• 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.

President Obama's Real Record: The Facts

You forgot:



You also omitted this:



And, you forgot this:



And, of course - there is the legality issue that you forgot to post as well:



Giving Bush credit for ending the war in Iraq, is a lot like giving Churchill, credit for dropping Fat Man on Hiroshima.




In 1959, according to a Gallup Poll, most Americans believed that Racial Segregation in Public Schools was better than the Supreme Courts decision in 1954, to make such segregation illegal.

pccraceBrown.jpg





Did the report ever talk about the fact that the Surge came AFTER President Bush essentially abandoned the mission that HE began in Afghanistan, allowing the insurgents to regain strength, while the President relegated his duty as Commander In Chief, by illegally invading Iraq, in his question for Iraq Oil fields and the establishment of unlawful PSA Contracts for Foreign Nationals?

The answer is: No.

So, the question that begs to be asked is, what would have happened, if President Bush, had followed through with his commitment to the United States Troops who remained behind in Afghanistan, to essentially fight a war that was unwindable given the support from the Commander In Chief himself, George W. "AWOL From the TANG" Bush?

Offering "report cards" without offering background on the teacher, the school, or the fact that the school was too poor to pay for its own text books - is "hardly much of a rebuttal."

Well, a very detailed post . . . having absolutely nothing to do with what I said. But if you need to keep in Bush-Bash-Practice, be my guest.
 
Many of the "accomplishment" on that list I see as failures.

Ok, fair enough. Let's examine your rebuttals one-by-one.


Examples:

- The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act

That's one.


- Prevented Economic Depression and put a floor under very weak economy (this is blatantly false)

That's two.


- Instantiated TARP II and Prevented a Core Financial Institution Meltdown

That's three.


- Prevented the U.S. Auto Industry from Collapsing and Forced its Restructuring

That's four.


- Signed the Mathew Sheppard Hate Crimes Act, Senate S.909

That's five.


- Signed Financial Regulatory Reform

That's six.


- Ending the War in Afghanistan (he could've ended it years ago)

That's seven.
-------------------------


Where is the rebuttal on the merits of the facts outlined in the OP? You cut and pasted my own words. You started by raising the stakes and insinuated that you were going to respond on the merits with a rebuttal.

This is EXACTLY the way Mitt Romney, handled himself in the debate and throughout his entire campaign. He tours the country telling people how Obama has failed, and then does absolutely nothing to DESCRIBE:

a) How Obama has failed.
b) How a Romney Administration would have done better.

I don't believe that I have ever seen a more empty suit campaign for the Presidency in my entire life. Seriously - I got a little excited about the fact that someone was going to finally step up and PROVE the success of the Obama Administration as outlined here (only in part). You then disappointed me by doing nothing more than cutting and pasting what has already been posted?

I am completely bewildered by your post. Stunned! :shock:
 
The facts matter. It was time a for a post like this.

How about you post some "facts" about those accomplishment?

Such as:

Obama only carried out existing policies concerning Afghanistan, Iraq and UBL.

The HIRE Act is a friggin joke. It doesn't give "tax cuts" to small businesses. It's amazing how people actuly believe that.


The Stealfromus, UAW bailouts, the hate crimes bill and Obamacare? Really? :rofl
 
Is there not one human being alive, willing to debate the merits of the OP?

Because, if the opponents to Barack Obama, can't handle this little post of hard facts about what this man has actually done as President between 2008 and 2012, then how on earth are you expecting to make the case that this Presidents entire Presidency is a failure?

The OP outlines his accomplishments AND it outlines the REASONS why Obama, has earned a second term. Yet, all I hear from Republicans is that Obama's entire Presidency is a complete and utter failure - backed-up with no evidence that proves their claims.
 
Sure, if you consider getting an $800 billion stimulus bill through Congress nothing. Or saving GM and Chrysler. Or winding down the war in Iraq. Or implementing a surge in Afghanistan. Or negotiating trade deals. :roll:

And here is where the devil is in the details. The original poster (The Obama4000XDS or whatever) says that anything Obama did was an "accomplishment" without actually looking to assess the effects of those "accomplishments". Obamacare may be a "success" if the benchmark for success is answering the question "is there Obamacare", but the law and regulatory scheme itself is completely dysfunctional and will be a disaster.

Same thing with the "stimulous". if the stimulous was a success merely because there was a stimulous, well great. We can do what the domescrats want us to do which is put away our critical thinking caps and go home. If, on the other hand, "success" means that a well-designed policy was developed and executed and achieved its objectives in a cost-effective manner, the stimulous was a miserable failure and not a "success".

As for the rest, GM and Crystel would have been fine. Sure their shareholders would have lost everything, but the productive assets, the IP, the technology, and everything else would have been fine and some car-producing entities carrying the names GM and Chrysler would have emerged from bankruptcy leaner and ore focused on giving the consumer what he or she wants. And even for the sake of argument GM and Chrysler went belly up and their plants were converted into community organizing clinics, things STILL would have been fine, as more efficient car companies making better cars that more closely meet demand would have seen an opportunity to expand to take up the slack. Instead, you get the worst of both worlds, with Obama using Chicago bully tactics to force creditors off their investments while rewarding his union cronies, dumping massive subsidies into continued production of loser products (Volt anyone) and delaying the inevitable shake-up at these companies that will be required until the next time they go bankrupt.

As for "winding down" the various wars, it is easy to wind down when you accept defeat as an option. You are losing and will lose Afghanistan because of Obama's policies. Maybe you don't care, and that's fine, but don't confuse accepting defeat for success.
 
Is there not one human being alive, willing to debate the merits of the OP?

Because, if the opponents to Barack Obama, can't handle this little post of hard facts about what this man has actually done as President between 2008 and 2012, then how on earth are you expecting to make the case that this Presidents entire Presidency is a failure?

The OP outlines his accomplishments AND it outlines the REASONS why Obama, has earned a second term. Yet, all I hear from Republicans is that Obama's entire Presidency is a complete and utter failure - backed-up with no evidence that proves their claims.

I already have, but you don't seem to have the desire to challenge me.
 
Sure, if you consider getting an $800 billion stimulus bill through Congress nothing. Or saving GM and Chrysler. Or winding down the war in Iraq. Or implementing a surge in Afghanistan. Or negotiating trade deals. :roll:

It was something; a gigantic waste of tax payer money.

Sesame Street got one million bucks of poorkulus money that created 1.4 jobs.

Sesame Street Media earns over $17 million a year. What the hell did they get a million dollars of tax payer cash for??
 
How about you post some "facts" about those accomplishment?

Did you just ask for a "fact" to back-up a known "fact?"

Who do you think you are kidding? Are you telling me that you don't know how to read for yourself? Are you saying that you can't read for yourself? Can you post a stated fact from the OP, where you feel you need more information?

For example:

Where I state that President Obama, cleaned-up the repayment and monitoring process of TARP-I and created TARP-II, where the direct result was the stabilization of the Financial Markets, while requiring that Banks repay the Government Loans with interest.

If you can somehow take that and demonstrate WHERE you need evidence of the facts, I would very much appreciate it.


Obama only carried out existing policies concerning Afghanistan, Iraq and UBL.

That's False.

Unfortunately, you are wrong. It should be common knowledge that President Obama, created a different plan for dealing with Afghanistan, after President Bush, had abandoned the mission in Afghanistan, leaving our Troops under-supported for the mission at hand. Al-Qaeda grew in strength while President Bush, launched his illegal war in Iraq, and the Taliban emerged in greater numbers during the same time.


The HIRE Act is a friggin joke. It doesn't give "tax cuts" to small businesses. It's amazing how people actuly believe that.

I think you are delusional. Your blatant and willful disregard for the facts and history, is so obvious that a response to this muse you offer is not even warranted.

Why Your Reply Is Dead Wrong.

Excerpt:
WASHINGTON — Two new tax benefits are now available to employers hiring workers who were previously unemployed or only working part time. These provisions are part of the Hiring Incentives to Restore Employment (HIRE) Act enacted into law today.

Employers who hire unemployed workers this year (after Feb. 3, 2010 and before Jan. 1, 2011) may qualify for a 6.2-percent payroll tax incentive, in effect exempting them from their share of Social Security taxes on wages paid to these workers after March 18, 2010. This reduced tax withholding will have no effect on the employee’s future Social Security benefits, and employers would still need to withhold the employee’s 6.2-percent share of Social Security taxes, as well as income taxes. The employer and employee’s shares of Medicare taxes would also still apply to these wages.


The Stealfromus, UAW bailouts, the hate crimes bill and Obamacare? Really? :rofl


Where's the rebuttal? You've said and done absolutely zilch, other than prove yourself to be absent any facts at all. Cut names like "stealfromus" don't change history, nor do they change the facts. I told you that before you made this ridiculous post, so you should know better than to come in here with something as weak as this, pretending to be rebutting on the merits.

You've been proven wrong and you have been given the facts that demonstrate your errors above.

Now, what do you do? More cute names without substance in rebuttal? That would pretty much match perfectly with what Republicans have offered the People of this country for the past 14 years. Cute names for things (Shock and Awe) and no real solutions that do anything but put this country further behind the eight-ball.

This Economy was trashed principally because the Republicans in charge ignored all things domestic and favored going to war in Iraq for Oil. For eight (8) years, you neglected this nation's economy, you have never taken responsibility for your actions and you now want the voting public to let you back into the White House, so you can do the same thing again? Is that the plan - is that the ONLY plan the Republicans can come up with?

Post something of substance, please.
 
Did you just ask for a "fact" to back-up a known "fact?"

Who do you think you are kidding? Are you telling me that you don't know how to read for yourself? Are you saying that you can't read for yourself? Can you post a stated fact from the OP, where you feel you need more information?

For example:

Where I state that President Obama, cleaned-up the repayment and monitoring process of TARP-I and created TARP-II, where the direct result was the stabilization of the Financial Markets, while requiring that Banks repay the Government Loans with interest.

If you can somehow take that and demonstrate WHERE you need evidence of the facts, I would very much appreciate it.




That's False.

Unfortunately, you are wrong. It should be common knowledge that President Obama, created a different plan for dealing with Afghanistan, after President Bush, had abandoned the mission in Afghanistan, leaving our Troops under-supported for the mission at hand. Al-Qaeda grew in strength while President Bush, launched his illegal war in Iraq, and the Taliban emerged in greater numbers during the same time.




I think you are delusional. Your blatant and willful disregard for the facts and history, is so obvious that a response to this muse you offer is not even warranted.

Two New Tax Benefits Aid Employers Who Hire and Retain Unemployed Workers





Where's the rebuttal? You've said and done absolutely zilch, other than prove yourself to be absent any facts at all. Cut names like "stealfromus" don't change history, nor do they change the facts. I told you that before you made this ridiculous post, so you should know better than to come in here with something as weak as this, pretending to be rebutting on the merits.

You've been proven wrong and you have been given the facts that demonstrate your errors above.

Now, what do you do? More cute names without substance in rebuttal? That would pretty much match perfectly with what Republicans have offered the People of this country for the past 14 years. Cute names for things (Shock and Awe) and no real solutions that do anything but put this country further behind the eight-ball.

This Economy was trashed principally because the Republicans in charge ignored all things domestic and favored going to war in Iraq for Oil. For eight (8) years, you neglected this nation's economy, you have never taken responsibility for your actions and you now want the voting public to let you back into the White House, so you can do the same thing again? Is that the plan - is that the ONLY plan the Republicans can come up with?

Post something of substance, please.

Post some links that prove me wrong then, if I'm so dillusional.

I'm especially excited to see all those, "tax cuts", that the HIRE Act provides for.
 
You read like a 4 year old child and you never rebut anything having been said. When you pull yourself out of the strong delusion that you now suffer from, come back to the thread and post something worthwhile. But, don't expect another reply from me if you can't even get real long enough to deal with the matter in substance and on the merits.

Were you this angry when Obama was doing well, or is this a manifestation of the frustration resulting from his debate performance (the quality of which was in line with his record of governing, I might add)? Cause it seems the bubble bursting on Obama's omnipotent benevolence seems to have made a lot of his supporters particularly angry in the last week or so.

But I get it. people don't like to have their perceptions shattered. Better to blame everyone else and convince one's self that the world as you perceived it before continues to be the world today, rather than accepting that maybe, just maybe, your previous assessment of reality was a tad ... off.
 
Post some links that prove me wrong then, if I'm so dillusional.

I'm especially excited to see all those, "tax cuts", that the HIRE Act provides for.


Your biggest problem is your lack of education. You walk the earth completely ignorant of the things that you NEED to know something about BEFORE blowing off reality in favor of some make-believe alternate reality.

The HIRE Act is a friggin joke. It doesn't give "tax cuts" to small businesses. It's amazing how people actuly believe that.

I think you are delusional. Your blatant and willful disregard for the facts and history, is so obvious that a response to this muse you offer is not even warranted.

Why Your Reply Is Dead Wrong.

Excerpt:
WASHINGTON — Two new tax benefits are now available to employers hiring workers who were previously unemployed or only working part time. These provisions are part of the Hiring Incentives to Restore Employment (HIRE) Act enacted into law today.

Employers who hire unemployed workers this year (after Feb. 3, 2010 and before Jan. 1, 2011) may qualify for a 6.2-percent payroll tax incentive, in effect exempting them from their share of Social Security taxes on wages paid to these workers after March 18, 2010. This reduced tax withholding will have no effect on the employee’s future Social Security benefits, and employers would still need to withhold the employee’s 6.2-percent share of Social Security taxes, as well as income taxes. The employer and employee’s shares of Medicare taxes would also still apply to these wages.
-------------------


Educating you guys is both fun and very sad, at the same time.

You were given an education (through my reply to MaggieD) on WHY Obamacare was so important to the country, not just from a Health Care standpoint, but from an economic survival standpoint, yet you never mentioned it. You were given a source for the information contained in my post, yet you pretend that it does not exist.

You don't really want to debate on the merits, because you know the facts don't align with your constant lies about what the President has actually done with his Presidency. His accomplishments don't go away merely because you want them to!

You've been lied to for four (4) years by hyper-partisan Republican Political Hacks in the Hill and that sound bite has been blasted into your ear through Faux Newz, for the same amount of time each and every night when you "tune-in" to watch and "tune-out" of reality. So, when a thread like this one comes along, you really fall into a state of total shock.

It literally shocks you to know that this President actually has some accomplishment under his belt, under an extremely difficult economy and near total opposition from those in Congress who told you that their ONLY agenda over the four years of the President's first term, was to See Him Fail. Under all that opposition, this man was still one of the most successful President's of the Modern Era, given the circumstances he found in office upon his arrival.

Those are facts etched in history - regardless of how under-reported those facts have been in the Mainstream Media.
 
It was something; a gigantic waste of tax payer money.

Sesame Street got one million bucks of poorkulus money that created 1.4 jobs.

Sesame Street Media earns over $17 million a year. What the hell did they get a million dollars of tax payer cash for??


Cause Obama is brave enought to stand up for Big Bird?
 
Your biggest problem is your lack of education. You walk the earth completely ignorant of the things that you NEED to know something about BEFORE blowing off reality in favor of some make-believe alternate reality.

Oh, is that it?...



I
think you are delusional. Your blatant and willful disregard for the facts and history, is so obvious that a response to this muse you offer is not even warranted.

Why Your Reply Is Dead Wrong.

Excerpt:

-------------------


Educating you guys is both fun and very sad, at the same time.

You were given an education (through my reply to MaggieD) on WHY Obamacare was so important to the country, not just from a Health Care standpoint, but from an economic survival standpoint, yet you never mentioned it. You were given a source for the information contained in my post, yet you pretend that it does not exist.

You don't really want to debate on the merits, because you know the facts don't align with your constant lies about what the President has actually done with his Presidency. His accomplishments don't go away merely because you want them to!

You've been lied to for four (4) years by hyper-partisan Republican Political Hacks in the Hill and that sound bite has been blasted into your ear through Faux Newz, for the same amount of time each and every night when you "tune-in" to watch and "tune-out" of reality. So, when a thread like this one comes along, you really fall into a state of total shock.

It literally shocks you to know that this President actually has some accomplishment under his belt, under an extremely difficult economy and near total opposition from those in Congress who told you that their ONLY agenda over the four years of the President's first term, was to See Him Fail. Under all that opposition, this man was still one of the most successful President's of the Modern Era, given the circumstances he found in office upon his arrival.

Those are facts etched in history - regardless of how under-reported those facts have been in the Mainstream Media.

Well, I know enough to know that a tax "cut" and a tax "break" are two different things and that spending $30,000 to save $3,000 is a really stupid idea. Would you spend 30 g's, that you didn't need to spend, just so you could get a $3,000 dollar tax credit?

Why do some people insist on propagating the outright lie that Obama gave small businesses a tax cut? The scary part, is that the people that are pushing lies are the same ones that claim to be smarter and better educated than those of us in the unwashed masses.

If it's "smart" to spend 30 grand just to save 3 grand, then I'll gladly stay ignorant. :rofl
 

I started to go through and itemize responses to your op, but it's basically a book of talking points and takes too long to get through. It's like you lumped over a hundred different threads into one post. It's not like any of the facts presented or even the spin you put on them is news to anyone here. We've debated them ad nauseum on this site.

Essentially, you've posted what you perceive to be all the positives that have happened in the last 4 years and given credit to our president and said anything negative came from the evil opposition.

You are welcome to assume that no one is capable of debating the OP, but it really comes down to no one wants to wade through it with nothing new being presented (or at least they haven't so far).

President Obama has not satisfied me that he is capable of running this country. His whole attitude is contrary to what I believe is good for us. He wants to expand government and polarize the country. I say this fully aware of the legislation he has passed and current economic conditions.

McCain would have been worse for us, though. If the president gets a second term, we will survive. I think we need a Gary Johnson in his seat, however. Failing that, I would prefer a successful businessman and governor. Obama was the better choice 4 years ago, today I think we have better options.
 
Were you this angry when Obama was doing well, or is this a manifestation of the frustration resulting from his debate performance (the quality of which was in line with his record of governing, I might add)?

LOL! You get facts posted in a thread about the real record of this President, and all of a sudden the OP is "angry."

That was hilarious. Thanks for the laugh!


Cause it seems the bubble bursting on Obama's omnipotent benevolence seems to have made a lot of his supporters particularly angry in the last week or so.

Is that a rebuttal to anything posted? Or, is it the fifth non-sequitur reply offered up by those who have no rebuttal in reply?

Did you not read the OP? I told you why I made this post in the opening paragraph. I know you can read, CJ. I'm just not sure that you like what you read, that's all. ;) Words have meaning and facts do matter, CJ. Like it or not, his record won't go away. It might get woefully under-reported by the MSM, but it won't change the facts written on the very first page of this thread.

Find a SINGLE statement about this President's achievement while in office over the last four (4) years that I have posted in error, provide the evidence for why you believe it to be in error and I will print a retraction. I've already said that once before, this makes it twice. I've also said this, if you CANNOT destroy the first page of this thread, then you also CANNOT logically conclude this man's presidency to be a failure.

That means, you MUST destroy this first page of this thread with FACTS that prove to the contrary, in order for ANY of the statements that the Republicans on the Hill have been making for four (4) years to be true.

I'm simply using logic to demonstrate the ridiculous nature of the absurd claim that somehow, this man's Presidency is a failure in anyway, shape or form. Now, prove those facts to be in error.


But I get it. people don't like to have their perceptions shattered.

Which is exactly why you pretend that the accomplishments of this President don't exist, even when they are easily researched and written in plain English on Post #1 inside this thread.

You have not even bothered to address a single fact or accomplishment - yet you consider yourself as actually having "replied" to the premise of the original post.

Like I said, this behavior is both sad and funny, at the same time.
 
Cause Obama is brave enought to stand up for Big Bird?


Nice retort! That was very much on target regarding Page #1 of this thread.

LOL!
 
Well, I know enough to know that a tax "cut" and a tax "break" are two different things and that spending $30,000 to save $3,000 is a really stupid idea.

Finally, now we might be getting somewhere with your education.


Would you spend 30 g's, that you didn't need to spend, just so you could get a $3,000 dollar tax credit?

Would you spend 30 g's as your part in a national strategic initiative to put more money into circulation that ultimately comes back to your company in the form of a stimulated economy? Of course, I would - why would I not do my part to help get the economy going again. That's what the plan was designed to accomplish.

It is also very clear to me that you really don't understand the issues, do you? Had you even bothered to educate yourself on the very Act that you called yourself ridiculing, you would have also learned by now that the employ would ALSO be eligible to off-set $250,000.00 in equipment costs. But, when you are about nothing more than seeing to it that the President fails, you tend to overlook significant savings like that for small to medium size businesses.

Would you not take advantage of a 250 g's worth of accelerated depreciation? Or, are you too "smart" to know the difference? These are the reasons WHY this President is accomplished. The facts matter and the truth cannot be hidden forever.

Geeepers. You guys are too much. Not turning in your homework. Not paying attention in class. Cutting class when important lessons were being taught. And, then bouncing around campus like you really know something? Get real.


Why do some people insist on propagating the outright lie that Obama gave small businesses a tax cut?

Maybe you've a full frontal - I believe i specifically stated Tax Advantages, or Tax Assistance, or Help with Taxes, or maybe even Tax Cuts - the point is that the business pays less in taxes.

If you want to split hairs - let's call it a Tax Credit. I could care less. It was designed to help small to lower-end medium size businesses and it was exactly what the President was supposed to do. President Bill Clinton, gave Tax Credits to hire and retain workers as well, but his economy was nowhere near as devastated as Obama's economy. Those Clinton Tax Credits were specifically targeted at the same kind of business owner and there were PART of an overall program and philosophy that went on to spur about 20 million new jobs in America.

The scary part, is that the people that are pushing lies are the same ones that claim to be smarter and better educated than those of us in the unwashed masses.

The scary part is that you are sitting here, pretending to be rebutting on the merits of the first page of this thread, and you did not even know what HIRE was. How do I know? Because, if you knew what HIRE was prior to reading this thread, then you would have ALSO known about the $250,000.00 depreciation for business who were eligible. The fact that you did not offer that, tells me that you either outright ignored it, because it cut against the grain of your ulterior motive, or you never knew about it, which meant that you were ignorant to the facts at hand. Which is up for you to decide.

If it's "smart" to spend 30 grand just to save 3 grand, then I'll gladly stay ignorant. :rofl

Still in the dark, aren't you. Still don't get it, do you? Still pretending.
 
LOL! You get facts posted in a thread about the real record of this President, and all of a sudden the OP is "angry."

That was hilarious. Thanks for the laugh!




Is that a rebuttal to anything posted? Or, is it the fifth non-sequitur reply offered up by those who have no rebuttal in reply?

Did you not read the OP? I told you why I made this post in the opening paragraph. I know you can read, CJ. I'm just not sure that you like what you read, that's all. ;) Words have meaning and facts do matter, CJ. Like it or not, his record won't go away. It might get woefully under-reported by the MSM, but it won't change the facts written on the very first page of this thread.

Find a SINGLE statement about this President's achievement while in office over the last four (4) years that I have posted in error, provide the evidence for why you believe it to be in error and I will print a retraction. I've already said that once before, this makes it twice. I've also said this, if you CANNOT destroy the first page of this thread, then you also CANNOT logically conclude this man's presidency to be a failure.

That means, you MUST destroy this first page of this thread with FACTS that prove to the contrary, in order for ANY of the statements that the Republicans on the Hill have been making for four (4) years to be true.

I'm simply using logic to demonstrate the ridiculous nature of the absurd claim that somehow, this man's Presidency is a failure in anyway, shape or form. Now, prove those facts to be in error.




Which is exactly why you pretend that the accomplishments of this President don't exist, even when they are easily researched and written in plain English on Post #1 inside this thread.

You have not even bothered to address a single fact or accomplishment - yet you consider yourself as actually having "replied" to the premise of the original post.

Like I said, this behavior is both sad and funny, at the same time.

My observations have nothing to do with your talking points, and everything to do with the way you throw yourself around and disparage everyone who disagrees with you. There is some real anger in there, and it's not that hard to see. It permeates your writings.

But thank you for the concession that I know how to read. Mighty kind of you.
 
Would you not take advantage of a 250 g's worth of accelerated depreciation? Or, are you too "smart" to know the difference? These are the reasons WHY this President is accomplished. The facts matter and the truth cannot be hidden forever.
Hey, wait a second!!

Isn't "accelerated depreciation" what you guys also refer to a "subsidies for big oil"? I thought that was some evil "Republican" thing?
 
Hey, wait a second!!

Isn't "accelerated depreciation" what you guys also refer to a "subsidies for big oil"? I thought that was some evil "Republican" thing?

Subsides for big oil...you know that tune in the number starting with B vs a 250,000 credit for small business-You know those things "republicans" pretend to care about.
 
Subsides for big oil...you know that tune in the number starting with B vs a 250,000 credit for small business-You know those things "republicans" pretend to care about.
Links? Source? Billions in "subsidies"? Really want to go there?
 
That pretty much sums it up. Although I will add that some Dems crossed the aisle on many of the votes.

And the public is buying it

RealClearPolitics - Election 2012 - General Election: Romney vs. Obama

With all those great accomplishments of Obama and with an adoring press why hasn't Obama been able to sell a positive message to the American electorate?

Think any of those so called accomplishments trump the high unemployment/under employment/discouraged workers, 1.3% GDP growth, 5.6 trillion added to the debt, 48 million on food stamps, a disastrous foreign policy that has our embassies under attack and an Ambassador dead?

Not sure where you get your information but for some reason you have a lot of passion invested in Obama and the question is why? What is it about Obama that deserves your kind of support?
 
And the public is buying it

RealClearPolitics - Election 2012 - General Election: Romney vs. Obama

With all those great accomplishments of Obama and with an adoring press why hasn't Obama been able to sell a positive message to the American electorate?

Think any of those so called accomplishments trump the high unemployment/under employment/discouraged workers, 1.3% GDP growth, 5.6 trillion added to the debt, 48 million on food stamps, a disastrous foreign policy that has our embassies under attack and an Ambassador dead?

Not sure where you get your information but for some reason you have a lot of passion invested in Obama and the question is why? What is it about Obama that deserves your kind of support?

My understanding is that he is the Messiah, here to heal the planet and right injustice. Like Superman, but better.
 
My understanding is that he is the Messiah, here to heal the planet and right injustice. Like Superman, but better.

LOL, I knew there were some good Canadians in this forum, glad to finally see one.
 
My understanding is that he is the Messiah, here to heal the planet and right injustice. Like Superman, but better.

LOL... yea... Superman is based Barak Erkle Huessein Obama...but Superman loved the USA...Obama not so much...: )
 
Back
Top Bottom