Is Obama a Socialist?

[DuncanONeil]

As usual you do not bother to let anyone know to what, or who, you are responding.

That makes it very hard to form a coherent response. Further much of what you say sounds like unsupported "talking points".

Therefore dream on!

Wow I think I finally agree with you on 1 point, its ridiculous for the Americans who caused the crisis to try and dictate to the world how it should be solved.

The rest however I rather vehemently dispute.
Your polling numbers look like data coming off fox news, if you look at the recent gallup poll, Obama is doing acceptably. Are you confusing numbers from a particular state with national numbers?

Regarding the Oil Spill what do you want him to do, nationalize the rig, put in experts and solve it? The problem is that rig didn't meet basic standards regulated by most of the world, but not required by the US anti-regulation party (aka the Republicans who cry communism whenever someone tries to pass a reasonable regulation that tries to prevent a catastrophic oil spill.) Basic equipment that could have prevented the spill was absent from the rig because the US government is one of few in the world that chose not to require it.

As for the sacking of the General, it is impossible to execute policy on the ground when people not only disagree with you but air their grievances publicly. The US has been at war in Afghanistan that the idea they have only ONE counterinsurgency expert for the region is ludicrous.

As for Obama being a socialist, he's to the right of most of the world. His health care plan is far to the right of the plan that Britains convervatives don't dare attack in virtually every other country in the world he'd be in a right wing party. The democrats nominated him in the primaries because he was to the RIGHT of Clinton who was seen as too left to win. Clinton was also seen as a repeat of a Clinton presidency which wasn't accused of being socialist.

[Lion]

As usual you do not bother to let anyone know to what, or who, you are responding.

That makes it very hard to form a coherent response. Further much of what you say sounds like unsupported "talking points".

Therefore dream on!

How about just rebutting the "talking points" instead of being critical on the way he conveyed his opinion?

[DuncanONeil]

How about just rebutting the "talking points" instead of being critical on the way he conveyed his opinion?

Because without the reference of what caused him to say what he did it is difficult to understand what gave rise to what he said.
There are other reasons, more personal in nature, That I choose to reserve.

[leo9]

How about just rebutting the "talking points" instead of being critical on the way he conveyed his opinion?

Since he can't, he's got to find some other response.

[DuncanONeil]

It is kind of hard to respond when he, essentially, refused to provide any reference to the issue his response is related to.
For example; "The rest however I rather vehemently dispute.
Your polling numbers look like data coming off fox news, if you look at the recent gallup poll, Obama is doing acceptably. Are you confusing numbers from a particular state with national numbers?"

Which poll is he talking about? Without that info how would you respond!?!?!