sr,

sr: "It doesn't matter what Obama says, you'll find some excuse to continue being in a state of pissy outrage over Obama being president."

And, in your case, what Obama SAYS is the only thing that matters and you'll dutifully continue to excuse him.

sr: "The upcoming election is equal parts ugly and crazy, and Obama's statement simply pointed that out,"

I already I know that you agree with Obama. That is a metaphysical certainty. But there's no reason whatsoever to think that the upcoming election is any uglier or crazier than any other election.  Simply asserting that it is oesn't make it so.

sr: "and that it was an opportunity to continue going forward instead of dipping into the well of craziness."

Going 'forward' to where? And it's quite clear that Obama is drinking deeply from the well of which you speak. Without a shred of evidence, he accused the US Chamber of Commerce of laundering foreign campaign donations to Republicans.

sr: "It takes a real hack to believe that he's belittling Americans when he's encouraging Democrats not to give up."

It takes a real synchophant to believe he can't do both at the same time.

sr: "I understand you need to stick to your belief that Obama won because people were annoyed, because to do admitting that he won the presidency because people believed his message and platform."

Again, you present a faulty dilemma. Sure, people believed Obama's message and platform but people were annoyed with Bush, too. And Obama picked at that scab. Obama's incessant campaign rhetoric centered on 'the past eight years of failed policies that got us into this mess', policies that brought about, according to Obama, 'the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression'. Here is campaigner Obama in 2008: "760,000 workers have lost their jobs this year. Businesses and families can't get credit. Home values are falling. Pensions are disappearing. It's gotten harder and harder to make the mortgage, or fill up your gas tank, or even keep the electricity on at the end of the month."

He repeated this line straight from his teleprompter on a daily basis in speech after speech leading up to election day. Read as many as you want. They're all the same.

http://www.barackobama.com/speeches/

In either case, people no longer believe or support his 'message and platform'. Why do you think that is, sr? Dr. Obama says Americans who oppose him and his 'message and platform' are not thinking clearly because they are fearful and frustrated. But people were fearful and frustrated in 2008 when Obama was campaigning for POTUS. Obama continually stoked that fear and frustration (see above quote of the typoical Obama campaign speech).

Now I know this runs directly counter to the DNC talking points you have committed to swallowing on a daily basis, but whatever fears and frustrations voters have are due to the policies and legislation passed by Obama and the Dems, ignoring the opposition of the majotiry of the people they allegedly 'serve'.

sr: "And yes, I understand that would mean admitting that the majority of Americans sided with a Democrat instead of the Republicans, who are always right even when they're dead wrong. You can believe that all you want, but it's a pretty lousy set of assumptions to base your analysis on."

I've never said Republicans are always right. And what do you mean by 'admitting that the majority of Americans sided with a Democrat instead of the republicans'? It is blindingly obvious that the majority of Americans DID sided with the Democrats instead of the Republicans. Voters handed complete control of the executive branch and the entire legislative branch to Obama and the Democrats. If the polling is accurately gauging the opinions of the electorate, the majority of Americans no longer side with the Democrats. Why do you think that is, sr? Dr. Obama says americans who oppose him and his 'message and platform' are not thinking clearly because they are fearful and frustrated.

What exactly happened between the inauguration of The One and now? What has happened that has turned allegedly clear thinking majority of Americans who 'sided with a Democrat instead of the Republicans' such that the majority of Americans now apparently side with the Republicans instead of the Democrats?

sr: "And the deficit? Well, it's higher than it could be, but it's going down, which is definitely a good sign."

That the deficit is slightly lower than alst years is a good thing, sr. But it's not a good sign of anything. CBO estimates the the LOWEST annual deficit over the next ten years will be $658 billion in 2012, after which it will steadily rise each year, reaching almost $1 trillion again in 2017 and exceeding $1 trillion a year for 2018 and 2019. That's what Obama's policies portend.

http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/100xx/doc10014/03-20-PresidentBudget.pdf

sr: "But blaming the deficit level on Obama conveniently leaves out that Bush left the presidency with a deficit that was already topping 1 trillion. But that cuts into your little myth, so it's left on the cutting floor."

It's left on the cutting room floor because it's FALSE. According to the same CBO numbers, the annual deficit for 2008, Bush's last year in office, was $459 billion on a budget passed by Democrat-controlled houses of Congress. At what point will you hold Obama accountable for Obama's policies? Like him, you continue to blame Bush for everything and give Obama a perpetual pass. Unlike you, the American electorate, clear thinking or not, appears poised to start the accountability process in a couple of weeks. 

sr: "The unemployment rates have been gamed for years and the definitions are changing regularly, so if you're trying to make Bush look good, why don't you try and find some stats that are a just bit more reliable?"

Demonstrate the differences between how the unemployment rate was calculated during the Bush years. Further, show specifically just HOW the rates have been gamed to make Bush look good.

Oh, and for the record, I'm not trying to make Bush 'look good'. That dislocates the subject of my posts. My interest is in showing that, whether the unemployment rate under the 'failed policies' of the eight Bush years was good OR bad, it is vastly worse under the policies of Obama and the Dems.

Perhaps you'd like to post something of substance, sr. Or perhaps not.

later. iowan15