The President has failed us

This week, I decided to list the reasons I would not vote for Barack Obama in the next election. Full Story
sun

Longview, WA

#106842 Feb 24, 2013
X -Man- wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, you're not the sharpest tool in the shed. So I wouldn't worry about it. ;)
Well you're not the sharpest tool in the shed.So I well worry about it.Bushwhacher

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#106843 Feb 24, 2013
Jaxxon wrote:
<quoted text>
That's kind of a broad statement isn't it?
Why didn't you just say "DONE!" like whatthewhooie does.
No, not really. On this particular subject there is no real rebuttal. Obama needs to own his involvement in this one.
sun

Longview, WA

#106844 Feb 24, 2013
yeppy kaya mf
Snake Eyes

Long Beach, CA

#106845 Feb 24, 2013
positronium wrote:
Obama fails to deliver transparency.
http://washington.cbslocal.com/2013/02/23/dan...
The list gets longer.
Obama's transparency record: lots of data, not as much sunlight

PolitiFact has tracked his transparency promises on the Obameter and found mixed success. Of his 14 core promises, PolitiFact rated four Kept, five Compromise, and five Broken.

Transpare more: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/artic...

Since: Feb 12

Location hidden

#106846 Feb 24, 2013
sun wrote:
<quoted text>Well you're not the sharpest tool in the shed.So I well worry about it.Bushwhacher
Suit yourself. ;)

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#106847 Feb 24, 2013
NTRPRNR1 wrote:
<quoted text>According to the author who rebutted your story, not true. Of course you didn't read the rebuttal so you couldn't possibly know that. How can I ay that? Well, the rebuttal came from Ezra Klein at the Washington Post, not one of the sources you usually find interesting, and the very first sentence reads:
QUOTE: Ezra Klein
"I don’t agree with my colleague Bob Woodward, who says the Obama administration is “moving the goalposts” when they insist on a sequester replacement that includes revenues."
Sorry - for you;-)
Sweetheart that is not a rebuttal to my post. My post had nothing to do with Obama's sequester replacement which includes revenues. Of course, you didn't read my post or you would understand that. My posts relates to Obama's involvement in the sequestration. He not only recommended it, he signed the bill, and vowed to veto any attempts to get rid of it.
----------

President Obama came up with sequestration — or automatic spending cuts — as a political tool to force Republicans to relent to a grand bargain as part of The Budget Control Act of 2011.

The Washington Post’s Bob Woodard had this exchange with Chris Wallace, host of “Fox News Sunday” on Feb. 17:

Wallace:“Bob, as the man who literally wrote the book about the budget battle, put this to rest. Whose idea was the sequester, and did you ever think that we'd actually get to this point?”

Woodward:“First, it was the White House. It was Obama and Jack Lew and Rob Nabors who went to the Democratic Leader in the Senate, Harry Reid, and said,'this is the solution.' But everyone has their fingerprints on this.”

Obama doubled down on the sequester back on Nov. 21, 2011, when he said this of Congress:

“My message to them is simple: No. I will veto any effort to get rid of those automatic spending cuts to domestic and defense spending. There will be no easy off ramps on this one.”

http://www.newsmax.com/BradleyBlakeman/Obama -...

“Work hard at work worth doing.”

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#106848 Feb 24, 2013
Hmmm...we need more of this, not the constant demand for bigger government and creating more debt.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/02/...
Snake Eyes

Long Beach, CA

#106849 Feb 24, 2013
X -Man- wrote:
<quoted text>
Suit yourself. ;)
Can an App Sort out Fact from Fiction?

While fact-checking is hardly a new concept for journalists, the developers hope Truth Teller can make a difference by checking those facts right away.

Check more: http://www.ajr.org/Article.asp...
Snake Eyes

Long Beach, CA

#106850 Feb 24, 2013
teddyr4me wrote:
Hmmm...we need more of this, not the constant demand for bigger government and creating more debt.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/02/...
Panel OKs plan to send money back to taxpayers

State lawmakers continue to debate what Iowa should do with surplus budget dollars. Should they put the money into services and programs or give it directly to taxpayers?

Send more: http://globegazette.com/news/iowa/panel-oks-p...

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#106851 Feb 24, 2013
Republican Honey wrote:
<quoted text>
No, not really. On this particular subject there is no real rebuttal. Obama needs to own his involvement in this one.
There is a difference between "involvement" and sole responsibility.

You want Obama to be held solely responsible for sequestration and he is not.

Congress (meaning the republcan majority) has the power to avoid sequestration if they choose to make some reasonable cmporomises that don't put most of the burden of spending cuts on the poor and middle class.

My guesss is that republican leaders will join with democrats and make a deal.

The far right won't be happy about it, but the far right matters less and less when it comes to a governing majority these days.

If there are drastic, across the board cuts and real people feel the pain from it, the republicans in the house will get the lion's share of the blame.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#106852 Feb 24, 2013
X -Man- wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, you're not the sharpest tool in the shed. So I wouldn't worry about it. ;)
"Well, you're not the sharpest tool in the shed."

That may be the understatement of the day.

Hey X.

I'm on my way out. What happened to all the smart conservatives anyway?

Teddy and WA are about it around here anymore aren't they?

Have a good one.

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#106854 Feb 24, 2013
X -Man- wrote:
Low I.Q and Conservative beliefs...
http://news.yahoo.com/low-iq-conservative-bel...
This post clearly identifies your bigotry.
Snake Eyes

Long Beach, CA

#106855 Feb 24, 2013
Jaxxon wrote:
<quoted text>
Oy vey!
This may the dumbest post you've made yet.
Matthew 25:33

And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left.
Paul McIntosh

Buffalo, NY

#106856 Feb 24, 2013
Jaxxon wrote:
<quoted text>
There is a difference between "involvement" and sole responsibility.
You want Obama to be held solely responsible for sequestration and he is not.
Congress (meaning the republcan majority) has the power to avoid sequestration if they choose to make some reasonable cmporomises that don't put most of the burden of spending cuts on the poor and middle class.
My guesss is that republican leaders will join with democrats and make a deal.
The far right won't be happy about it, but the far right matters less and less when it comes to a governing majority these days.
If there are drastic, across the board cuts and real people feel the pain from it, the republicans in the house will get the lion's share of the blame.
Whatever you say honey. Now stop playing on the internet and help me feed the chickens. After we'll watch a movie and have some popcorn, I might even let you rub my feet again.

Since: Feb 12

Location hidden

#106857 Feb 24, 2013
Jaxxon wrote:
<quoted text>
There is a difference between "involvement" and sole responsibility.
You want Obama to be held solely responsible for sequestration and he is not.
Congress (meaning the republcan majority) has the power to avoid sequestration if they choose to make some reasonable cmporomises that don't put most of the burden of spending cuts on the poor and middle class.
My guesss is that republican leaders will join with democrats and make a deal.
The far right won't be happy about it, but the far right matters less and less when it comes to a governing majority these days.
If there are drastic, across the board cuts and real people feel the pain from it, the republicans in the house will get the lion's share of the blame.
I am truly fed up with Republican B.S.
Snake Eyes

Long Beach, CA

#106858 Feb 24, 2013
You can blame whom you want for the sequester crisis
Pretty much everyone agrees that it will be stupid and destructive to allow the sequestration cuts to go into effect and almost no one seems to believe that the players who would have compromise to prevent them from taking effect will do so. So, instead, we are distracting ourselves with a relatively pointless argument over whose idea it was in the first place.

Sequester more: http://www.minnpost.com/eric-black-ink/2013/0...

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#106859 Feb 24, 2013
X -Man- wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh, well thank you for your permission to think what I wish. lol
I think I will, as it is not a matter of satisfaction, but instead, a matter of reality. ;)
Your opinion sweetie. Your opinion.
Wall Street Government

Sebastian, FL

#106861 Feb 24, 2013
sun wrote:
<quoted text>OH NO more stickle's
Stickle's?

No pickles:

www.wicklespickles.com - Cached

Since: Feb 12

Location hidden

#106862 Feb 24, 2013
Jaxxon wrote:
<quoted text>
"Well, you're not the sharpest tool in the shed."
That may be the understatement of the day.
Hey X.
I'm on my way out. What happened to all the smart conservatives anyway?
Teddy and WA are about it around here anymore aren't they?
Have a good one.
Hey Jaxx, so true. There is a very severe shortage these days.

You have a good one as well.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#106863 Feb 24, 2013
Jaxxon wrote:
<quoted text>
There is a difference between "involvement" and sole responsibility.
You want Obama to be held solely responsible for sequestration and he is not.
Congress (meaning the republcan majority) has the power to avoid sequestration if they choose to make some reasonable cmporomises that don't put most of the burden of spending cuts on the poor and middle class.
My guesss is that republican leaders will join with democrats and make a deal.
The far right won't be happy about it, but the far right matters less and less when it comes to a governing majority these days.
If there are drastic, across the board cuts and real people feel the pain from it, the republicans in the house will get the lion's share of the blame.
"cmporomises"...beli eve it or not that was supposed to be compromises, republican was missing an "i" and guess had an extra "s" tacked on the end.

Typing too fast.

:)

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form 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.

Barack Obama Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Obama heckled 6 min Truth is might 24
BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 19 min Rogue Scholar 05 180,952
Longtime GOP Texas Gov. Perry wins another term (Nov '10) 33 min Truth is might 22,923
Australia out of step with new climate momentum 52 min animals against i... 1
Global warming 'undeniable,' scientists say (Jul '10) 1 hr Fair Game 33,293
Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 2 hr Yeah 1,144,229
Obama's plan: 'Deport felons, not families' 3 hr Chicopee 121

Barack Obama People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE