• 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!

The Horrible Truth about Barack Obama's Presidency

ultmd said:
What you say means nothing....to me or to any other objective, rational person. You're a right winger who spews talk-radio styled fake news "facts"; so I don't care what you THINK is true. What you can prove is all that matters. And this thread has demonstrated that your point of view is based almost entirely upon "facts" that you can't back up, and the unsupported OPINIONS of other right wingers that have been discredited by me and others.



Either that (i.e. emotions and ignorance borne of 25 years of talk-radio/FoxNews styled "alternative" news)....or just malevolence and dishonesty. Those are pretty much the only objective possibilities, and I was giving you the benefit of the doubt by saying that you are the former (i.e. just one of those emotional conservatives who has been brainwashed), rather than an example of the latter. It's getting harder and harder to differentiate between emotional conservatives and malevolent conservatives these days. But make no mistake, you are one of the two.



Examine...with what? Unlike you ideologues, I'm open to FACTS which contradict my existing views and biases. But, like most ideologues, your problem is that you want your OPINIONS and the OPINIONS of other right wingers, to be accepted as "facts" and given equal weight in comparison to REAL FACTS being offered by the other side. Sorry, but that only works among other fake news types. Your arguments are not fact-based. They are opinion based. That much has been proven, over and over again in this thread.



And you are STILL talking about the Starbucks thread. Look, you lied...got caught and corrected....and now you're doubling down on your original lie. People who double down on lies are called liars.



Silly comment. The difference between you and me is that I allow the FACTS to shape my biases and opinions. You, like most ideologues, SELECT your "facts" in order to reaffirm your existing biases and opinions. So you and I are not equals in that regard. You're probably a strong Trump supporter, right?



Typical empty rhetoric from a right winger. Of course, at this point, I think you and I both KNOW that I can back up (and when challenged, already have backed up) every argument I've expressed in this thread, while you've offered nothing but unsupported opinions and canned, right wing talking points. So again, you and I are not simply opposites sides of a coin. We are not equals. As Karl Rove once aptly put it when describing (in a private conversation) the difference between his party and the rest of America, I represent the "reality-based community", while you represent the "alternative reality community".
Click to expand...

Egads, are you back on this again? You should really get help. BTW, your ENTIRE argument is not based on a fact but on a supposition, that being that the manager of the Starbucks acted out of racial motives. You can surmise that if you like but it has nowhere been proven despite your claims. You also do a lot of bloviating about me personally, things which, again, are not facts but just the product of your fevered imagination. You do quite a bit of all the things you accuse others of. You're a hypocrite but, worse than that, a loudmouthed, self important one. No doubt you'll be back to write another novel replete with all sorts of "facts" about me to bolster your blabbering.
 
Among historians, Obama is currently ranked 11th. Trump is ranked 44th (which is generous, IMO) and Bush is 32nd (way too generous, IMO).

That's from the aggregate score.

Because Republicans have so few accomplishments, and so much corruption and failure, one of the few things they can try to do is drag other people down to their level.

No one with an ounce of common sense will take them seriously.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_rankings_of_presidents_of_the_United_States
 
late said:
Among historians, Obama is currently ranked 11th. Trump is ranked 44th (which is generous, IMO) and Bush is 32nd (way too generous, IMO).

That's from the aggregate score.

Because Republicans have so few accomplishments, and so much corruption and failure, one of the few things they can try to do is drag other people down to their level.

No one with an ounce of common sense will take them seriously.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_rankings_of_presidents_of_the_United_States
Click to expand...

Hilarious. Obama was an unmitigated disaster. He's right down there with W and Carter.
 
<alt>doxygen said:
When someone starts out a tread by providing a link to a blog called "danfromsquirrelhill" as a reference, you know it's going to be worth reading what follows.
Click to expand...

OMG yes, I want to read just what Dan...had to say. I mean when a man is a liberal, black, socialist/communist Kenyan Muslim,
inherited a completely broken economy directly caused by the greed and avarice of the right's rent-seeking, risk-your-money wall street America's

real proud and fabulously wealthy socialists, then I mean there is no way he.....

didn't rebuild the auto industry, that Bush II started.....
didn't quadruple the drone war
didn't go after ISIS did more than Trump ever did, just basking like the preening little boy when he falsely takes credit.
didn't go after the right's fair-haired boys called...fraudulent bankers.
didn't restore the value of equities (paper) so the investor class could clean up and at Bush II's lower tax rates too.
didn't continue both wars he inherited.
didn't finally get America almost completely out of Iraq.
didn't create over 10 million jobs with GDP growth between 2 and 3% yearly.
didn't deal with a completely partisan and intransigent congress that gave him zero support for 8 years.
...and with dignity and class.

Be as cheaply partisan and ignorant as you wish but trust me and in uncertain terms, B. Obama will go down
as one of the best presidents and if he had an R after his name, would be practically a god.
 
Unitedwestand13 said:
question: do you consider calvin coolidge to be a great president?
Click to expand...

Great? I wouldn't say great but certainly not disastrous and surely unappreciated. A very good man. BTW, evaluations of presidents change with the times. Who may have been considered the better presidents 50 years ago are now ranked lower. The further we get from small government and move toward all encompassing government, the more our ratings of the earlier presidents will suffer.
 
Unitedwestand13 said:
question: do you consider calvin coolidge to be a great president?
Click to expand...

I might, I'd have to research some more but as long as you threw that out there, here is a little perspective on the real conservatism
no longer found in Wash., these days. (or since Reagan)

Coolidge a repub VP elected VP on a Harding/Coolidge ticket and after actual outlandish corruption of [his] own admin. and Harding's death
actuality appt. a special prosecutor to go after [his] own previous admin. Square that one with today. There were payoffs and convictions.

Although Coolidge had received a great deal of credit for the prosperity of the 1920s, he recognized that he bore some responsibility for the
severe economic downturn. He did however cut taxes and actually reduced federal spending unlike today's faux conservatives [sic] who borrow it instead.

He admitted to friends that he had spent his presidency avoiding the big problems. Coolidge died of a heart attack at the age of 60 at his
Northampton home on January 5, 1933. Much better than W or Trump.
 
Pedestrian said:
Any that I can believe. As Sgt. Joe Friday would say...just the facts. Make your case.
Click to expand...

Iran deal...pallets of cash.
Misusing the IRS against political opponents. (Yea, I know it didn't happen, except it did)
Surveillance of reporter James Rosen. (another abuse of power)
F&F. Border agent killed. Holder lied to Congress
Lying repeatedly about Obamacare with the famous "If you like your plan..." comment. Gruber told us what the strategy was.
Stirring up racial antipathy in Ferguson by taking up for criminal Michael Brown like he was some national hero. That indirectly fueled the growth of BLM with its associated problems.
Trading 5 top terrorists for deserter Bergdahl and not telling Congress until it was too late to be stopped.
Russian "reset"
Saying he had no power to write the Dreamer law into existence ("I'm not a king.") and then doing it anyway.
Letting ISIS fester for 3 years while it grew, took territory and murdered people across the ME. ("They're the JV.")
Failure to arm the Kurds for years and then only indirectly. (Other presidents failed here, too)
Drawing a red line in Ukraine, doing nothing and letting Putin look statesman-like.
Helping to destabilize Libya which led directly to Benghazi. (As Hill chirped, "We came, we saw, he died."....chuckle, chuckle)
Treated Israel like an adversary.
$500 million to Solyndra
Did nothing about the Black Panther Philadelphia voter intimidation.
Describing Ft. Hood as "workplace violence".
Failing to address sanctuary cities
Commutes sentence of traitor Chelsea Manning
Changing the rules on unmasking Americans as he left office in order to help the investigation of Trump



That's just off the top of my head. I'm sure there's more.
 
Last edited:
veritas1 said:
Great? I wouldn't say great but certainly not disastrous and surely unappreciated. A very good man. BTW, evaluations of presidents change with the times. Who may have been considered the better presidents 50 years ago are now ranked lower. The further we get from small government and move toward all encompassing government, the more our ratings of the earlier presidents will suffer.
Click to expand...

Well one can think what one wants but if Obama was a disaster, then lets take a look at the score sheet.....

Nixon, Reagan, Bush I, Bush II were all disasters too and Trump is...already a disaster.
 
Pedestrian said:
I might, I'd have to research some more but as long as you threw that out there, here is a little perspective on the real conservatism
no longer found in Wash., these days. (or since Reagan)

Coolidge a repub VP elected VP on a Harding/Coolidge ticket and after actual outlandish corruption of [his] own admin. and Harding's death
actuality appt. a special prosecutor to go after [his] own previous admin. Square that one with today. There were payoffs and convictions.

Although Coolidge had received a great deal of credit for the prosperity of the 1920s, he recognized that he bore some responsibility for the
severe economic downturn. He did however cut taxes and actually reduced federal spending unlike today's faux conservatives [sic] who borrow it instead.

He admitted to friends that he had spent his presidency avoiding the big problems. Coolidge died of a heart attack at the age of 60 at his
Northampton home on January 5, 1933. Much better than W or Trump.
Click to expand...

too be honest i don't have a problem with coolidge on a personal level. he was ideologically consistent as a financial conservative.

coolidge is not known for any big displays of presidential accomplishments, but he did nothing wrong or criminal either. he is sort of middle of the pack, somewhere 20 and 29 in terms of ranking.

i simply disagreed with his veiw of government.
 
veritas1 said:
Pretty much all of them except the announcing of Bin Laden's demise.
Click to expand...

You see that's ad hominum. Or can you really not specify just how Obama was in your words...an unmitigated disaster ?
 
Pedestrian said:
Well one can think what one wants but if Obama was a disaster, then lets take a look at the score sheet.....

Nixon, Reagan, Bush I, Bush II were all disasters too and Trump is...already a disaster.
Click to expand...

Ok, let's take a look at the score sheet. I doubt anyone else will. So here it is.

Obama (D) - 8 yrs in office. Zero criminal indictments, zero convictions and zero prison sentences. So the next time somebody describes the Obama administration as "scandal free" they aren't speaking wishfully, they're simply telling the truth.
Bush, George W. (R) - 8 yrs in office. 16 criminal indictments. 16 convictions. 9 prison sentences.
Clinton (D) - 8 yrs in office. 2 criminal indictments. One conviction. One prison sentence. That's right nearly 8 yrs of investigations. Tens of millions spent and 30 yrs of claiming them the most corrupt ever and there was exactly one person convicted of a crime.
Bush, George H. W. (R) - 4 yrs in office. One indictment. One conviction. One prison sentence.
Reagan (R) - 8 yrs in office. 26 criminal indictments. 16 convictions. 8 prison sentences.
Carter (D) - 4 yrs in office. One indictment. Zero convictions and zero prison sentences.
Ford (R) - 4 yrs in office. One indictment and one conviction. One prison sentence.
Nixon (R) - 6 yrs in office. 76 criminal indictments. 55 convictions. 15 prison sentences.
Johnson (D) - 5 yrs in office. Zero indictments. Zero convictions. Zero prison sentences.
So, let’s see where that leaves us. In the last 53 years, Democrats have been in the Oval Office for 25 of those years, while Republicans held it for 28. In their 25 yrs in office Democrats had a total of three executive branch officials indicted with one conviction and one prison sentence. That's one whole executive branch official convicted of a crime in two and a half decades of Democrat leadership.
In the 28 yrs that Republicans have held office over the last 53 yrs they have had a total of (a drum roll would be more than appropriate), 120 criminal indictments of executive branch officials. 89 criminal convictions and 34 prison sentences handed down. That's more prison sentences than years in office since 1968 for Republicans. If you want to count articles of impeachment as indictments (they aren't really but we can count them as an action), both sides get one more. However, Clinton wasn't found guilty while Nixon resigned and was pardoned by Ford (and a pardon carries with it a legal admission of guilt on the part of the pardoned). So those only serve to make Republicans look even worse.
With everything going on with Trump and his people right now, it's a safe bet Republicans are gonna be padding their numbers a bit real soon.
So let's just go over the numbers one more time, shall we? 120 indictments for Republicans. 89 convictions, and 34 prison sentences. Those aren't "feelings" or "alternate facts." Those are simply the stats by the numbers. Republicans are, and have been for my entire lifetime, the most criminally corrupt party to hold the office of the presidency.

And it looks to me like Trump's going to be upping their numbers relatively soon. But yeah Trumpsters are right, Obama was the worst...
 
Pedestrian said:
Well one can think what one wants but if Obama was a disaster, then lets take a look at the score sheet.....

Nixon, Reagan, Bush I, Bush II were all disasters too and Trump is...already a disaster.
Click to expand...

I don't think Nixon was a disaster except in how he ended. He was actually much more progressive than any liberals give him credit for. Reagan had ups and downs but one of the better presidents we've had. Bush I, not so hot but only one term. Bush II, disaster because of idiocy of Iraq. Trump...yet to be seen. Take away all of the political BS and posturing and he hasn't done badly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom