Senate passes 800 billion dollar stimulus without 1 member readind the actual bill!!!

[audiolife 5,000+ posts]

If they can't afford it, they shouldn't have gotten it. Why that happened has been covered in the above post. Did you read every word in your mortgage when you signed it (if you own your place of residence)? Did you read every word in your car loan? I'm sure a small percentage of these defaulting loans were people being personally irresponsible, but just generally speaking, who do you trust more? A used car salesman or a person buying a car? //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/biggrin.gif.d71a5d36fcbab170f2364c9f2e3946cb.gif
The rest of the quoted section is either a correct assertion or not relevent. I'm a responsible person. My fico score is above 750. The baby boomer generation was handed a time when credit was exploding and nobody knew the morals or pitfalls of credit cards. I truly believe that by and large Gen Y has learned something from that, or are at least aware of the problems they are getting themselves into with credit cards. I had a high school math teacher back in 1998 that used credit card interest for nearly every word problem she gave us. It's not the end of people being irresponsible with credit, but the lessons are now well documented.

I'm not complicating issues. The issues are complicated. And yes, the government is only institution with the ability to correct this problem. It's Macroeconomics 101. When business investment, household buying power, employment, and imports/exports are all tanking, the government is the only entity capable of ceasing the downward spiral. The macroeconomy is a feedback loop, and right now we're on a drastically negative feedback cycle. Without someone with the paddles to stand over it and yell "CLEAR!" the industrial heart of America will stop beating.

They can't get social security right because old people vote, and like I said, rule number 1 in politics is don't get voted out. Something will happen to social security in the next 20 years. Either it will be drastically cut back (or abolished entirely), or it will simply run out of money and the monthly checks will stop showing up in mailboxes. Both parties have done bad with social security, but I'd just say that republicans had all three legislative branches of government for 6 years and nothing happened. Clinton's goal was to run a surplus for the forseeable future and use that money to replenish the coffers of social security for the baby boomers. Say what people might about presidential BJs, Clinton did good with the economy.

I've already discussed common sense, and how much it doesn't make sense on these big complicated issues. And again, I'm not standing up for anyone that pushed for deregulation in the 2000s, D or R. Rs are pushing for it still if you watch the interviews on the cable shows.

//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif you are a hoot..who made Clinton be MORE responsible? didnt somthing happen in 1997?//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif I guess you over look what you want but didn't Clinton get destroyed by his own party for welfare reform?//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif Did it help balance the budget?//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/wink.gif.608e3ea05f1a9f98611af0861652f8fb.gif And the deeper you go the more you end up being like you were accusing me of being FYI lol One sided politics is weak its also a proven fact that is why Obama needs to go towards the center!!!

 

[02dodgeram 10+ year member]

//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif you are a hoot..

Why thank you. When I'm talking politics I don't usually get accused of being entertaining. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/biggrin.gif.d71a5d36fcbab170f2364c9f2e3946cb.gif

who made Clinton be MORE responsible? didnt somthing happen in 1997?//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif I guess you over look what you want but didn't Clinton get destroyed by his own party for welfare reform?//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif

You keep on thinking that I agree with everything democrats have done in the past 20 years. I've said over and over and over again that I don't, and cited specific examples of where I disagreed with them.

Did it help balance the budget?//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/wink.gif.608e3ea05f1a9f98611af0861652f8fb.gif And the deeper you go the more you end up being like you were accusing me of being FYI lol One sided politics is weak its also a proven fact that is why Obama needs to go towards the center!!!

Yes, Obama absolutely needs to go toward the center. The problem is, what is the center? Nobody can define the center of this country. You might say that 65% of the country believes that what obama is doing is the center based on the Gallup daily tracking poll, and only 23% think it's too far left. I would agree that is a horrible way to define it, but the point is that it's undefinable. As of January 20th, we were so far right, that it takes some huge liberal agenda to bring us back to center. If we start mandating vegetarianism or seize and destroy all pickup trucks, that's too far left.

Point out something I've said that is blindly following doctrine for no other reason than "they are my party". I've backed up everything I've said with sound reasoning of why I feel the way I feel.

