Obama

[The WH]

I've been surfing the internet the last few days. Reading things here and there.

Bare with me, I'm only 30 so this is only the 7th presidential term I've been around for, and probably the 3rd I've remotely paid attention to.

Is it just me or have both of Obama's inaugurations been over-the-top?

They seem to be extremely sensationalized productions like some awards show, or SuperBowl half time show. I don't think that Clinton's or Bush's were done this way.

I've never seen a President surround himself with so much pop-culture. Appear on Late Night TV shows things like that. Something about this presidency doesn't seem professional at all. Seems like that movie Richie Rich. Like "I've got all this power I'm gonna do all this awesome shit I've wanted to do"

Another thing I saw from my arm chair in the Frozen North was Obama doing that speech about the kids that got shot in CT. Has any president cried on the podium before? Maybe I'm reading way to much Game of Thrones, but, isn't crying something that leaders don't/shouldn't do in public? Isn't that considered a sign of weakness in a leader to some?

Don't get me wrong, kids died and that's tragic but FDR didn't cry after Pearl Harbor. Bush didn't cry after 9/11 (he was in on it, so that was a reason maybe). FDR offered that great speech, not just some random crap followed by tears.

But what if you are a rival that sees the leader of your enemy crying .... doesn't that show how to get to him?

Maybe I've spent too much time at the deep end of YouTube...something about this guy just doesn't sit right with me since I moved (yes I was one of the sheep that voted for him in 08 and I regret that. I got played by the media and there sabotage of the Republican ticket that year. Not to mention the Bush hangover. McCain was also a pandering douche)

Oh well, here's to a few more months before all hell breaks loose.

[fansince'76]

I think it's quite instructive that he used his inauguration speech to focus on gay rights, global warming and entitlement programs with nary a word mentioned about the country's unsustainable debt, unemployment or the economy.

[NJarhead]

I think it's quite instructive that he used his inauguration speech to focus on gay rights, global warming and entitlement programs with nary a word mentioned about the country's unsustainable debt, unemployment or the economy.

He does give very inspirational (to some) speeches though.

[Dwinsgames]

Bush didn't cry after 9/11 (he was in on it, so that was a reason maybe)..

do not go there , or run the risk of forever being persecuted on this site and be accused of wearing a tin foil hat and all kinds of shit ...

This Government never lies to you , and above all they are far to Honest to ever fathom an attempt at a cover up ...

complain all you want about entitlements ( even skew the numbers if need be ) complain about every piece of gun legislation mentioned whether it has merit or not , complain about free speech or lack thereof , hell even talk about the Bigfoot you saw last night .... but never and I mean never so much as hint that a conspiracy may have taken place .....

so just how big was the bigfoot anyways ?

[The WH]

by who?

[steeldawg]

everything on tv these days is over the top.

[Dwinsgames]

everything on tv these days is over the top.

tell -Lie -vision

[X-Terminator]

Of course it was over the top, because Obama is the biggest narcissist we've ever had as President. Everything is about drawing attention to himself. All of his sycophantic followers already think he's a rock star, so he figures he may as well live like one. Even Clinton didn't get this much attention from the leftists.

[Godfather]

I don't think that Clinton's or Bush's were done this way.

I've never seen a President surround himself with so much pop-culture. Appear on Late Night TV shows things like that.

I was in DC a few days before Clinton's first inauguration. He had a bunch of celebrities, but he did that during the pre-inauguration festivities.

The late night talk show circuit has been happening for at least 20 years. Clinton went on Arsenio Hall. Bush appeared on Letterman. McCain, Palin, Obama, and Hillary all made SNL appearances in 2008. That's more a reflection of changes in public expectations than it is on the candidates.

- - - Updated - - -

He does give very inspirational (to some) speeches though.

Not to anyone with minimal critical thinking skills. Even when he says something good, like the same rules should apply to everyone, it sounds phony to me because I know his record doesn't match his rhetoric. He doesn't care one bit about fairness, equality, opportunity, or hard work being rewarded.

[GoSlash27]

I think it's quite instructive that he used his inauguration speech to focus on gay rights, global warming and entitlement programs with nary a word mentioned about the country's unsustainable debt, unemployment or the economy.

On the subject of entitlements and debt... It really irks me that the media keeps getting away with their idiotic "gridlock" narrative. There is no disagreement on that subject between the Republicans and the Democrats. They both want more government and neither side wants to pay for it. Their only disagreement is in which *parts* of the government get bigger and which *parts* of the budget get neglected.
There's no "gridlock" on that issue. Both parties are in collusion.

[The Patriot]

Bush didn't cry after 9/11 (he was in on it, so that was a reason maybe). FDR offered that great speech, not just some random crap followed by tears.

[NJarhead]

He does give very inspirational (to some) speeches though.

Not to anyone with minimal critical thinking skills. Even when he says something good, like the same rules should apply to everyone, it sounds phony to me because I know his record doesn't match his rhetoric. He doesn't care one bit about fairness, equality, opportunity, or hard work being rewarded.

Precisely.

[zulater]

Bush didn't cry after 9/11 (he was in on it, so that was a reason maybe). FDR offered that great speech, not just some random crap followed by tears.

Bullshit! Christ no wonder this country is in such trouble. Too many people engaging in fantasy and science fiction.

[NJarhead]

Bullshit! Christ no wonder this country is in such trouble. Too many people engaging in fantasy and science fiction.

Thank you.

[ALLD]

Caca de toro. Just a lot of fluff to distract the people from the real problems facing the country and cause them to forget that the government works for the people instead of the other way around.

[BnG_Hevn]

They way I see the Obama's is like this. I've always had a difficult time relating to movies where "royal families" were so "proper" and you see how the king / queen to be are trained from an early age so when they take over the crown, they are ready.

By ready I mean they conduct themselves with class.

I've always had a problem .. until Obama took office.

He / his wife have absolutely NO CLASS. It is as though an ignorant, illiterate living in a trailer got promoted to the head of a big company: they just don't belong.

The Obama's, IMO, don't know how to conduct themselves in relation to the position they hold.

[The WH]

Bullshit! Christ no wonder this country is in such trouble. Too many people engaging in fantasy and science fiction.

Do you really want to have this discussion Zu?

[zulater]

Do you really want to have this discussion Zu?

Go for it if you want! I've read all the conspiracy 9-11 nonsense, and more to the point I'm quite familiar with the counter argument's that clearly prove the conspiracy theories are total fucking crap.

Bush may not have been your ideal President. But he's not a cruel calculated killer who's capable of pulling off the biggest mass murder on U.S soil in the history of this nation.

[steeldawg]

I agree these conspiracies are crazy talk, people died it was very tragic i highly doubt our goverment had a hand in these events.

[fansince'76]

Go for it if you want! I've read all the conspiracy 9-11 nonsense, and more to the point I'm quite familiar with the counter argument's that clearly prove the conspiracy theories are total fucking crap.

Bush may not have been your ideal President. But he's not a cruel calculated killer who's capable of pulling off the biggest mass murder on U.S soil in the history of this nation.

Besides that, this country's government isn't competent enough to keep a conspiracy of the depth and scope that's been alluded to by 9/11 conspiracy theorists under wraps. It simply isn't. They couldn't keep classified documents out of the hands of the likes of Julian Assange, yet they could cover up their alleged involvement in 9/11? That's giving them way too much credit.

[zulater]

Besides that, this country's government isn't competent enough to keep a conspiracy of the depth and scope that's been alluded to by 9/11 conspiracy theorists under wraps. It simply isn't. They couldn't keep classified documents out of the hands of the likes of Julian Assange, yet they could cover up their alleged involvement in 9/11? That's giving them way too much credit.

Thanks for posting that. And stay tuned in case I need help beating this brush fire out.

- - - Updated - - -

I agree these conspiracies are crazy talk, people died it was very tragic i highly doubt our goverment had a hand in these events.

Doubt isn't a strong enough word in this case when you dissect the supposed evidence.

[Dwinsgames]

would love someone to provide a demonstration on how Jet fuel and office materials can burn hot enough to melt steel I Beams heavy enough to be used in construction of a sky scraper ... I would love to see that demonstration .....

quite simply we will never see it because it can not burn hot enough in fact it burns at aprox 1,000 degrees to cool ( at its highest potential heat ) ...

