Republicans: Forget Jobs-Lets Focus On "Embarrassing The President"

[NoNukes]

Comparably which man looks over 60?

Is this the same idiot who landed on an aircraft carrier and announced 'Mission accomplished'? Who almost choked to death on a pretzel watching football? Who constantly embarrassed America with his inability to speak? The most embarrassing President since Gerald Ford.

Are you saying Obama never makes mistakes?

How about these?
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t4-AKcH3eC8]UNBELIEVABLE OBAMA GAFFES, Mistakes, Lies, and Confusion - YouTube[/ame]

And these.
YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.

He has not embarrassed America and the American the way Bush did.

 

[Trajan]

They've made no bones about this.

They've been brazeningly honest about this agenda.

And this needs to become a campaign issue.

why yes because it’s a shock, a shocker!!! And fucking surprising, roll the cameras the out party wants the in party to lose the elections.... the opposition party wants to limit the other parties time in office to a term…..gadzoooks!!!!. Holy Guadalcanal Batman!!!!you are one sharp dude...a cooooool customer ....smooooth operator…...does your dad call you sonny? he should U so darn bright!!!...

 

[Seawytch]

Libs - please fill in the blanks.

Since his inauguration, President Obama has created __________________ jobs

More in 3 years than Bush did in 8.

 

[elvis]

Libs - please fill in the blanks.

Since his inauguration, President Obama has created __________________ jobs

More in 3 years than Bush did in 8.

Yeah. He created a lot of jobs, but lost a lot more. You sound like those people who say they won five grand at the casino, but leave out the fact that you lost 20 grand to make the five.

 

[DontBeStupid]

Obama had super majorities in both the House and Senate.

You probably believe in the Easter Bunny too, don't you?

 

[elvis]

Obama had super majorities in both the House and Senate.

You probably believe in the Easter Bunny too, don't you?

Read your screenname and take heed.

 

[MarcATL]

Libs - please fill in the blanks.

Since his inauguration, President Obama has created __________________ jobs

More in 3 years than Bush did in 8.

Yeah. He created a lot of jobs, but lost a lot more. You sound like those people who say they won five grand at the casino, but leave out the fact that you lost 20 grand to make the five.

Then one should be wise enough and not be a total putz to use such an asinine anology.

Besides, aren't you Republicans the ones who keep harping on with "Government doesn't create jobs?!?!?""

So why the heck are you even asking that nonsensical question in the first place?

 

[elvis]

More in 3 years than Bush did in 8.

Yeah. He created a lot of jobs, but lost a lot more. You sound like those people who say they won five grand at the casino, but leave out the fact that you lost 20 grand to make the five.

Then one should be wise enough and not be a total putz to use such an asinine anology.

Besides, aren't you Republicans the ones who keep harping on with "Government doesn't create jobs?!?!?""

So why the heck are you even asking that nonsensical question in the first place?

I didn't ask any questions. I forgot the quotes around "created". Should I fix the post?

 

[Stephanie]

Gawd, the whining from the left about this President is becoming embarrassing.

People saw the writing on the wall when YOU IDIOTS went out there and voted in a INEXPERIENCD JUNIOR SENATOR OF TWO YEARS community organizer AS President.

We don't have to TRY and EMBARASS this dolt, he is a EMBARASSMENT to us people and this country. It's only you die hard Obamabots WHO don't see it.

 

[Mustang]

Flawed premise.
The President needs no help embarassing himself.

Let me know if Obama ever gets his ass kicked by a pretzel.

 

[DontBeStupid]

Obama had super majorities in both the House and Senate.

You probably believe in the Easter Bunny too, don't you?

Read your screenname and take heed.

I do so love how you refuse to look anything up before you post.

111th United States Congress - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As you can see, the Democrats never had 60 members in the senate. Never. Just because someone is not a Republican does not make them a Democrat.

You guys really need to drop the whole "with us or against us" bull shit.

 

[elvis]

You probably believe in the Easter Bunny too, don't you?

Read your screenname and take heed.

I do so love how you refuse to look anything up before you post.

111th United States Congress - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As you can see, the Democrats never had 60 members in the senate. Never. Just because someone is not a Republican does not make them a Democrat.

You guys really need to drop the whole "with us or against us" bull shit.

I never believed in the "with us or against us", but fuck you anyway.

 

[DontBeStupid]

I never believed in the "with us or against us", but fuck you anyway.

You're welcome

 

[Oldstyle]

You probably believe in the Easter Bunny too, don't you?

Read your screenname and take heed.

I do so love how you refuse to look anything up before you post.

111th United States Congress - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As you can see, the Democrats never had 60 members in the senate. Never. Just because someone is not a Republican does not make them a Democrat.

You guys really need to drop the whole "with us or against us" bull shit.

That's true only because two "independents" Bernie Sanders and Joe Liebermann aren't Democrats per se but did caucus with the Democrats. So yes, Barack Obama had a super majority to work with in the Senate as well as the House. The fact is...he had control and he STILL didn't do anything to create jobs. Or did you want to try and run that "jobs created/saved" bullshit by us?

 

[DontBeStupid]

That's true only because two "independents" Bernie Sanders and Joe Liebermann aren't Democrats per se but did caucus with the Democrats.

Oh yeah. That's right. I remember now how Lieberman came out and publicly said he would vote for anything and everything Obama was in favour of.



Seriously, you can't re-write history.

 

[bigbull]

Mitch McConnell said it almost immediately after Obama swore in, their goal is to make Obama a one-term President. Period. Full-stop. It doesn't matter who get's hurt or how many Americans gets hurt in the process. Even if the entire country burns down, as long as it's on Obama's watch and they can make it stick to him...they are happy.

That's their stated goal.

I don't know how much more evidence any sane and/or thinking person would need to realize this fact.

Oh please, quit whining. This is the Bush-bashing come full circle. The same liberals whining about how opposing Obama is bad for the country were main ones thumping the "Blame America First" drum when it came to Bush. Most of you don't give a shit about the country; you just don't want your guy blamed for fucking it up. Oh well, a little too late for that!

 

[NoNukes]

Mitch McConnell said it almost immediately after Obama swore in, their goal is to make Obama a one-term President. Period. Full-stop. It doesn't matter who get's hurt or how many Americans gets hurt in the process. Even if the entire country burns down, as long as it's on Obama's watch and they can make it stick to him...they are happy.

That's their stated goal.

I don't know how much more evidence any sane and/or thinking person would need to realize this fact.

It's very difficult to discuss things with people who can't get the most basic facts right. When did McConnell say this?


Someone who thinks that October 2010 is almost immediately after Obama was sworn in probably can't understand the practicality of that goal. The goal is to save America. The way to accomplish that is to not have Obama as president. Or as McConnell stated in greater detail:

"Over the past week, some have said it was indelicate of me to suggest that our top political priority over the next two years should be to deny President Obama a second term in office. But the fact is, if our primary legislative goals are to repeal and replace the health spending bill; to end the bailouts; cut spending; and shrink the size and scope of government, the only way to do all these things it is to put someone in the White House who won’t veto any of these things. We can hope the President will start listening to the electorate after Tuesday’s election. But we can’t plan on it."




Yes, some expressed a desire very early on that we stop Obama's agenda. But that again was not anti-American. Unlike the vast unwashed masses caught up in the hysteria of "hope and change", some of us actually LISTENED to Obama and knew some of the details of his vision for America. And we also listened enough to know what a double-talking politician he was. So we knew that if he achieved what he wanted that would be bad and we strongly suspected that if he didn't achieve what he wanted he would be the whining wienie that he is.

Not anti-American at all on our part. The people who apparently don't care about America were those who were too careless to do the research on Obama which would have showed how wrong he was for the job. Voters have a responsibility. Those who ushered Obama into office abdicated that responsibility.

The majority of Americans do not share the Tea party's vision for America.

Only 20 % support the Tea party's views.

 

[Oldstyle]

It's very difficult to discuss things with people who can't get the most basic facts right. When did McConnell say this?


Someone who thinks that October 2010 is almost immediately after Obama was sworn in probably can't understand the practicality of that goal. The goal is to save America. The way to accomplish that is to not have Obama as president. Or as McConnell stated in greater detail:

"Over the past week, some have said it was indelicate of me to suggest that our top political priority over the next two years should be to deny President Obama a second term in office. But the fact is, if our primary legislative goals are to repeal and replace the health spending bill; to end the bailouts; cut spending; and shrink the size and scope of government, the only way to do all these things it is to put someone in the White House who won’t veto any of these things. We can hope the President will start listening to the electorate after Tuesday’s election. But we can’t plan on it."




Yes, some expressed a desire very early on that we stop Obama's agenda. But that again was not anti-American. Unlike the vast unwashed masses caught up in the hysteria of "hope and change", some of us actually LISTENED to Obama and knew some of the details of his vision for America. And we also listened enough to know what a double-talking politician he was. So we knew that if he achieved what he wanted that would be bad and we strongly suspected that if he didn't achieve what he wanted he would be the whining wienie that he is.

Not anti-American at all on our part. The people who apparently don't care about America were those who were too careless to do the research on Obama which would have showed how wrong he was for the job. Voters have a responsibility. Those who ushered Obama into office abdicated that responsibility.

The majority of Americans do not share the Tea party's vision for America.

Only 20 % support the Tea party's views.

Well, let's see...I think we can agree that the Tea Party wants to shrink the size of the Federal Government. How many Americans do you think support that view? A recent Rasmussan poll found this:

"Sixty-seven percent (67%) of Likely U.S. Voters think that thoughtful spending cuts should be considered in every program of the federal government as the nation searches for solutions to the budget crisis. A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that just 22% of voters are opposed to considering cuts in every government program. Eleven percent (11%) are undecided."

Little higher than 20%?

Perhaps what you should have said was that only 20% support all of the Tea Party's views...hardly surprising when you take into account that the Tea Party is a collection of dozens of small groups with different views and political aspirations.

On many issues a majority of the American people are in agreement with the Tea Party. Progressives always want to highlight some of the most extreme views of some Tea Party people and accuse all Tea Party people of being of a like mind. Sorry, but that's not a truthful presentation of facts.

 

[editec]

Partian obstructionism is standard operating procedure now.

Character assassination of the POTUS is a now national past time.

This is what happens when all political discourse is based on the HATE YOUR NEIGHBOR poltical premise.

 

[Stephanie]

Partian obstructionism is standard operating procedure now.

Character assassination of the POTUS is a now national past time.

This is what happens when all political discourse is based on the HATE YOUR NEIGHBOR poltical premise.

Really? well it reached fever pitch during the Bush administration.