The Obama Record - Updated

Pilgrim

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
More insight into the damage to this country caused by the most liberal president in American history. Everyone elegible to vote in 2012 should be made aware of this easy to understand summary.
Largest wealth destruction in American history: Net Wealth Lost 2009-2011 --$8.7 Trillion

Highest sustained Unemployment in decades: 9.1%

Brutal Unemployment for minorities: Black Americans : 16.7%

Unprecedented Unemployment: Black Teenage Americans :46.5%

Historic loss in American credit: U.S. Credit Rating drops to AA-plus

Historic jump in Number of people in U.S. on Foodstamps : 45.8 Million

Quixotic investment in mythic Green Jobs : $80 billion
· Supposed Number of Green Jobs Created : 255,000
· Approximate Cost of each Green Job: $313,725.50

Stimulus Program: TARP : $475 Billion

Stimulus Program: Shovel Ready projects : $787 Billion

Stimulus Programs: Cash for Clunkers : $3 billion

Stimulus Programs: Cash for Caulkers : $10 Billion

Changes in Unemployment after $1.5 Trillion of government stimulus: +3% change

Averaged cost of a gallon of gas : $3.45 +$1.25 change

New Regulations 2009-2011 : 75 Major New Regulations, 1,827 Rules Amended

Executive Orders signed by Obama : 96

Cost of New Regulations : + $1.75 Trillion annually

Public Debt : $18.8 Trillion

2012 Federal Budget Proposed by Obama : $3.73 Trillion

Percentage of Americans that pay no taxes: 51%

Percentage of Federal Spending required from borrowing: 40%

Percentage of Government Spending on Entitlements: 60%

Number of Obama proposals to limit entitlement spending: ZERO

Obama--The Numbers Don't Lie - Lurita Doan - Townhall Conservative
An almost unbelievable record of failure and mismanagement, to say nothing of the corruption and incompetence coming to light in the Solyndra and "Fast & Furious" scandals. What's even worse is that Barack Hussein Obama has another year in office! No other American president would have been given a slight chance for re-election with this record, and probably wouldn't have been re-nominated. Bun in spite of all this mess there are still some in the MSM that try to claim he's unbeatable unless the GOP runs the perfect candidate against him. Of course it was the MSM that got him elected in the first place, and it only further exposes the liberal bias of the ones that are sticking with him. It will be interesting to see how long Chris Matthews and others like him will stay on the bandwagon.
 

moose

Veteran Expediter
the waving of the gas price will not last.
history have showed us that during an elections year gas prices drop to help reserve a seat.
 

greg334

Veteran Expediter
How does one justify teenage unemployment when they haven't entered the workforce or have held a job in the first place?
 

Moot

Veteran Expediter
Owner/Operator
Bun in spite of all this mess there are still some in the MSM that try to claim he's unbeatable unless the GOP runs the perfect candidate against him.

If 9.1 percent of the population is unemployed and collecting unemployment, 48.5 million people receive food stamps and 51% of Americans don't pay any income tax, I'd say he's got a decent size voter base to win re-election.
 

chefdennis

Veteran Expediter
Pilgrim wrote:

It will be interesting to see how long Chris Matthews and others like him will stay on the bandwagon.

I think more of the MSM are starting to see barry for what he is..worthless and dangerous to the country and are starting to "fall from the bandwagon"...you are seeing more and more negative news from them with this one being the leatest i have seen:

National / World News
6:31 a.m. Monday, October 10, 2011
By ERICA WERNER
The Associated Press
SPIN METER: Obama disconnects rhetoric, reality  | ajc.com

SPIN METER: Obama disconnects rhetoric, reality

WASHINGTON — In President Barack Obama's sales pitch for his jobs bill, there are two versions of reality: The one in his speeches and the one actually unfolding in Washington.

When Obama accuses Republicans of standing in the way of his nearly $450 billion plan, he ignores the fact that his own party has struggled to unite behind the proposal.
When the president says Republicans haven't explained what they oppose in the plan, he skips over the fact that Republicans who control the House actually have done that in detail.

And when he calls on Congress to "pass this bill now," he slides past the point that Democrats control the Senate and were never prepared to move immediately, given other priorities. Senators are expected to vote Tuesday on opening debate on the bill, a month after the president unveiled it with a call for its immediate passage.

To be sure, Obama is not the only one engaging in rhetorical excesses. But he is the president, and as such, his constant remarks on the bill draw the most attention and scrutiny.

The disconnect between what Obama says about his jobs bill and what stands as the political reality flow from his broader aim: to rally the public behind his cause and get Congress to act, or, if not, to pin blame on Republicans.

He is waging a campaign, one in which nuance and context and competing responses don't always fit in if they don't help make the case.

For example, when Obama says his jobs plan is made up of ideas that have historically had bipartisan support, he stops the point there. Not mentioned is that Republicans have never embraced the tax increases that he is proposing to cover the cost of his plan.

Likewise, from city to city, Obama is demanding that Congress act (he means Republicans) while it has been clear for weeks that the GOP will not support all of his bill, to say the least. Individual elements of it may well pass, such as Obama's proposal to extend and expand a payroll tax cut. But Republicans strongly oppose the president's proposed new spending and his plan to raise taxes on millionaires to pay for the package.

The fight over the legislative proposal has become something much bigger: a critical test of the president's powers of persuading the public heading into the 2012 presidential campaign, and of Republicans' ability to deny him a win and reap victory for themselves.

"He knows it's not going to pass. He's betting that voters won't pick up on it, or even if they do they will blame Congress and he can run against the 'do-nothing Congress,'" said Sherry Be***** Jeffe, a senior fellow at the University of Southern California's School of Policy, Planning and Development.

John Sides, political science professor at George Washington University, said Obama's approach on the jobs bill is "more about campaigning than governing."

"He's mostly just going around talking about this and drawing contrasts with what the Republicans want and what he wants and not really trying to work these legislative levers he might be able to use to get this passed," Sides said. "That just suggests to me that he is ready to use a failed jobs bill as a campaign message against the Republicans."

The president's opponents aren't exactly laying it all out, either.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., tried to force a vote on the bill last week, innocently claiming that the president was entitled to one. McConnell knew full well that the result would be failure for the legislation and an embarrassment for Obama.

House Speaker John Boehner, meanwhile, claimed that Obama has "given up on the country and decided to campaign full-time" instead of seeking common ground with the GOP. But Boehner neglected to mention that Obama's past attempts at compromise with Republicans often yielded scant results, as Obama himself pointed out.

The approach for Obama, who is seeking a second term in a dismal economy, is far different than the one he took when running for president. He criticized the GOP then, but talked about ending blue-state and red-state America, replacing it with one America, fixing the broken political system, and fundamentally changing Washington.

That ended up being change he could not bring about, and now analysts say Obama may have little choice but to campaign more narrowly by attacking opponents rather than trying to bring people together.

Obama's attempts at compromise with the GOP on the debt ceiling and budget won him little in the way of policy, instead engendering frustration from Democrats who saw him as caving to Republican demands.

The new, combative Obama isn't looking for compromise. He's looking for a win. And if he can't get the legislative victory he says he wants, he has made clear that he's more than willing to take a political win.

It is, he acknowledges, a result his campaign for his jobs bill is designed to achieve.

Talking up the bill in an appearance last month with African-American news websites, Obama said: "I need people to be out there promoting this and pushing this and making sure that everybody understands the details of what this would mean, so that one of two things happen: Either Congress gets it done, or if Congress doesn't get it done, people know exactly what's holding it up."

Oh and this article is part of a "series"....
 

Pilgrim

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
If 9.1 percent of the population is unemployed and collecting unemployment, 48.5 million people receive food stamps and 51% of Americans don't pay any income tax, I'd say he's got a decent size voter base to win re-election.
First of all, that 9.1% is a lowball figure - it's probably closer to 12-14% if we count the people that have quit looking. Then there's the UNDERemployed - how many of those are out there? Of all the above potential voters, how many of them are thanking Barack Hussein Obama for their current situation requiring them to collect unemployment and sign up for food stamps to feed their families?

I'll bet there's a considerable percentage of these people that can't wait to vote next Nov, and they won't be going to the polls to re-elect BHO.
 

Pilgrim

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
How does one justify teenage unemployment when they haven't entered the workforce or have held a job in the first place?
Ask that question to some high school senior that used to have a part time job that paid for his car insurance and gas; or especially the college kid that had a part time job last year that helped pay for his books and living expenses. As college tuition and expenses increase annually every year at a rate well above that of general inflation, a high percentage of college students must have that part time job to make ends meet. Now they're competing with middle aged adults for those jobs waiting tables and working in warehouses.
 

Moot

Veteran Expediter
Owner/Operator
Of all the above potential voters, how many of them are thanking Barack Hussein Obama for their current situation requiring them to collect unemployment and sign up for food stamps to feed their families?

Probably most of them. Many of them got him his first term. If he can just get re-elected, unemployment benefits will be extended again, food stamp requirements will be lowered, more money will be available for job training and the creation of new high paying union jobs and the economy will recover and be booming.

You must remember that this whole economic mess is the fault of George Bush and he had 8 years in office. Surely you can't expect Obama to save this country in only 4 years. Hope and change takes time to cultivate and mature. Six years maybe, but not 4.
 

greg334

Veteran Expediter
Ask that question to some high school senior that used to have a part time job that paid for his car insurance and gas;

Why? they are not really counted as employed nor are that eligible for any unemployment benefits. Their income is also sometimes underground or off the radar while at the same time, their expenses are a fraction of what is needed to run a household or support a family.

The number is derived for social reasons by the way, not economical reasons.

or especially the college kid that had a part time job last year that helped pay for his books and living expenses. As college tuition and expenses increase annually every year at a rate well above that of general inflation, a high percentage of college students must have that part time job to make ends meet.

Well a majority of college students are not a college kids, these are adults at the age of 18 and above. Their employment is also not a valid thing to count, they are building their education for a career and not using the employment thing as part of a household income. Most of the problems with affording college is the problem with accessing loans and grants and the tax money that goes into the school, making it a business more than a center of learning.

Now they're competing with middle aged adults for those jobs waiting tables and working in warehouses.

Rightfully so, they are not taking entry level jobs, waiting or warehouse work is not temp work or cutting lawns, they are where people make a living at and if one is to wait a table for their job, then that is OK but if one is depending on making money while in college by doing something others makes a living at, then it is a problem for them.

It used to be that college was affordable but because no one seems to get the idea that college is not there to have a billion dollar profit or have the sports departments make $300 million in licensing and merchandise, but start complaining about it as if it means education, then it will get more expensive and more out of the reach for those who don't want to carry a $300k debt going into the workforce.
 

greg334

Veteran Expediter
Nope don't have to check anything - the difference between temp workers and temp work is as much as having a career and having a job.
 

Pilgrim

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
Why? they are not really counted as employed nor are that eligible for any unemployment benefits. Their income is also sometimes underground or off the radar while at the same time, their expenses are a fraction of what is needed to run a household or support a family.
The number is derived for social reasons by the way, not economical reasons.
I don't disagree with any of that. Teenage unemployment is one of the statistics produced for social and economic reasons. But it is significant for a number of reasons, not the least of which applies to those 18-19 year olds that might be in college. In a lot of cases, they need a part time job to stay in college; if they don't have that, then they're no longer a student and become an unemployed adult. These part time jobs also serve a valuable purpose in teaching kids a work ethic that's sorely needed when they get older. That makes it a meaningful statistic in several ways that influence our society.
 

Pilgrim

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
Probably most of them. Many of them got him his first term. If he can just get re-elected, unemployment benefits will be extended again, food stamp requirements will be lowered, more money will be available for job training and the creation of new high paying union jobs and the economy will recover and be booming.
There will always be the 4-5% of the population that won't work no matter what. Thanks to LBJ and his "Great Society" stuff they can live off welfare and food stamps forever - there's your Obama voters, assuming somebody can get them to the polls. The rest are the ones who hate the thought of being on welfare and are embarrassed at having to use a food stamp card at the check-out line at the grocery store. These are the ones that will NOT vote for Obama, and there are a whole lot of them out there.
You must remember that this whole economic mess is the fault of George Bush and he had 8 years in office. Surely you can't expect Obama to save this country in only 4 years. Hope and change takes time to cultivate and mature. Six years maybe, but not 4.
How about 8 years, or maybe 12?:rolleyes: Obama's record speaks for itself. Sorry, this "whole economic mess" can't be pinned on Bush. Granted, he was one of the contributors, but the Democrats and their support of Fannie and Freddie had a lot more to do with the country's financial collapse then Bush and his policies.
 

purgoose10

Veteran Expediter
You can ad the $450 billion his cronney's what to take from the defense budget. He's appolagized to the entire sand box nation, now he wants to bring them here.
 

OntarioVanMan

Retired Expediter
Owner/Operator
Since losing the House in the 2010 election, Democrats have been howling for “bipartisanship” and “compromise.” However, when the Democrats (Tim Johnson SD) were busily ramming the Obamacare bill through Congress, where was the bipartisanship and compromise? There was none.

When the Democrats (Tim Johnson SD) were ramming the failed stimulus bill through Congress, where was the bipartisanship and compromise? There was none.

When the Democrats (Tim Johnson SD) were ramming the banking bill through the House/Senate, where was the bipartisanship and compromise? There was none.

Most thinking adults have figured out that the only time bipartisanship and compromise are mentioned is when the Dems are out of power. Whenever Republicans have caved and compromised on the Democrat bills, they have helped contribute to the current $16 trillion debt. This is what happens when you borrow 43 cents of every dollar spent on our failing economy, thus ensuring high unemployment and home foreclosures.

The Democrats should quit complaining. They got their “dream” pick for president, and literally owned both the House and Senate for over two years. The results are what they have always longed for: record numbers of people totally dependent on government for food stamps, unemployment checks, and health care.:(
Richard Folsland
Rapid City

 

Pilgrim

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
Pilgrim... you need to read Moot's last post again. I smelled sarcasm all the way from Michigan.
You're right - I thought that was probably the case when I was responding, and I don't use those smilie faces too much either. But it was another chance to reinforce a point.:eek:
 

tbubster

Seasoned Expediter
Everytime I hear a democrat say the republicans need to compromise.I think of the first two years of Obama and how the dems controlled washington and got what ever they wanted,to hell with the republicans was their way.I also think about the last two years of bush and how democrats controlled congress then also.

For myself I still and always will belive there has to be compromise.However not just from REPUBLICANS.
 
Top