389 replies to this topic

[squishyx]

Note: I had responded to each piece but I hit the quote limit =[ So I left in your remarks that i felt were most egregious.

[quote name='Jimmy Leeds' timestamp='1315426600' post='1046281']
Obama said in 2009 he "owns the economy." In fact, he said he wants to own it because he has solutions, so "give ...it to me."
[/quote]
He did indeed say this, and if congress handed him the reigns he would have had it too, but alas that's not how our government works (thankfully).

[quote name='Jimmy Leeds' timestamp='1315426600' post='1046281']
He said if we spent 700 billion in stimulus we would keep unemployment under 8%. It didn't happen.
[/quote]
He was wrong about this. But there is no question the stimulus, saved jobs and kept the recession from being worse. People have short memories, 33% of the stimulus was taxcuts, another 33% was state aid for medicaid, money the states would have had to pay anyway. And with the last 34% it went to jobs, which saw gdp growth around 3-4% for 2 years. When the spending went away, so did GDP.

[quote name='Jimmy Leeds' timestamp='1315426600' post='1046281']
He said last summer was the "summer of recovery" --it didn't happen.
[/quote]
Yes it did. You are entitled to your own opinion, but not your own definitions and since defining recessions revolves around GDP, and since that grew Obama did in fact preside over the country recovering.

[quote name='Jimmy Leeds' timestamp='1315426600' post='1046281']he lost the Congress because people realized he was all change and no hope. The change was more along the lines of socialism, which was not change most Americans beleived in. In fact, since passing Obamacare, more people are uninsured and health insurance is higher now than ever before.
[/quote]
I don't know if more people are uninsured or not, but that stands to reason given the mandate, which was the thing that will get everyone insured doesn't even kick in for 2 more years.

[quote name='Jimmy Leeds' timestamp='1315426600' post='1046281']
Since coming into office he has set a record for debt, and a new record for job loss.
[/quote]
Well duh, it's called inflation. Every president sets a record for debt. He also took over at a time of growing expenses and shrinking revenues which compounded the problem. Bush probably has the record for most job losses, especially if you factor in the first few months of Obama's presidency under Bush because realistically he couldn't have done anything about those jobs.

[quote name='Jimmy Leeds' timestamp='1315426600' post='1046281']
Gas prices went from 1.79 to 4 bucks a gallon.
[/quote]
That's what happens when you take over during a deep recession (when gas prices plummet) and then lead the economy into a shaky recovery (when gas prices rise). If you look at the price of gasoline over time it's pretty consistent, it shouldn't be a surprise to anyway that gas is around $4 (and it will probably stay there, despite Miss Bachmanns delusions).

[quote name='Jimmy Leeds' timestamp='1315426600' post='1046281']
he started two wars, and he escalated another war and now, after announcing a political withdraw in one scheduled next October before his election -- the tide has shifted in that war.
[/quote]
He "started" two wars. Please name the two wars that he STARTED. I can name two wars Bush started, I can think of a couple isolated areas where Obama intervened, but started wars? please you are just throwing sh!t at the wall.

[quote name='Jimmy Leeds' timestamp='1315426600' post='1046281']
He introduced pay czars, while ratcheting up the class warfare in an effort to make wealthy people not something to which we aspire, but rather people to be blamed.
[/quote]
The wealthy make as much (and probably more) as they did under Bush, more then did under Clinton, and substantially more then they did on Reagan. The class warfare you talk about is manufactured, the rich have never had it so good.

[quote name='Jimmy Leeds' timestamp='1315426600' post='1046281']
He gave a speech on civility in public discourse, and then allowed himself to be introduced by a union thug who on Obama's stage called for war and violence against those with whom he disagreed. Today, his white house announced "Obama won't be the word police for the democrat party." No, he prefers to be that for the GOP -- while letting the race-hustling poverty pimps, union thugs, and socialist revolutionaries use words to divide us and foment violence.
[/quote]
It's pretty absurd to see conservatives fired about about this statement given how fast they came to defense of Sarah Palin for putting cross hairs on districts. Either inflammatory rhetoric should be toned down, or it is moot, either way be consistent for once in your life.

[quote name='Jimmy Leeds' timestamp='1315426600' post='1046281']
In short, Mr. Obama has been an failure by every measure.
[/quote]
Only when you manipulate the measures to see them threw your lens. When you look at what he promised http://www.politifac...mises/obameter/ and analyze where he succeded compromised and failed you can see he followed through on a lot more then he missed. When you look at economic indicators other then unemployment he has done quite well. So by actually tangible measures he's done "ok". No one's perfect, he has room to improve. "failed by every measure" is obviously quite hyperbolic.

[quote name='Jimmy Leeds' timestamp='1315426600' post='1046281']
yes, he ordered the assassination of Bin Laden. i gave him credit for the order, even if finding him was the direct result of water-boarding that he opposed. Even if reaching him was the direct result of US forces being in Afganistan, which he once opposed.
[quote]
Once again untrue. The hunt for Osama was the result from a decade of intelligence gathering and research. There has never been any direct evidence that torture lead to any critical piece of information and it's downright shameful that you keep pretending that it did. A lot of people worked really hard to catch this SOB and while Obama deserves little credit for it, their work shouldn't be overlooked because you are trying to justify torture.

My 2 cents, Obama spoke a big game (and what candidate doesn't?) and lo and behold couldn't live up to it. He made decisions that absolutely baffled me and often just fed into the perpetual rhetoric machine that started about month 2 of his presidency and has been ramping up ever since. That said, he followed through on most of his promises and I don't consider compromise a bad thing and was glad to see him take that track often (something he never gets credit for). I think he would have been a good-to-great president if the political atmosphere wasn't as toxic, as it is I think he is about a C+ if I had to give him an arbitrary grade. Unfortunately he has not been a very effective president with a republican house and while I don't fault him for that, I also cant justify voting for him just for being a nice guy with the right ideas at the wrong time. We need someone who can actually bridge the political divide which thus far he seems inept. So we'll see, he hasn't lost my vote yet, there's a year to go.

[devilsfan26]

The wealthy make as much (and probably more) as they did under Bush, more then did under Clinton, and substantially more then they did on Reagan. The class warfare you talk about is manufactured, the rich have never had it so good.

"The number of Americans making $50 million or more, the top income category in the data, fell from 131 in 2008 to 74 last year. But that’s only part of the story.

The average wage in this top category increased from $91.2 million in 2008 to an astonishing $518.8 million in 2009. That’s nearly $10 million in weekly pay!

You read that right. In the Great Recession year of 2009 (officially just the first half of the year), the average pay of the very highest-income Americans was more than five times their average wages and bonuses in 2008."
My link

[Devils731]

"The number of Americans making $50 million or more, the top income category in the data, fell from 131 in 2008 to 74 last year. But that’s only part of the story.

The average wage in this top category increased from $91.2 million in 2008 to an astonishing $518.8 million in 2009. That’s nearly $10 million in weekly pay!

You read that right. In the Great Recession year of 2009 (officially just the first half of the year), the average pay of the very highest-income Americans was more than five times their average wages and bonuses in 2008."
My link

http://www.ssa.gov/c...p.cgi?year=2009

If I'm reading this chart correctly it says in 2009 there 72 people making 50+ million and they averaged 84.1 million.

In 2008 there were 131 people making 50+ million and they averaged 91.1 million.

2007 there were 151 making 93.9 million on average

2006 126 - 89.2

2005 102 - 99.3

-----------------

The numbers in that snippet were so astonishing I had to go and look at the raw data. It looks like he was looking somewhere incorrectly to me.

Edit: If we are concerned about what the ultra rich are making, I'm not really, it's only about another month or so until we see the 2010 numbers, but 2009 was not a good year for the 50+ million group, compared to prior years.

Edited by Devils731, 08 September 2011 - 02:12 AM.

[maxpower]

Why people even engage Leeds on this stuff blows my mind. You want to know what the problem is with our political system and it's the Leeds of the world, on both sides. People who care far too much for no discernable reason, and have been drained of every ounce of common sense and logic.... instead replaced with "media" talking points.

The gas price example was hilarious. Totally ignoring the reason for the drop in gas prices was that that the economy was teetering on the abyss of depression. Even then, look where the price gas was after 9/11 and look at the gas prices when the sh!t hit the fan a few years back.... and notice the difference. Inflation. It existed... even back then.

Anybody that uses $1 gas as a campaign promise is basically promising that you will be a 3rd world country that can't afford said gas anyway. The market is its own beast and it's connected to the dollar. Not how much oil you pump out.

[maxpower]

As for the actual election, Obama is obviously going to win because it's nearly impossible for Romney to win the nomination. If he could, he'd probably win pretty easily. Not that I think he's anything special, I think it's just eliminating one centrist (yes, centrist, unless you're a lunatic, hell, I think in other than things that appeal to the lunatics, he's probably more to the right than the guy he followed...) empty suit for another....

He will likely face someone who should be in an insane asylum and will get ripped to shreds in the perception department. Perry's been around for a few weeks and just keeps rolling out whopper after whopper.

[devilsadvoc8]

Maybe I am losing my mind but Romney brings nothing new to the table and in the case of Perry and Bachman I see a big step in the wrong direction. while I don't agree with a lot of Ron Paul's views, at least he brings new ideas to the table with some conviction something the Republican party is missing. If it is Obama v Romney or Perry I'll just get drunk on election day and stay home as this country will be no better off in 2016 than it is now.

[Jerrydevil]

I disagree that Romney is the only Republican who could beat Obama. Rick Perry is a formidable candidate. He is a successful governor. In a poor economy, Texas' economy did much better than most states. That's a powerful message in the most important issue in 2012 ... if anyone cares to listen. The liberals would rather get their panties in a bunch over creationism vs. evolution and global warming, while the country spends itself into oblivion.

Obama is certainly the worst president of my lifetime, even worse than W or Jimmy Carter. I believe that most of Jimmy's points are on the money. His legacy is class warfare rhetoric, finger pointing, anti-business regulations and unconscionable expansion of the federal government through Obamacare.

Oh, and we can't forget a stimulus that turned out to be a slush fund for Obama's supporters and did nothing to spur private sector jobs.

What a disaster.

[squishyx]

I disagree that Romney is the only Republican who could beat Obama. Rick Perry is a formidable candidate. He is a successful governor. In a poor economy, Texas' economy did much better than most states. That's a powerful message in the most important issue in 2012 ... if anyone cares to listen. The liberals would rather get their panties in a bunch over creationism vs. evolution and global warming, while the country spends itself into oblivion.

Obama is certainly the worst president of my lifetime, even worse than W or Jimmy Carter. I believe that most of Jimmy's points are on the money. His legacy is class warfare rhetoric, finger pointing, anti-business regulations and unconscionable expansion of the federal government through Obamacare.

Oh, and we can't forget a stimulus that turned out to be a slush fund for Obama's supporters and did nothing to spur private sector jobs.

What a disaster.

I'm still mystified by the over reaction to the healthcare "overhaul". The government requires you to put money into SS so that when you retire you have some income, the government (states) require you to have insurance to drive a car, the government requires you to pay taxes which fund things you might not like (war, medicaid, unemployment insurance w/e you are fired up about). What is so earth shattering about making people pay for getting health care? If you have insurance, your benefits became a little more secure; if you didn't have insurance and you can't afford it, you will get subsidies; if you can afford it and choose not too, well too bad the free health care ride is over.

In 1986 congress passed "Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act" and it took them 25 years to finally realize they need to pay for it and everyone is having a socialist cow about it.

[95Crash]

Anyone watch the Republican debate last night? I thought it was pretty good.

[Jerrydevil]

Squishy, my negative reaction is based on this: What does the government run well?

I also believe that healthcare decisions should be made by consumers.

[Jimmy Leeds]

Not everyone pays into SS.

Driving a car is not a right.

Forcing people to buy health insurance is the death of Obummercare.

Edited by Jimmy Leeds, 08 September 2011 - 11:19 AM.

[squishyx]

Squishy, my negative reaction is based on this: What does the government run well?

You wont be getting healthcare from the government, the mandate says you need to buy insurance from private companies.

I also believe that healthcare decisions should be made by consumers.

I don't really disagree with this, but I would argue that if you opt out of health insurance you should be not treated for emergency care. Of course there in lies the problem, when its an emergency how many lives will be lost in the time it takes to check to see if people have coverage? So in the end if we require hospitals to care for everyone, everyone should have to pay.

[devilsadvoc8]

Shameful story out of the Pacific NW.

http://news.yahoo.co...-144921214.html

Longshoremen storm a port, take guards hostage, destroy property all due to a labor dispute. That isn't bargaining, that's thugery. And just in case you were wondering, these thugs weren't replaced by non-union workers but simply by another union. So unions all ban together against the big bad old republicans but also have no fear fighting their own.

And these are the people we want to reward with federal money to create jobs? I'll wait and see what Obama has to say about job creation but I bet the projects he wants to provide money to will be union dominated. I could be wrong but am fairly confident. I also presume the term "shovel ready" will be avoided at all costs since we all know what a disaster that was.

[squishyx]

Not everyone pays into SS.

And not everyone who pays SS will collect it. Whats your point? the majority of people do, and the majority of people will have health insurance.

Driving a car is not a right.

Nor is healthcare... well until we declared it one without paying for it. 1986 was Reagan's term right? He's the real socialist if you had to pick one for this issue.

[maxpower]

I disagree that Romney is the only Republican who could beat Obama. Rick Perry is a formidable candidate. He is a successful governor. In a poor economy, Texas' economy did much better than most states. That's a powerful message in the most important issue in 2012 ... if anyone cares to listen. The liberals would rather get their panties in a bunch over creationism vs. evolution and global warming, while the country spends itself into oblivion.

Obama is certainly the worst president of my lifetime, even worse than W or Jimmy Carter. I believe that most of Jimmy's points are on the money. His legacy is class warfare rhetoric, finger pointing, anti-business regulations and unconscionable expansion of the federal government through Obamacare.

Oh, and we can't forget a stimulus that turned out to be a slush fund for Obama's supporters and did nothing to spur private sector jobs.

What a disaster.

Perry is well, he's Perry. Give six months of concentrated attention on him before a general election and get back to me. I don't care if he's the jobbingest creator in the history of the universe (which he probably isn't), I can't look past the other stuff. Maybe some people can, but I hold some regard for the position and would like to reverse the ignorant goofball trend we're getting, not deepen it. He's Palin and Bachmann with a dick. Wind them up and let them go and laugh at some of the stuff they come up with.

Romney is ugh... but at least he could win, in theory. Then again I'm not convinced he's any different than Obama. It would be nice if there was a true fiscal conservative that wasn't a lunatic/damaged goods/both.

[Jimmy Leeds]

Perry is an accomplished Governor over, like, the 13th largest world's economy. You slam him, yet know nothing about him, yet praise a failed community organizer who has never accomplished anything of substance in his life.

Congratulations and put your head back in the sand.

It really is a shame some people are even allowed to vote.

[devilsfan26]

Perry is an accomplished Governor over, like, the 13th largest world's economy. You slam him, yet know nothing about him, yet praise a failed community organizer who has never accomplished anything of substance in his life.

Congratulations and put your head back in the sand.

It really is a shame some people are even allowed to vote.

"PERRY SAID: "Ninety-five percent of all the jobs that we've created have been above minimum wage."

FACTS: The figures Perry pointed to represented all workers, not just the new jobs. That does not account for low-wage jobs that may be above the minimum wage. According to the Texas Workforce Commission, 51 percent of all Texas workers make less than $33,000 a year. Only 30 percent make more than $50,000 a year. Nationally, Texas ranked 34th in median household income from 2007 to 2009.

About 9.5 percent of Texas hourly workers, excluding those who are paid salaries, earn the minimum wage or less, tying Mississippi for the highest percentage in the nation."

My link


Also, do you agree with Perry that we should not be allowed to vote for our senators?

Edited by devilsfan26, 09 September 2011 - 12:36 AM.

[Devils731]

"PERRY SAID: "Ninety-five percent of all the jobs that we've created have been above minimum wage."

FACTS: The figures Perry pointed to represented all workers, not just the new jobs. That does not account for low-wage jobs that may be above the minimum wage. According to the Texas Workforce Commission, 51 percent of all Texas workers make less than $33,000 a year. Only 30 percent make more than $50,000 a year. Nationally, Texas ranked 34th in median household income from 2007 to 2009.

About 9.5 percent of Texas hourly workers, excluding those who are paid salaries, earn the minimum wage or less, tying Mississippi for the highest percentage in the nation."

My link

PERRY SAID: "Ninety-five percent of all the jobs that we've created have been above minimum wage."

That does not account for low-wage jobs that may be above the minimum wage.

I'm not sure why the fact checker feels Perry should include jobs that make slightly more than minimum wage when he is talking about only whether jobs were minimum wage or not.

[devilsfan26]

PERRY SAID: "Ninety-five percent of all the jobs that we've created have been above minimum wage."


I'm not sure why the fact checker feels Perry should include jobs that make slightly more than minimum wage when he is talking about only whether jobs were minimum wage or not.

They are saying that just being above minimum wage doesn't mean it's not still a low-paying job. He wasn't lying but it can be misleading. Also he is making it seem like 95% of the jobs he claims to have created are above minimum wage, but really it's just that 95% of all jobs are above minimum wage, and that Texas is tied for the highest percentage of hourly workers (excluding salaried) make minimum wage or less, so Perry shouldn't really be boasting about creating well-paying jobs.

Edited by devilsfan26, 09 September 2011 - 01:25 AM.

[Jerrydevil]

He's Palin and Bachmann with a dick. Wind them up and let them go and laugh at some of the stuff they come up with.

I'm not a religious person, so a lot of the God stuff doesn't resonate with me. Does it bug me that Perry says there's some holes in the theory of evolution? Yeah. But on issues of fiscal policy, I like what he has to say, plus he has experience running a big state. I'm focused on that because it's the most important issue. I'd like some Republican candidates to have a little more secular sensibility about them, but it's not a big enough problem where I decide to vote for Obama instead.

And how about Obama last night, imploring Congress to vote yes right away for his jobs plan, when he doesn't even have a detailed plan yet? He tells us that cuts will pay for the new stimulus, but he doesn't propose what he will cut. We have to wait until next week for that. Gimme a break.