How about sitting down with the IRS, and Firing those that targeted US Citizens for political reasons? Oh I forgot, he was the one who asked them to! Amazing he still has any supporters left!
I respect the office, but not the man for what he has done to this country. Might I offer you a free one way ticket to Cuba or Venezuela? I think they have the ideal government that will suit you.
As soon as you renounce your citizenship and land in Somalia. They seem to have the ideal government, or lack there of, for you.
I never referred to any prior President as “their President”. I understand that the person holding the office will not make every decision the way I see fit. President Obama is far from perfect, but what quantifiable damage has he done? Hint: Polls, regardless of the source, do not count. Those are people’s preceptions and opinions, not facts.
Ron – Agent will never come up with facts or sources for his shoot-from-the-hip Obama slams. Because he can’t. I don’t know why we keep trying…
August 20, 2013 at 4:37 pm
Agent says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
I will agree that he is far from perfect Ron. In fact, he is so far from perfect, it is a joke. Regardless of what you say about polls, his is in the toilet now and sinking rapidly. What is it now, 35% approval on the economy, 26% on taxes? He is sinking to GW’s lowest polls in the last year of his second term and he still has 3 1/2 years to go. How do you like that 1% growth and continual malaise we have had up to now? Only temp or part time jobs are being created and we have Obamacare looming in a few short weeks. See what the polls look like then when people wake up to see what has happened.
August 20, 2013 at 5:44 pm
Ron says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Agent,
Soooo, still no statistics to indicate President Obama has damaged the nation. Shocking. All you have are people’s opinions, valid or not, and slow growth which is a far cry from destruction.
For someone who claims to have earned an Economics degree, you are very short on facts to support your assertions or ability to cite your sources. All you have is, “Friedman is good and Keynes is bad”.
August 21, 2013 at 12:24 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
1. Quantitate easing, Twist. The buying up of banks bad debt so that they could buy properties at a low cost and then inflate the housing market selling them back at high costs to the consumer. That would be re-inflating the housing bubble. This will destroy the housing industry again in the future, and moreover, incomes did not increase they actually declined. He made it impossible for people to own homes.
2. Again, Quantitate easing, totaling about 4 trillion during his tenure in spending.
3. Spending/debt. Whether you want to admit it or not, (you actually tried to argue he didn’t increase the debt, because as a percentage it only rose minimally after Bush’s last year. This is a TERRIBLE BENCHMARK. The average during Bush’s presidency would be better. When we get to an unsustainable amount, we can’t continue to have ANY increases) Obama IS spending worse than Bush W. I don’t care if it’s been done before. It’s the wrong thing to do now, and is NOT helping the growth numbers.
3. Post and pre stimulus/sequester jobs numbers, look them up, I’m not posting the numbers for you.
Here’s a hint: Jobs growth so far after the sequester have outranked the previous year, except for one, which was 1,000 jobs less. So if we are having more jobs growth without stimulus, and actually, with cuts, WHAT THE HECK DO YOU THINK THIS SHOWS ABOUT OBAMA’S STIMULUS DEBT AS WELL AS HIS 1 TRILLION DEFICITS? They were not needed, and will end up costing us all huge taxes in the future. I call that not just wreck less, but extremely detrimental to the economy.
4. CBO itself stated that the long run net affect of the stimulus was a negative, and may only have short term benefits. Again, we did something bad in the long run for short term ratings approval.
To conclude: You’re 2%@$^$@ing ignorant argument that there is no evidence that he’s a bad president, would actually apply to all presidents, and is in fact your disingenuous method of arguing. Because agent can’t “prove” beyond a shadow of a doubt, Obama is just a normal president, how about Bush W? Just normal?
But I bet you always vote democrat. Meh they are all the same, but vote democrat right?
I know for a fact you are not an independent. The only people who make the arguments the way you do are younger democrats, who want to justify the fact that their current constituents are terrible and yet they vote for them anyway.
Grow up kid.
August 21, 2013 at 12:48 pm
Ron says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Bob,
The fact that you said, “I know for a fact you are not an independent. The only people who make the arguments the way you do are younger democrats, who want to justify the fact that their current constituents are terrible and yet they vote for them anyway.” tells me that you jump to conclusions based on limited information. Republican voters do the same thing with their representatives.
For your information, I actually vote for President Geoarge W Bush the first time. When he cut taxes during wartime and started to balloon our debt I realized that he was not the fiscal conservative for whom I voted. I was also very upset how his supporters tarnished Kerry’s war record when President Bush avoided the war all together.
I was planning on voting for Senator McCain until he, err the Conservatives, picked Sarah Palin as his running mate. That told me enough about his judgement.
Finally, as I have mentioned in several posts, I would have voted for Jon Huntsman, barring any new, radical information, if he was the Republican nominee.
I can only be awyed by quantifiable results, period. If all you have are predicitons, keep them to yourself.
August 21, 2013 at 1:02 pm
Libby says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
As soon as Hillary was out of the running, I too was seriously contemplating McCain. Until he picked that nitwit as his running mate. At his age I couldn’t take the chance that he’s make it through his term. Yikes! The thought of it brings chills…
August 22, 2013 at 8:15 am
jw says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
bob, did you mean “quantitative easing”?
August 20, 2013 at 9:55 am
D says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Your not going to start crying like Boener are you Mr. Agent?
Ron, I have eyes and common sense. You have neither. If Obama knew how to make the economy grow, how do you explain his dismal record? He has had 4 1/2 years to get a grip on it and all he proposes is more spending that has done no good at all. $6 Trillion in new debt and little sign that real jobs are being created, forcing businesses to cut back on jobs with the looming Obamacare is not exactly going to put America back to work. The way to do this is to create more taxpayers, not tax takers. I will agree with you on one point. Friedman’s positions are far more palatable than Keynes which has been a disaster in the making. Too bad you didn’t learn much in school or you would have realized the error of Keynes philosophy.
