Obama is an asshole.

Sending more to Iraq.

So if you can't watch the video Obama is addressing the fact that he's sending MORE (as in 30,000 more) of our soldiers to Iraq. I cannot even begin to describe my distaste for this guy! He tells everyone that he's going to bring out boys home and then he SENDS MORE! Why? So they can die. Ugg. Please someone give me feedback because I can't be the only one who thinks this.

No. I disagree with you there. They should have NEVER given him one to begin with!!!

I don't know but if that's the case why the hell haven't I gotten one? XD

I haven't been paying much attention to the news lately (mostly because it bores the shit outta me nowadays and I'm tired of hearing about DEATH, SEX, AND HOUSEHOLD ALTERNATIVES) but in my opinion I think that a man in his position should deserve a little bit of slack. Every president that comes out of that office no longer has their good looks and great hair. In other words, they're under a lot of stress every day.

Ask yourself this one question: would you be willing to carry the burden of an entire nation of egotistic, materialist, fast-food loving people going through a financial down-turn, dealing with tangled over-seas relations, and threatened every day by terrorists to be burned to the ground and your women and children slaughtered or made slaves?

Tough question; and though it may seem almost unfair, its true. However, I don't think I'll be taking a side on this issue anymore. I've had my fair share of politics a few years ago.

Well the truth if if you can't handle the pressure than don't put yourself in that position. I hold no sympathy for a man who evidently holds no sympathy for his people. I come from a family of military members and the things he puts the soldiers and those around them in quite unnecessary. How many people have to die for him to prove a point?

To be honest, I’ve never supported Obama. I didn’t buy into the things he preached, yes I say preached because that is exactly the way he addresses the country is by preaching to them, in the first place. Now, he hasn’t exactly stood by what he said during the election nor is he really doing us any favors. Personally I think a lot of what he is doing is going to fuck us over in the long run more than anything, however I digress.

As to the issue with troops, well… to be quite frank if he were to just pull our troops out of there now things would only get worse. You might not realize it, but the situation over there does indeed affect our lives over here. It is because things weren’t taken care of properly over in that region several times over now that we were ever in the position we were in during 9/11 in the first place. If we leave now, the place is going to fall back into tribal warfare (most likely) and who knows what that will do for terrorist organizations that take refugee there. It gives them a hell of an opportunity that we don’t want them having though.

Do I agree with the way things are being handled? Hell no. I think the situations we are currently in are ridiculous and the truth is they should have been taken care of a long time ago. The war situation, the economic situation… it all stems back decades ago. It isn’t ‘inherited’ from George Bush like a lot of people like to spout off either. If you want to take that route, then the same thing can be said that George Bush himself inherited these problems. However, it doesn’t matter who inherited what problem as president or anything of that matter. Things weren’t taken care of then and they have screwed us over now. The issue at hand is how we are going to deal with situations and unfortunately Obama hasn’t been doing a very good job at that, in my opinion.

Another thing is, people like to throw things out at one man; the president. Well, guess what… that isn’t how it works. The president is not a king, he is not a dictator. You can’t blame everything on the man because the rest of our government has the power to override everything he tries to do. The real problem right now, and it has been the real problem for quite a while, is that our entire government is full of incompetent, greedy bastards who don’t give a damn what the people actually have to say. Furthermore, it comes down to a partial fault of the people themselves. The system was set up so that the true power was in the people if the people were actually willing to keep tabs on things and make sure things went they way they wanted them to. Americans have gotten lazy and the majority just simply doesn’t anymore, which lets the wolves run wild and do whatever they please. Thomas Jefferson himself even stated that these would be potential issues with the government.

I've got to say that I agree with much of what Spirit has said. But to expand on it. A president can say he is going to do many, many, many things while running for election. But when you get right down to it when he gets into the oval office and sees things for what I can only imagine them to be. Shit changes. You may have had campaign promises but once your there and you realize you CAN'T take the troops out without the risk of another despot taking control? Yes, the presidents have to break their promises. And as much as it may anger the public, well to put it simply....the public at large is stupid. Make no bones about it; the person may be smart, but when carried to a frenzy, be it because of anger, paranoia or out right fear. The public is nothing more than a wild animal and at those stage and must be ignored for a rational, well thought out approach. Some examples of this?

Washington, the Jay Treaty in 1794. It was EXTREMELY unpopular. How unpopular? The people of his home state of Virgina sung about him being assassinated in bars. I'll say that again, Virgina (who might still see him as a god btw) was calling for the man to be killed. And that's from his home state. But America could ill afford a new war with England. So in a way Washington created the country on the battle field and saved it with a pen stroke. (Let's not forget his warning farewell address about the dangers of political parties. It's damn creepy to read now.)

John Adams, Treaty with France 1799. John Adams suddenly turns his back on his political party and the majority of the people of the country who wished for war with France. With the signing of the new treaty, Adams also signed his careers death. He would lose the next election being shunned by much of his party and the other alike. In fact is has not been till recently that this treaty and Adams has become recognized as one of the great turning points for America. (This was also when he said his now infamous quote, "Great is the guilt of an unnecessary war. ")

Of course Lincoln had an entire Civil War on his hands, and with that a large part of the north did not wish for war.

FDR pressed to join the WWII while the public thought it to be Europe's business. Rumors still swirl that he knew an attack was coming but did not prevent it because he knew it would lead us to war. (Just rumors, no one is truly sure how much FDR knew.)

A president is not subject to the will of the people, nor should be subject to lobbyist or his own party. A president is man who must be of unbelievable heart and character. A man of reason and strength. And must sometimes preform acts that will make him hated. I may not like the choice, WE might not like the choice, but we must take care in not becoming one of the bleating sheep on the television. We must look at the other side as well.

Well said Squall, well said.

Nowadays it seems people aren't electing a President as much as they are electing a scapegoat. Economy in the shitter? Point to the "man in charge". Iraq is still unstable and requires more military support? Surely Obama must have done something to piss off the Iraqis. At least that is the idea that I am getting.

Blaming all of the country's woes on a single man is absolutely ridiculous. I cannot even begin to fathom the stress involved with such a position. If you cannot see that Obama is using the information he has available and using what power he does have (which is most definitely limited) to try to get these numerous issues resolved, then perhaps you should try seeing things from his perspective. Most people can live by the mantra "You can please some of the people some of the time, but cannot please all of the people all of the time." The President isn't so fortunate, his job isn't about pleasing the people, it is about doing what is best for their country and hoping they can still walk away from whatever political backlash results from their decision.

Another thing is, people like to throw things out at one man; the president. Well, guess what… that isn’t how it works. The president is not a king, he is not a dictator. You can’t blame everything on the man because the rest of our government has the power to override everything he tries to do. The real problem right now, and it has been the real problem for quite a while, is that our entire government is full of incompetent, greedy bastards who don’t give a damn what the people actually have to say. Furthermore, it comes down to a partial fault of the people themselves. The system was set up so that the true power was in the people if the people were actually willing to keep tabs on things and make sure things went they way they wanted them to. Americans have gotten lazy and the majority just simply doesn’t anymore, which lets the wolves run wild and do whatever they please. Thomas Jefferson himself even stated that these would be potential issues with the government.

I wish more people would realize that. But that's just it; most people ARE lazy sheeple. The higher powers have made them that way, but the people still went ahead and let them.

Like Squall mentioned, everything the founding fathers predicted about bad government and passive people has been coming to pass.

The constitution means nothing to the government anymore. The courts say law is what the judge says, putting the judges above law, free to write their own. They've passed things time and time again without precedent.

Worse, the whole Congress regularly gets bypassed. Patriot Act is just one example. Then there's lobbying and all the other hazards and pitfalls of the political arena.

It's just a mess. What we really need is a revolution. The people need to retake the power that is theirs. They've given it up. They need to realize it is rightfully theirs, realize they need it, and go fight for it.

Sooner than you think we'll be in a police state, under martial law, and all sorts of things the founding fathers slaved to provide against.

It shows that there is still a huge amount of racism that Obama was elected in the first place. He is not an American citizen; he does not qualify for the presidency; yet if we were to throw him out of office, I believe there would be riots and racial wars, because he is the first "black" president.

It would have been the same if Hilary had been elected. "Women's rights" would have secured her place in office no matter what she did.

I'm just starting to rant now, so I'll stop. I guess the point is, Sighlent's right. Politicians are horrible. They never keep their promises, because the ones that do never make it into office.

It's actually refreshing that so many on this site have similar views on all this. I'm surprised, because many people I try to talk to in real life don't really get what's happening.

Kalon Ordona II wrote:
It shows that there is still a huge amount of racism that Obama was elected in the first place. He is not an American citizen; he does not qualify for the presidency; yet if we were to throw him out of office, I believe there would be riots and racial wars, because he is the first "black" president.

Whoa whoa ok. I can't tell if you were being sarcastic or not. But I in no way believe he is not an American. I'll be dead honest about something as well. I hate Tea Baggers, Birthers, extreme environmentalist and every other crack pot, radical and DANGEROUS group currently working in the United States and the world. They are just as dangerous as the politicians because they enable them to work. They stir up irrational fear and anger which politicians and the media alike latch on to and milk for all it's worth.

While I believe that America has slowly walked to the right direction I do not believe any armed revolution is needed. I think the American people and the government our founding fathers gave us is strong than that. Now if your talking about a revolution in politics then count me in. In fact count me as long as they stick to the right direction. I do NOT believe in any radical groups. They are plague. I'm a moderate through and through. But I'm much more vocal than my other reserved colleagues.

I agree, Squall. I can't stand the ridiculous radical groups out there...

However, I do agree on Kalon about the point of Obama being elected does show a sign of racism being strong in the country. His reason, however, I do not agree with. I've seen no possible proof to show that Obama is not an American and until I do, I will firmly believe that he is indeed an American.

That said, I believe that part of the reason Obama won the election was due to the uptight, high end white society trying to prove that they were not a racist by voting for a black man as president. This is something I am strongly against and believe that it can potentially cause further harm.

Truthfully, I don’t think the country really was ready for a black president. I mean, it might not be common knowledge but there is still a hell of a lot of Neo-Nazi, white-pride pricks out there. Furthermore, I wouldn’t be surprised if someone tries to pull another Charles Manson stunt and attempt evoking a race rare by taking out Obama, or at least trying to and, and framing it up as an act of racial violence. I just hope that it doesn’t happen.

A full on combat revolution would also be terrible. I mean, seriously… we have a war overseas and are in the middle of an economic crisis, ridiculous problems with illegal immigrants involved in drug and human trafficking as well as many of our own citizens involved in the same exact thing plus the gang activity… the last thing we need is for violent revolution. Like Squall though, I strongly support a political revolution.

As for going in the right direction, I think we are in some ways and that we aren’t in others. A lot of people are all for this ‘free health care’ but personally, I think that will really screw us over in the long run. I could be wrong, but this is a capitalist society and in making health care a government given coverage paid for through our taxes… I don’t think it will do anything to help the economy. That isn’t to say I agree with the way things are done right now, because they are terrible. I think what needs to be done is that there needs to be a meeting in the middle ground. Allow for health care to be handled through business but only allow it under a highly regulated system. Hell, you could have a governmental funded group that goes around, does the research and so forth to make sure everything is regulated properly and kept at affordable prices for people. If done so in this sort of direction it would keep the capitalism we have going and also offer more jobs to people who could greatly use them. Now, is this a perfect idea? No… but I think it is a move in a better direction than what either of our lovely political parties are conjuring up.

I agree with basically everything previous, so any more would be reiteration.

Yes, I was meaning a political revolution. Sorry that the meaning was unclear.
I do, however, believe in the right to bear arms. If you outlaw guns, then only outlaws will have guns.

At the same time, I wish guns did not exist. It should have stayed with swords. xD Stupid gunpowder.

Personally I can agree with things from both sides of the argument.

I do not think Obama should be hailed as an asshole for sending in more troops. In reality we, (we as in the common people) are ignorant of what is truely going on overseas. Therefore none of us can say if sending more troops is really the best plan or not. Things are going on overseas we have no idea about. Yet what I do know is that if we were to pull out now, and everything overseas went back to the way it was previously then the deaths of those who have already given their lives will be for nothing. For so many to have died in vain would be a true failure.
In the end it comes down to a matter of trust in the man the American people voted for to lead the country.

On the subject of a political revolution to put more power in to the hands of the people I'm on the fence. In general it's my opinion that at least half the nation is comprised of complete idiots. If you cannot trust the elected officials elected by the people, will a government in which those same people who voted for the failed officials have a greater power be any better?

The system is flawed. People are flawed. The World is flawed. Nothing in this world is perfect. We can't expect a thing like a government to be anywhere near perfect now or anytime in the near future. If they were, then there most likely would be no wars any longer.

Well that's just my two cents anyway.

Yeah well. Maybe I'm just a little peeved with the fact that my brother is being sent on his 5th tour. I mean seriously? He's luckier than any single man I've ever met. I get what you guys are saying I really do and I didn't mean for anyone to get offended if they did.

The only thing that I can do is quote one of the dumbest politicians I've ever come across.

"Poly - meaning more than one. And tick - a blood sucking parasite."
-Kinky Friedman

I think it's bullshit that you people really believe that the only reason Obama was voted into office is because he's black. I can honestly say that Hillary was my first choice, but Obama was my second because I believed in him. He's a damned good speaker, and he's intelligent. I believed that he could be a good leader for this country. He's also a way better choice than McCain who basically just did what W. Bush wanted him to do. At least Obama has a spine and can think for himself.

In all honesty, if you think that the reason that this country isn't ready for a black President is because we still have white-power racist faction in the country then by the same degree, we aren't ready for a President of any race. You honestly believe there aren't people who aren't white that have formed racist groups? That's just a little bit ignorant, don't you think?

I have aligned myself on the Democratic side of politics, but I am one of those Americans who doesn't really care about politics farther than the general things that are happening in this country. I'm not happy that we have troops in the Middle East at all, and I'm not happy that more are being sent. I've thought this "war" was a bad idea from the get-go.

Did you know that the War in Iraq isn't even officially a war? Congress has to declare it's a war to make it official, and "Dubya" bypassed their asses and went ahead with it anyway. Some political system, huh?

I honestly think that if I believed we could change the government for the better, I would care about it more. However, I really don't think that people can change what's happening. I know that "people like me" are the reason why, but that doesn't change the way I feel. I'm just hoping that I die before we end up having the sort of government like I saw in V for Vendetta. Just be glad that the government doesn't rule with an iron fist yet.

Obama is only doing what he can do at the moment. Even with his making decisions with which I don't agree, I still believe that he can do some good. I still believe he can live up to really earning that Nobel Peace Prize he received.

Unless in four years someone better comes along, I'll probably vote for him again. I sure as hell am never going to vote for Palin or for McCain if they run. That would be a bigger disaster in my opinion than what's going on now.

On the theme of quoting amusing things... I'll leave my rambling/bitching with a very amusing and a very true satirical quote from Douglas Adams' The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy series. I don't remember exactly which book. It's one of the later ones, methinks.

"On its world, the people are people. The leaders are lizards. The people hate the lizards and the lizards rule the people."
"Odd," said Arthur, "I thought you said it was a democracy."
"I did," said Ford. "It is."
"So," said Arthur, hoping he wasn't sounding ridiculously obtuse, "why don't people get rid of the lizards?"
"It honestly doesn't occur to them," said Ford. "They've all got the vote, so they all pretty much assume that the government they've voted in more or less approximates to the government they want."
"You mean they actually vote for the lizards?"
"Oh yes," said Ford with a shrug, "of course."
"But," said Arthur, going for the big one again, "why?"
"Because if they didn't vote for a lizard," said Ford, "the wrong lizard might get in. Got any gin?"

I completely understand where you are coming from Sigh. I've got family going back into the frying pan as well. Along with a few friends. I can only hope and pray they come home safely. There are good people over there doing good things, and it's amazing to see how, as little as we see it, that they do make a difference.

Sadly Kathryn, I believe the last official war the United States was involved in was World War II. The United State's military has mostly been used by either the UN, or as "advisers" or "police action." Some where made suspected not good intentions, other I believe were. Declaring war is very difficult to do, because of the support needed from the house and senate. It is also very hard to get out of which is the reasoning behind the lack of congressionaly sanctioned wars. A bi product from the past (namely the cold war) has come back to haunt the children of today. It is not surprising really.

Though I did not agree with the Iraq war, (I smelled a rat, and I was right.) I did fully support the war in Afgan. Clinton's term in office showed us that simply dropping a few bombs on terrorist training camps will not stop them from killing innocents. And though a ground war is not much better. A war in the shadows needs to be fought as a war in the shadows. These extremist, like extremist in our country and others, do not usually have uniforms. And are mostly trained in the arts of espionage. It makes them ghost, it makes them hard to track, and it makes their attacks all the more devastating.

They are ants and to attack with a full military force is like trying to kill a swarm of them with a boot. Sure you get a few but there will always be those that slip out from between the grooves of the sole. Sadly yes, it's time for a new quote. "Armies perfect the art of fighting the last war just in time for the next one." Not sure who said it or if it's just common knowledge. But it is dead on true. Many Americans, not just the military but the Average Joe and Jane, still think this war is something fought in some far off battlefield where the enemy will have the flag of his nation on his arm. But these men have no nation, just a extremist mind and ideal. This is a war of surgical precision, not of a big boot to the face. The leaders should have come out the day after 9/11 and told the American people that a war against terror would be long, it would be hard, and it would be different from others. They should have let the people know what they were getting into. Cause many ain't ready for that kinda fight.

I wasn’t meaning to imply that Obama was only elected because of his race. I was saying that I believe there is a strong group out there that were voting for him because of a fear of appearing as a racist, which is just as unhealthy and damaging to a nation as those who truly are racist. I also wasn’t saying I don’t believe there aren’t any non-white racists groups out there. The problem is that the racism towards blacks is the easiest one to use as a scapegoat in any means, thus it prevents a much larger problem until we can actually move past this ridiculousness of racism that plagues our entire species (globally) in the first place.

Haven’t aligned myself with either political party, because I think both are extremely flawed in the way they wish to do things right now.

As for the war in Iraq not being a technical war, Squall is pretty much right with what he said. Everything we’ve been involved in since WWII have been typically labeled as ‘Police Actions’ or something along those lines. Hell, we’re technically still involved in the war with Korean from the 1950’s… that was never actually resolved; it just became a cease fire. I’m seriously grateful though that things are going the way they are in Iraq, and not the way that they went in Vietnam which was a complete disaster.

I think there are some things Obama can do that would be good, but I remain extremely skeptical about how good things he does might be ten, fifteen years from now; though I do agree that he was a far better choice than Palin or McCain.

Particular it is a bi product of the conflict with the Russians in Afghanistan during the 1980’s… ‘tis highly unfortunate but I agree, not surprising at all really. I also agree that it would have been better if the government had simply come out and told the truth about what we were getting into. Though only problem is, do you think the people would have really been able to comprehend what they were being told had they done that? I mean, I believe they should have and all but I still remain on the fence whether or not it truly would have changed much in the long run.

Voting is anonymous. They could have voted one way only to openly say they voted another. Everyone knows we have some really amazing liars involved in politics, and they seem to feel no moral misdeeds by doing so.

You're probably very good for not aligning yourself with either parties. I would do the same, but I have more faith in the Democrats than in the Republicans ((at least the ones who I've seen running for the last decade or so)), and I don't want the other lizard to get into office, so I'm aligning myself.

The thing about life in general is that you never know how any actions are really going to affect things in the future. One can only try their best to judge the best course of action for today and hope it proves fruitful in a positive way for the future.

I hate all things war-like and military ((things not people)), but I also hate knowing that if we did away with our military, someone somewhere would take advantage of the situation in a negative way. =\

I'm just going to say now that human nature sucks... a lot.

Oh, I know that. The problem is that for some people… they don’t care about the fact of voting being anonymous and would still act on a fear of such thing. I actually have talked to people of this sort, unfortunately.

Honestly, I really can’t find it in me to place more faith in one or the other. I wish I could, really I do. But, every time I take a look at something I just see them both leaning towards a more extremist side of things that I feel isn’t going to be helpful at all in the future; even if that is a few years from now. And yes, I understand your point about life in general and I understand it, greatly so. It can very easily be argued that my biggest problem is I am indecisive on the matter… which I wouldn’t outright deny. I wish I could take a side; the problem is that I can’t bring myself to because from my viewpoint neither political party is overly better than the other.

Human nature does suck, greatly so. I know it is off topic, but a bit of trivia here. The only two species in the entire world that we have figured out enjoy the act of violence, the act of killing their fellow species are humans and chimps. Research and film has even shown that chimps act out very primitive tactics of warfare. It is a bit disturbing to think about really… that the most highly evolved (in terms of mental ability) species are the two that actually enjoy killing one another instead of the common combat over of survival.

Woooow, how did I miss this one?

A couple of points to fan the flames (or get facts straight, which usually causes blowhard republicans to either refute them without actual proof or start chanting USA, USA, USA):

1. We're sending troops to Afghanistan. Which is not Iraq. There is a pretty significant difference which I will expound upon:

2. Afghanistan, unlike Iraq, has actually, always been a hotspot of terrorist activity that we've had issues with. Ironically, even back in the Clinton days, this was being eyed as something that needed to get taken care of. Clinton had an anti-terror program in place which was poised to go and ferret out Osama Bin Laden PRE 9/11, but did not implement it because it was in the last months of his presidency and he didn't want to impose his policies on the incoming president.

3. Bush & Co promptly cancelled the program, left Bin Laden alone, and hey, 9 months or so later, well, we all know what happened.

4. At first we went into Afghanistan, to kill us some terrorists like we should have done... buuuuut....

5. Iraq has a lot of oil. Bush & Company have heavy ties with Haliburton and the oil industry. When we took over the place, Haliburton got some pretty choice rights to oil there with I'm sure has made them billions upon billions. Does this mean Bush & Co. had us invade Iraq for oil? Welllll, I have my views, but there's no definitive proof, so you be the judge!

6. Oh yeah, there was actually no proof that Iraq had any ties to the terrorists responsible for 9/11, at all. None, zero. We invaded that place with zero proof. Yeaahhh.

7. Once we invaded iraq, suddenly instead of being a force for launching strikes, our soldiers were on guard duty, which made them waaaaahhaaaay easier to attack. So every terrorist and their mom said to themselves: 'Dude, we should totally kill them in Iraq, because it's weaker.' So promptly all of the terrorists who weren't there, flooded in. In addition, America basically looked like a giant asshole for invading some country that hadn't done anything to us except generally flipped us off verbally. So, recruitment for terrorist organizations went way up....

8. At that point, we were pretty much in there for good. We had no exit strategy, and no justfication for being there. But now that the terrorists had all moved in we couldn't leave or we'd basically have screwed the country back to the stone age. So we stayed, and invested troops there... meanwhile forgetting about where most of the terrorist home bases were, and basically screwed over people's lives because well, we shouldn't have been there in the first place. We should have been in Afghanistan.

9. Speed up to current day. Obama decides to, y'know, actually do what we should have done, and go kill some frigging terrorists where we should have been killing them in the first place, except that there's no oil there (not to say that we invaded Iraq for oil, but....), and the uninformed people go "homg! he's supporting the war that Bush was in!".


Ugh.

So honestly, it's not that Obama is an asshole, but rather Bush is an asshole, because he pulled out of Afghanistan and instead went into Iraq, which had no WMDs, no proof of ties to terrorism at all, no reason for us being there other than oil (not to say that we invaded Iraq for oil, but....), and all the meantime lost Bin Laden at Tora Bora, got us into a situation which attracted terrorism into Iraq, made us look like global douchebags, and oh yeah, screwed the economy to shit while he was at it. As has been pointed out here by several other posts, at this point, if we left we'd be screwing over the populace hard core. In addition, Obama's actually fighting the battle we should have been fighting. It's regrettable, but at least we're trying to do what we need to do instead of something stupid, like going after oil... (not to say that we invaded Iraq for oil, but....)

What I think is funny though is how almost everybody followed Bush's plans like dogs. If people actually read some history, they would see that Saddam was just one out of a long line of hypocricy from the US government's side. The coalition invaded Iraq in search of WMDs, despite clear signs of that Iraq had none. Bush continous talked about fighting for democracy
(a system you cannot and should not spread by war), but who was Saddam just a few decades before that? "Our bastard". Saddam was supported by the US, and none of this would've happened had he not gone against the US's wishes and invaded Kuwait. Saddam's Iraq was just one of many client states of the US, just like Pinochet(he gained active support from the CIA to coup the democraticly elected government of Chile, we should all know what happened after that) and other dictators in South America, and even Al Qaeda itself!

The whole war is a farce, just another example of the US hypocricy. It was completely obvious, and yet the western countries follows. Ridiculous.

First I would like to point out that I am not American but Canadian. I guess this can act as a disclaimer, but I follow politics around the world so I am allowing myself to speak.

When someone starts saying that all politicians are bad or that they are all scum and that you, the Americans, should have a political revolution, this is when we pull up the red flag.

First I would like to acknowledge Misery and that all that he has said is very good and has hopefully opened some eyes.

Now, although I let myself speak here, I will still refrain from defending a president that is not my own. In its stead, I will defend politicians as the men and women that they are.

Now, I would like for you to get in character. You have, against ALL odds, become the next president of the USA. However, unlike your country, the world has not held its breath during your campaign and everything has gone to hell, so to speak.

Now, as the privileged leader of your country, you have access to information that only a very select few share. You are now in position, now that this enlightening new information has come to your attention, on how to react on certain issues. You see now that what you have been saying during your campaign is not only flawed, but also unrealistic. You must now, while knowing things that others don’t, (and your inability of sharing this secret information) do something that completely goes against what you have saying all along, but ONLY because you see you were in error and that this new way is indeed better for the country even though the population does not know it yet, disagrees with you, and most probably likes you less because of it. But I say this; What do they know?

In the world of politics, you come to see the population not as a group of individuals, but as a clod, or an ideal. They are The People and not George, Hannah and Charlie. Once in office, its is your duty to run the country, not to make sure that the population, who half the time has no idea what its talking about, is happy. Basically, you take decisions based on the effects to your country and if the population is happy with it (or understands it…which is rare), it’s a plus… albeit a very good plus.

To be a politician, you must have certain qualities, that do NOT include the following, contrary to popular, misinformed general; good liar, heartless, scum-bag, crooked, and greedy.

In fact, not only must you have an extremely strong character and confidence in self to be able to hack through endless criticism, but also un undying, unshakable and undeniable love for your country and iron will to make it a better place for you, your family and all of its inhabitants.

Do not hate the politician for making a hard decision that you do not agree upon, hate the negative thing that caused this decision which has been greeted by a bad reaction. The common logic that I, as have many of my co-workers have found, is that your president is fighting fire with fire.

These terrorists will stop at nothing, I repeat, nothing, to take away your and my freedom. It is only with a clear statement (something like 30,000 men and women) to show that the West will not, not now or ever, bow down to barbaric insurgents that are Al-Qaeda and its associates.

To the Original Poster, your brother is a hero, fighting for you, me and all that we believe in. Being angry is normal, upset all the same. However, it is not by hating the politician, thus slowing down the speed at which he can work (a politician needs the help of the people to work) but by having faith in the man your country has elected to do so.

In other words, let him do his job.