Page 102 of 344 FirstFirst ... 252929899100101102103104105106112152202 ... LastLast
Results 1,516 to 1,530 of 5150

Thread: President Obama

  1. #1516
    Joined
    May 2002
    Location
    Twain Harte, CA
    Posts
    20,453

    Re: President Obama

    ^^^ Yeah, that was your second expression of BDS when confronted with Obambi's tanking numbers (which are worse than any modern president in spite of your attempts to call them normal or expected or whatever else you choose to minimize his failures with).

    Its curious that those who think Boosh sucked are always the first to draw a comparison with him. I guess your point is that even though Obambi is tanking faster, he kinda sucks like Boosh, eh?

  2. #1517
    Joined
    Mar 2002
    Location
    California
    Posts
    26,285

    Re: President Obama

    Hopenchange? Mr. "I won" & his party whom like to call opposition "teabaggers" don't get much cooperation from across the isle. "The Won" can only wonder why...

    President’s first year has yielded few results in bipartisan political cooperation


    President Barack Obama campaigned as the candidate who would work across the aisle and bring Republicans into the debate. But in his first year in office, he’s discovered it’s tough to change Washington.

    Obama has reached out to GOPers on a number of issues, inviting Republican lawmakers to the White House to discuss the stimulus package, the war in Afghanistan and healthcare.

    Those efforts, however, have yielded almost no results in the voting columns as partisan tension remains high and Republicans have dug in to oppose the president's policies on climate change, healthcare and the economy.

    During the campaign, Obama said that Vice President Joe Biden would “be able to help me turn the page on ugly partisanship in Washington.” Obama described himself as “a big believer in working with the other side of the aisle.”

    “Even if we've got a majority of Democrats, I think it’s very important to listen to Republicans, to respect them,” Obama said in the spring of 2008.

    But almost immediately, Obama’s effort to pass a $787 billion stimulus package met with solid opposition from Republicans, who have continued to criticize spending they say has not produced enough jobs.

    Obama’s offer of $300 billion in tax cuts in the stimulus as a way of attracting GOP support failed to win over recalcitrant lawmakers, even though the level of tax cuts came as a surprise at the time.

    The divide only worsened as the healthcare debate wore on through the year and Tea Partiers and aspiring 2012 GOP candidates ratcheted up the rhetoric, accusing the president of everything from socialism to “death panels” for the elderly.

    Republicans say they have tried valiantly to work with Obama by providing the president with ideas to improve the economy that aren’t focused on spending.

    “You might remember that Senate Republicans began the year hopeful that the president would actually make good on his campaign promises to reach across the aisle and build consensus,” said one GOP aide, who argued the divide began with the stimulus.

    “People were skeptical of Obama’s rhetoric, but nobody could have predicted the surge in partisanship that his administration would wage over the first year. And their fierce partisan approach has become a major reason why independent voters are sprinting away from Democrats.”

    Republicans did approach the administration with ideas for ways to stimulate the economy, the aide said, “ideas like fixing housing, reducing taxes on job creators and limiting spending to projects that would create jobs quickly.”

    “Democrats didn’t take any of our ideas, and the stimulus has been a huge disappointment to unemployed Americans who were told it would help them get a job,” the aide said. “So when the healthcare debate began late in the spring, Republicans were naturally skeptical that the administration would earnestly seek input.”

    But administration officials said that Obama has sought to include Republicans at every turn, even as the minority party has made clear that it has no interest in helping Obama get anything done.

    “The president has repeatedly gone to great lengths to give Republicans in Congress a seat at the table as he’s confronted some of the difficult issues that Washington has ignored for too long," one senior administration official said. “Unfortunately, time and again, Republicans have put their political and partisan interests ahead of the nation’s and refused the president’s invitation to find common ground.”

    Administration officials have repeatedly pointed to a February incident when Obama headed to Capitol Hill to talk with both parties about the stimulus. Before the president even made it to the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue for the meeting, the GOP issued a press statement rebuking Obama and criticizing his plans for the stimulus.

    There have been some examples of bipartisanship in the first year of Obama’s White House, an administration official noted.

