CDZ What Will be Obamas Legacy?

[rightwinger]

That he made it to the point based on skin color isn't an accomplishment. It's yet another example of a black getting a government job based on his skin color rather than being able to do the job.

As far as being mixed race, he is. He's the by product of a typical runaway baby daddy and a white trash mother.

Being the first black president was quite an accomplishment. Considering that when he was born, his father would have been lynched in much of America for marrying a white woman. That a man with the name Barack Hussein Obama could rise to the presidency was a historic achievement.

Not when it happens because of being black. Someone with the same ideology, white skin, and the name John Smith wouldn't have made it through the primaries.

JFK did

Not the same ideology. JFK said ask not what your country can do for you while Obama says the country should do for you what you don't want to do for yourself and force others to pay for it.

"A tax cut means higher family income and higher business profits and a balanced federal budget....As the national income grows, the federal government will ultimately end up with more revenues. Prosperity is the real way to balance our budget. By lowering tax rates, by increasing jobs and income, we can expand tax revenues and finally bring our budget into balance." John F. Kennedy Source: September 18, 1963

JFK cut taxes into the 70% range for the upper tax rate (Obama has a rate of 35% on the wealthy). Would you be satisfied if Obama raised taxes on the rich to what it was under JFK?

 

[rightwinger]

I find it interesting that Obama and his supporters believe a business growing from the ground up that becomes successful "didn't build that" but that Obama is the one that actually killed bin Laden because he supposedly gave an order to do something just about anyone could have done.

Interesting order by Obama

At the time they were only 55% sure it was bin Laden. His options were:
1. Wait until you had positive proof
2. Respect the sovereignty of Pakistan and arrange for them to make an arrest
3. Use a drone attack to take out the compound
4. Send in SEALS and risk their killing or capture

Obama chose the most risky and it paid off with killing bin Laden...THAT is his legacy

His legacy is taking credit for something he didn't do acting as if making a choice anyone could have made is on the same level as those actually doing the job.

4 Honorable people die in Benghazi and he does everything he can to avoid accepting responsibility. Typical it goes well so it's to my credit but if it goes bad, I had nothing to do with it mentality.

Take the marine in Mexico, Tahmooressi (Sp). He had NOTHING to do with his release. He could have called the president in Mexico anytime in those months, but did not.

After Montel Williams, former Governor Richardson and two representatives from California worked tirelessly with the mother and the prosecutor in Mexico. the Marine was released. Astonishingly, Obama had the balls to say that his committee gained the man's release! That was without a conscience! He has no integrity at all.

It was the attacks on Mexico by the rightwing media that delayed his release

Really? How long did it take for you to come up with that?

Ask Mexico what they thought of Rush Limbaugh

 

[Conservative65]

Being the first black president was quite an accomplishment. Considering that when he was born, his father would have been lynched in much of America for marrying a white woman. That a man with the name Barack Hussein Obama could rise to the presidency was a historic achievement.

Not when it happens because of being black. Someone with the same ideology, white skin, and the name John Smith wouldn't have made it through the primaries.

JFK did

Not the same ideology. JFK said ask not what your country can do for you while Obama says the country should do for you what you don't want to do for yourself and force others to pay for it.

"A tax cut means higher family income and higher business profits and a balanced federal budget....As the national income grows, the federal government will ultimately end up with more revenues. Prosperity is the real way to balance our budget. By lowering tax rates, by increasing jobs and income, we can expand tax revenues and finally bring our budget into balance." John F. Kennedy Source: September 18, 1963

JFK cut taxes into the 70% range for the upper tax rate (Obama has a rate of 35% on the wealthy). Would you be satisfied if Obama raised taxes on the rich to what it was under JFK?

I'd be happy if the 47% that don't pay income taxes at all would start paying their fair share of them. That includes that family of four with 2 adults and 2 children making a gross income of almost $47,000 paying nothing. It includes that single parent of 2 kids working in fast food that even if he/she got $15/hour still wouldn't pay a dime despite doubling their pay. And the list goes on.

 

[Jackson]

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

I find it interesting that Obama and his supporters believe a business growing from the ground up that becomes successful "didn't build that" but that Obama is the one that actually killed bin Laden because he supposedly gave an order to do something just about anyone could have done.

Interesting order by Obama

At the time they were only 55% sure it was bin Laden. His options were:
1. Wait until you had positive proof
2. Respect the sovereignty of Pakistan and arrange for them to make an arrest
3. Use a drone attack to take out the compound
4. Send in SEALS and risk their killing or capture

Obama chose the most risky and it paid off with killing bin Laden...THAT is his legacy

Perhaps taking the most risky was not the wisest/. He jeopardized the lives of the Seals when a drone could have had the same effect without the cost and the risk. I don't really think that was smart. Have to talk to Valerie about that and what prompted her decision.

 

[Jackson]

Interesting order by Obama

At the time they were only 55% sure it was bin Laden. His options were:
1. Wait until you had positive proof
2. Respect the sovereignty of Pakistan and arrange for them to make an arrest
3. Use a drone attack to take out the compound
4. Send in SEALS and risk their killing or capture

Obama chose the most risky and it paid off with killing bin Laden...THAT is his legacy

His legacy is taking credit for something he didn't do acting as if making a choice anyone could have made is on the same level as those actually doing the job.

4 Honorable people die in Benghazi and he does everything he can to avoid accepting responsibility. Typical it goes well so it's to my credit but if it goes bad, I had nothing to do with it mentality.

Take the marine in Mexico, Tahmooressi (Sp). He had NOTHING to do with his release. He could have called the president in Mexico anytime in those months, but did not.

After Montel Williams, former Governor Richardson and two representatives from California worked tirelessly with the mother and the prosecutor in Mexico. the Marine was released. Astonishingly, Obama had the balls to say that his committee gained the man's release! That was without a conscience! He has no integrity at all.

It was the attacks on Mexico by the rightwing media that delayed his release

Really? How long did it take for you to come up with that?

Ask Mexico what they thought of Rush Limbaugh

Rush Limbaugh still exists and the man is out of Mexico. So that doesn't mean a thing.

 

[rightwinger]

Not when it happens because of being black. Someone with the same ideology, white skin, and the name John Smith wouldn't have made it through the primaries.

JFK did

Not the same ideology. JFK said ask not what your country can do for you while Obama says the country should do for you what you don't want to do for yourself and force others to pay for it.

"A tax cut means higher family income and higher business profits and a balanced federal budget....As the national income grows, the federal government will ultimately end up with more revenues. Prosperity is the real way to balance our budget. By lowering tax rates, by increasing jobs and income, we can expand tax revenues and finally bring our budget into balance." John F. Kennedy Source: September 18, 1963

JFK cut taxes into the 70% range for the upper tax rate (Obama has a rate of 35% on the wealthy). Would you be satisfied if Obama raised taxes on the rich to what it was under JFK?

I'd be happy if the 47% that don't pay income taxes at all would start paying their fair share of them. That includes that family of four with 2 adults and 2 children making a gross income of almost $47,000 paying nothing. It includes that single parent of 2 kids working in fast food that even if he/she got $15/hour still wouldn't pay a dime despite doubling their pay. And the list goes on.

How much additional revenue do you think that would raise as opposed to taxing those who really have the money? That 47% you whine about have 2 TENTHS of a percent of our wealth.....I can see why that is the group you want to go after for additional taxes

 

[Jackson]

JFK did

Not the same ideology. JFK said ask not what your country can do for you while Obama says the country should do for you what you don't want to do for yourself and force others to pay for it.

"A tax cut means higher family income and higher business profits and a balanced federal budget....As the national income grows, the federal government will ultimately end up with more revenues. Prosperity is the real way to balance our budget. By lowering tax rates, by increasing jobs and income, we can expand tax revenues and finally bring our budget into balance." John F. Kennedy Source: September 18, 1963

JFK cut taxes into the 70% range for the upper tax rate (Obama has a rate of 35% on the wealthy). Would you be satisfied if Obama raised taxes on the rich to what it was under JFK?

I'd be happy if the 47% that don't pay income taxes at all would start paying their fair share of them. That includes that family of four with 2 adults and 2 children making a gross income of almost $47,000 paying nothing. It includes that single parent of 2 kids working in fast food that even if he/she got $15/hour still wouldn't pay a dime despite doubling their pay. And the list goes on.

How much additional revenue do you think that would raise as opposed to taxing those who really have the money? That 47% you whine about have 2 TENTHS of a percent of our wealth.....I can see why that is the group you want to go after for additional taxes

Everyone enjoys the freedoms of this country. Everyone pays taxes. Even if it is a token amount, everyone should be paying something.

 

[rightwinger]

Not the same ideology. JFK said ask not what your country can do for you while Obama says the country should do for you what you don't want to do for yourself and force others to pay for it.

"A tax cut means higher family income and higher business profits and a balanced federal budget....As the national income grows, the federal government will ultimately end up with more revenues. Prosperity is the real way to balance our budget. By lowering tax rates, by increasing jobs and income, we can expand tax revenues and finally bring our budget into balance." John F. Kennedy Source: September 18, 1963

JFK cut taxes into the 70% range for the upper tax rate (Obama has a rate of 35% on the wealthy). Would you be satisfied if Obama raised taxes on the rich to what it was under JFK?

I'd be happy if the 47% that don't pay income taxes at all would start paying their fair share of them. That includes that family of four with 2 adults and 2 children making a gross income of almost $47,000 paying nothing. It includes that single parent of 2 kids working in fast food that even if he/she got $15/hour still wouldn't pay a dime despite doubling their pay. And the list goes on.

How much additional revenue do you think that would raise as opposed to taxing those who really have the money? That 47% you whine about have 2 TENTHS of a percent of our wealth.....I can see why that is the group you want to go after for additional taxes

Everyone enjoys the freedoms of this country. Everyone pays taxes. Even if it is a token amount, everyone should be paying something.

Again in a search for new revenue, why do you put the 40% who have 2/10ths of the wealth first in line?

 

[boedicca]

This pretty much sums it up.

 

[FA_Q2]

What Will be Obamas Legacy?

I don't see much to go on but one of the most failed presidencies in U.S. History.

When Harry Truman left office his approval rating was in the 20%'s.

The Bush presidency ended horribly, but for some reason, the same people that want Obama to fail don't think Bush's presidency was the worst ever.

We shall see.

Even better, those same people that hail Bush as one of the worst presidents ever claim Obama is one of the best despite doing much of the same shit as Bush.

 

[FA_Q2]

Not the same ideology. JFK said ask not what your country can do for you while Obama says the country should do for you what you don't want to do for yourself and force others to pay for it.

"A tax cut means higher family income and higher business profits and a balanced federal budget....As the national income grows, the federal government will ultimately end up with more revenues. Prosperity is the real way to balance our budget. By lowering tax rates, by increasing jobs and income, we can expand tax revenues and finally bring our budget into balance." John F. Kennedy Source: September 18, 1963

JFK cut taxes into the 70% range for the upper tax rate (Obama has a rate of 35% on the wealthy). Would you be satisfied if Obama raised taxes on the rich to what it was under JFK?

I'd be happy if the 47% that don't pay income taxes at all would start paying their fair share of them. That includes that family of four with 2 adults and 2 children making a gross income of almost $47,000 paying nothing. It includes that single parent of 2 kids working in fast food that even if he/she got $15/hour still wouldn't pay a dime despite doubling their pay. And the list goes on.

How much additional revenue do you think that would raise as opposed to taxing those who really have the money? That 47% you whine about have 2 TENTHS of a percent of our wealth.....I can see why that is the group you want to go after for additional taxes

Everyone enjoys the freedoms of this country. Everyone pays taxes. Even if it is a token amount, everyone should be paying something.

15 percent in ss.
3 percent in medicare.
Then all the other asinine hidden taxes. What needs to be done is making that a single rate so the politicians can no longer manipulate the tax code to bilk the tax code to screw the middle class without it being obvious.

They do pay. They tend to pay a higher percentage than the rich actually. It's the middle class that gets fucked hard in taxes.

 

[FA_Q2]

"A tax cut means higher family income and higher business profits and a balanced federal budget....As the national income grows, the federal government will ultimately end up with more revenues. Prosperity is the real way to balance our budget. By lowering tax rates, by increasing jobs and income, we can expand tax revenues and finally bring our budget into balance." John F. Kennedy Source: September 18, 1963

JFK cut taxes into the 70% range for the upper tax rate (Obama has a rate of 35% on the wealthy). Would you be satisfied if Obama raised taxes on the rich to what it was under JFK?

I'd be happy if the 47% that don't pay income taxes at all would start paying their fair share of them. That includes that family of four with 2 adults and 2 children making a gross income of almost $47,000 paying nothing. It includes that single parent of 2 kids working in fast food that even if he/she got $15/hour still wouldn't pay a dime despite doubling their pay. And the list goes on.

How much additional revenue do you think that would raise as opposed to taxing those who really have the money? That 47% you whine about have 2 TENTHS of a percent of our wealth.....I can see why that is the group you want to go after for additional taxes

Everyone enjoys the freedoms of this country. Everyone pays taxes. Even if it is a token amount, everyone should be paying something.

Again in a search for new revenue, why do you put the 40% who have 2/10ths of the wealth first in line?

Because its not a search for revenue. It's a way to get buy in from everyone on tax rates rather than the bullshit class warfare we deal with today. It is really easy to vote a tax raise on someone else for a subsidy on something you want.

 

[Jackson]

"A tax cut means higher family income and higher business profits and a balanced federal budget....As the national income grows, the federal government will ultimately end up with more revenues. Prosperity is the real way to balance our budget. By lowering tax rates, by increasing jobs and income, we can expand tax revenues and finally bring our budget into balance." John F. Kennedy Source: September 18, 1963

JFK cut taxes into the 70% range for the upper tax rate (Obama has a rate of 35% on the wealthy). Would you be satisfied if Obama raised taxes on the rich to what it was under JFK?

I'd be happy if the 47% that don't pay income taxes at all would start paying their fair share of them. That includes that family of four with 2 adults and 2 children making a gross income of almost $47,000 paying nothing. It includes that single parent of 2 kids working in fast food that even if he/she got $15/hour still wouldn't pay a dime despite doubling their pay. And the list goes on.

How much additional revenue do you think that would raise as opposed to taxing those who really have the money? That 47% you whine about have 2 TENTHS of a percent of our wealth.....I can see why that is the group you want to go after for additional taxes

Everyone enjoys the freedoms of this country. Everyone pays taxes. Even if it is a token amount, everyone should be paying something.

15 percent in ss.
3 percent in medicare.
Then all the other asinine hidden taxes. What needs to be done is making that a single rate so the politicians can no longer manipulate the tax code to bilk the tax code to screw the middle class without it being obvious.

They do pay. They tend to pay a higher percentage than the rich actually. It's the middle class that gets fucked hard in taxes.

No, that doesn't fly. When I was in that higher bracket and had to pay my damn taxes quarterly, I wanted a major street named after me for I felt I certainly paid for it. Don't tell me that the middle class is paying a higher percentage than the higher brackets, dude. Now I am in the middle class and happy with the lower percentage.

 

[FA_Q2]

JFK cut taxes into the 70% range for the upper tax rate (Obama has a rate of 35% on the wealthy). Would you be satisfied if Obama raised taxes on the rich to what it was under JFK?

I'd be happy if the 47% that don't pay income taxes at all would start paying their fair share of them. That includes that family of four with 2 adults and 2 children making a gross income of almost $47,000 paying nothing. It includes that single parent of 2 kids working in fast food that even if he/she got $15/hour still wouldn't pay a dime despite doubling their pay. And the list goes on.

How much additional revenue do you think that would raise as opposed to taxing those who really have the money? That 47% you whine about have 2 TENTHS of a percent of our wealth.....I can see why that is the group you want to go after for additional taxes

Everyone enjoys the freedoms of this country. Everyone pays taxes. Even if it is a token amount, everyone should be paying something.

15 percent in ss.
3 percent in medicare.
Then all the other asinine hidden taxes. What needs to be done is making that a single rate so the politicians can no longer manipulate the tax code to bilk the tax code to screw the middle class without it being obvious.

They do pay. They tend to pay a higher percentage than the rich actually. It's the middle class that gets fucked hard in taxes.

No, that doesn't fly. When I was in that higher bracket and had to pay my damn taxes quarterly, I wanted a major street named after me for I felt I certainly paid for it. Don't tell me that the middle class is paying a higher percentage than the higher brackets, dude. Now I am in the middle class and happy with the lower percentage.

I dont care what you think flies or not. Those are cold hard facts. All workers pay at least 17%. You wanted them to pay something - well they ARE paying something. Is 17% not enough for the poor? Tell me then, what percentage is enough for someone making 20k a year?

BTW, if you are relived that you are paying less then you never were above the middle class. Simple as that. The wealthy are not getting paychecks and are not paying anything even close to the top tax tier because thy don't earn a paycheck. They earn money through investments and wisely tie most of that up in asserts that are beneficial to their tax rate. It is how the Romney's of the world get away with a smaller tax rate than even SS. The tax code is a complete joke and needs to be reworked from the ground up.

 

[WelfareQueen]

The standard measures historians use to assess Presidents are:


1. Character and Integrity. I would give Obama and F.

2. Accomplishments. I would give Obama a C-. He got the ACA passed and the Stimulus. Both sucked, but at least he got them passed.

3. Political Appointments. Eric Holder and Janet Napolitiano anyone? D-

4. Political skills. I would give him a D-. He's great at reading a teleprompter. He sucks at working with others politicians to make things happen.

5. Crisis Management. I would give him an F. He always does one of two things in a crisis. Either he lies out his ass....or he plays golf....ignores the problem....and waits until it gets much worse.


So yeah....I would give Obama a D- to an F

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

"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.

 

[Ernie S.]

"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?

 

[Judicial review]

A lagacy of nothing, but failure.

 

[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.

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.

 

[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.