Obama and His Accomplishments

You'd be surprised.

Some literally have the rounds they make going to church to church asking for help.

 

Sorry, after reading my post, I see that I didn't make myself clear, but I wasn't arguing in favor of the indivdual mandate. In fact, I can see how it could exacerbate my issues. The individual mandate is still relying on for profit insurance companies. I disagree with the health of individuals being a profiteering opportunity. Like I said, I would like to see a not-for-profit model like many excellent hospitals in this nation operate.

I am no communist and I embrace free enterprise. But, I feel that in this particular arena, it is not the most effective option.

 

Whether the Arizona law is successfully upheld or stricken in its entirety is of secondary importance.

That it will force the Obama, and those others who have too long and willfully ignored the right of law, albeit informally, is the entirety of the issue. Simply, if the Federal government is going to ignore its own laws, then just say so, and tell us which others we may also ignore, too.

I don't care if they win or not - I just can't wait to read the transcript when CJ Roberts begins his line of questioning. The only way that it could be better if is the sitting President - you know, being the "constitutional expert" that he is, and all - argues it himself. You might be surprised to see how that might go - not that being editor of the Harvard Law review hasn't fully prepared him. It would be like watching C.S. Lewis debate a cardboard box full of monkey shit.

And that a decision in the case will come in late June - just as the presidential race is really heating up - will be like Red Bull dipped manna from heaven for the Romney campaign. Despite the enormity of the healthcare debacle that this Administration has vomited forth, it will take a back seat to immigration, come fall.

Think about that - healthcare won't be the biggest or most effective hammer that Romney will use against President Obama. Its going to be like Christmas morning with each debate.

 

Not that it has any legal bearing whatsoever, but I should also note that some 60% of Americans support Arizona's immigration bill.

Or, which can be easily and accurately abbreviated to, "voters".

 

I don't know why Republicans have latched on to this fantasy that Obama is a pushover in the debates. The Arizona law means little to most groups in this country, except for one, Hispanics. I don't really think that issue will go the way you think.

 

If Democrats really believe that, it explains why they continue to get their brains kicked out in the South and Southwest.

 

To the contrary, I think that President Obama excels at debating, and in a few other critical areas, as well, and which seem to carry him: he's black, he's liberal and he's friends with Oprah. Take any two of those away, and he's still an unknown community organizer in Chicago. If that. He sure as hell isn't POTUS.

He is the triple-threat of modern day politics, having assumed a role that he did not deserve, and having no f'ing clue as to what to do with it, once achieved. And he'll probably get re-elected. Not because he is the best candidate (he wasn't four years ago, and nothing has changed since then), but for all of the reasons previously mentioned, but primarily, because the American voting populace is one of the dumbest in modern society.

 

He's friends with Oprah? That's the logic you're going with? And, yes, being black certainly has been a prerequisite for being President during the 200+ years of our history.

 

Where are you getting this? The South hasn't voted Democrat since Lyndon Johnson guaranteed blacks the right to vote and the Southwest is trending Democratic. Nevada and New Mexico went for Obama in '08 and Arizona would've been in play were it not the home state of McCain. Furthermore, even Texas is trending towards being Democratic within 3-4 election cycles.

If you really believe opposition to the Arizona law is hurting the Democrats in the area, then you aren't paying attention to demographic changes.

 

People are compelled all the time. There are OSHA laws, speed limits on roads, regulations, minimum wage requirements, etc., etc.

 

The Oprah comment was hyperbole. The rest was not.

That you can't admit that President Obama's race was the single largest factor in his being elected, with his liberalism being a close second, is telling.

 

Is he debating "with" or "without" teleprompter?

 

Another Republican fairy tale that has arisen. Every president has used the teleprompter since its use became part of the available resources. The whole teleprompter thing is part of the evolving Republican smear campaign that includes trying to make him unintelligent, which is asinine.

 

Ah, the race card is pulled. It's telling that you think him being black was more important than the dissatisfaction with the Bush administration, Obama's superior organizational abilities, charisma, the economic meltdown and the selection of Palin as McCain's running mate. No, no, of course it had to be because he is black because, if you reduce him to just being black, then he's not legitimate.

 

Also didn't hurt that he ran against one of the worst republican candidates in years. IMO.

 

What exactly is in the health care mandate?

 

Our political discourse/parties are broken. We need to burn the sum[itch bay] down. Too many spiteful allegations on both sides.

 

You're my best argument.

Are you saying that his race wasn't only a component of his being elected? If you refer to, "statements of fact" as "pulling the race card", well, that makes for a convenient red herring, doesn't it? Just call or insinuate that someone is racist, and the matter is settled, right? Is that what they told you at the campfire rallies?

And it's laughable - comical, even - that you not only denied the race factor, but have the listed his "accomlishments" for office as being:

1. People hated Bush
2. "Superior organizational abilities" (the GOP should put this on tshirts and just give them away)
3. Charisma(WTF?!?!? - you forgot to also mention what an excellent bridge partner he is, or that he cooks a mean omelette)
4. The largest financial crisis in modern times (what lead you to believe that he was most capable - or competent, even - to handle this, exactly?)
5. The nomination of Palin (the irony of touting Palin's lunacy as Obama's strength isn't lost in most - it's like saying that he was neither dumb nor ill-prepared for office in comparison to her....guess what, brosuf - that's 99.98723% of all humanity)

Of the five things that YOU listed - only 2 had anything to do with Obama, himself. TWO. And those were his organizational prowess and his charisma? If true, then any number of designers who are featured on Trading Spaces would seem to be even more qualified, if hat's the standard.

And race still wasnt the reason he was elected.

That's. Your. Argument?

I wish that there was a font which implied someone pointing and laughing at the reader. Because if such existed, this post would be dipped in it several times over.

Please, elaborate more on this - I like watching people win an argument by merely repeating their opponents positions, and punching themselves in the groin for emphasis.

 

Who gives a shit if you are laughing because you think you are right? Sorry if your delusions of grandeur make you feel superior, but it doesn't make your argument correct.

I do notice that your argument has changed from race being the reason he was elected to a component. I listed 5 reasons that were more important than his race to counter your bullshit oversimplification, not to deny the fact that his race contributed to a record number of African-American turnouts or interest in his campaign.

However, to simply say it was because he was black that he got elected because he was black is moronic, as if the Democrats could just trot out any black guy with charisma and he would've won. So, yes, if you try and pull the "he only won because he's black" bullshit, then, yes, it's pulling the race card. Or, wait, only black guys are guilty of this. If I had a laugh track, I would use it.

 

Check how many Democratic senators and governors you had in, say, 1986. Check that figure now. Also, if you think legal Hispanics are all in favor of this adminstration's pandering to interests of lawbreakers, I can assure you that you are badly mistaken.