Obama = Worse President Ever

[TyroneSlothrop]

 

[Brain357]

I don't see the word "coincidence" anywhere in my post, could you point them out to me?

I would like to see your proof that the white house prepared the banner that the ship displayed.

Oh, I forgot, libs don't have to prove their claims.

CNN.com - White House pressed on 'mission accomplished' sign - Oct. 29, 2003

Navy and administration sources said that though the banner was the Navy's idea, the White House actually made it.
Bush offered the explanation after being asked whether his speech declaring an end to major combat in Iraq under the "Mission Accomplished" banner was premature, given that U.S. casualties in Iraq since then have surpassed those before it.
During the speech in May, Bush said, "The battle of Iraq is one victory in a war on terror that began on September 11, 2001, and still goes on."

The invasion of Iraq was not part of the war on terror....

Yes it was.

It created more terror in the region than it prevented

Did someone ask for your speculation?

It's a fact. Way more terrorists now.

 

[JoeB131]

Historians agree overwhelmingly that President Obama is the worse President in history:

Most Presidential Experts Agree: Obama is Worst President In History | Wizbang

While I am certainly not a historian, I certainly agree that on both the home front and on foreign policy, history will indeed record Obama as the worse President ever.

Guy, the drunks you hang out with are not "historians".

 

[Unkotare]

CNN.com - White House pressed on 'mission accomplished' sign - Oct. 29, 2003

Navy and administration sources said that though the banner was the Navy's idea, the White House actually made it.
Bush offered the explanation after being asked whether his speech declaring an end to major combat in Iraq under the "Mission Accomplished" banner was premature, given that U.S. casualties in Iraq since then have surpassed those before it.
During the speech in May, Bush said, "The battle of Iraq is one victory in a war on terror that began on September 11, 2001, and still goes on."

The invasion of Iraq was not part of the war on terror....

Yes it was.

It created more terror in the region than it prevented

Did someone ask for your speculation?

It's a fact. Way more terrorists now.

You are being illogical. It is speculation.

 

[Brain357]

The invasion of Iraq was not part of the war on terror....

Yes it was.

It created more terror in the region than it prevented

Did someone ask for your speculation?

It's a fact. Way more terrorists now.

You are being illogical. It is speculation.

No it is quite obvious.

 

[Unkotare]

Yes it was.

It created more terror in the region than it prevented

Did someone ask for your speculation?

It's a fact. Way more terrorists now.

You are being illogical. It is speculation.

No it is quite obvious.

Maybe you just don't understand logic. Not your fault.

 

[Redfish]

What's the obsession with Bush?

Perhaps he sent too many people to their deaths in an immoral war, he caused the world to be more unstable, the economy to collapse. I mean, ISN'T THAT ENOUGH? (he did more than that, but hey).

Same old leftist talking points:
Sadaam was terrible murderous dictator. While I agree it was not business of USA how can you say immoral?
Unstable? ME is never stable.
GWB caused world economy to collapse? So he alone forced USA banks to make sub-prime home loans to anyone & everyone (more poor could buy a house)? Allowed them to hide and bundle these loans in Wall street packages and sell those packages across the globe?
Even the end of the Clinton years is twisted. It has been proven (on this site) that the debt increased every year during Clinton, the surplus was not true. The debt/deficit was much less than now-days but some credit to R congress. Clinton gets credit for not screwing things up badl, agreed. They played accounting tricks to make things appear surplus.

Yes, Saddam was a murderous dictator. And in response Bush went in and set up conditions so that many other people could also be murderous. Well isn't that the solution to everything. Kind of like telling a women who's being beaten by her husband to leave him and go live with some other guy who likes to beat on her even more.

No, the Middle East is never stable, though in 2000 it was far more stable than it is now. In 2000 you could go visit almost every country, Iraq was stable, Iran was stable, Syria was stable, the only conflict was Israel/Palestine.

Promoting instability in the region, and then complaining that it's unstable, is kind of hypocritical.

I didn't say Bush caused the world economy to collapse. The US is not the world. It caused the US and many European economies to collapse. Australia, Germany, China, etc, they did well at this time.
No, he didn't force banks to act badly, he ALLOWED banks to act badly. Congress didn't do anything, the President didn't do anything in order to stop bad practices BEFORE they made the economy go bad.

Get over this "world economy collapsed" bullshit. There was no collapse. There was a market correction in 08 that was driven by banks being underfunded and mortgages being defaulted on.

It was not a collapse and it was not a depression. Smart people got rich after 08 by buying in when the market was at a low point. If you had a 401K you had short term losses but you should have more than recovered by now.

Do you libs ever actually think about these talking points before you repeat them?

 

[Redfish]

This thread contains so much entertaining insight into RWNJ's and the outrageous things they try to hoodwink us with.

First insight comes in the thread title. I don't think the OP thinks the word "worse" means what they think it means.

And then the link totally disproves the headline.

Obama should safely remain in the top 15 or so for years to come. Overall good to very good President who was able to save capitalism, help us brush off the worst of the Great Recession, and put us back on the right track. Only thing missing is the roaring comeback and we all know that's due to one whole party who has refused to do anything, even many things they agree on with the President, like tax reform that rewards American companies for investing here instead of only incentivizing them to offshore jobs. Republicans could have passed something on this years ago but new it would help a president they hate more than they love their country, so they've sat on their hands.

Even despite that, 68 straight months of private sector job growth is an American record. We're riding a personal best record and it seems like we'll continue to keep growing despite how fragile the rest of the world still is. Obama gets full credit for it. If the next few years wield more good times and higher wages, he'll eventually make the top 10.

how about "wurst president". e.g. sausage boy obama. That would offend his muslim brothers.

 

[rightwinger]

What's the obsession with Bush?

Perhaps he sent too many people to their deaths in an immoral war, he caused the world to be more unstable, the economy to collapse. I mean, ISN'T THAT ENOUGH? (he did more than that, but hey).

Same old leftist talking points:
Sadaam was terrible murderous dictator. While I agree it was not business of USA how can you say immoral?
Unstable? ME is never stable.
GWB caused world economy to collapse? So he alone forced USA banks to make sub-prime home loans to anyone & everyone (more poor could buy a house)? Allowed them to hide and bundle these loans in Wall street packages and sell those packages across the globe?
Even the end of the Clinton years is twisted. It has been proven (on this site) that the debt increased every year during Clinton, the surplus was not true. The debt/deficit was much less than now-days but some credit to R congress. Clinton gets credit for not screwing things up badl, agreed. They played accounting tricks to make things appear surplus.

Yes, Saddam was a murderous dictator. And in response Bush went in and set up conditions so that many other people could also be murderous. Well isn't that the solution to everything. Kind of like telling a women who's being beaten by her husband to leave him and go live with some other guy who likes to beat on her even more.

No, the Middle East is never stable, though in 2000 it was far more stable than it is now. In 2000 you could go visit almost every country, Iraq was stable, Iran was stable, Syria was stable, the only conflict was Israel/Palestine.

Promoting instability in the region, and then complaining that it's unstable, is kind of hypocritical.

I didn't say Bush caused the world economy to collapse. The US is not the world. It caused the US and many European economies to collapse. Australia, Germany, China, etc, they did well at this time.
No, he didn't force banks to act badly, he ALLOWED banks to act badly. Congress didn't do anything, the President didn't do anything in order to stop bad practices BEFORE they made the economy go bad.

Get over this "world economy collapsed" bullshit. There was no collapse. There was a market correction in 08 that was driven by banks being underfunded and mortgages being defaulted on.

It was not a collapse and it was not a depression. Smart people got rich after 08 by buying in when the market was at a low point. If you had a 401K you had short term losses but you should have more than recovered by now.

Do you libs ever actually think about these talking points before you repeat them?

Still trying to rewrite history that the Great Bush Recession of 2008 was no big deal?

 

[frigidweirdo]

What's the obsession with Bush?

Perhaps he sent too many people to their deaths in an immoral war, he caused the world to be more unstable, the economy to collapse. I mean, ISN'T THAT ENOUGH? (he did more than that, but hey).

Same old leftist talking points:
Sadaam was terrible murderous dictator. While I agree it was not business of USA how can you say immoral?
Unstable? ME is never stable.
GWB caused world economy to collapse? So he alone forced USA banks to make sub-prime home loans to anyone & everyone (more poor could buy a house)? Allowed them to hide and bundle these loans in Wall street packages and sell those packages across the globe?
Even the end of the Clinton years is twisted. It has been proven (on this site) that the debt increased every year during Clinton, the surplus was not true. The debt/deficit was much less than now-days but some credit to R congress. Clinton gets credit for not screwing things up badl, agreed. They played accounting tricks to make things appear surplus.

Yes, Saddam was a murderous dictator. And in response Bush went in and set up conditions so that many other people could also be murderous. Well isn't that the solution to everything. Kind of like telling a women who's being beaten by her husband to leave him and go live with some other guy who likes to beat on her even more.

No, the Middle East is never stable, though in 2000 it was far more stable than it is now. In 2000 you could go visit almost every country, Iraq was stable, Iran was stable, Syria was stable, the only conflict was Israel/Palestine.

Promoting instability in the region, and then complaining that it's unstable, is kind of hypocritical.

I didn't say Bush caused the world economy to collapse. The US is not the world. It caused the US and many European economies to collapse. Australia, Germany, China, etc, they did well at this time.
No, he didn't force banks to act badly, he ALLOWED banks to act badly. Congress didn't do anything, the President didn't do anything in order to stop bad practices BEFORE they made the economy go bad.

Get over this "world economy collapsed" bullshit. There was no collapse. There was a market correction in 08 that was driven by banks being underfunded and mortgages being defaulted on.

It was not a collapse and it was not a depression. Smart people got rich after 08 by buying in when the market was at a low point. If you had a 401K you had short term losses but you should have more than recovered by now.

Do you libs ever actually think about these talking points before you repeat them?

Read what I wrote. I said "I didn't say Bush caused the world economy to collapse."

So why are you claiming I did? This happens quite a lot.

"Do you libs ever actually think about these talking points before you repeat them?"

Oh, the irony.