"I will not rest until more people have jobs...."

[GarthUte]

I'm only paraphrasing a comment from Obama in a speech he gave in 2010. This is the full comment in better context:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Y3Y-owlgGG4

Well, not surprisingly, Obama lied about how hard he would work to ensure that the economy gets turned around. The Government Accountability Institute, a nonpartisan watchdog group in DC looked into just how much time Obama spent in meetings about the economy compared to time spent on vacation since he took office.

http://g-a-i.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/GAI-Presidential-Calendar-Report.pdf

Apparently, Obama has a different idea than most about "not resting". Granted, he's involved in several other meetings that take up many, many more hours, but if he's going to say he's focused on the economy, he really ought to focus on the economy.

[SeattleUte]

lol the one trick pony air balls. (Yes, you bet your ass I know it's a mixed metaphor.)

[Diehard Ute]

There are 536 people in DC that are the problem. Until we all realize that and unite as Americans instead of following the Crips and Bloods of politics nothing will change.

[LA Ute]

The 12 million losers in Obama’s new budget (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/04/10/the-12-million-losers-in-obamas-new-budget/)

[GarthUte]

lol the one trick pony air balls. (Yes, you bet your ass I know it's a mixed metaphor.)

What's it like having me live in your head rent-free?

[GarthUte]

There are 536 people in DC that are the problem. Until we all realize that and unite as Americans instead of following the Crips and Bloods of politics nothing will change.

You're blaming the House of Representatives for Obama's incompetence and failure to lead?

[Diehard Ute]

You're blaming the House of Representatives for Obama's incompetence and failure to lead?

I blame all of them. If you can't see issues with the house, then you just don't want to see said issues. They are all part of the problem. To try and blame the president without blaming congress is ostrich behavior.

I'm not a republican or democrat, I wish we'd get rid of this stupid party system we've developed. It doesn't solve problems.

[GarthUte]

I blame all of them. If you can't see issues with the house, then you just don't want to see said issues. They are all part of the problem. To try and blame the president without blaming congress is ostrich behavior.

I'm not a republican or democrat, I wish we'd get rid of this stupid party system we've developed. It doesn't solve problems.

I have no problem blaming everyone there. I just misinterpreted your comment and realized that you were including the House and Senate there.

But I stand by statement about Obama. His does fail to lead and he is incompetent. Had it not been for Pelosi, Obamacare would not have passed.

[U-Ute]

I have no problem blaming everyone there. I just misinterpreted your comment and realized that you were including the House and Senate there.

But I stand by statement about Obama. His does fail to lead and he is incompetent. Had it not been for Pelosi, Obamacare would not have passed.

Since you obviously have much better ideas on how to fix the healthcare system, I'd love to hear them.

[GarthUte]

Since you obviously have much better ideas on how to fix the healthcare system, I'd love to hear them.

I've never claimed to have better ideas, but it's obvious that Obama has absolutely no idea what he's doing.

Of course, this has drifted to a different topic than what I started, so I'll get it back on track by asking how folks feel about Obama spending more time on the golf course than in meetings about fixing the economy. Or does it not bother anyone that he's playing his fiddle while Rome is burning?

[scottie]

Garth, I appreciate you at least not using your "Obama worshiper" term here. It's annoying (just being honest). People can support Obama for any number of reasons, many times it's for patriotic purposes.

[GarthUte]

Garth, I appreciate you at least not using your "Obama worshiper" term here. It's annoying (just being honest). People can support Obama for any number of reasons, many times it's for patriotic purposes.

When I say Obama worshiper at the other sight, I specifically mean one poster in particular. It pisses him off to no end, so that's why I do it.

Do you want to comment on the report to which I linked?

[DanielLaRusso]

Can I get a clarification? Your original premise hinges on time and not necessarily results, correct? Your follow ups to the premise seem to indicate that you believe that more time = more results. Is this the framework under which you're pursuing this?

Also, I'm sick of you plebs not appreciating all that Nero did for our empire!...you're the truthers of the Julio-Claudinian period...disgusting!

[Mano]

You seem to be presenting the source for your article as unbiased. It is not.

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Government_Accountability_Institute

[Solon]

Can I get a clarification? Your original premise hinges on time and not necessarily results, correct? Your follow ups to the premise seem to indicate that you believe that more time = more results. Is this the framework under which you're pursuing this?

Also, I'm sick of you plebs not appreciating all that Nero did for our empire!...you're the truthers of the Julio-Claudinian period...disgusting!

LOL.
Bravo, Daniel-san!

[GarthUte]

Can I get a clarification? Your original premise hinges on time and not necessarily results, correct? Your follow ups to the premise seem to indicate that you believe that more time = more results. Is this the framework under which you're pursuing this?

Also, I'm sick of you plebs not appreciating all that Nero did for our empire!...you're the truthers of the Julio-Claudinian period...disgusting!

Kudos for your truther comment. That gave me a good chuckle.

As for the rest, I'm not saying that more time = more results. I'm pointing out that Obama is a liar. He said he wouldn't rest until everyone that is able is employed, but the numbers show that he's spent very little time doing what he said he'd do.

[GarthUte]

You seem to be presenting the source for your article as unbiased. It is not.

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Government_Accountability_Institute

And your source is a left-wing site that pushes its own agenda.Here's a link to the site of each organization to see what each group is about GIA (http://g-a-i.org/) and SourceWatch (http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/SourceWatch) group.

EDIT: I've linked to each respective site rather than to another source.

[Jarid in Cedar]

And your source is a left-wing site that pushes its own agenda. If we go to wikipedia (I know, it's really not a great source) for both sites, we can read that GIA (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_Accountability_Project) is a non-partisan group and Sourcewatch (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SourceWatch) is a progressive group.

Which is why I find these kind of things boring and frankly a waste of time. The amount of effort wasted by the left and the right on "gotcha tactics" is frustrating. This article doesn't make any interesting points. You can simply look at Obama's record to show how ineffective he is as the Executive of our nation.

[Mano]

And your source is a left-wing site that pushes its own agenda. If we go to wikipedia (I know, it's really not a great source) for both sites, we can read that GIA (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_Accountability_Project) is a non-partisan group and Sourcewatch (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SourceWatch) is a progressive group.


You kind of prove my point when your link references a completely unrelated organization. I am pretty sure the similarity in their names causing confusion is not by accident.

[GarthUte]

You kind of prove my point when your link references a completely unrelated organization. I am pretty sure the similarity in their names causing confusion is not by accident.

oops, you're right. I linked to GAP,not GAI. My bad. But my point about your source is valid. I'm not going to take the word of a left-wing site about who a certain group is.

[Mano]

oops, you're right. I linked to GAP,not GAI. My bad. But my point about your source is valid. I'm not going to take the word of a left-wing site about who a certain group is.

I needed to go to SourceWatch because the sight you are referencing is too shady and obscure to even have a wikipedia entry. Naming a shady organization to sound like something reputable should put up some red flags, but you seem to have no problem taking that garbage as gospel truth.

[GarthUte]

I needed to go to SourceWatch because the sight you are referencing is too shady and obscure to even have a wikipedia entry. Naming a shady organization to sound like something reputable should put up some red flags, but you seem to have no problem taking that garbage as gospel truth.

Nor do you.

We'll just have to agree to disagree about this.

[Mano]

Nor do you.

We'll just have to agree to disagree about this.

Nor do I what? I have stated no political opinion one way or the other, just that the site you source is sketchy. You counter by referencing a legit orginization that they tried to sound like. It doesn't sound like you actually know where this stuff is coming from, but just believe and repost it because it is anti Obama.