Obama couldn't govern himself out of a wet paper bag

[Magic Man]

It's so cute when a Smurph tries to reason.

It's even cuter when he outreasons an angry groundskeeper.

 

[Revoltingest]

It's even cuter when he outreasons an angry groundskeeper.

How on Earth did you win a humor award, when you just repeat re-worded versions of my jokes?
Besides, I've moved on from being an angry groundskeeper....check the new title.

 

[Magic Man]

How on Earth did you win a humor award, when you just repeat re-worded versions of my jokes?

Who said that was how I won it? Sometimes using your own words is better than anything else. And who said that was meant to be funny? And why are you so hung up on the fact that I've won a humor award. Jealousy doesn't become you.

Besides, I've moved on from being an angry groundskeeper....check the new title.

Then you might want to change your avatar. You named me based on my avatar. I did the same with you. Oh, sorry, I guess I should try to be funny for you. Take my wife, please.

 

[Sunstone]

The exact same unemployment and welfare regulations existed before and immediately after 2008, so "sending these people checks for doing nothing" clearly did not cause the rise of unemployment since 2008. It was caused by the recession.

Silly guy. You're trying to use reason to refute what amounts to a religion. You can't reason someone out of a position they did not reason themselves into.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

You can't reason someone out of a position they did not reason themselves into.

Aint that the trufe.

 

[madhatter85]

What are you talking about? When has the right ever said that and meant it? That's generally just something they say to get elected or when they know they have no chance of getting what they want. It's like having someone hold you back from fighting someone else. You can talk all kinds of trash and pretend you'd back it up if only this guy holding you back would get out of the way. And it is true that republicans want to take away unemployment benefits.

and that is exactly what the media is trying to get you to belive, congrats on being gullible. go watch some cpsan instead of foxnews.

I'm still waiting to hear what these "backhanded attempts to reach across the aisle" are. And what has Obama done that has added to the current debt?

you're joking right? this entire "stimulus" every economic move he has made since getting sworn in has done nothing but increase the national deficit.

No, it doesn't. The people have to be able to depend on the government. If not, there's no point in having it in the first place.

you really need to go read some history books. the entire reason we broke away from the UK was due to the government being too large, not enough freedom, too high of taxes.

Gettysberg Address:
...that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom -- and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.

the democrats in power are not for the people, they are for thier own coffers. they constantly inflate the national debt and then demand that people pay more taxes. This is especially true here in washington state where our lovely "queen christine" tried to tax candy and soda including other things because she doesn't know how to cut back spending. the same is true for many other states

 

[madhatter85]

News flash: If that debt ceiling does not get raised, then our government may well shut down. That may be a wet dream for the Tea Party, but to those who have ANY sense of any kind, they just so happen to know that doing so could push the economy off the cliff. Failure on the Republicans' part to raise the debt ceiling is flat-out stupid.

The government won't get any smaller on it's own but no, a government shutdown would be bad. but they don't need to raise the national debt to do it. They can sut programs that are unneccesary. Here's a analogy for you, way there is a blizzard and it is deathly cold, you are stuck in your car. do you keep the motor running constantly? or do you just warm up the car enough to stay warm , bundle up and then turn it off until it's too cold again? the dems want to keep the motor running all the time.

And as I said to Kathryn, you can deny all you want the fact that Obama has consistently attempted compromise with the Republicans, at the progressive agenda's expense, but denial don't make it so.

Obama is a toolshed and both parties know it. Including the americal people:
Obama's Approval Rating Dips Below George W. Bush's - Political Hotsheet - CBS News

If you think that the Republicans honestly want to reduce the deficit, then you need to seriously review everything they have done in the last ten years. Have you not forgotten that George W. Bush turned a multi-billion-dollar SURPLUS into a roughly $1.3-trillion deficit, that Obama did NOTHING to generate? Why were the Republicans so silent then? Why have they flip-flopped into becoming militant deficit hawks? It seems that they despise funding programs that will potentially help people find jobs, improve infrastructure, or simply put food on the table; but when it comes to guns, bombs, and war, not to mention tax cuts for the rich, they have absolutely no problem with the deficit!

No douubt George W Bush could have done a much better job had he ben competent enough to do math. However, It is not the tax cuts that caused the deficit. It's major spending habbits. Most of that deficit came from the war in Iraq. and it is liberal hogwash to say we should not have gone to war. Our country was attacked by a terrorist organization being harbored by an extremist section of the Iraqi government. the liberals seem to think that we should have said "don't do that again or we'll come over there and have sexy parties!" to the terrorists. People died in 9/11... lots of people. Had that not been answered with force it would be open season on the United States.
"Speak softly and carry a big stick" doesn't work when people try to call a bluff and you are unwilling to swing that upside thier heads.

 

[Revoltingest]

Jealousy doesn't become you.

Am I that obvious? Drat!

 

[madhatter85]

That's not the question. The question is whether I believe taking away the benefits will get them a job.

people are a lot more resourceful than you give them credit for. if people are just handed stuff because "poor baby, did you get an owwie?" - They have no motivation to change.

I lost my job the end of last year in the big dip of the recession. Guess what I did? I tightened my belt, prepeared to move my pregnant wife, and daughter from a house to an apartment after I had gotten a job a month later that paid $1500 less a month. luckily I found a job a month after that which allowed me to stay where we were at and I was making more than ever before. People are out of work for a long time because they want to be out of work. There are plenty of Jobs. look at monster. I really have no sympathy for them.

 

[Sunstone]

people are a lot more resourceful than you give them credit for. if people are just handed stuff because "poor baby, did you get an owwie?" - They have no motivation to change.

I lost my job the end of last year in the big dip of the recession. Guess what I did? I tightened my belt, prepeared to move my pregnant wife, and daughter from a house to an apartment after I had gotten a job a month later that paid $1500 less a month. luckily I found a job a month after that which allowed me to stay where we were at and I was making more than ever before. People are out of work for a long time because they want to be out of work. There are plenty of Jobs. look at monster. I really have no sympathy for them.

You conservatives always go with your subjective impressions in these matters. Objectively speaking, there are somewhere between five and seven applicants for every available job in the US. Google it.

 

[Magic Man]

and that is exactly what the media is trying to get you to belive, congrats on being gullible. go watch some cpsan instead of foxnews.

Huh?

Let's start with your last sentence. Accusing me of watching Fox News is one of the stupidest things I've seen. At least, if you're going to accuse me of being gullible and biased, accuse me of being so on the correct side.

Now, it's probably what the media is trying to get me to believe because that's what's happening. And just so you know, CSPAN is part of the media. And I'm getting my information from what Republicans are actually saying. Hell, just look at this thread and Rick. Sorry, but clearly I'm not the gullible one here.

you're joking right? this entire "stimulus" every economic move he has made since getting sworn in has done nothing but increase the national deficit.

This is why I asked. Some things he's done have added to the debt, yes, but we need to talk specifics. The stimulus is widely acknowledged to have done a lot of economic good. When you're in a recession as huge as we have been, you're going to have to spend some money you don't have. I'm still waiting to hear what these "backhanded attempts to reach across the aisle" are.

you really need to go read some history books. the entire reason we broke away from the UK was due to the government being too large, not enough freedom, too high of taxes.

Gettysberg Address:
...that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom -- and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.

First, what does that have to do with what I said? The people still have to be able to depend on the government.

Second, thanks, but I know plenty about our history. That's why I realize your painting of it is inaccurate. We broke away from England because of taxation without representation, not because government was too large. Yes, the government is supposed to be of the people, by the people and for the people, which is why they should be able to depend on it.

the democrats in power are not for the people, they are for thier own coffers. they constantly inflate the national debt and then demand that people pay more taxes. This is especially true here in washington state where our lovely "queen christine" tried to tax candy and soda including other things because she doesn't know how to cut back spending. the same is true for many other states

When do they demand people pay more taxes (other than one example of a crazy person trying to take soda)? Also, at least they try to pay for their spending. It's better than starting two unnecessary wars and cutting taxes at the same time.

Again, though, I have no idea what this has to do with anything. Democrats obviously aren't great, but they're still better than republicans. It would be nice to completely change the system to make it work better, but this is off-topic from your last post.

 

[GabrielWithoutWings]

This reminds me of when Jesus brought loaves and fish to the rich, in which they through the crumbs down to the poor.

I was thinking about that the other day.

It's rather socialist of him.

 

[madhatter85]

oh don't get me wrong, In a PERFECT WORLD, socialism i think would be great. However, people are lazy, arrogant, and greedy. Socialism does not work in practice while human nature is the way it is. Especially in the US.

 

[LuisDantas]

If you mean that it is wrong to socialize banker's debt, hey, I agree 100%.

 

[Revoltingest]

If you mean that it is wrong to socialize banker's debt, hey, I agree 100%.

Woo hoo hoo!
I agree too!

 

[Magic Man]

oh don't get me wrong, In a PERFECT WORLD, socialism i think would be great. However, people are lazy, arrogant, and greedy. Socialism does not work in practice while human nature is the way it is. Especially in the US.

I'm going to take a wild guess, and say you don't even know what socialism is, and that you're just relying on what you've heard in response to things like the healthcare bill. And you call me gullible?

 

[Mercy Not Sacrifice]

Mercy, I was being facetious. That's why I used the goofy accent in my post, sort of as a hint that I wasn't being serious and was having a bit of fun.

Sho nuff, sweet thang, dontchoo GIT IT, BOY? Who dat say dey gonna beat dem Saints?

But I digress.

Well dag-nabbit! Ya gotta use smileys when just kiddin' around!

I am an independent, as are many of my friends and associates. We dislike Obama, not because he's too left wing, or a moderate, or simply because of his policies.

He's got the most lightweight resume I've ever seen for a person in a position of responsibility. Hell, I wouldn't hire him to manage a Burger King franchise, let alone stand at the helm of the United States as Commander in Chief!

But we don't need division and political grandstanding. What we need is an intelligent, honest, problem solver with plenty of leadership experience and what, for lack of a better word, I call "social intelligence" - that innate ability (which cannot be trained into a person) to lead and influence with what at least appears to be humility coupled with competence. Fabulous combination in a leader, and sorely missing from Obama.

I actually agree with a lot of that last paragraph. Where I think we disagree would be what, or who, would satisfy those criteria.

 

[Etritonakin]

I say we send this to MYTHBUSTERS! I'd like to see him try!

hehehehehehehe

 

[madhatter85]

I'm going to take a wild guess, and say you don't even know what socialism is, and that you're just relying on what you've heard in response to things like the healthcare bill. And you call me gullible?

wikipedia:

Socialism is an economic and political theory advocating public or common ownership and cooperative management of the means of production and allocation of resources.[1][2][3] A socialist society is characterised by a free association, which is not based on coercive wage labour. It is organized on the basis of relatively equal power relations, self-management, collective decision-making and adhocracy rather than hierarchical, bureaucratic forms of organization in the economic and political systems.

most people are unfortunately incapable of self-management and don't take care of publix property. This is why private schools often provide the best educations; private parks are cleaner than public parks. Because when people "own" something they tend to take better care of it.

I would love a perfect socialist country if there were not so many lazy idiots ruining it.

 

[Magic Man]

wikipedia:


most people are unfortunately incapable of self-management and don't take care of publix property. This is why private schools often provide the best educations; private parks are cleaner than public parks. Because when people "own" something they tend to take better care of it.

I would love a perfect socialist country if there were not so many lazy idiots ruining it.

So, what you're saying is you still misunderstand socialism? We're not talking about communism, but socialism here. I'd suggest learning the difference.

But let's forget that. Let's go with your and the public's definition of socialism. No ideology is perfect on its own. You act as though, according to your definition of socialism, we don't use any such thing. Neither Obama nor most people in the country are advocating getting rid of capitalism and replacing it with socialism. What most people are advocating is regulating capitalism. Just as you think pure socialism is a bad idea, so would pure capitalism be.