Page 2 of 9 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 10 to 18 of 73

Thread: "Occupiers" try to blow up bridge that I drive on

  1. #10
    Olympic Champ r.payton@att.net's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Danville .Indiana
    Posts
    8,718

    Default Re: "Occupiers" try to blow up bridge that I drive on

    Quote Originally Posted by ban basketball View Post
    Speaking of the Tea Party, I'll be curious to see how those folks vote this November.

    I don't think any of them supported Romney when all of the GOP candidates were in the field, many of their views differ greatly from Romney's, so it will be interesting to see if they turn their heads and vote Romney, or if they stick to their principles first and write in a candidate.
    Crazy lady (Bachman) just tossed her endorsement to romney after stating (a few months ago)Romney stood ''no chance''against Obama
    You know, I think I would rather be a man than a god . We don't need anyone to believe in us. We just keep going anyhow. It's what we do.

  2. #11

    Default Re: "Occupiers" try to blow up bridge that I drive on

    Quote Originally Posted by ban basketball View Post
    I kind of figured that the guiding mantra would be ABO (anybody but Obama), which, according to Sean Hannity, was an "empty strategy" in 2004.

    As they say, politics has the shortest memory of all (or something to that effect), but it has been curious to see how Bill Clinton went from a "rigid socialist ideologue" to the "compromiser" that he has become known as today.
    First let me say that for someone who claims to despise Fox News and conservative commentators, you sure do know a lot about them. As for Clinton, I don't believe I've ever called him a rigid socialist ideologue. I do think he has socialist views, but he wasn't very rigid about them. I also didn't vote for him, but he was a pretty good domestic president. He clearly dropped the ball with Bin Laden and in Somalia but domestically he was pretty good. I will say that the Dot Com boom helped, but he allowed it to help. Obama would've blown even that. Here is an excerpt from an article I found about Clinton. I think it describes it pretty well.

    It is this, quite simply: Rigid ideology must not stop progress on behalf of the country.
    Clinton, speaking as part of WT's Distinguished Lecture Series, told a packed First United Bank Event Center that "we can do lots of stuff to grow the economy, but if we spend most of our time making ideological arguments ... we're not having the right debate. We're talking about whether to do something, instead of how to do it."
    Bingo, Mr. President.
    Clinton helped craft a successful presidency from 1993 until 2001 by working with congressional Republicans who took control of Congress after the landmark 1994 mid-term election. The president's tax policies, coupled with GOP-led spending restraints, helped bring about a balanced budget for several years running.

  3. #12

    Default Re: "Occupiers" try to blow up bridge that I drive on

    Quote Originally Posted by quinn14 View Post
    First let me say that for someone who claims to despise Fox News and conservative commentators, you sure do know a lot about them. As for Clinton, I don't believe I've ever called him a rigid socialist ideologue. I do think he has socialist views, but he wasn't very rigid about them. I also didn't vote for him, but he was a pretty good domestic president. He clearly dropped the ball with Bin Laden and in Somalia but domestically he was pretty good. I will say that the Dot Com boom helped, but he allowed it to help. Obama would've blown even that. Here is an excerpt from an article I found about Clinton. I think it describes it pretty well.

    It is this, quite simply: Rigid ideology must not stop progress on behalf of the country.
    Clinton, speaking as part of WT's Distinguished Lecture Series, told a packed First United Bank Event Center that "we can do lots of stuff to grow the economy, but if we spend most of our time making ideological arguments ... we're not having the right debate. We're talking about whether to do something, instead of how to do it."
    Bingo, Mr. President.
    Clinton helped craft a successful presidency from 1993 until 2001 by working with congressional Republicans who took control of Congress after the landmark 1994 mid-term election. The president's tax policies, coupled with GOP-led spending restraints, helped bring about a balanced budget for several years running.
    I think that you made a little bit of a false assumption: you took my comments personally, like I was talking about you, but I didn't even know you in the years that people were calling Clinton a "rigid socialist ideologue," so I CERTAINLY wasn't talking about you, but those who loathed Clinton during his presidency. These were things that were said DAILY about him.

    I'm not so sure if Obama would have messed up the dotcom bubble; who knows? Considering where the economy was when he took office in January of 2009, the economy HAS seen some significant improvement, albeit a bit slower than democrats would like, but it has and is improving. All major indicators, aside from foreclosures, are up.
    UNI Panthers...Because it's just right.

  4. #13

    Default Re: "Occupiers" try to blow up bridge that I drive on

    What indicators are up? I ask in all honesty. I just heard on the radio today that 115,000 jobs were created last month. Sounds good until you hear that over 300,000 people ran out of unemployment benefits. That means around 200,000 people are no longer counted as unemployed, so they say that the unemployment rate dropped. It's sketchy math at best. I realize it's been counted like that for a long time, but this is the longest period of time with this kind of unemployment since the great depression. I also heard on the radio that something like 85% of college graduates are moving back home with their parents. The unemployment rate for young people is the highest its been since WWII. I'm just not seeing a recovery at all.

    EDIT- I guess my numbers were a bit off. It seems that over 500,000 people left the labor force not the 300,00 I thought I had heard. Here is an article. People Not In Labor Force Soar By 522,000, Labor Force Participation Rate Lowest Since 1981 | ZeroHedge

    I really do wish that someone else was running on the democrat side because there are soooo many people who just vote a party instead of looking at performance. These are the people who would vote for Obama no matter what he did. I fear that around election time, Obama, the media, Trumka and SEIU will create some false drama about Mitt Romney and get the mindless drones all in a frenzy about something that will never happen. If they can get enough of these people all worked up and into the voting booths then Obama probably will win. There just isn't really enough "frenzy" around Romney to get people off their butts.
    Last edited by quinn14; 05-04-2012 at 11:10 AM.

  5. #14

    Default Re: "Occupiers" try to blow up bridge that I drive on

    Quote Originally Posted by quinn14 View Post
    What indicators are up? I ask in all honesty. I just heard on the radio today that 115,000 jobs were created last month. Sounds good until you hear that over 300,000 people ran out of unemployment benefits. That means around 200,000 people are no longer counted as unemployed, so they say that the unemployment rate dropped. It's sketchy math at best. I realize it's been counted like that for a long time, but this is the longest period of time with this kind of unemployment since the great depression. I also heard on the radio that something like 85% of college graduates are moving back home with their parents. The unemployment rate for young people is the highest its been since WWII. I'm just not seeing a recovery at all.

    EDIT- I guess my numbers were a bit off. It seems that over 500,000 people left the labor force not the 300,00 I thought I had heard. Here is an article. People Not In Labor Force Soar By 522,000, Labor Force Participation Rate Lowest Since 1981 | ZeroHedge

    I really do wish that someone else was running on the democrat side because there are soooo many people who just vote a party instead of looking at performance. These are the people who would vote for Obama no matter what he did. I fear that around election time, Obama, the media, Trumka and SEIU will create some false drama about Mitt Romney and get the mindless drones all in a frenzy about something that will never happen. If they can get enough of these people all worked up and into the voting booths then Obama probably will win. There just isn't really enough "frenzy" around Romney to get people off their butts.
    All major indicators are up since 2009, with the exception of foreclosures. Since 2009, unemployment has dropped, the stock market has recovered, productivity is up, new housing is up (slightly), the auto companies are solvent, etc, etc.

    Granted, the recovery is slower than democrats would like to see, but it is entirely false to say that the economy has not recovered. It clearly has. http://bea.gov/newsreleases/national...dp4q11_adv.pdf
    UNI Panthers...Because it's just right.

  6. #15

    Default Re: "Occupiers" try to blow up bridge that I drive on

    How is current and projected government debt looking? How about the current deficit?

  7. #16

    Default Re: "Occupiers" try to blow up bridge that I drive on

    Quote Originally Posted by Flop The Nuts View Post
    How is current and projected government debt looking? How about the current deficit?
    Debt is a different issue, and not one of the major economic indicators. However, since our founding, the U.S. has always operated in the red, so debt is nothing new.

    Yes, it's a problem, but as Dick F' Yourself Cheney said, "Reagan proved that deficits don't matter."
    UNI Panthers...Because it's just right.

  8. #17

    Default Re: "Occupiers" try to blow up bridge that I drive on

    This will also provide some perspective on the deficit. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/24/op...ay/24sun4.html

    I suspect that if you compare, as a percentage, how much Bush increased the deficit, versus what Obama increased it over Bush, you'll find, just as you do with unemployment, that, as a percentage, Bush has increased this far more than what Obama has. Unemployment isn't even comparable.
    UNI Panthers...Because it's just right.

  9. #18

    Default Re: "Occupiers" try to blow up bridge that I drive on

    Quote Originally Posted by ban basketball View Post
    the auto companies are solvent, etc, etc.
    Funny you say that. I just read yesterday that GM stock was down 25% from a year ago. The government still owns 28% of it. I suspect the reason it's down is because the main reason it rose was because of the tsunami in Japan that shut down Toyota. I work for a Toyota supplier and last year we couldn't even get full time work. Now we are swamped because people are once again able to buy the Toyota car they want. And you keep saying that unemployment has dropped and that is false. They are cooking the books and everyone who can simply add can see that. 522,000 people are no longer considered unemployed but still don't have a job. And that's just in one month.

    Another thing I never really thought of until my friend told me, was the fact that teenagers can't even find jobs flipping burgers. His 16yr old could not find a single summer job last year. That used to be an automatic. Also, gas prices have doubled since he took office, yet the media stays silent on that. If Bush were still there they would be screaming about his love of big oil. Obama has simply failed. You can doctor up the language and say that the recovery isn't as quick as you'd like, but the question is....Does that satisfy you enough to vote for him again? Do you want 4 more years of "not as quick as I'd like"? Or would you rather have a proven business man give it a shot? I suspect you will vote Obama even though he hasn't even satisfied you, but I wish people would reconsider and give someone else a chance. If Romney can't do it, then we need to find someone else. Status quo just because Obama has a "D" after his name is unacceptable.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •