Republicans only: what was so bad about Obama?

[Fuzzy Bear Loves Christian Missionaries]

His very left-wing social agenda, some of which was defeated in courts.  But, he was probably the first president who fully embraced the idea of America as a post-Christian nation and went all-in on secular, left-wing values.

America never was a Christian nation

But we were, in my lifetime, a Christian-IZED nation.  A nation where the Christian influence of our Founding Fathers wes taught in schools and celebrated.  Where the Church, and the idea of God were held by people with a degree of reverance, even if they were not religious.  Where the Ten Commandments were the standard for public morailty, even among unbelievers.  Where, despite differences, when American prayed, they were, for the most part, praying to the same God.

Why it surprises people that we, as a nation, have experienced more disunity as we become less Christianized is a mystery to me.  That we, as a people, prayed to the same God was a unifying force.  Those days are gone, and they are not likely to come back, short of a miracle of God, Himself.  But let's not kid ourselves; the secularism today that is a secularism steeped in open hostility to the idea of a God that is, indeed, an Authority Figure, has not always been the dominant moral force in our society.  I'm old enough to remember when it wasn't.

[Fuzzy Bear Loves Christian Missionaries]

His very left-wing social agenda, some of which was defeated in courts.  But, he was probably the first president who fully embraced the idea of America as a post-Christian nation and went all-in on secular, left-wing values.

America never was a Christian nation

That's the principle that we disagree on.  I don't think the government should force adherence to any religion, but our laws should absolutely have a basis in Christian values.

How profoundly against the letter and spirit of the founding fathers ideals.

"Separation of church and state" is not in the Constitution.  The first amendment only protects religion from government's interference, but does not protect the government from religion's influence.  No faithful Christian would be willing to say "Jesus, look away" when they were voting on a piece of legislation.  Christians must take Christ with them everywhere they go.

So surely you would not protest if a Muslim politician wanted to impose Sharia Law using the same rationale?

I would certainly protest the idea that electing someone who believed that would be good for the preservation of individual liberties.

[Fuzzy Bear Loves Christian Missionaries]

His very left-wing social agenda, some of which was defeated in courts.  But, he was probably the first president who fully embraced the idea of America as a post-Christian nation and went all-in on secular, left-wing values.

America never was a Christian nation

But we were, in my lifetime, a Christian-IZED nation.  A nation where the Christian influence of our Founding Fathers wes taught in schools and celebrated.  Where the Church, and the idea of God were held by people with a degree of reverance, even if they were not religious.  Where the Ten Commandments were the standard for public morailty, even among unbelievers.  Where, despite differences, when American prayed, they were, for the most part, praying to the same God.

Why it surprises people that we, as a nation, have experienced more disunity as we become less Christianized is a mystery to me.  That we, as a people, prayed to the same God was a unifying force.  Those days are gone, and they are not likely to come back, short of a miracle of God, Himself.  But let's not kid ourselves; the secularism today that is a secularism steeped in open hostility to the idea of a God that is, indeed, an Authority Figure, has not always been the dominant moral force in our society.  I'm old enough to remember when it wasn't.

Fuzzy. I hate to break it to you , but we never, ever, " all prayed to the same God". Or even prayed at all. The reality is infinitely more complex than that, and far less saccharin than your misplaced nostalgia for your personal sects religious hegemony over the public sphere.

Maybe not 100%, but America, for the most part, believed in Jehovah God (the God of the Bible) as God overwhelmingly for most of our history.  That's not to say that there weren't theological differences, but we prayed to the same God.  This includes Jews, who, while not (for the most part) believers in Jesus Christ as the Messiah, believe in God the Father as being the same personage as Christians do.

I was alive during this period.  Please don't condescend to the level of telling me what America was like at a time when I was alive and you were not.  I grew up and watched this change before my eyes.

[Fuzzy Bear Loves Christian Missionaries]

His very left-wing social agenda, some of which was defeated in courts.  But, he was probably the first president who fully embraced the idea of America as a post-Christian nation and went all-in on secular, left-wing values.

America never was a Christian nation

That's the principle that we disagree on.  I don't think the government should force adherence to any religion, but our laws should absolutely have a basis in Christian values.

How profoundly against the letter and spirit of the founding fathers ideals.

"Separation of church and state" is not in the Constitution.  The first amendment only protects religion from government's interference, but does not protect the government from religion's influence.  No faithful Christian would be willing to say "Jesus, look away" when they were voting on a piece of legislation.  Christians must take Christ with them everywhere they go.

So surely you would not protest if a Muslim politician wanted to impose Sharia Law using the same rationale?

I would certainly protest the idea that electing someone who believed that would be good for the preservation of individual liberties.

As would the deist Founding Fathers if someone wanted Christianity enshrined into law.

Deism amongst the Founding Fathers is overstated.

[Fuzzy Bear Loves Christian Missionaries]

His very left-wing social agenda, some of which was defeated in courts.  But, he was probably the first president who fully embraced the idea of America as a post-Christian nation and went all-in on secular, left-wing values.

America never was a Christian nation

That's the principle that we disagree on.  I don't think the government should force adherence to any religion, but our laws should absolutely have a basis in Christian values.

How profoundly against the letter and spirit of the founding fathers ideals.

"Separation of church and state" is not in the Constitution.  The first amendment only protects religion from government's interference, but does not protect the government from religion's influence.  No faithful Christian would be willing to say "Jesus, look away" when they were voting on a piece of legislation.  Christians must take Christ with them everywhere they go.

So surely you would not protest if a Muslim politician wanted to impose Sharia Law using the same rationale?

I would certainly protest the idea that electing someone who believed that would be good for the preservation of individual liberties.

As would the deist Founding Fathers if someone wanted Christianity enshrined into law.

Deism amongst the Founding Fathers is overstated.

The first sentence of the first amendment literally says we cannot base our laws based on any religion .

The wording of the First Amendment's Establishment Clause was designed to prevent America from having an "official denomination" and to prevent some future Executive from establishing some kind of Church of America in the vein that Henry VIII established the Church of England.  It did not mean that Christian motivation could not be the basis of law and public policy.

[Fuzzy Bear Loves Christian Missionaries]

His very left-wing social agenda, some of which was defeated in courts.  But, he was probably the first president who fully embraced the idea of America as a post-Christian nation and went all-in on secular, left-wing values.

America never was a Christian nation

That's the principle that we disagree on.  I don't think the government should force adherence to any religion, but our laws should absolutely have a basis in Christian values.

How profoundly against the letter and spirit of the founding fathers ideals.

"Separation of church and state" is not in the Constitution.  The first amendment only protects religion from government's interference, but does not protect the government from religion's influence.  No faithful Christian would be willing to say "Jesus, look away" when they were voting on a piece of legislation.  Christians must take Christ with them everywhere they go.

So surely you would not protest if a Muslim politician wanted to impose Sharia Law using the same rationale?

I would certainly protest the idea that electing someone who believed that would be good for the preservation of individual liberties.

As would the deist Founding Fathers if someone wanted Christianity enshrined into law.

Deism amongst the Founding Fathers is overstated.

That one tenth as much as they're supposed desire to found a specifically Christian Nation is overstated.

We get it. You want one nation, Under a very specific God.

Their goal was NOT to found a theocracy, although some of the founders of some of the colonies got carried away with that idea at times.  (Overbearing theocracy is why Roger Williams fled Massachusetts Bay colony and founded Rhode Island and Providence Plantations.)

[Fuzzy Bear Loves Christian Missionaries]

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.

[Fuzzy Bear Loves Christian Missionaries]

His very left-wing social agenda, some of which was defeated in courts.  But, he was probably the first president who fully embraced the idea of America as a post-Christian nation and went all-in on secular, left-wing values.

America never was a Christian nation

That's the principle that we disagree on.  I don't think the government should force adherence to any religion, but our laws should absolutely have a basis in Christian values.

How profoundly against the letter and spirit of the founding fathers ideals.

"Separation of church and state" is not in the Constitution.  The first amendment only protects religion from government's interference, but does not protect the government from religion's influence.  No faithful Christian would be willing to say "Jesus, look away" when they were voting on a piece of legislation.  Christians must take Christ with them everywhere they go.

So surely you would not protest if a Muslim politician wanted to impose Sharia Law using the same rationale?

I would certainly protest the idea that electing someone who believed that would be good for the preservation of individual liberties.

didnt you say you would voe for sherrod brown some time ago?

I would consider voting for Sherrod Brown.

[Fuzzy Bear Loves Christian Missionaries]

It's hilarious to hear people defend the "christian values" of the past that were also used to justify human bondage, lynchings, violent jim crow segregation, the slaughter of millions of innocent poor people all around the world.

 Would Jesus deny somebody Healthacre, or was it written that he healed the sick?

 Would Jesus bomb poor children in Southeast Asia?

 Would Jesus teargas poor people fleeing government incompetence and oppression, or was it not said that his mother fled the tyranny of the ruler who wanted to kill him?

 Conservatives are not Christian by values, they are Christian by identity and constantly reject Christian values to instead embrace greed, violence against others, lack of the most basic compassion, and rigid judgement of others without understanding.

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.

Just exactly how can people say that they have "Christian values", yet advocate for abortion on demand, or advocate for the permissibllity of sexual activity outside of a man and a woman married to each other?  That's a mystery for me as well.  I get your point, and it's well taken (to a point), but I certainly don't see how abortion or homosexual practices are consistent with Christian vales, either (by Biblical standards).  Your point cuts both ways.  The issues I speak of are clearly not sanctioned in Scripture, yet people simply ignore that aspect of it.  "God is Love", this is true, and it is Biblical, but Love is not God.

Now I certainly don't approve of a good deal of the military interventions America has engaged in, but many of our involvements have been to come to the defense of people and nations being attacked by others (granting that many of these fights were not our fights). 

And, please, let's be real about the "aslylum seekers".  The "asylum seekers" of the present day made it to Mexico.  The rules of asylum are clear; asylum seekers have the right to seek asylum in the nearest safe country.  That country is Mexico.  You know that (or should know that). 

I certainly believe that the Body of Christ has lost its way (somewhat) over political issues, but that cuts both ways as well. 

[Fuzzy Bear Loves Christian Missionaries]

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.

(Apologies for any grammatical errors below; it's late, and I'm drowsy).

Surprisingly, though I find much to disagree with in your post, there's some I do agree with. Republican policies (note I say Republican and not conservative) toward housing, which were a continuation of the policies of Bill Clinton, such as the Community Re-investment Act and continually lowering mortgage standards for the sake of promoting "inclusive" home-ownership, proved to be a massive failure. The economy was in meltdown mode. Obama continued the Bush legacy of bailouts and ensured that the reckless behavior would continue. Sadly, both Republican and Democratic presidents buy the old Keynesian crackpot theories on how to prime the economic pump, thus my main issue with Obama's economic record is not the anti-recession measures he took in 2009. Rather, my issue is his record of raising taxes on job creators, unleashing regulatory agencies at an unprecedented rate, and his overall hostile approach towards business.

On the healthcare front, I sadly agree with you that the GOP often acts with disdain towards the uninsured. GOP opposition to Obamacare was based largely on a knee-jerk reaction against Obama and less out of an ideological commitment to a true, market-based healthcare reform. I will say though, I don't believe there was ever any way to "fix the flaws" in Obamacare. It's a program that operates against market forces, drives up premiums and hurts Americans. It's a fundamentally flawed program. That's not to say the system in place before was acceptable; it certainly wasn't. Sadly, neither party is truly interested in a free-market solution to the healthcare issue, which would increase competition, lower costs, and improve both the quality of healthcare and the accessibility of care for the poorest in our society.

Overall, Obama was a president who intended good things but failed. His efforts to "help the middle class" led to stagnation and low-growth. His Affordable Care Act was neither affordable nor improved the quality of care in our country, and abroad, he projected weakness. I stand by my original claims, not as someone who is just looking for reasons to hate Obama but because I truly believe and the record shows he failed at leaving the nation in good-standing.

I have long believed that the real objection to Obamacare from the GOP was the idea that Democrats would get credit for it.

Obamacare was a recycled Republican idea.  It's the same idea, for the most part, as Romneycare.  Indeed, it's roots are in an idea for National Health Insurance pushed by Republicans in the 1970s.  (I'm old enough to have watched a discussion of this issue in the 1970s, and what turned out to be Obamacare was similar to the plan advanced by the 1970s GOP.  IIRC, it was Bill Brock that was discussing the Republican Plan on that show.)

Had the GOP been willing to honestly partner with Obama on this issue, the plan would have worked better than it has.  While I supported Obamacare's adoption, at this point I believe that the insurance program of Obamacare will eventually collapse of its own weight, as the GOP wishes to see it fail.