    The vote to confirm Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor was bipartisan, contracting reform enjoys the support of Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and many Republicans have applauded the president's new strategy for Afghanistan.
    RELATED ARTICLES

    * White House attacks GOP for pledging healthcare repeal
    * Grassley: Dems will get their way during health conference

    Republican strategist Kevin Madden said that Obama's talk of bipartisan outreach has “been all pageantry but no practice.”

    “They gave up at the first sign of opposition,” Madden said.

    But Ross Baker, an expert on the presidency and a professor at Rutgers University, said that Obama's “effort was a sincere one.”

    “It's sort of like a missionary who goes to a primitive tribe and tries to convert them from cannibalism and ends up eating human beings,” Baker said.

    Heading into the midterm election year of 2010, voices from all sides agree that there is little hope that Obama and Republicans will be able to find common ground in the new year.

    “It will get worse until the first Tuesday after the first Monday of next November, when voters will have a chance to express their outrage with the Democratic supermajority,” the Senate GOP aide said.

    But the White House said Obama isn't giving up.

    “The president will continue to look for ways to work with Republicans in Congress not because it’s easy – it hasn’t been — but because he believes it’s in the best interests of the country,” a senior administration official said.

    "The most dangerous myth is the demagoguery that business can be made to pay a larger share, thus relieving the individual. Politicians preaching this are either deliberately dishonest, or economically illiterate, and either one should scare us...
    Only people pay taxes, and people pay as consumers every tax that is assessed against a business."


    -The Gipper


  3. #1518
    Joined
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    10,814

    Re: President Obama

    Quote Originally Posted by Dutchcedar View Post
    ^^^ Yeah, that was your second expression of BDS when confronted with Obambi's tanking numbers (which are worse than any modern president in spite of your attempts to call them normal or expected or whatever else you choose to minimize his failures with). Its curious that those who think Boosh sucked are always the first to draw a comparison with him. I guess your point is that even though Obambi is tanking faster, he kinda sucks like Boosh, eh?
    To look at numbers is now BDS?

    Is all this to take away from you calling it 8 years?

    ...and how about the election results I showed in that post, even with real tanked numbers that Obama is nowhere near, Bush still got elected.

    Do I have BDS for mentioning he got elected a second term?


    But now you bring up another interesting turn. That of other presidents and how they really stacked up in modern times. If you only take where they stood in December of their first term (apples), then the only president to be in worse standing than Obama's 51% was....


    Ronald Reagan?

    wow, what's with that? Even Carter beat Reagan.


    Yet if you take a rolling average over the time served, then Obama is above average.
    Barack Obama's Daily Job Approval Trend Barack Obama's Term Average: 58% Average for U.S. Presidents Since Franklin D. Roosevelt: 55%


    Go wild with where Obama stands right now for he and Reagan can feel the humiliation of Carter having better closing numbers.


    Btw, I can tell more from this breakdown on where Obama stands...

    I hope you don't think I have ODS for looking at them.

  4. #1519
    Joined
    May 2002
    Location
    Twain Harte, CA
    Posts
    20,453

    Re: President Obama

    Quote Originally Posted by otoc View Post
    To look at numbers is now BDS?
    Oh, that was it, otoc... it was just looking at numbers. Just numbers. Boosh had nothing to with it.



    Its probably a tough concept to grasp for an acolyte of Obambi.

    You'll be back with more examples as we roll into 2010.
    Last edited by Dutchcedar; 12-31-2009 at 08:11 PM.

  5. #1520
    Joined
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    10,814

    Re: President Obama

    Quote Originally Posted by Dutchcedar View Post

    You'll be back with more examples as we roll into 2010.
    Of course I will, it's fun to watch you squirm and dodge my points, making a big thing of me. And even more fun to see you spend time photochopping a graph only to prove a point I made in a previous post.

    But you know, I think I have the most fun when you bring up a lower gut "fact" which opens the door for me to bring in facts, like how Obama did better than Reagan and worse than Carter in his first term for approval ratings and then have you totally ignore it with the shultsy shot as if you really are seeing nothing.

    You have a great day and a happy new year.

  6. #1521
    Joined
    May 2002
    Location
    Twain Harte, CA
    Posts
    20,453

    Re: President Obama

    ^^^ There's no squirming and dodging of your points, otoc. Some just aren't worth addressing. The Reagan thing is nothing new. I'm pretty sure we talked about it here before. The reason its probably not relevant is his popularity in that month didn't follow a plunge from lofty numbers like Obambi. Different polling places had Reagan's numbers a bit higher than what you've shown, not making it the record breaking moment you present.

