View Full Version : Ubama fights for more debt and loses again
jacksmar
06-01-2011, 10:36 AM
http://www.cnn.com/2011/POLITICS/06/01/debt.ceiling/index.html
Washington (CNN) -- President Barack Obama is scheduled to resume deficit-reduction talks with congressional Republicans Wednesday -- one day after the GOP-controlled House of Representatives overwhelmingly rejected a measure to raise the national debt ceiling without any accompanying deficit or spending reduction provisions.
The House voted 318-97 against the bill, which would have raised the federal government's debt limit by approximately $2.4 trillion. Republicans voted against it unanimously.
What really came through the process is Ubama's great leadership. 7 Dimrats voted present.
http://rlv.zcache.com/obama_the_fool_bumper_sticker-p128903265069178567trl0_400.jpg
Nitro Express
06-01-2011, 11:23 AM
Obama is an incompetent fraud. When he went to sign the guest book at Westminister Abby he had to ask what date it was. Most executives and presidents know what day it is if they are managing an organization let alone a country. Then the fool writes down the date he was told and put 2008 instead of 2011. The president doesn't even know what year it is.
Also, when he was first elected he was rude to the British. He returned a gift bust of Winston Churchill. He gave the Queen tacky gifts. I thought this narcissist hated the British and the Queen due to Kenya once being part of the common wealth and he had bitter feelings because of that for some reason. Now he's kissing the Brits ass even though he was not invited to the royal wedding.
When Obama first came in many labeled him a socialist, a marxist, a guy with an agenda. I think the real agenda is to feed his huge ego and be the center of attention. The guy is totally incompetent and all he cares about is being the man in power. He could care less about the American people. I get the drift he loathes us. Also if this joker doesn't get what he wants from the Congress he just does it anyways regardless of what the law of the land states.
Obama is a loose cannon and with the power he's abusing, not only can he destroy the country economically but he could set off another world war. The scary thing is he wouldn't care as long as he's in the spot light getting attention whether that's good or bad. We elected a guy with a two year old's brain for president.
I think we will soon see the angry Obama. Early on in his presidentcy he was the big celebrity with a congress willing to do his bidding. He had absolute power with nobody in his way. Now he doesn't have congress and his popularity with the people is going downhill fast. His rude and pompus behavior has alienated him with other foreign leaders. Obama is going to find himself more and more isolated and more and more hated. This is when the man will show his ugly side. I think this president is very dangerous because I question his mental stability.
ThrillsNSpills
06-01-2011, 11:28 AM
hello, he uses a teleprompter.
he eats stale cheerios
please stick to the real issues
Nitro Express
06-01-2011, 11:39 AM
hello, he uses a teleprompter.
he eats stale cheerios
please stick to the real issues
He's also a narcissist who is no longer bound by constitutional law thank's to the Bush Administration making legal loopholes around it. Obama is a dictator. That's why the congress better get damn serious about cutting the money off to his agencies he is using to further his agenda with. We need to cut off Obama's money and vote him out the next election. The longer this shit goes on the harder it will be to turn out of this decline. If it continues it will tear the country to shreds. The country will start to come apart in a very violent way. People mad as hell are still willing to use the established political process. If Obama wins a second term you will finally see a big uprising stonewall him and Obama won't back down. It will get real nasty from that point. As things sit, the country is sitting on a powder keg. As the economy worsens and people get more angry it just makes the potential bomb bigger.
jhale667
06-01-2011, 11:46 AM
hello, he uses a teleprompter.
he eats stale cheerios
please stick to the real issues
How would THEY know? FAUX doesn't cover the "real" issues. :lmao:
Unless you support ending tax cuts for the rich, ending subsidies to oil, corn, and tobacco, and slashing the living shit out of the "defense" budget, then you need to shut the fuck up about the debt.
knuckleboner
06-01-2011, 11:05 PM
hate to break it to you, jack, but the republicans plan on adding at least that much debt, too. they're just a little more deceptive about it...
