This is not, repeat, NOT, an anti Obama thread. I have to say, by turning this into a “lie & attack” dirty campaign, Obama is assuring himself of a victory. He is very successfully keeping the focus of the issues and his failed presidency and on forcing Romney to defend the attacks. I have to say, it may be dirty and underhanded politics at its worst, but it’s also effective. And making matters worse, Romney is unable (or unwilling) to take the high road. I love this stuff. Mud slingin’, lying, back-stabbin’, gouge you in the eyes politics is cheap entertainment at its best. So, how can Romney break out and put the emphasis back on the issues? Stay tuned! But so far Obama has out flanked him at every turn. It’s a lesson in strategy.
By many measures it has been a phenomenal success. No depression, no American Auto Industry collapse, full stock market recovery, many many months of steady job and economy growth, and Bin Laden dead. You are just a damn hater.
Sorry, you are right. Let me rephrase: You claiming Obama's first term is a failure is utterly false on many metrics and you should be ashamed of playing into the partisan catchphrase nonsense that is today's political climate.
That's much better. I think that every President has successes, but taken on whole I believe his administration has failed the country and failed it badly.
Well, I respect but completely disagree with your opinion. My God, I'm going to barf from all this civility.
That's because true leaders are vacant from today's politics. Why would they want to bother with a process that's horribly broken from corruption, greed, and ideological fanaticism?
http://www.forbes.com/sites/charles...y-greatly-increasing-the-power-of-government/ President Obama's Smashing Success Story: Greatly Increasing The Power Of Government Success, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder. The traditional measure of the success of an Administration’s economic program has been real economic growth, employment growth, the unemployment rate and the like. Based on these criteria, the Obama Administration’s economic program has been a dismal failure: Real economic growth during the recovery – now three years old – has averaged 2.2%, less than half of the historic average for post recession rebounds. There are 1.1 million fewer people on non-farm payrolls today than when President Obama took office. The unemployment rate has been above 8% for 42 consecutive months, the longest period of sustained high unemployment since the Great Depression. Even against the Obama economic team’s own criteria, the results scream failure: Passage of an $862 billion stimulus was promised to keep the unemployment rate from rising above 8%, compared to a projected 9% peak without the stimulus. Instead, the unemployment rate peaked at 10% in October 2008, and exceeded 9% for more than two years. Absent the stimulus, the unemployment rate was projected to fall below 7% during 2012. Yet, last month, it rose to 8.3%, in spite of 7.5 million people leaving the labor force, and therefore no longer being counted as unemployed. If the labor force participation rate had remained unchanged, the unemployment rate would now be above 11%. Yet, President Obama has not changed course, but rather continues to advocate more spending and higher tax rates. Why? Four years ago, then Senator Obama ran for President, promising to fundamentally change America. Based on that goal, his Administration’s economic program has been an extraordinary success! The combination of below average economic growth, high unemployment and his Administration’s initiatives to expand the number of welfare recipients have produced: An increase of 18 million people, to 46 million Americans now receiving food stamps; A 122% increase in food stamp spending to an estimated $89 billion this year from $40 billion in 2008; An increase of 3.6 million people receiving Social Security disability payments; A 10 million person increase in the number of individuals receiving welfare, to 107 million, or more than one-third of the U.S. population; A 34%, $683 billion reduction in the adjusted gross income of the top 1% to $1.3 trillion in 2009 (latest data) from its 2007 peak. In addition, the President has vastly expanded the power of the Administrative State over the American people, while elevating the power of the President over the other two branches of government. (more at the link)
So once again, Denny doesn't have any opinions of his own that he can argue, just regurgitating someone else's and plagiarizing their work part-and-parcel. The level of animosity and lack of civility on this message board regarding politics is a good part your fault, Denny. No one wants to read your stolen half-baked opinion articles. Then again, it's your message board, so if you want to circlejerk yourself, I guess none of us have a right to argue.
It's not plagiarism since I'm not taking credit for the writing. I cited the source. You have an opinion that you expressed, which is fine. The Forbes article expresses a very different one, which is the point of posting it.
I post opinions of my own all the time. Since you're so interested... GDP growth is dismal. Yet govt. is borrowing $1.4T and spending it. That's almost 10% of GDP. GDP growth is ~1.5%. Take away the borrowing and spending and GDP growth is NEGATIVE 8.5%. That's Obama's economy. My opinion is NEGATIVE 8.5% sucks. It is the worst economy since the depression, and it's all the result of Obama's policies and those of the people he's appointed at all levels of government. It's worse now than the year the banks and stock market crashed. It's worse than 2007 with Bush borrowing $500B, since even with that borrowing GDP was growing. That's the rosy picture of Obamanomics. Factor in another $600B in money PER YEAR that the Fed printed out of thin air that it used to buy back govt. debt and the NEGATIVE GDP growth is even worse. The result of NEGATIVE 8.5% is college graduates not being able to find a job for the entirety of Obama's first term, vast increases in the welfare roles, mortgage defaults, and all the things that article I cited reported (they're facts, sorry to break the news to you). You claim that he somehow saved the auto industry. But he didn't. All he did was a govt. guided bankruptcy proceeding instead of a private sector bankruptcy proceeding. I doubt the industry is any better off, period. In fact, the auto companies he invested taxpayer money in have lost us $50B - we can "save" a lot of industries by infusing 10 years worth of taxpayer money to cover their losses. His investments are typified by Solyndra. ObamaCare is Solyndra x100 - his biggest "investment." I see a guy who's been incompetent and shows no sign of improving with experience. He's no Bill Clinton, and I am a fan of Bill Clinton. In his defense, all I see are excuses and passing the blame somewhere else. I do recognize he's done some good things, like getting Bin Laden, ending DADT, and not prosecuting DOMA. But everything starts with the economy. It's the economy stupid.
Denny is right. The economy is much worse than it was under Clinton. Back when rich people paid their taxes. I wonder why Obama hasn't fixed this. It's like Harry Reid forgetting to pass a budget. Same type of cause. Wish I could figure it out.
