• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is obama insane, stupid or malicious?

Is obama insane, stupid or trying to destroy America?

  • insane

    Votes: 3 10.3%

  • stupid

    Votes: 6 20.7%

  • trying to destroy America

    Votes: 20 69.0%
  • Total voters
    29
Just my .02¢ about the housing. I follow this because I'm a recent landlord and buying houses is "my business".

What I think is going on right now is a disproportionate amount of home sales are going to investors. Indeed, investors have pretty much shut out legitimate home buyers. A few months ago, I was given to understand that Fannie/Freddie would waive to the appraisal requirement. My first reaction was WTF!!! but I can see that if they don't, nobody will get a house because most homebuyers need credit and investors don't. So, now a private buyer can outbid a cash investor and yes, housing prices have jumped sharply. But, at least in my area the prices are literally back to where they were 20 years ago and even if they increase, housing is a lot more rational than it was in 2004-6.

Just to use my own home as an example, it sold for $225K in 2005. I bought it for $63K in 2009 and in 2011 I bought an identical unit for $45K. Now, I see they are asking $65K and even if a lower credit buyer gets it, the intrinsic value is still greater than the retail price. In short, this is no way anything like the craziness of 2005.
 
Mycroft said:
Really? For years?

Can you pinpoint those years?

The reason I ask is that I'm not sure they've really had that many years in which they COULD be an opposition Party...at least, when compared to the number of years they were the controlling Party.
Click to expand...

To me, the worst years were the 90's....................Though, nothing probably tops the virtual wholesale endorsement of GOP policies post 9/11
 
Bonzai said:
You would be more on target if you acknowledged that the Democrats utterly failed for years to operate as an opposition party, part of the real reason we are in today's situation............................
Click to expand...

Good evening, Bonz. :2wave:

Maybe the word "opposition" means something different to you than it does me, but they sure looked like the opposition party when Bush was President! I think BHO's decision to turn things over to Reid and Pelosi was the wrong one, but I understand why he may have done so. He was new on the job, and both of them had been around forever, and knew the ropes. It was a natural way to avoid making mistakes, but as it turns out he could have chosen better. The good news for him is that Pelosi and Reid are taking the heat that he would have gotten, so maybe his decision was the right one...for him! It did cost him dearly in 2010 midterms, though, and he acknowledged that fact that by calling it a "shellacking!
 
None of the above. Or, let's say, no more malicious or insane than your average politician, regardless of party affiliation.

Both people on the right who demonize Obama and people on the left who idolize him seem oblivious to his most obvious quality: The man is deeply, profoundly mediocre. Unremarkable in every aspect of his public persona. From his terrible economic and fiscal policies to his belated positive promise on gay rights and immigration reform, he is a repeater and follower - not any kind of leader or trailblazer.

His oh-so-scary socialist ("liberal" in our nonsensical political jargon) ideology is merely an averaged and diluted version of the consensus that long dominated the minds of center-left Americans - for so long, as a matter of fact, that it already sounds archaic and reactionary to outsiders.

I think ten, twenty years from now, this presidency will be viewed not as an onslaught of dark forces or a long-overdue arrival of enlightened reformers, but as a period of repeated mistakes and wasted time. With Obama himself dwindling into a footnote.
 
Last edited:
This... this looks like a thread where reasonable discussion could emerge.
 
polgara said:
Good evening, Bonz. :2wave:

Maybe the word "opposition" means something different to you than it does me, but they sure looked like the opposition party when Bush was President! I think BHO's decision to turn things over to Reid and Pelosi was the wrong one, but I understand why he may have done so. He was new on the job, and both of them had been around forever, and knew the ropes. It was a natural way to avoid making mistakes, but as it turns out he could have chosen better. The good news for him is that Pelosi and Reid are taking the heat that he would have gotten, so maybe his decision was the right one...for him! It did cost him dearly in 2010 midterms, though, and he acknowledged that fact that by calling it a "shellacking!
Click to expand...

