"You didn't get there on your own"

[Listening]

wow, they finally admitted that Obama;s agenda is at best moderate, that practically everything he has supported was either initially created by a con or supported by them

and yet still they hate him, why? we all know, dont we

Yes, Obama is conservative to moderate, just look at his record:

Obamatax

DADT repeal

Pipeline stopped.

Shutdown of Yucca Mountain.

I could go one but why bother?

Obamacare.

 

[Murf76]

wow, they finally admitted that Obama;s agenda is at best moderate, that practically everything he has supported was either initially created by a con or supported by them

and yet still they hate him, why? we all know, dont we

Hate him ?

Not wanting the bastard to ruin our country does not mean we hate him.....but that won' work in your Hitleresque narrative. You need us to hate him so you can continue your crusade.

Ain't working.

We don't hate him. We just don't want him in the WH. We love the country he is working to change in a way we don't want.

Nobody admitted anything.

And you don't know s**t.

The FACTS are: Obama Is The Most Fiscally Conservative President in Modern History.

The FACTS are: Ronald Reagan tripled the Gross Federal Debt, from $900 billion to $2.7 trillion.

Reagan switched the federal government from what he critically called, a “tax and spend” policy, to a “borrow and spend” policy, where the government continued its heavy spending, but used borrowed money instead of tax revenue to pay the bills. The results were catastrophic. Although it had taken the United States more than 200 years to accumulate the first $1 trillion of national debt, it took only five years under Reagan to add the second one trillion dollars to the debt. By the end of the 12 years of the Reagan-Bush administrations, the national debt had quadrupled to $4 trillion!

Good grief. That 'most fiscally conservative president evah!' meme has been shot down so many times we could make a fishing net out of it, full of holes as it is.

 

[Listening]

Good grief. That 'most fiscally conservative president evah!' meme has been shot down so many times we could make a fishing net out of it, full of holes as it is.

If it helps people like this sleep better at night....I figure it's no big deal.

Nobody on MSNBC is going to make this argument.

Reagan's change is true. I would guess he didn't devise it...but it happened on his watch so it is his.

I admire Reagan for many things.

But if you read Eyewittness to Power by David Gergen, you see that Reagan was, indeed a compromiser.

 

[Neotrotsky]

wow, they finally admitted that Obama;s agenda is at best moderate, that practically everything he has supported was either initially created by a con or supported by them

and yet still they hate him, why? we all know, dont we

Yes, Obama is conservative to moderate, just look at his record:

Obamatax

DADT repeal

Pipeline stopped.

Shutdown of Yucca Mountain.

I could go one but why bother?

Obamacare.

It is all part of the Left's attempt to push the center
of American Politics more left to make their policies
and themselves appear less extreme

Any "appearance" of moderate that the Left claims is not by choice
but is a factor of the limiting powers of the Constitutions and fear of
public response.

Indeed, if left to his own then he would run left as fast and hard as he could

 

[saveliberty]

I like how the chart conveniently stops at 2007.

 

[Foxfyre]

Well the chart is one more tactic from the left to divert attention from or derail a discussion that is going badly for their Fearless Leader.

 

[American_Jihad]

A Business Owner’s Angry Response To Obama

July 19, 2012 by Wayne Allyn Root

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sqfbbmKOlaM&feature=player_embedded]A Business Owner's Angry Response To Obama - YouTube[/ame]

Wayne Allyn Root responds to President Barack Obama’s recent assertion that government, not entrepreneurs, is responsible for business success in the United States. Root, Obama’s college classmate at Columbia University, Class of 1983, notes that nearly all of his classmates at the college were openly socialist or Marxist. He says that the President’s most recent remarks are simply an act of the Marxist-in-Chief coming out of the closet.


A Business Owner’s Angry Response To Obama : Personal Liberty Alerts

 

[Foxfyre]

A Business Owner’s Angry Response To Obama

July 19, 2012 by Wayne Allyn Root

A Business Owner's Angry Response To Obama - YouTube

Wayne Allyn Root responds to President Barack Obama’s recent assertion that government, not entrepreneurs, is responsible for business success in the United States. Root, Obama’s college classmate at Columbia University, Class of 1983, notes that nearly all of his classmates at the college were openly socialist or Marxist. He says that the President’s most recent remarks are simply an act of the Marxist-in-Chief coming out of the closet.


A Business Owner’s Angry Response To Obama : Personal Liberty Alerts

Wow, he said a mouthful. The one thing I picked up on is that he is the first I have seen who remembers Obama being at Columbia. (Or did he? He doesn't mention seeing Obama in class, but oh well. . . . . )

But however extreme one might critique his commemts to be, I didn't hear him say a single thing for which there is no argument to support.

 

[American_Jihad]

Outraged small business owners fire back at Obama
Jul 28, 2012

Entrepreneurs say, 'We did build this'
Outraged small business owners fire back at Obama

 

[Bfgrn]

Hate him ?

Not wanting the bastard to ruin our country does not mean we hate him.....but that won' work in your Hitleresque narrative. You need us to hate him so you can continue your crusade.

Ain't working.

We don't hate him. We just don't want him in the WH. We love the country he is working to change in a way we don't want.

Nobody admitted anything.

And you don't know s**t.

The FACTS are: Obama Is The Most Fiscally Conservative President in Modern History.

The FACTS are: Ronald Reagan tripled the Gross Federal Debt, from $900 billion to $2.7 trillion.

Reagan switched the federal government from what he critically called, a “tax and spend” policy, to a “borrow and spend” policy, where the government continued its heavy spending, but used borrowed money instead of tax revenue to pay the bills. The results were catastrophic. Although it had taken the United States more than 200 years to accumulate the first $1 trillion of national debt, it took only five years under Reagan to add the second one trillion dollars to the debt. By the end of the 12 years of the Reagan-Bush administrations, the national debt had quadrupled to $4 trillion!

Good grief. That 'most fiscally conservative president evah!' meme has been shot down so many times we could make a fishing net out of it, full of holes as it is.

I don't believe you. So bring me your right wing bullshit proof so I can shoot it down and expose your ignorance.

 

[Foxfyre]

Please PLEASE don't let the designated thread derailers derail this thread folks. We have a good thing going here, and enough legitimate ammunition to last us until November.

 

[Bfgrn]

wow, they finally admitted that Obama;s agenda is at best moderate, that practically everything he has supported was either initially created by a con or supported by them

and yet still they hate him, why? we all know, dont we

Yes, Obama is conservative to moderate, just look at his record:

Obamatax

DADT repeal

Pipeline stopped.

Shutdown of Yucca Mountain.

I could go one but why bother?

Obamacare.

Emote all you want. But the FACTS don't support what you parrot. The Extended-Baseline Scenario is WITH Obamacare being fully implemented. The Alternative Fiscal Scenario is with Obamacare being repealed.

Federal Debt Held by the Public Under CBO’s Long-Term Budget Scenarios
(Percentage of gross domestic product)

Here is the 'rub'...We are on The Extended-Baseline Scenario trajectory Obama and the Democrats put us on. If Congress does nothing the Extended-Baseline Scenario is already in place.

IF the Bush tax cuts don't expire and the AHA is not fully implemented or repealed the The Alternative Fiscal Scenario is the trajectory Teapublicans will take us if they gain enough power.

the CBO lays it out perfectly clear...CRYSTAL.

The chart shows 2 scenarios. For all practical purposes, you can call the Extended-Baseline Scenario the Democrat scenario and the Alternative Fiscal Scenario the Teapublican scenario.


The Extended-Baseline Scenario adheres closely to current law. Under this scenario, the expiration of the tax cuts enacted since 2001 and most recently extended in 2010, the growing reach of the alternative minimum tax, the tax provisions of the recent health care legislation, and the way in which the tax system interacts with economic growth would result in steadily higher revenues relative to GDP.

The Alternative Fiscal Scenario
The budget outlook is much bleaker under the alternative fiscal scenario, which incorporates several changes to current law that are widely expected to occur or that would modify some provisions of law that might be difficult to sustain for a long period. Most important are the assumptions about revenues: that the tax cuts enacted since 2001 and extended most recently in 2010 will be extended; that the reach of the alternative minimum tax will be restrained to stay close to its historical extent; and that over the longer run, tax law will evolve further so that revenues remain near their historical average of 18 percent of GDP. This scenario also incorporates assumptions that Medicare’s payment rates for physicians will remain at current levels (rather than declining by about a third, as under current law) and that some policies enacted in the March 2010 health care legislation to restrain growth in federal health care spending will not continue in effect after 2021.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Healthcare costs destroyed the Bush economy

David Frum: A former economic speechwriter for President George W. Bush

Posted: September 15, 2009, 4:30 PM by NP Editor

Ron Brownstein ably sums up the Census Bureau’s final report on the Bush economy.

Bottom line: not good.

On every major measurement, the Census Bureau report shows that the country lost ground during Bush’s two terms. While Bush was in office, the median household income declined, poverty increased, childhood poverty increased even more, and the number of Americans without health insurance spiked.

What went wrong?

In a word: healthcare.

Over the years from 2000 to 2007, the price that employers paid for labor rose by an average of 25% per hour. But the wages received by workers were worth less in 2007 than seven years before. All that extra money paid by employers disappeared into the healthcare system: between 2000 and 2007, the cost of the average insurance policy for a family of four doubled.

Exploding health costs vacuumed up worker incomes. Frustrated workers began telling pollsters the country was on the “wrong track” as early as 2004 – the year that George W. Bush won re-election by the narrowest margin of any re-elected president in U.S. history.

Slowing the growth of health costs is essential to raising wages – and by the way restoring Americans’ faith in the fairness of a free-market economy.

Explaining the impact of health costs on wages is essential to protecting the economic reputation of the last Republican administration and Congress.

If Republicans stick to the line that the US healthcare system works well as is – that it has no important problems that cannot be solved by tort reform – then George W. Bush and the Congresses of 2001-2007 will join Jimmy Carter and Herbert Hoover in the American memory’s hall of economic failures. Recovery from that stigma will demand more than a tea party.

Read more: David Frum: Healthcare costs destroyed the Bush economy - Full Comment

 

[Neotrotsky]

Never trust the Left on taxes and
never trust the Left on spending estimates of gov't programs

Spending Program
Medicare Part A
What politicians said it would cost- $9 billion a year by 1990
What it actually cost- $67 billion a year

Entire Medicare Program
What politicians said it would cost- $12 billion a year by 1990
What it actually cost- $110 billion a year

Medicare relief to states for hospitals
What politicians said it would cost- $1 billion a year in 1992
What it actually cost- $17 billion a year



All the projections being used
Most are garbage just like Papa Obama care

 

[Foxfyre]

Never trust the Left on taxes and
never trust the Left on spending estimates of gov't programs

Spending Program
Medicare Part A
What politicians said it would cost- $9 billion a year by 1990
What it actually cost- $67 billion a year

Entire Medicare Program
What politicians said it would cost- $12 billion a year by 1990
What it actually cost- $110 billion a year

Medicare relief to states for hospitals
What politicians said it would cost- $1 billion a year in 1992
What it actually cost- $17 billion a year



All the projections being used
Most are garbage just like Papa Obama care

And to be fair, we can't say that applies only to the Left in government. The CBO can only use the numbers and criteria furnished it by the Congress/President when it costs out something and gives us the projected consequences. And despite who was in power at the time, I cannot remember a single time that the government projections were even close to the actual costs, or when the actual costs were less than the projected costs.

The private businessman uses real figures to project his costs, and can't afford to make up numbers that look good on paper but have no chance to stand up against the realty of the program or project. If he budgets and sets the prices in the same way the government does, he is shut down and/or declaring bankruptcy pretty quickly.

That is why so many businessmen are sitting on their investment capital and are not willing to risk it in the current economy. They don't know what Obama is going to do re taxing the rich. They don't know what the consequences and costs of Obamacare are going to be. They have no assurance that a one-world-government minded Congress and a like minded President will not pass cap and trade and put them at the mercy of the whims of other countries who will not have their interests in mind.

Is Fearless Leader considering any of this? No way in hell. All he wants is more power in government and the best way to accomplish that is to strip power from private enterprise and do a lot more deficit spending.

 

[boedicca]

Never trust the Left on taxes and
never trust the Left on spending estimates of gov't programs

Spending Program
Medicare Part A
What politicians said it would cost- $9 billion a year by 1990
What it actually cost- $67 billion a year

Entire Medicare Program
What politicians said it would cost- $12 billion a year by 1990
What it actually cost- $110 billion a year

Medicare relief to states for hospitals
What politicians said it would cost- $1 billion a year in 1992
What it actually cost- $17 billion a year



All the projections being used
Most are garbage just like Papa Obama care

And the corollary: introducing new taxes at low rates targeted at The Rich, and then driving the middle class into the taxable base via inflation while raising tax rates.

 

[Neotrotsky]

Never trust the Left on taxes and
never trust the Left on spending estimates of gov't programs

Spending Program
Medicare Part A
What politicians said it would cost- $9 billion a year by 1990
What it actually cost- $67 billion a year

Entire Medicare Program
What politicians said it would cost- $12 billion a year by 1990
What it actually cost- $110 billion a year

Medicare relief to states for hospitals
What politicians said it would cost- $1 billion a year in 1992
What it actually cost- $17 billion a year



All the projections being used
Most are garbage just like Papa Obama care

And to be fair, we can't say that applies only to the Left in government. The CBO can only use the numbers and criteria furnished it by the Congress/President when it costs out something and gives us the projected consequences. And despite who was in power at the time, I cannot remember a single time that the government projections were even close to the actual costs, or when the actual costs were less than the projected costs.

The private businessman uses real figures to project his costs, and can't afford to make up numbers that look good on paper but have no chance to stand up against the realty of the program or project. If he budgets and sets the prices in the same way the government does, he is shut down and/or declaring bankruptcy pretty quickly.

Agree

Most of our problems have been promoted by both sides

 

[Bfgrn]

Never trust the Left on taxes and
never trust the Left on spending estimates of gov't programs

Spending Program
Medicare Part A
What politicians said it would cost- $9 billion a year by 1990
What it actually cost- $67 billion a year

Entire Medicare Program
What politicians said it would cost- $12 billion a year by 1990
What it actually cost- $110 billion a year

Medicare relief to states for hospitals
What politicians said it would cost- $1 billion a year in 1992
What it actually cost- $17 billion a year



All the projections being used
Most are garbage just like Papa Obama care

ALL health care costs have gone up astronomically.

WHY have they gone up?

WHAT do we do about it??

 

[Bfgrn]

Never trust the Left on taxes and
never trust the Left on spending estimates of gov't programs

Spending Program
Medicare Part A
What politicians said it would cost- $9 billion a year by 1990
What it actually cost- $67 billion a year

Entire Medicare Program
What politicians said it would cost- $12 billion a year by 1990
What it actually cost- $110 billion a year

Medicare relief to states for hospitals
What politicians said it would cost- $1 billion a year in 1992
What it actually cost- $17 billion a year



All the projections being used
Most are garbage just like Papa Obama care

And to be fair, we can't say that applies only to the Left in government. The CBO can only use the numbers and criteria furnished it by the Congress/President when it costs out something and gives us the projected consequences. And despite who was in power at the time, I cannot remember a single time that the government projections were even close to the actual costs, or when the actual costs were less than the projected costs.

The private businessman uses real figures to project his costs, and can't afford to make up numbers that look good on paper but have no chance to stand up against the realty of the program or project. If he budgets and sets the prices in the same way the government does, he is shut down and/or declaring bankruptcy pretty quickly.

That is why so many businessmen are sitting on their investment capital and are not willing to risk it in the current economy. They don't know what Obama is going to do re taxing the rich. They don't know what the consequences and costs of Obamacare are going to be. They have no assurance that a one-world-government minded Congress and a like minded President will not pass cap and trade and put them at the mercy of the whims of other countries who will not have their interests in mind.

Is Fearless Leader considering any of this? No way in hell. All he wants is more power in government and the best way to accomplish that is to strip power from private enterprise and do a lot more deficit spending.

Such utter bullshit. YOU are the one disparaging 'businessmen' by painting them as thumb-sucking, fear-filled, insecure wimps.

REAL 'businessmen' decide to hire or expand based on market factors...PERIOD. Supply/demand, the cost of money and their ability to meet those demands. Your argument is pure bullshit.

 

[Neotrotsky]

Never trust the Left on taxes and
never trust the Left on spending estimates of gov't programs

Spending Program
Medicare Part A
What politicians said it would cost- $9 billion a year by 1990
What it actually cost- $67 billion a year

Entire Medicare Program
What politicians said it would cost- $12 billion a year by 1990
What it actually cost- $110 billion a year

Medicare relief to states for hospitals
What politicians said it would cost- $1 billion a year in 1992
What it actually cost- $17 billion a year



All the projections being used
Most are garbage just like Papa Obama care

ALL health care costs have gone up astronomically.

WHY have they gone up?

WHAT do we do about it??

Real market reforms
to start with and by no way all inclusive
-Competition across state lines
-tort reform CBO estimated it could save up to 54 billion

By all means get the gov't out as much as possible
All the things over the years by gov't
to "save us money" - have not

-Instead, they have increased the cost of doing business and
increase the economics of scale where a company has to be
larger and larger to deal with the additional burdens of gov't and
as such, more competition is driven out.

Quite often the gov't is the creator of the very problems
they claim they now want to fix- talk about job security

Imagine any tropical fruit on your morning breakfast table
say a banana - wasn't that expensive

Imagine if the gov't decided that everyone has to some share
of this fruit and as such the gov't was going to make sure
it got to our table

Honestly, do really believe the gov't would do it cheaper better
and with more quality ?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

ALL health care costs have gone up astronomically.

WHY have they gone up?

WHAT do we do about it??

what?? only a liberal could ask such a perfectly stupid question!!
What you do is introduce capitalism so people are shopping carefully with their own money and so providers are competing to offer low price and high quality in order to survive!!

See why we are 100% positive a liberal will be slow??? What other conclusion is possible???