Why They Hate Obama

Aug 8, 2013 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: The Daily Beast

As the Virginia Flaggers loft their Confederate flag in opposition to the 'tyranny' of 2013, Jamelle Bouie argues that racial bias plays at least some part in Obama's collapse in the South.

Comments
4,501 - 4,520 of 11,510 Comments Last updated 4 hrs ago

“no one told me”

Since: Dec 07

Denver

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4888
Jan 1, 2014
 

Judged:

1

1

1

TonyT1961 wrote:
<quoted text>
Absolutely correct - but these people know nothing regarding history - if it isn't being said on Faux News or Newsmax, in their minds, it isn't so. Why not refresh them with incontrovertible proof?
"The North American Free Trade Agreement: Ronald Reagan's Vision Realized"
http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/1993...
Then, Bush 41 finalized the deal, but did not sign it - it was however, a done deal;
"Following diplomatic negotiations dating back to 1986 among the three nations, the leaders met in San Antonio, Texas, on December 17, 1992, to sign NAFTA. U.S. President George H. W. Bush, Canadian Prime Minister Brian Mulroney and Mexican President Carlos Salinas, each responsible for spearheading and promoting the agreement, ceremonially signed it. The signed agreement then needed to be authorized by each nation's legislative or parliamentary branch.
Before the negotiations were finalized, Bill Clinton came into office in the U.S. and Kim Campbell in Canada, and before the agreement became law, Jean Chrétien had taken office in Canada."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_F...
Let them spin - it's actually funny watching these political imbeciles doing this.
Let's see them try to refute this / a little hard to do, when the facts are right there for them to see.
Watch Hillary squirm:

Daily Kos: Hillary On Record For NAFTA Support
www.dailykos.com/story/.../-Hillary-On-Record... ;
Feb 24, 2008 - Senator Clinton has some explaining to do. HILLARY CLINTON PRAISED NAFTA FOR YEARS 2006/2008: Newsday Reviewed Clinton's ...

“no one told me”

Since: Dec 07

Denver

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4890
Jan 1, 2014
 

Judged:

1

1

1

ooops!!!!

"There is a growing belief in Washington that the trade agreement will just win in Congress, but also some surprise that President Clinton should have made it a make-or-break issue for his presidency. The President's offer will be resented by the unions and other core Democratic supporters."

A make or break it for his presidency, pay attention dummies.

“no one told me”

Since: Dec 07

Denver

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4891
Jan 1, 2014
 

Judged:

1

1

1

more:

"Most of President Clinton's support comes from Republicans, some 120 of whom (two-thirds of their total) are expected to vote for the accord. To win, he needs to get an additional 100 out of 258 House Democrats and, since the Gore- Perot debate three days ago, he says he has picked up another 27 votes.

Given the energy Mr Clinton is putting into winning the vote, it would be a serious repudiation by the Democratic Party if he fails. The administration is also asking Congress to rally round the flag by supporting Mr Clinton before he goes to the Seattle trade summit to meet leaders from China, Japan and 13 other Pacific nations."

Now can we get back to the failure Obama and the fact he hasn't created one single job?

“no one told me”

Since: Dec 07

Denver

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4892
Jan 1, 2014
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Why are we even debating NAFTA?

Advantages of NAFTA - Benefits and Positive Effects - US Economy

useconomy.about.com ›...› US Economy › Trade › NAFTA&#8206;
by Kimberly Amadeo - in 104 Google+ circles
Feb 2, 2012 - The advantages of NAFTA for Mexico, Canada and the U.S. include an increase in trade which has contributed to economic growth.

Oblama probably never even heard of it, no one told him.

“no one told me”

Since: Dec 07

Denver

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4893
Jan 1, 2014
 

Judged:

1

1

1

NAFTA Benefits - United States Trade Representative
www.ustr.gov/sites/default/files/NAFTA%20Bene... ;
NAFTA Facts. Office of the United States Trade Representative www.ustr.gov . NAFTA Policy Brief –October 2007. NAFTA Benefits. How has NAFTA benefited ...

Nafta: After 20 Years, We're Not There Yet - Businessweek
www.businessweek.com/articles/2012.../nafta-2... ;
Aug 1, 2012 - There have unquestionably been some very positive benefits. From 1993 to 2007, for example, trade among the NAFTA nations more than ...

"
The U.S., Canadian, and Mexican economies have all benefited from NAFTA. Not as much as they should have, because—even after 20 years—the three countries still haven’t properly integrated their economies, which makes them competitive in many areas where they should be cooperative.

There have unquestionably been some very positive benefits. From 1993 to 2007, for example, trade among the NAFTA nations more than tripled, from $297 billion to $930 billion, according to (PDF) the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative. In 2010 alone, some 61 percent of the more than $301.5 billion in goods that Mexico imported came from the United States, as did more than 50% of Canada’s imports."

Sounds beneficial to me, why do libs hate economic progress?

“JESUS WOULD IMPEACH THE GOP!!!”

Since: May 09

Lake Success, N.Y.

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4894
Jan 1, 2014
 

Judged:

1

1

1

dont snow me wrote:
<quoted text>
Watch Hillary squirm:
Daily Kos: Hillary On Record For NAFTA Support
www.dailykos.com/story/.../-Hillary-On-Record... ;
Feb 24, 2008 - Senator Clinton has some explaining to do. HILLARY CLINTON PRAISED NAFTA FOR YEARS 2006/2008: Newsday Reviewed Clinton's ...
It took some searching - your link did not work - but I did find what you were sending me;

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/02/25/4635...

You're right - she's got some explaining to do regarding that remark. I was against it when Reagan proposed it, when Bush 41 had signed the deal, and when Clinton ratified it.

None are blameless. But again, who began this?

We both know the answer.

“JESUS WOULD IMPEACH THE GOP!!!”

Since: May 09

Lake Success, N.Y.

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4895
Jan 1, 2014
 

Judged:

1

1

1

dont snow me wrote:
Why are we even debating NAFTA?
Advantages of NAFTA - Benefits and Positive Effects - US Economy
useconomy.about.com ›...› US Economy › Trade › NAFTA&#8206;
by Kimberly Amadeo - in 104 Google+ circles
Feb 2, 2012 - The advantages of NAFTA for Mexico, Canada and the U.S. include an increase in trade which has contributed to economic growth.
Oblama probably never even heard of it, no one told him.
I and many who were impacted by NAFTA disagree with your assertion regarding the trade agreement. This is from your link which you just supplied;

"Furthermore, many in Congress have constituents who lost jobs thanks to NAFTA, and are rightly concerned they could lose more. Every trade agreement benefits industries that are highly competitive, by opening new markets. It threatens those with high wages, because foreign manufacturers can underbid them."

http://useconomy.about.com/

The TPP will put NAFTA on steroids - we will lose more work to 3rd world countries trying to compete for the work we retain. Bad move.

“JESUS WOULD IMPEACH THE GOP!!!”

Since: May 09

Lake Success, N.Y.

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4896
Jan 1, 2014
 

Judged:

1

1

1

dont snow me wrote:
NAFTA Benefits - United States Trade Representative
www.ustr.gov/sites/default/files/NAFTA%20Bene... ;
NAFTA Facts. Office of the United States Trade Representative www.ustr.gov . NAFTA Policy Brief –October 2007. NAFTA Benefits. How has NAFTA benefited ...
Nafta: After 20 Years, We're Not There Yet - Businessweek
www.businessweek.com/articles/2012.../nafta-2... ;
Aug 1, 2012 - There have unquestionably been some very positive benefits. From 1993 to 2007, for example, trade among the NAFTA nations more than ...
"
The U.S., Canadian, and Mexican economies have all benefited from NAFTA. Not as much as they should have, because—even after 20 years—the three countries still haven’t properly integrated their economies, which makes them competitive in many areas where they should be cooperative.
There have unquestionably been some very positive benefits. From 1993 to 2007, for example, trade among the NAFTA nations more than tripled, from $297 billion to $930 billion, according to (PDF) the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative. In 2010 alone, some 61 percent of the more than $301.5 billion in goods that Mexico imported came from the United States, as did more than 50% of Canada’s imports."
Sounds beneficial to me, why do libs hate economic progress?
Not beneficial at all my friend. The companies claiming exports are way up are in fact having their goods manufactured overseas at facilities that are American owned, but take advantage of low wages / case in point would be the multitude of clothing companies owned by Wal-Mart, and many more even I conduct business with.