The word "compromise" still gives me the dry heaves. Yes, governing is a give and take affair, but an "encounter session" no. There were many times in the past 3 decades when people were voting for the GOP because why not vote for the real thing instead of it's insipid 2nd rate imitation ?.............The vote for the Iraq war just showed that, despite the showmanship that you feel constitutes real opposition, when it came down to action, there was only one party.........................
 
sawyerloggingon said:
How can repeating the home loan fiasco be good for the country? It was all those sub prime mortgages that got us into this mess.
Click to expand...

It was a bit more detailed than that. A virtually unregulated derivatives market and untethered to reality loan policies has a whole lot to do with the nightmare. The reins have been artificially tight since the crash, by necessity and the regulation that should have been there all along are in place. We don't have to return to the environment that hurt us, but we can open the floddgates a little.

He may be thinking along those lines. I'm okay with that, but the question for me is how long will those protective regulations stay in place, or how long will it take for the banks to find another way around them and screw us again.
 
Is this thread insane, stupid or malicious?
 
Bonzai said:
The word "compromise" still gives me the dry heaves. Yes, governing is a give and take affair, but an "encounter session" no. There were many times in the past 3 decades when people were voting for the GOP because why not vote for the real thing instead of it's insipid 2nd rate imitation ?.............The vote for the Iraq war just showed that, despite the showmanship that you feel constitutes real opposition, when it came down to action, there was only one party.........................
Click to expand...

Was it on one of these threads the other day that someone remarked that it seemed that Republicans were more for the individual, and Democrats were more for the group? That may well be true, idiologically speaking. Perhaps that explains the different governing styles, at least in DC? :)
 
Cyrylek said:
None of the above. Or, let's say, no more malicious or insane than your average politician, regardless of party affiliation.

Both people on the right who demonize Obama and people on the left who idolize him seem oblivious to his most obvious quality: The man is deeply, profoundly mediocre. Unremarkable in every aspect of his public persona. From his terrible economic and fiscal policies to his belated positive promise on gay rights and immigration reform, he is a repeater and follower - not any kind of leader or trailblazer.

His oh-so-scary socialist ("liberal" in our nonsensical political jargon) ideology is merely an averaged and diluted version of the consensus that long dominated the minds of center-left Americans - for so long, as a matter of fact, that it already sounds archaic and reactionary to outsiders.

I think ten, twenty years from now, this presidency will be viewed not as an onslaught of dark forces or a long-overdue arrival of enlightened reformers, but as a period of repeated mistakes and wasted time. With Obama himself dwindling into a footnote.
Click to expand...

Good evening, Cyrylek. :2wave:

Very interesting post!

By the way, are you Welsh by background? Your previous tag line sounded like it might have been. The reason I am inquiring is because I am working on a book about life in Wales in the 12th and 13th Centuries. Just curious... :)
 
polgara said:
Good evening, Cyrylek. :2wave:

Very interesting post!

By the way, are you Welsh by background? Your previous tag line sounded like it might have been. The reason I am inquiring is because I am working on a book about life in Wales in the 12th and 13th Centuries. Just curious... :)
Click to expand...

Good evening, Polgara!

No, a mix of Slavic, Germanic and Baltic genes - Polish being predominant. Nothing Celtic that I can trace. Which is too bad: I could have a sense of humor;)
 
Cyrylek said:
Good evening, Polgara!

No, a mix of Slavic, Germanic and Baltic genes - Polish being predominant. Nothing Celtic that I can trace. Which is too bad: I could have a sense of humor;)
Click to expand...

Anyone who has to speak the language surely needs a sense of humor, or they'd do themselves in! :) Any word that has 15 or more letters in it--separated by dashes, BTW, that basically tells you the name of the little bridge you're on.... :shrug:
 
I'm not sure why so many on the Right Wing always feel the need to argue against an imaginary Obama...

Obama is many things, but someone hell bent on destroying America is not one of them.

Such things are the ramblings of the hopelessly paranoid and misinformed.
 
sawyerloggingon said:
"Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results" and obama wants to repeat the home loan policies that got us into the financial mess we are now in. Is he insane, stupid, or is he actively trying to destroy America? I vote insane.

