Has Obama been a good President?

Gimmesometruth said:

Sure, they can....but again, how is that manifest in society? Did the media create the large numbers of right wing militias, right-wing hate groups?

No.

Again, your question:

(is) the hate for Obama is more than it was for Bush?

and the conversation surrounding it, the context, was about how much people hate these 2 POTUS's. The punditry exists on both sides, the intense personal dislike by Americans of Obama exceeds what was expressed for Bush. We did not have large numbers of displays of guns and rifles by left-wing protesters during the Bush terms.

Click to expand...

I seem to remember some intimidation tactics used by several groups against "right wingers" during Obama's presidential campaign.

Edit: You are also ignoring those on the left who are not exactly happy with President Obama and his policies too. You can't ignore them. There are quite a lot of them. Apparently the president is not "left" enough for some of them.

ChrisL said:

I'm not denying that there are SOME groups out there that would definitely hate Obama because of his color. … However, I'm pretty sure they make up a relatively SMALL minority of those who disagree with Obama policies. Most of the people who disagree with him do so for legitimate reasons that have nothing to do with the fact that he is a black man.

Click to expand...

I'd say yer probably correct that "most of the people who disagree with him do so for legitimate reasons that have nothing to do with the fact that he is a black man." But when you wrote in yer previous post that "no one can be so dense as to believe it is due to his skin color in today's United States of America," I can say yer definitely wrong because I for one am that dense.

You need to divide his opposition into different groups. There are the "proud" racists who hate the idea of a black president. Then there are those who don't want to think of themselves as racists but are nevertheless affected by racist attitudes. And remember he's not just any black man. He's a law professor. His father was a Kenyan who was pretty far out on the Left. And in today's environment, it makes a difference that his father was a Muslim, not that it should. I want to emphasize that point. I don't have much of a problem with people feeling uncomfortable with his father's politics, but the idea that it makes a GD bit of difference that he was a Muslim is putrid, filthy, un-American bigotry, just as bad as racism. Bigotry is a heinous sin.

More than anything, I wanna say this is complicated. I'm willing to say that bigotry is very complicated. People who have a lot of character and decency can be affected by bigotry because of the way they were raised. When the country takes a big hit like we did in the Great Recession, and it's not altogether clear to many who was responsible because of the timing of Bush leaving and Obama coming in, and yer someone who has always been opposed to liberal Big Government, and you've always supported a foreign policy based on a willingness to take military action rather quickly and easily, and yer concerned about the economy and yer financial security and retirement due to the demographics of a low birth rate in the US and an aging baby boomer population, and the US position in the world seems to have slipped because of globalization and the rapid economic growth in countries like China and India, and it won't be long before whites are a minority in the US population, and perhaps worst of all he took on this problem we've been trying to solve for several decades of a lot of Americans without health insurance and the constant high inflation in healthcare costs and that inevitably was gonna be a very difficult process that would be very disruptive and probably look bad at first — all these things add up to make a lot of people feel even more negative about a man like Obama than they would about some white liberal who comes across as more "friendly" and "down-to earth" like Clinton.

>>In fact, a lot of the dissatisfaction comes from the left. Some liberals are very disappointed in Obama too.

That's a good point, and one that I think a lot of people don't take into account when they look at his relatively low popularity in the polls. And many forget that the country often just gets tired of a president in a second term.

>>It's pretty obvious by this statement above that you harbor quite a bit of hatred yourself.

It sure isn't obvious t' me. What would you point to as something that makes it obvious?

finebead said:

I could not respond to the poll, because I am a moderate american. I am fiscally conservative, socially progressive. I lean right on some issues, and left on others. I'll give Obama a B so far. I'll keep watching to see how Obamacare turns out in a couple of years. It's too soon to tell IMO.

Click to expand...

I didn't vote either, and basically for the same reason. I also agree with yer assessment of the President's performance.

ChrisL said:

They totally fuel the fires of hatred, yes. Many, many people are influenced by what they hear on their news programs. :roll:

Click to expand...

More to the point, I'd say, many people are affected by Faux News and right-wing hate media, which purport to report ( ) the news, but really only use that as a mechanism to generate big profits while peddling ideology.

ChrisL said:

I have to say that, in light of the newest events that have occurred in Iraq, my opinion of President Obama is even worse now. Did he have NO IDEA that any of this was going to occur? Were there were no warnings?

Click to expand...

