http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/06/09/obama.paygo/ The guy is invincible in the media, his real proposed budget bankrupts us, but he gets credit for lip service some fiscally conservative concepts. He's so smart. Image baby, image. The road to hell.
President Obama has done more damage in the last 6 months to Our Nation than anyone ever!!! To him and his Liberal Democrap cronies the Rule of Law doesn't matter, The Constitution doesn't matter, Bankrupcy laws and precedant doesn't matter, $2 Trillion Dollar Budget deficits don't matter, Pork Barrel spending doesn't matter, etc.... His Socialist policies will kill this Nation. Redistribution of wealth to the Unions... can you say UAW getting 55% of Chrysler!!! WTF. Obama has no clue. He is not that intelligent as everyone has made him out to be. Just look at all the mistakes he's made in such a short time ie... Cabinet appointments with Tax issues, Closing Gitmo with no realistic plan, Joe Biden as VP, Apologizing to the World, Signing Budget with 9000 earmarks, Signing $787 Billion Stimulas Bill without any clue as to what it really says, Air Force 1 fly over Manhattan, Bowing to the Saudi King, Telepromter gafts, and much more. Our Community Organizer in Chief had no executive experience. He has never really been employed in the private sector, except for the short sint at a law firm. He doesn't know how companies operate in a capitalistic system. No fucking clue at all!!! Obama is a fucking idiot! Obama will go down in history as the worst President ever!!!
I don't think he's an idiot, I think he is an image master. The guy's more bulletproof than Clinton. He can trash his own policy and look good to half the country. He told us we could not afford his own budget, he can't be that dumb.
this just sets us up for 60-70% top tax brackets ... and the inevitable plummeting of tax receipts, and a flight of capital and people from the US. the notion that a dollar spent here is a dollar cut somewhere else is beyond laughable. This country is filling with leeches, Obama will grant amnesty to 30 million illegals in his second term, and expect 30 million more to follow that. He is "finally proud of this country", now that he has the opportunity to destroy everything its stood for: The Anti-Reagan by Patrick J. Buchanan 06/09/2009 http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=32195 Despite his boldness, Barack Obama seems as fated to fail as were Woodrow Wilson and Jimmy Carter. And for the same reason: a belief in his own righteousness and moral superiority, and a belief that his ideals and his persona count mightily in the modern world. Wilson declaimed about America's fight to "make the world safe for democracy" when in harness with the British, French, Russian, Japanese and Italian empires, all slavering to feast on the carcasses of the Hohenzollern, Habsburg and Ottoman empires. By 1920, Wilson was a tragic failure, mocked by ex-allies and reviled by former enemies for having dishonored his own 14 Points. Jimmy Carter declared in 1977 that "we have gotten over our inordinate fear of communism that caused us to embrace any dictator who shared in that fear." So, we undermined Nicaragua's Anastasio Somoza and the Shah, and got the Sandinistas and the Ayatollah Khomeini. As for Barack, he behaves on the world stage like some Ivy League kid ashamed of the people he came from, letting one and all on campus know that he is nothing like his benighted family with its sordid history. In Cairo, he confessed that America had a hand in dumping over the regime in Iran in 1953. He did not mention that the United States forced the retreat of Joseph Stalin's army from Iran in 1946. For the 100th time, he declared, "I have unequivocally prohibited the use of torture by the United States, and I have ordered the prison at Guantanamo Bay closed by early next year." Is Obama unaware that Egypt, Turkey and Saudi Arabia run prisons that make Guantanamo look like The Breakers at Palm Beach? How many Guantanamo inmates plead to be sent home to Muslim countries? In Trinidad, Obama sat for 55 minutes enduring Daniel Ortega's diatribe against the United States for mistreatment of Castro's Cuba and for the Bay of Pigs. Obama protested that he could not be held responsible for something that happened the year he was born. Why could not he say to Ortega: "We also intervened in the Dominican Republic in 1965 to block a communist takeover, and in Grenada in 1983. The only problem with the Bay of Pigs is that we should have done it right and removed the odious Cuban dictatorship, and put Fidel, Raul and Che up against that same wall where so many patriots perished and spared the Cuban people 50 years of tyranny and the prostitution of their island into a base camp for the greatest despotism of the 20th century." What is the matter with Obama that he cannot defend our Cold War conduct and Cold War presidents like Ike and JFK? Answer: Obama cannot, because at heart he buys into the anti-American narrative that ours is a deplorable history -- of genocide against the Indians, of slavery and segregation, of robbing Mexicans of their land and of disrespecting our Latin neighbors. Obama is determined to make the requisite apologies to show the world he does not condone the sins our fathers committed. Thus, as Nile Gardiner of the Heritage Foundation has cataloged, Obama has apologized to Europe for our having "shown arrogance and been dismissive, even derisive." He apologized to Latin America for our having been "disengaged and at times ... sought to dictate." He told the Turks that we are "working through our own darker periods in our history. ... Our nation still struggles with the legacy of slavery and segregation, the past treatment of Native Americans." Obama, however, did not ask the Turks to confess to their own "darker periods," which might have taken some time. Obama is the anti-Reagan. Where Reagan ever spoke of the greatness and glory of America, her history and heroes, her capacity to make the world all over again, Obama is like a dismal parson, forever reminding us -- and everyone within earshot -- of our own and our fathers' sins. Obama is not only demoralizing Middle America, he is driving away the God-and-country patriots who are sick of hearing this rot from professors and journalists, and prefer not to hear it from their president. He is ceding moral high ground to regimes and nations that do not deserve it. If Obama believes he can build himself up by tearing America down, he is mistaken. Cynical foreigners will view it with snickering contempt, patriotic Americans with disgust. What kind of leader is it who talks down his own country on foreign soil? America's performance in the Cold War was hardly flawless. But does anyone deny that we were on the right side, that the Soviet Empire and Mao's China and communist Vietnam and Castro's Cuba were on the side of tyranny -- and that the neutrals were by and large irrelevant or worse in that great cause? A nation is an extended family. While families fight and quarrel, often bitterly, you do not take the family quarrel outside the family. You don't hang the family's dirty linen on the communal clothesline. Obama, however -- like some Hollywood actress seeking sympathy and public approbation with her tell-all biography detailing how she was abused by her father -- trolls for popularity with America's adversaries by reciting for the benefit of the world all the sins his country has allegedly committed. When did this become the duty of the president of the United States?
The US is changing demographically, so while in the past the loathing of anything western white male was always the minority view, now the demos are using this chance to try and cement that into a voting majority. Amnesty, union bolstering, continued monoploy in the education establishment, and outright takeover of private enterprise means the loathing will become permanent. While liberal parasites fed off the success of 'white male' western free enterprise, now they will kill it. The image master is perfect for this role, he only cares about being prez so he'll say anything to sound 'right' which includes sounding 'right' to hateful foreigners by self deprecation. After all he wants to be the messiah and be loved, and we all want to be worldy don't we? When it comes to actual policy, he hasn't a clue nor does he really care. The age of image and liberal feelings over substance is here.
i realize its pretty much futile with idealoges like you but maybe a few facts might make something click. How Trillion-Dollar Deficits Were Created http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2009/06/how-trillion-dollar-deficits-were-created/
I'm not exactly a Bush fan, sorry. I know Bush was not a conservative, thank you, and I am not proposing he would be better in this situation. While I may disagree with details, the article's conclusion is that the Obama plan is not realistic, which is my point. Bush is not an excuse for making more mistakes, after all this is supposed to be the hyper smart administration.
Actually Bush would be better in this situation, I take that back. Anything is better than certain bankruptcy. Think about the logic of Obama saying he wants PAYGO. He and the democrats have full control, all they have to do is discipline themselves. They don't want to, so instead Obama wants to deflect criticism by the publicity stunt of announcing PAYGO. Think about it... all they have to do... bah why bother, we are dealing with a bunch of self serving leftist ass holes.
This from the guy to still thinks GSE's and Clintons role in the CRA caused the subprime crisis... I don't see anything wrong with paygo, and it would be nice if they stuck to it. Like it or not, all the spending that has been done would have, for better or worse, been done be any president face to face with this mess. Will it work? Meh, I can't say, but if the market is any indication (which, according to many, it certainly used to be back when it was tanking after Obama was inaugurated) than we can say it looks like disaster MAY have been staved off or at least dampened. Maybe not. I suppose time will tell. Assuming that the spending was necessary, I think paygo is a step in the right direction.
"Assuming all the spending was necessary" ? Well Mr. Question Beggar, assume it wasn't, then what? WTF good is something like paygo if all they have to do to break it is 'assume the extra spending is necessary'? Why have PAYGO when you are in control? simply don't spend it. Dumb and typical image gimmick, designed to pacify the democratic voting majority with IQ<90. BTW, Clinton did push on the banks, and the first CDO was created on their watch. CDOs were a response to the obviously dumb idea of giving home loans to poeple with little money. The problem with you is that you don't look for deeper underlying causes.