6 ms·

Obama said that? Shame on him. He doesn't even need re-election. I was so happy for the US and world in general when Obama was elected. This man has become the

by alan_cx 13y ago

Obama said that? Shame on him. He doesn't even need re-election. I was so happy for the US and world in general when Obama was elected. This man has become the world biggest disappointment. Americans appear love world records and things that go down as "historic". Well chaps, you have another one. This man is worse than George W Bush. Bush was clearly what he was. We all knew what we were getting, and could rely on it. Obama is a lie in a suit. He makes the US look like a national and international lie. Maybe it is.

perlpimp 13y ago
Never trust a politician, never talk to the police.
madaxe 13y ago
He also categorically denied that any warrantless searches were/are being performed - which is also a flat lie, and explicitly refuted by the Guardian's piece a few hours before his bullshit session.
vermontdevil 13y ago
Jeez have we forgotten what Bush had done? Iraq anyone? And no I'm not saying Obama is doing hecka of a job. But let's not forget the serious damage Bush did. Not to mention all this NSA stuff too under Bush.
- madaxe 13y ago
  Frankly, both Bush and Obama are patsies for the system, which at this point is a fully fledged self-sustaining kafakesque bureaucracy. It's easy to personify and be angry with a person, less easy to be angry with an abstract clusterfuck of human interaction and behaviour gone horribly wrong, systemised, and enshrined in transgenerational tradition.
- tinco 13y ago
  No one cares about Bush anymore, you're being rather irrelevant.
  - vermontdevil 13y ago
    Yeah right. The Supreme Court appointees by Bush has caused the greatest damage we will see for years (Citizen United) The way America supported the Govt involvement in religion and tax money, the senseless wars, the intrusion of our lives by TSA etc. all accelerated by Bush and continued by Obama and will continue until this country collapses. Yeah keep on not caring about how our history has changed for the worst and for good.
    - tinco 13y ago
      It's no use to care about Bush, he himself is not in power anymore. What does it give us to say 'yeah, Bush was a bad guy'? If anything Bush did is still having adverse effects, Obama and his successors are the ones who we should look at. I think the most important thing in your comment is 'and continued by Obama', that's the pain point, that's what's matters to us now.
- jeltz 13y ago
  Bush was probably worse but Obama being almost as bad gives the impression that the situation is hopeless, that it does not matter who you elect.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
bambax 13y ago
Couldn't agree more. With Bush we could blame Bush; with Obama there is no one left to blame but America itself.
tjic 13y ago
> I was so happy for the US and world in general when Obama was elected. Clearly you didn't do much research on him before. No one who researched candidates is happy when ANYONE gets elected.
- venomsnake 13y ago
  A bit like sausages - they are only delicious if you have not been to the factory.
  - tjic 13y ago
    A bit like BAD sausage - leaves a gross taste in your mouth whether you know how the factory operates or not.
wpietri 13y ago
I am certainly disappointed with Obama, but I think there's a need for perspective here. If the US right had their way, we'd have invaded Iran by now. And there's a list of domestic horrors that I'm sure would be well underway if we had McCain and Palin running the show; you need only look at state-level activity in the red states to get an idea. I also think that Bush presented a much more reasonable face in the 2000 elections than we came to see. Compassionate conservatism was a line they pushed pretty hard that turned out to be a lie. And nobody expected Cheney to make Lord Voldemort look good by comparison. Rigged evidence for a war? Torture? And, of course, starting all these domestic surveillance programs that Obama is just continuing. In 2000, the Republicans could still lay claim to the legacy of the Rockefeller Republicans, who were sane and reasonable stewards of the state, people actually interested in public service. W himself could claim that because Bush Senior was one of those reasonable Republicans. So no, I don't think we all knew what we were getting with Bush. I'd say he turned out to be radically worse than people thought. As evidence, take a look at the difference between a British newspaper's endorsements: in 2000, they were for Bush; in 2004, against: http://www.economist.com/node/12499760 http://www.economist.com/node/12499760 And then compare with their 2009 retrospective on his leaving: http://www.economist.com/node/12931660 http://www.economist.com/node/12931660
- sigzero 13y ago
  Most of what you say is...false or half-truths. Rigged evidence for war? Everyone thought the evidence was there, Dems, Pubs, and foreign nations. Obama isn't just continuing the surveillance programs, he has EXPANDED them. I didn't like Bush and I hate Obama. To say "if the right was in charge" is a) speculation and b) probably 100% wrong. Your perspective, is skewed.
  - Nursie 13y ago
    No. We foreign nations thought the evidence was bullshit too. Our leaders in the uk were entirely transparent and the population didn't believe a word. We were ignored.
    - mongol 13y ago
angersock 13y ago
Maybe you should've voted for Ron Paul. You know, somebody who has clearly stated goals, consistent platforms, and who actually is engaging in some of the political issues surrounding federalism. Or, you know, screw it, let's vote for a guy because he got a bogus Peace Prize and is the first dude of some skin color in office--that's some solid bona fides there. EDIT: And to be fair, I'm equally sick of the smug Republicans saying you get what you deserved; they laid a lot of the groundwork for this tomfoolery.

by alan_cx 13y ago

perlpimp 13y ago

Never trust a politician, never talk to the police.

madaxe 13y ago

He also categorically denied that any warrantless searches were/are being performed - which is also a flat lie, and explicitly refuted by the Guardian's piece a few hours before his bullshit session.

vermontdevil 13y ago

Jeez have we forgotten what Bush had done? Iraq anyone? And no I'm not saying Obama is doing hecka of a job. But let's not forget the serious damage Bush did. Not to mention all this NSA stuff too under Bush.

madaxe 13y ago
Frankly, both Bush and Obama are patsies for the system, which at this point is a fully fledged self-sustaining kafakesque bureaucracy. It's easy to personify and be angry with a person, less easy to be angry with an abstract clusterfuck of human interaction and behaviour gone horribly wrong, systemised, and enshrined in transgenerational tradition.
tinco 13y ago
No one cares about Bush anymore, you're being rather irrelevant.
- vermontdevil 13y ago
  Yeah right. The Supreme Court appointees by Bush has caused the greatest damage we will see for years (Citizen United) The way America supported the Govt involvement in religion and tax money, the senseless wars, the intrusion of our lives by TSA etc. all accelerated by Bush and continued by Obama and will continue until this country collapses. Yeah keep on not caring about how our history has changed for the worst and for good.
  - tinco 13y ago
    It's no use to care about Bush, he himself is not in power anymore. What does it give us to say 'yeah, Bush was a bad guy'? If anything Bush did is still having adverse effects, Obama and his successors are the ones who we should look at. I think the most important thing in your comment is 'and continued by Obama', that's the pain point, that's what's matters to us now.
jeltz 13y ago
Bush was probably worse but Obama being almost as bad gives the impression that the situation is hopeless, that it does not matter who you elect.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]

bambax 13y ago

Couldn't agree more. With Bush we could blame Bush; with Obama there is no one left to blame but America itself.

tjic 13y ago

> I was so happy for the US and world in general when Obama was elected. Clearly you didn't do much research on him before. No one who researched candidates is happy when ANYONE gets elected.

venomsnake 13y ago
A bit like sausages - they are only delicious if you have not been to the factory.
- tjic 13y ago
  A bit like BAD sausage - leaves a gross taste in your mouth whether you know how the factory operates or not.

wpietri 13y ago

I am certainly disappointed with Obama, but I think there's a need for perspective here. If the US right had their way, we'd have invaded Iran by now. And there's a list of domestic horrors that I'm sure would be well underway if we had McCain and Palin running the show; you need only look at state-level activity in the red states to get an idea. I also think that Bush presented a much more reasonable face in the 2000 elections than we came to see. Compassionate conservatism was a line they pushed pretty hard that turned out to be a lie. And nobody expected Cheney to make Lord Voldemort look good by comparison. Rigged evidence for a war? Torture? And, of course, starting all these domestic surveillance programs that Obama is just continuing. In 2000, the Republicans could still lay claim to the legacy of the Rockefeller Republicans, who were sane and reasonable stewards of the state, people actually interested in public service. W himself could claim that because Bush Senior was one of those reasonable Republicans. So no, I don't think we all knew what we were getting with Bush. I'd say he turned out to be radically worse than people thought. As evidence, take a look at the difference between a British newspaper's endorsements: in 2000, they were for Bush; in 2004, against: http://www.economist.com/node/12499760 http://www.economist.com/node/12499760 And then compare with their 2009 retrospective on his leaving: http://www.economist.com/node/12931660 http://www.economist.com/node/12931660

sigzero 13y ago
Most of what you say is...false or half-truths. Rigged evidence for war? Everyone thought the evidence was there, Dems, Pubs, and foreign nations. Obama isn't just continuing the surveillance programs, he has EXPANDED them. I didn't like Bush and I hate Obama. To say "if the right was in charge" is a) speculation and b) probably 100% wrong. Your perspective, is skewed.
- Nursie 13y ago
  No. We foreign nations thought the evidence was bullshit too. Our leaders in the uk were entirely transparent and the population didn't believe a word. We were ignored.
  - mongol 13y ago

angersock 13y ago

Maybe you should've voted for Ron Paul. You know, somebody who has clearly stated goals, consistent platforms, and who actually is engaging in some of the political issues surrounding federalism. Or, you know, screw it, let's vote for a guy because he got a bogus Peace Prize and is the first dude of some skin color in office--that's some solid bona fides there. EDIT: And to be fair, I'm equally sick of the smug Republicans saying you get what you deserved; they laid a lot of the groundwork for this tomfoolery.