It is currently Mon Feb 24, 2025 2:29 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 123 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2017 11:24 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 10:00 am
Posts: 80536
Location: Rogers Park, USA
pizza_Place: JB Alberto's
leashyourkids wrote:
Once elected, it became clear that he was an academic who had to adjust to the world of realpolitik.


Probably as close as we'll ever get to a Chomsky presidency. :lol:

_________________
Freedom is our Strength.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2017 11:24 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 02, 2011 4:29 pm
Posts: 40942
Location: Everywhere
pizza_Place: giordanos
formerlyknownas wrote:
leashyourkids wrote:
denisdman wrote:
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
denisdman wrote:
good dolphin wrote:

It wasn't a symptom of his time. It was a continuation in the belief of the primacy of the executive he inherited from his predecessor.

I had really hoped for a more idealistic presidency from him. I expected someone steeped in constitutional law to understand the danger of the overreach of the executive for the past decade and have the personal self control to end it. He did not. I have no hope that there will ever be anyone in the future such discipline. Should someone get into office in the future, it will be so embedded into the "powers" of the presidency from the past two decades that no one will even think to question whether it is proper.


No doubt. It has been a running trend throughout our history that each President seems to take the cumulative power of the last and add more. It has been exacerbated by the lack of Congressional cooperation.


Acquiescence to the President's desires isn't the job of Congress.


I didn't say it was. But when you don't approve judicial appointments or pass regular budgets to run the country, what can the President do? It is Congress' job to hold votes on appointments (and not just the Supreme Court) and fund the country. They continued to hold the country hostage time and again with their inactivity. And if they don't like who Obama appoints, then hold hearings, and vote against the nomination(s).


Agreed. It may not be Congress's job to "acquiesce" to the president, but it is their job to do their job, and when they refuse to do ANYTHING, it makes the president's job nearly impossible.

How long has it been so adversarial? I mean, to this level? 1994?


I can remember as far back as Tip O'Neil and presidents having to suck his dick to get anything done. As far as the courts my first recollection of congress being asses was for Clarence Thomas.

_________________
Elections have consequences.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2017 11:25 am 
Offline
100000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 8:06 pm
Posts: 81466
pizza_Place: 773-684-2222
leashyourkids wrote:
denisdman wrote:
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
denisdman wrote:
good dolphin wrote:

It wasn't a symptom of his time. It was a continuation in the belief of the primacy of the executive he inherited from his predecessor.

I had really hoped for a more idealistic presidency from him. I expected someone steeped in constitutional law to understand the danger of the overreach of the executive for the past decade and have the personal self control to end it. He did not. I have no hope that there will ever be anyone in the future such discipline. Should someone get into office in the future, it will be so embedded into the "powers" of the presidency from the past two decades that no one will even think to question whether it is proper.


No doubt. It has been a running trend throughout our history that each President seems to take the cumulative power of the last and add more. It has been exacerbated by the lack of Congressional cooperation.


Acquiescence to the President's desires isn't the job of Congress.


I didn't say it was. But when you don't approve judicial appointments or pass regular budgets to run the country, what can the President do? It is Congress' job to hold votes on appointments (and not just the Supreme Court) and fund the country. They continued to hold the country hostage time and again with their inactivity. And if they don't like who Obama appoints, then hold hearings, and vote against the nomination(s).


Agreed. It may not be Congress's job to "acquiesce" to the president, but it is their job to do their job, and when they refuse to do ANYTHING, it makes the president's job nearly impossible.


A president needs to figure out a way to work with them or build public support for the things he or she wants. Republicans did an excellent job at branding all of Obama's policies. There are people in places like West Virginia and parts of Pennsylvania that would be dead without the ACA but they've willingly voted for people who will try to get rid of something that has kept them alive.

_________________
Be well

GO BEARS!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2017 11:27 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2005 2:35 pm
Posts: 82996
leashyourkids wrote:
Not sure about history, but I will view him as a guy who initially seemed to run for office because it's "what he was supposed to do." After he gave the speech in 2004 at the DNC, it was basically his turn. I don't think he ran with any particular set of ideals, as many on the Right have suggested. I don't believe he was a socialist or a white-hater. In fact, he never even really lived the "true" African-American experience (don't take that the wrong way). Great campaigner, articulate, easy to like, and good looking..


hmmm...

_________________
O judgment! Thou art fled to brutish beasts,
And men have lost their reason.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2017 11:28 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 10:00 am
Posts: 80536
Location: Rogers Park, USA
pizza_Place: JB Alberto's
Nas wrote:
There are people in places like West Virginia and parts of Pennsylvania that would be dead without the ACA...


Do you think that's true? Because I really don't remember an epidemic of sick or injured people dying on the front lawns of hospitals because they were refused treatment for lack of insurance. Obamacare is more about protecting people from dire financial consequences than it is about actual healthcare.

_________________
Freedom is our Strength.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2017 11:28 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 10:00 am
Posts: 80536
Location: Rogers Park, USA
pizza_Place: JB Alberto's
good dolphin wrote:
leashyourkids wrote:
Not sure about history, but I will view him as a guy who initially seemed to run for office because it's "what he was supposed to do." After he gave the speech in 2004 at the DNC, it was basically his turn. I don't think he ran with any particular set of ideals, as many on the Right have suggested. I don't believe he was a socialist or a white-hater. In fact, he never even really lived the "true" African-American experience (don't take that the wrong way). Great campaigner, articulate, easy to like, and good looking..


hmmm...



leash Biden.

_________________
Freedom is our Strength.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2017 11:29 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 02, 2011 4:29 pm
Posts: 40942
Location: Everywhere
pizza_Place: giordanos
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
Nas wrote:
There are people in places like West Virginia and parts of Pennsylvania that would be dead without the ACA...


Do you think that's true? Because I really don't remember an epidemic of sick or injured people dying on the front lawns of hospitals because they were refused treatment for lack of insurance. Obamacare is more about protecting people from dire financial consequences than it is about actual healthcare.


Bingo but I recall those against the ACA being painted as wanting people to die.

_________________
Elections have consequences.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2017 11:29 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2011 7:56 am
Posts: 32234
Location: A sterile, homogeneous suburb
pizza_Place: Pizza Cucina
Don't tell me you all haven't dreamt of "smoking a cigarette" with 'ole Barry.

_________________
Curious Hair wrote:
I'm a big dumb shitlib baby


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2017 11:30 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 93640
Location: To the left of my post
pittmike wrote:
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
Nas wrote:
There are people in places like West Virginia and parts of Pennsylvania that would be dead without the ACA...


Do you think that's true? Because I really don't remember an epidemic of sick or injured people dying on the front lawns of hospitals because they were refused treatment for lack of insurance. Obamacare is more about protecting people from dire financial consequences than it is about actual healthcare.


Bingo but I recall those against the ACA being painted as wanting people to die.
The best answer to that was about the "death panels" which are actually a thing they would have done if they could but they would have called it something a little nicer.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2017 11:31 am 
Offline
100000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 8:06 pm
Posts: 81466
pizza_Place: 773-684-2222
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
Nas wrote:
There are people in places like West Virginia and parts of Pennsylvania that would be dead without the ACA...


Do you think that's true? Because I really don't remember an epidemic of sick or injured people dying on the front lawns of hospitals because they were refused treatment for lack of insurance. Obamacare is more about protecting people from dire financial consequences than it is about actual healthcare.


The majority of the population that have benefited from the ACA are in those areas.

_________________
Be well

GO BEARS!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2017 11:31 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 2:39 pm
Posts: 19525
pizza_Place: Lou Malnati's
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
Nas wrote:
There are people in places like West Virginia and parts of Pennsylvania that would be dead without the ACA...


Do you think that's true? Because I really don't remember an epidemic of sick or injured people dying on the front lawns of hospitals because they were refused treatment for lack of insurance. Obamacare is more about protecting people from dire financial consequences than it is about actual healthcare.


You missed DiCaro's aunt and the 50 pound tumor she did not know she had until Obamacare.


Quote:
Marcey DiCaro thought she just couldn't lose that extra belly flab.

But unbeknownst to her, a 47-pound tumor was hard at work, ravaging her insides.


http://www.nydailynews.com/life-style/h ... -1.1825609

_________________
Why are only 14 percent of black CPS 11th-graders proficient in English?

The Missing Link wrote:
For instance they were never taught that Columbus was a slave owner.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2017 11:33 am 
Offline
100000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 8:06 pm
Posts: 81466
pizza_Place: 773-684-2222
pittmike wrote:
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
Nas wrote:
There are people in places like West Virginia and parts of Pennsylvania that would be dead without the ACA...


Do you think that's true? Because I really don't remember an epidemic of sick or injured people dying on the front lawns of hospitals because they were refused treatment for lack of insurance. Obamacare is more about protecting people from dire financial consequences than it is about actual healthcare.


Bingo but I recall those against the ACA being painted as wanting people to die.


I recall differently. I recall hearing death panels and a lot of other nonsense

_________________
Be well

GO BEARS!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2017 11:33 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 02, 2011 4:29 pm
Posts: 40942
Location: Everywhere
pizza_Place: giordanos
Nas wrote:
pittmike wrote:
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
Nas wrote:
There are people in places like West Virginia and parts of Pennsylvania that would be dead without the ACA...


Do you think that's true? Because I really don't remember an epidemic of sick or injured people dying on the front lawns of hospitals because they were refused treatment for lack of insurance. Obamacare is more about protecting people from dire financial consequences than it is about actual healthcare.


Bingo but I recall those against the ACA being painted as wanting people to die.


I recall differently. I recall hearing death panels and a lot of other nonsense


Yes both sides battled mightily.

_________________
Elections have consequences.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2017 11:37 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2005 2:35 pm
Posts: 82996
leashyourkids wrote:
Not sure about history, but I will view him as a guy who initially seemed to run for office because it's "what he was supposed to do." After he gave the speech in 2004 at the DNC, it was basically his turn. I don't think he ran with any particular set of ideals, as many on the Right have suggested. I don't believe he was a socialist or a white-hater. In fact, he never even really lived the "true" African-American experience (don't take that the wrong way). Great campaigner, articulate, easy to like, and good looking..


Winning elections is all about being opportunistic. The political landscape changes so rapidly that if you don't seize the opportunity today, it will not likely be present tomorrow. Obama had a quick succession of favorable moments with his senate and presidential campaigns. As an example of what I am saying, a few short years before he couldn't defeat a weakened Bobby Rush for congress. He was lambasted for not being sufficiently black. Four years later those same voters voted for him for a more important position specifically because he was black.

I think he will reveal in an interview some time down the road that he didn't think he was experienced enough for the office. I don't hold that against him.

_________________
O judgment! Thou art fled to brutish beasts,
And men have lost their reason.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2017 11:39 am 
Offline
100000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 8:06 pm
Posts: 81466
pizza_Place: 773-684-2222
good dolphin wrote:
leashyourkids wrote:
Not sure about history, but I will view him as a guy who initially seemed to run for office because it's "what he was supposed to do." After he gave the speech in 2004 at the DNC, it was basically his turn. I don't think he ran with any particular set of ideals, as many on the Right have suggested. I don't believe he was a socialist or a white-hater. In fact, he never even really lived the "true" African-American experience (don't take that the wrong way). Great campaigner, articulate, easy to like, and good looking..


Winning elections is all about being opportunistic. The political landscape changes so rapidly that if you don't seize the opportunity today, it will not likely be present tomorrow. Obama had a quick succession of favorable moments with his senate and presidential campaigns. As an example of what I am saying, a few short years before he couldn't defeat a weakened Bobby Rush for congress. He was lambasted for not being sufficiently black. Four years later those same voters voted for him for a more important position specifically because he was black.

I think he will reveal in an interview some time down the road that he didn't think he was experienced enough for the office. I don't hold that against him.


Clearly experience doesn't matter anymore

_________________
Be well

GO BEARS!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2017 11:39 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 9:10 am
Posts: 31948
leashyourkids wrote:
Not sure about history, but I will view him as a guy who initially seemed to run for office because it's "what he was supposed to do." After he gave the speech in 2004 at the DNC, it was basically his turn. I don't think he ran with any particular set of ideals, as many on the Right have suggested. I don't believe he was a socialist or a white-hater. In fact, he never even really lived the "true" African-American experience (don't take that the wrong way). Great campaigner, articulate, easy to like, and good looking.

Once elected, it became clear that he was an academic who had to adjust to the world of realpolitik. Add to that the fact that Congress wasn't his biggest fan and not a lot got accomplished immediately.

While governing, he did little to make drastic change. His signature legislation is anything but "progressive" and, as mentioned, he continued drone strikes and attacks on American citizens without due process. The executive order thing is overblown. FDR had 6 times as many executive orders as any president in history. That doesn't mean I'm a fan of them; but that's not really a huge part of his legacy more than it is any other president.

While in office, he certainly held the position with dignity and class and, IMO, was a great representative of America to the rest of the world.

In summary, he was an academic with very few ideals who did not accomplish a lot but did hold the country together during the crisis he came into and held the office with a dignity that is about to be appreciated more than we could ever imagine on January 20th.


I agree with this. I didn't see him as the "imperial" President as much as I saw him as a person great at equivocating an argument but terrible at problem solving. That is the primary reason that he was great on the stump but terrible at governing.

I also fault African Americans for failing to hold him accountable. I am actually interested in how black "leaders" will view his Presidency now that he is out of office. There was a reluctance to criticize him for anything but I wonder if that will change now that he is out of office.

_________________
The Hawk wrote:
This is going to reach a head pretty soon.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2017 11:42 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2005 2:35 pm
Posts: 82996
leashyourkids wrote:
Don't tell me you all haven't dreamt of "smoking a cigarette" with 'ole Barry.


I'd like to play him in basketball to see if his is actually any good. I have heard from some people that he isn't good. Invite him to a CFMB outing at Brooks Park. I know its crazy but I think he is the kind of guy who would very quietly show just to have fun with the whole experience.

_________________
O judgment! Thou art fled to brutish beasts,
And men have lost their reason.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2017 11:46 am 
Offline
100000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 8:06 pm
Posts: 81466
pizza_Place: 773-684-2222
long time guy wrote:
leashyourkids wrote:
Not sure about history, but I will view him as a guy who initially seemed to run for office because it's "what he was supposed to do." After he gave the speech in 2004 at the DNC, it was basically his turn. I don't think he ran with any particular set of ideals, as many on the Right have suggested. I don't believe he was a socialist or a white-hater. In fact, he never even really lived the "true" African-American experience (don't take that the wrong way). Great campaigner, articulate, easy to like, and good looking.

Once elected, it became clear that he was an academic who had to adjust to the world of realpolitik. Add to that the fact that Congress wasn't his biggest fan and not a lot got accomplished immediately.

While governing, he did little to make drastic change. His signature legislation is anything but "progressive" and, as mentioned, he continued drone strikes and attacks on American citizens without due process. The executive order thing is overblown. FDR had 6 times as many executive orders as any president in history. That doesn't mean I'm a fan of them; but that's not really a huge part of his legacy more than it is any other president.

While in office, he certainly held the position with dignity and class and, IMO, was a great representative of America to the rest of the world.

In summary, he was an academic with very few ideals who did not accomplish a lot but did hold the country together during the crisis he came into and held the office with a dignity that is about to be appreciated more than we could ever imagine on January 20th.


I agree with this. I didn't see him as the "imperial" President as much as I saw him as a person great at equivocating an argument but terrible at problem solving. That is the primary reason that he was great on the stump but terrible at governing.

I also fault African Americans for failing to hold him accountable. I am actually interested in how black "leaders" will view his Presidency now that he is out of office. There was a reluctance to criticize him for anything but I wonder if that will change now that he is out of office.


I don't and never will. They should have done more to help.

_________________
Be well

GO BEARS!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2017 11:50 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2005 2:35 pm
Posts: 82996
pittmike wrote:


I can remember as far back as Tip O'Neil and presidents having to suck his dick to get anything done. As far as the courts my first recollection of congress being asses was for Clarence Thomas.


I date the current political attitude to Newt Gingerich's first term

Guys, can you cut down on quoting so many people in one post? This is just cruel on your part.

_________________
O judgment! Thou art fled to brutish beasts,
And men have lost their reason.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2017 11:51 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2005 2:35 pm
Posts: 82996
Nas wrote:
good dolphin wrote:
leashyourkids wrote:
Not sure about history, but I will view him as a guy who initially seemed to run for office because it's "what he was supposed to do." After he gave the speech in 2004 at the DNC, it was basically his turn. I don't think he ran with any particular set of ideals, as many on the Right have suggested. I don't believe he was a socialist or a white-hater. In fact, he never even really lived the "true" African-American experience (don't take that the wrong way). Great campaigner, articulate, easy to like, and good looking..


Winning elections is all about being opportunistic. The political landscape changes so rapidly that if you don't seize the opportunity today, it will not likely be present tomorrow. Obama had a quick succession of favorable moments with his senate and presidential campaigns. As an example of what I am saying, a few short years before he couldn't defeat a weakened Bobby Rush for congress. He was lambasted for not being sufficiently black. Four years later those same voters voted for him for a more important position specifically because he was black.

I think he will reveal in an interview some time down the road that he didn't think he was experienced enough for the office. I don't hold that against him.


Clearly experience doesn't matter anymore


Nope. We have now reached the point where anyone really can become president.

_________________
O judgment! Thou art fled to brutish beasts,
And men have lost their reason.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2017 11:52 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 9:10 am
Posts: 31948
Nas wrote:
long time guy wrote:
leashyourkids wrote:
Not sure about history, but I will view him as a guy who initially seemed to run for office because it's "what he was supposed to do." After he gave the speech in 2004 at the DNC, it was basically his turn. I don't think he ran with any particular set of ideals, as many on the Right have suggested. I don't believe he was a socialist or a white-hater. In fact, he never even really lived the "true" African-American experience (don't take that the wrong way). Great campaigner, articulate, easy to like, and good looking.

Once elected, it became clear that he was an academic who had to adjust to the world of realpolitik. Add to that the fact that Congress wasn't his biggest fan and not a lot got accomplished immediately.

While governing, he did little to make drastic change. His signature legislation is anything but "progressive" and, as mentioned, he continued drone strikes and attacks on American citizens without due process. The executive order thing is overblown. FDR had 6 times as many executive orders as any president in history. That doesn't mean I'm a fan of them; but that's not really a huge part of his legacy more than it is any other president.

While in office, he certainly held the position with dignity and class and, IMO, was a great representative of America to the rest of the world.

In summary, he was an academic with very few ideals who did not accomplish a lot but did hold the country together during the crisis he came into and held the office with a dignity that is about to be appreciated more than we could ever imagine on January 20th.


I agree with this. I didn't see him as the "imperial" President as much as I saw him as a person great at equivocating an argument but terrible at problem solving. That is the primary reason that he was great on the stump but terrible at governing.

I also fault African Americans for failing to hold him accountable. I am actually interested in how black "leaders" will view his Presidency now that he is out of office. There was a reluctance to criticize him for anything but I wonder if that will change now that he is out of office.


I don't and never will. They should have done more to help.


I voted for him twice not so much because I thought that he'd be a good President as much as I didn't want to miss out on History. 2nd time was a little tougher but I was dealing with a woman that was planning to holdout if I didn't vote for him. Really didn't have an excuse since the polling place was right across the street from the crib. I would have voted for him anyway but the extra push didn't necessarily hurt the cause either.

_________________
The Hawk wrote:
This is going to reach a head pretty soon.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2017 11:57 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 93640
Location: To the left of my post
Who would have guessed I would end up the biggest Obama fan on the board?

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2017 11:58 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2011 7:56 am
Posts: 32234
Location: A sterile, homogeneous suburb
pizza_Place: Pizza Cucina
Not that this should have any bearing on anything, but he is extremely likeable... and that's coming on the heels of two presidents who were also very likeable (personally) in their own unique ways.

_________________
Curious Hair wrote:
I'm a big dumb shitlib baby


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2017 12:00 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2011 7:56 am
Posts: 32234
Location: A sterile, homogeneous suburb
pizza_Place: Pizza Cucina
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
Who would have guessed I would end up the biggest Obama fan on the board?


Anyone who had the foresight to see that he wouldn't be able to accomplish anything.

_________________
Curious Hair wrote:
I'm a big dumb shitlib baby


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2017 12:01 pm 
Offline
100000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 8:06 pm
Posts: 81466
pizza_Place: 773-684-2222
long time guy wrote:
Nas wrote:
long time guy wrote:
leashyourkids wrote:
Not sure about history, but I will view him as a guy who initially seemed to run for office because it's "what he was supposed to do." After he gave the speech in 2004 at the DNC, it was basically his turn. I don't think he ran with any particular set of ideals, as many on the Right have suggested. I don't believe he was a socialist or a white-hater. In fact, he never even really lived the "true" African-American experience (don't take that the wrong way). Great campaigner, articulate, easy to like, and good looking.

Once elected, it became clear that he was an academic who had to adjust to the world of realpolitik. Add to that the fact that Congress wasn't his biggest fan and not a lot got accomplished immediately.

While governing, he did little to make drastic change. His signature legislation is anything but "progressive" and, as mentioned, he continued drone strikes and attacks on American citizens without due process. The executive order thing is overblown. FDR had 6 times as many executive orders as any president in history. That doesn't mean I'm a fan of them; but that's not really a huge part of his legacy more than it is any other president.

While in office, he certainly held the position with dignity and class and, IMO, was a great representative of America to the rest of the world.

In summary, he was an academic with very few ideals who did not accomplish a lot but did hold the country together during the crisis he came into and held the office with a dignity that is about to be appreciated more than we could ever imagine on January 20th.


I agree with this. I didn't see him as the "imperial" President as much as I saw him as a person great at equivocating an argument but terrible at problem solving. That is the primary reason that he was great on the stump but terrible at governing.

I also fault African Americans for failing to hold him accountable. I am actually interested in how black "leaders" will view his Presidency now that he is out of office. There was a reluctance to criticize him for anything but I wonder if that will change now that he is out of office.


I don't and never will. They should have done more to help.


I voted for him twice not so much because I thought that he'd be a good President as much as I didn't want to miss out on History. 2nd time was a little tougher but I was dealing with a woman that was planning to holdout if I didn't vote for him. Really didn't have an excuse since the polling place was right across the street from the crib. I would have voted for him anyway but the extra push didn't necessarily hurt the cause either.


I definitely worked and voted for him the first time primarily because he was black. I don't apologize for it either. I thought he would try to live up to the expectations he set during his 2nd term because he wouldn't have to worry about reelection. While he was somewhat better his 2nd term I am overall disappointed in the job he has done. He paid lip service to the disadvantaged but routinely screwed them to get deals done. Every real budget cut included things that the lower class needed.

_________________
Be well

GO BEARS!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2017 12:01 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 93640
Location: To the left of my post
leashyourkids wrote:
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
Who would have guessed I would end up the biggest Obama fan on the board?


Anyone who had the foresight to see that he wouldn't be able to accomplish anything.
I hope Trump doesn't accomplish anything too!

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2017 12:02 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 9:10 am
Posts: 31948
leashyourkids wrote:
Not that this should have any bearing on anything, but he is extremely likeable... and that's coming on the heels of two presidents who were also very likeable (personally) in their own unique ways.


Yes he is. I generally think he is a good guy that is ill suited for the cutthroat world of politics.

_________________
The Hawk wrote:
This is going to reach a head pretty soon.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2017 12:03 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 19, 2009 11:19 am
Posts: 23915
pizza_Place: Jimmy's Place
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
Who would have guessed I would end up the biggest Obama fan on the board?


I would have been right with you up until a month or so ago. Not a BIGFAN of the tire fires he is starting for the next President...

_________________
Reality is your friend, not your enemy. -- Seacrest


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2017 12:09 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2011 7:56 am
Posts: 32234
Location: A sterile, homogeneous suburb
pizza_Place: Pizza Cucina
long time guy wrote:
leashyourkids wrote:
Not that this should have any bearing on anything, but he is extremely likeable... and that's coming on the heels of two presidents who were also very likeable (personally) in their own unique ways.


Yes he is. I generally think he is a good guy that is ill suited for the cutthroat world of politics.


I agree, but I don't know if it's solely because he's nice. I think he's a big picture/academic/philosophical guy, which doesn't translate well to a position like president where you don't have absolute authority. It might work for a CEO but not for a president. A president has to know exactly what he wants and do anything necessary to get it accomplished. He was "nice" but I also think he just didn't have that particular skill set. He seemed to be so "big picture" that, unlike MANY others, I wasn't a big fan of his speeches. He was a great orator, but he spoke too much in generalities while the seals in the audience would clap. Bill Clinton's speech at the 2012 DNC was better than anything I've ever heard Obama give because it had actual, specific substance.

_________________
Curious Hair wrote:
I'm a big dumb shitlib baby


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2017 12:11 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 9:10 am
Posts: 31948
Nas wrote:
long time guy wrote:
Nas wrote:
long time guy wrote:
leashyourkids wrote:
Not sure about history, but I will view him as a guy who initially seemed to run for office because it's "what he was supposed to do." After he gave the speech in 2004 at the DNC, it was basically his turn. I don't think he ran with any particular set of ideals, as many on the Right have suggested. I don't believe he was a socialist or a white-hater. In fact, he never even really lived the "true" African-American experience (don't take that the wrong way). Great campaigner, articulate, easy to like, and good looking.

Once elected, it became clear that he was an academic who had to adjust to the world of realpolitik. Add to that the fact that Congress wasn't his biggest fan and not a lot got accomplished immediately.

While governing, he did little to make drastic change. His signature legislation is anything but "progressive" and, as mentioned, he continued drone strikes and attacks on American citizens without due process. The executive order thing is overblown. FDR had 6 times as many executive orders as any president in history. That doesn't mean I'm a fan of them; but that's not really a huge part of his legacy more than it is any other president.

While in office, he certainly held the position with dignity and class and, IMO, was a great representative of America to the rest of the world.

In summary, he was an academic with very few ideals who did not accomplish a lot but did hold the country together during the crisis he came into and held the office with a dignity that is about to be appreciated more than we could ever imagine on January 20th.


I agree with this. I didn't see him as the "imperial" President as much as I saw him as a person great at equivocating an argument but terrible at problem solving. That is the primary reason that he was great on the stump but terrible at governing.

I also fault African Americans for failing to hold him accountable. I am actually interested in how black "leaders" will view his Presidency now that he is out of office. There was a reluctance to criticize him for anything but I wonder if that will change now that he is out of office.


I don't and never will. They should have done more to help.


I voted for him twice not so much because I thought that he'd be a good President as much as I didn't want to miss out on History. 2nd time was a little tougher but I was dealing with a woman that was planning to holdout if I didn't vote for him. Really didn't have an excuse since the polling place was right across the street from the crib. I would have voted for him anyway but the extra push didn't necessarily hurt the cause either.


I definitely worked and voted for him the first time primarily because he was black. I don't apologize for it either. I thought he would try to live up to the expectations he set during his 2nd term because he wouldn't have to worry about reelection. While he was somewhat better his 2nd term I am overall disappointed in the job he has done. He paid lip service to the disadvantaged but routinely screwed them to get deals done. Every real budget cut included things that the lower class needed.



The main reason that I never felt passionately about him was because I never thought that he'd fight for the impoverished. That belief was based upon his history of doing so. His professional history had never demonstrated that he would. I also thought that he lacked experience and didn't have any real accomplishments as a politician.

He didn't have to be the Civil Rights President but he should have been more attentive to the concerns of African Americans and more specifically people living in poverty. He never took the lead on anything. You never knew what his real passions happened to be. His coolness and aloofness served him well with getting elected but it didn't help with governing.

The argument regarding the 1% is also a rebuke of Obama's Presidency also but people have as of yet not applied it directly to him.

_________________
The Hawk wrote:
This is going to reach a head pretty soon.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 123 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 23 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group