CDZ What Will be Obamas Legacy?

[Spare_change]

The Obama Legacy -

1) Incompetence
2) Lied to the American people
3) Division of the country on class, gender, and racial lines
4) Failure to fix the recession
5) Contributed to the general malaise and distrust of government
6) Contributed to the downfall of American principles
7) Bribed, extorted, and cheated in order to pass the single most onerous and catastrophic law in history
8) Violated the Constitution
9) Set civil rights back 15 years
10) Earned two awards - Nobel Peace Prize without doing anything and Worst President in History because he wouldn't do anything

 

[Judicial review]

"What Will be Obamas Legacy?"

We'll know that some 35 years from now, at least.

Any attempt to do that now, well before the end of the president's second term in office, in this subjective, hyper-partisan environment, would be meaningless, irrelevant, and pointless.

"What Will be Obamas Legacy?"

We'll know that some 35 years from now, at least.

Any attempt to do that now, well before the end of the president's second term in office, in this subjective, hyper-partisan environment, would be meaningless, irrelevant, and pointless.

Like his presidency?

I disagree. His presidency will prove that liberalism fails big time. It will lead to nothing but republican control for 8 + years. This year's elections were nothing compared to what's coming in 2016 and beyond.

I don't give the American public the credit of having such a memory. The American electorate is ignorant and wishywashy. They can sway one way just as quick as they do the other.

No not after what they are experiencing by being afeted directly by liberal policies and 4 years of nothing getting done. Henice the 2014 elections. All the gop needs to do is pass bills. As many as they can. Hundreds on reds former desk.

 

[Publius1787]

"What Will be Obamas Legacy?"

We'll know that some 35 years from now, at least.

Any attempt to do that now, well before the end of the president's second term in office, in this subjective, hyper-partisan environment, would be meaningless, irrelevant, and pointless.

"What Will be Obamas Legacy?"

We'll know that some 35 years from now, at least.

Any attempt to do that now, well before the end of the president's second term in office, in this subjective, hyper-partisan environment, would be meaningless, irrelevant, and pointless.

Like his presidency?

I disagree. His presidency will prove that liberalism fails big time. It will lead to nothing but republican control for 8 + years. This year's elections were nothing compared to what's coming in 2016 and beyond.

I don't give the American public the credit of having such a memory. The American electorate is ignorant and wishywashy. They can sway one way just as quick as they do the other.

No not after what they are experiencing by being afeted directly by liberal policies and 4 years of nothing getting done. Henice the 2014 elections. All the gop needs to do is pass bills. As many as they can. Hundreds on reds former desk.

This argument we're having has ben addressed before. Relevant part is at 1:47

 

[Judicial review]

"What Will be Obamas Legacy?"

We'll know that some 35 years from now, at least.

Any attempt to do that now, well before the end of the president's second term in office, in this subjective, hyper-partisan environment, would be meaningless, irrelevant, and pointless.

"What Will be Obamas Legacy?"

We'll know that some 35 years from now, at least.

Any attempt to do that now, well before the end of the president's second term in office, in this subjective, hyper-partisan environment, would be meaningless, irrelevant, and pointless.

Like his presidency?

I disagree. His presidency will prove that liberalism fails big time. It will lead to nothing but republican control for 8 + years. This year's elections were nothing compared to what's coming in 2016 and beyond.

I don't give the American public the credit of having such a memory. The American electorate is ignorant and wishywashy. They can sway one way just as quick as they do the other.

No not after what they are experiencing by being afeted directly by liberal policies and 4 years of nothing getting done. Henice the 2014 elections. All the gop needs to do is pass bills. As many as they can. Hundreds on reds former desk.

This argument we're having has ben addressed before. Relevant part is at 1:47

Loved that show fyi. People are demanding a functional government. WhIch party will make it so will win power.

 

[Esmeralda]

I think Obama will be remebered as a good, but not great, president.

I would expect him to rank around the middle of the pack - certainly ahead of Bush Snr and Jnr, but hardly up there with any of the greats.

His major achievement may still be healthcare - it's a little too soon to tell on that - but also restoration of the US's battered reputation abroad, and decent work restoring the US economy to life after the meltdown.

I think the other lasting legacy of this period will be the bitterness, hatred and contempt of the extreme right wing in US, who to my mind have set new lows in anti-patriotism and political debate unprecedented in the developed world. It's been halfway between the Salem Witch Trials and the McCarthy era - with an unhealthy dose of illiteracy thrown in.

Excellent post.

 

[Esmeralda]

Presidents don't act in a vacuum, but they get credit for what gets done.

You asked, I answered. I'm not going to go around in circles with you about it.

Perhaps in the future, but as of now many Americans don't see Obamacare as a positive for Obama.

