It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Chicago Residents: Obama Will Go Down as Worst President Ever!

page: 2
14
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 13 2014 @ 02:04 PM
link   
a reply to: Willtell

You are caught up in the whole left right paradigm. They BOTH suck. BOTH parties need to be disbanded and high ranking officials need to be charged with serious federal charges. Obama IS one of the worse presidents in history second only to maybe FDR and Truman. Either way it's debatable. Lowest approval ratings, lowest respect from the military, lowest respect abroad, failing economy, failing policies.....the country is on the brink of civil war. I believe that qualifies him. A couple more goof moves, which he has 2 years to make, and he will be totally overqualified to be the worst President ever. I thought I went to sleep, woke up, and Bush had a tan. That's how similar they govern.




posted on Jul, 13 2014 @ 02:08 PM
link   
a reply to: beezzer





Instead of asking for government help AGAIN, these people that live and die in these areas need to take back their neighborhoods. Government can't/won't help.



Gun bans and whatnot. Not like they could defend themselves or go vigilante without repercussions. That's Rahm Emannuel's town now. Also.....we don't bring the drugs in. If all of a sudden there were no drugs to sell I imagine after a year or two we would see a drastic change. That would require the FBI and CIA to stop dealing. There is realistically nothing these people can do short of rioting. And I think we all know how a chicago riot is going to end. I for one don't wanna see that. I definitely don't expect to see any militias going to stand up for THEM when the Fed gov comes down on them.

edit on 13-7-2014 by rustyclutch because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 13 2014 @ 02:15 PM
link   
a reply to: beezzer

Maybe that's because the hundreds of billions of dollars we've spent fighting "crime" in the form of the War on Drugs have actually made the problem worse?

Chicago is of particular interest because its crime rate skyrocketed in 1920 after prohibition began. An effort to reduce crime actually lead to a drastic increase in crime.
edit on 2014-7-13 by theantediluvian because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 13 2014 @ 02:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: beezzer

Maybe that's because the hundreds of billions of dollars we've spent fighting "crime" in the form of the War on Drugs have actually made the problem worse?

Chicago is of particular interest because it's crime rate skyrocketed in 1920 after the prohibition began. An effort to reduce crime actually lead to a drastic increase in crime.


Prime example of why prohibition doesn't work. Think of all the tax dollars and nice things we could have had if they had been taxing the marijuana smokers instead of locking them up.



posted on Jul, 13 2014 @ 02:17 PM
link   
Obama has done some good stuff in addition to the stupid and corrupt stuff. Not really too much different than most others. If someone doesn't feel like their particular circumstance has gotten better they will complain. I would say he's the worst with regard to narcissism and his ability to cast a spell on people (or former ability). He's also pretty bad with regard to figuring out what is best for the Nation, case in point Obamacare. I just want a down to earth honest leader who listens to the people first and thinks stuff through.



posted on Jul, 13 2014 @ 02:19 PM
link   
a reply to: Dianec

What would the good stuff be? Surely you aren't talking about the Health Care bill that raised the cost of my health insurance.



posted on Jul, 13 2014 @ 02:44 PM
link   


No longer do we elect someone that will represent us.

Now it is all about what the representative can give us.

This is a perfect example of what is wrong in America.

"Where is MY free stuff?" - Instead of looking at it as a president that leads a government where I, the individual, can succeed.
a reply to: beezzer


We'll if you look at the flip side of this, if there are those who claim W Bush was a leader, than I wouldn't say all presidents that lead are good. (Considering he played on peoples fears to lead us into the war in Iraq and to push for ratifying the Patriot Act).



posted on Jul, 13 2014 @ 04:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: beezzer
a reply to: theantediluvian

The violence is the cities isn't new. It's been going on for decades. Government has poured billions into it. Local, federal governments have spouted every election that new initiatives, new programs will help. And every time it is a lie and everything either remains the same or it gets worse.

Instead of asking for government help AGAIN, these people that live and die in these areas need to take back their neighborhoods. Government can't/won't help.

While I can agree to some extent much of what you are saying, there is a fundamental problem, how are ordinary people going to 'take back their neighbourhoods' ? Vigilantism against illegal weapons, drug dealers and gangs and 'no go' areas. You might be able to walk down the street and KNOW who the drug dealers and pushers are, but how are you going to deal with it? How do you deal with the gangs, let them gut one another every so often just to let off steam, even if the odd innocent gets mown down now and again. For a start do you really think there is going to be 100% backing from the police? I don't think so.
It's time to start thinking deeply about guns, gun control like it or not. DARPA just put out the blurb on their new weapon, a fifty calibre semi-automatic sniper gun that shoots round corners, or behaves like a guided missile whatever, WTF happens when that comes into the public realm a few years down the line? According to the recent thread here, a youngster could own one at a younger age than being able to own a pistol. This is all crazy stuff, and requires new thinking.



posted on Jul, 13 2014 @ 05:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: smurfy

originally posted by: beezzer
a reply to: theantediluvian

The violence is the cities isn't new. It's been going on for decades. Government has poured billions into it. Local, federal governments have spouted every election that new initiatives, new programs will help. And every time it is a lie and everything either remains the same or it gets worse.

Instead of asking for government help AGAIN, these people that live and die in these areas need to take back their neighborhoods. Government can't/won't help.

While I can agree to some extent much of what you are saying, there is a fundamental problem, how are ordinary people going to 'take back their neighbourhoods' ? Vigilantism against illegal weapons, drug dealers and gangs and 'no go' areas. You might be able to walk down the street and KNOW who the drug dealers and pushers are, but how are you going to deal with it? How do you deal with the gangs, let them gut one another every so often just to let off steam, even if the odd innocent gets mown down now and again. For a start do you really think there is going to be 100% backing from the police? I don't think so.
It's time to start thinking deeply about guns, gun control like it or not. DARPA just put out the blurb on their new weapon, a fifty calibre semi-automatic sniper gun that shoots round corners, or behaves like a guided missile whatever, WTF happens when that comes into the public realm a few years down the line? According to the recent thread here, a youngster could own one at a younger age than being able to own a pistol. This is all crazy stuff, and requires new thinking.


Oh FFS! Murder is murder, and aren't we talking about Chicago here in this thread?

You know, one of America's premier cities showing the rest of the country and world how GREAT strict gun control laws are and how effective they are?

Way to take a topic and twist it to turn it into an argument about the 2nd!



posted on Jul, 13 2014 @ 05:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: seeker1963


Oh FFS! Murder is murder, and aren't we talking about Chicago here in this thread?

You know, one of America's premier cities showing the rest of the country and world how GREAT strict gun control laws are and how effective they are?

Way to take a topic and twist it to turn it into an argument about the 2nd!

Is that Premier Inn or Premier way to go out?
BTW, you ignored the new gun example altogether, tut tut. Your a very naughty boy!



posted on Jul, 13 2014 @ 05:59 PM
link   
I don't know what would solve the gang problem and high crime in the inner-cities.

But I do know what hasn't worked.

Politicians talking about it, hasn't worked.
Politicians passing more laws, hasn't worked.
Government spending countless billions, hasn't worked.
Social programs hasn't worked.
State and local and federal intervention hasn't worked.
Crying to government hasn't worked.

Maybe we need a revolution, just to save the good and honest people trapped by circumstance.



posted on Jul, 14 2014 @ 05:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: Willtell
a reply to: seeker1963

They promised health care and delivered somewhat.

What does the GOP promise?
Cut taxes for the rich, they certainly deliver on that. I imagine your proud of that.

Funny the GOP always promise economic health but Bush left an economy in shambles.
Clinton at least balanced the Budget that Bush went and unbalanced

Between the GOP and dems there is no choice but the dems, but that's because the GOP is so bad.


Clinton never balanced the budget. During his 8 years in office he increased United States debt from 4 trillion to 5.6 trillion dollars.

Here is a list of U.S. national debt by year:
useconomy.about.com... .htm

A list of U.S. presidents (for comparison):
en.wikipedia.org...

Some key points in this timeline:
In 1963 JFK is assassinated. He was the last president who tried to keep us on the silver standard. After his death executive order 11110 is ignored and no more silver certificates are issued.
In 1965 LBJ funds his Great Society.
In 1971 Nixon suspends the gold standard.
In 1973 and 1974 there is increasing inflation of the U.S. dollar. (it's not backed by anything anymore)
In 1982 the national debt exceeds 1 trillion dollars for the first time. From here on the rate of increasing debt begins to skyrocket.
From 2000 to 2008 the debt increased from 5.6 trillion to 10 trillion dollars. George Bush almost but not quite doubled the amount of national debt during his two terms.
From 2008 to now the debt increased from 10 trillion to 16.7 trillion dollars. Obama is on track to be the first president to actually double the national debt.
edit on 7/14/14 by peskyhumans because: (no reason given)

edit on 7/14/14 by peskyhumans because: fix a link


*EDIT: I apologize. ATS won't let me post the entire link to the national debt page I want to show. It's cutting it off for some reason... Just do a google search for "united states debt by year" and you should be good.
edit on 7/14/14 by peskyhumans because: stupid ATS doesn't let me post links



posted on Jul, 15 2014 @ 02:44 PM
link   
2 questions -

1) How many black folks had this opinion of 0bama in 2012 yet still voted for him a 2nd time?

2) IF 0bama could run for a third term, how many of these black folks would vote for him a 3rd time?

I'm just guessing here, and I could be wrong, but I think the answer to 1) is "most" and the answer to 2) is "all".

Voting for someone OR not voting for someone JUST BECAUSE of his or her skin color is....

wait for it....

racist

Also, as prep for 2016-

Voting for someone OR not voting for someone JUST BECAUSE of his or her GENDER is

wait for it...

sexist

When considering all of the "Inner City Black People" such as the angry Chicago people in the video, as a whole, Obama's life path is very different by comparison. He led a life of privilege, favor and ease. For some of his youth he wasn't even in this country.

One could say he IS looking out for his own, it just isn't the kind of people the folks in the video thought it was.
edit on 15-7-2014 by djmarcone because: clarifying my thoughts



posted on Jul, 15 2014 @ 02:46 PM
link   
We should ban cities, compare the crime rates in big cities to rural areas and you see what the problem is, too many people in too small an area.



posted on Jul, 15 2014 @ 02:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: EverydayInVA
We should ban cities, compare the crime rates in big cities to rural areas and you see what the problem is, too many people in too small an area.


If you take out the numbers from the large cities and apply the adjusted numbers to the gun violence charts, the USA is entirely on par with all the other "non-violent" countries around the world.

There is just so much gun violence in the cities - where guns are either illegal or heavily regulated - it puts the USA much higher on the chart.

The USA has, globally, very normal gun violence outside of the big cities.



posted on Jul, 15 2014 @ 03:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: seeker1963

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: nighthawk1954

How does this say it all?
All it says is that these people voted for him for cause he was black and from Chicago and they thought they were going to get some special attention. Cause that is all this video is about, african americans and chigago.
All they are crying about is the fact that THEY have not received any special attention, they don't care about anyone else. This whole video is all about them, and how they feel ignored.
I am willing to bet they weren't big fans of bush either. Do i need to find some videos of katrina victims saying bush was the worst president ever?
Sure i can find some with a group of people saying Clinton is the worst president ever.
Every president is the worst president every until the next guy gets in office. Cause they all suck and none of them care about the people, they are just there to be the puppet of the people that got them there


They have a right to be pissed, don't ya think?

Obama made all kind of promises to the black communities to get elected AND Re elected! Sure, they were dumb to believe him, but hey! At least they can't be called "Racists"!

Wouldn't they be racist if they only voted for him BECAUSE he is black?



posted on Oct, 2 2015 @ 09:28 AM
link   
October 2, 2015

RE: www.dnainfo.com...

President Obama's home town experienced 61 murders in the month of September 2015. Why does he stay silent about the atrocities occurring (literally) in his former backyard, but becomes so emotional when relatively few kids are shot in Oregon?

-cwm



posted on Oct, 2 2015 @ 12:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: Willtell
The thing about Obama is that he is too sensitive to being accused of catering to black America; therefore he has no urban policy, something that any white president probably would have done. Our cities are NOT ALL BLACK...

Our cities are falling apart and Obama shouldn’t be worried about what ignorant people will accuse him of.

This country needs an urban policy, something that will deal with the Detroit's, Chicago’s, the Newark’s, and other urban hell holes.

Obama has done nothing!
the problem with this is that cities are by definition a states issue. the national government can lead but it cannot dictate in that venue. And persuasion and leadership are hard. people who want the president to do something (if do something means getting legislation or making administrative regulations and such) are asking for authority to be taken away from states and mayors. What a president can properly do though is address bravely the true causes and persuade local leaders and local citizens to effect the necessary change of attitudes so that they themselves begin to positively effect the situation. on top of the social foundation of these problems in the community and home he can do things like persuade local leaders thier law enforcement policies are not working and get them to set ideology aside and do what works even if it is against thier ideology. He can also draw attention to violent video games and movies if he feels that is part of the problem. he can put significant pressure on everyone involved by coercive persuasive and shaming means. He can direct medical and scientific studies be done to affirm or dismiss the hypothesis that having violent garbage as your only source of mental stimulation for years and decades does something negative to your disposition and psychological well being. perhaps it does. perhaps it doesn't. but the mere act of doing that will have a surpressive effect on entertainment industry. And you know- perhaps all this progressive policy and attitude about families, mothers and fathers and social engineering to destroy traditional values, norms and families isn't so good either.



new topics

top topics



 
14
<< 1   >>

log in

join