reason_IHB
New member
[quote author="The_Maestro" date=1249538608].</blockquote>
hahaha. That's how I am feeling right now.
hahaha. That's how I am feeling right now.
Obama ruining the country?
- Thread starter ecchan_IHB
- Start date
trrenter_IHB
New member
[quote author="reason" date=1249536569][quote author="reason" date=1249536442][quote author="trrenter" date=1249536005]In my opinion Obama is trying to move to quickly.
When you rush to make important decesions they are usually not good decesions. Why did we have to fast track the <strong>stimulus package</strong>? The dems are freely admitting it is working as planned the never intended to spend all the money immediately. So if it was a slow moving plan what was the need to rush the plan? Maybe if we took more time crafting the bill it could have had a more immediate impact.
Why the rush to ge the healthcare bill through Congress? Slow down take your time think things through.
See my comments on Cash for Clunkers. That is just a stupid idea in my opinion. I am not worried about my taxes I worry about my kids and grandkids taxes.
I also have not seen or heard of the cuts we are making to pay for any of these projects. Which was a campaign promise.
So do I think he is ruining this country? No.
Do I think all of his decesions are going to have a positive impact. No.</blockquote>
Okay, here we go again. Have you forgotten the <strong>unaccountable </strong>billions upon billions of the stimulus package right before GWB terms ended? We still don't know where those tax dollars went. If you're going to pick on the current President. You can't ignore what his immediate predessor did also.
BTW, I am not a Democrat or a Republican.</blockquote></blockquote>
No I haven't forgot about that and I think there was a thread here where I voiced my opposition to that as well.
I will <strong>almost never</strong> be for any spending to "help" people today when the bill will ultimately fall on my kids or grandkids.
When you rush to make important decesions they are usually not good decesions. Why did we have to fast track the <strong>stimulus package</strong>? The dems are freely admitting it is working as planned the never intended to spend all the money immediately. So if it was a slow moving plan what was the need to rush the plan? Maybe if we took more time crafting the bill it could have had a more immediate impact.
Why the rush to ge the healthcare bill through Congress? Slow down take your time think things through.
See my comments on Cash for Clunkers. That is just a stupid idea in my opinion. I am not worried about my taxes I worry about my kids and grandkids taxes.
I also have not seen or heard of the cuts we are making to pay for any of these projects. Which was a campaign promise.
So do I think he is ruining this country? No.
Do I think all of his decesions are going to have a positive impact. No.</blockquote>
Okay, here we go again. Have you forgotten the <strong>unaccountable </strong>billions upon billions of the stimulus package right before GWB terms ended? We still don't know where those tax dollars went. If you're going to pick on the current President. You can't ignore what his immediate predessor did also.
BTW, I am not a Democrat or a Republican.</blockquote></blockquote>
No I haven't forgot about that and I think there was a thread here where I voiced my opposition to that as well.
I will <strong>almost never</strong> be for any spending to "help" people today when the bill will ultimately fall on my kids or grandkids.
ecchan_IHB
New member
[quote author="The_Maestro" date=1249537346]
Well if that isn't calling the kettle black. Get over yourself. If you hadn't started off with such an antagonistic thread maybe we could have avoided most of this meaningless discourse. It's only taken us 5 pages to get some consensus that Obama (alone) is not ruining the country.</blockquote>
Please answer, what did I say that is so antagonistic?
Well if that isn't calling the kettle black. Get over yourself. If you hadn't started off with such an antagonistic thread maybe we could have avoided most of this meaningless discourse. It's only taken us 5 pages to get some consensus that Obama (alone) is not ruining the country.</blockquote>
Please answer, what did I say that is so antagonistic?
green_cactus_IHB
New member
[quote author="trrenter" date=1249536005]Why the rush to ge the healthcare bill through Congress? Slow down take your time think things through.</blockquote>
Because that didn't work for Clinton - it only provided ample time for antagonistic attacks that would eventually derail the whole effort. Even now, you can see the talking heads making up all sort of ludicrous claims to discredit healthcare (for example, all the nonsense about killing old people). At this point in time, there is no meaningful alternative from the opposition. They do agree that "something" has to be done but nothing solid is being proposed.
Because that didn't work for Clinton - it only provided ample time for antagonistic attacks that would eventually derail the whole effort. Even now, you can see the talking heads making up all sort of ludicrous claims to discredit healthcare (for example, all the nonsense about killing old people). At this point in time, there is no meaningful alternative from the opposition. They do agree that "something" has to be done but nothing solid is being proposed.
ecchan_IHB
New member
In the first independent analysis, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office concluded that President Obama's budget would rack up massive deficits even after the economy recovers, forcing the nation to borrow nearly $9.3 trillion over the next decade.
<img src="http://media3.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/graphic/2009/03/21/GR2009032100104.gif" alt="" />
SOURCE: CBO, White House Office of Management and Budget | The Washington Post - March 21, 2009
<strong>What do you think Mr. Obama is going to do in 2010, 2011 to reduce our deficits?</strong>
<img src="http://media3.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/graphic/2009/03/21/GR2009032100104.gif" alt="" />
SOURCE: CBO, White House Office of Management and Budget | The Washington Post - March 21, 2009
<strong>What do you think Mr. Obama is going to do in 2010, 2011 to reduce our deficits?</strong>
no_vaseline_IHB
New member
[quote author="Look4house" date=1249541996]
<strong>What do you think Mr. Obama is going to do in 2010, 2011 to reduce our deficits?</strong></blockquote>
Nothing. He won't have to lift a single finger nor sign a single bill.
<strong>What do you think Mr. Obama is going to do in 2010, 2011 to reduce our deficits?</strong></blockquote>
Nothing. He won't have to lift a single finger nor sign a single bill.
ecchan_IHB
New member
[quote author="no_vaseline" date=1249543224][quote author="Look4house" date=1249541996]
<strong>What do you think Mr. Obama is going to do in 2010, 2011 to reduce our deficits?</strong></blockquote>
Nothing. He won't have to lift a single finger nor sign a single bill.</blockquote>
I can't resist anymore. Are you now the official Whitehouse spokesman for the President? Like I said your energy and potential are best suited for the Late Show, not on this useless thread.
<strong>What do you think Mr. Obama is going to do in 2010, 2011 to reduce our deficits?</strong></blockquote>
Nothing. He won't have to lift a single finger nor sign a single bill.</blockquote>
I can't resist anymore. Are you now the official Whitehouse spokesman for the President? Like I said your energy and potential are best suited for the Late Show, not on this useless thread.
ecchan_IHB
New member
[quote author="green_cactus" date=1249540708][quote author="trrenter" date=1249536005]Why the rush to ge the healthcare bill through Congress? Slow down take your time think things through.</blockquote>
Because that didn't work for Clinton - it only provided ample time for antagonistic attacks that would eventually derail the whole effort. Even now, you can see the talking heads making up all sort of ludicrous claims to discredit healthcare (for example, all the nonsense about killing old people). At this point in time, there is no meaningful alternative from the opposition. They do agree that "something" has to be done but nothing solid is being proposed.</blockquote>
Even, if there are a lot of disagreement, no one should rush something through with a plan that will most likely fail. If you do some research, government run insurance plan is unlikely the prescription for healthcare reform. Politics cannot mix with healthcare.
Because that didn't work for Clinton - it only provided ample time for antagonistic attacks that would eventually derail the whole effort. Even now, you can see the talking heads making up all sort of ludicrous claims to discredit healthcare (for example, all the nonsense about killing old people). At this point in time, there is no meaningful alternative from the opposition. They do agree that "something" has to be done but nothing solid is being proposed.</blockquote>
Even, if there are a lot of disagreement, no one should rush something through with a plan that will most likely fail. If you do some research, government run insurance plan is unlikely the prescription for healthcare reform. Politics cannot mix with healthcare.
ecchan_IHB
New member
[quote author="trrenter" date=1249530872]I can give my opinion on Cash for Clunkers.
It sucks!!!!
<a href="http://blog.newsweek.com/blogs/thegaggle/archive/2009/08/05/cash-for-clunker-s-impact-on-economy-and-environment-is-negligible.aspx">Cash for Clunkers' Impact on Economy and Environment Is Negligible </a>
This is a subsidy to the car companies and not just American companies.
A simple ROI would tell you moving from a fuel guzzler to a more fuel efficient car is the right move.
If you buy a 17k Ford focus with the clunkers money and you will walk out of the dealer with that car for about 12.5 K. Run the ROI in gas savings, the focus gets 35mpg. If you drive 20k miles a year you could save between $2,200 - $3,800 a year on gas alone. I will go with 3k as the average yearly savings on gas. Now consider the warranty on a new car so you are almost void of car repair bils. Lets be conservative and say a clunker would require $600 a year in repairs. So you save $3600 a year buy buying your new Ford Focus.
If your car payment is less then $300 a month for the Ford Focus you are actually saving money every month.
That is a pretty smart move even without the Clunkers program rebate.
<strong>So we are paying people not to be stupid I guess.</strong>
So somone planning to trade in a clunker gets a windfall at my childrens expense. They will be picking up the bill for this when they start paying taxes.</blockquote>
I thought it is stupid and if Bush was doing it, I would say the same thing. But remember what bltserv epmphasized: have patience, you are freaking out after 2 weeks since the program started. We will see the environmental and economic benefits in 2100.
It sucks!!!!
<a href="http://blog.newsweek.com/blogs/thegaggle/archive/2009/08/05/cash-for-clunker-s-impact-on-economy-and-environment-is-negligible.aspx">Cash for Clunkers' Impact on Economy and Environment Is Negligible </a>
This is a subsidy to the car companies and not just American companies.
A simple ROI would tell you moving from a fuel guzzler to a more fuel efficient car is the right move.
If you buy a 17k Ford focus with the clunkers money and you will walk out of the dealer with that car for about 12.5 K. Run the ROI in gas savings, the focus gets 35mpg. If you drive 20k miles a year you could save between $2,200 - $3,800 a year on gas alone. I will go with 3k as the average yearly savings on gas. Now consider the warranty on a new car so you are almost void of car repair bils. Lets be conservative and say a clunker would require $600 a year in repairs. So you save $3600 a year buy buying your new Ford Focus.
If your car payment is less then $300 a month for the Ford Focus you are actually saving money every month.
That is a pretty smart move even without the Clunkers program rebate.
<strong>So we are paying people not to be stupid I guess.</strong>
So somone planning to trade in a clunker gets a windfall at my childrens expense. They will be picking up the bill for this when they start paying taxes.</blockquote>
I thought it is stupid and if Bush was doing it, I would say the same thing. But remember what bltserv epmphasized: have patience, you are freaking out after 2 weeks since the program started. We will see the environmental and economic benefits in 2100.
green_cactus_IHB
New member
[quote author="Look4house" date=1249545166][quote author="green_cactus" date=1249540708][quote author="trrenter" date=1249536005]Why the rush to ge the healthcare bill through Congress? Slow down take your time think things through.</blockquote>
Because that didn't work for Clinton - it only provided ample time for antagonistic attacks that would eventually derail the whole effort. Even now, you can see the talking heads making up all sort of ludicrous claims to discredit healthcare (for example, all the nonsense about killing old people). At this point in time, there is no meaningful alternative from the opposition. They do agree that "something" has to be done but nothing solid is being proposed.</blockquote>
Even, if there are a lot of disagreement, no one should rush something through with a plan that will most likely fail. If you do some research, government run insurance plan is unlikely the prescription for healthcare reform. Politics cannot mix with healthcare.</blockquote>
Funny thing is that after doing some research and reading up on the current state of healthcare I find that a government sponsored healthcare plan is the <strong>only</strong> solution to fix this problem. I have zero confidence in the invisible hand of the free market to suddenly provide insurance coverage to those that today cannot afford it or are continuously denied coverage. There is a reason we have Medicare - old people were categorized as a losing bet by the insurance companies.
Because that didn't work for Clinton - it only provided ample time for antagonistic attacks that would eventually derail the whole effort. Even now, you can see the talking heads making up all sort of ludicrous claims to discredit healthcare (for example, all the nonsense about killing old people). At this point in time, there is no meaningful alternative from the opposition. They do agree that "something" has to be done but nothing solid is being proposed.</blockquote>
Even, if there are a lot of disagreement, no one should rush something through with a plan that will most likely fail. If you do some research, government run insurance plan is unlikely the prescription for healthcare reform. Politics cannot mix with healthcare.</blockquote>
Funny thing is that after doing some research and reading up on the current state of healthcare I find that a government sponsored healthcare plan is the <strong>only</strong> solution to fix this problem. I have zero confidence in the invisible hand of the free market to suddenly provide insurance coverage to those that today cannot afford it or are continuously denied coverage. There is a reason we have Medicare - old people were categorized as a losing bet by the insurance companies.
ecchan_IHB
New member
[quote author="The_Maestro" date=1249535219]
True, and everything came to a head during Bush's 8 years. That's not to say that everything was his fault. Just as Obama is not ruining the country. Obama was left with a country in crisis mode. Concluding that he is ruining the country when he was trying to save it from ruin (and taking the rest of the world with it) is rediculous, as rediculous as saying it's Washington's fault. I still haven't heard what the (short term) alternatives were to the actions he took. I can certainly agree that we need reform on many, many things. I don't think Obama is god though and didn't expect reform in 7 months and I don't expect reform on more than a few things. As has been discussed (finally) there are many more factors that contribute to the problems with our country that have been compounding for years and decades. Is it reasonable to hold Obama accountable for fixing all of those problems? Seems a bit unrealistic to me, unless Obama really is god. I never held him in such high regard.</blockquote>
This is one of the better observation I have seen and I agree with you on many fronts. I have not read anyone saying Obama is ruining our country. The question was asked whether he is. In all fairness, Obama is trying to change our country. But I think his policies raises a lot of doubts and questions of the consequences we maybe facing in the near future. Sometimes we need to focus in completing one project before we move on to the second one.
True, and everything came to a head during Bush's 8 years. That's not to say that everything was his fault. Just as Obama is not ruining the country. Obama was left with a country in crisis mode. Concluding that he is ruining the country when he was trying to save it from ruin (and taking the rest of the world with it) is rediculous, as rediculous as saying it's Washington's fault. I still haven't heard what the (short term) alternatives were to the actions he took. I can certainly agree that we need reform on many, many things. I don't think Obama is god though and didn't expect reform in 7 months and I don't expect reform on more than a few things. As has been discussed (finally) there are many more factors that contribute to the problems with our country that have been compounding for years and decades. Is it reasonable to hold Obama accountable for fixing all of those problems? Seems a bit unrealistic to me, unless Obama really is god. I never held him in such high regard.</blockquote>
This is one of the better observation I have seen and I agree with you on many fronts. I have not read anyone saying Obama is ruining our country. The question was asked whether he is. In all fairness, Obama is trying to change our country. But I think his policies raises a lot of doubts and questions of the consequences we maybe facing in the near future. Sometimes we need to focus in completing one project before we move on to the second one.
EvaLSeraphim_IHB
New member
[quote author="Look4house" date=1249546671]I have not read anyone saying Obama is ruining our country. The question was asked whether he is. . . . . </blockquote>
Under that theory, I should start a thread titled, "Look4house sleeps with goats?" I mean, I haven't heard that you are, and I'm not saying that you are, <em>I'm just asking the question.</em>
You can split hairs all day, but it was a rhetorical device, and you seem smart enough to be aware of it. If you want a legitimate discussion of policy, a less incendiary and more neutral title, such as "What do you think about how Obama is running the country?" or "Obama policies: good or bad for the country?" would meet your goals.
When and if we meet, shall I make you some tea?
Under that theory, I should start a thread titled, "Look4house sleeps with goats?" I mean, I haven't heard that you are, and I'm not saying that you are, <em>I'm just asking the question.</em>
You can split hairs all day, but it was a rhetorical device, and you seem smart enough to be aware of it. If you want a legitimate discussion of policy, a less incendiary and more neutral title, such as "What do you think about how Obama is running the country?" or "Obama policies: good or bad for the country?" would meet your goals.
When and if we meet, shall I make you some tea?
no_vaseline_IHB
New member
[quote author="Look4house" date=1249544398][quote author="no_vaseline" date=1249543224][quote author="Look4house" date=1249541996]
<strong>What do you think Mr. Obama is going to do in 2010, 2011 to reduce our deficits?</strong></blockquote>
Nothing. He won't have to lift a single finger nor sign a single bill.</blockquote>
I can't resist anymore. Are you now the official Whitehouse spokesman for the President? Like I said your energy and potential are best suited for the Late Show, not on this useless thread.</blockquote>
C'mon. You know the answer already.
<a href="http://www.heritage.org/research/taxes/wm956.cfm">And so does the Heritage foundation.</a>
And nobody has to do squat other than let the clock run out.
<strong>What do you think Mr. Obama is going to do in 2010, 2011 to reduce our deficits?</strong></blockquote>
Nothing. He won't have to lift a single finger nor sign a single bill.</blockquote>
I can't resist anymore. Are you now the official Whitehouse spokesman for the President? Like I said your energy and potential are best suited for the Late Show, not on this useless thread.</blockquote>
C'mon. You know the answer already.
<a href="http://www.heritage.org/research/taxes/wm956.cfm">And so does the Heritage foundation.</a>
And nobody has to do squat other than let the clock run out.
No_Such_Reality_IHB
New member
[quote author="no_vaseline" date=1249552782][quote author="Look4house" date=1249544398][quote author="no_vaseline" date=1249543224][quote author="Look4house" date=1249541996]
<strong>What do you think Mr. Obama is going to do in 2010, 2011 to reduce our deficits?</strong></blockquote>
Nothing. He won't have to lift a single finger nor sign a single bill.</blockquote>
I can't resist anymore. Are you now the official Whitehouse spokesman for the President? Like I said your energy and potential are best suited for the Late Show, not on this useless thread.</blockquote>
C'mon. You know the answer already.
<a href="http://www.heritage.org/research/taxes/wm956.cfm">And so does the Heritage foundation.</a>
And nobody has to do squat other than let the clock run out.</blockquote>
And those deficits assume the clock runs out.
<strong>What do you think Mr. Obama is going to do in 2010, 2011 to reduce our deficits?</strong></blockquote>
Nothing. He won't have to lift a single finger nor sign a single bill.</blockquote>
I can't resist anymore. Are you now the official Whitehouse spokesman for the President? Like I said your energy and potential are best suited for the Late Show, not on this useless thread.</blockquote>
C'mon. You know the answer already.
<a href="http://www.heritage.org/research/taxes/wm956.cfm">And so does the Heritage foundation.</a>
And nobody has to do squat other than let the clock run out.</blockquote>
And those deficits assume the clock runs out.
no_vaseline_IHB
New member
[quote author="No_Such_Reality" date=1249554670]And those deficits assume the clock runs out.</blockquote>
Not to add noise to this noise fest, I saw on CNBC yesterday that revenues were off 19% to the IRS this year compared to last. If Art Laffer is correct, the Bush tax cuts should of guaranteed that we never see another recession (okay, I'm being hyperbolic), but in reality, we've seen the last 10-13 years of productivity improvements vanish. Bam.
I'm all for lower taxes so long as you can come up with offsets. What the GOP Congress and W did was cut taxes (prime the pumps) and radically increase spending (really prime the pumps) in a period of time when, in retrospect, we needed to UNPRIME the pumps because of the bubbles in housing/consumer debt/ect. Now that we're in a period where we need to prime the pump that is the economy, the current Obama admin finds themselves handcuffed to the banister we know as the CBO.
Where was the outrage from 2002-2006?
<a href="http://stuffwhitepeoplelike.com/2008/02/03/50-irony/">#50 from Stuff White People Like - Irony.</a>
Not to add noise to this noise fest, I saw on CNBC yesterday that revenues were off 19% to the IRS this year compared to last. If Art Laffer is correct, the Bush tax cuts should of guaranteed that we never see another recession (okay, I'm being hyperbolic), but in reality, we've seen the last 10-13 years of productivity improvements vanish. Bam.
I'm all for lower taxes so long as you can come up with offsets. What the GOP Congress and W did was cut taxes (prime the pumps) and radically increase spending (really prime the pumps) in a period of time when, in retrospect, we needed to UNPRIME the pumps because of the bubbles in housing/consumer debt/ect. Now that we're in a period where we need to prime the pump that is the economy, the current Obama admin finds themselves handcuffed to the banister we know as the CBO.
Where was the outrage from 2002-2006?
<a href="http://stuffwhitepeoplelike.com/2008/02/03/50-irony/">#50 from Stuff White People Like - Irony.</a>
ABC123_IHB
New member
I haven't read any of the responses in the thread but to answer the question in the title of the thread, "Is Obama Ruining the Country", the answer is yes.
reason_IHB
New member
[quote author="ABC123" date=1249600863]I haven't read any of the responses in the thread but to answer the question in the title of the thread, "Is Obama Ruining the Country", the answer is yes.</blockquote>
oops.
oops.
no_vaseline_IHB
New member
[quote author="reason" date=1249602703][quote author="ABC123" date=1249600863]I haven't read any of the responses in the thread but to answer the question in the title of the thread, "Is Obama Ruining the Country", the answer is yes.</blockquote>
oops.</blockquote>
Hey - at least ABC is being honest! lol.
oops.</blockquote>
Hey - at least ABC is being honest! lol.
reason_IHB
New member
[quote author="no_vaseline" date=1249603352][quote author="reason" date=1249602703][quote author="ABC123" date=1249600863]I haven't read any of the responses in the thread but to answer the question in the title of the thread, "Is Obama Ruining the Country", the answer is yes.</blockquote>
oops.</blockquote>
Hey - at least ABC is being honest! lol.</blockquote>
Yeah, I like that. A man of few words. No beating around the Bush. I respect that. Lets have a vote. Yes or No.
What the hell. I had to throw in the name Bush. Sorry, didn't mean to offend.
oops.</blockquote>
Hey - at least ABC is being honest! lol.</blockquote>
Yeah, I like that. A man of few words. No beating around the Bush. I respect that. Lets have a vote. Yes or No.
What the hell. I had to throw in the name Bush. Sorry, didn't mean to offend.
bltserv_IHB
New member
I think Obama is doing a good job for the short time he has been in office.
<img src="http://www.bltserv.com/images/sherffius216.jpg" alt="" />
<img src="http://www.bltserv.com/images/sherffius216.jpg" alt="" />