Worst President, Revised

Matt and I have been busy and we rather blame Obama for this – keeping up with the ongoing disaster has been a trial, but we’ve been willing to do the work:

As Barack Obama’s presidential failures keep adding up, remembering them all can be a challenge. Matt Margolis and Mark Noonan are compiling everything you need to know about the presidency of Barack Obama (so far) into one book. Soon, you can easily find all the information that was ignored by the media and that Barack Obama doesn’t want you to know about.

Did Barack Obama really save this country from another Great Depression? Did he really improve our country’s image around the world, or unite America? What about the new era of post-partisanship and government transparency? Did he really expand health coverage while lowering costs and cutting taxes?

The answer to all these questions—and the facts to back them up—are coming in a new book later this year.

Please go to our book website and sign up for e-mail updates. This will allow you to know precisely when the new edition is released to the public. If you purchased the original, rest assured that this is expanded with a great deal of new information. As bad as you think Obama has been, you don’t know the whole story until you’ve read The Worst President in History: the Legacy of Barack Obama.

Advertisements

4 thoughts on “Worst President, Revised

  1. Cluster February 27, 2015 / 8:48 am

    I think we can honestly say – worst administration. Here’s the latest from Benghazi proving that yes, Hillary lied:

    From the very first moments of the terrorist attack on the U.S. compound in Benghazi on September 11, 2012, then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and her top aides were advised that the compound was under a terrorist attack. In fact, less than two hours into the attack, they were told that the al-Qaeda affiliate in Libya, Ansar al-Sharia, had claimed responsibility. These revelations and others are disclosed by a trove of e-mails and other documents pried from the State Department by Judicial Watch in a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit.

  2. tiredoflibbs March 2, 2015 / 1:15 pm

    Just came from the other blog… and our leftist “buddy” cappy had this to say:

    ” Neither Mark or Matt have any idea about how to research or evaluate sources.”

    Oh, that’s rich. After doing a simple search on this blog, cappy has used (when he actually takes a stand and includes one, which is rare): Rolling Stone, huffington post and more frequently, Wikipedia (snort!).

    • M. Noonan March 3, 2015 / 12:55 am

      Well, if he’s referring to the book, we have sources running from Counter Punch on the left to National Review on the right and everything in between. We’ve been exceptionally careful during the revision because we know that if the book becomes the success we hope it will, then liberals will rip into it like monkeys on a cupcake…now, to be sure, if they find no flaws, they’ll just make up things…and, of course, just ignore any point we make which is unanswerable. But Matt and I didn’t want to leave any easy openings for the critics…I don’t know how many source notes we have, exactly, at the moment, but it is an astounding total (943 – and we’re not quite done). Everything we say that happened, happened. We took care, also, to not get definitive when the definitive story simply is not known – in the Benghazi entry, for instance, we make no claims about what Obama may or may not have done during the actual event, because no one other than Obama and his closets aids know, and they ain’t telling. Its a bad enough thing as it is, anyway – we found no need to sharpen the stick.

      UPDATE: I was just reviewing a bit…geesh; seriously, anyone who wishes to take exception to the facts in the book would have to be the most partisan hack the world has ever seen. Really; we’re solid…heck, a lot of times it is Obama’s own Administration which is the source for facts and quotes. Thing is, liberals won’t read it because they simply won’t want to.

Comments are closed.