Yet I am to believe that it burned that hot in not just 1 area but the entire area because the buildings came straight down ( no toppling effect)

and I must at the same time discount fireman that where inside and barely escaped with their lives that talked about multiple explosions just prior to the building coming down ....

I would also love to hear the explanation for the thermite found at the site in the dust and debris a well as the rationalization for fema to already be on site as it was happening , and why for the first time in history that very day we had our civil air defense all moved south and out of range .... and why we where running drills for this very event ( planes hitting those particular building ) just prior to it happening .... in London same thing drills on the subway bombing scheduled starting time 5 min prior to the actual event .....

but I can all but guarantee you can not explain those small but important facts away , I will be watching ......


for the most part thus far all I get is name calling and arbitrary denial ....

[zulater]

http://www.popularmechanics.com/tech...y/news/1227842

It's all in here.

Why do people want to believe total nonsense?

- - - Updated - - -

Claim: "We have been lied to," announces the Web site AttackOnAmerica.net. "The first lie was that the load of fuel from the aircraft was the cause of structural failure. No kerosene fire can burn hot enough to melt steel." The posting is entitled "Proof Of Controlled Demolition At The WTC."

FACT: Jet fuel burns at 800° to 1500°F, not hot enough to melt steel (2750°F). However, experts agree that for the towers to collapse, their steel frames didn't need to melt, they just had to lose some of their structural strength—and that required exposure to much less heat. "I have never seen melted steel in a building fire," says retired New York deputy fire chief Vincent Dunn, author of The Collapse Of Burning Buildings: A Guide To Fireground Safety. "But I've seen a lot of twisted, warped, bent and sagging steel. What happens is that the steel tries to expand at both ends, but when it can no longer expand, it sags and the surrounding concrete cracks."

"Steel loses about 50 percent of its strength at 1100°F," notes senior engineer Farid Alfawak-hiri of the American Institute of Steel Construction. "And at 1800° it is probably at less than 10 percent." NIST also believes that a great deal of the spray-on fireproofing insulation was likely knocked off the steel beams that were in the path of the crashing jets, leaving the metal more vulnerable to the heat.

But jet fuel wasn't the only thing burning, notes Forman Williams, a professor of engineering at the University of California, San Diego, and one of seven structural engineers and fire experts that PM consulted. He says that while the jet fuel was the catalyst for the WTC fires, the resulting inferno was intensified by the combustible material inside the buildings, including rugs, curtains, furniture and paper. NIST reports that pockets of fire hit 1832°F.

"The jet fuel was the ignition source," Williams tells PM. "It burned for maybe 10 minutes, and [the towers] were still standing in 10 minutes. It was the rest of the stuff burning afterward that was responsible for the heat transfer that eventually brought them down."

Puffs Of Dust
Claim: As each tower collapsed, clearly visible puffs of dust and debris were ejected from the sides of the buildings. An advertisement in The New York Times for the book Painful Questions: An Analysis Of The September 11th Attack made this claim: "The concrete clouds shooting out of the buildings are not possible from a mere collapse. They do occur from explosions." Numerous conspiracy theorists cite Van Romero, an explosives expert and vice president of the New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology, who was quoted on 9/11 by the Albuquerque Journal as saying "there were some explosive devices inside the buildings that caused the towers to collapse." The article continues, "Romero said the collapse of the structures resembled those of controlled implosions used to demolish old structures."


FACT: Once each tower began to collapse, the weight of all the floors above the collapsed zone bore down with pulverizing force on the highest intact floor. Unable to absorb the massive energy, that floor would fail, transmitting the forces to the floor below, allowing the collapse to progress downward through the building in a chain reaction. Engineers call the process "pancaking," and it does not require an explosion to begin, according to David Biggs, a structural engineer at Ryan-Biggs Associates and a member of the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) team that worked on the FEMA report.

Like all office buildings, the WTC towers contained a huge volume of air. As they pancaked, all that air—along with the concrete and other debris pulverized by the force of the collapse—was ejected with enormous energy. "When you have a significant portion of a floor collapsing, it's going to shoot air and concrete dust out the window," NIST lead investigator Shyam Sunder tells PM. Those clouds of dust may create the impression of a controlled demolition, Sunder adds, "but it is the floor pancaking that leads to that perception."

Demolition expert Romero regrets that his comments to the Albuquerque Journal became fodder for conspiracy theorists. "I was misquoted in saying that I thought it was explosives that brought down the building," he tells PM. "I only said that that's what it looked like."

Romero, who agrees with the scientific conclusion that fire triggered the collapses, demanded a retraction from the Journal. It was printed Sept. 22, 2001. "I felt like my scientific reputation was on the line." But emperors-clothes.com saw something else: "The paymaster of Romero's research institute is the Pentagon. Directly or indirectly, pressure was brought to bear, forcing Romero to retract his original statement." Romero responds: "Conspiracy theorists came out saying that the government got to me. That is the farthest thing from the truth. This has been an albatross around my neck for three years."

Read more: 9/11 Conspiracy Theories - Debunking the Myths - World Trade Center - Popular Mechanics

[Dwinsgames]

sorry even if the premise of 50% loss a structural strength is lost is correct those beams where very BIG and even at 50% would have been plenty strong enough to sustain longer than they did and on top of that concrete will hold itself in place without the aid of the steel if it is not destabilized in some manner ( violent shaking / explosions or other outside forces )

and even if one where to believe that popular mechanics article they would also have to believe the fire was equally intense for the exact same amount of time at every beam or the towers fall in a toppling motion instead of virtually straight down ....

and much of the steel was found in a molten state weeks after 9/11 liquid steel red hot under the debris ... this does not happen from that sort of fire it is not scientifically possible and Pop Mech fails to address that as well as the dust particles containing thermite ...

nobody seems to want to go the whole 8 miles in " debunking" because they can't they go part way and try and explain away part of it and throw the baby out with the remaining bath water because they think they are done .... sorry does not work like that

just sayin

Now I am done ,

[Seven]

Anyone who thinks 9/11 was an inside job lacks common sense.

- - - Updated - - -

Oh and Obama still blows.

[zulater]

sorry even if the premise of 50% loss a structural strength is lost is correct those beams where very BIG and even at 50% would have been plenty strong enough to sustain longer than they did and on top of that concrete will hold itself in place without the aid of the steel if it is not destabilized in some manner ( violent shaking / explosions or other outside forces )

and even if one where to believe that popular mechanics article they would also have to believe the fire was equally intense for the exact same amount of time at every beam or the towers fall in a toppling motion instead of virtually straight down ....

and much of the steel was found in a molten state weeks after 9/11 liquid steel red hot under the debris ... this does not happen from that sort of fire it is not scientifically possible and Pop Mech fails to address that as well as the dust particles containing thermite ...

nobody seems to want to go the whole 8 miles in " debunking" because they can't they go part way and try and explain away part of it and throw the baby out with the remaining bath water because they think they are done .... sorry does not work like that

just sayin

Now I am done ,

Yeah I guess the media covered it all up, because you know, they always loved Bush so much.

- - - Updated - - -

Anyone who thinks 9/11 was an inside job lacks common sense.

- - - Updated - - -

Oh and Obama still blows.

I wouldn't say they lack common sense. But if you stare at the same picture for hours on end you start seeing things that aren't there.

[Godfather]

But if you stare at the same picture for hours on end you start seeing things that aren't there.

Kind of like those pictures from about 10 years ago. I could never get them to work.

[GoSlash27]

DWins,
You know I like and respect you and all.. but *seriously*... Are you going to turn *every* political thread into a 9/11 conspiracy theory thread? 'Cuz that's liable to get pretty darn tedious.

[X-Terminator]

DWins,
You know I like and respect you and all.. but *seriously*... Are you going to turn *every* political thread into a 9/11 conspiracy theory thread? 'Cuz that's liable to get pretty darn tedious.

He didn't start this discussion in this thread.

[Dwinsgames]

He didn't start this discussion in this thread.

This