God bless USA

[Esteban de la Sexface]

Having an opinion on how other people have opinions on how people post their opinions is the most irritating

This could go on

Having ire, in jeans when it is Sunny is irritating. You're just a prick.

I don't get it ???

Are you special ?

Do you slaver ??

3-1-2 is there a significance to the frequency of your question marks?

are you more quizzical on line 1???

just a little but unsure on point 2?

I think you are beginning to question yourself on sentence 3??

 

[Daz_Blue]

I think the president is right because Jack Beaur is back .....no terrorist organization or country can get past him

 

[Bigga]

Hmm, how many lives has Clarkson ruined?

How many innocent people has he overseen killed?

Are you seriously offering this for comparison?

If I remember this correctly, I don't think Obama has actually invaded any country to start a war. As for as I know, he's been trying to bring the troops home. As for 'innocents', sure such things happen and are unfortunate, but they call it 'casualties of war' for a reason.

It has already been stated on here how terrorists hid amongst civilians in the bid for more mayhem. Who do you blame? You blame Obama, of course. Silly me!

As for 'ruining lives', I'm pretty sure thousands of viewers and Clarkson's wife have plenty to say on that one...

If Clarkson can ruin your life as a viewer of Top Gear, then you must be a colossal ****.

I am bemused that this is the best answer you can give!

It literally shows how shit your 'points' are!

 

[Esteban de la Sexface]

Bigga, you say he is "trying" to bring the troops home. He is the President of the USA. If he wants to bring the troops home, he brings them home. No trying. What he is trying to do is, be all things to all men.

If you are comparing a fuckwit on tv who has no power to affect anything, to a fuckwit with the power of the US armed forces who has the means to invade whatever country he deems to be acting against democracy, then you are a deluded man.

 

[FromPollockToSilva]

For me, Faux-Bama being president is simply the lesser of two evils - a bit like preferring to have a heavy head cold than Aids, when ideally I don't want either.
He has been a huge disappointment as president, but has probably done a bit less harm than a Republican would have done, and that is about the best I can say for him.

Not that much the president can do when the House of Representatives is in the hands of an opposition that has routinely preferred total legislative paralysis to compromises and responsible governance. Obama's administration passed a great deal of good legislation when the Democrats had a super-majority, prior to the 2010 midterms when the Republicans took back the House.

 

[Bigga]

Bigga, you say he is "trying" to bring the troops home. He is the President of the USA. If he wants to bring the troops home, he brings them home. No trying. What he is trying to do is, be all things to all men.

If you are comparing a fuckwit on tv who has no power to affect anything, to a fuckwit with the power of the US armed forces who has the means to invade whatever country he deems to be acting against democracy, then you are a deluded man.

I have heard some bollocks today, but this is right up there ! He has the most difficult balancing task of any Western leader , I can think of! "All things to all men" is probably the best description of his tenure. Hands tied by the House of Representatives, fighting the NRA., trying to get people affordable Health Care, building relations in the Middle East whilst fighting terrorists, as well as trying to create jobs and keep the Banks in check are just a few of his problems.

Sorry he ain't perfect...

 

[Frank the Yank]

For me, Faux-Bama being president is simply the lesser of two evils - a bit like preferring to have a heavy head cold than Aids, when ideally I don't want either.
He has been a huge disappointment as president, but has probably done a bit less harm than a Republican would have done, and that is about the best I can say for him.

Not that much the president can do when the House of Representatives is in the hands of an opposition that has routinely preferred total legislative paralysis to compromises and responsible governance. Obama's administration passed a great deal of good legislation when the Democrats had a super-majority, prior to the 2010 midterms when the Republicans took back the House.

As a very learned man once said, "Elections have consequences". Please tell me of all the sweeping, positive legislation the administration passed between jan 2009 and jan 2011. If you think its bad now, wait til Jan 2015 when there is a chance that the Democrats lose the Senate as well.

Even members of his own party dont want the president anywhere near them when campaigning. Same same for Bush 43 during the midterms of 2006. Its always possible that the Republicans will snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. Afterall, they have so much practice. That cadaver named Harry Reid should have been clobbered 4 years ago but they Republicans put up such a terrible candidate we have had to listen to Reid's bullshit as Senate Majority leader the last 4 years.........

 

[SWP's back]

Are you seriously offering this for comparison?

If I remember this correctly, I don't think Obama has actually invaded any country to start a war. As for as I know, he's been trying to bring the troops home. As for 'innocents', sure such things happen and are unfortunate, but they call it 'casualties of war' for a reason.

It has already been stated on here how terrorists hid amongst civilians in the bid for more mayhem. Who do you blame? You blame Obama, of course. Silly me!

As for 'ruining lives', I'm pretty sure thousands of viewers and Clarkson's wife have plenty to say on that one...

If Clarkson can ruin your life as a viewer of Top Gear, then you must be a colossal ****.

I am bemused that this is the best answer you can give!

It literally shows how shit your 'points' are!

I honestly think you may be retarded.

Explain how any popular entertainment tv presenter can ruin someone's life through the medium of their shows?

 

[SWP's back]

Bigga, you say he is "trying" to bring the troops home. He is the President of the USA. If he wants to bring the troops home, he brings them home. No trying. What he is trying to do is, be all things to all men.

If you are comparing a fuckwit on tv who has no power to affect anything, to a fuckwit with the power of the US armed forces who has the means to invade whatever country he deems to be acting against democracy, then you are a deluded man.

I have heard some bollocks today, but this is right up there ! He has the most difficult balancing task of any Western leader , I can think of! "All things to all men" is probably the best description of his tenure. Hands tied by the House of Representatives, fighting the NRA., trying to get people affordable Health Care, building relations in the Middle East whilst fighting terrorists, as well as trying to create jobs and keep the Banks in check are just a few of his problems.

Sorry he ain't perfect...

Never known you defend a politician with such vigour since Dianne Abbot.

 

[FromPollockToSilva]

For me, Faux-Bama being president is simply the lesser of two evils - a bit like preferring to have a heavy head cold than Aids, when ideally I don't want either.
He has been a huge disappointment as president, but has probably done a bit less harm than a Republican would have done, and that is about the best I can say for him.

Not that much the president can do when the House of Representatives is in the hands of an opposition that has routinely preferred total legislative paralysis to compromises and responsible governance. Obama's administration passed a great deal of good legislation when the Democrats had a super-majority, prior to the 2010 midterms when the Republicans took back the House.

As a very learned man once said, "Elections have consequences". Please tell me of all the sweeping, positive legislation the administration passed between jan 2009 and jan 2011. If you think its bad now, wait til Jan 2015 when there is a chance that the Democrats lose the Senate as well.

Even members of his own party dont want the president anywhere near them when campaigning. Same same for Bush 43 during the midterms of 2006. Its always possible that the Republicans will snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. Afterall, they have so much practice. That cadaver named Harry Reid should have been clobbered 4 years ago but they Republicans put up such a terrible candidate we have had to listen to Reid's bullshit as Senate Majority leader the last 4 years.........

In those first two years the administration passed 34 'major' pieces of legislation. Since then, in three and a half years, it's passed half that number. 'Sweeping' and 'positive' were your terms, not mine.

There is a very good chance the Democrats will lose the Senate, but I think that would ultimately be to the detriment of the Republicans in 2016. Another two years of tiresome Congressional inertia is not what they need going into the Presidential election. Still, it seems like GOP high command is trying to systematically rid the party of its most corrosive elements in order to make them halfway electable, so we'll have to see what the landscape looks like after the midterms.