The end of the road for Barack Obama?

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

The guy has no experience at running anything but his mouth. It was inevitable. There is and was no "line" to get to the end of. There never was anything there. Since the entire premise is based on smoke and mirrors it is only a matter of time before everyone realizes it was never more than an illusion. Not really a particularly good one either. There is no "there" there. The thing which will become more clear in the future also, and perhaos the most indicting of all, is that the Republicans did nothing to prevent anything from happening or passing. Democrats have been, and continue to be, his main nemisis. That and his inate inability to do anything.

He is, essentially, the supreme example of Affirmative Action hires.

[Danno 1,228]

I have difficulty with propaganda in all its forms, and Fox is a propaganda machine. I have seen enough to speak firmly that that is my point of view. Those who buy the propaganda of course think Fox is fair and balanced because they churn out the rhetoric which their viewers believe in to begin with.

All that Propaganda and yet when I asked you to post the latest example of biased reporting you post clap-trap about interpreting polling about which is the most trusted source.

PLease, give up an example of how FOX is twisting the news facts.

I'm sure there are whole websites with daily updates.

*I wish I had FOX at home.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

It's interesting really when you look at Obama.

The article points out Obama's fallacies, which have always been his fallacies. He's never been a man of action since he entered the world of politics. He's actually smart in that way because it keeps many things from being placed upon him.

The fact of the matter is, is that Obama is a great speaker and could sell most imbeciles who cannot comprehend life anything. He could sell dog ####### to someone if he said it in the right way. He's that good of a salesman to those who cannot think for themselves or look at the facts surrounding him.

Hell, I even bought into Obama when he first accounced his candidacy in 2007, but after taking the time (and actually caring) I realized he wasn't what he said he was and tried to point that out to others.

It's not just about a "FoxNews" mentality, it's about a mainstream media mentality. Fox News helped elect Obama just as much as CNN/MSNBC/ABC,etc helped elect Obama. I mean really think about it. If one network is saying one thing and pointing things out, while others continually ignore it, is it really believable to the average person/voter? It actually makes them think the person might be good.

There's a reason why the man lost every debate, there's a reason why Charles Gibson destroyed him on taxes during one of them, there's a reason why he fumbles without a teleprompter. It's because HE is NOT that damn good when it boils down to it and doesnt' believe half the ####### coming out of his own mouth.

Great motivational speaker on script? Absolutely. - Great politician? Absolutely. - But great leader? No way in hell.

Don't fool yourselves though, he will be re-elected.

Even Reagan had pure ####### approval ratings until 1983, and look what happened to him.

Compare Reagan to Obama when it comes to the economy and what happened at first... you'll see very very similar circumstances.

Granted, Reagan could blame Carter administration wholeheartedly.... but Obama can try to blame Bush, but the truth is... the economic failure we saw under Bush was not his fault completely. Clinton was just as much to blame, along with Alan Greenspan and the rest of the administration. The only thing Bush is really guilty of is not Vetoing any bills until 2007. There again Rudy Giuliani can be blamed for part of that too after suing Bill Clinton over the line-item veto... so yes, plenty of blame to go around....

[ready4ONE 5,400]

All that Propaganda and yet when I asked you to post the latest example of biased reporting you post clap-trap about interpreting polling about which is the most trusted source.

PLease, give up an example of how FOX is twisting the news facts.

I'm sure there are whole websites with daily updates.

*I wish I had FOX at home.

I apologize for my lack of faith in wikipedia.

Edited March 9, 2010 by ready4ONE

[ready4ONE 5,400]

Granted, Reagan could blame Carter administration wholeheartedly.... but Obama can try to blame Bush, but the truth is... the economic failure we saw under Bush was not his fault completely. Clinton was just as much to blame, along with Alan Greenspan and the rest of the administration. The only thing Bush is really guilty of is not Vetoing any bills until 2007. There again Rudy Giuliani can be blamed for part of that too after suing Bill Clinton over the line-item veto... so yes, plenty of blame to go around....

I didn't realize Congress came into existence under Reagan. Learn something new everyday I suppose.

[ready4ONE 5,400]

The guy has no experience at running anything but his mouth. It was inevitable. There is and was no "line" to get to the end of. There never was anything there. Since the entire premise is based on smoke and mirrors it is only a matter of time before everyone realizes it was never more than an illusion. Not really a particularly good one either. There is no "there" there. The thing which will become more clear in the future also, and perhaos the most indicting of all, is that the Republicans did nothing to prevent anything from happening or passing. Democrats have been, and continue to be, his main nemisis. That and his inate inability to do anything.

He is, essentially, the supreme example of Affirmative Action hires.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

I didn't realize Congress came into existence under Reagan. Learn something new everyday I suppose.

The President still makes the 'ultimate' decision when it comes to legislation and only a congress who really wants to/and has the ability to override a Veto can truly be to blame.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

It's not the political agenda, it's the fact that whenever they have a panel everyone always seems to be yelling and interrupting each other. I can't make out the opinions since it's all noise. Maybe it's age, but my comprehension works better when I can hear a question followed by a reasonable amount of time for a respondent to answer. I guess that doesn't sell as much stuff on commercials as the loud and noisy style.

Nobody does in-depth interviews of opposing viewpoints in a civilized manner like Jim Lehrer.

Edited March 9, 2010 by Galt's gallstones

[Danno 1,228]

I apologize for my lack of faith in wikipedia.

No need to apologize, instead take that energy and click on the links which provide citations for what is "on" that page of wiki.

Edited March 9, 2010 by Danno

[Danno 1,228]

Nobody does in-depth interviews of opposing viewpoints in a civilized manner like Jim Lehrer.

Especially when it comes to Global warming.... so in depth is broadcast... and concerned with presenting "opposing viewpoints" we never heard from expert GW skeptics, in fact even after the CRU scandal broke it took a week before this broadcast even mentioned it.

Mainstream media is like eating Mexican food every night, sure each dish has a different name and some variation..... it don't even take a week before you realize you are eating the same basic things with redundancy.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Obama's already done as much damage in his first year as Bush did in his 8 years.

Really?

Bush

DJIA 21 Jan 2001 (close): 10,686

DJIA 20 Jan 2009 (close): 7,949 (-26%)

USD/EUR 21 Jan 2001: 1.07

USD/EUR 21 Jan 2009: 0.77 (-28%)

Obama

DJIA 21 Jan 2009 (open): 7,949

DJIA 08 Mar 2010 (close): 10,552 (+33%)

USD/EUR 21 Jan 2009: 0.77

USD/EUR 08 Mar 2010: 0.73 (-5%)

Median family income in 2000 was 61,000 (adjusted for inflation to 2007). At the end of the most recent economic expansion cycle in 2007, that median family income was 60,500. Under George W Bush, for the first time in recorded history has the median income actually decreased while the economy expanded. What a success!!

But hey, we've had threads on Obama's failed Presidency prior to him ever taking the office. His fate was sealed the day America elected him to the highest office. Or so the RWN and Hoax News would have us believe.

Edited March 9, 2010 by Mr. Big Dog

[Obama 2012 1,714]

Really?

Bush

DJIA 21 Jan 2001 (close): 10,686

DJIA 20 Jan 2009 (close): 7,949 (-26%)

USD/EUR 21 Jan 2001: 1.07

USD/EUR 21 Jan 2009: 0.77 (-28%)

Obama

DJIA 21 Jan 2009 (open): 7,949

DJIA 08 Mar 2010 (close): 10,552 (+33%)

USD/EUR 21 Jan 2009: 0.77

USD/EUR 08 Mar 2010: 0.73 (-5%)

Median family income in 2000 was 61,000 (adjusted for inflation to 2007). At the end of the most recent economic expansion cycle in 2007, that median family income was 60,500. Under George W Bush, for the first time in recorded history has the median income actually decreased while the economy expanded. What a success!!

But hey, we've had threads on Obama's failed Presidency prior to him ever taking the office. His fate was sealed the day America elected him to the highest office. Or so the RWN and Hoax News would have us believe.

In all fairness the DJIA is not the same as it was in 2001.

It would have to be quite a bit higher to be comparable....

Don't forget the growth had the DJIA up to 15,000 during "Bush"

Of course as I've previously noted, Bush isn't the one to blame here for the economic crisis and neither is Obama. There are plenty of people to blame outside of the presidency and from prior administrations due to lousy regulation on the derivities market (basically NONE at all).

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

In all fairness the DJIA is not the same as it was in 2001.

It would have to be quite a bit higher to be comparable....

Don't forget the growth had the DJIA up to 15,000 during "Bush"

Take any index you like - the picture is the same across the spectrum. And yes, the DJIA was way up there - until the bubble popped.

[luckytxn 2,265]

I love it. One network that is tuned to the right is causing all this fuss and all the other major networks have for decades been tuned to the Socialists and that was ok.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I love it. One network that is tuned to the right is causing all this fuss and all the other major networks have for decades been tuned to the Socialists and that was ok.

If the rationale you wrote there makes sense to you, I suppose you would "love it"

Tell me this though, do you still find that you giggle whenever someone says "butt", "poop" or "boobies"?