Jordanian Soldier

[kozanoglu]

Leader rules without listening to anyone. Leader is not restricted by law because he is the law. Anyone questioning the leader is automatically in contravention ıf the law. Leader is power. That is the leader some like and want. But that is an anachronism. That leader can't coexist with democracy, human rights, rule of law.

Napoloeon was a great leader as was Stalin for those with this leadership definition. They might hide they like them, but that is what they want. Subjugation, dominance has sexual connotations. Some are mazoshistic by nature or upbringing.

 

[Mystic]

Seems to me that a lot of people here are apparently forgetting that the current administration pretty much does whatever it wants to do without worrying much about Congress and without any concern for what the American people want.

 

[CKN]

Originally Posted By: kozanoglu
Originally Posted By: Astro14
The best looking one of the bunch is the King himself in camo and flight gear.

An image of leadership that we've not seen in quite a while.


Leadership?

Just one of many Mid East dictators who oppress their people, nothing special about it.


I well understand what leadership is. But I will say this-our current leader is responsible for killing more commandeers of the bad guys through the Drone Program than the previous "leader".

 

[CKN]

When the president appears-EVERYTHING is controlled, down to what he orders for lunch. The sign (Mission Accomplished) explanation came up after the criticism of that sign. It was called "spin control".

 

[BMWTurboDzl]

Originally Posted By: CKN
When the president appears-EVERYTHING is controlled, down to what he orders for lunch. The sign (Mission Accomplished) explanation came up after the criticism of that sign. It was called "spin control".


Ya his former press secretary (blonde gal) was on the news saying that they should never had allowed that sign to be there and cringed when it appeared on the shot.

 

[andrewg]

Funny how so many run to the defense of our current President but attacking the former.

And then the daft pseudo definitions posted here about what leadership is.

Comical actually.

In truth, this country has not had good leadership in a very long time.....no matter what side of the isle we are trying to stand up for here.

 

[Shannow]

Originally Posted By: andrewg
Funny how so many run to the defense of our current President but attacking the former.


andrewg, you are posting in the wrong thread (or making up sentiment for effect)...show me a poster who has run to the defence of your current president in this thread (pretty well on BITOG too)...or are you really posting in the wrong thread.

 

[andrewg]

Originally Posted By: Shannow
Originally Posted By: andrewg
Funny how so many run to the defense of our current President but attacking the former.


andrewg, you are posting in the wrong thread (or making up sentiment for effect)...show me a poster who has run to the defence of your current president in this thread (pretty well on BITOG too)...or are you really posting in the wrong thread.


I didn't make anything up.

If you don't have the perceptive ability to recognize defensive statements supporting our current horrid president....then nothing I say will help you see that.

Ideology often clouds perception.

 

[Nayov]

Originally Posted By: andrewg
Funny how so many run to the defense of our current President but attacking the former.





"So many"? No one, or just 1 or 2

on this message board "run" to the defense of Obama. To be expected here - just saying, please stay to the reality of the of political nature BITOG.

 

[andrewg]

Originally Posted By: Nayov
Originally Posted By: andrewg
Funny how so many run to the defense of our current President but attacking the former.





"So many"? No one, or just 1 or 2

on this message board "run" to the defense of Obama. To be expected here - just saying, please stay to the reality of the nature BITOG.


Ok....you are correct. I did not elaborate with my comment to mean just this thread. What I should have said was that when these types of threads devolve into "Bush vs. Obama" (as they often do, hence the term "many")....the current president and his shortcomings are ignored by blaming the former....instead of just dealing with the here and now.

 

[Mystic]

I am amazed that if anybody criticizes the current president in any way immediately they have to attack the previous president. So if somebody commits a crime blame the guy who was across the street?

 

[Dallas69]

The American people wanted him which is why he won the election
Dubious

 

[hotwheels]

Originally Posted By: Mystic
I am amazed that if anybody criticizes the current president in any way immediately they have to attack the previous president. So if somebody commits a crime blame the guy who was across the street?


By the same token, if someone accuses the or any previous president, someone will accuse the current president of an equal or even larger failure or shortcoming. Wanna give it a shot and see?

hotwheels

 

[Mystic]

hotwheels, are you following me around? I like it. This much I know to be truth-all presidents in the end have to live with what they accomplished in office, and what they failed to accomplish. It will all be in the history books someday.

 

[jcwit]

Originally Posted By: Dallas69
The American people wanted him which is why he won the election
Dubious


Nope, there were enough that had their hand out who voted.



Course we all know in the end it was Bushes fault.

 

[Thermo1223]

By the same token Gore should have won in 2000 since he was the "people's choice".

Ya because universal healthcare is such a bad thing...

 

[CKN]

The other party ran a very poor team of candidates, election before last. That is why, impart why he won. In the last election the other party's candidate ran a VERY POOR campaign-which is why he lost, and it's hard to unseat an incumbent.

 

[hotwheels]

Originally Posted By: Mystic
hotwheels, are you following me around? I like it. This much I know to be truth-all presidents in the end have to live with what they accomplished in office, and what they failed to accomplish. It will all be in the history books someday.


I simply responded to your post. That's hardly a reason to become paranoid. Do you agree or do you disagree with what I replied to you? Since you decided to switch the topic, I can't tell where you stand.

hotwheels

 

[Mystic]

Don't worry, I am not paranoid. I enjoy, I really, truly enjoy, when somebody decides they are going to follow me around.

And I stand by what I said. All presidents are judged ultimately in the pages of history. And that is true for all historical figures throughout history. A Roman emperor had a false history written about him. It did not matter. Because that emperor was not in power for the rest of history and the Roman Empire was not in power for the rest of history. In the end, the only historians who are respected are the ones who write the truth, and the truth ultimately gets written, even if it has to be written in another country.

 

[hotwheels]

Originally Posted By: Mystic
Don't worry, I am not paranoid. I enjoy, I really, truly enjoy, when somebody decides they are going to follow me around.

And I stand by what I said. All presidents are judged ultimately in the pages of history. And that is true for all historical figures throughout history. A Roman emperor had a false history written about him. It did not matter. Because that emperor was not in power for the rest of history and the Roman Empire was not in power for the rest of history. In the end, the only historians who are respected are the ones who write the truth, and the truth ultimately gets written, even if it has to be written in another country.


Answring my question is clearly not somthing you will do. I must presume you agree with me then.

hotwheels