Say What???

DOGS THAT BARK

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 13, 1999
19,506
193
63
Bowling Green Ky
when asked about this frightening (money in/money out) reality--




obama had this to say--

?Our real problem is not the spike in spending last year, or the lost, even the lost revenues last year, as significant as those are,? he said. ?The real problem has to do with the fact that there is a just a mismatch between the amount of money coming in and the amount of money going out." :SIB

--DUH Say What? Doubt "Da Base" don't even scratch their heads on that one. :)

He best revert to what got him here--straddle that fence.

--Anyone have any opinion of wall st bonus?

Gumby's got you back either way-

<HR>Now Obama Doesn't 'Begrudge' Millions in Bonuses for 'Savvy' Bankers...


Flashback: Obama Says Bonuses Are Violation Of 'Our Fundamental Values'


only thing he's been consistant on is--

ItsNotMyFaultItsBushsFault.jpg

Whaaaaa--It was Booooosh
 

bleedingpurple

Registered User
Forum Member
Mar 23, 2008
22,416
242
63
52
Where it is real F ing COLD
I am going to let his first year kind of slide. Sort of an adjustment / initial phase process.. Not going to let his first year rile me up, hell we got 3 more years to go... I would like to see some impovement over the next year mainly with increased employment. A little pist about about more troops not coming home but going to have to see how this year goes. I don't really know if anyone else would be doing better at this point but what the hell do I know.:shrug:
 

Lumi

LOKI
Forum Member
Aug 30, 2002
21,104
58
0
58
In the shadows
I am going to let his first year kind of slide. Sort of an adjustment / initial phase process.. Not going to let his first year rile me up, hell we got 3 more years to go... I would like to see some impovement over the next year mainly with increased employment. A little pist about about more troops not coming home but going to have to see how this year goes. I don't really know if anyone else would be doing better at this point but what the hell do I know.:shrug:

O' was given a shit sandwich and forced to take 2 bites !

Now ! he has to take the bull by the horns, kick it in the balls and right the ship and STOP blaming GEE WIZ !!!! it's getting really old.

I don't like Barry, in fact I don't like almost any POL, brace yourself :scared :mj07: but the fact is, not only is he fucking this monkey, he is holding the tail ! So get it done right or get out of the the way.

Or, hold another beer summit with the little people. :toast:

No, not these guys....

mini_kiss.jpg


The struggling working guy and gal, away from the camera, away from the teleprompter. Sit down, have a beer, or 3 and hear about the real struggles. :toast:
 

Chadman

Realist
Forum Member
Apr 2, 2000
7,501
42
48
SW Missouri
Wayne, while not completely on your point, I found this article kind of interesting about Obama and more specifically, people who are labeled anti-business. Kind of a different way to look at things:

Who Is Really "Anti-Business"?
By Dave Johnson

In the Bloomberg story today, Obama Doesn?t ?Begrudge? Bonuses for Blankfein, Dimon, President Obama, spoke up about the huge Wall Street bonuses handed out this year,
?I know both those guys; they are very savvy businessmen,? Obama said in the interview yesterday in the Oval Office with Bloomberg BusinessWeek, which will appear on newsstands Friday. ?I, like most of the American people, don?t begrudge people success or wealth. That is part of the free- market system.?

Free-market system? These huge bonuses are for the Wall Street robber-barons that caused the financial collapse, took taxpayer dollars to prop up their fortunes, and get free money from the Federal Reserve with which to "trade" -- speculate, gamble, call it what you want. Meanwhile they spend hundreds of millions of dollars "lobbying" (bribery) to fight any kind of financial reforms or consumer protections from enactment, and to make sure that no such think as a "free market" with honest competition never threatens their dominance of business and government.

So why is the President talking like this [note: see update below], at a time when so many Americans are out of work, losing their homes, and falling into poverty? Because he doesn't want to be perceived as "anti-business." From the story,

Obama sought to combat perceptions that his administration is anti-business and trumpeted the influence corporate leaders have had on his economic policies. He plans to reiterate that message when he speaks to the Business Roundtable, which represents the heads of many of the biggest U.S. companies, on Feb. 24 in Washington.

Meanwhile a Senate filibuster blocked the President's great nominee, Craig Becker, from serving on the National Labor Relations Board. So the Labor Board remains non-functional. The filibuster kept workers from being fairly represented, and the Board itself from having a tie-breaking vote so they can resolve labor disputes so the "free market" can function as it should, with workers able to bargain for better wages, benefits and working conditions.
These two stories this week present quite a contrast, and send mixed and demoralizing signals to the country. President Obama doesn't want to "appear" to be "anti-business." Meanwhile giant, monopolistic corporations and Wall Street are chewing up Main Street and keeping smaller businesses from competing, while their lobbyists keep the legislature from getting anything done at all.
Let's talk about this "anti-business" label and how it is used.

I wrote a post the other day titled, Tax Cuts HURT Small And Medium Businesses, championing small and medium businesses in their struggle to survive against the giant monopolistic corporations that are crushing them. Summary: struggling businesses don't pay taxes, so tax cuts only give more ammunition to the giants that are crushing them. In the comments at one of the places it was posted I was accused to being ?anti-business.?

Apparently championing small and medium businesses - America's job-creating, innovative engine - is "anti-business." If you look around, being anything but a servant to Wall Street and the giant monopolistic corporations earns you the label, "anti-business."

The Power Of Words

This got me thinking about the ways this label, "anti-business," gets used. It is always used by corporate/conservative types, against anyone who questions the power of Wall Street and the giant monopolistic corporations that are strangling smaller businesses, workers and democracy.

The President nominates a great candidate for the Labor Board, then worries that he is perceived as "anti-business." Labels like "anti-business" are powerful accusations and come from very, very powerful people. (Like this or this.)

Last year, in the post Misuse Of The Words Protectionism And Trade Is Making Us Poorer I wrote,

Language has tremendous power. People like George Lakoff and Drew Westin, who study the use of language in political discussion, say that our choice of words has the power to actually affect the ?wiring? or neuron circuits that our brains use to think.

The corporate marketers and political persuaders have certainly learned the power of language to influence us. It has even gotten to the point where ?neuromarketing? uses MRI and EEG to study how our brains react to certain stimuli so they can be used to market and persuade.

In politics I think that we have even reached a point where we give words more power and importance even than the ideas the words represent. In the Bush years we learned that the persuaders believed they could ?create their own reality.?

[. . .] words are used as weapons by professionals who wish to distract us from things that are in front of our own faces.

So how do we fight this? One way is to recognize our own power as citizens in a democracy. In America the people ? Main Street ? are supposed to be in charge of things, and the purpose of business and finance is supposed to be to serve our interests and needs, not the other way around. Why else would We, the People have set this system up, anyway? So we need to internalize this understanding, and believe in it. We are supposed to be in charge. We, the People are supposed to be telling businesses how they are supposed to operate, setting the rules and regulations, defining the playing field on which they operate. We need to have a sense that it is improper for businesses to be involved at all in the decision-making about the rules under which businesses operate. It must be this way because business interests will always, always try to tilt the rules against the free market and in their own favor, giving them advantages over other businesses.

This isn't about being "anti-business" at all, it is about being in favor of a level playing field, where the innovative small and medium companies have a fair chance to compete. It is the giant monopolistic corporations that are "anti-business."

Believe it.
 

DOGS THAT BARK

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 13, 1999
19,506
193
63
Bowling Green Ky
Lots of different articles supporting lots of diff things--but they all point same direction--wanting to give free ride to some at expense of others. So far he's passed the schip which took free healthcare for children to familys with $80,000 income in some states.

Healthcare reforms biggie was not reducing costs but trying to cover 30 million that don't have to which as you know because I've asked twice here--who are these 30 million--a few want it but can't afford but most are illegals or those that don't want--and from O's own mouth it would increase Medicade recipients by bout 15 mill--more fee rides. As the chart shows you got spending line straight up--tax revenues straight down.

Got another "Say What" a while ago-- :)

Top of the Ticket

Politics and commentary, coast to coast, from the Los Angeles Times

<!-- entry -->Joe Biden update: Iraq one of Obama's 'great achievements'

February 11, 2010 | 2:26 am




Who knew?
Thank goodness, Vice President Joe Biden went on CNN to chat with Larry King Wednesday night. So many think things are not going so well for the Democrat administration, as The Ticket chronicled here.
Many Americans recall the ex-Sen. Biden's Democratic primary plans to give in to Iraq's fractious factions and carve the country into three territories. And even more probably recall Biden's boss' plan to halt the Iraq war years ago. As long as it got started anyway without the permission of the then state senator.
Plus, of course, Obama's vehement opposition to the 2007 American troop surge of you-know-who from Texas that Obama knew for certain was only going to worsen sectarian strife there. (See 2007 video here.)....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_igpyewuzQ&feature=player_embedded



<CENTER><EMBED style="VISIBILITY: visible" height=344 type=application/x-shockwave-flash width=425 src="" target="_blank" href="http://www.youtube.com" www.youtube.com http:></CENTER>
Well, of course, it didn't turn out that way, thanks in large measure to the brave service of hundreds of thousands of U.S. troops who served in that war-torn land and helped peace to break out despite the loud political acrimony back home over their role.
Now, the Obama-Biden pair that opposed the Iraq war and its tactics and predicted their failure is prepared to accept credit for its success.

It seems that Biden, who's from Delaware when he's in Delaware and Pennsylvania when in Pennsylvania, is certain now that Iraq will turn out to be one of the Obama-Biden administration's greatest achievements.
No, really.


Here's how Biden put it to Lar:
I am very optimistic about -- about Iraq. I mean, this could be one of the great achievements of this administration. You're going to see 90,000 American troops come marching home by the end of the summer. You're going to see a stable government in Iraq that is actually moving toward a representative government.​
I spent -- I've been there 17 times now. I go about every two months -- three months. I know every one of the major players in all the segments of that society. It's impressed me. I've been impressed how they have been deciding to use the political process rather than guns to settle their differences.​
Biden did not elaborate on what all the administration's other "great achievements" were so far.
No doubt, Iraqis too are very thankful for that 2008 U.S. election. (Full King transcript here.)

-- Andrew Malcolm
 
Last edited:

DOGS THAT BARK

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 13, 1999
19,506
193
63
Bowling Green Ky
"SAY WHAT" part 3


http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalp...-limit-from-124-trillion-to-143-trillion.html

President Obama Signs Law Raising Public Debt Limit from $12.4 Trillion to $14.3 Trillion

February 12, 2010 3:21 PM

Behind closed doors and with no cameras present, President Obama signed into law Friday afternoon the bill raising the public debt limit from $12.394 trillion to $14.294 trillion.
The current national debt is $12.3 trillion. Check out the National Debt Clock, which tells you your share of that -- roughly $40,000 per citizen, $113,000 per taxpayer.
The bill also establishes a statutory Pay-As-You-Go procedure requiring that new non-emergency legislation affecting tax revenue or mandatory spending not increase the Federal deficit ? in other words, that any new spending or tax cuts be paid for with new taxes or spending cuts. :shrug:
 

DOGS THAT BARK

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 13, 1999
19,506
193
63
Bowling Green Ky
Who looks like a genius would depend on who you think has more input on gov--congress or pres.

I can get the chart for you--but believe the fact that Clintons 1st 2 years were so inept we had the greatest transfer of dems to rebs in history via the Rebs contract with America--see below.

So I'll let you make the call who was responsible--
P.S. The Rebs continued to hold congress till 2006. When Pelosi and Dems promised to change what they called worst economy since great depression--remember we had (5.4 unemployment-2.6 inflation-13,000 Dow)--
Gues what their "their hope/change" brought since transfer in 06--You got it--"THE FACTUAL" worst economy since great depression.
--correct :0corn
===========================
Billy Bobs #'s

USA Today calls it "the hidden election," in which nearly 7,000 state legislative seats are decided with only minimal media and public attention. But there was an important national story here: evidence of the disaster that Bill Clinton was for the Democratic Party. According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, Democrats held a 1,542 seat lead in the state bodies in 1990. As of 1998 that lead had shrunk to 288. That's a loss of over 1,200 state legislative seats, nearly all of them under Clinton. Across the US, the Democrats controled only 65 more state senate seats than the Republicans.
Further, in 1992, the Democrats controlled 17 more state legislatures than the Republicans. After 1998, the Republicans controlled one more than the Democrats. Not only was this a loss of 9 legislatures under Clinton, but it was the first time since 1954 that the GOP had controlled more state legislatures than the Democrats (they tied in 1968).
Here's what happened to the Democrats under Clinton, based on our latest figures:
- GOP seats gained in House since Clinton became president: 45
- GOP seats gained in Senate since Clinton became president: 7
- GOP governorships gained since Clinton became president: 11
- GOP state legislative seats gained since Clinton became president: 1,254
as of 1998
- State legislatures taken over by GOP since Clinton became president: 9
- Democrat officeholders who have become Republicans since Clinton became
president: 439 as of 1998
- Republican officeholders who have become Democrats since Clinton became president: 3


<CENTER>[SIZE=+2][/SIZE] </CENTER>
 

DOGS THAT BARK

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 13, 1999
19,506
193
63
Bowling Green Ky
Spin away my good man.

Spin????- Garry I just ask you a simple question--Who do you think is more imput in gov mandates--the pres or congress.

What is so hard about that:shrug:

Or is it you know if you say it was Bill- I'm going to ask you another simple question--what was he did.

I answered your intial question at length--and you give me a Smurphy (I ain't got a clue) one liner rebutal. :)
 
Bet on MyBookie
Top