Obama second in big race; Republican leader next to last

Obama and a Republican run a race. The Republican wins. The headline would be what you read above in my title. We have had amazing failures in policy. The economy remains in the dumps. Besides other Obama years, unemployment is worse now than it has been since 1984. Terrorists are resurgent. Places like Syria and Egypt are spinning out or control. Yet our liberal media thinks this is okay.

Had Romney been elected, he would already be blamed for the economic decline and the deteriorating situation in the Middle East. The recent dip in the economy would have been seen as harbinger of his poor leadership.

So let's sum up. Since the election the economy has gone negative; unemployment is higher; instability is spreading in Syria and Egypt; North Africa is in danger from terrorists and somebody bombed our Embassy in Turkey.

Let me say that I remain optimistic about America. We will eventually prosper despite Obama. But if we had better leadership over the past four years, we would have been better off. I actually believed that we would have recovered much more robustly by now. But prosperity is postponed. Meanwhile the Obama doldrums continue.

Of course the liberal press will keep on telling us how good this is. Back in 2004 when unemployment was 5.6% candidate John Kerry said that then-President George W. Bush sported "the worst economic record since the Hoover administration." The liberal media agreed. Will we every see unemployment that low again?

Posted by Christine & John at February 1, 2013 5:33 PM
Comments
Comment #361210

“…John Kerry said that then-President George W. Bush sported “the worst economic record since the Hoover administration.”

Well, considering the finale, was he wrong?

Posted by: Rich at February 1, 2013 8:05 PM
Comment #361211

Today, the Dow Jones Industrial Average closed at 14,009.

It seems you and reality are having a violent disagreement.

Perhaps you should go whole hog, and pretend Romney actually won the election. After all, Republicans claimed that the GOP convention was great, and the sight of an old man lecturing an empty chair was awesome, and the fact that the GOP received no bounce was an illusion, a conspiracy foisted upon the American public by the pollsters and media; and that the Democratic convention was awful, and the bounce shown by the polls was another example of a conspiracy between the pollsters and media; that Romney was going to win, as was clearly indidcated by Rasmussen polling, Karl Rove, Rush Limbaugh, et al; that there was no War on Women, aka a sustained legislative assault upon women; that blacks were going to vote en masse for Romney because of the Obama adminsitration’s position on gay marriage; that “self-deportation” was a perfectly reasonable approach to immigration; and jokes about killing illegal immigrants with a lethally electrified fence was hilarious.

Go for it. And don’t stop there. Just start making shit up. Become completely free of reality. That’s bound to convince people to become conservatives and vote Republican.

Remember Fast and Furious. Remember Benghazi conspiracy theory. Also, Global Warming is a worldwide hoax perpetrated by scientists in order to undermine America, and make the whole world socialist, and Evolution is ‘just a theory.’

So go ahead. Become completely untethered from reality. Pretend Romney won the election, but Obama stole it ‘cause he’s a socialist/communist/Kenyan/Indonesian/anti-colonialist black man who pals around with terrorists and hates America. And Obama has actually failed, and don’t believe all those stories, because it’s a conspiracy,l I tell you, a conspiracy! The media is in on it! And the pollsters! And low information voters! And liberals and San Francisco Democrats and Taxachussetts voters and single mothers and gays and blacks and illegal immigrants, aka brown people, and at least 47% of the takers!

Texas.

With a dollar sign.

(Extra points for anyone who can recognize that last reference!)

Posted by: phx8 at February 1, 2013 8:17 PM
Comment #361216

Rich

What will happen with the finale of Obama, we don’t know. It might be worse.

All we know at now is that at this point in his presidency, Obama is doing worse than Bush … and worse than any president in history who won a second term.

phx8

It is great that the stock market is doing well. But think about how this would be reported if a Republican was in office. You guys would be complaining that the fat cats were getting richer while ordinary people were suffering.

You can try to paint me as radical, but we both know that you wrong. You cannot beat me in real arguments so you make up your own to knock down. You may continue to engage in your auto-erotic fantasy. All I ask of you - all I ever ask of you all - is to apply similar standards to Democrats as you do Republicans.

Imagine this:

Unemployment higher than anytime in nearly thirty years, besides times this president was in office.

A quarter with no growth, actually slightly negative.

More people leaving the workforce.

Violence in the Middle East. Terrorist attack today at our Embassy in Turkey.

A president who disregards the ruling of court in his appointments.

A president who has kept Guantanamo open four years after he promised to close it and probably will never close it.

Poverty rates at highest levels in years while stock market soars.

If this president was Republican, can you really tell me honestly that you would be thinking this is good.

Posted by: C&J at February 1, 2013 8:37 PM
Comment #361218

C&J,
You spent years cheerleading for the Bush administration. You couldn’t have been more wrong. Deal with it.

Texas.

With a dollar sign.

Posted by: phx8 at February 1, 2013 8:51 PM
Comment #361223
Americans have a very special message for the federal government: Don’t tread on me.

That’s the takeaway from a new poll from the Pew Research Center in which, for the first time in at least the last two decades, a majority of Americans say Washington actually poses a threat to their “personal rights and freedoms.”

And it’s not just tea party supporters, Republicans and gun owners.

Nearly two-fifths of Democrats (38 percent) say the government is a threat to them personally, as do 45 percent of non-gun owners.

Overall, the percentage of Americans who view the federal government as a threat has increased from 36 percent in May 1995 to 53 percent today. It rose late in the 1990s and then dropped again after 9/11, down to 30 percent.

Today, most Americans now feel at least somewhat scared of what the government could do to them, and 31 percent see Washington as a “major threat.”

Posted by: Rhinehold at February 1, 2013 9:33 PM
Comment #361225

Well, with a black man threatening to take away their assault rifles, those 76% of conservative Republicans can hardly help but feel the government poses a “major threat” to them.

Conservatives should definitely stockpile guns and ammo and canned food. And buy gold.

There’s violence in the Middle East! Oh noooooooo.

I hear Obama is not that smart. And that he’s weak. And a dictator to boot. He reads teleprompters, you know, every time he’s in public. By the way, Romney actually won all those debates. Just sayin’.

Posted by: phx8 at February 1, 2013 9:52 PM
Comment #361227

I’ll repeat:

“Nearly two-fifths of Democrats (38 percent) say the government is a threat to them personally, as do 45 percent of non-gun owners.”

As for your racism, you can shove it.

Posted by: Rhinehold at February 1, 2013 9:59 PM
Comment #361232

Racist? No. Paranoid? Maybe.

I see no reason to be particularly polite about an article like this in the first place, an article that promotes an underlying conspiracy theory that the media is somehow in the tank for Obama, that everything is really bad, and anything good is happening in spite of the Obama administration.

As for the Pew poll… I see it’s all over conservative web sites. Only 16% of Democrats think the government poses a “major threat” to freedoms. How much of this relates to gun weirdos? The poll does not break that out.

In Texas:

“Sixty-seven percent of self-identified Republicans and 39 percent of all of those polled believe the president should be impeached.

While 50 percent of Texans do not support impeaching the president, it is clear that the idea has legs among Republicans. However, as is common with these types of polls, many of those surveyed tend to take the negative option of any question regardless of the context simply because they do not support Obama.”

Posted by: phx8 at February 1, 2013 10:39 PM
Comment #361235
How much of this relates to gun weirdos? The poll does not break that out.

Once again: “Nearly two-fifths of Democrats (38 percent) say the government is a threat to them personally, as do 45 percent of non-gun owners.”

You can view the actual results here:http://www.people-press.org/2013/01/31/majority-says-the-federal-government-threatens-their-personal-rights/

Posted by: Rhinehold at February 1, 2013 11:02 PM
Comment #361236

I hate when it does that…

http://www.people-press.org/2013/01/31/majority-says-the-federal-government-threatens-their-personal-rights/

BTW, the issue is not that these numbers exist, it is the DIRECTION they are going…

Just because progressives don’t understand what rights are doesn’t mean that conservatives haven’t figured it out, you know…

Posted by: Rhinehold at February 1, 2013 11:03 PM
Comment #361237
an article that promotes an underlying conspiracy theory that the media is somehow in the tank for Obama

Conspiracy? No… just honest critical observation.

Did you see 60 minutes with Obama and Clinton? That was some hard hitting journalism!

Posted by: Rhinehold at February 1, 2013 11:06 PM
Comment #361240

Rhinehold,
84% of Democrats do NOT think the government is a major threat to their rights.

The fact is, a poll that includes conservatives will generate all sorts of utterly ridiculous results if the questions are related to Obama.

I just read the transcript of the 60 Minutes interview with Obama and Hillary Clinton. Yeah, it was pretty soft, basically a puff piece. Then again, the interviewer was questioning a popular re-elected president and an equally popular outgoing Secretary of State. When it comes to interviews, that was a unique situation. Much of it covered their past and current relationship, which is appropriate, considering Hillary may run for president in 2016. She may be done with politics once and for all, which would make the interview even more of a swan song. (I don’t think it’s a done deal that she’ll run in 2016. Age is a factor, and she must surely be tempted to take it easy now). Given the fact that the interview was kind of an exit interview for Hillary, I don’t see that an adversarial approach would have necessarily been the right thing to do. There was a question about Benghazi and another about strength/weakness in foreign policy, but again, that was essentially an exit interview for Hillary.

Posted by: phx8 at February 1, 2013 11:54 PM
Comment #361241

Rhinehold,
If you’re looking for criticisms of Obama- and I mean real criticisms of foreign policy and human rights- you might want to check Daily Kos. Here is a good article on many of those issues, including drone warfare and Guantanamo.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/02/01/1184036/-Barack-Obama-Drone-Ranger

Compare that discussion with what comes from conservatives these days:

“Terrorists are resurgent. Places like Syria and Egypt are spinning out or control. Yet our liberal media thinks this is okay.”

And that’s relatively tame stuff compared to the dreck being pushed by Limbaugh, Beck, Hannity, Rand Paul, and many many others.

Posted by: phx8 at February 2, 2013 12:17 AM
Comment #361242

Unemployment at 7.9%, outrageous gas prices, 17 trillion in debt and cilmbing, more folks than ever on government assistance, Fast and Furious, Benghazi, Obamacare, the debt ceiling, the fiscal cliff, out of control spending, no budget since 2009, blaming Bush for everything, recession, the apology tour, bowing to our enemies. Obama is a total failure in everything but one. He did tell the military to take out Osama when they told him they found him. That’s the only thing he’s gotten right.
This clown is the worst president in the history of the country. Carter sure is glad Obama came along.


So go ahead. Become completely untethered from reality.

That’s exactly what the left has been doing for 40 years now. It’s got so they can’t tell reality when it jumps up and bites them in the face.

Posted by: Ron Brown at February 2, 2013 12:23 AM
Comment #361250

phx8

Have you been talking to Stephen?

I find this a troubling trend among liberals. It is an attempt by you to shut off debate by referring to things outside it. It goes like this. “Bush was bad; you said good things about Bush; therefore no matter what we do you have not right to say anything.” Well, I am American and I don’t believe in those sorts of tactics. I saw them too often in my fights with communists and fascists. Believe me, they were much fiercer than you all and if they couldn’t stop me you wimps certainly cannot.

I am also getting sick of your racism. You keep on bringing up race when nobody else has.

Re 60 minutes puff piece - Obama has a popularity rating lower than most reelected presidents. Hilary was leaving at a time of significant international tension. Sixty minutes would not have done that for any Republican.

This is the point of what I am saying. When Ronald Reagan was reelected by a higher margin than Obama ostensible popularity, the press didn’t throw him softballs.

In fact, when Reagan left office as the most popular two term president since Eisenhower, the press was full of cautions and criticisms.


Posted by: C&J at February 2, 2013 7:05 AM
Comment #361262

Phx8 spot on comments, my hat is off to you.

In fact, when Reagan left office as the most popular two term president since Eisenhower, the press was full of cautions and criticisms.

C&J wasn’t Reagan the only two term president since Eisenhower? Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Ford and Carter. So he was the most and least popular two term president since Eisenhower if we are to keep in tune with the mythology you have posted here.

But I was wondering what being “full” of cautions and criticisms means. It is just so vague and ambiguous as to be a worthless comment. Was the press also “full” of “if it bleeds it leads” stories? Was it because Reagan left office?

The mythology you are attempting to create here is laughable. The poor picked on conservative bullies. Woe is me, they have it so tough, the more they spend to create myths the less the myths are believed.

Rhinehold,
The question is why are not more people worried about government taking away personal rights, IMHO. For the past 30 years we have seen the damage conservatives have done to DC. They have taken away personal freedoms to fight the “war on drugs” and have attacked everything from the Miranda warning to search and seizure. They have orchestrated a campaign of disinformation and mythology based upon government being the bad guy since Reagan told them “government is the problem”. GWB and the conservatives in Congress “war on terror” has had its effects. The class war against the middle class has been supported by government as they protect the aristocracy. But lets remember it is not the system of government that is the problem. It is the deliberate attempt to make government small that has caused the government to become what it is today.

Posted by: j2t2 at February 2, 2013 10:44 AM
Comment #361263

Nixon, Reagan, Clinton, Bush & Obama. Obama is about as popular as Bush was at this time in his second term.

But consider the media coverage when Reagan won his second term by a landslide. Did the media welcome this?

We could count Johnson and Truman who chose not to run because they were so unpopular. Of course, Ford, Carter & Bush I lost, so they were less popular than their opponents.

Clearly the situation economically and in the world is bad right now. Yet the mainstream press is upbeat in general.

Even consider the difference in the inaugurations. When Bush was inaugurated for the second time, there was much criticism about the expense in a hard economic time (unemployment over 5%). Now that Obama spend more than any other president, at a time of nearly 8% unemployment, did we hear criticism?

You know that I often just use the reports about Republicans and change the names. It outrages you guys. I can say this with certainty. In all the years I have written for this blog, I have never shown anything like the disrespect for President Obama as you have for Bush. And I have never shown the disrespect for Democratic politicians that you have shown for Republicans. Yet my mild criticism drives you guys to fits of apoplexy.

I merely point out that negative economic growth (as reported this quarter) unemployment of 7.9%, increasing chaos in the Middle East and a terrorist attack on our Embassy is not good news. Do you think it is?

Posted by: C&J at February 2, 2013 11:13 AM
Comment #361269

I was confused by the wording of the comment C&J. But that being said we don’t know how popular Obama will be when his second term has ended so including him in this group is premature at the least.

But that being said the office of president really isn’t about who is most popular on a long term basis C&J. If we judged by popularity then the most corrupt administration in modern history, The Reagan Administration, could lead us to believe corruption is more popular than honesty. But is it?

In order for the myth of the liberal press to work C&J one has to assume the press was one huge conglomerate during Reagan’s time. That there was but one voice and that all the media agreed on everything. But that wasn’t true then nor is it true now.
The problem here is indeed a problem with the press but it isn’t a one sided problem. The press has become corporate business to the point where it is all about the profits for the quarter and not real investigative journalism or accurate and factual reporting. It is about ratings. It is about appealing to the masses. It is about making money not reporting the news. Faux is a leader in this mess.

But don’t blame the press for what we the people have asked them to do. We have willingly gave up much of the free press rights for sensationalism and short dresses on the news anchors. Faux one again leads in this way.

As for criticisms on the inauguration here is one-

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/16/2013-inauguration_n_2310770.html

For a few facts on it here is another-

http://urbanlegends.about.com/od/barackobama/a/inauguration.htm


C&J it isn’t your “mild” criticism that I respond to. It is the myths and misinformation that I find wrong. You have joined the peanut gallery here on WB if you are competing with me, which is a step in the wrong direction for you. Let the many righties in the peanut gallery compete with me, give us intelligent articles from a conservative point of view to disagree with. Let us get the dirt on the table so we can all sort it out. Just my opinion.

Posted by: j2t2 at February 2, 2013 1:53 PM
Comment #361272

It’s all good for them C&J, because they have the Presidency, ie, it’s all partisan politics.

Posted by: Weary Willie at February 2, 2013 2:36 PM
Comment #361273

j2t2, who on Fox News just lost their job for repeatedly lying and airing false stories.


SCANDAL-PLAGUED STEVE CAPUS OUT AS NBC NEWS PRESIDENT>/a>

Oh, Wait! That’s NBC!

Let’s take a peek at a real news story.

The rap sheet against Capus isn’t troubling, surprising, or even disturbing — it is breathtaking:
1. During last year’s presidential election, Andrea Mitchell was caught manufacturing a Romney gaffe where none existed.
2. During last year’s GOP primary, Ed Schultz edited video of Texas Governor Rick Perry to make him look racist.
3. In April of last year, the “Today Show” was caught editing audio of a 9-1-1 call to make George Zimmerman look racist.
4. In August of 2009, Contessa Brewer sliced and diced a photograph so it wouldn’t look like a black man attended a Tea Party carrying a firearm.
5. Just this week, NBC News maliciously edited video of a town council meeting to make it look as though Second Amendment civil rights activists heckled a parent who lost his son in Newtown.
This isn’t bias; this is committing outright fraud in pursuit of a political agenda. And it is no coincidence that every single one of these incidents aided and abetted Obama directly or whatever his agenda was at the time.
Posted by: Weary Willie at February 2, 2013 2:46 PM
Comment #361274

Here, j2t2. Read this one and weep! bwahhahahah!


ANDREW BREITBART’S BIRTHDAY GIFT: VICTORY OVER NBC

Posted by: Weary Willie at February 2, 2013 2:49 PM
Comment #361280

j2t2

What specifically do you find “crazy” in any of my recent posts.

I wrote that 7.9% unemployment was not good; asked the president to obey a court ruling, pointed out that Obama and Bush were reelected by almost identical margins & Obama is about as popular as Bush was at this point, mentioned the the economy shrunk in the last quarter, said it might be good for congress to pass a budget & generally talked about things like immigration and liking Coca-Cola.

Most of what I wrote in merely factual. Re myths, like what? Reagan was the most popular president I can remember. (I really cannot recall Eisenhower. I think Johnson was very popular for a few months, but he finished poorly.) The economy is growing poorly under Obama. It grew robustly after 1982. Obama is the only president to be reelected by a smaller margin than he got the first time. Just because these are facts you dislike, does not mean they are myths.

I have been always respectful of the president. I never called him a clown or a crook as you have Republicans.

Re “reasonable articles” I write some articles that I think are almost completely nonpartisan and almost nobody comments. They are less fun for you all.

Posted by: C&J at February 2, 2013 3:36 PM
Comment #361288

j2t2 writes; “The press has become corporate business to the point where it is all about the profits for the quarter and not real investigative journalism or accurate and factual reporting. It is about ratings. It is about appealing to the masses. It is about making money not reporting the news. Faux is a leader in this mess.”

If ratings and appealing to the masses were the criteria, why then are so many newspapers, magazines and TV networks in such trouble?

I subscribed to US News and World Report for many years until they folded and my subscription fulfillment want to Time. Time is now laying off hundreds. The leading national newspaper, The NY Times is in trouble. Two of the major TV networks are in trouble.

Fox is not the leader in the mess…just the leader. Ever wonder why?

Posted by: Royal Flush at February 2, 2013 5:04 PM
Comment #361294

Unemployment on Obama never got as bad as it did under Reagan, by a margine of almost a full percentage point.

Obama both exceeded his predecessor’s first term in terms of gross job growth, and net job growth, which is to say that Obama both created more jobs when job growth was positive, and ended his first term with positive job creation, which Bush didn’t.

Given the size of the recessions Bush had and Obama had, Obama doesn’t come in second.

The main difference is that Obama had to start from the trough of Bush’s recession, while Bush had to start from the heights of Clinton’s best job numbers. You drive this economy into the ditch, and then you complain that the car isn’t up on the roadway like it used to be, and blame Obama, since he took over.

Yeah, that’s good of you.

The reports on the latest numbers have indicated that a big part of the small contraction comes from the fact that the Defense department reduced its spending by historically remarkable amounts. That reduction is a product of your policy. So let me ask this: if this is a result of your policy, and if you have been successful in preventing Obama from carrying out much of his policy, then why are you sitting here and acting as if this is all Obama?

You seem to want to have your cake (that is, stop Obama policy and implement your own), and eat it, too (that is, blame Obama for a bad economy when the spending crunch reduces economic activity)

But you know what? The Right has come to believe it can say anything it wants to get back in power, so this is not surprising.

And really, shut about the liberal media. It’s the oldest excuse in the book for the fact that the Right doesn’t act sympathetically or wisely enough to merit getting good coverage. The Right doesn’t want balance, it wants a conservative bias in all media, so people will be more inclined to buy into their bull.

Why don’t you build your cases on facts and not paranoia about the media not liking you?

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at February 2, 2013 8:24 PM
Comment #361297

Now wait just a minute, Stephen Daugherty! Bush saved millions of jobs!

Posted by: Weary Willie at February 3, 2013 4:58 AM
Comment #361301

Weary, Competing with Faux is a tough job. But the one example, from of all media outlets available, Breitbart is suspect at best. My point is the media, all the media not one or two examples, is not a liberal conspiracy as many on the right would like to believe.


C&J Crazy? When did I say crazy? Myth and misinformation, such as the current Reagan revisionism, is what I was referring to.

Perhaps Reagan was the most popular president you can remember but Kennedy was more popular than Reagan and Kennedy was in office after Eisenhower which differs from your original comment.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_rankings_of_Presidents_of_the_United_States

If ratings and appealing to the masses were the criteria, why then are so many newspapers, magazines and TV networks in such trouble?

A lack of the things previously mentioned Royal.

Fox is not the leader in the mess…just the leader. Ever wonder why?

Faux is to news as night is to day Royal. Short skirts and stupid comments rule at Faux. Misinformation and myth are their stock in trade. They dumb people down, which has been proven. So no I don’t wonder why I wonder for how long will the American people fall for it.

http://www.poynter.org/latest-news/mediawire/174826/survey-nprs-listeners-best-informed-fox-news-viewers-worst-informed/

Posted by: j2t2 at February 3, 2013 10:00 AM
Comment #361306

j2t2

Kennedy was popular after he was killed. During his presidency, not so much. He was elected by a razor thin majority, perhaps with the help of voter fraud in Texas and Illinois. Everyone expected a tough race in 1964. Getting killed is a high price to pay to shore up your popularity.

So I accept that Kennedy is well thought of now, but the day before that fateful day in Dallas, his chances of being reelected in 1964 were in doubt.

In any case, I really do not remember Kennedy. I have a vague memory of the assassination. I do recall that Reagan was wildly popular and could have won a third term had it been allowed. It is good he could not, since his Alzheimer was hitting him.

But consider Reagan’s landslide. He won nearly 59% of the vote and carried all the states except Minnesota. This is what a mandate for change looks like. The more or less 51% that Obama and Bush got, not so much.

Posted by: C&J at February 3, 2013 2:11 PM
Comment #361308
Breitbart is suspect at best.
Posted by: j2t2 at February 3, 2013 10:00 AM

And that makes Presidents of major news outlets resign, j2t2?

I feel sorry for your having to blindly follow your partisan mindset. It really must be difficult grasping at these straws in an attempt to justify your views. Don’t you ever accuse anyone on the right of being closed minded, j2t2.

Posted by: Weary Willie at February 3, 2013 3:27 PM
Comment #361466
I feel sorry for your having to blindly follow your partisan mindset.

Weary not falling for Breitbart and their propaganda doesn’t mean I am partisan. The reputation of Breitbart precedes them, mountains out of molehills journalism. Believing them takes more of a partisan effort than recognizing them for the fakes they are.


It really must be difficult grasping at these straws in an attempt to justify your views.

Weary I am not grasping at straws I am allowing C&J to clarify the misconceptions they have attempted to create. They are down to justifying their comment with the election results of Reagan’s second term.


Don’t you ever accuse anyone on the right of being closed minded, j2t2.

I prefer to keep my options open Weary, you have created nothing but a strawman argument here.

Posted by: j2t2 at February 8, 2013 10:23 AM
Post a comment