The effects of the Obama economy

[longfisher]

...about Obama (BoBo?).

Most on the left and certainly those independents like me have had our hopes dimmed to the point of exasperation. Obama has succeeded in disappointing just about every political group across the entire spectrum.

Mostly, I think he's proven to be unproductive and easily influenced by others. He's also coming across as someone who won't fight a principled fight. I don't think he's spineless. But kindness and accommodation only goes so far in politics.

There was so much to do when he became President to reverse all the damage Bush did to the economy, civil liberties (otherwise known as freedoms, OK), the rule of law, the ending of two insanely expensive wars (3 trillion and counting), a return to the rule of law rather than the rule of a hereditary king, Americas standing in the world, the prosecution of American war criminals (Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Addington, etc.) and a restoration of the balance between the incredibly rich elite class and the rest of us, bringing peace and stability to the Israeli-Palestinian problem.

Virtually none of these things were done or appear to even be in the pipeline now. He's well on his way to being a one term president.

Personally, I think that we get crappy presidents most often when the one before him was a true loser. We got Reagan after Carter (seen any trickle down of late?). We got Carter after Nixon. We got Obama after Bush.

Elections are these days more of a charade than anything. The only thing they really change is the addressee on the checks Wall Street uses to bribe our politicians. Hey, that's not good enough.

I guess the Democrats will just have to mount a prinary challenge to Obama to try to get a real President in office. It shouldn't be too hard. The left now greatly dislikes Obama. And, whoever beats Obama in the primary will easily outscore Palin.

Lastly, I made no apologies for using a vocabulary larger than a few hundred words. Why don't you read a book once in a while?

LongFisher

[Reel Fanatic]

It's a fool who invents a false foil against which to rail. That foolishness reaches the level of perfection when the fool rails against a false foil in public for all to see.

try saying that fast two or three times...

Long, you take everything way too personally. My post was nothing more than a humorous way of looking at our current state and you take it as a personal assault of some sort.

I do hold Obama (aka BoBo) accountable because he is complicit and he runs the show now. On the other hand, I don't exempt his predecessor from his short comings or failures. If you compare the two together though, the difference is night and day and I don't mean that in a racial way. I sincerely believe the Bush administration tried to properly manage a bad situation as effectively as possible while a very hostile house and senate used every appropriate and inappropriate opportunity to undermine his efforts for purely political gain. During the Bush administration, it was noble and patriotic to be dissenting of his administration. If you so much as question BoBo, you are ignorant, you are racist, you are a threat. Why the difference?

You start spewing anti Bush, anti-Reagan, anti-Nixon garbage for some reason and I'm not sure why...I noticed that Clinton was exempted from your assessment. You call yourself an independent yet I have never once heard you espouse the virtues, merits, or exceptional qualifications of any independent candidate past, present, or near future.

I have an excellent vocabulary but choose not to use words just to be superfluous or unduly try to influence those I am speaking with into thinking I am smarter than I am. I enjoy reading, believe it or not, and most of the reading that I enjoy doesn't involve pictures (or at least the type that involve fold-outs). Before having my own business, being married, and having kids, I used to have a lot more reading time than I currently enjoy. Now I spend more time trying to be a good husband and even better parent when I am not trying to walk on the right side of our government's overly oppressive redundancies and ensuing incompetence in managing and enforcing those redundancies.

[longfisher]

Nice post RF. Very civil. And, it deserves a civil response.

I'm a libertarian. But I'm also a populist. I sincerely believe in the ascendency of the common man, what some call the American Dream. I am convinced that the right-wingers do not share that vision of America anymore. I suppose that means the Republican Party.

They used to, you know. Much that was accomplished in Republican Administrations before Reagan was intended not only to perpetuate business but to do so with a nod towards inclusion. Essentially, then Republicans wanted to make the government back off so as to enrich the possibilities of someone, perhaps anyone, achieving something in their lives according to their abilities.

Not so any longer. Republicans and to much the same extent the Democrats are intent only in jockying for power so as to reap the rewards of patronage. It's simply not the America I believe in.

The Dems are as bad as the Republicans in this regard, but the Republicans bring an altogether new paradigm to the debate, that is that if you don't agree with them on just about anything you're a traitor. Sick. Just sick as shit.

That sort of idea is definitely anti-American if you measure Americanism according to the founding principles. It is in inself incitefull, incendiary and exclusionary. Greatfully, it'll be their undoing. Short of a military coup, which unremarkably some on this board have recently advocated, it will finish them.

Good riddance.

"You start spewing anti Bush, anti-Reagan, anti-Nixon garbage for some reason and I'm not sure why...I noticed that Clinton was exempted from your assessment."

Perhaps I left Clinton out of my most recent post. But I've not spared any criticism of him in other posts. I felt he should have been impeached (actually he was), prosecuted and thrown in prison as a common fellon for obstruction of justice. I also thought he should have been the defendant in an EEOC action brought by Monica Lewinski. But she was too much of a witless slut to bring legal action.

I also feel that Clinton should have been held to account for his war crime of bombing the shit out of Yugoslavia without any form of U.N. sanction (although such a fig leaf was provided by the U.N. after the fact in an acti of complete complicity with the crime). I would love to have seen him swing for that one.

I also belive Reagan should have served time for Iran-Contra, that Bush I should have been prosecuted for invading that tiny Carribean island the name of which has slipped from my memory and that Nixon, above all the rest, should have been prosecuted for war crimes for invading that defenseless country Cambodia and unleashing 20 years of death and homicide by the Khmer Rouge.

I'm for all of them being held to the rule of law JUST EXACTLY LIKE YOU AND I WOULD BE HELD TO THAT STANDARD. How about you?

Heck, if we had to start with a obama-b-que to get this issue of accountability for Presidents straight, I'd volunteer to light the match, figuratively speaking. The issue would be to get those f***king invulnerables vulnerable to the law. Without accountability for the Executive Branch we don't have a democracy, we don't have a representative republic, we don't have a country worth a Goddamned shit. We just have a large fiefdom ruled by the hereditary elites who can at a whim crush any of us under "the wheel."

I'd be completely behind changing that.

How's that for a clarification?

LongFisher

[marine4003]

Nice post RF. Very civil. And, it deserves a civil response.

I'm a libertarian. But I'm also a populist. I sincerely believe in the ascendancy of the common man, what some call the American Dream. I am convinced that the right-wingers do not share that vision of America anymore. I suppose that means the Republican Party.

They used to, you know. Much that was accomplished in Republican Administrations before Reagan was intended not only to perpetuate business but to do so with a nod towards inclusion. Essentially, then Republicans wanted to make the government back off so as to enrich the possibilities of someone, perhaps anyone, achieving something in their lives according to their abilities.

Not so any longer. Republicans and to much the same extent the Democrats are intent only in jockying for power so as to reap the rewards of patronage. It's simply not the America I believe in.

The Dems are as bad as the Republicans in this regard, but the Republicans bring an altogether new paradigm to the debate, that is that if you don't agree with them on just about anything you're a traitor. Sick. Just sick as shit.

That sort of idea is definitely anti-American if you measure Americanism according to the founding principles. It is in inself incitefull, incendiary and exclusionary. Greatfully, it'll be their undoing. Short of a military coup, which unremarkably some on this board have recently advocated, it will finish them.

Good riddance.

"You start spewing anti Bush, anti-Reagan, anti-Nixon garbage for some reason and I'm not sure why...I noticed that Clinton was exempted from your assessment."

Perhaps I left Clinton out of my most recent post. But I've not spared any criticism of him in other posts. I felt he should have been impeached (actually he was), prosecuted and thrown in prison as a common fellon for obstruction of justice. I also thought he should have been the defendant in an EEOC action brought by Monica Lewinski. But she was too much of a witless slut to bring legal action.

I also feel that Clinton should have been held to account for his war crime of bombing the shit out of Yugoslavia without any form of U.N. sanction (although such a fig leaf was provided by the U.N. after the fact in an acti of complete complicity with the crime). I would love to have seen him swing for that one.

I also belive Reagan should have served time for Iran-Contra, that Bush I should have been prosecuted for invading that tiny Carribean island the name of which has slipped from my memory and that Nixon, above all the rest, should have been prosecuted for war crimes for invading that defenseless country Cambodia and unleashing 20 years of death and homicide by the Khmer Rouge.

I'm for all of them being held to the rule of law JUST EXACTLY LIKE YOU AND I WOULD BE HELD TO THAT STANDARD. How about you?

Heck, if we had to start with a obama-b-que to get this issue of accountability for Presidents straight, I'd volunteer to light the match, figuratively speaking. The issue would be to get those f***king invulnerables vulnerable to the law. Without accountability for the Executive Branch we don't have a democracy, we don't have a representative republic, we don't have a country worth a Goddamned shit. We just have a large fiefdom ruled by the hereditary elites who can at a whim crush any of us under "the wheel."
I'd be completely behind changing that.

How's that for a clarification?

LongFisher

Problem is there short slightness and complete disregard for the effects of there decisions, pledging aid to Haiti..wait, haven't we been doing that to the tune of 10 Billion dollars since 1998,and where does it go..Hey, nice palace you got there. Shutting down the fishieries..great move,lets dump another 200,000 into the unemployment ranks,and there are just the recent issues...Regardless of who caused this mess,the list is long,the current methods being employed are insane,you dont go out and spend when your broke,here in SC,Myrtle Beach,specifically,unemployment is now at 15%....15%..and predicted to go even higher,citys are closing schools in order not to default..Vote them all out,or stop complaining.

[Bird Dog]

I book no praise for Obama's handling of the economic mess that Bush left the nation in.

I stopped reading after this


Bush this........Bush that.........It's Bush's fault


Blame everything on W


Let me know when you liberals come up with a new defense mechanism

[worldcat lemon]

Obama must have been behind the "bail-outs", but maybe he was just following advice from George Bush.

I guess the $800 BILLION was Bush's fault? I don't know? Seems AIG went and spent 7 Billion to buy a bank in China, must have been a better investment than to put it into the US economy.

Somehow this administration thinks, to save money you gotta spend more than you have collateral for and fire up the printing presses we can just print more!!! So what if we are upside down to the tune of 14 trillion dollars and it exceeds the GNP by 8 trillion. Let's just spend more of what we don't have. GREAT PLAN OBAMA