Ask Experts Questions for FREE Help !
Ask
    excon's Avatar
    excon Posts: 21,482, Reputation: 2992
    Uber Member
     
    #1

    Aug 26, 2012, 07:28 AM
    2016: Obama's America
    Hello:

    Is anybody going to see this movie? It looks like the same old stuff... I saw the trailer... Obama, the neo-colonialist, wants to DESTROY America, while Romney, the great American Hope, wants to SAVE it...

    Gagggg..

    excon
    Wondergirl's Avatar
    Wondergirl Posts: 38,868, Reputation: 5431
    Jobs & Parenting Expert
     
    #2

    Aug 26, 2012, 07:56 AM
    Dear lord! One comment: "if he is elected, the first thing that they will do is try to take our guns." Where has that guy been for the past four years?

    I'm with Andy Price: "I don't get how the images shown in this trailer have anything to do with Obama. Painfully stupid, and so are you if you fall for this nonsense."
    cdad's Avatar
    cdad Posts: 12,701, Reputation: 1438
    Internet Research Expert
     
    #3

    Aug 26, 2012, 11:12 AM
    Maybe we should reserve comment until we have seen it. I haven't watched it yet but Im sure I will at some point.
    paraclete's Avatar
    paraclete Posts: 2,706, Reputation: 173
    Ultra Member
     
    #4

    Aug 26, 2012, 04:37 PM
    Without a doubt exploiting paranoia for political purposes, I though americans were bigger than that but perhaps they are small after all
    excon's Avatar
    excon Posts: 21,482, Reputation: 2992
    Uber Member
     
    #5

    Aug 26, 2012, 04:53 PM
    Hello again,

    I don't think it will convince anybody... The only people who would pay to see it are already true believers...

    excon
    Magpie95's Avatar
    Magpie95 Posts: 97, Reputation: 14
    Junior Member
     
    #6

    Aug 26, 2012, 04:54 PM
    I had not heard about this film. It seems ridiculous. I just watched the interview Fox did with the director. Sounds to me like a conspiracy theorist. They are always way out there. Swift boats, birthers, etc..
    More fear mongering. And conveniently released before the election.
    SonofExcon's Avatar
    SonofExcon Posts: 2, Reputation: 2
    New Member
     
    #7

    Aug 27, 2012, 03:13 AM
    I don' think I will... Dad
    tomder55's Avatar
    tomder55 Posts: 1,742, Reputation: 344
    Ultra Member
     
    #8

    Aug 27, 2012, 03:30 AM
    I read parts of the book. The movie did well at the box office considering the fact that it's distribution was not as extensive as the major releases. . Still ;I'll wait for the DVD .
    I go to the movies to get entertained and nothing about this administration (cept Biden's incoherence ) entertains me.
    paraclete's Avatar
    paraclete Posts: 2,706, Reputation: 173
    Ultra Member
     
    #9

    Aug 27, 2012, 03:44 AM
    Yes Tom I have the same feeling here a red head with a voice that will blow TV 's if not turned off immediately
    tomder55's Avatar
    tomder55 Posts: 1,742, Reputation: 344
    Ultra Member
     
    #10

    Aug 27, 2012, 07:45 AM
    I recall how the libs flocked to go see the Michael Moore hit piece of GW Bush 'Fahrenheit 9/11'... same deal .It had a degree of success among the faithful.

    Obama, the neo-colonialist,
    Actually it's anti-neocolonialism Didn't need a new book or movie to tell me that. All I needed was 'Dreams From My Father '. To me it doesn't really matter what shaped his socialist views. My concern is that he is in office implementing them. Anti-colonialism doesn't explain Obamacare or any of the other domestic polices . It could explain some of the foreign policy decisions ;but in all honesty ,American foreign policy has only changed in style under Obama... in substance ;as predicted ,there has been a history of continuity in foreign policy that has not changed all that much. Presidents are kind of handcuffed by national interests.
    excon's Avatar
    excon Posts: 21,482, Reputation: 2992
    Uber Member
     
    #11

    Aug 27, 2012, 07:58 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by tomder55 View Post
    To me it doesn't really matter what shaped his socialist views. My concern is that he is in office implementing them.

    President's are kinda handcuffed by national interests.
    Hello again, tom:

    Now you know how I felt when the dufus was implementing his fascist philosophy... You know, torture, rendition, black prisons, the shredding of our 4th and 5th Amendment rights... Stuff like that..

