Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Wow, someone is a little ornery that Democrats think that Obama is aloof and not just opposes compromise, but shuns it.
You must have bought into the perfect candidate, hope and change, the anti-Bush, messiah, etc...
Next time a Tea Party member says they oppose compromise, we should call them out for acting like an Obama. Except, most people would assume that being an Obama is equivalent to being called a liar, since Obama is primarily known for lying.
But republicans could care less about deficits, debt, or spending. Rather republicans ignore all important issues, and then attack Obama with 'social issues' like a group of little children.
The very best I ever saw at getting things done by reaching across the aisle, doing favors for the opposition and downright blackmailing an opposing Senator or two was Lyndon Johnson. He was a real statesman.
How do you feel about welfare and free cell phones for the poor? (you are against it.)
How do you feel about raising the min wage so low income workers get more money? (You are against it.)
How do you feel about giving healthcare to everyone in America? (you are against it.)
How do you feel about "big" tax credits for low income workers? (you are against it.)
How do you feel about the following $6.6 trillion dollar tax cut for the rich? (You are for it.)
If something gives money to the poor or working poor republicans say "no." If something gives money to the rich republicans say "yes." Can you prove that statement wrong?
Romney lost,there is no Romney tax cut, the thread is about key democrats opinion of Obama it has nothing to do with a tax cut that never happened
But republicans could care less about deficits, debt, or spending. Rather republicans ignore all important issues, and then attack Obama with 'social issues' like a group of little children.
If Obama slowed spending why has he run up 6 trillion in debt and how is that a topic for this thread who it's democrats who are complaint
But republicans could care less about deficits, debt, or spending. Rather republicans ignore all important issues, and then attack Obama with 'social issues' like a group of little children.
In one thread the left takes credit for cutting deficits and the next they say congress has the purse strings. Which is it?
But republicans could care less about deficits, debt, or spending. Rather republicans ignore all important issues, and then attack Obama with 'social issues' like a group of little children.
That's the result of the sequester that the Dems fought tooth and nail against, and that the GOP foolishly bartered away. And also, quite likely the result of a GOP controlled House since 2010.
But republicans could care less about deficits, debt, or spending. Rather republicans ignore all important issues, and then attack Obama with 'social issues' like a group of little children.
Facts:
-Democrat lawmakers call him aloof and say he shuns compromise with the GOP.
-Obama campaigned against Trickle Down economics, but uses trickle down economics more than Reagan.
-Obama's trickle down QE money creation has artificially lowered interest rates through money creation to big banks. If interest rates were to return to recent historical norms like under Bush or Clinton, the national annual deficit would increase back up to $1 Trillion a year, as we would be spending more money on the interest of that soon to be (January) $18 Trillion in national debt.
-Obama lied about the creation of the sequester and fear mongered the public over what would happen if it took effect. Now he wants credit for the positives of it?
-Obama said that Bush was failing and damaging the country for letting earmarks increase on his watch. Obama said this was bad and he promised to roll back earmarks to 1994 levels by veto if necessary. Well Obama has already had more earmarks in 5.5 years than Bush in 8 years. Obama's first and second year with Democrats in control had more earmarks than any time under Bush.
-Obama said he would end no-bid contracts under $25K...whoops.
-Obama said specifically that Bush was irresponsible for giving a no-bid contract to a Halliburton subsidiary in Iraq and Obama specifically promised not to give that company a no-bid contract as no-bid contracts means that the government always loses. Then Obama gave that very same specific Halliburton subsidiary a bigger no bid contract and then he handed out a no bid contract to the failed Obamacare website.
Your facts are all an illusion...sort of like Obama's "honesty" and Hope and Change.
And how many of those bills rewarded the rich and defunded Obamacare? Take away those that did and how many would you really have?
Remember it was the republicans who said their main goal was to make Obama a one term President. So why should Obama reach across the aisle with people like that?
That's the way bill are passed. Most have tons of pork attached. As for Obamacare, it was a totally partisan tax imposed against the people's wishes. The American people did not support the tax and no Republican Congress member voted for it. It is bad law. The bills were jobs bills. The Keystone Pipeline would provide a few well-paying jobs but Obama will not sign off on it. He might though with the election looming.
If you want to see what people with Narcissistic Personality Disorder are capable of when the adoration stops, study Jonestown.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.