Presidential Double-Talk

[cubby1223]

Originally posted by: retrospooty

Originally posted by: cubby1223

This stimulus was about as shitty as the government can get. I wouldn't doubt if half the moneys ends up stolen. The government can't even keep track of the $170 million in AIG bonuses, how the hell do you think the federal government can keep track of $800 billion? Oh, Joe "The Sheriff" Biden is on the job, no one will cross him! Did you hear Biden the other day enforcing responsibility by pleading with others? Yeah right, kiss that $800 billion goodbye, it will stimulate cheats, not hard workers.


I guess I could be like you, bury my head in the sand and hope when I pull my head out the economy will be fixed...

Well, we can listen to your right-slanted opinion of what you think will happen, or we can listen to highly educated people that live in the world of economics... I think I will choose them over you.

Oh, that's right, Obama claimed that all economists agree with him 110%

Head in the sand, buddy

 

[retrospooty]

Originally posted by: OrByte

Ds are spending on their constituents, Rs are trying to spend on their constituents....and fiscal conservatives everywhere are represented by no one.

When was the last time we had a fiscal conservative in the office? ha!

Thats a very good point and a very good question. It the past 40+ years, no-one but Clinton had a balanced budget- and even that was only a small portion of his 8 year term. You cant really call Reagan or Bush 1 fiscal conservatives with the debt they ran up. Ford? Nixon ? I was just a tot - I dont remember what they did, or how they ran things.

 

[retrospooty]

Originally posted by: cubby1223


Oh, that's right, Obama claimed that all economists agree with him 110%

Ya, thats what I said... :roll:

Pulling stuff out of thin air does not make a valid argument. Its called a deflection.

 

[Fern]

Originally posted by: retrospooty
-snip-
Lets be real though... When Obama was campaigning, he was campaigning based on the way things were at the time. By the time he finally got into office, it was clear that the economy was in dire straights... Much worse than anyone had hoped. The plan had to change based on the current situation. We were headed for massive depression fast. Something had to be done. No-one likes spending all that money, but you have to make tough choices when you are the leader of the free world. Not going ahead with the stimulus packages and bailouts would mean mortgage markets totally freeze up and we go into a depression. You think 8% unemployment is bad, try 25% or more if he were to do nothing. Even Bush knew we needed several stimulus. He did the one, and if he werent leaving office he would have done more. it simply HAD to be done. Not that it was done perfectly, nothing the govt. does is, but something had to be done.

Now, you can wait and see the real effects of what Obama is doing, or you can bitch about anything and everything he does and what you think will happen. Its all just uneducated, biased supposition. You're clapping with one hand.

The economic picture was clear back when Obama was campaigning. and long before he took office.

Bank failures started in 2007. The AIG bailout/takeover happend before the election.

If you pause for a moment you might remember that McCain was running pretty close with Obama in the polls, then the poop 'hit the fan' and McCain looked foolish with his whole 'let's suspend the campaign to deal with this economic crisis'.

Also, I think Bush did more than one stimulus, and that it was Obama and his team (who worked unprecidentedly closely with the GWB admin) who requested Bush make the second one. Also, Geithner had been head of the NY Fed bank for years and worked on the original bailout plan.

So, these guys knew what was going on well before taking office. (Which quite surprises that Geithner hasn't already formulated plan after being neck-deep in the problem for close to two years)

As far as the article's contention that the deeds don't match the rhetoric - it's fair to comment at any time, bit it's still a bit to definitively judge fairly IMO. But I do understand those who aren't optimistic.

Fern

 

[cubby1223]

Originally posted by: retrospooty

Originally posted by: cubby1223
Oh, that's right, Obama claimed that all economists agree with him 110%

Ya, thats what I said... :roll:

Pulling stuff out of thin air does not make a valid argument. Its called a deflection.

You said we should "listen to highly educated people that live in the world of economics", implying that they all agree that this spending spree is necessary. Head in the sand.

If you believe a massive stimulus is necessary, then fine, believe that.

But to think that the stimulus plan written by Madame Marie Antoinette, sorry I mean Nancy Pelosi, will achieve the goals you hope for, is nothing short of delusional.

There is nothing else to argue. You just want to hope everything will be fine, and I just want everyone to realize that we are all dopes.

 

[retrospooty]

Originally posted by: Fern

Originally posted by: retrospooty
-snip-
Lets be real though... When Obama was campaigning, he was campaigning based on the way things were at the time. By the time he finally got into office, it was clear that the economy was in dire straights... Much worse than anyone had hoped. The plan had to change based on the current situation. We were headed for massive depression fast. Something had to be done. No-one likes spending all that money, but you have to make tough choices when you are the leader of the free world. Not going ahead with the stimulus packages and bailouts would mean mortgage markets totally freeze up and we go into a depression. You think 8% unemployment is bad, try 25% or more if he were to do nothing. Even Bush knew we needed several stimulus. He did the one, and if he werent leaving office he would have done more. it simply HAD to be done. Not that it was done perfectly, nothing the govt. does is, but something had to be done.

Now, you can wait and see the real effects of what Obama is doing, or you can bitch about anything and everything he does and what you think will happen. Its all just uneducated, biased supposition. You're clapping with one hand.

The economic picture was clear back when Obama was campaigning. and long before he took office.

Bank failures started in 2007. The AIG bailout/takeover happend before the election.

If you pause for a moment you might remember that McCain was running pretty close with Obama in the polls, then the poop 'hit the fan' and McCain looked foolish with his whole 'let's suspend the campaign to deal with this economic crisis'.

Also, I think Bush did more than one stimulus, and that it was Obama and his team (who worked unprecidentedly closely with the GWB admin) who requested Bush make the second one. Also, Geithner had been head of the NY Fed bank for years and worked on the original bailout plan.

So, these guys knew what was going on well before taking office. (Which quite surprises that Geithner hasn't already formulated plan after being neck-deep in the problem for close to two years)

As far as the article's contention that the deeds don't match the rhetoric - it's fair to comment at any time, bit it's still a bit to definitively judge fairly IMO. But I do understand those who aren't optimistic.

Fern

I know... We all knew the economy was tanking... My point was that the extent was much clearer and it later became obvious that it was going to go into massive depression if bailouts and stimulus weren't implemented.

 

[retrospooty]

Originally posted by: cubby1223

There is nothing else to argue. You just want to hope everything will be fine, and I just want everyone to realize that we are all dopes.

Agreed... and only time will tell how it actually plays out in the real world. Though they are far from perfect - I am confident the stim package/bailouts will accomplish their goal of keeping us out of depression... and you are not.

 

[cubby1223]

One of these days you'll come around to realizing that government just does not work, despite how eloquent someone sounds while reading from a teleprompter

The only difference then and now is, with the situation we are in, can we really allow government to fail on the scale of trillions of dollars?

 

[retrospooty]

Originally posted by: cubby1223
One of these days you'll come around to realizing that government just does not work, despite how eloquent someone sounds while reading from a teleprompter

The only difference then and now is, with the situation we are in, can we really allow government to fail on the scale of trillions of dollars?

I already know that... I think pretty much everyone knows that, you'd have to be pretty thick headed not to see that...

Any organization is difficult to maintain in an efficient, fair and practical manor. The larger the organization the more difficult, and the US govt. is one of the largest organizations, if not THE largest on the planet. Of course its broken, its run by humans. They are flawed, selfish, and corruptable. Both sides of the aisle are totally corrupt.

What is the alternative? Philosophically speaking, I agree totally with the old republican concepts of small govt. low taxes, business friendly, govt. staying out of private lives... Its a great concept. Too bad even the republican party doesn't believe in it anymore. We are where we are now. like it or not (and no-one that loves America likes where we are). What can we do to fix it? To not do the stim/bailouts would lead to massive depression.

 

[Jiggz]

Originally posted by: retrospooty

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
I wonder how many of Obama's fans will skip this thread...

LOL - your're too funny. You read something like that, and agree, so you assume the logic is air-tight and no-one could argue against it.

Lets be real though... When Obama was campaigning, he was campaigning based on the way things were at the time. By the time he finally got into office, it was clear that the economy was in dire straights... Much worse than anyone had hoped. The plan had to change based on the current situation. We were headed for massive depression fast. Something had to be done. No-one likes spending all that money, but you have to make tough choices when you are the leader of the free world. Not going ahead with the stimulus packages and bailouts would mean mortgage markets totally freeze up and we go into a depression. You think 8% unemployment is bad, try 25% or more if he were to do nothing. Even Bush knew we needed several stimulus. He did the one, and if he werent leaving office he would have done more. it simply HAD to be done. Not that it was done perfectly, nothing the govt. does is, but something had to be done.

Now, you can wait and see the real effects of what Obama is doing, or you can bitch about anything and everything he does and what you think will happen. Its all just uneducated, biased supposition. You're clapping with one hand.

So I guess it was all a matter of context? Just like Blago was taken out of context and was impeached and gone. For some reasons, with this admin there seems to be a lot of issues taken out of context by the public in general? One thing for sure it's totally in parallel with Bill Clinton's semantics during the Lewinski investigation! Out of context my butt . . .!

 

[trenchfoot]

Well, let's see...a whole two months in office and the dire predictions from Obama's enemies that were spouted here just after the elections but BEFORE Obama actually took office have not come true, so all of that was merely empty agenda-driven sour grape hate-mongering.

I can see where that hasn't changed any, so I think I can safely assume the results will be the same.

Until the time comes where Obama's track record clearly and OBJECTIVELY shows what he's made of, what good is it to deny him any semblance of impartiality other than to drag him down to his immediate predecessor's PROVEN BEYOND DOUBT level of incompetence where they would have a "fair fighting chance" at ruining Obama and the rest of the Nation along with them, of which they've already proven they are able and more than willing to do?

What good is it that those who put us in this financial hellhole we now find ourselves in are now willfully and with dedicated purpose attempting to destroy Obama's and our Nation's chances at pulling us out of the mess that they themselves got us in other than to regain power and continue their very own version of "Redistributing Wealth" as they fondly and hypocritically accuse Obama of?

To what other power do these narrow-minded, self-interested, only-the-rich-deserve-to-eat-cake agenda-driven "self-anointed patriots" owe their allegiance to other than the Country that gave them everything they have?

It seems to me it was this notion of "Ideology-over-Country" that got us to where we are now, and it's this same notion that's now preventing us from getting us out of from where these "Ideologists" seemingly want us to remain, all so that they can get richer at the expense of everyone else.

 

[cubby1223]

I don't know what the alternative is, but anything would be better than the crap this government is doing.

I'm from Illinois. We just kicked our Governor out of office, and we have a U.S. Senator who has no business being there except that the Democrats need the straight party-line vote.

The greatest thing this country needs is confidence, and we're getting zero of it when the government runs around like a chicken with its head cut off...

Protests don't even work. Did protests end the Iraq war? Will these tea party protests end government spending? Nope.

Why are some Governors refusing stimulus money? Because the Democrats piled in so much policy change into the bill because no one took the time to debate it. The process was "Pelosi, deliver me $800 billion in spending with no discussion" and I still can't believe it worked!


I don't know. A depression is almost sounding like a welcomed changed considering what's going on today in Washington...

 

[Siddhartha]

Originally posted by: cubby1223
The past 8 years we overspent our ways into financial ruin.

Obama recognizes this as the "Thelma and Louise" situation where we're heading for a cliff and must change direction... by overspending our way out of financial ruin !

He's brought us the CHANGE we can believe it! Obama is George W. Bush on steroids!

Okay, one more time! You do not decrease government spending in a recession. Herbert Hoover tried to balance the budget at the beginning of the depression and made things worst.

 

[piasabird]

So basically OBamma is just a big liar like most political candidates.

O'Bamma is lying every time he opens his mouth.

 

[woodie1]

Originally posted by: piasabird
So basically OBamma is just a big liar like most political candidates.

O'Bamma is lying every time he opens his mouth.

Nice summary. But you left out the clueless part.

 

[chess9]

The article is a low grade C whack job. Not Samuelson's best work. He really should have included some examples rather than generalities. His focus is also wrong. Obama is spending a ton of money on the uber rich, money 90% of America won't benefit from. The bailouts are a festering sore on the Obama administration. The rest of his budget is pie in the sky because CONGRESS must pass his budget, and there will be major changes to most of it. Which is why Samuelson is talking in generalities. He can't SAY anything because he doesn't KNOW anything...yet.

He makes two good points about subsidies for Corporate Agriculture and SS and Medicare for the retired wealthy. The rest is something he wrote while sitting on the crapper.
He should have flushed it.

-Robert

 

[Duwelon]

Originally posted by: chess9
The article is a low grade C whack job. Not Samuelson's best work. He really should have included some examples rather than generalities. His focus is also wrong. Obama is spending a ton of money on the uber rich, money 90% of America won't benefit from. The bailouts are a festering sore on the Obama administration. The rest of his budget is pie in the sky because CONGRESS must pass his budget, and there will be major changes to most of it. Which is why Samuelson is talking in generalities. He can't SAY anything because he doesn't KNOW anything...yet.

He makes two good points about subsidies for Corporate Agriculture and SS and Medicare for the retired wealthy. The rest is something he wrote while sitting on the crapper.
He should have flushed it.

-Robert

You can lead a liberal to the truth, but you can't make them accept it.

Here's the part that caught my eye the most:

A prudent president would have made a "tough choice"? concentrated on the economy, deferred his more contentious agenda. Similarly, Obama claims to seek bipartisanship but, in reality, doesn't. His bipartisanship consists of sprinkling his cabinet with token Republicans and inviting some Republican members of Congress to the White House to watch the Super Bowl. It does not consist of fashioning proposals that would attract bipartisan support on their merits. Instead, he clings to dubious, partisan policies (mortgage cramdown, union checkoff) that arouse fierce opposition.

Obama has completely abandoned any conservative principals that exist in America. He is a full on, wacked out socialist hellbent on reshaping every part of America today into a European style society where taxes are high, production and invention are low. He is HELL BENT on doing this, because he is a leftist democrat.

This keeps up, I gaurantee you the USA will break up because as it is, the Democratic party is taking us much deeper into debt, dishonestly no less, by exploiting the crisis for their batshit crazy agendas of socialism, totalitarianism, gun controls, etc, all using scare tactics to push through items that have nothing to do with addressing the fear in the first place(the economy).

Ramh Emmanual and Hillary Clinton are on record as saying "never waste a good crisis". What kind of fool looks at a crisis for an opportunity? Only one who hates their country and wants to model it after another. That's the left today and any idiot who votes with them.

A breaking point is fast approaching where good men who still love the Constitution, will cling to their guns and religion and take a stand against the evil and corruption that is almost the entire left wing party in the US.

 

[OrByte]

Originally posted by: Duwelon

Originally posted by: chess9
The article is a low grade C whack job. Not Samuelson's best work. He really should have included some examples rather than generalities. His focus is also wrong. Obama is spending a ton of money on the uber rich, money 90% of America won't benefit from. The bailouts are a festering sore on the Obama administration. The rest of his budget is pie in the sky because CONGRESS must pass his budget, and there will be major changes to most of it. Which is why Samuelson is talking in generalities. He can't SAY anything because he doesn't KNOW anything...yet.

He makes two good points about subsidies for Corporate Agriculture and SS and Medicare for the retired wealthy. The rest is something he wrote while sitting on the crapper.
He should have flushed it.

-Robert

You can lead a liberal to the truth, but you can't make them accept it.

Here's the part that caught my eye the most:

A prudent president would have made a "tough choice"? concentrated on the economy, deferred his more contentious agenda. Similarly, Obama claims to seek bipartisanship but, in reality, doesn't. His bipartisanship consists of sprinkling his cabinet with token Republicans and inviting some Republican members of Congress to the White House to watch the Super Bowl. It does not consist of fashioning proposals that would attract bipartisan support on their merits. Instead, he clings to dubious, partisan policies (mortgage cramdown, union checkoff) that arouse fierce opposition.

Obama has completely abandoned any conservative principals that exist in America. He is a full on, wacked out socialist hellbent on reshaping every part of America today into a European style society where taxes are high, production and invention are low. He is HELL BENT on doing this, because he is a leftist democrat.

This keeps up, I gaurantee you the USA will break up because as it is, the Democratic party is taking us much deeper into debt, dishonestly no less, by exploiting the crisis for their batshit crazy agendas of socialism, totalitarianism, gun controls, etc, all using scare tactics to push through items that have nothing to do with addressing the fear in the first place(the economy).

Ramh Emmanual and Hillary Clinton are on record as saying "never waste a good crisis". What kind of fool looks at a crisis for an opportunity? Only one who hates their country and wants to model it after another. That's the left today and any idiot who votes with them.

A breaking point is fast approaching where good men who still love the Constitution, will cling to their guns and religion and take a stand against the evil and corruption that is almost the entire left wing party in the US.

scary....