President Obama - How is he doing so far?
The Rock
Posts: 1,439
I'm from the UK, don't always get chance to watch the news but I see snippets when they're talking about Obama. Now, I am not entirely familiar with everything Obama is doing, so I'm looking for anyone to give me some kind of summary regarding how he's doing so far.
Is he doing well? Does he seem to be taking the right steps? Has he done anything wrong and stupid so far?
I'm just looking to get a handle on him so far, so any information is appreciated.
Is he doing well? Does he seem to be taking the right steps? Has he done anything wrong and stupid so far?
I'm just looking to get a handle on him so far, so any information is appreciated.
2006: London Astoria, Lisbon I & II, Paris, Verona, Milano
2007: Wembley, Dusseldorf, Copenhagen, Nijmegen
2009: Manchester
2010: Belfast, Berlin
2012: Manchester I & II
2014: Leeds, Milton Keynes
2018: Amsterdam I, Prague, Krakow, Berlin, Barcelona, London
2022: Berlin, Budapest, Krakow, Amsterdam II
2022: Berlin, Budapest, Krakow, Amsterdam II
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
2022: Berlin, Budapest, Krakow, Amsterdam II
Well he has put us into debt 4 times deeper than Bush did in his 8 years, and still wants more. What is it going to take for people to wake up and see that the bailouts do not work! For proof look at the bailouts that has already been handed out, nothing good has come from them. I say it over and over again but I guess people are just blinded by his rhetoric. I would love it if just one person could show me economically how borrowing money we don't have, and can't pay back, is going to help us get out of debt and this depression.
It really makes me lose hope in the people of this country. Idiocracy is coming sooner than we expected.
http://www.myspace.com/christianjame (Music Page)
Myspace: http://www.myspace.com/19598996 (Personal Page)
I dont consider myself a democrat or republican and I think Obama is doing ok so far. I give him a B.
he has improved America's image abroad which is important to me. I'm not happy about his spending but I dont know how much choice he has. and I think he lied during the campaign about changing the way Washington does business and passes bills. that was all bullshit, but all politicians do that I guess. overall, he is doing a good job in probably one of the toughest environments ever.
um, this country has run on a debt for many years...something the clowns that whine about Obama's budget tend to forget or ignore, your choice, is that he's included the costs of the two wars he has inherited...
and you mention rhetoric...I find it ironic that you complain of rhetoric when your rant is nothing but....
Funny that people defend the great change agent by saying, it's always been that way...isn't that part of the problem?
Anyhow, I hope I get what I wanted out of 4-8 years of Obama...a better republican party.
About what I'd say. I was a strong Obama supporter, and for the most part I'm happy. I don't like the bailouts at all, but I got the impression both candidates were going to do it anyway, so not much choice there. They're talked about like a foregone conclusion.
Other than that, I've been pretty happy... closing gitmo is good for our image abroad, he's gone a long way towards mending some fences Dubya tore down and restoring our credibility internationally. He reversed the stem cell policy and the global gag rule, which are both good moves. It remains to be seen how his handling of Afghan and Iraq will play out. So far, it's been pretty good overall.
But so far Obama is doing great. Some don't want to admit it and some can't see it, but the vast majority of Americans are supporting him. Instead of ham-fisted executive orders, he's making changes happen in a way that will take time but will be done well.
The DADT policy is going to end but it's going to be ended right. That means a lot to me. He's also going to change federal recognition of gay couples so I can sponsor my husband into America and he cam become a citizen.
He's lightening the tax burden on the middle class and stopping the off-shore tax shelters used by the super rich. You'd think that would be popular, but oddly enough the few Republicans that are left staged Tea Party Protests because they wanted to pay higher taxes so billionaires could pay less. Or.. something, they didn't seem to know what it was about, either.
Most people, sadly, don't even "get" the "bailouts" and don't realize that those weren't gifts.. those were loans.. we're getting that money back. Unlike the war, it's not just money flushed down the toilet, it's money that if it WASN'T given, would have lead America down a path leading to total collapse. Had those companies actually gone under the country would have been in a MUCH worse place than we're in. But some people are too busy listening to the made-up garbage on Rush Limbaugh or Glen Beck to notice that.
The only people that don't seem to know what they were about is people who use the Daily Show or MSNBC as their only news source. Their big idea and major point of the tea parties was to protest the governments uncontrolled and unregulated spending.
