Alphanguy, I'd like to get a job corporate accounting, but the relatively few job openings available either are for jobs that I am over or underqualified for. Of course, I wouldn't personally have a problem taking a job that I am overqualified for, but nobody hires such people for "lesser" jobs for fear that they will use that job as a temporary stepping stone. (During the last 18 months, I've applied to hundreds of accounting jobs that I either was under or overqualified for, and I know full well that I have no chance of getting those jobs, since I am not what they are looking for. The only reason why I even bother applying at all is because I'll lose my unemployment benefits if I don't.)

For Pete's sake, Max.... accountant? Screw getting a job as a corporate accountant, just be a personal accountant for small businesses. There are quite a few of those around here, small businesses are always needing accounting services, and you could provide services for less than a larger company could. And you could set your own hours and have a degree of freedom. Don't depend on someone else to hire you, just drum up your own business, You could easily set up a DBA, and work as your own company.

Edited September 7, 201213 yr by alphanguy74

Jane, we'll have to agree to disagree, but nobody could have written a more eloquent defense. In regards to your excellent point that he didn't understand Washington and was in over his head, Obama would have served himself--and the country--far better had he accumulated more experience in the Senate prior to running for president.

I don't think more experience in the Senate would have helped him. There are plenty of residents in the Senate who would not have done any better than he and maybe even worse. He had a window and he went through it at the right time as far as I'm concerned.

People who don't like Obama seem to operate under the assumption that his supporters think he can do no wrong.

Even people who don't dislike him are probably aware that he has some blind followers who accuse anyone who disagrees with him or racism even when they are not being racist or they accuse others of being Uncle Tom/sellouts. They are a bunch of irrational fanatics but people should be smart enough to know that they are not representative of all those who support him.

I don't really think he is a wimp for changing the platform if the changes are representative of what he believes. If he indeed did it to try to avoid criticiism then it's a wimpy move.

I think he's been a wimp but I also find his need to comment on everything that is brought to his attention is annoying especially when he lacks all the facts. I also don't like the pandering and I will leave it at that.

I think changing the rhetoric in the DNC platform was caving. Read where God was referenced the 1 time in the 2008 platform vs how the verbage was altered for the 2012 platform and the intent was exactly the same. Add in the fact that the vote was in no way obvious to be affirmed by 2/3 of the voters. It was a stupid change and unnecessary.

I also am not sure more experience would have helped Obama. The political climate at the time was ripe for a fresh face and change so had he had 20 years senate experience, he may not have been elected anyway. Do I think the lack of Washington,political experience hurt him, yes, but Clinton, JFK, also had missteps in their first year or two and learned from that. Clinton had no Washington experience but what he has are exceptional political instincts. Kennedy had political pedigree to an extent. I think there was a lot of truth to what Bill Clinton said. No one other than Roosevelt has ever had to deal with an economic climate in such turmoil. I doubt John McCain, had he been elected, would have been much more effective.

I've stated numerous times that I dislike Obama's fetish for trying to find common ground with people who hate him and it think it has hurt him, the party and the country as a whole. It makes me sick and if I got ten minutes to talk to him that would be what I would tell him. This is a perfect example of that. At least this I can chalk up to his desire to win but when he did stuff like this with the Bush tax cuts or throwing out the public option with health care reform, I was livid. Does that mean I would even consider voting for Mitt Romney or the GOP? No. My problem with Barack is that he doesn't fight hard enough for the right beliefs. The problem I have with the GOP is that they don't have the right beliefs.

This is one of the reasons I love, love, love Bill Clinton. He's a street fighter who isn't afraid to break a few kneecaps and get sneaky. For example I heard that one of the reasons Clinton's speech was so long is because he wanted it to run into the 11:00 hour so it would pre-empt or break into the local news and so independents and moderates who weren't watching the convention would see it. And you know what? It worked. Come 11 o'clock quite a few of my conservative friends on FB and Twitter started posting about how pissed they were that the news was being bumped for Clinton. THAT's the kind of fighter I want. That doesn't mean I don't or won't support Obama.

(BTW, Buzzfeed actually posted the changes Clinton made to his speech with the changes tracked. It's an interesting read for anyone who writes or edits. I can think of few professionals I pity more than Bill Clinton's speechwriter. LOL! http://www.buzzfeed....ion-speech-4xje)

Double Word. Obama caving all the time is one of the reason I will always have reservations about him. it is exactly what has driven the progressives and much of the base away from him. We were spoilt by Clinton, the bare knuckle fighter. I have my issues with Clinton, but damn I loved that when the Republicans led by rabid Newt Gringrich refused to compromise and threatened to shut the government down, Clinton responded, "go ahead" and then, proceeded to ruthlessly beat the [!@#$%^&*] out of them until they begged for mercy. Clinton knew that the way to win was to be audacious while punching his enemies in the face and the country prospered as a result which is why they re-elected despite his lies and affairs. If only Obama had that those kind of brass balls. Maybe the problem is that he does not any strong beliefs about anything so it is easy for him to compromise at every turn. If Obama had pushed through a larger stimulus and insisted on giving house owners substantial mortgage relief like so many economists wanted, the economy would have recovering much faster instead of stuttering and this election campaign would not be difficult.

Edited September 7, 201213 yr by Ann_SS

Page 115... easily the best and most informative page in this entire thread! I may not agree with everything you all are saying, I certainly feel as if I'm finally gaining a better understanding of your viewpoints and why you've arrived at them. I seriously appreciate these posts...

Partisan rancor sucks... discussion and reason rules...

Maybe the problem is that he does not any strong beliefs about anything so it is easy for him to compromise at every turn. If Obama had pushed through a larger stimulus and insisted on giving house owners substantial mortgage relief like so many economists wanted, the economy would have recovering much faster instead of stuttering and this election campaign would not be difficult.

Obama has strong beliefs. Unfortunately one of those beliefs is that everyone can be reasoned with. He's stated numerous times in interviews that he believes that if your case is good enough and you make it strongly enough then people of opposing views can come together in good faith to work on solutions. Of course that's completely wrong and has been proven wrong for THOUSANDS OF YEARS. All of human history is filled with people who didn't care about facts or reason or reality and only cared about having their viewpoint affirmed. For example, Obama thought that if he showed the birthers his "long form" birth certificate they would acknowledge reality. Instead they moved on to demanding his college transcripts. ( Of course more revolting than the birthers are the conservative who won't take them to task but that's a different discussion.) The GOP was perfectly clear about its priorities from the day he took office. They wanted to oppose him on everything no matter what. Instead of taking them at their word, Obama decided to believe in the better angels of their nature and that's been his biggest mistake.

I have my issues with Clinton, but damn I loved that when the Republicans led by rabid Newt Gringrich refused to compromise and threatened to shut the government down, Clinton responded, "go ahead" and then, proceeded to ruthlessly beat the [!@#$%^&*] out of them until they begged for mercy.

Edited September 8, 201213 yr by marceline

Yes, I totally agree about how well and how concisely Bill Clinton can cut to the heart of an issue and make it accesible for everyone. See.. sometimes it takes an Ozark bumpkin to lay it out and get the job done!

For Pete's sake, Max.... accountant? Screw getting a job as a corporate accountant, just be a personal accountant for small businesses. There are quite a few of those around here, small businesses are always needing accounting services, and you could provide services for less than a larger company could. And you could set your own hours and have a degree of freedom. Don't depend on someone else to hire you, just drum up your own business, You could easily set up a DBA, and work as your own company.

Thanks again for your sincere concern, Alphanguy. I may just end up having to do that, although I would need to become a CPA first. (In my home state of NJ it sucks, because they force you to earn an additional 30 credits before one can earn the CPA designation. I personally feel that passing that extremely difficult test should be enough.)

I forgot to mention an important milestone that was reached yesterday (September 7): Jimmy Carter's ex-presidency is now the longest of any of our prior leaders (surpassing the previous record held by Herbert Hoover). It was sad that his presidency was so horrendous, but I'm glad he had a stellar career since leaving office.

Edited September 8, 201213 yr by Max

Page 115... easily the best and most informative page in this entire thread! I may not agree with everything you all are saying, I certainly feel as if I'm finally gaining a better understanding of your viewpoints and why you've arrived at them. I seriously appreciate these posts...

Partisan rancor sucks... discussion and reason rules...

Will you at least share which longtime allies are uncomfortable with the U.S.?

Will you at least share which longtime allies are uncomfortable with the U.S.?

Sure...

Israel, of course. No brainer...

