Democrats & Liberals Archives

Paul Ryan's Speakership Will Be Yet Another Farce

Between the years of 1931 and 1995, there was only one Republican to hold the position of Speaker of the House. Can you guess who he was without cheating? It was Joseph William Martin Jr. who served until Democrats took over the House in 1954. He’s also the last GOP speaker whose tenure wasn’t riddled with complete insanity and scandal after scandal. I can assure you that Paul Ryan’s tenure will not end that streak.

Newt Gingrich served as Speaker from 1995-1999, and in his time, he and his caucus single-handedly shut down the government twice, and caused more dysfunction and destruction in Congress. Not to mention he used charities to illegally launder political donations for his personal use, pursued and presided over the impeachment of Bill Clinton when Newt has had more affairs and left more wives than Clinton, and got caught in the 1983 pages scandal.

When Gingrich's childish antics as Speaker resulted in the Democrats picking up 5 seats in the 1998 midterm elections, Gingrich's support imploded, and he was replaced by Dennis Hastert. Mr. Hastert was not only laundering money to avoid federal financing laws, but he also paid hush money to three boys he'd sexually abused while he was a high school teacher before running for Congress. As Speaker, he presided over the unmitigated disaster that was the Bush administration, and supported Bush's disastrous foreign policy which, as you know, resulted in two wars.

Next up was John Boehner, who may have been free of personal scandals, still ranks as one of the worst Speakers in the history of the House. He spent his entire tenure in front of the cameras talking out his arse and refusing to do anything legislatively. After pledging that job creation would be the Republicans' first priority if they won the 2010 elections, Boehner and his Republicans instead voted 60 times to take health care from 30 million Americans, passed abortion bans, pursued long-debunked bogus "scandals," shut down the government, and nearly caused the country to default on its debt three separate times.

Now Paul Ryan, a guy who doesn't even want the job of Speaker was thrust into the role bcause the House Suicide Caucus originally refused to support anyone but a candidate nutty enough for their standards. One of Ryan's first acts as Speaker is to preside over the impeachment proceedings of the IRS chief, the result of yet another partisan witch hunt that yielded nothing. Ryan is more inclined to let the Suicide Caucus run wild, rather than try to rein them in as Boehner tried to do. Ryan will more than likely continue the Boehner Doctrine of refusing to govern and acting like children while Congress' 7% approval rating continues to drop. Ryan's Speakership will go down in history as yet another farce, as the far-right Republicans will inevitably become fed up with his not-crazy-enough ideology and try to force him out, as they successfully did John Boehner.

Once Republicans get full federal control and have gone completely wild, Ryan will be ousted as Speaker, and the grown ups will be in charge of a Democratic House. What Americans need to realize is that as long as they keep electing Republicans to Congress, their childish will never stop. Had enough yet? Vote Democratic for a change!

Posted by TreyL at October 29, 2015 5:13 PM
Comments
Comment #400093

Americans voted for Democrat change 7 years ago; how’s that going? Oh…wait a minute…after 2 years of Obama’s change and Nancy Pelosi’s “NUT” House, the American people handed the House over to Republicans…

Posted by: Blaine at October 29, 2015 9:06 PM
Comment #400097

That is a good point, but with Republicans killing Democrats in state governments, it stands to reason the Democrats will never gain control of the House again.

Posted by: James T.Kirk at October 30, 2015 7:35 AM
Comment #400101

Blaine, when the Democrats were in charge, if something was going to help the middle class, it got passed. We expanded health care, put the economy back on track, regulated the banks and repealed DADT. All the Reoublicans did to win in 2010 was scream the N-word.

James, that’s what they said after 1994. The plan at this point is to enact through direct democracy fair redistricting laws, and independent redistricting panels. Besides, once a Republican is in office, the pendulum will start swinging back. In 2006, even red states turned blue.

Posted by: TreyL at October 30, 2015 12:54 PM
Comment #400102

Trey, you do realize that your whole argument is that Democrats help the middle class more because they give us free stuff, run up debt, and create new so-called ‘rights’ that you want?

They misinformation about Bill Clinton and the N-word hyperbole was a good touch, though.

Posted by: kctim at October 30, 2015 1:06 PM
Comment #400103

Treyl, in the past 7 years, the plight of the middle-class has been degraded. On the average $6k drop in earnings, cost of HC insurance has tripled and out of pocket copay has quadrupled. So your talking points are bogus. When the free stuff is given out, it is the middle class who are paying for it.

What has Obama and the left done to make you possibly believe the Democrats could possibly regain the House? How many polls showing that we are going in the wrong direction do you have to see, for you to understand that the American people are fed up?

Posted by: Blaine at October 30, 2015 1:47 PM
Comment #400104

The really sad thing is Obama is dividing the country on purpose by supporting BLM in order to stir up the uninformed base of the Democratic Party. With the goal of turning them out to vote. Obama is a sick SOB, and the leftist who support his sick goals are SOB’s too.

Posted by: Blaine at October 30, 2015 1:53 PM
Comment #400106

I have never received any “free stuff”. I work for what I want and get, I pay taxes, I donate to charities, and I try to help those around me. I voted for President Obama twice. All of this “free stuff” nonsense is something that I grow tired of. The faux outrage about “free stuff” should be directed towards big corporations, who really get the “free stuff” in this country. Conservatives and Republicans have been using this nonsense for years, almost as long as I can recall. It used to work but anymore a lot of people see it for what it is. Made up stuff about someone or something they don’t like or approve of. We stopped looking for your approval a long time ago.

President Obama’s approval ratings seem to be hovering at just under 50% and ticks up lately. The only ones dissatisfied with his performance are the ones who did not vote for him and berated him for the past 7 years. You can do this in our great country, it is called dissent. But if the dissent is grounded in this “free stuff” nonsense then it just doesn’t ring true to most people.

Posted by: Speak4all at October 30, 2015 2:16 PM
Comment #400108

Speaks claims; “I have never received any “free stuff”.”

Wrong Speaks, nearly every American, rich or poor or middle class receives “free stuff”. I get free stuff too.

The government loses about $900 billion in revenue every year on just the 10 largest tax expenditures — called expenditures because while they aren’t direct outlays, they come at a cost just like direct spending.

That includes credits like the earned-income tax credit and Child Tax Credit as well as deductions and exclusions that help mainly middle-class people reduce how much they owe each April. It also includes special tax rates such as the lower burden on money made through investments instead of a salary.

Welfare for the poor, middle class and wealthy is expected by the voters and will continue until the nation is bankrupt.

Posted by: Royal Flush at October 30, 2015 2:44 PM
Comment #400109


Speaks

Trey is referring to the ACA when he dishonestly say that the Republicans voted to take health care from 30 million Americans. The ACA gives subsidies to some Americans to pay for, or help them pay for, health care insurance. The subsidies do not have to be payed back, they are free money.

Those who vote to receive those subsidies, or vote for others to receive them, are voting to be given free stuff.

You can argue that you agree with government providing stuff at no financial costs, but you cannot argue that it is not free.

Trey used hyperbole and he got called out on it. So goes life.

Posted by: kctim at October 30, 2015 2:47 PM
Comment #400111

It’s not free because I pay TAXES. My taxes are helping others and our country. That someone doesn’t like that or doesn’t want to do that does not affect me one bit. I suggest if you don’t like it, work to change what you don’t like. But to bitch constantly about “free stuff” is stupid and is becoming more and more meaningless everyday. Nothing in life is free, while some people have a hard time learning that or may never learn that is not my concern. I pay taxes so other less fortunate people can be attempted to be helped. I would suggest that if you don’t like paying taxes to help less fortunate people or our country as a whole then do something about it. I do you see, I pay TAXES knowingly and with pleasure to be able to live in our great country and see it succeed. Now military spending, that’s another thing entirely. But I am working on that.

Posted by: Speak4all at October 30, 2015 2:58 PM
Comment #400112

Speaks, relax some.

Tell you what. I will send you a beer and you tell us all how much money it cost you to drink it.

Posted by: kctim at October 30, 2015 3:18 PM
Comment #400113

I am very relaxed. You see, I am not the one whining about people getting “free stuff”. Thanks for the offer but I don’t use money and the amount I spend to calculate much of anything other than to try to make sure I have enough. The thought that money could somehow bring me happiness is beyond my understanding but I will admit that money can make happiness easier to obtain if the happiness you desire is productive to your general well being. But honestly, haven’t you ever heard the saying “The best things in life are free”? What do you think that means? Now don’t start with the liberty and freedom stuff, try to use something others can understand and relate to. I know you have a cherished respect for liberty and freedom and I can respect that but I would hope that you would understand that not everyone has that the same way you do.

Posted by: Speak4all at October 30, 2015 3:26 PM
Comment #400116

Speaks: “Now don’t start with the liberty and freedom stuff, try to use something others can understand and relate to.”

I just love Speak’s hyperbolic pontification. Only he and a few other elite Lefties can understand Liberty and Freedom.

Posted by: Royal Flush at October 30, 2015 3:34 PM
Comment #400122

I didn’t say that you numbskull. I said I respected his views on liberty and freedom. WTF is wrong with you old man. Did I say anything about what I though about liberty and freedom or are you just trying to put words in my keyboard again? I don’t understand liberty and freedom any better than anyone else on this blog but if you think I do you can live in your fantasy.

Posted by: Speak4all at October 30, 2015 3:51 PM
Comment #400125

OH, MY Speaks. Can’t stand reading your own writing?

Posted by: Royal Flush at October 30, 2015 3:56 PM
Comment #400126

Well since I didn’t write only me and the “lefties” know can understand liberty and freedom then I would say I can’t stand your writing wouldn’t I? Having a bad day?? Unable to keep it together?? Is that why you are accusing me of typing stuff I didn’t type? Maybe it is nap time?

Posted by: Speak4all at October 30, 2015 4:01 PM
Comment #400128

Poor Speaks, denies authorship of a direct quote and then calls me a “numskull”. How quaint.

Posted by: Royal Flush at October 30, 2015 4:08 PM
Comment #400129

We already knew your reading comprehension was as devoid of ability as your political acumen but to display that in such a manner on this blog seems a bit excessive. Are you also into self-flagellation?

Please try to point out how you think I said only I and “lefties” here understand liberty and freedom. I did not but you insist so somewhere in that space between your ears you must have a reason. Or maybe not?

Posted by: Speak4all at October 30, 2015 4:14 PM
Comment #400130

Speaks

I only mentioned free stuff because that was what Trey was speaking of when he said Republicans voted to take health care away from 30 million Americans.

In all honesty, the saying that I am familiar with is “The best things in life aren’t free. What I believe that means is that people appreciate the things they work for and earn, more than they do the things that are given to them for free. The former motivates, the latter demotivates.

Posted by: kctim at October 30, 2015 4:25 PM
Comment #400131

Poor Speaks. Wriggle, Wriggle, Squirm, Squirm, Spin, Spin.

Your quote: ““Now don’t start with the liberty and freedom stuff, try to use something others can understand and relate to.”

Using the word “others” clearly means that only the “few”, including your exalted self, can understand liberty and freedom.

Using the word “stuff” to describe liberty and freedom clearly indicates the low regard you have for these concepts cherished by most Americans.

Keep digging Speaks.

Posted by: Royal Flush at October 30, 2015 4:26 PM
Comment #400132

Well I guess we have different perspectives. To me the saying the best things in life are free means that the air I breathe, the love from another, the beauty of nature, the astounding immensity of our universe and many, many more things are available to anyone without paying a dime. That you are concerned with someone getting free stuff and not being grateful for that is understandable but there is nothing I can do about that. I tend to focus on things that I can do something about. But I do tire of being told that I only want free stuff when nothing could be further from the truth.

Posted by: Speak4all at October 30, 2015 4:33 PM
Comment #400133

RF, you never fail to amuse me. Here’s a tip, instead of thinking of what I mean when I type just stick to what I type and stop thinking you know what I mean rather than what I type, K?

Posted by: Speak4all at October 30, 2015 4:35 PM
Comment #400134

LOL…now Speak is spinning the meaning of common words like “others” and “stuff”.

Posted by: Royal Flush at October 30, 2015 4:38 PM
Comment #400135

No I typed “others” which means others, and “stuff” which means stuff. When you look words up in a dictionary do you comprehend what is attempted to be conveyed or do you sit there and say “I know what they mean, they mean this” and then turn it into your meaning? Black is white, up is down, in is out, that kind of meaning? And I have told you before, stop with the spinning nonsense. I think you think it makes you seem smart, it doesn’t.

Posted by: Speak4all at October 30, 2015 4:47 PM
Comment #400136

LOL…we can hear Speak’s pulse pounding as he is in hyper-spin mode.

“Others” Those who don’t understand “stuff”

“Stuff” Liberty and Freedom

Posted by: Royal Flush at October 30, 2015 4:55 PM
Comment #400138

RF, now you are beginning to understand how I interpret those words when you use them. You see they do mean something different to both of us. I know in your mind there is only one meaning but that is for you, not me. Now you know I enjoy our discussions immensely, well maybe not immensely but maybe minimally? Got a granddaughter that needs to be picked up and I do enjoy her company a lot more than our discussions, sorry. And remember be nice, or else.

Posted by: Speak4all at October 30, 2015 4:59 PM
Comment #400139

Go in peace Speak. Hope I didn’t dim your sunny disposition.

Posted by: Royal Flush at October 30, 2015 5:16 PM
Comment #400140

Free stuff; I’m sure we can all remember the black woman, who after voting for Mobama, bragged the she was going to get a free car, free gas, etc; and when asked how Mobama was going to give her free stuff, her answer was he was going to pay for it out of his stash. Of course, we all remember the free Mobama phones, and of course there is always the 50 million Americans who are on welfare and food stamps. Not to mention the free HC; of course, everyone else’s rates went up to pay for the free stuff. Then we have the millions who have opted to get a lawyer and file for SS disability because they have lost their jobs and also ran out of unemployment benefits. The whole premise of the left is to get as many people as possible on government free stuff. Stop and think of the tried and true democratic ploys when attacking republicans at election time; there going to steal your SS, school children are going to starve, republicans are going to take away your food stamps or welfare benefits; these is all free stuff and the left’s desire is the threaten the uninformed masses with loss of all the free stuff if they vote for republicans.

Speaks wants to argue about known facts. It’s a fact that democrats have built a voting base on the promises of free stuff.

Posted by: Blaine at October 30, 2015 5:31 PM
Comment #400144
Speaks wants to argue about known facts.
You seriously respond to this with a bunch of falsehoods?

Take your “Mobama phones”, for instance, that was a lie.

Posted by: Warren Porter at October 30, 2015 9:55 PM
Comment #400145

Speak4all says this is free stuff:

To me the saying the best things in life are free means that the air I breathe, the love from another, the beauty of nature, the astounding immensity of our universe and many, many more things are available to anyone without paying a dime.

The air he breathes is Al Gore’s air and he wants a tax on it.

The love of another and the beauty of nature are opinions.

The immensity of our universe is only seen when you look up. (this only works when it’s dark out, Speak4all) Otherwise, it will cost money.

Theodore Roosevelt and Speak4all think the beauty of nature are treasures held in trust by the federal government. Theodore and Speak4all trust in the American people to provide for the beauty of nature, and guarantees that provision, by paying the federal government to point the barrel of a gun at their, and their children’s heads.


Posted by: Weary Willie at October 30, 2015 10:21 PM
Comment #400146

Warren Porter, your such a wise ass. Try reading the link you provided. The Mobama phones are provided by taxpayers, it’s called a “Universal Service Fee”, that’s tacked on to the bill of every person who actually pays for cell phone service. Now you can twist and turn, and you can spin it all you want, as you usually do, but it doesn’t change the fact that America taxpayers are footing the bill.

You want to argue the fact that 50 million Americans are on food stamps too?

You want to argue the fact that a black woman said Mobama was going to give her a car and pay for the gas, out of his Mobama stash?

Do you want to argue the fact that people are paying higher HC premiums in order to provide free HC for those on welfare? Of which that number has risen since Mobama took office.

Or perhaps you would like to argue that the left never uses the same old worn out claims that republicans want to starve children, take old people’s SS away, or throw grandma off the cliff, like they do in every election?

Posted by: Blaine at October 30, 2015 11:43 PM
Comment #400148

Who gives a crap about Paul Ryan’s speakership? The democrats have already been praising Ryan as speaker. Let’s talk about how upset the democrats are at Obama for sending troops into Syria. They are calling it “mission creep “. Last month Obama said he was not putting any boots on the ground in Syria, and today we have them on their way. Is this another Obama lie, or will the left on WB defend him once again? What a pathetic bunch.

Posted by: Blaine at October 30, 2015 11:56 PM
Comment #400151
your such a wise ass

There’s no evidence to back yourself up so you resort to the very typical conservative tactic and administer an ad hominen attack rather than support your claim that “we all remember the free Mobama phones”. The truth is that there never was such a thing. There have been programs dating back to the ’30s providing telephone service for the underprivileged. The cellular telephone aspect began in 2008 when Barack Obama was a lowly Senator from Illinois.

Blaine, at this point you have lied so often and with such vindictiveness, nobody is takes your claims seriously anymore. You have zero credibility here. Show some contrition for a change when you get your facts wrong and maybe you will be treated differently.

Posted by: Warren Porter at October 31, 2015 1:18 AM
Comment #400152

Of course, I mistakenly butchered my comment when I replaced “is taking” to “takes” while proofreading. Mea Culpa.

Posted by: Warren Porter at October 31, 2015 1:20 AM
Comment #400158

Warped, Why do they call them “Obama phones” then?

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at October 31, 2015 11:10 AM
Comment #400159


“Why do they call them “Obama phones” then?”

God I hope this is a rhetorical question…

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at October 31, 2015 12:41 PM
Comment #400160

Why are they called “Obama phones”, Rocky

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at October 31, 2015 1:07 PM
Comment #400161

Let’s just say there were a few presidents that could have had their name attached to the free phone program. But the program had widespread growth during the Obama Administration hence the name “Obama Phone”.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at October 31, 2015 1:14 PM
Comment #400162
There are 17 million households currently signed up for the program, up from under 7 million just four years ago. There are two reasons for the rapid growth. First, the recession dramatically increased the number of people who are eligible. Second, in 2008, during George W. Bush’s administration, the FCC allowed wireless carrier Tracfone to join the program’s list of approved providers. Tracfone has aggressively gone after Lifeline customers. It advertises its “free phone” on television, pays commissioned street teams to canvas low-income neighborhoods for new subscribers, and signs customers up through a splashy website that promises “250 Free Minutes Every Month! Pay Nothing!”

My source is from 2012. So, 4 years ago refers to 2008, which was before Obama became President. Now, the question is, should we blame Obama for the fact that the recession increased the number of low-income households eligible for this program? Likewise, should we blame Obama for a decision made by GWB’s FCC to let Carlos Slim aggressively market and sell the service?

Posted by: Warren Porter at October 31, 2015 1:40 PM
Comment #400163

Warped, the program actually started with Reagan, then Clinton signed into law a communication program, Bush continued it and so did Obama the free phone program expanded under Obama by the increase of food stamp partisipants so Hence we get the Name “Obama Phone”. I googled it to, to get my info, mine came from one of the participating carriers.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at October 31, 2015 2:02 PM
Comment #400164

Warren, Obama himself calls it an Obama Phone; and his web site calls it an “important federal program”. Federal Program means federal dollars, which is translated tax payer dollars:

20 million financially-strapped Americans now have a free cell phone and minutes, thanks to this important federal program.

http://www.obamaphone.com/

Posted by: Blaine at October 31, 2015 6:54 PM
Comment #400165

Obamaphone.com even tells you how to get an obamaphone:

How to Get an Obama Phone?

It’s easy to get an Obama phone and service. Government programs such as Food Stamps and Medicaid qualify you for eligibility. So does meeting low-income requirements.

Millions of Americans have been economically devastated by the economic meltdown, by the deep recession that followed it, and by the nation’s ongoing economic struggles. Many of those needy Americans have reached the point where they consider a telephone a luxury that they cannot afford.

The Obama Phone program (also known as Lifeline Assistance) can lift that burden. More than 20 million Americans have already received a free Obama Phone and get 250 free cell phone minutes every month.

How do you get an Obama Phone for yourself?

The Federal Communications Commission has approved a number of companies national and regional companies to offer them to needy Americans. The program is now available in 49 states, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico. Considering the rapid growth of the Obama Phone program, it is expected that all fifty states will soon begin offering the program.

http://www.obamaphone.com/get-obama-phone

Posted by: Blaine at October 31, 2015 6:58 PM
Comment #400167
COPYRIGHT © 2015 OBAMAPHONE.COM IS NOT AFFILIATED WITH ANY DEPARTMENT OF THE US GOVERNMENT, THE FCC, OR THE LIFELINE PHONE PROGRAM.

In other words, this site is a lie. Just like your comments.

Posted by: Warren Porter at October 31, 2015 8:45 PM
Comment #400169

Warped, Do you really think those cell phone companies are giving those free phones and minutes to the poor because they want to be nice to the poor? They are getting paid through the government.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at October 31, 2015 9:20 PM
Comment #400170

First of all, let me clear up a few misreadings of what I have wrote.

I attacked Blaine for lying about Obama’s role regarding the SafeLine Wireless. Reasonable people can disagree regarding the wisdom of charging a Universal Service Fee to telephone subscribers or the wisdom of using some of the money from that fee to subsidize very rudimentary phone service for underprivileged Americans.

Ultimately, it is a matter of semantics as to whether or not the SafeLine program should be considered “taxpayer funded”. Regardless, arguing about such semantics is really a red herring. Although SafeLine is not a traditional taxpayer funded program, demonstrating that it is would not vindicate Blaine. My (now proven) allegation was that he lied regarding Obama’s involvement with the program. As I have documented, the principle of establishing the Universal Service Fund and subsidizing telecommunications for some people dates back to the 1934 Telecommunications Act. The 1996 Telecommunications Act revised and expanded some of the programs started in 1934. Lastly, in 2008, GWB’s FCC paved the way for a massive expansion in the number of wireless phones available through the program.

It is beyond incredulous to allege that Obama was somehow responsible for decisions made in 1934, 1996 or even 2008.

Blaine’s propensity to lie reared its head in a subsequent comment where a website that had no affiliation with the official program was passed off as “Obama’s site”.

Posted by: Warren Porter at October 31, 2015 11:04 PM
Comment #400171

Warped, 1) R. R. started it. 2) Clinton signed an FCC law granting something similar to what R. R. started. 3) Bush kept it going. 4) Obama did likewise to what Bush did but it expanded because of the rise of food stamps clients thus the handle “Obama phone”. Warped, you can not deny food stamp clients have risen under Obama which is one of the conditions a person needs to get a free phone.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at October 31, 2015 11:28 PM
Comment #400172

KAP, Warren Porter also cannot claim that Obama doesn’t want to be known for the free obamaphones. Sure he does, in fact it is his leftist goal to make everyone he can dependent upon freebies. That’s how you build a democratic base. Then you just attack republicans in every election by telling the uniformed class, republicans want to take your free stuff.

Posted by: Blaine at October 31, 2015 11:49 PM
Comment #400173

Sure he does Blaine that’s why he calls them Obama phones his self. Lately I’ve been calling Warren by his previous handle “Warped Reality” because lately that is what his comments are “Warped Reality”.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at November 1, 2015 12:03 AM
Comment #400178
food stamp clients have risen under Obama

I don’t know where you’ve been the last 8 years, but we just had the severest recession since WWII. Of course the number of people eligible for social welfare programs increased when millions of workers lost their jobs thereby increasing enrollment. Now, that the economy is recovering, the status quo isreturning.

For the sake of comparison, GW Bush ended his term with 14.7 million more people receiving food stamps than at the beginning. Obama, on the other hand, is currently looking at a net change of just 13.5 million through the first 6.75 years of his Presidency.
http://www.factcheck.org/2015/10/obamas-numbers-october-2015-update/

Warren Porter also cannot claim that Obama doesn’t want to be known for the free obamaphones. Sure he does, in fact it is his leftist goal to make everyone he can dependent upon freebies. That’s how you build a democratic base. Then you just attack republicans in every election by telling the uniformed class, republicans want to take your free stuff.

And why exactly am I supposed to trust a liar to accurately diagnose what Obama wants or doesn’t want? Watching you grasp for straws is really pathetic at this point.

Posted by: Warren Porter at November 1, 2015 6:17 AM
Comment #400181

Yea Warped, 13.5 million more on food stamps and almost twice the debt Bush had. I think it’s time democrats quit blaming Bush and take responsibilities for their screw ups. Don’t forget Obama still has 1 1/4 years to go so food stamps may surpass Bush’s numbers.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at November 1, 2015 9:23 AM
Comment #400186
Don’t forget Obama still has 1 1/4 years to go so food stamps may surpass Bush’s numbers.

Food stamp enrollment peaked in 2012 at 47.8 million. Last June, there were only 45.5 million recipients. Thus, in just 2.5 years enrollment has decreased by 2.3 million. Barring another economic downturn, there is zero chance that Obama will surpass Bush’s numbers.

I think it’s time democrats quit blaming Bush and take responsibilities for their screw ups.
Of course you think that as it lets you give Bush a free pass. The fact of the matter is that we had a recession and that recession was a direct consequence of Bush’s laissez-faire policies. Thus, when discussing the first 2 or 3 years of Obama’s term means we must discuss Bush’s recession as well. Nearly all the growth in food stamp recipients occurred in those first few years. Ever since Obama actually got a handle on the economy, things have gone down. Posted by: Warren Porter at November 1, 2015 10:36 AM
Comment #400190

Look Warped, I didn’t like Bush but the continued blame game you and the rest of the democrats are playing is getting old and it is time you and the rest of the democrats started to take responsibility for your screw ups. It ain’t all Bush’s fault after 6 3/4 years it’s Obama’s responsibility.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at November 1, 2015 1:14 PM
Comment #400192
after 6 3/4 years it’s Obama’s responsibility
Absolutely. For instance, Obama is entirely responsible the decrease in recipients after 2012. Bush had no hand in that.

However, that’s not what is being discussed. What was being discussed concerned the events of 2008 and 2009. This is Bush’s final year as POTUS and Obama’s first 11 months. The economy was a train-wreck at the time and all the bad statistics one can cite stem from the terrible economy. This was well before the ARRA had taken effect so Obama cannot be implicated.

By every measure, the recovery from that recession has gone quite well. Jobs are being created on a consistent basis. The stock market is on a long bull run. With the improved economy, all these things (poverty rate, social welfare enrollment, etc) will naturally sort themselves out.

Posted by: Warren Porter at November 1, 2015 1:35 PM
Comment #400193

Warped, the last years of the Bush Admin. the DEMOCRATS had control of the purse. The first years of the Obama admin. DEMOCRATS had control of everything but did NOTHING but pass a law a majority didn’t want being the ACA. I know, I know I going to hear Republicans and the obstruction BULLS**T.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at November 1, 2015 1:46 PM
Comment #400195

Warped Reality is a good name for a leftist; especially one who wants to sound like a moderate.

Well Warped, I guess both of us are disappointed in each other; I am a liar and you are a deceiver. You claim I lie for calling the freebie phones Mobamaphones, which Mobama also called them; and you deceived us by “acting like you truly wanted to know something about CCW laws and weapons”. When in reality, you were nothing more than another gun grabbing socialist who had no interest in learning anything. Simply a trick to argue your anti-second amendment agenda. So I guess we’re both disappointed; but at least I am what I claim to be…but you my friend are a fraud.

For the sake of comparison, GW Bush ended his term with 14.7 million more people receiving food stamps than at the beginning. Obama, on the other hand, is currently looking at a net change of just 13.5 million through the first 6.75 years of his Presidency…

Food stamp enrollment peaked in 2012 at 47.8 million. Last June, there were only 45.5 million recipients. Thus, in just 2.5 years enrollment has decreased by 2.3 million. Barring another economic downturn, there is zero chance that Obama will surpass Bush’s numbers.

So Warped claims Obama is responsible for removing 2.3 million off almost 48 million recipients. That is once again the fraudulent numbers of Warped. In the first 4 years of the Obama presidency SSDI recipients increased by 5.4 million, and we can only assume that has continued to go up in the past 3 years. How many of the say 8 to 9 million increased SSDI recipients are those who were previously on welfare, food stamps, or unemployment benefits?

And lastly, Warped’s claims to a robust economy:

The economy was a train-wreck at the time and all the bad statistics one can cite stem from the terrible economy. This was well before the ARRA had taken effect so Obama cannot be implicated.

By every measure, the recovery from that recession has gone quite well. Jobs are being created on a consistent basis. The stock market is on a long bull run. With the improved economy, all these things (poverty rate, social welfare enrollment, etc) will naturally sort themselves out.

The ARRA had no effect except to be a personal slush fund for the Obama administration.

Wake up Warped Reality; the economy is in shambles (that’s why it’s number 1 on voters concerns); Jobs are not being created and the jobs that are created are low wage; the average middle-income family has lost $6.5k a year income; the stock market cannot be trusted as an indicator of the economy as long as the Obama administration is printing and dumping money in the market; and (poverty rate, social welfare enrollment, etc) continue to plummet.

But hey…let’s continue to use the old leftist talking points and blame Bush, even after 7 years. By your computation, Bush could have blamed everything that happened in his first 7 years on Clinton.

Posted by: Blaine at November 1, 2015 3:03 PM
Comment #400198

Jeeesusss you guys do you really believe this crap you are spouting? KAP and Blaine how can anyone be on the planet as long as you have and sound so foolish while trying to convince us the economy is all because of Obama. You truly win the Idiocracy trophy for such devout obedience to ideology

Wake up Warped Reality; the economy is in shambles (that’s why it’s number 1 on voters concerns); Jobs are not being created and the jobs that are created are low wage; the average middle-income family has lost $6.5k a year income

Blaine, two words your team has been spouting for years- “Job Creators”. Your problem is with the job creators unless you want the GWB fix for job creation which was making the government bigger. The job creators you tell us deserve tax breaks have let us down, they have been doing this for years yet you point the finger at Obama. They got the tax breaks so where are the jobs?

Take a look at the conservative utopia of Kansas and see where we could be had Obama went the conservative route back in 2009.

Posted by: j2t2 at November 2, 2015 9:30 AM
Comment #400199

Jeeesusss you guys do you really believe this crap you are spouting? KAP and Blaine how can anyone be on the planet as long as you have and sound so foolish while trying to convince us the economy is all because of Obama. You truly win the Idiocracy trophy for such devout obedience to ideology

Wake up Warped Reality; the economy is in shambles (that’s why it’s number 1 on voters concerns); Jobs are not being created and the jobs that are created are low wage; the average middle-income family has lost $6.5k a year income

Blaine, two words your team has been spouting for years- “Job Creators”. Your problem is with the job creators unless you want the GWB fix for job creation which was making the government bigger. The job creators you tell us deserve tax breaks have let us down, they have been doing this for years yet you point the finger at Obama. They got the tax breaks so where are the jobs?

Take a look at the conservative utopia of Kansas and see where we could be had Obama went the conservative route back in 2009.

Posted by: j2t2 at November 2, 2015 9:42 AM
Comment #400200

j2, never said the economy was Obama’s fault but I will say his policies have done nothing to improve it. Massive debt, peoples wages going down, Obamacare???????????, people who gave up looking for work, more people applying for SSDI, foreign relation policies suck, YEP, Obama is doing a bang up job, YOU WISH!

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at November 2, 2015 10:01 AM
Comment #400203
never said the economy was Obama’s fault but I will say his policies have done nothing to improve it.

What bills exactly have the conservatives in Congress put forward to improve the economy this past 5 years or so KAP?

Massive debt,

We are at war KAP have been for years of course we are going to keep piling on the debt. Especially when we cut taxes while going to war.


peoples wages going down,

Since the 80’s wages have been stagnant, it is called trickle on economics KAP. It is called union busting KAP, it is called corporations making the laws under the guise of free markets KAP, what have you done about it, you and the conseratives you vote for?

Obamacare???????????,

What about it?????? Be honest KAP other than the butt hurt conservatives whining about it what has been the problem?

people who gave up looking for work,

Yet you prop up the “job creators” with your votes! You tell us lowering taxes will create jobs! So what bills exactly have those conservatives in Congress forwarded to Obama that would get people back into the workforce?

more people applying for SSDI,

Where are the jobs promised by the job creators? Assuming of course you are trying to tell us they are applying without being disabled.

relation policies suck,

Just because he didn’t run out and get us into an occupation of another country doesn’t mean relations are bad KAP. The whole occupation thing just added to our debt level. On the whole relations have improved since the cowboy diplomacy days of the past administrations.

YEP, Obama is doing a bang up job, YOU WISH!

Things are better know then when he first came to office KAP, much better. Now, you have thrown all this crap against the wall with nothing sticking but your ODS KAP, it is time for your to answer the questions presented to you instead of driveling away at this random selection of BS you hide behind.

Posted by: j2t2 at November 2, 2015 10:50 AM
Comment #400204

J2, What bills? Over 300 were sitting on Reid’s desk and now we have another A**HOLE Senate leader. Massive debt, You and others on your side of the fence complained about Bush growing the debt, “We were at war then” now your using that excuse for Obama. Obamacare billed as the Affordable Care Act, turns out it’s not so affordable premiums keep rising. People who gave up looking for work and more on SSDI, I refer you to the 1st sentence. Peoples wages down, you say since the 80’s wages have been stagnant I blame that on the Leaders we have had since then can’t expect much when IDIOTS are elected and re elected now can we j2? Foreign relations suck, never said we have to occupy a country now did I. Russia, Middle East countries and China, Korea think our fearless leader is a weakling with no backbone, I kinda think that to. We just about turned our back on Israel. The Iran agreement is a JOKE. Things are better now LOLOLOLOLOLOL, IN YOUR DREAMS J2!

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at November 2, 2015 11:17 AM
Comment #400206

J2,

What bills?

Yes KAP specifically what bills were passed in the HoR for job creation, infrastructure and such that would have helped the economy grow.

Over 300 were sitting on Reid’s desk

I’m not talking about the silly anti health care bills your team has been spending all their time on KAP.

and now we have another A**HOLE Senate leader.
You must be speaking of Mitch McConnell the guy who told us the job of conservatives is to obstruct Obama as their main goal.
Massive debt, You and others on your side of the fence complained about Bush growing the debt, “We were at war then” now your using that excuse for Obama.

Yes we did complain when GWB grew the debt while cutting taxes and keeping the war debt off the books so the next guy would be responsible for it. Those were not financially responsible actions KAP. I’m not using it as an excuse I am saying why are you guys using it when you were all for the war the debt and the tax cuts then. Little bit hypocritical to bi**h about it now isn’t it.

Obamacare billed as the Affordable Care Act, turns out it’s not so affordable premiums keep rising.

Premiums kept rising before the ACA KAP. The ACA was an effort to hold costs down but lets follow the money and see where the problem is I would suggest the insurance companies and hospitals who despite no inflation keep raising rates and costs. The free market works for it’s own interests after all right?

Peoples wages down, you say since the 80’s wages have been stagnant I blame that on the Leaders we have had since then can’t expect much when IDIOTS are elected and re elected now can we j2?

Well KAP are you denying your support for the job creators and the tax cuts they demanded to get the economy rolling again? You can blame the leaders but it is much more complicated than that, KAP. You have fallen for the Reagan myth “the government is the problem” while helping the idiots get elected, making government the problem. Despite knowing of the starve the beast strategy of the conservatives you favored the tax cuts, the off budget wars, the bankruptcy laws passe by corporate America. It is very naive to blame the idiots we elected when we elected then after listening to their lies and electing them again. Blame us and the idiots not the government. BTW I am using idiot and conservative interchangeably here.

Foreign relations suck, never said we have to occupy a country now did I.

But you did like GWB foreign policy and that is what his policy was. You also seem to confuse diplomacy with weakness atypical conservative trait. BTW how do you think anyone of the repub candidates whining about moderators will stand up against Putin with his tough questions and comments speaking of sucking.

Russia, Middle East countries and China, Korea think our fearless leader is a weakling with no backbone, I kinda think that to.

Of course you do KAP but you can’t have it both ways, the debt is increased as we continue to police the world and when we try to save a buck with diplomacy you complain. To think we can bray about our prowess after the Iraq debacle GWB go us into is laughable. Compared to a dictatorship, kings and Putin ruling like a Czar Obama is a weakling as he has the people of this country to answer to, The dictators don’t. But in the democratic civilized world he isn’t a weakling at all.

We just about turned our back on Israel.

Have you looked at a map of Israel of 1946 and an Israel of today? Perhaps they aren’t as lily white as you think KAP. I guess you may prefer blind obedience to Israel but not me.

The Iran agreement is a JOKE.

Always easy to say but what did your team do when they had the chance? Nothing. You either want war or you want a diplomatic solution, but can you afford another all out war in Iran instead of using diplomacy to get our foot in the door?

Things are better now LOLOLOLOLOLOL, IN YOUR DREAMS J2!

KAP, better than when Obama took office and while you can laugh at that you are being laughed at for denial of this truth. Despite your braying and blustering about Obama things are better. Especially when the conservatives have obstructed so much for so long for political gain.

Posted by: j2t2 at November 2, 2015 12:46 PM
Comment #400207

j2, You got your opinion I got mine. I think your full of S**T and you think I am. Concerning Israel, have you looked at a map dating say 1000-500 BCE?

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at November 2, 2015 1:02 PM
Comment #400208
You got your opinion I got mine. I think your full of S**T and you think I am.

KAP, I don’t think you are full of s**t. I think you have been deceived and have fallen for a line of s**t. You see when I ask you for specific facts you cannot provide any, yet you still hold to the Obama Derangement Syndrome mentality instead of thinking that there is more to the issue.

When you rail on about the debt after the previous administration cut taxes during war time and hid the debt from the American people it doesn’t necessarily indicate you are full of s**t, it signals the rest of us you are hypocritical in your opinions and lack critical thinking skills making you susceptible to conservative propaganda that you then call your opinion.

I also noticed you have refused to discuss the job creators at all. Why is that? Easier to blame Obama and the gubbermint than to face facts and reality?


Concerning Israel, have you looked at a map dating say 1000-500 BCE?

Seriously? In modern times the state of Israel was established by the UN in 1947. To look at such an ancient map as the one you refer to indicates a lack of reasoning as well KAP.

Posted by: j2t2 at November 2, 2015 1:45 PM
Comment #400209

j2 like I said you got your opinion I got mine. I also think you have been deceived and have fall for the liberal line of S**T. So on that point we are at a stale mate. Israel held those lands thousands of years ago and you say because the UN in 1947 is being generous to them shows a bigger lack of reasoning. I would say the same for the good ole USA they owe big time to the people we stole lands from. If Israel wants their land back that they held for 1000’s of years then so be it.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at November 2, 2015 3:34 PM
Comment #400210

As far as the JOB CREATORS j2. Tax rates and regulations are a BIG factor that are preventing the JOB CREATORS plus the fact that the $15.00 per hour minimum wage fight in some areas is preventing new hires. Look at what the raise has done in some areas, McDonalds is going to the touch screen ordering, not only McDonalds but even sit down restaurants are doing it so what good did the minimum raise do for those people? Factories are going High Tech. so now EDUCATION plays a factor it takes less people to do the work. Just a few examples of why the JOB CREATORS are not creating.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at November 2, 2015 3:47 PM
Comment #400211

Yes, I will dare to use the “G” word. God gave a portion of land to Israel, and I know the left will go nuts; but if God gave it to them, then it is theirs. All you have to do is read your bible and you will find out what land was given to Israel. God also told Abraham, “I will bless them that bless you (Israel), and curse them that curse you”; we have always been a nation that blessed Israel…that is until Obama came along. Obama curses Israel. And look what’s happening to America…

Posted by: Blaine at November 2, 2015 5:02 PM
Comment #400212

http://www.gop.gov/solutions/

“the insurance companies and hospitals who despite no inflation keep raising rates and costs”

- Health Reform, a.k.a. Obamacare) is that it limits the profits of health insurance companies. The ACA imposes a minimum medical loss ratio (MLR) on all insurers. The MLR is the amount of money spent on covered person medical care divided by the total revenue received through premiums.

“In modern times the state of Israel was established by the UN in 1947”

Why not look at 1967?

Posted by: kctim at November 2, 2015 6:03 PM
Comment #400213

“we have always been a nation that blessed Israel…that is until Obama came along…”

Blaine,

Apparently, you conveniently forgot about the disputes between the GH Bush administration and Israel. James Baker, Secretary of State during the GH Bush administration, famously said about the intransigence of Israel in testimony before Congress, ”I have to tell you that everybody over there [Israel] should know that the telephone number is 1-202-456-1414,” Mr. Baker said. ”When you’re serious about peace, call us.’

Posted by: Rich at November 2, 2015 6:19 PM
Comment #400214

The problem isn’t opinions. The problem is facts.

Those on the right either willfully ignore them outright, or merely make them up to suit their purpose as they go along.

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at November 2, 2015 6:55 PM
Comment #400215

You got that right Rocky the problem is facts. Both sides of the fence need to get their S**T together on FACTS not just the right. Also where you get your info, you get them from left wing sources you get left wing BS and likewise for the right.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at November 2, 2015 7:23 PM
Comment #400216
As far as the JOB CREATORS j2. Tax rates and regulations are a BIG factor that are preventing the JOB CREATORS plus the fact that the $15.00 per hour minimum wage fight in some areas is preventing new hires.

KAP, at what point in time do you cut bait on this “opinion” of yours? Taxes are as low as ever on the wealthy (since WWII), for many corporations they pay no taxes how in the hell can you fall for the tax line any more? It has been what 10 years since GWB cut taxes how long before you say to yourself this tax thing may not be right.
Compare the tax rate when your whipping boy, Jimmy Carter, was president and the tax rate under GWB and Obama. Look at the number of jobs created whilst Carter was president and the number of jobs created whilst Obama and GWB was in office. Use your own sources to do this. Then explain to me why tax rates need to be cut for the “job creators to create jobs. I mean KAP at some point in time shouldn’t the private sector have to produce for you to believe this.


Look at what the raise has done in some areas, McDonalds is going to the touch screen ordering, not only McDonalds but even sit down restaurants are doing it so what good did the minimum raise do for those people?

You do a good job of covering for these CEO’s and corporations I must say KAP. But you seem to be telling us that these “job creators” can only create jobs, in exchange for tax cuts for the wealthy, that are low paying. Yet productivity has increased so much over the last two decades but the gains have stayed at the top of the economic ladder.


Factories are going High Tech. so now EDUCATION plays a factor it takes less people to do the work. Just a few examples of why the JOB CREATORS are not creating.

Then why in the hell did you and your conservative friends tell everyone it was the tax cuts that were needed for the “job creators” to create jobs. Yet despite the cuts they still didn’t produce, if this was the government you would be all over this failure KAP yet you just keep making excuses for the private sector, why is that?

Here is a job creator telling you why you are wrong, KAP.
http://businessweekly.readingeagle.com/rhetoric-about-tax-cuts-for-job-creators-is-nonsense-viewpoint/

Posted by: j2t2 at November 3, 2015 1:05 AM
Comment #400219

j2, WHERE DID I SAY ANYTHING ABOUT TAX CUTS??????????????

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at November 3, 2015 8:19 AM
Comment #400220

Interesting.
It’s been ten years since Bush cut taxes and taxes are now “as low as ever,” but yet we are told the economy is booming and unemployment is basically at full employment.

Interesting how regulations and automation were ignored. I’m a system integrator, I understand how we impact the job market, so I know why that is usually ignored.
You guys usually have talking points about how the simplest regulations means people want dirty water and food, or something.

KAP

Just like the job bills, insurance company profits and Israel BS, tThe tax cuts/rates is nothing more than an emotional deflection tactic. You convince people that people paying millions of dollars of year in taxes aren’t paying their ‘fair share,’ and they ignore all the other contributing factors like spending, regulations and technology.

Posted by: kctim at November 3, 2015 9:08 AM
Comment #400223
j2, WHERE DID I SAY ANYTHING ABOUT TAX CUTS??????????????

KAP really?

I guess all my conservative friends have forgotten the constant repeating of the job creators myth they went through a few years back. It seems they have also forgotten Blaines’ accusations (see comment 400195) about the state of the economy.

http://crooksandliars.com/jon-perr/boehner-peddles-republican-job-creators-myth

Posted by: j2t2 at November 3, 2015 9:36 AM
Comment #400225

j2 really, still I NEVER mentioned anything and neither did I see in Blaine’s comment ANYTHING and I repeat ANYTHING about TAX CUTS. I did though mention TAXES, that has to do with TAX RATES in the good ole U.S. j2, quit reading something into a comment that does NOT EXSIST. TAX RATES are the highest of any industrialized nation on this planet for corporations. With taxes and regulations I would take my business to another country where the tax are low.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at November 3, 2015 10:04 AM
Comment #400226

I’m sure our conservative friends remember the talk about job creators, they probably just don’t believe that job creators are responsible for household debt, or for paying employees more than they are worth to pay off that debt.
I wonder if all that interest Americans are paying on their household debt would help the ‘demand crisis’ and improve the job market?
I wonder if government spending has increased over the last ten years or so and if the interest paid on that would have any effect if it were being put to better use?

Na, it’s all the Republicans fault. The nerve of them ‘giving’ people money by letting them keep more of their own money.

Posted by: kctim at November 3, 2015 10:23 AM
Comment #400229

OK KAP I’ll go slow. Blaine spins the conservative myth about how the economy is in shambles telling us jobs are not being created and of course it is all because of Obama.

2. I asked him what about the job creators but evidently you guys have forgotten that myth.

3. You piped in with a litany of other myths about Obama and I kept going on the job creator myth as well as answering your other rantings and conservative myths.

4. SO that brings us to you wondering where you said tax cuts after all these posts, as if the question is relevant, but the issue was job creators and the myth of tax cuts perpetrated by conservatives for years.

The good thing about all of this is between you and kctim, many salient points were brought up that were espoused by us leftist statist types while you all were braying about tax cuts for job creators and then about Obama not creating jobs.

So it seems with all the explanations you guys have made Blaines myth about Obama and job creation look silly, thanks for the help.

Not only that you guys are sounding like leftist statist yourselves, It does one good to see you have it in you to realize the problem isn’t government or Obama but instead the control of our elected reps by the corporate and wealthy oligarchy.

SO lets move on. IMHO the issue becomes how do we fix it.

Posted by: j2t2 at November 3, 2015 11:17 AM
Comment #400230

First J2, ‘leftist statist’ types don’t promote lower taxes, less government spending, or personal responsibility. And when you talk about job creators, you are talking about government controlling them so that they do what you think is ‘fair.’
To claim we are sounding like leftist statist types is ridiculous.

“the problem isn’t government or Obama but instead the control of our elected reps by the corporate and wealthy oligarchy”

Second, how in the heck is government not the problem when this “oligarchy” you mention is using GOVERNMENT?

How to fix it?
STOP giving government the power and control your “oligarchy” needs to do the things they want to do.

Posted by: kctim at November 3, 2015 12:20 PM
Comment #400231
First J2, ‘leftist statist’ types don’t promote lower taxes, less government spending, or personal responsibility.

promoting lower taxes at the detriment of our grandchildren is a conservative trait, as is more government spending, and don’t get me started on personal responsibility kctim., when conservatives talk the talk but certainly don’t walk the walk. That in itself is a lack of personal responsibility, I think what conservatives do value is personal responsibility for others if we base our opinion on actions not words.


Kctim, I remember Rich telling us many times about the household debt load when conservatives were telling us tax cuts were the way to go to create jobs. Just give those wealthy tax cuts and they will create jobs. Hell almost have the bail out was tax cuts and look where we are, you guys blaming Obama for the interest on the debt.

I wonder if government spending has increased over the last ten years or so and if the interest paid on that would have any effect if it were being put to better use?

It seems kctim you are describing the results of cutting taxes while paying for a war off the books. As insane as this sounds it is exactly what conservatives demanded and got during the GWB administration.

j2 really, still I NEVER mentioned anything and neither did I see in Blaine’s comment ANYTHING and I repeat ANYTHING about TAX CUTS. I did though mention TAXES, that has to do with TAX RATES in the good ole U.S. j2,

So let me get this straight KAP, you mentioned taxes being to high right? What would you like to do about these taxes you deem to high? My bet is you want to…cut them, cut taxes…. right? Despite us still being at war despite the huge debt build up for doing the same thing, tax cuts, a decade ago. Remember when conservatives insisted upon keeping the taxes cut for the wealthy telling us the job creators would create jobs by doing so.

It seems to me you want it both ways war on about everyone in the middle east, cepting of course Israel, and lower taxes for the wealthy while complaining about the high debt and a lack of jobs. DO I have this right?

quit reading something into a comment that does NOT EXSIST.

Reminds me of the tale about Obama, If a tree falls in the forest and no one is around is it Obama’s fault. Unfortunately in your case the tax cuts exist even if you don’t say it out loud. Tax cuts are what you want because you believe the myth about job creation despite all evidence to the contrary KAP.

TAX RATES are the highest of any industrialized nation on this planet for corporations.

If only KAP if only that was the rate they paid for the US war effort our debt would be much smaller. But as we know that simply isn’t what the big boys pay is it? So it seems we want to go to war and police the world on the cheap and yet we pay private contractors much more to do our fighting than we do our own military. It also seems to me the corporate tax rate should be higher to support these wars as they benefit proportionately. All of this because we wanted to get Saddam out of power and occupied Iraq instead…well you know, Neocon empire building and all that.

Posted by: j2t2 at November 3, 2015 1:22 PM
Comment #400232

You really like the silly stereotypes and hyperbole about those on the right, don’t you J2. LOL!

Lower taxes would not be a detriment to our grandchildren IF government spending and debt were kept in check.

YES! Conservative politicians do talk the talk but don’t walk the walk. They are so afraid of losing votes they won’t do what is best for the country. You won’t get an argument out of me over that.

“I remember Rich telling us many times about the household debt load”

Demand creates jobs, household debt stifles demand.

You see, that’s your problem J2. Hyper partisan blinders. You remember Rich talking about it, but apparently you don’t remember that those on the right have been talking about how bad individual debt is, for at least decades.

“Hell almost have the bail out was tax cuts and look where we are, you guys blaming Obama for the interest on the debt.”

Letting people keep more of their own property does not create debt, J2, spending does.

“It seems kctim you are describing the results of cutting taxes while paying for a war off the books.”

Um, no. I am asking a question about government spending, not looking for a scapegoat to blame it on, or an excuse to justify it, or a way to deflect.

“it is exactly what conservatives demanded and got during the GWB administration.”

Yes, Bush should have cut spending and asked Americans to make sacrifices. I believed that then and I believe that now. I am consistent in my beliefs.

Interestingly, Obama kept the Bush tax cuts and continues with the spending, but you make no mention of that. Could that be because you don’t really care about unnecessary spending and burdensome debt, all you care is that it goes where you want it to? That you are inconsistent in your beliefs and want to pick and choose what’s right and wrong?

Na, I’m sure you’ll just blame Bush and some 1% who secretly run the world.

Posted by: kctim at November 3, 2015 2:36 PM
Comment #400239

kctim,

Did you vote for George W. Bush in 2004?

Posted by: Warren Porter at November 3, 2015 7:40 PM
Comment #400248
silly stereotypes and hyperbole

Right kctim, I realize you need to spin it this way but the facts are the facts.

You see, that’s your problem J2. Hyper partisan blinders.

Once again facts be facts kctim.

Um, no. I am asking a question about government spending, not looking for a scapegoat to blame it on, or an excuse to justify it, or a way to deflect.

Well perhaps you are just misinformed, it happens a lot with the rightist it seems. Starve the beast, blind tax pledges, bloated military all add up to some serious debt. Your team did more than most to expand the military role, run up debt while cutting taxes, are we supposed to not mention that while your team blames Obama for the sun setting and everything under the sun? I think not.


Yes, Bush should have cut spending and asked Americans to make sacrifices. I believed that then and I believe that now. I am consistent in my beliefs

Yet here we are, Conservatives consistently blaming Obama for all the problems of the US of A. Consistently telling us they have the answers despite the failure of their “answers” and politicians. Yet You tell me I have hyper partisan blinders on for pointing the logical errors in conservative thought out to those who cannot see the problem with the babble they espouse.

Posted by: j2t2 at November 4, 2015 11:26 AM
Comment #400257

J2

Seeing lower taxes as a detriment is an opinion J2, not a fact.
Claiming Conservatives hate children, women, minorities etc… is nothing more than a partisan attempt to falsely label people for your own political gain. Stereotype.
Blaming low taxes rather than excessive spending, is a partisan exaggeration. Hyperbole.

Facts indeed be facts, J2. Unfortunately in your case, opinion, stereotypes and hyperbole do not equal fact.

“Starve the beast, blind tax pledges, bloated military all add up to some serious debt.”

And yet, gorging the beast, high taxes and a military under liberal rule now has our debt at over 18+ trillion and counting.

“are we supposed to not mention that while your team blames Obama for the sun setting and everything under the sun?”

Mention whatever you want. But when you act like Obama is responsible for the sun rising and blame all his failures on everything else, you are going to get called on it.

“Yet here we are, Conservatives consistently blaming Obama for all the problems of the US of A.”

And you blame them all on Bush and Conservatives. Nothing new.

“Consistently telling us they have the answers despite the failure of their “answers” and politicians.”

Like every other issue, that is because the answer you seek is different than the answer they seek. Because the answer you want to hear is bound to the dollar.

“Yet You tell me I have hyper partisan blinders on for pointing the logical errors in conservative thought out to those who cannot see the problem with the babble they espouse.”

No, I say you have blinders on because you rely on dismissing, ignoring, excusing and conspiracy theory to absolve the left of any and all wrongdoing. Because, as with KS, the so-called logical errors you point out are nothing but an oversimplified partisan opinion.

Posted by: kctim at November 4, 2015 2:48 PM
Comment #400264

Obamacare Is Dead


“It doesn’t work because it couldn’t work.”

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/426550/obamacare-failures

Posted by: Royal Flush at November 4, 2015 4:09 PM
Comment #400283

I don’t know kctim when we are running a deficit and the debt is mounting I would think lowering taxes id a detriment and that it is a fact. Now you may still be under the illusion that lowering taxes will create additional revenue but that myth has been exposed.

Claiming Conservatives hate children, women, minorities etc… is nothing more than a partisan attempt to falsely label people for your own political gain. Stereotype.

Yes kctim your sentence is a stereotype , you managed to throw in about everything but the kitchen sink. I haven’t done what you accuse me of.

And yet, gorging the beast, high taxes and a military under liberal rule now has our debt at over 18+ trillion and counting.

No middle ground for you guys kctim? Whilst starving the beast is an actual strategy used by conservatives, “gorging the beast” is the hyperbole you must be speaking of. While the military is under “liberal rule” the purse strings are under conservative rule right?

And you blame them all on Bush and Conservatives. Nothing new.

Kctim, Perhaps you should consider the situation and the comment all of this is in response to before making suck declarations. Secondly I would suggest you consider the fact that all of my comments are accurate reflections of the facts.

No, I say you have blinders on because you rely on dismissing, ignoring, excusing and conspiracy theory to absolve the left of any and all wrongdoing.

Oh puleezze kctim, conspiracy theory, seriously you deny the reality of the strategy used by conservatives for years? Starve the beast, google it and read up a bit. As far as dismissing, ignoring and excusing I haven;t done any of that. I am simply pointing out the involvement by conservatives in the debt you try to put on Obama. I mean GWB was the first to cut taxes while at war never have we as a country done anything so foolish in the past. Leaving the taxes cut in place was a deal demanded bu conservatives as part of the bail out signed by Obama. The same bailout conservatives claim was a failure.

Pointing these things out doesn’t make me a hyper partisan nor are they excuses or dismissing anything or anyone. But instead of making these silly claims why not counter my comments with actual facts that show the dems/liberals were to blame for leading us to war, cutting taxes as we did so, for paying for the war off the books so the debt didn’t accrue under the GWB administration. for signing tax pledges to Grover Norquist?

Posted by: j2t2 at November 5, 2015 9:49 AM
Comment #400287

“I don’t know kctim when we are running a deficit and the debt is mounting I would think lowering taxes id a detriment and that it is a fact.”

No, that is an opinion on how one feels is or is not the best way to deal with debt.
A fact would be that you cannot create debt if you don’t spend more than you have.

“I haven’t done what you accuse me of.”

So you have never claimed Republicans are racist, have a war on women, are bigots for supporting traditional marriage, or promote lower taxes to harm or damage children?
OK.

“Whilst starving the beast is an actual strategy used by conservatives,”

Not wanting to feed the beast more and more each year is NOT ‘starving the beast.’
IF they were intent on starving the beast as you say, they would be passing laws to eliminate government spending, instead of slowing it down.

“gorging the beast” is the hyperbole you must be speaking of.”

The size of our government, the record number of people now dependent on it and our debt, says different.

“While the military is under “liberal rule” the purse strings are under conservative rule right?”

Please. The strings are ruled by politicians, left and right, who use them for their own personal gain. When people like Sanders says they will cut our bloated defense spending in half, it means nothing.

“Secondly I would suggest you consider the fact that all of my comments are accurate reflections of the facts.”

Your comments are opinions of how you want to deal with facts.

“you deny the reality of the strategy used by conservatives for years?”

Sigh, no. I criticize them for not doing anything to cut spending effectively.

“I am simply pointing out the involvement by conservatives in the debt you try to put on Obama.”

While ignoring the debt created by Obama.

“I mean GWB was the first to cut taxes while at war never have we as a country done anything so foolish in the past.”

Agreed. The war should have been paid for with spending cuts and THEN taxes should have been cut.

“Leaving the taxes cut in place was a deal demanded bu conservatives as part of the bail out signed by Obama.”

And again it is the right to blame for what Obama did. At least you are consistent in that.

“Pointing these things out doesn’t make me a hyper partisan nor are they excuses or dismissing anything or anyone.”

Of course it doesn’t. As I said, trying to absolve the left by blaming the right for everything wrong, is what makes you hyper partisan.

“But instead of making these silly claims why not counter my comments with actual facts that show the dems/liberals were to blame for leading us to war,”

President Bush led us to war, J2. Some democrats supported him, liberals did not.

“cutting taxes as we did so,”

They were called the ‘Bush tax cuts.’ Did any dems or liberals support them? Are they still in place while us still being at war?
Dems/libs aren’t to blame for them then, they ARE to blame for them now.

“for paying for the war off the books so the debt didn’t accrue under the GWB administration.”

Typical politics. No different than counting previously insured people in order to say that 40 million people now have health insurance because of the ACA.

“for signing tax pledges to Grover Norquist?”

Well, the lefts desire for obscene spending IS why people sign that pledge, J2.

Posted by: kctim at November 5, 2015 11:34 AM
Comment #400293

kctim, 1. we have a debt
2. we have a deficit
3. we need revenue to pay the debt down, it won’t go away by cutting spending, the deficit will not the debt.

so lowering taxes would be detrimental to paying down the debt is a fact.

Not wanting to feed the beast more and more each year is NOT ‘starving the beast.’ IF they were intent on starving the beast as you say, they would be passing laws to eliminate government spending, instead of slowing it down.

It seems your hyper partisanship has left you unable to acknowledge the starve the beast strategy has been around for years and is real. But it is and you should read up on it. I would suggest it is still an active strategy on the right as all we seem to hear is cut taxes and we will grow the economy oh but pay down the debt and build up the military, screw the old and the young, pay for Viagra but let women pay for their own birth control, and get them minorities off of welfare. There, is that what you wanted to hear? Did you notice not “hate” in that so would you say you have exaggerated just a bit? What else did I miss, oh yeah you know it might be fair to say you guys hate government judging by the extents you are willing to go to to drown it in the bath tub.

Of course it doesn’t. As I said, trying to absolve the left by blaming the right for everything wrong, is what makes you hyper partisan.

Kctim, once again you try to deflect the points I make because they are “hyper partisan” in your opinion. But You fail to put forth any facts to counter what I say. You need to remember I am not CNN I don’t feel the need to criticize both parties equally to have a valid viewpoint. I am not trying to defend anyone I am pointing out for all the Obama detractors that they are wrong on the particular issue at hand, that is it.
I point out the debt didn’t start in 2009 because many conservatives seem to be confused on this. I point out the first president to cut taxes and go to war, because war is so expensive and well it just isn’t fighting for our freedom as many on the right would have us believe. Not only that it is one of the biggest portions the budget that can be cut. But most of all I pointed out in this thread the “job creator” myth conservatives have used for years. I haven’t heard it from Obama or dems in general so I didn’t call them, out on it.

Posted by: j2t2 at November 5, 2015 1:25 PM
Comment #400309

Royal,

The basic criticism of the article you linked was that Obamacare is not truly insurance but rather an elaborate cost sharing plan due to the requirement to cover pre-existing conditions, etc. OK, fair enough. It is indeed a modified community rated insurance plan. But, so is the most popular medical insurance plan in America, Medicare.

There are basically two alternatives if we accept the premise that all Americans should have access to affordable health care: a community rating model spreading costs across all risk groups (age, health status, pre-existing conditions, etc.); or a true actuarial system in which premiums are tied to an insured’s risk, i.e., age and health status. As the author points out, with the second pure insurance model, the government will have to directly subsidize those with pre-existing conditions or high risk factors (middle age) since the premiums from a pure actuarial system would be prohibitive.

What strikes me about both alternatives is that there will be cost sharing regardless of model. In the first instance, this will occur at the level of the insurance provider with community rating like Medicare. In the second instance, this will occur through the tax system in which tax dollars from the young and healthy are redistributed to those with pre-existing conditions and high risk factors.

Better, in my opinion, to recognize the reality and present both alternatives in simple and clear language for the American public to decide. Medicare for all, as with the Canadian model, or a pure insurance model with government subsidized high risk pools for those with high risk health status.

My bet is that the American public would overwhelmingly support the Canadian Medicare for all system. It preserves the private health care delivery system, allows for individual state variations in financing/benefits and fixes the cost for each American.

Posted by: Rich at November 5, 2015 6:12 PM
Comment #400315

J2

“we need revenue to pay the debt down, it won’t go away by cutting spending, the deficit will not the debt.”

Sigh. Of course it won’t, J2. But both are now so ridiculous and massive that they need to be properly addressed and dealt with, or we fail.
We cut spending to only what government needs to run government and get the deficit under control, and then we deal with the debt.

“so lowering taxes would be detrimental to paying down the debt is a fact.”

1. You stated that it would be detrimental to our grandchildren.
2. You have no problem with massive government taxing and spending as long as it does what you want it to do.
3. Because of 1 and 2, one can only conclude that you were referring to our grandchildren not receiving the liberal government programs you support.

“It seems your hyper partisanship has left you unable to acknowledge the starve the beast strategy has been around for years and is real.”

No, it’s not real J2, it’s nothing more than hyperbole. The fact that our deficit and debt continue to grow each year is proof of that.
Less of an increase, is not starving anything. Not as many government programs, is not starving anything.

“all we seem to hear is cut taxes and we will grow the economy”

The more money one has, the more they have to spend. That’s a very basic fact, J2.

“oh but pay down the debt and build up the military,”

This is a politician thing, not just a RW thing, J2.

“screw the old and the young,”

We have had Republican Presidents and RW controlled legislatures and the government programs for the old and young are still around.
Again, a decrease in the expected increase is NOT starving anything.

“pay for Viagra but let women pay for their own birth control,”

It is not governments job to worry or pay for either of those things.

“and get them minorities off of welfare.”

And people not on welfare is a bad thing?

“What else did I miss, oh yeah you know it might be fair to say you guys hate government judging by the extents you are willing to go to to drown it in the bath tub.”

Might be fair if it was even half true. Again, the current massive size of our government and the control it now has over the people, is proof that there are no attempts to starve or drown it.
Fact is, you are predicting doom because you only got 9 out of the 10 you demanded.

“But most of all I pointed out in this thread the “job creator” myth conservatives have used for years. I haven’t heard it from Obama or dems in general so I didn’t call them, out on it.”

You’ve heard it J2, every time they talk about government creating jobs, or it being solely responsible for them. You don’t call them on it because you believe more money going to government is better than more money going to the individual.

Posted by: kctim at November 6, 2015 10:52 AM
Comment #400317
“so lowering taxes would be detrimental to paying down the debt is a fact.”

1. You stated that it would be detrimental to our grandchildren.
2. You have no problem with massive government taxing and spending as long as it does what you want it to do.
3. Because of 1 and 2, one can only conclude that you were referring to our grandchildren not receiving the liberal government programs you support.

Kctim, I’m not alone in saying the debt will be detrimental to our grandchildren. I think that is a given for use baby boomers. Now I have never said “I have no problem with massive government spending” first of all and secondly that is your framing. SO why don’t you justify your framing of the issue as massive. What is the right amount of spending for the works we the people have decided our government should do? Should we go to third world wages for government employees? Or should we downsize the war effort and get real about “protecting our freedom”? Perhaps we should charge the corporations whose interest are protected by our involvement overseas or by hiring our military out to Israel(as an example) to gain revenue? Whatever but before you call government spending massive prove it is massive.

Ahh yes number 3 liberal government programs. Yes civilized societal programs best provided by the government that serve to make the country a better place. I would like to see all of our grandchildren have the same opportunities us boomers have had to contribute to and share in these liberal programs. Social Security, Medicare/medicaid and Social Safety net for the poor and working poor sure beat Welfare for corporate America IMHO.

No, it’s not real J2, it’s nothing more than hyperbole.

But it is KCtim and no matter how you wish it away or deny it it is real. It seems you won’t be bothered with facts that go against the rightist propaganda.

The fact that our deficit and debt continue to grow each year is proof of that.

No it isn’t kctim the “Starve the Beast” strategy is real
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starve_the_beast


Less of an increase, is not starving anything. Not as many government programs, is not starving anything.

You deflect kctim.

Posted by: j2t2 at November 6, 2015 1:30 PM
Comment #400318
The more money one has, the more they have to spend. That’s a very basic fact, J2.

So this conservative logic is why you guys and all your fair tax schemes fail kctim. The problem with your logic is that it is true only until a certain amount of money is reached then the money isn’t returned to the economy. Now giving tax breaks to the poor and working poor is useful because the money is spent.

We have had Republican Presidents and RW controlled legislatures and the government programs for the old and young are still around.

I suppose you are offering this as some type of proof that conservatives don’t eat their young kctim. I don’t think they actually do I think that eat their young thing is sarcasm, However after the attitude change since Reagan in this country I am beginning to wonder if there isn’t a bit of smoke to this.;)

A couple of things though kctim, are you suggesting conservatives want to keep those liberal programs mentioned above! Are you suggesting they don’t want to privatize SS? You need to read up on Paul Ryan the new speaker and conservative thought.

Here is a good read for you,speaking of repub controlled states.
http://news.yahoo.com/americas-red-state-crisis-231355002.html


Posted by: j2t2 at November 6, 2015 1:35 PM
Comment #400319
And people not on welfare is a bad thing?

Depends kctim your team wants to boot them if the are addicts/mentally ill while trying to justify their myth of so many able bodied workers who refuse to work on welfare. Lets remember we have the working poor with wal mart wages that need “welfare” just to get by. Times have changed since the boomers were doing well.

As our economy has shifted , as globalization and technology have decimated jobs and conservatives have decimated unions and good paying jobs, as employers have hired illegals and imported foreign workers to keep wages low corporations have been raising costs.

That being said I would like to see all Americans off of Welfare and perhaps instead of welfare we could look at a">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_income”>a different approach

Might be fair if it was even half true

Norquist favors dramatically reducing the size of the government.[13] He has been noted for his widely quoted quip: “I’m not in favor of abolishing the government. I just want to shrink it down to the size where we can drown it in the bathtub.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grover_Norquist

I’d say full truth Kctim. Especially when you consider the number elected officials who have signed a loyalty pledge on taxes to good ol’ Grover.

Fact is, you are predicting doom because you only got 9 out of the 10 you demanded.

Funny how you say I am predicting gloom and doom when I am actually just talking about what conservatism is and what

Posted by: j2t2 at November 6, 2015 1:38 PM
Comment #400320

conservatives see as the best for this country.

Posted by: j2t2 at November 6, 2015 1:47 PM
Comment #400321

Well, here’s the latest on HRC’s ongoing violation of classified material and her private server…the question is, will she be charged or will her aids be thrown under the bus?

http://freebeacon.com/politics/clinton-signed-nda-laying-out-criminal-penalties-for-mishandling-of-classified-info/

j2t2 also claims that I am spinning a conservative myth that the economy is in shambles. Here is the latest October polls from Gallup:

Gallup’s Economic Confidence Index is the average of two components: how Americans rate current economic conditions and whether they say the economy is improving or getting worse. Since March, Americans have consistently viewed the outlook for the economy more negatively than they have viewed current economic conditions. From a broader perspective, the main cause for the decline in the index since January is the drop in Americans’ economic outlook, which has fallen more steeply than their views of the current economy. Both components have been level since August.

In October, 24% of Americans described current economic conditions as “excellent” or “good,” while 31% rated them “poor.” This resulted in a current conditions average of -7.

The economic outlook average was -19 for this same period. This was the result of 38% of Americans saying the economy is “getting better” and 57% saying it is “getting worse.”

So 57% of Americans believe the economy is getting worse.

In fact the single most important issue since 2010, in all polls, is the economy. Is j2 saying that all these people are wrong and shouldn’t be concerned by the economy? We’re talking about all polls going back 5 years all the way up to today. Perhaps j2 and the rest of his WB leftist friends should publish the “great economy under Obama”, to the masses. Why, they don’t know how good they have it.

Posted by: Blaine at November 6, 2015 3:00 PM
Comment #400322

Government providing whatever a majority of citizens desire in terms of social welfare is a recipe for collapse. It simply can not be sustained.

Interest groups, whether corporate or individual, all want government to favor them in some financial way. Both have powerful lobbies and vote getting strategies. And, the squeaky wheel usually gets the most oil.

No elected official can truly represent all the various interests in his/her district or state. Favoring one means disfavoring another. Most politicians wish to be elected and reelected and to do this they must make political decisions that will most likely achieve their desires.

When a politician promises some financial gain, either corporate or private to a group, they do it knowing that government must be the payer of that promise. When enough politicians feel significant pressure to reward financial favors it becomes law and the government is committed to funding it.

We can not change private or corporate desire for financial rewards. We can not change the nature of politicians to grant that reward in return for high office.

What can we do?

We can employ the provisions of Article Five of the Constitution and have a State Constitutional Convention. Such a Convention could change the Constitution to require a balanced national budget among other changes. A balanced budget would force congress to only approve those measures which the current tax receipts could pay for. If more spending is demanded by the public then taxes must be increased to pay for it.

Posted by: Royal Flush at November 6, 2015 3:27 PM
Comment #400323

Royal, there is a continued move by conservative voters to elect constitutional conservatives, and they are doing it, but the process is so slow that it only takes a couple of years for conservative elected officials to become corrupt and part of the establishment. Republicans are taking over one state at a time, but it will required the backbone of these state elected officials to call for Article Five. I would love for the states to explain to the Federal Government who is boss, but I doubt it will ever happen.

Posted by: Blaine at November 6, 2015 4:01 PM
Comment #400325

Royal,

A federal balanced budget requirement would be a disaster for the US economy.

Please take the time to reflect on what the actual fiscal policies of Ronald Reagan were not his rhetoric. While talking a lot about a balanced budget, Reagan did the exact opposite.

The conservative Reagan administration ran huge deficits. The national debt increased 190% during his presidency. Contrast that with the debt increase of the Obama administration during its first six years of 70%. Clearly, the debt increased faster and larger under Reagan. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2014/12/08/does-obama-have-the-worst-record-on-any-president-on-the-national-debt/

Yet, Ronald Reagan is credited with reviving a stagnant US economy.

How could that have occurred Royal?

Posted by: Rich at November 6, 2015 7:09 PM
Comment #400326

Rich writes; “Royal, A federal balanced budget requirement would be a disaster for the US economy.”

How illogical can one get? What Rich really means is that a balanced budget would annihilate liberal dogma.

Can Rich actually believe that a $20 Trillion national debt (projected amount at end of OOObama’s term) and nearly $100 Trillion in Unfunded Liability is good for the nation? Pass the Silly Pills Rich.

From Rich’s link we find:

“under Obama, the debt has increased 70 percent after nearly six years. But let’s look at what happened under Republican hero Ronald Reagan, using the fiscal year numbers in the White House’s historical budget tables.

Size of national debt when Reagan took office: $1 trillion
Size after six years: $2.3 trillion (130 percent increase)
Size at the end of his presidency: $2.9 trillion (190 percent increase)”

Do I really need to explain the fallacy of Rich’s analysis? During the Reagan administration the debt rose $1.9 Trillion. By the end of the OOObama administration the debt will have risen $10 Trillion.

Here are the ratios of deficit to GDP for the past five presidents:

Ronald Reagan

1981-88 4.2 %

1982-89 4.2

Average 4.2

George H. W. Bush

1989-92 4.0

1990-93 4.3

Average 4.2

Bill Clinton

1993-2000 0.8

1994-2001 0.1

Average 0.5

George W. Bush

2001-08 2.0

2002-09 3.4

Average 2.7

Barack Obama

2009-12* 9.1

2010-12 8.7

Average 8.9

*fiscal 2012 ends Sept. 30, 2012, so this figure is estimated

Source: Economic Report of the President, February 2012

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesglassman/2012/07/11/the-facts-about-budget-deficits-how-the-presidents-truly-rank/

Posted by: Royal Flush at November 6, 2015 7:43 PM
Comment #400327

Royal,

In the last three decades, the champ in percentage increase in national debt increase has been Ronald Reagan. Second is GW Bush. The smallest increase goes to Bill Clinton. http://useconomy.about.com/od/usdebtanddeficit/p/US-Debt-by-President.htm

But, that wasn’t my question. Let me ask it again. If a balanced budget is necessary for a healthy economy, why did the economy recover from a deep recession and prosper during the Reagan terms despite and enormous deficits and a historical increase in the national debt?

Another question. Why did the economy flourish during the terms of Clinton despite a large tax increase, reduction of government expenditures and the balancing of the budget (even a surplus for two years)?

Posted by: Rich at November 6, 2015 10:00 PM
Comment #400328

Answer… JOBS!!!

No jobs under Obama, low paying jobs, or jobs with less than 30 hour work week.

Posted by: Blaine at November 6, 2015 11:29 PM
Comment #400329

Royal,

What you failed to include in your chart was the deficit to GDB ratios in the last three years which demonstrate dramatic progress in reducing the ratios to current levels below the average ratios over the past few decades. The principal reason is the improving economy reflected in increased tax revenues. https://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/FYFSGDA188S


2015 -2.5
2014: -2.79340
2013: -4.07811
2012: -6.72821
2011: -8.37480
2010: -8.64968

Posted by: Rich at November 6, 2015 11:50 PM
Comment #400331

Blaine , silly boy basing your BS on Faux news.

http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/videos/a39520/fox-anchors-jobs-report/

No jobs under Obama, low paying jobs, or jobs with less than 30 hour work week.

So Blaine first of all welcome to conservative America. Isn’t this what the free market is all about and isn’t this what your team has been working towards for 35 years now? You’ve busted the unions, you let corporate America make the rules and you act surprised at what deregulation and free market means for the average American.

The economy isn’t in shambles it is doing just what your wealthy capitalist leaders have wanted for years. Welcome to the new norm.

Why is it conservatives are now worried about the debt? Your starve the beast strategy has led us to where we are today. Look at how many of your fellow conservatives you have elected to represent us have signed a pledge to not raise taxes no matter what. Even the most ignorant conservatives of the past knew better than to start a war and not raise taxes to pay for it. You guys act surprised that the cumulative effect of borrowing and spending, of cutting taxes while going to war, while demanding unfunded mandates combined with trickle on economics would be different.

Posted by: j2t2 at November 7, 2015 2:15 AM
Comment #400332

Newsflash from Conservative Utopia, formerly known as Kansas. Starving the beast and cutting the taxes, making state government small.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/kansas-slashes-revenue-forecast-adjusts-235646647.html

Posted by: j2t2 at November 7, 2015 3:04 AM
Comment #400333


“Republicans are taking over one state at a time, but it will required the backbone of these state elected officials to call for Article Five.”

Apparently the proponents of this idea don’t realize that once the Article Five is in play, everything, including their sacred cows, is up for grabs.

Frankly I would warn them to be careful what they wish for.

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at November 7, 2015 7:40 AM
Comment #400334

Conservatives have no sacred cows. Establishment republicans may have; this is why there is a division within the Republican Party. So I have no problem with Article Five.

J2, what we are seeing in America is not the result of conservative policies. Obamacare is the reason 40 hour a week jobs have been cut to 30 hours or less. The left’s anti capitalist agenda for the past 7 years ace gotten us where we are today. You continue to say the economy is doing great and yet when I include links showing the main concern of voters, for the past 6 years is th economy, you fail to respond. The economic problems we have can be laid at the feet of Obama. It took Obama 7 years to shoot down the Keystone pipeline… and why, for political reasons. He has based jobs, oil independence, and the continued pumping of millions of US dollars into a decision about the environment. A GW policy based on a theory. Once again, Obama is doing all he can to destroy the country.

The economy is not good, and the unemployment numbers are a fraud. The American people know this and that is why the economy is number one on voter issues.

Posted by: Blaine at November 7, 2015 10:32 AM
Comment #400335

Correction: pumping millions of dollars into Muslim nations that want to harm us.

Obama and the Democrats own obamacare 100%; Obama took millions out of an already failing Medicare program to bolster Obamacare. As of to date, 9 of the federal obamacare exchanges have failed. The goal was always to dump these exchanges on the states. Obamacare is destined to completely fail, unless the republican congress is willing to dump millions more into it. Obamacare and democratic run cities are a perfect example of how the left’s socialist programs work. J2 talks about Kansas, but I ask the question, show me one city or state that is run by democrats that is not in trouble?

Posted by: Blaine at November 7, 2015 10:45 AM
Comment #400336
show me one city or state that is run by democrats that is not in trouble?

San Jose, California

Posted by: Warren Porter at November 7, 2015 11:46 AM
Comment #400338

Warren Porter, are you saying San Jose, or are you saying California has no financial problems? The state of California is in deep financial trouble, so that would superceed any city; since the state is controlled by democrats. Now, stop with th gotcha, and either show us a democrat controlled state or city that is financially stable, with thriving business, and does not have massive debt, pension, or minority unemployment.

Posted by: Blaine at November 7, 2015 1:23 PM
Comment #400339

Rich is asking why economies flourish despite debt. An economy as large as the US is difficult to harm by excessive debt over the short term.

I ask again; “Can Rich actually believe that a $20 Trillion national debt (projected amount at end of OOObama’s term) and nearly $100 Trillion in Unfunded Liability is good for the nation? Pass the Silly Pills Rich.”

Rich wrote; “The principal reason is the improving economy reflected in increased tax revenues.”

I did not find this statement in your link Rich.

One major cause of less deficit spending was the “Budget Sequestration enacted in 2013” which involved automatic spending cuts to the US federal government.

Warren Porter writes that San Jose, CA is not in financial trouble.

“SAN JOSE — Here in the wealthy heart of Silicon Valley, the roads are pocked with potholes, the libraries are closed three days a week and a slew of city recreation centers have been handed over to nonprofit groups. Taxes have gone up even as city services are in decline, and Mayor Chuck Reed is worried.

The source of Reed’s troubles: gold-plated pensions that guarantee retired city workers as much as 90 percent of their former salaries. Retirement costs are eating up nearly a quarter of the city’s budget, forcing Reed (D) to skimp on everything else.

Voters in San Jose have ratified unprecedented cuts in public workers’ retirement benefits, and Reed is pushing to make it easier for city leaders to enact similar reductions statewide, inviting the ire of unions and many fellow Democrats.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/in-san-jose-generous-pensions-for-city-workers-come-at-expense-of-nearly-all-else/2014/02/25/3526cd28-9be7-11e3-ad71-e03637a299c0_story.html

Posted by: Royal Flush at November 7, 2015 1:37 PM
Comment #400340
You continue to say the economy is doing great and yet when I include links showing the main concern of voters, for the past 6 years is th economy, you fail to respond.

Blaine we are all concerned with the economy, that doesn’t mean it isn’t doing excellent. Remember where the economy was when Obama took office? When we compare the start of his administration to today great is an understatement. Think about it for a minute, the economy has been the issue the last 6 years why? I say it is because it was crashed 7 years ago and has been slowly coming back despite all those conservative attempts to stop it. What isn’t coming back are wages that is the problem but hey when you ship so many jobs off shore it…..

You seem to want to compare the economy to the good ol’ days and that is where the concern of the middle class comes in. Conservative leaders have been at war with the middle class for years, hell free market capitalism destroys the middle class as it searched for lower costs. Our do nothing Congress must be held accountable for their lack of representing the people of this country and representing only the interests of the highest bidders.

I would say those blue collar and middle class voters worrying so much about the economy deserve exactly what they get. They have voted against their interests for years with “free market” and “liberty and freedom” and “lower taxes” and “smaller government” rhetoric leading them into a mind numbing catatonic state I refer to as conservatism.

History shows us conservatism means income inequality, oligarchy, robber barons an yet we are now going through it once again. Blame Obama all you want but you are wrong. We are the problem. We the people who allowed our elected representatives to be bought. We the people who allowed ourselves to believe the Reagan revolution was on our side. We the people who are forced into 30 hour part time situations because the robber barons are trying to evade health care costs. We the people who insist upon employer paid health care instead of a socialized system proven to work for much less costs everywhere else in the world. We the people who believe SS and Medicare are in trouble and then not strengthening the systems because conservatives tell us it cannot be fixed.

It is time to rethink work and pay IMHO. With globalization, technological changes and conservatism/corporatism/fascism controlled Congress we need to rethink how we operate as a country.

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2015/11/06/3719972/jobs-republicans-embarrassing-predictions/

Posted by: j2t2 at November 7, 2015 1:52 PM
Comment #400342
are you saying San Jose, or are you saying California has no financial problems? The state of California is in deep financial trouble, so that would superceed any city; since the state is controlled by democrats. Now, stop with th gotcha, and either show us a democrat controlled state or city that is financially stable, with thriving business, and does not have massive debt, pension, or minority unemployment.

I said San Jose, not California. You asked about a city or state. Please do not move the goalposts. Statewide finances notwithstanding, San Jose is doing well. You demand financial stability, a recent editorial by the San Jose describes the situation thusly:

Liccardo’s predecessor, Chuck Reed, left the city divided. Repairing the rifts is a burden for his successor. But Reed also left San Jose financially stable — a condition that would not exist without painful cuts to employee compensation and city services that trouble residents today.

Liccardo’s challenge is to bridge the rifts he inherited and raise the aspirations of employees and residents while holding a steady financial course. He’s off to a good start.

You inquire about minority unemployment:

As the economy recovers from the recession, Silicon Valley unemployment rates continue a downward trend while remaining at least two percentage points above pre-recession levels. Over the past year, Silicon Valley’s unemployment rate fell from 7.5% in January to 5.8% in November 2013, and was consistently lower than that of the state and country by 2.3-2.9% and 0.8-1.5%, respectively. Unemployment rates in Silicon Valley improved across nearly all racial and ethnic groups between 2011 and 2012, ranging from 4.5% to 10.4

It should be self-evident Silicon Valley contains thriving businesses.

Posted by: Warren Porter at November 7, 2015 3:20 PM
Comment #400343

If you want to talk states rather than cities, feel free to look at Massachusetts:

Black Unemployment is 3rd lowest in the nation.

Financial stability has earned the faith of all 3 bond raters.

Posted by: Warren Porter at November 7, 2015 3:50 PM
Comment #400344
Obamacare is destined to completely fail, unless the republican congress is willing to dump millions more into it. Obamacare and democratic run cities are a perfect example of how the left’s socialist programs work.

First of all Blaine the misconception you labor under regarding Obamacare being a socialist system is wrong. It is a market based system with private insurance. The problem is the high cots of the medical system and the high cost of the health insurance system which combines to make our system the most expensive per capita in the industrialized world.

The fact that it has lasted this long is amazing as we have seen such a hatred towards it by conservatives. How many repeals with no answer from our elected representatives in Congress?

I would agree the dems own Obamacare and would imagine they are proud of the accomplishment despite the setbacks. When we compare the conservative alternative to Obamacare we should be insisting our elected reps look at fixing it rather than trashing it. Perhaps it is time to feel the Bern, medicare for all.

Posted by: j2t2 at November 7, 2015 3:51 PM
Comment #400345

I wonder what happens when Republicans get put in charge of a large city? Oh right, the bond rating gets downgraded. Things aren’t looking too rosy in Indianapolis either.

Posted by: Warren Porter at November 7, 2015 4:00 PM
Comment #400346

Not for the faint of heart. Do not open this link if you are squeamish or a liberal.

http://demonocracy.info/infographics/usa/us_debt/us_debt.html

Posted by: Royal Flush at November 7, 2015 4:43 PM
Comment #400352

Just because the numbers are big doesn’t mean the debt isn’t sustainable.

Personally, I think the US ought to be moving towards a balanced budget now that the recovery from the recession is complete. This is why I won’t support Bernie Sanders for President. However, I still laud Obama for the tremendous work he has done to decrease the size of the annual budget deficit since he took office.

Posted by: Warren Porter at November 7, 2015 5:08 PM
Comment #400370

Royal,

My point about the huge deficits of Reagan and the deficit reductions and surpluses of Clinton was simply to illustrate that seemingly contradictory fiscal policies have been correlated with strong economic performance in the relatively recent past.

Economic circumstances require flexibility and a pragmatic approach to fiscal and monetary policies. The dogmatic mantra from conservatives about a balanced budget ignores the dynamic nature of our economy and our monetary system.


Posted by: Rich at November 8, 2015 9:37 AM
Comment #400371

When in the history of this country did we have a balanced budget whilst at war? Trying to balance the budget on the back of entitlement programs is foolish when we are transitioning to a globalized economy and corporate control of the government and from a democratic republic to a corpocracy/oligarchy. The problem is our bloated corrupt military industrial complex, as Eisenhower called it.

We all need to take a breath look around and realize why we are where we are. Look at the top 10 countries in the prosperity index, none of which are the USA. Look at the countries and realize what they have done to fit into the globalization of the economy, technological advances, and information/service age economy. We spend more on “defense” than these 10 countries combined. It is time to look at the sacred cow and realize how we can balance the budget.

These prosperous countries sure in he** haven’t went to some 19th century conservative malarkey to prosper while we languish in the stupidity of conservative thought. The conservative intent to destroy the government, to make government small except of course the military has taken a toll on the financial health of this country. Corruption has taken it’s toll, as has the trickle on economics and Reaganism/Fascism in general.

Blaine throws out the incredibly foolish “look at dem run states” as an equal to the conservative utopia of Kansas. But lets remember the dem run cities have a complete different problem than Kansas. They have faced years of manufacturing job losses, population losses and low wage jobs amongst many other problems. Kansas went downhill due directly to conservative economic theory. Self inflicted wounds brought on by conservative ideology. Yet they continue to dig the hole because they pledged to cut taxes instead of pledging to the people they serve to run the state correctly.

We continue to give credence to the conservatives and their starve the beast strategy. We give credence to conservative lower taxes ideology and invisible hand and free market deregulation while watching Seattle and other places get economically fit by refuting conservative economic voodoo.

The top 10 on the prosperity list have much lower costs health care systems yet we are told it can’t be done here. The top 10 have less corruption in government, God hasn’t struck them down because they have laws protecting homosexuals, and they d**n sure don’t have regressive tax schemes and corporations running all aspects of the government.

Posted by: j2t2 at November 8, 2015 12:15 PM
Comment #400372

Perhaps a link to the prosperity index would be in order here.


http://www.prosperity.com/#!/headline-findings

Posted by: j2t2 at November 8, 2015 12:21 PM
Post a comment