The WORST President Since WWII

[BlueHen86]

This!

Two substantive posts in a row from you! I'm proud!

Where?

[SDHornet]

Meh, Obama's ok. He hasn't really damaged the country, but he hasn't done anything special either (other than the ACA). IMO, he'll be remembered as a weak President that accomplished one major piece of legislation, but for the most part, allowed one of the worst Congress in US history to "bully" him.

That said, he does seem like he's trying to push back now, but it's probably too late.

I've only lived through two Presidencies that I can clearly remember and critically judge: Bush and Obama. IMHO, Bush was the worst...by a long shot. I'll remember Obama as...unmemorable.

I’m about your age trip, and there is a clear difference between the way Bush 2 and Obama operate. Clear difference.

Also if the press was anywhere near as critical of Obama as they were of Bush there would be nonstop uproar from the sheeple. Obama has shown zero accountability, zero leadership ability, and nothing but deflection and dodging of the numerous scandals. If Bush had even half of the scandals Obama currently has the press would have not let anyone forgotten about them and not let him off the hook like they have with Obama. Just imagine the uproar if Bush used his “phone and pen” to change legislation to his liking. Night and day difference between how the press has treated the two Presidents, and a night and day difference about how those two served/serving as President.

[Baldy]

Nice dodge.

Oh, I'm sorry...I hadn't realized you countered...

[Cap'n Cat]

Memories fade...


Still Reagan by a long shot

Indeed. Carter challenged America to change its ways, become part of the world community and to sacrifice a little. Lazy fucks would have nothing to do with it and elected fucking Nero, who shit on a us, the world and our past, setting the stage for fuckheads like Rove, Cheney, W, Rummy, Riebus, Palin, Cruz and Paul.

[kalm]

Oh, I'm sorry...I hadn't realized you countered...

[Pwns]

Memories fade...


Still Reagan by a long shot

Indeed. Carter challenged America to change its ways, become part of the world community and to sacrifice a little. Lazy fucks would have nothing to do with it and elected fucking Nero, who shit on a us, the world and our past, setting the stage for fuckheads like Rove, Cheney, W, Rummy, Riebus, Palin, Cruz and Paul.

And here I was thinking it was Reagan's kkkapitalist globalism that lowered the standard of living in the US while raising the standard of living in developing nations.

[houndawg]

I raised the question in another post a few weeks back, but would things be worse?

Sort of agree with that. McCain's a bit of a whacko, so it's hard to tell what he would've done, and frankly, he's pretty ineffectual as a Senator (as Obama was as well) so he probably wouldn't have gotten much done either. But yes, it might have been worse under McCain. Romney not so much, though. He was more of a consensus builder guy so he might have been able to do something better than Obama. But still, if you can't put together a campaign to beat someone, I have to question whether you could put together a government and adminster effectively.

That's what happens when you get punched in the head every day for five years.

[houndawg]

Meh, Obama's ok. He hasn't really damaged the country, but he hasn't done anything special either (other than the ACA). IMO, he'll be remembered as a weak President that accomplished one major piece of legislation, but for the most part, allowed one of the worst Congress in US history to "bully" him.

That said, he does seem like he's trying to push back now, but it's probably too late.

I've only lived through two Presidencies that I can clearly remember and critically judge: Bush and Obama. IMHO, Bush was the worst...by a long shot. I'll remember Obama as...unmemorable.

I’m about your age trip, and there is a clear difference between the way Bush 2 and Obama operate. Clear difference.

Also if the press was anywhere near as critical of Obama as they were of Bush there would be nonstop uproar from the sheeple. Obama has shown zero accountability, zero leadership ability, and nothing but deflection and dodging of the numerous scandals. If Bush had even half of the scandals Obama currently has the press would have not let anyone forgotten about them and not let him off the hook like they have with Obama. Just imagine the uproar if Bush used his “phone and pen” to change legislation to his liking. Night and day difference between how the press has treated the two Presidents, and a night and day difference about how those two served/serving as President.

Yeah if it hadn't been for the press Bush would have assumed his rightful position as the greatest President in the history of 'murica.

[Cap'n Cat]

Indeed. Carter challenged America to change its ways, become part of the world community and to sacrifice a little. Lazy fucks would have nothing to do with it and elected fucking Nero, who shit on a us, the world and our past, setting the stage for fuckheads like Rove, Cheney, W, Rummy, Riebus, Palin, Cruz and Paul.

And here I was thinking it was Reagan's kkkapitalist globalism that lowered the standard of living in the US while raising the standard of living in developing nations.

Kids.

Do some reading beyond the Limbaugh Letter, Schmaltzy.

Good book to start with:

http://www.amazon.com/Tear-Down-This-My ... +this+myth" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[kalm]

The hoax of reaganomics...

So what was the problem? Stockman was asked.

Military spending for one thing. It was, and would be throughout the Reagan era, a budget untouchable. By the end of his second term, the president had expanded the U.S. military budget to a staggering 43% increase over the total expenditure during the height of the Vietnam war. That meant the increase of tens of thousands of troops, more weapons and equipment, not to mention a beefed-up intelligence program.

And how was this to be paid for?
The answer: Deficient spending which undermined the whole legitimacy of Stockman’s economic program. Stockman remained hopeful that $20 or $30 billion worth of waste in defense spending could be used to offset the deficient problem. It was really the only way to save the sinking ship.

Vested Interest Overruled the Budget
What Stockman encountered had very little to do with balancing the budget and a lot more to do with representing the vested interests of a few big corporations.

When, for example, proposing cuts from the Export-Import Bank, which provides subsidized financing for international trade which including direct loans to companies like Boeing, Lockheed, General Electric, Westinghouse, McDonnell Douglas, Western Electric, Combustion Engineering, Stockman was only applying what Reagan considered a fundamental policy principle- the free market principles and reduced government interference.

Stockman thought the trade subsidies offended the free-market principles that all conservatives espouse—in particular, President Reagan's objective of withdrawing Washington from business decision-making. Supporters of the subsidies made a practical argument: the U.S. companies, big as they were, needed the financial subsidies to stay even against government-subsidized competition from Europe and Japan.

There clearly had been some mis-communication. The free market principles, everybody had assumed, meant that corporations would not be interfered with. The fact that it could also mean that taxpayers would not be subsiding corporations never seemed to occur to anyone in charge. Simply put, according to the cabinet secretaries, there were promises made and under no circumstances could they be broken, balanced budget or not.

The counter-offensive against the cut was led by Commerce Secretary Malcolm Baldrige and U.S. Trade Representative William Brock, who argued eloquently before the budget working group for a partial restoration of Ex-Im funds. By Stockman's account, the two "fought, argued, pounded the table," and the meeting seemed headed for deadlock. "I sort of innocently asked, well, isn't there a terrible political spin on this? It's my impression that most of the money goes to a handful of big corporations, and if we are ever caught not cutting this while we're biting deeply into the social programs, we're going to have big problems."

Stockman asked if anyone at the table had any relevant data. Deputy Secretary of the Treasury Tim McNamar thereupon produced a list of Ex-Im's major beneficiaries (a list that Stockman had given him before the meeting). "So then I went into this demagogic tirade about how in the world can I cut food stamps and social services and CETA jobs and EDA jobs and you're going to tell me you can't give up one penny for Boeing?"

Despite all the in-fighting and the inconclusive results, it was Reagan himself who, on September 29, 1981, spoke up the idea of a free market with little government interference. Reagan told the American people.

“We who live in free market societies believe that growth, prosperity, and ultimately human fulfillment are created from the bottom up, not the government down...This is the one irrefutable lesson of the entire postwar period, contradicting the notion that rigid government controls are essential to economic development.”

Some critics have pointed that this was, in fact, Reagan’s political blind spot, his failure to recognize that government regulation might well serve the interests of business by promoting fairness in competition. Additionally, regulation might serve to protect the consumer from wholesale greed and corrupt dealing. In short, deregulation meant a lack of oversight. (This fact seems to escaped him but it did not escape the neo-conservative administrations that followed him.)...

The other problem with his supply-side program? There was, he confessed, never any real organization to the cuts in spending.

"The defense numbers got out of control and we were doing that whole budget-cutting exercise so frenetically. In other words, you were juggling details, pushing people, and going from one session to another, trying to cut housing programs here and rural electric there, and we were doing it so fast, we didn't know where we were ending up for sure ...
In other words, we should have designed those pieces to be more compatible. But the pieces were moving on independent tracks—the tax program, where we were going on spending, and the defense program, which was just a bunch of numbers written on a piece of paper. And it didn't quite mesh. That's what happened. But, you see, for about a month and a half we got away with that because of the novelty of all these budget reductions."

If nothing else, Stockman's confession reveals an administration without any coherent organization and one essentially "faking it." In any case, once the plan had been introduced there was nothing else to do but to trot it out and sell it as best as they could. That was something Reagan knew how to do. Selling an idea was his gift.

- See more at: http://nomadicpolitics.blogspot.com/201 ... pD0sT.dpuf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

And even with history played out before them and indisputable numbers, conks are still buying what Reagan sold.

[Cap'n Cat]

I’m about your age trip, and there is a clear difference between the way Bush 2 and Obama operate. Clear difference.

Also if the press was anywhere near as critical of Obama as they were of Bush there would be nonstop uproar from the sheeple. Obama has shown zero accountability, zero leadership ability, and nothing but deflection and dodging of the numerous scandals. If Bush had even half of the scandals Obama currently has the press would have not let anyone forgotten about them and not let him off the hook like they have with Obama. Just imagine the uproar if Bush used his “phone and pen” to change legislation to his liking. Night and day difference between how the press has treated the two Presidents, and a night and day difference about how those two served/serving as President.

Yeah if it hadn't been for the press Bush would have assumed his rightful position as the greatest President in the history of 'murica.

Hornet needs to take some classes to catch up.

[Baldy]

I’m about your age trip, and there is a clear difference between the way Bush 2 and Obama operate. Clear difference.

Also if the press was anywhere near as critical of Obama as they were of Bush there would be nonstop uproar from the sheeple. Obama has shown zero accountability, zero leadership ability, and nothing but deflection and dodging of the numerous scandals. If Bush had even half of the scandals Obama currently has the press would have not let anyone forgotten about them and not let him off the hook like they have with Obama. Just imagine the uproar if Bush used his “phone and pen” to change legislation to his liking. Night and day difference between how the press has treated the two Presidents, and a night and day difference about how those two served/serving as President.

Yeah if it hadn't been for the press Bush would have assumed his rightful position as the greatest President in the history of 'murica.

It's OK houndy, not everyone is nuanced enough to see just how wonderful Obama has been for not only our great country, but for the entire world.

[houndawg]

Yeah if it hadn't been for the press Bush would have assumed his rightful position as the greatest President in the history of 'murica.

It's OK houndy, not everyone is nuanced enough to see just how wonderful Obama has been for not only our great country, but for the entire world.

DOW just hit 17,000.

[CitadelGrad]

It's OK houndy, not everyone is nuanced enough to see just how wonderful Obama has been for not only our great country, but for the entire world.

DOW just hit 17,000.

Fed-induced boom & bust.

[Baldy]

It's OK houndy, not everyone is nuanced enough to see just how wonderful Obama has been for not only our great country, but for the entire world.

DOW just hit 17,000.

...and al-Qaeda is on the run too, correct?

[travelinman67]

Memories fade...


Still Reagan by a long shot

Indeed. Carter challenged America to change its ways, become part of the world community and to sacrifice a little. Lazy fucks would have nothing to do with it and elected fucking Nero, who shit on a us, the world and our past, setting the stage for fuckheads like Rove, Cheney, W, Rummy, Riebus, Palin, Cruz and Paul.

[BlueHen86]

Indeed. Carter challenged America to change its ways, become part of the world community and to sacrifice a little. Lazy fucks would have nothing to do with it and elected fucking Nero, who shit on a us, the world and our past, setting the stage for fuckheads like Rove, Cheney, W, Rummy, Riebus, Palin, Cruz and Paul.

Jimmy Carter is a great human being, he was a lousy President, but he is no moron.

[Baldy]

The hoax of reaganomics...
And even with history played out before them and indisputable numbers, conks are still buying what Reagan sold.

Jeezus H. (for you Z) Fucking Christ...

I'm so glad you opened our eyes, kalm. Who would know more about Reagan and his philosophy than some "progressive" nit wit with a stick up his ass writing a targeted hit piece for anything other than your and his fucked up world view.

You and Cappy sound like Chuck Schumer or any other brain dead Donk when they try to give "advice" to Conks on how to get elected. You need to not focus on Obamacare but on immigration reform or gun control instead.

Reagan was certainly no George Washington, but he has EASILY been the best president over the past 50 years. Then again, the bar has been set so fucking low.

[houndawg]

DOW just hit 17,000.

...and al-Qaeda is on the run too, correct?

they welcome us with open arms.

[AZGrizFan]

The hoax of reaganomics...
And even with history played out before them and indisputable numbers, conks are still buying what Reagan sold.

Jeezus H. (for you Z) Fucking Christ...

I'm so glad you opened our eyes, kalm. Who would know more about Reagan and his philosophy than some "progressive" nit wit with a stick up his ass writing a targeted hit piece for anything other than your and his fucked up world view.

You and Cappy sound like Chuck Schumer or any other brain dead Donk when they try to give "advice" to Conks on how to get elected. You need to not focus on Obamacare but on immigration reform or gun control instead.

Reagan was certainly no George Washington, but he has EASILY been the best president over the past 50 years. Then again, the bar has been set so fucking low.

Thank you, Mr. Bald One.

[AZGrizFan]

It's OK houndy, not everyone is nuanced enough to see just how wonderful Obama has been for not only our great country, but for the entire world.

DOW just hit 17,000.

And when QE-Infinity stops pumping free money into the economy and the Dow tanks, will that ALSO be credited to Obama?

[kalm]

The hoax of reaganomics...
And even with history played out before them and indisputable numbers, conks are still buying what Reagan sold.

Jeezus H. (for you Z) Fucking Christ...

I'm so glad you opened our eyes, kalm. Who would know more about Reagan and his philosophy than some "progressive" nit wit with a stick up his ass writing a targeted hit piece for anything other than your and his fucked up world view.

You and Cappy sound like Chuck Schumer or any other brain dead Donk when they try to give "advice" to Conks on how to get elected. You need to not focus on Obamacare but on immigration reform or gun control instead.

Reagan was certainly no George Washington, but he has EASILY been the best president over the past 50 years. Then again, the bar has been set so fucking low.

You're most certainly welcome!

[Baldy]

...and al-Qaeda is on the run too, correct?

they welcome us with open arms.

If you like your health care plan, you'll be able to keep your health care plan.

[OL FU]

they welcome us with open arms.

If you like your health care plan, you'll be able to keep your health care plan.

I'm still wondering why my premium went up 10% instead of dropping $2500/year

[houndawg]

they welcome us with open arms.

If you like your health care plan, you'll be able to keep your health care plan.

Exactly!

That's why I'm keeping mine!