India has been less than pleased. Obama seems afraid and/or unwilling to really counter China in any significant way as their sphere of influence grows, encircling India. To be fair, India didn't like when Bush tried to get chummy with Pakistan to better facilitate the war on terror (bad move, in my opinion). Obama continued those policies.

Relations with Germany are poor; bad blood between Merkel and Obama date back prior to his election.

Poland is displeased, Obama having referred to a World War II death camp there as a "Polish death camp", rather than a Nazi death camp. Blunder. He hasn't done much to improve relations with them... kind of abandoned them re: missile defense because he was afraid and/or intimidated by Putin... or just didn't care. Whatever his thought process... Poland isn't particularly happy.

That's four of them. His foreign policy sucks and allies he hasn't totally pissed off, he's offended in some way. Even Australia was irritated when he cancelled scheduled visits there TWICE... then managed to visit Indonesia but couldn't seem to find the time to jump over to Australia during that time. I could think up some other stuff... do some research and Google it, I suppose... but that's just the stuff I can recall off the top of my head.

Sure...

Israel, of course. No brainer...

India has been less than pleased. Obama seems afraid and/or unwilling to really counter China in any significant way as their sphere of influence grows, encircling India. To be fair, India didn't like when Bush tried to get chummy with Pakistan to better facilitate the war on terror (bad move, in my opinion). Obama continued those policies.

Relations with Germany are poor; bad blood between Merkel and Obama date back prior to his election.

Poland is displeased, Obama having referred to a World War II death camp there as a "Polish death camp", rather than a Nazi death camp. Blunder. He hasn't done much to improve relations with them... kind of abandoned them re: missile defense because he was afraid and/or intimidated by Putin... or just didn't care. Whatever his thought process... Poland isn't particularly happy.

That's four of them. His foreign policy sucks and allies he hasn't totally pissed off, he's offended in some way. Even Australia was irritated when he cancelled scheduled visits there TWICE... then managed to visit Indonesia but couldn't seem to find the time to jump over to Australia during that time. I could think up some other stuff... do some research and Google it, I suppose... but that's just the stuff I can recall off the top of my head.

Thanks for answering.

I've already discounted Israel because I'll take the word of the Israelis who know and they've said otherwise.

I don't know how major any poor relations with Germany and Poland might be in terms of it being problematic since I haven't heard or read anything.

The Australian thing sounds terribly minor.

If these are the examples then I fail to see a porblem considering the size of the world.

It's my understanding that in general the Europeans at least see him as a major upgrade over his predecessor.

Poland..please. They were polish death camps and the poles knew what was going on there and were often willing accomplices.

It's my understanding that in general the Europeans at least see him as a major upgrade over his predecessor.

Pretty much.

http://globalpublics...omney-or-obama/

An excerpt:

"Europeans have had a four-year love affair with Barack Obama: 87 percent of Germans, 86 percent of French and 80 percent of the British have confidence in Obama, according to a 2012 poll by the Pew Research Center’s Global Attitudes project. In each case this is higher than public confidence in their own national leader. And 92 percent of the French, 89 percent of the Germans and 73 percent of the British want Obama reelected."

Edited September 9, 201213 yr by marceline

Thanks for answering.

I've already discounted Israel because I'll take the word of the Israelis who know and they've said otherwise.

I don't know how major any poor relations with Germany and Poland might be in terms of it being problematic since I haven't heard or read anything.

The Australian thing sounds terribly minor.

If these are the examples then I fail to see a porblem considering the size of the world.

It's my understanding that in general the Europeans at least see him as a major upgrade over his predecessor.

>>shrugs<< Europe's opinions on Obama's performance would have more relevance to me if Europe wasn't in a state of chaos and disaster. If I wished to dig some more, I could offer up a laundry list of foreign policy gaffes, mistakes, etc., but you would likely dismiss them all. These sorts of mini-debates within the thread never work. If you are satisfied with Obama's handling of foreign policy, that's great. It's a matter of opinion.

Our standing in the world is no better today than during the Bush years. For all of Obama's ass-kissing and bowing (literally) before others, relations with friends and enemies alike remain poor. However, when Putin and Jintao express a preference in an American election, it gives me pause...

The only one on the list that is legitimate is China who had some optimism for the US and World economic conditions when he took office that didn't culminate as they had hoped. Thats something tangible that some could argue has had a direct impact on them economically, but it's not like they were in love with the prior administration or were in love with Obama. They aren't an ally either.