Date: Sun, 15 Mar 2009 00:46:44 -0400 From: MD <[email protected]> MD wrote:
As America was bleeding jobs and home foreclosures, where were all these GOP plans, ideas and suggestions to President Bush before he left office? Mario responds: I have no idea where you get your information from. Please listen to this and perhaps you will learn something: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMnSp4qEXNM&NR=1 MD wrote: America has spent the past eight years with Republican policies and they have done nothing for the country. All those rich people who were supposed to create jobs with the Bush tax cuts didn't. Mario responds: This is false. The real legacy of President Bush was clearly outlined in the following blog post: http://www.israpundit.com/2008/?p=2749 MD wrote: President Obama to his credit is trying to reach across party lines and come up with a plan to help all Americans, Mario responds: This is false. No senior Republicans in the Legislature were consulted in developing the massive spending plans underway. See also excerpts from Newsweek column below. MD wrote: Obama stands alone with his back against a wall of opposition, Mario responds: Poppycock. Obama has overwhelming pluralities in the US Legislature and strong support from the far left wing. MD wrote: Americans are unemployed, therefore they need help with their bills. Mario responds: 92% of Americans are employed and need no help from anyone. MD wrote: Americans seem to be smarter than the average Republican lawmaker, thank goodness. Mario responds: Yes, thank goodness. This precisely why Obama's popularity is dropping in the polls as Americans realize they have been fooled by empty rhetoric and falsehoods. MD wrote: The fact that "President Barack Obama has implemented policies that harm Indians, like restrictions on H1-B visas and on nurses from India and other countries". Mario responds: This is a fact that makes me question why Indians are so happy that Obama was elected. Besides, this does not help most Americans if it increases the cost of the services provided by these Indians. MD wrote: President Obama has inherited a messed up America and can't work miracles, but unlike Bush he does not say 'you are with us or against us'. Mario responds: Unlike Obama, Bush 43 said what he meant and meant what he said. Obama now has a reputation of saying the exact opposite of what he is doing. See, http://www.newsweek.com/id/188261 Excerpts: Barack Obama is a great pretender. He constantly says he's doing things that he isn't, and he relies on his powerful rhetoric to obscure the difference. He has made "responsibility" a personal theme, and the budget's cover line is "A New Era of Responsibility." He claims that the budget begins "making the tough choices necessary to restore fiscal discipline." It doesn't. A prudent president would have made a "tough choice"— concentrated on the economy, deferred his more contentious agenda. Similarly, Obama claims to seek bipartisanship but, in reality, doesn't. His bipartisanship consists of sprinkling his cabinet with token Republicans and inviting some Republican members of Congress to the White House to watch the Super Bowl. It does not consist of fashioning proposals that would attract bipartisan support on their merits. Instead, he clings to dubious, partisan policies (mortgage cramdown, union checkoff) that arouse fierce opposition. It is Obama's conceit—perhaps his cockiness—that he can ignore these blatant inconsistencies. Like many smart people, he believes he can talk his way around any problem. Perhaps he can. In this, he has an ally in much of the mainstream media, which seem so enthralled with him that they can't recognize glaring contradictions. During the campaign, Obama claimed he would change Washington's petty partisanship; he also advocated a highly partisan agenda. Both claims could not be true. The media barely noticed; the same obliviousness persists. But Obama still runs a risk: that his overworked rhetoric loses its power and boomerangs on him. [end of excerpt] Here is another example: http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/krauthammer031309.php3 Excerpt: President Bush had restricted federal funding for embryonic stem cell research to cells derived from embryos that had already been destroyed (as of his speech of Aug. 9, 2001). While I favor moving that moral line to additionally permit the use of spare fertility clinic embryos, President Obama replaced it with no line at all. He pointedly left open the creation of cloned -- and noncloned sperm-and-egg-derived -- human embryos solely for the purpose of dismemberment and use for parts. I am not religious. I do not believe that personhood is conferred upon conception. But I also do not believe that a human embryo is the moral equivalent of a hangnail and deserves no more respect than an appendix. Moreover, given the protean power of embryonic manipulation, the temptation it presents to science and the well-recorded human propensity for evil even in the pursuit of good, lines must be drawn. I suggested the bright line prohibiting the deliberate creation of human embryos solely for the instrumental purpose of research -- a clear violation of the categorical imperative not to make a human life (even if only a potential human life) a means rather than an end. On this, Obama has nothing to say. He leaves it entirely to the scientists. This is more than moral abdication. It is acquiescence to the mystique of "science" and its inherent moral benevolence. How anyone as sophisticated as Obama can believe this within living memory of Mengele and Tuskegee and the fake (and coercive) South Korean stem cell research is hard to fathom. [end of excerpt] MD wrote: Aslo know the fact that the ball that loses it's shine has more spin in it. Mario responds: I know that. Spin is what you and Obama are trying to do with the facts. But it's not working - too easy to hit for sixers as we see above:-))
