17
   

Obama's done a lot, but gets little credit for it; why?

 
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Sat 24 Jul, 2010 07:18 am
@A Lone Voice,
A Lone Voice wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:


I'll tell ya right now - the Dems will hold both houses of Congress after the election, and Obama will be re-elected in 2012. You can take both of those to the bank. Cycloptichorn


Crap. My bank failed, one of 95 so far this year...

I hope you aren't going to rely on the government to protect your money ALV.

Thank God for FDR and the liberals.. eh?
A Lone Voice
 
  0  
Reply Sat 24 Jul, 2010 07:27 pm
@parados,
Actually, since this post, we're up to over 100 banks failing this year.

Won't it be great when the FDIC pays out even more taxpayer money to make up the losses? Heck, just add it to Obama's tab. It's only up to what, $1.47 trillion this year?

xris
 
  2  
Reply Sun 25 Jul, 2010 04:24 am
@A Lone Voice,
The bank failures was because of the last admins mistakes but you fail to recognise that fact.
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  0  
Reply Wed 28 Jul, 2010 04:37 pm
@xris,
xris wrote:

He had no option. Objecting would have carried with it an admission of failure.


Yeah, right.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Wed 28 Jul, 2010 04:40 pm
@A Lone Voice,
A Lone Voice wrote:

Actually, since this post, we're up to over 100 banks failing this year.

Won't it be great when the FDIC pays out even more taxpayer money to make up the losses? Heck, just add it to Obama's tab. It's only up to what, $1.47 trillion this year?


None of that has a thing to do with Obama, at all; however, the lax oversight policies of the last administration... yeah. Directly responsible for the failures of banks you see today. And where is your criticism of them?

Cycloptichorn
Finn dAbuzz
 
  0  
Reply Wed 28 Jul, 2010 04:57 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Nothing bad has anything to do with Obama...we get it Cyclo.

In the past I have been professionally engaged to clean up the mess of someone else.

It was understood going in that:

a) It would take some time and so an immediate turn around should not be expected

b) I had time to turn things around if I showed progress, and certainly not regress

I would be OK with giving Obama time if he wasn't so hell-bent on making things worse in the interim.
Cycloptichorn
 
  3  
Reply Wed 28 Jul, 2010 05:01 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
Quote:
Nothing bad has anything to do with Obama...we get it Cyclo.


A more careful reading of my posts would show that I have never said anything like this at all. In fact, there are plenty of bad things that you could blame on him, and if you're interested, I'd be happy to give you my list - not that you would agree that those things are bad, I'm sure.

Quote:
I would be OK with giving Obama time if he wasn't so hell-bent on making things worse in the interim.


None of his actions have 'made things worse,' in terms of the economy; at all. Unless you have a specific and provable example? Keep in mind that ideological differences between you and he are to be expected, and not actually proof of a problem, unless you can show bad effects which are actually happening.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
talk72000
 
  3  
Reply Tue 3 Aug, 2010 05:48 pm
This what I was afraid of when Obama was running for the presidency. The Republicans would load up on the mud throwing and repeated enough times it becomes truth to the average guy. He should have adopted Bill Clinton's way of minimizing the attacks by responding immediately with plausible explanations or dismissing them as untrue, erroneous or irrelevant. The response is the main thing.
0 Replies
 
Advocate
 
  2  
Reply Tue 3 Aug, 2010 06:15 pm
The media are a joke. For instance, why didn't the newspapers declare as false the claim that health reform would require death panels. Etc. The media seem to be afraid to tell the truth. So how can Obama expect any fair treatment from the media.
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Aug, 2010 10:52 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Thats where you and I disagree.
I contend that anything that has happened regarding the US debt and the US budget, are the fault of or to the credit of Obama.
He campaigned on lowering the unemployment rate, it has gone up instead.
The deficit has skyrocketed, with no end in sight.

So, anything that has happened to our economy, good or bad, is the fault of Obama IF it happened AFTER he passed his first budget.

You were one of the ones that said that after Bush became President, and especially after he had been in office over a year, that he couldnt blame Clinton for anything, good or bad.

You need to apply that same standard now.
parados
 
  1  
Reply Wed 4 Aug, 2010 11:25 am
@mysteryman,
Quote:
So, anything that has happened to our economy, good or bad, is the fault of Obama IF it happened AFTER he passed his first budget.

That is acceptable. But you can't define "bad" as not as good as you expect it to be.

The unemployment has not gone up since Obama first budget was implemented in Oct of 2009. In fact it has gone down which would be a GOOD thing, don't you agree? Or are you going to stick with your argument that it has gone up in spite of the evidence to the contrary?

http://www.npr.org/news/graphics/charts/gr-unemployment.png
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Wed 4 Aug, 2010 12:27 pm
@parados,
Ok, it is a good thing that it has gone down, but it went up above 10% on his watch, AFTER he passed his stimulus plan and said it wouldnt go above 8%.
Using the graph you posted, it was at 7.7% when he took office, and now it is at 9.5%.
Are you sure you want to crow about that?


Since he passed his budget, it has gone down less then 1%.
So, I will say that is a start, but you and I both know that doesnt translate into many new jobs.

I define bad as look at what our debt has climbed up to, with no end in sight.
It cannot be good for any economy when the national debt is up to almost 25% of the GDP.

BTW, when did Thomas Jefferson ever say anything about Fox?
parados
 
  2  
Reply Wed 4 Aug, 2010 12:55 pm
@mysteryman,
Quote:
Ok, it is a good thing that it has gone down, but it went up above 10% on his watch, AFTER he passed his stimulus plan and said it wouldnt go above 8%.

oh.. now you want to move the goal posts?
That seems rather partisan on your part. We agreed on time of budget going into effect and you now don't like the facts?
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Wed 4 Aug, 2010 01:59 pm
@BumbleBeeBoogie,
Quote:
WASHINGTON — Step by step, President Barack Obama is building a record of major legislation that's sure to make a mark on history.

The most sweeping financial regulation since the Great Depression. A vast expansion of health care, which Democrats had wanted for more than six decades. An $862 billion stimulus package that locked in long-sought Democratic priorities.

Yet his job-approval rating remains low. Why doesn't he get any credit?


1. "Most sweeping financial regulation..."
A: It falls short of what this new regulation will do; according to latest reports about preventing the gouging of consumers by banks will end up costing consumers more in the way of checking account fees and other penalties the banks are now instituting. They will "rob" Peter to pay Paul; just watch all the fees that will be added by most banks.
2. "Vast expansion of health care..."
A: This is indeed a chaos in the making; adding over 31 million more patients to a health system already stretched to meet current demands will result in slower service and rationing. The way Obama set up penalties for small companies not providing health insurance will make small companies pay the $2,500 penalty, and let the feds pay for health care. Finally, Obama did not institute any real savings in the implementation of his universal health plan, but demands that everybody be covered without lifetime max or denial of health care. Costs can only escalate upwards.
3. "$862 billion stimulus package..."
A: What a laugh; help wall street and phuck main street - the people who are in need of jobs. What stimulus? We haven't seen any increases in jobs with all that spending...and the national unemployment rate now stands at over 12%. Obama's stimulus is like an orgy for the rich and famous.
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Wed 4 Aug, 2010 03:35 pm
Quote:

Is a second American revolution coming?
The first one started with the Boston Tea Party. More than 230 years later, some think the time is ripe for a second American revolution.

An editorial in "Investors Business Daily" suggests people are now asking if the government does more harm than good—and if we should change what it does and the way it does it.

Much of the blame is laid on what it calls the "imperial presidency." It says that through his policies – like record spending and deficits, taxes, health care, etc. -President Obama is "diminishing America from within".

And there are growing signs that many Americans have had a bellyful of President Obama's policies.

Start with health care. 71 percent of Missouri voters supported a measure that would forbid the federal government from penalizing people who don't buy health insurance as mandated under President Obama's health care law.

And it's not just Missouri. Five states have passed similar bills, and two other states will have constitutional amendments on their November ballots to opt out of all, or part of, the new health care law.

There's immigration, which one day may be seen as the turning point in this struggle. While the federal government refuses to enforce the nation's immigration laws and refuses to secure our borders – it's going after Arizona in court for trying to protect its own citizens from an invasion of illegal aliens.

One Arizona sheriff says the federal government "has become our enemy and is taking us to court at a time when we need help." A Mexican drug cartel has reportedly offered $1 million to kill another Arizona sheriff, the controversial Joe Arpaio.

Things are getting very ugly. No surprise the president's approval ratings continue to decline. In some of the major polls, it's now approaching 40 percent.
http://caffertyfile.blogs.cnn.com/2010/08/04/is-a-second-american-revolution-coming/?hpt=T2

Obama does not get credit for greatness or even doing a good job, because according the the only measuring stick that counts in politics he has not.
0 Replies
 
talk72000
 
  1  
Reply Wed 4 Aug, 2010 04:22 pm
Obama has a basketball mindset. The quick break and score. The current situation resembles football. The Republicans are using nickel and dime offense and Obama is ignoring them. The best defense against the nickel and dime is to bend and prevent the long bomb. So Obama needs to resist i.e. instant response and defend against the big bomb (whatever political embarrassment) and give plausible explanations for little attacks even if it is a slightly losing argument but he must respond to every accusation or give an amusing version to show how ridiculous the charge is..
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Wed 4 Aug, 2010 04:40 pm
@talk72000,
I think that the real problem is that Obama has been hanging out on the basketball court trying to do some pickup games mainly because that is the game he loves, but the real struggle, and where the American people recruited him to play, is over on the football field.
talk72000
 
  1  
Reply Wed 4 Aug, 2010 07:32 pm
@hawkeye10,
He needs to muscle up. Twisted Evil Laughing Mr. Green 2 Cents
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Wed 4 Aug, 2010 07:38 pm
@talk72000,
He doesn't need to "muscle up." He needs to change his philosophy about running this country, and helping the people in this country rather than funding wars and charity to other countries. We have over 14 million people needing to work; this should be his first and last issue of concern.
talk72000
 
  1  
Reply Wed 4 Aug, 2010 07:51 pm
@cicerone imposter,
You seem to ignore that the meltdown created this mess and Obama must deal first things first. Stabilize the banking system then try to improve the economy. With the failure of the banking system you have a depression in short order and unemployment in the 25% range.
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 10/27/2021 at 07:19:00