Obama shaping up to be one of the most succesful presidents since Reagan or FDR

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]

[QUOTE="bobdood99"]Wow, thanks for giving me my laugh of the day. Considering Obama let's the president of Mexico come in and bash us around with his words, and Obama and regime stand up and applaud him..... Ya he's the greatest president we have.ryangb

.. The Mexican government criticized the policy in Arizona, something Obama is critical of too.. He never "bashed" the United States, especially when Mexico depends off the United States for multiple things.

dude every state should take actions like arizona, illegal immigration is just that, ILLEGAL... why can other people break the laws of my country but I (a citizen) can't? Everyone is angry that Arizona is enforcing a law that stops people from committing a crime. That's a bad thing? Illegal immigrants come into the U.S. don't pay taxes, some go to jail, they reap the benefits of living in America without any commitment to paying for those benefits. LEGAL immigration needs to be enforced, ILLEGAL immigration needs to be dealt with as well.

... No one is argueing that illegal immigrant needs to be dealt with.. Its just some people have a difference of opinion on how it should be handled.. Obama has a different opinion from you, deal with it.

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]

[QUOTE="bobdood99"] But why the heck would the president of the United States applaud someone coming in and bashing around one of our states?

Because he wasn't bashing Arizona? He was being critical of the new immigrant law that was passed there? And who cares if its some one from out of country, of the cirticism is seen as being just and right who cares where it comes from .. (Not suggesting the ruling in Arizona is right or wrong).

Even if he is against what they are doing, he shouldn't let people come in and say what they want. What kind of president do we have?

YEAH what the hell is he thinking! Freedom of speech isn't that important! We have a real national leader.. One that takes diplomacy, and one who is critical of something occuring in Arizona.. Mexico is also allies, and Obama happens to agree with the Mexican leader as well.. It shouldn't be hard to realize why he wanted this.. Honestly who cares one way or the other, people have their opinions on the matter.. And its amainzlgy partisan in disagreement..

In all honesty I think it sad that THIS is the reason why people are being critical of Obama.. There are far more things they could be critical of that actually matter..

bobdood99

... Not all policies are fair or just, I suppose you would be defenidng against this if it was something like the Jim Crow laws right? And the Mexican president was invited over here to say something.. And guess what, criticism is always a good thing.. If we do not allow any amount of critical thought within our government, our government stagnates.. Infact one of the key factors of a authoritarian government is the beating down of any form of public criticism what so ever.. And I hardly would call this an "attack"..

[QUOTE="Danm_999"][QUOTE="ryangb"] trying to get rid of the second amendmentryangb

do some research, he is trying to rid the U.S. of guns through international treaties. It's a loop hole around the second amendment.

Uh huh, thats why Obama signed a bill allowing firearms within national parks.. It was one of the biggest leaps in second amendment for decades.. And furthermore do you realize exactly HOW hard it would be to disarm a population the size of the United States.. No president regardless of their views on firearms would EVER want to deal with it.

[QUOTE="ryangb"]

[QUOTE="Danm_999"] Err, when did this happen?sSubZerOo

do some research, he is trying to rid the U.S. of guns through international treaties. It's a loop hole around the second amendment.

Uh huh, thats why Obama signed a bill allowing firearms within national parks.. It was one of the biggest leaps in second amendment for decades.. And furthermore do you realize exactly HOW hard it would be to disarm a population the size of the United States.. No president regardless of their views on firearms would EVER want to deal with it.

[QUOTE="Danm_999"][QUOTE="Radiatedrich91"]

That's why I think the US should withdraw from the UN.

Radiatedrich91

No, but the UN does similar things.

No it doesn't :| you seem a tad bit clueless on the UN.. The UN is for all intensive purposes powerless due to nations like China and United States using as tools for their own gain.. Meaning they will use it when it conviences them, and disregard it complete when it inconvinencies them (case in point Iraq War was against UN international laws)..

I haven't seen economy going up, what stimulus worked??? Unemployeement rate is still "increasing"!! And recently stocks just dropped like crazy again FYI. Not going to say he didn't do a good job, but, the result is not visible yet.magicalclick

The stock plunge has mostly to do with Europe's "crisis." The doom and gloom artists just move from one "crisis" to the next to dupe gullible retail investors into selling their shares. They short on the way down, pick up undervalued stocks on the cheap thanks to panic selling, and then ride it back up when people figure out that the world is not, in fact, coming to an end.

But economic recoveries take time, and for the majority, it probably doesn't seem like a recovery, since employment will always lag behind. It's more difficult to restore confidence than it is to break it, and even though things are improving nicely, employers will still be hesitant to hire unless absolutely necessary.

In the markets generally, the recovery is most certainly visible. It's not going to go up in a straight line. The markets never do. There needs to be a period of stabilization at support, and 10 000 may become that support level. We'll see...

[QUOTE="Radiatedrich91"]

The treaty in question is not even a UN treaty!Danm_999

No, but the UN does similar things.

No it doesn't :| you seem a tad bit clueless on the UN.. The UN is for all intensive purposes powerless due to nations like China and United States using as tools for their own gain.. Meaning they will use it when it conviences them, and disregard it complete when it inconvinencies them (case in point Iraq War was against UN international laws)..

[QUOTE="kayne2000"]http://www.usdebtclock.org/ that is the product of defecit spending see socialism and comunnism are brothers both the same socialism is communism light all eads to same thing ive read up on both i know what they are and america is heading down that path see though read our constitution government is not supposed 2 make jobs its not there job its unconstutionall defceit spending doesnt work....u don t spend money u dont have its a rotten idea. especially not usdebtclock.org amounts if money maybe 2 buy a house but not that freakin much even then u make payments on it communism is slavery. read it up karl marx had no intention of having a free land. why do u think they hate guns....u cant enslave a gun owner. china the communish land censors google. so google is leaving. 2 examples there. and read the books i said to read then get back to me. read the commujnist manefesto then look up stalin and hitlet and tell me u want to live there i sure as hell dont. for petes sake man liberals call arizona racist for defending its borderchessmaster1989

Hitler was not a communist, I'm not sure where you got that idea. Have you actually read the Communist Manifesto? Because Marx's communism is the antithesis of what you seem to think it is.

At the current moment, the worst should've hit us(the whole world) by now, but we just continue to put off the inevtiable and will onlybe a deeper hole to dig ourselves out of when we finally do let it happen.

[QUOTE="Danm_999"][QUOTE="ryangb"] trying to get rid of the second amendmentryangb

do some research, he is trying to rid the U.S. of guns through international treaties. It's a loop hole around the second amendment.

[QUOTE="bobdood99"][QUOTE="ColonelDrakePS3"]

Seriously, Obama has accomplished more in little over a year than most presidents wish to accomplish their entire run as president. Healthcare reform (its not a perfect bill but its a huge start) major nuke treaty signed with russia the biggest in 2 decades, Financial reform all but certain to pass, Dont Ask Dont Tell on the way to pass by the end of this year, revived our economy from a potential great depression part 2 (Jobs growing again, GDP growing for 3 consecutive quarters). So for no terrorist attacks (keyword attacks, those that attempted to attack us have been caught and are talking and giving valid information) the iraq war still on track to end in 3 months.

I was a big fan of Bill Clinton and Ronald Reagan (I would consider myself a Reagan democrat) im a moderate with a slight left lean, i have to say Obama is doing on hell of a job.. His approval numbers might not show it now, but then again lets keep in mind that both Reagan and Clinton where both at a 39% approval rating at this same poing in their presidencies.

sSubZerOo

.. The Mexican government criticized the policy in Arizona, something Obama is critical of too.. He never "bashed" the United States, especially when Mexico depends off the United States for multiple things.

The real irony of the President of Mexico badmouthing Arizona for wanting it's police agencies to enforce federal laws is that Mexico has less than stellar laws concerning illegal immigrants. It is a felony to be an illegal alien south of the border and he knows it yet bad mouths our countries laws.

Mexico's Immigration Law: Let's Try It Here at Home.

Mexico has a single, streamlined law that ensures that foreign visitors and immigrants are:
in the country legally;
have the means to sustain themselves economically;
not destined to be burdens on society;
of economic and social benefit to society;
of good character and have no criminal records; and
contributors to the general well-being of the nation.

The law also ensures that:
immigration authorities have a record of each foreign visitor;
foreign visitors do not violate their visa status;
foreign visitors are banned from interfering in the country's internal politics;
foreign visitors who enter under false pretenses are imprisoned or deported;
foreign visitors violating the terms of their entry are imprisoned or deported;
those who aid in illegal immigration will be sent to prison.
Above Link

[QUOTE="Danm_999"][QUOTE="ryangb"] trying to get rid of the second amendmentryangb

do some research, he is trying to rid the U.S. of guns through international treaties. It's a loop hole around the second amendment.

He has no obligation to search for evidence to support your statement. Provide proof to back up your claim, or your statement will become unsubstantiated and therefore weightless.

[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"][QUOTE="chessmaster1989"]

That is not true. If government funding creates a job during a recession and the additional employment (in addition to other fiscal and monetary policy) helps to bring the economy out of the recession, the job will be kept. It is in this manner that the government creates real jobs. All you've done is define real jobs in a way that conveniently works with your philosophy of economics. This general strategy, which I see reflected in most Austrian school thought, is part of why I cannot take it seriously as a viable school of economic thought (in addition, of course, to a lack of mathematical rigour and a lack of historical evidence supporting it (and, indeed, historical evidence if anything suggests otherwise)).

chessmaster1989

If you would care to link me to relevant articles, I'll be happy to read them. I'm sure you are familiar with some.

I don't know what I found funnier, the fact you are comparing Obama to Reagan or the fact that Obama has done nothing successful.

[QUOTE="chessmaster1989"]

[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"] if you want some homework read up on the crash of 1920 and then compare it to that of "great depression" i have gone into both and many other including world wide examples dating back to the 100 year war all the way to today here. its all been ignored and frankly i dont have the time or energy to do it any more. kayne2000

If you would care to link me to relevant articles, I'll be happy to read them. I'm sure you are familiar with some.

Ugh reading all the groundless, nonsensical swipes at Obama by random low count posters on this thread is making me nauseous. Legitimate criticisms please, or just stop talking about stuff you don't know much about. How teabaggish!

While it's true that he has passed some landmark legislations, it's not true that he's one of the most successful presidents in recent history...yet. Time will tell. Time and oil-gate.

dude every state should take actions like arizona, illegal immigration is just that, ILLEGAL... why can other people break the laws of my country but I (a citizen) can't? Everyone is angry that Arizona is enforcing a law that stops people from committing a crime. That's a bad thing? Illegal immigrants come into the U.S. don't pay taxes, some go to jail, they reap the benefits of living in America without any commitment to paying for those benefits. LEGAL immigration needs to be enforced, ILLEGAL immigration needs to be dealt with as well.

ryangb

I don't think you understand why, exactly, some of us are upset with Arizona. Yes, it's true that being an illegal immigrant is *sigh* illegal. However, illegal immigrants make up a recognizeable percentage of this country's GDP. They can't vote, but they fill out the census, which gives money and additional voting power to the state in which they reside. You want them all to just get up and leave? Fine. That can happen and then you'll realize just how influential they've been to this country--and don't be racist and say that people now need to cut their own grass. It's far more complicated. Like it or not, illegal immigration has weaved itself into the fabric of every part of this country and getting rid of them altogether will be far more detrimental than any law Arizona has passed or could pass.

What states along the border need to do is regulate illegal immigration to the point where it's a more streamlined process of helping them to become legal, instead of scaring them away via potential jail time.

While it's true that he has passed some landmark legislations, it's not true that he's one of the most successful presidents in recent history...yet. Time will tell. Time and oil-gate.

edgewalker16

I think time has already told, really; the health care reform bill and the financial reform bill were both landmark pieces of legislation. He hasn't been in office for two years now and he's already accomplished more than some presidents did in their entire terms.

Of course, one may disagree on whether or not the laws that he has passed are good, but on the question of whether or not he's been successful in passing what he wants to get passed I think it'd be hard to argue against the proposition that he has indeed been very successful.

[QUOTE="chessmaster1989"]

[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"] if you want some homework read up on the crash of 1920 and then compare it to that of "great depression" i have gone into both and many other including world wide examples dating back to the 100 year war all the way to today here. its all been ignored and frankly i dont have the time or energy to do it any more. surrealnumber5

If you would care to link me to relevant articles, I'll be happy to read them. I'm sure you are familiar with some.

Hmm, well I won't have time to read a full book at the moment because I'm already reading (in addition to some Asimov) Monetary Mischief, by Milton Friedman, after which I plan to read The General Theory of Employment, Interest, and Money by John Meynard Keynes, and The Road to Serfdom (Fredrik Von Hayek). But I'll put Dilorenzo's book on my list, thanks. :)

Although I see he's also the author of Hamilton's Curse, a book I absolutely despise, so I'm not expecting to agree with him. :P

[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"][QUOTE="chessmaster1989"]

If you would care to link me to relevant articles, I'll be happy to read them. I'm sure you are familiar with some.

chessmaster1989

Hmm, well I won't have time to read a full book at the moment because I'm already reading (in addition to some Asimov) Monetary Mischief, by Milton Friedman, after which I plan to read The General Theory of Employment, Interest, and Money by John Meynard Keynes, and The Road to Serfdom (Fredrik Von Hayek). But I'll put Dilorenzo's book on my list, thanks. :)

Although I see he's also the author of Hamilton's Curse, a book I absolutely despise, so I'm not expecting to agree with him. :P

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

[QUOTE="Volucris"]

So what exactly has Obama done because from what I can tell he has done very very little.

nocoolnamejim

Health care reform, financial reform, then there's all of this... I mean, really, if Obama has done "very very little", then what would he have to do in order to have done a substantial amount? Health care reform has been something people have been trying to do for a century, and now it's happened; that alone is a historic achievement.

One second..I just need to finish laughing. :lol:

Seriously, I don't think so.

While Reagan did up the deficit big time, Obama is on pace to leave the country with an almost insurmountable amount of debt.

I think he is getting bashed in ways that don't even make sense. the new religious right,combined with Faux news and this new "tea party" thing which really has no business existing, have really brainwashed the everyday american. which isn't really that hard. but still. obama is doing a fine job, especially considering his lack of experience. however, i do still think there are a lot of things he is not doing that he should be, such as working to curb the national debt before china ends up owning more than 70% of us. chopperdave447

[QUOTE="Radiatedrich91"]

[QUOTE="Danm_999"] The treaty in question is not even a UN treaty!sSubZerOo

No, but the UN does similar things.

No it doesn't :| you seem a tad bit clueless on the UN.. The UN is for all intensive purposes powerless due to nations like China and United States using as tools for their own gain.. Meaning they will use it when it conviences them, and disregard it complete when it inconvinencies them (case in point Iraq War was against UN international laws)..

And you're just a part of the elite inner circle that knows everything about everything, aren't you? The way I see it, the UN was basically the end of American sovereignty, and you're saying it should get MORE power over nations?

As for the Iraq war, I agree. It's BS that UN nations rarely play by their own rules.

[QUOTE="chopperdave447"]I think he is getting bashed in ways that don't even make sense. the new religious right,combined with Faux news and this new "tea party" thing which really has no business existing, have really brainwashed the everyday american. which isn't really that hard. but still. obama is doing a fine job, especially considering his lack of experience. however, i do still think there are a lot of things he is not doing that he should be, such as working to curb the national debt before china ends up owning more than 70% of us. fillini

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]

[QUOTE="Radiatedrich91"]

No, but the UN does similar things.

Radiatedrich91

No it doesn't :| you seem a tad bit clueless on the UN.. The UN is for all intensive purposes powerless due to nations like China and United States using as tools for their own gain.. Meaning they will use it when it conviences them, and disregard it complete when it inconvinencies them (case in point Iraq War was against UN international laws)..

And you're just a part of the elite inner circle that knows everything about everything, aren't you? The way I see it, the UN was basically the end of American sovereignty, and you're saying it should get MORE power over nations?

As for the Iraq war, I agree. It's BS that UN nations rarely play by their own rules.

... Lets go see.. The UN has no power over the United States.. The US controls the Un for their own gains.. Elite circle? Oh I don't know maybe you should read basic history.. Uh HUH it was so much teh end of American Sovienty that the United States is CONTINUING their policies for 60 years in supporting dictatorships, destabalizing regiosn and what not.. Or protecting the Israeli government even though they violate the geneva convention multiple times.. Yet the United States gets it np in putting UN pressure on anti American states like Iran..

Watch the economy collapse is another few years.

SgtKevali

Don't even try to compare Obama to that maniac Reagan. Obama will go down in history as one of the best presidents ever.

He is certainly proving to be one of the more aggressive presidents in the sense that he is vigilant in implementing policy change. Whether this ultimately translates into success remains to be seen. I would say he is on pace to be an above average president.

Those who state he is one of the worst presidents obviously have no knowledge of presidential history. Obama doesn't fit into the same category as Andrew Johnson and James Buchanan.

He is certainly proving to be one of the more aggressive presidents in the sense that he is vigilant in implementing policy change. Whether this ultimately translates into success remains to be seen. I would say he is on pace to be an above average president.

Those who state he is one of the worst presidents obviously have no knowledge of presidential history. Obama doesn't fit into the same category as Andrew Johnson and James Buchanan.

ragek1ll589

Have to love Andrew Jackson with his use of the spoils system and well as signing into law a policy that created the Trail of Tears for the Cherokee nation, causing tens of thousands of Native Americans of losing their lands and numerous deaths.

Don't even try to compare Obama to that maniac Reagan. Obama will go down in history as one of the best presidents ever.

Robbler

Don't even try to compare Obama to that maniac Reagan. Obama will go down in history as one of the best presidents ever.

Robbler

I wouldn't go that far either...

[QUOTE="ragek1ll589"]

He is certainly proving to be one of the more aggressive presidents in the sense that he is vigilant in implementing policy change. Whether this ultimately translates into success remains to be seen. I would say he is on pace to be an above average president.

Those who state he is one of the worst presidents obviously have no knowledge of presidential history. Obama doesn't fit into the same category as Andrew Johnson and James Buchanan.

sSubZerOo

Have to love Andrew Jackson with his use of the spoils system and well as signing into law a policy that created the Trail of Tears for the Cherokee nation, causing tens of thousands of Native Americans of losing their lands and numerous deaths.

Not to mention that he vetoed the Civil Rights bill, pardoned most Confederate leaders, and actively encouraged the southern states to not ratify the 14th Amendment.

Don't even try to compare Obama to that maniac Reagan. Obama will go down in history as one of the best presidents ever.

Robbler

So has Reagan.

[QUOTE="SgtKevali"]

Watch the economy collapse is another few years.

Serraph105

its not impossible but personally I think we will see that Obama has made several long term decisions that will pay off bigger than the short term ones he could have been making to get higher poll numbers.

also this

wow im not used to seeing bars like that :|

Obama is already the worst president of all time, just look at how he's handled this oil spill, well hasn't handled it. If it was Bush they would've crucified him, but the Divine One can do no wrong.

He's ruining this country. In 2012 he's out, not I nor any reasonable american would vote for that crook again.

Obama is already the worst president of all time, just look at how he's handled this oil spill, well hasn't handled it. If it was Bush they would've crucified him, but the Divine One can do no wrong.

He's ruining this country. In 2012 he's out, not I nor any reasonable american would vote for that crook again.

Tangmashi

Would you have liked him to put on his Spandex suit, flown over to the Gulf, and then used his power of super suction to extract all of the oil from the ocean?

[QUOTE="Tangmashi"]

Obama is already the worst president of all time, just look at how he's handled this oil spill, well hasn't handled it. If it was Bush they would've crucified him, but the Divine One can do no wrong.

He's ruining this country. In 2012 he's out, not I nor any reasonable american would vote for that crook again.

GabuEx

Would you have liked him to put on his Spandex suit, flown over to the Gulf, and then used his power of super suction to extract all of the oil from the ocean?

[QUOTE="Tangmashi"]

Obama is already the worst president of all time, just look at how he's handled this oil spill, well hasn't handled it. If it was Bush they would've crucified him, but the Divine One can do no wrong.

He's ruining this country. In 2012 he's out, not I nor any reasonable american would vote for that crook again.

GabuEx

Would you have liked him to put on his Spandex suit, flown over to the Gulf, and then used his power of super suction to extract all of the oil from the ocean?

I hold the Messiah to the same standard the liberals held Bush over Katrina. Bush responded to Katrina much faster than Obama did to this spill.

Unlike Bush, Obama can stop the spill by using a nuclear weapon, the russians have done it 5 times. Bush could not stop a hurricane.

Obama will be responsible for the entire destruction of the ecosystem of the gulf. I myself live near Clearwater, FL so eventually our beaches will be effected by this disaster. Pineallas County has always decided which way Florida would go in every election, and right now the attitude towards Obama is one of hate. We pretty much gave this guy a free pass in 08'. It's not unusual for people with Obama hats to get mugged or assaulted. People with Obama bumperstickers on their car get vandalized or even pulled over more frequently by the cops.

I hold the Messiah to the same standard the liberals held Bush over Katrina. Bush responded to Katrina much faster than Obama did to this spill.

Unlike Bush, Obama can stop the spill by using a nuclear weapon, the russians have done it 5 times. Bush could not stop a hurricane.

Obama will be responsible for the entire destruction of the ecosystem of the gulf. I myself live near Clearwater, FL so eventually our beaches will be effected by this disaster. Pineallas County has always decided which way Florida would go in every election, and right now the attitude towards Obama is one of hate. We pretty much gave this guy a free pass in 08'. It's not unusual for people with Obama hats to get mugged or assaulted. People with Obama bumperstickers on their car get vandalized or even pulled over more frequently by the cops.

Tangmashi

So, basically, you don't like the fact that Bush was held to a completely unrealistic standard, so you're going to hold Obama to a similarly unreaslistic standard? :?

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

[QUOTE="Tangmashi"]

Obama is already the worst president of all time, just look at how he's handled this oil spill, well hasn't handled it. If it was Bush they would've crucified him, but the Divine One can do no wrong.

He's ruining this country. In 2012 he's out, not I nor any reasonable american would vote for that crook again.

Tangmashi

Would you have liked him to put on his Spandex suit, flown over to the Gulf, and then used his power of super suction to extract all of the oil from the ocean?

I hold the Messiah to the same standard the liberals held Bush over Katrina. Bush responded to Katrina much faster than Obama did to this spill.

Unlike Bush, Obama can stop the spill by using a nuclear weapon, the russians have done it 5 times. Bush could not stop a hurricane.

Obama will be responsible for the entire destruction of the ecosystem of the gulf. I myself live near Clearwater, FL so eventually our beaches will be effected by this disaster. Pineallas County has always decided which way Florida would go in every election, and right now the attitude towards Obama is one of hate. We pretty much gave this guy a free pass in 08'. It's not unusual for people with Obama hats to get mugged or assaulted. People with Obama bumperstickers on their car get vandalized or even pulled over more frequently by the cops.

[QUOTE="Tangmashi"]

I hold the Messiah to the same standard the liberals held Bush over Katrina. Bush responded to Katrina much faster than Obama did to this spill.

Unlike Bush, Obama can stop the spill by using a nuclear weapon, the russians have done it 5 times. Bush could not stop a hurricane.

Obama will be responsible for the entire destruction of the ecosystem of the gulf. I myself live near Clearwater, FL so eventually our beaches will be effected by this disaster. Pineallas County has always decided which way Florida would go in every election, and right now the attitude towards Obama is one of hate. We pretty much gave this guy a free pass in 08'. It's not unusual for people with Obama hats to get mugged or assaulted. People with Obama bumperstickers on their car get vandalized or even pulled over more frequently by the cops.

GabuEx

So, basically, you don't like the fact that Bush was held to a completely unrealistic standard, so you're going to hold Obama to a similarly unreaslistic standard? :?

It's not unrealistic. Katrina was a natural disaster, this spill is a man made disaster that can be solved with a nuclear weapon detonation, but Obama won't use the nuclear option because he's against nuclear weaponsbecause they don't solve any problems. So he'll sacrifice the entire ecosystem because of his radical ideals.

A small yield nuclear weapon about the size of Hiroshima will completey plug the oil spill without any more enviromental damage that has already been done due to Obama's inaction.

To the second poster. The government has no capability other than the capability I just mentioned to deal with the oil spill. BP is in fact more qualified to handle the spill than the US government is, unless Obama wants to use the nuke, but he won't because of his ideals. So the people of the Gulf like myself will suffer and hewill not be reelected president, and that is a fact.

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

[QUOTE="Tangmashi"]

I hold the Messiah to the same standard the liberals held Bush over Katrina. Bush responded to Katrina much faster than Obama did to this spill.

Unlike Bush, Obama can stop the spill by using a nuclear weapon, the russians have done it 5 times. Bush could not stop a hurricane.

Obama will be responsible for the entire destruction of the ecosystem of the gulf. I myself live near Clearwater, FL so eventually our beaches will be effected by this disaster. Pineallas County has always decided which way Florida would go in every election, and right now the attitude towards Obama is one of hate. We pretty much gave this guy a free pass in 08'. It's not unusual for people with Obama hats to get mugged or assaulted. People with Obama bumperstickers on their car get vandalized or even pulled over more frequently by the cops.

Tangmashi

So, basically, you don't like the fact that Bush was held to a completely unrealistic standard, so you're going to hold Obama to a similarly unreaslistic standard? :?

It's not unrealistic. Katrina was a natural disaster, this spill is a man made disaster that can be solved with a nuclear weapon detonation, but Obama won't use the nuclear option because he's against nuclear weapons and they don't solve any problems. So he'll sacrifice the entire ecosystem because of his radical ideals.

A small yield nuclear weapon about the size of Hiroshima will complete plug the oil spill without any more enviromental damage that has already been done due to Obama's inaction.

To the second poster. The government has no capability other than the capability I just mentioned to deal with the oil spill. BP is in fact more qualified to handle the spill than the US government is, unless Obama wants to use the nuke, but he won't because of his ideals. So the people of the Gulf like myself will suffer and hewill not be reelected president, and that is a fact.

It's not unrealistic. Katrina was a natural disaster, this spill is a man made disaster that can be solved with a nuclear weapon detonation, but Obama won't use the nuclear option because he's against nuclear weaponsbecause they don't solve any problems. So he'll sacrifice the entire ecosystem because of his radical ideals.

Tangmashi

Citation?

[QUOTE="Tangmashi"]

It's not unrealistic. Katrina was a natural disaster, this spill is a man made disaster that can be solved with a nuclear weapon detonation, but Obama won't use the nuclear option because he's against nuclear weaponsbecause they don't solve any problems. So he'll sacrifice the entire ecosystem because of his radical ideals.

GabuEx

Citation?

Bit of an update: I went looking for this statement of Obama's myself, but all I could find was this story about Obama tasking a team of nuclear physicists with the responsibility of finding solutions to this disaster.

So... yeah, now I would really like a citation of Obama's alleged refusal to use nuclear weapons because of a philosophical disagreement.