Not that, just a man that would do what he said would. He didn't campaign on "no-precondition talks" with the Ayatollah (sound familiar yet?). The Iranians must have believed that too, why do any favors for the next administration of the Great Satan? Something you can't seem to explain away with your attempt at sarcasm.

I will give you an out, just say you saw it on Canadian TV, or MSNBC.

Actually, the accords signed that allowed the released was signed the day before.

In the end, Carter was the one who managed to get the hostage freed. In the end, Reagan did nothing in his 1st mandate but publicity stunts and lip service.

Didn't stopped him, however. He ended up being a great president. However, you decide to be harsher on Obama than you are on Reagan.

Uh, no.  That was"alleged" (and where the democrats coined the phrase that it was not the evidence that mattered, but the seriousness of the charges), but there was never any evidence to support it.  In other words, the democrats lied.

But you are partially right.  Once Reagan won, the Iranians backed down in a hurry!  I have said their leaders were crazy, ut I have never said they were stupid.

Actually, I have been good about keeping my tongue with Obama for the first year.  I did not vote for him, and for the most part he has done exactly what I expected he would do (I was not blinded by his teleprompter).  But I have never seen him as a smart man (not more than an ordinary politician), but I had hoped he was at least an honest man.

When I say that Obama has done worse than I expected, I am actually not talking about his policies, but his integrity.  The amount of lies and deceits the man has perpertrated since coming into office is worse than any newly elected president.  SHould he have the opportunity, he will make Nixon look like a saint.  And that is why he gets no quarter from me. 

I am not a nay sayer, but then I am very critical of thugs.  Obama has proven himself to be just a common ordinary thug (the first president to publically pick fights with major media outlets and individuals - that is beneath the office) and bully.  And for that he gets no respect from me.

But then I do have the luxury of not being in politics, so I do not have to be politically correct.  As for his lak of compromise, that was his choice.  He had the majorities and never sought to compromise.  It is not my attitude that hurt him.  It was his own arrogance and bullying that did.

No, Carter did no such thing.  The release of the hostages was Iran's final tweak of Carter's nose.  The knew they could because they knew Carter was a sop.  Reagan they did fear.  His overwelming election showed them that America and Reagan had had enough of their shenanigans.

Stupid people wait to be bloodied before they back down.  Smart people know how to read the signs and avoid an ass whooping.  Iran was stupid.  Crazy, but not stupid.

Funny how you claim that I cannot claim to understand american mentality, yet you seem to be able to read the Iranian's mind. Both in the past and right now. "Obama is not respected by the Iranians, North Korea". Pry tell me how I can acquire such mind-reading skill, so I could apply it on the USA.

Well having been an adult under both presidents (how about you?) I agree , Reagan didn't initiate a mandatory tax cradle to grave on every legal US citizen, Obama did (and isn't finished yet)...what's your point?

If I may interject here, it's call intuition and if comes from experience. If your lucky you'll end up with some. That's how you acquire it. Until then you'll have to answer reasoned responses with sarcasm.

Well, I am sorry if I don't take your "intuition" as face value, as you are clearly on one side of the political fence.

Good thing your not, right? Otherwise that sense of clarity that can only come from youth wouldn't be a factor.

Aaaaand Obama proceeded to cut taxes by 257B$, most of it on the private individuals.

Where? He didn't cut mine and I'm nowhere close to near his artificial $250K evil rich man barrier. It really don't count if you give with one hand and take away with another. Nice try though for not paying US income taxes. I'm sure the socialists here applaud the outside assistance.

It was part of the initial economic stimulus package (gosh! a democrat who thinks that cutting tax might help the economy!)

A very simply 500$ tax credit. The lowest-income earners won't really feel the fullest effect, but technically, everybody was supposed to pay 500$ less in taxes during 2009.

Ohhh, you mean the $9.61 a week that Obama let you keep out of your paycheck, that just end up reducing the amount of you tax return, or allowed you to pay in more if you were on the edge. Because you just paid less in, so owe more at the end of the year as the brackets didn't change, so it was more a loan of you own money. Yes, how generous, I remember the big laugh we all had about that last year. Maybe that is why it is so forgettable, and even Democrats aren't crowing about it. And your right, it didn't help people that pay nothing in Federal taxes or get a credit, even temporarily. Didn't help the people on fixed incomes, like social security, they got $250 ($4.81 a week. taxable) and no cost of living. Sounds awesome! Tell you want lets start another entitlement program, we can under fund....oh wait we just did. Thank you Mr. President.

Correction - I do not claim that.  You have a definitely different mindset from most Americans posting on this site (as you have pointed out - neither conservative or liberal - american wise), but I do not even pretend to know what is in Most American minds, much less foreigners.  However, the facts taht we do know, and the information leaked by Iran, and the democrat allegations all tend to support my hypothesis.  Plus human nature. Are you afraid of someone yelling at you from across the river?  or someone shooting at you from the corner?  The Iranians knew who would shoot and who would just yell.

Was the before or after the increase in Medicare taxes, Capital Gains taxes, SS Taxes, etc.?  Let me just answer that.  It did not include where he raised them, which meant it was a net tax increase.

You want to hear something that will make your blood boil?  YOu remember that cash for clunkers?  You get $4500 for a clunker right?  So you could sell the car for $3000, but 4500 is better right?  Not after taxes.  You are taxed on the 4500!  So you net lose!  not only do you no longer have an asset, but you wind up paying for giving it to the government to junk!