all you did jeff was speak the truth ma

Would a republican president had all the road blocks thrown at him by a congress that was determined to see him fail no matter what happened to the country? It's easy to sit in the cheap seats and write articles saying nothing was done so the president failed. How much did congress have to do with him failing and will Romney be any better? Romney would not have be reelected governor 5 years ago if he ran for reelection and now hecould be president hope he doesn't do to the country what he did to this state.

Come on Jeff, you know, it's ideology, nothing else matters. This administration is the 'Least Transparent' in fifty years, and has the Laziest Senate in thirty years. president Obama doesn't need other branches of government. Now a report comes out on friday, "we now spend ONE TRILLION DOLLARS a year on entitlements, not including SS and Medicare. Another 4 years, another 4 trillion added to our debt, your choice.

I am absolutely amazed that the president has the level of support the polls seem to indicate. His job record is an embarrassment to the entire country. I am unswayed by the excuses that George Bush left him a mess or that Congress has been less than cooperative. It is the president's responsibility to get the job done in spite of difficulties and obstacles. In the private sector he would have been 'let go' a couple years ago.

"If a Republican president compiled such an atrocious record, you would do everything you could to prevent his reelection. Can you vote in good conscience for a Democrat with such a record?"

Easy.  The opposing candidate is promising us he'll be ten times worse.

Lindsey Graham said "there are not enough angry white guys to sustain the GOP". Never has anyone so perfectly and suucinctly described the makeup of a political party and what it is all about. You guys are just plain backward Jeff; scared, backward, religious white guys, who long for a simple time in the past that really never existed.

By all means, if you value transparency in government, vote for the guy who won't even show his taxes.

Here's the situation we've gotten ourselves into: Republican politics has become, "Screw this country, even if what he's proposing is in our country's best interest we've got to be against it because Obama is *for* it." This was the same policy Hitler had (who, by the way, was also racist): 'Even if it destroys Germany, following my will is the only option.'  The Republicans spent four years following Hitlerian tactics, of defeating Obama at all costs. Having largely succeeded in making American government dysfunctional, the Republican strategy is now to push the blame on Obama. This infantile form of leadership has led to a significant proportion of the country buying into this kind of behavior, of regarding it as being acceptable. But in the end this scorched earth strategy of the Republicans has sown the seeds of its own destruction, because even if Romney wins a very significant proportion of this country will scream revenge, it will do everything it can to destroy Romney, at all costs. Republicans may have won the battle, but it will lose the war.

So Jeff is arguing that Obama is a Republican in Democratic clothing.  I guess Jeff will be voting for Obama.  Fascinating.  Probably the most pro-Obama piece Jeff ever wrote.  He's created an Obama that is a cross between Richard Nixon and Bush II a conservatives delight.

So Jeff, since Obama will win re-election, you can at least take solace in the fact that he's not really a liberal. In fact, Obama has actually run pretty much to the right of President Reagan the entire first four years of his presidency. As for me, yeah Obama has been a huge disappointment but only a moron would think the obvious alternative would be to vote for Romney because Obama wasn't liberal enough. Or are you telling liberals to stay home on election day? I'm not about to drop out of the process. Nice try.

Laughably slanted piece. "If a Republican president compiled such an atrocious record, you would do everything you could to prevent his reelection. Can you vote in good conscience for a Democrat with such a record?" Answer: Yes, and I would not vote for a Republican because the legacy of Lee Atwater is a party deep in the thrall of its most extreme right wing elements, who, if given the chance under a GOP president, would turn back the clock on the civil rights of women and minorities, and likely appoint SC Justices that would serve the interests of the the rich and powerful at the expense of the vast majority of American people.

LMAO.

Just reading the headline, I knew this would cause the Moonbats and Obamabots to start foaming at the mouth and fire up their keyboards to try and refute what is obviously so true!

Well done Jeff.

Of course people will support President Obama again.  Who wants a neo-conservatieve, Heritage Foundation's favorite as President.  It is fair enough to point out President Obama's shortcomings but the other choice will engage us in another disasterous war.  This President thinks before he acts.  Romney's last debate performance shows he is no cautious leader, in fact the opposite.  No thanks.

We have witnessed Chicago-style ward politics in the White House since 2008, not hope and change. Mitt Romney has signaled that he wants to work with Democrats to solve serious problems if elected. It's time to admit that Barack Obama has been a failure in providing presidential leadership.

Obama accomplished many things in his four years, despite astonishing Republican intransigence. He staved off potential widespread bank failure, presided over a rising stock market, addressed out of control health care costs, bailed out Detroit, executed Bin Laden, improved foreign relations. The GOP's answer to all these problems, and more, was no answer at all. Now, Jeff is trying to slam him for not eradicating Jeff's desired policies.

Gee, all I can think of in rebuttal is, "Mission Accomplished".

The truth is that all the blather about Bush's policies were not rooted in constitutional concerns, it was about political opportunism.  The shocking part of Obama's ascendency is that he never seemed to be rooting for America.  He dismissed all of Bush's successes in keeping us safe after 9-11, and seemed to want him taken away in hand cuffs the daay he was inaugurated.  A classier president would have stood shoulder to shoulder with his predecessor, and promised the world that he would continue the policies that Bush conducted.

NEW PARAGRAPH:  But no, he travelled the Globe apologizing for US "torture" and Gitmo.  But, as many of us predicted, once it was in his political interest to keep the country safe, he not only continued the Bush policies, but went further.  He does not torture terrorists, he simply orders their execution.  The down side to this is that we are no longer gathering intelligence by capturing terrorists.  Dead men do not talk.

NEW PARAGRAPH:  His shameful slander of a president of this country was unprecedented, as was his attempt to be elected with it.  But his hypocrisy should not surprise anybody.

Excellent article, Jeff.

Don’t forget Obama promised all U.S. foreign policy would be accomplished multi-laterally with our Allies, respect the sovereignty of other nations, and in accordance with all U.S. law.  So let’s examine his signature foreign policy achievement, the killing of Osama bin Laden.  This was done as a unilateral action, which violated the sovereignty of another nation, and executed outside the guidelines of Title 10 U.S. Code (the Goldwater-Nichols Act specifically).  Have we heard any complaints about this yet?

Note that none of those objecting to Jeff's pointing out the "inconvenient truth" of Obama's policies directly contradicting his oft stated goals can refute the hypocrisy of Obama's actions. These civil liberty issues, issues which have been pounded into our head's whenever a Republican holds office as impeachable offenses by liberals are now completely ignored by liberals. So were liberals lying about their concerns with such "constitutional" violations under Bush? What other conclusion can one draw? Like the, very well documented, abuse and debasement of women by Bill Clinton and Ted Kennedy, liberals seem to fall silent, deaf and dumb when their icons violate values that, among Republicans, that they would DEMAND expulsion from the political world. What does it say about a political perspective where the leaders routine violate the most preciouos values of the philosophy yet remain celebrated idols of the movement? 

If Romney wins the presidency, in four years some Democrat-leaning journalist will write a piece like this about promises he made and didn't keep. It has happened with all past presidents and it will happen with all future presidents. Picture a two-pan balance scale. Choosing -or not- an incumbent president amounts to visualizing if accomplishment outweigh failures or vice-versa. But in reality nothing of that counts. Voting is mainly an irrational act in which deep-seated emotions -largely unconscious- rule. I'm sure that Mr. Jacoby knows that and is using what appears to be an intellectual argument to justify his own biases -that of course we all have. 

Jacoby doesn't want to acknowledge that large numbers of moderates support Obama, not just "passionate and dedicated" liberals. Jacoby is whining because it's clear that the extremist Republicans he represents have suffered defeat after defeat at Obama's hands in the past four years: Obamacare (and the Supreme Court ruling supporting it), gays in the military, withdrawal of forces from Iraq, killing of bin Ladin and destruction of al-Qaida leadership, appointment of a liberal to the Supreme Court, a much improved (and improving) economy, and much more, along with tremendous overall success in cleaning up after the failed Bush presidency.

Ralph Reed (watching him now with George S. on ABC)....whew...guys like this, Sanctorum, Bachmann, Aken, Gingrich, Robertson, Perry, West, etc. whispering in Romney's ear to wipe out Iran, because it is the headquarters of Islam, the competing fairytale/mythology against Christianity. Their rationale is that God has given them "the bomb" first to be used in the name of Jesus Christ. God help us all if these lunatics get into power!!!

Amen.