Friday, June 20, 2014

There Will Be Better Days Ahead Mr.President...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Purveyor of Truth

Today's round up of articles that spell out less than desirable sentiments for the President's handling of national business.

1) White House Learned of Lerner's Crashed Hard Drive 6 Weeks Before Congress

2)Obama Has Two Options on Iraq. Both Are Terrible

3) Welcome to the White House's Nightmare

4) Approval of Obama's Handling of Immigration Falls to 31%

With just shy of 3 years and 5 months left to serve in office it seems the President can't catch a break. Global and national problems, as well as a gaggle of alleged scandals just keep dogging our first bi-racial President. I hope the man hits a lucky streak. It will be good for all of us.

Via: Memeorandum


  1. Unfortunately, the only thing that really matters to voters is the economy, and that's just not going to magically get better between now and January of 2017. The public will perceive his as a poor Presidency because of his inability to get wheels turning. Of course, there's only so much a President can do about that, and the opposition party has only one agenda - opposition.

    The next President is looking at the same, and the next one after that, and after that. The American people do not even understand the issues, so they can't demand the action from government that we need. It's not looking good.


  2. Might have helped if he had played a little winter ball prior to getting called up to the big leagues....Yeah, I know, water under the bridge.

  3. Lerner’s crashed HDD. Who the heck really cares? Do you honestly believe that these PACs masquerading as public service NPOs truly deserve non-profit status? Who are we kidding here?

    Obama has two options? Coming from a low taxes, small government libertarian? I thought that we could all agree that war is a waste of precious resources. Colin Powell’s Pottery Barn theory. You break it, it’s yours. Obama didn’t break it. He only volunteered to try to fix the mess. (So we all could go on living with some semblance of honor!)

    Welcome to the White House’s Nightmare? Why would you waste your time on conservative news and commentary sites? No profit there.

    Approval of Obama’s handling of immigration issues? Are you kidding? What could possibly be less relevant? The only obstacle to immigration reform is ultra-conservative elements within the republican party.

    Every time that I start to believe that you are a rational individual who thinks for himself, you always demonstrate your loyalty to the conservative Obama hatred machine.

  4. I think Jersey McJones gets the reason I posted this short round up of articles. You Junior obviously do not.

    Perhaps it would help if you were to read the intro paragraph and the closing paragraph without the clouded lenses of your paradigms. Reading only the articles linked without reading and understanding my commentary, as short as it is, shows your extreme partisan bias that all conservatives are bad. irrational, and hate the Presdent because he is bi racial or black This view belies a certain bigotry in itself.

    I am a fiscal conservative Junior, fiscal conservatism and common sense does not equate to being part of the Obama hate machine. Disagreeing with his economic policies or his handling of certain aspects of foreign affairs or national affairs goes NOT mean a person hates the President or wishes he fails. I am a conservative on economic and fiscal matters, I am liberal on civil rights issues. marriage equality, moderate on firearms regulations, pro science and wary of blind faith, in fact I'm an atheist, pro technology and understand we need to develop alternative energy, etc. etc etc.

    So Flying Junior, check your blind partisanship at the door please. Things are never as they seem when viewed through biased tinged thick partisan lenses.

  5. "Obama didn’t break it. He only volunteered to try to fix the mess."

    Which ended up being "go with the flow" and follow the Bush plan in Iraq. No bold new ideas, no new nothing. Just the typical indolence, uncuriousness, and lack of passion he has for issues (other than pet projects like healthcare and abolishing the secret ballot in union elections). He didn't start the fire, but he kept putting logs on it and tending it the same way For 5 YEARS.

    Or maybe it was just a matter of him lying to get elected, and being too lazy to do much after. Typical of politicians on both sides: no hope or change there, just business as usual.As in promising to clear out Gitmo. a promise he blew off. If it is a case of him promising something in Iraq and not bothering to deliver, then he fully owns it.

    As for Lerner's HDD, you might think it is OK for the IRS to selectively punish people with a tax penalty for speaking out against those in power, but it doesn't match well with the Bill of Rights. I don't,whether or not it is the people in the NRA or the people in the

    But RN is right. You are going about this completely from a point of view of blind partisanship. Being defensive about everything not out of principle, but because "your guy" is being accused.

    RN doesn't have a "guy" here, and that is quite clear. Nor does Will: Jersey's comment comes from stepping outside the failure of treating this like football team fandom as well.

    The less of having a "dog in this fight", the better, and more rational the arguments.

  6. I enjoy hearing from you guys. I'm always telling myself I will try to be a more polite guest. And no, RN, I'm not accusing you of hating anybody. I find dmarks a fascinating personality. Always something new to me.

    Who had the bold ideas about peace with honor or whatever it was you would have preferred to see happen in Iraq? My idea was basically just getting the hell out without leaving behind too much weaponry to fall into idle hands. I think it probably cost another half a triliion dollars just to go home. I think the president did that pretty much to everyone's satisfaction save the hardcore hawks. For Boehner to say that we all saw these latest developments coming is simply dishonest. For their part, republicans are still fighting increased benefits for veterans and a budget increase for the VA.

    What might the president have done differently to close Guantanamo? The opposition was monolithic from the GitGo. No trying of suspects in civilian courts was to be tolerated. No housing of inmates on the continental forty-eight was to be allowed. Look how much heat the president is taking for exchanging five prisoners for an American soldier??? We have checks and balances. No candidate can really promise anything that he will need cooperation on. I honestly believe that Obama did not fear or anticipate the level of republican obstructionism that he has encountered.

    501cs??? I think the entire category of non-profits that enjoy this status is simply riddled with abuse. I see no legitimate reason why either moveon or the nra should enjoy tax-exempt status. They are overtly political machines. To me a legitimate 501c is an organization that helps to feed or house the poor. Helps with job training or with older workers gaining new skills. Builds needed water projects on reservations. Habitat for Humanity. Or something like Greenpeace or the Nature Conservancy. Something where the stated goal is to help people or defend a cause for the good of all.

  7. Well now Flying Junior, I find nothing on your comment to dispute and any point of difference would not be worth the time discussing as they are insignificant.

    I hold Bush/Cheney and the neo con hawks most responsible for the Iraq CF.

    I too wished Obama would have pulled the plug a lot sooner. It is the regions's problem to solve not ours.

    As to charities and tax exempt status, SPOT ON.

    GITMO, still mulling this over. However, we should sh*t or get off the pot with respect to detainees. Obama did what any prudent executive would have, IMO.

    1. RN: Are you really so "spot on" on the part from Flying Junior on "charities and tax exempt status" where groups that are purely in advocacy (not charities) such as Greenpeace get tax-exempt status if their advocacy is politically approved?

      This question involves purely subjective partisan politics. Whether or not the NRA or or Greenpeace "defend a cause for the good of all" or not is purely partisan politics...that is, if someone decides that one such group deserves a tax break and the other does not.

      Or would you do what I would consider: only have this status for actual charities?

    2. Let me be clear (Flying Jimior, feel free to respond as well) dmarks:

      1) ANY organization with ANY political purpose, INCLUDING advocacy of ANY kind should NOT receive tax exempt status, PERIOD.

      2) To be MORE clear, CHARITABLE means to be actively pursuing activities that directly aid and support those in need, PERIOD.

      3) Neither the NRA, Churches, MoveOn, or any other organization with political interests whose advocacy of said interest(s) benefits only their own is deserving of tax exempt status, PERIOD.

      Any questions as to my position now dmarks?

    3. No questions, because I can take it from this that groups like Greenpeace are banned in #1. An improvement, IMHO.

  8. RN, now how about this instead....

    1) Charitable organizations can receive tax exemptions. CHARITABLE means to be actively pursuing activities that directly aid and support those in need. It does not include vague, controversial, disputable claims like about Greenpeace working for the common good.

    2) If a charitable organization engages in advocacy, but it is still overwhelmingly a charitable organization, it does not lose its tax exempt status.

    3) Advocacy organizations don't receive tax exempt status at all (None of Flying Jr's "NRA bad, Greenpeace good" determinations based on partisan issues).

    4) Organizations receiving any sort of taxpayer grant are expressly forbidden from lobbying or anything remotely resembling it (Sick and tired of organizations using tax money to pay for efforts to go to Congress, or advertise to get people to tell Congress to give them more money.)

    Is there a meeting point between yours and mine, RN?


As this site encourages free speech and expression any and all honest political commentary is acceptable. Comments with cursing or vulgar language will not be posted.

Effective 8/12/13 Anonymous commenting has been disabled. This unfortunate action was made necessary due to the volume of Anonymous comments that are either off topic or serve only to disrupt honest discourse..

I apologizes for any inconvenience this necessary action may cause the honest Anonymous who would comment here, respect proper decorum and leave comments of value. However, The multitude of trollish attack comments from both the left and right has necessitated this action.

Thank you for your understanding... The management.