Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Forbes)   Political pundits surprised to hear that a man who ran on a concept of "Change we can believe in" would be losing many supporters when he fails to follow through. Apparently, people didnt get the change that they wanted   ( forbes.com) divider line
    More: Obvious, political pundits  
•       •       •

1521 clicks; posted to Politics » on 03 Jun 2012 at 8:14 AM (5 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



383 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2012-06-03 01:09:03 PM  

Sabyen91: hubiestubert: Sabyen91: X-boxershorts: However, Obama has been fairly cowardly in his prosecution of said War on Terror and knowing that AQ has been pretty much shredded to bits, he could try to declare victory.

[images3.wikia.nocookie.net image 300x300]

You know who else declared mission accomplished?

Mitt Romney in France?


No, he just took credit for the Normandy Invasion.
 
2012-06-03 01:11:44 PM  
Reading through this thread there is an awful lot of criticism of Obama's record to date and a lot of really good explanations why those criticisms are largely unjust and why Obama's record is actually pretty good ion light of the facts.

What there isn't a lot of (read none) are reasons why anyone with a functioning brain would want to vote for the GOP.

There doesn't seem to be a case to even make there.

They've been whiny, horrible, hyper-partisan, party-over-country, obstructionist corporate meat puppets with an unsavory penchant for theocratic authoritarianism from the get-go. Dragging their heals in, not allowing appointments to be made, issuing secret holds, abusing the filibuster at levels nobody's ever seen before, pretending to come to a consensus and then still voting against stuff at the eleventh hour, they are, in a word, pathetic.

Their economic plan?

Crush unions. Deregulate everything. No environmental standards.

Oh and MOAR TAX CUTS for those who really really don't need them.

So again, why would anyone vote GOP in 2012?
 
2012-06-03 01:13:32 PM  
ion = in

heals = heels

/That's it, I'm firing my editor.
 
2012-06-03 01:23:41 PM  

Rug Doctor: This is really just an awfully written headline.


In Subby's defense, it was also a awfully written article.
 
2012-06-03 01:57:53 PM  
People love the idea of changing from something. The trouble is, that also involves changing to something, which they don't like nearly as much.
 
2012-06-03 02:01:33 PM  
It took us 30 years to dig the hole. It's going to take more than 3 to fill it.
 
2012-06-03 02:22:16 PM  

Wyalt Derp: tl;dr? Here's a summary: Just like the Right, the Left has a lunatic fringe who hate Obama too, but they have been left isolated out in the wilderness rather than embraced into the mainstream.


That was pretty much what I got. I'm the libbiest lib that ever libbed, not to mention signed on to Moveon.org, and I get none of those emails. A few paranoid ones about drones, yes, but they only mention Obama as the person to petition. Methinks this guy is making shiat up.
 
2012-06-03 02:24:07 PM  
This is different because black.
 
2012-06-03 02:33:38 PM  
Let's do away with the "Obama ended the Iraq war" lie.

Obama tried to extend our stay in Iraq past the end of the Bush timetable. The duly elected government in Iraq refused to let him do so:

President Obama's speech formally declaring that the last 43,000 U.S. troops will leave Iraq by the end of the year was designed to mask an unpleasant truth: The troops aren't being withdrawn because the U.S. wants them out. They're leaving because the Iraqi government refused to let them stay.

Trying to extend our war in Iraq past the end of the Bush deadline for withdrawal? Fail.

Let's remind ourselves of what Obama promised for Iraq in the last presidential campaign cycle: if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war.

Of course I'm sure more assholes will show up and try to convince you that Obama never did anything so left wing as to oppose war. (eye roll)

(derp)
Obama always promised us endless warmongering!
(/derp)
 
2012-06-03 02:34:53 PM  

cman: I find it rather funny.

Dems ask for single payer universal healthcare ran by the Gov. Dems got an individual mandate healthcare with corporations
Dems ask for the repeal of the Patriot Act. The Patriot Act is expanded and resigned.
Dems ask for the Bush tax cuts to be undone. Obama signs another extension.
Dems ask for human rights to be respected. Obama launches drone attacks and kills an American citizen without a trial.
Dems ask for gay marriage. Obama claims in 2008 that he did not support it, backtracks and says that a discrimination issue should be decided by the states
Dems ask for the Wallstreet Bankers to be farked up the ass. Obama does nothing to them at all
Dems ask for leeway on medical marijuana, Obama waits a few months then steps up on the federal raids

I am just showing you guys what Dems want and what they got. I am not a Dem so that makes me biased. However, this is how I view it.

