What Grade Would You Give Obama for First 100 Days?

[SirJosephPorter]

We participate here to discuss issues, so what is wrong with politics? You may have noticed, it is the thread about politics, religion etc. which generate plenty of passionate discussion.

Post a thread about how good everything is, how we should get along with brotherly love etc. and you will be lucky enough to get ten responses.

JLM, this jogged my memory, I remembered that Tolkien has said something similar in ‘The Hobbit’, so I looked up the exact quote.

“Now, it is a strange thing, but things that are good to have and days that are good to spend are soon told about and not much to listen to; while things that are uncomfortable, palpitating, and even gruesome, may make a good tale, and take a deal of telling anyway.”

The same applies to discussion topics. Post a topic which is all sweetness and light, and it is usually greeted with a yawn. Post a topic on a red meat issue (politics, religion, abortion, death penalty etc.) and it riles people up, makes for great discussion.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

History has a nasty habit of repeating itself.

It sure does, Yukon Jack. The only question is which history we are talking about the one involving Carter, or the one involving Franklin Roosevelt.

Comparing Carter to Obama:

Indeed, you could compare Obama to Carter (and one will, if one is a Republican). However, one could equally well compare Obama with Roosevelt (and one will if one is a Democrat). Only future will tell which is the valid comparison.


AS for the new Rnald Reagan?? Who knows?

Who knows? I thought Joan of Arc was the next Reagan. It cannot possibly be Bobby Jindal, he is Catholic, while Republican Party base is protestant. The same reason Romney was unacceptable to the Republican base (he is a Mormon, Republican base does not consider Mormons to be Christians), will also be the reason that Jindal will be unacceptable to the Republican base (he is a Catholic, Republican base does not consider Catholics to be Christians).

So I thought Joan of Arc was the next Reagan (anyway, Republican Party has now moved so far to the right that Reagan or Goldwater if he had been alive would have been thrown out of the party by the Republican base, as being just another RINO). If not her, who?

 

[YukonJack]

By now every reasonable person knows that Franklin Delano Roosevelt was the father of the welfare state, the perpetual debt and deficit, the originator of out-of-wedlock births, and also the father of 40 years of Cold War by his slavish love for communism and communist Stalin.

So, compare Obama to FDR, the comparison is entirely appropriate. Stalin or Castro, what the heck's the difference?

In spite of Democrat/liberal blathering otherwise (and proven by history) the Republican party is a far bigger tent than the Democrats.

Name a single chairman of the DNC who was black. Name a single Democratic Secretary of State whomwas black. Name a single Democratic Security Adviser who was black.

We all know that according to Democrats/liberals any black person who is Republican/conservative is nothing but a house ni66er. We all know that according to the free-thinking liberals/Democrats any black person who has the temerity to display conservative leanings is nothing but an Uncle Tom.

We also know that the so-called wide tent of Democrats/liberals would NEVER tolerate one single person, male or female who is not pro-abortion. Unlike the Republicans, whose tent is comfortable to cover those who are not a single issue conservatives.

It has been said that the more you are abused by your detractors, the more they are afraid of you. So, take your childish "Joan of Arc" nonsense, it only reveals your fear of her. And rightfully so.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

By now every reasonable person knows that Franklin Delano Roosevelt was the father of the welfare state, the perpetual debt and deficit, the originator of out-of-wedlock births, and also the father of 40 years of Cold War by his slavish love for communism and communist Stalin.

Yukon Jack we could argue about all that. For instance, FDR certainly didn’t have a monopoly on deficits and debts, in recent memory, conservatives (such as Reagan, Bush, Mulroney etc.) have contributed mightily to the debt and deficit.

However, you seem to forget that FDR was extremely popular with the people, won four straight presidential elections in a row and is generally credited for ending the Great Depression .

So I imagine in Obama wouldn’t mind at all being compared to FDR.

In spite of Democrat/liberal blathering otherwise (and proven by history) the Republican party is a far bigger tent than the Democrats.

Republican party has been shrinking recently and is more and more controlled by its while, male, elderly base. Anybody who does not fully support the far right agenda of the base is considered a RINO or a CINO (Republican, or conservative in name only). Whatever moderates are left in the party (and the number is shrinking daily, recent defection of senator Specter being the most notable example), the base insults them with such epithets. There is no room for moderates in the Republican Party.

We also know that the so-called wide tent of Democrats/liberals would NEVER tolerate one single person, male or female who is not pro-abortion.

Really? Democratic Senator Casey for Pennsylvania is a prominent prolifer. While prolifers in Democratic party are a minority (most of them tend to be single issue voters and so tend to gravitate towards the Republican Party), they are by no means absent.

It has been said that the more you are abused by your detractors, the more they are afraid of you

If that is true, that means that conservatives are deathly afraid of Obama, they have called him every kind of epithet under the sun (Communist, Fascist, Nazi, Muslim terrorist etc.).

 

[JLM]

Not at all JLM, it is not a question of being disillusioned. Politics, religion and social issues (such as abortion, gay marriage etc.) always make for passionate, heated, interesting discussions. Hardly anybody changes their mind as a result of these discussions, though.

We participate here to discuss issues, so what is wrong with politics? You may have noticed, it is the thread about politics, religion etc. which generate plenty of passionate discussion.

Post a thread about how good everything is, how we should get along with brotherly love etc. and you will be lucky to get ten responses.

When arguing politics, emotions play too large a role to be able to arrive at any sensible conclusions.

 

[YukonJack]

Nothing shows the tolerance of the Democrats/liberals better than the way they have treated Miss California recently.

Answering a question by a self-confesseed, raging homosexual (what in the Hell was he doing being a judge at an event about females, anyway????) Perez Hilton, (who being a typical liberal did not dare to use his own name), regarding same-sex marriage, Carrie Rejean had the unmitigated nerve to express her own opinion of opposing it.

Well, all hell broke lose after that. He referred to her as an uneducated bitch.

Another homosexual, a so-called columnist for the Village Vice, Musto, went on a real vicious personal attack. He claimed that Ms. Prejean used to be a man, had his penis removed by surgery and he is now a she.

It is a good bet that if Miss California had supported the abomination of same-sex "marriage", she would have been hailed as a hero by both of these worthless human pieces of garbage.

They give every reasonable and decent person a damned good reason to become anti-gay and anti-Semite.

And, anti Democrat.

 

[JLM]

Nothing shows the tolerance of the Democrats/liberals better than the way they have treated Miss California recently.

Answering a question by a self-confesseed, raging homosexual (what in the Hell was he doing being a judge at an event about females, anyway????) Perez Hilton, (who being a typical liberal did not dare to use his own name), regarding same-sex marriage, Carrie Rejean had the unmitigated nerve to express her own opinion of opposing it.

Well, all hell broke lose after that. He referred to her as an uneducated bitch.

Another homosexual, a so-called columnist for the Village Vice, Musto, went on a real vicious personal attack. He claimed that Ms. Prejean used to be a man, had his penis removed by surgery and he is now a she.

It is a good bet that if Miss California had supported the abomination of same-sex "marriage", she would have been hailed as a hero by both of these worthless human pieces of garbage.

They give every reasonable and decent person a damned good reason to become anti-gay and anti-Semite.

And, anti Democrat.

Why do you persist in this Republican vs. Democrat/ Conservative vs. Liberal nonsense? ALL parties are rife with corruption, each of us can sit here until Doomsday trotting out the various transgressions of all of them. ANYONE who is a slave to a political party obviously does not have a mind of his own. THEY ARE ALL CORRUPT.

 

[Extrafire]

I assume you mean disconnected with ‘conservative’ reality, the reality of the right and the far right. If so, I plead guilty.

Poor fellow. Doesn't even know what "reality" means.

 

[Extrafire]

President Obama is just average.

At least by the standard of approval ratings.

Though Obama's job approval score is strong and has been since he took office, historical polling data shows Obama's popularity during his first 100 days is right in the middle of the scores other new presidents received from the public over the past 60 years.

Obama's 63 percent average, according to a study released by Gallup last month, is the highest for a new president since Jimmy Carter (he clocked in at 69 percent during his first 100 days).

But John F. Kennedy bested Obama by more than 10 points, with 74 percent. Dwight Eisenhower enjoyed a 71 percent rating early on.

Even Richard Nixon averaged a 62 percent approval rating, just 1 point shy of Obama's.

Overall, Obama's average for the first three months matched the historical average of 63 percent for presidents since Eisenhower.

When you include presidents who took the oath mid-term -- after the death or resignation of a president -- Obama's 63 percent looks paltry.

Harry Truman enjoyed 87 percent approval, while Lyndon Johnson enjoyed 76 percent.

Obama might have benefited, too, from the unpopularity of his predecessor.
Even after the contested 2000 election, though, George W. Bush averaged 58 percent in his first 100 days, according to the study.

Ronald Reagan averaged 60 percent, George H.W. Bush averaged 57 percent and Bill Clinton averaged 55 percent.

Study: Obama's Early Popularity Only Average Among Predecessors - Presidential Politics | Political News - FOXNews.com

 

[SirJosephPorter]

Poor fellow. Doesn't even know what "reality" means.

Reality is relative. It is clear that we see the world from totally different perspectives. But what makes you think that your reality is the right one (or the only one)? That is really not much different from saying that your morality is the right one, anybody who disagrees with you is being immoral.

Basically you are saying something similar, what you are saying is that you are the only one who knows what reality is, anybody who disagrees with you is living in fantasy land. Well, that is just your opinion, isn’t it?

 

[SirJosephPorter]

Study: Obama's Early Popularity Only Average Among Predecessors - Presidential Politics | Political News - FOXNews.com

FOX is not exactly an admirer of Obama. It is Obama’s harshest critic, along with Rush Limbaugh. So I wouldn’t’ believe anything that FOX says.

Anyway, it does admit (somewhat grudgingly) that Obama’s job approval rating is strong (which must have been galling for FOX to admit), that is something. It also admits that Bush’s average popularity rating during first 100 days was around 58% (lower than Obama’s), which is even more astounding (it probably is akin to blasphemy in conservative circles).

Anyway FOX leaves out the most important factor of all. When Bush came to power, things were going very well, economy was roaring ahead, thanks to Clinton. People were not worried about their jobs; they felt pretty good about the direction the country was going. It is easy to achieve high popularity rating when everything is going smoothly.

When Obama came to power, the country was going to dogs. People were talking of another depression, with unemployment approaching 25%. Most economists and experts were in agreement, world economies were in financial meltdown, thanks to the economic mismanagement by the Republicans.

People were not feeling good about their own personal finances, about the economy of the country. People thought that we were headed in the wring direction. It is much more difficult to achieve good popularity rating under those conditions.

Bush’s approval ratings of high 50s (obtained when economy was roaring ahead and people were feeling good about themselves) in no way compare to Obama’s approval rating in the 60s (when economy was in the tank, thanks to Republicans and people were not feeling good about themselves or about the country).

 

[ironsides]

What is making some people uneasy is that we now have a single party system and a President that can pretty much do anything they want, and President Obama being much smarter than Carter (who had a similar majority) is starting to get people worried. I am not referring to the right, but the center left as well as some left wingers. So far he is doing and saying the right things, but then it has only been 100 days. We have a long way to go in his term.

 

[JLM]

There is only one reality, the problem being that some people who consider themsleves "realistic" just want to deal with PART of the reality. To be really realistic you deal with whole reality. Our illustrious premier doesn't do that - he selects the part (rich people) that he's comfortable with.

 

[Cannuck]

Our illustrious premier doesn't do that - he selects the part (rich people) that he's comfortable with.

What's wrong with that. I'm more comfortable with rich people. Poor people usually have bad hygiene, drink excessively and don't know which utensil they should use for which course.

 

[darkbeaver]

What is making some people uneasy is that we now have a single party system and a President that can pretty much do anything they want, and President Obama being much smarter than Carter (who had a similar majority) is starting to get people worried. I am not referring to the right, but the center left as well as some left wingers. So far he is doing and saying the right things, but then it has only been 100 days. We have a long way to go in his term.

Hey, you do have a long way to go, to the bottom. There is no other direction for the United States of Israel. You won't be alone though, Canada will volunteer to hold your hand all the way down.:lol:

 

[ironsides]

God’s ashamed of you. He’d like to take you back and try again.

 

[JLM]

What's wrong with that. I'm more comfortable with rich people. Poor people usually have bad hygiene, drink excessively and don't know which utensil they should use for which course.

Especially when we use our fingers to eat our filet mignon.

 

[YukonJack]

"FOX is not exactly an admirer of Obama. It is Obama’s harshest critic, along with Rush Limbaugh. So I wouldn’t’ believe anything that FOX says."

This 'expert' opinion is from someone who is too cheap to subscribe to FOXNews, and so never EVER watched it.

Same person who NEVER listened to Rush Limbaugh, but is an instant expert.

Or one that NEVER read anything by Dr. Thomas Sowell, but dismisses anything that DR. Sowell writes, just because Dr. Sowell's articles appear on Townhall.

Like I said before: no ignorance is as great and as glaring as a self-imposed ignorance.

Take SirJosephPorter's words not with a pinch, but with a ton of salt.

 

[JLM]

"FOX is not exactly an admirer of Obama. It is Obama’s harshest critic, along with Rush Limbaugh. So I wouldn’t’ believe anything that FOX says."

This 'expert' opinion is from someone who is too cheap to subscribe to FOXNews, and so never EVER watched it.

Same person who NEVER listened to Rush Limbaugh, but is an instant expert.

Or one that NEVER read anything by Dr. Thomas Sowell, but dismisses anything that DR. Sowell writes, just because Dr. Sowell's articles appear on Townhall.

Like I said before: no ignorance is as great and as glaring as a self-imposed ignorance.

Take SirJosephPorter's words not with a pinch, but with a ton of salt.

My, your expounding is getting very confounding......:lol::lol:

 

[SirJosephPorter]

What is making some people uneasy is that we now have a single party system and a President that can pretty much do anything they want, and President Obama being much smarter than Carter (who had a similar majority) is starting to get people worried. I am not referring to the right, but the center left as well as some left wingers. So far he is doing and saying the right things, but then it has only been 100 days. We have a long way to go in his term.

That is a matter of perspective, ironsides. Obama came to power in a very difficult situation. The economy was in the meltdown, credit market was completely frozen, there was every likelihood of another depression.

It was only proper that Obama implement the measures that he had promised during the campaign. I would say it is a very good thing that he got such a strong majority in the Congress. If Congress had been evenly split between the two parties, very likely nothing would have got done and we would have slid into a full fledged depression.

But now there is general agreement among economists and experts that there indeed are glimmers of hope. Recently Warren Buffet said the same thing. So what Obama did has every indication of working.

And people are still by and large behind Obama, he does have approval rating of over 60%. But you are right, it has only been 100 days, we don’t know what the rest of the four years will be like. Obama has made a very good start, it remains to be seen if he follows through.