ObamaYES!

[Detroit Stylin]

MY PRESIDENT:
1. Got Osama bin laden...check

2.unemployment rate 8.5%...check.

3. 1.6 million jobs created with no GOP help...check

4. 22 months of job and economic growth with no help...check

5. Ended war in Iraq ...check

6. DADT repeal...check

7.not one tax hike in 3 years....check

8.Brought out of rascism in the Gop...check

9.Still carry 80% of the black vote...check

10.Same wife for 15 years with no ex marital ...affairs...check

11. Save auto industry and 1.5 million jobs.. check

12.Assisted in ousting Khaddafi...check

13.Only active President to receive Nobel Peace prize while in office.

14. Mortgage modification to prevent home owners from losing their home.

15. STILL fighting for middle class families.

16.reform Affordable healthcare.... check

Despite what the GOP would have you believe the President has been doing these things and more by himself. Obama 2012-

[lit joe]

no no no no no

[Gannon]

Hey 'Stylin,

Do you hear a tiny voice...some opposition, but devoid of substantiation?!

Sounds like a two-year old, after learning their first word!


Thanks for the listing, I think everyone needs a reminder of the good things which've been done.

After tonight's speech, I consider President Obama a leader...I haven't seen him in that light until now. He was inclusive and self-deprecating, and used very definite terms to encourage everyone to work together to get our ship back on course.


Cheers,
John

[Detroit Stylin]

Hey 'Stylin,

Do you hear a tiny voice...some opposition, but devoid of substantiation?!

Sounds like a two-year old, after learning their first word!


Thanks for the listing, I think everyone needs a reminder of the good things which've been done.

After tonight's speech, I consider President Obama a leader...I haven't seen him in that light until now. He was inclusive and self-deprecating, and used very definite terms to encourage everyone to work together to get our ship back on course.


Cheers,
John

lol exactly....

[Relayer76]

View from Canada: What a refreshing burst of intelligence, dignity and common sense after weeks of Republican BS insults to the intelligence. I am green with envy. We are stuck with neo-Con Harper here until 2015.

[firstandten]

It was one of the strongest speeches he has given that was not a campaign speech. He covered a lot of ground and didn't talk in sound bites. He talked about long term fixes and not quick fixes. My fear is the american people sometimes have such a short term memory that they can't always see the big picture.

[firstandten]

Here is a political piece from the New Yorker mag. I like reading there articles because they are detailed, but also long. You may not be able to read it in one setting, but it is a fascinating look at the presidents growth. its not a fluff piece as there are some negatives about him in this article but it is a good read.



http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2...urrentPage=all

[oladub]

Here is a link to the President’s State of the Union speech:
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0112/71920.html

The President’s speech was an interesting combination of Amerika über alles, as usually found in Republican speeches, intertwined with Tinkerbelle’s magic wand spewing bright sparks of new government spending programs. Disingenuous notes were rampant and expected. Crony capitalism was trending. Constitutional considerations weren’t. The blather was insufferable.

Still, there were some mentions and ideas I liked .

1. Bin Laden is dead. I think. Good.
2. Tweaking the tax code to bring back jobs is a step toward raising tariffs to accomplish the same goal.
3. Definitely stop our government from providing any help to moving jobs abroad. That’s a no brainer.
4. Making other countries play by the rules of trade.
5. Developing our natural gas fields.
6. Getting rid of regulations that thwart new business start-ups.
7. Restoring Clinton tax levels on the rich.
8. Bringing the troops home from Afghanistan that he put in there.
9. Helping vets adjust to civilian life.

[rb336]

intertwined with Tinkerbelle’s magic wand spewing bright sparks of new government spending programs. Disingenuous notes were rampant and expected. Crony capitalism was trending. Constitutional considerations weren’t.

examples of these, please.

[rb336]

no no no no no

man, you just can't handle facts, can you

[canuck]

oladub, take note;

Navy Seals free hostages in Somalia. No ransom paid. check.

What would Ron Paul do? Buy back their freedom? Everytime someone is taken hostage, avoid a military operation?

[Detroit Stylin]

oladub, take note;

Navy Seals free hostages in Somalia. No ransom paid. check.

What would Ron Paul do? Buy back their freedom? Everytime someone is taken hostage, avoid a military operation?

Last I checked...the US does not negotiate with terrorists, terrorist states, or rebellious southern states who wants to cover up their real intentions on the war by burying it under states right which really mean their right to keep oppressing and owning people....

[oladub]

oladub, take note;

Navy Seals free hostages in Somalia. No ransom paid. check.

What would Ron Paul do? Buy back their freedom? Everytime someone is taken hostage, avoid a military operation?

Ron Paul might have done the same thing. Ron Paul did, for instance, authorize US forces to go after Bin Laden. He did not, however, support the subsequent nation building or whatever we are doing over there now. Ron Paul does support the use of Letters of Marque as authorized in the Constitution to pursue targets.

Well done by the Seals and everyone up the chain including President Obama by the way. Credit should be given where due. If only Carter had done as well as Perot rescuing hostages in Iran.

[TKshreve]

I thought the President delivered a very uplifting, positive toned speech. It also reinforced his platform moving into 2012, even though he has been pushing these ideas for some time now. Not to add a negative element to a thread which applauds the speech of the president last night, but.......

I just can't get past the pre-programmed mindset of many GOP attendees at the speech. The camera often showed clowns such as Eric Cantor and Mitch McConnell during key points in the speech. I found myself saying,

"How can these people not applaud the idea being proposed by the President right now?"

I know it's just their silly pledge to obstructionism, but here is plain-as-day evidence that these GOP losers have no interest in doing what is right for the majority of Americans.

They are programmed robots who run on lobbyist money and often do not represent the interests of a great deal of the people who put them into office.

[lit joe]

man, you just can't handle facts, can you

The facts of more george sorso puppet master taking us all for a ride. Pick and choose company that live or die. What a waste of money on G.M they could done a bankrupcy and done the same. How many ceo's in the frist year. IPO was their best figures its all down hill noe. The volts as good as its maker.

[antongast]

The facts of more george sorso puppet master taking us all for a ride. Pick and choose company that live or die. What a waste of money on G.M they could done a bankrupcy and done the same. How many ceo's in the frist year. IPO was their best figures its all down hill noe. The volts as good as its maker.

Porridge suitcase scuttled maple puppet Batman. Fish and drive for mice that swim or fly. How can ocean float cigar Poland. lit joes posts make sense.

[oladub]

examples of these, please.

They should be obvious and I don't want to write a book so I will limit myself to three items in each category.

Disingenuousness:
1a) Taking credit for getting the troops out of Iraq. In 2008, the Iraqi parliament had ordered us troops out of Iraq by the end of 2011. Obama kept them in until a month before the deadline after trying to keep them in longer through negotiations. 1b) Campaigning in 2008, Obama had promised to end the war immediately if he became president. He didn't and hundreds of young Americans died in Iraq in the interim.
2a) There was a lot of verbiage in his speech about bringing jobs back home. Going back to his 2008 campaign, he promised to address NAFTA. He didn't. Instead, he set up at least three new free trade agreements including one with S. Korea putting US auto workers, and other US union workers, in direct competition with Korean pay scales. Let's see how that works out. Probably like NAFTA. 2b) Need I mention Chinese job czar Immelt and GE Medical which transferred the headquarters of it's 155 year old X-ray division to China?
3a) All the talk about making rich people pay their share after Obama had extended Bush's tax cuts of the rich and 3b) acting like he was going to get tough with bankers after he voted for Bush's Wall Street bailout, transferred worthless assets from mega-banks to US taxpayers on Christmas Eve, 2009 and crammed his administration with Goldman Sachs personnel after GS donated almost $1M to his campaign.

"Crony capitalism is a term describing an economy in which success in business depends on close relationships between business people and government officials. It may be exhibited by favoritism in the distribution of legal permits, government grants, special tax breaks, and so forth":
1) The Crony capitalism arrangement between the federal government and GM and Chrysler. That was the second time the federal government has bailed out Chrysler. Leaner competitors were discouraged by federal deep pockets bailing out dinosaurs. If leaner suggests foreign, Chrysler is now Italian owned anyway. I had so wanted him to mention Solyndra.
2) A scheme to save mortgage holders $3,000 a year which is in large part another bankers' bailout. Banks will be charged with a fee but let me guess will the banks cut profits and executive bonuses or reduce savers interest to pay for this program?
3) More tax breaks for corporations. Republicans will probably offer bi-partisan support on that one.

Constitutional considerations:
1) Blatant disregard for 10th Amendment limitations [[ I know, I know, your DNC copy fo the Constitution edited out the 10th because there was no space to include it because 'the general welfare clause' and 'commerce clause' were in such big font) regarding the powers of the federal government. Many of the new federal government spending programs proposed could instead be carried out by states if they so chose to. There must have been ten new spending programs mentioned.
2) One of Obama's little dictator moments came last night was when he mentioned, "With or without this Congress, I will keep taking actions that help the economy grow." I think this is a reference to similar recent declaration and actions in which he uses executive orders to both legislate and spend money.
3) Bragging about taking out Khadafi, and bombing Libya by extension, without a Congressionally declared war, paying any attention to the war powers act, or otherwise consulting Congress. Did I mention having dictator moments?

__________________________________________________ __________

Gannon, Did you catch the mention of some sort of new cyber war fighting bill the President said he had passed on to Congress. What bill was he referring to? Right now there are SOPA/PIPA, ACTA, and 1981 floating around in various states. Was he referring to one of those bills or something else?

[old guy]

Porridge suitcase scuttled maple puppet Batman. Fish and drive for mice that swim or fly. How can ocean float cigar Poland. lit joes posts make sense.

............

[Gannon]

Gannon, Did you catch the mention of some sort of new cyber war fighting bill the President said he had passed on to Congress. What bill was he referring to? Right now there are SOPA/PIPA, ACTA, and 1981 floating around in various states. Was he referring to one of those bills or something else?

