Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And the President's hair color is relevant because? I haven't voted for or against any President based on hair color. Gee, I haven't even considered it.
Obama's not trying to hide his gray hair. He's made many jokes about it and I've seen him with it on several occasions. Just look at Bush or Clinton from their first days to their last. It's a tough job.
You keep talking about how old you are as if that's an inherent value, and yet Dick Cheney was old and look at the devastation his corruption, immorality, and cronyism wreaked upon our nation.
Shaking me head at the above. Wow!
Quote:
I'm a lot older than you seem to think, but "You don't have to be old to be wise" or to listen to Beck/Palin/Limbaugh/Hannityetc... and realize they are selecting pieces of arguments to tell a fictional story that their audience, who is looking for that story, does not address critically and accepts as fact.
Have no idea how old you are by the calendar. Just know how much experience it sounds like you have had in life from your input.
I would also like to point out that along with age, I have shared my experience over many years in being an "employee," moving on to "owning a very successful corporation and holding the positions of CEO and CFO," experiencing business around the world and probably didn't make clear that I have held the positions of delegate for the USA in world meetings of up to 64 countries to work out "international" problems/laws/rules, etc., that exist between countries because of some conflicts between same. When one works country wide and then world wide, one does tend to expand horizons of not only experience, but very wide perspective on how to foresee big-time messes created by big-time short sightedness.
Quote:
I chimed in to agree with you that the Tea Party should stop interfering with the govenrment's right to tax to promote the general welfare, and you've gone all extremist on me.
I think you have mixed up your posters. I never made any statement that "the Tea Party should stop interfering with the government's right...." The Tea Party stands for "small, minimum government" and "back to the Constitution." I am 100% for that!
Quote:
Your statements are just normal conservative talking points and you're entitled to that view, right or wrong. The reality is that, as the only entity capable of borrowing and spending in this market collapse, we needed the federal government intervention when the markets failed. The reality is that every developed nation provided stimulus to shore up its financial and industrial base, as well as local governments and basic jobs to keep us from bottoming out too much. Obama also passed the most sweeping regulatory reform since the 1930s to make sure this type of collapse doesn't happen again. Just look at Canada's financial system that remained heavily regulated and mostly avoided this whole economic collapse because of it.
No, if government had stayed out of it, our economy would have disposed of the bad crap and come back robust having eliminated the problem businesses, banking and unions via natural elimination.
Quote:
The reality is also that every developed nation has the human decency and pro-life values to provide basic health care to its citizens. It's barbaric and un-Christian to do anything else. Christ Jesus was hung for promoting such values and we're metaphorically seeing the same for Obama today with regard to health care.
And...should be provided by citizens, church groups and private organizations...NOT GOVERNMENTS!!!!
I have no idea why you're hitting your head. Cheney's dubious dealings and shaky moral imperatives are well documented.
Quote:
Have no idea how old you are by the calendar. Just know how much experience it sounds like you have had in life from your input.
I would also like to point out that along with age, I have shared my experience over many years in being an "employee," moving on to "owning a very successful corporation and holding the positions of CEO and CFO," experiencing business around the world and probably didn't make clear that I have held the positions of delegate for the USA in world meetings of up to 64 countries to work out "international" problems/laws/rules, etc., that exist between countries because of some conflicts between same. When one works country wide and then world wide, one does tend to expand horizons of not only experience, but very wide perspective on how to foresee big-time messes created by big-time short sightedness.
I will refrain from listing my resume, but rest assured I lack neither public policy nor international experience. What you seem to be misunderstanding is that I understand the nuanced complexity of these situations and recognize that bumpersticker ideology to cut government spending or slash taxes or whatnot does not necessarily translate into the intended results. That's one of the reasons why Obama's such a great president - he understands all sides and uses tools from all sides to leverage the best response for our economy.
Quote:
I think you have mixed up your posters. I never made any statement that "the Tea Party should stop interfering with the government's right...." The Tea Party stands for "small, minimum government" and "back to the Constitution." I am 100% for that!
Well, you had said you wanted to get back to the Constitution, so I guess I assumed that meant getting these Tea Party people to stop misinterpreting it as if taxation to provide for the general welfare isn't a major tenant of it.
Quote:
No, if government had stayed out of it, our economy would have disposed of the bad crap and come back robust having eliminated the problem businesses, banking an unions via natural elimination.
And...should be provided by citizens, church groups and private organizations...NOT GOVERNMENTS!!!!
That's your belief, and I guess you're entitled to it, but it's not grounded in reality. The economy may or may not have recovered faster, but it most certainly would have plummeted far deeper into depression without government intervention. Even Colin Powell recognized that this morning.
You can't cut federal funding, slashing public sector employees, let city and state budgets collapse, let construction, finance, and industry collapse, and then just hope that someone, somewhere, will pick up the slack.
Also, church groups, non-profits, etc... (who, btw, often receive federal grants and funding) can't possibly provide a health care system to ensure 40 million uninsured are cared for. It's just not realistic on a large scale given our current development. They've the past century to do it and they've failed so far, so I'm not sure what you're thinking will change.
It's a noble view you hold, but ultimately pretty naive, even with your elderly status and resume. Every developed country in the world enacts stimulus to keep capital flowing through the economy. It's time to stop now that the worst of the crisis is behind us, as Obama has done, but it's really not a choice otherwise at this point in our geopolitical development.
Originally Posted by Bluefly That common belief is not supported by evidence. Tax rates were far higher under Reagan and Clinton, especially for the upper income levels, and both experienced significant economic growth under their respective administrations.
I said Ahhhh, but the regulations weren't. You can't over regulate and expect business growth no matter how low the tax rates are. Regulations are a tax themselves, just not by name.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluefly
That's a completely different subject than the one we were discussion, but that's not true either. Government was on a long but steady process of deregulation beginning in the 1980s, continuing through Clinton, and finally collapsing our economy under Bush.
Canada's financial system, which remained heavily regulated, hardly blipped during the global crisis and is now touted as a model to which all financial systems should aspire.
How was this a different subject? I directly commented on something you said. Did I cut and paste someone elses post?
Canada has lowered their corporate taxes to 15%, this year, after 6 consecutive reductions. You just can't have it both ways. You can't over tax AND regulate business to hell. For every ONE dollar there is just ONE dollar. If you regulate and tax enough of that dollar then what will happen? Businesses will leave the country... Oh look, businesses have been leaving the country.
Well, you had said you wanted to get back to the Constitution, so I guess I assumed that meant getting these Tea Party people to stop misinterpreting it as if taxation to provide for the general welfare isn't a major tenant of it.
The key word is interpretation. This is how the progressives plan to change the meaning of the Constitution. By using their "modern interpretation" and arguing that the oirginal intent of the document doesn't keep with the modern lifestyle.
I should have known. You are young and an ideologue. A reasonable conversation can contain two points of view, unless one side is just a talking head. You do sound reasonably intelligent, but then so does a well trained parrot.
Yes please share. Exactly how has he changed. He just proposed massive new spending on infastructure and education which is what he's been doing the last 2 years and obviously has not helped at all.
You're being duped. Obama hasn't changed. Does a leopard change his spots?
What makes you think he has changed? What evidence is there? He's still pushing the same old horse manure.
Why would he suddenly change?
He hasn't changed. But the libs don't want to see it.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