He's the first President to achieve health insurance and healthcare reform. Whether people agree with it or not. That's a legacy.

OBL was killed under Obama's watch. That's part of his legacy. Even his most rabid detractors aren't coming out against the killing of OBL.....yet.

While Obama gets credit for being the man on the hill when OBL was taken out that is NOT a legacy. Legacies last and killing OBL will be largely forgotten within another decade.

OBL is not a legacy, Obamacare OTOH is.

9-11 will never be forgotten, neither will what happened to the guy who ordered it

9-11 will not be forgotten. OBL will. That is simple reality.

LOL that is absolute nonsense.

 

[Esmeralda]

Obama will forever have the legacy as our first black President. The fact that a man born of mixed race parents with a name like Barack Hussein Obama could rise to the presidency is quite an accomplishment

Beyond that, we will look at what were the conditions given to him when he became President and what were the conditions when he left. As well as his lasting legacy

There is no doubt history will acknowledge he was given an economy on the brink of collapse and two wars to contend with. Obama righted the ship and stabilized the economy. He also withdrew us from two wars and avoided future entanglements in Egypt, Syria, Iran and Ukraine

Lasting legacy was Obamacare, expanded gay rights and immigration reform

Top ten President

Excellent post.

 

[Esmeralda]

What I find interesting about Obama and his supporters is that when something good happens, he gets credit yet when things go poorly he had nothing to do with it. Early in his Presidency his supporters said he hadn't been in office long enough to be blamed for things. However, when something happened to go well, they gave him credit although the amount of time was the same. That means if he's been in office long enough to get credit, he's been in office long enough to take blame. When someone builds their small business into something financially well off, he says "they didn't build that" yet if something good happens during his time in office, his supporters give him sole credit.

This is exactly what Republicans do when the president is a Republican.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

The February 1952 Gallop Poll placed Harry Truman's job performance approval at only 22 percent, lower than that of GWB. When he left office in January 1953 his presidency was determined a failure.

Today Truman is considered among our greatest presidents.

Time is the sole and final judge of a president's legacy.

 

[Publius1787]

"What Will be Obamas Legacy?"

We'll know that some 35 years from now, at least.

Any attempt to do that now, well before the end of the president's second term in office, in this subjective, hyper-partisan environment, would be meaningless, irrelevant, and pointless.

Like his presidency?

I disagree. His presidency will prove that liberalism fails big time. It will lead to nothing but republican control for 8 + years. This year's elections were nothing compared to what's coming in 2016 and beyond.

I don't give the American public the credit of having such a memory. The American electorate is ignorant and wishywashy. They can sway one way just as quick as they do the other.

No not after what they are experiencing by being afeted directly by liberal policies and 4 years of nothing getting done. Henice the 2014 elections. All the gop needs to do is pass bills. As many as they can. Hundreds on reds former desk.

This argument we're having has ben addressed before. Relevant part is at 1:47

Loved that show fyi. People are demanding a functional government. WhIch party will make it so will win power.

He will be remembered as worst than Jimmy Carter on foreign policy. See Here >>> Does Anyone Want to be Obamas Next Secretary of Defense US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

 

[Esmeralda]

The ONE supposed accomplishment of Obuma has been DEFLATED by his own words.....

And Osama bin Laden did not fly planes into the WTC....but he did order it

The problem is Obama takes credit and is given credit by his supporters as if he was on the raid. Regularly, it's stated that he killed bin Laden as if he took the shot.

He ordered the mission. If the SEALS were killed or captured, it would have been Obama who took the blame

A point about giving a president credit for ordering an attack. When Carter ordered the mission on the US Embassy in Tehran, and the copter went down, killing Americans, he was fully blamed for the failure. But, according to the Right on this thread, when such a mission is a success, the president deserves no acclaim. He's at fault if it doesn't work, but he's not to be praised if it does. According to the right wing anyway, as long as the president is not a republican. Had the president been a republican when OBL was killed, he'd have gotten all kinds of acclaim from the Right. That's the problem with this thread: it's just a vehicle for the right wing to put down Obama, despite reality.

 

[Publius1787]

The February 1952 Gallop Poll placed Harry Truman's job performance approval at only 22 percent, lower than that of GWB. When he left office in January 1953 his presidency was determined a failure.

Today Truman is considered among our greatest presidents.

Time is the sole and final judge of a president's legacy.

His poll numbers were in part due to Republican hackery over the firing of Macarthur and the retreat at the Chosin Reservoir. Obamas foreign policy disaster run much deeper than that.

 

[Publius1787]

The ONE supposed accomplishment of Obuma has been DEFLATED by his own words.....

And Osama bin Laden did not fly planes into the WTC....but he did order it

The problem is Obama takes credit and is given credit by his supporters as if he was on the raid. Regularly, it's stated that he killed bin Laden as if he took the shot.

He ordered the mission. If the SEALS were killed or captured, it would have been Obama who took the blame

A point about giving a president credit for ordering an attack. When Carter ordered the mission on the US Embassy in Tehran, and the copter went down, killing Americans, he was fully blamed for the failure. But, according to the Right on this thread, when such a mission is a success, the president deserves no acclaim. He's at fault if it doesn't work, but he's not to be praised if it does. According to the right wing anyway, as long as the president is not a republican. Had the president been a republican when OBL was killed, he'd have gotten all kinds of acclaim from the Right. That's the problem with this thread: it's just a vehicle for the right wing to put down Obama, despite reality.

Obama was all set to let the military take the fall if it went bad. I guess he learned from jimmy carter.
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles...904577374552546308474.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
Former AG Michael Mukasey Obama Officials Drafted Memo to Blame Military If OBL Mission Failed Video The Gateway Pundit

 

[Esmeralda]

P

The ONE supposed accomplishment of Obuma has been DEFLATED by his own words.....

And Osama bin Laden did not fly planes into the WTC....but he did order it

The problem is Obama takes credit and is given credit by his supporters as if he was on the raid. Regularly, it's stated that he killed bin Laden as if he took the shot.

He ordered the mission. If the SEALS were killed or captured, it would have been Obama who took the blame

A point about giving a president credit for ordering an attack. When Carter ordered the mission on the US Embassy in Tehran, and the copter went down, killing Americans, he was fully blamed for the failure. But, according to the Right on this thread, when such a mission is a success, the president deserves no acclaim. He's at fault if it doesn't work, but he's not to be praised if it does. According to the right wing anyway, as long as the president is not a republican. Had the president been a republican when OBL was killed, he'd have gotten all kinds of acclaim from the Right. That's the problem with this thread: it's just a vehicle for the right wing to put down Obama, despite reality.

Obama was all set to let the military take the fall if it went bad. I guess he learned from jimmy carter.
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303916904577374552546308474?mod=googlenews_wsj&mg=reno64-wsj&url=http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303916904577374552546308474.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
Former AG Michael Mukasey Obama Officials Drafted Memo to Blame Military If OBL Mission Failed Video The Gateway Pundit

Prove it. Show the memo.

 

[Publius1787]

P

And Osama bin Laden did not fly planes into the WTC....but he did order it

The problem is Obama takes credit and is given credit by his supporters as if he was on the raid. Regularly, it's stated that he killed bin Laden as if he took the shot.

He ordered the mission. If the SEALS were killed or captured, it would have been Obama who took the blame

A point about giving a president credit for ordering an attack. When Carter ordered the mission on the US Embassy in Tehran, and the copter went down, killing Americans, he was fully blamed for the failure. But, according to the Right on this thread, when such a mission is a success, the president deserves no acclaim. He's at fault if it doesn't work, but he's not to be praised if it does. According to the right wing anyway, as long as the president is not a republican. Had the president been a republican when OBL was killed, he'd have gotten all kinds of acclaim from the Right. That's the problem with this thread: it's just a vehicle for the right wing to put down Obama, despite reality.

Obama was all set to let the military take the fall if it went bad. I guess he learned from jimmy carter.
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303916904577374552546308474?mod=googlenews_wsj&mg=reno64-wsj&url=http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303916904577374552546308474.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
Former AG Michael Mukasey Obama Officials Drafted Memo to Blame Military If OBL Mission Failed Video The Gateway Pundit

Prove it. Show the memo.

I guess you didn't know?

"Received phone call from (National Security Adviser) Tom Donilon who stated that the president made a decision with regard to AC1 [Abbottabad Compound 1]. The decision is to proceed with the assault. The timing, operational decision making and control are in Admiral McRaven's hands. The approval is provided on the risk profile presented to the president. Any additional risks are to be brought back to the president for his consideration. The direction is to go in and get Bin Laden and if he is not there, to get out. Those instructions were conveyed to Admiral McRaven at approximately 10:45 a.m."

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303916904577374552546308474?mg=reno64-wsj&url=http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303916904577374552546308474.html
“And it was to proceed according to the risks, only according to the risks that had been outlined to the president. And if he encountered anything else, he had to check back. And you better believe that if anything else had been encountered and the mission had failed, then the blame would have fallen on McCraven. That’s what that’s about.”

 

[Esmeralda]

All that says and implies is that if the risk is too high, the mission is not to go forward. If the person who tells the president the risk is not what it truly is, then that person is to blame because the president ordered the mission based on the level of the risk he had been given by someone else. It only makes sense. He's making an executive order based on the information he's getting. If their information is false and he makes his decision on false or misleading information, then it should be presented that way to the public. That is only fair. It depends on the spin you want to put on the memo, and, of course, the Right wants to interpret it to make Obama look as bad as possible. Everything you guys say is part of a biased agenda to portray Obama as an incompetent failure. It's as clear as day you are not concerned with reality. He has been evaluated by presidential historians as above average. Everything you say to depict him as anything else rings totally false.

 

[Publius1787]

All that says and implies is that if the risk is too high, the mission is not to go forward. It says nothing about protecting the president from blame.

National Security Experts Disagree http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303916904577374552546308474?mg=reno64-wsj&url=http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303916904577374552546308474.html

“And it was to proceed according to the risks, only according to the risks that had been outlined to the president. And if he encountered anything else, he had to check back. And you better believe that if anything else had been encountered and the mission had failed, then the blame would have fallen on McCraven. That’s what that’s about.”


That letter will hound the OBL decision right down into the history books. That's, my friend, was blatant lawyerly ass covering. No two ways around it!

 

[rightwinger]

The ONE supposed accomplishment of Obuma has been DEFLATED by his own words.....

And Osama bin Laden did not fly planes into the WTC....but he did order it

The problem is Obama takes credit and is given credit by his supporters as if he was on the raid. Regularly, it's stated that he killed bin Laden as if he took the shot.

He ordered the mission. If the SEALS were killed or captured, it would have been Obama who took the blame

A point about giving a president credit for ordering an attack. When Carter ordered the mission on the US Embassy in Tehran, and the copter went down, killing Americans, he was fully blamed for the failure. But, according to the Right on this thread, when such a mission is a success, the president deserves no acclaim. He's at fault if it doesn't work, but he's not to be praised if it does. According to the right wing anyway, as long as the president is not a republican. Had the president been a republican when OBL was killed, he'd have gotten all kinds of acclaim from the Right. That's the problem with this thread: it's just a vehicle for the right wing to put down Obama, despite reality.

Carter is an excellent example. His failed rescue attempt helped him lose a second term

There was no slam dunk in the SEALS bin Laden raid. In fact, they lost one helicopter in the raid which could have killed all aboard. Would Republicans have blamed the SEALS flying the mission or would they have blamed Obama for the deaths?

 

[rightwinger]

P

The problem is Obama takes credit and is given credit by his supporters as if he was on the raid. Regularly, it's stated that he killed bin Laden as if he took the shot.

He ordered the mission. If the SEALS were killed or captured, it would have been Obama who took the blame

A point about giving a president credit for ordering an attack. When Carter ordered the mission on the US Embassy in Tehran, and the copter went down, killing Americans, he was fully blamed for the failure. But, according to the Right on this thread, when such a mission is a success, the president deserves no acclaim. He's at fault if it doesn't work, but he's not to be praised if it does. According to the right wing anyway, as long as the president is not a republican. Had the president been a republican when OBL was killed, he'd have gotten all kinds of acclaim from the Right. That's the problem with this thread: it's just a vehicle for the right wing to put down Obama, despite reality.

Obama was all set to let the military take the fall if it went bad. I guess he learned from jimmy carter.
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303916904577374552546308474?mod=googlenews_wsj&mg=reno64-wsj&url=http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303916904577374552546308474.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
Former AG Michael Mukasey Obama Officials Drafted Memo to Blame Military If OBL Mission Failed Video The Gateway Pundit

Prove it. Show the memo.

I guess you didn't know?

"Received phone call from (National Security Adviser) Tom Donilon who stated that the president made a decision with regard to AC1 [Abbottabad Compound 1]. The decision is to proceed with the assault. The timing, operational decision making and control are in Admiral McRaven's hands. The approval is provided on the risk profile presented to the president. Any additional risks are to be brought back to the president for his consideration. The direction is to go in and get Bin Laden and if he is not there, to get out. Those instructions were conveyed to Admiral McRaven at approximately 10:45 a.m."

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303916904577374552546308474?mg=reno64-wsj&url=http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303916904577374552546308474.html
“And it was to proceed according to the risks, only according to the risks that had been outlined to the president. And if he encountered anything else, he had to check back. And you better believe that if anything else had been encountered and the mission had failed, then the blame would have fallen on McCraven. That’s what that’s about.”

Are you really that naive that you believe McCraven would have gotten the blame if the mission had failed? Have you seen our Republican Party? They would be running Benghazi times ten

 

[rightwinger]

The very fact that the rightwing cannot acknowledge ANY positive accomplishment from Obama shows how partisan they are in assessing his lasting legacy

Fail and you didn't do that are their only tools