President Barack Obama - Term 1 and 2 Thread

[Monker]

My only problem with that Boomchild is, now it's spilling over here. As much as Obama wants to use "workplace violence",ect, it's here. The facts are, after 9/11, Bush kept us safe, BO failed. Just throw it on his pile of failures. Now it needs to be stopped. But as Obama proved, you can't just pull out and leave a vacume. Hell, we still have troops in Japan, Germany and Korea. Obama screwed up Lybia too.

It is a "vacume" (moron) was caused by W invading Iraq in the first place. Like it or not, Saddam kept Iran and the Muslim factions in Iraq under control. The failure is this ridiculous vision of a new Iraq being a shining example of Democracy. The people of that region don't want a democratic government - they want a totalitarian regime ruled by whatever faction they support.

Having a permanent large force of troops in Iraq is a CRAZY MAN's idea. They would become nothing but a target for the crazies over there. When our embassy in Beirut was bombed, Reagan pull out...he was right to do so. And, we are right to pull out of Iraq - when THE COUNTRY DID NOT WANT US THERE. There is no point in committing troops to a country where nobody wants us and would be just as willing to fight against us if given the choice.

And, for you to say "Bush kept us safe," you have to ignore 9/11 - the worst attack of any kind on the mainland of the US. So, he didn't keep us safe. He kept much of the nation paranoid with his politically used "terrorism alert level". Even if there were no terrorist acts in the US, most didn't 'feel' safe. Wrapping your house in shrink wrap was his idea. Going shopping was his recommendation to the public after 9/11.

[Monker]

So what is the solution then? Put in more military resources and lives to the situation? We have lost the ability to determine just who the enemy is. For decades and many administrations nothing has worked to try stabilize the region of the world. It's futile effort. The people that occupy that region of the world will never get along with each other. Perhaps our focus should be insulating the U.S, against the stream of terrorism that is coming our way.

For starters, we could start listening to the military experts. [/quote]

Which only want to do exactly what Boomchild said, send more troops.

I'm afraid Obama has made it impossible not to send troops, not just to Iraq and Syria, but Lybia also.

No he hasn't...you just don't do it. It's really not that hard. You want us to police the world...that is what has become impossible - the American people don't want us to do that.

Keystone would be nice to drive oil prices down for the Middle East.

That's just not true. The oil would get here regardless of Keystone. Keystone has simply become a political tool being used by both sides...the affects of it are greatly exaggerated by everybody.

If we TRULY want to rid ourselves of the Middle East - then we need to get off of oil COMPLETELY, for national security reasons. Until that happens, we will always have an interest in what is going on in the middle east.

Obama is hoping to kick the Middle East can to the next President. What a loser.

W invading Iraq insured that the next few President's have to deal with this. W made the worst foreign policy decision in the history of this nation when he decided to invade Iraq.

[Monker]

GOP voters are ready to move into Trump Tower

http://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2015 ... story.html

Guess they can't wait to lose the election.

South Park just did a great bit about the Trump thing, and building walls, etc.

And, Trump was also on Colbert. He didn't do too bad.

Right now, I can't see how anybody can deny that Trump is most likely going to be nominated...and lose pretty badly in the election.

[Monker]

Well, Scott Walker dropped out...and is asking others to do the same so they can consolidate and defeat Trump. Bet it doesn't happen...at least not to the extent that will mean anything in Trumps polls.

Here's a clue Monker. The way it works, all but one will be there by the end. Even Democrats will drop out. Unless they die of old age first, or go to prison.

The point is, Walker wants others to drop out so they can consolidate the conservative vote and defeat Trump. Reality is the conservatives that Walker is talking about no longer have the votes to determine the nomination. Trump leads not because of conservatives, but because of Tea Party'ers, and those who are angry at the establishment.

That is NOT a winning combination. Ask Christine O'Donnell.

Republicans are so screwed. They are so screwed that even if Hillary goes to jail, she could still win. Even is Sanders dies, his ghost can still win. Biden could even win with a write in campaign, if he doesn't officially run.

And, as I predicted, nobody dropped out because of Walker's tantrum.

BTW, the clues from a clueless person like you are pretty worthless.

[The_Noble_Cause]

Trump appeals to independents and even some big labor Democrats. The question that remains to be seen, is whether he can keep this appeal or will the Republican primary process push him to the right and make him unelectable (like McCain)? If it is Hillary vs Trump, Trump wins in a landslide.

