Something To Ponder

[Andrew D]

The budget deficit in fiscal year 2010, the first year of Obama's budgets, was lower than the budget deficit in fiscal year 2009, the last year of Bush's budgets.

That is a fact. It does not depend on what might or might not happen in the future. It is done.

The budget deficit in fiscal year 2011 was lower than the budget deficit in fiscal year 2010. That is a fact. It does not depend on what might or might not happen in the future. It is done.

The budget deficit in fiscal year 2012 was lower than the budget deficit in fiscal year 2011. That is a fact. It does not depend on what might or might not happen in the future.

It seems that some people are so insistent on Obama's shortcomings -- and they are many -- that they cannot see his accomplishments.

[Andrew D]

--> In the last month of Bush's so-called presidency, the economy -- thanks to the Republicans' intellectually puny and morally filthy economic policies -- lost 818,000 jobs. In December of 2012, the economy gained 155,000 jobs, and that was not the best month of the Obama presidency. In every single month for more than the past two years, the economy gained jobs.

Yes, we are tenuously climbing out of the recession, and job growth is one of the indicators--but I'd bet this would happen whoever was president (unless a real idiot was in office)

--> In every single quarter for more than the past three years, our GDP has grown.

See above

--> Home prices are 7.7% higher now than when Obama took office.

See above

We have job growth plus GDP growth plus housing-market growth. What we had before, thanks to the Republicans, was job shrinkage and GDP shrinkage and housing-market shrinkage. The point is not that "one of the indicators" has grown. The point is that all three of those indicators have grown.

It is possible that such growth would have occurred no matter who was President. But it is not at all likely.

The viciously stupid Republican policies were what got us into the mess. Is it genuinely plausible that if another Republican occupied the White House, we would have seen policies that brought us job growth and GDP growth and housing-market growth?

I think not.

[Andrew D]

--> Foreclosures are down 20.5%.

A possible success, but let's see how this plays out first--are we stablizing things or just postponing the inevitable? Like most president, I think Obama enjoys th excitement of fighting a war, especially since it's not all that unpopular yet.

--> The S&P 500 is up by 58.0%.

See above

--> Manufacturing is up 12.2%.

See above

What do the decline in foreclosures, the rise in the stock market, and the rise in manufacturing have to do with "Obama['s] enjoying th[e] excitement of fighting a war"?

[Andrew D]

The economy aside, we stilll are hoding political prisoners taken in the last decade with no hope of a trial. Gitmo is open and running to keep at least some of these out of the reach of the federal courts. The rule of law is being openly flouted, and Obama, despite his promises, has done little to reverse it ....

Congress has forced Obama to keep Gitmo open. Congress has prohibited Obama from spending any federal funds to put the Gitmo detainees anywhere else. Congress has forbidden Obama from doing the right thing -- putting the detainees into the regular judicial process.

(It bears noting that the regular judicial process has resulted in the incarceration of more than 300 terrorists (some of them domestic). From 2001 to 2010, criminal courts convicted 65 times as many terrorists as did military tribunals.)

So what should Obama do?

Should he pull a Reagan?

Should he, like Reagan, subvert the Constitution by bumming money from some foreign dictator?

[Econoline]

Yes, we are tenuously climbing out of the recession, and job growth is one of the indicators--but I'd bet this would happen whoever was president (unless a real idiot Republican was in office)

Fixed.

[rubato]

The economy aside, we stilll are hoding political prisoners taken in the last decade with no hope of a trial. Gitmo is open and running to keep at least some of these out of the reach of the federal courts. The rule of law is being openly flouted, and Obama, despite his promises, has done little to reverse it ....

Congress has forced Obama to keep Gitmo open. Congress has prohibited Obama from spending any federal funds to put the Gitmo detainees anywhere else. Congress has forbidden Obama from doing the right thing -- putting the detainees into the regular judicial process.

(It bears noting that the regular judicial process has resulted in the incarceration of more than 300 terrorists (some of them domestic). From 2001 to 2010, criminal courts convicted 65 times as many terrorists as did military tribunals.)

So what should Obama do?

Should he pull a Reagan?

Should he, like Reagan, subvert the Constitution by bumming money from some foreign dictator?

He could kiss the asses of the Mullahs in Iran by selling them advanced weapons like Reagan did. And then lie about US foreign policy to the people who elected him president.

yrs,
rubato

[rubato]

It is easy to tell that all of the recovery is due to Obama when you look at the policies of the Republican party and compare them to all of the G-20 post-collapse: all of the countries who are still failing are following the policies the GOP are trying to enact here and which Obama has opposed. Having screwed us for a decade with no median wage growth and having screwed us into the worst collapse in 80 years they want to continue doing the same thing.

Their voters are witless idiots.



You can tell the degree to which each country has followed the Republican prescription (all austerity) by how badly they are doing:



Germany is an outlier in several ways, first they have not cut spending (they have been more like Obama) and second they did not experience the housing collapse (they regulated the home mortgage business).

The big deficit-cutters are all the worst: Spain, UK, Italy.



yrs,
rubato

[Big RR]

The economy aside, we stilll are hoding political prisoners taken in the last decade with no hope of a trial. Gitmo is open and running to keep at least some of these out of the reach of the federal courts. The rule of law is being openly flouted, and Obama, despite his promises, has done little to reverse it ....

Congress has forced Obama to keep Gitmo open. Congress has prohibited Obama from spending any federal funds to put the Gitmo detainees anywhere else. Congress has forbidden Obama from doing the right thing -- putting the detainees into the regular judicial process.

(It bears noting that the regular judicial process has resulted in the incarceration of more than 300 terrorists (some of them domestic). From 2001 to 2010, criminal courts convicted 65 times as many terrorists as did military tribunals.)

So what should Obama do?

Should he pull a Reagan?

Should he, like Reagan, subvert the Constitution by bumming money from some foreign dictator?

What should he do? Well, he could use his position as the chief executive to open Guantanamo to the press and let them document how the "prisoners" are treated; he could give their lawyers more access to consult with their clients and document how they are treated; he could mandate that the tribunals which (are under the auspices of the executive) conduct public trials which adhere to all federal court procedures and guarantee a fair trial; he could use the bully pulpit of the presidency to bring the plight of these prisoners to light and hammer home to the American public how the holding of prisoners indefinitely without trial is not something we should be doing. This would be a start; in any event it beats doing nothing but blaming Congress.

[Big RR]

[quote]What do the decline in foreclosures, the rise in the stock market, and the rise in manufacturing have to do with "Obama['s] enjoying th[e] excitement of fighting a war"?/quote]

You are right, very little. That was meant to be appended to the comments n ending the war. Apologies.

[oldr_n_wsr]

in any event it beats doing nothing but blaming Congress.

But that is so much easier and makes great sound bites.