POLE: Obammy Worst Modern-Day President

[olevetonahill]

Barack Obammy sad

AP

President Barack Obammy is the worst president since World War II, according to a plurality of voters in a new pole published Wednesday.

The Quinnipiac University survey found 33% of American voters named Obama as the worst while 28% named his predecessor, George W. Bush.

"Over the span of 69 years of American history and 12 presidencies, President Barack Obammy finds himself with President George W. Bush at the bottom of the popularity barrel," Tim Malloy, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Pole, said in a statement.

Richard Nixon, whose presidency ended in scandal, received only 13% of the vote and Jimmy Carter scored 8%. None of the remaining eight presidents received more than 3%.

Asked about the 2012 presidential race, 45% of respondents said the country would be better off if the Republican nominee, Mitt Romney, had won. Slightly less — 38% — said the country would be worse off under a President Romney.

"Would Mitt have been a better fit?" Malloy asked. "More voters in hindsight say yes."





Tolt Yall it would happen.

[champions77]

[QUOTE=olevetonahill;4661915]Barack Obammy sad

AP

President Barack Obammy is the worst president since World War II, according to a plurality of voters in a new pole published Wednesday.

The Quinnipiac University survey found 33% of American voters named Obama as the worst while 28% named his predecessor, George W. Bush.

"Over the span of 69 years of American history and 12 presidencies, President Barack Obammy finds himself with President George W. Bush at the bottom of the popularity barrel," Tim Malloy, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Pole, said in a statement.

Richard Nixon, whose presidency ended in scandal, received only 13% of the vote and Jimmy Carter scored 8%. None of the remaining eight presidents received more than 3%.

Asked about the 2012 presidential race, 45% of respondents said the country would be better off if the Republican nominee, Mitt Romney, had won. Slightly less — 38% — said the country would be worse off under a President Romney.

"Would Mitt have been a better fit?" Malloy asked. "More voters in hindsight say yes."



Is Pole short for Polack?

I don't know about the worst, but he has the worst record with respect to violating his sworn oath to obey the US Constitution. I think maybe even some of the lefties on here would have to agree to that. The US Supreme Court has called him out now 13 different times, mostly about exceeding his authority under the "Separation of Powers" of the Constitution. Dangerous path to be on and at this point with his latest promise to go it alone without Congress over the Immigration debacle, his demeanor is now one of defiance.

Sure brings some credence to those on the right who have predicted for some time that at the end of his term, he will stay on as President....because the nation needs him so badly would be his excuse I would presume.

Scary

[olevetonahill]

POLE = Old Board Joke. nOObs wouldnt understand

That is an article from Yahoo . I simply corrected a few spelling mistakes for em.:cocksure:

[Sooner8th]

Is Pole short for Polack?

I don't know about the worst, but he has the worst record with respect to violating his sworn oath to obey the US Constitution. I think maybe even some of the lefties on here would have to agree to that. The US Supreme Court has called him out now 13 different times, mostly about exceeding his authority under the "Separation of Powers" of the Constitution. Dangerous path to be on and at this point with his latest promise to go it alone without Congress over the Immigration debacle, his demeanor is now one of defiance.

Sure brings some credence to those on the right who have predicted for some time that at the end of his term, he will stay on as President....because the nation needs him so badly would be his excuse I would presume.

Scary

I keep seeing on this board about the 13 times the Supreme Court has ruled against Obama. Is there nothing you righties wont swallow from the rightwingnuts? Did any of you bother to look it up?

President Barack Obama received a strong rebuke from the Supreme Court last week for his attempt to make appointments when Congress was still technically in session.

The 9-0 decision in National Labor Relations Board vs. Noel Canning came just as Speaker John Boehner announced plans to sue Obama for executive overreach.

Rep. Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., who defended Boehner’s lawsuit, said the Supreme Court’s ruling was emblematic of Obama’s term. Goodlatte, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, said the "9-0 decision last week was the 13th time the Supreme Court has voted 9-0 that the president has exceeded his constitutional authority."

Has Obama really had such a tough time with the high court? We decided to review the record.

Goodlatte isn’t the only person to make this argument. Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, made a similar claim in a press release last week and it was also the subject of a column in the National Review, a conservative news website.

A spokeswoman for Goodlatte gave us a list of the 13 cases he referenced. We reviewed the evidence his office offered enlisted the help of a few experts to help us parse through the legalese.

Goodlatte’s assertion doesn’t seem to hold water. Susan Bloch, a constitutional law professor at Georgetown University, said the NLRB case is very different than the rest of the cases on the list, in that the court actually was ruling on a separations of power issue and a presidential overreach.

"That’s a fair case of the president’s use of executive authority getting rejected," she said.

But the rest of the claim? "It’s a total overstatement," Bloch said.

Why?

For starters, in eight of the cases, the alleged overreach occurred under President George W. Bush, as did the court cases that challenged the administration (United States vs. Jones, Sackett vs. EPA, Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church & School vs. EEOC, Gabelli vs. SEC, Arkansas Fish & Game Commission v. United States, PPL Corp. vs. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Horne vs. USDA, and Bond vs. United States). Bush’s Justice Department handled the initial court proceedings in most instances.

