Obama Should Resign

[rightwinger]

The economic recovery could have been much, much better. We could have invested more in infrastructure, we could have demanded more recovery money went to jobs rather than profit

But we had a GOP hellbent on austerity during a recovery. While millions are looking for jobs......NOW is the time to cut spending

Yeah I know, the good intentions of the halo wearing, angelic Democrats were once again foiled by the pitch fork toting, demonic Republicans, makes for a nice fairy tale but falls somewhat short in the objective analysis department.

Nothing personal, you seem like a nice guy (gal?) but I'm really not interested in partisan pom-pom waiving and "we good, they bad" parroted talking points.

The behavior of Republicans while the country was trying to recover from an economic collapse of their making as bordering on criminal

The fact that they refused to participate in a recovery being led by a Democrat was one of the saddest piece of placing politics over the needs of our country in history

Don't forget how Republicans secretly support ISIS, want grandma to get kicked out of her home and look through medicine cabinets at dinner parties

I also don't forget that Republicans supported TARP, stimulus and bailouts to help Bush recover during the economic collapse

But not a single Republicans would support the same things for Obama

They should have voted against that government waste both times

The economy was in collapse. Nobody in the private sector was willing to invest in it. It was only the Government willing to dump a trillion dollars into the economy and assure the world that our banks would not fail

It stopped a depression

 

[kaz]

Yeah I know, the good intentions of the halo wearing, angelic Democrats were once again foiled by the pitch fork toting, demonic Republicans, makes for a nice fairy tale but falls somewhat short in the objective analysis department.

Nothing personal, you seem like a nice guy (gal?) but I'm really not interested in partisan pom-pom waiving and "we good, they bad" parroted talking points.

The behavior of Republicans while the country was trying to recover from an economic collapse of their making as bordering on criminal

The fact that they refused to participate in a recovery being led by a Democrat was one of the saddest piece of placing politics over the needs of our country in history

Don't forget how Republicans secretly support ISIS, want grandma to get kicked out of her home and look through medicine cabinets at dinner parties

I also don't forget that Republicans supported TARP, stimulus and bailouts to help Bush recover during the economic collapse

But not a single Republicans would support the same things for Obama

They should have voted against that government waste both times

The economy was in collapse. Nobody in the private sector was willing to invest in it. It was only the Government willing to dump a trillion dollars into the economy and assure the world that our banks would not fail

It stopped a depression

That's the propaganda

 

[rightwinger]

The behavior of Republicans while the country was trying to recover from an economic collapse of their making as bordering on criminal

The fact that they refused to participate in a recovery being led by a Democrat was one of the saddest piece of placing politics over the needs of our country in history

Don't forget how Republicans secretly support ISIS, want grandma to get kicked out of her home and look through medicine cabinets at dinner parties

I also don't forget that Republicans supported TARP, stimulus and bailouts to help Bush recover during the economic collapse

But not a single Republicans would support the same things for Obama

They should have voted against that government waste both times

The economy was in collapse. Nobody in the private sector was willing to invest in it. It was only the Government willing to dump a trillion dollars into the economy and assure the world that our banks would not fail

It stopped a depression

That's the propaganda

I know..I know

Let it fail

 

[kaz]

Don't forget how Republicans secretly support ISIS, want grandma to get kicked out of her home and look through medicine cabinets at dinner parties

I also don't forget that Republicans supported TARP, stimulus and bailouts to help Bush recover during the economic collapse

But not a single Republicans would support the same things for Obama

They should have voted against that government waste both times

The economy was in collapse. Nobody in the private sector was willing to invest in it. It was only the Government willing to dump a trillion dollars into the economy and assure the world that our banks would not fail

It stopped a depression

That's the propaganda

I know..I know

Let it fail

I don't know what "it" means. Maybe your manhood you gave long ago to the Democrat party.

But yes, we should let the market losers fail. Winners replace them and succeed where they failed

 

[rightwinger]

I also don't forget that Republicans supported TARP, stimulus and bailouts to help Bush recover during the economic collapse

But not a single Republicans would support the same things for Obama

They should have voted against that government waste both times

The economy was in collapse. Nobody in the private sector was willing to invest in it. It was only the Government willing to dump a trillion dollars into the economy and assure the world that our banks would not fail

It stopped a depression

That's the propaganda

I know..I know

Let it fail

I don't know what "it" means. Maybe your manhood you gave long ago to the Democrat party.

But yes, we should let the market losers fail. Winners replace them and succeed where they failed

Good point. But who suffers when they fail?
The rich investors? They eventually recover their money....they always do

The ones who suffer are the workers who find they are the ones who pay the ultimate price for economic collapse. They are the ones who lose their jobs. They are the ones who default on their mortgages

700,000 people a month were losing their jobs. It was the workers who had to sacrifice wages and benefits

The investors quickly recovered. The workers haven't

 

[kaz]

They should have voted against that government waste both times

The economy was in collapse. Nobody in the private sector was willing to invest in it. It was only the Government willing to dump a trillion dollars into the economy and assure the world that our banks would not fail

It stopped a depression

That's the propaganda

I know..I know

Let it fail

I don't know what "it" means. Maybe your manhood you gave long ago to the Democrat party.

But yes, we should let the market losers fail. Winners replace them and succeed where they failed

Good point. But who suffers when they fail?
The rich investors? They eventually recover their money....they always do

The ones who suffer are the workers who find they are the ones who pay the ultimate price for economic collapse. They are the ones who lose their jobs. They are the ones who default on their mortgages

700,000 people a month were losing their jobs. It was the workers who had to sacrifice wages and benefits

The investors quickly recovered. The workers haven't

To point out the obvious that eludes you, the companies that succeed will hire more employees. I mean duh. And their jobs won't have to be endlessly funded by government

 

[rightwinger]

The economy was in collapse. Nobody in the private sector was willing to invest in it. It was only the Government willing to dump a trillion dollars into the economy and assure the world that our banks would not fail

It stopped a depression

That's the propaganda

I know..I know

Let it fail

I don't know what "it" means. Maybe your manhood you gave long ago to the Democrat party.

But yes, we should let the market losers fail. Winners replace them and succeed where they failed

Good point. But who suffers when they fail?
The rich investors? They eventually recover their money....they always do

The ones who suffer are the workers who find they are the ones who pay the ultimate price for economic collapse. They are the ones who lose their jobs. They are the ones who default on their mortgages

700,000 people a month were losing their jobs. It was the workers who had to sacrifice wages and benefits

The investors quickly recovered. The workers haven't

To point out the obvious that eludes you, the companies that succeed will hire more employees. I mean duh. And their jobs won't have to be endlessly funded by government

They were not succeeding. Investments were leaving the economy. No loans, nobody to back you up financially, your customer base was disappearing

What do you do to remain solvent? Shed employees, slash wages, threaten those workers who remain that they are next

 

[kaz]

That's the propaganda

I know..I know

Let it fail

I don't know what "it" means. Maybe your manhood you gave long ago to the Democrat party.

But yes, we should let the market losers fail. Winners replace them and succeed where they failed

Good point. But who suffers when they fail?
The rich investors? They eventually recover their money....they always do

The ones who suffer are the workers who find they are the ones who pay the ultimate price for economic collapse. They are the ones who lose their jobs. They are the ones who default on their mortgages

700,000 people a month were losing their jobs. It was the workers who had to sacrifice wages and benefits

The investors quickly recovered. The workers haven't

To point out the obvious that eludes you, the companies that succeed will hire more employees. I mean duh. And their jobs won't have to be endlessly funded by government

They were not succeeding. Investments were leaving the economy. No loans, nobody to back you up financially, your customer base was disappearing

What do you do to remain solvent? Shed employees, slash wages, threaten those workers who remain that they are next

I didn't say they would survive, Holmes. I said the winners would hire more people. They only survive if they become profitable or if government bails them out

 

[percysunshine]

But not for the reason people think.
Imagine if he came out and said, I've done everything I can here. I am no longer effective in my job. Therefore I hand over the reins to VP Biden, who will carry my agenda forward.
Simulataneously Biden announces he is running.
WHOOSH! Hillary is out of the field, Democrats are running an incumbent president for re-election. It would be a winner for the Democrats.

.
I think Obama should get laid. I mean, unless the Secret Service is hooking him up, he probably isn't getting any.


btw...as far as Biden goes...

"Also, if vests had sleeves, Joe Biden would have an easier time figuring out which hole his head is supposed to go through."

