Signs accumulate that liberals are embarrassed by Obama - The tides have turned

reply to post by campanionator


Here is some reality:

Add President Clinton to the long list of people who deserve a share of the blame for the housing bubble and bust. A recently re-exposed document shows that his administration went to ridiculous lengths to increase the national homeownership rate. It promoted paper-thin downpayments and pushed for ways to get lenders to give mortgage loans to first-time buyers with shaky financing and incomes. It’s clear now that the erosion of lending standards pushed prices up by increasing demand, and later led to waves of defaults by people who never should have bought a home in the first place.

www.businessweek.com...

Which goes back to Frank, and Schummer saying nothing to see there, and did not the Bush administration warn there were problems?

Why yes they did.

Then we add:

By the time the affiliation restrictions in the Glass–Steagall Act were repealed through the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act in 1999, many commentators argued Glass-Steagall was already “dead.”[4] Most notably, Citibank’s 1998 affiliation with Salomon Smith Barney, one of the largest US securities firms, was permitted under the Federal Reserve Board’s then existing interpretation of the Glass-Steagall Act.[5] President Bill Clinton publicly declared, "The Glass-Steagall Act is no longer relevant.

en.wikipedia.org...

President Bill Clinton publicly declared, "The Glass-Steagall Act is no longer relevant

The left owns the financial crisis and the abysmal "recovery".

reply to post by campanionator

Hey, thats a neat trick there. So if Romney wins in a few weeks, anything that happens for HIS first 9 months in the economy isn't his fault either? No matter his own decisions...or those of Congress... Any good OR bad until the end of Obama's carry over fiscal policies are entirely outside Romney's responsibility to take blame or credit for, right?

It works for both or it doesn't work at all. No Way that kind of fuzzy math and creative playing with the dates slides for Obama and wouldn't apply for Romney or the Republican who takes over in 2016, whichever comes first.

You really sure we want to go down that road of free months for Presidents? I'll give them a few months to sort out the last guys most serious piles of garbage. However, if things keep getting WORSE? Oh, he owns it and his 4 year term average is around 8.9 to Bush and Clinton's 5.2%. That;s a blue ribbon loser and still would be even if we gave him *ALL* of 2009 as a freebie. It still hung around 9% most of his Presidency.

By the way.... 300 Billion and change from TARP was still unallocated and free to RETURN if Obama thought it was a bad idea. He not only didn't return it to the Treasury, he demanded Bush not spend any more of it before he could be inaugurated and then proceeded to blow the rest while lining up his his orgy of spending in Stimulus 1.

I honestly wouldn't trust him doing the budget for my old semi-truck. Far too complex I think.

With that debate performance from obama
it is justified.

Obama showed himself to be only a good teleprompter reader.

Obama is not.true presidential material and now the intelligent democrats
are finally starting to see that.

Obama will be a one term president and i am starting to like mitt more.and more.

He will be a.good president. Finally people are smartening up to obamas BS

reply to post by neo96


To be fair, both parties own it and the problems, in essence, trace back to the George Washington administration and the initial furor between Hamilton and Jefferson.

Everything since has simply been reiteration of their initial disagreement about how to interpret the Federalist papers and whether or not the United States would be agrarian in nature or industrial.

~Heff

reply to post by campanionator

UR,,,, Obama's fiscal policies did not take into effect until September 30 2009

….And since then:

reply to post by Hefficide

To be fair, both parties own it and the problems, in essence, trace back to the George Washington administration and the initial furor between Hamilton and Jefferson.

Everything since has simply been reiteration of their initial disagreement about how to interpret the Federalist papers and whether or not the United States would be agrarian in nature or industrial.

To be fair, there is enough blame to go around but only one man has called the shots over the last 4 years.

Every 4 years the POTUS must account for his record of achievement or record of failure.

The time has come for Obama to be held to account for his record.

reply to post by seabag


As long as we're being fair. There's no reason to believe that McCain would have fared much better. The inertia was already there and the economy was in freefall when Obama took office.

In all point of fact, the inertia is there, now, to dictate how the next four years will likely go - regardless of who comes to power. The only way to effect inertia is by 'extreme reaction. And we all know that if any administration, Republican, Democrat, or third party moves to take extreme action of any kind the backlash would be profound and probably nearly universal.

Personally? I find it hard to blame either party for 30 years of Americans living with a credit/income ratio that was absurdly unbalanced. Add in the fact that we all loved the period where the bubbles expanded. Nothing like buying a $40,000.00 house and watching its worth go up by 25% per year. We ate it up, even though it totally violated logic and common sense.

We had the party, now the check has arrived... and here we are... all expecting the other guy to pay. I'm one of the few liberals on the boards who will say "I'm ready to pay my share". In fairness, I will add, there are few conservatives here who will agree to doing so.

It no longer matters who is to blame. It's time to pay up, fix things, and get it right. Otherwise? Well... it's just the same old, same old and we'll continue to descend from a first world nation into a second world one.

~Heff

reply to post by popcornmafia

With that debate performance from obama
it is justified.

Obama showed himself to be only a good teleprompter reader.

What was funny as hell to me was during the Republican SC debate Gingrich said he would debate president Obama in the 'Lincoln-Douglas' format and allow him to use his teleprompter.

Poetic justice for a man deemed the best orator of our time!

Obama is not.true presidential material and now the intelligent democrats
are finally starting to see that.

Obama will be a one term president and i am starting to like mitt more.and more.

He will be a.good president. Finally people are smartening up to obamas BS

He’s proven that he’s not fit for duty and at least some Kool Aid drinkers are coming around to that realization finally.

I've known for quite sometime that the really hardcore left leaning folks have been disappointed with the president because he has given in to the Republicans so many times and I agree with them.

But to say the "tides have turned" that is foolish in my opinion.

reply to post by Hefficide

I agree to a point but only to a point. When you look at the BLS figures going back further as my President's thread might show or just to the BLS site itself, there is a clear indicator of leadership change for some of it. I'm not sure quite how...but 'Ol Mr Peanut (Carter) managed to do real damage to the economy and other aspects, yet had little major effect on employment. At least not like came under Reagan for a bit or Daddy Bush and Obama. He seemed a decent influence there...even if someone having to buy a house under his leadership was hurt badly by what Peanut Power did to the interest rates up there in orbit somewhere.

Then we look at Reagan who was hit and miss and truly was up and down for %......where no such qualms can be said about Daddy Bush. He might have been good at retaking a little country or two..or three..in his time in Office, but he couldn't run a Taco Stand any better than Obama. Those two have a lot in common, really..and I'm not even half kidding the more that thought settles. They do.

Anyway.. Clinton was Midas when it came to the economy...whatever we each think of him as a person. The numbers all show it...we all knew it and felt it as we lived it...and it's one thing no one can take from him. He was (grumble ...forces self to say it...) a good President.

Baby Bush was like Carter in that he did the economy no favors but didn't whack unemployment outside the area around the start of the Iraq war. That scared business and got jobs frozen for a bit and I recall that too.

Then Obama, like Daddy Bush.... You wouldn't even need to KNOW what years America elect's it's President's for either man. One from each party, as it happens. Just a look at the numbers and the change is THAT clear in their cases.

Sometimes, who is President and their leadership (Or LACK of it, in this case) can effect numbers in direct ways, IMO.

Originally posted by JiggyPotamus


This is what will happen if Romney wins. Things will get worse, and all the republicans will blame Obama. But what happens when Obama tries to blame Bush for some of our problems now? The republicans aren't having that. Hypocrites. Obama has done more constructive things, or attempted to, than Bush ever did.

I think you nailed it actually, even though you didn't get the Irony , in what you said. First you have already "blamed" Romney, for NOTHING he has done. Hes not the President. Second, you subscribe to the view, that MANY Obama supports, continue to subscribe to. EVERYTHING that has gone wrong under this Presidents Administration, is Bushes fault. You cant call Republicans, Hypocrites, without looking in the mirror, when it comes to the Blame game. Your "version", of what hes done right, is just the other half of the coin, since MANY people, Democrats, Republicans, and Independents, obviously disagree with what Diehard Obama supporters are saying.

reply to post by Hefficide

As long as we're being fair. There's no reason to believe that McCain would have fared much better. The inertia was already there and the economy was in freefall when Obama took office.

We’ll never know.

IMO, McCain likely wouldn’t have fared much better but that has more to do with his liberal, big government tendencies; he didn’t even pretend to be conservative; hence the false left/right paradigm charge.

In all point of fact, the inertia is there, now, to dictate how the next four years will likely go - regardless of who comes to power. The only way to effect inertia is by 'extreme reaction. And we all know that if any administration, Republican, Democrat, or third party moves to take extreme action of any kind the backlash would be profound and probably nearly universal.

While I agree with the “extreme action” part I must disagree with the direction of the inertia. The falling unemployment numbers are a farce. I own a business, work for another, and know many business owners. Nobody is spending money because we don’t know what the future will bring. The next 4 years are far too uncertain for anyone to spend money now. If I’m wrong about the uncertainty then please explain the “prepper” movement; the ultimate reaction to the uncertainty we all feel.

We had the party, now the check has arrived... and here we are... all expecting the other guy to pay. I'm one of the few liberals on the boards who will say "I'm ready to pay my share". In fairness, I will add, there are few conservatives here who will agree to doing so.

I’ve been paying my share and the shares of many others. 46% of U.S. households paid no federal income tax in 2011, according to the Tax Policy Center, a centrist think tank in Washington!

It no longer matters who is to blame. It's time to pay up, fix things, and get it right. Otherwise? Well... it's just the same old, same old and we'll continue to descend from a first world nation into a second world one.

I agree. However, I don’t agree Obama is the man to make that happen. His lack of leadership and complete incompetence as POTUS has been evident over the past 4 years. Romney has at least turned a profit in his life.

Originally posted by seabag
reply to post by popcornmafia

 

With that debate performance from obama
it is justified.

Obama showed himself to be only a good teleprompter reader.

What was funny as hell to me was during the Republican SC debate Gingrich said he would debate president Obama in the 'Lincoln-Douglas' format and allow him to use his teleprompter.

Poetic justice for a man deemed the best orator of our time!

Obama is not.true presidential material and now the intelligent democrats
are finally starting to see that.

Obama will be a one term president and i am starting to like mitt more.and more.

He will be a.good president. Finally people are smartening up to obamas BS

He’s proven that he’s not fit for duty and at least some Kool Aid drinkers are coming around to that realization finally.

Oh I'll give ya one better. I'd caught some coverage on Fox 'the morning after' and they were doing random street interviews and asking people if it was fair that Obama wasn't allowed to use his teleprompter. It wasn't the stupidity of asking that which got me...it's the MSM. Newstainment is the order of the day. It was the better than half who said it WAS wrong to deny Obama use of his teleprompter during the ..ahem...live debate.

There are times when the brief periods I watch TV anymore just remind me why it IS so infrequent now. That level of pure, total and unmitigated stupidity was breathtaking to behold. A teleprompter...at a debate. Umm.. Doh!

reply to post by sonnny1


That's a circular argument that only history can take us away from....

One side blames Obama, then the other side blames Bush 43.

The other side then blames Clinton, which is replied to with "Reagan did it".

Which then gets replied to with "No, Carter did it."

And before it we're passing through FDR to Coolidge, to Harding.... and so forth.

The fact of the matter is this. We've got a broken machine and we keep blaming the guy we hire to operate that machine for the problem. Not the machine itself ( Our Government ) nor the mechanics we pay to fix these problems ( The House and Senate ).

It's almost like it were by design. We blame the guy who has an eight year MAX shelf life - while all the guys without term limits and who work as career "mechanics" stay under the radar.

Hrm...

~Heff

reply to post by seabag

hence the false left/right paradigm charge.

Everyone knows from the back and forth on these boards between the right and left there are two distinctly competing ideologies.

One need look no further that a pesky piece of paper that easily explains why they are perceived one in the same.

The constitution.

Originally posted by popcornmafia
With that debate performance from obama
Obama is not.true presidential material and now the intelligent democrats
are finally starting to see that.

This is one Benefit from the Debates that I never expected.
All of these desperate Rombots Collecting in a circle, and Mutually Satisfying each other.
Reminds me of Clowns in a Clown Car.

reply to post by Hefficide


Your right Heff, for 99.9% of it.

But........

Diehard Obama supporters are ALREADY blaming Romney, and hes not even the President !



That goes beyond the circular pattern..........

reply to post by neo96

Everyone knows from the back and forth on these boards between the right and left there are two distinctly competing ideologies.

One need look no further that a pesky piece of paper that easily explains why they are perceived one in the same.

The constitution.

I know there IS a right and left; most certainly. I’m much farther right than Romney.

What I meant was when the supposed “RIGHT” throws up guys like McCain (and in all fairnesss…Romney) this blurs the line.

Is NDAA a conservative position? Did McCain vote for NDAA? Did Paul Ryan?

The fact is, today’s Republican party isn’t “the right” they’re actually much closer to the center. I stand opposed to Republicans on many issues because I don’t think they swing far enough right!

Maybe we disagree here…that’s OK.

reply to post by Tw0Sides

This is one Benefit from the Debates that I never expected.
All of these desperate Rombots Collecting in a circle, and Mutually Satisfying each other.
Reminds me of Clowns in a Clown Car.

You could have just said, “I have nothing to add to this debate” and saved some typing!

I posed 2 questions in the OP….maybe you could be the first to answer.

1) What do you think he can legitimately do to salvage this campaign?

2) What do you think he’ll actually do to salvage his campaign.

reply to post by seabag

What I meant was when the supposed “RIGHT” throws up guys like McCain (and in all fairnesss…Romney) this blurs the line.

Guess I misunderstood because can't really argue that the GOP panders to moderates/independents by throwing candidates like McCain, and Romney.(R.I.N.O.'s.).