The Obama Epic FAIL BLOG

“Go Ahead Liberal, Make My Day”

Since: Dec 07

Florida...home of Trump

#567 May 27, 2014
Opinion wrote:
<quoted text>
But we know that you speak with a forked tongue.
give it up; your chances of becoming the next Mrs Obama fall after Valerie Jarrett and these two dried up sacks of puss
Bloody Bill Anderson

Hopkinsville, KY

#568 May 27, 2014
Opinion wrote:
<quoted text>
I tend to agree but I'm not a lawyer.
Appears to me that issue was somewhat covered in the Supreme Court opinion already rendered.
Chief Justice John Roberts says the mandate in the law requiring individuals to buy health insurance is not a tax. Therefor it is not a revenue bill that must originate in the House.
If you want to hunt deer you must get a deer license. If you do not get a license and get caught you are fined a penalty. You are required to get healthcare insurance and if you do not you get fined a penalty. So which is the “tax” the requirements to purchase the license or the fine (penalty) if you do not? Driving without a license & insurance also leads to a fine or penalty.
The chief justice of the United States says the penalty for not obeying the individual mandate is not a tax, it's a penalty.
Roberts thus concludes that because Congress calls the penalty for not complying with the individual mandate a “penalty” not a “tax,” the "penalty" therefore is not a "tax."
“The Affordable Care Act does not require that the penalty for failing to comply with the individual mandate be treated as a tax for purposes of the Anti-injunction Act,” writes Roberts.“The Anti-Injunction Act therefore does not apply to this suit, and we may proceed to the merits.”
The Supreme Court seems to have contradicted itself in its ruling on the Individual Mandate.

Roberts said this, then the Court turned right around and ruled that the Individual Mandate was Constitutional because it is a tax, and the Congress has the power to levy taxes.

The Court then proceeded to strike down the requirement that states participate in the Medicaid expansion on states rights grounds.

Like everything else concerning Obamacare, the Court seems to have done everything possible to make it unworkable without actually striking it down.

I still think that Obamacare is going to crash and burn. The sooner the better, because the sooner the crash, the less collateral damage there will be. The longer it manages to fly "on a wing and a prayer" the worse and more costly the damage will be. My advice to President Obama and the Democrats is hit the "Eject" button, agree to repeal, and say, "Okay. Now let's talk about a single payer National Health Insurance that covers everybody automatically and does not have all of the ACA's faults."
ZCs

New York, NY

#569 May 27, 2014
Another reason to cheer for President Obama.

Right Power!!!!!!!!!!

Obama rallied U.S. troops during a speech vowing to bring a "responsible end" to the war by the end of the year.

"For many of you, this will be your last tour in Afghanistan," he told nearly 3,000 troops.

His surprise trip on Memorial Day weekend came as the president and the Department of Veterans Affairs face criticism of long wait times and mismanagement in the VA that could have led to deaths at some clinics in the United States.

Deputy National Security Adviser Ben Rhodes said the White House wanted to make the trip about the troops and not Afghanistan politics. Rhodes said the VA scandal was not a “factor into the planning for the trip.”

On the trip, Obama received a briefing from top commanders in Afghanistan and visited wounded military personnel at a base hospital.

The trip marks Obama's fourth to the country and the first in his second term. More than 32,000 U.S. troops remain in the country and most are expected to return home later this year.

"We want to preserve the gains that you have helped to win,” he said in his speech.“And we are going to make sure that Afghanistan can never again, ever be used again to launch an attack against our country."

Obama called Afghan President Hamid Karzai before leaving Bagram, according to a White House pool report that quoted an administration official who said Obama praised Karzai for the progress being made by the Afghan security forces and for the successful first round of the presidential elections.

Obama also expressed support for an Afghan-led reconciliation process with the Taliban, the official said.
Opinion

Wall, SD

#570 May 27, 2014
Bloody Bill Anderson wrote:
<quoted text>
My advice to President Obama and the Democrats is hit the "Eject" button, agree to repeal, and say, "Okay. Now let's talk about a single payer National Health Insurance that covers everybody automatically and does not have all of the ACA's faults."
I would like to see a good Single Payer System that was set up right and well funded through a multitude of ways so everyone got to help fund it.

Problem is the Insurance companies along with their lobbying and political funding will be really tough to deal with since the two recent Supreme Court decisions regarding corporate spending in politics. It's not just the Republicans but also some Democrats that are well funded by Insurance Companies.

Democrats have long wanted a Single Payer System but in order to get something they went with the Republicans counter proposal of the "mandate" which the Republicans didn't really want when they first proposed it as a counter proposal.

If the Democrats today said "ok there is some problems with Obamacare and we would be willing to repeal it and trade it for a Single Payer System":, all the Republicans would hear was the first part -(problem & repeal it)- and be stone deaf on the replacement with a Single Payer System.

It amazed me that the Democrats were capable of sticking together to pass Obamacare in the first place. Democrats are all over the place politically and are not near as ideology pure as Republicans. Republican can march together over some pretty rough issues where Democrats have a tough time agreeing on much of anything.

There is no question that a Single Payer System done right and funded right would give all the best bang for the dollar spent.
NEGATIVE GDP

Dover, OH

#571 May 29, 2014
I love how the state run MSM STILL gives cover to the Obama 'recovery'.

The U.S. economy contracted in the first quarter for the first time in three years as it buckled under the weight of a severe winter, but there are signs activity has since rebounded.

The Commerce Department on Thursday revised down its growth estimate to show gross domestic product shrinking at a 1.0 annual rate.

It was the worst performance since the first quarter of 2011 and reflected a far slower pace of inventory accumulation and a bigger than previously estimated trade deficit.

The government had previously estimated GDP growth expanding at a 0.1 percent rate. It is not unusual for the government to make sharp revisions to GDP numbers as it does not have complete data when it makes its initial estimates.- YEAH OK

The decline in output, which also reflected a plunge in business spending on nonresidential structures, was sharper than Wall Street's expectations. Economists had expected the revision to show GDP contracting at a 0.5 percent rate.

STATE RUN MSM: CNBC
JOBS

Dover, OH

#573 May 30, 2014
"There are currently 61.1 million American men in their prime working years, age 25–54. A staggering 1 in 8 such men are not in the labor force at all, meaning they are neither working nor looking for work. This is an all-time high dating back to when records were first kept in 1955. An additional 2.9 million men are in the labor force but not employed (i.e., they would work if they could find a job). A total of 10.2 million individuals in this cohort, therefore, are not holding jobs in the U.S. economy today. There are also nearly 3 million more men in this age group not working today than there were before the recession began," the Republicans on the Senate Budget Committee claim.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/1-8-ameri...

“Go Ahead Liberal, Make My Day”

Since: Dec 07

Florida...home of Trump

#574 May 30, 2014
chock up two more names for the fail blog; along with Shinseki, you can now add the Obamatron's Favorite Bullshit Artist...Jay Carney.

They already names Jay's replacement....someone named "De Nile"
MAKING DESERTER WAR HERO

Dover, OH

#578 Jun 3, 2014
"Sometime after midnight on June 30, 2009, Pfc. Bowe Bergdahl left behind a note in his tent saying he had become disillusioned with the Army, did not support the American mission in Afghanistan and was leaving to start a new life. He slipped off the remote military outpost in Paktika Province on the border with Pakistan and took with him a soft backpack, water, knives, a notebook and writing materials, but left behind his body armor and weapons — startling, given the hostile environment around his outpost.

That account, provided by a former senior military officer briefed on the investigation into the private’s disappearance, is part of a more complicated picture emerging of the capture of a soldier whose five years as a Taliban prisoner influenced high-level diplomatic negotiations, brought in foreign governments, and ended with him whisked away on a helicopter by American commandos."

__________

Knowledge that Bergdahl announced he was going AWOL did not stop the military from promoting him while imprisoned, nor did it stop Susan Rice from lying for the Administration when she said Bergdahl “served the United States with honor and distinction”

SEDITION or TREASON?

http://www.truthrevolt.org/news/bowe-bergdahl...
92 MILLION NOT WORKING

Dover, OH

#579 Jun 6, 2014
92,000,000

( CNSNews.com )- The percentage of American civilians 16 or older who do not have a job and are not actively seeking one remained at a 36-year high in May, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

In December, April, and now May, the labor force participation rate has been 62.8 percent. That means that 37.2 percent were not participating in the labor force during those months.

Before December, the last time the labor force participation rate sunk as low as 62.8 percent was February 1978, when it was also 62.8 percent. At that time, Jimmy Carter was president. In April, the number of those not in the labor force hit a record high of 92,018,000.
Bloody Bill Anderson

Cadiz, KY

#580 Jun 6, 2014
92 MILLION NOT WORKING wrote:
92,000,000
( CNSNews.com )- The percentage of American civilians 16 or older who do not have a job and are not actively seeking one remained at a 36-year high in May, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
In December, April, and now May, the labor force participation rate has been 62.8 percent. That means that 37.2 percent were not participating in the labor force during those months.
Before December, the last time the labor force participation rate sunk as low as 62.8 percent was February 1978, when it was also 62.8 percent. At that time, Jimmy Carter was president. In April, the number of those not in the labor force hit a record high of 92,018,000.
I fully agree that far too many Americans are out of work. Finding a job is almost impossible today. That is especially true of jobs that call for a good education.

But I have to question how many of those 92 million people "16 or older" are over the age of retirement?

A more realistic jobs picture would look at those over high school graduation age but under age 62. It would also look at the mosaic of employment -- that is to say the kind of jobs that the people are working are doing based on pay scale, education level needed, etc. It would also take into consideration people who are underemployed -- for instance those with college degrees who are working flipping burgers for minimum wage. I know a recent graduate, an education major, who is doing that because she can't find an teaching job -- and isn't likely to find one anytime soon because of the huge per pupil spending cuts made by the states since 2008.

The side effects of the ACA would explain part of that dismal picture, but not all of it, nor even the major part of it's outline. That jobs picture is the result of the "tickle down" economics and tax cuts on the wealthy since the 1980s, shifting the burden for paying for education, health care, etc. down to lower income people, sending jobs overseas, and the resultant restructuring of the American economy.
OBAMA EXCUSE MAKER

Dover, OH

#581 Jun 6, 2014
Bloody Bill Anderson wrote:
<quoted text>
I fully agree that far too many Americans are out of work. Finding a job is almost impossible today. That is especially true of jobs that call for a good education.

But I have to question how many of those 92 million people "16 or older" are over the age of retirement?
see above

Funny that your question has not been asked BO, before Obama.

FACT: Since Obama came into office an additional 7,000,000 people are out of the work force. And that is even since the end of the recession in June 2009! The Obama 'recovery' is full of part time dead end jobs and the middle class has seen their income falling since 2009!!!
Bloody Bill Anderson

Cadiz, KY

#583 Jun 12, 2014
OBAMA EXCUSE MAKER wrote:
<quoted text>
see above
Funny that your question has not been asked BO, before Obama.
FACT: Since Obama came into office an additional 7,000,000 people are out of the work force. And that is even since the end of the recession in June 2009! The Obama 'recovery' is full of part time dead end jobs and the middle class has seen their income falling since 2009!!!
Some people were questioning it "BO" but nobody was listening to them.

It took the 2008 crash to get people's interest. Then, like a snowball rolling down hill, it grew as more and more people felt the effects of the new "wealth gushes to the top" economic structure. By then Obama was president. As Harry Truman once said, "The buck stops here." Better saying might be, "When the shit hits the fan, it splatters on the man in the Oval Office."

But I will agree that the Obama recovery has generated mostly part time dead end jobs. With the present structure of the economy, it can't generate any other kind. The only way to change that structure is to go back to a steeply progressive tax structure like the one in place during Eisenhower's time. No way that the Tea Party will ever let that happen while they control the Republican Party and the GOP can block any changes in Congress.
Opinion

Wall, SD

#584 Jun 13, 2014
Bloody Bill Anderson wrote:
<quoted text>
Some people were questioning it "BO" but nobody was listening to them.
It took the 2008 crash to get people's interest. Then, like a snowball rolling down hill, it grew as more and more people felt the effects of the new "wealth gushes to the top" economic structure. By then Obama was president. As Harry Truman once said, "The buck stops here." Better saying might be, "When the shit hits the fan, it splatters on the man in the Oval Office."
But I will agree that the Obama recovery has generated mostly part time dead end jobs. With the present structure of the economy, it can't generate any other kind. The only way to change that structure is to go back to a steeply progressive tax structure like the one in place during Eisenhower's time. No way that the Tea Party will ever let that happen while they control the Republican Party and the GOP can block any changes in Congress.
You said:
" The only way to change that structure is to go back to a steeply progressive tax structure like the one in place during Eisenhower's time. No way that the Tea Party will ever let that happen while they control the Republican Party and the GOP can block any changes in Congress".

I agree.

