Has obama failed as a leader

[BUnit1701]

GHWB's greatest success was his handling of the end of the Cold War IMO. More than anything, that was his greatest success. (and it was huge)

As for Obama, killing the US's single most wanted foreign adversary and the decimation of his organization definitely counts as foreign policy. He's also strengthened the coalition against Iran's nuclear program, leading to a significant improvement in one of the US's thorniest foreign policy problems, his intervention in Libya was largely successful, etc, etc.

It's not that he hasn't had blunders (Syria clearly comes to mind), but overall he's done a good job. Compared to his predecessor he's practically the second coming of FDR.

Sure, he's decimated Al Queda, so much in fact that they didn't just retake Falluja and are not becoming the defacto leaders of the Syran insurgency...

And absolutely he has strengthened our coalition against the Iranian nuclear program. Our coalition is strengthened by alienating Israel and Saudi Arabia. All hail Dear Leader!

 

[fskimospy]

There is no requirement for congress to do what the president wants. Sometime gridlock and defunding is the only way to deal with a dictator. We don't have to follow Obama to hell!

What I like about this comment is that you think that engaging in the normally accepted way of constitutional governance in our country is the 'only way to deal with a dictator'. Here's a hint: if he were a dictator it wouldn't matter what Congress did.

 

[Moonbeam]

There is no requirement for congress to do what the president wants. Sometime gridlock and defunding is the only way to deal with a dictator. We don't have to follow Obama to hell!

Exactly, the One Ring of irrational fear held high and worshiped.....

 

[irishScott]

That was so funny. Do it again.

Your laughter, so passing, so meaningless. Yet this is what you substitute for truth.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Failed? He got his name in lights so no.

I'd classify him as one in a long line of poor leaders.

 

[irishScott]

I don't know - I'm not going to be bitching about my phone bill going up by 20% ten years from now. I'm definitely annoyed today, but it's not worthy of caring about in the long run.

Incidentally, I always thought that the best way to communicate about ACA was to say, "Everyone already covered will see their premiums raise by 6% (or whatever it is), but in doing so you will allow 25 million of your fellow Americans to recieve affordable health care."

How much credit does Lyndon Johnson get for the Great Society programs? He was a one-term president and those were a mess at launch too, but he gets all of the kudos.



The projections are widely available. Add the fact that the ACA will particularly assist your average penniless college student and you've got a great plan in place to create fond memories of a president.

6% you say?
http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapot...miums-by-avg-of-41-subsidies-flow-to-elderly/

And whether LBJ deserves credit for the success or failure of the various great society programs is readily up for debate.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

What I like about this comment is that you think that engaging in the normally accepted way of constitutional governance in our country is the 'only way to deal with a dictator'. Here's a hint: if he were a dictator it wouldn't matter what Congress did.

Can he raise his own taxes?

 

[fskimospy]

6% you say?
http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapot...miums-by-avg-of-41-subsidies-flow-to-elderly/

And whether LBJ deserves credit for the success or failure of the various great society programs is readily up for debate.

We have talked about that exact chart in a previous thread. It is insanely dishonest.

Among many problems that Sactoking pointed out that rendered their analysis complete bullshit, the most obvious problem with it would be that it treats the 576,000 residents of Wyoming as equal to the 20 million residents of New York State.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

That was so funny. Do it again.

It's not funny. Many have challenged you (including myself) on the rationality of making the sweeping generalizations and conclusions you have drawn from a few studies. Yet you run away every time. You stand naked in your house of glass refusing the listen to the passerbys begging you to please put your clothes on.

 

[unokitty]

Poll: 63% Don't Have Confidence in Obama to Make Right Decisions

...a new poll from Washington Post-ABC News shows that fully 63 percent of Americans have either little no confidence Obama will make the right decisions. The public is evenly split on whether Obama is honest and trustworthy,

Just another data point.

Uno

 

[piasabird]

The real increases under ACA will not kick in till next year. Be ready for it. The people that had independent insurance contracts were just a small percentage of the American Work Force. Wait till all the big corporations start having to have ACA Qualified health care and people are paying %50 - %250 more for insurance. Plus your insurance if it is cadilac will require you to pay a tax. And if you have a family member who is perfectly healthy and doesn't have insurance you will pay a penalty for that also.

Pain and Misery is coming big time.

Then if the insurance companies lose money, the government under ACA is required to pay some of their losses.

 

[irishScott]

We have talked about that exact chart in a previous thread. It is insanely dishonest.

Among many problems that Sactoking pointed out that rendered their analysis complete bullshit, the most obvious problem with it would be that it treats the 576,000 residents of Wyoming as equal to the 20 million residents of New York State.

Link? Because reading through their methodology it would appear they account for population differences.

http://www.manhattan-institute.org/knowyourrates/about.htm

In order to tabulate the total number of potential subsidy beneficiaries we used the University of Minnesota Population Center's Integrated Public Use Microdata (IPUMS) for the Census Bureau's Current Population Survey (CPS). We used the 2012 March Economic Supplement as the primary data source.

It is important to note that we opted not to use replicate weights - instead we used the standard person-weights while using states as our strata. The reason for this is that the improvement in standard errors from using replicate weights was relatively minor given the additional computation time required to implement them.

 

[fskimospy]

Link? Because reading through their methodology it would appear they account for population differences.

http://www.manhattan-institute.org/knowyourrates/about.htm

Sure! You have to remember first of all that you should basically never believe anything the Manhattan Institute puts out. It is not an actual think tank, but an ideological advocacy organization.

Second, you did not read their methodology correctly. The part you are citing is talking about subsidy levels, not how they calculated pre and post-ACA rate changes. The relevant passages for that are here:

In order to document rate changes, we first gathered pre-ACA insurance rates using the federal government's finder.healthcare.gov website. Our pre-ACA dataset consists of the five least expensive plans (by monthly premium) for the most populous zip code in every county. To cover a significant age range we collected rates for 27, 40, and 64-year old male and female non-smokers. We adjusted these rates to take into account those who are denied health insurance coverage as well as those who receive a surcharge. Using the "denial rate" and "surcharge rate" from the federal government's repository, we assumed that those who are surcharged pay 75 percent more and those who are denied, find insurance elsewhere at three times the original rate. We used this to develop a weighted average of the five least expensive insurance plans for every zip code we identified. To develop a state-wide average, we took the state-wide average for every age-gender combination.

For ACA rates, we created state-level averages by averaging rates for the five cheapest plans across all counties in a state. The data was sourced from ValuePenguin and because the ACA bans denials based on pre-existing conditions, there is no need to develop a weighted average of these rates.

The bolded is pure, unadulterated bullshit.

 

[rudeguy]

The projections are widely available. Add the fact that the ACA will particularly assist your average penniless college student and you've got a great plan in place to create fond memories of a president.

The projections vary greatly.

The only firm numbers we have right now reflect very poorly on Obama. How many millions of people have lost their healthcare because of him? How many more will lose it once Obama's waivers for his special friends expire?

 

[cubby1223]

We have talked about that exact chart in a previous thread. It is insanely dishonest.

Among many problems that Sactoking pointed out that rendered their analysis complete bullshit, the most obvious problem with it would be that it treats the 576,000 residents of Wyoming as equal to the 20 million residents of New York State.

Ummm...

The chart was posted to dispute a claim that was selling Obamacare as only a 6% increase, whereas the chart clearly shows many, many people are paying well in excess of 6% more.

If you want to discuss the average increase amongst all people, then you can do so. But that's not what the original comment was.

Everyone already covered will see their premiums raise by 6%

The chart clearly shows that to be false, and your reasoning of why you don't like the chart, is completely irrelevant to that conversation. The original comment was about everyone and used a fixed number, not about averages.

I looked at that chart and I live in Illinois, therefore I likely will find my premiums to be ~43% higher, which is a far greater percentage than 6. You live in New York which has one of the best drops in prices. I'm so happy for you that you love Obamacare, I really am.

If the chart has faults in its methodology, then it has faults. But that still doesn't make the original comment true and correct to say.

 

[zinfamous]

lol. the executive orders bullshit,

The only modern President that has issued less executive orders than Obama, is H W Bush.

 

[Moonbeam]

Your laughter, so passing, so meaningless. Yet this is what you substitute for truth.

Your truth. You see yourself in me but not that fact. You practice self deceit because what youse I me you will not see in yourself. You are the me you claim I am. Try as you may, you can't fool somebody who has seen the horrible truth within. The price I paid foreknowledge was everything I had. I am a nothing and that is something you are unwilling to understand. I defeated the nothing by surrendering. Compared to the nothing, well really, you're not much.

 

[Moonbeam]

It's not funny. Many have challenged you (including myself) on the rationality of making the sweeping generalizations and conclusions you have drawn from a few studies. Yet you run away every time. You stand naked in your house of glass refusing the listen to the passerbys begging you to please put your clothes on.

If you have a pumpkin I will give you one. If you don't have one I will take it away.

 

[schmuckley]

This is a strange idea. Obama has had one of the most successful foreign policy tenures of any recent president; the only more successful one I can think of is GHWB. It's especially strange when you look at how much more successful he has been than the supposed foreign policy 'experts' from the previous administration.

There's a reason why the foreign policy community thinks so highly of him.

Wowww.So you call setting up an American Embassy in a hostile area with insufficient security; then having a whole American embassy full of people slaughtered with no repercussions successful?

I'll bet $20 right now he doesn't serve his full 2nd term.

WW1 was started over the asassination of Arch Duke Ferdinand.

The only president almost as bad as Obama was Carter.They are the 2 worst,ever!

 

[yllus]

Wowww.So you call setting up an American Embassy in a hostile area with insufficient security; then having a whole American embassy full of people slaughtered with no repercussions successful?

I'll bet $20 right now he doesn't serve his full 2nd term.

WW1 was started over the asassination of Arch Duke Ferdinand.

The only president almost as bad as Obama was Carter.They are the 2 worst,ever!

Why doesn't anyone ever respond to me with easy to win bets?

 

[Incorruptible]

Of course he has failed yet his scumbag piece of shit supporters defend him all the time. It's amazing how people can say his foreign policy was a success. Pandering to radical Islamists and apologizing for the US. Supporting the Muslim Brotherhood who are terrorist scum.

He attacked Libya without congress and the Constitution requires a declaration of war. He supported terrorists in Libya and some of them were the same terrorists killing Americans in Iraq. He killed Ghadaffi and his successors supported sharia law.

 

[Texashiker]

LOL at texashiker....5sec on google:

GOP needs to stop being part of no

You linked to an opinion piece, so what?

This is a strange idea. Obama has had one of the most successful foreign policy tenures of any recent president; the only more successful one I can think of is GHWB.

Giving millions of dollars and US military weapons to the muslim brotherhood, a terrorist organization, is somehow good foreign policy?

obama has alienated Israel and Saudi Arabia, but somehow that is good foreign policy?

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Wowww.So you call setting up an American Embassy in a hostile area with insufficient security; then having a whole American embassy full of people slaughtered with no repercussions successful?

I'll bet $20 right now he doesn't serve his full 2nd term.

WW1 was started over the asassination of Arch Duke Ferdinand.

The only president almost as bad as Obama was Carter.They are the 2 worst,ever!

Actually Obama has done well in terms of foreign policy compared to his predecessor. I have that in his plus column. The concern I had was alleviated by serendipity in the form Kerry shooting his mouth off. Genius? Hardly but we're not in a shooting war over it.

The embassy tragedy isn't something that would have been better with anyone else on deck. Controlling all variables in all potential situations isn't a realistic expectation.

Now if you wish to compare the inept bumbling of Junior with his contemptible Neoconservative killers, go ahead but it won't end well.

 

[row]

preznit chinnutz

during his acceptance speech at the 2008 democratic national convention preznit dumb fuck Claimed His Investments In Green Energy Would Create 5 Million New Jobs. OBAMA: “And I’ll invest $150 billion over the next decade in affordable, renewable sources of energy — wind power, and solar power, and the next generation of biofuels — an investment that will lead to new industries and 5 million new jobs that pay well and can’t be outsourced.”

how'd that work out for ya berrie?

berries unprecedented decision to invite China’s navy to participate in the 2014 Rim of the Pacific (RIMPAC) naval exercise held off Hawaii is a major unforced error. Among the many weapons systems that would be compromised are: details of the Patriot missile system; the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD); the Navy’s Aegis ballistic-missile defense system; the F/A-18 fighter jet, the V-2 Osprey; the Black Hawk helicopter; the Navy’s new Littoral Combat Ship; and the most expensive weapons system ever devised, the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, whose projected cost is $1.4 trillion

leftist rag la times says “There is something very wrong at the core of the Obama administration's and the Pentagon's China policies,”

berrie has failed to rein in china's monetary policy, has failed to get china's cooperation in help to contain north korea's nuclear program, has failed to address china's continued military build-up and has minimally answered their increased aggression, has failed to alter china's policy of providing aid to repressive regimes in asia, the middle east, africa and latin america. the list goes on.

talk about being on the wrong side of history:

The uprisings of the Arab Spring have so far produced anarchy in Libya, a civil war in Syria, greater autocracy in Bahrain and resumed dictatorial rule in Egypt. In Syria, the uprising began in March 2011 with demonstrations against the brutality of Assad’s regime. ‘Peace! Peace!’ protesters chanted. But ‘if there was a fair election in Syria today,’ one commentator said, ‘Assad would probably win it.

Christian church's burned on a daily basis and hundreds of Christian's murdered are a direct byproduct of the Muslim Brotherhood's incitements against Egypt's Christians in response to the June 30 Revolution, which saw the ousting of the Brotherhood.

Needing someone to scapegoat in order to set Egypt ablaze, Brotherhood leadership -- including supreme leader Muhammad Badie, Safwat Hegazi, and Sheikh Yusuf Qaradawi -- repeatedly demonized the nation's Christian minority, leading to any number of atrocities committed against the Copts. As today's headline from one of Egypt's most read newspapers, Tahrir News, put it: "The Brotherhood's crime in Waraq [location of Sunday's church attack]. Seventeen murdered Copts and 85 torched churches since ousting of Morsi[.] ... Copts pay price of June 30 Revolution."

Now consider the response of the United States concerning the conflict between Egypt and the Muslim Brotherhood in the context of U.S. aid. For years, human rights activists have been imploring the Obama administration to make aid to Egypt contingent on respect for the human rights of all Egyptians, including Christian minorities. Such a move would dramatically ameliorate the plight of the Copts, as all of Egypt, including the Muslim Brotherhood, are more interested in securing money than they are in killing Christians.

Instead, the Obama administration's approach has been 1) to ignore the plight of Egypt's Christians or 2) when attacks are especially egregious (and exposed by the MSM), offer perfunctory condemnation. (After all, if the administration was able to get away with the lip-service approach with Americans -- vocally condemning and promising to get the murderers of Americans in Benghazi but then ignoring it -- surely it will not hesitate to do so with a foreign nation.) But as for making U.S. aid contingent on respect for human rights, the Obama administration has been idle.

let's not forget that dear leader's administration continues to have a close relationship thru folk like mohamed elibiary, a member of the department of homeland security’s advisory council who has ties to the terrorist organization. retired U.S. Air Force Gen. Tom McInerney claims at least 10 are in government today, one of which would have been Huma Abedin, hillary clinton’s deputy chief of staff. the muslim brotherhood is even afforded vip treatment from federal bureaucrats at us airports. berries administration has become the brotherhoods global defenders and enablers.

this is not even close to categorizing the total fuck ups and failures of berrie and his butt buddies, maybe i'll take a break and list more later

in closing, i know in the mind of a leftist that the above are considered a feature and not a bug, but to me berrie's presidency reminds me of moonbeam's posts, he tries hard to fart, but shits his pants instead.

 

[Jimzz]

You linked to an opinion piece, so what?




Giving millions of dollars and US military weapons to the muslim brotherhood, a terrorist organization, is somehow good foreign policy?

obama has alienated Israel and Saudi Arabia, but somehow that is good foreign policy?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_Brotherhood_conspiracy_theories

Your foil is showing again.