Obama's middle class

Let's hope we can recover from the recovery. I know it makes some people mad when we talk about the Obama doldrums but ...

Private-sector employment almost back up to where it was before Obama, but real household incomes are still 5% lower. The share of all income going to the richest 1% of households remains near where it was in 2005, so Obama has protected the rich. But no so much the 99%. Fewer Americans consider themselves middle class than in 2008, according to Pew Research.

You know, people told me that if I voted for Romney, jobs would be worth less, the richest 1% would do lots better than the 99% and the middle class would shrink. Well, I voted for Romney and even though he didn't win, all those things happened. Thank you Barack Obama.

On the other hand, Obama continues to talk like he did back in 2007. In the fifth year of his presidency, you would think he would come up with a few new ideas.

It would be interesting to get Obama 2007 to comment on Obama 2013. What a savage criticism he could make of that idiot in the White House. He would not believe you if you told him that he would be the president to preside over that disaster. And wouldn't it blow his mind if you told him that the best news for the economy since 2008 is that we are producing much more oil and gas? And would he believe that a country with a black president and attorney general could suffer worse race relations than it did under Bush? And who could believe that the U.S. image among Muslims is worse now than it was when we were fighting in Iraq? And what about a president who refused to enforce key parts of the health care law and postponed it for a year ... for now? Surely that would not be Obama doing that.

I saw an interesting poster that said, "Politicians are like diapers; they have to be changed frequently and for the same reason." I guess Obama's change is like those full diapers. We missed the chance to make a chance and now we have to hold the load.

This is very depressing. It doesn't look like Obama can change and we don't have another chance to change for a long time. We just have to slog on and muddle through. We will have another three years of what we had for the last five: lots of hot and divisive rhetoric and sideways movement in jobs and prosperity. If we are lucky. The Federal Reserve kept us out of depression but how long can they continue to pump steroids into the economy?

My son recently graduated from college. He is working at Applebee's and hoping to get a job in a warehouse. My daughter, who graduated just before Obama, has a decent job but is not going anywhere, since there is no expansion and nobody leaves since they cannot get better jobs. They just cannot get their feet on the ladder. My youngest son will graduate in two years. I hope thing will be better, but I don't really expect it. He tells me that that the advice around school is "don't graduate on time." This is the fate of most young people today.

Somebody please give me reason to be optimistic. I graduated during tough times - unemployment was higher then than any time since - but we had Ronald Reagan newly elected and it was morning in America. Today it seems that the long twilight of Obama signifies the setting sun. It is ironic. Ronald Reagan was an old man but seemed to have young ideas compared to young Obama who seems unable to move beyond the old fashioned redistribution rhetoric that I thought we left behind in the 1970s. Growing is better than redistributing, we should have learned that much.

Posted by Christine & John at July 30, 2013 6:01 PM
Comments
Comment #369062

Obama has spent his whole political career trying to convince people that an activist big government is good.

Never before has the influence of small government libertarians been greater.

Republicans now have more to fear from a primary challenger than a Democrat. Thus, the whole Republican party has moved decisively to the right.

Obama is Obama’s worst enemy. He has convinced Americans that an activist big government is bad.

Considering that you believe an activist big government is bad, you should thank Obama. For Obama has done more to build distrust in an activist big government than Ronald Reagan could ever dream to accomplish during his time as President.

Posted by: Conversalibertarianibral at July 30, 2013 11:49 PM
Comment #369066

If Obama was white, he would never have been elected. Can you imagine a white man with Obama’s credentials being elected? He is not qualified and the only reason he was elected is because white liberals are overcompensating for the sins of the past and will not ask tough questions about Obama’s questionable past and lack of experience because he’s a black man.

The proof is in Obama’s inability to lead and inability to organize an effective cabinet. All he can do is read from a teleprompter.

Hell, Obama has never held a real job in his entire life. How can he know what it’s like to be an American if he’s never had a real job?

Look at what Obama has done after he won reelection.

The election was about JOBS! What does Obama focus on?

First, gun control. That flopped.

Second, immigration reform. That flopped.

Third, climate change and green energy. That flopped.

Now, after his liberal wish list went up in smoke, he is coming out with his “plan” for job creation.

Too little too late Obama. Again.

Posted by: Conversalibertarianibral at July 31, 2013 3:23 AM
Comment #369072

C&J-
What have Republicans actively done for the economy lately? Don’t say deficit cutting, their austerity’s caused significant fiscal drag. Don’t say shrinking government, it’s shrunk, but your glorious renaissance of business hasn’t happened. Don’t say blocking Obama’s proposals, which had a decent chance of adding growth to the economy.

What have they done? If the American People had stuck to their guns and kept Democrats in charge, we’d be better off. Instead, Americans are having to recover from this recession with an elephant on their backs. A self-righteous, arrogant, boastful elephant that never shuts up about how it would do things better even as it makes things objectively worse.

Conservalibertarianibral-
None of those things flopped with the American public, they were obstructed by Republicans who remain manifestly clueless about a number of things.

But what exactly have his opposition gotten into?

Hmm. A war on women’s reproductive rights? Flopped in both our senses of the term.

The Ryan Budget, and all it’s encores? Flopped in both our senses of the term.

Attempts to repeal Obamacare? 37,38 attempts that anybody with common sense knew wasn’t going to happen. Flopped by your standards at least.

The 2010 election was about JOBS!

But who focused on jobs in the Republican party, except to destroy them, either through direct cutting of the national budget, instability in the recovery caused by repeated threats to our monetary and fiscal stability or by refusal to use the subject as anything else but a Trojan Horse for their political agenda?

The American people were HAD.

But all you can do is spout stale, clichéd, anti-Obama talking points. Obama’s actually done things to create jobs, even if it didn’t help the recovery all the way. He saved an entire industry which now has not only recovered financially, but is competing on even ground for quality with their foreign competitors!

Gun Control will come up again, the next time there’s a mass shooting. Gun rights advocates don’t realize that without laws in place, the blame is going to go on those who make these weapons freely available, as people question what their purpose in a civilian society is.

And immigration reform? If the Republicans want to commit political suicide by failing to pass anything, so be it.

Oh, and by the way, the reason I voted for this guy is quite simple: he showed the ability to think. This guy doesn’t let his rhetoric lead him around by his nose, like Republicans do. He’s shown the ability to make actual, good decisions, unlike Bush, who couldn’t decide his way out of a paper bag.

Republicans attack Obama so much because if the attention was focused back on them, people would realize that they are both a ****ing mess, and the reason why so much in Washington is the same way.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at July 31, 2013 9:00 AM
Comment #369073

Mr. Daugherty said:

What have Republicans actively done for the economy lately?

Mr. Daugherty, it’s not the Republicans economy, it belongs to Obama. He was given TARP by Bush; something he told Bush he needed. He got the stimulus programs he wanted. He has the Federal Reserve who has been more than willing to print and pump billions into the economy. You and Obama say the decline of the economy started in 2006-07, when the Democrats controlled the Congress, but it was Bush’s fault. Now Obama is in charge, Reid controls the agenda of the Senate, the Democrats controlled the House for the first 2 years of Obama’s presidency, and yet you blame all the ills of the country on the Republicans who have only controlled the House for the past 2 ½ years. This economy sets smack in the middle of Obama’ lap.

If the American People had stuck to their guns and kept Democrats in charge, we’d be better off.

And tell us why the Democrats lost control of the House after the first 2 years of Obama? It is a fact that Obama did not try to fix the economy; instead he chose to go after Obamacare, which more than half of the American people did not want; but he chose to ram it down the American people’s throat. In 2010, Democrats lost Senate seats, they lost governorships and state legislators, and they lost control of the House. It was lost for one reason; Obama and his socialist agenda scared the hell out of the American people. He continues to do the same thing and the Democrats will lose again in 2014.

Hmm. A war on women’s reproductive rights?

Do you really want to go there; considering it is Democrat politicians who have managed to create scandal after scandal with the abuse of women?

Attempts to repeal Obamacare? 37,38 attempts that anybody with common sense knew wasn’t going to happen.

