PDA

View Full Version : "Quit Listening to Rush!" shrieks BHO."I won, I will trump you on that!"



Julie R.
01-24-2009, 12:38 PM
What is this lightweight going to do when things get really tough? We are the laughingstock of the world to elect such a man to run our country. He's never run a city, he's never run a state, hell he's never even run a lemonade stand, and he is already shrilly reminding people that don't agree with him "I won, I won!" :barf:

I sincerely hoped things would improve on the new president's watch, he did win the election and does deserve a chance however his childish rants and tantrums only a few days into his administration don't inspire much confidence.

WindyCreek
01-24-2009, 03:04 PM
The first few days have been "Ameratuer Hour" in so many ways and this is when it is easy. Wait until it gets hard.

YardleyLabs
01-24-2009, 04:46 PM
"Poll shows high approval for Obama (http://cnnwire.blogs.cnn.com/2009/01/24/poll-shows-high-approval-for-obama/) Posted: 04:14 PM ET
WASHINGTON (CNN) — More than two-thirds of Americans appear to approve of President Obama’s job performance during his initial days in the White House — an approval rating that significantly exceeds the early poll numbers of his two immediate predecessors.
The new survey by Gallup — the first conducted entirely after Obama took the oath of office Tuesday — found 68 percent of Americans approve of how the new president is handling the job.
Meanwhile, only 12 percent of Americans disapprove of Obama’s job performance so far.
It’s not unusual for new presidents to enter the White House with a high approval rating, but Obama’s is markedly higher than the initial approval numbers for both Bill Clinton and George W. Bush."

When Bush took office he launched an aggressive campaign to deliver on his campaign promise for tax cuts, shutting out any democratic participation in the formulation of the plan and effectively challenging Dems to oppose the plan so that this could be used in future campaigns. In 2004, when he actually managed to win the support of a majority of the electorate, he commented that he had political capital to spend and he intended to use it.

By contrast, Obama has reached out to Republicans in an unusual effort to obtain bi-partisan support despite the fact that he has the votes in Congress to get his way on most issues. In the course of the meeting one congressman complained that Obama's proposals focused too much on benefits for lower income families and contraceptives (not sure how that got into the discussion). Obama, who had campaigned on just that type of proposal pointed out that the election was over and he had won.

Following the meeting, Congressional Republicans were generally reported to have welcomed the effort to involve them in the development of the program and Mitch McConnell indicated that he believed a stimulus plan could be finalized by mid-February as requested by Obama even though there would continue to be areas of disagreement about the size and structure of the program.

"Republican leaders said they are pleased by the tone of the meeting and the willingness of Obama and the Democrats to listen to their ideas.

"I do think we'll be able to meet the president's deadline," Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell (http://www.newsday.com/topic/politics/mitch-mcconnell-PEPLT004312.topic) of Kentucky (http://www.newsday.com/topic/us/kentucky-PLGEO100102400000000.topic) said after the meeting." (Bloomberg News)

Most papers reported this as the story. However, the News Corp/Fox outlets focused on a story about the president mocking the Republicans and gloating over his victory. Media bias anyone?

As to being the "laughingstock of the world", we have been that ever since GWB rose to the Presidency. I suspect that the world will continue to worry about us as long as our economy is in the tank and our foreign policies continue to threaten their existence. Obama is viewed as an improvement simply because he's not George. However, that sheen will wear off quickly unless accompanied by some concrete changes.

Bob Gutermuth
01-24-2009, 05:09 PM
I will continue to spend time listening to Rush and Bill and Sean, hoping to learn enough to be able to help vote america out of the morass that the nattering nabobs of negativity have lead and are leading us into without a map or battle plan RESIT!

Illinois Bob
01-24-2009, 05:18 PM
Only 1456 days left.

subroc
01-24-2009, 05:36 PM
I thought he was going to do some big things.

YardleyLabs
01-24-2009, 05:48 PM
I thought he was going to do some big things.

Five days in office and we're still in a recession and still fighting in Iraq. Just goes to show what happens when you elect an amateur as President. Not only that, I still have my guns.;)

Pete
01-24-2009, 06:04 PM
Its only been less than a week and he has spent close to 200million partying:)

Pete

BlackDog1337
01-24-2009, 06:07 PM
i miss bush lol He made me feel like i had a chance at being president some day lol.

YardleyLabs
01-24-2009, 07:03 PM
Its only been less than a week and he has spent close to 200million partying:)

Pete

Yep. Spent about the same amount as Bush did in 2005 and managed to entertain five times the number of people. Finally, a President who understands the economies of scale.:D

BlackDog1337
01-24-2009, 07:06 PM
What is the 1st thing you want to do as president? Lets go party.

http://email.secureserver.net/download.php?rand=851006&folder=INBOX&uid=940&part=2&tnef_part=-1&aEmlPart=0&orig=cid%3A010401c97d55%246f8acf70%246f01a8c0%40ke yallegro.rockport.com&inline=1&filename=image001.gif&type=image%2Fgif&encoding=base64&

Julie R.
01-24-2009, 07:07 PM
Ahem, Jeff, for your information I haven't read the Fox report yet, I read about Obomo's little tantrum here http://www.nypost.com/seven/01232009/news/politics/prez_zings_gop_foe_in_a_timulating_talk_151572.htm


"You can't just listen to Rush Limbaugh and get things done," he told top GOP leaders, whom he had invited to the White House to discuss his nearly $1 trillion stimulus package.

Here's a NEWS FLASH, Mr. President: Limbaugh is an entertainer on the radio. That's all he is, he doesn't make policies, and he doesn't have one damn thing to do with setting the Republican agenda nor does he have any influence over it. That's the job of the RNC, and even those policies aren't binding to members of Congress like Eric Cantor.


"There are big things that unify Republicans and Democrats," the official said. "We shouldn't let partisan politics derail what are very important things that need to get done."
That wasn't Obama's only jab at Republicans today.
In an exchange with Rep. Eric Cantor (R-Va.) about the proposal, the president shot back: "I won," according to aides briefed on the meeting.
"I will trump you on that."
Not that Obama was gloating. He was just explaining that he aims to get his way on stimulus package and all other legislation, sources said, noting his unrivaled one-party control of both congressional chambers.

The world according to the Obombo administration's spin meisters. Not even a week in office and they're already having to make apologies and excuses and put a spin on their hero's childish outbursts. And you libs accused Dan Quayle and Dubya of being stupid?

Julie R.
01-24-2009, 07:09 PM
Yep. Spent about the same amount as Bush did in 2005 and managed to entertain five times the number of people. Finally, a President who understands the economies of scale.:D

If you don't count the wages paid to all the federal employees that got the day off. I expect that adds at least a hundred million to his tab.

Black N Gold
01-24-2009, 07:17 PM
"Nattering nabobs of negativism" is a quote by Spiro Agnew. I was there for the whole Nixon mess. Instead of complaining- How about contributing or doing something that helps. This Country need people to add not subtract.

YardleyLabs
01-24-2009, 07:27 PM
Julie,

If you look you'll notice I said "the News Corp/Fox outlets". The New York Post and Fox are both owned by News Corporation, a company founded and controlled by Rupert Murdoch, an Australian conservative who considers it so important to increase his political influence in America that he changed his citizenship from Australian to American for the sole purpose of avoiding US laws restricting foreign ownership of television stations.

Murdoch's most recent acquisitions have been the Wall Street Journal and the Dow Corporation. At the WSJ, the fear has been that he would use his power to undermine the historic division between news reporting and editorial policy that has existed there to force reporters to bend the news as needed to fit his political priorities. To convince the owners to sell, he agreed to preserve jounalistic indiependence. However, after the way he has managed the New York Post and Fox News, few expect him to honor that agreement.

YardleyLabs
01-24-2009, 07:58 PM
.....
And you libs accused Dan Quayle and Dubya of being stupid?

One of the biggest mistakes Liberals ever made was mistaking Bush's complete disinterest in policy analysis for stupidity. GWB is not and never was stupid.

Liberals have a tendency to confuse intelligence with analysis. One of my professors in graduate school pointed out correctly that true believers trump analytic types every time because they never allow themselves to be sidetracked by facts, self doubt, or considerations of fairness; it's enough to be right. In fact, I think GWB managed to outdo the true believers. His true belief was in his own capabilities of leadership and in his personal destiny as a leader. The direction in which he was leading was always of secondary importance and he delegated it to policy wonks like Karl Rove and Karen Hughes until their failures overwhelmed his administration. However, as a political executive Bush was highly effective, not stupid.

Obama seems to be an interesting mix of both GWB and Clinton. Obama is clearly very analytic in his approach to problems. However, he is also convinced of his own destiny as a great leader. Like Bush he forces a clear focus on the agenda and seeks to manage the news cycle to fit the needs of the agenda. He seems more willing to be introspective and to be flexible than was ever true of GWB.

However, that could easily change if he is cannot meet the challenges he faces. Hopefully, for all of us, he will find the right paths to help our economy recover and to break us out of the cycle of perpetual war. However, like Bush, he may not live up to the job. In that case, we will all pay more than we or our children can afford.

Pete
01-24-2009, 08:04 PM
Yep. Spent about the same amount as Bush did in 2005 and managed to entertain five times the number of people. Finally, a President who understands the economies of scale.:grin:
__________________


I would have put a 250 dollar topper on it:)

Pete

subroc
01-24-2009, 08:24 PM
...How about contributing or doing something that helps. This Country need people to add not subtract.

Yeh, I know what you mean. I was hoping the left would do that for the last 8 years.

M Remington
01-24-2009, 08:29 PM
Julie, let me point out. . .

We won, we won. So, the majority of Americans are not listening to your complaints. Get used to it, you're a minority.

subroc
01-24-2009, 08:34 PM
Julie, let me point out. . .

We won, we won. So, the majority of Americans are not listening to your complaints. Get used to it, you're a minority.

How exactly does a minority become a majority?

I could be wrong but it may actually have something to do with complaining and speaking out. Although, if one needed to stifle descent because their position lacks any substance, that would probably be a good method.

Richard Halstead
01-24-2009, 08:40 PM
Obama seems to be an interesting mix of both GWB and Clinton. Obama is clearly very analytic in his approach to problems. However, he is also convinced of his own destiny as a great leader. Like Bush he forces a clear focus on the agenda and seeks to manage the news cycle to fit the needs of the agenda. He seems more willing to be introspective and to be flexible than was ever true of GWB.

Is repealing the marrige act signed by Clinton more like Clinton? Leaning to the far left approving same sex marriages in all states more like GWB? This is all part of the agenda listed on the White House webpage.

Tim Geitner should not be approved anyone that doesn't pay their taxes and lie that Turbo Tax didn't warn him when the makers of Turbo Tax say those warnings are built into the system. As head of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York and the Fed’s man on Wall Street, Mr. Geithner was a key architect of the $30 billion bailout to prevent the bankruptcy of Bear Stearns Cos., leading to charges the government was stoking moral hazard. He shaped the Fed’s lifeline to investment banks that followed, and was among the officials involved in assessing the implications of the troubles around Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Lehman Brothers Holdings, American International Group and numerous other firms (from Wachovia to Citigroup) that have come under market pressure.

Obama is my President that doesn't mean I can't oppose his choices.

luvmylabs23139
01-24-2009, 08:53 PM
Julie, let me point out. . .

We won, we won. So, the majority of Americans are not listening to your complaints. Get used to it, you're a minority.

I'm not Julie, but personally I will scream and yell non stop about this messed up administration. My biggest reason, I pay taxes, and a darn lot, while most of the winners don't pay a darn dime. As far as I am concerned those no payers should shut up or put up their money instead of stealing mine!

M Remington
01-24-2009, 09:03 PM
You should reserve your judgement on this administration until things get rolling. I, too, pay a ton of taxes--too much. And, I realize that my taxes help people who cannot support themselves. Helping others is what makes us civilized. George Bush wanted us to keep more of our income--now we have a debt that we may never pay off.

luvmylabs23139
01-24-2009, 09:17 PM
Why should I even pay taxes, after all the nominee for treasury doesn't. Need we say more about this new idiotic administration?

Marvin S
01-24-2009, 09:19 PM
And, I realize that my taxes help people who cannot support themselves.

When I started I learned to live on what I earned. Your statement is about the most UNREALISTICALLY apathetic statement I have ever read.


Helping others is what makes us civilized.

Why don't the lefties give more then? The lefties mantra is forcing others to give when it's not necessary.

Steve
01-24-2009, 09:24 PM
Helping others is what makes us civilized.

Voluntarily helping others is what makes us civilized. Doing so at the point of a gun reveals that we allow legalized theft.

luvmylabs23139
01-24-2009, 09:33 PM
Voluntarily helping others is what makes us civilized. Doing so at the point of a gun reveals that we allow legalized theft.

+10000000 I agree

Gun_Dog2002
01-24-2009, 11:49 PM
Julie, let me point out. . .

We won, we won. So, the majority of Americans are not listening to your complaints. Get used to it, you're a minority.

Actually the actual vote was pretty tight. Don't confuse the electoral vote with actual vote.

/Paul

YardleyLabs
01-25-2009, 06:12 AM
Actually the actual vote was pretty tight. Don't confuse the electoral vote with actual vote.

/Paul

In the history of Presidential elections, it would qualify as a landslide. The margin of victory was actually 8 1/2 million votes which is the largest margin since Reagan's second run against Mondale and exceeds Reagan's victory in his first campaign (considered a landslide at the time).

badbullgator
01-25-2009, 06:51 AM
In the history of Presidential elections, it would qualify as a landslide. The margin of victory was actually 8 1/2 million votes which is the largest margin since Reagan's second run against Mondale and exceeds Reagan's victory in his first campaign (considered a landslide at the time).


IN numbers yes it is a lot, but far more people voted in this election and I would bet the percentage is not nearly a landslide.....

code3retrievers
01-25-2009, 07:13 AM
Just like a liberal to use figures to deceive the masses

Obama won by 7% of the vote.
Reagan's margin was 10% against Carter (incumbent)

Reagan got 8.4 million votes more than Carter with 86 million voting
Obama 9.5 million vote margin with 131 million voting

Obama s margin for electoral vote 365-173
Reagan again 489-49

Yes, Obama won but it was not a greater victory then Reagan. He got a million more votes but almost another 45 million voted.

The Reagan victory was considered a landslide due to the electoral vote.
Obama didn't come close on that one.

Julie R.
01-25-2009, 07:46 AM
I would also add that thanks to the dumbing down of America to meet the lowest common denominator, we are graduating functional illiterates and morons who can barely read or write, who don't know the capital of their own state much less who their representatives are, have no understanding of how government actually works, could not find Mexico or Canada on a map, think everything they read on the internet or hear on TV is true and YES FOLKS THEY VOTE!! In fact a lot of them voted for the first time in this last election. I feel really secure and confident knowing that folks like these and Mark Remington make up the majority who decides who gets to run the country.

PS to Remington: Gloat all you like, it's obviously important to you to be a part of a majority. You are a minority on this board and your majority ain't one I'd be bragging about belonging to.

Raymond Little
01-25-2009, 12:23 PM
I would also add that thanks to the dumbing down of America to meet the lowest common denominator, we are graduating functional illiterates and morons who can barely read or write, who don't know the capital of their own state much less who their representatives are, have no understanding of how government actually works, could not find Mexico or Canada on a map, think everything they read on the internet or hear on TV is true and YES FOLKS THEY VOTE!! In fact a lot of them voted for the first time in this last election. I feel really secure and confident knowing that folks like these and Mark Remington make up the majority who decides who gets to run the country.

PS to Remington: Gloat all you like, it's obviously important to you to be a part of a majority. You are a minority on this board and your majority ain't one I'd be bragging about belonging to.

Very Good Julie!!

Greg E
01-25-2009, 12:30 PM
Julie, you need to understand where M. Remington is coming from. He is the majority in his hometown of San Antonio Tx. It's the only city in the US that I will not let my wife drive through after dark. They depend on the Govt. Without their monthly checks the town would dry up. This is not an attack on Mark, just letting you know where he comes from.

YardleyLabs
01-25-2009, 12:56 PM
I would also add that thanks to the dumbing down of America to meet the lowest common denominator, we are graduating functional illiterates and morons who can barely read or write, who don't know the capital of their own state much less who their representatives are, have no understanding of how government actually works, could not find Mexico or Canada on a map, think everything they read on the internet or hear on TV is true and YES FOLKS THEY VOTE!! In fact a lot of them voted for the first time in this last election. I feel really secure and confident knowing that folks like these and Mark Remington make up the majority who decides who gets to run the country.

PS to Remington: Gloat all you like, it's obviously important to you to be a part of a majority. You are a minority on this board and your majority ain't one I'd be bragging about belonging to.

Interestingly, Obama won a majority of the vote from all educational levels. Those with a postgraduate level of education gave him 60% of the vote and those with incomes over $200,000 gave him 52% to McCain's 46%. Those certainly sound like the dumber folks to me.

However, you are absolutely right that a majority on this forum voted against Obama and I respect that completely. It's clear that those who voted for McCain and against Obama made intelligent, informed decisions concerning what they believed was best for the future of our country. Obviously, therefore, those who voted for Obama and against McCain were doing it to steal the wealth of everyone else, because they were ignorant and brain washed, or because they were agents for the Islamic jihad.

Democracy is a process of institutionalized respect for those with whom you disagree even when those disagreements are extreme.

Franco
01-26-2009, 02:46 PM
What is this lightweight going to do when things get really tough? We are the laughingstock of the world to elect such a man to run our country. He's never run a city, he's never run a state, hell he's never even run a lemonade stand, and he is already shrilly reminding people that don't agree with him "I won, I won!" :barf:

I sincerely hoped things would improve on the new president's watch, he did win the election and does deserve a chance however his childish rants and tantrums only a few days into his administration don't inspire much confidence.

You are correct Julie, he's not only a lightweight but, he is in over-his-head. Obama didn't win, the USA loss! WHAT ARE HIS QUALIFICATIONS OTHER THAN THE PRESS LOVES HIM AS WELL AS OUR ENEMIES ABROAD? I think many that voted for him either hate the USA or live in a vaccum. It's scary that this guy is President and Commander In Cheif.

Of course the news media will begin to tell thier listeners how much better things have gotten since he took office.

The Obama supporters can continue to drink Obama/Liberal Press kool-aide as we continue to weaken ourselves both domestically and abroad. BHO is a bad joke played on us!

The Dems are in charge but, can we survive both BHO and the Democrats?

Buzz
01-26-2009, 04:12 PM
I think many that voted for him either hate the USA or live in a vaccum. It's scary that this guy is President and Commander In Cheif.



I think most voted for him because they love the USA and hate what has been done to it by your buddy GWB.

Marvin S
01-26-2009, 05:18 PM
Former Republican and current Independent Conservative regards


:) :) :) :confused: :confused: I believe you are confusing the drivel you post with something substantive.

smillerdvm
01-26-2009, 05:31 PM
I would also add that thanks to the dumbing down of America to meet the lowest common denominator, we are graduating functional illiterates and morons who can barely read or write, who don't know the capital of their own state much less who their representatives are, have no understanding of how government actually works, could not find Mexico or Canada on a map, think everything they read on the internet or hear on TV is true and YES FOLKS THEY VOTE!! In fact .


In fact one of them was the Rep VP nomineee this year, and is considered be many to be the shining light for the Repubs for 2012

Good Luck with THAT!!!!!

As a Conservative, and former Republican; I feel completely abandoned by the Republicans after their recent track record. Particularly the $850 Billion Corporate Welfare program of stealing from the poor and giving to the rich, {and incompetent, and crooked and lobbyist protected etc. etc. etc.}

It made me sick to hear "W" prattle on about how he regretted having to "abandon his fundamental belief in free market policies" as he was SOCIALIZING our stock markets, Banking industry, Insurance industry, Auto industry, etc. etc. Nothing better than rewarding corruption and incompetence!!

That's kind of like when his old spiritual buddy Ted Haggard "abandoned his fundamental principal" of heterosexuality.

The result for the American taxpayer will be the same as it was for old Ted!!

Julie R.
01-26-2009, 06:41 PM
In fact one of them was the Rep VP nomineee this year, and is considered be many to be the shining light for the Repubs for 2012

Good Luck with THAT!!!!!

As a Conservative, and former Republican; I feel completely abandoned by the Republicans after their recent track record. Particularly the $850 Billion Corporate Welfare program of stealing from the poor and giving to the rich, {and incompetent, and crooked and lobbyist protected etc. etc. etc.}

It made me sick to hear "W" prattle on about how he regretted having to "abandon his fundamental belief in free market policies" as he was SOCIALIZING our stock markets, Banking industry, Insurance industry, Auto industry, etc. etc. Nothing better than rewarding corruption and incompetence!!

That's kind of like when his old spiritual buddy Ted Haggard "abandoned his fundamental principal" of heterosexuality.

The result for the American taxpayer will be the same as it was for old Ted!!

Here's a little personal feedback: It makes ME sick for people to prattle on about how awful Bush was, how he so offended their conservative sensibilities, they voted for Obamunism. So let's get this straight, you were so sickened by the Bush bail outs but you're OK with Obombo's? And you're still Bush (and Palin) bashing even though your guy won?
http://i138.photobucket.com/albums/q254/HopeSpringsFarm/Commobammunism.jpg
"I won! I WON!"
And you're OK with Obamunism trillion dollar 'bailout', nationalization of banks, and all his other grandiose socialist schemes? Hell they aren't even socialist, they're straight up communism, a great society where everything will be run by the government. Because let's face it, the gubmint does SUCH a good job with the programs they already run, right?

And it's OK that a tax cheat/scofflaw got easily confirmed by the Senate for Treasury Sec., and that Hillary Clinton's nomination sailed through just as seamlessly even though the Clinton Foundation collects MILLIONS every year as consulting fees from foreign governments including those hostile to US interests?

PLEASE, do me and the real conservatives a favor and don't call yourself a 'conservative' if you like the way this new administration is shaping up. By the way I see Obombo's ratings have fallen 15 percent after not even a week in office. Now that is a real achievement. I suspect spending $200 million on a party to pat himself on the back while the economy was in free fall will be one of our new president's most significant accomplishments. Think of all the corporate execs that money could've bailed out, how many ACORN votes that money might've funded!

Lucky Seven
01-26-2009, 06:57 PM
You do realize that the Mesiah's approval rating dropped 15 points in the last couple of day's........

I bet MSNBC, CNN, ABC, NBC, and CBS will be reporting on this any minute..... :rolleyes:

Good lord ..... are the next 4 years gunna be fun !!!!!

Chad



"Poll shows high approval for Obama (http://cnnwire.blogs.cnn.com/2009/01/24/poll-shows-high-approval-for-obama/) Posted: 04:14 PM ET
WASHINGTON (CNN) — More than two-thirds of Americans appear to approve of President Obama’s job performance during his initial days in the White House — an approval rating that significantly exceeds the early poll numbers of his two immediate predecessors.
The new survey by Gallup — the first conducted entirely after Obama took the oath of office Tuesday — found 68 percent of Americans approve of how the new president is handling the job.
Meanwhile, only 12 percent of Americans disapprove of Obama’s job performance so far.
It’s not unusual for new presidents to enter the White House with a high approval rating, but Obama’s is markedly higher than the initial approval numbers for both Bill Clinton and George W. Bush."

When Bush took office he launched an aggressive campaign to deliver on his campaign promise for tax cuts, shutting out any democratic participation in the formulation of the plan and effectively challenging Dems to oppose the plan so that this could be used in future campaigns. In 2004, when he actually managed to win the support of a majority of the electorate, he commented that he had political capital to spend and he intended to use it.

By contrast, Obama has reached out to Republicans in an unusual effort to obtain bi-partisan support despite the fact that he has the votes in Congress to get his way on most issues. In the course of the meeting one congressman complained that Obama's proposals focused too much on benefits for lower income families and contraceptives (not sure how that got into the discussion). Obama, who had campaigned on just that type of proposal pointed out that the election was over and he had won.

Following the meeting, Congressional Republicans were generally reported to have welcomed the effort to involve them in the development of the program and Mitch McConnell indicated that he believed a stimulus plan could be finalized by mid-February as requested by Obama even though there would continue to be areas of disagreement about the size and structure of the program.

"Republican leaders said they are pleased by the tone of the meeting and the willingness of Obama and the Democrats to listen to their ideas.

"I do think we'll be able to meet the president's deadline," Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell (http://www.newsday.com/topic/politics/mitch-mcconnell-PEPLT004312.topic) of Kentucky (http://www.newsday.com/topic/us/kentucky-PLGEO100102400000000.topic) said after the meeting." (Bloomberg News)

Most papers reported this as the story. However, the News Corp/Fox outlets focused on a story about the president mocking the Republicans and gloating over his victory. Media bias anyone?

As to being the "laughingstock of the world", we have been that ever since GWB rose to the Presidency. I suspect that the world will continue to worry about us as long as our economy is in the tank and our foreign policies continue to threaten their existence. Obama is viewed as an improvement simply because he's not George. However, that sheen will wear off quickly unless accompanied by some concrete changes.

Lisa S.
01-26-2009, 07:33 PM
I'm a conservative, haven't listened to Rush since before GWB was elected in 2000. I am offended that BHO would tell others we shouldn't listen to another viewpoint.

Of course BHO's approval ratings have gone down 15 points! The kind of things they expect from him can't come from one human being. I haven't heard so much worshiping of one person in a long time. Those who voted for him probably expected world peace already. Guess they'll be disappointed when he proves to be the U.S. President and not the second coming.

Lucky Seven
01-26-2009, 08:13 PM
did you guys/gals hear this phone call.

this really cracks me up. This is what the liberal media and the Messiah created.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2KZPgJn3EG4

toddh
01-26-2009, 09:21 PM
From another thread:



Rush, Hannity and company are becoming the boys who cried wolf -- which is why they are becoming increasingly irrelevant.

Then there's no need for Pelosi's pet "Fairness Doctrine"...right? Seems Rush's ratings are at an all time high.

I'm sure that's why Obama said what he did.



Disclaimer: I don't listen to Rush

Franco
01-27-2009, 01:28 PM
B H Obamo may be just what Rush needs to revitalize his ratings...
Rush Limbaugh Responds to Obama Attack




Rush Limbaugh has responded sharply to President Barack Obama’s comment about the radio talk show host, calling Obama’s economic stimulus plan "a trillion-dollar debacle."

At a meeting with Republican leaders on Friday, Obama told the lawmakers they shouldn’t be listening to Limbaugh if they plan on getting along with him.

"You can't just listen to Rush Limbaugh and get things done," he told the GOP leaders during a discussion about his planned stimulus package.

Limbaugh fired back in an e-mail to the Palm Beach Post’s “Page 2 Live” columnist Jose Lambiet, saying Obama is trying to shift the focus of the public debate from the stimulus plan to the radio talker. (http://www.page2live.com/)

Limbaugh, who has referred to Obama’s inauguration as "The Immaculate Inauguration," mockingly called the new president "The Great Unifier."

"If I can be made to serve as a distraction, then there is that much less time debating the merits of the trillion-dollar debacle," Rush wrote.

"The Great Unifier’s plan is to isolate elected Republicans from their voters and supporters by making the argument about me and not about his plan. He is hoping that these Republicans will also publicly denounce me and thus marginalize me."

Limbaugh continued in his e-mail to Lambiet: "I believe his stimulus is aimed at re-establishing 'eternal' power for the Democrat Party rather than stimulating the economy, because anyone with a brain knows this is NOT how you stimulate the economy.

"Obama’s plan would buy votes for the Democrat Party, in the same way FDR’s New Deal established majority power for 50 years of Democrat rule, and it would simultaneously damage any hope of future tax cuts."

Obama's $825 billion stimulus bill is set for debate in Congress this week. [See the full story about Limbaugh’s e-mail in the Palm Beach Post — Click (http://www.page2live.com/)

Buzz
01-27-2009, 01:52 PM
Limbaugh continued in his e-mail to Lambiet: "I believe his stimulus is aimed at re-establishing 'eternal' power for the Democrat Party rather than stimulating the economy, because anyone with a brain knows this is NOT how you stimulate the economy.



There goes Rush again, implying that he has a brain. I think he gives himself too much credit.

I for one hope that every conservative continues to listen to Rush AND Hannity.

Henry V
01-27-2009, 03:02 PM
I for one hope that every conservative continues to listen to Rush AND Hannity.
Mega dittos to that! They are almost as entertaining as the high level discussions on these boards.
Just what is BHO going to do on day 8? I can't wait to see. Buzz, have you noticed that there has been more criticism of his first 8 days from those on the "right" here than there was during 8 years of the W administration? Funny how that works.

Please keep it coming folks. Now, I don't have to tune into the radio for my periodic dose of right wing logic and reasoning.

duk4me
01-27-2009, 03:23 PM
There goes Rush again, implying that he has a brain. I think he gives himself too much credit.

I for one hope that every conservative continues to listen to Rush AND Hannity.

He does have a brain.....a brain on drugs. He's an entertainer, thats all.

Losthwy
01-27-2009, 10:17 PM
I agree with duk4me, Rush is an entertainer, a fat, pill popping entertainer formally of ESPN, but a entertainer none the less. Two days after the election Rush was calling it the "Obama Recession". And another pearl of his wisdom, "bipartinship is gutless". Funny guy that fat pill popping entertainer formally of ESPN.

JDogger
01-28-2009, 12:35 AM
I will continue to spend time listening to Rush and Bill and Sean, hoping to learn enough to be able to help vote america out of the morass that the nattering nabobs of negativity have lead and are leading us into without a map or battle plan RESIT!

well bob, ya said it all right here;

from bob on another thread;

"Whatever he spend on this party, it commemorates the darkes tday in america since Pearl Pearl Harobur and 811 combinded." Bob G.

and BTW bob, RESIT!, is what you utter when your dog breaks once again, just before the judges tell you to "pick 'em up".:p

JD

Steve Amrein
01-28-2009, 08:42 AM
well bob, ya said it all right here;

from bob on another thread;

"Whatever he spend on this party, it commemorates the darkes tday in america since Pearl Pearl Harobur and 811 combinded." Bob G.

and BTW bob, RESIT!, is what you utter when your dog breaks once again, just before the judges tell you to "pick 'em up".:p

JD

I always find it funny that spelling and grammar on a web type forum is the measure of one's performance. I wish I remember the last guy that was so impressed with himself and called someone out about spelling misspelled himself while doing so trying to make a point.

Maybe at the next swearing in they should use cue cards or a teleprompter.

backpasture
01-28-2009, 04:15 PM
We are the laughingstock of the world to elect such a man to run our country.

What world are you talking about? It's pretty clear that Obama has MUCH higher level of support globally than Bush did.


I sincerely hoped things would improve on the new president's watch, he did win the election and does deserve a chance however his childish rants and tantrums only a few days into his administration don't inspire much confidence.

'Shrill'? 'Rants'? 'Tantrums'? Hyperbolize much?

The supposed quote was "You can't just listen to Rush Limbaugh and get things done." And knowing his fiery temperament, I'm sure he was bellowing it at the top of his lungs. :rolleyes: Quite a 'tantrum'.

/Somehow I doubt you had much 'confidence' in him or his policies to begin with, but it is refreshing to hear that you think he 'does deserve a chance'. I'm sure you're earnest when you say that.:rolleyes:

backpasture
01-28-2009, 04:19 PM
Then there's no need for Pelosi's pet "Fairness Doctrine"...right? Seems Rush's ratings are at an all time high.

I'm sure that's why Obama said what he did.


Not only is there no need for the 'Fairness Doctrine', there is also virtually no support for it. It is laughable that the right wing-nuts keep going on and on about it, given that there is little chance it will even be discussed by Congress, let alone enacted.

Gotta be OUTRAGED! about something, though, I guess. :rolleyes:

IowaBayDog
01-28-2009, 04:57 PM
Not only is there no need for the 'Fairness Doctrine', there is also virtually no support for it. It is laughable that the right wing-nuts keep going on and on about it, given that there is little chance it will even be discussed by Congress, let alone enacted.

Gotta be OUTRAGED! about something, though, I guess. :rolleyes:


The outrage is that liberals vote and support morons that they obviously know nothing about.

From the liberals favorite source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairness_Doctrine

Reinstatement considered

[edit (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Fairness_Doctrine&action=edit&section=7)] Support

Some Democratic legislators have expressed interest in reinstituting the Fairness Doctrine,[18] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairness_Doctrine#cite_note-17) although no one has introduced legislation to do so since 2005.
In June 2007, Senator Richard Durbin (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Durbin) (Democrat of Illinois (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illinois)) said, "It’s time to reinstitute the Fairness Doctrine,” [19] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairness_Doctrine#cite_note-18) an opinion shared by his Democratic colleague, Senator John Kerry (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Kerry) of Massachusetts (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massachusetts).[20] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairness_Doctrine#cite_note-19) However, according to Marin Cogan of The New Republic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_New_Republic) in late 2008, "Senator Durbin's press secretary says that Durbin has 'no plans, no language, no nothing. He was asked in a hallway last year, he gave his personal view'—that the American people were served well under the doctrine—'and it's all been blown out of proportion.' " [21] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairness_Doctrine#cite_note-20)
On June 24, 2008, House Speaker (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speaker_of_the_U.S._House_of_Representatives) Nancy Pelosi (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nancy_Pelosi) (who represents most of San Francisco, California (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Francisco,_California)) told reporters that her fellow Democratic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._Democratic_Party) representatives did not want to forbid reintroduction of the Fairness Doctrine, adding “the interest in my caucus is the reverse.” When asked by John Gizzi of Human Events (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Events), “Do you personally support revival of the ‘Fairness Doctrine?’”, the Speaker replied "Yes." [22] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairness_Doctrine#cite_note-21)
On October 22, 2008, Senator Jeff Bingaman (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeff_Bingaman), Democrat of New Mexico (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Mexico), told a conservative talk radio host in Albuquerque, New Mexico (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albuquerque,_New_Mexico), "I would want this station and all stations to have to present a balanced perspective and different points of view," and "All I’m saying is that for many, many years we operated under a Fairness Doctrine in this country, and I think the country was well-served. I think the public discussion was at a higher level and more intelligent in those days than it has become since." [23] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairness_Doctrine#cite_note-22)

backpasture
01-28-2009, 05:10 PM
The outrage is that liberals vote and support morons that they obviously know nothing about.



You're grasping at straws (and strawmen). There is zero chance that the Fairness Doctrine is going anywhere. Can you find a few Reps to support it? Yes. You can find reps who will support just about any nutty idea in the hyperpartisan House. But, at best any discussion of it will die in committee. And, the Senate's not going to touch it.

Much ado about nothing.

IowaBayDog
01-28-2009, 05:28 PM
You're grasping at straws (and strawmen). There is zero chance that the Fairness Doctrine is going anywhere. Can you find a few Reps to support it? Yes. You can find reps who will support just about any nutty idea in the hyperpartisan House. But, at best any discussion of it will die in committee. And, the Senate's not going to touch it.

Much ado about nothing.


Those are the LEADERS of your party, not the Ron Paul/Bernie Sanders types.

backpasture
01-28-2009, 05:46 PM
Those are the LEADERS of your party, not the Ron Paul/Bernie Sanders types.

1) It's not MY party. I've never been a member of the Democratic party.
2) The Leaders of the the Democratic Congressional delegations are Pelosi and Reid. Tim Kaine is actually the Chair of the Party. Most would acknowledge Obama as the de facto Leader of the party. You got one right, though (Pelosi) , which is better than your usual average.
3) As I said before, there isn't any legislation that is coming forth on this. That is the reality, regardless of what Pelosi's position is. (And Pelosi definitely fits the 'hyperpartisan' description.)

The only legislation that has been introduced related to the Fairness Doctrine in the past few years has been introduced by Republicans (in order to 'pre-empt' the legislation that is supposedly being introduced in the bizarro world they inhabit).

The obsession that right wing-nuts have with this non-issue is amusing. So is your regurgitation of the talking points that Rush is spoon-feeding you.

duk4me
01-28-2009, 06:07 PM
Hey wasn't Rush one of those bands that we listened to in the 70's when we were doing things we shouldn't have been doing with the music wide open.

Somehow I get confused these days. Just wondering.

JDogger
01-28-2009, 06:17 PM
Originally Posted by JDogger http://www.retrievertraining.net/forums/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.retrievertraining.net/forums/showthread.php?p=392295#post392295)
well bob, ya said it all right here;

from bob on another thread;

"Whatever he spend on this party, it commemorates the darkes tday in america since Pearl Pearl Harobur and 811 combinded." Bob G.

and BTW bob, RESIT!, is what you utter when your dog breaks once again, just before the judges tell you to "pick 'em up".:razz:

JD


I always find it funny that spelling and grammar on a web type forum is the measure of one's performance. I wish I remember the last guy that was so impressed with himself and called someone out about spelling misspelled himself while doing so trying to make a point.

Maybe at the next swearing in they should use cue cards or a teleprompter.

Bob is quite capable of correct spelling and grammer. My jibes at him are about the things he says.

Lighten up Francis, :)

IowaBayDog
01-28-2009, 06:25 PM
1) It's not MY party. I've never been a member of the Democratic party.
2) The Leaders of the the Democratic Congressional delegations are Pelosi and Reid. Tim Kaine is actually the Chair of the Party. Most would acknowledge Obama as the de facto Leader of the party. You got one right, though (Pelosi) , which is better than your usual average.
.

Richard Joseph "Dick" Durbin (born November 21, 1944) is the senior United States Senator (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senator) from the U.S. state (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._state) of Illinois (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illinois) and Democratic Party Whip (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assistant_party_leaders_of_the_United_States_Senat e), the second highest position in the Democratic Party leadership in the Senate (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate).

John Forbes Kerry (born December 11, 1943) is an American politician (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politician) who is currently the junior (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Junior_Senator) United States Senator (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate) from Massachusetts (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massachusetts) and chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Senate_Foreign_Relations_Committee).[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Kerry#cite_note-0)
As the Presidential nominee of the Democratic Party (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Party_(United_States)), .....



Its amazing how un-informed you really are yet so arrogant about it.

backpasture
01-28-2009, 06:37 PM
Its amazing how un-informed you really are yet so arrogant about it.

Wow! The Party Whip and the 'Junior Senator from Massachusetts' are now leaders of the party?
That must be the case in the same bizarro world where the 'Fairness Doctrine' is getting shoved down our throats.

IowaBayDog
01-28-2009, 06:42 PM
I realize Kerry was a farce of a Presidential nominee but he was nominated by YOUR party.

It is amazing that it is not even 2 weeks in and the Democrats are already going back in the closet. Trying to find someone in the 90s that would admit they voted for Clinton was liking finding chicken teeth.

backpasture
01-28-2009, 06:50 PM
I realize Kerry was a farce of a Presidential nominee but he was nominated by YOUR party.

It is amazing that it is not even 2 weeks in and the Democrats are already going back in the closet. Trying to find someone in the 90s that would admit they voted for Clinton was liking finding chicken teeth.

That's right, if I'm not a Republican I must be a Democrat. If I don't watch O'Reilly, I must watch Olberman! If I don't listen to Rush, I must listen to Air America! Those are the choices, right?

Losthwy
01-28-2009, 08:11 PM
It is amazing that it is not even 2 weeks in and the Democrats are already going back in the closet. Trying to find someone in the 90s that would admit they voted for Clinton was liking finding chicken teeth.

What are you talking about? This is a bunch of rhetoric and rubbish. As well as your earlier post about being the laughing stock around the world for voting in Obama as president. Just the opposite is true. Pesident Obama's standing around the world is much higher than GW's, who most of the world saw as a bungling cowboy . Asked around you'll find a lot of chicken teeth. You just don't get it. Bush/Cheney administration was a failure. Bush left office with a 22% approval rating, the only modern president with a lower rating was Richard Nixon. In addition his reputation around the world was dismal. He left President Obama and the country with quite a mess. And good luck to this present administration on fixing the problems we are facing today. For if he doesn't we may not have a job tomorrow.

IowaBayDog
01-28-2009, 09:00 PM
... As well as your earlier post about being the laughing stock around the world for voting in Obama as president. t... ..


No, what are you talking about? I never said that.

You just don't get it, blaming Bush for all our financial troubles and thinking doing what Bush did (overspend) to the tune of trillions will fix it is moronic. Jimmy Carter is all smiles about Obama, finally someone to push him up off the bottom rung.

Gun_Dog2002
01-28-2009, 09:09 PM
Hey wasn't Rush one of those bands that we listened to in the 70's when we were doing things we shouldn't have been doing with the music wide open.

Somehow I get confused these days. Just wondering.

I listened to Rush this afternoon doing yard drills with the old dogs....

/Paul

Losthwy
01-28-2009, 11:21 PM
No, what are you talking about? I never said that.
My bad that was Julie R.

Lush Lumbago
01-29-2009, 03:52 AM
Why are you afraid of the Fairness Doctrine? After all, the air waves are publicly owned. If radio frequencies are publicly owned , why shouldn't they be open to all political stripes? Seems to me that is both democratic (not Democrat) and totally American.

IowaBayDog
01-29-2009, 05:32 AM
Why are you afraid of the Fairness Doctrine? After all, the air waves are publicly owned. If radio frequencies are publicly owned , why shouldn't they be open to all political stripes? Seems to me that is both democratic (not Democrat) and totally American.

The airwaves are open to anyone, its called the free market, if you have a program that makes the station money, you get put on the air. The Fairness Doctrine REQUIRES a station to air the equal amount of content. So if a station has 3 hours of Rush, they have to put someone like Al Franken on for 3 hours. Rush makes the station money through advertising, Franken and his ilk have proven they cannot. So stations are forced to drop talk radio altogether so they don't lose money 50% of the time so they switch to a different format. So you don't end up with both sides you end up with nothing but Easy listening music. This is not something new it was already done once and reversed.

subroc
01-29-2009, 06:02 AM
...why shouldn't they be open to all political stripes?...

They are. It appears, for the most part, that only conservative talk can make money from talk radio. Are you advocating a company be forced to offer a product that won't make any money for them?

Franco
01-29-2009, 07:17 AM
He left President Obama and the country with quite a mess.

The Democrats had a major hand in creating the mess. More bad news from Freddie and Fannie soon to be released. It was the Dems who promoted home ownership for everyone even if the can't afford it or have bad credit. Bush failed us in Iraq but, he did make us a safer country. And yes, other countries like Obomo better because they support anything that makes us weaker. Our only true ally is Great Britian and they think we've lost our minds.

Franco
01-29-2009, 07:22 AM
Why are you afraid of the Fairness Doctrine? After all, the air waves are publicly owned. If radio frequencies are publicly owned , why shouldn't they be open to all political stripes? Seems to me that is both democratic (not Democrat) and totally American.

If the left gets their own political talk shows syndicated it will have to be on non-profit tax payer funded public radio. Thats because they do not attract listeners and have very poor ratings. If the major broadcast companies felt they could make money in Liberal talk radio, they would do so. Imagine Barney Frank with his own talk show! Most would take it for bad comedy radio show.

Pete
01-29-2009, 09:05 AM
The last I heard we lived in a Republic not a democracy.

If you are sitting in a room filled with 1 girl and ten perverts and they take a vote on weather or not they should take advantage of her,,,well in a democracy she looses

In a republic it doesn't matter it would be her choice and she would get what she wanted regardless.

The last thing I need is some perverts on capitol hill trying to run my life or voting to take more of my money

Socialist and commies used to just kill the free thinkers,,,now because they are so PC they will just take away our voice.

Pete

zeus3925
01-29-2009, 09:43 AM
Our only true ally is Great Britian and they think we've lost our minds.

Then why must we go behind their majesties cleaning up every mess left by the British Empire?

The French have also been very strong allies of the USA, but they take care of their own messes in their former empire.

Losthwy
01-29-2009, 11:38 AM
And yes, other countries like Obomo better because they support anything that makes us weaker. Our only true ally is Great Britian and they think we've lost our minds.
Where do you get this stuff? Talk Radio? Go to the links below it's a real eye opener and yes, all of Europe think we lost our minds for voting for Bush.


http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2006/nov/03/terrorism.northkorea

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/uselection2008/2049487/Barack-Obama-wins-over-anti-Bush-Britain-US-election-2008.html

zeus3925
01-30-2009, 10:58 AM
The Democrats had a major hand in creating the mess. More bad news from Freddie and Fannie soon to be released. It was the Dems who promoted home ownership for everyone even if the can't afford it or have bad credit. Bush failed us in Iraq but, he did make us a safer country. And yes, other countries like Obomo better because they support anything that makes us weaker. Our only true ally is Great Britian and they think we've lost our minds.

Booty:
You are clearly looking at the world through very dirty Republican filters. There was an 8 year Republican administration during which they clearly knew we were headed for a collapse and they hoped and prayed it would not happen on their watch. Well, like everything else it blew up in their faces. Reestablishing laissez faire capitalism was far too important an ideology for them to give up. Withdrawing the regulators lead to such triumphs as contaminated food, massive fraud on government contracts, No control over para-military contractors, no accounting for billions that were lost track of by the Air Force, ad nauseum. The Wall Street debacle was just one more in a string of debacles that could have been avoided if there was an administration that was not asleep at the switch or deeply locked into ideology.

As far as a safer country, well at what cost? There is no such thing as freedom in a national security state. The state will continue to find reasons to sacrifice liberty in order to aggrandize its power. The Soviet Union was an example of a national security state run amok. I am one American that looks at alarm at direction my country has taken toward becoming another example.

I have been to Europe twice in the last year and a half--to France and Ireland. I was warmly treated by the citizens of both countries. Universally, there was a very high regards for Americans but a deep dislike of "W". I also found that to be true of people from Australia, New Zealand and South Africa I traveled with. They all were interested in all the potential US candidates, particularly in Obama.

In Ireland, we saw lots of Obama bumper stickers, but only one McCain sticker. The Irish treat politics as a national pass time and it is amazing how well informed they were of American politics. The up shot of all this --we being the laughing stock of Europe for electing Obama --NOT.

dixidawg
01-30-2009, 11:11 AM
Zeus,

What are the sources of US political info for the Europeans? Is it "fair and balanced"? Or are their main sources the estableshed MSM outlets?

Losthwy
01-30-2009, 01:56 PM
In Ireland, we saw lots of Obama bumper stickers, but only one McCain sticker. The Irish treat politics as a national pass time and it is amazing how well informed the were of American politics. The up shot of all this --we being the laughing stock of Europe for electing Obama --NOT.

When those in the UK were polled "Which world leader poses a danger to world peace". Osama bin Laden 87%, George Bush 75%, Kim Jong-Il 69%, leader of Hizbullah, Hassen Nasrallah 65%.

49% in a UK poll said they would vote for Obama compared to 14% for McCain.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2006/no...ism.northkorea (http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2006/nov/03/terrorism.northkorea)

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/news...tion-2008.html (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/uselection2008/2049487/Barack-Obama-wins-over-anti-Bush-Britain-US-election-2008.html)

mikeller3
01-30-2009, 02:24 PM
I like the rest of you, presumably, work. To keep my job I am subject to random urine tests (which I take with no debate, and pass, believe it or not). Because of this I get to keep my job, which entitles me to pay taxes. (like the rest of you I presume)

I am too a civilized human. Like many of my fellow civilized humans I wonder, why is it not a requirement for the benefactors of these programs and such to also pass a urine screening test. If I cannot take drugs to earn their pay check for them, why do they get to spend it on drugs?

Franco
01-30-2009, 04:11 PM
Where do you get this stuff? Talk Radio? Go to the links below it's a real eye opener and yes, all of Europe think we lost our minds for voting for Bush.


http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2006/nov/03/terrorism.northkorea

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/uselection2008/2049487/Barack-Obama-wins-over-anti-Bush-Britain-US-election-2008.html

Yea, the BBC loves Obomo too. I guess we can pick our publication to show what we want.

So, what do you thik of the 900 Billion stimulus package?

Franco
01-30-2009, 04:13 PM
Booty:
You are clearly looking at the world through very dirty Republican filters. There was an 8 year Republican administration during which they clearly knew we were headed for a collapse and they hoped and preyed it would not happen on their watch. Well, like everything else it blew up in their faces. Reestablishing laissez faire capitalism was far too important an ideology for them to give up. Withdrawing the regulators lead to such triumphs as contaminated food, massive fraud on government contracts, No control over para-military contractors, no accounting for billions that were lost track of by the Air Force, ad nauseum. The Wall Street debacle was just one more in a string of debacles that could have been avoided if there was an administration that was not asleep at the switch or deeply locked into ideology.

As far as a safer country, well at what cost? There is no such thing as freedom in a national security state. The state will continue to find reasons to sacrifice liberty in order to aggrandize its power. The Soviet Union was an example of a national security state run amok. I am one American that looks at alarm at direction my country has taken toward becoming another example.

I have been to Europe twice in the last year and a half--to France and Ireland. I was warmly treated by the citizens of both countries. Universally, there was a very high regards for Americans but a deep dislike of "W". I also found that to be true of people from Australia, New Zealand and South Africa I traveled with. They all were interested in all the potential US candidates, particularly in Obama.

In Ireland, we saw lots of Obama bumper stickers, but only one McCain sticker. The Irish treat politics as a national pass time and it is amazing how well informed the were of American politics. The up shot of all this --we being the laughing stock of Europe for electing Obama --NOT.

So, what do you think of the 900 BILLION stimulus package?

Franco
01-30-2009, 04:17 PM
I like the rest of you, presumably, work. To keep my job I am subject to random urine tests (which I take with no debate, and pass, believe it or not). Because of this I get to keep my job, which entitles me to pay taxes. (like the rest of you I presume)

I am too a civilized human. Like many of my fellow civilized humans I wonder, why is it not a requirement for the benefactors of these programs and such to also pass a urine screening test. If I cannot take drugs to earn their pay check for them, why do they get to spend it on drugs?

The idea of drug testing individuals on federal assistance is termed racist by those on the left. I think it is a great idea and should be implemented for the U S Congress and all State and Federal workers too.

Losthwy
01-30-2009, 04:38 PM
So, what do you think of the 900 BILLION stimulus package?
Don't really know one way or the other. We''l find out in 2-3 years if it is successful or not.

zeus3925
01-30-2009, 04:47 PM
Zeus,

What are the sources of US political info for the Europeans? Is it "fair and balanced"? Or are their main sources the estableshed MSM outlets?

I can only speak for the English language sources as I read French at a first grade level and I know how to read the menu. Beyond that, the French mercifully, were very glad to show off their English skills to me -- once I made the effort to speak French.

This is the age of satellite and there are many news outlets covering America in Europe including CNN, Fox and BBC. Most countries also have a version of public broadcasting. Most broadcasting was rather matter of fact and did not seem to prone to "Gotcha Journalism."

Newspapers tend to carry more of a bias, but then there are a lot of them.

The only place that I saw any anti- American sentiment was in the fence murals in Belfast. There were wall murals commemorating Americans such as Frederick Douglas for instance. But, there were several expressing local contempt for "W" and "greedy Americans".

blind ambition
01-30-2009, 05:00 PM
The idea of drug testing individuals on federal assistance is termed racist by those on the left.

No, the left just think drug testing is an invasion of privacy and would be as ticked off about it being compulsory in the work place or in the welfare roles, however, they might term racist those who think only racial minorities are on Federal assistance.

zeus3925
01-30-2009, 05:03 PM
So, what do you think of the 900 BILLION stimulus package?

Like a trip to the dentist or having major surgery. Something has to be done, but I sure don't like the pain. It better work or we are screwed. The bankers did not help the situation by sucking in big bonuses for ruining businesses, throwing big parties, buying jets and buying other banks. Make those SOB's sign in blood and grovel before they get another dime.

Most of all hire some overseers who can squeeze every nickel.

Franco
01-30-2009, 06:57 PM
Don't really know one way or the other. We''l find out in 2-3 years if it is successful or not.

Interesting. You are the first Oboma supporter not to have an opinion. If I supported Obomonomics, I wouldn't have an answer either. What about all the waste, pork and lack of any real stimulus? Obomonomics or Obommorronics?

dixidawg
01-30-2009, 09:19 PM
I can only speak for the English language sources as I read French at a first grade level and I know how to read the menu. Beyond that, the French mercifully, were very glad to show off their English skills to me -- once I made the effort to speak French.

This is the age of satellite and there are many news outlets covering America in Europe including CNN, Fox and BBC. Most countries also have a version of public broadcasting. Most broadcasting was rather matter of fact and did not seem to prone to "Gotcha Journalism."

Newspapers tend to carry more of a bias, but then there are a lot of them.

The only place that I saw any anti- American sentiment was in the fence murals in Belfast. There were wall murals commemorating Americans such as Frederick Douglas for instance. But, there were several expressing local contempt for "W" and "greedy Americans".


I was more wondering if it had a decidedly leftist bent to it. That alone could contribute to a lot of the European hatred of GWB.

IowaBayDog
01-30-2009, 09:28 PM
Like a trip to the dentist or having major surgery. Something has to be done, but I sure don't like the pain. It better work or we are screwed. The bankers did not help the situation by sucking in big bonuses for ruining businesses, throwing big parties, buying jets and buying other banks. Make those SOB's sign in blood and grovel before they get another dime.

Most of all hire some overseers who can squeeze every nickel.


Those SOBs buying jets and throwing big parties are SPENDING the money and actually stimulating the economy. The rest of the money has gone down some black hole. Buying the luxury items is the best thing they have done with the money.

Franco
01-30-2009, 09:38 PM
Like a trip to the dentist or having major surgery. Something has to be done, but I sure don't like the pain. It better work or we are screwed. The bankers did not help the situation by sucking in big bonuses for ruining businesses, throwing big parties, buying jets and buying other banks. Make those SOB's sign in blood and grovel before they get another dime.

Most of all hire some overseers who can squeeze every nickel.

Wouldn't it be better to give people and businesses tax cuts instead of a punch of pork projects? It is estimated that with interest, this current stimulus package will run well over a TRILLION dollars. The way to stimulate is to allow businesses to expand and individuals to keep more of what they earn. The Republican plan is the plan. Your trip to the dentist is an exploratory rootcanal.

zeus3925
01-30-2009, 10:14 PM
Well lets see who is a budget genius. Here is a little game to play while your watching the paint dry. How about giving it a whirl and see what we come up with.

http://americanpublicmedia.publicradio.org/engage08/budgethero/

zeus3925
01-30-2009, 11:09 PM
Wouldn't it be better to give people and businesses tax cuts instead of a punch of pork projects? It is estimated that with interest, this current stimulus package will run well over a TRILLION dollars. The way to stimulate is to allow businesses to expand and individuals to keep more of what they earn. The Republican plan is the plan. Your trip to the dentist is an exploratory rootcanal.

I was a strong believer in exactly that approach. The Republicans I learned my Poli. Econ.. from believed you should cut taxes AND spend in rough times. But once the economy fired up again, it was time to cut the spending and raise taxes to both moderate the irrational exuberance. I haven't seen either party have the political will to do that.

I share your distaste for pork. Unquestionably, we have too much of it. But sometimes the enemy is us. We love politicians who go porking for us and welcome them as heroes when they bring home the bacon.

Then there is a question on how far you go in determining what is pork. The nation's infrastructure is in bad shape. We need to address that now. Some may call it pork, but we have to do it anyhow. In this financial climate, the price tag won't be this cheap again.

In a normal recession, the Republican plan (actually a warmed over JFK plan) works pretty well. This ain't a normal circumstance. Many economists are now saying that tax cuts are not enough. We must get the money markets open as quickly as we can and stimulate spending enough to get the pump primed again. I don't see the differences between the plans as irreconcilable. We need elements from both plans.

Am I happy with a trillion bucks on top of the bailout? Hell no!

Vicky Trainor
01-31-2009, 02:26 AM
Stop the personal attacks. If you can't be a part of this discussion without doing so, don't hit the Submit button.

IowaBayDog
02-05-2009, 09:34 PM
1) 3) As I said before, there isn't any legislation that is coming forth on this. That is the reality, regardless of what Pelosi's position is. (And Pelosi definitely fits the 'hyperpartisan' description.)

The only legislation that has been introduced related to the Fairness Doctrine in the past few years has been introduced by Republicans (in order to 'pre-empt' the legislation that is supposedly being introduced in the bizarro world they inhabit).

The obsession that right wing-nuts have with this non-issue is amusing. So is your regurgitation of the talking points that Rush is spoon-feeding you.


http://www.politico.com/blogs/michaelcalderone/0209/Sen_Stabenow_wants_hearings_on_radio_accountabilit y_talks_fairness_doctrine.html?showall

Wrong again, its not even really a challenge anymore proving you wrong.:rolleyes:

John Kelder
02-06-2009, 06:00 PM
Yep. Spent about the same amount as Bush did in 2005 and managed to entertain five times the number of people. Finally, a President who understands the economies of scale.:D

Bush spent 42 million , BHO 200 million . I may not be an economist , but I can do the math .

YardleyLabs
02-06-2009, 06:11 PM
Bush spent 42 million , BHO 200 million . I may not be an economist , but I can do the math .

Wrong. The $42 million all costs other than for the parties themselves. The total cost was estimated at $150-160 million. For Obama the intial estimates for comparable costs are about $160-170 million although your $200 million number may prove to be more accurate. The comparable "party" cost for Obama was about $45 million compared to Bush's $42 million. BTW, quote yopur source and I'll post mine.

backpasture
02-09-2009, 03:49 PM
http://www.politico.com/blogs/michaelcalderone/0209/Sen_Stabenow_wants_hearings_on_radio_accountabilit y_talks_fairness_doctrine.html?showall

Wrong again, its not even really a challenge anymore proving you wrong.:rolleyes:

Are you really this thick, or are you just having a hard time getting off of the talking points? Of course there are some idiots in Congress who want to do this. But, they are a small minority.

Amusingly, each time one of those few left wing idiots who are for the 'Fairness Doctrine' says something about it, the entire right wing nutosphere has a conniption. The smart folks on the left are more than happy to have the Republicans follow their pied piper (Rush Limbaugh) right off the cliff.

Call me when the 'Fairness Doctrine' gets more than a handful of wingnuts supporting it. In other words, don't call me.

Julie R.
02-09-2009, 04:28 PM
Wrong. The $42 million all costs other than for the parties themselves. The total cost was estimated at $150-160 million. For Obama the intial estimates for comparable costs are about $160-170 million although your $200 million number may prove to be more accurate. The comparable "party" cost for Obama was about $45 million compared to Bush's $42 million. BTW, quote yopur source and I'll post mine.

You forgot to add the $200 million to repair the sod on the mall...that makes Obomo's coronation tab closer to about 400 million.

YardleyLabs
02-09-2009, 05:01 PM
You forgot to add the $200 million to repair the sod on the mall...that makes Obomo's coronation tab closer to about 400 million.


Just to be clear, the funds for improvement to the National Mall that were included in the original House bill have been dropped at Obama's urging. Second, the resodding costs were $21 million, not $200 million. If the balance is going for grass, it must be for the Republican leadership to smoke.;)

The efforts to refurbish the Mall did not start with the inauguration. This story from Newsweek (http://www.newsweek.com/id/146735) estimated costs of $350-500 million in needed repairs because of the 25 million visitors received by the particular National Park each year. The article was written last July. A number of people have objected to the fact that the project was dropped noting that it would have generated a large number of jobs almost immediately and therefore was appropriate for the stimulus package.

subroc
02-20-2009, 05:48 AM
Here is an article or open letter to the president by Rush about the fairness doctrine, free speech and the like.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123508978035028163.html

backpasture
02-20-2009, 12:42 PM
Here is an article or open letter to the president by Rush about the fairness doctrine, free speech and the like.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123508978035028163.html

Is Rush responding to the statement made 2 days earlier by a White House spokesman about this very subject? You know -- the one where spokesman Ben LaBolt told your beloved Fox News that President Obama "does not believe the Fairness Doctrine should be reinstated".
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/first100days/2009/02/18/white-house-opposes-fairness-doctrine/

Rush must be back on the pills (if he ever got off them).

There IS talk of some legislation about the Fairness Doctrine in the Senate. And, of course, it is from yet another Republican infatuated with the non-issue:
http://www.businessandmedia.org/articles/2009/20090219171331.aspx

Franco
02-20-2009, 01:00 PM
You know -- the one where spokesman Ben LaBolt told your beloved Fox News that President Obama "does not believe the Fairness Doctrine should be reinstated".
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/first100days/2009/02/18/white-house-opposes-fairness-doctrine/



It is going to be an issue. Legislation will be introduced under the "localism" banner, they won't call it the Fairness Doctrine. We just received a bullitin from our FCC attorney waring of this move. First, they will try and break up the large radio broadcast companies, then try and control what they air. The Dems are under huge heat and they will try and control the information being broadcast. The Dems DO NOT want freedom of speach as they want to stay in power.

Democrat talk radio has failed. No one pays any attention to it. Just compare on TV, Fox News with MSNBC. MSNBC's ratings are so small they barely show up at all. Fox News dominates on cable in primetime with men viewers. The Dems must be watching American Idol instead of MSNBC.