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 rjhowie:

Too much of the US dross tv here which saturates thanks to the buisness minds who can have something cheap.

I know, rj. You don't yourself prefer "something cheap," do you?

Originally posted by rjhowie:

How Americans of grey cell mode cope with such rubbish I don't kniow but if fills young minds here with nonsense.

There's a Scots version of television competing in the world market? (Who the heck could understand what they were saying? Do we have to buy the limited edition of the book that mentioned R. J. Howie to "get" it? Ah! The Ebonics of the White World!!)
Those that have adequate grey cells (I'm surprised that you spelled it the American way…) use them.

Originally posted by wikipedian:

Umm rj I live in the UK and not in the US. But I'm leaning towards the US since I was brought up in a US culture and took US education.

Kiddo: You didn't "take" it. You were given it. Now it's up to you, what you make of it.

What did Dalrymple say, most recently? (see here)

Originally posted by johnnysaucepn:

The government should be concerned with providing common services to all.

I'd have to stop you at that point… I do understand your viewpoint; I just disagree with it.

The government should be concerned with –in my view– mediating disputes between the various factions that arise among the polity. My heritage (the education I received) considers "factions" to be deleterious to the commonwealth.

We might as well have democracy…

Originally posted by rjhowie:

Well I wouldn't if I were you wikipedian! Perhaps you are young and a little carried away with the hype. It is one hell of a country to be poor in. Too much of the US dross tv here which saturates thanks to the buisness minds who can have something cheap. How Americans of grey cell mode cope with such rubbish I don't kniow but if fills young minds here with nonsense. So as reasonably as possible, get real!

I've never seen such utter rubbish as Coronation Street and other British soaps. The only decent British shows are Doctor Who and Merlin. Also, there is no British show that can match Nova: Science Now.

Originally posted by OakdaleFTL:

Originally posted by wikipedian:

Umm rj I live in the UK and not in the US. But I'm leaning towards the US since I was brought up in a US culture and had an American education.

Kiddo: You didn't "take" it. You were given it. Now it's up to you, what you make of it.

What did Dalrymple say, most recently? (see here)

I still do. The school I'm going to is http://www.mdlp.org.

Originally posted by OakdaleFTL:

Originally posted by johnnysaucepn:

The government should be concerned with providing common services to all.

I'd have to stop you at that point… I do understand your viewpoint; I just disagree with it.

The government should be concerned with –in my view– mediating disputes between the various factions that arise among the polity. My heritage (the education I received) considers "factions" to be deleterious to the commonwealth.

The problem with that is that all it creates is bureaucracy and paralysis. No wonder you have such a distaste for it...

Well unfortunately OakdaleFTL you folk have got the cheap media keech all sewn up and certainly the market leader in it. Even in neighbouring Canada some years ago they were trying to control the amount of guff being imprted north. I grant yo as I said that intelligent ex-Colonists have the vision to see much of the tv stuff to be a groan but it creates a sub-culture in other countries that isn't healthy. TV companies import it as it is cheap to buy and is cheap to look at. They do influence and undermine other cultures and your own to.

Originally posted by wikipedian:

I still do. The school I'm going to is http://www.mdlp.org.

I stand corrected. (Carry on!)

Originally posted by rjhowie:

They [American TV shows] do influence and undermine other cultures and your own

'Tis a pity so many are incapable of amusing themselves, RJ. But I think your criticism misses the mark. Even potted plants need watering…
————————————————————————

Originally posted by johnnysaucepn:

The problem with that is that all it creates is bureaucracy and paralysis. No wonder you have such a distaste for it...

As Yuval Levin says (at NRO's Corner)

The idea that our system is paralyzed by disagreement is very common, especially on the left. But it has very little to do with the crisis of governance we actually face.

Put another way, our system of government isn't designed primarily for the ease of our "lords and masters"…

It is just not true that nothing gets done in Washington. Lots gets done, and there is really only one kind of thing that we are truly failing to do: genuine fiscal reform, which means particularly entitlement reform. Our failure to do this is indeed leading us toward a huge crisis, but the usual liberal complaints about partisanship are more often used as a way of avoiding dealing with this coming crisis than as a way of confronting it.

Some people recognize this…

The fact is that the legacy of the Great Society, especially but not exclusively in the form of the two health-care entitlements of the Great Society, Medicare and Medicaid, now threatens the fiscal future of the government and therefore the economic future of the country. The design of those two entitlement programs was not well thought out in the mid-60s, and in more recent times has been a primary driver of the inflation of health costs that is at the core of both the health-care financing crisis and the government’s fiscal woes. It is far worse than the usual kind of legislative screwup. Medicare and Medicaid, structured as they are, are just the kinds of “bad laws” passed “through haste, inadvertence, or design” that Alexander Hamilton warned against in Federalist 73, and thought the constitutional system’s various restraints would protect us against. The elite governing consensus of the mid-60s represented a failure of those constraints that resulted in a number of costly errors. It was that period, not our own time, that marked a breakdown of our constitutional system.

This is not Rocket Science… (Good thing, too: We seem to have faltered there, as well.)

Now we are stuck having to deal with the consequences of that failure, yet many of our contemporary liberal elites still insist it was not a failure at all, and yearn for that golden age of the 60s when Republicans and Democrats in Congress could get together over coffee and agree to inflate the welfare state without interruption by the unwashed masses blathering on about liberty and the Constitution. Cleaning up the mess left by the Great Society will not be easy, precisely because the sort of consensus it took to pass Medicare and Medicaid is exceedingly uncommon in our republic. Reforming Medicare and Medicaid would seem to require a similar consensus, but no such consensus looks likely now that our constitutional system is, on the whole, working again.

That means that reform will have to be advanced through the normal processes and circumstances of our constitutional system, not around them. The solution will not involve quiet conversations among liberals of different parties, it will involve a political campaign aimed at informing the public and gaining its support. This has never been a pleasant prospect for politicians—simply put, we have not reformed our entitlement system because voters don’t want to, and bringing about such reforms will involve informing voters about the failures of that system and changing their minds, which is not what politicians generally do. But in the last couple of years we have finally begun to see the Republican Party step up and begin that work in earnest.

(And –like it or not– the Tea Party Movement has been influential toward that end.)

We shall see later this year if the public is open to such persuasion, or if the Democratic Party will succeed in persuading the public to ignore the coming disaster while simultaneously complaining about our paralyzed politics.

Either way, we should not be confused about the cause and the nature of the crisis we face. The elite-consensus government [Liberals] yearn for is not the solution but the problem.

(source of quotes: The Real Breakdown)

But this thread is about President Barack Obama, right? What's he up to now?

Call it President Obama’s Committee for the Re-Election of the President — a political slush fund at the Health and Human Services Department.

Only this isn’t some little fund from shadowy private sources; this is taxpayer money, redirected to help Obama win another term. A massive amount of it, too — $8.3 billion. Yes, that’s billion, with a B.

Here is how it works.
— continue reading

As the authors of the Post's article quip at the end: Now that is some serious audacity.

And –just when I think it can't possibly get any stranger– I'm pointed to a Fred Reed column from a-ways back: Justice at Last. I actually chuckled a time or two… But this could never happen. Right?

Originally posted by OakdaleFTL:

The idea that our system is paralyzed by disagreement is very common, especially on the left. But it has very little to do with the crisis of governance we actually face.

Not only is that not quite what I was getting at, it's a bit of a fallacy. You can't just argue that A isn't a problem because you think B is a bigger problem.

What, then, were you getting at? (If a patient brought into the E.R. has a sucking checst wound and a hangnail, what kind of doctor would choose to treat the hangnail first…?)

Would-be intellectual wanerings there old boy. It doesn't miss the mark. Most of it is dross and does influence others over there and here. Unfortunately we get saturated with it because cheap to buy and fills space ever since 24/7 became the norm.

Apparently, Dolly was not the only sheep cloned in Scotland… There was a long tradition? (Please refer to my previous mention of "potted plants".)

I know it's a difficult concept but, however the technology facilitates it, there is an OFF button… (Convincingly claiming that you've shut your brain off already and, hence, can't be accountable seems more than a little silly — to me.)

But what has this got to do with Barack Obama?

No there wasn't any long tradition dear straw clutcher. One would have thought by now being here so long you might just have noticed that every single thread here wanders off. Or has brain cloning become a taken for granted aspect in the ex-Colonies? Just to keep you happy I wil include Obama. My forecast is he will win the ramatazz that passes for an election.

How will you know anything? Your Telly corrupts you mind! (Should we come up with an American spelling? What: You don't like Boob-Tube? ) Are you so incapable of thought?
I take it, you think a popular election is a sensible way to give power to those who are above the law…. We've a different tradition.

ok, the reason(i hope) is our welfare system sucks ass(minus the budget) is that our Presidents(before Bush Sr, minus Clinton) taught us that the American dream was worth chasing. and they discouraged accepting handouts and being lazy. today obama is encouraging the social horse shit no one wants. and that the American is pointless and you should be as fucking ass lazy and its ok.

Oh I can fully agree with you OakdaleFTL, you do have a different tradition - it just lacks democracy and is awash with big money. Your elections are a nice give away sham to the children to keep them happy and wear funny hats and go ramatazz and what purpotes to be party "conferences". In truth they don't mean a fig. You are run by big business and the military. Democracy is only a word conjured up to keep you feeling good. The philosphy that if you are on welfare automatically somehow less American betrays much. Yiu don't really have much of a welfare system so it is a rather more class defined than you like to admit. As well as not caring a damn about the tens of millions poor in the Hollywood "dream" factory nonsense. Just look at the choices for 'leaqder'. A wordy community activist man out of his depth and caryying on much like the one before him in the world. Ethnics had a hand in that in the land of fairness. The other is a smiling goon who got somewhere because of money. What an insult to the education system! But you have been there before with Bush and Gore!

RJ, I bow before your urdu-ition! But your English is atrocious… Mine is –well– American.

Mutual intelligibility decreases in literary and specialized contexts which rely on educated vocabulary. Due to religious nationalism since the partition of British [colonies] and continued communal tensions, native speakers of both […] frequently assert them to be completely distinct languages, despite the numerous similarities between the two in a colloquial setting. However, it is quite easy to distinguish differences in vocabulary.

Put bluntly, you are an acute and astute observer only of your own bile.
(Of course, I mean this in the kindest, gentlest way… )

Originally posted by rjhowie:

Well unfortunately OakdaleFTL you folk have got the cheap media keech all sewn up and certainly the market leader in it. Even in neighbouring Canada some years ago they were trying to control the amount of guff being imprted north. I grant yo as I said that intelligent ex-Colonists have the vision to see much of the tv stuff to be a groan but it creates a sub-culture in other countries that isn't healthy. TV companies import it as it is cheap to buy and is cheap to look at. They do influence and undermine other cultures and your own to.

To the extent that people choose to watch TV, who's to blame? Other cultures? Let'em eat curds and whey.

And you can't make stupid Canadians smart by government edict.

As Forrest Gump put it, "Stupid is as stupid does."

I never watched any of the below BY CHOICE. If any of my Canadian forebears did, once again, who's to blame?

"When Things Were Rotten" (1975). Created by Mel Brooks. Hoo boy. Lasted a half season. Brooks used the same Robin Hood theme in the 1993 movie "Men in Tights."

"Mr. T. and Tina" (1976). Starring Pat Morita (who also played Arnold on "Happy Days"). Canceled after five episodes.

"The Ropers" (1979-80). An entire show built around the landlords from the nearly as awful "Three's Company."

"Joanie Loves Chachi" (1982-83). Scott Baio's addition to "Happy Days" was a classic jump-the-shark moment; here the shark goes belly up and begins to smell.

"Mama's Family" (1983-90). The Vickie Lawrence skit was the weak link on "The Carol Burnett Show." So, naturally, it got a weekly half-hour.

"Manimal" (1983). NYU prof could change into any animal to help fight crimes. Show turned into a turkey.

Originally posted by rjhowie:

Well unfortunately OakdaleFTL you folk have got the cheap media keech all sewn up and certainly the market leader in it. Even in neighbouring Canada some years ago they were trying to control the amount of guff being imprted north. I grant yo as I said that intelligent ex-Colonists have the vision to see much of the tv stuff to be a groan but it creates a sub-culture in other countries that isn't healthy. TV companies import it as it is cheap to buy and is cheap to look at. They do influence and undermine other cultures and your own to.

To the extent that people choose to watch TV, who's to blame?

Other cultures? Let'em eat curds and whey.

And you can't make stupid Canadians smart by government edict.

As Forrest Gump put it, "Stupid is as stupid does."

I never watched any of the below BY CHOICE. If any of my Canadian forebears did, once again, who's to blame?

"When Things Were Rotten" (1975). Created by Mel Brooks. Hoo boy. Lasted a half season. Brooks used the same Robin Hood theme in the 1993 movie "Men in Tights."

"Mr. T. and Tina" (1976). Starring Pat Morita (who also played Arnold on "Happy Days"). Canceled after five episodes.

"The Ropers" (1979-80). An entire show built around the landlords from the nearly as awful "Three's Company."

"Joanie Loves Chachi" (1982-83). Scott Baio's addition to "Happy Days" was a classic jump-the-shark moment; here the shark goes belly up and begins to smell.

"Mama's Family" (1983-90). The Vickie Lawrence skit was the weak link on "The Carol Burnett Show." So, naturally, it got a weekly half-hour.

"Manimal" (1983). NYU prof could change into any animal to help fight crimes. Show turned into a turkey.

Undermine?

Being Scottish is about driving a German car to an Irish pub for a Belgian beer,
then picking up an Indian curry, going home and sitting on Swedish furniture,
watching American TV shows on a Japanese TV.

Makes one wonder, eh?

Not really Jaybro. In a land full of nutjobs one can get used to you. One could also equate that portrayal of Scots (who built much of your country until the Irish came in to cause mayhem) along with the average American who hasn't a clue about the outside world hence Fox doing so well......And OakdaleFTL you really do think a lot of yourself accusing this quiet, unassuming opinionator, of exercising bile. Trouble is you ex-Colonists are so soft you can't take anything outside of softly, softly.

Not really Jaybro. In a land over there so full of nutjobs one can get used to you as one of the more harmless. One could also equate that portrayal of Scots (who built much of your country until the Irish came in to cause mayhem) along with the average American who hasn't a clue about the outside world hence Fox doing so well. And OakdaleFTL you really do think a lot of yourself accusing this quiet, unassuming opinionator, of exercising bile. Trouble is you ex-Colonists are so soft you can't take anything outside of softly, softly.

Originally posted by rjhowie:

And OakdaleFTL you really do think a lot of yourself accusing this quiet, unassuming opinionator, of exercising bile.

RJ, the only thing you've evidenced here in your posts more than your animosity for America, its position in the world, and what brought that about; is your lack of qualification for giving such opinions.

Here in the States we have a "traditional" position in our smaller burgs: The town drunk. No doubt, in the Old World, those who haven't the constitution to compete for that position must feel gratification and acceptance that their tradition still recognizes the Village Idiot.

Originally posted by rjhowie:

Not really Jaybro. In a land over there so full of nutjobs one can get used to you as one of the more harmless. One could also equate that portrayal of Scots (who built much of your country until the Irish came in to cause mayhem) along with the average American who hasn't a clue about the outside world hence Fox doing so well. And OakdaleFTL you really do think a lot of yourself accusing this quiet, unassuming opinionator, of exercising bile. Trouble is you ex-Colonists are so soft you can't take anything outside of softly, softly.

