If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above.
You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.
To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Not just Obama, I may add (like so many may think I'm talking about), but the whole damn admin. of tax-cheats and general law-breakers.
Shout, Shout, Let it all Out, These are the Things I Can do Without You Shouldn't Have to Jump for Joy, You Shouldn't Have to Shout for Joy
They Give You Life and in Return You Gave 'em Hell As Cold as Ice - No Bitch, You're Ice Ice Baby I Hope We Live to Tell the Tale, I Hope We Live to Shout the Tale
Will You Never Shout? And When You've Taken Down Your Guard... If I Could Change Your Mind, I'd Really Love to Break Your Heart! Come On Let Me Shout Shout Let Me, Come On Let Me Shout Shout!
I agree.. we have to many career politicians in office, from both sides of the spectrum. However, I do believe Obama and his followers in congress have created more problems to lead us to a facist society then any other administration has before. Its sad to see where America is going, and how it is getting so derailed from the constitution and what it was founded on.
_______________________________
"Government's first duty is to protect the people, not run their lives."Ronald Reagan
I agree.. we have to many career politicians in office, from both sides of the spectrum. However, I do believe Obama and his followers in congress have created more problems to lead us to a facist society then any other administration has before. Its sad to see where America is going, and how it is getting so derailed from the constitution and what it was founded on.
Mishele, I don't get into debates, but this statement about the Obama administration and his followers leading us into a 'Fascist society' and 'Derailing the Constitution' is not only bizarre, but it's downright untruthful.
An opinion based on fact is one thing, name calling (esp. involving heated rhetoric from the Fox Noise Channel) is not only deceptive, but inciteful as well.
If you could give specific examples of any of this, or maybe even just discuss your concern with some policy issue, that might lead to constructive discussion. Otherwise, this just seems like you're either trying to pick a fight with someone, or vent. But, neither is really 'debate', and neither advances the cause of clarification in the face of misinformation.
I'd be delighted to answer the question for Miss Barnett.
The Obama Administration has endlessly utilized statist procedures throughout the last year and a half. Examples of this would be cap and trade, bailouts, universal health care, seizure of private industries, the stimulus packages, et cetera. People seem to forget the controversy surrounding the watchdog who was asked to step down for doing his job. But I haven't.
I'd be delighted to answer the question for Miss Barnett.
The Obama Administration has endlessly utilized statist procedures throughout the last year and a half. Examples of this would be cap and trade, bailouts, universal health care, seizure of private industries, the stimulus packages, et cetera. People seem to forget the controversy surrounding the watchdog who was asked to step down for doing his job. But I haven't.
Lets hear Barney Frank's take on power:
[youtube]cKCawa3pgXA[/youtube]
More authority, indeed, Barney.
You are misinformed. First, what is a statist procedure? And Cap and Trade hasn't been passed, actually the whole Energy Bill is stalled in Congress. This, when the planet is dangerously warming, and there's a massive uncontrolled oil gusher off the coast of America. Bailouts? Which ones are you referring to? Wall Street? The excesses that led to the collapse of Wall Street were largely the result of the Bush administration's gutting of all regulatory agencies that were supposed to prevent the exact types of abuses that occurred. Allowing Wall Street to fail would have led to the collapse of the American economy and probably the world's, too. Besides, the original bailout was approved and instituted by Bush, Obama just inherited the problem, as well as it's cure. The stimulus was also required, when unemployment is at 10% and everyone is terrified about losing their jobs, the only people left to spend is the Gov't. Spending is what fuels the economy. With no one else doing that, the Gov't had to. And every top economist says the original stimulus wasn't enough, and there might need to be another, so brace yourself. Bailing out GM and Ford Motor were also necessary, there were hundreds of thousands of jobs at stake, ordinary Americans here. Likewise, there's no 'Universal Health Care', although there should be. What we got was a watered down version, which basically put restrictions on health insurance companies so they couldn't do things like drop people for actually using their coverage. And a mandate for people to get something they should have anyway, sorta like car insurance when you have a car.
I'd suggest you get the facts from reliable organizations (factcheck.org), rather than those personalities that might be more appealing to you personally. It might not be as fun or provocative or entertaining, but it's far more informed, which is a good thing to be these days b/c the problems our country (and our world) are facing are very serious and require people who can separate fact from emotion. It's easy to sit and complain, it's much more difficult to come up with reasonable, practical solutions , if you (or those who believe as you do) have reasonable, specific alternatives, please let the rest of us know.
And Cap and Trade hasn't been passed, actually the whole Energy Bill is stalled in Congress.
Which is the legislative branch. The executive branch, headed by Barack Obama, gave the thumbs up. Just because it's not passed doesn't mean it's not statist protocol.
Quote:
This, when the planet is dangerously warming, and there's a massive uncontrolled oil gusher off the coast of America.
Global warming is a separate subject entirely, which I won't go into right now.
Quote:
Bailouts? Which ones are you referring to? Wall Street? The excesses that led to the collapse of Wall Street were largely the result of the Bush administration's gutting of all regulatory agencies that were supposed to prevent the exact types of abuses that occurred. Allowing Wall Street to fail would have led to the collapse of the American economy and probably the world's, too. Besides, the original bailout was approved and instituted by Bush, Obama just inherited the problem, as well as it's cure.
Mm... that seems to be the modus operandi of this administration. Something goes wrong, "It's Bush's fault!" I think we can both agree that neither is without blame here.
Though, I'd be interested in hearing you explain how the bailout prevented collapse of the U.S. economy.
In addition to the Wall Street bailout:
AIG
Goldman Sachs
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac
JPMorgan
Curious though. You defend the bailout, but in the same breath, say that it's Bush's fault and Obama just inherited it. So, is it a problem or did Bush save the world?
Quote:
The stimulus was also required, when unemployment is at 10% and everyone is terrified about losing their jobs, the only people left to spend is the Gov't. Spending is what fuels the economy. With no one else doing that, the Gov't had to. And every top economist says the original stimulus wasn't enough, and there might need to be another, so brace yourself.
This is true and false. Spending money does fuel the economy. But the government spending it is not what fuels it. History has shown us time and time again that more government action results in the situation growing worse. Cutting taxes and spending has historically proven fruitful to the economy. Hence the roaring 1920s and the 1940s, where the economy was on the verge of collapse, but cutting both taxes and spending resulted in prosperous times. In fact, we refer to the former's case as the roaring twenties because it was that prosperous.
You will have to explain how spending more money equals us having more money. If I'm in debt, does it make sense that I go out and spend more money? Of course not.
As for unemployment being at 10%...
Quote:
Likewise, there's no 'Universal Health Care', although there should be. What we got was a watered down version, which basically put restrictions on health insurance companies so they couldn't do things like drop people for actually using their coverage. And a mandate for people to get something they should have anyway, sorta like car insurance when you have a car.
The point was conceptual to illustrate Obama's statist agenda. Your personal preference on universal health care does not excuse the fact that it's an authoritarian mandate.
Quote:
I'd suggest you get the facts from reliable organizations (factcheck.org), rather than those personalities that might be more appealing to you personally. It might not be as fun or provocative or entertaining, but it's far more informed, which is a good thing to be these days b/c the problems our country (and our world) are facing are very serious and require people who can separate fact from emotion. It's easy to sit and complain, it's much more difficult to come up with reasonable, practical solutions , if you (or those who believe as you do) have reasonable, specific alternatives, please let the rest of us know.
You're rather arrogant, aren't you? I don't recall saying anything condescending to you to warrant your snide remarks. Rather than snub your nose at me and try to act superior, just address my points. If you can actually refute my points, then I'll go back and check the facts for myself. Otherwise, telling me how bad you just kicked my butt before even reading my response just makes you look a little too full of yourself.
"If we are strong, our strength will speak for itself. If we are weak, words will be of no help." -- JFK
Last edited by AuntUnaFromElTuna; 07-07-10 at 09:48 PM..
What would you suggest instead? Please feel free to offer solutions.
My concern about your post is that it reflects a widely held (but largely misinformed) view of what's going on. Unfortunately, there's a loud noise machine that perpetuates the nonsense that you espouse, but they're more entertaining than informative, and many of their followers cannot distinguish that. And that's not arrogant, it's informed.
Spend the time getting the facts, and try to separate them from your feelings about Obama here.
As I said, I don't do debate, especially when the opposition is unwilling to consider the merits based on fact. This is just mindless bashing, there's not much point in continuing the discussion.
What would you suggest instead? Please feel free to offer solutions.
In terms of what, specifically?
Quote:
My concern about your post is that it reflects a widely held (but largely misinformed) view of what's going on. Unfortunately, there's a loud noise machine that perpetuates the nonsense that you espouse, but they're more entertaining than informative, and many of their followers cannot distinguish that. And that's not arrogant, it's informed.
Spend the time getting the facts, and try to separate them from your feelings about Obama here.
As I said, I don't do debate, especially when the opposition is unwilling to consider the merits based on fact. This is just mindless bashing, there's not much point in continuing the discussion.
So, because I don't have a different perception of what's going on than you, I'm misinformed? Is that how that works? No, sorry, that's arrogance. Ad hominem arguments like yours are usually used by individuals who are either arrogant or insecurity. Take your pick.
I'm quite willing to consider anything you have to say based on fact. However, you haven't provided any yet. So, kindly, point out where I'm misinformed or politely step aside.
You are intelligent. You are right to be proud of that. However, don't warp that pride with being supercilious, or you are bound to wind up embarrassing yourself many times in life. Treat your opposition with respect and if you lose, it can be done honorably. Paint your opposition as stupid and if you lose, you've painted yourself as even stupider.
I don't hate Obama, believe it or not. It's a farce to think that anyone who disagrees with him does. Considering your responses though, I'd say that you should take your own advice and look at the facts rather than letting your emotions dictate how you react to politics.
Last edited by AuntUnaFromElTuna; 08-07-10 at 10:38 AM..
Today's Toppers
The current administration.