He did end the Iraq war, and he did eventually support marriage equality (took a lot of budging on that one, however). But besides that, how do you Dems feel about his policies?


Was it painful for you to admit that Obama's done anything at all?
 
2012-06-03 02:35:51 PM  

BullBearMS:
(/derp)


I'm still trying to find a third party candidate to vote for. Got any suggestions?
 
2012-06-03 02:39:44 PM  

Mrtraveler01: BullBearMS:
(/derp)

I'm still trying to find a third party candidate to vote for. Got any suggestions?


Gary Johnson? Seems like he had a very good record as governor of NM, so he might be the best option if you like libertarians.
 
2012-06-03 02:43:10 PM  

TheJoe03: Mrtraveler01: BullBearMS:
(/derp)

I'm still trying to find a third party candidate to vote for. Got any suggestions?

Gary Johnson? Seems like he had a very good record as governor of NM, so he might be the best option if you like libertarians.


I'll pass.

He didn't throw Paul Ryan's budget plan in the trash where it belongs. I can't take anyone like that seriously no matter how much of a nice guy he is.

And he does seem like a nice guy.
 
2012-06-03 02:45:44 PM  

quatchi: Their economic plan?

Crush unions. Deregulate everything. No environmental standards.

Oh and MOAR TAX CUTS for those who really really don't need them.

So again, why would anyone vote GOP in 2012?


Crush unions: I suppose it doesn't count when Obama decides to start allowing Mexican long haul truckers to take jobs away from the teamsters?

Today's announcement by the White House to move forward with opening the U.S. border to long-haul Mexican trucks drew strong condemnations from Teamsters General President Jim Hoffa and highway safety proponents.

It's not enough that the rich are allowed to move the manufacturing jobs to Mexico. Now they want to take away the service jobs inside the United States as well. Why pay Americans a living wage when you can buy off the politicians?

Deregulate everything: Glass-Steagall was brought down under Clinton. Brooksley Borne's efforts to regulate Derivatives were also shot down under Clinton. Those two factors led directly to the recent destruction of our economy.

No environmental standards: Obama is pushing to fast track the Keystone pipeline and to open the arctic to drilling.

Moar tax cuts: When the Bush tax cuts finally expired, Obama fought his own party to have them renewed.

In urging lawmakers to vote for his tax deal, President Obama is using one of his go-to lines from the healthcare debate, according to a Democratic lawmaker.

Obama is telling members of Congress that failure to pass the tax-cut legislation could result in the end of his presidency, Rep. Peter DeFazio (Ore.) said.

"The White House is putting on tremendous pressure, making phone calls, the president is making phone calls saying this is the end of his presidency if he doesn't get this bad deal," he told CNN's Eliot Spitzer.
 
2012-06-03 02:49:41 PM  

PowerSlacker: MisterTweak: Despite the frothing hysteria and demands of both the fanatical greenies and anti-government medicare recipients, the presidency doesn't allow much deviation from year to year.

Both Bushes (41 & 43) were arguably to the left of both Obama and Clinton. Reagan and Nixon were both clearly more in favor of a strong federal government than were Johnson or Kennedy.

Look at just the policies, and Obama comes out as an emotionless, number-crunching technocrat. Bush 43 is a European welfare socialist, Nixon looks like Nikita Khrushchev, and Reagan looks like the love child of Berlusconi and Kadafi. Clinton's actual policies were closer to Ron Paul than Pol Pot, and GHWB looks pretty much like President Mitt Romney - but with a better cabinet.

What the hell is this logic doing in a Fark Politics thread?


Every fark politics thread contains one or two intelligent, thoughtful, and informative posts.

But nobody replies to them.

So, the better question is, What the hell are you doing replying to an intelligent, thoughtful, and informative post in a Fark Politics thread?

/note that since your post was dumb, I am not violating the rule here
 
2012-06-03 02:49:46 PM  

BullBearMS: quatchi: Their economic plan?

Crush unions. Deregulate everything. No environmental standards.

Oh and MOAR TAX CUTS for those who really really don't need them.

