- Joined
- Dec 9, 2009
- Messages
- 134,496
- Reaction score
- 14,621
- Location
- Houston, TX
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
ah conservative....i see you have had a relapse since our last encounter.....this thread isnt about obama, its about the midterms...get with the program!!
Well this is a perfect example of why Congress has such a low approval rating. They did the 2/3s thing because Republicans were just going to keep stalling, Wiener believed the King guy would actually have been able to convince his Republican buddies to vote on helping people that helped in 9/11, instead they didn't because it would have probably cut into their pals profits.
Republicans did what Republicans will constantly do; they overcomplicated a very straight forward vote for their own party, and if you really think that Republicans come out looking like they are on top on this one then well, wow.
politics are a local event, and i've a feeling the repubs are going to be very dissapointed when they don't regain control of both housesAnd midterms about continued support for the failed Obama agenda and the results generated.
politics are a local event, and i've a feeling the repubs are going to be very dissapointed when they don't regain control of both houses
Anything can happen. But, as I said on a previous thread a week or so ago, I got my money on the dems. That is in no way an endorsement but more of a logical observation. But anything can happen.
I know the hard core partisan hacks are telling everyone that the dems are sucking ass and they're gonna lose but we have to remember that they are the same folks that declared, without a doubt, that Obama wouldn't be elected in the first place.
Most of the airplay and noise being made since Obama's election has been coming from the right. But let us not confuse that noise with the silence of the majority of voting citizenry that is more or less just sitting back content with the president. Like a high pitch noise, people tend to tune out certain distractions. I think the right, in it's zeal, have already popped their wad and as soon as the pro-Obama masses take their turn and take to the airwaves, the distant Tea party and GOP whines (and insignificant numbers by comparison) really won't do much for the GOP.
Then there's the unemployment thing. Couple that with the GOP wanting to restrict those unemployed compensation and I think the dems pretty much have it in the bag. Most folks, right or wrong, still put the current economic situation sqarely on the shoulders of the GOP machine of last as well as their predecessors. Many think it is but a domino effect originally started by the republican's in their defense for big-busness capitolism vs. concern for the citizens.
Add to the mix the impression that the current GOP politicians are nothing more than obstructionist do-nothings hell-bent on defying the winning party at every turn regardless of the affect it has on the nation, and I'd say the GOP is in for a pretty rough ride.
But, you never know. But one thing I DO know is that the same folks in here that swore to the high heavens that the dems would lose last go around, will be back making claims against the dem's, that they will lose the NEXT go around. It doesn't seem that the words "Neener, neener" mean much to them. And the beat goes on.
i believe the country is on the right track, but that it will take time to get where we want to be...so why should i hope they lose?You better hope that the Democrats lose this fall. If not more of the same and those results aren't something to be proud of.
i believe the country is on the right track, but that it will take time to get where we want to be...so why should i hope they lose?
i believe the country is on the right track, but that it will take time to get where we want to be...so why should i hope they lose?
i can see a few seats, but not enough to take over. i do think the whole fight over extending the unemployment benefits will cost the repubs ....I predict a backlash on those who are throwing log-jams on to that track. I wouldn't bet a penny on the GOP making any significant gains. And I will only bet a nickel that the dems will still hold the reins. I wouldn't bet a dime on either.
Anything can happen. For sure. But I can't see the GOP picking up much, if any, additional support and the support they have now just ain't enough.
the track back to a robust economy, and full employment.And what track is that, cradle to grave coverage paid by 53% of the public?
I predict a backlash on those who are throwing log-jams on to that track. I wouldn't bet a penny on the GOP making any significant gains. And I will only bet a nickel that the dems will still hold the reins. I wouldn't bet a dime on either.
Anything can happen. For sure. But I can't see the GOP picking up much, if any, additional support and the support they have now just ain't enough.
the track back to a robust economy, and full employment.
i can see a few seats, but not enough to take over. i do think the whole fight over extending the unemployment benefits will cost the repubs ....
the track back to a robust economy, and full employment.
what about the bush 2, bush 1, and reagan agendas? they all added debt that has to be paid for....or did you forget about this?? like it or not, your preferred side of the aisle is not innocent when it comes to adding debt.....quit pretending that they are, and quit pretending that debt only matters when it is a democrat in office.You cannot have a robust economy without a strong private sector and Obama is destroyng that. No private sector employer is going to hire anyone with the economic agenda of Obama having to be paid for. The trillions added to the debt have to be funded and that means higher taxes, lower economic growth. The Obama agenda is a prescription for failure.
So, let's see, when it suits you the stock market is a barometer of how good the economy is? What affect do you believe 16 million unemployed Americans has on corporate expenses thus profits?Where you equally as excited when Bush had a 14000 stock market?
There are 7 million less employed today than when Obama took office, bls.gov and you think that is a success? 16 million unemployed or an increase of over 4 million since the stimulus plan took effect and that is a success to you?
A collapse that apparently Bush created all by himself? Tell us why taxpayers fund Congressional Representatives if it is the President that creates all legislation and unilaterally implements economic policy? Do you realize, probably don't care, but the Democrats controlled Congress and helped get us into this recession. Now with the same Congress and a Democrat empty suit in the WH they have made things worse, higher debt and higher unemployment. Where is your outrage?
Obama doesn't understand the economy nor do his book smart, street stupid Ivy League educated advisors. We have a public sector economy that is being destroyed and the results speak volumes, but Obama supporters never really cared about results.
The stimulus plan was designed to be spent on shovel ready projects but instead has been spent to bail out unions and other Democrat constituent groups. Jobs saved or created cannot be quantified but unemployment can.
After spending over a trillion dollars, taking over GM/Chrysler shouldn't things be better. Companies are hoarding cash because they have lower expenses now due to fewer workers thus higher profits and a fear of higher corporate taxes as well as healthcare costs.
We live in a free enterprise, capitalistic economy that Obama doesn't understand. The results speak for themselves.
what about the bush 2, bush 1, and reagan agendas? they all added debt that has to be paid for....or did you forget about this?? like it or not, your preferred side of the aisle is not innocent when it comes to adding debt.....quit pretending that they are, and quit pretending that debt only matters when it is a democrat in office.
hmmm....growing the economy to 'service ' the debt...why did reagan run a deficit at all??Reagan and GW Bush understood the benefits of a strong private sector that helped fund that debt with a growing economy. Bush with the help of 9/11 and then a Democrat Congress spent too much money but I know of no one that wouldn't take a 1.7 trillion debt of Reagan's over the 3 trillion of Obama's in just two years. Obama isn't growing the private sector economy thus isn't creating jobs or consumer spending to grow the economy enough to fund our debt, that means taxes have to go up and that kills jobs and economic growth. Debt matters whomever is in office but there is such a thing as funding that debt and Obama isn't
Okay - the Great Recession began in 2007. It didn't start overnight, though. In reality, it began several years before that. I would argue that every recession since 1980 all led up to the Great Recession as a result of continuous passing of economic policies under Reagan, Bush, Clinton, and Bush that created more and more income disparity.
Note that the two greatest periods of disparity were right before the Great Depression and right before the Great Recession. Tax policies that help concentrate wealth and reward wealth over work lead to hoarding.
To get the "trickle down" that supply-siders seems to like so much you basically have to force the wealthy to invest and hire.
I agree that the stimulus wasn't done completely properly. However, all Republicans have done is said they wouldn't have done it all. They complained about extending unemployment benefits without paying for it; but want to make permanent the Bush tax cuts without paying for it. They fought legislation that would have eliminated the loophole that left no estate tax for this calendar year, costing the government $25 - $30 BILLION dollars and didn't pay for it.
They are also fighting the bill that will give tax breaks to small business owners who hire and make equipment investments. Not because they dislike the legislation, but because they don't want Democrats to get credit for it. It is their goal to bring this nation to its knees while Obama is in office so they can get their claws back on all three houses and continue funneling money to the wealthy who will continue to pay for their campaigns.
Oh, and by the way: How Ford and GM Turned a Corner -- Seeking Alpha, there's evidence that the auto bailout (with a little help from Toyota's implosion) is actually working. But of course, we'll just bitch about it because maybe it wasn't perfect.
The economy didn't collapse overnight. It won't be fixed overnight.
hmmm....growing the economy to 'service ' the debt...why did reagan run a deficit at all??
doesnt matter how much 'revenue' he created, he was part of the problem.....and the whole 'peace dividend', many believe that the soviet union was going to collapse on its own, and that we didnt have to spend what we did on defense. a growing economy that 'creates ' taxpayers is a moot point if you constantly spend more than what you take in....that debt sucks up whatever additional revenue you create in the form of interest payments on that debt. the goal should be to balance the budget, then shrink it an additional 10% to create a 'surplus' that could be used to actually pay down the 'principal' on the debt.Reagan doubled govt. revenue with his tax cuts, Reagan created 20 million jobs, Reagan doubled GDP, Reagan set a record for Presidential vetoes of Congressional spending but Reagan needed one more thing, the line item veto and never got it. Reagan debt was 1.7 trillion with most of that coming from spending bills attached to the military spending that destroyed the soviet union and created a peace dividend in the 1990's something liberals want to ignore. A growing economy creates more taxpayers and more income and corporate tax revenue and that is what services the debt.
doesnt matter how much 'revenue' he created, he was part of the problem.....and the whole 'peace dividend', many believe that the soviet union was going to collapse on its own, and that we didnt have to spend what we did on defense. a growing economy that 'creates ' taxpayers is a moot point if you constantly spend more than what you take in....that debt sucks up whatever additional revenue you create in the form of interest payments on that debt. the goal should be to balance the budget, then shrink it an additional 10% to create a 'surplus' that could be used to actually pay down the 'principal' on the debt.
The economy didn't collapse by Bush policy alone and what Obama is doing isn't helping grow the private sector.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?