    That crap WASN'T about foreign policy.. It was all about attacking his own citizenry.

    In terms of Obama's socialism, Obamacare WAS a right wing idea. But, since Obama embraced it, right wingers disavowed it. And, THAT is what Obama is going to talk about... Maybe there's a left wing movie in our future.

    excon
    excon's Avatar
    excon Posts: 21,482, Reputation: 2992
    Uber Member
     
    #12

    Aug 27, 2012, 08:54 AM
    Hello again,

    Here's my movie, although it ain't moving... I hope you can read it..
    Attached Images
     
    speechlesstx's Avatar
    speechlesstx Posts: 1,111, Reputation: 284
    Ultra Member
     
    #13

    Aug 27, 2012, 08:55 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by excon View Post
    That crap WASN'T about foreign policy.. It was all about attacking his own citizenry.
    Like with drone attacks?
    speechlesstx's Avatar
    speechlesstx Posts: 1,111, Reputation: 284
    Ultra Member
     
    #14

    Aug 27, 2012, 09:26 AM
    Speaking of flip flops

    1. Keeping Guantanamo open

    Undoubtedly Obama’s biggest flip-flop, his decision to keep the Guantanamo detention facility in operation has outraged his liberal supporters and ‘shocked’ European governments, who, needless to say, had overwhelmingly declined to take large numbers of dangerous terror suspects off the hands of the US government.

    As a presidential candidate in 2008, Obama had condemned President Bush for supposedly “running prisons which lock people away without telling them why they’re there or what they’re charged with”, and signed an executive order shutting the facility down immediately upon taking office. Two years later Guantanamo still holds 172 detainees, and plays a vital role in the long war against Islamist terrorism.

    2. Bringing back military tribunals for terror suspects

    As a presidential candidate, Barack Obama was a firm opponent of the Bush administration’s military tribunals, which he said “failed to establish a legitimate legal framework and undermined our capacity to ensure swift and certain justice.” But, as The New York Times reported last week, “President Obama on Monday reversed his two-year-old order halting new military charges against detainees at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, permitting military trials to resume with revamped procedures but implicitly admitting the failure of his pledge to close the prison camp”, paving the way for 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and four co-conspirators to face trial at Guantanamo.

    3. Continuing renditions of terror suspects

    In a 2007 Foreign Affairs article, Senator Obama gave a strong indication that he would end the Bush administration practice of rendition of terror suspects:

    “To build a better, freer world, we must first behave in ways that reflect the decency and aspirations of the American people… This means ending the practices of shipping away prisoners in the dead of night to be tortured in far-off countries, of detaining thousands without charge or trial, of maintaining a network of secret prisons to jail people beyond the reach of the law.”

    But, as The New York Times reported in August 2009, the Obama administration’s Interrogation and Transfer Task Force announced that it would retain renditions, but with what The Times referred to as “more oversight”.

    4. Ordering military action in Libya without seeking Congressional authorisation

    President Obama has shown a striking lack of consistency with regard to the question of Congressional authorisation and the use of force. In a 2007 interview with The Boston Globe, then Senator Obama declared:

    “The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation. In instances of self-defense, the President would be within his constitutional authority to act before advising Congress or seeking its consent. History has shown us time and again, however, that military action is most successful when it is authorized and supported by the Legislative branch. It is always preferable to have the informed consent of Congress prior to any military action.”

    However, as president in March 2011, Barack Obama authorised military action against the Libyan regime without consulting Congress, a decision which drew heavy fire on Capitol Hill.

    5. Dropping Third Site missile defences in order to appease the Russians

    In his Prague speech in April 2009, President Obama pledged to move forward with the Bush-era plans for Third Site missile defences in Poland and the Czech Republic:

    So let me be clear: Iran's nuclear and ballistic missile activity poses a real threat, not just to the United States, but to Iran's neighbors and our allies. The Czech Republic and Poland have been courageous in agreeing to host a defense against these missiles. As long as the threat from Iran persists, we will go forward with a missile defense system that is cost-effective and proven.

    Just six months later however, the Obama administration surrendered to Russian demands, and dramatically dropped plans for Third Site. As I noted at the time, "this was a shameful abandonment of America’s friends in eastern and central Europe, and a slap in the face for those who actually believed a key agreement with Washington was worth the paper it was written on."

    6. Letting Sudan off the hook for the Darfur genocide

    In 2004, Senator Obama was a prominent supporter of a “humanitarian intervention” to halt state-sponsored mass killing in Darfur, declaring in a speech that “we cannot, in good conscience, stand by and let the genocide continue.” He advocated tough UN sanctions against the brutal regime of Omar Hassan al-Bashir, which “should freeze the assets of the Sudanese government, its leaders and business affiliates; outlaw arms sales and transfers to Sudan; and prohibit the purchase of Chinese oil.”

    However, as president, Obama dramatically changed his tune, extending the hand of friendship to Bashir, despite the fact the Sudanese government and its proxy Janjaweed Arab militias had butchered hundreds of thousands of people. As Obama’s special envoy to Sudan, retired Air Force Major General J. Scott Gration put it, describing the new strategy of appeasement:

    “We’ve got to think about giving out cookies. Kids, countries — they react to gold stars, smiley faces, handshakes, agreements, talk, engagement.”

    7. Backing a federal Europe after defending national sovereignty

    In July 2009 the president made a striking defence of the principle of national sovereignty in a speech he gave at the New Economic School in Moscow. President Obama spoke in eloquent terms of:

    “America’s interest in an international system that advances cooperation while respecting the sovereignty of all nations. State sovereignty must be a cornerstone of international order. Just as all states should have the right to choose their leaders, states must have the right to borders that are secure, and to their own foreign policies. That is true for Russia, just as it is true for the United States. Any system that cedes those rights will lead to anarchy.”

    His administration, however, has done all it can to advance the pooling of national sovereignty in Europe, and the rise of a European superstate. In her meeting with EU Foreign Policy chief Baroness Ashton in January, Hillary Clinton described the Lisbon Treaty, a blueprint for a European federal superstate, as “a major milestone in our world’s history”, and Obama's Ambassador to London, Louis Susman, told a group of MEPs in Brussels that “all key issues must run through Europe.”

    8. Pledging to restore America’s standing in the world but lowering it instead

    A key foreign policy theme of the Obama presidential election campaign was the notion that President Bush had damaged America’s image on the world stage, with his supposedly ‘cowboy’ policies. In the words of a campaign document, “Barack Obama and Joe Biden will restore America’s standing in the world by providing a new American leadership to meet the challenges of a new century”.

    As president, however, Obama has done exactly the opposite, insulting key allies such as Great Britain, Israel and Poland, projecting weak leadership, and undermining the standing of the United States as the world’s only superpower. As I’ve noted before:

    No American president in modern times has invested less effort in maintaining US alliances than Barack Obama. Whether it is siding with Marxists in Honduras against pro-American forces, condemning Israel, throwing the Poles and Czechs under the bus, or trashing the Anglo-American Special Relationship, the Obama administration has gone out of its way to kick its allies in the teeth while kowtowing to America’s enemies. For a president who boasted in his election campaign of restoring America’s “standing” in the world, Obama has done a spectacularly bad job of preserving friendships with Washington’s closest friends.

    9. Dumping Mubarak in Egypt after calling him a "stalwart ally"

    Big picture foreign policy strategy has not been a forté of this administration, as demonstrated by its inconsistent policy on Egypt and the Middle East. In an interview with the BBC’s Justin Webb in June 2009, when asked if he viewed President Mubarak as an authoritarian ruler, President Obama declared:

    No, I tend not to use labels for folks. I haven't met him; I've spoken to him on the phone. He has been a stalwart ally, in many respects, to the United States. He has sustained peace with Israel, which is a very difficult thing to do in that region, but he has never resorted to unnecessary demagoguing of the issue and has tried to maintain that relationship. So I think he has been a force for stability and good in the region.

    20 months later, the White House emphatically called for Mubarak to go.

    10. Killing the NASA manned space programme

    In August 2008, Senator Obama announced, as The Washington Post noted, “a detailed comprehensive space plan that includes $2 billion in new funding to reinvigorate NASA”. In the president’s words:

    "As president, I'll make our space program a priority again by devoting the attention and resources needed to not only inspire the world with feats of exploration but also improve life here on Earth."

    But, as The Washington Post reported in March 2010, President Obama later shattered the dreams of the NASA community with a decision “to kill NASA's Constellation program, crafted during the Bush administration with an ambitious goal of putting astronauts back on the moon by 2020.” In the words of Harrison Schmitt, a former US senator and Apollo 17 astronaut: “It’s bad for the country. This administration really doesn’t believe in American exceptionalism.”
    Let's see, he's flip flopped on Super Pacs, hiring lobbyists, accepting money from lobbyists, gay marriage, gun control, repealing the Bush tax cuts, raising the debt ceiling, PAYGO, spending freezes, earmarks, Israel, the Iraq surge, the Keystone pipeline, nuclear power, the Patriot Act, public campaign financing, running for president and probably most notably, civility.

    So what's your point?
    excon's Avatar
    excon Posts: 21,482, Reputation: 2992
    Uber Member
     
    #15

    Aug 27, 2012, 10:20 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by speechlesstx View Post
    Speaking of flip flops... Keeping Guantanamo open, undoubtedly Obama's biggest flip-flop,
    Hello again, Steve:

    Let's just take number #1. I shouldn't have to explain this to you, but there's a difference between a policy that congress won't LET you do, and a policy you flip on because you think it'll get you elected.

    excon
    talaniman's Avatar
    talaniman Posts: 54,328, Reputation: 10855
    Expert
     
    #16

    Aug 27, 2012, 10:21 AM
    Even right wing hackers are entitle to their opinion.
    tomder55's Avatar
    tomder55 Posts: 1,742, Reputation: 344
    Ultra Member
     
    #17

    Aug 27, 2012, 10:32 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by excon View Post
    Hello again, Steve:

    Let's just take number #1. I shouldn't have to explain this to you, but there's a difference between a policy that congress won't LET you do, and a policy you flip on because it'll get you elected.

    excon
    He uses EOs for everything else he wants. Congress has no say on GITMO except funding . The President could close down the prison any time he wants to . But he won't because in truth he knows it is the best place to house the prisoners from the war against Jihadistan.
    What I find telling is the lack of outrage by the Obama compliant press.
    excon's Avatar
    excon Posts: 21,482, Reputation: 2992
    Uber Member
     
    #18

    Aug 27, 2012, 10:58 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by tomder55 View Post
    What I find telling is the lack of outrage by the Obama compliant press.
    Hello again, tom:

    Me too.

    excon
    speechlesstx's Avatar
    speechlesstx Posts: 1,111, Reputation: 284
    Ultra Member
     
    #19

    Aug 27, 2012, 11:02 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by excon View Post
    Hello again, Steve:

    Let's just take number #1. I shouldn't have to explain this to you, but there's a difference between a policy that congress won't LET you do, and a policy you flip on because you think it'll get you elected.

    Excon
    Nice try but no dice.

    President Obama signed an executive order Monday that will create a formal system of indefinite detention for those held at the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, who continue to pose a significant threat to national security. The administration also said it will start new military commission trials for detainees there.

    The announcements, coming more than two years after Obama vowed in another executive order to close the detention center, all but cements Guantanamo Bay’s continuing role in U.S. counterterrorism policy.
    Congress had nothing to do with it, this was ALL Obama.
    Wondergirl's Avatar
    Wondergirl Posts: 38,868, Reputation: 5431
    Jobs & Parenting Expert
     
    #20

    Aug 27, 2012, 11:09 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by speechlesstx View Post
    Congress had nothing to do with it, this was ALL Obama.
    But no more waterboarding?

Not your question? Ask your question View similar questions

 

Question Tools Search this Question
Search this Question:

Advanced Search

Add your answer here.


Check out some similar questions!

In 2016 [ 9 Answers ]

Hello: The right wing thinks Romney will be another liberal free spender like Bush was. Instead of supporting HIM for 8 years, do you think they'll let Obama win so they can run a REAL conservative in 2016? excon

Obama's poodle [ 16 Answers ]

British PM came a knocking to the White House expecting to get the same royal treatment by his ideological kindred in Washington now that they have assumed control. Brown spoke with lofty rhetoric about a 'Global New Deal' to be lead by this new partnership... “a bond that will not break.” . ...

Obama's Intelligence? [ 22 Answers ]

Seems to be directly linked to his teleprompter. How could he be shocked at the fact that the US Troops watch Fox News, almost exclusively? He even insinuated that President Bush must have issued an executive order making Fox the only channel available to the troops overseas! Is he really...

Thoughts on Obama's speech yesterday, expanding socialism in America? [ 19 Answers ]

Can anyone explain what this guy is all about? Speaking yesterday, Obama outlined his plans to further socialize our Nation if we give him the chance. He wants to expand government volunteer's in such programs as AmeriCorps and The Peace Corps. He actually wants to increase the federal...


View more questions Search