OBAMA says: You can't just listen to Rush Limbaugh [Archive] - Debate Policy

REDWHITEBLUE2

01-24-2009, 04:52 PM

OBAMA says: You can't just listen to Rush Limbaugh
Yesterday at 5:26pm By CHARLES HURT, BUREAU CHIEF

Last updated: 8:15 pm
January 23, 2009
Posted: 8:13 pm
January 23, 2009

WASHINGTON -- President Obama warned Republicans on Capitol Hill today that they need to quit listening to radio king Rush Limbaugh if they want to get along with Democrats and the new administration.

"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.

One White House official confirmed the comment but said he was simply trying to make a larger point about bipartisan efforts.

"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.

While discussing the stimulus package with top lawmakers in the White House's Roosevelt Room, President Obama shot down a critic with a simple message.

"I won," he said, according to aides who were briefed on the meeting. "I will trump you on that."

The response was to the objection by Sen. Jon Kyl (R-Arizona) to the president's proposal to increase benefits for low-income workers who don't owe federal income taxes.
http://www.nypost.com/seven/01232009/news/politics/prez_zings_gop_foe_in_a_timul ating_talk_151572.htm

REDWHITEBLUE2

01-24-2009, 04:54 PM

LOL this will just increase Rush's listing Audience :laugh2:

OCA

01-24-2009, 04:59 PM

LOL this will just increase Rush's listing Audience :laugh2:

Whats his "listing audience?" Is he listing homes where he once purchased hillbilly heroin now?

Goddamn I love fucking with the illiterate!

stephanie

01-24-2009, 05:07 PM

Whats his "listing audience?" Is he listing homes where he once purchased hillbilly heroin now?

Goddamn I love fucking with the illiterate!

:lame2: 0

Mr. P

01-24-2009, 07:10 PM

"You can't just listen to Rush Limbaugh and get things done,"
Makes sense to me, in any context you wanna put it.

REDWHITEBLUE2

01-24-2009, 08:39 PM

Whats his "listing audience?" Is he listing homes where he once purchased hillbilly heroin now?thank you mr spell NAZI

I love fucking with the illiterate! you must fuck with your self a lot :dance:

manu1959

01-24-2009, 09:59 PM

what a tool............

Yurt

01-24-2009, 10:56 PM

quaint, the president just gave limbaugh a massive boost.

i wonder if obama went around telling people that "you can't just listen to air america and get things done..."

OCA

01-25-2009, 11:22 AM

quaint, the president just gave limbaugh a massive boost.

i wonder if obama went around telling people that "you can't just listen to air america and get things done..."

No but Rush is on record this week and I quote "I want him to fail".

What a stand up American Rush is...............stupid fucking junkie.

red states rule

01-25-2009, 11:55 AM

No but Rush is on record this week and I quote "I want him to fail".

What a stand up American Rush is...............stupid fucking junkie.

Telling only half the story again I see

If Obama wants to be like FDR and give America a "New New Deal" I want him to fail in that as well

However, if he does not raise taxes, he if does not want to punish hard work and risk taking, if he does not give terrorists US Constitutional rights - I want him to succeed

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/C4YcwI4NlKA&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/C4YcwI4NlKA&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

OCA

01-25-2009, 01:46 PM

Telling only half the story again I see

If Obama wants to be like FDR and give America a "New New Deal" I want him to fail in that as well

However, if he does not raise taxes, he if does not want to punish hard work and risk taking, if he does not give terrorists US Constitutional rights - I want him to succeed

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/C4YcwI4NlKA&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/C4YcwI4NlKA&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Seeing as how he was on record for wanting those latter things long ago and is in fact getting the ball rolling on enacting those things then you have no reason to utter the word fail.

Failure was the last 8 yrs under Bush.

OCA

01-25-2009, 01:47 PM

Anyway who cares really what a junkie says.

red states rule

01-25-2009, 01:52 PM

Seeing as how he was on record for wanting those latter things long ago and is in fact getting the ball rolling on enacting those things then you have no reason to utter the word fail.

Failure was the last 8 yrs under Bush.

Do you have a link to back up your statement? Or are you using the same source when you posted how Obama had a shitload of economic experience?

red states rule

01-25-2009, 01:54 PM

Anyway who cares really what a junkie says.

I doubt many people here care what you say OCA.

Kathianne

01-25-2009, 01:58 PM

Anyway who cares really what a junkie says.

I didn't know President Obama still did coke?

OCA

01-25-2009, 02:07 PM

I didn't know President Obama still did coke?

There are a myriad of things you don't know.

OCA

01-25-2009, 02:09 PM

Do you have a link to back up your statement? Or are you using the same source when you posted how Obama had a shitload of economic experience?

Well i'm sure there are plenty of links, go to his website to see that the things you claim he supports he really doesn't, in actuality he was the true conservative candidate running.

Call me crazy but I like lower taxes like the POTUS does.

OCA

01-25-2009, 02:10 PM

I doubt many people here care what you say OCA.

I know , I know...........they would rather listen to what a known liar copy's from a factual junkie.

5stringJeff

01-25-2009, 02:22 PM

Well i'm sure there are plenty of links, go to his website to see that the things you claim he supports he really doesn't, in actuality he was the true conservative candidate running.

Call me crazy but I like lower taxes like the POTUS does.

That's lower taxes for those who aren't rich, and higher taxes for those who are rich. Are you calling that a "conservative" stance?

OCA

01-25-2009, 02:40 PM

That's lower taxes for those who aren't rich, and higher taxes for those who are rich. Are you calling that a "conservative" stance?

Yes, in today's world it is high time the people who carry this country on their backs, the middle class, got some of those tax breaks and welfare loopholes the corporations and rich have been abusing for decades.

You've seen the economy right? You've seen what Wall St(the rich) have done to it, right?

red states rule

01-25-2009, 03:34 PM

Yes, in today's world it is high time the people who carry this country on their backs, the middle class, got some of those tax breaks and welfare loopholes the corporations and rich have been abusing for decades.

You've seen the economy right? You've seen what Wall St(the rich) have done to it, right?

It is not themiddle class who are carrying the country on their backs

This shows clearly a small minoirity of taxpayers are paying a huge majority of the taxes

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_otfwl2zc6Qc/SJY-S7joE4I/AAAAAAAAFSo/wrvr-E6MkvU/s400/tax.bmp

Pres Obama and Dems want to give tax "cuts" to people who do not pay taxes - while raising taxes on the ones who do pay taxes

Abbey Marie

01-25-2009, 03:37 PM

Anyway who cares really what a junkie says.

Actually, Rush kicked his pain pill habit a few years ago, while Obama is still addicted to cigarettes. :coffee:

Joe Steel

01-25-2009, 05:13 PM

It is not the middle class who are carrying the country on their backs

This shows clearly a small minoirity of taxpayers are paying a huge majority of the taxes

So?

They can afford it...and more.

GW in Ohio

01-26-2009, 11:54 AM

Hobbit

01-26-2009, 11:59 AM

Bonnie

01-26-2009, 12:52 PM

Oh, boy....

This made Rush's day. A president mentioning his name.

You can bet Rush would like nothing better than to make this into a feud with Obama.

But of course, that won't happen. Obama knows that you can't win when you get into a wrestling match with a pig. You will only get yourself full of mud and crap, and the pig will enjoy it immensely.

I'm sure if I went to ol' Rush's website today, it would be full of blowhard challenges to Obama and bloviating talk about Rush's "feud" with the prez.

Ain't gonna happen, Rush. Sorry.

Well Rush should be very flattered that President Obama gives him that much power and attention, especially considering how very busy Obama is at ruining our country.

The real issue here though is the hypocrisy of the champions of free speech...the Public sector taking on the Private sector in an attempt to silence any criticism.

Let's see now, I believe that makes us critics of Obama the TRue PATRIOTS now right???
I'll have to re-read the communist manifesto to see which part of it talks about government being in charge of propaganda and it being good for public debate :)

Bonnie

01-26-2009, 12:54 PM

So?

They can afford it...and more.

Sure until THEY run out of money and decide to jump in the wagon as well:salute:

Yurt

01-26-2009, 01:02 PM

Anyway who cares really what a junkie says.

obama has admitted to doing blow...so yeah, who cares what obama says...right

Yurt

01-26-2009, 01:04 PM

Bonnie

01-26-2009, 01:16 PM

um, obama started the feud, what a uniter your president is

He doesn't have to be a uniter, remember HE WON:coffee:

Yurt

01-26-2009, 01:29 PM

He doesn't have to be a uniter, remember HE WON:coffee:

"I will trump you on that."

red states rule

01-26-2009, 01:40 PM

I am sure Rush has alot more listeners today thanks to Obama the Uniter

5stringJeff

01-26-2009, 06:33 PM

bullypulpit

01-27-2009, 05:36 AM

red states rule

01-27-2009, 06:12 AM

Limbaugh is on the lunatic fringe, and they can listen to him all they want. But if the GOP'ers take his advice to heart and expect to govern effectively they are mistaken. Government works best when it comes from the center, not the lunatic fringes, either left or right.

As for low income workers...they're working, and not sucking on the government teat. How can they, or anyone else, drive the US economy if they can't afford to buy the goods and services that are the foundation of a consumer based economy?

BP, you should be thankful the Republican party did NOT listen to Rush in this last election cycle

Why is Obama so scared of Rush? Why is he constantly talking about Rush and Sean Hannity?

He is either worried people may listen to them, or he is very thin skined - or both

Abbey Marie

01-27-2009, 07:20 AM

BP, you should be thankful the Republican party did NOT listen to Rush in this last election cycle

Why is Obama so scared of Rush? Why is he constantly talking about Rush and Sean Hannity?

He is either worried people may listen to them, or he is very thin skined - or both

Mind control. It's a terrible thing to waste.

red states rule

01-27-2009, 07:25 AM

Mind control. It's a terrible thing to waste.

Abbey, Pres Obama must think Rush has a great deal of influence if Obama thinks Republicans in Washington are listening to Rush.

Pres Obama should know from the election, most of the elected Republicans may listen to his show, do not do as he says

GW in Ohio

01-27-2009, 09:30 AM

um, obama started the feud, what a uniter your president is

"obama started the feud..."

Give me a break, okay? Limbaugh has been trashing Obama on his radio show for 18 months.

And the only "feud" that exists is in Limbaugh's Oxycontin-clouded mind. Limbaugh would like nothing better than a feud with the president of the U.S. to give his radio show some prestige and boost his ratings.

But it ain't gonna happen. Limbaugh is to Obama as a flea is to an elephant.

red states rule

01-27-2009, 09:38 AM

"obama started the feud..."

Give me a break, okay? Limbaugh has been trashing Obama on his radio show for 18 months.

And the only "feud" that exists is in Limbaugh's Oxycontin-clouded mind. Limbaugh would like nothing better than a feud with the president of the U.S. to give his radio show some prestige and boost his ratings.

But it ain't gonna happen. Limbaugh is to Obama as a flea is to an elephant.

So now "trashing" is telling the truth about Pres Obama, or openly disagreeing with his policies?

Obama has a serious obsession with both Rush and Sean. Sean plays some of Obama's rants in his intro everyday :laugh2:

Yurt

01-27-2009, 10:08 AM

"obama started the feud..."

Give me a break, okay? Limbaugh has been trashing Obama on his radio show for 18 months.

And the only "feud" that exists is in Limbaugh's Oxycontin-clouded mind. Limbaugh would like nothing better than a feud with the president of the U.S. to give his radio show some prestige and boost his ratings.

But it ain't gonna happen. Limbaugh is to Obama as a flea is to an elephant.

rush talking about obama is not a feud :poke: it is political speech and commentary. for the president to be such a ninny that he would mention rush as being all powerful and as such, we should not listen to rush, is a sign of desperation and vast immaturity. when the dixie chicks bashed bush, he didn't tell people to stop buying their records.

your leader is a school yard bully.

emmett

01-27-2009, 10:22 AM

The electing of a president is a popularity contest, not the hiring of a qualified person, Obama is proving that with every word he says!

red states rule

01-27-2009, 10:24 AM

rush talking about obama is not a feud :poke: it is political speech and commentary. for the president to be such a ninny that he would mention rush as being all powerful and as such, we should not listen to rush, is a sign of desperation and vast immaturity. when the dixie chicks bashed bush, he didn't tell people to stop buying their records.

your leader is a school yard bully.

Obama hasn't addressed Rush's or Sean's criticism of him with facts or any original ideas.

He doesn’t offer answers to their questions or invite debate.

Why does Obama want to censor his critics?

OCA

01-28-2009, 06:26 PM

obama has admitted to doing blow...so yeah, who cares what obama says...right

Ahhh but Obama isn't on record as being a champion of all things morally superior such as Rush was before he was found to be a common junkie.

See the hypocricy?

OCA

01-28-2009, 06:27 PM

um, obama started the feud, what a uniter your president is

So he's not YOUR president also?:lame2:

OCA

01-28-2009, 06:33 PM

In other words, from each according to his ability, to each according to his need? When did you get all Marxist on us?

The recent actions of AIG and John Thane have left we with zero confidence in the rich and corporations to do jackshit except that which is in their own best interests.

Something has to be done to stop the widening gap between the haves and have nots, what do you want this to become friggin Brazil?

Here is the thing, for years conservatives have been championing the trickle down theory where you give cuts and incentives to the rich in the hopes they will take the money and reinvest it back into the economy, well we see that that didn't and won't ever happen, the rich didn't get rich by reinvesting their cash, they got rich by hording it and by being able to afford tax lawyers who found every friggin loophole and brought in every cent of rich corporate welfare available to them...................while the rest of America got fucked.

5stringJeff

01-28-2009, 07:06 PM

The recent actions of AIG and John Thane have left we with zero confidence in the rich and corporations to do jackshit except that which is in their own best interests.

Something has to be done to stop the widening gap between the haves and have nots, what do you want this to become friggin Brazil?

Here is the thing, for years conservatives have been championing the trickle down theory where you give cuts and incentives to the rich in the hopes they will take the money and reinvest it back into the economy, well we see that that didn't and won't ever happen, the rich didn't get rich by reinvesting their cash, they got rich by hording it and by being able to afford tax lawyers who found every friggin loophole and brought in every cent of rich corporate welfare available to them...................while the rest of America got fucked.

I never said businessmen were capitalists. In fact, many businessmen are not capitalists for the very reason you describe. But the way to fix the problem is not to jack up the tax rates; it's to get rid of loopholes in the tax code (i.e. get rid of deductions) to bring in more revenue, and to lower tax rates at the margin, so as to not encourage income to move offshore.

Yurt

01-28-2009, 07:11 PM

Ahhh but Obama isn't on record as being a champion of all things morally superior such as Rush was before he was found to be a common junkie.

See the hypocricy?

yes, that makes a difference...i'm sure obama is out there saying cocaine is good, let's legalize it...no, he is against legalizing coke...he is as big a hypocrite...

further, you made your statement solely on the fact he is a junkie, not on his being a hypocrite. you're changing your tune because you don't have a leg to stand on about junkies speaking with any authority

OCA

01-28-2009, 08:10 PM

yes, that makes a difference...i'm sure obama is out there saying cocaine is good, let's legalize it...no, he is against legalizing coke...he is as big a hypocrite...

further, you made your statement solely on the fact he is a junkie, not on his being a hypocrite. you're changing your tune because you don't have a leg to stand on about junkies speaking with any authority

Fuck him, he's a fat fucking junkie. Chew on that counselor.

Yurt

01-28-2009, 08:28 PM

Fuck him, he's a fat fucking junkie. Chew on that counselor.

fiesty little fellow ain't ya

OCA

01-28-2009, 08:35 PM

fiesty little fellow ain't ya

Not sure about the little but i'm in a foul mood today, came to the realization that America is finished, its over within 20 years.

This economy ain't gonna turn around no matter who is driving the ship.

