President Barack Obama - Term 1 and 2 Thread

[Rockindeano]

Now this is what this place should be like all the time. No more hiatus's or vacations...I need to see daily venom being spit from both sides....It is truly entertaining to me to see these epic fights.

Then get Lula back here...we'll have a donnybrook..union -v-non-union...pub -v- lib...healthcare or not...cap and trade or not..homeschool -v- state school..I'm down with it..."

Nah, she and I broke up...we're on to new people.

[Seven Wishes2]

I checked the last half dozen or so posts to find out what the hell you are talking about. I didn't find one that used the word "proof". Are you high? Recent head trauma? If not, could you please clarify what the hell you're talking about. I've given up hope that you'd learn to click the "quote" button for your responses. It makes you all the more incoherent! Thanks in advance!

Dipshit! It's right there in the post! You just have NOTHING to counter this with other than parroting Blimpbaugh and No'Reilly. Stop changing the subject! And everything IS attributed! What a dope.

[RedWingFan]

I checked the last half dozen or so posts to find out what the hell you are talking about. I didn't find one that used the word "proof". Are you high? Recent head trauma? If not, could you please clarify what the hell you're talking about. I've given up hope that you'd learn to click the "quote" button for your responses. It makes you all the more incoherent! Thanks in advance!

Dipshit! It's right there in the post! You just have NOTHING to counter this with other than parroting Blimpbaugh and No'Reilly. Stop changing the subject! And everything IS attributed! What a dope.

And I'll say once again. I'm not talking about your last 7 posts since emerging from Barney Frank's basement.
Do you understand?

When I pull up all your plagiarized posts from the past couple of years, you're going to say.

"That was from a long time ago." Or some BS like that!

[Seven Wishes2]

Barney Frank's basement is better than emerging from Limbaugh's enormous ass with "chocolate sauce" all over you ass-kissing lips.

[RedWingFan]

I checked the last half dozen or so posts to find out what the hell you are talking about. I didn't find one that used the word "proof". Are you high? Recent head trauma? If not, could you please clarify what the hell you're talking about. I've given up hope that you'd learn to click the "quote" button for your responses. It makes you all the more incoherent! Thanks in advance!

Dipshit! It's right there in the post! You just have NOTHING to counter this with other than parroting Blimpbaugh and No'Reilly. Stop changing the subject! And everything IS attributed! What a dope.

And I'll say once again. I'm not talking about your last 7 posts since emerging from Barney Frank's basement.
Do you understand?
When I pull up all your plagiarized posts from the past couple of years, you're going to say.
"That was from a long time ago." Or some BS like that!

Here you go. Take a bow plagiarizer!!! And away we go!
http://forums.melodicrock.com/phpBB/vie ... t=#4037547

Politicians in the nation's capital have been reluctant to set limits on the carbon dioxide pollution that is expected to warm the planet by 4 to 7 degrees Fahrenheit during the next century, citing uncertainty about the severity of the threat. But that uncertainty may have shrunk somewhat with the release last week of two scientific reports suggesting that global warming is not just a hypothetical possibility, but a real phenomenon that has already started transforming especially sensitive parts of the globe.

Overall, the reports say, Earth's climate has warmed by about 1 degree Fahrenheit since 1900. In the Arctic, where a number of processes amplify the warming effects of carbon dioxide, most regions have experienced a temperature rise of 4 to 7 degrees in the last 50 years.

That warmth has reduced the amount of snow that falls every winter, melted away mountain glaciers and shrunk the Arctic Ocean's summer sea ice cover to its smallest extent in millennia, according to satellite measurements. Swaths of Alaskan permafrost are thawing into soggy bogs, and trees are moving northward at the expense of the tundra that rings the Arctic Ocean.

These changes seriously threaten animals such as polar bears, which live and hunt on the sea ice. The bears have already suffered a 15 percent decrease in their number of offspring and a similar decline in weight over the past 25 years. If the Arctic sea ice disappears altogether during the summer months, as some researchers expect it will by the end of the century, polar bears have little chance of survival.

Things are less serious in the lower 48, where the effects of climate change have been more subtle. In much of the United States, spring arrives about two weeks earlier than it did 50 years ago. Tropical bird species have appeared in Florida and along the Gulf Coast. Species such as Edith's checkerspot, a butterfly native to western North America, have started dying out at the southern reaches of their ranges.

"Responses to climate change are being seen across the U.S.A," said Camille Parmesan, a biologist at the University of Texas in Austin. She is the co-author, with Hector Galbraith of the University of Colorado in Boulder, of "Observed Impacts of Global Climate Change in the U.S." The report was released Tuesday by the Pew Center on Global Climate Change, a non-partisan but not disinterested research organization dedicated to providing sound scientific information about global warming.