Hillary Clinton's Political Ambition -- It's Not Sexist to Point It Out | National Review Online


.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Obama is having too good a time to resign

For the first time, he has cast off Congress and is getting the issues he is concerned about implemented without them

He is now the only game in town in Washington and he is loving every minute of it

So, he is a dictator and this makes you happy.

Leftists yearn for a totalitarian system.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Well no. It's not "ridiculous".

It's the President that sets policy and signs bills into law. "The Democrats in congress" meme is the ridiculous one.

And essentially we've got a government crafted such that the "minority" has a good deal of power.

Reagan initiated supply side economics in the 80s. He cut the top tax rates, cut regulations across the board, broke the air traffic controller union (and basically drastically reduced the power of labor), spent wildly on expensively and useless military programs (like SDI) oversaw huge deficits and several financial cataclysms that required huge bailouts. Before leaving office he RAISED taxes on the poor and the middle class. He brought in brand spanking new taxes on TIPS and unemployment insurance. This is the history.

And while Vice President Bush was fiscally wiser, his SON Neil Bush oversaw one of the worst bank failures in history, Silverado savings and loan. It wasn't until President Clinton was elected that some of that got cleaned up. President Clinton is not entirely innocent, however, as he did sign into law the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act which repealed a major component of the Glass-Steagall act that separated financials and commercial banks. But he was able to raise the tax rates a bit on the top earners and bring down the deficit. That's in addition to essentially creating the telecommunications infrastructure and advancing the Information technology sector in this country.

Enter George W. Bush, who cut top rates, defunded regulators, looked the other way at the Enron/Anderson debacle, presided over a loss of our manufacturing base, started 2 very expensive wars, put into place new entitlements with no way to pay for them and left office in the midst of yet another conservative engineered financial cataclysm requiring massive tax payer bailouts. This took two terms to do. Generally it's much easier to destroy than rebuild. And rebuilding is what President Obama engaged in and in the face of historic obstruction.

Conservative policy has always been ruinous in this country.

Not one in five claims by you has even a hint of fact to it.

I realize that you only cut & paste shit from the hate sites, but seriously that steaming pile must raise some sort of awareness in even you, Shallow.

 

[The Rabbi]

Yeah I know, the good intentions of the halo wearing, angelic Democrats were once again foiled by the pitch fork toting, demonic Republicans, makes for a nice fairy tale but falls somewhat short in the objective analysis department.

Nothing personal, you seem like a nice guy (gal?) but I'm really not interested in partisan pom-pom waiving and "we good, they bad" parroted talking points.

The behavior of Republicans while the country was trying to recover from an economic collapse of their making as bordering on criminal

The fact that they refused to participate in a recovery being led by a Democrat was one of the saddest piece of placing politics over the needs of our country in history

Don't forget how Republicans secretly support ISIS, want grandma to get kicked out of her home and look through medicine cabinets at dinner parties

I also don't forget that Republicans supported TARP, stimulus and bailouts to help Bush recover during the economic collapse

But not a single Republicans would support the same things for Obama

They should have voted against that government waste both times

The economy was in collapse. Nobody in the private sector was willing to invest in it. It was only the Government willing to dump a trillion dollars into the economy and assure the world that our banks would not fail

It stopped a depression

LOL. The economy was not in collapse. Most of the damage was already done. Bush had passed TARP and stabilized the banks, which were lending to each other.
Obama took a crisis and didnt let it go to waste by producing the worst economic recovery on record.

 

[HenryBHough]

I'm hoping he gets on the Supreme Court.

That would be delightful! Seeing Him confined in impotent rage to a body He has demonstrated "presidents" are free to entirely ignore!

 

[Sallow]

Well no. It's not "ridiculous".

No need for that, I was already aware the you would never recognize how ridiculous your line of reasoning was.

It's the President that sets policy and signs bills into law. "The Democrats in congress" meme is the ridiculous one.

Learn how to read will you , I said Democrats in WASHINGTON before 2009, not "The Democrats in congress" ....

And essentially we've got a government crafted such that the "minority" has a good deal of power.

Reagan initiated supply side economics in the 80s. He cut the top tax rates, cut regulations across the board, broke the air traffic controller union (and basically drastically reduced the power of labor), spent wildly on expensively and useless military programs (like SDI) oversaw huge deficits and several financial cataclysms that required huge bailouts. Before leaving office he RAISED taxes on the poor and the middle class. He brought in brand spanking new taxes on TIPS and unemployment insurance. This is the history.

And while Vice President Bush was fiscally wiser, his SON Neil Bush oversaw one of the worst bank failures in history, Silverado savings and loan. It wasn't until President Clinton was elected that some of that got cleaned up. President Clinton is not entirely innocent, however, as he did sign into law the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act which repealed a major component of the Glass-Steagall act that separated financials and commercial banks. But he was able to raise the tax rates a bit on the top earners and bring down the deficit. That's in addition to essentially creating the telecommunications infrastructure and advancing the Information technology sector in this country.

Enter George W. Bush, who cut top rates, defunded regulators, looked the other way at the Enron/Anderson debacle, presided over a loss of our manufacturing base, started 2 very expensive wars, put into place new entitlements with no way to pay for them and left office in the midst of yet another conservative engineered financial cataclysm requiring massive tax payer bailouts. This took two terms to do. Generally it's much easier to destroy than rebuild. And rebuilding is what President Obama engaged in and in the face of historic obstruction.

Conservative policy has always been ruinous in this country.

So in nutshell your thesis seems to be that all economics problems from now until the end of time are the fault of policies implemented by Reagan and Bush II, any economic successes of course will be credited to whatever Democrat is the flavor of the month (currently President Obama) and that no Democratic President need ever take responsibility for structural issues within the economy since Reagan and Bush basically made them unfixable. It's telling that you completely ignore monetary policy during the periods you attempt to dissect it's as if you don't recognize the part that monetary policy plays in our economy, you also make no mention of what the Democrats were doing during those two Presidencies it's as if they didn't exist in Washington at all.

We've had 7 years of "progressive" economic and monetary policy and from the perspective of the average American the economy sucks (spare me the stats cherry picking, you can do it, I can do it, but unless you live under a rock (or in Washington D.C.) you know as well as I do the average American is struggling to tread water).

One question, how many terms in office will it take for President Obama to "fix" all the economic problems and return us to the growth rate, job growth and general prosperity we enjoyed say in the mid to late 1980's? will be 5 terms be enough? how about 10?

Take your time and think it through Amigo...

Been to the world trade center recently in NYC?

The work is still ongoing 14 years after the 2001 attacks.


The twin towers themselves took over a decade to put up.

And several hours to knock down.

It's much harder to build and create than destroy.

 

[Sallow]

The behavior of Republicans while the country was trying to recover from an economic collapse of their making as bordering on criminal

The fact that they refused to participate in a recovery being led by a Democrat was one of the saddest piece of placing politics over the needs of our country in history

Don't forget how Republicans secretly support ISIS, want grandma to get kicked out of her home and look through medicine cabinets at dinner parties

I also don't forget that Republicans supported TARP, stimulus and bailouts to help Bush recover during the economic collapse

But not a single Republicans would support the same things for Obama

They should have voted against that government waste both times

The economy was in collapse. Nobody in the private sector was willing to invest in it. It was only the Government willing to dump a trillion dollars into the economy and assure the world that our banks would not fail

It stopped a depression

LOL. The economy was not in collapse. Most of the damage was already done. Bush had passed TARP and stabilized the banks, which were lending to each other.
Obama took a crisis and didnt let it go to waste by producing the worst economic recovery on record.

The economy DID collapse.

UE shot up to about 10% several months after Obama assumed office. The financial, banking and automotive industries were in freefall. And it wasn't just in this country, economies around the world were tanking.

 

[The Rabbi]

Well no. It's not "ridiculous".

No need for that, I was already aware the you would never recognize how ridiculous your line of reasoning was.

It's the President that sets policy and signs bills into law. "The Democrats in congress" meme is the ridiculous one.

Learn how to read will you , I said Democrats in WASHINGTON before 2009, not "The Democrats in congress" ....

And essentially we've got a government crafted such that the "minority" has a good deal of power.

Reagan initiated supply side economics in the 80s. He cut the top tax rates, cut regulations across the board, broke the air traffic controller union (and basically drastically reduced the power of labor), spent wildly on expensively and useless military programs (like SDI) oversaw huge deficits and several financial cataclysms that required huge bailouts. Before leaving office he RAISED taxes on the poor and the middle class. He brought in brand spanking new taxes on TIPS and unemployment insurance. This is the history.

And while Vice President Bush was fiscally wiser, his SON Neil Bush oversaw one of the worst bank failures in history, Silverado savings and loan. It wasn't until President Clinton was elected that some of that got cleaned up. President Clinton is not entirely innocent, however, as he did sign into law the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act which repealed a major component of the Glass-Steagall act that separated financials and commercial banks. But he was able to raise the tax rates a bit on the top earners and bring down the deficit. That's in addition to essentially creating the telecommunications infrastructure and advancing the Information technology sector in this country.

Enter George W. Bush, who cut top rates, defunded regulators, looked the other way at the Enron/Anderson debacle, presided over a loss of our manufacturing base, started 2 very expensive wars, put into place new entitlements with no way to pay for them and left office in the midst of yet another conservative engineered financial cataclysm requiring massive tax payer bailouts. This took two terms to do. Generally it's much easier to destroy than rebuild. And rebuilding is what President Obama engaged in and in the face of historic obstruction.

Conservative policy has always been ruinous in this country.

So in nutshell your thesis seems to be that all economics problems from now until the end of time are the fault of policies implemented by Reagan and Bush II, any economic successes of course will be credited to whatever Democrat is the flavor of the month (currently President Obama) and that no Democratic President need ever take responsibility for structural issues within the economy since Reagan and Bush basically made them unfixable. It's telling that you completely ignore monetary policy during the periods you attempt to dissect it's as if you don't recognize the part that monetary policy plays in our economy, you also make no mention of what the Democrats were doing during those two Presidencies it's as if they didn't exist in Washington at all.

We've had 7 years of "progressive" economic and monetary policy and from the perspective of the average American the economy sucks (spare me the stats cherry picking, you can do it, I can do it, but unless you live under a rock (or in Washington D.C.) you know as well as I do the average American is struggling to tread water).

One question, how many terms in office will it take for President Obama to "fix" all the economic problems and return us to the growth rate, job growth and general prosperity we enjoyed say in the mid to late 1980's? will be 5 terms be enough? how about 10?

Take your time and think it through Amigo...

Been to the world trade center recently in NYC?

The work is still ongoing 14 years after the 2001 attacks.


The twin towers themselves took over a decade to put up.

And several hours to knock down.

It's much harder to build and create than destroy.

That's why Obama has reduced this country to "Banana Republic" status in only 7 years.

 

[The Rabbi]

Don't forget how Republicans secretly support ISIS, want grandma to get kicked out of her home and look through medicine cabinets at dinner parties

I also don't forget that Republicans supported TARP, stimulus and bailouts to help Bush recover during the economic collapse

But not a single Republicans would support the same things for Obama

They should have voted against that government waste both times

The economy was in collapse. Nobody in the private sector was willing to invest in it. It was only the Government willing to dump a trillion dollars into the economy and assure the world that our banks would not fail

It stopped a depression

LOL. The economy was not in collapse. Most of the damage was already done. Bush had passed TARP and stabilized the banks, which were lending to each other.
Obama took a crisis and didnt let it go to waste by producing the worst economic recovery on record.

The economy DID collapse.

UE shot up to about 10% several months after Obama assumed office. The financial, banking and automotive industries were in freefall. And it wasn't just in this country, economies around the world were tanking.

LOL! Unemployment is a lagging indicator, moron. And it shot up after Obama and the Dems passed the Stimulus Bill, which they swore would keep UE under 7%.

 

[rightwinger]

Obama is having too good a time to resign

For the first time, he has cast off Congress and is getting the issues he is concerned about implemented without them

He is now the only game in town in Washington and he is loving every minute of it

So, he is a dictator and this makes you happy.

Leftists yearn for a totalitarian system.

Dictators are not elected with 70 million voters

Obama is operating within the limitations of his executive powers. Republucans are suffering the consequences of their internal strife

 

[The Rabbi]

Obama is having too good a time to resign

For the first time, he has cast off Congress and is getting the issues he is concerned about implemented without them

He is now the only game in town in Washington and he is loving every minute of it

So, he is a dictator and this makes you happy.

Leftists yearn for a totalitarian system.

Dictators are not elected with 70 million voters

Obama is operating within the limitations of his executive powers. Republucans are suffering the consequences of their internal strife

Hitler and Mussolini were both elected, Nutjobber.
It isnt that you dont know anything. Oh wait, it is.

 

[Sallow]

Which "Banana Republic" builds these: