Barack HUSSEIN Obama

[King Doctor]

Does the President have to prove that his assumption is correct before making that assumption... in public...

First of all, the current president is known for making bold faced lies. The past week he has been trying to insist that Republicans were responsible for the current economic mess that he is saving us from right now. Never mind that the economy is going into a double dip recession because of his insane fiscal stimulus package.

The guy who is driving the car off of the cliff certainly has balls to suggest that the previous driver was irresponsible. But that's the Chicago way, and this two bit punk knows no other.

Could somebody please tell me if this Tzor fellow is (1) a hilarious troll making delightfully ironic 'lolz, here is what tea-party nutters would say' posts, or (2) actually being serious? I can't quite figure it out, he's walking the plausible/ludicrous line so tightly that it's difficult to figure out which side his head is on.

[tzor]

Could somebody please tell me if this Tzor fellow is (1) a hilarious troll making delightfully ironic 'lolz, here is what tea-party nutters would say' posts, or (2) actually being serious? I can't quite figure it out, he's walking the plausible/ludicrous line so tightly that it's difficult to figure out which side his head is on.

Why can't I be both?

I like tea; I drink green tea at work!

OK time to be serious ... I think I will quote congress ... Committee on Ways and Means - Republicans

Stimulus Fails to Create Promised Private Sector Jobs: Americans Left to Wonder "Where Are the Jobs?"

On the 18-month anniversary of the release of the Romer/Bernstein report, the table below compares the Obama Administration’s January 9, 2009 prediction for how many jobs its stimulus plan would create with what actually happened, by industry. As the table shows, most industries have not seen even one net new job since the Administration’s stimulus plan. The sole exceptions are Government (+201,000) and Education, Health and Social Services (+434,000, which includes 100,000 social assistance jobs, 52,000 education jobs, and 282,000 health care jobs). Through June 2010, many industries (construction, manufacturing, information, and transportation and warehousing) actually lost more jobs than the Administration predicted they would gain following stimulus.

CAMP: Unemployment Rate Remains Unacceptably High 3.3 million private sector jobs lost since January 2009, while federal government jobs increase by 405,000

Washington, DC – Ways and Means Ranking Member Dave Camp (R-MI) today issued the following reaction to today's jobs report:

“It is clear that too much taxing and deficit spending by Washington Democrats has had a chilling effect on our economy. Employers simply do not know what to expect next from Washington or how much it will cost them. The result is an unemployment rate that is unacceptably high.

"The slight dip in the unemployment rate last month was caused by the fact that 652,000 Americans gave up on even looking for work. If the people who stopped looking for work in just the last two months were counted, the unemployment rate would be back above 10 percent now. That’s not an improvement and should be a clear signal to everyone that Washington must chart a new course.”

[Baron Von PWN]

So, what I see here is the same strategy I've seen in the past three years or so from the President and Democrats (that seems to work) - marginalize anyone who doesn't agree with you by pointing to false ideas (or perhaps isolated thoughts) of certain people in that particular group. Tea Party bother you? Well, they are racist, gun-toting hicks who are all in militias that want to overthrow the government. Tea Party (in the Northeast) bothering you? Well, they are just fatcat rich bankers who want to steal your hard-earned money. Hillary Clinton bothering you? Well, she's racist too. Israelis not agreeing with you? They don't like my policies because my middle name is "Hussein." I'm not really surprised we are still falling for this strategy, but I really hope it goes away. For once I'd like our politicans and pundits to discuss issues and not whether someone is racist or someone's name is Hussein or whether soccer is a socialist sport.

Isn't this just politics as usual in the USA? When it was Bush people who disagreed "hated America" or "didn't support the troops". We are starting to get the same bullshit here in Canada and its infuriating.

This is simply what happens when there is no true political discussion. If the involved parties are not willing to actually debate and compromise then politics becomes a shouting match which devolves into a simple personality contest.

[tzor]

Isn't this just politics as usual in the USA? When it was Bush people who disagreed "hated America" or "didn't support the troops". We are starting to get the same bullshit here in Canada and its infuriating.

Yes but it is a little different. Bush did play the patriotism card, used by every successful president since Lincoln. The "support the troops argument" gets most of its momentum from Vietnam War backlash (although the war was wrong, the treatment that Vietnam Vets got when they reutrned was disgracefull and these are the people who are now making their senior voices heard). The irony of the later is that especially under the Rumsfield policy Bush never "supported the troops," neither on the field or after they returned. Talk all you want of Vietnam, but they never had repeated deployments ad nauseum, nor did they return to a gutted veterans administration that was doing everything they could to get those wounded vets off of the system. The treatment of Bush towards veterans was disgraceful bordering on criminial.

