I find if odd how the far left ideologues are willing to so easily dismiss a successful, proven leader while supporting a guy who has absolutely ZERO record of accomplishment, whether in private life or the political arena.
So as you say, "has absolutely ZERO record of accomplishment" but YOU dismiss: Obama has overhauled the food safety system Advanced women's rights in the work place Ended Don't Ask, Don't Tell (DADT) in our military Stopped defending DOMA in court. Passed the Hate Crimes bill. Appointed two pro-choice women to the Supreme Court. Expanded access to medical care and provided subsidies for people who can't afford it. Expanded the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) Fixed the preexisting conditions travesty [and rescissions] in health insurance. Invested in clean energy. Overhauled the credit card industry, making it much more consumer-friendly. While Dodd-Frank bill was weak in many respects, it was still an extremely worthwhile start at re-regulating the financial sector. He created a Elizabeth Warren's dream agency: The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. He's done a lot for veterans He got help for people whose health was injured during the clean-up after the 9/11 attacks. None of these things were priorities for Republicans. They actively opposed, directly or indirectly through obstruction, every single item on this list. In fact, they succeeded in killing a Cap & Trade bill in the Senate after it had passed through the House. All of these things are improvements that would not have occurred under a McCain-Palin administration. Moreover, a McCain-Palin administration would have moved in the other direction on most of these issues, or come up with even worse compromises. Of course since then... He's killed Osama Bin Laden Eliminated several other Al-Qaeda leaders Ended the War in Iraq Begun the drawdown of forces from Afghanistan End-run Republican obstructionism by recess-appointing Richard Cordray to run the Consumer Financial Protection Board. So I'd say zero Republican priorites for sure. You're too easy!
Without going into how much of your list is actual crap, you didn't even address the issue of NDAA: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Defense_Authorization_Act_for_Fiscal_Year_2012 Let's read what the ACLU has to say about the NDAA: The American Civil Liberties Union has stated that "While President Obama issued a signing statement saying he had 'serious reservations' about the provisions, the statement only applies to how his administration would use the authorities granted by the NDAA." and, despite claims to the contrary, "The statute contains a sweeping worldwide indefinite detention provision... [without] temporal or geographic limitations, and can be used by this and future presidents to militarily detain people captured far from any battlefield." The ACLU also maintains that "the breadth of the NDAA’s detention authority violates international law because it is not limited to people captured in the context of an actual armed conflict as required by the laws of war." Why don't you add the NDAA to your little list?
BO killed bin Laden? Really? I thought he was cowering next to the grown-ups when the SEALS killed bin Laden. I guess with the radical far lefts record of re-writing history I shouldn't be surprised. But really, I would be more apt to believe BO was in that plane with Hillary (drawing fire, barrell rolls) than off killing bin laden.
See, when your hyperbole is proven to be the total nonsense it is, you simply resort to childish personal attacks because you can't escape your political narratives and RW ideology. But this is nothing new. Republicans routinely and with precision accuse their political foes of doing something they themselves are provably guiltier of in the first place. You live for the lies that you adhere to even when presented with evidence of their falseness. I have presented a list of accomplishments and you retreat into the warmth and comfort of silly snipes that keep you from having to acknowledge that your words were completely wrong in the first place. Why am I not shocked? Listen, if you want to snipe and attack the president for whatever reason, knock yourself out. We all clearly know where you stand. Just let those of us that do not share your delusions know in advance and we won’t bother correcting your inaccuracies, lies, misconceptions, and falsehoods. We’ll just leave you alone with your rants. But for some reason, I think that you want us to participate because nothing reinforces a false narrative like people pointing out how they are false. I believe that is all you seek anyway. Glad I could help validate your RW propaganda.
Classic case of Obama Infatuation Syndrome, folks.....so tell us exactly who all makes up the "we" you seem to be speaking for? You & who else? Iqless? Is he going to do as you command? I can't think of anyone else here who routinely adheres to your radical, deeply-held ideology.
I find it peculiar that the liberals on this forum always seem to spin the topic into another direction or simply just start throwing out insults. I can see why forum members (i.e., Hollysmom) don't want to play in their sandbox. Their sandbox is full of grime, dirt, broken toys and unmentionable bodily excretions. At least the conservatives on here try to throw some fresh, clean sand into their box, but the liberals keep throwing it back out. Liberals, I don't mind you playing in your own muck, but please keep it inside your own box.
Poppycock. Having observed and participated here for a few months, I think I can say that both the conservatives and the liberals here give as good as they get. From what I've seen, neither side has a legitimate claim to the high ground.
I was reading about the dynamics of false narratives or what we used to refer to as propaganda. Specifically why it is so effective and why it works on certain people. The gist of the article said that once a certain type of person hears something often enough it becomes truth for them beyond all reason because they believe in the "authority" of those pushing the message. Even when presented with direct irrefutable evidence that contradicts their beliefs from multiple sources/people, they not only continue to believe in the false narrative but their belief in that narrative actually increases. Those that challenge the falsity of the belief actually inadvertently end up serving the purpose of intensifying the false belief for those taken in by the false narrative. I think it speaks directly to the strong reactions and personal attacks that arise from challenging false narratives such as this thread. Clearly, zero accomplishments is simply false which was easily proven by both the list of accomplishments and other threads where the poster claimed that Obama got everything he wanted because he had a congressional majority. When called on the false narrative, the true believer’s natural instinct is to believe the false narrative even more intensely simply because it was challenged. You can easily see this dynamic play out in the first page of this unfortunate thread. The good news is that there a convenient remedy for people like this.
The funny thing about this idiot blogger is that it was Reagan's dictum not Clinton's that Romney was pushing. What Romney was asking was if you were better off 4 years ago than you are today and that was Reagan's dictum that Clinton was throwing back in daddy Bush's face. The even funnier part is if you ask Romney if he is better off than he was 4 years ago, the answer is "Yes".
Ohhhh Joe! ...but you don't understand! David said it was so, so by gosh and by golly it must be true!
But... ...I just met Joe. Why would I follow his commands? Now, if Moen was still around I could ask him how I should respond to your.... odd.... questions. By the way, are you, rlm, and coin still taking your commands from FOX news? I ask 'cause earlier I was watching it and they were talking about how Obama was trying to destroy America and I wondered how far along you three are on posting about those "facts."
It's said that imitation is a form of flattery. If so, the righties really seem to enjoy flattering people. But, it's too bad they lack in originality. It would be more fun "talking" to them if they were less predictable.
