What could Obama do?

[CommunitarianKevin]

Question for Repubs...

So Repubs constantly call Obama a bad leader and uncompromising. So my question is what could he do to change your opinion of him? Answers such as "put a bullet threw his head," resign, or agree with Repubs will be taken as "there is nothing he can do to change my opinion."

So let's hear it...what can he do?

[Michelle]

I asked a Democrat, not too long ago, if there was anything Obama could do to make them think he wasn't perfect. I didn't get an answer.

I'm not a Republican so I won't answer.

[CommunitarianKevin]

I asked a Democrat, not too long ago, if there was anything Obama could do to make them think he wasn't perfect. I didn't get an answer.

I'm not a Republican so I won't answer.

Okay, if you are against Obama, you can answer...

I will give you an answer...

He could do something like he did with the NDAA...

Oh, I guess he isn't perfect...

Oh well, I still like him better, or rather the D after his name, better than the other options...

[Michelle]

Okay, if you are against Obama, you can answer...

I will give you an answer...

He could do something like he did with the NDAA...

That's it???

Sorry, I don't have time to play now.

[CommunitarianKevin]

That's it???

Sorry, I don't have time to play now.

What? I do not agree with the NDAA. I think it is a horrible thing. That clearly makes him not perfect. That clearly shows he does not represent my view on every point and that I do not accept his. How is that difficult for you to understand?

I cannot speak for everyone in my party, but I do not pray to Obama before I go to bed at night...

I am just a Liberal...I prefer the Democrat platform...It doesn't make every Dem perfect...

It goes the same for the other side...I do not hate every Repub. I do not dislike McCain and I respect Gingrich...but I do not agree with their platform...

Edited November 1, 2012 by HuttonEtAl

[RavenHawk]

I may have more to say later, but this came to mind first:

Corporal 'Stitch' Jones: Don't go away angry. Just... just go away. You've been told.

[CommunitarianKevin]

I may have more to say later, but this came to mind first:

Corporal 'Stitch' Jones: Don't go away angry. Just... just go away. You've been told.

(confused smiley)

Edited November 1, 2012 by HuttonEtAl

[Corp]

That's it???

Sorry, I don't have time to play now.

Well you asked for an example and he gave you one. How many examples are you looking for?

[Michelle]

Well you asked for an example and he gave you one. How many examples are you looking for?

Well, I have a pretty long list, such as expanding the Patriot Act and the TSA intrusions...not shutting down Gitmo, making it possible to hold American citizens indefinitely without trial if accused of terrorism....

Edited November 2, 2012 by Michelle

[CommunitarianKevin]

Well, I have a pretty long list, such as expanding the Patriot Act and the TSA intrusions...not shutting down Gitmo, making it possible to hold American citizens indefinitely without trial if accused of terrorism....

I gave you an answer. You asked for one and you got it. Sure, he extended the Partriot Act, a Repub policy...sure, he didn't shut down Gitmo (he wanted to, but didn't happen.) Like I said, the guy isn't perfect. I gave you the answer you wanted to hear, but still...it is not enough...

[RavenHawk]

[media=]

[/media]

Obama has done enough!

Edited November 2, 2012 by RavenHawk

[RavenHawk]

This came to me in an email just today. It checks out from snopes. What more can he do?

BEST SUMMATION OF BARACK AND MICHELLE EVER

Mychal Massie is a respected writer and talk show host in Los Angeles .

The other evening on my twitter, a person asked me why I didn't like the Obama's? Specifically I was asked: "I have to ask, why do you hate the Obama's? It seems personal, not policy related. You even dissed (disrespect) their Christmas family picture."

The truth is I do not like the Obamas, what they represent, their ideology, and I certainly do not like his policies and legislation. I've made no secret of my contempt for the Obamas. As I responded to the person who asked me the aforementioned question, I don't like them because they are committed to the fundamental change of my/our country into what can only be regarded as a Communist state.

I don't hate them per definition, but I condemn them because they are the worst kind of racialists, they are elitist Leninists with contempt for traditional America . They display disrespect for the sanctity of the office he holds, and for those who are willing to admit same, Michelle Obama's raw contempt for white America is transpicuous.

I don't like them because they comport themselves as emperor and empress. I expect, no I demand respect, for the Office of President and a love of our country and her citizenry from the leader entrusted with the governance of same. President and Mrs. Reagan displayed an unparalleled love for the country and her people. The Reagan's made Americans feel good about themselves and about what we could accomplish. His arrogance by appointing 32 leftist czars and constantly bypassing congress is impeachable. Eric Holder is probably the MOST incompetent and arrogant DOJ head to ever hold the job. Could you envision President Reagan instructing his Justice Department to act like jack-booted thugs?

Presidents are politicians and all politicians are known and pretty much expected to manipulate the truth, if not outright lie, but even using that low standard, the Obama's have taken lies, dishonesty, deceit, mendacity, subterfuge and obfuscation to new depths. They are verbally abusive to the citizenry, and they display an animus for civility.

I do not like them, because they both display bigotry overtly, as in the case of Harvard Professor Louis Gates, when he accused the Cambridge Police of acting stupidly, and her code speak pursuant to now being able too be proud of America . I view that statement and that mindset as an insult to those who died to provide a country where a Kenyan, his illegal alien relatives, and his alleged progeny, could come and not only live freely, but rise to the highest, most powerful, position in the world. Michelle Obama is free to hate and disparage whites because Americans of every description paid with their blood to ensure her right to do same.

I have a saying, that "the only reason a person hides things, is because they have something to hide." No president in history has spent over a million dollars to keep his records and his past sealed.

And what the two of them have shared has been proved to be lies. He lied about when and how they met, he lied about his mother's death and problems with insurance, Michelle lied to a crowd pursuant to nearly $500,000 bank stocks they inherited from his family. He has lied about his father's military service, about the civil rights movement, ad nausea. He lied to the world about the Supreme Court in a State of the Union address. He berated and publicly insulted a sitting Congressman. He has surrounded himself with the most rabidly, radical, socialist academicians today. He opposed rulings that protected women and children that even Planned Parenthood did not seek to support. He is openly hostile to business and aggressively hostile to Israel . His wife treats being the First Lady as her personal American Express Black Card (arguably the most prestigious credit card in the world). I condemn them because, as people are suffering, losing their homes, their jobs, their retirements, he and his family are arrogantly showing off their life of entitlement - as he goes about creating and fomenting class warfare.

I don't like them, and I neither apologize nor retreat from my public condemnation of them and of his policies. We should condemn them for the disrespect they show our people, for his willful and unconstitutional actions pursuant to obeying the Constitutional parameters he is bound by, and his willful disregard for Congressional authority.

Dislike for them has nothing to do with the color of their skin; it has everything to do with their behavior, attitudes, and policies. And I have open scorn for their constantly playing the race card.

It is my intention to do all within my ability to ensure their reign is one term. I could go on, but let me conclude with this. I condemn in the strongest possible terms the media for refusing to investigate them, as they did President Bush and President Clinton, and for refusing to label them for what they truly are. There is no scenario known to man, whereby a white president and his wife could ignore laws, flaunt their position, and lord over the people, as these two are permitted out of fear for their color.

As I wrote in a syndicated column titled, "Nero In The White House" - "Never in my life, inside or outside of politics, have I witnessed such dishonesty in a political leader. He is the most mendacious political figure I have ever witnessed. Even by the low standards of his presidential predecessors, his narcissistic, contumacious arrogance is unequaled. Using Obama as the bar, Nero would have to be elevated to sainthood... Many in America wanted to be proud when the first person of color was elected president, but instead, they have been witness to a congenital liar, a woman who has been ashamed of America her entire life, failed policies, intimidation, and a commonality hitherto not witnessed in political leaders. He and his wife view their life at our expense as an entitlement - while America 's people go homeless, hungry and unemployed."

If we don't manage to reestablish character as a desirable trait in our society, we simply will not survive --

Vic Kuykendall

[Varelse]

Oh my. Pot looks at Kettle and says "Loser!"

[ninjadude]

Mychal Massie is a respected writer and talk show host in Los Angeles .

only in his own mind.

[Legaia]

only in his own mind.

Anything to add about as to why he isn't?

[Legaia]

Hutt,

The majority of both parties are exactly the same. I am sure, at least to yourself, that you can admit that. The democrips do not care about the poor and the children, and the rebloodlicans do not care about tax relief for people like you and I, or even the "rich". They both pander to everyone so everyone will vote for one of them, thus increasing the fed's power. The concept is so simple, yet lost on so many. Just look at what happens to every single politician who is an outsider that starts to gain the attention of the people. I know you're more intelligent that some of the things you write, such as "agreeing with the democratic ideology".

So what could Obama do? Pretty much the opposite of everything his puppet masters have had him do the past four years. In 2008 he ran as a candidate that would be that kind of president, or at least something close to it, and I took the bait. Do I hate him for it? You bet. But my hate extends so far beyond him.

Edited November 2, 2012 by Legaia

[preacherman76]

Question for Repubs...

So Repubs constantly call Obama a bad leader and uncompromising. So my question is what could he do to change your opinion of him? Answers such as "put a bullet threw his head," resign, or agree with Repubs will be taken as "there is nothing he can do to change my opinion."

So let's hear it...what can he do?

Hey Hut. Great question. I cant really speak for republicans but, there are a number of things 0bama would have to do inorder to gain my trust. First would be a totaly honest independent audit of the federal reserve. Then when wrong doing is found, and it will be, arrest and convict those involved. Next thing would be ( I dont know how he'd do it) repealing parts of NDAA where the military can arrest and detain indefinitly a American citizan. Can even go so far as to torcher and or kill said person. Next, he'd have to rip up the patriot act, and burn the left over pieces live on TV. Then he'd have to disband the TSA, and allow airports to hire private security. No more naked body scanners, and no more molesting pat downs. Then, assuming he didnt have anything to do with it, he'd have to throw some people under the bus for fast and furious. Leave Iraq and Afgan indefinitly, as quickly as it could be done. Stop all foriegn aid, least till we are back on our feet here at home. Eliminate homeland scurity, or at least fire the people there, and hire people who dont see every single one of us as a possible terrorist. This would be a really good start.

Edited November 2, 2012 by preacherman76

[Rafterman]

Question for Repubs...

So Repubs constantly call Obama a bad leader and uncompromising. So my question is what could he do to change your opinion of him? Answers such as "put a bullet threw his head," resign, or agree with Repubs will be taken as "there is nothing he can do to change my opinion."

So let's hear it...what can he do?

1. He could have actually used the stimulus funding as promised - shovel ready jobs - the whole thing was a fiasco. All it did was funnel money into losing propositions (Solyndra anyone) and allow bloated state and local governments to keep running "business as usual" instead of making the cuts they needed to make to bring their fiscal houses in order. It was more crack for the crackheads frankly.

2. He pledged to cut the deficit in half. Rather than do that he increased it by $6 TRILLION dollars. While the reality of things is that he probably couldn't have cut it in half, I would have let him slide with only cutting it by, say, 10%. Hell, I would have cut him some slack if he'd simply kept it at 2008 levels or increased it by a few hundred billion.

3. Close Gitmo - seriously, this could have been done on day one.

Edited November 2, 2012 by Rafterman

[RavenHawk]

Well, I have a pretty long list, such as expanding the Patriot Act and the TSA intrusions...not shutting down Gitmo, making it possible to hold American citizens indefinitely without trial if accused of terrorism....

The Patriot Act isn’t as bad as it seems. It doesn’t give the government carte blanche to wire tap any American citizen. It’s only those that are in contact with known terrorists. Casual contact is easy to rule out. Under Bush, it was there to protect America but with it in place under Obama, it’s there to protect the regime. It can be used to wire tap any American considered a threat. I.e. that’s why Napolitano labeled vets, people with guns, and those that believe in GOD as potential enemies of the state. It’s just another chess piece put in place. Another piece is the FCC, Fairness Doctrine, and so called network neutrality.

Gitmo should never be closed but Obama was making a promise he couldn’t keep. Politicians do that all the time but there are things that you don’t try to reverse unless you know what you are talking about. And national defense is not his strong suit. You have to give him partial credit for pulling the string on getting Bin Laden but how many realize the covert ops that he destroyed and the alliances he has threatened for a few political points?

These are just a few things that reveal the character of Obama which helps to answer that he’s done enough.

[RavenHawk]

Other things to look at is his promise to have the most transparent Administration in history. That never happened. The best example is his Birth Certificate. A little disclaimer here because it seems to still be a hot subject. I discuss his BC here not because I may or may not believe that he was born here, but because it is an issue. Personally at this point in time, I believe that he was born in Hawaii, but the whole saga behind this leaves one wondering about the honesty of Obama. A 5 year old should be able to tell the difference between the short form and the long form and know why in this situation, the SF was not an adequate substitute for the LF and only a complete forensic examination of the record in the actual archive will provide sufficient proof. Again, where Obama was born is not the subject of this thread. That this whole mess could have been satisfied years ago is. Where he was born doesn’t matter now anyway. Although I would propose that for *ALL* future Presidents, an independent commission be assembled to go to the archive that the BC is housed and do a forensic examination. This would meet the Constitutional requirement and stop this crap. Academically, it has been a very enlightening event, but a President should have never let it go this far, which means that he didn’t understand it or was hiding something. This is not rocket science. He’s an expert of Constitutional law. So what was he hiding?

I am satisfied with him being born here, so why the secrecy with the President spending a million to keep his files sealed? What I think is that he lied about being born in Kenya when applying to college, i.e. to be able to qualify for a Fulbright Scholarship. But that troubles me to think that this would cause his support to dwindle even an ounce if known. So what else is there? I don’t know of any other President that has been as secretive and for whatever reason this is troublesome. If a President can’t be trustworthy in something as basic as this, then what does that say for the rest of his agenda?

Obamacare is another prime example that he’s done too much. People are quick to point out that healthcare is a Republican idea and they’re right. In the original version, it was full of Republican ideas but as each successive version came out, fewer and fewer Republican ideas remained. How many times did Obama claim in public that his door was open for anyone with good ideas but when Republicans came forward, that door closed shut? Yes, this bill was passed legally, but one would think that a law of such magnitude should pass with bipartisan support. There was no such support and that will bring into question its long lasting sustainability. Not one Republican Senator voted for it and it’s clear that half of the country does not want it. Yet we get this crammed down our throats at a time when the President should have been working on improving the economy and creating jobs (which he has failed miserably). If this wasn’t serious, it would a Greek comedy or is it a tragedy?? Who knows? This is not a man concerned with the needs and wants of the American people and the American way of life as it is forcing his concept of a socialist utopia on fiercely rugged individuals. This is the Dreams of his father, but the thing is, is that’s not the dreams of our Founding Fathers.

What can he do when he’s done so much so wrong?

[ninjadude]

1. He could have actually used the stimulus funding as promised - shovel ready jobs - the whole thing was a fiasco. All it did was funnel money into losing propositions (Solyndra anyone) and allow bloated state and local governments to keep running "business as usual"

it did go to shovel ready projects. A lot of them. It was NOT a fiasco. Solyndra was one minor failure out of a lot of successes. It also went to governments so they would not have to lay off employees. that's certainly not a failure.

2. He pledged to cut the deficit in half.

sure. before the 2008 recession.

[Legaia]

it did go to shovel ready projects. A lot of them. It was NOT a fiasco. Solyndra was one minor failure out of a lot of successes. It also went to governments so they would not have to lay off employees. that's certainly not a failure.

sure. before the 2008 recession.

I don't know why I bother replying to you, because I know you won't return the favor. Don't worry though, I know it's not because you don't want to. It's just that you can't ever back up any of the crap you write on here.

With that being said, can you back up that first claim you made?

[ninjadude]

http://stimuluswatch.org/index.php/project/by_state

http://www.recovery.gov/Pages/default.aspx << Don't you know that you can go to recovery.gov to find out where and how the money was spent? It completely debunks your position. Just click on each one of the three bars in the graph to find out where the money was spent. There are literally thousands of success stories. The sad thing is Republicans deriding the stimulus while ribbon cutting on those same projects.

Then there's the Mitt whoppers about clean energy that conservatives flog relentlessly. Nothing he says is correct. Nothing.

http://www.factcheck.org/2012/10/romneys-clean-energy-whoppers/

Mitt Romney made numerous bogus claims in the Oct. 3 debate about the $90 billion in grants, guaranteed loans and tax breaks for energy projects in the stimulus bill:

• Romney falsely claimed “about half” of the clean-energy companies that received U.S.-backed loans “have gone out of business.” But 26 companies received loan guarantees under a loan program cited by Romney, and three of those have filed for bankruptcy. The three firms were approved for about 6 percent of the loan guarantees.
  
• Romney incorrectly claimed the “$90 billion in breaks to the green energy world” was provided “in one year.” It was over several years.
  
• He stated at one point that Obama put $90 billion “into solar and wind.” But only $21 billion went for renewable energy projects, “such as the installation of wind turbines and solar panels,” according to a White House document cited by the Romney campaign. The spending also included $18 billion for transit projects and $10 billion to upgrade the nation’s electrical grid.
  
• He falsely claimed the $90 billion was equal to “about 50 years’ worth of what oil and gas receives” in tax breaks, which he estimated at $2.8 billion. By his own figures, it would have been 32 years’ worth. But it’s even less than that. The administration estimates that eliminating oil and gas tax preferences would raise about $3.9 billion a year (23 years’ worth). The industry itself says the administration would increase its taxes by $8.5 billion a year (10.5 years’ worth).
  
• He falsely claimed Obama “put $90 billion into green jobs … that would have hired 2 million teachers.” But that $90 billion included loans, not just grant money, and the government can’t hire teachers with loans.
  

The seven other sub-categories of “clean-energy” projects identified in the report were:

• $29 billion for energy efficiency, including $5 billion for the weatherization of low-income homes;
  
• $10 billion to modernize the nation’s electric grid;
  
• $6 billion for domestic manufacturing of advanced batteries and other components of alternative vehicles and fuel technology;
  
• $18 billion for transit projects, including high-speed rail;
  
• $3 billion for researching and developing clean-coal technology;
  
• $3 billion for job training;
  
• $2 billion in manufacturing tax credits.
  

So, clearly, the $90 billion wasn’t just for wind and solar project

But there were a total of 26 companies that received approval for $16 billion in loan guarantees under the section 1705 program. So, 11.5 percent of the companies — not half — have filed for bankruptcy. And those companies were approved for a little more than 6 percent of the $16 billion in total loan guarantees.

Two other companies were awarded a total of $10.3 billion in loan guarantees by the Obama administration under the section 1703 program. So, if you count them, the bankruptcy rate would fall to under 11 percent, and the money at risk drops to about 4 percent.

First, the $90 billion was not given out “in one year.” It was provided over several years to numerous federal agencies. For example, the Department of Energy was authorized to spend $41.7 billion – “$35.2 billion for projects and activities and $6.5 billion in borrowing authority” – but had spent only 36 percent of its stimulus funds as of March 10, 2011, according to a Government Accountability Office report.

-----------

You are absolutely correct about Obama promising to cut the budget in half. I was wrong.

On the other hand George W Bush promised the exact same thing and you re-elected him as well.

[Startraveler]

In the original version, it was full of Republican ideas but as each successive version came out, fewer and fewer Republican ideas remained.

You've got that backwards.