The President was elected by 537 votes in the deciding state for electoral votes and stopped the manual recount that was to decide if he actually did win the election. He was appointed to office by a U.S. Supreme Court decision. He actually received 543,895 votes less than his opponent.
The President and Congress passed a bill that opened up ability for government surveillance, restricted rules on opening bank accounts or transferring money, gave the government more access to private information. (Expanded government control over civil rights.)
The United States was attacked under the watch of this President.
This President ran on a platform of limited international involvement and less bi-partisanship. The same President went to war with a foreign nation on false pretenses. Congress was actually lied to before approving the war.
This President said “Bring It On” to people who were trying to kill American soldiers.
This President that claimed to be “bi-partisan” in his campaign made statements such as “you are with us, or against us.”
Enron.
This President gave large tax breaks to the wealthy, claiming it would help invigorate the economy.
According to the Bureau of Economic Analysis, the real GDP grew at an average annual rate of 2.5%. (Lower than had been in the past 50 years.) The DOW Jones Industrial Average dropped from 10,587 to 7,949. “Adjusted for inflation, median household income dropped by $1,175 between 2000 and 2007, said Elizabeth Warren, professor at Harvard Law School, in written testimony before the Joint Economic Committee.“ (Resource) In the last year of his office, the U.S. entered the longest post-war recession since WWII, due to a housing market bubble, mortgage crisis, and high oil prices. (Reuters, Xinhua)
This President passed an educational bill known as the No Child Left Behind Act, which has so many criticisms, they cannot all fit in one passage, but included underfunding and increase in access for military recruitment, and most importantly, increased segregation in public schools.
This President relaxed environmental standards, while claiming to want to reduce dependency on fossil fuels.
This President called to allow 12 million illegal immigrant workers to stay in the United States as part of his “temporary guest worker program.” (ABC) (Many in the Republican Party opposed this President’s bill because of the massive amounts of amnesty and legalization provisions for illegal immigrants.)
The worst natural disaster in US history struck during this President’s watch. The same President that presided over the worst attack on the United States. The disaster in New Orleans was actually preventable. Response to the disaster was limited because, not only was the United States engaged in a foreign war to remove a leader of a country that posed no immediate threat to the United States, but because he appointed a personal friend with no experience to head the agency to deal with such situations.
Under this President, United States Attorneys were dismissed on political grounds, rather than performance related issues. “In August 2009, Karl Rove and Harriet Miers testified before the House Judiciary Committee. A Justice Department inquiry into the firing of U.S. attorneys concluded that political considerations played a part in as many as four of the dismissals.“ (dead link from AP not posted) And the DOJ decided the firings were political but not criminal. (Yahoo News)
According to Gallup Poll, when this President took office, he had below a 60% approval rating and had below a 40% approval rating when he left office. His disapproval rating was above 60% when leaving office.
This President, in September of 2008, presided over the government takeover of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mack and watched the collapse of the Lehman Brothers. He also presided over the federal bailout of the American International Group (AIG) for $85 billion.
According to the Bureau of Labor and Statistics, 2.6 million jobs were lost in the last year of this President’s term.
Now.
No one had a problem with this President, but when a Black American is elected and wants to give everyone health care, there is outrage?
People complained about the legitimacy of Bush’s appointment to office. These are not the same people that are claiming President Obama is a usurper.
People complained about the No Child Left Behind Act and the Patriot Act, but these are not the same people who are complaining about Universal Healthcare and whatever other complaints there are currently.
And these people want to know why we believe they have racist motivations? Or ethnocentric at the best?
Where were the “Don’t Tread On Me” flags when President Bush passed the Patriot Act?
Where were the people marching on Washington when schools were de facto re-segregated?
Where was the protests against the amnesty President Bush wanted to give illegal immigrants?
Where was the outrage when the wealthy continued to increase their wealth while the middle class actually dropped in wealth?
Where was the protests to the “Socialist Nationalist” takeover of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac?
Where was the outrage at the stimulus bill passed by President Bush?
Where was the outrage during President Bush? It was from many of the people who voted for President Obama. And these are likely many of the people who have legitimate complaints about this current administration.
But what is to convince us that the complaints the Tea Party, the GOP and the Libertarians have are legitimate? I will admit, Ron Paul was highly critical of President Bush. His support before the election of Barack Obama was severely lacking. (I’m pretty sure a gun rack and a pack of Skoal were required to support Ron Paul prior to November 2008.)
President Obama actually expanded gun ownership rights. Why were the people marching around Virginia not carrying their guns in the parks during President Bush’s office?
You have New Right politicians today talking about “Second Amendment Solutions” and “Reload” as political discourse. They are actually referencing shooting people who disagree with them! This is rational? This is debatable?
Seriously, just think about it rationally for a moment: How are we to take you seriously when you have no complaints during the past 5 Presidents, and now you are furious that the Black guy won the election and wants everyone to have health care? That he is not inciting other countries? And there is this much anger over this President and not the previous one?
I honestly don’t even think anyone who disagrees with me will read this entry for what it is. Instead you will dismiss it as an attack on Former President Bush and blind defense of President Obama. The reality is that none of that is in here. This does not condemn, nor condone, either President. I just presented facts about the previous President. There are plenty of criticisms of the current President, and every previous one. What I’m trying to point to is the extreme outrage of the current President by people who were not outraged by the previous President, who actually did EVERY SINGLE THING THESE PEOPLE ARE COMPLAINING ABOUT TODAY!
I’m sure many GOPers that are complaining are the same people that said nothing when Bill Clinton blew up an Aspirin factory but went bonkers when he got a blowjob from an intern. The same people who actually cheered when he made Aid for Families with Dependent Children harder to access, but claimed there was a murderous conspiracy about him and some crap real estate deal. But, I don’t think those are the people that are carrying pictures of the President dressed as Hitler, screaming for an insurrection, insisting on indoctrinating the Protestant God in politics, and crying that the President is not a citizen.
Today, Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck were in D.C. spouting off at the mouth. Beck was even saying things very similar to what President Obama had said during his campaign speech. They are having a rally on the anniversary of Martin Luthar King Jr.’s “I have a Dream” speech. Beck actually said that his DC Rally will “reclaim the civil rights movement.” Reclaim it from whom? So, White people are reclaiming the Civil Rights Movement? I can’t even pretend to understand that concept.
If you want the rest of us to listen to you, you need to come up with something better than “The Black guy with the Muslim name wants to give everyone health care” as a rallying cry.
**note: This may be a rough draft. I’m not completely satisfied with it. Maybe I’ll come back and rewrite the same entry for tomorrow.**
Since this is a rough draft, fix this: “He actually received 543,895 votes less THAN his opponent.”
Good words.
Good lookin’ out. Thanks for that… I really need to proof better.
Well of course the tea party is racist – but the Jews? My gosh the Jews are racist too? Well I guess they must be.
——————————————————– As the Adam Baum is no doubt aware, tonight, by percentages of 70 to 30 the Jews were the key vote in choosing a conservative Catholic over the Jewish orthodox democrat. Why would they do that in a district that hasn’t been represented by a Republican in 90 years? Could it be they were voicing their ‘displeasure’ with oBOMBa’s anti-Israel positions. How disastrous this must be for those that smartly figured out that its actually widespread racism explains the anti-oBOMBa vote. Well anyway, the political class thinks this was a mostly a referendum on oBOMBa (you know kinda’ like the way that disastrous Wisconsin vote went).
———————————————————
So those Jews may say they don’t like his Israel policies, And those Tea Partiers may say they don’t like the leftist thuggery of oBOMBa. But the Adam Baum knows their mind better than they do. He knows that oBOMBa “is about as leftist as Reagan or Nixon”. So it doesn’t matter what they tell you why they are anti-oBOMBa. The Adam Baum will tell you what is objectively true about oBOMBa. Then he will assume that everyone really knows this. So everyone who tells you why they are against oBOMBa is lying about it. Lying Racist Tea Partiers and now… lying Racist Jews!
You were brought to this site by a racist Jew. I do not see the point in all of that.
Also, this was a “rough draft” from well over a year ago. I had to reread it. Quite a few things have happened in the past year, but I have to say that I find it all still, pretty-much rings true.
I would also like to point out that I said it is why so many “Appear to be racists.” I didn’t claim that they were racists. I just pointed out that the doubt standard makes one question the motivations. When it comes to Orthodox and Hassidic Jews and their support for Israel and Israeli policy, the situation is a bit different. Although, most support for Israeli policy hinges on religious and racist tendencies, that is not the beginning and end of the situation. To be sure, many Jews in Israel fear for their safety. And they should. There are many people in the region that want nothing more than to harm them. This can never be overlooked regarding Israel’s foreign and domestic policy. One could argue that the Afrikaaner Apartheid government enforced their Apartheid system for fear they would lose power of their country. When the population is less than 8% Afrikaaner, a popular democracy would definitely have ceded power to those whom did not have the best interest of Afrikaaners in hand. Israel runs a policy that is hard to support, mostly out of fear. I do not believe that Israel runs a policy of colonization and domination out of arrogance. I still do not support, nor endorse, many of their policies.
What matters is the validity of the claims. With all of these claims that President Obama is a “Ultra Left Radical” or a “Socialist,” how is anyone to take these claims at face value? This is the same president that continued to bail out Wall Street bankers and hedge fund managers, the same president that altered his health care bill to increase profits for Insurance companies and took out the ability to negotiate medicinal costs (for Big Pharma). How is this President so ultra-Left? What has this President done that was any farther Left than Reagan, W. Bush, or Nixon?
Me:
So it doesn’t matter what they tell you why they are anti-oBOMBa.
The Adam Baum:
What matters is the validity of the claims.
Notice the Adam Baum’s not so “sleight of rhetoric” tactic? It is the one he uses over and over again in this Blog to paint his political opponents as evil:
He accuses people of an evil motivation for their disgust of Obama. That motivation being Racism.——————He says this must be their motivation because he doesn’t believe that their expressed motivation for their disgust can be objectively true. What utter insanity! Do people disagree with what is objectively true? Obviously. Could the anti-Obamites be objectively wrong yet still believe that Obama is a commie thug or anti Israel. Obviously (there is a mountain of evidence in Obama’s auto biography’s alone to this effect that the Adam Baum pretends has never been offered to him). Yet the Adam Baum refuses to allow people to honestly come to the wrong conclusion. Why? Because if he did allow that he couldn’t claim that they were racist; And he absolutely must demonize his political opponents as evil racists in order to dismiss and dehumanize them. So what does he do. When you tell him that these people are motivated by what they say they are motivated by his only response that it doesn’t matter. He routinely diverts to discussing the ‘validity of their claims’. Why must he divert? Again because without the diversion he cannot accuse them of racism.
This whole thing shows a complete misunderstanding of what I had stated with several presuppositions that are completely false. I did claim the validity of the complaints is important, because it leads others to wonder what is the true motivation of complaints. When all the claims are invalid and people still maintain them, how can one not assume ulterior motivations? The article above does not posit that these people are racists, just an explanation on why so many people feel they very well could be racists.
There is also the aspect that, somehow, the Tea Party members are my “opponents.” It could be stated that they are ideological opponents of mine. But, then again, so is President Obama. Anyone that would compromise populous legislation to benefit a small, wealthy elite is my opponent as much as any reactionary force. My only interest is the truth. I only seek to find the true reason so many on the Reactionary Right continually contest everything this president does…especially when they herald Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush in such high regard, for doing the same exact things.
There is also the false presupposition that I am accusing everyone that has contempt for Obama as a racist. To be sure, there are racist motivations. But I am not so naive as to claim that everyone is a racist. I have even, subsequently, elaborated on the nuance between ultra-nationalism and racism. I do not desire anyone to be a racist. I also do not claim everyone on the Right is a racist. A racist would be someone who makes fallacious claims like the social classification of race is genetic, or that Black people cannot swim because they sink.
The Adam Baum:
“When all the claims are invalid and people still maintain them, how can one not assume ulterior motivations?”
What utter trickery!! Did Adam Baum stand before the Tea Partiers he accuses of being racist and prove to them that they are wrong to believe the mountain of evidence they have read and witnessed first hand that supports Obama being a Commie thug? Of course not. Yet he accuses them of “maintaining” their ‘invalid claims’. How could the Adam Baum presume that Tea Partiers ought to have recognized that their claims are invalid since he has never offered to them, his ‘ironclad argument’ – the one that Obama has done nothing more leftist then Reagan. There are literally hundreds of facts known by Tea Partiers that would lead any sane person to the conclusion that Obama is a Commie thug. Yet the Adam Baum holds them responsible for not believing as he does – even though he has zero reason to believe that they know of his arguments. And even if they did know them, the Adam Baum is ignorant as to whether they used sound reasoning to find those arguments insufficient – insufficient in light of everything they know about Obama that the Adam Baum doesn’t know or sticks his head in the sand when he is made aware of it.
Did the Adam Baum carefully read Obama’s autobiograpy? NO.————-
Does the Adam Baum consider that almost every single person in Obama’s life during his formative years was an extreme proud leftist? NO.———
Does the Adam Baum know that a proud admitted Communist college professor at his college spoke of Obama’s open support for Communist Revolution here in America? NO.—————————————
Does the Adam Baum know that Obama’s professor at Occidental, an avowed Communist, is one of the most frequent visitors to the White House? NO.
Does the Adam Baum know that Obama never once renounced his ‘youthful’ advocacy for Communism.——————————————-
Does the Adam Baum know that Obama, when older, registered with the ‘New Party’ – an openly proud Socialist party? Of course not.
Does the Adam Baum know that the leader of the party, professor Rogers, is a famous advocate of ‘Fabian incrementalism” to reach a similar goal to that of the Adam Baum’s? No. ———————————
Did the Adam Baum know that Rogers and Obama were compadres? No.———
Does Adam Baum understand how Obamacare, perfectly manifests Fabian incrementalism? Probably not. Joe Biden does. That’s why he whispered to Obama what a ‘big fucking deal’ it was when they signed it. As Rogers would explain, most leftists, (like the Adam Baum) suffers from the same problem that while they are Fabians in their head, they are impatient in their hearts and get intemperate.
———————————————————————
The above information is common knowledge and is only a small fraction of the evidence that Obama is an extreme redistributionist. Does the Adam Baum know that Obama publicly stated on radio that the Constitution was flawed by its failure to be redistributionist? Of course not.
—————————————————————–
But the average Tea Party member knows so much more about Obama’s history and stated beliefs than the Adam Baum. Yet the Adam Baum, with a supercilious attitude, assumes that his silly argument citing Reagan is dispositive. Is Obama willing to work with corporatists to achieve his ends. Of course. Any Fabian would be out of their mind to throw away the financial support essential to getting re-elected to make his ultimate dreams come true.
————————————————————
The Adam Baum like all intemperate leftists only faults Obama for not falling on his sword; they don’t realize all the small steps Obama has taken to reach their goal to destroy the U.S. capitalist engine – even if we are practically bankrupt now.———————————-
So much here to nitpick with by the likes of an Adam Baum. So much to avoid the central issue of the comment stated in the first paragraph. Now let’s see how he once again ‘bobs and weaves’ and never retracts his absurd claim that Tea Partiers, even its staunch, clever Black and Hispanic members, are racists.
Sigh.
If one were to actually read the words written above, it would be clear that I tried to explain “Why people perceive racism” not “why the tea party is racist.” The reality is that the Tea Party is a reactionary, fascist movement. As exemplified by Breitbart’s statement in Massachusetts, where he advocated using the military forces to “fight the liberals” with firearms… I am not delusional enough to believe this is racism.
The claims of “Communism” or “Socialism” are about as valid as claims that Lady Gaga is an alien working for the Illuminati. Ok, not that far… but one could point out that Dick Cheney is related to Barack Obama and that George Bush was related to Bill Clinton and that every American president was a Free Mason and member of the Skull and Bones… and correlate some conspiracy theory… but the reality is that there is no concrete evidence that this president plans to impose any Communist or Socialist legislation. Just as, I have no problem with a Christian, Muslim or Jew being my elected representative, as long as they do not legislate their religious beliefs upon me.
Also, A “thug” is a murdering thief. What evidence do you have that President Obama is murderous? What legislation has been even proposed that shows “redistributionist” tendencies?
I do not see these “small steps.” I see cutting taxes for the wealthy and starting wars that increase costs and decrease revenues. I see that President Reagan raised taxes 11 times. I see that Richard Nixon started the EPA and the DEA. I see that the Tea Party Republicans created the “debt ceiling” issue into one that caused international concern and a decrease in the United States credit rating. It was not just Obama, or the Democrats, that caused this situation, it was really everyone… both the Democrats and the Republicans, especially the Tea Party Republicans, that led to this situation. (Please take note that I did not excuse Democrats, Progressives or “Liberals” from blame in the current economic crisis.)
I see no reason to retract this comment, although the point of this entry was the perception of racism, not the actuality of racism. There are racist members of the Tea Party. I have met some of them myself at Tea Party rallies. Others have commented on this website making claims that “black people cannot swim because they sink” following this claim with false claims that Europeans are genetically ‘smarter’ for some reason.
Regarding the Black and Hispanic members: I do not see what this proves other than more perpetuation that we are supposed to believe that skin colour has some inclination of genetic patterns of thought… and this is impossible, as skin colour is not indicative of genetic race, only socially ascribed, arbitrary classifications of race that have absolutely no scientific basis.
I wish I could claim my delay in response was completely due to lack of concern, but the truth is that I have been pretty busy. (Although, the lack of concern did contribute.)