Newsweek Names Chicago Cubs as Best Sports Team of the 20th Century

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • no gnu taxes
    SBR Wise Guy
    • 08-18-11
    • 805

    #1
    Newsweek Names Chicago Cubs as Best Sports Team of the 20th Century
    Obama at No.10 – really?


    Despite having failed to stop let alone reverse the rising of the seas, Barack Obama has made Newsweek’s newest ten best presidents list, which gives readers a top ten of the chief executives since 1900. Newsweek, whose list unsurprisingly is dominated by liberal Democrats, gave this justification for selecting Obama in a caption in a photo slide:
    Picking a sitting president in a tally of the best is tricky – history hasn’t had time to put things in a more sober context. But the historic election of America’s first black president cannot be ignored. That a man whose ancestors included a slave could become the leader of a nation founded to some extent in slavery is as much an achievement for the country as it is a marker for Obama himself. Whether Obama stays or goes, his standing, as a fundamentally groundbreaking president will remain.
    So, Obama deserves to be on the list simply because he’s black?! Has affirmative action percolated into historical analysis? After all, such an honorable mention needs “a more sober context” with the passage of time to make an accurate and honest assessment. Historians often talk about “what could have been” if a former head of state had lived. You see this a lot with JFK, who is also on the list, and his 1000 daylong administration.

    Of course, JFK steered the world away from nuclear disaster in October of 1962, proposed an across the board tax cut, and pushed our scientific community to engineer a mission to the moon. By contrast, Barack Obama’s increased the national debt by $5 trillion, kept unemployment above 8 percent for over 40 consecutive months, and presided over the demise of the U.S. space shuttle program.

    Newsweek staffers are making the rounds to promote the list. Contributing editor Sir Harold Evans — he’s also the husband for Newsweek’s editor Tina Brown – appeared on yesterday’s Jansing & Co. program on MSNBC, where he said that the historians who formulated the list were looking for “active and effective” presidents who “enhanced” the ideal of what it is to be American.

    Not surprisingly, government-increasing liberal Democrats like FDR and LBJ, as well as slightly more moderate big government Democrats like Truman and Clinton dominate the list.

    Asked about why the list is predominantly Democratic in nature, Evans insisted that the Republicans in the 20th century were by and large uninspiring if not corrupt. In the process, he trashed free-market conservative Calvin Coolidge — who presided over an economic boom, low unemployment, and the reduction of the national debt — as unimaginative.

    If by lacking imagination, Evans means a mind that dreamed up new bureaucracies and larger federal government, he’s correct. But the results speak for themselves, even if they don’t excite historians.
  • TheRifleman
    SBR Hall of Famer
    • 08-30-12
    • 7284

    #2
    Comment
    • d2bets
      BARRELED IN @ SBR!
      • 08-10-05
      • 39995

      #3
      Well there are only 19 presidents since 1900 and this list puts Obama at #10. In other words, right in the middle.
      Comment
      • rkelly110
        BARRELED IN @ SBR!
        • 10-05-09
        • 39691

        #4
        You fcking hypocrite idiot Repukes. If Obama was a Repub you'd all be happy with him.

        Born poor, worked his way through school with honors and is now the POTUS. Straight out of the conservative
        hand book.

        Most of his work as pres is exactly what a Repub would do, except sucking off the rich or back patting.

        What part of the economy doing better than 4 years ago don't you understand? What, you want 5% unemployment
        in 3 years after a depression? You don't realize we are a world economy now? We have 1.5% growth with no
        help from the Repubs. If they weren't little 3 yo's we'd be at 3%.

        THINK for once, don't let Fox think for you.
        Comment
        • guitarjosh
          SBR Hall of Famer
          • 12-25-07
          • 5809

          #5
          Originally posted by rkelly110

          What part of the economy doing better than 4 years ago don't you understand? What, you want 5% unemployment
          in 3 years after a depression? You don't realize we are a world economy now? We have 1.5% growth with no
          help from the Repubs. If they weren't little 3 yo's we'd be at 3%.

          THINK for once, don't let Fox think for you.
          Yeah, because the market never could repair itself without the help of gov't.
          Comment
          • hockey216
            SBR MVP
            • 08-20-08
            • 4583

            #6
            Newsweek is so left-wing it's a joke. No wonder they named the cubs the best team.

            You kidding me? How many world series have they won?
            Comment
            • hockey216
              SBR MVP
              • 08-20-08
              • 4583

              #7
              Originally posted by rkelly110
              You fcking hypocrite idiot Repukes. If Obama was a Repub you'd all be happy with him.

              Born poor, worked his way through school with honors and is now the POTUS. Straight out of the conservative
              hand book.

              Most of his work as pres is exactly what a Repub would do, except sucking off the rich or back patting.

              What part of the economy doing better than 4 years ago don't you understand? What, you want 5% unemployment
              in 3 years after a depression? You don't realize we are a world economy now? We have 1.5% growth with no
              help from the Repubs. If they weren't little 3 yo's we'd be at 3%.

              THINK for once, don't let Fox think for you.
              Ronald Raegan inherited unemployment over 10%. He got the economy around in one term. In fact, he turned most of the 80's into a time of growth and prosper. He did it by cutting taxes for the rich and by cutting spending. It wasn't done through reckless government spending or through welfare. The growth has not been due to Obama's policy. And don't kid yourself. Just because the stock market rebounded does not mean things are back to normal. Unemployment is still very high. Things are still very bad. The Federal Reserve bank has unleashed the "monetary cannon" keeping interest rates at 0%-0.25%. Banks can basically borrow for free and profit even if they make less than 1% return on their money within a year. Fed has also bought Trillions of dollars in securities. Pumping Trillions of dollars into the economy should have done what it did. If we weren't in a recession, this would have caused inflation. The federal reserve has been inflating the prices in the stock market. It wasn't the GM bailout. It wasn't Obama's clean energy companies. It wasn't Obamacare. It wasn't anything that Obama did.

              The only think Obama did to help the economy in his first term was extend the bush tax cuts.

              Earnst & Young Study shows that if Obama raises taxes on the top 1%, we will see $200 Billion dollar reduction in domestic production and 700,000 more people will loose their jobs. These are not just rich people. These are middle class people that will be losing their jobs. There will be a reduction in production, and thousands of people will lose their jobs in every single one of all 50 states.

              Obama is going to put 3/4 of a Million more people out of work with another reckless decision.

              Taxes, even on the rich, cause markets to underproduce.

              Here is the study. Read it for yourself. Earnst & Young is a consulting company that does econometrics and analytics. They have a very good reputation.

              EY_Study_Long-run_macroeconomic_impact_of_increasing_tax_rates_on_high_income_taxpayers_in_2013_.pdf
              Comment
              • no gnu taxes
                SBR Wise Guy
                • 08-18-11
                • 805

                #8
                Born poor,
                In Hawaii, supposedly, to the parents of world travelers? Doesn't sound very poor.

                worked his way through school with honors
                Worked? Doing what? All he's talked about was smoking dope and goofing off. With honors? You seem to know more about his grades than anyone else does.


                now the POTUS.
                Well, nobody ever went broke unerestimating the intelligence of the Dem voters.


                Straight out of the conservative hand book.
                Wrote wrote THAT handbook? Saul Alinksky or Frank Marshall Davis?

                Most of his work as pres is exactly what a Repub would do, except sucking off the rich or back patting.
                Would that be mostly continuing the policies of Bush? Didn't realize you loved No. 43 that much.

                What part of the economy doing better than 4 years ago don't you understand? What, you want 5% unemployment
                in 3 years after a depression? You don't realize we are a world economy now? We have 1.5% growth with no
                help from the Repubs. If they weren't little 3 yo's we'd be at 3%.
                You can continue on with this broken record BS if you want, but by any historical standard, the recovery should have been much, much more robust if NOTHING had been done, much less blowing a trillion dollars. Family income has DROPPED 10% since the recession ended. What help from the Repubs do you suggest -- allow Obama to absolutely waste another trillion?

                THINK for once, don't let Fox think for you.
                You seem to be a lot more familiar with Fox than me.
                Comment
                • rkelly110
                  BARRELED IN @ SBR!
                  • 10-05-09
                  • 39691

                  #9
                  Sorry, went on a rant. Full moon.

                  The Reagan days are over and the Dems worked with him. Just imagine if the Repubs worked with Obama, maybe
                  we couldv'e turned it around like the Reagan days.

                  Obama inherited a much worse mess than Reagan. Yes, the economy is turning around by itself, but some things
                  needed bailed out to prevent a huge disaster.

                  There's a world economy now. Notice how the Euro affects our markets?

                  I'm saying, Obama is more conservative than you guys give him credit for. Bush's policies didn't work, let's try
                  Obama's. When he tries, he's blocked. Brings up Repub ideas, blocked. Will the Repubs pull the same crap in
                  the next 4 years? Yes. The country will be crap for another 4 years, unless they start to (grow up) put country 1st.
                  Comment
                  • no gnu taxes
                    SBR Wise Guy
                    • 08-18-11
                    • 805

                    #10
                    Originally posted by rkelly110
                    Sorry, went on a rant. Full moon.

                    The Reagan days are over and the Dems worked with him. Just imagine if the Repubs worked with Obama, maybe
                    we couldv'e turned it around like the Reagan days.

                    Obama inherited a much worse mess than Reagan. Yes, the economy is turning around by itself, but some things
                    needed bailed out to prevent a huge disaster.

                    There's a world economy now. Notice how the Euro affects our markets?

                    I'm saying, Obama is more conservative than you guys give him credit for. Bush's policies didn't work, let's try
                    Obama's. When he tries, he's blocked. Brings up Repub ideas, blocked. Will the Repubs pull the same crap in
                    the next 4 years? Yes. The country will be crap for another 4 years, unless they start to (grow up) put country 1st.
                    The Reagan days are over and the Dems worked with him. Just imagine if the Repubs worked with Obama, maybe
                    we couldv'e turned it around like the Reagan days.
                    This is why I use sources rather than type. Have you read, or even heard about Bob Woodward's new book? I asume you know who Wooward is right, and his history, because I really don't want to explain it.

                    I'm saying, Obama is more conservative than you guys give him credit for. Bush's policies didn't work
                    Do you even know what Bush's policies were? Actually, Obama has continued most of them. Bush initiated TARP (not to give him credit or blame -- either Obama or McCain would have done the same).

                    What I am saying is that Bush was far more liberal than he was ever acknowledged to be among liberals (conservatives hated him for this) and far more than conservatives wanted him to be.

                    Obama has had to continue Bush policies because he was advised he HAD to.

                    Look, the issue is the future, I'm not sure of what you expect from Obama for 4 more years. "Fired up, ready to go," please.
                    Comment
                    Search
                    Collapse
                    SBR Contests
                    Collapse
                    Top-Rated US Sportsbooks
                    Collapse
                    Working...