The 244 ACCOMPLISHMENTS of President Obama !

[gregjones]

HERE IT IS ! (New List)
The 244 ACCOMPLISHMENTS of PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA !

For those who ignorantly claim The President " hasn't done anything "...just hit them with this incredible list....which PROVES that he's done more in 20 months than most have in 2 terms. Fight Lies with TRUTH !....GOTV...and share this everywhere !!!
It's FIGHT TIME !!!

Click for list: http://blacks4barack.blogspot.com/2010/09/new-244-accomplishments-of-president.html

[babylonsister]

1. Now that's a list! Great website, gregjones, and welcome to DU!

:fistbump:

[young but wise]

2. Yes.

I'm ready to win this for America.

[CakeGrrl]

3. k/r and thanks!

Too bad it could be used around here as well!

:crazy:

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

20. Watch out. You'll be called a jerk, an idiot, and an "Obamabot" for merely

suggesting that he's done a lot.

More articles that everyone should see and pass around:

Newweek:

http://www.newsweek.com/2010/01/14/a-modern-day-lbj.html

Time:

http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1893277,00.html

http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1984460,00.html

[impik]

4. Hell yea, this is awesome. Thank you.

[lamp_shade]

5. Bookmarked.

[mike_c]

6. missing the forest for the trees....

Look, Obama has been in office for nearly two years. OF COURSE one can list his accomplishments. Anyone who occupies that office for two years without doing ANYTHING-- without any sort of agenda-- would have to be brain dead. A similar list of accomplishments could be compiled at the two year mark for just about any U.S. administration.

And yet the country remains fundamentally unchanged. Our national policies have not changed much. We haven't begun debating any genuine, progressive alternative visions for America's future. The Obama administration has been relatively good with the band-aids. Unfortunately, the patient is dying and needs resuscitation and a major life-style change, not band-aids.

[JamesA1102]

10. You mean you think it is possible to fundamentally change a country

of 300 million people in less than two years. What color is the sky in the world that you live in?

[DrDan]

17. a country can be changed in a matter of hours

look what the crisis of 9/11 has done.

Impacts in all areas - financial, security, societal, etc.
Every one was impacted.

And these changes are permanant. We will never return to our pre-9/11 climate.

[JamesA1102]

18. Please that is an apples and oranges comparison

and I disagree that the country was radically changed after 9/11. We're back to where we were in the '90s for most part.

[DrDan]

28. oh really . . . 2 wars going on? Same level of Islamophobia?

Same level of security?
Same paranoia?
Same level of freedom (patriot act)?

No way - major changes that remain today - and will continue for years and years

[JamesA1102]

32. Again apples and oranges.

Those are just policies and programs. The fundemental character or institutions of the country haven't changed.

[Whisp]

11. -100000009

jeebus cripes

[treestar]

21. FCOL

Our country remains fundamentally unchanged? OMG.

This country is dying? Don't think so.

[smalll]

7. These interminable lists: Here's four marvellously impressive "accomplishments" I found

in just the first 20 listed:

-- Instructed all federal agencies to promote openness and transparency as much as possible (2009)

-- The White House website now provides information on all economic stimulus projects and spending, along with an unprecedented amount of information on our government (2009)

-- Has been holding open meetings with Republican leaders, although they complain of a lack of access and information (2010)

-- Has urged Congress to adopt “Pay-Go” (whereby each dollar of spending is offset by a dollar in cuts or revenues, which was used in the `90s but abandoned in the `00s) (2010)

If I keep reading, am I going to find things like --

-- President Obama now responds to every non-spam email he receives within 24 business hours (2010)

-- Has urged Sasha and Malia to eat their vegetables as much as possible (2009)

-- Has Instructed Michelle to make sure each new dress she receives is either free or is acquired at a reasonable price to be paid for with her debit card, rather than with a credit card (which was used in the 1990s, when it was known as the Filene's Basement Policy) (2010)

-- Continues to attempt to make friendy eye contact with that one White House Marine guard that the grapevine reports is anti-Obama, although reports continue to come in that the Marine in question continues to call the President "uppity" in private. (2010)

[DrDan]

8. did you actually read the list?

credit should be given for 244 accomplishments that includes the following?


Announced his intention to close the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay (2009)

Signed a one-year extension on some provisions of the controversial PATRIOT Act

Authorized the use of more unmanned warplanes/drones (Predator, Reaper, etc.) in the War on Terror

Authorized the deployment of 17,000 additional troops to Afghanistan, which had been pending for months during the Bush Administration

Visited US soldiers in Afghanistan

Invited the Israeli Prime Minister to Washington; met with him

Called for the repeal of the capital gains tax for small businesses


Sure - there have been accomplishments. But when the intent is to just beef up numbers with items like the above, the whole list is suspect.

Lets get real.

Flame away.

[Mira]

9. Recommended - bookmarked - thank you. n/t

[vaberella]

13. So of 244 you pick out 7 and say list is suspect.

When a few of them are stalled by Dem and Repub obstruction. But if he didn't call for them at all he'd be seen as weak and spineless. But Repubs and Dems hold him back but their not accomplishments that he tried to push through.

[DrDan]

14. those are examples, obviously

yes there have been accomplishments. But to create a list and COUNT those accomplishments when it includes items such as inviting a leader for a visit makes the list suspect.

As I said.

[uponit7771]

15. Even if you can pic out 24 that are "examples" Obamas accomplishments vs his negatives are good

[DrDan]

16. I am not questioning that . . . .but why claim 244 accomplishments when some

are just bogus.

