President Barack Obama - Term 1 and 2 Thread

General Intelligent Discussion & One Thread About That Buttknuckle

Moderator: Andrew

Postby donnaplease » Thu Jul 22, 2010 9:58 pm

RedWingFan wrote:
Lula wrote:
you do realize she was not working for the ag dept at the time, it was non profit and she did help the farmer, realizing she was wrong in her initial reaction. hers is a story of redemption. did you even see the whole unchopped edited defamatory hack job version, the whole enchilada? you must not have to say what you have said.

What I'm saying is that SHE is irrelevant to the situation this wasn't posted to get her fired. That was Obama trying to cover his ass.
It was posted to show the roomfull of NAALCP laughing at her discrimination before the happy ending. The ending is irrelevant. Do you understand that?


I'm not 100% convinced that was wholly the reason for it. I think some folks are spinning it that way now, and certainly that was part of the discussion about it when it aired, but I think Fox is doing some damange control now, just as the white house is by considering rehiring her. I think there are some better and more appropriate means out there to prove what we all know about the NAACP.
User avatar
donnaplease
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 3435
Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2006 11:38 am
Location: shenandoah valley

Postby donnaplease » Thu Jul 22, 2010 10:08 pm

Memorex wrote: What I do not want is a journalist deciding what I get to read when i think I am reading a fair source. If I tune in Hannity or Maddow, I know what I am getting. When I want to be pissed at the right, I watch her. When I want to be pissed at the left, I watch him. But when I tune in to see non-opinionated news - I want it fair. And that simply no longer exists. Everything has to come with a comment or opinion or whatever.


Bingo! I try to watch and listen to both sides just to see what spin is out there. I am becoming somewhat disheartened with Fox News. Even the morning show (which I love for the banter between Brian, Steve and Gretchen) is guilty of trying to lead their guests one way or another. Granted, they do it on other shows as well, including GMA and the Today show, but it doesn't make it right.

Part of what I see is that Fox and some of the radio shows spent so much time defending the conservative viewpoint when they and the Bush administration were being unabashedly trashed, that now that it's their turn, they've lost a little bit of perspective (and sometimes, a LOT of perspective). It's not right, but someone on here said that in today's political world it's necessary. And that's truly sad. Lines of decency are blurred to the point that they no longer exist, and it not only makes us look bad as a nation, I think it's fodder for our enemies. What's the easiest way to defeat an opponent? Break them down from the inside.
User avatar
donnaplease
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 3435
Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2006 11:38 am
Location: shenandoah valley

Postby conversationpc » Thu Jul 22, 2010 10:40 pm

RedWingFan wrote:It was posted to show the roomfull of NAALCP laughing at her discrimination before the happy ending. The ending is irrelevant. Do you understand that?


No, it was posted both for what she said AND what the audience was doing. While it's great that she was redeemed from this kind of racism, it's also disgusting how those folks in the audience were reacting.
My blog = Dave's Dominion
User avatar
conversationpc
Super Audio CD
 
Posts: 17830
Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 5:53 am
Location: Slightly south of sanity...

Postby Rockindeano » Fri Jul 23, 2010 12:19 am

RedWingFan wrote:
Lula wrote:
RedWingFan wrote:
conversationpc wrote:
Rockindeano wrote:This is why I don't take you or any other Fox follower seriously. You are all programmed, period. To defend this situation? Sickening.


Mr. Myrmidon...Did you even bother to read my blog? I didn't defend Fox News and, in fact, mentioned Hannity and O'Reilly as being culpable along with Breitbart.

Culpable of what? Blowing the whistle on someone inside of an administration that used the term "your own kind" to someone of another race seeking their help? And having a room full of NAALCP laughing at it, after accusing the tea party of racism.
Would anyone here be so quick to defend a white person in the Bush administration if they'd said that? I know I wouldn't


you do realize she was not working for the ag dept at the time, it was non profit and she did help the farmer, realizing she was wrong in her initial reaction. hers is a story of redemption. did you even see the whole unchopped edited defamatory hack job version, the whole enchilada? you must not have to say what you have said.

What I'm saying is that SHE is irrelevant to the situation this wasn't posted to get her fired. That was Obama trying to cover his ass.
It was posted to show the roomfull of NAALCP laughing at her discrimination before the happy ending. The ending is irrelevant. Do you understand that?


LOL, the NAALCP. Good one Rush. :roll: For all you out there who don't know what this means. NAALCP is an acronym started out by that fat scumbag, black hating Rush Limbaugh. The 'L' stands for 'Liberal.' Oooh, good one Rush! I guess you have to be liberal to not hate blacks. Good God is that pathetic RWF. You are a blind lemming.
User avatar
Rockindeano
Forever Deano
 
Posts: 25864
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 2:52 am
Location: At Peace

Postby Rockindeano » Fri Jul 23, 2010 12:21 am

conversationpc wrote:
RedWingFan wrote:It was posted to show the roomfull of NAALCP laughing at her discrimination before the happy ending. The ending is irrelevant. Do you understand that?


No, it was posted both for what she said AND what the audience was doing. While it's great that she was redeemed from this kind of racism, it's also disgusting how those folks in the audience were reacting.


Good point Dave. It reminded me of the OJ trial, where once the verdict was read and the Juice was found 'innocent' :roll: , blacks erupted in joy. THAT was sickening too.
User avatar
Rockindeano
Forever Deano
 
Posts: 25864
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 2:52 am
Location: At Peace

Postby ohsherrie » Fri Jul 23, 2010 12:48 am

Fact Finder wrote:
Memorex wrote:
ohsherrie wrote:
Memorex wrote:
ohsherrie wrote:
Memorex wrote:
I truly think you are part of the problem. Your posts over the last few days/weeks are scary.


Only for people who can't handle the truth. And by the way, I'm not liberal. I'm anti-wingnut.


Actually, that has been the biggest issue for me. People that have an agenda only tell the truth, or the truth they believe, about the other side. Their side only gets defense. It's rampant.


There is not one thing that I've posted in this thread that isn't the truth. You may not like it, but that's to be expected because it's not the version of the truth that you want to hear. If anything I've said in this thread is scary to you then you must not be able to handle, or completely deny, the truth of what I say.

If you don't realize how completely corrupt Fox News is then I'd say it a matter of you not recognizing the truth when you hear it and if you've read many of my posts over the last few weeks you know that I'm really not liberal.


Then why do you not say the same about MSNBC or Huffington post? They are equally skewed. You came here and bashed Fox (extremely biased) by using an article from Rachel Maddow (extremely biased) pulled from Huffington post (extremely biased). That's the scary part. You are using one side of the coin to bash the other. But by acting like Fox is the only culprit, it is equivalent to being dishonest. Point to the problem, not just the one part of the problem you choose to highlight.



I wish I had said this. Perfect Memorex. 8)


Well, no actually it's not perfect. Yes, MSNBC and Huffpost are both left leaning, but I've never known of a situation where either of those news agencies has intentionally misrepresented a fact in a story or article. Faux has repeatedly done so both with video and audio editing as well as issuing blatant exaggerations and lies.

You may find opinions that you disagree with in the Huffpost blogs or spoken by some of the personalities on MSMBC, but you won't find lies and intentional misrepresentations of the facts in the news stories of either. Those are Faux's and the republican party's M.O..
User avatar
ohsherrie
Digital Audio Tape
 
Posts: 7601
Joined: Sat Jan 04, 2003 12:42 pm

Postby Rockindeano » Fri Jul 23, 2010 12:50 am

ohsherrie wrote:
Well, no actually it's not perfect. Yes, MSNBC and Huffpost are both left leaning, but I've never known of a situation where either of those news agencies has intentionally misrepresented a fact in a story or article. Faux has repeatedly done so both with video and audio editing as well as issuing blatant exaggerations and lies.

You may find opinions that you disagree with in the Huffpost blogs or spoken by some of the personalities on MSMBC, but you won't find lies and intentional misrepresentations of the facts in the news stories of either. Those are Faux's and the republican party's M.O..


Was just going to say this as well. MSNBC doesn't go out and grease up liberal bloggers, get together and try to hurt somebody. That belongs to Breitbart and Fox News. Congratulations.
User avatar
Rockindeano
Forever Deano
 
Posts: 25864
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 2:52 am
Location: At Peace

Postby Lula » Fri Jul 23, 2010 1:14 am

treetopovskaya wrote:if she was fired unfairly the only people to blame are those doing the firing.

since when does a cable news channel hold such power as to influence our gov??? if true THAT is effin scary.

maybe i'm missing something because i haven't been watching or listening. really don't need to... common sense tells me that our gov... shouldn't be getting it's info from the media. do their own research/homework.

lame.


while i think it's time the obama admin stopped being afraid of hurting feelings or the perception they have opinions and simply did what they believe to be right, this falls on breitbart and fox for creating just another race driven scandal. just add it to the new black panther scare :roll: .

the folks surrounding obama need to back off and let him be the person i voted for. i am so sick of the spinlessness being displayed by obama.

as for getting her job back, i hope she turns it down and gets her own show on fox.
User avatar
Lula
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 4561
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2006 12:10 pm
Location: santa monica

Postby hoagiepete » Fri Jul 23, 2010 1:38 am

Sounds like Fox screwed up here for sure. Not sure what they have done in the aftermath, but should be interesting. I'm hoping this whole thing may lead to some good.

This one quote bothers me though...

Soon after, the Rev. Al Sharpton said black leaders should refrain from calling on the administration to apologize[/b[b]], saying that creates the impression that black leadership is fractured. "We are only greasing the rails for the right wing to run a train through our ambitions and goals for having civil and human rights in this country," Sharpton said.
Talk about someone that wants to keep race an issue! If it weren't he'd more irrelevent than he is today. What would he do to find a camera??

I'm sick of all you fuckers that say just because you are conservative, your a racist. You ought to be ashamed of yourself.

Also, it wears thin that you libs continue to say a conservative can't have a thought of their own and are just following Fox or Limbaugh and that all liberal opinions must be original. Every time you say this you look even more foolish (as I know for fact that is not true in many cases). Don't you realize there were conservatives long before Fox and Limbaugh? You appear to be following the Lib strategy of "if we keep saying it long enough, everyone will believe it and all conservatives will lose credibility." It comes right out of the playbook of lib talking points.

Now, back to my cave.
hoagiepete
Cassette Tape
 
Posts: 1610
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2006 10:16 am

Postby Rockindeano » Fri Jul 23, 2010 1:45 am

hoagiepete wrote:Sounds like Fox screwed up here for sure. Not sure what they have done in the aftermath, but should be interesting. I'm hoping this whole thing may lead to some good.

This one quote bothers me though...

Soon after, the Rev. Al Sharpton said black leaders should refrain from calling on the administration to apologize[/b[b]], saying that creates the impression that black leadership is fractured. "We are only greasing the rails for the right wing to run a train through our ambitions and goals for having civil and human rights in this country," Sharpton said.
Talk about someone that wants to keep race an issue! If it weren't he'd more irrelevent than he is today. What would he do to find a camera??

I'm sick of all you fuckers that say just because you are conservative, your a racist. You ought to be ashamed of yourself.

Also, it wears thin that you libs continue to say a conservative can't have a thought of their own and are just following Fox or Limbaugh and that all liberal opinions must be original. Every time you say this you look even more foolish (as I know for fact that is not true in many cases). Don't you realize there were conservatives long before Fox and Limbaugh? You appear to be following the Lib strategy of "if we keep saying it long enough, everyone will believe it and all conservatives will lose credibility." It comes right out of the playbook of lib talking points.

Now, back to my cave.


1- Sharpton IS a racist...a true racist. Fuck him AND Jesse.

2- When I say Cons blindly follow, I am talking about the participating Cons on here- RWF, who follows Rush in and out of the bathroom, Fact Finder(so obvious) and ConversationPC who will deny it but I know he follows Fox.
User avatar
Rockindeano
Forever Deano
 
Posts: 25864
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 2:52 am
Location: At Peace

Postby Lula » Fri Jul 23, 2010 1:49 am

hoagiepete wrote:Sounds like Fox screwed up here for sure. Not sure what they have done in the aftermath, but should be interesting. I'm hoping this whole thing may lead to some good.



Also, it wears thin that you libs continue to say a conservative can't have a thought of their own and are just following Fox or Limbaugh and that all liberal opinions must be original. Every time you say this you look even more foolish (as I know for fact that is not true in many cases). Don't you realize there were conservatives long before Fox and Limbaugh? You appear to be following the Lib strategy of "if we keep saying it long enough, everyone will believe it and all conservatives will lose credibility." It comes right out of the playbook of lib talking points.
Now, back to my cave.


i believe both liberal and conservative practice this mantra. as for fox, haven't seen the tv shows yet today, but my guess is fox is placing blame on the obama admin for not doing their homework and railroading this woman to resign. hopefully people will wake up and not fall for the tactics used by fox and it's talking heads.
User avatar
Lula
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 4561
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2006 12:10 pm
Location: santa monica

Postby The_Noble_Cause » Fri Jul 23, 2010 1:52 am

hoagiepete wrote:Also, it wears thin that you libs continue to say a conservative can't have a thought of their own and are just following Fox or Limbaugh and that all liberal opinions must be original. Every time you say this you look even more foolish (as I know for fact that is not true in many cases).


The GOP made Limbaugh an honorary member of congress in the 90s and prominent Republicans routinely appear on his show to apologize. Indepedent conservatives who speak against him find themselves kicked out of the movement (see David Frum). What does that tell you? Liberals aren't hoping that Limbaugh, Beck, and FOX becomes the face of the modern conservative movement. They're just identifying the truth.

hoagiepete wrote:Don't you realize there were conservatives long before Fox and Limbaugh?


Sure. And many of them, like Goldwater or Eisenhower, would be called liberals today and kicked out of the tent. The paranoid fringe Bircher scum that Buckley repudiated now has a seat at the levers of power. Just take a look at this year's keynote speaker at both the CPAC and the NRA conventions, Glenn Beck. This huckster crackpot is seeing reds under the bed and in his morning cereal.
Last edited by The_Noble_Cause on Fri Jul 23, 2010 4:25 am, edited 1 time in total.
"I think we should all sue this women for depriving us of our God given right to go down with a clear mind, and good thoughts." - Stu, Consumate Pussy Eater
User avatar
The_Noble_Cause
Super Audio CD
 
Posts: 16110
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 9:14 am
Location: Lake Titicaca

Postby Lula » Fri Jul 23, 2010 2:07 am

i seriously think glenn beck is off his rocker. i shake my head at his thories, rants, whatever you want to call them. his version of history and his "teachings" would be funny if so many didn't believe what he says to be fact.
User avatar
Lula
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 4561
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2006 12:10 pm
Location: santa monica

Postby KenTheDude » Fri Jul 23, 2010 2:19 am

I just received this in an email:


In just six months, the largest tax hikes in
the history of America will take
effect. They will hit families and small businesses in three great
waves on January 1, 2011:

First Wave: Expiration of 2001 and
2003 Tax Relief

In 2001 and 2003, the GOP Congress enacted
several tax cuts for investors, small business owners, and families. (the
"Bush" tax-cuts)
These will all
expire on January 1, 2011:

Personal income tax rates will rise. The top
income tax rate will rise from 35 to 39.6 percent (this is also the rate
at which two-thirds of small business profits are taxed). The lowest
rate will rise from 10 to 15 percent. All the rates in between will
also rise. Itemized deductions and personal exemptions will again
phase out, which has the same mathematical effect as higher marginal tax
rates. The full list of marginal rate hikes is below:

- The
10% bracket rises to an expanded 15%
- The 25% bracket rises to
28%
- The 28% bracket rises to 31%
- The 33% bracket rises to
36%
- The 35% bracket rises to 39.6%

Higher taxes on
marriage and family. The “marriage penalty” (narrower tax
brackets for married couples) will return from the first dollar of
income. The child tax credit will be cut in half from $1000 to $500
per child. The standard deduction will no longer be doubled for
married couples relative to the single level. The dependent care and
adoption tax credits will be cut.

The return of the Death
Tax. This year, there is no death tax. For those
dying on or after January 1 2011, there is a 55 percent top death tax rate
on estates over $1 million. A person leaving behind two homes and a
retirement account could easily pass along a death tax bill to their loved
ones.

Higher tax rates on savers and
investors. The capital gains tax will rise from 15 percent
this year to 20 percent in 2011. The dividends tax will rise from 15
percent this year to 39.6 percent in 2011. These rates will
rise another 3.8 percent in 2013.

Second Wave:
Obamacare

There are over twenty
new or higher taxes in Obamacare.
Several will first go into effect on January 1, 2011. They
include:

The “Medicine Cabinet Tax” Thanks
to Obamacare, Americans will no longer be able to use health savings
account (HSA), flexible spending account (FSA), or health reimbursement
(HRA) pre-tax dollars to purchase non-prescription, over-the-counter
medicines (except insulin).

The “Special Needs Kids
Tax” This provision of Obamacare imposes a cap on flexible
spending accounts (FSAs) of $2500 (Currently, there is no federal
government limit). There is one group of FSA owners for whom this
new cap will be particularly cruel and onerous: parents of special needs
children. There are thousands of families with special needs
children in the United States , and many of them use FSAs to pay for
special needs education. Tuition rates at one leading school that
teaches special needs children in Washington , D.C. (National Child Research Center) can easily exceed $14,000 per year. Under tax rules, FSA
dollars can be used to pay for this type of special needs education.


The HSA Withdrawal Tax Hike. This
provision of Obamacare increases the additional tax on non-medical early
withdrawals from an HSA from 10 to 20 percent, disadvantaging them
relative to IRAs and other tax-advantaged accounts, which remain at 10
percent.

Third Wave: The Alternative
Minimum Tax and Employer Tax Hikes

When Americans
prepare to file their tax returns in January of 2011, they’ll be in for a
nasty surprise—the AMT won’t be held harmless, and many tax relief
provisions will have expired. The major items
include:

The AMT will ensnare over 28 million families, up
from 4 million last year. According to the left-leaning
Tax Policy Center,
Congress’ failure to index the AMT will lead to an explosion of AMT
taxpaying families—rising from 4 million last year to 28.5 million.
These families will have to calculate their tax burdens twice, and pay
taxes at the higher level. The AMT was created in 1969 to ensnare a
handful of taxpayers.

Small business expensing will be
slashed and 50% expensing will disappear. Small businesses
can normally expense (rather than slowly-deduct, or “depreciate”)
equipment purchases up to $250,000. This will be cut all the way
down to $25,000. Larger businesses can expense half of their
purchases of equipment. In January of 2011, all of it will have to
be “depreciated.”

Taxes will be raised on all types of
businesses. There are literally scores of tax hikes on
business that will take place. The biggest is the loss of the
“research and experimentation tax credit,” but there are many, many others. Combining high marginal tax rates with the loss of this tax
relief will cost jobs.

Tax Benefits for Education and
Teaching Reduced. The deduction for tuition and fees will
not be available. Tax credits for education will be limited.
Teachers will no longer be able to deduct classroom expenses.
Coverdell Education Savings Accounts will be cut. Employer-provided
educational assistance is curtailed. The student loan interest
deduction will be disallowed for hundreds of thousands of
families.

Charitable Contributions from IRAs no longer
allowed. Under current law, a retired person with an IRA
can contribute up to $100,000 per year directly to a charity from their
IRA. This contribution also counts toward an annual “required
minimum distribution.” This ability will no longer be
there.
PDF Version Read
more: http://www.atr.org/six-months-untilbr-l ... kes-a5171##ixzz0sY8waPq1

Now your insurance is
INCOME on your W2's......
One of the surprises
we'll find come next year, is what follows - - a little
"surprise"that 99% of us had
no idea was included in the "new and improved"
healthcare legislation . . . the dupes, er, dopes, who
backed this administration will be astonished!



Starting in 2011, (next year
folks), your W-2 tax form sent by your employer
will be increased to show the value of whatever
health insurance you are given by the company. It
does not matter if that's a private concern or
governmental body of some sort. If you're
retired? So what; your gross will go up by
the amount of insurance you get.

You will
be required to pay taxes on a large sum of money that
you have never seen. Take your tax form you
just finished and see what $15,000 or $20,000
additional gross does to your tax debt. That's
what you'll pay next year. For many, it also
puts you into a new higher bracket so it's even
worse.

This is how the government is going to buy
insurance for the15% that don't have insurance and
it's only part of the tax increases.

Not
believing this??? Here is a research of the
summaries.....

On page 25 of 29: TITLE IX
REVENUE PROVISIONS- SUBTITLE A: REVENUE OFFSET
PROVISIONS-(sec. 9001, as modified by sec. 10901)
Sec.9002 "requires employers to include in the W-2
form of each employee the aggregate cost of applicable
employer sponsored group health coverage that is
excludable from the employees gross income."

Joan
Pryde is the senior tax editor for the Kiplinger
letters. Go to Kiplingers and read about 13
tax changes that could affect you. Number 3 is
what is above.
User avatar
KenTheDude
Cassette Tape
 
Posts: 1737
Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2007 9:55 pm
Location: Texas

Postby Lula » Fri Jul 23, 2010 2:28 am

i knew the expiration of the bush tax cuts was going to be touted as a tax increase. we're still being taxed less than the 1950s lol.
User avatar
Lula
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 4561
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2006 12:10 pm
Location: santa monica

Postby RedWingFan » Fri Jul 23, 2010 3:16 am

The_Noble_Cause wrote:Sure. And many of them, like Goldwater or Eisenhower, would be called liberals today and kicked out of the tent.

Yeah right. Just like the tax cutting hawk JFK would be drummed right out of the democrat party. Hell, they pushed liberal Lieberman out for daring support a war. :roll:
Seven Wishes wrote:"Abysmal? He's the most proactive President since Clinton, and he's bringing much-needed change for the better to a nation that has been tyrannized by the worst President since Hoover."- 7 Wishes on Pres. Obama
User avatar
RedWingFan
Digital Audio Tape
 
Posts: 7868
Joined: Mon Jul 17, 2006 5:37 pm
Location: The Peoples Republic of Michigan

Postby RedWingFan » Fri Jul 23, 2010 3:22 am

Rockindeano wrote:LOL, the NAALCP. Good one Rush. :roll: For all you out there who don't know what this means. NAALCP is an acronym started out by that fat scumbag, black hating Rush Limbaugh. The 'L' stands for 'Liberal.' Oooh, good one Rush! I guess you have to be liberal to not hate blacks. Good God is that pathetic RWF. You are a blind lemming.

It's a far more accurate desciption of the group. They sure don't defend or advance all black people.
Example... their silence of Obama's cutting the school voucher program to allow poor minority students to escape D.C. public schools.
Seven Wishes wrote:"Abysmal? He's the most proactive President since Clinton, and he's bringing much-needed change for the better to a nation that has been tyrannized by the worst President since Hoover."- 7 Wishes on Pres. Obama
User avatar
RedWingFan
Digital Audio Tape
 
Posts: 7868
Joined: Mon Jul 17, 2006 5:37 pm
Location: The Peoples Republic of Michigan

Postby ohsherrie » Fri Jul 23, 2010 3:43 am

conversationpc wrote:Image
ohsherrie wrote:And by the way, I'm not liberal. I'm anti-wingnut.


What's liberal about wanting ALL illegal immigrants out of this country?

What's liberal about wanting learning the English language to be a requirement for immigrants to stay here legally?

What's liberal about wanting Washington to get out of Wall Streets pockets and take care of Main Street? Oh........well yeah......., that must be liberal because the cons are doing all they can to keep their hands in Wall Street's pockets and f**k Main Street.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/22/us/po ... 2cong.html
User avatar
ohsherrie
Digital Audio Tape
 
Posts: 7601
Joined: Sat Jan 04, 2003 12:42 pm

Postby The_Noble_Cause » Fri Jul 23, 2010 4:25 am

RedWingFan wrote:Yeah right. Just like the tax cutting hawk JFK would be drummed right out of the democrat party.

Dropping the top marginal tax rate from 90% to 70% hardly makes JFK a supply-sider. This is a right wing talking point swallowed whole by those who obviously know very little about JFK or history. And he wasn't a hawk. He went to his grave pledging to end Vietnam and crossed every interventionist hawk in his administration by not invading Cuba during the misile crisis. The JFK who championed big government "socialist" programs like Medicare and the Peace Corps would be very much at home in today's Democratic party. In fact, him and his brother would probably have been challenging Obamacare from the left. Nice try at claiming a good proud liberal, RWF. Whatsamatter? Aren't you proud of the GOP's rich presidential legacy, like George W. Bush and Richard Nixon? If you want to bone up on a subject for next time, before spewing your garbage, I'd recommend you start here, with JFK's "Why I am a Liberal" speech.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/presidents ... beral.html

RedWingFan wrote:Hell, they pushed liberal Lieberman out for daring support a war. :roll:

A dumb war. Just like Vietnam, which ALL the Kennedys opposed. You're out of your depth. Stop bullshitting the forum, RWF.
"I think we should all sue this women for depriving us of our God given right to go down with a clear mind, and good thoughts." - Stu, Consumate Pussy Eater
User avatar
The_Noble_Cause
Super Audio CD
 
Posts: 16110
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 9:14 am
Location: Lake Titicaca

Postby The_Noble_Cause » Fri Jul 23, 2010 4:26 am

KenTheDude wrote:I just received this in an email:


Good. Now hit delete. Not a single right wing chain email posted on this forum has been accurate.
"I think we should all sue this women for depriving us of our God given right to go down with a clear mind, and good thoughts." - Stu, Consumate Pussy Eater
User avatar
The_Noble_Cause
Super Audio CD
 
Posts: 16110
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 9:14 am
Location: Lake Titicaca

Postby Rockindeano » Fri Jul 23, 2010 4:47 am

Look at TNC getting loose and slapping you Cons around like pinballs. I would say that's game set and match. Drive safely and come again.
User avatar
Rockindeano
Forever Deano
 
Posts: 25864
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 2:52 am
Location: At Peace

Postby ohsherrie » Fri Jul 23, 2010 5:03 am

KenTheDude wrote:
In 2001 and 2003, the GOP Congress enacted
several tax cuts for investors, small business owners, and families. (the
"Bush" tax-cuts)
These will all
expire on January 1, 2011:



http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/22/us/po ... 2cong.html

"President Obama called on the Senate to approve the bill in a statement in the Rose Garden on Monday. “We all have to continue our efforts to do everything in our power to spur growth and hiring,” he said. “And I hope the Senate acts this week on a package of tax cuts and expanded lending for small businesses, where most of America’s jobs are created.”

He also raised the issue in his weekly radio and Internet address on Saturday. The White House said Mr. Obama would continue pushing for the bill.

“Small businesses are the engine of private sector job creation, and the president will fight against any attempts by the partisan minority to block progress on legislation that helps our economic recovery,” a spokeswoman, Amy Brundage, said.

Senator Mary L. Landrieu, Democrat of Louisiana and chairwoman of the small-business committee, who is a main author of the legislation, said the Senate Republican leader, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, seemed intent on denying Mr. Obama and the Democrats a chance to pump up the economy ahead of the midterm elections.

“I think Senator McConnell knows and believes this bill could actually create millions of jobs and doesn’t want to give the president and Democrats credit for doing what we do, which is standing up for the middle class,” Ms. Landrieu said."
User avatar
ohsherrie
Digital Audio Tape
 
Posts: 7601
Joined: Sat Jan 04, 2003 12:42 pm

Postby RocknRoll » Fri Jul 23, 2010 5:33 am

ohsherrie wrote:http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/22/us/po ... 2cong.html

"President Obama called on the Senate to approve the bill in a statement in the Rose Garden on Monday. “We all have to continue our efforts to do everything in our power to spur growth and hiring,” he said. “And I hope the Senate acts this week on a package of tax cuts and expanded lending for small businesses, where most of America’s jobs are created.”

He also raised the issue in his weekly radio and Internet address on Saturday. The White House said Mr. Obama would continue pushing for the bill.

“Small businesses are the engine of private sector job creation, and the president will fight against any attempts by the partisan minority to block progress on legislation that helps our economic recovery,” a spokeswoman, Amy Brundage, said.

Senator Mary L. Landrieu, Democrat of Louisiana and chairwoman of the small-business committee, who is a main author of the legislation, said the Senate Republican leader, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, seemed intent on denying Mr. Obama and the Democrats a chance to pump up the economy ahead of the midterm elections.

“I think Senator McConnell knows and believes this bill could actually create millions of jobs and doesn’t want to give the president and Democrats credit for doing what we do, which is standing up for the middle class,” Ms. Landrieu said."



Funny, this bill was first introduced in January and the Congressional majority didn't think it was important enough to push through then. NOW, that they are getting scared it's back on the table and they care. Give me a break, The majority led congress dropped the ball on this one. Maybe we'd have some jobs now if the majority led congress wasn't so intent on pushing through an agenda that wasn't doing anything to improve the economy, which the minority were right to oppose.

http://www.readwriteweb.com/start/2010/ ... oposes.php

Startup Stimulus: Obama Proposes $30 Billion For Small Businesses
Written by Chris Cameron / January 28, 2010 10:40 AM / 9 Comments « Prior Post Next Post »

Earlier this week we told you how New York Times op-ed contributor and author Thomas Friedman urged President Obama to take steps to help foster a new age of innovation and entrepreneurship. Well it seems that Obama may have received that message, as Wednesday night during his State of the Union address to Congress the president proposed a bill to help small businesses and entrepreneurs.

Perhaps Obama listened to Friedman, or maybe he saw the frenzied excitement that grows around new innovations like the iPad - either way, the president seems to have taken the first baby steps toward a more entrepreneurial culture in America.

In the first quarter of a speech that lasted nearly seventy minutes - due in no small part part to the customary and, at times, comically frequent applause breaks - Obama leveled his focus on small businesses, calling for a $30 billion bill to help them attain credit from banks.

"We should start where more new jobs do -- in small businesses," said Obama. "Companies that begin when an entrepreneur takes a chance on a dream, or a worker decides it's time she became her own boss."

Obama also called for a tax credit which will go to small businesses that raise wages or hire more employees, along with with the reversal of taxes on small business investments. Instead of paying capital gains taxes, Obama proposed that small businesses should instead be given tax incentives for investing in things like new plants and equipment.

One idea that Obama did not mention which could bolster the nation's innovative spirit is the so-called "startup visa" which could bring foreign entrepreneurs to the U.S. and create jobs - a movement we wrote about earlier this month.

As is the custom when the president gives his yearly address to congress, the Republican party chooses a representative to deliver their formal response. This year's choice, Senator Bob McDonnell from Virginia, warned of growing government and increased spending, but agreed with the president that inspiring growth in small businesses is critical.

"We must enact policies that promote entrepreneurship and innovation so America can better compete with the world," McDonnell said. "What government should not do is pile on more taxation, regulation and litigation that kill jobs and hurt the middle class."
Embedded below is the White House video of Obama's speech. Skip ahead to 13:14 to hear the president's ideas for entrepreneurs and small businesses.
Last edited by RocknRoll on Fri Jul 23, 2010 5:44 am, edited 2 times in total.
RocknRoll
Cassette Tape
 
Posts: 1707
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 8:46 am

Postby RocknRoll » Fri Jul 23, 2010 5:35 am

...and just to dispute what some keep harping on:

http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2010/07/ ... 279798011/

Obama signs bill to trim federal waste
Published: July 22, 2010 at 1:46 PM


WASHINGTON, July 22 (UPI) -- U.S. President Barack Obama signed a bill Thursday that requires federal agencies to clamp down on improper payments.

The federal government wasted $110 billion in fiscal 2009 by sending out fraudulent Medicare and Medicaid payments, overpaying contractors and sending benefit checks to dead people, The Washington Post reported.

The new law is designed to reduce that figure by $50 billion by 2012, requiring agencies to spend at least $1 million on audits, the White House said.

"The bipartisan bill I'm signing today will help ensure that our government serves as a responsible steward for the tax dollars of the American people," Obama said in a statement from the White House, "and builds on the efforts we're taking to cut wasteful spending. Those include my proposal for a three-year freeze on all non-security discretionary spending in my budget and working to put an end to wasteful government contracting and unnecessary no-bid contracts. The bill I'm signing today passed unanimously in both the House and the Senate -- a powerful reminder of what we can accomplish when we put partisanship aside and do what's best for the people we serve."In November 2009, the White House said, Obama issued an executive order with a strategy to "reduce improper payments through boosting transparency, holding agencies accountable and creating strong incentives for compliance."

In March this year, Obama directed all federal departments "to intensify and expand payment recapture audits," and set up "a federal 'do not pay list' so that there is one source for agencies to check on the eligibility status of an individual or contractor," the White House said.


“Small businesses are the engine of private sector job creation, and the president will fight against any attempts by the partisan minority to block progress on legislation that helps our economic recovery,” a spokeswoman, Amy Brundage, said.

Senator Mary L. Landrieu, Democrat of Louisiana and chairwoman of the small-business committee, who is a main author of the legislation, said the Senate Republican leader, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, seemed intent on denying Mr. Obama and the Democrats a chance to pump up the economy ahead of the midterm elections.

“I think Senator McConnell knows and believes this bill could actually create millions of jobs and doesn’t want to give the president and Democrats credit for doing what we do, which is standing up for the middle class,” Ms. Landrieu said." [/i][/quote]
RocknRoll
Cassette Tape
 
Posts: 1707
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 8:46 am

Postby ohsherrie » Fri Jul 23, 2010 5:43 am

First of all, Bob McDonnell is the governor here in Virginia, not a senator. He's doing a lot of talking about what "HE'S" accomplished. But here's what a local TV channel found:

http://www2.wsls.com/sls/news/state_reg ... rs/111835/

"According the Virginia Economic Development Partnership (VDEP), 80% of those 71,500 jobs were created by private sector companies, while just 20% are new local, state, and federal government employees.

A lot of those jobs are credited to money from the Economic Stimulus Act, including the 14,896 folks the Census says it hired in Virginia hired between the start of February and the end of May. The Census hires include 14,236 field workers, and 660 supervisors.

Those 71,500 people getting a paycheck don’t include the 7,154 new jobs McDonnell has announced since February. Most have yet to be filled.

The VDEP tells WSLS that work behind a “substantial majority” of those 7,154 announced jobs, was started in the Kaine Administration, and finished off by the McDonnell Administration."


Now, it was never that the Democrats didn't think the bill was important, they've just had too much else going on to work on this.

They can only fight the THICK RED WALL OF OBSTRUCTION one battle at a time.
User avatar
ohsherrie
Digital Audio Tape
 
Posts: 7601
Joined: Sat Jan 04, 2003 12:42 pm

Postby Since 78 » Fri Jul 23, 2010 5:47 am

Can I ask you all a serious question? Doesn't watching and listening all these political shows just put you in a foul mood? I used to listen to Rush years ago and after awhile I found I was just pissed all the time so I stopped.

Anyway, just asking.
Image
Image
Still They Ride
User avatar
Since 78
Digital Audio Tape
 
Posts: 8194
Joined: Sun Mar 02, 2008 2:21 pm
Location: Pinhead Nation

Postby RocknRoll » Fri Jul 23, 2010 5:53 am

ohsherrie wrote:First of all, Bob McDonnell is the governor here in Virginia, not a senator. He's doing a lot of talking about what "HE'S" accomplished. But here's what a local TV channel found:

http://www2.wsls.com/sls/news/state_reg ... rs/111835/

"According the Virginia Economic Development Partnership (VDEP), 80% of those 71,500 jobs were created by private sector companies, while just 20% are new local, state, and federal government employees.

A lot of those jobs are credited to money from the Economic Stimulus Act, including the 14,896 folks the Census says it hired in Virginia hired between the start of February and the end of May. The Census hires include 14,236 field workers, and 660 supervisors.

Those 71,500 people getting a paycheck don’t include the 7,154 new jobs McDonnell has announced since February. Most have yet to be filled.

The VDEP tells WSLS that work behind a “substantial majority” of those 7,154 announced jobs, was started in the Kaine Administration, and finished off by the McDonnell Administration."


Now, it was never that the Democrats didn't think the bill was important, they've just had too much else going on to work on this.

They can only fight the THICK RED WALL OF OBSTRUCTION one battle at a time.


Fair... and great to see jobs of any kind being created.

My issue is what this Congress has considered priorities. It completely baffles me. Like most Americans, to me it should be all about the economy and jobs first and than tackle those big contentious, ideological issues. If Congress has been working on jobs and the economy I'm betting that THICK WALL OF OBSTRUCTION would have been pretty THIN.

What's Virginia's unemployment rate now? I believe they weren't quite as bad as the rest of the country. Especially since that includes people who work in DC, which is gaining jobs.
WOW!! I can't keep up with all the font changes.

EDIT: Duh!! I just got the connection on McDonnell.
Last edited by RocknRoll on Fri Jul 23, 2010 6:17 am, edited 2 times in total.
RocknRoll
Cassette Tape
 
Posts: 1707
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 8:46 am

Postby RocknRoll » Fri Jul 23, 2010 5:57 am

Since 78 wrote:Can I ask you all a serious question? Doesn't watching and listening all these political shows just put you in a foul mood? I used to listen to Rush years ago and after awhile I found I was just pissed all the time so I stopped.

Anyway, just asking.


I'm like you, I don't watch or listen to them. However, I will watch CSPAN and do watch CNBC although there's a couple commentators there that are too outspoken and get on my nerves, so it's click "OFF"
RocknRoll
Cassette Tape
 
Posts: 1707
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 8:46 am

Postby RedWingFan » Fri Jul 23, 2010 6:08 am

The_Noble_Cause wrote:
RedWingFan wrote:Yeah right. Just like the tax cutting hawk JFK would be drummed right out of the democrat party.

Dropping the top marginal tax rate from 90% to 70% hardly makes JFK a supply-sider. This is a right wing talking point swallowed whole by those who obviously know very little about JFK or history. And he wasn't a hawk. He went to his grave pledging to end Vietnam and crossed every interventionist hawk in his administration by not invading Cuba during the misile crisis. The JFK who championed big government "socialist" programs like Medicare and the Peace Corps would be very much at home in today's Democratic party. In fact, him and his brother would probably have been challenging Obamacare from the left. Nice try at claiming a good proud liberal, RWF. Whatsamatter? Aren't you proud of the GOP's rich presidential legacy, like George W. Bush and Richard Nixon? If you want to bone up on a subject for next time, before spewing your garbage, I'd recommend you start here, with JFK's "Why I am a Liberal" speech.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/presidents ... beral.html

RedWingFan wrote:Hell, they pushed liberal Lieberman out for daring support a war. :roll:

A dumb war. Just like Vietnam, which ALL the Kennedys opposed. You're out of your depth. Stop bullshitting the forum, RWF.


Let me get this straight. You're claiming Lieberman is to the RIGHT of JFK?
Seven Wishes wrote:"Abysmal? He's the most proactive President since Clinton, and he's bringing much-needed change for the better to a nation that has been tyrannized by the worst President since Hoover."- 7 Wishes on Pres. Obama
User avatar
RedWingFan
Digital Audio Tape
 
Posts: 7868
Joined: Mon Jul 17, 2006 5:37 pm
Location: The Peoples Republic of Michigan

Postby RedWingFan » Fri Jul 23, 2010 6:17 am

The_Noble_Cause wrote:
RedWingFan wrote:Yeah right. Just like the tax cutting hawk JFK would be drummed right out of the democrat party.

Dropping the top marginal tax rate from 90% to 70% hardly makes JFK a supply-sider. This is a right wing talking point swallowed whole by those who obviously know very little about JFK or history. And he wasn't a hawk. He went to his grave pledging to end Vietnam and crossed every interventionist hawk in his administration by not invading Cuba during the misile crisis. The JFK who championed big government "socialist" programs like Medicare and the Peace Corps would be very much at home in today's Democratic party. In fact, him and his brother would probably have been challenging Obamacare from the left. Nice try at claiming a good proud liberal, RWF. Whatsamatter? Aren't you proud of the GOP's rich presidential legacy, like George W. Bush and Richard Nixon? If you want to bone up on a subject for next time, before spewing your garbage, I'd recommend you start here, with JFK's "Why I am a Liberal" speech.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/presidents ... beral.html

Yeah, now watch this and tell me today's democrat party would be in favor of tax cuts TO SPUR THE ECONOMY!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aEdXrfIMdiU
Tax cuts for the RICH no less!!!! :lol: You're the one spewing garbage and expecting people to believe it. Go ahead and tell me this represents the democrat party and Obama so the board can collectively laugh at you.
Seven Wishes wrote:"Abysmal? He's the most proactive President since Clinton, and he's bringing much-needed change for the better to a nation that has been tyrannized by the worst President since Hoover."- 7 Wishes on Pres. Obama
User avatar
RedWingFan
Digital Audio Tape
 
Posts: 7868
Joined: Mon Jul 17, 2006 5:37 pm
Location: The Peoples Republic of Michigan

PreviousNext

Return to Snowmobiles For The Sahara

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests