While it looks obvious to me that Obama is the worst President in many generations

and should have never been elected, he still does some things that are good, and it is possible that his motives and actions are FAR better than I think or that Conservatives or critical Democrats think. For one good example, here is a clip from an article in the Christian Science Monitor about the action that Japan and Germany are taking toward increasing their military roles in the world.

"“Since international society is so unstable and US influence seems to be diminishing, other countries have to take on responsibilities,” says Mr. Nagashima. “Germany and Japan have finally accepted that kind of security role.”

I recognize that there is a possibility that this is exactly what Obama & Co. have in mind, and that once other countries DO step up, that America could step back up a LITTLE bit (from the diminished role where Obama seems to have taken us), to assume a role as SLIGHTLY the world's greatest power.

Here is the entire article:

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Asia...ff-WWII-arms-constraints.-A-cause-for-concern

 

I'm more than convinced that this has been Obama's objective and goal all along. Uhuh. What a brilliant strategy. (I always have to spellcheck that word).

 

Yes, but then again some people see it as Obama's deliberate attempt to knock the United States out of its super power status and into a second tier status as a nation among equals rather than the leader among nations. Which is all very egalitarian and typically elitist liberal in nature but fails to take into account the long established historical fact that whenever a leader nation gets 'tired' and steps back for a rest then hostile competitor nations (like Russia and China) immediately surge forward and become significantly stronger and ALWAYS more hostile and dangerous in nature . . . to the exhausted former leader nation.

Liberals NEVER, EVER think of such consequences because they are always leading with their feeeeeeeeeeeeelings and their -- oh so superior -- sensitivities pertaining to how the world SHOULD BE . . . if only their concerted efforts at wishful thinking would actually -- you know -- change human nature . . . which it won't do.

 

The world is constantly changing. Nowhere is it changing as fast as in the Middle East. The question is - should the U.S. be working to influence events in the ME; or should the U.S. take no actions either covert or openly to influence how that part of the world takes shape? Is there a middle ground somewhere between covert operations and diplomatic and policy actions?

In the past, the U.S. has used covert operations to either install or support or overthrow various governments. The blame-America-first liberals have always been very critical of this. When Jeremiah Wright said, "America's chickens have come home to roost" most on the left agreed and quietly applauded him.

Now that Dreams of My Anti-Imperialist Father is in office, what exactly are we getting? Since Obama has done so little by way of policies and diplomacy to influence events; do you think he's doing anything of a more clandestine nature? The only other option is he is doing absolutely nothing, deliberately, because he is sorry for American intervention and wants to change our role as a world leader for democratic change?

 

Hyper-partisans alienated from America are constantly wee wee'd up by the hysterics of their media entertainers, but the reality is that the President that America's electorate has most recently twice chosen to lead the nation is just an average, middle-of-the-road POTUS whose overall performance has been mediocre.

He'll leave office with the nation better than he found it, but that isn't saying much.

 

Japan is terrified of China, and rightly so. Given the opportunity, the Chinese and North Koreans will take over South Korea and subjugate Japan to the role of being a vassal state. The Japanese know that they must be able to pose a "mutually-assured-destruction" threat to China and North Korea in order to survive another 50 years.

The Germans have been occupied and micromanaged by the United States for the past 69 years -- even more so than the Japanese. They have a military of sorts, or at least what passes for being a military force in Western Europe today. The truth is that in many ways the Germans are as useless as the French, or the British. They, too, must have nuclear weapons in order to be regarded as being able to defend themselves in the true sense of the word.

The question is this: today, decades after the end of World War II, is the United States willing to let both Japan and Germany be really, totally independent, and command their own nuclear weapons and missile systems? When the sun rose this morning, the answer was still, "no".

As far as America goes, it's a lot like what happens in the animal kingdom. The dominant male in the society sets the tone for how all members are going to behave, and how they rank in the "pecking order". This dominant male is challenged from time to time, and so long as he remains the most powerful, he rules! But, at some point, he is overthrown, or just gets old, sick, and tired, and either gets killed, or is expelled from the society, or, he just dies. As I see it today, America is dispirited, sad, bored, and become more and more enfeebled every day, and an America-hating socialist nothingness like Barack Obama has only made things far, far worse....

 

Its just reality. The US is not going to be able to do it all forever and the world is waking up about it.

Military superiority and ongoing conflicts don't come cheap. It takes lots of tax dollars to pay for them. Tax dollars we are intent on not paying.

If our goal is zero tax revenue we have to give up military world superiority.

 

'better [off]' Well, when a ship rights itself after enduring rough seas, The Captain of the ship can't claim much credit. Ships are designed to right themselves. Obama was (is) in it for the glory. And in the eyes of some, he attained that. In the eyes of some, he failed miserably. All is in the eye of the beholder. Hopefully this country is still strong enough that it will endure what damage was done and if any good comes of his tour, we will envelope that too. Onward and upward....tally-ho....etc.

 

I really do not think America as a whole will be better then it was before he was elected. Granted, when Obama took office it was like he was walking into a frat house the morning after a big party. However, instead of cleaning things up, all he did was to drink the rest of the beer. The cost of commodities are much higher. Gas is much higher. Health insurance is much higher. Wages are stagnant. Good jobs are still hard to find. Big brother is stronger. Our individual freedoms are smaller. We still have major conflict that we are involved with in the world. Our relationship with our "allies" is weaker. And to top it off, we are probably the closest we have been to being at war with Russia then we have in the past 20 years.

 

tHAT COKSUKER Obama suckks! I hate his guts, But I'd vote for him again to block the Tea party from getting power if I had too.

 

I think the president has done a great job considering the obstruction he's getting from conservatives in Congress

And no one knows how far they will go
Remember they refused to fund any effort
To solve the problems on its southern border

They have worked constantly to hurt the economy is so they could blame it on the president

And I am sure that if they could find a reason they would not fund troops abroad And then blame it on the president

So the presidential must be very careful


And the sad part of this is so many voters are too stupid to realize what's going on

 

The nation survived the hapless Bush who squandered a budget surplus, ignored accurate intel about a terrorist attack that killed 3,000 whilst embracing phony intel that plunged the nation into multi-trillion dollar nation-building fiascos as well as an economic depression.

His lacklustre successor can be taken in stride.

 

He certainly has not been the un-Bush that many hoped for. On the other hand, the nation has been extracted from two bloody and costly nation-building fiascos and there is reason for hard-won, guarded optimism as the GDP continues to grow:

Date US Real GDP
Jun 30, 2014 15.99 trillion
Dec 31, 2013 15.92 trillion
Dec 31, 2012 15.43 trillion
Dec 31, 2011 15.19 trillion
Dec 31, 2010 14.94 trillion
Dec 31, 2009 14.54 trillion

and, if you think that a President has an effect on the stock market, it's obvious which one has been better for business:

​

 

I see many on the right are circulating this meme that Obama is the worst POTUS in history or the last 50 years or something similar. In reality, he is probably the most competent, intelligent, rational, pragmatic and successful POTUS since FDR. These types of posts are lame attempts to start the war on history which the right wing continues to pursue as a point of policy. This is how many came to consider Carter the worst POTUS and Reagan the best POTUS. It is pure propaganda and every time I read this kind of tripe, I remind the author of it that they are wrong despite their very passionate feelings. By every measure, Obama has had a tremendous record as POTUS.

 

Yes, I agree that libs are quite ignorant when it comes to realizing that the time is not right for their idealistic concepts.

Of course we SHOULD be one world, there probably SHOULD be no borders, but this is in an ideal world- and probably NOT while there are people who would attack us and force liberals to attend a Muslim church 4 times a week and pray 5 times a day.

We also shouldn't have to lock our doors at night. But I'll bet most liberals lock them anyway.

- - - Updated - - -

Bush was a better President than Obama is, and by a long ways.

He is also a better person than Obama is.

 

Tell this to Natty Bumpo. He/she seems to be of somewhat in another camp on this.

 

I remember back when Bush won and the GOP controlled Congress...and guys like Limbaugh would go on the air and mock "lib'ruls" by saying "Whenever they lose an election, they call the American people stupid. Because they simply can't accept that they lost and their candidates weren't popular."

Naturally when Republicans lose, the script is flipped.

 

So you suspect he might be gay also, huh?
I've wondered that ever since I saw that photo of him smoking a joint and sitting unnaturally close to the guy he was smoking with on the couch. And then seeing guys like Holder around him really added to my concern.

 

Why do I have no doubt your first stop in the morning is at the Drudge Report....where Matt Drudge leads rightwingers to stories and even tells them what to think about them even before they click on the link?

- - - Updated - - -

BTW, your Obama Derangement Syndrome...isn't going to end on January 20th, 2017....that's painfully obvious.

While likely one of those rightwingers who ask "Why is the Left still talking about Bush 6 years later?".....you'll be obsessed with Obama....for DECADES. Guaranteed.

 

Wow man, IMO this post is some of the most inaccurate and downright stupid stuff I've ever seen written in this forum. And it looks like you actually believe it.

Are you a paid poster I wonder? Or are you stoned, perhaps?

 

Because you have no idea where I'm coming from Gorn.
Just like you have no idea where Obama is coming from.

I've seen the Drudge site maybe twice in my life. It is one of the ugliest sites I've ever seen, by the way.

Gorn, you have every right to be a happy man (or woman). Stand on that right!

 

sounds good to me

"“Since international society is so unstable and US influence seems to be diminishing, other countries have to take on responsibilities,” says Mr. Nagashima. “Germany and Japan have finally accepted that kind of security role.”


let others help out, we can't afford to be the worlds police

 

one of the best Presidents, but we also had one of the worst Congresses sadly

 

So where exactly do you get your news? Just from Fox?

 

Really?......there is that unbelievable narrative that Obama hates America again!

Do you think it's a coincidence that all the chatter in righty media this week serves the larger narrative of "We should have elected Romney"?

Bush was right about Iraq....
Romney was right about Russia.....
Obama is doing nothing about ISIS.....
Romney showing up on TV when he was completely absent for 2013 and the first half of 2104.

With all that in mind...I still can't believe you think Obama wants to diminish America. That's really kind of kooky.

That would be a lousy election strategy for the Democrats to allow.