 

[audiolife 5,000+ posts]

Why thank you. When I'm talking politics I don't usually get accused of being entertaining. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/biggrin.gif.d71a5d36fcbab170f2364c9f2e3946cb.gif


You keep on thinking that I agree with everything democrats have done in the past 20 years. I've said over and over and over again that I don't, and cited specific examples of where I disagreed with them.

Yes, Obama absolutely needs to go toward the center. The problem is, what is the center? Nobody can define the center of this country. You might say that 65% of the country believes that what obama is doing is the center based on the Gallup daily tracking poll, and only 23% think it's too far left. I would agree that is a horrible way to define it, but the point is that it's undefinable. As of January 20th, we were so far right, that it takes some huge liberal agenda to bring us back to center. If we start mandating vegetarianism or seize and destroy all pickup trucks, that's too far left.

Point out something I've said that is blindly following doctrine for no other reason than "they are my party". I've backed up everything I've said with sound reasoning of why I feel the way I feel.

Most polls he fell from 70% to under 60%. Just like the deal with Barney Frank you said was no ones bizz..it is a direct conflict of interest to be on a governmental board over seeing banks and lenders while dating someone that is a high ranking official on one of those institutions PERIOD! Spending 4 trillion dollars in NEW spending is not center of anything. We have stimulus 1, second half of the TARP, Tarp 2, Omnibus, health care and stimulus 2 all being chatted about:laugh: you are a hoot, you backed up everything based on a view point no facts. Since NAFTA has gone into effect how many manufacturing jobs have left the United States? I will concur NAFTA is not the sole reason we lost those jobs but to simply over look it because it is only a portion to the issue is absurd. Just like others motives in government. I do not reward failure even if it is for an emotional cause....There is more to being leaders than being a humanitarian, a scholar or a great speaker.

 

[02dodgeram 10+ year member]

Most polls he fell from 70% to under 60%.

Still over half the country. We can squable about 10 points, but what's the difference? It speaks to the larger point I was making.

Just like the deal with Barney Frank you said was no ones bizz..it is a direct conflict of interest to be on a governmental board over seeing banks and lenders while dating someone that is a high ranking official on one of those institutions PERIOD!

You're right, it's a conflict of interest. You're absolutely right. I didn't say it wasn't. I don't know enough about it to give you my up or down approval on his character. I said he's smart and his voting record isn't bad. But you're still thinking small political battles, and not the overall war. If there's a good idea out there, it should be looked at. It's not time to knit pick about things that happened in the past.

Spending 4 trillion dollars in NEW spending is not center of anything. We have stimulus 1, second half of the TARP, Tarp 2, Omnibus, health care and stimulus 2 all being chatted about:laugh: you are a hoot, you backed up everything based on a view point no facts.

Why is it not center? Because cable news doesn't say it is? Most people want healthcare reform. Most people want the economy to work. Most people want a new park on their street (omnibus). I'm speaking in concepts, not specific examples. We're thinking on two different wavelengths. I'm not going for political fights. I'm going for large scale solutions.

Since NAFTA has gone into effect how many manufacturing jobs have left the United States? I will concur NAFTA is not the sole reason we lost those jobs but to simply over look it because it is only a portion to the issue is absurd. Just like others motives in government. I do not reward failure even if it is for an emotional cause....

I don't know the number of jobs that have left the US because of NAFTA. I don't like NAFTA. I already said that. Someone else was arguing for NAFTA. It carved away at our middle class, and is a perfect example of why Free Trade is not a good idea for America. The upside of it is that we get cheaper goods. The downside of it is that we lose jobs, so nobody can buy the cheaper goods. It does create some transit jobs and retail jobs, but those aren't good jobs. Which party supports free trade as a part of their political platform? Conservatives!

There is more to being leaders than being a humanitarian, a scholar or a great speaker.

What do you look for in a good leader? I'd add "gets things done", "logical", and "flexible" to the list, but those three you listed are at the top of mine.

My entire argument can be summed up as: We're out of balace, too far to the right, regardless of the party.

 

[audiolife 5,000+ posts]

Still over half the country. We can squable about 10 points, but what's the difference? It speaks to the larger point I was making.


You're right, it's a conflict of interest. You're absolutely right. But you're still thinking small political battles, and not the overall war. If there's a good idea out there, it should be looked at. It's not time to knit pick about things that happened in the past.

Why is it not center? Because cable news doesn't say it is? Most people want healthcare reform. Most people want the economy to work. Most people want a new park on their street (omnibus). I'm speaking in concepts, not specific examples. We're thinking on two different wavelengths. I'm not going for political fights. I'm going for large scale solutions.

I don't know the number of jobs that have left the US because of NAFTA. I don't like NAFTA. I already said that. Someone else was arguing for NAFTA. It carved away at our middle class, and is a perfect example of why Free Trade is not a good idea for America. The upside of it is that we get cheaper goods. The downside of it is that we lose jobs, so nobody can buy the cheaper goods. It does create some transit jobs and retail jobs, but those aren't good jobs. Which party supports free trade as a part of their political platform? Conservatives!

What do you look for in a good leader? I'd add "gets things done", "logical", and "flexible" to the list, but those three you listed are at the top of mine.

My entire argument can be summed up as: We're out of balace, too far to the right, regardless of the party.

Common sense and a willingness to own up to problems:laugh: Saying you disagree as a politician and do nothing about what you disagree with is weak. Since what you are saying about trade I guess I will go off your word and expect free trade to tighten up...or else LOL. Cable news does not bend me one way or the other, I look at the facts then base an opinion which you can't do off some networks because there be nothing but gum drops and cotton candy clouds in what they report about.//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif It is also hard to get a large scale solution without getting into specifics. Reason why libbies won't go into specifics is those who asked for specifics were lobbyists...

 

[azimuth 5,000+ posts]

i guess the people who wanted to live in a lefty world, full of thought police, got their wish. on a side note: i find it funny how we are giving universal health care billions of dollars, even though we don't even have universal health care wonderful new legislation we have.

 

[02dodgeram 10+ year member]

Common sense and a willingness to own up to problems:laugh:

Well common sense would put us in the dark ages within 100 years. You've got to look beyond "common" sense to solve complex problems. That method would have us moving from one fire to the other, creating bigger problems as we go. And what hasn't Obama owned up to in your eyes? If memory serves, everyone's been saying he's been all doom and gloom recently.

Saying you disagree as a polition and do nothing about what you disagree with is weak.

Agreed.

Since what you are saying about trade I guess I will go off your word and expect free trade to tighten up...or else LOL.

Not quite sure what that means, but I think we're in agreement that free trade isn't a good thing for America specifically. In theory, it IS a good thing, but only in the overal scale. The stronger economy drops some, while the weaker economy grows rapidly until they meet in the middle. Overall, more production is achieved, but at the cost of the stronger economy.

Cable news does not bend me one way or the other, I look at the facts then base an opinion which you can't do off some networks because there be nothing but gum drops and cottan candy clouds in what they report about.//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif It is also hard to get a large scale solution without getting into specifics. Reason why libbies won't go into specifics is those who asked for specifics were lobbyists...

"libbies" start with a winning concept, and then write the details to pass legislation. Conservatives start with details, and hope it forms into some kind of concept by vote time. Every great achievement we've made as a nation has been because of "radicals" and liberal philosophy. Our founders were the most radical people in the world in their time. Lincoln was a complete radical by turning the slaves loose. Teddy Roosevelt radically set aside land for national parks that could have been used for development. FDR spent us out of the depression (in 2 phases). Eisenhower spent tons of money to build our highway system. Clinton radically taxed the upper class to balance the budget.

The parties themselves are more suited to different roles. Liberals should be in power making progress, while Conservatives should apply the brakes if we start progressing too quickly for our own good. Right now we're in desperate need of progress.

When we come out of this recession, we'll have to quickly turn our attention to inflation, and we'll probably see interest rates up in the 7-8% range. Hence, apply the brakes.

 

[02dodgeram 10+ year member]

i guess the people who wanted to live in a lefty world, full of thought police, got their wish. on a side note: i find it funny how we are giving universal health care billions of dollars, even though we don't even have universal health care wonderful new legislation we have.

Who said a thing about thought police? Has anyone started policing thoughts? You just invented that.

He's budgeting for universal healthcare now, based on the assumption that legislation is passed this year, and goes into effect next. It is next year's budget he's just put out, and I'd think a fiscal conservative would appreciate him being honest about the cost ahead of time.

 

[02dodgeram 10+ year member]

And as a guilty pleasure of mine "If you don't like it, you can leave my country".

That was totally uncalled for, but after how many times I've had it said to me, I had to do it.

 

[azimuth 5,000+ posts]

Well common sense would put us in the dark ages within 100 years. You've got to look beyond "common" sense to solve complex problems. That method would have us moving from one fire to the other, creating bigger problems as we go. And what hasn't Obama owned up to in your eyes? If memory serves, everyone's been saying he's been all doom and gloom recently.


Agreed.

Not quite sure what that means, but I think we're in agreement that free trade isn't a good thing for America specifically. In theory, it IS a good thing, but only in the overal scale. The stronger economy drops some, while the weaker economy grows rapidly until they meet in the middle. Overall, more production is achieved, but at the cost of the stronger economy.

"libbies" start with a winning concept, and then write the details to pass legislation. Conservatives start with details, and hope it forms into some kind of concept by vote time. Every great achievement we've made as a nation has been because of "radicals" and liberal philosophy. Our founders were the most radical people in the world in their time. Lincoln was a complete radical by turning the slaves loose. Teddy Roosevelt radically set aside land for national parks that could have been used for development. FDR spent us out of the depression (in 2 phases). Eisenhower spent tons of money to build our highway system. Clinton radically taxed the upper class to balance the budget.

The parties themselves are more suited to different roles. Liberals should be in power making progress, while Conservatives should apply the brakes if we start progressing too quickly for our own good. Right now we're in desperate need of progress.

When we come out of this recession, we'll have to quickly turn our attention to inflation, and we'll probably see interest rates up in the 7-8% range. Hence, apply the brakes.

that statement is false. i use global warming as an example. the libs have started the debate at the world ending, working backwards with their "science" to get a desired result. they live in a world of their own. an unrealistic world.

 

[azimuth 5,000+ posts]

Who said a thing about thought police? Has anyone started policing thoughts? You just invented that.
He's budgeting for universal healthcare now, based on the assumption that legislation is passed this year, and goes into effect next. It is next year's budget he's just put out, and I'd think a fiscal conservative would appreciate him being honest about the cost ahead of time.

liberals. obama and his administration hasn't started yet. any argument with a liberal, that they can't win, ends up with the other guy being a racist, or a hate monger. it's an argument stopper. political correctness is thought policing:fyi

 

[azimuth 5,000+ posts]

:laughbama, the "ear mark free" administration, has a literal earmark in the new bill. joe biden has close to a dozen earmarks in it. obama must think we're stupid. and in some cases, he's probably right.

 

[azimuth 5,000+ posts]

and as far as the republicans go. they aren't any better. michael steele comes out and bashes obama for wasteful spending, yet tons of republicans have earmarks in the bill also. we no longer have representation in washington, liberal, or conservative.

 

[azimuth 5,000+ posts]

president obama is now going to remove his name. not the earmark. just his name.

 

[its_bacon12 10+ year member]

My entire argument can be summed up as: We're out of balace, too far to the right, regardless of the party.

But fiscally conservative doesn't lead to Statewide bankruptcy in recessions (see California, soon New York)

I don't care what you say, you're a liberal/democrat no matter what you label yourself. Everything you advocate and believe in is EXACTLY what MSM (main street media) provides us all with, and exactly what Dems/libtards believe.

Now, I can justifiably say I am conservative, but not necessarily Republican, although most my beliefs lean you to believe that with fiscal and monetary policies. Now, I am ok with being called a republican but I prefer conservative.

Now, how can you justify this new budget outline by Obama?