Poll: Obama ‘Worst President’ Since World War II

[Yssup Rider]

It's a bullshit poll and a bullshit post.

The Turd Reich is grasping at straws, tilting at windmills and soon will be fleeing this fast sinking ship.

They've got a saying in Russian that translates to -- Hey boy, go fetch me a drink!

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by Hank3fan

Come on!!! George W. Bush ignored vital info pertaining to 9/11, started 2 wars (one of them by lying to the country), declared one of them "mission accomplished " yet we were still there fighting for years afterward. And oh yeah there was that little thing about bankrupting the country when he inherited the best economy since WW2 from his predecessor. The lack of oversite that led to the savings and loan crisis. Just to name a few things.

Also the only reason we didn't have casualties on such a mass scale as we did in Vietnam is because our medical technology is light yeas more advanced than it was back in th 60's/70's.

You're a lying SOB. W didn't ignore a damn thing. One contemporary CIA analyst described the pre-9/11 scenario as trying to connect the dots on a page that was literally black with dots. Your lying ass can't produce a single instance where intel was ignored by Bush that wasn't previously available to Slick Willie. And the "Mission Accomplished" sign was more for the sailors aboard the U.S.S. Abraham Lincoln referring "specifically to the aircraft carrier's 10-month deployment." And the economy was on the slide from the dot-com bust that occurred on Slick Willie the Perjuring Sexual Predator's watch, you dumb-ass liar.

[DSK]

Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

Absolutely nothing wrong with food stamps when monitored correctly. Have you ever been penniless and hungry? Recently a family member lost her job and had no income. House payment. Car payment. Obviously other monthly bills. Single parent. No savings. She did some jobs at minimum wage or slightly higher but nowhere near enough income to meet her bills. She had no choice but to apply for food stamps in order to put food on the table. A little compassion please.

How about a trade off? No voting privileges for two years after you receive more than 10,000 in cumulative benefits?

Otherwise, if she needs some quick money and she is pretty, she knows what to do, if her own relatives won't help her out first.

Unpleasant consequences for failure tend to make for more productive, self supporting citizens.

[Yssup Rider]

Typical JL.

Only the wealthy get rights. If you want to be treated as a citizen, you need to pay for it.

Typical JL.

How much did HE pay to come back to the US after he fled to Israel?

How much did HE pay to escape the hangman's noose after posting under so many handles at the same time?

How much did HE pay to return to the forum after being exiled?

FUCK YOU JL. SLAVE FUCKING FAGGOT!!!

[Munchmasterman]

Fake news about a fake poll?
Wrong. It's a real poll about real current events.
Stop acting stupid. Abuse of power isn't a "charge".
It's an opinion. They were asked for their opinion. Someone can act legally but still be thought to be abusing their power. In this case, 49% of those polled felt so.
Listen to you rationalizing why your opinion is valid and theirs isn't.
You and the trumpys feel the courts of appeals are abusing their power (or at least trump does).
In other words, my post is a poll by the same gang as yours comes from, subject to all the same standards.
And since it's about current events, you don't like what it says. You get mad and start trying to suppress the opinion of others.

Originally Posted by the_real_Barleycorn

There you go, you just invalidated your own post. Since what Trump did was perfectly legal and constitutional it doesn't matter what people think of it. The very fact that they think it was an abuse of power totally disqualifies their other opinions about the subject matter. In other words, fake news about a fake poll.

[Munchmasterman]

No need to trade off anything. It's already been settled.
None of your ideas will be implemented.

Originally Posted by DSK

How about a trade off? No voting privileges for two years after you receive more than 10,000 in cumulative benefits?

Otherwise, if she needs some quick money and she is pretty, she knows what to do, if her own relatives won't help her out first.

Unpleasant consequences for failure tend to make for more productive, self supporting citizens.

[DSK]

Originally Posted by Munchmasterman

No need to trade off anything. It's already been settled.
None of your ideas will be implemented.

I know, and it is sad. That is another reason I say the liberals are responsible for the demise of a once great nation.

You can't even man up enough to demand someone put forth a better effort to support themselves, or make failure unpleasant enough to provide enough motivation for someone to improve themselves. While you and I may have sufficient internal motivation to take care of ourselves and our families, some people need a strong push.

Would any army in the world be worth a shit if people didn't have to earn their stripes? Wouldn't any half ass lazy loser be happy to not work and drink all day if you enabled him?

People need to repent and pay the price for their sins, or suffer the flames of poverty and disgrace.

If people who I am forced to support by the government get to continue to vote in the same government that enslaves me to give the unproductive a living, it violates my rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

[the_real_Barleycorn]

The founders had "taxation without representation is tyranny" but i'm for "representation without taxation is unfair". It doesn't have the same kick but to be allowed to vote, you should be paying taxes. By paying taxes I mean putting something in the kitty to be doled out to the masses. If you're just a taker then you shouldn't be deciding on who is doling out the money. The democrat base would dry up overnight and the democrats would get into the business of finding people jobs rather than handouts.

