Taxation has existed for millennia to surrender government debt. This is how governments have functioned since there have been governments. The new wrinkle in fiscal policy was Dr. Laffer's "supply side" theory which stated that reduction of taxation increased revenue. The theory used the "Laffer Curve" to demonstrate the principle. As the title suggests, the graphed data exists on a curve. As such, it demonstrates that there is a point of diminishing returns. In other words, the principle has limited efficacy. It is not a constant. The point of that is, taxation is sometimes necessary. We are past the point of diminishing returns in the "supply side" process. That point was reached decades ago. Reduction of tax rates does not increase revenue. That is established fact. Greenspan acknowledged it. David Stockman acknowledged it. George W. Bush acknowledged it.

Supply side theory is a gambit propelled by ideology, not economic fact. It attempts to conflate microeconomic principles to affect macroeconomic problems. Ryan's plan does not seek to balance a budget, it seeks to eliminate certain programs which are not to his liking on an ideological basic, not a fiscal one.

You claim that President Obama is "clueless", yet you offer not a single bit of fact to back your argument. Supply Side theory has been relegated to tin foil hat territory. You can't make something true because you want it to be so. Math does not work that way. You need to demonstrate how this "curved" line on the graph is a constant. You need data and logic. This post has none.

Bill-I never said we should NOT tax anyone. I just have a problem with citizens being singled out because they are successful. Is that what America has become? Succeed in life...but not too much. If a tax needs to be levied in order to gain control of this situation then the Fair Tax should be enacted. Once this happens people will have a better idea of what things cost and they will also be actively participating in the running of their country. Right now the "rich" are the only ones who actually run the government.

"You claim that President Obama is "clueless", yet you offer not a single bit of fact to back your argument." Do I need to present evidence? Shouldn't that be HIS burden? After all he IS the President. Respect is earned. With the most recent polls showing that EVEN AMONG THE POOREST AMERICANS

(sorry hit the enter button) he has last support. If Obama is going to convince the American People that he deserves another 4 years and that he is the man to lead us out of this crisis, then the data suggests he has an uphill climb.

By implication, one has to be "cluefull" to discern if another is "clueless." Therefore, I question your ability to make such pronouncements. Okay, I deny it exists.

Actually, there was never a time when top marginal tax rates curbed investment, so Laffer's Curve didn't spent a moment in reality's sun. The truth is capital will always seek whatever increase it can get. In the 50's, under Eisenhower, that rate was 90%, which translated into an effective 50-60%. The economy was booming. Of course, 1/3rd of the workforce was unionized, and that elevated all worker's incomes, and increased productivity was tracked by rising incomes.

In other words, and in complete reality, New Deal Liberalism far outperformed the slow, but ever increasing speed of national demise brought by Reaganomics. Now we can call it Ryanomics, but there's a difference--we can say Reagan didn't know it doesn't work, and Ryan should.
Obama shouldn't spend a moment considering Ryan's rehash plan. There's no sane reason to include failed ideological and national-suicidal, disproved concepts as a matter of 'bipartisan" outreach. Ryanomics belongs in the ash heap of history, next to communism. Both produce the same basic result.

PJO quote: "In the 50's, under Eisenhower, that rate was 90%, which translated into an effective 50-60%. The economy was booming. Of course, 1/3rd of the workforce was unionized, and that elevated all worker's incomes, and increased productivity was tracked by rising incomes."

The thing that is missing today is balance. I finally got a part-time job back in retail and it is clear that top level corporate greed is worse than ever. Our hours and commissions have been cut so that we are on subsistence wages, while the execs in the Ivory Tower continue to collect six-figure bonuses for their "effective" cost cutting. The big difference between the 1950's and today is that back then you had greed but it was not unadulterated greed.

If you were willing to start as a janitor back then you could work hard and possibly end up running the company. Those days are over. A cashier has no chance for any significant advancement in big box retail America.

The Wal-Mart heirs are all multi billionaires, yet one third of Wal-Mart's workforce is on public assistance and Wal-Mart has started a policy of firing full time workers for the smallest infraction and replacing them with part-time workers. Long term managers are also getting canned and replaced with less expensive labor.

There is no pretty solution to this problem.As an aside, Obama is an idiot and DJohn's stats on the minimal effect of drastic taxation bear this out. ( Obama's own staff has started to question his mental stability. http://socyberty.com/issues/obama-delusional-and-mentally-incompetent/ )

http://www.examiner.com/watchdog-politics-in-national/white-house-becoming-a-cuckoo-s-nest

Paul-REALLY? Are you seriously going to try to compare the economic policies of the 50's and 60's with the more expansive GLOBAL economy of the last 20 years? Apples and oranges my friend. Competition these days is MORE fierce and there ARE more players. How many other countries could even compete with the United States at the time? There was a reason we were a SUPERPOWER. Other than the Soviet Union there was no other international force that could come close.

Neither Obama nor Ryan seek to balance the budget in the near-term future. Obama's plan doesn't cut enough. Ryan's plan reduces tax rates.

Therefore, neither plan is satisfactory. Both remain as fearful politicians, unwilling to anger large blocks of voters, while not having the courage to face, much less tell, the consequences of what will happen if we do not restore confidence that we can bail out a fiscally sinking ship of state.

However, there is yet time in this debate for more chit chat. Hopefully, some of it will contain some common sense.

Rated

DJohn,
I can easily compare the domestic economic policy. Then, unions and high marginal tax rates kept wages rising with productivity and capital limited to productive investment. With the conversion to Reaganomics, wages went stagnant and tax cuts sent more capital into the system than true productive investments could accommodate. Thus began a series of credit bubbles. Debt shot through the roof. As capital concentrated at the top, it was loaned--in place of rising wages/productivity, back to workers instead of raises. To keep that deception going, jobs were outsourced and cheap imports imitated rising wealth. Eventually, and especially after China was admitted into the WTO in 2001, the loss of jobs caught up with the credit deception that was made even worse by investment bank deregulation and SEC vastly extending minimum capital requirements. The resulting housing bubble- which exploded consumer debt even as Bush and the GOP were exploding Fed debt- itself exploded, and the results of 30 years of exceedingly stupid "conservative" destruction revealed itself.

Now, it's very libertarian to say this outsourcing couldn't be stopped, and was an expression of "liberty." That is, if you accept that destroying your own country is "liberty." The truth is American workers funded China's economic expansion, Republican debt explosion, and the loss of their own jobs.

Which is why I compare Reaganomics to communism. Destructive economics that benefit the few and impoverish the many. All they need are fairly dull and easily manipulated ideologues who will buy that:
1. It's not their fault
2. The "Liberals" did it
3. That extending the same damaging policies represents "liberty."
4. Ryan is courageous, and slashing entitlements is the only way to extract us from the (Reaganomics Fraud/ Republican's 13 trillion in debt) Liberal Overspending
5. More top end tax cuts (debt increases) will create jobs.

Know any suckers like that?

DJohn,

The way accusations and proof works in America is that the one making the charge has to present the evidence. The burden of proof is yours, not Obama's. Do you not understand this fundamental principle of American freedom?

Look, you can say anything you want. That is another fundamental principle of our system. Regrettably, many have come to think that saying it, or constructing it as an opinion is the same as it being credible or valid. There is an important difference between opinion and fact. Fact is objective and unchanging. Opinion can be based upon fact, or nothing at all. Opinion is not reliable in assessing reality or truth. Facts are.

Budgets and fiscal policy are real things, that count real things, in the real world, in real ways. Reality is important in their construction. Supply side theory does not have reality on its side. Revenue is raised by the various means that revenue is raised, taxation is primary among those ways, and has been for thousands of years. If you expect your charge of another man as being "clueless" to be valid with regard to that, you must provide proof of that. Just saying it does not make it so. Clue in to that. It is called reality. The burden of proof is on you.

Martin Bashir today on NBC made some very important distinctions regarding successful people and did a substantial segment on Goldman Sachs and how in fact so many on Wall St. (and other parts of Corporate America) who have become astronomically successful, in fact didn't get that way through honest competition. NO. They got that way because they cheated and/or limited the competition of others in blatantly cheating ways.

And all of the inside information that is not made available to the average, but rather illegally traded among the "successful."

And how the insiders at the SEC and other regulatory agencies (see wxpose done by New York Times yesterday and today) "singled out" the "successful" for special treatment by NOT thoroughly investigating them and prosecuting them. And how all these people tasked with these responsbilites are the exact same people who were true believer ideological political appointees that Karl Rove and Bush made sure got civil service protection so that couldn't be fired when Obama took over...and on and on and on...

So yes, there a a whole lot more people among the so called "successful" who should be in jail right now as opposed to say the Black man caught with a bag of weed.

Oh, that bit about "citizens being singled out because they are successful" is an absurdity. That is pure anti tax propaganda. Taxation provides citizens with ownership of government. Government has costs, and it will raise its capital somewhere. If it is not supplied by citizens, it will be supplied by corporations. You dont want to live in a society that is owned by groups of corporations. You really should investigate some of these concepts before pledging your allegiance to them. Taxation builds infrastructure, and educated, healthy populace, markets, and stability. This is not a penalty for the successful. This expands their opportunities. The "penalizing the successful" bit is pure propaganda bullshit. Since the middle ages, anything considered modern required capital. Why do great cities exist over hundreds and thousands of years? Capital, markets, infrastructure, industry, export, and a skilled/educated populace all contribute towards opportunity for the successful. All of these things, and more are what provide opportunity. Taxation is part of how these opportunities are afforded. Business cannot provide what taxation can provide. Businesses have to show profits in a relatively short period of time. Taxation is a special type of civic investment that can roll forward indefinitely to create things like Interstate Freeways, or the Internet, which business could never, ever create. There is no profitable business model to create such things, but government can. And the successful benefit from these things. Learn about how things work, Djohn.

I left out a word in last paragraph of my comment that's important modifier. Should say,

"And how ABOUT all these people..."

New Post Title: DJohn Is Angry

And I believe you are. I don't believe any of your post, though:

Obama is Clueless/Idiot --- Obama was President of Harvard Law with advanced Ivy Leage degree.

Ryan is Economic Genius --- Ryan went to Miami of Ohio (kudos to its students; good on them admission isn't competitive)

analysis ... post doesn't add up

Obama will Tax the Rich --- Fact: no, the Bush Tax Cuts will expire as they were passed through reconciliation, the only way to force them through ... ten year window; expiration; surplus goes to current defict

Ryan numbers add up: Fantasy: 3.5% unemployment right around the corner ... well, last 2 supply side attempts raised unemployment; so how is this possible. It is not.

Cutting defense spending will hurt National Security: No, ending 2 unnecessary wars that hurt security will stop a large part of the problem, and allow our military to do its job and do it correctly.

The first two statements here are simply obvious. As to the last two, 2 of my kids have done 5 tours and have seen the total disaster they are way to close. Both are beyond disillusioned, and say we have to get out as quickly as possible to stem the damage. I myself was a DOD worker at Pearl Harbor for years and have some idea what our military does, should do, and what has worked. War hasn't.

These are Big Words but they are all talking points; empty.

The fact Obama shows up at the Lincoln Memorial to take credit that it is still open to the tourists, is one example of his cluelessness.
This is on the government website:
Operating Hours & Seasons: The public may visit the Lincoln Memorial 24 hours a day. However Rangers are on duty to answer questions from 9:30 A.M. to 11:30 P.M. daily.

Obama then says that the first step in his plan will reduce the budget by 750 billion dollars over the next 12 years. The 38.5 billion dollar agreement reached, that Obama says will reduce the budget by 750 billion dollars, only adds up to 462 billion dollars over the next 12 years. These amounts are all peanuts anyway, but it shows he is waving his magic wand of illusion again, or should I say delusion. This is probably why Biden fell asleep. Obama picked Biden as a VP for what he is, a buffoon who will sit and do whatever Obama tells him to do, and to have a puppet pet. Obama and his cronies are going to spin and lie whichever way they can to achieve their socialistic goal.

Everyone seems to forget how Obama whores around with the unions and is giving them payback for the millions dumped into the Democrat coffers. If unions quit their squealing and pitched in, the states would be in much better financial situations. Evidently the unions would rather make sure they keep their obscene wages, pensions and benefits before caring about the elderly, the children or the poor. Businesses will keep leaving America in direct retaliation to unions. Businesses will leave states that are under union strangle holds and that is their right. Unions are attacking the hands of the business man that feeds them. Small businesses will be hurt by the, so called, tax the rich policy, not to mention that small business employs the most people. This is also not to mention how many small business owners are legal immigrants, such as Mexicans, Puerto Ricans, Arabs, Indians and about every other nationality you can think of. These immigrants worked hard to get to where they are today, and progressives want to take it away from them.

The problems with unions are that they are really about an Obama socialistic agenda and not for honest, hard working Americans, all of whom are immigrants. The agenda, flying under the radar, is all about socializing business and taking these men and women’s businesses away from them, so everyone makes low wages except the socialist elite.

This is truly a Piven plan coming into being, calling for violence in the streets. Obama wanted the massive debt to come into being to force the Republican party to make drastic cuts. He knew these cuts were going to cause riots from union workers and the poor. This was how an army of progressive slaves was brought about. If Obama did not run up massive debt in his first two years, on bills that had nothing to do with jobs and getting people back to work, America would be in much better shape.

The one fly in the ointment, was November 2010. Obama and the progressives never expected that blindside slap in the face. I can only imagine what would be happening if the progressives still had a majority and Carte Blanche. Obama and the progressive organizations are now using the budget battle to bring their progressive slave army into the streets with violence.

Like I said before, you can squeal, scream, protest and have your “Days of Rage”; Americans will only become more and more informed about the Truth of the progressive violence and agenda. We will become hardened and entrenched to protect the American way of life. Patriots of America will show up when the timing is right, progressives are their own worst enemy and are marching straight to their demise in 2012. True Americans will tame the progressive and Republican government beast, and America will once again become a nation where you will reap what you sow.

The Pincer Movement is a great strategy where an enemy thinks they are attacking and winning. The progressive slave military will wind up decimated by Patriotic Americans who still love and care about the Real America. Presently, progressives should think about the Tea Party and the Pincer Movement Strategy.

Live Free from Progressive Tyranny or Die Trying!!!

I know what it is. Obama is just so much smarter than the rest of us we just can't keep up with his brilliance. If that is the case then he needs a new PR firm to get that message out because according to the new Gallup numbers things are NOT looking good. His approval number is 42% and trending downward and his disapproval number has finally crossed the 50% line and trending upward. Meanwhile unemployment is stuck at 9.6% and the underemployment is at 19%. Consumre confidence is in the toilet and nobody can figure out the fuzzy math that Obama is using to come up with his deficit plan.

Maybe the truth is that the American People are just a bit smarter than you all give them credit for and they "know how stuff works." Right now...it ain't workin'.

Now excuse me while I go to the shooting range. Who has my Bible?

DJohn
AMEN!!!!!

Obama isn't unpopular, gas prices are unpopular. Bush was never popular, war, in his case, was popular. That's how it goes, most of the time. Only indoctrinated babblers get confused about that. Speaking of which, you and Tommy don't hold a single thought of your own, just crackpot embellishments on the issues you're told to be excited about.

You don't get page views because your borrowed opinions are relevant, or because you have any kind of insight, but because you are a reliable parrot of right-wing concerns. What views you get are divided between those wanting a laugh, and having people like me and Bill, and in this case Ron and Oahu, commenting.
Absent that, you'd get a miserly 30 or so.
So, try to be as nice as possible, or we'll leave and take your audience with us!
Face it, you're one of the biggest recipients of Open Salon Welfare.

O'Roarke,

If I may piggyback on your excellent dissection of DJohn, one of the reasons to come to these "crackpot embellishments" is to see them taken apart piece by piece as you do so well. If one were to hear it on the radio, those dolt wont let dissent call in, and right wing radio is not worth the time. If you encounter one of these fools on the street, well, who is ever in one of those carny neighborhoods anyway. But here, the "crackpot embellishment" is delivered in print. One can read the whine line by line looking for some sort of supporting logic. The writer, like DJohn live in oblivion or denial that support for an argument is even necessary. Like he said earlier, he thinks he can make an accusation and that the burden of proof is upon the accused. Seeing that demonstration of ignorance is edifying. We are dealing with an ideology that is not only ignorant of the processes that it delivers "crackpot embellishments" about, but more significantly demonstrates ignorance about the fundamental concepts of truth and logic. It demonstrates that it comes in beneath the floor of low expectation. When presented with the flaw, no evidence, it attempts co correction to be credible. Any statement, no matter how absurd, can have some sort of supporting argument. These "crackpots" seem to not know how to try. So, one comes to this place to see these lies and delusions pulverized with facts and logical construction, as you have. Sometimes it is fun to watch batting practice pitches getting crushed into the parking lot.

apologies: O'Rourke

And of course the personal attacks. So predictable...so humorous. The problem you gentlemen have is you are a dying breed. More American's identify with conservatism than any other political ideology and the gap is widening. Liberals are dying out and aborting themselves as well so they are a doomed class. Obama is a failure and MOST in this country now know it. Heck, even the world has turned its back on him now. He is frantically running around trying to figure out what his legacy is going to be. So far it's astronomical debt and high unemployment. He is not a leader and he knows it. When faced with conflict he punts and lets someone else take the heat. He can't even come up with his own ideas but just rehashes failed policies of the past. His base is upset because he has turned out to be just another politician and not the messiah as previously thought. His own people are turning against him and his support is eroding faster than the beaches of New England. There is no doubt that he will go down in history but that history will be one he will try to shake for the rest of his life. He'll turn to international business or "peace" brokering like Jimmy Carter so that on some level he will be able to make himself believe that he actually was a good President. I actually have to thank him at this point because he has managed to awaken the slumbering American patriots that have allowed this to go on much too long without speaking up.

I know why you feel you must lash out at others who can't seem to understand your ideology. You feel enlightened and profusely smarter than most Americans and you can't understand why people can't see the genius of this man. You shake your heads because you can't believe you've been duped this badly and now you hide the fact that you voted for the man lest you need to explain yourself to anyone in public. Those stickers have come off the car because deep inside you are ashamed of the buffoon this man has turned out to be and you would rather not get into any confrontations over him. You are exhausted for having to defend the man at every turn because he seems incapable of doing it himself. You are angry because you know you look like a fool and you can't stand the fact that YOU got duped. "How did this happen you say?" "He had such promise." Alas, you've come to the end of your defense and you now realize that you've made a tragic mistake so the anger build inside you. You NEED to express your self in forums like this or you'll explode. You NEED to make sure that people understand how you feel. It's ok, we can take it.

Now, take a deep breath and repeat after me: "I'm special and I like myself." "I have seen the light and my eyes have been opened." "I will think more clearly the next time around and make a better decision and will NOT hole this mistake against me for too much longer." "I need to move on."

There now. Don't you feel better?

Dj - I'm disappointed. Just as Republican Senator Jon Kyl brought disgrace to the Senate floor by lying about Planned Parenthood (he said that 90% of what it does is provide abortions when the true number is 3%), it seems that you have bought into these types of lies and enthusiastically spread them. That suggests that the term "Semper Fi" to you is merely a slogan by which to mask your ideological commitment to free yourself of the burden of facts as you promote YOUR hatred towards the Commander and Chief of the United States of America. Semper Fi!

DJohn,

I consistently try to get you to support your statements with facts. One of the things that would accomplish is to keep it clear of personal attacks. (And to be fair, your title and thesis is only a personal attack on the President, and you know it.)

That aside, let's discuss your ad hominem theory regarding liberalism and liberals. Your theory/statement is actually completely counter to the facts. But the most interesting part about this dichotomy that you have constructed is that it is a dichotomy of ideology. Your premise was that the President was "clueless" about budget and revenue. Now you say those who disagree with you are doing so on an ideological basis. Whether you realize it or not, you have completely obliterated your own original position. Budget and revenue, and certainly debt and surplus, are not ideological. You have outed your slanted accusation which contained no facts.

And that returns you to why it is dangerous to construct an argument with no facts, no logic, and all accusation. When you step out to a statement like your last one about "liberals not getting it", you reveal its falseness. 2+2=4. That is not ideological. That is a matter of fact. One need not be liberal or conservative to agree to that. Conversely, Laffer and his supply side theory, and Ryan's goofy proposal based upon supply side theory, are demonstrably false. Cutting revenue from taxation does not raise revenue. It was once called "voodoo economics." All it created was massive debt. It does not work.

I know this may go right over your head, but this is not meant as a personal slight. It has nothing to do with liberalism versus conservatism. Now try to address the economics of it since it is an economic issue that you raised.

Another thing to consider, DJohn:

Liberalism can't "die out" or be replaced by conservatism. Conservatism is not a stand alone political philosophy. Conservatism is based upon, and dependent upon liberalism. Conservatism means slower, or less progress.

Reactionary philosophy would be necessary for a completely replacement of liberalism. That would mean the elimination of constitutional government for some sort of autocratic government. If that is what you seek, you are not a "conservative."

I will say it in a more simplistic way. You can't drive a brake. You need an engine, and the rest of the vehicle. Liberalism is the engine. Conservatism is the brake. If you seek to build an engine that goes in the opposite direction, you are not slowing the liberalism engine, you are inverting or redirecting in a reactionary manner. That is not the same as conservatism. So if you call yourself a "conservative", you cannot think or prove that liberalism is ending. If you seek some sort of autocratic philosophy, you are really a fascist or something of that sort. I suspect that you are not a fascist. You just have a fundamentally flawed idea of what a constitutional republic is, why that is liberalism, and why that is not likely to change. Sorry, Bub. You are wrong again.

Bill-it's real simple: The FACTS are the the facts. They can't be changed. President Obama has added $1.8 trillion on average for each fiscal year he has been President. In contrast, President Bush added $0.5 trillion each year on average. (using the GAO numbers).

From Politifact: Obama said-"By the end of this decade, the interest we owe on our debt could rise to nearly $1 trillion," Obama said.

We found Obama's number only gets close if you consider a "budget window" at the end of the 10 years ending in 2021. Using the figures for 2019 or 2020 as "the end of this decade" instead, Obama’s numbers are off by anywhere from 13 percent to 29 percent. Obama’s underlying point is still sound -- the United States will have hundreds of billions of dollars of debt on the books -- but we think the most obvious numbers fall short of "nearly $1 trillion." On balance, we rated the statement Half True.

Obama said-"In the last decade, the average income of the bottom 90 percent of all working Americans actually declined," Obama said. "The top 1 percent saw their income rise by an average of more than a quarter of a million dollars each."

Politifact: This turns out to be a controversial statistic, and we found that it takes a careful selection of years and a number of assumptions about income for Obama's statistic to hold up. We rated the president's claim Half True.

So there you have it: Half Truths from our "fearless leader."

This though is what I consider to be the "gem" of the speech and it is bound to upset some math teachers out there:

The first step in our approach is to keep annual domestic spending low by building on the savings that both parties agreed to last week – a step that will save us about $750 billion over twelve years.

So if he is speaking about the $38.5 billion in cuts that was agreed to then how does he come up with $750 billion?

38.5 x 12 = 462

Somewhere there is $288 billion we haven't talked about. maybe it's jut some Washington "fuzzy math" that gets us there.

Then again he has been known to have trouble with numbers: "It is just wonderful to be back in Oregon. And over the last 15 months we've traveled to every corner of the United States. I've now been in 57 states; I think one left to go."

Now that is how to make an argument. Good job. You only left out one very important factor. Unfortunately for you, it is a major confounding factor to your argument. That point is that Bush did not place the wars on his budget. They were left off of the budget. That was the major portion of the spending. Conversely, President Obama put them on the budget, so the comparison that you are making is not apples to apples. Bush's budget was with one enormous accounting trick. And that is not even touching the Bush tax cuts.

Oh, and the $38 billion you ask about, the budget refers to savings for half of a year. It is not a full 12 months. It is for the remaining portion of this year. (April thru Sept.) That is not 12 months, DJohn. You should know that.

DJohn,

Read what you wrote about Politi-fact. The President said, "by the end of the decade." Politi-fact said, "We found Obama's number only gets close if you consider a "budget window" at the end of the 10 years ending in 2021." That is precisely the same thing.

They go on further to say that if you take the previous two years, (obviously not the end of the decade), the figure is slightly lower. They conclude by saying, "Obama’s underlying point is still sound -- the United States will have hundreds of billions of dollars of debt on the books -- but we think the most obvious numbers fall short of "nearly $1 trillion." Now, your point seems to be that the President is concerned that the debt might be higher than it actually would be in the two years prior to the end point that he stated. Any fool knows that geometric progressions work in exactly that manner. If you take two years prior to 2018 and 2019, it will be even lower on a curve. We know this. I don't think you even understand what you read, copied, and pasted.

Clue #1 - Does Average = Insurmountable?
Clue #2 - Debt as Percentage of GDP - Where does US Fall?
Clue #3 - Debt vs DEBT - What does nationalizing The Fed Do?
Clue #4 - World Trending - You want insurmountable - Greece

I don't know about Obama, but in case you didn't have a clue, I just gave you 4.

"And of course the personal attacks. So predictable...so humorous. "

DJohn- These are your words, yet, the Title of your post is a personal attack. My conclusion is you fall into the argue by insult and being loud category, and, admittedly, that works on your average timid Lib.

What you have run into here, however, is a group of men you'd have a hard time with in a dark alley. Emulating Hannity is no way to be taken seriously in a real Salon ... Gertrude would show you the door.

Oh, mixing fact and fiction, again: unemployment 9.6 when it is 8.8? Hard to take that seriously.

Subjectively, rw's comment about Wal Mart says a lot- you guys are scared and have your own backs to the wall, but are too proud to ask us for help ... please do, John Wayne's long gone.

Mr. O'Rourke,

I saw the comment you made about Socialist Economics and Supply-Side Economics, where you compared the two. I believe you intuited your way into something few people know.

These 2 schools of economics share 1 very important trait, and that trait is the reason they both fail so spectacularly in their stated goals -

Both were arrived at after their inventor's Macro Philosophies had already been created. i.e. Marx believes in social equality for laborers and Freedman believes the wealthy will always use their wealth to create more wealth (as opposed to hoarding and capturing the wealth of others), and all mechanisms of production were based on those ideas.

Once that (starting with an end game/macroeconomic theory) happened, both systems were doomed because both required constant tweaking to make up for the difference in actual human behavior from both of their (polar opposite) ideas of idealized human behavior.

If you knew that, sorry to have rehashed it for you.

Oahusurfer
“Obama is Clueless/Idiot --- Obama was President of Harvard Law with advanced Ivy Leage degree.”
Truth: Obama was the president of the Harvard Law Review. The Harvard Law Review is a journal of legal scholarship published by an independent student group at Harvard Law School. I wonder if Soros had anything to do with that.


“Ryan is Economic Genius --- Ryan went to Miami of Ohio (kudos to its students; good on them admission isn't competitive)”
Truth: Ryan graduated from Miami University and worked as a marketing consultant and an economic analyst. Marketing and economy, definitely something the Obama regime is lacking in, don’t you think? The proof is definitely in the Obama pudding there.

“analysis ... post doesn't add up”
Truth: You don’t add up.

“Obama will Tax the Rich --- Fact: no, the Bush Tax Cuts will expire as they were passed through reconciliation, the only way to force them through ... ten year window; expiration; surplus goes to current defict”
Truth: Allowing Bush tax cuts to expire causes taxes to go up, hence an increase in the taxes. Obama proves he lied this past December and proves his character is untrustworthy.

“Ryan numbers add up: Fantasy: 3.5% unemployment right around the corner ... well, last 2 supply side attempts raised unemployment; so how is this possible. It is not.”
Truth: At least he started with something instead of the Democrat Blind Mice who have nothing to show, they could not even pass a 2010 budget, with a majority. They were too busy spending America into the abyss of progressivism. The problem, Ryan’s budget cuts do not even scratch the surface of how many cuts are really needed to bring America back to fiscal solvency.


“Cutting defense spending will hurt National Security: No, ending 2 unnecessary wars that hurt security will stop a large part of the problem, and allow our military to do its job and do it correctly.”
Truth: You conveniently left out the war in Libya; Obama conveniently got us involved in. It is also pretty evident you did not fully read what DJohn said about the defense spending.

“The first two statements here are simply obvious. As to the last two, 2 of my kids have done 5 tours and have seen the total disaster they are way to close. Both are beyond disillusioned, and say we have to get out as quickly as possible to stem the damage. I myself was a DOD worker at Pearl Harbor for years and have some idea what our military does, should do, and what has worked. War hasn't.”
Truth: If your kids are so disillusioned, why do they keep signing up for more tours? If they do not agree with what is going on, then simply get out. That seems to be a simple and basic way to disagree with the wars. War worked in WWII when the world was falling under the thumb of tyrannical leaders. If Hitler was not defeated, you probably would have been put to death, because Hitler’s plan was for a master race and that did not include anyone in the Pacific Region. Hitler, if he had attained his goal, would have gone to war to eradicate Japan and take the world, if America did not stop him. America helped S Korea from being enslaved by a N Korean tyrannical leadership. If it was not for the failure and indecision of the Democrats during Nam and the leftist student organizations putting pressure on cutting the funding for us in Nam, we might have actually had the tools given to us to WIN. Instead the leftist organizations of back then, which are now the progressive organizations of today, helped send good American men to their deaths and spit on the good American men who were able to make it home. It is the typical Democrat way of doing things, half assed. War works when it is for a just cause and liberal bastards are not in the streets protesting violently because they want to shoot dope and are afraid to die for their country. Liberals during Nam were trying to demoralize us, the very men and women who were fighting for and protecting the liberal’s rights in America, from serving our country. Not only did Liberal organizations, during Nam, send American men and women to their deaths, but also gave death sentences to many S Vietnamese who were depending on us. In my book, liberal progressive organizations are nothing but self entitlement cowards.


“These are Big Words but they are all talking points; empty.”
Truth: So is your cranium.

Oahu-If I'm not mistaken I think you just threatened me. Trust me buddy the LAST thing you would want to do is meet ME in a dark alley. I've looked death in the face on many occasions and I'm still here. Let that sink in cupcake.

Ron-Tell me. As the Commander in Chief, what is Obama in command of at this moment in time? Job creation? Paying down the debt? Controlling energy prices? Keeping health care costs down? Let's see. No, no, no and no. Oh and as far as "commanding" the military is concerned? NATO is overseeing the Libya thing and Iraq is just a logistics operation at this point. But he might be involved in Afghanistan...the drones I mean.

Bill-Yeah I get it. What they are saying is the number Obama is throwing out there and the policies he is pursuing to get the debt paid off are not going to work. That's clear. What isn't clear is where the missing $288 Billion is going to come from to get us to that magic number. Methinks he needs to add it again.

Hey Ron
Obama may have the title of Commander in Chief, but he is far from it in his lack of character and lack of love for America. The man is very close to being a traitor to the United States of America and DO NOT say Semper Fi and Obama in the same statement. Ron, you have just entered into dangerous waters. What happens if your savior Obama goes completely unconstitutional? Obama is already treading on thin ice with his tactics of slowly taking away states rights. Obama is instituting policy that the majority of Americans do not want, such as a healthcare bill that was never read by Democrats and Pelosi says “We will just have to pass it, to see what is in it”. Yeah Ron, real good leaders you have there. Then Obama circumvents congress to get approval to enter a war in Libya from the United Nations. Even Bush went to congress for war. Obama is disrespecting and turning on the greatest ally we have in the Middle East, ISRAEL. Obama stops American companies for drilling for oil in the Gulf, yet he gives billions of dollars to a Brazilian company, mind you, one that Soros used to hold stock in, to drill in deep water. Just another part of taking America’s wealth and giving it to another country, don’t you think Ron?

"Semper fidelis" signifies the dedication and loyalty that individual Marines have for "Corps and Country", even after leaving service. CORP AND COUNTRY!!!!! GET IT RON!!!!! NOT A PRESIDENT GOING AGAINST HIS COUNTRY. ALWAYS FAITHFUL TO CORP AND COUNTRY, not a pathological lying, manipulating, hating socialist man in the White House.

I do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same. That I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.

Notice Ron, “I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and DOMESTIC; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same”, comes before “I will obey the orders of the President of the United States”. Interesting dilemma America may have, don’t you think? The military has the obligation to protect the American People instead of a possibly going anti-constitutional President. I brought this scenario up with many of my Brothers in Arms; they all said they would defend The People against a rogue government. You know, the way all you liberal progressive organizations are getting involved in the Middle East and loved the military defending The People against their dictators. You just might see that in a worst case scenario, here in America.

You liberal progressives are as blind and deluded as they come. You follow a man in the White House, your puppeteer, trying to bring about the demise of America. Your secrets are out and Americans are learning more and more every day about your socialistic agenda, YOU WILL NOT have a cake walk.

Mark my words, the military will be on the side of the People against an unconstitutional administration. The treason will not fall on the military or the People, the treasonous acts will have been perpetrated by a rogue President and his administration.

Interesting concept, do you not think?

Live Free From Progressive Tyranny or Die Trying!!!!

DJohn
These are the hard core and deluded liberal progressives. Let them mouth off. They are like satan himself, trying to use your own character and principle against you, to get you to question yourself. When the time comes, American Patriots will answer a call to action that they will not be able to form a response to. 2012 is coming. Let us hope all it takes is a vote for them to meet their demise. These progressive organizations will take to the streets, between now and them, to instigate violence against America. That will be their squealing voices as they head to the hog farm. This is what will be the turning point, in showing True Americans the real progressive agenda. The progressives violence will be what really turns Americans against them.
OORAH!!!!!

DJ-

I was writing metaphorically; even the slightest nuance is simply lost on you.

The point is basic: you can't intimidate this crowd just by raising your voice and insulting people, a la your role model Joe McHannity. That works on the timid, not here pal!

The problem is the information you keep serving up. It's false. It comes from a crowd of people who your supposed idols, Buckley and Goldwater, and even Ms. Rand, (whose soirées could actually qualify as salons themselves, if only they had served wine that merely bolstered courage, as opposed to meth that sourced the conversation into fantasy and paranoia,) barred from participation due to the zany, crazy, hateful and conspiratorial nature of their rants. They called them THE VULGARIANS and thanks to the web being free to all, as it should be, these poster children for credulity have posted the false facts you pick up and attempt to pass off here. This nonsense comes from the New World Order crowd, and used to embarrass the Repubs until, out of desperation, they let the lunatics run their asylum.

The reason is clear- fear. Y'all are scared, and angry. Angry like Michael Douglas in "Falling Down"- because you've been sold down the river as sacrificial lambs, something very disturbing to real men, and scared, because a.) you don't what to do about it; b.) the people running the show now are different than you, and you think they want revenge- they don't ... THEY SIMPLY WANT THEIR COUNTRY BACK, and not back to the Gilded Age.

The people you are arguing with here, on the contrary, get their information from Science, Education, Actual Government Research, not jibberish, Philosophy, and, the killer, Futurism ... as in we'd like to have one!

Scared is no way to go through life, no matter how tough you were when you were young. We all get old, the bigger buck shows up in the bar ... trust me, I've been there on that one too ...

Join us, Brother. Shuck the yoke the puppet masters planted on your shoulders so long ago ... you will feel a whole lot better when you stop carrying their water and being a schill, and you'll quickly see how easy we forgive.

IMUA (Onward)

DJohn,

Your 11:45 comment/question to Ron is particularly idiotic. Sorry for the strong language, but there is just no excuse for how completely inane your question was. You asked, "as commander in chief....what is the President in command of."

The answer to that is, the military. That is the whole answer, and the same for any president. You asked accusingly if he is "commanding the economy." Moronic. No one commands the economy. You asked about fuel prices, same as above. Then you ask about Libya, and offer a complaint about NATO. This shocks me because you claim that you are a former Marine. As such, you should understand this. Libya is a military campaign, it is not the military. The fact that there is a coalition does not make anyone any more or less the Commander in Chief of their respective military. This is such a basic thing, and I don't get how you don't get this. Commander in Chief is one aspect of the President's job where he ranks highest in the military structure. That is all it means. It does not apply to economic mattes, and it has no bearing whatsoever on coalitions with other countries. The rank structure is unchanged. The economy is unaffected. That question is beneath you, DJohn. Even you.

Oahu-So then you consider all of the following to be illegitimate sources of knowledge: The Government Accounting Office, The IRS, The CBO (Congressional Budget Office), Obama's OWN Deficit Reduction Plan and Gallup. These are the sources that I used to get this information. Sure there is some opinion in here as well but the opinion is based upon the facts that were provided (as anyone can research for themselves) by these organizations.

Regardless of what you may think I am not IN the GOP camp. True, I do align with their methodology moreso than the Democrats but the fact is we are ALL being duped by professional politicians. I believe there are SOME in Congress that have OUR best interest in mind but for the last 50 years of so that has become a second consideration to political careers.

I'm a HUGE proponent of term limits for this very reason. Corruption and complacency begin when these politicians consider themselves to be untouchable and above the law. What I don't like about Obama is that he thinks he's the only one with the solutions to all of our problems but when given a chance to lead he abdicates that leadership to a third party. American's will rally around a leader in tough times IF that leader shows true leadership. Obama showed that for the first half of his term he was willing to play partisan politics at every turn and was going to ram through his agenda the people be damned. Now that he no longer holds a majority however he just prefers to stall, stall, stall.

Within his OWN party people are frustrated because all this guy does well is TALK about issues. He doesn't act. Instead he still blames Bush for just about everything. I have NEVER seen a President defer to the past more than Obama. He knew what the situation was when he ran for the office. If he didn't want to accept the challenges then he should have stayed in the Senate. Now that he is the President it's his JOB to address these issues.

However, now that his re-election campaign has obviously started we can expect very little to be done because for Obama, campaigning is much more important than governing.

Bill-I obviously know that the CIC means that he is in "command" of the military. However, you and I both know that when there is a strong leader in The White House it resonates into every otehr part of our society. Reagan challenged us to believe in ourselves again and we did. He brought us out of the malaise of the 70's to regain our pride once again. A leader can do that.

However, at every opportunity, Obama's message is the America is NOT a great country. We are a selfish, bully on the world's stage and we deserve to be humbled. Well, nothing inspires confidence like someone telling you that you are worthless and not a great person. It does wonders for out national pride and self-esteem. The reason that Obama gets the resistance he gets is because like it or not there is a very large number of Americans who believe he is NOT on our side.

All the apologies, the deference to our enemies and the cold shoulders to our allies has people confused. Obama has incredible gifts that if used properly could unite this country and make us stronger than ever. However, he chooses to divide and send mixed signals.

If the wars are wrong then end them and bring the troops home. I would be in favor of either and all-out surge to break the enemy in Afghanistan or a complete removal of our troops. Why are we still there spending that money if we don't believe in the mission?

Why go to war in Libya with such a half-hearted plan if there is no real objective? I thought war was bad and Bush was evil? Apparently though it's ok for us to get involved in a civil war inside a Muslim country.

Let me ask you this Bill and be honest. What is Obama's grand plan for American and how do think he plans to achieve that? Ha he laid that out? Is there a strategy? Why does he deserve to be re-elected?

I'm not sure if I am privy to a "grand plan" of any sort. That sounds a bit sinister. I can say that the first order of business was to stop the financial crisis. That was a two part problem. First was toxic debt, and that caused a lending crisis. The lending crisis was basically the bank to business crisis on a daily basis. The circulation of money had essentially stopped, like a major heart attack. That crisis was averted. That prevented a major crisis which could have wrecked the world economy. On that alone, the man deserves to be re-elected. But there is much more.

The justice dept has started enforcing business regulations which prohibit slave labor and support wages for American workers. You may remember Tom DeLay, who was just convicted and sent to prison. DeLay was involved with doing things like "Made in America" placed on textiles which were actually made in the Marianna Islands. The labor was essentially slave labor. The Obama administration is undoing that nonsense.

Another thing is health care reform. A small portion of the plan is active now, with more to come after 2014. The GOP is attacking it, as you are aware, but they will not likely succeed. This will bring down the cost of HC, and make all governments more fiscally healthy. It will also help major industry, like the auto plants in Ontario Canada being able to make cars when Detroit cant...(same companies). Reclaim some of the Reagan Democrats who left 30 years ago. That is already beginning to happen as you see the numbers rise with independents. A good deal of thanks goes to Govs. Kasich and Walker who opened the eyes of many working folk who had been voting GOP, but are union members like Police and Fire Fighters.

Some which have been partially accomplished, and I see more to gain in the near future is our improved standing in the world. Bush had the U.S. going alone in various initiatives, and eschewed diplomacy. A return to sensible diplomacy saves the country money, and promotes stability in the world.

Investment in green technologies, and reduced dependence on fossil fuels is another. Very little has been done there, but there is much hope for the future. So far we have been busy with several crises.

All of the things listed have been attempted by previous presidents irrespective of party, except for fuel systems with Reagan. He blew it off. But even Nixon had the freeway speed reduced to 55 to save fuel. The point is, these are goals sought by both ends of the political spectrum, and President Obama has had more success than any President in a century on these matters.

There are challenges, but mainly because he is up against ideological nihilists. You are a very good example of that. You state FALSE statistics, and try to trick people into believing falsehoods. That info comes from think tanks which do this in an organized manner. That sort of ting will continue, but it wont eliminate all progress. Yeah, I think he merits another term. If you knew any better, you would think so too. You switch from saying that he does not have a clue, to just abandoning the discussion when proved wrong. Your demographics are wrong. Your understanding of economics is wrong. You were completely wrong. What we have is time. Just like you used to hype Orly Taitz and her birther stuff, which has turned out to be a great big nothing, so will this nonsense about the economy. The economy is improving. 13 consecutive months of job GROWTH. Hell yes, he should be re-elected.

Look, it's one thing to want the man to lose no matter what for purely subjective reasons. It may be senseless, but it is your right. Your vote does not have to make sense. But things like sensible banking regulations are real, measurable, grown up reasons for wanting his administration in place. The repeal of such regulations hurt the national economy and the world economy. Fixing it is a good thing, even for you.

Wanting to believe that the man is from Kenya, or Indonesia, or anywhere but America is fine. You can delude yourself on whatever matter you choose. But the vast majority of the world runs on reality. Fantasies don't serve but to delude people which is short sighted politics. Even if it were true that the President was born outside of the United States, that would mean that a plan hatched by two people of no means, 49 years ago, placed a man in the Oval Office. To believe that is a possibility while BILLIONS of people are watching is beyond idiotic. An idiot like Orly Taitz may say it, and thousands if not millions of idiots may believe her, but there are not enough people that idiotic to make a completely moronic lie like that hold up. Forget all of the crazy BS about that theory that does not add just. Just focus on the fact that two people could hatch this plan over a nearly 50 year period and make it work. If that were even remotely possible, not only would it have been done long before by more powerful people, but there is no hope going forward anyway.

Come down from the delusion tree, DJohn. They make no sense, and everyone can see you and Tommy up there. Watch what happens.

Bill-Thank you for your honest opinion. You make some valid points and while I don't agree that with most of it I thank you again for opining. it would seem we are worlds apart. Just like our nation.

I guarantee you, I form my opinions based on evidence. All of the things I listed have data that is available to all. Look at the LIBOR rate for lending. Look at what it was during the lending crisis. The actions taken at the time fixed that crisis. There is empirical data which demonstrates this as fact, not opinion. Taxation is science, not ideology. This deficit problem will be fixed with a scientific approach, not an ideological one. Fact support the position I stated.

The President was born in Hawaii. Hawaii was a state since 1959. The President was born in 1961. These are recorded facts, not opinion. Orly Taitz is utterly in conflict with facts, not opinion. That is the whole point.

Bill, you say:
“I can say that the first order of business was to stop the financial crisis. That was a two part problem. First was toxic debt, and that caused a lending crisis. The lending crisis was basically the bank to business crisis on a daily basis. The circulation of money had essentially stopped, like a major heart attack. That crisis was averted. That prevented a major crisis which could have wrecked the world economy. On that alone, the man deserves to be re-elected. But there is much more.”

Pelosi took the gavel on January 4, 2007 to January 3, 2011. When Pelosi gave her inaugural address as speaker of the House in 2007, she vowed there would be “no new deficit spending.” Since that day, the national debt has increased by $5 trillion, according to the U.S. Treasury Department. "After years of historic deficits, this 110th Congress will commit itself to a higher standard: Pay as you go, no new deficit spending,” Pelosi said in her speech from the speaker’s podium. “Our new America will provide unlimited opportunity for future generations, not burden them with mountains of debt." At the close of business on Jan. 4, 2007, Pelosi’s first day as speaker, the national debt was $8,670,596,242,973.04 (8.67 trillion), according to the Bureau of the Public Debt, a division of the U.S. Treasury Department. At the close of business on Oct. 22, it stood at $13,667,983,325,978.31 (13.67 trillion), an increase of 4,997,387,083,005.27 (or approximately $5 trillion). Pelosi, the 60th speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, has added more to the national debt than the first 57 House speakers combined.

Think again, if you think it was all Bush and Republicans, even though they were progressives in their spending. What about the banks being pressured into giving loans to people that could not afford homes? Fannie and Freddie were horrendous as well as Barney Frank. In May 2007, Barney Frank and the Democrat-controlled House passed GSE reform legislation. Legislation which was adamantly opposed by the Treasury Dept. and the Bush Administration for limiting federal oversight of Fannie and Freddie’s mortgage holdings. Legislation which included Frank’s pet project, an “affordable housing” fund backed by tax payers.
Let it also be noted that going into 2007 Fannie and Freddie had never in history been allowed to purchase or finance sub-prime mortgages. But under pressure from Democrats in Congress (including Frank), they were granted this authority by regulators in September 2007.
Let it also be noted that in 2007 Frank aggressively pushed to increase the maximum loan limits which could be underwritten by the GSE’s, a move which would ultimately transfer tens of billions of dollars of loan liabilities from private financial institutions to tax payers.

Come on Bill, your progressive democrats were also a huge reason for the financial collapse.

Bill, you say:
“The justice dept has started enforcing business regulations which prohibit slave labor and support wages for American workers. You may remember Tom DeLay, who was just convicted and sent to prison. DeLay was involved with doing things like "Made in America" placed on textiles which were actually made in the Marianna Islands. The labor was essentially slave labor. The Obama administration is undoing that nonsense.”
Bill, do we really need to get into the corruption of the Democrats. Yeah right, the justice department does not look into the Black Panther voter intimidation case and refuses to defend the DOMA law, yet they start enforcing business regulations. They tell ICE to not prosecute the Arizona law while WWIII is starting on our Mexican Border. In June 2010, seven thousand ICE officers and employees from ICE cast a 'Vote of No Confidence' in their Director, John Morton and the Assistant Director Phyllis Coven. Bill, are you serious?
The point is, DJohn makes a huge point that both parties have failed and a need for limited terms is a must. These people in government receive lifelong benefits as well as having lifelong jobs.


Bill, you say:
“Another thing is health care reform. A small portion of the plan is active now, with more to come after 2014. The GOP is attacking it, as you are aware, but they will not likely succeed. This will bring down the cost of HC, and make all governments more fiscally healthy. It will also help major industry, like the auto plants in Ontario Canada being able to make cars when Detroit cant...(same companies). Reclaim some of the Reagan Democrats who left 30 years ago. That is already beginning to happen as you see the numbers rise with independents. A good deal of thanks goes to Govs. Kasich and Walker who opened the eyes of many working folk who had been voting GOP, but are union members like Police and Fire Fighters.”
For crying out loud, Washington DC would not accept the same healthcare that they wanted the American People to be forced to have. If the Healthcare Bill was so great, why did Washington not want it? Why are so many unions and companies receiving opt outs from the bill if it is so great? According to the Government Accountability Office (GAO), there are close to 30,000 career fire fighters across the country that are volunteering as fire fighters – generally in their hometowns – when they are off-duty. We refer to these individuals as “two-hatters.” Unfortunately, many two-hatters face pressure from their union or employer to quit volunteering. The strong arm of the unions actually attacking men and women to try to stop them from doing something they love because it does not fit the progressive union regulations. In April 2009, the NVFC board voted to direct the Volunteer Advocacy Committee to initiate a public awareness campaign to inform the public and elected officials about the challenges facing two-hatters. According to the National Volunteer Fire Council, 73% of all firefighters are volunteers. They say they do it, because it is simply in their blood. Unions are making everything so expensive, such as autos, that Americans cannot afford American products with the union label. What do we do? Do all Americans get to have a union job with obscene pay, pensions and benefits? Then there would be no more companies, they would close up shop and move overseas, such that has happened now. It is, in reality, unions sending jobs overseas.
You are delusional if you think Independents are turning toward the Democrats. Last week’s CBS poll found 35 percent of independents now approve of the president’s handling of the economy and 54 percent disapprove — hovering near their pre-election lows. Polls can be spun whichever way you want them to look. A new Gallup Poll finds President Barack Obama’s approval rating is now tied to his lowest — at 41 percent. His problem: a resumption of voter support erosion from independent voters: The latest Gallup Daily tracking three-day average shows 41% of Americans approving of the job Barack Obama is doing as president. That ties his low as president, which he registered three times previously — twice in August 2010 and once in October 2010. Don’t count on Independents being there. If progressive unions and organizations go the violent protest route this next year, you will have written your own epitaph with Americans.

Bill, you say:
“Some which have been partially accomplished, and I see more to gain in the near future is our improved standing in the world. Bush had the U.S. going alone in various initiatives, and eschewed diplomacy. A return to sensible diplomacy saves the country money, and promotes stability in the world.”
Improve our standing in the world? Libya is turning into another Nam, all because Obama allowed the United Nations to take control of approval and then allow France and England to take the lead. What a cluster f$%k going on over there. Obama is not a military or financial leader; he is and always will be, just a community organizer sweet talking the public. Sheesh, he even campaigned for President overseas. Americans will see Obama turning America into a third world nation, which I think he wants. Obama wants a one world government with no borders for anyone. Yeah, that will work real well, because someone is always not going to be happy. Islam comes to mind there with their want for world domination. Mark my words, Islam will be coming after your progressive butts in due time.


Bill, you say:
“Investment in green technologies, and reduced dependence on fossil fuels is another. Very little has been done there, but there is much hope for the future. So far we have been busy with several crises.
All of the things listed have been attempted by previous presidents irrespective of party, except for fuel systems with Reagan. He blew it off. But even Nixon had the freeway speed reduced to 55 to save fuel. The point is, these are goals sought by both ends of the political spectrum, and President Obama has had more success than any President in a century on these matters.”

These are crises that have come about largely due to Obama spending like a drunken sailor and getting us involved in another war. Green technologies are coming about due to progressives, such as Gore, Soros and Obama’s friends being heavily invested in them. Soros even heavily invests in foreign oil where Obama gives the Brazilians a couple of billion dollars. The Brazilian President is Marxist Dilma Rousseff. She was arrested in the 70′s. She was a Marxist guerrilla prior to being arrested, working for an organization that liked to kidnap foreign diplomats and hold them for ransom. Her life in the 60′s and 70′s is quite similar to other people who President Obama has been associated with in his life such as Weather Underground leader Bill Ayers. Rousseff’s radical background and phony transformation into a non-extreme mainstream leftist is similar to Obama and to other’s associated with Obama such as Van Jones. Pretty convenient, huh? The average American is going to go broke trying to pay for Green Energy. In 2008, Obama even said himself, “Energy prices would necessarily skyrocket with my plan”.
I am all for wind and solar energy, but not at the cost of putting severe financial burdens on Americans trying to pay their bills and feed their kids. We have plenty of oil and natural gas in America to last over a hundred years. We should be drilling at home and using our own natural gas and oil. In the meantime, Green Energy can be perfected in the next 20-30 years, at a cost that is affordable for the average American. Obama needs to start handing out drilling permits. Americans would also appreciate those jobs.

Bill, you say:
“There are challenges, but mainly because he is up against ideological nihilists. You are a very good example of that. You state FALSE statistics, and try to trick people into believing falsehoods. That info comes from think tanks which do this in an organized manner. That sort of ting will continue, but it wont eliminate all progress. Yeah, I think he merits another term. If you knew any better, you would think so too. You switch from saying that he does not have a clue, to just abandoning the discussion when proved wrong. Your demographics are wrong. Your understanding of economics is wrong. You were completely wrong. What we have is time. Just like you used to hype Orly Taitz and her birther stuff, which has turned out to be a great big nothing, so will this nonsense about the economy. The economy is improving. 13 consecutive months of job GROWTH. Hell yes, he should be re-elected.

I have to disagree with your statement that he is up against ideological nihilists. The ideological nihilists definition, you need to look it up, definitely describes socialism. I think job growth is great; could it be due to entitlements ending and people actually going out and getting jobs? Re-electing Obama just on job growth is a very poor and near sighted reason. The private sector, that is responsible for job growth could be very optimistic about Obamanomics being severely curtailed, causing a more positive outlook for businesses. Plus, the job growth you are talking about is barely growth. The unemployment rate is barely affected on this job growth. It stands to reason that we should get a little job growth, due to the exorbitant amount of layoffs; you reach a point where you have a skeleton crew and cannot layoff anyone else. The unemployment level also drops as people drop off the radar without jobs. Presently there are way too many variables involved to get a true picture on the job situation, but liberals will pounce on anything to inflate themselves. Bill, come to the reality of the evil agenda Obama and his liberal progressives have in store for America. Like I said, you are severely deluded.

Tommy,
Not that it will help your condition, but your rant was as long as it is ignorant. It would be funny if you stumbled across a fact or two, even though they would be crushed under the pile of expressed abject stupidity.
You're wrong about Fannie/Freddie. You're wrong about unions, and the rest of the junk is Space Aliens ate my pickup truck stuff.

Nobody is going to read all of that crap, so you should shorten up a bit. You can be just as irrelevant and ignorant with 1/3rd of the words. Perhaps it's an issue of genre, and I'm not schooled in the appropriate style for psycho-fiction, but I don't think so.

Meanwhile, check under your bed for radical Islamic assassins...you know their secret plan, so you're sure to go first.

Be sure to friend Chris, he needs you to fill out his collection.

I'm enjoying the hell out of this discussion, and I wish everyone on OS would read it. The fact that I'm enjoying it should be a clue as to which point of view I share, and I thank those of you who are doing the heavy lifting for "our" sake. Anyone who is following this and may be confused as to why my enjoying it should clue them to my sympathies might look at who remains cool and good-humored and who is losing it. Bravo, my side!

Paul
Everyone, who does not believe you, is wrong. Oh well.

One thing I have learned about liberal progressives in Salon, they forget about the facts posted and insist on more facts. I could have left out copying and pasting Bill Beck's remarks and just posted my rebuttals, but then he would have forgotten his own remarks my rebuttal was on. They do not even take the effort to look at their own remarks further up in the post. It seems, if we do not flood some of you with facts, you live in your delusional world.

Maybe Paul, it is the facts revealed you really do not like. What the heck, you cannot make everyone happy.