[Monker]

Bush handed a controled, stable Iraq to Obama. Fucking idiot!

That is bullshit.

When W left office, there was incredibly weak government propped up after multiple failed attempts to even get one started. And, Bush signed an agreement to leave Iraq by 12/31/2011 (U.S.–Iraq Status of Forces Agreement ). And, Obama wanted to leave up to 10,000 non-combat troops in Iraq but it failed during negotiations: http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/st ... raddatz-c/

The Iraq government was weak and divided among various factions, all wanting more power. There was even a point where the talk was to divide the country into thirds. Control and stable - that's a lie. Things were then further complicated by the promise to withdraw. Obama's fault? Hardly.

[Monker]

Trump appeals to independents and even some big labor Democrats. The question that remains to be seen, is whether he can keep this appeal or will the Republican primary process push him to the right and make him unelectable (like McCain)? If it is Hillary vs Trump, Trump wins in a landslide.

No way. One simple fact - he will lose the Latino and woman vote. If the Republicans do not do well in those two demographics, they lose. In fact, the Latino vote alone kills Trumps chances at being elected - regardless of who he runs against. Obama's reelection proved that Republicans MUST expand their appeal to minorities of all types. They have simply not done that.

Also, the way Trump has talked down to minorities in general drags the entire party down and makes it harder for ANY Republican to be elected.

[Monker]

"Oi...Get your filthy hands off my desert!"
"What 'e say?"

Brezhnev took Afghanistan.

And, Reagan and Bush funded and trained Osama bin Laden to push them out. After the soviets were gone, he blew up New York. Ooops.

[Monker]

Oh, wow, Bill Maher agrees with Trump:

http://www.real-time-with-bill-maher-bl ... s-norquist

Donald Trump supports raising his own taxes and getting rid of all kinds of loopholes for the super rich. This is the great thing about being able to finance your own campaign: You don’t have to do what donors want; you can focus on what voters want. And even most Republicans want to eliminate loopholes and raise taxes on Wall Street billionaires.

Finally, a Republican can tell Grover Norquist to shove his pledge up his ass.

Trump also supports full disclosure of all campaign contributions, another thing Republican donors are adamantly against.

The big surprise of this campaign so far is that I thought the Republican I’d agree with most – meaning, best-case scenario, one that’s only half crazy – would be Rand Paul. It turns out, on some things, it’s Trump

[Boomchild]

Bush handed a controled, stable Iraq to Obama. Fucking idiot!

Please tell me you don't actually believe this statement.

[The_Noble_Cause]

No way. One simple fact - he will lose the Latino and woman vote.

Right now, Hillary doesn't have a lock on women, minorities or ANYONE except Chelsea, James Carville, and Sid Blumenthal. She actually has higher unfavorability numbers than previous losers Kerry or Romney. Yes, Trump is radioactive right now with his "Mexcian rapists" comments, but in a general, he would beat Hillary handily.

[Monker]

No way. One simple fact - he will lose the Latino and woman vote.

Right now, Hillary doesn't have a lock on women or minorities. She actually has higher unfavorability numbers than previous losers Kerry or Romney. Yes, Trump is radioactive right now with his "Mexcian rapists" comments, but in a general, he would beat Hillary handily.

Clinton still polls ahead of Trump in head to head national polling. You seem to be making stuff up based on your opinion only...and not what the voters are actually saying right now. In the WORST case, Trump would win in a very close election.

It's not just his "Mexican rapist" comments...his immigration policy in general berates Latinos. Then there is how he disrespected Jorge. I haven't looked, but I would be surprised if his approval/disapproval ratings among latinos were not the worst of any candidate running.

In general, Trump is the worst candidate for Republicans in head to head polling against any Democrat. But, like I said, those who are for nominating Trump are not necessarily as interested in winning the election as they are making a point about establishment candidates. They would rather lose the election than nominate an establishment candidate (Bush, for example) who could win. Tea Party'ers, gotta love'em!

Look at the latest polls at realclearpolitics.com.

[Monker]

When are you going to stop believing every opinionated article from biased Republican sources that is full of nothing but propaganda? You are nothing but a faithful zealot following the religion of Republican conservatism. Even when they are spewing forth obvious exaggerations and lies.

I offered the actual document W signed in agreement with Iraq that set the date to be out of Iraq. I offered a fact checked article that said Obama wanted to leave up to 10,000 troops in Iraq but the negotiations with Iraq failed. They did not want us there.

The article below is fiction. If it is not, offer some real evidence to back it up...not just biased opinionated words from a blowhard Republican conservative dumb-ass that you are trying to emulate.

During the 2012 reelection campaign, Obama repeatedly bragged and boasted that he had ended the war in Iraq, and brought our troops home. GOP nominee Mitt Romney warned that the pull out from Iraq was premature, and trouble would soon follow, but Obama continued to hold up Iraq as his crowning achievement in regards to foreign policy.

But now that the radical Islamic ISIS terror army is rampaging through Iraq, persecuting and slaughtering Christians and Muslim minorities alike, Obama is attempting to distance himself from what was once viewed as glorious. In an attempt to rewrite the history books, Obama is now claiming that leaving Iraq was “not my decision”.

According to the Washington Times, Obama has shifted the blame for the fall of Iraq to his predecessor, George W. Bush, claiming the Bush administration had created the plan to pull out precipitously, and the decision was set in stone, with nothing he could do to stop it.

Of course that couldn’t be further from the truth, as former President Bush was repeatedly on record as saying it was critical to not leave Iraq too soon, before the Iraqi Army was fully capable of standing up on their own and defending their own country.

Before heading out on vacation in Martha’s Vineyard, Obama took a moment to say, “What I just find interesting is the degree to which this issue keeps on coming up, as if this was my decision. Under the previous administration, we had turned over the country to a sovereign, democratically elected Iraqi government.”

“So let’s just be clear: The reason that we did not have a follow-on force in Iraq was because the Iraqis — a majority of Iraqis did not want U.S. troops there, and politically they could not pass the kind of laws that would be required to protect our troops in Iraq. So that entire analysis is bogus and is wrong. But it gets frequently peddled around here by folks who oftentimes are trying to defend previous policies that they themselves made.”

Stable might be a little too strong of a word, but Iraq was under control and starting down a better path.

[Monker]

Bush handed a controled, stable Iraq to Obama. Fucking idiot!

Please tell me you don't actually believe this statement.

Iraq was under control nd having their own elections.

That is a fucking exaggeration and a lie. You read this crap so often that you actually believe in this fictional history. They had their own elections, like three different attempts, but the country was FAR from being "under control".

[Monker]

Some great news for Conservatives. Hopefully, McConnell will follow.

http://www.yahoo.com/politics/at-conser ... rk=ma&nf=1

Yep, Boehner and McConnell have been huge disappointments for us on the right. The rumored replacement speaker McCarthy may be even worse, especially on immigration. Seems we're fucked no matter what, these idiots keep reaching across the aisle and trying to work with a group who have no intention of reciprocating at all.

LOL...just what we need...a congressional leader named McCarthy advancing the Republican agenda. Oh, the irony.

[Boomchild]

Some great news for Conservatives. Hopefully, McConnell will follow.

http://www.yahoo.com/politics/at-conser ... rk=ma&nf=1

Yep, Boehner and McConnell have been huge disappointments for us on the right. The rumored replacement speaker McCarthy may be even worse, especially on immigration. Seems we're fucked no matter what, these idiots keep reaching across the aisle and trying to work with a group who have no intention of reciprocating at all.

Ding, Ding,Ding!

[Monker]

Some great news for Conservatives. Hopefully, McConnell will follow.

http://www.yahoo.com/politics/at-conser ... rk=ma&nf=1

Yep, Boehner and McConnell have been huge disappointments for us on the right. The rumored replacement speaker McCarthy may be even worse, especially on immigration. Seems we're fucked no matter what, these idiots keep reaching across the aisle and trying to work with a group who have no intention of reciprocating at all.

Ding, Ding,Ding!

Except the fact is, and it IS a fact, that Republican leaders met before Obama was even sworn in and made it their agenda to not pass ANY bill that Obama sponsored in congress. This has been detailed in articles, books, and even video. It was their strategy to make Obama a one term President...and regain the power they had lost after the complete failure of W's Presidency. "The party of 'No'" That strategy failed as far as Obama's reelection...but it worked to regain the power in congress.

I have yet to see ANY hard evidence that the Democrats made such a pact.

[The_Noble_Cause]

You seem to be making stuff up based on your opinion only...and not what the voters are actually saying right now. In the WORST case, Trump would win in a very close election.

As a student and observer of politics, my analysis of this race is just as valid as yours. As for what the voters are saying.... In NH, Clinton is currently getting her ass handed to her by a 74 year old Socialist Jew from Brooklyn. She is pretty much done. Finished. If she becomes the nominee, the GOP could run Ted Nugent and still win in a rout.

[Monker]

You seem to be making stuff up based on your opinion only...and not what the voters are actually saying right now. In the WORST case, Trump would win in a very close election.

As a student and observer of politics, my analysis of this race is just as valid as yours. As for what the voters are saying.... In NH, Clinton is currently getting her ass handed to her by a 74 year old Socialist Jew from Brooklyn. She is pretty much done. Finished. If she becomes the nominee, the GOP could run Ted Nugent and still win in a rout.

You analysis is based solely on opinion...what I am saying is based on the available facts. Those facts contradict your opinion.

NH alone does not nominate the candidate. Nationally, Clinton is ahead in a landslide. In fact, I was watching Maddow a while back, and Sanders alluded that he did not even had the infrastructure in place to run a true national campaign. Is he even on the ballot in all 50 states yet? He even admitted he didn't expect to have the support that he does. He obviously entered to bring his agenda to the front, but did not expect to be a serious contender.

Clinton is NOT done. Again, look at the polls...she is STILL ahead of Trump. So, your Nugent reference is kinda backwards according to reality. This thing hasn't even really started on the Democrat side. When it does and we get some debates, I expect both Sanders and Clinton to go down, and the lesser knowns to go up...and things will really shake up if Biden enters. After a few debates, we'll know who is truly "done", and who isn't.

However you look at things, the Republican leader is their worst available candidate running - and loses against everybody, including Clinton. To make it worse, their best candidates, like Bush, are the ones the conservatives hate the most. They have not positioned themselves well at all. I still feel Rubio is their best candidate...but he is probably too moderate and too establishment to win the nomination in this environment.

[The_Noble_Cause]

You analysis is based solely on opinion...what I am saying is based on the available facts. Those facts contradict your opinion.

You have been championing Hillary on here for months. All of your "facts" are rooted in your insuppressible hard-on for the inevitable one, who is running a horrible campaign and will probably be indicted. At the start of September, Hillary strategists rebooted her campaign. She appeared on Ellen and danced - looking like a fucking moron. She did a mea culpa on TV for the email mess. What's next? A phot-op wearing camo waders and hunting for varmints? This is a campaign in a tailspin. I predict that she will drop out of the race by November. At this point, you sound as deluded as a Lyndon LaRouche supporter handing out pamphlets on a street corner.

In fact, I was watching Maddow a while back, and Sanders alluded that he did not even had the infrastructure in place to run a true national campaign.

And I watched the same interview. First off, presidential campaigns do not typically have campaign offices in all 50 states to start off with. Bernie's campaign has continually expanded and opened more offices. Bernie himself is visiting red states and even conservative viper pits like Liberty University. Say what you will, but the dude has balls. Meanwhile, Hillary keeps the press cordoned off and only agrees to cushy sit down interviews with pre-agreed upon questions. If Hillary's campaign is better financed, well, maybe that is because her top donors are the same corrupt scumbags that destroyed the economy, including: Citigroup, Morgan Stanley, JPMorgan, Lehman Bros, Merrill Lynch etc. Change you can believe in, right?

He even admitted he didn't expect to have the support that he does. He obviously entered to bring his agenda to the front, but did not expect to be a serious contender.

That is false. Bernie said repeatedly he would only enter the race if he could win and run a campaign based on small donor campaigns.This is not a vanity campaign like Kucinich, Mike Gravel, or Gary Johnson. Several of Obama's top people that orchestrated his campaign are working for Sanders.

ClintonThis thing hasn't even really started on the Democrat side. When it does and we get some debates, I expect both Sanders and Clinton to go down, and the lesser knowns to go up...and things will really shake up if Biden enters. After a few debates, we'll know who is truly "done", and who isn't.

You poor poor naive fool. And why aren't there any Democratic debates yet, Monker? It is because Debbie Wasserman Schultz, head of the DNC and former Hillary surrogate, colluded with Hillary to limit debates. Now, why would that be? Because every time Hill speaks, her polls take a shit. The Wash Post even reported that Hillary was pushing for the Dems to only have FOUR debates total (link below). Compare that to the 20-some debates that took place in 2008. Does this sound like the strategy of a shoo-in?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/pl ... r-debates/

However you look at things, the Republican leader is their worst available candidate running - and loses against everybody, including Clinton.

I think you are still viewing politics from an old paradigm that no longer applies. Hillary and Jeb are the candidates of the old guard mainstream media, which is now pretty much irrelevant.

[S2M]

I stopped voting years ago...but IF I did vote, I'd vote for Trump.

[JBlake]

I'm ready for Hillary.....to go to prison.

Looks like Bernie stickers are now popping up on bumpers in place of the few Hillary ones that I've seen a few months back.

[JBlake]

Well, berry has fucked up everything now. It appears the Ruskies started their Syria campaign by bombing the Free Syrian Army instead of ISIS. What is the FSA you ask, it's just the group that America has been supporting in their attempt to overthrow Assad. Now Vlad is in the house propping up Assad against our supposed attempts at deposing him. Also, apparently a Russian 3 Star General went to our Baghdad Embassy last night and asked the US to vacate Syrian airspace. Don't just do something berry, stand there!

"Berry" can offer up some good old "hope & change". Hahaha. Oh but wait, that only works when dealing with the brain dead immoral Democrapers and Liberals in America.

Well, we all know according to D'crapers and Libs that this no doubt has to either be Bush's fault, the Republicans caused it some way or the other, or the Republicans would have done the very same thing had they been in office. More proof that "Berry" is effectively ineffective as always.

[JBlake]

Kortney Moore, 18, from Rogue River, was in her Writing 115 class in Snyder Hall when one shot came through a window. She saw her teacher get shot in the head. The shooter was inside at that point, and he told people to get on the ground. The shooter was asking people to stand up and state their religion and then started firing away, Moore said.

More details I'm reading FF is that the gunman asked specifically if they were Christians. If they said yes they got capped in the dome. If they said other or nothing at all, they got capped in the leg. At this point it seems would be either a sort of spinoff domestic terrorist or a D'crapper/Libturd type, which basically are two of the same.

[Boomchild]

Hillary and Bill's minds could always be changed..........for the right price.

It's just the creed of every veteran politician.

[Boomchild]

Well, berry has fucked up everything now. It appears the Ruskies started their Syria campaign by bombing the Free Syrian Army instead of ISIS. What is the FSA you ask, it's just the group that America has been supporting in their attempt to overthrow Assad. Now Vlad is in the house propping up Assad against our supposed attempts at deposing him. Also, apparently a Russian 3 Star General went to our Baghdad Embassy last night and asked the US to vacate Syrian airspace. Don't just do something berry, stand there!

"Berry" can offer up some good old "hope & change". Hahaha. Oh but wait, that only works when dealing with the brain dead immoral Democrapers and Liberals in America.

Well, we all know according to D'crapers and Libs that this no doubt has to either be Bush's fault, the Republicans caused it some way or the other, or the Republicans would have done the very same thing had they been in office. More proof that "Berry" is effectively ineffective as always.

Ah yes, the opening chimes to WWIII. Gotta love it. Folks with kids turning 18 better hurry up and make sure they register with Selective Service.

[JBlake]

They are saying that the shooter perhaps listed himself as a conservative republican. Yeah, he's definitely politically confused. Conservative republicans usually honor and respect Christianity. The nutjob responsible for this shooting was specifically targeting them to kill.

[JBlake]

So what's "Berry" going to do in regards to the Russian deal in Syria now? Seems like he comes up with ideas during the time he smokes two joints before he smokes two joints, and while he smokes two more.

[Boomchild]

Hey Boomchild, maybe Obama will fight it like WW1 and we'll get those Shovel Ready Jobs digging trenches.

Well after all, we're still waiting for those shovel ready jobs aren't we?

[Boomchild]

They are saying that the shooter perhaps listed himself as a conservative republican. Yeah, he's definitely politically confused. Conservative republicans usually honor and respect Christianity. The nutjob responsible for this shooting was specifically targeting them to kill.

Even if he was a Republican, which they always try to say, that would be one out of how many liberal shootings?

Oh come on now, you know a liberal would never own a gun.