• 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!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Obama - Weakest President ever?

Definately. He's practically coddling the terrorists.

GWB would have started military operations in Iran already if he was still president.

Another preemptive strike by GW!

That being said, if Bush was good at finishing things that he started, maybe he would have captured or killed Bin Laden years ago...but he didn't.

Honestly, the terrorists that I am concerned about these days are the militia-types, or the kids walking into movie theaters with military-grade firearms.
 
for my little buddy Adam: once again you have it wrong and have bought into the obama lies about GM paying back its "loans"

Still Government Motors - Forbes.com

You seem to have mistaken me for a strawman. I never claimed that GM has paid off its loans in full. They probably never will, which is unfortunate, but a small cost compared to the disaster that would have ensued if GM and Chrysler had failed at the height of the Great Recession.

And of course that doesn't change the fact that you are wrong about GM not being profitable, wrong about GM not making Cadillacs in the US, and wrong about GM workers being angry because GM is a global auto maker.
 
So you think he should act as a dictator?
I think that Obama should STOP acting as a dictator. he has several federal agencies enacting provisions of laws that have not pssed. HE has also misused executive orders to circumvent Congress altogether. Hitler would be proud.
 
You seem to have mistaken me for a strawman. I never claimed that GM has paid off its loans in full. They probably never will, which is unfortunate, but a small cost compared to the disaster that would have ensued if GM and Chrysler had failed at the height of the Great Recession.

And of course that doesn't change the fact that you are wrong about GM not being profitable, wrong about GM not making Cadillacs in the US, and wrong about GM workers being angry because GM is a global auto maker.

A GM bankruptsy would have only been a disaster for the UAW. But I already covered that, you just refuse to accept the reality of why the whole thing was done---to save the UAW and guaranty their support to the obama campaign. It was all politics, using our money to buy votes. it was the worst kind of corruption.
 
I think that Obama should STOP acting as a dictator. he has several federal agencies enacting provisions of laws that have not pssed. HE has also misused executive orders to circumvent Congress altogether. Hitler would be proud.

Here we go. We have one person saying he's far too weak of a leader, and one saying he's a dictator that does what he wants, even if it's against the law. lol, you can't make this up.
 
You seem to have mistaken me for a strawman. I never claimed that GM has paid off its loans in full. They probably never will, which is unfortunate, but a small cost compared to the disaster that would have ensued if GM and Chrysler had failed at the height of the Great Recession.

And of course that doesn't change the fact that you are wrong about GM not being profitable, wrong about GM not making Cadillacs in the US, and wrong about GM workers being angry because GM is a global auto maker.

Ok, one more time slowly so maybe you can understand the question: do you believe that union workers and the UAW are happy about GM products being made in China and Mexico instead of Detroit?

GM also has a plant in Kentucky, I wonder if it is union. anyone know?
 
Here we go. We have one person saying he's far too weak of a leader, and one saying he's a dictator that does what he wants, even if it's against the law. lol, you can't make this up.

he is actually both of those. most dictators are weak leaders, thats why they become dictators.
 
he is actually both of those. most dictators are weak leaders, thats why they become dictators.

It was commented that he was a weak leader because he can't get anything that he wants and refuses to push for it. Then it's commented that he is a dictator because he pushes for what he want's. You can spin it all you want, it still won't make sense.
 
Definately. He's practically coddling the terrorists.

GWB would have started military operations in Iran already if he was still president.

Another reason I thank GOD Bush is no longer our president.
 
ebf3aa888107161ed4cc4af0989359f4.jpg


UK paper asks: Is Barack Obama the weakest President in history? - Spokane Conservative | Examiner.com

UK paper asks: Is Barack Obama the weakest President in history?

On foreign policy, he is the American Neville Chamberlain.
On domestic policy, he is a crybaby "the Republicans won't let me!"

He's the most skilled shill we've ever had as president, but also probably the weakest.

From the article:
INEFFECTUAL, invisible, unable to honour pledges and now blamed for letting Gaddafi off the hook. Why Obama’s gone from ‘Yes we can’ to ‘Er, maybe we shouldn’t’...

Pukas reminds readers of the euphoria felt by many on the left when Obama, the "son of a Kenyan goatherd" was elected to be America's first African-American President. Liberals across the country swooned as though it was the second coming of the Messiah. Giddy from the election, some thought their days of working were over and the new President would pay their mortgage and put gas in their car.
She also reminds us of his simple slogan, "Yes we can," but immediately notes:
His presidency, however, is turning out to be more about “no we won’t.” Even more worryingly, it seems to be very much about: “Maybe we can… do what, exactly?“ The world feels like a dangerous place when leaders are seen to lack certitude but the only thing President Obama seems decisive about is his indecision. What should the US do about Libya? What should the US do about the Middle East in general? What about the country’s crippling debts? What is the US going to do about Afghanistan, about Iran?
Pukas' questions are direct and to the point. They also happen to be the same questions asked by many here in the U.S.

She spends much of her article on the obvious indecision displayed by Obama on the issue of Libya, but his inability to lead has been apparent to many conservatives since the very beginning.

One thing Obama is good at, though, is campaigning - and going on vacation. He seems to spend a lot of time playing golf, and there's always NCAA brackets to be chosen. Those are, after all, far more important issues than bloodshed in Libya.

She writes:

It is also true that the President is constantly stymied by a hostile, Republican-ruled Congress. But Obama’s apparent reluctance to engage with momentous events is starting to look like more than aloofness. Some tempering of America’s role as the world’s No1 busybody may be no bad thing but under Obama the US appears to be heading towards isolationism. He is hardly doing much better at home. Economically, the US is in big trouble but the national debt is not shrinking.
Perhaps Ms. Pukas doesn't realize that for the first two years of Obama's term, he had a solid majority in both the House and the Senate and the GOP has only been the majority in the House for 3 months. He still has a majority in the Senate, however, a number of Democrats are concerned about their re-election in 2012.

She also seems to forget that the "world's No 1 busybody" is the same nation that led the fight against Nazism and Japanese imperialism and the same nation that stood firm against the expansion of Soviet Communism. Obama is not leading the nation to isolationism, as she puts it, but rather leading the nation to a status just slightly above a banana republic.

She continues:

Yes we can was a noble and powerful mantra which secured for Barack Obama the leadership of the free world.
That, and hatred of George W. Bush along with a sympathetic - no, adoring - media complex that did everything it could to ensure his election, while trashing Republican VP Candidate Sarah Palin in the most despicable way imaginable.

Pukas concludes by writing:

Those than can, do. It is time he started doing.
This is a sentiment most of us can agree upon. The problem, however, is that Obama has never held any executive position in his life, nor has he ever served a day in uniform. His resume is that of a radical political agitator, and he is very good at that.

The sad reality is that Americans have elected the most inexperienced, radical, left wing ideologue as President.

On practically every issue, except health care, he has dithered, flipped, flopped, and fiddled. When the going get tough, he gets going - to Rio, Hawaii, the golf course, or wherever First Lady Michelle wants to go.

In short, the world is burning while President Obama fiddles.
 
Last edited:
Here we go. We have one person saying he's far too weak of a leader, and one saying he's a dictator that does what he wants, even if it's against the law. lol, you can't make this up.

Its "damned if you do...damned if you don't" with this ODS crowd. I will fault Obama for trying to play too much of a compromiser. Once the Republicans drew a line in the sand and said that we aren't going to agree to anything and our only goal is to ensure that you are a one-term President...I wouldn't have even tried to negotiate with them.

But at least lets be honest Joko....if Obama had done the things that you bemoan...you would have been crying that he's a socialist dictator and won't listen to the opposition.
 
Obama's inexperience is the reason he has failed, IMO. And 4 years of OJT haven't helped because he still doesn't know what he's doing.
 
It was commented that he was a weak leader because he can't get anything that he wants and refuses to push for it. Then it's commented that he is a dictator because he pushes for what he want's. You can spin it all you want, it still won't make sense.

To conservatives, Obama is an empty chair, which allows anyone to put a make-believe person in there to attack him.
 
Definately. He's practically coddling the terrorists.

GWB would have started military operations in Iran already if he was still president.

True. And he would have done it off the books, without proper funding and likely in opposition of other world leaders....and conservatives would have been perfectly okay with that (again).
 
Barack Obama is a strong campaigner and one hell of a public speaker -- almost hypnotic at times. Aside from that, I hope he loses in a landslide this November.

I don't find him that great of a speaker...in fact he can be a bit of a drone and boring most times...perhaps that is what you mistaken for hypnotic.
 
Back
Top Bottom