HARD HITTING DETROIT LIONS FORUM
http://www.lionbacker.com/forum/

A plan to survive the Obama years
http://www.lionbacker.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=11745
Page 1 of 2

Author:  wjb21ndtown [ November 30th, 2008, 3:04 pm ]
Post subject:  A plan to survive the Obama years

Quote:
A plan to survive the Obama years

Z. Dwight Billingsly BY Z. DWIGHT BILLINGSLY

11/27/2008

As Jack Buck once said, "I don't believe what I just saw!" Americans on Nov. 4 turned over control of the United States of America to a management team possessing no executive experience, having never run, as I liked to put it, nothing.

Well, Americans usually get the government they deserve, and I urge you all to get ready for this 21st century version of amateur hour. It's going to be an embarrassing and dangerous time for America and American ideals. There won't be much, I'm afraid, to be thankful for.

Bill Kristol, writing in The Weekly Standard, reminded me that every 16 years we get a Democrat president with no experience in national security or international affairs who's elected after Republican presidents have made and kept America safe: After Eisenhower, we got Kennedy; after Nixon/Ford, we got Carter; after Reagan/Bush, we got Clinton. And after Bush II, we get Barack Obama.

Every strong Republican president who succeeded in protecting America has allowed Americans to become complacent about national security, thereby opening the door for weak Democrats who allowed enemies to threaten and attack America without penalty. Obama will be no different, and Americans will have to learn again that there can be no economic security without national security.

That's not to say that Obama's election doesn't come with a couple of interesting side effects. For example, henceforth no black man in America may be called unqualified for any job that he might seek, no matter his prior education or experience level. Want to be a nuclear scientist but lack a Ph.D. in physics? If the applicant is a black man, it's no problem. Just offer hope to the profession and promise change from all those stuffy theorems that have given the discipline its structure over the years, and you're in.

That's on a par with throwing out the fact that tax cuts lead to more investment, job creation and increasing government revenues, just because the black man, that transcendent agent of change, says it's OK.

Another side effect has been white people contacting me to say that I should be proud to see a black man become president. Could there be a comment that is more condescending, more insulting, than that? If I believed that in America a black man could not be president, then I would be proud to see any black man elected president. But because I always have believed that nothing in America prevents a black man from becoming president or anything else he wants to be, I can be embarrassed, not proud, to see someone as unqualified and inexperienced as Obama become president.

Jackie Robinson, the first black man in modern-day major league baseball, illustrates my point. He was the right man with the right combination of talent, temperament and character at the right time to be successful for that important "first." Obama? An empty suit who will fail.

I'm going to approach the Obama years the same way liberals handled the Iraq war. Just as they claimed to support our troops while opposing the war, I'm going to support my country while opposing Obama and what he stands for in every way that I can. It's only four years and with the astute Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky as Senate minority leader, Republicans can stop the Obama extremists for two years until mid-term elections in 2010 give Republicans the boost in Congress that inevitably will come.

And in 2012, we'll have Sarah Palin to clean up Obama's mess and remind us again of America's exceptionalism.

Author:  Pablo [ December 1st, 2008, 11:51 am ]
Post subject: 

Well with all the call for change, from what I've seen of his appointments this is starting to look like the Clinton administration once again.

Author:  LionFan57 [ December 1st, 2008, 12:56 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: A plan to survive the Obama years

wjb21ndtown wrote:
Quote:
...

As Jack Buck once said, "I don't believe what I just saw!" Americans on Nov. 4 turned over control of the United States of America to a management team possessing no executive experience, having never run, as I liked to put it, nothing.

Well, Americans usually get the government they deserve, and I urge you all to get ready for this 21st century version of amateur hour. It's going to be an embarrassing and dangerous time for America and American ideals. There won't be much, I'm afraid, to be thankful for.

...


Almost identical to what we got when Ford handed the keys to Matt Millen. Now watch the disaster unfold. :(

Author:  LionsFan4Life [ December 1st, 2008, 12:59 pm ]
Post subject: 

Pablo wrote:
Well with all the call for change, from what I've seen of his appointments this is starting to look like the Clinton administration once again.


I have no problem with that. From what I remember.. we did quiet well economically with Clinton in the office. Look at the defecit Bush is leaving us after Clinton had done a good job in balancing our debt. We sure weren't over our heads in debt and the economy wasn't tanking.

Author:  buell17 [ December 1st, 2008, 1:07 pm ]
Post subject: 

LionsFan4Life wrote:
Pablo wrote:
Well with all the call for change, from what I've seen of his appointments this is starting to look like the Clinton administration once again.


I have no problem with that. From what I remember.. we did quiet well economically with Clinton in the office. Look at the defecit Bush is leaving us after Clinton had done a good job in balancing our debt. We sure weren't over our heads in debt and the economy wasn't tanking.


Not that I'm agreeing with this article, but Clinton destroyed the military during his time in office. I don't see Obama doing that, but with everything going on in the world today, we can't afford for our military to be in the sad state it was when Clinton left office.

Author:  wjb21ndtown [ December 1st, 2008, 3:44 pm ]
Post subject: 

LionsFan4Life wrote:
Pablo wrote:
Well with all the call for change, from what I've seen of his appointments this is starting to look like the Clinton administration once again.


I have no problem with that. From what I remember.. we did quiet well economically with Clinton in the office. Look at the defecit Bush is leaving us after Clinton had done a good job in balancing our debt. We sure weren't over our heads in debt and the economy wasn't tanking.


Now all we need is Al Gore to "invent" the internet or a similar new product, create a new commodity and industry, and ride a BOOM that no one understands!!!

Do you really think Biden has it in him!???


The Clinton era market was a fallacy. It was a new industry with wild speculation and it busted. There were companies that had NEVER MADE A DIME worth HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS OF DOLLARS simply because they had such a large (free!) consumer base! NOT ONE DIME was made by Yahoo before their market cap BLEW UP, and guess what? Bill Clinton had NOTHING to do with it. NOTHING to do with etrade, NOTHING to do with AOL, NOTHING to do with YAHOO, NOTHING to do with EBAY, NOTHING to do with the economy.

In fact, many blame NAFTA for our current market collapse of our auto industry... Who brought NAFTA about??? :roll:

Author:  Touchdown Jesus [ December 1st, 2008, 4:03 pm ]
Post subject: 

Well, without getting too deep in the debate, all I'll say is that if people are going to blame Bush for the current economic condition, then he also deserves credit for the economic boom that preceded it. Likewise, Clinton would deserve credit for the dot com boom and the bust that followed. See how that works? Both sides get credit and blame.

That being said, it's a little ridiculous to assign credit or blame to the president for the economy. Presidents can't make policy. They can set a tone and make suggestions, but ultimately it is the congress who makes the policies that really affect things. Not to mention other outside factors and market forces that can push things one way or the other even more.

Author:  lightning_in_a_bottle [ December 1st, 2008, 8:01 pm ]
Post subject: 

Touchdown Jesus wrote:
Presidents can't make policy.


That has to be the delusional Republican quote of the year.

Author:  Touchdown Jesus [ December 1st, 2008, 8:31 pm ]
Post subject: 

lightning_in_a_bottle wrote:
That has to be the delusional Republican quote of the year.

First of all, I'm not a Republican. Second, it's true. If you think a president creates policy I suggest you go back and retake your high school government class. The president can say what he wants policy to be, but he doesn't have the power to create legislation. Congress does that. The president can veto legislation he disagrees with, but congress has the power to override that veto as well. So the ultimate power rests with the congress, not the president. The point is that when a president is in power, they tend to get too much credit and too much blame for things, especially the economy (i.e. Carter was an ineffectual president, but the bad economy wasn't all his fault, just as the good economy in the 80s wasn't all due to Reagan).

Seriously man, you really should stop all the partisan sniping you do. For someone who claims to be a supporter of Obama and what he stands for, you don't practice what he preaches.

Author:  WarEr4Christ [ December 1st, 2008, 9:48 pm ]
Post subject: 

Not that I'm agreeing with this article, but Clinton destroyed the military during his time in office. I don't see Obama doing that

Actually I heard reports that Obama snubbed the military when he visited Afghanistan. I hope he doesn't take an elitist type attitude and treat the military as a step child.... The Clinton's were a joke, and made themselves look good off of successful Reaganomics.

Author:  WarEr4Christ [ December 1st, 2008, 9:51 pm ]
Post subject: 

Actually I tried to edit that last post, it wasn't the Reaganomics that made Clinton successful, it was his gutting of the military budget, and reduction of a 600 ship Navy to a less than 400, (and that was just one branch) that made him successful.

Author:  buell17 [ December 1st, 2008, 10:12 pm ]
Post subject: 

DevilDoc wrote:
Not that I'm agreeing with this article, but Clinton destroyed the military during his time in office. I don't see Obama doing that

Actually I heard reports that Obama snubbed the military when he visited Afghanistan. I hope he doesn't take an elitist type attitude and treat the military as a step child.... The Clinton's were a joke, and made themselves look good off of successful Reaganomics.


I wouldn't know. The only person who visited Afghanistan while I was there was Cheney and they tried to blow him up. Not even the general would come as far down range as I was.

Author:  Blueskies [ December 2nd, 2008, 2:32 am ]
Post subject: 

Quote:
It's going to be an embarrassing and dangerous time for America and American ideals.


Well considering we just had to live through the worst presidency in the history of the United States...I can't expect it to get much worse.

Author:  dh86 [ December 2nd, 2008, 5:47 am ]
Post subject: 

Move to China, where the workers get paid what they deserve and you can lay low until Sarah Palin saves us all with her common sense values. No, I did not keep a straight face typing this.

Author:  lightning_in_a_bottle [ December 2nd, 2008, 11:44 am ]
Post subject: 

This whole thing is just ridiculous. It totally ignores what Obama's been saying since 2004 and his moves since being elected. Yes, he has a progressive agenda. But he's going to take talented people from across the spectrum to implement changes in our system that are long overdue. And no, none of these changes will be anything like socialism.

I swear, it's like people enjoy being ill-informed...

Page 1 of 2 All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/