So again, why would anyone vote GOP in 2012?

Crush unions: I suppose it doesn't count when Obama decides to start allowing Mexican long haul truckers to take jobs away from the teamsters?

Today's announcement by the White House to move forward with opening the U.S. border to long-haul Mexican trucks drew strong condemnations from Teamsters General President Jim Hoffa and highway safety proponents.

It's not enough that the rich are allowed to move the manufacturing jobs to Mexico. Now they want to take away the service jobs inside the United States as well. Why pay Americans a living wage when you can buy off the politicians?

Deregulate everything: Glass-Steagall was brought down under Clinton. Brooksley Borne's efforts to regulate Derivatives were also shot down under Clinton. Those two factors led directly to the recent destruction of our economy.

No environmental standards: Obama is pushing to fast track the Keystone pipeline and to open the arctic to drilling.

Moar tax cuts: When the Bush tax cuts finally expired, Obama fought his own party to have them renewed.

In urging lawmakers to vote for his tax deal, President Obama is using one of his go-to lines from the healthcare debate, according to a Democratic lawmaker.

Obama is telling members of Congress that failure to pass the tax-cut legislation could result in the end of his presidency, Rep. Peter DeFazio (Ore.) said.

"The White House is putting on tremendous pressure, making phone calls, the president is making phone calls saying this is the end of his presidency if he doesn't get this bad deal," he told CNN's Eliot Spitzer.


Which third party should I vote for then?

You keep dodging what should be a very easy question.
 
2012-06-03 02:56:12 PM  

BullBearMS: Moar tax cuts: When the Bush tax cuts finally expired, Obama fought his own party to have them renewed.



False. Democrats had to vote for extension of tax cuts if they wanted unemployment insurance to also be extended.

Working with the opposite party to pass bills, how does it work?
 
2012-06-03 02:58:29 PM  

Mrtraveler01: BullBearMS: quatchi:
Which third party should I vote for then?

You keep dodging what should be a very easy question.


Sorry for butting in here but. . .

It isn't that easy of a question because the voting system from the EC to the sometimes impossibly hard standards to meet in the states for third parties, make the two party system a fixture. I'm beginning to believe that if I ever want to be able to vote for someone with out holding my nose it's the very structure of how our votes are counted that will have to change.
 
2012-06-03 02:59:30 PM  
 
2012-06-03 02:59:44 PM  

BullBearMS: The duly elected government in Iraq refused to let him do so:



I think it's cute you believe the Iraqi government, a puppet of America, had any real power.
 
2012-06-03 03:02:44 PM  

Zombie Butler: I'm beginning to believe that if I ever want to be able to vote for someone with out holding my nose it's the very structure of how our votes are counted that will have to change.


Congrats! You figured it out.

Beats the "both sides are bad so we should just sit out and let the Republicans win" strategy that some on Fark are taking.
 
2012-06-03 03:03:12 PM  

BullBearMS: President Barack Obama delivered his most explicit threat yet that the United States will attack Iran if that's what it takes to prevent it from developing a nuclear bomb.



Coming across as tough on the war on terror and against enemies of America, shocking that a President would do that. /sarcasm
 
2012-06-03 03:04:09 PM  

intelligent comment below: BullBearMS: The duly elected government in Iraq refused to let him do so:


I think it's cute you believe the Iraqi government, a puppet of America, had any real power.


I just thought that the companies that are getting the oil money, now have their security in place , can get the government out of it's business. "Thanks for paying for the army to take the oil fields. Now get the fark out so we can conduct business in private."
 
2012-06-03 03:07:52 PM  

Mrtraveler01: BullBearMS:
(/derp)

I'm still trying to find a third party candidate to vote for. Got any suggestions?


You might as well just vote for Romney then.

All this talk of what Obama has done that seems conservative is exactly what Clinton did. If you don't have a mandate in government and need votes from the other side, you steal a lot of their platform. Tough on terror, fiscally moderate, etc. Leaving them with no differing politics in important parts.

Clinton embraced welfare reform and balancing the budget against the wishes of his party to get some votes from the Republicans and take away their largest arguments. Obama is doing the same thing here.

All conservative policies of Obama are to appease enough Republicans to help him with other things.
 
2012-06-03 03:08:06 PM  

intelligent comment below: False. Democrats had to vote for extension of tax cuts if they wanted unemployment insurance to also be extended.


Because unemployment had never been extended by both parties multiple times before that?

Because it would be a bad move politically to allow the Republicans to kill an unemployment extension on the eve of the mid-term elections?

Or because you like making excuses for the actions of the Democrats?

Obama on the campaign trail discussing the Bush tax cuts: "George Bush's tax cuts may not offend McCain's conscience, but they offend my conscious"

Obama after election when the Bush tax cuts expire: "Progressives, you must extend those tax cuts that I had previously claimed 'offended my conscious' or it will be the end of my Presidency!"
 
2012-06-03 03:08:59 PM  

Zombie Butler: intelligent comment below: BullBearMS: The duly elected government in Iraq refused to let him do so:


I think it's cute you believe the Iraqi government, a puppet of America, had any real power.

I just thought that the companies that are getting the oil money, now have their security in place , can get the government out of it's business. "Thanks for paying for the army to take the oil fields. Now get the fark out so we can conduct business in private."



The truth is Obama wanted out of Iraq, and did that to make the world think the Iraqi government was separate and powerful enough to tell America to get lost.

And yes, now all the bidding for the oil contracts is taking place, and western firms are eating it up.
 
2012-06-03 03:10:23 PM  

intelligent comment below: Coming across as tough on the war on terror and against enemies of America, shocking that a President would do that. /sarcasm


Yes. It was only bad when Bush worked to lie America into a war for oil. If Obama does the same thing, it's just plain awesome.
 
2012-06-03 03:11:38 PM  

intelligent comment below: The truth is Obama wanted out of Iraq


Again. This is a lie. Obama tried to extend the war in Iraq past the end of the Bush deadline for withdrawal. Iraq's government would not allow him to do so.
 
2012-06-03 03:12:38 PM  

BullBearMS: Because unemployment had never been extended by both parties multiple times before that?


That means nothing and is not relevant here. Republicans voted against unemployment extensions


Because it would be a bad move politically to allow the Republicans to kill an unemployment extension on the eve of the mid-term elections?


What alternative universe do you live in?

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2010/11/18/5489804-gop-blocks-un e mployment-extension?lite


Or because you like making excuses for the actions of the Democrats?


Sounds like you're making excuses for Republicans, you want everyone to believe Democrats had complete power of everything and Obama could snap his fingers and create and pass laws.


Obama on the campaign trail discussing the Bush tax cuts: "George Bush's tax cuts may not offend McCain's conscience, but they offend my conscious"


Separation of powers, how does it work?


Obama after election when the Bush tax cuts expire: "Progressives, you must extend those tax cuts that I had previously claimed 'offended my conscious' or it will be the end of my Presidency!"


Political compromise, how does it work?

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57380261-503544/congress-passe s -extension-of-payroll-tax-cut-unemployment-benefits/
 
2012-06-03 03:13:46 PM  

BullBearMS: intelligent comment below: Coming across as tough on the war on terror and against enemies of America, shocking that a President would do that. /sarcasm

Yes. It was only bad when Bush worked to lie America into a war for oil. If Obama does the same thing, it's just plain awesome.



What 10 year 3 trillion dollar war did Obama lie you into?


BullBearMS: intelligent comment below: The truth is Obama wanted out of Iraq

Again. This is a lie. Obama tried to extend the war in Iraq past the end of the Bush deadline for withdrawal. Iraq's government would not allow him to do so.



You just have no idea how politics works. If you believe the Iraqi government was powerful enough to tell America what to do then I have a bridge in NYC to sell you.
 
2012-06-03 03:14:50 PM  
I would encourage anyone that doesn't want to see every thread from now until the election shiat on by lying Republican shills to report them to the moderators.

You know who I'm talking about.
 
2012-06-03 03:15:46 PM  

Zombie Butler: intelligent comment below: BullBearMS: The duly elected government in Iraq refused to let him do so:


I think it's cute you believe the Iraqi government, a puppet of America, had any real power.

I just thought that the companies that are getting the oil money, now have their security in place , can get the government out of it's business. "Thanks for paying for the army to take the oil fields. Now get the fark out so we can conduct business in private."


Well, we do have a small army of blackwater type private security contractors till in Iraq.

However, the Iraqi government absolutely refused to give Americans the blanket immunity from prosecution for illegal acts against their people that our military had.
 
2012-06-03 03:16:14 PM  

intelligent comment below: Sounds like you're making excuses for Republicans, you want everyone to believe Democrats had complete power of everything and Obama could snap his fingers and create and pass laws.


But believe us, he's a liberal who's just looking out for the best interest of liberals.

And somehow, letting the GOP win is in the best interest of liberals although he hasn't been able to explain why.
 
2012-06-03 03:19:12 PM  

BullBearMS: However, the Iraqi government absolutely refused to give Americans the blanket immunity from prosecution for illegal acts against their people that our military had.



Oh yeah that powerful Iraqi government bossing America around...

Just stop it.
 
2012-06-03 03:27:36 PM  
It took Bush eight years to fark this up- and Obama is supposed to fix it in four?

You're all stupid.
 
2012-06-03 03:29:54 PM  

BullBearMS: Zombie Butler: intelligent comment below: BullBearMS: The duly elected government in Iraq refused to let him do so:


I think it's cute you believe the Iraqi government, a puppet of America, had any real power.

I just thought that the companies that are getting the oil money, now have their security in place , can get the government out of it's business. "Thanks for paying for the army to take the oil fields. Now get the fark out so we can conduct business in private."

Well, we do have a small army of blackwater type private security contractors till in Iraq.

However, the Iraqi government absolutely refused to give Americans the blanket immunity from prosecution for illegal acts against their people that our military had.


I knew Blackwater (whatever it's name is now) is Private but I didn't know we (taxpayers) are still paying for it. So the oil companies getting rich off of this are getting the best of both worlds, no government interference and an army paid for by the American people? Sneaky farking bastards.
 
2012-06-03 03:31:21 PM  

intelligent comment below: Political compromise, how does it work?


Claiming to oppose things when you run for office and then fighting for the very things you claimed to oppose once you gain office.

How does it work?

"To be clear," Sen. Barack Obama. D-Illinois, spokesperson Bill Burton told Talking Points Memo last October about the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, or FISA, "Barack will support a filibuster of any bill that includes retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies."

Reaffirmed Obama's Senate office in December: "Senator Obama unequivocally opposes giving retroactive immunity to telecommunications companies and has cosponsored Senator Dodd's efforts to remove that provision from the FISA bill. Granting such immunity undermines the constitutional protections Americans trust the Congress to protect. Senator Obama supports a filibuster of this bill, and strongly urges others to do the same...Senator Obama will not be among those voting to end the filibuster."


Of coruse, Obama voted to give this retroactive immunity to those telecoms as soon as he had won the nomination.

Then, after he was in office, he fought to shut down legal challenges against these same companies:

The Obama administration is urging the Supreme Court to halt a legal challenge weighing the constitutionality of a once-secret warrantless surveillance program targeting Americans' communications

Obama was awfully concerned about undermining constitutional protections before he made it into the oval office, wasn't he?

The Obama administration is urging Congress not to adopt legislation that would impose constitutional safeguards on Americans' e-mail

Not so much after he was in the oval office.

The Obama administration is urging the Supreme Court to allow the government, without a court warrant, to affix GPS devices on suspects' vehicles to track their every move.

The Justice Department, saying "a person has no reasonable expectation of privacy in his movements (.pdf) from one place to another," is demanding the justices undo a lower court decision
 
2012-06-03 03:32:39 PM  

hubiestubert: bulldg4life: However, the indefinite detention thing still bothers me. I don't think Obama will get my vote. And, I don't care about the exact reasons for GITMO or if I'm a silly single issue voter....it's a big issue.

It IS a big issue, but from a practical point, Obama CAN'T close Gitmo. Cannot. The last Administration borked due process and chain of evidence so badly, we have a ton of folks being held, who simply put, cannot be tried. They also can't really be repatriated back to their country, because they'll be a focus for recruitment if not active participants. The legal Limbo these folks are in was inherited, and at best, we can try to deal with the mess that was left. Bush and his team worked every legal angle they could to insure that folks didn't realize how badly they bungled these arrests and detentions. So badly, that no court in the nation can ever convict them. We release them from that Limbo, they go free, and become the focal point for a lot of groups. Many will go back and become actives who will just wind up getting captured again, or shot.



of course they can be repatriated back to their country. of course they can be tried for their crimes or released here or abroad. they have to be released here or sent back. if the government feels they need to put a tail on them for the rest of their lives fine, but we don't get to keep people locked up forever because someone f*cked up prosecution and we think they will be acquitted if tried in a court of law.

the constitution guarantees no one will be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law. due process of law cannot be the president declared you are dangerous.

moreover why am I supposed to believe the president has enough military resources to wage a war against Libya without securing additional funds from the legislature but not enough resources to put the remaining 169 detainees on a military transport ship and take them to brig at Norfolk naval base (145 beds1) and the naval consolidate brig at Charleston (288 beds2)?

when you apologize and for this shiat you become the problem. you are an authoritarian and the enabler of crimes against the constitution.

www.globalsecurity.org

1Yaser Esam Hamdi, captured in Afghanistan, then transferred to the Guantanamo Bay detention camps, in Cuba, was transferred to Norfolk, when it was realized he was an American citizen.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Navy_Brig,_Norfolk_Virgini a

2The brig recently housed several enemy combatants, including Yasser Hamdi, José Padilla and Ali Saleh Kahlah al-Marri.[5] Al-Marri was the last of the three to remain at the brig, being transferred to a civilian prison after he pled guilty in 2009.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naval_Consolidated_Brig,_Charleston
 
2012-06-03 03:32:46 PM  
BullBearMS:

Still waiting for a third party option.

Elizabeth Warren isn't one because:

A. She's a Democrat
B. She's running for Senate in Massachusetts on the Democratic ticket
 
2012-06-03 03:36:28 PM  

intelligent comment below: Oh yeah that powerful Iraqi government bossing America around...

Just stop it.


You're embarrassing yourself.
 
2012-06-03 03:37:40 PM  

BullBearMS: intelligent comment below: Political compromise, how does it work?

Claiming to oppose things when you run for office and then fighting for the very things you claimed to oppose once you gain office.

How does it work?

"To be clear," Sen. Barack Obama. D-Illinois, spokesperson Bill Burton told Talking Points Memo last October about the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, or FISA, "Barack will support a filibuster of any bill that includes retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies."

Reaffirmed Obama's Senate office in December: "Senator Obama unequivocally opposes giving retroactive immunity to telecommunications companies and has cosponsored Senator Dodd's efforts to remove that provision from the FISA bill. Granting such immunity undermines the constitutional protections Americans trust the Congress to protect. Senator Obama supports a filibuster of this bill, and strongly urges others to do the same...Senator Obama will not be among those voting to end the filibuster."

Of coruse, Obama voted to give this retroactive immunity to those telecoms as soon as he had won the nomination.

Then, after he was in office, he fought to shut down legal challenges against these same companies:

The Obama administration is urging the Supreme Court to halt a legal challenge weighing the constitutionality of a once-secret warrantless surveillance program targeting Americans' communications

Obama was awfully concerned about undermining constitutional protections before he made it into the oval office, wasn't he?

The Obama administration is urging Congress not to adopt legislation that would impose constitutional safeguards on Americans' e-mail

Not so much after he was in the oval office.

The Obama administration is urging the Supreme Court to allow the government, without a court warrant, to affix GPS devices on suspects' vehicles to track their every move.

The Justice Department, saying "a person has no reasonable expectation of privacy in his movements (.p ...


So which third party option would take a more desirable stance to these issues?
 
2012-06-03 03:45:40 PM  

BullBearMS: Claiming to oppose things when you run for office and then fighting for the very things you claimed to oppose once you gain office.



You just have no idea how government works. You aren't electing a king. I wouldn't expect anything different from a libertarian.

swahnhennessy: intelligent comment below: Oh yeah that powerful Iraqi government bossing America around...

Just stop it.

You're embarrassing yourself.



I posted facts to every argument I made. You haven't addressed anything and instead want to insult me without factual basis. Go troll somewhere else, useless tool.
 
2012-06-03 03:52:36 PM  
Greater than 90 percent of 'that's can be omitted, this headline is a good example. Read it without them.
 
2012-06-03 03:53:26 PM  
To me, this election is simple: Barack Obama took a shrinking economy and made it grow almost immediately. Sure, it's not growing as fast or as evenly as we would like, but the fact remains that that is growing, and that 2000-2008 proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the economic policies of the Republican Party inherently cause the economy to shrink, The choice is between Obama's slow growth or another GOP recession.

And let's not forget how astonishing it is that we're even talking about the economy. Remember 2000-2008, when all we could talk about was national security? The economy has grown since then, it hasn't gotten any worse. That's objective reality. The only reason we can talk about the economy is that Barack Obama's administration has essentially wiped Islamofacism off the face of the map.
 
2012-06-03 04:00:29 PM  

hubiestubert: from a practical point, Obama CAN'T close Gitmo


Awwww... Remember when Obama claimed that our black hole prisons housing foreign nationals without charges or without a trial offended him and something should be done about them?

As a parent, I can also imagine the terror I would feel if one of my family members were rounded up in the middle of the night and sent to Guantánamo without even getting one chance to ask why they were being held and being able to prove their innocence.

Of course, this is the same Obama who first began fighting for indefinite detention without a trial, even for American citizens, only weeks after he made it into the oval office.

Now that a Federal Judge has stricken down that portion of the NDAA (Which Obama has both fought for and claimed he never even wanted in the first place) he is in court fighting to have that ruling overturned:

The Obama administration has asked a federal judge to reverse her order barring enforcement of part of the National Defense Authorization Act that permits indefinite military detention.

Pretending to oppose things and then fighting for the very things you once claimed to oppose.

How does it work?
 
2012-06-03 04:01:40 PM  

BullBearMS: Pretending to oppose things and then fighting for the very things you once claimed to oppose.

How does it work?


Which third party candidate should we vote for instead that will take a tougher stand on these things?

/Still waiting for an answer
 
2012-06-03 04:12:53 PM  

udhq: To me, this election is simple: Barack Obama took a shrinking economy and made it grow almost immediately.


To me this election is also very simple. President Obama took an economy that had recently been destroyed by the fraudulent actions of the obscenely wealthy and instead of keeping his promise to "fix the economy" he chose to protect those who had destroyed it from the consequences of their illegal actions.

Now we have the same banks, now even larger and dangerous than before, headed by the same people, and engaging in the same actions that destroyed our economy so recently.

See: Citibank, supposedly the smartest bank on Wall Street, losing billions gambling on the derivatives market despite the fact that they are FDIC insured.

This isn't "fixing the economy".
 
2012-06-03 04:17:15 PM  

BullBearMS: udhq: To me, this election is simple: Barack Obama took a shrinking economy and made it grow almost immediately.

To me this election is also very simple. President Obama took an economy that had recently been destroyed by the fraudulent actions of the obscenely wealthy and instead of keeping his promise to "fix the economy" he chose to protect those who had destroyed it from the consequences of their illegal actions.

Now we have the same banks, now even larger and dangerous than before, headed by the same people, and engaging in the same actions that destroyed our economy so recently.

See: Citibank, supposedly the smartest bank on Wall Street, losing billions gambling on the derivatives market despite the fact that they are FDIC insured.

This isn't "fixing the economy".


And you'll be voting for...?
 
2012-06-03 04:39:59 PM  

BullBearMS: Let's do away with the "Obama ended the Iraq war" lie.

Obama tried to extend our stay in Iraq past the end of the Bush timetable.


Let's do away with the "Bush timetable" lie, shall we?

Getting out of Iraq was an idea that was forced on Bush by the left and by the Iraqi people and global pressure. Generals were forced into early retirement for bringing up Bush's evident lack of an exit strategy for Iraq back in those bad old days so calling the timeline the "Bush timeline" is more than a little hilarious at this point.

Obama was the guy who did all the heavy lifting after Dumbya reluctantly signed off on a timetable and made sure the troops got out in an orderly fashion that did not resemble Saigon in 1975.

This endless repetition of the talking point that Obama is some kind of warmonger because at one point in the process he asked the Iraqi government if American troops could remain past the date specified in said timeline and was told "not if you don't want them under the authority of the Iraqi justice system" is patently absurd.

The fact that the GOP and their backers are all too eager to engage Iran, (the last nationalized oil fields in the area) rather undercuts your concern trolling and BSABSV3rdP shtick on this particular subject by my lights.

Not that that's gonna stop you, just saying.
 
2012-06-03 04:50:02 PM  
 
Displayed 50 of 383 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter





Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report