Counting our blessings: let's talk about how Obama is better than Bush

[Craig234]

OK, a third topic, in another post to help not make the last one longer:

What's that hard about the stem cell issue?

Bush banned new stem cells in research and allowed continued use of existing ones.

This was a compromise position. It did have a large negative effect on the research, consistent with his policies. It was not a total ban.

It's not that hard to say simply and accurately, he RESTRICTED stem cell research, without the word ban; or he BANNED the use of new stem cells.

So, it's a Goldilocks issue. You can criticize him for being wrong on either side, or say he got it right with the compromise. 'He banned stem cells!' 'No he didn't!' are wrong.

 

[Jhhnn]

What was unemployment under bush? high 4 to low 5%.

What is it under Obama? Have SS receipients gotten a raise under his rule? People are MUCH worse since Obama took office.

You're delusional if you think it's better than when Bush was in office, we were doing pretty good. People would LOVE to be back to those times. Times when layoffs, paycuts, reduced benefits, and no raises were uncommon. Now with Obama, it's common. He simply will not rest until the entire country is at the same misery level.

Clue for you, democrats took control of congress in 2006 and it was nothing but downhill from there. And I thoroughly dismantled the OP after he refused to come back after being owned on capital gains and stock options posting mindless, zero personal experience, liberal bullshit.

Now, since the historic elections of 2010 and republican leadership in the house to STOP OBAMA we're seeing a small turn around.

Wake up and pay attention. The more we STOP this president the better off the entire country is. Wake up and pay attention. That much should be obvious, stop obama, country is better and economy is better.

Remember those minor things like the housing bubble, aka the ownership society, and the near collapse of the self regulated financial sector? Going to war, twice, and cutting taxes simultaneously?

Musta been the Democrats leading the charge on that stuff, huh?

There are consequences to credit bubbles, and we're living them. All in all, Obama hasn't done badly in that regard, considering the extreme obstructionism from congressional repubs.

Obama, unfortunately, is not nearly the Liberal Lion that many of us had hoped for... regardless of the raving from the right fringe, (which includes most repub leaders at this point) where everybody who's not them is a commie...

 

[micrometers]

OK, a third topic, in another post to help not make the last one longer:

What's that hard about the stem cell issue?

Bush banned new stem cells in research and allowed continued use of existing ones.

This was a compromise position. It did have a large negative effect on the research, consistent with his policies. It was not a total ban.

It's not that hard to say simply and accurately, he RESTRICTED stem cell research, without the word ban; or he BANNED the use of new stem cells.

So, it's a Goldilocks issue. You can criticize him for being wrong on either side, or say he got it right with the compromise. 'He banned stem cells!' 'No he didn't!' are wrong.

IIRC, nothing has come from research into existing lines. They were either contaminated or proved unable to give the flexibility that a new stem cell would allow.

So effectively it was a ban. The extent that it was a "compromise" would have been like 90% against. And it was done at the behest of the pro-life lobby, so in other words abortion politics withheld from people potential life-saving treatments.

 

[trenchfoot]

The arguing in this thread is pathetic in many posts.

First, let's take the 'how was the economy issue'.

*snip*

What a bunch of crappy arguing.

Craig, thanks for the info. Especially the section on Student Loans.:thumbsup:

 

[nageov3t]

not that I'm not happy we've left Iraq... but how is the Iraqi government kicking us out a credit to President Obama?

if he had his way, we'd still have boots on the ground.

 

[cybrsage]

1. Obama reversed George Bush's stem cell research ban.

2. Obama is moving to make student loans less burdensome to young people

3. Obama is winding down the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan

4. In the conflicts Obama has gotten into (Libya) he has done so squarely in the international framework so as to not unduly burden the US military or taxpayer. He does this by enlisting allies and not being stupidly belligerent

I thought you said we should talk about how Obama is better than Bush. Will you post a list of those items, instead of ways in which he is worse or equal to Bush?

 

[cybrsage]

OK, a third topic, in another post to help not make the last one longer:

What's that hard about the stem cell issue?

Bush banned new stem cells in research and allowed continued use of existing ones.

This was a compromise position. It did have a large negative effect on the research, consistent with his policies. It was not a total ban.

It's not that hard to say simply and accurately, he RESTRICTED stem cell research, without the word ban; or he BANNED the use of new stem cells.

So, it's a Goldilocks issue. You can criticize him for being wrong on either side, or say he got it right with the compromise. 'He banned stem cells!' 'No he didn't!' are wrong.

Add to it that he did not ban research...simply banned using federal money for the research. Because of this, research into adult stem cells flourished and have yielded great results.

 

[micrometers]

Add to it that he did not ban research...simply banned using federal money for the research. Because of this, research into adult stem cells flourished and have yielded great results.

No, US research was gimped due to the unnecessary restriction of research of embryonic stem cells.

 

[randomrogue]

Add to it that he did not ban research...simply banned using federal money for the research. Because of this, research into adult stem cells flourished and have yielded great results.

I actually have no idea how stem cell research has been doing or how the Bush administration's partial ban affected it. Google wasn't much help either. Care to post a link to the flourishing and results?

 

[micrometers]

I actually have no idea how stem cell research has been doing or how the Bush administration's partial ban affected it. Google wasn't much help either. Care to post a link to the flourishing and results?

badly. the "approved lines" were actually contaminated.

http://www.smh.com.au/news/Science/...ls-contaminated/2005/01/24/1106415529930.html

 

[cybrsage]

No, US research was gimped due to the unnecessary restriction of research of embryonic stem cells.

Only research where they people had their hands out begging for federal money. Private money was always available and allowed.

I actually have no idea how stem cell research has been doing or how the Bush administration's partial ban affected it. Google wasn't much help either. Care to post a link to the flourishing and results?

Here is a link from back in 2008 with lots of info.
http://www.frc.org/insight/adult-stem-cell-sucess-stories-2008-jan-june

Here is a woman who had her own stem cells harvested and used to treat spinal cord injury:
http://www.stemcellresearchfacts.org/i-will-walk-again/

Here is a diabetes treatment from adult stem cells:
http://www.lifenews.com/2012/01/11/adult-stem-cell-study-finds-success-in-treating-diabetes/

Here is a link where they claim adult stem cells are about to transform medicine:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/a...ine-dozens-clinical-trials-early-success.html

The wonderful part about adult stem cells is that there is a 0% chance of rejection...they are YOUR own cells. Your body will not reject them, so you never need drugs of any sort to keep the new cells working in you.

The other wonderful part is that you will find no moral objections to it by any but the most "out there" of groups (the ones who oppose all medicine). It is truely a win-win situation.

 

[theeedude]

Dropped the ball on 9/11 and lost Bin Laden vs killed Bin Laden
Started unnecessary Iraq war vs ended unnecessary Iraq war
Started the recession vs stopped the recession
Dying auto industry vs restructured thriving auto industry
Preexisting condition discrimination vs no preexisting condition discrimination.
God Bless Obama, off to my all day bike ride

 

[shira]

WHAT was unemployment under Bush?

The unemployment rate in October, 2009, the end of the final Bush fiscal year, was 10%. It's been going down ever since. Or do you want to claim that Obama is responsible for budgets passed by the Bush Administration?

 

[spidey07]

The unemployment rate in October, 2009, the end of the final Bush fiscal year, was 10%. It's been going down ever since. Or do you want to claim that Obama is responsible for budgets passed by the Bush Administration?

That's only because it looked like Obama was going to win and industry rightfully prepared for his anti-business policies. They knew what he was just as I did.

Hold onto your wallet and cash, Obama is coming was the mood. Liberals keep complaining about business holding onto cash. It's very simple, they are trying to weather the Obama storm. Many business leaders have come right out and said it. Obama is the main element holding our economy back.

 

[Craig234]

That's only because it looked like Obama was going to win and industry rightfully prepared for his anti-business policies. They knew what he was just as I did.

Hold onto your wallet and cash, Obama is coming was the mood.

Sequence of events: McCain ahead in polls, then economy crashed, then Obama won.

You're wrong as usual. But interesting theory businesses lay off millions expecting Obama.

Goes to show your huge ignorance about how business works.

This is the biggest crash since the Great Depression - under Bush - was the mood.

 

[randomrogue]

That's only because it looked like Obama was going to win and industry rightfully prepared for his anti-business policies. They knew what he was just as I did.

Hold onto your wallet and cash, Obama is coming was the mood. Liberals keep complaining about business holding onto cash. It's very simple, they are trying to weather the Obama storm. Many business leaders have come right out and said it. Obama is the main element holding our economy back.

This is partially true. We fired half our staff and lowered everyone's salary. So did just about everyone in our industry in the run up to the election. However it wasn't SOLELY due to Obama even if his name came up in just about every discussion about laying off people. The fact was the economy just straight up sucked and had come to a virtual stand still. Those that didn't lay off massive amounts of people to free up payroll funds all went out of business within the next 6-18 months.

However I disagree that Obama is the main element holding our economy back. He's definitely partially to blame but he's not the main reason. This is a GLOBAL recession on the brink of a GLOBAL depression. If you were to ask me what the main reason is I would put that burden squarely on the shoulders of the banking industry. They refused to lend money and called in all lines of credit to protect themselves at the expense of the economy as a whole. Most businesses need huge sums of borrowed money to operate and without it they just sat on their thumbs.

 

[nageov3t]

Sequence of events: McCain ahead in polls, then economy crashed, then Obama won.

er, my recollection was that McCain was ahead for about a week around the time of the GOP convention, and that Obama was comfortably leading him polls at every other point prior to the election.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ep...neral_election_mccain_vs_obama-225.html#chart

blaming Obama or Bush for issues that have been decades+ in the making seems a little partisan.

 

[randomrogue]

Congress is the real villain here.

Another thing that I had forgotten about but after Obama won and with the economy so horrible one of our competitors sent about 80% of their staff home early for Christmas. No pay, no bonus. It was going to be a rough holiday for them. Then when they came back after New Years they were all fired. That's how bad things were. People were having to make decisions very fast to stay afloat.

 

[shira]

That's only because it looked like Obama was going to win and industry rightfully prepared for his anti-business policies. They knew what he was just as I did.

What an ideologically-blind moron you are. The unemployment began rising steadily in May, 2007, long before anyone knew who would be the nominees for President, let alone who would become the actual President. Just look at the trajectory of the unemployment rate in the following graph, starting in May, 2007:

http://www.google.com/publicdata/ex...seasonality:S&dl=en&hl=en&q=unemployment+rate

Oh, and curious minds would like to know, SPECIFICALLY, what "Obama policies" are anti-business? You do know, don't you, that tax rates have been the same under Obama as under Bush, except that Obama-spearheaded a 2% REDUCTION in the payroll tax. And all TALK of changes in tax rates has specifically referred to INDIVIDUAL tax rates for the top 1% of earners. There's been no "talk" at all about raising CORPORATE tax rates.

Yes, tell us, specifically, what "policies" you're referring to.

 

[spidey07]

Mainly energy as that hits every bottom line. Under my plan energy prices would skyrocket.

 

[Jhhnn]

That's only because it looked like Obama was going to win and industry rightfully prepared for his anti-business policies. They knew what he was just as I did.

Hold onto your wallet and cash, Obama is coming was the mood. Liberals keep complaining about business holding onto cash. It's very simple, they are trying to weather the Obama storm. Many business leaders have come right out and said it. Obama is the main element holding our economy back.

Pure fantasy & Denial- totally unsurprising from you.

The handwriting was on the wall before the 2006 election, let alone 2008-

http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2006/08/26/weekinreview/27leon_graph2.html

And it largely played out in 2007-2008, prior to Obama's nomination, let alone his election-

http://edition.cnn.com/2008/BUSINESS/09/30/us.bailout.timeline/index.html

After weak job growth during the Bush years, employment began to plummet at the end of his second term in response to the other economic factors, employment being a trailing factor-

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/01/03/obama-romney-jobs/

You do understand the idea of a trailing factor, right?

Your whole premise is faulty. It's not like businessmen decide to quit making money on the basis of who's in the Whitehouse. The economy would have landed in the cellar had McCain been elected, it's just that Righties would have been denied any room for Denial as to the cause, which is their own policy.

Your sense of revisionist history is quite remarkable. I remember the 2008 RNC convention, where the then Prez & Vice Prez couldn't even show their faces because they'd screwed up so badly, because the economy was already in free fall because of Repub policy. I also remember a complete reversal of Bush admin hands off policy wrt banking in the form of the bailout, too. If they'd been doing such a great job, why did they need that? Because Obama was coming? Puh-leeze. It was because their policy was the policy of failure.

 

[spidey07]

One just needs to google to see what business leaders think about Obama and all the harm he has caused.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news...aders-air-growing-unhappiness-obama/?page=all

As the economic recovery stalls and the debt debate in Washington fuels market uncertainty, business leaders — many of whom were once close to the White House — are increasingly airing their fears that President Obama’s policies are stifling job creation.

Kimberly-Clark Corp. Chairman and CEO Thomas J. Falk told a Senate panel this week that the administration’s proposal to raise the tax on foreign earnings of American-based firms “would put U.S. companies at a significant disadvantage.”

The move “would slow economic growth in the U.S. and impede the creation of U.S.-based jobs,” Mr. Falk, whose global company makes Kleenex, Huggies and health care products, said Wednesday at a hearing of the Senate Finance Committee.

Leaders in the oil and gas industry say the administration could clear the way for the creation of thousands of domestic jobs if it weren’t beholden to environmentalists. As one example, they point to the proposed Keystone XL pipeline, a massive construction project that has been awaiting approval since Mr. Obama took office. The pipeline would run from Alberta, Canada, to Houston.

More about Obama's destructive NLRB and job killing policies...

http://www.npr.org/2011/09/01/140098788/labors-criticism-of-obama-grows-louder

The business community complains that the White House is choking them with new regulations. The labor community says Obama is throwing working-class people overboard.

 

[Matt1970]

Oh, and curious minds would like to know, SPECIFICALLY, what "Obama policies" are anti-business? You do know, don't you, that tax rates have been the same under Obama as under Bush, except that Obama-spearheaded a 2% REDUCTION in the payroll tax. And all TALK of changes in tax rates has specifically referred to INDIVIDUAL tax rates for the top 1% of earners. There's been no "talk" at all about raising CORPORATE tax rates.

Yes, tell us, specifically, what "policies" you're referring to.

Government mandated health care would really be the only one on paper, but a President running around telling us we need to raise taxes and spread the wealth around in the middle of a recession is never good for the market. Bush did little to nothing to enstill consumer confidence either.

 

[shira]

Government mandated health care would really be the only one on paper, but a President running around telling us we need to raise taxes and spread the wealth around in the middle of a recession is never good for the market. Bush did little to nothing to enstill consumer confidence either.

That's just BS: If Obamacare has been huge anti-business driver you say it is, then why has unemployment gone DOWN significantly since Obamacare was passed in March, 2010? Also, the only tax Obama has advocated raising has been on the top 1% of individuals. I'd really like to know how that affects corporate decisions to hire and fire.

 

[Craig234]

er, my recollection was that McCain was ahead for about a week around the time of the GOP convention, and that Obama was comfortably leading him polls at every other point prior to the election.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ep...neral_election_mccain_vs_obama-225.html#chart

That's correct, except it was more like a couple weeks. A lot happened to sort out.

The GOP convention was the first week of September; that's when McCain took the lead. He held it until mid-September - which is when the crash happened.

September 18 was the big meeting about ' emergency $700 bailout to save the economy', and the same time almost to the day Obama retook the lead.

Point was rebutting the claim that the economic reaction was to 'expecting Obama'.

blaming Obama or Bush for issues that have been decades+ in the making seems a little partisan.

Not putting blame where it's deserved is no less 'partisan', that scareword for 'centrists'.

The Bush policies contributed to the problems. He was only one factor among many.

You need to sort out the accurate history, not just 'blame or avoid blame'.