DebateGate
General Category => 3DHS => Topic started by: sirs on September 16, 2011, 06:20:43 PM
-
Since the 2012 Campaign is now being shifted from park, into 1st gear, with Obama's save-my-job's Speech, let truthfully start listing the accomplishments that he and the Dems that support him, can hang their hat on. (and try to actually address actions performed vs actions not performed, example being, National Unemployment #'s are not above 12%....yet. Nor can it be "Well...the Republicans are worse")
I'll start
- under Obama's watch, Bin Laden, leader of the organization that attacked us on 911, was not only located, but "justice was served", (although I'm a little surprised he wasn't read his miranda rights or appointed a laywer, before sentence was handed down, and a civil trial initiated per his plan to try other terrorists. They're not enemy combatants, right?)
So, what else can Obama and the Dems hang their hat on, and claim a substantive reason for being relected come 2012?
-
-
-
-
-
-
I don't know if it will reelect them but they certainly made this nation much more Socialist than it was 2 years ago. Of course the Socialists, Terrorists, Communists & Anarchists, will vote for them in 2012. People that want to work and keep their jobs won't vote for them. People that don't want to get hosed on taxes won't vote for them. People that are sick & tired of Obama and his ugly face preempting their favorite TV shows won't vote for him or his ridiculous laughing stock party!
-
I'm doubting we'll be seeing any DNC commercials touting, as an accomplishment, that of making us more of a socialist nation. I could be wrong though. Maybe the left has more cajones than I would have thought they'd have
-
I'm doubting we'll be seeing any DNC commercials touting, as an accomplishment, that of making us more of a socialist nation. I could be wrong though. Maybe the left has more cajones than I would have thought they'd have
Well then I have no idea what they are going to brag about. I guess they will just try and scare us but how can Perry or Romney scare us compared to 4 more years of the boy?
-
Well, Xo has the floor. Let's see those "accomplishments" that the Dems and Obama can hang their hat on, to justify another 4years of it
-
Well, Xo has the floor. Let's see those "accomplishments" that the Dems and Obama can hang their hat on, to justify another 4years of it
He's more concerned about Greece & Turkey than trying to list an Obama accomplishment. Trying to do that could cause his head to explode.
-
this could be our worst NIGHTMARE!
Dems May Ask Obama Not To Run
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dU9Hy6QY1TM&feature=player_embedded# (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dU9Hy6QY1TM&feature=player_embedded#)!
-
Likely not the commercial the DNC will run with either, on touting any accomplishment. ;) So, so far, we have 1 item the Chosen and the Democrats can hang their hat on, and claim, this is the reason we need four more years of this. That it??
Xo.........you've got nothing?, outside of some snide response & derogatory insult you're just waiting to pull out, that might make you feel better, but does nothing to facilitate discussion, in this, a debate forum??
And please, anyone can answer. I started with a legitimate accomplishment. There's got to be something else........right?
-
No, XO is not going to list any type of reason why Obama should be reelected based on accomplishments, because he doesn't have any.
He is just going to try to tear down anybody on our side with insulting and snide comments. "He/she will never get nominated. Wait and see. They are doomed. They will never get elected. The oligarchy will never promote them." blah blah blah.
He does the same thing every year.
-
No, XO is not going to list any type of reason why Obama should be reelected based on accomplishments, because he doesn't have any.
He is just going to try to tear down anybody on our side with insulting and snide comments. "He/she will never get nominated. Wait and see. They are doomed. They will never get elected. The oligarchy will never promote them." blah blah blah.
He does the same thing every year.
his silence speaks volumes.
-
Indeed, it would appear
-
Indeed, it would appear
Really though if you think about it, XO isn't defending Obama anymore. Which dovetails into my recent conclusion that Obama has finally lost his following. That is why I speculate that maybe Hillary will step in, make a big game changing move, and replace him in 2012. You gotta admit that ballsy move would make the history books for sure.
XO reminds me of the Jap soldiers that hid out for years after the war ended and finally emerged from their jungle camp to surrender. I think he's given up and realizes the war is over.
-
There is no reason to try to explain the obvious to those who have demonstrated that they are incapable of perceiving reality as it is
What speaks volumes is the stupidity of the constant hateObama, hateObama, hateObama spewed by the pathetic lumpenproletarians.
Discussing anything with such creatures is akin to barking back at the neighbor's schnauzer.
Palin and Bachmann will not get the nomination, watch and see.
Perry should be unelectable because he is a sly, manipulative dolt, and if the Republicans have a brain (not that recent developments suggest that there is anyone home) they will choose Romney or Huntsman.
-
There is no reason to try to explain the obvious to those who have demonstrated that they are incapable of perceiving reality as it is
What speaks volumes is the stupidity of the constant hateObama, hateObama, hateObama spewed by the pathetic lumpenproletarians.
Discussing anything with such creatures is akin to barking back at the neighbor's schnauzer.
Palin and Bachmann will not get the nomination, watch and see.
Perry should be unelectable because he is a sly, manipulative dolt, and if the Republicans have a brain (not that recent developments suggest that there is anyone home) they will choose Romney or Huntsman.
I see you and Obama still share many of the same opinions about the majority of American citizens.
-
LOL...so, NO ACCOMPLISHMENTS, and just like clockwork, an XO response consisting of how horrible everyone is who doesn't covet the Chosen, and how responding to us neanderthals is all too..............wait, he keeps responding. Go figure
-
"Xo.........you've got nothing?, outside of some snide response & derogatory insult you're just waiting to pull out, that might make you feel better, but does nothing to facilitate discussion, in this, a debate forum??"
