How is President Obama worse than President George W. Bush?

[Meathead]

These charges are so stupid and easy to disprove. I will pick the easiest.

First, it was Republicans who screamed Gitmo should be closed and when Obama began to close it, it was Republicans using terrorist tactics screaming that Obama wanted to let dangerous people go into our streets and backyards. They turned Public Opinion against him so bad he had little choice but to keep it open. Because Republicans are scum. They just wanted to hurt him politically.

Then, the so-called "failed" stimulus was a huge success. More than a hundred Republican congressmen took hundreds of millions of dollars and created tens of thousands of jobs they took credit for after voting against it. A simple Google search and you can find their names, states, projects and how it helped the economy.

The nation is divided because Republicans are 90% white and the most racist party in American history and they are paying the price.

And the Bush era tax cuts? He was blackmailed. Even the conservative Christian Science Monitor wrote multiple articles about it.

Unemployment benefits: not until Bush tax cuts pass, Senate GOP says - CSMonitor.com

Unemployment benefits extended in tax-cut deal - CSMonitor.com

Obama couldn't let millions of Americans suffer, but Republicans can and want to.

Now, prove "let him die" and "feed the poor and they will breed" and "the apology to BP" and all the other things written about Republicans aren't true. Just kidding. We both know they ARE true.

The scary part is that you probably believe this. Have we seriously dumbed down this much, or this is just extreme partisanship?

Come to think of it, I'm not sure there's much of a difference.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

I'm too lazy to go through your post piece by piece, so I'll just respond to these two comments.

The nation is divided because Republicans are 90% white and the most racist party in American history and they are paying the price.

Well, this is easy to disprove. Democrats supported slavery and the expansion of Jim Crowe laws; Republicans didn't.

....And, when Civil Rights legislation was passed, in the early-'60s, those "Dems" magically turned-into Republicans.
​

 

[TemplarKormac]

Lakhota if you have to ask, then you're content with crap and I dont have all day...I'll give you one..

Governement spending (and hell that was Bush's biggest weakness)

Government spending? As I've asked many times before: How much debt has Obama created that wasn't a direct/indirect result of Bush actions?

How many times must I ask people I know, and people like you?

Why is it always Bush's fault?

And if you must ask, just do some digging at the CBO website. That should give you some insight.

In fact he made the situation worse. He passed a $2.8 trillion (according to revised CBO estimates) healthcare overhaul. Which he originally stated wouldn't exceed 1 trillion.

Do some math.

Yep, Obama's a Big Spender...Just Like His Predecessors - Forbes

 

[007]

Bush left a major mess - but Obama is slowly cleaning it up - without any help from obstructionist Republicans.

And there you have it. One of the TOP propaganda lies being purported by the leftist obama ass kissers. NOTHING could be further from the truth. This lie will probably go down as one of the biggest lines of BULL SHIT in this CENTURY.

Yes, the kenyan inherited a shitty situation, but all he's done since he's been in office is make a bad situation TEN TIMES WORSE... THERE is the TRUTH.

If the republicans "drove the car into the ditch," then obama has shit and pissed inside it, bashed in all the windows, slit all the tires and set it on FIRE.

 

[TemplarKormac]

I'm too lazy to go through your post piece by piece, so I'll just respond to these two comments.

The nation is divided because Republicans are 90% white and the most racist party in American history and they are paying the price.

Well, this is easy to disprove. Democrats supported slavery and the expansion of Jim Crowe laws; Republicans didn't. Democrats nominated a known segregationist for POTUS; Republicans didn't.

Truth is Republican party really never changed it has been the Democrat Party that has changed in the last 40 years. However it is the goal of the new left wing socialist party to make you believe otherwise because of the embarrassing history of the left. The Democrat Party would hold very little credibility on issues if it were not able to change Americans perspective view of the party. So since the late 60's the Democrat Party along with the willing left wing media have been on full campaign mode in convincing American's with a vail of misleading twisted facts. Even to this day the democrat party focuses most of its energy of points of political emotion rather than facts. It is much easier to pull on ones emotions rather than try to use logic in explaining their socialist views. This is how the Republican Party got such a bad name over the last 40 years. The problem was never the fact that the republican party "changed", it never really did, it was that they never really evolved in protecting their history and goal of preserving the constitution and freedom for all in their ability to pursue happiness.
In the course of our national historical development the United States of America has in many ways exhibited the diverse traits of a Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. The struggle between our two "selves" came most profoundly into focus a mere 85 years after the founding of this democracy "conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal"-- when we found ourselves "engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure". This Civil War had been precipitated when the author of those words, Abraham Lincoln, was elected first Republican President of the United States in the fall of 1860, and the southern bloc of slave states, which voted primarily Democratic, refused to accept this result, and instead claimed the right to secede from the Union the following spring. South Carolina, convinced that "a lady's sewing thimble will hold all the blood that will be shed" in any armed conflict with the Union (James McPherson, 'Battle Cry of Freedom'), was not only the first southern state to secede, but the first to commence hostilities as well when it fired upon the federal garrison at Fort Sumter in Charleston Harbor after it refused to surrender, and the ensuing four years of Civil War would in fact claim nearly 700,000 lives on both sides.

Today the heartland of Lincoln's electoral base then-- the densely populated northeastern states which were to make up the bulk of the Union forces, also called the North in the war-- votes staunchly Democratic. Amazingly, the states which formed the Confederacy, also known in the war as the South, contain most of the hardcore base of the current GOP, which began as Lincoln's very own Republican Party. For a physical analogy to this astonishing "turn" of events, try this experiment-- hold a magnifying lens close to your eye and gaze through it at an object across the room. No amount of effort will put the object in focus, but at least it will appear right-side-up. Now slowly move the lens away from your eye, while keeping the same object in view, and suddenly you will lose sight of it in a chaos of blur and color; continue moving the lens until your arm is near fully extended, locate the object again if you can in the field of the lens, and somehow it has emerged from the confusion, somewhat larger and still unfocused but now has completely flipped upside down! And, with a good lens and a long enough arm, the inverted object can in fact be brought into clear focus, though it will remain upside down.........................................



The putrid leftovers of feudalism which still slither around the South, on Wall Street, and through the side streets of our nation's capitol would make CEOs kings and their multi-national corporations empires. Similar forces fought against Lincoln's vision once before and lost. Though they killed him, his ideas have lived on. Will we the people allow this new aristocracy of the rich and powerful to consolidate permanent control of our nation? Or can we, as so many great generations before us have done, step forward and seize hold of what has been given us by those who came before, and pass it intact to those who will come after? If not, then the blood of Gettysburg and the other great battles in that Civil War will have been shed in vain, and we will see nothing but the war of all against all in our lifetimes. There are few alternative paths if the light of our Constitution is allowed to finally be extinguished in these days, and our great experiment in government of the people, by the people, and for the people should be allowed to fail, here in the land of the free, and the home of the brave.




"Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent a new nation, conceived in liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.
Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation, so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure. We are met on a great battle-field of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a final resting place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this.
But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate...we can not consecrate...we can not hallow this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us-that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion-that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain-that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom-and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth." ~ Abraham Lincoln, Gettysburg, Pennsylvania, November 19, 1863


Read more: When did republicans become democrats and democrats become republicans

The Gettysburg Address? You do realize you're quoting a Republican right? Yeah, the right is racist but here you are quoting their key political figures. Oh yeah, Frederick Douglass was a Republican.

Keep failing as you do, as always. I TL;DR'd most of that to be quite honest...

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Lakhota if you have to ask, then you're content with crap and I dont have all day...I'll give you one..

Governement spending (and hell that was Bush's biggest weakness)

Government spending? As I've asked many times before: How much debt has Obama created that wasn't a direct/indirect result of Bush actions?

How many times must I ask people I know, and people like you?

Why is it always Bush's fault?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1y04g6OPLnQ]Obama Dismantles Republican Caucus Part 1 of 7 - YouTube[/ame]


​

 

[TemplarKormac]

President Obama seems much better to me. What do you think? Got any credible facts?

None that your closed Liberal mind would be willing to accept.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Government spending? As I've asked many times before: How much debt has Obama created that wasn't a direct/indirect result of Bush actions?

How many times must I ask people I know, and people like you?

Why is it always Bush's fault?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1y04g6OPLnQ]Obama Dismantles Republican Caucus Part 1 of 7 - YouTube[/ame]


​

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMnSp4qEXNM]Timeline shows Bush, McCain warning Dems of financial and housing crisis; meltdown - YouTube[/ame]

​

 

[poet]

The Gettysburg Address? You do realize you're quoting a Republican right? Yeah, the right is racist but here you are quoting their key political figures. Oh yeah, Frederick Douglass was a Republican.

Keep failing as you do, as always. I TL;DR'd most of that to be quite honest...

Indeed...a Republican, who, by today's standards, would be revered as a Liberal Democrat.
Frederick Douglass? A Republican, in the tradition of the Party of Lincoln, which no longer holds true for today's Republican Party. The point of my long re-posting was to illustrate that the parties "switched" ideologies...what was once the racist Democratic Party, is now today's Republican Party, that is breaking its' neck trying to find diversity within its' ranks. Hello??????????????

 

[rdean]

I'm too lazy to go through your post piece by piece, so I'll just respond to these two comments.

The nation is divided because Republicans are 90% white and the most racist party in American history and they are paying the price.

Well, this is easy to disprove. Democrats supported slavery and the expansion of Jim Crowe laws; Republicans didn't. Democrats nominated a known segregationist for POTUS; Republicans didn't.

And the Bush era tax cuts? He was blackmailed. Even the conservative Christian Science Monitor wrote multiple articles about it.

Unemployment benefits: not until Bush tax cuts pass, Senate GOP says - CSMonitor.com

Unemployment benefits extended in tax-cut deal - CSMonitor.com

Obama couldn't let millions of Americans suffer, but Republicans can and want to.

The Democrats had a super majority in Congress in 2009. Why didn't they repeal the Bush tax cuts when they had the chance? They didn't even try.

For a very short time. Be honest for once. And they were occupied with saving what Republicans left of the country after they carpet bombed the economy, wrecked the military and redistributed the wealth to the top 1% of the nation.

As far as Republican policies, Bush wasn't radical. He followed Republican policies perfectly. He did everything they wanted. The redistribution, the wars, trying to buy votes through drugs, all passed through reconciliation.

You guys know it to be true. You keep saying "lie, lie" when what you mean is "deny, deny".

Any you notice right wingers never say, "We couldn't let millions of American suffer". Because they can an want to. The leadership of the Republican Party is dirty. It's been dirty for a long time.

 

[Redfish]

I'm too lazy to go through your post piece by piece, so I'll just respond to these two comments.

The nation is divided because Republicans are 90% white and the most racist party in American history and they are paying the price.

Well, this is easy to disprove. Democrats supported slavery and the expansion of Jim Crowe laws; Republicans didn't. Democrats nominated a known segregationist for POTUS; Republicans didn't.

And the Bush era tax cuts? He was blackmailed. Even the conservative Christian Science Monitor wrote multiple articles about it.

Unemployment benefits: not until Bush tax cuts pass, Senate GOP says - CSMonitor.com

Unemployment benefits extended in tax-cut deal - CSMonitor.com

Obama couldn't let millions of Americans suffer, but Republicans can and want to.

The Democrats had a super majority in Congress in 2009. Why didn't they repeal the Bush tax cuts when they had the chance? They didn't even try.

For a very short time. Be honest for once. And they were occupied with saving what Republicans left of the country after they carpet bombed the economy, wrecked the military and redistributed the wealth to the top 1% of the nation.

As far as Republican policies, Bush wasn't radical. He followed Republican policies perfectly. He did everything they wanted. The redistribution, the wars, trying to buy votes through drugs, all passed through reconciliation.

You guys know it to be true. You keep saying "lie, lie" when what you mean is "deny, deny".

Any you notice right wingers never say, "We couldn't let millions of American suffer". Because they can an want to. The leadership of the Republican Party is dirty. It's been dirty for a long time.

you are very good at repeating the dem/lib talking points, all lies but you fools just keep spewing the BS like your masters tell you to.

Bush was far from perfect, he made many mistakes. But, Obama has continued the bush mistakes and added more of his own.

Obama had a chance to fix some things, but instead he rammed obamacare up our asses, doubled the debt, divided the country, made us look foolish to the world, and pushed his marxist ideas and his "get even" mentality.
He is clearly the worst president in history, bar none.

 

[bripat9643]

Presidential Rankings:

14 Obama

34 George W. Bush

Historical rankings of Presidents of the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Historians:

Democrat - 68%
Republican - 2%
Communist - 30%

 

[bripat9643]

Obama's Idea of leading this country is by Dividing it among Racial, and Economic Lines. To him everything is a campaign, he cares more about defeating his Political Opponents than this country.

How is Obama dividing the country more than Bush?

"Republicans have to ride in the back."

- Barack Obama -

 

[Glensather]

I dunno, I think they're both pretty shitty.

 

[Meathead]

Presidential Rankings:

14 Obama

34 George W. Bush

Historical rankings of Presidents of the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The poll posted is even more disingenuous than silly. The poll was taken in 2010 by supposed historians. Obviously, no credible historian could respond to such a poll as a historian. Perhaps they were impressed by his Nobel Peace Prize.

 

[Oddball]

Presidential Rankings:

14 Obama

34 George W. Bush

Historical rankings of Presidents of the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The poll posted is even more disingenuous than silly. The poll was taken in 2010 by supposed historians. Obviously, no credible historian could respond to such a poll as a historian. Perhaps they were impressed by his Nobel Peace Prize.

 

[foxyladi]

How is President Obama worse than President George W. Bush?

President George W. Bush was an intelligent man and knew what he was doing. President Owe Bama doesn't have a clue and is a complete dumb ass.