long time, particularly in the Bush era, this pushed many people more and more to the left. I mean, I don't have a statistic to back this up, but I sure as heck don't remember very many pro-bush/right wing web personas from then.
It got to a point though, where it wasn't about Bush or Republicans, but more about social issues. People like to do what makes them feel good, and more liberal ideals and norms are generally in line with what is right on a personal level(gay rights, equality, etc). Of course, these things don't mesh with the antiquated beliefs of Christianity, which is a main staple of many Republicans/Conservative minded folks. By refusing to accept progress(societal flux) for so long, Republicans and conservatives alienated quite a lot of young people, simply because more and more people do not keep with religion, because so often, religion(moreso religious zealots) does not advocate for what is right or rather, what is true.
Of course, once you start identifying a political ideology with, "This is what's right; this is what's true." The other side can only seem to be full of imbeciles or charlatans. This line of thinking, never conscious of itself, is in my opinion, what lead to identity politics. Identity politics isn't something I really like to talk about or think about, mainly because it is as dogmatic and problematic as the antiquated system it unwittingly replaced in the hearts and minds of people.
I mean, imagine for a moment the average IQ of the individual. Most people aren't really all the dumb, but most people aren't really all that bright either. In the words of George Carlin, "then half of them are dumber than that!" Religion is in the process of being replaced in our culture, and those mindless enough to become religious sycophants are the same sort of people becoming mindlessly enthralled by identity politics.
So anything outside of their identity and the party that protects it, is intolerable. Of course, it's not only this. It's the fact that Trump is not a gifted public speaker. He's the kind of guy that lets money do the talking for him. He sounds like an idiot every time he speaks publicly, whether or not he's right or whether or not he's stalling/trolling. This leads us to the intelligent side of those with liberal ideals.
There are plenty of intelligent people in this world, if average is kinda dumb and half of'em are dumber than that, the other half are kinda smart and smarter than that. They don't respect/listen to people who time and again prove that they cannot or will not at least seem coherent. These people need a leader who speaks well, who does not hold antiquated beliefs, and is somewhat humble. If there's someone for them to look better by comparison to, then it enhances their liking of said person. Until the politician demonstrates intelligence to them, then they will not respect him/her. Until he does this more than the times he has proven to be unintelligent, they hold their first notion about the character.
ANYWHO, phew, that was long winded. Back on point. All of these things that I've listed/described sweep together in such a way that for many younger people, 18~32(off the top of my head), they've never had a Republican president that has displayed a great deal of intelligence or tact. They've also never been told to respect one or had any reason to respect one. They've only been given reason after reason to think of them as dumb or unworthy or draconic. Time and time again, for about two decades, liberal presidents showcase more tact, better speeches, and are glorified in large by all forms of media. When you view it from this perspective, it's not hard to understand why Trump isn't getting any respect. Even if he had tact, spoke intelligibly, and presented admirable qualities, he would still be vilified. It's just, it's even easier because of the way that he is, but one thing I do find respectable about him, is that he keeps on trucking. He knows what he's facing, and he's determined.
I mean, honestly he makes my head hurt most of the time, but push comes to shove, he's the leader of the United States. I'd serve under him just as willingly as I served under Obama. A lot of people can't see it that way though, if not for the reasons I think, then for something similar. I don't think I'm too far off the mark, though I got kinda word soupy and ramble-y. Yeah, the groupie culture. Liberal ideas are also more appealing (by nature) to the younger demographics, and they're usually louder and more passionate about their causes.
Remember, I wasn't asking about why X group didn't like/respect Y president/party, but whether they should rethink how they act about it. In your last paragraph, you showed that you're pretty sensible about going about this.
He is also very insecure. There's only so many times you can talk about your big win numbers and your crowd(lying about it no less) until it becomes pathetic. Could it be that he is just appealing to the American people, by, you know, posing as a "winner"? Kinda like the WWE shitshows lol (he's basically a badass like Steve Austin, and that kind of stuff makes some crowds go wild).
