Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Obama: That's Irresponsible. It's Unpatriotic  
User currently offlinefr8mech From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 5370 posts, RR: 14
Posted (2 years 11 months 1 week 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 2077 times:

Was listening to Medved this afternoon and he aired this gem:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1kuTG19Cu_Q

Obama was on the stump in 2008. So, what has changed? How much has Obama added in just 2 years? What are the prospects?

Food for thought.


When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
29 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinegoblin211 From United States of America, joined Jun 2010, 1209 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (2 years 11 months 1 week 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 1964 times:

Why were you listening to Medvedev? What was he saying about the US/Obama that made you do this post?


From the airport with love
User currently offlinestasisLAX From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 3280 posts, RR: 6
Reply 2, posted (2 years 11 months 1 week 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 1950 times:

Quoting fr8mech (Thread starter):
So, what has changed? How much has Obama added in just 2 years

The robber-barons on Wall Street crashed the global banking system and the real estate bubble burst, leading to mass confusion and anxiety in corporate boardrooms around the country, thus leading to the massive layoffs or offshoring of good-paying American jobs. Greed won, patriotism be damned - that is what happened in a nutshell.

Enough Obama bashing and irresponsible labeling - let's be Americans and work out our differences and relearn the art of compromise. That would be a POSITIVE change that WE all can believe in.

This registered Libertarian is tired of all of the rhetoric - Democratic and Republican potlitical leaders need to show RESULTS, not just "activity" and "partisanship". Otherwise, we all should be supporting third party candidates in the next general election.



"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety!" B.Franklin
User currently offlinefr8mech From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 5370 posts, RR: 14
Reply 3, posted (2 years 11 months 1 week 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 1906 times:

Quoting goblin211 (Reply 1):
Why were you listening to Medvedev? What was he saying about the US/Obama that made you do this post?

Medved, not Medvedev.

Website

Quoting stasisLAX (Reply 2):
Enough Obama bashing and irresponsible labeling - let's be Americans and work out our differences and relearn the art of compromise. That would be a POSITIVE change that WE all can believe in.

Compromise is the soup where principles dissolve. ~paraphrased from an unknown source

Actually, I'm a fan of compromise, when it benefits me or my cause. That is the Liberal mantra, isn't it?

Quoting stasisLAX (Reply 2):
that is what happened in a nutshell

No, what happened was that Obama and the Left capitalized on a recession, that was exasperated by high fuel prices. The real estate bubble helped them immensely. Throw in a mediocre GOP candidate. And, you have a political victory. Then, the spending begins and it is no longer "irresponsible' or "unpatriotic" to spend way beyond our means.

That's what happened.

Oh yeah, and the Pelosi/Obama/Reid economic/social agenda have kept us in recession since it began.



When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
User currently offlineWarRI1 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 8852 posts, RR: 10
Reply 4, posted (2 years 11 months 1 week 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 1833 times:

http://www.megaessays.com/viewpaper/3492.html



I would say that compromise is more than the mantra of Liberals. I suggest compromise is responsible for our Constitution. Thank goodness we had people with enough intelligence to realize that we cannot have our way all the time. I suggest the Repbulicans and TP folks realize this, before we have no Constitution.

[Edited 2011-08-24 20:11:14]


It is better to die on your feet, than live on your knees.
User currently offlinefr8mech From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 5370 posts, RR: 14
Reply 5, posted (2 years 11 months 1 week 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 1818 times:

Quoting WarRI1 (Reply 4):
I suggest compromise is responsible for our Constitution.

I'll more than suggest it. I'll declare it. Our Constitution was built on compromise and principle.

My point is that when you compromise, you must rely on your principles and not compromise them. The GOP should not compromise away their core principles.

Back to the original video. Why hasn't the media attacked Obama for calling Bush's spending irresponsible and unpatriotic, while he spends us over a cliff?

The man is a hypocrite, a liar, a political opportunist and bad for this country. He was the wrong man at the wrong time. An inexperienced dilettante that is playing at being President.



When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
User currently offlineBaroque From Australia, joined Apr 2006, 15380 posts, RR: 59
Reply 6, posted (2 years 11 months 1 week 6 days ago) and read 1797 times:

Quoting stasisLAX (Reply 2):
stasisLAX

What a relief to read a post like that.

By contrast, the dirges of "hypocrite, a liar, a political opportunist" are really getting very tiring. An inexperienced dilettante playing at President, yes that was Bush. Whatever it was that Obama did before coming to office, he was more successful at it than the Bush association with Arbusto and Harken - and I do not recall the Bin Ladens investing in Obama's previous enterprises.


User currently offlinefr8mech From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 5370 posts, RR: 14
Reply 7, posted (2 years 11 months 1 week 6 days ago) and read 1786 times:

Quoting Baroque (Reply 6):

That's nice, deflection.

Let's recenter.

I will repeat:

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 5):
Back to the original video. Why hasn't the media attacked Obama for calling Bush's spending irresponsible and unpatriotic, while he spends us over a cliff?

Why wasn't it ok, to Obama, for Bush to spend irresponsibly and unpatriotically, yet it's perfectly ok for Obama to do so?

I'm just hoisting him with his own petard.



When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
User currently offlinen318ea From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (2 years 11 months 1 week 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 1782 times:

The Internet (Thanks Al)is a wonderful thing!. I save clips like these for the Progressive/Liberals whom are so fond of re-writing history. One of the best is President Clinton, Hilary, Teddy and Kerry on WMD in Iraq.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i87cZ3Og6ts
Another keeper.  


User currently offlineseb146 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 11536 posts, RR: 15
Reply 9, posted (2 years 11 months 1 week 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 1768 times:

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 7):
Why wasn't it ok, to Obama, for Bush to spend irresponsibly and unpatriotically, yet it's perfectly ok for Obama to do so?

Let's be clear here: The Constitution grants powers of spending to the House. Not the president. Much as I think Bush was not a leader at all, how many years of right-wing spending were there that were approved and off-the-books? When the Democrats finally took over in 2008, all that spending was put on the books and, lo and behold, it was all the Democrats fault for over spending. It was the Democrats fault for wanting a nation wide and open and honest dicussion about health care and that ment no budget passage; again blame for Democrats. Damned if they do, damned if they don't.



Life in the wall is a drag.
User currently offlineBaroque From Australia, joined Apr 2006, 15380 posts, RR: 59
Reply 10, posted (2 years 11 months 1 week 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 1758 times:

Quoting seb146 (Reply 9):
Quoting fr8mech (Reply 7):
Why wasn't it ok, to Obama, for Bush to spend irresponsibly and unpatriotically, yet it's perfectly ok for Obama to do so?

Let's be clear here: The Constitution grants powers of spending to the House. Not the president. Much as I think Bush was not a leader at all, how many years of right-wing spending were there that were approved and off-the-books? When the Democrats finally took over in 2008, all that spending was put on the books and, lo and behold, it was all the Democrats fault for over spending. It was the Democrats fault for wanting a nation wide and open and honest dicussion about health care and that ment no budget passage; again blame for Democrats. Damned if they do, damned if they don't.

Not much I need to add except there is a graph showing spending and revenue loss that were initiated under Bush and similar for under Obama - posted I think by Racko. Next time I will save it. But by far the major part of the current expenditure results from Bush admin commitments. History can be unforgiving.

So basically that summary of O and B is twaddle - not to mention being wrong in fact.


User currently offlinefr8mech From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 5370 posts, RR: 14
Reply 11, posted (2 years 11 months 1 week 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 1752 times:

Quoting seb146 (Reply 9):
Quoting Baroque (Reply 10):

I see that the lead Obama apologists will still deflect the argument.

This isn't a question about spending per se. It is about a hypocrite that claimed one thing while running for the office and then, when in the office, did the same thing, except at a much higher level.

Oh, by the way. I'm going to guess that if you used the search function you will not find one instance of my defending the Bush Administration's rubber stamp of Congressional largesse.



When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
User currently offlineNIKV69 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (2 years 11 months 1 week 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 1728 times:

Quoting stasisLAX (Reply 2):
Enough Obama bashing and irresponsible labeling

Then what is this?

The robber-barons on Wall Street

If you want the rhetoric to stop one could set an example.


User currently offlineBaroque From Australia, joined Apr 2006, 15380 posts, RR: 59
Reply 13, posted (2 years 11 months 1 week 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 1704 times:

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 11):
Quoting seb146 (Reply 9):
Quoting Baroque (Reply 10):

I see that the lead Obama apologists will still deflect the argument.

The word deflection must have taken on a new meaning since I lived in the US. One more time with feeling, most of the current debt is due to commitments made under the Bush administration, or to revenue foregone as a result of Bush tax cuts that Obama wished to terminate.

Obama does have a problem, paying off his inheritance.


User currently offlineplanespotting From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 3524 posts, RR: 5
Reply 14, posted (2 years 11 months 1 week 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 1621 times:

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 3):
Actually, I'm a fan of compromise, when it benefits me or my cause. That is the Liberal mantra, isn't it?

Haha. You're being totally sarcastic, right?

Have you been paying attention to the compromises democrats have made during the course of Obama's administration? None of their compromises have benefited anyone but conservatives, yet they still keep making them.



Do you like movies about gladiators?
User currently offlineplanespotting From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 3524 posts, RR: 5
Reply 15, posted (2 years 11 months 1 week 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 1616 times:

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 7):
Why wasn't it ok, to Obama, for Bush to spend irresponsibly and unpatriotically, yet it's perfectly ok for Obama to do so?

And to answer this question, Obama has added most of his share of nat'l debt on Stimulus to fix an economy that was (and is) broken. Bush and a Republican Congress added to the nat'l debt during prosperous times (and on very long-term additions to the nat'l debt that Obama and subsequent administrations will have to pay for without any additional means to pay those obligations, such as Medicare Part D and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan).

In fact, they now have even less to pay for those obligations because of lower-than-necessary tax rates that haven't done anything to boost a very-much struggling economy.



Do you like movies about gladiators?
User currently offlinefr8mech From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 5370 posts, RR: 14
Reply 16, posted (2 years 11 months 1 week 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 1573 times:

Quoting planespotting (Reply 14):
Have you been paying attention to the compromises democrats have made during the course of Obama's administration? None of their compromises have benefited anyone but conservatives, yet they still keep making them.

All of Obama's compromises, while his party enjoyed majorities in both the House and Senate were to keep Democrats on his side. All except he Obama tax increases that were scheduled to go into effect on 1-Jan-11, but, by then the poeple had already spoken.

Quoting planespotting (Reply 15):
Stimulus

Didn't, no, couldn't work. There were no 'shovel-ready', there were no plans other than 'get the money to the States so that they can prop up their budgets'. An absolute waste of ~$800B, plus the opportunity cost of actually using that money for something useful, like not borrowing it from 'who-ever'.

Quoting planespotting (Reply 15):
lower-than-necessary tax rates

How about 'lower-than-necessary tax revenues' due to the business adverse environment that Obama and gang have engendered since day one.

Ok, I guess we'll never understand how Obama (and his sycophants) rationalize his responsible and patriotic spending while lambasting Bush's 'irresponsible' and 'unpatriotic" spending.



When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
User currently offlineKen777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 8191 posts, RR: 8
Reply 17, posted (2 years 11 months 1 week 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 1568 times:

What happened?

The Great Recession happened.

The housing crash from the liar loans.

The banks.

The Auto Bailout.

Bush left one hell of a mess and Obama stopped us from going into a genuine Depression.

Only at TPer would believe that could be done on the cheap.


User currently offlineD L X From United States of America, joined May 1999, 11220 posts, RR: 52
Reply 18, posted (2 years 11 months 1 week 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 1556 times:

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 3):
Compromise is the soup where principles dissolve. ~paraphrased from an unknown source

"The problem with quotations you read on the internet is that it is difficult to determine their veracity." -Abraham Lincoln



Send me a PM at http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/sendmessage.main?from_username=NULL
User currently offlinefr8mech From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 5370 posts, RR: 14
Reply 19, posted (2 years 11 months 1 week 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 1547 times:

Quoting D L X (Reply 18):

"The problem with quotations you read on the internet is that it is difficult to determine their veracity." -Abraham Lincoln

I like that.

Didn't read it though..heard it...though the guy I heard it from probably read it...or it was read to him...it was on the Thom Hartmann show on Sirius Left.   



When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
User currently offlineplanespotting From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 3524 posts, RR: 5
Reply 20, posted (2 years 11 months 1 week 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 1537 times:

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 16):
Didn't, no, couldn't work.

Yes, because it was too small. Again, the president compromised to try and get Republicans to sign on - like every piece of major legislation he has tried to put forth. If you somehow ignore that fact then you don't care to see any truth at all.

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 16):
How about 'lower-than-necessary tax revenues' due to the business adverse environment that Obama and gang have engendered since day one.

Ahh yes, this hypothetical business-averse environment that hasn't attempted to take on anything like climate change or corporate tax rates. In fact, all they took on was healthcare reform, and unless you're a health insurer, that won't affect your business until 2013, and only then on business who don't already provide employees some kind of healthcare coverage.

Yes, what a terrible, anti-business environment our poor businesses have had to put up with. The large, multi-national company I work for has been doing great, and so have a ton of other businesses too. They're just holding onto their money or returning it to their shareholders in the form of stock buybacks and dividends, instead of investing in their business. They're returning cash to shareholders because they're afraid to go overboard hiring employees so they don't ever get caught overextended again, which means lots of people are still looking for jobs, which is why the stimulus should have been larger in the first place, both to promote more hiring and less cash hoarding.



Do you like movies about gladiators?
User currently offlineD L X From United States of America, joined May 1999, 11220 posts, RR: 52
Reply 21, posted (2 years 11 months 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 1491 times:

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 19):
Didn't read it though..heard it...though the guy I heard it from probably read it...or it was read to him...it was on the Thom Hartmann show on Sirius Left.

Either way, I'll add one more:

"No problem has ever been solved by a principle." - D L X



Send me a PM at http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/sendmessage.main?from_username=NULL
User currently offlineKen777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 8191 posts, RR: 8
Reply 22, posted (2 years 11 months 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 1475 times:

Quoting D L X (Reply 21):
"No problem has ever been solved by a principle." - D L X

Tell that to Steve Jobs.


User currently offlinebhill From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 954 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (2 years 11 months 1 week 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 1456 times:

President Obama "anti business"..hows that? If that were true, how much of the TARP funds went to "business" compared to "main street?" As for the promises made during the election, do you honestly think canditate Obama was privy to how rotten the core of the economy was? I have a pretty good hunch that he got a bit of a shock when Bush handed over the keys...


Carpe Pices
User currently offlinefr8mech From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 5370 posts, RR: 14
Reply 24, posted (2 years 11 months 1 week 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 1384 times:

Quoting bhill (Reply 23):
President Obama "anti business"..hows that? If that were true, how much of the TARP funds went to "business" compared to "main street?"


TARP was Bush. I grudgingly supported TARP, not because it was Bush and certainly not because I'm a fan of governmental bailouts of businesses that are failing, especially those that were badly managed. I was ok with it because if the US banking system collapsed, then we would be living in a much different world right now. One, that most of us, except the hardest of the hard-core Marxists, wouldn't want to envision. That bail-out was a psychological necessity.

Quoting planespotting (Reply 20):
Yes, because it was too small. Again, the president compromised to try and get Republicans to sign on


Again, his compromises had nothing to do with the GOP and had everything to do with getting his party in line. The only thing (in the House) bi-partisan about Stimulus was the opposition to it. Same thing about PPACA. So, to say that he compromised for the GOP is to be disingenuous.

Quoting planespotting (Reply 20):
because it was too small


So, you want Obama to be more 'irresponsible' and 'unpatriotic'?



When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
25 MAH4546 : There's no point arguing with a democrat. Once you utter the words "citing facts," they go on a tangent. It's no surprise Obama acts the way he does.
26 tugger : OK, from a Republican: The simple reason is that during the Bush II years, he had a surplus, a booming economy, a Republican legislature for time, an
27 WarRI1 : He certainly does. Absolutely Take a look at the approval rating of congress, versus Obama. Yes indeed.
28 steeler83 : I believe that's what has happened. I never trusted the Obama Administration, and I still don't. Government intervention will not solve anything; it
29 tugger : Please demonstrate where this has happened. "Belief" in this situation is not enough. Tugg
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
It's That Time Again: Post A Pic Of Your Car posted Mon Feb 23 2009 15:10:28 by UAL747
Could It Be Obama Is Actually..... Cuban? posted Tue Nov 4 2008 02:24:15 by MIAMIx707
Looks Like It's Obama And Bayh... posted Fri Aug 22 2008 17:14:19 by Slider
Is It Really That Cold? posted Thu Dec 20 2007 07:03:57 by Farcry
Forget Obama, WHO On Earth Is That Singing? posted Mon Nov 5 2007 13:36:59 by IFEMaster
It's Over For Obama posted Wed Sep 19 2007 16:52:49 by CALTECH
Star Wars Toys That Didn't Make It posted Wed May 16 2007 10:14:36 by Bwest
Is It That Hard To Get Soldiers In Germany? posted Thu Nov 9 2006 00:30:53 by Oly720man
GOP: It Wasn't Only Iraq That Did Them In posted Thu Nov 2 2006 20:46:22 by ArtieFufkin
Well, That's It... posted Wed Nov 1 2006 10:42:14 by Pawsleykat