Obama...State of the Union Address

[longfisher]

...was a Bush initiative supported by a Republican-dominated Congress before 9/11.

Please tell me how Bush's reluctant veto pen and the then non-existent Democratic majority in the Congress that didn't materialize until 2006 had anything to do with the largest FDR-like entitlement program enacted in decades? I thought that dope Bush had become a Democrat.

You on the right suffer from early dementia, as judging from the shortness of your memories...hardly wisdom as the last poster suggests.

Or, is it that when the truth of history doesn't fit your recall you simply resort to historical revision?

Partisan hacks.


LongFisher

[RCARNEY]

Longfish
Federal deficit for 2006 was 1.9% GDP
2007 was 1.2% GDP
2008 was 2.7% GDP
2009 was 3.3% GDP
estimate for 2010 is 11.2% GDP
Please remind us when the Dems. took control of Congress.

I know figures lie and liars figure. There is no point clouding the issue with numbers that I found in TIME.

But tell us what your idea of utopia would be and who would be in charge. Of the choices in 2000 and 2004, I will take the reckless compassionate conservative over "the earth has a fever" Gore and the "stupidfied with fear" Bush over "I voted for the war before I voted against the war" Kerry.

In my mind this is still the best country in the world, even with our faults, and would take it over the Middle East despite your praise for it's culture. It is just that we "partisan hacks" have real concerns about the current direction the current administration is determined to take us.

[canyongear]

Well we wouldn't be in half of this mess, the other half perhaps, If....Barney Fife, a democrat, was not in charge of the house financial services committee..

"Quote from Wikipedia":

Frank became the chairman of the House Financial Services Committee in 2007 after the Democratic Party won a majority in the House. The committee oversees the entire financial services industry, which includes the securities, insurance, banking, and housing industries.

F'ing all I got to say...this wasn't a dot.bomb bubble..it was a housing fiasco..led by the democrats..and executed by FNMA and FHLMC, both quasi-governmental agencies, not to mention HUD which has the full, faith and credit backing of the US bank book. Friggin pitiful..use of power and stewardship by an elected official from a great state. Hopefully, Mass. has another revelation in the next election, as this ranger needs to go and be shunned forever.

[JFT]

Great post Longfisher.

You're right about the debt stuff. It is astonishing that we have gone from the black ink that Clinton left us straight downhill to truly unsustainable debt.

To POTUS' credit, he turned around the economy and it is growing. I got a brokerage statement yesterday that showed 25% growth in 2009. Pretty impressive, but greatly tempered by the massive spending it took to heal the massive financial wounds inflicted by GWB.

I thought the SOTU was pretty good. I just hope to God he can come through on at least some of his promises.

Here's what mystifies me:

Why didn't all you guys screaming about Obama's spending say anything while GWB spent and borrowed us into this situation?

DITTO and AMEN !

[longfisher]

That is, you're confusing the national debt with the annual deficit. They're different things altogether, or, don't you know that.

As an analogy, the national debt is like what an individual might owe overall in all accounts, credit card, bank loan, car loan, and mortgage. The deficit is what whether or not your spending more than you earn on a short time frame, say monthly.

As another anology, the national debt is like the balance of a balance sheet in business. The deficit is like the income statement provided to managers each month to see how they're doing on a more short-term basis.

In an above post I referred to a chart I'd posted early in my membership at SFM.com. I've attached it again below, even though it's dated now with Obama having made substantial contributions to the overall debt now.

It doesn't help resolve anything if you and I are talking about completely different things, especially if you're doing that deliberately and as a diversion to avoid facing the reality of the poor to disasterous financial stewardship during the Bush years.

So, kind sir, please look up the national debt numbers from a source you like and post them as a counterargument to my assertion that Bush put us more deeply in debt than any contemporary president in modern times (so far, as Obama seems on track to overtake even the dope Bush) instead of posting and arguing for irrelevant statistics on a completely different measure.

If you won't debate honestly then you, Sir, deserve the moniker "partisan hack".

LongFisher

[longfisher]

...as my firm belief is that they're all so beholding to monied interests because it costs so much to get elected that the pendulum swings in who's actually occupying the White House or in the majority in the Congress doesn't seem to make much difference...

...except in the minds of those who have become convinced by these two parties that minutia matters.

My entire thesis since joining this board and these discussions has been that both parties play us for fools. They do so by enraging us about petty issues, principly social and moral issues, that cause hackles to rise on the necks of the left and right. That angst causes fierce debate but it's all both running in place and deliberately evoked smoke and mirrors.

While we're fighting over whether or not John and Jack can marry or whether it's OK to have the word God on our currency, the elites of the country, right and left, retire to their fancy waterfront villas and stare in amazement that we're so stupid to squander all our energies fighing one another over divisions entirely made up by the elites. Then they quietly change the laws to allow their goose who lays the golden eggs, Wall Street, to encroach ever more on our lives, steal our money and squander it on items and issues that benefit the rich.

You emphasize that my choices are among those who ran in previous elections. You present me with a false choice. I vote Libertarian or Independent whenever there's a Libertarian or Independent on the ballot in any race no matter whether or not I know one thing about the candidate.

Neither the left or the right ever present a candidate I can support fully. That's because I know that the only thing that really changes with changes in political leadership in the Federal Government is whose address is on the checks the rich will give out as political contributions after the election, if they wait that long. All politicians are behoding to their donors as parasites are to their hosts.

So, representative democracy does not really exist here in the U.S. anymore because the term itself implies the politicians are beholding to the people; i.e., that they are our representatives and they act as honest agents on behalf of the people. They're not. The people can't possibly contribute enough money to get them elected because the rich and, more recently, the corporations and PACs can easily outspend the people. So, the voice of the people is never heard. The only voices that really matter are those of the monied elite.

So, what changes when the parties trade spots in Washington D.C.? The only things that really change with each passing administration is the color (from red to blue or blue to red) and those that the resulting patronage system rewards for having helped install a particular party. That's all. Nothing you and I might want for our country changes...at all.

I've said this before, I'll say it again for emphasis, Mr. Rcarney,

the greatest trick any policitian ever pulled on the American people was to erect false controversies (gays in the military, homo-marriage, partial birth abortion, etc.) and to convince us that those issues were of paramount importance in the greater scheme of things so we would not pry too deeply into the complex inner workings of the government and economy to discover how we've been HAD!

And you, Mr. Rcarney, if you deliberately chose to confuse the deficit with the national debt and erect a false debate are precisely the sort of person they've already had.

LongFisher

[RCARNEY]

Thanks so much for talking down to me and the rest of the uninformed. I always had the opinion that we had the right to pick the greater of the inadequate on election day. You are correct that it is futile to hope that there will be any improvements for us. The two party system does nothing to bring hope to us. Yes, both parties are beholding to their donors. The problem with the left, in my humble opinion, is based on their never ending desire to give away our hard earned money to buy votes from non-producers. In no way am I considering seniors in the aforementioned group. The longer this goes on, the worse it will become. At some point we will reach the point of no return, What do you suppose will happen if the Dems. finally bring statehood to D.C. and P.R.? Eddie Murphy claimed that the attempted assassin of the Pope was hoping to take the express train to hell, I hope the right might prolong the inevitable for us. We do not suffer as much from lack of revenue as we suffer from out of control spending and unless I am that naive, Congress submits most spending bills that I merely mentioned that Bush did not use the veto pen upon receipt. You took exception to my response to anothers question and in doing so, dragged me into this soon to end back and forth discussion. Our current leader wants to take the lead on the spending issue. Being conservative does not make one a partisan hack unless there is a conservative party.
Understanding your disdain for GWB, it sure would not matter to you that the country did suffer a significant hurricane expense that you are sure to say was managed improperly, suffered 9/11 and in your opinion, two expensive and unjustified wars.
I notice that in your writings that you complain about leadership, which is not unfounded, but unless I missed it, you offer no solid suggestions for improvement other than that you vote for a Libertarian or independant, whether you know anything about them or not. You come across to be more thoughtful than to be one that would vote blindly rather than voting while holding your nose. We still await your idea of utopia, which most certainly must be outside our borders.

[longfisher]

...spelled out in a post I made some months ago.

Please see...

What To Do If Americn Turned Off Beck and Olberman

Thanks for asking.

LongFisher

[Big Fish Billy]

Somebody analyzed the blinking, said Obama was worse than McCain....blinking=lying.......