Your use of the word "legit" is truly mind-boggling. Almost so much so that it defies description. But leave it to you to not be able to comprehend how important a President elect's appointments to his cabinet are, and how they can be a reflection of his leadership qualities . . . And you think that Obama has simply appointed a bunch of "YES" men? Once again, your twisted sense of "logic" is absolutely amazing. But I'll leave it at that.
I consider Obama's silence over the past months a legit argument. You do not consider it legit. I can accept the fact that people have different views while you cannot. Your absolute surprise and weirdness when it comes to addressing people with different views makes you sound like a child. Have you never argued against someone with different views? Might I suggest a forum in which people tend to always agree with you in order so you don't have a heart attack?
Obama's silence??? Please show me WHERE President elect Obama has been "silent" when speaking about the current economic crisis that our Country is facing? He's not even President yet and he's already meeting with Congressional leaders from both side of the aisle this coming Monday afternoon to try and advance a huge economic stimulus package. http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20090103/pl_nm/us_financial_usa_stimulus He also met with the nation's Governor's back on December 2nd, regarding crafting an economic stimulus plan. How can you be so uninformed?
You know what thread your posting in right? I was referring to the mid east crisis. Why am I not surprised about you trying to change the subject?
I guess you have never heard about how SILENCE regarding an issue can SPEAK VOLUMES. Why is that so difficult for you to comprehend? By not saying anything, he is in fact saying a lot. This has already been touched upon by other posters on this thread. But for some reason, you are unable to comprehend that, let alone accept that.
Obama's silence basically means that he does not condemn Israel's actions. The majority of the democrats are on the side of Israel and I doubt he wants to stray from that. My problem is that Obama should be able to make a clear statement about the situation. Many think he does not want to make a clear statement about the situation because if he makes a clear statement before he is president than he will have to live with it when he becomes president. My word to Obama would be that you have to live with every single one of your statements and decisions whether you are president or not. There is always an opportunity cost. So therefore I interpret Obama's silence as indecisivness. I truly think he is not willing to make a clear statement because he is so damn worried about his popularity that he can't be honest with his own thoughts.
It wouldn't happen to be due to the FACT that we already have an ACTING President currently leading the United States of America, with his own Secretary of State, Condoleeza Rice and it would not be appropriate for him or anyone else in his cabinet to comment on, no? No, of course not. We should always have two Presidents at the SAME time voicing their philosophies and attitudes towards Foreign Policy so that the message from the United States is perfectly CLEAR. Once again, your twisted "logic" makes perfect sense to me. Congrats!
I interpret your last comment as a child getting caught with his hand in the cookie jar. As for your actual argument. Are you saying the only person that should voice philosophies and attitudes should be the president? Sounds like an argument for monarchy. You said I had the twisted logic?