Andrei.Hicks wrote on May 10
th, 2011 at 3:57pm:
darkhall67 wrote on May 10
th, 2011 at 12:04pm:
Glad to see you have changed your mind about Obama then.
Makes you wonder what else you have been completely wrong about.
Nope, the economic recovery would have happened no matter who the current President.
In fact I believe it has happened in spite of the current leader.
He does deserve congratulations for authorizing the raid on Bin Laden and removing his as a threat to this country.
However Obama has proved to be
exactly the do-nothing failure I predicted he would be in 2008.
The only good thing about his election was the fact it meant that power-hungry witch Clinton was not elected.
That woman would step on her dead grandmother to grab power.
Amazing how blind people can be , even when they live in the country they are talking about.
Obama has been one the most productive presidents in history.
I read somewhere when he was getting graded on his first year that he was the most legislative successful president since roosevelt.
"I know this is supposed to be Barack Obama’s summer of discontent. The oil spill is still gushing; the economy is still floundering; the Afghan war is deteriorating; Americans don’t find him so charming anymore. But have you noticed that when it comes to actual policy, he keeps racking up the wins? This week it was financial-regulatory reform. One can argue about whether the bill the Senate passed will truly change the way Wall Street operates, but off the top of your head, can you name a more significant piece of progressive legislation signed by either of the last two Democratic presidents? Neither can I. And that goes for Obama’s stimulus package and his health-care reform as well. All of which means that, legislatively at least,
Obama has exceeded in 18 months what Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter achieved in a combined 12 years. By summer’s end, he’ll also have shepherded two young liberal justices on to the Supreme Court.But even if Obama never manages another legislative victory, he’ll already have pulled off one of the most impressive opening acts in American political history. The question is why we’re paying so little attention.
The answer is that the media views policy through the lens of politics. Unless a policy victory brings political benefits—rising poll numbers, better prospects for the next elections—it is not treated as a big win. Thus, the Tea Party movement is considered an ominous sign for Obama, evidence that the country is turning against him. But the reason that the Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin crowd is so angry is that Obama has expanded the federal government’s relationship with the private sector in fundamental ways. In political terms, the Tea Party movement may be a sign of Obama’s weakened position, but in policy terms, it is a testament to his success. As shrewd conservatives like David Frum recognize, the current mood of Republican optimism is wildly misplaced. When Republicans refused to compromise with Obama on health care, they gambled that he wouldn’t, or couldn’t, push through reform with only Democratic support. Then, when he did, they insisted that he was destroying his chances of passing future legislation. Now he’s proved them wrong again."
http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2010-06-28/obamas-winning-streak-...A "do nothing failure"?
Yeah right.
Forum
Pages: 
