Happy Inauguration Day Broadway!- Page 2

[SporkGoddess]

Posted: 1/21/09 at 7:57pm

I agree, philly. Well said.

[Winston3]

Posted: 1/21/09 at 8:13pm

I don't know if I would say it is just high hopes. I think that people are confusing high hopes with excitement. I think that for a lot of people Obama represented everything that Bush wasn't. I think that there were a bunch of people out there who were VERY unhappy with what Bush did over the past eight years and they wanted something, anything that was different. And to them Obama was it. I think that a lot of people who aren't Obama supporters have a misconception of them. I think that the misconception is is that the anti Obama supporters think that the people who do support him are convinced that he is this god who can get done what he says with a wave of his hand. I think the Obama supporters are many things but naive. I think that they know that he can't solve everything but he can get the country going in the right direction. I think that often times the excitement of that gets mistaken for hype.

[SporkGoddess]

Posted: 1/21/09 at 8:33pm

It's not just excitement. They're already comparing him to Lincoln, for heaven's sake (and he's encouraging it, such as using that bible for taking the oath).

[sondheimgeek]

Posted: 1/21/09 at 8:57pm

"It's not just excitement. They're already comparing him to Lincoln, for heaven's sake (and he's encouraging it, such as using that bible for taking the oath). "

And Lincoln wasn't actually that good of a president! History has just been in Lincoln's favor because of his speeches.

[TheCharleston]

Posted: 1/21/09 at 9:09pm

"I think that a lot of people who aren't Obama supporters have a misconception of them."

but I AM an Obama supporter.

I'm just not mistaking what he can realistically do and what I want him to do.

How quickly we forget about Obama and many of his own party members, in Congress, strongly disagreeing with his ideas for an economic turnaround only two weeks ago!

It's wonderful and historic. He's a truly inspiring man and I adore him for what he accomplished, on a local level, in Chicago. But we can't forget that there are other politicians and administrations and governmental systems that will fight Obama... many of whom supported him only months ago!

Thank you for the dull insight, Winston, but it's NOT a confusion of high hopes and excitement. They are completely different. There's no way to confuse the two. Sorry.

[philly03]

Posted: 1/21/09 at 9:48pm

Well I'm glad you and I agree somewhat on politics SporkGoddess...just keep out Christine Andreas I suppose!


"And Lincoln wasn't actually that good of a president! History has just been in Lincoln's favor because of his speeches."

You honestly think that Lincoln does not deserve a spot as one of "best" presidents? The man only lead the nation through a civil war and "ended" slavery. Let's not forget he was a fan of theatre (bad Death-joke!) either!

That's like saying History has been in GEORGE WASHINGTON's favor because we won the war. They are good presidents.

While George Bush is on the more awful side of them, I don't neccessarily dislike him. So he had much faulted intelligence on 95% of everthing, but he did have some good intentions; even if they backfired on him (Including No Child Left Behind..!)

[sondheimgeek]

Posted: 1/21/09 at 10:01pm

You honestly think that Lincoln does not deserve a spot as one of "best" presidents?

No, no, no. That's not what I meant haha. He's simply looked upon differently than would be expected. He did a good job, but he did not fight so much to end slavery, as he did to preserve the union. He also did things such as suspending Habeas Corpus, imprisoning thousands of citizens without trial or cause, sent troops out to an Indian reserve and put bounties on the Indians, etc. Again, he wasn't bad, but he's not sometimes what he's made out to be.

But my intention wasn't to start an argument, it was a silly little comment.

Updated On: 1/21/09 at 10:01 PM

[SporkGoddess]

Posted: 1/21/09 at 10:06pm

Lincoln was a great president for the situation he was in, but he wouldn't be so wonderful now, IMO, and I don't want habeas corpus suspended.

I am tired of hearing him praised as this great civil rights promoter, however. He only freed the slaves to hurt the Confederate war effort; the Emancipation Proclamation didn't even free everyone. Lincoln did not believe in equality of the races, which is why I find it odd that the first black president is so intent on being viewed as his second coming.

Also, he was tremendously unpopular during his first term and Obama doesn't have a General Sherman to capture Atlanta for him.

Updated On: 1/21/09 at 10:06 PM

[sondheimgeek]

Posted: 1/21/09 at 10:14pm

Exactly. Lincoln wanted to send the Africans back to Africa after they were emancipated, as he didn't have a very high regard for them.

He told Maryland they could keep their slaves as long as they stayed loyal to the Union.

He cared more about the Union than civil rights. Times of crisis call for desperate measures, but he's not as wonderful as history has made him out to be. His marvelous speeches though, have redeemed him to a certain extent.

[ghostlight2]

Posted: 1/21/09 at 11:03pm

"Please don't miss my point.

Change is needed, but I can't commit to someone from the get-go just because everyone else is. I didn't vote for him, nor did I vote for McCain. I am on no one's side... I am waiting and hoping. "

Waiting for what, exactly, ThanksToPhantom? I miss your point entirely. Just because Obama can't make everything he wants to change happen overnight, he shouldn't try at at all? And of course he's butted heads with Congress, The Charleston. How else will things get done? Change doesn't happen easily, and one man can't do it alone, of course, but if he only gets a handful of things done that he's said, more power to him.

What's wrong with high hopes? What's wrong with aiming high? And what are you doing about it?




The Presidential Pledge

[TheCharleston]

Posted: 1/21/09 at 11:25pm

"What's wrong with high hopes?"