Parmesan and Galbraith acknowledge that nothing in the report would strike the average person as particularly alarming. They also allow that some of the past century's warming might have happened even if humans hadn't been pumping carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. But they argue that the changes they describe should be taken as a "very clear signal" that climate change will have significant effects in coming decades.

"The canaries in the coalmine are squawking, and we should absolutely take that seriously," Galbraith said.

The Bush administration has argued that not enough is known about climate change to justify major efforts at forestalling or preventing future warming.

The Arctic report, released Monday, was commissioned by the Arctic Council, an international commission of eight countries, including the United States, and six indigenous groups. It was written by a team of 300 scientists.

"The report will be a valuable contribution to the literature on potential regional impacts of climate change, and the United States government will take its findings into account as it continues to review the science," State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said in a statement released Tuesday.

The United States faces a potential showdown with other members of the Arctic Council on Nov. 24, when representatives of the organization's members are scheduled to meet in Iceland to consider climate change policy recommendations.

The atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide has risen from 280 parts per million in 1800 to 380 parts per million today due to the combustion of fossil fuels. Carbon dioxide causes warming because it heats up more when exposed to sunlight compared to other atmospheric gases.

Scientists have always expected the Arctic to respond earlier and more intensely than other regions to the buildup of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, thanks to several phenomena that make the far north especially sensitive to climate perturbations. When warmer temperatures melt snow, for example, the bare ground that is exposed absorbs more heat than the white surface did, causing yet more warming. A similar thing happens when sea ice melts, exposing open water.

In the past three Septembers the Arctic sea ice has melted back 12 percent to 15 percent beyond its normal minimum extent.

"It almost suggests that maybe we're about to reach a threshold beyond which the sea ice may not be able to recover," said Mark Serreze of the National Snow and Ice Data Center in Boulder, Colo.

Ice in the interior of the Arctic pack normally remains frozen from year to year, growing thicker with each season. But the recent increase in melting has eaten into much of that multi-year ice. So while the Arctic Ocean still freezes over each winter, more of the solid cover now consists of thin single-year ice that melts every spring.

The Arctic is also particularly sensitive to warming because its plants and soil hold less water than more temperate environments. That means more energy reaching the ground is dedicated to heating the surface instead of evaporating water.

The atmosphere is thinner in the Arctic than it is farther south, which also intensifies warming. And while temperate zones shed some of their extra heat by shipping it north in ocean currents and meteorological fronts, the Arctic is the end of the line in that respect.

A small minority of scientists remains unconvinced that increasing atmospheric carbon dioxide can be held responsible for the recent warming, arguing that natural variability explains most if not all of the trend.

"It's very complicated and I believe people who claim they understand ... are just overestimating drastically their ability to do science," said Petr Chylek of the Los Alamos National Laboratory.

Scientists aren't the only ones who have noticed the Arctic warming trend. Inuit hunters in Canada and Saami reindeer herders in Finland have detected shifts in the migratory behavior of animals. In some cases, people whose elders taught them decades ago how to forecast storms from wind patterns and cloud formations have lost their predictive abilities to new weather patterns.

"One of the unique things about Arctic communities is how much they're tied to the land, and that's why this is such a big deal for them," said Harvard University geographer Shari Fox Gearheard.

Farther south, where the changes have been far less extreme and most people live far removed from the subtleties of their climate, a warmer world remains a hypothetical realm of scientists and environmentalists. But the latest reports suggest that in some of the world's more populated places, astute observers may soon begin to noticing that the climate is changing.

[Seven Wishes2]

Way to avoid the subject, dittohead. Par for the course.

It looks like one of YOUR innumerable cut-and-paste jobs, except mine had actual FACT to supports its premise, whereas yours have NONE.

[Seven Wishes2]

ONCE AGAIN...YET AGAIN...you attempt to subvert the conversation away from your indefensible position. Typical Republican. Again, I offered an opinion in my own words and then used 100% correct factual sources to prove it. Had I not provided those facts and those links, you would have accused me of having no proof. Why no outrage when LiePaster just simply copies and pastes from conservative blog posts, with no sourcing? Hypocrites.

Eventually, you dittoheads need to understand you cannot reinvent science or reality. Just because you've collectively (for some reason) decided to witch hunt the 98% of the scientific community that knows humankind is at least in part responsible for global warming, does NOT mean that position has any validity. You can argue until you're blue in the mouth, but you have NO PROOF and only a few scattered (and apparently unqualified) conservative hackneys to offer the weakest of countenances.

[slucero]

[RedWingFan]

I love the smell of desperation a week before an election.....smells like......VICTORY!

It can't be considered victory until Republicans get there and actually defund this destruction and stop it in it's tracks for the next 2 years.

[Seven Wishes2]

Heh heh heh. LMFAO. Bush pillaged, raped, and ruined this economy, and spat and pissed upon the Constitution. The entire "taking our country back" is nothing more than thinly veiled racism.

To understand Republicans' nagging fear that the Nov. 2 elections might not be quite the massive triumph that many have predicted, check out Pennsylvania's perplexing Senate race.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101024/ap_on_el_se/us_senate_perplexing_races

Republican "economic policy" is laughable and non-existent. And unless the GOP somehow manages to get a 60-40 majority in Congress, HEALTH CARE REPEAL WILL NEVER HAPPEN. By the time 2012 rolls around, the plan will have had more time to take effect and more people will support it. As it stands right now, only 37% of the country (91% of those are Republicans) actually wants the law repealed - 10% want to see it scaled back somewhat. Counter that with the fact that 36% of the country fully supports it and another 17% THINK IT DID NOT GO FAR ENOUGH. Last time I checked, 37% does NOT constitute a majority, unless you're talking about the Italian Parliament. Keep smoking the good stuff, though. It's very entertaining.

[RedWingFan]

Heh heh heh. LMFAO. Bush pillaged, raped, and ruined this economy, and spat and pissed upon the Constitution. The entire "taking our country back" is nothing more than thinly veiled racism.
To understand Republicans' nagging fear that the Nov. 2 elections might not be quite the massive triumph that many have predicted, check out Pennsylvania's perplexing Senate race.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101024/ap_on_el_se/us_senate_perplexing_races
Republican "economic policy" is laughable and non-existent. And unless the GOP somehow manages to get a 60-40 majority in Congress, HEALTH CARE REPEAL WILL NEVER HAPPEN. By the time 2012 rolls around, the plan will have had more time to take effect and more people will support it. As it stands right now, only 37% of the country (91% of those are Republicans) actually wants the law repealed - 10% want to see it scaled back somewhat. Counter that with the fact that 36% of the country fully supports it and another 17% THINK IT DID NOT GO FAR ENOUGH. Last time I checked, 37% does NOT constitute a majority, unless you're talking about the Italian Parliament. Keep smoking the good stuff, though. It's very entertaining.

Of course Republicans aren't going to get a veto-proof majority in the senate. What the republicans can and should do is win the House (which they will) and vote for repeal send it to the senate and make all the democrats there vote against repeal to put the final nail in the coffins of those up in 2012 (like our miserable senator Debbie Stabenow) when the senate kills the bill. The House republicans can refuse to fund Healthcare and keep it from growing.

Quit getting your numbers from DailyKos. The majority of the American people are against it. If they weren't how would you square Congress' miserable approval ratings for doing something American's love. Wherever you get these BS #'s is really making you look foolish. And you don't need any help in that department.

Check out these #'s from RealClearPolitics. Every poll shows a majority of American's against ObamaCare.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls ... -1130.html
Sorry to burst your bubble and happiness that premiums going up since it's passage ater Obama promised they'd go down by 14% if it was passed.

http://gatewaypundit.firstthings.com/20 ... 4-in-2011/

[Seven Wishes2]

Published: Sat, October 23, 2010 @ 12:00 a.m.

Associated Press

WASHINGTON

First it was President Barack Obama’s health-care overhaul that divided the nation. Now it’s the Republican cry for repeal.

An Associated Press-GfK poll found likely voters evenly split on whether the law should be scrapped or retooled to make even bigger changes in the way Americans get their health care.

Tea-party enthusiasm for repeal has failed to catch on with other groups, the poll found, which may be a problem for Republicans vowing to strike down Obama’s signature accomplishment if they gain control of Congress in the Nov. 2 elections.

Among likely voters, 36 percent said they want to revise the law so it does more to change the health-care system. A nearly identical share — 37 percent — said they want to repeal it completely.

[Seven Wishes2]

The GOP is running out of steam everywhere. A majority in the House remains a 50-50 proposition, and they are very unlikely to win the Senate and would therefore be politically impotent, only capable of their usual "just say no" holding pattern of their past two disastrous years.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_exclusive/20101023/pl_yblog_exclusive/this-weeks-key-question-is-christine-odonnell-a-bad-neighbor

[RedWingFan]

Published: Sat, October 23, 2010 @ 12:00 a.m.
Associated Press
WASHINGTON
First it was President Barack Obama’s health-care overhaul that divided the nation. Now it’s the Republican cry for repeal.
An Associated Press-GfK poll found likely voters evenly split on whether the law should be scrapped or retooled to make even bigger changes in the way Americans get their health care.
Tea-party enthusiasm for repeal has failed to catch on with other groups, the poll found, which may be a problem for Republicans vowing to strike down Obama’s signature accomplishment if they gain control of Congress in the Nov. 2 elections.
Among likely voters, 36 percent said they want to revise the law so it does more to change the health-care system. A nearly identical share — 37 percent — said they want to repeal it completely.