Check the facts, the bailouts were sold to public as "loans" but were changed right before they were voted on. Now the idea is that the company's accepting the bailout money are being controlled by the government. Take GM (Government Motors) and the Bank of America as examples. And it doesn't even matter if they still were considered loans - how are the company's going to pay them back if after they received all this federal money they still file for Bankruptcy.
Look at the crap hole that is Chrysler. We gave them over a hundred million dollars to help save them and keep American jobs. As soon as the money went through and the company was now worth the amount that we as tax payers are going to ultimately be responsible for, they up and sold to Fiat. And now Fiat has announced that they are going to close American plants and begin manufacturing in other countries, including Mexico.
So we just gave them a bunch of money basically to get rid of thousands of American jobs.
Smooth move.
http://www.myspace.com/christianjame (Music Page)
Myspace: http://www.myspace.com/19598996 (Personal Page)
Actually the idea of our country running on debt is a relatively new concept. The many years that you are referring to must be the last eight, because Clinton had us as close to debt free as a country can expect to be. And even so, lets say for the sake of your argument that we as a country have always lived off of debt, in his 100 plus days in office, Obama has more than quadrupled the amount of that debt. One of his election points was to curb government spending, and even the most liberal hippy has to agree that he has done completely opposite of that. Is this the big change that we were promised (my f'n question mark button is broken so I have to end this question with a period). And that is NOT including the cost of the 2 wars. This is because every time he gives a speech on TV (which seems like at least once a week) he is asking congress for a couple of hundred billion more. Looking at this from a personal finance perspective, if you owed the bank $100,000, and you knew there was no way you were going to make that much, would you go to another bank and borrow $1,000,000 to make sure you've got it covered, and then some (damn question mark button). If you answer yes than I am really glad that you have nothing to do with my finances. Sure it's a temporary fix, but it's going to come back and completely bury you in the next few years. My goal is to be debt free in ten years, and I have a house, 2 cars, and a kid. Borrowing money right now is the absolute worst thing I could ever do if I want to reach that goal.
It only takes a little common sense to understand this. With so many people not being able to grasp the common sense of financial principles I now understand why our country is having the credit crises we are. And these are the same people who support Obama and his bailouts.
This is the second or third time you've said this to me. I don't think you understand what rhetoric means, because my posts don't really fall under that category. If my rant is really nothing why don't you dispute the points I made instead of my semantics (still damn you question mark button).
http://www.myspace.com/christianjame (Music Page)
Myspace: http://www.myspace.com/19598996 (Personal Page)
Uh huh.
that's why there were all those people carrying around those stuffed monkeys. If you want to believe those were about anything but anger from the right wing that their big bag of bullshit isn't being bought anymore, you're welcome to it.
Yes.. the bailout has seen failures. Nobody is going to be arguing with that. But it's a fuck of a lot better than what was planned by the right wing whose only ideas were "tax cuts" and "deregulate." Oh, and lots of kvetching about how the "liberal hippies" have no "common sense." (and carrying around stuffed monkeys)
Yes. Very little. Very very little. About as much "common sense" as you'll get from Joe the Plumber and Bristol Palin.
but hey... I mean... they both got rich this year, didn't they?
You're right about the emotion being anger, but it has nothing to do with animosity towards the election results. Anytime anybody disagrees with the current administration they always have some BS reason to avoid answering it instead of addressing the issues the protesters are bringing up. The way the liberal news reported on the tea parties bordered on fiction, completely skirting the points brought up during them. That's of course if they even covered them at all. I noticed the next day on two different news channels they spent less than 60 seconds talking about the tea parties and then both instantly went to a four minute and three and a half minute report respectively about Obama's new dog. Whether you agree with why the rallies were happening or not, the fact that major news organizations chose to basically ignore their existence, whenever every single major city in the US had its own version, with a decent turnout, proves that media bias does exist. Of course even the few that did report on them downplayed the event, either by not reporting the true numbers of participants, or by not explaining the unifying reasons why so many hard working, job holding Americans took a day off of work to voice their concerns.
Contrary to what Pelosi and the media reported, the tea party's were not about jealousy from losing the election, or unrelenting hatred against all things Democratic, or even (a Pelosi and Barney Frank favorite) racism towards a black President. They were about the outrageous and unregulated spending that the current administration and Congress keep pushing through. There were other issues as well, including the ever increasing personal intrusion of "big Brother" government and the attack on the biggest factor of America's past world domination; capitalism. As a participant in one, and communicating with others across the country, these topics were the focus of every gathering, especially all of the major ones. If you didn't personally attend one, or at least talked to someone who did, and all you know about them is from the 60 second news blurb, sandwiched between the weather report and the sports review, then you really have no leg to stand on in this debate.
It all boils down to this: if the Obama administration and the Democrat controlled House and Senate pass all of the bailouts and incentive spending packages they have announced, then this country as we know it is done. The dollar amount that Obama has proposed is mathematically impossible to recover from. You do realize that there is not enough money in circulation on this planet to cover what he wants to spend. Global inflation would rise beyond anything that this world, let alone this country, has ever seen. As a matter of fact, if the next four plans he is pushing goes through overnight more than three quarters of this country would drop below the poverty line before the ink could dry on his signature. This isn’t some doomsday, perfect storm scenario; this is a mathematically financial reality. Does it make me racist for pointing this out (still no question mark button).
There is no doubt that Bush left us in a shithole, but it’s time for Obama to stand up and take some responsibility. George W. is gone and he’s not coming back, quit making excuses and get shit done (I’m talking about Obama, not Jasunmark, you’ve got your own stuff to worry about).What Obama has done is in no way In fact, what Obama has done is quite possibly the worst thing he could have done. It’s a good thing Obama has a team of people working for him, because if ran his personal finances like he is running the nations, he would be filing for bankruptcy. I know the Democrats don’t want to hear this, but cutting taxes and deregulation on businesses is exactly what this country needs in times like these. “But that’s what we had the last eight years, and we have to move away from every single failed policy from the past”. I can hear it now, with the same inflection that he’s used every time he’s talked about bringing forth his “hope and change”. The truth is that tax cuts and deregulation are not failed policies of the past; in fact they were pretty much the only policies that were successful. It is a tested, proven and basic macro economical fact: a country cannot tax itself out of a recession or depression. Do the math, it will never work. However this is the great hope and change solution that Obama is sticking by and pushing forth with all of his might. The truth is, sitting back and doing nothing is a better plan than what we are doing. It’s as if the country fell into a hole and Obama decides that he wants us to start digging deeper to try and get us out because, “we can’t just sit still and do nothing”.
It’s really late, and I need to go to bed before I start making more and more mistakes. Before I go though I do want to say, even though you might not pick it up from my arguments I’ve laid out here, I am not now nor have I ever been a Republican. I’m a registered Independent. As a matter of fact I attended the Vote for Change shows during the previous elections. I ‘m also not sure McCain would have done any better, it’s just that I don’t believe Obama has done the great job that so many others think he has. I honestly believe he is going to take this country into way deeper problems then even Bush would have. To me it’s a no win situation no matter which way you lean.
More importantly, Peace Out!
http://www.myspace.com/christianjame (Music Page)
Myspace: http://www.myspace.com/19598996 (Personal Page)
I still think it's a big bag of bullshit.
go do the math and you will see evenflow is right.
What I'm saying isn't opinion, it's fact.
And you can continue to live in your little shell and not believe me, but when the shit hits the fan and you can't afford bread or water I really don't want to hear you complaining about it. Of course if you're a liberal Democrat you will complain, and probably blame Bush, rather than admit you were wrong.
http://www.myspace.com/christianjame (Music Page)
Myspace: http://www.myspace.com/19598996 (Personal Page)
Oh look.. I know that there's a lot of things that aren't going to work about the bailout, but this ridiculous Doomsday scenario where we can't afford bread and we're all speaking Arabic is just more Glenn Beck nonsense.
So is this whole "You're a liberal Democrat" because I can see how fixing the errors from the last 8 or so years is going to take some very drastic measures. Many of the bailed out companies aren't going to survive. I know that.
But I also know that pretending that things would and even COULD have been better with John McCain or just about anyone else running the show is pretty much like pretending that "George Bush kept us safe." Don't think I'm just blindly saying all is cool. I'm sure not happy with the new, rather unconstitutional "Prolonged detention" that he's proposed. Nor am I happy that DADT hasn't been thrown on the garbage heap it belongs on.
But for the most part, I'm still on side.
I was thinking the exact same thing. They all do so let's accept it.
Same concept as I don't vote third party because I don't want to waste my vote.
His appointments are shit. Eric Holder is trying to take away Constitutional Rights. He supports amnesty for illegal aliens, he put us into debt that will probably never be paid for. Plus he is a Chicago Dem, the most crooked city in the nation.
Prior to the election, the only political writer worth reading, Matt Taibbi, wrote, "either obama represents real fundemental change, or is one more example of the disturbing lengths to which the system will go to to reinvent itself".
Its clear Taibbi hit it right on, the latter part.
Lets see, Obama, packs his cabinet and administration with war hawks. The same people who presided over a Bush presidency, now work with obama. Getting Emmanuel, and Clinton also didnt help matters. All are currupt. Two intensely unpopular wars continue under Obama, with obama vowing to escalate the war in afghanistan. How he plans to convince our soldiers this is a valid fight is anyone's guess. He has done absolutely nothing to help bring the troops home, and has done zilch to ease the pain of those whose family members are serving in iraq and to help those troops who come back home deal with what happened over there. We are in the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression, and are experiencing a Depression of our own. Obama has done little to nothing to solve this.
This only cements my belief: real change never happens by the electoral process. No politician has ever started a social movement. All change, all meaningful change comes from normal people. Normal people who arent bought off and dont work on Capitol Hill.
Politicians are liars, thieves and criminals. Thats a stone cold fact. No one is exempt. No one. To think that Obama was an exception was a risk people took, and it turned out to bite them in the behind.
Obama is a liar, criminal and killer. He is responsible for the war just as Bush was and is, and Pelosi, Reid and all the other blowhard lying Dems and Republicans who do nothing to end this illegal war.
Obama is useless, meaningless and the sooner he is out of office the better.
No one has ever answered this question for me, and I have posted this on the board multiple times. To the six year old son or daughter whose father r mother is in Iraq right now, what difference does Democrat or Republican serve? Do they care about if Obama or Bush is in? Do you really think that six year old kid gives a damn someone has a D next to their name?
Obama should be tried for war crimes just like Bush and every single other president since Truman. When are we going to start the hearings?
couldnt disagree more. What about his work do you dislike?
God forbid a writer of political issues not be swayed one way or the other. Taibbi is brilliant because he isnt some partisan hack. He doesnt write to put his money hungry friends in office. He writes to expose the fools who litter both sides of the aisle like detritus.
He seems to suggest that both parties are hopelessly currupt.
For all the crap he gave bush, he completely reemed Pelosi and Reid for their criminal and completely inept "opposition" to Bush.
For me, getting actual facts is about what the truth. True, you arent going to get actual facts from any political writer. They are expressing opinions.
That said, Taibbi cuts through the endless amounts of crap, and is very talented.
And its quite the opposite. Rolling Stone is useless as a music magazine. Anyone who thinks they will hear about a worthwhile band from the likes of the Spin's or Rolling Stones of the world is seriously mistaken.
But Rolling Stone's political writing and writings about social issues are some of the best in the buisiness.
Additionally, how is what Taibbi said, as quoted by me above, not the truth? Obama has shown himself to be the corporate tool and fool he always was. He doesnt give a damn at all.
What in a person makes them able to go on living, while they send youngsters off to die in Iraq and afghanistan? I have never understood that mindset. The mindset that feels everything is copasetic and kosher, when sending these kids off to war. I dont get it, and never will.
Bob Dylan's Masters of War remains the best antiwar song ever written. He exposes those phony people who cart others off to war, and in the end wants nothing else than to be watching as they are lowered into the crowd in a coffin. I couldnt agree more, and I cant wait for that day either. War is hell, and those who personally are involved in making decisions that send others to die, will be residing in hell in the future. Bush and his administration to be sure, but also the lowlife's like the Pelosi's, the Reid's, and Obama.
Life is precious. Thats clear to me. How can Obama or Bush or any president be as callous as to send people off to die?
The war will be Obama's undoing just like it was Bush's. You cant continue a war this unpopular without some consequences. And you cant lie to people without some consquences. You cant send people to die, refuse to bring them home, jerk their chains repeatedly with stop loss nonsense, and then refuse to assist them when they come home.
Their will be consequences. Obviously once again, power currupts, and money is shown to be more important than ethics, and human life. A real shame.
I think obama is pissing off an already pissed off population. He never had the republicans behind him. And continuing 2 wars, staffing the ranks with prowar advisors and his policies and such which have turned out to be centrist or even the right wing of the democrat party. His lack of action on the economic crisis. He isnt doing himself any favors and is alienating alot of left wingers.
He sold himself as a new breed of politician but I have yet to see a single action that isnt exactly the same as any other president.
Flawed thinking is flawed thinking no matter if its Bush or Obama. Obama is under the impression that a war is going to solve the terrorist problem. That simply isnt a valid way of looking at the world. It was embarassing that Bush believed it, and its embarassing now.