Mr. Daugherty, you know as well as I, that nothing is done in Washington unless focus groups are first consulted. When the House is voting to repeal Obamacare, it is because focus groups have shown this is what the American people want. In each House vote, more Democrats are voting with the Republicans. Am I naïve enough to think the Democrats are having a change of heart based on what is right? No, they are voting to repeal, based on what the American people want. Reid will not allow this to come to the floor of the Senate because there would be Democrats who would vote to repeal; and if they didn’t, it would cost them their elections.

The 2010 election was about JOBS!

You’re a complete dumbass Mr. Daugherty; the 2010 elections were about Obamacare. Senate seats are state elections and they are harder to change. But House seats are local districts, and the big city democrat strongholds have no influence over rural district votes. Go back and check your facts again; but don’t try to spread that revisionist history around here.

But all you can do is spout stale, clichéd, anti-Obama talking points.

And all you can do is spout Obama talking points.

Gun Control will come up again, the next time there’s a mass shooting. Gun rights advocates don’t realize that without laws in place, the blame is going to go on those who make these weapons freely available, as people question what their purpose in a civilian society is.

Mr. Daugherty, when has gun control ever helped a Democrat get elected? Your anti-gun policies have always been a losing battle. Obama has done his best to create race riots in America, Democrat controlled cites have become war zones, Obama has never done anything to curb illegals from entering the country, and you want gun control in a nation where the gun industry is working overtime and CCW permits have skyrocketed. Law suits were filed in Illinois for CCW rights and the IL state legislator was forced to legalize conceal carry or the courts would impose it. Gun ownership is growing and the American people have no stomach for more controls. But, go ahead, pursue more gun control.

And immigration reform? If the Republicans want to commit political suicide by failing to pass anything, so be it.

So, tell us Mr. Daugherty, why are you advising us on something that will help more Republicans get elected?

Oh, and by the way, the reason I voted for this guy is quite simple: he showed the ability to think. This guy doesn’t let his rhetoric lead him around by his nose

Mr. Daugherty, are you serious; Obama is nothing but rhetoric. Go back and listen to his speeches of the past 5 years. They are all word for word, the same. The media is making fun of Obama for saying the same old things. He’s simple alriight, simple minded.

Posted by: Political Hostage at July 31, 2013 10:05 AM
Comment #369077

President Obama is saying and doing everything he can to make the ‘middle class’ as dependent on government as the ‘lower class’ is.
He tells them they did not build their success.
He tells them they are entitled to the profits of others.
He tells them they are entitled to more money from government.
He forces them to buy what he says to buy.
He forces them to lower their quality of life in hopes of raising it for another.

He is yet another liberal, a multi-millionaire one at that, who demands me and my 30 grand do more to support what he pretends to care about.

This is the new normal, get used to it.

Posted by: kctim at July 31, 2013 1:01 PM
Comment #369080

Political Hostage-
I asked what had they done for the economy lately, not who was responsible for it.

What you don’t pick up on?

1) The toxic assets that weighed down the banks were mostly derivatives built up on the notion that the housing market would continue to go up indefinitely. The peak was 2006 for that, if not 2005. By the beginning of 2007, the declined had already begun, and 2008 was the first budget that Democrats actually had a hand in.

2) Additionally, Republicans started their obstructionism with Recordbreaking levels of filibustering, essentially minimizing the Democrats’ effects on the economy.

3) Republicans have deliberately gotten in the way of any additional economic stimulus.

4) Republicans also have insisted on austerity, including the sequester, that are now having a profoundly negative effect on the economy.

But even with all that true, the question is, what are Republicans doing to make sure something gets done about it?

Not much at all.

And tell us why the Democrats lost control of the House after the first 2 years of Obama? It is a fact that Obama did not try to fix the economy; instead he chose to go after Obamacare, which more than half of the American people did not want; but he chose to ram it down the American people’s throat.

It is a fact? No Stimulus, no Wall Street Reform? He only pushed Obamacare after he passed that broad fiscal stimulus package. Can’t even keep your facts straight.

You’re a complete dumbass Mr. Daugherty; the 2010 elections were about Obamacare. Senate seats are state elections and they are harder to change. But House seats are local districts, and the big city democrat strongholds have no influence over rural district votes. Go back and check your facts again; but don’t try to spread that revisionist history around here.

62% of voters, according to CNN exit polls, cited the economy as their main concern.

Yeah, and you didn’t even check any such thing. You can call somebody a dumbass, but when the dumbass does his research better than you, what does that make you?

You folks don’t impress me. I see your talking points coming, often enough, a week before you’re using them here. You let others feed you your opinions, and you don’t even challenge your own assumptions.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at July 31, 2013 5:12 PM
Comment #369084

http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/31/opinion/hatch-public-pensions/index.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+rss%2Fcnn_topstories+%28RSS%3A+Top+Stories%29

“The city of Detroit made promises to its public employees: $9.2 billion in retiree health care and pension commitments that it simply cannot afford.

This all led to the city filing for Chapter 9 bankruptcy, which provides for the reorganization of municipalities.

This is a tragedy for those government workers who had been relying on the promised pension benefits and who will end up paying the price.

To be clear, Detroit is an extreme example, but there are states and municipalities across America that simply cannot afford their pension obligations. The Pew Center for the States found that states’ public pension plans faced a stunning $757 billion shortfall in 2010. And some economists place the figure as high as $4.4 trillion in 2012.

Chicago’s credit rating was just downgraded because of its $19 billion in unfunded pension liabilities. Los Angeles, America’s second-largest city, could see up to $30 billion in pension obligations. The fear is that some of these cities will declare bankruptcy and a Washington bailout will make innocent taxpayers in Utah and across the country foot the bill, which just isn’t fair or right.

I spent a good deal of time looking at this crisis.

For many teachers, police and firefighters, the promise isn’t a robust paycheck but robust retirement benefits. But if the promise can’t be fulfilled, they are left with little retirement security.

The question is whether there is another option for these cities and municipalities that is fair to those workers and to taxpayers alike?

There is, and it’s by moving away from these traditional defined benefit pension plans and into something called an annual annuity. Instead of a city putting money into a pension fund that could be raided or underfunded at any time, that money would go into a fixed insurance contract with the employees. It could never be stolen by government and workers get the money they are promised once they retire.”

Many states, including my state of Texas, have used annuities to fund employee retirement benefits. My wife retired from 34 years in public education. Her monthly annuity is almost double what she would have received under Social Security.

Posted by: Royal Flush at July 31, 2013 5:59 PM
Comment #369086

Stephen

fifth year of Obama and the economy still sucks. If you read all the things I wrote that are happening, don’t you feel at least a little like the man has let you down?

The best economic stimulus, BTW, has been shale gas. The oil and gas boom and its offshoot have created 1.7 million jobs. Almost all Obama’s success is from these things that Obama of 2007 would have abhorred.

Want more stimulus? Encourage more of this. Let people build the Keystone pipeline. Yes, Obama can do it.

Posted by: CJ at July 31, 2013 6:37 PM
Comment #369087

C/J - “The best economic stimulus, BTW, has been shale gas. The oil and gas boom and its offshoot have created 1.7 million jobs.”

A very true statement and this is despite the governments attempts to limit the boom. And, the cherry on top of this pie is that it was not done at taxpayer expense and hasn’t added a dime to our debt.

Posted by: Royal Flush at July 31, 2013 7:13 PM
Comment #369088

“A very true statement and this is despite the governments attempts to limit the boom [shale gas]. And, the cherry on top of this pie is that it was not done at taxpayer expense and hasn’t added a dime to our debt.”

Royal Flush,

What has the government done to limit shale gas? In fact, there are regulatory exemptions for shale gas under federal law. That is why even the pioneer developer of shale gas technology (George Mitchell) urged greater federal regulatory control in his last interview “The administration is trying to tighten up controls,” he told me. “I think it’s a good idea. They should have very strict controls. The Department of Energy should do it.” http://www.forbes.com/sites/christopherhelman/2013/07/27/father-of-the-fracking-boom-dies-george-mitchell-urged-greater-regulation-of-drilling/

In addition, research and development of shale gas extraction technology was not only supported by large federal DOE public/private partnerships beginning in the Carter administration but the federal government also incentivized private investment in unconventional gas development by federal tax credits (Section 29 tax credit for unconventional gas). “Up until the public and private R&D and demonstration projects of the 1970s and 1980s, drilling in shale was not considered to be commercially viable.” Mitchell built upon those technological developments to produce the first economical shale fracture in 1998 using an innovative process called slick-water fracturing. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shale_gas

Contrary to your statement, exploitation of the vast known shale gas reserves was a principal public funding priority beginning in the Carter administration continuing through the Reagan administration. It involved direct public R&D funding through the DOE and extensive tax expenditures through the Section 29 credit. That is not to take anything away from George Mitchell who utilized the information in an innovative manner made it commercially feasible.

Posted by: Rich at July 31, 2013 8:03 PM
Comment #369102

Why would Stephen even care about the economy and jobs? He lives with his parents. He doesn’t have to worry about a job when mommy and daddy are paying for his lazy behind to play politics on Watch Blog.

Posted by: Another at August 1, 2013 12:56 AM
Comment #369103
You folks don’t impress me. I see your talking points coming, often enough, a week before you’re using them here. You let others feed you your opinions, and you don’t even challenge your own assumptions.

Take a look in the mirror. Why don’t you find a job and stop depending on others to take care of you. Stop lecturing real Americans from your mom’s basement.

Posted by: Another at August 1, 2013 1:01 AM
Comment #369110

Mr. Daugherty, with you, its hash the same old crap over and over; the housing market problems were because of Freddie and Fanny. Remember Barney Frank testifying that everything was just fine. Then we have the Democrats that pushed home loans with no collateral or income. Any banks that did not comply were threatened by the DOJ with endless investigations.

Regarding endless filibustering and getting in the way of Obama’s targeted stimulus for unions, or Democrat run and failed cites, and states…Good, they are doing what we sent them to DC to do. Stephen, what part of “we sent them there to do that”, don’t you understand. If we wanted continued stimulus spending and socialist programs, we would have voted for Democrats. You can’t seem to understand the two party system, can you?

Regarding sequester; sequester was another of the “gloom and doom” cries from the left. “We’re all gonna die”; sequester is going to be the end of the nation…bull, sequester worked exactly how it was supposed to word. What negative effect has sequester had on the economy?

It is a fact? No Stimulus, no Wall Street Reform? He only pushed Obamacare after he passed that broad fiscal stimulus package. Can’t even keep your facts straight.

Stimulus did nothing but pad the pockets of Obama supporters. Can anyone say failed and bankrupt green jobs and solar panels? What Wall Street reform; are you telling me something changed on WS? The only thing Obama can show for his first term is passing Obamacare on a strictly partisan vote, with no Republican support, during the first 2 years of his term when Democrats controlled the Congress. It was because of this that the Democrats lost the House, lost Senate seats, and lost state governorships and state legislators. Sorry Mr. Daugherty, but that’s the facts. Why don’t you list for us the successful results of the stimulus?

Mr. Daugherty, I call you a dumbass because you have no idea what you are taking about. You have no facts other than liberal media commentaries or leftist blog sites. You are incapable of logical thought. Your comments that you would have found Zimmerman guilty of manslaughter if you had been on the jury, did it for me. Not one member of the jury (active or alternate), who heard the evidence, was able to find him guilty; but you, who from the very beginning, chose to base your opinion on emotion and feelings, are able to say he was guilty and would have willingly sent him to prison for 25 years. I read your comments from last year and you based your opinions on the fact that Zimmerman was a racist. This was false and the prosecutor, the police, the FBI, and the DOJ could not prove a violation of Martin’s civil rights. You are a political hack; you chose to pre-condemn Zimmerman based on the racist-in-chief’s comments. So your arguments on ANY topic are questionable and are subject to analyzing your political motives. Your political motives are leftist. When you complain of teachers being armed; you have no concern for the rights of the people, school boards, or politicians of their own districts. You base your comments purely on your leftist agenda of “they don’t have a right to do anything that the government does not first approve of”. You try to act like you are for 2nd amendment rights; but you would agree with Obama to confiscate all weapons if that is what Obama wanted to do. Mr. Daugherty, you cannot have an open and logical conversation with anyone about any conversation based on the fact you are a leftist liberal hack whose sole purpose is to protect Obama and his agenda. Yet you have the balls (I reservedly use that term) to complain that we support the decisions of our conservative politicians to shut the leftist Democrat agenda down. For this reason, you are a dumbass.

You folks don’t impress me. I see your talking points coming, often enough, a week before you’re using them here. You let others feed you your opinions, and you don’t even challenge your own assumptions.

I don’t really give a rat’s behind if you are impressed or not. The only thing that impresses you Mr. Daugherty is every rhetorical word that comes out of Obama’s mouth. You try to turn the tables by saying you see our talking points coming…what an idiot you are…I have seen dozens of comments on WB that everything you say or defend is based upon Obama’s daily talking points. I have honestly been expecting you to come out with a post dealing with Obama’s and his talking heads comments about the “phony scandals”. Isn’t this the latest talking points of Obama and the Democrats?

Mr. Daugherty, perhaps you could tell us, except for Adrienne, who is nuts, why is it, you are the only leftist on WB who can NEVER concede a problem with Obama and the Democrats? You NEVER find anything Obama has done as questionable or wrong.

Posted by: Political Hostage at August 1, 2013 8:52 AM
Comment #369147

Royal Flush-
1)Who is doing the raiding? Who mismanaged the assets?
2)You are aware, aren’t you, that part of the problem is that because of Wall Street’s irresponsibility, and that of the ratings agencies, many of the pension funds were lead to buy into the toxic assets that went bust, and before that, invest in companies like Enron?
3) You are aware that many 401ks underperformed, leaving workers with less than ideal retirement savings?
4)Are you aware that the person making the decision to take the city into bankruptcy is an Emergency Manager, appointed by the Tea Party Governor?

That last part is important. There’s a difference between not paying because you can’t, and not paying because you don’t want to, because you want to bust unions, sell of government assets, and force your libertarian viewpoints on people regardless of what they want.

C&J-
Obama isn’t the entire government, especially now that you’ve succeeded in taking over a critical part of the lawmaking process. You’ve shared responsibility since 2010, at least on paper. The paper being the constitution.

You talk about shale gas being an economic stimulus. But what would that gas matter if it weren’t for tougher efficiency standards? What would it matter if the economy hadn’t come back?

You are purposeful in your selectivity. If it hadn’t been for increased demand, gasoline prices would have remained low, and all those nice alternative sources would have been too expensive to be profitable. No jobs. As it is, drilling is slowed by the fact that the price on natural gas has been lowered by the increased supply. So is fracking necessarily a job stimulus or not?

The answer is, it’s complicated. But you don’t want complicated. You want advocacy.

Your side would ignore potential problems with groundwater, rather than figure things out. Your side would buy the TransCanada line, and not look deeper to find out that cheap gas wasn’t what they were after.

Folks like you keep on insisting that the market always makes things cheaper, more efficient, but the real world answer is, it’s complicated. In some situations, deregulation of energy has actually made the system work more inefficiently, as people looking to increase, increase, spot price have wheeled generators on and off, straining the power grid and creating artificial scarcity.

Another-
I have a job. I’ve supported my family for much of the time here, not the other way around.

As for who is a real American? We both are. It’s sad that you can’t seem to make a comment without trashing me with it.

Political Hostage-
Fannie and Freddie Mac again, right? Tell me, oh wise and correct one, what was their market share of the secondary market?

Less than twenty percent. And regulations forbade them from buying loans that didn’t meet minimum standards.

You have a short memory, and you probably didn’t pay nearly enough attention to what was happening in 2007 or before. The benefit of working from my side is that they weren’t in active denial then, and aren’t in active denial now.

As for what those folks were sent to Washington to do?

How about ours? Were they sent to be welcome mats for the Republicans, much less the Tea Partisans?

No. So we have an impasse. Mature adults would see that things needed to get done, corrections needed to be made, and changes needed to be responded to.

More to the point, are these hacks who simply push the hardline representing their constituents faithfully, or just a platform? We know for a fact that many of these districts are only barely Republican majority. And are all those Republican voters the absolutists you are?

You pile your comments up with all the excuses for why we’re not supposed to stimulate, all the talking points, but in the end, you’re just arguing for the government to do nothing. And then Blaming the government for the fact that things aren’t better? It’s like taking a monkey wrench to your car’s engine, then complaining about the mechanic’s work.

As for the Sequester, that seems to be doing exactly what we said it would do, undermining the recovery. So badly, in fact, that it’s actually become counterproductive, by reducing revenue through its economic drag. If that’s what happens with a compromise, then would it really have paid to get exactly what you folks wanted, much less the failure of the debt ceiling altogether?

You call me a dumbass because you don’t have the faith in your intellect to answer premise for premise. I don’t need to demonstrate you’re stupid. I just need to demonstrate you’re wrong. You’re the one who feels it necessary to push your opponent’s face in the mud to feel like you’ve really struck a blow for the side of right and good. Me? I just feel I have to get my facts straight.

As for why we don’t concede things? To what are we conceding? Insults that degrade us as human beings? Viewpoints we find erroneous anyways? Facts like the ones you started your comments with, which we know to be false?

I don’t feel much reason to back down before you. If the facts are on my side, and you’re being an a****** to me, then I am perfectly fine with being a stubborn son of a bitch.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at August 2, 2013 12:50 PM
Comment #369162

Stephen

“You’ve shared responsibility since 2010, at least on paper.”

I agree, but as junior partner.

Of course, now you admit that Democrats, who won the elections of 2006 in BOTH houses, share responsibility for the financial crash that took place in 2008.

Finally, we got you to admit this.

RE “what would that gas matter if it weren’t for tougher efficiency standards?” You mean higher standard enacted under Bush, since those enacted under Obama have not yet had much chance to have an effect.

Again, finally, we go you to praise Bush.

” So is fracking necessarily a job stimulus or not?” fracking brought billions of dollars into the economy (at now cost to taxpayers) and created 1.7 million jobs. I call that a stimulus.

Re groundwater - I don’t ignore it. I have studied it and found few cases in general and when there were cases, it comes from improper sealing, which respectable firms want to have regulated.


Posted by: CJ at August 2, 2013 5:45 PM
Comment #369342



提起みんなきっとこの名前を感じないのでほとんど知らないでいかなる1人の身の回りも抱えている運動靴甚だしきに至っては多くの人たちに運動靴の多い彼自分さえない。運動靴の定義について次の2つの観点。この2種類の定義別れは運動靴の広義から狭義の方面と説明。広義の理解を適切に運動して、フィットネス運動、レジャー、娯楽運動と専門の競技を訓練過程及び公式試合運動が使用した靴の種類は運動靴。その靴を含むツアー、革張りの運動靴、ゴム靴、布靴やスリッパなど。狭義の理解を運動靴は、もっぱらプロスポーツ選手の設計と生産、供給のプロ選手の競技员が参加して訓練と正式競技使用の靴。この靴を求めるだけでなく、
一般運動靴の快適さ、保護、marcbymarczu.com 美観などの特性のほかにもっと注意を払うどのように運動を強化するには、運動機能を避け、成績向上運動。いくらは広義は狭義の運動靴も運動の特徴要求に適合しなければならない。人はフィットネス運動は競技スポーツ要求にも運動靴運動中の力学、生物学、人体の工学、運動学、運動生理学、衛生学の要求を考えても助け向上運動選手より良い成績を創造成績や運動。だから運動靴の設計と製造過程では十分に考え運動の特性はスニーカーの違い は革靴など他の履物のマーク。


Posted by: jp-glassses.com at August 8, 2013 11:18 PM
Post a comment