Obama claims he is a good president and could win a third term!!!!!!!!

[Guest]

He is either naieve or stupid or in his own little world or he does not care what most Americans think.

It is no wonder those who support him act and talk as they do. The Kool aide in chief sets the tone....the message....how he sees things....no matter how far from reality.....

When I saw the article and his assessment of himself as a "good president", my first reaction was as measured by what.

My second reaction was to :1rotfl:......but could not because I was barfbarf

[Guest]

I got so :censored: up I forgot the link:

Obama: ‘I’m a Pretty Good President’ And If I Ran For a Third Term, I Could Win | Washington Free Beacon (http://freebeacon.com/politics/obama-im-a-pretty-good-president-and-if-i-ran-for-a-third-term-i-could-win/)

:1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

[Guest]

Actually, you have to ask who would beat him if the election were held today. Pretty sobering, eh?

[Guest]

Actually, you have to ask who would beat him if the election were held today. Pretty sobering, eh?

Well, Republicans and Tea Partiers - answer the question - what Republican or other party candidate WOULD beat President Obama if an election were held today?

Vewy, vewy quiet out there.

[Guest]

We'll never know will we, unless we can quickly get that pesky 22nd amendment repealed.

Only seven US presidents have won two back-to-back elections with over 50% of the popular vote, and none since Eisenhower; Reagan didn't do it, Clinton didn't do it, and George W Bush certainly didn't do it.

[Guest]

Well, Republicans and Tea Partiers - answer the question - what Republican or other party candidate WOULD beat President Obama if an election were held today?

Vewy, vewy quiet out there.

Romneywould beat him today!

[Guest]

Actually, you have to ask who would beat him if the election were held today. Pretty sobering, eh?

:1rotfl:

:1rotfl::1rotfl:

:1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

[Guest]

Well, Republicans and Tea Partiers - answer the question - what Republican or other party candidate WOULD beat President Obama if an election were held today?

Vewy, vewy quiet out there.

:1rotfl::1rotfl:

[Guest]

Well, Republicans and Tea Partiers - answer the question - what Republican or other party candidate WOULD beat President Obama if an election were held today?

Vewy, vewy quiet out there.

I think that just about any candidate could beat Obama if the election were held today. Most have come to realize that Obama's "delusions of grandeur" and anti-American policies have been detrimental to most Americans, as well as, the rest of the world.

[Guest]

He is either naieve or stupid or in his own little world or he does not care what most Americans think.

It is no wonder those who support him act and talk as they do. The Kool aide in chief sets the tone....the message....how he sees things....no matter how far from reality.....

When I saw the article and his assessment of himself as a "good president", my first reaction was as measured by what.

My second reaction was to :1rotfl:......but could not because I was barfbarf

:agree::agree:
Even compared to Carter, Obama lowered the bar for "worst."

[Guest]

I think that just about any candidate could beat Obama if the election were held today. Most have come to realize that Obama's "delusions of grandeur" and anti-American policies have been detrimental to most Americans, as well as, the rest of the world.

:agree::agree:

[Guest]

Well, Republicans and Tea Partiers - answer the question - what Republican or other party candidate WOULD beat President Obama if an election were held today?

Vewy, vewy quiet out there.

One thing that Obama did prove; anyone is qualified for the position and there are always those easily lead guppies that will ignorantly vote for whoever the liberal media paints flattering (if not false) images of. Got a thing for Tea Party folks? I'm not a member but I have yet to see fault in their ideology. Obama wouldn't get the support of his own party now. They are embarrassed of him.

[Guest]

We'll never know will we, unless we can quickly get that pesky 22nd amendment repealed.

Only seven US presidents have won two back-to-back elections with over 50% of the popular vote, and none since Eisenhower; Reagan didn't do it, Clinton didn't do it, and George W Bush certainly didn't do it.

George W would have handed Clinton his hat if not for Perot splitting the conservative vote. Let's face the truth, ok? Obama got such a high turnout because he was supposed to be the black messiah. He had a record black turnout. Race loyalty vs logic and common sense. He told everyone that he was a socialist and promised to fundamentally change America. Who wanted change? The minority with misconceived ideas that he was going to "give" them wealth with no responsibility. Take from those that have to give to those without. That's an enticing idea, but only in fairytales. Obama's utopia didn't work out. Instead, we have more racial divide and political divide than ever. More black unemployment, more folks on food stamps, record poverty, etc.

