Quantcast
Opinion

Letter: Dishonest president

Comments

Return To Article
  • embarrassed Utahn! Salt Lake City, UT
    Nov. 20, 2013 5:25 a.m.

    One can only imagine the horrors if Mitt Romney would have succeeded in fooling the American people.

    Barack Obama is a great man and truly wanted to be a bi-partisan leader. Republican "Party of NO" representatives simply wanted this great man to be a failure.

    They won't succeed.

  • Iron Rod Salt Lake City, UT
    Nov. 20, 2013 5:28 a.m.

    Did he intentionally lie?

    I wonder if that criteria could be used on President Bush in regard to Iraq?

    Were we lied to? Were they planning an attack even before 911?

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    Nov. 20, 2013 5:55 a.m.

    And here I thought this was going to be about 'Dishonest president' GW Bush, Mission Accomplished, Weapons of Mass Destruction, 5,000 dead - 75,000 wounded American servicemen/women, and $4 Trillion of unfunded spending...

    But Utah, the Deseret News and the Republican establishment with their 15 second goldfish memories can't seem to EVER remember.

    Only Obama and his, "secret" birth certificate, Benghazi cover-ups, and telling "millions" of Americans [all 0.4% of them] who had their substandard insurance policies cancelled.

    I'd like to know,
    Does ANYBODY in Utah know personally of ANYBODY who has received one of these letters and been dropped?
    [on the contrary, I've talked with many who have been previously denied, who can now get it.]

    I've been asking this for weeks now -- and still haven't heard of anyone.

  • ugottabkidn Sandy, UT
    Nov. 20, 2013 7:17 a.m.

    Since before Jan 20, 2009 you continually judge a man by a different standard than those before. I wonder where your outrage was for those who lost their insurance before the ACA or were forced to file bankruptcy because of medical reasons or those who were 'misled' to search for weapons of mass destruction or the thousands that died after "mission accomplished". It's amazing that it's a lie when this POTUS speaks but when the last guy speaks it's just politics.

  • Nate Pleasant Grove, UT
    Nov. 20, 2013 8:32 a.m.

    @Wayne Maden "Democrats who are up for re-election next year are starting to distance themselves from him and his plans."

    Wow, I believe I have just met the master of understatement. Distancing themselves? They're fleeing like rats from a burning ship.

    The problem for them is that the botched rollout was preceded by botched legislation. And they all voted for it.

  • Irony Guy Bountiful, Utah
    Nov. 20, 2013 8:48 a.m.

    As I am not a mind-reader, I don't know if O is a conscious liar or not. I don't know if GW Bush was a conscious liar when he got us into Iraq. I doubt either of them intended to create a debacle. History will judge the consequences of both. I suspect history will be kinder to Obama.

  • Roland Kayser Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Nov. 20, 2013 9:19 a.m.

    President Obama made a statement that was true for about 95% of the people. And he should have clarified that it wouldn't apply to the other 5%. But on the other side, opponents of the ACA have been spouting one outrageous lie after another e.g. death panels, government takeover of all healthcare, people will get microchipped by the government, etc.

    These same people that have been lying through their teeth are now absolutely outraged that the president made a statement that was only 95% true.

  • FT salt lake city, UT
    Nov. 20, 2013 9:19 a.m.

    Irony Guy sums it up well and let me add to his comments by saying that all Presidents either lie or were incorrect when stating supporting arguments for their positions.

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    Nov. 20, 2013 9:27 a.m.

    Nate
    Pleasant Grove, UT
    @Wayne Maden "Democrats who are up for re-election next year are starting to distance themselves from him and his plans."

    Wow, I believe I have just met the master of understatement. Distancing themselves? They're fleeing like rats from a burning ship.

    The problem for them is that the botched rollout was preceded by botched legislation. And they all voted for it.

    8:32 a.m. Nov. 20, 2013

    =====

    Wow Nat --
    I thought you were talking about the new and improved Mike Lee,
    member key-figurehead of the Republican Tea-Party Caucus.
    or the NOW "I'm not a Tea-Partier" Mia Love.

    Talk about the #1 play from Mitt Romney's Flip-Flop political playbook.

  • Mike Richards South Jordan, Utah
    Nov. 20, 2013 9:44 a.m.

    Mr. Maden wrote: "Did he intentionally lie? That's quite hard to prove, and he knows that. But remember, the best con men are the ones who draw you into their confidence."

    The letter was not about former Presidents. It was about our current President. Surely no one would claim that a former President is forcing Obama to lie. Surely no one would tell us that Obama is just a puppet for some former President. Surely no one would stoop so low as to divert attention away from Obama.

    Obama is the President. The facts are beginning to come in about ObamaCare. The facts being presented by DEMOCRATS contradict what Obama said. The facts show that Obama knew that his "promises" were untrue.

    The question demands that we evaluate Obama. Either Obama is a dupe who doesn't know what is going on or he purposefully lied to us. Which is worse? Which would engender trust?

    Obama has used up his allotment of "trust". He needs to feel the consequences of what he has done (or failed to do, if he really is ignorant of the consequences of signing ObamaCare).

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    Nov. 20, 2013 9:51 a.m.

    Let's not forget --

    President George "Read My Lips, NO new taxes!" Bush.
    President finger waging Bill "I did not have sexual relations" Clinton,
    President Reagan and Iran-Contra,
    President Richard "I am not a crook" Nixon,

    But,
    let's stay focused on the only President ever capable of telling a 95% half/truth...

  • Hemlock Salt Lake City, UT
    Nov. 20, 2013 10:09 a.m.

    Recent polls indicate that if the last election were held today, Romney would win. It's called buyers remorse. Obama has been exposed as a rigid ideologist who still believes that nothing good can come unless the government does it. He has subsidized a dependent class of voters that is his base. The census bureau revelations concerning their manipulation of job creation and unemployment prior to the last election confirm that the supine media and this dishonest administration stop at nothing to present their fantasy of prosperity. The ACA fiasco is not the problem, it is a symptom of the administration's incompetence and dishonesty.

  • 4601 Salt Lake City, UT
    Nov. 20, 2013 10:13 a.m.

    You have your choice of dishonesty or ignorance. Pick the one you feel comfortable with. The trouble with being honest 95% of the time is that one cannot tell when the other 5% is being spoken.

  • Nate Pleasant Grove, UT
    Nov. 20, 2013 10:30 a.m.

    @Roland Kayser "President Obama made a statement that was true for about 95% of the people."

    That's incorrect. You're not figuring in the employer mandate, which kicks in next year. The Obama administration has estimated that somewhere between 39% and 69% of health care plans would be replaced under Obamacare. They have argued this before the Supreme Court, while Obama was telling everyone "If you like your health care plan, you'll be able to keep your health care plan. Period."

    The 5% figure is another Obama lie. Don't be suckered in by it. He's not credible.

  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Nov. 20, 2013 10:31 a.m.

    embarrassed Utahn!

    RE: "Barack Obama is a great man and truly wanted to be a bi-partisan leader. Republican "Party of NO" representatives simply wanted this great man to be a failure"...

    If he really wanted to be a bi-partisan leader... then why did he allow his super-majority in Congress actually LOCK the doors to the room where they were discussing and crafting the Obama Care legislation and not allow a single Republican into the room??

    Google it... Democrats actually had the locks changed on the doors to keep Republicans out of the chambers where they were discussing the legislation!

    How the heck is THAT "bi-partisan"??

    Barack Obama PROMISED to change Washington politics as usual... but name even ONE thing he has actually done to even TRY to accomplish that!

    Locking Republicans out does NOT accomplish that. Congressional leaders telling Republicans "We don't need your votes so you won't be involved in the conversation"... does not send that message to the other party.

    IF Obama really wanted to be bi... he would have reigned in his party' leaders in Congress and INSISTED they involve Republicans in crafting his first legislation.

  • Pagan Salt Lake City, UT
    Nov. 20, 2013 10:44 a.m.

    New report indicates 500,000 peopled died in Iraq.

    No WMD's.

    Lets have a honest conversation about a lying President….

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    Nov. 20, 2013 10:56 a.m.

    It started out as a true statement when made before the healthcare bill passed because all plans before then would be grandfathered in. It's only plans developed after Obamacare passed that fail to meet Obamacare standards that there are issues with. These issues affect around 5% of people.

    It's just silly the feigned outrage as if this is the first time a politician has ever said a statement that turned out to be false.

    @Nate
    "You're not figuring in the employer mandate, which kicks in next year."

    The employer mandate has nothing to do with this.

    @2bits
    It takes two to tango and the Republicans have shown no willingness to work on anything (where's their immigration bill btw?).

  • 2 bit Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Nov. 20, 2013 11:10 a.m.

    Pagan,

    RE: "New report indicates 500,000 peopled died in Iraq"... and

    Are you aware that more American soldiers have died in the first 5 years Obama has been President than the whole 8 years Bush was President?

    ---

    It's not so fun when you realize that your partisan game ends up pointing more to your guy than to the one you WANTED to vilify.

    This is a quote from an article dated June 27 2013)...
    "575 US troops died in Afghanistan during the Bush presidency. By August 18, 2010, following two troop surges initiated by President Obama, that number had doubled. Today, over 1500 US troops have died in Afghanistan since President Obama took office".

    That was dated June 27 2013, so it's even worse now... And now your hero Obama has signed an agreement to keep US troops in Afganistan till 2024... what do you have to say about THAT?

    I remember in a debate when Senator McCain said he thought we would be involved in Afghanistan for a decade, and Obama and the Democrat-Media ridiculed McCain over that.

    It's weird that you think this vilifies Bush and not Obama.

  • Confused Sandy, UT
    Nov. 20, 2013 11:33 a.m.

    Pagan....

    Please do some research on the internet and you find that the US did Actually find WMD's in IRAQ after their invasions...

    what they did not find is any "NEW" WMD's, but they did find some WMD's that was suppose to be destroyed under the UN mandate of 1991...

    Sorry to bust your bubble, the fact that no liberal News media reported it shows the bias. Check out wikileaks and Huffington Post for more details.

  • ConservativeCommonTater West Valley City, UT
    Nov. 20, 2013 12:01 p.m.

    hmmm, so Obama lied about something that is helping 47 million people or more in the long run?

    But, Bush merely made a "mistake" by invading Iraq due to bad info about WMD's? Bush's "mistake" has killed over 4,000 Americans and more than 100,000 Iraqi's. Bush's "mistake" has kept the U.S. in Afghanistan for the longest war in our history.

    Bush's "mistakes" have cost $trillions and will take another decade to correct.

    Obama's "lie" about a few people being able keep their current Doctors and coverage is much worse though.

    Is that about right???

  • happy2bhere clearfield, UT
    Nov. 20, 2013 12:11 p.m.

    Obama will be judged as failure or success depending upon whos talking. To me Carter/Obama will go down as the worst in modern times. To some of you, that honor will go to Reagan/Bush. So What!! The main point I want to make is it is useless to debate over Bush or any past President. The only thing that can be changed is the here and now. And here and now we have President Obama. His program is losing popularity, (not that it ever had any) and his approval rating are falling like the stock market in 1929. It is up to the one with power today to either fix things or continue to ruin things. It's up to Obama. I don't think the man has it in him. To inexperienced, bad advisors, and I think he has the kind of character flaws, (Nixon for example) that will leave his problems unfixed and will ruin his record and legacy. 3 more years. We'll see.

  • RedShirt USS Enterprise, UT
    Nov. 20, 2013 12:29 p.m.

    With Obama it is one of 2 things. Either he is a liar when it comes to what he knew and when he knew it or else he is an incompetent leader.

    Just look at the scandals surrounding his presidency. He has 2 basic excuses for not knowing about the scandals. He has used the "I didn't know about that until I saw it in the news" excuse for quite a few scandals. Doesn't that show that he is not in control of his own cabinet since the scandals have been traced to White House level officials?

    His other excuse is to say that he didn't really mean what he said before or that he mis-spoke. Basically this is an admission of being a poor communicator.

    So, either he is a liar or incompetent. Do we want a President that is a liar or is incompetent running this nation?

  • Happy Valley Heretic Orem, UT
    Nov. 20, 2013 12:33 p.m.

    @Confused. Sorry you've been mislead by you radio.

    Intelligence Committee found in 2008 that his administration "misrepresented the intelligence and the threat from Iraq".

    Source:
    Press Release of Intelligence Committee
    Senate Intelligence Committee Unveils Final Phase II Reports on Prewar Iraq Intelligence

    Two Bipartisan Reports Detail Administration Misstatements on Prewar Iraq Intelligence, and Inappropriate Intelligence Activities by Pentagon Policy Office

    Thursday, June 5, 2008

  • 2 bit Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Nov. 20, 2013 1:09 p.m.

    embarrassed,
    RE: "One can only imagine the horrors if Mitt Romney would have succeeded in fooling the American people"...

    I suspect that we would be basically right were we are today IF Romney had won. No... it would not have been "horrific", "the end of the world", "cats and dogs living together", etc...

    ObamaCare probably would have been delayed or redone instead of just plowing ahead with it ready-or-not... but everything else would have been pretty much the same.

    I think Romney has seen business plans that were in trouble before (ie the SLC Olympics, Staples, etc) and he probably would have noticed that we didn't do any scalability testing on the website and done something about it.

    ---

    ConservativeCommonTater,
    I'm pretty sure Iraq decision was about more than just WMDs. If you can ignore all the OTHER reasons for addressing Saddam Hussein, and just focus on ONE THING... you may be able to make the case that the decision to use military force was a lie.

    But then you have to explain why the decision got unanimous bi-partisan support in Congress (including Democrats)

  • Confused Sandy, UT
    Nov. 20, 2013 1:22 p.m.

    ConservativeCommonTater

    You crack me up... Is ObamaCare fully implemented yet? NO....

    So it may help some now... but when the employer mandate kicks in next year.. well the being helped is going to go down substantially.

    by the way, go talk to those .04 percent people and see if they care if it helps 47 million...

    Second, go look at the number of American killed in Afghanistan since Obama took over. Now they are going to keep troops their until 2024?

    Third, tell me what "mistake" Bush made.... just because you do not like the war in IRAQ does not make it a mistake. There was WMD's in IRAQ, There was a bounty on Bush's father, there was payment to suicide bombers by Sadaam. So not sure what "mistake" you are talking about. If you think it was a mistake, go talk to an Iraqi about it.

  • Confused Sandy, UT
    Nov. 20, 2013 1:28 p.m.

    Happy Valley...
    Sorry no Radio .. never listen to it...

    Second, The "Intelligence" (that is a contradiction) committee was made up of democrats that wanted to smear the Bush administration.

    The facts are 1) Congress had the same intelligence reports as the president 2) both Russia and British intelligence reports said the same thing. 3) Bush himself said that the report was flawed because AT THE TIME the intelligence community was not working together. That is why we now how HomeLand security agency.

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    Nov. 20, 2013 1:29 p.m.

    @2bit
    "ObamaCare probably would have been delayed or redone instead of just plowing ahead with it ready-or-not... but everything else would have been pretty much the same."

    Depends on if Democrats still held the Senate. It would be interesting to see how Romney would've operated with a Democratic Senate when it comes to Obamacare. I wonder if he'd return to his Massachusetts way of trying to work with the other party, or if he'd be like the House and consider compromise a 4 letter word.

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    Nov. 20, 2013 1:30 p.m.

    @2bit
    "But then you have to explain why the decision got unanimous bi-partisan support in Congress (including Democrats)"

    The war in Afghanistan war was near unanimous (I want to say Barbara Lee was the only one or one of few to oppose that). The war in Iraq was not unanimous at all, though it did get many Democrats there was a sizable number that opposed it.

  • Nate Pleasant Grove, UT
    Nov. 20, 2013 1:32 p.m.

    @atl134 "The employer mandate has nothing to do with this."

    Yes, it does.

    If you were to check the Federal Register dated June 17, 2010 (vol. 75, no. 116) you would see estimates from the Obama administration that between 39% and 69% of employer plans would lose their grandfather status by the end of 2013. The mid-range estimate is 51%. That's a lot of millions of people. For small business employers, the projection is between 49% and 80%.

    It didn't come up as an issue this year, because Obama unilaterally postponed the application of the employer mandate until the beginning of 2015. This means that 90-day cancelation notices will start going out in October of 2014 -- one month before midterm elections. This is why Democrats up for reelection are so panicked.

    I'll be surprised if one of them doesn't co-author the repeal bill himself.

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    Nov. 20, 2013 1:36 p.m.

    @happy2behere
    "To me Carter/Obama will go down as the worst in modern times. To some of you, that honor will go to Reagan/Bush. "

    I'd go with the likes of Buchanan, Pierce, and Hoover at the bottom. I'd put Reagan somewhere in the middle, Obama in the teens (with an eventual range of around 12-25 depending primarily on how the healthcare bill turns out years down the road), and W. Bush somewhere in the mid 30s.

  • The Deuce Livermore, CA
    Nov. 20, 2013 1:51 p.m.

    To: embarrassed Utahn! - First of all, if Mitt Romney were in this office, he would have a far greater understanding of this particular issue than does our current president. He also has a much better knowledge and understanding of how business works. So don't be comparing apples to oranges. Second, the American people were sold a bill of goods that had never been fully vetted. Even the great Nancy Pelosi stated that we must first pass the law to know what is in it. She was on Meet the Press last Sunday and did a horrible job trying to defend that statement. I actually felt embarrased for her. Yes, this was President Obama's agenda and it was rushed out long before it was ready. Yes, he did not understand what the problems were even though we now find out that these issues were brought up to him. Have other presidents made the same type of mistake, yes!. But we are dealing with this mistake now and we want to get this right or corrected or thrown out, if thats what it takes.

  • silo Sandy, UT
    Nov. 20, 2013 2:11 p.m.

    @ 2 bits
    "Google it... Democrats actually had the locks changed on the doors to keep Republicans out of the chambers where they were discussing the legislation!"

    Not true.

    In October 2009, democrats did change locks on a committee room door. However, the committee meeting in question had absolutely nothing to do with the PPACA and nothing to do with legislation at all. In fact it was a meeting by the House Oversight and Governmental Reform Committee to discuss Countrywide Mortgage.

    I googled it. Either you failed to do the research, or you lied when you tried to tie the lock changing incident to PPACA legislation.

    That you posted this misinformation as a comment in this particular article is thick with irony, hypocrisy or both.

  • happy2bhere clearfield, UT
    Nov. 20, 2013 2:23 p.m.

    atl134

    Well, my definition of "modern times" is post WW2 or say FDR forward. As for those other Presidents, I really haven't studied enough to have an opinion. Obama does still have 3 more years, so I might be premature to label him as bad as I think he is. However, I don't see it in his nature to change much, so I'm going on the assumption that his high point as President will have been giving the order to kill Bin Laden, killing many other terriorists with drone strikes, giving the order to save many others with military action. His military successes certainly have been much better than Carters, but one can't deny that Obama also inherited from Bush not only a bad economy, but his military policy too. And so I don't give full credit to Obama for that anymore than I give full blame to Obama for the bad economy. I only blame him for doing what I think has been the wrong things to bring this country out of the bad economy. And, I sound like a broken record, adding 6 plus trillion to the debt.

  • ConservativeCommonTater West Valley City, UT
    Nov. 20, 2013 4:04 p.m.

    to: "Confused"

    "by the way, go talk to those .04 percent people and see if they care if it helps 47 million..."

    The Republican way, "I've got mine and I don't care if no one else gets theirs."

    Why don't you ask the 47 million if they care that the .04% have to get something different. You will find that you are outvoted.

    Yes, you are right about Bush having other reasons for starting and unfunded war in Iraq. Bush wanted to be America's Greatest War Hero, surprising since he essentially deserted his position in the Texas ANG to work on a Republican political campaign.

    GW Bush also started the war in Iraq in part because "He (Saddam) tried to kill my daddy."

    As for the WMD's, we're still waiting to find the ones you and Bush claim were there.

    You also overlooking the Republican mantra of low taxes and less government, while starting 2 wars and not funding either, but putting them on the credit card.

    But, that's different.

  • Confused Sandy, UT
    Nov. 20, 2013 4:23 p.m.

    ConservativeCommonTater

    Your response to my .04 percent is pretty predictable from a liberal... Yet, you have no problem with taking from others WHAT they earned and giving to yourself... interesting huh?

    Second, Google about WMD's found in IRAQ. There are several sources that confirmed the finding of WMD's, just not any "New" ones.

    Third, The "unfunded" of the wars is erroneous, it was funded fully by congress. Not sure why you liberals always say that it was unfunded.. it was part of Bush driving up the debt.

    fourth, I never said I liked Bush and ALL his decisions, He made some real bad decision when it came to economy and the budget, but that does not negate the fact that his decision to go into IRAQ was wrong.

    and lastly, The GOP party during the time of Bush II is what pushed this country to the fiscal cliff we faced, now the democrats and Obama are determined to push us over the cliff without a parachute.

  • Hemlock Salt Lake City, UT
    Nov. 20, 2013 5:00 p.m.

    Bush's mistake in Iraq did not result in 100,000 much less 500,000 Iraqi deaths. The Shiite-Sunni conflict is the 1200 year old problem. More US troops have died in Obama's Afghanistan war than in Iraq. Mr. Obama adopted the Afghan war soon after his election and though he would like to blame Bush, even Jay Carney wouldn't put that forth.

  • lcg Bluffdale, UT
    Nov. 20, 2013 5:33 p.m.

    I am amazed that anyone could say Obama DIDN'T lie about this. Every speech he gives is veted by dozens of people and every word is examined. This was an out right lie - not just once but at least 29 times. For those who excuse this by vilifying Bush, remember Bush took every bit of information he had to Congress who discussed at length and took a vote on where to go to war with the information they had. The vote was to do just that. In addition the US had the support of dozens of nations with access to the same data. In contrast - Obama was well aware that a good percentage of people would lose their coverage under Obamacare and be pushed into the exchanges. It was the plan all along.

  • Truthseeker SLO, CA
    Nov. 20, 2013 8:11 p.m.

    Re:2bits

    "But then you have to explain why the decision got unanimous bi-partisan support in Congress (including Democrats)"

    More Democrats voted against the Iraq War Resolution than voted for it.
    Specifically, 111 yeas, 147 nays

    Republicans 263 yeas, 7 nays

  • one vote Salt Lake City, UT
    Nov. 20, 2013 10:44 p.m.

    When did George Bush apologize for Iraq? People died there and are still being blown p weekly due to the destabilization.

  • Iron Rod Salt Lake City, UT
    Nov. 20, 2013 11:11 p.m.

    Re: Cunfused
    Sandy, Urah

    Please tell us more about "the weapons of mass destruction that were found in Iraq after the invasion "

    I some how must have missed it.

  • Pagan Salt Lake City, UT
    Nov. 21, 2013 12:34 a.m.

    'Are you aware that more American soldiers have died in the first 5 years Obama has been President than the whole 8 years Bush was President?'

    Did Obama start the Iraq war x7 years before he was elected President?

    Or did George W. Bush?

  • samhill Salt Lake City, UT
    Nov. 21, 2013 9:05 a.m.

    "Did he intentionally lie?"

    ---------------

    Wayne, no one can "lie" UN-intentionally.

    One can unintentionally and unknowingly say something that is false. But, Part of the definition of lying is to knowingly and thus intentionally, convey a falsehood.

    We now have abundant proof that the flaws with both the web site and Obamacare itself were known many months in advance of the actual "roll-out" date. It is inconceivable that Obama, the Chief Executive Officer of the entire government, was unaware of this. Even if his audacious hopefulness compelled him to paint the rosiest scenario of the impending "roll-out", there is no chance the completely inevitable cancellation of millions of current healthcare plans was not only known but actually designed.

    Not only is Obama a serial and flagrant liar, something most people nowadays consider a given for any politician, the entire administration is being run, more and more, as a criminal enterprise.

    BUT, it is WE, the people, the electorate, who put them in power and it is WE who can and **must** replace them, for our own sake and that of our descendants.

  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Nov. 21, 2013 9:27 a.m.

    How did Democrats changing the locks and locking Republicans out show how committed they were to Bi-Partisanship (even if they didn't discuss ObamaCare in the meeting)?

    The minute Obama was elected... Democrats started shunning Republicans and locking them out. Exactly HOW does that show their concern for bi-partisanship?

    IF Obama is a leader.. and he promised to END partisan politics in Washington during his campaign... Shouldn't he have said something to Reid and Pelosi and demanded they open the doors and be bi-partisan?

    Shouldn't the President have INSISTED that Republicans be allowed to participate in legislation instead of being locked out because he didn't need any of their votes to quickly pass the Democrat agenda?

    Can anyone name ONE THING Obama has done to sponsor bi-partisanship in Washington....

  • Badgerbadger Murray, UT
    Nov. 21, 2013 11:39 a.m.

    2 Bits

    "Can anyone name ONE THING Obama has done to sponsor bi-partisanship in Washington...."

    Don't hold your breath. We have been waiting 5 years since his promise bring the nation together, and so far he says and does only what divides, in an attempt to dominate, abusively/illegally as needed.

  • the old switcharoo mesa, AZ
    Nov. 23, 2013 5:12 p.m.

    Right. So death panels, threats of socialism, communism, riots in the streets, he's on the way to take your guns so hurry and buy more for him to - take? I don't see the rationale unless you know your lying.

    So I figure the right is lying about Obama lying again. Little story called, Chicken Little.

    Just because I know it causes a Pavlovian reaction, Benghazi!