The numbers look good, but they don't specify WHERE the products they export are manufactured. That entire article is a ruse.

“JESUS WOULD IMPEACH THE GOP!!!”

Since: May 09

Lake Success, N.Y.

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4897
Jan 1, 2014
 

Judged:

1

1

1

dont snow me wrote:
more:
"Most of President Clinton's support comes from Republicans, some 120 of whom (two-thirds of their total) are expected to vote for the accord. To win, he needs to get an additional 100 out of 258 House Democrats and, since the Gore- Perot debate three days ago, he says he has picked up another 27 votes.
Given the energy Mr Clinton is putting into winning the vote, it would be a serious repudiation by the Democratic Party if he fails. The administration is also asking Congress to rally round the flag by supporting Mr Clinton before he goes to the Seattle trade summit to meet leaders from China, Japan and 13 other Pacific nations."
Now can we get back to the failure Obama and the fact he hasn't created one single job?
"Now can we get back to the failure Obama and the fact he hasn't created one single job?["

Sure we can - why won't the House even let the Jobs Bill come up for a vote?

"Washington (CNN)- House Majority Leader Eric Cantor flatly rejected President Obama's call for the House and Senate to hold a vote on his jobs bill by the end of the month, saying Monday the full bill, called the "American Jobs Act," won't get a vote in the House of Representatives.

Cantor criticized the President for continuing to press for a vote on the entire package, saying at his weekly session with reporters on Capitol Hill, "This all or nothing approach is unreasonable."

Instead Cantor announced the House will take up several measures this month that he believes House Republicans and the White House agree on, including the three pending free trade agreements with Korea, Colombia, and Panama."

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/10/...

Now ask yourself - why are these politicians always quick to support free trade, but not a Jobs Bill?
serfs up

Ormond Beach, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4898
Jan 1, 2014
 

Judged:

1

1

1

TonyT1961 wrote:
<quoted text>
It took some searching - your link did not work - but I did find what you were sending me;
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/02/25/4635...
You're right - she's got some explaining to do regarding that remark. I was against it when Reagan proposed it, when Bush 41 had signed the deal, and when Clinton ratified it.
None are blameless. But again, who began this?
We both know the answer.
it began when the welfare state expanded massively. it began when government became so huge we could not compete. It began when big ticket unions became greedy and together with white collar management produced products that were the same or inferior while they cost more money to purchase. It began when people bought products not caring where they were made as it was not worth it to them. Many of those people were progressives who talk loudly but walk timidly as blaming others is their game.

“no one told me”

Since: Dec 07

Denver

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4899
Jan 1, 2014
 

Judged:

2

2

1

TonyT1961 wrote:
<quoted text>
It took some searching - your link did not work - but I did find what you were sending me;
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/02/25/4635...
You're right - she's got some explaining to do regarding that remark. I was against it when Reagan proposed it, when Bush 41 had signed the deal, and when Clinton ratified it.
None are blameless. But again, who began this?
We both know the answer.
why is NAFTA even being discussed? It had many fathers and is irrelevant to Oblama.

What's relevant is the lack of jobs after 5 years of Oblama and the traitor Harry Reid.

“no one told me”

Since: Dec 07

Denver

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4900
Jan 1, 2014
 

Judged:

2

2

2

TonyT1961 wrote:
<quoted text>
"Now can we get back to the failure Obama and the fact he hasn't created one single job?["
Sure we can - why won't the House even let the Jobs Bill come up for a vote?
"Washington (CNN)- House Majority Leader Eric Cantor flatly rejected President Obama's call for the House and Senate to hold a vote on his jobs bill by the end of the month, saying Monday the full bill, called the "American Jobs Act," won't get a vote in the House of Representatives.
Cantor criticized the President for continuing to press for a vote on the entire package, saying at his weekly session with reporters on Capitol Hill, "This all or nothing approach is unreasonable."
Instead Cantor announced the House will take up several measures this month that he believes House Republicans and the White House agree on, including the three pending free trade agreements with Korea, Colombia, and Panama."
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/10/...
Now ask yourself - why are these politicians always quick to support free trade, but not a Jobs Bill?
What jobs bill? Another of Oblama's pie in the sky fantasies that will increase the debt and be worthless?

Obama's Jobs Bill Fails to Advance in Senate Despite White House ...
www.foxnews.com/.../white-house-pushes-for-pa... ;
Oct 11, 2011 - President Obama's $447 billion jobs bill failed to clear a procedural hurdle in the Democratic-controlled Senate Tuesday night despite a White ...

This one the democrat senate wouldn't even pass?

Wheres them "shovel ready" jobs Oblama got a big laugh out of?

The Keystone Pipeline is shovel ready, Oblama has forbidden it.

“no one told me”

Since: Dec 07

Denver

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4901
Jan 1, 2014
 

Judged:

1

1

1

TonyT1961 wrote:
<quoted text>
Not beneficial at all my friend. The companies claiming exports are way up are in fact having their goods manufactured overseas at facilities that are American owned, but take advantage of low wages / case in point would be the multitude of clothing companies owned by Wal-Mart, and many more even I conduct business with.
The numbers look good, but they don't specify WHERE the products they export are manufactured. That entire article is a ruse.
You post your opinion, I post facts, the least you could do is post an article from a credible source. Do you dispute the figures I posted? If you do, show me something to counter them.

International trade is beneficial, we export hundreds of billions every year. Raising tariffs on other nations goods has proved disastrous.

“no one told me”

Since: Dec 07

Denver

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4902
Jan 1, 2014
 

Judged:

1

1

1

TonyT1961 wrote:
<quoted text>
"Now can we get back to the failure Obama and the fact he hasn't created one single job?["
Sure we can - why won't the House even let the Jobs Bill come up for a vote?
"Washington (CNN)- House Majority Leader Eric Cantor flatly rejected President Obama's call for the House and Senate to hold a vote on his jobs bill by the end of the month, saying Monday the full bill, called the "American Jobs Act," won't get a vote in the House of Representatives.
Cantor criticized the President for continuing to press for a vote on the entire package, saying at his weekly session with reporters on Capitol Hill, "This all or nothing approach is unreasonable."
Instead Cantor announced the House will take up several measures this month that he believes House Republicans and the White House agree on, including the three pending free trade agreements with Korea, Colombia, and Panama."
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/10/...
Now ask yourself - why are these politicians always quick to support free trade, but not a Jobs Bill?
I'll presume there' s provisions the republicans find objectionable and in fact counter productive.

Is your point they're doing it to harm America?

The only way to produce jobs is for the government to get out of the way, for the government to actually help business's and reduce the amount of onerous and unneccesary rules and regulations.

Every year they add more and more, it never stops.
Eric Gustafson

Newport News, VA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4903
Jan 1, 2014
 

Judged:

2

2

1

barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
NAFTA was Reagan's baby.
Wipe your chin, SnowJob.

Republicans like to repeat popular misinformation........ Reagan introduced open borders with Mexico in his Presidential Campaign in 1979, once elected he began working on a Treaty with Mexico and Canada was extended an invitation.

The NAFTA Treaty took 12 years of negotiating and was signed by George H.W Bush, Clinton signed into law (((((((NAFTA Legislation))))) that changed existing laws to accommodate the provisions in the NAFTA Treaty, Reagan initiated and George H.W Bush signed with Canada and Mexico.

Reagan's primary focus was dismantling organized labor and changing American pension laws, allowing Corporations to retain funds and used those funds to reinvest back into Corporate operations at tight times. Companies like Enron can be an example of the disaster that policy change brought to American workers..

“no one told me”

Since: Dec 07

Denver

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4904
Jan 1, 2014
 

Judged:

1

1

1

TonyT1961 wrote:
<quoted text>
"Now can we get back to the failure Obama and the fact he hasn't created one single job?["
Sure we can - why won't the House even let the Jobs Bill come up for a vote?
"Washington (CNN)- House Majority Leader Eric Cantor flatly rejected President Obama's call for the House and Senate to hold a vote on his jobs bill by the end of the month, saying Monday the full bill, called the "American Jobs Act," won't get a vote in the House of Representatives.
Cantor criticized the President for continuing to press for a vote on the entire package, saying at his weekly session with reporters on Capitol Hill, "This all or nothing approach is unreasonable."
Instead Cantor announced the House will take up several measures this month that he believes House Republicans and the White House agree on, including the three pending free trade agreements with Korea, Colombia, and Panama."
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/10/...
Now ask yourself - why are these politicians always quick to support free trade, but not a Jobs Bill?
I read the article, did you? Cantor's position is perfectly clear. Where would the $400 plus billion come from?

Do you vaguely remember Pelosi's claim of pay as you go"? Boy, was that a bad joke.

Any worthwhile bill will have bipartisan support.

“no one told me”

Since: Dec 07

Denver

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4905
Jan 1, 2014
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Eric Gustafson wrote:
<quoted text>
Republicans like to repeat popular misinformation........ Reagan introduced open borders with Mexico in his Presidential Campaign in 1979, once elected he began working on a Treaty with Mexico and Canada was extended an invitation.
The NAFTA Treaty took 12 years of negotiating and was signed by George H.W Bush, Clinton signed into law (((((((NAFTA Legislation))))) that changed existing laws to accommodate the provisions in the NAFTA Treaty, Reagan initiated and George H.W Bush signed with Canada and Mexico.
Reagan's primary focus was dismantling organized labor and changing American pension laws, allowing Corporations to retain funds and used those funds to reinvest back into Corporate operations at tight times. Companies like Enron can be an example of the disaster that policy change brought to American workers..
so what?

AS to your last paragraph your opinion wont get it, proof will.

I'm still waiting for some answers from you and your blueprint for a perfect society.
Eric Gustafson

Newport News, VA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4906
Jan 1, 2014
 

Judged:

2

2

1

The Jobs Bill was one of the Record Republican Filibusters in the Senate, failed as in failed closure on debate in the senate, it was filibustered.

Amazingly the 7 Million jobs created under Obama so far as been done with absolutely no contributions from the Republicans who were purposely trying to make sure the country fails and the sluggish recover would linger for their political benefit.
dont snow me wrote:
<quoted text>
What jobs bill? Another of Oblama's pie in the sky fantasies that will increase the debt and be worthless?
Obama's Jobs Bill Fails to Advance in Senate Despite White House ...
www.foxnews.com/.../white-house-pushes-for-pa... ;
Oct 11, 2011 - President Obama's $447 billion jobs bill failed to clear a procedural hurdle in the Democratic-controlled Senate Tuesday night despite a White ...
This one the democrat senate wouldn't even pass?
Wheres them "shovel ready" jobs Oblama got a big laugh out of?
The Keystone Pipeline is shovel ready, Oblama has forbidden it.

“no one told me”

Since: Dec 07

Denver

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4907
Jan 1, 2014
 

Judged:

2

2

2

TonyT1961 wrote:
<quoted text>
I and many who were impacted by NAFTA disagree with your assertion regarding the trade agreement. This is from your link which you just supplied;
"Furthermore, many in Congress have constituents who lost jobs thanks to NAFTA, and are rightly concerned they could lose more. Every trade agreement benefits industries that are highly competitive, by opening new markets. It threatens those with high wages, because foreign manufacturers can underbid them."
http://useconomy.about.com/
The TPP will put NAFTA on steroids - we will lose more work to 3rd world countries trying to compete for the work we retain. Bad move.
Ok, who's pushing for this TPP?

Sadly the halcyon days of the 40's, 50s and 60's manufacturing sector are gone and unlikely to come back for the foreseeable future.

Or do you have a plan and no one in power will listen to you?

It's not that simple, what s simple is hard work, ingenuity, education and perseverance, something libs don't even want to talk about. It's how I, and likely you, got ahead.

“no one told me”

Since: Dec 07

Denver

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4908
Jan 1, 2014
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Eric Gustafson wrote:
The Jobs Bill was one of the Record Republican Filibusters in the Senate, failed as in failed closure on debate in the senate, it was filibustered.
Amazingly the 7 Million jobs created under Obama so far as been done with absolutely no contributions from the Republicans who were purposely trying to make sure the country fails and the sluggish recover would linger for their political benefit.
<quoted text>
There are no 7 million created jobs, let's deal in reality, not leftist fantasies.

Any jobs that were created were created with no help from Oblama, unless it was new government employees , like those hired to enforce OcommieKare at the point of a gun.

Republicans are the last people who wish to see the country fail. Republicans are for success for all. Demorats are for a constantly growing welfare state.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

•••
•••