Obama is a Bad President:

...Obama’s Answer to Jonathan Alter


I recently discovered John Ransom. He's the Finance Editor for Townhall Finance and lives in Castle Rock.
http://finance.townhall.com/columnists/ ... than_alter
John Ransom

But from time to time another person makes a case that Obama is a bad president, and I would like to afford him the opportunity right here in this space to be heard.

That person is Barack Obama.

Between now and the election I intend to let Obama speak for himself on these pages as often as possible and thereby show how unfit he is for the presidency.

So here we go:

Mistakes happened, said Obama regarding the financial crisis of 2008, as he defended the lack of prosecution for any of the acts that brought us the final sequel- so far- of the mortgage meltdown that started in 2006.

“Some of the most damaging behavior on Wall Street, some of the most unethical behavior on Wall Street, wasn’t illegal,” Obama told 60 Minutes which aired on Sunday. “That’s why we had to change the laws,” regarding banking regulation that were enacted by the Democrats, he continued.

Thus Obama made the case to the whole country, on broadcast TV, in the most concrete terms as to why he should not be reelected to office of president of the United States.

Because nothing is as characteristic of this president’s tenure, as his ignorant defense of the misguided, so-called banking reform measures that the Democrats took under the Dodd-Frank legislation currently being enacted. Nothing also better illustrates the Democrats' lack of responsibility for how the financial system came apart.

He also blames Republicans, which I agree!

And while the left likes to blame Wall Street for the problems and the right likes to blame Washington, both sides were not only culpable, but in cahoots.

They still are.

If we are going to make real progress on actual reform, we have to break up the federal regulatory cabal, not codify it through ineffectual and dangerous legislation that makes no attempt to actually reform anything, but rather just gives stealing the soft name of lobbying.

Logic that I can understand seems in short supply with him.

I wouldn't call him bad, but I will call him a weak president without enough experience or pull to actually get things done. Barely keeping his head above water.

And with his constant campaigning and fund raising, it is clear he doesn't like the actual sausage making of Washington. Instead, he prefers to go on the road and hear the cheers from carefully gathered supporters.

In some respects I think he's done remarkably well given the circumstances that he inherited. But other things he's done just make me crazy.

I do think he'll get another term simply because the GOP candidates are so pathetic. So at this point I'm thinking he'll get re-elected but the Congress will go Republican. That may not be a bad thing...

cydl wrote: In some respects I think he's done remarkably well given the circumstances that he inherited. But other things he's done just make me crazy.

I do think he'll get another term simply because the GOP candidates are so pathetic. So at this point I'm thinking he'll get re-elected but the Congress will go Republican. That may not be a bad thing...

I think I'd rather have a firmly Republican Congress and a Democratic President than the other way around.

chickaree wrote:

cydl wrote: In some respects I think he's done remarkably well given the circumstances that he inherited. But other things he's done just make me crazy.

I do think he'll get another term simply because the GOP candidates are so pathetic. So at this point I'm thinking he'll get re-elected but the Congress will go Republican. That may not be a bad thing...

I think I'd rather have a firmly Republican Congress and a Democratic President than the other way around.

Clinton II?

Downside? Supreme Court nominees.

Ohh, yeah - the SCOTUS nominees are REAL scary! Of course, that's why there's a nomination process. Seems to me though that not too many have ever gotten rejected in that process.

FredHayek wrote:

chickaree wrote:

cydl wrote: In some respects I think he's done remarkably well given the circumstances that he inherited. But other things he's done just make me crazy.

I do think he'll get another term simply because the GOP candidates are so pathetic. So at this point I'm thinking he'll get re-elected but the Congress will go Republican. That may not be a bad thing...

I think I'd rather have a firmly Republican Congress and a Democratic President than the other way around.

Clinton II?

Downside? Supreme Court nominees.

Congress has the power to block overtly partisan nominees. What we need now is a disciplined budget. I'm just not sure either party has the will or ability to deliver this.

How long has Reid's Senate gone without even voting on a budget?

They're all too busy campaigning and pointing fingers...