I see you one scrawny poll and raise it!

RCP Average 8/27 - 10/18 -- 40.1 50.1 Against/Oppose +10.0
Associated Press/GfK 10/13 - 10/18 1501 A 40 45 Against/Oppose +5
Bloomberg* 10/7 - 10/10 721 LV 42 47 Against/Oppose +5
Rasmussen Reports* 10/8 - 10/9 1000 LV 39 55 Against/Oppose +16
Rasmussen Reports* 10/2 - 10/3 1000 LV 44 50 Against/Oppose +6
Rasmussen Reports* 9/24 - 9/25 1000 LV 35 57 Against/Oppose +22
Politico/GWU/Battleground* 9/19 - 9/22 1000 LV 42 54 Against/Oppose +12
Rasmussen Reports* 9/18 - 9/19 1000 LV 33 61 Against/Oppose +28
CBS News/NY Times 9/10 - 9/14 990 A 37 49 Against/Oppose +12
PPP (D) 9/10 - 9/13 590 RV 44 50 Against/Oppose +6
Associated Press/GfK 9/8 - 9/13 1000 A 41 46 Against/Oppose +5
Pew/National Journal 9/9 - 9/12 1001 A 38 45 Against/Oppose +7
Rasmussen Reports* 9/10 - 9/11 1000 LV 38 53 Against/Oppose +15
Rasmussen Reports* 9/4 - 9/5 1000 LV 38 56 Against/Oppose +18
USA Today/Gallup 8/27 - 8/30 1021 A 39 56 Against/Oppose +17

[Rockindeano]

See the trend there RWF? The polls are going from 22% ooppose down to 5% oppose. Eventually, it will be a majority in favor of the law, because once it has a chance to be enacted, people will like it.

[Seven Wishes2]

Typical slanted Rasmussen data set there. The remaining 63% are constituted of those who want it scaled back slightly (but NOT repealed) or who want the law to go further or simply want it the way it is.

Nice try, GoebbelsFan. Nice try.

[RedWingFan]

Anyway. DavePC already handed you your ass on this issue. By the way I love your statement... "And on the issues that matter most to Americans, more people want Democrats in charge than the GOP"

Enjoy the ass beating of epic proportions next Tuesday, you clueless bastard. You should really pull your head out of Monkers ass and get a clue!

http://forums.melodicrock.com/phpBB/vie ... th#4498266

[Seven Wishes2]

Um, no, he most certainly did not.

You're the one who's misinformed and trying to slant this issue.

And I love how you and the other neo-cons have completely ignored the irrefutable global warming data I posted last night. You immediately begin assailing my character or calling me names instead of addressing the question.

[RedWingFan]

Um, no, he most certainly did not.

You're the one who's misinformed and trying to slant this issue.

And I love how you and the other neo-cons have completely ignored the irrefutable global warming data I posted last night. You immediately begin assailing my character or calling me names instead of addressing the question.

So you're happy that Obama's healthcare plan has failed to lower premiums by 14% as he promised?
Are you happy that they premiums went up instead?

Can I get an "Obama lied people had to drop their coverage and died" chant from you?

[Monker]

Anyway. DavePC already handed you your ass on this issue. By the way I love your statement... "And on the issues that matter most to Americans, more people want Democrats in charge than the GOP"

Enjoy the ass beating of epic proportions next Tuesday, you clueless bastard. You should really pull your head out of Monkers ass and get a clue!

http://forums.melodicrock.com/phpBB/vie ... th#4498266

What? Did you not even read the note that I wrote on this? I said that the Republicans will take the House...but not by the huge landslide of 100 seat swing that Newt, and others, are putting out as propaganda. I said they will gain seats in the Senate, but will not get a majority.

That's realistic...neither of you two seem to be able to do that. Maybe you should get your head out of each others ass.

[RedWingFan]

That's realistic...neither of you two seem to be able to do that. Maybe you should get your head out of each others ass.

Cool you're here. Can you reach down and tap 7 Wishes on the shoulder and ask him to answer my question about Health Care premiums going up after Obama promised they'd go down? Thanks in advance!

[slucero]

Here's anther one of those AP-Gfk polls..

[RedWingFan]

See the trend there RWF? The polls are going from 22% ooppose down to 5% oppose. Eventually, it will be a majority in favor of the law, because once it has a chance to be enacted, people will like it.

There is no trend. All the AP/gfk polls show low #'s, Rassmussen #'s are higher. Probably how they're phrasing the question causing the difference in result.

You really think people seeing smaller and smaller checks because HC premiums skyrocketing are going to be happier with Obamas bill? You're not stupid Dean!

[slucero]

Published: Sat, October 23, 2010 @ 12:00 a.m.

Associated Press

WASHINGTON

First it was President Barack Obama’s health-care overhaul that divided the nation. Now it’s the Republican cry for repeal.

An Associated Press-GfK poll found likely voters evenly split on whether the law should be scrapped or retooled to make even bigger changes in the way Americans get their health care.

Tea-party enthusiasm for repeal has failed to catch on with other groups, the poll found, which may be a problem for Republicans vowing to strike down Obama’s signature accomplishment if they gain control of Congress in the Nov. 2 elections.

Among likely voters, 36 percent said they want to revise the law so it does more to change the health-care system. A nearly identical share — 37 percent — said they want to repeal it completely.

Thank you for using an article that skews and misrepresents the actual facts, then not checking the facts yourself... and then proving yourself wrong..

Doesn't that make you no different than those who C&P and don't research and post facts - sorta like FF right?

From the very AP-Gfk poll you refer to...

Interesting info from that poll:

45% - Oppose it
40% - Support it

32% - want it retooled
39% - want it repealed
18% - leave it as is

And before you can say the respondents are mostly Tea Party fans... (from the same poll)

It would appear, based o n the info you've provided (the AP-Gfk polling data)... that the majority of those polled are not Tea Partiers and yet they are also AGAINST the HC bill...

Here's the actual polling data if anyone wants to peruse... http://www.ap-gfkpoll.com/pdf/AP-GfK%20 ... opline.pdf

[Seven Wishes2]

Whatever. I already clearly delineated the actual truth about the polls.

I, in fact, proved myself to be CORRECT.

And RWF, I will address the issue of premiums going up at a later time - although the nominal increases they are forecasting will be nowhere NEAR the annual increases we saw under the Dubbya Administration - as soon as you actually address the irrefutable proof I provided about global warming.

You've avoided it because you have NOTHING to back you up. NOTHING.

[slucero]

Whatever. I already clearly delineated the actual truth about the polls.

I, in fact, proved myself to be CORRECT.

And RWF, I will address the issue of premiums going up at a later time - although the nominal increases they are forecasting will be nowhere NEAR the annual increases we saw under the Dubbya Administration - as soon as you actually address the irrefutable proof I provided about global warming.

You've avoided it because you have NOTHING to back you up. NOTHING.

Sure you might be right... in you own mind ... But the facts (YOUR facts) prove you wrong... you delineated nothing... just C&P'd an article that misrepresented the facts... and then you called them truthful and accurate...

and now you can't even admit you fucked up...

[RedWingFan]

Whatever. I already clearly delineated the actual truth about the polls.
I, in fact, proved myself to be CORRECT.

And RWF, I will address the issue of premiums going up at a later time - although the nominal increases they are forecasting will be nowhere NEAR the annual increases we saw under the Dubbya Administration - as soon as you actually address the irrefutable proof I provided about global warming.

You've avoided it because you have NOTHING to back you up. NOTHING.

Sure you might be right... in you own mind ... But the facts (YOUR facts) prove you wrong... you delineated nothing... just C&P'd an article that misrepresented the facts... and then you called them truthful and accurate...
and now you can't even admit you fucked up...

Man, poor 7 Wishes hasn't even been back 48 hours and he gets nuked beyond belief!!! 7 Wishes isn't know as the lying plagiarizer for nothing! How embarrassing!
Classic. Nice job Slucero, I've been busy with football. Raiders up 14-0 on the Broncos 5 minutes into the game!!!

[slucero]

hey I've got nothing against 7... he just needs to "Practice what he preaches"...

[Seven Wishes2]

Man, poor 7 Wishes hasn't even been back 48 hours and he gets nuked beyond belief!!! 7 Wishes isn't know as the lying plagiarizer for nothing! How embarrassing!
Classic. Nice job Slucero, I've been busy with football. Raiders up 14-0 on the Broncos 5 minutes into the game!!!

Bring it on, you spineless, brainless limp-dick. You cannot change reality simply because you don't agree with it. You're both wrong, as usual...again.

[conversationpc]

The more things change, the more they stay the same.