Someone takes herself rather seriously. My husband is, well, I'm not exactly sure where. So I use humor to make me feel less bad about that. Or, wait, no I use humor because I'm on a message board on the internet where levity is allowed.
But, fine, I don't think that the method Obama receives information indicates that he doesn't care or skips over it. If he needs clarification, I'm sure he can call and ask for it. I don't think that hearing something automatically makes one more engaged and active. I know I learn better from reading than listening. So I find the entire argument that Bush cared b/c he listened while Obama reads to be completely specious. Properly dealt with through humor.
Applause to you! But there is no indication that he's asking anyone for clarification. Obama simply reads the info. Bush listened and had subject matter experts on hand. I brought up a valid point and people here would rather point out grammar mistakes. They also fail to admit that -oh - I was right. Bush DID go to Harvard.
One more time - people DIED and there was evidence that the government knew this was going to happen. All I am saying is that maybe - just maybe - we could have done MORE to protect our citizens abroad. I think these are important questions to ask. Obviously there was a failure here. And we need to understand what happened to prevent it from happening again.
By all means.... let's nitpick anything I wrote instead of asking the real questions.
Please don't use YH being in Afghanistan to try and make people feel guilty for pointing out a mistake. I worked/volunteered 70 hour weeks while MH was gone and managed not to use that to induce guilt in people who teased me or disagreed with me.
Good for you? Honestly? She made a mistake. So what?
Post by anonymous on Sept 16, 2012 20:17:39 GMT -5
People were responding to you tldk (sorry don't remover the exact letters in your name), on the issues. Several people mentioned that GWB was the only president to have verbal briefings so your argument that B/c Obama reads his briefings rather than having verbal briefings caused him to lack in the FP area and contributed to the violence on the ME is not an effective one. Your response to that has been that YOU think it may have contributed but we'll never know and all we are left with is dead citizens. What is there really left to discuss? By the way, did you previously post under the name rbytsdy? I'm thinking not, but you remind me of her.
And if you're annoyed at people making fun of you, why not respond to me? I didn't, I talked about your points, which are weak R points trying to make Obama seem weak on FP. Because Gov. Romney is a FP joke.
And I like that this thread contains more reference to troops in Afghanistan than Gov. Romney's convention speech.
I'm not annoyed that people are pointing out my grammar mistakes. Point that out all you want. If that's your best argument then go for it! Trust me - I have much thicker skin than to worry what some random person on a message board is saying. ;D Plus, I was right about GWB's education after several people tried to claim I was wrong. I love that asking serious questions gets me labeled a troll.
Post by basilosaurus on Sept 16, 2012 20:27:41 GMT -5
Plenty of people made substantive counter arguments which you ignored and continue to ignore in order to think all we did was attack the grammar. But, go ahead, be a martyr. You won't last long on this board if this is your normal habit of responding.
And I'm with Stan on the bullshit of saying I made a mistake because blah blah afghan. Whatever, who cares. Take your ribbing like an adult and go on with your bad self. The location of your spouse has nothing to do with whether you can laugh at a dumb little mistake.
What does where Bush or Obama went to school have to do with anything??
tlk - I think its a pretty big stretch to suggest that the reason for any potential security shortfall was because of how Obama got his briefings (reading vs. verbal). I don't fault you for wondering if there was a security error - thats legitimate, absolutely. BUT to go on about grammar and how someone gets their intel is a bit strange. Stick to the facts at hand.
I recall post 9/11 a lot of people were quick to blame Bush because he should have been able to prevent 9/11 somehow. I think that any side can easily twist intel, snippets of news, etc. But I'm not sure that it will accomplish anything.