I've heard ACTA is worse than SOPA/PIPA, but haven't studied it yet. I've heard of nothing else, but he seemed gung-ho on introducing new initiatives.

Thanks for your critique above, you gave me a ton of things to think about.


Cheers

[Whitehouse]

Freed two hostages from pirates in Somalia... Check.


Edit:

Already mentioned.... check.

[firstandten]

They should be obvious and I don't want to write a book so I will limit myself to three items in each category.

Disingenuousness:
1a) Taking credit for getting the troops out of Iraq. In 2008, the Iraqi parliament had ordered us troops out of Iraq by the end of 2011. Obama kept them in until a month before the deadline after trying to keep them in longer through negotiations. 1b) Campaigning in 2008, Obama had promised to end the war immediately if he became president. He didn't and hundreds of young Americans died in Iraq in the interim.

Oladub I will use just this one example because most of your post follows the same style

1. You have some truths
2. You leave out context
3. You have items that are either unverifiable or difficult to verify




Under an agreement negotiated by the Bush administration in 2008, U.S. troops were due to end their mission in Iraq by the end of 2011. [[Truth)

According to people familiar with the negotiations -- which were conducted for the Obama administration by some of the same individuals who led the Bush-era process -- the main sticking points in recent months were over the precise number of troops that would stay behind, and whether the Iraqi government would agree to provide them with legal immunity.
Experts on the mission in Iraq say that despite the public protestations on all sides, both parties were eager to come to an agreement over a continuing troop presence: the Iraqis because they hoped for help in providing stability, and the Americans because they wanted a futher bulwark against encroachment by Iran.
[[lack of context)
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...des-from-iraq/


[[ The actual campaign promise)

[oladub]

firstandten,

What I wrote:
Obama kept [[US troops) in until a month before the deadline after trying to keep them in longer through negotiations.
What politifact wrote:
both parties [[Obama and the Iraqis) were eager to come to an agreement over a continuing troop presence.

Maybe you see a big difference between those two statements but they seem to be in agreement to me. To go around trying to collect votes for getting the troops out after Politifact agrees that he was trying to keep some over there is by definition disingenuous. Thank you for verifying my statement for me. And I have the "actual campaign promise" Obama made. It is only 15 seconds long. The way to measure the import of such lies is to count the number of body bags caused by the discrepancy between the promise and reality.

[firstandten]

firstandten,

What I wrote:
Obama kept [[US troops) in until a month before the deadline after trying to keep them in longer through negotiations.
What politifact wrote:
both parties [[Obama and the Iraqis) were eager to come to an agreement over a continuing troop presence.

Maybe you see a big difference between those two statements but they seem to be in agreement to me. To go around trying to collect votes for getting the troops out after Politifact agrees that he was trying to keep some over there is by definition disingenuous. Thank you for verifying my statement for me. And I have the "actual campaign promise" Obama made. It is only 15 seconds long. The way to measure the import of such lies is to count the number of body bags caused by the discrepancy between the promise and reality.

The point that I was trying to make with that was both parties Iraq and the US wanted to keep troops over for the reasons mentioned in the post.. You made this seems like this was a purely Obama production begging the Iraqis to let us keep troops over there. So yes, I do see a difference between the statements.

You once said Obama promise to end both wars if he were elected. He made no such promise.

However he did say he would end the Iraq war responsibly.


I listened to the video I did not hear the word immediately, I did hear he will get the troops out if they are not out by the time he is president. Once he was elected he laid out the timetable for getting the troops out.

[oladub]

firstandten: The point that I was trying to make with that was both parties Iraq and the US wanted to keep troops over for the reasons mentioned in the post.. You made this seems like this was a purely Obama production begging the Iraqis to let us keep troops over there. So yes, I do see a difference between the statements.

Whatever some party in Iraq wanted to do or not do is irrelevant to the point I made that Obama was disingenuous in trying to sell himself as the guy who brought the troops home after he tried to negotiate to keep them there longer.

You once said Obama promise to end both wars if he were elected. He made no such promise.

I don’t remember ever saying that. The notes I took in 2007 say that Obama was already suggesting that he wanted to expand the war in Afghanistan and Pakistan. I encourage you to find where I ever said that to back up your claim. maybe somebody else said that.

However he did say he would end the Iraq war responsibly.
I listened to the video I did not hear the word immediately, I did hear he will get the troops out if they are not out by the time he is president. Once he was elected he laid out the timetable for getting the troops out.

I transcribed the words for you:
“I will promise you this. That if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am President, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank.”

[firstandten]

Whatever some party in Iraq wanted to do or not do is irrelevant to the point I made that Obama was disingenuous in trying to sell himself as the guy who brought the troops home after he tried to negotiate to keep them there longer..

I guess we will agree to disagree on that !

I don’t remember ever saying that. The notes I took in 2007 say that Obama was already suggesting that he wanted to expand the war in Afghanistan and Pakistan. I encourage you to find where I ever said that to back up your claim. maybe somebody else said that..

I stand corrected !