The Horrible Truth about Barack Obama's Presidency

[Shiftman]

Considerably more popular than Trump is or will likely ever be.....)

 

[Fearandloathing]

Truth of the matter is -- if Obama is as horrible as your partisan heart so wants to believe -- history will deem it so, people will pretend they never supported him, the party in general will try their hardest to distance from anything associated with Obama --

Now, I am trying to remember if there is an example of a former president ever being treated that way...hmmmmmmmm, oh yea Buuuuussssshhhhhhh!!!

Nixon

 

[poweRob]

It's a shame that the first US African-American President is also by every objective standard one of the worst.

Do you have any clue as to what "objective" even means?

BWWWWAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAaaaaa... #1

Stefan Molyneux gives an outstanding video presentation, link below, his source information links are below that.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VsWzfhvvOgg

On January 20, 2009, President Barack Obama took office on a platform of "hope" and "change" for the United States of America. As Obama has completed his final day as President of the United States, Stefan Molyneux reviews his accomplishments, failures and legacy in the annals of American history.



Sources

https://danfromsquirrelhill.wordpress.com/2013/08/15/obama-252/

Barack Obama?s Economy: The Ugly Truth | National Review
America hits new record under Obama?s welfare economy: 95 million people NOT in the work force
Record 95,102,000 Americans Not in Labor Force; Number Grew 18% Since Obama Took Office in 2009
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2014/02/07/black-teen-unemployment-jumps-to-38/
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/03/05/is-the-unemployment-rate-lying-to-you/
http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-bl...came-most-fiscally-irresponsible-president-in
http://conservativerevival.com/late...debt-obama-accumulated-during-his-presidency/
http://www.macleans.ca/culture/books/a-veteran-reporter-on-americas-forever-war/
http://www.forbes.com/sites/mikecollins/2015/07/14/the-big-bank-bailout/#6170d6e83723
http://www.newsmax.com/Finance/DavidStockman/obama-jobs-lies-economy/2015/07/03/id/653391/
http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2013/07/28/americans-poverty-no-work/2594203/
http://conservativetribune.com/obama-makes-astonishing-race/
http://hotair.com/archives/2015/12/17/survey-under-obama-race-relations-in-the-us-reach-20-year-low/
https://www.city-journal.org/html/obamas-biggest-failure-14638.html
http://townhall.com/columnists/john...have-gotten-worse-under-barack-obama-n2192725
Record 95,102,000 Americans Not in Labor Force; Number Grew 18% Since Obama Took Office in 2009

Breitbart
conservativetribune
hotair
townhall
cnsnews
nationalreview
opinion pieces and blogs...

BWWWWAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAaaaaa... #2

 

[Shiftman]

I bet I could find twice as many blogs etc. that rate Obama much better; I am on record as one of his toughest critics. Having said that, what it says it that the United States ideological war is alive and sick, and here, a year and a half after Trump's election you are all so insecure you have to constantly re-assert the OPINION Obama was bad.

In ONE area, he reigns so far over Trump he's in ****ing orbit....and that's class. He is a gentleman who treats others with respect and for the most part was honest. He also, in my opinion made decisions based on what he believed would be the best for his country at the time.

Trump is a rude fart at the dinner table, a cruel bully of a man whose decisions are ALL made on what is best for Trump.

My suggestion to the Trump and/or anti-Obama people; start paying attention. He's robbing you blind and laughing at you

Trump is simply a low class individual. Always has been and likely always will be. My guess is that 95% of these devout Trump supporters wouldnt want Trump near their wives, sisters and daughters. I have always been amazed at how weak and insecure folks gravitate to people with wealth and celebrity.

Trump is about as classy as Kim Kardashian is talented. Both seem to attract the same type of fans.

 

[Shiftman]

Do you have any clue as to what "objective" even means?

BWWWWAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAaaaaa... #1



Breitbart
conservativetribune
hotair
townhall
cnsnews
nationalreview
opinion pieces and blogs...

BWWWWAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAaaaaa... #2

You forgot Foxnews. A.K.A. TRUMPTV.

 

[biff_poindexter]

Nixon

Tell that to Trump and Roger Stone.

 

[itsforthekids]

Really, worse than Bush who left the economy in free fall, two unfinished wars and enormous budget deficit?

Score card:

Bill Clinton: left a good economy. no wars. budget surplus.

Bush: trashed the economy. two wars. huge deficit

Obama: left good economy. no wars. reduced deficits.

Trump: time will tell but deficit has already exploded.

You live in a fantasy land...

 

[Fearandloathing]

Tell that to Trump and Roger Stone.

You know what? I have no ****ing idea who is Roger Stone and don't care enough to wiki. It's 72 and sunny with lots and lots of bare skin and hijinx in an area where pot is pretty much legal. I cut my journalistic teeth on the Nixon era, and history is that, that which has happened and the longer ago it did the more attractive are bikinis ...have a good day

 

[ultmd]

What a load of horse dung. You simply say , "Oh, that never happened" and expect that's the last word on it. You're the worst sort of ideological drone. Hilarious.

And............as predicted, you STILL can't address any questions or provide any kind of objective proof in support of your arguments. As I stated previously, Obama is the only two-term president in over a century (since the 19th century) without a single legitimate moral or ethical scandal. That is a FACT, that you cannot refute with empty-headed "Obama's dirty linen" blatherings. Fast and Furious, Benghazi, IRS, AP News, Birtherism, Death Panels, Jade Helm, Solyndra, etc. etc.)..........ALL FAKE SCANDALS that were thoroughly discredited......often times after multiple republican-lead investigations. Heck, Behghazi was investigated by EIGHT different republican-lead witch hunts, and not ONE criminal offense (much less ethical or moral) was ever documented. Now....I realize that kind of hard TRUTH bothers people like you, but that's really your problem, not mine. Deal with it.

Philly Starbucks thread. Posts #798 & #800. A black conservative was asking you to tell him how he was deluded. You ran off. So, you either have a faulty memory or are simply dishonest.

Run? If by "run", you mean that I don't contribute 50 posts per day to this message board.....consider me a proud "runner". I don't post here daily....nor will I ever do so. That Starbucks thread ended a week ago (when last I was on this board), and is now burried 9 pages deep in the list of threads. So now, what's your excuse? You're running from questions and challenges in this very thread, remember? LOL.

:lamo, did I hurt your feelings when I spoke about "denial" (not delusion) in that Starbucks thread? I did search back and found that thread, and I'm going to cut you some slack because I'm pretty sure you don't understand your own confusion here, probably because your such an emotional poster.

In that thread, I argued that denial of (not delusions about) basic, everyday racism is rampant among whites with high levels of racial resentment in our society. That's a fact, and the two words are NOT synonyms. A person in "denial" is someone who recognizes a pathology, but CHOOSES to ignore it because doing so suits his personal/emotional interests. A "delusional" person is someone who cannot recognize pathology, so good/bad or right/wrong decisions are made entirely based upon personal/emotional interests.

So back to the white victimhood/entitlement issue in the starbucks thread. These "denialists" are people who can ALWAYS be counted on to turn every new report of racism against black or brown person.........into a screed of excuses, rationalizations and a lot of self-indulgent "white victimhood" whining. And that, too, is a fact. This board provides fairly regular examples of that phenomenon. Maccabee also responded by saying that he is black, to which I said "so am I....so what?". The obvious inference was that not everyone who makes excuses for white entitlement issues is a white person. Maccabee also said that I called him "delusional"...which was wrong. I never called him delusional (although he very well might be). "Denial" is NOT the same thing as "Delusional". You don't have to be white to make excuses for racism committed by white people. So I'm not sure what you, or Maccabee, thought you were getting at with your remarks....but what I do know is that they were reflective of fairly standard, simple-minded conservative thinking.

Hey....It is 100% ok to be a minority and a conservative. It's ok to be white and liberal. What is NOT ok, is using lies, fake facts and fact-free arguments in defense of a point of view because you KNOW the facts are against you. That's where you have consistently lost your credibility in these threads, veritas. And when you can no longer defend your fake-facts in these threads, you try mightily to change the subject....or you run. As you JUST DID with your last response to me. And you know it.

Honestly, I think it's interesting that you would even bring up that Starbucks thread, given that that is the thread where you literally ran from every single question or challenge I I (and others) presented to you. You posted an op/ed piece filled with unsubstantiated right wing drivel, and when asked (repeatedly) if you could back ANY of it up with objective FACTS...........you ran. And now you're accusing me of running?

Let's get back to the subject of this thread. The questions before you (posed by numerous posters) are if you can provide ANY objective facts and sources to back up ANY of your FoxNews-styled criticisms of the Obama legacy. Can you, or can you not?

Enough with the deflection and dodging. Either man up and post some sources, or we can just agree that you were purely FOS on this one, ok?

 

[veritas1]

And............as predicted, you STILL can't address any questions


I'm not wading through this verbal thicket. You might try getting your posts to be a little shorter than War & Peace if you want somebody to read them. Who cares when the other thread ended BTW? You were on it when asked that question and you refused to answer him. I was on it at the time, too. You keep blubbering about "facts" while completely ignoring every one that is presented to you. Your "facts" in the Starbucks case amounted to some observations from other customers. From that you deduced that the manager had acted due to racial antipathy. That is a completely unsubstantiated OPINION. Got that? Opinion.

 

[ultmd]

I'm not wading through this verbal thicket. You might try getting your posts to be a little shorter than War & Peace if you want somebody to read them. Who cares when the other thread ended BTW? You were on it when asked that question and you refused to answer him. I was on it at the time, too. You keep blubbering about "facts" while completely ignoring every one that is presented to you. Your "facts" in the Starbucks case amounted to some observations from other customers. From that you deduced that the manager had acted due to racial antipathy. That is a completely unsubstantiated OPINION. Got that? Opinion.

So now you aren't going to read my "verbal thicket", huh?

:lamo Of course you aren't.

If I was getting my hind-quarters handed to me, as you are, I might say something like that, too.

Well....not really. But I'm not like you. I don't say things I can't back up, and then cry "victim" because I can't defend myself (and my views) any longer.

If you don't want to read it, don't. I realize that a thoughtful, detailed written argument is like kryptonite to most right wing ideologues. So let's just agree that you're "dodging" me, rather than "running from me", ok? That should make you feel better, right?

:lamo

And, btw..........don't hijack this thread.

If you want to hash out the details of the Starbucks thread, do back and restart it.

 

[veritas1]

So now you aren't going to read my "verbal thicket", huh?

:lamo Of course you aren't.

If I was getting my hind-quarters handed to me, as you are, I might say something like that, too.

Well....not really. But I'm not like you. I don't say things I can't back up, and then cry "victim" because I can't defend myself (and my views) any longer.

If you don't want to read it, don't. I realize that a thoughtful, detailed written argument is like kryptonite to most right wing ideologues. So let's just agree that you're "dodging" me, rather than "running from me", ok? That should make you feel better, right?

:lamo

And, btw..........don't hijack this thread.

If you want to hash out the details of the Starbucks thread, do back and restart it.

I don't want to rehash anything. I know the difference between facts and opinions. Most everything you tried to use to pin a racial motive on the manager was subjective. It was your interpretation of the event. Just because some blacks, perhaps a lot of them, face discrimination, doesn't mean they all do at all times. There is such a thing as enforcing the rules because they are the rules or the law because it's the law without regard to race, gender or anything else.

 

[Casca XV]

:lamo:lamo:lamo:lamo:lamo

To the OP:

You have GOT to be joking with this, if you think that:

1. posting a youtube "analysis" of the Obama economic and policy legacy by an "expert" like Stefan Molyneux (who is nothing more than a right wing blogger, whose economic "credentials" include studying music theater before ultimately getting a degree in History)...

and...

2. posting a series of links to obscure right wing OP/EDS from well-known, LUNATIC right wing/alt-right, fake news blogs (i.e. Twisted News, Conservative Tribune, Conservative Revival, Breitbart, Townhall, HotAir, NewsMax, CNS News, etc.)...

....."proved" anything other than your own lack of intellectual bonafides.

The simple FACT of the matter is that most leading economists (conservative, moderate and liberal) give great credit to Obama for the job his administration did to save the U.S. (and, indeed, world) economy. And his record of sustained economic growth was the longest in the history of recorded macroeconomics. We could go on and on, but I doubt that people who get their "facts" from the likes of Breitbart and Twisted News, etc......are interested (not to mention "capable") of a substantive discussion.

Even worse, from the perspective of how presidential historians and political scientists review Obama's legacy.....the FACT is that they have consistently ranked the former president (Obama) in the 1st or 2nd quartile on the all-time POTUS lists. The last three ranking (from 2015, 2017 and 2018) have shown a decidedly upward trend, from #18, to #12, to #08.

Only the the alternative world of anti-intellectual fake news and "liberal media/academia conspiracies" do opinions such as those expressed in most of the links you posted predominate.

Name a none Leftist economists who has a high opinion of Obama?

Name the Obama policy that improved the economy?

The average GDP under Obama was 1.5%, he had it down to 1.2% when President Trump took office. Within 2 months Trump had it up to over 3% where it has averaged since.

 

[Casca XV]

Another fact-free, emotional right wing belief, being presented (by a right winger, of course) as an objective argument. Trump acolytes are entitled to express their own opinions, must like rational, intellectually honest, real Americans.




LOL, I doubt that....unless you were on one of your alt-right/nationalist message board, perhaps.

post #1 I give dozens of facts and a list of source's.

 

[Puigb]

Ike was the last good Republican president.

If I was going to write a book about Reagan, it would be titled 'The 1,001 Screwups of Ronald Reagan'.

Fixed...

 

[Puigb]

One thing that will benefit Obama's legacy in the future is having his presidency wedged in-between two absolutely terrible Republican presidencies (Bush and Trump). People will look back and say "gee, maybe he wasn't the greatest, but he looks damn good compared to his predecessor and his successor".

 

[FreeWits]

It's a shame that the first US African-American President is also by every objective standard one of the worst.

Stefan Molyneux gives an outstanding video presentation, link below, his source information links are below that.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VsWzfhvvOgg

On January 20, 2009, President Barack Obama took office on a platform of "hope" and "change" for the United States of America. As Obama has completed his final day as President of the United States, Stefan Molyneux reviews his accomplishments, failures and legacy in the annals of American history.

1) Stefan Molyneux isn't even trying to review Obama's accomplishments, he's just trying to criticize Obama for what he views as Obama's negatives. So when you say SM is reviewing Obama's accomplishments, you are misrepresenting what the video is about.

2) You claim Obama is objectively one of the worst Presidents. This is not objective. It's almost entirely subjective.

3) I'm not going to watch an hour of this crap. I watched about 15 minutes and it was as terrible as most of Molyneaux's stuff is. If you want to list out every argument, I'd be much more willing to break each point down.

4) You really have to be careful with Stefan Molyneaux. I consider him to be a con artist. Go and look through all the times Stefan Molyneaux stated the economy was going to crash. He literally stated the economy was going to crash every year from the start of the recovery until the present, and we've had nothing but growth every year. But oh, he'll bring gold peddlers on to sell you some gold to protect your wealth from the impending economic collapse that never comes. But point out how wrong he has been and this scam he is operating and he will block you rather than deal with the actual argument. Stefan Molyneaux is no form of credible authority. Take a look at this:

The start of the recovery can be deemed to be 2010 (GDP), with growth every year until the present: https://www.statista.com/statistics/188165/annual-gdp-growth-of-the-united-states-since-1990/

2010 Stefan Molyneaux economic crash prediction: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GzazGIUV8qw

2011: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VGuZhBSoWI0

2012: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_NZJ_vTMBYI

2013: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bYkl3XlEneA

2014: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=15-aBo_q0Xo

2015: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3zoDuMpJ8I4

2016: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gO6vC5otfm4

2017: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Qj2V1Y8ooM

2018: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vDnvugZ8YVc

I always say that if you predict an economic crash coming long enough you'll be right eventually, but it would be hard to be as wrong as Stefan Molyneaux has been on the economy. I used to listen to him on some stuff pertaining to culture, but I just can't justify supporting him, nor do I want to listen to him anymore, when he has been so wrong. And furthermore, I've come to the conclusion that he's fearmongering for money given the type of guests he has on his show. This is what propaganda really is (literally). I'm not being hyperbolic he. I hate the person he is for what he does to people. I personally think he knows what he is doing. But regardless of whether this is nefarious or not, we can see his predictions and see that he is objectively wrong over and over. And I don't mean objective in the way you use the term, I mean in the actual way where you can define parameters of what it means to have an economic collapse and see that we have had nothing but growth for about 8 years now while Molyneaux has predicted the exact opposite for the same amount of time.

 

[Sampson Simpson]

Too damn funny. All of Obama's dirty linen was fake news but Russian collusion is real. You can't make this crap up. Talking about race and extreme ideology, you called a black conservative poster in here deluded. He asked you to elaborate and you ran away.

****ing christ, you need to work on your trolling, this is just pathetic

 

[SonOfDaedalus]

You live in a fantasy land...

Let me ask you a basic factual question. Did the U.S. experience the longest period of job growth in U.S. history under Obama?

 

[jnug]

All of the people that take the office of President have flaws. They are all people and are as such all flawed. Our problem is that for decades now each of them has exhibited less of the qualities that are needed to be an effective President to the point where the last three were IMO the worst three of the modern era. Donald Trump exhibits so little in the way of the qualities needed for the job that he does not even do a good job of masquerading as the President.

Obama got handed a bad hand from Bush Jr. No question. Some of that he handled well, some not so much. Had he gotten out after 1 term, we might have considered his the greatest 1 term presidency in history. For all the guff he takes about the ACA and for all the effort made to kill it, it won't die after all just for example. WILL IT? The reason it won't die is because while flawed and incomplete, it was directionally correct and the GOP can scream and squawk all they want, the reason it has not died in the face of all these efforts to kill it is because it was directionally correct and the American People know it. Not the 30% of the Electorate that put Bozo the clown in office, but the rest.

But Obama did not have qualities that would have allowed him to fight though what he faced in the Congress without resorting to excessive Executive Order and then went on to run for a second term without the will to carry his party even into the House behind him, leaving him with 6 years in a row without the political support of the House. If you are going to run and I don't care who you are including the sitting President, you have to run taking all the variables into consideration and you have to run with a will that not just leaves you the position but the means to do something with the position. Obama did not have that and rightfully belongs bookended between Bush Jr and idiot Trump in this continual decline of the people occupying the Presidency in this country.

The real problem is I don't know we get worse than the current idiot in the WH if this decline is to continue. Is Donald Duck next, Goofy.....?

 

[itsforthekids]

Let me ask you a basic factual question. Did the U.S. experience the longest period of job growth in U.S. history under Obama?

No. In fact, the jobs which were "created" were mainly minimum wage pay type jobs and wages actually decreased under barry. And furthermore, barrycare cost American's jobs and income ability because of the idiotic rule about the 30 hour work week (I know many people who are held to 29 hours weekly), and the rule for mandatory health benefits for a company with more than 50 employees (regressive in that it causes job growth stagnation.)
barry was "clean and articulate", but was basically a guy who could read excellently from the teleprompter, but sounded like a teenage kid when speaking without it. Lot's of um, ah, um.... not to mention how long winded he was when answering any question. I started to think that he was paid by the word. He was an empty suit.

 

[SonOfDaedalus]

No. In fact, the jobs which were "created" were mainly minimum wage pay type jobs and wages actually decreased under barry.

Wrong. The answer is yes. We experienced the longest consecutive streak of job growth in American history. That's a fact. What you're trying to do is known as spin.

The U.S. is currently in the longest consistent job growth streak ever reported. The latest jobs report continued to show growth for the 76th month in a row and cited 227,000 new jobs in January alone. The last reported job loss was in September 2010.

When looking at business cycles and specifically the expansion periods following recessions, the current recovery (beginning June 2009) is now the fourth-longest in recent U.S. history.

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/us-enjoying-its-longest-lasting-streak-of-jobs-growth-2017-02-03

And your spin is devoid of any actual facts. Let me show you real facts.

It's sad that you are so partisan that you deny facts. The fact is that Obama took over an economy that experienced the biggest economic crisis since the Great Depression. The fact is when Obama left we had the longest period of job growth in American history. Those are facts. Your spin is without facts and easily disproven.

 

[SonOfDaedalus]

but was basically a guy who could read excellently from the teleprompter, but sounded like a teenage kid when speaking without it. Lot's of um, ah, um.... not to mention how long winded he was when answering any question. I started to think that he was paid by the word. He was an empty suit.

That's your view. Then there is reality. Any sensible person can see how distorted your perception is.

 

[itsforthekids]

Wrong. The answer is yes. We experienced the longest consecutive streak of job growth in American history. That's a fact. What you're trying to do is known as spin.



https://www.marketwatch.com/story/us-enjoying-its-longest-lasting-streak-of-jobs-growth-2017-02-03

And your spin is devoid of any actual facts. Let me show you real facts.

It's sad that you are so partisan that you deny facts. The fact is that Obama took over an economy that experienced the biggest economic crisis since the Great Depression. The fact is when Obama left we had the longest period of job growth in American history. Those are facts. Your spin is without facts and easily disproven.

He just happened to be in office. From where we were in 2008, due to decades of progressive "fair housing" projects, the economy couldn't help but go up...America also had record food stamp use, the lowest labor participation rate in history and a very low economic index outlook. He also added $10,000,000,000,000 to the debt....doubling it.

 

[SonOfDaedalus]

He just happened to be in office. From where we were in 2008, due to decades of progressive "fair housing" projects, the economy couldn't help but go up...America also had record food stamp use, the lowest labor participation rate in history and a very low economic index outlook. He also added $10,000,000,000,000 to the debt....doubling it.

Has the labor participation rate changed under Trump? No, but suddenly conservatives don't mention the labor participation rate anymore.
Has Trump reduced the debt? No, he actually increased the deficit.

Obama decreased our yearly deficits. If you understand basic math you understand that our debt will increase every year we have a deficit. But Obama reduced that deficit.

Trump in one year has increased it. Trump had no economy in crisis to stimulate.

And the reason the economy collapsed had more to do with a lack of regulations in the banking and lending sector. It's no different than the junk bond crash in 1989. Wall Street bankers took high-risk corporate debt and bundled them to average out the risk. How is that different from Wall Street bankers doing the same with mortgages? Wall Street bankers got rich with both schemes and then bailed with everything fell apart. Your attempts to blame liberals for the lack of regulations conservatives promoted is ridiculous.

Anyway, I've spent enough time totally demolishing your nonsensical points.

Obama inherited a disaster of an economy from a Republican administration. He left with the longest period of job growth in American history. Yet, people like you refuse to give him credit because you're such partisan hacks.