• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Barack Obama - the Best Republican President Since Eisenhower!

Shadow Serious

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
1,460
Reaction score
395
Location
Oklahoma
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Under President Obama:

1. We pay less of a percentage of our personal income in federal taxes since any time since 1950.


2. Taxes are lower for the middle class now than when he took office.

3. Politifact says that Obama's statement that "taxes are lower now for CEO's and hedge fund managers than at any time since the 1950's" is 'mostly true'.

4. The Dow Jones has more than doubled since its nadir a couple months after President Obama took office.

5. President Obama got 'Obamacare' passed - and it was a REPUBLICAN idea pushed by the Heritage Foundation and Newt Gingrich until somebody with a (D) behind his name was able to get it passed.

6. President Obama will likely get immigration reform passed - and in a form that is much more conservative than Reagan's amnesty.

7. President Obama has deported more immigrants than any other president.

8. Bush gave up on Osama bin Laden - President Obama didn't.

9. AND Obama was able to get almost all of the above done despite the fact that he's had to deal with the most obstructive Congress since the Civil War!

If only Barack Hussein Obama had an (R) behind his name, he'd be called the Second Coming of Reagan by our nation's Republicans!

The US News and World report article (Feb 11 2001) by Robert Schlesinger referees to another article in the NYT's Washington Monthy Section which refers to a USA Today's analysis which is an article May, 5, 2010 about tax year 2009

Tax bills in 2009 at lowest level since 1950 - USATODAY.com

and which tax rate is determined by the year previously which was Bush the Younger last year in office. Although if Obama had his way the taxes paid for the year 2009 would have been higher since when he did take office he tried to get them raised for that tax year during that tax year.




He was referring to pay roll taxes that is taxes that are not income taxes and since there were a tax holiday on those so yes that would be true. This doesn't mean that there were not taxes in other areas that the middle class did not have to pay though





Politifact said Obama was referring to hedge fund managers and they are taxed at the capital gains rate of 15% as opposed to the normal income tax rate of 35%. And that the top marginal tax rate was actually lower from 1998 to 1992 (Bush the Elder's time). This is why they said the statement is Mostly True.



The Nadar was July 1, 2010 for 9,686 and the high Feb 18, 2003 for 14,035. (14,035/9,686) = 1.449 which is not quite half as much it is NOT double.



Just because the Heritage Foundation and Newt Gingrich were for it doesn't mean that it was a good idea.




No, Obama would settle for immigration reform if it means getting the sweeping amnesty that he desires. And even if the Repubs get what they want I do not doubt that Obama will drag his feet on the implementation of it.



Given how porous the border is I would expect a higher deportation rate.



I doubt that Bush gave up on finding Osama he did not get the intelligence and if he did there might have been complications in achieving his kill or capture in doing so.



His first two years he had a Democrat Congress. If you say they were obstructive I do not know what I could say to dissuade you.




This statement deserves no comment.

1. No, because Obama is closer to being a Keynesian, and with Keynesian economics, the government spends in times of economic hardship in order to kickstart the economy, and only starts to raise taxes and engage in fiscal frugality once the economy is better off.

That is nice. It has been my experience however that those politicians who describe themselves as Keynesian or are described by others as Keynesian do not adhere to the second point of fiscal frugality when the economy is better. That said I was addressing your point about the claim of that most people paid less in their income since 1950. I pointed out that was due to Bush's policy and not Obamas and was due to pay roll taxes being reduced.

2. And those taxes in "other areas" are? And how were those "other taxes" due to Obama's efforts?

The issue was what Obama was talking about and that was taking credit for the lowered payroll taxes.

3. Yes, and capital gains needs to be taxed at the same rate as everyone else's income. There zero reason that the interest on money in a bank can't be taxed at the same rate as the income of a worker at McDonald's.

You apparently have the illusion that rich people have a "money bin" like Scrooge McDuck or a big fat bank account. Any way they do have investments and yes the rate of the tax is lower than the income tax rate. And yes the income tax rate should be lowered to that of the capital gains rate.

