obama's 2012 campaign

**attaboy** · 12-09-2012, 07:37 AM

Originally Posted by S Landreth

Originally Posted by attaboy

What does this remind you of?

Respect!

Something you should do every time you see Obama’s picture

So you think free men should bow? There folks you have Landreth exhibiting his proclivity for authoritarian display. Free men bow before no one especially a potentate.

**sabang** · 12-09-2012, 08:00 AM

Free men bow before no one especially a potentate.

I think this beats 'Liberal White Guilt' hands down, for non-Issue of the year.

**attaboy** · 12-09-2012, 08:58 AM

I know. I know. We are all supposed to forget who Barack Obama is because the Democrats want to recast his image into something more dynamic and less effete so they can win four more years and he can dole out federal cash to loyal Democrat districts. Get people used to it and they will vote Democrat all their life.

The guy quit governing and started campaigning six months earlier than what's traditional. He's a quitter. What has the Democrat leadership needed to do? They've had to bring in Bill Clinton to do the heavy lifting at the convention. Bill Clinton will have to drag the president across the finish line.

**Boon Mee** · 13-09-2012, 03:45 PM

Chucking Israel under the bus or what?

Barack Obama invited Muslim Brotherhood Egyptian President Mohammad Morsi to meet with him in New York next week. But, not Netanyahu.

The man never ceases to amaze...

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/...88A18320120911

**robuzo** · 14-09-2012, 12:24 PM

Here's some meat for the Obama haters. . .although it kind of makes me wonder why you hate him so much. Other than the racism. . .but hey, you hated Clinton, too, just as much, right? Right? And not just because he was the "first black president," I assume.
Obama?s Campaign Duplicities Rival Romney?s and Ryan?s?By John R. MacArthur (Harper's Magazine)
Obama’s Campaign Duplicities Rival Romney’s and Ryan’s
By John R. MacArthur

Like other liberals, I’ve been inundated with e-mails attacking the “lies” lately retailed by the Republican Party and the two candidates leading its national ticket.

Paul Ryan’s remarks about the shutdown of his hometown General Motors plant, and President Obama’s alleged deception about keeping it open, is the casus belli cited by most of the anti-Ryan/Romney truthers. But the Janesville/GM gambit seems to stand in for a broader belief among Obama partisans that the Republicans are “lying” on a grander scale than ever before.

I don’t disagree that Paul Ryan and Mitt Romney are dishonest propagandists (Ryan posing as the future savior of Medicare is the most laughable lie to date), but why isn’t Obama being held to the same standard? While the Republicans get slammed for reading back the president’s words to their advantage, Obama gets a free ride from liberals about his own double talk, especially on matters industrial and blue collar.

To be sure, all politicians lie, but Obama has distinguished himself with prevarications such as not closing Guantánamo and not even trying to raise the minimum wage as he pledged. And on “free trade” and tax policy, Ryan’s lies are no match for Obama’s powers of outright distortion. The incumbent’s rhetoric these days is populist, but his record shows him squarely on the side of the capitalist/banking class he purports to oppose.

Obama quickly reversed his pledge to “renegotiate” the North American Free Trade Agreement once in office and then compounded his hypocrisy by pushing through new job-killing trade deals with South Korea, Colombia, and Panama. As far as I know, he’s made no mention whatsoever of Permanent Normal Trade Relations with China or our tiny 2.5 percent tariff on Japanese car imports (not including pickup trucks)—two policies that contributed greatly to the death of the Janesville, Wisconsin, GM plant.

Obama’s approach to taxing the rich has always been timid, but he has repeatedly backed down when his foes make loud enough threats, as when the G.O.P. objected to raising the debt ceiling. Sacrificed was Obama’s commitment to letting the Bush tax cuts expire, which would have raised the top marginal tax rate a few points, to the still historically low 39.6 percent of the Clinton era.