Dr. Love
06-01-2011, 11:38 PM
http://i.imgur.com/KXp2P.jpg
jacksmar
06-02-2011, 01:51 PM
Unless you support ending tax cuts for the rich, ending subsidies to oil, corn, and tobacco, and slashing the living shit out of the "defense" budget, then you need to shut the fuck up about the debt.
So the seals should not have been funded to get Obama Bin Laden?
No problem with the end to the subsidies. Everyone plays by the same rules and no government handouts including the socialist welfare subsides. No fucking social walfare lobbies and no social security. Deal?
jacksmar
06-02-2011, 01:58 PM
hate to break it to you, jack, but the republicans plan on adding at least that much debt, too. they're just a little more deceptive about it...
Could not have stated this better. I would just add term limits to Congress.
The SEALs should have been funded to get Bin Laden, and they should have done so within a week of 9-11-01. NOTHING else regarding Afghanistan or Iraq should have ever been funded, but prior to Chimpy's wars, there was still billions of wasted dollars in the "defense" budget, most of it not even going to the military itself, but to "defense" contractors for ridiculous weapons systems. For example, did all those missiles Ronald Reagan and Poppy Bush charged on the national credit card in the 80's do a damn thing to stop 19 idiots with box-cutters? (Assuming you believe that crock of shit anyway)
As for social security and welfare, those are worthwhile programs. Those who can work, should do so (which brings up the whole lack of jobs thing, but that is a whole other thread, which I will probably get to later today) but those who can't, because they are too old or otherwise unhealthy, need some sort of a safety net.
Money spent on those programs is a far better investment than money wasted on imperialism, subsidies for industries that produce harmful products (and make shitloads of money selling them), or tax "cuts" for tax dodging millionaires.
jacksmar
06-02-2011, 02:53 PM
FORD, Check Federalist 62: "A good government implies two things: first, fidelity to the object of government, which is the happiness of the people; secondly, a knowledge of the means by which that object can be best attained."
Not prosperity. Not security. Not equality. Period.
The only thing those programs do is make you feel good about yourself. Your kind have this belief that everyone will naturally have the same distributions of outcomes in life. Your kind rig the outcome to make this happen. It hasn’t solved anything and it hasn’t helped anything. You are a genuine socialist. Good luck with that.
The Federalist papers are the opinions of an unknown author (though most likely James Madison and Alexander Hamilton). Interesting historical reading, but not binding law, so they aren't all that relevant to the discussion.
Furthermore, there's no discussion of "socialism" here. Just fiscal sanity.
jacksmar
06-02-2011, 03:46 PM
"As for social security and welfare, those are worthwhile programs."
That is socialism and they socialist programs. It's absolutely relevant. You want slash the military because you want to attach the dollar amount to a former president and policies. I want to do the same to the socialist programs for the same reason. In fact I can go one better: slash congressional pay, benefits, and staff 50%.
FORD you swerved into being correct. America is wealthier than any time in history but every year, the American government redistributes more than a trillion dollars of that wealth to provide for retirement, health care, and to get rid of poverty. Believe it or not, we still have millions of people without comfortable retirements, without adequate health care, and living in poverty.
The socialism is not working, it never has.
Nickdfresh
06-02-2011, 05:54 PM
"As for social security and welfare, those are worthwhile programs."
That is socialism blah troll blah blah troll trolling...
Um, Obama is still cleaning up the shitty mess left behind the incompetents YOU voted for. The one who invaded the wrong country, enable corporatist welfare and wholesale fraud, and destroyed the economy...
Guitar Shark
06-02-2011, 06:48 PM
Bush also heavily lobbied for, and signed, that Medicare prescription drug benefit entitlement program that costs tens, if not hundreds, of billions of dollars a year. Both parties have been extremely irresponsible with spending. It's simple - either spending needs to decrease, or taxes need to increase, or some combination of the two. We can't continue borrowing money at this pace.
jacksmar
06-02-2011, 06:53 PM
I didn't vote for Hillbilly Clinton, Impeached.
Corporate welfare can take the form of direct government grants, loans, insurance, or subsidies provided to business; trade barriers designed to protect U.S. firms in particular industries from foreign competition at the expense of American consumers like this leftist gem:
Agriculture Department's Market Promotion Program, which subsidizes the foreign advertising of U.S. corporations such as Pillsbury, Dole, and Jim Beam;
or a loophole in the tax code carved out solely for the benefit of a particular company or industry.
Same shit, different year Nick.
http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/1995-04-04/news/9504040207_1_tax-cuts-gop-tax-500-per-child-tax
April 04, 1995|By Knight-Ridder Newspapers
House Republicans removed a major stumbling block to their $190 billion tax-cut plan Monday after GOP leaders agreed to make tax reductions conditional on passing a budget that would eliminate the deficit by 2002.
Meanwhile, Vice President Al Gore blasted the tax plan, calling it ''highly partisan'' and ''extremist,'' and accused Republicans of cutting taxes for the wealthy at the expense of the poor and the middle class.
Same tards; different suits. It's still socialism and thanks to the incompetents you continue to vote for it will be worse soon enough.
Baby's On Fire
06-02-2011, 07:13 PM
You American 'tards amaze me. Honest to motherfucking God.
Common sense clouded by partisan and ratial hate.
BigBadBrian
06-02-2011, 07:43 PM
You American 'tards amaze me. Honest to motherfucking God.
Common sense clouded by partisan and ratial hate.
You wish you were an American. :tongue0011::tongue0011:
BigBadBrian
06-02-2011, 07:46 PM
and slashing the living shit out of the "defense" budget, then you need to shut the fuck up about the debt.
Nope. We won't shut up.
What part of the defense budget would you "slash the living shit out of?"
BigBadBrian
06-02-2011, 07:47 PM
hate to break it to you, jack, but the republicans plan on adding at least that much debt, too. they're just a little more deceptive about it...
Bullshit. Your argument, counselor.
BigBadBrian
06-02-2011, 07:49 PM
For example, did all those missiles Ronald Reagan and Poppy Bush charged on the national credit card in the 80's do a damn thing to stop 19 idiots with box-cutters? (Assuming you believe that crock of shit anyway)
FORD, you're in over your head...stop! :lmao:
BigBadBrian
06-02-2011, 07:52 PM
Bush also heavily lobbied for, and signed, that Medicare prescription drug benefit entitlement program that costs tens, if not hundreds, of billions of dollars a year. Both parties have been extremely irresponsible with spending. It's simple - either spending needs to decrease, or taxes need to increase, or some combination of the two. We can't continue borrowing money at this pace.
Holy shit! A liberal sees the light!
knuckleboner
06-05-2011, 10:40 AM
Bullshit. Your argument, counselor.
beyond easy:
the ryan budget adds more than $4 trillion to the national debt over the next decade.
the republican study committee's alternative budget, which, by the way is the SUPER conservative budget and by far the most draconian that's been proposed, adds another $2.2+ trillion over the next decade.
so, republicans, implicitly acknowledge that, yes, we're going to need more debt. and trillions of it. but they're going to be more fiscally responsible in the long run and gradually lower deficts over the years. but they don't say that because it doesn't exactly fit onto their bumper stickers.
retort?
What part of the defense budget would you "slash the living shit out of?"
Every penny that doesn't go to the actual defense of the United States of America.
Believe it or not, we still have millions of people without comfortable retirements, without adequate health care, and living in poverty.
The socialism is not working, it never has.
It's corporatism that screwed up healthcare, closed factories, and outsourced jobs. Not socialism.
jacksmar
06-05-2011, 06:57 PM
Spoken like socialist. Equal sharing of miseries and profits are evil. Predictable.
As a socialist FORD, I suggest you understand statism before replying again.
Yeah, I'm a "socialist", just like Tommy fucking Jefferson.......
"Another means of silently lessening the inequality of property is to exempt all from taxation below a certain point, and to tax the higher portions of property in geometrical progression as they rise. Whenever there is in any country, uncultivated lands and unemployed poor, it is clear that the laws of property have been so far extended as to violate natural right." - Thomas Jefferson
jacksmar
06-05-2011, 09:30 PM
Jefferson was not proposing this for the US. He saw this as unjust land policy in France and Eurpoe and wrote to Madison about it.
As soon as I had got clear of the town I fell in with a poor woman walking at the same rate with myself and going the same course. Wishing to know the condition of the labouring poor I entered into conversation with her, which I began by enquiries for the path which would lead me into the mountain: and thence proceeded to enquiries into her vocation, condition and circumstance. She told me she was a day labourer, at 8. sous or 4 d. sterling the day; that she had two children to maintain, and to pay a rent of 30 livres for her house (which would consume the hire of 75 days), that often she could get no emploiment, and of course was without bread. As we had walked together near a mile and she had so far served me as a guide, I gave her, on parting 24 sous. She burst into tears of a gratitude which I could perceive was unfeigned, because she was unable to utter a word. She had probably never before received so great an aid. This little attendrissement, with the solitude of my walk led me into a train of reflections on that unequal division of property which occasions the numberless instances of wretchedness which I had observed in this country and is to be observed all over Europe.
FORD, socialism doesn't work. What Jefferson did is the act of a Christian. Your parsed and out of context quote can't change that.
Ubama is a socialist that surrounded himself with communists and apparently doesn't know his heritage. One day Ubama thinks he's Kenyan and recites Muslim prayer and the next Obama thinks he's from Ireland drinking Guinness. He's anything but an American because he knows nothing of American heritage and history. Ubama is a Blackberry twerp that's never signed a paycheck. Obama is an idiot that doesn't know his credit card balance.
What Ubama and every socialist Democrat doesn't understand is poverty to some point is a part of the human experience. Good intentions, increased taxes, and more socialist welfare don’t guarantee the end of poverty, nor does anything else including socialism.
Tax rate cuts cause a short term drop in revenue but they are also followed by stock rallies, then by gdp growth, and finally by revenue increases. And as Democrats are so artful at stealing and lying about it, one would think they would co-opt the idea and make it theirs again. It would be too easy to lead the same assholes that voted for Ubama in that direction because that would be change and they're too stupid to know what the fuck that means. They would think it's socialism.
Seshmeister
06-05-2011, 09:43 PM
You talk a lot about knowing American heritage but even I know Jefferson wasn't a Christian, he was a theist even back in the day when every thing was a big mystery.
It seems to be common in America to use the word socialism as a scary negative word without even knowing what it means.
Your post would kind of make sense in an morally bankrupt way if you were one of the 1% at the top of the tree in the US who are doing pretty well.
Maybe I'm wrong but I doubt you are which just makes you a silly sheep.
FORD, socialism doesn't work. What Jefferson did is the act of a Christian. Your parsed and out of context quote can't change that.
Christ Himself would be a "socialist" by your definition. Or do you know any corporatists who sell all they have and give the money to the poor?
Ubama is a socialist that surrounded himself with communists and apparently doesn't know his heritage. One day Ubama thinks he's Kenyan and recites Muslim prayer and the next Obama thinks he's from Ireland drinking Guinness. He's anything but an American because he knows nothing of American heritage and history. Ubama is a Blackberry twerp that's never signed a paycheck. Obama is an idiot that doesn't know his credit card balance.
At least he knows how to spell his own name. I guess that makes him smarter than you. And what the fuck is wrong with drinking Guinness when you're in Ireland? Or anywhere else for that matter (though as the Prez himself said, it just ain't the same in the states) :gulp:
What Ubama and every socialist Democrat doesn't understand is poverty to some point is a part of the human experience. Good intentions, increased taxes, and more socialist welfare don’t guarantee the end of poverty, nor does anything else including socialism.
Tax rate cuts cause a short term drop in revenue but they are also followed by stock rallies, then by gdp growth, and finally by revenue increases. And as Democrats are so artful at stealing and lying about it, one would think they would co-opt the idea and make it theirs again. It would be too easy to lead the same assholes that voted for Ubama in that direction because that would be change and they're too stupid to know what the fuck that means. They would think it's socialism.
If this trickle down RandTard bullshit worked, then how come this country has gone down the toilet for the last three decades with even the so-called "socialist" Presidents not getting off this economic trainwreck.
Seshmeister
06-05-2011, 09:56 PM
Why can't so many Americans realise that spending trillions of dollars on 'defence' is public spending?
Seshmeister
06-05-2011, 10:01 PM
If this trickle down RandTard bullshit worked, then how come this country has gone down the toilet for the last three decades with even the so-called "socialist" Presidents not getting off this economic trainwreck.
The ridiculous thing about this theory is that it doesn't even try to hide.
TRICKLE!
TRICKLE!
TRICKLE!
HELLOOOOO!!!
Is there anyone home?
TRICKLE!
What does that word mean? Does it mean lots?
Does it mean 'a decent proportion?'
Does it imply a 'fair amount'?
Any time I hear the phrase I want to hit people in the head.
'If we give the super rich millions some of it is bound to trickle down back to the people that need it'.
Jesus suffering cunt on a bike...
Here's a fucking plan lets try a deluge up rather than a trickle down.
jacksmar
06-05-2011, 10:21 PM
You talk a lot about knowing American heritage but even I know Jefferson wasn't a Christian, he was a theist even back in the day when every thing was a big mystery.
It seems to be common in America to use the word socialism as a scary negative word without even knowing what it means.
Your post would kind of make sense in an morally bankrupt way if you were one of the 1% at the top of the tree in the US who are doing pretty well.
Maybe I'm wrong but I doubt you are which just makes you a silly sheep.
Jefferson was raised as an Anglican and he gave money to all denominations. He had a wife die young along with his kids that died which probably led to his Unitarian beliefs.
What I refer to in point to BHO is for full nationalization of the economy. Bush gave us Medicare Part D which is socialism. Think I have pretty good handle on it. In Europe it's apparently some point of pride due to the the mixed economies, ask Gordon Brown. BHO isn't some Stalinist, he's more like Tony Benn. Calling BHO a socialist isn't racist, or fear mongering, or conspiratorial; it's a fact.
Barack Obama is intrinsically undemocratic and it's becoming more obvious. In that wonderful piece propaganda that BHO "wrote" Obama sees himself as an African and not as a black American. BHO goes on a personal quest to understand his Kenyan roots, not American roots.
I'm fine financially. Thanks for asking.
jacksmar
06-05-2011, 10:40 PM
"though as the Prez himself said, it just ain't the same in the states"
No shit Obama. Ever tried a Bud while in Europe? It's real beer in Europe.
And parroting Robert Reich doesn't make anything true. Reich has never crated a job because he's an asshole that spent his entire career in politics. Between community organizer and social economist; which profession is more worthless? Both are lifelong parasites. Would anyone with good mind go to Reich for financial planning? Fuck no.
They borrowed from Social Security to produce a surplus and HillBilly's dot.com bubble burst. HillBilly's surplus topped out at $236 billion per year but led to a $3 trillion national debt. How the fuck does that happen?
The socialism doesn't work, it never has.
Unchainme
06-05-2011, 11:16 PM
You American 'tards amaze me. Honest to motherfucking God.
Common sense clouded by partisan and ratial hate.
What a douche-tube you are. I feel sorry that Canada has a jackass like you soiling her name
Nickdfresh
06-05-2011, 11:24 PM
Jefferson was raised as an Anglican and he gave money to all denominations. He had a wife die young along with his kids that died which probably led to his Unitarian beliefs.
Um, no. He was part of a wider movement and its subset called the Enlightenment and the Rationalist. The Unitarian Church didn't exist then, and wasn't spawned until the wake of American Romantic writers like Hawthorne, Thoreau, and Melville...
What I refer to in point to BHO is for full nationalization of the economy. Bush gave us Medicare Part D which is socialism. Think I have pretty good handle on it. In Europe it's apparently some point of pride due to the the mixed economies, ask Gordon Brown. BHO isn't some Stalinist, he's more like Tony Benn. Calling BHO a socialist isn't racist, or fear mongering, or conspiratorial; it's a fact.
...
Complete horseshit! Show where Obama has nationalized any industry. And most of Western Europe ISN'T "socialist," they're actually "mixed" capitalist economies like the U.S.
Medicare part D is the OPPOSITE of "socialism", since it is the privatization of a part of Medicare. And now the Randtard Ryan wants to privatize the rest of it.
jacksmar
06-05-2011, 11:59 PM
Nick,
You are so correct. Jefferson didn't join a Unitarian church. He attended services. He used to write to Jared Sparks and John Adams. Wait, that would make you incorrect.
Nick, as a teacher, you may understand the following blue-book question: What is a salary(pay) czar? Define the need for a pay czar. What industries does the pay czar oversee?
No horseshit (socialist) answer will be accepted.
Ever tried a Bud while in Europe? It's real beer in Europe.
Well, yes and no.......
http://www.brandchannel.com/home/image.axd?picture=2010%2F7%2Fbudweiser.png
Indeed, there is a beer called Budweiser brewed in the Czech Republic. But it has no affiliation whatsoever with the Anhueser Busch corporation, nor the horrid swill they produce under the same name.
I've heard the Czech Budweiser is good, but I haven't tried it, and I'm not a big Pilsner fan anyway, so it probably wouldn't be my first choice even if it were available. Guinness may be slightly different in every country (best I ever had was at a pub just north of the Canadian border) but its essentially the same beer, same label, same company, etc. :gulp:
LoungeMachine
06-06-2011, 02:54 AM
Has anyone bothered to point out to Jagsmear that the RePukes raised the debt ceiling 17 times under Bush?
:gulp:
Doesn't matter, because Chimpy was a White Christian American and not a Kenyan Muslim Socialist :biggrin:
Nitro Express
06-06-2011, 03:17 AM
Doesn't matter, because Chimpy was a White Christian American and not a Kenyan Muslim Socialist :biggrin:
Basically all that means is we could fire a full broadside of insults at Bush without worry of being labeled a racist or an uncultured hater.
Nitro Express
06-06-2011, 03:25 AM
It's corporatism that screwed up healthcare, closed factories, and outsourced jobs. Not socialism.
The corporations did a lot of damage because the government allowed them to do it. I like regulated capitalism where the government plays the role of being the referee. It used to be corporations had six year charters that were renewed according to that corporations behavior. The US government in theory is set up to represent the citizens, not corporations and over the years the corporations have slowly taken over the government so what we have now is fascism not socialism. Socialism is putting the people's money into a pot which the government uses to buy good and services which hopefully benefit the public. But again, the public have to watch the store or that money will be spent for the benefit of the politicians and the lobbyists.
The problem isn't so much the government but who the government sides with.
Nickdfresh
06-06-2011, 09:05 PM
Well, yes and no.......
http://www.brandchannel.com/home/image.axd?picture=2010%2F7%2Fbudweiser.png
Indeed, there is a beer called Budweiser brewed in the Czech Republic. But it has no affiliation whatsoever with the Anhueser Busch corporation, nor the horrid swill they produce under the same name.
I've heard the Czech Budweiser is good, but I haven't tried it, and I'm not a big Pilsner fan anyway, so it probably wouldn't be my first choice even if it were available. Guinness may be slightly different in every country (best I ever had was at a pub just north of the Canadian border) but its essentially the same beer, same label, same company, etc. :gulp:
It's good, for a pilsner...
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.