    And its not the making of a big thing about you. The charade may be fun to play with... the liberal parading as a centrist who parted from the right in disgust... but like the rest of us, you're just another moniker on the web.

  7. #1522
    Joined
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    10,814

    Re: President Obama

    Quote Originally Posted by Dutchcedar View Post
    The Reagan thing is nothing new. I'm pretty sure we talked about it here before. The reason its probably not relevant is his popularity in that month didn't follow a plunge from lofty numbers like Obambi.

    Gallup Reagan Approval Polling

    No, they reflected a peak and plunge in less time. Have fun with wherever you are going with this.

  8. #1523
    Joined
    May 2002
    Location
    Twain Harte, CA
    Posts
    20,453

    Re: President Obama

    ^^^ Maybe you should have presented that earlier, instead of your BDS.

  9. #1524
    Joined
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    10,814

    Re: President Obama

    Quote Originally Posted by Dutchcedar View Post
    ^^^ Maybe you should have presented that earlier
    Am I supposed to predict what you are going to write before you write it and post a rebuttal? Come on now.

  10. #1525
    Joined
    May 2002
    Location
    Twain Harte, CA
    Posts
    20,453

    Re: President Obama

    Quote Originally Posted by otoc View Post
    Am I supposed to predict what you are going to write before you write it and post a rebuttal? Come on now.
    Of course not, unless you want to. The BDS comes out in its finest when you're true to yourself, otoc.

  11. #1526
    Joined
    May 2002
    Location
    A Little South of Sanity
    Posts
    12,925

    Re: President Obama

    Quote Originally Posted by otoc View Post
    Of course I will, it's fun to watch you squirm and dodge my points, making a big thing of me. And even more fun to see you spend time photochopping a graph only to prove a point I made in a previous post.

    But you know, I think I have the most fun when you bring up a lower gut "fact" which opens the door for me to bring in facts, like how Obama did better than Reagan and worse than Carter in his first term for approval ratings and then have you totally ignore it with the shultsy shot as if you really are seeing nothing.

    You have a great day and a happy new year.
    Obambi has his work cut out for him......

    A little persective on President Ronald Reagan: A bigger picture look

  12. #1527
    Joined
    Mar 2002
    Location
    California
    Posts
    26,285

    Re: President Obama

    Inept, naive and indeed has had a great fall.... banner year for "the Won".

    A Humpty-Dumpty View of the World

    What might explain the inexplicable like the following?

    A president comes into office facing a $500 billion deficit and grows it to $2 trillion.

    A president comes into office facing a threat of radical Islamic terrorism, and at home changes the very name of the struggle from war on terror to a variety of wishy-washy euphemisms.

    A president comes into office facing a variety of Middle East thugs, from al-Qaeda, Hezbollah, and Hamas to Syria and Iran, and employs the ancient kowtow, the postmodern apology, and the Carteresque reach-out to allay the threat?

    A president comes into office after record high energy prices have nearly crippled the American economy, and he ignores new drilling and brushes off nuclear power — only to wax about wind and solar that provide less than 5% of our energy needs, and crushing cap and trade taxation to come.

    The Wrong Narrative

    I think candidate Obama had the wrong narrative. Many presidents do. Bush railed against nation-building and decided he would do just that. Reagan raised not lowered deficits. Clinton ended up being a moderate after 1995. But rarely has a candidate’s entire world view been so abruptly refuted in the first year of a presidency.

    As president, Obama suddenly found himself a stranger in a strange land, far from that of the Ivy League dean, the upscale liberal suburbanite, the radical chic, hip world of Chicago yuppies, and the brooding, shrill pulpit of Rev. Wright. The result is that his fantasies are out of place in the all too real world of the White House.

    When he started his campaign in 2007 the U.S. economy was still strong, and he felt his redistributive agenda would merely need to skim off a few trillions from the wannabe rich.

    There was plenty of money socked away; we could “share the wealth” and “they” could “pay their fair share” in “patriotic” fashion to ensure “redistributive change.” But when the recession hit, the money dried up, and there was no “they” any longer. No matter, Obama is stuck with his preconceived notion of gorging the beast, and so we will rack up $8 trillion more in aggregate debt and redefine the English language, as trillion becomes billion, and billion a mere million.

    War—what war?

    It was so simple in late 2007. The surge was “not working.” Few were dying in Afghanistan, now dubbed the good war where there were lots of Europeans. Al-Qaeda was quiet and its dozens of plots all foiled.

    Presto — the real narrative was how the Bush-Cheney nexus destroyed our liberties. Only a Chicago law lecturer could understand the complexity: the Patriot Act, renditions, tribunals, wiretaps, intercepts, Guantanamo, Predators, all that had shredded the Constitution. Such a compelling thesis — as long as one could blame the prior administration for keeping us safe.

    Can’t We All Just Get Along?

    Barack Obama would drop this mythical war on terror, and instead conduct legal seminars at press conference to remind us how the “prior administration” had scared us to death to destroy our liberties.

    Then the real war returned in Afghanistan. Iraq quieted down. And there really are thousands of radical Muslims like Major Hasan and Abdulmutallab who want to kill us.

    So the narrative imploded. Even the most fawning Obama aficionado does not wish to get blown-up at 30,000 feet, because a political hack appointee wanted to broadcast politically-correct credentials.

    Now a reluctant Obama has to face the reality that all his chest-thumping about his middle name, his unique background, and his liberal sensitivity means less than nothing to a killer such as Dr. Zawahiri.

    In 2007 candidate Obama had some interesting theories about the world abroad — not unlike those voiced in the 1920s by the well-intentioned who formed the League of Nations to end all wars. A Gilbert Murray or H.G. Wells or Alfred Zimmern all had interesting things to say, as did Smuts and House — all interesting and all dead wrong once an Austrian-born corporal fancied himself the architect of a new Reich.

    The “reset button” foreign policy postulated that twangy, “smok’ em out” Bush had caused all the bad feelings. As an antidote, a postracial, postnational charmer could assure the world that we were on its side. We are back to 1930 in a blink of an eye.

    Remember, in this reset narrative, there are no such bothersome things as irreconcilable differences, antithetical agendas, or reductionism such as thugs like Ahmadinejad, Assad, Chavez, or Putin, who always interpret magnanimity as weakness in their nonstop quest for more influence and power at the expense of the perceived weaker party.

    So here we are after all the apologies, all the bowing, all the trashing of Bush, all the Cairo speeches and al Arabiya interviews: Putin brags about a new generation of nuclear weapons, bullying his neighbors and doing nothing to stop Iran; Iran kills its dissidents while we sleep and promises a bomb to come. Chavez wants one too, and Syria does it best to destroy Lebanese autonomy. And that is just the beginning.

    It was not supposed to happen that way. (All those adoring crowds in the streets of London, Cairo, and Nairobi were supposed to translate into their leaders’ infatuation with Obama.)

    Tilting at Windmills

    Those in the faculty lounge, in the community-organizing hall, or media green room often wax on about how “they” are doing nothing to make us energy independent. In this fantasyland of a con artist like Van Jones, millions of windmills and solar panels will free us from energy costs and cool the planet.

    In such mythologizing, and without any knowledge of the grubby world of oil rigs and dirty pipeline laying, we could have all the clean power we wished if only an Exxon just weren’t so greedy. So the narrative emerged that we need not drill for more oil here in the US. New natural gas fields still meant bad carbon fuels. Coal, burned daily, was still politically-taboo. Nuclear plants were always referenced in terms of Chernobyl and Three-Mile-Island.

    The result, however, in the real world was that low energy prices are a result of a global downturn in the economy, not Obama’s dreams of ugly windmills on every mountain ridge. In short, very soon a President Obama is going to have to explain what exactly he did to transition us to new sources of power during this reprieve, as we begin to pay for $5 a gallon of gas.

    I could go on. But most of you readers remember young Barack Obama in late 2007 hitting the stump against Hillary, proclaiming to the world how his hope and change bromides would stop the Bush-Cheney nexus from destroying the planet.

    Those were heady times when Guantanamo was still a gulag with its hundreds of Solzhenitsyns, not psychopaths like Khalid Sheikh Mohammeds, when we could just leave Iraq by “March 2008”, and when there would be no lobbyists, no tax cheats, no insider buy-offs and horse-trading for votes. In such a dreamy world, geniuses like Timothy Geithner don’t pocket their FICA allowances, and Tom Daschles don’t fudge on their complimentary limo services.

    And then tragically Obama got elected and discovered that the real world had no relationship whatsoever to his fantasy impressions of it. In a cosmos of radical Islam, Chinese bankers, Japanese exporters, and Arab oil producers, there were no more law school profs, Rev. Wrights, or Chris Matthews and Newsweek editors to wink and nod and reassure Obama that his mellifluous but empty rhetoric allusions were at all reality-based.

    So here we are. A president of the United States does not want to rush to the microphones and swear he will hunt down the Abdulmutallabs of the world and their sponsors, or that there will be no more Major Hasans (so much easier to rush to call the Cambridge police “stupidly” acting, while employing “allegedly” for the bomb-making of Abdulmutallab).

    He does not wish to sound like a can-do guy who reassures us that we will tap all the American energy we can to ensure that we don’t go bankrupt before the new generation of power arrives. Obama does not wish to sound like some retrograde SOB who warns Ahmadinejad there really will be things he won’t like if he insists on going nuclear. Our commander in chief does not wish to snarl at the American people to announce that the party is over and all those trillions really do have to be paid back.

    No, all that was someone else’s fault, others’ reality — and certainly not what Obama signed on for.

    So if he seems bewildered, angry sometimes, and more at home in warm, lush Hawaii, you would be too — once you discovered that your easy fantasies and winged rhetoric of the last thirty years have no relation with the here and now.

    All the soaring cadences in the world, all the self-referencing, and all the whining and blame-gaming sadly cannot put the shattered Humpty-dumpty view of a once comfortable world back together again.
    "The most dangerous myth is the demagoguery that business can be made to pay a larger share, thus relieving the individual. Politicians preaching this are either deliberately dishonest, or economically illiterate, and either one should scare us...
    Only people pay taxes, and people pay as consumers every tax that is assessed against a business."


    -The Gipper


  13. #1528
    Joined
    Sep 2004
    Location
    In a House
    Posts
    968

    Re: President Obama

    Quote Originally Posted by AMDScooter View Post
    Inept, naive and indeed has had a great fall.... banner year for "the Won".

    A Humpty-Dumpty View of the World
    This blogger lies in his second sentence and I'm supposed to beleive anything else he says: Quote from one of scoot's other posts\links
    President Bush presided over a $2.5 trillion increase in the public debt through 2008.
    Last edited by liteman; 01-01-2010 at 05:53 PM.
    Fox News watchers are less informed - The Proof

    I hope we shall... crush in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations which dare already to challenge our government in a trial of strength, and bid defiance to the laws of our country.
    - Thomas Jefferson

  14. #1529
    Joined
    Mar 2002
    Location
    California
    Posts
    26,285

    Re: President Obama

    Quote Originally Posted by liteman View Post
    This blogger lies in his second sentence and I'm supposed to beleive anything else he says
    Well he is off by a lil...


    A president comes into office facing a $500 billion deficit and grows it to $2 trillion.
    But a lie? Hardly.

    Quote Originally Posted by liteman View Post
    Quote from one of scoot's other posts\links
    How about ya post a link to that "other" post/link?
    "The most dangerous myth is the demagoguery that business can be made to pay a larger share, thus relieving the individual. Politicians preaching this are either deliberately dishonest, or economically illiterate, and either one should scare us...
    Only people pay taxes, and people pay as consumers every tax that is assessed against a business."


    -The Gipper


  15. #1530
    Joined
    Sep 2004
    Location
    In a House
    Posts
    968

    Re: President Obama

    Quote Originally Posted by AMDScooter View Post
    Well he is off by a lil...




    But a lie? Hardly.



    How about ya post a link to that "other" post/link?
    You just used the same link to try to prove his innocence...priceless

    http://blog.heritage.org/2009/03/24/...t-in-pictures/
    Last edited by liteman; 01-01-2010 at 06:26 PM.
    Fox News watchers are less informed - The Proof

    I hope we shall... crush in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations which dare already to challenge our government in a trial of strength, and bid defiance to the laws of our country.
    - Thomas Jefferson

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •