• 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

LOL, I knew there were some good Canadians in this forum, glad to finally see one.

If Obama wins.. Canada will be laughing at us..Canada will be looking better and better... : )
 
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.

Let's start there. I posted a list of the Official Declarations for what this President has done. Those declarations can be found on the very website that the President promised you during his campaign as a matter of adding more transparency. The other "Official Declarations" can be gleaned from the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics and the United States Bureau of Economic Analysis. Any remainder can be easily looked-up with a browser and a search engine, for anyone who dared to actually see what this President has done.

Yet, you call them "talking points." I never knew that a House Resolution that got signed by the President, was a "talking point." I never knew that Executive Signatures from the President himself, were mere "talking points." And, I never knew that BLS and BEA official documentation about the economy were all just "talking points."


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.

So, you are going to change Official Declarations that every Voting Citizen of the United States of America should already know about their President, and label it a "lumping" of over a hundred different threads, when I don't have 10 threads to my account on this board?

You then claim that you've "debated them ad nauseum on this site?" I've read much of the stuff that you call "debate" on this forum and I can't help but grin when you tell me that what I've posted on the first page of this thread, has been all debated before in this forum.


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.

What I perceive to be all positives?

Where have you seen Faux Newz, or CNN, or MSNBC, or anywhere else for that matter, clearly delineate the true record of this President? I don't see anyone in the MSM having taken the time to do this country a service, by actually reporting on the facts of this Presidency. All I ever see are those members of the Media who continuously report day-in and day-out, their hypothesis that this entire Presidency is a total failure. Or, I see members of Congress, standing in front of a camera, preaching day-in and day-out their own brand of religiosity about how the past four (4) years have been a total failure for this President.

But, what I DO NOT see, is anyone in the MSM, who simply reports the facts as they are and without spin.

I specifically state the man's record of accomplishments.
I specifically state the condition of the economy before his arrival at the White House.
I specifically state the more than $5 trillion in cash being held by companies in this country.
I specifically state that this economy would be well on its way to recovery with a fraction of the $5 trillion being put back into the economy.


That's what my post does and it details WHY those things are true. That is precisely what the opening post in this thread does - nothing more and nothing less. I simply tell the truth about what really happened between 2008 and 2012. It is not my opinion about what happened. Either those things did, or did not happen and if they did not happen, then simply call me on it, post the evidence for your claim and I'll post a retraction. I've said this three (3) times already.


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).


What does that mean? Are you fully aware of what you just admitted?

Look, the logic is crystal clear. Romney and Ryan, are now running around the country lying to people by claiming that Obama, does not deserve four (4) more years because his policies have failed. That is THEIR claim to fame. They offer no comprehensive alternative plan of their own and instead, they simply say that more leadership is needed in the White House to get things done and to bring jobs back to the middle class. That is the entirety of their campaign - despite all the flipping and flopping Romney, has been doing over the past two (2) years. For the past four (4) years, Republicans on the Hill have been telling the entire world that Obama's entire presidency is a failure. They began calling his policies a failure, exactly 90 days after his took office.

All I have done, is outline President Obama's actual accomplishments WITHOUT the spinning top from Republicans in the House, the Senate, or the two guys out on the campaign trail right now, selling more Trickle Down Economics as the solution to the nation's problems.

Now, if what the Republicans have been saying for the past (4) years is TRUE, then it should be EASY to contradict every single word that you see inside the first post of this thread. If what the Republicans have been selling over the past four (4) years through the Media to the American People is FALSE, then no one will be able to contradict what has been written on the first page of this thread. Why? Because the first page of this thread does nothing but outline President Obama's successes and accomplishments, and if he has no successes and accomplishments as Republicans have claimed for the past (4) years, then EVERYTHING that I posted on the first page should be a total LIE.


President Obama has not satisfied me that he is capable of running this country.

Personal opinion not based on facts, is proof that your satisfaction is not rooted in reality. So, what's new? There are a lot of irrational people out there proclaiming what they heard on Faux Newz to be true. There are a lot of people out there who have idea whatsoever, what this President has done, or has not done and my dialog with CJ, proves that fact.

He knew nothing about HIRE until I posted it for him. Here we are - almost at the door of the election, and he knew nothing about PART of the President's strategic plan to reinvigorate the job market by offering incentives to small and medium size businesses, by way of tax help and $250,000.00 in depreciation that can be taken all at once.

That's a picture perfect example of WHY a thread like this is necessary. People PRETEND to know things - but upon testing them, then demonstrate they knew precious little AND they were actually wiling to make DECISIONS based on their own ignorance of the facts.

Take MaggieD, as the other example. She came off cocky and concluded that I had been smoking something for including Obamacare, as an achievement of the President. She basically quoted Mitt Romney's, foolhardy zinger that he prepared for the debates, asking the President, why he would spend so much time on "Health Care," when "Jobs" were needed.

That response from Romney, and the repeating of that same response by MaggieD, tells me clearly that neither Romney, nor MaggieD, had any clue whatsoever, that Health Care is an Economic issue tied to "Jobs" and that without dealing with Health Care right now, our Debt and Deficit will never be reduced and we will never see a robust economy EVER again - and precisely for the reasons that I outlined in detail for MaggieD.

My biggest Problem with Obama, is that he did not explain the connection between National Income, National GDP and National Health Care Expenditures. That is a HUGE subject to discuss during a paltry 2 minute response, but I do think the President should have at least tried to explain it to Romney.


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.

Generalizations don't equate to facts and opinion without fact is not even an educated guess.

I believe the attitude that says 47% of the country is unreachable and should be discarded as relevant, is a far more divisive attitude than anything Obama, has ever said of done - including Guns and Bibles. I also see the duplicity in declaring that there will never be any peace between Israel and Palestine, to a group of $50k per plate donors one night, while standing in front of a camera and fully flipping in the other direction the next day on the campaign trail, by claiming that you are committed to being an honest broker in the Middle East, is also very divisive in many respects.

I further believe that proclaiming you are Pro-Choice, and then proclaiming that you are Pro-Abortion, then flipping back to Pro-Choice, only to flip back to possibly leaning towards being Pro-Abortion yet again, is highly divisive to the country and profoundly confusing for many people. I can also see how telling the American People one day that you are Pro-Gun Control and then flipping in the opposite direction by proclaiming that you are one of the biggest supporters the NRA could possibly have in the White House, is very bizarre and unusual coming from a Presidential Candidate, and highly confusing for the the American Electorate. I can also see how making statements that clearly indicate your intention to cut public education and then hand out vouchers while telling parents to "go shopping" for their child's school, while knowing full well that there will be many parents who will be priced completely out of the market for attending the more well funded schools, because of the basic principles of supply and demand, can be very divisive as well.

Note the differential in my reply -vs- yours? In my reply, I give examples of WHY I believe Romney's attitude to be unhealthy for the country as its sitting President. I don't just make a blanket statement without providing you at least something can be verified as fact.

So, can dismantle Romney's distortion of his own statements fairly easily, but that's not what this thread is all about. This thread is about simply demonstrating what this President has actually done and not what the extreme Right Wing in this country wants you to be believe he's done.


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.

Its a nice bumper sticker. I works as a great campaign slogan. But, it does not answer the essential question about this thread:

If the Republican lies are true, then none of the President's accomplishments and successes should even exist. Bottom line. This thread simply makes it crystal clear, what some of those accomplishments look like, why they are important and why they afford the President a second term. Romney, has simply demonstrated himself to be unable to tell the truth. Period.
 
If Obama wins.. Canada will be laughing at us..Canada will be looking better and better... : )

We already sort of are laughing at you. No offence.

We are going through a bout of sefl-confidence I have never seen in my lifetime. We have always had a bit of an inferiority complex vis-a-vis the US, which manifested itself in various ways, but it truly seems we are moving beyond that. Our recession was extremely mild, our deficits are completely under control and working back to zero (at least nationally), or oil and gas plays out west and in newfoundland are driving massive investment, and our dollar has gone from funny money at 67 cents to the greenback to above parity in just a few years.

While it's probably a fiction, I think the sentiment here is that we've grown beyond our abject dependence on the US and can be proud of ourselves in our own right.

And we laugh at you from both sides of the political spectrum, to be honest. The right sees the complete unseriousness of your leadership, particularly on economic issues, while the left laughs at your fixation on guns and your unwillingness to adopt a single payer health care system, along with your fixation on right wing social issues. The only thing that tempered these in the past was the rather obvious reality that you guys were far mroe successful than us, implying you were doing a lot more right than we were, but that disparity has largely dissipated and we are continuing our upward trajectory while you languish in economic mismanagement with a dysfunctional political system of "checks and balances" (we just let the party that gets 40% of the votes do whatever it wants).

As for Canada looking better and better, you do know that if the govenrment pays for a particular health care service you need to go through the public pay system and it is illegal to pay cash to jumpt the queue? Oh, and my marginal tax rate is 46.41% (which kicked in at about 130k) and we have a 13% sales tax on pretty much everything.

Just saying.
 
We already sort of are laughing at you. No offence.

We are going through a bout of sefl-confidence I have never seen in my lifetime. We have always had a bit of an inferiority complex vis-a-vis the US, which manifested itself in various ways, but it truly seems we are moving beyond that. Our recession was extremely mild, our deficits are completely under control and working back to zero (at least nationally), or oil and gas plays out west and in newfoundland are driving massive investment, and our dollar has gone from funny money at 67 cents to the greenback to above parity in just a few years.

While it's probably a fiction, I think the sentiment here is that we've grown beyond our abject dependence on the US and can be proud of ourselves in our own right.

And we laugh at you from both sides of the political spectrum, to be honest. The right sees the complete unseriousness of your leadership, particularly on economic issues, while the left laughs at your fixation on guns and your unwillingness to adopt a single payer health care system, along with your fixation on right wing social issues. The only thing that tempered these in the past was the rather obvious reality that you guys were far mroe successful than us, implying you were doing a lot more right than we were, but that disparity has largely dissipated and we are continuing our upward trajectory while you languish in economic mismanagement with a dysfunctional political system of "checks and balances" (we just let the party that gets 40% of the votes do whatever it wants).

As for Canada looking better and better, you do know that if the govenrment pays for a particular health care service you need to go through the public pay system and it is illegal to pay cash to jumpt the queue? Oh, and my marginal tax rate is 46.41% (which kicked in at about 130k) and we have a 13% sales tax on pretty much everything.

Just saying.

Thanks for RUSH!
 
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.

You can't tell that by reading a post on the Internet. So, if you are that thin-skin that I would suggest that maybe a political debate forum is not the place for you. Maybe you missed MaggieD's comment that I had been smoking something. That disparaging, is it not? Yet, you decided to overlook that comment.

I simply took it in stride and let her know that she was the one about the be smoked and THEN and began her re-education on what National Health Care = National Economy. That's how you deal with people in an on-line debate forum who attack you. You attack back using FACTS and HISTORY. It works every single time, as long as you don't lie about the actual record.

What I posted is the actual record of accomplishment for the President. I know that it is a shock to most people who have been brainwashed for four (4) years about how much of a total failure the man was. Those were lies. What you see in the first post in this thread are facts - not opinion.

Here's a clue. I will NEVER instantiate a thread where I know that I am standing on a bald face lie. Never. That's why I can argue the premise of this thread all day long and KNOW that I stand on firm ground. I DO NOT take the losing side or arguments. Period. Never have and I never will. If I cannot stand on FACTS that I KNOW to be real, then I DO NOT jump into the debate.

That's called being smart.

So, I would say that there are lot of smart people on this forum who refuse to engage in a debate when they do not have the facts on their side. Which pretty much spells the reason why there have been on real challenges to the OP.


There is some real anger in there, and it's not that hard to see. It permeates your writings.

LOL, yeah! And, I saw Elvis, last night at the Apollo Theater!

You're gonna have to come with something better than that, kid! :cool:


But thank you for the concession that I know how to read. Mighty kind of you.

You are indeed welcome!

I know that facts don't matter on this forum and they never have to many people, here. But, at least we agree on something!

Democracy at work!
 
The opening post appears to be a talking paper from Obama Inc Cut and Pasted on this forum. Indeed, many of the opening poster's posts appear to be from Obama inc
 
Let's start there. I posted a list of the Official Declarations for what this President has done. Those declarations can be found on the very website that the President promised you during his campaign as a matter of adding more transparency. The other "Official Declarations" can be gleaned from the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics and the United States Bureau of Economic Analysis. Any remainder can be easily looked-up with a browser and a search engine, for anyone who dared to actually see what this President has done....

Edited for boredom.

Sry, bud, but that post is just too overflowing with hack for me to really get into much detail. You wrote another book that again doesn't cover anything new. I mean, heck, I can't even quote the whole thing to address it out of pity for the folks who are reading this thread for a laugh.

Simply put, I spoke to the talking points, not the facts you mingled in there. The cherry picking of data presented can be a talking point. This is easily evidenced by simply stating the U3 went down to 7.8% without mentioning how many people dropped out of the workforce or mentioning how many jobs were added over the last 31 months without mentioning that the number doesn't even keep up with population increases.

It's also cute how you seem to think you are the only person creating threads here. Lumping threads together was referencing all threads, not just yours and we have covered these topics. The fact that you mock the discussion on this site doesn't speak well to the value of us bothering to reply to you.

The media has done a fine job of lauding the president's "accomplishments". The problem you have there is that not everybody is fool enough to think they were all positives. We know of them. We have debated them. By and large, I disagree with most of his choice of legislative focuses. From the ACA he shoved down the throats of the American public to Lily Ledbetter Right to Sue act, we are aware of them.

In the next few chapters of your book, you talk about the value of personal opinion and then proceed to claim ignorance makes folks disagree with you. You even cite Maggie, who is a well-respected and incredibly intelligent poster here. It's pretty entertaining to read these even if it is a baseless assumption. Turns out you aren't the smartest person around and it's quite possible and even highly likely that informed folks with high IQ scores will disagree with you and your quest to praise Obama and spin everything into a positive.

In the continued incessant ramblings of that post, you give the usual talking points about Romney and 47% and flip-flopping and blah blah. You then show great pride that you can repeat these points and give examples. I'm glad you feel that sense of accomplishment. I'm not here to attack the president, however. I actually have some respect for him. I was just saying that the opposition isn't all lies and games, there are very valid reasons to disagree with him even (especially) when informed on the topics.

I realize you are under the wrong impression throughout your post and especially in your epilogue. I'm not a republican or conservative. I'm libertarian. There is a dramatic difference. I can't recall ever watching Fox news beyond a few posted clips. If you are ignorant of the differences between libertarian and republican/conservative, I highly recommend you educate yourself.

Gawd, I'm even bored writing that long of a response. Feel free to create more strawmen or assume ignorance of those who disagree with you. I suspect you won't be turning many votes with this thread, however.
 
Another Fact about the Obama Administration and their record.

Ok, let's got check it out.



Ok, I check it out by reading every word.

My thoughts are that I feel this Woman's pain. However, not for the context shifting reasons that you have clearly attempted to inject here. A more clear and precisely reading of the link that you provided, would have pointed you here:

Reporter Logan Sexual Abused in Egypt.

When I read something as convoluted as this:

Logan -
“Shoot ’em, bomb ’em, **** ’em. They will kill your children.”

Followed by this:

Logan -
“The foreign correspondent and 60 Minutes star skewered American policy in Afghanistan and Libya, called for a ramped-up military campaign against terrorists, and criticized the Obama administration and others for both underestimating the Taliban’s strength in Afghanistan and for tolerating Pakistan’s obvious coddling of terrorists killing American soldiers.

The Taliban and al Qaeda, she made clear, ‘want to destroy the West and us,’ and we must fight fire with fire. She appeared to leave the assembled alternatively riveted and just a bit troubled by a critique with interventionist implications clearly drawn from her reporting.”


Then I know I am reading someone who is at the very least emotionally compromised. She has a darn good reason to be angry. However, misdirecting that anger by spewing statements that have no rational or coherent basis in either fact, nor any method or means for being successfully accomplished (even if what she says is fact), is simply not a realistic framework to judge the President's performance on so-called "terrorists."

This President has a very clear record on the subject. He did what Bush, failed to do in Bora Bora and he gave the orders to take out Osama Bin Forgotten. He's also given order to take out many of Al-Qaeda and Taliban higher ranking practitioners and he's lead the way to causing serious damage to both organizations. As I have already made clear, he's lead the way on dealing with Mubarak and Qaddafi, via the proper channels through the United Nations and through NATO, while resolving that U.S. Forces be used in a limited capacity. Both engagements were successful in returning all U.S. Troops homes safely.

That's is the proper way to handle matters such as the Arab Spring. The other way is paved by the words that come from Neocons on Faux Newz. That somehow the President should strut like Male Peacock and flap his wings while wearing a Flight Suit that he did not earn, as he proclaims from on high how North Africa and the Middle East should go about conducting their lives and organizing their post-dictator affairs.

Look, the bottom line is that even the United States of America went through a Civil War, remember? How many people did we lose in that war? Over 620,000 people. Yet, did anyone from another country proclaim how we should have handled our affairs at the time, other than the British, who were seeking to provoke the incident? We tend to forget our own past and we tend to be rather hypocritical when it comes to someone else doing the exact same thing that we did, during settling of our own nation.

Let these guys work matter out for themselves. Our role should be extremely limited in a direct sense and only through the United Nations and NATO, should we get engaged in military conflict during this period of time where these people sort out their own affairs. What does Logan, want exactly? She says, we should fight fire with fire. Ok, what exactly does that mean? What is the Strategic Military Agenda and Assessment for fighting fire with fire? Does it look like Iraq, circa 2003? Because, if it looks anything like the illegal invasion of Iraq, then I want no part of that nonsense.

However, if it looks more like what we did in Egypt and in Libya, where we took the mandates of the United Nations Security Counsel and worked closely with our allies and with NATO forces to apply limited military force for the sole purpose of either protecting innocent people from being slaughtered according to the protocols outlined in the United Nations prohibitions against member nations attacking its own people, then I can get on board with that kind of joint, milti-lateral action.

But, sitting back and taking pot shots at the President, for not invading Pakistan, or something equally as ridiculous, is not the way to approach these issues. People often times make it seem as if the United States can do all things, solve all problems and protect all people. We cannot afford to take that position as a Foreign Policy Strategy. Just look at how stretched our military was while engaged in Iraq and Afghanistan. We cannot be sprawled out all over world, solving every single hot spot with unilateral action.

Now, I will ask Logan, this very simple question: Where was her outrage during Apartheid in her homeland South Africa? Was she as outraged then? Do we have any links to her outrage over the Darfur Genocide?

This is no rebuttal to the OP, and I believe I have demonstrated at least that much in my reply to the Logan link.


In addition the latest Military Times Poll has Romney with a 2 to 1 lead over Obama showing who our military supports so another accomplishment and fact about OBama that his supporters want to ignore

Oh, geepers. More Ignore the Facts Himself, wants to talk about people "ignoring" things? That's a hoot!

Yes, indeed. I'm very surprised that a Military Poll comes down in favor of the Republican Candidate. Do you have anymore shocking news from the North Poll?
 
The opening post appears to be a talking paper from Obama Inc Cut and Pasted on this forum. Indeed, many of the opening poster's posts appear to be from Obama inc


Geepers. The fact that I can string a coherent sentence or two together, is no evidence of a cut and paste campaign. You guys are hilarious! You dance and dance and dance, all day long and yet none of you have dared touch the real subject of the OP.

That speaks volumes. Thanks.
 
Geepers. The fact that I can string a coherent sentence or two together, is no evidence of a cut and paste campaign. You guys are hilarious! You dance and dance and dance, all day long and yet none of you have dared touch the real subject of the OP.

That speaks volumes. Thanks.

I find it amusing that a "centrist"'s main posting history on this board is starting what appear to be campaign statements for Obama.

Just saying.........
 
Ok, let's got check it out.




Ok, I check it out by reading every word.

My thoughts are that I feel this Woman's pain. However, not for the context shifting reasons that you have clearly attempted to inject here. A more clear and precisely reading of the link that you provided, would have pointed you here:

Reporter Logan Sexual Abused in Egypt.

When I read something as convoluted as this:

Logan -


Followed by this:

Logan -



Then I know I am reading someone who is at the very least emotionally compromised. She has a darn good reason to be angry. However, misdirecting that anger by spewing statements that have no rational or coherent basis in either fact, nor any method or means for being successfully accomplished (even if what she says is fact), is simply not a realistic framework to judge the President's performance on so-called "terrorists."

This President has a very clear record on the subject. He did what Bush, failed to do in Bora Bora and he gave the orders to take out Osama Bin Forgotten. He's also given order to take out many of Al-Qaeda and Taliban higher ranking practitioners and he's lead the way to causing serious damage to both organizations. As I have already made clear, he's lead the way on dealing with Mubarak and Qaddafi, via the proper channels through the United Nations and through NATO, while resolving that U.S. Forces be used in a limited capacity. Both engagements were successful in returning all U.S. Troops homes safely.

That's is the proper way to handle matters such as the Arab Spring. The other way is paved by the words that come from Neocons on Faux Newz. That somehow the President should strut like Male Peacock and flap his wings while wearing a Flight Suit that he did not earn, as he proclaims from on high how North Africa and the Middle East should go about conducting their lives and organizing their post-dictator affairs.

Look, the bottom line is that even the United States of America went through a Civil War, remember? How many people did we lose in that war? Over 620,000 people. Yet, did anyone from another country proclaim how we should have handled our affairs at the time, other than the British, who were seeking to provoke the incident? We tend to forget our own past and we tend to be rather hypocritical when it comes to someone else doing the exact same thing that we did, during settling of our own nation.

Let these guys work matter out for themselves. Our role should be extremely limited in a direct sense and only through the United Nations and NATO, should we get engaged in military conflict during this period of time where these people sort out their own affairs. What does Logan, want exactly? She says, we should fight fire with fire. Ok, what exactly does that mean? What is the Strategic Military Agenda and Assessment for fighting fire with fire? Does it look like Iraq, circa 2003? Because, if it looks anything like the illegal invasion of Iraq, then I want no part of that nonsense.

However, if it looks more like what we did in Egypt and in Libya, where we took the mandates of the United Nations Security Counsel and worked closely with our allies and with NATO forces to apply limited military force for the sole purpose of either protecting innocent people from being slaughtered according to the protocols outlined in the United Nations prohibitions against member nations attacking its own people, then I can get on board with that kind of joint, milti-lateral action.

But, sitting back and taking pot shots at the President, for not invading Pakistan, or something equally as ridiculous, is not the way to approach these issues. People often times make it seem as if the United States can do all things, solve all problems and protect all people. We cannot afford to take that position as a Foreign Policy Strategy. Just look at how stretched our military was while engaged in Iraq and Afghanistan. We cannot be sprawled out all over world, solving every single hot spot with unilateral action.

Now, I will ask Logan, this very simple question: Where was her outrage during Apartheid in her homeland South Africa? Was she as outraged then? Do we have any links to her outrage over the Darfur Genocide?

This is no rebuttal to the OP, and I believe I have demonstrated at least that much in my reply to the Logan link.




Oh, geepers. More Ignore the Facts Himself, wants to talk about people "ignoring" things? That's a hoot!

Yes, indeed. I'm very surprised that a Military Poll comes down in favor of the Republican Candidate. Do you have anymore shocking news from the North Poll?

The only think more shocking would be proof that you weren't on the Obama payroll. You cut and paste well so hopefully they are paying you well because you do a great job carrying their water, too bad no one can take you seriously because of the distortion. diversions, and downright lies in your posts. Kerigan handled you quite well and I really have no interest in responding to your novels. Anyone with that much time and that much passion for failure doesn't have a lot of credibility.
 
I stopped reading after seeing the BS of the title...

Why? Because PW400 tells the truth?

I've done what I believe most Americans should be doing - sit down, read books, news articles and other literature from a vast cross-section of authors, journalist and professionals who speak on the issues that matter in this country - and then compare what you learn to how the country is being governed not just by the President but also by our legislatures at both the state and federal levels. I, too, have kept abreast of the President's many accomplishments as "scored" by PolitiFact and FactCheck and other organizations, and frankly I don't get how people who have "done their homework on the issues" can come away with this notion that this President - with all the obstacles placed before him - can be described as a failure. Other than FDR, I don't know of any other sitting President who's had to deal with as many issues as President Obama has within his first term. NONE!

- A failing national economy
- High and prolonged unemployment
- A failing auto industry
- A corrupt banking industry
- A dubious stock exchange (Wall Street)
- Widespread corporate greed
- An inept and uncooperative Congress
- A failing and mismanaged health care system
- Overwhelming federal debt due to years of wreckless spending
- TWO wars abroad
- A plethera of national disasters from all four corners of the nation - wild fires, forrest fires, floods, droughts, earth quakes, hurricanes, tornadoes, unexpected bitter winters - you name it, it has happened!

And those were the real problems, not the manufactured issues, i.e., which budget or bill to pass, what social issues is more important over the other, how to deal with this foreign leader or that terrorist group, etc.

I would love to see what this President could have accomplished in his first term WITHOUT all the partisan rancor, but it's difficult to achieve much in a hyper-partisan environment when your opponents have openly and continuously declared that their first mission - and in many respects their only mission - isn't to create jobs as they say it was based on 1) winning the House in 2010 and 2) their Plege to America, but rather to make THIS President a 1-term President. It's nothing short of amazing that he has accomplished anything at all. But unlike many people including some who post to this forum every day, I don't sit an listen to partisan talk radio all day everyday. And I don't subscribed to partisan newsletters. And I don't sit and watch the 24/7 news cycle. As such, I'm able to filter through all the BS and discern for myself what's really going on in our national politic. And based on the issues, I think the man who is currently sitting in the White House deserves to have a second term because the alternative wouldn't foster a stronger middle-class. Instead, Romney would only embolden the wealth-class more. And before anyone says it, I don't begrudge anyone of their wealth. I just believe based on the evidence - news reporting, books, state and federal agencies (i.e., BLS, IRS, etc.) and professional economist themselves - that unless Congress and the corporate elites (captain's of industry) work toward real solutions to strengthen the middle-class and pay people a living wage, this country will be in deeper trouble in the near future. Moreover, unless someone with a level head a foresight is able to tread the waters of foreign policy without making undue waves, this country could very well be headed on a glide path to another war.

Thus, IMHO, Mitt Romney is not that guy. But people have to come to their own conclusion based not on misleading or distorted information, but the truth. PW400 has provided much of it. It's up to the people to figure out the rest.
 
Why? Because PW400 tells the truth?

I've done what I believe most Americans should be doing - sit down, read books, news articles and other literature from a vast cross-section of authors, journalist and professionals who speak on the issues that matter in this country - and then compare what you learn to how the country is being governed not just by the President but also by our legislatures at both the state and federal levels. I, too, have kept abreast of the President's many accomplishments as "scored" by PolitiFact and FactCheck and other organizations, and frankly I don't get how people who have "done their homework on the issues" can come away with this notion that this President - with all the obstacles placed before him - can be described as a failure. Other than FDR, I don't know of any other sitting President who's had to deal with as many issues as President Obama has within his first term. NONE!

- A failing national economy
- High and prolonged unemployment
- A failing auto industry
- A corrupt banking industry
- A dubious stock exchange (Wall Street)
- Widespread corporate greed
- An inept and uncooperative Congress
- A failing and mismanaged health care system
- Overwhelming federal debt due to years of wreckless spending
- TWO wars abroad
- A plethera of national disasters from all four corners of the nation - wild fires, forrest fires, floods, droughts, earth quakes, hurricanes, tornadoes, unexpected bitter winters - you name it, it has happened!

And those were the real problems, not the manufactured issues, i.e., which budget or bill to pass, what social issues is more important over the other, how to deal with this foreign leader or that terrorist group, etc.

I would love to see what this President could have accomplished in his first term WITHOUT all the partisan rancor, but it's difficult to achieve much in a hyper-partisan environment when your opponents have openly and continuously declared that their first mission - and in many respects their only mission - isn't to create jobs as they say it was based on 1) winning the House in 2010 and 2) their Plege to America, but rather to make THIS President a 1-term President. It's nothing short of amazing that he has accomplished anything at all. But unlike many people including some who post to this forum every day, I don't sit an listen to partisan talk radio all day everyday. And I don't subscribed to partisan newsletters. And I don't sit and watch the 24/7 news cycle. As such, I'm able to filter through all the BS and discern for myself what's really going on in our national politic. And based on the issues, I think the man who is currently sitting in the White House deserves to have a second term because the alternative wouldn't foster a stronger middle-class. Instead, Romney would only embolden the wealth-class more. And before anyone says it, I don't begrudge anyone of their wealth. I just believe based on the evidence - news reporting, books, state and federal agencies (i.e., BLS, IRS, etc.) and professional economist themselves - that unless Congress and the corporate elites (captain's of industry) work toward real solutions to strengthen the middle-class and pay people a living wage, this country will be in deeper trouble in the near future. Moreover, unless someone with a level head a foresight is able to tread the waters of foreign policy without making undue waves, this country could very well be headed on a glide path to another war.

Thus, IMHO, Mitt Romney is not that guy. But people have to come to their own conclusion based not on misleading or distorted information, but the truth. PW400 has provided much of it. It's up to the people to figure out the rest.

You do know Obama had two years to do anything he wanted.. and he chose to lie and take our freedoms with Obamacare...

His record is a disaster... he doesnt deserve 4 more days in office.
 
What flim-flam. Just what would you have American companies spend their "hoards of cash" on? Building new plants they don't need? Hiring people they don't need? Buying equipment they don't need? What?? Tell us.

So, what you're really saying is our economy is just fine. Corporations don't need to hire anyone else, small businesses can just get bent and to hell with the poor or those who have been impacted by all these natural disaster or who have lost their jobs due moreso to their greed and negligence than to spend their money to help preserve this country's properity? Sounds to me you're just fine with all the outsourcing that has taken place over the years, and all the spending to maintain the Industrial Military Complex, and all the tax shelters that have been enacted that do more to make the rich richer and the poor poorer.

Is that really what you're saying?
 
You do know Obama had two years to do anything he wanted.. and he chose to lie and take our freedoms with Obamacare...

His record is a disaster... he doesnt deserve 4 more days in office.

Come on, man. You can't be serious here?

Let me say it as plainly as I can - NO ONE HAS TAKEN AWAY YOUR FREEDOM!

You can still go anywhere you want in this country WITHOUT being asked for your papers (that is, unless you're of Hispanic descent and live in AZ, AL or any other state that has hastily ushered in immigration reform measures).

You can still buy anything you want within legal limits.

You can still exercise your right to bear arms, worship as you please, vote provided you're of the legal age limit, hold public office provided you're either a U.S. citizen or naturalized.

Your freedom has not been treaded upon...at least no more now than they were under the last President. In fact, you're in better shape under Obama than you were under GW Bush (re: warrantly cellphone wiretaps anyone?). I mean, for all the crying that's taking place over the individual mandate in ObamaCare, you folks completely and utterly ignore that your GOP heros from Newt Gingrich to Romney himself lamented the exact same thing either in their own books OR as heads of state. In fact, you completely ignore the fact that the individual mandate was a Republican idea based on...

....wait for it...

TAKING PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR YOUR OWN HEALTH CARE!

Here's the kicker - you folks complain and complain and complain about folks among the poor and the middle-class having an "entitlement mentality" yet when the President of the United States enacts legislation that directs the nation's citizens to do just that, you bitch about it! What freakin' sense does that make?
 
So, what you're really saying is our economy is just fine. Corporations don't need to hire anyone else, small businesses can just get bent and to hell with the poor or those who have been impacted by all these natural disaster or who have lost their jobs due moreso to their greed and negligence than to spend their money to help preserve this country's properity? Sounds to me you're just fine with all the outsourcing that has taken place over the years, and all the spending to maintain the Industrial Military Complex, and all the tax shelters that have been enacted that do more to make the rich richer and the poor poorer.

Is that really what you're saying?

You got that diatribe from my saying:

What flim-flam. Just what would you have American companies spend their "hoards of cash" on? Building new plants they don't need? Hiring people they don't need? Buying equipment they don't need? What?? Tell us.

Our economy isn't "just fine." I never said that. I never said any of that **** you've posted. If you want to have an intelligent discussion about what you think big business / small business should spend their money on that they don't need to spend? I'm your gal. If not, then find another poster to harangue.
 
Apparently, you are about to be smoked.

Your argument is bogus. It is not bogus because I say so. It is bogus because you do not understand how our nation's fiscal policies decisions have been made over the course of the previous 50+ years. Your education begins here, however.

The facts are crystal clear. The NUMBER #1 cost factor to this country for decades, has been the rising cost of its national health care. The NUMBER #1 contributing factor to the increase in our nation's Debt and Deficit, has been the rising cost of this nation's health care. The very fact that you don't yet understand this, speaks volumes about your ability to reply on the merits, instead of replying off the cuff based on what you have watched on TELEVISION as opposed to what you have actually READ in an Economic Journal and/or an official Government document related to the current and project cost expenditures that this nation has faced in previous decades and WILL face in future decades, if we do not get our house in order relative to the massive burden that national health care costs have placed on the American Tax payer. That's the introduction to your re-education on the subject.

You need to educate yourself on the history, cost containment factors, relevant drivers and expenditures of our health care system, before you can even dream of having an argument to make that this President did the wrong thing by focusing on National Health Care as a method for ensuring long term economic stability for the United States of America. You have sat an listened to a man (Mitt Romney) during the debates who has no ability to think or act strategically and therefore, he had no idea what he was saying when he called himself schooling the President on why he would spent time working on health legislation, while at the same time dealing with TARP I, TARP II and Stimulus. President Obama, was smart to deal with Health Care up front, because he knew that UNLESS this nation gets its health care costs under control, there will be NO ECONOMIC FUTURE worth debating over in the decades to come, as the entire nation will be forced into a state of hyper inflation from which it would never recover.

Now, let's get down to some brass on Health Care and YOUR education about it.

Health care costs in the United States soared past $2.5 trillion dollars in 2010. In 1980, those same costs were a whopping $256 billion. That is a multiple of 10, just in case you need help with the math. But, that's not the destructive component. The real destructive component to all of this bloated health care expenditure, is the fact that current rates of growth in health care costs will EXCEED OUR NATIONAL INCOME at the current pace. Now, just stop being so Hyper-Political and THINK about what that means!

We are a nation that was headed down the path of spending more on just health care, than what our nation drives in aggregate annual income. That is totally UNSUSTAINABLE and it would have bankrupted our entire country. When you couple that with the fact that our country has been either in Recession or fighting from entering Recession over the past 12 years, and the lower incomes that are a direct result of constantly battling Recessionary pressures, that places an enormous burden on the average citizen, struggling to make current health care payments that continue to skyrocket and have skyrocketed over the past several DECADES.

97% of employers have seen an increase in health care costs SINCE 2002. This was not an Obama caused phenomena as Right Wing Nut politicians have lied about. Health Care costs rose the MOST under Bush 43 - that's a fact. Because the nation is growing older and more people are reaching the age where they become eligible for Medicare and Medicaid, the public sector cost expenditures have risen as well, placing even more burden on Federal and State Budgets. As a nation, we spent more than 18% of our GDP on health care and that was back in 2002! Again, NOT a problem created by President Obama, as the Right Wing Lies have concluded.

In giving you this education MaggieD, and in order for you to understand the importance and the significance of what the President did by pushing for the Affordable Health Care Act as early as he possibly could during his first term in office, it is extremely important that you fully understand just HOW our nation spends its health care dollars.

According to Health Affairs, in 2012, The United States of America spent:

1% on Government Administration (Republican Myth Busted)
3% on Residential and Personal Care
3% on Direct Home Health Care
3% on Retail Products related to Health Care
5% on "Other" related Personal Health Care
5% on Nursing Home Care
6% on Net Cost of Health Insurance
6% on Health Insurance Investments
7% on Other Professional Services related to Health Care
10% on Retail Drug Prescriptions for Health Care
20% on Physician and Clinical Services for Health Care
31% on Hospital Care

Now, when you look at these numbers it does not take a rocket scientist to figure out that we are spending (as a nation) more than 51% on Physician, Clinical Services and Hospitals. Well, guess what MaggieD. Physician Costs, Clinical Services Costs and Hospital Costs was PRECISELY what the Affordable Health Care Act, is primary geared to deal with. Please READ about how it works and what it TARGETS, MaggieD:

HealthCare.gov


Now, what are the Drivers of Health Care Expenditures in the United States, MaggieD? Let's continue our education on the subject, shall we.

- New Drug Patents
- Clinical Drug Trials
- New Medical Equipment Certification Costs
- Administrative Costs
- Chronic Disease Costs

Chronics Diseases are estimated at being nearly 75% of the aggregate cost of national health care in this country, MaggieD. That's HUGE. That's one of those cost factors that I alluded to in my summary introduction to you back at the top of my reply. Anything that consumes 75% of your expenditures is ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO BE CONTINUALLY IGNORED! And, this is PART of what the new Affordable Health Care Acts is designed to tackle, MaggieD. Those are the facts - like it or not. We cannot continue to delude ourselves as a nation by pretending that Preventative Care Treatment is not something worth spending a LOT of time, energy and effort into making tremendously better than it is at present and THAT is also what the Affordable Health Care Act attempts to deal with, MaggieD.

Lastly, is the issue of Cost Containment. There are several factors here that I do not have the time to fully elaborate on, but some of the key issues that YOU need to educate yourself on are the following:

- Increased government oversight of insurer premiums, protocols and practices
- Increased competition among Health Insurance Providers AND Health Providers themselves
- The establishment of open-ended (Come As You Go) Health Care Exchanges
- Reforming the way payments are made when errors in treatment are detected and recognized
- Greater funding for CER (Comparative Effectiveness Research)
- Greater focus on a Patient Centric Model for Delivery of Care
- A more Enterprise Oriented approach to using Information Technology in Care Facilities


ALL of which were designed to be addressed by the Affordable Health Care Act.

Until you get your head around the fact that our economy WILL NOT SURVIVE on the current trajectory of national health care expenditures as such a massive component of our GDP, the sooner your real education on this subject will commence and the sooner you will understand what an amazingly important decision was made by this current President, to get the major ball rolling on solving our nation's Health Care COST Crisis.

We've been INCORRECTLY calling it a "Health Care Crisis," but the correct term is most definitely a Health Care COST Crisis and this President, nearly single handily, helped this country in future decades and generations to come and he has not NEARLY received anywhere near the level of credit for having done so, that the history books will one day proclaim.

THAT is what you have failed to properly understand about WHY this President spent the first half of his first term in office, dealing with Health Care. He was dealing with our Long-Term National Economy as a DIRECT result. The entire matter has been blown out of proportion by extremist on the Right, and twisted into proverbial knots as they lied about (and continue to lie about) what this President has actually done.

Now, you KNOW better.

Dude! You need to re-post this in the Health Care forum!!

Well Done!!! :applaud
 
The opening post appears to be a talking paper from Obama Inc Cut and Pasted on this forum. Indeed, many of the opening poster's posts appear to be from Obama inc
They "appear" that way to you because your world is filtered through right wing radio and television. You are being cited detailed facts and your only response that it "appears" to come from some place....
 
You got that diatribe from my saying:



Our economy isn't "just fine." I never said that. I never said any of that **** you've posted. If you want to have an intelligent discussion about what you think big business / small business should spend their money on that they don't need to spend? I'm your gal. If not, then find another poster to harangue.

You miss the larger argument here.

Corporations don't have a problem with their balance sheets. I think we both can agree with that. They now have a problem with consumer spending ("consumer confidence") whereas before (and by that I mean early in Obama's tenure - the first 2-years) the problem was a "lack of investor confidence". So, how do you get corporations to spend their money in a way that forsters economic growth? Sad to say, they're waiting on tax reform instead of doing the one thing that can get people pumping more money into the economy that would increase labor, that would spur changing inventory, that would lead to consumer demand - RAISE SALARIES!

People - consumers - don't wait to see what their tax liabilities will be befoe they go out and buy things. They look at their paychecks! And if they see there isn't enough money to buy things, they cut back as much as possible BEFORE THEY SAVE. This is the over-riding problem in our nation's economy today as things stand. Now, imagine what would happen if employers paid higher salaries WITHOUT waiting on tax reform (that's sure to come regardless of who wins the 2012 presidential election)? Imagine how more consumer spending would affect inventories? Imagine what corporations would do if demand couldn't keep up with supply? What do you believe manufacturers would do in that situation?

You think about it and get back to me when a real answer pops into your head instead of rhetorical talking points and pointless slander.
 
They "appear" that way to you because your world is filtered through right wing radio and television. You are being cited detailed facts and your only response that it "appears" to come from some place....

Well given your posts appear to be Soros Sponsored spam its not surprising you would be supporting another obvious Obama propaganda poster
 
You do know Obama had two years to do anything he wanted.. and he chose to lie and take our freedoms with Obamacare...

His record is a disaster... he doesnt deserve 4 more days in office.

Apparently, you missed both AdamT's and PW400's posts on the matter. But not to worry; PW400's well articulated post has been reposted for your reading pleasure (post #68 below).
 
Edited for boredom.

Blah, blah, blah. Let's see what you bring this time. Don't disappoint me! I really want you to bring it this time.


Sry, bud, but that post is just too overflowing with hack for me to really get into much detail.

The opening stanza that always comes before the failure to reply on the merits. I'll hold my breath just this one time, however.


You wrote another book that again doesn't cover anything new. I mean, heck, I can't even quote the whole thing to address it out of pity for the folks who are reading this thread for a laugh.

Not even a good diversion from the OP. Attacking the length of a post without attacking its substance is truly not an art form - but I'll let you go on thinking that it is.


Simply put, I spoke to the talking points, not the facts you mingled in there. The cherry picking of data presented can be a talking point. This is easily evidenced by simply stating the U3 went down to 7.8% without mentioning how many people dropped out of the workforce or mentioning how many jobs were added over the last 31 months without mentioning that the number doesn't even keep up with population increases.

Yeah, well - when you've looked at as many Employment Reports that I've looked at in my business of running a small fund, then I'll actually believe that your prose where you profess to understand the U3 data, carries some weight. Until then, just know that what you just mentioned is nothing more than a red herring wrapped in a non-sequitur, as there is absolutely nothing in the U3 segment that has the slightest to do with comparing national economic employment numbers.

Nice try - but you are going to have to do more homework to fool me with such filibustering blither.


It's also cute how you seem to think you are the only person creating threads here. Lumping threads together was referencing all threads, not just yours and we have covered these topics. The fact that you mock the discussion on this site doesn't speak well to the value of us bothering to reply to you.

I find it much more cute that you think you can push this line of non-sequitur reply past me as though it has any relevance whatsoever to the OP I posted. Claiming that I have lumped threads together is tantamount to you claiming that a peanut butter and jelly sandwich, attempts to lump peanut butter and jelly together into one sandwich. It is a ridiculous statement that has no relevance to anything posted inside this thread.

The OP is crystal clear. I wrote it. Get over it.

I contains precisely what I've said it contains and I have no intention of repeating myself again. Either respond to the substance contained within the post, or simply admit that you've been lied to for four (4) and brainwashed into believing the ridiculous, that somehow this President has generated a failed record, when nothing could be farther from the truth. His record, under the circumstanced outlined and detailed above in the OP, rather remarkable for anyone being intellectually honest about the matter. But, again, that does take some intellectual honesty to bring yourself to admit, now doesn't it?


The media has done a fine job of lauding the president's "accomplishments".

Really? Can you point me to thread or a link where somebody is talking about how the MSM has done a fabulous job of lauding the President's "accomplishments?"

Be very careful how you answer that question - because it is a trick question, designed to catch smart people like you - not telling the truth.


The problem you have there is that not everybody is fool enough to think they were all positives.

I think you and those who think like you, are having a really hard time coming to grips with that this thread is designed to accomplish. I've stated it outright now three (3) times, yet you seem to not have caught on. So, to explain it again, would mean that I define the purpose of this thread four (4) times, and I'm just not going to do that for you.

I'm not going to read for you.

The OP stands as being UN-addressed by you or anyone else in a direct fashion for that matter and the reason behind the thread is crystal clear and written in plain English for any intellectual honest person to consider - should they care to. Whether the do or not, is there business. I'm just making this thread available for the intellectual curious to ponder and juxtapose the reality of what this man has done in office thus far, against the words offered by those who hate him and have publicly stated that there four (4) year mission in life was to see to it that Obama, is a one term President.

That fact that you are STILL ignoring the overwhelming evidence that there were Congressional Members who spent the past four (4) years of their life trying to unseat this man, is staggering in and of itself. But, you go right ahead and continue the pretense. This OP will be right here to remind you, of just how wrong you've been.


We know of them. We have debated them.

Still missing the point of this thread - are you not? Whether you've "debated" them or not is hardly the point of why this OP exists. Amazing that you can't simply READ the reason for the existence of the OP, as opposed to making up your own reasons for why you think it exists.


By and large, I disagree with most of his choice of legislative focuses. From the ACA he shoved down the throats of the American public to Lily Ledbetter Right to Sue act, we are aware of them.

Hmmmm. So, you disagreed with the President? Now, we are getting somewhere (hopefully).

Since when did your disagreement with the President on Lily Ledbetter, for example, all of a sudden translate into Obama's entire Presidency has failed? Because, is you support the statements that other Republican Political Operatives have been intentionally dropping into ever media encounter they can, that "Obama is a failed President," then you have to have a reason for making such a statement.

Now, how many people disagree with you on the "legislative focus" that you use to attack the President? How many of those people classify what he did as a genuine success and something that was important to their lives as Americans? How many of those people disagree with your assessment that the President has failed and how many of them would read the OP and conclude as I conclude, that under the circumstances that this President was faced with upon taking office, that his accomplishments are nothing short of historic and positive for the country?

You see - your opinion does not alter history, when it comes to whether or not a piece of legislation was successful or not. What determines that are the facts. And, the facts don't agree with your opinion.

Now, I fully understand that you don't like that logic, but that's sound logic nonetheless. Either Lily Ledbetter helped somebody and people agree, which they do, then who are you to conclude that in summation, that Obama's Presidency is a failure, merely because you don't agree with the legislation?

THAT is why the OP exists. To make the clear distinction between Republican Opinion and Historical Fact.

Got it? Now, let's move on.



In the next few chapters of your book, you talk about the value of personal opinion and then proceed to claim ignorance makes folks disagree with you.

Well, whenever you dare quote me, you had better provide a link to my exact words in proper context. So, I'll give you an opportunity to explain yourself using my words, as this last sentence of yours make no sense whatsoever and I don't dare answer something that makes no sense. So, go right ahead and link it all up for me, so I can see the context.


You even cite Maggie, who is a well-respected and incredibly intelligent poster here.

That's interesting. How can one develop the reputation of being "well respected" when the very first thing this "well respected" individual did was make a personal attack about someone being on drugs? How do you "respect" someone like that? Oh, don't answer - I know how. The same way you respect Mitt Romney, who lies to your face all day long, while you never dare to correct him on it - right? I'm so certain of it.


It's pretty entertaining to read these even if it is a baseless assumption. Turns out you aren't the smartest person around and it's quite possible and even highly likely that informed folks with high IQ scores will disagree with you and your quest to praise Obama and spin everything into a positive.

Reading you, is what I find entertaining. You just called MaggieD, into your reply, yet you completely missed the retort that she throw my way. You then failed to acknowledge the fact that she was summarily corrected and taken to task on the matter of Health Care as an Economic Imperative for out nation. You have even bothered to address any of the response sent her way, you just decided instead to pick and choose what you deem as being "well respected" as if somehow, she has no responsibility to remain civil.

I am ALWAYS bewildered by those who can dish it out, but can never take what they dish out in return. It is ok for MaggieD, to be rude - but if she gets taken to school, well watch out! Because doing that is a sign of "disrespecting MaggieD," and that just won't be tolerated.

Amazing. :shock:


In the continued incessant ramblings of that post, you give the usual talking points about Romney and 47% and flip-flopping and blah blah.

Would you stop and listen to yourself for just a moment. Do you hear yourself thinking when you type on your keyboard? Talking points, is what you just said. How can 47% be a talking point - can you explain that to anyone? How can something that a Candidate running for the Presidency of the United States of America, actually said with his own mouth, ever be a "talking point?"

You are making no sense, whatsoever.

Talking points are BY DEFINITION fabricated statements to move your opinion one way or another. Talking points are constructions that may or may not contain real hard facts. When Romney, put his foot down his own throat and slammed half the entire country, including Retired Veterans and Single Mothers working two (2) jobs just to make ends meet, that is NOT a mere "talking point" that is in fact, what comes directly from the man's heart and his character.

He could care LESS about the 47% and he proved it to you! Yet, you sit here and try to pass this off like its some minor point in the campaign? How dare you? How incredibly insensitive could you be? Do you know who those 47% represent? Those are Senior Citizens who CAN NO LONGER WORK are who are struggling to get by from day to day. The are former members of our Military, who SERVED THEIR COUNTRY WITH HONOR AND DISTINCTION, but who get slapped in the face by a Candidate running to capture his 51% of the vote and who give a rats tail about their SERVICE.

That, is who that 47% represent. They are Republicans, Democrats and Independents. Most importantly, they are United States Citizens. So, you can take that fake, phony, facade of carrying about "MaggieD," and hold up to the light so scrutiny as you marginalize the 47% right along with Mitt "Clueless" Romney.

Now that - yes. That one made me angry - because I served this country for eight (8) years and I KNOW that some of our Vets our suffering out there, unable to pay the bills and unable to find jobs. All because Neocons had to start playing Masters of the Universe, by setting this world on fire in 2001.

The things you do not understand about your Government are epic my dear friend.

When you actually get around to finding that education that instructs you properly on why we the West can't seem to buy a decent relationship in the Middle East, and why that is now spreading into North and East Africa, you will actually have done something very important in your life. The moment you understand WHY the shift from the former USSR as being the "bad guy" on the planet, had to be made to the Middle East, and how that relates to why were are where we are right now in our Foreign Policy hang-ups, will be the day you actually learn something of value.

I hope, for YOUR sake, that day comes soon.
 
Dude! You need to re-post this in the Health Care forum!!

Well Done!!! :applaud

Spoken by someone who doesn't seem to have any concept of actual healthcare costs and who pays them. Do you actually think that you pay the healthcare costs of the uninsured in TX? Why should the federal taxpayer pay for those expenses? Healthcare is a state expense and thus a state responsibility and putting the Federal Govt. in control of the healthcare system just gives a federal bureaucrat that helped created the 16 trillion dollar debt more control and power.

it is absolutely incredible how poorly informed Obama supporters really are and how they buy the lies of this Administration. When Obama took over the economy he implemented a stimulus program that by all standards failed and rather than address that failure he moved on to Healthcare and basically a govt. mandate. That showed poor leadership and poor priorities with the results today showing that.

What bothers the American people is this

22.7 million Americans unemployed/under employed/discouraged
5.6 trillion dollars added to the debt
48 million on food stamps
Over 100 million Americans in need of some form of Taxpayer assistance
1.3% GDP growth which is less than last year and last year was less than the year before
A foreign policy that is a disaster and a world that is not nearly as safe as what he inherited. He got Bin Laden and we lost an Ambassador and had embassies attacked
He implemented the Status of Forces Agreement negotiated by Bush and then blew the peace
He implemented a surge in Afghanistan that has created a stronger Taliban
He has done nothing to stem Iran's pursuit of a Nuclear Weapon and has thrown Israel under the bus.

I could go on but those issues are why Obama doesn't have a job approval rating over 50% and why he is now losing in the polls.

He is an incompetent, empty suit that has no concept of leadership where you can never delegate responsibility. Obama supporters that remain don't understand the concept and thus will continue to make excuses for his failures. The record listed is what will and should make Obama a one term President
 
Last edited:
You do know Obama had two years to do anything he wanted.. and he chose to lie and take our freedoms with Obamacare...

His record is a disaster... he doesnt deserve 4 more days in office.

Obama without a teleprompter is like a puppet without its strings.
 
Back
Top Bottom