DALLAS, November 18, 2013 – An article written for the Huffington Post by professor Matthew Lynch, Ed.D., provides a unique, chilling insight into the mind of an Obama supporter intoxicated by blind idealism.

12 Reasons Why Obama Is One of the Best Presidents Ever” begins by acknowledging Obama’s made a “number of mistakes”, but stands firm his legacy will, “be remembered in the annals of history as a revered revolutionary.”

6 years into presidency, President Barack Obama seems to compete with George W. Bush in terms of extraordinary power abuse, constitutional crimes, perpetual scandals, and extraordinary corruption. He has earned an impeachment and a 39% approval rating. Judging his legacy prematurely is unwise, but so is glossing over his grave misconduct.

1)      “He is for The People. His actions have always been motivated by a sincere desire to do what is best for the majority, even if it meant losing ground with the wealthy, influential or powerful minority.”

Obama is no populist. He “supports Occupy Wall Street movement” but raised more money from Wall St. than any other candidate in 20 years. The financial criminals partially responsible for 2008’s economic disaster remain free. TARP corporate-welfare bailouts transferred $73 billion in taxpayer wealth to corporate cronies. Punishing hard-working taxpayers for playing by the rules while rewarding the fantastically rich criminals makes him a man of the people?

Please note: by Oath, Obama’s must preserve constitutional protections for all minorities, not favor special classes. He has eroded those protections against abusive government, granting his successor horrifying executive powers (see #2).

2)    “He is for civil rights. His outspoken support of gay marriage is an excellent example.”

1)    Obama invalidated the right to trial by signing 2012’s National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), which expanded military detention powers for Americans. He threatened to veto it, lied and then was sued. Government lawyers continue arguing ruthlessly for the power to kidnap Americans.#2


2)    Obama renewed the Patriot Act, assaults the free press, defends warrantless wiretapping, and the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. Guantanamo Bay remains open and he’s executed four U.S. citizens without judicial process, an impeachable offense.

3)    Obama brags about hunting and caging whistleblowers reporting crimes and established the Insider Threat Program (ITP) which equates whistleblowing to “aiding the enemies of the United States”.

4)    Though Obama’s “Choom Gang” smoked massive amounts of marijuana, his administration is the most hostile to medical marijuana in history. Peaceful Americans from Colorado, Montana, Nevada, Washington and California have been assaulted, robbed and caged for following state law. They face millions in fines and decades in in prison.

Oh, and Obama reversed his position on same-sex marriage after alienating his LGBT allies because it was politically expedient. What a freedom fighter!

3)    “He is for one race – the human race. America has never been more unified as a people than it has been under the direct leadership of Barack Obama.”

The American people themselves have the honor of improving race-relations, not Barack Obama.

He politicizes racial tensions often with highly incendiary (and premature) remarks like, “If I had a son, he’d look like Trayvon”. His underlings race-bait, underscoring a divisive internal culture. Kathleen Sebelius compared Obamacare opponents to segregationists fighting for “lynching” and Eric Holder keeps the Trayvon Martin fire burning by threatening a civil rights suit against George Zimmerman.




America is actually more divided than ever before. 59% believe we’re moving in the wrong direction, 6 in 10 worry about the economy, 1 in 5 question the UNION. They blame Washington and Obama.

4)    “Healthcare because he’s compassionate.”

50-75% of the 14 million consumers who buy their insurance individually would lose their policies and Obama lied about it. 52 million may still lose their healthcare, rates may increase from 41%77%. Narrower networks, fewer physician options, minimal personal choice and forced participation will likely result in poor quality.

But White House friends and cronies love ObamaCare. The struggling middle class will pay fines and high costs for healthcare they may not need or want, but the 1% president’s pals sit pretty. Compassion.

#55)    He is for the middle class.

4 in 5 face near-poverty and unemployment. Small businesses, once America’s economic backbone, cannot stay afloat. There are many factors, but if Obama cared for the shrinking middle class, why pass $46 billion in new regulations and $11 billion more in one-time implementation costs? This is 5 times the cost of Bush’s administration.

11,327 pages of federal regulations have been added, mostly for small and medium-sized businesses. This array of nanny-state regulations transfers hundreds of billions of dollars from the citizen’s ledger to the federal treasury. These result in less innovation, job-creation, fewer development of new products and technologies, which results in fewer jobs, less disposable income and higher costs of living. 46% of employers won’t hire for fear of more.

Obama’s rich friends thrive while the middle class suffocates under the boot of big government.

6)    He is for women’s rights because of the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act.

Obama passed politically-timed legislation, so now he’s a civil rights hero. 780,000 more women are unemployed under Obama. Women face healthcare premium increases from 18-37% under ObamaCare. But at least we have taxpayer subsidized birth control!

Question: do the women of Pakistan, Yemen, Libya, and Afghanistan have a right not to be executed by a death robot?

In his first drone strike, Obama killed 36 women and children according to investigative journalist Jeremy Scahill, a former Obama supporter. Watch this devastatingly sad graphic. 98% of those killed are women and children.

Consider Obama’s track record (see #2), it’s hard to argue he values anyone’s rights until it’s time to counter the Republican’s “War on Women”.

#77)    “He is for doing away with pomp and circumstance. Let’s be real – Obama is one cool cat.”

His administration is the most secretive since Richard Nixon. He’s also a habitual liar.

The deficit would be cut by 50%. The NSA isn’t abusing its power, every dime spent rescuing Wall Street was repaid and TARP was earmark free. Fast and Furious was Bush’s fault, the rich don’t pay their fair share, there were no “boots on the ground” in Libya, ObamaCare isn’t a new tax and it’ll pay for itself, so we shouldn’t mandate it.

Here’s a longer list. But he’s “cool”, I guess.

8)    He is for the environment.