Obama’s Justice Department in many of the cases handled the appellate process and ultimately defended the actions to the Supreme Court. But that’s commonplace, experts we spoke with said.

Goodlatte spokeswoman Jessica Collins contended that doesn't make the chairman's statement untrue. "Regardless of who started the policies that were overturned by the courts unanimously during the Obama administration, President Obama decided to continue those policies which were struck down," she said.
Additionally, in many of the cases, executive overreach wasn’t really even at issue. For example, in United States vs. Jones, the court was ruling on whether the FBI had the power to use a GPS to track a suspect and gather evidence.

Technically, the FBI is a federal department under the Justice Department, a department in the executive branch. But the court was not reeling in an administration that was abusing power. Rather, "it gave us some guidance about how new technology and the Fourth Amendment should interact," Bloch said. "It has nothing to do with presidential authority."

Another case on the list, Arizona vs. United States, surprised our experts. Why? Because many saw it as a partial victory for Obama.

This is the case surrounding Arizona’s tough immigration laws that many civil rights groups said amounted to racial profiling. In 2012, the Supreme Court released a complicated 5-3 ruling, in which the court actually sided with the Obama administration on three of four counts. On the fourth provision, which allowed Arizona authorities to check the immigration status of anyone suspected of being an undocumented immigrant, the court basically said it’s too soon to tell, and unanimously decided to send the issue down to the lower courts to monitor for further challenges.

"The Supreme Court struck down three of the four because they interfered with federal immigration enforcement, which was defended by the Obama administration to advocate for the laws passed by Congress," Stephen Wermiel, a constitutional law professor at American University.

Another case on the list was last week’s ruling in United States vs. Wurie, which was decided along with Riley vs. California. The court ruled that police could not search your cell phone without a warrant if you were arrested.

Wermiel said it was "absurd" to include the Wurie case on the list. It also originated prior to Obama taking office and was the result of a Boston police effort. Like the Jones case, it dealt with technology issues, not executive overreach.

Another case on the Goodlatte’s list and decided last week, McCullen vs. Coakley, dealt with state laws, particular whether a Massachusetts law that put no-protest zones around abortion clinics was constitutional. While the Obama administration filed a brief supporting the Massachusetts law, the issue decided had little to do with executive authority.

The last case included, Sekhar vs. United States, did originate under the Obama administration. It’s complicated, but basically the FBI sought extortion charges against a Massachusetts venture capitalist, who was accused of trying to force a legal adviser to the New York state comptroller to persuade the comptroller to invest in his company. The Supreme Court said the FBI couldn’t arrest him under federal extortion laws.

In all, how does Goodlatte’s assertion hold up? Not well, our experts said.

"This is a concocted statistic," said Tom Goldstein, publisher of the Supreme Court blog SCOTUSblog.com. "It's just saying that the government lost cases unanimously. The government participates in roughly 60 cases a term. Every administration loses cases unanimously."

"It's true that the Obama Administration's views have been rejected repeatedly in the Supreme Court. But this way of putting it overreaches considerably."

Our ruling

Goodlatte said, the "9-0 decision last week was the 13th time the Supreme Court has voted 9-0 that the president has exceeded his constitutional authority." A thorough review of the 13 cases found many instances where presidential authority was not at issue. Further, most of the cases originated under and were first litigated by the Bush administration.

We rate Goodlatte’s statement False.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2014/jun/29/bob-goodlatte/gop-leader-supreme-court-has-ruled-13-times-obama-/

[olevetonahill]

Dayum I wernt even fishin and Caught a Big Sucker fish

Matlock8th
This IS NOT about Bush or Obammys Legal woes. Its a simple Pole showing that Obammy is as Of right NOW The MOST disliked President of the Modern day.

When will you ever QUIT defending Obammy by attackin W? Yer a Dumbass Moran!

[Sooner in Tampa]

Gurgle...gurgle...gurgle...swallowing all of Obammy's manjuice



Your stupid azz reply has nothing to do with the OP

Please just go the **** away...forever...you are only here to sing the praises of your messiah

[Sooner8th]

Dayum I wernt even fishin and Caught a Big Sucker fish

Matlock8th
This IS NOT about Bush or Obammys Legal woes. Its a simple Pole showing that Obammy is as Of right NOW The MOST disliked President of the Modern day.

When will you ever QUIT defending Obammy by attackin W? Yer a Dumbass Moran!

I was referring to champions77 not you dumbass.

Is Pole short for Polack?


I don't know about the worst, but he has the worst record with respect to violating his sworn oath to obey the US Constitution. I think maybe even some of the lefties on here would have to agree to that. The US Supreme Court has called him out now 13 different times, mostly about exceeding his authority under the "Separation of Powers" of the Constitution. Dangerous path to be on and at this point with his latest promise to go it alone without Congress over the Immigration debacle, his demeanor is now one of defiance.

Sure brings some credence to those on the right who have predicted for some time that at the end of his term, he will stay on as President....because the nation needs him so badly would be his excuse I would presume.

Scary

The quote picked up what you said first.

[Sooner8th]

Dayum I wernt even fishin and Caught a Big Sucker fish

Matlock8th
This IS NOT about Bush or Obammys Legal woes. Its a simple Pole showing that Obammy is as Of right NOW The MOST disliked President of the Modern day.

When will you ever QUIT defending Obammy by attackin W? Yer a Dumbass Moran!

Who attacked bush? Just giving the facts. Too bad you don't like them, dumbass.

[olevetonahill]

Who attacked bush? Just giving the facts. Too bad you don't like them, dumbass.

Twist, spin and deflect!
If you were Only responding to 77s Post why did you also quote mine?

Ya moronic ****in dildo You always twist shat around and Make it about W when ever Yer 1/2 Boy gets a Bad look. Go **** yerself moran!

[Sooner8th]

Twist, spin and deflect!
If you were Only responding to 77s Post why did you also quote mine?

Ya moronic ****in dildo You always twist shat around and Make it about W when ever Yer 1/2 Boy gets a Bad look. Go **** yerself moran!

AGAIN DUMBASS, it picked up yours with champion77. Is that too hard to understand?

[champions77]

Who attacked bush? Just giving the facts. Too bad you don't like them, dumbass.

Is there any level or degree of incompetence, overreach and dishonesty of this Administration that will disturb you? You appear to one that will defend this man regardless of what he does.

You might gain some measure of respect on here if you were to get upset about something, anything.

[Sooner8th]

Is there any level or degree of incompetence, overreach and dishonesty of this Administration that will disturb you? You appear to one that will defend this man regardless of what he does.

You might gain some measure of respect on here if you were to get upset about something, anything.

OK let's start again, 8 of the 13 were from BUSH. OK? Get it? Did you not read the article? MOST were not a question of overreach. WOW try to learn.

Am I defending him? NO, just giving facts.

I am upset about how the republican party is blocking anything and everything upto and including his constitutional duties of appointing his own cabinet and he was a REPUBLICAN! I am upset about how you and your party just don't get he was elected TWICE! Barack Obama is the first president in more than five decades to win at least 51 percent of the national popular vote twice. The electoral college win was a wipe out both times. Let the guy govern.

[champions77]

OK let's start again, 8 of the 13 were from BUSH. OK? Get it? Did you not read the article? MOST were not a question of overreach. WOW try to learn.

Am I defending him? NO, just giving facts.

I am upset about how the republican party is blocking anything and everything upto and including his constitutional duties of appointing his own cabinet and he was a REPUBLICAN! I am upset about how you and your party just don't get he was elected TWICE! Barack Obama is the first president in more than five decades to win at least 51 percent of the national popular vote twice. The electoral college win was a wipe out both times. Let the guy govern.

Let the guy govern? Why, he has mismanaged just about everything he has tried. You have extremely low standards. I have seen many conservatives call out Bush on here as to his spending and his enlarging the Federal footprint. W was no conservative, as a matter of fact, his policies had a lot to do with the reason BHO is in the WH today. Please tell us the areas that you are not pleased with BHO. There has got to be something.

[dwarthog]

I keep seeing on this board about the 13 times the Supreme Court has ruled against Obama. Is there nothing you righties wont swallow from the rightwingnuts? Did any of you bother to look it up?

President Barack Obama received a strong rebuke from the Supreme Court last week for his attempt to make appointments when Congress was still technically in session.

The 9-0 decision in National Labor Relations Board vs. Noel Canning came just as Speaker John Boehner announced plans to sue Obama for executive overreach.

Rep. Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., who defended Boehner’s lawsuit, said the Supreme Court’s ruling was emblematic of Obama’s term. Goodlatte, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, said the "9-0 decision last week was the 13th time the Supreme Court has voted 9-0 that the president has exceeded his constitutional authority."

Has Obama really had such a tough time with the high court? We decided to review the record.

Goodlatte isn’t the only person to make this argument. Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, made a similar claim in a press release last week and it was also the subject of a column in the National Review, a conservative news website.

A spokeswoman for Goodlatte gave us a list of the 13 cases he referenced. We reviewed the evidence his office offered enlisted the help of a few experts to help us parse through the legalese.

Goodlatte’s assertion doesn’t seem to hold water. Susan Bloch, a constitutional law professor at Georgetown University, said the NLRB case is very different than the rest of the cases on the list, in that the court actually was ruling on a separations of power issue and a presidential overreach.

"That’s a fair case of the president’s use of executive authority getting rejected," she said.

But the rest of the claim? "It’s a total overstatement," Bloch said.

Why?

For starters, in eight of the cases, the alleged overreach occurred under President George W. Bush, as did the court cases that challenged the administration (United States vs. Jones, Sackett vs. EPA, Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church & School vs. EEOC, Gabelli vs. SEC, Arkansas Fish & Game Commission v. United States, PPL Corp. vs. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Horne vs. USDA, and Bond vs. United States). Bush’s Justice Department handled the initial court proceedings in most instances.

Obama’s Justice Department in many of the cases handled the appellate process and ultimately defended the actions to the Supreme Court. But that’s commonplace, experts we spoke with said.

Goodlatte spokeswoman Jessica Collins contended that doesn't make the chairman's statement untrue. "Regardless of who started the policies that were overturned by the courts unanimously during the Obama administration, President Obama decided to continue those policies which were struck down," she said.
Additionally, in many of the cases, executive overreach wasn’t really even at issue. For example, in United States vs. Jones, the court was ruling on whether the FBI had the power to use a GPS to track a suspect and gather evidence.

Technically, the FBI is a federal department under the Justice Department, a department in the executive branch. But the court was not reeling in an administration that was abusing power. Rather, "it gave us some guidance about how new technology and the Fourth Amendment should interact," Bloch said. "It has nothing to do with presidential authority."

Another case on the list, Arizona vs. United States, surprised our experts. Why? Because many saw it as a partial victory for Obama.

This is the case surrounding Arizona’s tough immigration laws that many civil rights groups said amounted to racial profiling. In 2012, the Supreme Court released a complicated 5-3 ruling, in which the court actually sided with the Obama administration on three of four counts. On the fourth provision, which allowed Arizona authorities to check the immigration status of anyone suspected of being an undocumented immigrant, the court basically said it’s too soon to tell, and unanimously decided to send the issue down to the lower courts to monitor for further challenges.

"The Supreme Court struck down three of the four because they interfered with federal immigration enforcement, which was defended by the Obama administration to advocate for the laws passed by Congress," Stephen Wermiel, a constitutional law professor at American University.

Another case on the list was last week’s ruling in United States vs. Wurie, which was decided along with Riley vs. California. The court ruled that police could not search your cell phone without a warrant if you were arrested.

Wermiel said it was "absurd" to include the Wurie case on the list. It also originated prior to Obama taking office and was the result of a Boston police effort. Like the Jones case, it dealt with technology issues, not executive overreach.

Another case on the Goodlatte’s list and decided last week, McCullen vs. Coakley, dealt with state laws, particular whether a Massachusetts law that put no-protest zones around abortion clinics was constitutional. While the Obama administration filed a brief supporting the Massachusetts law, the issue decided had little to do with executive authority.

The last case included, Sekhar vs. United States, did originate under the Obama administration. It’s complicated, but basically the FBI sought extortion charges against a Massachusetts venture capitalist, who was accused of trying to force a legal adviser to the New York state comptroller to persuade the comptroller to invest in his company. The Supreme Court said the FBI couldn’t arrest him under federal extortion laws.

In all, how does Goodlatte’s assertion hold up? Not well, our experts said.

"This is a concocted statistic," said Tom Goldstein, publisher of the Supreme Court blog SCOTUSblog.com. "It's just saying that the government lost cases unanimously. The government participates in roughly 60 cases a term. Every administration loses cases unanimously."

"It's true that the Obama Administration's views have been rejected repeatedly in the Supreme Court. But this way of putting it overreaches considerably."

Our ruling

Goodlatte said, the "9-0 decision last week was the 13th time the Supreme Court has voted 9-0 that the president has exceeded his constitutional authority." A thorough review of the 13 cases found many instances where presidential authority was not at issue. Further, most of the cases originated under and were first litigated by the Bush administration.

We rate Goodlatte’s statement False.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2014/jun/29/bob-goodlatte/gop-leader-supreme-court-has-ruled-13-times-obama-/


For starters, in eight of the cases, the alleged overreach occurred under President George W. Bush, as did the court cases that challenged the administration (United States vs. Jones, Sackett vs. EPA, Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church & School vs. EEOC, Gabelli vs. SEC, Arkansas Fish & Game Commission v. United States, PPL Corp. vs. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Horne vs. USDA, and Bond vs. United States). Bush’s Justice Department handled the initial court proceedings in most instances.

Obama’s Justice Department in many of the cases handled the appellate process and ultimately defended the actions to the Supreme Court. But that’s commonplace, experts we spoke with said.


So why didn't the noted law scholar Eric Holder of the Justice Department and the noted Constitutional scholar at the Whitehouse cease pursuit of these obviously egregious overreaches by the Bush administration instead of eating up docket space at the Supreme Court?

[Pricetag]

Don't worry, guys, Hillary will do better.

[Sooner8th]

Let the guy govern? Why, he has mismanaged just about everything he has tried. You have extremely low standards. I have seen many conservatives call out Bush on here as to his spending and his enlarging the Federal footprint. W was no conservative, as a matter of fact, his policies had a lot to do with the reason BHO is in the WH today. Please tell us the areas that you are not pleased with BHO. There has got to be something.

You would have to show me where anyone on here called him out while he was in office, two years before his term ended because no one nationally did. W was no conservative - that is LAUGHABLE- he is the most conservative president we have ever had.

I am not pleased with him not standing up to republicans, not letting the bush tax cuts expire on schedule, not getting card check through, not eliminating the offshore tax havens, not eliminating the capital gains carryover tax break, closing gitmo, getting out of iraq, enough?

[Sooner8th]

So why didn't the noted law scholar Eric Holder of the Justice Department and the noted Constitutional scholar at the Whitehouse cease pursuit of these obviously egregious overreaches by the Bush administration instead of eating up docket space at the Supreme Court?

Who says they continued them? It says Obama’s Justice Department in many of the cases handled the appellate process and ultimately defended the actions to the Supreme Court that Bush started. Not that they continued to do them, but I don't know if they did or not.

[REDREX]

Barack would have my vote

[champions77]

You would have to show me where anyone on here called him out while he was in office, two years before his term ended because no one nationally did. W was no conservative - that is LAUGHABLE- he is the most conservative president we have ever had.

I am not pleased with him not standing up to republicans, not letting the bush tax cuts expire on schedule, not getting card check through, not eliminating the offshore tax havens, not eliminating the capital gains carryover tax break, closing gitmo, getting out of iraq, enough?

Not standing up to Republicans? Let me ask you when did he work WITH Republicans? First two years, he did as he pleased, be damned if a Republican objected.

W being the most conservative Republican President ever is maybe the most ridiculous thing you have stated on here. Do you think the most conservative Republican ever would have created 4 trillion in additional debt for this Country, or created Medicare Part D? He expanded the reach and depth of the Federal government like none other. Silly.

[Sooner in Tampa]

W was no conservative - that is LAUGHABLE- he is the most conservative president we have ever had.


Just when I think you can not be any more stupid...

[Turd_Ferguson]

Just when I think you can not be any more stupid...

http://i1.ytimg.com/vi/zo-YVqV0v4Q/mqdefault.jpg

[Sooner8th]

Not standing up to Republicans? Let me ask you when did he work WITH Republicans? First two years, he did as he pleased, be damned if a Republican objected.

W being the most conservative Republican President ever is maybe the most ridiculous thing you have stated on here. Do you think the most conservative Republican ever would have created 4 trillion in additional debt for this Country, or created Medicare Part D? He expanded the reach and depth of the Federal government like none other. Silly.

I love it when you and your party elect a "real" conservative and when they govern like a "real" conservative you you claim they are not. Bush has governed, wherever possible, fully in step with the basic conservative principles that defined Ronald Reagan's presidency and have shaped the political right for the last two generations: opposition to New Deal-style social programs; a view of civil liberties as obstacles to dispensing justice; the pursuit of low taxes, especially on businesses and the wealthy; a pro-business stance on regulation; a hawkish, militaristic, nationalistic foreign policy; and a commitment to bringing religion, and specifically Christianity, back into public policy. "Mr. Bush has a philosophy. It is conservative," wrote Peggy Noonan in 2002.

Now lets talk about the god of conservatives, Ronnie - legalized abortion in California, tripled the deficit and debt and a major expansion of Medicare to provide insurance against lingering major illnesses. Sounds like W to me. Seems "conservitives like to increase the deficit and debt and expand medicare.

You are living in an alternate universe. THOSE are your "real" conservatives.

As for did anything he wanted for the first two years what a ****ing joke, put the pipe down man. He only had 60 votes in the senate for 2 months, during which time Teddy was dying of cancer.

As for working with republicans - 36% of the stimulus was TAX CUTS THE REPUBLICANS WANTED - $288 billion in tax breaks to individuals and businesses and how was he repayed? With THREE votes from republicans in the senate Susan Collins, Olympia Snowe, and Arlen Specter NONE in the house.

Get your facts straight and stop regurgitating rightwing talking points.

[olevetonahill]

OK let's start again, 8 of the 13 were from BUSH. OK? .

Yea Moron Lets start again THIS ****ING THREAD IS ABOUT OBAMMY BEING THE WORST PRES EVER. you have successfully turned it ino bash W
I will say this You are good at twisting things around.

So In your OWN words "LETS START AGAIN"



Did Yall know Obammy is the WORST ****in President EVER.

[champions77]

I love it when you and your party elect a "real" conservative and when they govern like a "real" conservative you you claim they are not. Bush has governed, wherever possible, fully in step with the basic conservative principles that defined Ronald Reagan's presidency and have shaped the political right for the last two generations: opposition to New Deal-style social programs; a view of civil liberties as obstacles to dispensing justice; the pursuit of low taxes, especially on businesses and the wealthy; a pro-business stance on regulation; a hawkish, militaristic, nationalistic foreign policy; and a commitment to bringing religion, and specifically Christianity, back into public policy. "Mr. Bush has a philosophy. It is conservative," wrote Peggy Noonan in 2002.

Now lets talk about the god of conservatives, Ronnie - legalized abortion in California, tripled the deficit and debt and a major expansion of Medicare to provide insurance against lingering major illnesses. Sounds like W to me. Seems "conservitives like to increase the deficit and debt and expand medicare.

You are living in an alternate universe. THOSE are your "real" conservatives.

As for did anything he wanted for the first two years what a ****ing joke, put the pipe down man. He only had 60 votes in the senate for 2 months, during which time Teddy was dying of cancer.

As for working with republicans - 36% of the stimulus was TAX CUTS THE REPUBLICANS WANTED - $288 billion in tax breaks to individuals and businesses and how was he repayed? With THREE votes from republicans in the senate Susan Collins, Olympia Snowe, and Arlen Specter NONE in the house.

Get your facts straight and stop regurgitating rightwing talking points.

Again, conservatives don't cause 4 trillion in new debt and enact yet another government program. W was a moderate, just like HW and now Jed.

So where do you think your hero resides in the political spectrum? 1 to 10 with 1 being Fidel Castro and 10 being Shawn Hannity?

[Sooner8th]

Again, conservatives don't cause 4 trillion in new debt and enact yet another government program. W was a moderate, just like HW and now Jed.

So where do you think your hero resides in the political spectrum? 1 to 10 with 1 being Fidel Castro and 10 being Shawn Hannity?

YES THEY DO! Too funny, now claiming bush isn't a conservative. So your WHOLE party a mere 10 years ago were a bunch of flaming commie pinkos?

Who says he is my hero? I just point out what you whine and cry about obama, bush did the same things or had worse numbers, gdp, employment and increasing deficits. You people just regurgitate any rightwingnut talking about you hear that day without looking to see if it is true or not and you people call me stupid and a moron.

He is about a 5.5. Hannity is not a good range indicator because he will change his positions to keep on the leading edge of crazy to keep viewers. Of course he is for you all, 'cause you all listen and watching him foaming at the mouth with each new ginned up outrage.

[Sooner8th]

Yea Moron Lets start again THIS ****ING THREAD IS ABOUT OBAMMY BEING THE WORST PRES EVER. you have successfully turned it ino bash W
I will say this You are good at twisting things around.

So In your OWN words "LETS START AGAIN"



Did Yall know Obammy is the WORST ****in President EVER.

So this poll you believe? Didn't believe the polls from the 2012 election, dismiss the polls that say 80-90% of Americans want background checks, but this one you hang your hat on? When did you boys start loving polls? Oh yeah, when you agree with them. Who is bashing bush? Just telling facts, dumbass.

[olevetonahill]

So this poll you believe? Didn't believe the polls from the 2012 election, dismiss the polls that say 80-90% of Americans want background checks, but this one you hang your hat on? When did you boys start loving polls? Oh yeah, when you agree with them. Who is bashing bush? Just telling facts, dumbass.

Never said I believe anything dipstick. But just so ya know If any thing a 2 year old pole aint much relevant to todays Current events where as one taken in the last few days/weeks MIGHT be relivant!

[champions77]

YES THEY DO! Too funny, now claiming bush isn't a conservative. So your WHOLE party a mere 10 years ago were a bunch of flaming commie pinkos?

Who says he is my hero? I just point out what you whine and cry about obama, bush did the same things or had worse numbers, gdp, employment and increasing deficits. You people just regurgitate any rightwingnut talking about you hear that day without looking to see if it is true or not and you people call me stupid and a moron.

He is about a 5.5. Hannity is not a good range indicator because he will change his positions to keep on the leading edge of crazy to keep viewers. Of course he is for you all, 'cause you all listen and watching him foaming at the mouth with each new ginned up outrage.


5.5? Wow, are you serious? That is really scary that as far left as BHO is, you've got him at a 5.5. So you consider him a moderate?

Hannity was not a good example of a 10. Probably Michael Savage would have been a better 10. Hannity is probably a 8.

[Sooner8th]

5.5? Wow, are you serious? That is really scary that as far left as BHO is, you've got him at a 5.5. So you consider him a moderate?

Hannity was not a good example of a 10. Probably Michael Savage would have been a better 10. Hannity is probably a 8.

Well.......he is. Hannity is an 8? Savage is a 10? They are not conservative, they are crazy.

You asked me what areas im not happy with obama, so you tell me what areas you ARE happy with him.

[Sooner8th]

Never said I believe anything dipstick. But just so ya know If any thing a 2 year old pole aint much relevant to todays Current events where as one taken in the last few days/weeks MIGHT be relivant!

So your dumbass starts a tread about a poll and get little girly panties in a twist when the topic veers off, now you are telling me that the very poll you you stated you don't believe?

[champions77]

Well.......he is. Hannity is an 8? Savage is a 10? They are not conservative, they are crazy.

You asked me what areas im not happy with obama, so you tell me what areas you ARE happy with him.

Thanks, it will be a lot easier to list the things that I like about BHO.

Has a likeable personality. Likes sports, likes travel, heck he's been to all 57 states.

I wish he would have been better. If the media had vetted him like they would have any other candidate, he would not be in a position to damage this country like he has. The main stream media refused to look into his past because they too were lefties and any close scrutiny would have earned them an accusation that they were racist. So they didn't go there. Shame, could have spared him the designation as the worst President ever, and would have spared the nation this incomparable level of incompetency. Obvious to most everyone except those of your ilk that he is egregiously in over his head. Domestic policy, militarily, his foreign policy, they all are similar in their level of ineptness.

I just wonder how bad it has to become before you jump off the bandwagon too.

[olevetonahill]

So this poll you believe? Didn't believe the polls from the 2012 election, dismiss the polls that say 80-90% of Americans want background checks, but this one you hang your hat on? When did you boys start loving polls? Oh yeah, when you agree with them. Who is bashing bush? Just telling facts, dumbass.

Dint say that either Moran.
I started a Thread mainly Pokin fun at Brack Boy. with your 1st Post you take off about Bush . Good Jorb.

[Skysooner]

I think it is funny, but if you read the comments after the article it is mainly people that hated him even before he started office. For my part, Carter ranks as the worst president. Reagan got away with some stuff he could have been impeached for, but success breeds forgiveness. I voted for Reagan both times btw.

[Sooner8th]

I think it is funny, but if you read the comments after the article it is mainly people that hated him even before he started office. For my part, Carter ranks as the worst president. Reagan got away with some stuff he could have been impeached for, but success breeds forgiveness. I voted for Reagan both times btw.

Carter was not a very good president, but he did better than reagan on the economy, more jobs, less debt gdp around the same. Bush BY FAR is the worst, terrible on jobs, deficits, debt, gdp, starting wars, not ending wars, terrible, terrible appointments. total joke.

[Sooner8th]

Thanks, it will be a lot easier to list the things that I like about BHO.

Has a likeable personality. Likes sports, likes travel, heck he's been to all 57 states.

I wish he would have been better. If the media had vetted him like they would have any other candidate, he would not be in a position to damage this country like he has. The main stream media refused to look into his past because they too were lefties and any close scrutiny would have earned them an accusation that they were racist. So they didn't go there. Shame, could have spared him the designation as the worst President ever, and would have spared the nation this incomparable level of incompetency. Obvious to most everyone except those of your ilk that he is egregiously in over his head. Domestic policy, militarily, his foreign policy, they all are similar in their level of ineptness.

I just wonder how bad it has to become before you jump off the bandwagon too.

You just regurgitated rightwing talking points. I guess I should have asked what he has DONE that you do like.

[SoonerorLater]

YES THEY DO! Too funny, now claiming bush isn't a conservative. So your WHOLE party a mere 10 years ago were a bunch of flaming commie pinkos?

Who says he is my hero? I just point out what you whine and cry about obama, bush did the same things or had worse numbers, gdp, employment and increasing deficits. You people just regurgitate any rightwingnut talking about you hear that day without looking to see if it is true or not and you people call me stupid and a moron.

He is about a 5.5. Hannity is not a good range indicator because he will change his positions to keep on the leading edge of crazy to keep viewers. Of course he is for you all, 'cause you all listen and watching him foaming at the mouth with each new ginned up outrage.

BHO is 5.5? It would be pushing it to say Bush was a 5.5. BHO is maybe a 2.5 if that. They do both however show a propensity to spend like drunken sailors, trash the constitution and display varying levels of ineptitude. Debating the relative merits of Bush vs. Obama is like discussing which is your favorite mosquito-borne disease, Malaria or Dengue Fever.

[Skysooner]

BHO is 5.5? It would be pushing it to say Bush was a 5.5. BHO is maybe a 2.5 if that. They do both however show a propensity to spend like drunken sailors, trash the constitution and display varying levels of ineptitude. Debating the relative merits of Bush vs. Obama is like discussing which is your favorite mosquito-borne disease, Malaria or Dengue Fever.
Only thing worse is Congress at a zero. Btw don't agree eith your 2.5 rating. No better than 5 but not that bad. Wouldn't talk about trashing the Constitution since the the last 3 Pubs have been much worse.

[TAFBSooner]

Dint say that either Moran.
I started a Thread mainly Pokin fun at Brack Boy. with your 1st Post you take off about Bush . Good Jorb.

There's a reason we liberals keep bringing up Bush the Lesser's record:

http://www.gop.com/act/i-miss-george-w-bush-t-shirt-face

Some GOP'ers are still acting like he did a fine job.

[olevetonahill]

There's a reason we liberals keep bringing up Bush the Lesser's record:

http://www.gop.com/act/i-miss-george-w-bush-t-shirt-face

Some GOP'ers are still acting like he did a fine job.

Keep telling yerself that bro LOLOLOL
I think its cause Yall cant come up with anything Brack has done thats worth a shat!

[REDREX]

Barack has been an awful President this country will be paying for the last 6 years and next 2 for many years to come

[TAFBSooner]

Keep telling yerself that bro LOLOLOL
I think its cause Yall cant come up with anything Brack has done thats worth a shat!

He hasn't started any new ground wars. That's a big one. Have to wait and see on Iraq 3.0, though.

His response to our 2008 victimization at the hands of the Wall Street vampire squid (that is the plural) was anemic, but enough to keep us from full-blown depression.

Even though Obamacare is a big ol' plum for the medical insurance industry, it has helped some of our people to get insured. It's a couple steps in the right direction.

"Getting us out of Iraq" is a good thing, but he put a fair amount of effort into reneging on Bush's exit strategy in order to stay there. In other words he tried to negotiate al-Maliki into letting our troops stay there and not be subject to Iraqi law. Just to be clear, our troops shouldn't be under Iraqi law, ergo they shouldn't be on Iraqi soil. At least he wasn't willing to stay in Iraq without legal backing.

He appointed two liberal justices to the Supreme Court.

He didn't make martyrs out of the numbnuts at Bundy Ranch, showing that the federal government CAN learn from its WhACkO mistakes.

It's a thin list. But I would 100% still vote for him over Bomb-bomb McCain, or Mitt "Corporations are my friends, people" Romney. In the real 2008, I voted for him out of hope. In the real 2012, and in the "hindsight" version of both elections, I did/would have been voting out of fear of what the other guy would do.

As far as the pole, the incumbent is always in the toilet at this point in their eight years. I'm not impressed.

[olevetonahill]

He hasn't started any new ground wars. That's a big one. Have to wait and see on Iraq 3.0, though.

His response to our 2008 victimization at the hands of the Wall Street vampire squid (that is the plural) was anemic, but enough to keep us from full-blown depression.

Even though Obamacare is a big ol' plum for the medical insurance industry, it has helped some of our people to get insured. It's a couple steps in the right direction.

"Getting us out of Iraq" is a good thing, but he put a fair amount of effort into reneging on Bush's exit strategy in order to stay there. In other words he tried to negotiate al-Maliki into letting our troops stay there and not be subject to Iraqi law. Just to be clear, our troops shouldn't be under Iraqi law, ergo they shouldn't be on Iraqi soil. At least he wasn't willing to stay in Iraq without legal backing.

He appointed two liberal justices to the Supreme Court.

He didn't make martyrs out of the numbnuts at Bundy Ranch, showing that the federal government CAN learn from its WhACkO mistakes.

It's a thin list. But I would 100% still vote for him over Bomb-bomb McCain, or Mitt "Corporations are my friends, people" Romney. In the real 2008, I voted for him out of hope. In the real 2012, and in the "hindsight" version of both elections, I did/would have been voting out of fear of what the other guy would do.

As far as the pole, the incumbent is always in the toilet at this point in their eight years. I'm not impressed.

He aint started any? Bro 3/4 the country wanted to go to war when W did. Forget that shat.
He got us out of Iraq? W had us almost disengaged when he left. Brack hurried it too much in Opinion. Now look what we got.
The 2 Libs to the SC is just a turd in the Punch bowl. Give us Folk who AINT political but are True Jurists!

[TAFBSooner]

He aint started any? Bro 3/4 the country wanted to go to war when W did. Forget that shat.
He got us out of Iraq? W had us almost disengaged when he left. Brack hurried it too much in Opinion. Now look what we got.
The 2 Libs to the SC is just a turd in the Punch bowl. Give us Folk who AINT political but are True Jurists!

First of all, you asked what liberals approved of in Obama's record. I assumed you wanted liberal reasons.

"W had us almost disengaged when he left. Brack hurried it too much in Opinion." ???? Pick one.

In reality, Obama followed Bush's schedule, which was set in place by the lack of a status of forces agreement. Hard to give Obama much credit or blame for that. I give him a little.

As for SCOTUS, are you saying the five Catholic males who voted to let Hobby Lobby impose their religious beliefs on their employees, aren't political? Since I believe that women deserve to run their own lives, the two replacement liberal justices (which would have flipped to conservative if a Republican were POTUS) are IMHO, his second biggest achievement after the no new ground wars.


. . . and as for Bush, Cheney, wolfie, et. al. lying us into Iraq 2.0, I will never forget or forgive that shat.

[olevetonahill]

First of all, you asked what liberals approved of in Obama's record. I assumed you wanted liberal reasons.

"W had us almost disengaged when he left. Brack hurried it too much in Opinion." ???? Pick one.

In reality, Obama followed Bush's schedule, which was set in place by the lack of a status of forces agreement. Hard to give Obama much credit or blame for that. I give him a little.

As for SCOTUS, are you saying the five Catholic males who voted to let Hobby Lobby impose their religious beliefs on their employees, aren't political? Since I believe that women deserve to run their own lives, the two replacement liberal justices (which would have flipped to conservative if a Republican were POTUS) are IMHO, his second biggest achievement after the no new ground wars.


. . . and as for Bush, Cheney, wolfie, et. al. lying us into Iraq 2.0, I will never forget or forgive that shat.

Nope I dint ask Jack shat about Yall,

I axed WHY? whenever Yall get sompun axed about Obammy Yall start throwing W back at us! Personally I DGAS they ALL suck donkey dick!

I dont GAF, Obammy is a black ased idiot the others before were White fu*king Idiots!
Now Did W not have to Follow Blow jobs lead? Did BJ NOT have to follow Bush1s lead?
Aint they ALL followed evey ********** that was before em?

[TAFBSooner]

Nope I dint ask Jack shat about Yall,


You said I couldn't come up with anything good that Obama has done. So I did; and added it was a thin list.



I axed WHY? whenever Yall get sompun axed about Obammy Yall start throwing W back at us! Personally I DGAS they ALL suck donkey dick!

I dont GAF, Obammy is a black ased idiot the others before were White fu*king Idiots!
Now Did W not have to Follow Blow jobs lead? Did BJ NOT have to follow Bush1s lead?
Aint they ALL followed evey ********** that was before em?

There I agree with you. They all work for the fooking Wall Street 1%ers, or Crony Capitalists if you prefer. That part has been the same over the years.

They also are expanding the power of the presidency, at the expense of Congress and all the rest of us. That part has been getting worse with each new president. Bush's crew comes up with some new attack on our civil rights, and the Democrats complain about him castrating the Constitution. Barack's folks do something along the same lines but a little worse, and now it's a d@mn3d bipartisan consensus.

Other example is Social Security. Bush tried to privatize it in 2005, right after his second inaugural. Fortunately, FAIL. Obama tried to cut our earned benefits last year, right after HIS second inaugural. Also, fortunately, FAIL.

Just to be fair, I can name one Bush the Lesser policy that I appreciate much more than Obama's. Bush set up goals for future manned space exploration (that I might see in my lifetime), and Obama all but killed the program.