This brought a big smile. A BIG smile!
One sunny day in January 2013 an old man approached the White House from across Pennsylvania Avenue, where he’d been sitting on a park bench. He spoke to the U.S. Marine standing guard and said, “I would like to go in and meet with President Obama.”
The Marine looked at the man and said, “Sir, Mr. Obama is no longer president and no longer resides here.”
The old man said, “Okay”, and walked away.
The following day, the same man approached the White House and said to the same Marine, “I would like to go in and meet with President Obama.”
The Marine again told the man, “Sir, as I said yesterday, Mr. Obama is no longer president and no longer resides here.”
The man thanked him and, again, just walked away.
The third day, the same man approached the White House and spoke to the very same U.S. Marine, saying “I would like to go in and meet with President Obama.”
The Marine, understandably agitated at this point, looked at the man and said, “Sir, this is the third day in a row you have been here asking to speak to Mr. Obama. I’ve told you already that Mr. Obama is no longer the president and no longer resides here. Don’t you understand?”
The old man looked at the Marine and said,
“Oh, I understand. I just love hearing it.”
The Marine snapped to attention, saluted, and said,
“See you tomorrow, Sir.”
Trackbacks
Comments are closed.
Wow, there was a time when being conservative meant valuing social stability. Granted, this is meant as humor, and it does bring a smile. But let’s not overlook that the moral to this tale is disturbingly anti-conservative. The serious whispered message behind the humor — that the military should relish the end of this presidency — is more worthy of unstable non-democracies like Pakistan or Myanmar than the U.S.
I imagine that William F. Buckley would permit himself a very faint smile, and then admonish the author of this joke.
I’m presuming by your comment that you are an Obamabot? This slimy Marxist is attempting everything to destroy this nation and its Constitution. See how well you do in the “idealized” nation it would create. It will be nothing but JOY when this thing is no longer in the big chair. O
samabama must go.Hey, I love that, it makes me smile also.
As far as Center Square goes, he/she/it does NOT know what a conservative is or was in classical terms. I won’t waste my time on educating people, there is Metacrawler for that.
Setting up a straw man and burning it down is a fool’s errand. Red herrings as well.
Anyways, I told ya over at the Rott that I’d get in touch. Shoot me an e-mail and we can get on the phone soon. I really hate this e-mail and comment stuff, I prefer ta hear voice inflections. More clear and concise, and definitely a more rapid exchange.
Plus, I type SLOWLY…
(My e-mail should be logged with you now.)
Laters, my friend…
I would love hearing that, too…a LOT.
Good one, CM – the dude up there is obviously an Obamabot and undoubtedly has never served this country in uniform. Absolutely the majority of our soldiers would be very happy to see this idiot out of the office. He is no more a CINC than Hillary is a supermodel.
BTW – did you get my e-mail? Looking for some good bloggers to do some guest posts.
Wow. Do you guys really believe that anyone who thinks it is a bad idea for the military to overthrow the duly elected government is an “Obamabot”? Are you sane?
I smiled as well. Just the thought of this usurper gone buoys my spirits.
Yeah I just can’t understand why a member of our military would be happy that an unrelenting marxist shit heel like the PUS would no longer be in charge. After all he dithered six months while he pondered the political (to him) ramifications of actually winning the war in Afghanistan. Then screwed the pooch by declaring preemptive surrender and announcing that the war ends July 2011 whether the Taliban and al-qaeda like it or not. I wonder if they will comply?
Or the fact that he was at least toying with the idea of our troops mirandizing(advising of constitutional rights) to people who wish to see the constitution overturned. I guess that last bit appeals to the PUS as he is looking to do that on a daily basis. This while prosecuting a team of Navy seals for giving a known terrorist a fat lip.
Or the fact that when the slanderer in chief was accusing, along with the rest of his anti-American party, the military of torture and violation of “civil rights” of people who are afforded no such privilege under the laws of war or Geneva. The only reason this is even being discussed is because of the tortured logic used by the socialist wing of the SCOTUS plus. A suit that was brought up by lawyers just like the current joke AG Eric Holder in which the SCOTUS really had no jurisdiction, the conduct of war.
As for social cohesion Blake said it well but as always I will add something. Obama tears social cohesion down every day with his racialist, pro-invasion anti-American bilge. He has made it clear that he will enforce the law arbitrarily and to the benefit of his cronies and those he considers fellow travelers. It is this dichotomy that allows this despot to prosecute our soldiers under UCMJ but give the full panoply of protections to those trying to kill them. He will prosecute the Klan(if it still exists) for racial intimidation of voters and advance fictitious notions of the racism of his opponents(tea party, conservatives) but dismiss a conviction of the New Black Panther Party for intimidation of white voters and ignore the violence of his purple shirted thugs in SEIU.
And as for turning Obama out in 2013 we have these little events every 2-4 years called elections. You might want to read a book a learn about such things. That is what free societies do. We have had two one term presidents in the last 6 elected. The society didn’t melt down. As a matter of fact there was an orderly transition that a civilised people can accomplish. However with the arbitrary nature of the ruling junta and the febrile ranting of their acolytes I’ m not so sanguine of that outcome if Obama is defeated. Everyone her know the howls of racism will be deafening. They are now when the guy is criticized.
As for what Mr Buckley would think, since he fought for 50 years to stop just this type of government intrusion and blame America first mentality, I”m sure he would smirk slyly and give this joke some polite golf applause.
Center Square, did you notice the “date” on that joke? January 2013. That means that it was voted out of office. You must be a liberal, or you would have noticed that small feature right at the beginning. “OMG, TEH WON™ isn’t appreciated as a Holy Godhead”. Have you paid no attention to what’s been happening to the markets, for but one example? He is a COMMUNIST with every intention of destroying this nations free market economy, and his group of minions and he are doing a pretty damn good job. We may only hope to repair the damage once they’re gone. I pray we’re not so fucked up as to have to start from ground zero like we did in that little unpleasantness 234 years ago.
As for my thinking the military should overthrow this government? Not all of them. We should have enough left to operate a Democratic Republic until such time as we can replace the traitors removed. You see, there’s this OATH about protecting the Constitution from ALL enemies, foreign AND DOMESTIC! And that illegal alien shitpuddle in DC has directly said he wants to make the Constitution different, tear it up and start again. That, right there, should have instantly voided his run. But too many “Dancing With The Stars” addicts paid no attention. When he and “Joe the plumber” got into their first discussion, and he said “redistribute the wealth”, that should have been a clue.
I’ve got others, as do most of my readers. Hey y’all, want a chew-toy?
Center Square,
Are you dense? 2013 is the year that a new President would take office after a constitutionally mandated election. At no point does the article mention, advocate or condone a military overthrow of the government. It is understood by sentient life forms that an election has taken place and Obama has lost.
Take your rampant paranoia about right wing death squads and military coups and file them with the myths of how great things will be in the marxist Utopia Muga… uh… I mean Obama wishes to impose upon us.
We are the ones who are looking to restore the constitutional order.
My god man look around you. The only ones perpetrating a coup is the regime versus the American people. i.e. the 70% that don’ t constitute his true believing fellow travelers.
Just because a despot(through prevarication and obfuscation) gets elected through democratic means doesn’t make him him amenable to democracy. Obama like Chavez in Venezuela wishes to use the patina of a democratic election to institute patently un- democratic reforms and curtail God given rights in order to satisfy his re-distributionist desires.
He uses the power of government to steal property to give to an ever burgeoning underclass which votes but does not contribute to the public fisc. Gee I can’t understand why those of us who are actually net tax payers would be happy this re-distributionist anti-American yahoo would be defeated in 2012, not in the least.
If your offended by this you are either an Obamabot, Canadian or David Frum.
fxpcpa, that was excellent. He’s all yours brother.
Hey great minds think alike. My next post mirrors your response somewhat. I was typing it and the next thing I know you had already said it.
And thank you.
Center Square – I looked again at what has been stated here in the post and the comment section – still trying to figure out where you got the idea that one of us said our military should overthrow our government. Again, obvious proof you have never served our country nor do you understand the minds of our military.
CM was correct in his response to you with regards to the ability of our military to do so on the basis of their oath of service to defend and protect our country against all enemies foreign and domestic. This administration and Teh One are obvious domestic enemies as they consistently trash this country, our military, and our constitution. Never in the history of this country have we had a communist such as this lead our country. If you can’t see what he has done – then you are indeed an Obamabot.
The thing is – our military won’t ever attempt an overthrow of our government. However, if there were a civil revolution against this administration – I’m also sure they would not fire upon the citizens either because of their oath.
I think fxpcpa put you in your place eloquently enough – me – I wouldn’t have said all of that as nicely…bottom line for me – you are an idiot for a.) not understanding or getting the fact this is a joke, b.) not realizing this takes place AFTER the election, and c.) because you are a freakin’ moron for buying in to this marxist bullshit coming from a poseur POTUS.
To all my fans here, of course I understood the joke. Understood that it was after the next election and all that. I even find the joke funny, if anyone cares to know that.
This has nothing to do with support or opposition to Obama. I reacted to the idea that the military personnel who guard our leaders should express such political preferences. I assure you, I would have posted the exact same comment had this joke been dated 2009 about President Bush, or 1853 about Zachary Taylor. All of those who took my comment as a pro-Obama, or anti-anti-Obama, are mistaken.
Further, I would have had no comment at all had the one character in the joke not been a Marine. If it were, say, some lady who manages the White House tourism office, then no problem.
Maybe you don’t recall or know about the assassination of Indira Ghandi in 1984. She was killed by her own bodyguards. She was the duly elected President of a stable democracy, the world’s largest. At this moment, people in at least fifteen countries live under repressive regimes following military-led coups d’etat. Our President, and all of our elected leaders, live in the constant presence of men with live ammunition in their guns. It is a sobering thought.
Do I think that’s going to happen in the US? No. Nor do I think it could be sparked by a little joke anywhere. But as people spew forth their anti-Obama invective (or anti-Bush invective in years past, for that matter), I suggest they remember that the greatness of our nation rests on our long history of social order and stability. A deeply conservative principle.
[Sidebar-- Try this: Copy this part of the text: "The Marine looked at the man and said, “Sir, Mr. Obama is no longer president and no longer resides here;” paste it into google; change "Obama" to "Bush;" and see what comes up. Then try Clinton. This joke apparently has been around a long time. Remember: the armed Marine guarding the White House might just harbor a hatred of YOUR guy in 2013.]