Perhaps our nutjobbery stems from our Scottish' buildery.

As of January 2011, the Democratic Party-affiliated Public Policy Polling reports that Fox News Channel is the second-most trusted television news network in the country, with 42% of respondents reporting they trust the network, compared to other major news channels (behind PBS which stands at 50%, and ahead of NBC at 41%, CNN at 40%, CBS at 36%, and ABC at 35%). Simultaneously, Fox News Channel is also ranked the most distrusted news channel in the country, with 46% of respondents reporting they distrust the network (behind PBS at 30%, NBC at 41%, and CNN, CBS, and ABC each at 43%). Overall this represents a combined -16% drop among respondents from the year before and places the channel fourth among Americans in terms of trust/distrust (behind PBS, NBC, and CNN, and ahead of CBS, and ABC). Most of this drop is the result of a strong increase of distrust among moderates and liberals. While conservatives largely held the same view of the network as the year before (moving from 75% who trusted the channel last year to 72% who trust it this year), moderates and liberals increased heavily in their distrust of the network, with levels of distrust raising 48% to 60% among moderates and 66% to 82% among liberals. Of the poll's respondents, 18% identified as liberal, 41% as moderate, and 40% as conservative, while 40% identified as Democratic, 37% as Republican, and 23% as independent/other.[40][41]

You see, Sir, the world is far more complicated than the citizenry of your average English appendage (that would be Scotland) could possibly imagine.

Originally posted by jbrothernew37:

Undermine?

Being Scottish is about driving a German car to an Irish pub for a Belgian beer,
then picking up an Indian curry, going home and sitting on Swedish furniture,
watching American TV shows on a Japanese TV.

Makes one wonder, eh?

Yes - driving on Scottish-invented pneumatic tyres, on Scottish-invented tarmac, eliminating that curry into Scottish-invented flush toilet, and watching a Scottish-invented TV.

All those other countries? Merely standing on the shoulders of giants.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_inventions_and_discoveries

Did they have something to do with this invention too?

Maxwell's equations for Jello Pudding...

Originally posted by johnnysaucepn:

...watching a Scottish-invented TV.

All those other countries? Merely standing on the shoulders of giants.

Don't forget his equation for creating Jello Pudding!

The J is for Jello, and what follows it stands for whipping cream.

Originally posted by johnnysaucepn:

...watching a Scottish-invented TV.

All those other countries? Merely standing on the shoulders of giants.

Don't forget his equation for creating Jello Pudding!

The J is for Jello, and what follows it stands for whipping cream...Hence, Jello with whipping cream.

.....
Giants, you say?

Originally posted by Smileyfaze:

Did they have something to do with this invention too?

proof? btw in order to proof this, you must be able to add all the budgets up and then add obama's debt ceiling met under it. the budgets are mostly likely public as well.

Apart from johnnysaucepn's correct and excellent putdown Jaybro don't you dare lay the blame on the mother country for your two centuries of self-created arrogance, political skulduggery and misuse of the words freedom and rights. You marched off from us and beat your chests about that Revolution. After that event you were on your own and what a damn mes you have made of it all.

Originally posted by johnnysaucepn:

Yes - driving on Scottish-invented pneumatic tyres, on Scottish-invented tarmac, eliminating that curry into Scottish-invented flush toilet, and watching a Scottish-invented TV.

To take just the last:
German, Russian, Scots, Hungarian, American, American — well, the rest is history… (Check here and here.) Give the Romans credit for roads that don't wash out, eh? But don't ask them for their advice on problems facing the modern world; at least, not as Romans.

Originally posted by rjhowie:

Apart from johnnysaucepn's correct and excellent putdown Jaybro don't you dare lay the blame on the mother country for your two centuries of self-created arrogance, political skulduggery and misuse of the words freedom and rights. You marched off from us and beat your chests about that Revolution. After that event you were on your own and what a damn mes you have made of it all.

your acting surprised that humans arn't arrogant... just the american breed.

Deny the British empire's crimes?

No, they simply ignore them.

New evidence of British colonial atrocities has not changed their national ability to disregard it.

SOURCE

There is one thing you can say for the Holocaust deniers: at least they know what they are denying. In order to sustain the lies they tell, they must engage in strenuous falsification. To dismiss Britain's colonial atrocities, no such effort is required. Most people appear to be unaware that anything needs to be denied.

The story of benign imperialism, whose overriding purpose was not to seize land, labour and commodities but to teach the natives English, table manners and double-entry book-keeping, is a myth that has been carefully propagated by the rightwing press. But it draws its power from a remarkable national ability to airbrush and disregard our past.

Last week's revelations, that the British government systematically destroyed the documents detailing mistreatment of its colonial subjects, and that the Foreign Office then lied about a secret cache of files containing lesser revelations, is by any standards a big story. But it was either ignored or consigned to a footnote by most of the British press. I was unable to find any mention of the secret archive on the Telegraph's website. The Mail's only coverage, as far as I can determine, was an opinion piece by a historian called Lawrence James, who used the occasion to insist that any deficiencies in the management of the colonies were the work of "a sprinkling of misfits, incompetents and bullies", while everyone else was "dedicated, loyal and disciplined".

The British government's suppression of evidence was scarcely necessary. Even when the documentation of great crimes is abundant, it is not denied but simply ignored. In an article for the Daily Mail in 2010, for example, the historian Dominic Sandbrook announced that "Britain's empire stands out as a beacon of tolerance, decency and the rule of law … Nor did Britain countenance anything like the dreadful tortures committed in French Algeria." Could he really have been unaware of the history he is disavowing?.................Continued...

Britain destroyed records of colonial crimes

Review finds thousands of papers detailing shameful acts were culled, while others were kept secret illegally

Thousands of documents detailing some of the most shameful acts and crimes committed during the final years of the British empire were systematically destroyed to prevent them falling into the hands of post-independence governments, an official review has concluded.

Those papers that survived the purge were flown discreetly to Britain where they were hidden for 50 years in a secret Foreign Office archive, beyond the reach of historians and members of the public, and in breach of legal obligations for them to be transferred into the public domain...................Continued...

SOURCE

Still think Her Majestie's petticoat is devoid of colonial blood?

ARROGANCE noun. An overbearing pride evidenced by a superior manner toward perceived inferiors, which is a self-descriptive word employed freely & often by the British, to be used ever so seldom on their own shameful selves, but only on those they consider much less civilized then they. note: the vat calling the kettle black.

Originally posted by rjhowie:

You marched off from us and beat your chests about that Revolution.

We kicked British ass then, & a few years later when they came back for more,
Ole Hickory promptly served them up another helpin' of ole fashioned KickAss!
They didn't like that none to much, so they skedaddled all the way back to Mummy England.


Today, that 1815 skirmish with those funny talkin' inferior invaders in red jackets would be simply called a "Tennessean KickAss"

Care ta try one moe time girls??

Or, has the Almighty British Empire shot its collective load in it's collective hands?

And when you and your particular ethnic clan tried to invade north into Canada you well and truly got your arse kicked. Maybe also you brned the White House for propaganda?! It is also interesting that you lambast the British Empire. In the early 1930's you actually planned to attack it accodrding to your own US ducuments but then though better of it - wisely. However you wanted an Empire of your own and went out all hell an leather to replace ours with yours which you did thanks to WW2 and your own malevolent ends. You moan about Empires but have one yourself. It is an economic and military one with more bases round the world than we ever had so save us the bleat about Empires when you practice one yourself without having to administer your colonies. We gave the world an international language and created global trade and the corporates who have ran America since their money forebears threw the tea into Boston Harbour were jealous and determined to replace it. Thanks for the compliment!

