We’ve heard it all before, Barack

by lewwaters

Can we take another 4 years of Obama’s failures? He only proposes more of what he promised in 2008 and not one thing he proposed then helped.

21 Comments to “We’ve heard it all before, Barack”

  1. I’m not so much worried about the President’s failures as I am about his successes in that his successes usually result in diminished freedoms for American citizens.

    Like

  2. Devastating. But the Mike D’s of the world will vote for that empty suited clown anyway.

    Like

  3. Mandatory purchase of a private product, one of the only things I disagreed with Obama on, and a Conservative Supreme Court justice slapped me down, so from my pov, the guy is almost pitch perfect. (However, I also believe that man landed on the moon, and Kennedy was shot by a lone gunman.)

    Like

  4. If the President’s policies haven’t been implemented (i.e. obstructed by the GOTP) then how could they fail?

    Like

  5. What policies of his haven’t been implemented? QE1, QE2, Obamacare, Ending DA/DT, Cash for Clunkers, a $786 Billion “stimulus,” bailing out the auto unions, putting 789 Chrysler Dealers out of business?

    How ridiculous for anybody to claim the GOP blocks anything he wants when he has repeatedly implemented what he wants by executive order, screw congress and the separation of powers.

    Remember when the left hated executive orders?

    Like

  6. Obama is an more of an empty suit than an empty chair and he appoints a tax cheat and AIG crooks to his cabinet. He bailed out his banker buddies and then blamed republicans for the continued abuse of tax payer stimulus that went to bank ceo’s bonuses Obama is amazing, I have never seen anyone lie through their teeth and talk from both sides of their mouth like this community agitator has.

    Like

  7. K.J. I thought your name was Kage? Anyway……..But yes he has my support thus far. In my world I’ve seen this president, just as I have seen other presidents, get some of their agenda blocked by the opposition party. In the 90’s there was gridlock. From 2006-2008 there was gridlock. And now for the last several years there has been gridlock. Even with the majority in both houses, he did not have 60 Democrats in the senate and we have seen a record number of filibusters from the GOP which put the kibosh on many pieces of legislation. Claiming that he has been able to do EVERYTHING he wanted is just political hyperbole. I thought you had a poli-sci degree, Kage? If Obama is to stop blaming Bush and the GOP for the economy, then I think conservatives need to stop solely blaming Obama for not turning it completely around in his first term. He is not the supreme leader of the land that can command legislation to pass at his whim. It’s a cooperative effort by both parties to get bills passed. Not to mention, is just idiotic to assume ANYONE can get this mess that’s been festering for a generation, cleaned up in 4 years. Obama may have said he could turn it around and that’s something he will have to defend, but I remember everyone in late 2008, including conservatives, saying this turnaround is going to be difficult and either McCain or Obama will have a struggle. People saying “who would want that job?” Obama isn’t the magic man here….but he’s got the right ideas. Investing in infrastructure, an all of the above approach toward energy independence, investing in education and training….yes it is going to cost more money. But like I’ve said before, ask the guy unemployed guy down the street with 3 kids if he really cars about the debt. He wants a job, he wants his home value to increase…and we do that by creating jobs through government spending in building and repairing roads/bridges, making college affordable for his children, giving him the training he needs to compete for a good job. I believe we can do both, create jobs and by creating more taxpayers start to tackle our debt…..but first things first we have to get the economy turned around. Sometimes you have to spend money to make money….just ask Mitt. Investing now with greater returns later.

    Like

  8. only a complete idiot would support the totally worthless , totally incpmpetent bozo currently in the White house. “investing” is bankrupting the country incase you did’nt know it. a six-year old kid could see that.

    Like

  9. Jack, how do we fix the economy? Other than cutting taxes and reducing regulations (that hasn’t worked)

    Like

  10. In 2009 there was an 8 member Republican committee that sponsored a health care reform plan that started to pick up support. By June of that year President Obama indicated that he supported the bill. IMMEDIATELY afterward, 6 of the 8 Republicans dropped their support, with the other two following a week later.

    Later that year, 7 Republican Senators co-sponsored a resolution to establish a bi-partisan debt reduction panel. When the resolution came up for a vote in January of 2010, and it became clear that it would actually have the 60 votes necessary to pass the threatened Republican filibuster, all 7 Senators VOTED AGAINST THEIR OWN BILL. Why? Because President Obama had gone on record supporting it.

    And yet Conservatives continue to tell us that “Obama has failed to govern”. Herding rabid cats looks to be more viable than governing with the GOP.

    Like

  11. It is preferred that if you are going to make claims or level accusations, that you link to your source of such claims and accusations.

    Like

  12. Those are pretty good examples, Schuyler. However, are there Republicans here that deny they are trying to torpedo Obama? They want him (and all other Dems) gone, and if that means a few years of a shit economy then that’s just the price. Why do Dems act so confused about the strategy?

    Like

  13. Zero Obozo is “torpedoing himself. Martin. He’s been a colossal failure.

    Like

  14. the way to fix the Economy is to get the government the hell out of it.

    Like

  15. Martin, can you deny that for 8 years, Dems tried to torpedo George W. Bush?

    This has become the nature of our government, polarized and heavy partisan. In fact, it has been going on longer than either of us can remember.

    Like

  16. I agree, Lew. Politics is defined by perversity: Democrats vote based on envy – they don’t like other people having what they don’t have; and Republicans vote based on resentment – they don’t like other people having what they do have.

    Like

  17. That’s where you’re wrong, Martin.

    But you sure display a shitty attitude towards your fellow man.

    Conservatives don’t begrudge others having what we may have, we just do not want to have to pay for it for them and would prefer they accomplish it on their own.

    Liberals, on the other hand, want someone else to pay for what they want others to have or if they do not like something, they feel no one should have it.

    Like

  18. Jim DeMint’s (R) comment made it clear:  
    “Our goal is a complete gridlock for the next two years. There is no place for bi-partisanship, compromise, only acceptable outcome is total victory and any politician that disagrees will be treated as a traitor. This is war.”  

    Like

  19. Schuyler, the concept that the needs of the group outweigh the wants of individuals is, by definition, socialist… I don’t think Republicans are on that wavelength, so their spite is understandable.

    Like

  20. And what was Democrat Tip O’Neills comment years ago, something like since there is no evidence, that means we need to look harder?

    And don’t forget, you guys set the tone during Bush’s 8 years. Don’t act so surprised it is coming back at you today.

    Like

  21. A little reminder for you and Martin, Schuyler: http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2004/06/21/ronald-reagan-tip-oneill-and-the-clash-of-the-titans

    At various times, O’Neill said, “Reagan was Herbert Hoover with a smile, a cheerleader for selfishness. He said that Reagan’s policies meant that his presidency was one big Christmas party for the rich.”

    And if it is gridlock that bothers you, may I remind you of Democrat Ted Kennedy leading the the filibusters against Bush’s judicial nominees, fairly unheard of before then.

    So don’t even come here and try to pretend this is something new, decided on by Republicans.

    It’s well past time Democrats learned what compromise is. It does not mean abandon your point of view to accept theirs.

    Like

%d bloggers like this: