An Intransigent President

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

The politicians most responsible for America's debt crisis are portrayed by the media as "grown-ups" while those least responsible for it are dubbed "intransigent." Veteran profligate spenders have been credited in recent days with a "balanced approach" to the crisis, even as Tea Partiers in Congress with no fingerprints on the debt have been cast as recklessly indifferent to it.

The mainstream media exclusively defines "intransigence" as conservative opposition to non-negotiable liberal demands. Hence, President Obama 's willingness to risk default rather than drop his insistence on tax increases isn't considered intransigent and reckless but principled and mature.

The American Spectator : An Intransigent President

Gotta love me some media bias.....well not really but

 

[NYcarbineer]

No, if you add all the social programs they are the most expensive.
You add Pensions,Health Care and Welfare,they are by far the most expensive.
Once again, that is what our constitution says that government is suppose to be doing. Defense and veteran entitlements.

Then why aren't veteran entitlements scored as military spending? Eh?

When you add all of defense and veterans entitlements it comes to 1.415 trillion dollars.
When you add all of the Social programs it comes to 2.154 trillion dollars.
We are suppose to have benefits for our veterans. Ever since this nation started we had retirement pay for our veterans .
It is the social programs that are costing us way to much.

Social Security is paid for with the payroll tax. The government is funding defense in large part by the borrowing from SS that occurs when the payroll taxes are invested in treasuries.

Social Security is not causing a nickel of the deficit or the debt.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Social Security is paid for with the payroll tax. The government is funding defense in large part by the borrowing from SS that occurs when the payroll taxes are invested in treasuries.

Social Security is not causing a nickel of the deficit or the debt.

The $2.15 trillion in social spending doesn't include Social Security.

Try again.

 

[P@triot]

That would be a huge comsumer of the private sector.

The government buys hardware from General Dynamics, Lockheed Martin, General Electric, Grumman, Boeing, Raytheon, L-3 Communications, United Technologies, SAIC, KBR, Computer Sciences Corporation, Honeywell, AM Electric - to name a few.

These companies could be building things for the government, that if used, didn't kill people.

That would be money well spent.

Doncha think?

Or we could just cut it. And not spend.

Your rationale makes no sense there. The government takes half of the money that General Dynamics, Lockheed Martin, General Electric, Grumman, Boeing, Raytheon, L-3 Communications, United Technologies, SAIC, KBR, Computer Sciences Corporation, Honeywell, AM Electric earns, but then you think the govenrment is doing them a favor by "buying" stuff from them?!?! So, the government takes their money, then gives it back to them in return for their products and services? So essentially, the govenrment gets their products and services for nothing. Because the money they exchanged already belonged to those companies - they just gave it back to them. No wonder the economy is collapsing when liberals think like that.

The government takes money from company A, then uses that money they just took to purchase a product or service from company A. Company A had to spend money to manufacture that product or pay the salary for that service, which means it's a net loss over all. Wow. Just wow.

No it doesn't.

What are you insane?

Most of them pay nothing in taxes. Quite a few of them get MONEY BACK from the government.

Holy shit.

Holy shit is right. Only a liberal cries that nobody is paying taxes. The fact is, the top 1% of this country pays 38% of the taxes. The top 10% pays 68% of the taxes. As usual, the numbers (which don't lie) are in direct opposition to the propaganda of the liberals.

It's amazing, because everyone I know has 55% of everything they earn stolen from them by the US government through force. Liberals love slavery. They fought Abraham Lincoln and the GOP over slavery back in the 1800's and since they lost that battle, they've found a new way to create slavery - taxes. I have to work to support some lazy liberal who doesn't want to work. It's pure slavery. I labor all day and more than half of it is taken from me and given to lazy Communists and Socialists.

 

[Hope_and_change]

Passed a stimulus package that is creating no jobs across the country. This bill has given more to the rich then every previous President combined!

 

[P@triot]

Just because a liberal/communist/socialist appointed court "rules" something is constitutional, doesn't actualy make it constitutional. That's like saying OJ Simpson and Casey Anthony are innocent just because a jury didn't find them guilty. They still committed the murders, they just got away with it because they had a jury that wanted them to get away with it. And Social Security is 100% unconstitutional - it just was ruled by communists who wanted the government to get away with it. Obamacare is 100% unconstitutional as well, but a few liberal/communist/socialist idiot judges have ruled it "constitutional" because they want Obama to get away with this.

1. learn terms and definitions. you're supremely ignorant and using terms interchangeably which do not mean the same thing.
2. if the high court says it's constitutional, it is... lower courts are just that... lower courts. that's what there are avenues for appeal.
3. oj and casey anthony were never found innocent, ijit... they were found 'not guilty'. perhaps that means the same thing in your narrow little mind... but not to most people.

sucks being you.

Nothing is more amusing than making a point that can't be disputed by a liberal - their M.O. is to instantly get angry and nasty and make a fool out of themselves.

My entire point, which everyone else here got but you, was that just because OJ and Casey were found "not guilty" doesn't mean they were innocent. Way to redundantly repeat my entire point while acting like you just taught me something. LMAO!

Additionally, I used that as analogy to show that just because some liberal appointed radical socialist idiot judge ruled social programs "constitutional" does not actually make them constitutional - any more than some idiots finding OJ and Casey "not guilty" actually makes them not guilty.

The problem with liberals, as clearly illustrated recently by idiot Sonia Sotomayor, is that they feel the Judicial branch gets to make law from the bench. Law is made by the Legislative branch. And 235 years ago, our legislative branch legally delegated 18 enumerated powers to the federal government. Not one of them is social and the judicial branch does not get to decide otherwise.

But of course, this is a waste of breath since I'm talking to a liberal and liberals hate the constitution and refuse to abide by it. Now, please miss the entire point here in your fury and post more foolish redundant nonsense with venom. Why have a rationale, intelligent conversation when liberals are so used to violence and hate, right?

 

[Neotrotsky]

Why is the Left and Papa Obama willing to sell enough of our future wealth to the Chinese

Oh wait, then we might be communist by default, once they own all our future wealth


This is actually dated, since the debt is even more now

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DsrFa9jrpv8]‪Child's Pay 2‬‏ - YouTube[/ame]

 

[P@triot]

This is surprising. No one had a problem when George Walker was spending money on Fascist/Theocratic programs. This failed drunken driving corporatist (Who took money from public programs to enrich himself when he "ran" businesses) caused a national econmic collapse almost single handely and failed to capture one of the worst and most vile terrorists ever to attack this country. And utterly failed. He did this while destroying a nation that didn't attack us in 9/11 (or at all) and left us will the bill.

Is this the way conservatives operate? By electing people that were convicted of crimes to the Presidency? Do they think that low of the office? George Walker was the first man ever convicted of anything to occupy the office.

You need to look up the term Fascist - because that describes the Dumbocrat Party. Not GWB. Stopping a vicious, oppressive dictator who poses a threat to the entire world is not facism my uninformed friend. It's called national security. Facism is oppresing others and implementing a single party. You know, exactly what liberals do. It's liberals who are tyring to get Fox News off of tv. It's liberals who are tyring to get Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh off the air. Because liberals are fascists who don't want the truth to be told because it exposes their Communist/Socialist/Nazist agenda. Take by force, silence anyone who disagrees, piss all of the US Consitution. That's the liberal slogan.

You need to look up the term yourself. It refers to Socialism for the rich. It describes the Republican party perfectly..my uninformed friend.

Nazis killed socialists, communists and jews by the way. They were the Facist Arm of Christianity. Even Pope John Paul recognized that in his "apology".

And you never answered my question about why conservatives think that the office of the President so low..that they elected a Theocratic Fascist like George Walker into the office.

OMG - could you be any more ill informed?!?!? You're too lazy to even look up the definition of the word fascism before using it? Here, let me help you (because, frankly, I feel really sorry for you right now - this is just embarassing for you):

Fascism ( /ˈfæʃɪzəm/) is a radical, authoritarian nationalist political ideology.[1][2] Fascists advocate the creation of a totalitarian single-party state that seeks the mass mobilization of a nation through indoctrination, physical education, and family policy including eugenics

How, in any way, does that describe Republican's?!?!?

Liberals have a history of eugneics (see liberals Herbert Croley, Woodrow Wilson, and Margaret Sanger). Further, liberals want to silence opposition so they can have a "single-party state". And liberal idiot Michele Obama is pushing physical education and diet like a typical fascist.

You have no idea what the definition is of a word you are throwing around recklessly. You are a typical, uninformed, angry little liberal.

 

[P@triot]

Yep.

Defense.

Explain to me how invading almost every nation in the world is defense? With a few possible exceptions, WWII and Afghanistan come to mind..I can't think of many military actions that this country participated in..as aiding to the Defense of the Homeland. Can you?

And there NOTHING in the constitution that prohibits spending on social programs.

In fact..the GENERAL WELFARE CLAUSE covers it.

You are completely inaccurate on your constitutional statements. I encourage you to read the document before commenting on it. "General welfare" does not mean providing food, housing, and healthcare to individuals. General welfare means things like the billions the federal government gave to the city of NY to clean up the horrific disaster left by the 9/11 attacks. The city could not afford the clean up and leaving that would have crippled the US (it is the financial hub of the entire nation). You take GENERAL and conveniently interpret that is individual. The 9/11 clean up did not go to individuals, it went to the city to "provide for the general welfare". The Social programs are simply unconstitutional. The federal government has 18 enumerated powers, and that is not one of them. What is sad is that it would be perfectly constitutional if the states did it - but greedy liberals want to get their hands on everyone's money, not just the money of people in their own state.

You have no idea what the founders meant by "General Welfare"; parroting right wing propaganda does not make a credible argument. Taking false premises and concluding "Social programs are simply unconstitutional" is an opinion based on the opinion of others.

Language evolves, and words have different definitions at different times. Do some research and try to determine what the word "welfare" meant in the 18th C. and consider who wrote the preamble and how some other than the obvious partisans and propagandists might define it today, consider:

"The Constitution was written by several committees over the summer of 1787, but the committee most responsible for the final form we know today is the "Committee of Stile and Arrangement". This Committee was tasked with getting all of the articles and clauses agreed to by the Convention and putting them into a logical order. On September 10, 1787, the Committee of Style set to work, and two days later, it presented the Convention with its final draft. The members were Alexander Hamilton, William Johnson, Rufus King, James Madison, and Gouverneur Morris. The actual text of the Preamble and of much of the rest of this final draft is usually attributed to Governor Morris"

Constitutional Topic: The Preamble - The U.S. Constitution Online - USConstitution.net

From the same source: Promote the Genereal Welfare:

"This, and the next part of the Preamble, are the culmination of everything that came before it — the whole point of having tranquility, justice, and defense was to promote the general welfare — to allow every state and every citizen of those states to benefit from what the government could provide. The framers looked forward to the expansion of land holdings, industry, and investment, and they knew that a strong national government would be the beginning of that."

It's not opinion - it's fact. The constitution is written in black & white, and only the Dumbocrats want to "interpret" it because they don't like what it says. There is nothing to "interpret" - it says what it says. Look up the term GENERAL my friend. How is the GENERAL welfare promoted when an INDVIDUAL is given welfare dollars, food stamps, Medicaid, and Obamacare. Taking my money and giving it to someone else is certainly not helping me and it's not helping any of my neighbors either. So how is that "promoting" the "general welfare"?!?! Exactly. The funds funneled to New York city by the federal government after 9/11 is an example of "promoting the general welfare" because we all (ie the entire nation) benefited by getting our financial hub back up and running after that terrorist attack.

Thanks for playing, but you're flat out wrong on this and no amount of twisting on your part can change that.

 

[Mustang]

The politicians most responsible for America's debt crisis are portrayed by the media as "grown-ups" while those least responsible for it are dubbed "intransigent." Veteran profligate spenders have been credited in recent days with a "balanced approach" to the crisis, even as Tea Partiers in Congress with no fingerprints on the debt have been cast as recklessly indifferent to it.

The mainstream media exclusively defines "intransigence" as conservative opposition to non-negotiable liberal demands. Hence, President Obama 's willingness to risk default rather than drop his insistence on tax increases isn't considered intransigent and reckless but principled and mature.

The American Spectator : An Intransigent President

There's an old saying when referring to someone who's a good salesman. It goes something like this:

He's such a good salesman that he could sell a refrigerator to an Eskimo.
​

The monumental hurddle that you, The American Spectator, and every other conservative has to clear in order to convince non partisan independents that it is the president and not Republicans who are responsible for the negotiation impass is just too high to clear with a bunch of rhetorical nonsense as your only evidence.

 

[Dot Com]

The politicians most responsible for America's debt crisis are portrayed by the media as "grown-ups" while those least responsible for it are dubbed "intransigent." Veteran profligate spenders have been credited in recent days with a "balanced approach" to the crisis, even as Tea Partiers in Congress with no fingerprints on the debt have been cast as recklessly indifferent to it.

The mainstream media exclusively defines "intransigence" as conservative opposition to non-negotiable liberal demands. Hence, President Obama 's willingness to risk default rather than drop his insistence on tax increases isn't considered intransigent and reckless but principled and mature.

The American Spectator : An Intransigent President

There's an old saying when referring to someone who's a good salesman. It goes something like this:

He's such a good salesman that he could sell a refrigerator to an Eskimo.
​

The monumental hurddle that you, The American Spectator, and every other conservative has to clear in order to convince non partisan independents that it is the president and not Republicans who are responsible for the negotiation impass is just too high to clear with a bunch of rhetorical nonsense as your only evidence.

WillowTree had 8 years of a Repub admin & 6 yrs of a Repub Congress. What did it get her? Looks like the Repub House is also doing their best to alienate Independents going into the '12 elections too.

 

[P@triot]

The mainstream media exclusively defines "intransigence" as conservative opposition to non-negotiable liberal demands. Hence, President Obama 's willingness to risk default rather than drop his insistence on tax increases isn't considered intransigent and reckless but principled and mature.

The American Spectator : An Intransigent President

There's an old saying when referring to someone who's a good salesman. It goes something like this:

He's such a good salesman that he could sell a refrigerator to an Eskimo.
​

The monumental hurddle that you, The American Spectator, and every other conservative has to clear in order to convince non partisan independents that it is the president and not Republicans who are responsible for the negotiation impass is just too high to clear with a bunch of rhetorical nonsense as your only evidence.

WillowTree had 8 years of a Repub admin & 6 yrs of a Repub Congress. What did it get her? Looks like the Repub House is also doing their best to alienate Independents going into the '12 elections too.

Can you explain how exactly the GOP controlled house is doing their best to "alienate" independent voters? I'm struggling to understand how being the only responsible adults in the room and trying to stop reckless, irresponsible, nation-collapsing-spending by the Marxist/Socialist/Communist Dumbocrats would "alienate" anyone. Why would working to keep more money in the pockets of people who work and earn that money alienate anyone?

Trying to reign in uncontrolled spending by the government and allowing the American people to keep more of what they earn should get everyone except Marxists, Socialists, and Communists really excited.

 

[Neotrotsky]

Hey

he said it with BIG FONT right above you

so it has to be true

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Dem's don't want to cut back on government period.

