• 84 results
  • 1
  • 2
#1 Edited by BatWatch (2891 posts) - - Show Bio

Hit the spoiler block if you want to know why I've been writing so many articles recently.

For those of you wondering why I have made so many posts recently, I thought I would let you know that the reason is that I am going to start a blog. For the past week, I have been typing up things as they come to mind and posting them here just to get some preliminary feedback. I hold a Libertarian viewpoint, so I have some serious issues with the left, and I have made three anti-liberal posts this week. The first was about President Obama's hypocrisy regarding being his brother's keeper which was something I threw together quickly after hearing a news story. The second was an old article I had written simply mocking stupid comments from liberals on Youtube which was actually only posted for the benefit of one person, but I was pleased to see it actually received a moderately good response. After consideration, I decided I could do a better version of the first article giving some more examples of things I dislike about the President, and that turned into this article. I've actually been sitting on this article for three days because I did not want to have multiple negative posts on President Obama circulating at the same time, but Vaternus and Isaac seem determined never to let my "President Obama's Character" article die, so I decided to go ahead and throw this out.

I also have some serious issues with the right, and for those of you wishing I would be more balanced in my bashing, know that my Mitt Romney is a horrible person article is on my agenda. I have also already started a conservative version of my stupid youtube comments compilation. You can definitely expect that by next week. I do not know that I will continue to post these articles in Off-Topic after I "open" my blog, but you will probably still see several more articles over the next couple of weeks at least.

I am not only doing political commentary. I have also done a review of Paranorman and a review of almost all the current Batman titles (I want to review all of the Bat Verse comics on my blog, but it is taking some time to write good reviews on all the current comics. I've managed to get eight out in one week while working on other projects, and I am pretty happy with that. I will also probably be doing some religious musings (it will not be pointed since my religious views are in flux at the moment. They will be more self-reflective than anything). I also have a Red Robin story that I am working on, and I think it will be really great, but time will tell.

I did not expect great responses to my anti-liberal articles since comics skew to a younger demographic, and younger people tend to be more liberal, but I still appreciate all of you who read my articles and take the time to compose thoughtful responses. My second point in this article is a repeat of my previous article, and the first point is debatable, but I would like to see if anyone can honestly say that point number three is anything other than morally abhorrent. Thus far, I have not seen anyone disagree and manage to give an explanation of how I am wrong...which just indicates to me that you cannot. Please, if you have good thoughts about something, kindly share them with me. I think the Mod RazzaTazz would be willing to confirm that I am polite and willing to discuss differing viewpoints.

Three Reasons President Obama Is a Horrible Person

When Barack Obama first entered the world’s stage in 2007, I, like many Americans, found him to be a very nice man. Granted, I never liked what I knew of his policies, but he seemed to be an eloquent, compassionate family man, and who doesn’t like that?

Since then, many things have come out which clearly indicate the true nature of Barack Obama’s character, yet many still seem to worship at the shrine of Obama lifting him up as the moral arbiter of our day. Those that still hold this view are either tragically misinformed or possess a staggering set of distorted morals. For those who are not morally lost, I ask that you give me a chance to convince you that Barack Obama is a truly horrible person.

Reason #1 The Obama Stimulus Package

One of the phrases Obama continually uttered during his run for the Oval Office was “the failed politics of the past” referring most often to the soon-to-be-leaving President George W. Bush, and let’s be fair, Bush gave Obama plenty of material to criticize. Among other criticisms, Barack accurately blasted Bush for spending over five trillion dollars in debt. During his campaign and inaugural speech, President Obama promised to reign in over spending, yet...

Almost immediately upon taking office, President Obama signed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 in an effort to stop the nation’s downward financial spiral. This was round two of the stimulus plan that President Bush had signed into law in 2008, a piece of legislation that famously and spectacularly failed to stop the hemorrhaging of jobs. However, this did not dissuade President Obama from following in President Bush’s staggering footsteps, and with this single piece of legislation, President Obama racked up 831 billion dollars worth of debt in his first month in office! Let’s look at that once more in slow motion. It took President Obama one month to rack up a sixth of the amount of debt that President Bush created in eight years. Someday, the citizens of the United States will have to pay for that stimulus package, but President Obama is more than happy to sell out the future in order to make a meaningless gesture in the present.

Of course, President Obama’s spending did not stop there. Within two years in office, President Obama had nearly matched the amount President Bush had spent in his eight years, and as of last March, President Obama surpassed President Bush’s legacy of fiscal ineptitude. The American people should give President Obama a medal. Perhaps he would like to hang it up next to his noble peace prize.

All of these debt numbers assume that the Congressional Budget Office’s estimates for programs are correct (and government programs almost always cost more than projected). Furthermore, the biggest piece of legislation Obama has passed, Obamacare, has not yet kicked in, so none of those numbers have begun to contribute to Obama’s debt tally.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57400369-503544/national-debt-has-increased-more-under-obama-than-under-bush/

Reason #2 Obama’s “Charitable” Spirit

President Obama presents himself as someone with great moral integrity and pureness of heart. His excellent speeches manage to touch so many because they have an inspiring undertone wherewith President Obama urges the American people to do their best, help out where able, turn away from divisiveness, and contribute to a sort of collective altruism. Barack even likes to intersperse his messages with Biblical phrases to drive home certain themes such as “love thy neighbor” and “brother’s keeper.” Just check out this quote from one of President Obama’s speeches and envision his righteous anger and soul inspiring sincerity as you read.

“If there's a child on the south side of Chicago who can't read, that matters to me, even if it's not my child. If there's a senior citizen somewhere who can't pay for their prescription, who has to choose between medicine and the rent, that makes my life poorer - even if it's not my grandparent. If there's an Arab-American or Mexican-American family being rounded up by John Ashcroft without benefit of an attorney or due process, I know that that threatens my civil liberties. And I don't have to be a woman to be concerned that the Supreme Court is trying to take away a woman's right, because I know that my rights are next. It is that fundamental belief - I am my brother’s keeper, I am my sister’s keeper - that makes this country work.”

No doubt these words have inspired millions, but it is all a complete load of nonsense. President Obama has no true interest in being his brother’s keeper as evidenced by the fact that he has allowed his literal brother to live in poverty for the last five years. To be fair, George Obama, Barack Obama’s half-brother, has only met the President a couple of times, and he has never asked for special favors. That being said, President Obama is fully aware that George Obama lives in a small shanty in the slums of Kenya. George lives off a couple of dollars a day, and he recently found himself on the edge of financial disaster when he could not pay his son’s medical bills, a measly $1,000, which is the equivalent of nearly a year’s worth of work to the poor man. George Obama has applied for citizenship in the United States demonstrating that he is looking for a better life, but he was denied, and his big brother has made no effort to help him in any way.

Barack Obama’s hesitation to lend assistance is understandable. After all, the current leader of the free world is strapped for cash barely possessing 11.8 million dollars in assets, and who among us would be willing to part with a whole grand just to help a blood relative provide healthcare for a seriously ill relative? The liberal apologists have handled this situation by ignoring the issue, but if you manage to corner a liberal debater on the issue, they will tell you that George Obama has stated that he wants to make it on his own, and that he does not expect assistance from the President. It is true that George said he did not want special favors from the President, but there is a huge difference between having your needs met for life (which the President could easily do for George without even making a noticeable dent in his portfolio) and lending aid in a crisis situation. The idea that George would not accept assistance was clearly disproven when George called up Dinish D’Souza, a Republican filmmaker he barely knew, and begged him for money to pay his son’s healthcare bill.

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/08/16/how-became-george-obama-brother/

There are other examples of President’ Obama’s fiscal hypocrisy. His aunt, Zeituni Onyango, lives in poverty, but she lives in the United States and draws welfare, so it is hardly as dark a situation as that of George Obama. Still, President Obama has never made any effort to assist her. In the years 2002-2005, the great humanitarian Barack Obama only managed to give approximately one percent of his income to charities despite the fact that he was making more than $200,000, and of course that does not count the money Michelle Obama made. Again to be fair, President’s Obama’s charitable contributions have greatly increased as he has become more and more a public figure, but this is not a sign of true charity, but a sign of political posturing. When he was out of the public eye, Barack Obama, a member of the wealthiest one percent, only contributed one penny of each dollar to those in need.

http://townhall.com/columnists/michaelmedved/2010/10/06/obamas_auntie_and_the_scandal_of_liberal_hypocrisy/page/full/

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/obamas-gifts-to-charity-just-1-percent/2012/02/14/gIQAXuMDER_blog.html

When it comes to the pocket book, it is clear that Barack Obama is a very generous man willing to open a wallet to help the needy. However, he will be opening your wallet rather than his own.

Reason 3 Obama’s Pro-Infanticide Position

Though the conservative media continually digs up new dirt on President Obama which gives great insight into his character, the tidbit that disturbs me most about our President is one that we have known for a long, long time.

Obama is an extremist on abortion. He approves abortion not only in cases of incest or rape, but even when it is simply an inconvenience to the mother. Beyond that, he has campaigned on behalf of partial birth abortion, the procedure wherein labor is induced on a fully formed baby, but the head is kept in the mother. While the child struggles, a doctor slices open the back of the baby’s head and sucks out the brains with a high-powered vacuum. How anyone can approve of this is beyond my understanding, but Barack Obama does not flinch from partial birth abortion, nor does he stop there.

While working as an Illinois state senator, Barack Obama defended doctors’ “rights” to refuse healthcare to a child born who is born via a botched abortion. In other words, if a woman delivers a child that was only partially destroyed while in the womb or slips out before a partial birth abortion can be completed, Barack Obama said it was okay for the doctors or nurses to take the infant into a closet, close the door, and wait until the crying stops.

http://dailycaller.com/2012/08/28/the-gop-should-make-obamas-extremist-abortion-position-an-issue/2/

This is the man that is leading the country today.

I cannot imagine why anyone would support him.

#2 Posted by pooty (11598 posts) - - Show Bio

@PsychoKnights: I cannot imagine why anyone would support him.

Honestly, do you think it makes a difference who the President is? If we lived in a dictatorship then i could see being upset, but with politics in the USA does it really matter?

#3 Posted by BatWatch (2891 posts) - - Show Bio

@pooty said:

@PsychoKnights: I cannot imagine why anyone would support him.

Honestly, do you think it makes a difference who the President is? If we lived in a dictatorship then i could see being upset, but with politics in the USA does it really matter?

Yeah. Obviously it matters. It is always bad when people with power are immoral. It is the whole concept behind the super villain. Are you really trying to tell me that you do not have a problem with the person controlling the military having ethical issues? Not just ethical issues, but these ethical issues?

#4 Posted by Static Shock (47329 posts) - - Show Bio

He's a politician. All of them have issues. LOL.

#5 Posted by YoungJustice (6887 posts) - - Show Bio

If you posted this on YouTube you would be called racist..............

#6 Posted by joshmightbe (25021 posts) - - Show Bio

This is your 3rd Obama hate thread this week, you're entitled to your opinion but do you need more than one thread to say you don't like they guy?

#7 Posted by YoungJustice (6887 posts) - - Show Bio

I wouldn't say he is a horrible person. Just a god awful president and politician.

#8 Posted by Cozy_Da_Djed_Eye (10173 posts) - - Show Bio

Ohhhh boy =]

#9 Posted by CODYSF (2053 posts) - - Show Bio

Mitt and Obama sucks end of point.

#10 Posted by Inverno (13330 posts) - - Show Bio

If I didn't knew I would say you probably don't like him very much.

#11 Posted by InnerVenom123 (29510 posts) - - Show Bio

@Static Shock said:

He's a politician. All of them have issues. LOL.

#12 Posted by SoA (5135 posts) - - Show Bio

i dont vote or care for politics more people followed my example ,everyone wins

#13 Posted by x_29 (2274 posts) - - Show Bio

Well that is you're opinion. I feel like i have seen this thread before.

#14 Posted by blueduck (24 posts) - - Show Bio

Comic book forums where I turn for all my well thought out political opinions.

#15 Posted by Kal'smahboi (3572 posts) - - Show Bio

I only read the third point, but I'm pretty sure most of it is untrue. And your opinion blog from the Daily Caller didn't quite convince me otherwise. You spent way too much time on this to use a blog from that rag of a website as your source.

#16 Posted by Necrotic_Lycanthrope (2388 posts) - - Show Bio

@CaioTrubat:

Alot of people don't like Obama. You just don't hear much from them because they get labeled if they make a peep.

#17 Posted by DoomDoomDoom (4253 posts) - - Show Bio

@Kal'smahboi: Obama has stated he would have opposed the ban on partial-birth abortions had he been in congress at that time, that much is true. I'm not sure about the "botched-abortion" bit though, something I'll have to look up.

#18 Posted by Vance Astro (91365 posts) - - Show Bio
@Necrotic_Lycanthrope said:

Alot of people don't like Obama. You just don't hear much from them because they get labeled if they make a peep.

Biggest misconception regarding Obama.
Moderator
#19 Posted by Inverno (13330 posts) - - Show Bio

@Necrotic_Lycanthrope: Oh I see. I don't have much opinion on Obama though I don't live in the USA after all. But I understand how criticism can get shot down by very, very vocal and defensive supporters.

#20 Posted by DoomDoomDoom (4253 posts) - - Show Bio

@Necrotic_Lycanthrope said:

@CaioTrubat:

Alot of people don't like Obama. You just don't hear much from them because they get labeled if they make a peep.

Labeled what?

#21 Posted by Kal'smahboi (3572 posts) - - Show Bio
@DoomDoomDoom said:

@Kal'smahboi: Obama has stated he would have opposed the ban on partial-birth abortions had he been in congress at that time, that much is true. I'm not sure about the "botched-abortion" bit though, something I'll have to look up.

I did. He voted "present," which is basically a "no." That looks bad, but it's ALREADY ILLEGAL to just allow somebody to die in a hospital, including the survivors of failed abortions.
 
I would also like to say that partial-birth abortions are very poorly understood by most people and have been demonized by the political environment.
#22 Posted by NlGHTCRAWLER (2899 posts) - - Show Bio

That last one made me cringe.

#23 Edited by DoomDoomDoom (4253 posts) - - Show Bio

@Kal'smahboi said:

@DoomDoomDoom said:

@Kal'smahboi: Obama has stated he would have opposed the ban on partial-birth abortions had he been in congress at that time, that much is true. I'm not sure about the "botched-abortion" bit though, something I'll have to look up.

I did. He voted "present," which is basically a "no." That looks bad, but it's ALREADY ILLEGAL to just allow somebody to die in a hospital, including the survivors of failed abortions. I would also like to say that partial-birth abortions are very poorly understood by most people and have been demonized by the political environment.

Gotcha, thanks for sharing that. I agree they are misunderstood, and it doesn't help that "partial-birth abortion" isn't even a medical term.

@NlGHTCRAWLER said:

That last one made me cringe.

I would suggest looking up what a D&E and how the procedure is actually carried out, it always sounds worst when someone who is against it is explaining it.

#24 Edited by BatWatch (2891 posts) - - Show Bio

@Static Shock: @YoungJustice: @joshmightbe: @YoungJustice: @CozyDaPrynce: @CODYSF: @CaioTrubat: @SoA: @x_29: @blueduck: @Kal'smahboi: @Necrotic_Lycanthrope: @DoomDoomDoom: @pooty:@NlGHTCRAWLER:

Three anti-liberal posts in a week does deserve an explanation. I should have put this in the OP (and through editing, I now have), but I did not when I originally wrote it. The explanation is below.

For those of you wondering why I have made so many posts recently, I thought I would let you know that the reason is that I am going to start a blog. For the past week, I have been typing up things as they come to mind and posting them here just to get some preliminary feedback. I hold a Libertarian viewpoint, so I have some serious issues with the left, and I have made three anti-liberal posts this week. The first was about President Obama's hypocrisy regarding being his brother's keeper which was something I threw together quickly after hearing a news story. The second was an old article I had written simply mocking stupid comments from liberals on Youtube which was actually only posted for the benefit of one person, but I was pleased to see it actually received a moderately good response. After consideration, I decided I could do a better version of the first article giving some more examples of things I dislike about the President, and that turned into this article. I've actually been sitting on this article for three days because I did not want to have multiple negative posts on President Obama circulating at the same time, but Vaternus and Isaac seem determined never to let my "President Obama's Character" article die, so I decided to go ahead and throw this out.

I also have some serious issues with the right, and for those of you wishing I would be more balanced in my bashing, know that my Mitt Romney is a horrible person article is on my agenda. I have also already started a conservative version of my stupid youtube comments compilation. You can definitely expect that by next week. I do not know that I will continue to post these articles in Off-Topic after I "open" my blog, but you will probably still see several more articles over the next couple of weeks at least.

I am not only doing political commentary. I have also done a review of Paranorman and a review of almost all the current Batman titles (I want to review all of the Bat Verse comics on my blog, but it is taking some time to write good reviews on all the current comics. I've managed to get eight out in one week while working on other projects, and I am pretty happy with that. I will also probably be doing some religious musings (it will not be pointed since my religious views are in flux at the moment. They will be more self-reflective than anything). I also have a Red Robin story that I am working on, and I think it will be really great, but time will tell.

I did not expect great responses to my anti-liberal articles since comics skew to a younger demographic, and younger people tend to be more liberal, but I still appreciate all of you who read my articles and take the time to compose thoughtful responses. My second point in this article is a repeat of my previous article, and the first point is debatable, but I would like to see if anyone can honestly say that point number three is anything other than morally abhorrent. Thus far, I have not seen anyone disagree and manage to give an explanation of how I am wrong...which just indicates to me that you cannot. Please, if you have good thoughts about something, kindly share them with me. I think the Mod RazzaTazz would be willing to confirm that I am polite and willing to discuss differing viewpoints.

#25 Edited by Necrotic_Lycanthrope (2388 posts) - - Show Bio

@Vance Astro:

?

I'm talking about the reaction people have to critics of Obama. How is that a Barack misconception?

@DoomDoomDoom:

Racist, bigot, haters, Nazis, KKK, backwards, anti-progressive, sexist. Must I continue?

@CaioTrubat:

You very rarely see opposition from a major media source outlet. The only places one can see the opposition is Fox News and the radio, two places reffered to as "racist and prejudice".

#26 Posted by YoungJustice (6887 posts) - - Show Bio

I don't get involved in politics. Boring as f*ck.

#27 Posted by NlGHTCRAWLER (2899 posts) - - Show Bio

@YoungJustice said:

I don't get involved in politics. Boring as f*ck.

That's fine. Just make sure to be quiet when the grown ups are talking. :P (Sounded mean, but i'm joking)

@PsychoKnights:

I don't mind your threads or any political threads for that matter. They can be radical sometimes (not yours but in general) but at least they provide some interesting reads, which is hard to find on the Off-Topic board.

#28 Posted by Inverno (13330 posts) - - Show Bio

@Necrotic_Lycanthrope: Well that explains a lot. I don't watch Fox News or listen to American radio stations after all.

@YoungJustice said:

I don't get involved in politics. Boring as f*ck.
#29 Posted by DoomDoomDoom (4253 posts) - - Show Bio

@Necrotic_Lycanthrope: If someone has a legitimate gripe with the president they should voice their opinion and not let fear of being labeled stop them. Honestly if someone labels you such for simply disagreeing with the president, they end up looking like the idiot.

@YoungJustice said:

I don't get involved in politics. Boring as f*ck.

Well despite it being "boring as f*ck" to you politics have a major impact on your life whether you like it or not.

#30 Posted by Necrotic_Lycanthrope (2388 posts) - - Show Bio

@DoomDoomDoom:

People DO express opposition. But what I'm saying is not alot, because many are afraid of the criticism hey get (ex. many of the non-Conservative Republicans keeps shut about their vies because they don't want to be compared to KKK. )

At one point I was called a Nazi in high school for not liking Obama. :/ And all I did was say that I didn't like his political views.

#31 Posted by Vance Astro (91365 posts) - - Show Bio
@Necrotic_Lycanthrope said:

@Vance Astro:

?

I'm talking about the reaction people have to critics of Obama. How is that a Barack misconception?

It's not real is what i'm telling you. People who pretend that you can't be critical of Obama are usually the people who fit those "labels" so well.
Moderator
#32 Posted by DoomDoomDoom (4253 posts) - - Show Bio

@Necrotic_Lycanthrope: I gotcha, being on the other side of the political line I guess I just didn't know many people hold back.

Well that's a rather extreme claim...

#33 Posted by Necrotic_Lycanthrope (2388 posts) - - Show Bio

@Vance Astro:

Hmm, then I can tell my BFF that next time she calls be a bigot for having a picture of Ronald Reagan in my room. There is alot of hate for what I call "anti-establishers". Obama=current beliefs and establishment. Conservatives=anti-establishment.

Ex. in the TV guide I read a paragraph labeling an actress on Soup Operas as being prejudice and a bit bigoted because she supports Chik-a-fil (I think that's what the restaurant's name is). She wasn't interviewed to give her side of the issue.

#34 Posted by Necrotic_Lycanthrope (2388 posts) - - Show Bio

@DoomDoomDoom:

I wanted to tear the guy's face off for saying that to me. I even yelled at him for it.

All he did was smile and shrugged it off. As if its no big deal to call someone a Nazi nowadays (maybe I should make him watch the Mengele torture vids from WW2. Let him see the Hell those Jewish and Gypsy kids where put through in the camps.)

#35 Posted by Vance Astro (91365 posts) - - Show Bio
@Necrotic_Lycanthrope said:

@Vance Astro:

Hmm, then I can tell my BFF that next time she calls be a bigot for having a picture of Ronald Reagan in my room. There is alot of hate for what I call "anti-establishers". Obama=current beliefs and establishment. Conservatives=anti-establishment.

All I'm saying is I don't think that it's a fact that conservatives get unfairly labeled because of some prejudice or bias from the other side at least not at a level that it's really mentionable. Of course on both sides you have irrational people and those that only attack the other side because it's the side they aren't on, but alot of the time as far as the media is concerned when people get "labeled" for something they said about Obama, what ever was said is usually nonsense.  
 