4. WRONG! "Nadir" means "lowest point", and the Dow's lowest point during Obama's tenure was 6,469.95 on March 6, 2009 - less than two months after he took office...so YES, the Dow has more than doubled on Obama's watch.

Here is a link: Dow Jones Averages

Select the visit now link and go to the last decade and the Dow shows 9686 as the minimum. You did mean the DOW did you?



5. It wasn't just them, guy - it was much of the Republican party, because the Individual Mandate was being offered as an alternative to Hillarycare. Just as with cap-and-trade, as soon as the Democrats say "okay, we can work with that - let's do it!" the Republicans throw a hissy fit and reject it in toto.

The Republicans had their own ideas about a health care policy but they were not allowed to address them during the process of constructing the bill that became Obama Care. The hissy fit as you described it was the Republicans being shut out of the process.


6. Paying a hefty fine and enduring a thirteen-year process of getting citizenship is hardly 'amnesty'. But I hope the Republicans continue to bitterly oppose it - because just as with the Supreme Court striking down the teeth of the Voting Rights Act today, all the more the minorities will stick with the Democratic party...because they know we actually do care about them. Of course, most hard-line conservatives will think that last phrase is completely false...but it's not. That's simply a sign of how little most conservatives understand what liberals are about.

The fact they are here distorts the labor market and this in part is why wages are down. Also some of those people who are here are not here to get citizenship they are here to make money and send it home so are not contributing as much to the economy as such. Furthermore if here as a legal resident under amnesty they may be entitled to welfare and become a burden to this country. The Supreme Court was right to strike down the section in the Voting Rights Act since those state are not what they were it has been 48 years ago and there must be proof of existing discrimination by race or creed. Conservative are concered and do want what is best for all citizens of this country and want them to do well. By your words "liberals" should care for the invaders of our country. Also I think that the "liberals" want both should be "provided for" but not to do too well since that would mean they wouldn't have to look to the Democrats for their livelihood.

7. Really? Even given the fact that for the past couple years we had more people going BACK to Mexico than were coming over to this side? Here's a clue, guy - when the economy is better here, more illegals will come. When the economy here sucks, more illegals will go back. So that makes it REAL simple - destroying America's economy is the single best way to solve our illegal immigration problem. Maybe that's why the Republicans are trying so hard to keep Obama from fixing the economy - they just want to keep more illegals from coming across the border! No, of course that's not it - but illegal immigration has always had far more to do with the economy than with whoever's in charge.

Maybe those from Mexico but not I think those from Central America or South America. Obama has refused to enforce laws restricting illegal immigration and refuses to support building infrastructure for the border and increasing border patrol.


8. Did he give up all the way? Probably not - but it certainly wasn't his priority at the time, given the fact that he had to deal with his illegal and unprovoked invasion of Iraq...which he'd begun planning TEN DAYS after he took office in January, 2001, eight months before 9/11. Frankly, he and Cheney need to be sent to stand for war crimes trials at The Hague.

I was fairly certain that when Bush the Younger was elected that we would be at war with Iraq. There should be a provision added to the Constitution that would prohibit 1st degree relations from assuming the Presidency that had been President before. If Bush should go before the Hague Obama would be a candidate for that also. Never the less I do not believe that the capture or killing of Obama was the top priority for the "war" in Afghanistan but the intelligence was there and he did give the nod to proceed.


9. 'Scuse you, but Congress was in session only SEVENTY-TWO DAYS before Republican Scott Brown was elected senator from Massachusetts...and the Democrats lost their supermajority, and the Republicans began using the filibuster far more than at any other time in American history. Since that day, by any measure the Congress has been more obstructive than at any time since the Civil War, passing less legislation than even the "Do-Nothing" Congress that Truman had to deal with.

So your idea of copperation is that the Republicans should roll over and play dead. The fact of the matter is that Obama had a Democratic House and a majority in the Senate and all it would take is for one Republican to cave in on most any issue to remove cloture. For all intents and purposes the Republicans could only delay in the first two years.




10. Because it's right.

No because it was a completely ridiculous statement. Obama is not anything like a Regan conservative.
 

Fenton

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 17, 2012
Messages
29,771
Reaction score
12,231
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Wrong. Because if the prisoner thinks that it's
an 'either-or', just like when he's being tortured (either give us intel or...!), he's gonna give you whatever comes to mind that he thinks might avoid that "or" event. He'll tell you a thousand things...and it's doggone hard trying to figure out the two or three important things he said among that thousand.

However, if you treat the prisoner as your friend and show them that no, you aren't the ogre that he's been told - and then he sees that no, he's not going to be tortured like all his buddies said, there's a part of him that begins to realize that hey, my guys were wrong, these guys aren't so bad...and THEN they start to open up with REAL intel, quality stuff, the stuff you really need to know.

THAT, sir, is what the WWII interrogators were trying to tell you. Show them that yeah, America really does try to wear the white hat and play by the rules even with our enemies...and sooner or later in their eyes we're standing on a moral pedestal again. But when we torture, they find out...and not only do we not get the intel we need, but it turns into the best damn recruiting tool we could give them.

George Washington was right.

So were the WWII interrogators.

Dubya and Cheney were flat wrong...and need to stand trial before The Hague for war crimes.

LMAO !!!

What a bunch of nonsense. Yea, "be their good buddy...

What a pathetic joke.

Cheney and Bush got the Intel needed so Obama could spike the Football.
 

blaxshep

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
May 22, 2012
Messages
16,875
Reaction score
7,666
Location
St. Petersburg
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
If you treat the prisoner as your friend and show them that no, you aren't the ogre that he's been told - and then he sees that no, he's not going to be tortured like all his buddies said, there's a part of him that begins to realize that hey, my guys were wrong, these guys aren't so bad...and THEN they start to open up with REAL intel, quality stuff, the stuff you really need to know.

BWAAAAAAAAAA HAAA HAAA HAAAA HAAAAAA! :lamo
 

Fenton

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 17, 2012
Messages
29,771
Reaction score
12,231
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
BWAAAAAAAAAA HAAA HAAA HAAAA HAAAAAA! :lamo

I called one of my Tech buddies away from his Oscilloscope for that one.

I'm thinking of cut/paste and copying it to theCHIVE.

Under Funny/Fail.
 

Fenton

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 17, 2012
Messages
29,771
Reaction score
12,231
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
So the interrogators of Nazi WWII prisoners
who spoke up as a group against torture were wrong?

You actually think integators go into a session completely blind and ignorant ?

That they could be swayed by false information because the prisoner was in pain ?

How ridiculous.
 

Glen Contrarian

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 21, 2013
Messages
17,688
Reaction score
8,046
Location
Bernie to the left of me, Hillary to the right, he
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
By allowing more effective means?

Seems like the WWII interrogators had a very good idea what "more effective means" were - and they said so less than ten years ago. No matter what you might think, your experience - which I'm not doubting - does not compare to theirs, and we never faced a threat in our wars in the Middle East that came close to comparing to the threat we all faced in WWII.
 

Glen Contrarian

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 21, 2013
Messages
17,688
Reaction score
8,046
Location
Bernie to the left of me, Hillary to the right, he
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
lol Obama is anything from a republican.

Ask most liberal political wonks and they'll tell you that Obama's obviously a center-right president and closer to the Republicans of Eisenhower's day (except for on social issues) than he is to being a real Democrat.
 

OldWorldOrder

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 14, 2012
Messages
5,820
Reaction score
1,438
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Seems like the WWII interrogators had a very good idea what "more effective means" were - and they said so less than ten years ago. No matter what you might think, your experience - which I'm not doubting - does not compare to theirs, and we never faced a threat in our wars in the Middle East that came close to comparing to the threat we all faced in WWII.

What makes you think they disagree with me?
 

Mycroft

Genius is where you find it.
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 27, 2011
Messages
83,978
Reaction score
35,964
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Ask most liberal political wonks and they'll tell you that Obama's obviously a center-right president and closer to the Republicans of Eisenhower's day (except for on social issues) than he is to being a real Democrat.

Why on earth would any thinking human being as a liberal political wonk anything?
 

OldWorldOrder

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 14, 2012
Messages
5,820
Reaction score
1,438
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Seems like the WWII interrogators had a very good idea what "more effective means" were

How do you come to that conclusion?

- and they said so less than ten years ago. No matter what you might think, your experience - which I'm not doubting - does not compare to theirs, and we never faced a threat in our wars in the Middle East that came close to comparing to the threat we all faced in WWII.

I don't understand: did you talk to all of them, or something? Or was this a small group of them?
 

Glen Contrarian

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 21, 2013
Messages
17,688
Reaction score
8,046
Location
Bernie to the left of me, Hillary to the right, he
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
How do you come to that conclusion?
I don't understand: did you talk to all of them, or something? Or was this a small group of them?

You really didn't read the article, did you? Why is that? Was it because a liberal like me said it was proof against something you believed in, so you refused to look at it? Guy, I try always to use credible references - I don't use fly-by-nigh blogs. Try doing something different and read about the experiences of those who were doing the job you say you did, were doing it probably before you were born, and did it in a time where freedom was in far greater risk than it has been since the fall of the Soviet Union. For your edification, here's the first part of the article:

For six decades, they held their silence.

The group of World War II veterans kept a military code and the decorum of their generation, telling virtually no one of their top-secret work interrogating Nazi prisoners of war at Fort Hunt.

When about two dozen veterans got together yesterday for the first time since the 1940s, many of the proud men lamented the chasm between the way they conducted interrogations during the war and the harsh measures used today in questioning terrorism suspects.

Back then, they and their commanders wrestled with the morality of bugging prisoners' cells with listening devices. They felt bad about censoring letters. They took prisoners out for steak dinners to soften them up. They played games with them.

"We got more information out of a German general with a game of chess or Ping-Pong than they do today, with their torture," said Henry Kolm, 90, an MIT physicist who had been assigned to play chess in Germany with Hitler's deputy, Rudolf Hess.

Blunt criticism of modern enemy interrogations was a common refrain at the ceremonies held beside the Potomac River near Alexandria. Across the river, President Bush defended his administration's methods of detaining and questioning terrorism suspects during an Oval Office appearance.

Several of the veterans, all men in their 80s and 90s, denounced the controversial techniques. And when the time came for them to accept honors from the Army's Freedom Team Salute, one veteran refused, citing his opposition to the war in Iraq and procedures that have been used at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba.

"I feel like the military is using us to say, 'We did spooky stuff then, so it's okay to do it now,' " said Arno Mayer, 81, a professor of European history at Princeton University.


Okay? I know you don't want to think that what you were taught was wrong, but these weren't just simple Joes taken off the street and told to "get this guy to talk". If you'll read the article, you'll find some the things we learned...some of which we use even today.
 

John Liberty

Banned
Joined
Jun 30, 2013
Messages
275
Reaction score
72
Location
Ask the NSA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Under President Obama:

1. We pay less of a percentage of our personal income in federal taxes since any time since 1950.

2. Taxes are lower for the middle class now than when he took office.

3. Politifact says that Obama's statement that "taxes are lower now for CEO's and hedge fund managers than at any time since the 1950's" is 'mostly true'.

4. The Dow Jones has more than doubled since its nadir a couple months after President Obama took office.

5. President Obama got 'Obamacare' passed - and it was a REPUBLICAN idea pushed by the Heritage Foundation and Newt Gingrich until somebody with a (D) behind his name was able to get it passed.

6. President Obama will likely get immigration reform passed - and in a form that is much more conservative than Reagan's amnesty.

7. President Obama has deported more immigrants than any other president.

8. Bush gave up on Osama bin Laden - President Obama didn't.

9. AND Obama was able to get almost all of the above done despite the fact that he's had to deal with the most obstructive Congress since the Civil War!

If only Barack Hussein Obama had an (R) behind his name, he'd be called the Second Coming of Reagan by our nation's Republicans!

I really don't mean to sound like an a**. I strongly disagree with using slander to prove your point. But I am honestly concerned with the state of your mind right now. I think you've been watching a little too much television. Obama is in no way Republican(original republican, not this modern neo-conservative crap) nor is he a good president. None of this information is even remotely in any way true...and if it is that just means the previous presidents have been true communists because this information is as ridiculous as it is untrue.

This immigration reform bill is most definitely not conservative. This new immigration "Gang of 8" bill is a huge risk to our national security and economy. I agree we need immigration reform, but not in that way.

Taxes have tripled since Bush. Bush was a TERRIBLE president and Obama continued the Bush agenda.

And just an FYI Congress has been obstructive because Obama is trying to pass bills that take away our freedoms! I do agree with #10, unfortunately people believe in party platforms rather then true ideas.

Bottom line is: He is not a conservative, he is in line with neo-conservatives yes. But neo-conservatives are just Liberals who hide behind the Republican platform for money.
 

Glen Contrarian

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 21, 2013
Messages
17,688
Reaction score
8,046
Location
Bernie to the left of me, Hillary to the right, he
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
I really don't mean to sound like an a**. I strongly disagree with using slander to prove your point. But I am honestly concerned with the state of your mind right now. I think you've been watching a little too much television. Obama is in no way Republican(original republican, not this modern neo-conservative crap) nor is he a good president. None of this information is even remotely in any way true...and if it is that just means the previous presidents have been true communists because this information is as ridiculous as it is untrue.

This immigration reform bill is most definitely not conservative. This new immigration "Gang of 8" bill is a huge risk to our national security and economy. I agree we need immigration reform, but not in that way.

Taxes have tripled since Bush. Bush was a TERRIBLE president and Obama continued the Bush agenda.

And just an FYI Congress has been obstructive because Obama is trying to pass bills that take away our freedoms! I do agree with #10, unfortunately people believe in party platforms rather then true ideas.

Bottom line is: He is not a conservative, he is in line with neo-conservatives yes. But neo-conservatives are just Liberals who hide behind the Republican platform for money.

We have a winner here! I mean that in the Fox News/Alex Jones kind of way, since he's Absolutely Sure that everything I posted was wrong (and he provided no references to show that I was wrong)...AND he said that "taxes have tripled since Bush".

Tell you what, guy - why don't you prove that! Get some numbers from some REPUTABLE websites, okay? I've got no doubt that you'll find some site with numbers...and when you post them, I'll go to the trouble to show you what the problem is with your numbers.
 

OldWorldOrder

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 14, 2012
Messages
5,820
Reaction score
1,438
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
You really didn't read the article, did you?

No.

Why is that?

Because I don't care? Because you need to make your own argument? Most of all, because I know it wasn't all of them, at all, (obviously), and I don't appreciate you trying to pain it that way.

Was it because a liberal like me said it was proof against something you believed in, so you refused to look at it?

I voted for Obama twice and Kerry before him, so I doubt that's it.

Guy, I try always to use credible references - I don't use fly-by-nigh blogs.

Great.

Try doing something different and read about the experiences of those who were doing the job you say you did, were doing it probably before you were born, and did it in a time where freedom was in far greater risk than it has been since the fall of the Soviet Union. For your edification, here's the first part of the article:

I don't care. If we both know it was only one or two or three or twenty, why are you acting like it was all of them or something?

For six decades, they held their silence.

The group of World War II veterans kept a military code and the decorum of their generation, telling virtually no one of their top-secret work interrogating Nazi prisoners of war at Fort Hunt.

When about two dozen veterans got together yesterday for the first time since the 1940s, many of the proud men lamented the chasm between the way they conducted interrogations during the war and the harsh measures used today in questioning terrorism suspects.

Back then, they and their commanders wrestled with the morality of bugging prisoners' cells with listening devices. They felt bad about censoring letters. They took prisoners out for steak dinners to soften them up. They played games with them.

"We got more information out of a German general with a game of chess or Ping-Pong than they do today, with their torture," said Henry Kolm, 90, an MIT physicist who had been assigned to play chess in Germany with Hitler's deputy, Rudolf Hess.

Blunt criticism of modern enemy interrogations was a common refrain at the ceremonies held beside the Potomac River near Alexandria. Across the river, President Bush defended his administration's methods of detaining and questioning terrorism suspects during an Oval Office appearance.

Several of the veterans, all men in their 80s and 90s, denounced the controversial techniques. And when the time came for them to accept honors from the Army's Freedom Team Salute, one veteran refused, citing his opposition to the war in Iraq and procedures that have been used at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba.

"I feel like the military is using us to say, 'We did spooky stuff then, so it's okay to do it now,' " said Arno Mayer, 81, a professor of European history at Princeton University.


Okay? I know you don't want to think that what you were taught was wrong, but these weren't just simple Joes taken off the street and told to "get this guy to talk". If you'll read the article, you'll find some the things we learned...some of which we use even today.

lol I'm not going to learn anything from a Washington Post article about this, but okay lol
 

Glen Contrarian

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 21, 2013
Messages
17,688
Reaction score
8,046
Location
Bernie to the left of me, Hillary to the right, he
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
No.



Because I don't care? Because you need to make your own argument? Most of all, because I know it wasn't all of them, at all, (obviously), and I don't appreciate you trying to pain it that way.



I voted for Obama twice and Kerry before him, so I doubt that's it.



Great.



I don't care. If we both know it was only one or two or three or twenty, why are you acting like it was all of them or something?



lol I'm not going to learn anything from a Washington Post article about this, but okay lol

I think we have our answer. You didn't read the article referenced, either because of what it said, or because of who published the article. You immediately dismissed out-of-hand what the men said - they came out as a group, and these men spoke for that group, remember. And how many WWII or Korean War interrogators came out to dispute what they said? None.

Think on this, guy - if you're eighty-something or more years old, will you really give a damn about anyone's political agenda? Will you lie concerning something about which you've kept your silence for over half a century, concerning secrets you thought you'd take to your grave?

No, I don't think you would.

Most times, we should indeed take today's level of knowledge - such is normally the nature of progress. But when it comes to the human animal, emotionally and intellectually, we're still much the same as we were ten thousand years ago - and for this reason we should not be so quick to dismiss the wisdom passed down to us from our elders, particularly when it comes to matters of great moral import. They weren't always right, but they weren't always wrong, either.
 

Woodman909

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 28, 2013
Messages
1,285
Reaction score
566
Location
Southwest AZ
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
from the very beginning, when he stood up behind a podium with a "Seal of the Office of the President-Elect", an office which does not exist... it should have been a wake-up call that we were in for a whole ****load of trouble with this Kenyan.
 

Glen Contrarian

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 21, 2013
Messages
17,688
Reaction score
8,046
Location
Bernie to the left of me, Hillary to the right, he
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
from the very beginning, when he stood up behind a podium with a "Seal of the Office of the President-Elect", an office which does not exist... it should have been a wake-up call that we were in for a whole ****load of trouble with this Kenyan.

Feel free to address the points I brought up in the OP, then.
 

jmotivator

Computer Gaming Nerd
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 24, 2013
Messages
30,259
Reaction score
15,796
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
With Obama's agenda from day one, there is absolutely no way he can ever be confused with a Republican...a conservative...or even with being a good President. The past 4 1/2 years have proven that.

Well, also Bush didn't give up on Osama Bin Laden. The CIA closed the office at Langley for show, but moved the hunt to Afghanistan and Pakistan under the code name Operation Cannonball.
 
Top Bottom