Yurt

01-28-2009, 08:44 PM

Not sure about the little but i'm in a foul mood today, came to the realization that America is finished, its over within 20 years.

This economy ain't gonna turn around no matter who is driving the ship.

so you vote obama.... because it doesn't matter...

you bitch about republicans and defend democrats...because it doesn't matter

Sitarro

01-29-2009, 02:50 AM

Fuck him, he's a fat fucking junkie. Chew on that counselor.

He's played Augusta National.

Psychoblues

01-29-2009, 02:57 AM

Considering that self described "conservatives" have been in charge for 20 of the last 28 years and not including the fact that Clinton is also somewhat a "conservative" by average Democratic standards I find it no surprise that our economy is in the condition it is presently in. I forecast it in 1980, reforecast it in 1984, 1988, changed a bit in 1992 but reforecast it in 1996, absolutely in 2000 and 2004.

Trickle down bullshit is just that. Bullshit!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

:beer::cheers2::beer:

Psychoblues

red states rule

01-29-2009, 08:00 AM

Not sure about the little but i'm in a foul mood today, came to the realization that America is finished, its over within 20 years.

This economy ain't gonna turn around no matter who is driving the ship.

You mean Pres Obama will not fix the economy after all the "shitload" of economic experience you told us about? :laugh2:

Nukeman

01-29-2009, 08:26 AM

You mean Pres Obama will not fix the economy after all the "shitload" of economic experience you told us about? :laugh2:

:lol::lol::clap::clap::lol::lol:

Well what is it OCA?????? Does he have the experience or is it all over???????

red states rule

01-29-2009, 08:31 AM

:lol::lol::clap::clap::lol::lol:

Well what is it OCA?????? Does he have the experience or is it all over???????

Jim kept asking him on another thread. OCA could not produce the evidence, amd ran away from not only the thread - but the board as well for about 2 weeks

Nukeman

01-29-2009, 08:33 AM

Jim kept asking him on another thread. OCA could not produce the evidence, amd ran away from not only the thread - but the board as well for about 2 weeks
Yep saw that. the great "debator" lost big time so he went back to his stand by of just maturbating that he is good at!!!!!

red states rule

01-29-2009, 09:05 AM

Yep saw that. the great "debator" lost big time so he went back to his stand by of just maturbating that he is good at!!!!!

Maybe OCA believes the following will create jobs and turn the economy around - like his guy Pres Obama believes

$87 billion for Medicare outlays and related spending
$20 billion toward nutrition assistance program (food stamps)
$2.8 billion to expand broadband Internet service in rural areas
$4 billion for programs “to develop rural communities…”

$3 billion for grants to improve the criminal justice system
$3 billion for grants to fund science and technology research
$1 billion for periodic censuses and programs
$1 billion for programs of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration

http://libertymaven.com/2009/01/28/pork-galore-obamas-stimulus-bill-does-little-to-stimulate-the-economy/4159/

GW in Ohio

01-29-2009, 09:15 AM

red states rule

01-29-2009, 09:16 AM

So let's see here......

Rush is talking about Obama incessantly on his radio show and his website....trashing him at every opportunity. Since I don't listen to Rush (had a choice yesterday between root canal without novocaine and listening to Rush.....took the root canal), maybe one of you dittoheads can report on whether Fat Boy has been calling Obama out, challenging him to a duel of blabbering mouths at 50 paces.

Anyway, Obama is talking about Rush.......

Not at all.

Feud? In Rush's fondest Oxycontin-clouded dreams.

GW, Pres Obama (and candidate Obama) mentioned Rush and Sean Hannity more times then he did Little Adolf in Iran

Anyone remember this:

“I am sick and tired of people who say that if you debate and you disagree with this administration, somehow you’re not patriotic, and we should stand up and say, “WE ARE AMERICANS AND WE HAVE A RIGHT TO DEBATE AND DISAGREE WITH ANY ADMINISTRATION!”

It was screamed by Hillary Clinton

GW in Ohio

01-29-2009, 09:36 AM

GW, Pres Obama (and candidate Obama) mentioned Rush and Sean Hannity more times then he did Little Adolf in Iran

Anyone remember this:

“I am sick and tired of people who say that if you debate and you disagree with this administration, somehow you’re not patriotic, and we should stand up and say, “WE ARE AMERICANS AND WE HAVE A RIGHT TO DEBATE AND DISAGREE WITH ANY ADMINISTRATION!”

It was screamed by Hillary Clinton

I don't remember Obama mentioning Limbaugh more than a time or two during the campaign. And there's no mention of Fat Boy in the above quote.

Let's face it, Rush would like nothing better than an ongoing feud with Obama. He has everything to gain from it (ratings, money, prestige).

Obama has nothing to gain from engaging Limbaugh.....nothing.

The only feud is in Limbaugh's Oxycontin-flavored dreams.

red states rule

01-29-2009, 09:40 AM

I don't remember Obama mentioning Limbaugh more than a time or two during the campaign. And there's no mention of Fat Boy in the above quote.

Let's face it, Rush would like nothing better than an ongoing feud with Obama. He has everything to gain from it (ratings, money, prestige).

Obama has nothing to gain from engaging Limbaugh.....nothing.

The only feud is in Limbaugh's Oxycontin-flavored dreams.

Obama started it by telling Republicans not to listen to Rush. Well, Republicans have not listened to him - or the aprty would not have went with McCain

I agree with Rush. If Obama wants to raise taxes, increase spending, the size of governemnt, and increase the deficit - I also hope he fails

Seems GW, you had no problem wanting Pres Bush to fail - now that Obama is president you demand everyone support him

Hillary's quote was posted as an example of what Dems were saying while Pres Bush was in office

GW in Ohio

01-29-2009, 09:46 AM

Obama started it by telling Republicans not to listen to Rush. Well, Republicans have not listened to him - or the aprty would not have went with McCain

I agree with Rush. If Obama wants to raise taxes, increase spending, the size of governemnt, and increase the deficit - I also hope he fails

Seems GW, you had no problem wanting Pres Bush to fail - now that Obama is president you demand everyone support him

Hillary's quote was posted as an example of what Dems were saying while Pres Bush was in office

No, no, no, no, no......

I never wanted Bush to fail. He did that all on his own. After it became clear what an incompetent fuck-up he was, I expected him to fail. But I never wanted him to fail. Why would I want that? If he fails, we all fail.

And he failed. What a sad, sorry incompetent he was, and thank God he is back in Texas, where he can't do much damage.

red states rule

01-29-2009, 09:49 AM

No, no, no, no, no......

I never wanted Bush to fail. He did that all on his own. After it became clear what an incompetent fuck-up he was, I expected him to fail. But I never wanted him to fail. Why would I want that? If he fails, we all fail.

And he failed. What a sad, sorry incompetent he was, and thank God he is back in Texas, where he can't do much damage.

and it looks like Pres Obama is well on his way to failing. The pork bill does nothing to create real jobs. Most of the money will not be spent for about 2 years, and all the bill does is payoff political supporters

Seems all the gripes libs had when Pres Bush wa sin office have been forgotten

Check out SOME of the pork in the bill GW

http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?t=21114

Yurt

01-29-2009, 10:04 AM

You mean Pres Obama will not fix the economy after all the "shitload" of economic experience you told us about? :laugh2:

that was good

red states rule

01-29-2009, 10:05 AM

that was good

Maybe it was a freudian slip on OCA's part

jimnyc

01-29-2009, 11:02 AM

You mean Pres Obama will not fix the economy after all the "shitload" of economic experience you told us about? :laugh2:

He won't produce the evidence because it doesn't exist. How anyone can speak with such certainty about something that just doesn't exist? He'll never retract it though as it would prove he had no clue what he was posting.

red states rule

01-29-2009, 11:04 AM

He won't produce the evidence because it doesn't exist. How anyone can speak with such certainty about something that just doesn't exist? He'll never retract it though as it would prove he had no clue what he was posting.

We all know that Jim. You gave him several chances to produce it - but he blew up at you and ran away

Now the House has passed a pork fest, and only 2 Republicans voting with Dems in the Senate will make it law

Obama and the Dems are about to spend nearly 1/3 of the annual Federal budget to payoff their political supporters - and it will do nothing to improve the economy

actsnoblemartin

01-29-2009, 12:58 PM

that was good

no it was excellent :clap:

red states rule

01-29-2009, 02:40 PM

DCCC Chairman Chris Van Hollen Condemns Rush Limbaugh’s Comment Hoping President Obama Fails

DCCC Chairman Chris Van Hollen released the following statement in response to conservative commentator Rush Limbaugh's outrageous remark saying that he ‘hopes' President Obama fails.

"Rush Limbaugh's reprehensible remark that he ‘hopes' President Obama fails to meet the extraordinary economic challenges Americas face has no place in the public discourse.

"Mr. Limbaugh's comments politicize the economic struggle of millions of hard working Americans. With the unemployment rate over seven percent, today's news that 62,000 more Americans filed for unemployment benefits last week, and millions of Americans struggling to keep their health care and homes, all Americans, regardless of their ideology, hope that President Obama succeeds in getting people back to work and turning our economy around."

http://dccc.org/blog/archives/dccc_chairman_chris_van_hollen_condemns_rush_limba ughs_comment_hoping_presi/

Excuse me Mr Hollen, Rush's comment (which you took out of context) does belong in the public discourse - and the First Amendment says so

Dems are constantly trying to silence those who are pointing out how Dems are only going to make things worse with their insane spending

OCA

01-29-2009, 04:09 PM

He's played Augusta National.

Oooooh, lets bown down and lick his nutsack because he's played Augusta.

OCA

01-29-2009, 04:10 PM

You mean Pres Obama will not fix the economy after all the "shitload" of economic experience you told us about? :laugh2:

Corporate Republicans are not going to let him.

OCA

01-29-2009, 04:12 PM

:lol::lol::clap::clap::lol::lol:

Well what is it OCA?????? Does he have the experience or is it all over???????

He has the experience but................American power is in the death grip of corporations who care more about their profitability and bonus programs and nothing about this country.

OCA

01-29-2009, 04:16 PM

He won't produce the evidence because it doesn't exist. How anyone can speak with such certainty about something that just doesn't exist? He'll never retract it though as it would prove he had no clue what he was posting.

I produced it, you ignored it. Whether it was little or alot of experience he certainly had more that Johnny Lib.................or else he would not have been elected.

Care to explain how a guy who you claim has zero experience on just about everything got elected in a landslide?

OCA

01-29-2009, 04:19 PM

We all know that Jim. You gave him several chances to produce it - but he blew up at you and ran away

Stand back RSR, I think all that blowing of Jim's cock is gonna make him get his nut.

Ran away? From a known liar like you? Are you shitting me? I have a life, trying to stay ahead of this shitty economy Repubs and the mortgage industry shit on the American people.

I guess if you had a job you would understand...........sorry, my bad.

OCA

01-29-2009, 04:22 PM

no it was excellent :clap:

Errrrr.......................jeopardy at 3:00, jeopardy at 3:00 errrrrr.:laugh2:

Don't get mad at me, get mad at God, he's the one who fucked up in the assembly line when it came to you.

OCA

01-29-2009, 04:24 PM

red states rule

01-29-2009, 04:27 PM

OCA

01-29-2009, 04:32 PM

Did you post something other then this? Or did we miss it?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama

Nope that was it, oh and the fact that he won the election in the most desperate economic times since the great depression proves he has the experience.

You should know better, I don't fall for the "ignore the obvious" bullshit from RINOS.

red states rule

01-29-2009, 04:34 PM

Nope that was it, oh and the fact that he won the election in the most desperate economic times since the great depression proves he has the experience.

You should know better, I don't fall for the "ignore the obvious" bullshit from RINOS.

and this is his "solution" to bring the economy back. His "experience" is showing t

No wonder support for the bill is falling

snip

“We Will Ban All Earmarks In The Recovery Package.”
- Barack Obama, Press Conference, 1/6/09

Here are just six points in the bill:

$20 million “for the removal of small- to medium-sized fish passage barriers.” (Pg. 45 of Senate Appropriations Committee report: “20,000,000 for the removal of small- to medium-sized fish passage barriers)

$400 million for STD prevention (Pg. 60 of Senate Appropriations Committee report: “CDC estimates that a proximately 19 million new STD infections occur annually in the United States …The Committee has included $400,000,000 for testing and prevention of these conditions.”)

$25 million to rehabilitate off-roading (ATV) trails (Pg. 45 of Senate Appropriations Committee report: “$25,000,000 is for recreation maintenance, especially for rehabilitation of off-road vehicle routes, and $20,000,000 is for trail maintenance and restoration”)

$34 million to remodel the Department of Commerce HQ (Pg. 15 of Senate Appropriations Committee report: $34,000,000 for the Department of Commerce renovation and modernization”)

$70 million to “Support Supercomputing Activities” for climate research (Pgs. 14-15 of Senate Appropriations Committee Report: $70,000,000 is directed to specifically support supercomputing activities, especially as they relate to climate research)

$150 million for honey bee insurance (Pg. 102 of Senate Appropriations Committee report: “The Secretary shall use up to $ 50,000,000 per year, and $150,000,000 in the case of 2009, from the Trust Fund to provide emergency relief to eligible producers of livestock, honey bees, and farm-raised fish to aid in the reduction of losses due to disease, adverse weather, or other conditions, such as blizzards and wildfires, as determined by the Secretary”)

http://rightsoup.com/

OCA

01-29-2009, 04:44 PM

and this is his "solution" to bring the economy back. His "experience" is showing t

No wonder support for the bill is falling

snip

“We Will Ban All Earmarks In The Recovery Package.”
- Barack Obama, Press Conference, 1/6/09

Here are just six points in the bill:

$20 million “for the removal of small- to medium-sized fish passage barriers.” (Pg. 45 of Senate Appropriations Committee report: “20,000,000 for the removal of small- to medium-sized fish passage barriers)

$400 million for STD prevention (Pg. 60 of Senate Appropriations Committee report: “CDC estimates that a proximately 19 million new STD infections occur annually in the United States …The Committee has included $400,000,000 for testing and prevention of these conditions.”)

$25 million to rehabilitate off-roading (ATV) trails (Pg. 45 of Senate Appropriations Committee report: “$25,000,000 is for recreation maintenance, especially for rehabilitation of off-road vehicle routes, and $20,000,000 is for trail maintenance and restoration”)

$34 million to remodel the Department of Commerce HQ (Pg. 15 of Senate Appropriations Committee report: $34,000,000 for the Department of Commerce renovation and modernization”)

$70 million to “Support Supercomputing Activities” for climate research (Pgs. 14-15 of Senate Appropriations Committee Report: $70,000,000 is directed to specifically support supercomputing activities, especially as they relate to climate research)

$150 million for honey bee insurance (Pg. 102 of Senate Appropriations Committee report: “The Secretary shall use up to $ 50,000,000 per year, and $150,000,000 in the case of 2009, from the Trust Fund to provide emergency relief to eligible producers of livestock, honey bees, and farm-raised fish to aid in the reduction of losses due to disease, adverse weather, or other conditions, such as blizzards and wildfires, as determined by the Secretary”)

http://rightsoup.com/

Doesn't matter, he won, Dems have all the power, it will get passed eventually then we will see it it fails or not.

Can't get any worse than what Bush and Republicans have left us with.

red states rule

01-29-2009, 04:49 PM

Doesn't matter, he won, Dems have all the power, it will get passed eventually then we will see it it fails or not.

Can't get any worse than what Bush and Republicans have left us with.

It doesn't matter that Obama promised no pork in the bill?

It doesn't matter the bill is nearly 1/3 the entire Federal budget?

It doesn't matter all of it will add to the deficit?

It doesn't matter that this level of spending will cause inflation to come back?

