"You only hate Obama because he's black"

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

They were behind it and got their minions to spread it. The Repubs ran with it and the Clintons laughed about it.

Evidence would be nice.

Boru

[Drich]

Interesting list.  What policy or action of Obama's do you think set race against race, because I haven't noticed much in the way of racial politics in his administration?

Specifically His support of "Black lives matters." I've left links that explain or document his support as well as link describing what the group is fundementally about. In short they are anti cop, Anti white and seek minority control over the people in the United states. Yet Obama has openly supported this radical group.

 I talked to black and hispanic who are mad about that, but I don't think that that is what you meant by setting one race against the other.

He is polarizing the nation (making people choose sides) this does not mean that have to be set/fight against on another, but we are indeed forced to choose a side which is a sign of a poor leader unless it is his goal to polarize the nation and divide along racial lines. Which if that was his goal makes him a good leader, just a very bad person.

In what way do you think a president should support law enforcement that Obama is not?

When all the law enforcement shooting black suspects hit the news, he offered no perspective. In truth their was a 3 to 1 ratio of non blacks suspects being shot (white/hispanic) to every black suspect being shot/killed. Which the president was quick to denounce. After each and every shooting of a black suspect the president had something to say with in a day or so.

In contrast when cops were being targeted for 'pay back' Obama did not say a word. He polarized a people during a crisis and did not try and correct the mess he inspired. He was shamed by the media into even speaking about the slain officers.

On top of all of that he openly denounces the police department's move to more military style tactics. I have police officers in the family and they like all police will tell you if their departments mobilize like the military it is in response to escalating fire power and tactics criminals use. There is a 60 minutes report that showed us gangs would recruit guys and send them into the military so they could then come out and teach other gang members how to ambush and attack their rivals/police. Yet none of this was mentioned when he publicly vowed to mandate a 'restructuring' of the police departments. In effect he is looking to soften the response police use while criminals are escalating thier efforts. as a result many agencies across America right now are loosing officers and can't get new ones because they are not being supported by this country, making their jobs far more dangerous than they need be.

 What do you think being president has to do with supporting local law inforcement?

Again denounce groups like black lives matter who en-site riots looting and violence. Do not defund local law enforcement.

 Or do you think doesn't support the FBI?

I'm sorry were you trying to create a strawman or do you not understand the Federal Bureau of Investigation is not a LOCAL agency? You'll never see the FBI staring down the criminals who burned and looted Ferguson.

What spying policies (including phone hacks do you think are different than W's?  Because I don't see anything worse, I just wish I saw better.

You tell me the husband and wife shooter team in Ca (Christmas Party slaughter) Didn't exactly keep their plans hidden. The wife is reported in posting her and her husband's intentions on social media. She also posted her intentions to wage holy Jihad on the west, BEFORE Obama's policies vetted her for a Visa. Policies that included no social media checks that were allowed.

I'm all for privacy, but once you post your crap on facebook or on a web site like this, it ceases being private! All of that should have been looked at, but it seems looking at middle eastern social media for hints of radicalization was considered to be 'profiling.'

I don't see that his proposed legislation is to the left of Clinton either.

Clinton said 'don't ask don't tell, Obama says Tell and we will force others to accept you.
clinton pushed for universal health care, congress (rep=publican at the time) Said no, we want to balance the budget instead (not spend more than we take in.) Clinton accepted the no. Same thing happened with obama, and Obama forced obama care via a presidential order by passing what congress voted down. Clinton defunded the Military but, made it's old equipment accessible to local law enforcement, obama is looking to take all of that away. All of that is wide left of Clinton (the reason one not the poser now running)

 To the contrary, he looks like W2 to me.  

It takes congress and the president to shut down the government.  It happened under Clinton too.  I was working for the Federal Courts then.  I noticed when I worked at an "essential" job with the understanding that my paycheck would resume when Clinton and congress sorted out their differences.

No it's Supposed to work that way. Obama's policies has put us on an out of control spending plan, and will not allow congress to defund programs and try and balance the budget. Meaning he will not sign any budgets that do not full support his plans, So congress is forced to raise the debt ceiling. Which is bad enough, but his administration also adds New spending to the spending in those measures with absolutly no way to pay for them except selling our financial securities (gold) to china, which will ultimately lead China being the world dominating economic force... If you think Ultra right wing republicans are impossible to deal with, just imagine trying to deal with a people who's values militantly opposite of yours, they have no ties or responsibility to your community or way of life (meaning you have no hold, influence or say in their policy making) and can completely control you and the rest of this country by making breaking this country's economy. What we call "sanctions" think Iran, cuba, North Korea. Those people live as a third world country because The world ecconomic power said to the rest of the world do not trade with them unless they XYZ... What do you think China will do with similar power? do you think it will be fair and understanding of all the hippy nonsense that put us in such deep debt to them? to you think they will let us keep spending their money once they have secured what they want from us? (our Gold reserves) Absolutely not they will cut us off completely till we drop obama care and do away with whatever other trillion dollar giveaways we want to have.

This is the path/legacy of Obama. He sold this country's future to make a name for himself.

I can't imagine your reasons are racist, Dritch---just knee jerk right.

Their not racist, he is just as white as I am. The man is bad for the country and has set us down a dangerous path just so he can feel he as left 'lasting' a legacy on the US.

[dyresand]

Reasons not to like Obama:
Polarized the nation turning races against one another, by not speaking out against extremist groups./Fostering hatred.

Does not support law enforcement.

Does not support military, yet uses them extensively

Illegally pushing socialist legislation via 'presidential order' bypassing congress.

Does not deal in any moderate policies,(as clinton did) will not work with congress to pass any non-left wing agenda legislation.

Threatens government shut downs when he does not get his way.

Shutting down policy and support that have lead to 1/2 terrorist attacks on American soil.

Won't take responsibility for any of this, rather see opportunity to push more leftist agenda and go after assault rifles, stronger gun laws and the like.

Endorses FBI to hack apple phones.

obama care.

Sold US Gold reserves to china.

Has this nation in the greatest debt since the great depression, and yet continuing to push his legacy building despite how it affects the country.

Promised change, got more of the same political nonsense but on a deeper level.

At least clinton worked with the republicans, Obama seems to hate his opposition.

Honestly we can have a bit of socialism people want that you can have a hybrid of socialism completely remove privatized healthcare 
and make it so it is government regulated instead. Because you know cheaper and affordable health care for all. Not to mention the EU
Canada etc have a better health care costs and it's  cheaper. Here you know health care you damned if you have it you are damned if you don't. 
In the great words  of Alan Grayson Republicans want you to die early.

[Mister Agenda]

BLM is a needed social movement, not a terrorist organization.

[Brian37]

This is one of the most obnoxious things still coming out of people's leftist mouths.

As a former theist who always voted GOP, my dislike for Obama had nothing to do with his skin color.  You could accuse me of being brainwashed by right-wing propaganda if you want to, but I find the charge of "If you're not X you must be a racist" to be very narrow-minded and a pathetic strawman.

Are there some right wingers who hate Obama because he's a black man in a position of authority?  Of course, but even after coming over to the "dark side" I still don't think most of their dislike for the President has anything to do with his African Americanism.

Same fucking dodge you get from the left "Not all"..... If you merely disagreed with his policies, I could go with that, and yes certainly there ARE those who appose him merely for those reasons.

But you are a moron if you think that party is not driven to pander to the worst. THEY DO. They SCREAMED from day one after his first election in NOVEMBER ,2 months before he took his first oath, BEFORE he did a thing. They allowed their own camp to make an issue of his birth and did nothing on any wide scale to silence it. They allowed their right wing media and followers to make issue of his middle name "Hussein" and Trump lead that charge. The only politician who did the right thing was McCain, everyone else has allowed that xenophobia to go unchecked.

Just like politically correct liberal and moderate Muslims who say "not all", it does have to be all, just enough.

Now if you really want to make the argument that you are not racist, fine, but you are flat out full of shit to claim that party does not run on selling fear. 

TRUMP is the one who called Mexicans rapists, you'd never hear that out of Hillary or Bernie. Trump is the one saying we should deny refuge to fellow humans fleeing war. He really literally might as well be saying "fear the Jews, deport the Jews, make Germany Great Again".

NO, you may not think that of yourself, but you are supporting a party that uses fear to get votes, and it only takes a few to buy that fear to hold everyone else hostage.

[Brian37]

BLM is a needed social movement, not a terrorist organization.

Yep, same demonizing was used to keep South Africa's Apartheid going.

It is a typical tactic of the bully, accuse the victim of what you are doing.

[KevinM1]

RE: government shutdown: What actually happened was that the House Republicans tried to defund the ACA with their proposals. Obama, naturally wasn't for that, and the government shut down. Eventually, the Republicans, with their tails between their legs, agreed to what was essentially the Obama proposal, with only minor tweaks to the ACA. Why? Because the people were decidedly against them and it was threatening to influence the upcoming midterm election cycle.

And Drich, lowering military spending isn't a bad thing. Our military is bloated from a budgetary standpoint. It wastes billions on things like the F-35, and isn't agile enough to shift gears to address a new kind of terrorism-driven warfare. Money isn't a cure-all. The design of the military - how its various units are constructed, how they're deployed, the tech they use - is far more important, and we're still largely dealing with a Cold War design. We need it to be more efficient and modular all around. It's slowly modernizing, but it's not there yet. And, let no one here forget that you're griping about the government spending money on 'socialism' but, in the same breath, bemoaning more money not being spent on killing people. Interesting priorities you have there.

Regarding Obama himself, there's absolutely no way to ignore that a lot of the hate thrown his way is racially motivated. From the birther movement, to various right wing pundits and cartoonists calling him/portraying him as a monkey or ape, to the idiotic "Barrack HUSSEIN Obama" emphasis, to believing he's a 'secret' Muslim (despite not living according to Muslim tradition at all), to idiots like Drich saying he's somehow making race relations worse when he's largely just pointing a flashlight onto things that have been going on for generations and saying "Racism isn't over, people." Even his wife (how many Chewbacca jokes are there?) and kids haven't been spared.

Now, like Brian said, not all people who hate Obama are racist. But that's not the point. A very vocal contingent is. And they're the ones who are largely in control of how he's portrayed by the opposition. The talking heads and pundits who thrive on the hate of morons are the ones driving it, with those morons eating it up, which just fuels racism. Racism that Obama is blamed for intensifying, not people like Coulter, Limbaugh, etc.

[KevinM1]

NO, you may not think that of yourself, but you are supporting a party that uses fear to get votes, and it only takes a few to buy that fear to hold everyone else hostage.

And that's one of the big problems with our two party, winner take all system. We're seeing how easy it is for someone charismatic to step up, feed off of people's fear largely borne of ignorance, and intensify that fear, creating a feedback loop.

Now, it's not all Trump, but this is the culmination of the Tea Party movement. Ignorance is championed. Hate is fuel. Fear must be obliterated rather than understood. Bravado above all else. The only thing missing is a trend to evangelicalism, and, well, that's what Cruz is for.

At least the Germans had crippling post-war poverty to blame for wanting to listen to a person who had easy answers. What's our excuse?

[Brian37]

NO, you may not think that of yourself, but you are supporting a party that uses fear to get votes, and it only takes a few to buy that fear to hold everyone else hostage.

And that's one of the big problems with our two party, winner take all system.  We're seeing how easy it is for someone charismatic to step up, feed off of people's fear largely borne of ignorance, and intensify that fear, creating a feedback loop.  

Now, it's not all Trump, but this is the culmination of the Tea Party movement.  Ignorance is championed.  Hate is fuel.  Fear must be obliterated rather than understood.  Bravado above all else.  The only thing missing is a trend to evangelicalism, and, well, that's what Cruz is for.

At least the Germans had crippling post-war poverty to blame for wanting to listen to a person who had easy answers.  What's our excuse?

"At least" what the fuck kind of argument is that? So because we were and are not as bad off as Germans were, that excuses Trump's xenophobic bullshit? 

That is the same bullshit argument used by the economic right "Third world poor have it worse than our poor".

No, that is just another bullshit excuse the rich make to justify a race to the bottom so they can maximize profits on cheap labor.

No we are most certainly NOT Germany, which is why that asshole Trump should not be demonizing Mexicans or Muslims as if they were Jews.

Yes our poor SHOULD have it better, we are the richest nation in the world, so there is no excuse for lack of livable wages. And if the assholes on the economic right would do the right thing and pay livable wages they would find that would create that "less dependency" they all claim we should be.

NOW economics in our species history always leads to unrest just like stretching a rubber band too far, it will break. Now when that unrest happens, we see our species over correct in the opposite direction. The issue is not no rules or nanny state,  that is a bullshit argument. The issue is abuse of power. And any system you set up can be manipulated regardless. 

MONOPOLIES OF POWER can take place in political ideology, religious ideology, economic ideology and class ideology or a combo of those. But there is still NOT ONE government on the face of the planet, friend or foe, that does not invest in the global market. NOT ONE.

Far too many libertarians and republicans have been sold the bullshit idea that "capitalism" is a form of government and it is not. China allows western business and it's one party dictatorship keeps it's power by allowing western businesses. The Saudi Royal family owns oil companies and invests in banks and weapons. Gadaffi was a billionaire that owned stock in GE.

NOW liberals are not communists nor do we want Stalin's Russia. But it still remains that worker pay is not keeping up with the cost of living. PERIOD.

We do have a plutocracy and it does not require a one party state or a family dictatorship to happen. MONOPOLY OF POWER is the issue.

[downbeatplumb]

If America is the richest country in the world how come it's debt is so massive?