[nevergaveitathought]

lbj should find his place among the worst

but perhaps he is sheltered by his relative obscurity

not even talking about his voter fraud record, his selling of his office for money, Hillary learned at his knee it seems, or his political payoffs...nope

he broke social security, you know the solemn lockbox of al gore's infamy

and there was the viet nam war, which almost destroyed the us military

but of course Obama is the worst mainly due to three things: his ideological extremism, his outrageous lying and his racism

then carter for his ineptness, domestically and in foreign affairs

[Guest050619-1]

Originally Posted by the_real_Barleycorn

If you're just a taker then you shouldn't be deciding on who is doling out the money. The democrat base would dry up overnight and the democrats would get into the business of finding people jobs rather than handouts.

Hahahahaha.....sheeee-yit! That would mean Pelosi, Schumer, Waters, and the rest of that lazy Dimtard congress would be forced to roll up their sleeves and actually do some real work for a change. They can't have that....much easier givin' other people's money away....

[dilbert firestorm]

Originally Posted by the_real_Barleycorn

The founders had "taxation without representation is tyranny" but i'm for "representation without taxation is unfair". It doesn't have the same kick but to be allowed to vote, you should be paying taxes. By paying taxes I mean putting something in the kitty to be doled out to the masses. If you're just a taker then you shouldn't be deciding on who is doling out the money. The democrat base would dry up overnight and the democrats would get into the business of finding people jobs rather than handouts.

If people are taking handouts from the govt, they shouldn't be voting.

this also applies to people (CEOs & business owners) bidding & accepting contracts from the govt. too.

On the former, I've been accused not caring about mothers "who are the backbone of the family". the partial quote was made by a republican in the early 1900s.

[the_real_Barleycorn]

I'm only referring to federal taxes at this point. If the states want to follow suit then that is up to them. Even rich people pay taxes (did you just read that democrats?) though they do find ways to reduce that amount and that is patriotic according to Theodore Roosevelt. The saving grace is that a man who makes $30,000 a year has the same power in his vote than Oprah does. Just as long as he is paying some tax. The one exception that I remember is active duty military. I was told that paying taxes is the sacrifice we pay for freedom (a democratic politician told me this) and I replied that the service people are already sacrificing their lives and homelife (as well as that of their families) for that freedom. Why make them pay twice? I never got an answer. Anyway, I have time and time again proposed to various public officials that ACTIVE duty military be exempted from paying federal, state, or local taxes. I add active because I don't want to hear about Major Hillary Clinton USMCR getting a tax free $20 million dollar book deal.

I would also give the right to vote to those who have retired or become disabled to the point that they can't hold a job.

[wordup666]

Originally Posted by dilbert firestorm

If people are taking handouts from the govt, they shouldn't be voting.

this also applies to people (CEOs & business owners) bidding & accepting contracts from the govt. too.

On the former, I've been accused not caring about mothers "who are the backbone of the family". the partial quote was made by a republican in the early 1900s.

Tell that to someone who has had their job outsourced.

[Munchmasterman]

It's sad we're even discussing this.
Man up to demand someone put forth more effort? Towards what?
By whose standards?
Shit happens, bud. You act like these people are living high on the hog on $1000 a month.
What about when an industry goes overseas? Or any one of numerous reasons.
It's called a safety net for a reason. And you want to get rid of that too.

If we're in decline it's because we've lost our soul. Tax cuts for the people with all the money. Fuck everybody else, right?

Originally Posted by DSK

I know, and it is sad. That is another reason I say the liberals are responsible for the demise of a once great nation.

You can't even man up enough to demand someone put forth a better effort to support themselves, or make failure unpleasant enough to provide enough motivation for someone to improve themselves. While you and I may have sufficient internal motivation to take care of ourselves and our families, some people need a strong push.

Would any army in the world be worth a shit if people didn't have to earn their stripes? Wouldn't any half ass lazy loser be happy to not work and drink all day if you enabled him?

People need to repent and pay the price for their sins, or suffer the flames of poverty and disgrace.

If people who I am forced to support by the government get to continue to vote in the same government that enslaves me to give the unproductive a living, it violates my rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

[SpeedRacerXXX]

Originally Posted by the_real_Barleycorn

Your relative is why the program was passed into law but you have to admit that far too many people have turned it into a lifestyle choice. In the old days charity was closer to home and the charity giver could decide on merit who deserved help, what kind, and how much. With government in charge everyone who meets minimum standards reaps the benefits and the money of the taxpayers. Show some gratitude people and exercise some responsibility.

I certainly do not disagree with you. I have always believed in a helping hand, not a handout.