world

Obama says 'I don't quit' as he makes job growth top priority

141 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2010 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

©2020 GPlusMedia Inc.

141 Comments
Login to comment

"Obama will stand before a country dispirited by unemployment in double-digits and federal deficts soaring to a record $1.4 trillion.

Obama is in over his head.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The people moved and believed and voted Obama in. The one who is not moving or believing is Obama...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Obama is in over his head.

There's an understatement!

Mr. President, you've spent the past year tripling or quadrupling our debt with nothing to show for it but a larger and more inefficient government that's even less transparent than before. Now you're going to get to work doing what we wanted you to do a year ago?!?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Obama's goal: Get agenda moving, people believing

Wasn't this same headline written on Jan. 20, 2009?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Get then moving, get them believing, anything to make em notice that his on-the-job training isn't go too well.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Obama need only say these two words to turn America back around and headed in the right direction: "I resign."

0 ( +0 / -0 )

These Democrat ideologues have got to be the most arrogant, elitist, tin-eared bunch America has ever been duped into electing:

“The president’s going to explain why he thinks the American people are angry and frustrated,” White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said on “Good Morning America.”

(source:ABC News)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"I resign."

Not gonna happen unless he became a jerk like Nixon.

These Democrat ideologues have got to be the most arrogant, elitist, tin-eared bunch America has ever been duped into electing:

Yeah, just like the folks in the previous administration were like for 8 years. This country is totally in chaos since the end of 2008. People can't tell the difference which is better or worse.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Wow! Lots of irrationality and hatred from the rightie-tighties today! Let's see now...

Sarge -

Obama is in over his head.

Just another of Sarge's unsubstantiated conjectures - no big deal there...

WhiteHawk -

Now you're going to get to work doing what we wanted you to do a year ago?!?

WhiteHawk never wanted Obama to succeed, then or now; just another of WhiteHawk's many lies - nothing to worry about there...

RomeoRamenII -

Obama need only say these two words to turn America back around and headed in the right direction: "I resign."

Just another example of RomeoRamenII opposing the will of the vast majority of America - hardly worthy of response...

Odogma -

These Democrat ideologues have got to be the most arrogant, elitist, tin-eared bunch America has ever been duped into electing

Just more of the pot calling the kettle black while ignoring the informed will of the American public - same old, same old righty bleating...

Nah, on second thought, you've bored me already. I need a State of the Union address from the only President of the United States in eight years to deserve America's attention to interest me! Take care, gang!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I don't believe President Obama can get his agenda moving.

Sarge - not only is Obama in over his head, he is drowning in his own Liberal extremism. Time to hit the reset button yet again Mr. President.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

He's got his agenda moving, and that is the problem... People do believe that, recent elections prove it. I don't think there is anything this man can or will do, to turn things around other than being slowed down further by mid-term elections...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I never understood where Socialists/Communists/Marxists expect faith out of the populace yet burn down the "churches.". -Perhaps going blindly forward and forgetting the past is only for the leaders.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Just another of Sarge's unsubstantiated conjectures - no big deal there...

More dismissive comments from a loony leftist. No surprise of course. Reality is not the loons best friend. The only thing Obama has going for him, is he does a good job reading the teleprompter.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I must say... the dude was all talk... but I still give him high five for not doing anything and getting a peace prize and inheriting 2 wars with 10% unemployed and 1% in prison... I just came back from the US... it sure is scary, my home.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Obama said the 'freeze' won't start until next year, saying "that's how budgeting works" and he got laughed at!!

Too funny.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

He's giving out autographs!?!!?? The One still thinks he's a rock star.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

RomeoRamenII - Nowhere near as funny as your childish "I resign" comment seems, now that President Obama has said "I don't quit!"! It was almost like he was saying it to you personally, big guy! ROTFLMAO!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Under Obama, America is now in deficit over $14 Trillions and climbing. After Clinton, the debt was over $3Tr and doubling it during eight years of Bush to about $7Tr. Just one year under Teflon-Don team, now is $14Tr. in debts plus over 10% unemployment. His targeted economy and jobs revival are like the stimulus to nowhere. More that words, empty or fancy, the deeds are what matter most. So far what Obama has been saying and doing are totally hollow. Responsibility and accountability by placing the country as top priority must be the standard barrier of any presidency. Please stop staging and may the real man stand up. Otherwise we will vote (boot) you all out very soon.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Badsey -

I never understood where Socialists/Communists/Marxists expect faith out of the populace yet burn down the "churches.". -Perhaps going blindly forward and forgetting the past is only for the leaders.

Well, just be thankful none of those dreadful things is happening with President Obama at the helm!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Is he going to increase recruitment into the US Army and Marines? Good on him. Some other small country is waiting to be invaded. But the question is... will it be illegal or legal this time?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Noticed how restrained the applause Obama got from his fellow democrats. Heh, even they recoginize a loser when they see/hear one.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Who does this jerk think he is??

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"I don't quit"

I was going to say, "Please do quit," but then who would we have to take his place - Biden! Well, Biden couldn't be worse. Or could he?

"inherited 2 wars with 10% unemployed"

It wasn't 10% unemployed when he was elected.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"An embattled President Barack Obama"

How could he be embattled already?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

forgot the "now"... this must be your racket Sarge... sorry

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Obama vows to make job growth his top priority

But, but, but ....... when he signed off on Porkulus Maximinus he also said it would keep U.S. unemployment under 8 percent. And we all know how well that promise was kept.

Just more sound bites from President hocus pocus (now you see it; now you don't): The master of the political three-card Monty.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

But, but, but ....... when he signed off on Porkulus Maximinus he also said it would keep U.S. unemployment under 8 percent. And we all know how well that promise was kept.

Yes, let's see Obama's sycophants explain that one.

Well, it was a lovely campaign speech, wasn't it? Reid yawned, Biden looked at his watch, and Obama said a whole lot of nothing.

There are few things in political life as ironic as watching an ardent anti-capitalist (who has spent his life surrounding himself with other ardent anti-capitalist Marxists, Maoists and worse) promise to get a private-sector economy growing. It would almost be funny if only it were happening to somebody else's country.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"I don't quit" is line that would have some real impact if this president had actually accomplished anything.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

In relation to the fiscal meltdown and stimulus package, watching conservatives talking about debt is like seeing a homeowner who burns down their house and then complains about the cost of the cleanup.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I've got a couple of comments and I'll then allow the republicans to beat their chest in false pride and self ridicule.