Even the blacks wanted to fight with the British because they felt it would be worse with the new bosses and how right that one was to prove. An Indian or negroe in the land of the free? Now there's a big joke! You also took a Hell of a lot longer to eradicate slavery but money is always the winner in America. Neither were you content to stay on the east side of the mountains as Britain did but determined to do the red man in by slaughter or conning them with worthles treaties. No redcoats just bluecoats and the money men pulling the strings.

Take it to more modern times and Stormin' Norman lavished praise on the continuers of the redcoats having them on board. Can I remind you of S. Vietnam please. Half a million and the jungle boys ran circles round you. What about those girls eh? What about WW1 coming in at the end all kiss arse mode and got damn slaughtered in their thousands with the over confidence brainwashing they were superior to everyone else. Those boys got badly done in - shame on you. So wax on about girlies dear terorist but you leave your own history wide open to not only a negative but a laugh following your way of assessing things.

As Presidential as he can get, our dear President, the Annointed One, the One & Only, the Master of Obamanation, may I introduce to you,

Barack Hussein Obama.

Originally posted by rjhowie:

We [(some of the British)] gave the world an international language

Now, if only it would reach as far as Glasgow!

We're a hell of a lot nearer. It hasn't reached America yet and you won't get it right so pots n' kettles. Eben much of england has a problem with it's own laguange so not much chance for you folks.

Would you fault my usage (of the King's/Queen's) English?

And —again, I ask: How is this pertinent? Aren't we talking about Bush-44? You are typical, RJ.

Originally posted by rjhowie:

In the early 1930's you actually planned to attack it accodrding to your own US ducuments but then though better of it - wisely. However you wanted an Empire of your own and went out all hell an leather to replace ours with yours which you did thanks to WW2 and your own malevolent ends.

More nonsense, out of historical context, and out of the actual world.

Thanks to our malevolence and Adolf's stupidity, you don't speak German today.

For a little context:

Joint Army and Navy Basic War Plan Red, also known as the Atlantic Strategic War Plan[citation needed], was a war plan by the United States in the event of war with British Empire (the "Red" forces). The war was seen as "unlikely" and "highly improbable,"[1] but was used as a planning exercise to understand the United States' ability to defend the Atlantic coast, as well as fight a two-front war with Japan and the British Empire simultaneously.

.....
Please explain which "malevolent ends" we're operative. Better yet, what does it even mean?

Originally posted by Smileyfaze:

Still think Her Majestie's petticoat is devoid of colonial blood?

ARROGANCE noun. An overbearing pride evidenced by a superior manner toward perceived inferiors, which is a self-descriptive word employed freely & often by the British, to be used ever so seldom on their own shameful selves, but only on those they consider much less civilized then they. note: the vat calling the kettle black.

The brits paid for the crimes in blood and in full. The wars they lost after ours in 1812 was the retribution paid by Britain.

Originally posted by Virusboy:

Originally posted by Smileyfaze:

Still think Her Majestie's petticoat is devoid of colonial blood?

ARROGANCE noun. An overbearing pride evidenced by a superior manner toward perceived inferiors, which is a self-descriptive word employed freely & often by the British, to be used ever so seldom on their own shameful selves, but only on those they consider much less civilized then they. note: the vat calling the kettle black.

The brits paid for the crimes in blood and in full. The wars they lost after ours in 1812 was the retribution paid by Britain.

No, they will never finish paying, for their crimes are ongoing, & their remorse is non-existent.

No it is NOT nonsense Jaybro.

Very recently, I watched an hour long tv documentary on the that very thing, Code Red. It followed an American journalist who showed the actual ldocumentation is kept in government hands. He got access throughfreedom of information access. It gave great details including the building of an airfield near the Canadian border for a lighning attack. Britain were not as close then as now and there was simmering resentment of the place of the British Empire and the wish to replace it. There were interviews as well and the papers where there on display on the screen. Plans to rush at Canadian cities and assess the military resistance as well as how long it would take for Great Britain to come and assist. The meeting of navies was part of the plan too and they tried to assess what the outcome would be and reckoned it would be stalemate as Britain would call on Empire resources. Special training groups were set inone of the largest army camps near the Border too. In the end the matter was dropped and as things moved in Europe re Hitler, etc it was decided to shelve the whole sorry, stupid idea. So it is a factual document and your government archives has the papers.

And in sorties the American terrorist, Smileyfaze, who lurked about with murdering scum that killed innocents. Did I hear someone shout "hypocrisy"?! Crimes are ongoing? Now there is another laugh. Just look at the bloody hands of America all over the world. The stirrer of terrorism the invader and usurper. It is the most violent nation on Earth and you can use those words about never finishing paying for foul deeds. It's negative accolade is the worst terror creating country itself. You have already been caught out mouthing emotional and terrorist guff and had your teeth pulled. Maybe Obama is the lesser of two evils in the election. Look at Smilefaze's only alternative - that dopey Mormon clown!

Originally posted by rjhowie:

Maybe Obama is the lesser of two evils in the election. Look at Smilefaze's only alternative - that dopey Mormon clown!

It does always seem to revert to some religious prejudice, with you, doesn't it, RJ? (Yes, I can laugh at that: Presbyterianism isn't exactly taking the world by fire…)

Well, when I first watched Obama pounding his chest about "Gettin' Osama Bin Laden" I thought it was just an over blown, full on electioneering media blitz, a bit over the top with the Romney cheap-shots, but as time went on it became crystal clear why his media camp pulled out all the stops, & he went all out on this one successful accomplishment (actually it was the brave Navy Seals that actually did the deed, all Obama did was make a thumbs up decision any President would have made given the same intell ).

And as I was beginning to assemble my views about this issue, somebody put into words exactly what I was feeling & thinking:



It's so true, he has nothing else he can talk about, nothing to brag about.

I think this was spot on.

What about you?

.....if you disagree, please provide us with a long list (at least 10-20) major accomplishments of Obama's four (4) years as President, & please don't blame Bush for any of them.

Well, when I first watched Obama pounding his chest about "Gettin' Osama Bin Laden" I thought it was just an over blown, full on electioneering media blitz, a bit over the top with the Romney cheap-shots, but as time went on it became crystal clear why his media camp pulled out all the stops, & he went all out on this one successful accomplishment (actually it was the brave Navy Seals that actually did the deed, all Obama did was make a thumbs up decision any President would have made given the same intell ).

And as I was beginning to assemble my views about this issue, somebody put into words exactly what I was feeling & thinking:



It's so true, he has nothing else he can talk about, nothing to brag about.

I think this was spot on.

What about you?

.....if you disagree, please provide us with a long list-----I'd expect at least 10-20 during the first 2 years when he had full control of both House & Senate-----a list of major accomplishments of Obama's four (4) years as President.
Oh, & please don't blame Bush for any accomplishments--------------whether he was responsible for them or not.

Well you needn't smirk with some moral high ground OakdaleFTL. The last Presidential seen a situation that was full of racial undertones. And why is it your country feels a need to be so high and mighty, better than anyone else and thinking it is superior to evrywhere else? You haven't exactly set the world on fire but more trampled on it. Your own history is riddled with racial, religious and political bigotry so I am quite happy to be a routine Presnyterian which strikes me as rather more acceptable in the world at large than Uncle Sam is!

Just a pity Smileyfaze wasn't able to be the Republican candidate as he would have really filled the bill so dead easily. Only problem for him is he would take it harder losing to Obama whereas Romney has little clue what day of the week it is and smiles at everyone like an empty head! On a psasing note that ship seems to portray the country at large oddly?

Originally posted by rjhowie:

Well you needn't smirk with some moral high ground OakdaleFTL.

Yes, I do need to, RJ — until you have a black Queen… (Would you comment on the likely reaction of your "polity"?)

Originally posted by rjhowie:

And why is it your country feels a need to be so high and mighty, better than anyone else and thinking it is superior to evrywhere else?

As I've mentioned before, that is your inferiority complex speaking: I've never heard anyone else mention it…

We are, however, different. We're Americans, don'tcha know?!