Unemployment:
When Obama took office: 7.8%
Now: 8.3%
Median Household Income:
When Obama took office: Almost $55,000
Now: Less than $51,000
Price of Gas:
When Obama took office: $1.85 per gallon
Now: $3.78 per gallon (almost double!)
National Debt:
When Obama took office: $10.6 trillion
Now: Exceeded $16 trillion last week
134 Executive orders by Obama. Many of them infringing on our Constitutional rights.
With this much damage done in one term, Why would any sane person want four more years of this guy? Answer: They wouldn't!
recommend
Facebook
Twitter
bookmark 
print
Comments: 72
Good job, BigMama! Americans need to think about each of these. Pay sure hasn't gone up, let alone enough to cover these, and that's for those who even still have jobs ... . No, no government role is going to keep anyone's head above water, especially so if they ever force everyone in dependency on them. Americans have to look at what happens next and that ain't pretty.
...executive orders - Bush more? Bush had 9/11, Bush was in office 8 years, Obama 3years 10months.
unemployment/economy - inherited from Bush? maybe, but created by democrats. 3years 10months and nothing better under Obama, nothing better on the horizon. OBAMA - FAIL!
...and democrats and their bla bla bla are irrelevant being that they are incapable of truthfulness.
Come on libbys, its ok to admit that you made a mistake....
...Ha!! Especially when the democrats, who's 36+ years of failed policies caused the melt-down in the first place, now hold the White House and the Senate. The fox guarding the hen-house.
ANY sane person would be able to recognize the damage that the communists running the democrat party have done with their "Overwhelm the System" policies geared towards bringing down our American Capitalist system, and that the American Patriots in the Republican party are the only ones standing in the way of a complete communist takeover.
...One can always expect Tony to show up in defense of that communist take-over.
Reagan didn't inherit the same economy from Carter that Obama did from Bush, so you're projecting a false equivalency. The '08 economic collapse is the worst we've seen since FDR. In effect, trying to compare any other economy to this one is completely disingenuous.
As for wild tin foil hat conspiracy theories about communists and red scares, not even worth my time.
I've been wondering the same thing myself. Seems they're too busy with conspiracy theories about communists and Muslims. It really is sad. Too bad you can't acknowledge the truth instead of brushing it aside as "excuses". But I guess it is easier to just insult people by calling them idiots.
"And Obama said that if he didn't turn the economy around in one term he would be a one term president."
Ah yes, that old lame-duck issue. Naturally, I doubt Obama would have made that remark if he had been aware of the unprecedented obstructionism that was in his unforeseeable future. But the details don't matter, just take everything out of context, it really helps your argument.
lol, paranoid delusions abound. Can't debate like adults, so now it's time for accusations of altars and personal attacks. Typical.
But at any rate, your deflection techniques from the issues at hand are duly noted.
Jimmy Carter LOL.
When Reagan took over, the prime rate was over 20%.
There were (for the second time) lines at gas stations, There was rationing of gas (odd/even – if your license plate started with an odd number you could only buy gas on odd numbered dates etc – same as in 73).
There were wars in Afghanistan, Angola, Ethiopia, Lebanon, and 5 or 6 others. We had troops in place as an “aid” to most of them.
The cold war was still in full force.
Inflation was running in the 11 to 12% range. The unemployment rate was pushing 10% (the combined “Misery Index was at 21.98%).
So tell me again, that it was worse when Obama took over, than it was when Reagan took over!
Those would be impressive grounds for "worst economy since the great depression", if not for the fact that it's dwarfed by Bush's mess. The 2007–2012 global financial crisis, also known as the Global Financial Crisis and 2008 financial crisis, is considered by many economists to be the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression of the 1930s. It resulted in the threat of total collapse from large financial institutions, the bailout of banks by national governments, and downturns in stock markets around the world. In many areas, the housing market also suffered, resulting in evictions, foreclosures and prolonged unemployment. The crisis played a significant role in the failure of key businesses, declines in consumer wealth estimated in trillions of US dollars, and a downturn in economic activity leading to the 2008–2012 global recession and contributing to the European sovereign-debt crisis.
The active phase of the crisis, which manifested as a liquidity crisis, can be dated from August 7, 2007 when BNP Paribas terminated withdrawals from three hedge funds citing "a complete evaporation of liquidity".
The bursting of the U.S. housing bubble, which peaked in 2006, caused the values of securities tied to U.S. real estate pricing to plummet, damaging financial institutions globally. The financial crisis was triggered by a complex interplay of the overvaluation of bundled sub-prime mortgages, questionable trading practices — including those based on over-reliance on Black-Scholes-Merton formula — on behalf of both buyers and sellers, and a lack of adequate capital holdings from banks and insurance companies to back the financial commitments they were making.
Questions regarding bank solvency, declines in credit availability and damaged investor confidence had an impact on global stock markets, where securities suffered large losses during 2008 and early 2009. Economies worldwide slowed during this period, as credit tightened and international trade declined.
So yeah, pretty much way worse than anything Carter threw at Reagan. Hope that answered your question.
1) Someone makes a point.
2) I make a counter-point.
3) You swoop in with an insult.
4) Rinse, repeat.
It's really starting to get tiresome.
At least you didn't bother trying to deny your propensity for insults.
Like I said before, I don't insult anyone unless they've insulted me first.
"No one has made direct personal insults towards you."
It's too bad that repeating that over and over again doesn't make it true. In direct response to my above comment...
Your tactics don't work anymore! What the hell will it take for idiots to wake up and see him for what he is?
Oops.
"So I answered him back , he accused me of insulting him..."
I accused you of name-calling, get it straight.
While your debating techniques are admirable, your logic is incredibly flawed!
You may also want to look at the demise of State Savings and Loans, that were a direct result of laws put into effect by J Carter.
Remember those?
S&L’s declined to a point, that there were runs on them – the Federal Government had to step in, FSLIC was dissolved, as well as dozens of State Deposit Guarantee Funds?
Get some real life experience, read something other than LSE/Krugman based articles in the Economist, with more and more Keynesian slop and look at what has actually worked.
Smithian economic law has been proven to work over and again, and proven to fail when it is “tweaked” with semi-Keynesian stupidity (or worse full blown Keynes based failure!).
At a press conference in 2006, the question was asked of George W. Bush, "What do you say to people who are losing patience with gas prices at $3 a gallon? And how much of a political price do you think you're paying for that, right now?"
Also in 2006, Barbara Boxer said, "Since George Bush and Dick Cheney took over as president and vice president, gas prices have doubled... They are too cozy with the oil industry"
In 2008, Nancy Pelosi "blasted" the president as reported on ABC San Francisco, "The speaker blames what she labels the Bush-Cheney big oil agenda, using graphics to point out gasoline prices have more than doubled in the Bush administration. 'This is a scam of the greatest magnitude,' says Speaker Pelosi." Now that the gas prices are at the highest levels in history, when has the media blamed Obama's "big oil agenda?" When do critics in the mainstream media or Nancy Pelosi call Obama's handling of high cost of fuel, a "scam"?
The Kerry/Edwards Campaign in 2004 said, "America has failed to turn the corner on energy independence or reliability. Under the Bush-Cheney Administration, we have become MORE dependent on foreign oil and gas prices have soared too [sic] new highs, not only stretching the family budget, but adding difficult costs to business and threaten our economic security."
In 2007, Hillary Clinton said, "With oil nearing $100 a barrel and gas prices over $3 per gallon, Americans are feeling the pain of seven years of a failed Bush-Cheney energy policy," the LA Times reported. Then Senator Barack Obama "speaking at a town hall meeting Thursday in Ottumwa, Iowa, also reminded voters of the recent rise in gas prices." Mr. Obama continued, "Washington has ignored the economic pressures facing the working class" and "Three dollars a gallon in November—that's never been seen before."
"This week, the price of oil and gasoline both hit new record highs—almost $120 for a barrel of oil and more than $3.50 a gallon for gas. These out-of-control prices mean that hundreds of thousands of Americans are driving to work and spending too much of their day just earning back the cost of their commute. The American people deserve to know why this happened." April, 2008 account of Sen. Frank Lautenberg's radio address on behalf of the Democratic Party.
It's Bush's fault!
Well, Tony, in fairness - that is only true if the president is a democrat...."
I have no idea where you got that quote, but it wasn't from me, so I'm puzzled as to why you have addressed me with it.
Are those the "facts" you were speaking of, BM? Btw, thanks again for swooping in with an insult. I should start posting those in the "Insult Report" group.
Mr. Stark,
If I were using debate techniques, I would question my own sincerity.
In a debate, I can take either position, no matter what I think.
This is a dispute of fact.
What I am stating, I have had proven to me repeatedly over my many decades - most of which were after I had to acknowledge, and abandon, the very same ideologies you are espousing.
You do not want Keynes brought up, yet his (failed) theories are the basis for your contentions!
Either way, I want to discuss fact.
One you brought up was the housing crisis, and implied the blame laid at the feet of Bush.
The planting of the "seeds" for that crisis were a result of CRA, which was Jimmy Carter - that guy you claim left the economy in better shape than Bush did.
By the way, I am no fan of any economic activity that either Bush implemented - because there were more of the same as Carter, Clinton, and now Obama.
"This is a dispute of fact."
Dispute/debate - now it's a debate over semantics.
Trying to involve Jimmy Carter in the 2008 financial meltdown is an exercise in futility. Even if what you say is true, it would be a very small sliver in the comedy of errors that led to the crash. When the housing bubble was created and when it became a detriment to our economy are two separate situations. Bush's drive for home ownership fueled the housing bubble and drove us to the brink of a great depression. From his earliest days in office, Bush paired his belief that Americans do best when they own their own homes with his conviction that markets do best when left alone. Bush pushed hard to expand home ownership, especially among minority groups, an initiative that dovetailed with both his ambition to expand Republican appeal and the business interests of some of his biggest donors. But his housing policies and hands-off approach to regulation encouraged lax lending standards.
Bush did foresee the danger posed by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-sponsored mortgage finance giants. The president spent years pushing a recalcitrant Congress to toughen regulation of the companies, but was unwilling to compromise when his former Treasury secretary wanted to cut a deal. And the regulator Bush chose to oversee them - an old school buddy - pronounced the companies sound even as they headed toward insolvency.
As early as 2006, top advisers to Bush dismissed warnings from people inside and outside the White House that housing prices were inflated and that a foreclosure crisis was looming. And when the economy deteriorated, Bush and his team misdiagnosed the reasons and scope of the downturn. In February 2008, for example, Bush was still calling it a "rough patch."
The result was a series of piecemeal policy prescriptions that lagged behind the escalating crisis.
Looking back, Keith Hennessey, Bush's current chief economic adviser, said he and his colleagues had done the best they could with the information they had at the time. But Hennessey did say he regretted that the administration had not paid more heed to the dangers of easy lending practices.
And both Bush's Treasury secretary, Henry Paulson Jr. and his predecessor, John Snow, say the housing push went too far.
Jimmy Carter cannot be blamed for that and is ultimately why even mentioning his name in regard to this issue is absurd. It's a straw man raised by heavily leaning right wing sites like "newsbusters.org".
You like the initials BM?? TS is not too bad either!"
I have no idea what you're rambling on about. Maybe instead of being so vague, you'd like to be more specific about your accusations. Be straightforward or don't bother me with this anymore, it's bordering on harassment.
LOLOLOLOLOLOL
Bush's old school buddy - you mean Barney Frank????
ROFLMAOFOMCPIMP!
CRA, Fair Credit Act, Fair Credit and Housing act, Fair Credit and Collections act, Dodd-Frank.........................
I was IN the lending business when it started (under Carter), and I knew people from the initial app takers, to the Corporate Presidents, that all agreed it would be a disaster in a few decades.
Think of it this way - it one person sticks a needle in a Dam, and several times other people cram bigger and bigger objects into that hole, and the dam finally breaks .......... whose fault is it?
And as I have said repeatedly, Bush (neither of them) helped, and did in fact make it worse, with Keynesian economic policies!
You want to group Keynesian with Birthers and people that claim he is a Muslim??????
What a joke! You OBVIOUSLY do not have the first clue what the word means!
Keynesian economics is not a conspiracy; it is a set of economic theory that many people believe in, even tho it has failed every single time.
You must be thinking that it has to do with being Kenyan born, which I do not believe, and never said. Maybe a dictionary would help you keep up?
IF you think it is a otherwise, you need to read some books on economics, BEFORE you comment on economic situations!
And certainly stop getting your info from Huffington post - you are in WAY over your head (at least as far as you have shown so far!).
LOLOLOLOLOLOL
Excellent rebuttal.
"Bush's old school buddy - you mean Barney Frank????
ROFLMAOFOMCPIMP!"
Even better.
"And as I have said repeatedly, Bush (neither of them) helped, and did in fact make it worse..."
Thanks, that was my point. I'm not sure where you've said that repeatedly, but it wasn't in this thread. You were clearly laying all the blame on Carter.
"You want to group Keynesian with Birthers and people that claim he is a Muslim??????
What a joke! You OBVIOUSLY do not have the first clue what the word means!"
Obviously not.
"You must be thinking that it has to do with being Kenyan born, which I do not believe, and never said. Maybe a dictionary would help you keep up?"
I'll explain, since it seems you're having a hard time following along. I lumped all of those together because they are favorite talking points of the extreme right, not because I thought John Keynes had anything to do with Kenya. So no, I never said that, but thanks for putting words in my mouth. That coupled with all your snarky comments about keeping up, life experience, Huffington post, etc. paints you as a person that is quite unworthy of my time. I've laid out in detail how the financial crisis was triggered by a complex interplay of of many factors, and all you can do is laugh and scoff, basically ignoring everything I have said. In order to make a counter point, you have to first acknowledge the original point. You have failed to do that here. Good luck with your crusade to prove... whatever it is you're trying to prove.
And the Middle Class.....it's going, going, going.......soon to be gone, I'm afraid. Very scary.
Won't take four more years at this rate.
I think you answered your own question about why people want four more years of death and destruction.
...maybe Bob Hope said it best HERE