[+]
Ragnarok.Zeig
Server: Ragnarok
Game: FFXI
Posts: 1619
By Ragnarok.Zeig 2017-02-17 07:38:33
Bismarck.Josiahfk said: »This is still a democracy. Despite what we feel about his behavior trump still deserves more respect than you provide him Jackie
Don't forget he is still a human being. Not because he "deserves" it (being human alone doesn't warrant respect; respect is earned blah blah), but rather, because the position demands it. Because painting your country's president as an imbecile makes the whole country look like one. I always found this weird since Bush days.
That, of course, doesn't mean they can't criticize him. This is semantics because we are defining respect differently and I'm referring to respecting his basic human rights; He deserves basic human decency like anyone else, something seemingly forgotten far too often.
But he has to earn respect as a world leader. There is a difference between acknowledging his position and respecting his decisions. Look man, if you meant by "respect = basic human decency" that some South Park-level of funny (like that episode I remember from 2008 elections; where an object was lost in Hillary's vagina) then yeah, I find that silly and terrible, and I agree with your point.
Then there's the "respect" that's earned. If I don't know the person, I treat them with a default level of respect/tact. It's up to them by that point to increase it or to totally lose it. In Trump's case I guess it's obvious what he did to his reputation.
By fonewear 2017-02-17 07:58:19
I don't know how the left can keep the outrage up for 4 years. If I was on their side I would have been bored 2 weeks ago.
By fonewear 2017-02-17 07:58:39
I guess if you have no life you can spend 4 years complaining but I got other ***I got to do !
Valefor.Sehachan
Server: Valefor
Game: FFXI
Posts: 24219
By Valefor.Sehachan 2017-02-17 08:14:16
It's a big mistake to stop caring about what your government is doing. The biggest enemy to democracy is apathy.
Lakshmi.Flavin
Server: Lakshmi
Game: FFXI
Posts: 18466
By Lakshmi.Flavin 2017-02-17 08:19:14
There is a difference between acknowledging his position Problem is, half the country hasn't even done that.
Respect went out the window as soon as Clinton conceded. Now it's all about the Resistance.
Resistance against the bogymen the people in the Resistance portrays. In some cases, they are the ones causing the mayhem and discord they are supposed to cherish, and in the Resistance to maintain! Berkeley is a prime example of that! How is this any different than with obama? It's like people forget recent history and then act all shocked when it happens again... no one remembers people calling for obama to be impeached because he was accused of not even being a real citizen or the tea party movement and all their crazy?
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 34187
By Asura.Kingnobody 2017-02-17 08:30:13
There is a difference between acknowledging his position Problem is, half the country hasn't even done that.
Respect went out the window as soon as Clinton conceded. Now it's all about the Resistance.
Resistance against the bogymen the people in the Resistance portrays. In some cases, they are the ones causing the mayhem and discord they are supposed to cherish, and in the Resistance to maintain! Berkeley is a prime example of that! How is this any different than with obama? It's like people forget recent history and then act all shocked when it happens again... no one remembers people calling for obama to be impeached because he was accused of not even being a real citizen or the tea party movement and all their crazy? How is it different? There wasn't mass protests hours after Obama was elected. There wasn't riots/vandalism happening from the time Obama was elected throughout his entire presidency due to the fact that he was elected. Sure, there were riots/vandalism, but it was done by the left, not the right, and due to them wanting free stuff and cause property destruction complaining that their lives aren't perfect.
But you want to compare "The Resistance" to the Tea Party? Fine, compare them.
But remember, one was peaceful while the other has turned violent on many occasions.
[+]
Server: Shiva
Game: FFXI
Posts: 20130
By Shiva.Nikolce 2017-02-17 08:33:33
I don't know how the left can keep the outrage up for 4 years.
we've kept it up a lot longer than that!.... /wink /finger gun
phrasing boom!
birther movement, the tea party...benghazi!....
and it's not just us...
don't tell me you've forgotten cindy sheehan already! omg... every time bush held a presser you would have thought the world was about to end. WHY WON'T YOU TALK TO THE MOTHER OF A FALLEN SOLDER!!!! and he was all like but I've talked to her fourteen times already
and true we are all old and have jobs so we can't get out there and protest in the streets like we used to... but we'll get our chance to *** again four years, eight years what's the difference?
[+]
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 34187
By Asura.Kingnobody 2017-02-17 08:33:52
When President Obama’s National Security Advisor Lied, The Media Laughed
Quote: Buried deep beneath the Michael Flynn hysteria this week was Judicial Watch’s release of newly obtained State Department documents related to the Benghazi terrorist attack on September 11, 2012. One email confirms—again—that the Obama administration knew the day after the attack it was not a random act of violence stemming from an anti-Muslim video. That was the excuse shamefully propagated by top Obama administration officials (including the president himself) and swallowed whole by a media establishment desperate to help Obama win re-election six weeks later.
According to the summary of a call on September 12, 2012 between State Department Under-Secretary Patrick Kennedy and several congressional staffers, Kennedy was asked if the attack came under cover of protest: “No this was a direct breaching attack,” he answered. Kennedy also denied the attack was coordinated with the protests in Cairo over the video: “Attack in Cairo was a demonstration. There were no weapons shown or used. A few cans of spray paint.”
It’s somewhat ironic—galling?—that this email was disclosed the same day the anti-Trump universe was spinning into the stratosphere over Flynn’s resignation as President Trump’s national security advisor. It begs for a little trip down memory lane, to a kinder, gentler time when the media gave a great big pass to another national security advisor in the days after four Americans, including an ambassador, were murdered in Libya by Islamic terrorists under her watch.
Lying to Us Only Matters If We Dislike You
Fun fact: While Trump press secretary Sean Spicer fielded 55 questions on February 14 related to the Flynn debacle, Obama’s press secretary Jay Carney received only 13 questions from reporters on September 12, 2012, three of which were set-ups to blast Mitt Romney’s criticism of the administration after the attack. 55 to 13.
So as we now suffer through yet another patch of media mania, conspiracy theories, and unsubstantiated claims about how Trump hearts Russia, as well as the daily beatings endured by Spicer, let’s reminisce to when the media and Obama’s press flaks spun, deflected—even joked about golf and “Saturday Night Live!”—less than a week after Benghazi.
The day after Hillary Clinton’s deputy had that call with key Capitol Hill staffers, including advisors to senators Durbin, Feinstein, and McGaskill, to dispute the notion the attack was about an anti-Muslim video, here’s what Carney said: “I think it’s important to note with regards to that protest that there are protests taking place in different countries across the world that are responding to the movie that has circulated on the Internet. As Secretary Clinton said today, the United States government had nothing to do with this movie. We reject its message and its contents. We find it disgusting and reprehensible.”
On September 14, hours before the remains of the Benghazi victims would arrive at Andrews Air Force Base, Carney was still blaming the video. Just steps from the Oval Office, Carney opened his briefing with this: “First of all, we are obviously closely monitoring developments in the region today. You saw that following the incidents in response to this video, the president directed the administration to take a number of steps to prepare for continued unrest.”
Carney went on to mention the video/film/movie another 30 times during his briefing. He stuck with his story even after some reporters pushed back, citing other sources who said it was indeed a pre-mediated attack. One reporter said several senators admitted the “attack on Benghazi was a terrorist attack organized and carried out by terrorists, that it was premeditated, a calculated act of terror,” and asked Carney, “is there anything more you can — now that the administration is briefing senators on this, is there anything more you can tell us?”
Carney: “Again, it’s actively under investigation, both the Benghazi attack and incidents elsewhere. And my point was that we don’t have and did not have concrete evidence to suggest that this was not in reaction to the film. But we’re obviously investigating the matter…” Who cares, Sean Spicer called Justin Trudeau Joe, OMG!
Susan Rice’s Audacity of Trope
But of course nothing matches the audacity of trope by Obama’s National Security Advisor Susan Rice on September 16, 2012. Rice went on several Sunday shows to peddle a story she knew was completely phony, one that was already quickly unraveling even as most in the media and administration tried to keep it intact.
You can read most of her comments here, but Rice repeats the line that Benghazi attack was not premediated and was connected to the demonstrations in Cairo over the video (a document obtained by Judicial Watch last year shows Hillary Clinton met with Rice a few days before her television appearances). Which presidential administration is fact-challenged, again?
In a press gaggle on Air Force One the next day, guess how many times Deputy Press Secretary Josh Earnest was asked about Rice’s comments? Ten? Five? One? Not once. Let me repeat that. The day after Obama’s national security advisor was on five news programs to blame a terrorist attack on a YouTube video, not one reporter asked the White House about it. I actually had to re-read the transcripts several times, even checking the date over and over, to make sure this was accurate. Her name did not even come up.
No discussion about the investigation. No discussion about emerging evidence from around the world that Benghazi was indeed a terrorist attack. (The only time it was mentioned was when Jen Psaki criticized Mitt Romney’s comments about how the administration handled Benghazi and questioned whether he was ready for “primetime.”)
Here’s what they did discuss: Debate prep, Occupy Wall Street, and the Chicago’s teachers strike. An actual human reporter asked this: “It was a beautiful weekend for golf and he wasn’t out on the course. Is it safe to assume maybe he was doing some preparation at the White House?” WHAT? Then they joked about football and “Saturday Night Live.”
Sometimes the hypocrisy, double standard, and outright lies by the media under the Trump presidency is funny. Sometimes it is infuriating. But never was the media’s complicit sheep-like coverage more evident than it the days after Benghazi, behavior you can never imagine now. They have yet to admit their mistakes and failures, even as more evidence is revealed.
Remember that the next time you want to worry about how Trump is responsible for undermining the media’s integrity and credibility.
[+]
Lakshmi.Zerowone
Server: Lakshmi
Game: FFXI
Posts: 6949
By Lakshmi.Zerowone 2017-02-17 08:40:57
I guess if you have no life you can spend 4 years complaining but I got other ***I got to do !
Some people here been doing it for 8, could ask them for some pointers.
By Viciouss 2017-02-17 08:56:01
I always enjoy seeing the selective memory of Bush's disastrous foreign policy. The guy can't even leave the US without risking being arrested for war crimes. He has taken what 1..maybe 2 trips? His unpopularity and failures ran worldwide, Europe especially dislikes him. But yeah, lets limit it to "mainly the Middle East" and make up dreams of Obama being worse. And that's all they are, dreams.
Server: Shiva
Game: FFXI
Posts: 20130
By Shiva.Nikolce 2017-02-17 08:58:23
His unpopularity and failures ran worldwide
They love bush in africa. Which surprised even him.
[+]
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 34187
By Asura.Kingnobody 2017-02-17 08:59:38
I always enjoy seeing the selective memory of Bush's disastrous foreign policy. The guy can't even leave the US without risking being arrested for war crimes. He has taken what 1..maybe 2 trips? His unpopularity and failures ran worldwide, Europe especially dislikes him. But yeah, lets limit it to "mainly the Middle East" and make up dreams of Obama being worse. And that's all they are, dreams. Hmmm, sounds like you can back up what you are saying.
Why won't you though?
[+]
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 34187
By Asura.Kingnobody 2017-02-17 09:11:18
[+]
By Viciouss 2017-02-17 09:11:59
Hmmm, sounds like you can back up what you are saying.
Why won't you though?
I consider my audience. You didn't back up anything you said, of course the difference is, it didn't sound like you could. Thats what happens when you just make things up and say things like "mainly the middle east."
Forget about pissing off our European allies and wasting their resources in Iraq, causing them to hesitate to get involved anywhere else, bringing Japan into the fold for the first time since WWII based on a lie and irritating the hell out of them. Probably won't see them anywhere else for a while. But yeah, just focus on the Middle East for Bush. Don't worry about how well regarded Obama was in Europe and Asia. And how well regarded he will continue to be now that he is out of office.
|
|