Obama Is Ruining America - Really? Tell Us Exactly HOW He Is Doing That

[NoNukes]

I don't care if you call me a racist. I think that everyone that voted for Obama is a piece of sh*t regardless of race. When 92% of blacks voted one way I would say that is racist. You are just too fvcking dumb to see it. I would vote for Herman Cain. He is no n****r.

You're right on target. Keep firing. They don't mind calling each other ****** and using the words "bitch, whore, ******" on their rap songs, but don't you dare use the word because that means you're a racist. They're confused little twits.

I don't buy into all that political correctness. Fvck that race baiting. If someone acts like a n****r, that is what they are to me. It is an offensive word that is meant to be offensive. Liberals offend me everyday. Fvck you, if you don't like it. It is not about the color of skin, it is a mentality.

Poor little boy who wants to be a cowboy.

 

[George Costanza]

You're saying that there is a downside to oil exploration and recovery?

Yes. Okay.

There are risks in everything. We still need the oil. The more we produce domestically, the more prosperous the process is for our market. The less we produce domestically, the less prosperous the process is for our market even against the risks.

And so we should shut down offshore drilling?

That makes no sense at all.

Is Obama an idiot? Yes.

Well, that's YOUR opinion. What to do about this has a lot to do with where your priorities are - and where the priorities are of the current administration. How much of a price is our country willing to pay for oil? Most conservatives feel that sacrificing our envirnment is not too high a price to pay. Most libs disagree. We have a democratic administration presently in power.

 

[Skynet]

You're saying that there is a downside to oil exploration and recovery?

Yes. Okay.

There are risks in everything. We still need the oil. The more we produce domestically, the more prosperous the process is for our market. The less we produce domestically, the less prosperous the process is for our market even against the risks.

And so we should shut down offshore drilling?

That makes no sense at all.

Is Obama an idiot? Yes.

Well, that's YOUR opinion. What to do about this has a lot to do with where your priorities are - and where the priorities are of the current administration. How much of a price is our country willing to pay for oil? Most conservatives feel that sacrificing our envirnment is not too high a price to pay. Most libs disagree. We have a democratic administration presently in power.

its funny how fast they forget about the Horizon Deep Well Spill and how it affected the entire gulf coast economy...

 

[Misty]

Obama has taken bush's homeland security civil rights invasion to an all time high by increasing the government's nose in our business policy.

His healthcare reform bill has actually made people lose their insurance and raised costs of insurance rather than the opposite, which he claimed was the intent of reform.

Bush and obama's wall street ballout and fm bail out turned out to be a bandaid on a gunshot wound.

His speech about Israel giving up the gaza strip was the most ignorant speech ever given. Why Jews support democrats I will never know.

And his administration is running up the biggest deficit in united states history.

 

[JRK]

1)Auto bailout: Taking 80 billion dolllars and ignoring the way our BK laws work in this country and giving that 80 billion dollars without congress approving it
A: Ignored the laws as they cover BK events
B: By passed congress in spending tax payers welath like it was his own
Basically what he did ther is what is done in third world countries that have men like Castro running them

2) Obamacare: No way to pay for it as it looks. We need a resolve with this issues. we should have started with pre existing, helping the UE with a track record of working to keep insurance and then how do we pay for medicare

3) The 550 billion dollar slush fund for unions: The failed stimulus

4) The abuse of tarp, his 1/2: where did it go?

5) lost 3 million jobs on top of the failed stimulus and tarp, you want me to go on?

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

You're saying that there is a downside to oil exploration and recovery?

Yes. Okay.

There are risks in everything. We still need the oil. The more we produce domestically, the more prosperous the process is for our market. The less we produce domestically, the less prosperous the process is for our market even against the risks.

And so we should shut down offshore drilling?

That makes no sense at all.

Is Obama an idiot? Yes.

Well, that's YOUR opinion. What to do about this has a lot to do with where your priorities are - and where the priorities are of the current administration. How much of a price is our country willing to pay for oil? Most conservatives feel that sacrificing our envirnment is not too high a price to pay. Most libs disagree. We have a democratic administration presently in power.

What are your priorities when it comes to oil? And don't give me the green energy crap. When its perfected and economically feasible then we'll talk. Until then all we have is rnd and nothing more.
Now, about my first question...
A: drill at home with the possibility of having to clean up a few spills and dead animals
Or
B: keep funding our enemies while cleaning up other countries and our dead soldiers and contractors.

Seems like an easy choice to me

 

[freedombecki]

You have it on authority that the water boarding our soldiers experience in training is the same as the water boarding that would be administered to them by the enemy if captured or, for that matter, the same as the water boarding we practice on "enemy combatants"?

What do you think water boarding is? Seriously - tell me what you think happens, step by step, in a water boarding session.

Yes, I'm sure its the same. Simulated drowning. Of course we don't do it with the ferocity that we would on our enemies but its still done on them yes. And I have watched videos of it.

What does "simulated drowning" mean? Be specific. How far do they take the victim - do you have ANY idea?

Geeze, Mr. Costanza, You're such a nice guy to think of waterboarding recipients as "victims." I know it seems to be the red-white-and-blue good guy American thing to think, and you seem to me to be all of those best-of-America personalities.

But can I point out a couple of things for you to think about sometime when you're not on the defense of a good debate? I know that may be asking the impossible, but I still think of you and others here who post their diverse perspectives as men and women of intelligence, imagination, and best of all, reason.

It is correct to say that getting waterboarded is probably not a very pleasant experience. In fact, it's so unpleasant, its "victim" often gives up information that prevents serious harm upon your fellow American citizens in less than 30 seconds of it.

Do you really, really think a mass serial murderer who has participated in killings of your fellow American citizens and their children can be justifiably called a "victim?"

Think about that. These terrorists are brainwashed individuals whose minds are literally poisoned by sociopathic liars who use religion as their language of persuasion, quite literally, in other words, misinterpreting mosque doctrine to have unchary pawns do dirty work they'd never consider doing under ordinary circumstances. Case in point, the lackluster playboy and multimillionaire Osama bin Laden, who used people in the world's poorest country who revered his money power, mainly, to execute people--and as many innocent people as possible--for whom he quite simply had no feelings.

Then-CIA director George Tenet, in his 2007 memoir, says that tough interrogation of al-Qaeda members — and documents found on them, he is careful to add — thwarted more than 20 plots "against U.S. infrastructure targets, including communications nodes, nuclear power plants, dams, bridges, and tunnels." A "future airborne attack on America's West Coast" was likely foiled only because the CIA didn't have "to treat KSM like a white collar criminal." Time Magazine​

Osama bin Laden, rich, spoiled, oversexed, and holier-than-thou nutcase, cast out of Saudia Arabia for subversion, came back with malice aforethought, and took over a dozen of its citizens as dupes for his petty and avaricious revenge against not only Saudia Arabia, but to pay back America for not kissing his kooky heiney when they helped him fight off Russia. That is hardly the portrait of a "victim." In fact, not only was OBL not a victim, he was the chief perpetrator, along with a seriously paranoid and craven horde of yes-men (who were the only type people OBL could stand, btw.) Victim, think about that word. The victims were the thousands of people who were trapped when Osama tapped his Saudi brainwashees to murder on 9/11/2001 in the New York World Trade Center.

Be careful when you use the case of victimhood on persons who undertook to satisfy and pander to Osama bin Laden, modern-day Midas, to kill our fellow Americans. These are your people, who laughed at your hilarious sketches and jokes on Seinfeld, shopped at discount houses to save pennies for a better future, and often voted for people you like as a charming liberal. Your "victims" are actually mercenaries who profit by pulling at other people's heartstrings and sympathetic natures to extract a scenario of murder against human beings as a whim of their disenchantment with a different culture--a culture they fear and can pander fears in others, particularly those who cannot understand our language and who are culturally naive enough to fool.

No waterboarding is not pleasant, but it is generally employed to get information, not to maim or to kill. And our people only used it on the worst offenders to find out where to stop terrorist acts, which is a very Constitutional requirement Americans demand of leadership.

And it is used only for national security from terrorists, and never as a common law enforcement procedure.

George Tenant had no axes to grind when he revealed, in his memoir of a few years back, which terrorist acts were directly thwarted through the use of waterboarding against only the worst mass serial perpetrators of murder against America's citizens and guests at the WTC.

Please trust that waterboarding does not scar or damage a person physically, but it gives the criminal terrorist an incentive to come clean to help those who watch over the American people an edge against our worst enemies.

Thanks for hearing me out, Mr. Costanza.

 

[Too Tall]

Lately, I have heard a number of conservatives/Republicans grousing about the fact that, in their opinion, Obama is "sinking the country" or is "ruining America."

Is that what you think? If so, howz about coming on this thread and telling us SPECIFICALLY what you think he is doing to "sink the country." Frankly, I would like to know if there is anything to this claim, or if (as I strongly suspect), he just isn't falling in line with what the cons want to have happen.

Gentlemen (and ladies) - start your engines!

The latest example is allowing the NLRB to tie up Boeing with a law suit for having the audacity to build an aircraft plant in South Carolina, a right to work state. Boeing intends to compete with Airbus and aircraft sales are an export item.

I think Boeing will win this law suit, but it will probably take at least a year and will probably go to the Supreme Court.

If Obama was the least bit interested in people getting jobs, he would call off his appointees that are merely making a lot of lawyers rich.

 

[daveman]

Lately, I have heard a number of conservatives/Republicans grousing about the fact that, in their opinion, Obama is "sinking the country" or is "ruining America."

Is that what you think? If so, howz about coming on this thread and telling us SPECIFICALLY what you think he is doing to "sink the country." Frankly, I would like to know if there is anything to this claim, or if (as I strongly suspect), he just isn't falling in line with what the cons want to have happen.

Gentlemen (and ladies) - start your engines!

The latest example is allowing the NLRB to tie up Boeing with a law suit for having the audacity to build an aircraft plant in South Carolina, a right to work state. Boeing intends to compete with Airbus and aircraft sales are an export item.

I think Boeing will win this law suit, but it will probably take at least a year and will probably go to the Supreme Court.

If Obama was the least bit interested in people getting jobs, he would call off his appointees that are merely making a lot of lawyers rich.

In a hearty "Eff you!" to the Obama Administration's job-killing and union-ass-kissing decision, Boeing opened their new plant in SC 4 days ago.

 

[Too Tall]

This president has usurped the authority of United States Congress, and in doing so undermined the very sovereignty of this country. Never seeking congressional approval or even addressing the public about taking military action in Libya. He did get a UN resolution.

Not since the Civil War have the states been so divided against the federal government. This president, while never even touching the issue of illegal immigration, issued a report to the UN Commissioner of Human Rights about Arizona's insistence that federal immigration law be enforced.

How is this president ruining America? How isn't he?

seeing as how Libya is not a "war" and he sent the proper paperwork to congress under the conditions of the war powers act, everything was legal. we are also now part of a UN led program in Libya.

if you disagree with the war powers act and its interpretation by the courts that a separate issue. but as it currently stands, everything has been legal and within his power as president.

If the bombing of Libya is not a "war" why do idiots say the "war" powers act is being used to conduct whatever it is?

According to the Speaker of the House, there has been NO paperwork sent to Congress.

Here is an excerpt from a letter sent to the President from the Speaker.

June 14, 2011

Dear Mr. President:

Five days from now, our country will reach the 90-day mark from the notification to Congress regarding the commencement of the military operation in Libya, which began on March 18, 2011. On June 3, 2011, the House passed a resolution which, among other provisions, made clear that the Administration has not asked for, nor received, Congressional authorization of the mission in Libya. Therefore, it would appear that in five days, the Administration will be in violation of the War Powers Resolution unless it asks for and receives authorization from Congress or withdraws all U.S. troops and resources from the mission.

Since the mission began, the Administration has provided tactical operational briefings to the House of Representatives, but the White House has systematically avoided requesting a formal authorization for its action. It has simultaneously sought, however, to portray that its actions are consistent with the War Powers Resolution. The combination of these actions has left many Members of Congress, as well as the American people, frustrated by the lack of clarity over the Administration’s strategic policies, by a refusal to acknowledge and respect the role of the Congress, and by a refusal to comply with the basic tenets of the War Powers Resolution.

Boehner warns Obama that Libya will violate war powers | Susan Ferrechio | Beltway Confidential | Washington Examiner

 

[Too Tall]

You're saying that there is a downside to oil exploration and recovery?

Yes. Okay.

There are risks in everything. We still need the oil. The more we produce domestically, the more prosperous the process is for our market. The less we produce domestically, the less prosperous the process is for our market even against the risks.

And so we should shut down offshore drilling?

That makes no sense at all.

Is Obama an idiot? Yes.

Well, that's YOUR opinion. What to do about this has a lot to do with where your priorities are - and where the priorities are of the current administration. How much of a price is our country willing to pay for oil? Most conservatives feel that sacrificing our envirnment is not too high a price to pay. Most libs disagree. We have a democratic administration presently in power.

Most conservatives that I know feel that by using the latest technology, there is a minimum possibility of damage to our environment.

 

[Too Tall]

Lately, I have heard a number of conservatives/Republicans grousing about the fact that, in their opinion, Obama is "sinking the country" or is "ruining America."

Is that what you think? If so, howz about coming on this thread and telling us SPECIFICALLY what you think he is doing to "sink the country." Frankly, I would like to know if there is anything to this claim, or if (as I strongly suspect), he just isn't falling in line with what the cons want to have happen.

Gentlemen (and ladies) - start your engines!

The latest example is allowing the NLRB to tie up Boeing with a law suit for having the audacity to build an aircraft plant in South Carolina, a right to work state. Boeing intends to compete with Airbus and aircraft sales are an export item.

I think Boeing will win this law suit, but it will probably take at least a year and will probably go to the Supreme Court.

If Obama was the least bit interested in people getting jobs, he would call off his appointees that are merely making a lot of lawyers rich.

In a hearty "Eff you!" to the Obama Administration's job-killing and union-ass-kissing decision, Boeing opened their new plant in SC 4 days ago.

Sierra Hotel !

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

So I'm beginning to see how this works. The democrats on this forum appear to be hit and run artists.
I have been thoroughly challenged twice in 2 days of posting here. Yet when I give a thorough answer and then ask one of you all I'm ignored. Why is that? I've given answers then asked straight forward questions in my rebuttals. Once on oil and once on waterboarding. My answers and questions were to the point and included no insults or insinuations of superiority.
Am I right or wrong in my deduction?

 

[Too Tall]

$6,000,000,000,000 in debt in three years should be enough to say Obama is a failure and doesn't deserve the office...ESPECIALLY since he made the promise of cutting the deficit in half in his first term. LOL.

nice try but Obama did not add $6 trillion to the debt in 3 years.

Bush ran up a total of $3.283 trillion in deficit spending .In his first two fiscal years, Obama will run up a total of $2.826 trillion in deficit spending ($1.294 trillion in 2010, an estimated $1.267 trillion in 2011. The 2009 budget was Bush's budget.

When President George W. Bush took office, our national debt was $5.768 trillion. By the time Bush left office, it had nearly doubled, to $10.626 trillion

(remember the deficit increases by more than just the amount borrowed because of interest on the debt), so even though Bush has only $3.283 trillion in deficit spending, the debt when up by $4.858 trillion, the same with Obama his deficit spending has only been $2.561 (through FY 2011) but the debt has gone up around $3.6 trillion from interest on the current debt.

It appears to me that Obama's $2.561 Trillion in deficit spending in two years is almost as much as Bush's $3.283 Trillion deficit spending in eight years. Obama should easily pass Bush's eight years deficit spending this year. And, it will only take him three years to do it.

 

[candycorn]

Lately, I have heard a number of conservatives/Republicans grousing about the fact that, in their opinion, Obama is "sinking the country" or is "ruining America."

Is that what you think? If so, howz about coming on this thread and telling us SPECIFICALLY what you think he is doing to "sink the country." Frankly, I would like to know if there is anything to this claim, or if (as I strongly suspect), he just isn't falling in line with what the cons want to have happen.

Gentlemen (and ladies) - start your engines!

For some, it was 2 things. Being elected while being black

 

[daveman]

The latest example is allowing the NLRB to tie up Boeing with a law suit for having the audacity to build an aircraft plant in South Carolina, a right to work state. Boeing intends to compete with Airbus and aircraft sales are an export item.

I think Boeing will win this law suit, but it will probably take at least a year and will probably go to the Supreme Court.

If Obama was the least bit interested in people getting jobs, he would call off his appointees that are merely making a lot of lawyers rich.

In a hearty "Eff you!" to the Obama Administration's job-killing and union-ass-kissing decision, Boeing opened their new plant in SC 4 days ago.

Sierra Hotel !

Ain't it just?

 

[daveman]

So I'm beginning to see how this works. The democrats on this forum appear to be hit and run artists.
I have been thoroughly challenged twice in 2 days of posting here. Yet when I give a thorough answer and then ask one of you all I'm ignored. Why is that? I've given answers then asked straight forward questions in my rebuttals. Once on oil and once on waterboarding. My answers and questions were to the point and included no insults or insinuations of superiority.
Am I right or wrong in my deduction?

Nope. You nailed it.

 

[daveman]

Lately, I have heard a number of conservatives/Republicans grousing about the fact that, in their opinion, Obama is "sinking the country" or is "ruining America."

Is that what you think? If so, howz about coming on this thread and telling us SPECIFICALLY what you think he is doing to "sink the country." Frankly, I would like to know if there is anything to this claim, or if (as I strongly suspect), he just isn't falling in line with what the cons want to have happen.

Gentlemen (and ladies) - start your engines!

For some, it was 2 things. Being elected while being black

Indeed. My life-long-Democrat in-laws refer to President Obama as "that n----r in the White House".

 

[smartdonkey]

Lately, I have heard a number of conservatives/Republicans grousing about the fact that, in their opinion, Obama is "sinking the country" or is "ruining America."

Is that what you think? If so, howz about coming on this thread and telling us SPECIFICALLY what you think he is doing to "sink the country." Frankly, I would like to know if there is anything to this claim, or if (as I strongly suspect), he just isn't falling in line with what the cons want to have happen.

Gentlemen (and ladies) - start your engines!

Obama plans to go on the offensive regarding economic issues in 2012, on several fronts. He will highlight the improving economy, the improving job market, and the spectacular success of the auto bailout. He will hammer the Republicans for attacking unions and working families, for fighting efforts to control gas prices, for blocking efforts to develop jobs, and for clinging bitterly to their tax breaks for the rich and corporations. And he will also hammer them on Medicare and other health and budget issues.

More dirt at How The Race Was Won: Economics and How The Race Was Won: Budget and health issues

 

[Antiderivative]

Obama is ruining the country since he is keen on following the disastrous path of the Bush and the Republicans.

We haven't experienced fundamental change. It is more of the same, with a few changes on the margin. However, many people exaggerate the most insignificant change of them all; going from an (R) to a (D).