Again with the concept of “social stability”. What the hell does that even mean in this context. Obama has been the enemy of social stability his whole adult life from the time he was a rabble rousing “community organizer”, to the time he instituted a law suit on behalf of ACORN to advance the the loaning of money under the Community Re-Investment Act which led eventually to the current economic crisis as two government entities collapsed because of these sub-standard undocumented loans, to befriending a known unrepentant terrorist, to sitting in a church listening to crackpot liberation theologist. Liberation theology being the ultimate in challenging “social stability”
Does he look like a champion of social stability when he ignores the rule of law and defames and refuses to protect citizens of the country he was elected to lead in favor of a veritable army of invaders. Does he look like an agent of social stability when he stands up and categorically lies about a bill that will control a sixth of the economy and will dislocate the preferred arrangements of 90% of the populace so he can afford a middle class lifestyle to the indigent whose votes he buys with such largess.
This man has been an agent of social disintegration his whole adult life and you think that enjoying the idea that this despot, tin pot tyrant wanna be will be a one term President is the genesis of the decline of “social stability”. That’s fatuous on it’s face. Criticizing your adversaries and taking a little pleasure in denying them their goals, especially goals as perverted and anathema to the American way of life, is our right as citizens. It is not a sign of social instability to be able to criticize those you disagree with. As a matter of fact what would increase social instability would be if Obama got his ostensible wish and was able to stifle his critics. He is a paranoid, narcissistic sociopath who doesn’t have the ability to advance his “brilliant” agenda even though he has been proclaimed the greatest speaker since William Jennings Bryan. He can’t advance his agenda through logic and facts so he has to use subterfuge and political thuggery. Does this sound like a paragon of social stability. Oh and by the way the social stability that Obama would impose once he is done tearing down the current society would yoke you like an oxen in the service of the state so he would be able to deliver on his raison d’ etre of establishing “social justice” to his preferred constituencies. As is the case with all socialist shitholes you would be yoked to Obama. But even that stability would be illusory as there is no more unstable government than a dictatorship.
A healthy give and take including criticism (without being threatened with being silenced by the government)of the ruling party is the sign of a healthy, self confident society. Look at all the bad actors in the world. They shut down the very thing enshrined in our organic law. These are societies of fear(Natan Sharansky) and are inherently fragile as they know they lag behind nations that protect the basic rights of citizens. They cannot stand the scrutiny of a free and inquiring people. I have a feeling neither can Obama or the ruling NDSWP.
This country has had two one term presidents in the last 34 years and when those two were ousted because of their gross ineptitude society didn’ t revert to a lord of the flies state of nature did it?
You’re precious social stability will be best preserved when this man leaves the Oval Office…permanently.
CS, it is not “political preference”. It is the preservation of our Constitution from one whose stated aim is to destroy it. He is an outspoken enemy of this nation, and proves it nearly every day. There are Democrats more conservative than many Republicans. Were one of those offered, a true JFKennedy grade (NOT JF’inKerry sort) Dem, I’d vote for him/her. The modern DemonCRAP bunch are socialists, and that just won’t do.
Oh, Obama had the guards disarmed. When he spoke at the Naval Academy graduation he would not allow a part of the uniform, the cadet’s swords, to be worn. As an example of him knowing what he’s doing, and realizing the potential consequences.
VERY well said BoBo.
fxpcpa, EXCELLENT! You are far more eloquent than I. I tip my hat.
I see that my linkage of military involvement in politics to social instability has fallen on deaf ears. Which is precisely my point.
It’s not politics CS, it’s treason. There’s a difference. You obviously don’t understand the difference. Those who voted for them have been dumbed down to the point of incomprehension, or it was their purpose to support what he’s doing. That’s all. Were he simply a liberal following his concept through the guidelines of the Constitution, that would be one thing. His stated intent to rewrite it is something else.
Again, thank you, you make my point. Here we have the duly elected president doing exactly as he campaigned to do. There is no political leader on the national stage with as much support as Obama. And that is labeled as treason?? Wow. I didn’t come here to defend Obama, but to make the point that your attitude is exactly how military insurrections against lawful government get started.
Center Square,
In case you didn’t notice, my first response to your misapprehension of the above parable enumerated 3 or 4 reasons why a military may prefer a change in leadership.
However your premise of a military coup by the US Military is fatuous and a slap in the face of all those who serve, served or will serve. Those who have made the military their career understand the concept of civilian audit and control of the military and try and affect change in their boss in the same way as any other citizen does; they vote. That is when the party of Obama allows their votes to be counted.
The military, by any number of opinion polls, prefer Republicans/ conservatives by a wide margin. But you never hear of the military openly carping about policies they consider detrimental as the Slanderer in Chiefs(as enumerated before)clearly are. As a matter of fact from what I understand politicking openly is verboten under the UCMJ and the only ones who seem to violate this maxim are those who hold the same view as the PUS and have given a pass for fear of the propanganda media from declaring the dark night of facism(under Bush).
The military actually has less say in who they work for than the PUS’s purple shirted thugs who populate the SEIU(government workers union). And boy aren’t they the vanguard of social stability.
Those in the military understand the rule of law(which bodes well for your precious “social stability”) far better than the regime does, as the regime acts in a lawless fashion daily. The military understands they have two options, click their heels, salute smartly and carry out the orders or resign their commission and work against what has manifested itself as an anti-American junta.
Oh and a couple questions. Since you think that enjoying the legal demise of a politcal hack some how paves the way for social turmoil, do you also believe that the outward expression of islamists hateful rhetoric spurs on so called normal muslims to take up the jihad? Do you think that the PUS’s overtly racialist invective and contempt for the citizens of Arizona attempt to protect themselves from invasion doesn’t contribute to breakdown of social cohesion? These are much clearer attempts at destroying the social fabric than a Marine happy with a legal change at the top.
CS. Most of the people that voted for the MFCSPOSCiC had not the first clue of what they were voting for. A handsome young mulatto that seemed to speak well. That’s all they knew. They had not the first clue as to what he was actually saying. Which, by the way, was not a God-damned thing concrete. Lots of fluff, nothing of substance. And then the unemployment rate continued to rise. The stock market began to crash. With Shrub, a 5% unemployment was horrendous, with Odumbo 10%+ is all Shrubs fault. A few things about W were good, not by any means all. The bowing and scraping of this puke to our enemies makes us the laughing stock of the Earth. We have people that want us dead, don’t you understand that? The only way you get them to leave us alone is the fear that we WILL destroy them. Them, their families, their countryside. To reassure them that they’ll be looking like charismatic Pentecostals, raising their hands to the sky if they want to bow to Mecca. Our Constitution is the very fabric of this nation, and Odipshit wants to destroy it. The removal of this POS would be not a coup but a preservation of the nation and the Constitution.
But the JOKE that started this entire foofooraw was the rejoicing in its being gone AFTER THE ELECTION! At no time was there an inference of a military coup. Where did that come from?
fxpcpa, this particular individual seems, somehow, to be doing nothing more than giving US thought and polishing our thoughts, that we may present valid arguments should we be confronted. I begin to believe that he/she is merely playing “devils advocate” to push us into presenting those points we must provide in the election cycle.
Pop quiz:
(1) Which political figure made this statement? “We need immigration reform that will secure our borders, and punish employers who exploit immigrant labor.”
(2) Which political figure made this statement? “I think that if they are illegal, then they should not be able to work in this country.”
(3) How many jobs were created or lost in the U.S. economy in 2008? In 2009? So far in 2010?
(4) How much did the wealth of all Americans increase or decrease in 2008? In 2009? So far in 2010?
(5) According to the Office of Management and Budget, how much will the federal deficit increase in FY 2010 versus FY 2009? How about FY 2011 versus FY 2010?
(6) What percentage of the increase in the federal deficit for FY 2009 was due to spending increases? What percentage was due to tax reductions?
(7) How much did the federal deficit increase in FY 2009 versus FY 2008 — the last fiscal year before Obama? How much has it increased in FY 2010 versus FY 2009 — Obama’s first?
Changing the subject, are we? fx? I’m sure you’ve got more answers than merely “doubled the debt in less than 90 days”. Oh, and the number appears to be “doubles each year”.
See, that’s part of the problem right there. “Doubled the debt in less than 90 days”? Hardly. Federal debt in Obama’s first fiscal year increased by 8.9%. That is from Jun 30, 2009 ($11.9 trillion) to Apr 30, 2010 ($12.9 trillion). By comparison, it rose 18.8% the prior year, and 11.3% the year before that, if you’re interested in that information. Well, it rose those largers amounts even if you’re not interested in that information.
But extremists put forth rhetoric that he “doubled the debt in less than 90 days,” and that under Obama the debt “doubles each year.” Remember, it takes only one armed person close to the president to believe these lies and cause a national crisis.
Here is the actual data on the federal debt, if you care to be informed: http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/histdebt/histdebt.htm.
Believe what you will. The fact remains all this vehemence began with a joke about relief the communist was no longer in power. Sensitive, are we?
I don’t know what you mean, “believe.” Facts are not believed, they are either known, or not known.
At any rate, I know that this group and I cannot engage in any meaningful dialogue. It did inspire a posting on my site, though, if you’re interested: http://thecentersquare.wordpress.com/2010/05/24/right-wing-political-discourse/.
My best to each of you.
Center Square,
If you had any thing meaningful to say we would certainly engage in a discussion. You throw out false premises like military coups and that the whole of american society will collapse if Obama isn’t accorded a second term or if we find humor in the fact this tin pot dictator wanna be is turned out of office by legitimate,legal means.
Multiple recent examples were given as to why your febrile delusion is ridiculous and instead of addressing them you just restate your risible premise. Repetition isn’t an argument it’s stubborness. Then when your foolishness about military coups was addressed again and I tried to gauge what you think about events that really do strike at the fabric of society not only don”t you answer. You go off and spout economic statistics that are such a non sequitir that they aren’t worth addressing in this forum. The one piece of economic information that Mr Blake adavnced was categorically true the unemployement rate under Bush was 5% at it’s best and didn’t get above 6.5% even during the depths of the recession that Bush inherited from Clinton. Meanwhile after Obama has implemented his economy saving measures the economy goes directly in the crapper with unemployment rising to 10% over the last year. The reason businesses are afraid to hire is that they are afraid Obama is going to step in again.
So because someone confuses the national debt(sorry for the rough segue) with the budget deficit which with porkulus Obama did double, you are gonna get all uppity on us. Ok so I lied about not addressing it. Quite frankly I don’t think your hero Obama knows the difference either; that one is current and one is culmulative. BTW Mr. Center Square 12.8 trillion is just the on the books stuff. By proper accounting standards they should also be consolidating the losses accumulated by GM, FNMA and FHLMC as the Fed either controls them or bears the risk of loss. But, of course, the Fed exempts itself from the rule it places on everyone else and Obama while not responsible for this isn’t about to change it. Plus if you add in the unfunded liabilties of SS and medicare(weren’t the new deal ans the great scoiety grand?) it’s closer to 75-100 trillion which if you were an SEC filer you would have to disclose. This also doesn’t include the massive new debt that Obama saddles us with once Obamacare it takes full effect. A program whose costs were hidden and juggled so the NDSWP could fool themselves and there synchphants in the press that they were actually going to reduce the budget deficit and consequently the national debt. Of course their own actuaries found 115 billion in new costs over the next 10 years and that was supposed to be the net saving. Isn’t that funny. It’s also funny that they are using ten years of revenue to fund six years of benefits. I guess then the next decade after the 1st decade of Obamacare will be 16yrs long, hunh. If an SEC filer did that they would be shut down and their officers would be prosecuted.
Meanwhile, Obama and the NDSWP congress plan to let the tax cuts expire and add more taxes on top of that to dampen the economy even more which stagnates revenue to the treasury creating and even bigger deficit/debt.
After all I just cited, yeah, Obama is a regular Ebeneezer Scrooge when it come to looking after a buck. Considering all the economic havoc that Obama and his cronies are causing that’s another reason to be happy about his defeat in 2012.
Okay, I’ll take you at your word, and assume you do wish to have an honest debate. I will post in several comments to keep this organized. Please be patient.
(1) Military coup: I never stated, nor do I believe, that there will be a military coup if Obama is not reelected. What I meant was that there is a particular brand of political discourse that serves to undermine the legitimacy of our constitutional government. That joke portrays a whiff of that brand of discourse by suggesting the satisfaction that a military officer felt that Obama (or Clinton, or Bush, in earlier incarnations of the same joke) was done serving. The joke isn’t dangerous. I believe I presented that fairly in my comments.
(2) Social stability: Look at the terminology used in this thread to describe our duly elected president:
“attempting everything to destroy this nation and its Constitution” — “usurper” — “unrelenting marxist shit heel like the PUS” — “slanderer in chief” — “his anti-American party” — “the ruling junta” — “a COMMUNIST with every intention of destroying this nations free market economy” — “replace the traitors” — “that illegal alien shitpuddle in DC” — “The only ones perpetrating a coup is the regime versus the American people” — “despot” — “like Chavez in Venezuela” — “obvious domestic enemies as they consistently trash this country, our military, and our constitution” — “if there were a civil revolution against this administration – I’m also sure they would not fire upon the citizens” — “the enemy of social stability” — “ignores the rule of law” — “agent of social disintegration” — “tin pot tyrant” — “stated aim is to destroy [the Constitution]” — “an outspoken enemy of this nation” — “handsome young mulatto.”
These comments go beyond dissent. They indicate a mindset that he is not our legitimate, rightful president. That is evidence of social instability. Perhaps you should address this directly: Is Obama our duly elected president, constitutionally voted into office and the legitimate officeholder of the presidency?
(3) Economic progress: Let’s go through the pieces.
(3a) Jobs: All through 2007 and 2008 and into early 2009, the economy shed jobs at a faster and faster rate, as the economy sunk further into recession. By the time we hit Jan 2009 and Obama took office, job losses had reached more than 750,000 per month. Almost immediately after Obama took office, they began to shrink. Finally, a year later, the pendulum had swung enough that the economy was producing more jobs than it lost. April 2010 was a gain of 300,000 jobs, mostly in the private sector. This was famously presented by Rachel Maddow a while back in what has become called the “bikini graph.” Here is that data: http://obama.3cdn.net/d9d98835a020fb2394_6bm6bx3yb.pdf.
Do I believe that Obama policies magically began reversing those job losses the minute he took office? No. But I do believe it is impossible to make the argument that he has failed to address the jobs crisis in America. I think it empirically demonstrates that the jobs crisis was the result of the recession before he took office, and that the direction has been positive during his administration.
Yes, it took the unemployment rate a year to crest. That is because job losses continued during his first year. But they did get progessively smaller and smaller, until finally the pendulum swung over to the other side and the economy began adding jobs again a couple of months ago.
What would anyone have wished would go better than it did since early 2009?
(3) Economic progress:
(3b) Economic growth: The economy was severely contracting in 2007, 2008, and through the first half of 2009. Since then, it has resumed its growth. Here is the data: http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/national/gdp/gdp_glance.htm.
This is failure? Again, what would have constituted good enough performance in your mind?
(3) Economic progress:
(3c) Financial markets: Since hitting their low point shortly after Obama took office, in March 2009, the equity markets have risen more than 75%. See the data here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:DJIA_2000s_graph_(log).svg. This improvement has added approximately $4 trillion to the net worth of Americans.
(4) Fiscal policy: This is the one area where I think Obama’s track record is decidely mixed. While it is nowhere near the calamity that your crowd may think, there are dangers out there that I’d like to see Obama deal with more forcefully.
The first thing to understand is that the grotesque deficits and debt accumulation happening here are a continuation of the fiscal condition that Obama inherited. I know the far right wing doesn’t want to hear that, but it’s true.
Remember that the FY which ended Jun 30, 2009, over which Obama had almost no influence, posted a deficit of $1.4 trillion. The year before, the deficit was $458 billion. The increase in the deficit happened because federal receipts went down by $419 billion and expenditures went up by $535 billion. The nation was in full-blown rampaging deficit mode by the end of 2008 — most months being $150 billion to $200 billion the hole. That is where Obama STARTED. Those facts are indisputable. See data here: http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts/displayafact.cfm?Docid=200.
Granted Obama has made no favorable progress. But despite the severe recession, he hasn’t let them get worse either. In fact, it is remarkable that he managed to stop the recession dead in its tracks and turn around, with essentially no change in the deficit. And the forecast for the coming years is favorable. Now that the economy is growing again, the deficit is forecast to be $289 billion less in FY 2011; another $438 billion less in FY 2012; and another $102 billion less in FY 2013. I don’t place much faith in those estimates. But I also don’t put much faith in the completely unsubstantiated doomsday scenarios the “he’s a Marxist” crowd subscribes to.
I rate fiscal policy under Obama a draw.
Okay, that’s it for now. Agree or disagree, I will defend to my last breath that I am not an “Obamabot,” that his performance has been okay to good in most areas, that my positions are well documented with facts and analysis, and that the deeply racist and personal invective against him that his been presented here is just plain wrong. Un-American, even.
Thanks for listening, if in fact that’s what happens here.
Not at all. The complete misleading of the initial response was the conflict implied. But thanks for playing. I might point out that the Congress, the people actually in charge of the spending, had been in Dem control since 2006. POTUS, R or D, has very little control over the spending. And Shrub was only sort of an R.
Oooo! 37 comments so far! I went to CS‘s site, and read his post that linked to this. Sure enough, his purpose was provocation. My response there, so it doesn’t get deleted into the void of forgetfulness:
The attempt to sound sincere on his part was amusing.
I could have rifled through all the chatter, but I only have this to say…
Lawful governments do not discard the same US Constitution that the US Military is sworn to uphold. It happens to be the job of the US Military to seize and desist any US government that is found to be in violation of the US Constitution.
Precisely the purpose of the OATH!
“In fact, it is remarkable that he managed to stop the recession dead in its tracks and turn around, with essentially no change in the deficit.”
Wait…what? Somehow I think you’ve forgotten something…like the truckload of expenditures that Obama has been put off to the next president. Your mathematics are as flawed as those of the CBO and the rest of the remedial course flunkies in Washington.
Remarkable is what Reagan did to inspire capitalism and not just stop Carter’s blunders.
Running over seas to every subversive and troubled nation in order to throw America and her people under the bus is not remarkable.
Spending hundreds of billions of alleged stimulus monies on marsh mice, lobsters and wind mills is not remarkable.
Cherry picking Obama supporting states for selective stimulus funding is not remarkable.
Sending monies to fake districts that do not exist is not remarkable.
Losing $350 billion of TARP monies is not remarkable with little other explanation than the bailing out foreign banks.
Penalizing those who have learned to succeed by supporting the US economy via job growth is not remarkable.
What’s truly remarkable is that this idiot president has ANY support in spite of the monthly increase in jobless claims, the increase in racial divisions within America, the increase in the amount of Americans who will pay no taxes at all, the security threats against our home land security due to wide open borders, the infiltration into our government and our society of the very socialist ideology that generations of Americans have fought and died to prevent in abroad, etc. The list goes on and on.
What’s remarkable is that there are so many Americans in this country who have yet to understand how this same progressive mind set will land the entire United States of America in the same latrine that many of our states like California, Michigan, etc. are current finding themselves.
What’s remarkable is that the last time the conservatives held congressional power, the unemployment rate was…4.9%. Then the Democrats took over in 2006.
Yes, I place all of the current recession at the feet of the Democrat’s socialistic ideology from which the “moderate” Republicans were so spineless that they could summon up little more than to raise a thimble full of token resistance.
Our greatest generation is leaving us and with them the true values that made the United States the envy of every eye from every foreign square foot of real estate around the world.
What are we doing to thank them for the sacrifice they made and the examples they set?
We are throwing them and their values away without so much as the salute that they rightfully deserve. In fact, we are destroying their hard earned pensions and retirement savings in order to give it away to those who choose not to participate in the America that made us great, but rather the America that prefers the protests of “what about me” over patience, perseverance and hard work.
Center Square…YOU (and people like you) are what’s wrong with this country.
Shit, man…sorry for the hijacking. Libtard got me a little riled.
Party on, G. Party on. Did you check his site? And your comment was superb!
“It happens to be the job of the US Military to seize and desist any US government that is found to be in violation of the US Constitution.”
Exactly my point. Thank you, Grackle. Can (some in) this group drop the pretense that they accept the legitimacy of this presidency? You don’t. Have the courage of your convictions. Just say it.
Dude, I accept his legitimacy as president as he was elected under Constitutional Law. I haven’t a clue whether his birth in this country is true or not, but it doesn’t really matter to me at this point.
I do not accept…
The radical appointments, and subsequent approval by a puppet Congress, of unqualified personnel to cabinet posts.
The unconstitutional appointment of various czars given similar powers as cabinet members without congressional approval.
The buying off of members of Congress by promise, accusation and threat.
Encouraging Congress to circumvent Constitutional Law to smash through dangerous and careless legislation for little other purpose than to leave a destructive mark on this country by, and I’m fairly certain of his goals here, economic racism.
The legitimizing of illegal aliens for the sole purpose of winning the next election. Just wait, this one will become the next step in our undoing.
The backdoor deals, the blatent lies and manipulation of US law.
But mostly, the attempts to criminalize of the people’s rights in his attempts to ignore, destroy and render weakness to the first ten amendments to the US Constitution.
He was elected, as far as we know, legally under the same US Constitution that he seeks to ignore, render useless and quite possibly destroy.
THIS is my objection. What you liberals fail to understand is that this president’s reign will end and the next president will rule under the same manner. Your kind will object mightily without considering that it was your kind that allowed it to persist.
You reap what you sow…and the pendulum will swing the other way.
Sadly, we are witnessing our own demise, if we don’t rise up and find a way to stop this nonsense.
Right, I’ll say it then. While he may have been fairly elected, he is not legitimate. He is a dual citizen, not a natural born citizen, as his father was/is a British subject. Whether he was actually born in this country or not, which we do not know due to nearly $2M spent on lawyers to hide everything back to his kindergarten records, the fact remains that not BOTH of his parents were American citizens. For that matter, even though John McCain’s were, he was born on foreign soil. Downtown, not on the base. But, SCOTUS heard his case and he was approved as qualifying. Obama, however, never stood that same review. Same as how he got his opponent disqualified in Illinois, he tried the same for POTUS. Happy? And before you squawk about that not being in the Constitution read the Federalist Papers and Vattel’s Law Of Nations. This would have been the Founders intent.
Since he was elected, there he is. Unless SCOTUS decides to invoke that, which I highly doubt. A bit late now to go for the Art 2, sec 1, para 5 disqualification of candidacy. What we must do now is keep very close track and establish a plan to repair all the fascist destruction to our society he and his minions are creating.
Actually, no. But I just got done explaining that to CS.
I’m guessing we are still smacking this pinata.
Yes, Obama was legitimately elected and inso far as that grants legitimacy it was fine. But remember Chavez was democratically elected and has used the patina of that legitimacy to force any number of un-democratic reforms on the subjects of Venezuela. Reforms that many in the ruling regime of this country openly admire.There is an old saying in marxist circles, one man, one vote, one time. They use the democratic system to essentially dismantle the democratic system.
Legitimacy is obtained by democratic provenance, it is maintained by the adherance to the the rule of law. When the government refuses to execute it’s clearly mandated responsibilties it ceases to be legitimate. When it passes legislation that it, by reference to the organic law,has no right to pass it loses it’s legitmacy.When the government allows input from a foreign body(UN) to make US law it loses it’s legitimacy. When it supports a foreign corrupt head of state whos has a vested interest in exporting his problems to our shores and supports that leader in his condemnation of our country he ceases to be legitimate. When members of the government make false equivalencies with some of the most brutal regimes ever to grace the planet they cease to be legitimate.
I could go on and on but I will leave it at that for now.
In an earlier post you decried some of the epithets used in this thread, one was anti-American after again citing examples of how Teh Ones agenda actually do cut against American interests and values. How can you in all honesty think that stating the truth incites your amorphous concept of social instabiltiy when the PUS demagouges about potential racism and supports the racialist sentiments of a third world kleptocrat. There are others you mentioned that can be fully substantiated and have been. Meanwhile the PUS and his cronies demean, demonize and insult the American citizenry on a daily basis and that certainly detracts from “social stability” and diminishes his legitmacy. His legitmacy is eroded because of the actions and policies he he supports and enacts.
Thank you for the additional clarifications here, cmblake and fxpcpa. Personally, I think the citizenship issue is complete bullshit. And I think that fxpcpa’s concerns, while carrying a higher level of factual veracity, are the sorts of things that the extreme opposition says about every president.
Example: Supports a corrupt foreign head of state? — Saudi Arabia? Nicaragua? El Salvador? Iran (pre-revolution)? Cuba (also pre-revolution). I.e., hasn’t that been a constant since, like, forever? If every president who does that — even accepting your premise regarding Obama and Mexico — is illegitimate, then are there any legitimate presidents?
Same reasoning goes for the United Nations and holding forth with brutal regimes. No modern president passes such a legitimacy test.
I have never been comfortable with the realpolitik concept of “he may be a bastard but he’s our bastard” because it does open up the possibilty of the sophists screaming “hypocrisy”. As you’ve basically just done.
Of course you left out the differential to our supporting other thugs in that other Presidents would not allow our client to come to our shores and address our congress, blasting us for closing his social and economic safety valve while nodding like a bobblehead doll in agreement and members of his party giving standing approbation to a man who presides over an immigration policy orders of magnitude harsher than the treatment his subjects receive here. The same foreign leader whose government has printed pamphlets on how to sneak across the border and not get caught. Obama and his party spat in the face of the American people who wish their government to enforce the rule of law and advance their legitimate concerns not take the side of an invading tide of humanity.
As for aquiesence to the UN there are international progressives in both parties but none have kowtowed as much to UN legitimacy as the particular resident of the White House. I screamed loudly (although to myself when Bush went to the UN to try an obtain permission for us to defend ourselves. We don’t need therir permission.You declaim my use of the term PUS(short for UN Proconsul in Charge of the US, I know clumsy). That’s is how he rules as he tries to both economically,through the taxation and regulatory regime, and diplomatically by running every foreign policy decsion and action through the UN security council. He cares more for the opinion of the international elite than he does for the opinion of those he was elected to govern. His supplication to this unelected transnational body is un-precendented.
Oh and to address your charge of extremism. I am an extreme constitutionlist. I disagreed with GWB on medicare D, amnesty, dubai ports, no child left behind, garnering UN support for us defending ourselves as if the UN were some moral exemplar, calling Islam the religion of peace instead of the religion of submission and the concept of “compassionate consertvatism” in general which just means big government republicanism.
Blake if you wish me to discontinue please let me know.
Blake, the point wasn’t necessarily that I agree that its a legal election, because I think on many levels, this election is no less or no more dirty than any other.
I should have said that I simply accept the reults and been done with it.
As far as the citizenship thing goes, there is so much crap stuck to the walls and dripping from the ceiling over that very issue that it would be impossible for me to make any determination from my nose bleed seat in the rafters. If this ever does go to court, then there will surface a document that will appear legal to any judge in America regardless of legality or otherwise.
To me, its moot. I accpet the result and go forward. There are much larger items of concern for me, as I think you know.
fxpepa said:
” . . . and announcing that the war ends July 2011 whether the Taliban and al-qaeda like it or not”
You are aware that the ‘drawdown’ begins in July 2011. Not withdrawal. Drawdown. Obama sent an additoinal 30K troops in recently and we now have more soldiers in country than Bush EVER had.
Sounds like you guysj would like to hang around for yet another Vietnam. That’s an ugly thought and a horrific thing to wish on American soldiers. Guess we never learn.
Center Square,
One other point about your raising the ghost of despots past. Quite often in life it’s not a choice between good and bad but bad and worse(thank you to Dr V.D.Hanson for that phrase). While I may not be comfortable with the “he’s our bastard” philosophy can you honestly, with the benefit of hindsight, consider that Batista was worse than Castro, that the Park(?) Regime was worse than the Kim(Korea)regime, that Palavi was worse than Khomeni(Iran) or potentially the socialist Mossadeq(judging on what sociallism actually is)?
Meanwhile, by supporting Park(?)in Korea and Marcos(in the Phillipines) we were able to birth 2 relatively free and prosperous allies.
Reagan finally did it right in the ’80′s by actually playing both sides in the Iran/Iraq conflict bleeding 2 totalitarian shitholes white and using the proceeds to undercut the the vicious Sandinista regime in Nicaragua( really CS Ortega over Zamosa?). The only thing Reagan got for this amazing triple bank shot was congressional hearings conducted by intellectual fellow travelers of those who philosophically oppose us.
fxpcpa, party on! You’re doing very well indeed.
Moe, did you know that we were within 6 weeks of the NV total surrender when we snatched defeat from the jaws of victory? Read General Giap’s writings. He was the supreme commander of the NV military. In his book, he names by name those US persons (I won’t give them credence as citizens, and for damn sure won’t call them Americans) to whom he credits the opportunity for their chance to catch a breather and regroup. Do we want another Viet Nam? No. Japan 1945? Hmmm, how’d that work out? Oh yeah, we won.
Hey Moe(woo,wooo,woooo)
1st what Blake said in spades.
2nd
Yes I understand it is a “draw down”. It is also a telegraphing of what outr intentions are. Draw down. Surrender. Whatever you want to call it. It sends a message that we don’t have the will to win the “good war”, The war Obama said we can’t lose.
As I understand the “draw down” in Afghanistan is ostensibly tied to “facts on the ground”. Taking into account the PUS’s nature do you think there are any amount of facts that would have him not start “drawing down” troops in July 2011?
The thing that is most worrisome is that al Qaeda/taliban pulls some major stunt as the draw down occurs. Think Tet. You don’tt hink this enemy won’t use that and say they drove the infidel out? What do you think that would do for recruiting within the Muslim world? Remember the parable of the strong horse.
I hope our boys (god bless them, everyone) have accomplished the fact of ending both the Taliban and al Qaeda. Oh, I didn’t like it when Bush did it either. Unless you beat your enemy so badly by the time you leave(actual victory) you run the risk of them doing something drastic(like Tet) and claiming or having our press claim victory for them( only if a republican is President). This is a risky propostion.
As you should have guessed I was using hyperbole as a device to show how Mr Obama is potentially not well liked by the military in answer to a comment about how the military doesn’t really care who the C-in-C is.
I do appreciate your reading my comment thought I hope I cleared that up for.
Thanks Blake but I think we’ve milked this one dry.lol.
I think we’ve stated our case indeed.
As do I. Thank you all for the conversation.
Indeed. It was fun, and provocative. Led to lots of comments!