"No, XO is not going to list any type of reason why Obama should be reelected based on accomplishments, because he doesn't have any. He is just going to try to tear down anybody on our side with insulting and snide comments. "He/she will never get nominated. Wait and see. They are doomed. They will never get elected. The oligarchy will never promote them." blah blah blah."
and the subsequent response.......*drum roll*.......
There is no reason to try to explain the obvious to those who have demonstrated that they are incapable of perceiving reality as it is
What speaks volumes is the stupidity of the constant hateObama, hateObama, hateObama spewed by the pathetic lumpenproletarians.
Discussing anything with such creatures is akin to barking back at the neighbor's schnauzer.
Palin and Bachmann will not get the nomination, watch and see.
Perry should be unelectable because he is a sly, manipulative dolt, and if the Republicans have a brain (not that recent developments suggest that there is anyone home) they will choose Romney or Huntsman.
8) And what "reality" is that, Xo? The one where you just responded precisely how we would have expected you to?
-
I just thought of 1 accomplishment............Damn I lost it, I had one on the tip of my tongue, then it just went bye bye and for the life of me I can't remember what it was....
-
Turning his TelePrompter on?
-
I think that's done in advance of his speech, by some techie or aide, but again, doutful the DNC will press that as an accomplishment/commercial that warrants another 4years of someone turning on his teleprompter for him ;)
-
I don't see it as much of an accomplishment but repealing don't ask don't tell gay policy in the military could be one. I don't believe that warrants reelection.
-
He listened to Petraeus.
-
He listened to Petraeus.
is that an accomplishment?
-
i would think the troops in Iraq and Afghanistan would say so. Remember he took a lot of heat from the antiwar crowd for doing so.
-
I agree.
Yet, is that something his base is going to be happy with? Unlikely, but pushing some of those commercials would be extremely advisable, as an accomplishment, to pull in some Independents that have left him in droves, since 2008
-
His base has no choice, fight or surrender.
But i don't rule out a challenge or a resignation that just might be a game changer.
-
From all indications, I don't see this current President even entertaining the notion of resignation. It would be his exclamation point of a confirmation of how bad a President he has been. Hillary's the only "challenge", and she's smart enough to allow him to implode politically, then try to pick up the pieces in 2016, when the economy is likely to still be in shambles, and she can blame the Republican President for it, unless the GOP sweeps the political spectrum with a veto-proof Senate majority.
I don't see that happening
-
He might not really have a choice.
It's not his power it's his parties power that is at risk.
Think of the party elders who talked Nixon into resigning.
-
His party's not going to tell the 1st Black President, that they invested all this "hope & change" in, to resign, and he's not, in any way, shape or form, demonstrating any sense of ever even entertaining the idea.....imho
-
Guess we will have to just see how it plays out.
-
Not to belabor the point, but the Party pushed Nixon to resign, because of an apparent felony his administration got caught in. You wouldn't be suggesting Obama's administration has performed such a criminal act, are you? I realize the Solyndra scandal is the height of crony capitalism, and a perfect window of what this Administration is all about, both in wreckless fiscal responsibility and piss poor judgement, but I don't think it reaches the level of an impeachable offense, that sent the party in to have Nixon resign
-
Not to belabor the point, but the Party pushed Nixon to resign, because of an apparent felony his administration got caught in. You wouldn't be suggesting Obama's administration has performed such a criminal act, are you? I realize the Solyndra scandal is the height of crony capitalism, and a perfect window of what this Administration is all about, both in wreckless fiscal responsibility and piss poor judgement, but I don't think it reaches the level of an impeachable offense, that sent the party in to have Nixon resign
I don't think GunWalker stops at Holder. But that will be one possible reason. I envision more of a LBJ style decision. Where he will focus on jobs, jobs jobs for the remainder of his term.
-
(http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y273/ItsZep/Politics/eca58a29.jpg)
-
Needless to say he is the worst president in history, black or white. Now he wants to raise taxes by $1.5 trillion. He's a complete and total losers. Oh and the rest of his Jobs Plan Stimulus will be released soon after his next vacation.
-
"We will support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and success of liberty." has to be the dumbest thing any president has ever said with a straight face.
What did JFK do to support liberty in China? Brazil? the USSR? NOTHING!
And this country, with 6% of the world's population could NEVER do this. Nor should any president say that it is their intent. That is how we got mixed up in Vietnam, and we saw how well THAT turned out.
The US can take advantage of particular opportunities, such as in Libya and Egypt, from time to time, to support local movements for self-determination and reform. "Opposing any foe" is not what JFK did, nor is it what he should have done.
JFK was highly overrated. He had good speechwriters, and that's about it.
There was only ONE thing positive I can recall: he wasn't Nixon.
-
"We will support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and success of liberty." has to be the dumbest thing any president has ever said with a straight face.
What did JFK do to support liberty in China? Brazil? the USSR? NOTHING!
And this country, with 6% of the world's population could NEVER do this. Nor should any president say that it is their intent. That is how we got mixed up in Vietnam, and we saw how well THAT turned out.
The US can take advantage of particular opportunities, such as in Libya and Egypt, from time to time, to support local movements for self-determination and reform. "Opposing any foe" is not what JFK did, nor is it what he should have done.
JFK was highly overrated. He had good speechwriters, and that's about it.
There was only ONE thing positive I can recall: he wasn't Nixon.
Obama is no JFK, he's not even a Jimmy Carter.
-
Not to belabor the point, but the Party pushed Nixon to resign, because of an apparent felony his administration got caught in. You wouldn't be suggesting Obama's administration has performed such a criminal act, are you? I realize the Solyndra scandal is the height of crony capitalism, and a perfect window of what this Administration is all about, both in wreckless fiscal responsibility and piss poor judgement, but I don't think it reaches the level of an impeachable offense, that sent the party in to have Nixon resign
I don't think GunWalker stops at Holder. But that will be one possible reason. I envision more of a LBJ style decision. Where he will focus on jobs, jobs jobs for the remainder of his term.
I think in the manner of "GunWalker", it does stop at Holder. Yes, there'll be hearings, yes, this will make Obama's administration, and Holder's Justice Dept, look that much worse....and all this criticism is "obviously" racially motivated, while the MSM circles the AttackDog.com wagons
And as noted, his current focus, with the renewed classwarfare baton, is on saving his job, job, job, for the remainder of his term. You can't strengthen the weak by weakening the strong. Tax more of x, you get less of x
(and for the Xo's of the world, no, that does not equate to abolishing all tax. It references a NOT RAISING THEM. IF anything, LESSEN/REDUCE (NOT ABOLISH) taxes. Knowing how Xo likes to pull that strawman of a card, thought I'd nip it in the bud)
-
I don't think GunWalker stops at Holder. But that will be one possible reason. I envision more of a LBJ style decision. Where he will focus on jobs, jobs jobs for the remainder of his term.
Clearly killing jobs has been his main focus since getting in office so yes I agree that he will continue to focus on jobs for the remainder of his one term in office.
-
1 Obama accomplishment that I am pretty pleased with is him pushing Jews to the Republican Party. Good job Barry!
-
*snicker*....again, not something I'd expect is going to be in a DNC commercial, as an accomplishment 8)
-
I was not referring to Obama at all.
I was commenting that the statement by JFK, presented in the silly cartoon as a wonderful thing, was a truly dumb thing to say, and should never have been said. When I heard him say it in 1961, I recall that I lost respect for JFK as a wise leader.
After then came Vietnam, and I lost a lot more respect for LBJ and Nixon and all the clowns surrounding them.
-
I was not referring to Obama at all.
I was commenting that the statement by JFK, presented in the silly cartoon as a wonderful thing, was a truly dumb thing to say, and should never have been said. When I heard him say it in 1961, I recall that I lost respect for JFK as a wise leader.
After then came Vietnam, and I lost a lot more respect for LBJ and Nixon and all the clowns surrounding them.
and being the dummy you are, what do you do -- you vote for the biggest dummy to come down the pike in 200 years, your pal Obama, the first black president. you really are stupid!
-
What is intriguing, is that in a thread, asking for specific Obama accomplishments, that the DNC could hang their hat on, and run commercials impressing the electorate on why we need 4 more years of those types of accomplishments, the biggest supporter of Obama, currently in the saloon, has provided 3 responses in said thread, and yet not 1 reference to even 1 accomplishment
Imagine that. Is Obama's presidential plight that bad, I wonder?
-
What is intriguing, is that in a thread, asking for specific Obama accomplishments, that the DNC could hang their hat on, and run commercials impressing the electorate on why we need 4 more years of those types of accomplishments, the biggest supporter of Obama, currently in the saloon, has provided 3 responses in said thread, and yet not 1 reference to even 1 accomplisment
Inagine that. Is Obama's presidential plight that bad, I wonder?
it's worse than bad
-
Well, given the now effort to follow the Mondale Campaign platform of "I'm going to tax you more, well at least make it appear I'm going after the evil greedy rich bastards, as its not fair they have so much more", we'll see just how worse than bad its going to get
Notice also how the Administration is no longer talking about jobs. They can't because they know, and given the videos of Obama himself saying it, increased taxes lead to a stagnation if not worsening of unemployment, especially in a recession. No, now its all about class warfare, trying to make himself out to be one of the "littleguys" fighting off the evils of those rich bastards. Campaign 2012 has begun
-
Notice also how the Administration is no longer talking about jobs. ..... No, now its all about class warfare, trying to make himself out to be one of the "littleguys" fighting off the evils of those rich bastards. Campaign 2012 has begun
More food for the right (http://www.cnbc.com/id/44608472)
Stocks End Sharply Lower After Fed Decision
Published: Wednesday, 21 Sep 2011
Stocks closed near session lows after selling off sharply in the final hour Wednesday as investors were cautious over the Fed's grim outlook, even as it proposed plans to ramp up its aid to help the economy.
The Dow Jones Industrial Average plunged 283.82 points, or 2.49 percent, to end at 11,124.84, led by BofA & JP Morgan
The S&P 500 slumped 35.33 points, or 2.94 percent, to close at 1,166.76, logging its biggest drop in almost a month. The Nasdaq fell 52.05 points, or 2.01 percent, to finish at 2,538.19.
The CBOE Volatility Index, widely considered the best gauge of fear in the market, soared near 37.
Among the key S&P sectors, materials and financials fell.
The Fed announced it would launch a new $400 billion program in a move to rebalance its $2.87 trillion portfolio—a version of the widely expected Operation Twist—by selling shorter-term notes and using those funds to purchase longer-dated Treasurys.
Fed's 'Operation Twist' and Stocks: A History Lesson
"Recent indicators point to continuing weakness in overall labor market conditions, and the unemployment rate remains elevated," the Fed said in a statement. "There are significant downside risks to the economic outlook, including strains in global financial markets."
"[The Fed's view] of a 'significantly weaker economy’—is what investors are focusing on,” said Alan Valdes, director of floor operations at DME Securities.
What Changed in the Fed Statement?
The Fed also said it would reinvest the proceeds from maturing agency debt and mortgage-backed securities into mortgage-related debt to help keep mortgage rates low and bolster the housing market.
"The market appears to be confused as to what the Fed is trying to accomplish," said Michael Darda, chief market strategist and economist at MKM Partners in a note regarding the Fed statement. "Perhaps the next round of support will come in the form of an explicit goal for boosting nominal GDP back to its trend level, meaning previous and future Fed balance sheet expansion would be permanent, up to a point."
-
You guys are sure getting cocky about an election that is a year away and your current leading candidate has a scandal brewing with his Gardisil Executive Order. Remember Obama has the unions and the MSM on his side and they have the money and tools to control the narrative. Last poll (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/elections/) i saw he didn't lose to any named Republican.
-
You guys are sure getting cocky about an election that is a year away and your current leading candidate has a scandal brewing with his Gardisil Executive Order. Remember Obama has the unions and the MSM on his side and they have the money and tools to control the narrative. Last poll (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/elections/) i saw he didn't lose to any named Republican.
the only poll that counts is the ballet box.
-
Yeah they don't open those ballot boxes for another 14 months.
-
"We will support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and success of liberty." has to be the dumbest thing any president has ever said with a straight face.
What did JFK do to support liberty in China? Brazil? the USSR? NOTHING!
And this country, with 6% of the world's population could NEVER do this. Nor should any president say that it is their intent. That is how we got mixed up in Vietnam, and we saw how well THAT turned out.
The US can take advantage of particular opportunities, such as in Libya and Egypt, from time to time, to support local movements for self-determination and reform. "Opposing any foe" is not what JFK did, nor is it what he should have done.
JFK was highly overrated. He had good speechwriters, and that's about it.
There was only ONE thing positive I can recall: he wasn't Nixon.
It is hyperbole, but it isn't stupid.
If Americans are not in favor of human freedom then we have no creed.
It certainly isn't true that we do absolutely anything to ensure the success of free people , but I am pleased when we can be helpfull.
-
Being in favor of human freedom is find.
FIGHTING for the freedom of what was in 1961 was a majority of the population of the entire planet was not something that the US could do with our 6% of the population. Most of the world in 1961 was ruled by one sort of dictatorship or another.
In 1961, the US record for supporting freedom was pretty awful. The governments of Taiwan and Korea were brutal dictatorships. So was Portugal and Spain, our NATO allies, and their colonies. There was oppression in British and French colonies, and even Mexico, right on our border, had political prisoners. Most of the people JFK sent to recolonize Cuba in the Bay of Pigs fiasco were Batistianos and others who would have imposed another dictatorship.
JFK's statement was impractical and foolish. As I said, his main advantage was not being Nixon, who was even worse. Plus, he was better looking, and so was his wife.
-
Why won't XO name any accomplishments of Obama?
Why is he discussing JFK and Nixon in this thread where it doesn't belong?
-
Why should I write one word of anything, just to be insulted by knucklewalking ratbag rightwingers such as you?
Why post a silly cartoon of JFK saying something stupid like it actually was worthy of saying?
I can comment on any damned thing I wish, and you cannot do one thing about it.
-
Why should I write one word of anything, just to be insulted by knucklewalking ratbag rightwingers such as you?
Why post a silly cartoon of JFK saying something stupid like it actually was worthy of saying?
I can comment on any damned thing I wish, and you cannot do one thing about it.
name one accomplishment, just one!
-
I am not playing your stupid game, you lame moron.
-
I am not playing your stupid game, you lame moron.
you can't name any because none exists.
-
Why should I write one word of anything, just to be insulted by knucklewalking ratbag rightwingers such as you?
I am not playing your stupid game, you lame moron.
Why are you insulting everybody in this thread? You were just asked to name one accomplishment of Obama. It is obviously clear why you won't.
-
Anytime I say anything about our President or the Democrats, I get insulted with reams of illogical lies and trash It isn't worth the bother, and I am not playing any stupid games with right wing morons. None of you is remotely interested in the truth, anyway.
-
Can you name any accomplishments of Bill Clinton?
-
Welfare reform
-
Welfare reform
not his initiative but he did sign it.
-
What a jackass XO is. He can't trumpet Clinton's great economy, welfare reform or balanced budget on paper because that would undercut his lie that he is trying to say about Obama, i.e. that he can't name any accomplishments because he will be "insulted." XO used to say for years what a great economy Clinton had, but now he is silent because that praise would prove the lie about Obama. XO is not afraid to be insulted. He hasn't named any Obama accomplishments because there aren't any.
-
Ricky,
You are a pretty savvy student of politics. How would convincingly spin an Obama re-election campaign. Consider it a thought experiment.
-
I'm sorry, but I just can't do that.
Maybe if it were Clinton or even Hillary I could come up with a rationale for reelection. But another four years of Obama would be terrible for this country. The bad unemployment should be broken by now, but because of Obama's disastrous policies we are suffering.
-
What does Cain's winning Florida do to Obama's Race Card?
-
It proves that liberals lied about the Tea Party being racist.
I think Romney will win the Florida primary, but it was a great night for Cain and he deserved it.
-
I'm sorry, but I just can't do that.
Maybe if it were Clinton or even Hillary I could come up with a rationale for reelection. But another four years of Obama would be terrible for this country. The bad unemployment should be broken by now, but because of Obama's disastrous policies we are suffering.
Obama isn't qualified to manage a Churches Fried Chicken fast food joint let alone get another 4 years to continue his ruination of our nation under his silly, dumb and misguided immature and unrealistic policies. Only a moron would give Obama more time in office.
-
It proves that liberals lied about the Tea Party being racist.
I think Romney will win the Florida primary, but it was a great night for Cain and he deserved it.
=======================================
First of all, "liberals" meaning all liberals, have expressed no official opinion about Teabaggers being racists. Some teabaggers carried clearly racist signs at some rallies, but most did not. It is safe to say that some of them are racists.
Second, you cannot "lie" about your opinion. An opinion may or may not turn out to agree with reality.
If I say that I don't think John Travolta likes anchovies, and it turns out that he does, I am only lying if I already know that he likes them. If I have no proof, I cannot lie about Travolta's dislike or affinity for anchovies.
A lie is when you deliberately state that something you know is true is not, or vice versa. An opinion is simply a judgement about something. It is speculation. A speculation is not a lie. A lie is a deliberate falsehood.
Third, you assume that no racist would vote for Cain. Even if you accept this as fact, a majority of the Florida Straw Poll voters did NOT vote for Cain. As many as 63% might be, but that is unlikely.
Fourth, there is no proof that all, or some, or any, of the Florida Straw Poll voters are teabaggers. It would be reasonable to say that some are, and some are not.
So no, it does not prove anything other than more Florida Straw Poll voters, some of whom may be teabaggers, voted for Cain than any other single candidate.
I cannot say that Cain deserved or did not deserve to win. Deserve involves a value judgement, and I really don't think Cain has a ghost of a chance for a variety of reasons.
I agree that Romney seems likely to win the FL primary, but not by over 50%.
-
I could care less about your opinon of Republicans. What has Obama done?
-
I could care less about your opinon of Republicans. What has Obama done?
I'm embarrassed for XO. I'm also scared to think he called himself an educator. I can only imagine how screwed his students ended up after getting a dose of XO.
-
You moron. I taught Spanish.
I refuse to debate you or any rightwing idiot.
-
You moron. I taught Spanish.
I refuse to debate you or any rightwing idiot.
you are so dumb you think that just being a stupid spanish teacher means you can't influence students.
-
I refuse to debate you or any rightwing idiot.
The feeling is mutual. Sirs exposed your tactic. You want to ignore Obama's failures and just criticize Republicans. It doesn't work that way, pal. MSNBC is trying to do the same thing. They haven't even mentioned the Solyndra scandal during their primetime shows a single time. The morons that watch that channel have probably never even heard of Solyndra and still think Obama is Jesus. He currently has a 36% approval rating.
Also, using a homo slur to describe Tea Partiers is just as bad as saying the N word.
-
The Teasies call themselves teabaggers. It's not a slur except to obsessed reactionaries
-
You are a teabagger.
-
Sooo....with Xo having been unable to provide an answer, and now that Brass & Tee have decided to provide some injected commentary, perhaps they can present the saloon with accomplishments of Obama's that the that the Dems can hang their hat on, and DNC can start the work on commercials, as to why we need 4 more years of similar accomplishments
-
I am not going to debate with sirs or Kramer, because they are ideological dwarves: Kramer is always insulting, and sirs skids off into some wacky neverneverland of obscure arguments that never amount to a pile of fresh dog turds.
Why order the Blue Plate Special when you know that all they are serving is vomit?
-
I am not going to debate with sirs or Kramer, because they are ideological dwarves: Kramer is always insulting, and sirs skids off into some wacky neverneverland of obscure arguments that never amount to a pile of fresh dog turds.
Why order the Blue Plate Special when you know that all they are serving is vomit?
In other words you can't name any Obama accomplishments. But we all knew that from the get-go.
-
I am not going to debate with sirs or Kramer, because they are ideological dwarves: Kramer is always insulting, and sirs skids off into some wacky neverneverland of obscure arguments that never amount to a pile of fresh dog turds.
Because a simple direct question of our current President's "accomplishments" is so "wacky & obscure". Yea, right.....do you ev er read what you write beforehand? FAR more likely that you have no answer, despite my initial effort to provide one, as you've made several posts in this thread alone, and not once is it addressing the question posed. In fact, I have a 2nd serious answer to the question......Under Obama, the upscaled attacks against suspected Islamic terrorists, via use of our drone & tomahawk fleet has significantly weakened the likes of AlQeada, and their ability to wage war on us. I think the DNC could make a commercial about that.
Isn't that something you and your fellow lefties can hang their hat on, advocating 4 more years of that?? Because, of course, that's such an "obscure" question
-
All Obama has done is well known to all.
Experience has taught me that responding to you and Kramer is an utter waste of time. No more fun or agreeable than the aforementioned plate of vomit.
I would refrain from discussions with Moe, Shemp, Larry and Curly Joe as well, but I would give them priority over you and Kramer.
-
All Obama has done is well known to all.
Which of course, you still have yet to name 1
Experience has taught me that responding to you and Kramer is an utter waste of time.
Yet you continue to do so, providing nothing more than verbal bisquick, and still the serious question goes unanswered. But you're right in 1 regard.....Pretty much the country has been exposed to what Obama has done, which is why current polling has him losing to ANY Republican, that were hypothetically running
-
I shall continue to do so, lest you serve me a plate of disgusting vomit.
I dislike your replies and know that you will have nothing even remotely interesting to say. All conversations with you by everyone end up with you arguing about something of no importance at all until everyone forgets what the point was.
-
And yet still no answer to the serious question posed. Just more bisquick
-
I would refrain from discussions with Moe, Shemp, Larry and Curly Joe as well,...........
Actually that sounds like fun, how about if we had Chico and Grocho Marx to argue with? Harpo if he could type.
-
Why should I write one word of anything, just to be insulted by knucklewalking ratbag rightwingers such as you?
And yet you are debating other issues with us on other topics. You won't comment on this thread because Obama doesn't have any accomplishments.
-
You noticed that, too ;-)
-
Sadly, yes. It appears his statement that he refuses to debate us is disingenuous, especially since he does in other threads.
-
Indeed......especially on a question so simple......and most especially when he perseverates in the same insults he alleges he "won't be drawn into" with any answer to this simple inquiry
-
Again, there is no reason to sit at the table when all they are serving is dog barf.
-
And ..... surprise (not) ...... still no answer to the question posed, just more rhetorical bisquick
-
And more dog barf from you, sirs.
-
Seriously xo, if you weren't going to take this debate seriously, you should have not responded from the beginning. Every post you provide, in this thread in particular, that parrots exactly the type of insults and slurs you keep claiming that not answering allowed you to avoid, demonstrates just how hypocritically disingenuous you are
-
And more dog barf from you, sirs.
Are you a grown up or a 5 year old?
-
Today Americans will witness an extraordinarily rare event.
The president will sign a bill that originated in the Republican-controlled House of Representatives, the Jumpstart Our Business Startup Act.
Sadly, it is almost unheard of for Obama, who ran in 2008 on post-partisanship, to actually engage in such bipartisanship for the good of the economy. House Republicans have passed 27 other jobs bills (with some Democratic support) that Senate Democrats and the president have ignored.
When it comes to creating jobs and helping the economy, Democrats talk a good game. But that’s about it. The JOBS Act is a start, but we could have accomplished much more by now.
We could have…
• Helped entrepreneurs
• Reduced regulatory burdens
• Increased energy production
• Increased access to capital for job creators
• Provided middle class tax relief
That’s just a sampling. But all 27 bills would have helped create jobs and grow the economy. Thanks to Democrats’ intransigence, though, they are just 27 missed opportunities.
Make no mistake: Democrats’ inaction is politically motivated. Because of their failed record on jobs, the deficit, debt, healthcare, energy, and more, they have nothing to run on in 2012. So they decided that if they can’t run on their own record, they’ll distort Republicans’ record.
President Obama has made it clear that he wants to run against a do-nothing Congress. But there’s a problem with that strategy. The Republican House has been doing plenty. It’s the Democrat-controlled Senate that does nothing. They haven’t even passed a budget in three years.
Obama’s hypocrisy is astonishing. He attacks Republicans for—of all things—passing a budget. Meanwhile, his own 2013 budget went down in the House 0-414. The Senate voted down his 2012 budget 0-97.
President Obama went so far as to call Republicans’ Path to Prosperity budget “a Trojan Horse.” If he really wants to talk about Trojan Horses, let’s talk about his 2008 campaign. Americans who supported Obama in ’08 surely did not expect “hope and change” to become “fear and division.”
They would have expected the candidate who campaigned as a transformative, post-partisan uniter to work with House Republicans on bipartisan bills, instead of signing just one. They expected policies that were good for the economy and struggling families.
Yet Obama’s policies have not been in the interest of most Americans. In their efforts to grow government, raise taxes, over-regulate businesses, and coddle the special interests, Democrats have done plenty—all destructive, to be sure.
But on growing the economy, creating jobs, and reducing the deficit, they have been nothing but Do-Nothing Democrats (http://townhall.com/columnists/reincepriebus/2012/04/05/the_donothing_democrats). That’s something America can do without. Just wait till November.
-
Psst: Do-Nothing "Republican" Congress Strikes Again
Guy Benson
Apr 05, 2012
President Obama signed the bipartisan JOBS Act into law at a Rose Garden ceremony this afternoon:
President Barack Obama on Thursday signed into law a bill that aims to make it easier for small companies to raise money from investors. The House voted last month to send the bill to Obama for final approval. Critics say the bill won't create jobs and puts investors at risk by loosening regulation. However, the Obama administration on Thursday also directed the Treasury Department, Small Business Administration and Justice Department to "closely" monitor the implementation of the legislation to ensure it maintains "appropriate investor protections."
The Republican-held House passed this bill in early March. After some pointless foot-dragging, the Democratic Senate eventually approved the measure, and now it's law. Let the record show that as of today, the "do nothing," "Republican" Congress has worked with the president by
- extending the payroll tax cut extension,
- passing patent reform,
- repealing a counter-productive withholding rule,
- and approving three free trade agreements.
These were all elements of President Obama's jobs agenda. Now he's signed a job creation bill championed by House Republicans. Remember this roster of bipartisan accomplishments as our desperate president castigates his Congressional opponents as unflinching ideological obstructionists -- as he's guaranteed to do for the next seven months. The truth is that Republicans cooperate with this president when it's sensible to do so; they attempt to jettison his worst ideas, like cap and trade, Obamacare, higher taxes, and a second slush fund stimulus. And why is this president so bitter and desperate? Well, there's this:
In a hypothetical Election 2012 matchup, Mitt Romney attracts 47% of the vote, while President Obama earns 45%. If Rick Santorum is the GOP nominee, the president leads 46% to 44%. Overall, 46% of voters say they at least somewhat approve of the president's job performance. Fifty-three percent (53%) at least somewhat disapprove
Now, if only the Do-nothing Dems, would actually get off their arsses (http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2012/04/05/psst_donothing_republican_congress_strikes_again)
-
I'm guessing even our illustrious BsB isn't going to have much of a laundry list in Obama accomplishments that could headline some DNC commercials. I'd expect more of the let's Blame Bush..&..Re-Elect Obama. Oh, almost forgot.....Republicans want to prevent women from getting BC, garbage as well
-
And Romney's accomplishments are?
-
As President? Has to be elected 1st
As Private Citizen, he apparently co-founded Bain Capital, a private equity investment firm, with $37 million in private investment capital, and was re-recruited to help it out of bankruptcy, which he apparently was successful at
Was apparently asked to be President of the Winter Olympics, & oversaw a $1.32 billion budget, 700 employees, and 26,000 volunteers. By 2002, the Olympics were the most successful ever, going from near-bankruptcy to a $100 million profit
Became CEO and spokesman for the Free and Strong America PAC, an organization supporting conservative candidates across the nation
As Public Servant, he was elected by the people of to run their state of Mass, and eventually served as national Chairman of the Republican Governors Association
Anything else?
-
So Obama has more experience in government than Romney. 10 year priors to election to the Presidency vs 4 for Romney. Running a business vs running a govt are completely different animals.
-
So Obama has more experience in government than Romney. 10 year priors to election to the Presidency vs 4 for Romney. Running a business vs running a govt are completely different animals.
While I'd opine someone successfully running a business, is PRECISELY what's needed to fix the Government. The fact he also has executive experience, FAR more so than when Obama took office, also speaks volumes. I'll take 4 years experience functioning as the head executive, vs 0 years for Obama, prior to election, in a heartbeat. But nice spin
-
This isn't about who you would choose.
Just looking at the big picture.
Let's see.
Obama ran for the Democratic nomination once and won.
This is Mitts second rodeo isn't it?
Does that say anything about leadership and the team of people surrounding each?
-
I realize you're no Mitt fan. Lemme remind you....neither am I. So, if the choice comes down to Mitt vs Obama......that's really no contest.
You can spin and rationalize with the best of the DNC, but the facts still remain.....Obama has no record to run on, and as this thread has painfully demonstrated, has no serious accomplishments that Democrats can run on with the slogan of "4 more years of this". He was elected with alot of "1st black president" coat-tails attached. Perhaps if Romney were black, he'd only needed 1 rodeo himself.
Thing is, I could care less about color or race. I care about policy & intentions. The "open-mic" incident pretty much sealed Obama's "intentions". Mitt has a record to run on, both as a successful business person and as a chief executive, with far more experience than Obama. He's someone who has led large throngs of people, and not as just some community organizer. He's turned profits, he's saved enterprises, and he has executive experience......exactly what is needed to run as chief executive of the country. Is he perfect?, nope. Will he flip flop on various issues?, probably. Is he the better choice vs another 4 years of Obamination?, HELL YES. Joe the Plumber would be better, but he's not running
-
I realize you're no Mitt fan. Lemme remind you....neither am I. So, if the choice comes down to Mitt vs Obama......that's really no contest.
Thing is, I could care less about color or race. I care about policy & intentions. The "open-mic" incident pretty much sealed Obama's "intentions".
Wait and see how flexible Obama will be
As Bob Hope and Bing Crosby observed in "The Road To Bali":
"He gets his shirts straight from Paris
Cigarettes from the Nile
He talks like a highbrow
But he plays Chicago style..."
I've no idea where President Barack Obama gets his shirts and smokes, but he certainly talks like a highbrow, sufficiently so to persuade presidential historian Michael Beschloss to pronounce him the day after the 2008 election "the smartest president ever." Yet, in the end, he plays Chicago style. You can take the community organizer out of Chicago, but you can't take the Chicago out of the community organizer. Or as the Agence France-Presse headline put it, "Combative Obama Warns Supreme Court On Health Law."
Headlines in which the executive "warns" the courts are usually the province of places like Balochistan, where powerful Cabinet ministers are currently fuming at the Chief Justice's determination to stop them kidnapping citizens and holding them for ransom – literally, that is, not merely figuratively, as in America. But, here as there, when Obama "warns" the Supreme Court "over health law," it's their health prospects he has in mind. He cautioned the justices – "an unelected group of people" – not to take the "unprecedented, extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected Congress."
The eunuchs of the palace media gleefully piled on: as the New York Times sees it, were the justices to take an "unprecedented" step so unprecedented there are two centuries' worth of precedents going back to 1803, they would be fatally damaging "the Court's legitimacy."
All that's unprecedented here is the spectacle of the president of the United States, while the judges are deliberating, idly swinging his tire iron and saying, "Nice little Supreme Court you got here. Shame if anything were to happen to it."
A nation can have formal "checks and balances," but in the end free societies depend on a certain deference to the proprieties. If you're willing to disdain those, you can drive a coach and horses through accepted norms very easily. The bit about "a democratically elected Congress" was an especially exquisite touch given Obama's recently professed respect for the democratic process: as he assured Vladimir Putin's sock puppet the other day, he'll have "more flexibility" to accommodate foreign interests after he's got his "last election" and all that tedious democracy business out of the way. His "last election," I hasten to add, not America's.
Aside from his contempt for judicial review and those rube voters, what other checks and balances doesn't he have time for? Well, he makes "recess appointments" when the Senate isn't in recess, thus circumventing the dreary business of confirmation by that "democratically elected" legislature he likes so much. But, hey, it's only members of the National Labor Relations Board and the director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, so why get hung up on constitutional niceties?
By the way, have you heard of this Consumer Financial Protection Bureau? No? Don't worry, no big deal, it's just a new federal agency. Because we can always use another of those, right? What's one more acronym jostling in the ever more crowded alphabet soup of federal regulation? CFTC, CPSC, CNPP and now CFPB. Not to be confused with CFPB-FM, the Inuit radio station just south of the Arctic Circle in the Nunavut village of Kugaaruk, where in 1975 the world's all-time coldest wind chill was recorded: minus 135 degrees Fahrenheit.
Where was I? Oh, yes: the world's all-time coldest wind chill. That's what you're going to be feeling at this point in an Obama second term. If you like his contempt for judicial review, parliamentary scrutiny and representative democracy now, wait'll you see how "flexible" he'll get starting in January 2013. The CFPB appointment is not a small thing. Indeed, its new director, one Richard Cordray, embodies what's gone so disastrously wrong with American government: you'll have to be in compliance with him, but he doesn't have to be in compliance with anybody, whether the Senate or the Constitution. As I say somewhere in my recent book, you don't need a president-for-life if you've got a bureaucracy-for-life. More and more aspects of the citizen's daily existence are regulated by rules and officials both of which are ever more disconnected from any meaningful accountability to the people's representatives. As the president says, look for even more "flexibility" in a second term:
- more non-recess recess appointments,
- more executive orders,
- more bewildering innovations from the commissars of the hyper-regulatory state.
Which brings us to another aspect of government that Obama apparently finds a frightful bore: budgets. In free societies, the executive is subject to the creative tensions of popular restraint, legislative restraint, judicial restraint and fiscal restraint. All these the president has artfully sidestepped. In the past three years, the United States has ceased to have any meaningful budgeting at the national level, with the consequence that Washington piles on roughly a trillion dollars of new debt every seven or eight months. This week, before the fawning toadies at the Associated Press luncheon, Obama attacked Congressman Paul Ryan's plan to prevent America plunging into the debt abyss and at least keep its fingernails clawing at the clumps on the cliff edge for a couple more decades. Don't believe him, sneered the president. "Hundreds of national parks" will close. Parts of the country will see "complete elimination of air traffic control." We will be unable to "combat violent crime." Two million mothers and young children will wind up without "access to healthy food". Anything else? You bet. The Ryan plan will doom everything everywhere – "the air we breathe, the water we drink, the food that we eat."
"This is not conjecture," said the president. "These are facts."
Speaking of facts, in the past year the federal government has added the equivalent of the GDP of Canada in new debt. Who's buying it? The Chinese? Not so much. They've got pretty much all the Washington IOU's they need. Sixty-one percent of debt issued by the Treasury is bought by the Federal Reserve – which is to say the left hand of the U.S. Government is lending money to the right hand of the US Government. That's one reason the dollar is in steep decline against every major currency. Indeed, had it not been for the French and Germans et al inaugurating the new century by inventing a currency for an artificial jurisdiction with even less connection to economic reality (the European Union), it's likely that the markets would have yanked the rug out from under the dollar by now.
Nonetheless, in a land where every mewling babe in the American nursery is born with a debt burden of just under $200,000, the president brags that only his party is "compassionate" to have no plan whatsoever even to attempt to do anything about this, no way, no how, not now, not ever.
Last week, the head of the General Services Administration, the federal agency that picks out the office furniture for the other federal agencies, had to resign after a bureaucrats' junket to Vegas that included a lavish party with clowns and a $3,200 mind reader. The clowns seem surplus to requirements, but I'd love to know what that mind reader found.
Obama-sized government ends nowhere good, and in his Chicago-style contempt for checks and balances he's telling us that, if you enjoyed the first term, you ain't seen nuthin' yet (http://www.ocregister.com/opinion/president-348106-obama-new.html).
-
I think I can deduce why so many on the left and self proclaimed know-it-all's are so absent when it comes to discussing the issue of Obama and any "accomplishments". Not only are there none to hang their hat on, as it relates to commercials to run highlighting "vote Obama and get four more years of .....this". But that they truely may be geting quie fatigued at trying to defend his overt lack of education, when it comes to Constitutional matters, and horrible lack of leadership when it comes to ..... just about everything else
Now, what the left is......left with, is simply going on the attack. This will be perhaps one of the ugliest elections in a long time. Yes, the MSM will circle their Obama-coolaide wagons, but at least more and more GOP politicans & conservative pundits aren't allowing the MSM to dictate the template of questioning. Instead of sitting their with deer-in-the-headlights look and trying to be polite trying to explain away the question(s), they're starting to take cues from messers Palin & Newt, on how to turn the tables on such loaded questions, designed to try and make the right and/or Romney look bad. And what the right and Romney have at the top of their arsenal is....... Obama's record and "accomplishments" to throw right back at them
It's the Republicans to lose. Let's see what they do
-
(http://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/mrz041212dAPR20120412124520.jpg)
-
Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but they are not entitled to their own facts." -- Daniel Patrick Moynihan (http://townhall.com/columnists/johnhawkins/2012/05/18/15_facts_that_even_obamas_biggest_supporters_should_be_able_to_admit_are_true)
Conservatives and liberals may disagree on reasons, motivations, and excuses for Barack Obama's performance, but the facts are still facts. There may be many reasons that a pro football coach goes 1-15, but everyone can agree that his record is still 1-15, right? Well, here are some basic facts about how the country is faring with Barack Obama in the White House. Take a look at the numbers, sans commentary, and make your own judgment about whether Barack Obama deserves another term in office.
1) Real median household income is down $4300 since Obama took office.
2) The percentage of unemployed workers who've been out of a job for more than a year is over 30%.
3) The country has had the longest streak of +8% unemployment since the Depression under Obama: 39 months and counting.
4) In 2011 under Barack Obama, nearly one out of every seven Americans was on food stamps. That's a 70 percent increase from 2007.
5) Fifty percent of new college graduates are underemployed or unemployed.
6) U.S. home ownership is at a decade long low. So is the number of Americans who say their home is worth more than they paid for it. Home prices are the lowest they've been since 2002.
7) Barack Obama ended NASA's manned space program.
8 ) Going into this election cycle, Barack Obama had raised more money from Wall Street than any President in history. He has also raised more money from Wall Street than all of the GOP presidential contenders combined in this election cycle.
9) Under Barack Obama's leadership, the last time Harry Reid and the Senate Democrats passed a budget was April 9, 2009.
10) Barack Obama's budget was defeated 414-0 in the House and 99-0 in the Senate.
11) When he was running for President in 2008, Barack Obama pledged not to raise taxes on families making less than 250,000 dollars per year. He broke that promise with the tanning salon tax and with Obamacare, which raises almost 500 billion dollars in new taxes, a significant portion of which would be paid by people making less than 250,000 dollars per year.
12) When Barack Obama took office, gas was $1.95 per gallon. Today gas is $3.72 per gallon.
13) In February of this year, the federal government had a 229 billion dollar deficit. That was the largest deficit in the history of the United States.
14) America lost its AAA credit rating (which it had held since 1917) on Obama's watch despite the fact that Timothy Geithner publicly said there was "no risk" of that happening.
15) Barack Obama added more to the debt in just 38 months than George Bush did in two full terms as President
-
(http://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/mrz051912dAPC20120519124517.jpg)