|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
ytuque
Joined: 29 Jan 2008
Location: I drink therefore I am!
|
 Posted: Thu Jan 21, 2010 5:34 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Quote: |
I don't think Obama taking some time to respond to the underwear bomber is unreasonable either. These aren't really time-sensitive issues. A crime occured; that isn't going to change whether the President speaks up about it one minute later or one week later.
|
Obama was pretty quick to jump on the Cambridge police department which nobody is mentioning. BTW, the majority of voters in Massachusetts supported the cop on that one.
| Quote: |
| All it takes is one terrorist attack -- even a failed one -- and suddenly she wants a passionate President who dictates to us to keep us safe. |
People want a leader not a politician when they feel threatened. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 21, 2010 5:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ytuque wrote: |
| Quote: |
| All it takes is one terrorist attack -- even a failed one -- and suddenly she wants a passionate President who dictates to us to keep us safe. |
People want a leader not a politician when they feel threatened. |
That's fine, but anyone who feels threatened by this kind of thing is engaging in pointless panic. If this were something like a desparate war for survival, okay, maybe I could see her point. That's not what we're takling about here, though. The overwhelming majority of Americans will never, ever be in harms way because of this. Demanding the President respond to incidents like this with "passionate leadership" is silly. How about we just calm down and accept it for what it is: a minor incident that shouldn't affect us as a nation. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ytuque
Joined: 29 Jan 2008
Location: I drink therefore I am!
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 21, 2010 9:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Fox wrote: |
| ytuque wrote: |
| Quote: |
| All it takes is one terrorist attack -- even a failed one -- and suddenly she wants a passionate President who dictates to us to keep us safe. |
People want a leader not a politician when they feel threatened. |
That's fine, but anyone who feels threatened by this kind of thing is engaging in pointless panic. If this were something like a desparate war for survival, okay, maybe I could see her point. That's not what we're takling about here, though. The overwhelming majority of Americans will never, ever be in harms way because of this. Demanding the President respond to incidents like this with "passionate leadership" is silly. How about we just calm down and accept it for what it is: a minor incident that shouldn't affect us as a nation. |
It was only a minor incident because of a failed detonator. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 21, 2010 9:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ytuque wrote: |
| Fox wrote: |
| ytuque wrote: |
| Quote: |
| All it takes is one terrorist attack -- even a failed one -- and suddenly she wants a passionate President who dictates to us to keep us safe. |
People want a leader not a politician when they feel threatened. |
That's fine, but anyone who feels threatened by this kind of thing is engaging in pointless panic. If this were something like a desparate war for survival, okay, maybe I could see her point. That's not what we're takling about here, though. The overwhelming majority of Americans will never, ever be in harms way because of this. Demanding the President respond to incidents like this with "passionate leadership" is silly. How about we just calm down and accept it for what it is: a minor incident that shouldn't affect us as a nation. |
It was only a minor incident because of a failed detonator. |
A plane being blow up in mid air is a minor incident from the perspective of a nation of 300 million people. Is it a tragedy? Sure, but so is a car accident. So is cancer.
When considering national policy, things need to be kept in perspective. If I decide to get into my car one day and mow through my local university's campus during the busy between-classes times and manage to kill a hundred or so people, I don't think that has anything to do with the President of the United States. The same is true if someone manages to blow up an airplane. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bacasper
Joined: 26 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 21, 2010 10:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Fox wrote: |
| People like this hysterical woman are part of what's wrong with the country. All it takes is one terrorist attack -- even a failed one -- and suddenly she wants a passionate President who dictates to us to keep us safe. |
Yeah, this woman was speaking from the POV of one who was directly involved in the incident, so I give her a pass on her shrillness.
But I thought it fairly illustrative of how some "leftists" are becoming disillusioned with BO. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ytuque
Joined: 29 Jan 2008
Location: I drink therefore I am!
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 22, 2010 1:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
| bacasper wrote: |
| Fox wrote: |
| People like this hysterical woman are part of what's wrong with the country. All it takes is one terrorist attack -- even a failed one -- and suddenly she wants a passionate President who dictates to us to keep us safe. |
Yeah, this woman was speaking from the POV of one who was directly involved in the incident, so I give her a pass on her shrillness.
But I thought it fairly illustrative of how some "leftists" are becoming disillusioned with BO. |
My lefty friends were in love with the idea of a black president and one who is everything Bush is not. They used to talk about this post-racial America, and America's improved standing around the world if Obama was elected.
I don't hear this anymore. Chris Mathews' leg probably doesn't tingle anymore either. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Otus
Joined: 09 Feb 2006
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
Bush lost control in 2006 midterms. The democrats have been manipulating a lot since then. Mass. senate election has to be the first republican rebound.
Still - I'll never forget the Bush re-election ... not for Bush being re-elected, but for Daschle losing his seat in the Senate at the same time. That must have been a bruising on par with this ... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bacasper
Joined: 26 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 22, 2010 9:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Street Magic wrote: |
| bacasper wrote: |
| Street Magic wrote: |
Then you have your Martha Coakley's who not only tar innocent folks with sex offender labels and send them away to prison for as long as she can get away with, but also go that extra step further and petition against clemency in spite of the unanimous 5-0 decision to commute from what has been arguably the most conservative pardons and paroles board in the nation...
Martha Coakley is a vindictive pro-prosecution McCarthyist who will fight to the death to keep her targets suffering so as to satisfy her angry soccer mom supporters that all the bad Grinch people like sex offenders and drug users are getting theirs. |
If that is the case then I am glad she lost. Perhaps it is a sign that people are becoming aware of the insanity and witchhunt nature of America's unjust sex laws. Let's hope that was a deciding factor. |
Judging by the Daily Show or even the responses in this thread, that election had very little to do with the right reasons to be against Coakley. I'm doing my best to spread the word about her life ruining political antics as district attorney, but I seem to be getting drowned out wherever I point out her history by stock debates about health care proponents stealing our freedom/health care opponents killing poor people. At best, someone will mention how Coakley called Curt Schilling a Yankees fan or how Scott Brown made an ad about his truck.
On the plus side though, you could call it a victory against the sex crime hysteria in that no one really tried to promote her campaign by going on about how she was tough on "sexual predators." |
Would you buy it was because Scott Brown used to be a nude model (according to Olberman)? Can anyone confirm this? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Street Magic
Joined: 23 Sep 2009
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 22, 2010 12:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| bacasper wrote: |
| Street Magic wrote: |
Judging by the Daily Show or even the responses in this thread, that election had very little to do with the right reasons to be against Coakley. I'm doing my best to spread the word about her life ruining political antics as district attorney, but I seem to be getting drowned out wherever I point out her history by stock debates about health care proponents stealing our freedom/health care opponents killing poor people. At best, someone will mention how Coakley called Curt Schilling a Yankees fan or how Scott Brown made an ad about his truck.
On the plus side though, you could call it a victory against the sex crime hysteria in that no one really tried to promote her campaign by going on about how she was tough on "sexual predators." |
Would you buy it was because Scott Brown used to be a nude model (according to Olberman)? Can anyone confirm this? |
Yeah, I heard that a few times too. His wikipedia article says he used his earnings from winning a "sexiest man" contest in Cosmopolitan magazine to pay for law school. That must be a fun story to throw around: "Yeah, I was Cosmo's sexiest man... no biggie-- they just paid for my JD is all. PS: I'm a senator."
I can see how his attractiveness could have helped him win. Few people consciously decide to judge others based on their appearances, but whenever voters turn away from pet issues or partisan loyalties and consider vague intuitive notions like personality, they're likely going to be imagining more agreeable traits in nicer looking or younger looking people.
This would also bring up the issue of whether gender played a role in the election, the question being whether voters interpreted personality traits based on gender that weren't there or at least weren't as pronounced as they imagined. That would be pretty lame if appearances or gender were a decisive factor in this kind of election, although not any more lame than most of the other reasons people seem to be invoking to explain what happened. Which makes no sense to me given how easy it is to Google either candidate and familiarize yourself with what they've done. Then again, like I mentioned before, it's kind of a victory voters didn't do their research and go on to decide Coakley was a great candidate based on her record as a DA. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bacasper
Joined: 26 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 05, 2010 11:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Street Magic wrote: |
| bacasper wrote: |
| Street Magic wrote: |
Then you have your Martha Coakley's who not only tar innocent folks with sex offender labels and send them away to prison for as long as she can get away with, but also go that extra step further and petition against clemency in spite of the unanimous 5-0 decision to commute from what has been arguably the most conservative pardons and paroles board in the nation...
Martha Coakley is a vindictive pro-prosecution McCarthyist who will fight to the death to keep her targets suffering so as to satisfy her angry soccer mom supporters that all the bad Grinch people like sex offenders and drug users are getting theirs. |
If that is the case then I am glad she lost. Perhaps it is a sign that people are becoming aware of the insanity and witchhunt nature of America's unjust sex laws. Let's hope that was a deciding factor. |
Judging by the Daily Show or even the responses in this thread, that election had very little to do with the right reasons to be against Coakley. I'm doing my best to spread the word about her life ruining political antics as district attorney, but I seem to be getting drowned out wherever I point out her history by stock debates about health care proponents stealing our freedom/health care opponents killing poor people. At best, someone will mention how Coakley called Curt Schilling a Yankees fan or how Scott Brown made an ad about his truck.
On the plus side though, you could call it a victory against the sex crime hysteria in that no one really tried to promote her campaign by going on about how she was tough on "sexual predators." |
I hadn't realized that Coakley is the maniac who was behind the campaign to keep the Amiraults in prison in the travesty of justice that was the Fells Acres Day Care case of the 80s & 90's, attributing sex abuse of toddlers to a grandmother, and complete with testimony about magic rooms, bad clowns, animal butchery and the rest, and about which Dorothy Rabinowitz wrote award-winning pieces for The Wall Street Journal.
Judith Levine, author of Harmful to Minors: The Perils of Protecting Children from Sex, has a great piece about Coakley, Sympathy for the Devil:
| Quote: |
| Lately reborn as a defender of justice at Guant�namo, Coakley is a leading legal light among sex-panic witch hunters. As Middlesex county district attorney and, since 1997, Massachusetts attorney general, she rose to prominence via the tireless prosecution of crimes that never happened: satanic ritual abuse of toddlers at the hands of daycare teachers, bizarre grandparental incest, and unfounded priestly pedophilia. |
full version at link |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 06, 2010 9:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ytuque wrote: |
| My lefty friends were in love with the idea of a black president and one who is everything Bush is not. They used to talk about this post-racial America, and America's improved standing around the world if Obama was elected. |
America's standing has improved around the world, as a direct result of Obama's election. Or do you think he actually earned that Peace Prize? It was awarded for not resembling Bush.
As for your leftie friends talking about post-racial America, I call BS. The post-racial meme was an invention of the media. I didn't meet anyone who seriously thought racism would end as a result of the election of a black man. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2010 2:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
I agree that America's standing has improved abroad. No disrespect to Obama, but it would have taken a genius for it to have gotten much worse. Things have improved considerably in that department. The fear that even many otherwise friends were feeling seems to have gone.
How come I never heard anything about a post-racial America during the campaign? I paid pretty close attention, but I don't recall anyone saying Obama's election would create a post-racial world. I do recall people saying it would be a symbol of the distance we'd come since the civil rights struggle of the mid 60's. It wasn't till right wingers here on Dave's started asking where the post-racial world was that I became aware of it. It looks to me like it's another of those straw dogs of the right. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2010 8:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Kuros wrote: |
As for your leftie friends talking about post-racial America, I call BS. The post-racial meme was an invention of the media. I didn't meet anyone who seriously thought racism would end as a result of the election of a black man. |
I don't know if the opposite of a post-racial society is a racist society. I don't know what post-racial or racist means.
I spent a long while in the deep deep deep south recently. I'm stunned at the integration and how well blacks and whites get along. My previous experiences with the white-black divide have been in San Francisco, Miami (essentially a North Eastern city with a Hispanic majority), Seattle and NYC. I reckon relations are much better in the south, mostly because they're used to eachother and everyone seems much more agreeable. Blacks and whites get on very well. I don't know why.
Anyways, the point is I don't know if America should aspire to being post-racial or if it should aspire to being respectful and agreeable. Jackson isn't a model for much at all, but gawddamn are people nice to each other. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
