President Barack Obama - Term 1 and 2 Thread

[Boomchild]

Like you truly give a fuck. If left up to people like you, our Government would be run like a corporation (translation - outsourced, hollowed out, and run by Third World slaves making pennies on the dollar). The true outrage is that the private sector no longer offers generous benefits to workers like the public sector does. Don't take that out on the public sector.

Try to stay on point. The truth is that our congressmen and Senators are getting a steep discount on their healthcare when they have incomes that they can easily pay the same rate as a citizen could who earns as much as they do. That would be paying their fair share. BTW, the private sector can offer as little or as much as they want. But, I wouldn't expect a liberal, progressive, socialist to understand that. They would rather have the government own and run all industry and dictate to it's subjects.

[The_Noble_Cause]

Try to stay on point.

In other words, let's ignore that staffers are NOT exempt from Obamacare and just say whatever the hell we want. To paraphrase an old saying: when you have the facts on your side, pound the facts. When you don't have any facts, pound the table. Try not to hurt your hand, bro.

The truth is that our congressmen and Senators are getting a steep discount on their healthcare when they have incomes that they can easily pay the same rate as a citizen could who earns as much as they do. That would be paying their fair share.

Union representation of federal employees has not been decimated like private-sector workers. As a result, private sector workers are less and less likely to get benefits, unlike fed workers. I am not going to blame the federal government for taking care of it's workers. That's how it should be.

BTW, the private sector can offer as little or as much as they want. But, I wouldn't expect a liberal, progressive, socialist to understand that.

Actually, no. No they can't. Progressive legislation, (like child labor laws, workplace safety standards, and minimum wage, to name a few) helped to give US workers an envied standard of living. Strong union membership later created the middle class. Of course, to acknowledge this, you would have to know history (ever hear of the Triangle Shirtwaist fire?) and not read books by AM talk radio shock jocks. So I wouldn't expect a conservative, authoritarian, crypto-fascist Nazi stooge to understand.

[Boomchild]

In other words, let's ignore that staffers are NOT exempt from Obamacare and just say whatever the hell we want. To paraphrase an old saying: when you have the facts on your side, pound the facts. When you don't have any facts, pound the table. Try not to hurt your hand, bro.

I didn't say that staffers were exempt. Your acting as if I brought that point up and continue to try and prove that point. Someone else made that claim. If you want to babble on about that specific point I suggest you take it up with them. Otherwise you are just using it to deflect what I was pointing out.

Union representation of federal employees has not been decimated like private-sector workers. As a result, private sector workers are less and less likely to get benefits, unlike fed workers. I am not going to blame the federal government for taking care of it's workers. That's how it should be.

Providing access to healthcare coverage to them is one thing. Giving a subsidy to those that do not need it is another. Your dancing around the actual issue. Which is "rich" people are getting a discount they don't need at the tax payers expense. In other words, they are indulging in wasteful spending to their own personal benefit. No wonder we can't expect them to not do it in other areas of government.

Actually, no. No they can't. Progressive legislation, (like child labor laws, workplace safety standards, and minimum wage, to name a few) helped to give US workers an envied standard of living. Strong union membership later created the middle class. Of course, to acknowledge this, you would have to know history (ever hear of the Triangle Shirtwaist fire?) and not read books by AM talk radio shock jocks. So I wouldn't expect a conservative, authoritarian, crypto-fascist Nazi stooge to understand.

Again, try to stay on topic. In case you have lost your train of thought the subject has been healthcare benefits. Which is a benefit. Benefits and perks are things private sector businesses are not required by law to provide. So when speaking about the actual topic here they can offer as little or as much as they want. In reality as far as healthcare coverage is concerned it should no loner be an issue right? Obamacare fixed that by offering anyone coverage so that people are not reliant upon their employer having to offer it. To act like none of the private sector businesses offer good benefits to their employees is ridiculous.

[The_Noble_Cause]

Your acting as if I brought that point up and continue to try and prove that point. Someone else made that claim. If you want to babble on about that specific point I suggest you take it up with them. Otherwise you are just using it to deflect what I was pointing out.

Actually, no. I repeatedly attributed that comment to JBlake, even going so far as to quote him. But you replied to him, and seemingly agreed with him. So it is fair to assume you share his views. Otherwise you would have corrected him & NOT piled on.

Providing access to healthcare coverage to them is one thing. Giving a subsidy to those that do not need it is another. Your dancing around the actual issue. Which is "rich" people are getting a discount they don't need at the tax payers expense. In other words, they are indulging in wasteful spending to their own personal benefit. No wonder we can't expect them to not do it in other areas of government.

Ok...so what of it? Why are you so concerned about rich people bilking the system? Do you think the head of Lehman Bros deserves his 500 million dollar salary, much of it subsidized by TARP funds? If it seems I am beating around the bush, it is because your concern over the issue of income fairness is disingenuous to the extreme. How many posts have you made about CEO compensation increasing by over 700 percent since the 80s? Spare me the outrage over a glorified intern's take home pay on Capital Hill.

Again, try to stay on topic. In case you have lost your train of thought the subject has been healthcare benefits. Which is a benefit. Benefits and perks are things private sector businesses are not required by law to provide.

A perk is just a regulation that hasn't been legislated yet. Name any labor law (5 day work week etc) and I can point you to a time when it wasn't guaranteed to workers and was considered a cushy perk.

[Boomchild]

Actually, no. I repeatedly attributed that comment to JBlake, even going so far as to quote him. But you replied to him, and seemingly agreed with him. So it is fair to assume you share his views. Otherwise you would have corrected him & NOT piled on.

I said that I did not make that claim and yet you continue to assume. How about when you reply ask someone if they agree with a statement or viewpoint if it's not crystal clear. Don't just assume. I didn't pile on with incorrect information or information supporting JBake's position that they were trying opt out. You just used it as dodge to my discussion.

Ok...so what of it? Why are you so concerned about rich people bilking the system? Do you think the head of Lehman Bros deserves his 500 million dollar salary, much of it subsidized by TARP funds? If it seems I am beating around the bush, it is because your concern over the issue of income fairness is disingenuous to the extreme. How many posts have you made about CEO compensation increasing by over 700 percent since the 80s? Spare me the outrage over a glorified intern's take home pay on Capital Hill.

You still can't stay on topic can you? It's not about interns, Lehman Brothers or CEO compensation etc. etc... It's about the ridiculous subsidy for healthcare coverage given to actual Congressman and Senators who can obviously afford their premiums without it.

A perk is just a regulation that hasn't been legislated yet. Name any labor law (5 day work week etc) and I can point you to a time when it wasn't guaranteed to workers and was considered a cushy perk.

Since the topic is healthcare benefits I will repeat. Obamacare has fixed the issue of the private sector not offering it to it's employees as well as giving people more options. Right? Since Obamacare is the law then there is no need to regulate\force businesses to offer healthcare coverage options. They can either opt to offer it or pay the tax for not offering it if they fall into that specific category.

It's obvious you are not interested in addressing the the actual subject, so there is no reason for me to continue on with you on this topic.

[The_Noble_Cause]

In other words, TNC is twisting what you said instead of just looking at the facts. Typical.

Still shooting spitballs from the sidelines, coward? I don't think your MR friends appreciate you helping them lose an argument. Btw, it is open line Friday on the Limbaugh show. Did you remember to call in and tell Rushbo all about your new anal kegel exercise regimen and how many condoms full of oxycontin now fit snugly inside your waxed and bleached anus?

[The_Noble_Cause]

Actually, no. I repeatedly attributed that comment to JBlake, even going so far as to quote him. But you replied to him, and seemingly agreed with him. So it is fair to assume you share his views. Otherwise you would have corrected him & NOT piled on.

I said that I did not make that claim and yet you continue to assume. How about when you reply ask someone if they agree with a statement or viewpoint if it's not crystal clear. Don't just assume. I didn't pile on with incorrect information or information supporting JBake's position that they were trying opt out. You just used it as dodge to my discussion.

Ok...so what of it? Why are you so concerned about rich people bilking the system? Do you think the head of Lehman Bros deserves his 500 million dollar salary, much of it subsidized by TARP funds? If it seems I am beating around the bush, it is because your concern over the issue of income fairness is disingenuous to the extreme. How many posts have you made about CEO compensation increasing by over 700 percent since the 80s? Spare me the outrage over a glorified intern's take home pay on Capital Hill.

You still can't stay on topic can you? It's not about interns, Lehman Brothers or CEO compensation etc. etc... It's about the ridiculous subsidy for healthcare coverage given to actual Congressman and Senators who can obviously afford their premiums without it.

A perk is just a regulation that hasn't been legislated yet. Name any labor law (5 day work week etc) and I can point you to a time when it wasn't guaranteed to workers and was considered a cushy perk.

Since the topic is healthcare benefits I will repeat. Obamacare has fixed the issue of the private sector not offering it to it's employees as well as giving people more options. Right? Since Obamacare is the law then there is no need to regulate\force businesses to offer healthcare coverage options. They can either opt to offer it or pay the tax for not offering it if they fall into that specific category.

It's obvious you are not interested in addressing the the actual subject, so there is no reason for me to continue on with you on this topic.

Yawn. I have addressed these points and then some.You obviously can't read worth a fuck. These subsidies as a percentage of GDP are a drop in the bucket. Go take a shit.

[The_Noble_Cause]

NYTimes has provided a harrowing account of Foley's imprisonment, religious conversion, and execution at the hands of ISIS. In a journalistic landscape increasingly occupied by fake news and basement bloggers, it is refreshing to read real shoe leather reporting
NOTE - the article requires a minimal third grade reading level. KC, you may want to sit this one out. PS When you go to the dentist to get your dentures custom fitted for your slack jawed overbite, is it true you bring along a copy of Archie to read in the waiting room?


http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/26/world ... html?&_r=0

[Boomchild]

More health insurance changes on the way

"Employers have a financial incentive to offer such plans. Under the Affordable Care Act, employers in 2018 that offer plans that cost more than $10,200 for an individual or $27,500 for a family will be charged a 40 percent tax on the amount exceeding the threshold. By raising deductibles and lowering premiums, companies will lower their chance of triggering the tax."

http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/insuranc ... ar-BBaRM9P

So due to the the tax implemented by Obamacare, it is pushing employers to offer lower quality plans and increases the employee's out of pocket expenses. I thought the idea was to make healthcare better and more affordable. Doesn't seem it's actually going to make that happen.

[Monker]

Hillary has the Obamaitis...

Hillary: 'Don't Let Anybody Tell You' That 'Businesses Create Jobs'


thank you your thighness!

...and her very next sentence was, "You know, that old theory, trickle-down economics, that has been tried, that has failed. It has failed rather spectacularly."

In context, she is absolutely right.

But, of course, you don't care about context...you just want a phrase to pass about to support your politics.

[Boomchild]

Obama, in low demand, suits up for governor races

Democratic governor candidates also are better shielded from Obama's policies than Democratic candidates for Senate, whose votes can directly advance the president's agenda. With Obama's approval ratings at the lowest of his presidency, Democrats in tight Senate contests have distanced themselves. One called him irrelevant; another refused to say whether she even voted for him.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/ ... ar-BBbraly

Ouch! That comment has gotta hurt!

[The_Noble_Cause]

No, what she said is a lie. Trickle down did not fail. It was the best thing for Companies, and great for the one percent.

Unless a politician is a complete moron, any economic policy will be fine-tuned to appeal to the masses. While the GOP comes close, even they know better than to exclusively target policies to an oligarchy. The last great Supply Side effort, the George W Bush tax cuts, were sold as creating widely shared prosperity and being self-financing. Neither of these promises were true. So Hillary is 100% correct. Economic growth is driven by demand. Consumer demand is fueled by the middle and especially low income classes working paycheck-to paycheck. While the rich have significant purchasing power, they tend to save. So the idea of giving tax breaks to the affluent is not stimulative and NEVER has been. The old term for Supply Side Economics was "Horse-and Sparrow Economics". Meaning, when you feed a horse oats,it will shit some out on the road for the sparrows to peck at. Given the GOP's unflagging support for supply side policies, it seems they like being shit on more than Cartman's German shizer pornstar mom.

[JBlake]

Go easy on TNC today. His mommy just lost a lot of money.
https://tv.yahoo.com/blogs/tv-news/-hon ... 26154.html

LOL, Yeah, he's both the son and the molester.

[The_Noble_Cause]

Go easy on TNC today. His mommy just lost a lot of money.
https://tv.yahoo.com/blogs/tv-news/-hon ... 26154.html

LOL, Yeah, he's both the son and the molester.

Two grown men discussing a child pageant-themed TV show. Yeaa nothing creepy here. You are both just envious that Mamma Junebug was able to upgrade to a double-wide trailer while you're still saving tip money from the Waffle House. I bet you even add your own Robin Leach narration to the show and pretend you are watching "Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous." Sigh. Redneck jealousy is such an ugly thing.

[The_Noble_Cause]

Good thing Bill had Newt Gingrich to do the math for him. Clinton takes all the credit for "The contract for America". The last nine months of Clintons term we were in a recession. Something Democrats never seem to remember.

So you think supply-side economics screws over the working class, yet you praise Newt Gingrich, who never met a problem that couldn't be solved by more tax cuts? Huh? Talk about political cognitive dissonance. It is one thing to be an independent, but you are either just bi-polar or do not know what the hell it is you believe in.

[The_Noble_Cause]

Jon Lovitz Publicly Humiliates Hillary Over Her “Businesses Don’t Create Jobs” Nonsense [TWEET]

A real expert right there. Lovitz proudly joins the ranks of these other GOP celebrity A-listers.

[Boomchild]

Guess who's watching what you get in the mail?

Report Reveals Wider Tracking of Mail in U.S.

The audit found that in many cases the Postal Service approved requests to monitor an individual’s mail without adequately describing the reason or having proper written authorization.

The audit was posted in May without public announcement on the website of the Postal Service inspector general and got almost no attention.

Interviews and court records also show that the surveillance program was used by a county attorney and sheriff to investigate a political opponent in Arizona — the county attorney was later disbarred in part because of the investigation — and to monitor privileged communications between lawyers and their clients, a practice not allowed under postal regulations.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/report ... ar-BBbBDKr

You can't blame the implementation of these programs on B.O., so I am in no way doing that. However, prior to being elected B.O. did state he was opposed to things like this, such as the Patriot Act. That he felt it infringed on the privacy of Americans. He campaigned on the promise he was going to stop things such as this. Only to do a 180 and not only leave stuff like this in place but expand the scope in some areas. So I doubt even with the exposure of these programs, he will most likely do nothing to stop their use.

[Monker]

An Effervescing Republican
with tiny brain and great big mouth
once whispered to a tiny ear
the ear of one inferior
that by next June we'd all be dead, oh yeah!
because Ebola would spread.

The little one said:
"Oh my goodness I must stay at home!
And, every time I hear a tummy growl
I'll know the Ebola's on the prowl
and I'll never really be safe, you know
the Republicans they told me so!"
Everyone was nervy, oh yeah!

And the message was spread:
To CNN, the prime time news, and the crazy internet
they swallowed the story before they chewed
this spicy, hyped up, bullshit news
and tended to ignore the truth
preferring to survey a group
of stupid, mindless, ignorant, dupes, oh yeah!

And all the country took fright,
and ran around for all the day and the night
but all in vain, because, you see,
Ebola came and said: "Who me?!
You know, I wouldn't hurt not one of you.
I'd much prefer something to chew
and you're all to scant." oh yeah!

He ate the elephants instead.

[Monker]

http://www.techtimes.com/articles/18641/20141025/global-warning-is-a-big-fat-lie-and-the-science-behind-it-is-fake-john-coleman.htm

Global warming is a big fat lie and the science behind it is fake: John Coleman Co Founder of the Weather Channel.

Coleman's arguments (which he takes from others, since he is clueless) have been debunked for over 10yrs. I give up on your pop-up ridden link...but here is a link that looks at his common claims:

http://uscentrist.org/platform/position ... rming-scam

[JBlake]

"Oh, I guess they need some recallabrating".

http://www.pocketfullofliberty.com/voti ... es-to-dem/

Big surprise......

Too interesting, thus far, how all these machine malfunctions across the US, seem to all be in favor of Democraps. Pretty good indication of what's really going on.

[Monker]

http://www.techtimes.com/articles/18641/20141025/global-warning-is-a-big-fat-lie-and-the-science-behind-it-is-fake-john-coleman.htm

Global warming is a big fat lie and the science behind it is fake: John Coleman Co Founder of the Weather Channel.

Coleman's arguments (which he takes from others, since he is clueless) have been debunked for over 10yrs. I give up on your pop-up ridden link...but here is a link that looks at his common claims:

http://uscentrist.org/platform/position ... rming-scam

I won't need your link. I watched him interviewed last night while he destroyed all beliver morons with reality. Maybe you might try a anti virus. I had one pop up. More ice, colder temps. He just doesn't work where they are required to ONLY find what they need to prove their point, or be still. He just does research. It is what it is.

He doesn't do "research". He takes other people's research and politicizes it.

[JBlake]

Couldn't happen to a more despicable bunch..

House Dems fret debilitating losses


The political environment continues to deteriorate for House Democrats ahead of a midterm election that’s certain to diminish their ranks.

With President Barack Obama’s unpopularity hindering their candidates and Republican cash flooding into races across the country, Democrats are increasingly worried that the election will push them deep into the minority and diminish their hopes of winning back the majority in 2016 or beyond.


http://www.politico.com/story/2014/10/h ... z3HSXlZMQ2

Yeah, I'm very happy to read this, but like they say, it isn't over till TNC's mom(girlfriend) sings.

[The_Noble_Cause]

Yeah, I'm very happy to read this, but like they say, it isn't over till TNC's mom(girlfriend) sings.

Aw, how adorable. You and KC's passive aggressive posting styles are becoming harder to tell apart. It is EXACTLY like watching a couple that finishes each others sentences. Why, I bet you even typed this wearing a matching pink his/her monogrammed bathrobe. Way to defend your girl's honor, JBlake! I think somebody can confidently expect a York Peppermint Patty blowjob from their retarded lover tonight.

[JBlake]

Top Democratic strategists are blasting President Barack Obama for putting the Democratic Party in a precarious position heading into the midterm elections.

"It's puzzling--and to the Kay Hagans of the world, infuriating--the number of times President Obama has stepped in it, repeatedly reminding voters that a vote for Hagan is a vote for Obama's policies," Democratic strategist Christy Setzer told The Hill.

Another individual whom The Hill describes as a "top Democratic strategist" groused about Obama golfing this past weekend instead of helping Democrats.

"He and his team could have made it clear a long time ago that there's nothing more important than the Senate remaining in Democratic hands in 2014," said the Democratic strategist. The strategist said the Obama White House has "already set up their defense" and is "laying the predicate down for the blame to come. It's really obvious."

The internecine rancor within Democratic ranks has grown so intense that at least one Democratic candidate says his own party is torpedoing his candidacy.

"My national party--that I'm a member of--(was) trying to drive votes to Larry Pressler [the Independent candidate] and trying to drive up my negatives," Democratic U.S. Senate candidate Rick Weiland told the Argus Leader.

Democrats' angst is eclipsed only by an angry voting electorate fed up with an unpopular president and Congress.

A new ABC News/Washington Post poll finds that seven out of ten Americans rate the Obama economy negatively.

Voters head to the polls in seven days.

Yeah, I'll be sure to check my votes to make sure the machine doesn't switch them to democrap, like what's been going on in IL and MD.

[conversationpc]

Nice to know when revisiting old glories that some things on this forum haven't changed at all. The longer I've been away from this forum, the more I realize how much BS most Democrats and Republicans are filled with. Staying here would've retarded my political growth and likely just caused me to argue for the sake of arguing. I'm glad I stopped posting in this thread for the most part because I've learned a lot more elsewhere.

Carry on!

[The_Noble_Cause]

Good for you, Dave. When it comes to MR right wing dipshits, you were always a voice of reason. You continue along this new found path of political enlightenment, and I'm confident you will find your way inside the Democratic party soon enough. Just make sure to bring sum cold beers along with you.

[The_Noble_Cause]

http://twitchy.com/2014/10/27/dads-you-may-want-to-sign-up-if-only-for-the-bumper-sticker-pic/?utm_source=iacfbp&utm_medium=fbpage&utm_campaign=IAC

There's that GOP all-inclusiveness at work again. Here's the truth...Republican dads don't want daughters to date liberals because they are afraid of getting into a heated political argument at Thanksgiving dinner and getting their misinformed asses kicked. Pretty soon Cons will be saying the very idea of dating is progressive, and that the REAL conservative alternative is protecting the ideological bloodline through mandatory incest. Instead of engaging in outreach to expand the party's base, the GOP is becoming as insular as the Sawney Bean clan. This is how political parties become extinct.

[The_Noble_Cause]

More GOP policies at work.

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/ne ... r-20141023

[Monker]

So, who do you believe? Monker, seller of corn seed, or John coleman, co founder of the Weather Channel?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=amM1lUbIUyQ

Dude, this is the interview you are so psyched about? I saw this too, and it's just blabbing off and hoping to get naive people like to follow his opinions.

He was asked SEVERAL times for his data. At first he ignored the question. Then he mentioned the petition thing that a bunch of people signed, which was also posted in this forum. So, he backed his opinion by giving others opinions. What a loopy train of thought.

But, lets take his points one by one.

CO2 isn't a significant greenhouse gas. That assertion is simply crazy...and anybody claiming this is, IMO, nothing but a political tool spewing rhetoric for his agenda. Again, as I have said before...look at the other planets in our solar system. Mercury, right next to the sun, has NO CO2 and as a result the surface temperature is LESS than Venus, a lot less. It's a LOT less because Venus has a CO2 rich atmosphere. Than there is Mars, a surface temperature that varies wildly...because there is very little CO2. CO2 is a vital part of our atmosphere and how our planet regulates its temperature, and keeps it fairly even. Yes, there is very little in total percentage...but, that's the point and why it is critical to not fuck with it. A small change can have a large impact: http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn1 ... FBzeBbrv-5

Ice at the poles. This guy doesn't even get his facts straight. The surface area ice at the south pole is increasing. I have not heard of the 'thickness' increasing. But, the simple FACT is that land locked ice at BOTH poles is decreasing...and THAT affects ocean levels and such. He is simply flat out wrong, or is intentionally lying...especially when it comes to the north pole: http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/

Polar bears. I don't know anything about this...and I don't care much, to be honest. HOWEVER. He was asked where his data is. Well, WHERE IS IT? He is just spewing things out, most of it untrue, and hoping people will by into his rhetoric. Throw in the bits about the mainstream media and Al Gore...and he has naive Republicans eating out of his hand....all along not having to back up ANY of his claims with ANY true data.

Then there is his credentials, since YOU made the point of "co founder of the Weather Channel":

He is essentially a glorified local news Weatherman who co-founded the Weather Channel. He is not some "climate" expert. He has no training. He does no true "research". He simply repeats others arguments, gets facts completely wrong, or cherry-picks facts and takes them out of context in attempts to support his opinions.

Even Snopes has commented on him saying, "As Coleman's critics have noted, he does not hold a degree in climatology or any related discipline, nor has he studied or conducted any research in that field; he merely parrots arguments advanced by others. Moreover, much of his criticism of climate change deals with impugning the motives of those engaged in that discipline rather than refuting the science behind their work."

Read more at http://www.snopes.com/politics/science/ ... 3xcwYZ2.99

In short, Coleman is just another example of someone advancing a political agenda - which YOU have bought into.

[Boomchild]

Nice to know when revisiting old glories that some things on this forum haven't changed at all. The longer I've been away from this forum, the more I realize how much BS most Democrats and Republicans are filled with. Staying here would've retarded my political growth and likely just caused me to argue for the sake of arguing. I'm glad I stopped posting in this thread for the most part because I've learned a lot more elsewhere.

Carry on!

I think the term for this thing is called a "drive by".