What Exactly Has Obama Done To Make You Hate Him?

There is a long list of such items. Just from the top of my head giving large chunks of GM and Chrysler from stockholders to unions, nationalization of health care, appointing Anita Dunn avowed Marxist and public praiser of Chairman Mao. Where have you been for the past two year?

Gm and Chrysler is now making a profit. We are being paid back for that loan and millions of jobs were saved due to the extraordinary actions of this administration

Love the new Health Care Reform bill - we were able to change from BCBS to AVMED - saved my boss $2,900 (approx) per employee. We all had pre-existing and was unable to change for years while BCBS kept raising everything from deductibles to co-pays and now we save on our pharmaceuticals and our co-pays while our deductibles were cut in half. My mother now can get 50% off name-brand perscriptions because she fell into that "donut-hole" and was unable to get the medication she needed. Those are the parts of the bill that effect my life. My kids are out of college and are older than 26 - but I bet there are a lot of parents who are grateful to be able to have their kids continue with health-care after they leave college or home.

Anita Dunn did not avow Marxism - can you please post exactly what Anita Dunn said so everyone can see exactly what you are trying to smear.

I've been right here for the last two years - obviously you've had your eyes focused on Fox and Friends without doing research for yourself.

Any way have a happy New Year - wish people would stop with the lies and distortion just because of party line issues. It doesn't make sense to keep posting crap that has been debunked over and over again.

ah capitalism !

http://www.wsm.ie/attachments/imagecache/local/attachments/nov2009/460_0___30_0_0_0_0_0_capitalism3.jpg

There are many books on the best sellers list all discussing these things

There were books on the best sellers list, eons ago, that said the earth was flat and that the moon was made of cheese. You shoud'nt believe everything you read, it retards original thought, The answer to the question is so elementary; He's Black. Those who hate him, would have the same hatred if he was not the President.

Anita Dunn did not avow Marxism - can you please post exactly what Anita Dunn said so everyone can see exactly what you are trying to smear.

http://spectator.org/blog/2009/10/16/anita-dunn-mao-tse-tung-fan

Anita Dunn: Mao Tse Tung Fan?

Here's a video from Glenn Beck which seems to show interim White House communications director Anita Dunn listing two of her "favorite political philosophers" in a speech: Mother Teresa and... Mao Tse Tung.

(Skip to 4:10 for the Anita Dunn clip)

Dunn initially juxtaposes the two to make it a joke. "Not often coupled with each other," she says, to a few laughs. Dave Weigel thinks the whole thing's a joke that everyone but Glenn Beck gets.

At that point in the video, it is clearly a joke. But then Dunn goes into a somewhat long history of Mao and Chiang Kai Shek in 1947 that's a little bit too bright, and a little too hagiographic. It suggests that she was in fact not joking that Mao is one of her favorite political philosophers. The joke was the juxtaposition between him and Mother Teresa, not her beliefs. Her love of Mao's political philosophy, unfortunately, doesn't seem to be one of the speech's jokes.

If Anita Dunn does not understand what is wrong with citing Mao as a favorite political philosopher, then she is out of her mind. Is there anything in her background to suggest that she is indeed this crazy? Or is this simply a clip taken out of context?

Then again, she is the White House's communications director, and the bottom line is that she's supposed to communicate her political preferences a little better than this.

http://www.examiner.com/orange-county-conservative-in-orlando/maoist-anita-dunn-married-to-lawyer-who-is-paid-millions-by-obama-to-hide-his-birth-certificate

Maoist Anita Dunn married to lawyer who is paid millions by Obama to hide his birth certificate

For those Conservatives paying attention might find WND.com’s article posted this morning about the Maoist Anita Dunn and who she is married to. The culprit is Robert Bauer, the chief of the political law group at Perkins Coie.

WND reports that the Obama campaign has paid Dunn’s husband millions (reported to FEC $1,352,378.95) to hide Obama’s birth certificate and defend him in the birther’s lawsuit.

The WND article points out Bauer’s long history of representing scummy democratic politicians,

The answer to the question is so elementary; He's Black. Those who hate him, would have the same hatred if he was not the President.

It is not 2008. The new normal is to blame Fox News. Calling all a racist who oppose Obama is now passe. It went out after the midterms.

Wow Texasguy

Read exactly what you posted - you debunked yourself across the board and frankly every BS link you posted is just that BS. Gosh, I wish people would look further to the actual backgrounds instead of relying on Beck to give them their daily crap to spew and come on Texasguy World Nut Daily? - can you please post something that is not blathering BS.

Keep believing in Obama. Deny the truth at all costs. At least I have an open mind. Did Anita Dunn not speak those things?

Texasguy01

In one school of psychology this is called "Awfulization;" take something that you personally don't agree with - which is fair game for debate - and streeeeetch and distort it into the Anti-Christ meets the Fall of the Roman Empire, declaring it an absolute fact on par with Newton's Laws of Motion.

It is complete and utter nonsense.

Then again, she [Anita Dunn] is the White House's communications director, and the bottom line is that she's supposed to ...

No she is not the WH communications director. She did serve briefly (5/09 to 9/09).

Dan Pfeiffer has that job now (since 9/09).

WingNutDaily, home of Birtherism, and Glenn Beck's Nazi Tourettes.....they are so reasonable. /sarc

Dunn gave a decent food for thought answer when she named Mother Teresa and Mao in the same sentence, hinting on the irony, sadly lost on the biased and the paranoid.

Was Dinesh D'Souza's retarded anti-colonialism lunancy on Obama a best-seller? Sad...

His love of open Marxism and a desire to remove/replace/destroy capitalism as the foundation of the America economy.

This goes to Obama's supposed state of mind which is being inferred. Communism has been so discredited, I don't know why that old bogeyman is still being trotted out.

Unbridled capitalism has been and continues to be very destructive since it values monetary profits above all else. Presidents since William McKinley and Theodore Roosevelt have worked to modify the total market control and monopolies that business once enjoyed. No one wants to do away with capitalism completely -- Russia and China both have aspects of a free market economy.

Thomas Jefferson, along with James Madison worked assiduously to have an 11th Amendment included into our nation’s original Bill of Rights. This proposed Amendment would have prohibited “monopolies in commerce.” The amendment would have made it illegal for corporations to own other corporations, or to give money to politicians, or to otherwise try to influence elections. Corporations would be chartered by the states for the primary purpose of “serving the public good.” Corporations would possess the legal status not of natural persons but rather of “artificial persons.” This means that they would have only those legal attributes which the state saw fit to grant to them. They would NOT; and indeed could NOT possess the same bundle of rights which actual flesh and blood persons enjoy. Under this proposed amendment neither the 14th Amendment of the US Constitution, nor any provision of that document would protect the artificial entities known of as corporations.

http://soundingcircle.com/newslog2.php/__show_article/_a000195-000205.htm

“I hope we shall crush… in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations, which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and bid defiance to the laws of our country."

http://www.thenation.com/blog/37038/thomas-jefferson-feared-aristocracy-corporations

Thomas Jefferson is probably rolling over in his grave.

DEBEKI;

Please point out where you see Chrylser is turning a profit? Chrysler is the albatross around Obama's neck- I pulled a search and everything I found showed that Chrysler is leaner- but did not turn a profit in 2010.

http://www.npr.org/2010/11/24/131575206/chrysler-leaner-but-still-not-turning-profit

This article shows that they have lost $500 million in 2010. That was as of November 24th.

I was not in favor of turning over either auto industry to the Unions- and shafting the share holders; thankfully I didn't own stock in either- but I know people that did.

Nor was I in favor of any of the bailouts under Bush or Obama- companies that used business models that worked were penalized to save companies that were, and in many cases still are, failures.

So, aside from the phony cries of "socialism, communism, ahhhh!" the only valid complaint is that he once appointed someone who once said something that you don't agree with? Are you kidding me?

Even more for you. Nothing like people making $9 an hour financing this out of their pockets? All of the rhetoric about being for the "little guy" fall on their face in this deal. This is public corruption.

http://www.sodahead.com/united-states/gm-plan-really-a-uaw-bailout-what-do-you-think/question-1243853/

GM plan really a UAW bailout? What do You Think?

Under normal circumstances, it would be difficult to step in and
confiscate billions of dollars in stockholder and bondholder wealth.
These are not normal times, however. Industry turmoil gives the Obama
administration the go-ahead to prepackage a bankruptcy petition that
pads union coffers while wiping out common shareholders and ravaging
public bondholders.

Under the administration’s plan, the U.S. government gets 60 percent
of the new GM (presumably now called “Government Motors”), the Canadian
government gets 12.5 percent, the United Automobile Workers’ health care
fund gets 17.5 percent, and bondholders get the leftover 10 percent. As
a sweetener, the UAW also gets a $2.5 billion note, and $6.5 billion in
preferred stock paying a 9 percent cash dividend. In commenting on the
plan, UAW leaders said that necessary changes involve “painful,
unprecedented sacrifices” for union workers, the New York Times
reported.

If UAW leaders want to contemplate really
painful and unprecedented sacrifice, they should consider the plight of
taxpayers, GM’s common stockholders and public bondholders. Common
stockholders get nothing. Their investment in GM, worth as much as $12
billion during the past year, goes to zero. Bondholders who lent GM $27
billion are slated to receive only 10 percent ownership in the new GM.

While the $19.4 billion in Treasury financing received by GM is
expected to grow to roughly $70 billion, it’s not clear why a projected
$70 billion in Treasury financing buys 60 percent of the new GM whereas
$27 billion in debt forgiveness by bondholders buys only 10 percent.
Apparently, every dollar of Treasury financing is worth about two and
one-half times each dollar provided by private bondholders.

If you want to see the value of union votes in the next election,
consider that the Obama plan results in reducing UAW health care plan
liabilities by $20 billion in exchange for $9 billion in cash and senior
securities plus 17.5 percent ownership in the company. In other words,
the UAW gets 17.5 percent of the new GM as compensation for reducing
GM’s health care liabilities by $11 billion.

Debt forgiveness by the UAW is “super money” worth about twice as
much as financing provided by the U.S. Treasury, and more than four
times as much as money provided by private bondholders. Actually, it’s
worse than that. Much of the Treasury-provided financing is targeted for
direct payments to the UAW and not slated to buy more productive plant
and equipment.

The New York Times reports that nearly all of GM’s hourly workers
will soon receive lucrative buyout and early retirement offers.
Production workers eligible to retire would receive $20,000 and a
$25,000 discount voucher toward a new vehicle. Workers with at least 20
years of seniority who agree to give up future benefits would receive
$115,000 plus a voucher. Union votes are pricey.

This Treasury-imposed restructuring is not a GM bailout; it is a UAW
bailout with far-reaching ramifications. GM’s common stockholders are
getting wiped out and public bondholders are getting hammered. Taxpayers
and consumers get to pay billions of dollars for GM products that they
never received or even wanted in the first place. All of this is to
reward the UAW for bringing to its knees what was once an American icon.

In the process, the Obama administration is cutting a huge swath
through contract law, overturning long-established bankruptcy
procedures, and undermining basic free-market principles. Last year,
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were nationalized in order to stabilize the
credit markets. This year, GM’s common stockholders and bondholders,
taxpayers and consumers are being bulldozed in order to protect the UAW.

Thank you for the link Texasguy01- I am admittedly not the best at scouring the net for info.

In other words (and this is notorious for someone like Texasguy) - "not a damn thing", except what I heard/read/saw on some right-wing site that scared me into believing up is down and left is right.....its the lies (and they're whoppers for sure) that the Right wing cooks up and the "base" laps up like dogs.....one has to wonder.

Texas guy gets his news from Beck.........that tells you all you need to know..........................

texas

His love of open Marxism and a desire to remove/replace/destroy capitalism as the foundation of the America economy. There are many books on the best sellers list all discussing these things.

HA!, HA!, HA!!!! Sure, a guy who raked in 5.5 million in income a year or two ago is trying to destroy capitalism and replace it with Marxism! I must assume you're auditioning to be comedian!

texas

There is a long list of such items. Just from the top of my head

There’s a difference between the top of your head and what’s in it.

giving large chunks of GM and Chrysler from stockholders to unions,

Are you saying that money was taken from stockholders and given to unions? Where’s your proof? I bet you eat, drink and sleep FOXNews and other such lunatic fringes.

nationalization of health care,

We don’t have nationalized healthcare. Where do you get these insane allegations?

appointing Anita Dunn avowed Marxist and public praiser of Chairman Mao.

So what’s wrong with someone who can read the writings of Marx AND understand them? Mao did more for his people that the Bushes did for the American people!

#2.3:Any way have a happy New Year - wish people would stop with the lies and distortion just because of party line issues. It doesn't make sense to keep posting crap that has been debunked over and over again.

And I still did not receive an answer to the Author's inquiry, so thanks for your offensive stance on behalf of our President! Some people still are "talking loud and saying nothing"! Most of the comments are those giving stalemate "talking points", recited, regurgitated, rehashed and rehearsed words, phrases and slogans. Nothing profound or clear but all mere vague inferences.

I will continue to read the responses in hope of getting a "real" answer as to what the Author, Aimee, asks. I won't hold my breath though for while I await the "real" answer, because there is not ONE! Conversely, it is a very good question.

Imo, it is all superficiality based on bias and prejudice- that's all. And note that I did not say racism per se, but bias against and prejudice against includes racism as one of the elements that make up this bias and prejudice! Along with some elements that come to mind as well, but mainly "not like me". And everyone must be "like me"!

We should note here that gwb has the worse record of all past presidents, yet he is not hated and is often revered by the repug party, ala ronnie reagan who started all of the "wealthy only getting wealthier" contest and the trickle down game.

So the question now is what is the cause of this disparity between presidents doing the correct thing when they are in office and choosing not to- and those not having a chance, or not being given the chance AND TIME to do the correct thing -yet?

Well, no, there are as many answers as there are people who don't like him.

Some people hate him, but then clearly some people hated Bush, and Clinton, and Carter, and Nixon, etc.

Most people who dislike him see him as the farthest left member of Senate ever voted into presidential office and disagree with his views on the role of government.

As someone who palled around with Mr. Wright I have a certain amount of contempt for him as a person. But mostly it is the huge expansion of government spending that stokes my dislike for his actions.

Gm and Chrysler is now making a profit. We are being paid back for that loan and millions of jobs were saved due to the extraordinary actions of this administration

What about the recently disclosed additional 9 TRILLION DOLLAR bail out loans that was done in secret by the Federal Reserve on Obama's watch that are interest free loans.. which we won't make a penny on a hope in hell we get back?

Actually that was in September of 2008 that this occured. I do believe that Geroge W. Bush was still prez then. :)

But the Democrats were in control of the House and Senate....

Hey, it takes a lot of effort to become the greatest mass murderer in history. Mao had to work very hard at it, I'm sure.

Wait a second..."Mao did more for his people than <sic> the Bushes did for the American people"...? Seriously?

seriously. you do realize that, in china, mao is reverred as the father of the nation, just as george washington is here. no one is comparing the bushes to washington, or claim that either of them is the father of the country.

because the quote was that mao did more for his people, not the american people. if it said mao did more for americans than the bushes, tehn everyone could have called bs, but that was not what was stated. it was that mao did more for the chinese, than the bushes did for americans, and undoubtedly, he did. he is the father of a country that is quicly becoming a world power, if not super power. the bushes were handed a super power, and although it did not completely fall apart, it certainly did not thrive as china has.

I highly doubt George Washington would be "revered" if he carved out America by killing off hundreds of thousands if not millions of Americans to do it?

maybe not washington, but our roots are based on the blood of the native american. i do not know the numbers of how many were destroyed to form this great nation. also, there was the whole slavery thing, but i digress.

Than Stalin and Hitler also did more for their country than Washington.

Sure you kill tens of millions of people but Stalin modernized Russia, and all he had to do is kill 20 million people.

Hitler did tremendous "good" for his country, until June of 1941 or so.

Mao did tremendous good for his country, but had to kill 30 million people to do so. On the other hand, perhaps a government with a little freedom would have done more without so many corpses.

HA!, HA!, HA!!!! Sure, a guy who raked in 5.5 million in income a year or two ago is trying to destroy capitalism and replace it with Marxism!

The elite ruling political class in Soviet Russia, and Maoist China were all wealthy, too. Obonehead and his wife love the opulent high life for themselves - but he lectures us about our greed....

“We can’t drive our SUVs and eat as much as we want and keep our homes on 72 degrees at all times …”

- B. Hussein Obama [Famous American Marxist]

Wow, the way you support your position with reason and logic is so impressive.

bad

Than Stalin and Hitler also did more for their country than Washington.

most germans do not consider hitler to be the father of their country. i believe that many feel that he is an embarrassment. i am not sure how russians feel about stalin. in china, mao is reverred.

If Hitler had not invaded Russia than it he would probably have still been admired in Germany.

But the main point is Mao, Stalin, and Hitler (in that order) are the worst mass murderers in history.

Not that this has anything to do with Obama.

badchess

Can you break down exactly what President Obama spent money on

Can you explain the voter intimidation cases - I only heard of one and it was totally debunked and bogusness spurred on by the blathering of Fox and Friends

Who is the bigoted "spiritual advisor" - are you talking about Rev. Wright - seems nobody cared prior to President Obama's election - why care now especially since everyone who had the chance to view the total surmon from Rev. Wright - albeit very emotional was not beyond what we hear from the "kill President Obama preachers".....

Three presidents have increased the US deficit to above 10% of the GDP. Wilson during world war 1, Roosevelt during world war 2, and Obama. At the time I disapproved of Bush's free spending ways, but now I look back on the Bush levels of spending with envy.

Tell me this, what would your reaction be if someone in a white hood stood around outside a polling station with a billyclub and said something like "black devil" and "you're about to be ruled by the white man, @!$%#" to people going to vote.

I'd want them proscuted to the fullest extent of the law. There seems to be an attitude at the civil rights division that intimidiation is a one way street.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Black_Panther_Party_voter_intimidation_case

Nobody cared about Wright because he was below the nations radar screens. I am willing to give Obama the benefit of the doubt and presume he only hung out with Wright for hypocritical appearances sake, and not any actual religious conviction.

If McCain had hung out for decades with a "kill president Obama preacher" or in church like the Trinity United Church of Christ I'd be pretty contemptious of him too.

"what would your reaction be if someone in a white hood stood around outside a polling station with a billyclub and said something like "black devil" and "you're about to be ruled by the white man, @!$%#" to people going to vote."

Oh, libs won't touch that. The guy got away scot free after threatening to kill some crackers. Mis-conduct by Charlie Rangel also overlooked. Then there is Maxine Waters. Shouldn't voters be just a little angry?

Falling for that old Republican line, huh?

Bring spending back to 2008 levels..Yeah, the levels that did NOT include the cost of two wars...funny how ya'll ignore that they are now on the books and that's what helped raise the deficit...the TRUE cost of war is now in the open.

BTW- it was Bush's Judicial office that declined to prosecute those two idiots in Philly!

"that declined to prosecute those two idiots"

Rangel and Waters??

reasons listed are not factual.

And the ones in your intro ARE factual?

I believe your reasons for disliking Bush are just as opinionated as badchess.

Hey, I disliked Bush too. Well, not as a person, just as someone who loved to spend money and increase the size and reach of the government. I look upon him as sort of an Obama light (if you'll pardon the expression).

I even called for his impeachment for signing the McCain-Finegold bill.

Didn't mean to infer that you liked Bush. My opinion of him went downhill, too.

badchess

from your wiki link:

Under the Bush administration, a criminal investigation into the incident was started, but later dropped.

it was not the obama doj that did not go after the new black panthers.

bubba

The guy got away scot free after threatening to kill some crackers.

he can say whatever he wants at a street rally, which is where he said it. that is free speech. people say to pray for obama's death and the like, but it is not illegal. it is disgusting, however, as were the words of shabazz.

Bring spending back to 2008 levels..Yeah, the levels that did NOT include the cost of two wars...funny how ya'll ignore that they are now on the books and that's what helped raise the deficit...the TRUE cost of war is now in the open.

You said it.

I'm all for it - so long as the wars that were not on the books are immediately taken off the map. Stop the wars - immediately - bring all our personnel and equipment home - and then let's talk about spending at 2008 levels.

And the ones in your intro ARE factual?

Yes, they are. Grow up and deal with it.

Kate- Total agreement, my friend!!!

Three presidents have increased the US deficit to above 10% of the GDP. Wilson during world war 1, Roosevelt during world war 2, and Obama. At the time I disapproved of Bush's free spending ways, but now I look back on the Bush levels of spending with envy.

Not true.

has a justice department that chooses not to punish clear cases of voter intimidation

Not true and, yes, the story was invented by the right-wing media because they're a bunch of racists.

supports corrupt Chicago politicians

Not true.

supports stability rather than freedom

Do you believe that it should be illegal to commit murder? Oh @!$%#! You support stability over my freedom to kill people!

"Stop the wars - immediately "

Obama escalated it after he promised to end it.

http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/federal_deficit_chart.html

So you are saying the new black panther party was not standing in front of a polling place discouraging voter turn out, is that it?

And someone else named Obama wrote a letter supporting a corrput Chicago politician, etc.

"Stop the wars - immediately "

Obama escalated it after he promised to end it.

Did I say something to the contrary?

Context - it really is good to have context.

Obama escalated it after he promised to end it.

See? Perfectly legitimate complaints do exist, and do not rely on "reverse racism," or running around screaming "socialism!"

So you are saying the new black panther party was not standing in front of a polling place discouraging voter turn out, is that it?

I am saying that your spin is 100% misinformation, made up by Fox News.

http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/federal_deficit_chart.html

You're right--my bad. You said deficit, rather than spending. I apologize for referring to the information that is meaningful, rather than the one that makes a good talking point.

And someone else named Obama wrote a letter supporting a corrput Chicago politician, etc.

That's not what he did, and you know it. You're watching too much Fox. Your "guilt by association" implications are moronic. Please point out one politician, ever, who did not, at one point in their life, say something in support of a person who did something illegal. Just one politician, ever.

baschess

Spends money like a drunken sailor on crack

You have the wrong president. George W aka Jackass Junior was the lush.

has a justice department that chooses not to punish clear cases of voter intimidation

You mean like the time Jackass Junior cheated Gore out of the election.

hung out for decades with an evil bigoted "spiritual adviser"

Jackass Junior had such spiritual advisors as Brother Cheney and his neocon “spiritualists” who alone killed more Middle Easterners than the Crusades.

subjected his children to a hate filled church

Where’s your proof that the church was hateful?

supports corrupt Chicago politicians

Where’s you proof?

supports stability rather than freedom

Says who? If anyone took our freedom away it was Jackass Junior in his violations of habeas corpus; used an “alert system” intended to frighten the American people but after the 2004 election faded into oblivion as the system was no longer needed to keep Jackass in the presidency.

Aimee

reasons listed are not factual.

True facts are the bane of red necks, morons and losers. FOXNews takes the news, twists it and uses small words so their audience can understand words and phrases like "Duh", "I tink Obamanation is a commie, pinko, freeko" and "tree cheeeers 4 prez bush".

Spends money like a drunken sailor on crack

"You have the wrong president. George W aka Jackass Junior was the lush."

Didn't the current Jackass already outspend Mr Bush?

bubba

Didn't the current Jackass already outspend Mr Bush?

Obama had little choice as he inherited a mess almost comparable to the Great Depression. True unemployment hovers around 20% when all is said and done. This was necessary to sustain those who suffered under laissez-faire Capitalists. Had there been no stimulus there would be even more people out in the street.

Jackass Junior pissed money away by starting two wars while moronically setting up the parameters which would tank the economy.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-500803_162-4486228-500803.html

True, Bush was a big spender. He added 4.8 trillion to the debt in 8yrs. Obama has already added 3.3 trillion in just 2yrs. Where is the change we were promised? Obama, so far, is spending at a rate nearly 3 times Mr Bush. Mr Obama promised to cut George's deficit in half. At this rate it ain't gonna happen.

http://www.theobamadebt.com/

I never thought I'd look back to the free spending ways of George Bush as "The good old frugal days."

Spends money like a drunken sailor on crack

Might be true, but that's an insult to sailors because they are spending their own hard earned money.. unlike big Gov.. who take our money and waste it on all kinds of @!$%#.

Jackass Junior pissed money away by starting two wars while moronically setting up the parameters which would tank the economy.

How old are you…..8..?? Were you around on 9/11/2001? There was not a soul alive on that day that was not behind the President and the decision to retaliate…..!!! FYI…..he did not start anything !!!

i wondered about that one. it does not imply that all sailors are drunks or use crack.

I presume a drunken sailor is going to spend his money on tattoos and whores. Not that I disagee with that, it is just when the drunken sailor picks my pocket to pay for his crack that it bothers me.

And a Happy New Year to you. I look forward to Congress on Wednesday. See quick reply above.

My apology DEBEKI it was the only way I found to get in effort to repley to the guy in Texas. But I don't think you'll get too many answers to your questions. I've rarely read any.

The gut response from Texan did make a truthful statement as to why the "leaders" of the republican party and many of their followers hate Mr. Obama. It is because he is labeled "black". But he did have a good looking white mother. There in lies the anguish upheld by many. If you notice, no one called him out for the use of the race card! But it remains in many hearts and mind when and while Mr. Obama serves in the position he is in. I can only thank the guy from Texas for showing his true fear, yet offering nothing more than hate to feed his fear. But then, it is a First Amendment Right.

The guy from Texan gave the only truthful response but it is held by many of the opposition here and now posting. They just won't say it and allow themselves to conjer up some other insane idea.

I do find people who can only look at this and only see racism as actually quite funny and illogical. If America was so racist then how was President Obama elected? Would not the massive secret thundering hordes of hidden KKK members all at the ballot box voted for him? Was it a carefully created ploy of deception? That suddenly they would all turn at the last minute in a calculated move after he was elected and change course? If your mind only operates on black and white, racist and non racist the it is the only option available to you to think in.

My mind tends to see many seniors threatened by Obamacare who became enraged. If you track President Obama's popularity health care was the one issue that had people screaming at their Congressperson. Obama wanted health care and death panels loomed for those who built this country and illegal immigrants get free health care. Of course you can debate these but at that point this was the topic. In a down economy pursuing Marxist fantasy's of Cuban style health care bordered on politically insane and extremely arrogant. And the American People melted down the phone lines to Congress of those who ignored them. Payback was in the Midterm elections. And now the Democrats must reap what they have sown.

Arad, I agreed with your point, not because I agree with it personally but because I believe it is factual. A great deal of the country has been told to hate Obama, he is a democrat, he is a liberal, liberal is a bad, bad word it equals evil and communism and marxism and the devil and so forth. The right has done a great PR job. Take a word and an ideaology and smear it to death, any one who is remotely associated is toast.

Well, now that liberal means "judge, hire, and fire people by the color of their skin and not their abilities than liberal is bad. The liberal moral compass has drifted about 180 degrees in the last half century.

Well, now that liberal means "judge, hire, and fire people by the color of their skin and not their abilities than (sic) liberal is bad.

Where did you dream that one up?

Ever hear of instances when "the wrong" people pass a standardized test, so the results have to be scrapped? Differing standards for getting into schools or scholarships depending how much melanin you have?

Ever hear of instances when "the wrong" people pass a standardized test, so the results have to be scrapped? Differing standards for getting into schools or scholarships depending how much melanin you have?

Sure - I've heard of that.

I've also heard of the Easter Bunny, Santa Claus, and unicorns.

So I presume you put msnbc in the unicorn catagory?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30346519/ns/us_news-life/

Discrimination happens, that's true. Sometimes it goes this way, sometimes it goes the other way. It's wrong no matter how it happens. However, that doesn't make your statement

Well, now that liberal means "judge, hire, and fire people by the color of their skin and not their abilities than (sic) liberal is bad.

anthing close to meaningful.

Discrimination is not a liberal thing - it's a people thing and all kinds of people do it. It's wrong. But it's not "liberal" any more than it is "conservative."

And for what it's worth, this is about a 2003 case involving the city of New Haven, and how THEY thought something should be done.

Had to bring up Bush, didn't you? LOL

Had you bother to read the article you would have know that President Bush was already mentioned in it. So I guess I will laugh at someone who comments on an article they have not read. LOL

I will say thank you as well...in scrolling through these responses so far, this is the first I have seen that I felt displayed a level of true thought, not just emotion or too much time in front of Fox News.

I'd also say "hate" is too strong. If I were to name politicians I hate, I'd go with Byrd and Kennedy. They were far worse specimens of humanity than Obama.

No One:"...too much time in front of Fox News"

you mean Fox News--the #1 cable news channel---that Tops All Competitors Combined...?

Stacey, yes, I know it is the most watched news channel...in terms of viewership, there are many actual shows that get higher ratings..even The Simpsons. Just because something is watched by a lot of people doesn't suddenly make it 'Fair and Balanced'...I cannot think of a single news organization that is truly balanced, but only Fox put it as their motto. I even watch Fox News, rarely agree w/a thing I see or hear, but it is important to be well rounded.

Stacey, yes, I know it is the most watched news channel..

Just a quick correction. Most watched *cable* news channel. The entire cable news industry viewership doesn't even come close to the news programs on the big three broadcast networks (ABC/CBS/NBC).

Most of America *doesn't* get it's news from cable.

@jmorris, you are right, I am sorry cable, yes.

Okay.. the "Mission Accomplished" was in reference to the invasion of Iraq. They got in, kicked butt, Saddam ran, and they assumed control of the country at that point. The initial assault / invasion was over. It wasn't in reference to.. the war is over and its about time and pack up to go home. We all knew it was going to take a long time, and it has taken a lot more time then all estimates were and became more difficult then originally though. As far as the major combat operations to overthrow the Iraqi Gov. / Military.. yes.. it was "Mission Accomplished". Do you understand what I mean?

I believe it was a reference to the crew of the Lincoln and how they did their job in the longest deployment since the days of Yankee station of the coast of Southeast Asia.

Stopping off shore oil drilling-Stupid decision, look at what is happening to gas prices, the billions that will be removed from the economy and the loss of jobs.

That ban was rescinded months ago...Gas prices are due to a healthy stock market and oil being over $90 a barrel!

Rachel your totally right the Oil prices are being pushed by Billionaires playing in the futures market.

Stopping off shore oil drilling-Stupid decision, look at what is happening to gas prices

You don't bother to connect cause to effect much, do you? Just whatever insinuation suits your agenda.

Stopping off shore oil drilling-Stupid decision, look at what is happening to gas prices, the billions that will be removed from the economy and the loss of jobs.

What specific off-shore oil drilling projects were impacted by the (now repealed) moratorium? (Do you recall (or did you know) that an executive order by G.H.W. Bush prevented off-shore drilling from 1990 until G.W. Bush lifted it in 2008?)

What percentage of gasoline production in the U.S. comes from coastal oil wells?

Rachel, Kate

For both of you IT is not repealed.

http://www.farmfutures.com/story.aspx/administration/stops/future/oil/drilling/17/44363

How much from the offshore drilling-about ONE third of our total.

http://www.eia.doe.gov/kids/energy.cfm?page=oil_home-basics

Oil price increase under Obama

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/raymond-j-learsy/the-price-of-oil-has-doub_b_214143.html

maximillo

Get your facts together before your insinuations show how little you know.

OY!!! yes, it was!

More than two months after the Obama administration lifted its ban on drilling in the deep-water Gulf of Mexico, oil companies are still waiting for approval to drill the first new oil well there. Experts now expect the wait to continue until the second half of 2011, and perhaps into 2012.

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2011/01/03/drilling-is-stalled-even-after-ban-is-lifted/#ixzz1A0ZayCZY

After prolonged pressure from both industry and Gulf region politicians, Interior Secretary Ken Salazar announced yesterday that the moratorium on deepwater oil drilling has been lifted. Environmentalists are not happy, but budget wonks might approve: This means that Sen. Mary Landrieu is likely to lift her hold on Jack Lew's nomination to direct the Office of Management and Budget.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2010/10/wonkbook_drilling_ban_lifted_f.html

p.s. Your first link just talks about NEW drilling...existing wells not included!!!

How much from the offshore drilling-about ONE third of our total.

http://www.eia.doe.gov/kids/energy.cfm?page=oil_home-basics

Either you didn't understand the question or you don't have a lot of comprehension skills. From YOUR link:

Crude oil is produced in 31 States and U.S. coastal waters. In 2009, 50% of U.S. crude oil production came from five States:

...

About one-third of U.S. crude oil was produced from wells located offshore in State and Federally administered waters of the Gulf of Mexico.
...
In 2009, the U.S. imported about 52% of the crude oil and refined petroleum products that it used.

About 100 countries produce crude oil and NGPL; the top five producing countries in 2009, and their share of total world production:

Russia (12.3%)
Saudi Arabia (12.0%)
United States (9.0%)
Iran (5.2%)
China (4.7%)

Rachel

OY!! My confusion on expanding the new oil drilling sites. But oil prices have skyrocket under Pres Obama.

Kate.

Gasoline prices are tied to oil prices. I know I didn't answer your question on how much gasoline is produced from that oil because it is difficult to get an answer.

But oil prices have skyrocket under Pres Obama.

Float..that's because the Stock Market has gone from 7K to 12K under Obama...it isn't him, it's the speculators on Wall Street.

BTW- you are buying into the fallacy that the present cost of refined oil (gasoline) is directed related to the current barrel price..Not true, the stuff you put in your car today was refined 6-12 months ago..when oil was low.

If you have a problem with today's gas prices...Blame the Gas Companies!

that's because the Stock Market has gone from 7K to 12K under Obama

Oh, well, now Obama has saved Wall Street!

well, he kinda DID save Wall Street.....first Bush bailed them out with TARP, but it was Obama who made sure that there were strings attached to the money, and thus he does deserve some credit for keeping the economy from falling over the cliff. And, for all the screaming about Marxism, Socialism and the like, it bears noting that this past year, executives saw the biggest bonuses ever (but that's kinda to be expected when you go from 7000-12000 in the same time period). Obama isn't anti-business - he could have come down like a hammer back in 2009 with the regulations, but instead, worked WITH Republicans and Wall Street and the banks and the big corporations and signed some watered down bills into law....better than nothing, but not super strong....and clearly nothing too radical.

Also, as far as gas prices go, keep in mind that a little "accident" happened about 6 months ago and THAT has a lot to do with the price of gas going up, as all of that crude that made its way into the Gulf DIDN'T make its way to the refineries and ultimately, the pump....supply and demand strikes again.

well, he kinda DID save Wall Street.....

Actually, it was investors who didn't pussy out and continued to put money into the markets, they are the saviors of Wall Street.

Well, either he helped "nudge" the free market, OR the market did it on its own....either way, he didn't do anything to corrupt or destroy the market, or prevent capitalism to do its thing....in other words, he didn't 'redistribute the wealth' or engage in some kind of 'radical' or 'Marxist' or 'Socialist' activity....The right can criticism him all they want, they have the right to do so...but they can't have it both ways. He can't be the savior and ally and enemy and scourge of business all at the same time. He can't be anti-capitalist, but act to save the capitalist system....in other words, the rhetoric and bull@!$%# don't add up to reality.

Interjection here.

Obama did little or nothing for the stock market. Nor did it rise from average investors putting there money into the market.

The market has been pumped full of hot air from the federal reserve and the POMO along with QE1 and QE2...buying assets as it can find them. Retail investors have pulled out of the market during 2010.

What we're seeing is a high roller game in a casino. Banks betting against each other via high frequency trading via computer programs. We're also seeing a rise in the market due to a devalued dollar that is being used in the betting between the financial houses.

Obama hasn't put his fingers into the markets.

As to my personal diatribe with Obama. I don't hate him, but I was tremendously disappointed in the flat over-ride of the rule of law in the GM take-over. Bondholders used to be in the front of the line for payout, but they were placed behind the union and government. Those bondholders were mom and pop, grandma and grandpa, and their pension funds. A lot of those bondholders were just plain old people that had, to them, big chunks of their retirement funds invested in GM.

Obama and Congress @!$%#ed them.

And today similar events are going on with Bank of America and it's settlements with Fannie and Freddie...(Obama's not involved, but the people he's put into place sure are)

I'm disappointed in Obama that we have about 80 miles of Arizona declared, by the Federal Government under Obama, as unsafe to travel...along Interstate 10...due to mexican incursions by drug runners and the Mexican army. And our demands for secure borders are belittled as fear-mongering.

I am disappoinited in Obama that, as our national economy collapses, and millions have found themselves unemployed..his focus was on health care instead of jobs.

I am disappointed in Obama for reappointing Bernanke who is dead set on destroying our currency by debasement as he churns out unregulated and unauthorized American currency to buy interests from foreign banks and Wall Street.

I am disappointed in Obama in pushing for the Stimulus when the Federal Reserve was multiplying the effects without review or knowledge of the Treasury (worse, if the Treasury was aware).

I am disappointed in Obama in not absorbing the news that the World is seriously considering dropping the dollar as the international medium of exchange and acting on improving our capital.

I am disappointed in "Cash for Clunkers" that took millions of running assets off the roads and put millions of Americans deeper in debt while making the cost of replacement parts jump and creating a new black market for car thieves.

I am disappointed in the "Home Buyers Credit" that brought future home sales into the last year and put millions into debt on inflated home values that will soon be underwater. And will ultimately make them homeless.

There was a time in 2008 and 2009 when some here on the vine proposed that Obama simply give each taxpayer over fifty a million dollars with the stipulation that they had to buy a new car. The calculations then were unbelievable, but after the last few years of all the stimulus, credits, rebates, governmental growth and increased spending, along with all the money pumped out by the Fed...it could have been done.

I am disappointed in Obama because he lacks vision, leadership, charisma, or any other practical experience that would enable him to focus on the core problems of this nation rather than his personal agenda.

And it doesn't matter if he's white, black, yellow, green, republican or democrat...he's already a failure as a president if he doesn't get his @!$%# together immediately.

I am disappointed in the "Home Buyers Credit" that brought future home sales into the last year and put millions into debt on inflated home values that will soon be underwater. And will ultimately make them homeless.

my wife and i are exceedingly happy with the home buyers credit. we were in the market for a house, but that $8,000 sealed the deal. it was a huge weight off of our shoulders knowing that we would get back a substantial part of the down payment that we needed to purchase our home. we bought before the deadline, but then, of course, they extended it for another year. placing the blame on the credit for those who overbuy, is misplacing the blame. it is not the credit that makes people overspend.

spot on, oldphart!

I am disappoinited in Obama that, as our national economy collapses, and millions have found themselves unemployed..his focus was on health care instead of jobs.

it is estimated that the health care reform has already created 200,000 jobs, and will create over 250,000 jobs a year for the next several years.

800 lb. gorilla

In order to just keep pace we need something on the order of 750,000 jobs a year. And I suspect that jobs related to healthcare reform will be paid via health care reform. In other words a new equivalent of public workers, paid by taxpayers.

In other words a new equivalent of public workers, paid by taxpayers.

Err, not so much.

SOME of those jobs will be government related, but most will be private sector. Some of the reforms that are to be enacted deal with streamlining and better using technology, so we will see IT jobs, data entry jobs, medical billing/coding, AND as one of the requirements will be higher percentages of insurance premiums going towards care, we will (HOPEFULLY) see more provider positions, PAs, RNs, DOs, etc. The ripple effect of the new HC law IS an economic boon, and with a few tweaks here and there (likely in 2015 or so), we can see even MORE jobs created.

Now, as for the government jobs - one of the very subtle effects of the new law will be enforcement of already enacted Medicare rules, thus tamping down on fraud. One reason why Medicare is so bloated is because for years (post 9/11), many providers have been able to get away with (either through negligence or intentional misrepresentation), double or triple billing for procedures, or flat out billing for what is not performed. The FBI used to have a taskforce specifically dealing with Medicare/Medicaid fraud, but after 9/11 the mission shifted and there were other priorities. Under the new law, the FBI is going to be back on the case, all medical records will be electronic by 2014 and we will see proper enforcement. Also, HCR provides some much needed re-tooling to the VHA.

That said, we are still a very long ways away from the 750k a year (I thought it was about 150k per month), that we need, but, given 12 straight months of private sector job growth, preceded by many months of slowing job loss, we're moving in the right direction.

slinger to the rescue.

i will add that as the public and private sector jobs are created around the health care initiative, that more people will be working and spending money, which, in turn, creates a greater need for workers in other industries, which have picked up with increased spending in the consumer market.

It was loaned to the US...It didn't belong to the American people.

Yeah it was a loaner. The bust was removed from the Oval office before Obama took over.

Removed from the Oval Office, OR handed back to Britain "We don't want this piece of crap anymore"

Why would we want a bust of Churchill over the bust of a US Statesman? I don't think anyone other than you called it a piece of crap. But seriously, why in your opinion is better to have the Churchill bust in the Whitehouse than the Lincoln bust?

No, it's not about a Bust of ANYBODY. It's about openly insulting your allies by returning a gift - though I certainlywould rather have Churhill in the whitehouse than Lincoln!

it wasn't a gift, it was a loan. Why would you prefer Churchill over Lincoln? Churchill wasn't a US leader.

And that bust belonged to the American people, it was not his private property to dispose of. He should be charged with theft.

How much of that Faux hyperbolic exaggerated rhetoric do you take as fact? So there was suppose to be a Vote on the Bust or something? THEFT?!

WOW. Like he can't as a US President make a decision to change the drapes even! Ridiculous

Removed from the Oval Office, OR handed back to Britain "We don't want this piece of crap anymore"

Shockingly evil, isn't it? Um, no, not really....

Nope....its all reasonable criticism...no blind hate..../sarc

Why would you prefer Churchill over Lincoln? Churchill wasn't a US leader.

Oh, this should be interesting....! lol

It's about openly insulting your allies by returning a gift

Well, it wasn't really a 'gift' since it had a timeline - it was a loaned piece of art.

And if it were a 'gift' - it would've been a gift to the previous Administration, not 'the American people.'

And if it were a 'gift' - it would've been a gift to the previous Administration, not 'the American people.'

Not true! Any sitting President receives a gift, it belongs to them after following a few steps:

Reasons for Not Retaining Gifts

The President and First Lady keep for themselves only a small percentage of the gifts that they receive. Reasons for this include the following:

.

• The requirement to pay for certain foreign official gifts (see first section).

• The White House Gift Unit constantly receives items from the general public, and it is impossible for the President and First Lady to ever see most of them.

• To protect the President and his family, the Secret Service requires destruction of food and drink gifts, combus­tible items which may release fumes, and colognes and other substan­ces that are applied to the skin.

• Any gifts retained by the President and First Lady that are not from a close relative – including foreign official gifts that they keep – may have to be declared in an annual disclosure report to the Office of Government Ethics.[2]

• The President and First Lady may have to pay federal taxes on the appraised value of gifts that they keep.

http://www.reagan.utexas.edu/archives/reference/gifts.html

Well, here's the deal. Winston Churchill was a brilliant Statesman who helped an entire WORLD out of war.

Lincoln was a despot who dragged an entire NATION into a war for his own purposes. He was responsible for numerous unconstitutional acts, such as suspending habeas corpus. He was responsibile for the imprisonment of American Citizens. He was ultimately rsponsibile for the deaths of 1/2 a million Americans. He declared war on citizens of his own country. He launched an invasion without the consent of Congress, blockaded American ports, censured communications, confiscated private property and effectively single-handedly gutted the 10th and 9th Amerndments

Wow kjmgirl...you have totally rewritten history into some kind of personal hate fest against a well-respected American President who freed millions of Americans whose only crime was that they happened to dark-skinned. I will always be grateful to President Lincoln for that and pity those sick people who hate him for it.

kjmgirl - have you been reading Texas text books?

Hate. Again that word. Why are you looking at this as a Personal "re-writing of history". It is all actual verified FACT. He "freed the slaves" causing 500,000 people to die. Why did he do that? You think he CARED about the slaves? I got news for you. It would have been far cheaper and far better for this country to simply BUY all the slaves and then free them. It would have saved lives, money and an entire COUNTRY. He did exactly what he wanted to do - break the Constitution. He wanted to PROVE once and for all that HE made the rules - NOT the States. Lincoln's agenda was a NATIONAL GOVERNMENT FORCE breaking the backs of the States. Don't make this about something it wasn't.

Because he intended to do something GOOD doesn't make it right to do 10848484827203984 BAD things in the process

I believe it was the South that fired the first shot, kjmgirl.

Habeas corpus can be suspended during a war.

He imprisoned enemy combatants...however, does Andersonville ring any bells??

Welcome to the New History of the US, folks, compliments of kjmgirl!

I do have my criticisms of Lincoln and the Industrialization of the time, and wanting to get the military advantage....but he still doesn't end up being villainous as described above, and perhaps still a way better statesman than Churchill.

Churchill on the other hand, I have issues with his prejudiced notions, such as against Indians (yes, Lincoln, like the time was prejudiced against blacks still), including massacre such as the gassing of the Kurds, his alienation of his personal associates for politcal gain and embracing of despots, such as 'Uncle Stalin', etc.

Surprisingly a lot more British folks are tempered in their views of Churchill, where they don't really put him at a too heroic high, nor put him down at a too evil stump.

I personally choose Lincoln over Churchill, hands down...

What next?

Joe McCarthy was right all along and FDR was a communist, and Obama's mention of them as otherwise is EVILz!

What next?

Joe McCarthy was right all along and FDR was a communist, and Obama's mention of them as otherwise is EVILz!

I'm going to remember that you started it when I see that meme floating around next month! ;-)

All I can say about your reasoning kjmgirl is...wow!

And if it were a 'gift' - it would've been a gift to the previous Administration, not 'the American people.'

Not true! Any sitting President receives a gift, it belongs to them after following a few steps:

I have no idea what you're getting at here - as it was actually a loan of a piece of art, not something anybody was going to eventually 'own.' It was renewed by W. Bush, who received it at first - the loan came up in January 2009 and Obama chose not to request a renewal.

It would have been far cheaper and far better for this country to simply BUY all the slaves and then free them.

... and what, pray tell, would've stopped those states that preferred to have Slaves from refusing to sell their slaves?

... or then acquiring more?

thelopes- just clarifying the gift giving aspect...that's all!

Wow. This site never ceases to amaze me. If you say the sky is blue these people will fight to the death to argue that it's lime green.

It's really unfortunate that you people think it's OK to "gang bang" someone for their beliefs, when it's quite SIMPLE, REALLY TO JUST LOOK UP THE FACTS. Morons!

Bad day, kjmgirl?

BTW- nice CoH there....

If you say the sky is blue

then I look out my window and decide for myself rather than take yours or anyone else's word for it.

:D

Lots of people. Joe Biden, Hillery Clinton, John McCain to name a few, and probably at least several million others.

They are to busy ACTUALLY running the country to run for Chief Puppet again...

Who would want his job !! For even a half hour !!

I would so I can really see what's in area 51, the CIA, the NSA, and all the other above top secret stuff the Gov. / Military has. :D That knowledge would priceless. The bull@!$%# involved? Not so much. To be in the history books? Yeah that be kind of cool.

I'd certainly love a wack at it.

Don't think I could stand all the ass kissing you need to do to get the job though.

@PCMan, as for the word Hate, you are right, it is ugly, but I think it is called for in regards to the way people speak of our president. I have even had my young elementary school children come home and tell me some shocking things their peers have said that their parents said about our president.

For me, I never liked President Bush (W), didn't vote for him either time, only agreed with a smidgen of his policies, actions, etc, but never, ever would I speak of him in the way I hear so many people speaking of President Obama. The utter lack of respect for his position as our president is shocking. I even met the first President Bush, and while I also disagreed with him more than I agreed, I shook his hand and always respected his position.

I have and will continue to raise my children that people have differences in opinion, beliefs, etc, and that politics is a vast array of those differences, but that it is never acceptable to speak so poorly of others and it is never acceptable to have such a lack of respect for the office of the Presidency.

One can hold a difference of opinion and work towards different goals without the nasty speech and vitriol that has been on display since President Obama was merely running for President.

From my 'one person perspective', that is why the word hate is used.

Good for you.

I presume you also noticed the level of hate toward Bush since, oh, the year 2000 or so.

@badchess, I dunno, I live in true Bush country, so I cannot say I experienced Bush hating in my daily interactions, but I can say I never experienced it through the media as the 'hate' is now. Maybe that is a matter of there being far more avenues to 'experience' media and such, but I can honestly say it is disheartening that people call themselves patriots and then are so blatently disrespectful to the office of our President.

@PC, Maybe because as a general rule YOU neo-cons promote hate as part of your incessant prejudiced rhetoric vitolic vile on a daily basis without fail?

I believe the word HATE is used because I have heard and seen the word specifically used. When people actually want to kill someone ( he has been threatened more than any other president) I wouldn't call that dislike, or disrespect, those words fall short.

BTW I am in total agreement No One particular - well put.

Well No one particular, I live in true Obama country, so I got a full eight years (come to think of it, ten years) of Bush is Hitler.

And just to make sure, I was serious when I said "good for you." I liked your sentiments, even though I probably have a far different view of how much government should be involved in the life of US citizens and how large it should be than you do.

@badchess...my what a difference it makes what area of the country you live in, huh? As for our differences, I always view that as a good thing...it is a shame that debate and differences have taken on such a hysteria. Without debate, where would growth come from?

I cannot say I ever understand the crazy hysteria, we are in bad times, no doubt, but if we all take a step back, a deep breath, and tell ourselves 'this too shall pass', we could all work together a bit better.

@PC, Maybe because as a general rule YOU neo-cons promote hate as part of your incessant prejudiced rhetoric vitolic vile on a daily basis without fail?

How sweet………I sure wish I could express my point of view with such charm….!!?? Is this a strategy for winning friends and influencing people……??

Clearly a disciple of Mr. Carnegie

I pity his children. I imagine being subjected to the Rev. Wright for years will stunt their ethical growth.

simpleton.

Don't badmouth our president that way. Even if you think is Obama is a simpleton show some respect for the office.

They seem to be settled and very well adjusted.

Go figure.

Hopefully they were young enough to not be too damaged by the hate.

I wonder if they ever said "Daddy, why did White people invent aids?"

That's not even coherent.

Hopefully they were young enough to not be too damaged by the hate.

I wonder if they ever said "Daddy, why did White people invent aids?"

Bad Chess, you are a good case of projection and racial resentment.

Badchess.....I thought YOU invented aids, or at least caught it from monkeys.

but I have never loved any first family as much as I love this one.

What makes you "love" them so much? Have you met them?

Don't badmouth our president that way. Even if you think is Obama is a simpleton show some respect for the office.

The office is just a position and a room, the Presidency is the leader of the country, with checks and balances, or at least it once was. He has made this 'term' a travesty of foot in mouth remarks and poor decision with countless amounts of promises that have been nothing but lies.

To the person who wants to bring in the fact he is disliked because of being black, he is half white, perhaps he needs to remember that once in a while(if Michelle will allow him to).

Perhaps people don't like him because he is white...

I'd say it is the far leftish policies that bug most people.

The few percentage of people who think he can do no wrong because he is blackish cancel out the few percentage points of people who think he can do no right because he is blackish

Bad Chess,

I think you misunderstood.... I am a die hard Obama fan.

I was just yankin' your chain Stevie.

You have the honors of being the first one to bring his skin color into the discussion. FAIL. :-/

It is kind of pathetic how the left seems unable to see past the color of someones skin.

Is that Gomer's cousin.....?

Actually I am. You got a problem with that, PC?

It's easy to plead "I'm not a racist" but your protestations convince me otherwise. Your cowardice won't alloiw you to man up and admit your prejedices. Besides, lying comes most naturally to the white fright right radicals!

Sounds like you really like to engage in stereotyping and bigotry.

Hope you don't knock your pointy hat off as you leave the doorway.

Sounds like you really like to engage in stereotyping and bigotry.

From personal observation I would agree you seem to fit a stereotype and you seem to carry the banner for the right wing bigots!

Thank you.

Little Sure Shot actually Mexico's immigration laws / naturalization laws are way more severe then AZ could ever be. In fact they are some of the toughest in the modern World. They are VERY xenophobic and down right racist... yet they have the @!$%#ing audacity to preach about ours which are the most easy going most unenforced system in the World. The sheer arrogance of the Mexican President and the Mexican people in general is beyond mind boggling. They deserve the stereotypes they bring on themselves.

I wish we would just copy their laws, wouldn't that be a laugh riot?

Well, actually the righties (or at least Bush) was preventing on regulating by lefties like Barney Frank.

While Obama's skin tone provides a handy recruiting tool that the righties can use to recruit the lower echelon to fight for their agenda, the hate would still have come out if he had two white parents.

No…..you have this reversed…..this statement and many others just like it has obviously been a lame tool for the far liberal left to influence the intolerant minority…….think about it…….what validity of merit is there in such a proclaim..??

Barney Frank didn't prevent Bush-Cheney from doing anything. The real cause of the disasters was the legislation readied by the supremely corrupt Phil Gramm and his henchmen that deregulated the banks and the derivative market, a move that had to have been mandated by the corporatists that owned him.

PC: I don't understand your comment about the "far liberal left" using Obama's ethnic background "to influence the intolerant minority." It's really vague. Who/what is the "intolerant minority" to which you are referring? Of what are they "intolerant"? What role does Obama's ethnic background play in influencing these people? Who is in the "far liberal left" and how is this group defined as opposed to the entire rest of the political spectrum?

You don't hate FOX News?

Why?

Fox viewers are the most misinformed of all news viewers.

Why would I hate Fox News? Your presumption that their viewers are less informed shows the ignorance of those here who show the same views. Those same things could be said about MSNBC’s viewers as well. I do have real disdain for most of the mainstream media since the campaigning started in 2008,but most notably MSNBC and their Democratic shill mouthpieces Olberman and Maddow.

Your presumption that their viewers are less informed shows the ignorance of those here who show the same views.

Not so much. (Actually, not at all.) Not a presumption at all.

http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/pdf/dec10/Misinformation_Dec10_rpt.pdf

From page 19 (PDF page 21):

Consumers of all sources of media evidenced substantial misinformation, suggesting that false or misleading information is widespread in the general information environment, just as voters say they perceive it to be.

And from page 20 (PDF page 22):

Those who watched Fox News almost daily were significantly more likely than those who never watched it to believe that:

most economists estimate the stimulus caused job losses (12 points more likely)

most economists have estimated the health care law will worsen the deficit (31 points)

the economy is getting worse (26 points)

most scientists do not agree that climate change is occurring (30 points)

the stimulus legislation did not include any tax cuts (14 points)

their own income taxes have gone up (14 points)

the auto bailout only occurred under Obama (13 points)

when TARP came up for a vote most Republicans opposed it (12 points)

and that it is not clear that Obama was born in the United States (31 points)

These effects increased incrementally with increasing levels of exposure and all were statistically significant.

And you believe that left wing stuff? Look at who happens to bank roll the World Public Opinion .org. Wanna take a guess? He's a big Nobama supporter and probably donated quite a bit to his 2008 campaign? Any guesses yet? Another clue he's a Billionaire.

Ha HA.

http://bigjournalism.com/dloesch/2010/12/18/alternet-soros-funded-study-says-fox-viewers-are-stupid/#more-150912

You really linked a Breitbart site as your source?

Apparently not just misinformed but blissfully so. Reminds me of a Thomas Gray quote:

where ignorance is bliss, 'tis folly to be wise

Kate: that study also proved that viewers of MSNBC were misinformed on other subjects. and there is a video going around that shows the conclusions drawn were not well researched. for the basis of what "most economists think", they mainly used the CBO report. how is that indicative of what most economists think?

Huh?

Even after the DHS corrected its figures in March 2010 (http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2010/03/dhs-corrects-report-that-overs.html) it was still clear that deportations were up under President Obama.

Kate,

So when he took a public stance with Calderon against the AZ anti-immigration law, how was he reinforcing what you allude to his aggresive posture against illegal immigration?

Obama does that sort of thing quite often. He talks down nafta to one group, and the next day talks about the poor plebes who cling to guns because they fear foreign competition.

And almost every Bush policy involving wars and terrorism he decried pre 2008 became just dandy as soon as Obama took office.

And he hates gay marriage, except when he is for it.

So when he took a public stance with Calderon against the AZ anti-immigration law, how was he reinforcing what you allude to his aggresive posture against illegal immigration?

He wasn't. The two aren't related. The AZ law will not stop (or even slow) illegal immigration from the south. It will (if not struck down by the SCOTUS) chase Latinos/Latinas out of AZ into neighboring states to avoid harassment for "looking illegal."

I want illegal immigration stopped; the AZ law will not accomplish that. Only prosecution of businesses which employ undocumented workers will accomplsih that. As long as it is financially less risky to use undocumented workers than to use legally authorized and documented workers, incentive for foreigners to come and work illegally will continue.

I want both. prosecution of businesses which employ illegal aliens as well as an ID check for anyone receiving government services or voting.

Even after the DHS corrected its figures in March 2010 (http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2010/03/dhs-corrects-report-that-overs.html) it was still clear that deportations were up under President Obama.

Which had nothing to do with anything Obama or his administration had done... unless you can show me orders from him or his administration beefing up ICE to crack down on illegals.

I'm willing to give him some credit for this. I don't know he had anything to do with it, but still, good job nonetheless.

If he has then kudos on that. I think a good job when we actually can seal our borders and deport all the illegals in this nation. Then only let those in who do so legally and have waited their line in turn like MANY of my friends have done. Illegals are a slap in this face to this nation, to our people, and to the immigrants who have come here and worked hard to be LEGAL. I no no respect for @!$%#s who cut in line and act like we OWE them something.

Perfect example is Obama's Aunt.

I'd do that and hammer people who know they are employing illegals.

Deportations have gone up during the last two years. For whatever reason, I am glad.

Employers and those who support illegals are 50 percent of the problem. Both need to be nailed. I agree.