Less publicized has been Obama’s reneging on another campaign pledge—to raise the capital-gains tax to 25 percent from 15 percent, which would have forced hedge-fund and private-equity partners to pay higher tax on income they claim as “fees” but that should really be treated as personal income and taxed at 35 percent. Much liberal hot air has been bloviated about Romney paying the 15 percent capital-gains rate for his ill-gotten gains from Bain Capital, but liberals evidently don’t find it appropriate to mention that the big Democratic congressional majority in 2009–10 chose not to raise Romney’s taxes when it could have easily done so.

None of this should be surprising to anyone who has read Obama’s campaign book The Audacity of Hope, in which he expresses his admiration for Robert Rubin, the arch deregulator who did so much damage on behalf of Clinton’s “new Democrat” lurch to the right. But what should be surprising is Obama’s hypocrisy about GM. With its initial 61 percent stake in the corporation, the Obama Administration could have insisted that GM preserve more American jobs (including at GM/Janesville) in exchange for the government’s largesse with taxpayer money.

But it didn’t, because the principal architect of the GM bailout was the financier Steven Rattner, himself a disciple of Rubin and his free-market church. Rattner’s plan wasn’t that different from what Bain Capital and Romney would propose: Refinance GM and Chrysler with other people’s money and saddle them with debt while both companies continue to shut down unionized plants and outsource jobs to such cheap labor locales as Mexico and China. Today, fewer than half of GM jobs are in the United States, and the corporation has made it clear it intends to increase manufacturing in Mexico and China.

The more pertinent critique of Paul Ryan’s “lying” use of Obama’s Janesville/GM speech would have concerned his choice of quotes. For it’s clear that Ryan’s speechwriters shied away from the more damning section about “free trade” and NAFTA. If Ryan and the Republicans had any guts, or honesty—if they really disagreed with Obama—this is how his speech would have gone:

“My fellow Americans, we need to face up to the reality and the ravages of globalization—the damage done by so-called free-trade policies that benefit no one but the financial class. Where we desperately need candor, we instead get deception and dissembling from the president. I know, because he was at his very worst in my hometown of Janesville. I’d like to quote from candidate Obama’s campaign speech of February 13, 2008: “ ‘It’s also time to look to the future and figure out how to make trade work for American workers. I won’t stand here and tell you that we can—or should—stop free trade. We can’t stop every job from going overseas. But I also won’t stand here and accept an America where we do nothing to help American workers who lost jobs and opportunities because of these trade agreements. And that’s a position of mine that doesn’t change based on who I’m talking to or the election I’m running in. You know, in the years after her husband signed NAFTA, Senator Clinton would go around talking about how great it was and how many benefits it would bring. Now that she’s running for president, she says we need a time-out on trade. No one knows when this time-out will end. Maybe after the election. I don’t know about a timeout, but I do know this—when I am president, I will not sign another trade agreement unless it has protections for the environment and protections for American workers.’ ”

Maybe in 2016, someone will run for president who doesn’t give duplicitous speeches like Paul Ryan and Barack Obama.
---
Ye gods ye the Romney campaign is an atrocity; it is hard to imagine how a campaign could be any stupider even if they had given Sarah Palin another chance. So, since Obama is going to win anyway- barring another embassy hostage crisis plus a third-party candidate sucking away votes (for those of you old enough to remember Carter; probably won't be any of the sort of sucking revelations that lost it for Gore, who was the Vice- in both senses- incumbent)- I think we might as well start holding O's feet to the fire about now. Especially after the nomination acceptance speech, in which he said all the right things and after five minutes of reflection properly made me feel like a right sucker.

**robuzo** · 14-09-2012, 12:32 PM

^Oh, right- so why vote for Obama, then? Two reasons:

1) Supreme court vacancies
2) Probably less war if Obama is president and less kissing of Likudnik ass. If the Israeli right wants to take a side in the Sunni-Shia festivities (Sunnis already got their bomb, which makes the Hidden Imam unhappy I'm sure) that's their problem. Attacking Iran is the stupidest idea since Gulf War Redux, actually stupider. I hope Obama doesn't prove me wrong.

**sabang** · 14-09-2012, 01:22 PM

Obama should be rightly taken to task for not delivering on several campaign promises, but the Progressive or liberal wing of the party that is most let down are hardly going to vote for Mitt- they may stay home on voting day however, which obviously is a positive for the GOP.

**buriramboy** · 14-09-2012, 01:30 PM

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

Chucking Israel under the bus or what?

Barack Obama invited Muslim Brotherhood Egyptian President Mohammad Morsi to meet with him in New York next week. But, not Netanyahu.

The man never ceases to amaze...

Obama won't meet Netanyahu over Iran row -Israeli official | Reuters

Quite understandable seeing that Israel is the worlds biggest culprit when it comes to state sponsored terrorism.

**Boon Mee** · 15-09-2012, 06:19 AM

Obama flashback:

The Day I’m Inaugurated Muslim Hostility Will Ease.

Did anybody actually believe that?

**sabang** · 15-09-2012, 06:36 AM

In the GOP's self destructive stampede to the far Right, it has changed the ergonomics of voting. It used to be the case that the republicans were kind of a default 'safe' choice for the middle ground, if there were no singular major issue's that defined the election. Now it is the opposite.

How long will the republican party machine act like ostriches? If this election does not shake them out of their fossilised denial, find a new second party America- because that one is headed for extinction. Read and weep, stalwarts-

Obama vs. Romney Electoral Map

**Boon Mee** · 15-09-2012, 06:41 AM

^
Heh...those so-called 'maps' change on a daily basis. Don't get cocky there. Obama's latest example of ineptitude is playing across the country & world as we speak. Remember when Europeans loved him:

Der Spiegel: “Obama’s Middle East Policy Is In Ruins.”

But then, historically, their taste in leaders has tended to lead to disappointment.

**sabang** · 15-09-2012, 06:51 AM

Paddle along deNial (without a paddle) for as long as you want booner- but every rational analyst knows that these polls, and demographic trends in general, are very bad news for the GOP. I hardly need tell you the economy sucks and people are hurting, or that this situation is generally considered a 'gimme' for the Opposition party. Not so in 2012- the GOP Campaign platform is looking very much like an Epic Fail.

**Boon Mee** · 15-09-2012, 06:56 AM

Originally Posted by sabang

Paddle along deNial (without a paddle) for as long as you want booner- but every rational analyst knows that these polls, and demographic trends in general, are very bad news for the GOP. I hardly need tell you the economy sucks and people are hurting, or that this situation is generally considered a 'gimme' for the Opposition party. Not so in 2012- the GOP Campaign platform is looking very much like an Epic Fail.

Don't know where you're getting your news but Congress - at least the House is a lock-in for the Republicans this fall. That's from Bloomberg News which is definitely middle-of-the-road when it comes to politics. In fact, lately they seem to be tilting a bit left with some of their guests.

Anyhow, the fact is unless Romney takes the WH it's going to be another 4 years of gridlock - count on that.

**S Landreth** · 15-09-2012, 07:02 AM

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

Anyhow, the fact is unless Romney takes the WH it's going to be another 4 years of gridlock - count on that.

What else could we/Americans expect from the Rethugs,…………Obstructionists

Keep it up, your party will never ever see the inside of the White House again, unless by invitation from a sitting Democratic president.

**sabang** · 15-09-2012, 07:16 AM

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

Congress - at least the House is a lock-in for the Republicans this fall

Fair point. Describing it as a 'lock-in' is obviously wishful thinking, but now that the Potus election looks all but in the bag for Obama, it will be interesting to see how the Congressional results tally. These are quite important too, given the neorepublican tactics of serial obstructionism and hostage taking at Congressional level.

**MrG** · 15-09-2012, 08:15 AM

Originally Posted by robuzo

What about Obama's lies? Here's some meat for the Obama haters. . .although it kind of makes me wonder why you hate him so much. Other than the racism. . .but hey, you hated Clinton, too, just as much, right? Right? And not just because he was the "first black president," I assume. Obama?s Campaign Duplicities Rival Romney?s and Ryan?s?By John R. MacArthur (Harper's Magazine) Obama’s Campaign Duplicities Rival Romney’s and Ryan’s By John R. MacArthur

Great post, Robuzo. I think closing gitmo didn't go through for lack of trying: it was stymied by Congress.

I won't try to dispute most of the facts in here, but I question the distinction the author makes between bald face lies about facts on the ground (Ryan's Convention speech), and the failure to live up to campaign promises. This is pretty much par for the course for any President, whether due to planned duplicity or just seeing things different once they'r in the White House. There's also political reality and the calculation of what can be done. Raising the campaign tax from 15% to 25% with this congress...POTUS may just have tried to spend his political capital somewhere else. I wonder if the records show he tried.

Good article and forces a lot of issues into the open. I wonder if anybody will do a re-buttal.

Interesting that he didn't mention Obama's biggest failure...not amending the Patriot Act and restoring habeus corpus.

**robuzo** · 15-09-2012, 09:20 AM

Originally Posted by MrG

Originally Posted by robuzo

What about Obama's lies? Here's some meat for the Obama haters. . .although it kind of makes me wonder why you hate him so much. Other than the racism. . .but hey, you hated Clinton, too, just as much, right? Right? And not just because he was the "first black president," I assume. Obama?s Campaign Duplicities Rival Romney?s and Ryan?s?By John R. MacArthur (Harper's Magazine) Obama’s Campaign Duplicities Rival Romney’s and Ryan’s By John R. MacArthur

Great post, Robuzo. I think closing gitmo didn't go through for lack of trying: it was stymied by Congress.

I won't try to dispute most of the facts in here, but I question the distinction the author makes between bald face lies about facts on the ground (Ryan's Convention speech), and the failure to live up to campaign promises. This is pretty much par for the course for any President, whether due to planned duplicity or just seeing things different once they'r in the White House. There's also political reality and the calculation of what can be done. Raising the campaign tax from 15% to 25% with this congress...POTUS may just have tried to spend his political capital somewhere else. I wonder if the records show he tried.

Good article and forces a lot of issues into the open. I wonder if anybody will do a re-buttal.

Interesting that he didn't mention Obama's biggest failure...not amending the Patriot Act and restoring habeus corpus.

Also in Harper's, Kevin Baker elaborates a bit in reference to the speech:
The Path to Genuine Political Change?By Kevin Baker (Harper's Magazine)
[excerpt]
Obama demonstrated beyond doubt that he was the adult in this race. But he didn’t do it only by shooing the children from the room. He went on to lay out a reasoned, eloquent defense of not just his more progressive initiatives thus far, but the entire liberal tradition of engaging with the world. It was, in fact, a remarkably liberal speech, remarkably well-reasoned. It only made one wish that he could have come into office at a time of right-wing disarray, with an impassioned grassroots movement at his back and large congressional majorities to support him.

Oh, wait. That already happened, and Obama squandered each of these advantages, sometimes quite deliberately. [Bold/underlining above is mine- Rob] The saddest lesson of the past four years is that this president doesn’t believe much of what he says to galvanize his base. All the evidence is that, in a second term, President Obama will preoccupy himself almost exclusively with striking a “grand bargain” on the budget deficit, so dear to commentators’ hearts. Considering the opposition, any such compromise will likely be an unmitigated disaster for the liberal cause and the country. Such a deal is the only major thing that is likely to happen—indeed, that is possible—given “four more years.” That, and a few more quiet trade deals that will offshore still more American industrial jobs—such as the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) being negotiated in Virginia even now—or perhaps some terrible foreign policy overreach on Obama’s part, such as, God forbid, an invasion of Iran.

**Boon Mee** · 15-09-2012, 09:29 AM

Originally Posted by S Landreth

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

Anyhow, the fact is unless Romney takes the WH it's going to be another 4 years of gridlock - count on that.

What else could we/Americans expect from the Rethugs,…………Obstructionists

Keep it up, your party will never ever see the inside of the White House again, unless by invitation from a sitting Democratic president.

Heh...not obstructionists but perhaps patriots is the better description. Believe it or not, there are some who do not want to see America turn into the Nanny State that is Europe.

**sabang** · 15-09-2012, 10:23 AM

Inward looking empire, ehh? You should learn from Chinese history. Nothing exists in isolation, certainly not in the Internet age, and more and more Americans are noticing that their living standards are slipping, both in absolute and (more so) comparitive terms. Why is this so, they ask.

**Boon Mee** · 15-09-2012, 10:28 AM

Originally Posted by sabang

Inward looking empire, ehh? You should learn from Chinese history. Nothing exists in isolation, certainly not in the Internet age, and more and more Americans are noticing that their living standards are slipping, both in absolute and (more so) comparitive terms. Why is this so, they ask.

Might just be because the number of regulations that Obama has put in place that hamstring small businesses? That and the encroaching socialization of the country - i.e. Obamacare? When the money runs out do you suppose they ask themselves perhaps we should have focused on profits a bit more?

**Boon Mee** · 15-09-2012, 01:30 PM

Wow! Embassies are burning across the Middle East, butt don’t worry; we will not be distracted from our primary mission:

The man is shameless...

**david44** · 15-09-2012, 01:53 PM

How odd The GOP have selected a loser against a disgraced failure,like the real governors want to supress the vote for lackluster candidates.No wonder USA is in terinal decline if this is the best tey can offer even Powell,Guliani,Hilary,Bloomberg seems preferable to them.

**barbaro** · 15-09-2012, 05:49 PM

Originally Posted by sabang

Inward looking empire, ehh? You should learn from Chinese history. Nothing exists in isolation, certainly not in the Internet age, and more and more Americans are noticing that their living standards are slipping, both in absolute and (more so) comparitive terms. Why is this so, they ask.

We know the answer.

Globalization and Neo-liberal policies that began in earnest after WWII ended.

The standard of living in the US will continue to decline and the standard of living in emerging markets will continue to increase, and somewhere along this line, both will intersect.

**Boon Mee** · 16-09-2012, 06:02 AM

Number Of Times Obama Has Tweeted About Jay-Z And Beyonce: 47 – Number Of Times He Tweeted About Murder Of Four Americans In Libya: 1

Just one of President Barack Obama’s last 47 tweets from his official campaign account mentioned the crisis unfolding in the Middle East or the four Americans who lost their lives in a fiery attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya on Tuesday.
Among the tweets sent out by Obama’s Twitter account included a chance to win tickets to an Obama event hosted by Jay-Z and Beyonce, links to Obama merchandise and solicitations for $5 and $10 donations.
The only mention of the consulate assault came in the form of a retweet of the White House Twitter account

Obama Campaign Has Tweeted About Jay-Z & Beyonce More Than Libya Consulate Attack | TheBlaze.com

Really has his priorities straight, eh?

**Boon Mee** · 28-09-2012, 07:21 AM

Screaming Apparent Obama Supporter Explains Why We Need to Re-Elect President: ‘He Gave Us a Phone, He Gonna Do More!’

Obama Voter Says Vote for Obama because he gives a free Phone - YouTube

If you work for a living, you are this woman's slave. How 'bout them apples!

In case you did not hear that clearly, let's transcribe it:

“Everybody in Cleveland, low minorities, got Obama phone. Keep Obama in president, you know. He gave us a phone, he gonna do more.”

The person shooting the video asks, How did he give you a phone? To which the woman replies: “You sign up! If you on food stamps, you on social security, you got low income, you disability…”

The video includes a cut at that point and picks up with the filmer asking “What’s wrong with Romney?” Without blinking, the passionate Obama supporter says:

“Romney, he sucks! Bad.”

And this is exactly what Mitt the Leader was talking about in terms of the 47%. America is totally fucked if Obama is re-elected.

Source for the quotes here

Thread: obama's 2012 campaign

Thread Tools

Display

What about Obama's lies?

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

Posting Permissions