Does Everybody Hate Pres. Obama?

I believe it's "polarized national politics" that no longer works. "Hyperpolarized" would be more accurate, in fact. There's very little civil discourse or disagreement anymore, just knee-jerk labelling the other guy as right/wrong, liberal/conservative, D/R.

Someone who ends up compromising is not inherently lacking substance, or a constituency.

I think the President has a large ideological constituency - but being reasonable and working to please a broad spectrum doesn't make for good ratings/sell ad space. :roll:

I don't think anyone hates him, at least I hope not. A good portion of the country doesn't agree with the policies he's promoted and signed into law though.

I can't speak for the far left though, those folks have some pretty high expectations and may feel disgruntled.

Personally I respect the man for what he's accomplished.

Does Everybody Hate Pres. Obama?

Article below provides support for my long-time thesis that the current president is a moderate who has no ideological constituency.

Barack Obama learned how to ?do? politics in Chicago & Illinois, first as a community organizer & then as a state representative. He learned the art of the deal--compromise--giving all parties something. He learned mutual back scratching & log rolling. It turns out that compromise no longer works in polarized national politics.

Obama's politics fall short of the ideological purity desired by the Right & Left.

Right-wing & Left-wing politicians have a constituency, but moderate politicians have no constituencies.

Robert Gibbs attacks the fringe losers of the Left - Glenn Greenwald - Salon.com

I love your thoughtful and concise analysis of President Obama's method of governing, though I personally believe it to be totally flawed in its analysis.
No one I know "hates" President Obama. It is just that to some of us, as much as we wanted him to succeed, he has proved totally inept as a leader when we are in a period where one is what everyone desires and seeks. The fact that he is a poor leader, arrogant and is still campaigning and evidently does not realize he has won the Presidency, does not bode well for him at this point in time.

Your question does raise another pertinent question...

If he is truly a moderate democrat, then, whose agenda is the country following? The stuff coming out of the Legislative branch is anything but moderate, IMHO. So, does that mean that Obama is calling the shots, or are Reid and Pelosi calling the shots? If it's the latter, it pretty much reduces Obama to an insignificant talking head.

Personally, I feel sorry for the guy. He's in, seemingly, over his head and has built an inner circle of people who are political lightning rods. The rest of his term is going to be a "damned if you do damned if you don't" scenario.

I can only speak for myself. Hate is much, much too strong a word. However, he is not my favorite president during my voting lifetime........by a long shot. Some of his moves/decisions, I have no respect for and others I do.....pretty normal for any Presidency I'd say.

Maybe the far left is ticked because they thought they'd get more than what they already have. Still two and a half years to go and trillions out there to rack up during that time. They need to relax a bit and enjoy the ride like the rest of us.

Your question does raise another pertinent question...

If he is truly a moderate democrat, then, whose agenda is the country following? The stuff coming out of the Legislative branch is anything but moderate, IMHO. So, does that mean that Obama is calling the shots, or are Reid and Pelosi calling the shots? If it's the latter, it pretty much reduces Obama to an insignificant talking head.

The Health Insurance Reform Act that came out of Pelosi's & Reid's Congress, after incorporation of several hundred amendments from the Repubs is, overall, a bit to the right of Richard Nixon's proposal. It leaves our health care in the hands of private for-profit corporations.

Obama's passion for the Afghan war is IMHO not the mark of a moderate, nor is continuation of rendition, or military tribunals, nor is his support of the "Patriot" Act.

He kept his predecessor's SecDef. He cleverly pretends to support the military by supporting the military.

If he's an enemy of business/capitalism, he shows it by bailing out the banks & auto companies.

Gays say he hasn't done enough for the gays (he opposes gay marriage).
Blacks say he hasn't done enough for the blacks (hasn't done Anything!).

My point is that there are plenty of Obama policies to pick on whether you're Right or Left (or maybe even in the middle).

Your question does raise another pertinent question...

If he is truly a moderate democrat, then, whose agenda is the country following? The stuff coming out of the Legislative branch is anything but moderate, IMHO. So, does that mean that Obama is calling the shots, or are Reid and Pelosi calling the shots? If it's the latter, it pretty much reduces Obama to an insignificant talking head.

Everything that has come out of congress since 2006 has had the clear mark of Pelosi and Reid. They are currently running the country. Obama seems more like a figure head who's twisting in the hot wind Pelosi and Reid blow.

I think they pushed through the health care debate - at a time when it wasn't fiscally responsible - because of the declining health of Senator Kennedy. His supporters convinced the President to do that.
Trying to be a fiscally responsible, I wouldn't have tackled health care until something was done with the mess he inherited and he pulled our young people out of the wars - no war will ever be 'won' again. But because he pushed for health care reform now - there's very little he can do to regain support. But I think his presidency does reveal the desperation of the white male to hang on to what he can.
It has just been in my life time since laws have been changed to allow equality. The trouble is, as that happened, our country has become more divided economically which doesn't allow for minorities any piece of the American pie. CEOs, actors, athletes, etc. making 7, 8, 9 digit salaries?
The great divide is getting greater. Why are powerballs only popular once they reach $250000000? What can one person do with that much money?
But think what 2500 could do with $100,000? Washer, dryer. New (used) car. Down payment on a house. School. Vacation. Saw the thread. You got me started Ellen
(My husband and I never moved up. We have no debt. That allows us to be UL fans and come to 30A. We made the right decision. I can't imagine not being able to go to all of the UL games these past 25 years, nor come to 30A 2 or 3 times a year plus dine out, etc. I could have been sitting in my 2 1/2 story foyer watching others do that Or not!

...If he's an enemy of business/capitalism, he shows it by bailing out the banks & auto companies...

One rebuttal...
In regards to the auto industry, he did bail them out in total indifference to bankrupcy law and gave preference to the unions over the people who held all of the debt, both secured and unsecured. He screwed them in order to keep the unions in his back pocket.

I agree that our country has become more divided economically (yet many are wealthier at the same time), but I don't think those divides are necessarily along racial lines.

Consumerism and debt have gotten WAY out of control - by the standards of other countries/generations, I am obscenely rich. By the standards of many Americans I am practically poor and to be pitied for my lack of bling, designer items, and plasma screen tvs. Statistically I should have more credit cards, WAY more debt, and am middle class.

Health insurance was a big issue during the election and for many Americans, so I don't think it was just for Kennedy's sake. Would be interesting to see how it played out if it waited like you said, as I think the recession/unemployment levels would have opened many eyes/changed some minds.

One rebuttal...
In regards to the auto industry, he did bail them out in total indifference to bankrupcy law and gave preference to the unions over the people who held all of the debt, both secured and unsecured. He screwed them in order to keep the unions in his back pocket.

It's worth noting that the bailout of the auto industry was initiated by the GWB administration & continued by the Obama administration (another example of his middle-of-the-roadism?).

On July 29, the Prez declared that all auto bailout money will be repaid:

"You now have all those U.S. auto companies showing a profit. They've rehired 55,000 workers. We are going to get all the money back that we invested in those car companies."

The Obama and Bush administrations poured some $85 billion into General Motors, Chrysler, auto lenders and suppliers to avoid an industry-wide meltdown in 2008 and 2009.

Auto bailout money will be paid back, Obama says | Business | Chron.com - Houston Chronicle

It's worth noting that the bailout of the auto industry was initiated by the GWB administration & continued by the Obama administration (another example of his middle-of-the-roadism?).

On July 29, the Prez declared that all auto bailout money will be repaid:

"You now have all those U.S. auto companies showing a profit. They've rehired 55,000 workers. We are going to get all the money back that we invested in those car companies."

The Obama and Bush administrations poured some $85 billion into General Motors, Chrysler, auto lenders and suppliers to avoid an industry-wide meltdown in 2008 and 2009.

Auto bailout money will be paid back, Obama says | Business | Chron.com - Houston Chronicle

Regardless of who initiated it I think that the claim that GM repaid the loan is laughable. They received 52 billion in bailout money, yet, only repaid 6.7 billion as loan repayment. Bottom line is that GM is still Government Motors. Will the rest actually ever get paid back as the article states? Only time will tell.

We love Obama. He is the perfect POTUS for our family--I think that may make him a little left of center only, but that is better than nothing. If he only has one term, ( I believe he will have two) then I just hope he can end one of the two wars going on, and that he will be the President to find a replacement for Anthony Scalia, if he should not be able to fulfill his presence on the SC. One can only HOPE.

Regardless of who initiated it I think that the claim that GM repaid the loan is laughable. They received 52 billion in bailout money, yet, only repaid 6.7 billion as loan repayment. Bottom line is that GM is still Government Motors. Will the rest actually ever get paid back as the article states? Only time will tell.

I did a little Googling & found that you're right: recouping all gov't $ is dependent on gov't selling its (our) GM stock at the "right price."

Thx for bringing this to my attention.

I did a little Googling & found that you're right: recouping all gov't $ is dependent on gov't selling it's (our) GM stock at the "right price."

Thx for bringing this to my attention.

Well good thing the stock market is predictable and that stock prices are directly correlated with performance and financials!

One rebuttal...
In regards to the auto industry, he did bail them out in total indifference to bankrupcy law and gave preference to the unions over the people who held all of the debt, both secured and unsecured. He screwed them in order to keep the unions in his back pocket.

Calling BS

First, all bankruptcies have to go to court and the last time I took civics we had three branches of the government. To help you out they are the courts, the executive branch and the legislative branch.

President Obama does not have super powers to give "preference to the unions over the people who held the debt".

Anyone who bought GM bonds KNEW what they were buying and KNEW it was a high-risk gamble because the yield was higher.

For the record General Motors is GOING through bankruptcy. A bankruptcy on the scale of GM is going to have many players and will be complex. Unions did make concessions, take a look at Detroit it ain't exactly Manhattan.

Calling BS

First, all bankruptcies have to go to court and the last time I took civics we had three branches of the government. To help you out they are the courts, the executive branch and the legislative branch.

President Obama does not have super powers to give "preference to the unions over the people who held the debt".

Anyone who bought GM bonds KNEW what they were buying and KNEW it was a high-risk gamble because the yield was higher.

For the record General Motors is GOING through bankruptcy. A bankruptcy on the scale of GM is going to have many players and will be complex. Unions did make concessions, take a look at Detroit it ain't exactly Manhattan.

Call BS all you want, but the government leaned as heavily on GM's creditors as it could to get them to accept a terrible deal so that the UAW could get a better one. From the Washington Post article "GM's new owner (the Obama administration) should stop bullying the company's bondholders":

While the Obama administration has been playing hardball with bondholders, it has been more than happy to play nice with the United Auto Workers. How else to explain why a retiree health-care fund controlled by the UAW is slated to get a 39 percent equity stake in GM for its remaining $10 billion in claims while bondholders are being pressured to take a 10 percent stake for their $27 billion? It's highly unlikely that the auto industry professionals at GM would have cut such a deal had the government not been standing over them

Based upon this and the amount of Federal Loan money that was forgiven in the bankruptcy, I would never, ever, purchase a GM vehicle.

Buz, as you know, I have the highest respect for you but I think you are letting your Democrat principles override your financial acumen and your utmost unbiased professionalism in your field. To say the unions have not gained anything in the GM take over is to belie basic facts. You can forget me purchasing GM products as well.

Buz, as you know, I have the highest respect for you but I think you are letting your Democrat principles override your financial acumen and your utmost unbiased professionalism in your field. To say the unions have not gained anything in the GM take over is to belie basic facts. You can forget me purchasing GM products as well.

Thanks but you misinterpret my comments.

Unions did give up wages/benefits, that's a fact. Their health care plan owns GM stock, boy ain't that great! Gimme some of that!

GM is in bankruptcy and bondholders -who took risk- have lost income.

My point is the bondholders took risk because they were being rewarded quite handsomely if GM still made the payments. For the record they are better shape than Lehman Bros bondholders.

GM bondholders had plenty of time to sell and should have (in retrospect).

In some cases, GMAC bondholders actually made out quite well.

BTW, I haven't bought a GM product in decades. But it is foolish to think anyone is giving the finger to the UAW, my Subaru was 40% manufactured in Indiana by UAW labor,l assume.

Regards to Betty

Apology accepted

Democrat principles .

Democratic - adjective

Democrat - noun

Why do folks use Democrat instead of Democratic?

Wondering....

My mama was a Republican not a Republic..true story.

Democratic - adjective

Democrat - noun

Why do folks use Democrat instead of Democratic?

Wondering....

My mama was a Republican not a Republic..true story.

I use to say "Democratic Party". Then, the party started calling itself the "Democrat Party. So, noun or adjective, blame your party leaders. They are the ones calling it the Democrat Party. You know, Pelosi, Reid, Frank...all those intellectual giants who are really great at correct English and punctuation.

you're right: recouping all gov't $ is dependent on gov't selling its (our) GM stock at the "right price."

General Motors Co posted its biggest quarterly profit in six years on Thursday, a day ahead of an expected IPO filing that would open the gates for the U.S. government to slash its stake in the automaker.

Good thing for us taxpayers/stockholders that not everyone (unlike futurebeachbum & Andy A) has sworn off ever buying anything from GM.

http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2010/08/12/news/news-us-gm.html?_r=1&hp

Democratic - adjective

Democrat - noun

Why do folks use Democrat instead of Democratic?

Wondering....

My mama was a Republican not a Republic..true story.

Republicans have used, and insert the term "Democrat Party," whenever they can. It serves two purposes for them: it is their special way of dumbing themselves down for the sake of their very maleable base, AND it fosters the idea in their base's paranoid heads that there may be actually nothing democratic about the party--which of course is not true.