Why do people hate Obama so much? I mean, what has he done to deserve this criticism?

So the key reason for the "hate" is because he is Black? Does that mean that folks only "hate" half of him? Do they "love" the white half? And "code words"??? Sorry, but don't read palms, I don't have a membership card for Phycic Hotline, and I don't try to interpret "code words" by reading things into what folks actually say. I only go by what is actually said.

Such a racist mindset and statement really isn't worthy of my time or response, so I will go on to your more (slightly more) rational comments.
== == ==
SayWhat: "You claim such concern about our children’s' financial future because of the trillions of debt"

Yes I do. Ignoring the problem merely enslaves our children to be bound to the greed of the previous generation's demand of something for nothing. I.E. the 47% that Romney spoke of in that infamous speech he made last March that he accurately said were the people that won't be voting for him anyway, so has a candidate, his job is to focus on the sector of voters that are still undecided. As you obviously don't care about loading your children up with debt, but only educating them just enough to get a job that will PAY that debt... you obviously have bought into the Plantation mindset where the slaves are well trained so as to be able to make the plantation as productive as possible... not for the benefit of the slaves, but for the benefit of the Plantation Massah, as nowhere in the training does the Massah ever teach the slaves how to OWN their own plantation. Yet you don't mind piling on more and more debt while destroying the purchasing power of the dollar you earned that is already in your pocket. Example of that is the $1.80/gallon for gas when Barry was sworn in as POTUS compared to the $3.80/gallon it costs now. Or that ounce of gold that cost $880/oz in Jan'09 versus the $1700 /oz today. Or that institutional size can of tuna that I've been buying for our church 'feed the homeless' project we have every weekend. I've been providing my famous tuna casserole each week for years... and that super large can of tuna at Walmart used to cost $7.95 in 2008 but costs $12.39 last week. That's erosion of purchasing power I'm talkin' about. Do you think it will be any better in 2016? Or 2020? Or when your children are buying tuna, gas or can no longer afford to invest in gold? Barry said he would only raise taxes those earning above $250k... but instead, he has eroded the purchasing power of EVERYONE, including those in the lowest income levels! Inflating the number of dollars in circulation is still eroding the value of that currency and either way you slice it, it’s still a tax!
== == ==
SayWhat: "yet you support those who oppose improvement of education that would better enable them to feel the jobs that would best bring down the deficit"

Can you give me an example of either the GOP or the Libertarian Party (both of whom are those that "you support") of opposing "improvement of education"???

I do oppose the unconstitutional involvement of the federal government in state functions, i.e. providing education to our children. I would much rather have 50 different states (or 57 states, for Obama supports) trying their own individual policies of improvement for education than to have all 50 trying to adhere to a 'one size fits all' federal mandate that provides 7% of the educational funding while requiring 100% of the regulatory control and underfunded mandates imposed on those states.

Besides, I'm a supporter of public FUNDING of education and not a supporter of public VENDING of education. Vouchers work quite well for providing food, housing, college education and dozens of subsidy endeavors, so why can't we simplify our government's involvement and just provide each parent with a voucher or tax credit up to the amount that society is willing to fund, for each of that parent's K-12 age children?

Why not simply allow each state's commerce department assist their existing "public" school teachers and administrators in opening their own private schools, assisting them with SBA loans and assisting them with the purchase of existing franchises like Sylvan, Montessori or 'The Learning Center' or the dozens of other acclaimed educational training venues that are available? Why have gov't RUNNING schools when they can simply be FUNDING schools via vouchers and tax credits?

Why is it that the typically PRO-CHOICE Liberal Progressives are so REGRESSIVE when it comes to being Pro-Choice in where parents can choose their child to school?

Again, please give me an example of either the GOP or the Libertarian Party of opposing
"Improvement of education"???
== == ==
SayWhat: "Obama didn’t borrow all that money to fight those unfunded wars that took more than 100 times the lives that were lost at the twin towers"

Yes, you are right. Less than one trillion went to pay for the war that Barry escalated in Afghanistan. The remaining FIVE TRILLION DOLLARS of debt was spent on things like non-existing "shovel ready" jobs that Barry later said were not 'shovel ready'... Or funding his trillion dollar 'stimulus' package where Gary Johnson noted:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?... Or paying for entitlements like the Social Security deficit where 44 million current beneficiaries are receiving benefits while 85 million baby boomers are just now reaching the age to claim benefits, thereby adding 200% more RIDERS in the wagon than there were, while fewer and fewer workers are PULLING the wagon. Barry's solution is to PRINT MORE MONEY.
== == ==
SayWhat: "you expected Obama to undue in 4 years that which took more than 8 years to evolve???

Yes, I expected Obama to do what HE SAID he would do! I.E. cut the deficit in half in four years (his 2008 campaign platform), Cut unemployment to less than 5% (it was just over 7% when he was sworn in, [the lowest rate of unemployment during his entire administration]), Not have any lobbyists in his administration (that promise was broken in February 2009, <30 days after becoming POTUS). Close Gitmo within a year. (It’s still in operation). I could go on, but I need to comment on your point "you expected Obama to undue in 4 years that which took more than 8 years to evolve???"

Please note that Reagan 'inherited' far worse economy (16% interest rates, massive inflation, 10.7% unemployment, etc, etc from Jimmy Carter. Yet by the end of Reagan's first 4 years, inflation was down to less than 4%, unemployment was less than 5% and the economy and GDP was growing at over 6%...

That just proves that it can be done!

But not with the policies of Obama that are "geared toward managing the decay of our nation. Managing declining resources. Managing diminishing manufacturing capacity. Managing a lower standard of living where he would put the coal & oil industries out of business and "electricity would cost substantially more"....which is exactly what I said back in April, which is what prompted you to reply to me 6 hours ago. Compare that to Jimmy Carter and you would find numerous similarities in Obama's "managing the decay" to Carter's administration of lower standards, and failure using both administrations’ dismal projections.

YES! I did expect Obama to DO WHAT HE PROMISED TO DO.
== == ==
SayWhat: "thats insane!!!."

You are quite right... That IS the definition of insanity. Voting for the same person, who promises the same policies, wanting to do the same thing over and over, while telling us to expect a DIFFERENT RESULT... is quite insane!!!

That's why I'm voting for change this time so as to NOT do the same thing over and over while trying to get me to believe it will result in a different result.

You are quite right... That IS the definition of insanity.

the largest part of the budget is the military budget which is closely guarded by the conservatives. you can't go past congress on matters of the budget given that they control it.
pretty sure that fox has done more to divide the country. he created more than 200,000 jobs just this year and any problem is a "real problem" or else it wouldn't be a problem. The part about house foreclosures and related is actually due to the companies that the "unnecessary and crippling" regulations(bill o'rilly) were ment to Regulate to keep from occurring which were loosened by conservatives. As for that last part you are right but its not quantity of individuals paying taxes but saturation of taxes in the significantly more dense areas of wealth.if you stop looking for your keys you can never find them, same applies.the lower income americans are the ones that are actually putting money back into the system(not just the government but also general economy because increased profit also means that there is less money for the base, which broke down due to lack of support from the "job growers", which holds up the economy and has only been barely saved by those in the lower realms having to liquidate their assets to the base.) and because they have little or no profit they are not going to see any growth.<--- thats the gap collapse that has caused many economic dificulties which is only caused when there is a significant decrease in the influx of value which has only ever been caused by those who can do such things, what the 30's called "Fat Cats". i still don't understand why in the 21st century we are still arguing over such things as simple economics and politics but after all "Ignorance begets only ignorance".