Ramirez on presidential grade inflation
posted at 8:55 am on December 23, 2011 by Ed Morrissey
It’s taken people almost two weeks to catch up to a nugget in Barack Obama’s interview with 60 Minutes that CBS, for obvious reasons, didn’t show on air but included in the transcript. The Washington Examiner’s Joel Gehrke immediately recognized the absurdity of Obama’s claim to have been more accomplished than any other president in his first two years, with the possible exception of FDR, LBJ, and some guy named Abraham Lincoln almost two centuries ago:
President Obama suggested, during his recent CBS interview, that his domestic and foreign policy achievements over his first term surpass any other United States president, “with the possible exceptions” of Presidents Lincoln, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, and Lyndon Johnson.
“I would put our legislative and foreign policy accomplishments in our first two years against any president — with the possible exceptions of Johnson, F.D.R., and Lincoln,” Obama told Steve Kroft, “just in terms of what we’ve gotten done in modern history.”
This would make a great Obamateurism — and it did last week, also winning the OOTW poll last Sunday. You’ll get a chance to vote on it again next week in the OOTY polls, so keep your eyes peeled. It’s getting noticed by more commentators this week than last, too, including our old friend Michael Ramirez, the two-time Pulitzer Prize-winning editorial cartoonist for Investors Business Daily. Rather than calling him the most accomplished President ever, Ramirez awards him another distinction entirely:
Say, didn’t Ronald Reagan inherit a worse economy and manage to produce better results by the same point in his presidency? Why yes, in fact, he did. Reagan came into office with a jobless rate of 7.5% and economic malaise; Obama came into office with the jobless rate at 7.8%. By November of the third year, Reagan’s unemployment rate was 8.5%, while Obama’s is 8.6%. Reagan got those numbers while growing the civilian labor force participation rate slightly from 63.9% to 64.1%, a trend that would accentuate the jobless rate. Obama, on the other hand, got to 8.6% while the civilian labor force participation rate dropped from 65.7% to 64.0%, which artificially lowered the unemployment rate figure. Not coincidentally, Obama has now brought the participation rate to its lowest level since … Reagan.
Also, be sure to check out Ramirez’ terrific collection of his works: Everyone Has the Right to My Opinion, which covers the entire breadth of Ramirez’ career, and it gives fascinating look at political history. Read my review here, and watch my interviews with Ramirez here and here. And don’t forget to check out the entire Investors.com site, which has now incorporated all of the former IBD Editorials, while individual investors still exist.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »
I don’t disagree with 0bama – he has made more change than nearly any other president – in nearly every area.
It’s just that the change is all in the negative direction.
cane_loader on December 23, 2011 at 10:23 AM
Illinois and the MidWest in general were antagonistic towards blacks. In the 19th Century, the MidWest didn’t promote black slavery because the white working class couldn’t tolerate being undercut. Aside from finding slavery morally repulsive, poor but surviving WHITE property owners (majority of population) couldn’t afford either slaves, hired help, or servants. And if MidWest entrepreneurs had money to hire help, they hired white workers. Given the 19th Century racism in the MidWest, blacks weren’t allowed to migrate to settle there, and certainly weren’t allowed to buy property to live in white communities.
Morons need not mistake the agony of 19th Century Labor as any sort of promotion for slavery. Point being, it wasn’t easy for anyone in the working class. Blacks, free or not, weren’t allowed to migrate to Illinois for work because they were NOT WELCOME. And those early Industrial Revolution factory workers were subjected to inhumane working conditions, permanently disabling injury and death without recompense, by the Northern Industrial interests who sponsored the Civil War against the Constitution’s States’ Rights including the right to secede (slavery or not). Early labor meant entire families working full time merely to scrape by subsistence living in slums amongst disease riddled populations in America (and in Europe). For morons today to ignore the reality of pain, suffering, disease, abuses and death that inner city American unorganized labor endured, citing the union corruption now as reason to revise historical record, or to feel justified in declaring that labor, skilled or not, deserves hardship as a fact of life, illustrates a vicious cycle of stupid is as stupid does.
maverick muse on December 23, 2011 at 10:26 AM
Lincoln’s got a cult following – why he’s held up as some kind of poster child for racial tolerance is unfathomable? They excuse his overt racism – they excuse that he would have kept the institution of slavery if it meant keeping the Union intact.
The emancipation proclamation forgives all his other failings? More likely people are just ignorant of his Presidency “They get the spin and white wash”. Lincoln is not in my top #4 Presidents – Lincoln was a racist. I think more of what the Kennedy family did for civil rights in their times than I would ever lay at Lincoln’s feet.
Dr Evil on December 23, 2011 at 10:26 AM
You are ignorant slobs who think anyone who disagrees with you just must not have heard your arguments before.
fadetogray on December 23, 2011 at 10:27 AM
Jimmy Carter will always be the champ in the worst department!
thuja on December 23, 2011 at 10:17 AM
No. Barky is orders of magnitude worse. There is no comparison between the damage Barky has done and the damage that any natural born American President has done. Barky is the only one to occupy the White House who has ever actually hated our nation, our institutions and our culture. He has no attachment to America and has made that painfully clear as he tried to destroy everything he possibly could (and was very successful at that). But, that’s why Barky was elected – as the ultimate act of pennance by the white guilters, given an extra push by the credit crisis (which pushed America to a psychotic break and thus brought on the desire for National Suicide by Indonesian).
ThePrimordialOrderedPair on December 23, 2011 at 10:28 AM
Just imagine if 0bama had used his charisma and Democrat majority for good? He really could have maken a great difference. Just goes to show that, even in such a complicated system as ours, the individual character of one man still counts.
cane_loader on December 23, 2011 at 10:28 AM
Video: ’60 Minutes’ Edits Out Obama’s Claim That He’s the Fourth Best President
And then, get a load of this, from the First Water Buffalo:
Those two are two of a kind, a gruesome twosome.
petefrt on December 23, 2011 at 10:30 AM
I am not the one who can’t have a HISTORICAL debate without calling someone a racist. All you have is rhetoric. Both me and Dr. Evil have given you historical reasoning why we don’t think Lincoln was a great President. Apparently you have to believe that suspending Habeas corpus, and a huge war was a good thing or you are defening slavery.
melle1228 on December 23, 2011 at 10:31 AM
Of course you are defending slavery.
fadetogray on December 23, 2011 at 10:32 AM
Of course you are defending slavery.
fadetogray on December 23, 2011 at 10:32 AM
Get a brain.
ThePrimordialOrderedPair on December 23, 2011 at 10:34 AM
Lincoln had to straddle a lot of lines to try to prevent breakup of the Union. He rightly figured that allowing that would open the door for foreign powers to divide and conquer. I give Lincoln credit as a great pragmatist.
cane_loader on December 23, 2011 at 10:34 AM
melle1228 on December 23, 2011 at 10:35 AM
This is so completely wrong it is hilarious. I think Lincoln was a terrible President.
That does not change the fact the South got exactly what it deserved one little bit.
fadetogray on December 23, 2011 at 10:35 AM
“That’s with the possible exception” means he’s willing to argue he’s better than some of them, so 4th best is the starting point. Second or third being the more realistic number in his opinion. As I find it hard to believe even Obama thinks he’s better than old Abe I’d say he’s aiming for a more modesty “second best in history.” And that’s in keeping with his “good solid B plus” approach to self grading. But give him four more years and watch out Abe!
Fred 2 on December 23, 2011 at 10:37 AM
Lincoln did a lot of things that can only be defended by the fact that we were in a huge war between the states, if not a true civil war.
But we really shouldn’t blame him for the Reconstruction, which was a horrible time for the South. Lincoln actually wanted the southern states re-admitted to the Union with a minimum of fuss. It was the Congress of the time that wanted to punish the South.
Andrew Johnson tried to follow the same policies as Lincoln, and came within a hairsbreadth of impeachment for his trouble. Granted, he was hardly a strong president, but if Lincoln had been alive he would have had a hard time doing any better. The Congress that was in place really wanted the South to pay.
tom on December 23, 2011 at 10:38 AM
Really? Why is that? Why not go farther shouldn’t America “get exactly” what it deserved? The north was by no means innocent to slavery, and certainly “working” blacks in the north didn’t have it much better than slaves. So tell me what does the north deserve for its sins?
melle1228 on December 23, 2011 at 10:40 AM
That’s the truth of it. Lincoln made up his mind that the Union would remain intact. After he made that decision it was just a question of the means, and sacrifice it was going to take to accomplish that end.
Dr Evil on December 23, 2011 at 10:42 AM
The Radical Republicans wanted the slaves to really be freed and treated like human beings, full American citizens.
The South did not want to do that.
Those of you defending the South in any way in this matter are, in fact, defending slavery and empowering the modern Left with your every utterance.
You are deluded fools.
fadetogray on December 23, 2011 at 10:43 AM
You really aren’t defending slavery, are you? Riiiight.
fadetogray on December 23, 2011 at 10:49 AM
I love how we have completely romanticized the time period
Noble northerners(with no ulterior motives) fight to free the slaves. Blacks were treated just like whites and we all lived happily ever after. There was really no need for that pesky Civil Rights act.
melle1228 on December 23, 2011 at 10:49 AM
How old are you? You said ” The south deserved what it got.” I assume for keeping slaves. So tell me what punishment did the north deserve? I mean they kept slaves too. Should we all pay reparations now? It’s called logic. You want to punish someone for the keeping of slaves i.e., the south. The north kept slaves as well. Oh nvm….
melle1228 on December 23, 2011 at 10:53 AM
Well, what started out as a discussion of Mr. Obama has turned into a discussion of what happened in the 1860′s. That’s fine with me; there is a limit to how much B.O. you can take in one day.
Here’s a question I have never heard anyone touch on:
Did Abraham Lincoln have any constitutional authority that permitted him to make the Emancipation Proclamation?
Dextrous on December 23, 2011 at 10:53 AM
No, that is your position. I am not defending slavery at all. I am arguing that the way we ended it maybe wasn’t the best way, get it? It certainly wasn’t Constitutional. You don’t take someone else’s constitutional rights away to restore someone elses, get it? Am I “high schooling” this down for you enough? You don’t kill 600,000 of thousands of people to free 200,000. Get it?
melle1228 on December 23, 2011 at 10:23 AM
I think the term “high schooling” is a bit harsh. I would hope that if your original statement had been uttered in any high school American history class room a good teacher would have had you elaborate in greater detail. A recently published book, This Fiery Trial, describes the evolution of Lincoln’s thoughts on the slavery question as the war progressed and has been helpful in fostering my understanding of the political side of the slavery question. I am not a Civil War scholar but based upon my limited reading I would question your generalizations.
DaveDief on December 23, 2011 at 10:54 AM
Lincoln in his own words what to do with freed black slaves.
“The whole nation is interested that the best use shall be made of these territories. We want them for the homes of free white people.” ~ Lincoln, on whether blacks – slave or free – should be allowed in the new territories in the west, October 16, 1854.
“I, as well as Judge Douglas, am in favor of the race to which I belong having the superior position. I have never said anything to the contrary.” ~ Lincoln, Aug. 21, 1858, in remarks stating his belief that blacks were naturally inferior to whites, which was a nearly universal belief on the part of whites in both the North and South long before and long after the Civil War.
“Root, hog, or die” ~ Lincoln’s suggestion to illiterate and propertyless ex-slaves unprepared for freedom, Feb. 3, 1865.
“They had better be set to digging their subsistence out of the ground.” ~ Lincoln in a War Department memo, April 16, 1863
“Send them to Liberia, to their own native land.” ~ Lincoln, speaking in favor of ethnic cleansing all blacks from the United States.
“I cannot make it better known than it already is, that I favor colonization.” ~ Lincoln, in a message to Congress, December 1, 1862, supporting deportation of all blacks from America.
“President Lincoln may colonize himself if he choose, but it is an impertinent act, on his part, to propose the getting rid of those who are as good as himself.” ~ America’s preeminent immediate Abolitionist and advocate of free trade, William Lloyd Garrison.
“[Lincoln] had not a drop of anti-slavery blood in his veins.” ~ William Lloyd Garrison.
The comments shown here illustrate that abolition was not what motivated Lincoln. The coldness in Lincoln’s remarks, the lack of thought and preparation about the process of emancipation, and how the freedman would cope without the necessary skills is readily apparent.
Dr Evil on December 23, 2011 at 10:54 AM
Wow. The narcicist president rates himself as “at least” the 4th best ever and the thread devolves into – “you are a racist and are defending slavery”. Wow.
VegasRick on December 23, 2011 at 10:55 AM
..it must be you because everyone knows Obama has no balls.
The War Planner on December 23, 2011 at 10:56 AM
The South’s refusal to give up slavery reminds my of the difficulty we are having in finding a way to reduce our reliance on gasoline for our transportation. We know we need to do it, but no one has been able to present a viable plan to get there from here. No one had a good plan for the plantation owners to reduce their reliance on slavery, even though the majority of them were morally torn over it.
Flame away, but the moral lines were more blurred than some would think. Had someone been able to craft a viable economic solution to slave labor, and sell it, the War could have been prevented.
cane_loader on December 23, 2011 at 10:57 AM
Yeah, VegasRick, we kind of got off topic, didn’t we.
cane_loader on December 23, 2011 at 10:58 AM
I was going to say that mooochelle has one thing going for her – She never has to ask “Does this dress make my a$$ look big?”
VegasRick on December 23, 2011 at 11:01 AM
I have read transcribed manumissions from as far south as Alabama (Heart Of Dixie) in the National Genealogical Quarterly. No it wasn’t cut and dried, there were southerners trying to figure out how to free slaves, I suspect in some cases they were mixed family members.
Dr Evil on December 23, 2011 at 11:02 AM
DaveDief on December 23, 2011 at 10:54 AM
I haven’t based any of my arguments on Lincoln’s opinions on slavery. I have said more than once that there were other ways to handle the slavery issue that would have:
1. Had slavery die a natural death thus transitioning slaves into the economy slowly by passing laws like they already had done. This would have ensured better employment for freed slaves.
2. By transitioning, it also would have kept the plantations intact so at least some slave would be able to continue to work as paid work if the south.
3.Think the transitioning would have sped up civil rights by a lot of years.
4. It would have allowed the south no justification for rebellion since it would have been constitutionally done.
5. Would have saved a lot of lives.
All that being said, Lincoln made the decision he did. Slavery ended which was great. I think him ending slavery and keeping the union together the way he did makes him one of the better Presidents. I just don’t think he is one of the greatest. As the first post that started this, I think Washington is completely overlooked and a much better President.
melle1228 on December 23, 2011 at 11:03 AM
Hey Ramirez, here’s your next cartoon:
Mitt’s driving the station wagon a la Chevy Chase, and the conservative electorate is tied to the roof, pooping down the back window….
cane_loader on December 23, 2011 at 11:03 AM
Now to defend Obama, some must break down other presidents; amazing and foolish little people. This man child had a super majority and did not get what he wanted because Pelosi was the big kahunas who wrote the Health Ins Law, the so call stim bill and the first and only budget. Obama has shown what he cannot do when dealing with the opposition who did not sit in the back of the room – zip, zero nada – which is fine with me. He is proud of what he did, when behind closed doors as his intention is to break America down. Lincoln alone saved this nation, while fighting everyone in his cabinet. Surely feelings of doubt were expressed over 4 years while 600,000 casualties mounted. But to denigrate Abe to say Obama is better is weak [for the lack of passing comments].
democratsarefools on December 23, 2011 at 11:03 AM
That Obama is the worst (well there was Carter) is a given and assumed. We were just debating his “choices” of great Presidents.
melle1228 on December 23, 2011 at 11:07 AM
The South got what it deserved for starting a war.
Hard Right on December 23, 2011 at 11:07 AM
That is a completely idiotic and illogical argument, and, yes, it is a defense of slavery. Any time you use moral equivalence to try to make a lesser evil look the same as a greater evil, you are defending the greater evil.
Slavery has existed all throughout the history of the world. It was universally accepted up until the Revolution. Then it began to be rolled back.
Those resisting the end of slavery deserved what they got.
Your reparations argument is ludicrous.
fadetogray on December 23, 2011 at 11:07 AM
Also, the North didn’t take up arms against the duly elected government to prevent the end of slavery.
The “states rights” claim is a red herring.
Hard Right on December 23, 2011 at 11:10 AM
Amidst the number of very ugly comments in this thread, I guess it is lost on all that Ramirez gave the Republican candidates all of the talking points they ever needed. In one cartoon.
exliberal on December 23, 2011 at 11:12 AM
Quoting Lincoln in his own words is denigrating Abe. That’s nonsense.
Dr Evil on December 23, 2011 at 11:14 AM
What am I making morally equivalent? I said and I repeat one more time for you, Lincoln could have handled the slavery issue differently and still came out with the same result. I said because of the way Lincoln handled it; I didn’t think he was a great President. You seem to think that because I don’t think Lincoln is God that I must I just must be defending slavery.
Slavery still exist all over the world today.
melle1228 on December 23, 2011 at 11:15 AM
If wishes were horses, beggars would ride.
In 1860 almost no one was arguing for the abrupt termination of slavery, with no period of adjustment. However, what the South was actually arguing for was not some way to wind down slavery, but to expand it into the territories.
The war was already going on in the territories.
The arguments that try to defend the South on this are a combination of foolishness and duplicity.
And those arguments play right into the hands of the political left.
fadetogray on December 23, 2011 at 11:16 AM
Yeah, let’s get off the Civil-War thing. That’s better for an open thread.
Did Ramirez put it all is a nutshell, or what?! I’m trying to think of what he left out, because he pretty much covered the map.
cane_loader on December 23, 2011 at 11:17 AM
Welcome back narutoboy.
tom daschle concerned on December 23, 2011 at 11:17 AM
Riiight.
Good.
fadetogray on December 23, 2011 at 11:18 AM
Tough to argue with someone so full of himself. The narcissist-in-chief is truly a legend in his own mind. It will be great fun watching the blame game if he loses his bid for a second term. Those darn rascally people just did not appreciate what I was trying to accomplish–the rubes. Of course, with the Republican circular firing squad, it’s probably too optimistic to expect one-term for the great healer.
BuckEyeBob on December 23, 2011 at 11:18 AM
LOL
melle1228 on December 23, 2011 at 11:19 AM
I put it on my facebook reluctantly since I have a lot of family that voted for him in 2008. I was pleasantly surprised how many aren’t voting for him this time.
melle1228 on December 23, 2011 at 11:21 AM
fadetogray, it seems we have some southern types or sympathizers who want to pretend the South was the victim of a dictator.
Been thru this with folks like them and there is no rationality behind their arguments, just emotion and hatred. Lincoln was a great (if imperfect) president and they simply can’t face the facts.
Hard Right on December 23, 2011 at 11:22 AM
Agreed.
When ever I hear someone trying to generically promote change without any specifics, I think of this Dilbert cartoon.
God bless Scott Adams!
listens2glenn on December 23, 2011 at 11:25 AM
I am in the Washington camp.
Carter recently sent his condolences to the North Koreans over the passing of their despot the late Kim Jong Il. I think he’s nervous about giving up his title.
Dr Evil on December 23, 2011 at 11:25 AM
This is so key. Look at the big picture, and I’ve said it before. I am convinced that America is ready to eject 0bama. The voters just want the GOP to put forward an acceptable candidate, and 0bama’s gone.
The question is – is Gingrich “acceptable?” That’s what remains to be battled out.
cane_loader on December 23, 2011 at 11:26 AM
Good for you. And that is great news about your family members now see through his bs.
VegasRick on December 23, 2011 at 11:27 AM
Yeah I think Romney is more of an easy win with the “apathetic” electorate, but I think Newt may(knock on wood) be more predictable. Like I said before though, if it wasn’t for SCOTUS nominees and the repeal of Obamacare. I would almost hope for a split Presidency and Congress. Gridlock means nothing gets done, and that means nothing gets messed up.
melle1228 on December 23, 2011 at 11:30 AM
We have to choose our candidate with an eye toward whom the electorate will accept.
That’s where poor Rick Perry is screwed – he just conjures up too many shades of Bush 43 – like a dog whistle that evokes in people the subliminal message that the MSM has hammered home. Between Perry’s mediocre ability to think on his feet, and the unfair MSM “Bush meme,” choosing Perry terrifies me, because the stakes are so high.
I know that’s not entirely fair to Perry, but choosing Perry would be a hell of a gamble – like taking a cross-country trip in a 1972 Pinto with speeding semis on your butt.
Will you make it there? Almost certainly. If you get rear-ended? Not the car you want to be in.
cane_loader on December 23, 2011 at 11:31 AM
nobody notices that the graphic for this post looks like a d1ck?
kaltes on December 23, 2011 at 11:34 AM
In a wall of noise I found this little gem of observance. I thought it was worth repeating.
The Arrant Knave on December 23, 2011 at 11:37 AM
-1 to Ed for missing a chance for “over 100 years ago:”
HitNRun on December 23, 2011 at 11:42 AM
LOL–nope.. All the “wall of noise” I made on this thread and I completely missed it. Thanks for pointing it out though; it’s fitting!
melle1228 on December 23, 2011 at 11:44 AM
Not until you mentioned it. I am used to cartoonist caricatures I didn’t think much about it…..I think you are onto something.
Dr Evil on December 23, 2011 at 11:46 AM
Hey Squiddy, name me 3 Liberal Comedians who are actually funny.
Del Dolemonte on December 23, 2011 at 11:50 AM
Obama is proof that sometimes evolution goes backwards.
logicman_1998 on December 23, 2011 at 11:54 AM
Lots o’ racism here at HotGas lately.
Bishop on December 23, 2011 at 11:55 AM
He was technically correct. There are 57 states.
In the OAS, that is.
Del Dolemonte on December 23, 2011 at 11:55 AM
well,
mark81150 on December 23, 2011 at 11:56 AM
Only about two two and a half hours ago.
Oldnuke on December 23, 2011 at 11:57 AM
Citing Cindy Sheehan’s boyfriend? LOL.
Del Dolemonte on December 23, 2011 at 11:58 AM
Really not you too?.. Geez I never thought on a Conservative site I couldn’t have a historical discussion on whether on not Lincoln was a great President, whether he handled the ending of slavery well, or whether or not there was an alternative to the civil war.
I am so sorry that I didn’t preface my comments with “YES I THINK SLAVERY IS BAD” and “YES I THINK IT SHOULD HAVE ENDED.” I truly thought that was a given, because in my mind it was.
melle1228 on December 23, 2011 at 11:59 AM
Well, if it’s accuracy in media you want, then Ramirez should have left off the ears….
cane_loader on December 23, 2011 at 11:59 AM
It’s been a long time since we had a Civil War free for all. Gotta have one of these every five years or so to clear out the bad blood.
Oldnuke on December 23, 2011 at 12:00 PM
Speaking of ‘modesty’
Note also how the ‘educated’ pronounce “strength”.
Schadenfreude on December 23, 2011 at 12:01 PM
Yes, but for his O-ness, these are accomplishments.
Let’s stop him before he accomplishes any more.
Pablo Snooze on December 23, 2011 at 12:01 PM
I don’t think he’s even the 40th best. The 4th from last sounds more like it. Hands down.
mile66 on December 23, 2011 at 12:05 PM
Huh, I wasn’t even fishing and a scrappy Walleye just jumped up on the dock.
Bishop on December 23, 2011 at 12:06 PM
:) Sorry little sensitive about being called a racist earlier which I don’t believe I have ever been called in my life. I thought debates about history and policy were fair game on a conservative site.
melle1228 on December 23, 2011 at 12:09 PM
Some people are unable to rationally debate the Civil War because they learned in school that it was a black and white issue, with no complications or nuances.
North = GOOD
South = EVIL.
No rational discussion allowed, or else you’re a racist.
cane_loader on December 23, 2011 at 12:11 PM
No problem, you’ll find that I snark a lot, usually on topics that have already been beaten to death and there isn’t much left to add which hasn’t already been said a dozen times.
Bishop on December 23, 2011 at 12:13 PM
Bishop on December 23, 2011 at 12:13 PM
I know I like your posts. That was what was making it extra hard on me that you might think I am racist. ;)
melle1228 on December 23, 2011 at 12:14 PM
And Reagan didn’t have the luxury of his party controlling the House and Senate, like Obama did.
The House of Representatives was controlled by Democrats for the entire duration of Reagan’s Presidency.
And the Senate was controlled by Democrats for the last two years of Reagan’s Presidency.
Yet Obama whines about having to deal with a Republican House led by a Speaker who will “never give up on” Obama.
Pelosi and Reid came into majority control with the jobless rate at 4.4%
Obama was an active member of the Democratic Congress which sent both unemployment and debt skyrocketing. He didn’t inherit a bad economy… he helped create it!
Unemployment was LOW five years ago when Republicans controlled the Presidency, House and Senate. It’s the Demonrats who screwed things up! Not the least of which was their support of the corruption at Fannie/Freddie:
And tell me, how much money did Obama get from their lobbyists?
ITguy on December 23, 2011 at 12:14 PM
C orrupt
B bullcaca
S tation
May they spontaneously combust, incl. all the other media, for dereliction of duties.
Obama is a sausage made from mixing: Orwell, Pinocchio, Muenchhausen and Machiavelli.
Schadenfreude on December 23, 2011 at 12:15 PM
sesquipedalian on December 23, 2011 at 9:39 AM
Fools are indignant.
Schadenfreude on December 23, 2011 at 12:18 PM
Ronald Reagan wasn’t a member of Congress’ majority party in the two years before his inauguration. Ronald Reagan didn’t play a part in creating the economic problem that he inherited.
Obama was, and did.
ITguy on December 23, 2011 at 12:18 PM
The President has spoken, he’s almost a great a president as Abraham Lincoln (well the PC version anyway). It’s time to add the nuance, context and texture….it’s Christmas time grab some tinsel, let’s finish decorating this historically, and geographically challenged genius.
Dr Evil on December 23, 2011 at 12:19 PM
Best, evah, your nemesis, and a national treasure. May he mock your ‘god’ into the oblivion he deserves to sink.
Schadenfreude on December 23, 2011 at 12:19 PM
melle1228 on December 23, 2011 at 12:14 PM
Bishop on December 23, 2011 at 12:19 PM
WTF with the coding?
Bishop on December 23, 2011 at 12:20 PM
If he were, you’d ignore him, alas.
Schadenfreude on December 23, 2011 at 12:21 PM
You’re just drinking, early :)
Schadenfreude on December 23, 2011 at 12:22 PM
Oh no! Never will you hear anything leftist cross these lips or err this keyboard.. LOL
melle1228 on December 23, 2011 at 12:22 PM
Comment of the year!!!
Schadenfreude on December 23, 2011 at 12:24 PM
Big ears on the cartoon of a man who doesn’t listen?
Great!
TimBuk3 on December 23, 2011 at 12:24 PM
@fadetogray
Is that gray like the Rebel soldiers who were willing to kill their own brothers and neighbors just to keep slavery?
Nutstuyu on December 23, 2011 at 12:38 PM
No, he didn’t “inherit” anything because Carter didn’t die and and have Reagan in his will. Reagan chose to run for President and then chose to take the oath of office. Just like Obummer chose to run for President, chose to accept the DNC nomination, chose to campaign against McCain and chose to take the oath of office. So stop with the useless misuse of the word “inherit” and teach your man-child in the Oval Office to TAKE SOME G.D. RESPONSIBILITY FOR ONCE!
Nutstuyu on December 23, 2011 at 12:42 PM
Obama is JUST AS MUCH white as he is black. So it is impossible for us “whites” to be racist against the 44th white president.
Nutstuyu on December 23, 2011 at 12:43 PM
C’mon, can’t I get a runner-up for this? ;-)
cane_loader on December 23, 2011 at 12:49 PM
The “One” thinks he’s “The 4th”……but to me he will always be “The Wizard of ZerOZ!”
And every time I see him I ask,”How the hell did this happen to this great country?”
IslandLibertarian on December 23, 2011 at 1:15 PM
Most “great presidents” would never attempt to claim the mantle of being a “great president.” That moniker is bestowed upon them as a result of good outcomes, strong character, moral clarity and courage in the face of national hardship.
Obama is probably the first president to declare himself a great president. If he has to say it, then it probably isn’t true.
ted c on December 23, 2011 at 1:34 PM
Whoa…. This post certainly took an ugly turn and quickly. Lincoln is obviously still a passionate subject but let’s keep our heads folks.
A couple quick things:
The civil war was not begun or fought over slavery. In fact Lincoln famously freed the slaves in DC when it was threatened by siege and not a day before. Before you start arguing here research the dates of the wars beginning and the date of the signing of the proclamation of emancipation. So those of you out there claiming that people criticizing Lincoln are defending slavery are demonstrating your ignorance.
The southern states started the war at Ft. Sumter by attacking the union garrison there. There is no escaping this simple fact either folks. So all you folks out there criticizing Lincoln for an unjust war our demonstrating your ignorance.
The simple fact is the civil war was fought over power. Where the states allowed to override the federal government or was the federal government supreme. We can all debate Lincoln’s intentions all we want but that is the simple fact. Lincoln was constitutionally the absolute worse president in history there is no denying that fact. Lincoln was also president during the most trying period in our history so I personally try to grade on a curve considering the circumstances.
Finally the war is long since over, the veterans are all buried. As are the slaves and the slave owners. I think we would all be best served to take the lessons from this period and leave hatred, animosity and passions in the past where it belongs. We are Americans today for better or worse. Let’s behave as such.
iidvbii on December 23, 2011 at 1:36 PM
Of course they’ll be “Presidential Grade Inflation?” Dear Leader has been the recipient of grade inflation and various other preferences his entire life…
badcrow on December 23, 2011 at 1:45 PM
You got it :) Sorry to have missed, good one.
Schadenfreude on December 23, 2011 at 1:45 PM
-
This is key to Barry’s success btw…
-
RalphyBoy on December 23, 2011 at 1:49 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »