My top 5 favorite political cartoons this week…
by Henry Payne at Townhall.com…
by Nate Beeler at Townhall.com…
by Mike Lester at Townhall.com…
by Mike Holbert at Townhall.com…
And last, for good measure, more liberal smear against Republican pro-lifers and conservatives, by Don Wright at GoComics.com…
Violations will be deleted and you may be banned.
Threats will be immediately reported to authorities.
Following these rules will make everyone's experience visiting JillStanek.com better.
Our volunteer moderators make prudent judgment calls to provide an open forum to discuss these issues. They reserve the right to remove any comment for any reason. Jill's decisions on such moderations are final.
Go to gravatar.com to create your avatar.
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
Pretty lame sunday funnies this week.
How in the world did our country vote in someone with a fraction of the qualifications of his opponent? And one who spent most of those few years in office running for the next one?
And on a petty, but still bizarre note, could we have voted for an “Adler Hintler” during WWII with a much more qualified candidate to choose? It’s been nothing but a cascade of cringes this past week to hear all the “Obama / Osama” flubs.
I liked McCain quite a bit – the version of him that ran against Bush. But then he changed about half of his positions, and decided to run as Bush the third…I wasn’t a big fan of the previous 8 years, so 30 years of experience or not, it was time for something different!
Change is always tempting. But we have to be aware when that change has all the potential to be much, much worse.
Oh sure, of course. Glad things are trending in the right direction (in many areas, not all, but many).
Trending the right direction? Oh, you must be talking about the conservative landslide of 2010. I couldn’t agree with you more there Ex-RINO.
Hans, one reason McCain didn’t win is he lost a lot of respect by his choice of running mate. Many conservatives have said that was the moment they realized he didn’t have the judgment to be President.
Here’s one take of it in November of 2008:
“VP pick: McCain made his “Hail Mary” pick — privately acknowledged by some advisers as his only shot of winning — with the governor of Alaska, Sarah Palin. For a few weeks, it looked like that game-winning touchdown could happen as the base-rousing running mate burst onto the national scene with such power that the GOP ticket took the lead in major opinion polls. But inconvenient investigations, unfortunate interview performances and questions about qualifications soon hit Palin’s approval ratings. McCain’s own reputation was tarnished as revelations about hasty vetting raised questions in voters’ minds about his judgment. And by then, his central argument against Obama — that experience was critical — was essentially off the table given Palin’s relatively thin resume.”
Whatever the reason, we should just be thankful that we ended up with such a capable man as our President.
Hal,
Oh, puh-leeze. VP choices really make their greatest effect in simply carrying their home state. Technically, Palin had the most executive experience of the four candidates.
Biden was chosen for his foreign policy creds, but lost to Palin in the debate. I seem to remember he made 14 mistakes. And that’s comparable to Palin hesitating to spin off her reading material?
Most presidents are elected in or coming out of a recession. Reagan, Clinton, and George W. Bush led us to booming recoveries of 3 – 5 years. Obama has “led us from behind” into an extension of a recession. The best you could call it is stagnant.
“Whatever the reason, we should just be thankful that we ended up with such a capable man as our President.”
Stephen Wright has nothing on you, Hal.
Hans -
Bush led to a decent recovery of 3-5 years and a massive crash at the end. It is a wonder, numbers wise, that the economy didn’t crash even further – the entire credit market completely seized up. I mean, the economy was losing 400K – 600K jobs a MONTH at the end of ’08.
For historical purposes, I’d take a look at how long it took Reagan and those policies to pull us out of a depression. Unemployment peaked a couple of years INTO his term – close to what we are seeing now.
I love Palin as well though – when I’ve had a tough day and need a laugh, I love pulling out either her “I quit Alaska” farewell speech, or the great interviews when she was a VP candidate. At least she kept us safe, with her eyes on the sky in Alaska, watching for Putin and his jets to fly over the border! Great stuff.
Bush total deficit spending less than two trilion dollars over eight years.
Obama total defecit spending over 3 trillion dollars in his his first two years.
Did you say something about trending in the right direction Ex-RINO?
Truth – check your numbers and resubmit your question.
That Taliban guy should realize that a woman’s place is in the House….except if she gets elected to the Senate instead.
Ex-GOP Voter,
That Bush ever led a recovery after the double-whammy of Clinton’s bubble-burst recession and 9/11 is remarkable enough (I believe it was a record 70+ months of expansion.). But Clinton (and Dodd and Frank) left him with a third time-bomb: the housing collapse thanks to the irresponsible Fannie Mae and Freddy policies.
Obama lucked out. That bomb went off when the election looked like a dead-heat.
So what is it with the Palin Derangement Syndrome? Who has she hurt?
Hans -
A couple of things:
– I believe the longest economic expansion was from March 91-March 01 – so mostly under Clinton years. 61-69 under JFK was the 2nd longest – and 82 to 90 under Reagan was the third.
– I do believe Bush was dealt a tough economic hand with 9/11, and give him credit for the rebound. It also wouldn’t be fair then to not fault him for the last few years of his Presidency. Overall, the growth of jobs and GDP under his Presidency is tough to look at – it was kind of a lost decade.
– I think it is tempting to try to write off the economic collapse as being the fault of just Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac – but that is a MASSIVE over simplification. The whole story can’t be told without talking about credit default swaps…without talking about the Graham-Leach-Billey act and it’s repeal on the Glass-Steagall act of ’33….without talking about Europe’s economic crisis. I agree that the handling of the housing market for years (through Clinton and Bush), and the promotion of household debt was a factor – but you can’t pin that on one President – at least if you are honest about it.
– I don’t know if Palin has really hurt anybody – I just think the idea of her as a credible candidate is laughable. I don’t think she’s heading that direction though – she makes too much money doing other things.
That last one was spot on!!! Haha, so true! Thankfully, we live in a society in which Women have options!
This is not necessarily a pro-choice vs anti-choice statement. Anyone who wants to take away funding for pregnancy prevention (NOT ABORTION! I REPEAT, I AM NOT REFERRING TO ABORTION!) is a misogynist, in my educated opinion.
I like the last one. I find that the best comedy is that which is closest to the truth of the situation.
Word, Reality!
As far as the first one, President Obama never attempted to take all the credit for Bin Laden’s death.
Ex-GOP Voter,
I believe most presidents don’t have a great deal to do with handling the reins of an economy. Most ups and downs are inevitable.
But they can put roadblocks in the way. Obama seems to think the government must be the engine of a recovery. But tripling the debt and threatening more taxes and regulations has only paralyzed businesses.
Trickle-down economies, to one degree or another, have always been the hallmark of successful capitalism. Trickle-down government is inefficient and leads nowhere good.
Ex-RINO,
Those are really easy numbers to find. Here is a link where I saw them though. I just googled Bush deficit vs obama deficit and it was the top hit:
http://tinyurl.com/crslff
Maybe you have different numbers?
Hans -
– I agree that the President is only one aspect of it.
– Many/most economists said the stimulus was too SMALL – and even the GOP was recommending a large stimulus. Bush went into deficit spending in a recession – Reagan did too.
– I used to be a bit more on your side on the trickle down economics…but the Bush tax cuts were a massive failure in regards to trickling down any economics and growing the overall GDP. Massive failure. Massive.
Truth – numbers I’m seeing are in the $4.5 to 5 range:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_debt_by_U.S._presidential_terms
What is sad is, in January 2001, the CBO projection for the decade was a 5.6 trillion surplus. Then…
– Bush put in tax cuts
– 9/11 happened
– CBO revised the surplus of the 10 year figure down to a $1.6 trillion surplus
– Bush put in more tax cuts
– Went to war in two countries
– Big Medicare expansion bill
So the reality of it is we went from a 5.6 trillion projected SURPLUS (imagine what the debt would look like then!) to a 4.6 or so trillion deficit – or a 10 trillion dollar swing in a decade.
Wild.
Answering your “trending in the right direction” comment – I agree with most economists that have said let the economy continue to recover and worry about the debt in 2012 and beyond. Very easy – let some of the Bush tax cuts expire, and combine that with some overall spending cuts. Back in business. When I said trending in the right direction, I’m talking job numbers. 9.8 in January of this year…8.7 now.
Ex-GOP says: May 15, 2011 at 3:58 pm
Pretty lame sunday funnies this week.
==============================================================
But not near as lame as b o.
Seems the bounce in his popularity was short lived and has already dropped from 52 to 48 percent right back to the steady decline it was on the day before obl was mercifully put out of our misery before he died of boredom.
http://www.gallup.com/Home.aspx
Hal says: May 15, 2011 at 4:53 pm
Hans, one reason McCain didn’t win is he lost a lot of respect by his choice of running mate. Many conservatives have said that was the moment they realized he didn’t have the judgment to be President.
============================================================
Either conservatives held their nose and voted for McCain/Palin or did not vote at all.
No conservative could honestly say that b o or biden had exhibited more judgement than either McCain or Palin.
It would be the rare conservative who would vote for any one as far to the left as b o or biden.
Evidently ‘judgement’ is not something liberals/progressives require in their candidates.
One does have to marvel at intellectual, spiritual and moral contortions required of Jews and Catholics to vote for b o and biden. It took a Herculean effort to reconcile their understanding of GOD and the book in order to justify a vote for an anti-christ.
Ken, according the the chart at Gallup, 48% is not a “steady decline” but about where the President has been for the last 14 months.
Try this site for a comprehensive view:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president_obama_job_approval-1044.html
Here is a time line that more accurately reflects the sequence of events and the motivation behind the decisions that were made.
11:50pm-Acting on intellgence gathered by the CIA acquired over several months utilizing both human and technological resources, the SEAL team left their base in Aghanistan and immediately shut down all their communications, except the intercomms between the individuals soldiers and the air craft that transported them to obl’s hideout.
They did this for two reasons: 1, To avoid detection by bad guys. 2 To avoid having the mission aborted by b o. [He has demonstrated a predilection for aborting.]
12:30am. b o is being chauferred in a golf cart, when members of his administration notify him that there are boots on the ground in Pakistan and he might want to return to the White House ‘situation room’ for the phot op.
12:53am-SEAL team kills obl before he can die of boredom or old age.
11:30- b o orders obl’s body to be embalmed and mounted on the hood of his campaign bus for a hood ornament.
Many/most economists said the stimulus was too SMALL
Ex-GOP, the link you provided did not even provide any numbers for the Obama years. What numbers do you have for Obama deficit spending so far (during his first two years)?
You shouldn’ have to look too hard Ex-RINO to find Obamas deficit spending since becoming president. The whole nation is stressing over our reaching the 14.3 trillion dollar debt ceiling, and you say he hasn’t spent enough? Wow. In just two years Obama has added over 25% (more than an additional 3 trillion dollars) to the nations historical deficit spending total and you want to double down with him. All I can say to you is WOW.
Ex-GOP: I think it is tempting to try to write off the economic collapse as being the fault of just Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac – but that is a MASSIVE over simplification. The whole story can’t be told without talking about credit default swaps…without talking about the Graham-Leach-Billey act and it’s repeal on the Glass-Steagall act of ’33….without talking about Europe’s economic crisis. I agree that the handling of the housing market for years (through Clinton and Bush), and the promotion of household debt was a factor – but you can’t pin that on one President – at least if you are honest about it.
Exactly – Fannie and Freddie were a drop in the bucket compared to the credit default swaps, etc., and indeed that came from Phil Gramm et al, who removed the separation between big commercial banks, insurance companies and brokerages.
No conservative could honestly say that b o or biden had exhibited more judgement than either McCain or Palin.
It would be the rare conservative who would vote for any one as far to the left as b o or biden.
Ken, not true at all – in the end quite a few conservatives voted for Obama. Quite a bit of it was due to concerns about McCain’s competency, especially after he picked Palin.
The economists/tinkerers think the stimulus was too small only because the result was such a bust. Instead of admitting they were wrong they want to throw more good money after bad.
It’s surprising how quickly Obama’s poll bounce to return to earth. “It’s the economy…” The elder Bush’s Gulf War bounce stayed for months, till a recession and Perot hit.
Can we just say that the CBO projecting the Clinton / GOP Congress surplus to go on for a decade is just as trustworthy as a month-ahead weather forecast? G.W. Bush proposed his tax cuts to get us out of the internet-bubble burst recession. And despite 9/11 it did. For some six years.
I do wish we’d get a president who’s as serious about cutting government as he is holding down taxes. Despite the proofs of Coolidge, Kennedy, Reagan, and G.W. Bush, many still think more taxes will bring more revenue.
Doug 1:47PM
Speaking of competence, exactly what were Obama’s qualifications to be president? Also, I would suspect that conservative votes for Obama had more to do with McCain’s ”moderation” i.e. he stood for nothing and wanted to be liked by everyone, than it had to do with Palin. Obama had the good fortune to run against someone who didn’t want to win. I only voted for McCain because he was the lesser of the two evils. As far as I’m concerned, Palin has a bigger pair than most Republican men.
Hal says:
“…we should just be thankful that we ended up with such a capable man as our President.”
Indeed, Obama is a very capable liar. Remember the stimulus? Obama told us we had to pass it to keep unemployment from going higher than 8%. Wrong!
He told us he would cut the deficit in half…and now we have his $1.5 trillion dollar annual deficits as far as the eye can see.
Taking us into Libya while bypassing congress–just great! Apologizing to despots around the world and bowing to kings–whose side is he on?
We just had a little thing called an election a few months back. The party opposing Obama gained 700 state and federal legislative positions. They took the House, and in 18 months they will take the Senate.
Obama, like Carter, is destined to be a one term president.
Doug says: May 16, 2011 at 1:47 pm
“Ken, not true at all – in the end quite a few conservatives voted for Obama. Quite a bit of it was due to concerns about McCain’s competency, especially after he picked Palin.”
====================================================================
Doug,
“not true at all”
I assert it is MORE than just a little bit true.
“quite a few conservatives voted for Obama.”
To quote Dr. Phil, “How’s that working for you?”
McCain, is unreliable and predictable, but even his most laughable positions are nothing compared to b o/biden.
Even self confessed socialst Senator Bernie Sanders had a voting record that was to the left of then Senator b o.
Like the James Taylor songs says, ‘Line em up’.
Just provide the names of a few ‘conservatives’ who voted for b o/biden.Then we will verify their ‘conservative’ credentials. [Ex-RINO does not qualify.]
There may be some authentic ‘conservatives’ who voted for b o/palin, but it probably had more to with ‘getting even’ with someone who had offended/betrayed them than political idiotology.
But it would be more likely that an offended conservative would simply not vote at all for president or vote for a third party candidate.
[Neither ‘forgive’ nor ‘forget’ are found in the political lexicon.
Revenge is.
It is a recommended course that is best served cold.]
“Palin has a bigger pair than most Republican men.” – only trouble is, like most men she thinks with them rather than a brain.
“Taking us into Libya while bypassing congress–just great!” – misrepresentative of the situation.
“in 18 months they will take the Senate” – wanna bet?
“Obama, like Carter, is destined to be a one term president” – yep, keep living that dream!
Reality,
LOL. She at least has a pair. BTW Reality, what were Obama’s qualifications to be elected president? Perhaps you can also explain his brilliant strategy in Libya and why some congresspeople were so incensed at being bypassed. Perhaps since he was enjoying a visit to Brazil at the time, the small matter of informing Congress just slipped his mind.
truth -
A couple of things:
– If I said, “well, let’s raise taxes now then to cut the deficit” – you would get in a massive huff, throw your arms up and say that I’d be damaging the economy – and to a certain extent, you’d be right. More revenue would be brought in, but it would also impact consumer spending, which is a main driver of the economy. On the same way, if you massively cut government spending, you are going to damage a consumer economy. There’s no way around it – for instance, in Wisconsin, like it or hate it, the money that previously went to teachers that now goes to the government most likely was spent in the past…I don’t think that those union members were stuffing it in their pillow cases – so taking the money out of the economy takes it out of consumer spending.
If you look around, you’ll find plenty of people that say that the government should continue to do what it can to help the economy recover. I don’t know of a President that didn’t run a deficit to help recover an economy. You freak out about the trillions – but you need to look at the % of the GDP – that is all that matters quite frankly.
This is all a big game – if the economy was so in peril because of our debt, we’d pass a combo of taxes and spending cuts. That would be the only responsible thing to do. Right now, it is clear that the parties aren’t worried about the debt – they are hoping to leverage it to get some policy decisions in their favor.
Ex-RINO, I am somewhat in disbelief that their are people like you out there publicly promoting deficit spending. You are saying that you are not worried about the over 3 trillion dollars in deficit spending during Obama’s first two years and you are not worried if it continues or even doubles down in the next two years. What % of personal GDP do you allow as responsible deficit spending in your own finances?
ts,
Correct me if I am wrong but aren’t these the same people who proudly point out Clinton’s balanced budget?
“Ex-RINO, I am somewhat in disbelief that their are people like you out there publicly promoting deficit spending.”
O’Neill said he tried to warn Vice President Dick Cheney that growing budget deficits-expected to top $500 billion this fiscal year alone-posed a threat to the economy. Cheney cut him off. “You know, Paul, Reagan proved deficits don’t matter,” he said.
Mary, what mandatory qualifications do you claim obama lacks? What qualifications has every other president had that he doesn’t? Not pithy, partisan ‘qualifications’, real ones?
The strategy in Libya was not obama’s.
Reality,
LOL, nice try. I never said anything about mandatory qualifications. Now, please name for me Obama’s qualifications to be president. Don’t feel bad if you have some problem doing so, you wouldn’t be the first.
Google, “Obama orders bombing of Libya”. Again I ask, his strategy in Libya is what?
Hey Mary,
I heard the number of Obamacare waivers is going through the roof. And it is all the unions and left wing people who voted for Obamacare that are being given the waivers. This really stinks of cronieism at its worst. Think how shitty this is will get when the bureaucrats get whole new administrative departments sticking their hands into our health care. And no other than Naacy Peolsi herself has granted something like 20% of the existing Obamacare waiversand she only represents one four-hundred and thirty sixth of the people. How do they get away with such bold hypocrisy and it doesn’t even hit the news? Remember Pelosi marching that huge gavel around after forcing this Obamacare pig down everyones throat. And now her constituents have 20% of the waivers. Now I know what they mean when they say that the truth can be stranger than fiction. And in this case more dishonest too.
There’s no way around it – for instance, in Wisconsin, like it or hate it, the money that previously went to teachers that now goes to the government most likely was spent in the past…I don’t think that those union members were stuffing it in their pillow cases – so taking the money out of the economy takes it out of consumer spending.
Ex-RINO,
Then do you also agree with Nancy Pelosi when she said that one of the best things the government can do for the economy is to pay more unemployment benefits?
The strategy in Libya was not obama’s.
Reality, thanks for clearing that up. lol
Ex-RINO,
So far over three million people (and counting) have needed Obamacare waivers or they would have been dropped from their employers health care plans.
Hi ts,
Yes I’ve heard about the waivers for unions. Its also the businesses in Princess Pelosi’s very high rent district as well. Obamacare has been declared unconstitutional, but who cares? A minor technicality.
Why doesn’t it hit the news? What passes for “journalism” in this country is little more than White House stenography by Obama media lapdogs. Maybe Chris Matthews is too busy tinkling down his leg and drooling over Obama’s smile to notice. I never thought I would miss Sam Donaldson!
You’re welcome truthseeker.
Obama has all the qualifications that are required Mary. Where do you think he lacks them? Remember, not pithy, partisan ‘qualifications’, real ones?
“Again I ask, his strategy in Libya is what?” – the actions taing place in regards to Libya are not obama’s. Google ‘UN resolution on Libya’.
Mary -
What sort of job would impress you that a person held before being the President? i mean, what would actually fully qualify a person for being the leader of the free world? Maybe leader of a small island, or of the unfree world?
truth -
– From a purely economic standpoint, Pelosi is right – unemployment and food stamps are too of the biggest boosters of the economy. Now, by that, what the numbers mean is that if you cut the taxes, of lets say Donald Trump by $1,000 – he might spend that, he might create a job, or he might just put it in savings and keep it for himself. Food stamps and unemployment benefits, statistically, return to the economy. Somebody without a job doesn’t get unemployment and decide to throw it into savings – they spend it – and remember, we’re a consumer driven economy – which is why after 9/11, we were told to buy things, go shop, spend money…
We’re not talking about what is fair or good policy here – we’re just saying statistically, the government is out $1,000 either way – but in one way, there’s a greater chance that money is going to cycle back through the economy through other business.
Make sense?
EGV,
I’ll put the question to you. Please tell me Obama’s qualifications to be president.
Mary/Truth -
I’m not quite sure if you fully understand the waivers – essentially, there are a few provisions of the laws that kicked in early. One of those provisions is in regards to a $750K min. coverage limit – and that is where the waivers have been given.
The reason this problem exists essentially is the timing of implementation – it is like I said you had to buy a car this year, but didn’t give you many choices because the cars hadn’t shown up. Some of the provisions ushered in now really fit with the full legislation rolling out in 2014 – but obviously, it isn’t 2014.
I’d post an article on it explaining it better, but I don’t think you two would read it anyways…
Mary – I think that is the 7th time I’ve seen you use the “tinkering” joke.
I gotta tell you – funniest joke I’ve EVER heard – I hope you share it often with people.
Reality, 8:15PM
LOL, so do I!! Given this, you should have no question about Sarah Palin’s qualifications, right?
Please just answer my question. Again, I understand it is difficult.
Uh Reality, he ordered American bombing of Libya, i.e. American involvemnet, so I would hope he has a strategy of some sort. Or is he just a UN lapdog?
EGV,
Its “tinkling” not tinkering. I’m glad you enjoy.
Mary -
Qualifications for President for Obama.
Constitutionally, he was over the age and birth limits.
We then had two distinct choices – they raised a bunch of money, ran a bunch of commercials, debates a few times, pitched their ideas, and we voted.
In the end, Obama got 69.5 million votes. McCain got 60 million votes. That means that about 10 million more people wanted Obama President.
Now, seeing that qualifications are that you have to convince more people (well, not straight up, you understand the electoral college), Obama, beyond any shadow of a doubt, proved he was qualified through the fulfillment of our democracy.
There’s no other way to look at it – given the entire scope of the position of the President, nobody comes close to meeting all the qualifications. We pick the person with the best ideas and hope that they surround themselves with people to help fulfill those ideas.
Mary – I was posting as you were posting.
On Palin, if people elected her, that is fine.
I, personally, think she is the dumbest politician I’ve ever seen in action. In fact, I can’t think of anybody even close ….maybe Michelle Bachmann, though I think she’s just dishonest…not as much stupid. Tough to sort out stupidity and lying sometimes…
But if people elected her, well, who’s to argue? The electorate decides who is qualified and who isn’t – not you or I. That is the beauty of this country.
EGV,
Those are constitutional requirements, not qualificiations. I meet those as well. I certainly do not consider myself qualified.
Obama had the good fortune to run against someone who did not want to win. McCain stood for nothing and tried too hard to be everyone’s friend. Obama was also tremendously charasmatic and had an adoring media. The American people have proved time and again that good judgment does not always prevail when picking a president.
As for the dumbest politician, that is a purely subjective assessment.
Sure it is a subjective assessment…your entire paragraph before that was a subjective assessment. 98% of our conversations are subjective assessments!
EGV,
Perhaps. But you must admit Obama was charasmatic, I certainly thought he was and I didn’t even like him.
He was charismatic. is that a bad thing? He’s a good speaker…people like good speakers…people like charismatic people. I think it would be a terrible thing to run a campaign being as dull as you could possibly be…I don’t think that would get a person very far!
I don’t think there’s anything that means palin is not ‘qualified’. I think she’s an ignorant, dishonest loon, but that doesn’t mean she isn’t ‘qualified’.
What is it that you don’t understand about the operations and function of the UN and NATO? America didn’t bomb Libya.
I’m not quite sure if you fully understand the waivers – essentially, there are a few provisions of the laws that kicked in early. One of those provisions is in regards to a $750K min. coverage limit – and that is where the waivers have been given.
Ex-RINO,
I think Harry Reid got a bunch for Nevada that waived the “80% of fees collected must be used to pay for actual care” provision. You are right that only a small number of the provisions have kicked in already. I shudder to think of the massive numbers of waivers or fines the government will grant/levy when the rest of the provisions kick in in 2014. No coincience they kick in after the 2012 election. Obama will be gone and everybody else will be ‘left’ to clean up his crap.
“From a purely economic standpoint, Pelosi is right – unemployment and food stamps are too of the biggest boosters of the economy.”
Ex-RINO, So your plan for the economic recovery is for the government to just give everybody money to spend and everything else will take care of itself. At least for all the public sector employess and those on the government dole that is. I don’t mind you drinking the Obama Kool-aid but could you quit advocating people sucking so long and hard on the government tit?
EGV,
I didn’t say charisma was bad. People can be influenced by it to their own detriment.
Reality,
What is it you don’t understand about an American president ordering American bombers into action? Why do you suppose congress was less than happy with Obama about this?
Google “congressional outrage over American bombing of Libya”. Even Obama’s buddy Charlie Rangel was none too pleased.
“America” didn’t take action against Libya. US forces, along with those of other nations, operating under the auspices of the UN, took action.
Those who were less than happy didn’t understand or acknowledge the processes in play.
Google ‘Gadaffi unhappy over UN bombing of Libya’ – doesn’t make any difference.
Reality,
Ohhhh, big difference. America didn’t do it, we just went along with NATO forces under the auspices of the UN. I guess I didn’t realize our president is supposed to order American troops to do the bidding of the UN.
I guess those congresspeople were complete idiots concerning what is constitutional and their outrage over our fearless leader ordering our bombers into action without their knowledge or consent was totally unjustified. Did he order the bombing before or during his trip to Brazil?
Gadaffi is unhappy over the UN bombing of Libya? You can’t be serious.
truth -
Given the current GOP field, I think Obama has a pretty decent shot of hanging around for four more years, but we’ll see. A lot plays into the election. Regardless, there will be some pains with expanding health care. There are pains in the current system as well. There would be pains in Paul Ryan’s system. If you can point to a perfect system, please let the world know.
In regards to your statement on Pelosi – I’m pretty disappointed in you. I was VERY clear that this wasn’t necessarily great economic policy - “We’re not talking about what is fair or good policy here” . You either skipped that sentence or decided to make your own truth. Regardless of what happened, it’s bordering on lying and if you want me to be civil and answer questions, I’d appreciate if you at least extend me some honesty when we chat. You are better than that.
Now you’re getting it Mary.
Mary@9:13:
So true.
Another thing O is trying is right out of the Alinsky/Socialism 101 textbook, class warfare. Identify the boogeyman; i.e. the rich, and demand taxing the hell out of them because they are hoarding ill gotten gains that rightly belongs to the people.
The scary thing is how utterly susceptible many people are to this thinking and how quickly they would throw their fellow citizens under the bus. Pathetic. More and more people are becoming so childlike–depending on the government for everything, unable to think or act for themselves. These people are prime candidates to be taken in by Obama’s ”charisma” and his pandering to them.
Ex-RINO,
I am not what I said that you felt was so untrue. To me it comes down to a very simple concept. You and the left want to grow government and increase government giveaways in order to sustain economic growth and keep our economy healthy. I think that is completely ass backwards. Correct me if I stated that unfairly.
When the CBO scored the cost of Obamcare to taxpayers it was based on 19 million people who would be forced into the mandated Obamacare exchanges. Looks like we know the number already today would be 300 million and only a small fraction of the Obamacare provisions have been implented so far. This thing is a monstrous clusterf#@$.
This could hardly get more bizarre. Harry Reid has secured an Obamacare waiver for the entire state of Nevada and the reason HHS gave for the waiver is:
The Health and Human Services Department announced late Friday that Nevada had secured a statewide waiver from certain implementation requirements of the Obama administration’s health care law, because forcing them through, the department found, “may lead to the destabilization of the individual market.”
Reid and Pelosi are the King and Queen of Obamacare waivers. I guess they didn’t understand what was in it when they voted for it. And now that it is law they are finding out what is in it. OMG
Hi Jerry,
How I wish it was only people dependent on gov’t taken in by Obama. I’ve seen religious people, the media, and educated people as well. I know of a Catholic nun who viewed him as a Messiah, literally.
As I’ve said many times before, I no longer wonder how people as educated and cultured as the Germans could follow an Austrian street thug to their own destruction.
Hi ts,
Didn’t Princess Pelosi decree we would have to pass the law to see what was in it?
Hi Mary:
I hear you..seen the same.
Truth -
Short term economic stimulus – doing something to help the economy BECOME healthy is much different than long term economic plan. Pelosi’s comment was in regards to stimulus, and I made it clear that yes, if the government wants a quick fix in the economy, unemployment benefits, statistically, recycle nicely.
You jumped to the conclusion of long term economics – which I don’t know how you did.
Let me try a different example to make it clear to you.
Several times in our life, during an economic downswing, the government has chosen to send checks to people. Now, in regards to jumpstarting the economy, it isn’t a bad idea – you borrow money (deficit spending) to jumpstart consumer spending – it trickles through the economy, strengthens business, adds to bottom lines. Now, it would be a horrible idea to do that weekly – to make it a long term economic pillar in the economy. But as a short term thing, not a bad idea.
So yes, you stated it unfairly.
I see no other questions adressed to me…though I would recommend a few of you read up on waivers a little bit more to get an understanding of them.
Furthermore, I think it is sad that you folks are so darn upset about waivers being granted in regards to certain provisions of the bill (they meet the other provisions of a plan, but simply not one), when your goal is to eliminate health care for millions, open pre-existing conditions back up for denial, and open up the donut hole for seniors again. So, there’s some waivers. The “perfect plan” being floated by the GOP would add 44 million uninsured. Heck of a giant waiver there!
Support of the 44 million figure… http://www.thenorthwestern.com/article/20110510/OSH0101/110510104/Report-Rep-Paul-Ryan-s-budget-would-leave-up-44-million-more-uninsured
Ex-GOP,
It has been 750 days since the Dumocraticly controlled Senate has even passed a budget. Is that ok to do once in a while to leave the president an open checkbook while stimulus spending?
Ex-GOP,
44 million ‘more’ uninsured… That is one of the oldest advertising tricks in the book to use the word more but don’t bother explaining more than what. Does this represent the 44 million that would still not get insurance under Obamacare only in addition to not having insurance they would also be levied fines under the Obamacare mandates. Wouldn’t leave them without insurance and with a hefty debt to the federal government cause they paid their rent instead of paying into the Obama health exchanges?
truth -
“Does this represent the 44 million that would still not get insurance under Obamacare only in addition to not having insurance they would also be levied fines under the Obamacare mandates.”
I suggest you read the link and the study – educating yourself a bit on this matter would be useful if you are going to have such strong opinions.
It has been 750 days since the Dumocraticly controlled Senate has even passed a budget. Is that ok to do once in a while to leave the president an open checkbook while stimulus spending?
Truthseeker, is that compared to past Republicans. Dude, not a leg to stand on…
Huh Doug? When was last Senate that went 750 days without offering a budget? And we will say I am still standing on two legs till you can name one.
Now, it would be a horrible idea to do that weekly – to make it a long term economic pillar in the economy. But as a short term thing, not a bad idea.
Ex-RINO, why would it be a horrible idea in the long term economy Ex-RINO?
To borrow money and cut checks? That seems pretty obvious to me.
Let’s go back to the original conversation though. Pelosi made that when the right wanted to stop extending unemployment benefits, and the reasoning was it was that it cost too much money. At the exact same time, the right was arguing that we needed to extend out the tax rates from Bush’s tax cuts. Pelosi is essentially arguing that BOTH cost money in regards to the impact on the deficit, and if you look at the numbers and stats, paying out unemployment benefits yield better results in regards to consumer spending, which boosts the economy.
Personally, I think unemployment benefits should be paid out, but not forever. I think it is a system that can be abused and can be too much of a safety net. I also believe some of Bush tax cuts should be allowed to expire because the deficit needs to be controlled, and it is clear that those cuts impacted the deficit negatively.
So truth – do you stil stand behind Ryan’s latest plan? Or have you given that pause?
I like the way Ryan’s plan addresses the health entitlement problem which is the single biggest problem that nobody else has been willing to tackle. The far left has nothing helpful to offer about the problem and would keep us on the unsustainable path we are on now and lead our country into default in the next six years if Obama gets re-elected. The longer we wait the more austerity it will cause to the American people in order to right the ship. They run ads showing old people in wheelchairs being thrown over a cliff and demagogue the plan but have NO plan of their own.
Truth – Your last statement of having no plan isn’t actually true.
Here’s a nice breakdown of Ryan’s plan, Health Care Reform, and the plan from the bipartisan debt commission:
http://www.bipartisanpolicy.org/blog/2011/05/medicare-ryan-v-domenici-rivlin-v-obama
In a nutshell:
Ryan’s plan takes all people 55 and over and says when they reach Medicare age (which I believe he raises to 67), the government will give them a monthly voucher that goes towards private insurance.
The current law (health care reform – Obamas) puts in place certain cost triggers, and if the growth of the program is unsustainable, a board puts together recommendations for congress
The debt commission appears to keep medicare in place while also offering a premium support (voucher) plan
I remember an interview with Charlie Rose where members of the debt commision said as much themselves. Ryan was part of the debt commision and though they praised Ryans ideas they were not able as a body to offer any meaningful reform of Medicare costs.
truth -
Great article on Forbes today about how well Health Care Reform is working – you’ll have to look it up.
I’m not convinced still that Ryan’s plan would “solve” Medicare – I’ve yet to see any sort of answer of what happens if a very old person can’t pay their bill. Does Medicaid step in, or do we let the person die? Have you seen anything on it?