[quote]Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) on Friday accused President Obama of conducting a foreign policy that is helping to create a second Ottoman Empire in the Middle East.
Gohmert was speaking on the House floor, where he accused the Obama administration of pulling out of Iraq after victory had been won, and allowing Iran to better influence Iraq. He said withdrawing means less American influence there, and said the results of that decision are already being seen in some of the attacks on U.S. diplomatic outposts in the Middle East and North Africa.
[B]"This is the beginning… a massive beginning of a new Ottoman Empire that President Obama can take great credit for,"[/B] Gohmert said. "Thank you President Barack Hussein Obama. This will be quite a legacy for you.
"And I'm not one of those who says he's not a Christian. All I know is that's between him and God. But what I do know is he has helped jump start a new Ottoman Empire, and left our friend and ally Israel so vulnerable in this sea of radicalism that he has helped bring to the surface."
Gohmert added later that while Obama said he would be able to negotiate better with Muslim countries given his time living abroad, the [B]U.S. is now less liked under Obama than it was under President Bush.[/B]
"The approval rating of the United States in those Muslim countries where we've been was 33 percent, which was terrible, under President Bush in 2008," Gohmert said. "And now under this president, we see a report last week, it's now 15 percent.
"This president is trying to buy affection from people who are bullies, who are radical Islamists, who want to destroy us. You're not going to get love and affection, you get contempt."
Gohmert's comments came as part of a nearly one-hour critique of the Obama administration on a range of issues including the economy and the growing national debt. He started by saying Democrats were disingenuous for saying they want to reduce federal spending.
"How incredibly disingenuous for anyone in America who would stand up and say, 'gee we really want to bring down our spending.' And yet everything they propose except for the military creates more spending," he said.
He also said the sequester benefits Democrats who want to see military cuts, and said Republicans should never have supported the agreement that created the sequester.
"I blame my leadership," Gohmert said, referring to Republican leaders. "We should never have agreed with Democrats to that stupid supercommittee, deficit ceiling bill. We should not have."
Gohmert spoke after Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), who accused Republicans of crashing the economy and then questioning the speed at which it is recovering under Obama, and for failing to compromise with Democrats. But Gohmert rejected that analysis on several fronts.
In response to Pelosi's charge on the lack of cooperation, he said, "Are you kidding me?" and argued that Democrats did not cooperate with Republicans at all when passing the healthcare law in 2010.
Gohmert was followed on the floor by Rep. Trent Franks (R-Ariz.), who cited several statistics indicating the weakness of the economy under Obama. For example, he noted that the labor force participation rate is at its lowest point in 31 years, the number of unemployed Americans hit 15 million for the first time, the time needed to find a job is at a new record high, and that four million people have stopped looking for work.
The House recessed subject to the call of the chair after Franks spoke, signaling an end to floor activities in the House until after the election. The House will meet again next Tuesday for a pro-forma session.[/quote]
Source: [URL]http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/house/251045-rep-gohmert-says-obama-helping-to-build-second-ottoman-empire[/URL]
where do people even get the idea that the president (not just obama, the office) has the capability to do these kinds of things
and not even just that, they make it always sound like he wants to do these kinds of things
Something about this is making me angry, and it's more than just "you're wrong, dumbass".
[quote]U.S. is now less liked under Obama than it was under President Bush.[/quote]
This part really stuck out. Worse liked than under Bush? Is that even possible?
I always like how republicans sure do like to use his full name of 'Barack [I]Hussein[/I] Obama' when making these kind of stupid arguments.
Like it de-legitimises him as an American or something.
[QUOTE=Megafan;37827174]This part really stuck out. Worse liked than under Bush? Is that even possible?[/QUOTE]
don't you know that those dirty afganistan folk and iraqis [I]loved[/I] the US for invading their countries??
[QUOTE=Protocol7;37827147]where do people even get the idea that the president (not just obama, the office) has the capability to do these kinds of things
and not even just that, they make it always sound like he wants to do these kinds of things[/QUOTE]
if he could just magically do this shit then why don't they believe he cant just magically fix the economy?
actually they might just say he has an agenda not to.
[QUOTE=Medevilae;37827217]That's not a statistic, Rep. Gohmert said that[/QUOTE]
I know it wasn't a statistic, I'm just saying that even the premise sounds ridiculous.
[QUOTE=J!NX;37827340]if he could just magically do this shit then why don't they believe he cant just magically fix the economy?
actually they might just say he has an agenda not to.[/QUOTE]
he's obviously running the country to the ground because he wants to be king of the US
someone out there believes this shit and I wish to smack them
what? Talk about an "insult" out of left field.
[QUOTE=J!NX;37827340]if he could just magically do this shit then why don't they believe he cant just magically fix the economy?
actually they might just say he has an agenda not to.[/QUOTE]
No, they [b]do[/b] say that he doesn't want to.
[QUOTE=Protocol7;37827461]he's obviously running the country to the ground because he wants to be king of the US
someone out there believes this shit and I wish to smack them[/QUOTE]
Please don't smack my mother.
[QUOTE=Megafan;37827395]I know it wasn't a statistic, I'm just saying that even the premise sounds ridiculous.[/QUOTE]
I loved Bush but that's because I'm from and living in the UK, so he was just a comedy goldmine for Mock the Week episodes.
A second Ottoman Empire...
Under Iran?
This guy is aware that the Ottoman Dynasty was Turkic, not Persian, right? It would be more apt to say "Persian Empire". Even the term "Caliphate" is technically unacceptable since the Caliphate is supposed to be ruled by a descendant of Muhammed.
Well I always thought that the Ottoman Empire was pretty cool.
I fail to understand why a second Ottoman Empire would be a bad thing
It would represent a unified Middle East, which means more trade, more stability, more money :v:
Thanks Obama!
[QUOTE=ewitwins;37827891]I fail to understand why a second Ottoman Empire would be a bad thing
[/QUOTE]
because moooslims hate are country
Geography.
[QUOTE=Protocol7;37827147]where do people even get the idea that the president (not just obama, the office) has the capability to do these kinds of things
and not even just that, they make it always sound like he wants to do these kinds of things[/QUOTE]
Yeah, that was basically the premise of that weird documentary conservatives ate up, 2016 Obama's America. There's a perception that Obama is intentionally undermining US foreign policy to fufill some "anti-Imperialist" position of his, either through turning a blind eye to events abroad or "transferring" the US's wealth to underdeveloped countries. The documentary takes this a step further by claiming this is from father abandonment issues.
People believe in this shit, if the box office results for that movie are to be believed.
[QUOTE=Megafan;37827174]This part really stuck out. Worse liked than under Bush? Is that even possible?[/QUOTE]
It is possible, but take that number with a grain of salt. Remember that the whole "Innocence of Muslims" fiasco started one or two weeks ago, and the number he's pulling out is also from a week ago. It could be very well possible that the number is only so low because people were furious over it and blaming the US. I'd bet that Bush's numbers were about that low, if not lower, during the Muhammad incidents during his presidency, but I don't have the numbers in front of me so I don't know.
[QUOTE]and left our friend and ally Israel so vulnerable in this sea of radicalism that he has helped bring to the surface[/QUOTE]
oh the irony
This race to the bottom that Republicans are running is amusing to watch, but concerns me greatly because there are actually morons out there who believe this shit.
a second ottoman empire could be a good idea though
[quote]In response to Pelosi's charge on the lack of cooperation, he said, "Are you kidding me?" and argued that Democrats did not cooperate with Republicans at all when passing the healthcare law in 2010.[/quote]
There are no words.
[QUOTE=Fhenexx;37828607]It is possible, but take that number with a grain of salt. Remember that the whole "Innocence of Muslims" fiasco started one or two weeks ago, and the number he's pulling out is also from a week ago. It could be very well possible that the number is only so low because people were furious over it and blaming the US. I'd bet that Bush's numbers were about that low, if not lower, during the Muhammad incidents during his presidency, but I don't have the numbers in front of me so I don't know.[/QUOTE]
Every time I hear about this documentary I can't help but remember that shitty but hilarious 2016 movie trailer that was a completely unrelated thing.
[QUOTE=Megafan;37827174]This part really stuck out. Worse liked than under Bush? Is that even possible?[/QUOTE]
People weren't aware of how shit the Us was under Bush, now they know so it is as if is worse even when it isn't.
Well destroying barbarian naval units gets you 25 gold and possibly a new ship, and the Janissary's are great too.
[QUOTE=JDER14;37827467]what? Talk about an "insult" out of left field.[/QUOTE]
Don't you mean right field? :v:
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.