"The Obama administration is engaged in a broad push to make more home loans available to people with weaker credit, an effort that officials say will help power the economic recovery but that skeptics say could open the door to the risky lending that caused the housing crash in the first place.
President Obama’s economic advisers and outside experts say the nation’s much-celebrated housing rebound is leaving too many people behind, including young people looking to buy their first homes and individuals with credit records weakened by the recession.
In response, administration officials say they are working to get banks to lend to a wider range of borrowers by taking advantage of taxpayer-backed programs — including those offered by the Federal Housing Administration — that insure home loans against default."


Obama administration pushes banks to make home loans to people with weaker credit - Washington Post
Click to expand...

i'm sure the left will turn and say......... it's still bush.
 
mtm1963 said:
i'm sure the left will turn and say......... it's still bush.
Click to expand...

Not that I represent the left, but I have already commented. As I recall, you're smart enough to know laying things at the feet of one person, or make simplistic judgements really benefit no one.
 
Jetboogieman said:
I'm not sure why so many on the Right Wing always feel the need to argue against an imaginary Obama...

Obama is many things, but someone hell bent on destroying America is not one of them.

Such things are the ramblings of the hopelessly paranoid and misinformed.
Click to expand...

To be fair, let's not forget the rhetoric from the left when Bush was in office. An evil halfwit chimpanzee war criminal who sent thousands to their deaths to get his oil tycoon buddies moar money.



Every President, democrat or republican, seems to draw out irrational hatred from many. I blame it on a sort of mob-mentality that emerges from the two-party system.
 
the_recruit said:
To be fair, let's not forget the rhetoric from the left when Bush was in office. An evil halfwit chimpanzee war criminal who sent thousands to their deaths to get his oil tycoon buddies moar money.



Every President, democrat or republican, seems to draw out irrational hatred from many. I blame it on a sort of mob-mentality that emerges from the two-party system.
Click to expand...


Yes, both sides have those who are hyperbolic. I also agree there is this silly notion of us and them, and with two parties that are largely not all that different. It's really silly when you think about it.
 
sawyerloggingon said:
It was all those sub prime mortgages that got us into this mess.
Click to expand...
Is that myth still alive? :roll:

The subprime mortgages in question were not government insured. If they had been the banks wouldn't have had to buy off the rating agencies to manufacture false credit ratings on instruments loaded with crap that the banks themselves originated and backed. Banks took it on themselves to originate those loans instead of using government qualifications and backing because the banks wanted to make more loans above and beyond what those pesky Fanny/Freddie regulations would allow and took no notice of the risk. That was the ultimate cost of merging the investment and savings (street corner) banks in 2000. Yes, virtually all of Congress including the Dems voted for it and Clinton signed it (not that it would have mattered considering the vote tally in Congress). It was a huge mistake and one we still allow. :( DC is populated by economic morons on BOTH sides of the isle - but this move isn't a mistake. We need something to get the middle and bottom end of the housing market moving again. The top end seems to be taking care of itself.
 
Last edited:
He's not stupid...he is just incompetent. He is a failed community organizer, an absentee state politician, a politically appoint adjunct, and was elected because he was a clean articulate well spoken black man that made all the white liberals feel squishy inside. The fact is he hasn't a clue how to deal with the complex problems the world faces so he vanishes. He has spent 5 years as president doing the same thing he did as an Illinois rep...he is 'present'.
 
The 'poll' doesn't have enough choices.

And it's not really a poll, it's a sign-up sheet for far-right losers who are still upset over getting their backsides handed to them last November.

Wasting time on malarkey like this will not help them in future elections.



"Better days are coming." ~ But not for the out of touch, running out of time, GOP.
 
shrubnose said:
The 'poll' doesn't have enough choices.

And it's not really a poll, it's a sign-up sheet for far-right losers who are still upset over getting their backsides handed to them last November.

Wasting time on malarkey like this will not help them in future elections.



"Better days are coming." ~ But not for the out of touch, running out of time, GOP.
Click to expand...

You don't appear to know much about american politics
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom