Factcheck.org: judging Obama's presidency based on FACTS not hyperbole or rhetoric

[The Rabbi]

1. Obamacare= uncertainty for everyone in America. That is without question.


2. Profit are up largely because the Fed has been pumping almost $100,000,000,000.00 a month into the economy for the last three years. If that stops....bye bye wall street.

No. Profits are up because businesses have been investing in cost savings over increased production. Note that productivity is much higher now, which comes from cutting costs.
There is only so much profit that comes from other than the top line. Additionaly a lot of that profit was generated overseas and cannot be repatriated.

But this has been explained to Billy many times. ANd he keeps bleating the same thing: the stock market is up as are corporate profits. So how can Obama be a failure?
There is no explaining facts to someone who cannot focus on more than one or two metrics.

Hmm how many times has this been explained to me? You're so full of shit.

Also, I never said Obama was the reason corporate profits were up. Try and keep up.

Probably every fucking thread it comes up and you spout off, is how often.
You defend Obama by pointing out corporate profits are up. Don't try to dodge it.

 

[Billy000]

No. Profits are up because businesses have been investing in cost savings over increased production. Note that productivity is much higher now, which comes from cutting costs.
There is only so much profit that comes from other than the top line. Additionaly a lot of that profit was generated overseas and cannot be repatriated.

But this has been explained to Billy many times. ANd he keeps bleating the same thing: the stock market is up as are corporate profits. So how can Obama be a failure?
There is no explaining facts to someone who cannot focus on more than one or two metrics.

Hmm how many times has this been explained to me? You're so full of shit.

Also, I never said Obama was the reason corporate profits were up. Try and keep up.

Probably every fucking thread it comes up and you spout off, is how often.
You defend Obama by pointing out corporate profits are up. Don't try to dodge it.

I brought up the fact that corporate profits were at an all time high because another user made the assertion that Obama was the reason hiring was down, you ass clown.

 

[The Rabbi]

Hmm how many times has this been explained to me? You're so full of shit.

Also, I never said Obama was the reason corporate profits were up. Try and keep up.

Probably every fucking thread it comes up and you spout off, is how often.
You defend Obama by pointing out corporate profits are up. Don't try to dodge it.

I brought up the fact that corporate profits were at an all time high because another user made the assertion that Obama was the reason hiring was down, you ass clown.

You understand those statements are not contradictory, right ass clown?

 

[bravoactual]

This thread is partly inspired by welfarequeen's poll on how USMB members grade Obama's presidency. The large majority of you gave Obama an F which, in my opinion, is completely unfair and is an obvious indication of willful ignorance.

This is a fair and balanced assessment of how the country has faired under Obama. They are based upon numbers only. Subjective criticism such as his character or leadership skills are not in this article. I highlighted in bold what I consider to be important points. Keep in mind that these figures only represent what has happened UNDER Obama. Which means many factors influence them. Not just Obama.

America is still gaining jobs under President Obama, but millions more live in poverty, typical household incomes have not kept pace with inflation, and the federal debt is up nearly 90 percent and on pace to double before he leaves office. Stockholders, meanwhile, are far wealthier than they were the day he was sworn in.
U.S. oil production continues to boom, as do wind and solar power, while dependence on foreign oil keeps dropping. International opinion of the United States has slipped a bit, but generally remains far higher than before he took office, except in the Muslim world, where it has gotten even worse.

These are among the findings in our latest update of “Obama’s Numbers.”

This is another in our series of regular quarterly updates of key statistical indicators of the Obama presidency. It follows our “Obama’s Numbers” article in October, a pre-election update we posted Nov. 5, and quarterly updates posted April 16 and July 19.
The mix of statistics in these reports will vary. This update includes income and poverty figures that are issued annually, for example. We select other figures that are available monthly or quarterly depending on what we judge to be most topical. Our intent is to provide accurate measures of what’s changed — for better or worse — since Obama first took office in January 2009.


– by Brooks Jackson

Obama?s Numbers, October Update

To me the trick is determining how much Obama's policies have influenced these economic numbers. And of course not just him, but Congress as well.

My take on the economy: Things could be better with 7.3% unemployment. However, the economy went into a free fall in 2007. 100,000s of jobs were being lost each month up. The unemployment rate may have gone up under Obama, but there is no denying that Obama has created more jobs than Bush did in his entire 8 years. In other words, a president only has so much control over a nation's economy. In my perspective, the higher unemployment rate has very little to do with Obama's policies. Could he have done more to repair the problem? Maybe, but our do-nothing congress has contributed a great deal to this. Republicans, historically since 2000, have done NOTHING to improve the economy.

There you go again. Using those pesky facts.

The Cons on this forum don't like facts because they believe every word that Faux Snooze, the least trusted name in news. Seldom fair and Very Un-Balanced.

How dare you.....how dare you sir.....I am shocked....nay...nay I say I am acrimonious.

How dare you steep so low as to use facts.

You know Conservative hate facts.

Facts are French and Gay.

 

[Old Rocks]

Oh and where you completely come off the rails is in this part of your analysis. You are showing that you have no concept of the basics of an economy when you argue that Obama had enough power to create more jobs than Bush but had not enough power to create more.

May I suggest you run to the fridge and get yourself some more koolaid?

but there is no denying that Obama has created more jobs than Bush did in his entire 8 years. In other words, a president only has so much control over a nation's economy.

Yeah ill admit I made a hypocritical statement there. My bad.

No worries. Appreciate the honesty. Truly.

I was just up at our local co-op gas station the other day. Do not feel bad how we post.

There was this old timer filling up and he was saying "see Bush brought the price down. I knew he'd do it."

My jaw was hitting the ground. Oh it gets worse.

And as he drove off my neighbor (who was there too) just realized she'd signed him up to vote in this by election we're having.

In Manitoba Canada.

Well, I suppose the two terms Bush had here would not effect term limits in Canada Do they have term limits in Canada? Damn, just realized I haven't been up there on a major trip since '75, when we drove to Yellowknife. Wonderful trip, met many wonderful people, be interesting to see how much it has changed.

 

[Billy000]

This thread is partly inspired by welfarequeen's poll on how USMB members grade Obama's presidency. The large majority of you gave Obama an F which, in my opinion, is completely unfair and is an obvious indication of willful ignorance.

This is a fair and balanced assessment of how the country has faired under Obama. They are based upon numbers only. Subjective criticism such as his character or leadership skills are not in this article. I highlighted in bold what I consider to be important points. Keep in mind that these figures only represent what has happened UNDER Obama. Which means many factors influence them. Not just Obama.

America is still gaining jobs under President Obama, but millions more live in poverty, typical household incomes have not kept pace with inflation, and the federal debt is up nearly 90 percent and on pace to double before he leaves office. Stockholders, meanwhile, are far wealthier than they were the day he was sworn in.
U.S. oil production continues to boom, as do wind and solar power, while dependence on foreign oil keeps dropping. International opinion of the United States has slipped a bit, but generally remains far higher than before he took office, except in the Muslim world, where it has gotten even worse.

These are among the findings in our latest update of “Obama’s Numbers.”

This is another in our series of regular quarterly updates of key statistical indicators of the Obama presidency. It follows our “Obama’s Numbers” article in October, a pre-election update we posted Nov. 5, and quarterly updates posted April 16 and July 19.
The mix of statistics in these reports will vary. This update includes income and poverty figures that are issued annually, for example. We select other figures that are available monthly or quarterly depending on what we judge to be most topical. Our intent is to provide accurate measures of what’s changed — for better or worse — since Obama first took office in January 2009.


– by Brooks Jackson

Obama?s Numbers, October Update

To me the trick is determining how much Obama's policies have influenced these economic numbers. And of course not just him, but Congress as well.

My take on the economy: Things could be better with 7.3% unemployment. However, the economy went into a free fall in 2007. 100,000s of jobs were being lost each month up. The unemployment rate may have gone up under Obama, but there is no denying that Obama has created more jobs than Bush did in his entire 8 years. In other words, a president only has so much control over a nation's economy. In my perspective, the higher unemployment rate has very little to do with Obama's policies. Could he have done more to repair the problem? Maybe, but our do-nothing congress has contributed a great deal to this. Republicans, historically since 2000, have done NOTHING to improve the economy.

There you go again. Using those pesky facts.

The Cons on this forum don't like facts because they believe every word that Faux Snooze, the least trusted name in news. Seldom fair and Very Un-Balanced.

How dare you.....how dare you sir.....I am shocked....nay...nay I say I am acrimonious.

How dare you steep so low as to use facts.

You know Conservative hate facts.

Facts are French and Gay.

Best. Post. Ever.

 

[Stephanie]

This thread is partly inspired by welfarequeen's poll on how USMB members grade Obama's presidency. The large majority of you gave Obama an F which, in my opinion, is completely unfair and is an obvious indication of willful ignorance.

This is a fair and balanced assessment of how the country has faired under Obama. They are based upon numbers only. Subjective criticism such as his character or leadership skills are not in this article. I highlighted in bold what I consider to be important points. Keep in mind that these figures only represent what has happened UNDER Obama. Which means many factors influence them. Not just Obama.

America is still gaining jobs under President Obama, but millions more live in poverty, typical household incomes have not kept pace with inflation, and the federal debt is up nearly 90 percent and on pace to double before he leaves office. Stockholders, meanwhile, are far wealthier than they were the day he was sworn in.
U.S. oil production continues to boom, as do wind and solar power, while dependence on foreign oil keeps dropping. International opinion of the United States has slipped a bit, but generally remains far higher than before he took office, except in the Muslim world, where it has gotten even worse.

These are among the findings in our latest update of “Obama’s Numbers.”

This is another in our series of regular quarterly updates of key statistical indicators of the Obama presidency. It follows our “Obama’s Numbers” article in October, a pre-election update we posted Nov. 5, and quarterly updates posted April 16 and July 19.
The mix of statistics in these reports will vary. This update includes income and poverty figures that are issued annually, for example. We select other figures that are available monthly or quarterly depending on what we judge to be most topical. Our intent is to provide accurate measures of what’s changed — for better or worse — since Obama first took office in January 2009.


– by Brooks Jackson

Obama?s Numbers, October Update

To me the trick is determining how much Obama's policies have influenced these economic numbers. And of course not just him, but Congress as well.

My take on the economy: Things could be better with 7.3% unemployment. However, the economy went into a free fall in 2007. 100,000s of jobs were being lost each month up. The unemployment rate may have gone up under Obama, but there is no denying that Obama has created more jobs than Bush did in his entire 8 years. In other words, a president only has so much control over a nation's economy. In my perspective, the higher unemployment rate has very little to do with Obama's policies. Could he have done more to repair the problem? Maybe, but our do-nothing congress has contributed a great deal to this. Republicans, historically since 2000, have done NOTHING to improve the economy.

There you go again. Using those pesky facts.

The Cons on this forum don't like facts because they believe every word that Faux Snooze, the least trusted name in news. Seldom fair and Very Un-Balanced.

How dare you.....how dare you sir.....I am shocked....nay...nay I say I am acrimonious.

How dare you steep so low as to use facts.

You know Conservative hate facts.

Facts are French and Gay.

oh yeah, facts from left biased site called, politifact and we are just ALL suppose to swallow it as the gospel FACTS...
well, sorry but some people do think for themselves... that might be a shock and suck for obamabots

 

[Billy000]

Probably every fucking thread it comes up and you spout off, is how often.
You defend Obama by pointing out corporate profits are up. Don't try to dodge it.

I brought up the fact that corporate profits were at an all time high because another user made the assertion that Obama was the reason hiring was down, you ass clown.

You understand those statements are not contradictory, right ass clown?

Obviously. My point was that it didn't make sense to me why corporations are not hiring because of profits being at record levels and because stockholders are wealthier than ever. He made the assertion that Obama's policies have made corporations uneasy about hiring. That is, of course, bullshit.

All of this information is in the thread. Do I really need to explain this to you?

 

[Billy000]

This thread is partly inspired by welfarequeen's poll on how USMB members grade Obama's presidency. The large majority of you gave Obama an F which, in my opinion, is completely unfair and is an obvious indication of willful ignorance.

This is a fair and balanced assessment of how the country has faired under Obama. They are based upon numbers only. Subjective criticism such as his character or leadership skills are not in this article. I highlighted in bold what I consider to be important points. Keep in mind that these figures only represent what has happened UNDER Obama. Which means many factors influence them. Not just Obama.




Obama?s Numbers, October Update

To me the trick is determining how much Obama's policies have influenced these economic numbers. And of course not just him, but Congress as well.

My take on the economy: Things could be better with 7.3% unemployment. However, the economy went into a free fall in 2007. 100,000s of jobs were being lost each month up. The unemployment rate may have gone up under Obama, but there is no denying that Obama has created more jobs than Bush did in his entire 8 years. In other words, a president only has so much control over a nation's economy. In my perspective, the higher unemployment rate has very little to do with Obama's policies. Could he have done more to repair the problem? Maybe, but our do-nothing congress has contributed a great deal to this. Republicans, historically since 2000, have done NOTHING to improve the economy.

There you go again. Using those pesky facts.

The Cons on this forum don't like facts because they believe every word that Faux Snooze, the least trusted name in news. Seldom fair and Very Un-Balanced.

How dare you.....how dare you sir.....I am shocked....nay...nay I say I am acrimonious.

How dare you steep so low as to use facts.

You know Conservative hate facts.

Facts are French and Gay.

oh yeah, facts from left biased site called, politifact and we are just ALL suppose to swallow it as the gospel FACTS...
well, sorry but some people do think for themselves... that might be a shock and suck for obamabots

Factcheck.org dear. Do try and pay attention. If you don't trust these facts, where are the real ones? I am dying to know.

 

[Stephanie]

There you go again. Using those pesky facts.

The Cons on this forum don't like facts because they believe every word that Faux Snooze, the least trusted name in news. Seldom fair and Very Un-Balanced.

How dare you.....how dare you sir.....I am shocked....nay...nay I say I am acrimonious.

How dare you steep so low as to use facts.

You know Conservative hate facts.

Facts are French and Gay.

oh yeah, facts from left biased site called, politifact and we are just ALL suppose to swallow it as the gospel FACTS...
well, sorry but some people do think for themselves... that might be a shock and suck for obamabots

Factcheck.org dear. Do try and pay attention. If you don't trust these facts, where are the real ones? I am dying to know.

I get the two mixed up...I don't take either one as the gospel for truth...
and the real facts are staring people in the face and the Majority of us not in in that 30 something approval of him are Living it
the rest have their blinders wrapped on their heads tight

 

[The Rabbi]

I brought up the fact that corporate profits were at an all time high because another user made the assertion that Obama was the reason hiring was down, you ass clown.

