Why are Republicans so dishonest about Obama?

[Bruce_T_Laney]

Why are Republicans so dishonest about Obama?
And what is up with this alternate view of reality? The economy was already "saved" before he became president. We had won the war in Iraq and everything was going great. Health care was cheap and everyone had it.

If you can't be honest, will people, besides those in gerrymandered districts, vote for you?

The real question is America back to where it was when Clinton left office?

I am not denying the failure during the Bush era when he was in office, but to me President Obama has been a failure.

I have never agreed with the ACA and believe he did not care about immigration reform when he had the House and Senate, and when the Democrats lost the House he should have been more willing to work by offering a trade for what he wanted.

Now I do understand the Tea Party Caucus will never work with President Obama, and will paint him in a negative light, and let be really honest it will not change if Hillary or Trump is elected because the Tea Party Caucus want it their way only and if not they will take their toys home and cry like little babies.

So as much as you pain one side as being the only problem it take two to tango, and in my opinion President Obama has been part of the problem and never part of solving the problem.

 

[Bruce_T_Laney]

Dems invented Gerrymandering but now that they're a permanent minority all of a sudden its a bad thing

In 2006 and 2008 after the massive loss by the GOP to the Democrats many Democrats felt the same way as you do when it came to one party being the permanent minority, and poof 2010 that all changed and by 2014 the Democrats lost all their lead, but I would never write they are a permanent minority because the American Public is fickle and will turn on your political party as quickly they turned on the Democrats in 2010 and the GOP in 2006.

I know how dare I even write such drivel that is reality!

I sometime write things to upset and annoy Progressives

I will be honest and admit I believe the GOP will not win the white House.

The Hispanic and African American vote will cost the GOP in states like Texas and I could see Hillary winning, and before you write no way or how she is a criminal that is beside the point, and my question is if Hillary does win how many more years of this hostile hatred will this country have to endure?

I actually also believe if Trump win he will be hated by Congress and the GOP, so how will this country survive another four years of this nonsense?

I like Paul Ryan, and believe he has the balls to get stuff done, but in the end if Trump or Hillary win I believe the hatred for Obama will carry over to their term, and America will be stuck with four to eight more years of this nonsense, and can this country survive it without going into the tank?

I believe America is going to be hurting the next eight to twenty years and the partisan bickering is hurting more than helping...

 

[BlindBoo]

Why are Republicans so dishonest about Obama?
And what is up with this alternate view of reality? The economy was already "saved" before he became president. We had won the war in Iraq and everything was going great. Health care was cheap and everyone had it.

If you can't be honest, will people, besides those in gerrymandered districts, vote for you?

FLASHBACK—Obama: ‘We’re Leaving Behind a Sovereign, Stable and Self-Reliant Iraq’

In 2011 they were. Soon after however the Iranian backed, Shiite led government turned on their Sunni countrymen, and the Iraq civil war enter a new phase and turned into a wider, regional conflict.

Translation: the lack of leadership from Obama has led to a meltdown of the Middle East leading to World War III starting.

The real story

Republicans desperately want to deflect from the fact that President Bushes invasion and occupation of Iraq was a monumental strategic blunder that has tipped the tenuous balance of power in the Middle East and likely started a regional conflict that is likely to kill millions.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Why are Republicans so dishonest about Obama?
And what is up with this alternate view of reality? The economy was already "saved" before he became president. We had won the war in Iraq and everything was going great. Health care was cheap and everyone had it.

If you can't be honest, will people, besides those in gerrymandered districts, vote for you?

Quicker and less labor-intensive to just make stuff up.

 

[Dale Smith]

"Republicans desperately want to deflect from the fact that President Bushes invasion and occupation of Iraq was a monumental strategic blunder that has tipped the tenuous balance of power in the Middle East and likely started a regional conflict that is likely to kill millions"

Just because Bush was a sorry piece of shit doesn't excuse the Barrypuppet for doubling down on the bullshit........of course those of us that are awake know that Barrypuppet is just an extension of the Bushpuppet agenda.

 

[Weatherman2020]

Why are Republicans so dishonest about Obama?
And what is up with this alternate view of reality? The economy was already "saved" before he became president. We had won the war in Iraq and everything was going great. Health care was cheap and everyone had it.

If you can't be honest, will people, besides those in gerrymandered districts, vote for you?

FLASHBACK—Obama: ‘We’re Leaving Behind a Sovereign, Stable and Self-Reliant Iraq’

In 2011 they were. Soon after however the Iranian backed, Shiite led government turned on their Sunni countrymen, and the Iraq civil war enter a new phase and turned into a wider, regional conflict.

Translation: the lack of leadership from Obama has led to a meltdown of the Middle East leading to World War III starting.

The real story

Republicans desperately want to deflect from the fact that President Bushes invasion and occupation of Iraq was a monumental strategic blunder that has tipped the tenuous balance of power in the Middle East and likely started a regional conflict that is likely to kill millions.

Why are Republicans so dishonest about Obama?
And what is up with this alternate view of reality? The economy was already "saved" before he became president. We had won the war in Iraq and everything was going great. Health care was cheap and everyone had it.

If you can't be honest, will people, besides those in gerrymandered districts, vote for you?

FLASHBACK—Obama: ‘We’re Leaving Behind a Sovereign, Stable and Self-Reliant Iraq’

In 2011 they were. Soon after however the Iranian backed, Shiite led government turned on their Sunni countrymen, and the Iraq civil war enter a new phase and turned into a wider, regional conflict.

Translation: the lack of leadership from Obama has led to a meltdown of the Middle East leading to World War III starting.

The real story

Republicans desperately want to deflect from the fact that President Bushes invasion and occupation of Iraq was a monumental strategic blunder that has tipped the tenuous balance of power in the Middle East and likely started a regional conflict that is likely to kill millions.

President Bush's invasion of Iraq led to a stable and Democratic nation that was self sustaining.
Obamas own words.

 

[Dale Smith]

Weatherman2020, it's me...bassdws888 from the old yahoo message boards...hope all is well with you!

 

[Weatherman2020]

Weatherman2020, it's me...bassdws888 from the old yahoo message boards...hope all is well with you!

Hey dude! All is well, hope your doing well.

 

[Dale Smith]

.I have no major complaints...just older and there isn't much I can do about that...LOL! So glad that I found you here and added you so I can peruse your musings......yes, the liberals still suck and the NWO agenda hasn't had a better ally than the uber lefties.

 

[francoHFW]

Why are Republicans so dishonest about Obama?
And what is up with this alternate view of reality? The economy was already "saved" before he became president. We had won the war in Iraq and everything was going great. Health care was cheap and everyone had it.

If you can't be honest, will people, besides those in gerrymandered districts, vote for you?

With quite a few of them, I think they actually believe what they are being spoon-fed by wingnut radio and faux. Delusional is the word that comes to mind.

libtards believe what is fed to them by cnn, the msm and their lib professors for 50 years.

...and every news media except for the total bs NEW BS GOP Propaganda Network you functional morons swallow....

 

[francoHFW]

Why are Republicans so dishonest about Obama?
And what is up with this alternate view of reality? The economy was already "saved" before he became president. We had won the war in Iraq and everything was going great. Health care was cheap and everyone had it.

If you can't be honest, will people, besides those in gerrymandered districts, vote for you?

I'm always amazed at how much blame and credit americans give to presidents. Bush didn't ruin the economy, the seeds for that debacle had been sown much earlier. Obama didn't save the economy. Heck look at the economic team he put in place, it was the same people that got us into the mess in the first place.

Simplistic sound bites on presidents seems to be the only things the electorate in this country can process.

Sorry, W Bush regulators let their pals run wild with toxic assets and wrecked the world. Obama at least keeps things honest, no typical Pub bubble/bust/scandal...

And it was under the Clinton adm that the derivatives markets took off. It was under the Clinton adm that rubin and greenspan refused to regulate OTC derivatives. It was under the Clinton adm that Glass Steagal was repealed. It was Clinton through executive order that increased fannie mae and freddie mac exposure to subprime mortgages from something like 12% to in excess of 30%. Note that in the case of derivatives and glass steagal one of the chief architects was Robert Rubin, Obamas first chief economic adviser.

The first bank I can think of that blew up because of this nonsense was citicorp in 1994. Another was Long Term Capital Management in 1998.

As far as Obama keeping things honest, you've got to be kidding. What's changed? Dodd Frank forced minor changes to banks leverage positions but derivatives and OTC derivatives are pretty much the same.

People seem to think we've fixed the problems we haven't. I remember an interview with some one from SEC 2 years after Dodd Frank was passed. When asked if the legislation fixed the problems he laughed and said "put it this way if this financial crash was instead a plane crash, we'd still be looking for the plane".

Irrelevant bs. Fannie and Freddies' share of the market fell from 75% to 25% in 2003, and the private lenders were scum who Boosh regulators let run wild. BOOM! Today F+F dominates again. Good.

You're clueless anyway. You seem to think Dodd Frank is a person. Typical dupe. See sig, last line.

Irrelevant? That 25% seems to be on the order of 1.8 trillion. And while I agree with the culpability of the private lenders and the Bush adm I don't think you can dismiss the effects of govt in this mess. Here's a quote from the 1994 National Homeownership Strategy, published at the request of President Clinton. it called for

“financing strategies, fueled by the creativity and resources of the private and public sectors, to help homeowners that lack cash to buy a home or to make the payments.” Lack cash to buy a home or make the payments. Brilliant

I'm quite aware of what dodd frank is. I remember an interview on NPR with a govt official on the 3rd anniversary of it's passage. She was so proud, it was almost 45% written.

That Dem rule was for WORTHY people with JOBS lol, not the toxic loans that Boooshies allowed to be rated A+, insured and sold around the world. So what WAS Dodd Frank talking about, then. Caught in cluelessness....

 

[francoHFW]

Oops sorry for the empty post hit the wrong button/

Maybe you are correct that the President doesnt have direct personal responsibility for an economy.

However, being as how the POTUS is the Peoples Rep-resentative, they do get credit or blame.

To make the evalualtion of the past two Presidents easy (Bush and Obama) I suggest you look at your investment statements from the end of the Bush period and look at those investments today.

See if you can figure out under which President you did better.

Oops sorry for the empty post, hit the wrong button.

Again I see no reason to give credit to Obama. This adm essentially did the same thing the bush adm was doing. Not surprisingly since his economic team was comprised of the same people.

You mean invading the wrong country?

Or you mean blackmail using Americans as hostages?

Unemployment benefits: not until Bush tax cuts pass, Senate GOP says

No I meant,

Bush adm prescription for dealing with the economic blow up - pump large amts of money into the big banks
Obama adm prescription for dealing with the economic blow up - pump even larger amts of money into the big banks

.

Clueless. Obama's bailout was not like TARP at all, NOT for big banks! 40% tax cuts for the nonrich, aid to state and local gov't for schools and police, 20% infrastructure. And it worked GREAT! GD Pubs...

Ever hear of quantitative easing. We've basically erased 1.6 tr of bad debt from the banks bottom lines. Not like tarp
but still pumping money into the big banks.

That's the Fed, not Obama. And the only thing mindless obstructionist Pubs will allow duh. THEY LOVE IT.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Repubs talk out both sides of their mouths .

First Obama isn't doing enough to stop ISIS , then it's an ilegal war ?!

Well which one is it!?

You call the pin pricks obama is dishing out war?

 

[baileyn45]

I'm always amazed at how much blame and credit americans give to presidents. Bush didn't ruin the economy, the seeds for that debacle had been sown much earlier. Obama didn't save the economy. Heck look at the economic team he put in place, it was the same people that got us into the mess in the first place.

Simplistic sound bites on presidents seems to be the only things the electorate in this country can process.

Sorry, W Bush regulators let their pals run wild with toxic assets and wrecked the world. Obama at least keeps things honest, no typical Pub bubble/bust/scandal...

And it was under the Clinton adm that the derivatives markets took off. It was under the Clinton adm that rubin and greenspan refused to regulate OTC derivatives. It was under the Clinton adm that Glass Steagal was repealed. It was Clinton through executive order that increased fannie mae and freddie mac exposure to subprime mortgages from something like 12% to in excess of 30%. Note that in the case of derivatives and glass steagal one of the chief architects was Robert Rubin, Obamas first chief economic adviser.

The first bank I can think of that blew up because of this nonsense was citicorp in 1994. Another was Long Term Capital Management in 1998.

As far as Obama keeping things honest, you've got to be kidding. What's changed? Dodd Frank forced minor changes to banks leverage positions but derivatives and OTC derivatives are pretty much the same.

People seem to think we've fixed the problems we haven't. I remember an interview with some one from SEC 2 years after Dodd Frank was passed. When asked if the legislation fixed the problems he laughed and said "put it this way if this financial crash was instead a plane crash, we'd still be looking for the plane".

Irrelevant bs. Fannie and Freddies' share of the market fell from 75% to 25% in 2003, and the private lenders were scum who Boosh regulators let run wild. BOOM! Today F+F dominates again. Good.

You're clueless anyway. You seem to think Dodd Frank is a person. Typical dupe. See sig, last line.

Irrelevant? That 25% seems to be on the order of 1.8 trillion. And while I agree with the culpability of the private lenders and the Bush adm I don't think you can dismiss the effects of govt in this mess. Here's a quote from the 1994 National Homeownership Strategy, published at the request of President Clinton. it called for

“financing strategies, fueled by the creativity and resources of the private and public sectors, to help homeowners that lack cash to buy a home or to make the payments.” Lack cash to buy a home or make the payments. Brilliant

I'm quite aware of what dodd frank is. I remember an interview on NPR with a govt official on the 3rd anniversary of it's passage. She was so proud, it was almost 45% written.

That Dem rule was for WORTHY people with JOBS lol, not the toxic loans that Boooshies allowed to be rated A+, insured and sold around the world. So what WAS Dodd Frank talking about, then. Caught in cluelessness....

According to Clinton it was for "homeowners that lack cash to buy a home or to make the payments". Sounds like failure by design.
The Bush adm didn't create the derivatives that allowed those toxic loans to be A+ rated, although they certainly helped spread the disease. Heck Brooksley Borne of the CFTC was warning about them in 1999 before Bush was elected. If she was warning about them in 1999 I sincerely doubt they had sprung up the night before.
As far as Dodd Frank is concerned I along with many others are still trying figure out what it is supposed to do. I'm curious have they finished writing it yet?

 

[francoHFW]

P

Sorry, W Bush regulators let their pals run wild with toxic assets and wrecked the world. Obama at least keeps things honest, no typical Pub bubble/bust/scandal...

And it was under the Clinton adm that the derivatives markets took off. It was under the Clinton adm that rubin and greenspan refused to regulate OTC derivatives. It was under the Clinton adm that Glass Steagal was repealed. It was Clinton through executive order that increased fannie mae and freddie mac exposure to subprime mortgages from something like 12% to in excess of 30%. Note that in the case of derivatives and glass steagal one of the chief architects was Robert Rubin, Obamas first chief economic adviser.

The first bank I can think of that blew up because of this nonsense was citicorp in 1994. Another was Long Term Capital Management in 1998.

As far as Obama keeping things honest, you've got to be kidding. What's changed? Dodd Frank forced minor changes to banks leverage positions but derivatives and OTC derivatives are pretty much the same.

People seem to think we've fixed the problems we haven't. I remember an interview with some one from SEC 2 years after Dodd Frank was passed. When asked if the legislation fixed the problems he laughed and said "put it this way if this financial crash was instead a plane crash, we'd still be looking for the plane".

Irrelevant bs. Fannie and Freddies' share of the market fell from 75% to 25% in 2003, and the private lenders were scum who Boosh regulators let run wild. BOOM! Today F+F dominates again. Good.

You're clueless anyway. You seem to think Dodd Frank is a person. Typical dupe. See sig, last line.

Irrelevant? That 25% seems to be on the order of 1.8 trillion. And while I agree with the culpability of the private lenders and the Bush adm I don't think you can dismiss the effects of govt in this mess. Here's a quote from the 1994 National Homeownership Strategy, published at the request of President Clinton. it called for

“financing strategies, fueled by the creativity and resources of the private and public sectors, to help homeowners that lack cash to buy a home or to make the payments.” Lack cash to buy a home or make the payments. Brilliant

I'm quite aware of what dodd frank is. I remember an interview on NPR with a govt official on the 3rd anniversary of it's passage. She was so proud, it was almost 45% written.

That Dem rule was for WORTHY people with JOBS lol, not the toxic loans that Boooshies allowed to be rated A+, insured and sold around the world. So what WAS Dodd Frank talking about, then. Caught in cluelessness....

According to Clinton it was for "homeowners that lack cash to buy a home or to make the payments". Sounds like failure by design.
The Bush adm didn't create the derivatives that allowed those toxic loans to be A+ rated, although they certainly helped spread the disease. Heck Brooksley Borne of the CFTC was warning about them in 1999 before Bush was elected. If she was warning about them in 1999 I sincerely doubt they had sprung up the night before.
As far as Dodd Frank is concerned I along with many others are still trying figure out what it is supposed to do. I'm curious have they finished writing it yet?

BS. And Pubs are good at blocking its implementation. Anything for big money, dupe.

 

[francoHFW]

Repubs talk out both sides of their mouths .

First Obama isn't doing enough to stop ISIS , then it's an ilegal war ?!

Well which one is it!?

You call the pin pricks obama is dishing out war?

He's a warmongering dictator pussy, of course. lol at hater dupes...

 

[baileyn45]

Oops sorry for the empty post hit the wrong button/
Oops sorry for the empty post, hit the wrong button.

Again I see no reason to give credit to Obama. This adm essentially did the same thing the bush adm was doing. Not surprisingly since his economic team was comprised of the same people.

You mean invading the wrong country?

Or you mean blackmail using Americans as hostages?

Unemployment benefits: not until Bush tax cuts pass, Senate GOP says

No I meant,

Bush adm prescription for dealing with the economic blow up - pump large amts of money into the big banks
Obama adm prescription for dealing with the economic blow up - pump even larger amts of money into the big banks

.

Clueless. Obama's bailout was not like TARP at all, NOT for big banks! 40% tax cuts for the nonrich, aid to state and local gov't for schools and police, 20% infrastructure. And it worked GREAT! GD Pubs...

Ever hear of quantitative easing. We've basically erased 1.6 tr of bad debt from the banks bottom lines. Not like tarp
but still pumping money into the big banks.

That's the Fed, not Obama. And the only thing mindless obstructionist Pubs will allow duh. THEY LOVE IT.

And you believe the fed acts entirely independent of the sitting adm? Not to mention the ties within the adm, Geithner Obama's first treasury sec was the former head of the NY fed.
The left in this country would have us believe that the Obama adm is markedly different from those that came before, that's nonsense. This adm has done nothing different other than where the massive amts of money pumped into wall street came from.
.

 

[baileyn45]

P

And it was under the Clinton adm that the derivatives markets took off. It was under the Clinton adm that rubin and greenspan refused to regulate OTC derivatives. It was under the Clinton adm that Glass Steagal was repealed. It was Clinton through executive order that increased fannie mae and freddie mac exposure to subprime mortgages from something like 12% to in excess of 30%. Note that in the case of derivatives and glass steagal one of the chief architects was Robert Rubin, Obamas first chief economic adviser.

The first bank I can think of that blew up because of this nonsense was citicorp in 1994. Another was Long Term Capital Management in 1998.

As far as Obama keeping things honest, you've got to be kidding. What's changed? Dodd Frank forced minor changes to banks leverage positions but derivatives and OTC derivatives are pretty much the same.

People seem to think we've fixed the problems we haven't. I remember an interview with some one from SEC 2 years after Dodd Frank was passed. When asked if the legislation fixed the problems he laughed and said "put it this way if this financial crash was instead a plane crash, we'd still be looking for the plane".

Irrelevant bs. Fannie and Freddies' share of the market fell from 75% to 25% in 2003, and the private lenders were scum who Boosh regulators let run wild. BOOM! Today F+F dominates again. Good.

You're clueless anyway. You seem to think Dodd Frank is a person. Typical dupe. See sig, last line.

Irrelevant? That 25% seems to be on the order of 1.8 trillion. And while I agree with the culpability of the private lenders and the Bush adm I don't think you can dismiss the effects of govt in this mess. Here's a quote from the 1994 National Homeownership Strategy, published at the request of President Clinton. it called for

“financing strategies, fueled by the creativity and resources of the private and public sectors, to help homeowners that lack cash to buy a home or to make the payments.” Lack cash to buy a home or make the payments. Brilliant

I'm quite aware of what dodd frank is. I remember an interview on NPR with a govt official on the 3rd anniversary of it's passage. She was so proud, it was almost 45% written.

That Dem rule was for WORTHY people with JOBS lol, not the toxic loans that Boooshies allowed to be rated A+, insured and sold around the world. So what WAS Dodd Frank talking about, then. Caught in cluelessness....

According to Clinton it was for "homeowners that lack cash to buy a home or to make the payments". Sounds like failure by design.
The Bush adm didn't create the derivatives that allowed those toxic loans to be A+ rated, although they certainly helped spread the disease. Heck Brooksley Borne of the CFTC was warning about them in 1999 before Bush was elected. If she was warning about them in 1999 I sincerely doubt they had sprung up the night before.
As far as Dodd Frank is concerned I along with many others are still trying figure out what it is supposed to do. I'm curious have they finished writing it yet?

BS. And Pubs are good at blocking its implementation. Anything for big money, dupe.

Blocking whats implementation? As far as anything for big money, big money is doing splendidly under this adm.

 

[francoHFW]

You mean invading the wrong country?

Or you mean blackmail using Americans as hostages?

Unemployment benefits: not until Bush tax cuts pass, Senate GOP says

No I meant,

Bush adm prescription for dealing with the economic blow up - pump large amts of money into the big banks
Obama adm prescription for dealing with the economic blow up - pump even larger amts of money into the big banks

.

Clueless. Obama's bailout was not like TARP at all, NOT for big banks! 40% tax cuts for the nonrich, aid to state and local gov't for schools and police, 20% infrastructure. And it worked GREAT! GD Pubs...

Ever hear of quantitative easing. We've basically erased 1.6 tr of bad debt from the banks bottom lines. Not like tarp
but still pumping money into the big banks.

That's the Fed, not Obama. And the only thing mindless obstructionist Pubs will allow duh. THEY LOVE IT.

And you believe the fed acts entirely independent of the sitting adm? Not to mention the ties within the adm, Geithner Obama's first treasury sec was the former head of the NY fed.
The left in this country would have us believe that the Obama adm is markedly different from those that came before, that's nonsense. This adm has done nothing different other than where the massive amts of money pumped into wall street came from.
.

They're not greedy a-hole chickenhhawks who wrecked the world in every possible way...

 

[francoHFW]

P

Irrelevant bs. Fannie and Freddies' share of the market fell from 75% to 25% in 2003, and the private lenders were scum who Boosh regulators let run wild. BOOM! Today F+F dominates again. Good.

You're clueless anyway. You seem to think Dodd Frank is a person. Typical dupe. See sig, last line.

Irrelevant? That 25% seems to be on the order of 1.8 trillion. And while I agree with the culpability of the private lenders and the Bush adm I don't think you can dismiss the effects of govt in this mess. Here's a quote from the 1994 National Homeownership Strategy, published at the request of President Clinton. it called for

“financing strategies, fueled by the creativity and resources of the private and public sectors, to help homeowners that lack cash to buy a home or to make the payments.” Lack cash to buy a home or make the payments. Brilliant

I'm quite aware of what dodd frank is. I remember an interview on NPR with a govt official on the 3rd anniversary of it's passage. She was so proud, it was almost 45% written.

That Dem rule was for WORTHY people with JOBS lol, not the toxic loans that Boooshies allowed to be rated A+, insured and sold around the world. So what WAS Dodd Frank talking about, then. Caught in cluelessness....

According to Clinton it was for "homeowners that lack cash to buy a home or to make the payments". Sounds like failure by design.
The Bush adm didn't create the derivatives that allowed those toxic loans to be A+ rated, although they certainly helped spread the disease. Heck Brooksley Borne of the CFTC was warning about them in 1999 before Bush was elected. If she was warning about them in 1999 I sincerely doubt they had sprung up the night before.
As far as Dodd Frank is concerned I along with many others are still trying figure out what it is supposed to do. I'm curious have they finished writing it yet?

BS. And Pubs are good at blocking its implementation. Anything for big money, dupe.

Blocking whats implementation? As far as anything for big money, big money is doing splendidly under this adm.

Your pal Todd Frank duh.
Thanks to your heroes. Ay caramba.