Thread: President Obama’s Accomplishments : Discuss

Isn't it amazing that, within only one week of Tiger Woods crashing his Escalade, the press found every woman with whom Tiger has had an affair during the last few years?

And, they even uncovered photos, text messages, recorded phone calls, etc..!

Furthermore, they not only know the cause of the family fight, but they even know it was a 9 iron from his golf bag that his wife used to break out the windows in the Escalade.

Not only that, they know which wedge!

And, each & every day, they were able to continue to provide America with updates on Tiger's sex rehab stay, his wife's divorce settlement figures, as well as the dates & tournaments in which he will play.

Now, Barack Hussein Obama has been in office for over three years, yet this very same press:

· Cannot find any of his childhood friends or neighbors;

· Or find any of Obama's high school or college classmates;

· Or locate any of his college papers or grades;

· Or determine how he paid for both a Columbia & a Harvard education;

· Or discover which country issued his visa to travel to Pakistan in the 1980's;

· Or even find Michelle Obama's Princeton thesis on racism.

They just can't seem to uncover any of this.

Yet, the public still trusts that same press to give them the whole truth!

Don't you find that totally amazing ?

NOW TELL ME THERE IS NO CORRUPTION IN THE AMERICAN PRESS


You cannot get the water to clear up until you get the pigs out of the creek.

Total Conspiracy in D.C. for BOTH parties. The House of Reps, can do more, and on their own, and they don't bother.

Honestly they should be required when they run for a Public Office, no matter how small they MUST take a test regarding the U.S. Constitution's ORIGINAL document. Results must be made PUBLIC, since when you are sign-in you swear to UPHOLD IT!

PORTRAIT OF A PRESIDENCY: LIES & ILLEGAL BEHAVIOR

“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.” – Presidential Oath of Office, U.S.A.

If the President’s sworn duty is to honor the oath, above, and, as it says, “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States,” why is the current occupant of the White House ignoring this solemn promise, and isn’t it our moral duty as American citizens and freedom lovers to call for an investigation of his behavior?

•Obama refuses to enforce the Defense of Marriage Act.

•After the New Black Panther Party clearly disenfranchised white voters in Pennsylvania, Obama instructed his Justice Department to drop the matter and ignore the crime.

•Obama sent troops into Libya without Congressional approval, ignoring the War Powers Act of 1973—arguing that “international permission” was good enough.

•Obama refuses to enforce our immigration law—and even sues States who fight for the right to do so!

•And now we discover Obama lied to us about the Benghazi attacks that killed Libyan Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans, because he wanted to keep his re-election campaign on track.

When the President of the United States puts his reelection campaign ahead of national security and the lives of Americans, it is time for him to go.

One of the most important characteristics in a President is honesty. We teach our children not to deceive, but then we turn on the news and watch our “leaders” do it with straight faces. Or, with laughter. If you are Joe Biden, you smile and grin and guffaw as you are saying that Chris Stevens and his staff never requested extra security, despite the fact that State Department officials testified they actually did, and were denied.

Outright lies and cover-ups are never acceptable. Unfortunately, we have come to expect and even accept lying from our politicians. Obama and his “Chicago politics” administration are intensely focused on next month’s election and will do whatever it takes to ensure Obama maintains power, even at the expense of our national security, and sadly, even at the expense of the law.

Last year, Bruce Ackerman wrote in the New York Times that by going into Libya without Congressional approval, “The White House has shattered the traditional legal process the executive branch has developed to sustain the rule of law over the past 75 years.”

Shattered…his is not a word we want associated with our President, our White House, our government, or our country.

Obama’s lies are unraveling since the hearings began on October 10th. Now, it is time to pay special attention to what the President did. If he willfully obstructed the truth about the Libyan attack from the American people—he should be impeached. Additionally, he should be brought to justice for his other transgressions against our Constitution and our country.

President Obama has stated clearly through his actions that he doesn’t care about America, and he certainly doesn’t care about America’s future. He is weakening our national security, decimating our Constitution, and setting dangerous precedents that can be easily abused by future Presidents—but he doesn’t care. He didn’t believe in our Founding principles in the first place, and when he took office he promised to “fundamentally transform” America. Congratulations, Mr. President. You have been a great success in that area—and now, it’s time to go.

Tony Adkins
Conservative-Daily

It keeps replaying in my mind how Hillary, at the ceremony of bringing the ambassador home, kept referring to the "video" as the culprit. Horrendous.

Originally Posted by Jolie Rouge

PORTRAIT OF A PRESIDENCY: LIES & ILLEGAL BEHAVIOR



If the President’s sworn duty is to honor the oath, above, and, as it says, “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States,” why is the current occupant of the White House ignoring this solemn promise, and isn’t it our moral duty as American citizens and freedom lovers to call for an investigation of his behavior?

Conservative-Daily

Because we have 535 Members of Congress that have no BALLS!

He's better off.... Are YOU ?

“The 7-Eleven Presidency”
[Darleen Click]

…but but, this can all be solved if the dirty, filthy, stinking, cheating richie-riches would just pay a little more! http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/...cy_654846.html

In the wake of the Treasury Department’s newly released summary of federal spending for 2012, it’s now possible to detail just how profligate the Obama years have been. Here’s the upshot: Under Obama, for every $7 we’ve had, we’ve spent nearly $11 (or, to be more exact, $10.95). That’s like a family that makes $70,000 a year — and is already knee-deep in debt — blowing nearly $110,000 a year. [...]

[U]nder Obama, the federal government has acquired $6.846 trillion in tax revenues and other receipts, and it has spent $10.711 trillion — 56 percent more than it has had available to spend.

Moreover, Obama has amassed this historic record of fiscal profligacy even before his centerpiece legislation has really taken effect. If it’s not repealed first, the colossally expensive Obamacare is poised to present grave new challenges to our fiscal solvency — and to our liberty — once it would become a reality on these shores in early 2014.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...3E6015CBF987AC

http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=44495

Obama car czar: You have to go back to the 30′s to find economic performance this bad
posted at 12:01 pm on October 18, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

A couple of weeks ago, Jazz Shaw wrote that conservatives should consider Morning Joe a good forum to have for moderates and independents that tune into MSNBC to get some semblance of the truth. http://hotair.com/archives/2012/09/2...ting-on-msnbc/ We’ve already noted Mark Halperin’s cutting criticism of Team Obama’s “Bindergate,” and this is another piece of data that these viewers would not have heard had MSNBC scheduled a Hardball/Rachel Maddow clone for this slot.

Steve Rattner, the former “car czar” for Barack Obama, explains why voters may have narrowly given Obama the edge in the debate on Tuesday night, but give Mitt Romney a 31-point advantage on the economy. You have to go all the way back to the 1930s, Rattner explains after Willie Geist presses the point, to find a President with a worse record on economic growth in a first term: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a-oTo...layer_embedded

We’ve talked about this for months, but the word needs to get out to voters who haven’t yet made a decision. That’s what makes Morning Joe and Joe Scarborough valuable. When they focus on the hard data, it makes the decision a lot more obvious to all the right people.

That’s why Obama’s edge in polling on debating style won’t matter. Karl Rove makes the same point today in the Wall Street Journal, writing that Obama may have “won” the debate, but he’s losing the argument: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...928525340.html

After the debate, CNN found that Mr. Romney came out ahead on the essential question of who was better for handling “the economy” with 58% to Mr. Obama’s 40%. This was an improvement from Denver, when the Romney advantage was 55%-43%. So Mr. Obama continues to run behind on the all-important argument over who offers the better prospect of a stronger economy, greater prosperity and serious deficit reduction.

This goes to the essential flaw in Team Obama’s strategy. The president and his advisers have been so intent on disqualifying Mr. Romney that they have done a miserable job defending the president’s record and virtually nothing to frame a second-term agenda. Meanwhile, according to Pew Research Center polls conducted in mid-September and early October, the president’s favorability ratings among all voters have declined to 49% from 55%.

And while Obama did get a slight edge in those debate polls, election polling tells a very different story with less than three weeks to go:

Gallup reported on Sept. 9 that only 30% of the public is “satisfied” with the condition of the country. The Oct. 13 Washington Post/ABC poll found that 56% think the country is “off on the wrong track.” The rates of unemployment, second-quarter GDP growth and labor-force participation are all worse than they were three weeks before any modern presidential re-election. Mr. Obama’s status-quo, stay-the-course campaign will be a hard sell with a public that wants change.

That’s reflected in polling data. Mr. Obama led 49.1% to 45% in an average of national polls conducted about one week before the candidates’ first debate. In national surveys taken since then, Mr. Romney averages 47.4% to Mr. Obama’s 46.9%. The Republican candidate continues to lead among independent voters. In eight recent national polls, an average 49% of the likely independent voters say they support Mr. Romney, while 37% favor Mr. Obama.

On Monday Mr. Romney reached 50% in Gallup’s daily tracking of likely voters—something Mr. Obama has not yet been able to do. No other presidential candidate has been at 50% or higher at this point in the race in this survey and lost.

Records matter. Economic despair matters. If one candidate chooses to ignore a stagnating economy in an election bid, especially an incumbent, it catches up to him sooner or later.

Update: Timothy Dalrymple agrees that debate “performance” has become irrelevant after the first event in Denver http://www.patheos.com/blogs/philoso...is-irrelevant/

Put it this way. When it comes to Obama, most people’s minds are made up. 45 percent are going to vote for him. 45 percent will not. Of the remaining ten percent, Obama has had four years to close the sale and he has failed. If those 10 percent believed that Obama’s record as President warranted another four years, they would not be undecided. The primary reason they’re undecided is because they’re still assessing Romney. If people see a version of Obama that’s arrogant, petulant and stammering, that will have a slight negative effect, but it won’t sway people’s opinions too much. And the upside of a rousing debate performance is extremely limited, because we’ve heard it all before from President Obama.

In other words, Romney soared in the polls after Denver not because Obama performed so poorly but because Romney himself performed so well. …

The Obama campaign spent a great deal of money immediately after the conclusion of the Republican primaries because they wanted to “define” Romney. And the press went along with it. They made out Romney to be a heartless robber baron who just (for some reason) wanted to kill puppies, destroy American jobs and make his rich friends richer. It was ridiculous, but it was working. And when Romney not only delivered a virtuoso performance on the Denver stage but showed the American people who he is and what he cares about, I think a lot of the American people realized that they had been sold a false bill of goods.

That means that Obama’s continued assault on Romney’s record and character will have a limited effect. The Left was clamoring for Obama to go on the offensive, but that’s the last thing he needs to do. No one trusts that Obama will accurately represent Romney. And the American people understand intuitively that a strong President would be running on his own record, his own accomplishments, his own vision — not on scaring people away from a caricatured version of his opponent. Obama can keep on attacking Romney, but the American people just don’t believe him anymore.

I’ve said all along that the real inflection point for this election would be the first debate — when Romney got to stand on stage with Obama and demonstrate whether or not he could connect with voters and get his message past the media filters. Obama’s collapse in Denver only made the contrast between them more obvious, and that’s a bell that simply cannot be unrung, and certainly not with the same tired strawmen that Romney torched in the first debate.

http://hotair.com/archives/2012/10/1...ance-this-bad/

Was sent as an email ... to tired after a long weekend to fact check tonight ...

While claiming to be a Christian, Obama's actions show a great hostility toward Christianity, and encouragement for Islam. Here are a few of the scores of actions revealing Obama’s hostility to Biblical faith.

· April 2008 – Obama speaks disrespectfully of Christians, saying they “cling to guns or religion” and have an “antipathy to people who aren’t like them.”

· April 2009 – When speaking at Catholic Georgetown University, Obama orders that a monogram symbolizing Jesus’ name be covered when he is making his speech.

· September 16, 2009 – The Obama administration appoints as EEOC Commissioner Chai Feldblum, who asserts that society should “not tolerate” any “private beliefs,” including religious beliefs, if they may negatively affect homosexual “equality.”

· May 2009 – While Obama does not host any National Day of Prayer event at the White House, he does host White House Iftar dinners in honor of Ramadan.

· 2010 – While every White House traditionally issues hundreds of official proclamations and statements on numerous occasions, this White House avoids traditional Biblical holidays and events but regularly recognizes major Muslim holidays, as evidenced by its 2010 statements on Ramadan, Eid-ul-Fitr, Hajj, and Eid-ul-Adha.

· October 19, 2010 – Obama begins deliberately omitting the phrase about “the Creator” when quoting the Declaration of Independence – an omission he has made on no less than seven occasions.

· April 2011 – For the first time in American history, Obama urges passage of a non-discrimination law that does not contain hiring protections for religious groups, forcing religious organizations to hire according to federal mandates without regard to the dictates of their own faith, thus eliminating conscience protection in hiring.

· August 2011 – The Air Force stops teaching the Just War theory to officers in California because the course is taught by chaplains and is based on a philosophy introduced by St. Augustine in the third century AD – a theory long taught by civilized nations across the world.

· May 2012 - The Obama administration opposes legislation to protect the rights of conscience for military chaplains who do not wish to perform same-sex marriages in violation of their strongly-held religious beliefs.

· June 2012 - Bibles for the American military have been printed in every conflict since the American Revolution, but the Obama Administration revokes the long-standing U. S. policy of allowing military service emblems to be placed on those military Bibles.

· February 2012 – The Obama administration makes effulgent apologies for Korans being burned by the U. S. military, but when Bibles were burned by the military, numerous reasons were offered why it was the right thing to do.

Obama is also anti-life, supporting and promoting abortion consistently throughout his public life, is against the Biblical family, recently saying he supports same-sex marriage, and promotes public immorality. ALL THIS while professing to be Christian. What a JOKE!!!