With all Republicans voting against the bill, Dems will own it. But they will try to blame Pres Bush anyway

OCA

01-29-2009, 05:04 PM

It doesn't matter that Obama promised no pork in the bill?

It doesn't matter the bill is nearly 1/3 the entire Federal budget?

It doesn't matter all of it will add to the deficit?

It doesn't matter that this level of spending will cause inflation to come back?

With all Republicans voting against the bill, Dems will own it. But they will try to blame Pres Bush anyway

Could you link me to the quote where the president specifically "promised pork"? The rest of America and I must've missed this.

What you call pork most of Americans call "job creation".

Inflation is not a concern, actually if you knew a fucking thing about economics "deflation" is more of a concern right now.

I guess you must've conveniently forgotten all the pork TARP bullshit given to the bush admin. and the used to pay off CEO bonuses......all of which went to the deficit, a deficit created by Republicans when that had inherited a surplus from Demos in 2000.

Face it, it would take Obama 4 terms to outspend what W did in 2.

red states rule

01-29-2009, 05:11 PM

Could you link me to the quote where the president specifically "promised pork"? The rest of America and I must've missed this.

What you call pork most of Americans call "job creation".

Inflation is not a concern, actually if you knew a fucking thing about economics "deflation" is more of a concern right now.

I guess you must've conveniently forgotten all the pork TARP bullshit given to the bush admin. and the used to pay off CEO bonuses......all of which went to the deficit, a deficit created by Republicans when that had inherited a surplus from Demos in 2000.

Face it, it would take Obama 4 terms to outspend what W did in 2.

I will do better then a link - here is the video of the press conference

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/MpolOSPTDaI&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en&feature=player_embedded&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/MpolOSPTDaI&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en&feature=player_embedded&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

IF this pork bill "creates" the 4 million jobs Pres Obama said it will - it will cost taxpayers $230,000 per job

OCA, if the US keeps printing the money at this rate, inflation will happen

As far as the TARP - Dems approved it and added huge amounts of pork to it as well

5stringJeff

01-29-2009, 06:46 PM

Nope that was it, oh and the fact that he won the election in the most desperate economic times since the great depression proves he has the experience.

The fact that he won an election means nothing about his experience. It only means that more people voted for him than for McCain.

moderate democrat

01-29-2009, 08:54 PM

The fact that he won an election means nothing about his experience. It only means that more people voted for him than for McCain.

experience is overrated. I would put wisdom as a much more valuable trait, along with vision, leadership, the ability to inspire, and the ability to surround oneself with intelligent advisors.

Abbey Marie

01-29-2009, 09:03 PM

Yurt

01-29-2009, 09:05 PM

experience is overrated. I would put wisdom as a much more valuable trait, along with vision, leadership, the ability to inspire, and the ability to surround oneself with intelligent advisors.

you like obama because, like you, obama breaks promises

Yurt

01-29-2009, 09:09 PM

wisdom
noun
Synonyms:
...
experience,
...

Since you like copying from dictionaries, how about a Thesaurus?

Looks like wisdom and experience are synonymous. Makes sense- no better way to gain wisdom than through experience.

true, however, experience is not always necessary for wisdom nor does experience always equate with wisdom. out of the mouth of babes....

moderate democrat

01-29-2009, 09:11 PM

you like obama, because like you, obama breaks promises

That is incorrect. I don't break promises, and, in any case, I have never promised you anything. I am optimistic about our president because he has wisdom, leadership, vision, the ability to inspire, and the ability to surround himself with intelligent advisors.

moderate democrat

01-29-2009, 09:12 PM

wisdom
noun
Synonyms:
...
experience,
...

Since you like copying from dictionaries, how about a Thesaurus?

Looks like wisdom and experience are synonymous. Makes sense- no better way to gain wisdom than through experience.

experience does not always bring wisdom. wisdom does, however, always amplify experience.

Yurt

01-29-2009, 09:28 PM

That is incorrect. I don't break promises, and, in any case, I have never promised you anything. I am optimistic about our president because he has wisdom, leadership, vision, the ability to inspire, and the ability to surround himself with intelligent advisors.

you're lying that you don't break promises. you've never broken one promise....

and btw, i never said you promised me anything creep. why do you always make things so personal with me? you obsessed or something? i don't get it...

do you deny that obama has broken promises...yes or no...

moderate democrat

01-29-2009, 09:38 PM

you're lying that you don't break promises. you've never broken one promise....

and btw, i never said you promised me anything creep. why do you always make things so personal with me? you obsessed or something? i don't get it...

do you deny that obama has broken promises...yes or no...

what promises do you know that I have broken? What did you mean when you said this: "you like obama, because like you, obama breaks promises"

And all politicians must, from time to time, reverse their positions and break promises. Things change. situations change. I certainly want my leaders to change and adapt their views based upon changing circumstances, and if that means that they must "break a promise" ever now and then, great.

Yurt

01-29-2009, 09:54 PM

what promises do you know that I have broken? What did you mean when you said this: "you like obama, because like you, obama breaks promises"

And all politicians must, from time to time, reverse their positions and break promises. Things change. situations change. I certainly want my leaders to change and adapt their views based upon changing circumstances, and if that means that they must "break a promise" ever now and then, great.

lol, love how you deny that you have never broken a promise. liar

nice to know you think obama is great because of his ability to break promises. i bet when you hear the word hack, it is not....you can hack it...it is...you are a political hack

your hero promised not to vote for FISA, what changed...huh...come on now....what changed that caused your messiah to break his promise?

or is this going to be another lie that you have scholarly work to prove me wrong and then when asked for said work, you run off like a thief in the night.....

moderate democrat

01-29-2009, 10:02 PM

lol, love how you deny that you have never broken a promise. liar

nice to know you think obama is great because of his ability to break promises. i bet when you hear the word hack, it is not....you can hack it...it is...you are a political hack

your hero promised not to vote for FISA, what changed...huh...come on now....what changed that caused your messiah to break his promise?

or is this going to be another lie that you have scholarly work to prove me wrong and then when asked for said work, you run off like a thief in the night.....

nice dodge of your own quote. And as I said before, we both know that you changed your birthday to make your timeline fit... and when I saw that, it became clear to me that carrying on meaningful dialog with you concerning the middle east was impossible, so I told you that I would not continue that discussion and have not. I didn't run away from anything. We both know that you ran away from the truth in that interchange, but you clearly do not have the ethics to admit it.

Regarding Obama's vote on FISA, I have no idea what new information he had that caused him to change his mind and neither do you.

Yurt

01-29-2009, 10:09 PM

nice dodge of your own quote. And as I said before, we both know that you changed your birthday to make your timeline fit... and when I saw that, it became clear to me that carrying on meaningful dialog with you concerning the middle east was impossible, so I told you that I would not continue that discussion and have not. I didn't run away from anything. We both know that you ran away from the truth in that interchange, but you clearly do not have the ethics to admit it.

Regarding Obama's vote on FISA, I have no idea what new information he had that caused him to change his mind and neither do you.

are you drunk? i didn't dodge my quote.

you're lying that you don't break promises. you've never broken one promise....

i notice you keep dodging this...so you've never broken one promise....

so you say that i changed my birthday....whooopee, as i told you, it was not my real birthday anyway. so what difference does it make if i changed my birthday? hmmmmm....none. you're a coward and a liar who made a claim you can't back up. booo hooo

what a cop out on obama....you hack...i am sure you gave bush the benefit of the doubt....face it, obama had no different knowledge than you or i. he had no executive privilege then and you cowardly hiding behind that you don't know what he knows is pure comics....as if obama new some secret that the other dems who voted AGAINST it didn't....oh...are you ADMITTING obama had information he DID NOT SHARE....

seriously, you're no moderate, you have shown yourself to be nothing more than a democratic party hack.

moderate democrat

01-29-2009, 10:17 PM

are you drunk? i didn't dodge my quote.

i notice you keep dodging this...so you've never broken one promise....

so you say that i changed my birthday....whooopee, as i told you, it was not my real birthday anyway. so what difference does it make if i changed my birthday? hmmmmm....none. you're a coward and a liar who made a claim you can't back up. booo hooo

what a cop out on obama....you hack...i am sure you gave bush the benefit of the doubt....face it, obama had no different knowledge than you or i. he had no executive privilege then and you cowardly hiding behind that you don't know what he knows is pure comics....as if obama new some secret that the other dems who voted AGAINST it didn't....oh...are you ADMITTING obama had information he DID NOT SHARE....

seriously, you're no moderate, you have shown yourself to be nothing more than a democratic party hack.

how do YOU know I have broken promises. Either prove I have, or retract it.

Your birthday showed that you were eight years old when you claimed that you were in the middle east. I noticed that, and asked you about it. you changed it. and then lied and said that you had not changed it. It made the entire story about you sitting on top of a pyramid suspect, and, as an extension, it made the entire story about your having first hand knowledge about the middle east and your claims that muslims lacked any real concern about Jerusalem suspect. I don't believe you. YOu have proven yourself to be a liar and discussions with you about that topic seemed useless.

And as I said, neither of us know the background for why Obama chose to change his position on FISA.

Yurt

01-29-2009, 10:58 PM

moderate democrat;343953]how do YOU know I have broken promises. Either prove I have, or retract it.

keep on proving yourself virgil.... i phrased it as a question, but your own words above convict you. as i said, do stay and continue to post. no need to hide. i am not like democrats who want to shut down the opposing voice and tell them to bend over and take it.

Your birthday showed that you were eight years old when you claimed that you were in the middle east. I noticed that, and asked you about it. you changed it. and then lied and said that you had not changed it. It made the entire story about you sitting on top of a pyramid suspect, and, as an extension, it made the entire story about your having first hand knowledge about the middle east and your claims that muslims lacked any real concern about Jerusalem suspect. I don't believe you. YOu have proven yourself to be a liar and discussions with you about that topic seemed useless.

translation:

the scholarly evidence i said existed that yurt is a fraud...doesn't exist....

dude, don't make promises you can't keep and don't lie about evidence you have that can prove another is a liar, especially if you are going to wuss out and claim i am the reason you won't present it.

if you had the evidence, you would have presented it. instead, you're a liar and had no evidence, so you blame it on me.

And as I said, neither of us know the background for why Obama chose to change his position on FISA.

so then obama had background information that the other dems did not have? why is it the other dems kept their promises and not obama? why can't you answer that simple question? what "background" information did obama have and why, since you claim he had "some" sorta spooky background info, did obama NOT share it?

are you going to tapdance all night or are you going to debate policy?

moderate democrat

01-29-2009, 11:09 PM

1. my name is not virgil
2. you said that I liked Obama because he broke promises like I did. guess you can't back that up. I understand
3. you lied about your birthday... why should I believe that you were in the middle east or climbed a pyramid or know anything about the region?
4. I stated my opinion. I have read a few books on the subject and the impression I got was that Jerusalem was extremely important to muslims given the fact that it is the third holiest spot in the world for all of them and it is in jewish hands. you claimed personal discussions with muslims in the middle east led you to believe that was not the case. Since I don't believe your story about being there, I don't believe your claim
5. I have no idea what made Obama change his mind about FISA and neither do you. I choose to give him the benefit of the doubt. you do not. so be it.

Yurt

01-29-2009, 11:11 PM

prove I have, or retract it.

provide proof or retract.

retract your insult.

prove it or retract it.

gonna have to do better moderate democrat.....

REDWHITEBLUE2

01-29-2009, 11:58 PM

Anyway who cares really what a junkie says. Don't be so hard on obama

red states rule

01-30-2009, 06:43 AM

I will do better then a link - here is the video of the press conference

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/MpolOSPTDaI&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en&feature=player_embedded&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/MpolOSPTDaI&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en&feature=player_embedded&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

IF this pork bill "creates" the 4 million jobs Pres Obama said it will - it will cost taxpayers $230,000 per job

OCA, if the US keeps printing the money at this rate, inflation will happen

As far as the TARP - Dems approved it and added huge amounts of pork to it as well

***crickets chirping*****

moderate democrat

01-30-2009, 09:03 AM

provide proof or retract.

retract your insult.

prove it or retract it.

gonna have to do better moderate democrat.....

you made a claim that I have broken promises like Obama... you have no basis to make such a claim... but run away from it if you like.

red states rule

01-30-2009, 09:06 AM

you made a claim that I have broken promises like Obama... you have no basis to make such a claim... but run away from it if you like.

Please stop derailing threads.

jimnyc

01-30-2009, 10:24 AM

I produced it, you ignored it. Whether it was little or alot of experience he certainly had more that Johnny Lib.................or else he would not have been elected.

Care to explain how a guy who you claim has zero experience on just about everything got elected in a landslide?

I ignored nothing. I clearly outlined what was in your link relating to his economic experience. All it contained was him authorizing a website to track funds. Trust me, this is NOT more than McCain. And what voters think about who they think is best fitted to help our economy does NOTHING to change his level of experience. Either you can provide evidence of his "shitload of economic experience" or you can't, it's really that simple, and as of yet you have provided us with jack shit.

jimnyc

01-30-2009, 10:27 AM

Nope that was it, oh and the fact that he won the election in the most desperate economic times since the great depression proves he has the experience.

Being elected proves he has experience? Seriously, Mike, your debating skills are dwindling. I've seen 17yr olds get elected as Mayors in small towns, does that mean they all have the experience since they got elected?

Again, can you share ANYTHING with us outlining his "shitload of economic experience" other than a Wikipedia page that gives us NOTHING?

Abbey Marie

01-30-2009, 01:16 PM

Being popular in a country that made the careers of Britney Spears and Anna Nicole Smith, doesn't mean a whole lot.

moderate democrat

01-30-2009, 01:32 PM

Please stop derailing threads.
tell that to your pal yurt. He made an accusation, he should be able to defend it. If he coud stick on topic and not insult me, we wouldn't be talking about this.

red states rule

01-30-2009, 01:33 PM

tell that to your pal yurt. He made an accusation, he should be able to defend it. If he coud stick on topic and not insult me, we wouldn't be talking about this.

Zzzzzzzzzz

moderate democrat

01-30-2009, 01:43 PM

Zzzzzzzzzz

quit derailing threads. debate or go snore somewhere else.:lol:

red states rule

01-30-2009, 01:44 PM

quit derailing threads. debate or go snore somewhere else.:lol:

Different day - same old Virgil :laugh2:

Yurt

01-30-2009, 02:31 PM

you made a claim that I have broken promises like Obama... you have no basis to make such a claim... but run away from it if you like.

yeah, where is that scholarly work you claimed existed to prove i know shit about the ME....liar

provide proof or retract.

retract your insult.

prove it or retract it.

and you had better thank me for warning you that your words are identical to a former poster, as i said, you had better keep yourself underwraps more closely.

Yurt

01-30-2009, 03:01 PM

what a cop out on obama....you hack...i am sure you gave bush the benefit of the doubt....face it, obama had no different knowledge than you or i. he had no executive privilege then and you cowardly hiding behind that you don't know what he knows is pure comics....as if obama new some secret that the other dems who voted AGAINST it didn't....oh...are you ADMITTING obama had information he DID NOT SHARE....

can't explain can you....face it, you're about party over country and you will make up anything to excuse any wrong by obama. you admit/claim obama had secret knowledge he did not share with other democrats who voted against FISA. instead of making this country more secure by sharing this secret knowledge, the political hack obama keeps it to himself instead of sharing it with other democrats. obama also does not share this secret knowledge with the american people, instead allowing the dems to continue bashing bush over FISA. obama and yourself have proven that party is more important than country.

sad.

moderate democrat

01-30-2009, 03:13 PM

can't explain can you....face it, you're about party over country and you will make up anything to excuse any wrong by obama. you admit/claim obama had secret knowledge he did not share with other democrats who voted against FISA. instead of making this country more secure by sharing this secret knowledge, the political hack obama keeps it to himself instead of sharing it with other democrats. obama also does not share this secret knowledge with the american people, instead allowing the dems to continue bashing bush over FISA. obama and yourself have proven that party is more important than country.

sad.

again... who was your first choice for the republican nomination? and who did you vote for in november?

I do not claim or admit anything of the sort, pal. I suggested that neither one of us knew what sort of reasons Obama had for changing his mind. Neither you, nor I have any idea how much of his rationale he shared with other senators. Neither you nor I have any idea what other senators thought of Obama's reasons and how much their weighed the importance of those reasons when they made up their minds.

Yurt

01-30-2009, 03:21 PM

again... who was your first choice for the republican nomination? and who did you vote for in november?

I do not claim or admit anything of the sort, pal. I suggested that neither one of us knew what sort of reasons Obama had for changing his mind. Neither you, nor I have any idea how much of his rationale he shared with other senators. Neither you nor I have any idea what other senators thought of Obama's reasons and how much their weighed the importance of those reasons when they made up their minds.

liar, you're just bitter because you got called out on your logic and now refuse to be honest about it and debate it.

pathetic.

moderate democrat

01-30-2009, 03:25 PM

liar, you're just bitter because you got called out on your logic and now refuse to be honest about it and debate it.

pathetic.

you put words in my mouth. I merely spit them out at you. I never claimed that Obama had secret knowledge that he refused to share. I clearly stated that I, nor you, had any idea as to what he knew or did not know...or what he did or did not share with other senators.

now... quit tap dancing...who was your first choice for the republican nomination and who did you vote for in november?

Yurt

01-30-2009, 03:26 PM

you put words in my mouth. I merely spit them out at you. I never claimed that Obama had secret knowledge that he refused to share. I clearly stated that I, nor you, had any idea as to what he knew or did not know...or what he did or did not share with other senators.

now... quit tap dancing...who was your first choice for the republican nomination and who did you vote for in november?

you idiot, you claimed obama had knowledge that led him to vote for FISA. other democrats voted against FISA, ergo, they did not have obama's knowledge, ergo, obama did not share his knowledge, ergo, said knowledge is secret.

man, i am beginning to feel like debating is like picking on a child.

moderate democrat

01-30-2009, 03:30 PM

you idiot, you claimed obama had knowledge that led him to vote for FISA. other democrats voted against FISA, ergo, they did not have obama's knowledge, ergo, obama did not share his knowledge, ergo, said knowledge is secret.

man, i am beginning to feel like debating is like picking on a child.

false logic. Obama decided to vote for FISA... he weighed the information before him and decided to change his mind. Others decided differently. Nothing suggests that Obama did not share... just that he came to a different conclusion.

Yurt

01-30-2009, 03:32 PM

you put words in my mouth. I merely spit them out at you. I never claimed that Obama had secret knowledge that he refused to share. I clearly stated that I, nor you, had any idea as to what he knew or did not know...or what he did or did not share with other senators.

now... quit tap dancing...who was your first choice for the republican nomination and who did you vote for in november?

so... when you wanna quit tap dancing, let me know

wow, identical "..." as well...

just answer the questions and quit tap dancing

then quit tap dancing and answer a simple question, amigo

either answer them or not. quit your fucking tap dancing.

you had better do better to hide your new identity

red states rule

01-30-2009, 03:35 PM

wow, identical "..." as well...

you had better do better to hide your new identity

I hope he does a better job Yurt

I'll wait

Yurt

01-30-2009, 03:37 PM

false logic. Obama decided to vote for FISA... he weighed the information before him and decided to change his mind. Others decided differently. Nothing suggests that Obama did not share... just that he came to a different conclusion.

my scenario is far superior to yours. he promised he would vote against, then voted for it, NEVER explained why, NEVER shared his reasons...you have to pull a massive ASSumption to get to your logic.

moderate democrat

01-30-2009, 03:46 PM

my scenario is far superior to yours. he promised he would vote against, then voted for it, NEVER explained why, NEVER shared his reasons...you have to pull a massive ASSumption to get to your logic.

because he did not share his reasons with the public does not mean that he did not share his reasons with his colleagues. I have no idea why he changed his mind and neither do you. The fact remains: the mere fact that Obama voted one way and other democrats voted another does not prove that Obama KNEW anything they did not know or HID anything from them, as you have suggested.

moderate democrat

01-30-2009, 03:47 PM

wow, identical "..." as well...

you had better do better to hide your new identity

"tap dancing" is a fairly common idiomatic expression.

I would suggest that you drop this silliness about me being someone else and try debating me instead.

Yurt

01-30-2009, 03:50 PM

"tap dancing" is a fairly common idiomatic expression.

I would suggest that you drop this silliness about me being someone else and try debating me instead.

you used the same "..." as well.

you must do better, you must really get more into this new identity, it is getting boring showing old posts that look identical to yours....alas, it proves me right though.

Yurt

01-30-2009, 03:52 PM

because he did not share his reasons with the public does not mean that he did not share his reasons with his colleagues. I have no idea why he changed his mind and neither do you. The fact remains: the mere fact that Obama voted one way and other democrats voted another does not prove that Obama KNEW anything they did not know or HID anything from them, as you have suggested.

well if you DON'T KNOW, then you can be quiet now

thank you for proving me right...again

obama also does not share this secret knowledge with the american people, instead allowing the dems to continue bashing bush over FISA. obama and yourself have proven that party is more important than country.

moderate democrat

01-30-2009, 03:55 PM

you used the same "..." as well.

you must do better, you must really get more into this new identity, it is getting boring showing old posts that look identical to yours....alas, it proves me right though.

why not stop this silliness and talk issues instead of trying to suggest that I am someone I am not?

Again...why do you continue to avoid questions posed to you? are you afraid of answering?

Yurt

01-30-2009, 04:00 PM

why not stop this silliness and talk issues instead of trying to suggest that I am someone I am not?

Again...why do you continue to avoid questions posed to you? are you afraid of answering?

why do you lie about who you are?

red states rule

01-30-2009, 04:02 PM

why do you lie about who you are?

I would like to know as well

Maybe he will confess and tell us the truth

I'll wait

moderate democrat

01-30-2009, 09:57 PM

why do you lie about who you are?

I am not lying. Why do you hide behind this fantasy that I am someone else to avoid talking about the issues that I clearly put forward?

again: who was your first choice for president out of the republican field of candidates, and who did you vote for in November? Why, oh why do you continue to run away from that question???

Yurt

01-30-2009, 10:04 PM

I am not lying. Why do you hide behind this fantasy that I am someone else to avoid talking about the issues that I clearly put forward?

again: who was your first choice for president out of the republican field of candidates, and who did you vote for in November? Why, oh why do you continue to run away from that question???

i've avoided nothing and debated you on any issue i want....

you know my hometown, you proved you are lying about who you are...

it really doesn't matter who my first choice is or was, it was never about me, it was about you being a hypocrite regarding RSR. but since you are so obsessed about it, i never had a first choice. i didn't really know enough about anyone of them to make a choice. and what i did learn, never convinced me to vote for them... i voted for mccain for the sole reason that obama is worse.

moderate democrat

01-30-2009, 10:07 PM

i've avoided nothing and debated you on any issue i want....

you know my hometown, you proved you are lying about who you are...

it really doesn't matter who my first choice is or was, it was never about me, it was about you being a hypocrite regarding RSR. but since you are so obsessed about it, i never had a first choice. i didn't really know enough about anyone of them to make a choice. and what i did learn, never convinced me to vote for them... i voted for mccain for the sole reason that obama is worse.

party over country. I knew it. thanks for proving my point.

Kathianne

01-30-2009, 10:09 PM

Yurt

01-30-2009, 10:09 PM

party over country. I knew it. thanks for proving my point.

whatever mfm...

i voted for the other guy because i didn't like your guy and that makes me "party" over country....you aren't to bright...but you are good liar

it was so easy manipulating you and getting you to reveal yourself, thanks for the fun!

Yurt

01-30-2009, 10:10 PM

Sooo, who was right?

now that is a good question!

Kathianne

01-30-2009, 10:11 PM

now that is a good question!

Thank you. Can't wait for the answer for moderate democrat.

moderate democrat

01-30-2009, 10:13 PM

Sooo, who was right?

I happen to believe that FISA, as it was originally written, provides the administration with all the tools it needs to do its job, while providing citizens all the protection they need from the government.

Yurt

01-30-2009, 10:14 PM

moderate democrat

01-30-2009, 10:17 PM

obama was voting on the original?

No..he was voting on a modification. I disagree with his decision to do so, but, if I want someone to vote my way 100% of the time, the only way to do that is to run for the office myself.

Yurt

01-30-2009, 10:18 PM

No..he was voting on a modification. I disagree with his decision to do so, but, if I want someone to vote my way 100% of the time, the only way to do that is to run for the office myself.

party over country...

moderate democrat

01-30-2009, 10:23 PM

party over country...

nothing is higher than my allegiance to my country, except my allegiance to my God and to my family.

liar.

Kathianne

01-30-2009, 10:59 PM

I happen to believe that FISA, as it was originally written, provides the administration with all the tools it needs to do its job, while providing citizens all the protection they need from the government.

So Obama thought Bush correct and you disagree. But still back him, got that right?

If so, means all your yakking about this was garbage, right?

moderate democrat

01-30-2009, 11:03 PM

So Obama thought Bush correct and you disagree. But still back him, got that right?

If so, means all your yakking about this was garbage, right?

I disagree with Obama on several things. Nevertheless, I still felt he was a better option to lead our country than McCain at this juncture. I voted for Obama and hope he does well. I guess you would rather see America suffer if it meant a return to prominence for your beloved GOP.... got that right?

Kathianne

01-30-2009, 11:39 PM

I disagree with Obama on several things. Nevertheless, I still felt he was a better option to lead our country than McCain at this juncture. I voted for Obama and hope he does well. I guess you would rather see America suffer if it meant a return to prominence for your beloved GOP.... got that right?

Unlike you or whatever version you are now going bye, I made clear my stance, regardless of party. Never threw up an excuse of 'juncture.' Nor that our candidate deserved anything. That IS for Democrats...

moderate democrat

01-30-2009, 11:47 PM

Unlike you or whatever version you are now going bye, I made clear my stance, regardless of party. Never threw up an excuse of 'juncture.' Nor that our candidate deserved anything. That IS for Democrats...

I am fairly new here... and I vote my party, unless my party puts up a bad candidate. It has on a few occasions, and I have voted for someone else when that happened. It seems to me that you are anxious for America to fail so that the GOP will, somehow, succeed. Whatever blows your skirt up. I don't roll that way. For me, country first, party second.

Yurt

01-31-2009, 12:13 AM

nothing is higher than my allegiance to my country, except my allegiance to my God and to my family.

liar.

you said because i voted for mccain because i did not like obama made me party over country....

yet you toed the party line despite obama lying about FISA....party over country all the time

you're not a christian, that is for sure

BoogyMan

01-31-2009, 12:40 AM

I disagree with Obama on several things. Nevertheless, I still felt he was a better option to lead our country than McCain at this juncture. I voted for Obama and hope he does well. I guess you would rather see America suffer if it meant a return to prominence for your beloved GOP.... got that right?

You will see America suffering pretty soon under Obama. The porkulus he is ramming down our throats and his first official action being one that insures that Americans pay for foreign abortions are some great indicators in the present of real suffering in the future.

red states rule

01-31-2009, 06:31 AM

red states rule

01-31-2009, 06:57 AM

I am fairly new here... and I vote my party, unless my party puts up a bad candidate. It has on a few occasions, and I have voted for someone else when that happened. It seems to me that you are anxious for America to fail so that the GOP will, somehow, succeed. Whatever blows your skirt up. I don't roll that way. For me, country first, party second.

Speaking of bad candidates

I guess you voted for Carter in 76; and

Carter in 1980

Mondale in 1984

Dukakis in 1988

Gore in 2000

Kerry in 2004

I see the pattern here. Tax and spend liberals with a huge "D" at the end of their name

moderate democrat

01-31-2009, 09:10 AM

Speaking of bad candidates

I guess you voted for Carter in 76; and

Carter in 1980

Mondale in 1984

Dukakis in 1988

Gore in 2000

Kerry in 2004

I see the pattern here. Tax and spend liberals with a huge "D" at the end of their name

and my guess is that you voted for the republican in every election. correct?

As a matter of fact, however, I did NOT vote for Mondale in '84... I voted for Anderson. Now tell me which presidential elections YOU voted for someone other than the republican. Will you do that for me?

moderate democrat

01-31-2009, 09:13 AM

you said because i voted for mccain because i did not like obama made me party over country....

yet you toed the party line despite obama lying about FISA....party over country all the time

you're not a christian, that is for sure

incorrect assumption. I do not vote party over country. I happen to believe that me party is the best answer for my country. If I didn't believe that, I wouldn't vote that way. Can you not understand that logical thought process?

and I am a Christian. Why would you say otherwise?

red states rule

01-31-2009, 09:23 AM

and my guess is that you voted for the republican in every election. correct?

As a matter of fact, however, I did NOT vote for Mondale in '84... I voted for Anderson. Now tell me which presidential elections YOU voted for someone other than the republican. Will you do that for me?

You are correct. My first vote was for Ronald Reagan in 1980

I have never voted for a Dem because all your party has ever put up are tax and spend big governement liberals

The difference between you and me is - I am truthful and up front about myself - while you lie every chance you get

That is why you feel so at home in the Democrat party

OCA

01-31-2009, 09:46 AM

you like obama because, like you, obama breaks promises

What promises has he broken?

Oh wait...............did he break a promise on par with Bush's "no nation building?"

OCA

01-31-2009, 09:52 AM

***crickets chirping*****

I guess I missed the part where he specifically said "pork bill", which you claimed.

Just for your further information, because I want to help you out so you continually stop making a fool out of yourself................its a job creation bill.

red states rule

01-31-2009, 09:53 AM

OCA

01-31-2009, 09:55 AM

I ignored nothing. I clearly outlined what was in your link relating to his economic experience. All it contained was him authorizing a website to track funds. Trust me, this is NOT more than McCain. And what voters think about who they think is best fitted to help our economy does NOTHING to change his level of experience. Either you can provide evidence of his "shitload of economic experience" or you can't, it's really that simple, and as of yet you have provided us with jack shit.

Somebody get this man laid!

He has the experience and the wisdom, I believe it and the voters believe it even though there is not much of a paper trail to document that experience, you don't believe it, so be it.

OCA

01-31-2009, 09:56 AM

***Crickets still chirping****

Can you link me to where he called it a "pork bill?"

My guess is no because like most of your thoughts its all bullshit.

OCA

01-31-2009, 09:58 AM

Being popular in a country that made the careers of Britney Spears and Anna Nicole Smith, doesn't mean a whole lot.

Well it does and it doesn't but you are onto something, America ain't the greatest place on earth anymore.

Yurt

01-31-2009, 09:58 AM

What promises has he broken?

Oh wait...............did he break a promise on par with Bush's "no nation building?"

you're kidding right...

FISA for starters

oh, and we're talking about obama, not bush

OCA

01-31-2009, 09:58 AM

Zzzzzzzzzz

Partisan

Yurt

01-31-2009, 10:00 AM

OCA

01-31-2009, 10:00 AM

whatever mfm...

i voted for the other guy because i didn't like your guy and that makes me "party" over country....you aren't to bright...but you are good liar

it was so easy manipulating you and getting you to reveal yourself, thanks for the fun!

Could you ever vote for a Demo because he was obviously a better choice than the Repub, honestly?

red states rule

01-31-2009, 10:00 AM

Can you link me to where he called it a "pork bill?"

My guess is no because like most of your thoughts its all bullshit.

That is not what you asked

You asked

Could you link me to the quote where the president specifically "promised pork"? The rest of America and I must've missed this.

I posted the video where he said NO EARMARKS would be in the bill

Sorry OCA - Obama lied

OCA

01-31-2009, 10:01 AM

:lol:

Whats so funny?

If McCain had had more experience or trust on the economic issue he would've won.................its as simple as that.

Yurt

01-31-2009, 10:01 AM

incorrect assumption. I do not vote party over country. I happen to believe that me party is the best answer for my country. If I didn't believe that, I wouldn't vote that way. Can you not understand that logical thought process?

and I am a Christian. Why would you say otherwise?

what church do you belong to...

OCA

01-31-2009, 10:02 AM

That is not what you asked

You asked

Could you link me to the quote where the president specifically "promised pork"? The rest of America and I must've missed this.

I posted the video where he said NO EARMARKS would be in the bill

Sorry OCA - Obama lied

And there aren't any earmarks in the bill..................just job creation spenditures.

Obama................truth teller........................its killing you, isn't it?

OCA

01-31-2009, 10:04 AM

you're kidding right...

FISA for starters

oh, and we're talking about obama, not bush

Nope, we're not going to dodge Repubs who broke promises.

FISA don't mean shit..................nation building cost about 3,000 plus American lives...................needlessly.

red states rule

01-31-2009, 10:04 AM

And there aren't any earmarks in the bill..................just job creation spenditures.

Obama................truth teller........................its killing you, isn't it?

You are such a fool OCA. You are boxed in the corner and are so desperate

Job creators eh?

20 million “for the removal of small- to medium-sized fish passage barriers.”(Pg. 45 of Senate Appropriations Committee report:“20,000,000 for the removal of small- to medium-sized fish passage barriers)

$400 million for STD prevention (Pg. 60 of Senate Appropriations Committee report:“CDC estimates that a proximately 19 million new STD infections occur annually in the United States …The Committee has included $400,000,000 for testing and prevention of these conditions.”)

$25 million to rehabilitate off-roading (ATV) trails (Pg. 45 of Senate Appropriations Committee report:“$25,000,000 is for recreation maintenance, especially for rehabilitation of off-road vehicle routes, and $20,000,000 is for trail maintenance and restoration”)

$34 million to remodel the Department of Commerce HQ (Pg. 15 of Senate Appropriations Committee report:$34,000,000 for the Department of Commerce renovation and modernization”)

$70 million to “Support Supercomputing Activities” for climate research (Pgs. 14-15 of Senate Appropriations Committee Report:$70,000,000 is directed to specifically support supercomputing activities, especially as they relate to climate research)

$150 million for honey bee insurance (Pg. 102 of Senate Appropriations Committee report:“The Secretary shall use up to $ 50,000,000 per year, and $150,000,000 in the case of 2009, from the Trust Fund to provide emergency relief to eligible producers of livestock, honey bees, and farm-raised fish to aid in the reduction of losses due to disease, adverse weather, or other conditions, such as blizzards and wildfires, as determined by the Secretary”)

Yurt

01-31-2009, 10:06 AM

Whats so funny?

If McCain had had more experience or trust on the economic issue he would've won.................its as simple as that.

i'll buy trust, but not experience. even mfm, er moderate democrat, said obama's experience didn't matter so much as character. people voted against bush more than they voted for obama. the simple fact is, obama did not have more experience. if he did, you could easily cite to it.

obama himself, when asked if he had more economic experience than palin, cited his campaign as experience and the large budge his campaign had. now thats funny! couldn't cite anything, so he cites the fact he is running for office as his experience....

OCA

01-31-2009, 10:06 AM

You are such a fool OCA. You are boxed in the corner and are so desperate

Job creators eh?

20 million “for the removal of small- to medium-sized fish passage barriers.”(Pg. 45 of Senate Appropriations Committee report:“20,000,000 for the removal of small- to medium-sized fish passage barriers)

$400 million for STD prevention (Pg. 60 of Senate Appropriations Committee report:“CDC estimates that a proximately 19 million new STD infections occur annually in the United States …The Committee has included $400,000,000 for testing and prevention of these conditions.”)

$25 million to rehabilitate off-roading (ATV) trails (Pg. 45 of Senate Appropriations Committee report:“$25,000,000 is for recreation maintenance, especially for rehabilitation of off-road vehicle routes, and $20,000,000 is for trail maintenance and restoration”)

$34 million to remodel the Department of Commerce HQ (Pg. 15 of Senate Appropriations Committee report:$34,000,000 for the Department of Commerce renovation and modernization”)

$70 million to “Support Supercomputing Activities” for climate research (Pgs. 14-15 of Senate Appropriations Committee Report:$70,000,000 is directed to specifically support supercomputing activities, especially as they relate to climate research)

$150 million for honey bee insurance (Pg. 102 of Senate Appropriations Committee report:“The Secretary shall use up to $ 50,000,000 per year, and $150,000,000 in the case of 2009, from the Trust Fund to provide emergency relief to eligible producers of livestock, honey bees, and farm-raised fish to aid in the reduction of losses due to disease, adverse weather, or other conditions, such as blizzards and wildfires, as determined by the Secretary”)

So who does all those things? Machines?

He's going to create jobs in the very least and that fucking kills you.

Partisan hacks like you are the fools because its party before country.

Yurt

01-31-2009, 10:08 AM

Nope, we're not going to dodge Repubs who broke promises.

FISA don't mean shit..................nation building cost about 3,000 plus American lives...................needlessly.

they do it too...

give it time, obama will break more promises

red states rule

01-31-2009, 10:08 AM

So who does all those things? Machines?

He's going to create jobs in the very least and that fucking kills you.

Partisan hacks like you are the fools because its party before country.

They are not permanent jobs - what happens after the work is done. Like the "Big Dig" multiply the cost by a factor of about 5

IF 4 million jobs are created - which is doubtful - the cost to the taxpayer is $230,000 per job

How is 150 million for honey bee ins a job maker? or $5 billion to ACORN?

red states rule

01-31-2009, 10:10 AM

So who does all those things? Machines?

He's going to create jobs in the very least and that fucking kills you.

Partisan hacks like you are the fools because its party before country.

Here is more of the pork you said was not in the bill

5 billion to ACORN

$50 million for the National Endowment of Arts

$726 million for an afterschool snack program

By all accounts, the $73 billion wish list may be the largest collection of parochial spending projects in American history. Strolling through the 800 pages, we found such beauties as:$1 million to upgrade the Los Angeles County Convention Center elevated “catwalk” for cameras and lighting; $350,000 for an Albuquerque, N.M., fitness center; $94 million for a parking garage at the Orange Bowl in Miami; $4.5 million for Gretna, Florida, to bottle water with recyclable bottles; a $35 million music hall of fame in Florissant, Missouri, and $3.1 million for a swimming pool in Tulsa.

Oh, and desperate Santa Barbara, Calif., respectfully requests $80,000 for a tennis facility; Savannah, Georgia, would like to build a children’s museum; Ventura, Calif., wants $6 million to renovate the beach at Surfers Point, and Durham, N.C., home of the Durham Bulls, wants to construct the first Minor League Baseball Hall of Fame. Dayton, Ohio, wants $1.5 million to reduce prostitution with education programs, and Ponce, Puerto Rico wants $5.7 million to improve its cruise ship terminal (which will create all of 60 jobs

OCA

01-31-2009, 10:14 AM

people voted against bush more than they voted for obama.

And who told you that would happen? Who told you about 18 months before the election that it didn't matter which Repub ran for whatever freakin office in November that they would get wiped out, that the winning percentage would be in the single digits? For chrissakes Al Franken is probably going to the Senate!

But it ain't just Bush's fault, Repubs have fucked up on so many fronts and so many issues in the past 8 years that I don't have the time to discuss them all or the persons involved there are so freakin many.

What is sad though, what really depresses me is that it is painfully obvious that Repubs are no longer fiscally responsible conservatives. That maybe, just maybe, conservatism in respect to economics is not right, that it in fact has done much more damage to the economy than the liberal model. That can't be argued against with a straight face.

OCA

01-31-2009, 10:15 AM

Here is more of the pork you said was not in the bill

5 billion to ACORN

$50 million for the National Endowment of Arts

$726 million for an afterschool snack program

By all accounts, the $73 billion wish list may be the largest collection of parochial spending projects in American history. Strolling through the 800 pages, we found such beauties as:$1 million to upgrade the Los Angeles County Convention Center elevated “catwalk” for cameras and lighting; $350,000 for an Albuquerque, N.M., fitness center; $94 million for a parking garage at the Orange Bowl in Miami; $4.5 million for Gretna, Florida, to bottle water with recyclable bottles; a $35 million music hall of fame in Florissant, Missouri, and $3.1 million for a swimming pool in Tulsa.

Oh, and desperate Santa Barbara, Calif., respectfully requests $80,000 for a tennis facility; Savannah, Georgia, would like to build a children’s museum; Ventura, Calif., wants $6 million to renovate the beach at Surfers Point, and Durham, N.C., home of the Durham Bulls, wants to construct the first Minor League Baseball Hall of Fame. Dayton, Ohio, wants $1.5 million to reduce prostitution with education programs, and Ponce, Puerto Rico wants $5.7 million to improve its cruise ship terminal (which will create all of 60 jobs

Awesome! More upgrading of the infrastructure which means more job creation!

Guess it better than the Repub and conservative alternative......pay CEO bonuses or do nothing.

OCA

01-31-2009, 10:17 AM

They are not permanent jobs - what happens after the work is done. Like the "Big Dig" multiply the cost by a factor of about 5

IF 4 million jobs are created - which is doubtful - the cost to the taxpayer is $230,000 per job

How is 150 million for honey bee ins a job maker? or $5 billion to ACORN?

So you support the Repub "pay CEO bonuses and do nothing else alernative?

History proves that JUST tax cuts do not create jobs.

jimnyc

01-31-2009, 10:18 AM

Somebody get this man laid!

He has the experience and the wisdom, I believe it and the voters believe it even though there is not much of a paper trail to document that experience, you don't believe it, so be it.

It's not a matter of belief, it's either he has the experience you stated or he doesn't. You made the statement and simply cannot back it up. I don't believe it because it doesn't exist and you can't supply is with a damn thing to backup your statement. And why? Because it doesn't exist.

Just believing a man has the experience doesn't make it so. Either post appropriate evidence of your claims or admit you haven't a clue what you're posting about regarding his "shitload of economic experience".

red states rule

01-31-2009, 10:19 AM

Awesome! More upgrading of the infrastructure which means more job creation!

Guess it better than the Repub and conservative alternative......pay CEO bonuses or do nothing.

OCA, if you REALLY want to create jobs - do not them shovels to do the digging - give them spoons

We can get more on the payroll that way :laugh2:

Seem you have become a full blown liberal OCA. Let the pork flow like a river

You still have not addressed why Obama lied about the pork or what will happen to those "created" jobs when the project is done

Pass another pork bill where the jobs will cost $230,000 each?

OCA

01-31-2009, 10:19 AM

they do it too...

give it time, obama will break more promises

When have Demos engaged in nation building? Oh wait I know, WWII, Germany and Japan, and they did a wonderful job in less time.

I know you won't seriously compare Iraq to post WWII Germany and Japan as being anywhere close to an equal job on the quality level..................that would be fucking outrageous!

red states rule

01-31-2009, 10:20 AM

So you support the Repub "pay CEO bonuses and do nothing else alernative?

History proves that JUST tax cuts do not create jobs.

Pres Reagan had 20 million new jobs

Pres Bush had 54 straight months of postive job growth

5stringJeff

01-31-2009, 10:20 AM

And who told you that would happen? Who told you about 18 months before the election that it didn't matter which Repub ran for whatever freakin office in November that they would get wiped out, that the winning percentage would be in the single digits? For chrissakes Al Franken is probably going to the Senate!

And who predicted that we'd be dealing with President Hillary Clinton today?

But it ain't just Bush's fault, Repubs have fucked up on so many fronts and so many issues in the past 8 years that I don't have the time to discuss them all or the persons involved there are so freakin many.

This I'll absolutely agree with. I can count the number of small government Republicans on my two hands - and the GOP leadership wants nothing to do with them.

What is sad though, what really depresses me is that it is painfully obvious that Repubs are no longer fiscally responsible conservatives. That maybe, just maybe, conservatism in respect to economics is not right, that it in fact has done much more damage to the economy than the liberal model. That can't be argued against with a straight face.

I wouldn't say for a minute that Bush's economics were conservative. In fact, Bush increased spending at an astronomical rate - more than even LBJ! And that doesn't include spending for the war. So to look at Bush's record and say that conservative economics (i..e small-government, low taxation) has failed is a non sequitor. You'd have to go back to Reagan to find an actual conservative economic Presidency.

OCA

01-31-2009, 10:21 AM

It's not a matter of belief, it's either he has the experience you stated or he doesn't. You made the statement and simply cannot back it up. I don't believe it because it doesn't exist and you can't supply is with a damn thing to backup your statement. And why? Because it doesn't exist.

Just believing a man has the experience doesn't make it so. Either post appropriate evidence of your claims or admit you haven't a clue what you're posting about regarding his "shitload of economic experience".

I shall do neither since you know full well that the only tune I listen to is my own Grammy worthy voice. I take orders from no one else my friend.

OCA

01-31-2009, 10:23 AM

Pres Reagan had 20 million new jobs

Pres Bush had 54 straight months of postive job growth

Both had record deficits and Bush ended up fixing us a nice big recession which looks more and more like it will end up in a depression.

Bill Clinton gave us a surplus and balanced a budget while creating jobs, care to explain that?

jimnyc

01-31-2009, 10:27 AM

I shall do neither since you know full well that the only tune I listen to is my own Grammy worthy voice. I take orders from no one else my friend.

Hey, whether you post it for me or not is irrelevant. I know it doesn't exist anyway, and your lame posturing only enforces the facts for me.

You talked shit and were busted and now want to tapdance around the issue. Can't blame you though, it must suck to be backed into a corner and look foolish.

OCA

01-31-2009, 10:28 AM

it must suck to be backed into a corner and look foolish.

I'll let you know the first time it happens!:cool:

Don't hold your breath though.

red states rule

01-31-2009, 10:29 AM

Both had record deficits and Bush ended up fixing us a nice big recession which looks more and more like it will end up in a depression.

Bill Clinton gave us a surplus and balanced a budget while creating jobs, care to explain that?

In the case of Pres Bush and Pres Reagan, revenues increased thanks to the tax cuts

Under Reagan, revenue DOUBLED in 8 years

It was spending that caused the deficits

With Clinton, conservatives took over Congres in 1994 and actually cut back on the spending

red states rule

01-31-2009, 10:30 AM

I'll let you know the first time it happens!:cool:

Don't hold your breath though.

It has happened twice

First when you said Obama had a "shitload of economic experience"

and when you said there was no pork in Obama's stimulus bill

jimnyc

01-31-2009, 10:31 AM

I'll let you know the first time it happens!:cool:

Don't hold your breath though.

After seeing your "evidence" I have asked for no less than 20x, I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for anything within a debate with you. The self proclaimed king of the board, refusing to properly engage in an honest debate and providing facts, how ironic.

OCA

01-31-2009, 10:32 AM

It has happened twice

First when you said Obama had a "shitload of economic experience"

and when you said there was no pork in Obama's stimulus bill

You mean the "job creation" in the stimulus bill.............no thanks needed from you for the correction.

OCA

01-31-2009, 10:34 AM

After seeing your "evidence" I have asked for no less than 20x, I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for anything within a debate with you. The self proclaimed king of the board, refusing to properly engage in an honest debate and providing facts, how ironic.

Keep trying to pry it out, the only way its gonna happen is on a cold slab at the morgue.

But shittttttt it is funny seeing you try to belittle my abilities! We both know thats a load of shit!:laugh2::laugh2:

red states rule

01-31-2009, 10:34 AM

You mean the "job creation" in the stimulus bill.............no thanks needed from you for the correction.

There is little "job creation" in the mega pork bill. Only the private sector can create permanent jobs

Again, only 3% of the nearly $1 trillion goes to building/repairing roads and bridges. The rest is pork and political payoffs

jimnyc

01-31-2009, 10:36 AM

Keep trying to pry it out, the only way its gonna happen is on a cold slab at the morgue.

But shittttttt it is funny seeing you try to belittle my abilities! We both know thats a load of shit!:laugh2::laugh2:

I'm done with you. Debating with you lately is akin to taking on Joe Steel or a "one hit wonder" who registers and disappears. Not worth my time. I'll step away now knowing you dodged instead of confronting.

Happy debating!

Yurt

01-31-2009, 10:38 AM

And who told you that would happen? Who told you about 18 months before the election that it didn't matter which Repub ran for whatever freakin office in November that they would get wiped out, that the winning percentage would be in the single digits? For chrissakes Al Franken is probably going to the Senate!

But it ain't just Bush's fault, Repubs have fucked up on so many fronts and so many issues in the past 8 years that I don't have the time to discuss them all or the persons involved there are so freakin many.

What is sad though, what really depresses me is that it is painfully obvious that Repubs are no longer fiscally responsible conservatives. That maybe, just maybe, conservatism in respect to economics is not right, that it in fact has done much more damage to the economy than the liberal model. That can't be argued against with a straight face.

the same guy who said clinton would win....

i'll buy trust, but not experience. even mfm, er moderate democrat, said obama's experience didn't matter so much as character. people voted against bush more than they voted for obama. the simple fact is, obama did not have more experience. if he did, you could easily cite to it.

obama himself, when asked if he had more economic experience than palin, cited his campaign as experience and the large budge his campaign had. now thats funny! couldn't cite anything, so he cites the fact he is running for office as his experience....

OCA

01-31-2009, 10:39 AM

In the case of Pres Bush and Pres Reagan, revenues increased thanks to the tax cuts

Under Reagan, revenue DOUBLED in 8 years

It was spending that caused the deficits

With Clinton, conservatives took over Congres in 1994 and actually cut back on the spending

I guess thats how it goes with a party hack, only Repubs get the credit for the good shit.

You see i'm a "buck stops here" type of guy in regards to the President

1. Bush to blame for 9/11
2. Clinton to blame for all his philandering i.e. Monica
3. Reagan to blame for huge deficit and commercial real estate crash towards the end of his time
4. Bush to blame for huge deficit and deep recession towards end of his term
5. Clinton to blame for International meddling in Kosovo
6. Clinton to blame for bombing aspirin factory

You see how being honest can be freeing?

red states rule

01-31-2009, 10:40 AM

I guess thats how it goes with a party hack, only Repubs get the credit for the good shit.

You see i'm a "buck stops here" type of guy in regards to the President

1. Bush to blame for 9/11
2. Clinton to blame for all his philandering i.e. Monica
3. Reagan to blame for huge deficit and commercial real estate crash towards the end of his time
4. Bush to blame for huge deficit and deep recession towards end of his term
5. Clinton to blame for International meddling in Kosovo
6. Clinton to blame for bombing aspirin factory

You see how being honest can be freeing?

I answered your question Mike on taxes and spending - now you branch out in other areas

BTW, here is more of the pork you said was not in the bill. Another great job creator eh?

Washington, Jan 23 - The House Democrats’ trillion dollar spending bill, approved on January 21 by the Appropriations Committee and headed to the House floor next week for a vote, could open billions of taxpayer dollars to left-wing groups like the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN). ACORN has been accused of perpetrating voter registration fraud numerous times in the last several elections; is reportedly under federal investigation; and played a key role in the irresponsible schemes that caused a financial meltdown that has cost American taxpayers hundreds of billions of dollars since last fall.

House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) and other Republicans are asking a simple question: what does this have to do with job creation? Are Congressional Democrats really going to borrow money from our children and grandchildren to give handouts to ACORN in the name of economic “stimulus?”

Incredibly, the Democrats’ bill makes groups like ACORN eligible for a $4.19 billion pot of money for “neighborhood stabilization activities.” Funds for this purpose were authorized in the Housing and Economic Recovery Act, signed into law in 2008. However, these funds were limited to state and local governments. Now House Democrats are taking the unprecedented step of making ACORN and other groups eligible for these funds:

“For a further additional amount for ‘Community Development Fund,’$4,190,000,000, to be used for neighborhood stabilization activities related to emergency assistance for the redevelopment of abandoned and foreclosed homes as authorized under division B, title III of the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 (Public Law 110–289), of which—

“(1) not less than $3,440,000,000 shall be allocated by a competition for which eligible entities shall be States, units of general local government, and nonprofit entities or consortia of nonprofit entities[.]”

“(2) up to $750,000,000 shall be awarded by competition to nonprofit entities or consortia of nonprofit entities to provide community stabilization assistance […]”
The House Democrats’ trillion dollar spending bill also includes $1 billion for the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program. CDBG funds are given by the federal government to state and local governments which often contract with nonprofits for services related to the purpose of the grant

http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2009/01/surprise-dems-stimulus-package-is.html

OCA

01-31-2009, 10:41 AM

I'm done with you. Debating with you lately is akin to taking on Joe Steel or a "one hit wonder" who registers and disappears. Not worth my time. I'll step away now knowing you dodged instead of confronting.

Happy debating!

Hey you too Jimmy.............quite supprised I wasn't banned for some bullshit reason again this time though.................thanks for being cool this time around!:beer:

OCA

01-31-2009, 10:47 AM

I answered your question Mike on taxes and spending - now you branch out in other areas

BTW, here is more of the pork you said was not in the bill. Another great job creator eh?

Washington, Jan 23 - The House Democrats’ trillion dollar spending bill, approved on January 21 by the Appropriations Committee and headed to the House floor next week for a vote, could open billions of taxpayer dollars to left-wing groups like the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN). ACORN has been accused of perpetrating voter registration fraud numerous times in the last several elections; is reportedly under federal investigation; and played a key role in the irresponsible schemes that caused a financial meltdown that has cost American taxpayers hundreds of billions of dollars since last fall.

House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) and other Republicans are asking a simple question: what does this have to do with job creation? Are Congressional Democrats really going to borrow money from our children and grandchildren to give handouts to ACORN in the name of economic “stimulus?”

Incredibly, the Democrats’ bill makes groups like ACORN eligible for a $4.19 billion pot of money for “neighborhood stabilization activities.” Funds for this purpose were authorized in the Housing and Economic Recovery Act, signed into law in 2008. However, these funds were limited to state and local governments. Now House Democrats are taking the unprecedented step of making ACORN and other groups eligible for these funds:

“For a further additional amount for ‘Community Development Fund,’$4,190,000,000, to be used for neighborhood stabilization activities related to emergency assistance for the redevelopment of abandoned and foreclosed homes as authorized under division B, title III of the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 (Public Law 110–289), of which—

“(1) not less than $3,440,000,000 shall be allocated by a competition for which eligible entities shall be States, units of general local government, and nonprofit entities or consortia of nonprofit entities[.]”

“(2) up to $750,000,000 shall be awarded by competition to nonprofit entities or consortia of nonprofit entities to provide community stabilization assistance […]”
The House Democrats’ trillion dollar spending bill also includes $1 billion for the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program. CDBG funds are given by the federal government to state and local governments which often contract with nonprofits for services related to the purpose of the grant

http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2009/01/surprise-dems-stimulus-package-is.html

Nah actually you didn't, you dodged the deficits that come along with it, saying some bullshit about how its all congress's fault like Reagan didn't have a veto pen.

BTW, Bush outspent both Reagan and Clinton combined.

Awesome! More fucking job creation! Love ittttttttttttttttttttttt!

Please do not dodge this question again: do you support the Republican plan of pay CEO bonuses and do nothing else?

red states rule

01-31-2009, 10:50 AM

Nah actually you didn't, you dodged the deficits that come along with it, saying some bullshit about how its all congress's fault like Reagan didn't have a veto pen.

BTW, Bush outspent both Reagan and Clinton combined.

Awesome! More fucking job creation! Love ittttttttttttttttttttttt!

Please do not dodge this question again: do you support the Republican plan of pay CEO bonuses and do nothing else?

I addressed the deficits - you might want to take a remedial reading class

As far as the bonuses, I find it funny Obama rants about the those (the average bonus is around $100,000) while he wants to spend $1 trillion in pork

Obama & Dem Reasoning:

Wall Street Bonuses = Shameful

Payments to Illegal Aliens, people who don't pay taxes, and political allies = Stimulus

Any questions?

Yurt

01-31-2009, 10:55 AM

the same guy who said clinton would win....

i'll buy trust, but not experience. even mfm, er moderate democrat, said obama's experience didn't matter so much as character. people voted against bush more than they voted for obama. the simple fact is, obama did not have more experience. if he did, you could easily cite to it.

obama himself, when asked if he had more economic experience than palin, cited his campaign as experience and the large budge his campaign had. now thats funny! couldn't cite anything, so he cites the fact he is running for office as his experience....

you've missed this twice...

OCA

01-31-2009, 10:59 AM

I addressed the deficits - you might want to take a remedial reading class

As far as the bonuses, I find it funny Obama rants about the those (the average bonus is around $100,000) while he wants to spend $1 trillion in pork

Obama & Dem Reasoning:

Wall Street Bonuses = Shameful

Payments to Illegal Aliens, people who don't pay taxes, and political allies = Stimulus

Any questions?

Well I would have questions...............if you were honest about anything.

You know damn well you are just repeating untruthful rhetoric.

red states rule

01-31-2009, 11:01 AM

Well I would have questions...............if you were honest about anything.

You know damn well you are just repeating untruthful rhetoric.

I am posting facts that you are unable to counter. Your bruised ego and temper have taken over Mike - and your debate skills have taken a back seat

Now, you are posting like a liberal hack out of the MFM (i.e moderate democrat) mold

OCA

01-31-2009, 11:23 AM

I am posting facts that you are unable to counter. Your bruised ego and temper have taken over Mike - and your debate skills have taken a back seat

Now, you are posting like a liberal hack out of the MFM (i.e moderate democrat) mold

Uhhh first of all I don't remember ever giving you permission to use my real name on the board so refrain from doing that in the future.

Second of all can you point out the fact of " the pork to illegal aliens?" or is this more of your bullshit?

red states rule

01-31-2009, 11:27 AM

Uhhh first of all I don't remember ever giving you permission to use my real name on the board so refrain from doing that in the future.

Second of all can you point out the fact of " the pork to illegal aliens?" or is this more of your bullshit?

Eh, Jim has used it many times - but I will honor your request.

As far as the illegals

WASHINGTON (AP) - The $800 billion-plus economic stimulus measure making its way through Congress could steer government checks to illegal immigrants, a top Republican congressional official asserted Thursday.
The legislation, which would send tax credits of $500 per worker and $1,000 per couple, expressly disqualifies nonresident aliens, but it would allow people who don't have Social Security numbers to be eligible for the checks.

Undocumented immigrants who are not eligible for a Social Security number can file tax returns with an alternative number. A House-passed version of the economic recovery bill and one making its way through the Senate would allow anyone with such a number, called an individual taxpayer identification number, to qualify for the tax credits.

A revolt among GOP conservatives to similar provisions of a 2008 economic stimulus bill, which sent rebate checks to most wage earners, forced Democratic congressional leaders to add stricter eligibility requirements. That legislation, enacted in February 2008, required that people have valid Social Security numbers in order to get checks.

The GOP official voiced concerns about the latest economic aid measure on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to discuss it publicly.

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D960U4HG0&show_article=1

OCA

01-31-2009, 11:43 AM

Eh, Jim has used it many times - but I will honor your request.

As far as the illegals

WASHINGTON (AP) - The $800 billion-plus economic stimulus measure making its way through Congress could steer government checks to illegal immigrants, a top Republican congressional official asserted Thursday.
The legislation, which would send tax credits of $500 per worker and $1,000 per couple, expressly disqualifies nonresident aliens, but it would allow people who don't have Social Security numbers to be eligible for the checks.

Undocumented immigrants who are not eligible for a Social Security number can file tax returns with an alternative number. A House-passed version of the economic recovery bill and one making its way through the Senate would allow anyone with such a number, called an individual taxpayer identification number, to qualify for the tax credits.

A revolt among GOP conservatives to similar provisions of a 2008 economic stimulus bill, which sent rebate checks to most wage earners, forced Democratic congressional leaders to add stricter eligibility requirements. That legislation, enacted in February 2008, required that people have valid Social Security numbers in order to get checks.

The GOP official voiced concerns about the latest economic aid measure on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to discuss it publicly.

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D960U4HG0&show_article=1

That was Jimmy, not you.

Awesome! They worked, they contributed to their respective local economies so they should get something back unlike the millions of Americans born on this soil who are capable of work but choose to be on the dole.

I say kudos to President Obama and the Dem Congress! :clap:

red states rule

01-31-2009, 11:47 AM

That was Jimmy, not you.

Awesome! They worked, they contributed to their respective local economies so they should get something back unlike the millions of Americans born on this soil who are capable of work but choose to be on the dole.

I say kudos to President Obama and the Dem Congress! :clap:

So now it is "awesome" and not bullshit, eh?

Well the Dems are handing out the welfare OCA

Another "stimulus" secret is that some $252 billion is for income-transfer payments -- that is, not investments that arguably help everyone, but cash or benefits to individuals for doing nothing at all. There's $81 billion for Medicaid, $36 billion for expanded unemployment benefits, $20 billion for food stamps, and $83 billion for the earned income credit for people who don't pay income tax. While some of that may be justified to help poorer Americans ride out the recession, they aren't job creators.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123310466514522309.html

OCA

01-31-2009, 11:52 AM

So now it is "awesome" and not bullshit, eh?

Well the Dems are handing out the welfare OCA

Another "stimulus" secret is that some $252 billion is for income-transfer payments -- that is, not investments that arguably help everyone, but cash or benefits to individuals for doing nothing at all. There's $81 billion for Medicaid, $36 billion for expanded unemployment benefits, $20 billion for food stamps, and $83 billion for the earned income credit for people who don't pay income tax. While some of that may be justified to help poorer Americans ride out the recession, they aren't job creators.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123310466514522309.html

So getting back what you overpaid or getting something for just contributing to the fucking economy is welfare, eh? Thats what sucks about conservatism, no common sense.

red states rule

01-31-2009, 12:04 PM

So getting back what you overpaid or getting something for just contributing to the fucking economy is welfare, eh? Thats what sucks about conservatism, no common sense.

The point is, Obama is giving income tax refunds to people who (!) do not pay income taxes, and (2) US taxpayer money to poeople who are in the country illegally

A couple years ago, OCA the conservative would be pissed off about this

Now OCA the liberal cheers it on

And you said there was no prok in this bill, and Obama never promised there would be no prom in it

My how the "mighty" have falled

OCA

01-31-2009, 12:23 PM

The point is, Obama is giving income tax refunds to people who (!) do not pay income taxes, and (2) US taxpayer money to poeople who are in the country illegally

A couple years ago, OCA the conservative would be pissed off about this

Now OCA the liberal cheers it on

And you said there was no prok in this bill, and Obama never promised there would be no prom in it

My how the "mighty" have falled

Nope, wrong again.

OCA was always for amnesty, why not have amnesty for the people who do the work Americans won't do?

BTW, that is coming soon.....guess which Repub senator will vote along with Demos?:laugh2:

red states rule

01-31-2009, 12:26 PM

Nope, wrong again.

OCA was always for amnesty, why not have amnesty for the people who do the work Americans won't do?

BTW, that is coming soon.....guess which Repub senator will vote along with Demos?:laugh2:

and Pres Reagan thought the same thing - and no the problem is much worse. Rewarding bad behaviour will only get you more bad behaviour

Bottom line is, illegals put a severe drain on the local, state, and federal budget. Look at CA if you want to see how much damage. Now even US citizens can't get their tax refunds because the state is out of money

Now Obama wants to give more money.

OCA

01-31-2009, 12:28 PM

and Pres Reagan thought the same thing - and no the problem is much worse. Rewarding bad behaviour will only get you more bad behaviour

Bottom line is, illegals put a severe drain on the local, state, and federal budget. Look at CA if you want to see how much damage. Now even US citizens can't get their tax refunds because the state is out of money

Now Obama wants to give more money.

Reagan had the right idea, he knew they were the backbone of the economy along with the middle class.

I think the problem is much better.

red states rule

01-31-2009, 12:29 PM

Reagan had the right idea, he knew they were the backbone of the economy along with the middle class.

I think the problem is much better.

Pres Reagan gave amnesity to what 2.7 million?

Now there are over 20 million and you say the problem is better??????

OCA

01-31-2009, 12:41 PM

Pres Reagan gave amnesity to what 2.7 million?

Now there are over 20 million and you say the problem is better??????

Because we have people here to do the work Americans won't do, that is good for the economy................well until Bush, Republicans, Wall St and greedy mortgage companies shot the economy in the head out of their uncontrollable greed.

red states rule

01-31-2009, 12:43 PM

Because we have people here to do the work Americans won't do, that is good for the economy................well until Bush, Republicans, Wall St and greedy mortgage companies shot the economy in the head out of their uncontrollable greed.

Spoken like a true liberal OCA

And who will pay for the amnesty? The price tag a year and half ago was over $2 trillion

OCA

01-31-2009, 01:03 PM

Spoken like a true liberal OCA

And who will pay for the amnesty? The price tag a year and half ago was over $2 trillion

The new taxes collected after the amestees are rolled into the system will more than pay for it I believe................if not we'll find it just like we do for the trillions spent on the social service action we've been performing in Iraq.

red states rule

01-31-2009, 01:04 PM

The new taxes collected after the amestees are rolled into the system will more than pay for it I believe................if not we'll find it just like we do for the trillions spent on the social service action we've been performing in Iraq.

Oh really?

These people do not PAY any taxes OCA. That is the problem

Amnesty Will Cost U.S. Taxpayers at Least $2.6 Trillion
by Robert E. Rector
WebMemo #1490
The Senate is currently considering a massive immigration reform bill, the "Secure Borders, Economic Opportunity and Immigration Reform Act of 2007" (S. 1348). This bill would grant amnesty to nearly all illegal immigrants currently in the United States.

The fiscal consequences of this amnesty will vary depending on the time period analyzed. It is expected that many illegal immigrants who are currently working "off the books" and paying no direct taxes will begin to work "on the books" after receiving amnesty, and therefore tax payments will rise immediately. By contrast, under S. 1348, benefits to these immigrants from Social Security, Medicare, and most means-tested welfare programs (such as Food Stamps, public housing, and Temporary Assistance to Needy Families) will be delayed for many years. In consequence, then, the increase in taxes and fines paid by amnesty recipients may initially exceed slightly the increase in government benefits received. In the long run, however, the opposite will be true. In particular, the cost of retirement benefits for amnesty recipients is likely to be very large. Overall, the net cost to taxpayers of retirement benefits for amnesty recipients is likely to be at least $2.6 trillion.

http://www.heritage.org/research/Immigration/wm1490.cfm

OCA

01-31-2009, 01:17 PM

Oh really?

These people do not PAY any taxes OCA. That is the problem

Amnesty Will Cost U.S. Taxpayers at Least $2.6 Trillion
by Robert E. Rector
WebMemo #1490
The Senate is currently considering a massive immigration reform bill, the "Secure Borders, Economic Opportunity and Immigration Reform Act of 2007" (S. 1348). This bill would grant amnesty to nearly all illegal immigrants currently in the United States.

The fiscal consequences of this amnesty will vary depending on the time period analyzed. It is expected that many illegal immigrants who are currently working "off the books" and paying no direct taxes will begin to work "on the books" after receiving amnesty, and therefore tax payments will rise immediately. By contrast, under S. 1348, benefits to these immigrants from Social Security, Medicare, and most means-tested welfare programs (such as Food Stamps, public housing, and Temporary Assistance to Needy Families) will be delayed for many years. In consequence, then, the increase in taxes and fines paid by amnesty recipients may initially exceed slightly the increase in government benefits received. In the long run, however, the opposite will be true. In particular, the cost of retirement benefits for amnesty recipients is likely to be very large. Overall, the net cost to taxpayers of retirement benefits for amnesty recipients is likely to be at least $2.6 trillion.

http://www.heritage.org/research/Immigration/wm1490.cfm

Nah,the net receipts of rolling them into the tax system will far outweigh expenditures(if there are any), if not we can end the folly called "Iraq" and easily pay for it................in fact I think Iraq is ending inside of 18 months.

Most illegals are hard working and receive or seek out few if any public monies or services...............unlike many native born able bodied Americans.

I can't wait for it to happen because there is little if anything Repubs can do to stop it.

red states rule

01-31-2009, 01:22 PM

Nah,the net receipts of rolling them into the tax system will far outweigh expenditures(if there are any), if not we can end the folly called "Iraq" and easily pay for it................in fact I think Iraq is ending inside of 18 months.

Most illegals are hard working and receive or seek out few if any public monies or services...............unlike many native born able bodied Americans.

I can't wait for it to happen because there is little if anything Repubs can do to stop it.

Oh really?

the Federal budget is running over $1 trillion short. That does not count the mega pork bill OCA - or the new $2 trillion bank bill I heard about this morning

SS and Medicare currently needs about $41 trillion to balance their books

The Net Retirement Costs of Amnesty

Giving amnesty to illegal immigrants will greatly increase long-term costs to the taxpayer. Granting amnesty to illegal immigrants would, over time, increase their use of means-tested welfare, Social Security, and Medicare. Fiscal costs would rise in the intermediate term and increase dramatically when amnesty recipients reach retirement. Although it is difficult to provide a precise estimate, it seems likely that if 10 million adult illegal immigrants currently in the U.S. were granted amnesty, the net retirement cost to government (benefits minus taxes) could be over $2.6 trillion.

The calculation of this figure is as follows. As noted above, in 2007 there were, by the most commonly used estimates, roughly 10 million adult illegal immigrants in the U.S. Most illegal immigrants are low-skilled. On average, each elderly low-skill immigrant imposes a net cost (benefits minus taxes) on the taxpayers of about $17,000 per year. The major elements of this cost are Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid benefits. (The figure includes federal state and local government costs.) If the government gave amnesty to 10 million adult illegal immigrants, most of them would eventually become eligible for Social Security and Medicare benefits or Supplemental Security Income and Medicaid benefits.

However, not all of the 10 million adults given amnesty would survive until retirement at age 67. Normal mortality rates would reduce the population by roughly 15 percent before age 67. That would mean 8.5 million individuals would reach age 67 and enter retirement.

Of those reaching 67, their average remaining life expectancy would be around 18 years.[17] The net cost to taxpayers of these elderly individuals would be around $17,000 per year.[18] Over 18 years, the cost would equal $306,000 per elderly amnesty recipient. A cost of $306,000 per amnesty recipient multiplied by 8.5 million amnesty recipients results in a total net cost of $2.6 trillion.

These costs would not occur immediately. The average adult illegal immigrant is now in his early thirties; thus, it will be 25 to 30 years before the bulk of amnesty recipients reaches retirement. At their peak level, it appears the amnesty recipients will expand the number of beneficiaries under Social Security by 5 to 10 percent. This will occur at a point when Social Security will already be running deficits of over $200 billion annually.

This is a rough estimate. More research should be performed, but policymakers should examine these potential costs very carefully before rushing to grant amnesty, "Z visas," or "earned citizenship" to the current illegal immigrant population.

http://www.heritage.org/research/Immigration/wm1490.cfm

and

Is Social Security and Medicare Sustainable?

A recent report by the GAO (Government Accountability Office) has established that Social Security and Medicare are not monetarily sustainable with the rising cost of services, compounded with the number of recipients going up. In fact, the report asserted that for the governmental programs to deliver their promised benefits over the next 75 years, they will need to come up with an extra $41 trillion.

The report stated that Social Security alone will need more than $7 trillion. Medicare Hospitalization will need $12 trillion, while Medicare Part B (doctor’s services) and Medicare Part D (prescription drugs) will need $13 trillion and $8 trillion.

The GAO’s report doesn’t just simply state that Social Security and Medicare are not monetarily sustainable for the future, it proposes that the programs should be updated and modified for the rapidly changing needs of the elderly and the new challenges the 21st century. The report mentions that the health care system, the tax system and all other government programs should be assessed and changed to make them more sustainable for the not-so-distant future.

If the programs don’t change, the $41 trillion will have to be created over the next 75 years through new taxes and spending cuts.

http://disabilityblogger.blogspot.com/2008/08/is-social-security-and-medicare.html

red states rule

01-31-2009, 01:24 PM

Most illegals are hard working and receive or seek out few if any public monies or services...............unlike many native born able bodied Americans.

I can't wait for it to happen because there is little if anything Repubs can do to stop it.

Wrong again OCA

Figures from the Department of Public Social Services show that children of illegal aliens in Los Angeles County collected $450 million in welfare and food stamps in 2008 – an increase of $25 million from the previous year, announced Los Angeles County Supervisor Michael D. Antonovich

Annually the cost of illegal immigration to Los Angeles County taxpayers exceeds over one billion dollars, which includes $220 million for public safety, $400 million for healthcare, and $450 million in welfare and food stamps allocations. Twenty-five percent of the County’s total allotment of welfare and food stamps benefits goes directly to the children of illegal aliens born in the United States.

“Illegal immigration continues to have a devastating impact on Los Angeles County taxpayers,” said Antonovich. “The total cost for illegal immigrants to County taxpayers exceeds $1 billion a year – not including the millions of dollars for education.”

http://www.hometownstation.com/local-news/illegal-aliens-clarita-2009-01-29-10-51-2.html

Yurt

01-31-2009, 02:36 PM

you've missed this twice...

i'll buy trust, but not experience. even mfm, er moderate democrat, said obama's experience didn't matter so much as character. people voted against bush more than they voted for obama. the simple fact is, obama did not have more experience. if he did, you could easily cite to it.

obama himself, when asked if he had more economic experience than palin, cited his campaign as experience and the large budge his campaign had. now thats funny! couldn't cite anything, so he cites the fact he is running for office as his experience....

for the third time....

red states rule

01-31-2009, 03:08 PM

Oh really?

the Federal budget is running over $1 trillion short. That does not count the mega pork bill OCA - or the new $2 trillion bank bill I heard about this morning

SS and Medicare currently needs about $41 trillion to balance their books

The Net Retirement Costs of Amnesty

Giving amnesty to illegal immigrants will greatly increase long-term costs to the taxpayer. Granting amnesty to illegal immigrants would, over time, increase their use of means-tested welfare, Social Security, and Medicare. Fiscal costs would rise in the intermediate term and increase dramatically when amnesty recipients reach retirement. Although it is difficult to provide a precise estimate, it seems likely that if 10 million adult illegal immigrants currently in the U.S. were granted amnesty, the net retirement cost to government (benefits minus taxes) could be over $2.6 trillion.

The calculation of this figure is as follows. As noted above, in 2007 there were, by the most commonly used estimates, roughly 10 million adult illegal immigrants in the U.S. Most illegal immigrants are low-skilled. On average, each elderly low-skill immigrant imposes a net cost (benefits minus taxes) on the taxpayers of about $17,000 per year. The major elements of this cost are Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid benefits. (The figure includes federal state and local government costs.) If the government gave amnesty to 10 million adult illegal immigrants, most of them would eventually become eligible for Social Security and Medicare benefits or Supplemental Security Income and Medicaid benefits.

However, not all of the 10 million adults given amnesty would survive until retirement at age 67. Normal mortality rates would reduce the population by roughly 15 percent before age 67. That would mean 8.5 million individuals would reach age 67 and enter retirement.

Of those reaching 67, their average remaining life expectancy would be around 18 years.[17] The net cost to taxpayers of these elderly individuals would be around $17,000 per year.[18] Over 18 years, the cost would equal $306,000 per elderly amnesty recipient. A cost of $306,000 per amnesty recipient multiplied by 8.5 million amnesty recipients results in a total net cost of $2.6 trillion.

These costs would not occur immediately. The average adult illegal immigrant is now in his early thirties; thus, it will be 25 to 30 years before the bulk of amnesty recipients reaches retirement. At their peak level, it appears the amnesty recipients will expand the number of beneficiaries under Social Security by 5 to 10 percent. This will occur at a point when Social Security will already be running deficits of over $200 billion annually.

This is a rough estimate. More research should be performed, but policymakers should examine these potential costs very carefully before rushing to grant amnesty, "Z visas," or "earned citizenship" to the current illegal immigrant population.

http://www.heritage.org/research/Immigration/wm1490.cfm

and

Is Social Security and Medicare Sustainable?

A recent report by the GAO (Government Accountability Office) has established that Social Security and Medicare are not monetarily sustainable with the rising cost of services, compounded with the number of recipients going up. In fact, the report asserted that for the governmental programs to deliver their promised benefits over the next 75 years, they will need to come up with an extra $41 trillion.

The report stated that Social Security alone will need more than $7 trillion. Medicare Hospitalization will need $12 trillion, while Medicare Part B (doctor’s services) and Medicare Part D (prescription drugs) will need $13 trillion and $8 trillion.

The GAO’s report doesn’t just simply state that Social Security and Medicare are not monetarily sustainable for the future, it proposes that the programs should be updated and modified for the rapidly changing needs of the elderly and the new challenges the 21st century. The report mentions that the health care system, the tax system and all other government programs should be assessed and changed to make them more sustainable for the not-so-distant future.

If the programs don’t change, the $41 trillion will have to be created over the next 75 years through new taxes and spending cuts.

http://disabilityblogger.blogspot.com/2008/08/is-social-security-and-medicare.html

I guess OCA gave up on this one :laugh2:

moderate democrat

01-31-2009, 03:26 PM

You are correct. My first vote was for Ronald Reagan in 1980

I have never voted for a Dem because all your party has ever put up are tax and spend big governement liberals

The difference between you and me is - I am truthful and up front about myself - while you lie every chance you get

That is why you feel so at home in the Democrat party

And I have never voted for a republican because all your party has ever put up are candidates who support the republican party agenda...

I am certainly truthful about that. Why would I be otherwise? I happen to believe that the democratic party offers the best hope for America's future. I vote for my country when I vote for democrats...just like you believe that you are voting for your country when you vote for republicans.

red states rule

01-31-2009, 03:29 PM

And I have never voted for a republican because all your party has ever put up are candidates who support the republican party agenda...

I am certainly truthful about that. Why would I be otherwise? I happen to believe that the democratic party offers the best hope for America's future. I vote for my country when I vote for democrats...just like you believe that you are voting for your country when you vote for republicans.

So in 2008 you voted for change since the economy was in such bad shape

Yet in 1980 you did not vote for change - and the economy was in much worse shape

I wonder why? :laugh2:

moderate democrat

01-31-2009, 03:32 PM

So in 2008 you voted for change since the economy was in such bad shape

Yet in 1980 you did not vote for change - and the economy was in much worse shape

I wonder why? :laugh2:

Clearly, I did not agree with the plan that the republican candidate was proposing to deal with the economy.

YOU voted for change in 1980, but did not do so in 2008. Why was THAT?

red states rule

01-31-2009, 03:34 PM

Clearly, I did not agree with the plan that the republican candidate was proposing to deal with the economy.

YOU voted for change in 1980, but did not do so in 2008. Why was THAT?

So you were happy with double digit inflation, a prime rate of 21%, gas lines around the block, a top tax rate of 70%, near 10% unemployment, double digit inflation, and US hostages held for 444 days?

I guess you were opposed to fixing those problems for the sake of the Dem party

I knew what Obama would do - wioth a liberal Congress

And the $1 trillion mega pork bill is only the beginning

moderate democrat

01-31-2009, 03:36 PM

So you were happy with double digit inflation, a prime rate of 21%, gas lines around the block, a top tax rate of 70%, near 10% unemployment, double digit inflation, and US hostages held for 444 days?

I guess you were opposed to fixing those problems for the sake of the Dem party

I knew what Obama would do - wioth a liberal Congress

And the $1 trillion mega pork bill is only the beginning

you didn't answer my question. I answered yours. Why don't you try again:

YOU voted for change in 1980, but did not do so in 2008. Why was THAT?

5stringJeff

01-31-2009, 03:36 PM

Nope, wrong again.

OCA was always for amnesty, why not have amnesty for the people who do the work Americans won't do?

BTW, that is coming soon.....guess which Repub senator will vote along with Demos?:laugh2:

When unemployment hits 10%, I think there will be a whole lot fewer jobs Americans "won't do." In fact, the tide of immigration is already starting to slow.

red states rule

01-31-2009, 03:38 PM

you didn't answer my question. I answered yours. Why don't you try again:

YOU voted for change in 1980, but did not do so in 2008. Why was THAT?

Eh, I did answer

I knew what Obama would do - with a liberal Congress

And the $1 trillion mega pork bill is only the beginning

There "solutions" wilol only make things worse

So why did you want to continue with Carter's failed policies?

Party before country?

moderate democrat

01-31-2009, 03:40 PM

Eh, I did answer

I knew what Obama would do - with a liberal Congress

And the $1 trillion mega pork bill is only the beginning

There "solutions" wilol only make things worse

So why did you want to continue with Carter's failed policies?

Party before country?

you voted for change in 1980 because YOUR party would be in charge of changing it according to their party priorities... but did NOT vote for change in 2008 because your party was not offering it. Sounds to me like you vote party before country all the time.

red states rule

01-31-2009, 03:42 PM

you voted for change in 1980 because YOUR party would be in charge of changing it according to their party priorities... but did NOT vote for change in 2008 because your party was not offering it. Sounds to me like you vote party before country all the time.

Twisted logic to say the least

Libs had total control for 4 years - and they screwed it up. Yet you voted for Carter again

We had a much worse economy then when we do now

I know Obama and the Dems would go back to those same failed policies - and I was right

moderate democrat

01-31-2009, 03:44 PM

Twisted logic to say the least

Libs had total control for 4 years - and they screwed it up. Yet you voted for Carter again

We had a much worse economy then when we do now

I know Obama and the Dems would go back to those same failed policies - and I was right

you voted against change in 2008 and claim that I voted against change in 1980... but somehow, when YOU do it, you are voting for country OVER party but I am not? :laugh2:

OCA

01-31-2009, 03:45 PM

When unemployment hits 10%, I think there will be a whole lot fewer jobs Americans "won't do." In fact, the tide of immigration is already starting to slow.

Jeff I agree and disagree, yes the tide is slowing only because they aren't stupid, America is a shithole right now economically speaking so no reason to come.

Sorry, but the jobs we are talking about that illegals do Americans just don't have the gumption to do anymore, they've gotten soft so I believe they will hit the dole instead of seeking out that employment.

5stringJeff

01-31-2009, 03:50 PM

Jeff I agree and disagree, yes the tide is slowing only because they aren't stupid, America is a shithole right now economically speaking so no reason to come.

Sorry, but the jobs we are talking about that illegals do Americans just don't have the gumption to do anymore, they've gotten soft so I believe they will hit the dole instead of seeking out that employment.

I don't agree with that. In the 1930's, people looked for and found jobs to do. Now yes, there will always be that lazy element of society that will expect the world to be handed to them on a silver platter. But I think the longer the recession lasts (and it will probably be 6-8 quarters more), the more people will realize that they need to roll up their sleeves and take whatever work is available.

red states rule

01-31-2009, 03:53 PM

you voted against change in 2008 and claim that I voted against change in 1980... but somehow, when YOU do it, you are voting for country OVER party but I am not? :laugh2:

Like good ol Rev V - you are still stuck on repeat

Libs had total control for 4 years - and they screwed it up. Yet you voted for Carter again

We had a much worse economy then when we do now

I know Obama and the Dems would go back to those same failed policies - and I was right

OCA

01-31-2009, 03:53 PM

I don't agree with that. In the 1930's, people looked for and found jobs to do. Now yes, there will always be that lazy element of society that will expect the world to be handed to them on a silver platter. But I think the longer the recession lasts (and it will probably be 6-8 quarters more), the more people will realize that they need to roll up their sleeves and take whatever work is available.

Jeff, I know you aren't comparing the American citizen of the 1930's to the American citizen of the 21st century work ethic wise!:laugh2:

5stringJeff

01-31-2009, 03:54 PM

Jeff, I know you aren't comparing the American citizen of the 1930's to the American citizen of the 21st century work ethic wise!:laugh2:

Call it naivety, call it faith in America, call it what you will, I just don't see America sitting on welfare and riding the recession out. But it's pointless to argue about it; we'll just have to wait and see.

moderate democrat

01-31-2009, 03:56 PM

Like good ol Rev V - you are still stuck on repeat

Libs had total control for 4 years - and they screwed it up. Yet you voted for Carter again

We had a much worse economy then when we do now

I know Obama and the Dems would go back to those same failed policies - and I was right

I am not rev V... and the fact remains: you voted against change when democrats were proposing it, and for change when republicans were proposing it....

party before country for you. you can't hide from that.

OCA

01-31-2009, 03:57 PM

Call it naivety, call it faith in America, call it what you will, I just don't see America sitting on welfare and riding the recession out. But it's pointless to argue about it; we'll just have to wait and see.

True, it is pointless. You nor I were alive in the 30's but from what some old timers have told me before the same spirit does not exist anymore.

red states rule

01-31-2009, 03:58 PM

the fact remains: you voted against change when democrats were proposing it, and for change when republicans were proposing it....

party before country for you. you can't hide from that.

What change? Multi trillion dollar deficits? Increased social spending? Well, you have your change

In 6 months the Dems and Obama will own this economy, and people will see we are now having Carter's second term

OCA

01-31-2009, 03:59 PM

I am not rev V... and the fact remains: you voted against change when democrats were proposing it, and for change when republicans were proposing it....

party before country for you. you can't hide from that.

Oh its always been party before country with Ol' RSR, that ain't no secret, everyone here knows he don't give a shit about America as a whole.

5stringJeff

01-31-2009, 03:59 PM

What change? Multi trillion dollar deficits? Increased social spending? Well, you have your change

Large deficits and increased social spending is no change from the Bush years.

OCA

01-31-2009, 04:01 PM

Large deficits and increased social spending is no change from the Bush years.

HALLELUJAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Someone besides me finally said it!

Watch, it will be the Dem Congress's fault from the last two years, a 5 spot says he says that.

red states rule

01-31-2009, 04:01 PM

Oh its always been party before country with Ol' RSR, that ain't no secret, everyone here knows he don't give a shit about America as a whole.

Same old OCA. Pissed off over his failed prediction Hillary would win

I notcied you did not reply to the numbers on illegals and their drain on SS and Medicare. Oversite or retreat?

the Federal budget is running over $1 trillion short. That does not count the mega pork bill OCA - or the new $2 trillion bank bill I heard about this morning

SS and Medicare currently needs about $41 trillion to balance their books

The Net Retirement Costs of Amnesty

Giving amnesty to illegal immigrants will greatly increase long-term costs to the taxpayer. Granting amnesty to illegal immigrants would, over time, increase their use of means-tested welfare, Social Security, and Medicare. Fiscal costs would rise in the intermediate term and increase dramatically when amnesty recipients reach retirement. Although it is difficult to provide a precise estimate, it seems likely that if 10 million adult illegal immigrants currently in the U.S. were granted amnesty, the net retirement cost to government (benefits minus taxes) could be over $2.6 trillion.

The calculation of this figure is as follows. As noted above, in 2007 there were, by the most commonly used estimates, roughly 10 million adult illegal immigrants in the U.S. Most illegal immigrants are low-skilled. On average, each elderly low-skill immigrant imposes a net cost (benefits minus taxes) on the taxpayers of about $17,000 per year. The major elements of this cost are Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid benefits. (The figure includes federal state and local government costs.) If the government gave amnesty to 10 million adult illegal immigrants, most of them would eventually become eligible for Social Security and Medicare benefits or Supplemental Security Income and Medicaid benefits.

However, not all of the 10 million adults given amnesty would survive until retirement at age 67. Normal mortality rates would reduce the population by roughly 15 percent before age 67. That would mean 8.5 million individuals would reach age 67 and enter retirement.

Of those reaching 67, their average remaining life expectancy would be around 18 years.[17] The net cost to taxpayers of these elderly individuals would be around $17,000 per year.[18] Over 18 years, the cost would equal $306,000 per elderly amnesty recipient. A cost of $306,000 per amnesty recipient multiplied by 8.5 million amnesty recipients results in a total net cost of $2.6 trillion.

These costs would not occur immediately. The average adult illegal immigrant is now in his early thirties; thus, it will be 25 to 30 years before the bulk of amnesty recipients reaches retirement. At their peak level, it appears the amnesty recipients will expand the number of beneficiaries under Social Security by 5 to 10 percent. This will occur at a point when Social Security will already be running deficits of over $200 billion annually.

This is a rough estimate. More research should be performed, but policymakers should examine these potential costs very carefully before rushing to grant amnesty, "Z visas," or "earned citizenship" to the current illegal immigrant population.

http://www.heritage.org/research/Immigration/wm1490.cfm

and

Is Social Security and Medicare Sustainable?

A recent report by the GAO (Government Accountability Office) has established that Social Security and Medicare are not monetarily sustainable with the rising cost of services, compounded with the number of recipients going up. In fact, the report asserted that for the governmental programs to deliver their promised benefits over the next 75 years, they will need to come up with an extra $41 trillion.

The report stated that Social Security alone will need more than $7 trillion. Medicare Hospitalization will need $12 trillion, while Medicare Part B (doctor’s services) and Medicare Part D (prescription drugs) will need $13 trillion and $8 trillion.

The GAO’s report doesn’t just simply state that Social Security and Medicare are not monetarily sustainable for the future, it proposes that the programs should be updated and modified for the rapidly changing needs of the elderly and the new challenges the 21st century. The report mentions that the health care system, the tax system and all other government programs should be assessed and changed to make them more sustainable for the not-so-distant future.

If the programs don’t change, the $41 trillion will have to be created over the next 75 years through new taxes and spending cuts.

http://disabilityblogger.blogspot.co...-medicare.html

red states rule

01-31-2009, 04:02 PM

Large deficits and increased social spending is no change from the Bush years.

Only they are much worse. The same people who were screaming about it under Pres Bush are now cheering Obama on - and want to spend more

Kathianne

01-31-2009, 04:06 PM

Jeff I agree and disagree, yes the tide is slowing only because they aren't stupid, America is a shithole right now economically speaking so no reason to come.

Sorry, but the jobs we are talking about that illegals do Americans just don't have the gumption to do anymore, they've gotten soft so I believe they will hit the dole instead of seeking out that employment.

You mean that upon your return to Shangri-La, otherwise known as Greece, (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7849498.stm) you are going to pick olives? Maybe that's what you hope your children may achieve? I mean, you got yours, right?

moderate democrat

01-31-2009, 04:06 PM

Oh its always been party before country with Ol' RSR, that ain't no secret, everyone here knows he don't give a shit about America as a whole.

I am beginning to understand that. He seems to only care about America if republicans are calling the shots. It actually seems like he wants Obama's economic recovery to fail!

red states rule

01-31-2009, 04:07 PM

I am beginning to understand that. He seems to only care about America if republicans are calling the shots. It actually seems like he wants Obama's economic recovery to fail!

It will fail. Economics 101 tells you it will.

OCA

01-31-2009, 04:07 PM

Same old OCA. Pissed off over his failed prediction Hillary would win

I notcied you did not reply to the numbers on illegals and their drain on SS and Medicare. Oversite or retreat?

the Federal budget is running over $1 trillion short. That does not count the mega pork bill OCA - or the new $2 trillion bank bill I heard about this morning

SS and Medicare currently needs about $41 trillion to balance their books

The Net Retirement Costs of Amnesty

Giving amnesty to illegal immigrants will greatly increase long-term costs to the taxpayer. Granting amnesty to illegal immigrants would, over time, increase their use of means-tested welfare, Social Security, and Medicare. Fiscal costs would rise in the intermediate term and increase dramatically when amnesty recipients reach retirement. Although it is difficult to provide a precise estimate, it seems likely that if 10 million adult illegal immigrants currently in the U.S. were granted amnesty, the net retirement cost to government (benefits minus taxes) could be over $2.6 trillion.

The calculation of this figure is as follows. As noted above, in 2007 there were, by the most commonly used estimates, roughly 10 million adult illegal immigrants in the U.S. Most illegal immigrants are low-skilled. On average, each elderly low-skill immigrant imposes a net cost (benefits minus taxes) on the taxpayers of about $17,000 per year. The major elements of this cost are Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid benefits. (The figure includes federal state and local government costs.) If the government gave amnesty to 10 million adult illegal immigrants, most of them would eventually become eligible for Social Security and Medicare benefits or Supplemental Security Income and Medicaid benefits.

However, not all of the 10 million adults given amnesty would survive until retirement at age 67. Normal mortality rates would reduce the population by roughly 15 percent before age 67. That would mean 8.5 million individuals would reach age 67 and enter retirement.

Of those reaching 67, their average remaining life expectancy would be around 18 years.[17] The net cost to taxpayers of these elderly individuals would be around $17,000 per year.[18] Over 18 years, the cost would equal $306,000 per elderly amnesty recipient. A cost of $306,000 per amnesty recipient multiplied by 8.5 million amnesty recipients results in a total net cost of $2.6 trillion.

These costs would not occur immediately. The average adult illegal immigrant is now in his early thirties; thus, it will be 25 to 30 years before the bulk of amnesty recipients reaches retirement. At their peak level, it appears the amnesty recipients will expand the number of beneficiaries under Social Security by 5 to 10 percent. This will occur at a point when Social Security will already be running deficits of over $200 billion annually.

This is a rough estimate. More research should be performed, but policymakers should examine these potential costs very carefully before rushing to grant amnesty, "Z visas," or "earned citizenship" to the current illegal immigrant population.

http://www.heritage.org/research/Immigration/wm1490.cfm

and

Is Social Security and Medicare Sustainable?

A recent report by the GAO (Government Accountability Office) has established that Social Security and Medicare are not monetarily sustainable with the rising cost of services, compounded with the number of recipients going up. In fact, the report asserted that for the governmental programs to deliver their promised benefits over the next 75 years, they will need to come up with an extra $41 trillion.

The report stated that Social Security alone will need more than $7 trillion. Medicare Hospitalization will need $12 trillion, while Medicare Part B (doctor’s services) and Medicare Part D (prescription drugs) will need $13 trillion and $8 trillion.

The GAO’s report doesn’t just simply state that Social Security and Medicare are not monetarily sustainable for the future, it proposes that the programs should be updated and modified for the rapidly changing needs of the elderly and the new challenges the 21st century. The report mentions that the health care system, the tax system and all other government programs should be assessed and changed to make them more sustainable for the not-so-distant future.

If the programs don’t change, the $41 trillion will have to be created over the next 75 years through new taxes and spending cuts.

http://disabilityblogger.blogspot.co...-medicare.html

All neccessary and worthy expenditures for people WILLING AND WANTING TO WORK.

I notice how you always skip over any mention of the fact that many more able bodied native born Americans use these services to a way greater extent..................and they don't work.