Welcome to PatsFans.com

3 years in, still blaming Bush

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by Wolfpack, Jan 23, 2012.

  1. Wolfpack

    Wolfpack Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2009
    Messages:
    9,111
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Well it sounds like the Obama re-election committee has their official slogan:

    "Yeah, Obama sucks, but look at what he inherited!"

    http://www.wlsam.com/Article.asp?id=2378295&spid=

    President Obama's State of the Union speech Tuesday evening is likely to be viewed as a reelection speech, and the president's former chief of staff, Mayor Rahm Emanuel has some ideas about how the speech should be constructed.

    The mayor told a panel at the University of Chicago that the president should say very little about his first term, and focus on what he would do in a second term. Emanuel said, "What you do with the first term is say, 'I inherited a mess, I did what I could to stabilize it, and here's what we're gonna do.' "
    Last edited: Jan 23, 2012
  2. Boston Boxer

    Boston Boxer U.S. Air Force Retired PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2004
    Messages:
    2,433
    Likes Received:
    11
    Ratings:
    +16 / 3 / -1

    #75 Jersey

    well, he did...and it is going to take a while to recover from it. Nobody can deny that Obama was handed an absolute mess.

    looking forward to see how this is spun
  3. Wolfpack

    Wolfpack Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2009
    Messages:
    9,111
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    And nobody can deny he has done an awful job and made a bad situatin worse.
  4. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    40,844
    Likes Received:
    90
    Ratings:
    +151 / 3 / -19

    Step..1.. Lower taxes for those can afford them most, the job creators who choose not to create jobs, instead invest for themselves.
    Step..2..start a war based on lies
    Step..3..create about 5 trillion of unfunded liabilities, due to said war
    Step..4..Bail out the banks to the tune of 7.7 to 13 trillions of dollars

    The result is a f..ing mess, not hard to understand why we are where we are. All of the liabilities that Bush created, were unfunded.
  5. Titus Pullo

    Titus Pullo Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2009
    Messages:
    2,613
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    They can't? Wow.... I guess that depends on what you define as "awful." Anything that's not "great?" That's probably the case in the black-or-white world of the arch con, like you. But here in reality, there's a ton of gray.

    I'll give him a C-. Mostly because of torture, expansion of fascist surveillance legislation and his Bush-League approach to regulating Wall St.

    But none of that pales in comparison to the grade the Boy King idiot gets who came before him. And a lot of it is in an attempt to slowly mitigate away from years of "I break it, we all own it" ideology. Can't happen overnight. Can't happen in 3 years. But you know this. You just hate him because he's black, popular, suave and "socialist."

    At some point, maybe you'll stop telling the forum what no one can do. Or how dumb it is to even ask. But probably not.
  6. PatsFanInVa

    PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2006
    Messages:
    20,008
    Likes Received:
    180
    Ratings:
    +285 / 5 / -8

    Been watching too many pubbie debates, and deciding that whatever three loonies and a "job creator" who guts healthy companies say is true?

    Yes, everybody thinks everything does suck. That's because we continue, and will continue for some time, to compare the state of things to how it was before the Bush crash of '08.

    The Obama Administration policies undoubtedly made things better, not worse. Spare me the idiot graph showing the month and day the recession bottomed. You know, I know, and whoever's your pubbie hero du jour knows that spending through your companies capital, holding on for dear life despite cratered demand, can damn well continue your company for a few weeks or months, just not years. Every damn one of us knows, whether we like it or not, that a whole system predicated on vanished liquidity, doesn't screech to a halt over night, but over months.

    Since the trough? 3.2 million private sector jobs gained. Were the pubbies not busy cutting public sector jobs, someone might be giving this guy a nobel prize in econ to go w/the peace prize.

    http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/01/job-killer-obama-guilty-or-innocent/

    Your buddies are just liars, wolfie.
    Last edited: Jan 24, 2012
  7. Harry Boy

    Harry Boy Look Up, It's Amazing PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    Messages:
    38,855
    Likes Received:
    119
    Ratings:
    +296 / 1 / -9

    And Obama has kept the mess going the Bush policys are alive and well.

    CHANGE WE CAN BELIEVE IN
    :singing::singing::singing:
  8. Mrs.PatsFanInVa

    Mrs.PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2009
    Messages:
    15,227
    Likes Received:
    225
    Ratings:
    +315 / 7 / -3

    #12 Jersey

    Thanks to a "do nothing" Senate and Congress, yes, many of them are.

    A president alone has little ability to change anything.
  9. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    40,844
    Likes Received:
    90
    Ratings:
    +151 / 3 / -19

    In 2009 Obama signed an order closing Guantanamo, the most expensive prison in the world ($800,000 per inmate), which was a campaign promise. Later Congress passed a law indicating it could not close.

    Last summer the american people favored, 75% approval, Obama's economic package, then congress defeated it.

    In 2011 Obama tried to reduce military spending, now the rights favorite christian, Santorum, has vowed to reinstate the cuts Obama made.

    The reality is that the way DC is working, it is not about the American people and what they want, it is about one upping Obama... and anything he says or does is automatically bad.

    It goes on and on, contentiousness at its finest.. very little of what is happening inside the beltway is about the American People..
    Last edited: Jan 24, 2012
  10. Harry Boy

    Harry Boy Look Up, It's Amazing PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    Messages:
    38,855
    Likes Received:
    119
    Ratings:
    +296 / 1 / -9

    They know Obama is nothing but a "feel good social experiment" and they can't let him run amok, Obama IS NOT presidential material it would be a danger to America to turn him loose, America is much better off if he just continues to Play Golf,
  11. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    40,844
    Likes Received:
    90
    Ratings:
    +151 / 3 / -19

    but this is what you said...make up your mind.

  12. JackBauer

    JackBauer On the Roster

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2005
    Messages:
    15,639
    Likes Received:
    159
    Ratings:
    +294 / 6 / -5

    When Obama was elected in Q4 2008, the economy was growing at a rate of about -9 percent and was shedding ~750,000 jobs a month. Rahm's statement that Obama inherited a mess and that it took time to turn it around is factually sound. Of course, posters like WP don't like it because it undermines their ex post facto attempts to rehabilitate their guy's image.

    Now, the economy is adding more than 200,000 jobs a month and growing at a rate of around three percent. Not ideal, but a far cry from how bad things were. At the very least, these figures should illustrate just how much of a liar/troll WP is.
    Last edited: Jan 24, 2012
  13. Drewski

    Drewski Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2007
    Messages:
    3,702
    Likes Received:
    18
    Ratings:
    +42 / 0 / -1

    No Jersey Selected

    Jack, your post (outside of me confirming the numbers which I have no interest in doing) is correct. Obama inherited a sh*t show....but

    Here is my issue with it all. At some point people have to account for their own performance. You cant blame your predecessor forever (basically Obama's full first term).

    I think anyone with a brain knows Obama came into a terrible economic situation, but so has every other president who came in under a similar context. Obama isn't the first (nor will he be the last) to inherit a crappy economy.

    I would prefer my leader to say something like this.

    "You know, while things aren't back to where we would all like them to be, I hope everyone knows and sees that I am working my frigging ass off to get America back to where we all want and feel it should be"

    Instead we get
    "Well its been really hard because we inherited a mess...."

    No sh*t. But you are the president, OWN THIS. No one (at least sane people anyway) thinks Obama is a miracle worker who could take something so bad (the economy) and completely get us back to where we were in three years. But at some point you have to own it, and in my opinion, that the current President (regardless of who it is) "owns" it within 3 years of their Presidency. Yes things aren't back all the way, but lead. Don't point a finger to the jackass before you.

    Did FDR continue to blame those before him 3 years into his term?
    Did Reagan personally blame Carter 3 years into his term?
    Did Clinton blame Reagan/Bush I 3 years into his term?

    I think people just want their leaders to lead. To own their time and to do what they thinks is best to get the country back.
  14. PatriotsReign

    PatriotsReign Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    25,620
    Likes Received:
    73
    Ratings:
    +149 / 1 / -9

    The most non-partisan assessment of this topic I've read in a long time. And everything you wrote is true.
  15. JackBauer

    JackBauer On the Roster

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2005
    Messages:
    15,639
    Likes Received:
    159
    Ratings:
    +294 / 6 / -5

    I think all of that is fair, and I agree that a lot of us Obama supporters with the president would be more vocal in defending his record, which, IMHO, is about as good as could be expected from anyone put in his position (i.e. McCain, Newt, Romney, whomever would not have an economy that is appreciably stronger by this juncture in their term).

    However, this cuts both ways. While Obama doesn't do enough to run on the merits, he's also faced with an opposition that is both deranged and largely divorced from reality. To claim that Obama has made things worse is something you'll hear often from the GOP field and from some of the deep thinkers on this board. The usual suspects, who of course conducted themselves as church mice between 2000-2008, decry Obama's orgy of spending and record deficits without being intellectually honest enough to acknowledge that the loss of government revenue (tax cuts!) was the single largest contributor to the deficit we see now.

    I guarantee you full well the moment people stop blaming the president for things that are not his fault, he'll stop pointing out the genesis for most of these problems.

    Finally, it's not really fair to cite how other presidents acted with respect to their predecessors, because other than FDR there's really no basis for comparison. I think it stands to reason Obama would have preferred not to drop 800b to prop up the economy upon assuming office, as it seems similarly self-evident that any president in his position would have done the same.
    Last edited: Jan 24, 2012
  16. JackBauer

    JackBauer On the Roster

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2005
    Messages:
    15,639
    Likes Received:
    159
    Ratings:
    +294 / 6 / -5

    No offense, but I question your ability to gauge what, exactly, constitutes a non-partisan assessment after your claim (which you declined to support) that CNN is a partisan network.
  17. Harry Boy

    Harry Boy Look Up, It's Amazing PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    Messages:
    38,855
    Likes Received:
    119
    Ratings:
    +296 / 1 / -9

    There are Three Words permanently imbedded into Barack Hussein Obama's Teleprompters those words are as follows "THE PREVIOUS ADMINISTRATION"
  18. Drewski

    Drewski Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2007
    Messages:
    3,702
    Likes Received:
    18
    Ratings:
    +42 / 0 / -1

    No Jersey Selected

    I like the honest reply (and discussion) Jack, something which keeps me coming back here even with all the “noise”. My reply below.
    “I think all of that is fair, and I agree that a lot of us Obama supporters with the president would be more vocal in defending his record, which, IMHO, is about as good as could be expected from anyone put in his position (i.e. McCain, Newt, Romney, whomever would not have an economy that is appreciably stronger by this juncture in their term).”
    1. I have no issue with supporters supporting Obama’s POV/accomplishments and the detractors not doing so. However, I don’t agree with the latter part of your statement, not because I think McLame, My Pet Newt or Ken would have done better, I just don’t know what it they would have cuz they aren’t President. I cant say they wouldn’t have done better, and I don’t think anyone can say they would have. I deal with tangible evidence, not hypotheticals.
    “However, this cuts both ways. While Obama doesn't do enough to run on the merits, he's also faced with an opposition that is both deranged and largely divorced from reality. To claim that Obama has made things worse is something you'll hear often from the GOP field and from some of the deep thinkers on this board. The usual suspects, who of course conducted themselves as church mice between 2000-2008, decry Obama's orgy of spending and record deficits without being intellectually honest enough to acknowledge that the loss of government revenue (tax cuts!) was the single largest contributor to the deficit we see now.”
    2. I agree that many of the things that people are yelling at Obama about they were silent while boy king was in office. It can’t be ok when it is their guy and wrong when it isn’t theirs. Its all or nothing.
    I also agree that Obama has worked with an opposition that is deranged and sees the world’s reality that isn’t the reality most of the rest of see. That being said, this current congress has their own issues and many of them will be gone soon. I hope the American people stop voting for a letter and start voting for people who want to be part of the solution, not part of the problem.
    Also, I don’t fully agree with your last point; although astute fiscal policy people and economist may. In my mind when you have a revenue problem (such as a household), the first thing you do is tighten the belt. You cut spending first and raise revenue second. Obama increased spending and then has talked about raising revenue (taxes). Having said that it was a crazy time, with the issue so deep, cutting spending “may” have made it worse.
    “I guarantee you full well the moment people stop blaming the president for things that are not his fault, he'll stop pointing out the genesis for most of these problems.”
    3. Couldn’t he, or any president for that matter, be the bigger person? Yes stupid people will blame him for stuff he had no control over, but continually refocusing the blame isn’t leading nor is it owning their presidency. Presidents throughout time get credit for the good times and credit for the bad times while they are in office, even when most of the time they personally had no involvement (other than being at the right place at the right time) in the situation (good or bad). Again, own it. You are the leader of the free world.
    “Finally, it's not really fair to cite how other presidents acted with respect to their predecessors, because other than FDR there's really no basis for comparison. I think it stands to reason Obama would have preferred not to drop 800b to prop up the economy upon assuming office, as it seems similarly self-evident that any president in his position would have done the same.”
    4. Maybe it isn’t “fair” because the severity isn’t the same for Obama/Reagan/Clinton etc. But many presidents have come in under bad times. My parents have made it reasonably unscathed through this down turn, but in 1980 when they got married, their MTG had an interest rate closer to 20 than 10. Bad times take different forms. People unaffected in one are affected in another.
    I just want my President to own his time. If they try their best and it fails, well at least they tried. But if you continue to blame someone who is gone you aren’t doing that, and that is where I hold them accountable.
  19. JackBauer

    JackBauer On the Roster

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2005
    Messages:
    15,639
    Likes Received:
    159
    Ratings:
    +294 / 6 / -5

    That's all well and good, but there really is no tangible evidence because we were in largely unchartered waters.

    However, when people like Romney come out, as he did just today, and say that Obama's policies "have made troubled times last longer," how would you like the president to respond to such baseless rhetoric?

    We can, however, look at the arsenal of public policy options that were available at the time and broadly surmise that, given the political constraints, we made out pretty well. That's not to say there aren't areas of criticism, such as an unsuccessful mortgage modification policy and inefficiencies written into the stimulus bill.

    I would argue the opposite. You can cite Britain and Italy as examples of how austerity during an economic slowdown generally will have a deleterious effect on economic growth in the short term.

    I agree that medium-term deficit/long-term debt reduction is a priority, as does the president if you acknowledge that his willingness to concede spending cuts during the debt ceiling debacle was sincere.

    However, we aren't going to right the balance sheet with spending cuts alone, unless various stakeholders are willing to accept draconian cuts in services (which we know they aren't). It's going to require a holistic approach featuring both increases in revenue and decreases in spending. Obama has agreed to this approach in principle; the GOP has categorically ruled out any revenue enhancement, whatsoever.
  20. Drewski

    Drewski Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2007
    Messages:
    3,702
    Likes Received:
    18
    Ratings:
    +42 / 0 / -1

    No Jersey Selected

    The president should respond with examples/statistics/metrics etc of how, in his mind, his policies have helped. Bringing up what he inherited again focuses on something other than him, which, some may argue is what he is trying to do.

    I would argue Britain and Italy (as well as the rest of Europe) have situations which don’t reflect to the US’. Most of their cuts (if I am not mistaken) came to social programs which most people would argue shouldn’t exist in the first place*. I wish we cut more, starting with like 50% from defense.

    In my opinion he has to be willing to have meaningful cuts first before raising taxes (which is admittedly hard because people are getting services now, and taking them away is far harder). I think B5 had a graph going around some time ago which showed the portion of taxes paid by group tier. The rich in this country already pay their share**. How much more can you expect to get from them and still be fair?

    I agree, it will take new revenue streams as well as cuts. But we could create revenue without outright raising taxes – one example would be legalizing pot and taxing it.

    And yes the GOP he working “with” are crazier than sh*thouse rats.

    *An example of a program in Europe which “shouldn’t” exist is unemployment in Portugal. If you “prove” you are looking for a job, the Portuguese government will pay you unemployment for the REST OF YOUR LIFE. Another would be full retirement, with benes in Greece at age 50.

    **This statement is made from the “absolute” value that the richest pay a lot more than “their share” (which should be more because they are rich). That being said in CA the top 1% paid something like 51% of the taxes. Is that fair? Is that enough? If not how much more do you think they should be accountable for?

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>