Obama’s new energy regulations cost taxpayers and companies billions and unknown number of jobs, but let’s not forget Solyndra? The unprofitable corporate rouse cost taxpayers an obscene $528 million. Despite inevitable bankruptcy, cash infusions continued so White House regular George Kaiser could get rich.




Clean energy has its benefits, but it’s also another way to enrich campaign contributors and the government treasury, which surely isn’t a factor. #8 - environment

9)    He is for veterans.

Fancy dinners, patriotic speeches, sometimes-effective government programs; veterans have received them all.

Offline, Obama proposed a “tiered increase” in annual TRICARE premium payments to annually raise active duty and veteran rates from 30% to 78%, then 94% to 345%. Benefits would be means-tested benefits and new annual fees introduced, but veteran’s groups organized. Note: Defense Department workers (often compensated 50% more) were exempt.

The claims-processing system has collapsed. Veteran’s healthcare is a national embarrassment. 800,000 to 1 million pending claims still sit on desks throughout nationwide facilities; veterans wait 219 days on average, nearly twice that long in large cities. Why? Billions of dollars and years later, the VA has no efficient database. Private companies could’ve solved this issue in a 10th of the time.

Obama manipulated disabled veterans over the sequester, expended no political clout to restore death gratuities for soldier’s families, and unnecessarily shut down World War II memorials.

But thanks for killing Bin Laden.


10)  He is for peace.

The Iraq War was an epic blunder; thanks to Obama for withdrawing. The Afghanistan War is winding down at great cost and military families are grateful. Engaging Iran would be a costly mistake and we should applaud Obama’s resistance to severe political pressure from the warhawks and special interests. [contextly_sidebar id=”0c595fff760ab4d3b156994ea907ebdd”]

But when Obama’s not telling aides he’s “really good at killing people” with drones, he’s killing women and children with drones. Again, for every 50 murdered, 1 “terrorist” is killed. As Jeremy Scahill notes, Obama went from an anti-war candidate to guaranteeing “that many of those policies would become entrenched, bipartisan institutions in U.S. national security policy for many years to come.” Here’s why.

11) He is for education.

Goals are wonderful, but what are the actual results? We still rank below overseas competitors and the answer Obama says? Build bureaucracy and deliver mediocrity. This Washington Post editorial explains how Obama favors powerful teacher unions over the needs of disadvantaged children.

We haven’t seen anything yet. Common Core will more than likely destroy classroom innovation, create another layer of bureaucracy, and standardize a one-sized-fits all approach to education regardless of classroom needs, a tactic with proven poor results.

12) “He is for entertaining the masses. If we have to listen to a president yakitty-yak about this or that for another four years, we might as well pick one with charisma and charm”.

Being a witty comedian makes you a fantastic president? The maestro of America’s bread-and-circus both sings and dances, smiles and charms and because he’s cool! Lynch concludes that if you don’t believe president Obama is one of the best presidents ever, then you are not thinking objectively!

Herein lies the crux of blind idealism.

The article’s comments section supports Lynch isn’t alone, which is frightening. Think what you will of Obama, but soon, a successor will rise to an office with extraordinary powers and new precedents. As we wade into uncharted, murky constitutional waters, we cannot afford starry-eyed sycophantic personality worship. Skepticism, not childlike reverence, is required. We must evaluate actions, not rhetoric. By this test, Obama holds no candle to most of his predecessors.

TiffanyTiffany Madison is a writer, libertarian pundit and social media strategist from Dallas, Texas. Her column for Washington Times Communities covers current events, civil liberties, veteran’s issues and foreign policy. Her work has been featured or referenced by Policy Mic, The Rutherford Institute, Freedom Outpost, Military.com, and AmberLyon.com.

About The Author

130 Responses

  1. THOR 221

    Much of what this article shares is exactly the way I think and feel.

  2. JR Dowd

    I have a sneaky sensation, there will NEVER be another Presidential election again. He has our health, our industry, our banks and the sheeple that support him. I truly believe his power will wipe out the 22nd Amendment and therefore give him another chance at running, and he has us by our throats. I could be wrong and God willing I am… but you don’t do all this government power build up to walk away. If control is what he’s after, and he is… why give it up? – something to think about. Again, I hope I am wrong.

    • Odotry

      Does that honestly make a difference? Things have been the exact same for decades now. Newsflash, all candidates work for the same gang, the banksters holding the country hostage. This Democrat vs. Republican crap is a dog and pony show, an illusion, smoke and mirrors. Get rid of one guy, another with the exact same agenda comes along.

      If voting changed anything it would’ve been illegal.

      • JR Dowd

        Maybe I am but I no longer trust this government after seeing the absolute abuse of the constitution.

      • Jim_in_Denver

        It’s a shame that media has warped that phrase and that so many like you choose to hurl it as an insult.

        Do you really believe that no conspiracies exist? None? Might be you’re the one in need of evaluation.

      • Jim_in_Denver

        It’s a shame you choose to level a personal attack against him instead of engaging in honest discourse. An even greater shame is that you’ve taken to the warped meaning of “Conspiracy Theorist” that the media has fabricated.

        Conspiracies exist, you may want to open your eyes.

        Easy proof (yes it’s dated but a quick and verifiable example) is the Gulf of Tonkin conspiracy. In 2010 declassified information shows that Senators knew of the misinformation but choose not to disclose it. Robert MacNamara who was the Secretary of Defense admitted that the torpedo attacks on the Maddox never happened… and withheld that information from the President even as LBJ sought authorization from congress to strike back which of course led to the Vietnam War.

        Further, the deceptions which led us into the second conflict in Iraq over WMDs I would consider as a conspiracy as well.

        I also encourage you to watch the BBC documentary titled “Dead In the Water” about the attack on the USS Liberty.

      • JR Dowd

        Mark. No I am not living in my own shadow I am looking at the facts. Did hitler build up his power to walk away no? Obama has stepped on the constitution time and time again. He’s also currently fundraising for 2016 and not for other party members. If we just say he can’t do that because the constitution won’t let him think again it hasn’t stopped him yet and we are letting him get away with it.

      • Yourownfault

        While I am not happy with where my country is right now, I have not lost that much pride in out country that we the people or the people representing us would allow that happen no matter which side of the house you live on

      • Jim_in_Denver

        The personal investment so many people have made in their party is frightening. Party over Country seems to be the growing trend. When you’re more attached to a “Team Blue” victory over “the enemy” than you are to sustainable solutions you’re part of the problem.

        The “you” I use is plural.

    • Shannon Morrow

      Your suspicion is based on the assumption that Obama is actually the person in charge where as I see him as more of a figurehead. The people with the money are the ones actually running everything.

      • Jim_in_Denver

        And can only do so with a complicit Congress and complicit constituents. Take away Congress’ power to hand out favors, to pick who the winners will be and this country will see immediate benefits.

      • azsequaya

        IMO,,,He“s NOT a figure head,,, He`s the figure A$$ HOLE,,,

  3. Guest

    Even this is soft on Obama. So many omissions, but I will allow for the possibility there is a part 2 to come. I will start… How about the demonization of returning soldiers, libertarians, Christians, (just about ANYONE who isn’t an obama worshippomg progressive) in homeland security documents? Peace prize?! THIS GUY IS AS UNITING AS SATAN and appears to be planning a coup… under NDAA and other ‘security measures’ he and his brother Bush have drafted, and these continue to be fine tuned, they can toss anyone who disagrees into a black hole – never to be seen or heard again, no trial, no right to a defense. How peaceful and loving. Obama may be the catalyst for a 2nd civil war. Nice legacy.

  4. Guest

    I am not a huge fan of Obama, I think that every president we have ever had has issues. However, for fun, I would like to try to refute all 12 of these arguments: My point is not to promote Obama but for you to make better arguments if you plan to write.

    1) He does seem to want to help others, intentions are good but the outcomes are not good at all. Using how much money he raised from wall street is silly. Every president who won gets ton of money from wall street red or blue. Its how you play the game. So throw that argument out the door, its the only way to win in our media happy ignorant world out there.

    2) Obaama changed his views of gay marriage, whats wrong with that? He now supports it. He is like many of the other millions of people who have become accepting of something that at one time was considered lewd and wrong by everyone. He is the first president to openly get behind it 100%

    3) Using one statement saying that Martin could have been him is the logic behind arguing his entire position of race? Yes he did not need to say that, was a dumb call and I agree, but then you throw in the 59% division in our country, its not a racial division so you are using the wrong stats for that point.

    He is actually pretty much in the middle with races and other than that dumb comment has shown now special favoritism to any race.

    4) Healthcare, the administration screwed that up, he did not write the bill, nor did he get all the information he should have. He is responsible for the consequences, but don’t throw the outcomes as his personal intentions.
    Obama care is a mess, its was poorly written and executed. Like a kid with big dreams. He made the mistake of pushing it in, but it was not his goal to do the damage that it is causing, so don’t make a villain out of an idiot.

    5) You numbers don’t make sense to me at all. Since 2009 small business and mid size business growth is actually slowly going back up, same with the job creation. http://www.nfib.com/research-foundation/surveys/small-business-economic-trends

    However, I do agree that the middle class is probably the hardest hit by the Obama administration. I can’t argue with that no matter what

    6) Seriously? You relate women unemployed to Obama some how and throw in unexpected outcomes for drone strikes and say he hates women? This one is the worst yet.

    7) This one is a good one 🙂 I agree, he came into office thinking he could play that way, but when he learned how politics work in office, he had to change his way of thinking. Lots of crap has happened that has made it hard for him to be “cool” I agree with you and cannot argue this one.

    8) He is for the environment, and your argument is that it costs polluters money? I don’t get it. That does not take away why he is for the environment, just means he did not have a good executed plan to help protect the environment. I think #8 with your argument is he values ideologies of fundamental economics.

    9) Iit’s
    not easy fixing such a deeply entrenched bureaucracy as VA, especially
    when two wars are concluding and politicians are too busy fighting each
    other to pass many laws. But by almost any measure, the situation for
    veterans and their families is demonstrably better now than it was under
    the previous administration.

    10) We all wanted to pull out of Iraq, we are sick of war and he pull them out so, its his blunder. And the only argument for him being for peace is drones?

    I think we killed alot more innocents when we send in troops generally. Prolly a few thousand more. Don’t really get this one having anything to do with peace.

    11) Education has been and will be a mess for a long time. I think he has put into place some small things to try to help it grow, like race to the top. However,My viewpoints make it hard to be devils advocate, i think all schools should be private and get rid of unions…

    12) He he almost as fun to listen speak as good ole bill clinton 🙂

  5. Yourownfault

    I feel that some of these are a long stretch from the truth. If you want people who are democratic to change their votes you need more solid arguments on some of these topics

    • Tiffany Madison

      Hi there! I did not remove your comment. This page is uncensored. May I ask, given the heavy sourcing and thorough research, which arguments were lacking?

      • Yourownfault

        Wish i could find it back, i wrote a comment for all 12 points and explained why they were either a good or weaker formed argument 🙁 Was not a trolling bash i was just trying to find more solid points to fill the holes

      • Yourownfault

        1) Obama is defiantly someone who is trying to save the world, but he had no idea how the world works for him to change it. All his actions back that, and using the wall street argument I feel is weak because all politicians have to go through wall street to get the funds to become elected. So to target him for making the most this year is kinda silly as every year they break the record Blue or red.

      • Jim_in_Denver

        By the way, this is a major problem in today’s political discussions… assumptions. You assume that because she criticizes the actions of one party that she must be doing it in defense of the other.

        No where does she praise “the red” record. She was rebutting statements made by another writer. Likely, being a libertarian she disapproves of non-balanced budget spendings.

      • Yourownfault

        Tiffany is great with her work. I never assumed she was republican in any way, I just wanted to do my best to bring all these topics into further discussion. Your input is awesome! We agree on a ton of points, and I tried to state from the start that i am just trying to be devils advocate to understand why things happen the way they do.

      • Daniel Ros

        Bought and paid for politicians are ok for you? Oh its corruption, but its cool, everyone is doing it. Lol. Weak argument? Really? Your cabinet member is a corrupted a@@hole. But your cool cause your ‘trying’ hard lol. All his actions back that????? NAME ONE!!!!!!!

      • Yourownfault

        I agree with your frustration with the system. I do hope there is a change.

        You make alot of extreme assumptions. Obama, plays the political game needed to become president and he brought his agenda that he felt would better the country.

        Unfortunately, he is a fool.

      • Yourownfault

        2) Like society as a whole, Obama did not back Gay marriage earlier on in his career but he has changed his stance, like many Americans have in the last decade. He has not flopped on that since he made the commitment. I do think this is a positive thing for him. And I think all politicians should have the right to change their view if its for the better of society

      • Jim_in_Denver

        Maybe the Federal Government shouldn’t be involved in marriage in the first place?

        Additionally, you chose to ignore the real violations. Patriot Act renewal and the Indefinite Detention Provision in the NDAA that he lied about.

      • Yourownfault

        I agree. When Gay marriage first came around as a topic, I suggested removing marriage from law and just have domestic partnership as a neutral word that allows the equal benefits for any sexuality. My point on this one is you cannot attack someone on their previous views and changing.

        Allowing gay marriage is much easier than removing marriage from law. so yay government

      • Yourownfault

        3) I agree with you on this one, His comment on Trayvon was a mistake, he did not have all the information when he made the comment and encouraged the racial divide. I also believe that you are right about his libral views has caused a larger rift in the country. Good points

      • Yourownfault

        4) The Obamacare was a good intention with unexpected results. Like a cat dropping off a dead rat as a gift. So i do think that he is compassionate and had good intentions. The Results are caused because while he is running the country, the people he left in charge of making this happen did a horrible job at EVERYTHING.

        So i agree that obama care is bad now but you cannot say its because he lacks compassion or wanted to harm people.

      • Abigail Moreno

        You have to define what compassionate and good intentions mean because people could say that German Nazis who used a gas chamber to murder Jews was more compassionate than starving them to death. Now I may agree that his main intention was probably not to harm people, but his bad decisions to lead this country have definitely done so and he continues to make decisions that are not according to the Constitution, which he should know by now that those decisions harm people. He also wanted his Affordable Health Care Act to pass and it was obviously a failure (even though this act was un-constitutional to begin with) he wanted it passed no matter what and was not budging to make a deal to wait on it. His people and himself were not prepared for Obamacare (thank God!) and I’m sure he knew this, so why didn’t he wait on it?

      • Yourownfault

        Compassionate, as in he saw something that seemed wrong in the country, that people were not getting what they needed to live a healthy normal life. He saw the poor and impoverish part of our country and wanted to provide a service to save them. I dont see how you can argue with Nazi’s as your extreme example. What I am saying is that he does of a heart, he does of good intentions and he wanted to stick to his word before election. He had a great plan in his head that was poorly executed.

        If a kid has a plan to feed the homeless by making a special restaurant for them and writes up the plan an school, everyone loves it. When he finishes culinary school and starts it up its great news and you can see he wants to do something special, now when he runs out of money and it goes under. He is still compassionate, just poor knowledge of the business world around him.

        Obama is like that in that I don’t think he understood all the outside factors that cause The Affordable Care act to be such a mess.

        He was wrong to do it and i think it will continue to do more harm than good, but the guy has a heart and had good intentions. Thats the point i am making

      • Yourownfault

        Lol i got that, no i meant running the country, but that was witty of you 🙂

      • Jim_in_Denver

        Except that half of the country opposed it? Except that half of the country predicted the mess it would create? Except that government cannot solve social problems that require the labor of trained professionals to provide a service?

      • Yourownfault

        More than have the country opposes libertarian ideas. But would you implement it anyway? Once again, i am TRYING my best to pretend to like Obama for this 😛 you are not helping 😉 great points, all of them

      • Jim_in_Denver

        There is no comparison between campaigning for a cause and ramming legislation down everyone’s throats. No one who understands and follows the concepts of Libertarian beliefs would implement sweeping coercive law against the public’s will.

        I believe that Libertarianism can best be described as a system of voluntary exchange.

      • Yourownfault

        I always looked at Libertarianism as personal responsibility and accountability 🙂 Minimizing government roles in our lives and giving power back to the state, gives more power to the people to be accountable for their actions on how they vote and live their lives. Getting rid of entitlements and forcing people to work hard in life will bring us back to a strong united country.

        This is kinda off topic but in my opinion the only way to change the country is to find good policies and force it. My reasoning is the public will is detrimental to everyone else and them selves. Maybe you and I agree on some good points, but half the country has no clue. How to you make change to ignorant people who just want free stuff?

      • Jim_in_Denver

        Gently, through education and persistence. The current system is going to begin to fail spectacularly and unlike the last time when we technically defaulted on our debt and the government confiscated the public’s gold*… there’s no gold standard scapegoat to save them this time. There will be two choices, totalitarianism and libertarianism. Hopefully the public gets it right.

        * Roosevelt penned executive order 6102 which criminalized the possession of monetary gold by any individual, partnership, association or corporation. (Wikipedia)

      • Mario Lawrence

        lol you two….
        exchange phone numbers already.
        such a beautiful bromance. ‘brought a tear to me eye…’

      • Dylan McInnis

        How do you know the intentions of Obamacare? Does it just make you feel warm and fuzzy? Do you even know who wrote the law?

        Get real. Obama’s intentions had NOTHING to do with Obamacare.

      • Yourownfault

        As I have stated multiple times, I wrote this in the sport of making stronger arguments against Obama. Nothing about it makes me happy to say the least. My goal is to convince Liberals to change their way of thinking, in order to do so, you need to understand their reasoning no matter how different it might appear to you.

        There were tons of people involved with creating the Affordable care act, i don’t even know how much involvement Obama actually had with the writing, i know a lot of people target Max Baucus as the “architect” but i cant find any good sources.

        I wonder if Obama even read a page of the law before he pushed it through.

        By doing this, he may have used his good intentions over judgement by pushing a law he was talked into passing? not sure i was not there.

      • Yourownfault

        5) The problem with this argument, is that we are still doing better, its been a steady growth since 09.

        The link i added caused the comment to go away

        While i do agree that middle class is hurt the most by this administration i think that the small business and mid business argument for a backing might not be as strong. I think a focus on taxes and lack of entitlements for the middle class in comparison to the upper and lower classes would be a better target

      • Yourownfault

        6) I don’t think that your argument is valid to disprove he is for women’s rights. He is not directly related to the job losses women had. I don’t see the relationship.

        The Drone strikes were not targeting women directly, if it was all old men would you say Obama hates old men?

        Another point i don’t feel is related

      • Jim_in_Denver

        What she didn’t site, which would have been more relevant is the pay gap between women and men in his administration.

      • Yourownfault

        Do they all have the same job title? you have to be more specific than the entire white house staff. If you compare men to women of the same job title / pay grade and then to a comparison, maybe you can get more relevant data.

      • Jim_in_Denver

        Doubtful that they do, but unequal pay for equal pay grade jobs isn’t the only form of inequality. In industries where men are overrepresented due to physical / risk requirements the pay gap can be justified. In the White House, such gender differences should not exist. So if males are on average making 18% more than females in the White House it is due to one reason or the other (though possibly both). Either they’re being discriminated against for higher paying (senior) positions or they’re being paid a lower salary for the same position.

      • Daniel Ros

        He is part of the system that has lead to women and men loosing jobs. No Obama didn’t cause the crash that he got coming into power. This whole simpleton debate as whether it was Bushinomics or Obaminonics is such an old and tired Red Herring its laughable. The FED controls our politicians and controls our money supply. Obama nor Bush have anything real to do with it. They are just puppets. Look at their cabinets and appointees. Monsanto, Wall Street. Can’t you see that banking policy is never brought to the table.

        Drone Strikes are designed to ensure our future reliance on the military industrial complex and to fatten their wallets. Can’t you look past the facade? Bush = Obama = the FED

      • Yourownfault

        I like to debate, but you grab one sentence and then go off on a tangent that has nothing to do with it. If you are on a bus, and the bus driver runs over someone. are you guilty as well? Obama is in the system, and he has alot of blame. But when it comes to women rights I cannot see an argument to blame him for any of it.

        If you do not like a president, and you want change, you need to pick your battles wisely and with solid evidence to make people change their opinion

      • Yourownfault

        7) I agree, he seemed like he was a pretty solid and savvy leader before he was elected, but that is how we all are before thrown into the fire right? You make good points here.

      • Nathan E

        The the “rich don’t pay their fair share” part is true. The top 5% may make up 56%% of the total federal personal tax income, but when they control 95% of the total wealth, that’s an imbalanced figure. Let’s not forget, those are gross income figures in the middle column, so after taxes that 32k a year is more like 20k a year, so pretty much anything beneath that is poverty level. Of course the people who control the majority of the wealth should pay the majority of the taxes. Gouging the lower, middle and upper middle class for up to 32% of their total income while the rich pay in half that percentage, how is that not economically detrimental? If you make 32k a year at a 32% tax rate you’re paying in around 13k a year, if you make 250k a year and pay a 15% tax rate you may pay in nearly 3 times as much at around 35k a year, but financially that has nowhere near the impact on you. Now, the economy is NOT a trickle down system, we the consumers need money to put into the system to build it up, well when 1/3rd of your yearly budget goes out in taxes, that’s less money you have to put back into the economy. While the rich may also spend more on average than the middle class, the lower/middle class outnumber the rich, by what 80 to 1? So even if a single wealthy person spends 30 times what a single middle class person does per year on luxuries, food, clothing, etc… it doesn’t even out. I’m not an obama supporter, but that particular “lie” wasn’t a lie if you have a decent comprehension of economics and mathematics.

      • Yourownfault

        Would you say you are for a flat tax rate? I’m a big fan of that.

      • Yourownfault

        What is your suggestions to fix what you see as a big issue with our tax system? One thing i wanted to add, if you make 32k a year you get your taxes back

      • l84wrk

        Just a small point – if someone is “making” $250,000 per year, they’d only be paying 15% in taxes if *all* that income is from capital gains. Earned income of that amount – which I’d think is way more common – would be taxed at a substantially higher rate, about 37% (at the highest amount, using the graduated tax tables).

        If you want to get really technical, that person probably isn’t paying tax on that entire $250k, taking deductions and losses into account. But the amount would still be substantially higher than even 15% charged on the entire $250,000.

      • Yourownfault

        that is right, its a long painful process but each portion of that 250k gets taxed differently based on the bracket your in, but t hat really goes beyond this topic right?

      • zeromein

        It could be argued that those at the lower end of the spectrum USE more of the services than those at the higher end of the spectrum and so taxing them that amount is justified.

      • Jim_in_Denver

        Our economy and monetary system isn’t a zero sum game. Someone being rich doesn’t prohibit you from acquiring your own wealth – that’s not how it works.

        What does get in the way however is Congress’ ability to hand out favors, to pick winners. That’s what you should focus on instead of your misplaced angst towards class warfare.

      • Dylan McInnis

        No, but our economy and monetary system are debt enslavement. Look, I don’t agree with biased laws, but I also don’t agree with rich people controlling the US and it’s military while everyone else is barely scraping by.

      • Yourownfault

        Well the liberals want to tax the rich people and give it to everyone else “scrapping by” sounds like you like Obama more than you think

      • Dylan McInnis

        That’s not Obama’s agenda. You’re believing some media that preys on leftists and tries to convince them that the democratic party is full of leftists. It’s lies, and yes I am a leftist. I can still be libertarian and on the “left”.

      • Chunka Burninlove

        Perhaps, Nathan, but the wealthiest 1% earn 19% of the total income in America and pay over 37% of the total income tax. That blows your argument out of the water. And I would argue that BOTH numbers are as they should be. The wealthiest Americans, in terms of direct wealth, do NOT use that direct wealth to create more…they use investors money while their nest remains mostly untouched. Its the “middle rich” who use their own resources to improve a business, or a new start up venture, and its these people who are reaping the majority of deduction benefits in the current system. THESE are the people who risk more than any other segment. These are the people who drive growth in our economy: not the middle class laborers, not the lower income consumers! THESE are the people creating genuine widespread employment and prosperity, and these deductions greatly assist in allowing them to do so. Is this a perfect method? No, but no one to date has come up with a better solution. All that have tried have greater drawbacks.

        And perhaps we do not have a “trickle down” economy, but its definitely an economy driven predominantly by producers. We’re in the trouble we’re in now because many “leaders” over the last few decades have seemingly done everything in their power to drive out the producers from our nation….to vilify and revile them, to make “profit” a dirty word. Only soft brained imbeciles buy into that garbage….but sadly that seems to accurately describe the majority of the electorate.

      • Dylan McInnis

        Considering 80% of us are lower class, I find some fault with you saying that it’s the middle class that spurs development. Despite the idea of classes shoved in your mind, it’s the masses that spurs business and development. The splitting of the masses into classes is a control tool by the elite.

      • Chunka Burninlove

        Interesting. I’m still trying to figure out where it was that I claimed the “middle class” spurred growth. Read, dont skim, if you plan to reply to a post.

      • Chunka Burninlove

        I will give you this: its demand created by middle income consumers that prompts investment into growing business, because by and large thats your bread and butter. But, AGAIN, its the people who are NOT the “richest” Americans, but still quite wealthy (which is by no means “middle class”) who most heavily invest/spend in ways the push development and growth…..and these people, who DO get big tax breaks, are exactly the type investors that these breaks were designed to help. Without them you just plain would not see anywhere near the prosperity we enjoy in America.

      • Dylan McInnis

        I did read your post, sorry “Middle rich” which makes your point even more incorrect. If what you say is true, and it’s the middle rich that spur growth then we truly are doomed as those are decreasing in number.

      • Chunka Burninlove

        And let me also ask this, Nathan: just how many people do you employ? How many families’ paychecks do YOU directly sign? I’m more than willing to knock off some tax liability from the people who produce, even if it means the people who do NOT get less in entitlements.

      • Yourownfault

        8) He IS for the environment your facts just show how crazy in love with the environment he is.

        I think he is a poor implementer of his ideas both his clean energy and obama care has proven that. But at least he wanted to try to make positive change 🙂 so yes he is for the environment

      • Jim_in_Denver

        The “green energy” white stag… Building green energy devices uses toxic chemicals (see Solyndra) and creates toxic by-products. The Obama administration cut funding to Hydrogen Fuel Cell research that had already been in the works in favor of battery dependant green energy technology… batteries are toxic.

      • Yourownfault

        Good point. Once again Obama cares about the environment, makes an uneducated push for clean energy and does not realize the by product of solar energy.

        Much like his flaw with obamacare the guy does not have enough information before hand and makes poor choices.

        I am not arguing about the failure of it. I am only defending his intentions are good, he just has no clue what he is doing. And he should stop!

      • Dylan McInnis

        I like how you describe Obama’s failures as a mistake or something he forgot, when in actuality his cabinet and “administration” control everything he does. He chose the toxic batteries on purpose.

      • Daniel Ros

        Yes blatantly paying off campaign donors and making them rich on tax payers money was a good try. Nothing deeper to this story. Golly Jeepers Wally! I’m sure Obama was really ‘trying’ on this one. Just a great guy with a bad taxpayer funded gambling problem.

      • Yourownfault

        The amount of money that the candidates have to gather are extreme.

        Every company is a campaign doner. alot of them donate to both sides.

        Was this even a top 10 doner? You are just putting to things together and making another assumption and labeling it bad.

        It could be possible but your argument is not strong enough to change peoples opinions

      • Yourownfault

        9) Despite these very serious problems, things have gotten better for veterans overall since Obama took office. It’s not easy fixing such a deeply entrenched bureaucracy as VA, especially when two wars are concluding and politicians are too busy fighting each other to pass many laws. But by almost any measure, the situation for veterans and their families is demonstrably better now than it was under the previous administration.

        im not saying hes good,, but some messes are hard to cleanup

      • Jim_in_Denver

        Some messes are especially difficult to clean up when you’re not even trying. Also, nice cherry picking… the choice not to fund death benefits, the increase in costs to soldiers and the closing of monuments rest directly on his shoulders.

      • Yourownfault

        I dont think Obama knew that death benefits were halted and signed a bill to re-enact them. The increase to costs to soldiers has to do with Tri-care I believe and its to offset the increase in government costs Not that we need to add more to the deficit.

        And monuments? it was for a government shutdown, a couple weeks i dont think that’s a big picture argument that affects veterans that much, its was for a couple weeks and life moves on. The shutdown was a mess on both sides, mistakes were made and im not sure how much blame you can throw on him. I dont know if its related to improving VA.

      • Jim_in_Denver

        It is big picture in that it was a directed and spiteful action. It cost more money and required additional resources to close monuments which are unguarded after hours in normal circumstances.

        Unfortunately it went way beyond the monuments. In Yellow Stone National Park, for instance, there were Senior citizens and foreign tourists held prisoner in their hotel rooms by armed guards.

        Residents on Lake Meade(?) were evicted from their homes because they were on Park property.

        And the list goes on. These were unnecessary and deliberate acts against private citizens.

      • Yourownfault

        While I agree its messed up. you are leaving out some facts:

        No one was held prisoner, their were armed guards in yellow stone, and vacations were ruined but there were no guards at hotel rooms.

        Lake Meade has a law stating you cannot have this as your primary home, its a vacation home only. So its not like they were kicked out of their private home.

        I am not defending him, it was all messed up, i am not sure how much he was involved with ANY of this. In fact you can blame all politicians for the shut down, not Obama alone.

        Seriously, how much involvement was he in any of that?

      • Yourownfault

        10) I think the Iraq war was a blunder long before Obama pulled out troops from a country that made their own constitution and needed to take care of themselves.

        I understand people are not happy with drones, but 50 is a lot less to take out someone than if we had troops in there doing it. I think 200,000 innocents died in iraq. And if he is taking out people that will likely kill alot more than 50 people, is that justifiable?

      • Jim_in_Denver

        Are you really trying to justify the deaths of 50 innocent people?

        We never should have gone to Iraq in the first place, I’d venture to guess that she would agree – but that’s an assumption.

      • Yourownfault

        I am trying to justify the deaths of innocents. It is called collateral damage. The drone was created to minimize those. If it accomplishes that and reduces it dramatically compared to sending in troops, then I would say it is a success.

        We can have a separate discussion on should we attack terrorist leaders before they launch attack on our own people or thousands of others that is a whole different tangent.

      • Jim_in_Denver

        I understand the concept of collateral damage, but I also understand that War must be an act of last resort. Once begun it must be complete, it must be horrible and there must be clear goals and an exit strategy.

        Endlessly hunting down those who “plan violence” and killing hundreds potentially thousands of innocent people in the process is not just, it is not ethical.

        You are a million times more likely to be killed by a slip and fall in your bathtub than you are to be killed by a terrorist. And my guess is that if our country would cease putting it’s arrogant finger into the face of other nations that statistic would improve exponentially.

      • Yourownfault

        I agree with you, i never backed any of the recent “wars” My argument was just on the use of drones over soldiers.

        And if you are a million times more likely to slip and fall compared to a terrorist attack,

        you are a 300 million times more likely to slip and fall compared to a drone strike killing you.

      • Jim_in_Denver

        Possibly true, but the statistic doesn’t justify the unethical action of “pre-emptive” strikes on a non-state entity. If there were irrefutable proof of an impending attack by… oh let’s say Iran. They televised their intentions, hired mercenaries and amassed a fleet headed for the US, yes, wipe them out. Abdula the Goat Herder sitting in a shack surrounded by innocent family members planning and scheming? No. Not only is it unethical but that is proven to create more enemies than it kills. If you’re trying to prevent terrorist attacks you go after their means of war, you do not employ a digital lynch mob.

      • Yourownfault

        Jim, why don’t you run for office? I agree on this as well. The problem is, we don’t get to see the inelegance so we don’t get to know what evidence they had that made it worth the risk of innocent lives, all we can do is make assumptions

      • Jim_in_Denver

        Quite simply, because I know that the two party system we are saddled with is currently favored by the media.

        And quite honestly because on a discussion forum I can hit the delete key, in person I can bit a little abrasive.

      • Daniel Ros

        You think its justifiable to have a policy which directly increases terrorism? What would you do if someone used a machine to bomb the shit out of your child? How about the same country that openly supports a genocide against a similar group of people as you. Say you live in Cali and they are killing, enslaving, subjugating, and stealing the land of people in Alabama. How about that fact that our government uses the drug trade to finance CIA operations that steal resources from foreign nations to support big business? How about the fact that our country had intervened in democratically elected countries and overthrew their leaders and installed puppet, oppressive dictators?????? How fanciful you really are about the world. Time for a wake up call.

      • Yourownfault

        I believe in using technology to beat an enemy, if the government will use whatever means necessary to take someone down, i’d prefer the means that would reduce the risk of collateral damage. Now picking out 50 whole people being killed is a minute number that is inflated with emotions. It would be alot worse with missiles and troops on the ground.

        Now I am not sure if I agree with the war on terror, but its a grey area that both sides seem to believe that if they back down it will get worse.

        I play generalization, i don’t try to personalize things because I would then lose sight of the big pictures. As for the last half of your speech. I don’t understand your points and what it has to do with anything… can’t connect the dots, please elaborate the point and course of action you are trying to get at.

      • Yourownfault

        11) Education will always be a mess, i don’t think any president from either side will fix it. I wish they would just disband the unions and give parents an allowance to take their kids to whatever private school they want…

        But Obama has done nothing that I think is very notable to help at all. I agree with your points.

      • Jim_in_Denver

        The Department of Education is a relatively new entity… it got into full swing around 1980. It is remarkable that prior to federal involvement in education we managed to find ourselves at the top of the performance charts, led the world in technology and became the world’s super power.

      • Yourownfault

        Jim, I want to thank you for all the replies. Really good points. You don’t see these kind of genuine thoughts on most websites these days. And I think that we can agree on most of what you say such as this one. Government involvement has clearly been more of a hindrance. As stated here, taxes, and energy.

      • Jim_in_Denver

        You’re welcome. It’s nice to engage in discussions which do not revolve around red faced ad hominem attacks.

      • Chunka Burninlove

        Not at all surprising. The NEA (labor union, not the “Piss Christ” dipsheets) pretty much controls the DoEd, and has since Carter. The last thing those clowns concern themselves with is real education.

      • Yourownfault

        12) I don’t think we ever had a “best” president in our life times. But i don’t know if its the politicians fault, or is it our fault for relying on bias media, unreasonable expectations, and poor prioritization on issues. I think the whole country needs an overhaul on right and wrong..

        thanks for your post and reading my long rant

      • Daniel Ros

        Kennedy cause he was going to remove the power of controlling the nations money supply and return it to congress where it says it’s supposed to be in the constitution. The ‘media’ is bought and paid for. Guess what else comes with a lot of money? Psychiatrists, pubic relations, mass population propaganda. Go youtube Edward Bernays. They know how to control populations and make people like you think Obama is actually an elected president.

      • Miguel Leiva-Gomez

        Open debate is more than welcome on most libertarian fronts. Good to see you here, despite our disagreement. 🙂

    • Austin Petersen

      Hey dude, I definitely don’t censor comments. The only thing that gets flagged is bad language, even then I try and go in and approve them if they are sincere comments. We’re not conservatives or anything. I’m just one guy running a small enterprise at scale. Thank god for Tiffany Madison! lol

      • Yourownfault

        Austin I apologize, what happened was i had a bunch of links to source my arguments, unfortunately it did not take, i was really confused but figured it out

  6. Dat's Racis' (.com)

    Tiffany, I’m just here to ask you to marry me. That’s about it.

  7. capok

    Way closer to objective than that garbage you posted this rebuttal to. Well done.

    • Kneel

      I agree that this is MUCH closer to objectivity, although there are some signs of blatant subjectivity here.
      Nevertheless, thumbs up.

  8. Serr8d

    Nicely written. You were linked in the comments at protein wisdom..
    http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=51997

    Mr. Obama’s supporters are as obviously desperate as he is, to pen an Onion piece and get it posted at HuffPo.

    OFA shills are encouraging Obama’s impeachment. That’d be a mistake, giving him a rally point to gather his withering support. No, let him wallow in the defeat of his signature ‘Obama’ Care program without giving him the lifeline of impeachment. We’ll see his attempts to bring socialism to this Republic go down, because as we all know, socialism always fails. Because, unsustainable.

    Oh, and Cheers!

  9. Mario Lawrence

    Mrs. Tiffany Madison… why would you bother make a rebuttal to Mr. Lynch? You don’t pen a rebuttal to someone that says something like this:

    “If these 12 reasons aren’t enough to convince [you] that president Obama is
    one of the best presidents ever, then you are not thinking objectively!” – Matthew Lynch, Ed.D.
    brackets mine

    If someone doesn’t draw a certain SUBJECTIVE conclusion, then they aren’t thinking OBJECTIVELY?
    What kind of paradoxical verbiage is this?
    His statement doesn’t even compute…. and he’s supposed to have a doctorate in education (Ed.D). I mean… was his post serious? Was he paid to troll?

    Because if we’re trolling, then you only needed to send him THIS as a rebuttal:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hfYJsQAhl0

    On a more serious note, please don’t fail to cite your sources when you put out numbers. I enjoyed reading your rebuttal. =)

    • Tiffany Madison

      Thank you! I chose to write this because, frighteningly, the comments section at the Huffington Post seemed to reflect an overwhelming agreement with his article. This type of revisionist history of his legacy cannot go unchecked. I am glad you enjoyed and thank you for the video. I’m checking it out now. 🙂

      • Mario Lawrence

        Also, I apologize. I hadn’t noticed that nearly every statement you made contained a link to the article backing the claim.
        Pardon my goof.
        You performed flawlessly.

      • CRAVEN-BLUNTZ

        Mario and tiffanyhave the potential to be libertariansrepublic’s new “IT” couple…..

  10. Johnny V. Boykins

    Clearly, this “rebuttal” lacks the effort of conducting simple research. I know the word impeachment is your bread and butter, the red meat for your cause, but I simply want to point out that the articles and grounds for impeachment are explicitly prescribed. And there is a reason why impeachment has only been achieved twice in our nations history. The same goes for treason, which is the only law that is prescribed in our constitution. (STOP WITH THE BUZZ WORDS) How about you do your homework. With respect to the opinion editorial of one guy, lets face it is it really worth your cause’s time to come up with a poor excuse of a rebuttal when its just one guys opinion….

    • Austin Petersen

      Sorry friend, your wrong here. The article links to another article that is heavily cited on the grounds for impeachment for Obama’s crimes. Part 2 of this will be coming later this week.

    • VenturaCapitalist

      Try this on for size, junior:

      “He has, acting personally and through his subordinates and agents, endeavored to obtain from the Internal Revenue Service, in violation of the constitutional rights of citizens, confidential information contained in income tax returns for purposes not authorized by law, and to cause, in violation of the constitutional rights of citizens, income tax audits or other income tax investigations to be initiated or conducted in a discriminatory manner.”

      If it was good enough for Nixon it’s good enough for President 9-Iron.

    • Tiffany Madison

      Thank you for your comment, but please click on the word “impeachment” to explore the academic argument regarding the case for Obama’s crimes both foreign and domestic. Signing the National Defense Authorization Act which effectively revokes the right to trial of American citizens would constitute “high crimes and misdemeanors”, an impeachable offense. Authorizing the execution of 4 U.S. citizens without due process also constitutes as a “high crime and misdemeanor” as well as waging war without congressional approval. I find it rather curious that no matter how many hours of research are conducted, sources linked and claims supported, those that may disagree with an argument will always attempt to call it “lacking in simple research”.

  11. GTP

    There’s got to be an “anals of history” joke somewhere here…

  12. Mitchell Holland

    TIffany. Incredibly polite article to describe the current war against our citizens from within. I’m sure you could have written much more but held back to make your article ultimately more palatable. Keep up the great work.

  13. scottcrow

    Superb. I read that article yesterday and contemplated writing a rebuttal that would have been posted nowhere. Keep writing.

  14. Perso Nasplit

    why is it libertarians and some Rs and Ds can see this…..and not demand they stop?

  15. Guest

    So the rebuttal confirms to initial argument. It’s amazing this man’s paid for his mental abilities. While trying to refute something, he just admits it’s all true, then adds ‘ but-but-but it was for a good reason, if you’re a communist ‘.

    Good job, dweeb.