What makes this more historic than the last one?

Barack Obama is the first president in more than five decades to win over 51% of the vote twice.

Barack Obama is the first president to draw over a million patriotic citzens to the inguration twice.

President Obama became the first president to use the word gay in an inaugural address.

Richard Blanco was the first Latino and the first openly gay poet to recite at a presidential inauguration.

Myrlie Evers-Williams, widow of Medgar Evers, was the first woman and the first layperson to deliver the inaugural invocation.

Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor, who swore in Vice-President Joe Biden, was the first Hispanic to administer an oath of office.

http://nymag.com/thecut/2013/01/obama-said-gay-and-other-inauguration-firsts.html

All inaugurations are historic. They are part of the historic record. Some might have more significance than others.

Healey - just because it's a "first", doesn't make it good, bad, right or wrong. It's just first. Lots of firsts are about as far from good as you can get.

PC,
"patriot" asked "What makes this more historic than the last one?"
"firsts" are the very definition of "historic".

In your eyes there are times when democracy is not the best? Or only when democrats win?

Irregardless, the majority voted this clown in office. We only have ourselves and the millions of EBT/People on the Dole to blame

I felt like my thoughts where just run through a blender.
Class war fair has been going on for centuries and Obama has not missed a beat in that rhetoric. If you cater to the masses winning is the result. Unfortunately if there are more unemployed that"s what will influence the out come.
When a small group of people own land and they have the same vote as the many of people that don't, who has control?

I could not care less about his race or ethnicity. I care more about the unemployment rate, the increase of people on food stamps from 35 million to 50 million, the huge increase in people on Social Security disability....

And if Romney had won, he would have been the first Mormon. I remember the first Catholic.
+
A true hero:
John F. Kennedy

On November 22, 1963, when he was hardly past his first thousand days in office, John Fitzgerald Kennedy was killed by an assassin's bullets as his motorcade wound through Dallas, Texas. Kennedy was the youngest man elected President; he was the youngest to die.

Of Irish descent, he was born in Brookline, Massachusetts, on May 29, 1917. Graduating from Harvard in 1940, he entered the Navy. In 1943, when his PT boat was rammed and sunk by a Japanese destroyer, Kennedy, despite grave injuries, led the survivors through perilous waters to safety.

"I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character. "

The fact that more has been said here in the feed back about the color of Obama's skin and not his character shows that we are no further toward accomplishing what MLK dreamed of today then we were then. The only real difference is that today we give minorities extra consideration because of the color of their skin instead of holding them back, that is not equality.

We are no better today then when Obama first took office, if anything we're worse. The debt that was bad under Bush has become worse under Obama and the Democrats who blasted Bush have now turned to defending the spending. The wars under Bush have become worse under Obama, we are now at a point were more innocent lives were taken under Obama's presidency then Bush's. Again the Democrats who blasted Bush have grown silent. The unemployment rate today is the same as when Obama first took office, again Democrats who blasted the Bush economy are now silent. The same people who blasted Bush I for "the read my lips" taxes remain silent as Obama lied about taxing those under $250k a year.

Time to put party aside, color aside and hold EVERYONE accountable to the same standards.

Mr. Barnes,
if you think in 2013 that minorities, and especially black people (or as Rick the racist Santorum would say "blah people") have special treatment and are not held to the same standards as others, then you need to come to terms with reality and with the history of this country.

Get yourself educated, and get your head out of that right wing echo chamber that you love so well.

In 2013, race matters in America, and we do not live in a "post racial" America, because racism still exists in the USA. The message of the Republican presidential campaign of 2013 has its roots in Lee Atwater's use of race to divide America. He readily admitted before he died long ago that this is how the Republicans operate their presidential campaigns. His protege Karl Rove, among others, have kept this "Southern Startegy", going.

And we can see how deliberate it was in the 2013 campaign to keep black people from voting by making them wait four hours to vote. That's just the tip of the iceberg.

One more thing Mr. Barnes, Obama did not lie about raising taxes for people earning under 250K.

Ray, I think it is you who needs to "get yourself educated".

A court case last year stated colleges CAN use race to allow one person to be admitted over another, if that isn't special treatment based on skin color then please define what is.
http://www.cnn.com/2012/10/08/us/scotus-college-admissions-race/index.html

The 2nd half of your post supports what I was saying, we are no better off today. We still look at the color of skin over quality of character. You can say that Democrats are better because they give exceptions instead of holding people of color back but reverse racism is still racism.

As for Obama's lies about taxes, here's his exact statement:
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/promise/515/no-family-making-less-250000-will-see-any-form-tax/
"I can make a firm pledge. Under my plan, no family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase. Not your income tax, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains taxes, not any of your taxes."

PolitiFact rates that a "Broken Promise", if it isn't a lie then what is it?

Yes Mr. Barnes, poor white people like you and me, we are the victims of prejudice.

The fact is that colleges use race as a determinate because minorities have been traditionally left out due to discrimination. Context is everything. Traditionally not allowed, so now colleges are making up for that, but what do you say? The heck with past injustice.

And Obama did not raise taxes on the middle class, so payroll taxes went up, but for the most part he kept his promise.

Your argument about Obama amounts to this; he didn't solve every problem, therefore he didn't solve anything. But he will save us trillions by ending the two wars.

You go through life with half-truths, with blinders on. You ignore discrimination against minorities, but whine about colleges now making up for that.

Your myopic view is laughable.

We are hardly worse off than under Bush. The stock market has recovered although jobs have not. Obama gets the blame for the trillions added to the debt due to war and bailouts of Wall Street, yet it was the Laissez Faire policies of Bush that caused the economic collapse, the deficit, and the trillions added in national debt under Obama.

Ray you are the best cure for depression. If you ride the train long enough it will eventually stop. I can hardly give credit for the stopping of the train because someone is on board.
Even Hillary voted for the war that Obama now takes credit for ending.

Ray,

"I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character. "

Whether you look differently at minorities to make up for the past or because you are discriminating against them, you are still treating people different because of skin color.

My argument about Obama is that he didn't solve ANY of our problems, and in most cases things are worse.
I was no fan of Bush and I've said publicly more then once he should have been tossed out after his first term, but Obama is worse then Bush ever was.
The debt that was bad under Bush is now worse.
The economy was bad under Bush, it's now worse.
The wars in the middle east have expanded.
GITMO is not only still open but Obama expanded it.
The Patriot Act was expanded under Obama instead of eliminated.
The hidden costs of ObamaCare are slowly starting to surface and we are now hearing the health costs are expected to continue to increase instead of drop.
Number of people on federal assistance has ballooned under Obama.

What is better today then before Obama took office? Please enlighten me. No rhetoric of what he might do or what he claims he'll do... what is actually better today then before he took office.

I can think of two accomplishments...
Bin Laden is dead
Gays can openly serve in the military

Mr. Barnes,
You are the master of spin.

Treating people differently because of the color of the skin is not the issue, past discrimination is the issue, and making up for past injustice, these are the issues. Your logic is like saying that European Jews cannot receive reparations from Germany because "taking" from someone is wrong.

Spin, spin, spin about Bush's consequences.

Policy has consequences. The consequences of policy under Bush resulted in economic collapse, warfare, and huge build-ups in national debt.

It was Obama's policies over the last 4 years that prevented total disaster.

Again Mr. Barnes, the half-truth is not the whole truth. Your spin might work in your right wing echo chamber, but not under the full light of the sun.

"You are the master of spin. Treating people differently because of the color of the skin is not the issue, past discrimination is the issue, and making up for past injustice, these are the issues."

Funny, I was the one who made the original point that more has been said here about skin color the what Obama has accomplished and you suggest I missing the issue? How can that be because I made the point of the issue. Are you suggesting you know better then me what I am actually talking about? That's an amazing accomplishment.

"Your logic is like saying that European Jews cannot receive reparations from Germany because "taking" from someone is wrong."

Look at Obama like a baseball player.

Jackie Robinson came along and broke down the color barrier. In doing so he took a lot of abuse but he didn't do it by forcing teams to hire X percentage of blacks, he did it by playing better then anyone else.
Today, Reggie Jackson, Rickey Henderson etc have gotten into the hall of fame based on what they proved they can do. When people watch a ball game they don't look to see if a team has the right mix of whites or blacks regardless of past history and how bad blacks had been treated.

When the rest of society catches up to baseball then we'll truly have accomplished what MLK dreamed.

"It was Obama's policies over the last 4 years that prevented total disaster."

Actually under Obama we've seen the slowest recovery ever in modern US history.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/louiswoodhill/2012/08/01/obama-wins-the-gold-for-worst-economic-recovery-ever/

You want to deflect and blame Bush, that's fine. I'm a constitutionalist, I'll agree with you that Bush was a bad president and made a lot of messes (although not everyone the Democrats attempt to blame on him are his fault) but Obama ran on the fact he would clean up those messes. He hasn't. He's done the worst job EVER recovering from a recession.

Democrats remind me of my kids when I walk in the room and there are toys everywhere. I tell them to pick them up and instead of doing it they sit there for an hour arguing about who actually made the mess. It doesn't matter who made the mess, it matters who is going to pick it up. Obama said he'd pick it up and so far hasn't, but he and Democrats have continued to argue about who made the mess in the first place.

So nice to blame one president, Bush!
Hardly all his fault.
http://www.moneynews.com/FinanceNews/Feinberg-Hagerty-Fannie-CFTC/2012/10/25/id/461525

Patriot,
Memory is short for most people.

There were article discussing the pending banking problem back in 1999, but who remembers that far back.
http://www.nhinsider.com/richard-barnes/2008/10/3/the-banking-problem-history-1999.html

The most Bush can truly be blamed for is not taking action for problems that were looming over him. But as I stated back to Ray, who made the mess is no longer relevant. It's over, the mess has been made. For argument's sake, if he wants to say Bush made the mess, fine... but Obama ran on cleaning it up. That and that alone should be the focus... cleaning up the mess. Once it's clean then we can discuss all we want about who made it in the first place.

Yes Mr. Barnes,
we have very short memories.

Under Bush in 2007 and 2008 America was bleeding jobs. The news had layoffs each month of 30,000 at Ford, 25,000 the next month at GM, etc...

You seem to forget that policies have consequences. This isn't just "blame Bush". The Laissez Faire policies of the last thirty years led America into economic collapse, and here you all are blaming the guy who cleaned up the mess for making the mess. But make no mistake, it was Obama that got the economy going again, and cleaned up the mess.

You say it's a slow recovery, but you admit, it is a recovery, no thanks to the Republican Congress who did everything to sabotage the economy, disdainful to give Obama one iota of credit.

According to its forecast that appears to have been based on discussions with experts,
a total of 3.4 million service sector jobs might move abroad by 2015.27 As shown in Table 1,
Forrester projected in 2004 that a total of 1.2 million services jobs might be relocated offshore
between 2003 and 2008. Of this five-year total, computer occupations might represent one of
every five offshored positions.
http://forbes.house.gov/uploadedfiles/crs_-_offshoring_and_job_loss_among_u_s__workers.pdf

Again the loss of jobs in this country has been bleeding out for decades.

That you don't understand how historic it was to elect (and then re-elect!) the first non-white-guy tells us a lot about you. No, we probably won't have quite as much hoopla about the first Hispanic or Asian, but this was a really big deal.

And we probably will have an equally-big celebration the first time a non-guy (i.e., a woman) gets elected President. *THAT* event will also mark a watershed in our country's maturation.

And who knows: someday, it will actually be *TRUE* that *ANYONE* can be elected President, not just the very-Caucasian Christian Men we drew from for the first several hundred years.

And they don't need a birth certificate or a college transcript.

Atlant, he is half white, just for the record. Hilary was all woman!

"we probably won't have quite as much hoopla about the first Hispanic or Asian, but this was a really big deal."

Too bad for the Hispanics and the Asians. I guess not all races are equal.

I know at least half of all Republicans are of below average intelligence, but even they should realize that the political divide and economic divide are perpendicular to each other, not superimposed over each other.(Sorry, there were a lot of big words in there, lets go simpler)

There are just as many Republicans receiving government assistance as Democrats.

Really, perhaps you need to get out more. Rather then speculate based on who you claim you know how about looking at FACTS?

http://super-economy.blogspot.com/2012/02/do-welfare-recipients-mostly-vote.html

NPR concluded that 72% of those long term unemployed supported Democrats.

Share of Recipients of each program that self-identified as supporters of Republican party in 2004-2007 Maxwell Poll:
Gov. Subsidized Housing 12%
Medicaid: 16%
Food Stamps: 20%
Unemployment Compensation: 21%
Welfare or public assistance: 22%
Disability benefits from government 25%

RCB, Your propaganda website misrepresents the NPR Data and I'm sure the rest as well.
From the NPR poll:
"More likely to support Democrats, less likely Republicans 10%"

Really, scroll back a bit in that same NPR poll...

56/57. Leaned Party Table #2 based on total LTU, LTPT and FTE
Total LTU
& LTPT LTU LTPT FTE
Democrat 37 42 30 27
Independent Lean Democrat 15 13 19 14
Independent/don’t lean 12 10 14 9
Independent Lean Republican 11 9 13 16
Republican 18 16 20 26

52% lean Democrat compared to 29% lean Republican, taken directly from the NPR poll.

Whether the original site I gave misrepresented or not, the facts still disprove your original statement that just as many republicans are receiving government assistance as democrats.

If you feel the sites I provided are bias or wrong, please present alternative facts for consideration. Otherwise just admit that your statement was factually incorrect.

Really??, who did they poll democrats or republicans from NY?

RCB,
From 72% to 52% in minutes, its a world record.
So barely 2% over half "lean" Democrats?

Sounds like you just confirmed that "There are just as many Republicans receiving government assistance(within the statistical error) as Democrats"

Sounds like you just confirmed that "There are just as many Republicans receiving government assistance(within the statistical error) as Democrats"

52% Democrat to 29% Republican is "just as many"?

Really, spin this any way you want but you made the original quote "There are just as many Republicans receiving government assistance as Democrats". Regardless of which link you use or how you spin the numbers my links disprove your claim and so far other then insults and spin you've done nothing to back the claim up that you made.

Also note that NPR's poll is talking about people on unemployment insurance, not government assistance. Employees and employers pay into a system that provides that insurance back to the unemployed..

In a year when the Republican representation was so embarrassing, a huge percentage of Republicans would refuse to admit there affiliation to the party. I would contend that those "allegedly independent" voters were just embarrassed Republicans.

RCB,
You have to agree that Steve Sully's implication that it was only Democrats on welfare is patently absurd.

Where was the mention of jobs in Obama's speech? Must have slipped his mind, eh? Or perhaps,and more likely, it's just not a priority for him. After all, pandering to green energy supporters and all those global warming scientists who survive on taxpayer funded research grants come first.

Proud Conservative:

"No single person can train all the math and science teachers we’ll need to equip our children for the future, or build the roads and networks and research labs that will bring new JOBS and businesses to our shores. Now, more than ever, we must do these things together, as one nation, and one people."

"The path towards sustainable energy sources will be long and sometimes difficult. But America cannot resist this transition; we must lead it. We cannot cede to other nations the technology that will power new JOBS and new industries – we must claim its promise. That is how we will maintain our economic vitality and our national treasure – our forests and waterways; our croplands and snowcapped peaks. That is how we will preserve our planet, commanded to our care by God. That’s what will lend meaning to the creed our fathers once declared."

"Together, we determined that a modern ECONOMY requires railroads and highways to speed travel and commerce; schools and colleges to train our workers."

-=-=-=-=-=-

So where did you get your line of bullsh.., err, "mistaken idea" that he never mentioned jobs?

By the way, if anyone here would like to actually *READ* what President Obama said (rather than be lied-to about what the President said or didn't say), you can find a transcript of the entire speech here:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/01/21/transcript-president-obama-2013-inaugural-address/

I'm sure plenty of video versions are also available on-line.

He mentioned "jobs" with the same emphasis and in the same context that he mentioned "roads". I'm not running out to start my car so I can drive on his roads and no one is updating his or her resume to stand in line for one of the jobs he has, will or plans to create. Obama should have, but did not, make jobs a priority for his second term in his inaugural address.

> Obama should have, but did not, make jobs a priority for his second term
> in his inaugural address.

Sez you.

I, and millions like me, think his second inaugural address was stirring, hitting all of the right themes. (And like it or not, he *DID* mention jobs; you were trying to mis-inform us.)

@Patriot: please change your screen name: you are the antithesis of a patriot with statements such as that. You have proved that you are a truther, a buyer and peddler of conspiracy theories, and you should be ashamed each and every time you see your hypocritical face in the mirror. A patriot? Far, far from it in your sad, sad, little world of hate.

essay, I am quite happy to be a Patriot and have no fear of criticism from people that made a career out of Bush bashing. I admit to being a republican and I also think Hillary would have been far superior than the current occupier of the peoples house.
*
Obama is a great talker not much else. You continue to support your party and I will continue to read your criticism of mine.
*
I wore the United States Military uniform and put my life on the line for the people of this country and my fellow citizens. Even though I may at times disagree with events and actions taken by the same I would put the uniform on again and fight for you.
*
History will vindicate our thoughts.

Sounds like today's America.

steve, you would move to China to save a dime? Have you ever been to China?

Now I know how come you support Obama Really??, Steve never said he would move to China!

Let the adults talk "patriot"

Now he has!
*
Never realized this thread was for "Adults."

The United States is still the world´s largest manufacturer, if you are doing it elsewhere, you're putting yourself at a disadvantage.

What?

I can still support a family with one job.

You are truly a very lucky adult!

All it takes is a little effort, you should give it a try some day.