They want Pres. Obama to fail?
 

I have heard this from some of the right wing nuts that they want President Obama to fail as a president. Besides being downright unpatriotic, it is downright foolish.

Do they want their 401(k) to go back to the levels they were in late 2007? Personally, I am glad mine is way up from that time period. Did they honestly want major car companies to go bankrupt at the time of a major economic downturn of the country. This would have put millions of Americans on the unemployment line and would have caused the collapse of the already damaged economy.

Did they want the US to stay in Iraq forever hunting for non-existent WMD's?

Yes, the current president is not perfect and there have been shortcomings but it sure is better than how things were back in late 2007. Gas prices are way too high, there should be drilling for domestic oil, and a pipeline from Canada to Texas is a good idea.

I am very happy at the upswing of the stock market as it is now over 13,000 as compared with how it was in late 2007. Do you want it to go back to those levels? I hope not.

It's the way the political world has turned. Driven by big $$$$. They have no shame in either or any party.

Of course they want him to fail, but they have no new ideas and so far no viable candidate to replace him.

Yes they want him to fail and watch your stock market because the bubble will burst again and soon. Look at the statistics from 2000 and 2001 and 2008 its going to hit you and hard. Look it up for yourself. I,m out of the market completely. Not that anyone cares

Were you liberals hoping for President Bush to succeed?............no, really.

Limbaugh: I Hope Obama Fails - The Rush Limbaugh Show

Come on guys you all know perfectly well that Obama is very capable of allowing himself to fail and he doesn't need anyone's help.

Look at his failed foreign policies
Look at his failed economic policies
Look at ObamaCare which is coming apart at the seams according to the CBO.
Look at his failed energy policies. etc, etc, etc,

No, I beleieve Obama is doing a very fine job of sabotaging himself

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

I am VERY CURIOUS, as you have said.."I have heard this from some of the right wing nuts".....WHERE you heard it other than the comment by Limbaugh ? And why you choose to begin the name calling again ?

That kind of thing seems to be a basic characteristic of folks who support Obama....the name calling..dont get it !

Mitch McConnell Senate repub leader....what did he say the repubs number 1 job was? And could someone please tell me where our foreign policy failures are,what economic failures have there been and on and on.

Bucco: It is a mystery as to why otherwise logical individuals would place themselves at a disadvantage?

Start with HEALTH CARE and a fiasco to come. THIS is major and would, in my mind supercede anything good he may have done.

I think the bail out of the auto companies will come back to haunt the industry and our country. He set such precedents with unions...did you know that the government favored unions over anyone and anybody...and actually over other workers. I attach a link that may give you more information as I am not the best at explaining.

"Driving to Delusionville
Obama’s former auto czar is in deep denial about the government’s failed bailout"

Driving to Delusionville - Reason Magazine

Then our relations with ME countries is just terrible including with those we consider friends.

I began a thread on here about China being name the BEST FRIEND of our unions.....there is death and destruction and terroristic actions all over and while I am surely not endorsing war, we do NOTHING...see Syria, Somalia to begin.

He is on a mission to systematically change what this country is all about....he TALKS so nice and I agree...if all I had was his speeches I would be absolutely a big fan,but you have got to look at what he does or does not do....he is a master of big talk, no action.

Will get back to you...everytime I go down this path I get so depressed. This is NOT, I REPEAT NOT...an endorsement of the Replublican party or any candidate, but this man has done all the things I was wary of in 2008 and if he is in a situation where he does not have to stand in front of the voters anymore, I fear.

BUT.....

WAYNENET...please admit at least how difficult it is to get any of his fans, including you to discuss the actual issues....it is all about one liners...PLEASE at least follow the ACTIONS,and not just the WORDS.

Bucco,
You would have rather let the auto manufacturers go bankrupt and out of business than to bail them out? The country was in economic turmoil at that time when Bush Jr first gave money to the auto manufacturers. This was necessary to have them survive. If they had gone bankrupt, the entire Midwest economy would have totally collapsed with millions of American workers out of a job. It would have been the final straw that would have pushed the world economy over the brink.

Your bank accounts would not have been worth anything. Your retirement package would be gone up in smoke. The housing market would have collapsed completely and disaster would have been right there.

No matter who was President, the bailout of the auto industry was the right thing to do.

Everything you say is your surmise and is the LINE of the Democratic party. I submit that all you say would have happened would NOT have happened. The ONLY thing that can be said in a legitmate manner is that the private money was not there...I DO NOT AGREE, but lets assume it was not...THEN bail them out.

This bail out has EMPOWERED THE UNIONS and is such a shallow "victory" that did nothing to reestablish these companies as stronger entities. Let the system work....it will. Some pain, maybe....but you will come back stronger....they still pay the big bonuses...unions are stronger than ever....dont see that as a good thing !

I think it is important to establish something here. Those who continually bring up "you want Obama to fail" are playing to an audience that has to be so shallow. It is a result of one comment by a commentator, and I, FOR ONE ANYWAY, am really insulted when somebody throws that at me....and that adds the unamerican part. To them I say...HOW DARE YOU..how dare you take my opposition to your idol and turn it like that. This is an oft used tactic by the President on any critics he has....and I suppose you folks just pick it up from there but it is insulting.

I wish his agenda to fail regarding many things...THAT IS TRUE, but you folks take this to a new and disgusting level.

I also will add, as is the normal course of events, someone will talk about Bush in some way shape or manner....it is just inevitable.....I never heard him talk that way...I did hear followers of his say that "un american" stuff and that was wrong. It is wrong and insulting no matter who does it.

Thanks for allowing me to get that off my chest !

And what about the republican congress that won't pass one thing the president proposes even when it was their idea in the first place?

Bucco - that article lost me at "failed bailout".

Record profits at GM kind of shoot holes in that story. And that's just for starters.

"“The Obama Administration yesterday acknowledged the reality we have long been pointing out – that General Motors stock is hopelessly below our break-even price. And that We the People will not – as the President once asserted – make money on the auto bailout."

"Word came late yesterday that the Barack Obama Administration had upped dramatically the estimated loss on the automobile industry bailout – from $14.3 billion to $23.6 billion."

Plus, you do know that most of the money, if not all, received prior to the bail out, ie. money recd from the Bush adminstration did not have to be paid back.....BILLIONS. Good route to profit.

Good News: We Won’t Lose $14.3 Billion on the Auto Bailout – Bad News: It Will Actually Be $23.6 Billion

Now, we know that GM, etc DID IN FACT go into bankruptcy just like the President said they didnt....after he gave them money..they could have done that for fee I think and the banks would have been fine with restructing.

Chrysler is now owned and managed by Fiat....however

Most important to me is that I always am on folks for blaming Bush for everything....this President Obama has said that HE saw the trouble and went into action to save them, BUT......Bush fought with congress who said NO to him and gave them 17 BILLION dollars on condition that they shrink debt, negotiate with the union on wage cuts and benefit cuts and submit plans for the future...NOT OBAMA but BUSH. I didnt agree then with Bush and agree less with Obama and really get upset when I listen to him and his cronies say how HE saved the industry,

The jury is still out on how much the loss or profit (however unlikely) will be on the GM bailout because the government does still own GM stock, though not nearly as much as when the bankruptcy happened.

Can you quote me something where the President said GM *didn't* go into bankruptcy - because what they went through sure seemed like it to me. The difference being a reorganization versus a liquidation (there were no banks willing to loan GM the money to go through a reorg).

You are correct that the President never said that...I apologize

I still hang with my premise on this subject however..and that stock that the Govt owns is very very devalued !

But, I think it will ALWAYS have been a bad idea, but how bad will take a number of years.

and whaat about a president and senate who will NOT meet the opposition part way and negotiate what might not be best BUT would be a better path for america? - regardless of whose idea it is!!!

Compromise by both parties is lacking but is much needed by both sides.

Please cite examples of this so I can comment.

Last count I saw was TWENTY EIGHT 28 bills stalled in the Senate passed by the house, and of course...

"Harry Reid Sits on Jobs Bill to Force Votes on 17 Obama Lifetime Judiciary Nominees. Senate majority leader Harry Reid is at it again. Instead of putting the recent jobs bill passed in the House last week, and endorsed by Obama, in front of the Senate for a vote, Reid is setting it aside in order to force votes on 17 Obama lifetime judicial nominees. Harry Reid, in his obstruction of passing the jobs bill, wants to blame the Republicans, again, for obstructionism as he forces votes.

Yes, Reid has blamed Republicans repeatedly for obstructionism:"

UPDATE: Harry Reid Sits on Jobs Bill to Force Votes on 17 Obama Lifetime Judicial Nominees - American Live Wire | American Live Wire

"Jobs Bill Stalls as Congress Fights Over Agency"

"A fight over a small export credit agency is dividing Congress and holding up a popular bipartisan jobs bill. "

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/15/bu...er-agency.html

Having said all of this, the post to which you want to reply to is simply a reply to another post calling out the Republican party for blocking bills. THEY BOTH DO IT, and if you need to waste time in tit for tat on THIS, then the party is your most important thing and not actually what is happening. Congress, BOTH PARTIES have a low approval rating for a reason...to color it a Red or Blue is just a waste of time

Bucco is right about this situation.

Barbara Bush was recently quoted as saying that it seems Compromise is a dirty word for politicians. Smart lady.

janmcn: Those Republicans are doing what the Navy did during World War II, deflecting kamikaze pilots.

janmcn - as you posted no examples in your response to waynet ["And what about the republican congress that won't pass one thing the president proposes even when it was their idea in the first place?"], i was simply turning the tables without example.

Fair enough. Here are just a few examples of the republican congress fighting the president at every step: not wanting to raise the debt limit, not wanting to pass the payroll tax cut, not wanting to approve his nominee to head the Consumer Protection Agency, not wanting to pass the Affordable Care Act, saying no to his Jobs Bill, not funding the FAA. If the republican led house does not pass the highways bill by March 31, all highway projects come to an end and thousands of people lose their jobs.

Now cite your examples.

janmcn - can't do that today - wish i could - have a patch over one eye and have difficulty negotiating the computer - but i googled 'obama won't negotiate' and you can read a bunch of examples there. in the examples you cited, did the republicans flat out refuse to negotiate? or did the pres refuse to give a bit to get a bit? i don't recall where the repubs flat out said NO; but rather, wanted something in return or perhaps a different approach to a similar end.

What in my post above did the republicans not fight the president every step of the way? Then today I pick up the newspaper and find out republicans are against the "Violence Against Women Act". So I guess this means they are for violence against women. Seems like republicans are trying to lose every election in 2012.

How long has it been since the Democrate controlled Senete has passed a budget resolution and sent it on to the House? Not a CR, but a real budget resolution.

THAT is not going to happen !!! We have not had a budget since this administration came into power.

But what do we need a budget for...spend it....if we run out, borrow or print it

If you read "How a bill becomes a law" you'll learn that the republican controlled house of representatives introduces the bill, passes it on to the democratic controlled senate for debate, and then the president signs it. The congress controls the purse strings.



Kids in the House - Grade School - How a Bill Becomes a Law

We all, or should, know how a bill becomes law.....in a hurry but will leave you with a few items....and of ccourse you will run to your nearest party site to find other things, but ...

...President Obama proposed a FY2012 budget last year, and the Senate voted it down 97–0. (And that budget was no prize—according to the Congressional Budget Office, that proposal never had an annual deficit of less than $748 billion, would double the national debt in 10 years and would see annual interest payments approach $1 trillion per year.)

...The Senate rejected House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan’s (R–WI) budget by 57–40 in May 2011, with no Democrats voting for it.

...Senator Reid has said it would be “foolish” to pass a budget, but failing to pass it is proving to be beyond irresponsible. The middle class will be left holding the bag, paying for the Senate’s reckless negligence with soaring deficits,

Have a nice day...someday MAYBE YOU WILL come to terms with a few things...

This President is NOT what you think he is at all.

This congress ON BOTH SIDES OF THE AISLE are a joke

NO political party is worth the adulation you give to this president and this party...NO PARTY

A do nothing Congress, imagine that.

For what is worth, I started a new thread regarding a column on Thomas sowell. One of the issues sowell address was the gridlock in Washington. he believes it is of great economic benefit because otherwise Washongton would continue to omplemet these God awful policies.

By the way this congress is probably the least effective in the origination of a bill. They are poorly researched, poorly written and/or poorly drafted, poorly reviewed, if they are reviewed at all and worse yet poorly understood. I guess we can contribute that to our education system

My point being that the House passed a budget and sent it on to the Senate where it died. They could have passed their own and sent it to Conference, but the Dems wanted no part of that.
Nice cheap shot, though.

I forgot the biggest example of republican obstruction: The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009, the first bill President Obama signed into law after taking office. Ninety-eight percent of republican house members voted no. That's correct 98% voted no.

The next time you shop at Publix, tell the cashier that you don't think SHE should make as much money as the man next to her doing the exact same job. UNBELIEVABLE

Republicans will try to spin these votes every which way come election time, but unfortunately for them, all the votes are in the Congressional Record.


National Committee on Pay Equity NCPE

The Republicans are concerned with the rising specter of fraud accompanying this bill this time around.

There is the problem of U-visas which are given to illegal immigrants who can aid a legal investigation, but immigrants who apply for U-visas do not need to assist in actual investigations, Republicans say, so an illegal immigrant facing deportation could apply for one without ever needing to aid law enforcement. Leahy’s bill does not contain provisions to prevent such abuse.

This new incarnations has no provisions against marriage fraud according to Republicans. If abuse is alleged a person can self petition without their "spouse" being involved. Another scenario ripe for fraud.

The revised bill also provides unprecedented legal jurisdiction for alleged crimes of violence committed against American Indian women by non-Indians on Indian reservations. The Supreme Court ruled in 1978 that tribes do not have authority over non-Indians, even if the crime occurs on the reservation.
This provision in the act would allow tribes to prosecute offenders who are not American Indian or Alaska Native, when their victims are, and the violence happens on a reservation.

Also the Republicans are said to be wary about a lack of oversight for $600,000 in grants contained in the bill. The Government Accountability Office has found that funding is not adequately tracked to evaluate the effectiveness of VAWA programs, and that the Office of Inspector General has raised questioned about the size of the grants and the grantees’ use of the money.

Iowa Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley introduced his own version of VAWA in committee to address those issues and it was this version of the bill Democrats rejected.

So, when you just point to wage concerns between men and women workers, it's only a part of this bill and not the reason why Republicans rejected the Democrat's version of the bill with it's lack of oversight and it's granting of powers to Indian tribes that is against all Supreme Court precedent.

The whole story is that the Democrats are voting against oversight of the money being funneled into this version of the bill, and against the oversight of illegal immigrants who may be "covered" under this version of the bill.

I'm glad you brought this to our attention Jan. It's one more reason to vote against the Democrat Party.

Violence Against Women Act | Senate Republicans | The Daily Caller

And thank YOU richielion for reinforcing the view that republicans are waging a war against women. They vote no on the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009, they vote no on the Violence Against Women Act, they introduce 1100 bills in 2011 in every state in the country pertaining to women's health issues (and are on track to surpass that number in 2012).

Even John McCain said yesterday on Meet The Press that this war on women has got to stop.

Saw an interesting headline recently that said "Don't Republicans Realize That Women Vote?"




Yes, There Is A Republican War On Women Voters | Fox News



http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/0...n_1359515.html

How soon we forget
 

that these liberal, left wing socialist Dems had the senate, house and presidentcy for two years and could not put their affairs in order or get it done, any of it. Now they turn around and blame anyone but themselves. What a line of crap they and the msm are trying to feed us. The reason that they no longer have the House or their super majority is that the Donkey B.S. is falling on deaf ears and the American People are getting smart and at the same time tired of their antics.

Obama is merely the mouth of the B.S. they are trying to shell out. Wake Up, the do nothing congress has a label and it is DEMOCRAT. The proof is in the party line that the libs in the political threads are trying to diseminate.

Note, how if they disagree with a commentary they name call but cannot retort with any intelligent or cogent thought and/or proof of their rhetoric.

November cannot get here soon enough!

Frank, and Ackerman, may your retirement be long and happy and your policies and speeches short lived.