Hello wingers:

You know, you're whole right wing thing about NEVER admitting that we did wrong, is wrong.

In fact, it's bizarre. I don't know WHY you do this. You can't really think that we've done no wrong. Do you? Really? If we have, you certainly don't think recognizing it harms us, do you? Do you think denying it does us GOOD??

Of course, admitting that we've done wrong, doesn't mean that we've never done anything right. It doesn't diminish any of those things. However, denying that we've ever done wrong certainly DOES diminish the good we do.

It's blindness... It's an emperor wearing no clothes...

Maybe I've got you guys wrong. Is it that we've done no wrong, or you just don't want to admit it?

excon

Hello ex, seems my last post (https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/current-events/cap-trade-again-368611-8.html#post1868413) touched a nerve.

Have "we" as a nation officially "contributed most significantly to the problem that we face with climate change?" How does Hillary justifyy that statement? Is she using scientific facts or is that more of that "true pretty much (https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/current-events/carbon-aint-really-pollution-375248-3.html#post1858151)" stuff scientists are going by these days? Just curious.

I don't see that we have anything to apologize for here so why are we apologizing? If Obama wants to apologize he can start by apologizing to the Iranian people for not standing with them over their fraudulent election. He can apologize for supporting the wannabe dictator in the Honduras instead of supporting their Constitution and rule of law. He can apologize for snubbing Sarkozy, giving stupid DVD's to the Queen and sticking his nose in the German election. Then he can apologize for being so darned apologetic. How's that?

Have "we" as a nation officially "contributed most significantly to the problem that we face with climate change?"Hello Steve:

First off, you don't believe there IS a problem, so nobody could have contributed to it. But, if there IS a problem with climate change, and it comes from throwing our industrial trash into the air, then yes we have.

But, more to my point. You think we're perfect, and never admitting that we aren't is a GOOD way to go about things??

I wonder if you relate that philosophy to the fact that the party who thinks that way is OUT of power, and getting farther and farther away from ever getting it back?

excon

Nope, I don't think we're perfect, I don't think anyone is perfect. We just have different ideas on what we should apologize for. By the way, Obama's approval ratings and support for his health care plan are rapidly eroding. More Americans now trust Republicans on the economy than Democrats, and the latest polling shows job approval for Congress is at 22 percent (http://www.pollingreport.com/CongJob.htm) with a disapproval rating of 65 percent. I wouldn't write off the GOP just yet.

Does going around the world apologizing for every conceivable slight either real or imagined enhance our national image ? Or does it make our leaders look like a bunch of eunichs ?
Hint ;I don't see ANY other national leader doing mea culpas and self flagulations so why does our commander feel compelled to do it unless he is in fact ashamed of the country he leads ?

Let him apologize for his own actions then perhaps I'll think it justified . But he is going around the world saying all his predecessors were wrong which is a collective insult to them . What a putz ! Does he really think telling the French the US has been arrogant is appropriate or necessary ? The French ? He went to central America and insulted JFK to defend himself against the idiot Ortega's rants . Did he get anything in return for his grovels ? No .

Did he get anything in return for his grovels ? No .Hello tom:

Maybe if we didn't deny that we support Kings who ARE dictators, (as opposed to democratically elected leaders you CALL dictators), we might not have been attacked on 9/11. Maybe if we didn't deny that we overthrew the elected leader in Iran, and imposed the Shah on them, they wouldn't be so pissed at us. I don't know how you don't know that.

In fact, you don't think that ANY of the bad stuff that happens to us, has anything to do with the bad stuff that we do. You don't see a connection. I don't see how you could miss it.

In fact, you THINK denying it is a GOOD foreign policy, and that its worked well for us in the past.

I couldn't disagree more.

excon

Hello wingers:

You know, you're whole right wing thing about NEVER admitting that we did wrong, is wrong.

In fact, it's bizarre. I dunno WHY you do this. You can't really think that we've done no wrong. Do you? Really?? If we have, you certainly don't think recognizing it harms us, do you? Do you think denying it does us GOOD???

Of course, admitting that we've done wrong, doesn't mean that we've never done anything right. It doesn't diminish any of those things. However, denying that we've ever done wrong certainly DOES diminish the good we do.

It's blindness.... It's an emperor wearing no clothes...

Maybe I've got you guys wrong. Is it that we've done no wrong, or you just don't want to admit it?

excon

First of all, speaking as one who IS very nearly perfect (or as Rush puts it "certified right 99.6% of the time"), I take the view that I don't need anybody apologizing for me. On the rare occasions when I am wrong, I don't need anyone apologizing for me, I can do it fine just by myself. And I SURELY don't want my rare mistakes being brought up in the international media where my political and diplomatic enemies can use it against me. And you know they will. They always do.

Second, take a look at WHO the apologies are being made to. The leaders of some of the most corrupt, barbarous, pollution-creating, civil-rights-abusing, woman-raping, murdering nations in the world. Who are they that we should be apologizing to them? In most cases, if not for our aid, they'd all be dead or slaves to other, more barbarous nations. In several cases, the apologies were made to those who have attacked us, or supported those who did. To enemies. Why would we apologize to parties that are guilty of the same and MUCH worse, and continue to desire our destruction? What apologies do we owe them?

Third, Obama isn't just apologizing for our wrongs. In several cases he is deliberately recanting our good accomplishments. Most recently, in Moscow University, he said that the fall of the Soviet Union was not due to the actions of Ronald Reagan, Margaret Thatcher and Pope JPII, but rather due to the great leadership of the former Soviet Union and its pupet states. He completely negated the actions taken by AMERICA and its leaders. He's done that a number of times, that one just happened to be the most recent and most blatant.

So your basic premise is wrong. Obama isn't just apologizing for the bad stuff we may have done. He's actively downplaying the GOOD we have done. Which means that what you said in your OP about Obama apologizing for us "not diminishing the good we have done" is completely wrong. He is doing just that.

Elliot

There were serious issues to discuss on her trip to India .These included both economic and military cooperation in the region.But Evita squandered her time on the insignificant issue of C02 emissions .

Her apology was an embarrassment to her and to the country that did nothing to further relations .In fact it did the opposite . The Indians gave her an earful about the issue.

Have to agree with Elliot 100%
Other countries have even said he is showing a weakness and vulnerability by apologizing which to many countries is interpreted as a disgrace to oneself.

What's funny is Obama will apologize for every perceived evil allegedly perpetrated by Republicans but won't apologize for himself. He doesn't see it as any big deal to impugn the Cambridge police after having admitted to "not having been there and not seeing all the facts."

He's also very good at blaming everyone but himself (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203517304574306323185061360.html) for his legislative woes even though Democrats have the White House, a 70 seat majority in he House and a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate.

What's funny is Obama will apologize for every perceived evil allegedly perpetrated by Republicans but won't apologize for himself. He doesn't see it as any big deal to impugn the Cambridge police after having admitted to "not having been there and not seeing all the facts."

He's also very good at blaming everyone but himself (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203517304574306323185061360.html) for his legislative woes even though Democrats have the White House, a 70 seat majority in he House and a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate.

Of course he blames everyone else for his shortcomings. He's a narcissist and happily blames everyone else as he is perfect.

He should apologize to the American public though for not proving his real birth certificate proving that he is not a natural born citizen and an illegal alien living in this country illegally. That is what he needs to apologize for. Not America, or anything America has done in the past or present. It seems that every time that man opens his mouth he puts someone else's foot in it. If his handlers would just keep him off TV giving inane speeches that make no sense in the real world and stop jaunting around the world and this country to prove his "point" whatever that may be on whatever topic he thinks he has a slight inkling of what it is about, then he would do a lot better in his popularity contest as King of America or Emperor of America (take your choice here).

Of course he blames everyone else for his shortcomings. He's a narcissist and happily blames everyone else as he is perfect.

He should apologize to the American public though for not proving his real birth certificate proving that he is not a natural born citizen and an illegal alien living in this country illegally. That is what he needs to apologize for. Not America, or anything America has done in the past or present. It seems that everytime that man opens his mouth he puts someone else's foot in it. If his handlers would just keep him off TV giving inane speeches that make no sense in the real world and stop jaunting around the world and this country to prove his "point" whatever that may be on whatever topic he thinks he has a slight inkling of what it is about, then he would do a lot better in his popularity contest as King of America or Emperor of America (take your choice here).

Hahaha.

I love your posts!! I'd really like to meet you. You crack me up!!

I have to say ask, can we please put this birth certificate conspiracy to rest? It is NOT an issue (http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html).

I have to say ask, can we please put this birth certificate conspiracy to rest? It is NOT an issue (http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html).

I agree. There are plenty of GOOD reasons to dislike Obama. His policies, being the main ones, though his relationships with radical anti-Americans is pretty far up on the list too.

We do not need to create false conspiracies that make those who are against his policies look like conspiracy nut-jobs.

Stick with the issues. There's quite enough to be against Obama there.