Yeah, there were a LOT of warnings. The ones that count came in 2002 and 2003 from people who argued against a clumsy and poorly planned invasion of Iraq.

mmi;1063397976[QUOTE said:

]I'd say yer probably correct that "most of the people who disagree with him do so for legitimate reasons that have nothing to do with the fact that he is a black man." But when you wrote in yer previous post that "no one can be so dense as to believe it is due to his skin color in today's United States of America," I can say yer definitely wrong because I for one am that dense.

You need to divide his opposition into different groups. There are the "proud" racists who hate the idea of a black president. Then there are those who don't want to think of themselves as racists but are nevertheless affected by racist attitudes. And remember he's not just any black man. He's a law professor. His father was a Kenyan who was pretty far out on the Left. And in today's environment, it makes a difference that his father was a Muslim, not that it should. I want to emphasize that point. I don't have much of a problem with people feeling uncomfortable with his father's politics, but the idea that it makes a GD bit of difference that he was a Muslim is putrid, filthy, un-American bigotry, just as bad as racism. Bigotry is a heinous sin.

More than anything, I wanna say this is complicated. I'm willing to say that bigotry is very complicated. People who have a lot of character and decency can be affected by bigotry because of the way they were raised. When the country takes a big hit like we did in the Great Recession, and it's not altogether clear to many who was responsible because of the timing of Bush leaving and Obama coming in, and yer someone who has always been opposed to liberal Big Government, and you've always supported a foreign policy based on a willingness to take military action rather quickly and easily, and yer concerned about the economy and yer financial security and retirement due to the demographics of a low birth rate in the US and an aging baby boomer population, and the US position in the world seems to have slipped because of globalization and the rapid economic growth in countries like China and India, and it won't be long before whites are a minority in the US population, and perhaps worst of all he took on this problem we've been trying to solve for several decades of a lot of Americans without health insurance and the constant high inflation in healthcare costs and that inevitably was gonna be a very difficult process that would be very disruptive and probably look bad at first — all these things add up to make a lot of people feel even more negative about a man like Obama than they would about some white liberal who comes across as more "friendly" and "down-to earth" like Clinton.

>>In fact, a lot of the dissatisfaction comes from the left. Some liberals are very disappointed in Obama too.

That's a good point, and one that I think a lot of people don't take into account when they look at his relatively low popularity in the polls. And many forget that the country often just gets tired of a president in a second term.

>>It's pretty obvious by this statement above that you harbor quite a bit of hatred yourself.

It sure isn't obvious t' me. What would you point to as something that makes it obvious?

Click to expand...

Perhaps I should have said it is dense to think that MOST Americans dislike Obama because of his skin color? That is what I mean. I don't deny that there are those who are ignorant and dislike him simply because of his skin. I never really believed that Obama was a "Muslim." I do know that he had some exposure to the religion as a young person or perhaps when he was a child, but personally that is of no concern to me. I was never concerned with those rumors. I happen to just think he was not the right man for the job. Perhaps in easy times, he would have made a FINE president, but he just too inexperienced to deal with the issues that we were and are facing as a nation IMO.

As to that man's anger . . . I think it's quite apparent if you read pretty much ANY of his posts. That is all I'm going to say on that particular matter.

ChrisL said:

Do you think the hate for Obama is more than it was for Bush? I don't think so, especially not in the media.

What do you think about the insurgency happening in Iraq now? Negative for Obama?

Click to expand...

On the whole yes. Other than outliners, most like myself just disagreed with his behavior concerning Iraq. No one questioned his birth, for example. You had to find those who were more extreme to find the silliness. I can walk into a local establishment and hear this nonsense. I couldn't with Bush.

ChrisL said:

I seem to remember some intimidation tactics used by several groups against "right wingers" during Obama's presidential campaign.

Click to expand...

Are you going to argue that the same thing did not go on by the right?

Edit: You are also ignoring those on the left who are not exactly happy with President Obama and his policies too. You can't ignore them. There are quite a lot of them. Apparently the president is not "left" enough for some of them.

Click to expand...

FFS, not only can you not remember what your original question and the context surrounding it was.....but now you can't remember that we JUST HAD THE SAME CONVERSATION:

ChrisL said:

In fact, a lot of the dissatisfaction comes from the left. Some liberals are very disappointed in Obama too. Surely, no one can be so dense as to believe it is due to his skin color in today's United States of America?

Click to expand...

Gimmesometruth said:

Are you seriously going to say that a lot of the left HATE Obama with the same intensity as the right wing?
But don't hate him......you are forgetting what you asked.
Straw, I never said those that are "disappointed" with Obama are racists, you are moving the goal post on your own question......but then you seem to thrive on dishonest discussion.

Your question was:

(is) the hate for Obama is more than it was for Bush?

Don't try to change what you asked, it remains on the page.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

I have NOT ignored your silly attempt to change your question from "hate" to "disappointed" or "not happy".

FFS ChrisL, can't you have just one honest, fair, non-hypocritical debate with me where you don't have to move your own goal post?

Boo Radley said:

On the whole yes. Other than outliners, most like myself just disagreed with his behavior concerning Iraq. No one questioned his birth, for example. You had to find those who were more extreme to find the silliness. I can walk into a local establishment and hear this nonsense. I couldn't with Bush.

Click to expand...

I disagree. I think the hate displayed is pretty much equal for both. We are . . . how many years into the Obama presidency, and people are STILL blaming and talking about Bush. :roll: Obama assured us that he could handle the job. Well, I disagree and have always disagreed.

Like I said in another post, if times were good, he might be a great president, but with the problems that our country is facing, he just doesn't have what it takes IMO. I'm actually concerned with what is happening in Iraq. This is MORE than just a blame game for some of us, and when you DO want to place blame, well it has to go to the current POTUS.

Gimmesometruth said:

Are you going to argue that the same thing did not go on by the right?

Click to expand...

I think that's exactly what YOU were insinuating in your last post to me, trying to make it seem as if Obama was more hated because of the intimidation by certain groups. I just countered your point with one of my own. I've already acknowledged SEVERAL times that there are groups of people who are ignorant and would certainly dislike the president because of the color of his skin. However, those people are the minority and the outliers. I believe that MOST people dislike Obama because of his policies.

FFS, not only can you not remember what your original question and the context surrounding it was.....but now you can't remember that we JUST HAD THE SAME CONVERSATION:

Click to expand...

Obviously, you are getting too angry to have any kind of a rational discussion. One would think that Obama is your lover.

I have NOT ignored your silly attempt to change your question from "hate" to "disappointed" or "not happy".

FFS ChrisL, can't you have just one honest, fair, non-hypocritical debate with me where you don't have to move your own goal post?

Click to expand...

I've moved nothing. It's not MY fault that you are unreasonable, irrational and cannot converse like an adult.

Boo Radley said:

On the whole yes. Other than outliners, most like myself just disagreed with his behavior concerning Iraq. No one questioned his birth, for example. You had to find those who were more extreme to find the silliness. I can walk into a local establishment and hear this nonsense. I couldn't with Bush.

Click to expand...

ANYWAYS . . . with what is going on in Iraq right now, who really cares who is more hated? Bottom line is that neither of them (Bush/Obama) were/are very good presidents. Although, to be honest, I feel much more disagreement with Obama than I ever did with Bush. When Bush declared war, I assumed that there WAS evidence of WMD, and I still would NOT be surprised if there had been.

ChrisL said:

Perhaps I should have said it is dense to think that MOST Americans dislike Obama because of his skin color? That is what I mean.

Click to expand...

Yeah, It wasn't altogether clear what you were saying, and I sorta knew what you meant. YOUR FAULT for being imprecise.

>>I happen to just think he was not the right man for the job. Perhaps in easy times, he would have made a FINE president, but he just too inexperienced to deal with the issues that we were and are facing as a nation IMO.

In my opinion, you have this exactly backwards. I think he was THE person who was ideally suited to deal with the problems we had. Lots of people really HATED Lincoln, and as you know, that whole thing was wrapped in a blanket of race and bigotry. Bush43 showed himself to be a capable leader when the financial crisis hit and he went along with TARP even though I bet he was very unhappy about doing so. It had to be done, like an amputation to save a life. To complete the analogy, I'd say Obama has helped us grow back a new limb to replace the one we lost. I see him as a VERY intelligent and HIGHLY skilled technocrat. It's easy t' say that he's a bit tone-deaf as a politician, but otoh, he is a two-term POTUS, so …

>>As to that man's anger . . . I think it's quite apparent if you read pretty much ANY of his posts.

Well, I've read a number of his posts where he seemed quite reasonable. I see yer point — you two kinda went at it here and I'm guessing elsewhere. As you know, these things happens in discussion groups. Perhaps by next week, you'll be friends.

ChrisL said:

I disagree. I think the hate displayed is pretty much equal for both. We are . . . how many years into the Obama presidency, and people are STILL blaming and talking about Bush.

Click to expand...

Um, because Bush decided(er), with all of the his PNAC/Neocon/Vulcan cabal to illegally invade Iraq on false pretense, without waiting for full intel on WMD's, without the backing of the UN membership, creating a +2Trillion (and counting) unfunded hole in debt that we will be adding to with care for Vets for decades out. He took a nation that had relative stability and prosperity which is now going to burn in a another series of civil war, costing another tally of unknown numbers of dead innocents.

We haven't even touched on his administrations absolute lack of doing anything to halt the housing bubble that triggered the worst recession since 1929.

Like I said in another post, if times were good, he might be a great president, but with the problems that our country is facing, he just doesn't have what it takes IMO. I'm actually concerned with what is happening in Iraq. This is MORE than just a blame game for some of us, and when you DO want to place blame, well it has to go to the current POTUS.

Click to expand...

Yeah, all of it is on Obama, it is not that he inherited any of the problems left by the previous admin, nor has he had a completely dysfunctional Congress.

He's just an average president--not too bad, not too good-- the problem is isn't the president we needed.
Voted No

ChrisL said:

I think that's exactly what YOU were insinuating in your last post to me,

Click to expand...

BS, the conversation never touched on political shenanigans at campaign rally's. I was clearly referring to protests post elections.

trying to make it seem as if Obama was more hated because of the intimidation by certain groups.

Click to expand...

Again, any thinking person using the "special instruments" of eyes and a brain can clearly see that the LEVEL and INTENSITY of hatred displayed by rw extremists is much greater than what the Bush admin faced in the US.

I just countered your point with one of my own. I've already acknowledged SEVERAL times that there are groups of people who are ignorant and would certainly dislike the president because of the color of his skin. However, those people are the minority and the outliers.

Click to expand...

You are confirming that the level of hatred is more intense than for Bush.

I believe that MOST people dislike Obama because of his policies.

Click to expand...

Again, moving your goalpost.

Stop moving your goalpost.

Obviously, you are getting too angry to have any kind of a rational discussion. One would think that Obama is your lover.

Click to expand...

Any other stupid distractions and baiting your want to troll with?

I've moved nothing. It's not MY fault that you are unreasonable, irrational and cannot converse like an adult.

Click to expand...

Oh, OK....hate="disappointed/dislike/not liked".

There is your rational discussion.

My friend Barry was doing so poorly in this poll, I decided to give him a "Yes" vote, even though I protest the fact that I had to qualify it by identifying myself as "left-leaning." I want to restate that I don't think polls should be worded that way. It's one thing to ask voters in an exit poll about their ideology and party affiliation, but it shouldn't be on the ballot, imo.

Currently down, 55-28. Come on, you Obama supporters! Give the boy a thumbs up!

ChrisL, I think it may be that yer dividing these things too sharply. Iow, you seem to be saying that people either oppose Obama because he's black or they oppose his policies. I was trying to suggest earlier that the two can be mixed, especially subconsciously. Would you agree that a lot of sort of "mild" racism is subconscious, given that it's viewed widely today as unacceptable?

mmi said:

Yeah, It wasn't altogether clear what you were saying, and I sorta knew what you meant. YOUR FAULT for being imprecise.

Click to expand...

Well, I took care of that misunderstanding.

In my opinion, you have this exactly backwards. I think he was THE person who was ideally suited to deal with the problems we had. Lots of people really HATED Lincoln, and as you know, that whole thing was wrapped in a blanket of race and bigotry. Bush43 showed himself to be a capable leader when the financial crisis hit and he went along with TARP even though I bet he was very unhappy about doing so. It had to be done, like an amputation to save a life. To complete the analogy, I'd say Obama has helped us grow back a new limb to replace the one we lost. I see him as a VERY intelligent and HIGHLY skilled technocrat. It's easy t' say that he's a bit tone-deaf as a politician, but otoh, he is a two-term POTUS, so …

Click to expand...

I disagree that he was the right person. He has taken it upon himself to ignore the advice of those who know. His troop withdrawals were against the advice of his own military advisers. I don't believe President Obama has ever even served in the military, or has had anything to do with the military. How on earth would he know anything about how to manage a war? Not to mention TWO wars? Certainly, a president doesn't HAVE to have military background, but he should at least listen to those that do know about such things IMO.

I hated TARP, and gosh, I couldn't disagree more with your assessment of the president. He is intelligent, but I don't think it is the right kind of intelligence that one needs to be POTUS.

:lol: I can see that you and I are going to disagree on a lot of things probably. :mrgreen:

Well, I've read a number of his posts where he seemed quite reasonable. I see yer point — you two kinda went at it here and I'm guessing elsewhere. As you know, these things happens in discussion groups. Perhaps by next week, you'll be friends.

Click to expand...

No way, there are some people who are just always cranky, miserable and difficult and unpleasant to converse with.

mmi said:

ChrisL, I think it may be that yer dividing these things too sharply. Iow, you seem to be saying that people either oppose Obama because he's black or they oppose his policies. I was trying to suggest earlier that the two can be mixed, especially subconsciously. Would you agree that a lot of sort of "mild" racism is subconscious, given that it's viewed widely today as unacceptable?

Click to expand...

Sure, that could be the case in some instances I suppose. I still would disagree that even MOST people feel this way though. I feel that Americans are a lot more enlightened than that, especially the younger generations.

ChrisL said:

Sure, that could be the case in some instances I suppose. I still would disagree that even MOST people feel this way though. I feel that Americans are a lot more enlightened than that, especially the younger generations.

Click to expand...

Again, you change your argument, your argument was whether there is MORE hatred for Obama or was there MORE for Bush. The point that mimi is making is that the intensity of the hatred is greater towards Obama because the political dislike is intensified by the racism. You did not have anywhere near the level of racism focused at Bush.

ChrisL said:

His troop withdrawals were against the advice of his own military advisers.

Click to expand...

Some of his advisors. Kennedy may have avoided WWIII by using his own judgement.

>>I don't believe President Obama has ever even served in the military, or has had anything to do with the military. How on earth would he know anything about how to manage a war?

Lincoln learned how to wage war on the job, and saved the country doing it. His generals let him down until he found the right one.

As I see it, there are two principal elements involved here, although it's important to understand that they overlap. Military leaders often know best how to fight wars at the battlefield level, but sound political judgement is required, and obviously hoped for, in knowing first, whether or not a war should be fought, and secondly how any military action will fit in with national interests defined broadly. War is both political and martial. Skills in both areas are needed.

>>I hated TARP.

Why? I don't like it, moral hazard and all that. But what choice did we have?

>>there are some people who are just always cranky, miserable and difficult and unpleasant to converse with.

In my experience, people can get off on the wrong foot in discussion groups. Sometimes people just rub each other the wrong way, as they say. I think of myself as a nice guy, but I can be sorta mean in these online political discussions, not that I should be.

On race and politics, it's not the younger generations that are the problem. I'd say this is true about much in society that troubles us. Kids can be stupid; older men (I'm one myself) can be destructive.

MMI, not "mimi." Multi Media Information, America's leading dead small business.

He's been an abject failure in every possible way.

In leadership
Decision making
Strategy
Vision
Everything

He has brought irreparable harm to this nation and should be ousted from power immediately.

Jimmy Carter looks like George Washington compared to this POS....

mmi said:

Some of his advisors. Kennedy may have avoided WWIII by using his own judgement.

>>I don't believe President Obama has ever even served in the military, or has had anything to do with the military. How on earth would he know anything about how to manage a war?

Lincoln learned how to wage war on the job, and saved the country doing it. His generals let him down until he found the right one.

As I see it, there are two principal elements involved here, although it's important to understand that they overlap. Military leaders often know best how to fight wars at the battlefield level, but sound political judgement is required, and obviously hoped for, in knowing first, whether or not a war should be fought, and secondly how any military action will fit in with national interests defined broadly. War is both political and martial. Skills in both areas are needed.

>>I hated TARP.

Why? I don't like it, moral hazard and all that. But what choice did we have?

>>there are some people who are just always cranky, miserable and difficult and unpleasant to converse with.

In my experience, people can get off on the wrong foot in discussion groups. Sometimes people just rub each other the wrong way, as they say. I think of myself as a nice guy, but I can be sorta mean in these online political discussions, not that I should be.

On race and politics, it's not the younger generations that are the problem. I'd say this is true about much in society that troubles us. Kids can be stupid; older men (I'm one myself) can be destructive.

MMI, not "mimi." Multi Media Information, America's leading dead small business.

Click to expand...

Okay, but times have changed a LOT since the days of Lincoln. Our military is a huge complicated machine. War is different today too. I don't see the point in comparing these two times at all. There are way too many differences and other complicating factors involved. Also, I believe back in those days, more men WERE actually familiar with how to wage and manage a war. It was just the way things were back then when men were expected to fight at a moment's notice. He was probably very familiar with the operations of the military for the times.

I believe that politics are what loses wars. I don't believe America will ever win another war if we don't learn from our mistakes. I've read and seen documentaries about Vietnam, and how mistakes were made because of the fact that it was a "political" war. You should read or watch The Art of War. I've watched the documentary, and it is excellent and very interesting. If and when you have the time of course.



About TARP, I thought we should have let those companies claim bankruptcy. Though it would have been painful, I think it would have reeked less havoc on the economy in the long run.

Sure, I don't have any issues with disagreeing with a person on a political matter, or matters. We CAN argue about things and still keep it relatively civil I think.

ChrisL said:

times have changed a LOT since the days of Lincoln. Our military is a huge complicated machine. War is different today too.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I thought about that when I was commenting. But I'd say the only major difference is that things happen MUCH more quickly. And even that is still often just a battlefield consideration. The type of judgements involved at a political level have NOT changed, imo. Roman, Greek, Egyptian, Mesopotamian, as far back as you can go, it's political judgement about how people react to things and how societies function that's required.

Now I'm sure that stuff has changed too — a modern, industrial society probably doesn't react to things the way an ancient, agrarian one does. But you yerself point to Sun Tzu. His wisdom, insight, whatever you call it, is rightly held up as timeless. Btw, I did study his work years ago in school, and I would agree that, like any great philosophical treatise, it's the kind of thing that one can benefit from reviewing and contemplating repeatedly.

I trained to be a public policy analyst, but along the way I studied a LOT of history and philosophy, and it seems like I keep going back to that, rather than economic and statistical models, in my efforts to understand things. Lately I've been reviewing some of my notes on the writings of Marcus Aurelius, particularly his Meditations, written while campaigning.


>>back in those days, more men WERE actually familiar with how to wage and manage a war. It was just the way things were back then when men were expected to fight at a moment's notice. He was probably very familiar with the operations of the military for the times.

I don't agree. I'd say they were much more focused on scratching a living in agriculture. The regular Army was quite small and my guess is that militias were not very organized or proficient. Lincoln was a lawyer and a politician. I expect he was quite unfamiliar with fighting and managing a war.

>>I believe that politics are what loses wars. I don't believe America will ever win another war if we don't learn from our mistakes. I've read and seen documentaries about Vietnam, and how mistakes were made because of the fact that it was a "political" war.

I'd say all wars are political. Bad politics makes for bad wars.

>>About TARP, I thought we should have let those companies claim bankruptcy. Though it would have been painful, I think it would have reeked less havoc on the economy in the long run.

In my view, without TARP there was a large risk of a cascading collapse of the financial system and unimaginable damage.

finebead said:

I could not respond to the poll, because I am a moderate american. I am fiscally conservative, socially progressive. I lean right on some issues, and left on others. I'll give Obama a B so far. I'll keep watching to see how Obamacare turns out in a couple of years. It's too soon to tell IMO.

Click to expand...

I give Obama an F-.

ChrisL said:

I disagree. I think the hate displayed is pretty much equal for both. We are . . . how many years into the Obama presidency, and people are STILL blaming and talking about Bush. :roll: Obama assured us that he could handle the job. Well, I disagree and have always disagreed.

Like I said in another post, if times were good, he might be a great president, but with the problems that our country is facing, he just doesn't have what it takes IMO. I'm actually concerned with what is happening in Iraq. This is MORE than just a blame game for some of us, and when you DO want to place blame, well it has to go to the current POTUS.

Click to expand...

I never understand this. What Bush did he did. That doesn't change ever. Not now under Obama. Not under any president of any party in the future. What he did, he did. He can never say he wasn't him who did it.

And yes, times matter. But I but there would still be excessive exaggeration over everything, just as we see now.

And no, blame lies where the blame lies, and not who is in office. The trouble with Iraq continues to be that we invaded in the first place. We will never recover from that. It will only be when do we cut our loses and leave it to the Iraqis.

Bush lied to America and caused many people to die. Obama tried to give Americans affordable health care.

Lets call it a wash, eh?

Boo Radley said:

I never understand this. What Bush did he did. That doesn't change ever. Not now under Obama. Not under any president of any party in the future. What he did, he did. He can never say he wasn't him who did it.

And yes, times matter. But I but there would still be excessive exaggeration over everything, just as we see now.

And no, blame lies where the blame lies, and not who is in office. The trouble with Iraq continues to be that we invaded in the first place. We will never recover from that. It will only be when do we cut our loses and leave it to the Iraqis.

Click to expand...

With congressional approval.