Those who receive the greatest benefit from the economic engine of the USA should be required to pay the most to keep the machinery greased that makes it work. That just as a matter of fairness.
Bloody Bill Anderson

Madisonville, KY

#585 Jun 13, 2014
Opinion wrote:
<quoted text>
You said:
" The only way to change that structure is to go back to a steeply progressive tax structure like the one in place during Eisenhower's time. No way that the Tea Party will ever let that happen while they control the Republican Party and the GOP can block any changes in Congress".
I agree.
Those who receive the greatest benefit from the economic engine of the USA should be required to pay the most to keep the machinery greased that makes it work. That just as a matter of fairness.
I never really understood how the economy was and is structured and the role that progressive taxation plays in it until I took the Klingon lady economics professor to supper. I also did not know what the tax rates really were in the 1950s. I just took the statement that "taxes are now higher than they have ever been" at face value. Then I found out what the tax rates really were during the Eisenhower administration. That told me that the Tea Party are nothing but a bunch of damned liars.

Truth is, in an unregulated free market economy two things happen: 1) Wealth tends to concentrate in the hands of a few extremely wealthy people at the top. 2) In a related development, industry and business tends to become monopoly as weaker, smaller competitors are swallowed up or put out of business by larger, stronger ones.

There are only two workable remedies to the problem. One is steeply progressive taxation that acts as a ceiling on incomes. That also redistributes income back through the whole economy when the government pays for things like infrastructure (just look at all the stuff built in the 1950-60s), education, and other things that benefit the great mass of the people. Regulation of business prevents monopolization. Thus you have real competition between many providers to give the best product and service to the customer.

The alternative to the method that the USA used from the New Deal to the 1980s is the one proposed by Karl Marx. Marx recognized that in a totally free market economy the wealth would tend to go to the top, business and industry would become monopoly, the middle class would sink into poverty, and then the impoverished workers would rebel, overthrow the capitalist system, and go to socialism (which he called communism). He could not imagine any government ever doing what the New Deal did, since the wealthy owners of capital controlled government and would not allow it to happen. Now it seems that the Libertarian free market people want to undo all the New Deal and tempt fate by putting Marx's prediction to the test.

When you come right down to it, I think they are fools. If the current situation continues, Karl Marx's prediction is far more likely to come true than is the nonsense put out by Ludwig von Mises, Murray Rothbard, and Ayn Rand.
Bloody Bill Anderson

Madisonville, KY

#587 Jun 13, 2014
Lord Hater wrote:
<quoted text>
The greatest benefit. That would be all the unemployed getting something for nothing.
I have heard that "the unemployed getting something for nothing" shit so much I am about to the point of next time somebody says it to me, I'm just going to draw back a fist, hit him so hard he thinks a mule kicked him, and leave him laying.

People would not be unemployed if the damned rich bastards hadn't sent all the jobs to sweatshops overseas. And don't give me your damned shit about it being unions' fault either. It was the greedy rich bastards at the top wanting to maximize profits any way that they could.

You can go lick the billionaires asses if you want to. I'm about to the point of saying I'd like to see every billionaire lynched with the guts of a television preacher.
Bloody Bill Anderson

Madisonville, KY

#588 Jun 14, 2014
Interesting story from PBS Newshour about the increasing income inequality. The top 1 percent's income double; everybody else gets less.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/combat-tighten...
Opinion

Wall, SD

#589 Jun 14, 2014
Bloody Bill Anderson wrote:
<quoted text>
I never really understood how the economy was and is structured and the role that progressive taxation plays in it until I took the Klingon lady economics professor to supper. I also did not know what the tax rates really were in the 1950s. I just took the statement that "taxes are now higher than they have ever been" at face value. Then I found out what the tax rates really were during the Eisenhower administration. That told me that the Tea Party are nothing but a bunch of damned liars.
Truth is, in an unregulated free market economy two things happen: 1) Wealth tends to concentrate in the hands of a few extremely wealthy people at the top. 2) In a related development, industry and business tends to become monopoly as weaker, smaller competitors are swallowed up or put out of business by larger, stronger ones.
There are only two workable remedies to the problem. One is steeply progressive taxation that acts as a ceiling on incomes. That also redistributes income back through the whole economy when the government pays for things like infrastructure (just look at all the stuff built in the 1950-60s), education, and other things that benefit the great mass of the people. Regulation of business prevents monopolization. Thus you have real competition between many providers to give the best product and service to the customer.
The alternative to the method that the USA used from the New Deal to the 1980s is the one proposed by Karl Marx. Marx recognized that in a totally free market economy the wealth would tend to go to the top, business and industry would become monopoly, the middle class would sink into poverty, and then the impoverished workers would rebel, overthrow the capitalist system, and go to socialism (which he called communism). He could not imagine any government ever doing what the New Deal did, since the wealthy owners of capital controlled government and would not allow it to happen. Now it seems that the Libertarian free market people want to undo all the New Deal and tempt fate by putting Marx's prediction to the test.
When you come right down to it, I think they are fools. If the current situation continues, Karl Marx's prediction is far more likely to come true than is the nonsense put out by Ludwig von Mises, Murray Rothbard, and Ayn Rand.
Could not agree more.

In addition to that the power of decision making is mostly in the hands of those who benefit the most by operating the economy as it now is. The wealthy and large corporate interests.
Who really benefits

Islip, NY

#590 Jun 14, 2014
Opinion wrote:
<quoted text>
Could not agree more.
In addition to that the power of decision making is mostly in the hands of those who benefit the most by operating the economy as it now is. The wealthy and large corporate interests.
The other people who benefit the most from operating the economy as it is now are the democratic party.

They need income inequality because it provides them a base of individuals voting democrat.

They act like they want to fix it, but there is a reason that everywhere the democrats are in power income inequality increases, and the number of individuals dependent on government subsidies increase, because those people vote democrat, and the democrats know this very well.

That is why there are so many uber rich people who support the democratic party.
Opinion

Wall, SD

#591 Jun 14, 2014
Lord Hater wrote:
<quoted text>
The greatest benefit. That would be all the unemployed getting something for nothing.
I believe that "all" forms of government welfare and subsidies should be watched over with a close eye for true need and length of time having received such help.

I have no problem with the idea of people doing something if they can in order to receive welfare help over an extended period of time. If needed create "make work" projects such as cleaning parks or waterways.

Yet lets consider the entire picture when coming down hard on someone getting government - taxpayer assistance.

About $59 billion is spent on traditional social welfare programs.$92 billion is spent on corporate subsidies. So, the government spent 50% more on corporate welfare than it did on food stamps and housing assistance in 2006.

So which comes closest to meeting the Christian mandate of helping your fellow man?
Subsidizing the already wealthy through tax breaks, large corporations, or helping another human get by?

It's your tax dollar, where do you want it spent? You tell me in detail.

As I said I believe all welfare should be closely watched for abuse and designed not to be a way of life but a temporary life line of help.
Opinion

Wall, SD

#592 Jun 14, 2014
Who really benefits wrote:
<quoted text>
The other people who benefit the most from operating the economy as it is now are the democratic party.
They need income inequality because it provides them a base of individuals voting democrat.
They act like they want to fix it, but there is a reason that everywhere the democrats are in power income inequality increases, and the number of individuals dependent on government subsidies increase, because those people vote democrat, and the democrats know this very well.
That is why there are so many uber rich people who support the democratic party.
I tend to think that your thinking is upside down.

I am a life long Republican of Old. Conservative yet progressive that believes it is wise to keep the religious nuts out of politics.

That said it was President Reagan that implemented the idea of trickle down economy and moved the county towards more and more corporate deregulation. The industrial base was moved out of this country and slowly the good jobs were sucked out of the USA.

IBM was sold to China and slowly that company has cut jobs in the USA and not just worker jobs but jobs of top Engineers.

The Democratic Party is not perfect either but right now the Republican Party has taken a trip down the rabbit hole into whacko land.

If one takes a honest look at what Bush/Cheney did while in office one has to give President Obama a lot of credit for trying to straighten out the mess they handed him. But to take that "honest" look one has to take off the blinder's that tie you to treating a political party like a religion where it can do not wrong.

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.

New York Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Drop a Word, Add a Word (Jan '10) 36 min SweLL GirL 17,583
News Hillary Clinton fans mob New York bookstore for... 38 min Retribution 27
News Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision (Jan '08) 44 min cpeter1313 317,612
jets talk back (Dec '07) 1 hr jimi-yank 14,390
President Trump's first 100 days - Roadmap to D... (Nov '16) 9 hr Dudley 5,238
The United Hates of America (Sep '10) 10 hr Go trump 3,101
Do not take a knee on Sunday NFL 10 hr Go trump 7
Giants talk back (Dec '06) 13 hr Paul Yanks 6,823
Yankee talk back 4, or is it 5 (Aug '08) 16 hr Enforcer 340,300

New York Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

New York Mortgages