@Necrotic_Lycanthrope said:

Ex. in the TV guide I read a paragraph labeling an actress on Soup Operas as being prejudice and a bit bigoted because she supports Chik-a-fil (I think that's what the restaurant's name is). She wasn't interviewed to give her side of the issue.

Is this supposed to be an example of someone being labeled for what they believe or is this supposed to relate to the original concept? Celebrities are unfairly labeled all the time. It's not comparable to people being labeled because of their political affiliation.
Moderator
#36 Posted by mikethekiller (8474 posts) - - Show Bio

I do not care

#37 Posted by coolguyr99 (3019 posts) - - Show Bio

He can dance though.

#38 Posted by joshmightbe (25021 posts) - - Show Bio

Politics has become ridiculous if you don't like Obama the left calls you a racist, if you don't act like Obama is the anti christ the right calls you a liberal communist you just can't win.

#39 Posted by comicdude23 (11400 posts) - - Show Bio

@Static Shock said:

He's a politician. All of them have issues. LOL.

I agree. Except I wouldn't call Obama a horrible person.

#40 Posted by pooty (11598 posts) - - Show Bio

@PsychoKnights said:

@pooty said:

@PsychoKnights: I cannot imagine why anyone would support him.

Honestly, do you think it makes a difference who the President is? If we lived in a dictatorship then i could see being upset, but with politics in the USA does it really matter?

Yeah. Obviously it matters. It is always bad when people with power are immoral. It is the whole concept behind the super villain. Are you really trying to tell me that you do not have a problem with the person controlling the military having ethical issues? Not just ethical issues, but these ethical issues?

Any one who gets in the white house is immoral. It's an immoral country if you havn't noticed. The President can NOT go to war with out consent from a few dozen other people. The President is a puppet. Congress holds more power then he does. So no i don't have a problem with an immoral president in charge of the military. He has NO POWER to do anything on his own. And if you replace Obama, that person will be no different.

#41 Posted by pooty (11598 posts) - - Show Bio

@PsychoKnights said:

Hit the spoiler block if you want to know why I've been writing so many articles recently.

For those of you wondering why I have made so many posts recently, I thought I would let you know that the reason is that I am going to start a blog. For the past week, I have been typing up things as they come to mind and posting them here just to get some preliminary feedback. I hold a Libertarian viewpoint, so I have some serious issues with the left, and I have made three anti-liberal posts this week. The first was about President Obama's hypocrisy regarding being his brother's keeper which was something I threw together quickly after hearing a news story. The second was an old article I had written simply mocking stupid comments from liberals on Youtube which was actually only posted for the benefit of one person, but I was pleased to see it actually received a moderately good response. After consideration, I decided I could do a better version of the first article giving some more examples of things I dislike about the President, and that turned into this article. I've actually been sitting on this article for three days because I did not want to have multiple negative posts on President Obama circulating at the same time, but Vaternus and Isaac seem determined never to let my "President Obama's Character" article die, so I decided to go ahead and throw this out.

I also have some serious issues with the right, and for those of you wishing I would be more balanced in my bashing, know that my Mitt Romney is a horrible person article is on my agenda. I have also already started a conservative version of my stupid youtube comments compilation. You can definitely expect that by next week. I do not know that I will continue to post these articles in Off-Topic after I "open" my blog, but you will probably still see several more articles over the next couple of weeks at least.

I am not only doing political commentary. I have also done a review of Paranorman and a review of almost all the current Batman titles (I want to review all of the Bat Verse comics on my blog, but it is taking some time to write good reviews on all the current comics. I've managed to get eight out in one week while working on other projects, and I am pretty happy with that. I will also probably be doing some religious musings (it will not be pointed since my religious views are in flux at the moment. They will be more self-reflective than anything). I also have a Red Robin story that I am working on, and I think it will be really great, but time will tell.

I did not expect great responses to my anti-liberal articles since comics skew to a younger demographic, and younger people tend to be more liberal, but I still appreciate all of you who read my articles and take the time to compose thoughtful responses. My second point in this article is a repeat of my previous article, and the first point is debatable, but I would like to see if anyone can honestly say that point number three is anything other than morally abhorrent. Thus far, I have not seen anyone disagree and manage to give an explanation of how I am wrong...which just indicates to me that you cannot. Please, if you have good thoughts about something, kindly share them with me. I think the Mod RazzaTazz would be willing to confirm that I am polite and willing to discuss differing viewpoints.

Three Reasons President Obama Is a Horrible Person

When Barack Obama first entered the world’s stage in 2007, I, like many Americans, found him to be a very nice man. Granted, I never liked what I knew of his policies, but he seemed to be an eloquent, compassionate family man, and who doesn’t like that?

Since then, many things have come out which clearly indicate the true nature of Barack Obama’s character, yet many still seem to worship at the shrine of Obama lifting him up as the moral arbiter of our day. Those that still hold this view are either tragically misinformed or possess a staggering set of distorted morals. For those who are not morally lost, I ask that you give me a chance to convince you that Barack Obama is a truly horrible person.

Reason #1 The Obama Stimulus Package

One of the phrases Obama continually uttered during his run for the Oval Office was “the failed politics of the past” referring most often to the soon-to-be-leaving President George W. Bush, and let’s be fair, Bush gave Obama plenty of material to criticize. Among other criticisms, Barack accurately blasted Bush for spending over five trillion dollars in debt. During his campaign and inaugural speech, President Obama promised to reign in over spending, yet...

Almost immediately upon taking office, President Obama signed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 in an effort to stop the nation’s downward financial spiral. This was round two of the stimulus plan that President Bush had signed into law in 2008, a piece of legislation that famously and spectacularly failed to stop the hemorrhaging of jobs. However, this did not dissuade President Obama from following in President Bush’s staggering footsteps, and with this single piece of legislation, President Obama racked up 831 billion dollars worth of debt in his first month in office! Let’s look at that once more in slow motion. It took President Obama one month to rack up a sixth of the amount of debt that President Bush created in eight years. Someday, the citizens of the United States will have to pay for that stimulus package, but President Obama is more than happy to sell out the future in order to make a meaningless gesture in the present.

Of course, President Obama’s spending did not stop there. Within two years in office, President Obama had nearly matched the amount President Bush had spent in his eight years, and as of last March, President Obama surpassed President Bush’s legacy of fiscal ineptitude. The American people should give President Obama a medal. Perhaps he would like to hang it up next to his noble peace prize.

All of these debt numbers assume that the Congressional Budget Office’s estimates for programs are correct (and government programs almost always cost more than projected). Furthermore, the biggest piece of legislation Obama has passed, Obamacare, has not yet kicked in, so none of those numbers have begun to contribute to Obama’s debt tally.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57400369-503544/national-debt-has-increased-more-under-obama-than-under-bush/

Reason #2 Obama’s “Charitable” Spirit

President Obama presents himself as someone with great moral integrity and pureness of heart. His excellent speeches manage to touch so many because they have an inspiring undertone wherewith President Obama urges the American people to do their best, help out where able, turn away from divisiveness, and contribute to a sort of collective altruism. Barack even likes to intersperse his messages with Biblical phrases to drive home certain themes such as “love thy neighbor” and “brother’s keeper.” Just check out this quote from one of President Obama’s speeches and envision his righteous anger and soul inspiring sincerity as you read.

“If there's a child on the south side of Chicago who can't read, that matters to me, even if it's not my child. If there's a senior citizen somewhere who can't pay for their prescription, who has to choose between medicine and the rent, that makes my life poorer - even if it's not my grandparent. If there's an Arab-American or Mexican-American family being rounded up by John Ashcroft without benefit of an attorney or due process, I know that that threatens my civil liberties. And I don't have to be a woman to be concerned that the Supreme Court is trying to take away a woman's right, because I know that my rights are next. It is that fundamental belief - I am my brother’s keeper, I am my sister’s keeper - that makes this country work.”

No doubt these words have inspired millions, but it is all a complete load of nonsense. President Obama has no true interest in being his brother’s keeper as evidenced by the fact that he has allowed his literal brother to live in poverty for the last five years. To be fair, George Obama, Barack Obama’s half-brother, has only met the President a couple of times, and he has never asked for special favors. That being said, President Obama is fully aware that George Obama lives in a small shanty in the slums of Kenya. George lives off a couple of dollars a day, and he recently found himself on the edge of financial disaster when he could not pay his son’s medical bills, a measly $1,000, which is the equivalent of nearly a year’s worth of work to the poor man. George Obama has applied for citizenship in the United States demonstrating that he is looking for a better life, but he was denied, and his big brother has made no effort to help him in any way.

Barack Obama’s hesitation to lend assistance is understandable. After all, the current leader of the free world is strapped for cash barely possessing 11.8 million dollars in assets, and who among us would be willing to part with a whole grand just to help a blood relative provide healthcare for a seriously ill relative? The liberal apologists have handled this situation by ignoring the issue, but if you manage to corner a liberal debater on the issue, they will tell you that George Obama has stated that he wants to make it on his own, and that he does not expect assistance from the President. It is true that George said he did not want special favors from the President, but there is a huge difference between having your needs met for life (which the President could easily do for George without even making a noticeable dent in his portfolio) and lending aid in a crisis situation. The idea that George would not accept assistance was clearly disproven when George called up Dinish D’Souza, a Republican filmmaker he barely knew, and begged him for money to pay his son’s healthcare bill.

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/08/16/how-became-george-obama-brother/

There are other examples of President’ Obama’s fiscal hypocrisy. His aunt, Zeituni Onyango, lives in poverty, but she lives in the United States and draws welfare, so it is hardly as dark a situation as that of George Obama. Still, President Obama has never made any effort to assist her. In the years 2002-2005, the great humanitarian Barack Obama only managed to give approximately one percent of his income to charities despite the fact that he was making more than $200,000, and of course that does not count the money Michelle Obama made. Again to be fair, President’s Obama’s charitable contributions have greatly increased as he has become more and more a public figure, but this is not a sign of true charity, but a sign of political posturing. When he was out of the public eye, Barack Obama, a member of the wealthiest one percent, only contributed one penny of each dollar to those in need.

http://townhall.com/columnists/michaelmedved/2010/10/06/obamas_auntie_and_the_scandal_of_liberal_hypocrisy/page/full/

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/obamas-gifts-to-charity-just-1-percent/2012/02/14/gIQAXuMDER_blog.html

When it comes to the pocket book, it is clear that Barack Obama is a very generous man willing to open a wallet to help the needy. However, he will be opening your wallet rather than his own.

Reason 3 Obama’s Pro-Infanticide Position

Though the conservative media continually digs up new dirt on President Obama which gives great insight into his character, the tidbit that disturbs me most about our President is one that we have known for a long, long time.

Obama is an extremist on abortion. He approves abortion not only in cases of incest or rape, but even when it is simply an inconvenience to the mother. Beyond that, he has campaigned on behalf of partial birth abortion, the procedure wherein labor is induced on a fully formed baby, but the head is kept in the mother. While the child struggles, a doctor slices open the back of the baby’s head and sucks out the brains with a high-powered vacuum. How anyone can approve of this is beyond my understanding, but Barack Obama does not flinch from partial birth abortion, nor does he stop there.

While working as an Illinois state senator, Barack Obama defended doctors’ “rights” to refuse healthcare to a child born who is born via a botched abortion. In other words, if a woman delivers a child that was only partially destroyed while in the womb or slips out before a partial birth abortion can be completed, Barack Obama said it was okay for the doctors or nurses to take the infant into a closet, close the door, and wait until the crying stops.

http://dailycaller.com/2012/08/28/the-gop-should-make-obamas-extremist-abortion-position-an-issue/2/

This is the man that is leading the country today.

I cannot imagine why anyone would support him.

If you don't like either side, what is the point of your rant? Are you looking for a revolution? Do you want the people to take control?

#42 Posted by BatWatch (2891 posts) - - Show Bio

@pooty

Alright, you seem to be a conspiracy theorist, so I will probably disengage after this, but I thought I would give one last shot at reasoning with you.

It's an immoral country if you havn't noticed.

I will agree with you that everyone is immoral in one sense or another, but the vast majority of people do not support infanticide. You really think we cannot do any better?

The President can NOT go to war with out consent from a few dozen other people.

You need the funding of Congress to go to war, so you actually need the support of a couple hundred people to go to war. That being said, once Congress declares war, the President has complete control over their actions. He could order them to target civilians, and he would have violated no U.S. law.

The President is a puppet.

(eyeroll) You can theorize that the President is a puppet all you want, but you have no way of knowing one way or another. Believe me, I have entertained the idea myself. In the end, this is what we do know; puppet or not, the President is the most powerful man in the United States and probably the world.

Congress holds more power then he does.

The division of power between the three branches is actually pretty even, but you can defnitely make the case that the legislative branch is more powerful than the executive branch. However, the legislative branch is a conglomeration of several hundred people. The executive branch is one man, and a bunch of people employed by that one man. There is no more powerful position in the United States that President.

So no i don't have a problem with an immoral president in charge of the military.

Right. There is no way the most powerful man in the United States could misuse his power.

He has NO POWER to do anything on his own.

True, but neither does the legislative or judicial branch. He has massive amounts of power as long as Congress continues to pass laws, which they do constantly, and continues to fund the executive bureaucracy. I feel like you missed a class in Civics somewhere.

And if you replace Obama, that person will be no different.

Right, because the moral quality of a leader makes no difference whatsoever. Hitler or Churchill, they both act in the exact same manner.

Your comment does not suggest a mind overburdened with a great amount of intelligence.

#43 Posted by BatWatch (2891 posts) - - Show Bio

@pooty: Seriously, you quoted my whole response just for a one line question which addresses nothing in my post.

I already explained that I wrote this because I am going to start a blog, and I am using comicvine as a sounding board/test run. Though I dislike both sides, I definitely think Romney is the lesser of two evils. To compare him with my three points on Barack Obama he 1. probably would have done the exact same thing because he is big government, just a different style of big government. 2. Romney is actually pretty generous consistently in his charitable giving, and I know of no family in need that he has allowed to waste away. 3. He did support abortion, so that is pretty lousy in my book, but he certainly never supported infanticide.

Also, I find your comments asking if I support a revolution offensive, and I will be reporting them. It is way out of line to ask if I am for a revolution (which is almost always a violent proceeding) because I demonstrate that Obama's policies are immoral.

The people already have control. They need to be informed which was one of the purposes of my post.

#44 Posted by pooty (11598 posts) - - Show Bio

@PsychoKnights: Is this new blog going to give any new info on Obama? Give us a different point of view? Ground breaking news? or are you going to continue repeating what so many other blogs are already saying? If you have nothing new to add to the information that already exist, people are going to ignore it..... I mean i have a thread about interpreting dreams and it has almost as many post as this thread

#45 Posted by DoomDoomDoom (4253 posts) - - Show Bio

@PsychoKnights: Please explain to me the difference between abortion and infanticide. You used them interchangeably with Obama yet it seems you are distinguishing between the two terms with Romney.

Also, I find your comments asking if I support a revolution offensive, and I will be reporting them. It is way out of line to ask if I am for a revolution (which is almost always a violent proceeding) because I demonstrate that Obama's policies are immoral.

You have demonstrated something with those last two posts but not in the slightest that Obama's policies are immoral.

#46 Posted by SilverGalford (3272 posts) - - Show Bio

Only Barack Obama? LOL! that name sounds like a beer drink xD

#47 Posted by BatWatch (2891 posts) - - Show Bio

@YoungJustice:

You really do not think that somebody who would approve of the killing of infants is immoral?

@CaioTrubat:

(chuckles) You are very perceptive.

@blueduck:

(grins) Since you replied, it would appear that it is at least one of the sources to which you listen. Surely you are not implying that comic readers are too stupid to form good political opinions.

@Kal'smahboi:

It is true. What is wrong with the Daily Calller (sincere question)? I've seen this from enough trusted sources that I know it to be true, but I confess, I just took the first article I found that backed up all my points. It is easier to find one that backs me up than find five.

If you want the really long, complicated, back and forth explanation, you can go to fact check.

http://dailycaller.com/2012/08/28/the-gop-should-make-obamas-extremist-abortion-position-an-issue/2/

This contains President Obama's attempt to explain that he opposed the legislation because it would undermine Roe vs. Wade. Now, even if this is true, this still means that President Obama signed off on the murder of "fetuses outside of the mother's body which showed their own vital signs," also known as babies, just because it might possibly be used to undermine the right to kill humans still inside their mother's bodies. To me, that is still completely inexcusable. Furthermore, you will have to suffer though a lot of crap if you read the whole article, but if you do, you will find that there was NOTHING in the legislation which addressed abortion in any way other than in the specific case of a child that had lived through it.

I know it is horrible, but the truth is that Obama signed off on the death of children. You can try to make excuses for my first two points, but I don't think the third is in anyway excusable.

@Necrotic_Lycanthrope:

Sometimes yes. Sometimes no.

@DoomDoomDoom:

Please do look up the infanticide issue. If you look above, I provided a link from to Kal from fact check which backs me up.

Can you give me the source where Barack Obama opposed partial birth abortion?

Here is my source for where he voted for it, twice. http://www.ontheissues.org/social/barack_obama_abortion.htm

@CaioTrubat:

There are a lot of liberals who will shout down conservative viewpoints. In my opinion, this is because liberal views are usually based on emotion and not reason therefore any they see any attempt to reason with them as an affront to their personal views rather than as an attempt to find out the truth. You often get a, "How dare you think differently than me," sort of attitude. That being said, there are certainly many liberals who can articulate their thoughts and have reached their views through reasoning. Those are the kinds of liberals with which I enjoy conversing. There are also many conservatives that behave like toddlers when a liberal voices their opinions. There are idiots in every group.

@Kal'smahboi:

First, Can you explain to me which part of my explanation about partial birth abortion is inaccurate?

Second, can you give me a source that says that President Obama voted "present?"

Third, babies had been left to die on previous occasions. Since they were meant to be aborted, they were considered fetuses and not babies. http://bornalivetruth.org/index.php

@YoungJustice:

If you wish to find politics interesting, just pretend that the fate of the whole world depends on politics, or if pretending is nor your thing, you can realize that the fact of the world actually does depend on politics.

@NlGHTCRAWLER:

I appreciate the compliment. Personally, I cannot see how anyone could read point number three and not cringe.

@mikethekiller:

Yet you took the time to come into this tread?

Hopefully, you do not vote either.

@coolguyr99:

And swat flies with uncanny speed.

@joshmightbe:

Not everybody is unreasonable. There are a few who can actually articulate their views without becoming petty.

@pooty:

You have failed to address any of my comments thus far. To be fair, I do not blame you for being unwilling to debate since you I pretty much destroyed every "point" you tried to make. Anyway, I am not going to do the courtesy of responding to you unless you respond to me.

If you want to have an actual conversation, then respond to all of my points directed towards you. If you just want to make accusations phrased as questions, then feel free to continue, but I will be ignoring you.

Unless you respond to all my points, this will be the last time I talk to you on a political issue because you have never demonstrated the ability to muster an ounce of political debating skills.

Just for fun, here is the breakdown of our conversation so far.

Psycho: Barack Obama is a bad person because of X, Y, and Z. Sources attached.

Pooty: That does not matter!

Psycho: It does matter because of A and B.

Pooty: Inaccurate statement, inaccurate statement, inaccurate statement, conspiracy theory, inaccurate statement, opinion based on inaccurate statements and conspiracy theory, true statement applied incorrectly, inaccurate statement. Question. question implying violent intentions on Psycho's behalf, question.

Psycho: Disproving inaccurate statements, pointing out the conspiracy theory is unproven, clarification of incorrectly used fact. Answer to questions and reporting of implication of violent intent.

Pooty: Ignores all Psycho's responses, asks more questions, speculates on future failure of Psycho's blog, and then becomes oddly defensive about Psycho's thread versus Pooty's thread.

Psycho: Step up or shut up.

@DoomDoomDoom:

By the legal definition, abortion is killing a young human inside a mother and infanticide is killing a young human outside the mother. Obviously, this is the essence of the difference and not the word for word legal phrasing.

I did not at any point describe abortion and infanticide as the same thing. You either misread or you are being dishonest. If after rereading, you still believe I have used them interchangeably, please quote where I do so.

I do not believe I have written the word Romney in this entire thread until now, but I certainly did not in OP, so again, you are either misreading or lying.

If you believe infanticide is moral, that is your prerogative. I think 95% of people would disagree with you, and personally think you support something which is disgusting to say the least, but to each their own.

#48 Posted by pooty (11598 posts) - - Show Bio

@PsychoKnights: Again you misunderstand. I don't vote. I don't care who is in the white house. I have told you this before. So your "points" fall on deaf ears. I'm more concerned about the top man in my house then the man in the white house. My point to you was: If you're going to take time to make a blog. Make a good one. Make one that stands out. Look at your first Obama thread. that did well because it was something comic vine had not really seen. but this one is just more "i don't like Obama" and all your OP is taken from similar blogs. It's boring. And you spend more time attacking the responders then posting NEW, FRESH info. Think about it. Has anyone read your responses and said "maybe i should re-think who i vote for"?

#49 Posted by DoomDoomDoom (4253 posts) - - Show Bio

@PsychoKnights:

Please do look up the infanticide issue. If you look above, I provided a link from to Kal from fact check which backs me up.
Can you give me the source where Barack Obama opposed partial birth abortion?
Here is my source for where he voted for it, twice.http://www.ontheissues.org/social/barack_obama_abortion.htm

I never said Obama opposed partial-birth abortions, I said he has stated he would have opposed the ban on partial-birth abortions. So you must be mislead or lying.(lol)

You talked about Romney here---So you are either mistaken or lying(lol).

Romney is actually pretty generous consistently in his charitable giving, and I know of no family in need that he has allowed to waste away. 3. He did support abortion, so that is pretty lousy in my book, but he certainly never supported infanticide.

I don't necessarily even believe abortions are moral, but I see a difference between legality and morality and realize it would be unfair of me to impose my morals on the whole of the country simply because I find something "disgusting".

#50 Posted by Dracade102 (8167 posts) - - Show Bio

@CODYSF said:

Mitt and Obama sucks end of point.

@Static Shock said:

He's a politician. All of them have issues. LOL.

Pretty much this. ^