Thread: Why the Right Really Hates Obama

Originally Posted by Irishman

I think he (*)(*)(*)(*) well knew it couldn't be done. He just said what everyone wanted to hear. Problem is, he made the whole country look bad trying to make his opponent look bad by vilifying his opponents party.

Please lets not make this into a who is vilifying who discussion there's enough rocks thrown around these days to where it could last all night. Lets stay focus on Gitmo, and whether or not Obama knew it couldn't be done. I think the question to decide that is this. Would a politician risk being publicly spanked by the congress attempting to do something he knew couldn't be done. For example do you think George W. Bush knew his social security reform had no chance to pass congress? Do you think Woodrow Wilson knew there was no chance the Senate would ratify the league of nations?

I don't think so politicians do a lot of deception, but embarrass themselves is not one of them. Not purposefully.

Originally Posted by LowKey

None of any prominence though?

I don't believe so, but I wasn't keeping tabs lol.

Originally Posted by LowKey

Please lets not make this into a who is vilifying who discussion there's enough rocks thrown around these days to where it could last all night. Lets stay focus on Gitmo, and whether or not Obama knew it couldn't be done. I think the question to decide that is this. Would a politician risk being publicly spanked by the congress attempting to do something he knew couldn't be done. For example do you think George W. Bush knew his social security reform had no chance to pass congress? Do you think Woodrow Wilson knew there was no chance the Senate would ratify the league of nations?

I don't think so politicians do a lot of deception, but embarrass themselves is not one of them. Not purposefully.

I don't think Obama gave a (*)(*)(*)(*), to be honest. Obama wanted to be elected and was willing to say and do anything to get there.

Originally Posted by LowKey

I don't think he did or he wouldn't have even gone through the effort of releasing some prisoners, and trying to bring others back to the states, and were it not for a hostile congress he would have.

Considering only 6 Senator's voted to close Gitmo, then I guess you could say it was a "hostile Congress".

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/0..._n_205797.html

If he truly thought he could close Gitmo, then he was much more lacking in experience then I give him credit for......maybe even naive. Not a good attribute for the POTUS.

Originally Posted by Cigar

The mockery of Obama as the Messiah reveals far more about the Tea Party than it does about the president.

I always wondered about that. Why do the right-wingers talk about Obama in religious terms? Us left-wingers don't.

Maybe you're on to something here.

Originally Posted by Hoosier8

Or it could simply be a wish for fiscally responsible legislators for a change instead of the left wing race and theology talking points.

If that were the case we'd have Republican representatives who are willing to compromise on tax increases as part of a plan to balance the budget.

Originally Posted by Nunya D.

Considering only 6 Senator's voted to close Gitmo, then I guess you could say it was a "hostile Congress".

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/0..._n_205797.html

If he truly thought he could close Gitmo, then he was much more lacking in experience then I give him credit for......maybe even naive. Not a good attribute for the POTUS.

Quite possibility. Not that he didn't learn from the experience. That doesn't really make the case that he knew. During the Bush years Democrats in congress were highly critical of the facility, and it's detention practices. They are the ones who deceived the public. Obama just made the mistake of believing they meant it as much as he did.

Originally Posted by Daybreaker

I always wondered about that. Why do the right-wingers talk about Obama in religious terms? Us left-wingers don't.

Maybe you're on to something here.

Here, let me clear it up for you....Louis Farrakhan first attached "Messiah" to the Boy King.....which, for all but the most sensitive and protective slobbering Obama sycophant...

is a sentiment that well deserves mocking.

Originally Posted by Daybreaker

I always wondered about that. Why do the right-wingers talk about Obama in religious terms? Us left-wingers don't.

Maybe you're on to something here.

Originally Posted by webrockk

Here, let me clear it up for you....Louis Farrakhan first attached "Messiah" to the Boy King.....which, for all but the most sensitive and protective slobbering Obama sycophant...

is a sentiment that well deserves mocking.

It wasn't only Farrakhan. Watch around 4:00 - 4:30

So the source of the Right’s hatred of Obama isn’t just that he’s a black man and a liberal.

Statements like this only prove that some people on the left do not even know what they are protesting against on the right. Such remarks are either deliberately dishonest attempts to unjustly villify conservatives or they are simply blind emotional partisanship that conveniently ignore the popularity of men like Herman Cain and Allen West. Whether it is an inability to understand it or just an unwillingness to accept it, Obama's race has nothing to do with the right's dislike of him. It is the second part of this statement that holds the truth; the fact that he is a liberal.

Now if you want to further explore the race issue, then it's important to point something out. With George Zimmerman, countless liberals have used his being half-white as justification to call him a white man. But Obama is just as white as Zimmerman. So whatever is said about Zimmerman's race MUST be applied to Obama's race by default. Otherwise you're only calling someone a minority when there is something to gain politically from it and you're only calling them white when you want to make them look bad. Congratulations on illustrating the very definition of racism.

Originally Posted by Daybreaker

I always wondered about that. Why do the right-wingers talk about Obama in religious terms? Us left-wingers don't.

Maybe you're on to something here.

It's intended to mock the fanaticism of his fanbase. It doesn't really fit so well anymore now that the excitement has dwindled and he's kind of become the George W. Bush of the Democratic party, but it was quite accurate (and a bit funny) for the first couple of years when people were hailing him as one of the most important presidents in history before he had even really done anything.