Doesn't "220 accomplishments" that are legitimage make a sounder sounder argument - than than "244 accomplishments" that include an invitation, and continuing bush policies?

[lovemydog]

12. thank you gregjones

And welcome here, Your web site is outstanding.

[JoeyT]

19. Most people aren't claiming he hasn't done anything, they're claiming he's done the wrong thing.

His civil liberties record is absolutely godawful.
At this point he could pretty much get himself a parrot and teach it to say "State Secrets!".

[treestar]

22. Bush may have used that too much, but that doesn't mean there should

never be any:

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/17390/209395?RS_show_page=5

People will say, "I don't know — you've got your Justice Department out there that's still using the state-secrets doctrine to defend against some of these previous actions." Well, I gave very specific instructions to the Department of Justice. What I've said is that we are not going to use a shroud of secrecy to excuse illegal behavior on our part. On the other hand, there are occasions where I've got to protect operatives in the field, their sources and their methods, because if those were revealed in open court, they could be subject to very great danger. There are going to be circumstances in which, yes, I can't have every operation that we're engaged in to deal with a very real terrorist threat published in Rolling Stone.

[Exilednight]

23. Fair enough, but how about using "state secrets" to deny a US citizen ..............

their right to due process and order a Presidential sanctioned killing of said US citizen?

[ClarkUSA]

25. The order is KILL OR CAPTURE. Al-Aulaqi can always surrender. It's his choice. nt

[Exilednight]

26. Maybe you should go back and read my qestion, because that answer has nothing ................

to do with whether or not the president has the legal authority to order the sanctioned killing of a US citizen and deny them their right to due process.

[ClarkUSA]

29. I clarified your statement. And "here is a hint, they don't owe you shit."

"You dont get echelon data on your neighbor or your boss. you cant download KH (whatever model it is now) pictures of katy perry rubbing suntan lotion on her boobs in real time. You will not get detailed information from cold war cryptographic or nuclear facilities. you will not know the operational range of a modern torpedo.

So you are not going to see NSA's BOM in a phone room in san fran over a labor dispute in open court. Get real.

You are not going to hear wiretaps on this guy, not going to see who snitches on him, and not going to see the gun camera footage from the weapon that kills him.

Not UNDER ANY PRESIDENT. Ever. There is a hot war being fought (war powers act) and this guy is playing for the other side. Out of his own fucking mouth.

So just like the mexican student who got shot by ehmmm (colombian special forces) playing with the FARC, he needs to find better friends or be prepared to die with his current set.

He made his choice, I can believe all the people carrying water for the asshole."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=9204263&mesg_id=9212857

[COLGATE4]

31. Nobody's 'carrying water for the asshole'. The point is very

simple: Can the President order killing an American citizen without giving the citizen the rights absolutely conferred him by the Constitution, i.e. the right to due process and trial by jury? There's no wiggle room here - the answer is either YES or NO.

[ClarkUSA]

33. al-Aulaqi's actions make him a target.

He is an active threat, like a guy shooting at the police or holding a grenade. The police will not die to bring an active shooter to trial. They shoot them, like the discovery channel moron.

This guy is on the other side of a war, he choose to be there. He will die for that choice unless he surrenders.

And yes the government can kill him, and will if the opportunity presents itself. Bet on it.

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

Hat Tip to Pavulon, who gets it.

[Name removed]

34. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Exilednight]

36. WOW!! You're actually advocating for a US citizen to be executed without a trial..................

What kind of liberal political party have we become that some sit idly by, and some even support, the power of the presidency to kill its own citizens without a trial?

Your Realpolitik position would make Kissinger proud.

[ClarkUSA]

41. Why don't you go to Yemen and bring him back for "a trial" then? I mean, it's so easy, right?

Remember, al-Aulaqi fled from US authorities into a hidey hole in Yemen. He has resisted entreaties to surrender from his own father.

Until al-Aulaqi is caught or surrenders, he is a military target. It's his choice.

[Fruittree]

38. Andrew Sullivan actually has an interesting article about this

if you go to his website. His claim is that unlike Bush, Obama allows judicial review of these state secret claims and allows for a counter-suit (if that's what you call it) and Al-alaqi's (spelling?) is currently doing just that.

[Exilednight]

40. Obama just put a halt to a counter-suit claiming state secrets. n/t

[COLGATE4]

30. That is a false choice, i.e. no choice at all.

[ClarkUSA]

42. How so? al-Aulaqi could also surrender. He has choices but he evidently wants to die a martyr.

President Obama would prefer al-Aulaqi surrender or be captured alive due to the wealth of intel he possesses. That's why he delayed issuing the kill or capture order so al-Aulaqi's father could try to get his son to surrender. That didn't work, so now he's a military target.

[Kind of Blue]

24. Your site is fantastically comprehensive.

Love it and well done.
KnR

[great white snark]

27. "Fight time" is right, thanks for the ammo.

Bookmarked.

[Pavulon]

35. Loss of US citizenship..(from my passport)

he is not a citizen any more..

http://travel.state.gov/law/citizenship/citizenship_778.html

[Exilednight]

37. That's not quite true ...........

First, you have to prove he is guilty of anything that would allow for his stripping of citizenship. And that requires a trial.

Second, and this is the most important part, he must renounce his US citizenship. And even then the law is still fuzzy as to whether or not he is or is not a US citizen.

Even if you want to strip of him US citizenship he still has to receive a trial to prove he is guilty before he can no longer be declared a US citizen.

[oswaldactedalone]

39. What are we doing to get this

info out to the American public?

[RepublicanElephant]

43. thanks! nt

:)