If he knows they are lies and considers himself a patriotic American [based on his obvious jingoism], what is the justification for his continuing to support these lies? What would he stand to gain or lose?
No, joe, everything is true, just because you don't want to recognize it doesn't mean it isn't. CBO numbers, government numbers, Obama and the your Democrats have tippled the deficit numbers in one year, and have done nothing to stop the hemorrhaging of jobs from the private sectored, the only real job growth has been in the government, and that is paid for by the Taxpayers of this country, at the cost of money to invest in hiring in the private sector were the money to pay the oppressive liberal tax program is generated. Federal spending has risen by 18% in one year under the Democrats and Obama, and they want to claim a 2.2% growth in the economy? We are 15.8% behind by those numbers, and the tax revenues are falling like a rock, why? again because Obama and your Democrats have done nothing to create jobs in the private sector where the Taxes are paid, and the private economy is not doing any new hiring because of the increase in taxes that Obama and your Democrats have increased on them, because You and Your Democrats, and You hero Obama thinks they are the Rich and deserve to be soaked in the name of wealth distribution. You want to brag about FDR? Well guess what, His vaunted Social Security Program from the start made sure that any money paid in by the Tax Payer didn't belong to to them in any kind of a lock box, once sent in it was the Government, and the Government has taken every last Dollar, Quarter, Dime, Nickel, and Penny, out of Social Security and spent it on Pork Barrel Sweet Heart Deals. What is left in the Social Security Fund? Promisory Bonds? from a Government that is broke and spending money that our great, great, great, great, great, grandchildren don't have, yes tell me how great Your Democrats are, CBO numbers..... http://news.morningstar.com/newsnet...J/201001071910DOWJONESDJONLINE000640_univ.xml The deficit reached a record high of $1.4 trillion in fiscal 2009, more than triple the previous high set just the previous year.
Don't look now but your nose is growing Buffalo Roam. The US economy started loosing jobs in 2007, becoming progressively worse each month, and reaching a zenith in March of 2009 with 700k jobs being lost per month. When you loose that many jobs, it is going to have an enduring effect on the employment rate that is going to last more than a few months and even years...duh. And unders who's administration were those jobs lost? George II and his merry band of Republicans were in control that entire time. It is going to take time to get unemployment numbers back down. It is going to take longer to get those people employed than it did to get them unemployed. Job losses under the Democrats are now much improved, back to the initial levels seen in 2007. Who was it the double the federal debt? George II and his merry band of Republicans. You complain about the huge defict in the first year of the Obama administration, when did Obama's and the Democrats first budget kick in? Can you say October, 2009? So for the first 3 quarters of 2009 we were operating under a Repbulican budget. By the way, which administration committed the nation to fighting wars without paying for them? Which administration expanded entitlements more than any administration prior to FDR without funding them, can you say George Bush II and his merry band of Republicans? And now you have the unmitigated gaul to lay that at the feet of Democrats! George Bush II and his merry band of Republicans ran the economy into the ground necessitating a massive stimulus and you want to lay that blame on the Democrats too....what cowards. George II and his merry band of Republicans failed to regulate and enforce existing laws which caused the financial markets to melt down. And you want to blame those that are fixing the problem versus those that created the problems. What you are your merry band of Republicans have done is killed the economy. When the paramedics arrive to try and save the economy you give the smoking gun to the paramedics and when the cops show up you tell the tell them the paramedics killed the economy. Hopefully the cops are smart enough to see through your story.
Yes, and the Democrat took the reigns of Congress, both House and Senate, in 2007 and blocked any reform efforts on Fannie and Freddie, and started spending on pet projects. Remember you Government from High School, joe? The House writes the spending bills, it is the House who allocates the Money, and in 2007 the House and Senate returned to Democratic Control, and the Democrats froze out the Republican from the committees, and went behind closed doors and started cutting sweet heart deals to each other, and RINO, and spending money we didn't have. Starting long before 2007 the Democrats, Barny Frank, Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and Christopher Dodd, and the Democrats were defending the financial practices of Fannie and Freddie like a mother bear defends her cubs. In 2005 the Restoring American Financial Stability Act, was passed to reign in Fannie and Freddie excess, The bill gave a regulator power to crack down, and would have required the companies to eliminate their investments in risky assets. But who came riding to Fannie and Freddies rescue? The Democrats, on a party line vote, blocked the Bill for ever coming up for a vote. Dodd, the Senate Banking Committee chairman....$165,000. Obama..... $125,000 Clinton.....$75000 Frank.....$40,000 All from Fannie and Freddie, a cheep buy if you ask me, as the boards of Fannie and Freddie took home million dollar bonuses during that time. You should also keep in mind while Democrats point fingers, Senator John McCain was one of the three cosponsors of S.190, the bill that would have averted this whole mess,
I think David Green at commondreams.org says it best, here is a short snip... The rest of the article has a fairly comprehensive look at the failures and some methods of improvement, however I doubt Obama could appreciate any of them.
Liberals just love to pile on insults and don't even consider whether they make sense. To a Liberal, Conservatives are always either complete idiots or evil geniuses, often both at the same time. And they're always liars too, even when lying would serve no purpose. As to the thread topic, The Financial Times has a nice piece on the subject: At the end of Barack Obama’s worst week since taking power a year ago, the US president’s fortunes look set only to deteriorate over the coming days. Following the shock defeat of the Democratic candidate in Massachusetts on Tuesday, a move that deprived the president of his 60-seat super-majority in the Senate and left his legislative agenda in tatters, Mr Obama has just four days to reboot the system. The US president had originally delayed next week’s State of the Union address to Congress in the hope he would get his signature healthcare reform bill enacted in time. That prospect, already waning, was killed dead by the voters in Massachusetts. A growing number of Democrats believe the nine-month effort could collapse altogether. The death of the healthcare effort would rob Mr Obama of what he had hoped would be the centrepiece of his first State of the Union message. “It now looks extremely difficult, if not impossible, to get anything resembling a broad healthcare bill out of Congress,” said Scott Lilley, a senior fellow at the liberal Centre for American Progress, the think-tank that is closest to the White House. “In his State of the Union, Obama has to slim down his ambitions. It should be short and simple and focus on jobs.” However, even a more modest agenda looks tough for Mr Obama now. Believing their strategy of total opposition was vindicated by the voters last Tuesday, Republicans are in even less of a mood to co-operate with Democrats than before. The difference is that with 41 seats in the Senate they are in a position to block almost anything Mr Obama proposes – including the Wall Street regulatory measures he announced on Thursday. “Obama has to decide whether he wants to be a transformational president, which looks optimistic at this stage, or merely an effective president,” says Bruce Josten, head of government affairs at the US Chamber of Commerce, which has spent tens of millions of dollars opposing healthcare. “My advice would be that he pick up the phone and ask for Bill Clinton’s advice on how to recover from a situation like this.” Nor can Mr Obama rely on unity within his own party, which has been in disarray, if not panic, since Tuesday. For example, Mr Obama’s more populist tack on Wall Street re-regulation failed to attract endorsement from Chris Dodd, chairman of the Senate banking committee, even though he was present when Mr Obama made the announcement. Others, such as Tim Johnson, Democratic senator for South Dakota and a senior member of the banking committee, were already opposed to elements of Mr Obama’s regulatory proposals including the plan to establish a consumer financial protection agency. Worse, most people do not think Mr Obama can even command unity within his own administration on the Wall Street proposals amid growing speculation about whether Tim Geithner, the Treasury secretary, can survive in his job. Mr Geithner was conspicuously sidelined during Thursday’s announcement by the presence of Paul Volcker, the former Federal Reserve chairman, who lent his name to the push to rein in Wall Street banks. The speculation about Mr Geithner is only likely to grow. “The Obama proposals were clearly politically motivated and came from the White House not the Treasury,” says a Democratic adviser to the administration, who withheld his name. Finally, there is increasingly open Democratic disaffection about the way Mr Obama is managing relations with Capitol Hill. Many believe that Rahm Emanuel, Mr Obama’s aggressive chief of staff, served Mr Obama badly by persuading the president that his election was a transformational moment in US politics that gave him the opportunity to push through long-cherished Democratic goals, such as healthcare reform. In fact, exit polls from Mr Obama’s election showed that almost two-thirds of the voters cited the economy as their chief concern, with fewer than one in 10 mentioning healthcare. Mr Emanuel is also perceived to have mishandled the day-to-day logistics of getting healthcare through Congress. By leaving the scripting of the details of the healthcare bill to Democratic leaders on Capitol Hill, the White House openly courted the risk of chaos. Tellingly, in his victory speech in Boston on Tuesday, Scott Brown, the new Republican senator, cited voter disdain for the sight of lots of “old men” on Capitol Hill bickering over healthcare reform at a time when their priority was jobs. “I haven’t seen Rahm Emanuel except on television,” Jim Pascrell, a Democratic lawmaker from New Jersey, told Politico, the news website, on Friday. “We used to see him a lot; I’d like him to come out from behind his desk and meet with the common folk.” In short, Mr Obama’s nightmare January could easily slip into a nightmare February. “Unless and until the president changes the way his White House, works, things are going to continue to go badly for him,” says the head of a Democratic think-tank. “Heads still have to roll.”
I believe it goes like this: The leaders (politicians, etc) are evil geniuses, the followers (their voters, activists etc) are complete idiots. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
More Republican nonsense and wholly unrelated to the issues at hand. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac did not create the problem and doing anything to them would not solve the problem. Any respectable economist or business man would laugh you out of the room for even suggesting same. The reasons for this crisis have been fully explained to on many occasions. Yet you blindly go back to the same old nonsense about Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. It is really ludicrious. By the way, those numbers you cited came mostly from individuals working for those companies. Kind of like my employer being credited for decisions I make as a private individual...in a word STUPID. As for a lesson in government, you need to know the role of the president. He is the guy who leads government and must sign all bills into law. And even now, even though the Dems have majorities in each house, they do not have enough power to run through their legislative agenda because the Republican Party has choosen to be the party of NO. And one needs a super majority in order to pass legislation through the Senate. Something the Democrats do not have and the reason for our current troubles.
Hay joe I thought you claimed to be a small business owner, with years of experence? So whats this? Now yes, it was the actions of the Democrats in protection, and sweet heart deals for Fannie and Freddie that brought this mess about, if Fannie and Freddie hadn't went Tits Up, we wouldn't be were we are today. If the Democrats hadn't blocked the 2005 the Restoring American Financial Stability Act,, we wouldn't be were we are today. It was the melt down of Fannie and Freddie that lead to the domino fall of the Wall Street institutions, all abided by the cronyism of the Democrats in Congress and the Board of Fannie and Freddie FU, in their revolving door for Democrats faithful, musical chair, million dollar bonus board room.
Are you sitting down Buffalo Roam, are you ready for this? Guess what, people can do more than one thing in a lifetime. Don't tell anyone, that is a secret, just between you and me. We all don't have to live boring lives doing the same thing all the time....especially if we have any creativity and skill. Those of us less skilled and less educated may have to settle for one career or doing one thing at a time for a life time. LOL, you are going to make me laugh again. That statement shows just how little you know about finance or the current crisis. I suggest you learn what Fannie and Freddie do, they purchase mortgages giving liquidity to banks. They were victims not predators. Someone should shoot this lame limbaughite/ditto head excuse and put it out of its misery. I suggest you learn about credit default swaps.
What are you talking about? 1.We never fought the Soviets. We have never went to war with the Soviets. 2.The Soviets are no longer a major force in the world. 3.We didn't need an army for the Cold war. Because not a single shot was fired durring the war. 4.Army's would be pointless during a cold war, because it was nuclear weapons that were the biggest threat. 5.We need our army to fight the terrorist groups in the MiddleEast. 6.Without our army this country wouldn't be free. Or for that matter even started.
Buffalo Roam, Just to make sure we're straight here, it was Bush Jr who started bailing out Wall Street Banks. That was back when McMuffin head was running for POTUS if I remember correctly. Again, Bush Jr. started bailing out Wall Street way back when people thought Hillary would be POTUS.
Yes, kmguru. Obama= Born loser. All he did was prove any idiot can be the POTUS now. His record stinks, he's won nor accomplished anything so far except for a Nobel that's a mystery to everyone, including him. The full scale referendum on him: 0 for 4- Va, NJ, Mass, Copenhagen(more to come). What promise has he kept? Tough on terror? Pfft! Dec 25th looked real tough on terror. Where's our new and wonderful econ? 1st pres to miss this and that, 1st pres not to attend X, and so on. I'm sorry the progressives feel like they got a pig in poke, but what else do you call it? Big promises, big plans, big money, big idiot. Any wise man would have come to the table saying, this situation sucks, and we can't make promises based on the circumstances at hand. And only a fool would have believed he could have done any of things he claimed. Which... incidentally... have never materialized and won't, hello.... The only good thing about cash for clunkers is that 95% of the Obama stickers are off the road now. Club Gitmo is still open for business, the econ is still tanked, unemployment is still rising, we're still at war, public health care was a pipe dream, and we are more indebted now than in written record. No grades have been released, the actual birth cert is still MIA, his best buddies are all criminals and lunatics. He's a loser, and a fraud. He suckered the American people with big promises, and they took the bait. The man has never run so much as a hot dog stand, and now he wants to run big business? Arm twist the banking industry and car makers? Who does he think he's kidding? He has a zero realistic resume with any kind of real life job experience, I wouldn't let that guy change light bulbs for me. Sorry if I ruffle feathers, but I vote with my head, not my heart.
And you, Joe, keep forgetting that those "dittoheads" vote! ...LOL! And the more you deride and denigrate them, the more pissed off they'll become, then they'll really gather together and vote as block. And then, Joe, you'll be really, really, really sorry that you called them "dittoheads". Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Baron Max
LOL, God help you if you vote with your head. Obama's record is not perfect, it could have been better. But hind sight is always better than foresight. He and his administration did save the economy from complete collapse, a small thing for those using their heads to make votes versus their hearts. He did take the economy to growth mode from a shrinkage mode...going from minus 6 percent to a plus 2+ percent. He did reverse the trend of ever increasing job losses, going from a high point of 700k job losses to only 54k las month.
That is precisely the problem, if you care to read previous posts, a misinformed electorate. And as long as they remain misinformed they will continue to do stupid things.
Stupid things by YOUR judgement, Joe, but NOT theirs! And, Joe, isn't it the voters that our system of government is attuned to? But, Joe, isn't that attitude sort of elitist, egotistical, self-righteous and self-important? I mean, I don't like what the voters do sometimes, but it's how things are set up, and to be honest, it seems to me that it's in our best interest to work with those people instead of against them. Or would you prefer a dictatorship with Joepistole as the dictator? Baron Max
Baron Max, my issues are not with democracy. My issues are with those who deliberately misuse and mislead the electorate. This has always been an issue, but more so in recent years. Democracy is best served when electors are educated and well informed. That is what I am arguing. It has nothing to do with elitist, egotistical, self-righteous or self importance.
