9/22/2010 6:53:56 PM

Keep blaming Bush as you whistle past the graveyard (dedicated to Supplanter)

9/23/2010 12:32:23 AM

way to go Obama. a couple hours after reaching out for the umpteenth time to Iran, Iran spits in our collective faces again, for the umpteenth time. good work, man.

9/24/2010 1:26:56 PM

I've been a staunch obama supporter, but its time for him to stop playing nice and fuck some people up.

9/24/2010 2:24:55 PM

^ how, exactly, will obama manage that. there is no "fuck some people up" execute power. obama had what he needed when his term began and he piddled it away. now the country doesn't trust him, and obama has no one to blame but himself for that. without the backing of congress, which seems to be in perpetual campaign mode, obama can't do shit.

9/24/2010 5:08:05 PM

I think Obama legitimately thought he would take office, "be nice" and solve all of our foreign relation problems with a smile and a beer summit.

9/24/2010 5:17:47 PM

what the hell are we talking about here?

we're going to "fuck iran up" because they said some things we thought were mean? what is this middle school?

9/24/2010 6:18:46 PM

Quote :

"I think Obama legitimately thought he would take office, "be nice" and solve all of our foreign relation problems with a smile and a beer summit. "

Yep.

9/24/2010 11:16:50 PM

I highly doubt he was that naive.

Likely he just thought it was at least worth a try, and even if it didn't work, was still a better plan than trying to blow people up, calling other nations an "axis of evil", and entering the US into unnecessary wars.

But that just might be me projecting my views on foreign relations onto Obama. For all I know, he is that naive.

9/24/2010 11:29:28 PM

Obama's response was amateurish: Ahmadinejad


http://www.tehrantimes.com/Index_view.asp?code=227333

[Edited on September 26, 2010 at 1:19 AM. Reason : ]

9/26/2010 1:19:41 AM

Quote :

"I highly doubt he was that naive. Likely he just thought it was at least worth a try, and even if it didn't work, was still a better plan than trying to blow people up, calling other nations an "axis of evil", and entering the US into unnecessary wars. But that just might be me projecting my views on foreign relations onto Obama. For all I know, he is that naive."

naive, maybe. idealogical, definitely.

Obama legitimately believed, like a lot of Americans (maybe even yourself), that all Bush did when he rode into office was decide he was gonna "blow people up, call other nations an "axis of evil", and entering the US into unnecessary wars"...which is certainly untrue.

the truth is, those countries earned their titles. Obama is just now learning the hard way. they (their governments) dont give a FUCK about us, other than the fact they hate us and use that hatred of us to prop themselves up to their own people in order to consolidate power. no amount of US ass-kissing is going to change that.

they hated us long before Bush, and will hate us long after. just as long as it is convenient for them to do so.

[Edited on September 27, 2010 at 1:48 PM. Reason : .]

9/27/2010 1:47:28 PM

Looks like Rahm is leaving for greener pastures.

9/30/2010 12:45:59 PM

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-september-29-2010/indecision-2010---democratic-campaign-woes?xrs=share_fb

wow, pretty funny

9/30/2010 12:49:41 PM

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/Elizabeth-Warren_s-profitable-conflict-of-interest-1075643-104180843.html

Quote :

"... According to Bloomberg News, even as [Elizabeth Warren] was serving as head of the congressional panel overseeing the $700 billion bank bailout this year, Warren took $90,000 to testify in a class-action lawsuit by retailers against several of the major banks whose bailout she was overseeing..."

Where's the conflict of interest, exactly?

10/5/2010 3:14:01 PM

I'm in the mood for a cheap shot . . . from a Foreign Policy magazine interview with Bob Woodward:

Quote :

"FP: Do you think [Petraeus] and Obama have established a real working relationship yet? BW: There's not much evidence of it. I thought one of the most telling moments when I talked to Obama was when I asked about [appointing Gen. Stanley] McChrystal, and he only met with him for ten minutes. I said, but this is your Eisenhower. He would not accept that and he went off saying "I'm not FDR" and "This isn't World War II" and so forth. And I just said to him, "But this is your war" and it's personal relations that count. The point is to spend ten minutes with the guy who's going to take over the war? I don't get that. But then he gets on a plane and goes every week on these campaign swings, you know, to send a political message of the day? It's a misallocation of time."

Said it before, I'll say it again. The man is a masterful . . . well was . . . a masterful campaigner. He is a mediocre politician.

[Edited on October 11, 2010 at 9:21 PM. Reason : .]

10/11/2010 9:21:15 PM

Quote :

"Saying it would appeal a ruling striking down the law that bans gay men and lesbians from serving openly in the United States military, the Obama administration on Thursday asked the federal judge who issued the ruling for an emergency stay of her decision."

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/15/us/politics/15military.html?_r=2&hp

Really, Obama? REALLY?!?

10/15/2010 12:31:53 AM

Quote :

"“I agree with the basic principle that anybody who wants to serve in our armed forces and make sacrifices on our behalf, on behalf of our national security — anybody should be able to serve, and they shouldn’t have to lie about who they are in order to serve. And so we are moving in the direction of ending this policy,” he said. But, he added: “It has to be done in a way that is orderly, because we are involved in a war right now. But this is not a question of whether the policy will end. This policy will end, and it will end on my watch. But I do have an obligation to make sure that I’m following some of the rules. I can’t simply ignore laws that are out there. I’ve got to work to make sure that they are changed.”"

10/15/2010 12:38:04 AM

Much like Duke Nukem Forever and The Hobbit movie, I'll believe it when I see it.

10/15/2010 12:51:34 AM

Obama needs to keep the gays oppressed and voting for him.

10/15/2010 1:11:28 AM

OMG OBAMA'S RUNAWAY SPENDING



...or not.

10/17/2010 7:19:18 PM

Illustrating the fact that FY2009 was Bush's budget.

Most people know this, but I found the source interesting:

http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/dont-blame-obama-for-bushs-2009-deficit/

10/23/2010 8:32:59 AM

And I thought congress controlled the checkbook. Hey what happened in 2006?

10/23/2010 9:11:58 AM

Hey, remember that time when Congress had to override Bush's veto in order to pass the stimulus and bailouts?

10/23/2010 9:37:26 AM

missed that one. hey remember that time I was defending Bush's spending.

10/23/2010 9:47:14 AM

Quote :

"Despite doom-saying about Democrats’ chances in the midterms, the latest NEWSWEEK Poll (full results) shows that they remain in a close race with Republicans 12 days before Election Day, while the president’s approval ratings have climbed sharply. The poll finds that 48 percent of registered voters would be more likely to vote for Democrats, compared with 42 percent who lean Republican (those numbers are similar to those in the last NEWSWEEK Poll, which found Democrats favored 48 percent to 43 percent). President Obama’s approval ratings have jumped substantially, crossing the magic halfway threshold to 54 percent, up from 48 percent in late September"

http://www.newsweek.com/2010/10/22/poll-obama-approval-jumps-dems-more-fired-up.html



^^^^


[Edited on October 23, 2010 at 12:03 PM. Reason : ]

10/23/2010 12:03:04 PM

so, you are telling me that dubya is responsible for near $600b deficits for the next ten years and that Obama has nothing to do with it? really? And then the porkulous bill doesn't have any effect on the 2009 budget? really? really... really?

10/23/2010 1:35:25 PM

^your the typical idiot that the GOP loves.....

10/23/2010 7:34:15 PM

10/23/2010 11:28:04 PM

^
Christine O'Donnell does not approve

10/24/2010 12:23:34 AM

a newsweek poll huh moron. Yeah they bet big on president O.

Which one looks like an outlier?

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president_obama_job_approval-1044.html

10/24/2010 9:47:27 AM

^^^^ you have nothing else to add or to refute my statements? wow, what a shocker, coming for someone who doesn't know the difference between "your" and "you're"

10/24/2010 2:36:42 PM

10/24/2010 2:39:35 PM

when you are gonna call someone an idiot, at least get your grammar correct.

10/24/2010 2:47:34 PM

He must have been listening to Sean Connery saying:

Quote :

"PUNCH THE KEYS"

10/24/2010 2:58:16 PM

Quote :

"you have nothing else to add or to refute my statements? wow, what a shocker"

You didn't make any sort of argument to dispute the graph, I think your argument boils down to "really?"

10/24/2010 10:14:39 PM

what part of "so, you are telling me that dubya is responsible for near $600b deficits for the next ten years and that Obama has nothing to do with it? really? And then the porkulous bill doesn't have any effect on the 2009 budget?" did you miss, Kris?

10/25/2010 7:31:35 PM

the part of it that was an argument.

10/25/2010 7:40:57 PM

ok, let me clarify for you...

Bush's average deficits were $300-400b a year until 2008. Then it ballooned, as one would expect, due to the recession. Add 350b for TARP, and you get that number. The next year, we can reasonably attribute 350b to TARP. With 800b for the porkulous bill, we are left over ~ 400b of deficit. That's on par with what dubya averaged before hand. so...

1) How is it fair to label the entire 2009 deficit as "BUSH'S FAULT!!!" when he had no place in the 800b porkulous bill that makes up the vast majority of that deficit.
2) Given that Bush averaged 3-400b deficits and sans-recession he effectively leaves a 400b deficit + 350 from TARP, how is it fair to say he is responsible for the ~600b deficits that follow for 10 years after Obama is elected.


I'd figure that most people who have basic skills of comprehension could have garnered all of that, but you, being the communist dolt that you are, clearly need it spelled out so even your simple mind can understand it. I forgot that we have such fools on here, so please forgive me

10/25/2010 8:07:23 PM

ok now explain why it took over 4 posts for you to provide an actual argument

10/25/2010 8:36:32 PM

the argument had already been provided. you were just too stupid to see it

10/25/2010 8:37:53 PM

I think you got trolled burro.

10/25/2010 8:53:55 PM

You didn't post shit, I had to egg you on to get anything more than a bad weekend update sketch.

10/25/2010 10:15:34 PM

Even with the dems losing the House, Obama still is favored over the potential GOP presidential candidates....maybe because the GOP doesnt have anyone fresh (same old same old from 2008), kinda like when Kerry ran, the dems were stuck in the same situation.....the GOP's most popular (and hated by the most dems) is Sarah Palin....Sarah Palin to the dems is like Hillary Clinton to the GOP. If she gets the nod, people will show up just to vote against her when they may normally not show up at all. Although, I would not mind a Palin/O'Donnell ticket (she will need a little magic to win).

11/7/2010 3:06:53 PM

comments on the 60 minutes interview that is currently on?

or at least more pictures of the obama dancing with indians?

11/7/2010 8:34:07 PM

Those were his long lost relatives he was dancing with.....sorta a family reunion...

11/7/2010 9:00:05 PM

you could tell he was lying the whole time because he blinked a shitload

11/7/2010 9:18:03 PM

Quote :

"Sarah Palin to the dems is like Hillary Clinton to the GOP."

I wouldn't say that. I thought Hillary was a better candidate than Obama and would've voted for her if she got the nomination. It's unfortunate today's society is easily bought by a catchy slogan and popularity even though the man is not qualified for the job.

11/10/2010 8:04:04 PM

11/10/2010 8:06:19 PM

^^ pretty sure he was qualified

11/10/2010 8:24:57 PM

2 years in senate = qualified for president?

11/11/2010 12:33:41 PM