Despicable DNC commercial

[shrek]

For the Past few days there has been a commercial running here locally in Phx.

It says for 8 years Bush ran down the US Economy underfunding education and healthcare and then his house of cards came tumbling down.

It then says Obama needs our help to get his budget passed so he can fix Bushes mess.

It urges Americans to call their congressmen and urge them to pass the budget. For the good of America.

It then ends stating the ad was paid for by the DNC.

THe funny thing is that the add fails to state the truth. Obama wants to draw us even further in debt. That is not fixing Bush's mess but just changing what the mess is paying for.

I called my Congressmen and told them not to vote for it. And I urge any one here to do the same.

Now do any liberals on these boards have the guts to come here and defend this commercial by the DNC????????????

[homiebrah]

There is a moveon.org ad being played on 550AM along those similar lines.

FactCheck remains quiet on the subject.

[ModerateVoice]

Democratic screeching point: "We won, so deal with it!"

American talking point: "Fine, you won, so fix it instead of whining about it."

[shrek]

There is a moveon.org ad being played on 550AM along those similar lines.

FactCheck remains quiet on the subject.

My Car Stereo's AM broke and have had limited access to 550 AM for the last several months. But am not surprised to hear it.

Have you seen the commercials I am referring to?

On a side note. What do you think of Phoenix so far?

[CrusaderFrank]

The DNC is a Perfect Example of the 100th (KGB) Monkey Effect

[shrek]

Democratic screeching point: "We won, so deal with it!"

American talking point: "Fine, you won, so fix it instead of whining about it."

Moderate Voice,

Exactly, I agree entirely. What the Dems keep failing to do however is explain how more deficit spending fixes Bush's Mess?

And I doubt we will get many on this thread offering an explanation.

How does going trillions more in debt help us???????????

And why should we call congress and tell them to help Obama?

[homiebrah]

My Car Stereo's AM broke and have had limited access to 550 AM for the last several months. But am not surprised to hear it.

Have you seen the commercials I am referring to?

On a side note. What do you think of Phoenix so far?
I haven't seen the commercial you are referring to yet. I've limited my travels into Phoenix to the west side (Goodyear/Glendale) due to living out south of Buckeye. Waiting for it to get hot so I can see if I can cook an egg on my car. That, and getting to catch some D-backs games this summer.

[homiebrah]

I dont think they have to. Nothing other than subjective opinion on both sides. I do not see anything to prove or defend. Its a fact Bush policy was partly to blame for this mess and its a fact Obama's policies are going to fix it at the cost of future debt.
It's assumed Obama's policies will correct it...the future debt is established fact.

[CrusaderFrank]

You have to keep in mind that Obama's base are the biggest ****ing morons on the planet, so this is no surpirse

[shrek]

I dont think they have to. Nothing other than subjective opinion on both sides. I do not see anything to prove or defend. Its a fact Bush policy was partly to blame for this mess and its a fact Obama's policies are going to fix it at the cost of future debt.

They want to go trillions in debt. Of course they have to prove and defend why they think going further in debt will get us out of this mess.

Would you care to give it a try????????????

YOu say yourself that Obama's policies are going to fix the economy, how?????????????????????

Please explain.

YOU CAN NEVER EVER SPEND YOUR WAY OUT OF DEBT. History proves this.

[Strongbone]

You have to keep in mind that Obama's base are the biggest ****ing morons on the planet, so this is no surpirse

I have to agree. I saw them today in the streets in England. I just couldn't figure out why they were wearing masks though. Seems that they would be proud. :think:

[shrek]

I haven't seen the commercial you are referring to yet. I've limited my travels into Phoenix to the west side (Goodyear/Glendale) due to living out south of Buckeye. Waiting for it to get hot so I can see if I can cook an egg on my car. That, and getting to catch some D-backs games this summer.

:dance: You have less than 2 months before we first hit a hundred. So you will get to test your theory. I live in Peoria but my brother and I have our store in Goodyear. But am familiar with Buckeye. Lived there for several years.

If you ever get to see the commercial you will see what I mean.

[Strongbone]

They want to go trillions in debt. Of course they have to prove and defend why they think going further in debt will get us out of this mess.

Would you care to give it a try????????????

YOu say yourself that Obama's policies are going to fix the economy, how?????????????????????

Please explain.

YOU CAN NEVER EVER SPEND YOUR WAY OUT OF DEBT. History proves this.

Here's what I don't get.

If over spending and over heated markets caused this economy to tumble...how is over spending and over "boosting" failed enmities going to fix the economy?

[homiebrah]

:dance: You have less than 2 months before we first hit a hundred. So you will get to test your theory. I live in Peoria but my brother and I have our store in Goodyear. But am familiar with Buckeye. Lived there for several years.

If you ever get to see the commercial you will see what I mean.
If they show it during primetime, I'm sure I'll see it when I go back and watch my DVR'd shows from last week and this week. Sent you a PM.

[shrek]

The DNC is a Perfect Example of the 100th (KGB) Monkey Effect

Not trying to toss this thread off kilter into another direction. But have you seen the new ask KGB? www.kgb.com (http://www.kgb.com)

Why choose those initials? One has to wonder considering the history of those initials if they want to legitimize those initials or something of the sort?

[shrek]

If they show it during primetime, I'm sure I'll see it when I go back and watch my DVR'd shows from last week and this week. Sent you a PM.

Got it I responded. Thanks.

[shrek]

Here's what I don't get.

If over spending and over heated markets caused this economy to tumble...how is over spending and over "boosting" failed enmities going to fix the economy?

Exactly, that is the thing Obama nor his obamabots can answer.
They always go silent when asked. Notice in this very thread how devoid of Liberals it is.

[Stricken]

For the Past few days there has been a commercial running here locally in Phx.

It says for 8 years Bush ran down the US Economy underfunding education and healthcare and then his house of cards came tumbling down.

It then says Obama needs our help to get his budget passed so he can fix Bushes mess.

It urges Americans to call their congressmen and urge them to pass the budget. For the good of America.

It then ends stating the ad was paid for by the DNC.

THe funny thing is that the add fails to state the truth. Obama wants to draw us even further in debt. That is not fixing Bush's mess but just changing what the mess is paying for.

I called my Congressmen and told them not to vote for it. And I urge any one here to do the same.

Now do any liberals on these boards have the guts to come here and defend this commercial by the DNC????????????

Sounds about right. I have a question though. When did Karl Rove start working for the DNC? :lol:

Stricken

[RickRhetoric]

Now do any liberals on these boards have the guts to come here and defend this commercial by the DNC????????????

Defend what? Defend the fact that we transformed your America from a greedy semi-capitalist nation into a compassionate socialist state -- which 65 percent of America voted for?

Defend the fact that we Democrats accomplished the transformation by not allowing America to become energy independent -- no drill, no nuke and no dig?

Defend the fact that we Democrats forced lending institutions to give comfortable homes to every American, thus collapsing the housing industry and sabotaging an economy based on corporate callousness?

Defend the fact that we have welcomed illegal immigrants to share our America?

Defend what?

We don't have to defend anything, amigo. Mission accomplished! :)):)):))

[shrek]

Sounds about right. I have a question though. When did Karl Rove start working for the DNC? :lol:

Stricken

Did Karl Rove Produce the commercial in question? If he did not then your spinning and deflecting and nothing more.

[shrek]

Defend what? Defend the fact that we transformed your America from a greedy semi-capitalist nation into a compassionate socialist state -- which 65 percent of America voted for?

Defend the fact that we Democrats accomplished the transformation by not allowing America to become energy independent -- no drill, no nuke and no dig?

Defend the fact that we Democrats forced lending institutions to give comfortable homes to every American, thus collapsing the housing industry and sabotaging an economy based on corporate callousness?

Defend the fact that we have welcomed illegal immigrants to share our America?

Defend what?

We don't have to defend anything, amigo. Mission accomplished! :)):)):))

You forgot one thing. :dance: Forcing Obama to have to spend 2 Trillion to spend our way out of debt!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[oldandtired]

It's assumed Obama's policies will correct it...the future debt is established fact.

Exactly correct. That being said, even f the policies work, they will leave a whole new set of problems for us and our children.

It was a gamble.....with our money. And one done without anyone, including the Presidnet, scrutinizing the bill....and not afraid to admit it either.

That, to me, is the epitomy of arrogance.

[penner01]

Democratic screeching point: "We won, so deal with it!"

American talking point: "Fine, you won, so fix it instead of whining about it."

Excellent....

[penner01]

Exactly correct. That being said, even f the policies work, they will leave a whole new set of problems for us and our children.

It was a gamble.....with our money. And one done without anyone, including the Presidnet, scrutinizing the bill....and not afraid to admit it either.

That, to me, is the epitomy of arrogance.

To me it has been and continues to be seizing opportunity to spend a great deal of money that would not otherwise be available to the government - based on false pretenses - and fund agenda projects that would not otherwise pass muster. And it's falsely stating the facts of the big picture.

[homiebrah]

Exactly correct. That being said, even f the policies work, they will leave a whole new set of problems for us and our children.

It was a gamble.....with our money. And one done without anyone, including the Presidnet, scrutinizing the bill....and not afraid to admit it either.

That, to me, is the epitomy of arrogance.
Deficit spending must only be acceptable when a Democrat is in office, and claims inheritence of problems.

[MrShotShot]

Bush can be accused of a lot of things, but underfunding education is not one of them.

Funny how the Dems scream about fairness and accuracy when it comes to talk radio, but yet are amazingly silent regarding their own ads.

[deportalllibs]

Moderate Voice,

Exactly, I agree entirely. What the Dems keep failing to do however is explain how more deficit spending fixes Bush's Mess?


Details details, I'm afraid libs cannot provide the details of there plan to implement hope, change, work together, and sieze the opportunity.

Lib game plan: Spend trillions, when it fails throw your hands up in frustration and yell Booooosh!

[penner01]

Exactly correct. That being said, even f the policies work, they will leave a whole new set of problems for us and our children.

It was a gamble.....with our money. And one done without anyone, including the Presidnet, scrutinizing the bill....and not afraid to admit it either.

That, to me, is the epitomy of arrogance.
And I wonder, when it doesn't work, how it will be spun to the American public. How will they gloss over and rationalize the failures?

[penner01]

Bush can be accused of a lot of things, but underfunding education is not one of them.

Funny how the Dems scream about fairness and accuracy when it comes to talk radio, but yet are amazingly silent regarding their own ads.

Funny, I just saw an interview with OMB and they have this new term their are using to describe how they report thier information to the public........"Fair and Balanced" he said......omg.

Where do you suppose they heard that?

[shrek]

Bush can be accused of a lot of things, but underfunding education is not one of them.

Funny how the Dems scream about fairness and accuracy when it comes to talk radio, but yet are amazingly silent regarding their own ads.

Very good point. But then the Dems have a long history of false advertising.

I still remember back in 1995 when Republicans suggested a less of an increase in Social Security payments in that years budget be increased by less of an increase than the previous budget.

The dems ran to ABC, CBS, and CNN and screamed that Republicans wanted to cut SS. When in fact they wanted to increase it but at a lower % than the last increase.

Only NBC refused to go along with the story. But that did not stop the Dems and the other news outlets from blasting it all over the place.

[Patriot365]

I dont think they have to. Nothing other than subjective opinion on both sides. I do not see anything to prove or defend. Its a fact Bush policy was partly to blame for this mess and its a fact Obama's policies are going to fix it at the cost of future debt.

How is your prediction of the future a "fact"?

[shrek]

Deficit spending must only be acceptable when a Democrat is in office, and claims inheritence of problems.

Keep in mind that Obama campaigned for President with a proposed budget with deficit spending all the while attacking McCain for his association with Bush and Bush's deficit spending.

:rolleyes:

[croupier101]

Deficit spending must only be acceptable when a Democrat is in office, and claims inheritence of problems.

No it worked for Reagan when he did it after Carter. And he's a Republican who inherited a failed economy from a Democrat.

[shrek]

No it worked for Reagan when he did it after Carter. And he's a Republican who inherited a failed economy from a Democrat.:))

Ah yes here comes the spin and deflection.

Croup,

Reagan did not propose deficit spending to get out of debt.

Yes he signed a budget into law that had deficit spending but that budget was created and voted for by a Dem controlled congress.

Remember it was Reagan that first demanded the Line Item Veto and it was for that reason.

But please spin and deflect if you wish.

[KeithBlubberman]

To me it has been and continues to be seizing opportunity to spend a great deal of money that would not otherwise be available to the government - based on false pretenses - and fund agenda projects that would not otherwise pass muster. And it's falsely stating the facts of the big picture.

Exactly the point.

[croupier101]

:))

Ah yes here comes the spin and deflection.

Croup,

Reagan did not propose deficit spending to get out of debt.
Umm, yes his budgets increased defecit spending by 143 Billion dollars his first 2 years.

Yes he signed a budget into law that had deficit spending but that budget was created and voted for by a Dem controlled congress.
Reagan, just as Obama has, proposes the budget. Congress then writes it with negotiations with the President. Then Congress passes it, then the President signs it.

Reagan and Clinton increased defecit spending by over 20% their first 2 years after inheriting failed economies. And both Reagan and Clinton successfully rallied the economy. Reagan used the increased revenue on defense, Clinton to pay down the debt. I hope Obama does the latter.

[croupier101]

Reagan's Budget Proposals compared to what was signed.
1982 695.3
1983 773.3
1984 862.5
1985 940.3
1986 973.7
1987 994.0
1988 1024.3
1989 1094.2

That is in billions.

[shrek]

Umm, yes his budgets increased defecit spending by 143 Billion dollars his first 2 years.


Reagan, just as Obama has, proposes the budget. Congress then writes it with negotiations with the President. Then Congress passes it, then the President signs it.

Reagan and Clinton increased defecit spending by over 20% their first 2 years after inheriting failed economies. And both Reagan and Clinton successfully rallied the economy. Reagan used the increased revenue on defense, Clinton to pay down the debt. I hope Obama does the latter.

You skipped right over the line item veto. Yes Reagan signed the budgets into law but the budgets he signed were not the ones he gave to congress.

Reagan wanted the line item veto to cut out the waste that the Dem controlled congress tossed in there.

Note that Clinton after his first two years in office had a Republican controlled Congress.

[simssk]

Same old arguments seem to pop up in just about every thread.

I think the point of the OP was that it is time for republicans/conservatives to start standing up and making some noise. DNC got a commercial out there that is wrong - RNC - get one up with facts to correct their statements then add a few conservative thoughts and assertions. Conservatives need to start making some noise instead of letting ONLY Limbaugh and Sean and other radio talk show hosts make the noise.

It's obvious the media is not going to cover something unless it just demands coverage. Lets start demanding coverage!

[Dubarry20833]

Bush can be accused of a lot of things, but underfunding education is not one of them.

Actually, he can be accused of underfunding education. That was the problem with No Child Left Behind. It was all requirement with no money behind it.

[croupier101]

You skipped right over the line item veto. Yes Reagan signed the budgets into law but the budgets he signed were not the ones he gave to congress.

I only posted Reagans budget proposals. I didn't post what he signed. The President proposes the initial budget. 3 Times congress made him cut, and 5 times they let him increase his proposals. At the end, his deficit spending was a record.

And Reagan's proposals were:
1982 695.3
1983 773.3
1984 862.5
1985 940.3
1986 973.7
1987 994.0
1988 1024.3
1989 1094.2

What Reagan signed was:
1982 745.8
1983 808.4
1984 851.8
1985 920.2
1986 954.2
1987 1003.9
1988 1064.1
1989 1114.2

[AvgGuyIA]

Defend what? Defend the fact that we transformed your America from a greedy semi-capitalist nation into a compassionate socialist state -- which 65 percent of America voted for?

Defend the fact that we Democrats accomplished the transformation by not allowing America to become energy independent -- no drill, no nuke and no dig?

Defend the fact that we Democrats forced lending institutions to give comfortable homes to every American, thus collapsing the housing industry and sabotaging an economy based on corporate callousness?

Defend the fact that we have welcomed illegal immigrants to share our America?

Defend what?

We don't have to defend anything, amigo. Mission accomplished! :)):)):))Thank you for answering on behalf of ALL HANNITY LIBERALS!

[Stricken]

They want to go trillions in debt. Of course they have to prove and defend why they think going further in debt will get us out of this mess.

Would you care to give it a try?

YOu say yourself that Obama's policies are going to fix the economy, how?

Please explain.

YOU CAN NEVER EVER SPEND YOUR WAY OUT OF DEBT. History proves this.

Shrek,

No one believes going further into debt is going to get us out of this mess. It's the lesser of two evils. This notion that we could simply let the "failures fail" and go about our business is crazy. We have no way of knowing just how far down the bottom would be. Tens of millions of Americans would lose their jobs. We would see 15-25% unemployment rates. I don't believe this generation could handle that kind of environment. We have become way too spoiled for that. There would be mass chaos in the streets.

So, the money is being spent to hopefully catch the freefall that would otherwise happen. I hate that we are having to spend all this money just as much as the next person, but I do believe the alternative of just sitting back and doing nothing would be just as foolhardy.

Hopefully, once things stabilize, we can begin to pay all this back. Is it a risk? You betcha! I have two young boys though that I would rather not live through another great depression so I'm willing to take the chance.

Stricken

[penner01]

Same old arguments seem to pop up in just about every thread.

I think the point of the OP was that it is time for republicans/conservatives to start standing up and making some noise. DNC got a commercial out there that is wrong - RNC - get one up with facts to correct their statements then add a few conservative thoughts and assertions. Conservatives need to start making some noise instead of letting ONLY Limbaugh and Sean and other radio talk show hosts make the noise.

It's obvious the media is not going to cover something unless it just demands coverage. Lets start demanding coverage!

Absolutely right. Republicans just don't seem to fight. They don't aggressively get the message out. Even now, you only see them with talking points when they happen to get an interview and half of that is on FOX which doesn't get the message to the right people. Dems can make all kinds of false and malicious claims and the Reps don't fight back.

[croupier101]

Absolutely right. Republicans just don't seem to fight. They don't aggressively get the message out. Even now, you only see them with talking points when they happen to get an interview and half of that is on FOX which doesn't get the message to the right people. Dems can make all kinds of false and malicious claims and the Reps don't fight back.

Do you think one of the reason that the Republicans don't get a very good conservative message out because it is hard to take them seriously when they claim we should cut spending, being that while in control they actually increased spending to record levels?

[jmb6]

Moderate Voice,

Exactly, I agree entirely. What the Dems keep failing to do however is explain how more deficit spending fixes Bush's Mess?

And I doubt we will get many on this thread offering an explanation.

How does going trillions more in debt help us???????????

And why should we call congress and tell them to help Obama?

You are missing the point. They don't see the budget deficit as a bad thing. Neither did Bush.

The bankers want and encourage deficit spending. How else can they gain all the wealth in the world?

Transfer of wealth from the middle class to the very rich with a few bones thrown to the poor to make it look good.

[shrek]

I only posted Reagans budget proposals. I didn't post what he signed. The President proposes the initial budget. 3 Times congress made him cut, and 5 times they let him increase his proposals. At the end, his deficit spending was a record.

And Reagan's proposals were:
1982 695.3
1983 773.3
1984 862.5
1985 940.3
1986 973.7
1987 994.0
1988 1024.3
1989 1094.2

What Reagan signed was:
1982 745.8
1983 808.4
1984 851.8
1985 920.2
1986 954.2
1987 1003.9
1988 1064.1
1989 1114.2

Croupier,

Do you deny that there was pork barrel earmarks attached to those budgets?????????

Your numbers only tell part of the picture.

[penner01]

Do you think one of the reason that the Republicans don't get a very good conservative message out because it is hard to take them seriously when they claim we should cut spending, being that while in control they actually increased spending to record levels?

No croup I don't think that is exactly it. Americans have come to always expect increased spending levels. When was the last time we actually saw less - in reality. I think it's the message. Republicans just don't seem to deliver message.

[shrek]

Shrek,

No one believes going further into debt is going to get us out of this mess. It's the lesser of two evils. This notion that we could simply let the "failures fail" and go about our business is crazy. We have no way of knowing just how far down the bottom would be. Tens of millions of Americans would lose their jobs. We would see 15-25% unemployment rates. I don't believe this generation could handle that kind of environment. We have become way too spoiled for that. There would be mass chaos in the streets.

So, the money is being spent to hopefully catch the freefall that would otherwise happen. I hate that we are having to spend all this money just as much as the next person, but I do believe the alternative of just sitting back and doing nothing would be just as foolhardy.

Hopefully, once things stabilize, we can begin to pay all this back. Is it a risk? You betcha! I have two young boys though that I would rather not live through another great depression so I'm willing to take the chance.

Stricken

:naughty: Stricken, Your point would be valid if the Trillions in deficit spending Obama is proposing were only going to shore up failed businesses.

Its not. He also wants to fund education at a level even higher than Bush did, which note was higher than what Clinton funded education. He also wants to use that money to fund His version of Universal healthcare and many other Campaign promises he made.

So this was not a necessary evil to keep us from falling deeper in a Depression abyss.

The question is where is the plan to start paying it back? Answer: there is none.

[homiebrah]

Croupier,

Do you deny that there was pork barrel earmarks attached to those budgets?????????

Your numbers only tell part of the picture.
Pork barrel spending has become accepted in this day and age. Hell, I'd be willing to bet a Jack-in-the-Box taco in a few years, they won't be counted in the bill tally.

Presidents don't mind deficit spending (Clinton may be an exception) because they know the buck will be passed. No matter where the claim the buck stops.

[shrek]

You are missing the point. They don't see the budget deficit as a bad thing. Neither did Bush.

The bankers want and encourage deficit spending. How else can they gain all the wealth in the world?

Transfer of wealth from the middle class to the very rich with a few bones thrown to the poor to make it look good.

Jmb6,

Ah but how am I missing the point????????? I agree that they do not see the budget Deficit as a bad thing.

That is why I say we must call congress as the ad suggested but tell congress, you vote for it, I vote against you.

[simssk]

And I wonder, when it doesn't work, how it will be spun to the American public. How will they gloss over and rationalize the failures?

That one is fairly easy to answer. First, it was "inherited" so not their fault. Second, it was and continues to be Bush's fault because he had a deficit. Never mind the bama has tripled it in a little over 60 days. That doesn't count. It is all Bush's fault and bama simply inherited it.

That will be their cry for as long as they can make it last - and unfortunately 52.9% of the american people continue to buy that line over and over and over. So I think it's safe to say, we're going to hear this for a very long time.

[simssk]

Defend what? Defend the fact that we transformed your America from a greedy semi-capitalist nation into a compassionate socialist state -- which 65 percent of America voted for?
Why do libs have to continually inflate the percentage that bama won the election? Now it's up to 65%. Get your facts straight before you come here and tell us how wrong we are.

[itsrea]

For the Past few days there has been a commercial running here locally in Phx.

It says for 8 years Bush ran down the US Economy underfunding education and healthcare and then his house of cards came tumbling down.

It then says Obama needs our help to get his budget passed so he can fix Bushes mess.

It urges Americans to call their congressmen and urge them to pass the budget. For the good of America.

It then ends stating the ad was paid for by the DNC.

THe funny thing is that the add fails to state the truth. Obama wants to draw us even further in debt. That is not fixing Bush's mess but just changing what the mess is paying for.

I called my Congressmen and told them not to vote for it. And I urge any one here to do the same.

Now do any liberals on these boards have the guts to come here and defend this commercial by the DNC????????????Guess the ad fails to note that Bush steadfastly refused to sign the budget that the Dems presented to him, sending it back and telling them to take out the pork?

[simssk]

Actually, you're incorrect as others have pointed out... Reagan and Clinton did this... But let's make it easier for you to understand what it is Obama is doing... i'll cite a personal example.

A few years ago I had over 40 grand in credit card debt (bad personal habits led to that, i agree). Although, i did have 10K in the bank in cash. I took that 10K and *spent* it by buying stocks and investing in sound companies. That 10K grew to approx 70K in about 3 years. See what I'm saying? I INVESTED money i really didn't have and made it grow because of SOUND investments. I cashed out 100% from the market and after taxes I was able to pay off all my credit card debt and had a little left over to keep investing in the market. I no longer have any credit card debt.

So you see... if you take money you don't have and spend it (deficit spending) and spend it on something that will generate returns on that money (investing wisely) then in the end, you CAN pay off debt. Put this on a grander scale... if Obama spends on education to improve the system, there will be MORE people making MORE money to pay MORE in taxes and thus help pay down the debt he's creating. By investing in Health Care now (deficit spending), the amout of SAVINGS it has in the future more than outweighs the initial cost. To spend 500 billion now to save several trillion over a few years is SMART spending. Modernizing health care is an extremely good idea. Do i agree with ALL the spending Obama is planning on? NO, but i do agree with the principal and can see past the edge of my nose. Look down the road for the good of the country and not just the good of your political party.

Hopefully that helps put things in perspective.

Thank you for sharing your story averagejoe. But I think it is fair to say your story is not an "average" story at all. Most people who have $40,000 in credit card debt are not going to invest in the stock market with their savings. You obviously know what you are doing in the market. You got lucky or else you have an incredibly smart broker or you are incredibly smart in investing. This is a very unusual story.

[Stricken]

:naughty: Stricken, Your point would be valid if the Trillions in deficit spending Obama is proposing were only going to shore up failed businesses.

Uh....right now our country is a failed business. Anything done to improve it would be shoring up the problem.


Its not. He also wants to fund education at a level even higher than Bush did, which note was higher than what Clinton funded education. He also wants to use that money to fund His version of Universal healthcare and many other Campaign promises he made.

God forbid we actually give our children better education. As for healthcare, it's been a long time coming. I run my own business along with having a full time job. You ever tried to get health insurance? A plan for a family a 4 will run you about $1,200 per month. So tackling healthcare is a great step forward for the country. I would say cutting out the middleman(health insurance companies) that are skimming 33% of health care costs would be a good thing.

So this was not a necessary evil to keep us from falling deeper in a Depression abyss.

So says you. You are entitled to your opinion.

The question is where is the plan to start paying it back? Answer: there is none.

Wow....I was unaware you had access to the meetings taking place at the Whitehouse. Surely you can prove there is no plan to repay this once it is over.

Stricken

[Stricken]

Actually, you're incorrect as others have pointed out... Reagan and Clinton did this... But let's make it easier for you to understand what it is Obama is doing... i'll cite a personal example.

A few years ago I had over 40 grand in credit card debt (bad personal habits led to that, i agree). Although, i did have 10K in the bank in cash. I took that 10K and *spent* it by buying stocks and investing in sound companies. That 10K grew to approx 70K in about 3 years. See what I'm saying? I INVESTED money i really didn't have and made it grow because of SOUND investments. I cashed out 100% from the market and after taxes I was able to pay off all my credit card debt and had a little left over to keep investing in the market. I no longer have any credit card debt.

So you see... if you take money you don't have and spend it (deficit spending) and spend it on something that will generate returns on that money (investing wisely) then in the end, you CAN pay off debt. Put this on a grander scale... if Obama spends on education to improve the system, there will be MORE people making MORE money to pay MORE in taxes and thus help pay down the debt he's creating. By investing in Health Care now (deficit spending), the amout of SAVINGS it has in the future more than outweighs the initial cost. To spend 500 billion now to save several trillion over a few years is SMART spending. Modernizing health care is an extremely good idea. Do i agree with ALL the spending Obama is planning on? NO, but i do agree with the principal and can see past the edge of my nose. Look down the road for the good of the country and not just the good of your political party.

Hopefully that helps put things in perspective.

+1 Holy Crap....a voice of reason. :clap:

Stricken

[itsrea]

Shrek,

No one believes going further into debt is going to get us out of this mess. It's the lesser of two evils. This notion that we could simply let the "failures fail" and go about our business is crazy. We have no way of knowing just how far down the bottom would be. Tens of millions of Americans would lose their jobs. We would see 15-25% unemployment rates. I don't believe this generation could handle that kind of environment. We have become way too spoiled for that. There would be mass chaos in the streets.

So, the money is being spent to hopefully catch the freefall that would otherwise happen. I hate that we are having to spend all this money just as much as the next person, but I do believe the alternative of just sitting back and doing nothing would be just as foolhardy.

Hopefully, once things stabilize, we can begin to pay all this back. Is it a risk? You betcha! I have two young boys though that I would rather not live through another great depression so I'm willing to take the chance.

StrickenWhat about the Constitution?

[itsrea]

Do you think one of the reason that the Republicans don't get a very good conservative message out because it is hard to take them seriously when they claim we should cut spending, being that while in control they actually increased spending to record levels?Do you think we should take seriously a poster when he fails to note that during the same time frame he is belittling Republicans for, the Democrats were in office TOO, writing legislation TOO, voting on spending money TOO, and that they were in control the last two years and did nothing to CHANGE the way things had been done in the previous six years?

I don't.

[itsrea]

Pork barrel spending has become accepted in this day and age. Hell, I'd be willing to bet a Jack-in-the-Box taco in a few years, they won't be counted in the bill tally.

Presidents don't mind deficit spending (Clinton may be an exception) because they know the buck will be passed. No matter where the claim the buck stops.It would seem that Government only works when you have a Congress controlled by one party and a President of the opposit party... Clinton only SEEMS to be the exception because he has a Republican controlled congress that held him in check... go back and research the battles and you'll see that is true.

IMO what today's government/debt has proven in just 50-some days is that while a Republican controlled Congress AND a Republican White House didn't prove to be a good thing, a Democratic controlled Congress and a Democratic White House IS proving to be a whole hell of a lot worse.

[adroit]

Actually, you're incorrect as others have pointed out... Reagan and Clinton did this... But let's make it easier for you to understand what it is Obama is doing... i'll cite a personal example.

A few years ago I had over 40 grand in credit card debt (bad personal habits led to that, i agree). Although, i did have 10K in the bank in cash. I took that 10K and *spent* it by buying stocks and investing in sound companies. That 10K grew to approx 70K in about 3 years. See what I'm saying? I INVESTED money i really didn't have and made it grow because of SOUND investments. I cashed out 100% from the market and after taxes I was able to pay off all my credit card debt and had a little left over to keep investing in the market. I no longer have any credit card debt.

So you see... if you take money you don't have and spend it (deficit spending) and spend it on something that will generate returns on that money (investing wisely) then in the end, you CAN pay off debt. Put this on a grander scale... if Obama spends on education to improve the system, there will be MORE people making MORE money to pay MORE in taxes and thus help pay down the debt he's creating. By investing in Health Care now (deficit spending), the amout of SAVINGS it has in the future more than outweighs the initial cost. To spend 500 billion now to save several trillion over a few years is SMART spending. Modernizing health care is an extremely good idea. Do i agree with ALL the spending Obama is planning on? NO, but i do agree with the principal and can see past the edge of my nose. Look down the road for the good of the country and not just the good of your political party.

Hopefully that helps put things in perspective.

I'm sorry, but I'm going to have to either call BS, lack of information, or struck-by-lightning-10-times luck.

In order to take $10,000, invest it for 3 years, and come out with $70,000, you'd have to make an ANNUAL return of over 90% (assuming you're not adding to it). You almost doubled your money every year. Seeing how the historical market average is like 10%, and an annual APR for a credit card is what, like 10% or more, the chances of you investing that 10k and paying off the end result of 53k (assuming you're not paying some interest off) from credit after accrued interest, are close to nothing.

So, using your example and relating it to how Obama is going to spend us out of debt is absolutely ridiculous. And Stricken said you and this story were a voice of reason... :))

[harumph]

Actually, you're incorrect as others have pointed out... Reagan and Clinton did this... But let's make it easier for you to understand what it is Obama is doing... i'll cite a personal example.

A few years ago I had over 40 grand in credit card debt (bad personal habits led to that, i agree). Although, i did have 10K in the bank in cash. I took that 10K and *spent* it by buying stocks and investing in sound companies. That 10K grew to approx 70K in about 3 years. See what I'm saying? I INVESTED money i really didn't have and made it grow because of SOUND investments. I cashed out 100% from the market and after taxes I was able to pay off all my credit card debt and had a little left over to keep investing in the market. I no longer have any credit card debt.

So you see... if you take money you don't have and spend it (deficit spending) and spend it on something that will generate returns on that money (investing wisely) then in the end, you CAN pay off debt. Put this on a grander scale... if Obama spends on education to improve the system, there will be MORE people making MORE money to pay MORE in taxes and thus help pay down the debt he's creating. By investing in Health Care now (deficit spending), the amout of SAVINGS it has in the future more than outweighs the initial cost. To spend 500 billion now to save several trillion over a few years is SMART spending. Modernizing health care is an extremely good idea. Do i agree with ALL the spending Obama is planning on? NO, but i do agree with the principal and can see past the edge of my nose. Look down the road for the good of the country and not just the good of your political party.

Hopefully that helps put things in perspective.

Had you tried your clever little upside-down risky investment 6 months ago, you would be [more than likely] unemployed right now. At which point, you would be kicking yourself for spending money that you did not have.

Educating more people in a talent-rich, job-poor environment is useless.

As far as modernizing healthcare, Obama's solution is a let-them-eat-cake answer. He has NO CLUE about the technical complexity, certification, security, cross-platform nightmare this little "answer" has opened up. Not to mention the sheer cost of covering all pre-existing conditions in this country and forcing every hospital and doctor to comply. He has done nothing more than pander to the far left, while blaming the right for inaction.

[itsrea]

Actually, you're incorrect as others have pointed out... Reagan and Clinton did this... But let's make it easier for you to understand what it is Obama is doing... i'll cite a personal example.

A few years ago I had over 40 grand in credit card debt (bad personal habits led to that, i agree). Although, i did have 10K in the bank in cash. I took that 10K and *spent* it by buying stocks and investing in sound companies. That 10K grew to approx 70K in about 3 years. See what I'm saying? I INVESTED money i really didn't have and made it grow because of SOUND investments. I cashed out 100% from the market and after taxes I was able to pay off all my credit card debt and had a little left over to keep investing in the market. I no longer have any credit card debt.

So you see... if you take money you don't have and spend it (deficit spending) and spend it on something that will generate returns on that money (investing wisely) then in the end, you CAN pay off debt. Put this on a grander scale... if Obama spends on education to improve the system, there will be MORE people making MORE money to pay MORE in taxes and thus help pay down the debt he's creating. By investing in Health Care now (deficit spending), the amout of SAVINGS it has in the future more than outweighs the initial cost. To spend 500 billion now to save several trillion over a few years is SMART spending. Modernizing health care is an extremely good idea. Do i agree with ALL the spending Obama is planning on? NO, but i do agree with the principal and can see past the edge of my nose. Look down the road for the good of the country and not just the good of your political party.

Hopefully that helps put things in perspective.There are three important issues at stake here and they are:

1.) You risked your OWN money - the government is risking mine.

2.) You put only yourself in debt and risked only your own future - the government is putting future generations into debt.

3.) What you did was LEGAL - It is not Constitutionally legal for the government to own private industry, nor to compete with private industry.

[homiebrah]

It would seem that Government only works when you have a Congress controlled by one party and a President of the opposit party... Clinton only SEEMS to be the exception because he has a Republican controlled congress that held him in check... go back and research the battles and you'll see that is true.

IMO what today's government/debt has proven in just 50-some days is that while a Republican controlled Congress AND a Republican White House didn't prove to be a good thing, a Democratic controlled Congress and a Democratic White House IS proving to be a whole hell of a lot worse.
Ultimately, Clinton was given the credit for paying down the debt, even with a Republican Congress. Then, 6 years of Bush and a rubber-stamping Republican Congress recreated the deficit, which was lambasted as horrible.

Now, Obama and a Democratic-controlled Congress are doing the same damned thing, in the guise of a crisis too good to pass up, and its accepted as necessary and given a full pass.

Something fishy here, and it's the middle of the desert.

[Bluesgtr44]

Democratic screeching point: "We won, so deal with it!"

American talking point: "Fine, you won, so fix it instead of whining about it."

More like..."It's not just about all Americans, it's about our side now...I won!"

[itsrea]

You're unfortunately a victim of propoganda ... tis a shame..
<snip> None of which addresses the point that the DEMS STILL wrote legislation, STILL asked for pork, STILL earmarked pork as earmarks, SPENT A HELL OF A LOT OF MONEY, both while the Cons were in control and while THE DEMS THEMSELVES were in control.

To pretend that they sat on their hands for the whole eight years is just not realistic.. take a look at what Obama asked for for his home state and home town the same year McCain* asked for NOTHING (http://jay1949.wordpress.com/2008/08/26/mccain-versus-obama-the-earmarks-issue/), and my point is made FOR me: The democrats only voted no on anything the President wanted... they VOTED YES, mostly straight party line, on ANY legislation and spending that any DEM proposed.

In other words the issue Croup fails to bring up time after time is that the Dems were spending, TOO.




*I'm no McCain fan but show me one Dem that asked for NOTHING in ANY of the eight years, please...

[Ballygrl]

For the Past few days there has been a commercial running here locally in Phx.

It says for 8 years Bush ran down the US Economy underfunding education and healthcare and then his house of cards came tumbling down.

It then says Obama needs our help to get his budget passed so he can fix Bushes mess.

It urges Americans to call their congressmen and urge them to pass the budget. For the good of America.

It then ends stating the ad was paid for by the DNC.

THe funny thing is that the add fails to state the truth. Obama wants to draw us even further in debt. That is not fixing Bush's mess but just changing what the mess is paying for.

I called my Congressmen and told them not to vote for it. And I urge any one here to do the same.

Now do any liberals on these boards have the guts to come here and defend this commercial by the DNC????????????

I sent yet another email to the RNC last night, every Republicans should call or send an email asking when the RNC is going to start fighting the lies, ask them why Republicans aren't in front of the camera everyday exposes the lies of Democrats.

[adroit]

It's a shame you feel that way. I have zero intention of posting all my investments and trades to show you my returns, but they were in fact real. In fact, one big hit I had was on a stock called GIGM. I rode that from about 2 dollars a share up to almost 20 per share. I looked at all kinds of things and invested WISELY. You can choose to believe or not believe, that's your choice. I ended up with the actual goods. FYI, the "market average" only applies if you're investing in mutual funds that perform "with the market". If you invest in actual securities directly, it has zero correlation with the "average market" gain. But you knew that, right?

Yes, I knew that. And anyone also knows that it's UNSUSTAINABLE to have returns like yours. It's a huge amount of luck. Otherwise, you'd be a millionaire in no time. You would have kept investing and in 10 years that $10k would be over $6 million. But you knew that, right?


BTW, your 53K figure is quite off the mark. You assume all kinds of things such as me not paying a single dime to my cards for those few years where i made these returns... that's false. I DO have a job you know. In addition, you assume I paid a 10% interest rate, but I did not as I did the "balance transfer" thing quite a bit to keep the interest rate at or below 1 or 2 % (often, it was 0%).

I guess you missed the part where I said (assuming you didnt make any payments). Even if there was no interest, going from $10k to pay off 40k in 3 years is far from a regularity.


Anyhow, keep on disbelieving. Your disbelief (along with many here) will keep you from seeing the future and instead will be locked into "now" for eternity.

If you think it's wise for the government to rely on pulling off returns with our tax payer money like you did, you're smoking something powerful. If it were possible, we wouldn't be in ****ing >$10 trillion of debt. We'd have a surplus of over a gazillion dollars and people would cry tears of gold and **** diamonds.

[itsrea]

:rolleyes:Uh....right now our country is a failed business. Anything done to improve it would be shoring up the problem.

God forbid we actually give our children better education. As for healthcare, it's been a long time coming. I run my own business along with having a full time job. You ever tried to get health insurance? A plan for a family a 4 will run you about $1,200 per month. So tackling healthcare is a great step forward for the country. I would say cutting out the middleman(health insurance companies) that are skimming 33% of health care costs would be a good thing.

says you. You are entitled to your opinion.

Wow....I was unaware you had access to the meetings taking place at the Whitehouse. Surely you can prove there is no plan to repay this once it is over.

StrickenHave you noted that every single socialist country in the world is advising the President: DON'T DO IT!!

??

They're advising against the very things you are promoting because these programs are not sustainable..

Have you noted that you're advising the same people that set up and run the DMV? that screwed up SS and Medicare, making it cost more? and that couldn't even run the Mustang Ranch long enough to recoup back taxes run the programs YOU think we should fund?

:rolleyes:

[shrek]

Actually, you're incorrect as others have pointed out... Reagan and Clinton did this... But let's make it easier for you to understand what it is Obama is doing... i'll cite a personal example.

A few years ago I had over 40 grand in credit card debt (bad personal habits led to that, i agree). Although, i did have 10K in the bank in cash. I took that 10K and *spent* it by buying stocks and investing in sound companies. That 10K grew to approx 70K in about 3 years. See what I'm saying? I INVESTED money i really didn't have and made it grow because of SOUND investments. I cashed out 100% from the market and after taxes I was able to pay off all my credit card debt and had a little left over to keep investing in the market. I no longer have any credit card debt.

So you see... if you take money you don't have and spend it (deficit spending) and spend it on something that will generate returns on that money (investing wisely) then in the end, you CAN pay off debt. Put this on a grander scale... if Obama spends on education to improve the system, there will be MORE people making MORE money to pay MORE in taxes and thus help pay down the debt he's creating. By investing in Health Care now (deficit spending), the amout of SAVINGS it has in the future more than outweighs the initial cost. To spend 500 billion now to save several trillion over a few years is SMART spending. Modernizing health care is an extremely good idea. Do i agree with ALL the spending Obama is planning on? NO, but i do agree with the principal and can see past the edge of my nose. Look down the road for the good of the country and not just the good of your political party.

Hopefully that helps put things in perspective.

You invested money. You did not spend it. There is a difference. How does use deficit spending on Healthcare and education = an investment?

How are either going to pay themselves back? Answer they cannot Where is the proof that spending money now will save the federal gov trillions more down the road?

Answer there is no proof. Healthcare nor Education caused this problem so how is spending healthcare and or education going to get us a return on the money spent?

One could possibly make the arguement that if you were going to use 2 Trillion to buy up every bad mortgage then when the market turns around they could sell those mortgages and could possibly make their money back.

But that is not what Obama is doing. Is it?????????

[itsrea]

God forbid we actually give our children better education. As for healthcare, it's been a long time coming. I run my own business along with having a full time job. You ever tried to get health insurance? A plan for a family a 4 will run you about $1,200 per month. So tackling healthcare is a great step forward for the country. I would say cutting out the middleman(health insurance companies) that are skimming 33% of health care costs would be a good thing
Stricken.<snip> Sounds to me like you don't know that insurance is a CONSTITUTIONALLY guaranteed STATE ISSUE, not a federal one.

In the second place the problem is a simple one if you would vote for people that would quit turning your tax dollar over to the Feds and keep it in state: that way the same people that barter for State Employees to have reasonably priced group plans could barter for private citizens to be enrolled in a reasonably priced private-citizen GROUP PLAN.

:rolleyes:

[shrek]

Uh....right now our country is a failed business. Anything done to improve it would be shoring up the problem.




God forbid we actually give our children better education. As for healthcare, it's been a long time coming. I run my own business along with having a full time job. You ever tried to get health insurance? A plan for a family a 4 will run you about $1,200 per month. So tackling healthcare is a great step forward for the country. I would say cutting out the middleman(health insurance companies) that are skimming 33% of health care costs would be a good thing.



So says you. You are entitled to your opinion.



Wow....I was unaware you had access to the meetings taking place at the Whitehouse. Surely you can prove there is no plan to repay this once it is over.

Stricken

Stricken,

Spending money on something that did not get us in this mess in the first place is not a best case scenerio for shoring up a failing business.

Niether healthcare nor Education got us into this mess. So he is not spending this money on cleaning up the mess but on social goals and agendas that he campaigned on.

I also own a business and work full time. I know full well of the costs of Insurance. But again how is spending deficit budget money on insurance going to start getting the feds back in the black?

And no I am not privy to white house meetings. But care to tell me what the plan is to pay it back? I mean if they have one, why keep it secret??????????

WOuldn't it be easier to run ads stating we have a plan to pay this 2 trillion in debt back instead of running ads saying its all Bush's Fault???????????????????

[shrek]

I sent yet another email to the RNC last night, every Republicans should call or send an email asking when the RNC is going to start fighting the lies, ask them why Republicans aren't in front of the camera everyday exposes the lies of Democrats.


Ballygirl,

I agree, Every Republican should indeed do that and keep doing it. And the RNC should start running ads countering.

But I do not see them doing that.

[itsrea]

Great! A real debate! I was thinking this site was just for spouting hatred against eachother's ideology! I'm glad we can talk... so here's my responses..

1) Yes, i risked my own money... but when you think about it, as much as i was in debt, I was really risking other people's money, but that's neither here nor there. Your point is taken. However, Obama was the one voted on by the majority of voters to be the CHIEF of spending the money we send to gov't. You don't have to like it, but that's our system. The majority votes in the president, and the president spends the tax revenue for various programs that our elected officials bring to the table and get passed in addition to earmarks thrown in there by EVERY SINGLE senator and representative. It's the way our system works and has worked for eons.

2) I did not just put myself in debt. I also put my family in debt. However, I put my family in debt knowing that if I invested wisely, I can pull my whole family OUT of debt so that we wouldn't have debt later. This is ultimately what happened. Obama is doing this for HIS family (The United States) now. He's spending money so that the INVESTMENTS he makes now will pay off later and will be paid off. In other words, over time, he's expecting that tax income and spending savings will be much higher if the things that are put into place now actually works.

3) Yes, what I did was legal. In addition, what the president is doing IS legal. The gov't does NOT own private industry. Nor is it competing with private industry. The gov't does not own any corporation. However, the gov't (the gov't is YOU and ME btw) does own the money that was given to the auto companies to keep them afloat. It is the duty of our elected officials to preserve that capital. If it's being spent unwisely, we (the gov't) have the duty to stop that from happening. If you believe the gov't owns GM, then how come there's no gov't employee running GM? You'll never see that happen because it CANNOT happen. We can have members on the board though since we are majority shareholders and it's perfectly legal for the gov't to buy SHARES in a company. In addition, the gov't has not set up any company to compete with our own private industry. It just doesn't happen. Can you cite an example of that?

Thanks in advance.If the President has no power over GM how come he was able to fire their CEO.. and then show me, please, where it says in the Constitution that the Executive Office has that kind of power....

You see, you STILL fail to address the issue of Constitutionally legal steps that either Congress or the White House CAN take.

The Feds do NOT have the right nor the Constitutional Power to step in and run these businesses and that is EXACTLY what they did when they handed my money over to them. It's EXACTLY what they did when they said hand over a working program in so many days or else...

Stabilize the economy, yes, by arranging for the businesses trouble to go into private receivership, by getting out of the loan guarantee business as in fannie and freddie, and by getting idiots like Franks off the committtees and replacing them with qualified people...

What they have done (and I include Bush in that) instead IS Constitutionally illegal. And it's NOT going to work... nobody in their right mind is going to buy a GM product so in three months when the money runs out AGAIN, the company will STILL be in trouble...

OR the company will be forced by the White House to mass produce alternative fuel vehicles that will put the White House's directives in direct conflict and competition with private industry such as ford and honda... which is Constitutionally illegal.

(And I might add, IMO, a step that is also a step towards failure because the Feds can't take over the loans already owned on current vehicles, can't force loan companies to forgive the loans, can't force me to purchase a alternate fueled vehicle, which would mean forcing me to make two payments, and has no place to PUT all the current vehicles anyway.)

Obama should have kept his word and changed politics-as-usual and instead he has put our government in jeopardy by putting them in a no-win-no-win situation.

[itsrea]

I sent yet another email to the RNC last night, every Republicans should call or send an email asking when the RNC is going to start fighting the lies, ask them why Republicans aren't in front of the camera everyday exposes the lies of Democrats.I'll send one too.

[itsrea]

Indeed, dems did put in pork.. as did republicans. Who put in more? No idea. I'm not saying that Dems are innocent, just that they could NOT derail the republicans for spending like drunken sailors. I'm telling you, i saw numerous floor "debates" where the dems showed EXACTLY what would happen via charts and graphs and other demonstrations and not ONE republican was swayed... then years later, what the dems said would happen HAPPENED. It's really that simple. BUT, as to earmarks. As Obama said, Earmarks make up such a SMALL percentage of the overall budget that it's really a straw man argument. The pork spending is NOT the cause of the budget being over inflated, but it is a very small part of it. The whole point of my response to croup is that the Dems were spending TOO,,, so the budgets, the legislation, the money the President ok'd being spent was spent by the Dems, TOO... your arguments won't move me off that point. It doesn't matter if the DEMS spent LESS.. my post was addressing the dishonesty of posting as if the Dems has spent none, as if ALL the spending was on the reps part.

BTW, McCain not submitting for "Pork" is not exactly accurate. He HAS requested quite a few bits of pork during his years in the gov't. However, once he thought about running for pres, he didn't ask for any.... know why? His COUNTERPART (the OTHER senator from Arizona) asked for all KINDS of pork.Did you look at the link?

One thing tho'... McCain actually did have requests for pork - although TINY by comparison to the other candidates. McCain in 2006 co-sponsored legislation that asked for $10-million for an academic center at the University of Arizona to honor the late Supreme Court chief justice William Rehnquist. In 2003, McCain won authorization to buy property to create a buffer zone around Luke Air Force Base in Arizona. In 1992, McCain asked the Environmental Protection Agency to provide $5-million toward a wastewater project in Nogales, Ariz.

Please note: I find nothing wrong with senators and representatives asking for "pork" for their districts. It goes to help the people of their district... tax paying folks. It's when it gets EXCESSIVE that I have a problem with it.there is a difference between a legal earmark, as in it is legal for the feds to even be involved in funding road repair in my state, and pork, which is my state asking your state to help pay for projects that are exclusively my state's responsibility and that my state doesn't have money for because it spends beyond it's means.

That you are ok with your state paying for my state's bad judgement in going over budget shows a horrendous lack of understanding of Constitutional directives.

Edited to add: That you don't understand that doesn't change that the Feds taking your state's money and handing it to my state for welfare, education, health care, etc is not Constitutional.

[shrek]

If the President has no power over GM how come he was able to fire their CEO.. and then show me, please, where it says in the Constitution that the Executive Office has that kind of power....

You see, you STILL fail to address the issue of Constitutionally legal steps that either Congress or the White House CAN take.

The Feds do NOT have the right nor the Constitutional Power to step in and run these businesses and that is EXACTLY what they did when they handed my money over to them. It's EXACTLY what they did when they said hand over a working program in so many days or else...


Itsrea,

Your points are dead on. If the Feds now do not own or control GM then how can Obama demand the CEO Step down? Or how can Obama Demand that GM and Chrysler end their relationship with NASCAR after this season??????????

The reality that Obama is acting like he is in control of the companies and your right that is in violation of the Constitution.

The other challenge with all of this is that Average Joe made the statement that he took $10,000 invested it and made enough to pay back his debt.

But how is spending money on education and healthcare an investment and how are either going to pay back the debt incurred????

The thing is if Obama were only spending money to buy off bad loans and then selling them later when the market improves he may make some of that money back.

But the reality is that even that is not allowable by the US constitution.

[itsrea]

You invested money. You did not spend it. There is a difference. How does use deficit spending on Healthcare and education = an investment?

How are either going to pay themselves back? Answer they cannot Where is the proof that spending money now will save the federal gov trillions more down the road?

Answer there is no proof. Healthcare nor Education caused this problem so how is spending healthcare and or education going to get us a return on the money spent?

One could possibly make the arguement that if you were going to use 2 Trillion to buy up every bad mortgage then when the market turns around they could sell those mortgages and could possibly make their money back.

But that is not what Obama is doing. Is it?????????the other point I should have made is that this man says he used his savings to get himself out of debt... that means he spent cash.

Obama is spending credit.

[shrek]

the other point I should have made is that this mansays he used his savings to get himself out of debt... that means he spent cash.

Obama is spending credit.

Also a very good point. It would be one thing if Obama said we have to spend X to buy all these bad mortgages, but we will cut spending in these other areas to compensate.

However just the opposite is true. He spending credit on things that have no way of ever paying the US gov back and he is not cutting spending.

[itsrea]

Itsrea,

Your points are dead on. If the Feds now do not own or control GM then how can Obama demand the CEO Step down? Or how can Obama Demand that GM and Chrysler end their relationship with NASCAR after this season??????????

The reality that Obama is acting like he is in control of the companies and your right that is in violation of the Constitution.

The other challenge with all of this is that Average Joe made the statement that he took $10,000 invested it and made enough to pay back his debt.

But how is spending money on education and healthcare an investment and how are either going to pay back the debt incurred????

The thing is if Obama were only spending money to buy off bad loans and then selling them later when the market improves he may make some of that money back.

But the reality is that even that is not allowable by the US constitution.I agree... and it's my understanding the money that is in the budget for health care is not even going to be spent on health care, yet.. the news said the President said it is a DOWNPAYMENT on getting health care started... in other words no health care for that small group of 40,000 people, yet.

[homiebrah]

Also a very good point. It would be one thing if Obama said we have to spend X to buy all these bad mortgages, but we will cut spending in these other areas to compensate.

However just the opposite is true. He spending credit on things that have no way of ever paying the US gov back and he is not cutting spending.
We blew our credit long ago. It wouldn't surprise me if it got to the point where we needed to show $1 worth of gold when showing a $1 bill.

[shrek]

I agree... and it's my understanding the money that is in the budget for health care is not even going to be spent on health care, yet.. the news said the President said it is a DOWNPAYMENT on getting health care started... in other words no health care for that small group of 40,000 people, yet.


Good point, I had heard that myself. We are spending Billions and it is only a down payment.

LOL that is like putting the downpayment for your house on a Credit card and having to start making payments on that credit card before you even move into the house.

It is ill advised at best. Stupid at worst.

[shrek]

We blew our credit long ago. It wouldn't surprise me if it got to the point where we needed to show $1 worth of gold when showing a $1 bill.

I know this is really beginning to get scary.

[itsrea]

Good point, I had heard that myself. We are spending Billions and it is only a down payment.

LOL that is like putting the downpayment for your house on a Credit card and having to start making payments on that credit card before you even move into the house.

It is ill advised at best. Stupid at worst.Did you get the part about 40,000 people? Polkfan is the one who gave me that number (as an estimate)... he contends that national health care won't cover everyone.. it's simply for the 40,000 (more or less) people between welfare and private insurance who will be covered... that means the guy who claims to be paying $1000 a month premium is not going to be eligible for it, and me (with my managed medicare) won't be either... but both HIS and MY tax dollar will be used to pay for it.

:rolleyes:

[shrek]

Yes, i spent my "savings" to get myself out of debt and yes, that savings was in cash. But i owed well more than my savings so therefore, the "cash" i had wasn't really MY cash and instead was "credit." The gov't has CASH too... LOTS of it. The problem is, the gov't has a very big credit card and owes more than it has in cash.

I'm glad my personal situation has received discussion as discussion is all I was aiming for.

Have a nice day.

Just because you had more debt than savings does not mean the cash on hand was really credit.

You had cash on hand. And you invested it in something that could and did earn you money back.

The reality is that Paying for Education and Healthcare is never going to provide a return investment.

If he had bought the bad bank notes with a promise of selling them when the market improves then that may actually pay the US taxpayers back.

But paying for education and healthcare will not. Plain and simple.

And yes the gov has lots of cash. But they are not spending the cash on education and healthcare. They are using credit.

And they are not going to get a return.

Both are rather stupid on the face of it and prove that you cannot spend your way out of debt.

[itsrea]

Yes, i spent my "savings" to get myself out of debt and yes, that savings was in cash. But i owed well more than my savings so therefore, the "cash" i had wasn't really MY cash and instead was "credit." The gov't has CASH too... LOTS of it. The problem is, the gov't has a very big credit card and owes more than it has in cash.

I'm glad my personal situation has received discussion as discussion is all I was aiming for.

Have a nice day.We're not 'discussing' your personal situation - we're rejecting it as not a valid talking/debating point because your stated talking point is not the same situation as the government and us tax payers are in now that Obama is buying up companies and giving away money for non-stimulus projects.

But, hey? Don't run away now... you still haven't honestly addressed the Constitutionality of Obama and his Congress' actions.

[shrek]

Did you get the part about 40,000 people? Polkfan is the one who gave me that number (as an estimate)... he contends that national health care won't cover everyone.. it's simply for the 40,000 (more or less) people between welfare and private insurance who will be covered... that means the guy who claims to be paying $1000 a month premium is not going to be eligible for it, and me (with my managed medicare) won't be either... but both HIS and MY tax dollar will be used to pay for it.

:rolleyes:

I got it but had thought it was a misprint for 40 Million. Apparently it was not.

So in other words we are going billions further in debt for 40,000. LOL what a joke.

[itsrea]

I got it but had thought it was a misprint for 40 Million. Apparently it was not.

So in other words we are going billions further in debt for 40,000. LOL what a joke.Polk told me there are a lot of different figures, but the closest estimate was the 40,000 - I don't know for sure that the figure is accurate - just that the estimate seems to be that only SOME of us are going to be eligible for a health care program touted at a national health care program, insinuating that EVERYONE is going to be eligible... and that everyone will be paying for.

Why am I in the least surprised by a Obama lie?

[shrek]

Polk told me there are a lot of different figures, but the closest estimate was the 40,000 - I don't know for sure that the figure is accurate - just that the estimate seems to be that only SOME of us are going to be eligible for a health care program touted at a national health care program, insinuating that EVERYONE is going to be eligible... and that everyone will be paying for.

Why am I in the least surprised by a Obama lie?

LOL Obama lies so much I would be amazed if he can even keep the lies straight.

Let me guess, that is why he needed his blackberry so bad.

[dittoheadAZ]

For the Past few days there has been a commercial running here locally in Phx.

It says for 8 years Bush ran down the US Economy underfunding education and healthcare and then his house of cards came tumbling down.

It then says Obama needs our help to get his budget passed so he can fix Bushes mess.

It urges Americans to call their congressmen and urge them to pass the budget. For the good of America.

It then ends stating the ad was paid for by the DNC.

THe funny thing is that the add fails to state the truth. Obama wants to draw us even further in debt. That is not fixing Bush's mess but just changing what the mess is paying for.

I called my Congressmen and told them not to vote for it. And I urge any one here to do the same.

Now do any liberals on these boards have the guts to come here and defend this commercial by the DNC????????????

KFYI has been taking some heat for running the George-Soros-produced ad.

While it's not going to convince anyone (since the KFYI listeners are the most intellectual in the country, as opposed to say the old KTAR), it still turns my stomach, so I immediately flip to the sports station. Sometimes I forget to change back... so I don't get to hear KFYI's other advertisers.

It's a free market, but a bad decision.

[shrek]

KFYI has been taking some heat for running the George-Soros-produced ad.

While it's not going to convince anyone (since the KFYI listeners are the most intellectual in the country, as opposed to say the old KTAR), it still turns my stomach, so I immediately flip to the sports station. Sometimes I forget to change back... so I don't get to hear KFYI's other advertisers.

It's a free market, but a bad decision.

Hate to say it, but this is a down economy and I am gessing ad revenue for KFYIis down as well. So if Soros is willing to pay they can and should take it.

I do not change the channel when the commercials come on TV. I just laugh at the blatant lies.

[cbc]

Do you think one of the reason that the Republicans don't get a very good conservative message out because it is hard to take them seriously when they claim we should cut spending, being that while in control they actually increased spending to record levels?

In case you missed it, record has been broken.

[shrek]

In case you missed it, record has been broken.

:)) Very good point. I do love the hypocracy when people knock the Republicans for out of control spending, all the while the Dems have out spent the Republicans by Trillions in deficit spending.