@quantumushroom

>>> You think Obama failed because he wasn't liberal enough, is that correct? I saw no vision, just a clever media-protected imago who freely admitted he acted as a mirror or canvas for everyone to project their ideas onto him. Middle East failures are no surprise. He's an appeaser, his offered olive branch to the turbaned vermin was predictably shoved up his you-know-where.

No. I think he failed because he has no balls. He has done everything in half measures, trying to please everyone. If he just pushed his own agenda balls-to-the-wall, he'd be getting a lot more respect from the rest of the world, and Americans too. I think Americans value a strong President even more than one who shares their point of view. On that count, Obama is a ridiculous failure.

>>> It would do more good than fake solar companies. Special thanks to the current idiot Energy Secretary for admitting out loud what the rest of us already knew.

No, it wouldn't. A pipeline taking oil OUT of the country, including American oil couldn't possibly help. Other sources of energy that are used within the country could. In any case, neither choice has any real effect on gas prices.

>>> Where were you with this warning before the scamulus began (and yes, Bush conceived it but Obama supercharged it).

I said it several times back in '08. I may have even said it here.

>>> Back to leadership: a real leader can take it. FDR's scamulus was also a failure and revisionist history hides its lack of effectiveness, but at least FDR said of his enemies, "I welcome their hatred."

That's what I'm saying. Guy's not a leader. He's not even a speaker. He's a speech reader. He did a great job of that during the election, and hasn't done much else since.

My cards on the table: I think Obama is a horrible leader, one of the worst I've ever seen in elected office. I thought he had great vision before, and I liked his early actions in the Middle East, but he seems to lack the balls to do anything decisive. Even if he made strong decisions that I disagreed with I'd respect him more than I do. On that count, Bush was better.

>>> You think Obama failed because he wasn't liberal enough, is that correct? I saw no vision, just a clever media-protected imago who freely admitted he acted as a mirror or canvas for everyone to project their ideas onto him. Middle East failures are no surprise. He's an appeaser, his offered olive branch to the turbaned vermin was predictably shoved up his you-know-where.

What good would the Keystone Pipeline do the US? All it does is remove oil from the States to sell abroad. How could this possibly be a good thing?

>>> It would do more good than fake solar companies. Special thanks to the current idiot Energy Secretary for admitting out loud what the rest of us already knew.

Assuming "scamulous" means "stimulus", then yes, of course it failed. Nothing would have succeeded.

>>> Where were you with this warning before the scamulus began (and yes, Bush conceived it but Obama supercharged it).

And if he hadn't given a stimulus package, the Republicans would have jumped down his throat for doing nothing.

>>> Back to leadership: a real leader can take it. FDR's scamulus was also a failure and revisionist history hides its lack of effectiveness, but at least FDR said of his enemies, "I welcome their hatred."

But per your last comment, "the guy in charge at the time the fit hits the shan gets the blame", so you accept then that the entire worldwide financial crisis is Bush's fault anyway. Deal.

It's a tad more complicated than that. Bush Hatred was a daily staple of the libmedia diet and people were naturally disenchanted with negative-only libmedia reporting on the wars. I'm not sure if Bush got the lion's share of the blame for the Follies of '08...he does deserve blame for the initial scamuli, as well as acting like a liberal with a few conservative tendencies.

The seeds of the banking crisis were sowed by government ineptitude and corruption. Few people take huge risks with their own money, so when a socialist government funds a "Free Houses for Poor People Who Can't Afford Them Act" program and promises banks "risk-free" support of loans and investments to do so, people act accordingly.

Europe has European socialism to blame for its follies. Someone's gotta pay for all that free honey, and when there are more freeloaders than worker bees the hive collapses.

May the majority of bewildered voters not be so readily fooled this year, even if it means electing a stiff like Romney. Welcome back stability after His Earness and his planned chaos. And Barney Frank belongs in an orange jumpsuit for his role in the financial crises.












>> ^messenger:

My cards on the table: I think Obama is a horrible leader, one of the worst I've ever seen in elected office. I thought he had great vision before, and I liked his early actions in the Middle East, but he seems to lack the balls to do anything decisive. Even if he made strong decisions that I disagreed with I'd respect him more than I do. On that count, Bush was better.
What good would the Keystone Pipeline do the US? All it does is remove oil from the States to sell abroad. How could this possibly be a good thing?
Assuming "scamulous" means "stimulus", then yes, of course it failed. Nothing would have succeeded. And if he hadn't given a stimulus package, the Republicans would have jumped down his throat for doing nothing. But per your last comment, "the guy in charge at the time the fit hits the shan gets the blame", so you accept then that the entire worldwide financial crisis is Bush's fault anyway. Deal.

Another fake history action movie?

What's next?

Bill Clinton: International man of mystery?
Ray-gun: republicans in space?
Dubya and Clive: a comedy about a stupid-looking ape and an orang-utan?

Actually, they all sound awesome. I'm totally on board with this. carry on....

Between this and FDR: American Badass, it looks to be a helluva year for Nazi killin'.

And I am totally digging the trend of big-budget camp revival.
Hollywood garbage that takes itself seriously...ugh
Hollywood garbage that shamelessly embraces shittiness WITHOUT holding back (*cough* snakes on a plane), I can live with!

Top Five Causes of the Civil War

1. Economic and social differences between the North and the South
2. States versus federal rights
3. The fight between Slave and Non-Slave State Proponents
4. Growth of the Abolition Movement
5. The election of Abraham Lincoln

Dr. Paul isn't presenting "revisionist" history, he's bringing perspective to the "winner-written" version of history. The first 18 months of the war were about the "other things" until Lincoln made the war about slavery (say, wasn't Lincoln a REPUBLICAN and the klan democrats? Libs seem to downplay that little fact).

Just another reason to get rid of federal government schools. Are you surprised big government is the "hero" in these creative interpretations of history when it runs the schools?

Slavery is the lazy, convenient answer for the Civil War, just like the Big Lie about FDR's big-government socialism "saving" the country from the Depression when in reality it prolonged it, and paved the way for the federal mafia we have today.

>> ^packo:

>> ^quantumushroom:
His Earness was never a conservative or "moderate". He's a leftist radical who was somewhat but not all-the-way stopped from furthering federal tyranny. Apparently no one learned from FDR's folly that no nation can spend its way out of a depression.
If POS obamacare is ruled "constitutional" expect further chaos.

he's been wanting to raise taxes... he was the first to say there was a revenue problem
the problem being the Republican keep stalling him because he wants to raise taxes on the wealthy/corporations... NOT your average citizen
he wanted an infrastructure bill, to create jobs, to stimulate the economy... again... denied by Republicans
then Republicans come around and say he's doing nothing about creating jobs, and that he should raise taxes... on who? not the corporations/wealthy... but the average citizen
who is really fighting unions? not the democrats... hard to have their support if they were doing that
who is passing/trying to pass bills (latest Arizona) that are trying to make illegal public sector collective bargaining?
give you a hint.... the party starts with a "R", and has their lips firmly planted on the Koch brother's corn holes


and btw, all this R vs D debate is bs... because whatever party gets into power, or is seen to be the popular party, gets corrupted by money/corporate interest

the differences the parties spout only matter to the people voting, not the parties themselves... its all a dog/pony show

you wanna fix the country, get corporate money outta politics...
the insanity of it just boggles the mind
treason should be redefined to include not just betraying your nation to foreign governments... but to corporations (MOST of whom really owe allegiance to no nation... even those that say they are American - why do they bank offshore then? why do they fire American workers and hire overseas? the economics of it aren't the issue... that they are allowed to pass this off as being PATRIOTIC is)

>> ^quantumushroom:

His Earness was never a conservative or "moderate". He's a leftist radical who was somewhat but not all-the-way stopped from furthering federal tyranny. Apparently no one learned from FDR's folly that no nation can spend its way out of a depression.
If POS obamacare is ruled "constitutional" expect further chaos.


he's been wanting to raise taxes... he was the first to say there was a revenue problem
the problem being the Republican keep stalling him because he wants to raise taxes on the wealthy/corporations... NOT your average citizen

he wanted an infrastructure bill, to create jobs, to stimulate the economy... again... denied by Republicans

then Republicans come around and say he's doing nothing about creating jobs, and that he should raise taxes... on who? not the corporations/wealthy... but the average citizen

who is really fighting unions? not the democrats... hard to have their support if they were doing that

who is passing/trying to pass bills (latest Arizona) that are trying to make illegal public sector collective bargaining?

give you a hint.... the party starts with a "R", and has their lips firmly planted on the Koch brother's corn holes

His Earness was never a conservative or "moderate". He's a leftist radical who was somewhat but not all-the-way stopped from furthering federal tyranny. Apparently no one learned from FDR's folly that no nation can spend its way out of a depression.

If POS obamacare is ruled "constitutional" expect further chaos.

Oh yeah, Hoover, acting like a liberal, paved the way for FDR. You might agree that without Hoover's antics clearing a path, there would've been no New Deal.

FDR is a sacred cow of the left. You here would have a better chance of convincing shinyblurry there is no God than me convincing you FDR was clueless, and overrode the the original power-limiting intent and meaning of the Constitution.


>> ^crotchflame:

>> ^quantumushroom:
"High tariffs and government-sponsored deflation followed by enormous taxation and unthinkable government expenditures turned a stock market stumble into a decade-long nightmare."


Jesus. Neither of those could be attributed to FDR. The tariffs were under Hoover and massive government spending under the new deal is anything but deflationary.
I mean, go ahead and say the New Deal did not work and all that vague nonsense. You would be wrong but at least it would look like a sensible statement.

"We have tried spending money. We are spending more than we have ever spent before and it does not work. And I have just one interest, and if I am wrong … somebody else can have my job. I want to see this country prosperous. I want to see people get a job. I want to see people get enough to eat. We have never made good on our promises. … I say after eight years of this Administration we have just as much unemployment as when we started. … And an enormous debt to boot." --Henry Morgenthau, Jr., U.S. Secretary of the Treasury during the administration of Franklin D. Roosevelt

The myth of FDR is the edifice on which the modern welfare state wobbles.




>> ^Yogi:

>> ^quantumushroom:
So what did FDR do, exactly? If big biz (that old reliable satan of the left) really "controlled" government then all FDR did was make government bigger and more tyrannical, and to this day the left claims big biz still runs it.
FDR's antics extended the Depression. "High tariffs and government-sponsored deflation followed by enormous taxation and unthinkable government expenditures turned a stock market stumble into a decade-long nightmare."
Obama's cut from the same fictive cloth, a dragon pretending to be dragonslayer.

These statements are from a reputable historian or economist I take it?

Congratulations! Your comment has just received enough votes from the community to earn you 1 Power Point. Thank you for your quality contribution to VideoSift.

Congratulations! Your comment has just received enough votes from the community to earn you 1 Power Point. Thank you for your quality contribution to VideoSift.

You must be new here.>> ^crotchflame:

>> ^quantumushroom:
"High tariffs and government-sponsored deflation followed by enormous taxation and unthinkable government expenditures turned a stock market stumble into a decade-long nightmare."


Jesus. Neither of those could be attributed to FDR. The tariffs were under Hoover and massive government spending under the new deal is anything but deflationary.
I mean, go ahead and say the New Deal did not work and all that vague nonsense. You would be wrong but at least it would look like a sensible statement.

>> ^quantumushroom:

So what did FDR do, exactly? If big biz (that old reliable satan of the left) really "controlled" government then all FDR did was make government bigger and more tyrannical, and to this day the left claims big biz still runs it.
FDR's antics extended the Depression. "High tariffs and government-sponsored deflation followed by enormous taxation and unthinkable government expenditures turned a stock market stumble into a decade-long nightmare."
Obama's cut from the same fictive cloth, a dragon pretending to be dragonslayer.


These statements are from a reputable historian or economist I take it?

>> ^quantumushroom:

"High tariffs and government-sponsored deflation followed by enormous taxation and unthinkable government expenditures turned a stock market stumble into a decade-long nightmare."



Jesus. Neither of those could be attributed to FDR. The tariffs were under Hoover and massive government spending under the new deal is anything but deflationary.

I mean, go ahead and say the New Deal did not work and all that vague nonsense. You would be wrong but at least it would look like a sensible statement.