FOUR MORE YEARS

[SamIam]

Originally Posted by Adak

I don't blame Obama for the fiscal mess we were in when he was sworn in -- not at all.

What I do blame him for, is his fiscal actions and policies, since he became President.



I'm well aware of Bush's policies - he was a social conservative, but a fiscal big spender. More importantly, had he recognized the impending crisis earlier, he could have helped us avoid more of it.


Let's not forget our mistakes, let's learn from them. Bush was a big spender, and it was a mistake. Obama is a bigger spender, and it's a mistake.

Let's stop the big spending, already - there are a number of fiscal calamities that await us, if we don't use common sense, and STOP the massive over-spending!

First of all, you don't have to yell at me. I'm right in front of my computer screen and I can hear you just fine.

You can't have it both ways. You can't post that everything is Obama's fault and then flip flop when soneone calls you out on your rhetoric. Your reasoning could stand some improvement, as well.

"Overspending! Massive overspending!" You admit that Bush started it and then continue to mindlessly bash Obama and blame the entire deficit on Obama's spending problem without addressing the fact that Obama also has an income problem since the wealthy seem to think that they'd have to go live in a park and be homeless if they had to pay taxes at the rate they did before W. rescued them from their tax induced lives of poverty.

Get honest. You'd buy the navy a thousand aircraft carriers it didn't need before you'd hand a hungry child a dollar to buy a loaf of bread. In fact, you'd probably tell the that kid he needed to give the dollar to the Navy to help build carrier number one thousand one.

The issue that needs to be addressed here is why it is now to the nation's benefit for one ever more elite group is to continue to shirk all reponsibility while enriching themselves at the expense of the rest? Like the CEO of a large financial corporation who gave free rein to the morgage party gang that worked in his department. The Corporation would have gone tits up, but thank god for Uncle Sugar. And thank god for the tireless ants who make an honest if simple living and actually contribute to the greater good rather than stealing from it. Because Uncle Sugar grabs some cash from the ants and goes bail for the Corporation.

Meanwhile, back at the ranch, the Corporation, fresh from the bail bonds office, orders the sleaze bag CEO into the office. But, far from firing him or better yet - filing charges against him - the Corporation gives him a $121 MILLION$$$$$$ annual bonus for carrying his job out at "a difficult time." Should someone mention to our hero that maybe he should pay the same amount of taxes that he paid back in 1999 and the mouth of hell opens up and a million tea party members boil out to take a stand on his behalf.

So greed is no longer a sin. These days it has become a patriotic duty to accept offerings from the masses because this will create more jobs that you can then outsource to Katmandu. Oh, and don't forget the "illegal alien" who gets hired on as the third gardener on your million acre estate. So, let's all whistle the "Star Spangled Banner," as we walk into our offshore bank.

[Adak]

Originally Posted by SamIam

First of all, you don't have to yell at me. I'm right in front of my computer screen and I can hear you just fine.

You can't have it both ways. You can't post that everything is Obama's fault and then flip flop when soneone calls you out on your rhetoric. Your reasoning could stand some improvement, as well.

"Overspending! Massive overspending!" You admit that Bush started it

He started THIS overspending spree, certainly. I've said this repeatedly. Bush was a social conservative, and a fiscal liberal who overspent big time.

and then continue to mindlessly bash Obama and blame the entire deficit on Obama's spending problem

NO! Obama put in 780+ Billion into a stimulus package. What do we have to show for this?

It isn't just the amount of money Obama has spent, it's where the money was spent. At least with Bush, the money went into good purposes - Prescription drug law, HUGE donation to fighting AIDS in Africa, fighting Saddam and Al Qaeda. You know what the money went for.

Try that with Obama's spending, and see what comes to mind? Nothing.

without addressing the fact that Obama also has an income problem since the wealthy seem to think that they'd have to go live in a park and be homeless if they had to pay taxes at the rate they did before W. rescued them from their tax induced lives of poverty.

Get honest. You'd buy the navy a thousand aircraft carriers it didn't need before you'd hand a hungry child a dollar to buy a loaf of bread. In fact, you'd probably tell the that kid he needed to give the dollar to the Navy to help build carrier number one thousand one.

You're drinking again or just being totally silly? Stop this nonsense.

The issue that needs to be addressed here is why it is now to the nation's benefit for one ever more elite group is to continue to shirk all reponsibility while enriching themselves at the expense of the rest? Like the CEO of a large financial corporation who gave free rein to the morgage party gang that worked in his department. The Corporation would have gone tits up, but thank god for Uncle Sugar. And thank god for the tireless ants who make an honest if simple living and actually contribute to the greater good rather than stealing from it. Because Uncle Sugar grabs some cash from the ants and goes bail for the Corporation.

Meanwhile, back at the ranch, the Corporation, fresh from the bail bonds office, orders the sleaze bag CEO into the office. But, far from firing him or better yet - filing charges against him - the Corporation gives him a $121 MILLION$$$$$$ annual bonus for carrying his job out at "a difficult time." Should someone mention to our hero that maybe he should pay the same amount of taxes that he paid back in 1999 and the mouth of hell opens up and a million tea party members boil out to take a stand on his behalf.

Lots of finance guys got away scot free, we know that. That is how justice is done in America, and doesn't have much to do with either political party. Obama does control the entire Justice Dept at the Federal level, however.

So greed is no longer a sin. These days it has become a patriotic duty to accept offerings from the masses because this will create more jobs that you can then outsource to Katmandu. Oh, and don't forget the "illegal alien" who gets hired on as the third gardener on your million acre estate. So, let's all whistle the "Star Spangled Banner," as we walk into our offshore bank.

Oh yeah! I can see you've swallowed the "let's hate the rich" kool aid that the Democrats were selling.

Let's remember that if they take off for Singapore (or wherever), we will all be substantially poorer here. According to the CBO (Congressional Budget Office, as reported by The Washington Times, the wealthy pay 70% of all our federal income tax monies.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...d-share-taxes/

Might want to think twice before you throw em overboard.

[tw]

Originally Posted by Adak

NO! Obama put in 780+ Billion into a stimulus package. What do we have to show for this?

One by one. The money is being paid back with interest. What do we have to show for it? Profits. And we averted a 40% unemployment. Why do you routinely ignore facts? Limbaugh did not mention those profits?

Where is the spending? Drug prices in America (and charged to government perscription plans) are 40% higher in America. Thanks to corporate welfare laws passed by George Jr that add another $1trillion of debt in ten years. Did they forget to tell your that? Mission Accomplished: we have only just started to pay for that $3trillion fiasco. Did they forget to tell you that?

Meanwhile, where is that 40% unemployment rate that was clearly defined in that meeting in 2007. The meeting that George Jr said, "I have lost control of this meeting" and then walked out. What happened to the 40% unemployment rate that left so many Senators and Representatives leaving that meeting with 'ghost faces'? Oh. They forgot to tell you about that.

Why do you routinely forget to the lessons from history. Limbaugh is not an honest source.

At least you stopped insulting people - somewhat.

[Adak]

[quote=tw;838196]One by one. The money is being paid back with interest. What do we have to show for it? Profits. And we averted a 40% unemployment. Why do you routinely ignore facts? Limbaugh did not mention those profits?

That's what they lead you to believe, but unfortunately, the Feds own a lot of stock, also. To just break even, the price per share of GM stock would have to approximately double.

The previous pay back they gave us so quickly, was actually another loan - so they were able to make Obama look good, by paying us back -- *with interest*, with our own money.

Fact is, the Volt is a colossal failure, since it isn't a hybrid, and has such a limited range. Now it's range is up to 38 whole miles -- whoopee! That's with brand new batteries, of course.

Where is the spending? Drug prices in America (and charged to government perscription plans) are 40% higher in America. Thanks to corporate welfare laws passed by George Jr that add another $1trillion of debt in ten years. Did they forget to tell your that? Mission Accomplished: we have only just started to pay for that $3trillion fiasco. Did they forget to tell you that?

All conservatives are aware that Bush Jr. was a big spender - and not a fiscal conservative.

Meanwhile, where is that 40% unemployment rate that was clearly defined in that meeting in 2007. The meeting that George Jr said, "I have lost control of this meeting" and then walked out. What happened to the 40% unemployment rate that left so many Senators and Representatives leaving that meeting with 'ghost faces'? Oh. They forgot to tell you about that.

No, I heard about it. But there were lots of meetings, and lots of ashen faces when the depth of the sub prime mortgage debacle became clear.

Why do you routinely forget to the lessons from history. Limbaugh is not an honest source.

Why do you assume I listen to Limbaugh? I don't. His personal attacks against liberals is not something I'll tolerate.

At least you stopped insulting people - somewhat.

There's nothing gained by insulting people. Oh, I'll do it if the others are posting insults at me or my friends, but it's your idea's, not you, that are the heart of the matter, and should be insulted, kicked down into the basement, thrown into the boiler, and chopped up like sushi!

Nothing personal.

[tw]

Originally Posted by Adak

All conservatives are aware that Bush Jr. was a big spender - and not a fiscal conservative.

When do those bills come due? Now. That is how economics works. Nixon did the same thing in 1968 and 1970. When did his bills come due. We had that resulting recession in 1975 and 1979.

Mission Accomplished may end up costing as much as $3trillion. When due those bills come due? Obama is now paying them.

Tax cuts cause recessions and increased debts. When do we start paying those debts? When we increase taxes to pay for that borrowed money with interest. Tax cuts only demonstrate there is no free lunch.

No way around it. Today's debts are from the expression, "Reagan proved that deficits don't matter." Quoted often because that sentence long ago predicted the coming debts and resulting recession. A balanced budget created by Clinton was subverted because George Jr's conservatives did what conservative do. Spend wildly. Increase spending on military, on welfare to big Pharma, useless wars with obvious violations of military doctrine, on welfare to the rich (also called tax cuts), etc. They even wanted to put SS in the stock market. Fortunately we did not let them spend as wildly as conservatives would do.

History shows debts are only solved by tax increases and other 'taxes' on the public. This included Carter's massive interest increases and tax increases by Reagan and George Sr. Jobs are created AFTER government reduces its debts. After government stops using money games and other myths to 'fix' the economy. Those are well proven lessons from history.

The Volt is a disaster. Created when George Jr's administration said automakers need not market hybrids originally designed in the early 1990 and paid for by government money. Because the hybrid was evil - a result of an agreement between Clinton and the auto companies. Then when patriotic companies (Honda, then Toyota) introduced hybrids, GM did what any business school graduate would do. Rushed to market a kludge - the Volt while also creating another disaster - the Camaro. Volt is a disaster created almost ten years after they could have introduced their first hybrid - the Precept.

Hybrids were another of so many Clinton ideas that were evil only because it was by Clinton.

Volt's defects resulted from business school graduates (in 2000 through 2007) who did not have to market their existing hybrids. And then needed some 'magic bullet' to compete against superior and patriotic Insight and Prius products. The Volt was started somewhere around 2002 - using concepts that engineers said would not work. Volt is the kludge that resulted when it would not work on the test track. And was then patched together - kludged. Because it designed when GM top management (ie Rick Wagoner) were MBAs. Search the Cellar to find additional details of why the Volt is so anti-American.