You understand those statements are not contradictory, right ass clown?

Obviously. My point was that it didn't make sense to me why corporations are not hiring because of profits being at record levels and because stockholders are wealthier than ever. He made the assertion that Obama's policies have made corporations uneasy about hiring. That is, of course, bullshit.

All of this information is in the thread. Do I really need to explain this to you?

Do you ever think? That's a serious question.
If profits are high why do you suppose corporations aren't hiring?
Let me guess, GREED! Right?

 

[Oldstyle]

And yet stockholders are richer than ever. Obama wanted to lower the corporate tax rate to 28% at one point. Give me the evidence that says EPA regulations have CAUSED economic harm.

Do you really not grasp what would have happened if the EPA was allowed to put those stricter greenhouse gas regulations into place? Businesses make decisions based on what they think will happen in the future. If you propose things like ObamaCare, Cap & Trade, Card Check, a higher minimum wage, then businesses will take those things into consideration when determining if they will expand or contract and whether that will take place here in the US or in a country that isn't proposing those new regulations.

The fact is Barack Obama backed off on allowing those stricter greenhouse gas regulations to be enforced by the EPA because enough of his fellow Democrats screamed bloody murder that allowing the EPA to do so would devastate jobs in their areas and they would pay the price politically. Barry wanted that policy but wasn't able to get it. The mere threat however affected business leader's decisions on where to expand their businesses.

Is there a reason why your reply only focused on EPA regulations?

I replied regarding EPA regulations because that was the example I used. I could also use the stonewalling of drilling permits following the Gulf oil spill as an example of policy by this Administration that drove jobs away from the US. Because Barack Obama has put people in charge at the Department of the Interior who have an anti drilling agenda. Drilling companies were put in limbo trying to figure out when they would be able to drill in US waters again.

Drilling Is Stalled Even After Ban Is Lifted - WSJ.com

This is just one small policy set down by the Obama Administration that affected the jobs of thousands of Americans. There are dozens more that have crippled the ability of our economy to recover. Take the NLRB's decision to sue Boeing simply because they chose to build a new aircraft assembly plant in South Carolina rather than in union friendly Washington. Or the Justice Department's raid on a Gibson guitar factory to seize wood that Justice decided violated the rights of foreign workers. Or the ongoing Keystone pipeline that Obama Administration appointees have been blocking for years now with calls for additional studies. Or the leisurely three year period the Obama Administration took to send the pending trade agreements with Panama, Colombia and South Korea to Congress. Which means that in all this time American companies have been paying higher tariffs for exports.

The fact is, this Administration has put in place administrators with little to no business experience to "oversee" entire industries...administrators who view businesses as the enemy that must be subdued and brought to heel. In the five years that Barack Obama has been in the Oval Office he has made the excoriation of businesses that make a profit a regular theme for why Americans are struggling economically...something that boggles the mind, quite frankly since it's THOSE businesses that have the potential to put Americans back to work if they felt more confident in the leadership of the country.

 

[WelfareQueen]

No one is denying the economy still sucks. Do you really think a different president could have done much better? Based on what? This economic downturn is unlike any in history. Even economists do not fully understand how things could have gotten so bad.

So in your mind Obama is a failure. What's Bush? A super failure? Your pessimism is unfair. Give Obama credit for something.

I think Obama's policies have created a great deal of uncertainty which has kept down hiring. But, to be fair, the globalization of the world economy means many good American jobs continue to be shipped overseas to places like India and China. Those are jobs we will probably never see again.

I hold both Democrats and Republicans equally responsible for it the globalization clusterfuck. Both Party's have taken the corporate money and sold the rest of us down the river.

What certainty? Explain how Obama has created uncertainty. Profits are at an all time high. Why they can't hire more based on that is beyond me.

Let's also not forget that there are many jobs available that can't be filled because there is lack of people qualified for them. Obama tried fixing this problem by proposing job training programs at community colleges. But, of course, Repubs blocked it.

The Federal Government currently has over 22 different job training programs spread across almost as many agencies. It is a complete boondoogle.

Why is the Democrat solution to always reflexively throw money at a problem?

Prove with real data that the existing job training programs are working and I would consider throwing more money at them. Without any evidence....no way.

 

[freedombecki]

debt under obama has gone down.

so why has the debt ceiling been raised?

Because the Obama administration keeps raising the National Debt.

It's over $17 trillion now.

U. S. National Debt to the Penny (U. S. Treasury Department) $17,189,547,404,790.46

 

[healthmyths]

This thread is partly inspired by welfarequeen's poll on how USMB members grade Obama's presidency. The large majority of you gave Obama an F which, in my opinion, is completely unfair and is an obvious indication of willful ignorance.

This is a fair and balanced assessment of how the country has faired under Obama. They are based upon numbers only. Subjective criticism such as his character or leadership skills are not in this article. I highlighted in bold what I consider to be important points. Keep in mind that these figures only represent what has happened UNDER Obama. Which means many factors influence them. Not just Obama.

America is still gaining jobs under President Obama, but millions more live in poverty, typical household incomes have not kept pace with inflation, and the federal debt is up nearly 90 percent and on pace to double before he leaves office. Stockholders, meanwhile, are far wealthier than they were the day he was sworn in.
U.S. oil production continues to boom, as do wind and solar power, while dependence on foreign oil keeps dropping. International opinion of the United States has slipped a bit, but generally remains far higher than before he took office, except in the Muslim world, where it has gotten even worse.

These are among the findings in our latest update of “Obama’s Numbers.”

This is another in our series of regular quarterly updates of key statistical indicators of the Obama presidency. It follows our “Obama’s Numbers” article in October, a pre-election update we posted Nov. 5, and quarterly updates posted April 16 and July 19.
The mix of statistics in these reports will vary. This update includes income and poverty figures that are issued annually, for example. We select other figures that are available monthly or quarterly depending on what we judge to be most topical. Our intent is to provide accurate measures of what’s changed — for better or worse — since Obama first took office in January 2009.


– by Brooks Jackson

Obama?s Numbers, October Update

To me the trick is determining how much Obama's policies have influenced these economic numbers. And of course not just him, but Congress as well.

My take on the economy: Things could be better with 7.3% unemployment. However, the economy went into a free fall in 2007. 100,000s of jobs were being lost each month up. The unemployment rate may have gone up under Obama, but there is no denying that Obama has created more jobs than Bush did in his entire 8 years. In other words, a president only has so much control over a nation's economy. In my perspective, the higher unemployment rate has very little to do with Obama's policies. Could he have done more to repair the problem? Maybe, but our do-nothing congress has contributed a great deal to this. Republicans, historically since 2000, have done NOTHING to improve the economy.

"but there is no denying that Obama has created more jobs than Bush did in his entire 8 years. "

Do you recall these events??

1) Recession that started under Clinton ended 11/01?
Specifically, 50.8 million jobs were lost through the first six quarters of the ‘01 recession .
Heritage Employment Report: February Continues Winter Blues
The 2001 recession officially started 03/2001... BUT the steps leading up to it started under Clinton!

DID THIS HAPPEN?? WAS IT BUSH's FAULT???
1) Dot.com bust cost $5 trillion in lost market value..
this means every year for 30 years now starting in 2000 the federal revenue is over $20 billion written off against taxes owed.
According to the Los Angeles Times, when the dot-com bubble burst, it wiped out $5 trillion dollars in market value for tech companies.
More than half of the Internet companies created since 1995 were gone by 2004 -
and hundreds of thousands of skilled technology workers were out of jobs.
The dot-com bubble: How to lose $5 trillion ? Anderson Cooper 360 - CNN.com Blogs

DID THIS HAPPEN???
DID THIS HAPPEN??
2) Did YOU forget that 9/11 occurred and it cost $2 trillion over the next 30 years again $8 billion will NOT BE PAiD.. was that Bush's fault?
Jobs lost in New York owing to the attacks: 146,100 JUST in New York!!
Year 2001: September 11 Terrorist Attacks
The 9/11 terrorist attacks were the events that helped shape other financial events of the decade. After that terrible day in September 2001, our economic climate was never to be the same again. It was only the third time in history that the New York Stock Exchange was shut down for a period of time. In this case, it was closed from September 10 - 17. Besides the tragic human loss of that day, the economic loss cannot even be estimated. Some estimate that there was over $60 billion in insurance losses alone.

Approximately 18,000 small businesses were either displaced or destroyed in Lower Manhattan after the Twin Towers fell. There was a buildup in homeland security on all levels. 9/11 caused a catastrophic financial loss for the U.S.
The Top 10 Financial Events of the Decade

DID THIS HAPPEN???

DID THIS HAPPEN?? DID BUSH CAUSE THE WORST HURRICANE SEASONS!!!!???
3) $1 trillion in written off losses due to the WORST Hurricane SEASONS in history!
The worst Katrina made landfall in Louisiana as a Category 3 in 2005. It took 1,836 lives and caused $81.2 billion in damages. Andrew slammed into South Florida in 1992 as a Category 5. It caused 40 deaths and $30 billion in property damage. More than 250,000 people were left homeless and 82,000 businesses were destroyed or damaged.
Hurricane Katrina ALONE! Year 2005: Hurricanes Katrina and Rita
On August 25, 2005, Hurricane Katrina hit the Gulf Coast of the U.S. as a strong Category 3 or low Category 4 storm. It quickly became the biggest natural disaster in U.S. history, almost destroying New Orleans due to severe flooding.

Hurricane Rita quickly followed Katrina only to make matters worse. Between the two, more than $200 billion in damage was done. 400,000 jobs were lost and 275,000 homes were destroyed. Many of the jobs and homes were never to be recovered. Hundreds of thousands of people were displaced and over 1,000 were killed and more are missing. The effect on oil and gasoline prices was long-lasting.

400,000 jobs due to Hurricanes Katrina/Rita
145,000 jobs in NYC alone due to 9/11
300,000 jobs lost due to dot.com busts.

Largest Gross Domestic Product in history!!
When Bush took office in 2001 GDP was $12.355,271,000,000
when Bush left office in 2008 GDP was $14,359,490,000,000
A 16% increase in GDP or $2 TRILLION.

Bush growth of the GDP was greater then Clinton in 2005 GDP grew at 6.5% Clinton's best:6.4%
Measuring Worth - GDP result.

When Bush started 131,785,000 people employed.
At the end of 2008 136,790,000 people employed or

5,000,000 more employed then when he took office.

DID THIS HAPPEN???
Oh and did I mention along the way when "Mission Accomplished" occurred after less then six weeks of combat in May 2003.. 10 years ago..that over 1 million Iraq people were
saved from starving? 50,000 people a year were starving under Saddam and when he was removed, (by the way at the request of Kerry,Pelosi, and 90% of the 28 million Iraqis) the
UN mandated embargo was removed.
Researcher Richard Garfield estimated that "a minimum of 100,000 and a more likely estimate of 227,000 excess deaths among young children from August 1991 through March 1998" from all causes including sanctions. Human rights in Saddam Hussein's Iraq - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

SO PLEASE.... TELL ME what comparable EVENTS during Obama's presidency comes CLOSE TO the above?????
AND YET he still shuts down federal drilling leases!
Obama orders EPA to destroy millions of jobs!
FACTS: 1) EPA itself estimated that its ozone standard would cost $90 billion a year,
while other studies have projected that the rule could cost upwards of a trillion dollars and destroy 7.4 million jobs.
2)Boiler MACT Rule: EPA's Boiler MACT (Maximum Achievable Control Technology) standards are so strict that not even the best-performing sources can meet them, so many companies will have no choice but to shut their doors and ship manufacturing jobs overseas.
The rule has been projected to reduce US GDP by as much as 1.2 billion dollars and will destroy nearly 800,000 jobs.
Articles: Obama's EPA Plans for 2013

So HoW can there be more jobs more employment while Obama's EPA is destroying theM???

 

[Mr. H.]

There is zero relation between Obama or his policies and the increase in U.S. crude oil and natural gas production. If anything, his administration continually puts up roadblocks with respect to the endangered species act and high-volume high-pressure horizontal fracturing on public lands.

The eastern Gulf of Mexico remains off limits, as do our ourter-continental shelfs. ANWR is untouchable.

To top it off, Obama's proposed budget contains over $40 billion in taxes on the oil and gas industries.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

debt under obama has gone down.

so why has the debt ceiling been raised?

Because the Obama administration keeps raising the National Debt.

It's over $17 trillion now.

U. S. National Debt to the Penny (U. S. Treasury Department) $17,189,547,404,790.46

but ned said the debt has come down under obama. Is this that liberal fuzzy math thingie?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

There is zero relation between Obama or his policies and the increase in U.S. crude oil and natural gas production. If anything, his administration continually puts up roadblocks with respect to the endangered species act and high-volume high-pressure horizontal fracturing on public lands.

The eastern Gulf of Mexico remains off limits, as do our ourter-continental shelfs. ANWR is untouchable.

To top it off, Obama's proposed budget contains over $40 billion in taxes on the oil and gas industries.

it's war on gas, coal and the U.S. economy.

 

[uhkilleez]

This thread is partly inspired by welfarequeen's poll on how USMB members grade Obama's presidency. The large majority of you gave Obama an F which, in my opinion, is completely unfair and is an obvious indication of willful ignorance.

This is a fair and balanced assessment of how the country has faired under Obama. They are based upon numbers only. Subjective criticism such as his character or leadership skills are not in this article. I highlighted in bold what I consider to be important points. Keep in mind that these figures only represent what has happened UNDER Obama. Which means many factors influence them. Not just Obama.

America is still gaining jobs under President Obama, but millions more live in poverty, typical household incomes have not kept pace with inflation, and the federal debt is up nearly 90 percent and on pace to double before he leaves office. Stockholders, meanwhile, are far wealthier than they were the day he was sworn in.
U.S. oil production continues to boom, as do wind and solar power, while dependence on foreign oil keeps dropping. International opinion of the United States has slipped a bit, but generally remains far higher than before he took office, except in the Muslim world, where it has gotten even worse.

These are among the findings in our latest update of “Obama’s Numbers.”

This is another in our series of regular quarterly updates of key statistical indicators of the Obama presidency. It follows our “Obama’s Numbers” article in October, a pre-election update we posted Nov. 5, and quarterly updates posted April 16 and July 19.
The mix of statistics in these reports will vary. This update includes income and poverty figures that are issued annually, for example. We select other figures that are available monthly or quarterly depending on what we judge to be most topical. Our intent is to provide accurate measures of what’s changed — for better or worse — since Obama first took office in January 2009.


– by Brooks Jackson

Obama?s Numbers, October Update

To me the trick is determining how much Obama's policies have influenced these economic numbers. And of course not just him, but Congress as well.

My take on the economy: Things could be better with 7.3% unemployment. However, the economy went into a free fall in 2007. 100,000s of jobs were being lost each month up. The unemployment rate may have gone up under Obama, but there is no denying that Obama has created more jobs than Bush did in his entire 8 years. In other words, a president only has so much control over a nation's economy. In my perspective, the higher unemployment rate has very little to do with Obama's policies. Could he have done more to repair the problem? Maybe, but our do-nothing congress has contributed a great deal to this. Republicans, historically since 2000, have done NOTHING to improve the economy.

Your post confuses causation with correlation. Republicans controlled Presidency and Congress for a short time, the three decades previous were almost unanimously controlled by Democrats. Nonetheless, they are merely the same people masquerading these days.

The economy has slightly improved under Obama, but it is despite his actions and not in spite of them. In order to prove this point, I ask you, what is the critical difference between Obama and Bush?

Both push meaningless wars. Obama has killed more Middle Eastern people than Bush ever did.

Both approved outrageous bailouts for the already rich and risky upper-class bankers.

Both approved redundant social programs designed to give the people back a small portion of their money.

Both approved sanctions to increase welfare.

Both approved legislation that benefits our corporatocracy.

The biggest difference between GWB and Obama is that Obama did all the same things Bush did, but harder. I have been alive and paying full attention long enough to see full well the comparisons, even in my relatively young age.

EDIT: Another drunken spelling error.

 

[Billy000]

This thread is partly inspired by welfarequeen's poll on how USMB members grade Obama's presidency. The large majority of you gave Obama an F which, in my opinion, is completely unfair and is an obvious indication of willful ignorance.

This is a fair and balanced assessment of how the country has faired under Obama. They are based upon numbers only. Subjective criticism such as his character or leadership skills are not in this article. I highlighted in bold what I consider to be important points. Keep in mind that these figures only represent what has happened UNDER Obama. Which means many factors influence them. Not just Obama.

America is still gaining jobs under President Obama, but millions more live in poverty, typical household incomes have not kept pace with inflation, and the federal debt is up nearly 90 percent and on pace to double before he leaves office. Stockholders, meanwhile, are far wealthier than they were the day he was sworn in.
U.S. oil production continues to boom, as do wind and solar power, while dependence on foreign oil keeps dropping. International opinion of the United States has slipped a bit, but generally remains far higher than before he took office, except in the Muslim world, where it has gotten even worse.

These are among the findings in our latest update of “Obama’s Numbers.”

This is another in our series of regular quarterly updates of key statistical indicators of the Obama presidency. It follows our “Obama’s Numbers” article in October, a pre-election update we posted Nov. 5, and quarterly updates posted April 16 and July 19.
The mix of statistics in these reports will vary. This update includes income and poverty figures that are issued annually, for example. We select other figures that are available monthly or quarterly depending on what we judge to be most topical. Our intent is to provide accurate measures of what’s changed — for better or worse — since Obama first took office in January 2009.


– by Brooks Jackson

Obama?s Numbers, October Update

To me the trick is determining how much Obama's policies have influenced these economic numbers. And of course not just him, but Congress as well.

My take on the economy: Things could be better with 7.3% unemployment. However, the economy went into a free fall in 2007. 100,000s of jobs were being lost each month up. The unemployment rate may have gone up under Obama, but there is no denying that Obama has created more jobs than Bush did in his entire 8 years. In other words, a president only has so much control over a nation's economy. In my perspective, the higher unemployment rate has very little to do with Obama's policies. Could he have done more to repair the problem? Maybe, but our do-nothing congress has contributed a great deal to this. Republicans, historically since 2000, have done NOTHING to improve the economy.

"but there is no denying that Obama has created more jobs than Bush did in his entire 8 years. "

Do you recall these events??

1) Recession that started under Clinton ended 11/01?
Specifically, 50.8 million jobs were lost through the first six quarters of the ‘01 recession .
Heritage Employment Report: February Continues Winter Blues
The 2001 recession officially started 03/2001... BUT the steps leading up to it started under Clinton!

DID THIS HAPPEN?? WAS IT BUSH's FAULT???
1) Dot.com bust cost $5 trillion in lost market value..
this means every year for 30 years now starting in 2000 the federal revenue is over $20 billion written off against taxes owed.
According to the Los Angeles Times, when the dot-com bubble burst, it wiped out $5 trillion dollars in market value for tech companies.
More than half of the Internet companies created since 1995 were gone by 2004 -
and hundreds of thousands of skilled technology workers were out of jobs.
The dot-com bubble: How to lose $5 trillion ? Anderson Cooper 360 - CNN.com Blogs

DID THIS HAPPEN???
DID THIS HAPPEN??
2) Did YOU forget that 9/11 occurred and it cost $2 trillion over the next 30 years again $8 billion will NOT BE PAiD.. was that Bush's fault?
Jobs lost in New York owing to the attacks: 146,100 JUST in New York!!
Year 2001: September 11 Terrorist Attacks
The 9/11 terrorist attacks were the events that helped shape other financial events of the decade. After that terrible day in September 2001, our economic climate was never to be the same again. It was only the third time in history that the New York Stock Exchange was shut down for a period of time. In this case, it was closed from September 10 - 17. Besides the tragic human loss of that day, the economic loss cannot even be estimated. Some estimate that there was over $60 billion in insurance losses alone.

Approximately 18,000 small businesses were either displaced or destroyed in Lower Manhattan after the Twin Towers fell. There was a buildup in homeland security on all levels. 9/11 caused a catastrophic financial loss for the U.S.
The Top 10 Financial Events of the Decade

DID THIS HAPPEN???

DID THIS HAPPEN?? DID BUSH CAUSE THE WORST HURRICANE SEASONS!!!!???
3) $1 trillion in written off losses due to the WORST Hurricane SEASONS in history!
The worst Katrina made landfall in Louisiana as a Category 3 in 2005. It took 1,836 lives and caused $81.2 billion in damages. Andrew slammed into South Florida in 1992 as a Category 5. It caused 40 deaths and $30 billion in property damage. More than 250,000 people were left homeless and 82,000 businesses were destroyed or damaged.
Hurricane Katrina ALONE! Year 2005: Hurricanes Katrina and Rita
On August 25, 2005, Hurricane Katrina hit the Gulf Coast of the U.S. as a strong Category 3 or low Category 4 storm. It quickly became the biggest natural disaster in U.S. history, almost destroying New Orleans due to severe flooding.

Hurricane Rita quickly followed Katrina only to make matters worse. Between the two, more than $200 billion in damage was done. 400,000 jobs were lost and 275,000 homes were destroyed. Many of the jobs and homes were never to be recovered. Hundreds of thousands of people were displaced and over 1,000 were killed and more are missing. The effect on oil and gasoline prices was long-lasting.

400,000 jobs due to Hurricanes Katrina/Rita
145,000 jobs in NYC alone due to 9/11
300,000 jobs lost due to dot.com busts.

Largest Gross Domestic Product in history!!
When Bush took office in 2001 GDP was $12.355,271,000,000
when Bush left office in 2008 GDP was $14,359,490,000,000
A 16% increase in GDP or $2 TRILLION.

Bush growth of the GDP was greater then Clinton in 2005 GDP grew at 6.5% Clinton's best:6.4%
Measuring Worth - GDP result.

When Bush started 131,785,000 people employed.
At the end of 2008 136,790,000 people employed or

5,000,000 more employed then when he took office.

DID THIS HAPPEN???
Oh and did I mention along the way when "Mission Accomplished" occurred after less then six weeks of combat in May 2003.. 10 years ago..that over 1 million Iraq people were
saved from starving? 50,000 people a year were starving under Saddam and when he was removed, (by the way at the request of Kerry,Pelosi, and 90% of the 28 million Iraqis) the
UN mandated embargo was removed.
Researcher Richard Garfield estimated that "a minimum of 100,000 and a more likely estimate of 227,000 excess deaths among young children from August 1991 through March 1998" from all causes including sanctions. Human rights in Saddam Hussein's Iraq - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

SO PLEASE.... TELL ME what comparable EVENTS during Obama's presidency comes CLOSE TO the above?????
AND YET he still shuts down federal drilling leases!
Obama orders EPA to destroy millions of jobs!
FACTS: 1) EPA itself estimated that its ozone standard would cost $90 billion a year,
while other studies have projected that the rule could cost upwards of a trillion dollars and destroy 7.4 million jobs.
2)Boiler MACT Rule: EPA's Boiler MACT (Maximum Achievable Control Technology) standards are so strict that not even the best-performing sources can meet them, so many companies will have no choice but to shut their doors and ship manufacturing jobs overseas.
The rule has been projected to reduce US GDP by as much as 1.2 billion dollars and will destroy nearly 800,000 jobs.
Articles: Obama's EPA Plans for 2013

So HoW can there be more jobs more employment while Obama's EPA is destroying theM???

Okay a few things.

1) Your red huge font is extremely obnoxious. I know you want us to think you are passionate and bold, but in reality it makes you look like a complete tool. Big type does nothing to change the fact that you are ignorant.

2) You have a poor understanding of economics. You haven't provided any sources for all of this obnoxious babbling for one thing. Another thing is that doesn't even matter. just because there was more people in the workforce after 8 years, it does not mean that many jobs were created. Plus, When it comes to jobs created, the stats still take into account jobs loss as well. The most jobs lost were in 2007 and 2008 regardless of this point (bush's final two years).

Here are the real facts:

Surprise! Obama Is Creating More New Jobs Than George W. Bush - Rick Newman (usnews.com)


More Jobs Created Under Obama Than Bush, Nonpartisan Report Finds - Careers Articles


More Jobs Created Under Obama Than Bush, Non-Partisan Report Finds | Politics And Regulation | Minyanville's Wall Street

The Truth About The Bush Tax Cuts And Job Growth - Forbes