Obama spoke to the country and directly to the congress that they need to stop their bi-particism and work together.

He reminded us that this debt, that the the republicans keep crying about, was created during the last administration and it isn't going to just disappear. It's got to be dealt with and paid.

Now you can go back whining again. < :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Positioning himself as a fighter for the regular guy

And who better than a privileged Ivy League elitist.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

In relation to the fiscal meltdown and stimulus package, watching conservatives talking about debt is like seeing a homeowner who burns down their house and then complains about the cost of the cleanup.

Asking what the poster sushisake3 has to say about economics in the US is about as reasonable as asking your neighbor's lawn dwarf back home if it prefers Kirin or Sapporo.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"inherited 2 wars with 10% unemployed"

Conservatives must be patting themselves on the backs.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I have the feeling "I don't quit" will one day be up there with John Kerry in 2004, "Reporting for duty."

0 ( +0 / -0 )

adaydream:

Obama spoke to the country and directly to the congress that they need to stop their bi-particism and work together.

But did Nancy listen?

He reminded us that this debt, that the the republicans keep crying about, was created during the last administration and it isn't going to just disappear.

hahaha!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

“far more” al-Qaida terrorists were killed under his watch last year in the U.S.-led global fight than in 2008.

And more al-Qaida terrorists were treated like they were American citizens under Obama's watch last year in the U.S.-led global fight than in 2008.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

As usual, Conservatives simply cannot bring themselves to mention how their votes and the GOP members they voted for have totally screwed America, not to mention the rest of the world.

The size of the bailout (remember the first $680 billion one that bush just threw away without any checks or accountability? No, conservatives will no doubt have conveniently forgotten that, too) - is in direct proportion to the hole the GOP blew in the U.S. economy.

But, no - actually, the problems that grew to economy-busting size between 2000-08 are - in fact - all President Obama's fault.

That's true if you believe in Santa.

If conservatives/GOP wanted to actually start doing something for the good of the country, they could begin by admitting their domestic and foreign policies screwed the economy, and then continue by quitting blocking and actually - this would be a first - working with the Dems for the good of Americans.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

All that said, expecting conservatives/GOP to work for the benefit of ordinary Americans is like thinking you can rake the incoming tide out.

Pretty much all the conservatives/GOP have to offer Americans is blocking, blocking, blocking, hailstorms of criticism with no new ideas, and a drug-addicted faux leader in talk show host in Rush Limpbough.

And that's the good news from the GOP camp. :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I wonder how many people have died because of his decisions. I wonder if his decisions are going to eventually kill me. Westerners have really proven themselves to be useless. God help us.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"Pretty much all the conservatives/GOP have to offer Americans is blocking, blocking, blocking, hailstorms of criticism with no new ideas, and a drug-addicted faux leader in talk show host in Rush Limpbough."

The State of the Union Speech I listened to had nothing to do with what conservatives can offer America - they are no longer in power. Nor did it include any mention whatsoever of talk show hosts.

I can only wonder what sushisake3 got when he searched for a link to the SoTU....

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The size of the bailout (remember the first $680 billion one that bush just threw away without any checks or accountability? No, conservatives will no doubt have conveniently forgotten that, too) - is in direct proportion to the hole the GOP blew in the U.S. economy.

I haven't forgotten it. Nor have I forgotten how Bush was against it until the Democrat-led congress convinced him. And if it was such a bad idea, why did Obama repeat it?

All that said, expecting conservatives/GOP to work for the benefit of ordinary Americans is like thinking you can rake the incoming tide out.

Ordinary Americans? You mean like Al Gore? George Soros? Ron Gettlefinger, perhaps?

Pretty much all the conservatives/GOP have to offer Americans is blocking, blocking, blocking, hailstorms of criticism with no new ideas, and a drug-addicted faux leader in talk show host in Rush Limpbough.

How much blow did Obama do? Or have you forgotten that already?

Republicans have offered several plans, but they were blocked by Democrats. So your claim that Republicans are the ones blocking and are not offering ideas is a complete lie.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

WhiteHawk - "Republicans have offered several plans, but they were blocked by Democrats."

You mean the GOP healthcare alternative that was only going to cover an additional 3 million people?

That deserved to be blocked.

Or how about the one when the GOP blocked the closing down of offshore tax havens?

The point is the GOP - as is blindingly obvious also the case with most conservatives on this thread - simply have no workable ideas.

Show me one positive plan the GOP has put forward that isn't directly connected with righting the economic wreckage they themselves were responsible for creating.

And please - no 'Don't raise taxes!' Enough mantras.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"...it’s time to get serious about fixing the problems that are hampering our growth" ? ! ? ! ? Cash for clunkers, bail out wall street, tripled the deficit, oh boy, hold on to your hats boys! Its gonna be one helluva ride.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

“Just saying no to everything may be good short-term politics, but it’s not leadership

They are a bunch of babies. America is a mess.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Show me one positive plan the GOP has put forward that isn't directly connected with righting the economic wreckage they themselves were responsible for creating.

And please - no 'Don't raise taxes!' Enough mantras.

Sheesh Sushi, Bet you where sure dissapointed when he said this part then.

So tonight, I'm proposing that we take $30 billion of the money Wall Street banks have repaid and use it to help community banks give small businesses the credit they need to stay afloat. I am also proposing a new small business tax credit -- one that will go to over 1 million small businesses who hire new workers or raise wages. While we're at it, let's also eliminate all capital gains taxes on small business investment and provide a tax incentive for all businesses, large and small, to invest in new plants and equipment.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sail, thanks, but those are Obama's words.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

You mean the GOP healthcare alternative that was only going to cover an additional 3 million people?

How about the one that involved tort reform? Oh yeah, the Democrats can't have that! That might actually reduce the cost of health care, and then people won't see a need for the government to come to their rescue with the promise of "free" health care.

The point is the GOP - as is blindingly obvious also the case with most conservatives on this thread - simply have no workable ideas.

But a trillion-dollar-plus bureaucratic nightmare to cover only "47 million" people IS a workable idea?!? That's your argument?!?

Show me one positive plan the GOP has put forward that isn't directly connected with righting the economic wreckage they themselves were responsible for creating.

Whoa. Just what part of the economic wreckage were they exclusively responsible for? Fannie/Freddie? The CRI of 1977?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Whitehawk, it's funny to see you complaining about the cost of Dem policies ("a trillion-dollar-plus bureaucratic nightmare" !! :-) when the GOP set in motion the burning of $3 trillion plus in just one foreign policy bungle in the invasion of Iraq.

I know it's difficult, but if you could remember back to some of the disastrous policies enacted by your GOP over - gosh - it was only the last 7 short years - you might actually get a glimpse of how baseless and hypocritical your argument is.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Whitehawk, it's funny to see you complaining about the cost of Dem policies ("a trillion-dollar-plus bureaucratic nightmare" !! :-) when the GOP set in motion the burning of $3 trillion plus in just one foreign policy bungle in the invasion of Iraq.

I'm sure the people of Iraq, who can now vote for somebody other than Saddam Hussein without worrying about being killed as an example to others, will appreciate your sentiments.

Or would you rather we do the same for Sudan?

By the way, that was a bi-partisan effort.

I know it's difficult, but if you could remember back to some of the disastrous policies enacted by your GOP over - gosh - it was only the last 7 short years - you might actually get a glimpse of how baseless and hypocritical your argument is.

It might be more productive if you remember them. And list them here.

Along with backing up some of your other claims I've refuted.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sail, thanks, but those are Obama's words.

I know and stolen right from the republican playbook and conservative philosphy on how to grow jobs and create wealth. Now if he is onboard with that, then those ideas actually have real merit after all dont you think?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Oh, and the trillion-dollar gold mine of fraud and abuse known as Obamacare IS a workable idea for you. Thanks for admitting that.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

sailwind:

I know and stolen right from the republican playbook and conservative philosphy on how to grow jobs and create wealth. Now if he is onboard with that, then those ideas actually have real merit after all dont you think?

Oh, but you know and I know and Charles Krauthammer knows and especially SushiSake knows that Obama was just faking it.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sushi, Why should the government provide or subsidize your health care?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

WhiteHawk - "I'm sure the people of Iraq, who can now vote for somebody other than Saddam Hussein without worrying about being killed as an example to others, will appreciate your sentiments."

An aside, I know, but it's funny that you STILL think Iraq is/was an American problem that demanded U.S. intervention.

While I appreciate your tear-jerking quasi-caring sentiment for the Iraqi people, it'll take a lot more than that prove that invasion was worth it.

Whitehawk - "It might be more productive if you remember them. And list them here."

Making tax cuts permanent. Invasion of Iraq (the wrong country) Being asleep at hte wheel as lax financial industry regulations led to the bubble, then the meltdown.

Is that good enough for starters?

Whitehawk - "Oh, and the trillion-dollar gold mine of fraud and abuse known as Obamacare IS a workable idea for you. Thanks for admitting that."

Making a wild claim like that before the healthcare reform has even been enacted shows just how desperate the conservatives are becoming.

As I said - no new ideas.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Midnightpromise - "Sushi, Why should the government provide or subsidize your health care?"

Perhaps you'd like your tax dollars spent on pointless ventures like idiot invasions of other countries?

Oh, sorry, the GOP has already started 2 of them.

To answer your question, are you implying you would turn down universal healthcare, a system that most of the developed world has and yet America hasn't?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Making tax cuts permanent.

You say that like it's a bad thing. As both Reagan and JFK proved, lowering taxes increases revenue, thanks to the economic growth they enable. And, if Obama is to be believed, he's now seeing that as well. Unless he was just faking it.

Being asleep at hte wheel as lax financial industry regulations led to the bubble, then the meltdown.

Exactly which regulations were lax? Do you mean the financial industry regulations that forced banks to make loans they knew wouldn't get repaid?

Making a wild claim like that before the healthcare reform has even been enacted shows just how desperate the conservatives are becoming.

Not a wild claim at all, but proven time and again:

http://www.japantoday.com/category/world/view/much-at-stake-for-obama-in-close-massachusetts-senate-race#comment_448648

As I said - no new ideas.

And Obama's ideas are new? Only if you've never heard of Marx, Mao or Chavez.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sushi, most of the world regrets and is swamped providing socialist health care. But hey, why not keep trying right? As for deficits, it all started with Clinton and the dems bailing out thier buddies when they invested in Mexican bonds and other risky ventures, the ones that worked they got filthy rich profits, the ones that failed, ole Bill bailed them out. Then came "every one deserves a house" long as they have a job right, so immigrants making $1oK a year qualified for loans on 250,000 houses, which leads us to G. Bush "economic banking failures", yea right, he was just holding the notes when they came due and there wasn't any funds to bail out the banks stuck with those Pelosi/Reid shiite mortgages. Oh well I feel I am wasting my breath casue now you will want references, quotes, and "links" to verify. Check it yourself, or follow the lemmings off the cliff, I could care less. The Americans with sense will correct things starting in Nov 2010.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Obama`s speech was an utter farce. I watched the complete address. He compares himself to Lincoln, JFK, and Reagan. That is some hubris for a man who has accomplished nothing and got a Nobel Peace Prize for it.

I admit he is quite popular with some parts of the world for it is easily recognized that he makes America weak.

And a weak America is good, right?

America is just too strong and needed some downsizing, correct?

Maybe not.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sushsi, one quick quote for ya: G. Stephanopoulos on GMA when discussing the Repub idea of using tax cuts to stimulate the economy: "But, those tax cuts are going to increase the deficit, aren't they, sir?" Him and the other dems in charge are financial morons, period.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

As for the headline "I don't quit", listen up Obamba, you are not on American Idol or The Apprentice. I only wish someone can convince D. Trump to announce that the evening of Nov 6, 2012, "You're Fired!"

0 ( +0 / -0 )

How about the one that involved tort reform? Oh yeah, the Democrats can't have that! That might actually reduce the cost of health care...

Might? Where are the insurance companies offering any kind of deal where they specify how much they'll reduce rates should tort reform be enacted?

More than likely, it will just represent a windfall to them that they'll pocket, and which Republicans will defend as rightful profit-seeking.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

As both Reagan and JFK proved, lowering taxes increases revenue, thanks to the economic growth they enable.

Pure voodoo.

The biggest tax cuts in U.S. history came over the last decade. And the growth was as negative as the deficits they spurned were deep.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

You say that like [making tax cuts permanent is] a bad thing.

Well, when the tax cuts were sold to the American people, they were limited to ten years in order to calculate and promote the cost in lost revenues. Bush claimed that his budget could afford the tax cuts, protect Social Security, maintain a surplus, pay down the national debt, AND provide for a trillion dollar contingency fund.

First, the Republicans' costing of the tax cuts were a total lie because no Democrat rightfully believed that Republicans would allow them to expire after ten years. (And so the lost revenue costs would be far higher.) The words used at the time were this: "The surplus represents an 'overpayment' by the American people and should be returned to them."

Oh yeah? And what does the national debt and all those deficits represent? Based on those words, the tax cuts were set to expire after ten years if the government could not maintain a surplus and returned to deficit spending -- which we know happened around 2003 and every year since.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sushi: Perhaps you'd like your tax dollars spent on pointless ventures like idiot invasions of other countries?

You can't expect to keep using this as a response to any Obama criticism forever.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Whitehawk - "You say that like [making tax cuts permanent is] a bad thing."

You're saying they did good for the economy?

Yabits hits it on the head - massive deficits and a massie recession.

Fat lot of good your 'tax cuts' were, mate.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sushi,

The Democrats NEVER, not ONCE in 2009, needed one single GOP vote to pass Obamacare. Not ONE. And yet... even possessing the needed majority, they couldn't get their "mandate" through.

Quit acting like Obamacare, OR ANYTHING ON THEIR AGENDA, is teetering on the abyss because of GOP "obstruction".

Obama is an empty suit. Always has been, always will be.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Loki520 - reality proves otherwise.

The GOP now have 41 votes in Congress, letting them obstruct pretty much anything they want.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The GOP now have 41 votes in Congress, letting them obstruct pretty much anything they want.

Thank God for the good people of Massachusetts once again. heck of tea party hey Sushi.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

ShonanMaruNo2 - you are right - from a week ago.

Talking about the deficit the GOP continually goes off about - the one that they were instrumental in creating in the firt place...I just realized an interesting fact - America is now pretty much a dependancy of China and Japan.

The U.S. economy would cease to function if the governments of those 2 countries stopped buying U.S. government bonds.

Oh, how the mighty have fallen.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Obama, in his SOTU speech:

“’I have embraced the vision of John F. Kennedy and Ronald Reagan.’

I read that and think I do believe his Lame Duckness is considering tax breaks.Cant wait to see his lefty base explode!

sushisake3 likes to blame the GOP for a world depression [sic] when it suits her. And when that 'argument' fails we get this

"The U.S. economy would cease to function if the governments of those 2 countries stopped buying U.S. government bonds."

Actually, it is that scenario which would produce a global depression - which I suspect frustrated leftists such as SS3 secretly pine for.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"Oh, how the mighty have fallen."

To be replaced by whom?

You have no reply, do you.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Actually, I do.

China. The Russian economy is a basketcase.

ShonanMaruNo2 - "Actually, it is that scenario which would produce a global depression - which I suspect frustrated leftists such as SS3 secretly pine for."

The GOP have alread given us a global deprssion.

Sorry, I know reality hurts at the best of times.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

It's due to skills of the GOP and the support of conservatives that America is - in fact - now a dependency of China and Japan.

Supporters like ShonanMaruNo2 must be thinking "Mission Accomplished!"

0 ( +0 / -0 )

But it hasn't just been the GOP that has been selling out America.

They have been supported - either willingly or otherwise - by their base from 2000 to 2008.

The same base that is now going ballistic about massive deficits that they themselves were instrumental in creating.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"The GOP have alread given us a global depression."

Sorry. You don't understand US politics and economy; or more likely you area troll of some sort with some freaky obsession about "the GOP."

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Why do I not hear a single person concerned about all the money we owe? Why is it that the republicans think that the deficit will just disappear? The last administration spent money like it was somebody else's and didn't have to be replaced.

I heard like 6 different taxes that Obama plans to see killed. How come these so called republicans haven't embraced this action, because even if they get tax cuts, it's not enough. They expect not to pay a single dime of tax dollars. Even though they are paying no more then when Ronald Reagan was president. Pretty stupid.

I propose that the republicans just hold their breath till the US debt disappears. Or just the portion created by george bush and the republicans.

I loved the admonition of the Supreme Court and judge Alito last night. They just gave away freedom of speach to the richest and deepest pockets, whether foreign or domestic. < :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

ShonanMaru2 - "You don't understand US politics and economy; or more likely you area troll of some sort with some freaky obsession about "the GOP."

Not surprisingly, quite the opposite is true.

Do you somehow fail to understand that the global recession started in December 2007 - when bush and the GOP were in charge?

Like the ever-changing GOP excuses for the Iraq invasion, I can understand why a GOP supporter like yourself continues to deny the real reasons and blame the wrong guy.

Do you also fail to understand the financial wreckage the GOP caused, not in a small part by invading Iraq, the immense money drain of which is now a prime reason why the GOP and their conservative supporters are now going off about the national debt?

I am fully aware that conservatives have about as strong a grip on basic economic fundamentals as a jelly has on a wall, but for your sake, please put some thought into your comments before you post them.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

adaydream - "Why is it that the republicans think that the deficit will just disappear?"

I think it's because they think money just grows on trees, which is a core reason they burnt through so much of it without thinking where more was going to come from.

Besides - of course - "cut taxes!", which as Yabits and myself indicated earlier, completely failed.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Wow, the shrieking on this thread is impressive.

I know that the extreme right-wing shied away from yesterday's honest question....but maybe they forgot that thread in all fairness.

So perhaps, as this thread is full of activity, at least one conservative could provide me with the name and the solution from a conservative who has a plan to get the US out of this mess rather than blamng Obama.

Disclaimer - Anything other than a conszrvative name and a intelligent alternative plan will be rejected as hardcore partisan delusion, and in fairness, possible chronic dementia.

Thanks.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Just read the transcript. Obama used "I" only 96 times in a speech that clocked in at 74 minutes. Heh, good to see his handlers are finally beiginning to reign him in.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

adaydream - "Pretty stupid."

Exactly, as was the GOP idea that there wasn't any need to raise taxes despite the country being at war.

It's thinking like that - thinking that conservatives like ShonanMaruNo2 likely embrace lovingly - that is one reason the GOP is now screaming that the national debt is too high.

What goes around comes around....

0 ( +0 / -0 )

ShonanMaruNo2 - so, now you are denying the recession in America began in December 2007?

The reality denying just gets worse, but I can fully understand where you are coming from, although I have no desire whatsoever to be there. :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Madverts - "So perhaps, as this thread is full of activity, at least one conservative could provide me with the name and the solution from a conservative who has a plan to get the US out of this mess rather than blamng Obama."

I have already asked a similar question.

The silence from the conservatives on this board has been deafening.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

RomeoRamenII - "Just read the transcript. Obama used "I" only 96 times in a speech that clocked in at 74 minutes."

96 times?

Are you sure about that?

That's obsession for yer! :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

SushiSake3 - A solution - Debt forgiveness across the board - Everywhere with the wealth returned to be put to use to help all people. Those American values Obama spoke of are basically shared human values. Americans have no unique claim to them. And I do not like the cult of blood and soil.Had enough of it in the 20th century. Debt forgiveness forall who accept the gift.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

At this point in the conversation, I'd like to make a shout out to conservatives - because what I haven't learnt from them about denying reality probably isn't really wrth knowing, so I'd like to thank them for providing their wisdom on this issue.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

OneForAll - "debt forgiveness."

Not a bad suggestion. It appears to be working in Africa.

Thank you.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"ust read the transcript. Obama used "I" only 96 times in a speech that clocked in at 74 minutes."

Hey ramen, perhaps you could find the courage to answer my question. I know you failed yesterday, but today's a different day and all!

Amways remeber my moto - it's better to spend an hour as a lion, than a whole lifetime as a worm!!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Obama has been accused of being "unfeeling" and "thinking too much with his head and not his heart". That he isnt able to talk to the Average Joe. I think his speech tonight was trying to turn that around. He is a great speech-maker and has a magnetic aura. I hope now that his Presidency is no longer style over substance. It is hard to blame Obama for things that happened in his first six months - but the honeymoon is over.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

It was very subtle but did anyone notice when Obama spoke about our friends in Asia he said South Korea and not Japan. While this omission was not an explicit rebuff of Japan those with good hearing may have something to ponder about the omission. Another point, Obama addressed China head on. If there is one thing that can make Americans willing to pay for infrastructure and rail improvements it would be a wound to national pride. I say well done Obama, a good speech and now let’s go out and kick some ass.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

You want a plan? Hows this for a plan. Don't freeze spending, only in a few select targetted areas, most of which you've already ramped up spending on anyway. Cut spending. You have a budget, you have a good idea how much is coming in. Don't spend any more then that. What an amazing idea! Its that simple. Politically impossible, but really that simple.

Thats why people back home, who balance their own checkbooks don't understand the government. If you have x dollars coming in, and y dollars going out. y cannot exceed x for any length of time. The solution is not a tax increase, but a spending decrease.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

the problem with cutting spending molenir is that the cuts really hurt some while they are simply a mere annoyance for others. Tax Cuts for the top while pulling the rug out from under a working family is akin to class war, and is what the US government, under conservative control, has done for 20 of the last 30 years.

Cutting spending is necessary but let us target our cuts and raise taxes on those that have taken too much for too long.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

SushiSake: At this point in the conversation, I'd like to make a shout out to conservatives

Troll.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"I don't quit" but man we wish you would. How about quit spending money on "golden fleece" projects that don't create jobs. How about quit attacking the banks and causing the stock market to fall. How about quit pushing a healthcare agenda that doesn't achieve universal coverage but lines the pockets of the insurance industry. Ah hell, just quit and go back to Chicago it'll be less of a hassle for you and better for America.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Do you somehow fail to understand that the global recession started in December 2007 - when bush and the GOP were in charge?

No that would be the democrats, in 2006 the democrats took control of congress, and as anyone that knows anything about USA's political structure would know that Congress is more powerful then the executive branch/presidency.

It is amazing at how many people, especially people outside of the USA think that the US president has all these powers when in fact most of those powers can only be done by congress.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Molenir,

I don't actually class you with the foaming at the mouth Obama detractors here and appreciate your concerns about the difficulties that America is facing right now. But even you haven't got an answer to my question.

President Obama has had a shaky first year in office I'll grant, but unless there are politicians out there with any credible plan, I think it's time to shut up and let the man get on with his mandate. If he's that bad he'll be gone anyway in 2012!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

If Obama is worth all the pages and pages of breathless ranting you radical conservatives have had since Nov 2008 - I want to know which conservative actually has a solution to the problem Obama is facing, and what that solution is....

Apparently you prefer not to look at solutions, instead only seeing the complaints. Lots of people have posted solutions, some more effective then others. They vary from my own, cutting spending, to him resigning and going back to Chicago. You may disagree, you may not like them, they may be politically unfeasible, but they are suggestions, and many of them would work if implemented.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Molenir,

You mis-understand me. Other than winding up some of the freaks that reside here, I'm truly trying to understand your radical two-party system.

To date, I've yet to see a viable suggestion handed to us from a conservative politician. Obama's bean dalt a bad hand, and he fought hard to actually be able to play this hand. It's far too easy to critisize without any solutions.

As to spending - from my miniscule end of the capitalist scale, one thing I do know, is that you've got to spend money to earn money. Speculate to accumilate. But you've got to do it right.

I think there are a lot of much worse people for the job than then man America elected.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Once again the American people have spoken. If you are wondering about the success or effects of last nights speech here in the US- well, here it is- just after lunch here- and the Dow Jones has shed another 155 points ! The man has become a curse ! Everytime he opens his mouth, the economy heads south- literally !

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Justice Samuel Alito ... shook his head in disagreement and seemed to mouth the words “not true” as Obama said the court in a recent decision had “reversed a century of law to open the floodgates for special interests — including foreign corporations — to spend without limit in our elections.”

Justice Alito is correct; they didn't reverse "a century of law". They reversed parts of a bad decision from 1990 and parts of one from 2003.

Obama is either just dumb or a liar: take your pick. But since he claims to have been a "constitutional law professor" one would think he could read a court opinion and realize that his statement was a blatant lie.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The Dow dropped 155 points! Obama is pure poison.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Ah hell, just quit and go back to Chicago it'll be less of a hassle for you and better for America.

Exactly.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

He quit on closing gitmo. He quit on dealing with Iran. He quit on the six party talks. He quit on CO2 reduction. He has pretty well quit on health care. Not that he was leading in the first place. Maybe that's it? Since Obama wasn't leading anyway you can't blame him for the failures? Guess we're back to blaming Bush, eh?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

sounds like he will quit... which means 200 more years of 'white prazidants, know what i'm sayin?' lol.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I love how conservatives try try try to hang a down day on Wall Street around Obama neck while overlooking the fact that the GOP is bought and owned by big banks an big business. If there is any proof that cowards can be pandered to it is proven daily on Wall Street.

The economic problems that the world faces today are due to one thing; the conservative approach, aka Wild West financial self regulation and a market that has been given so much rope that they almost hung themselves and destroyed world wide capitalism.

I say go at them Obama and hold the fat cats to the fire!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Also, I do believe that the market is up over the year, I do believe that between inauguration day and Christmas Eve in 1981, the S&P 500 lost 7.65% under Ronald RayGUN. However, since Obama took office, the S&P 500 has gained 39.9%

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Obama:

So tonight, I'm proposing that we take $30 billion of the money Wall Street banks have repaid and use it to help community banks give small businesses the credit they need to stay afloat. I am also proposing a new small business tax credit -- one that will go to over 1 million small businesses who hire new workers or raise wages. While we're at it, let's also eliminate all capital gains taxes on small business investment and provide a tax incentive for all businesses, large and small, to invest in new plants and equipment.

Um, how many small businesses pay capital gains taxes in the first place?

yabits:

The biggest tax cuts in U.S. history came over the last decade.

You mean we went from 70% income tax rates to 50%? Oh wait, that was in the 80's. When revenues increased and Democrats reneged on their deal with Reagan to cut their spending.

Might? Where are the insurance companies offering any kind of deal where they specify how much they'll reduce rates should tort reform be enacted?

Is that their job? Actually, the cost of meritless lawsuits has been quite well documented, and I've listed the links on previous threads. Just because you ignore something doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

More than likely, it will just represent a windfall to them that they'll pocket, and which Republicans will defend as rightful profit-seeking.

Let me get this straight: You're arguing that the savings wouldn't be great enough to be worth enacting tort reform, but if it were enacted, the savings would be great enough to qualify as windfall profits? Which is it, yabits?

Oh, and did you ever look up my health insurance rates once I gave you the name of my provider? You never came back to that thread, and I know what that usually means with the Leftists on JT.

SS3:

You're saying they did good for the economy?

It's the spending, stupid. Bush, ever the moderate, didn't veto a single congressional spending bill. Not the Republicans, nor the Democrats.

The GOP now have 41 votes in Congress, letting them obstruct pretty much anything they want.

Sushi, Brown just got elected. He hasn't cast a single vote yet. Is that your excuse for the past year? That Republicans now have a 41st vote? Loki520 was referring to the past year. You know, 2009.

Besides, 41 isn't more than 59. Even a satirist like Colbert can see through that excuse.

ShonanMaruno2:

Actually, it is that scenario which would produce a global depression - which I suspect frustrated leftists such as SS3 secretly pine for.

Secretly?!? What's so secret about it?

adaydream:

The last administration spent money like it was somebody else's and didn't have to be replaced.

And this administration is correcting that by spending three times as much (and trying for four).

I heard like 6 different taxes that Obama plans to see killed. How come these so called republicans haven't embraced this action, because even if they get tax cuts, it's not enough.

Because we know he's faking it. Remembers "words have meaning"? Except when they're his campaign promises, which he now refers to as "so much campaign rhetoric". How come Leftists, who were obsessed with Bush's "lie", never call Obama out for any of his?

I loved the admonition of the Supreme Court and judge Alito last night. They just gave away freedom of speach to the richest and deepest pockets, whether foreign or domestic.

So "the rich" don't get freedom of speech? You remind me of Rick Mayall's character on The Young Ones.

Don't you worry, George Soros (the world's most powerful and evil capitalist) will still have his influence, and Bill Clinton can breathe a little easier about his fund-raising with the Chinese.

SS3:

Do you somehow fail to understand that the global recession started in December 2007 - when bush and the GOP were in charge?

Say, isn't that when the Democrats had control of congress for a year? You know congress, that's where the budgets are written.

Oh, and did you forget that Bush and the GOP had been in charge the previous 7 years, when the economy was strong?

Do you also fail to understand the financial wreckage the GOP caused, not in a small part by invading Iraq, the immense money drain of which is now a prime reason why the GOP and their conservative supporters are now going off about the national debt?

But Iraq isn't even a big slice of our budget pie. It's domestic spending that consumes the vast majority of our budget.

I think it's because they think money just grows on trees, which is a core reason they burnt through so much of it without thinking where more was going to come from.

I guess they just could have printed more. Oh wait, that's the Democrat's solution.

Madverts:

So perhaps, as this thread is full of activity, at least one conservative could provide me with the name and the solution from a conservative who has a plan to get the US out of this mess rather than blamng Obama.

So you're denying the Pelosi, Reid and Obama have blocked and shelved Republican submissions? Or are you denying that the Democrats were elected to find solutions but are failing to do so, and are still trying to blame the GOP?

Sushi and yabits, it seems you are conceding on my previous points about the Democrats' proposed health care legislation, since you have not provided rebuttals. Your concessions are duly noted.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Other goodies:

President George W. Bush’s Non-Defense Discretionary Spending In FY 2009 Was $589 Billion.

Obama Raised It By 19.5 Percent To $704 Billion For FY 2010, The Largest One-Year Increase In 34 Years.

But in the SotU, Obama promised a decrease in discretionary spending. Let's have a look at his proposal:

Obama’s FY 2010 Budget Originally Called For $687 Billion In Non-Defense Discretionary Spending.

Dropping To $641 Billion In FY 2011, A 7 Percent Decrease.

Dropping To $622 Billion In FY 2012, A 3 Percent Decrease.

Rising Slightly To $625 Billion In FY 2013, A 0.5 Percent Increase.

So according to Obama, going from $589 billion to $625 billion represents a spending decrease.

And here's something Obama's JT sycophants always demand of others but rarely (if ever) provide themselves: Proof.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/historicals/

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2010/assets/summary.pdf

And here's an interesting tidbit. Obamacare would be mandatory spending, not discretionary. And it could cost $2.5 trillion, according to Democrat Max Baucus. Ooooops.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Obama:

I Disagree With Senator McCain About An Across-The-Board Freeze. That’s an Example Of An Unfair Burden Sharing.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/07/presidential.debate.transcript/

He said that here in my hometown. And then he went on to say in the following debate:

[W]e Do Have A Disagreement About An Across-The-Board Spending Freeze. It Sounds Good. It’s Proposed Periodically. It Doesn’t Happen.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/10/16/politics/2008debates/main4525254.shtml

But that's okay, JT Leftists. Keep blaming Bush, keep blaming Republicans when it was the Democrats who were elected to provide solutions. It's almost funny, really, that during the campaigns, the Leftists here on JT were crowing that they would "fix all of Bush's mistakes, you'll see". But now that they have more power in D.C. than the Republicans have ever had, they're failing and continuing to blame the Republicans.

By contrast, when those same JT Leftists were complaining about "Bush's deficits" and campaigning for Obama (or Hillary, depending on the week), I predicted that having Democrats in the White House and in control of Congress would only result in an substantial increase in spending, and a reckless one at that. Oh, but how the JT Leftists chided me for suggesting such a thing! But now history has proven me right and them wrong. And it didn't take as long as I thought it would.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Whitehawk, george bush gave away $4Trillion in one swift pen stroke to the top 1% of the population. You know better, but it's so convenient to forget that.

I was just listening to Sean Hannity in the car. They had to give him oxygen on air. He was whining about Obama's speach with his "The Annointed One" and "let's talk about this with specificity".

The republicans are wild. I really like the ire of the republicans being bristled up. We're not getting anything done the way they are, so they might as well flip-flop like fish and make a spectical of themselves. < :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The democrats have provided solutions. The republicans have stalled, stammered and been regular obstructionist. But we knew this was going to happen on Jan 19, 2009, didn't take a year to figure that out. < :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

adaydream:

Whitehawk, george bush gave away $4Trillion in one swift pen stroke to the top 1% of the population. You know better, but it's so convenient to forget that.

He did? Where did he get the money? Oh, that's right, it was their money to begin with. Typical Leftist, you work on the presumption that all property belongs to the government.

I was just listening to Sean Hannity in the car.

You were? Heck, I don't even listen to him.

The republicans have stalled, stammered and been regular obstructionist.

Again, you've had a 60-vote majority and the White House for the past year, but are still trying to blame someone else. You wanted a congress where you didn't need the Republicans, you've had that, and you still refuse to take responsibility. Pathetic? Pathological? Both.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Oh, just realized that I left a little nugget out of my 5:37 post.

The last two years of Bush's second term, when the Democrats had control of congress (again Sushi, where the budgets are written), that same congress increased the budget by 23%.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

We were in debt $7Trillion and he gives away $4Trillion, I don't see where it's their money. It's America's money and we had to borrow the $4Trillion to pay it out. But heaven forbid. That's why he got elected. To screw the poor and give away the $4Trillion. Oh yeah to start his war, also.

But now we're indebt $12Trillion, jobs went overseas with tax breaks, but it's Obama's fault there aren't jobs.

Banks got their bailouts, (whether you like them or not) and the banks held on to the money without loaning it out to create jobs. So the republicans took the bank loans and screwed the little guys by not giving loans to small businesses. The republicans who could helped create jobs held on to the money, thus it's the republicans that held back unemployment. But you bet they got their bonuses.

But it's Obama's fault. < :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

We were in debt $7Trillion and he gives away $4Trillion, I don't see where it's their money.

Did they spend the money? No, congress did. Was it congress' money to spend? No. Congress spent money they didn't yet have.

That's why he got elected. To screw the poor and give away the $4Trillion.

What, you didn't get your $600 check? I got mine. Remember? Everybody who paid taxes got a cut.

Btw, what's your source for the $7 trillion figure? I mean, since I'm posting my sources...

But now we're indebt $12Trillion, jobs went overseas with tax breaks, but it's Obama's fault there aren't jobs.

No, jobs went overseas because labor was cheaper, environmental regulations weren't as stringent (expensive), and land was cheaper overseas.

Since Obama claimed that unemployment would exceed 8% if the stimulus spending spree wasn't passed, and it has since climbed to over 10% since it was passed, yes, he does bear some responsibility.

Banks got their bailouts, (whether you like them or not) and the banks held on to the money without loaning it out to create jobs.

Which is what some (right-wing) economists predicted.

So the republicans took the bank loans and screwed the little guys by not giving loans to small businesses.

You mean only Republicans own banks?!? I never knew that! What's your source?

The republicans who could helped create jobs held on to the money, thus it's the republicans that held back unemployment.

You mean only Republicans own businesses?!? that's news to me as well. I never knew that giants such as Microsoft and Google were owned by Republicans.

With Obama, Pelosi and Reid spending like drunken sailors (except that drunken sailors spend their own money), and planning to cover it by printing more money, just how much confidence were these exclusively Republican bankers and business owners supposed to have in the market?

What were they supposed to do, loan funds to people who couldn't repay the loans? No, that was a Democrat idea and it didn't work. I know! Sub-prime loans! No wait, that was another Democrat idea that didn't work. Besides, thanks to those Democrat ideas, there are way more homes and commercial buildings on the market than there are buyers.

Did some banks short-change their customers once they got bailouts? Yes, although that was predicted by some "mean, stingy" Republicans. Those same Republicans, who predicted that banks would be tempted to secure themselves and not their customers ("we don't need your business anymore, the government's already taken your money and given it to us"), were criticized for thinking that the market might correct itself quicker if the government didn't reward failure. All of which is forgotten, however, once the Democrats are in control, not making progress (but you're "progressives"!) and in need of someone else to blame.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

When President Obama says "I don't quit" it means he won't quit spending money the nation doesn't have. Please Mr. President, quite already!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

There's your source.

http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/faq.html

republicans own the banks. you think a bunch of poor democrats own them? Please!!! <:-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Just to add to my previous comment:

No, jobs went overseas because labor was cheaper, environmental regulations weren't as stringent (expensive), and land was cheaper overseas.

adaydream, perhaps you can point out the specific tax law which Republicans wrote to give companies a tax break for moving their production overseas?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Except for the george bush Memorial War in Iraq there wasn't anything that went through congress except the normal budget. Everything else he'd already sent through when the republicans were in power, except the bailout.

When Obama came into office we were already indebted $11Trillion. We went from $5.75Trillion debt to $11Trillion just during bush's reign. It wasn't on Obama's watch. < :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

There's your source.

I'm sorry, I meant to ask your source for the number for the $4 trillion Bush "gave away", not the $7 trillion debt figure. My apologies for the confusion.

republicans own the banks. you think a bunch of poor democrats own them? Please!!!

Proof?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sorry ca

This would stop the practice. http://www.treas.gov/press/releases/tg119.htm

53 NAT’L TAX J. 825, 835 (2000) 54 NAT’L TAX J. 787, 790 (2001)

And here's a link that tells how it works.

http://hlpronline.com/law/2009/12/shipping-jobs-overseas-how-the-tax-code-subsidizes-foreign-investment-and-how-to-fix-it/

Enjoy the read. < :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

$4Trillion tax give away. Look for it yourself. You and I both know you aren't that ignorant about the facts. You want that one, find it yourself. < :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

As I suspected you would do, you have provided information on tax shelters for multi-nationals that claim a head office overseas. (Not unlike Teddy Kennedy protecting $500 million of family wealth in a Fiji tax shelter, and Bono exploiting European tax shelters.) I specifically asked for tax breaks for moving production overseas.

Even your second source shows the basic argument as to why tax breaks exist:

"Due to these three factors, each nation has an incentive to cut corporate taxes below their neighbors’ rates to attract foreign investment."

Although to be fair, I only scanned over the articles. Still, it appears that my post about cheaper labor, land and environmental restrictions remains undisputed.

Oh, and your evidence that these tax laws were exclusively Republican created...?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Look for it yourself. ... You want that one, find it yourself.

Ah, playing USAFdude's game now, eh? Fine.

I'm still interested in seeing your proof that only Republicans own banks and businesses though.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

WhiteHawk - Why shouldn't adaydream play "my game"? I certainly defeated you with it, tough guy! LOL!

Now quit your whining and start doing your own research. You'll need it if you ever hope to make your thesis-long rants actually sound intelligent.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I certainly defeated you with it, tough guy!

No, you only defeated yourself. I asked for examples of racism against Obama that you claimed were abundant, and you provided NONE. You merely claimed to have found a bunch with a Google search, but never listed a single one.

I even provided an example for you, but it turned out to be a Berkeley-educated Iranian official. Not only was he not an American, nor a Republican, but he also demostrated that the promises of Obama restoring respect for America on the world stage have also failed.

So here's your second chance. Give me some examples of racism against Obama.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

It is not your place to grant or deny me "chances". I provided plenty of excellent examples that you foolishly try to deny exist (i.e. you're a liar). Check out the thread again; better yet, get a neutral third party to do so, if you have the balls.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

ca1ic0cat at 3:45 AM - Good one.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Anyone else notice this little winner in Obamas speech last night?

"With all due deference to separation of powers, last week the Supreme Court reversed a century of law that I believe will open the floodgates for special interests -- including foreign corporations -- to spend without limit in our elections.... I don't think American elections should be bankrolled by America's most powerful interests, or worse, by foreign entities,'' the president said. "They should be decided by the American people. And I'd urge Democrats and Republicans to pass a bill that helps to correct some of these problems.''

He was of course referring to the recent court case holding that corporations can give money in support of political cause. In that case, the court ruled that only 2 U.S.C. Section 441a- was unconstitutional..the relevant code , 2 U.S.C. Section 441e ,- was not even addressed in the ruling. That section says..

Foreign corporations are prohibited from making any contribution or donation to any committee of any political party, and they prohibited from making any "expenditure, independent expenditure, or disbursement for an electioneering communication."

Also, the law Obama was referring to, was a law prohibiting corporations directly giving to a candidates campaign funds. That law also was left intact. So, the question everyone wants to know. Was Obama lying to score some political points, or is a Harvard law degree not what it used to be?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Was Obama lying to score some political points, or is a Harvard law degree not what it used to be?

Could it be both?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

It could be both, but it's probably just Obama lying to score some political points.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Whitehawk,

"So you're denying the Pelosi, Reid and Obama have blocked and shelved Republican submissions?"

No.

Now go back, read the question again, and answer the question if you can. Thanks!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Give it up Whitehawk. You'll never make any headway. They will believe whatever the DNC tells them without any hesitation.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I know Loki520, but still...

http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKTRE51263920090203

http://www.cqpolitics.com/wmspage.cfm?docID=cqmidday-000003019936

0 ( +0 / -0 )

sounds like he will.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

quit, that is.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Looking from outside at America it would seem that much higher taxes are an inevitable part of your future as there is no cuture of saving and your trade deficit is rising rapidly every year.You are beginning to borrow from Peter to pay interest to Paul. That is not sustainable. Taxation would seem to be the only otion to enforce some saving and ... See moredebt repayment. The end to the rampant consumerism will also benefit the world`s environment. Your debt is over $50,000 per person now and growing fast daily. I can see a doubling of present tax rates over the next 10 years sorry. No choice

0 ( +0 / -0 )

It is true that high power private interest groups have lost major republican basis over there hence they should launch any possible dirty tricks to sabotage any middle class living condition advancements supported by democrats starting from halting health care reform.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The brilliant Obama:

"We find unity in our incredible diversity, drawing on the promise enshrined in our Constitution: the notion that we are all created equal...."

A full week has passed since this astounding gaffe. The media remain curiously disinterested.

Wan't this guy supposedly professor of Contitutional Law?

He doesn not even know the Declaration of Independence from the Constitution.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I look forward to paying more taxes for the benefit of Obama's agenda. Thanks Mr. President for a job not so well done! Your own side (democrats) is starting to see your true colors now, too...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I'm sorry, why is he talking about quitting? Maybe he should. Especially the ones controlling him. It would be better on his ratings.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites