I blame Obama for high gas prices. Never mind that our gas prices are still lower than anywhere in Europe, and most of the rest of the western world; never mind that gas prices go up globally, not nationally; never mind that oil production has gone up nationally overall, and only gone down 2% on federal lands. Never mind that no new gas taxes have been introduced. I still blame Obama. Why? Well, because... Um... I blame Obama for the recession. Never mind that it started in 2008, during a bubble crash caused by deregulation in the mid-90s and exacerbated slightly by government action from the same period. Never mind that since the stimulus, we have stopped sinking. Never mind that, for a depression of this scale, we've been doing quite well; never mind that Obama cannot pass a single bill through the republican congress at this point, and is basically forced to take it, lest they choose to default on our debt... It's still Obama's fault. Why? Um..... IT JUST IS. I blame Obama for the failures of Solyndra and similar producers of solar cells. Never mind that the company actually looked good back when the loans went through. Never mind that shortly afterwards, a spike in the cost of raw materials needed to produce that kind of solar cells made them expensive to make, something nobody saw coming; never mind that shortly after that, the Chinese started exporting far more of an alternative type of power cell at much lower prices, which, again, nobody saw coming; never mind that the loans involved started under Bush, it's still Obama's fault. Why? Well, because he's a democratic president, and they have ultimate supreme control over the entire world. Duh. I blame Obama for the company I work for moving my job elsewhere. Never mind that the cited reason by the company was the tough economy, and competition from other sources, never mind that it has nothing to do with regulation or taxation, never mind that it couldn't due to the dearth of increased taxes and regulation; it's still somehow Obama's fault. I blame Obama for spilling my milk. He's in charge, why did he let this happen under his watch?
I LAME OBAMA for letting the Dollar Index drop to EIGHTY. Sure, Obama got the Dollar Index to go UP TO EIGHTY SIX in 2011 from Bush's RECORD LOW of SEVENTY ONE in 2008, but gee, a black guy should have been able to raise it to ONE HUNDRED! Let's get a Republican back since they did such a good job last time! I am sure Romney, like Bush, will emerge from this presidential term even MORE FABULOUSLY WEALTHY, MANY TIMES RICHER than when Romney went in!
Obama's record: •Unemployment is 8.3% and has been above 8% for 44 straight months! •Underemployed is over 15% •The price of gas – When Obama took office, a gallon of gas cost you $1.85. Today, it’s up to $3.59 per gallon (July’s rise was 17 cents a gallon). •GDP has consistently been under 3% which is awful. •71% of small business owners believe we’re still in a recession. •More than 30% of unemployed Americans have been out of work for more than a year – In 2007, that number was 10%. •Low income America – According to NBC News, virtually half of all Americans are considered to be “low income” or living in poverty. •Propping up the economy by monetizing our massive debt — In 2008, the Federal Reserve bought “negligible” amounts of our debt, last year the Fed purchased 61% of the government debt issued by the Treasury Dept. •The price of gold when Obama was inaugurated, $850 an ounce. Today, gold is over $1500. •Billions Spent on Green Energy is just gone with no results.
And, as I pointed out in the OP, this is clearly all his fault. I mean, it's obviously his fault that we're in a recession that was caused primarily by Clinton- and Bush-era policy and that started beforehand. It's obviously his fault that gas prices (which have spiked globally) have gone up. It's obviously his fault that the government debt is skyrocketing, after all it's his programs (like the War in Iraq and the Bush tax cuts) which are primarily responsible. Are you really that stupid? Yes. That is "his record". He has jack (*)(*)(*)(*) to do with most of it. -.- This isn't whining, this is accurate policy analysis, and it's very important to keep things like this in mind. Any president whose entire first term is during the largest recession in the last 80 years is going to look bad on paper until you actually spend time analyzing the data.
Obama failed to create an environmental to grow a recovery. That is without a doubt his fault. And, the frustrated progressives know it. Ultimately, he is going to set the Democrats back for decades by doing such a poor job. But, really, who do the Democrats have to blame but themselves? They picked this community organizer with two questionable autobiographies and a history of smearing his political opponents in order to win. Bad move Dems. You needed a performer, not a hack.
I never said that. There is fair criticism to be lobbied against his administration – failure to implement real health care reform, being unwilling to play hardball with the republicans over the debt ceiling, killing innocent civilians in drone strikes, et cetera. But so much of what is being thrown in his face by republicans is simply not his fault. Ironically, much of it is actually their fault. What does this even mean? Seriously, what would be an environment to grow a recovery after a major financial crisis? We're in a situation where everyone is saving, holding onto their money, and aggregate demand is way down. Businesses won't hire if consumers aren't consuming, and without jobs, consumers don't have money to consume with. It's a pretty basic demand-driven recession. In such a case, the only environment to grow business is one where the government steps in to fill the gap between supply and demand by hiring people and putting money into people's pockets. Now, I suppose it is fair to criticize Obama on this – public employment has gone down during his administration, as has public spending. But it's unfair to criticize him for this while simultaneously supporting Romney, who thinks the very best thing for the economy right now is more austerity. A man who thinks the correct environment for business has something to do with Obama "offending" small business owners, and the confidence fairy. We needed to elect a president after the largest depression of the modern age, not during. We should've thrown the 2008 election. Then it would be McCain failing miserably to get a situation under control in 4 years which could not reasonably be controlled in 4 years, and we would be able to scream partisan bull(*)(*)(*)(*) like a bunch of monkeys flinging poo, much like you are now. The fact is that Obama has performed extremely well given the circumstances, from the massive amounts of filibusters (and don't give me that 2-year-supermajority crap, it was two weeks between Al Franken's election and Ted Kennedy's death, and 6 weeks between Al Franken's election and Scott Brown's election) coming from republicans to the obstructionism in the house to the misguided focus on the deficit (hey, here's a great idea: let's try to shrink the deficit at a time when revenue is at a record low due to a recession!), to the fact that the economy was terrible and only getting worse when he entered office.
It's really not all his fault. MOST of it is his fault, mind you, chiefly because of his lack of demonstrated leadership, and the lack of an intelligent, positive vision for this country. A great deal of the blame goes to the members of Congress, both parties, both houses, who are by and large a bunch of greedy, useless, bought-and-paid-for politicians, not leaders. A fair share of the blame goes to the gullible, deluded, and not terribly-bright American citizens who voted for Obama in the first place. Hopefully, and all signs point to this, there will be a lot less of them this time around. Thank you. ;
...Really? So the 2008 crash is his fault? And so is the global rise in gas prices? And the Iraq and Afghanistan wars? And these things came about because he "didn't demonstrate leadership or a vision for the country"? Also, you wanna tell me how either of those are true? xD
We are happy with Obama overall. Did you see the piece from the promo video for Bain capital where Romney speaks about buying companies, taking five to seven years to turn them around and then "harvesting" them for profit? http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/09/1985-romney-bain-harvest-firms-profits-video If it takes 5 to 7 years to turn a company around, why would it take less time to turn a whole country around?
You can use this same logic with Bush. Why blame him for the Iraq war when the intelligence was agreed upon that there was a serious threat. Other nations and most of the democrats all saw this information and agreed with him to go to war but you only blame Bush for it. Congress could have not funded it but they did, other countries could have not allied with us but they did. Everyone agreed it was a threat but nobody gets blamed but Bush. Bush gets blamed for the housing burst yet the democrats were with him every step of the way and agreed that his policies were great in regards to low income lending. Yet when it blows up it all gets blamed on him. They had access to the same information he did. Bush gets blamed for cutting taxes yet democrats to this day still want most of them to stay in place. Were they arguing back when Bush was proposing this or did they happily go along? Hell, Obama extended all of them not too long ago, pretty far back off of principles there don't ya think?
It means create a business-friendly general environment instead of targeting just progressive pet projects and connected crony capitalists. This would increase job creation and therefore consumer spending. People aren't spending because they don't print money like the Fed does. If they think their job is at risk, they will not spend. Obama's policies assure that the recession continues.
Obama has stated that he wants gas prices to rise. His energy secretary has cited a goal of $10 per gallon. Obama forced the moratorium in the Gulf, but supported Brazil drilling in the Gulf with $2 billion U.S. dollars. He's shutting down coal plants endangering the electric grid and he wants to build nuke plants which even Japan and Germany have abandoned as an alternative energy source. Obama has supported the Af/pak war, Libya war, and the Muslim brotherhood ensuring high oil prices through geopolitical instability. He gets an F on the economy, whose failure, can be blamed on both partys including the saintly, compassionate, greedy Dems.
So, using your lib logic, given that the country is thousands of times the size of a business, how many thousands of years should it take Obama to turn the economy around?
The fact that Solyndra was insolvent and on the verge of bankruptcy, was well known to Obama before he authorized the loan that benefited the democrat owned company and it's investors. Obama is a corporate welfare president. He appointed the head of one of our largest military weapons manufacturing companies as his jobs czar. And gave healthcare waivers to all his favorite mega rich corporations.
This... Is not true. The intelligence going into Iraq was largely known to be faulty. This is why I blamed Clinton in the OP – it was under Clinton that these policies started, and Glass-Steagall was repealed. Blaming bush for the housing crisis is pretty much entirely inaccurate ...Did you happen to remember the circumstances of said tax break extensions? In 2011, Obama wanted to either let them expire, or specifically retool them to help the poor and middle class, but not the rich. The republicans said no, and with one house of congress, were able to hold the nation hostage over the debt ceiling. But you still haven't explained what this means. As I said earlier, a business-friendly environment requires demand, and that's what's missing at the moment. Now, how does the government raise demand? Well, here's how: hire people and companies to do work. This puts more money into people's pockets, helps businesses, and generally ensures that money keeps moving. And, once again, Romney does not think that this is what we should do. He believes that what we need right now, more than anything else, is austerity. That we need less government employees, that we need less government contracts, that we need to get government out of the marketplace entirely. And that this will somehow fix things, rather than making them worse by cutting aggregate demand. This is false. Ah, the confidence fairy. Again. While confidence does play a role, this idea that Obama's policies are putting jobs at risk is, at best, a self-fulfilling prophecy. Think about that for a moment. And yes, people aren't spending. So how do we change that? Simple – we have the government spend, hiring individuals and companies to work for it, thus placing more money into people's hands. Stimulus is a pretty straightforward macroeconomic tool, and Obama does have another row of it planned, one estimated to create upwards of 2 million jobs. Congress won't vote on it, though. Wow, so many claims which seem like they require justification, and for which a simple quote would be enough... without any citations or links. Why is this so hard to figure out, guys? Hey, watch, I can do this too. Romney says that he wants to create chinese-style sweatshops here in the USA. His press secretary has cited the goal of completely destroying minimum wage. He also wants to remove all work-safety regulations, but has simultaneously been working to reinstate them in countries like China and Taiwan. Also, he apparently eats babies.
Blame? The presidency (choke) of El Barrack bin Husseini Ibn O'Bama Blackeagle can not be boiled down to an itemized list of inconvieniences to which we can asign blame. Chairman Obama's entire body of work is an expose` of failure. There is not one thing he has said or done that has benefitted us as free citizens of a nation of liberty. Clueless incompetence are verbs too meager to acurately describe the America hating progressive leftist loser that is Obama.
The reason you're going to remain 'STAGNANT' in your lot in life and with your excuses for hussein's total failure as potus is because you're caught up in the past just like hussein is in blaming everyone (especially Bush) for those failures. Try posting something here about hussein that clearly shows he's stands for something worthy and viable for the American people and for America as a nation. You simply cannot because this guy is a dye in the wool socialist of the worse kind. People keep posting charts of his economic failure such as the one where America was the #1 economic power in the world when hussein took office, and I believe we've dropped to #14 or so since living through this 4 year nightmare. Businesses all over America are not hiring and are in fact laying people off because of hussein's tax and regulate policies. This guy has absolutely nothing to offer America other than 4 more years of failure.
The Liberals totally ignore the 9/11 stock market crash, $140 per barrel oil, worldcom, enron, the dot com bubble bursting and all the other economic catastrophes that Bush had to deal with. And it wasn't until the democrats won the congressional house in 2006, that things started to go really bad.
That is so true. Progressive leftists are not deep thinkers, I guess that explains why they are Obama voters.
Stagnant, (And I call you that because it is your stage name here. You may want to consider a name change, however. 'Stagnant' is hardly complimentary, and when applied to a personae, is chiefly considered a pejorative.) Obama inherited a down-turning economy, and he inherited the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Gas prices were in the range of $1.80 or so. His lack of leadership is what contributed to a worsening of the economy, and yes, contributed to further rising of the gas prices. His own lack of leadership on the world stage, and his making an enemy of big oil, helped see to that. Apologies all over the globe don't inspire respect, especially in the Arab world. They invite scorn and laughter. Did he get resistance and push-back from the conservatives in Congress, on a great number of his plans and initiatives? Yes. But a true leader would have found a way to forge meaningful compromise, and outcomes that would be good for the nation. Obama's solution to Republican opposition, sadly, has been, "Well screw you. We're going to do it my way or not at all." Not the trademarks of a true leader. And the end, what does it matter to Obama? He has shown that he doesn't really need Congress to do what he wants to do anyway, by executive fiat. Sending forces into Libya. Offering huge sums of money to college students (money the treasury does not have, by the way) in order to pander for votes. Directing the Department of Health and Human Services to offer waivers to the work requirement, and in the process, blatantly pandering for votes from the welfare class. The list goes on and on. But I suspect that you don't want to hear simple truths like this, not from an independent free-thinker like me. ?
