OBAMA is the BEST PRESIDENT EVER
Opinion

Custer, SD

#12699 Sep 26, 2013
Praise to Obama wrote:
Barack tears the GOP a new one!
I think it is a little early to make a victory claim.

In the past Democrats are less willing to go to the mat than Republican are. Right now the House Republicans are demanding a lot not to take the economy off the cliff. Not only to eliminate laws already passed but demanding new laws they want as a minority to be passed.

The blame game will begin if someone don't cave in. The economy will suffer and the degree it will suffer is up to debate including the possibility of creating a world mess.

When you play chicken with a nut the outcome likely will not be good.
nac

Merrick, NY

#12700 Sep 26, 2013
Opinion wrote:
<quoted text>
I think it is a little early to make a victory claim.
In the past Democrats are less willing to go to the mat than Republican are. Right now the House Republicans are demanding a lot not to take the economy off the cliff. Not only to eliminate laws already passed but demanding new laws they want as a minority to be passed.
The blame game will begin if someone don't cave in. The economy will suffer and the degree it will suffer is up to debate including the possibility of creating a world mess.
When you play chicken with a nut the outcome likely will not be good.
The economy is going to go over the cliff regardless of what republicans or democrats do at this point.

Our unsustainable spending and debt, coupled with massive printing of our fiat currency has no other possible outcome than disaster.

This isn't a partisan issue... this is a history issue. Look into the Weimar Republic. Unsustainable debt, unreasonable spending, printing an unreasonable amount of FIAT currency ("quantitative easing" in 2013 terms)... it led to BIG TIME disaster.

If you haven't already started to prepare for economic collapse, you haven't been paying attention.

You are the earthy type, Opinion... chickens & rabbits are great sustainable food sources. Start planning & preparing now.

If you fail to plan... plan to fail.
Opinion

Custer, SD

#12701 Sep 26, 2013
nac wrote:
<quoted text>
The economy is going to go over the cliff regardless of what republicans or democrats do at this point.
Our unsustainable spending and debt, coupled with massive printing of our fiat currency has no other possible outcome than disaster.
This isn't a partisan issue... this is a history issue. Look into the Weimar Republic. Unsustainable debt, unreasonable spending, printing an unreasonable amount of FIAT currency ("quantitative easing" in 2013 terms)... it led to BIG TIME disaster.
If you haven't already started to prepare for economic collapse, you haven't been paying attention.
You are the earthy type, Opinion... chickens & rabbits are great sustainable food sources. Start planning & preparing now.
If you fail to plan... plan to fail.
I guess that I pretty much already live where & like if things went to hell I could manage.

I have a small farm type place and used to feed out cattle. But today I lease it out for cattle grazing.

I guess I could get back into the farm business pretty easy as I have the barn, tractor and chicken coop. Gave the rabbit cages away to a kid for 4H. I used to raise some rabbits but found it hard to kill and then eat them plus they could out produce what we could eat. I have deer in my yard if needed.

I have quite a bit of food on hand. Winter time can kind of lock us in from making a daily trip to the grocery store.

Likely could survive quite a while although the quality of the eating might go down somewhat. Likely run out of coffee first.

Heat with a 150,000 BTU coal stoker (usually have a supply of stoker coal available and maintain enough gas to run a generator if needed during any power outage. If that don't work I have three old Warm Morning coal/wood stoves plus two old cook stoves made in the late 1800's I restored. Also have a two burner gas cook stove.

Needless to say I have a lot of junk and stuff setting around that if needed could be put to work.
DILLIGAF

New York, NY

#12703 Sep 26, 2013
Opinion wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you not the same nitwit that first believed and then posted the HOAX email in posting #12558?????
It was pretty evident that you don't know much about anything regarding Obamacare.
When you made the fool out of yourself you changed subjects to jumping canyons in a single leap over recent shootings.
Now you come sneaking back to defend Glen Beck, Sarah Palin, Ted Cruz, and Michelle Bachmann intelligence level.
Yea, right! You have me convinced there one who has proved to be genius by being so fooled by posting some clearly stupid chain email.
You brilliance is blinding.
You need to get laid sweetheart, you wouldn't be so frustrated, what you're too homely, even dogs can get laid once in a while, try it , you may like it.
DILLIGAF

New York, NY

#12704 Sep 26, 2013
Opinion wrote:
<quoted text>
If that is not the case then quit standing on some Constitutional soap box expounding your expertize, like a born again self proclaimed preacher standing on a soapbox expounding on the Bible.
I'm quite willing to admit that I am giving Republicans hell for acting like idiots, opposing everything they can unless its lock step there way.
You infer I'm crazy but I do not infer that on you other than you make a false claim about yourself and purpose.
If you don't like me giving Republican hell find someone to discuss the Constitution with you.I'm planning on messing around down here in the political pig pen where one likely will get into some bullshit other than what you say you deal in.
I've never seen someone who claims to be so brilliant, just like the mutt in the WH, and his moronic adherents,you make,so many grammatical mistakes, you take the cake for typos, and misspellings on this thread, You need to use a teleprompter like Barry Soetaro, I've never claimed to be so smart as you, you are the one who keeps reminding everyone else in here how brilliant you are. Remove all the mirrors in your abode, you've reached the height of extreme egoism.
Opinion

Custer, SD

#12706 Sep 27, 2013
DILLIGAF wrote:
<quoted text>
You need to get laid sweetheart, you wouldn't be so frustrated, what you're too homely, even dogs can get laid once in a while, try it , you may like it.
Why get mad and post silly childish stuff.

You made a fool out of yourself all by yourself.

Are you not the same nitwit that first believed and then posted the HOAX email in posting #12558?????

It was pretty evident that you don't know much about anything regarding Obamacare.

When you made the fool out of yourself you changed subjects to jumping canyons in a single leap over recent shootings.

Now you come sneaking back to defend Glen Beck, Sarah Palin, Ted Cruz, and Michelle Bachmann intelligence level.

Yea, right! You have me convinced there one who has proved to be genius by being so fooled by posting some clearly stupid chain email.

You brilliance is blinding.
Opinion

Custer, SD

#12707 Sep 27, 2013
nac wrote:
<quoted text>
The economy is going to go over the cliff regardless of what republicans or democrats do at this point.
.
Just wondering what your position is if Congress fails to act on the debt.

Does the President have the authority under the 14th Amendment of the Constitution to act and borrow to pay the debts already incurred?

Could the President of the USA ask for an emergency ruling on whether he has that authority to the Supreme Court if Congress fails to pass a debt increase bill?

Some say he does have that authority and others say that he doesn't and if he did they would start impeachment hearings. Submitting the question to the Supreme Court would seem to settle the question either way.
Opinion

Custer, SD

#12708 Sep 27, 2013
DILLIGAF wrote:
<quoted text>
I've never seen someone who claims to be so brilliant, just like the mutt in the WH, and his moronic adherents,you make,so many grammatical mistakes, you take the cake for typos, and misspellings on this thread, You need to use a teleprompter like Barry Soetaro, I've never claimed to be so smart as you, you are the one who keeps reminding everyone else in here how brilliant you are. Remove all the mirrors in your abode, you've reached the height of extreme egoism.
To please you I will try to take more time and review my postings. Sometimes I get in a hurry to get a reply posted and don't double check. I have other things to do like going fishing before winter ice freezes the lake. But then when the ice is thick enough its ice fishing time.

But then they also say that people with very high IQ's generally have spelling problems. Spelling rules do not make sense like mathematics plus people with high IQ's think faster than their fingers can type. Sometimes a your comes out as a you.

But just remember that people with low IQ's fall for and believe stupid made up stuff like the email you posted that was simple to ID as a hoax by any person with a IQ above a moron.
nac

Merrick, NY

#12709 Sep 27, 2013
Opinion wrote:
<quoted text>
Just wondering what your position is if Congress fails to act on the debt.
Does the President have the authority under the 14th Amendment of the Constitution to act and borrow to pay the debts already incurred?
Could the President of the USA ask for an emergency ruling on whether he has that authority to the Supreme Court if Congress fails to pass a debt increase bill?
Some say he does have that authority and others say that he doesn't and if he did they would start impeachment hearings. Submitting the question to the Supreme Court would seem to settle the question either way.
Based on the Constitution, the debt issues are up to Congress to settle. But based on the last few presidencies, the President can do whatever he wants - Constitution be damned.

But they will raise the debt ceiling. If you count on anything, count on that. Sure, it will be used as a political football to be used to get what congressmen want on other issues... but they will raise the debt ceiling.

It's all for show now anyway. What would happen if they don't raise it? We can't look back to history - since they always have. But in theory, the Treasury would be unable to borrow money.

But who would stop them? If it came to that scenario... and someone tried to stop the Treasury from borrowing above the debt ceiling, they'd be playing golf with JFK within a few days.
Opinion

Custer, SD

#12710 Sep 27, 2013
nac wrote:
<quoted text>
Based on the Constitution, the debt issues are up to Congress to settle. But based on the last few presidencies, the President can do whatever he wants - Constitution be damned.
But they will raise the debt ceiling. If you count on anything, count on that. Sure, it will be used as a political football to be used to get what congressmen want on other issues... but they will raise the debt ceiling.
It's all for show now anyway. What would happen if they don't raise it? We can't look back to history - since they always have. But in theory, the Treasury would be unable to borrow money.
But who would stop them? If it came to that scenario... and someone tried to stop the Treasury from borrowing above the debt ceiling, they'd be playing golf with JFK within a few days.
I see the Senate just kicked the football back to the House.
ILAL

Bronx, NY

#12711 Sep 27, 2013
Opinion wrote:
<quoted text>
I agree. Even before the Citizen's United decision the wealthy along with corporate interests controlled Washington.
Politicians listen to who gives them money to campaign with and once in office those nice gifts.
Once a politician takes money from corporate interests, they become beholden to them and have no choice but to do what they say, completely getting lost as to why they were elected to political office in the first place: to legislate for the betterment of America as a whole, not cowtow to special interests.
ILAL

Bronx, NY

#12712 Sep 27, 2013
Opinion wrote:
Some of you boys are pretty good at hind sight and making fun.
Amazing how none of you ever jump up and present what should be done and how.
Had Obama shot the place up based on his authority alone you bird would have ranted and raved about that.
Then when he goes to congress you rant and rave about that.
Then when a non-military option is available you rant about that.
Just what would you nit wits have done in the past and what would you do in the future regarding Syria?
Please for once come up with something other than some stupid one liner.
It's unfortunate that with some, that's all they got and the best they can do.
Common sense plays no part in their lives.
Reconciliation

Islip, NY

#12714 Sep 27, 2013
Since the democrats used reconciliation as well as backroom dealings and payoffs to ram Obamacare down the throats of America, they have created a atmosphere and anger and antagonism in Washington and in this country that will not dissipate until Obamacare is defeated.
Opinion

Custer, SD

#12715 Sep 27, 2013
ILAL wrote:
<quoted text>
It's unfortunate that with some, that's all they got and the best they can do.
Common sense plays no part in their lives.
I would try to drag the Supreme Court into the debt ceiling mess.

If Congress is unable to agree on a plan to raise the nation's debt, Obama will have to decide which government bills to pay and which not to pay — or to simply ignore Congress, pay all the bills and simply raise the debt ceiling on his own.

Regardless of what he does legally it untested waters.
Obama says he lacks the constitutional power to raise the debt limit, but that may not necessarily be the case under the 14th Amendment according to some experts. In general the President has the power during crises to take actions that are necessary to protect the country.

Obama can cite the 14th Amendment of the Constitution, which says "the validity of the public debt … shall not be questioned," and a crises is at hand asking the Supreme Court of the USA to rule.

He would have little to lose and a lot to gain regardless of which way the Supreme Court ruled or if they refused to rule.

If they refused to hear a emergency request to give a Constitutional interpretation they assume some of the blame for the default.

If they said no then he could say I would have and tied to find a way out of the mess the House has created.

If they say yes then he could and have legal authority and he would be safe from impeachment or lawsuits.
Opinion

Custer, SD

#12716 Sep 27, 2013
Reconciliation wrote:
Since the democrats used reconciliation as well as backroom dealings and payoffs to ram Obamacare down the throats of America, they have created a atmosphere and anger and antagonism in Washington and in this country that will not dissipate until Obamacare is defeated.
Wake up and smell the roses. The majority ruled. Republicans had their say they were entitled to as the minority party.

If the people of this country wanted to punish Obama for Obama Care they sure passed up the chance at the last election.

Whether or not you remember he won by a landslide. By a landslide and not just a little landslide.

Next election if the Republicans take control of the government they can repeal Obama Care. By that time Obama Care will be in place and you can use the train wreck you predict for your political resurrection.

