Who IS Barrack Obama? Who is Ted Cruz?
- Thread starter Daniel1611
- Start date
The most I know of is 6 times. Holder said the woman will not be prosecuted. The three of them are racists bigots, so no surprise.
So he helped to make the citizenry less health, less intelligent and competitive while also managing to lag behind the rest of the nation in jobs creation???
How isn't this guy already in Congress?
lain:
Are you an American citizen?
WizardofOz
New member
So he helped to make the citizenry less health, less intelligent and competitive while also managing to lag behind the rest of the nation in jobs creation???
How isn't this guy already in Congress?
I wanted his policies to have a fair chance at running their course
Mocking You
New member
Ah, thanks Nick. My guy right now IS Scott Walker. I haven't voted for a Democrat since 1990. Am I a liberal? LOL.
From your posting on TOL, yes. There was no election in 1990, unless you are telling me that you keep your civic virtues up to date and vote in the midterm.
I will be voting against my re-publican mayor in April. The card came today with the location.
Mocking You
New member
Yes, that's what I'm telling you. I voted for the conservative pro-life Democrat for governor rather than the pro-choice RINO running against him.
There is hypocrisy on both sides. I'm merely observing and reporting it. Therefore you might think I'm not a conservative because I point out the faults on the right as well as the left.
I agree. He's a voice that shouldn't have a chance of getting the nomination.
Who is Obama? Who was he, now. I think of him as a more effective Bush, Sr. He blew a great opportunity while still managing to get a few things done.
He got it done alright...dividing a nation, destroying all semblance of foreign policy in the middle east, destroying the american health care system against the will of the majority of Americans while lying to them the entire time, allowing a petty dictator in Russia to invade a NATO ally while doing absolutely nothing about it, Using the IRS as weapon against the people of the united states for political difference, opening borders to allow a flood of illegal immigrants into this country through unconstitutional presidential fiat....I could go on but, what is the point...History will hallmark Barrack Obama's presidency as the worst president in history.
I think you're wrong on nearly every point, but I appreciate the response staying in the "what you believe" territory. The Ukraine isn't in NATO so being a "Natio Ally" isn't particularly meaningful politically. Either you are or you aren't and we don't control what Putin does. We have leveled sanctions, with help, that are seriously impacting his economy. Unless you want to play military policeman to the world what else is there? There's no evidence the President directed anyone in the IRS to go after anyone. The President is wrong on immigration. Most Americans weren't against a health care initiative, though a big money and highly politicized battle, frequently fueled by willful misinformation, did lead to a real split on the issue. What isn't arguable is that we were spending dramatically more of our GDP on healthcare than even some socialist countries in the West who were providing better healthcare to more of their people. That should shame a market driven economy. Lastly, the President didn't divide a nation, a nearly destroyed Republican party did that when they tacitly adopted a posture of no in lieu of constructive engagement and set their cap at destroying the first term of the President by any means necessary. That set the tone. The President's worst mistake was courting the right at all, sitting down and expecting engagement instead of a calculated delay.
The worst presidents of recent memory...Bush, Jr., then Carter, then Bush Sr for lousing up a good run, then Nixon for his actual illegalities. Obama? I think history will recognize his first term as important in keeping this nation from an economic collapse that would have rippled through the rest of the world and will condemn his hypocrisy relating to transparency and Gitmo and a number of other issues of importance. I suspect the healthcare initiative will be more of a beginning point for a real public good than a public good itself. That is, it will be seen as the thing that forced the right to become involved in the issue meaningfully and will survive in some form or fashion.
The only thing that you got right in this post was that Ukraine was never let into NATO (though they applied)...my bad. The rest of your points are not points at all counselor, unless you want to argue what "IS" means or how much evidence is needed to prove Obama's involvement in the IRS scandal, or that Nixon only attacked another political party while this president uses the full force of the government against the citizenry. Moving on...Last I checked 54% against to 43% for this abortion health care law does constitute a majority, and given that it was rammed down all Americans throats before it could even be debated, challenged amended, or even put out for public view (Gotta pass it to see what's in it) how would you or anyone know what americans really thought to begin with. Your boy genius despot empirical president will go down as the worst presidency in history bar none, right next to Woodrow Wilson & Carter. At least Nixon had the decency to admit his errors & leave with the little bit of dignity he had left, while this turd will take us to the bitter end with his tyrannical despotism.
Last edited:
Well, you didn't say they were in NATO, only an ally, but that's problematic, as per my answer.
Depends on when you took the snapshot of public perception, which I noted was impacted by a great deal of misinformation, to which I'd add speculation and out and out lies on either side of it.
And yet the Republican party was objecting and loudly protesting as though they did. I suspect favorable public responses had more to do with something being done on a subject where the do nothing status quo was by any sane metric untenable.
The timing had a lot to do with the Republican strategy, which was to pretend to negotiate in good faith while undermining the effort and beginning a whirlwind public campaign to erode support. The President and whoever advised him at the time seemed incapable of understanding that until someone managed to get word out about the strategy and the intent of those he'd been meeting with to oppose him in every way they could, regardless of merit, to revive their party and unseat him in the next election.
And the efforts at dividing his own party, a party much more cobbled than solid, were proving fruitful. So it was strike while the iron had some heat or fail as the Clinton administration had before it. My response at the time was, essentially, good. Now that it's here let the republicans do what they should have all along, which is make the thing more efficient and on point. Work out the practical aspects of the aim.
Rather, our President, who is neither despot nor genius and whom I feel relatively confident in noting neither of us voted for the last time out.
I think you lack anything approaching objectivity on the point and that's underscored by the emotion laden rhetoric you use to describe him. That's closer to an expression of hatred, unlike my mild disinterest in Cruz and impression that he won't win the margin he needs to have any real shot at the White House.
Now if public sentiment were the weather vane you'd have a slightly more compelling case:
According to a Quinnipiac University poll released Wednesday, 33 percent of voters think the current president is the worst since 1945.
Obama’s predecessor, former President George W. Bush, came in at second-worst with 28 percent, and Richard Nixon was in third place with 13 percent of the vote. After Jimmy Carter, who 8 percent of voters said was the worst president in the time period, no other president received more than 3 percent.
Link.Obama’s predecessor, former President George W. Bush, came in at second-worst with 28 percent, and Richard Nixon was in third place with 13 percent of the vote. After Jimmy Carter, who 8 percent of voters said was the worst president in the time period, no other president received more than 3 percent.
But even that isn't really in agreement with you and is hardly a majority of opinion, with many a republican being outside of that 33, which is one reason I underscore the sort of rhetoric you use, my way of underlining that you're at the fringe and as such your objectivity is compromised significantly.
I think you're mistaken and that he will be remembered for a few important and beneficial acts and a series of petty or avoidable failures. Time will tell how that washes out.
He did nothing of the sort, only noted undefined errors and that he lacked sufficient political support to continue. Nixon pretended to leave office for the benefit of the nation. In fact, he left the office to a good man he knew would protect him from the consequences of his actions to spare that nation further upheaval. It was a shrewd political assessment and, as he usually was in that arena, he had it right.
He's a tragic figure, but not a noble one. His second act was better.
See: my earlier comments on what the rhetoric we use says about the objectivity of our approach and our ability to promote a fair analysis.
let the debate begin
but
first you have to answer one question
will you vote for the republican nominee?
you can leave right now
if
you can't say yes
but
first you have to answer one question
will you vote for the republican nominee?
you can leave right now
if
you can't say yes
Like a DNA sample of somebody who didn't do it, that is 100% excluded from existing.
WizardofOz
New member
You don't understand the 'voted for him 3 times' comment, do you?
Maybe you don't understand my comment. Not all comments have direct relation to somebody else's comment, even if used as a bridge.
Daniel1611
New member
I'm a citizen. Born and raised outside of Pittsburgh. I voted in 2008 and 2010. I turned 18 in 2007 so '08 was the first year I could vote. Then I grew up, figured out that all the politicians have the same owners, and that major policy never changes from one administration to the other. I don't "vote for the lesser of two evils" because I refuse to vote for evil. I pay attention to what's happening because I'm the type of person to pay attention to current events because I'm a history buff. The present is just history happening. I just don't feel like wasting my time on something as meaningless as voting. And I waste time on some pretty meaningless things too.
We are polar opposites TH, this despotic man is the worst thing that has ever happened to this country...and I stand by it. There is really no point in you and I discussing this subject further because we are so completely opposed as I see it, judging from your rhetoric in this post.
Daniel1611
New member
Every president since November 22, 1963 was awful, including the current president.