Barack Obama, our next President

Full story: Hampton Roads Daily Press

"The road ahead will be long. Our climb will be steep," Obama cautioned. Young and charismatic but with little experience on the national level, Obama smashed through racial barriers and easily defeated ...

Comments (Page 38,345)

Showing posts 766,881 - 766,900 of1,073,390
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Yeah

Mililani, HI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#830875
Dec 30, 2012
 

Judged:

4

4

4

sonicfilter wrote:
<quoted text>
but but but, 2007! Dems! Congress!
it's like the economy was great before 2007 or something.
lol! I know! As the argument goes, everything was going well and hunky dory until non cons took over the House in 2006 and everything went downhill from there until the near great recession of 2008

Fast forward to 2012 and the Cons have the House again over the past two years and we're still in an economic slump. Worse still the cons don't want to help recover and instead, are NOW sticking to a radical political philosophy.

So really, according to their logic, it's people like Boehner who are the problem!

Since: Dec 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#830876
Dec 30, 2012
 

Judged:

5

4

4

RED BANNER OVER BUMFK wrote:
<quoted text>
WOULD YOU PLEASE HURRY UP AND PULL THOSE PANTIES DOWN. IT DOESN'T MATTER TO DEBIL (DEATH), BUT IF YOU INSIST ON FASTIDIOUSNESS OVER COMFORT ...
/j
(Those sunglasses have got to go. They make you look like some kind of supercilious, bloodless little Stepford husband. Or a beetle. Or an alien. Do you wear them so that Earthlings can't see your red-tinged eyes. Anyway, quit trying to appear human. It ain't working ...)
I wear them so aliens can't steal my thoughts.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#830877
Dec 30, 2012
 

Judged:

4

4

4

Yeah wrote:
<quoted text>No one can refute your opinions. The fact of the matter is the US is not a true capitalistic society.
Again, don't confuse political philosophy with an economic one.
As for the Post Office, the government is really in an advisory role. The PO has been for a while now, a profit organization.
Exactly, and US Constitution doesnt allow & rejects a Society based on True Capitalism even Thomas Jefferson rejected & feared a Capitalistic Society and the Term Capitalism had not been invented yet and was invented & termed by Karl Marxs(1818–1883).

"I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around [the banks] will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered. The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs."

Thomas Jefferson,(Attributed)
3rd president of US (1743 - 1826)

http://www.quotationspage.com/quote/37700.htm...

Since: Dec 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#830878
Dec 30, 2012
 

Judged:

4

4

4

carol wrote:
<quoted text>
Tenzing, is that you? You don't have a death wish now, do you?
What crap did I demand? Or, rather, conservatives demand that liberals didn't demand more of?
Just in the last decade you demanded two wars, increased spending on education, Medicare expansion, more Executive agencies ...

And you still refuse to pay for ANY of it.

Bi tch!

No, don't have a death wish. Wanted to kill off Tenzing with a transition for continuity.

Since: Dec 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#830879
Dec 30, 2012
 

Judged:

4

4

4

Sister Kathryn Lust wrote:
<quoted text>Carol believes we're either ants or grasshoppers. From what I've gathered, she's an ant, and everyone else is a grasshopper.
Personally, I tend to liken myself more to a firefly,
but that's just me.
:)
Carol is anything but an ant.

“I'm here with bells on.”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#830880
Dec 30, 2012
 

Judged:

5

4

4

Curious wrote:
<quoted text>
This was written in 2009 add in how much more the wealthiest have accumulated since then (something WSJ did not)
"By Les Leopold
It’s great to know that during the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression, the wealth of the 400 richest Americans, according to Forbes, actually increased by $30 billion. Well golly, that’s only a 2 percent increase, much less than the double digit returns the wealthy had grown accustomed to. But a 2 percent increase is a whole lot more than losing 40 percent of your 401k. And $30 billion is enough to provide 500,000 school teacher jobs at $60k per year.
Collectively, those 400 have $1.57 trillion in wealth. It’s hard to get your mind around a number like that. The way I do it is to imagine that we were still living during the great radical Eisenhower era of the 1950s when marginal income tax rates hit 91 percent. Taxes were high back in the 1950s because people understood that constraining wild extremes of wealth would make our country stronger and prevent another depression.(Well, what did those old fogies know?)
Had we kept those high progressive taxes in place, instead of removing them, especially during the Reagan era, the Forbes 400 might each be worth “only”$100 million instead of $3.9 billion each. So let’s imagine that the rest of their wealth, about $1.53 trillion, were available for the public good.
What does $1.53 trillion buy?
It’s more than enough to insure the uninsured for the next twenty years or more.
It’s more than enough to create a Manhattan Project to solve global warming by developing renewable energy and a green, sustainable manufacturing sector.
And here’s my favorite: It’s more than enough to endow every public college and university in the country so that all of our children could gain access to higher education for free, forever!
Instead, we embarked on a grand experiment to see what would happen if we deregulated finance and changed the tax code so that millionaires could turn into billionaires. And even after that experiment failed in the most spectacular way, our system seems trapped into staying on the same deregulated path.
Instead of free higher education, health care and a sustainable economy, we got a fantasy finance boom and bust on Wall Street which crashed the real economy. We have our 400 billionaires, and we have 29 million unemployed and underemployed Americans. We have an infrastructure in shambles. We have an environment in crisis. We have a health care system that would make Rube Goldberg proud. And we have the worst income distribution since 1929.
I hazard to guess that each and every Forbes 400 member could get by with a net worth of $100 million. I don’t think that would kill their entrepreneurial drive or harm our economy–in fact it would be a major boon to the economy to step back from the edge of such massive concentration of wealth. The real problem is getting there from here. A wealth tax that kicks in when you become worth more than $100 million would be a good start. The Eisenhower tax rate on adjustable gross income over $3 million a year would help as well.
And please let’s not call it socialism, now that we’ve placed the entire financial sector on welfare to the tune of over $13 trillion in subsidies and guarantees.(By the way, the yearly budget outlays for means tested programs for low income citizens is about $350 billion per year. So Wall Street’s welfare is about 37 times as large as welfare for poor.)
So if narrowing the income/wealth gap isn’t socialism, what is it? It’s the America that thrived in the 1950s and 1960s. It’s the America that created a middle-class and vowed never to let the financial gamblers return us to another depression. It’s an America that put its people to work and built an infrastructure that was the envy of the world.
But....but.......in the 'good ol' scenario,' the 29 Million have the 'opportunity' to be one of the 400, don'tcha know...?

(sarcasm alert).

“I'm here with bells on.”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#830881
Dec 30, 2012
 

Judged:

4

4

4

Death of Tenzing wrote:
<quoted text>
Carol is anything but an ant.
Try telling her that - her posts indicate she's not just 'an' ant, but 'the' ant.

Carryin' the 'ole world on 'er shoulders, don'tcha know....
sonicfilter

Indianapolis, IN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#830883
Dec 30, 2012
 

Judged:

4

4

4

Bush Tax Cuts Had Little Positive Impact on Economy

Bruce Bartlett

Republicans are heavily invested in permanently extending the tax cuts enacted during the George W. Bush administration, all of which expire at the end of this year exactly as the legislation was written in the first place. To hear Republicans, one would think that the Bush tax cuts were the most powerful stimulus to growth ever enacted and only a madman would even think of allowing any of them to expire.

The truth is that there is virtually no evidence in support of the Bush tax cuts as an economic elixir. To the extent that they had any positive effect on growth, it was very, very modest. Their main effect was simply to reduce the government’s revenue, thereby increasing the budget deficit, which all Republicans claim to abhor.

Read more at http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Columns/2010/09...

Since: Dec 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#830884
Dec 30, 2012
 

Judged:

4

4

4

RED BANNER OVER BUMFK wrote:
Tenzing's day-uh-dee sent him to a pra-vit school, but he still says "y'all" to try and look like one of the good ole' boy-uhs.
Hahahahahahahaha!(For somebody who starts up 5 companies a month(?), he sure is on da treads a lot .... Was that you Ten-zing, or was that somebody else?)
I wouldn't respond to such tripe but you got what I said completely wrong.

No private school for me, my kids? Yes.

The involvement with 5 businesses was since Obama was elected and I specified "the first time" and that involvement has been in varying degrees from helping my daughter get her business off the ground to starting a 501(c)3 and an LLC to manage the non-profit's assets to consulting for another startup in exchange for shares.

“I'm here with bells on.”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#830885
Dec 30, 2012
 

Judged:

5

4

4

Anonymous of Indy wrote:
<quoted text>Exactly, and US Constitution doesnt allow & rejects a Society based on True Capitalism even Thomas Jefferson rejected & feared a Capitalistic Society and the Term Capitalism had not been invented yet and was invented & termed by Karl Marxs(1818–1883).
"I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around [the banks] will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered. The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs."
Thomas Jefferson,(Attributed)
3rd president of US (1743 - 1826)
http://www.quotationspage.com/quote/37700.htm...
Mr. Jefferson was a Deist. He understood that chaos is the driving force behind the workings of the world. We humans are ever attempting to impose 'order' on chaos, and when we feel we've achieved it, we call it 'God'.

It's an exercise in futility.
sonicfilter

Indianapolis, IN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#830886
Dec 30, 2012
 

Judged:

6

5

5

Money lost to the U.S. Treasury due to tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans, enacted by President Bush and extended by President Obama.

http://costoftaxcuts.com/

Since: Nov 09

Alamo, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#830887
Dec 30, 2012
 

Judged:

6

6

5

carol wrote:
<quoted text>
Who controlled the purse strings for six years prior to 2000?
How come you guys never think of that?
Whoever it was did a great job because they left a surplus for the president that took over in 2000. Also consider who controlled the veto over the budget 2000-2008? A president that doesn't approve of a budget brought to him by congress vetoes it and it doesn't become law. Watch how a president that is a true leader uses the veto, and threat of a veto, in the next few days.

Since: Dec 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#830888
Dec 30, 2012
 

Judged:

5

5

4

sonicfilter wrote:
Best year in Washington: Nate Silver
Republicans reacted with outrage as Silver’s model kept pumping out predictions that Obama had an 80 percent (or higher) chance of winning. A columnist for the Examiner chain critiqued Silver’s appearance and voice. Others questioned how anyone could predict to the percentage point the likelihood of Obama winning or losing. Even the mighty David Brooks — himself a columnist for the Gray Lady — scoffed at the idea of making calculations accurate to the decimal point:“If there’s one thing we know, it’s that even experts with fancy computer models are terrible at predicting human behavior.”
The net effect was that Silver — a shy guy by nature — turned into a political football. He became a household name nationwide and, by some reports, accounted for 20 percentor more of the Times’ overall Web traffic as the election approached.
If Silver was big before the election, he turned huge — like Jay-Z/Beyonce huge — after it. Jon Stewart called him the “God of the algorithm.” President Obama referenced Silver when talking about the annual turkey pardon. Silver was named Out Magazine’s person of the year. He even sat down with Fix hero Bill Simmons (a.k.a. the Sports Guy) for an hour-long podcast.(And, yes, we are VERY jealous.)
For Nate Silver — and political nerds, statisticians and number-crunchers everywhere — it was a very good year.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/best-y...
Maybe FOX should hire Nate.
Like Asimov's "Psychohisory", it only works if the public is unaware of it. This could prove a fairly dangerous tool.

Since: Dec 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#830889
Dec 30, 2012
 

Judged:

4

4

4

Anonymous of Indy wrote:
<quoted text>Obvisously you are still in denial of facts when presented and I know that article is correct about Capitalism.
Yes, and it pointed out that capitalism was our economic system prior to the re-interpretation of the Constitution in the Progressive Era. Now it didn't state that overtly, you have to know your history to get there.

Since: Dec 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#830890
Dec 30, 2012
 

Judged:

4

4

4

Yeah wrote:
<quoted text>No one can refute your opinions. The fact of the matter is the US is not a true capitalistic society.
Again, don't confuse political philosophy with an economic one.
As for the Post Office, the government is really in an advisory role. The PO has been for a while now, a profit organization.
Y'all are both so insanely stupid.

Prove the US was not capitalist in its early history.

Demonstrate where I've confused political philosophy with economic theory, quite the opposite which is clear in my first post on this subject which you've re-posted repeatedly (you'd think you might have actually read it).

You've dispensed with the post office so show where the Constitution gives the government the authority to own the means of production, distribution, and exchange.
TSM

El Paso, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#830891
Dec 30, 2012
 

Judged:

4

4

4

Obama's out trying once again to blame others for his failed leadership!! Obama idea of negotiating is “My Way or the Highway” My fellow American it’s time to stop playing Russian roulette with this President/Democrats let’s take the Plunge!!

Since: Dec 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#830892
Dec 30, 2012
 

Judged:

4

4

4

Anonymous of Indy wrote:
<quoted text>the Hell or you would understand by now, Clause 3, or the Commerce Clause and what the Commerce Clause states and how the Federal Government can regulate Interstate Commerce because of the US Constitution but you must not understand interstate commerce.
interstate commerce - The buying and selling of products and services across state borders.
http://www.investorwords.com/2574/interstate_...
Article 1 Section 8
Clause 3. To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;
Congress has the power to impose regulations on interstate and international business. This "interstate commerce clause" has been quite controversial in the history of constitutional law; for a long time, judges tended to read the clause narrowly, overturning federal laws they deemed focused mainly on regulating economic activity within states rather than between them. Since the 1930s, however, judges have tended to read the clause broadly, allowing the government to regulate all kinds of economic activity—by setting a national minimum wage, for example.
http://www.shmoop.com/constitution/article-1-...
The Commerce Clause doesn't transfer authority for production, distribution, and exchange to the government, only the authority to regulate it.

Adam Smith said we were capitalists you nitwit.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#830894
Dec 30, 2012
 

Judged:

9

9

9

Death of Tenzing wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, and it pointed out that capitalism was our economic system prior to the re-interpretation of the Constitution in the Progressive Era. Now it didn't state that overtly, you have to know your history to get there.
Right, and speaking of the Progressive Era or what is known as Fourth Party System is the term used in political science and history for the period in American political history from about 1896 to 1932 that was dominated by the Republican party, excepting the 1912 split in which Democrats held the White House for eight years. History texts usually call it the Progressive Era.

Fourth Party System

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

Progressive Era

The Progressive Era was a period of social activism and political reform in the United States that flourished from the 1890s to the 1920s.

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

Since: Nov 09

Alamo, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#830895
Dec 30, 2012
 

Judged:

15

11

10

Carol has said a couple times that Republicans should just get out of the way and let Obama and the Democrats impose their policy and let the chips fall. I agree, we spent almost a full year listening to the ideas put forth by both parties and with our votes said, "We want to try the ideas presented by the Democrats.".
That's how a democracy works! Why on earth would any sane person believe that that past election was a mandate for continued obstructionism from the right?
Yeah

Mililani, HI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#830896
Dec 30, 2012
 

Judged:

12

12

12

Anonymous of Indy wrote:
<quoted text>Exactly, and US Constitution doesnt allow & rejects a Society based on True Capitalism even Thomas Jefferson rejected & feared a Capitalistic Society and the Term Capitalism had not been invented yet and was invented & termed by Karl Marxs(1818–1883).
"I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around [the banks] will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered. The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs."
Thomas Jefferson,(Attributed)
3rd president of US (1743 - 1826)
http://www.quotationspage.com/quote/37700.htm...
Which goes to show that even he would reneg on his position by actually using the banking system in order to facilitate the Louisiana Purchase!

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 766,881 - 766,900 of1,073,390
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

113 Users are viewing the Chicago Forum right now

Search the Chicago Forum:
Topic Updated Last By Comments
BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 3 min Rogue Scholar 05 173,794
Fun Song Combos (Sep '12) 9 min not a ghost 353
Song Titles Only (group/artist in parenthesis m... (Mar '10) 10 min RJS 7,686
Abby 7-14 10 min Toj 4
Amy 7-14 14 min Toj 3
Ill. House Approves Legalizing Same-Sex Civil U... (Dec '10) 20 min Dusty Mangina 48,707
Onlookers stunned as plane with SWASTIKA advert... 20 min NY Jew Snakes 1
•••
•••
•••

Chicago Jobs

•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••

Chicago People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Chicago News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Chicago
•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••