Home Original Content Funny Pictures Funny GIFs YouTube Funny Text Funny Movies Channels Search

hide menu
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
#20 - I Am Monkey (12/08/2011) [-]
Cherry picking stupid people who oppose him doesn't make his presidency any less of a failure.
-5
#72 to #20 - marharth **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #59 to #20 - TwistedBamboozler (12/08/2011) [-]
Every president ***** up. Every single one. They have to make incredibly tough decisions every day and of course they are going to make a few poor decisions here and there. Of course those are the only things you are going to hear about because of the media. Don't you dare go around acting like you know what you are talking about just because you can say he ****** up this or that. I'd say only 5% of the people on this site know what the hell they are actually talking about and have a firm grasp of politics and government.

Not directed towards you IamMonkey, just general.

Rant over
User avatar #130 to #59 - xshadeeisafag (12/08/2011) [-]
Yeah, nobody makes every decision right, but that doesn't mean some didn't make waaay more right decisions than others...
User avatar #30 to #20 - tehbomb (12/08/2011) [-]
George Bush ****** **** up beyond repair.

It's not Barack, it's his predecessors. He is taking it up the ass because the person before him was a ******* dumbass.
#163 to #30 - anonymous (12/08/2011) [-]
Last time i checked, George Bush can't triple the national debt while not in office.
User avatar #46 to #30 - I Am Monkey (12/08/2011) [-]
Maybe you could make that argument if anyone else had won, but he won the election by telling everyone that he's going to cure AIDS and fire laser beams out his rectum. After running a campaign promising so much you can't just say "hey, we did the best we could" and expect people to be happy with it.

Also, Clinton was really the one who ruined the economy by deregulating the banks.
He made it so banks had to make loans to people who could barely afford them. Then when the dipped and those people forclosed in a chain reaction effect and tanked the housing market. The whole economy came down with it.

Bush had much bigger problems than regulating loans at the time. Even if he saw it coming he couldn't have stopped it. Imagine the man who "doesn't care about black people" changing the banking system so poor people can't get loans.
+1
#336 to #46 - chinamannnn **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #241 to #46 - Chuckaholic (12/08/2011) [-]
Clinton got the US economy to the highest value it had for years. When Clinton was in office it was a 1:1 ratio with a Euro. When Bush left it was a 1:1.5 euro to dollar. That is some serious failure by Bush.
#71 to #46 - anonymous (12/08/2011) [-]
well the reason why Barrack can't do alot of the things that he promised is because the congress won't let him.. And yes Clinton ****** up big time, but that doesn't make Bush a saint.. He controlled the biggest nation in the world without considering the economy..

[small][small]
User avatar #148 to #71 - I Am Monkey (12/08/2011) [-]
I'm sorry, but the most powerful man on earth can't play victim. Every failing president tries to blame the "do nothing congress". He had two years to do whatever he wanted, he couldn't deliver so the democrats lost their majority and now he's acting like they're the reason he can't do anything.

Apparently this new victim tactic it working quite well against the idiot demographic.
Losing the midterm election was the best thing to happen to Obama since he figured out that you can successfully campaign on intangible concepts. Now he doesn't have to own up to anything, he can just blame the republicans.

Why is it that when Bush fails under a democrat congress it's the republicans fault, but when Obama fails under a republican congress it's still the republicans fault?
User avatar #244 to #148 - Chuckaholic (12/08/2011) [-]
In the first place I don't know, however you can't deny that the congress blocked him from making proper decisions that were needed just because he was from a different party.
User avatar #417 to #244 - I Am Monkey (12/08/2011) [-]
The ability to bring two opposing sides together is crucial for the president. Obama has no ability to do so because he has no experience in actual politics.

If congress doesn't want to cooperate that's entirely on him. His handling of the healthcare bill completely polarized the parties. He basically said "we have the majority deal with it". Because of his complete disregad for the other party and the american people his party was voted out in 2010. Now he expects the republicans to play ball and it's not going to happen. So he's going to play victim and cross his fingers that his party gets the majority back in 2012.(assuming that he remains in office)
#287 to #244 - anonymous (12/08/2011) [-]
didn't he ignore the congress with the Libya situation .....
User avatar #418 to #287 - Chuckaholic (12/08/2011) [-]
That's foreign policy though, for domestic affairs I don't think he can ignore congress.
User avatar #47 to #46 - I Am Monkey (12/08/2011) [-]
Sorry, I meant to say "the market dipped" in the second 2nd paragraph.
I think I accidentally the word.
User avatar #142 to #47 - JamesBrad (12/08/2011) [-]
so you blame clinton for people being to take out ones in which they could not afford? its their fault for being consumer whores.
User avatar #31 to #30 - dangler (12/08/2011) [-]
Prove it.
#45 to #31 - anonymous (12/08/2011) [-]
Clinton comes into office and signs trade deals, NAFTA, which put america at a trading disadvantage today. then bush comes in, gets unlucky with 9/11, but then goes into a decade long war with no exit strategy and no plan to pay for any of it. he then, at the same time reduces taxes, for example the top tax bracket went from 39% roughly to 35%. and he did not have any plan to pay for those. those tax cuts alone have cost you americans 2 trillion dollars since their conception a decade ago. in '07 defense spending totalled roughly 550 billion, which was up 9% from '06. each of those years defense discretionary spending was about 50% of discretionary spending.

the causes for the '08 collapse are not so much political problems as they are institutional problems which were pushed by the banks and big business which funds the campaigns of these politicians.
User avatar #91 to #45 - duhdope (12/08/2011) [-]
You say "you Americans" as if you aren't one. If you're not, that's amazing that you know and understand all of that.
#234 to #91 - pastawins (12/08/2011) [-]
that's the funny think about world media, everyone gets to know how **** in America gets ****** up badly.

I'm not hating on America here... **** is ****** up in Europe too...
User avatar #426 to #234 - duhdope (12/08/2011) [-]
Yeah, I noticed :l

I know you're not hating on America, to be honest, there's not much to like.
 Friends (0)