tjfoose1
Member
Posted 1 month ago
#
...but until the US Government reduces the footprint of entitlements, little if any meaningful headway into balancing our budget.
Dare I compound the issues by bringing in a religious reference to a political discussion?... "Amen, brother"
Statefan1998
Member
Posted 1 month ago
#
Tj, I don't totally agree with you, but I see many of your arguments and respect your views.
tjfoose1
Member
Posted 1 month ago
#
The surplus?
I know first hand that the defense cuts, at least as they were applied, were massive and greatly effected our ability to provide defense. Entire squadrons were deemed 'unfit' because they were cannibalizing parts just to keep a few of the aircraft in the air.
Not to mention the draconian cuts to the intelligence community. Thank you, Bob Torricelli. That man should be in jail for life, for treason and thousands of counts of manslaughter, IMO. Hope your girlfriend was impressed, Bob.
Yeah, the 'peace dividend' as it was called... there's thousands of New Yorkers who might have a different name for it if they were around to give it.
But I'm digressing, sorry.
For perspective, it is also important to remember the economy of those years greatly benefited from the R&D tax cuts from the 80's and the ensuing technological and bio-medical advancements.
Also, a lot of the generated wealth that played a major role in the 90's boom was due to the corruption and fraud perpetrated by Enron, Global Crossing, Adelphia, Tyco, et al... The 'clean up' and prosecution of that fraud (and the associated fallout) was a major negative influence on the economy of the 2000's.
tjfoose1
Member
Posted 1 month ago
#
To all,
Appreciate the intelligent, cordial (for the most part), and tempered discussions that are filling this summer downtime while we await news from down I40. I know from my postings you all can tell I am quite opinionated, but I do enjoy and appreciate reading thoughtful, informed, countering points.
I sometimes read perspectives here that I had not previously considered. In spite of what my postings may imply, I do try to keep an open mind. I learn from you all, thanks.
NCStatePride
Member
Posted 1 month ago
#
For what it's worth, I decided I couldn't criticize the POTUS for not visiting the National Jamboree, claim to be a big believer in the program and not visit it for myself.
...so I went there today to see what was going on. For what it's worth, I could see Obama avoiding the jamboree just for the terrible parking organization. Thank God I had a truck and could kind of 'make a parking space' at the end of the lot. I have never seen so many adolescents in goofy uniforms in one place.
Anyway, I would think this jamboree would be something he would kind of latch onto. A lot of support-our-troops things, representatives from various religions that have niches in scouting (even Buddhism). A lot of talk about developing young men into leaders. It was photo-op heaven!
Pack78
Member
Posted 1 month ago
#
I visited the Jambo back in '97 before my son went as a participant in 2001; Clinton came to speak in '97, flying in on Marine One (no problem finding a parking space for that vehicle!),and though I was not a fan politically of the POTUS, the pomp and circumstance of the visit was impressive. All afternoon prior we would occasionally see young, fit men with radios prowling the woods around the meeting site,great time.
Alpha Wolf
Administrator
Posted 1 month ago
#
Regarding going on The View vs. speaking to the Boy Scouts, I wonder - why could Obama not have done both?
It's not like the Jamboree lasted a mere four-odd hours that it took to tape the TV appearance, and it's not like the TV appearance could not have been scheduled for another time.
That's my criticism of the whole deal, but I think (as usual) the pundits on CNN and Fox were just bitching to hear themselves bitch. Frankly, I get as much value from those two channels as I do from the toilet paper I just flushed. Both stink and both are just as s**ty.
(Sorry for that terrible analogy, but that's about how much I hate cable news. It's a living lobotomy to watch.)
Avid109
Member
Posted 1 month ago
#
The reason for skipping the Boy Scout event was NOT due to Obama's appearance on The View (that was taped in advance); it was due to a couple of party fund-raising events.
travelwolf
Member
Posted 1 month ago
#
Back to the original question...
Answer: Boy Scouts don't vote
why do you think that old people get free health care but children don't? same reason... you have to be over 18 to vote. and old people have figured out how important it is to vote, but people under 30 haven't yet.
sometimes life is simple. simple as that.
Pack78
Member
Posted 1 month ago
#
^True enough-those less than 18 cannot vote; but scout adult leaders and scouting alumni (of which there are millions) can and do vote, probably in greater percentages than the population at large. I think that this is just another constituency that Obama has either written off or does not care about. He appears to be acting on very bad political advice or is so self-assured of his 'personal wonderfulness' (to quote Brit Hume) that he can overcome these choices. Bill Clinton learned from the blow-back of his skipping the "93 Jambo and attended in '97; Obama appears not to have these political chops.
tjfoose1
Member
Posted 1 month ago
#
As referenced earlier, it is simple. The values of the Boy Scouts do not represent the values of a large percentage of Obama's base. If fact, those traditional 'American' values alienate that base.
What are those values? ... Pro American ideals; individualism; self reliance, capitalism; free markets; a government of, for, and by the people which exists to secure and protect the freedom and independence of the individual, NOT an oligarchy that dictates to the people, subjugates liberty, and usurps individual rights in the name of bettering the collective.
There's a word for the latter.
Think about it... does anyone really think Obama would've passed up such an opportunity and photo op - one reinforcing traditional American Ideals (which is exactly the area where Obama is weak, fair or not) - if he thought it would help him?
Juxtapose where Obama has gone and who he has seen (domestic and foreign) vs where he has not and who he has not... tie in his actions. Do your own analysis.
It's not the data point. It's the pattern. It's the trend.
Pack Mentality
Member
Posted 1 month ago
#
I agree that this was bad political advice. Wrightly or wrongly democrats get labeled as the party that is not as strong on "American values". Clinton took great measures to counter this such as duck hunting photo-ops, etc. It seems that since that label is being applied even harder to Obama he should at least attend these type of events for political reasons...it couldn't hurt him at all.
MrPlywood
Member
Posted 1 month ago
#
...an oligarchy that dictates to the people, subjugates liberty, and usurps individual rights in the name of bettering the collective.
Funny, that's the way I felt about Cheney, Rove, Rummy, and the rest of the W bunch...
packplantpath
Member
Posted 1 month ago
#
unny, that's the way I felt about Cheney, Rove, Rummy, and the rest of the W bunch...
Don't worry, you are both right.
tjfoose1
Member
Posted 1 month ago
#
That's been Washington, in general, for quite some time. Just more accelerated and harder left now.
GoldenChain
Member
Posted 1 month ago
#
Question:
Regarding going on The View vs. speaking to the Boy Scouts, I wonder - why could Obama not have done both?
Answer:
ACLU & the GLT crowd.
Don't forget the BSA fought all the way to the Supreme Court to ban 'diverse' Scout leaders....AND WON!!!!(PRAISE JESUS!)
Frankly I wouldn't want to sent my 13 yo off into the mountains with a person who made a big issue out of their homosexuality, but that's just me.
(...in fact I would want to send them out with anyone who made an issue of their sexuality period)
However the ACLU and the GLT crowd are HUGE consituants of the Obama administration.
GoldenChain
Member
Posted 1 month ago
#
Oh, and what tjf said.
Its T&B season ('turd & bugger' season for those in faison) and we all hope to keep our minds sharp for the upcoming football season.
I really do hear some ideas and perspectives that make me think and I hope that I do likewise.
And tjf, I love ya man! Like me, you "shoot tangents" to see what people will grab onto!LOL
KEEP IT UP!
Pride I hear on the grapevine that you have a goodie bag from the Jamboree for me, I'll put those patches on and act like I was there to NOT HEAR the President!
NCStatePride
Member
Posted 1 month ago
#
^I wanted to see if they had any t-shirts that said something like: "I went to the 100th Anniversary of the BSA, 2010, and all I got was this lousey t-shirt... because Obama was busy."
I don't know anyone who isn't aware of why President Obama skipped out on the BSA, but I think there is a question as to who thought this would be a smart sell. The logic of "kids don't vote" seems kind of a apples-to-oranges comparison. This would be more like refusing to help a nun across the street so you could go suck-up to the city counselman on the sidewalk. Yeah, one of these options might be a more obvious benefit to yourself, but overall you look more like an a#%^@#e.
GoldenChain
Member
Posted 1 month ago
#
Pride, I think you are quite correct, its not the votes of the kids as future voters that matters (after all, the only voters important important to the administration are the ones who will vote in 2010 & 2012 after that nothing matters...I hate to say it but Bush took that attitude too).
What matters is that in appeasing one constituancy he managed to PO 50,000,000+ people who think Scouting is an important, wholsome, and valuable institution in this country.
Only a fruitcake would have thought this snub was a great idea.
packplantpath
Member
Posted 1 month ago
#
Only a fruitcake would have thought this snub was a great idea.
Honestly, if it wasn't for this forum, I don't think I would be hearing about it still. Are they talking about it on Rush or Fox news? If so, that's preaching to the choir, nobody listening to that was going to vote for him anyway.
Really, it was a no lose situation for him, even if I think it was wrong. Nobody who would have possibly voted for him is being swayed by this, because they don't know about it. He did it because he could get away with it, and knew he could get away with it. If there were real consequences, he may have reconsidered.
NCStatePride
Member
Posted 1 month ago
#
Really, it was a no lose situation for him, even if I think it was wrong. Nobody who would have possibly voted for him is being swayed by this, because they don't know about it.
You don't see that this is the short-mindedness that the President is exhibiting? Someone can throw their hands up in the air and say "those votes are lost causes!" if they want, but one thing that the past several Presidental elections proved to us is that no vote can be ignored. Lock your base, and reach out as much as possible to gain independents. If you think the Boy Scouts are all these right-wing wackos, you're insane. If you think "middle American" views the Boy Scouts as some political orgnization, you're just plain stupid. This isn't about the Right Winger radio hosts or the left-wing TV crowd; this is about image and how it is portrayed to swing voters. Independents will vote for "the good guy" if they can't be convinced of anything else. By Obama sacrificing photo opts and appearances at events like these, he's not in danger of creating a giant scandal with the public (just as you said... you would have never heard). However, he is cashing in major political capital that he could use during the elections to say "Look, whether you agree with me or not, I deserve your vote because I stand for America and I transcend labels."
Hell, that whole "no more partisan politics" is a big reason why he got elected in the first place. Why any supporter of his would use the argument "it doesn't matter because he's not getting those people's votes" is beyond me.
GoldenChain
Member
Posted 1 month ago
#
I think Plant makes a point by saying the people who already don't like him or have begun leaning that way will look at it as another nail in the coffin. The rest won't care.
(I would have probably called it no win instead of no lose)
Still I say it would have been better politically to show up make a 10 minute speech, then go do whatever at some diversity event to make up for it
packplantpath
Member
Posted 1 month ago
#
Pride, that's not what I'm saying at all. I'm saying, outside of this forum, nobody is talking about it. Nobody cares. He got away with it and knew he would get away with it. It's possible it will come up at a later date, but for now, he is in the clear.
It could end up a missed opportunity, but it was a calculated risk. If, come re-election time, the biggest thing we hear about is that the president didn't go to a boy scout Jamboree, he will win re-election in a landslide. In reality, there will be far more pressing economic problems going on and nobody will care a whit about the BSA.
NCStatePride
Member
Posted 1 month ago
#
I had a post and it got deleted (my connection timed out). What I am saying is that your observation, while accurate, misses the point to be made. Obama, amongst other things, ran generically on this platform of transcending political lines and, while he had his agenda, he wanted to be open, transparent, and "play nice" because he "believed in the ability of everyone to work together". What I am saying is that by Obama skipping out on "events and organizations comprised of people who may not be aligned with him", he is supporting the concept that he previously ran on. What independents liked so much was not just the "he's not Bush" concept, but the "he's not your typical politician" concept. By only catering to individuals that he knows supports him, he is showing zero effort to actually follow through with his previously successful personna. It's not about this one event, but about an image that Obama won with in a landslide election but is refusing to support with his actions.
You must log in to post.