That is the way it works.
ILAL

Bronx, NY

#12717 Sep 27, 2013
Opinion wrote:
<quoted text>
I would try to drag the Supreme Court into the debt ceiling mess.
If Congress is unable to agree on a plan to raise the nation's debt, Obama will have to decide which government bills to pay and which not to pay — or to simply ignore Congress, pay all the bills and simply raise the debt ceiling on his own.
Regardless of what he does legally it untested waters.
Obama says he lacks the constitutional power to raise the debt limit, but that may not necessarily be the case under the 14th Amendment according to some experts. In general the President has the power during crises to take actions that are necessary to protect the country.
Obama can cite the 14th Amendment of the Constitution, which says "the validity of the public debt … shall not be questioned," and a crises is at hand asking the Supreme Court of the USA to rule.
He would have little to lose and a lot to gain regardless of which way the Supreme Court ruled or if they refused to rule.
If they refused to hear a emergency request to give a Constitutional interpretation they assume some of the blame for the default.
If they said no then he could say I would have and tied to find a way out of the mess the House has created.
If they say yes then he could and have legal authority and he would be safe from impeachment or lawsuits.
I'm curious as well as to how this is going to play out since in the past, congress had no problem raising the debt ceiling under previous administrations without question.
It was always a given.
Why are they giving the current administration such a hard time borders on absurdity.
Opinion

Custer, SD

#12718 Sep 27, 2013
ILAL wrote:
<quoted text>

Why are they giving the current administration such a hard time borders on absurdity.
Debt reduction is really the main issue that has to be dealt with.
I think that all the drama over the debt ceiling might be the long-term goal of forcing America to embark on medium-term plan for deficit reduction. Yet at this point, the deal is uncertain and will be offset by how it was achieved.
Fiscal solvency is not merely a function of deficits and debt, interest rates and the profile of maturities. It is also highly sensitive to economic growth.
The lower an economy’s growth rate, the higher a budget deficit is likely to be, the larger the debt accumulation, and the greater the need for yet another round of fiscal austerity to safeguard solvency. All are components of the much-feared debt trap.
These various components can be tweaked and changed but going nuts with any one of them creates problems.
As I stated the real issue to be concerned with is debt reduction. That is tough and going to be a battle down the road. When all Republican candidates stood and rejected a $1 increase in taxes for a $10 cut in spending it’s going to be a rocky road.
There first is the problem of stopping more debt by cutting spending to where revenue coming in balances spending. They can’t even agree over where the cuts should be.
The second problem is that even if they could cut spending to a level of revenue coming in, they need to find a way to increase revenues coming in to pay off the debt it will remain.
One group wants to use deep cuts below revenue (with no revenue increase other than economic growth) to pay off the debt. Ok, where are those deep cuts going to take place?
Where do we spend the most? Yet, one side always wants to cut “entitlements”. Some things are true entitlements and other things are not. Social Security, each of us paid separate and apart from regular taxes into the SS trust fund and thus are entitled to a retirement based on the fact we paid for it. Originally, the term "entitlement" in the United States was used to identify federal programs that, like Social Security and Medicare, got the name because workers became "entitled" to their benefits by paying into the system. If you didn’t work and pay into the fund you were not entitled to receive benefits.
Understand the difference regardless whether one supports these programs or not. We did not pay into a separate fund for veterans' benefits, welfare benefits, unemployment compensation, food stamps, and agricultural price support. We did not pay for corporate welfare, farm/ranch welfare subsidies or foreign aid. A corporation/ individual may become eligible for benefits but they are not special funded programs by those who paid for them and are entitled. They are just programs passed and paid for by general taxation. Fact is a benefit can be gotten regardless if they ever paid general income taxes.
Let’s look where we could cut. We still have bases in Australia, Bahrain, Brazil, Bulgaria, Cuba, Djibouti, Germany, Greece, Greenland, Guam, Italy, Israel, Japan, Kosovo, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Netherlands, Oman, Pakistan, Philippines, Portugal, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Spain, South Korea, Turkey, United Arab Emirates and the United Kingdom. Let’s not forget the U.S. Navy’s battle ships, air craft carriers and submarines patrolling, wherever they’re patrolling, or the Marine Corps contingents at about 170 embassies around the world. This will substantially reduce our defense budget, allowing troops scattered across the globe to stay consolidated at home in preparation for America’s next undeclared war, thus freeing our National Guard to be available for local emergencies – as National Guard advertisements still stress are its primary mission.
Opinion

Custer, SD

#12719 Sep 27, 2013
ILAL wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm curious as well as to how this is going to play out since in the past, congress had no problem raising the debt ceiling under previous administrations without question.
It was always a given.
Why are they giving the current administration such a hard time borders on absurdity.
Debt reduction is really the main issue that has to be dealt with.

I think that all the drama over the debt ceiling might be the long-term goal of forcing America to embark on medium-term plan for deficit reduction. Yet at this point, the deal is uncertain and will be offset by how it was achieved.
Fiscal solvency is not merely a function of deficits and debt, interest rates and the profile of maturities. It is also highly sensitive to economic growth.
The lower an economy’s growth rate, the higher a budget deficit is likely to be, the larger the debt accumulation, and the greater the need for yet another round of fiscal austerity to safeguard solvency. All are components of the much-feared debt trap.
These various components can be tweaked and changed but going nuts with any one of them creates problems.
As I stated the real issue to be concerned with is debt reduction. That is tough and going to be a battle down the road. When all Republican candidates stood and rejected a $1 increase in taxes for a $10 cut in spending it’s going to be a rocky road.
There first is the problem of stopping more debt by cutting spending to where revenue coming in balances spending. They can’t even agree over where the cuts should be.
The second problem is that even if they could cut spending to a level of revenue coming in, they need to find a way to increase revenues coming in to pay off the debt it will remain.
One group wants to use deep cuts below revenue (with no revenue increase other than economic growth) to pay off the debt. Ok, where are those deep cuts going to take place?
Where do we spend the most? Yet, one side always wants to cut “entitlements”. Some things are true entitlements and other things are not. Social Security, each of us paid separate and apart from regular taxes into the SS trust fund and thus are entitled to a retirement based on the fact we paid for it. Originally, the term "entitlement" in the United States was used to identify federal programs that, like Social Security and Medicare, got the name because workers became "entitled" to their benefits by paying into the system. If you didn’t work and pay into the fund you were not entitled to receive benefits.
Understand the difference regardless whether one supports these programs or not. We did not pay into a separate fund for veterans' benefits, welfare benefits, unemployment compensation, food stamps, and agricultural price support. We did not pay for corporate welfare, farm/ranch welfare subsidies or foreign aid. A corporation/ individual may become eligible for benefits but they are not special funded programs by those who paid for them and are entitled. They are just programs passed and paid for by general taxation. Fact is a benefit can be gotten regardless if they ever paid general income taxes.
Let’s look where we could cut. We still have bases in Australia, Bahrain, Brazil, Bulgaria, Cuba, Djibouti, Germany, Greece, Greenland, Guam, Italy, Israel, Japan, Kosovo, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Netherlands, Oman, Pakistan, Philippines, Portugal, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Spain, South Korea, Turkey, United Arab Emirates and the United Kingdom. Let’s not forget the U.S. Navy’s battle ships, air craft carriers and submarines patrolling, wherever they’re patrolling, or the Marine Corps contingents at about 170 embassies around the world. This will substantially reduce our defense budget, allowing troops scattered across the globe to stay consolidated at home in preparation for America’s next undeclared war, thus freeing our National Guard to be available for local emergencies .
Reconciliation

Islip, NY

#12720 Sep 27, 2013
Opinion wrote:
<quoted text>
Wake up and smell the roses. The majority ruled. Republicans had their say they were entitled to as the minority party.
If the people of this country wanted to punish Obama for Obama Care they sure passed up the chance at the last election.
Whether or not you remember he won by a landslide. By a landslide and not just a little landslide.
Next election if the Republicans take control of the government they can repeal Obama Care. By that time Obama Care will be in place and you can use the train wreck you predict for your political resurrection.
That is the way it works.
The majority of people then and now don't want obamacare.

The majority did not rule, a minority of elitist career officials who have used their power again and again to reap its benefits on themselves, their families and their supporters ruled.

and they did it using reconciliation, and backroom deals that stink even in the context of their ongoing lies and corruption.
Opinion

Custer, SD

#12721 Sep 27, 2013
Sorry about the double post. The first one didn't show for a long time and I thought it didn't post.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form 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.

Jackson-Heights Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Ismael Gerli, guidelines on forming an offshore... 3 min Ismael Gerli 1
News Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision (Jan '08) 28 min cpeter1313 318,389
Giants talk back (Dec '06) 55 min jimi-yank 7,016
Yankee talk back 4, or is it 5 (Aug '08) 56 min jimi-yank 341,284
NFL attendance - fake news 1 hr Black cntl not gu... 2
Mets talkback (Dec '07) 1 hr jimi-yank 45,770
Women Are Their Own Worst Objectifiers 2 hr Fred 7

Jackson-Heights Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Jackson-Heights Mortgages