POLL: Cain, Romney and Perry all beat Obama

[tinydancer]

That statement itself is delusional.

From 1992 through 2000, the Federal deficit as a percentage of GDP, turned down below zero percent between 1998 and 2000. Read it and at least try to remain intellectually honest when you reply to me, please.

Here's the data:


Year, GDP-US $ billion, Federal Deficit-fed pct

1992, 6342.3, 4.58 a (Clinton)
1993, 6667.4, 3.83 a
1994, 7085.2, 2.87 a
1995, 7414.7, 2.21 a
1996, 7838.5, 1.37 a
1997, 8270.46, 0.27 a
1998, 8727.02, -0.79 a (inversion)
1999, 9286.86, -1.35 a
2000, 9884.17, -2.39 a (Bush 43)
2001, 10218, -1.25 a (rise in debt & deficit)
2002, 10572.4, 1.49 a (reversion)
2003, 11067.8, 3.41 a
2004, 11788.9, 3.50 a
2005, 12554.5, 2.54 a
2006, 13310.9, 1.87 a
2007, 13969.3, 1.15 a
2008, 14270.5, 3.21 a
2009, 14014.8, 13.14 b
2010, 14551.8, 8.65 b

Legend:

a - actual reported
b - budgeted estimate in US fy10 budget
******************************************

Clearly, the data shows that in 2000, Bush was still riding the prosperity wave that was created during the Clinton Era, and not the other way around as you incorrectly stated.



Another, delusional statement. This has always been a systemic lie told by the Right, to excuse the poor leadership performance of George W. Bush. That facts are rather surprising for under-educated Republicans to learn.

The well established economic definition of recession, is GDP growth below zero (negative) for two consecutive quarters. Not merely declining GDP growth q/q.

Annual United States GDP Rate of Growth YoY​

Clearly, U.S. GDP did not turn negative until AFTER 2001, which was AFTER the election of George W. Bush, in 2000. The Bush 43 administration never saw a GDP expansion figure that at any time, was higher than during the Clinton administration. Those are the facts clearly put before you.




Fannie and Freddie, did not cause the housing crisis. That's yet another illogical and irrational lie told by Republicans, to cover for their total lack of leadership from 2000 through 2008.

The housing crisis was caused because people could no longer pay their mortgage. People could no longer pay their mortgage because people lost their respective jobs. People lost their respective jobs, because corporations moved them off-shore. Corporations were allowed to move Middle Class American jobs off-shore, because of Congressional tax loopholes and a de-regulatory environment that enabled it. Republicans, favored deregulation and corporate tax loopholes and therefore, Republicans were the primary reason why American Middle Class jobs are mostly a thing of the past.

The very thing (under-regulated industry and tax breaks for the super rich) that Republicans promised would expand our economy, is the very thing that moved American Middle Class jobs overseas. Those are the facts.




That is absolutely nonsense. The stock market went ballistic under Clinton. The stock market has never been higher, than under Clinton. There were record numbers of new millionaires being created between 2000 and 2008, than at any other time in recorded American history.

The tech-bubble, was a direct net effect of too much capital, chasing too few deals and once again. This brought too many charlatans into the market and created an IPO frenzy that eventually lost steam because the market lost faith, precisely at the same time as enterprise technology (mostly software) was reaching its product development life cycle zenith. Those things combined, set the path for the tech-bubble correction and then the collapse.

Microsoft, was not an IPO between 2000 and 2008, nor was Microsoft beholden to high-tech venture capital. So, the Justice Department -vs- Microsoft, was a non-issue relative to the tech-bubble collapse in real terms. There were many companies providing too much of the same technology at the same time and in a market that had become saturated with look-alike profiles, and there were only so many large scale corporate entities to sell into for growing tech companies.

I worked in Silicone Valley, in the enterprise software industry during the entire time and I know what took place there on the ground.




That is some of the most hyperbolic nonsense gibberish that I've ever heard for the collapse of the enterprise software industry in SV. I lived it everyday of my life - I know what took place because I was there.

Innovation ran into a brick wall, because funding dried up. Funding dried up because of too many fake/phony profit models were created that would never pan out. That was caused by GREED - pure and simple. The market needed to shake-out the greedy, before stabilizing on moving on, but the market never got that chance under Clinton, and instead, was invited to 911 as a nail in the coffin of innovation.




Obama, in reality, has either delivered or attempted to deliver on campaign promises made at at time when there was NO economic meltdown. You seem to have amnesia on WHY Obama had to alter course in both his message and his focus during the campaign. The country was hit with the worse economic retracement since 1929/32. That forced a shift in Obama rhetoric and Obama actions/behavior with respect to the economy and his purposed pre-election agenda.




Safety of his armchair? Is that where Vice President Dick "Five Time Deferment" Cheney, sat when he was scamming CIA intelligence behind the scenes to place American Troops into harms way? Is the armchair, were Bush 43 himself sat, after he want AWOL at the TANG, only later in life and without a a conscious, set out to become a Commander In Chief? We STILL don't have an official copy of Bush 43's DD-214, do we?

I have my DD-214 and it shows precisely what I did in the military. Why can't we get a copy of Bush 43's DD-214? Or, did his Daddy, clean that up for him too?




Merely stating that it would be wrong to vote for someone to the U.S. Supreme Court based on purely ideological reasons, and then not voting for any one individual in particular, is NOT a demonstration of failed principles.

To put this out as some kind of indictment on Obama, is irrational at best. Should one declare that they would not refuse to purchase chocolate ice cream, merely because of the way it tastes when compared to vanilla ice cream, and then going out that Friday night to Basking Robbins and buying vanilla ice cream, does NOT demonstrate some kind of warped problem with personal principle.

He can say that people should not make decisions based on pure ideology, rather the issues at hand, but still decide to vote against any particular individual for the Supreme Court. That in no way reduces his principles and concluding as much is illogical on its face.



Yet, you've failed miserably here to delineate one iota of truth about what you just claimed - as I have shown with data, charts and facts. You can sit back and throw stones from a glass house if you wish - it will only come back to haunt both you and the country down the road.

If your disdain for the President is predicated on irrational talking points and hyper-political dogma based in hate and woefully lacking in supportive data or facts, then the least of your concerns would be those who do support Obama, based on the very inverse of the same.

Now, you were saying something about how Obama has failed?

Two comments:



It did go ballistic, and then he slammed on the brakes when against DOJ's recommendations he decided he needed to rub Gates' nose in some poo. It dropped suddenly right after he rejected DOJ's recommendations. Sure, it recovered some, but not enough to avoid the recession.

Obama, in reality, has either delivered or attempted to deliver on campaign promises made at at time when there was NO economic meltdown. You seem to have amnesia on WHY Obama had to alter course in both his message and his focus during the campaign. The country was hit with the worse economic retracement since 1929/32. That forced a shift in Obama rhetoric and Obama actions/behavior with respect to the economy and his purposed pre-election agenda.

That would sure be noble and admirable if it were true that Obama did shift gears in response to the economic crisis. But he didn't. He kept on with his vanity healthcare legislation instead of paying attention to the efficacy of his stimulus and programs such as HAMP.

He failed in keeping many promises which had he honored them could have kept America on board with him.

His most egregious failure was when he explicitly promised the Hispanic community that there would be a comprehensive immigration bill in the congress within his first year and he would put his weight behind it. What made that most egregious is how he explicitly said that he was aware of how many times the Hispanic community had been given empty promises just for purposes of garnering their votes and he stated quite firmly that the promise he was making that day would not be one of those empty promises.

He was elected on the illusion that he would be a different kind of politician. But he is as much of a liar if not worse than any inhabitant of the oval office in my lifetime.






I reserve any further comments until I have time to read your essay in greater detail.

do us all a favor
keep it simple
The Bush Deficit, the Clinton Surplus and TARP by Gregory Hilton | The DC World Affairs Blog
W added about 2.5-3 trillion to the debt if you split 09 with Obama. Closer to 2.5 trillion with
2 wars
Enron
& major hurricanes
adding homeland security
2 recessions
Early 2000s recession - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The "economic meltdown" has nothing to do with spending 4 trillion dollars we do not have and getting 0 in return

That is the issue we have with Obama
he has locked down the fossil fuel business when we are allowing Canada and mexico to make money off of us, and create millions of jobs we could create right here
Nuclear power

what else?

Out of curiosity, did you know Ken first suggested the trading of carbon credits?

 

[Sallow]

I am amused in a sickened way by the people who support Obama and don't even keep track of his speeches. No one yelled "you lie" at a State of the Union address.

Obama is a media hog so I understand that it would be hard to keep track of all of his addresses. But at least try to tell the difference between the State of the Union and Obama's other speeches.

You are correct..it wasn't the SOTU. But it was at a session of congress with the President speaking. It was done by a Republican Congressmen against a Democratic President. In the last century..when has that occurred? When has anything so outrageous happened?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rw9lQT1Ark4&NR=1]Joe Wilson shouts "YOU LIE!" to Obama during his address on Health Care Reform - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Amelia]

I am amused in a sickened way by the people who support Obama and don't even keep track of his speeches. No one yelled "you lie" at a State of the Union address.

Obama is a media hog so I understand that it would be hard to keep track of all of his addresses. But at least try to tell the difference between the State of the Union and Obama's other speeches.

You are correct..it wasn't the SOTU. But it was at a session of congress with the President speaking. It was done by a Republican Congressmen against a Democratic President. In the last century..when has that occurred? When has anything so outrageous happened?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rw9lQT1Ark4&NR=1]Joe Wilson shouts "YOU LIE!" to Obama during his address on Health Care Reform - YouTube[/ame]

Joe Wilson was outrageous to make that accusation during the speech itself. Congressional rebuke was appropriate.

However, that's not the most outrageous thing which has happened in the past 100 years. How to compare it? I think a lie told with a straight face is more outrageous than a spontaneous outburst.

Obama does lie. He shouldn't be called on it in the middle of a speech but he does tell falsehoods and he does it so smoothly. That's kinda scary.

 

[JRK]

Two comments:



It did go ballistic, and then he slammed on the brakes when against DOJ's recommendations he decided he needed to rub Gates' nose in some poo. It dropped suddenly right after he rejected DOJ's recommendations. Sure, it recovered some, but not enough to avoid the recession.






That would sure be noble and admirable if it were true that Obama did shift gears in response to the economic crisis. But he didn't. He kept on with his vanity healthcare legislation instead of paying attention to the efficacy of his stimulus and programs such as HAMP.

He failed in keeping many promises which had he honored them could have kept America on board with him.

His most egregious failure was when he explicitly promised the Hispanic community that there would be a comprehensive immigration bill in the congress within his first year and he would put his weight behind it. What made that most egregious is how he explicitly said that he was aware of how many times the Hispanic community had been given empty promises just for purposes of garnering their votes and he stated quite firmly that the promise he was making that day would not be one of those empty promises.

He was elected on the illusion that he would be a different kind of politician. But he is as much of a liar if not worse than any inhabitant of the oval office in my lifetime.






I reserve any further comments until I have time to read your essay in greater detail.

do us all a favor
keep it simple
The Bush Deficit, the Clinton Surplus and TARP by Gregory Hilton | The DC World Affairs Blog
W added about 2.5-3 trillion to the debt if you split 09 with Obama. Closer to 2.5 trillion with
2 wars
Enron
& major hurricanes
adding homeland security
2 recessions
Early 2000s recession - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The "economic meltdown" has nothing to do with spending 4 trillion dollars we do not have and getting 0 in return

That is the issue we have with Obama
he has locked down the fossil fuel business when we are allowing Canada and mexico to make money off of us, and create millions of jobs we could create right here
Nuclear power

what else?

Out of curiosity, did you know Ken first suggested the trading of carbon credits?

who is Ken?

 

[CessnaCJ4]

Two comments:

It did go ballistic, and then he slammed on the brakes when against DOJ's recommendations he decided he needed to rub Gates' nose in some poo. It dropped suddenly right after he rejected DOJ's recommendations. Sure, it recovered some, but not enough to avoid the recession.

Hallucination and greats flights of fantasy, will not make you educated on this subject. There is nobody on planet earth that understands that stock market correction during the Clinton Era, to be catalyzed by the Department of Justice! That's so far removed from any reasonable causation that I've ever heard, that I'm simply going to let it stand all by itself as a glowing example of precisely why humanity needs to stop doing drugs.

Ridiculous, is the notion.

Ah, what the heck. Here is an INDU chart from inception. Look at it an PLEASE educate yourself.

INDU Chart 1928 to 2011​

​

There was an explosion in the stock market in the early 1990's, which has not been seen in the United States of America since the Clinton Era, or before the Clinton Era.

In stark contrast, look at what happened immediately after the election of one George W. Bush. The stock market corrected, rallied, corrected again, rallied again - between Bush 43 and the current President, Obama.

You guys need to do your homework before stepping into a public forum like this and embarrassing yourselves collectively. No where in that chart, do you see a sharp correction in the market during the Clinton Era, as you do during the Bush 43 Error.

That would sure be noble and admirable if it were true that Obama did shift gears in response to the economic crisis. But he didn't. He kept on with his vanity healthcare legislation instead of paying attention to the efficacy of his stimulus and programs such as HAMP.

That's nonsense. Candidate Obama, began increasing his town-hall meetings specifically around the issue of the economy. Anyone truly paying attention already knows this to be true, number one.

Number two, Republicans don't seem to be able to understand what 1/6th means, neither mathematically or practically. 1/6th of our GDP, is what the United States of America spends on Healthcare. That's 1/6th of nearly $14 trillion and ANY Presidential Candidate or President, who turns a blind eye and a deaf ear to such large and overblown expenditures, especially during times of economic crisis, is a Candidate who does not have the capacity to be President, or a President who does not have the intellectual horsepower to remain in office.

We cannot possibly see continued growth sustained in our economy over the long haul, if we continue to ignore 1/6th of our GDP. Only those who continue to stick their head in the sand would believe otherwise.

He failed in keeping many promises which had he honored them could have kept America on board with him.

I've already picked apart every single one of the non-existent failure that you mentioned above, yet you continually repeat the Rush Limbaugh Chant, that was put into place long before any of the President's policies were executed. I'm still waiting for an accurate list of these so-called failures, but I've never run into a solitary Republican who can delineate that message to me with a straight face and survive the correction that surely comes their way.

His most egregious failure was when he explicitly promised the Hispanic community that there would be a comprehensive immigration bill in the congress within his first year and he would put his weight behind it.

You really do need to simply stop, take a deep breath and get yourself up to speed on what's going on in this country. Now, here's what the President actually said and what he's actually doing, coupled to what he actually has to deal with from Congress:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1_HS3xdhc9E&feature=related]DREAMers tell OBAMA YES YOU CAN!! - YouTube[/ame]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=axy9qxXPcHw&feature=related]Obama Issues DREAM Act by executive order | What is the DREAM Act? | with Lili Gil - YouTube[/ame]

He tried to work with the Republican inside the Congress, but ultra-Right-wing obstructionists would refuse to work with the President in real terms, almost every single time. So, he issued an Executive Order. That fact that you did not know this, is staggering.

Regarding promises:

President score card is 16 Promises Kept; 3 Promises Working and 6 Promises Not Kept. And, he's accomplished that in less than 3.5 years, with the majority of the kept promises accomplished in under 2.5 years. I would say that such a record is absolutely nothing to be warrant material for describing a President who cannot keep his promise.

Promises Made. Promises Kept. Promises on Pending. Promises Broken.

Furthermore, this notion that you can expect a President to do all things instantaneously, and at the exact same time, is a rather silly notion at best. He has four (4) years, eight (8) years with re-election, to fulfill his campaign promises. The problem with Republicans, is that they have never even pretended to be willing to give this President anywhere near the same latitude they gave war criminal George W. Bush, when he not only failed to deliver on most of his campaign promises, but he never even had a domestic agenda to speak of.

What made that most egregious is how he explicitly said that he was aware of how many times the Hispanic community had been given empty promises just for purposes of garnering their votes and he stated quite firmly that the promise he was making that day would not be one of those empty promises.

Maybe now you understand what you did not understand before you made this glaring post in error.

He was elected on the illusion that he would be a different kind of politician. But he is as much of a liar if not worse than any inhabitant of the oval office in my lifetime.

Facts, not opinion make such a statement true. I've taken ever single statement in error that you have made here, shown you either the data and/or the clear evidence that disproves what you say and am still waiting for genuine evidence from you that this President is what you say his is, a failure.

I reserve any further comments until I have time to read your essay in greater detail.

Spend more time researching your own posts, before studying my essay. I have corrected so many errors here, that I can hardly stand it.

 

[Amelia]

That's nonsense. Candidate Obama, began increasing his town-hall meetings specifically around the issue of the economy. Anyone truly paying attention already knows this to be true, number one.

That's so funny. He increased his town-hall meetings?

You mean he talked more?

Words mean squat. He kept telling us he "got it", over and over he told us, as he wasted more than a year creating an unconstitutional healthcare boondoggle which he foisted on our increasingly fearful nation rather than making sure that his stimulus was doing what it could have done.

We could have been in a robust recovery if Obama hadn't strangled it.


I just hope we don't go downhill farther before we can get a grown up in office who lets people who know how to create business get to work.

 

[CessnaCJ4]

My god you Libs are really pissed

I'm not a Liberal, I'm an Independent who is sick and tired of the blind eyed lunacy that I keep hearing come from the Right. I grew weary of the lies being told, the distortions being made, the twisting of facts that are crystal clear to any rational minded human being about where are economy is right now, how it got there, who is responsible and what's being done to correct the problem.

I get sick and tired of reading and hearing Republicans, exclude themselves from the crisis, when THEY had eight (8) years to prevent the crisis! The American People have a right to be pissed at government right now, and especially at those who have tried to run and hide from their own role in the biggest criminal financial scandal the world has ever known.

Republicans, were in charge of a government that stood by and allowed the American People to be stripped of their jobs, stripped of their retirement savings, stripped of their right to retire for having to work through age 93 and never once blinked an eyelash while doing it.

THAT is what the march on Wall Street is all about right now - people getting sick and tired of being played like pawns in a chess board. Republicans had EIGHT years (do you understand that?) to avert this crisis and did NOTHING.

John McCain, to solidify the complete and total incompetence of the Republican party on anything economic, stood in front of a camera during the campaign and proclaimed that "the fundamentals of the economy are strong."

That statement was a critical indictment on the entire Republican party and its complete and utter bankruptcy on anything having to do with domestic policy.

And, you wonder WHY people are now taking to the streets, or are a little "pissed?"

Wake Up! Extract yourself from the valley of denial and accept responsibility for the role Republicans played.

 

[CessnaCJ4]

That's nonsense. Candidate Obama, began increasing his town-hall meetings specifically around the issue of the economy. Anyone truly paying attention already knows this to be true, number one.

That's so funny. He increased his town-hall meetings?

You mean he talked more?

Words mean squat. He kept telling us he "got it", over and over he told us, as he wasted more than a year creating an unconstitutional healthcare boondoggle which he foisted on our increasingly fearful nation rather than making sure that his stimulus was doing what it could have done.

We could have been in a robust recovery if Obama hadn't strangled it.


I just hope we don't go downhill farther before we can get a grown up in office who lets people who know how to create business get to work.

This post is nothing more than the whimpering sigh of one who realizes that their distortions have been uncovered, cleaned, seasoned and cooked. You provide the distortions - I provide the facts, data and evidence that they are distortions. You then shoot back with ad hominem redundancy and moot nonsequitur gibberish.

Do you have anything else to say on this subject? Any other facts and data you want to provide, showing how recession was already set in before Bush 43 took office? Or, will the counter data that I have provided here suffice as proof that you were not telling the truth?

Rebuttal?

 

[CessnaCJ4]

There are so many ways we can take him out.

It's just the moment to play it right. No pun intended.

And, likewise, an equal number of ways that you can be taken out, if the pun still fits - wear it.

 

[Amelia]

Furthermore, this notion that you can expect a President to do all things instantaneously, and at the exact same time, is a rather silly notion at best.

I don't expect a President to do all things instantaneously and at the exact same time.

I expect him to prioritize. This President failed to prioritize appropriately.

I expect the public not to buy it when a candidate overpromises, but failing that, since they did believe Obama, I expect him to be held accountable for overpromising, and when he says he WILL do something in his first year he better do it, especially when he reiterated the promise and underscored that this would not be just words.

He said he couldn't guarantee that the comprehensive immigration bill would pass but he promised there would be one in the first year and he promised he would put his weight behind it. He had a lot of capital that first year. His weight would have meant something - as opposed to what it means now that more of us know who he really is.


If Hispanics want to cast their vote to him again, they deserve all the lies he told them then and all the lies he is telling them now.



But luckily the mass hypnosis which ushered Obama into office doesn't have the hold on the nation that it did then.

Hopefully enough people have awakened that they will vote for competence next time around instead of symbolism and image.

 

[CessnaCJ4]

This man never has deserved the Presidency.

That's your problem. No man "deserves" the Presidency. It is ALWAYS both an honor and a privileged to serve your country. A salient point that was sorely missed. The President is a servant of The People.

It is not whether the man deserves the presidency, it is whether the man is fit to be a servant of The People.

A good servant, will never lie to its master, as proof of fitness to serve. George W. Bush, failed that test when he lied about WMD. Unfit to serve his master, The American People.

You seem to have forget the most important thing of all here, that it is WE The People, who are in charge and NOT our servants on the Hill, or in the White House.

When you get that lesson on the brain correctly, come back and we can talk a bit about service to one's country by way of political appointment.

We don't have descendent Kings and Queens in the U.S. who deserve to rule over The People. We rule ourselves and we select our Servants.

Rebuttal?

 

[Sallow]

That's nonsense. Candidate Obama, began increasing his town-hall meetings specifically around the issue of the economy. Anyone truly paying attention already knows this to be true, number one.

That's so funny. He increased his town-hall meetings?

You mean he talked more?

Words mean squat. He kept telling us he "got it", over and over he told us, as he wasted more than a year creating an unconstitutional healthcare boondoggle which he foisted on our increasingly fearful nation rather than making sure that his stimulus was doing what it could have done.

We could have been in a robust recovery if Obama hadn't strangled it.

I just hope we don't go downhill farther before we can get a grown up in office who lets people who know how to create business get to work.

And that's completely untrue. You either don't understand the scope of the damage done to the economy..or the systemic destruction wrought by Republicans against the regulatory structure in this country. Along with a terrible paradigm shift in the private sector that encourages quick profit over long term sustainability.

President Obama's efforts staggered and slowly reversed the economic decline. The huge problem with his methods were they were to concilaitory and asked no accountability from the very people that caused this mess. In fact..many of those people profitted greatly and went on BAU.

There's no Republican candidate that seems to understand any of this. Indeed the least crazy of the bunch, Romney, is talking about reinstituting the very same practices that caused the collapse.

That's still nuts.

 

[CessnaCJ4]

do us all a favor
keep it simple

Simple is as simple does. It is simple for simple sake, is often times a recipe for disaster. Recall, we elected a simple man to the White House to server us, and look what happened. Bush 43, plunged the nation into war, debt and more deficit - not to mention the acute fact that his failure to produce a domestic, helped to accelerate an imploding economy.

The "economic meltdown" has nothing to do with spending 4 trillion dollars we do not have and getting 0 in return.

Really? Because that's not what Republicans are saying out on the campaign trail right now. Republicans, are blaming Obama's domestic agenda (by way of the People who voted for him) for the economic meltdown, or have you not been paying attention? Just last night, all but Run Paul, were in accord that Obama's domestic policy was the cause for the economic crisis AND the inability to produce jobs. I watched the debates last night and took note of what was said.

You can't magically pull numbers from thin air, and then blame Obama, for your inability to get it right. It is not that you can't understand, it is that you are intentionally trying not to understand WHY the debt has increased AFTER the 2008 economic meltdown.

TARP I
TARP II
Stimulus I


I also noticed that you failed (as every single Republican presidential hopeful) to mention that the Reserve Fund was fully paid for - 100%. That means that the total cost of the final National Healthcare system, won't be anywhere near what Republicans have lied to the American People about. In fact, it could end up being less than $200 billion, all in, over 10 years. That's relative cheap, given the benefit of having everybody covered.

Furthermore, the Lewin Group, claims that over a period of about 10 years, the accumulative savings throughout the entire healthcare system would range up to $517 billion. Let's do the math:

$200 billion in
$517 billion out

That's a Net Positive development when all is said and done. But, Republicans don't want America to know these truths, so they keep lying about Death Panels and skyrocketing costs. None of which are true.

This is what I mean when I say people opposed to Obama's healthcare initiative, either did not take adequate time to study it, or are by nature, such hyper-partisan creatures, that no matter what evidence you put before them, they will Just Say No To Obama for any reason, even when the reason is no reason at all.

That is the issue we have with Obama
he has locked down the fossil fuel business when we are allowing Canada and mexico to make money off of us, and create millions of jobs we could create right here
Nuclear power

what else?

The issue is that you are not taking the necessary time to properly educate yourself. I just dispelled the increased cost of Obamacare for you. Now, you want to prove that somehow, our country will maintain its footing in the global economy, by remaining the worlds largest consumer of fossil fuel based energy sources, and that drill-baby-drill, is somehow the answer to our economic problems in the 21st century and beyond.

The answer to securing our future economy, is to design a smarter economic model that encompasses BOTH:

- Clean and sustainable energy creation
- Clean and sustainable energy consumption
- Exportation of new clean energy technology to the world

If we can do those three things, then we will have the strongest economy and the strongest Middle Class that the world has ever known. If we fail to do this, then China, will eat our fossil fuel lunch.

Class dismissed.

I've got no more time for this debate today, but I'll visit the forum again some time in the near future.

 

[rightwinger]

Ron Paul beat Odumbo in a poll back at the end of September as well. I can't post a link yet just wanted to share that.

Too bad all Ron Paul can win is straw polls

 

[Sallow]

I am amused in a sickened way by the people who support Obama and don't even keep track of his speeches. No one yelled "you lie" at a State of the Union address.

Obama is a media hog so I understand that it would be hard to keep track of all of his addresses. But at least try to tell the difference between the State of the Union and Obama's other speeches.

You are correct..it wasn't the SOTU. But it was at a session of congress with the President speaking. It was done by a Republican Congressmen against a Democratic President. In the last century..when has that occurred? When has anything so outrageous happened?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rw9lQT1Ark4&NR=1]Joe Wilson shouts "YOU LIE!" to Obama during his address on Health Care Reform - YouTube[/ame]

Joe Wilson was outrageous to make that accusation during the speech itself. Congressional rebuke was appropriate.

However, that's not the most outrageous thing which has happened in the past 100 years. How to compare it? I think a lie told with a straight face is more outrageous than a spontaneous outburst.

Obama does lie. He shouldn't be called on it in the middle of a speech but he does tell falsehoods and he does it so smoothly. That's kinda scary.

Lie where?

A lie is knowningly telling an untruth. Reagan lied many times. And that's easy enough to prove. He lied about some very substantial issues. As did George W. Bush.

But Obama? Lie? No. Got some things wrong? Yep.

 

[CessnaCJ4]

And that's completely untrue. You either don't understand the scope of the damage done to the economy..or the systemic destruction wrought by Republicans against the regulatory structure in this country. Along with a terrible paradigm shift in the private sector that encourages quick profit over long term sustainability.

That is correct.

They do not understand the full magnitude of what actually took place in 2008. They don't understand that the entire game has changed. Capitalism, as we know it has changed, forever. Things will never, ever, ever, be exactly the same again.

You are right! The paradigm shift has already happened, yet people are still thinking with old economic model assumptions. Those days are gone, like it or not. We could not fund our own bubble. China, had to fund them for us and they have been doing it for decades. That party is over. China, will recognize that the U.S. economy can be brought to a screaming halt, unlike the previous myth taught us, and as a direct result, they will begin to fund their own suburban economy.

Right now, China, has been comfortable with funding its urban transformation. 2008, has forced China, to re-evaluate its risk/reward profile and it has already made the decision to begin providing liquidity to its areas that surround its major urban economic centers. As China, shits its spending back into its own economic development, it will continue to draw-down its purchase of long-term U.S. debt. Thus, we will have no more easy money to spend.

Bingo. Just like that, you get your U.S. economic paradigm shift. Why? Because, it has been primarily China, that has provided liquidity to our credit markets, through our treasury department. Once that source dries up, we will be forced to shift our economy to something that can sustain itself long-term.

They just don't get it. I pray that some day they will understand.

 

[CessnaCJ4]

Now, I can go. Back some other day to debate.

 

[Amelia]

You are correct..it wasn't the SOTU. But it was at a session of congress with the President speaking. It was done by a Republican Congressmen against a Democratic President. In the last century..when has that occurred? When has anything so outrageous happened?

Joe Wilson shouts "YOU LIE!" to Obama during his address on Health Care Reform - YouTube

Joe Wilson was outrageous to make that accusation during the speech itself. Congressional rebuke was appropriate.

However, that's not the most outrageous thing which has happened in the past 100 years. How to compare it? I think a lie told with a straight face is more outrageous than a spontaneous outburst.

Obama does lie. He shouldn't be called on it in the middle of a speech but he does tell falsehoods and he does it so smoothly. That's kinda scary.

Lie where?

A lie is knowningly telling an untruth. Reagan lied many times. And that's easy enough to prove. He lied about some very substantial issues. As did George W. Bush.

But Obama? Lie? No. Got some things wrong? Yep.

Example 1: The healthcare mandate is a tax, and it isn't a tax. Depending upon which group he is trying to sell it to - the people or the courts.

Example 2: Stating his goal of single payer healthcare then claiming he never said he supported it.

Example 3: His broken promise over supporting a comprehensive immigration bill in his first year. A broken promise wouldn't be the same as a lie necessarily but he was so explicit about how this particular promise was not just words. He made it a guarantee. So in not following through, he made it a lie.

Example 4: During the budget battles, when Democrats had offered up $10.5 billion in savings after the House asked for $61 billion, Obama said that the Democrats had met Republicans halfway. That could be only an error, but it's an offensive one since Obama used it as justification to call the Republicans ... um what was it ... did he say they were behaving like children? Sorry, I can't remember the exact wording, but it was offensive, and if he is going to insult us he should get his figures right. He used his mathematical fudging to try to claim some high ground which didn't exist. The Democrats were nowhere near meeting the Republicans halfway.


That's just a few off the top of my head. I could come up with more upon reflection. But it's not like I have an organized file of them.

 

[rightwinger]

Joe Wilson was outrageous to make that accusation during the speech itself. Congressional rebuke was appropriate.

However, that's not the most outrageous thing which has happened in the past 100 years. How to compare it? I think a lie told with a straight face is more outrageous than a spontaneous outburst.

Obama does lie. He shouldn't be called on it in the middle of a speech but he does tell falsehoods and he does it so smoothly. That's kinda scary.

Lie where?

A lie is knowningly telling an untruth. Reagan lied many times. And that's easy enough to prove. He lied about some very substantial issues. As did George W. Bush.

But Obama? Lie? No. Got some things wrong? Yep.

Example 1: The healthcare mandate is a tax, and it isn't a tax. Depending upon which group he is trying to sell it to - the people or the courts.

Example 2: Stating his goal of single payer healthcare then claiming he never said he supported it.

Example 3: His broken promise over supporting a comprehensive immigration bill in his first year. A broken promise wouldn't be the same as a lie necessarily but he was so explicit about how this particular promise was not just words. He made it a guarantee. So in not following through, he made it a lie.

Example 4: During the budget battles, when Democrats had offered up $10.5 billion in savings after the House asked for $61 billion, Obama said that the Democrats had met Republicans halfway. That could be only an error, but it's an offensive one since Obama used it as justification to call the Republicans ... um what was it ... did he say they were behaving like children? Sorry, I can't remember the exact wording, but it was offensive, and if he is going to insult us he should get his figures right. He used his mathematical fudging to try to claim some high ground which didn't exist. The Democrats were nowhere near meeting the Republicans halfway.


That's just a few off the top of my head. I could come up with more upon reflection. But it's not like I have an organized file of them.

None appear to be a lie....keep trying

 

[KissMy]

The Obamacrat Jobs Disaster

We were creating lots of jobs that were out-pacing the population workforce growth rate until the DEMOCRATS were elected in 2006 & took control January 2007. The jobs creation machine went off the rails 3 months after these assholes took power. A year & 3 months later the jobs train went off the cliff. Their socialistic wet dream that has turned into a nightmare for the now unemployed.