President Barack Obama

President Barack Obama

This thread is dedicated soley to discussing the new President. This includes his inauguration, policies, etc. If it involves President Obama, discuss it here.

Originally posted by Daveski17:

Originally posted by rjhowie:

Regarding adding Scotland. Not just tv but roads, mediccal breakthroughs, telephone, etc.

Elisha Gray and Alexander Bell are trying to claim the phone from the British 'rj' don't let them....My money is on the Jocks (sorry Scottish people).

Well...
Documents in the London Science Museum show, that, in 1947, engineers from the British firm Standard Telephones and Cables (STC) found Reis's device dating from 1863 could transmit and "reproduce speech of good quality but of low efficiency".

Sir Frank Gill, then chairman of STC, ordered the tests be kept secret, as STC was negotiating with AT&T, which had evolved from the Bell Company of Alexander Graham Bell. Bell was generally accepted to have invented the telephone, and Gill thought that evidence to the contrary might disrupt the negotiations.

Besides Reis and Bell, others claimed to have invented the telephone. The result was one of the United States' longest running patent interference cases, involving Bell, Edison, Elisha Gray, Berliner, A E Dolbear, J W McDonagh, G B Richmond, W LW Voeker, J H Irwin, and Francis Blake Jr. The case started in 1878 and was not finalised until February 27, 1901.

The final irony of this case came a century later when, on September 25, 2001, the U.S. Congress (by resolution) declared the Italian American Antonio Meucci inventor of the telephone.
From here.

Originally posted by Macallan:

Originally posted by Daveski17:

Originally posted by rjhowie:

Regarding adding Scotland. Not just tv but roads, mediccal breakthroughs, telephone, etc.

Elisha Gray and Alexander Bell are trying to claim the phone from the British 'rj' don't let them....My money is on the Jocks (sorry Scottish people).

Well...
Documents in the London Science Museum show, that, in 1947, engineers from the British firm Standard Telephones and Cables (STC) found Reis's device dating from 1863 could transmit and "reproduce speech of good quality but of low efficiency".

Sir Frank Gill, then chairman of STC, ordered the tests be kept secret, as STC was negotiating with AT&T, which had evolved from the Bell Company of Alexander Graham Bell. Bell was generally accepted to have invented the telephone, and Gill thought that evidence to the contrary might disrupt the negotiations.

Besides Reis and Bell, others claimed to have invented the telephone. The result was one of the United States' longest running patent interference cases, involving Bell, Edison, Elisha Gray, Berliner, A E Dolbear, J W McDonagh, G B Richmond, W LW Voeker, J H Irwin, and Francis Blake Jr. The case started in 1878 and was not finalised until February 27, 1901.

The final irony of this case came a century later when, on September 25, 2001, the U.S. Congress (by resolution) declared the Italian American Antonio Meucci inventor of the telephone.
From here.

I knew it! A conspiracy....the CIA are behind all of this I am certain.

Originally posted by rjhowie:

What really got through to me was one BBC reporter in DC gushing on about Obama as if he was damn well ours (thank goodness he isn't).

Matt Frei perhaps?

Originally posted by Daveski17:

A conspiracy....the CIA are behind all of this I am certain.

And there I was thinking it was the E.A.C (Evil Atheist Conspiracy) .

Originally posted by thedawgfan:

Originally posted by Daveski17:

A conspiracy....the CIA are behind all of this I am certain.

And there I was thinking it was the E.A.C (Evil Atheist Conspiracy) .

No...I was talking about the CIA (Communist Insurgency Association), who else?

I just noticed the man is a lefty ,i am too but i dont write like he does hes well curved .Scarry thought only the mark of the beast will write like this cause the beast cannot hold a pen properly .No it cannot be true ,my dreams are shattered .:L)
So if his left hand is doing the work ,his right hand is getting the country on the right path .

Originally posted by Cocoa_butter:

I just noticed the man is a lefty ,i am too but i dont write like he does hes well curved .Scarry thought only the mark of the beast will write like this cause the beast cannot hold a pen properly .No it cannot be true ,my dreams are shattered .:L)
So if his left hand is doing the work ,his right hand is getting the country on the right path .

Garfield, Truman, Ford, Reagan, Bush I and Clinton were left-handers too. So am I. Well, ambidextrous, but mostly write left-handed.

