Liberals you have a decision to make

[Flash]

I don't think many liberals have a problem with Obama, it's the racists who hate Obama.

No, that's just a claim people make so he can avoid criticism. Joke's on the people claiming that, though, since he's white, and that claim is usually used against white people.

Half-white. His mother was white. His deadbeat father was black.

I think a good argument could be made that he isn't really “black”, in the sense that most black Americans are. Most black Americans are descended from people who were brought here centuries ago, against their will, to be used as slaves. They have a long heritage rooted in that background, and of the struggle to overcome slavery and achieve their freedom within this nation. Obama has no part in that heritage at all. All of his American ancestors were white; none of his black ancestors were ever Americans.

It is much, much more likely that Obama has ancestors who owned slaves, or who participated in the slave trade, than that he has any ancestors who were slaves or who were otherwise victims of that trade.

He is the offspring of a stupid confused Hippy bitch and a deadbeat African.

No slave ancestors there.

He was raised a Muslim, which accounts for his cowardice in dealing with Muslim terrorist.

On top of that when the Boy supposedly turned Christian he attended a church that preached hate against Whites and Jews. The equivalent of a Black KKK rally every Sunday.

These Moon Bats were idiots electing him. What the hell were they thinking?

 

[initforme]

As a white heterosexual male christian who owned his own business I cannot accept any of you who judge yourselves as the accepted. You are no closer to god than any other bigot.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Wow, that's an argument, that the president did exactly what you wanted him to do, but failed at doing it.

It's like saying Dubya did everything in his power to not invade Iraq, but failed, or he did everything in his power to make the post war period a success but failed.

I'm sorry, but it sounds like you're just making shit up.

Attributing the economy's recovery to Obama is inaccurate. Under any president, the economy repairs itself, it's how capitalism works. For any president, all you have to do is sit back and watch. The biggest thing with any president that has damaged or slowed the economy is that they refused to sit back and watch, they couldn't keep their dirty mitts off of our free market. Nothing Obama has done has actually 'caused' economic growth, he just loves taking credit for things, whether he actually had anything to do with it or not.

You don't have to apologize, I know it's hard for a lot of Liberals to accept reality.

I didn't attributing it to him was right. However you're claiming he tried to screw it up but failed. That's not true. A president can mess the economy up, or they can do the right things and the economy will go as it should. It's not just the president though. But of course, politicians try and take the praise for everything they can. You wouldn't be a successful politician if you didn't.

Obamacare and his recent Executive Order are a very good example of Obama's war on the Private Sector. I'm pretty sure he also continued the war on coal, which would also slow economic growth.

The funny thing here is that when Obamacare comes out everyone on the right shouts about how much money it will cost. However when the whole of the healthcare system is as corrupt as hell, with potentially 20-30% of all spending going on corruption and the right don't care, in fact they encourage it, you know there's a problem.

Is encouraging corruption promoting the Private Sector?

Coal, jeez, can't believe you're talking about coal. Maggie Thatcher got rid of much of the coal in the UK, and the right in the US LOVES her.

I was mainly referring to forced benefits and the tax on employees. I don't actually know who Maggie Thatcher is, but if she's warring on the coal industry also, she's contributing to the high price of energy.

Well, of you're going to talk about removing coal from an economy, you need to go look at Thatcher, she was in power when Reagan was and the Reagnites loved her.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Why do you think that is a record?

From my memory, the only other President that even came close, or may have even surpassed that number, was Franklin Roosevelt.

We seem to be dealing a lot with your memory. I don't want to deal with what you think as this could easily be what you have just made up, do you see my point?

It's why I didn't claim it's a fact that it was a record, I said I think it is. The fact in that post is that he has violated the Constitution 64 times.

Which means what? It's just an unsubstantiated claim. It's pointless.

It not only goes to show that he's pushing the power of the Executive Branch of government beyond the bounds of what it was meant to be, but also that he doesn't care about the Constitution. If he cared, he wouldn't be stomping all over it, basically. Not to mention that none of the Constitutional Violations actually helped the country. He's violating the document that protects the freedom of the people, and our government structure.

I mean, this has been happening for hundreds of years and the American people STILL KEEP VOTING FOR THE SAME TWO PARTIES. Think whose fault this is......

 

[Pumpkin Row]

Attributing the economy's recovery to Obama is inaccurate. Under any president, the economy repairs itself, it's how capitalism works. For any president, all you have to do is sit back and watch. The biggest thing with any president that has damaged or slowed the economy is that they refused to sit back and watch, they couldn't keep their dirty mitts off of our free market. Nothing Obama has done has actually 'caused' economic growth, he just loves taking credit for things, whether he actually had anything to do with it or not.

You don't have to apologize, I know it's hard for a lot of Liberals to accept reality.

I didn't attributing it to him was right. However you're claiming he tried to screw it up but failed. That's not true. A president can mess the economy up, or they can do the right things and the economy will go as it should. It's not just the president though. But of course, politicians try and take the praise for everything they can. You wouldn't be a successful politician if you didn't.

Obamacare and his recent Executive Order are a very good example of Obama's war on the Private Sector. I'm pretty sure he also continued the war on coal, which would also slow economic growth.

The funny thing here is that when Obamacare comes out everyone on the right shouts about how much money it will cost. However when the whole of the healthcare system is as corrupt as hell, with potentially 20-30% of all spending going on corruption and the right don't care, in fact they encourage it, you know there's a problem.

Is encouraging corruption promoting the Private Sector?

Coal, jeez, can't believe you're talking about coal. Maggie Thatcher got rid of much of the coal in the UK, and the right in the US LOVES her.

I was mainly referring to forced benefits and the tax on employees. I don't actually know who Maggie Thatcher is, but if she's warring on the coal industry also, she's contributing to the high price of energy.

Well, of you're going to talk about removing coal from an economy, you need to go look at Thatcher, she was in power when Reagan was and the Reagnites loved her.

I disagree with removing coal from the economy regardless of what she did, it drives up people's power bills.

 

[Pumpkin Row]

From my memory, the only other President that even came close, or may have even surpassed that number, was Franklin Roosevelt.

We seem to be dealing a lot with your memory. I don't want to deal with what you think as this could easily be what you have just made up, do you see my point?

It's why I didn't claim it's a fact that it was a record, I said I think it is. The fact in that post is that he has violated the Constitution 64 times.

Which means what? It's just an unsubstantiated claim. It's pointless.

It not only goes to show that he's pushing the power of the Executive Branch of government beyond the bounds of what it was meant to be, but also that he doesn't care about the Constitution. If he cared, he wouldn't be stomping all over it, basically. Not to mention that none of the Constitutional Violations actually helped the country. He's violating the document that protects the freedom of the people, and our government structure.

I mean, this has been happening for hundreds of years and the American people STILL KEEP VOTING FOR THE SAME TWO PARTIES. Think whose fault this is......

The people being ignorant enough to keep voting for the wrong candidates doesn't excuse the candidates themselves violating the constitution once in power.

 

[frigidweirdo]

I didn't attributing it to him was right. However you're claiming he tried to screw it up but failed. That's not true. A president can mess the economy up, or they can do the right things and the economy will go as it should. It's not just the president though. But of course, politicians try and take the praise for everything they can. You wouldn't be a successful politician if you didn't.

Obamacare and his recent Executive Order are a very good example of Obama's war on the Private Sector. I'm pretty sure he also continued the war on coal, which would also slow economic growth.

The funny thing here is that when Obamacare comes out everyone on the right shouts about how much money it will cost. However when the whole of the healthcare system is as corrupt as hell, with potentially 20-30% of all spending going on corruption and the right don't care, in fact they encourage it, you know there's a problem.

Is encouraging corruption promoting the Private Sector?

Coal, jeez, can't believe you're talking about coal. Maggie Thatcher got rid of much of the coal in the UK, and the right in the US LOVES her.

I was mainly referring to forced benefits and the tax on employees. I don't actually know who Maggie Thatcher is, but if she's warring on the coal industry also, she's contributing to the high price of energy.

Well, of you're going to talk about removing coal from an economy, you need to go look at Thatcher, she was in power when Reagan was and the Reagnites loved her.

I disagree with removing coal from the economy regardless of what she did, it drives up people's power bills.

By maybe drives down their coal dust inhalation. Here's a case of business trumping people's welfare, for you

 

[frigidweirdo]

We seem to be dealing a lot with your memory. I don't want to deal with what you think as this could easily be what you have just made up, do you see my point?

It's why I didn't claim it's a fact that it was a record, I said I think it is. The fact in that post is that he has violated the Constitution 64 times.

Which means what? It's just an unsubstantiated claim. It's pointless.

It not only goes to show that he's pushing the power of the Executive Branch of government beyond the bounds of what it was meant to be, but also that he doesn't care about the Constitution. If he cared, he wouldn't be stomping all over it, basically. Not to mention that none of the Constitutional Violations actually helped the country. He's violating the document that protects the freedom of the people, and our government structure.

I mean, this has been happening for hundreds of years and the American people STILL KEEP VOTING FOR THE SAME TWO PARTIES. Think whose fault this is......

The people being ignorant enough to keep voting for the wrong candidates doesn't excuse the candidates themselves violating the constitution once in power.

It doesn't, however why are they there in the first place? Perhaps because everyone will make an excuse about why it's not their fault?