White House Bullshit

[SGOS]

From what I saw of the Obama era, many Americans never thought we would elect a black man and the repubs surely thought they would not. They could not recover from being rejected for a blackie and would not consider working with him at all. But that was not so much him being black as this is politics now, refusing to work together. But him being black and bowing to the tea party..working with the blackie was not an option.

I question how much Republicans hated Obama for his color.  I think they hated him because he was a Democrat.  I don't think they hated him any more than they hated Bill Clinton or Hillary.  They did refuse to work with him, but that was an idea that was first voiced by Rush Limbaugh, as a political strategy, not the result of racial threats to white supremacy, and the strategy will continue during all democratic White Houses for the foreseeable future regardless of color.  The presence of racism was apparent from certain segments of the population, and I was alarmed by how much of it was out there, but the Republican leadership didn't exploit it that much.

I don't think Republicans care that much about color.  There was a "Draft Colin Powell" movement before Powell himself squashed it.  Republicans just don't want Democrats in the White House. 

[Baruch]

I had hoped for better from Bill Clinton, because of his childhood.  I expected better from Barak Obama, because of his childhood.  But both were completely coopted by the Deep State.  George HW and George W ... were Deep State.  I see Donald Trump as coopted by the Deep State as anyone else.  Donald Trump however had a privileged upbringing, just like the two Georges.

[Sylar]

I question how much Republicans hated Obama for his color.  I think they hated him because he was a Democrat.  I don't think they hated him any more than they hated Bill Clinton or Hillary.  They did refuse to work with him, but that was an idea that was first voiced by Rush Limbaugh, as a political strategy, not the result of racial threats to white supremacy, and the strategy will continue during all democratic White Houses for the foreseeable future regardless of color.  The presence of racism was apparent from certain segments of the population, and I was alarmed by how much of it was out there, but the Republican leadership didn't exploit it that much.

I don't think Republicans care that much about color.  There was a "Draft Colin Powell" movement before Powell himself squashed it.  Republicans just don't want Democrats in the White House.

Why are Democrats the only ones who get heat for refusing to work with a Republican president? They even get heat from liberals and moderates. GOP, on the other hand, are rewarded for refusing to work with a Democrats president.

Or at least that is how it appears.

[Sylar]

I expect and hope and measure the performance of our leaders under two broad categories security and prosperity. I really don't care what political party is in office if they can get the job done. IMO we're worse off after 8 years of Obama. Bush gave us Obama, Obama (and Hillary) have given us Trump. I wasn't for Trump until it was a him or Hillary choice. I preferred Rubio or even Kasich over Trump. Now that he is president I'll evaluate him as any other president. Thus far I approve of some of his actions but he's inexperienced or just incompetent in other areas. Too early to call yet but he's fumbling and possibly squandering an opportunity to get things done.

How are we worse off after 8 years of Obama?

The economy is doing much better. Obama got us out of a recession.
We are effectively out of Iraq, just like vast majority of the American people wanted. It wasn't even Obama's timetable, he just oversaw the timetable negotiated by Bush.
Security-wise, how are we worse off than 2008? ISIL? That is not on Obama, that is a consequence of the Iraq war and incompetent Shiite Iraqi leadership. Obama used our drone technology to fight terrorists abroad instead of risking American lives.

What is the standard baseline you use to measure performance of presidents?

[Sorginak]

He means the economy was bad for Republicans who didn't get all the tax breaks they somehow think they deserve.

[Sylar]

Trump condemned both protestors (some are innocent, but not anti-Fa).  As he should given the results.  FEMA camps for both sides.  That is what is objected to ... that SJW aren't made heroes, though they did have the misfortune to play victims.  I know enough to stay away from KKK rallies.  This used to be a regular thing in my childhood (but not where I lived).  Instead we were one town over from the Watts riots.

SJW makes out like Trump was down there ... under a bed sheet, leading it.  But then SJW are racists.  But y'all who aren't Jewish ... have no reason to fear the Nazis.  You are the Commies.  You should wear your Che t-shirts.

Rubio?  We would have already invaded Venezuela.  Kasich ... maybe better.

Sorry Baruch, the two sides are not equal. Their ideologies are entirely opposed, and ironically Mitt Romney was right on the money in his tweet.

One side advocates slavery, antisemitism, racial superiority, and subjugation of other human beings. The other side advocates diversity, inclusion, equality, and social justice.

A few bad apples in the latter do not create an equilibrium between the two sides. There is one side in the wrong here, and you can say that while condemning the few violent apples on the other side.

There was one side shouting "blood and soil", "Jews will not replace us", etc. There was only one side imitating the first days of the Holocaust on American streets.

[Unbeliever]

Someone pointed out that we fought a long, hard bloody war to wipe out the Nazis - doesn't Chump even know that!?

[Baruch]

Someone pointed out that we fought a long, hard bloody war to wipe out the Nazis - doesn't Chump even know that!?

Half of America supported the Nazis, until 1942.  Just ask the Bush family.  And no, wiping out the Nazis wasn't the plan, that is why we brought so many of their scientists to the US after the war, and employed their sleeper cells in E Europe that the Stalinists didn't catch.  So no, your history is ... like George Washington chopping down a cherry tree.  The actual ennui was against the Japanese, because of racism.  Hitler and Mussolini were regarded as jokers in Boy Scout uniforms.

The purpose of the Civil War wasn't to exterminate the White Southerner.  Not Lincoln's plan at all ... maybe John Brown's though.  I am glad they hung him.  Col Robert E Lee was the one who stopped him.  But insurrection is OK, as long as it furthers Marxism, right?  But the Southern reaction, was also insurrection.  So they deserved what they got.  They seceded for slavery, but they weren't punished for slavery, other than losing their investment in it.  But the Yankees are just as evil then (wage and debt slavery), and are today as well.  There are no good Americans, just ask the Natives or Marx (who is freebasing on the Noble Savage idea of Rousseau).  The Yankees are capitalists, or did you miss that?  Billions must die, so socialist utopia will arrive.

[Baruch]

Why are Democrats the only ones who get heat for refusing to work with a Republican president? They even get heat from liberals and moderates. GOP, on the other hand, are rewarded for refusing to work with a Democrats president.

Or at least that is how it appears.

Be happy we don't routinely give each other the Sen. Sumner treatment:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caning_of_Charles_Sumner

I think the British term would be "The Americans deserve a good thrashing".

The two parties have never cooperated.  The idea that R or D have ever lined up behind each other's legislation is only a legend in your own mind.

[Baruch]

Sorry Baruch, the two sides are not equal. Their ideologies are entirely opposed, and ironically Mitt Romney was right on the money in his tweet.

One side advocates slavery, antisemitism, racial superiority, and subjugation of other human beings. The other side advocates diversity, inclusion, equality, and social justice.

A few bad apples in the latter do not create an equilibrium between the two sides. There is one side in the wrong here, and you can say that while condemning the few violent apples on the other side.

There was one side shouting "blood and soil", "Jews will not replace us", etc. There was only one side imitating the first days of the Holocaust on American streets.

Self righteous are we?  Maybe you love one master and hate the other ... oh, I read that somewhere.  Can't serve both.  I serve neither.

Ah, but the Media since the 80s, no longer has to give equal time to all (2) sides, like they used to.  So ... no, I don't see that this is 1980, and nobody is giving equal time to anyone.  It is Civil War, death to all enemies foreign and domestic.  Anti-Fa are not bad apples, they are the heart of the D party.  KKK isn't bad apples, they are the heart of the R party.  I am not member of either party, I hate both.  There a wrong side?  Yes, ape men must all die.  That is one side, we are all members of.  But I get better after I eat supper ;-)

[Mike Cl]

Someone pointed out that we fought a long, hard bloody war to wipe out the Nazis - doesn't Chump even know that!?

He does not care.  Can I make money?--that's what he cares about.

[Baruch]

He does not care.  Can I make money?--that's what he cares about.

Like any capitalist.  Haven't your read Das Kapital, comrade?  So is your goal in life, to lose money?  If Obama wants to be Gandhi, he will have to give up all his money making plans (post WH) and start up an ashram, and spin thread into cotton cloth, by hand, sahib.

[Drew_2017]

Anybody who is a drone for the R or D party ... is part of the problem.

If some other party has a chance to win I may consider voting but I'm not going to throw away my vote on principal.

[Baruch]

If some other party has a chance to win I may consider voting but I'm not going to throw away my vote on principal.

So if these geniuses run Hitler and Stalin, you will vote for one of them?  Maybe the hard work of starting a new party, starts with you.  This is normal in other countries, having more than 2 parties.

[Sylar]

Be happy we don't routinely give each other the Sen. Sumner treatment:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caning_of_Charles_Sumner

I think the British term would be "The Americans deserve a good thrashing".

The two parties have never cooperated.  The idea that R or D have ever lined up behind each other's legislation is only a legend in your own mind.

I never said 'line up' behind each other's legislation. Political parties will always have different philosophies and solutions to the same problems, and they will always have those differences.

Bipartisanship isn't uncommon, though (https://bipartisanpolicy.org/history-of-bipartisanship-2/). What I was saying is that GOP do not get punished at the polls for refusing to work with Democrats, while the same is not true in reverse.