So why isn't our President

[justplugit]

Originally Posted by spence

You think he's going to fix it next week?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

A true leader would take the bull by the horns and start imediately.

Problem is , he's got the bull by the tail.

"Manana, manana, manana is good enuff for him."

[spence]

Originally Posted by justplugit

A true leader would take the bull by the horns and start imediately.

Problem is , he's got the bull by the tail.

"Manana, manana, manana is good enuff for him."

It's a moot issue anyway. The GOP has already stated their highest priority is ensuring he's a one term president. You know where their priorities lie.

-spence

[justplugit]

Originally Posted by spence

It's a moot issue anyway. The GOP has already stated their highest priority is ensuring he's a one term president. You know where their priorities lie.

-spence

Spence, if he took the reins and brought Congress back, his ratings
would go up. No doubt in my mind.
If he were a true leader, he would be above politics and make his priority
leading America out of the financial debacle and getting the jobless back to work.

Maybe it's "above his pay grade."

If he had his priorities straight and worked on the econmy rather than all
that time spent on Obamacare we would be in a lot better shape.
Unfortunately, it wasn't part of his agenda.

[Slipknot]

Have they figured out by now that we cut our own throats by buying imported crap cheap that used to be made here with pride and quality and made to last ?

keep buying junk from overseas and see where that gets us jobwise

pretty soon when we stop buying their crap, they are going to slow down there also since they'll run out of customers

America was good at educating the world, can we still do that? Let's educate ourselves!

Buy American

[Slipknot]

A good leader is supposed to set a good example

we need a great leader now

[Fly Rod]

Originally Posted by Slipknot

A good leader is supposed to set a good example

we need a great leader now

We do not need a great leader, we just need a leader that is willing to take the country in the right direction.

Spence's leader can not do that.

[Raven]

he was born to follow

[scottw]

Originally Posted by spence

It's a moot issue anyway. The GOP has already stated their highest priority is ensuring he's a one term president. You know where their priorities lie.

-spence

"The GOP"....... "stated" this as their highest priority when?....did the Dems NOT want Bush to be a "one term president"? Does any party want the leader of the other party to NOT be a one termer?

such sophistry Spence.....tisk tisk


wait....I found it...shocking

Decision 2010 on msnbc.com
GOP leader's top goal: Make Obama 1-term president


funny... that's what the headline says but nowhere in the article is it "stated" even though it would be stating the obvious would it not?.........MSpenceNBC is great

according to THINKPROGRESS ..GOP Rhetoric Evolves From ‘Jobs Is Highest Priority’ To ‘Nothing More Important Than Abortion’

REALCLEARPOLITICS ....Banning Federal Abortion Funds "Highest" GOP Priority

Cleveland.com GOP's No. 1 priority -- burying the estate tax -- is telling

Bisiness Insider...The GOP's #1 Priority Next Year: Deprive Obamacare Of Its Funding

DailyDemocrat...Time to take GOP back from radical right. Confronting them and wresting the Republican Party from their grip is a matter of the highest priority for the nation.



OUCh!!!!...say it ain't so HUFFPO

Huffington: Obama's Highest Priority Is Campaigning For Reelection

[spence]

Originally Posted by scottw

"The GOP"....... "stated" this as their highest priority when?....did the Dems NOT want Bush to be a "one term president"? Does any party want the leader of the other party to NOT be a one termer?

The GOP has worked against just about every Obama action since his inauguration on the basis that he fundamentally runs counter to American values. It's not even about policy...

You sure didn't see this with Bush in either election.

McConnell probably made the strongest direct statement as a GOP leader, but it's been underneath everything since day one...

-spence

[scottw]

Originally Posted by spence

McConnell probably made the strongest direct statement as a GOP leader, but it's been underneath everything since day one...

-spence

sooo...as usual you are just making things up and stating them as fact

Quote:
Originally Posted by spence
" The GOP has already stated their highest priority is ensuring he's a one term president". -spence

[spence]

Originally Posted by scottw

sooo...as usual you are just making things up and stating them as fact

The proof is in the pudding.

-spence

[scottw]

Originally Posted by spence

The proof is in the pudding.

-spence

slither

[scottw]

Originally Posted by spence

Obama fundamentally runs counter to American values.
-spence

I promised...so here you go...you stated an actual fact...

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

It's a moot issue anyway. The GOP has already stated their highest priority is ensuring he's a one term president. You know where their priorities lie.

-spence

As a Republican, let me say that's precisely where their priorities should be. Obama could not be doing more damage if he was a paid Al Queda agent.

Spence, can you please tell me what evidence there is, that liberal economics are a good idea? Can you tell me a liberal state that's thriving? Can you show me a state that isn't suffering because of union benefits? Can you show me an inner city, dominated by Democrats, that is improving? How many countries in Western Europe are thriving?

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Obama could not be doing more damage if he was a paid Al Queda agent.

Number 2!

Spence, can you please tell me what evidence there is, that liberal economics are a good idea?

Well, looking at the past century of tax increases, debt increases, regulation increases and bloated government...and despite all our current problems...we've still managed to build the most prosperous and successful nation in the history of the modern world.

Can't be all bad.

Can you tell me a liberal state that's thriving?

Probably not. All their federal tax dollars are sucked away and sent to the Red states to fund projects that create jobs

Can you show me a state that isn't suffering because of union benefits?

Most states are suffering because of bad management. I've never advocated union excess. I'd also note that most state and municipal budget issues were created at the local level...

Can you show me an inner city, dominated by Democrats, that is improving?

Can you show me an inner city dominated by Republicans improving or not?

How many countries in Western Europe are thriving?

Off the top of my head I can think of one that has extensive social programs that's doing great...GERMANY.

-spence

[scottw]

Originally Posted by spence

Number 2!


Well, looking at the past century of tax increases, debt increases, regulation increases and bloated government...and despite all our current problems...we've still managed to build the most prosperous and successful nation in the history of the modern world.

Can't be all bad.



Probably not. All their federal tax dollars are sucked away and sent to the Red states to fund projects that create jobs



Most states are suffering because of bad management. I've never advocated union excess. I'd also note that most state and municipal budget issues were created at the local level...


Can you show me an inner city dominated by Republicans improving or not?

Off the top of my head I can think of one that has extensive social programs that's doing great...GERMANY.

-spence

this is stupidity

[Jim in CT]

Spence - you are precious, you really are...

"and despite all our current problems...we've still managed to build the most prosperous and successful nation in the history of the modern world.Can't be all bad."

Funny, when Obama was campaigning on the need for "change", libs like you were not saying that things weren't so bad. All they talked about was how bad things were, thus the need for "change". And things are worse now than they ever were in 2008. Go figure.

Furthermore, all that borrowing you say isn't a big deal? It soon will be. Medicare has a $30 trillion shortfall projected for the next 50 years. If you don't think that's a big deal, you are as clueless as they come.

"All their federal tax dollars are sucked away and sent to the Red states to fund projects that create jobs "

Spence, listen to me, please. Wealth re-distribution is the cornerstone of your ideology, not mine. Now you are complaining that rich states are suffering because they are forced to give too much money to poor states. SPENCE IS COMPLAINING ABOUT WEALTH RE-DISTRIBUTION!!! You sound like a tea-partier. AND YOU'LL STILL VOTE DEMOCRAT. Unfreakinbelievable.

"Most states are suffering because of bad management."

And which party has dominated in the states that are nearly bankrupt? CT, IL, RI, MA, CA? Notice any patterns there? Those are blue states. TX is adding jobs like crazy.

"I've never advocated union excess."

Your party does. If you mention that unions need to be reasonable, libs say you hate the middle class.

"Can you show me an inner city dominated by Republicans improving or not?"

I can show you that red states are the ones adding jobs. I can show you that, but it won't mean anything to you, because somewhere along the way, you surrendered any ability to think.

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Spence - you are precious, you really are...

Funny, when Obama was campaigning on the need for "change", libs like you were not saying that things weren't so bad. All they talked about was how bad things were, thus the need for "change". And things are worse now than they ever were in 2008. Go figure.

Obama didn't campaign that America was bad, he was talking about the leadership in Washington.

Furthermore, all that borrowing you say isn't a big deal? It soon will be. Medicare has a $30 trillion shortfall projected for the next 50 years. If you don't think that's a big deal, you are as clueless as they come.

You're misquoting me, I never said that debt wasn't a big deal, rather, that even considering it the past 100 years have been pretty damn good for Americans. Additionally, that debt is a product of both Democratic and Republican leadership...

Spence, listen to me, please. Wealth re-distribution is the cornerstone of your ideology, not mine. Now you are complaining that rich states are suffering because they are forced to give too much money to poor states. SPENCE IS COMPLAINING ABOUT WEALTH RE-DISTRIBUTION!!! You sound like a tea-partier. AND YOU'LL STILL VOTE DEMOCRAT. Unfreakinbelievable.

Not complaining that they are suffering, rather pointing out that your Red states are benefiting disproportionately from this "liberal" ideology on one measure. If you are to present a rounded argument I'd think you'd want to factor this in.

The real world isn't black and white, or red and blue for that matter.

And which party has dominated in the states that are nearly bankrupt? CT, IL, RI, MA, CA? Notice any patterns there? Those are blue states. TX is adding jobs like crazy.

About 40 states have serious budget shortfalls.

And as has already been mentioned, the job growth in Texas has largely been driven by high energy prices and perhaps investment in education along with a generally pro-business climate. Look at what Perry has done to fight environmental regulation to benefit local corporations...but at what expense to the health of Texans?

There's also the other side of Texas, it has one of the worst poverty rates in the Country. In fact looking nationwide the bottom of the list seems to be filled with Red states.

Your party does. If you mention that unions need to be reasonable, libs say you hate the middle class.

My party? It may surprise you how I vote...

I can show you that red states are the ones adding jobs. I can show you that, but it won't mean anything to you, because somewhere along the way, you surrendered any ability to think.

My thinker is actually working quite well.

The problem Jim is that your arguments are really shallow. Get below the surface just a bit and the real world is a heck of a lot more complicated. I agree some Red states are doing well, but did you ever ask yourself why? Is it simply because they're Red or are there other reasons like Federal investment or industry trends that are part of the equation? If some Red states are doing well does that mean they're all doing well? Does that mean all Blue states are failing?

Are EU nations struggling simply because of large social programs, or could an inability to integrate millions of immigrants also be a factor?

The funny thing is that the success of the USA hasn't been because of liberal or conservative ideas...it's been because of both.

It was interesting to see the Republican debate the other night when every candidate said they wouldn't take a 10:1 spending cut to tax increase ratio to reduce the deficit. This doesn't sound like leadership, it sounds like absolutism of those trapped by dogma.

Reagan would have taken 10:1 and proudly proclaimed it as a great Conservative success.

Remember the wise words of Obi Wan Kenobi - "Only a Sith deals in absolutes."

-spence

[scottw]

Originally Posted by spence

Obama didn't campaign that America was bad, he was talking about the leadership in Washington.


-spence

he didn't??? I think it's time to relive some quotes

[detbuch]

Jim in CT: Spence, can you please tell me what evidence there is, that liberal economics are a good idea?

Originally Posted by spence

Well, looking at the past century of tax increases, debt increases, regulation increases and bloated government...and despite all our current problems...we've still managed to build the most prosperous and successful nation in the history of the modern world.

Can't be all bad.

-spence

You've failed to actually make the connection between "liberal economics" and building "the most prosperous and successful nation in the history of the modern world." If by "liberal economics" we mean Progressive and Keynsian, it could well be said that our strong, conservative foundation has been able to withstand (less and less)the intrusion of liberal economics (tax and spend massively in excess of revenue). And that we built that "most prosperous and successful nation" before, not "despite," our current problems, and that the liberal economic intrusion in the form of "tax increases, debt increases, regulation increases and bloated government" have begun to finally strangle that success. If you track the growth of the National Debt, it really began to grow almost continually and in large quantity with the ascendence of progressive politics. It started out around $75 million with the debt accrued due the Revolutionary War, and was lowered with bumps up and down due to spending on Constitutionally sanctioned Federal actions until somewhere in 1835 it had shrunk to less than $34 thousand. After the costly Civil War and the beginning of progressive political views it started on a gradual then sharp uptick. And by progressive I don't mean Democrat. Both parties have been acting "progressively." Certainly Teddy Roosevelt and Herbert Hoover were progressives. FDR simply jumped the shark and created progressivism on steroids, which Obama wants to emulate and surpass.