Egypt (and everyone else) laughing at obama

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg

originally posted by: lakesidepark

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg
a reply to: lakesidepark

Translation: He's a sooper seekrit mus'lim terrorist!

I'm really starting to worry about this site. Hell, I'm starting to worry about the entire USA.

My response was considered 'political trolling and baiting'.

And this isn't?

I likewise am beginning to worry about this site. And the entire USA. When leftist trolling is condoned, and any dissenting opinions are silenced, here and in the larger MSM context, we are in trouble.

Other countries see it for what it is. A JOKE.

Your words were, frankly, disgusting. And yes, I am worried about the USA. That's not trolling, that's concern, especially as my wife is a US citizen. The amount of deranged hatred for Obama is revolting. "He's a terrorist!" (Not true.) "He's a Muslim!"! (Not true) "He's a Communist!" (Massively not true)
What next?

What is disgusting about what I spoke?

I did NOT say Obama was a terrorist. You said that. However Obama, by his and Hillary's actions in Libya and Syria, and in Iraq and Afghanistan, has aided and abetted terrorists.

I did NOT say Obama was a Muslim. YOU SAID that. However, it is true that his strongest childhood influences, and his closest childhood friends, and the school he attended, in the country he resided, were Muslim.

I did not say Obama was Communist. YOU SAID THAT. However he lists avowed Communists as his mentors in his own book.

Obama took a unique opportunity to not only heal race relations in this country, but to change the image of the USA across the world, and on both counts he has squandered that opportunity in spectacular fashion!

I spoke truth, and expressed opinions that may not be popular with the MSM, and with a lot of people in this country, but that in itself is NOT disgusting. What is disgusting is the extreme effort being exerted by the sympathizers of Obama to silence any dissenting opinion and to silence the statement of any factual information that supports those opinions.

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg

originally posted by: Vroomfondel

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: Vroomfondel

I remember recent history quite well. clinton inherited a healthy economy. In the last six months of his administration he was making drastic cuts in spending to limit the damages of his administrations failed economic policies. Unfortunately, that is what was left for the next administration to deal with. And it took its toll.

Perhaps you were transported here from an alternate reality?

Not an alternate reality. I just interpret the real one correctly.

Your graphic shows exactly what I said. The economy was beginning to improve prior to clinton. That upward trend is what clinton "inherited". You know, inherited... the obama theme song... And in clinton's first term you see the effects of his predecessors successful financial policies in full effect. Then in clinton's second term you begin to see the effects of his own failed economic policies. And by the end of his second term, as your graphic clearly shows, the economy was trending downward just about to go negative. If it were not for the drastic cuts in spending clinton made in the last six months of his second term the economy would have gone negative before he left office. That downward trend is what Bush inherited. Bush turned it around and things were beginning to trend upward again. That is what obama inherited. An economy that was in debt but trending up. obama promptly added 15% more debt just in his first term than Bush did in his entire administration.

obama has repeated the word "inherited" for seven years now. And the whole time liberals defended him by saying the same thing. Even after seven years in office he still cant take responsibility for the economy during his administration. He still says its Bush's fault.

Fine. If the previous administration has that much effect on the next then it must be true for everyone. So the good clinton economy was inherited. Just like the sinking Bush economy was inherited. And obama, according to your graphic, inherited an economy that was on an upswing. obama stopped the upswing and then took us farther into debt than we have ever been before.

Look at the graphic. The trends are right there in front of you. clinton inherited an economy trending up. After 8 years it was nearly negative. Bush inherited an economy trending down. After 8 years it was trending up. obama inherited an economy trending up, and turned it into a rock tied to an anchor.

"Inherited" works for everyone. Not just liberals.

Can I please ask you to turn your hate-level down a bit, the screeching is a bit annoying. Now. Some facts. Government policy does not always dictate what is happening in the economic world. More often than not it is driven by what is happening in said world. Clinton strove for balanced budgets and as you can see he by and large succeeded. GHWB was basically going off Reaganomics, which largely didn't work, except in the field of bankrupting the USSR via a spending war that they just couldn't afford. Clinton by the way did the unthinkable for the GOP and invested in infrastructure. It works.
Let's go back to the chart. See that huge drop in 2001-2002? That's the tax cuts plus the war in Afghanistan, which Dubya stuck on the credit card. Same in 2003, when there's the impact of the insanity that was Iraq, which will go down in history as the biggest foreign policy mistake since the Suez Crisis and which was also stuck on the credit card.
Let's now get to the bit that you are glossing over and ignoring - and I shall keep coming back and reminding you about this. TARP. Remember that? It's the massive bank bailout organised by Hank Paulson and signed into law by the then President Dubya when he was the lamest of lame ducks. Bush authorised it. Bush paid for it. Obama agreed to it, because it was that or nothing as far as the economy went, but it was Dubya's baby. That happened in the last months of 2008. The impact on the debt showed up the next year. So you can't blame Obama for it. You can't.

First, any hate or screeching is in your head. Its not hate, its only facts. It just doesnt agree with you so you call me racist, hater, obamaphobe, whatever. I dont care.

The body of your response seems to be of the opinion that government policy does not always dictate what is happening in the economic world. If that is true, why do liberals always blame Bush for the economy but not obama?

originally posted by: dukeofjive696969
This one is a beauty, op is slowly figuring out that again the video posted is edited and the translation is poor at best, but he keeps attacking obama.

Dont change ats, another one bites the dust.

I dont get the anger anymore, you guys get to vote for trump, oh the irony.

I said early on I knew it was fake. The first time I saw it I suspected it was fake and with very little effort proved that to be true. The video still does reflect, though with a decided sarcastic humor, the thoughts of many people in this country and around the world about our glorious leader.

This video will not make me attack obama nor will it make me stop. You knee-jerk guys are so quick in one direction and but slow as hell in the other...

originally posted by: Vroomfondel

originally posted by: dukeofjive696969
This one is a beauty, op is slowly figuring out that again the video posted is edited and the translation is poor at best, but he keeps attacking obama.

Dont change ats, another one bites the dust.

I dont get the anger anymore, you guys get to vote for trump, oh the irony.

I said early on I knew it was fake. The first time I saw it I suspected it was fake and with very little effort proved that to be true. The video still does reflect, though with a decided sarcastic humor, the thoughts of many people in this country and around the world about our glorious leader.

This video will not make me attack obama nor will it make me stop. You knee-jerk guys are so quick in one direction and but slow as hell in the other...

Yes I feel your pain too. As evidenced by the blank spots in this thread with my screen name on them....

Obama had the greatest opportunity any president ever had to improve racial relations in this country....instead he has unleashed hell upon the inner cities, on the streets, in the universities...

Obama, with his experience from youth with Islam, had a unique opportunity to quell the unrest in the Middle East and with relations in this country, instead he has unleased war and suffering across the world.

That war and suffering are now spilling over into Europe, across Asia, across Africa, and soon here too.

Populations that adored Obama in Europe now spit his name in disgust and horror.

Obama, with his economic policies and his war on health care, has further destroyed opportunities for the poorest among us. And disproportionately so for the black communities!

Obama did ALL of that, not right-wingers!

For the record Obama could be my brother and I would STILL be disgusted with his actions in office!

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: Vroomfondel

Let's talk about crap that's repeated ad nauseam:

"King Obama" "King Obama" "King Obama" "Obama hates America" "Obama the Kenyan" "Obama the Muslim" "Obama hates America" "King Obama" "King Obama"

Obama supporters were saying "Yes we can" for a matter of months — 7 years ago — and you've been saying the above for 7 years since?

king obama has yet, after seven years, to pass a balanced budget plan, yet he can blame Bush for the current economy at the drop of a hat...any hat.

Under king obama national debt increased 15% more in only his first term than it did during the entire 8 year GWB administration. Clinton didn't create a great economy. He inherited one from Reagan and Bush. It was the clinton administrations failed economic policies that led to later downturns.

There were no balanced budgets under Reagan or either Bush either let alone surpluses. Reagan cut taxes (Bush 41 lied about "no new taxes") and increased spending (Reagan lied about reducing the size of government like every other recent Republican) and by any measure other than non-adjusted dollars (read: raw dollar amount) Reagan was the "king" of debt increase. Just look at percentage increase or even better, GDP to debt ratio. Speaking of GDP, the annual percentage growth in GDP ranking goes in this order: Clinton, Reagan, Obama, Bush 41, Bush 43. How about something like change in median family income by President? Ranking: Clinton, Reagan, Bush 43, Obama, Bush 41.

By practically any commonly cited measure, the Clinton years were the best and the Bush years were worse than the Obama years. Here's the reality: considering Presidents going back to JFK anyway, the economy has performed better under Democrats, it's well established and researched. But why? The conclusion of a forensic analysis by Princeton economists was actually that it had less to do with either party's policy and far more to do with luck. (see Binder and Watson)

At BEST you're claim about Obama "destroying the economy" is misguided hyperbole and at worst, it's an outright lie.

Yes, middle America got their s**t riled before king obama took office. Its not because we are racist, its because we knew this was going to happen. You don't elect a world leader because its "time for a black president". You don't elect a world leaders because its "time for a woman president". Skin color and gender are not a basis for election to the highest off ice the land. Conservatives seem to understand that fairly simple piece of logic. You elect the best person for the job, regardless of who it is. Its ok to vote for a black man. Its to vote for a woman. But that should be incidental to the vote, not the main reason.

So the popularity of birtherism stemmed from clairvoyance and not because 'he's a Kenyan Muslim Manchurian Candidate created by the Muslim Brotherhood!?' Funny how this crystal ball was completely opaque when Bush 43 was elected TWICE. What were his qualifications again? His last name?

Yea, conservatives vote for the best person for the job.

Trump is a bloviating attention whore with no depth. His appeal seems to largely be that "he's an outsider!" who will appeal to any baser instinct or prejudice (he's also gonna build a database and close down mosques because who actually cares about privacy or religious freedom). What about Carson? He's even less qualified and more of a wingnut.

Get your s**t together liberals, and maybe, just maybe, we can scrape enough votes together to get the right person into office for a change.

Can you see the relevance of the thread yet...? Or are you still wearing the "attack the republicans" goggles?

If you were honestly concerned about the 'world laughing at us' than maybe you should take a look at how the rest of the world views the current GOP front runners. The top two are two of the three biggest clowns in the running (the third being Ted Cruz).

Who here is really wearing partisan blinders?

But you see, there is a difference. I am some guy on a public forum. king obama is president of the US. When I repeat something ad nauseam its just some guy talking on a forum. When the POTUS does it, its a sad reflection of how bad off our political system really is. I expect to hear ad nauseam bashing in forums to some degree, regardless of who it is. But for a world leader to do it...

Look at it this way, when some guy makes a questionable comment about something, lets say nibiru, or faked moon landings, it sounds like a joke and most of the time no one takes it seriously. Every once in a while someone will come up with some information or a theory that actually bears some investigation. The flag blowing in the breeze on the moon, the questionable shadows in moon pictures, etc. Some people believe it, some dont, some just dismiss it without the benefit of conscious thought. Its not big deal. But when a world leader says something like, "We sent an astronaut to the sun. We went at night because it wasnt as hot." He sounds like an idiot and it amazes the entire civilized world that someone so stupid could be in a position of authority. That is the way many people see obama.

Is this video fake? Of course it is. But it still reflects the way many people see our clown in chief.

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: Vroomfondel

Looks like you would have had just enough time to edit your OP when you found out it was fake, guess you couldn't be bothered. Might as well leave the misleading OP up I guess.

I have read the comments, one thing I haven't noticed was any other source about the worlds opinion of him. Just more of your opinion on what the world thinks.
www.pewresearch.org...

Bush existed, he was the president before Obama, we HAVE to discuss him.
He handed over a damn near depression and two wars, of course the debt increased. Bush rang up all the cost and then handed Barry the bill.

Obama hasn't been great by any means, but hardly worse then Bush.

I didnt need to edit my op, I always at least suspected it was fake and it took very little effort to prove that. And it wasnt misleading, I acknowledged that in the discussion. The op served a purpose. If you bothered to read the comments you might have discovered that.

Please dont bother citing statistics on public polls. I worked phone polls. I know how they work and how easily you can get whatever answer you want to your questions. I hope you also know how easy that is.

If I had to choose one president today and had Bush and obama as options, there is no question it would be Bush. I cant imagine how anyone could think otherwise after the last seven years. There has to be a limit to what liberals will overlook. Servicement gunned down in recruiting stations on US soil because king obama doesnt think they need guns and he calls it "work place violence." HIllary says muslims are "...peaceful and tolerant and have nothing to do with terrorism." When some guy in a forum says something like that its just some guy. When a world leader or world leader wanna-be makes a statement like that the whole world notices. Not that most average guys walking down the street would ever say anything so stupid, but hey...lets allow for the possibility.

a reply to: Vroomfondel

"Never play chess with a pigeon. It doesnt matter how good you are the bird will still sh!t on the board and strut around like it won the game."

I like that sig.
BTW....didn't Putin say that about Obama?
It is about what other world leaders think of him!

Yes, I know the video is fake. Get over that.

It is fake but still reflects, with a fair dose of comic sarcasm, how so many people here and around the world feel about our glorious leader. Someone had the thought before the video existed. It doesnt take much to figure out why. This video is just a comedic reflection of how a lot of people feel.

He does look like a wimp compared to Putin. And we have all seen (at least I hope you have) video of Putin slamming king obama in numerous venues. And its not just Putin and its not just world leaders. Its people - a lot of people - who think that way.

We are fighting a battle against terror more than we are fighting against terrorists. Think about that. What is the most valuable weapon a terrorist has? The answer is terror. Now ask yourself this question and give yourself an honest answer:

Does obama make you feel safe? Does obama make you feel like our military has a solid skilled warrior in chief? Does obama come across on the world stage as a leader or a confused second string sophomore quarterback in over his head?

originally posted by: lakesidepark
a reply to: Vroomfondel

"Never play chess with a pigeon. It doesnt matter how good you are the bird will still sh!t on the board and strut around like it won the game."

I like that sig.
BTW....didn't Putin say that about Obama?
It is about what other world leaders think of him!

You beat me to it. See above.

a reply to: Vroomfondel

It is fake but still reflects, with a fair dose of comic sarcasm, how so many people here and around the world feel about our glorious leader. Someone had the thought before the video existed. It doesnt take much to figure out why. This video is just a comedic reflection of how a lot of people feel.

Have you considered that it may make for great comedy because the very "reflection of how a lot of people feel" is laughable?

Real good comedy, in my opinion, is rooted in a bit of truth. But it uses embellishment and silliness to make it entertaining.

The feeling towards Obama is rooted in a bit of truth, but people actually believe, and perpetuate, the embellishments and silliness.

This video plays those people for fools in the end.

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Vroomfondel

It is fake but still reflects, with a fair dose of comic sarcasm, how so many people here and around the world feel about our glorious leader. Someone had the thought before the video existed. It doesnt take much to figure out why. This video is just a comedic reflection of how a lot of people feel.

Have you considered that it may make for great comedy because the very "reflection of how a lot of people feel" is laughable?

Real good comedy, in my opinion, is rooted in a bit of truth. But it uses embellishment and silliness to make it entertaining.

The feeling towards Obama is rooted in a bit of truth, but people actually believe, and perpetuate, the embellishments and silliness.

This video plays those people for fools in the end.

Humor has some truth to it. You choose to ignore that and say it makes people who believe humor has some truth to it look bad. Whatever. Your logic, if that is what you call it, is laughable. If you do not wish to advance the conversation please feel free to stop responding. All you ever seem to do is follow my threads trying to derail them with nitpicking and nonsense. You add very little, if anything, of value to any conversation I have seen you take part in. The only thing you seem interested in doing is finding ways to pick apart things you have a fundamental disagreement with. If I was to dedicate as much time to picking your posts apart as you do to mine, you would need therapy when I was done with you.

originally posted by: Vroomfondel

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Vroomfondel

It is fake but still reflects, with a fair dose of comic sarcasm, how so many people here and around the world feel about our glorious leader. Someone had the thought before the video existed. It doesnt take much to figure out why. This video is just a comedic reflection of how a lot of people feel.

Have you considered that it may make for great comedy because the very "reflection of how a lot of people feel" is laughable?

Real good comedy, in my opinion, is rooted in a bit of truth. But it uses embellishment and silliness to make it entertaining.

The feeling towards Obama is rooted in a bit of truth, but people actually believe, and perpetuate, the embellishments and silliness.

This video plays those people for fools in the end.

Humor has some truth to it. You choose to ignore that and say it makes people who believe humor has some truth to it look bad. Whatever. Your logic, if that is what you call it, is laughable. If you do not wish to advance the conversation please feel free to stop responding. All you ever seem to do is follow my threads trying to derail them with nitpicking and nonsense. You add very little, if anything, of value to any conversation I have seen you take part in. The only thing you seem interested in doing is finding ways to pick apart things you have a fundamental disagreement with. If I was to dedicate as much time to picking your posts apart as you do to mine, you would need therapy when I was done with you.

Humor is also a good way to shed light on a subject mater, and there is nothing wrong with that. In this case, the humor belies a more critical situation, and is a good way to start a conversation about a serious subject.

And I also have noted the pattern in the poster you replied to...its not isolated to you either I assure you, its seems to be a common response from the above.

a reply to: Vroomfondel

Your graphic shows exactly what I said. The economy was beginning to improve prior to clinton. That upward trend is what clinton "inherited". You know, inherited... the obama theme song... And in clinton's first term you see the effects of his predecessors successful financial policies in full effect. Then in clinton's second term you begin to see the effects of his own failed economic policies. And by the end of his second term, as your graphic clearly shows, the economy was trending downward just about to go negative. If it were not for the drastic cuts in spending clinton made in the last six months of his second term the economy would have gone negative before he left office. That downward trend is what Bush inherited. Bush turned it around and things were beginning to trend upward again. That is what obama inherited. An economy that was in debt but trending up. obama promptly added 15% more debt just in his first term than Bush did in his entire administration.

As with just about everything you've said in this thread, the above is almost entirely incorrect. What happened was the dot com bubble collapsed and then 9/11 happened. Those two thing were primarily responsible for kicking off a short recession which was then followed by a modest recovery. I remember it quite vividly because like me, most of of my friends are IT professionals. Almost overnight it seemed like half the people I knew went from making money hand over fist to being unemployed and then within a year, everyone was back to work again because though the speculation had been out of control, technology related industries were still growing. This growth was part of what was being referred to as "the long boom" and actually it was the second "long boom," the first being from about the end of WWII to 1973 when the STHF (mounting Vietnam War debt, end of the gold standard under Bretton Woods, OPEC quadrupling the price of crude, etc).

Then in 2007 the housing bubble burst and back we went into recession.

Fine. If the previous administration has that much effect on the next then it must be true for everyone. So the good clinton economy was inherited. Just like the sinking Bush economy was inherited. And obama, according to your graphic, inherited an economy that was on an upswing. obama stopped the upswing and then took us farther into debt than we have ever been before.

Look at the graphic. The trends are right there in front of you. clinton inherited an economy trending up. After 8 years it was nearly negative. Bush inherited an economy trending down. After 8 years it was trending up. obama inherited an economy trending up, and turned it into a rock tied to an anchor.

"Inherited" works for everyone. Not just liberals.

Nonsense. Obama didn't "inherit" an economy trending up anymore than Bush 43 "inherited" an economy trending up. In fact they both came into office in the midst of speculative bubbles bursting, crashing markets and recession. Obama just happened to come into office during the largest economic downtown since the Great Depression.

If you were actually reading what I was saying instead of making straw man arguments, you'd see that I not only disagree with your statements about economic performance (which were wrong), I disagree with the entire premise of your argument. Here's what I said at the end of my last response about the economy:

Here's the reality: considering Presidents going back to JFK anyway, the economy has performed better under Democrats, it's well established and researched. But why? The conclusion of a forensic analysis by Princeton economists was actually that it had less to do with either party's policy and far more to do with luck.

I'll say it again. Your claim about Obama "destroying the economy" is complete BS.

a reply to: Vroomfondel

Humor has some truth to it. You choose to ignore that

No. That's actually exactly what I said. Did I not say: "Real good comedy, in my opinion, is rooted in a bit of truth"?

If you do not wish to advance the conversation please feel free to stop responding. All you ever seem to do is follow my threads trying to derail them with nitpicking and nonsense. You add very little, if anything, of value to any conversation I have seen you take part in. The only thing you seem interested in doing is finding ways to pick apart things you have a fundamental disagreement with. If I was to dedicate as much time to picking your posts apart as you do to mine, you would need therapy when I was done with you.

Someone with a sense of humor would see the "comedy" in what you just posted.

a reply to: lakesidepark

You hinted - heavily - that he was a muslim. And then you said something profoundly disgusting about his mother. So yes, I am unsurprised that the mods took your post down.

originally posted by: Vroomfondel

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg

originally posted by: Vroomfondel

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: Vroomfondel

I remember recent history quite well. clinton inherited a healthy economy. In the last six months of his administration he was making drastic cuts in spending to limit the damages of his administrations failed economic policies. Unfortunately, that is what was left for the next administration to deal with. And it took its toll.

Perhaps you were transported here from an alternate reality?

Not an alternate reality. I just interpret the real one correctly.

Your graphic shows exactly what I said. The economy was beginning to improve prior to clinton. That upward trend is what clinton "inherited". You know, inherited... the obama theme song... And in clinton's first term you see the effects of his predecessors successful financial policies in full effect. Then in clinton's second term you begin to see the effects of his own failed economic policies. And by the end of his second term, as your graphic clearly shows, the economy was trending downward just about to go negative. If it were not for the drastic cuts in spending clinton made in the last six months of his second term the economy would have gone negative before he left office. That downward trend is what Bush inherited. Bush turned it around and things were beginning to trend upward again. That is what obama inherited. An economy that was in debt but trending up. obama promptly added 15% more debt just in his first term than Bush did in his entire administration.

obama has repeated the word "inherited" for seven years now. And the whole time liberals defended him by saying the same thing. Even after seven years in office he still cant take responsibility for the economy during his administration. He still says its Bush's fault.

Fine. If the previous administration has that much effect on the next then it must be true for everyone. So the good clinton economy was inherited. Just like the sinking Bush economy was inherited. And obama, according to your graphic, inherited an economy that was on an upswing. obama stopped the upswing and then took us farther into debt than we have ever been before.

Look at the graphic. The trends are right there in front of you. clinton inherited an economy trending up. After 8 years it was nearly negative. Bush inherited an economy trending down. After 8 years it was trending up. obama inherited an economy trending up, and turned it into a rock tied to an anchor.

"Inherited" works for everyone. Not just liberals.

Can I please ask you to turn your hate-level down a bit, the screeching is a bit annoying. Now. Some facts. Government policy does not always dictate what is happening in the economic world. More often than not it is driven by what is happening in said world. Clinton strove for balanced budgets and as you can see he by and large succeeded. GHWB was basically going off Reaganomics, which largely didn't work, except in the field of bankrupting the USSR via a spending war that they just couldn't afford. Clinton by the way did the unthinkable for the GOP and invested in infrastructure. It works.
Let's go back to the chart. See that huge drop in 2001-2002? That's the tax cuts plus the war in Afghanistan, which Dubya stuck on the credit card. Same in 2003, when there's the impact of the insanity that was Iraq, which will go down in history as the biggest foreign policy mistake since the Suez Crisis and which was also stuck on the credit card.
Let's now get to the bit that you are glossing over and ignoring - and I shall keep coming back and reminding you about this. TARP. Remember that? It's the massive bank bailout organised by Hank Paulson and signed into law by the then President Dubya when he was the lamest of lame ducks. Bush authorised it. Bush paid for it. Obama agreed to it, because it was that or nothing as far as the economy went, but it was Dubya's baby. That happened in the last months of 2008. The impact on the debt showed up the next year. So you can't blame Obama for it. You can't.

First, any hate or screeching is in your head. Its not hate, its only facts. It just doesnt agree with you so you call me racist, hater, obamaphobe, whatever. I dont care.

The body of your response seems to be of the opinion that government policy does not always dictate what is happening in the economic world. If that is true, why do liberals always blame Bush for the economy but not obama?

Address. My. Facts. TARP - who signed it into law? Who? Are you so blind in your senseless hate that you cannot see the truth?

a reply to: Vroomfondel

Seriously? If you had a choice between the man who got the USA into a senseless war in Iraq that has destroyed the region, based on a stack of lies, and the guy who said that it was a stupid war, you'd vote for Bush???? Seriously?
How depressing.

a reply to: lakesidepark

I'm not sure you understand how popular Obama is here in Europe. He's the anti-Bush. Which is a good thing. The hate is strong with you as well.

As far as I'm aware, Obama is seen as alright here in Aus. Not amazing, but certainly better than several of his predecessors (notably Dubya and Reagan, though I also personally dislike Clinton.)

Here's what the "JOKE" is: Your entire political system. Ours as well, sadly. Most are. But here's a list of some of the bigger names in US politics that I'm aware of.


H. Clinton - Utter shill. Liar. Really wants to be president, and will do practically anything for that goal.
Trump - Troll, Grandstander, Bigot, etc.
Carson - Nuts.
Obama - Ineffectual.
Dubya Boosh - My GOD, what a failure. And a war criminal, that's sort of important, eh?
Bill Clinton - Signed NAFTA, which is why most of the US's industries have been exported to China.
Reagan - Created Reaganomics, also known as Supply Side economics and "Doesn't Work" economics.

Yes, Obama is far from a savior, but he's a hell of a lot better than you could have had, and a hell of a lot better than what you did. Stop circle jerking over the hatred of a single man and realise the truth: The entire system has been #$!*ED since JFK died.

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg
a reply to: Vroomfondel

Seriously? If you had a choice between the man who got the USA into a senseless war in Iraq that has destroyed the region, based on a stack of lies, and the guy who said that it was a stupid war, you'd vote for Bush???? Seriously?
How depressing.

Lets not forget that Bush had a lot of people telling him the war in iraq was necessary:

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
- Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998


"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force -- if necessary -- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members ... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real..."
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003

Lets put the blame where it belongs. If you say it was Bush's responsibility because it was on his watch, then you must say the same about obama and everything that happened on his watch.