Nothing wrong with it for ME.

for other naive fools, they will be hit with a heavy load of dissapointment when nothing.. at all... is different in a couple of years.

I'll say it again - it's great that everyone is so excited (myself included) but I'm strictly speaking about those people who are worshipping him like he's the Messiah. I'm sorry but Obama is not the answer to all of our problems.

Maybe if you could have a few Obama's on the cabinet and a few Obama's in the Congress. And have Obama kick Nancy Pelozzi out of that chair. and then MAYBE we'll see some changes.

[SporkGoddess]

Posted: 1/21/09 at 11:29pm

I don't like all of the changes that he's suggested, so that's kind of where the issue lies with me. Change isn't always a good thing, especially when his ideas directly contradict with my own beliefs of what government should be and do.

But then I have opposite political views of most of you, so that's to be expected.

[TheCharleston]

Posted: 1/21/09 at 11:36pm

stay strong!

as someone who's been between the sides, on the fence, for many of my years I must commend you for being so strong in your conservative views.

You have strong conviction.. and that's the most impressive part. It's all a matter of perspective. Neither party is "wrong"

[sondheimgeek]

Posted: 1/21/09 at 11:49pm

"You have strong conviction.. and that's the most impressive part. It's all a matter of perspective. Neither party is "wrong""

Thank you so much! I have always believed this and will always stand by it. Just because someone doesn't agree with your views doesn't mean that they're wrong.

And if you can't express your views, spouting an insult does not compensate.

I'm torn because my social views are liberal, but when it comes to certain (and the more important) aspects of government/economy, I tend to favor the conservative views slightly.

[SporkGoddess]

Posted: 1/21/09 at 11:55pm

TheCharleston: Thank you! I'm actually a fiscal conservative, not social.

[ghostlight2]

Posted: 1/22/09 at 12:10am

"for other naive fools, they will be hit with a heavy load of dissapointment when nothing.. at all... is different in a couple of years. "

You honestly believe there will be no change at all in a few years? Wow. Glad I don't have your attitude.

I'll say it again, change happens slowly. I'll be happy if Obama can do a tenth of the things he's trying for. Capping the salaries for white house aides today was a good start.

[TheCharleston]

Posted: 1/22/09 at 12:12am

"Capping the salaries for white house aides today was a good start."

I doubt you'd be saying the same if you were one of them, darling.

[ghostlight2]

Posted: 1/22/09 at 12:15am

Get it straight - it's "babe", sweetheart, not "darling". And I'm willing to make sacrifices. I'd be perfectly happy with $100,000 dollars, and that's the cap, doll.
Updated On: 1/22/09 at 12:15 AM

[TheCharleston]

Posted: 1/22/09 at 12:15am

LOL

wouldn't we all?

[ghostlight2]

Posted: 1/22/09 at 12:18am

Shake hands and part friends, then?

[Winston3]

Posted: 1/22/09 at 1:18am

I think that there are way to many Americans out there who are too self centered at a time when it isn't good to be so. A time of crisis is usually a time to have to make sacrifices for the better good. If it means a pay cut then deal with it.

Also, I think that it is wrong to judge if Obama is a good president if he hasn't done anything yet for us to figure out if he is good or not. It wasn't like Bush got the much deserved bashing right out of the starting gate. It happened after he caused one F*ck up after another. And, you can't blame bad intelligence or anything like that because that is a cop out. When your president the ultimate responsibility and all the heat falls on you. Not the FBI or CIA but the president. At the end of the day the president is the one taking all the heat regardless of what either the CIA or the FBI has done.

[SporkGoddess]

Posted: 1/22/09 at 12:40pm

Ummm, actually, he did get the bashing "right out of the starting gate." People were determined to hate him no matter what.

People may blame the president for everything but that doesn't mean that they should. Congress is JUST as responsible as Bush in many of the events people blame him for.

[winston89]

Posted: 1/22/09 at 1:45pm

Your right spork, he did get bashed right out of the starting gate. That is because he didn't legally get the title of president until 04. It reminds me of a George Carlin quote. "Good ol' Gov. Bush. Maybe if he does a good job we'll elect him president in 2004." I am convinced that the last title that man held legally was gov. Your right, the basing was from the starting gate but it was well deserved. Bush, is the worst president this nation has ever had. And, he is a taint. I don't mean a stain on the presidency. (Which he was). I am talking about the anatomical area of the male body between the anus and the testicles.

[SporkGoddess]

Posted: 1/22/09 at 1:55pm

If you think that Bush is the worst president in history, you clearly haven't heard of a fellow called Andrew Jackson.

And, um, his presidency was legal. So what if he lost the popular vote? A lot of presidents only got in through the electoral college.

As for your insult: very classy.

Updated On: 1/22/09 at 01:55 PM

[winston89]

Posted: 1/22/09 at 3:04pm

Thanks, I find any insult that was written by Colbert to be very classy. Of course, he was talking about Harding while I was talking about Bush.

It has nothing to do with the fact that he only won by electoral college. It has to do with that he illegally became president in 2000. I find it fishy that his brother being the gov of Florida was the one to decide what to do in terms of the recount. His brother basically gave him the election when he stopped counting when Bush was ahead. Had they actually decided to figure out who would win in a democratic way that was partially fair, then they would have had every last vote count. I feel that if they did do that then Gore would have been the victor.