Is Obama that bad? - Printable Version
+- Roosh V Forum (https://rooshvforum.network)
+-- Forum: Main (https://rooshvforum.network/forum-1.html)
+--- Forum: Everything Else (https://rooshvforum.network/forum-7.html)
+---- Forum: Politics (https://rooshvforum.network/forum-8.html)
+---- Thread: Is Obama that bad? (/thread-51837.html)
+- Roosh V Forum (https://rooshvforum.network)
+-- Forum: Main (https://rooshvforum.network/forum-1.html)
+--- Forum: Everything Else (https://rooshvforum.network/forum-7.html)
+---- Forum: Politics (https://rooshvforum.network/forum-8.html)
+---- Thread: Is Obama that bad? (/thread-51837.html)
Is Obama that bad? - The Black Knight - 07-04-2016
Quote: (06-23-2016 02:39 PM)Truth Teller Wrote:
The most persecuted group in the United States has become heterosexual white men. Everything is their fault. Women are failing? We must not be letting them "lean in." Some Islamist shoots up a nightclub? Must be white, Christian homophobia. I'm fat? Not my fault, men have to love my body the way it is. Anybody against "body positive" language is a bigot!
Lord Jesus... ain't that the truth!
Is Obama that bad? - Off The Reservation - 07-08-2016
Quote: (07-03-2016 08:20 PM)The Lizard of Oz Wrote:
I wrote the following earlier in this thread:
Quote: (11-19-2015 10:39 PM)The Lizard of Oz Wrote:
1. The "sexual assault" witch hunt on US college campuses was explicitly demanded and created by this administration. It is the direct result of the "Dear Colleague" letter sent in 2011 by the Department of Education to US college administrators, threatening them with Title IX lawsuits and the denial of federal funds if they did not institute the current system of "sexual assault" kangaroo courts, and student expulsions on the basis of "preponderance of evidence" -- all to solve the ludicrous invented problem of a "sexual assault epidemic" in some of the safest places on the face of the earth.
If that were not enough, the administration has repeatedly and explicitly made clear -- at the highest levels, including the President -- that it views the perpetuation of this evil witch hunt as a very high priority. It has publicized discredited studies and outright propaganda to give credence to absurd and discredited "1 in 5" statistics.
This administration is directly responsible for darkening the atmosphere of US college campuses, and for destroying the lives of a significant number of male students who were judged and convicted by kangaroo courts summoned at its behest.
Today, a WaPo article confirms this point: Obama and Biden (Biden in particular, but with Obama's full support and encouragement) view the perpetuation of the "sexual assault" witch hunt on US college campuses as one of their highest priorities. They are personally involved in making sure that the witch hunt continues and intensifies.
Biden and Obama rewrite the rulebook on college sexual assaults
Quote:Quote:
Last month, Vice President Biden penned a searing letter to the victim in a notorious Stanford University rape case. “I am filled with furious anger,” he wrote, “both that this happened to you and that our culture is still so broken.”
Biden’s letter encapsulated the national outrage that erupted when the woman’s attacker was sentenced to just six months in county jail. It was also a sharp reminder that one of the Obama administration’s most ardent policy initiatives has been a concerted campaign to end the scourge of sexual assault on college campuses.
According to White House officials, top members of the administration — including the president, the vice president, their wives and members of the Cabinet — will not visit institutions whose leaders they consider insufficiently serious about pursuing sexual-assault allegations and punishing perpetrators. Biden said in an interview that he would like the federal government to “take away their money” if a college or university fails to change its ways.
As the administration nears its end, the urgency of some proposals has dissipated, but the focus on campus sexual misconduct has intensified: “Now’s the time to put the pedal to the metal,” Biden said.
Please read the rest of the article, which details how the Obama administration has used Title IX blackmail to force colleges into instituting kangaroo courts where the accused have no rights and self-proclaimed "survivors" are given unlimited power to destroy the lives of innocent young men.
Obama and Biden bear personal responsibility for the destruction of these lives. Their white-knighting and Year Zero fanaticism has made a real and terrible difference.
I just heard a very informed commentator on Rush Limbaugh (sorry didnt catch the name) that says the Obama admin essentially has been doing the exact same witch hunt with police departments all over the US. Same playbook, darkening and destroying local police, and burying them in fines and paperwork.
Is Obama that bad? - DannyAlberta - 07-12-2016
Some brilliant insight from economist Thomas Sowell about what the endgame of Obama's policies are (the US would have done much better with him as POTUS instead of Obama):
http://townhall.com/columnists/thomassow...or_fascist
Quote:Quote:
It bothers me a little when conservatives call Barack Obama a "socialist." He certainly is an enemy of the free market, and wants politicians and bureaucrats to make the fundamental decisions about the economy. But that does not mean that he wants government ownership of the means of production, which has long been a standard definition of socialism.
What President Obama has been pushing for, and moving toward, is more insidious: government control of the economy, while leaving ownership in private hands. That way, politicians get to call the shots but, when their bright ideas lead to disaster, they can always blame those who own businesses in the private sector.
Politically, it is heads-I-win when things go right, and tails-you-lose when things go wrong. This is far preferable, from Obama's point of view, since it gives him a variety of scapegoats for all his failed policies, without having to use President Bush as a scapegoat all the time.
Government ownership of the means of production means that politicians also own the consequences of their policies, and have to face responsibility when those consequences are disastrous -- something that Barack Obama avoids like the plague.
Thus the Obama administration can arbitrarily force insurance companies to cover the children of their customers until the children are 26 years old. Obviously, this creates favorable publicity for President Obama. But if this and other government edicts cause insurance premiums to rise, then that is something that can be blamed on the "greed" of the insurance companies.
...
What socialism, fascism and other ideologies of the left have in common is an assumption that some very wise people -- like themselves -- need to take decisions out of the hands of lesser people, like the rest of us, and impose those decisions by government fiat.
The left's vision is not only a vision of the world, but also a vision of themselves, as superior beings pursuing superior ends. In the United States, however, this vision conflicts with a Constitution that begins, "We the People..."
That is why the left has for more than a century been trying to get the Constitution's limitations on government loosened or evaded by judges' new interpretations, based on notions of "a living Constitution" that will take decisions out of the hands of "We the People," and transfer those decisions to our betters.
The self-flattery of the vision of the left also gives its true believers a huge ego stake in that vision, which means that mere facts are unlikely to make them reconsider, regardless of what evidence piles up against the vision of the left, and regardless of its disastrous consequences.
Only our own awareness of the huge stakes involved can save us from the rampaging presumptions of our betters, whether they are called socialists or fascists. So long as we buy their heady rhetoric, we are selling our birthright of freedom.
While Sowell is focusing more on the fascist/socialist overlap, he identifies something that is becoming increasingly worrisome for people like me, namely the disguised alliance between big business and big government. I don't think it's either fascism or socialism, although they all share common authoritarian characteristics. I would best describe it as "statist-cronyism."
It is certainly fair to say big business and big government are in a 'disguised' alliance, because for the 2D world (which is where most people live), big government and big business seem outright hostile to each other. Big business screams at the government to be free from the shackles of "over-regulation". Big government screams at business to pay their "fair share" of taxes and stop being so "greedy".
In the 3D world, all of this can immediately be seen to be 100% disingenuous. Things are actually going 100% according to plan.
Obamacare is the quintessential example. If one assumes Obama's goal was to help BOTH big government and big business with Obamacare (which it was) rather than deliver a good social program for the masses, then you start to see the truth.
On the surface, big government may snipe at the insurance companies for raising their premiums so high and big business may snipe at the government for enacting a labyrinthian system, but that was exactly the point of the Faustian bargain between them. Big government gets to regulate in (and perpetually 'supervise') a huge and overly complex system while big business gets to either rake in the higher premiums that result from mandatory coverage in the case of insurers, or in the case of non-insurers, obtain a bonus competitive edge when small and middle sized businesses can't navigate or afford the new system.
