White House offers glimpse into president’s Libya vacation
August 23rd, 2011
11:47 AM ET

White House offers glimpse into president’s Libya vacation

VINEYARD HAVEN, MA (CNN) – As the situation in Libya was unraveling over the weekend, a vacationing President Obama was trying to get as much intelligence as possible from his national security team. He’s an “aggressive robust consumer” of information said a senior administration official who did not want to be identified discussing internal deliberations.

Counterterrorism adviser John Brennan provided frequent updates in person. Other senior members of the national security team weighed in as called on and during at least two conference calls with the president, the official said.

With so much uncertainty and in the midst of what the president himself called a “fluid” situation, the White House wanted to be careful to have confirmation of critical details before sending the president out to make public statements.

His mood during this time was described by the official as “businesslike.”

As more information poured in the administration received “greater clarity,” said Deputy White House spokesman Josh Earnest. In-between a conference call and a basketball game Monday afternoon, the president walked out under a shade tree on his rented Chilmark compound and delivered his first public remarks on Libya.

“In just six months the 42-year reign of Muammar Gadhafi has unraveled,” the president told the nation. But he stopped short of calling the US-NATO effort there victorious.

Even though the administration has been criticized for not acting more forcefully to end the dictator’s reign much sooner, the official dismissed any chatter of vindication.

“It’s not what’s driving this,” the top White House official said. “What you see here is a lot of hard work….this is fundamentally in our interest.”

The administration is focused on helping the National Transitional Council establish a fair and peaceful transition to democracy. But the official insisted that there are still no plans to put U.S. boots on the ground in Libya.

Referring to the rebels the official said “They haven’t asked” for U.S. boots on the ground, “they don’t want” boots on the ground.

The official suggested that any support of that nature would have to come from international partners.

While the sun is setting on Gadhafi’s reign, his exact whereabouts remains unclear. The White House seems less concerned by that detail and instead is focused on this: “He’s definitely not in charge of the country,” the official said.


Topics: Libya • Mark Zuckerberg • President Obama • The News

soundoff (157 Responses)
  1. jean2009

    Work, Work, Work....no vacation here.

    August 23, 2011 at 12:13 pm |
    • Jay in NC

      He transfered control of the assault against Libya to NATO. Now he wants to take credit for the victory? What an ego. Barry, go back to 'work' on your speech. I have no doubt that your hard line followers will continue to praise your every word. The rest of us will pop some corn, sit back and watch your approval rating fall.

      August 23, 2011 at 5:14 pm |
      • jean2009

        @Jay in NC....You spend too much time posting and not enough time reading. The US has been in control of bombing the no fly zone from day one, Numerous missions...although it is being reported as only a support role, U.S planes are still bombing. We have been bombing heavy for over the last two weeks.. According to the stop NATO website they say U.S. is flying 27% of NATO's 20,000 missions over Libya.

        And Jay....Kansas was a free state. The Dunham's probably did not own slaves.

        August 23, 2011 at 5:56 pm |
      • Obama2012

        Jay -paragraph 6:

        “In just six months the 42-year reign of Muammar Gadhafi has unraveled,” the president told the nation. But he stopped short of calling the US-NATO effort there victorious.

        August 23, 2011 at 8:14 pm |
      • Jay in NC

        Jean, if you are going to support this guy you should take the time to read more about him. He is descended from slave owners. I know that this just blows your Liberal mind.

        http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/03/us/politics/03obama.html

        August 23, 2011 at 10:55 pm |
      • Jay in NC

        Jean, according to thehill.com Barry ceded control of the forces to NATO. Our men have been under NATO control, not the president.

        http://thehill.com/homenews/house/177957-kucinich-libyan-foray-represents-new-international-gangsterism

        August 23, 2011 at 11:19 pm |
      • annie s

        Please supply quotes and links proving that the President is taking credit for anything in Libya. The truth is that despite calls for shoot from the hip action (Palin) and troops on the ground (McCain), Barack Obama chose for the United States to be a part of a NATO mission designed to protect the rebels while allowing them to fight for their own country. And by all accounts, it was the exact right decision. Kind of fries you, doesn't it?

        August 24, 2011 at 9:45 am |
      • W

        Uh huh, if this thing had turned out bad and the rebels had lost the right would have put every inch of blame on President Obama but since it turned out okay they want to say it had nothing to do with him. Ha! Yall are a joke, grow up.

        August 24, 2011 at 10:19 am |
      • C-Lo

        Annie–he can't take credit for Libya or any other action as that would nullify his Nobel Peace Prize for his stance on deplomacy. He may be a great orator but he's a terrible facilitator.

        August 24, 2011 at 10:31 am |
      • mgc florida

        Are you stupid?? where do you see him claiming credit for anything? Instead he has congratulated the rebels. Do you hate him so much you can't even see whats really going on?

        August 24, 2011 at 11:15 am |
      • mgc florida

        Jay in NC, alot of folks are desended from slave owners, probably you are too, so what. Now you are starting to sound a little racist.

        August 24, 2011 at 11:16 am |
      • nojello

        Ahhh, you mean his jobs speach? Obama sure to propose some common sense solutions to the job crisis in America: spend lots and lots of money building bridges across America, then spend gobs more money to dig the rivers to go under them.

        August 24, 2011 at 2:13 pm |
      • Cassandra

        If his approval rating falls, it will be due to person like yourself who will not approve of ANYTHING that he does. Even if it benefits you. So pop on.

        August 24, 2011 at 2:47 pm |
      • wandaz

        Did you even read the article?

        “In just six months the 42-year reign of Muammar Gadhafi has unraveled,” the president told the nation. But he stopped short of calling the US-NATO effort there victorious.

        Even though the administration has been criticized for not acting more forcefully to end the dictator’s reign much sooner, the official dismissed any chatter of vindication.

        “It’s not what’s driving this,” the top White House official said. “What you see here is a lot of hard work….this is fundamentally in our interest.”

        Nothin in there suggests he is taking credit...man you folks on the right keep on proving just how moronic a human being can be!

        August 24, 2011 at 3:10 pm |
      • Kevin

        Hey Jean you said it right there the USA was doing the SUPPORT ROLE. He did transfer all the bombings to NATO and you know that. There is a big difference of being in charge of a military role and a support role. You should know that or are you from the same Planet as Allah Obama

        August 24, 2011 at 4:49 pm |
      • C-Lo

        @ Jean–Since you are so into facts, technically Kansas was a free state, as were all states admitted to the Union 1861 and after. The prospect of the admission of Kansas as a state was one of the main driving forces of the US Civil War as the enslavers were looking for self-determination of the newly admitted states violation of the Missouri Compromise. That doesn't nullify the fact that there were slave owners in the territory at the time, and actually re-enforces it.

        August 24, 2011 at 4:51 pm |
      • jean2009

        Updates on Libyan war/Stop NATO news: August 23, 2011
        August 23, 2011 richardrozoff Leave a comment Go to comments

        ====

        New International Gangsterism: Kucinich Wants NATO Commanders Tried

        NATO’s Air War Against Libya: 20,000 Sorties, 7,541 Attacks

        U.S. Flies 27% Of NATO’s 20,000 Air Missions Over Libya

        American Air Strikes Against Libya Nearly Doubled In Past 12 Days

        Libya: West Engaged In Information Warfare

        http://rickrozoff.wordpress.com/2011/08/23/updates-on-libyan-warstop-nato-news-august-23-2011/

        August 24, 2011 at 5:51 pm |
      • jean2009

        From looking at President Obama's ancestry online it looks like most of his ancestors on the Dunham/Armour side of his family tree (great-great-great-grandparents C.1830's) were born in Indiana, Illinois, Ohio, Kentucky, W. Virginia, Ireland . Of the16 listed....5 were born in Ohio, 1 in Ireland, and 3 actually lived part of their life in Kansas.
        I'm sure this looks much like the family tree for all people....noted was one ancestor Columbus Clark who was on the side of the North during the Civil War...and many of the footnotes are interesting.

        http://www.wargs.com/political/obama.html

        August 25, 2011 at 4:08 pm |
      • Jay in NC

        From the Baltimore Sun.

        http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/bal-te.obama02mar02,0,5765826.story

        great-great-great-great grandfathers, George Washington Overall, owned two slaves who were recorded in the 1850 census in Nelson County, Ky. great-great-great-great-great-grandmothers, Mary Duvall, also owned two slaves.

        Like I said before, that must make for some interesting talks at the presidents table.

        So many Liberals want to continue to blame whites for slavery. As if anyone today had anything to do with it. Yet they will ignore that the Messiah of the Liberal World is descended from slave owners. Just goes to prove that you can not tell by looking at someone if they have bad blood or not. Maybe this should be a lesson to Liberals to stop being prejudice.

        August 25, 2011 at 6:40 pm |
    • Jay in NC

      Jean a few days ago you claimed that I posted a racist comment about The First Date. I have look over the post again, and yet again I can not find a single racist statement that I have made. If you can show the world the exact statement, I will stop posting. If you can not then you should at least apologize.

      Here is a link to the post you claimed is racist.

      http://whitehouse.blogs.cnn.com/2011/07/20/michelle-obama-on-her-own-food-struggles/

      August 23, 2011 at 5:31 pm |
      • jean2009

        Referring to the First Lady as the "first date: is disrespectful and highlights the fact that you are racists...did you refer to Mrs. Bush in the same manner? If so show me when.

        August 23, 2011 at 6:09 pm |
      • Obama2012

        Jay – If you post inaccurate or offensive subject matter, people will call you out. That's the nature of the beast. Get over it.

        August 23, 2011 at 8:18 pm |
      • Jay in NC

        Jean, you said that Michelle Bachmann did not have brains. Does that make you a sexist or racist?

        The First Date has given us many reasons to dislike her. Like the fact that she told young children, at the White House, that her favorite first book was Song of Solomon by Toni Morrison. You know the book with the 'N' word, hate filled racist statements, where one character lays in his bed dreaming of ways to kill little white girls. Rape, sex with a child, prostitution, under age drinking, drugs, murder and suicide. Yep, that's an excellent book to tell young children about. And to think it was her favorite first book. My, what age was she when her parents allowed such a book? Or is it that she did not have a favorite first book until she was older?

        No, The First Date has not earned our respect, black, white, or blue she is not a very good roll model. She hates America, so I guess you can say that her chickens have come home to roost.

        August 23, 2011 at 10:45 pm |
      • annie s

        Jay in NC, got to defend Jean here – I've read many of your posts over the months and the truth is, you're a racist.

        August 24, 2011 at 9:47 am |
      • jean2009

        Jay.... No, it only means I notice the obvious she's an idiot.

        Bachmann's promise of $2 gas is a lot like Herbert Hoover's promise of a chicken in every pot, and a car in every garage...which didn't pan out.

        "The sun, the moon and the stars would have disappeared long ago... had they happened to be within the reach of predatory human hands."  ~Havelock Ellis, The Dance of Life, 1923

        August 24, 2011 at 6:06 pm |
    • Howard

      STOP CONTRIBUTING MONEY TO OBAMA !!!

      DON'T HELP OBAMA BUY THE PRESIDENCY FOR A BILLION DOLLARS !!!

      August 24, 2011 at 5:39 pm |
      • jean2009

        OBAMA-BIDEN 2012

        August 24, 2011 at 6:06 pm |
  2. joe

    Obama's a joke a real snake oil salesman
    if Obama's bullshit was electric He would be a power plant

    August 23, 2011 at 12:17 pm |
    • Howard

      By voting 'Present', Obama just happens to be there, and gets the undeserved credit, for other people's achievements. And, the fools who are duped into giving Obama credit, are putting the survival of America into the hands of an even bigger FOOL !!!

      August 23, 2011 at 12:39 pm |
      • Pete

        We hear you Howard Obama takes credit for all the good and blames bush for the bad

        like joe says obama is a snake oil salesman

        August 23, 2011 at 12:49 pm |
      • Jim

        This victory has little to do with this president or the last. I'm happy with the outcome so far, final yet to be seen. At least we didn't put 'boots on the ground.'

        August 23, 2011 at 12:53 pm |
      • Amy

        Poor Howard – as much as you'd like that to be true, your wanting failure – not only for Obama, but for everything he is doing to better our country and our world – is a reflection on your own foolish self-disgust, acted out.

        August 23, 2011 at 1:22 pm |
      • jean2009

        @Howard I see you have found your topic for today...but again with not the full facts.
        @Howard....you may want to check that with POLITIFACTS...which gave it a big fat red FALSE.on the TRUTH -O-METER.

        There is no record of President Obama ever having voted "Present" when he was a U.S. Senator, and the Senate does keep very accurate records of how each senator votes. Which can be checked online.

        However,as a Illinois Senator that did happen, not just for him but for several State Senators who wanted to block a vote on a bill...in Illinois voting "present" is the same as voting "no" without the hassle.

        The fact that he voted "present" in Illinois 129 times over 8 years, out of over a total 4,000 votes, is nothing more than a blip. You can also check that out on POLITIFACTS. It was given it a Half-true.

        Most of the 129 "present" votes were on issues dealing with minors in the justice system, or state budget financing.

        And you need to make the distinction between Illinois Senator and U.S. Senator. Which again shows you don't know exactly what you are talking about...but you are blindly having a knee-jerk reaction.

        August 23, 2011 at 3:36 pm |
      • Jay in NC

        @Jean, CNN says that your guy missed a lot of votes.

        November 02, 2007
        Obama making less than a quarter of Senate votes

        http://articles.cnn.com/2007-11-02/politics/obama.missed.votes_1_obama-spokesman-bill-burton-iranian-revolutionary-guard-rothenberg-political-report?_s=PM:POLITICS

        August 23, 2011 at 4:53 pm |
      • jean2009

        Are you discussing during the Presidential Campaign?

        "During the November 2 edition of CNN's The Situation Room, CNN congressional correspondent "Jessica Yellin reported on the voting records of Democratic presidential candidates who are also current U.S. senators. Yellin stated that Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) has missed "nearly 80 percent since September" and that Sens. Joseph R. Biden Jr. (DE), Chris Dodd (CT), and Hillary Rodham Clinton (NY) "don't have great voting records, either." She added that "the Obama campaign points out that if you consider the entire year of voting, it is not Obama who's missed the most, but Senator Biden, then Dodd, and Obama comes in third."

        " However, Yellin left out the fact that Sen. John McCain (AZ) - the only current Republican presidential candidate who is a sitting U.S. senator - has missed more votes than any other senator since Congress convened in January, with the exception of Sen. Tim Johnson (D-SD), who spent months recuperating from a brain hemorrhage.

        According to washingtonpost.com's U.S. Congress Votes Database, Obama has missed 74 out of 93 roll-call votes (79.6%) since the end of the August congressional recess. McCain has missed 63 out of 93 roll-call votes (67.8%) since the end of the August congressional recess. But for the entire year, McCain has missed 79 more votes than Obama; since January, McCain has missed 212 out of 403 (52.6%) roll-call votes in the 110th Congress, while Obama has missed 133 out of 403 (33.0%) roll-call votes."

        I'm sure the things being produced by a deadlocked senate during a Presidential Campaign year are nothing to write home about.

        August 23, 2011 at 6:19 pm |
      • Obama2012

        Do you really need to go back to his pre-Presidential days in order to find something to complain about? President Obama has been the most productive, informed, and stable President that we have had in decades. He obtained office via a majority vote. Therefore, he has earned the title and respect of being OUR leader, whether you like it or not.
        Either support our elected President and help him to get us out of this mess or SHUT IT!

        August 23, 2011 at 8:28 pm |
    • 2cents4free

      “Reagan targeted Qaddafi; George W. Bush targeted Bin Laden; Obama has done both.” Read it and weep you haters.

      August 23, 2011 at 1:21 pm |
      • C-Lo

        Reagan targeted the Soviet Union–success...Bush 41 saved Kuait, Clinton lobbed a few missles and missed (figuratively too), Bush 43 targeted Hussein and the Taliban–success...bin Laden irrelevant (non-threatening) for 8 years–success. You can have your 2 cents back, I'll even give you an extra quarter for down payment on a clue.

        August 23, 2011 at 1:50 pm |
      • rainjam

        C-Lo you must live in the Faux News la la land to cite all those things as accomplishments, before you make a fool of yourself and spew Faux news propaganda check your facts.

        Reagan had nothing to do with the Soviet Union's fall that was in the making for decades, the fall of communism was coming for a long time. SUCCESS at being in the right place at the right time.

        Bush 41 did not save Kuwaite, he murdered 100s of thousands of Iraqis to save the oil and still left Saddam Hussien alive. SUCCESS in greed not humanity.

        Bush 43 supplied weapons and military support to Hussein and Taliban until they bit him in the ass and he bombed the whole country and killed millions of civilians to get just Hussein and make Taliban even stronger than they were and managed to help Al-Qaida recruits millions more militants to their cells. NOT A SUCCESS by a long shot.

        Could not and did not get Bin Laden who was always relevant and active in every attack around the world and in US. NOT A SUCCESS but a disaster.

        So next time you cite historical events make sure you check them, you are entitled to your opinion (as they say) but not your own facts.

        August 23, 2011 at 2:39 pm |
      • Jerry

        @ C Lo

        The Soviet Union defeated itself, but yes, Reagan helped by arming Bin Laden to fight them in Afghanistan – FAIL.
        Bush snr saved Kuwait, but totally SCREWED the Iraqi people he'd goaded into rebelling.- FAIL
        Bush jnr toppled an irrelevant dictator based on lies and I think you'll find the Taliban are still around and just waiting us out. – FAIL.

        I wouldn't give a penny for your afterthoughts.

        August 23, 2011 at 3:27 pm |
      • jean2009

        @C-Lo....Amazing you call Reagan spending us blind for weapons so the Soviets would spend themselves blind on weapons a success.....about all that did was triple our deficit producing much of our current mess. So, Russia ran out of money first...WHOOPEE!

        You consider a 101/2 year fiasco (Iraq War) for non-existence WMD which has cost a fortune, cost us considerable treasure and life; a war which we are still fighting.... a success? In what alternate universe do you live?

        As for President Clinton (and Kosovo) that is a war no longer being actively fought, the ethnic cleansing has ceased, a War Crimes Tribunal has found people guilty, but tensions remain...so that is somewhat like Ireland...simmering...not active. More a success than a failure.

        It seems you best keep your quarter...as you are the one who is clueless.

        August 23, 2011 at 4:06 pm |
      • C-Lo

        three of you offer different reasonings for the failure of the Soviet Union (read success of the free world), and yet all three can be re-phrased for the current situation(s) Obama is finding himself in..."success" in getting bin Laden? Right place right time...Fall of Libya and, hopefully, Syria leadership...brewing for a long time...no more Obama's success than Reagan's cold war

        rainjam....don't really know how to address your ignorance, but first of all, haven't had Fox News on in years...with the exception of an occational Bill O'Reilly, which has even been far and few between, who is no Bush apologist. Don't really think Bush 43 was giving any aid to the Taliban or Hussein considering he hated Sadam and the Taliban "resistance" ended in the mid 90's when they had taken full control of the country. It was Carter the peanut farmer who initiated the arming of Afghani "freedom fredom fighters" under operation cyclone...yes continued by the Reagan Admin.

        Jean, I didn't call the Iraqi war a success, did I? I was merely pointing out to 2 cent that if you are judging "success" and "failure" by who was disposed of under an Administration, his/her "point" was pointless. Let's look closer here– 1st WTC attack, African Embassies, USS Cole...all under Clinton's watch...makes him a failure in your eyes. WMD's were one of several reasons given for the Iraqi invasion, including the genocide of the Kurds. Kosovo genocides ended, does that make a portion of the Iraqi war a success in your eyes? Outspending the Soviets to the point of bankruptcy to incur the better part of a decade of "peace dividends" that Clinton, and America benefited from–is that a failure?

        Jerry, yes Taliban is still around and why Obama still has us in Afghanistan and ordered a troop surge (remember that? same strategy that Bush was demonized for?) If Iraq and Afghanistan were such bitter failures under Bush, why does Obama still have us in both? Why did Congress authrorize the actions they did? We were fed a boat load of info from MI6 on Iraq because Clinton had so steeply dismantled the CIA. Why do you think Tony Blair and the Brits were our biggest ally in the war? IT WAS THEIR INFORMATION BECAUSE WE COULDN'T GET IT OURSELVES!

        Bottom line is that 2 cent's comments were more of the same from the left–quick hate/blame Bush and worship Obama for matters that are much more complex than "getting bin Laden or Quidafi/kadafy/q-daffy duck, or however you might spell scrub head's name.

        August 23, 2011 at 5:32 pm |
      • maikl

        You Obama lovers cannot show a single deal Obama did, so our country is better. Only kva-kva-kva and bla-bla-bla. I cannot wait when i 'm not going to see him on tv. I change channel when he start his kva-kva-kva and bla- bla- bla-. Now he going to say that earthquake guilty of economy. He is .....

        August 23, 2011 at 9:56 pm |
      • Pete

        obama just happened to be the man in charge He planed nothing he followed President George bushes program

        August 24, 2011 at 5:16 pm |
    • mgc florida

      By all means listen to Bachman Joe, after all she is so intelligent that she can just make up facts! That should suit you fine.

      August 24, 2011 at 11:18 am |
      • Anouar

        Decide long time ago, Rubes.There is much much more to the Ayers/Wright/Rezko stuff – wjy else did Billy go underground again.Get pelope asking questions, Rubes! Well done! That Pastor Wright stuff is quite a story that will have legs onit like Cyd Charisse – The Mansion just may have been built with Katrina Funds.

        July 31, 2012 at 10:53 am |
    • cejathejust

      the best!

      "if obama's bullshit was electricity..."

      August 24, 2011 at 2:42 pm |
  3. DonaldH

    With all that electricity too bad old Joe's light bulb is so dim.

    August 23, 2011 at 12:27 pm |
  4. Pete

    I agree with you joe

    August 23, 2011 at 12:29 pm |
  5. kintaki

    There are a few non-democratic countries in the world like Libiya,China is one of them.Hi boy,come on!

    August 23, 2011 at 12:51 pm |
  6. Koungouat

    who want to challange the facts ? - no troops on the ground and job done–.

    August 23, 2011 at 1:50 pm |
    • jean2009

      I call that the right way to do success.

      August 25, 2011 at 4:14 pm |
      • Pete

        Jean
        why do need troops if your just watching a rebellion
        Lybia is a civil war against a dictatorship
        Iraq was a dictatorship that was overtrown and saved millions of lifes
        I was there don't try to speak about somthing you have no hard knowlage on

        August 25, 2011 at 4:46 pm |
    • Pete

      you have no clue what your talking about
      libia is a rebellion

      August 25, 2011 at 4:42 pm |
    • Pete

      its obvious you have no military expereience or knowlage of what is going on in Lybia

      August 25, 2011 at 4:49 pm |
    • Pete

      Koungouat
      YOU HAVE NO CLUE
      Lybia is a revolution

      August 25, 2011 at 5:03 pm |
  7. snapfu

    Whom wrote the headline...some how I am not convinced President Obama has a Libya vacation ! Do you mean he was out .riding presidential dune buggy's or sand rails, swimming in the Med., riding Camel's somewhere

    August 23, 2011 at 1:53 pm |
  8. Betty

    Biden and Obama was walking the streets looking at the poor people on the streets when Obama spotted a man with a bottle of boones farm passed out in the gutter .Obama told Biden that could be you when this term is over .They then went to eat and was eating when on the Tv showed Ladens funeral and biden said ,yea and that could be you before your term is up; .

    August 23, 2011 at 1:55 pm |
    • Will

      That is not even funny. As a matter of fact that is sick. I have no problem with people who disagrees politically with the President, but some of you pyschos take it way to far. I am suprised CNN even posted that. You people are a bunch of sick, crazy individuals. Yall belong in a zoo.

      August 23, 2011 at 2:05 pm |
    • MollyBee

      How sick are you?

      August 23, 2011 at 2:44 pm |
    • annie s

      You're disgusting.

      August 24, 2011 at 9:50 am |
  9. almostaking

    Liberals are gutless, irrelevant cowards!

    August 23, 2011 at 2:13 pm |
    • Jerry

      And you are a hyperpartisan douche.

      You are everything that is wrong with America.

      August 23, 2011 at 3:30 pm |
      • jean2009

        Amen!

        August 23, 2011 at 4:07 pm |
    • Obama2012

      That may or may not be. But, we irrelevant liberals are going to kick some Repug a$$e$ out of Washington in 2012.

      August 23, 2011 at 8:40 pm |
    • Patrick from Minnesota

      Then explain how Obama (a liberal) wound up in Libya you coot.

      August 24, 2011 at 2:07 pm |
    • Pete

      you have that right

      August 24, 2011 at 5:20 pm |
  10. felicia

    Now you know we are you to you "Joe the Plumber"

    August 23, 2011 at 2:16 pm |
  11. felicia

    I can't even respond to all this stupidity. Not enough time. Obama is a pimp and he just slapped the Republicans once again with that ugly stick. I really don't know how he keeps from laughing in the faces of the Repunks. That's okay, I'm laughing for him. Loudly.

    August 23, 2011 at 2:21 pm |
  12. rainjam

    Hey Betty, I think it gets tiring and even disgusting to be joking about somebody’s funeral. Anybody’s would be disgusting and hateful but this man’s even more because of how much he is hated and how many death threats he must be getting, (because he is black and he is the first black president and so on), here is what you can do to understand this concept of disgust at wishing some one dead, the next time you think about that joke insert one of your children or parent (some one you love, you know what love is right?) instead of the president and see how that may (just may) make you feel something. Since you don’t really have any humanity in you to actually think that is not funny or a joke, if you do…..you are disgusting and there is something wrong with you.

    August 23, 2011 at 2:24 pm |
  13. dennis

    C-lo if you pull your head out of that ass you can see, hear and read better.

    August 23, 2011 at 2:25 pm |
    • C-Lo

      Wow, that's an intelligent reply...by the same token, if your mom hadn't been so into crack and abortions you might be able to form an intelligent argument. Now that we're done with the pettiness, would you care to expand?

      August 24, 2011 at 9:37 am |
      • I hate Republicunts

        C-Lo so your very intellectual? You make me sick dude... You do have your head so up your ass that you cant even rationalize facts. To tell you the truth my patriot terrorist, if the republicunts keep saying no to every piece of legislation just to make this president look bad, things will get out of control sooner rather than later. You think that majority of working class people in this country dont see the bs you guys dish out? I got news for you asso, I will make sure this president remains sitted at the oval chair when 2012 comes around. You republicunts should be proud that we have a president that can actually communicate and and handle tough situations the way this president has handle himself. As a matter of fact, the US hasn't had a president of his caliber in years.

        August 24, 2011 at 10:41 am |
    • wandaz

      Yeah, but then he'd have to smell himself.

      August 24, 2011 at 3:19 pm |
      • C-Lo

        and still no rational argument from any of you...I have asked time and again for anything this president has done to better this country...show me one positive result instead of throwing out cheap mindless dribble. We are the party of hate? Hmmm...

        August 24, 2011 at 4:15 pm |
    • C-Lo

      @ I hate Repub....won't finish because there are women on here. Are you and dennis one and the same, just changed your name? Wow, pretty inflamed comments and if you'd paid attention to the rest of this thread, you'd see that I said what I did to emphasize the pettiness and asked for you (dennis) to expand on what his hateful comment was actually supposed to mean. But keep it up. I appreciate you all showing your true colors as well.

      August 24, 2011 at 4:32 pm |
      • jean2009

        One Thing....Affordable Health Care Act, 2010.

        August 25, 2011 at 4:20 pm |
  14. Chuck

    Wow, look at all the haters hating. They don't even care what they're hating at anymore.

    Obama could end all wars, bring prosperity for everybody, cure cancer, and invent a power source that gets us to Mars and these people would still be bitching.

    August 23, 2011 at 2:32 pm |
    • rainjam

      Amen to that, which shows the lack of credibility of the teabaggers, this is why they are going down in the polls since the majority of Americans have finally seen the true colour of the tea party (white) patriots. No matter what this guys does the hate will not subside. Imagine, he is the first president in the history of US to show his papers, this will not end no matter how much he accomplishes and the unpatriotic repugs will make sure he accomplishes as little as possible. even if that means the country's demise.

      August 23, 2011 at 5:42 pm |
      • C-Lo

        What, specifically, did he accomplish in the 2 years without "obstructionism?" We are still in Iraq and Afghanastan, the liberal dream of single payer health care couldn't even get passed...it was simply a mandate to the american people to further supplement Big Insurance you all hate. Maybe our next president will force us all to purchase large SUV's and trucks, because if we are all driving bigger vehicles with lower fuel milage we will slow down and be more protected which would save lives. Oh what a wonderful world it would be then! So again, I ask you, what has he done that has made your life better?

        August 24, 2011 at 10:39 am |
      • rainjam

        1. Ordered all federal agencies to undertake a study and make recommendations for ways to cut spending
        2. Ordered a review of all federal operations to identify and cut wasteful spending and practices
        3. Instituted enforcement for equal pay for women
        4. Beginning the withdrawal of US troops from Iraq
        5. Families of fallen soldiers have expenses covered to be on hand when the body arrives at Dover AFB
        6 Ended media blackout on war casualties; reporting full information
        7. Ended media blackout on covering the return of fallen soldiers to Dover AFB; the media is now permitted to do so pending adherence to respectful rules and approval of fallen soldier’s family
        8. The White House and federal government are respecting the Freedom of Information Act
        9. Instructed all federal agencies to promote openness and transparency as much as possible
        10. Limits on lobbyist’s access to the White House
        11. Limits on White House aides working for lobbyists after their tenure in the administration
        12. Ended the previous stop-loss policy that kept soldiers in Iraq/Afghanistan longer than their enlistment date
        13. Phasing out the expensive F-22 war plane and other outdated weapons systems, which weren’t even used or needed in Iraq/Afghanistan
        14. Removed restrictions on embryonic stem-cell research
        15. Federal support for stem-cell and new biomedical research
        16. New federal funding for science and research labs
        17. States are permitted to enact federal fuel efficiency standards above federal standards
        18. Increased infrastructure spending (roads, bridges, power plants) after years of neglect
        19. Funds for high-speed, broadband Internet access to K-12 schools
        20. New funds for school construction
        21 The prison at Guantanamo Bay is being phased out
        22. US Auto industry rescue plan
        23. Housing rescue plan
        24. $789 billion economic stimulus plan
        25. The public can meet with federal housing insurers to refinance (the new plan can be completed in one day) a mortgage if they are having trouble paying
        26. US financial and banking rescue plan
        27. The secret detention facilities in Eastern Europe and elsewhere are being closed
        28. Ended the previous policy; the US now has a no torture policy and is in compliance with theGeneva Convention standards
        29. Better body armor is now being provided to our troops
        30. The missile defense program is being cut by $1.4 billion in 2010
        31. Restarted the nuclear nonproliferation talks and building back up the nuclear inspection infrastructure/protocols
        32. Reengaged in the treaties/agreements to protect the Antarctic
        33. Reengaged in the agreements/talks on global warming and greenhouse gas emissions
        34. Visited more countries and met with more world leaders than any president in his first six months in office
        35. Successful release of US captain held bySomali pirates; authorized the SEALS to do their job
        36. US Navy increasing patrols off Somali coast
        37. Attractive tax write-offs for those who buy hybrid automobiles
        38. Cash for clunkers program offers vouchers to trade in fuel inefficient, polluting old cars for new cars; stimulated auto sales
        39. Announced plans to purchase fuel efficient American-made fleet for the federal government
        40. Expanded the SCHIP program to cover health care for 4 million more children
        41. Signed national service legislation; expandednational youth service program
        42. Instituted a new policy on Cuba, allowing Cuban families to return home to visit loved ones
        43. Ended the previous policy of not regulating and labeling carbon dioxide emissions
        44. Expanding vaccination programs
        45. Immediate and efficient response to the floods in North Dakota and other natural disasters
        46. Closed offshore tax safe havens
        47. Negotiated deal with Swiss banks to permit US government to gain access to records of tax evaders and criminals
        48. Ended the previous policy of offering tax benefits to corporations who outsource American jobs; the new policy is to promote in-sourcing to bring jobs back
        49.. Ended the previous practice of protecting credit card companies; in place of it are new consumer protections from credit card industry’s predatory practices
        50. Energy producing plants must begin preparing to produce 15% of their energy from renewable sources
        51. Lower drug costs for seniors
        52. Ended the previous practice of forbidding Medicare from negotiating with drug manufacturers for cheaper drugs; the federal government is now realizing hundreds of millions in savings
        53. Increasing pay and benefits for military personnel
        54. Improved housing for military personnel
        55. Initiating a new policy to promote federal hiring of military spouses
        56. Improved conditions at Walter Reed Military Hospital and other military hospitals
        57 Increasing student loans
        58. Increasing opportunities in AmeriCorps program
        59. Sent envoys to Middle East and other parts of the world that had been neglected for years; reengaging in multilateral and bilateral talks and diplomacy
        60. Established a new cyber security office
        61. Beginning the process of reforming and restructuring the military 20 years after the Cold War to a more modern fighting force; this includes new procurement policies, increasing size of military, new technology and cyber units and operations, etc.
        62. Ended previous policy of awarding no-bid defense contracts
        63. Ordered a review of hurricane and natural disaster preparedness
        64. Established a National Performance Officer charged with saving the federal government money and making federal operations more efficient
        65. Students struggling to make college loan payments can have their loans refinanced
        66. Improving benefits for veterans
        67. Many more press conferences and town halls and much more media access than previous administration
        68. Instituted a new focus on mortgage fraud
        69. The FDA is now regulating tobacco
        70. Ended previous policy of cutting the FDA and circumventing FDA rules
        71. Ended previous practice of having White House aides rewrite scientific and environmental rules, regulations, and reports
        72. Authorized discussions with North Korea and private mission by Pres. Bill Clinton to secure the release of two Americans held in prisons
        73. Authorized discussions with Myanmar and mission by Sen. Jim Web to secure the release of an American held captive
        74. Making more loans available to small businesses
        75. Established independent commission to make recommendations on slowing the costs of Medicare
        76. Appointment of first Latina to the Supreme Court
        77. Authorized construction/opening of additional health centers to care for veterans
        78. Limited salaries of senior White House aides; cut to $100,000
        79. Renewed loan guarantees for Israel
        80. Changed the failing/status quo military command in Afghanistan
        81. Deployed additional troops to Afghanistan
        82. New Afghan War policy that limits aerial bombing and prioritizes aid, development of infrastructure, diplomacy, and good government practices by Afghans
        83. Announced the long-term development of a national energy grid with renewable sources and cleaner, efficient energy production
        84. Returned money authorized for refurbishment of White House offices and private living quarters
        85. Paid for redecoration of White House living quarters out of his own pocket
        86. Held first Seder in White House
        87. Attempting to reform the nation’s healthcare system which is the most expensive in the world yet leaves almost 50 million without health insurance and millions more under insured
        88. Has put the ball in play for comprehensive immigration reform
        89. Has announced his intention to push for energy reform
        90. Has announced his intention to push for education reform
        Oh, and he built a swing set for the girls outside the Oval Office.
        Did I mention he passed health care reform ?
        There are policies that many of us disagree with or wish he would improve or facilitate more quickly, but come on, this is a pretty sweet list.

        August 25, 2011 at 2:49 pm |
      • rainjam

        @ C-Lo

        “quarter for down payment on a clue.”
        Calling 2cents4free clueless

        “rainjam....don't really know how to address your ignorance,”

        @Dennis…..”Wow, that's an intelligent reply...by the same token, if your mom hadn't been so into crack and abortions you might be able to form an intelligent argument.”

        Any one disagreeing with you is only offering “cheap mindless dribble”

        @ Liz and Dennis “It was meant to point out the pettiness of his "argument" or lack thereof.”

        Have you ever thought that not every one has to agree with you or even see things the way you do? If yes then you agree that there are differences in opinions as there are differences in values, ways of life as well as interpretation of the world around us.

        Calling me ignorant for having a different opinion than you and interpreting events according to my world view doesn’t help your point or prove your argument, it stifles the discussion, demeans people and hurts the discourse.

        August 25, 2011 at 2:52 pm |
      • rainjam

        citing source for the list above http://3chicspolitico.com/president-obamas-accomplishments/ even if you think the source is a liberal site, i hope you can agree with the facts regardless of source. peace.

        August 25, 2011 at 2:57 pm |
      • C-Lo

        Thanks for the "list" rainjam...I don't know how close you read it or just copied and pasted it, but out of the 90 I'll just take a few...I have no problem conceding a handful of them (28, 29, 44, 46, 47, 53, 54, 56, 66) there may be others but you get the point.

        Some of them are extensions, continuations of Bush policies (some of which I agree and some I disagree with) including 21, 26, 40, 49, 51, 79.

        Some were what I would consider backpeddling from the 10 election results–1, 2, 46

        Many are non-accomplishments– 69, (moving jurisdiction from one branch ATFE, to another, FDA) 88, 89, 90 (just announcing intent of something doesn't accomplish it).

        Some are just in the course of doing business (acting to free US hostages), and yes ordering the attacks on the pirates and bin Laden are fair enough, as if they'd gone wrong he'd of had a lot more 'splainin to do, Lucy (Ricky Ricardo reference for # 42)

        Some are smoke and mirrors–look good on the surface, but the end result was neutral or negative, i.e. not accomplishments, cash for clunkers (pushed up sales during that time, which led to a huge dropoff later, home refinancing which only postponed the inevitable for people who bought homes they couldn't afford (a large % lost thier homes even after the bailout), stimulus that didn't create the jobs expected

        Some are considered accomplishments by the left, but are huge points of contention–federal funding of expanded embryonic stem-cell research (I'm still struggling with the morality of this myself, admittedly), health care reform–costs greatly outweigh benefits, restructuring 1/6th of the us economy, focused on insurance costs, not the underlying healthcare costs, 4 years of taxes without benefit to suplement 6 years of spending (meaining it's costing 75% more than we can even afford from tax collections for it), it's a monstrocity that even many on the left don't like.

        Building a playground for the girls??? You can't be serious! and I don't think you (or the article if they are the ones who put it in there) are. But it does reflect how i see a lot of the left view him–if he gets out of bed without falling down he's praised for another miraculous accomplishment for the day.

        Still doesn't answer how he's improved your life unless your are a Cuban in the military on SCHIP. Because his "accomplishmens" all come at huge costs, many of which could be better served in the private sector...but that's another discussion.

        And I wasn't calling you ignorant for having a different opinion, but for the "facts" you cited w/respect to the Repub presidents.

        Bush 41 did not kill 100's of thousands in bombing raids, even Hussein put the number (most likely artificially high) at 20-35,000, with about 2300 civilian (too many civilian, yeah maybe, but certainly not 100's of thousands). Your contemporaries even credited Reagan at least to an extent, for better or worse, for ending the cold war. Bush 43 didn't even have time to supply weapons to Iraq (who according to libs he was out to get anyway) and Taliban aramaments had ended long before 43 took office. These "facts" you presented show ignorance (not stupidity, mind you).

        August 25, 2011 at 5:15 pm |
      • rainjam

        And there you go again calling me ignorant because I see things and interpret them differently than you do.

        I suppose I could give this president credit for getting out of bed without falling as an accomplishment (I don’t have to since he has accomplished more than that) but the bar was set so low by the previous president who fell over himself and chocked on a pretzel and could not remember his lines…..fool me once shame on you fool and you never fool again. You know, this is an improvement for a president to know a little more to do than just bomb other nations.

        The Taliban armaments continued until months before 9/11 attacks, look it up. As to your point of what policies have improved my life? Any policy that makes people’s lives improve benefits me. I have a lot of privileges and enjoy more than most do, but when school lunch programs extended even if it is not my child that takes advantage of that, it benefits me. Equal pay for women, end of DOMA, DADT, and yes building a playground for girls and anything else that seemed insignificant or non-accomplishment, that helps others benefits me too. So the fact that you think most are either negative or just smoke and mirror and not really accomplishments shows that it doesn’t really matter what facts are presented to you, you are against all the this man stands for. Against it based on politics or personal, or morality as you put it, you are against it. So …..i will leave it at that because arguing or debating with people like you give me a headache.

        August 25, 2011 at 6:46 pm |
      • C-Lo

        Well then rainjam, I guess you'll vote for me as our next president as I have...
        1. Gotten out of bed successfully each morning
        2. Worked with children to put together backpacks of school supplies for the less fortunate
        3. Stuffed bags with groceries for children on reduced cost lunch programs for them to eat during the weekends
        4. Donated more than just a little cash to help fund these programs
        5. Built furniture and other things for my girls (step-daughters whom I treat better than many natural fathers) and grandsons
        6. Shovel my neighbor's walk and driveway every snow storm (and yes with a shovel)
        7. Pay my taxes faithfully and on time each year
        8. Announce my intention for doing some more good stuff at sometime
        9. Announce my intention to do other stuff some people might like
        10 Once president I will have my people talk to their people about more good stuff
        11. Because I will be the first middle-class American president, all the people here and abroad will automatically love all the good stuff I think I'd maybe like to do so much they'll award me a Nobel Peace Prize just for thinking about good stuff.
        12. Once President I won't have to worry about freeing any hostages anywhere nor wars because those are bad stuff and I only believe in good stuff and the world will love me so they will only belive in good stuff.
        13. Proven leadership qualities assumed, but not included.
        14. Educated at a PUBLIC University. And we all know that public education is far superior to private based on the ongoing efforts to keep our kids in public institutions rather than allowing parents' choices for private/charter schools with taxpayer money.
        15. Never served in a public office, which should be a plus these days.

        Pretty well sums up that I stack up as well against Obama as anyone.

        C-Lo 2012!!! 'Cause I'm a guy who believes in good stuff and you should too.

        August 26, 2011 at 10:41 am |
  15. snapfu

    yep it is true he got Bush friends from the middle eastern shot up and tossed into the sea, yep Obama had a major Saudi Arabian terrorist slaughtered like a pig " Bin Ladin", now Obama has the Lyiban terrorist Qaddfi inches away from hell.
    What have the Republicans done? Answer collapse the economy over and over and sell all America out... no I done really like Obama but he is frickin great killing terrorist swine the Republican friends.

    August 23, 2011 at 2:38 pm |
  16. RENEE' MCDUFFIE

    Were are all of the Christians on the website. The people that post on the website are racist. A black man has just as much right to be the President as any white man. If it was not for the slaves that you white folks stole from Africa you would not have what you have. Rememeber that American was built on the blood sweat and tears of the slaves. Nearing the ending of time a dark skin race of people will raise to power and stardom. You need to read your scripture. Obama will always be alright because he has God all over him. No weapons against him will prosper.

    August 23, 2011 at 2:44 pm |
    • Jay in NC

      Your president's ancestors owned slaves. His wife's ancestors were slaves. Must make for some interesting dinner conversations.

      August 23, 2011 at 4:59 pm |
      • rainjam

        when you say "your president" are saying you are not an american because if you are then he is your president too, as much as that hurts your narrow mind and really closed heart if you are an american he is your president too. oh wait unless you are a teabagger then that is a whole different issue. no black man can be your leader or the leader of 'your' country....right?

        August 23, 2011 at 5:46 pm |
    • rainjam

      we are are not all Christians.........

      August 25, 2011 at 3:15 pm |
  17. Jack Meoff

    hahahahahahaha :) This is just funny.... stupid people are upset over the fact that the president is visiting a vacation spot that is designed for presidents while a conflict he backed up from the git go & everyone that hated him opposed comes to a brighter end? call me crazy...but that is either very hypocritical or tremendously naive....this is just silly...is this any different than a girl complaining about how her man is smothering her & then when he stops & does what she wants she begins to complain about how the man's being too distant? So let me get this straight....this guy's the worst president in the world because of this, right? People are stupid...you want more proof? take a look at all the negative comments on this blog & they always use some menial point to defend the fact that people just don't like the guy....WE GET IT....YOU HATE HIM & ANYONE WHO LOOKS LIKE HIM! Can you just admit to be a dumbass so that we can all move on....oh wait...excuse me.... a "teabagger!"

    August 23, 2011 at 2:57 pm |
  18. Jerry

    Enough is enough. Give the President credit. He organized the International Coalition which ran the sorties and routed Gadhafy's forces giving enough breathing space for Libyans to win the ground war.

    Would it kill people to tell the truth and stop politicking?

    This is without question a victory for our President and Libyans and the Coalition.

    Ronald Regan would be proud.

    The buck stops with the President's decision to go in - and it didn't cost 1 US casualty.

    August 23, 2011 at 3:46 pm |
  19. RENEE' MCDUFFIE

    All of you physco on this site need Jesus really bad.

    August 23, 2011 at 4:37 pm |
  20. Dee

    Obama, haters you will never give the President credit for anything , yes he should get credit for Osama and Gaddahfi what all of you seem to miss is that these men were and are dangerous to the United States and the world. President Obama is doing a great job keeping nuclear weapons out of the hands of terroist and you have the nerve to criticize him and say he is not a LEADER. He is doing a damn good job with foreign policies.

    Of Course there are some in this Society that will never give this President credit for anything but it is the haters who have nothing else to do but continue to denegrate him.

    We had better begin looking at what is happening all around us and clean up our acts all the hatred, wars, fires, tornados, earth quakes, floodings, global warmings and hurricanes are signs of time, that the Lord has put his hands in this foolishness and we had better straighten up. This President has a lot on his plate and we should be supporting him instead of tearing him down. He can only do what congress allows him to do everything is sitting there to be voted on but they are the people of "NO" so why don't you give them HELL.

    Back off and leave this President alone because looking at the GOP candidates you are in deep trouble all they are doing is criticizing the President and they have no solutions.

    August 23, 2011 at 7:46 pm |
    • maikl

      No, you wrong. I give him credit. He is the best in kva-kva-kva and bla-bla-bla. I give him gredit:he is a Little better than Carter,but the worse than any other president.

      August 23, 2011 at 9:59 pm |
    • C-Lo

      Dee, backtrack 5 years and rephrase with the president at that time and thinking about how the left treated Bush...you reap what you sow. So many of "you" like to point the finger at "us" for extedning the same courtesy to an overly liberal president. Why is nearly all criticizm of him immediately dismissed as racist, even when it focuses solely on policy? Why, if "we" can see no right in him, can "you" see no wrong? To say "we" are obstructionist, when "you" had full control of DC for 2 years and couldn't/wouldn't pass a budget, what gives there? To give Obama credit (which I have elsewhere) for "getting bin-laden," but overlooking the Bush accomplishments of effectively dismantling the core by "getting Sadom and his sons, many of the top lieutenants, removing the Taliban from leadership, etc." is as untruthful as you accuse "us" of being.

      If you take a look at "Nathan G.'s" comments about "the whole Jesus thing," it's further proof that "your side" is as quick to judge and overlook facts as "you" accuse "us" of doing. He won't give the GOP the time of day because of these views???? when in fact it is two liberal women who brought this out. So now where is poor Nathan going to turn? I ask thse questions sincererly, hoping for an honest and insightful answer. Being one of "us" I can understand the policy disagreements from my ilk. Nor will I deny that there are a few who are driven by racism. However, when it comes to defending this president's policies, I have yet to find any credible arguements other than saying "we" don't like him. How, specificaly, have you benefited under this administration?

      August 24, 2011 at 10:18 am |
      • I hate Republicunts

        But you republicunts are obstructionists. The reason he was at war with congress 5 yrs was because of the whole iraq war you cunt... As a matter of fact, George W. Bush should have been crucified here in US. He did nothing short from what Natzy and Japan leaders were crucified for raging war upon other countries without any probable cause. Even the UN didn't give approval to the US. Who the hell does George throught we were?

        August 24, 2011 at 11:07 am |
  21. Liz Carter in Georgia

    @Dee; I agree with you 100%. @RENEE' MCDUFFIE; I am one Christian who agrees with your whole comment! Theses low-lifes don't read the word nor do they care what it says. Unless they can twist it into something that could potentially justify or validate an action they are taking, whether it's good for AMERICA or not, they have no use for the BIBLE. Americans of ISLAM are aware of that! And they have the nerve to question the KORAN and Muslims. They're nothing but hypocrites, period! OBAMA/BIDEN 2012!

    August 23, 2011 at 10:08 pm |
  22. Nathan G.

    I take issue with a lot of what has been said here – starting with the whole "you people need Jesus" thing. This is a major problem with this country, and a major reason I cannot bring myself to side with the GOP. Our country is full of religious diversity, and a group that pushes a morality based on its religion on the rest of the country is beyond distasteful, it is a violation of the rights of everyone else. The GOP just needs to admit that it does not speak for the country; it speaks for those supporting right wing policies only. This country cannot function by going entirely to the right or entirely to the left. Different programs need different approaches – some of those liberal and some conservative.

    As for those who do nothing but attack Obama – it takes a special kind of idiot (and one apparently represented in great numbers in our country these days) to ignore evidence contrary to your viewpoint. Calling Obama ineffective is patently ludicrous. He has been going up against the GOP his entire time – a party that stated from the beginning that its modus operandi was to block *everything* Obama tried to do – and has still managed to accomplish much (things like improving benefits for veterans and making sure troops had better body armor and equipment, supporting our free-market economy by ending a Bush policy of awarding no-bid defense contracts, and was instrumental in the demise of "don't ask, don't tell"). Disagree with his policies all you want, but claiming he has been ineffective and the worst president ever just makes you look like a babbling idiot.

    The same goes for those on the left who just attack republican leaders. We may disagree with a lot of their policies, but that doesn't mean they didn't do things we can't all agree are good. I don't like a lot of things GW did, but he doubled the US funding in the fight against AIDS. No leader is perfect, but as far as our presidents go, they usually have contributed something good.

    And crying out loud people, would it be possible to drop all the vitriol? Intelligence, fact-driven conversations are possible, you know.

    August 24, 2011 at 3:33 am |
    • Jay in NC

      RENEE' MCDUFFIE and Liz Carter of Georgia are Liberals, they are the ones that said that "you people need Jesus."

      You call someone a "special kind of idiot" then say that people should drop all the vitriol? What a hypocrite.

      Barry has accomplished very little, GITMO is still open, don't ask don't tell has not been fully implemented, Patriot Act extended, Tax breaks for the rich extended, Afghanistan War still raging, Iraq War extended by a year, new war in Libya, unemployment still above 8%. All key issues that he promised would end. I will continue to point out his lies and broken promises.

      August 24, 2011 at 9:17 am |
      • Brian

        We all appreciate the citizens of this country holding those in public office accountable.

        August 24, 2011 at 9:25 am |
      • Nathan G.

        1. I wasn't referring specifically to those two people; I was making a generalization that the comments left by those two brought to mind. You cannot deny that the GOP supports a Christian agenda, and so my point stands.

        2. I didn't call anyone a special kind of idiot. I said, and I quote so you can see it again, "it takes a special kind of idiot (and one apparently represented in great numbers in our country these days) to ignore evidence contrary to your viewpoint." If you feel that someone who clings to a baseless claim despite all evidence to the contrary is not an idiot, well... we'll just have to disagree on what defines one.

        3. I'm in the military. DADT has been repealed, we are just in the standard 60-day waiting period before fully implementing policy changes. That is standard procedure. Just because we are in the 60-day period does not mean that somehow the DADT repeal hasn't already been decided. As for Tax breaks for the rich, that is a Republican policy. When the president tried to simply close loopholes that the rich use to avoid taxes, the Republicans cried foul and accused him of raising taxes.

        In regards to the Iraq War, it has not been extended. Combat operations stopped when he said they would stop, and combat forces have long since been removed. Troops over there now function in an advisory and training role.

        As for Libya – we are not at war in Libya. All we are doing is bombing runs when Qadhafi forces target civilians. Would you rather we weren't working with NATO to do that? Do you wish we were letting people over there die so we can save a few dollars in our budget? How much are human lives worth to you?

        GITMO and the Patriot Act I won't disagree with, as both deserve to die a quick death; however, I will point out that one of the primary reasons GITMO is still open is because if we do return many of the folks currently being held there to their homelands, they will disappear. That being said, it is ridiculous that some solution can't be found that doesn't put folks who have no evidence against them at risk. And on a side note, some folks were released and ended up killing our troops on the ground. The situation is not as black and white as you paint it, and despite the President's promise he has had to be flexible. Would you rather have a President who sticks to his guns even after he finds out he was wrong? That he didn't have all the facts? I for one prefer a flexible President, one who can look at all sides as new information comes in.

        8% unemployment is another issue. Obama inherited an 8% unemployment rate, and it's only as high as it is now because the aftereffects of the big housing bubble bust continued to wreak havoc on the markets after he was elected. It went up, and has since steadily gone down. If you want to talk awful unemployment rates, Bush inherited a 4% and left with an 8%. His policies doubled the unemployment rate. Another factor to consider is the stimulus. Take the bank bailout – first of all, had already returned an 8% profit in 2010, so calling it a bad idea in general is ignoring the facts. Now, that being said, looking at the intent behind the stimulus creates a whole other problem. The banks and other troubled assets that received TARP funds were given the money with the understanding that they would correct issues such as foreclosures and employment rates. The government, which so many insist you can't trust, decided to take these major corporations at their word and got burned. Many of these corporations are now sitting on scads of cash, which certainly makes them more stable, but does nothing to help the little guy. Many of them took TARP funds, and then turned around and initiated mass layoffs. In retrospect, TARP was a bad idea. It would have made more sense to freeze all foreclosures and work on reducing mortgage payments with that money – the banks still would have gotten funds, and the little guy wouldn't be on the sidelines losing his home over vastly ballooned mortgage payments.

        You paint the world black and white, when it is obvious you are ignoring the vast majority of the facts surrounding the points you raise. If you are going to cough up partisan talking points, the least you could do is cite some evidence to back them up, and preferably without name-calling. The debate might remain civil and intelligent that way.

        August 24, 2011 at 10:51 am |
      • Jay in NC

        1. You say that you were not referring specifically to those two people, yet you quoted them?

        2. Oh, I see, you did not call them a special kind of idiot. You just called them an idiot. That clears things up.

        3. Just as I said, DADT has not been fully implemented.

        GITMO. On Jan 22, 2009, Barry signed executive order to close GITMO. Promising to return America to the "moral high ground." He needs to apologize or close the place. Just another example of Liberal hypocrisy.
        http://articles.cnn.com/2009-01-22/politics/guantanamo.order_1_detention-guantanamo-bay-torture?_s=PM:POLITICS

        Liybia, I am glad you cleared this issue up, now I understand, we are not a war, we are conducting bombing runs. Maybe we need to take another look WWII, World Bombing Run II would be a better name.

        8% Unemployment, The $1,000,000,000,000 stimulus was suppose to keep unemployment below 8%. But I guess you guys do not want to talk about that promise. It is much simpler to blame it all on President Bush.

        TARP money, Barry begged congress for the money when he first took office. Threatened to veto any bill unless the released the funds. President Bush may have signed the bill but Barry gladly gave the money a way.

        August 24, 2011 at 11:50 am |
      • jean2009

        @ Jay in NC as usual trying to rewrite history. The TARP legislation was passed and signed by Pres. George W. Bush on October 7, 2008 the Auto-Bail Out was signed by Pres. George W. Bush on Dec. 11, 2008.
        Both bills passed and were signed by George Bush during his administration.

        August 24, 2011 at 6:57 pm |
      • Jay in NC

        Jean, again you lie about me. I said that President Bush signed the bill. No rewrite of history here. It is a fact that Barry demanded to spend the money.

        August 25, 2011 at 2:22 am |
    • C-Lo

      Nathan, first, thank you for your service. Now that being said–
      Your 1st point falls desperately short of a logical explination because you specifecally cite the quote from a liberal individual. By generalizing GOP and Christian the way you did dismantles the rest of your arguments. Not only that but the corollary to your argument is that you cannot deny that many Christian support a liberal agenda. Your second point you fail to acknoledge that this comment was couched in citicizing people who criticize Obama–on both sides of your "idiot" comment...which leads to the perfectly logical conclusion that you are calling those of us who disagree with the president idiots, special kinds of idiots, no less.

      I do acknowledge and commend that you, to an extent, call out those on the left, but after the rest of the post, these seem to be only to hedge the rest of your post.

      August 24, 2011 at 11:11 am |
      • Nathan G.

        I mentioned being in the military simply to point out that I have a better understanding of what the military is doing than someone sitting on the sidelines watching the news.

        My first point falls short of logical explanation? You're joking, right? Have you watched the GOP candidates? Have you seen the rallies? I assumed folks who had an interest in the future Republican nominee would be following that. Secondly, I didn't deny that there are left-wing folks who have a religious agenda – but taken as a whole, the Democrats do not push their *religious* morality in the rest of the country, whereas a great many Republicans do. Additionally, my comment was not about religious people pushing a conservative or liberal agenda. It was about religious people pushing their own religious morality on the rest of the country. How can one be free to practice their own faith when the rules of another religion dictate things they can't do?

        As for my second point, it was the folks merely writing single-line criticisms of the President without anything to back it up and having no basis in fact that brought that comment to mind. It should go without saying that it applies to everybody. After all, I did not say "Any Republican" or "Only Liberals". It's easy to infer when you ignore the substance of an argument and look for something to attack. I also never said folks who disagree with the President are idiots. There is plenty about which to disagree with him. But like any opinion, you cannot deny that someone who makes a comment that flies in the face of all evidence fits the bill I described.

        As for calling out folks on the left – I do, when they merit being called out and are relevant to the argument. Just as I would call out folks on the right, under the same circumstances. Both parties need to pull their heads out of their asses and compromise – the President has at least *tried* to do so on a number of occasions.

        August 24, 2011 at 12:07 pm |
      • Nathan G.

        And Jay –

        1. I wasn't referring to them specifically; I quoted the comment because that was brought to mind the heavy religious influence in politics these days. Separation of Church and State. How difficult is it to remember that?

        2. Apparently you don't see. But to your point, if someone is assuming that they are being referred to as an idiot by me, then they must also accept the fact that they are spouting out information that all evidence shows to be false, even knowing that evidence is there. If you go back and read what I actually wrote, you will see that I didn't direct that comment at any particular person – I directed it at those folks who come onto sites like this and post things that are blatantly false – and more specifically (as evidenced by my noting that such comments were flying in the face of fact) at those who are continuing to cling to information that has been disproved.

        3. If you want to play semantics, DADT was issued as a defense directive on December 21, 1993. Since I assume however you mean to say the *repeal* of DADT – I will address your point as if that is what you meant to say. As the policy is no longer being enforced, the fact that there is a 20 September date this year for it to be officially gone is of little functional impact. As of October 19, 2010, openly gay individuals were allowed to enlist. On October 20th, one such individual who had been discharged under DADT was allowed to re-enlist into the Army. On July 6th of this year a federal appeals court ruling officially barred enforcement of the policy – which had already been made difficult to do regardless by a requirement for the Secretary of a branch of the armed forces to approve the discharge. The DADT repeal bill was enacted in December 2010, and began the process of dismantling the program.

        4. GITMO – again, I don't disagree with GITMO needing to be shut down, and there has been plenty of time to arrange for the detainees to go somewhere where their governments won't put them through worse than we did as authorized by the previous administration. That being said, it *is* in President Obama's hands now, and it would not be much of a distraction from other issues to issue an order to the military to have it shut down within x period of time.

        5. Libya – your choice to resort to sarcasm does not make you any less incorrect. We are not at war with or in Libya. We are supporting UN missions against a regime when it is targeting innocent civilians. Again, how much is a human life worth to you? Secondly, comparing Libya to World War II? I just going to assume you were joking there, because the logical steps to make that comparison are nonexistent.

        6. 8% unemployment. There is no need to talk about that promise as there never was such a promise made. That was a talking point used by the GOP in response to projections the Obama administration put forward. It *projected* that without the stimulus unemployment would climb higher, while with the stimulus it would not. No promise made there, and no lie either. It was a prediction, based off the assumption that companies would use the funds to create jobs, not a statement of fact.

        5. He did not threaten to veto any legislation unless he got the money. He threatened to veto a bill that would have blocked the release of the second half of the bailout. And yes, he did give the money away – but while it did not produce as many jobs as hoped, it did step the growing unemployment rate and we are now seeing that rate go gradually down. There are other factors in the global market that are having an impact on that as well, you might want to take those into at least some consideration. Additionally, as I stated before, even if the TARP money that went to banks did not create the jobs hoped for, it is providing a return on investment – an actual profit – to the federal government. I'm not sure I know of anyone who could logically say money invested that gives more money back is a bad idea.

        August 24, 2011 at 12:37 pm |
      • C-Lo

        Nathan, thank you for trying to clear that up...I'll take it at face value, but still call you out on the fact that your "idiot" comment was bookended by discussion of critics of this president. As to the point of the GOP espousing religeous views, the left does the same with its liberal religeocity–what kind of lightbulbs we have to use, what kinds of cars we have to drive, how much electricity we can('t) use, what social programs our tax money should support.

        Personally, I am more-or-less a libertarian, which are the values of old-school Republicans, smaller govt, personal responsibility, protectionism, and so on. IMHO Democrats created their Frankenstein in Bush. They have fought for decades for more control in DC, believing in a mostly heavily powered Federal gov't to help better "spread the wealth" and enforce their brand of morality on the nation. As it turns out, once a conservative gained power under these "ideals" they weren't so happy with the results. Of course corps like this layout, they have their entire audience confined to one location, making it easy to control–all due to Dem's desire for strong central gov't. Had Republican (traditional Republican, not to be confused with conservative) ideals been strengthened, we would not be in the mess we are now, because corps would be much harder pressed to control 50 "independent" states than one national stage. And if you don't think the Dem's are just as much in the pockets of these special interests, take a good close look at the healthcare plan which, passed under full dem control, siphons taxpayer money into the pockets of Insurers while protecting unions which make up less than 20% of the population.

        With bigger government, we as individuals have less and less control. I'm not even sure we really have control of our own lives much any more. When I found that certain programs at my church were not benefiting the people they were meant to benefit (i.e. adopting families for Christmas to walk in with food and gifts to a home where they were watching a tv bigger and better than mine, not the church's fault, but a greedy family) I had the right and option to direct my giving elsewhere, and have sought out on my own other families/individuals to "adopt" at different times of the year. When big gov't does it, we don't have a choice.

        Sorry, long way of getting to the conclusion of why I dislike the dem's and this president's policies of ever expanding gov't.

        August 24, 2011 at 1:25 pm |
      • Jay in NC

        http://www.economy.com/mark-zandi/documents/The_Job_Impact_of_the_American_Recovery_and_Reinvestment_Plan.pdf

        Take a look at page 5, Unemployment rate with Recover Plan, below 8%, without recovery plan 9%, Wow, Barry got that one wrong. This was originally on the White House website.

        Projection, prediction, just playing with words. The point is Barry and his crew told the world that if he spent the money the problem would be solved. It is a shame that this guy, you and all his followers will not take responsibility for anything.

        Oh, about GITMO, he already signed a executive order to close the place with in one year. Like I said, Jan 22, 2009. Still waiting....

        August 24, 2011 at 1:40 pm |
      • jean2009

        @ Jay in NC I don't know what is going on with North Carolina but I do know that ARRA has created and retained jobs in Ohio. It may not have created as many jobs as everyone would have wished, but I suspect it has kept the unemployment rate from going much higher than it did.

        August 24, 2011 at 7:04 pm |
    • Yewon

      I enjoyed the vent. I too have woernded why when Bill Clinton got a hummer in his office (White House), married man, with young employee and lied to the American people and the Grand Jury was conducting his own PRIVATE life and it was nobodies business .yet when Ben Roethlsberger, single guy, at a bar, being overly agressive (maybe, as no charges filed) is maligned by the general public and punished by his employer! Yeah, thats fair.

      July 31, 2012 at 3:41 am |
    • Miftahul

      I don't know how a few tough questions got slpiped into a Democrat debate, but they did. The effect of those questions was to expose Barack Obama over and over again as an empty suit with no real working knowledge of the economy, taxes, or even an understanding of the American people and how they live. Once again, he described religion as not the way human beings relate to their Creator- but instead as a refuge people use when government doesn't work. Apparently to him, God and government are equivocated. If government works properly, the people won't need God! Hmm, given this, I guess he justifies calling himself a religious man only because of governmental failure, hence the need for Change and Hope only he can deliver.Obama not only came up with bad answers, but he showed that without a teleprompter and a professionally-written speech from a speechwriter, he is inarticulate, fumbling, and, at times, even incoherent.Hillary pounded him on the issue of his spiritual mentor, Jeremiah Wright, saying, you choose your pastor, not your family. She also nailed him on his friendship with Weather Underground terrorist William Ayers. Although BO described him as a neighbor, Hillary pointed out that Obama and Ayers worked on a foundation together for years, even after Ayers wrote in the New York Times on Sept. 11, 2001, that he not only didn't regret his terrorism upon the United States, but that he wished he had done more (bombings). It got really cringe-worthy when Charlie asked about capital-gains tax rates, which Obama has pledged to raise. Charlie kept pointing out that decreasing the rates actually increased the revenues, and Obama fumbled around until he simply had to admit that it didn't have anything to do with a prosperous economy, everything just had to be fair. Ouch. Then, it got truly hilarious when both Hillary and Obama fumbled through explanations of how they support the second amendment, but still backed gun bans.Not only is there nothing new or hopeful about BO, he's basically the next Jimmy Carter. We elected that idiot 32 years ago. And we're still paying for it today.The winner in this debate? McCain.

      August 2, 2012 at 12:23 am |
  23. surf's up2010

    ANYONE BUT OBAMA 2012

    August 24, 2011 at 8:56 am |
    • jean2009

      Obama -Biden 2012

      August 24, 2011 at 7:05 pm |
      • Pete

        For a strong America get rid of Bozo Obama and clara bell bidin

        Perry – Romny team 2012

        Bring back america;s integrety and Ecomomic power
        put business men in the White house
        and get rid of the clowns

        August 25, 2011 at 3:20 pm |
      • jean2009

        @pete Obama-Biden 2012

        August 25, 2011 at 4:50 pm |
      • Pete

        Perry – Romny team 2012

        for a Better America

        August 25, 2011 at 5:17 pm |
    • Pete

      Perry – Romny team 2012

      August 25, 2011 at 5:15 pm |
      • Pete

        Perry – Romny team 2012 a move away from socalism

        August 25, 2011 at 5:18 pm |
  24. Brian

    The problem with Washington, Obama and anyone on the "right" is that the voters of this country refuse to hold those in public office accountable for their actions or inactions. What I object to is that each and every time you try and hold Obama or this administration accountable for anything, the majority of the media tries to label you a racist.

    Anyone who tries to say that the entire republican party has done nothing but to try and block everything Obama has tried to do has failed to even realize that the democrats had the majority in the House, in the Senate and with a democratic President . . . Obama could have passed anything during the first 2 years, but somehow when very little was accomplished it was the fault of the republicans?! After 6 years of democratic control in the House and Senate the voters of this country took a hard look and realized that what was being done was not in the best interest of this country, but only themselves. In the words of maxine waters . . . the democratic party can go straight to hell! However, that would continue the vitriol. So I will simply say that although we have different view points, we do agree that there is a limited amount of money this country can spend and a limited number of citizens that pay taxes. That alone should help decide what we can and cannot afford in the years to come and to simply sit back and wait until there is no money to fund the social programs that we agree are needed would be irresponsible. The time is now and the hard decisions must be made to save these programs.

    August 24, 2011 at 9:22 am |
    • normalice

      the "democrats" never had control of the house. Sure, there was a time when the majority of the people were those with a (D) next to their name, but they were not all democrats. Many of them were conservatives who simply ran with a D next to their name, because that's what their district is used to.

      It's sort of like the Tea Party now, except if the republicans controlled the house and senate, the tea party would dictate everything. The democrats would vote against everything, so nothing would pass without Tea Party support. Of course, normal republicans don't mind how far right something is – so they'll vote for it.

      Pity the democrats aren't liberal by default, or a lot may have gotten done during those two years they controlled the house and senate.

      August 24, 2011 at 9:58 am |
    • racist

      Hey Racist, I got one word for you: FILLIBUSTER

      August 24, 2011 at 10:49 am |
    • I hate Republicunts

      it doesn't even matter that this administration would bring up a legislation to vote or debate anymore. Everytime this president brings out or agrees to something, the republicunts are against it...

      August 24, 2011 at 11:17 am |
      • Pock

        , "What I saw was a shallowness beynod conception".Bernadine Dohrn at the Flint Michigan Weatherman "war council" famously stated regarding the Manson slayings,"Dig It. First they killed those pigs, then they ate dinner in the same room with them, they even shoved a fork into a victim's stomach! Wild!"These people worship Lenin, Stalin, Mao and according to one of Bill's blog entries; "Capitalism is exhausted as a force for progress: built on exploitation, theft, conquest, war, and racism"

        July 31, 2012 at 3:18 am |
  25. normalice

    Yeah, I'll vote for him as the lesser of two evils (unless Ron Paul wins the primary), but don't think for a second that your half-hearted liberal spin has swayed my opinion, CNN.

    August 24, 2011 at 10:00 am |
  26. Pete

    Obama;s vacations are a security nightmare
    Bsh stayed on his ranch and security was fixed and had a normal cost
    Obama likes to play the big shot on someone elses money
    sort of like you lowlife liberals collecting off the goverment
    God forbid we have to have this moron Obama in office four more years the guys a disgrace and a total joke
    the worlf is laughing at us since we have Bozo the clown for president

    August 24, 2011 at 10:06 am |
    • jean2009

      President Obama is not the first president to vacation on Martha's Vineyard President Clinton did also. I assume the SS have worked out the details for securing the island for presidential vacations.
      On another note: Do you realize that President Bush's 77 round trips to the Crawford Ranch on Air Force One alone cost about $20million....without even counting the Secret Service expense. Secret Service is a given cost for Presidents and their family....which is not cheap even at the White House.

      August 24, 2011 at 7:32 pm |
      • Pete

        obama's vacations cost more than President Bushes Vacations

        August 25, 2011 at 3:22 pm |
      • jean2009

        @pete
        http://ochairball.blogspot.com/2010/07/who-pays-for-obamas-vacations-and-other.

        August 25, 2011 at 4:28 pm |
  27. Richard in NC

    I think we all can agree that anything posted by Jay in NC is garbage. Unfortunately, it seems that this person’s primary concern is to incite negativity with ignorance.
    So, for all others with intelligent thoughts and opinions (that may or may not agree) please avoid this distraction and move on.

    August 24, 2011 at 10:49 am |
    • I hate Republicunts

      Well said... I think i just wasted an hour of my life in this article.

      August 24, 2011 at 11:20 am |
    • Jay in NC

      And yet Barry's job approval rating is only 38%.

      http://www.gallup.com/poll/113980/Gallup-Daily-Obama-Job-Approval.aspx

      August 24, 2011 at 11:27 am |
      • jean2009

        http://rickrozoff.wordpress.com/2011/08/23/updates-on-libyan-warstop-nato-news-august-23-2011/

        Read my post above about U. S. planes are still doing 27% of the 20,000 bombing missions in Libya August 23, 2011.

        August 24, 2011 at 6:20 pm |
      • Jay in NC

        Jean, take the time to read before you post. I never said that US troops were not bombing. In fact I am complaining that they are and that NATO is in charge of our guys/gals. Barry does not call the shots, he ceded it over to NATO.

        August 25, 2011 at 2:25 am |
      • jean2009

        @Jay...you do understand that NATO means North Atlantic Treaty Organization of which the United States of America is a member nation? As for NATO funding the US still pays a greater percentage of the overall cost, and provides a greater share of the weapons and equipment.

        August 25, 2011 at 4:48 pm |
      • Pete

        Jean your 100% right there
        its like the UN they all vote aND WE PAY THE BILLS
        tHERE IS ANOTHER GOOD COST CUTTING MEASURE NO PAY NO VOTE

        August 25, 2011 at 4:52 pm |
  28. Midwest

    Can we have some objective dialogue here? Many sit back and criticize the leader of the free world when they couldn't get elected to their PTA! Whether you agree with their policies or preferences, President and Michelle Obama are two qualified leaders. They have the education and the proven leadership and lately, Obama has had some amazing international wins with Bin Laden dead and Libya on it's way to freedom. A win for our president is a win for us all!!!

    August 24, 2011 at 11:07 am |
  29. Republicans - The Not Intended To Be Factually Accurate" Party

    The Presidency is a 24/7/ 365 job for Mr. Obama. Comparatively, #44 has taken 1/3 the vacation time as #43.

    The scorecard:

    One dictator gone [Saddam], over 4,000 American lives lost, over $1 TRILLION spent.

    – or –

    One dictator gone [Moammar], ZERO American soldier lives lost, LESS than $1bIllion spent.

    Try as they might, the Obama haters can`t dodge these facts.

    Nor can they hide the fact that the Europeans & Arabs, along with the Libyan rebels OWN the responsibility to rebuild & restore the country.

    Definitely a WORKING vacation for the Nobel Prize winning President. Well done, sir!

    August 24, 2011 at 12:24 pm |
    • jean2009

      Thanks.

      August 24, 2011 at 6:32 pm |
  30. Liz Carter in Georgia

    C-lo; 'if your mom wasn't so into crack'? I don't know who you were responding to, but that was waaay low! I remember not long ago, you getting on me about name calling and berating people. Honestly, C-lo, I've noticed from reading most of your posts, you're quick to call names! Putdown? You portray a monstrously demeaning spirit of self-described, higher intellect eliteness, and narcicism! You try to tell people how to word or pose their own personal opinions using YOUR guidelines. It'll never work! OK?

    August 24, 2011 at 2:15 pm |
    • C-Lo

      Liz, I don't know if your posts display the same way, but that comment was directed at a very weak "attack" on me by dennis, and yes, I did lower myself into the muck-raking. It was meant to point out the pettiness of his "argument" or lack thereof. If you read the rest of it, you will see that I asked him to elaborate, which he never did. Thank you for calling me out on it. Beyond that, who have I called names? 2 cent? that was his/her own usage. Why don't you ask Jean the same thing. I have and she has yet to "tone it down." I think if you have read most of my posts, you will see (look at the "conversation" with Nathan G) or even the ganged up responses to me after I pointed out the fallacies in 2cent's mindless post. Oh, yeah, I guess I did level a pretty harsh name at Quiddafi, but only to show solidarity with the rebels who call him fuzz-head.

      August 24, 2011 at 2:39 pm |
    • C-Lo

      PS, Even though I disagree with a lot of what you have to say, I like you Liz. You have heart, and, I believe, compassion. You have said yourself how you get too caught up in some of this, I'm human too and make poor judgment calls at times.

      Narcisistic, wow, didn't mean to come across like that. My "suggestions" of how to pose opinions have been typically been meant more to explain how what they have written I have interpreted (again citing the discussion with Nathan). That's one of the problems with this crappy form of communicaition and debate, I think too much context is lost in translation, and it takes too much time to clarify what are otherwise innocuous statements.

      I'm glad to know you've been keeping tabs on me, though...I will work on being less "agressive" :-)

      August 24, 2011 at 2:51 pm |
      • jean2009

        Mostly all I see is someone who calls people a communist without a clue to their own right-wing fascism.
        Someone has to take on Jay who is nothing short of an outright racist, and Howard who wants this country to fail so he can gloat.

        August 24, 2011 at 6:30 pm |
      • C-Lo

        Jean:
        1. I didn't call you a communist, but this site or "news" organization...I mearly said in a round about way that you provide me more reason to read anything here than their writers...
        2. I am not blind to my fiscally conservative views, but a facist I most certainly am not–as facism requires a large, controlling gov't as well. Libertarian is my cup of "tea." And your continued use of "teabagger" is as derogitory as any out there. If you don't know what it means, look it up. If you do, you may want to send an appology to your GLBT friends.

        August 25, 2011 at 5:37 pm |
  31. nojello

    Part of Obama's jobs speech will include a response to Democratic complaints about the high unemployment numbers among their constituents.: he will setup 1930s style bread lines: lines for wheat and lines for rye.

    August 24, 2011 at 2:18 pm |
  32. Liz Carter in Georgia

    C-lo; I may be able to say the same thing about you, although I can't agree with everything you say either; but I believe you mean well, sometimes, LOL! You can get a little overbearing. You can 'explain away' or put to rest anything you've said that's viewed negatively in any of your posts presentations. That takes good thoughtful, focus and you do it at the 'drop of a hat'! Yes, I do have a heart and hate to hear or see anyone misunderstood or mistreated! I find myself even lashing out for them! TRUCE!

    August 24, 2011 at 7:20 pm |
  33. Liz Carter in Georgia

    If anything happens under the OBAMA Presidency that may be viewed as good or positively, why can't he get the credit? At least some of it? When something goes down that is turned into a negative or bad, by the system, through the media and the ill-informed, he gets ALL of the credit then! WHY IS THAT Howard and everyone who tries to steal his joy of celebration as PRESIDENT of the UNITED STATES during the time of the action?!?

    August 24, 2011 at 7:30 pm |
    • Ajeng

      Obama has a shown a pattern of not kwoinng anything about anyone who surrounds him. He knows nothing about Rezko, never heard his pastor's inflammatory comments, doesn't know the Ayers history.As things slowly perculate to the top, he suddenly remembers a few things, and then does more distancing.It's the pattern of good old fashioned politicians, not the "trancendent" ones.

      July 31, 2012 at 3:25 pm |
  34. Liz Carter in Georgia

    I think that the above tirade of dismissive characterizations are ver-r-r-ry demeaning and 'unusually' hateful, slanderous and scandalous as it's been lodged against the President; any President of the United States, but......Well, if that's all you believe it takes, then why don't you just go for it C-lo? Maybe Joe, Jay and the rest of his unhappy, disgusted, blog politicians should also get into the running! I'm sure you all will have everything tidyed up in a cool pair of seconds! Right? LOL!

    August 27, 2011 at 1:35 pm |
    • C-Lo

      Liz, I assume you are referring to my list of why I believe I'd make a good candidate...If you'd take a closer look, I did concede some of the 90 points rainjam cut and pasted, apparently without reading. Yes, absolutely some were dismissive, and they weren't aimed at the president, they were aimed at his supporters who want so badly to not have to admit they made a mistake in voting for him, they include things like him SAYING he's going to do stuff as an accomplishment. Saying he's closing GITMO or:
      88. Has put the ball in play for comprehensive immigration reform
      89. Has announced his intention to push for energy reform
      90. Has announced his intention to push for education reform
      A lot of presidents have announced intentions, said what they'd like to do, "started balls rolling." These are NOT accomplishments. Me saying I intend to be president won't make it so, will it? Building a swingset for his kids doesn't make him a good president, just a good father. Is that all it takes to be qualified?

      I don't believe that's all it takes and is part of the reason I don't believe he's been a great, or even good, president. It seems like so many of his supporters are grasping at straws because he hasn't accomplished that much, and what he has has been in conflict with how I believe the country should be managed. I have pointed out many of Bush's policies that I disagreed with too. As a matter of fact, I didn't vote for Repub or Dem in 04 or 08 because I think they are both pushing a big go't agenda, just with different ideologies. It is for this reason I support the initial underlying push of the Tea Party who sees the same power grab in DC from both sides and is tired of it. Unfortunately this base message has been decimated by the radicals and/or media hype. This "message of hate" was not the goal but has been embraced by the left to discredit the message of personal responsibiltiy and smaller gov't.

      These were the intents of my "tyrade" to call out the supporters of his who, just opposite of the detractors see no wrong. And no, I will not support him in most of his goals, because I disagree with his policies. As we've discussed we are entitled to our opinions and I don't believe that Obama was/is ready to have been president. No track record of large scale leadership. Dems even said as much when campaigning in the primaries against him. So it's not just a right/left argument nor a black/white argument.

      And I have an honest question...how many people are following him and agreeing with his policies simply because they don't want to be labled a "racist?" Maybe a few, maybe a lot. I don't know. And along those same lines, like I said before, how many are grasping at straws to show ANYTHING as an accomplishment? And yes, I do understand that this is done as a counterpunch against those who dismiss everything he does. If this country was in such bad shape, why would you want someone without extensive leadership skills to get us out? I understand the black community rallying behind him, which unfortunately (or maybe fortunately) points to the fact that we are not past the race issue in this country (some areas worse than others).

      Sorry for the long post, and I'm sorry you found that hateful. Did you find any of rainjam's comments (to whom this was directed) as dismissive, demeaning and hateful?

      August 30, 2011 at 12:33 pm |
  35. Liz Carter in Georgia

    No...I didn't C-Lo. Did I miss something? Show it to me if I did.@Jay, Obama is not alone. He is among a big group. Many AFRICAN AMERICANS are descendants of slave owners...so why are you so bent on the fact that the President happens to be one? That was a very prevalent thing that went on back then and most times the black woman was raped or taken. I am a descendant of a slave owner. Sad, but we can't pick our family; we can't help where we came from, but we sure can choose/plan where we're want to go!

    August 30, 2011 at 11:43 pm |
    • C-Lo

      Sorry Liz, had to go back and re-read all of that. No you didn't miss anything other than the continued derogotory terms that (s)he and her/his ilk continue to use, and I don't think my response was out of line. A bit snide? yes, to the extent again, that the "list" pointed out things Obama has mentioned or "though about" doing. Wouldn't you agree that those cannot be considered "accomplishments?" As I pointed out to rainjam, calling his response ignorant is not calling him stupid or unintelligent, but un-informed (didn't say it quite like that). My justification for it was that he accused 41 of killing 100's of thousands of Iraqis in the gulf war. "Official" estimates from Hussein himself were between 20 and 35k with about 2300 civilian. FAR CRY from 100's of thousands...misinformed=ignorance. Saying 43 was supplying arms to the Taliban and Hussein, not true. misinformed=ignorance. (s)he told me to look it up. I've scoured the internet for even non-credible sources for these "facts" and have come up empty. There is a lot of information saying US arms suppllied to the rebels/freedom fighters in Afghanastan fell into Taliban hands, which is NOT the same as Bush arming the Taliban.

      And I also stand by my "dismissive" reply as I disagree as much about calling these presidential accomplishments as I do with the fact that these same "accomplishments" don't make me any more qualified for president than the next guy. I think this is particularly evident with my comments about public university education vs. private. My point on this strikes to the heart of liberal hypocracy as I see it. They don't want to allow school choice ie public/private vouchers (witness Douglas County, Colorado), insisting that the public school system is a superior mode of education, then turning around and pointing out the superiority of a private education.

      Long way to an explination, but you already know that about me, right? :-)

      P.S. I know the derogetory terms the libs continue to use have become so common place that most libs "overlook" them as much as a racist would overlook the "n" word, but doesn't mean they are any less hate-filled or derogetory–Witness "I Hate Republic...ts. Why aren't the feminests up in arms about THAT? This guy is one sick mysogenist pig–oh, no nevermind he holds the liberal ideals, so his use is ok.

      August 31, 2011 at 11:31 am |
    • Pete

      the biggist problem america has to correct is that we are AMERICANS not african Americans not spanish americans
      not Italian Americans ETC until that happens were all in deep shit

      August 31, 2011 at 11:46 am |
  36. Liz Carter in Georgia

    Good one! I finally can agree with you Pete! However, not to the exclusion of each of our histories, noting our rise and evolvement in AMERICA and our heritages decent. BTW, maybe you can start with the NATIONAL CENSUS BUREAU.

    August 31, 2011 at 11:46 pm |
  37. Arianna

    You Obamazoids ought to have your heads examined. Jesus obama could be chagut waterboarding someone and you would shrug it off. What spell does this piece of crap have you all under anyways? None of you is old enough to remember the terror of these pieces of shit he is hanging around. You are all pissing children who think you are going to a cool rock concert. Ayers is scum. And yes, he wasn't convicted and that is only because the stupid FBI screwed up the surveilance, as usual. But it never stopped Ayers from bragging about how proud he was of his bombings for years to come. These people were killers and they are still the same radicals they were yesterday. They are true domestic terrorists. For all your claim to brains, the least you could do is google the weathermen, so at least you will know that this is not funny shit. So you keep trucking along following this fake Messiah. The rest of us are going to do our damdest to makes sure stupid people like you don't get this time bomb elected.

    August 2, 2012 at 12:25 am |