Republicans only: what was so bad about Obama?

[Slander and/or Libel]

Barack Obama's Presidency was failure.

On the domestic front, his anti-growth approach to the economy, which consisted of increased taxes and unchaining regulatory agencies ensured that his presidency would be one marked by anemic economic growth. The fact that his economic recovery after the Great Recession was the weakest in 70 years is a testament to this fact. His largest achievement, Obamacare, has been a failure. From causing millions of Americans to lose their insurance, to the economically harmful employer mandate/regressive individual mandate, and skyrocketing healthcare costs, Obamacare failed to improve the American healthcare system.

On the international stage, from ignoring the threat of Russia, to putting distance between us and Israel, and engaging in the ineffective/dangerous Iranian Nuclear Deal, Obama's approach to foreign policy was a record of weakness and naivete.

I do find this an unfairly harsh judgement.

Obama took office in the wake of something that was more than just a recession; it was an economic event that caused longstanding structural damage to our economy that was caused, unquestionably, by Republican economic policies that sought to create a "boom" economy that was fueled by inflated housing values, and not by real growth in the economy.  It was Republican policies that caused housing values in America to soar far out of proportion to what working people actually earned; a certain amount of the housing crash was an inevitable correction that the Republican economic policymakers of the Bush 43 administration should have known would occur. 

I personally believe that the main problem with Obama's Stimulus policies was that they didn't go far enough.  In that regard, the GOP is to blame, because they did not want Obama to succeed.  They wanted more of the same that created the problem.  If the Democrats have become a party which worship secularism, the GOP has become a party that worships capitalism to the point of Social Darwinism.

The insurance that Obamacare caused people to use was, for the most part, junk insurance with inadequate coverage; something that people could present to get them into the hospital in a pinch, only to hear soon afterward that they aren't covered.  The GOP has long governed America in a manner where they have been unconcerned for the masses without health insurance, or who were plunged in to medical bankruptcy due to catastrophic illness; they have opposed any and all proposals that included universal coverage.  And they have refused to consider legislation designed to fix the flaws in Obamacare; they WANTED it to fail and WORKED for it to fail.  And they have no plan that will, indeed, ensure healthcare access to all that will not bankrupt people.  (I thought, at one time, that Trump actually had some ideas that would fix the flaws in Obamacare, but he's apparently cast his lot making deals with the Freedom Caucus, which is not what I had in mind when I voted for him.) 

Obama had his flaws.  His foreign policy failed to extract us from any number of foolish foreign entanglements, and some of his accomplishments don't look as good in hindsight (although the Iran Nuclear Deal WAS a positive on balance).  And he wrecked the Democratic Party; the Clinton's takeover of the party apparatus was accomplished, in part, because of Obama's neglect of the party, itself.  I certainly didn't enjoy the social liberalism, not at all.  But the GOP Congress dealt with him with ill will, unconcerned for the common weal.  Their whole goal was to work to see him fail, and they were pretty open and honest about that.  I abhor "The Resistance" Congress to Trump, and I view the concept as un-American, but a certain amount of that is a response to "The Obstruction" that the GOP presented Obama.  There was never ANY good will extended Obama by Republcans.  None at all.  They wanted him to fail so they could get back in power, and they didn't really hide it.  In that regard, Obama may have been better off being more like Trump; giving more crap to his opponents that he got from them. 

I suppose my assessment of Obama is mixed because of my mixed outlook (economic liberal, social conservative) on issues.  He's not Mount Rushmore material, but the harsh judgements on his Presidency by Republicans are purely partisan.  Compromise and achievement on the part of Republicans during the Obama years would have been wonderful for America, both practically and socially, but Republicans were no better at putting the whole of America ahead of partisanship then than Democrats are now.

You and I have had our disagreements, some sharp, so I wanted to make sure to give credit where credit is due: I agree almost completely with the bolded sections above. The only caveat I would make is that while Obamacare policies sometimes give inadequate coverage, I think they largely either give less inadequate coverage than the system that was in place before the ACA, or give at least some (though not enough) benefits to people who previously couldn't get any coverage at all. I think the ACA is extremely flawed, but also genuinely helps people on balance, and represents pretty much the maximal good that could be accomplished at the time. If the veto point dems hadn't insisted on making the law worse, or any Republicans had decided to cooperate constructively, it could have been much better.

[Slander and/or Libel]

Why should Republicans get have all the fun?

Obama presided over a slow economic recovery. People lived through nearly a decade of higher poverty and unemployment than they what they had been accustomed to previously. Anyone transitioning between occupations or graduating from school had a rougher time moving into a new career. Why should they have been happy with that?

He held no one to account for the invasion of Iraq, the financial crisis, or the horrific federal response to Hurricane Katrina.

He repeatedly sought reconciliation with Republicans who showed no interest in working with him. His politics were a poor fit for the time, and a disaster for most of his party, because they sacrificed teamwork and political effectiveness for Obama’s personal popularity - which remains extremely high even as he floats from one billionaire-funded junket to another as he enjoys his post-presidential ascent into the global upper class.

He passed a health care bill that violated virtually every major promise that he had made on the subject while campaigning, from his opposition to the individual mandate, to his pledge that the typical family would see health care costs decrease, to “if you like your insurance, you can keep it.” Even the goal of truly universal coverage was, at best, a mirage, and, at worst, an enormous lie.

He failed to remove US troops from Iraq and Afghanistan and committed the country to more foreign conflicts – especially once his administration realized how much drone warfare relieved domestic political pressure. If there is such a thing as an “Obama doctrine,” it ought to be that the political cost of foreign civilian casualties can be kept extremely low if members of the US military are out of reach of physical harm.

He chose his priorities poorly. Health care took precedence when his focus should have been on economic recovery and fixing the financial system that caused the 2008 crisis. Austerity took priority when his focus should have been on rising rates of poverty and underemployment. He wanted to cut Social Security and Medicare when he should have been talking about expanding those programs. He did nothing meaningful to relieve the cost burden of housing, education, or health care.  His climate change policy was a bad joke – a Potemkin Village of pledges, benchmarks, and facile rhetoric meant to achieve nothing but the appearance of seriousness in the face of a problem that mainstream politicians have no idea how to address.

That’s a start, anyway.

I'm not just trying to play defense here, but how much of that stuff represents Obama's policy preferences, and how much represents what he could accomplish given the lay of the land in Congress, especially after 2010? The prioritization of health care was largely his choice, but it's not clear to me that Congress had an appetite for more stimulus or more financial reform than they passed, even if it wasn't enough. I'm not sure how/if Obama could have done more (with the exception, of course, of holding the heads of the institutions that caused the crisis accountable, to prevent the moral hazard in the first place).

[Slander and/or Libel]

It was the more Christian elements of America that were the driving force of the Abolitionist movement.  It was also the more Chrsitian elements of America that made the Civil Rights Movement a success.

There is truth in what you’re saying here, but you’re overstating it and also leaving out important context. It is certainly true that there was a Christian character to much of the abolitionist movement, but your assertion that more Christian meant more abolitionist is both unsupported and also contradicted by the often extremely Christian character of slaveholders. Likewise with opposition to the Civil Rights movement. I think most of those who opposed civil rights for black people would be affronted at the assertion that they didn’t represent the more Christian elements of America.