Omg

[Col. Bo Cowshut]

OMG!

Why is it Obama refuses to tell the truth? Have you ever noticed that the lottery/casinos only tell you what you want to hear? Have you ever seen a lottery/casino ad that showed people committing suicide when they lose their money? Have you ever seen a lottery/casino show the broken families when all the rent/grocery/bill money is lost? Now, why do you think Obama is not man enough to tell you the truth? OMG!

The best estimates on Obama's taxing millionaires will only raise between $37 to $50 billion dollars in ten years. Now let us say Obama's welfare redistribution works twice as good as claimed, $100 billion dollars over ten years. How far will $100 billion dollars go to pay off Obama's $15 trillion dollar debt? But wait, that $15 trillion is today. In ten years, Obama will have doubled that amount of debt. Why doesn't Obama/manipulated media simply tell the truth? OMG.

I saw that on a bumper-stricker today. O bama M ust G o!

[easeltine]

"But wait, that $15 trillion is today. In ten years, Obama will have doubled that amount of debt."

In ONLY 3 1/2 years of the Obama Administration the National Debt has climbed from 10 Trillion to 15.68 Trillion. A totally accurate statement!

The Senate saw this stupid political game President Obama was playing and voted against the "Buffet Rule."
You hear from the media, "Those Republicans in the Senate blocked the "Buffet Rule" voting against it with 55 votes." You feel like they are saying those unfair dirty Republicans. The fact is that there are only 47 Republicans in the Senate, and there were Democrats that voted with the Republicans. Those Democrats could see this political farce for what it is!

[stage director]

From: 40 Weird Facts About The U.S.

"It took from the founding of the nation until 1981 for the U.S. national debt to cross the one trillion dollar mark. Today, our national debt is well over 15 trillion dollars and we add more than a trillion dollars to our debt every single year."

"The U.S. national debt is now more than 22 times larger than it was when Jimmy Carter became president."

"In 2011, our trade deficit with China was more than 49,000 times larger than it was back in 1985."

Here's a couple for you, Bo:

"Approximately 48 percent of all Americans are currently either considered to be “low income” or are living in poverty."

"In the United States as a whole, one out of every four children is on food stamps."

"There are 313 million people living in the United States. 46 million of them are on food stamps."

Now, compare that to the fact that blacks only make up a little more than 12% of the population.

[easeltine]

It is a sad commentary when the Federal Income Tax Refund you get is DOUBLE any pay check during the year!

[turtle]

I got a question for you why do surveys exception would be medical include race. The point is this you using guidelines having nothing to do necessarily with proverity. Do you know if you are not white you get more food stamps and more assistence then if you are white. Poor white do not live as good. Why because they base things on race. It time this stupid fighting stop. We are all equal all equality should be based on ability not what they look like, however I admit image does make a difference if working with the public, but it should not matter. What wrong with your survey col. Why the discrimination?

[easeltine]

"There are 313 million people living in the United States. 46 million of them are on food stamps."

I find this a very disturbing statistic. When unemployed I found it impossible for me to get food stamps, and I had no money in the bank, just unemployment insurance. If this country does not change its direction quickly we are going to see problems we have never seen before.

People want to use the word, "Progressive," "Socialist," or "Marxist." I contend that the Obama Administration's solution and goal is to change this country into a Communist Dictatorship. I look at the history of President Obama, (Muslim upbringing, Family history, Alinski, Ayers, SDS-1968, Chicago Community Organizer, Chicago Politics, Rev. Wright & that denomination's beliefs having Open Communion w/ the Radical Liberal Churches, Black Liberation Theology), what he says, and what his policies are, (example - takeover of GM). That is how I have come to this conclusion.

The reason the media doesn't tell the Truth is that they want the country to change to a Communist Dictatorship, and that is really an OMG!

[dodge]

To paraphrase what you just wrote, Easeltine, just to make sure I’m hearing you correctly, “The Obama Administration and the media want to change the United States into a Communist dictatorship.”

You have surpassed yourself and Cowshut, and have gone deep into Glenn Beck/Rush Limbaugh lunatic right-wing fringe territory. Of course, I know you don’t believe that; you’re just being provocative and seeing how many cages you can rattle. That’s what Beck, Limbaugh, and Ann Coulter do; but they’re only giving their base what they want to sell more books. What’s your goal?

Just in case you really mean what you wrote, please tell me why the President of the United States and “the media” (radio, television, newspapers and magazines) would want to change the United States from a federal constitutional republic into a Communist dictatorship. What would be their motives?

[ba2]

National Debt Graph by President

This says it all.

http://zfacts.com/p/318.html

[turtle]

Socialism is one step away from a communist dictatorship. I am not against Obama, however I not against Nick rommedy either. Here is the point. Before the the race in between bush and obama we almost lost our nations' freedom due to this war we are in over seas and still in, though land changed. Here is the point socialism has far as healthcare make since to many. Will it work in a capitalist plan. Does socialist education work with a capitilistic world. Think about how many from over seas come here looking for the gold rush, only to return home with money, but not as much as Bill Gates. Can you have your cake of what good in another system with what good with our system and destroy what bad in ours at the same time?

Well doctors wanting the gold and not to help people be forced to not do face lifts of the wealthy, no because some procedures are not necessary. That could be expense in from of capitalism and not in social world. However you start taking like birth control issue and that different. There some plastic surgery though that not a luxury it necessary for patient health and well being. That different.

[easeltine]

Ba2's Graph

I have never looked at graphs and charts, facts about the economic matters except the past year. Never before in the history of the United States have we seen such Spending as we have in the past 3 years!

National Debt 10 Trillion to 15.7 Trillion since President Obama has been in office.
Federal Deficit 400 Billion to 1,560 Billion requested in 2011 - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Un...federal_budget

Only during WWII era have we seen a higher GDP vs. Spending Debt Ratio, currently at around 42%, as a comparison President Clinton 1997 and President Bush 2007 both held that rate at the exact same figure of 36%, (Ba2's Graph that I have studied now quite a bit). Never before in the history of the United States have we seen this before with the exception of WWII that President Roosevelt and President Truman, members of Congress worked together to lower, because they had BRAINS.

This Administration is like the guy that now we all KNOW truly has a heart says is an, "Unmitigated Disaster."

Senator Obama would have vomited his mouth against President Obama, if he judged himself the same way Senator Obama judged and spoke about President Bush.
The fact is that the Spending situation has escalated since the Democrats gained power in both the House and Senate in January 2007, with their $790 Billion Stimulus Package in February of 2009, (every Republican voting against that one). That Economic Stimulus package is where 800 Billion of that 1,560 Billion went.

THESE MATTERS CANNOT BE DEFENDED DODGE! THE OBAMACARE WILL ONLY MAKE MATTERS WORSE, BUT THE INDIVIDUAL MANDATE WILL BE DECLARED UNCONSTITUTIONAL BY AROUND A 7-2 or 8-1 vote by the Supreme Court, and THE HEALTH LAW ITSELF UNCONSTITUTIONAL BY A - LISTEN TO THIS PREDICTION -6-3 OR 7-2 SUPREME COURT VOTE. Why? ...because Speaker Pelosi and the rest voted on it not knowing what was in it, and what is in it is UNCONSTITUTIONAL. That Bill being UNCONSTITUTIONAL is the fault President Obama, and the current Mayor of Chicago, Rahm Emanuel, (your bud taking "advantage of the situation" - Dodge).

Well, Governor Romney may slow the Spending Pace down some, and besides that, Romney...at least he's not a Commy!

[ba2]

Easeltine

You said you haven’t paid much attention to any graphs until very recently. Well you should. If Reagan/Bush and Bush would have simply balanced the budget, like every president before them since Roosevelt, our debt would have been at historic lows, Even with the Obama mess.
Look over the graph. The real disaster was Regan/Bush/ and then Bush. And I am partly to blame because I voted for Regan and Bush the elder. I voted against Clinton the 1st time but for the 1st time in my life, after seeing the results of Regan/Bush and their voodoo economics, and the improvement under Clinton, I voted Democrat. Clinton got us back on track and Bush the younger blew it. You can blame Obama for continuing the mess, but the stimulus package was pushed by Bush as he left office. Did you complain about the big stimulus spending started by Bush in 2008? 500 Billion for the housing market and another 700 billion to banks? And when Bush voiced support of the 2009 stimulus, where were you?

Look up your facts about the composition of Congress. The Dems did not have control until 2009 and lost control in 2011. Yes, all Republican House members voted against the package. They also voted against all the Senate Republican amendments, they weren’t for anything. The House Republicans don’t seem to understand macro-economics. The Senate Republicans saw the need for the stimulus but couldn’t get the House Republicans to join in. Instead of a compromise, which would have been good, we got the pure Democrat version. We have a very dysfunctional House and the Senate isn’t much better.

Senate
2005–2007 44 Dems, 55 Repub
2007–2009 49 Dems, 49 Repub
2009–2011 57 Dems, 41 Repub
2011–2013 51 Dems, 47 Repub

House
2005-2007 Dems 202, Repub 231
2007-2009 Dems 233, Repub 198
2009-2011 Dems 256, Repub178
2011-2013 Dems 193, Repub 242

The unmitigated disaster since the 1980’s has been the Republican Party, of which I was a card carrying member. My party has been high-jacked by some radicals. Everything was going great until then.

As far as the Health care bill goes, most likely only one small, but significant piece will be thrown out by the courts. They are not looking at the whole package.

[easeltine]

Ba2,

I think in your post you are most wrong about the economic policies, and results of President Bush Sr. President Bush Sr.'s economic policies were pretty good if you look at the facts and statistics.

The worse thing to me was that stupid compromise they did I think at the end of 2010. The Republican compromised allowing all the Spending to continue, and the Democrats compromised not raising taxes on the wealthy. Bunch of hypocrites.

Again, the facts are that in the 8 years of President Bush the National Debt went from 5.5 Trillion to 10 Trillion, a raise of 4.5 Trillion.
In just 3 1/2 years of President Obama the National Debt went from 10 Trillion to 15.7 Trillion, a raise of 5.7 Trillion.

President Bush averaged a raise of 562 Billion per year to the National Debt, President Obama averaged a raise of 1,629 Billion per year to the National Debt.

President Obama raised the National Debt at a pace that is three Times the yearly average of President Bush.

The choice for me between Governor Romney and President Obama is very clear! No President in the History of the United States has done a worse job with the economy than President Obama. Find me an example of a President that has raised the National Debt 57% in less than one Term. Nobody. You can't do it.

Show me a chart where a President even comes close. Remember, your own chart Ba2 36% GDP vs. Spending in 1997 under President Clinton, and 36% GDP vs. Spending in 2007 under President Bush - 42% since President Obama! Look at this point the Total Revenue in 2007 was $2.57 Trillion, the Total Expenditures was $2.73 Trillion, that is only a $161 Billion Dollar Deficit. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_Un...federal_budget
You can't be really looking at the data and not see these facts?

From 1960 to 2007 the GDP vs. Spending has always averaged from 30% to 36%. This President has pushed the envelope, and also, in fact, The Supreme Court is considering, 1. Is the Individual Mandate Constitutional? 2. Is the Health Law Itself Constitutional? I say that at least Justice Kagen with her question, "Does this make a single mother that cannot afford the Health Care Mandate, and chooses not to pay it breaking Federal Law?," on the side of the four Conservative and Moderate for at least a 6-3 decision, and the #2 question will be at least a 5-4 decision.

Also, how about that 9-0 ruling with the Lutheran School case where every Supreme Court Justice went against the Obama Administration? The Obama Administration has stepped over too many lines! I mean, Liberals, how is it even possible that Justices Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagen could go against the Obama Administration and side with the Conservatives and one Moderate if everything was hunky dory? No, that one is truly amazing.

None of this is Right-Wing stuff, it is all looking at Charts and Facts.

[ba2]

easltine,
Basic macroeconomics: During recession, the government needs to spend more so that people can have work. During recession, it is a time to rebuild the infrastructure of roads, public buildings, rail and air, etc. The worse the recession, the bigger the need for the government to spend money. So, I absolutely support the notion of stimulus spending but what it’s spent on I can argue. Giving the banks big bailouts so that their executives could get big bonuses was very counterproductive. It didn’t put anyone back to work. When the economy is good, we should stop, or at least slow down the spending on non-essential projects and use the added revenues to pay off the loans. What our government tends to do, at least in the last 30 years or so, is exactly the opposite. They want to spend more when the cash is coming in and spend less when it’s not. Totally backwards. Maybe, instead of lawyers and professional politicians, we need an economics expert to run for president.

Maybe a 30%-36% of GNP is about right under normal times, but these are not normal times.

I am not pleased with Obama, but to be honest, he was handed an economy that was the worst since Roosevelt. We should expect the debt chart under Obama (and the last few years of Bush) to have a similar move upward like we did under Roosevelt, and we do. We should not have seen these upward moves during Regan’s term, but we did. When Bush Sr. campaigned against Reagan, he called it right, it was voodoo economics. When he got into the presidency he couldn’t turn it around. His pressure to get us back to good historic policies caused the party to limit their support for him which allowed Clinton to win the election. Clinton was able to turn it around. Then, Bush Jr, especially Cheney & Co, put Reagan’s policies back in place which caused even greater debt during good economic times. and the economy was hurt.

I switched parties when I saw what Bush/Cheney was prepared to do. I’ll come back to the Republicans when I see them return to sanity.

So why did you bring up the 9-0 vote? Sounds to me like maybe you just plain hate Obama? He had little or nothing to do with the case of a teacher losing their job because of a handicap. If the job description didn’t list their teachers as ministers of their church, the courts would have very likely ruled differently. The ruling held that a church has the sole right to determine who their minister should be, even though this particular teacher didn’t do any preaching. What started as a job discrimination case, ended up being a separation of church/state issue. So, not as simple as it sounds.

[dodge]

Hi Ba2 -- Very good points you make about the economy and the factors that led up to the current debt; and also that Easeltine just hates the President, which is pretty obvious. He represents the extreme Christian right with all the usual talking points, anything that negatively affects Barack Obama even though it isn’t true or the facts are spun to make it look like something its not. Political propaganda, it’s what they do. Oh well, some things never change.

[easeltine]

The good point about President Clinton was that he was able to work with the Republicans in Congress to really help the economy. President Obama is very devisive, and has brought disunity between himself and the Republicans. His economic ideas are much more left than President Clinton was, the ideas are wreckless. Also, TARP has been almost paid off, the Economic Stimulus package of the Democrats in February 2009 was not properly done. That package has added $790 Billion Dollars to the Federal Deficit with nothing to show for it. The economic facts I have presented are not going to go away!

I also think that there are two people in upper government that are more incompetent than President Obama. One doesn't matter because he is the Vice President. The most incompetent leader in government I have ever seen is Attorney General Eric Holder. The Obama Administration is going to look very poor with A. This Zimmerman case. B. The Individual Mandate, and the Health Law itself. C. The Arizona Immigration Law. There has already been a couple cases now where the Obama Justice Department has lost 0-9. I bring up these matters because it blows my minds that the Justice Department can get Justices Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagen to agree with the the Moderate Justice Kennedy, and the four Conservatives. The Obama Administration is out of control.

At least, from my perspective, Secretary of State Clinton has done a good job. To me, President Clinton, and Secretary of State Clinton are responsible Moderate Center Left Democrats, (except President Clinton's lying and affairs), and President Obama is an irresponsible Left Wing Democrat that alienates Republicans, and is now alienating Conservative Democrats like Senator Manchin, and Senator Nelson. I hope President Obama loses to Governor Romney. Governor Romney is Center Right, and has a better understanding of Economics. I prefer Presidents with a background of being a Governor.

[ba2]

Hi Ba2 -- Very good points you make about the economy and the factors that led up to the current debt; and also that Easeltine just hates the President, which is pretty obvious. He represents the extreme Christian right with all the usual talking points, anything that negatively affects Barack Obama even though it isn’t true or the facts are spun to make it look like something its not. Political propaganda, it’s what they do. Oh well, some things never change.

Few people really understand economic theory. The average person thinks that running a government is like managing a household budget or like running a business. There is no comparison. If we ran our government like our house or business, we would become third world before we knew what hit us. A few people would have all the money and power, and everyone else would be their serfs.

I don’t understand the hatred for Obama. Like blaming him for our economic problems when it clearly started before he was in office, or continually suggesting he wasn’t born in Hawaii, or that he is Muslim. I have heard people state, with conviction, that he hates America and is trying to destroy it. Yes, I do think he could have done better, but with the hand he was dealt, he certainly could have done worse. It might simply be political propaganda but I tend to believe this is actually pure and simple bigotry.

[ba2]

Easltine,
All things being equal, I too would prefer presidents with a background as governor. It seems to be a better preparation for the job. However, not all governors have the same responsibility; it really depends on the laws and constitution of the particular state. In Wisconsin, we have a governor who probably has the most authority of any governor in the country. Very powerful position. This also means that the governor can really screw things up, as can be demonstrated by the push for unprecedented changes creating a very hostile and divisive environment in Wisconsin, which is normally a very easy place for members of either party to get along and work together.

Yes, president Clinton could work with Congress, and yes, president Obama has trouble with Congress. But I would say that anyone near the center, whether Democrat or Republican, would have trouble with this group, especially the House. I agree that the stimulus package in Feb of 2009 was not properly done. This was a Bush/Cheney plan which should have been totally rewritten by Obama. I blame Obama for not making the necessary changes. The Senate Republicans wanted changes but the House Republicans wanted nothing. They killed the opportunity for a good compromise. They wanted nothing and refused to negotiate. When a group refuses to compromise, which is what good legislating is all about, we end up with either nothing or an extreme.

I think Romney will be our next president. I hope we can replace the radical members of the House so that Romney can do a proper job. If the House remains intact, we will see nothing from Romney and he too will be a one term president and the economy will suffer.

[turtle]

Truth in all matters Obama done much of what I think He thought he could accomplish though it was perhaps not everything. Meaning the working with other parties is a plus. HOwever what about next term. Four years not knowing you going to be in office again. Now what is Obama plans to cause change and how that is the concern of many.

[easeltine]

Four years ago the candidate that I wanted the most as President was Governor Romney. Governor Romney had experience as Governor of Mass., and knew how to work with Democrats. The Governor was a little bit Right of Senator McCain, but not much.

Senator McCain, the person I voted for President, is a Moderate Republican that has proven experience working with Democrats. His set-up of the Gang of 14 to stop the nuclear option was a perfect example of that. He negotiated with Democrats, had only a 68% Pro-Life voting record, because has always been anti-abortion and pro stem cell research. NARAL undeservedly gave him a 0% out of a 100. I knew where he came from watching him in the 1988 Presidential Convention, (the speech on his friend in the Hanoi Hilton follow by people joining the Senator in the Pledge of Allegience). I knew that the Senator loved America, and would put better people to deal with the economy and negotiate more with the other side than President Obama.

Sec. of State Clinton was too Left for me, however, she would have negotiated more with Republicans, and had White House experience as being First Lady. President Clinton would always be there to be a helpful advise giver.

Then there was President Obama:

A history of being on the Left. Chicago Community Organizer with friends that were former SDS members. A questionable past, even his name is Muslim. Always a Partisan Democrat, who never has known how to negotiate with the other side to come up with good sensible solutions to problems. Very little experience in Government, a Freshman Senator. An unqualified person, that had different viewpoints on every issue that I have.

I am not Far-Right enough to oppose Senator McCain, or Far-Right enough to think that Governor Romney is a "Progressive."
That is what a Far-Right person really thinks. I will have no problem voting for Governor Romney, I will not have to hold my nose, rather happily vote for a person that will be able to come up with solutions from both sides of the aisle, not a Partisan Hack ~ like Rahm Emmanuel comment of having a window of opportunity ~ to me he means a lot in that statement that I OPPOSE. Some of what I OPPOSE has already been OPPOSED AND WILL be OPPOSED by those Justices considered to be on the LEFT in the Supreme Court. Two cases against the Obama Administration 0-9, and there will be a few coming up here that will be opposed also.

I think that all Nine Supreme Court Justices are Right of the Obama Administration - because they will all support the Constitution.

[ba2]

...Then there was President Obama:

A history of being on the Left. Chicago Community Organizer with friends that were former SDS members. A questionable past, even his name is Muslim. Always a Partisan Democrat...

You are probably referring to Bill Ayers: “A retired professor in the College of Education at the University of Illinois at Chicago, formerly holding the titles of Distinguished Professor of Education and Senior University Scholar.” Ayers also worked closely with the Mayor's office in Chicago.


The top contributors to Obama have been the banks and Wall Street. He surrounded himself with advisors with strong Wall Street connections.

In post #6 you stated: “I contend that the Obama Administration's solution and goal is to change this country into a Communist Dictatorship...”

If that were true, why would he surround himself with advisors from Wall Street? Why would the banking industry support him?

He certainly is left of anyone in the Republican Party, but to suggest he is pushing for a Communist Dictatorship is pretty farfetched.

What is he specifically doing that makes you believe he is a Communist?

You keep bringing up the word “Muslim” when you talk about Obama. His mother is a Christian from Kansas. Before he was three, his parents were separated and divorced, never living within 1000 miles of each other. Obama stayed with his mother. Mother remarried a man from Jakarta and he lived there from age 6 to 10. There he attended a public school for a short time but mostly attended a private Christian school. At age 10, he returned to the USA to live with his maternal grandparents, who were Christian. In Chicago, as you know, he attended a Christian church which he separated relations with because of some controversial statements made by the pastor, which is exactly what one would have wanted him to do. It seems that he attended Christian churches for his entire life.

Why do you keep bringing up the word “Muslim”?

You complain that he is a partisan Democrat. Aren’t you a partisan Republican?

I understand a desire to have one's favorite politician and party members get elected. But we somehow have to get away from the hatred spewing out of the extreme factions of the parties. Somehow, we must all come to understand that our president does not hate our country, quite the contrary. Our president, all presidents, want what is best for the country. The direction they take may be different than what we would prefer, but I truly don't believe we have ever had a president that didn't love America, including our present president. If both sides could start with that premise, then maybe we could all talk.