Elliot

I addressed the non-issue of the President's birth cert. during the campaign.

https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/politics/ineligible-candidate-275470.html

We do not need to create false conspiracies that make those who are against his policies look like conspiracy nut-jobs. Hello again, El:

But you did, and you do. Bummer.

excon

Nah... I stick to what he does. That's what ticks you off so much.

Unlike you, I don't have to make up conspiracy theories about assassination plots and government takeovers by right wingers to make a point. I just stick to the facts.

We do not need to create false conspiracies that make those who are against his policies look like conspiracy nut-jobs. Elliot

Nah... I stick to what he does. That's what ticks you off so much. Hello again, El:

Please try to follow along here... You used the word "we". I'm assuming you were talking about others of your right wing persuasion.

I then used the euphemistic "you", in my reply. I spoke about "you" in the same way you spoke about "we". That ain't hard to grasp, is it?

Then you appear to deny that people on YOUR side DO create these false conspiracy's... It's OK. I'm used to your denial of the undeniable.

excon

It was just a week or so ago that I was accused of doing nothing but attacking Obama, "that's all you do" were the words used I believe. The story here is I asked to put an end to this conspiracy theory in defense of Obama, something tom had done months and months ago and to which Elliot concurs. Just let the record show we've all 3 defended Obama on this.

Hello again, El:

Please try to follow along here... You used the word "we". I'm assuming you were talking about others of your right wing persuasion.

I then used the euphemistic "you", in my reply. I spoke about "you" in the same way you spoke about "we". That ain't hard to grasp, is it?

Then you appear to deny that people on YOUR side DO create these false conspiracy's... It's ok. I'm used to your denial of the undeniable.

excon

But you addressed the post to me... you even said "hello again, El". If you meant "you" in the plural sense, you were very unclear about it, especially since you specifically addressed me in the post.

Elliot

It was just a week or so ago that I was accused of doing nothing but attacking Obama, "that's all you do" were the words used I believe. The story here is I asked to put an end to this conspiracy theory in defense of Obama, something tom had done months and months ago and to which Elliot concurs. Just let the record show we've all 3 defended Obama on this.

Ah... but don't you see... since excon doesn't have facts to back up his positions, he needs to continue to find ways to marginalize us. So keeping this ridiculous "birther" argument alive is in his best interests. That's also why he comes up with stuff about us trying to justify an assassination of Obama or a government takeover. He can't win a straight-up argument anymore, so he has to resort to marginalization tactics.

It must suck when the guy he's been supporting has done all the same things that you have been complaining about "the dufus" doing over the past 8 years. It leaves him with no logical leg to stand on in an argument, and results in him having to resort to other, less viable tactics in an argument. Like taking statements out of context in order to build conspiracy theories about right-wing government takeovers and assassination plots.

Elliot

So keeping this ridiculous "birther" argument alive is in his best interests. Hello again, El:

I'M keeping it alive?? Dude! The birthers are YOURS. They come from the Sarah Palin wing of the Republican party. You remember that chick, don't you? You supported her after all..

So, go read twinks stuff. Tell me she's a Democrat... Dude! Talk about marginalizing yourself.

excon

I know Elliot, it pains him to have to say Obama sucks. Unlike some though he will again... eventually.

Barack Obama is a US citizen - fact | World News | News.com.au (http://www.news.com.au/story/0,27574,25846169-401,00.html)

Even Rupert's website is saying it is a joke. I bet it still won't be enough for the likes of wack jobs like Twinkie. Bitter old lady she is!!

For the record. Twink was a PUMA Democrat supporter of Evita during the elections ;not a conservative Republican . I'm sure she will confirm that fact.

Sarah Palin has never brought up the birth cert. issue nor has any responsible conservative .

Hello again, El:

I'M keeping it alive??? Dude!! The birthers are YOURS. They come from the Sarah Palin wing of the Republican party. You remember that chick, don't you? You supported her after all..

So, go read twinks stuff. Tell me she's a Democrat... Dude! Talk about marginalizing yourself.

excon

The "Sarah Palin Wing" of the Republican Party?

Can you define that please?

And is Sarah Palin a birther herself, or are you just trying to link her to a bunch of conspiracy theorists in order to marginalize HER too?

Since she has never made any public comments about Obama not being a born citizen or the lack of a birth certificate, it would seem to me that you are trying to create a link between Palin and the birthers that doesn't exist.

Peekaboo... we see you.

Just as a side note, you should probably check into who some of the more prominent members of the birther movement are. They include:

- Philip J. Berg, a Pennsylvania attorney and 9/11 conspiracy theorist; Berg describes himself as a "moderate to liberal" Democrat who backed Hillary Clinton for president,

- Andy Martin, a perennial candidate and born Democrat who served as an intern to Senator Paul Douglas, but has run for various offices as both Democrat and Republican. He's the guy who started the "Obama is a secret Muslim" whisper campaign.

- Robert L. Schulz, a tax protester and activist who placed full-page advertisements in the Chicago Tribune in December 2008 arguing that Obama had been born in Kenya or had subsequently renounced U.S. citizenship.

Yes, there have been quite a few conservatives who have jumped on the birther bandwagon. But the birthers are hardly exclusive to the Republican party or the conservative movement. And Sarah Palin ain't one of 'em.

Elliot

We do not need to create false conspiracies that make those who are against his policies look like conspiracy nut-jobs.

Just as a side note, you should probably check into who some of the more prominent members of the birther movement are. They include:

- Philip J. Berg, a Pennsylvania attorney and 9/11 conspiracy theorist; Berg describes himself as a "moderate to liberal" Democrat who backed Hillary Clinton for president,

- Andy Martin, a perennial candidate and born Democrat who served as an intern to Senator Paul Douglas, but has run for various offices as both Democrat and Republican. He's the guy who started the "Obama is a secret Muslim" whisper campaign.

- Robert L. Schulz, a tax protester and activist who placed full-page advertisements in the Chicago Tribune in December 2008 arguing that Obama had been born in Kenya or had subsequently renounced U.S. citizenship.Hello again, El:

First they're nut jobs, and now they're prominent?? Dude! Do you hear yourself??

excon

Again, the story here is those conservatives on AMHD who have defended the president on this nonsense. And this should settle it, in a stunning display of unanimity on a most pressing issue, the House unanimously passed a resolution recognizing Hawaii's entry into the union and Obama's birth (http://belowthebeltway.com/2009/07/27/congress-unanimously-passes-resolution-recognizing-obamas-hawaiian-birth/) there.

Hello again, El:

First they're nut jobs, and now they're prominent??? Dude! Do you hear yourself???

excon

There are plenty of prominent nut jobs out there. Prominence, means that they are well known. Nut jobs means they're crazy. What makes you think that they are mutually exclusive?

Susan Sarandon is a VERY prominent nut job. In fact, most of Hollywood is made up of prominent nut jobs. There are plenty of prominent nut jobs in the political arena too. (It may, in fact, be part of the job description.)

The three people I mentioned are prominent, in that they are well-known. They are nut jobs, well, because they're complete whack-jobs.They are also Dems.

Which is my point. The birther movement (which is made up exclusively of nut jobs, some of whom are prominent) has both liberals and conservatives, both Republicans and Democrats as followers. Trying to paint it as a "right wing conspiracy" is just simply wrong because there are quite a few lefties among them as well.

Elliot

Trying to paint it as a "right wing conspiracy" is just simply wrong because there are quite a few lefties among them as well.

Hello again, El:

So, the birthers are bipartisan, huh? My God, Dude! You have fallen off the deep end.

excon

Hello again, El:

So, the birthers are bipartisan, huh? My God, Dude! You have fallen off the deep end.

excon

Ex, is this any more ridiculous than the "Trig truthers," chief among them Obama supporter and celebrated journalist Andrew Sullivan, a conspiracy which Time magazine acknowledged and noted as a rumor which "moved from Daily Kos to the Times of London at Internet speed?"

No it isn't, you guys just want to paint all conservatives as kooks and all kooks as conservatives.

No it isn't, you guys just want to paint all conservatives as kooks and all kooks as conservatives.Hello again, Steve:

Nahhh, we got our share of kooks... But, here's the facts... The Republicans used to be a party very similar to the Democratic party. Both had kooks on the fringes, and regular folks in the middle... But, MOST of those middle ground Republicans left the party. In fact, they were INVITED to leave. So, the party, apparently ON PURPOSE, has reduced itself down to a VERY conservative, very white, very southern MINOR party.

So, your kooks ain't so much on the fringe anymore. That's all I'm saying.

excon

PS> (edited) Oh, yeah. I forgot. You got ONE NY Jew too. I don't know how he slipped in.

Hello again, El:

So, the birthers are bipartisan, huh? My God, Dude! You have fallen off the deep end.

excon

Nope. Falling off the deep end is a function of not being able to accept reality. That describes YOU, not me.

The three people I mentioned above are Dems. They are birthers. They are, in fact, some of the loudest birthers out there.

I am not saying that the birthers don't include Republicans and Conservatives. They do. But they also include lots of Dems and Libs.

You seem to be having trouble dealing with reality lately...

Elliot

Hello again, Steve:

Nahhh, we got our share of kooks.... But, here's the facts... The Republicans used to be a party very similar to the Democratic party. Both had kooks on the fringes, and regular folks in the middle... But, MOST of those middle ground Republicans left the party. In fact, they were INVITED to leave. So, the party, apparently ON PURPOSE, has reduced itself down to a VERY conservative, very white, very southern MINOR party.

So, your kooks ain't so much on the fringe anymore. That's all I'm sayin.

excon

I don't know... in recent polls, 60-67% of Americans identified themselves as Conservatives. Yeah, the Republican party has lost some luster... deservedly so. But the philosophy of Conservatism is growing rather strongly. Which means they ain't the "fringe" you would like to paint them as.

Again, your attempts to marginalize conservatives are failing miserably.

You ought to try a new tactic.

Elliot

Hello again, Steve:

Nahhh, we got our share of kooks.... But, here's the facts... The Republicans used to be a party very similar to the Democratic party. Both had kooks on the fringes, and regular folks in the middle... But, MOST of those middle ground Republicans left the party. In fact, they were INVITED to leave. So, the party, apparently ON PURPOSE, has reduced itself down to a VERY conservative, very white, very southern MINOR party.

So, your kooks ain't so much on the fringe anymore. That's all I'm sayin.

excon

PS> (edited) Oh, yeah. I forgot. You got ONE NY Jew too. I dunno how he slipped in.

I wish you guys would make up your mind, for the past 8 years you couldn't make up your minds if were neocons or extreme right-wing bigots. But then that is the problem with the GOP, they can't seem to keep from letting everyone else define who we are.

I dunno... in recent polls, 60-67% of Americans identified themselves as Conservatives. You ought to try a new tactic.Hello again, El:

New tactic?? Okee doakee then. How about the only recent poll that COUNTED?? 52.9% Democrat - 45.7% Republican...

You are living in a fantasy world.

excon

Hello again, El:

New tactic???? Okee doakee then. How about the only recent poll that COUNTED??? 52.9% Democrat - 45.7% Republican....

You are living in a fantasy world.

excon

Yep. That's the one that counted... in 2008.

What about 2010 and 2012?

The past is the past. Can't change it.

The future, though... that's looking rather bright for conservatives.

The future, though... that's looking rather bright for conservatives.http://www.funnypix.ca/d/5475-2/Palin+2012.jpg

NK,

That's actually pretty funny. I admit it.

Elliot

Could be worse...

I don't think Kucinich has quit anything to plan a run.

I don't think Kucinich has quit anything to plan a run.

And your point is??

I don't think Kucinich has quit anything to plan a run.

I'm not sure what your point is with this statement.

All I said was that the future looks bright for conservatives. At which point you brought out that rather funny mock-Palin bumper sticker. Which was countered by Steve's mock-Kucinich bumper sticker (also pretty funny).

What has any of that got to do with Palin's resignation or the fact that Kucinich didn't quit anything?

Elliot

Palin is touted as gearing up for a prez run, Kucinich isn't. It really isn't that complicated.

Palin is touted as gearing up for a prez run, Kucinich isn't. It really isn't that complicated.

That Palin is "gearing up for a prez run" is as much speculation as it is that Kucinich will run again. Couldn't you just enjoy a chuckle for a change? I mean come on, "because ketchup is a vegetable" as a slogan for a fruit loop like Kucinich is funny.

LOL! You're right. Someone as dense as Palin running for prez is clearly outlandish I think you'll agree. LOL!

LOL! You're right. Someone as dense as Palin running for prez is clearly outlandish I think you'll agree. LOL!

Try to be nice and just offer a laugh and you can't even play along with that. Typical.

Try to be nice and just offer a laugh and you can't even play along with that. Typical.You are such a hypocrite LOL!

I mean come on, "because ketchup is a vegetable" as a slogan for a fruit loop like Kucinich is funny.

You are such a hypocrite LOL!

Are you really that dense, NK? I'd explain it but obviously you're too clueless to understand.

Go ahead explain it.

Palin is touted as gearing up for a prez run, Kucinich isn't. It really isn't that complicated.

Really?

Did she announce?

I hadn't heard that.

Can you cite a source for that?

As far as presidential apologies are concerned:

On the global stage, the President of the USA is SUPPOSED TO BE it's leading cheerleader. That is part of his job! He is supposed to create excitement and support for the country he leads.

Instead, Obama goes abroad and hangs crêpe! (spell that anyway you like)

At home, he is supposed to be the HEAD OF THE USA BETTER BUSINESS BUREAU and CEO of the USA Development Council. He is supposed to promote CONFIDENCE in his country.

Obama is failing on both jobs. If it were not for Biden, he should resign now.