[Guest]

Obama would make an excellent replacement for Jon Stewart and to be the host of the Daily Show ... he pretty much lives it as it is

[Guest]

One thing that Obama did prove; anyone is qualified for the position and there are always those easily lead guppies that will ignorantly vote for whoever the liberal media paints flattering (if not false) images of. Got a thing for Tea Party folks? I'm not a member but I have yet to see fault in their ideology. Obama wouldn't get the support of his own party now. They are embarrassed of him.

I agree, but I would rephrase your first sentence and replace "...anyone is qualified for the position...", with "anyone can get elected even though unqualified for the position" .

[Guest]

I agree, but I would rephrase your first sentence and replace "...anyone is qualified for the position...", with "anyone can get elected even though unqualified for the position" .

You have a good point. However, he has proven that "anyone is qualified" IF he is qualified. :)

[Guest]

Obama would make an excellent replacement for Jon Stewart and to be the host of the Daily Show ... he pretty much lives it as it is

Too bad he wasn't offered the job (oops) six years ago :1rotfl:

[Guest]

Too bad he wasn't offered the job (oops) six years ago :1rotfl:

Then all of us would like him.

[Guest]

George W would have handed Clinton his hat if not for Perot splitting the conservative vote. Let's face the truth, ok? Obama got such a high turnout because he was supposed to be the black messiah. He had a record black turnout. Race loyalty vs logic and common sense. He told everyone that he was a socialist and promised to fundamentally change America. Who wanted change? The minority with misconceived ideas that he was going to "give" them wealth with no responsibility. Take from those that have to give to those without. That's an enticing idea, but only in fairytales. Obama's utopia didn't work out. Instead, we have more racial divide and political divide than ever. More black unemployment, more folks on food stamps, record poverty, etc.

Excellent analysis ... black turnout and white guilt ridden liberals elected him ... he is the failed Black Messiah unfortunately mainly because of his hard core Lefty views. Race relations are WORSE which no one would have predicted for the most part. Heckuva job Barry.

[Guest]

You have a good point. However, he has proven that "anyone is qualified" IF he is qualified. :)

Fair enough.

[Guest]

Romneywould beat him today!
It's been a long three years for you, hasn't it?

[Guest]

You have a good point. However, he has proven that "anyone is qualified" IF he is qualified. :)

True, I hadn't looked at it that way.

[Guest]

It's been a long three years for you, hasn't it?

....and it will be 8 years of Mrs. Clinton to make for an even longer time period.

Well, most of the geezers who are the rabid Tea Bags won't make it to the end of Pres. Clinton's second term. Maybe then sanity (not Hannity) will prevail.

[Guest]

What could possibly lead Obama to such a conclusion. Oh wait!

The 2016 Republican Clown Car (http://republicanclowncar.blogspot.com/)

[Guest]

....and it will be 8 years of Mrs. Clinton to make for an even longer time period.

Well, most of the geezers who are the rabid Tea Bags won't make it to the end of Pres. Clinton's second term. Maybe then sanity (not Hannity) will prevail.

How moutby and brave of you hiding behind your keyboard.

We know you don't have the balls to call us names across the table face to face.
Unless you bring a really big keyboard.

[Guest]

....and it will be 8 years of Mrs. Clinton to make for an even longer time period.

Well, most of the geezers who are the rabid Tea Bags won't make it to the end of Pres. Clinton's second term. Maybe then sanity (not Hannity) will prevail.

Your derogatory diaherria Underscores your stupidity by making comments about those who may be younger than you.......for sure smarter than you.
You just go right ahead stroking yourself.......you will never live long enough to see a Clinton criminal become president.
There just are not enough stupids to make that happen.

[Guest]

....and it will be 8 years of Mrs. Clinton to make for an even longer time period.

Well, most of the geezers who are the rabid Tea Bags won't make it to the end of Pres. Clinton's second term. Maybe then sanity (not Hannity) will prevail.

Sorry friend, but "Tea B**s" is a term more appropriate to use on the liberal side. Not to disparage anyone's education but that term is a derogatory term used to describe a deviant sexual act that liberals would likely experience more the "geezers" you unjustly deride.
As for Billary getting the position, you will more likely suffer those consequences than the "geezers." I guess the laugh, though painful, would definitely be suffered by those of the future generations. Liberals may win again, but they are the Greece of the future, if that happens. When shooting for a win, be careful of the prize. You may win something rotten. :yuck::yuck:

[Guest]

I think he might win a third term, the idiots who voted for him before don't appear to have gotten any smarter and there are more of them.

[Guest]

I think he might win a third term, the idiots who voted for him before don't appear to have gotten any smarter and there are more of them.

:agree::yuck:

[Guest]

Putin says he is a great president/dictator too. Third term? Bah, we don't need no stinkin' election.

[Guest]

Well, Republicans and Tea Partiers - answer the question - what Republican or other party candidate WOULD beat President Obama if an election were held today?

Vewy, vewy quiet out there.

Anyone could beat this one. He goes down as the "worse President " ever.

[Guest]

Anyone could beat this one. He goes down as the "worse President " ever.

No, that honor was bestowed on George W. Bush. :boom::boom::boom::boom:

[Guest]

Anyone could beat this one. He goes down as the "worse President " ever.








McCain couldn't

Romney couldn't

Lotta Repub bluster - and not much else

[Guest]

I think he might win a third term, the idiots who voted for him before don't appear to have gotten any smarter and there are more of them.
You said the secret word...

https://youtu.be/GlA35y0bGQc

[Guest]

....and it will be 8 years of Mrs. Clinton to make for an even longer time period.

Well, most of the geezers who are the rabid Tea Bags won't make it to the end of Pres. Clinton's second term. Maybe then sanity (not Hannity) will prevail.

You forget that Ms Clinton will be in jail by then and a convicted felon ... for mishandling 100s of classified emails

[Guest]

The thought that went into every Republican post on this matter is amazing. Some of them even put two sentences together. What a country! With such a informed Republican base, how did they ever lose? The sheer brilliance of this cast of characters here should have been able to convince the blackest of the black, the poorest of the poor, and all other Kenyan citizens voting that Obama was the worst person ever to run for president let alone be elected president. Hope and change! Everybody knows they are two swear words. The only thing that Republicans in Congress want to do is change their diapers. Their hope is that they never have to take their foot out of their mouth.

[Guest]

Dear Guests: I read every post and post after post made me sadder because it reflected the state of our nation. We have become so polarized so
nasty and mean in our message. Its no wonder we are failing in government, education economy. We are witnessing moral anarchy ,weak and divisive leadership loss of our patriotism belief in our exceptionalism .

We elected a national leader who promised hope and change who taxed us into the highest recorded debt in the history of this nation, who divided us by class race, income. Who embraced our enemies and and berated our friends. a leader whose most frequent words were "I" and "me". A leader who has left our military vulnerable to protect us against attack. A leader who has mounted a record breaking number of entitlements. A leader whose agencies are marred in scandal and deceit . A leader who has no respect for our Constitution three branches for the need for balance of
power. Who clearly see America only as to its colonial past

A leader who has unfortunately revised the saying that "anyone can be president".

So I wonder will the American voters follow that failed blueprint? Is there a declared candidate who can right this ship called America? Can we believe the message of any of the candidates? Shouldn't we stop berating one another and come together to decide on the most likely candidate to turn this country around? The stakes are high. there is no room or time for pettiness we need serious voters .

Personal Best Regards:

[Guest]

The thought that went into every Republican post on this matter is amazing. Some of them even put two sentences together. What a country! With such a informed Republican base, how did they ever lose? The sheer brilliance of this cast of characters here should have been able to convince the blackest of the black, the poorest of the poor, and all other Kenyan citizens voting that Obama was the worst person ever to run for president let alone be elected president. Hope and change! Everybody knows they are two swear words. The only thing that Republicans in Congress want to do is change their diapers. Their hope is that they never have to take their foot out of their mouth.

:blahblahblah::blahblahblah: Can anyone say TROLL?

[Guest]

No, that honor was bestowed on George W. Bush. :boom::boom::boom::boom:

Might want to check your facts out, and the current polls. But, I am sure you can find someone at Huffington to help you out.

[Guest]

Dear Guests: I read every post and post after post made me sadder because it reflected the state of our nation. We have become so polarized so
nasty and mean in our message. Its no wonder we are failing in government, education economy. We are witnessing moral anarchy ,weak and divisive leadership loss of our patriotism belief in our exceptionalism .

We elected a national leader who promised hope and change who taxed us into the highest recorded debt in the history of this nation, who divided us by class race, income. Who embraced our enemies and and berated our friends. a leader whose most frequent words were "I" and "me". A leader who has left our military vulnerable to protect us against attack. A leader who has mounted a record breaking number of entitlements. A leader whose agencies are marred in scandal and deceit . A leader who has no respect for our Constitution three branches for the need for balance of
power. Who clearly see America only as to its colonial past

A leader who has unfortunately revised the saying that "anyone can be president".

So I wonder will the American voters follow that failed blueprint? Is there a declared candidate who can right this ship called America? Can we believe the message of any of the candidates? Shouldn't we stop berating one another and come together to decide on the most likely candidate to turn this country around? The stakes are high. there is no room or time for pettiness we need serious voters .

Personal Best Regards:
Glad to see a non polarized post.

[Guest]

I find the opposition posts to be very limited and repetitious. It must be not very satisfying to be restricted in what one is allowed to say.....and boring.
Totally dependent on party messaging.

One for one Obama amplifiers.

[Guest]

Dear Guests: I read every post and post after post made me sadder because it reflected the state of our nation. We have become so polarized so
nasty and mean in our message. Its no wonder we are failing in government, education economy. We are witnessing moral anarchy ,weak and divisive leadership loss of our patriotism belief in our exceptionalism .

We elected a national leader who promised hope and change who taxed us into the highest recorded debt in the history of this nation, who divided us by class race, income. Who embraced our enemies and and berated our friends. a leader whose most frequent words were "I" and "me". A leader who has left our military vulnerable to protect us against attack. A leader who has mounted a record breaking number of entitlements. A leader whose agencies are marred in scandal and deceit . A leader who has no respect for our Constitution three branches for the need for balance of
power. Who clearly see America only as to its colonial past

A leader who has unfortunately revised the saying that "anyone can be president".

So I wonder will the American voters follow that failed blueprint? Is there a declared candidate who can right this ship called America? Can we believe the message of any of the candidates? Shouldn't we stop berating one another and come together to decide on the most likely candidate to turn this country around? The stakes are high. there is no room or time for pettiness we need serious voters .

Personal Best Regards:

Always the voice of reason.........thank you!!

[Guest]

As appealing as that may be, it probably won't happen but it will further her reputation as a fundamentally dishonest and untrustworthy person. Even the most ardent Clinton supporters are having to come to grips that she fundamentally doesn't believe that rules apply to her.

You forget that Ms Clinton will be in jail by then and a convicted felon ... for mishandling 100s of classified emails

[Guest]

I find it really amusing that former Virginia governor McDonald - a staunch Republican (known as Gov. Probe) is now going to be in the slammer for quite a while.

...and the Dumpublicans:loco:wonder why Virginia changed to a Blue State.

[Guest]

I find it really amusing that former Virginia governor McDonald - a staunch Republican (known as Gov. Probe) is now going to be in the slammer for quite a while.

...and the Dumpublicans:loco:wonder why Virginia changed to a Blue State.

Are you capable of being able to make a Point without name calling.

Are you that crude and rude face to face?

Pee poor representation of your party.

[Guest]

I'm a conservative but I think Obama might be right. It all boils down to who can deliver the most "something for nothing" and doesn't ask for any kind of sacrifice. Most posters in this forum have no idea of the hole that has been dug by our generation, long before Obama. He is just convenient.

[Guest]

Can anyone say troll? What for pointing out the obvious! Hey dude, try strings two sentences together. I would really be careful. The stress may put you in the hospital. You are the clown that laughs at his own jokes.

Don't throw any praise at Mr. Voice of Reason. This is the guy, who said he reads both sides of an argument, and draws a logical "fair and balanced" conclusion. The conclusion is always the same. It is nothing more than Republican nonsense. Any questions that he knows he is dead wrong, he won't answer. If you haven't noticed that, you haven't been looking.

Okay. I am ready for the attack of the one liners. By all means, please do not strain your brain. A brain is a terrible thing to waste. This assumes you have a brain. Evidence shows that could be a real stretch.

[Guest]

Are you capable of being able to make a Point without name calling.

Are you that crude and rude face to face?

Pee poor representation of your party.

Crawl back down your troll hole. You have been told more than a few times you are not relevant anymore. Shoo!

[Guest]

The women of Northern Virginia had enough of their governor regulating their reproductive rights. The final straw was his mandate for vaginal probes if the women wanted an abortion. Invasive procedures rendered for political reasons? Well, these women make up a sizable voting bloc and were able to elect a Democrat instead of McDonald. McDonald got indicted and is now going to be having a tax paid vacation IN PRISON.

Yes, this is one major reason that Virginia politics went from Republican to Democrat. Legal immigrants are another reason. Notice, I said LEGAL immigrants. The Republicans are trying (and succeeding) in cutting aid benefits to poor families. Does that ingratiate them to these folks? Which way will someone vote when things are taken away by Republicans? No rocket science here.

The rest of Virginia is basically hillbilly and even though they vote Republican as a rule, they do not count because the Northern Virginia (educated) over rule them on just about every issue due to numbers.

[Guest]

I'm a conservative but I think Obama might be right. It all boils down to who can deliver the most "something for nothing" and doesn't ask for any kind of sacrifice. Most posters in this forum have no idea of the hole that has been dug by our generation, long before Obama. He is just convenient.

While I do agree that there is plenty of blame to go around, the "hole that has been dug" was $10 trillion (the total of all Presidents before Obama) when Obama took office and is now over $18+ trillion, and it is expected to exceed $20 trillion by the time that he leaves office. So, I would say that it is more than just a matter of convenience that Obama gets most of the blame.

[Guest]

crawl back down your troll hole. You have been told more than a few times you are not relevant anymore. Shoo!

kma

[Guest]

While I do agree that there is plenty of blame to go around, the "hole that has been dug" was $10 trillion (the total of all Presidents before Obama) when Obama took office and is now over $18+ trillion, and it is expected to exceed $20 trillion by the time that he leaves office. So, I would say that it is more than just a matter of convenience that Obama gets most of the blame.

How much do you think that deficit would be if we could deduct the expense of two unpaid-for wars? How about if we could deduct George Bush's unpaid-for Medicare Part D?

Do you believe that Barack Obama will leave behind the worst recession since the great depression when he leaves office?

[Guest]

I find the opposition posts to be very limited and repetitious. It must be not very satisfying to be restricted in what one is allowed to say.....and boring.
Totally dependent on party messaging.

One for one Obama amplifiers.

Interesting that you are able to defend your messiah (Obama) only by finding some blame to point out on everyone else. Kind of hard to defend him, right? I have yet to see where you mention all his GOOD traits. Must be hard to find something convincing.

Boring is hearing the same ole "well Bush did this" and "but the GOP minority in congress obstructed" etc. You do realize that your supposed defense is typically juvenile, right?

[Guest]

How much do you think that deficit would be if we could deduct the expense of two unpaid-for wars? How about if we could deduct George Bush's unpaid-for Medicare Part D?

Do you believe that Barack Obama will leave behind the worst recession since the great depression when he leaves office?

If you check your facts before expounding mindlessly, you would find that both wars did not constitute an expenditure near the gigantic deficit incurred by this administration by their frivolous give-a-ways. Much more was wasted in all their failures in the past 5-6 years. But, keep the mantra rolling...."blame Bush."

[Guest]

I find the opposition posts to be very limited and repetitious. It must be not very satisfying to be restricted in what one is allowed to say.....and boring.
Totally dependent on party messaging.

One for one Obama amplifiers.

Hate to see you bored. The door is just a click away. :click:

[Guest]

:agree::agree:Are you capable of being able to make a Point without name calling.

Are you that crude and rude face to face?

Pee poor representation of your party.

[Guest]

[QUOTE=Guest;1092867]How much do you think that deficit would be if we could deduct the expense of two unpaid-for wars? How about if we could deduct George Bush's unpaid-for Medicare Part D?

I have no idea, please provide the figures. Thank you.

Do you believe that Barack Obama will leave behind the worst recession since the great depression when he leaves office?/QUOTE]

He has already been given credit for the slowest recovery from a recession since WWII. The economy is slowly recovering inspite of his policies. If it weren't for the Fed monetary policy, it would be much worse. its own.

[Guest]

Crawl back down your troll hole. You have been told more than a few times you are not relevant anymore. Shoo!

:agree:

[Guest]

[QUOTE=Guest;1092867]How much do you think that deficit would be if we could deduct the expense of two unpaid-for wars? How about if we could deduct George Bush's unpaid-for Medicare Part D?

I have no idea, please provide the figures. Thank you.

Do you believe that Barack Obama will leave behind the worst recession since the great depression when he leaves office?/QUOTE]

He has already been given credit for the slowest recovery from a recession since WWII. The economy is slowly recovering inspite of his policies. If it weren't for the Fed monetary policy, it would be much worse. its own.

Good points. His defense still doesn't validate Obama's claim. But, like Obama these liberals have learned to blame someone else for their faults. I guess that makes them "good" ???

[Guest]

Obama knew exactly what he was getting into when he ran for office. He said so, and made grand claims of how he would fundamentally change everything. He has done nothing but complain about his situation since the day he was sworn in. He had the total majority in congress for two years and couldn't get anything done. Lack of leadership. Now, he can't even get his own party to back him on anything. When we had midterm elections, no one wanted to be associated with him during their campaigns. He wasn't a good president. He was pathetic, divisive, stubborn, uncompromising, and racially biased. Biggest mistake America ever made. But, we have to live with our mistakes. Hopefully, the voters have learned because they sure aren't acting very bright.

[Guest]

How much do you think that deficit would be if we could deduct the expense of two unpaid-for wars? How about if we could deduct George Bush's unpaid-for Medicare Part D?

Do you believe that Barack Obama will leave behind the worst recession since the great depression when he leaves office?

The so-called two unfunded wars is an interesting supposition. You do realize that no wars are budgeted for, right? But, it is an interesting subject. According to what I have learned, the sum of the "two wars" does not equal a trillion bucks. As a matter of fact, all spending on national defense from 2003 through 2008 was $3.0 trillion. But, let's expand the war spending through 2011 and we might be able to round it off to a trillion. What percentage of the total defense spending budget? So, if you look at Bush's spending as percentage of GDP, his is lowest since 1940.

Now, addressing the Medicare D. That was a problem, right? The reason why he couldn't get Democrat support for it was because they felt he didn't go far enough. Example: Obamacare. Talk about "unfunded." Attempting to steal from our Medicare to fund it and still need a trillion bucks (unfunded).

As for the recession, it's easy to Monday morning quarterback now. However, Bush asked for an audit of Freddy and Fannie on more than one occasion and also pushed congress to regulate them. Barney Frank(D) stonewalled and blocked Bush at every request. Bush had no authority to force it.

The "repeal" of Glass Steagall, that happened in 1999 -- passed in the Senate by a vote of 90-8 and signed into law by President Clinton. As a matter of fact, let's look at some of the signers of that bill; Senators voting for that change included Chuck Schumer, John Kerry, Chris Dodd, John Edwards, Dick Durbin, Tom Daschle, and Joe Biden. Do you understand what this "repeal" meant?

Now, even though this has nothing to do with Obama being a "good" president, I thought I would answer your questions. I believe you were attempting that tired old defensive measure of blaming Bush for Obama's failures? If Obama needs you to defend his terrible record, then perhaps he is not as good as liberals seem to adamantly insist. It appears that the emperor's wardrobe is nonexistent. :wave:

[Guest]

By the way, if you want to "Dis" Bush on something, why not mention his tax cuts? I think that Bush made the largest mistake of his career by cutting the tax rate for almost 47% of the low earners to the point where they not only didn't pay a dime, but many of them got money back that they never paid into the system. If they don't pay taxes, they certainly aren't going to vote for the GOP that favors the earners. As long as the feeding hand tells them that the rich should pay more so that they would reap the benefits, then they will vote for the giver, not the taker. Personally, I think that Bush made a major blunder in that regard. He just handed the liberals control of the government. The Dems won't tax the little guy and the little guy will vote for them to ensure the gravy train. Everyone should have to pay something, in my opinion. But, Obama and his fellow socialists believe that the burden is in those that have the wealth.

[Guest]

The so-called two unfunded wars is an interesting supposition. You do realize that no wars are budgeted for, right? But, it is an interesting subject. According to what I have learned, the sum of the "two wars" does not equal a trillion bucks. As a matter of fact, all spending on national defense from 2003 through 2008 was $3.0 trillion. But, let's expand the war spending through 2011 and we might be able to round it off to a trillion. What percentage of the total defense spending budget? So, if you look at Bush's spending as percentage of GDP, his is lowest since 1940.

Now, addressing the Medicare D. That was a problem, right? The reason why he couldn't get Democrat support for it was because they felt he didn't go far enough. Example: Obamacare. Talk about "unfunded." Attempting to steal from our Medicare to fund it and still need a trillion bucks (unfunded).

As for the recession, it's easy to Monday morning quarterback now. However, Bush asked for an audit of Freddy and Fannie on more than one occasion and also pushed congress to regulate them. Barney Frank(D) stonewalled and blocked Bush at every request. Bush had no authority to force it.

The "repeal" of Glass Steagall, that happened in 1999 -- passed in the Senate by a vote of 90-8 and signed into law by President Clinton. As a matter of fact, let's look at some of the signers of that bill; Senators voting for that change included Chuck Schumer, John Kerry, Chris Dodd, John Edwards, Dick Durbin, Tom Daschle, and Joe Biden. Do you understand what this "repeal" meant?

Now, even though this has nothing to do with Obama being a "good" president, I thought I would answer your questions. I believe you were attempting that tired old defensive measure of blaming Bush for Obama's failures? If Obama needs you to defend his terrible record, then perhaps he is not as good as liberals seem to adamantly insist. It appears that the emperor's wardrobe is nonexistent. :wave:

Excellent analyses ... but it's UNFAIR when you use facts, reason and logic to demolish liberals' "religious views" :) .... which is all they really are when you get down to it.

[Guest]

Bush asked for audits on Fanny and Freddie. He certainly did. In 2005, the Republican house passed a GSE reform act, which would have created stronger regulation of Fannie and Freddie, powers to increase capital at Fannie and Freddie, limit their portfolios, and deal with the possibility of receivership. Bush opposed the bill, and it died in the Senate. The author of the bill, a Republican, stated that if passed into law, it might have stopped the 2008 crash.

No one could have foreseen the games that large banks, and investment houses were playing with mortgages. Grouping 100 garbage mortgages together, selling them to mutual funds with A+ rating from rating companies. Dowd/Frank law tried to put a stop to this practice, and placed strong regulations on banks, and investment houses. It also established a Consumer Protection Agency. Elizabeth Warren was going to head it. The Republicans stalled her approval for ever. They paid for that one.

Nobody walks away from the 2008 great recession with clean hands.

[Guest]

My mistake. Elizabeth Warren was blocked by Republicans from the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, and not Consumer Protection Agency.

[Guest]

Bush asked for audits on Fanny and Freddie. He certainly did. In 2005, the Republican house passed a GSE reform act, which would have created stronger regulation of Fannie and Freddie, powers to increase capital at Fannie and Freddie, limit their portfolios, and deal with the possibility of receivership. Bush opposed the bill, and it died in the Senate. The author of the bill, a Republican, stated that if passed into law, it might have stopped the 2008 crash.

No one could have foreseen the games that large banks, and investment houses were playing with mortgages. Grouping 100 garbage mortgages together, selling them to mutual funds with A+ rating from rating companies. Dowd/Frank law tried to put a stop to this practice, and placed strong regulations on banks, and investment houses. It also established a Consumer Protection Agency. Elizabeth Warren was going to head it. The Republicans stalled her approval for ever. They paid for that one.

Nobody walks away from the 2008 great recession with clean hands.

Never forget the impact of the Community Reinvestment Act. It had quite an impact and is oft ignored.

[Guest]

Again with the 47%! This is the breakdown of the 47% from Fox News. 10.3% elderly. This people are living on social security, and small pensions. Their combined income doesn't throw them into a tax payment situation.

6.9% non-elderly Either make less than $9,500. or do not work. They do not file income taxes.

28.3% They pay social security, and Medicare Taxes. They work at very low wages or part time jobs, which doesn't raise them to the level where they have to pay income taxes. They receive Earned Income Credit.

less 1% other.

The Bush tax cut lowered the tax rate for all tax brackets. There were some capital gains changes. The child credit went from $500. to $1,000. per child. These changes benefitted the higher tax brackets more than the all the others. Other than the child tax increase, it didn't do a damn thing to the 47% of people that pay taxes. First grade math any number multiplied by zero the answer is zero.

The 47% was a mistake by Romney. It might have cost him the election. A great number of the 47% live in Republican dominated states. The takers in these states certainly didn't change the outcome in these states. Concerning the Democrat states on each coast, these states are paying more in taxes than they are receiving back from the federal government. Your argument doesn't hold water.

[Guest]

Again with the 47%! This is the breakdown of the 47% from Fox News. 10.3% elderly. This people are living on social security, and small pensions. Their combined income doesn't throw them into a tax payment situation.

6.9% non-elderly Either make less than $9,500. or do not work. They do not file income taxes.

28.3% They pay social security, and Medicare Taxes. They work at very low wages or part time jobs, which doesn't raise them to the level where they have to pay income taxes. They receive Earned Income Credit.

less 1% other.

The Bush tax cut lowered the tax rate for all tax brackets. There were some capital gains changes. The child credit went from $500. to $1,000. per child. These changes benefitted the higher tax brackets more than the all the others. Other than the child tax increase, it didn't do a damn thing to the 47% of people that pay taxes. First grade math any number multiplied by zero the answer is zero.

The 47% was a mistake by Romney. It might have cost him the election. A great number of the 47% live in Republican dominated states. The takers in these states certainly didn't change the outcome in these states. Concerning the Democrat states on each coast, these states are paying more in taxes than they are receiving back from the federal government. Your argument doesn't hold water.

The 47% was used as an estimated number. No one said different. If you figure the numbers though, with the changes in the tax rates, and deductions, plus the idea of EITC, many folks filed and received gov money that they never paid into the system. If you do the math, a family of four making $50K per year, paid $0. I know for a fact that some folks received hundreds in money not deducted from their income.

It's ok for Obama or other liberals to generalize and scoff off any critical comments when pointed out, but heaven help a conservative if he/she makes a sweeping comment or estimate.

The fact is that Bush's tax breaks, although good for the economy, made it hard for conservatives running for election. Those NOT paying taxes will jump on the liberal band wagon when it comes to unfairly taxing the wealthy. And fairness is when ALL are treated EQUALLY. You want to be fair in taxation, then do away with income tax and go to a federal sales tax.

[Guest]

Bush asked for audits on Fanny and Freddie. He certainly did. In 2005, the Republican house passed a GSE reform act, which would have created stronger regulation of Fannie and Freddie, powers to increase capital at Fannie and Freddie, limit their portfolios, and deal with the possibility of receivership. Bush opposed the bill, and it died in the Senate. The author of the bill, a Republican, stated that if passed into law, it might have stopped the 2008 crash.

No one could have foreseen the games that large banks, and investment houses were playing with mortgages. Grouping 100 garbage mortgages together, selling them to mutual funds with A+ rating from rating companies. Dowd/Frank law tried to put a stop to this practice, and placed strong regulations on banks, and investment houses. It also established a Consumer Protection Agency. Elizabeth Warren was going to head it. The Republicans stalled her approval for ever. They paid for that one.

Nobody walks away from the 2008 great recession with clean hands.

GSE was not passed because of ONE Democrat vote, according to what I read. I believe McCain was involved in pushing the reform, more than once. But, I agree that there are a lot of dirty hands. But, to blame Bush is quite a stretch. He had no authority (unlike emperor Obama) to dictate a change.

[Guest]

I'm a conservative but I think Obama might be right. It all boils down to who can deliver the most "something for nothing" and doesn't ask for any kind of sacrifice. Most posters in this forum have no idea of the hole that has been dug by our generation, long before Obama. He is just convenient.

Unbelievable!

I'm a progressive/liberal loon but I think that Obama is an idiot, socialist, Muslim.

:1rotfl::1rotfl::jester::jester::pepper2::pepper2:
:rolleyes::rolleyes:

[Guest]

"good" ??? As compared to what/whom? I guess it is all dependent on one's perspective of oneself. I am a good citizen, a good father, a good neighbor, a good driver.

[Guest]

All the posts I've read supporting Obama seem to condone his continual lies half truths and failure to enforce the law. Those in his support either don't pay attention or are very happy being a socialist with Washington controlling their life , all supporters please tell us what Obama has accomplished for the good of the country. The Clintons were broke when elected and now multi millionaires , Obamas broke when elected and now multimillionaires ,how has either one of these Presidents improved you wages?

[Guest]

Do we really need an inept, pathological lying narcissist, who destroys our economy, turns the Middle East into an inferno, allows China & Russia to attack our servers, expand their military, threaten its neighbors, give Iran the nuke, enrage the Jews befriend Islamic terrorists, polarize & incite racial tensions then lecture us when rioters have looted & burned the town. This is a man with infinite tolerance for the misery of others. He goes golfing after someone loses his head, goes campaigning after an ambassador & 3 Americans are killed in Benghazi. It it wasn't for the cover of the Corrupt Lib Media more people would know how destructive the Commie Kenyan is.

[Guest]

For sure he would win a 3rd term....all he has to do is come up with more freebies and of course all the dems would approve and borrow the money from China to buy the votes. Rush Limbaugh said it the best "YOU CAN"T BEAT SANTA CLAUS!!!!" If you do not agree then you can not handle the truth!

[Guest]

Obama has said a lot of ludicrous things. Why take him seriously now?