Originally posted by fanfaron:

Originally posted by Cocoa_butter:

I just noticed the man is a lefty ,i am too but i dont write like he does hes well curved .Scarry thought only the mark of the beast will write like this cause the beast cannot hold a pen properly .No it cannot be true ,my dreams are shattered .:L)
So if his left hand is doing the work ,his right hand is getting the country on the right path .

Garfield, Truman, Ford, Reagan, Bush I and Clinton were left-handers too. So am I. Well, ambidextrous, but mostly write left-handed.

I can write left-handed but it's too much of a pain in the arse ( actually, more like a pain in the wrist ) so that's one of the few things I prefer doing wrong-handed

All this time, I thought it was us who were drinking the koolaide, now I know that's not true, it's the conspiracy theorists who have been drinking it all along, crazy people they are. They are so easy to fall for makebelieve.

Originally posted by thedawgfan:

I told you a long time ago Mr. Howie: England, Wales, Scotland and N. Ireland are due to become our 51st, 52nd, 53rd and 54th states respectivally. It's only a matter of time....

Bambi is NOT the leader of the world. The media may make him out to be, but he ain't.

As the US-54 join the European Union?

Obama certainly got attention in Europe, I was travelling yesterday. Practically all newspapers, and most weeklies, had Obama's face plastered on the front page, sometimes to the exclusion of anything else. The British in particular went overboard with commemorative issues. One exception was a Swedish tabloid giving a local murder case first billing and Obama second, and the Czech newspaper Mladá_fronta_DNES had a local murder case on the front page as well, the alleged murder of Tycho Brahe, but here the Obama inauguration had top billing.

Originally posted by fanfaron:

Garfield, Truman, Ford, Reagan, Bush I and Clinton were left-handers too. So am I. Well, ambidextrous, but mostly write left-handed.

So you have had sinister presidents for 34 years, with the exception of Jimmy Carter and Bush jr who were not in their right minds?

Originally posted by fanfaron:

Garfield, Truman, Ford, Reagan, Bush I and Clinton were left-handers too. So am I. Well, ambidextrous, but mostly write left-handed.

You can write well with your right hand? How'd you do that? Did it just come natural or did you practice? Were you forced to write with your right hand like my father back in the '40s?

Originally posted by HumbleBee:

Yes, they can seem repetitive but they are necessary, Americans need constant reassurance because of our doubt, whether we doubt him or ourselves or whatever it is, we need someone who can reassure us. Besides, don't all presidential candidates do that? It's propaganda.

We'll need far more than reassurance, but cheerleading has some value. Churchill did that when times looked very dire.

In the dark days after 9/11, Bush's reassurance was to encourage us to go shopping! Boy, did that ever raise my spirits.

I don't agree that we're post-racial (I know you didn't say that exactly), as some have put it. But there's no immediate fix in such rhetoric for what ails us right now. I have my fingers crossed.
...........................................................................................................................
When I'm feeling a little down, I can always check in to D&D for reassurance from my British friends. We are a miserable lot! If only we'd followed your lead, there'd be peace on earth and good will toward men.

Originally posted by fanfaron:

Originally posted by Cocoa_butter:

I just noticed the man is a lefty ,i am too but i dont write like he does hes well curved .Scarry thought only the mark of the beast will write like this cause the beast cannot hold a pen properly .No it cannot be true ,my dreams are shattered .:L)
So if his left hand is doing the work ,his right hand is getting the country on the right path .

Garfield, Truman, Ford, Reagan, Bush I and Clinton were left-handers too. So am I. Well, ambidextrous, but mostly write left-handed.

Me too ambidextrous,plus i can write backwards perfect with my left hand .
But what i meant how he writes with his left hand i dont hold my pen and write like he does never have done .

Originally posted by darumaki:

All this time, I thought it was us who were drinking the koolaide, now I know that's not true, it's the conspiracy theorists who have been drinking it all along, crazy people they are. They are so easy to fall for makebelieve.

what you onabout ?

Originally posted by jax:

As the US-54 join the European Union?

Yes, I reckon.

Originally posted by Jaybro:

When I'm feeling a little down, I can always check in to D&D for reassurance from my British friends. We are a miserable lot! If only we'd followed your lead, there'd be peace on earth and good will toward men.

As do i.

Originally posted by darumaki:

All this time, I thought it was us who were drinking the koolaide, now I know that's not true, it's the conspiracy theorists who have been drinking it all along, crazy people they are. They are so easy to fall for makebelieve.

Is Koolaide like Vimto? I used to drink it when I was very young, then when I was 13 or 14 I discovered beer. Unfortunately I had to wait until I was 18 to drink it legally (although I was often served the occasional pint of Bitter in pubs right up until I was 18).

Originally posted by Frenzie:

Originally posted by fanfaron:

Garfield, Truman, Ford, Reagan, Bush I and Clinton were left-handers too. So am I. Well, ambidextrous, but mostly write left-handed.

You can write well with your right hand? How'd you do that? Did it just come natural or did you practice? Were you forced to write with your right hand like my father back in the '40s?

In the second grade they forced me to write with my right hand. Before my that my hand writing was pretty good. Since then its been horrible.

Originally posted by Jaybro:

When I'm feeling a little down, I can always check in to D&D for reassurance from my British friends. We are a miserable lot! If only we'd followed your lead, there'd be peace on earth and good will toward men.

With your anti-British attitude I very much doubt that you have any British friends. Our past may have been violent & we built an Empire, which, just like yours is now, was based on capitalist Benthamite economics & the gun. It was libertarian capitalism that created the Empire that committed atrocities & ruled with an iron fist. Thankfully that is all behind us now. I don't mourn for the Empire; at its height when we were the richest country in the world, there was terrible *poverty, slum conditions & suffering for most of the working people in Britain. The lower middle classes weren't that well off either. It was an empire built on greed, money & exploitation by the wealthy, just like yours is. I am not proud of the fact that the British Empire was based on exploitation. Neither should you be of yours. As far as I know we don't sponsor international terrorism either now. Perhaps following our lead nowadays wouldn't be such a bad thing.


*Read the novels, plays or books of ~ Charles limey Dickens, George limey Eliot, Fanny limey Burney, Elizabeth limey Cleghorn Gaskill, Benjamin limey Disraeli, John Stuart limey Mill, Arthur limey Wing Pinero, William limey Morris, George limey Meredith, George Henry limey Lewes, Thomas limey Carlisle & Walter limey Bagehot inter limey alia.


P.S. If it makes you feel any better I don't like you either Jaybro.

Originally posted by Frenzie:

Were you forced to write with your right hand like my father back in the '40s?

Yes. Never very well but good enough to get along.

Originally posted by Daveski17:

With your anti-British attitude I very much doubt that you have any British friends.

Man, you're just as bad as Mr. maybe-we-were-on-the-wrong-side-in-ww2.
With that knee-jerk attitude I very much doubt that you have any friends at all.

Have a or two and calm down.

Originally posted by Macallan:

Originally posted by Daveski17:

With your anti-British attitude I very much doubt that you have any British friends.

Man, you're just as bad as Mr. maybe-we-were-on-the-wrong-side-in-ww2.
With that knee-jerk attitude I very much doubt that you have any friends at all.

Have a or two and calm down.

How did you know I don't have any friends? You must be psychic Mac.

Originally posted by Daveski17:

Originally posted by Macallan:

Originally posted by Daveski17:

With your anti-British attitude I very much doubt that you have any British friends.

Man, you're just as bad as Mr. maybe-we-were-on-the-wrong-side-in-ww2.
With that knee-jerk attitude I very much doubt that you have any friends at all.

Have a or two and calm down.

How did you know I don't have any friends? You must be psychic Mac.

Q.E.D.

Originally posted by fanfaron:

On what basis? Some speeches? He still hasn't done anything yet, and his speeches sound pretty much the same. That "leader of the world" stuff may stop after he makes a few unpopular decisions.

According to Wikipedia he is the Leader of the Free World at least.

The Leader of the Free World is an expression, primarily used during the Cold War, to describe the President of the United States. The phrase implies that the U.S. president as leader of the principle democratic superpower of the time was, by extension, the leader of all the worlds’ democratic nations. Although it had a Cold War origin, it is still used.

Unpopular decisions won't affect this titling since it applied for G.W.Bush as well.

I would have expected there to be a bit of a media circus about Obama, after all, he is making history as being the first Black US president. You can't begrudge him his day in the limelight. What I find most strange about the whole thing is that he seems to have kept his middle name (Hussain) quiet while he was trying to be elected. I know it means nothing, but all the same...

Originally posted by Daveski17:

I would have expected there to be a bit of a media circus about Obama, after all, he is making history as being the first Black US president. You can't begrudge him his day in the limelight. What I find most strange about the whole thing is that he seems to have kept his middle name (Hussain) quiet while he was trying to be elected. I know it means nothing, but all the same...

Well, the usual suspects ( read: far out right-wing radio talkshow hosts ) tried to use it as a smear.

Originally posted by Macallan:

Originally posted by Daveski17:

I would have expected there to be a bit of a media circus about Obama, after all, he is making history as being the first Black US president. You can't begrudge him his day in the limelight. What I find most strange about the whole thing is that he seems to have kept his middle name (Hussain) quiet while he was trying to be elected. I know it means nothing, but all the same...

Well, the usual suspects ( read: far out right-wing radio talkshow hosts ) tried to use it as a smear.

I imagined it was something of the sort. Why didn't he just change his name to John Smith? Or used special effects make-up to turn him white. Then when he won the election, pull off the mask & say 'surprise'. That would have been much funnier.

Just an update: I've read where ole Bambi has signed the papers to close Gitmo within the year. (If I find the link, I'll post it)
Edit: Here it is http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7845585.stm

Originally posted by Frenzie:

Originally posted by fanfaron:

Garfield, Truman, Ford, Reagan, Bush I and Clinton were left-handers too. So am I. Well, ambidextrous, but mostly write left-handed.

You can write well with your right hand? How'd you do that? Did it just come natural or did you practice? Were you forced to write with your right hand like my father back in the '40s?

Partly, but I guess the largest part of it just had to do with being in a right-handed world.

Originally posted by fanfaron:

Originally posted by Frenzie:

Originally posted by fanfaron:

Garfield, Truman, Ford, Reagan, Bush I and Clinton were left-handers too. So am I. Well, ambidextrous, but mostly write left-handed.

You can write well with your right hand? How'd you do that? Did it just come natural or did you practice? Were you forced to write with your right hand like my father back in the '40s?

Partly, but I guess the largest part of it just had to do with being in a right-handed world.

Wrong-handed you mean

While there are countless articles floating about on how great ole Bambi is, there are some who see differently. Oddly enough, it isn't Fox News for once (which really baffled me)
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/gerald_warner/blog/2009/01/20/barack_obama_inauguration_this_emperor_has_no_clothes_it_will_all_end_in_tears

"This will end in tears. The Obama hysteria is not merely embarrassing to witness, it is itself contributory to the scale of the disaster that is coming. What we are experiencing, in the deepening days of a global depression, is the desperate suspension of disbelief by people of intelligence - la trahison des clercs - in a pathetic effort to hypnotise themselves into the delusion that it will be all right on the night. It will not be all right.

We have been here before. In the spring of 1997, to be precise, when a charismatic, young prime minister entered Downing Street, cheered by children bussed in for the occasion waving plastic Union Jacks. A very few of us at that time incurred searing reproaches for denouncing the Great Charlatan (as I have always denominated Tony Blair) and dissenting from the public hysteria. Three times a deluded Britain elected that transparent fraud. Yesterday, when national bankruptcy became a formal reality, we reaped the bitter harvest of the Blair/Brown imposture.

The burnt child, contrary to conventional wisdom, does not fear the fire. After the Blair experience there is no excuse for anybody in Britain falling for Obama. Yet today, in this country, even some of those who remained sane during the emotional spasm of the Diana aberration are pumping the air for Princess Barack. At a time of gross economic and geopolitical instability throughout the Western world, this is beyond irresponsibility.

To anyone who kept his head, the string of Christmas cracker mottoes booming through the public address system on Washington's National Mall can only excite scepticism. It is crucial to recall the reality that lies behind the rhetoric. Denouncing "those who seek to advance their aims by inducing terror and slaughtering innocents" comes ill from a man whose flagship legislation, the Freedom of Choice Act, will impose abortion, including partial-birth abortion, on every state in the Union. It seems the era of Hope is to be inaugurated with a slaughter of the innocents.

Obama's American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan is like one of those toxic packages traded by bankers: it camouflages many unaffordable gifts to his client state. With a federal deficit already at $1.2 trillion, Obama wants to squander $825 billion (which will undoubtedly mushroom to more than $1 trillion) on creating 600,000 more government jobs and a further 459,000 in "green energy" (useless wind turbines and other Heath-Robinson contraptions favoured by Beltway environmentalists).

It is frightening to think there is a real possibility that the entire world economy could go into complete meltdown and famine kill millions. Yet Western - and British - commentators are cocooned in a warm comfort zone of infatuation with America's answer to Neil Kinnock. We should be long past applauding politicians of any hue: they got us into this mess. The best deserve a probationary opportunity to prove themselves, the worst should be in jail.

It is questionable whether the present political system can survive the coming crisis. Whatever the solution, teenage swooning sentimentality over a celebrity cult has no part in it. The most powerful nation on earth is confronting its worst economic crisis under the leadership of its most extremely liberal politician, who has virtually no experience of federal politics. That is not an opportunity but a catastrophe.

These are frank, even ungracious, words: they have the one merit that, unlike almost everything else written today about Obama, they will not require to be eaten in the future."

Just noticed your comment Daveski17 about "Jocks (!). Totally happy with that descriptive word. Anywhere the Jocks went into battle the opposites had a hard time. At least we don't get touchy on nicknames (!).

It will be of great interest to see how Obama gets the countryout the financial mess. Borrow more money to get out of debt? As for internationally I very much doubt if he will make a lot of differe3nce. Espeically the ME. He might change the words about but the Palestinians an't gong to get fooled at all. What he has to be aware of is that thedecline in US populairty around the world has been grwoing since before President Bush came along. He certainly hastened the dislike and upopularity but I doubt if we will see any dramatic changes in policy internationally. There will be nice words but maybe the rest of the world isn't as desperate and gullible as internal America. All clappy-happy and isn't-he-wonderful. Heavens the guy has done nothing so he has a heck of a lot to prove. The dream has been sour in the States for a while so maybe that is why people are so desperate for something to change their fortunes. That I can understand but all that mawkishness and childish stuff. No doubt we will get nice word about (with a national sigh) how the US doesn't want to be responsible for the world and democracy )so many over there think they created the democracy baby) but (sigh) there was no-one else. Yeah, yawn.

For Americans I do hope that something comes out of all the oratic hype. It is all the same rhetoric over and over again now he has to DO something. A shame in a sense as there is much in Americans to like - their ambition, hope, flair, optimism and warmness. It is a pity the way the place is run because all those decent people deserve better than they have been getting.

Yeah well...he's only been in office two days, he probably doesn't know where all the toilets are in the Whitehouse yet! I can't see him doing anything different. Besides he isn't half as funny as 'W' was.

Originally posted by Daveski17:

Besides he isn't half as funny as 'W' was.

We have to take this as a plus.

Gerald Warner, the writer of the Telegraph piece cited by thedawgfan, is a part of the problem. As goofy as the hype is, that goofy is the school that sees disaster two or three days into an administration. But people like Warner have to get a living, and this is as good a way as any, I suppose.

If Warner is correct, we're doomed. If McCain had been elected, we'd also have been doomed. If bullshit were £s, people like Warner would be rich.

From an Oct. 3rd piece on Sarah Palin by Warner: "She looked more like the vote-winning machine she was two weeks ago. The media promised us the ritual humiliation of a political novice; what we saw was a laid-back lady, smiling her way through a relaxed encounter. If this was supposed to be Barack Obama's tipping point, his campaign had better get back to the drawing board."

I don't understand what is so hard about having faith, and not religious faith, because a chunk of the world isn't religious, but actual FAITH: the belief of things unseen and unpredicted(my paraphrase of the definition). I'm not saying all hail to Obama, but I am saying the pre-judging is getting a bit ridiculous. I believe that Obama will contribute to some kind of change in the world whether it be good or bad or not seen until after his 4 or 8 years have passed and there is a new president. BUT, but, I also won't be surprised if he doesn't because he's human, not a GOD, and being head of state may not be the "job" for him, but he deserves a chance to show you like everyone else.

Originally posted by HumbleBee:

I don't understand what is so hard about having faith, and not religious faith, because a chunk of the world isn't religious,

Luckily, I happen to live in that chunk of the world.

Okay, but there is a second part of that sentence which is why that part was mentioned.

Originally posted by HumbleBee:

Okay, but there is a second part of that sentence which is why that part was mentioned.

Well I suppose what I am saying is that I am just fortunate that it isn't particularly a problem in the particular part of Albion that I happen to live in. We just aren't particularly religious, & I like it that way. If I wanted to live in a religious country I would move to Iran or the USA.

Good point. But I do think things have changed a little in the US since they no longer include the words "under GOD" in the Pledge of Allegiance. You used "particular" a lot in that statement. Lol.

Yeah...I didn't want to be too particular!

Originally posted by HumbleBee:

Good point. But I do think things have changed a little in the US since they no longer include the words "under GOD" in the Pledge of Allegiance. You used "particular" a lot in that statement. Lol.

Like what? It's not like 'under god' has been there from the beginning.

Lol @ Daveski...

And, I didn't say it has.

BEER!!!!!

Originally posted by HumbleBee:

But I do think things have changed a little in the US since they no longer include the words "under GOD" in the Pledge of Allegiance.

But "under God" is still in the pledge. What are you going on about?

Originally posted by thedawgfan:

Originally posted by HumbleBee:

But I do think things have changed a little in the US since they no longer include the words "under GOD" in the Pledge of Allegiance.

But "under God" is still in the pledge. What are you going on about?

Wasn't there some provision to allow bloody heathens like myself to omit it?

Originally posted by Macallan:

Originally posted by thedawgfan:

Originally posted by HumbleBee:

But I do think things have changed a little in the US since they no longer include the words "under GOD" in the Pledge of Allegiance.

But "under God" is still in the pledge. What are you going on about?

Wasn't there some provision to allow bloody heathens like myself to omit it?

Well, this is a democracy so if you took a fancy to doing so I reckon you could.
On the nat'l scale however, like at the inauguration, "under God" will be said.

Originally posted by thedawgfan:

Originally posted by Macallan:

Originally posted by thedawgfan:

Originally posted by HumbleBee:

But I do think things have changed a little in the US since they no longer include the words "under GOD" in the Pledge of Allegiance.

But "under God" is still in the pledge. What are you going on about?

Wasn't there some provision to allow bloody heathens like myself to omit it?

Well, this is a democracy so if you took a fancy to doing so I reckon you could.
On the nat'l scale however, like at the inauguration, "under God" will be said.

Yeah, it's still political suicide for a presidential candidate to declare that (s)he isn't a christian of some sort.
Otherwise, at least for immigrants becoming US citizens any religious references are strictly optional.

Originally posted by HumbleBee:

I'm not saying all hail to Obama, but I am saying the pre-judging is getting a bit ridiculous.

People pre-judge presidents every time a new one is in office. Supporters of that new president carp and whine about it, forgetting the fact that they did it themselves the last time a president not of their party was inaugurated.

For example, I noticed that in 2004, it was "F*ck the South" (the South, of course, voting mostly Republican). This time, it was "From 52 to 48, with love." What a difference 4 years make. Well, winning makes the difference, of course.

Originally posted by fanfaron:

Originally posted by HumbleBee:

I'm not saying all hail to Obama, but I am saying the pre-judging is getting a bit ridiculous.

People pre-judge presidents every time a new one is in office. Supporters of that new president carp and whine about it, forgetting the fact that they did it themselves the last time a president not of their party was inaugurated.

For example, I noticed that in 2004, it was "F*ck the South" (the South, of course, voting mostly Republican). This time, it was "From 52 to 48, with love." What a difference 4 years make. Well, winning makes the difference, of course.

Which now means in a couple of months, it will be F**k the North (or Yankees).
Or maybe a Latino Jermemiah Wright will emerge to give a sermon as noteworty as Obama's former spiritual mentor. (Go***mn America)
Who knows?

My apologies, I must be mistaking reality with some warped fantasy world. Thank you for correcting me, DawgFan.

And I am aware that people pre-judge newly placed presidents. What I am saying is that it's ridiculous. Skepticism on the other hand is expected.