Under Obama, only the richest 10 percent saw incomes rise

[Endus]

... you think the President can do those things?

Not by fiat. Through leadership? Quite possibly.

[Uvwaex]

Then why campaign on it as if you have any influence over what happens? Because it's what low-information Democratic voters like to hear?

- - - Updated - - -



How is data from the Federal Reserve biased?

Every presidential candidate from every party has willingly and happily campaigned for things they have little to no influence over

[Belize]

He gets the blame and the credit, for pretty much everything. Where have you been living?

Under a rock. Where have YOU been living?

[pentavelant]

The article and thread title is blatantly biased.


I like how it says "Under Obama," as if he is a king and doesn't share equal power with 2 other branches of government.

Besides the fact the this Congress being the least productive in the history of the country, let's just blame the black guy.

so typical of libs and demos just throw the race card in.If you actually paid attention to what is going on in politics,you would see that obama doesnt give a shit about the other 2 branches of government.he has invoked the executive order more than any other president.completly bypassing the congress and senate to push his agenda upon everyone else and for those that say that congress is the problem.the first two years of his reign the democrats had control of both house and senate and they did jack shit.

[Deleted]

1> Raise minimum wage, which will provide upward pressure that boosts wages throughout the working and middle class.
2> Raise corporate/capital gains taxes, disincentivizing profit for profit's sake and encouraging re-investment in the company to expand/improve operations
3> Wage caps for executives

Just for starters. Plenty of options that encourage/require employers to invest more in their workforce.

and every single one of these options wouldnt make/didnt made it past the republican block in the senat, so we just wait until obama/every other democratic president is gone and republicans have the next president with a reasonable opposition from the democrats because republicans wont work with the current/democratic one out of spite?

i hate to quote tv shows in political discussions, but yeah, the tee party are the american taliban.

[NYC17]

But guys, the Obama economy has created 4.5 million jobs!

So does he get credit for good economic news under his Presidency, but none of the blame for bad economic news?

Someone on the first page provided you context for your bullshit, from your own source, that you subsequently ignored. So it's really not about Obama as much as it is about bullshit and people being tired of it.

[Daelak]

so typical of libs and demos just throw the race card in.If you actually paid attention to what is going on in politics,you would see that obama doesnt give a shit about the other 2 branches of government.he has invoked the executive order more than any other president.completly bypassing the congress and senate to push his agenda upon everyone else and for those that say that congress is the problem.the first two years of his reign the democrats had control of both house and senate and they did jack shit.

YEAAAAAAA, he is a communist sympathizer that wants to install Sharia Law and become the Ayatollah of America. Oh and the rest of the stuff you are saying is false.



- - - Updated - - -

Under a rock. Where have YOU been living?

Not standing in a fire

[Independent voter]

The thing about these graphs is the data usually doesn't match reality. Who in the heck is "the American Presidency Project". Where do they get their funding?

[pentavelant]

Democratic presidents are 90% delegated to foreign policy and selecting judicial/executive branch nominees until 2020. And not eliminating the 3 programs that Rick Perry would completely eliminate (if he can remember what they were).[/QUOTE]

Lol,so explain to me obama's foreign policy.Is it turning your back on Israel.Letting terrorist run rampant thru-out the middle east.Knowing full well what ISIS is and has been doing for the last several years but doing nothing about it except wagging his finger and uses harsh words.Oh and lets not forget about Benghazi,where a president sat around and did absolutely nothing while americans were murdered and them tried to blame it on a video that nobody but a handfull of people have ever seen.that's good foreign policy!

[Daelak]

The thing about these graphs is the data usually doesn't match reality. Who in the heck is "the American Presidency Project". Where do they get their funding?

A Political Science professor at UCSB runs it. So that means it should not be believed.

- - - Updated - - -

Democratic presidents are 90% delegated to foreign policy and selecting judicial/executive branch nominees until 2020. And not eliminating the 3 programs that Rick Perry would completely eliminate (if he can remember what they were).

Lol,so explain to me obama's foreign policy.Is it turning your back on Israel.Letting terrorist run rampant thru-out the middle east.Knowing full well what ISIS is and has been doing for the last several years but doing nothing about it except wagging his finger and uses harsh words.Oh and lets not forget about Benghazi,where a president sat around and did absolutely nothing while americans were murdered and them tried to blame it on a video that nobody but a handfull of people have ever seen.that's good foreign policy![/QUOTE]

You are right, we need to start a multi-faceted war against Russia, China, Iran, Syria, Sudan, Somalia, Pakistan, Yemen, Mexico, Libya, then and ONLY THEN will the boy king Obama be MY president!

[Grishnaar]

lol...USA is few hundred years old.

The rich have been getting richer since the the times where one men ruled others. It's nothing new.

All this talk of democrats, republicans, this that....bunch of needless labels.

Whoever gets to the "top", as we call it, use it for their own gain.

Some people are evil and selfish, no matter which "side" they take.

Think about it

[Deleted]

It really doesn't matter who sits in the oval office when you live a country that facilitates and actively encourages legal bribery.

But, by all means, overlook the hundreds of elected officials that influence the country's decisions whose integrity and interests are determined by whomever has the deepest pockets.

[Adam Jensen]

so typical of libs and demos just throw the race card in.If you actually paid attention to what is going on in politics,you would see that obama doesnt give a shit about the other 2 branches of government.he has invoked the executive order more than any other president.completly bypassing the congress and senate to push his agenda upon everyone else and for those that say that congress is the problem.the first two years of his reign the democrats had control of both house and senate and they did jack shit.

More than any other president except for most of the presidents of the 20th and 21st centuries you mean . . .

- - - Updated - - -

Democratic presidents are 90% delegated to foreign policy and selecting judicial/executive branch nominees until 2020. And not eliminating the 3 programs that Rick Perry would completely eliminate (if he can remember what they were).

Lol,so explain to me obama's foreign policy.Is it turning your back on Israel.Letting terrorist run rampant thru-out the middle east.Knowing full well what ISIS is and has been doing for the last several years but doing nothing about it except wagging his finger and uses harsh words.Oh and lets not forget about Benghazi,where a president sat around and did absolutely nothing while americans were murdered and them tried to blame it on a video that nobody but a handfull of people have ever seen.that's good foreign policy![/QUOTE]

So what should Obama do with ISIS? Invade? You'll scream about him starting a third American war in the Middle East. Do nothing? You'll scream about him sitting by and allowing it to happen. Air strikes? Drone strikes? You scream about innocents killed by collateral damage. Getting involved in ISIS (or anything for that matter) is a no-win situation with you guys for Obama.

Benghazi? This again? Seriously? While no one, NO ONE, complained about the MULTIPLE attacks on American embassies during the Bush Administration.

[Wildtree]

The Washington Times..... Might as well use Fox News as proof..
No difference there.

[Naxere]

The Washington Times..... Might as well use Fox News as proof..
No difference there.

http://www.nizkor.org/features/falla...d-hominem.html

[Wildtree]

http://www.nizkor.org/features/falla...d-hominem.html

wrong conclusion...
you posted a link from the Washington Times, which is known for both, bad journalism, GOP bias.
The same is known for FOX news.

[Blur4stuff]

give an example of "leadership" that would cause republicans to vote with the president

[Mcsheepy]

Talk about biased talking points, Yes the rich recovered much faster then the rest of country, this is not "news". This is more congress failing then presidential.

Congress fails because the president isn't a leader. Leaders get stuff done but what we have is a president who blames the Republicans for blocking everything because they won't do what he wants them to do. This is a republic not a democracy!

[sonshinegreene]

I'm confused. Faux News(a shitty pun that doesn't read as well as you think it does) is "news"... If you put news in quotes like that then it indicates it's not what people are calling it. Basically get rid of the quotes around both instances of news... Aside from all that. The Washington Times runs plenty of articles that aren't Republican based. They tend to lean a bit more right, though, because there are a lot of right wing people who read it.

I think he put the news in quotations for all the incorrect facts they shove down peoples throats.

[pentavelant]

YEAAAAAAA, he is a communist sympathizer that wants to install Sharia Law and become the Ayatollah of America. Oh and the rest of the stuff you are saying is false.



- - - Updated - - -



Not standing in a fire

Hmmmm,if i remember my REVISIONIST history correctly.FDR was in the middle of the great depression and a world war.His executive orders were to stimulate the economy,building bridges and highways and the general infrastructure of the country.Oh and then there was that whole Hitler thing.FDR's executive orders wern't to force socialist policies down our throats


[Infracted]