Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (302951)	4/28/2009 1:18:20 PM
From: mph	8 Recommendations Respond to of 793955

We differ on this. Like Clinton, he's cutting the military budget. Like Carter, he's ineffectual with enemy tyrants, and worse yet, has basically told them in so many words that they can get away with murder, and are justified in doing so because America is so darn evil. He sent troops to Afghanistan to fulfill a campaign promise, but hasn't addressed Pakistan, which appears to be the bigger problem. WRT Iraq, he found out that his naive candidate's promises couldn't be achieved. That's the only reason he slowed down troop withdrawal threats. He caved to pressure from his lunatic fringe and improvidently released the so-called torture memos, which only helped our enemies, made him appear weak, and focused the country backwards instead of forward in a positive manner. He is so insensitive to terrorism that he not only changed the lexicon and did so in an inanely stupid way, but also decided to have glamour shots taken over NYC without warning the population of the flyover demonstration. [At least he cancelled the planned May flyover in D.C., but only because of pressure.] Obama will always have cover from the MSM. The question is whether popular support would continue for long if it appears that his actions precipitated an attack. As you'll recall, the left was all over Bush as though he personally caused 9/11.