With Obama, there is a difference. Everything is all about him. Since he is, obviously, perfect, wonderful, and has the true solution to everythying, clearly anyone who doesn't agree with him is either off their rocker or has a silly impediment that keeps them from seeing the obvious. It's not "they don't agree with me because they don't agree with my policy," or "they don't agree with me because they don't agree with my actions," because in his own mind everyone has to agree with his brilliant super genius. So it has to be something trivial, like his middle name.

So I will keep on saying Barack Hussein Obama ... only because it makes such a great meter and, frankly, I think it is the only really noble thing about the president.

[Baron Von PWN]

Isn't this just politics as usual in the USA? When it was Bush people who disagreed "hated America" or "didn't support the troops". We are starting to get the same bullshit here in Canada and its infuriating.

Yes but it is a little different. Bush did play the patriotism card, used by every successful president since Lincoln. The "support the troops argument" gets most of its momentum from Vietnam War backlash (although the war was wrong, the treatment that Vietnam Vets got when they reutrned was disgracefull and these are the people who are now making their senior voices heard). The irony of the later is that especially under the Rumsfield policy Bush never "supported the troops," neither on the field or after they returned. Talk all you want of Vietnam, but they never had repeated deployments ad nauseum, nor did they return to a gutted veterans administration that was doing everything they could to get those wounded vets off of the system. The treatment of Bush towards veterans was disgraceful bordering on criminial.

With Obama, there is a difference. Everything is all about him. Since he is, obviously, perfect, wonderful, and has the true solution to everythying, clearly anyone who doesn't agree with him is either off their rocker or has a silly impediment that keeps them from seeing the obvious. It's not "they don't agree with me because they don't agree with my policy," or "they don't agree with me because they don't agree with my actions," because in his own mind everyone has to agree with his brilliant super genius. So it has to be something trivial, like his middle name.

So I will keep on saying Barack Hussein Obama ... only because it makes such a great meter and, frankly, I think it is the only really noble thing about the president.

Aren't you doing the exact same thing you are accusing Obama of? You are attacking his character rather than any of his policies or plans which was the whole point of my post. When you waste time blathering about bullshit "Obama thinks anyone opposing him is racist!" "People only oppose Obama because of his middle name!" you aren't discussing the real problems you are simply engaging in a personality contest.

These kind of petty arguments poison politics and make it impossible to engage in any kind co-operation(how are you supposed to work with the person you were publicly insulting?). Its true that these tactics work and they can help a politician win an election, however they reduce the level of debate to such inane trash that politicians reduce respect for public service and tarnish the reputation of democracy.

[King Doctor]

in his own mind everyone has to agree with his brilliant super genius

See, crazy speculative ad hominem stuff like this.

This is why I can't figure out whether Tzor is trying to be serious, or is really just a hilarious parody of a ranting tea-party nutter (most likely played by a laid back left-wing dude somewhere in San Francisco).

[thegreekdog]

So, what I see here is the same strategy I've seen in the past three years or so from the President and Democrats (that seems to work) - marginalize anyone who doesn't agree with you by pointing to false ideas (or perhaps isolated thoughts) of certain people in that particular group. Tea Party bother you? Well, they are racist, gun-toting hicks who are all in militias that want to overthrow the government. Tea Party (in the Northeast) bothering you? Well, they are just fatcat rich bankers who want to steal your hard-earned money. Hillary Clinton bothering you? Well, she's racist too. Israelis not agreeing with you? They don't like my policies because my middle name is "Hussein." I'm not really surprised we are still falling for this strategy, but I really hope it goes away. For once I'd like our politicans and pundits to discuss issues and not whether someone is racist or someone's name is Hussein or whether soccer is a socialist sport.

Isn't this just politics as usual in the USA? When it was Bush people who disagreed "hated America" or "didn't support the troops". We are starting to get the same bullshit here in Canada and its infuriating.

This is simply what happens when there is no true political discussion. If the involved parties are not willing to actually debate and compromise then politics becomes a shouting match which devolves into a simple personality contest.

Yes, it's definitely politics as usual. I think the Bush political game was a little more conspicuous (although probably more insidious considering the laws and actions that came out of those kinds of statements), but I think President Obama's political games are working pretty well. If the economy ever comes under control, he'll be tough to beat in the next election.

[Timminz]

I think President Obama's political games are working pretty well. If the economy ever comes under control, he'll be tough to beat in the next election.

I don't know... Palin is looking like an awfully strong contender.

[thegreekdog]

I think President Obama's political games are working pretty well. If the economy ever comes under control, he'll be tough to beat in the next election.

I don't know... Palin is looking like an awfully strong contender.

I really hope not.

[tzor]

Yes, it's definitely politics as usual. I think the Bush political game was a little more conspicuous (although probably more insidious considering the laws and actions that came out of those kinds of statements), but I think President Obama's political games are working pretty well. If the economy ever comes under control, he'll be tough to beat in the next election.

I think that if any intelligent person were to run for president in 2012, Obama would loose by a significant margin, given his low polling numbers. On the other hand, the definition of "intelligent person" sort of implies that he would not be running for president in the first place.

[Woodruff]

I think President Obama's political games are working pretty well. If the economy ever comes under control, he'll be tough to beat in the next election.

I don't know... Palin is looking like an awfully strong contender.

I disagree...if the Republicans put Palin up as his opposition, they are literally handing him the election. Assuming something of historically bad proportions doesn't happen in the next couple years, of course. Palin would be a huge mistake.

[tzor]

I disagree...if the Republicans put Palin up as his opposition, they are literally handing him the election. Assuming something of historically bad proportions doesn't happen in the next couple years, of course. Palin would be a huge mistake.

As long as the maintream media continues to "worship" Obama and go on a feeding frenzy towards any Republican then any Republican would be a huge mistake. However, by 2011, the media may start a feeding frenzy against Obama and then, everything changes.

If 2010, however goes as predicted, Palin will have one advantage, a lot of friends who she helped get elected. (A lot of them being women.) She may well be on her way in pulling another "Reagan" although that remains to be seen.

[Woodruff]

I disagree...if the Republicans put Palin up as his opposition, they are literally handing him the election. Assuming something of historically bad proportions doesn't happen in the next couple years, of course. Palin would be a huge mistake.

As long as the maintream media continues to "worship" Obama and go on a feeding frenzy towards any Republican then any Republican would be a huge mistake. However, by 2011, the media may start a feeding frenzy against Obama and then, everything changes.
If 2010, however goes as predicted, Palin will have one advantage, a lot of friends who she helped get elected. (A lot of them being women.) She may well be on her way in pulling another "Reagan" although that remains to be seen.

Palin would lose almost all independents and a surprisingly large number of conservatives, in my opinion. Conservatives would do better putting up...gads largely anyone else. Even Bill O'Reilly thinks she'd be a useless candidate.

[Trephining]

I'd like to see an actual conservative candidate.

[jimboston]

I think President Obama's political games are working pretty well. If the economy ever comes under control, he'll be tough to beat in the next election.

I don't know... Palin is looking like an awfully strong contender.

I disagree...if the Republicans put Palin up as his opposition, they are literally handing him the election. Assuming something of historically bad proportions doesn't happen in the next couple years, of course. Palin would be a huge mistake.

I just assumed Timminz was being sarcastic suggesting that Palin coule beat Obama.

[Timminz]

I think President Obama's political games are working pretty well. If the economy ever comes under control, he'll be tough to beat in the next election.

I don't know... Palin is looking like an awfully strong contender.

I disagree...if the Republicans put Palin up as his opposition, they are literally handing him the election. Assuming something of historically bad proportions doesn't happen in the next couple years, of course. Palin would be a huge mistake.

I just assumed Timminz was being sarcastic suggesting that Palin coule beat Obama.

Yeah, I'm pretty amazed my comment didn't just get ignored completely. At most, it deserved a , or a .

[King Doctor]

I just assumed Timminz was being sarcastic suggesting that Palin coule beat Obama.

Actually, I hear that Obama's coulé is pretty good. He'd definitely spank Palin with anything longer than a foil.

[jimboston]

I just assumed Timminz was being sarcastic suggesting that Palin coule beat Obama.

Actually, I hear that Obama's coulé is pretty good. He'd definitely spank Palin with anything longer than a foil.

Who is trolling who now?

[the.killing.44]

I just assumed Timminz was being sarcastic suggesting that Palin coule beat Obama.

Actually, I hear that Obama's coulé is pretty good. He'd definitely spank Palin with anything longer than a foil.

Who is trolling who now?

[Baron Von PWN]

Yes, it's definitely politics as usual. I think the Bush political game was a little more conspicuous (although probably more insidious considering the laws and actions that came out of those kinds of statements), but I think President Obama's political games are working pretty well. If the economy ever comes under control, he'll be tough to beat in the next election.

I think that if any intelligent person were to run for president in 2012, Obama would loose by a significant margin, given his low polling numbers. On the other hand, the definition of "intelligent person" sort of implies that he would not be running for president in the first place.

This is the type of thing I was talking about. Its gotten to the point where people have such complete lack of respect for their political opponents you will not even admit the president is an intelligent man. Such total disrespect for political opponents only degrades politics and lowers the level of debate to trivialities.

[King Doctor]

Who is trolling who now?

Dunno.

Who has been reduced to a state of paranoia about trolling so deep that they cannot seem to fail to mention it multiple times a day?

That's usually a good way of picking out the 'trollee'.

[Woodruff]

I'd like to see an actual conservative candidate.

I would absolutely love to see a fiscally conservative candidate. Particularly a proven one at some point in their past (at a state level or possibly city level, if necessary).

[Woodruff]

Yes, it's definitely politics as usual. I think the Bush political game was a little more conspicuous (although probably more insidious considering the laws and actions that came out of those kinds of statements), but I think President Obama's political games are working pretty well. If the economy ever comes under control, he'll be tough to beat in the next election.

I think that if any intelligent person were to run for president in 2012, Obama would loose by a significant margin, given his low polling numbers. On the other hand, the definition of "intelligent person" sort of implies that he would not be running for president in the first place.

This is the type of thing I was talking about. Its gotten to the point where people have such complete lack of respect for their political opponents you will not even admit the president is an intelligent man. Such total disrespect for political opponents only degrades politics and lowers the level of debate to trivialities.

In fairness, it doesn't look to me like tzor is disrespecting his political opponent (Obama) as much as he's disrespecting "anyone that would run for President".

[tzor]

I think that if any intelligent person were to run for president in 2012, Obama would loose by a significant margin, given his low polling numbers. On the other hand, the definition of "intelligent person" sort of implies that he would not be running for president in the first place.

This is the type of thing I was talking about. Its gotten to the point where people have such complete lack of respect for their political opponents you will not even admit the president is an intelligent man. Such total disrespect for political opponents only degrades politics and lowers the level of debate to trivialities.

First of all, I think there was an assumption there that I was talking about Republicans. I don’t think any Democrat would run against Obama, at least not yet. Nor was I specifically talking about the President. I could talk about the President, but I was not talking about the “intelligence” of the President in that above quote.

Obama faces a very difficult problem in his reelection. It is impossible to “fact check” the future. It is easy to fact check the present and the past. Obama’s claims that he would, if elected, do X, Y and Z could never be “fact checked.” Obama’s record, on the other hand can be. His statements about the past, especially who and what caused the recession can be. His constant attempt to blame everything on Bush has already worn thin and beneath the veneer is the fact that the buck will one day stop at his desk for the state of the economy in 2012.

The average voter is generally conservative in terms of fiscal policies. The problem is trying to get the message to the voter against an appeal to emotion. The fundamental problem with socialism is that eventually it’s nothing but snake oil. It’s really only good when you are not taking it currently.

While I am not going to discuss the “intelligence” of Obama here, I will throw out a couple of facts for you to consider. He is not all that great at ad-libbing, outside of his teleprompter (although he doesn’t go into gaffs like Biden does). He is known for stating things as “fact” that are at best stretching the truth. I don’t think he has ever been able to debate a person who could rebut and fact checks him on the fly and I think he would buckle under the pressure. (But then a lot of politicians would probably do the same.)

[King Doctor]

I will throw out a couple of facts for you to consider. He is not all that great at ad-libbing, outside of his teleprompter (although he doesn’t go into gaffs like Biden does). He is known for stating things as “fact” that are at best stretching the truth. I don’t think he has ever been able to debate a person who could rebut and fact checks him on the fly and I think he would buckle under the pressure. (But then a lot of politicians would probably do the same.)

So your "facts" are:

That you don't believe that he is good without a teleprompter, which is a personal opinion that is not supported by large numbers of other Americans, or by the fact that he has a distinguished academic record and is world-renowned for being an impressive advocate both with a teleprompter and when addressing an audience less formally.

That he states 'facts' that are later disproved, just like every other politician (and human being) that has ever roamed the earth.


Oh hey, let's go play the fun "how did Bush do on those fronts, and how loudly were you crying then?" game and see what happens... I hear that guy was just fucking great when he was ad-libing and had a real killer grasp of facts and figures.




Seriously, Obama is a good President and he's serving during a very difficult time in your country's history; you should give him a chance to actually get on with the job instead of irrationally trying to pillory him for every random non-issue that you can dream up. You never did it for the other guys, you don't suddenly feel a need to denounce their previous actions as deplorable and evil, what's suddenly got you in such a hysterical mood about this particular President?