August 24th, 2012

If Obama was an MD, would you call him Dr. Obama?

First off, he's the president, so no, I'd call him President Obama.

Secondly, if he were NOT the President, I wouldn't consider him worthy of any honorable title whatsoever. He's a bald-faced liar.

MisterCooper has lost it again!

@GhostWriter: there is such things as black fascists. Ever heard of Idi Amin?

Although I should point out that before people mistake me I am not calling Obama a fascist. Heck I did not call the Republican Party who I despise fascists.

As for the next election I predict that the Democrats may have a chance. Hilliary Clinton has proven herself to be good in diplomacy and that is what we Brits like in our US presidents...

Yes, there are black fascists, but would they really be "Nazis"? That was more tongue in cheek though.
We're going to need some citations to back up the first claim - that Obama's actually a liberal. Because from over here, in NYC, he sure looks conservative :lol:

Also, aren't small government liberals simply 'Libertarians'? Isn't that the whole point of libertarianism? Of course, any libertarian that wants to determine the acceptable methods of stimulating the pubic nerve or which medical procedures a small business may specialize in is certainly NOT a libertarian, right?

I guess that depends on how you define "Liberal." That's a valid question I think. I consider being in favor of abortion (Especially partial birth abortion) being legal, supporting gay marriage, redistribution of wealth, exc. as "Liberal" regardless of whether you agree with them or not. Now, I guess you might say he's "Not quite liberal enough" and you could probably find other conservative policies he supports (Of course, that's all the "Bad" stuff like foreign wars, patriot act, exc. which is one reason why I can't stand the guy, I feel like he takes the worst from both.)

As for a Libertarian being a small government liberal, Libertarian and classical liberal are the same thing really. Truth be told, I won't claim to be 100% affiliated with either, although I do think the government, or at least the CENTRAL government, should be about 10-20% of what it is. If "liberalism" only applies to social issues, that would be true, as a "Small government" liberal would want a small government in economic issues too. Truth be told however, liberal politicians almost universally support a bigger government on both economic AND social issues.
 
Secondly, if he were NOT the President, I wouldn't consider him worthy of any honorable title whatsoever. He's a bald-faced liar.

Ron Paul is a bald faced liar too.
 
First off, he's the president, so no, I'd call him President Obama.
I don't think I have ever, not even once, heard you call Barack Hussein Obama "President Obama".

Secondly, if he were NOT the President, I wouldn't consider him worthy of any honorable title whatsoever. He's a bald-faced liar.
So if your personal doctor cheated on his wife, you wouldn't call him "Dr. <name>"? :confused:
 
Yes, there are black fascists, but would they really be "Nazis"? That was more tongue in cheek though.
Nazism != Facism. Fascism placed the emphasis on the nation whereas Nazism placed the emphasis on racial identity, a 'transnational' issue.


I guess that depends on how you define "Liberal." That's a valid question I think. I consider being in favor of abortion (Especially partial birth abortion) being legal, supporting gay marriage, redistribution of wealth, exc. as "Liberal" regardless of whether you agree with them or not.
I find it funny that Emma Goldman would be considered a modern Liberal by you.
When that happens, you really need to wonder whether your definition is at all accurate.
 
They are really close though. If not precisely identical.

According to Roderick Stackleberg, nazism is "a radical variant of fascism".

The far right (if fascism is on the right at all) is really quite complex. In fact, no politics is simple.
 
While in policies they may share some similarities, pretty much their entire ideological base was different.
 
I mean really. How could Obama fail to get re-elected with the entire media backing him. Except Foxnews, but foxnews isn't real media.
 
FRIDAY 2 PM: The anti-Obama movie 2016 Obama’s America went into wider release around America today and is opening right now in first place at the domestic box office. That’s quite a feat since the Rocky Mountain Pictures political documentary is still playing in only 1,090 North American theaters &#8211; or about 1/3 as many theaters as big-budget actioner The Expendables 2 (3,355 theaters).
 
Why we are on the brink of the greatest Depression of all time

Because we elect conservatives. Question answered. :p
 
Secondly, if he were NOT the President, I wouldn't consider him worthy of any honorable title whatsoever. He's a bald-faced liar.

First, I think he is a damn good liar, not a bald-faced one. Secondly, why would personal hatred strip a man of his educational right to that title? If you were a doctor, despite my dislike of you, I'd still call you a doctor.
 
First, I think he is a damn good liar, not a bald-faced one. Secondly, why would personal hatred strip a man of his educational right to that title? If you were a doctor, despite my dislike of you, I'd still call you a doctor.

Because that would be respectful.
 
I admit I had no idea this was an anti-obama movie. I have egg on my face. I just never pay attention to new Hollywood releases.

So how did Hollywood let this film get made? I don't get it. And I just didn't think they could make an anti-Obama movie. He just hasn't really done anything wrong or screwed anything up. There is no "dirt" on him so to speak. Even the oil spill turned out to be largely no big deal. It was hardly like Bush's Katrina (not caring about black people). I'm not an Obama fanboy mind you. I should mention that while Obama hasn't done anything horrible, he hasn't done anything good either. Just an average president.
 
I admit I had no idea this was an anti-obama movie. I have egg on my face. I just never pay attention to new Hollywood releases.

So how did Hollywood let this film get made? I don't get it. And I just didn't think they could make an anti-Obama movie. He just hasn't really done anything wrong or screwed anything up. There is no "dirt" on him so to speak. Even the oil spill turned out to be largely no big deal. It was hardly like Bush's Katrina (not caring about black people). I'm not an Obama fanboy mind you. I should mention that while Obama hasn't done anything horrible, he hasn't done anything good either. Just an average president.

Welcome to the right wing. Through their actions, the right wing in this country has turned me into a devout liberal.
 
Back
Top Bottom