That's it exactly. The Dems think the only problem is political and the GOP is simply ginning this up for gain. They can't understand why the GOP wont just roll over and increase the debt limit, like every time before. If there is a problem, the Democratic solution is to raise taxes so they can put in even more social programs and wasteful crap.

"Read my LIPS!!!!"

​

 

[The Rabbi]

There's an old saying when referring to someone who's a good salesman. It goes something like this:

He's such a good salesman that he could sell a refrigerator to an Eskimo.
​

The monumental hurddle that you, The American Spectator, and every other conservative has to clear in order to convince non partisan independents that it is the president and not Republicans who are responsible for the negotiation impass is just too high to clear with a bunch of rhetorical nonsense as your only evidence.

WillowTree had 8 years of a Repub admin & 6 yrs of a Repub Congress. What did it get her? Looks like the Repub House is also doing their best to alienate Independents going into the '12 elections too.

Can you explain how exactly the GOP controlled house is doing their best to "alienate" independent voters? I'm struggling to understand how being the only responsible adults in the room and trying to stop reckless, irresponsible, nation-collapsing-spending by the Marxist/Socialist/Communist Dumbocrats would "alienate" anyone. Why would working to keep more money in the pockets of people who work and earn that money alienate anyone?

Trying to reign in uncontrolled spending by the government and allowing the American people to keep more of what they earn should get everyone except Marxists, Socialists, and Communists really excited.

The country has a serious debt and spending crisis. The GOP is working hard to develop plans that are feasible both economically and politically. The Democrats are using it as an opportunity to look good and play to the media. Obama pouts, wags his finger, and walks out of meetings.
I think people see this and know who the serious ones are and who the klowns are. The Dums are the klowns.

 

[Sallow]

Can you explain how exactly the GOP controlled house is doing their best to "alienate" independent voters? I'm struggling to understand how being the only responsible adults in the room and trying to stop reckless, irresponsible, nation-collapsing-spending by the Marxist/Socialist/Communist Dumbocrats would "alienate" anyone. Why would working to keep more money in the pockets of people who work and earn that money alienate anyone?

Trying to reign in uncontrolled spending by the government and allowing the American people to keep more of what they earn should get everyone except Marxists, Socialists, and Communists really excited.

They're not only alienating independent voters..they are alienating the majority of Americans. They are acting like economic terrorists and they completely lied to get into power. During the 2010 midterms the Fascist/Theocratic/Monarchists Republicants ran on a platform of scaring seniors into believing that the Obama administration was going to weaken Medicare by cutting 500 billion from the budget and create death panels that would ration medical care. That and high unemployment gave them a big victory. The very first thing they did when they got into Congress was to craft bills to kill the Health Care package, restrict abortions and tax abortions that would never pass. The very second thing they did was to block every other bill. The 112th Congress is being held hostage by these Theocratic and Fascist freshmen. And it was Republican Theocratic Conservative Hero, Governor Jan Brewer that actually did cut life saving funding for medical procedures..effectively killing two people.

The spending was created by the PNAC Fascist Empire builders in the George Walker administration. The invasions and conquering of Iraq and Afghanistan, as part of a global unilateral creation of Pax Americana..the rise of the Republican Fascist State..and to do so, the plan was to choke off energy supplies to "enemies" like China and Russia..who were no longer enemies. Unfortunately..despite initial success in crowning George Walker King by Judicial decision...Scalia couldn't figure out how to stop the election in 2008..when we had a Constitutionally elected President restore our Republic and Democratic values.

 

[Neotrotsky]

CNN poll: Repub Cut Cap Bill gets 2-1 approval or Left bias CNN can't hide US support

Tip: Hot AIr

The CCB/BBA approach wins majorities in every single demographic — including self-described liberals. Sixty-three percent of Democrats back the House bill. The least supportive age demographic is 50-64YOs at 62/37; the least supportive regional demographic is the Midwest at 61/39. Even those who express opposition to the Tea Party supports it 53/47.

In other words, it’s a clean sweep. Simply put, there is no political demographic at all where the CCB/BBA doesn’t get majority support. The BBA on its own does even better. It gets 3-1 support (74/24),​

 

[American Horse]

The politicians most responsible for America's debt crisis are portrayed by the media as "grown-ups" while those least responsible for it are dubbed "intransigent." Veteran profligate spenders have been credited in recent days with a "balanced approach" to the crisis, even as Tea Partiers in Congress with no fingerprints on the debt have been cast as recklessly indifferent to it.

The mainstream media exclusively defines "intransigence" as conservative opposition to non-negotiable liberal demands. Hence, President Obama 's willingness to risk default rather than drop his insistence on tax increases isn't considered intransigent and reckless but principled and mature.

The American Spectator : An Intransigent President

And for starters, that would've been impossible if the public had been told the truth about the financial crisis vis-a-vis Fannie and Freddie. But the politicians and their enablers (the State Owned Media) naturally chose the easiest route (and most helpful for the perps), that it was all a Wall Street creation. So all legislative energy was focused on tangential symptoms instead of the cancer within, even skewing the narrative that it was about removing regulations instead of the real truth, F&F was never properly regulated but instead was fed more and more power.

 

[The Rabbi]

Can you explain how exactly the GOP controlled house is doing their best to "alienate" independent voters? I'm struggling to understand how being the only responsible adults in the room and trying to stop reckless, irresponsible, nation-collapsing-spending by the Marxist/Socialist/Communist Dumbocrats would "alienate" anyone. Why would working to keep more money in the pockets of people who work and earn that money alienate anyone?

Trying to reign in uncontrolled spending by the government and allowing the American people to keep more of what they earn should get everyone except Marxists, Socialists, and Communists really excited.

They're not only alienating independent voters..they are alienating the majority of Americans. They are acting like economic terrorists and they completely lied to get into power. During the 2010 midterms the Fascist/Theocratic/Monarchists Republicants ran on a platform of scaring seniors into believing that the Obama administration was going to weaken Medicare by cutting 500 billion from the budget and create death panels that would ration medical care. That and high unemployment gave them a big victory. The very first thing they did when they got into Congress was to craft bills to kill the Health Care package, restrict abortions and tax abortions that would never pass. The very second thing they did was to block every other bill. The 112th Congress is being held hostage by these Theocratic and Fascist freshmen. And it was Republican Theocratic Conservative Hero, Governor Jan Brewer that actually did cut life saving funding for medical procedures..effectively killing two people.

The spending was created by the PNAC Fascist Empire builders in the George Walker administration. The invasions and conquering of Iraq and Afghanistan, as part of a global unilateral creation of Pax Americana..the rise of the Republican Fascist State..and to do so, the plan was to choke off energy supplies to "enemies" like China and Russia..who were no longer enemies. Unfortunately..despite initial success in crowning George Walker King by Judicial decision...Scalia couldn't figure out how to stop the election in 2008..when we had a Constitutionally elected President restore our Republic and Democratic values.

 

[Sallow]

CNN poll: Repub Cut Cap Bill gets 2-1 approval or Left bias CNN can't hide US support

Tip: Hot AIr

The CCB/BBA approach wins majorities in every single demographic — including self-described liberals. Sixty-three percent of Democrats back the House bill. The least supportive age demographic is 50-64YOs at 62/37; the least supportive regional demographic is the Midwest at 61/39. Even those who express opposition to the Tea Party supports it 53/47.

In other words, it’s a clean sweep. Simply put, there is no political demographic at all where the CCB/BBA doesn’t get majority support. The BBA on its own does even better. It gets 3-1 support (74/24),​

The bright to passing that bill is that it would make it impossible to invade another country ever again..

But of course..warmongers would find a way around it.