Obama is dangerous and according to his wife, not the Alpha Dog of The White House, she is. To me that makes him a wimp too, a dangerous, socialist wimp.
Obama is a weak potus who is clueless about everything and is a shame for a country like America. "Thanks" Obama's "Activities" the entirely World is laughing about the U.S. which is on the best way in the Third World.
He is.... destructive anti American an apologist muslim black theology advocate over spender community organizer for welfare recipients un-American socialist progressive class warfare advocate hater of the successful hater of the rich anti capitalist liar foreigner Israeli (jew)hater lover of arabs etc..etc.
Asking a right wing forum there persepective of Obama. Intreseting idea. IMO, Obama is a good person, presidency wise, I think he's lacking. Most of his problems though seem to stem from the Republicans in the house though.
Yes, there "blocking" during the debate ceiling debatcale certainly saved our nation from getting any worse.
President Obama is: 1) An American 2) A Christian (but even if he was a Muslim, who cares) 3) doing a decent job despite being blocked at every turn by a House that cares more about party than country. 4) A President who has done more for American image than the Presdient before him. 5) A President who has continued some very bad policies from his predicessor that he should have tried to abolish. If he has any black marks on his record it is the signing of the NDAA and the killing of an American Citizen on foreign soil (even though, I would offer that the American killed had given up his citizenship by his actions against the U.S) 6) A good Husband and Father who loves his family. 7) A Moderate President who is trying to work with his rivals to make this country a better place.
What is language of origine? It certainly isn't English. . .Do you live in the US? The rest of the world is not laughing at Obama. . .actually, the rest of the world's appreciation of the US has increased BECAUSE of Obama.
Individual insurance mandate. Conservatives and Republicans once favored a requirement that all or most people buy basic health insurance. Like cap and trade, it was conceived by free-market conservatives as a way to avoid harming the private sector. It also fit with conservative views of personal responsibility and the immorality of freeloading. In 1993, Republicans pushed it as an alternative to an employer mandate. Stuart Butler, a domestic policy expert at the Heritage Foundation, described the individual mandate in 2003 as a necessary part of a "social contract." Republican Mitt Romney signed a health law with a mandate in 2006, when he was governor of Massachusetts. Now, however, Republican governors and attorneys general are suing the federal government over the individual mandate in the new health law, saying it is unconstitutional. Romney says the federal government has no right to impose such a plan on all states. Butler told me that experience in the last seven years with the federal employee health benefits system and with auto-enrollment (you're enrolled at work or school unless you opt out) suggests the requirement is not necessary to achieve a stable health insurance system with broadly shared risks. Obama's campaign position was similar, but health experts later changed his mind. http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/07/11/things-republicans-were-for-and-now-are-against/ There's one. If you know how to use a little thing called google, you can find lots more, my friend.
Medicare spending curbs. Democrats have financed their new health law in part by planning on nearly $500 billion in Medicare savings over the next 10 years. The proposal provoked months of attacks from Republicans. That was a dizzying role reversal from the days when Republicans used to recommend the same types of reductions in future Medicare spending (and had to play defense against attacks from Obama and other Democrats, now having their own role reversal). In 1995, for instance, Republicans proposed cutting $270 billion over seven years. In 1997, McConnell and McCain were among the Republicans voting for a Balanced Budget Act that cut Medicare by $115 billion over five years. And in his 2008 presidential campaign, McCain proposed combined Medicare and Medicaid cuts of $1.3 trillion over 10 years. Yet last year, as he neared a re-election campaign in a state full of retirees, McCain led the fight against the Democrats' plans to trim Medicare. Seven issues, scores of lawmakers, an epidemic of head-slapping and rethinking that corresponds to Obama's tenure and the rise of the Tea Party movement. Coincidence? Doubtful. Principles are in the mix, for sure, but nobody should mistake where they are sitting in the car. That would be the back seat, with politics at the wheel. http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/07/11/things-republicans-were-for-and-now-are-against/ Here's another
Exactly, and thankfully, he was there at the right time. I shudder to think of how deep the ashes would have been if McCain/Palin let everything burn. Shiver... Bee
Obama started his presidency during one of the most difficuilt periods in American history. The only ones that had it as bad were Lincoln, Washington, Truman, FDR, and even Wilson in some respects. He did a good job of changing his election platform to suit his evolving enlightenment regarding the realities of the office, but often seems to be vexed by the nature of Washington politics. He was naive not to expect the implacable rejection of his agenda from the right. Obama's failures are surrounded by GOP obstructionism, and what could have been his successes, have been neutered and diluted to an ineffective state by compromise with the GOP.