No censorship, eh?

[redrumloa]

Red this seems to be the typical Republican wank. Clinton is blamed for the 8 years of bad economy after his term. Followed closely by the Obama failures of 60 days.

It is not simple enough to point a finger at a single person. Obama did not create the initial problem, but everything he has done has a direct correlation to the decline within his term. Look at specific legs down and you will see they fall on the day of or day after he signed some pork into law, or was on TV talking about draconian policy changes.

How can anybody like this stuff? Are some of you guys even paying attention? We are in the worst housing crash since the great depression and possibly US history, yet in this environment Obama wants to eliminate the mortgage interest tax deduction :?: :shocked:

 

[faethor]

How can anybody like this stuff? Are some of you guys even paying attention? We are in the worst housing crash since the great depression and possibly US history, yet in this environment Obama wants to eliminate the mortgage interest tax deduction :?: :shocked:

I guess it's a question of how one is paying attention. Your statement seems like he wants to do this to every home owner. Obama proposes this on individuals with adjusted gross of more than $200K or couples of more than $250K.

 

[FluffyMcDeath]

I don't like ANY censorship.

But you think it's still OK for the media companies to censor news and opinions?

I am against all? Air America failed miserably on it's own. You will disagree, but the simple fact is the few right leaning talk shows out there are a (small) counterbalance to the much larger liberal media.[...]

So you don't like the idea that the liberal media should be forced to be more balanced?

 

[FluffyMcDeath]

Playing with numbers?

Better watch where those stones are going, glass house man.

Every time Obama opens his mouth or signs a new bill, the market goes down. The markets don't live in a vacuum, they react to policy and is a good indicator of the economy going forward. You knew this very well during Bush, but ignore it now during Obama?

If I push a car down a hill but it passes you halfway down, then it's your fault that it's going down the hill!!!

You think if Bush or McCain or anybody else where the president the markets wouldn't keep falling. You KNOW everything's falling because it's fundamentally broken and you KNOW there is pretty much nothing that can fix it so if you're expecting miracles then perhaps you've bought into the whole Obama as Messiah gibberish that you and your lgf/freeper crowd have been pretending that everyone else believed in.

 

[metalman]

And who decides what is in the public interest? King Obama?

JFC man!, it' getting bleeping old. You don't like him.. Got it. Jeez.

You didn't complain about any one of cecilia's two thousand "Bush SUCKS" posts
:slingshot:

Sorry Wayne, I heard bitching about Bush for 8+ years. I won't ignore Obama's policies after a couple months just because some people who voted for him are sensitive.

It wasn't 8+ years because most of the harsh criticism didn't come until he started talking about invading Iraq. He had pretty strong support after 9/11 which he squandered on Iraq and the patriot act. So you should at least wait and let Obama actually do something before you criticism him for it - seems only fair.

The Bush criticism started before he was even sworn in. Remember 2000?

Re-edited for schadenfreude value:
Heil “O” Hell No Radical-In-Chief is NOT MY PRESIDENT!
Bi-Partisanship -NO- it’s compromise with Socialism
0bama Lies, & your Bank acct Dies (4/15 Truthers)

Four months after winning the election, six weeks after his swearing-in, "Obama with his pacifier teleprompter" by his side, has yet to unveil a plan to deal with the banking crisis, credit bubble, and the massive destruction of asset wealth.

Ex Obama supporter Warren Buffet said today:
"If you're in a war, and we really are in an economic war, there's a obligation to the majority to behave in ways to not go around inflaming the minority. If on Dec. 8, or maybe it was Dec. 7, when Roosevelt convened Congress to vote on the war. He didn't say, ‘I'm throwing in about ten of my pet projects,'"

 

[redrumloa]

So you don't like the idea that the liberal media should be forced to be more balanced?

No, I simply don't watch the worst offenders. I don't care who's views it is, once you have gov dictating what can be said and what can't you have consorship and you do not have freedom of speech.

 

[redrumloa]

If I push a car down a hill but it passes you halfway down, then it's your fault that it's going down the hill!!!

You think if Bush or McCain or anybody else where the president the markets wouldn't keep falling. You KNOW everything's falling because it's fundamentally broken and you KNOW there is pretty much nothing that can fix it so if you're expecting miracles then perhaps you've bought into the whole Obama as Messiah gibberish that you and your lgf/freeper crowd have been pretending that everyone else believed in.

I fully expected McCain to have been a trainwreck too and I bitched about him during the election. I don't expect miracles, but YOU should know better than others that putting the money printing machines into overdrive and trying to reinflate the bubble if far worse than letting some large banks and insurers fail. We are at the doorsteps of the 2nd Great Depression and Obama proposes the largest spending bill in US history with the largest increase in US history? Is now the time to tackle every liberal pork pet project? Is now the time to increase taxes on almost every single person in this country?

 

[ilwrath]

Is now the time to increase taxes on almost every single person in this country?

Can you please cite where you keep finding this point of data? I have a household income above median, yet my taxes are scheduled to go down, as are everyone's as far as I can tell, who makes under $250,000 household (>3x median). Am I missing something here, or are you feeling sorry for people who's income is more than a quarter-million dollars a year?

Now, I agree, the budget has a final total that makes everyone scared as hell. It needs to be brought under control. But the "pork" might actually put a few people to work (albeit on questionable projects). And it only costs pennies compared to the black holes of bank and insurance bailouts. Really, the problem is in where the majority of the money is going. I mean, Fannie and Freddie kinda made sense to throw some government money at. They probably never should have been privatized in the first place. But it's never made sense why AIG or Citi should still be breathing.

 

[Glaucus]

The "Obama Stock Chart".

http://stockcharts.com/h-sc/ui?s=$INDU& ... 7561270329

From inauguration day until today.

-Edit-

Ok now you're getting silly. As Fluffy already pointed out, the decline didn't start when Obama took office. Even a 5 year old can see how this is grossly misleading. And I also remember you predicting that this downturn still has a lot more to fall before things get better. I don't think you ever expected a recovery by end of year, so why are you acting all shocked now that the markets have continued to go down since Obama took power? We know you expected this regardless of who's in power, so what's with this "it's all Obama's fault" act?

 

[FluffyMcDeath]

I don't expect miracles, but YOU should know better than others that putting the money printing machines into overdrive and trying to reinflate the bubble if far worse than letting some large banks and insurers fail.

That depends on how you print the money and who you give it to.

If you print the money by creating government debt to the Federal Reserve (the bond which is a promise to pay in the future which is the same thing that Dubya called I.O.U.s when he was criticizing Social Security, but which everyone else including the Fed is happy to take as the safest money in town) then it's bad. And if you take that debt to the banks and they issue loans and you give those loans back to the banks to bail them out then it's very bad.

If, on the other hand, the money is directly created by the government, then it comes debt free. It will hurt the people who already hold a lot of US dollars to see them diluted but it if the new dollars are given out as pensions for example to retirees who have been wiped out in the markets then the injection will be broad based, "compassionate" and stimulating.

This only works if the government reclaims it's right to issue money rather than letting the banks issue money. Otherwise it increases taxpayer indebtedness.

If the government does issue new money then it can be inflationary but some of that would just go to canceling out inflation that has already occurred (in assets such as houses and stocks which were highly inflated).

The first step in the solution is to end the Federal Reserve System.

Is now the time to tackle every liberal pork pet project?

There were worse things than pork. One man's pork is another man's bacon.

Is now the time to increase taxes on almost every single person in this country?

Here's the US census data. Well, OK, it covers 2007 but it's fairly recent.

Total earners 116,783 (in thousands)
making $250,000 and up 2,245 (in thousands)

percentage 1.9%