obama administration working for you....

[Trampled Underfoot]

So not very radical to sue a state. :shrug:

 

[Trampled Underfoot]

mags..they don`t hear you....they don`t want to hear you....you give examples and explain your p.o.v.......but they aren`t interested in hearing what you`re saying....

if you don`t agree with obama,you`re a racist...period...that`s how their dna reads....

"you can`t wake a person who`s pretending to asleep"....so save your breath....

i`m counting the days till november so this government can be restored it`s intended balance.....with both parties sharing power...

but i`m extremely worried about the damage that a lame duck congress can do from late november until january....

hopefully we aren`t headed for a lost decade...:mj09:

Thanks for adding your worthless opinion. I don't really see anything worth responding to in your post. It just sounds like you are crying. :facepalm:

 

[gardenweasel]

anybody know why the doj isn`t suing sanctuary cities and states?...they aren`t trying to uphold our immigration policies....they`re ignoring them.....




/thank god it`s not political...:SIB ............:142smilie

 

[gardenweasel]

Thanks for adding your worthless opinion. I don't really see anything worth responding to in your post. It just sounds like you are crying. :facepalm:

you could go back to the playbook and call me a "racist"....

 

[gardenweasel]

you wanna see some real dyed-in-the wool racism?......

palpable,hateful,in your face bigotry?.....

http://liveshots.blogs.foxnews.com/2010/07/22/wi-candidate-is-not-the-whitemans-bitch/

 

[Trampled Underfoot]

you could go back to the playbook and call me a "racist"....

Still nothing, huh.

 

[gardenweasel]

Still nothing, huh.

hows `bout charlie rangel...ex-head of the ways and means committee.....

only took 2 years to get it to a hearing...pelosi said it would over and done with by the end of 2008...

that`s something,ain`t it?...

 

[Trampled Underfoot]

hows `bout charlie rangel...ex-head of the ways and means committee.....

only took 2 years to get it to a hearing...pelosi said it would over and done with by the end of 2008...

that`s something,ain`t it?...

What does that have to do with our working analysis in this thread?

 

[gardenweasel]

What does that have to do with our working analysis in this thread?

analysis?...don`t sprain your rotator cuff patting yourself on the back.....

the analysis is,the woman held racist feelings,she told a story of redemption...breitbart either edited it or received only snippets and the woman`s full speech was taken out of context....

everybody reacted before the context became known...she was fired by the administration...and subsequently offered reinstatement after the correct context became known...

that`s the long and the short of it...doesn`t need to be analyzed...


then the thread veered off into the az immigration battle and again,the dreaded racism meme...


you asked what i had and being that the thread had moved off topic,i gave you charlie rangel`s shenanigans....

and i raise you with a classic john kerry slip and dodge...

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jiEqSiM_kEqSEnbAFURQP7v4scTAD9H4Q8OO0

this guys has been married to 2 of the richest women in the world....and he`s trying to side-step paying taxes to his home state...a state that is going under...

these guys are great at making others pay exorbitant taxes...not so good at paying themselves...

 

[Trampled Underfoot]

analysis?...don`t sprain your rotator cuff patting yourself on the back.....

the analysis is,the woman held racist feelings,she told a story of redemption...breitbart either edited it or received only snippets and the woman`s full speech was taken out of context....

everybody reacted before the context became known...she was fired by the administration...and subsequently offered reinstatement after the correct context became known...

that`s the long and the short of it...doesn`t need to be analyzed...


then the thread veered off into the az immigration battle and again,the dreaded racism meme...


you asked what i had and being that the thread had moved off topic,i gave you charlie rangel`s shenanigans....

and i raise you with a classic john kerry slip and dodge...

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jiEqSiM_kEqSEnbAFURQP7v4scTAD9H4Q8OO0

this guys has been married to 2 of the richest women in the world....and he`s trying to side-step paying taxes to his home state...a state that is going under...

these guys are great at making others pay exorbitant taxes...not so good at paying themselves...

Are you on drugs? Another nice deflection.

I haven't even watched the video. When you want to talk about what a radical Obama is, let me know.

 

[Chadman]

1. Economic Stimulus, which was projected to not be effective, and clearly hasn't been. Put more money into the government by printing it. Most of the money spent went to public projects - and public employees.

Very little time tonight, but wanted to address some of this. Good job with a thoughtful post. I don't agree with much of it, but I certainly respect it. I have two simple thoughts about these points. First, there were COUNTLESS economists and talking heads that CLEARLY had no idea what was the best thing to do in the economic firestorm we were in. The administration previous to this one was the originator of the stimulus idea, and many economists said that if we did not engage in some sort of stimulus and bail out certain parts of private financial and insurance businesses, our entire financial system, and country, could collapse, and we'd be in a worse depression than this country had ever seen. It's EASY to sit here now and say the stimulus was wasteful and inappropriate for capitalistic enterprise (which can be looked at as part of the problem over the past couple of decades, by the way), since things didn't collapse. But MANY conservatives maintained that we had to do something, or risk financial fallout like none of us have ever experienced.

As for the public projects and public employees, at least a lot of those things went to things that are good for our country and infrastructure. And many private contractors, subcontractors, engineers, etc., were the beneficiaries of these public works and infrastructure projects. I've seen a lot of road work accomplished here in Minnesota due to the stimulus programs, and that's measurable, and something good for our state. I can think of MANY other pork projects and defense projects that are FAR less worthy of our tax dollars than what has been accomplished by these projects. MANY.

2. Transforming 16.7% of our national economy from a free market, private based system to a government controlled, quasi-private system. How many private businesses have limits on admin costs and profits set by the government? And the funny thing is, Obama did this to lower costs - but now the CBO is showing that this will INCREASE costs. And that doesn't even touch the fact that the government is now going to require you to purchase a product you may not want to purchase. What is next? My guess it that Obama will make it mandatory that all citizens only buy GM cars, since it the government's company, and it is important to support it. Hmm, forced to buy the government's products.... sounds like Communist Russia to me.

I will defer to your knowledge about the healthcare system, although we have had spirited discussions about it in the past. I know there are many studies and reports that show all kinds of things - including CBO reports of reduced deficits in the future due to the healthcare plans. I don't think they went far enough to address the real cost problems, and I also worry about many parts of the healthcare bill. As for the car thing, I think you are being - pardon my comment - ridiculous in your guess that Obama will make it mandatory that all citizens only buy GM cars. Seriously? You really think that? I generally respect your views, but I'm sorry, I think that comment is ludicrous, self-serving, and a political cheap shot that has no basis in common sense. I know conservatives are desperate to tie Obama to communism or socialism, or whatever negative term they can, but this is a bit ridiculous, IMO.

3. Taking over the auto industry, that has been ravaged by poor decision making, excessive wages and benefits driven by out of control unions, and poor products. Businesses fail all the time if they lack the ability to manage their own company. The Government's job is not to take over industries when they screw up - you let them go out of business, and let a new player come in and pick up the slack. More government control.

So, our country would have been better off if 2 of the 3, if not all 3, major car manufacturers in the U.S. would have failed, putting how many people out of work, including all the companies that support these companies, sell them products, etc? What new players would have come in to take the place of these companies? Are they U.S. based? These companies have long suffered from competition from foreign car manufacturers that have been subsidized by other governments, with the main intent to take over chunks of U.S. car manufacturer market share. If anything, this action is a sensible reaction to the competitors to U.S. companies. Not to mention, the practices put in by other administrations to encourage "free trade" have served other countries pretty well, and caused our trade deficits to go through the roof. Conservatives are so quick to worry about Cap and Trade, because other countries won't abide by the same policies, but they are silent when other countries take advantage of the free trade policies and don't abide by EXISTING policy. And flaunt that, by the way. Hypocritical? I think so.

4. Financial regulation - more radical government control. Yet, the companies (Freddy and Fanny Mac) most responsible for the mortage/real estate meltdown are not even included in the financial reg bill. Why? Because they are government agencies of course, and are assumed to be non-sensical agencies to begin with.

There are countless companies responsible for the mortgage/real estate meltdown. I agree the two you mention are very much responsible, but to say that private enterprise was not equally responsible, if not more so, is not true, IMO. All parts of the equation are responsible, I think. But one thing I do know is conservatives are so quick to talk about the good financial times of the Bush years, when a huge part of that was funded by credit - often bad - and then when the time comes to add up the bottom line, they blame everyone else. Take credit, avoid responsibility. Credit funded virtually everything positive during the Bush years. And we see the fallout now.

5. The Federal lawsuit against Arizona's bill that coincides with federal law to actually help the Feds do it's job. To my knowledge, the government has NEVER sued a state before. Never. And the public is very strongly against the government sueing Arizona on this issue - and very strongly in favor of the law as written. How's that for radical?

I think the government has sued states before, but I haven't gone to look for the info. I personally have mixed feelings about this issue, but think all things considered, erring on the side of trying to establish some control of the border is a positive step. I think it's ridiculous in the law to allow private citizens to sue police officers if they think they aren't checking out people of color, though - that's a ridiculous precedent, and one that definitely has racist qualities, and opens up a smelly can of worms. I doubt conservatives support the attorneys having a new avenue to sue the deep pockets of police forces, but I could be wrong.

There are many more examples - but I am getting tired of typiing. Obama is clearly the most radical and polarizing president ever - and I believe it has nothing to do with his race. If he was a white democrat (with no AA blood) the public would feel the same way.

There is a reason why Obama had such a high approval rating overall when he was elected (people loved him, no matter if he called himself black or white) and him as a potential leader. And people STILL like him, overall, as an enagaging personality - all the polls show that.

But they also show a president who has had the biggest and quickest drop in approval rating in his first year of being elected. Why? Did everyone all of sudden discover he was black and decided not to like him anymore? Of course not, his skin color has nothing to do with it.

It's his radical policies and agenda that people hate. And people that try to make this a race issue are either liberal democrats who really want us to be a socialistic country, or are just too blind to see the damage that is being done to our great country.

I've heard two sources today say that Ronald Reagan's support numbers at the same point were worse than Obama's. And I know they are close, regardless. I certainly know Obama's current numbers are higher than Bush approval ratings at the end of his tenure. So, these numbers are interesting to look at, but it's still very early. Historically, president numbers average about a 5% drop, and Obama came in very high and in a very difficult spot as a President, so I would presume a big drop - as Reagan experienced. We'll see moving forward. I do take issue with your assessment that Obama being black has little to do with the complaining against him. I think a large segment of the complainers have an issue with a black president, although I would agree the drop is probably not tied to that. The race issue is huge, and I think has a bigger effect on segments of the population than people give credit to.

Certainly, white privilege is challenged by a black president. I know many white people who have money bristle at the term white privilege, but it's evident in every segment of society. And economics is probably the most noticeable area of it. I don't want to get into this now, but I think that much of what Obama HASN'T done is due to existing protocol in government, and I think he's been very status quo in some important areas that I know are important to conservatives - like war, for instance.

Good discussion, from some here. I enjoy it. Now, back to work on what I SHOULD be doing...

 

[Trench]

hopefully we aren`t headed for a lost decade...:mj09:

We just came out of a lost decade. Where the f*ck have you been?

Trench

 

[Trench]

anybody know why the doj isn`t suing sanctuary cities and states?...they aren`t trying to uphold our immigration policies....they`re ignoring them.....

/thank god it`s not political...:SIB ............:142smilie

Gee I dunno... why didn't the DOJ sue sanctuary cities under Reagan, Bush 41, Clinton or Dubya?

If the courts uphold SB1070, they'll effectively uphold the rights of States and local municipalities to usurp federal authority on immigration and naturalization policy.

If the courts strike down SB1070, the onus will then be on the Obama Administration and the DOJ to follow suit with sanctuary cities. Then, and only then, would there be any point in suing sanctuary cities.

Trench

 

[Trench]

What does that have to do with our working analysis in this thread?

It has nothing to do with the thread.

It's the go-to play for neocons on 4th and 29, from their own 1. They have no other play but... change the subject.

Trench

 

[Lumi]

It has nothing to do with the thread.

It's the go-to play for neocons on 4th and 29, from their own 1. They have no other play but... change the subject.

Trench

Fake Filed Goal ?

Why is the DOJ suing AZ of a Law that is essentially a duplicate of the Federal Statute.

"Don't put your State Law into effect, we already have one, but we don't enforce it, but if you do enforce it we will be forced to file suit"

Sounds like a Monty Python Skit :0002

 

[DOGS THAT BARK]

We just came out of a lost decade. Where the f*ck have you been?

Trench

--it hasn't been at huffers post drinking the kool aid.

--lost decade????- Record quarters for growth--record tax revenue (after tax cuts) 14,000 dow better employment records than Clinton admin.

You must be a Pelosi by product.

--of course they did continue welfare reform--so guess from somes (Da Base) perspective-- it might have been lost decade.

 

[Trench]

Why is the DOJ suing AZ of a Law that is essentially a duplicate of the Federal Statute.

The DOJ lawsuit deals only with Federal authority vs. States rights.

However, the existing federal law does not allow for racial profiling...

Trench

 

[Lumi]

The DOJ lawsuit deals only with Federal authority vs. States rights.

However, the existing federal law does not allow for racial profiling...

Trench

Nice that you post a Pic from "Left Wing Conspiracy"

Come on Trench ! You know that is not the truth about the law.

Is it racial profiling under the federal or any state law now when a law enforcement officer asks for drivers license, registration and proof of insurance?

And if the driver of the vehicle does not have any of the three, which is required, under SB1070, this is when he can conduct a proof of citizenship. It can happen to the whitest of white guys, insert pale face here, and if he is driving his vehicle erratically he will be pulled over and will be asked for the required paper work. Not papers please which that clown Olbermann and the rest at MSNBC love to repeat. And said white guy is a Canuck with and expired work visa, did the Deputy raical profile him or was he doing his job?

It's really easy to continue to mantra of this bill being a racially motivated law, when what it is in fact is a law to enforce an existing law to protect the people, the law abiding legal citizens of Arizona. I have heard and read stories that in Phoenix that once the sun starts to go down, when you approach a red light or stop sign, proced with caution and go, do not come to a complete stop, it's that dangerous.

WE can all sit up on our high horse and pass judgement of what is happening in Arizona, but until WE live it and experience the terror that all citizens, legal or illegal experience because of the thugs and drug cartels that terrorize the people, the law needs to come down hard on these jack asses.

We will find out next friday, but there is sure to be some activity before then.

 

[rusty]

--it hasn't been at huffers post drinking the kool aid.

--lost decade????- Record quarters for growth--record tax revenue (after tax cuts) 14,000 dow better employment records than Clinton admin.

You must be a Pelosi by product.

--of course they did continue welfare reform--so guess from somes (Da Base) perspective-- it might have been lost decade.

DTB??How can you say that Bush created more jobs than Clinton ??:shrug: It's just not true.

Gotta defend my man Clinton,Sorry.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KvHyyhFKJOM

 

[Lumi]

DTB??How can you say that Bush created more jobs than Clinton ??:shrug: It's just not true.

Gotta defend my man Clinton,Sorry.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KvHyyhFKJOM

and you attack me for my info :142smilie

the young turks :142smilie holy shit ! complete fuck stick socialists

learn to post the video rusty !

do you see the button on the youtube page that says "embed" ?

click that, then right click to copy, then back to madjacks, right click paste ! simple, so simple even a ..... well you can do it