148 Comments Add a Comment
linkicon reporticon emailicon
AK-47_Justice says:
by Karen8069:
I'm a conservative. . .and opposed to abortion...
********************************






YOU are only a "social" conservative, and part of the religious right that hijacked the GOP 30 years ago, as reagan tripled our national debt through reckless fiscal irresponsibility!

Instead of trying to re-write history in your own terms, try to understand that Bill Clinton was the only fiscal conservative president since Ike, and handed the bushies a budget surplus.

Instead of trying to re-write history to make the GOP look good, please understand that our first oil embargo was in 1973, under tricky dickie, and our foreign oil importation has only gotten worse by conservative policies and ideology of following BIG OIL.
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
Empire-George says:
by hungry1968-17 November 10, 2009 11:42 AM EST
I've schooled and spanked Mortar so many times, he can't even respond to me anymore, so he quit trying.

It doesn't stop me from exposing his idiocy though.
_______________

I've never once seen that happen on CBS....again, dellusions of grandure by hungry, who couldn't debate his way out of a wet paper bag.....blaming bush for everything is hardly a spanking
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
pjk12354 says:
Don't worry about finding the GOP's soul..........they sold it.
reply
Mortarman-29 replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
And dont worry about the Democrat's soul...they never had it.
us_1776 replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
No mortarman-29, the Democrats try to help their fellow man. Quit spreading your mindless Limbaugh/Beck/Hannity nonsensical crap.
pjk12354 replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
Since there is no soul in Washington........makes you kind of wonder where this country is heading......
linkicon reporticon emailicon
abbarick says:
AT THE MOMENT EVEN THOUGH MORE NEW JOBS ARE BEING CREATED BY NEW PEOPLE, THE FEAR OF THE INSTABILITY AND THE RISKS IN THE SYSTEM AND THEIR PAST NEGATIVE EXPERIENCES IS STILL KEEPING THE OLD GUARDS OFF FROM GOING AHEAD IN CREATING ADDITIONAL JOBS THROUGH BUSINESS EXPANSION, INSTEAD THEY ARE STILL FOCUSED ON CUTTING JOBS AND MINIMIZING LOSSES. THE STIMULUS HAS HELPED MANY TO STAY ON TO WAIT AND SEE IF THINGS REMAIN STABLE UNDER THE NEW ADMINISTRATION. IT WILL TAKE AT LEAST A YEAR TO JUDGE THE ECONOMIC TREND UNDER A NEW ADMINISTRATION, AND MAYBE LONGER FOR THOSE MAKING MAJOR BUSINESS DECISIONS. IT IS QUITE STRANGE THAT THOSE WHO WERE QUICK TO CONDEMN THE NOBEL COMMITTEE AS BEING TOO QUICK TO AWARD THE PEACE PRIZE TO OBAMA FOR THE VISIBLE IMPACT OF HIS FOREIGN POLICY IDEALS, WHERE HE IS BETTER PLACED TO MAKE REAL IMPACT, ARE NOW RUSHING TO CONDEMN HIM PREMATURELY FOR THE ECONOMIC WOES OF THE NATION OVER THE WHICH, BEING A PRIVATE ENTERPRISE SYSTEM, THE ADMINISTRATION HAVE VERY LIMITED POWER TO INFLUENCE IN THE SHORT RUN. THE ECONOMIC SITUATION THAT DEVASTATED AND BROUGHT DOWN GLOBAL GIANTS WHO ARE OLDEST AND MOST EXPERIENCED IN THE FINANCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL SECTORS SURELY REQUIRES A VERY LONG LOOK TO DETERMINE ITS REAL TREND IN ORDER TO MAKE MAJOR INVESTMENT DECISIONS. HENCE IF IT IS GOING TO TAKE ONE YEAR OR MORE OF WAIT AND SEE FOR THE BUSINESSES TO MAKE DECISIONS THAT WILL LEAD TO JOB CREATION, THEN IT WOULD BE WRONG TO EXPECT THE POSITIVE EFFECTS OF THE NEW POLICY TO GO BEYOND DAMAGE AND CRISIS CONTROL, AND THAT IS WHAT THE STIMULUS PACKAGE HAS BEEN DOING IN STABILIZING THE ECONOMIC DOWNTURN. LET'S JUST IMAGINE WHAT WOULD HAVE HAPPENED IF THE AUTO GIANTS AND MANY OTHER TROUBLED ENTERPRISES HAD BEEN ALLOWED TO FAIL. THEY WOULD HAVE BROUGHT DOWN WITH THEM TENS OF THOUSANDS OF OTHER BUSINESSES THAT DEPEND ON THEM DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY AND THE UNEMPLOYMENT SITUATION WOULD HAVE QUICKLY REACHED OVER 20% LONG AGO.
reply
Mortarman-29 replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
Let's imagine. Ford was allowed to fail, and they just posted a hug profit. Hmmmmmmmm.
BigJim716 replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
Yet the graph Obama presented showed unemployment not exceeding 8% if the so-called stimulus boondoggle was passed. And the graph showed unemployment not exceeding 9.3% or so if the so-called stimulus boondoggle was not passed. HMMM.

A new motto for the Dems: "If at first you don't succeed....change the definintion of success".

I never understood why the Dems simply do not say there would be 50% unemployment without the so-called stimulus boondoggle and that you "saved" 40 million jobs. Obama's fans, the only ones who believe this garbage, would still believe them and they could be so much happier with the results.
AK-47_Justice replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
by Mortarman-29:
Let's imagine. Ford was allowed to fail, and they just posted a hug profit. Hmmmmmmmm.
**************************





Hmmmmmmmmmmm is right, since it was "restructuring" by Ford -- closing factories and laying-off employees -- that lead to their latest "profit." Isn't that just peachy?? Get a clue!
linkicon reporticon emailicon
abbarick says:
When the US initiated the collapse of Soviet Union and the economies of Eastern Europe leading to sudden drastic unemployment and inflation combined US analysts were almost united in saying that the pain was good and necessary to correct the failed "communist" system. The pain of the people was completely ignored by the US and the west generally. The common argument the US analysts, particularly the Republicans, was that time was required for the crises to "bottom out" first before any hope of recovery. Now, more than 15 years since the adoption of the US led IMF economic prescriptions and doses, things are still "bottoming out" in those countries with all still saddled with double digit unemployment. Before the US/IMF imposed/inspired economic reforms those countries had virtually no unemployment problems and lower crime rates and no deficit problems. It is hypocritical and shameful for the US, and the Republicans and other conservative analysts in particular, to expect the economic woes that was the result of their decades long practised economic ideas should go away immediately without having to "bottom out" first just because the Democrats are now in charge. So, fellow Americans, let's brace up and be patient like those we have sold our economic prescriptions to in Eastern Europe and elsewhere. Things like, say the unemployment, must first "bottom out" before it gets really better indeed. The Obama administration and most of the Democrats being part of the failed American private capitalist system made mistake in their failure to understand and acknowledge that the current unemployment that started with the last administration had to "bottom out" first before any reversal in the trend is really felt.
reply
Mortarman-29 replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
But Obama is just digging, making the bottom deeper. Thus making things worse and making it so we take longer to hit bottom.
us_1776 replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
mortarman-29, that is complete nonsense. Let's compare. The Bush/Cheney crime syndicate starts a needless Iraq war based on planted fake WMD documents that ends up costing TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS - the full cost of which will still not be known for another five years. And then we have the Bush T.A.R.P. bailout to the tune of $700 BILLION initial downpayment to bailout all the Republican financial industry "crooks".

So now we have the Democrats who are trying to prevent another major catastrophy from occurring in the country and that is the entire collapse of the healthcare system which ALL credible experts agree is going to happen if nothing is done to stop it. And with 50+ million Americans uninsured heading toward 70+ million within 3 years there are clear warning signs that this is going to happen. And so the Democrats take a great deal of time in carefully structuring a healthcare reform that will cover nearly all Americans just like every other "sane" western democracy but will also cost virtually a net zero or even reduce the deficit (operate at a net gain). And what do we see the critics do? The complain because the healthcare reform amounts to 829B in total size, and what they conveniently ignore is the cost-savings and revenue that the bill creates that offsets this.

There is no comparison between spending TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS on a needless war that is money completely lost - never to return, and the healthcare reform which nearly or completely pays for itself.

The mindless arguments made by the Limbaugh/Beck/Hannity parrots is incredible. Nothing more than lies, scares, and gross distortions of fact. With as many of these irresponsible lies that have been debunked by credible news organizations around the country I cannot imagine why the FCC has not pulled the license from these propagandists and incitists.
linkicon reporticon emailicon
us_1776 says:
QUOTE: President Obama's spending policies, he argues, "will rob my children and their generation of their prosperity, and some of their freedoms."

What a complete joke. The Republican spending sprees over the past three Republican administrations have ALREADY robbed our children of prosperity. 9 TRILLION DOLLARS WORTH OF NEEDLESS SPENDING TO BE EXACT. Completely needless wars on behalf of "corporate" war machine companies. Oil industry; Halliburton, Carlysle, others. The Republicans and their "corporate" cronies just backed up to the public treasury and emptied it.

I will never vote for another Republican. The whole miserable stinking corrupt Republican party needs to die.
reply
Mortarman-29 replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
How about the miserable corrupt Democrat Party?
us_1776 replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
The Democratic Party is trying to rebuild this country from all the WRECKAGE that was left behind by the failures of corrupt Republican leadership.
Mortarman-29 replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
The Democrat Party is trying to destroy this country on the heels of the wreckage of the Republican Party. That is more accurate.
linkicon reporticon emailicon
hungry1968-17 says:
by BigJim716 November 10, 2009 11:35 AM EST

It is silly for you to rightfully critisize the Republican spending without critisizing Obama.







So I should criticize Obama for what he MIGHT spend?

??????
reply
BigJim716 replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
That too....but you are aware his 1 trillion dollar per year deficit budget was passed earlier this year. And am sure you are aware Obama has run up about a $1.5 trillion dollar deficit nearly 10 months into his term.
AK-47_Justice replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
by BigJim716:
That too....but you are aware his 1 trillion dollar per year deficit budget was passed earlier this year.
***********************************





WRONG! The 2008-2009 budget was done by bush and congress last year, and ran from Oct. 1st, 2008 to Sept. 30th, 2009, and was already at a negative $1.2 Trillion on Jan. 20th, 2009, when Obama became president.

It was forecast to be much higher at a budget deficit of $1.8 Trillion, but was actually downsized to an actual budget deficit of $1.4 Trillion for last year -- not good, but only $200 Billion higher than handed President Obama by the bushies.

We're already on a new budget year now, that just started Oct. 1st, 2009, and everything will depend upon the economy and revenue, despite the bush tax cuts for the wealthy still in place, which has considerably cut federal revenue for the past 8 years.
linkicon reporticon emailicon
hungry1968-17 says:
by Mortarman-29 November 10, 2009 10:25 AM EST
By the way Sky, the president doesnt get us out of debt. That would be the Congress. The president only signs the budget. He doesnt make it.







So clueless.....

Sad really, and there's no reason for it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Us_budget

"Each year, the President of the United States submits his budget request to Congress for the following fiscal year, as required by the Budget and Accounting Act of 1921. Current law (31 U.S.C. ? 1105(a)) requires the president to submit a budget no earlier than the first Monday in January, and no later than the first Monday in February."




Try to catch up.
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
BeckieBest says:
The GOP has a soul?
reply
Mortarman-29 replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
They dont. Neither do the Dems.
linkicon reporticon emailicon
hungry1968-17 says:
by Mortarman-29 November 10, 2009 10:24 AM EST
You asking me to defend Bush? Lol.







You're hailing Reagan as some sort of conservative "god", and Bush Jr copied the Reagan model down to the letter.

How can you hail one policy, and NOT defend it at the same time?
reply
BeckieBest replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
Good question Hungry.

He'll probably run away now.

lol!
hungry1968-17 replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
I've schooled and spanked Mortar so many times, he can't even respond to me anymore, so he quit trying.

It doesn't stop me from exposing his idiocy though.
traxiii replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
W was no Reagan and Dede Scozzafava is nomoderate.
2/5