Obama '08?

@Advocate,

Advocate wrote:

Historians declare Obama best president in U. S. history.

http://knowinglyundersold.wordpress.com/2009/10/09/historians-declare-obama-best-president-in-u-s-history/

You were a little late in posting this, you missed the target day of April 1.

0 Replies

@Advocate,

From your own link...

Quote:

, and assuming all campaign and inaugural promises come to pass,

Since we know that this not only will not happen, and that there are several campaign promises he has already reneged on, then therre is no way anyone can say that he is the best president in US history.

So, will they still think that if he gets us into another war, or if the economy totally crashes, or if one of a million other things go wrong during his presidency?

0 Replies

@Advocate,

Advocate wrote:

Amigo wrote:

“It’s obvious to anyone with a knowledge of world events and conjecture that President Obama will end up with accomplishments greatly outnumbering those of Abraham Lincoln, Thomas Jefferson, and Franklin Roosevelt combined.”

http://knowinglyundersold.wordpress.com/2009/10/09/historians-declare-obama-best-president-in-u-s-history/

WHAT THE ****!?!?!

Toss these guys in the **** heep.

Your spelling is a testament to your intellect (lack thereof).

Intellect and spelling are not related, that is a fact.

Do you believe that Obamas accomplishments will greatly outnumber those of Abraham Lincoln, Thomas Jefferson, and Franklin Roosevelt combined?

I am a high school drop out. I never went to school. i am totally self educated. Think about this. If you argue this with me you will lose.

Do you defend these historians position that Obamas accomplishments will greatly outnumber those of Abraham Lincoln, Thomas Jefferson, and Franklin Roosevelt combined?

2 Replies

So this is what you win the Peace Prize for?

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article7107179.ece

Quote:

HAUNTED by the memory of a lost opportunity to kill Osama Bin Laden before he attacked the World Trade Center in New York, US military planners have won President Barack Obama’s support for a new generation of high-speed weapons that are intended to strike anywhere on Earth within an hour.

What kind of weapons would he be approving if he hadnt won the peace prize?

1 Reply

@Amigo,

If congress is not taken over by the mindless right, Obama has an excellent chance at having more accomplishments than any past president. He is currently accomplishing things at a rate much higher than any president in the past.

Since sh*t happens, he has had to back off of some campaign promises. I think every president has had to do this.

1 Reply

@Advocate,

Advocate wrote:

If congress is not taken over by the mindless right, Obama has an excellent chance at having more accomplishments than any past president. He is currently accomplishing things at a rate much higher than any president in the past.

Since sh*t happens, he has had to back off of some campaign promises. I think every president has had to do this.

Ok, fine.

So Obama has:

1) Changed the name of Operation Iraqi Freedom to Operation New Dawn and sent 30,000 more troops for the war he expanded to Afganistan where along with pakistan is bombed by daily/weekly. We don't really know what war he is waging with these drone bombers because it's secret and the pilot is flying it like a video game here in the states. The pilot does not even know what he is really doing. And how much money is going to Obamas war?? I don't know.

2) "Reformed health care" Did he really reform health care. Does any body really know what this "Health care reform" does. Maybe what it really does is allow the insurance companys, medical industry and drug companies to go after the only people with any money under the guise of "taking care of the people". Bullshit

3) Gave $2.5 trillion of taxpayers money to bankers that caused the finacial meltdown in the first place who incidently gave obama.....

Goldman Sachs $994,795
Citigroup Inc $701,290
JPMorgan Chase & Co $695,132
Morgan Stanley $514,881

To name a few.

Jefferson, Lincoln and Roosevelt

1)Founded a country
2) created the Declaration of Independence
3) created Emancipation Proclamation, initiated Emancipation Proclamation
4)fought and won the cival war
5) ended slavery
6) Won the Nobel Peace Prize for negotiating the peace treaty that ended the Russo-Japanese War
7) built the Panama canel
8) Created National Parks system
9) Created the new deal
10) had a teedy bear named after him

Well have to wait and see

2 Replies

@Amigo,

Yaknow man, you might be taken more seriously if you displayed any understanding that Teddy Roosevelt and Franklin D. Roosevelt were separate people.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Yaknow man, you might be taken more seriously if you displayed any understanding that Teddy Roosevelt and Franklin D. Roosevelt were separate people.

Cycloptichorn

I just looked at the last name. I was concentrating of Jefferson and Lincoln.

The thing that is really absurd is that I can't spell, I droped out of school, I don't know teddy from Franklin Roosevelt. I can still be taken more seriously then a team of professors at a University.

I'm not asking anybody to take me serious. I force them to.

2 Replies

@Amigo,

Quote:

I just looked at the last name. I was concentrating of Jefferson and Lincoln.

Yes, I know. That's incredibly intellectually sloppy and a major fault with your argument.

Quote:

The thing that is really absurd is that I can't spell, I droped out of school, I don't know teddy from Franklin Roosevelt. I can still be taken more seriously then a team of professors at a University.

The operative word being 'can.' I believe that you believe that others take you seriously.

Quote:

I'm not asking anybody to take me serious. I force them to.

No, you don't. You have no real in-depth understanding of the topics you choose to discuss here, yet think your opinions are justified anyway. That isn't what someone who is presenting a serious argument does.

Let's take the health care bill which was just passed. You trash it but you don't know what it does, what the elements of it are. What about that makes you think your argument should be taken seriously? This is a serious question.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

Obama took X amount of money from the bankers in campaign contributions. Then to save us from economic collapse he claims we must give these bankers X amount of money to save the system. The very same bankers that deregulated the system through Washington in their favor now is rewarded with our tax money in addition to the money thay already got from the deregulation.

By my logic the same formula Obama used for the banking bailout to pay back the bankers return on their investment in campaign contributions is now being used in health care. This is my theory.

Are there medical drug, insurance and industry people/lobbiest operating in washington? And how much did they have to do with this health reform. My question is:

What amount of money is taken from a group of people against their will and given as profit not health care to the medical industry, insurance companies and drug companies and not the people who can't afford health care?

The foundation for my suspicion is Obamas bailout.

If we are going to take X amount of money from a certain group of Americans to pay for another group of Americans shouldn't the group paying for the rest be able to have a say in who and what system the money is being given to.

Is a check up costing the tax payer 300$ instead of 50$

Or is this just like the money given to the no-bid contracts of Halliburton for the war WE MUST fight?

Or the bankers WE MUST bailout?

Or the medical care WE MUST pay for?

Why would they handle healthcare any different then the way they handle anything else?

This is why in all confidence be taken seriously.

1 Reply

@mysteryman,

mysteryman wrote:

So this is what you win the Peace Prize for?

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article7107179.ece

Quote:
HAUNTED by the memory of a lost opportunity to kill Osama Bin Laden before he attacked the World Trade Center in New York, US military planners have won President Barack Obama’s support for a new generation of high-speed weapons that are intended to strike anywhere on Earth within an hour.

What kind of weapons would he be approving if he hadnt won the peace prize?

Did he award himself the Peace Prize?

And you can't be a hardcore Republican and not pysched about defense technology, mysterman. It's hypocritical.

1 Reply

@Amigo,

It is pretty tragic if, by now, you don't know what HC reform does.

2 Replies

@Advocate,

Advocate wrote:

It is pretty tragic if, by now, you don't know what HC reform does.

What does it do?

1 Reply

@Amigo,

Amigo wrote:

Advocate wrote:

It is pretty tragic if, by now, you don't know what HC reform does.

What does it do?

Do a little research (e.g., check Google). If you still have questions, let me know.

1 Reply

@Advocate,

Advocate wrote:

Amigo wrote:

Advocate wrote:

It is pretty tragic if, by now, you don't know what HC reform does.

What does it do?

Do a little research (e.g., check Google). If you still have questions, let me know.

I want to know if you know right now off hand. If you don't it is tragic right?

What does it do?

0 Replies

@Amigo,

Quote:

The foundation for my suspicion is Obamas bailout.

Okay dude. I'm just going to point this out to ya and let the rest of it go.

The 'bailout' of Fannie and Freddie was not done by Obama but Bush, in 2008, before Obama was elected.

The 'bailout' of GM was not done by Obama but, once again, by Bush in 2008.

The 'bailout' of the banks, the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) was signed into law by who? George Bush, in 2008.

Obama received a total of over 745 million dollars in donations. The amount which came from the banks you listed totals what, 4 million dollars?

In short, I'm having a hard time finding a single fact that you are correct about in your posts. You like to go on and on about how other people's formal education makes them no smarter or better able to argue then you. I would like to believe that is true, but constant factual errors combined with shallow analysis don't lend a lot of credence to your assertions in this area.

Cycloptichorn

2 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Quote:

The foundation for my suspicion is Obamas bailout.

Okay dude. I'm just going to point this out to ya and let the rest of it go.

The 'bailout' of Fannie and Freddie was not done by Obama but Bush, in 2008, before Obama was elected.

The 'bailout' of GM was not done by Obama but, once again, by Bush in 2008.

The 'bailout' of the banks, the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) was signed into law by who? George Bush, in 2008.

Obama received a total of over 745 million dollars in donations. The amount which came from the banks you listed totals what, 4 million dollars?

In short, I'm having a hard time finding a single fact that you are correct about in your posts. You like to go on and on about how other people's formal education makes them no smarter or better able to argue then you. I would like to believe that is true, but constant factual errors combined with shallow analysis don't lend a lot of credence to your assertions in this area.

Cycloptichorn

What is popularly known as Obamas actions (listed) are really Bushes actions. Is that right?

That Bushes policies and Obamas policies practiced are one in the same and what we see today. In that case who do we give the credit to Bush or Obama?

Are you telling me Bush and Obama have the same policies or that once Obama took office it was to late to stop Bushes policies. You are defending Obama with Bush's policies. Or you are telling me Obama is implementing bushes policies? Why is Obama doing what bush wanted to do?

"Obama received a total of over 745 million dollars in donations. The amount which came from the banks you listed totals what, 4 million dollars?"

I am checking into these figures.

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

"The 'bailout' of GM was not done by Obama but, once again, by Bush in 2008."

http://gm-volt.com/2010/04/25/obama-says-gm-bailout-has-been-a-success/

So Obama has yet to give Bush credit?

1 Reply

@Amigo,

I think Obama gets credit for the bankruptcy. Fair?

0 Replies

@Gargamel,

Your right, it is.
But since I am NOT a repub, then it isnt hypocritical, is it?

0 Replies

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know