 Steve B
join:2004-08-02
Seattle, WA | Enough Already Can't the judge just say enough is enough with stalling, hand them over and deny any future stalling tactics on this? | |
|  | 
nodifference
@qwest.net
| Re: Enough Already said by Steve B  :Can't the judge just say enough is enough with stalling, hand them over and deny any future stalling tactics on this? Basically, he just did. Now we get to see whether Obama thinks he's above the law as Bush/Cheney and Nixon did. My money is on yes. | |
| 
Harddrive
Premium
join:2000-09-20
Norwich, CT
| Obama = Bush? its the same old Government, just with a different look.
Remember the campaign trail? what did he say?
Yes We Can.
sad to see its changed to...
No We Won't.
Wake up America. Even the CEO of the USA is getting 'something' from the Telcos.
I love my Country, but i hate my Government. | |
| apollo80
join:2002-01-31
Richmond, VA | Not surprised Meet the new boss, same as the old boss. | |
| | 
knightmb
Everybody Lies
join:2003-12-01
Franklin, TN
 ·AT&T DSL Service
| Re: Not surprised said by apollo80 :Meet the new boss, same as the old boss. LOL, it's no surprise to me. Did anyone really think that 8 years of Bush could be undone in less than a year, less than 2 years? Plug-in McCain for Obama and you would have the same result, but in the opposite direction.
It always cracks me up that those that voted against Obama in the last election have higher (sometimes unrealistic) expectations than the very people that did vote for him. Good thing we have online forums such as this to vent out people's feelings. 
--
Fight Insight Ready (Was NebuAD) and the like:
Click Here to pollute their data | |
| | | 
Time
Premium
join:2003-07-05
 ·Dish Network
 ·Cox HSI
·Embarq
| Re: Not surprised said by knightmb :said by apollo80 :Meet the new boss, same as the old boss. LOL, it's no surprise to me. Did anyone really think that 8 years of Bush could be undone in less than a year, less than 2 years? Plug-in McCain for Obama and you would have the same result, but in the opposite direction. It always cracks me up that those that voted against Obama in the last election have higher (sometimes unrealistic) expectations than the very people that did vote for him. Good thing we have online forums such as this to vent out people's feelings. PST - Bush is long gone, this is your saviors time now. You can only blame the previous administration for so long. "It always cracks me up" how those who voted for Obama still pull the Bush card. You'll likely be doing that 3 1/2 years down the road when the elections come up again.
--
"If it can't be done with brains, it can't be done with hours" - Clarence "Kelly" Johnson | |
| | | | 
Van
Premium
join:2009-07-08
Washington, DC
·Cox HSI
·Comcast
| Re: Not surprised It's funny you say that because Republicans still are crying about Bill Clinton to this day.
Couldn't go a week in the last 8 years without a bashing Clinton, blaming Clinton, crying about Clinton article or TV segment on FakeNews.
Yet not even a year into Obama's term....and they want us to stop even remotely talking about George Bush.
It's like....huh? | |
| | | | | 
Rob
In Deo speramus, God Bless the USA
Premium
join:2001-08-25
Kendall, FL
·Comcast
| Re: Not surprised said by Van :It's funny you say that because Republicans still are crying about Bill Clinton to this day. Couldn't go a week in the last 8 years without a bashing Clinton, blaming Clinton, crying about Clinton article or TV segment on FakeNews. Yet not even a year into Obama's term....and they want us to stop even remotely talking about George Bush. It's like....huh? What happened, happened. We can't change it, so there's no point in getting upset over it.
When Bush was in office, the Democrats always said "Bush is in office, not Clinton, so stop bringing up what Clinton did", yet the Democrats continue to bring up Bush.
It'll be like this forever - both sides will never stop.
--
CheckSite.us | YourIP.us | Reverseip.us | |
| | | | | |
Van
Premium
join:2009-07-08
Washington, DC
·Cox HSI
·Comcast
| Re: Not surprised I agree. So why would one side tell the other to stop bringing the other up? No matter who is in office, the minute something bad happens, the previous admin will be blamed by the new ones fans.
Clinton was blamed for everything under the sun that went down during Bush's terrible 2 terms. Bush will be blamed for everything under the sun that goes down during Obama's....well, we will see what his term or terms bring. | |
| | | | | | |
Rob
In Deo speramus, God Bless the USA
Premium
join:2001-08-25
Kendall, FL
·Comcast
| Re: Not surprised said by Van :I agree. So why would one side tell the other to stop bringing the other up? No matter who is in office, the minute something bad happens, the previous admin will be blamed by the new ones fans. Clinton was blamed for everything under the sun that went down during Bush's terrible 2 terms. Bush will be blamed for everything under the sun that goes down during Obama's....well, we will see what his term or terms bring. I just feel bad for the very last person who will be President of the U.S. - he'll get blamed for everything! 
--
CheckSite.us | YourIP.us | Reverseip.us | |
| | | | | | | | ross
join:2000-08-16 | Re: Not surprised The LAST president will no doubt have earned the title, and be blamed befittingly for ending our system of government. | |
| | | | |
Time
Premium
join:2003-07-05
·Dish Network
·Cox HSI
·Embarq
1 edit | said by Van :It's funny you say that because Republicans still are crying about Bill Clinton to this day. Couldn't go a week in the last 8 years without a bashing Clinton, blaming Clinton, crying about Clinton article or TV segment on FakeNews. Yet not even a year into Obama's term....and they want us to stop even remotely talking about George Bush. It's like....huh? Except for the fact that I'm not a Republican, and I don't like Republicans, so I really could care less what that party does. I've no clue what they are blaming Clinton for, but it is probably moronic.
I'm just pointing out the fact that you can only blame Bush and his Administration for so long, and it's past that time. You have to start taking responsibility for whom you elected, and he has to start taking responsibility for his actions/administration's actions and the very obvious lies throughout the campaign. I hate saying "I told you so", but anyone who bought that "CHANGE WE CAN BELIEVE IN" garbage deserves it. All politicians are the same crooks with different letters by their names.
Frankly, the whole "FauxNews" and "FakeNews" thing isn't really surprising. Fox News is just as biased as MSNBC, Matthews is to O'Reilly, as Hannity is to Olbermann, as Beck is to Maddow. They're both the same, just on different sides of the political spectrum, so I hope for your sake that you don't view MSNBC as a "real" source of news while criticizing "FauxNews".
--
"If it can't be done with brains, it can't be done with hours" - Clarence "Kelly" Johnson | |
| | | | | |
Van
Premium
join:2009-07-08
Washington, DC
·Cox HSI
·Comcast
| Re: Not surprised He has not even been President for 1 freakin year. Let me repeat that....not 1 freakin year.
The fact that some are already calling him a failure, etc....shows they have motives that reach far behind what he actually does.
It's comical....2 years in? Sure....not even 1 year? Could people show their bias any more?
I DID NOT EVEN VOTE FOR THE DAMN MAN | |
| | | | | | | lesopp
join:2001-06-27
Land O Lakes, FL | Re: Not surprised Appearantly that was long enough to surpass Bush's deficiet by a factor of three.
And he did it in less than 1 freakin year. Let me repeat that....in less than 1 freakin year. | |
| | | | | | |
Time
Premium
join:2003-07-05
·Dish Network
·Cox HSI
·Embarq
| said by Van :He has not even been President for 1 freakin year. Let me repeat that....not 1 freakin year. The fact that some are already calling him a failure, etc....shows they have motives that reach far behind what he actually does. It's comical....2 years in? Sure....not even 1 year? Could people show their bias any more? I DID NOT EVEN VOTE FOR THE DAMN MAN 1. You rush to the defense of a man you didn't vote for.
2. You criticize "FauxNews" every chance you can in this thread.
Do you really expect anyone to buy that you didn't vote for this guy?
It doesn't matter if it hasn't been one year yet, we were promised change and transparency, and none of that has happened. Actually, I should say that we weren't promised anything, those who chose to "VOTE FOR CHANGE" were, thus they are the ones that are actually being shafted. He's no different than Bush & Co., sorry to say. As the saying goes; same shit, different day.
--
"If it can't be done with brains, it can't be done with hours" - Clarence "Kelly" Johnson | |
| | | | | | | |
Van
Premium
join:2009-07-08
Washington, DC
·Cox HSI
·Comcast
| Re: Not surprised 1. I rush to fight stupidity.
2. Well no, I mocked them 3 times in this thread. Is that the best people have now? 3 times = Vote for Obama? Pass on the book detailing the exact number of times needed.
As for me not voting for Obama, I didn't. I wouldn't have the slightest problem saying otherwise. The fact that you are stuck on it tells me you have nothing else to say. It's a common attack online when people are faced with their idiotic arguments.
Again, you want to cry about Obama after less than 1 year tells me you have little to no actual interest in anything he has to do. You are the type who gets to work (if you work) and first thing first goes to some extreme blog and finds the bashing article of the day. You read how much Obama sucks and think to yourself, "Yea, that will teach him"
It's sad, It's pathetic, and it's why so many people are running away from both parties. | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 
amigo_boy
join:2005-07-22
Tempe, AZ
·Cox HSI
 ·magicjack.com
2 edits | Re: Not surprised said by Time :He will be a one term President - just like Jimmy Carter. Depends on who Rs run against him. Remember how bad Clinton looked after Whitewater, Monica, cigars, etc? And the Rs ran Dole? And Clinton won? (OMG!).
Right now, extremist Rs are hoping for a "Republican Revolution" revival in the 2010 mid-term elections. They're threatening moderate Rs, etc. I don't think they have the popular support for that kind of political overreaction.
Clinton was elected to his first term with 38% of the vote (thanks to Perot). He (and Democrats generally) governed like they received a huge mandate. Obama received a relative landslide compared to Clinton (especially when you consider the electoral college), yet he's been profusely timid compared to Clinton's first two years. He's continued Bush's spending programs. He's alienating those who believed he was really going to do something different. That the election was a "referendum."
So, I don't see a "Republican Revolution" in the near future. Rs will probably run a moderate like they did in the last election. In that case, liberals still win because it will demonstrate (like the last election) that the population is more moderate than Radical (irrational) Republicans (teabaggers, etc.).
Mark | |
| | | | | | | | | | vinnie97
join:2003-12-05
Mesquite, TX | Re: Not surprised Teabaggers are only irrational to someone who is fiscally blind.
And continued Bush's spending programs? C'mon, he's expanded them tendfold and then some. | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | matrix3D
join:2006-09-27
Deep River, CT
1 edit | Re: Not surprised So now going into Afghanistan to get rid of the Taliban and al-Qaida was a BAD idea? Please explain.
And maybe you're the one too stupid to form your own opinion. Why should it take more than a year to provide the "government transparency" that was a cornerstone for your entire f***ing campaign?
EDIT: And please clue us in to ONE SINGLE THING that Obama has crossed off his to-do list? You act like a year is no time at all... bullshit. He should have been able to get SOMETHING done in a year. Either that, or he's just going to milk everything for the next three years, acting like he's doing something, and then when re-election time comes he'll pull the same old "there's more work to do" line that every President does. | |
| | | | | | | | | |
Time
Premium
join:2003-07-05
1 edit | Re: Not surprised Upon reflection, I do not wish to post. Take me back! | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Van
Premium
join:2009-07-08
Washington, DC
·Cox HSI
·Comcast
1 edit | Re: Not surprised said by Time :Meanwhile, he's parading around like some King from the new world. In your eyes, I am sure he is....it must be painful for you to see him as our President. Got to find something new to mock him about....now it has just gotten to the point of hating him because of how he walks around....brilliant.
You certainly don't give a shit because it has no effect on you. Judging by the amount of money it takes to fund the operations, it seems to effect us all. But, I know what you are getting at with the "You aren't in the military so you don't care"....excuse me while I roll my eyes. You can play up that card all you want, you have not the SLIGHTEST clue who I am, where I have been, or what I have done. Unlike you, I don't flaunt my card at every chance I get. That's the difference between us.
YOU are the reason that this country is going down the toilet. Right, well while I give someone a chance to prove his worth, have fun crying like a girl at every chance you get. Seems to be a staple of your type. | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 
Eat Me
join:2002-09-25
Sussex, NJ
·PenTeleData
·Future Nine Corpor..
·VOIPo
·Vonage
| said by Van :He has not even been President for 1 freakin year. Let me repeat that....not 1 freakin year. The fact that some are already calling him a failure, etc....shows they have motives that reach far behind what he actually does. It's comical....2 years in? Sure....not even 1 year? Could people show their bias any more? I DID NOT EVEN VOTE FOR THE DAMN MAN The left blamed Bush for 9/11 despite it happening 8 months into his Presidency, and called him a failure all throughout the 8 years of his Presidency.
If the shoe fits, wear it. | |
| | | | | | | |
Van
Premium
join:2009-07-08
Washington, DC | Re: Not surprised People called him a failure throughout his 8 years because he failed at everything he did. | |
| | | | | | 
Neyland
join:2003-02-04
USA | Personally I find Beck more libertarian. | |
| | | | | | | 
sporkme
drop the crantini and move it, sister
Premium,MVM
join:2000-07-01
Morristown, NJ
·Optimum Online
| Re: Not surprised said by Neyland :Personally I find Beck more libertarian. Sure, if libertarian = rapid-cycling bipolar.
--
with every mistake we must surely be learning | |
| | | | | | | |
amigo_boy
join:2005-07-22
Tempe, AZ
·Cox HSI
·magicjack.com
| Re: Not surprised said by sporkme :said by Neyland :Personally I find Beck more libertarian. Sure, if libertarian = rapid-cycling bipolar. Beck probably leans small-L libertarian. I'm sure if pinned down on consistent application of his principle-based rhetoric, he'd squirm and begin talking about how big-L Libertarians are irrelevant. (That's how it always works.).
I remember in the mid- to late-'90s after the so-called "Republican Revolution" began to fade due to public backlash, Limbaugh began backbeddling from his libertarian positions. His audience felt betrayed by Rs who they felt had been elected with a huge mandate, and were now "caving." They were increasingly discontent with Limbaugh not speaking out. They were talking in modern "teabagger" terms, and Limbaugh wasn't joining in.
I'll never forget the night that Limbaugh (on his TV show) drew the line in the sand, and went through his "kook test." He began, "you're a kook if you believe...." There were 10-12 things, each describing the people who had taken his small-l libertarianism seriously over the past 3-4 years.
His audience sat in awkward silence. Forced to decide if they were Limbaugh fans, or ideologues.
I forget what the "kook" definitions were. I recall one was "if you believe the UN is part of a one-world conspiracy, you're a kook."
It was really something to see. It whipped his audience in line. Let them know where they needed to be in order to be "good Rs." Gone was a large dose of principle-ladden rhetoric.
I think the difference between Beck and Limbaugh is that Beck hasn't been forced (yet) to define himself like that.
Mark | |
| | | | | | | | ross
join:2000-08-16
·Digizip
2 edits | said by sporkme: Sure, if libertarian = rapid-cycling bipolar.
You nailed it! | |
| | | | | | | | | 
Noah Vail
Premium
join:2004-12-10
Lorton, VA | Re: Not surprised Look who has a cute little star.
YOU do!
NV | |
| | | | | | lesopp
join:2001-06-27
Land O Lakes, FL | Do you really expect a community organizer or his lemmings to take responsibility? | |
| | | | | 
NOVA_Guy
Obama- Commander in Thief
Premium
join:2002-03-05
·VOIPo
| There's one big difference between Bush and Clinton: Bush went after Bin Laden. Clinton had the chance to kill him, and let him get away.
As far as I'm concerned, some of the blood that was shed on 9/11 is on Clinton's hands.
--
Nobel peace prize for Obammer... Now he's got one more thing in common with Arafat besides hating America. And he's just as succesful as Jimmy "the failure" Carter. | |
| | | | | |
Van
Premium
join:2009-07-08
Washington, DC
·Cox HSI
·Comcast
| Re: Not surprised Clinton went after him...and failed
Much like Bush
People want to give Bush credit for "trying" which is odd to me as a more calculated approach to Iraq's situation may have in fact netted Bin Laden
Instead, we went in guns blazing and screwed it all up from the start. | |
| | | | | | |
NOVA_Guy
Obama- Commander in Thief
Premium
join:2002-03-05
·VOIPo
| Re: Not surprised What I recall most is Clinton electing to not expend significant resources going after him after he tried to bring down the WTC the first time. We knew where he was, and could have killed him much quicker and easier than now.
But Clinton didn't have the balls to deal with him in that manner, much like Carter couldn't deal with hostage takers. So far it seems like Obama is shaping up to be from the same mold-- he seems to care more about getting the world to like us than doing the tasks of a man charged with acting in the best interests of the United States. We don't need to win popularity contests among the nations of the world, and we shouldn't have a president who acts as though we do.
--
Nobel peace prize for Obammer... Now he's got one more thing in common with Arafat besides hating America. And he's just as succesful as Jimmy "the failure" Carter. | |
| | | | | | 
neowulf
join:2000-10-20
Port Orange, FL
| Bush had the chance to go after him too, he received a memo prior to the attacks warning him about impending attacks by terrorist organizations, he chose to do nothing before the attacks as with Clinton, neither of them was any better at dealing with Bin Laden. Bush also had a second chance at Bin Laden in Afghanistan, he gave up to go after Iraq because Iraq was no longer going to use the US dollar for oil trading. The whole use of that Iraq supports terrorist, and them having weapons of mass destruction was found out to be a farce put on by the Bush administration. Even if it was true, well we have known for years that Saudi Arabia does support terrorist activities, almost every person who took part on the attacks on 9/11 on the planes held Saudi citizenship, but we don't do anything there. I wonder why, maybe because they still accept the US dollar for oil trading?
Hey look Iran started talking about scrapping the dollar in favor of the Euro and Yen about two years ago, hmmm about the same time the whole Iran has weapons of mass destruction stories started to pop up in the news, coincidence? I think in that case Americans took to the Bush notion of, "Fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again." | |
| | | | | | |
amigo_boy
join:2005-07-22
Tempe, AZ
·Cox HSI
·magicjack.com
| Re: Not surprised said by neowulf :Bush had the chance to go after him too, ... I always find it amusing when Clinton opponents claim that Clinton is the cause of 9/11 because it was obvious what Bin Laden was plotting, and Clinton didn't give it sufficient priority.
President Bush had nine months. What did he do? If it was supposed to be so obvious, why didn't he make it his singular priority?
Mark | |
| | | |
knightmb
Everybody Lies
join:2003-12-01
Franklin, TN
·AT&T DSL Service
| said by Time :said by knightmb :said by apollo80 :Meet the new boss, same as the old boss. LOL, it's no surprise to me. Did anyone really think that 8 years of Bush could be undone in less than a year, less than 2 years? Plug-in McCain for Obama and you would have the same result, but in the opposite direction. It always cracks me up that those that voted against Obama in the last election have higher (sometimes unrealistic) expectations than the very people that did vote for him. Good thing we have online forums such as this to vent out people's feelings. PST - Bush is long gone, this is your saviors time now. You can only blame the previous administration for so long. "It always cracks me up" how those who voted for Obama still pull the Bush card. You'll likely be doing that 3 1/2 years down the road when the elections come up again. If Obama was the only member of the Executive Branch of our government, then I would agree. There is no Bush card, there is only people that are still sore about the election results and anything that goes on within the "US Government" which is made up of us, the people living here, not "just" Obama; turns into another conspiracy theory of how one man is doing the job of thousands.
Newsflash, he doesn't/can't/won't do every thing. If the story had some details about how Obama called up the Judge and gave an order to 'Delay Everything'; this might carry a teaspoon of water in an argument.
Obama might sit at the top of the Executive Pyramid, but he sure doesn't micro-manage every single person or issue that takes place within that part of the US Government.
To claim otherwise shows a great lack of understanding for how our government works. So yes, I will continue to laugh at how naive people are with the comments they post. No one thinks of Obama as the savior or messiah; that was just all Republican spin from the last election. Not including the loonies anyway.
Carry on though, the comments are hilarious. It's good to poke fun at your leader, keeps them grounded so all of those 'Obama Worshippers' out there will finally realize that he isn't a deity like the nice man in the red hat shirt told last year.
--
Fight Insight Ready (Was NebuAD) and the like:
Click Here to pollute their data | |
| | | | | jimness000
join:2005-03-28
West Chicago, IL
| Re: Not surprised
"No one thinks of Obama as the savior or messiah"
You must have missed the rally at Grant Park in Chicago on election night. The tears, the ecstatic smiles, the hugs.
People DID think he was the messiah, and thought they'd been saved. Hallelujah!
Reality is setting in. Nobody can turn this ship quickly, there is just too much inertia. It takes a lot of effort, with people working together. Are there enough to make a difference?
I think he had good intentions, and willingly accepted the adoration and unrealistic expectations, but now's the time his hair will turn completely gray, trying to balance all of the energies.
Anyone with a long-term perspective realized that the political pendulum had swung to the extreme left with tax-and-spend about to occur. And, here we are. The pendulum will swing back the other way in a few years, and we can fight about that when it happens. | |
| | | | | |
amigo_boy
join:2005-07-22
Tempe, AZ
·Cox HSI
·magicjack.com
| Re: Not surprised said by jimness000 :You must have missed the rally at Grant Park in Chicago on election night. The tears, the ecstatic smiles, the hugs. C'mon. That was a reaction to the national milestone of electing a Black president. They didn't believe he was going to walk on water, or heal the lame.
People cried when civil rights legislation passed in the '60s (or slavery was abolished in the 1860s). They didn't believe Congress was the Messiah.
Mark | |
| | | |
neowulf
join:2000-10-20
Port Orange, FL
| Huh, really? Like throughout Bush's term not one republican blamed everything on Clinton? I mean 9/11 was all Clinton's fault I thought because Bush had only been in office such a short time that there was no way he was able to read memos put on his desk warning him about impending attacks against the US by terrorist groups? In fact wasn't Bush on vacation 90% of the time before 9/11? Obama goes on a weekend break with the family and that is huge news.
Heck republicans still preach about their savior Regan. The very President who laid out the ground work for economic collapse. Reaganomics the very notion of removing regulations and removing corporate taxes, it maybe a great idea in theory, but only if greed wasn't a motivating factor in corporate America.
I have no great love for Obama going back on what he campaigned for as a open government and transparency. This is going to hurt him bad in the next election as even many who believed in him will have trouble distinguishing him from policies made during the Bush administration that now that he as President is not willing to let go.
Then again I do not like two party systems at all, too much room for corruption, too much room for back room deals. Just the whole notion of a two party system plays out as they can just always blame the other side, while actually never doing or accomplishing much of anything. It's always the other party that is to blame.
As they say, how can you trust a senator who will spend 10's of millions running for a seat that pays $174k a year. Politicians spend more time in office looking for money for their next campaign rather then actually doing the job they were elected to do.
I guess I am just tired of watching politics ruin this country, all in the name of a buck, which is losing value every day. | |
| | | | |
Neyland
join:2003-02-04
USA
| Re: Not surprised said by neowulf :I guess I am just tired of watching politics ruin this country, all in the name of a buck, which is losing value every day. The current debt.. that I will place at Obama's feet. (I'll kick some to Bush since he did the first bailout too). | |
| | | | | |
amigo_boy
join:2005-07-22
Tempe, AZ
·Cox HSI
·magicjack.com
| Re: Not surprised said by Neyland :said by neowulf :I guess I am just tired of watching politics ruin this country, all in the name of a buck, which is losing value every day. The current debt.. that I will place at Obama's feet. (I'll kick some to Bush since he did the first bailout too). Some? See this article: »www.nytimes.com/2009/06/10/busin···tml?_r=1
Also see the sidebar graphic which depicts Clinton's, Bush's and Obama's contributions: »www.nytimes.com/interactive/2009···hic.html
What I think is funny is how Conservatives portray President Obama as too liberal. But, when he merely continued President Bush's stimulus, bailout and war spending, he's suddenly responsible for the current debt, and Bush only responsible for "some."
Mark | |
| | | | | | |
Neyland
join:2003-02-04
USA
| Re: Not surprised said by amigo_boy :said by Neyland :said by neowulf :I guess I am just tired of watching politics ruin this country, all in the name of a buck, which is losing value every day. The current debt.. that I will place at Obama's feet. (I'll kick some to Bush since he did the first bailout too). Some? See this article: » www.nytimes.com/2009/06/10/busin···tml?_r=1Also see the sidebar graphic which depicts Clinton's, Bush's and Obama's contributions: » www.nytimes.com/interactive/2009···hic.htmlWhat I think is funny is how Conservatives portray President Obama as too liberal. But, when he merely continued President Bush's stimulus, bailout and war spending, he's suddenly responsible for the current debt, and Bush only responsible for "some." Mark Bush was a free spender himself there's no doubt, but Obama took Bush's lead and added some juice. We're looking at a deficit not equaled since World War II.
I'm wondering, with the devaluation of the dollar oversees, the current debt and running deficits... how are we planning on fixing Social Security... you know that elephant's still in the room.
Obama needs to reverse the spending spree, not pile on. | |
| | | | | | | |
amigo_boy
join:2005-07-22
Tempe, AZ
·Cox HSI
·magicjack.com
1 edit | Re: Not surprised said by Neyland :We're looking at a deficit not equaled since World War II. We're looking at an economic collapse not equaled since the Depression, which generated the deficit going into WWII.
said by Neyland :I'm wondering, with the devaluation of the dollar oversees, the current debt and running deficits... how are we planning on fixing Social Security... you know that elephant's still in the room. Obama needs to reverse the spending spree, not pile on. The drop in the dollar's value (relative to foreign currencies) reduces the import deficit and helps US industry by making US products more affordable to other countries.
Other countries are contemplating intervention in their currencies to reduce this effect. They're looking at devaluing their own currencies to preserve their own export markets.
Re Soc. Sec. That's a two-edged sword. An incentive exists to stimulate the economy and get more workers paying taxes. The alternative to running up a debt (in the process of stimulating) isn't that good either.
Mark | |
| | | | 
doc69
Premium
join:2004-08-01
USA
·Insight Communicat..
·Comcast
| said by Time :said by knightmb :said by apollo80 :Meet the new boss, same as the old boss. LOL, it's no surprise to me. Did anyone really think that 8 years of Bush could be undone in less than a year, less than 2 years? Plug-in McCain for Obama and you would have the same result, but in the opposite direction. It always cracks me up that those that voted against Obama in the last election have higher (sometimes unrealistic) expectations than the very people that did vote for him. Good thing we have online forums such as this to vent out people's feelings. PST - Bush is long gone, this is your saviors time now. You can only blame the previous administration for so long. "It always cracks me up" how those who voted for Obama still pull the Bush card. You'll likely be doing that 3 1/2 years down the road when the elections come up again. It will be a lot longer that 3 or 4 years to ever undue the shit that bush & cheney dumped on this country. And no obama is not the savior of this country. But bush is gone so we can work our way up from the bottom now. It will be 2 or 3 presidents before his mess even starts to look like it's going away. Right now i feel sorry for this country. These idiots are fighting with each other over bullshit to see who looks good when they come out on the other side.
Just do what is needed to get this country back on its feet & move on. Then we can lock these assholes in a room & let them fight it out amongst themselves.
--
I'll keep my God, my freedom, my guns, and my money. You can keep "THE CHANGE." | |
| | |
NOVA_Guy
Obama- Commander in Thief
Premium
join:2002-03-05
·VOIPo
| said by knightmb :LOL, it's no surprise to me. Did anyone really think that 8 years of Bush could be undone in less than a year, less than 2 years? According to The Almighty One, it could. Or has everybody forgotten about the "promises" he made on the campaign trail about transparency, accountability, and responsibility?
What have we gotten? I doubt I need to go into details, as it's all been said in various places before.
said by knightmb :Plug-in McCain for Obama and you would have the same result I pretty much agree with this. McCain has since proven that he's a RINO (Republican in Name Only) by caving in and supporting Obama instead of standing up for what is right and leading the charge against ideas that threaten the democracy and unity of this nation.
said by knightmb :It always cracks me up that those that voted against Obama in the last election have higher (sometimes unrealistic) expectations than the very people that did vote for him. Hmm... I'm not sure about this, at least in my case. Due to various things (lack of experience, selection of advisers, foreign policy missteps, etc.) I've expected him to fail. So far it seems like we have Jimmy Carter Junior in office, so he's pretty much lived down to my expectations.
--
Nobel peace prize for Obammer... Now he's got one more thing in common with Arafat besides hating America. And he's just as succesful as Jimmy "the failure" Carter. | |
| | | lesopp
join:2001-06-27
Land O Lakes, FL | Its no longer about the previous moron, it about the current moron. | |
| | |
Noah Vail
Premium
join:2004-12-10
Lorton, VA
·RoadRunner Cable
| said by knightmb :LOL, it's no surprise to me. Did anyone really think that 8 years of Bush could be undone in less than a year, less than 2 years? EFF:The FoIA says we're entitled, under federal law, to see telco lobbying documents. May we have them please?
O'Bama:NO!
So, where was the Bush involvement in that little drama?
said by knightmb :Plug-in McCain for Obama and you would have the same result, but in the opposite direction. Um, so it would play like this?
EFF:The FoIA says we're entitled, under federal law, to see telco lobbying documents. May we have them please?
McCain:Sure boys, anything you say. I've some juicy NSA files over here, would you like a peek?
I'm not so sure...
I think McCain would refuse, exactly as O'Bama did and for the same reasons. It wouldn't serve his political purposes to release them.
said by knightmb :It always cracks me up that those that voted against Obama in the last election have higher (sometimes unrealistic) expectations than the very people that did vote for him. I agree. O'Bama voters have low expectations on average. Their near universal inability to meaningfully explain why they were voting for him is a reflection of that.
I voted for Bush back when, and against O'Bama more recently. I have the same anger now for O'Bama now that I did for Bush then. It's about each of them making the same bad decisions on the same critical issues.
NV
--
In my perfect religion, a giant hole appears and sucks up all the lousy people.
I call it the Crapture. | |
| | nasadude
join:2001-10-05
Rockville, MD
·Comcast
| said by apollo80 :Meet the new boss, same as the old boss. seems to be absolutely no difference between this admin and last admin on security, constitutional issues and kowtowing to big business.
I voted for Obama once, won't do it again. | |
| | |
See 6 replies to this post | |
| gorehound
join:2009-06-19
Portland, ME
| i m not surprised either.i voted for obama so i wouldn't have to see more years of replubicans after 8 years of bush and his cronies.
it would be great if a working man not a rich man won the presidency.most folks in the country are not rich and are just working class. | |
| | |
amigo_boy
join:2005-07-22
Tempe, AZ
·Cox HSI
·magicjack.com
3 edits | Re: Not surprised said by gorehound :it would be great if a working man not a rich man won the presidency.most folks in the country are not rich and are just working class. IMO, a large part of the problem is that the number of Representatives hasn't increased with the population, diminishing each individual's representation.
The constitution says there should be no than "one for every thirty Thousand." (Article I, Section 2.). It doesn't say there should be that level of representation. But, it gives an idea of the level of representation they had in mind.
In 1911, Congress fixed the number of Representatives to 435. Since then, we just reapportion that number among a growing population.
For example, the number of Representatives at the founding until 100 years later (1st Congress starting: 1789, 50th Congress ending: 1889):
1st. Congress: 59-65
2nd Congress: 69-73
5th Congress: 106
10th Congress: 142
20th Congress: 213
30th Congress: 230
40th Congress: 226 (fewer due to southern states removed from the union during Reconstruction).
50th Congress: 325
I think this is a problem. I haven't taken the time to examine national population (and the ratio of representation, which was skewed by Blacks counting as 3/5 of a person, and women not voting). Obviously we have much less representation as an individual.
The same problem exists with the Senate. It was changed from senators appointed by state legislatures around 1912 due to corruption (Senators owing favors to state power brokers). But, it's remained 2 per state since then. Which means the population in 1912 had greater representation than future generations.
Then consider how state legislative bodies have suffered the same diminution of representation as populations have grown.
Mark | |
| 
Z80
1 point 77
Premium
join:2009-08-31
Amerika | Transparency? Accountability? No we can't.
Meanwhile it was just announced that Obama has won Motor Trend Car of the Year. | |
| | 
SLD
Premium
join:2002-04-17 | Re: Transparency? Accountability? Was the Nobel Prize for best pretender? | |
| | |
anonmoose
@igt.com | Re: Transparency? Accountability? "current administration's pointed directive on transparency in government"
This was a campaign lie. | |
| | | |
Z80
1 point 77
Premium
join:2009-08-31
Amerika | Re: Transparency? Accountability? One of many. Liar and politician go hand in hand, no matter what party they are in. | |
| | |
Van
Premium
join:2009-07-08
Washington, DC | Man, these documents must really have some juicy information in it | |
| |
See 12 replies to this post | |
footballdude
Premium
join:2002-08-13
Imperial, MO
| Read that again "current administration's pointed directive on transparency in government, and the public's renewed interest in the question of legal immunity for the telecommunications companies that participated in the warrantless wiretapping program while considering currently pending legislation repealing the amendments to FISA, the Court finds that the public interest lies in favor of disclosure."
Nowhere in there do I see any discussion about the relevant LAW pertaining to this case. The judge is making a decision based on an Obama campaign promise and the fact that people are watching him.
--
The goggles! They do nothing! - McBain | |
| | openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
·AT&T Southeast
| Re: Read that again Read the ruling. My take is that the court is denying the temporary stay because it doesn't believe the Defendants intend to pursue their appeal and that the Defendants haven't presented any new arguments. Additionally, the judge does reference legal precedences on what's required to prevail in a motion to stay a pending appeal.In order to prevail on a motion to stay pending appeal, Defendants would have to address the following factors: “(1) whether the stay applicant has made a strong showing that he is likely to succeed on the merits; (2) whether the applicant will be irreparably injured absent a stay; (3) whether issuance of the stay will substantially injure the other parties interested in the proceeding; and (4) where the public interest lies.” See Hilton v. Braunskill, 481 U.S. 770, 776 (1987). In ruling on a motion for a stay pending appeal, courts employ “‘two interrelated legal tests’ that ‘represent the outer reaches of a single continuum.’” Golden Gate Restaurant Ass’n v. City and County of San Francisco, 512 F.3d 1112, 1115 (9th Cir. 2008) (citing Lopez v. Heckler, 713 F.2d 1432, 1435 (9th Cir. 1983)). “At one end of the continuum, the moving party is required to show both a probability of success on the merits and the possibility of irreparable injury.” Lopez, 713 F.2d at 1435. “At the other end of the continuum, the moving party must demonstrate that serious legal questions are raised and that the balance of hardships tips sharply in its favor.” Id. | |
| eugenegill
join:2004-05-05
Greenville, SC | Let's Try Something New “The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results”
Keep voting for the RepubliCrats and expect a different result.
»www.lp.org | |
| |
See 9 replies to this post | |
joebarnhart
Paxio evangelist
join:2005-12-15
Santa Clara, CA | We have a two-party system in the U.S.... BUT! The problem is, the two parties are the Incumbents and the Challengers. Everytime we elect the latter, the no-good sumbtch switches sides when he gets to office! | |
| | | |
NOVA_Guy
Obama- Commander in Thief
Premium
join:2002-03-05
·VOIPo
| Re: We have a two-party system in the U.S.... BUT! I'd say the two parties are more like us and them.
Isn't it interesting how we always seem to wind up with bigger government and more people doing more things we don't need them to do-- no matter what party is in charge? With Bush (the RINO... true conservative Republicans don't support the needless creation of large government agencies), it was DHS (TSA, for the most part). With Obama, it looks like it will be this whole health care debacle. Who knows what it will be the next time around...
--
Nobel peace prize for Obammer... Now he's got one more thing in common with Arafat besides hating America. And he's just as succesful as Jimmy "the failure" Carter. | |
| chronoss2009
join:2008-09-23 | they cant hand it over they destroyed evidence YOU WILL SEE | |
| |
amigo_boy
join:2005-07-22
Tempe, AZ
·Cox HSI
·magicjack.com
1 edit | Re: they cant hand it over said by chronoss2009 :they destroyed evidence YOU WILL SEE That's a possibility. I think the more realistic reason they're stalling is that the records show that the surveillance wasn't "certified" by the AG (as required by 18 USC 2511) between the year-long period when Ashcroft objected and was replaced by Gonzalez.
Remember Comey's testimony? Ashcroft refused to certify something for about a year. Comey said he was told it was certified anyway.
I suspect they want to avoid the constitutional question of whether 2511 strictly requires the AG to certify. Or, if it is a broader recognition of the Executive's power to surveill, and because the AG is a function of the Executive office, the Executive can certify.
Personally, I think that's what the civil-suit activists are after. They know something went awry for a year.
Mark | |
| 
KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK | Sorry Obama... you've been on the wrong side of this issue ... since the start. Time to give it up. | |
| |
Noah Vail
Premium
join:2004-12-10
Lorton, VA
·RoadRunner Cable
| Re: Sorry Obama... you've been on the wrong side of this issue said by KrK :... since the start. Time to give it up. I wholeheartedly agree. It bothers me that O'Bama didn't/doesn't/won't have the courage to openly speak of the core issue.
Chris Dodd is the only name I have, inside the beltway, who decided to have a spine about the NSA tapping all our traffic.
I'm no fan of Dodd, but I'd 'single issue' vote for him if he openly maintained this position.
NV
--
In my perfect religion, a giant hole appears and sucks up all the lousy people.
I call it the Crapture. | |
| | | | | | |
|
|
Court: Uncle Sam Must Hand Over Immunity Lobbying Docs
