What is your opinion of President Obama, the President, not the man?
It has been almost a year since he left office. Though he seems to stick around DC and make his comments occasionally about policies...
The question I have for all is this - what is your opinion of this President in his 8 years in office...?
Overall, has he been good or bad for America?
Please use facts to back up your opinion.
As a Conservative, I have strong opinions of the Obama Administration, and the damage he has caused. I realize it is a matter of debate. No one person or administration is all bad or all good...
I want to hear some opinion especially the ones defending his actions...
What good has he done for the US?
The common perception of even Republicans, is that he is a good family man, a husband, a father and a role model...just that they disagree with his progressive agenda...
Let's keep the two side separate. One can be a great father and husband in his personal life and be ineffective or destructive in his work... the two are mutually exclusive.
How would you rate his job performance? And why?
1 - 5, 1 being the best.His average rank by presidential historians -- from conservative to liberal -- is 17th overall among all presidents. That's a fact.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historica … ted_StatesYes, but ranking rise and fall due to circumstance and time. The longer the timeframe, the more stable the ranking. Some of his policies have long lasting effect way past his presidentcy. I will just name a few...
the ACA or Obamacare has yet to play out...
The Iran Nuclear deal
North Korea Missiles testing...
The national debt...
Illegal immigration open borders...
Anti terrorism
NSA spying
IRS scandal
Climate Change and EPA over reach
And many more...
Time will tell my friend.All common complaints of biased conservatives and not the majority of Americans or presidential historians.
Right, conservatives are biased yet NYT and Washington Post and NBC and CBS and CNN are all main stream...give me a break...even millennials are not buying it.
You can continue to believe what you believe about conservatives but one thing you need to know. Conservatives are Constitutionalist and they do not follow blindly one party. They rely on the Constitution which is foremost the rule of the land."Conservatives are Constitutionalist and they do not follow blindly one party. They rely on the Constitution which is foremost the rule of the land"
Jack lee, just more bull Shyte? Gosh, you conservatives are so full of it.
You pretend to want impartial commentary.
I think Obama was an effective President, if not ranking among the greatest. He would have done a hell of a lot better without the obstruction from the GOP and the Right.
So, your man, Trump, can expect at least as many roadblocks..First of all, he is not my man and not my first choice by a long shot.
Second, I have criticized Trump on many occasions when he over step his power as President...
Third, if his policies are sound, I will support them, even if it cost me personally in tax dollars...
For example, I support rebuilding our infrastructure and building the wall...
You are the blind obedient party member of the Democrats who can't see how policies thst can help all people are best...like bring jobs back from overseas...and energy drilling and pipelines...
Obstruction is the only thing the Democrats have and ever will have.
They have tried the progressive path and look what they brought -
Bankrupt our treasury with little to show for it.
Sad...On a scale of 1to 5, I rank him somewhere between 3.5-4, as I mostly agree with the assessment of historians.
I, too, support rebuilding our infrastructure, same as I did when it was proposed by Obama, Bernie, and other Democrats during the Obama administration. Republicans didn't want to spend the money then. If Trump can get them to do it now, then that will be a major achievement that I will happily support and acknowledge.Let's get the record straight. The money of nearly 1 trillion was earmarked for infrastructure but was miss approprated by the Obama Administration on keeping government union jobs...
Obama laughed at one point saying those shovel ready jobs were not so shovel ready...after 6 years into his administration and the money spent...
"First of all, he is not my man and not my first choice by a long shot."
Well, you seem to support him as if he were your second cousin
----------------------------------
"Second, I have criticized Trump on many occasions when he over step his power as President..."
You, criticize Trump, where was that?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Third, if his policies are sound, I will support them, even if it cost me personally in tax dollars..".
I am waiting and so far there has been just disappointment
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
"For example, I support rebuilding our infrastructure and building the wall..."
The "wall" is ridiculous. I thought that he was going to get the Mexican government to pay for it, haven't heard much about that lately.
As for building the infrastructure, if it were such a good idea why didn't the GOP sign on to it during Obama's term?
Is it now viable for conservatives only because Trump, a Republican, proposes it?
Here is what I think. Trump employs the old pretend to be a populist to dupe naïve voters trick.
I have to see it to believe it. The idea of infrastructure rebuilding contradicts fundamental conservative philosophy. It is not the kind of thing that Republicans support. They support massive tax cuts for the rich, AKA, "job creators" with the hope that it will trickle down to the undeserving rabble through their need to increase employment opportunities. But, there is too much benefit from infrastructure building for working and middle classes for the GOP to ever support such an idea. So, it was just another Trump lie or exaggeration.
There has really been no real practical path for bringing back industries who under the very rules of capitalism are going to operate to decrease their costs. Trump has yet to convince me. Trump and the GOP gives me little reason to be confident in the course of this nation at this time. And YES, I do not trust GOP and conservatives, give me a reason to think otherwise?
-------------------------------------
"Sad..."
You imitate Trump in this aspect as well, he always says this.Right, I am a Trump supporter. That is why I didn't vote for him..
The GOP help passed a 900 billion infrastructure bill under Obama. Go look it up.
He didn't use it for infrastructure...that was the problem...those shovel ready jobs were np where to be found...
Your idea about conservatives are all wrong.
We don't object to any government spending, just the wrong kind of spending that is not mandated by our constitution. We support defending our borders, one of the enumerated power of the Constitution along with strong national defense...
The kind of spending I object is crony capitalism such as the omnibus bailout bill, the welfare state of foodstamps. I prefer Red cross, and United way and other private charities such as Catholic Charities to help the poor and the people with disabilities...
There is not just one solution, that of big government programs. There are many ways to skin the cat...
Yep, everyone is biased except for conservatives.
He was young, not since Kennedy have we had someone who was closer in age and outlook to a college student than a established Professor.
What difference does that make?
Lots, he connected to the younger voters, and younger ideals & outlooks more than that of an experienced and tested older individual who had become more cynical and worldly would have.
Obama was the Kennedy of his generation, without the Assassination to make him both a Martyr and 'Frozen in time' young, energetic, challenging the 'powers that be' President that Kennedy will always be seen as.
Unlike Kennedy, Obama was in office long enough to learn that the establishment wasn't going to adjust or be drastically altered, it was he who was going to have to adjust, compromise, and let go of many of his ideals and dreams.
So while he took to the media, to talk-shows in particular in ways no other President had, and was a cult-of-personality President, he was also forced to become the front-man for the establishment, like Bush before him, and Clinton before that.
As for what he accomplished, top on that list is the ACA (just as many people favor it as who despise it) which has lost the allure of the pretty wrapping paper it came in, and now more and more people are realizing it to be a government (Big-Pharma, Insurance, etc.) money grab and bureaucratic nightmare (as anything the government takes over becomes) than anything else.
All else is IMO just more of the same.
Libya got knocked off and is a disaster area which now allows refugees to flow unchecked from the African continent into Europe.
Syria is an unmitigated catastrophe that has cost the lives of hundreds of thousands, and still counting.
Afghanistan and Iraq still roll on as warzones.
We almost got stuck with TPP, which would have made it far easier for jobs/businesses to flow out of America. That would have been a big negative on his resume years down the road...
When you take a step back, and look at the course this nation, its foreign policies, and its economic growth in and objective fashion... its like Bush handed things off to Obama, and almost everything kept right on course with little alteration. Because essentially, since the mid-Clinton years, and NAFTA, Glass-Steagall, etc. the power of the Presidency has been largely forfeited to a cabal of Congressmen that are bought and paid for by the corporations and foreign nations that are filling their pockets and the 'Deep State' a cool name for what otherwise means long tenured Bureaucrats and Military lifers that once they are embedded into D.C. they are like ticks burrowed under the skin, you can't get them out, and you can't take back power and control from them.I agree with most of you said except, he believed in most of his progressive policies. The people behind the scene pulling the strings are the same people Democrat or Republican controlled Congress...
Obama took the mantle of a progressive and doubled downed, where as Clinton, triangulated when he was rejected in the mid term...that is why Bill Clinton was a better politican than Obama but a sad case personally.
That said, his damage to our nation is long term for years to come and I also believe worldwide...
His failure to stop ISIS, lead indirectly to the refugee crisis in Syria...and else where. You can argue that it was our failure in the Iraq war that started this path...but he was president for 8 years and had plenty of opportunity to change. Instead, he pursued the same Bush policies just reduced in strength...Bush lite.
My prediction is that he will always have as his legacy being the first black President but his Obamacare will be a yoke around his neck for years to come...
He will be know for the president who brought single payer health insurance to America for good or for ill...
He also created an atmosphere that set back race relations for a decade, just the opposite what people expected. You would think electing and relecting a black president would help race relations in America...just the opposite.He also created an atmosphere that set back race relations for a decade, just the opposite what people expected. You would think electing and relecting a black president would help race relations in America...just the opposite
You have to be quite naïve to think that an American institution like racism was going to just go away with Obama's election. Cell phone cameras probably play a greater role in simply letting people see what most of us already know.I agree. I support body camera on all police officers on duty. It could have helped in the Ferguson case...don't you think?
Yes, indeed, I think that bodycams should be standard equipment. But I have run into conservatives on this forum that say that such an accouterment would be an unnecessary impediment for the law officer. The idea I am getting is that conservatives are content will all those wooly heads beaten without their being accountability for their actions or recourse by the citizen/victim. As long, of course, as they are just wooly heads....
This is the attitude that I am garnishing from the Session's Justice Department. "Law and Order', and cops are being put upon by even the suggestion that major cities review police policies and procedures relative to the communities they serve.
More 'good cop, bad cop' with the Trump administration advocating for the 'bad cop' scenario.No one is advocating for bad cops...
The cameras will work to benefit both sides, when there is abuse by cops, the camera will proof it.
When there is wrong doing on the part of arrestees, it will show that too.
I am conservative and I am pragmatic, and I support body cameras for all police. Does thst sirprise you?Kudos to you for being rational. Not everyone on these forums has a rational view of body cams. As far as I know, opposition has come only from the conservative side. I don't know of any liberals who are against body cams for every police officer.
Does 'that' surprise me? Yes, it does. I am not just surprised but astonished!!
Credence2, you are so far out of line with this one that you have firmly planted yourself among the ranks of those that you like to criticize the most vehemently - partisan zealots.
"The idea I am getting is that conservatives are content will all those wooly heads beaten without their being accountability for their actions or recourse by the citizen/victim. As long, of course, as they are just wooly heads...."
Besides the slander of us Conservatives, you have also diminished your own credibility with such an outlandish statement. "Wooly head?" What's next, a fist-bump greeting of wahs-ssup my .......?
What if that shoe were put on the other foot. What if, well no, you have thoughtfully pissed me off with this one, but even so, I won't use a fitting example. to go where you went.
And for your "Sessions" thought, it is "garnering" not garnishing." Although, considering the substance of your comment, maybe you are "garnishing" what you are getting from Session's DOJ.
Geesh! At least try to get the small stuff right. Then you can work your way back to ... geez, there I go again. These snark attacks are really getting hard to resist.
Come on bud. Take a breath. Step away from the edge. We can help you.
GACredence2, you are so far out of line with this one that you have firmly planted yourself among the ranks of those that you like to criticize the most vehemently - partisan zealots.
Alright, let's have a look.
------------------------------------------------
"The idea I am getting is that conservatives are content will all those wooly heads beaten without their being accountability for their actions or recourse by the citizen/victim. As long, of course, as they are just wooly heads...."
The attacks on BLM, the problems with Stop and Frisk, etc, it is clear that these sorts of issues have a racial component. Most AA will tell you that there are issues with the police conduct in their communities, you are not saying that they are all imagining it, would you? We all would like to think the problem is universal and neutral, but it is not.
----------------------------------------
Besides the slander of us Conservatives, you have also diminished your own credibility with such an outlandish statement. "Wooly head?" What's next, a fist-bump greeting of wahs-ssup my .......?
I thought that you were purple? Again the fact that the problem and issues bear far more heavily on the black and minority community than otherwise. "Wooly head" is for emphasis.
-------------------------------
What if that shoe were put on the other foot. What if, well no, you have thoughtfully pissed me off with this one, but even so, I won't use a fitting example. to go where you went.
How do you put the shoe on the other foot? You have to look at the big picture sometimes, GA.
------------------------
And for your "Sessions" thought, it is "garnering" not garnishing." Although, considering the substance of your comment, maybe you are "garnishing" what you are getting from Session's DOJ.
My spell check went awry, you can sue me. Cmon, GA, Sessions has an agenda in regards to the issue, it is being screamed from the treetops.
------------------------
Geesh! At least try to get the small stuff right. Then you can work your way back to ... geez, there I go again. These snark attacks are really getting hard to resist.
You diminish the ramification of this controversy on those more likely to be affected, as you don't and can't sit where I do from a visual perspective.
-------------------------
Come on bud. Take a breath. Step away from the edge. We can help you.
I caught my breath, thanks....May I politely point out that what you view as over the top is, in my view, quite a mild reaction considering the years of abuse heaped upon minorities by the police and the justice system. Further, your taking credence to task seems a little one-sided. Yes, I have seen you admonish conservatives, but it's rarely for something as mild as what credence just wrote. I know you pride yourself on your objectivity, and for the most part, you're pretty good at it. However, when you err, you pretty much always err on the "conservative" side which I suppose is natural, since that is your bent.
I've seen some pretty nasty racially-based statements from regular posters on these forums that haven't provoked a peep from other conservatives who I believe don't feel the same way but either don't notice or don't care enough to say anything. That must be hard to take for someone who is a member of the minority group on the receiving end. It galls me no end and I'm a white lady.
Just my two cents. :-)Panther, in one word, thanks
"It ain't easy being me"
Rodney DangerfieldPrettyPanther, I try to follow the advice of the adage that there is no gain in stating the obvious. I think that sometimes, stating the obvious can even be detrimental. (even when politely offered)
But, to be clear, that point is directed at your notice that "...I've seen some pretty nasty racially-based statements from regular posters on these forums that haven't provoked a peep from other conservatives who I believe don't feel the same way..." and you will also have noticed that I haven't addressed any of those poster's comments at all. Or, if I did slip, it would have been a martini night when my snark got the best of me.
Another bromide that I have found useful is Mark Twain's; "Never argue with idiots, they will bring you down to their level - and then beat you with experience." I think idiots can be pretty broadly defined. Hence my non-engagement with their comments.
With that explained, the obvious - that shouldn't need to be stated - is that Cred isn't an idiot, but to apply the statement he did to "Conservatives" in general, (when I am sure he knows he should have narrowed his scope), and to use, what I viewed as an unnecessary pejorative term to emphasize, (his explanation), his point was out of line.
Further, both his and your reference to the treatment Blacks endure in today's society have absolutely nothing to do with my response, nor should it have had anything to do with Cred's characterization of who typically opposed police body cams.
Once more, to be clear, my ire was at his broad brush accusation that was turbocharged by an intentionally insulting descriptor, (wooly heads). My opinion is that the folks he is talking about are the fringe of conservatism, the, (newly coined), Alt-Right, or even Right-wingers. This is an error he has been committing with some frequency, of late. An error, (I feel), that he should correct. He is self-proclaimed as a progressive, I don't label him a Left-winger, or Socialist. I think there is a difference.
Had he narrowed his focus, and, used a less denigrating descriptor, (to me it is like name-calling, if that is a needed tactic, then your point is too weak to support your contention), then I would probably have agreed with him; re. as to who usually objects to police body cams, but he didn't. And in that lack his comment was totally off-base. In my opinion of course.
Your "two-cents" was politely offered, and it is good to see you come to his defense, but I must ask; with this explanation, do you still feel I was "over the top?"
ps. Cred, I am hopeful you see this response. It would also be my answer to your response to my original "over-the-top comment ;-)
GARe-reading your response after the events in Charlottesville....
I guess I am tired of hearing that bigotry is only perpetrated by the "fringe" of conservatism. We have a white supremacist sympathizer in office. He now has TWO white nationalists in his inner circle: Steve Bannon and Stephen Miller. He has no problem tweeting his outrage toward all kinds of insignificant people and events, as well as significant ones, yet he has to be cajoled and shamed into fully condemning white supremacist groups, even after one of them murdered a woman and injured many innocent people.. Condemning the Nazis and the KKK is a no-brainer, but apparently Trump has some deep-seated emotional resistance to doing so. Why? His father was racist; he is racist. I no longer have a single doubt in my mind that Trump is a racist SOB.
Anyway, the "fringe" of conservatism is large and influential enough that these people are now sitting in our beloved White House, perpetrating their nasty ideas. I can barely stand the thought of it.
Yet, here we are, tsk-tsking credence for using the phrase "woolly heads."
I know you're not intentionally supportive of racism, but....I think you need to re-evaluate your party's (edited to add: I realize you might not consider the GOP to be "your party" but one cannot deny that conservatives vote GOP far more than they do Democrat) long history of turning the other way when confronted by the ugly racist base that calls themselves Republican. Use your tsk-tsks on them. They deserve it WAY more than does credence.People don't seem to understand that tacit approval of racism makes you a racist.
I don't understand it....
Do you really think Trump is a Racist?
Do you really think a Trump can be successful in Hollywood with a top show - The Apprentice for so many years and be a racist? (remember Paula Deen?)
You might not agree with Trump on issues and policies but to pull then you call people a racist that you disagree with. got it?Would a president who is intolerant of racism include two white supremacists in his inner circle at the White House?
They are his advisors...who are accused of White Supremacist.
Have you check Steve Bannon's background? what what I can tell, he has conservative credentials but no sign of white supremacist connection.
It is so easy to throw these charges around to attack people you don't like...
I am not saying that about you but about people in the media and press who makes this man out to be a monster.Here is his wikipedia profile -
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_BannonI'm not going to read his wikipedia profile. I have read enough about him to believe he is definitely a white nationalist (he has admitted this publicly) and probably a white supremacist. I should have called him a white nationalist in my post above, to be strictly accurate, so I will back off the supremacist moniker, given it is harder to prove, even though I believe it to be true, based upon his support of white supremacist literature.
President Trump's response to Charlottesville proves he's a racist.
Please lookup the definition of the word racist before calling someone - it makes you look ignorant..
And just as an aside, he had a top show in Hollywood while apparently grabbing pussy whenever he wanted, so could he survive there being a racist? Certainly.
Says the guy the things climate change is made up. Says the guy who thinks Reagan was responsible for the fall of the Soviet Union.
Ignorance is in the eye of the beholder. Further, those who are ignorant or misinformed or uneducated pretty much think everyone else is ignorant because they just plain don't know enough to think any differently.
If you support racists, you're a racist. Does he actually need to show up to a rally for you to call him a racist? Are people who go to these rallies racists or just concerned Americans?
When you can't even bring yourself to denounce Nazis, you're a racist.You got it all wrong my friend. I an a climate change skeptic and there are plenty of people who agree with me. Just look it up...
You history of Reagan is off the wall. I don't need to defend my position on Reagan. Historians agree with me.
A racist is someone like David Dukes, a self proclaimed white Supremacist.
A racist is BLM groups...
A racist is LaRaza group that claims Mexican superiority...
Trump may be many things, an egotist, but he is no racist.
You have allowed the media and the Democratic party to cloud your judgement.
This man for the most of his life has been a successful businessman in NYC - one of the most diverse city in the world. He build luxury apartments and sold to many people from all races.
If he was a racist, he could not have been successful...
He only got that label, once he decided to run for President and worst when he won against all odds."This man for the most of his life has been a successful businessman in NYC - one of the most diverse city in the world. He build luxury apartments and sold to many people from all races.
If he was a racist, he could not have been successful..."
More BS, Jack? He is synonymous with unethical business practice and low con man dirty tricks. There are plenty of racists that 'play the game' for short term gains. Good guys do not always wear white hats...So what are you saying, is Hillary Clinton a racist too... she went to his wedding...
Are all democrats who received his contributions in NY racist or racist sympathizers just by associating with Trump?
Use your brain not your heart in these matters....She, Hillary, may have well have been a racist, as she supported Goldwater early in her career. But that did not translate to her policy positions, today. I forgave Senator Byrd, even though he was a KKK supporter because he came around to our way of thinking in a profound way. People can change, Trump has not.
Simplistic points of reasoning and argument are not going to save you, Jack....Oh no, don't drag Goldwater into this Cred, he and Reagan are my heroes. They were both great men, without a racist bone in their bodies. Now LBJ...he is a different story altogether.
You need to read Dinesh D'Souza and/or see his movies. Eye Opening!
"Oh no, don't drag Goldwater into this Cred, he and Reagan are my heroes. They were both great men, without a racist bone in their bodies. Now LBJ...he is a different story altogether."
Sorry, I guess for conservatives, these men are heroes. Not for me. A brief example that of Barry Goldwater, his adherence to the concept of 'States Rights' was embraced by Southern racists as the tool to keep the Black population under their feet. While neither of these men can be considered racists per se, their policy positions exacerbated problems making race conflicts that much more likely and more difficult to resolve. LBJ was a pleasant surprise in getting desperately needed legislation passed, we were all afraid that LBJ, as a Southerner, would not carry on the legacy of the late John Kennedy. He did not disappoint.Let's make a Deal Cred. I'll watch a Michael Moore movie, if you will watch a Dinesh D'Souza movie and then we can compare notes.
I have only heard of this fellow D'Souza. Let me do a little research and get back with you.
Let me help. He's a convicted felon. He outed gay classmates in college. He thinks white nationalists belong in the democratic party but other than that he seems to be an upstanding individual.
I don't understand it....
Do you really think Trump is a Racist?
-------------------------
If he is not, he certainly is not above using race baiting tactics to his advantage when needed. It is as low as one can go, expedient, superficial.
------------------------
Do you really think a Trump can be successful in Hollywood with a top show - The Apprentice for so many years and be a racist? (remember Paula Deen?)
------------------------------
Jack, that show was bull shyte. It was the Trump show, featuring washed up actors and entertainers. That has nothing to do with his actual purpose. The way he screwed black tenents in his rental properties under his control years ago is far more telling. There are plenty of racists that accommodate the system as it is and reality, but they are still the same.
--------------------------
You might not agree with Trump on issues and policies but to pull then you call people a racist that you disagree with. got it?
---------------------------------
No, I don't agree with Trump on issues and policies and I don't like him surrounding himself with the more rabid of race baiters and yet, still, conservatives and he wants me to believe that he is above the fray? I doubt it.Yes and HELL YES. Of course he's a racist by any definition of the word. If you weren't sure before today's appearance on TV, there should be no doubt now. By the way, if by any chance he isn't racist or an apologist for the racists in this country, you should have no doubt he's unfit to be president. He doesn't have the moral temperament or the temperament at all to be the leader of the free world. Good lord the man is an embarrassment. If this were Hillary or Obama or any other democrat displaying what we've witnessed the last 6 months I'd railing against them too. This isn't a liberal/conservative or a democrat/republican issue. This is a sanity issue.
Jack, are you sure you want to go down this path?
If Trump is a racist, 44% of the voters voted for him. Are you saying they are all racist?
That would lead to the logical conclusion that America is a racist nation?
Is that what you are accusing us?
I am serious. Pay close attention.
If America is a racist nation, how did we win the second world war, and help Germany and Japan rebuild. How did we bomb Yogoslavia to save Moslems?
How did we force the end of Aparteit in South Africa?
You have no clue who America is let along who Trump is?
He is a patriotic American, who saw what was going on in America over rhe last 20 years and decided to run for President to save it.
You bought into the Russia distraction, and now the racist charge by the media.
They are not your friend and they are not America's friend. They are world elitists who wants America to be knocked down a few notches like what President Obama did in his 8 years.
If you are really accusing America, you are a traitor of the worst kind.
You would rather overthrow a duly elected president, to get your way. You would sacrifice America in the process and destroy what is left of our Constitutional government.
Why?Jack, you are asking me an all or nothing question. Of course I'm not saying that anyone who voted for Trump is a racist because I think he's a racist. It's an insulting question that clearly falls well below who I thought you were based on your posts. Now Jack, you play close attention: Donald Trump is the greatest threat to our democracy we have ever seen. Not because I think he's a racist. Not because I think he's a terrible leader. I watch what he does and says. In real time he's attacking he pillars of democracy. He attacks the press. If the press is critical at all he attacks. He talks of jailing journalists and loosening libel laws. He attacks the judiciary. A Mexican can't be a judge because he wants to build a wall. Travel ban pisses off so let's break up the 9th circuit court. He attacks the legislature. Let's undo 100s of years senate tradition so that he can ran whatever stupid legislation he wants. He attacks our intelligence apparatus because he doesn't like investigations into him and/or his campaign. He threatens our election process because he is convinced millions of dead people voted for Hillary and supports voter suppression measures. He claims that coal energy is critical to make America great again when even the biggest climate change deniers cannot honestly think coal has any role in our energy independence.
So please save me the righteous indignation. I love my country as much as you and if you can't see the existential danger that poses, tough beans.Its all an act... I just wrote a forum educating people like you...
Please read it and learn.Its an act? This isn't "The Apprentice" jack. This is real world and your guy isn't up to the task. I know you're sensitive about being called a racist because you voted for Trump or because liberals think conservatives are racist by definition.(We don't) Honestly Jack, you don't impress me that much with your writings. You're inconsistent and a bit defensive with the conservative thing.
There you go...you assume too much and wrong on all counts.
Trump is not my guy. If you followed my writing since the election, you would know that.
You would also know that I did not vote the top ticket in this election cycle. I supported Carson first and then Cruz before they went by the way side.
I support Trump now because he is our President and I see the unfair attacks on him like calling him a racist...when he is not.
I will defend who ever is mis aligned even if I disagree with his politics.
Please go read up on him...you have a lot to catch up. I noticed you are new to HubPages...
I have been here over 2 years and published over 400 articles.
Please don't attack and accuse until you know for sure... it makes you to be ignorant.
I just re-read your post and I apologize for my response. You are a complete moron. To call me a traitor goes beyond the pale. I don't buy anything about the Russians yet, however, the actions of this man in response to the investigations of Russian meddling make me very suspicious. He brought it on himself. He looked into a camera and encouraged Russia to find Hillary's emails. His campaign took meetings with Russians. His son in law asked a Russian diplomat for a secure meeting in a Russian facility. That's just the tip of the iceberg. So, an investigation is warranted and I'll trust Mueller to come up with the findings we all need to see. You of course can laugh it off as a joke. I don't call people who believe Trump isn't involved in Russian meddling traitors. And you, being such a strong constitutionalist, let me ask you a riddle and lets see if your superior intellect can come of with the answer: What follows 1?
Jack, you are watching too much CNN and NBC...
You haven't answered my question. What existential threat?
You have so little faith in our government.
We survived Carter, Nixon and Obama... We will be fine with Trump.
The people who are trying to unseat a president are the real threat.
We can't have the fifth state leaking information and revealing our national secrets...
You are free to believe what you want...it is a free country.
Just don't jump off a cliff over Trump Derangement Syndrome.
Have a great day!
Life is short...enjoy your family.We don't want to unseat him, he will unseat himself when all the snarling messes he is involved in comes to a head.
You have no idea what I watch or read. My thoughts and concerns are my own. I am a critical thinker and I am of the opinion that Trump because of his demeanor, actions, threats, and his history cannot make America great again. I believe he's a threat to the very thing you hold so dear. I think he does love America and believes he is the only one who can fix it, as he has told us many times. I don't share his belief. I don't see the country and world through the dystopian prism that he does. So, I do see him as an existential threat to the country and by extension to the world and if your fantasy of the shadow government trying to take down a sitting president is true, so be it. I'll take the dark state over the garbage he's peddling any day.
You are a prolific writer on HubPages which gives you exactly what? Look Jack, believe what you want. I never said Trump was your guy and I don't care who your guy was. You are in fact defending him which kind of makes him your guy...now. Like your attempts to educate me on about the virtues of being a good conservative, I am trying to educate you on the virtues of being a good American. Right or wrong...only time will tell. I too wish you and your family well.
Jack, you are watching too much CNN and NBC...
You haven't answered my question. What existential threat?
You have so little faith in our government.
We survived Carter, Nixon and Obama... We will be fine with Trump.
The people who are trying to unseat a president are the real threat.
We can't have the fifth state leaking information and revealing our national secrets...
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I have little faith in our government? Hmmm. I have faith that the government which opened hearings on the house and senate intelligence committees concerning Russian meddling in our election will do their job and even more confident that a special counsel has been established headed by Robert Mueller will do his job. Is that the government you were referring to or is it some fictional deep state fairytale you refer to? We can't have the fifth estate leaking information and revealing our secrets unless they are about Hillary in an effort to help Trump win? Is that the same 5th estate you refer to? I'm curious why you haven't solved my riddle, seeing that you have over 400 articles on HubPages and you are obviously an intelligent engineer kind of guy.
We did survive all past presidents, although I'd argue the book is still out on W and the neocons and their adventures in the middle east. Truth be told, I'd take W over Trump right now given that choice.
What historian have you read that agrees with your position?
And just because there are people who don't understand climate data (which makes them ignorant, btw) are skeptics, doesn't make them right. The overwhelming number of scientists are not remotely skeptical about climate change. There are plenty of people who think the sun revolves around the earth - probably more than believe climate change isn't real. Are they right too? Don't believe that the sun revolves around the earth? Go look it up.
And how in the world, in a debate between Nazis and anybody do you and your President find yourselves on the wrong side?Please go read my hub and come back here to debate me-
"Climate-Change-Predictions-How-Accurate-Are-They"
Life is too short...
And your comment that BLM is a racist organization is beyond offensive. I assume you believe the NAACP is racist too?
Jack, you couldn't pay me to read one of your hubs. Are you an expert on climate? Thanks, but I'll stick with the experts, you know, the ones who have spent their entire lives studying this? Just like when I need to go to the doctor, I don't read a hub by Jack first to see what's wrong. I just go to the doctor.
And the whole title of your hub proves you don't understand the subject at all.Crank...as I tell all my conservative friends...if you have 99 doctors who diagnose you with a fatal form of cancer and the 100th doctor tells you "You'll be fine, live your life", is analogous to the congressional climate change deniers believing the scientist funded by Exxon that climate change really isn't something we can be sure of, so "You'll be fine, live your life".
If only it were 99 to 1. And if people would only quite grossly exaggerating that figure into something beyond anything believable.
Right...sorry, 97% on the high end and 82% on the low end which still begs the question, "Do you feel lucky, punk?" Just kidding..trying to channel my inner Clint Eastwood. If it were 50.1% I'd still consider it a real problem.
Crankilicious, some people also don't realize that perception doesn't equal reality. That one perceives non-agreement, (or not addressing with condemnation), as "tacit" does make it the reality of fact.
Your perspective of what constitutes racism is just that - yours. Your perception that it is the only correct perspective is also just that - a perception.
GASorry, but tacit support of Nazis means you're a racist.
Certainly, people probably have different definitions of racism. I'm sure some believe that you can use the n-word and not be a racist. I simply prefer not to obfuscate on this particular topic. Seems like there are a whole bunch of white people in this forum trying to tell everyone what racism is, having probably never experienced any themselves. I, among them.
I have to agree with this:
"People don't seem to understand that tacit approval of racism makes you a racist."
As President, he was obligated to make it clear that he was not racist, and those he appointed around him, if accused of it, needed to publicly denounce those accusations and anything in their past that could be associated with racism...
Whether or not prior Presidents set this standard, whether or not this policy or effort to mold people's perceptions was done by Obama or anyone else, it would have been the smart, unifying thing to do.
By not taking steps to disprove the accusations, he unwittingly gave them credibility.
I say all this with one caveat, if Trump DID come out and strongly oppose such accusations since becoming President, and had his appointees do the same, then he shouldn't have to repeat it every other day, every time someone wants to sling it at him.Thanks, Ken.
After yesterday's events, I'm wondering what exactly the President has to do for people to realize what kind of human being he is. Certainly, we've had a lot of questionable human beings in the White House, but his comments yesterday, aside from being racist were, from a political standpoint, profoundly stupid.Really? sorry for jumping in...
How is his comments racist?
How is it stupid in your opinion?
What would you want him to say that will satisfy your ego?
He is not that way and will not cave to pressures like your or the media and the fake news crowd...
They dislike him no matter what...
He could praise Mother Teresa and they will find some fault with that...haha
Don't deny it ... it is true and it hurts.He didn't explicitly say, "Hey, I'm a racist". I suppose that would be your red line with this president. His comments gave shade to a predominately racist crowd. He equated them to the "alt-left" which doesn't exist. He gave it a moral equivalency when there is none.
You're right jack, he won't cave and while you find comfort in that notion, so do I but for far different reasons. He is his own greatest communicator and concurrently his own worst enemy. Funny jack that you support a man who tacitly supports a sub culture of people who if they had their way would either want you dead or expelled from their vision of an all white nation."...tacitly supports a sub culture..."
Right! They should never have been allowed their constitutional rights to protest. Better yet, just open up on them with bullets, rockets, war gasses or even a nuke, right? Not doing so certainly supports a sub culture of hatred, right?There is no moral equivalency between fascist and people resisting fascists. By calling these scumbags the alt-right is to legitimize or soften the kkk, Nazis, or whatever you want to call them. They want an all white country. No jews. No people of color. they were given their 1st amendment right to march and protest.
wilderness, your comment makes no sense.
I'm not sure what you mean by moral equivalency, but people should be able to express their constitutional right of free speech without being attacked with clubs and yelled at by professional protesters hired by George Soros.
When their philosophy advocates for an all white nation and praise an evil movement to kill jews, people of color and anything not racially pure, they need to be countered and resisted. they had their day and will continue to have their day and they will continue to be resisted. And please, enough with George Soros. Do you honestly think that the all these protestors were financed by Soros or that the all the protests against Trump or sponsored by Soros? I have marched against Trump. I have spoken out every chance I get. I will continue to do so. this is much bigger than Soros and some liberal conspiracy you read about on right wing media or heard from Limbaugh, Hannity, Alex Jones or whatever Trump apologist you choose to listen to.
I guess I am tired of hearing that bigotry is only perpetrated by the "fringe" of conservatism.
--------------------
Well, GA and I have spoken on this at length and the "fringe" seems more like a chunk. I can count on my hands to number moderate GOP in Congress today. The 'ugly' has consumed the Conservative movement and saying and doing nothing indicates tacit approval to being an accessory to the crime.
His record and background does little to promote him. And even if he, himself is not a racist he uses their tactics to incite the racist for economic or political gain. That is not much better. I could have said the same about either Reagan or Nixon.
I have always said to conservatives who say that they are on the fence, that you cannot have it both ways. Most are rallying around Trump and while they express displeasure with Trump and his behavior, they are still found in his column, anyway.... and here we are. Me, insisting that my point, (the Tsk! Tsk!), was directed at the error of broadstroke generalizations in a reasonable perspective - and you insisting that your disgust makes erroneous generalizations a non-issue.
That may work for you, but not for me. For instance; I think that your perspective that "the fringe of conservatism" was influential enough to put Trump in the White House is a result of the very type of generalization I was speaking of. Like the wagon that hauls a load, the squeaky wheel is getting all your attention, when the fact is that there were three others participating in the work of getting the job done.
You are right about the non-party part. I don't have one. But I am very comfortable with my Conservative/Purple perspectives, and not concerned that I am in any way supportive of racism. I am also confident that if I hammer an issue, I try to hit the nail of the issue - not the wall it is hanging on. Or at least as close to the nail as I can get. Sometimes I am a little off-base, but I hope never so far that I view just hitting the wall as sufficient. Your broad attribution of bigotry seems to fit that analogy.
GA"Like the wagon that hauls a load, the squeaky wheel is getting all your attention, when the fact is that there were three others participating in the work of getting the job done."
In voting for Trump, the others who got the job done willfully overlooked the hateful words and actions of Donald Trump, who courted and emboldened that fourth squeaky wheel. Trump voters knew it and didn't care enough to withhold that vote. Heck, some are still defending the racist dumbass.The alternative was supporting someone who has a history of selling out America's interests, was even more out of touch with 'common America' than Trump, and who had slung just as many racial slanders as Trump could dream of, just not many in this particular election cycle.
Some people chose Trump because the alternative to Trump was even worse, while others understood just how much D.C. has been screwing them over for decades now, and also, didn't have a better choice.
Blaming the voters is like blaming someone who was robbed, beaten, raped, and left for dead on the side of the road calling 911. If you aren't rich, you have been screwed by your government... be it Obama, Bush, or Clinton, never really mattered the screwing just kept coming.
People are realizing that, hence Trump, hence D.C. and the MSM amping up the racism, sexism, and all around hate for the 'other side' like we have never seen in this country...
It is paramount that they have us hating and blaming each other, because if we ever stop doing that, and start holding our government accountable rather than fearing what awful crime they are going to inflict upon us next, then D.C. and those pulling the strings, would have a real problem on their hands.
Jackclee,
You think too much happened by accident, it did not, most of what happened was by design, that's what I mean when I infer the term 'front man'.
"His failure to stop ISIS, lead indirectly to the refugee crisis in Syria."
We weaponized and supported the 'separatists' that became ISIS.
Benghazi happened because 'we' were involved in a 'black-ops' that was shipping Libyan anti-aircraft and anti-armor weapons to 'rebels' in Syria.
"Instead, he pursued the same Bush policies just reduced in strength...Bush lite. "
Its like you see what is going on, but you fail to connect those last couple of dots, yes he basically continued all the Bush policies, all those things when he ran he said he would stop... like Gitmo, like Iraq (and by extension that would mean NOT starting new wars in Libya and Syria), like not just signing off on NSA's powers, but expanding them, when he ran of shutting them down... you know, the very thing the media was going beserk about when Bush instituted them.
There is a reason for that, its because the President really doesn't have a whole lot of control over what America does, and we are seeing this even more with Trump, especially when overnight he flipped his tune from 'we're getting out of Syria' to 'we're bombing Syria to teach them a lesson' ... and from ... "I'd rather be friends with Russia than enemies, to, we are placing severe sanctions on Russia'
Sure, there are policies the President influences, things he can curtail, but its not really up to him. Much as I am sure he would have liked it to be.
"He also created an atmosphere that set back race relations for a decade, just the opposite what people expected. "
That I agree with, and that I have to credit to him, he campaigned on promises of being able to bring us together and heal the nation, but his every effort seemed to work to make the strife in this nation between races, political parties, and even religions, greater than it has been at any other time in my lifetime.Very insightful...
The Power That Be is pulling the strings no matter who sits in the White House.Essentially, things have shifted in this direction since Bill Clinton.
Consider how Reagan was able to go in there and force through changes that the bulk of the Congress seemingly wanted to oppose. Of course there was much more teamwork between the Exec office and Congress in those days.
That changed during the Clinton era, the Clintons, were coerced and duped into a lot of things, especially by Alan Greenspan who essentially told them what they would do, or he would tank the economy on them and have them ousted. Then Congress Impeached him, despite the fact that he was essentially a yes man to whatever they put on his desk, like NAFTA, like Glass-Steagall. All these various powers were asserted over the Presidency during the 90s, and the Office has never regained its authority.
Bush to a degree (Cheney actually) gained a little of it back, but essentially it is those long tenured Congressmen and women, and those lifers in the Halls of D.C. that are 'running the show'.
Which is understandable in our system, there are no term limits on Congressmen. So it is far more advantageous for 'lobbyists' to buy off Senators and Representatives, then they can own them for decades, where as a President you can only control for 4 or 8 years.
If you control enough Congressmen, you essentially control the government.
Hi Ken, Now I don't want to get into your complete theory, but I would offer support for two of your points.
I also think Benghazi was due to the arms shipments to the Syrian rebels. I remember when supporting anti-Assad rebels was the mantra of the day. I also remember the cautions that we couldn't really know who the real anti-Assad rebels were, and that they were folding to the Al Qaeda-based rebel groups daily. Meaning the weapons we gave the 'good' rebels, were being turned over to the 'bad', (ISIS), rebels, almost as soon as they were received. So I agree, we, in effect, armed ISIS. And, our efforts to empower the good rebels, because Americans were demanding we do something, are the same efforts that armed and empowered ISIS.
In effect, I must agree that Pres. Obama must bear the blame for this. He had strong opposition, (at least from the news stories I saw), to supplying the rebels from his military advisers, but he chose instead to listen to his political advisers who were listening to the public voice instead of the military one.
The other point I agree with was the expansion of the NSA and Patriot Act powers. My view is that this was a pure power-grabbing over-reach that denied there were any other viable options. An "the end justified the means" argument that Pres. Obama should have flatly rejected. In my opinion, if you need that argument for justification, then it is almost never the right choice.
However, you know me by now. I can't offer two agreements without at least one disagreement. And I disagree with your contention that he, (Pres. Obama), didn't have the power to resist the machine. A simple vocal "No" to the Patriot Act" expansion would have been monumental. It would have provoked a firestorm of public condemnation that would have - as its best effect, brought the Patriot Act powers into the public forum. Consider this; I think the Patriot Act is a terrible abrogation of our rights, but, do you think the general public has a clue what the Patriot Act does, except for, 'let the government listen in on terrorists?"
GAGA
Things are never as simple as I put in type, of course, everything discussed is always more complicated than can be covered here.
In order to go further in this discussion, lets consider....
What is the Federal Reserve?
What is ExxonMobil?
Answering these types of questions (really understanding the history, the where, why, when and who of it all) makes things easier to understand.
If you understood the federal government from the highest levels, or the military, or both, and by understand, I should say, if you had actually worked in, or dealt with federal administrations (EPA, DEA, etc.), or the military (Pentagon, 18th ABC) at the highest levels, or near the highest levels, this would give you insight into some of the truths that you are not going to find in NY Times articles or from CNN.
There is a level of awareness that you get from dealing with it, that isn't conveyed through an interview on Democracy Now, or from an article in the NY Times. I have never liked the NYT BTW, a good source of news is the WSJ, a good source of propaganda mixed with a tinge of real news is the NYT.
Anyways, some more questions... who is the funder, founder, and Chairman of the Open Society Foundations?
What organizations/groups does the OSF fund?
Track those answers down, and you will find many different names, and different causes being funded by one individual. And that person is currently funding the majority of opposition to the President, in the streets, in D.C., and in the schools.
Way off topic now. Your review of events in regards to Benghazi is mostly correct. The Muslim Brotherhood had a hand in those events, and the distribution of those weapons. Almost nothing of the truth was ever published by an American news source, I stopped reviewing the matter a couple years back, but up to that point, nothing I saw or heard.
Looking at what occurred on the night of Sep 11, 2012, and moving forward...
1) No standards adhered to - no Security detachment to protect the Ambassador, no standard Gov issue vehicles, inadequate compound security measures, etc.
2) Just before the attack, Ambassador Stevens had finished meeting with a Turkish Ambassador (at around 9 pm).
3) On Sep 14, the Times of London reported that a Libyan ship “carrying the largest consignment of weapons for Syria … had docked in Turkey.” and then "more than 80 per cent of the ship's cargo…has been moved into Syria." The shipment reportedly weighed 400 tons and included SA-7 surface-to-air anti-craft missiles and rocket-propelled grenades.
4) Those heavy weapons are most likely from Muammar Gaddafi’s stock of about 20,000 portable heat-seeking missiles—the bulk of them SA-7s—that the Libyan leader obtained from the former Eastern bloc. Reuters reports that Syrian rebels have been using those heavy weapons to shoot down Syrian helicopters and fighter jets.
5) The ship’s captain was ”a Libyan from Benghazi and the head of an organization called the Libyan National Council for Relief and Support,” which was presumably established by the new government, he also has ties to the Muslim Brotherhood.
6) A Libyan militia known as the February 17 Brigade, had been charged with providing local security to the consulate in Libya. This was what the State Department was depending on to protect Ambassador Stevens. The 'commander' of the February 17 Brigade, Fawzi Bukatef, is a member of Libya’s branch of the Muslim Brotherhood.
7) It is the Muslim Brotherhood movement in Syria that received at least part of the weapons shipment. In a NY Times article from June, it was stated "that a small number of C.I.A. officers are operating secretly in southern Turkey, helping allies decide which Syrian opposition fighters across the border will receive arms by way of a shadowy network of intermediaries including Syria’s Muslim Brotherhood."
8) The origins of the 'riots' and attacks on our Embassies began in Egypt, which was then under the rule of the Muslim Brotherhood. In each step, from where and when the riots began, to who was supposed to be providing protection to the Ambassador, to the Captain of the ship, to those who received the weapons... the Muslim Brotherhood had a presence in every step.
What is the Muslim Brotherhood, what was its relationship to the Obama Administration?I don't know Alex jones, but I know what is real, and what is a load of crap.
I really wish you would have put that much detailed research into Trump's past.
What was there to research, the choice was either him or Clinton, America got off easy.
Trump is tough to listen to, truly, I dread 3 more years of his speeches. But on the other hand, he has forced the D.C. train off tracks for the moment, and gave the country a breath of fresh air after 30 years of deplorable decision making... striking TPP, and reversing a few EOs, has gone a long ways to reversing the trend of jobs flying out of the country to foreign lands at an ever faster pace."gave the country a breath of fresh air after 30 years of deplorable decision making..."
Your version of 'fresh air' and mine are not even sort of comparable.
Why did the carnage in Charlottesville happen? Because we lie to ourselves. http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/article166952582.html
We saw this crap in Portland and Seattle - including shootings. But, I have no words for this other than TRUMP PROVOKED THIS. And I hold this against every damn person who voted for him.
Lets hope this is the end of this crap.
Idiots.You can blame Trump for that...
About as much as you can blame Obama for the police murders by BLM
Two equally racist, hateful, groups
Yes, BLM is a racist, hateful group, according two their own ideology.
But I wouldn't want you to compromise your beliefs with actual facts.
So you just go on with your own version of hate, calling those with opinions and views that differ from yours idiots is always a way to show you hold the superior position in the debate.Funny, Ken, you and Jack blamed Obama for deteriorating race relations in America. On who do we blame this mess? Obama is no longer in office, you know
".Rep. Don Beyer, D.-Va., tweeted Saturday morning that "white supremacists chanting Nazi slogans aren't Virginia or America. They are weak, ignorant, fearful people with citronella tiki torches."
Could not have said it better.
To be honest I have to accept the right of all people to protest and peaceably assemble, even Nazis, KKK and white supremacists. Trump, for once in his life, may be right. If each side avoided the other perhaps the clashes could have been avoided. But, if the vehicular homicide was the responsibility of one of their group members, our pursuit of justice will be relentless. But it all says that racism is still part of parcel of American life and it has nothing to do with neither Obama or Trump. It is just an ugly truth of life, here.Bare bones truth of it?
I blame the people for being stupid. I blame the people for wanting to hate/kill/despise other races and religions all the while our 'leaders' in D.C. make their mega-millions selling out the people and our country, and getting people to blame the "other side" for their failures and corruption.
Black, white, it doesn't matter... Politicians enter D.C. poor as you and me, and leave with tens or hundreds of millions in their bank.
We buy into the BS the MSM feeds us, and hate groups sell, for what?
For not being able to pay for cancer treatments , or get support for our autistic children... but we never stop to ask WHY has cancer and autism spiked up 5,000% from less than 100 years ago?
WHY aren't our government offices and politicians protecting us?
WHY is the FDA run by a former Monsanto lawyer?
WHY is the SEC overseen by a decades long corrupt insiders?
WHY can't the politicians focus on putting together a fair and decent healthcare plan... rather than one that pads the profits of Insurance, Pharma, and Medical companies?
I will tell you why, because the ignorance of American citizens is at an all time high, you can see it here in these threads, or anywhere else that people are commenting on the issues... on top of being ignorant of the real facts of most issues... they are hell bent on hating someone for the wrongs they perceive in the world. BLM, KKK, you name it, they are all in vogue today with the people.
People on here, intelligent people in other respects, hate... and I mean HATE Trump. They can't see reason about anything when it comes to politics or Trump. To them this is flat out war, some would probably be out there running over people themselves with their cars if they were told they would be able to get away with it, and not spend their lives in jail over it.
I didn't like where things went under Obama. But I never hated him, nor do I hate Trump. Sorry... not worth my time or energy to hate on them. Maybe that's why there are a few on here that seem to direct their ire towards me, and those like me, that refuse to buy into hating a person, or Party."People on here, intelligent people in other respects, hate... and I mean HATE Trump. They can't see reason about anything when it comes to politics or Trump."
Yes, we HATE Trump; and this is the reason WHY: Pro-Trump demonstrators, counter-protesters rally in downtown Seattle http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-new … n-seattle/
Trump isn't 'political' - he's extremely divisive, which is dangerous. Why you can't see that is amazing. He's polarizing, and he has intentionally been that way from day one - and you're fine with it.
As I've told you before, your 'movement' COULD have went out and FOUND a good spokesperson to stand for your causes - but you didn't. You became accidentaly-enamoured with an inexperienced, egomaniacal as*hole who was playing a marketing stunt for his reality show.
Nobody is even looking at or engaging in the things you want 'changed' about this country because we are all trying to HOLD IT TOGETHER at the moment - and neither Trump NOR his supporters are helping at ALL.
Tell me another sorry story...Bare bones truth of it?
I blame the people for being stupid. I blame the people for wanting to hate/kill/despise other races and religions all the while our 'leaders' in D.C. make their mega-millions selling out the people and our country, and getting people to blame the "other side" for their failures and corruption.
Black, white, it doesn't matter... Politicians enter D.C. poor as you and me, and leave with tens or hundreds of millions in their bank.
------
We buy into the BS the MSM feeds us, and hate groups sell, for what?
For not being able to pay for cancer treatments , or get support for our autistic children... but we never stop to ask WHY has cancer and autism spiked up 5,000% from less than 100 years ago?
WHY aren't our government offices and politicians protecting us?
WHY is the FDA run by a former Monsanto lawyer?
WHY is the SEC overseen by a decades long corrupt insiders?
WHY can't the politicians focus on putting together a fair and decent healthcare plan... rather than one that pads the profits of Insurance, Pharma, and Medical companies?
--
I will tell you why, because the ignorance of American citizens is at an all time high, you can see it here in these threads, or anywhere else that people are commenting on the issues... on top of being ignorant of the real facts of most issues... they are hell bent on hating someone for the wrongs they perceive in the world. BLM, KKK, you name it, they are all in vogue today with the people.
People on here, intelligent people in other respects, hate... and I mean HATE Trump. They can't see reason about anything when it comes to politics or Trump.
------------------------------------------------
I hear you, we are all asking the same questions. But, I sure remember folks that stooped to hating Obama. Obama's politics and style was more to my liking and I did not see the monster that many insisted was there. I don't like Trump, his policies nor his style. I admit that. But, he is the President as long as he is he will get a man's chance to succeed from me. But, I find only points of criticism to date in regards to him.
---------------------
To them this is flat out war, some would probably be out there running over people themselves with their cars if they were told they would be able to get away with it, and not spend their lives in jail over it.
-----------------------
There are a lot of malevolent thoughts we all harbor, but the point is and can only be who actually acted upon them?
------------------------------
I didn't like where things went under Obama. But I never hated him, nor do I hate Trump. Sorry... not worth my time or energy to hate on them.
Maybe that's why there are a few on here that seem to direct their ire towards me, and those like me, that refuse to buy into hating a person, or Party.
-----------------------------------------------------
Yes, I am going to come after you, or any conservative and challenge their points of view, that is one of the reasons I am here. I tell all not to take it personally.If a conservative claims to support Trump, they are no conservative. The republicans who claim to be conservatives and support Trump are just opportunistic. Opportunists are very susceptible to the con...and brother we are part of the biggest con in the history of our country.
I cannot deny anything that you have said here, Jack. I just know with certainty that Trump is NOT progressive and get no support from them. Trump's policies are more conservative/rightwing than not so of course many conservatives are going to pinch their noses and support Trump as the next best thing.
Since you obviously could not read the article, here is an end splash:
"I am likewise not unmindful that too many of you have watched with complicit silence and quiet terror of demographic change as voting rights were abridged, murderous policemen went free, Fox “News” turned your resentment into ratings and politicians turned your rancor into power.
The result of which erupted Saturday for all the world to see. Meaning not just the violence and not just the terrorism, but the sense of victory and vindication embodied in the smug rejoinder of a white supremacist to a group of people who had come to chant in support of something higher than bigotry and rage.
“Too late f------!”
Maybe he’s right. Maybe it is.
That’s a decision you’ll have to make."
Obama was elected because he had potential to change things: the same reason Trump was elected. I know most people have completely forgotten the 2008 Dem fight between Hillary & Obama. The GOP was laughing at them, then - in the same way the Dems were laughing at the GOP dealing with Trump this time around - until Trump won.
Obama was supposed to be a centrist who would create bipartisan policies - not be the same old kind of politician who catered to one party or the other. He failed for a few reasons (how much he 'failed' is a matter of perspective); but not because he was incapable of doing a good job - but because he was a black man who had no business mingling in the business of white superiority.
Obama ended up having to play the 'black man part' - MIND his P's & Q's; and say & do absolutely everything PERFECTLY. Any deviation from 'GOP established norms' was ramped up, hyped & smeared with as much stink as could possibly be added to it. Obama could NEVER have gotten away with talking at people the way Trump has.
Honestly, we will never know just what kind of president Obama COULD have been without GOP fear tactics and brainwashing propaganda. They know how to manipulate their base; and its their own damn fault that they have Trump to deal with, now. Its not like he was their 1st choice.
The GOP treated Obama like sh*t from day one, obstructing every little thing they could & blowing up every opportuntiy they could. One example: they held out for a YEARish on approving Obama's Supreme Court pick - what a slap in the face to the American people (a majority without question) who elected him.
Obamacare is the disfunctional way it is because of a LACK of GOP interest in helping to develop it. GOP are completely uninterested in what 'we the people' are telling them; and absolutely REFUSE to work across the divide.
Obama gets a 'B' for effort; and for him and his family doing such a damn good job of representing this country, ANYWAY.
The Dems get a freaking 'D' for forcing him to stay within their just-as-innane political BS crap - and turning him into a normal politician.
The GOP gets and 'F' for completely disrespecting BOTH Obama and those of us who voted for him in the way they talked about him AND acted towards him.
Thanks, MC, you are one of the good ones. I could not have said it better....
I disagree in your assessment. Obama was not a centrist...perhaps only in the mind of leftist. He got what he wanted having both houses of congress the first two years. He said election had consequences... as a result, we got Obamacare. We also got the huge debt which the GOP signed off on under the objections of most conservatives.
Why didn't he pass immigration reform? Why didn't he used the billions to fix our infrastructure? Why didn't he go after ISIS when the generals told him what was going on...he overruled them...
He was a progressive just as Hillary would have been if she was elected...Bill Clinton was a centrist president and accomplished much more with bipartisan efforts. Please go read up on your history.
It was never about his skin color. If Hillary had won in 2008, we conservatives would have been just as against her policies."The GOP treated Obama like sh*t from day one, obstructing every little thing they could & blowing up every opportuntiy they could."
And we see the same going on now, wouldn't you agree?
The President is small fries compared to the Congressmen and women who have dug themselves in to the D.C. establishment for 30 years or more, they are all following the same Piper(s), party affiliation no longer matters for these vampires. Not to mention the bureaucrats and lifers that control the Pentagon, the FDA, the Federal Reserve, etc. etc. none of them are voted in by the people, but most of them have been in D.C. for decades.
History will tell how Obama ranks. Compared to the current resident in the White House, he's George Washington, Abe Lincoln, and FDR rolled into one...believe me.
He had grace, dignity, a certain amount of modesty, something that could pass for humor (or he chose his writers well) and he had a spotless record in terms of personal morality.
This does not mean I would choose him as a national leader.All true but that was exactly what I ask not to rate him on...read the question please.
President Obama will definitely be listed among the Top 10 Best U.S. Presidents. "No Drama Obama" made America proud. His presidency is all the more appreciated considering the incompetency of the current Administration.
Really, would you be willing to place a bet on that?
Obama will end up being bottom half of all presidents in 10 years.
That will put him around 22 or 23 out of 45 presidents.
Reagan on the other hand will remain on the top ten list of Presidents.That is your opinion, do you have credentials as a historian?
Really? Reagan would be branded a liberal by the current congressional republicans. Trickle down economics...joke. Cut and ran from Beirut. Vetoed anti-Apartheid bill. Corrupt cabinet. The list is long yet among conservatives he's considered a God. Sucked as governor too.
Yes, that is why he was elected a second time by 49 out of 50 electoral states. He is revered all over the world especially over in the former eastern Europe... where he freed millions from the tyranny of communist rule. He will go down in history as one of the great in the 20 th century...
He was not perfect,,, but he stands shoulder above both Clinton and Obama...
And he went against his own party and the media and spoke to the American people...
Come to think of it, if he had twitter, he probably would have used it like Trump...
He was a master communicator but more over, he had good sound principles...I'll admit he had way of looking at Americans and communicating with them effectively, even as his policies were harming the same Americans. You can put lipstick on a pig...you know the rest.
What policies harmed Americans?
His policies are based on sound economic principles and I may add color blind...
He treated all equally... equality of opportunity, not of outcome...
Okay I am late to the show, but the words on the marquee lured me in. "No Drama Obama" made America proud."
In whose world...the Illusionist, the Delusionist, the Revisionist?
There was nothing but drama with the man from the first time he uttered the words, "I want to fundamentally transform the United States of America" to him forcing us and multitudes of other small business owners away from our Businesses and into the streets of D.C. as first time activists. By placing mandates on us; purchase this product or suffer the consequences, provide this service for your employees or else. Who was he, overstepping the limits of his power, placing mandates on us? That was not in his job description, no more than it was for him to insert himself into Police matters and other sensitive matters throughout the land, pitting groups of people against one another.
Fast and Furious...Benghazi...thriving illegal border crossings/Sanctuary Cities...crossed red lines ignored...vague threats....
No Drama Obama...out across this Nation and across the world, criticizing America, throwing America under the bus at every opportunity, constantly apologizing for America's shortcomings, but having a hard time coming up with a single attribute.
To answer your question Jack, I wasn't impressed.Abwillaims, I hope I have mentioned before that it is good to see you in this forum. We, (us HP Politics and Social Issues participants), forum dwellers seem to be losing objective-opinion members. I am not a carded member of your choir, but I can agree with more than a few of your points.
GAI don't typically come in late as I did, but upon seeing....."Obama will definitely be listed among the Top 10 best U.S. Presidents", took my breath away and the heart palpitations started. My response was purely for therapeutic purposes before I'd be able to get any sleep.
The reality is that a large portion of middle America was deeply setback by the policies of President Obama. We have many friends (small business owners) that have either closed their doors or have had to call in reinforcements, in hopes of keeping their doors open.
Obama not only accepted many things which were not in America's best interest, he encouraged them, all as a part of his transformational vision.
He doesn't get a pass now because he has moved down the road and he certainly is not deserving of any high praise.
I know that all going on is so much more complex than just one man!
Another friend that is in the latter category of business owners, is ready to stand on the street corner with a pitchfork, he is so outraged with what is going on with the Mueller investigation and with those 'dug in' in D.C. He recently informed me that he has two pitchforks, so I can join him, then he'll not be the only crazy one....
But he didn't take your guns and convert all of us to Islam.
His list of accomplishments after his failed predecessor is well documented. As will the Democratic president who follows Trump. That is if the USA is still standing by then.
What accomplishments might that be? winning the Nobel peace prize for what exactly?
Spending 10 trillion of our dollars we don't have?
Apologizing tour all over the world and leading from behind strategy of foreign policy?
Iran nuclear deal which gave them billions of dollars for doing exactly what they are doing and enriching uranium...
Sign on to Paris Accord which would cost US taxpayers billions to sent to help third world nations while China, the biggest polluter of all is scott free for 10 years...
By the way, did he close Gitmo ? - it was his highest priority coming into office...
He claimed it was a recruiting tool for terrorist... if true he helped in that process especially with ISIS...
His failure to deal with ISIS lead to a huge human tragedy of over 1 million refugees pouring into Europe...
Domestically, race relations took a step back under Obama, with Ferguson and other high profile cases he intervened without knowing the facts...
Gime a break, my prediction stands. He will be judged by historians as one of the president in the bottom 50% ranking.Most GOP voters hated Obama because of his funky name & WAY too dark skin color from the beginning. I don't know how many times I heard, "There is no way we are going to allow a black man run our country!" While he was running for the Dem nomination and the pres office. (And lets not forget all those ridiculous conspiracy theories they came up with - that didn't come true!)
Your prediction is nothing but a Fox-incited fantasy. You can go look up what he won the Nobel Peace Prize for - a difficult thing for most Obama haters, sure. Wasting trillions? You mean like the GOP have done in the past when THEY have been in office? You can list all kinds of things about how horrible Obama was for this country; and I could find a GOP politician to match and probably even OUTmatch it. The same thing goes for Hillary. How GOP supporters are so blind to the failings within their own deviant party is beyond me.
No, Obama didn't close Gitmo cuz a president CAN'T just do anything they want - even with an EO (someone should have informed Trump). I'm sure it continues to operate for a reason - and probably not ones that most liberals would appreciate. Dang, that means that someone in the gov EITHER 'outranked' Obama on making final decisions about Gitmo; OR Obama came to the conclusion himself after hearing the reasons WHY it should remain open. Which means that there are 'checks & balances' within our government that we are not aware of; OR Obama made a decision AGAINST his own campaign promises because it was best for the country. That is what a leader does. Imagine that.
Race relations took a step back because he was a black man and so many people in this country HATED it - and their ugliness came out in shill protests that included burning Obama in effigy. It is one of the aspects of this country that Trump tapped into - get rid of the Obamination!
Your party is so messy; and you're so oblivious to it - that your rants in here are becoming ridiculous, Jack. Both parties are messy; and one is not messier than the other. Things are like that intentionally to keep the attention of the American public diverted, distracted & FIGHTING. You know this, but refuse to acknowledge or take responsibility for your part in it - like most conservatives. What a shocker.
As much as you wish it, the GOP is not my party. How many times do I have to remind you I am a conservative. I am not a Republican. To proof it, if you care, I have voted for Presidents of both parties..in some cases I voted the lesser of two evils...
Also, some of is, because I can't speak for all conservatives, are against Obama for his progressive policies, not his skin color or his name. I supported Dr. Carson in this past election. He is black conservative.
I have criticized both political parties all my life. I call it as I see it.
I have made mistakes in my political stance... I voted for Carter for president and was disappointed at his performance. He being a nulcear engineer by profession was a double disappointment.
i also voted for Bill Clinton the first time but voted against him the second time. He was a smooth talker but lied to get elected. He did in office contrary to what he promised to do on the campaign trail...that is why I voted against the man for his dishonesty.Well since the GOP is officially known as the party for conservatives; SINCE that is where the majority of you vote; and SINCE you 'talk the talk' about Obama like most people who worship Fox News - you don't get to claim to not be GOP.
I have also voted for GOP candidates in the past - it makes no difference; and my posts talk about BOTH parties. Stop acting like a GOP right-wing hardliner and you will stop being accused of it. I honestly would not have thought that would have been a problem for you - you seem to LIKE being a staunch conservative.
It's really sad to see people post who are deluded into believing there is a difference between Dem & Rep still. If you objectively look at matters, you can see the direction we have gone in Foreign Relations (wars) has remained consistent now for TWENTY YEARS... or did you not notice how the trend of overthrowing governments in the Middle East continued under Obama?
You are correct on some issues but not across the board. For example illegal immigration had a big impact under Democrat Administration but much reduced under a Trump admin. Why is that?
The same can be said for business out sourcing...Not everything, but the BIG ticket items, the ones that effect 90% of us, they (Congress) are.
As for the immigration issue, that is a direct result of Trump, and you can't lump Trump in with the last 4 Presidents that all continued with same agendas and goals, (they were nothing more than front men). Trump's ego and non-D.C. background is why he has shifted the country's direction (momentarily at least) and why he is the #1 enemy of the establishment and under attack from all sides 24X7.
Whether its the ACA, or NAFTA, or WTO, when it comes to what impacts hundreds of millions of lives, or loses the country millions of jobs, party doesn't matter, only those who are corrupt (anyone that has been in D.C. more than a quarter century you can bet IS corrupt) don't vote along party lines or what is best for Americans.
As to the topic of discussion (Obama) this is a great read:
http://thefederalist.com/2016/07/13/how … than-ever/Here is a better Federalist article:
http://thefederalist.com/2017/08/16/don … yesterday/
More than likely, the same people that you heard say that about Obama, said something similar, when Clarence Thomas was nominated for the Supreme Court and when Tim Scott was running for U.S. Senate. I'm sure that it was said about Herman Cain, when he desired to be the President of the United States.
In other words, (unless you count the reason for the birth of the Republican Party) it is not a Political Party thing, it is a racist thing.Of course, now Obama is responsible for the Arab Spring! Even the guy with the name of the Canadian rock band didn't mess up on that one.
What is the existential threat Trump poses?
If you can't answer that question, you have no business posting here or anywhere?I agree with Jack and President Trump! Fascists and anti-fascists are both at fault and we can't pin the blame for violence on just one group.
You have to hand it to the MSM, they are hammering away at Trump, doesn't matter that he came out and said it was wrong, that we need to come together, etc. etc. nothing he says will be good enough, and nothing he does will escape criticism. The power of propaganda overcomes all, we have seen this in corrupt system after corrupt system for decades now, its just finally come to our shores.
I am not saying Trump is a great guy, I'm not saying he isn't in it for himself (that is a different topic and I like to keep the Trump hate rhetoric separate from the we are all being screwed by a corrupt D.C.).
What I am trying to make obvious is the outright effort of the 'establishment' to destroy Trump, which I am sure is fine to all those who despise him, but pay attention, because the next President they do it to, will be one YOU believe in. In essence, your President, your politicians, YOU are powerless to change the direction of the nation and the corruption that has control of it.
The government (combined with the MSM and outside forces like the U.N., WB, WTO, IMF, etc.) essentially have established a dictatorship right now, right here in America, one of corrupt politicians and D.C./Pentagon bureaucrats, so long as there are enough corrupt Congressmen/women who will do the wrong things for Americans, and for America's future... the only difference is there is an illusion of 'democracy'.
That illusion is taking us down a dangerous path, as a majority of Americans are being forced to ‘pick sides’ and choose to blame one side or the other for all the woes we face today.
And as the pressure builds, the politicians and MSM seem to stoke these animosities ever higher, so that people hate each other, blame each other, based on race or religion or political party, rather than focusing their blame on the real source of our problems, an out of control corrupt establishment/federal government.
With a dictatorship you can identify the evil, and work to overthrow it. People would like to believe that Trump is this evil dictator, that is far simpler and easier to accept than the realization that our government (and the MSM that supports it) is our biggest enemy.
With a false 'democracy' most of the people remain ignorant of the truth, and will fight those who are trying to expose the corruption and criminal activity being done.
For example the ACA (Obamacare) was written to make the Insurance and Pharma companies even richer. The very people responsible for writing it were representatives for the Insurance and Pharma companies, it was a new way to control prices (rather than open market competition), take more of people's money, increasing costs and taxes, both the government and corporations win… the people lose.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/robertlenzner/2013/10...
http://healthoverprofit.org/2017/02/05/obamacare-t...
Another example of this, look who is running the FDA, a lawyer who defended Monsanto. The person who may be responsible for more food-related illness and death than anyone in history, Michael Taylor was appointed to the FDA by Bush, then the senior advisor to the commissioner of the FDA by Obama and the Principal Deputy Commissioner of the FDA by Trump.
Among some of the things he is responsible for, is the removal of warning labels for meat products laced with carcinogens, which had been around since the late 50s, and striking from labeling, informing consumers of known cancer causing poisons being in various food products.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_R._Taylor
The SEC… the same type of corruption exists there.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/harrybroadman/2016/02...
http://www.softpanorama.org/Skeptics/Financial_ske...
I sometimes wonder if Trump wasn't the perfect President for the establishment after all, more and more people were becoming disillusioned with Congress and D.C. on the whole, but now they are being forced to focus on, and take sides in regards to Trump and people are no longer paying attention to the ACA, trade imbalances, or any of the other critical things that are putting more and more Americans into the poor house.Ken...within one minute of condemning the acts of the so called(his words)alt right, he was equivocating their actions with those of the so called alt left drawing a moral equivalency between the two. There is an effort to destroy his presidency because he's an absolute danger to our democracy however corrupt you feel it is. He is losing support, not by the day, but by the hour. To top it all off, he is destroying his own presidency with his words and actions. The media reports in real time said words and actions yet you think its some grand conspiracy of the MSM to take down Trump. Don't worry, he's accomplishing everything any liberal would want all by himself. The media that supports him in fact distort and mince the words that the stupid SOB says.
And with all due respect Ken, your premise that our country is so corrupt due to government/establishment is nothing new. Where there is great wealth there is corruption. Always has been and always will be. Take the money out of politics. Undo Citizens United.
You want to undo your so called dictatorship? Think Trump is the catalyst for that? Only if he abolishes the constitution which I wouldn't put past him. If he thought he could get away with it, I think he would. Maybe you would prefer a world where Trump, Putin, and a united authoritarian Europe control western civilization?
My point is that Pandora's box opened long ago. We can't undo that. Hopefully, together as well meaning citizens, we mitigate the wrongs and operate on a level playing field for everyone and not just the elites. We are a world order. We are a world economy. We are reliant on mutual security. We will not go back to any form of isolationism.I think you see things as you see them Jack, that doesn't make it so.
What you are proclaiming/predicting "He is losing support, not by the day, but by the hour. " was said over, and over, and over again during the Republican Primaries, and again during the national election, then 30 days into his Presidency, 60 days, etc.
I don't know what you think is going to happen, other than his continued Presidency for 3+ more years. Anything else would be a coup d'état of one sort or another. With that you really would have a dictatorship, an event that would likely cause the economic collapse of not just this country, but the entire world, which would then trigger riots, wars, very dangerous, all encompassing wars as countries fight for resources, food, survival.
Impeachment even at breakneck speed would require a lot more than anything currently said or done by him to have him removed from office.
I have gone over that process and others in other answers, the only viable option requires the VP, and the majority of his staff to find him unfit, and for Congress to ratify that decision which would then make the VP President for the remainder of the term, as the only potentially viable, legal, constitutional way of removing him.
Unless he were to remove himself, if they put a gun to his and his children's heads he just might. Other than that type of threat to his family, made by people he knew would act, he is not stepping down.
Ken, what do you think about the chiefs of the military branches each sending a clear message to their forces that bigotry won't be tolerated? Do you think they are part of the grand conspiracy to take the president down? They have reiterated their loyalty to the president but I see it as a very clear message: We are watching you Mr. President. Unprecedented.
Think Trump gives a damn?I think I know a lot more about the military than most, and why they do what they do. And nothing said or done sends any such message as you suggest.
History is filled with both close minded and open minded military people.
Ken, I respect your military service, however, unless you served in a command capacity and know something most of us don't, I can't see how any reasonable person would not construe what the joint chiefs did and when they did as anything more as a message to the president. Maybe not exactly how I interpret as a warning to the president but certainly one as a clear message that the military will not tolerate intolerance.
Spoken as one with no experience would speak it, with an absolute certainty on a topic of which he has no experience, nor depth of information to draw from.
I always thought it was the Trumps of the world putting people into the poor house. Recall this is a guy who defrauded people with a fake university, refused to pay hard working vendors, and is likely laundering money for Russian oligarchs.
Congressional corruption pales in comparison to this guy selling out our nation to help himself and his buddies make millions in oil with the Russians.
Related Discussions
- 112
What grade would you give President Obama for the 8 years in office?
by Jack Lee 6 years ago
Now that the dust has settled, after the 2016 election and a new administration in place, what grade would you give Obama? (A, B, C, D, F)?There is no right or wrong answer. Just your honest assessment of what he accomplished or failed to do...I will start by giving him a C minus. His 8 years has...
- 160
What is YOUR analysis, opinion, and synopsis of President Barack Obama
by Grace Marguerite Williams 10 years ago
in light of the current sociopolitical and socioeconomic situation regarding the United States of America? Do you believe that President Obama is doing the best job he can under the circumstances? Do you maintain that President Obama can do a much better job as President? Do you contend that...
- 91
Is this what you had in mind when you voted for change?
by Kathleen Cochran 7 years ago
"One of the many underappreciated legacies of the Obama administration has been its widespread implementation of pro-consumer policies. Under the outgoing president’s leadership, multiple executive branch departments and independent agencies have enacted laws, rules and regulations designed to...
- 116
Danger: Biden's Presidency akin to the Weimar Republic redux?
by Credence2 2 months ago
I was disturbed by an article I had recently read. The main theme emphasizing similarities between the current administration and the period during the 1920's after WWI and before the deluge of Hitler's ascendency in Germany. Yes, the article is from Salon but its content is still food for thought....
- 246
President Obama and his administration spied on President elect Trump?
by Jack Lee 6 years ago
This is a shocking relvelation, if true, undermines our whole democratic process...Why is this not headline news?
- 71
What is your opinion of President Obama stating that the current Administration
by taburkett 9 years ago
What is your opinion of President Obama stating that the current Administration scandals are Phony?Does this statement present a distraction to the public? Does it show that the President has little concern for the truth? Does it echo the same illogical rhetoric as that used to hide...