All the 'arguing' back and forth is for show. It persuades the 2D thinkers, on both sides of the political aisle, that their side is supposedly looking out for them. The reality is that neither are.
Even better, the worse people are off financially (a direct result of the exploding costs of something like Obamacare premiums or private plans affected by Obamacare) the more likely they will be to vote for bigger government to "fix" their problems. Of course big government just gets bigger, fixes nothing, but continues to regulate in a manner that ultimately favours big business.
The EU and its unbelievable over-regulation of its member states that only the biggest of the big companies can navigate is a further example of this.
Obama's favouring of illegal and legal immigration is yet another manifestation of the unholy but disguised alliance between big government and big business. Big government gets to import people predisposed to favour of bigger government as future voters and immediately add to the welfare rolls (which keep big government going). Big business gets cheaper labour.
Obama claims to be on the political left, approaching "democratic socialism" because it is what garners him majority support. However, once your 2D blinders are off, you see that he is the biggest boon to big business that the latter could ever hope for. It's no wonder he raised so much money from Wall Street.
Obama embodies the new "statist-cronyist".
Is Obama that bad? - Deepdiver - 07-12-2016
Obama during his speech at the memorial for the fallen Dallas police officers started ok but he could not help himself and reverted to form bringing up the specter of slavery and the "fact" that black parents still need to have "the talk". Then he decried the lack of jobs in minority communities <he has had 8 years to turn this around> and then he decried how it is easier for urban youth to get a Glock than a computer or a book - WTF... mentioned the two "victims" in Baton Rouge and Minnesota by name and how much more work needs to be done. He did not mention BLM by name but kept referring to the police protecting "peaceful protests" again WTF does he not see all the mega hate spewed by these BLM protesters???
Of course NO mention of how a black America Afghan war vet was turned to hate filled anti-white murderous rage by anti white anti police hate filled BLM rhetoric. Obama has blood on his hands in his support for BLM described as a domestic terrorism organization by Rudy Giuliani and funded with more than $30 Million by the retched evil bastard George Soros who has also donated more than $13 Million to Hillary Rotten Clinton and owns her phat arse. Soros is truly a despicable deviant degenerate anti-American and Anti Christian stirring up the pot in all the Arab spring states and across Europe backing the radical islamist sympathizers invasion of Europe. His goal is clearly to do the same to the USA.
Is Obama that bad? - LeeEnfield303 - 07-12-2016
After what's gone on the last week or so, I don't really know why the OP's question is still extant.
Is Obama that bad? - greekgod - 07-12-2016
Harder for a child to access a book and internet than a glock.
He says this on Prime Day when Kindles are going for pennies on the dollar! Even McD's has WiFi. Theres are thousands of free 'sphere E-Books kids could access if they just tried.
It's fucking infuriating. Chicago has one of the best public library systems in the world but all that knowledge hasn't swayed folks to put down the guns.
Is Obama that bad? - Chetthebaker - 07-12-2016
Yes.
-Obamacare is a fucking joke. Ask any doctor who's been around awhile- it's not real insurance. Young people who've never been sick don't understand this. The deductibles are super high so if you get sick or have a chronic illness and don't have money you're fucked.
-He's been weak and ineffectual in dealing with Iran and Syria. They all bullshit him and laugh.
-less importantly, but still annoying- he seems really concerned with looking cool. We don't need the president to be cool.
Is Obama that bad? - budoslavic - 07-23-2016
![[Image: Cn7cvwUUMAAS06E.jpg:small]](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cn7cvwUUMAAS06E.jpg:small)
Is Obama that bad? - HOD - 07-28-2016
A mediocre candidate like himself of any other race would not have been elected for sure.
George Bush was the first Legacy admission president, a C student and a loser.
Obama was the first affirmative action president. (Below average SAT score,apparently his GPA at Columbia cannot be confirm and he was in the bottom 20% of his class to get into Harvard Law. Obama will never release his academic records, because he is a loser.)
Hillary will be the second affirmative action president, another person who use the affirmative action route.
Is Obama that bad? - Samseau - 07-28-2016
Quote: (07-28-2016 09:12 AM)HOD Wrote:
Hillary will be the second affirmative action president, another person who use the affirmative action route.
No, she's going to trial under a Trump administration.
Is Obama that bad? - Duke Castile - 07-28-2016
Quote: (07-12-2016 11:13 PM)greekgod Wrote:
Harder for a child to access a book and internet than a glock.
He says this on Prime Day when Kindles are going for pennies on the dollar! Even McD's has WiFi. Theres are thousands of free 'sphere E-Books kids could access if they just tried.
It's fucking infuriating. Chicago has one of the best public library systems in the world but all that knowledge hasn't swayed folks to put down the guns.
You can download thousands upon thousands of books for free and legally that are now in the public domain.
All of the classics for example.
The way he made that comment with such conviction tells you a lot.
Is Obama that bad? - hydrogonian - 07-28-2016
Quote: (07-28-2016 01:38 PM)Samseau Wrote:
Quote: (07-28-2016 09:12 AM)HOD Wrote:
Hillary will be the second affirmative action president, another person who use the affirmative action route.
No, she's going to trial under a Trump administration.
If she loses the election, a crafty ploy would be for the DOJ to bring charges so that she can be pardoned by Obama before Trump is sworn in. Though, I could be missing something in terms of the legal protocol for how such pardons work. Perhaps she would first have to be convicted.
I also don't quite buy that Trump and Hillary are complete enemies out of the spotlight, given their past.
Is Obama that bad? - Dantes - 07-28-2016
Quote: (07-28-2016 02:04 PM)hydrogonian Wrote:
Quote: (07-28-2016 01:38 PM)Samseau Wrote:
Quote: (07-28-2016 09:12 AM)HOD Wrote:
Hillary will be the second affirmative action president, another person who use the affirmative action route.
No, she's going to trial under a Trump administration.
If she loses the election, a crafty ploy would be for the DOJ to bring charges so that she can be pardoned by Obama before Trump is sworn in. Though, I could be missing something in terms of the legal protocol for how such pardons work. Perhaps she would first have to be convicted.
I also don't quite buy that Trump and Hillary are complete enemies out of the spotlight, given their past.
Politicians are in the same club. They are much closer than they reveal when on the campaign trail and publicly. Just look at the Bushs and Clintons who were political rivals. They have strong personal relationships. Trump and Hillary have a history of shared interests.
Is Obama that bad? - Armogan - 07-28-2016
Quote: (07-28-2016 02:04 PM)hydrogonian Wrote:
Quote: (07-28-2016 01:38 PM)Samseau Wrote:
Quote: (07-28-2016 09:12 AM)HOD Wrote:
Hillary will be the second affirmative action president, another person who use the affirmative action route.
No, she's going to trial under a Trump administration.
If she loses the election, a crafty ploy would be for the DOJ to bring charges so that she can be pardoned by Obama before Trump is sworn in. Though, I could be missing something in terms of the legal protocol for how such pardons work. Perhaps she would first have to be convicted.
I also don't quite buy that Trump and Hillary are complete enemies out of the spotlight, given their past.
The president can give a pardon before any indictment or charges. This happened with Ford and Nixon. Ford pardoned Nixon before any possible indictment, no further legal action was ever pursued on Nixon.
If she loses, Obama will likely pardon her before leaving office, along with Eric Holder. I believe they do hate each other, but she probably has so much dirt on him that if he doesn't pardon her she'll bring him down (e.g., spill the beans on the IRS scandal targeting republicans, whose idea it was to blame Benghazi on the video, etc.).
Is Obama that bad? - spokepoker - 07-28-2016
If he does pardon them, I'm sure new charges can be found.
Is Obama that bad? - HOD - 07-28-2016
Quote: (07-28-2016 01:38 PM)Samseau Wrote:
Quote: (07-28-2016 09:12 AM)HOD Wrote:
Hillary will be the second affirmative action president, another person who use the affirmative action route.
No, she's going to trial under a Trump administration.
Stranger things will happen.
Gore defeated Bush, and Bush some how won.
Bernie defeated Hillary, but some how she won.
I don't think the Elites or power to be, want Trump to be there guy.
Is Obama that bad? - Armogan - 07-29-2016
Quote: (07-28-2016 10:17 PM)spokepoker Wrote:
If he does pardon them, I'm sure new charges can be found.
The president can give a full and absolute pardon for any and all crimes committed against the United States. This can be before or after indictment. As much as I'd like to see this played out, the chances of Hillary actually going to prison are quite small.
Is Obama that bad? - spokepoker - 07-29-2016
Can the next president undo that?
Is Obama that bad? - GlobalMan - 07-29-2016
delete
Is Obama that bad? - Praetor Lupus - 07-31-2016
David Icke on Michelle Obama:
Is Obama that bad? - bigrich - 07-31-2016
The Obama family has had this squeaky clean image over the past 8 years while supporting all types of degenerate behavior. It turns out it was all an act. Malia is riding the hoe train on her break of self discovery before going to Harvard.
Is Obama that bad? - 911 - 07-31-2016
Quote: (07-29-2016 04:01 AM)spokepoker Wrote:
Can the next president undo that?
There are dozens of things you could indict the Clintons on, they're literally in the fight of their lives if they don't win. Obama is not going to skate either if Trump wins (fingers crossed...)
The Clintons handlers have so much stuff on them that they are their slavemasters. That's why they picked them to win, as opposed to a number of more electable politicians.
Is Obama that bad? - tomtud - 08-01-2016
Watching CNN at the moment and he is talking about the fallen soldiers. Ironic since it coincides with the manufactured outrage after the DNC with khans story.
Is Obama that bad? - RaccoonFace - 08-01-2016
Traitor In Chief...
Quote:Quote:
Syrians granted temporary amnesty in U.S.
Homeland Security granted a new temporary amnesty Monday to more than 8,000 Syrians living in the U.S. right now, saying they can remain for up to 18 months longer no matter what their legal status.
Secretary Jeh Johnson issued “temporary protected status” to Syrians, saying that if they are in the U.S. as of Monday and continue to reside here permanently, they can apply for work permits and other documents to remain and live in the U.S. without fear of being ousted.
His order applies to some 5,800 Syrians who were granted status under a 2012 TPS program, and 2,500 new arrivals who don’t have a more permanent status here.
“Syria’s lengthy civil conflict has resulted in high levels of food insecurity, limited access to water and medical care, and massive destruction of Syria’s infrastructure. Attacks against civilians, the use of chemical weapons and irregular warfare tactics, as well as forced conscription and use of child soldiers have intensified the humanitarian crisis,” Mr. Johnson said in announcing the new program.
Those eligible for TPS include any Syrian illegal immigrants who have managed to sneak into or remain in the U.S. beyond their visa expirations over the past four years.
TPS is intended to be humanitarian relief for those whose home countries face a massive natural disaster or war that makes returning both dangerous for the individual, and a potential burden for the home country’s government.
Source: http://archive.is/QKC6e
Is Obama that bad? - MY DETROIT PLAYAS - 08-01-2016
Quote: (07-28-2016 09:12 AM)HOD Wrote:
A mediocre candidate like himself of any other race would not have been elected for sure.
George Bush was the first Legacy admission president, a C student and a loser.
Obama was the first affirmative action president. (Below average SAT score,apparently his GPA at Columbia cannot be confirm and he was in the bottom 20% of his class to get into Harvard Law. Obama will never release his academic records, because he is a loser.)
Hillary will be the second affirmative action president, another person who use the affirmative action route.
Crazy how you can be elected President of the Harvard Law Review while simultaneously be such a mediocre student.
http://www.nytimes.com/1990/02/06/us/fir...eview.html
![[Image: facepalm3.gif]](https://rooshvforum.network/images/smilies/new/facepalm3.gif)