August 21, 2013 at 12:19 pm
Ron says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Agent,
To me, when “eyes and common sense” is all you have, you have nothing. Did you ever write a paper in college based on statistical analysis? If so, were Eyes and Common Sense your only sources?
Do some research and come back with some data and a cited source.
I never said that Obama knows how to make the economy grow, I only said that it is not nearly as bad as you and other Republicans make it out to be. More importantly, it has been much worse in the past. Do you know who the Presidents were when the Great Depression and Great Recession began? I am not blaming anyone, just look at the facts.
When did I ever say I agreed with Keynes’ philosphy? You are the one that wants to increase government spending with these voter ID laws, not me.
August 22, 2013 at 4:06 pm
Patti Cake in the East says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Agent–you know as well as I do the this president doesn’t have time to grow the economy–he’s been campaigning for the past 4.5 years!! Just absolutely pathetic.
August 23, 2013 at 8:47 am
Ron says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Patti,
Please tell me where in the Constitution that is says the President has complete autonomy over the economy to do whatever he/she would like.
Funny how a liberal will always revert to an emotional outburst of ridicule when presented with facts. Dispute these!
FACT: The IRS under this President has targeted individuals and organizations that he does not agree with. When did the US become a nation that allows such actions. What would you liberals say if it were the ACLU or Green Peace that was targeted by Bush, and before you say that was the case, please present your facts.
FACT: Hillary Clinton put forth a blatant lie about a stupid movie causing the deaths of 4 Americans and our ambassador. While at the time, facts have shown that there was been no evidence of such a reason for the attack. “They Died and Hillary Lied”
FACT: The NSA has been spying on Americans in direct conflict with the 4th Amendment of our Constitution. If I am not mistaken Obama voted and campaigned against the Patriot Act, Now with the PRISM prgram, The Patriot Act is on Steroids. We also are allowing drones to be used by our law enforcement officers. Where is the ACLU on this one? Liberals are Hypocrites!
FACT: The Obama administration under Holder has illegally obtained information from journalists, (CBS & Fox) Then lied about it in a congressional hearing. Holder also let guns walk in Mexico to push their anti-gun agenda back in the US, knowing these guns would make their way back here and kill US citizens like the border agent who was shot with the fast and furious guns. He also would not bring forth action against the black panthers siting outside a polling station wielding a bully club. What if it were a KKK member with a white sheet and a bully club? Liberals are Hypocrites!
And just what emotional outburst was that, Sarah? I could care less what you have to say. You’re just as nasty as all the other right-wing, extremist, terrorist, dipsh*ts on this blog.
And BTW, there were not “black panthers” (plural) sitting outside a voting place with billy clubs. There was one guy and all he did was stand there. No billy club. Here’s the picture to prove it:
Are you aware of any incidents where Conservatives have been hypocrites? In my experience, nearly every person has been guilty of hypocrisy at some point in their lives. Maybe President Obama learned the importance of the patriot Act provisions that have kept us relatively safe since 9/11. It is called personal growth, not necessarily hypocrisy.
I am sure every President would say that governing and making decisions from the back seat is far easier than actually driving the car. That is why I do not ever blame or give full credit to any President for everything that happens in the country. They are all giving their best effort to help the country with the tools that they have.
Obama learned the importance of Gitmo. Just changed his mind. Had nothing to do with the election?
Learned the importance of the patriot act, nothing to do with the election.
Learned the importance of gay marriage, nothing to do with numbers.
Sequester, first it was good, then bad, first it was his idea, then it wasn’t (but actually has been confirmed to be his cabinet’s idea)
The reason you don’t give credit or blame is that you refuse to acknowledge a president’s impact.
Without Obama there would not have been QE. Without Obama there would not have been Twist. Without Obama homes would not have been reinflated. Without Obama there would have been no stimulus. Without Obama there would have been no dodd-frank act. These all had huge affects on the economy’s ability to recover.
Voting, MATTERS.
You try to act like it does not. Presidents are not the same.
August 21, 2013 at 12:40 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Moving to Bush W:
Were it not for democrats we would have alternate forms of retirement plans. Ever heard of them? I doubt you even know the names. They involved tax credits for the poor for investments, tax deferred growth, tax free from your salary, tax free at removal. I want to know right now how that was a bad plan Ron. Immediately. Because the democrats blocked it. I want to know how this would not be a “different” path, and a definite different affect on the economy that a president would affect (it would for a fact be a president that would get this done)
We would have the option for vouchers to chose our healthcare, or to go with medicare (Romney plan, that you on the left said was the removal of medicare. It was both. More options, not less)
Without democrats, we could choose no payroll tax, no investment income taxes, and to go without social security in favor of a private option (republicans have been trying for years) or to go with traditional social security. More options rather than less. I like that. If you’re unfamiliar with this push, what do you think that shows about your political knowledge? All these aspects have been attempted.
You’re just a clueless kid, that I don’t like giving off the image of knowledge when in fact you are telling everyone “it doesn’t matter, just vote D! Just believe in Obama he’s not that bad!”
I prefer to focus on what we can do. Not how “everyone is the same”. Side comment, that “everyone is the same” mentality bull crap is a form of socialism, and it doesn’t work for economy or when it comes to how you regard politicians.
August 21, 2013 at 1:01 pm
Ron says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Bob,
I believe that once someone is actually in office and has to start making hard decisions that impact people’s lives, they may very well change their positions.
If the President has so much impact, why couldn’t President Hoover or President Bush stop the Great Depression and Great Recession respectively? Go ahead, blame the Democrats. Pick a side, is the President all powerful or not?
I am not saying that all Presidents are the same or that voting doesn’t matter. I am saying, “look at the results”.
I actually agreed with President Bush’s plan to help the poor save for retirement. I did not agree with the privatization of Social Security. If it wasn’t for the government raiding the fund, beginning with President Johnson and continuing throughout other adminstartions, it would be solvent for many, many years.
Saying, “You’re just a clueless kid, that I don’t like giving off the image of knowledge” is very disrespectful. You know absolutely nothing about me. All I do is present facts and cite my source, and request the same in return.
What have you done to implement your ideas of what we can do? All you do is criticize Democrats and spin every situation.
August 21, 2013 at 1:07 pm
Libby says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Bob said “Were it not for democrats we would have alternate forms of retirement plans.” Then goes on to say “it would for a fact be a president that would get this done.”
Make up your mind. Either a president gets it done or Congress gets it done. You can’t say “Democrats blocked it” and then blame the president.
August 20, 2013 at 4:44 pm
Agent says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Sarah, let’s not leave out the gun/missile running to Syria that was what caused Benghazi. 400 missiles are missing and no one knows where they went. These missiles can knock an airliner down since they are shoulder fired. The CIA are into this up to their necks and it needs to come out.
Agent, you are absolutely right, but. I find it very interesting that the liberals have no problem with Hillary’s idiotic statement over and over that our Embassy was attacked because of a stupid you tube video! What if it was Condolesa Rice or Collin Powell that said 9/11 was due to a video without any evidence of such. What did they say about the weapons of mass destruction even though every other countries intelligence said the same as our CIA, that Sadam had them, but hey! As Hillary says “WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE?”
Exhibit “A” your response Libby. LMAO! too funny.
Ron, At least your response made some sense. Kudos to you. I agree that so called “conservatives” have been hypocritical in their criticism and their voting records on over spending. But the current situation with Obama and his supporters of the above civil liberty issues as well as blaten corruption, is way over the top. Its actually very funny to watch, so called liberals approve of the violations of civil liberties in such a fashion. BTW, I am not a republican, I actually hate the two party system. I am a Constitutional Libertarian, who is disgusted at the current assault on our rights, liberties, and freedoms and the creation of an entitlement society.
I would be very interested to see how a true Libertarian would govern as the President once they experience the realities of the world and the USA’s place in it. I think it is easy to say we should be isolationists and not get involved. I wonder how that would impact our manufacturing, energy, and export and import businesses. How many jobs would be lost if cut the military, from personnel to defense contractors? So many unintended consequences.
In addition, how many lives have been saved through surveillance used to stop terror plots? We may not like the programs used, but I would rather be alive to complain about them than a dead man with all of my rights, freedoms and liberties in tack.
When you do not have your liberties, freedom, privacy, opportunity for success or ability to express your opinions without reprisal. What good is being alive? I like our founders agree with “Give me liberty or give me death!
I fear our Government as much as I do terrorists. At least I know who they are.
Ron, I don’t see any good arguments here to not be isolationists.
Manufacturing? If anything it would improve. I don’t see how us meddling in others foreign affairs is helping American manufacturing. And it is not just wars which I think is harmful for obvious reasons.For example our rules(forgot the exact legislation name) that puts an increased rate on a foreign countries imports if that country refuses to inform the US of former citizens working in their countries. All so we can tax these citizens. There is really now way out, how free and American is that? And do you think other countries enjoy being bullied like that?
Military jobs? First of all, these jobs are basically public works on steroids and in my opinion provide very little real value. However that said there is a value in protecting out borders and defense. Isolationists don’t want to reduce the size of the military personnel just the military expansionism and cost associated with empire building. AKA bring them home and defend.
Exactly how many lives have been saved through surveillance? Take the other side of the coin. We are risking all our privacy for what? I don’t see any pay off from it. Just as others say “well I have nothing to hide so I don’t mind, it’s for our safety.” Well yeah odds are it won’t even affect you. But odds are you won’t win the lottery either but still buy tickets the fact remains that they can and probably eventually if not already will use it against an innocent person, either personally or politically. Maybe and most probably not “you” but does that make it right? As Snowden made evident whether you are for him or against him these are just people like you and me in control of this PRISM program and they can make their own rash decisions, like leaking information or perhaps using it for dirty politics or personal vendettas.
Also at the risk of seeming to into conspiracy theories, I wouldn’t be very surprised if it’s not that presidents “experience the realities” but rather are shown/coerced into “doing what we say or else.” *Cough* CIA *Cough* Lobbyist. Haha not a firm believe in that just saying wouldn’t be too surprised.
Sarah: You’re an idiot. There is no such thing as a “Constitutional Libertarian.” They are two separate parties. So make up your mind. Which one are you?
Talk about Idiot? Its not a party it is an ideological position. I believe in a very small government which obeys the US Constitution. WOW! you are out there Libby! Get a grip!
So Libby, I guess you think “The Rent Is Too Damn High” , The New York political party is a legitimate political party too? C’mon, Let me say it a different way for your simple twisted mind. I am a Libertarian who believes that we should honor the Constitution and the Oath to uphold it that all politicians take. Get it now? Yikes….
August 22, 2013 at 4:11 pm
Patti Cake in the East says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Libby!! You are the first person the call someone out for calling people names…you, m’dear, are the biggest LIBERAL HYPOCRITE on this site…
Sarah, did you notice that Charlene Lamb and cohorts went back to work at the State Dept with no punishment and never missed a check. They played a large part of what happened in Benghazi and we have 4 dead Americans and almost a year has passed with no answers. I wonder what they will do when the next embassy is attacked. What will the next excuse be?
Interesting that when we had credible intelligence that an attack was planned, nobody died. That is better than handling a situation like Benghazi. Don’t you think.
As a side note, I still hold President Obama and his administration, including Secretary Clintion, for the attack on and poor handling of the Benghazi attack. I want answers too.
By the way, we really do not need a President who is in need of personal growth after he or she becomes President. I would next time look for those traits before electing a community organizer.
The Presdency is a very unique job and I would guess that every President experienced some personal growth during their term(s). That is why none of them ever keep all of their campaign promises, especially when elected to their first term.
Unless you have the opporunity to walk a mile in their shoes, you have no business judging them.
Ron, All I am saying is lets do a little more research in the leadership abilities of our President before we elect them. This guy was a one term Senator with a community organizational background. No leadership experience at all on his resume. Now all we get is a good speech, read on a teleprompter and nothing to back it up! It has become very apparent that he is way over his head in the job. I would give him an A in politics, but thats it!
I don’t think research was the problem. We all knew what all of the candidates brought to the table. President Obama did a better job of selling himself to the voting public than the other candidates. Either that or people voted against the other candidates.
Maybe if we were presented with a better candidate from the Libertarian Party we would not be in this mess. If their ideology is so superior, why can they not present a viable cnadidate who can sell the platform? I am an Independent who would love to have a reasonable third party candidate from from to choose. I would respect Ron Paul more if he did not run as a Republican and focused on the Libertarian party.
Ron, Unfortunate as it is, a third party candidate can not win the election. I like your idea but Ron Paul, Ross Perot or a Donald Trump or the likes could not win because they have not sold their soul to the political machine in Washington. The political parties along with their special interest who support the parties push their guy through the process and even they push the opposing candidate they want to win, ie; McCain. They knew Obama would beat him, thats why the media push McCain. Who do you think wrote the 2400 ACA? Obama? Ried? We all know Pelosi didnt even know what was in it! No, Physicans, Health Insurance Industry, Unions, AARP, These were the people who actually wrote the legislation. Make no bones about it!
Our political system is broke and we need both term limits and make all political donations illegal or something of the sort. It is pathetic to see rich politicians with their family full of lobbyists, ie; Harry Rieds son and daughter, Hillary’s business partners. Not just Dems either Virginias Governor (R) as well who accepted gifts after the election. These relatives and friends and business partners lobby for industries, unions etc. It is actually sickening!
August 20, 2013 at 2:23 pm
Sarah says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Third Party Candidates can not win unless they identify with either the GOP or the DNC. It is a shame you have to sell your soul and future votes to the powers to be in DC. Otherwise you do not stand a chance. That is why both the DNC and the GOP do not like the so called “TEA Party” It is a threat to them and the DC Machine. They hate spending and the political machine of both parties in Washington DC loves it! 4.7 Trillion Dollars a year flows through DC and the Corporations, Unions, Lobbyist and Government workers all want more of it! A politician who is not beholden to them is not welcome in DC.
August 20, 2013 at 3:16 pm
Don't Call Me Shirley says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
In a way, the Republicans had a third party candidate. His name was Jon Huntsman. It’s a shame they weren’t smart enough to support him, but he wasn’t ideologically extreme enough for them. I believe he would have done a good job.
August 20, 2013 at 3:58 pm
Libby says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
“Our political system is broke and we need both term limits and make all political donations illegal or something of the sort. It is pathetic to see rich politicians with their family full of lobbyists.”
Finally! Something I can agree with Sarah about.
August 20, 2013 at 3:59 pm
Ron says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Don’t Call Me Shirley,
Thank you for posting that. I have made that point in the past as well. Based on what information I learned about Jon Huntsman I would have voted for him and know many other people, mostly Democrats, that also would have voted for him. I believe that he would have easily won the Presidency if the Republican party could have put aside their allegiance toward candidates who spoke in extremes and nominated him.
August 20, 2013 at 4:14 pm
Ron says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Sarah,
You correct about the political system being broken. I would be all for a system where 3 candidates, regardless of party affiliation, are selected based on experience (resume) and an interview from a panel (3-5 people depending on the office). Then each candidate receives the exact same air time, office space, staff, and advertising paid for with public money. No private money allowed. Then let the best candidate win.
August 20, 2013 at 4:25 pm
Agent says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Ron, Politics makes strange bedfellows. Democrats are great at running their opposition down, making up all kinds of lies and the complicit media will keep harping on them. It is almost impossible for a Conservative to get their message across in this environment. Ron Paul is the worst candidate ever. He was right on a few fiscal issues, but really goofy on most others including foreign policy. He even stated he had no problem with Iran getting Nukes. Hello! Republicans will never win again until they get a true Conservative with real ideas to run. They can’t win being moderate or being RINO’s. It is time for Ted Cruz to step forward, not Christie or even Rubio who was disappointing on the immigration issue.
August 21, 2013 at 12:17 pm
Agent says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Basically, he knew how to sell a slogan to the low information voters. The Republicans obliged him by putting up the worst possible RINO candidate and the rest is history. Those of us who were paying attention knew where he was coming from when he told Joe the Plumber that we had to spread the wealth around. If this President was looking after the citizens, he would have concentrated his efforts on the economy and getting it going instead of wasting 2 years ramming healthcare down our throats. A weak economy cannot stand another huge entitlement and this one will bankrupt the country.
August 21, 2013 at 12:28 pm
Ron says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Agent,
Please provide some staistical proof, with a cited source, that the wealth has been spread from the wealthy to the poor and middle class around.
Hint: The ACA does not count since it has not fully gone into effect.
If you want proof that the opposite has happened, see the stock market and stagnant wages.
August 20, 2013 at 1:17 pm
Sarah says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
I think being judged comes with being President! wouldn’t you say?
Gay Marriage, Iraq, Afghanistan, Gitmo, The Patriot Act, The Debt being unpatriotic? Those are just a few of his “personal growth issues” Obama has made Bush look like a wimp on the Patriot act that all liberals were up in arms about! It is just so hypocritical its really not even funny.
How many Americans have died in terrorist attacks since the Patriot Act was signed? I am influenced by results, not ideology. As far as I know, none of my freedoms, rights or libertied have been infringed upon. If they feel a need to listen to my boring phones calls and read my emails about my kids activities to keep me and my family safe, go for it. If they stop doing those things causing death to me and/or my family, then I would be mad.
Ron, Ask the families of the Ft Hood shootings how many died. Don’t bother to tell us it was workplace violence. Hasan was as big a Terrorist as we have had in this country. I fault the Army for letting him go with political correctness. That is a travesty of biblical proportions. By the way, more could have died had the bombers been better at their job. Do you remember the Times Square bomber, the underwear bomber, Ft Dix? Of course, those brothers in Boston did a number on the innocent, didn’t they? We have cells all over this country and they are just waiting for orders.
August 21, 2013 at 8:29 am
Ron says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Agent,
The terrible terrorist act commited by Hasan would have happened regardless and we all feel for the victims and their families. Obviously we cannot stop every terrorist act, but we have not seen anything near the scale of 9/11. That is thanks to both the Bush and Obama administrations and in part to all of the increased surveillence.
I find it hysterical that most people, not saying you in particular, who applauded Presdient Bush for keeping us safe since 9/11 are now up in arms over President Obama using the same methods and achieiving very similar rsults.
August 20, 2013 at 2:05 pm
Libby says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
We can tell you haven’t undergone any personal growth lately, Sarah.
WOW. you two should get together for some mud wrestling.
August 20, 2013 at 11:41 am
Sarah says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Libby, your pictures are selective. There was two guys at the voting poll in 2008 one at the same poll in 2012. What if it was a KKK in a white sheet with a night stick? BTW, It is illegal to stand and intimidate people at a polling station while they are voting. Isnt it funny how a liberal would justify voter intimidation and not want a voter to present an ID when voting. You are a Hypocrite as well Libby! LMAO at you!
Didn’t look like intimidation to me. Looked like he was just standing there. That said, no I am not for voter intimidation or voter fraud. And BOTH parties have been guilty of it. Not just the Dems. Get your own house in order before you LYAO at someone else, toots.
Looked like a Black Panther with a night stick to me! When you see someone from the KKK in white sheets with a night stick, or a Democrat Politician voting for Voter ID come forth, Please let me know. Otherwise please be quiet Libby, You are a hyprocrite.
Sarah, I was glad to see NC pass a new voter law. Must present a valid ID, can’t register at the last minute. Of course, Holder will have to sue them now saying they are being unfair.
Libby, I understand, like all liberals, you have a hard time with facts and following on what is really going on legislatively in the country other than what news you get from MSNBC, CBS or ABC and CNN. But, here are the States and their voter ID laws concerning voters presenting an ID. These states are just verifying these voters truly exist. They have enacted these laws to prevent what happened in 2008 with ACORN and the dead people voting in Illinois and Ohio and all of the other fake and fraudulent voters who supported Obama and other liberals collected by ACORN, Unions, etc.
I see some hypocrisy in your position on voter ID laws. Doesn’t that limit the freedom to vote for those who do not have a government issued ID? Will the Gopvernment provide ID’s to eligible voters who currently do not have one? Will people need to go somewhere to obtain an ID? How far will they need to travel and at what cost? Sounds like an additional tax to be able to vote which is against the 24th Amendment.
So you are now OK with the government dictating the paramteters of your right to vote? I would think as a Libertarian you would be against any law that might restrict an eligible voter from exercising their right to vote.
yes all states that require a photo ID will issue you a photo ID, in Florida you can get one at the DMV, you need a photo ID to board an airplane, buy beer, I see no problem with it, if it stops people like ACORN who violated the law hundreds if not thousands of dead people voting, or those that voted many different times.
They will issue the ID, but at whose cost? The individual or the taxpayers?
Sounds like there will be an additional cost or burden on someone who is eligible to vote and does not currently have a government issued photo ID. Not everyone boards a plane or buys beer. There are many inner city people, mostly the elderly and minorities, who never needed a driver’s license or any other ID so they never obtained one. Government officials should be at the polling places ready to issue the IDs, at no cost, to anyone who does not have one.
Question, how many confirmed incidents of in-person voter fraud have occured in the U.S.? Please cite your source.
The ACORN issue was about obtaining false registrations, not actual votes.
The Bush Administration found 23 cases of ineleigible or multiple voting over the course of 5 years. I would wager big money that the voter ID laws will keep more than 23 eligible voters from voting. Sounds like an overreaction by big government. http://www.factcheck.org/2008/10/acorn-accusations/
Its free in every state that has a photo ID law. Tell that to the polling stations in Ohio who had people register using dead peoples names. Or the thousands of voters who voted twice using false names that were fraudulently registered. If there were fraudulent voters registered it’s only logical to assume there were fraudulent votes cast. I wonder how many of those ACORN registered voters voted for McCain?
August 21, 2013 at 8:50 am
Libby says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
ACORN’s voter registration drives, which it has conducted since the 1980s, has been frequently mischaracterized by supporters of Republican candidates as “voter fraud”. ACORN received significant negative publicity in the wake of the 2009 production and publication of videos, which were later found to be partially falsified and selectively edited, by two conservative activists, James O’Keefe and Hannah Giles. The activists used hidden camera recordings to portray low-level ACORN employees as engaging in criminal activity, apparently advising them on how to hide prostitution activities and avoid taxes.[9] A nationwide controversy ensued, immediately resulting in a loss of funding from government and private donors,[10][11][12] including legislative amendments to spending bills in the United States House and Senate prohibiting government funding of the group.
Following the publication of the videos and withdrawal of funding, four different independent investigations by various state and city Attorneys General and the GAO released in 2009 and 2010 cleared ACORN, finding its employees had not engaged in criminal activities and that the organization had managed its federal funding appropriately, and calling the videos deceptively and selectively edited to present the workers in the worst possible light.
August 21, 2013 at 9:23 am
Ron says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Sarah,
For someone who gets most of their information online, it should be very easy for you to cite your source(s). I want proof and convictions for voter fraud, not voter registration fraud, before I will agree that the additional burden created by voter ID laws justify the additional expenses (legislators, court costs, state attorneys, etc) to me, as a taxpayer.
As a Libertarian I would think you would want the same justification of additional government spending.
August 21, 2013 at 12:10 pm
jw says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Sarah – a state ID is not free. It costs the same as a driver’s license.
August 21, 2013 at 10:00 am
Agent says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
The idea Ron is to permit only citizens the right to vote in elections. It is not that hard to get a valid ID to prove you are a citizen. It is not that hard to register as a voter. Why would you want someone to vote that came here illegally, has no ID or registration? I see a lot of hypocrisy in your position and it is idiotic.
Hypocrisy? What’s hypocrital about his statement? For many people it IS that hard to get a valid ID. Poor and elderly folks in rural areas have no way to get to the DMV for an ID. And they have no need for one. Many don’t even have proof of citizenship because they were born at home with no birth certificate. Does that make them illegal??? Why are you so fixated on illegals trying to scam the system? I doubt they try to vote anyway. Why would they?
Until you can provide documented proof that there is more in-person VOTER fraud, not to be mistaken with VOTER REGISTRATION fraud, than the potential for disenfranchising eligible voters, stop spending my money on a non-issue. For someone so against bigger government and more spending, you have no problem with this?
Maybe it’s because Republicans believe this is their only chance of winning elections.
While you’re at it, how about providing some credible information, including source, about illegals obtaining medicaid, unemployment, social security disability, and all the other benefits you say they are abusing? Every single one I have met is hard working and consciencious. How many have YOU met?
i get most of my information on line. I try to find factual unbiased information without leading questions or polls asked in a way to influence the answers. Unlike NBC, MSNBC, CNN, etc.
I see why they call the rest of the map the Red States. The real reason we are in the “Red”. Big hand outs to defense contractors, excessive number of military bases, Big Farming and Big Oil subsidies, predominantly in Redville.
I am sure the righties on this blog will spin away, but the bottom line is that most traditionally red states have a federal tax deficit where most traditionally blue states have a federal tax surplus.
Why don’t you give us up to date info Ron? Your favorite chart ends in 2009, the first year of Obama. It would be interesting to see what has happened after $6 Trillion in new debt has been added since then. Please explain if the trillion dollar Stimulus that didn’t create jobs would be added into the mix. It is well known that no shovel ready jobs were created and it was merely a political payoff to supporters. Most of the money received by States, counties and cities was promptly blown to pay legacy costs of pensions and other entitlements and they are still in the same boat, all at taxpayer expense.
The chart is from 2011. How long do you think it takes the IRS to compile this data and disseminate it to the public?
August 21, 2013 at 10:31 am
Ron says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Agent,
If you can find updated info, please provide and cite your source. I cannot control how often data is gathered and presented. At least I am able to present facts with a cited source.
Can you dispute the data in the chart?
How about that quantitative proof that President Obama is DESTROYING our economy and country? Remember to cite your source.
August 21, 2013 at 12:18 pm
jw says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
I read in one of the local papers within the past week that Kentucky (A RED STATE) gets $1.57 back for every $1.00 sent to the federal government in taxes. Imagine that.
August 21, 2013 at 12:38 pm
Libby says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
You can thank New York and California. Or as Sarah says, Wall Street and Los Angeles. LOL!
August 20, 2013 at 10:41 pm
Sarah says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Kind of like the silly 60 billion in emergency aid for Sandy, that they actually spent only 5 billion in aid, and the rest to be used later for infrastructure and other areas not associated with the storm. Pathetic!
All politicians have sold out to unnecessary spending to get votes, all the while leaving our children holding the bag of debt.
And your data is old Ron and doesn’t cover the past 4 years. Anyone with a brain knows what has gone on in the past 4 years. Only you can trust data that is this old. Find a current one and we will talk again.
I am sick of doing all of the work. Why don’t you find some recent data? When is the last time you provided any statistics with a cited source? You are the laziest person on this blog.
August 20, 2013 at 10:20 pm
Sarah says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Tell that to Detroit, Chicago, New York, LA. All are either bankrupt or will be soon!
extremely misleading, this is Federal spending and tax revenue. What about the states, city and municipal revenues and spending and legacy debt, pensions are all way under funded, most of these liberal cities will not be able to sell bonds unless the Feds back them somehow. That is the secret bailout that they will get from the Fed until this bubble bursts.
I am just showing the hypocrisy of the Republicans, of which I know you are not. Most of the red states that complain about spending and debt are actually in the red take more than they contribute. If we ran the country as a business, all of the states in the red would be shut down. Of the 24 state that voted for Romney, only AR, GA, NE and TX contributed more than they recieived. Whereas 18 of the 26 states the voted for President Obama contributed more than they received.
You believe it is misleading because the data does not support your position. If you have other data, please provide and cite your source.
its just logical that CA, NY and the North East pay much more in taxes than does Alabama. Like I said before look at those cities and state revenues and expenses and legacy costs their financial houses are not in order at all, as is our federal governments. That is just a fact! Not opinion. As Major Bloomberg stated last week, NYC will be the next Detroit if they do not reform their pension plans for government workers and drastically reduce their spending. Look at Chicago, they will actually beat NYC to bankruptcy. The whole State of CA is pretty much bankrupt. The only thing keeping them standing on their feet is low interest rates and bond funds still buying their bonds. I think Detroit might have a problem selling their bonds now, don’t you think?
It is not just what they pay, but what they do NOT receive back from the federal government. Do you know what the term surplus means? I was talkng about who benefits more from federal spending in relation to what they contribute. What part of that do you not understand. If you ran the country like a business, would you keep open the states that are losing money?
I wonder how many of those cities run by Republicans receive federal dollars to help balance their budgets.
Here is a chart that explains exactly why New York with Wall Street, and California with its 9th largest economy in the world pays more than it takes in benefits. Do you think that New York without Wall Street would be paying more into the feds than it recieved? You really need to look at revenue. A great deal of the States costs are Medicaid, Unemployment and Education and Services. These cost are not mentioned in your federal example.
My point is this, If you look at the real problem with our Government is that the Federal Government thinks it can keep printing money, borrowing 40% of every dollar they spend without any reprisal.
It doesn’t matter WHY, Sarah. The fact is Red states take more federal funds than Blue states. Yet they are the ones that complain about the Federal government printing money and having to pay 40% to borrow more. Are you in a Red state or a Blue state? Let me guess…
It depends Libby, Soon with the promise of “entitlements” (gosh I hate that word) we will all be blue states and living in a third world. Just look at Venezuela!
I bet you will be happy though!
August 21, 2013 at 10:35 am
Libby says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Why would I be happy about that? I’m not some liberal wingnut. I happen to have liberal social views, which I thought Libertarians were all for, but conservative fiscal views, another Libertarian value. Just because I feel healthcare is a basic human right that every American deserves does not mean I for irresponsible spending and borrowing. People are so judgmental on this blog.
August 21, 2013 at 10:27 am
Agent says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Sarah, I like your chart a lot better than Ron’s outdated one. It is easy to identify the heaviest taxed states on your chart. However, no matter how much they take in, they always seem to find a way to spend more than that. They also have a complicit Fed which prints money 24/7 on their “quantitative easing” plan which does nothing but lower the value of the dollar. This bubble is about to burst, but I am sure they will blame Republicans for their demise.
“no matter how much they take in, they always seem to find a way to spend more than that.”
Are you blind or just dumb? They paid in MORE than they spent. That’s what the chart shows. And I see no reason that a 10 year trend would change over the past 4 years. Even if federal funding increased, it would take alot to eat through a $237 billion (with a B) surplus.
August 21, 2013 at 10:47 am
Sarah says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Ron’s graph is right even now. But I am just trying to explain the reasons for it. Wall Street, although all liberals would disagree pays a tremendous amount of taxes. and those lower populated agriculture states lack those revenues to support their states. If you look at the states and City budgets you will find a total different story.
August 21, 2013 at 10:48 am
Ron says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Agent,
I normally avoid Wikipedia as a source, but if that is what you like, then let’s tell the whole story.
14 of the 19 states that are net contributors and 12 of the 31 net takers voted for President Obama in both elections. 1 contributor and 1 taker voted for Obama in 2008 then Romney in 2012.
Considering that you are a business owner, isn’t profit all that really matters at the end of the day?
August 21, 2013 at 10:53 am
Libby says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
So Sarah, you’re saying that the contributers should subsidize the takers because they are fiscally incapable of supporting themselves. Isn’t that a libtard, socialist viewpoint?
Only cities have mayors, Sarah. A city operates completely separate from the State. Now that I’ve given you your civics lesson for the day, kindly shut it.
Libtard,, I mean Libby, Yes, I know what a city and a state is. Again, Ron is making a point about the federal spending, I am explaining why NY with Wall Street takes in more than it spends and you again are talking out your A**. Yes, I know Cities are the only one with a mayor. But for some strange reason you keep bringing up irrelevant issues, topics etc.
August 21, 2013 at 10:56 am
Libby says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
What’s irrelevant is bringing up cities when we are talking federal funding of STATES. And I’ll say it again, because you seem to have difficulty in comprehending: “It doesn’t matter WHY, Sarah. The fact is Red states take more federal funds than Blue states. Yet they are the ones that complain about the Federal government printing money and having to pay 40% to borrow more.”
Got it? Good. Now shut it.
August 21, 2013 at 11:03 am
Sarah says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
So let me get this right, you cant think of an argument for yourself to make on its own merits you keep stating Ron’s. FYI, I have already agreed that Ron’s Graph is correct, I was just explaining why! States pay for the services more than the Federal Government. States with Agriculture and lower populations and lower wages will pay less taxes. So find your own graph, facts or opinions instead of just your leftwing ideological rants. At least Ron is presenting facts and logical opinions, I just happen to disagree with some his but not all. Unlike yours!
August 21, 2013 at 11:09 am
Libby says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
So Sarah, you’re saying that the contributers should subsidize the takers because they are fiscally incapable of supporting themselves. Isn’t that a libtard, socialist viewpoint?
And why do I need to provide a graph on this issue? Do you find it efficient to re-create the wheel? If I had a different viewpoint or opinion, I would have no problem providing a source.
Is that all you got? Shut it.
August 21, 2013 at 11:21 am
Sarah says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Libby, your ideological rants have no meaning anymore. I tried to explain but you are hell bent on talking like Ron’s Parrot. Done with you.
Yes I agree that some of the so called Red States that do not have a Chicago, Los Angeles, San Francisco or or NYC with Wall Street. Collect more in Farm and crop subsidies, National Flood programs and other benefits. And still they want to curb spending! Wow! They want to sacrifice what they get for you! Isn’t that great! You should be happy!
August 21, 2013 at 11:53 am
Ron says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Sarah,
You said, “Yes I agree that some of the so called Red States that do not have a Chicago, Los Angeles, San Francisco or or NYC with Wall Street. Collect more in Farm and crop subsidies, National Flood programs and other benefits. And still they want to curb spending!”. Where has nany represenatative from a red state say they want to spend less in their district/state? Therein lies the problem. They want to curb spending, just not their own. That goes for the blue states as well. Everyone wants someone else to spend less.
August 21, 2013 at 12:12 pm
Libby says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Whatever, Sarah. You explained nothing. You only brought up some irrelevant information to support your position – which is red states deserve more because they don’t have big cities. You’re ridiculous. LOL!
August 21, 2013 at 1:18 pm
Sarah says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Ron, What I meant was that the Feds spend money more money on Federal Subsidies for Farming, Flood Insurance, Yes I would always agree that every politician will go for the pork. My point was you also have to look at the revenue when you make conclusion as to why there may be a surplus. Revenue collected from each state and why does one state collect more revenue than another. Not just which states collect more than they receive. A better way to look at it would be, How much taxes do Conservatives pay vs Liberals. Not to get off track but, Kind of like how much do Conservatives donate to charity vs liberals. I think your intention was to show that Red States take more than they give? How about how much of the tax revenues are paid by Democrats vs Republican on a per capita basis? Huh? 47% pay no federal taxes at all.
Not talking to you Libby, Libtard!
August 21, 2013 at 1:35 pm
Libby says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Another emotional outburst by Sarah. Shutty.
August 21, 2013 at 1:43 pm
Sarah says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
I guess I left Libby Libtard babbling and bewildered. She does not understand when someone is using logic and reason versus emotion and ridicule.
August 21, 2013 at 1:43 pm
Ron says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Sarah,
I understand the role revenue plays and why the surpluses and deficits exist for each state. I was approaching it more from a business standpoint where maximizing profit is the number one goal. That is why I believe spending needs to be a part of the conversation.
I think it is hypocritical that the people who rail aginst federal spending and the national debt tend to come from states that are exacerbating the problem and blaming the people that voted for President Obama even though those states are helping to lower the debt.
I actually fall into that 47% and is one the of the reasons I could not vote for Romney. I have never accepted any government assistance, never felt like the government owes me anything, put myself through school through earning my Master’s degree in Management, married with three children who attend a Catholic school.
Thepeople who think I need to pay Federal Income tax in order to have skin in the game should change the tax code. Just realize this; I live paycheck to paycheck. Therefore every dollar that goes to the government is taken out of the pocket of the private sector. If you think the government deseves my money more than your business, fine. Just understand that is what will happen.
August 21, 2013 at 2:01 pm
Libby says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
“Not talking to you Libby, Libtard!”
Too funny! Exhibit “A”. LOL!
August 21, 2013 at 2:02 pm
iloveinsurance says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Conservatives certainly wouldn’t be donating to charity like they do if they couldn’t write it off that’s for sure. If there wasn’t a financial gain to be made, it wouldn’t be worth their time. They will always tell you how much they gave to charity but don’t tell you about their ulterior motive behind it. Kinda like the mega churches they join. If they can’t write off their tithes and network out of it, what would be the point? Then again they are holier than thou.
August 21, 2013 at 2:15 pm
Sarah says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
iloveinsurance,
I thought liberals were for religious tolerance, oh wait that is only for radical Islamist. BTW, you can not write off an expense that you do not have. So there is nothing really to gain from donating to any charity except for the tax amount on the money. Your argument does not make sense from an accounting point of view.
August 21, 2013 at 2:26 pm
Sarah says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Ron,
I just believe that those that pay for the benefits for others should not be made out to be a greedy unappreciated people. I do not believe in income envy, and that is exactly the way liberals come across. You can not legislate wealth, or give to those that do not earn their money without first taking from someone who does. I really do have a problem with those that actually get more back in taxes than they pay in. Those should find their way into the welfare lines instead. The tax code is not a welfare code.
I do hand it to you for providing for your family and earning your income. I hope you understand I have not attacked you or your opinions as they have been respectful and logical in nature. Time for me to go back to earning money and paying taxes.
August 21, 2013 at 2:33 pm
Libby says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
“Respectful and logical.” Not at all like you, Sarah.
August 21, 2013 at 3:22 pm
Ron says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Sarah,
I agree with most of your points. I think it is incredible that one thing both sides seem to agree on is updating the tax code, but no one wants to take it on because nearly every constituency group takes advantage of the current tax code and politicians from both sides are worried more about their jobs than the country.
I never took any of your comments as personal attacks as mine were not intended as such to you. I have no problem with a healhty, respectful debate. I only get frustrated with those who misinterpret what I write, make assumptions about me, and label me without even knowing me, i.e Agent and Bob. I would also like to see more facts with cited sources from others, especially those two. However, I am becoming more resigned to the fact that they have nothing to support their positions.
Enjoy earning your money and have a nice evening.
August 22, 2013 at 11:01 am
Agent says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Wow, what a cat fight between Sarah & Libby. I read all the comments about who was paying what in taxes and who was receiving the most in benefits between the states. I saw no mention that the Federal Government spends $1 Trillion+ more than it takes in each year. It really makes no difference which pot it comes from. Our politicians from both parties have failed the American People miseerably over a very long time. They aren’t interested in fiscal responsibility and are totally drunk on spending. That is why there is so much pork attached to every spending bill. Somehow, they think spending more than they take in will somehow make it all better and it is a disaster. $17 Trillion in debt with $6 Trillion in the past 4 years. Unfortunately, liberals think this is a successful strategy. It has never worked in the history of the world and repeating the same mistakes over and over and hoping for a different result is not a wise strategy.
August 22, 2013 at 1:50 pm
Captain Planet says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
I agree with you agent. Spending has been bad with both parties for too long. I wish President Reagan hadn’t turned us into a debtor nation. His economical experiment has failed this country creating the largest wealth gap in the history of the world. We need a different approach to Capitalism. It’s time to throw in the towel on the myth of trickle down. Even Alan Greenspan admits Reaganomics failed: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5GQecQ06xus
August 21, 2013 at 10:15 am
Sarah says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
If you do not think there is money to be made in Government, Look at the figure for the District of Columbia on the tax revenue paid there. LOL>…… Washington is drunk on our money!
My point was Ron has intelligence, I disagree with his ideology but unlike you, he can formulate a point of view using logic and reasoning unlike your babbling and irrational, illogical diatribes that you put forth
My postings are not babbling, irrational, or illogical. And I usually am respectful until someone feels a need for insults and put-downs. Then I can dish it out too, sister.
You just disagree with me because I am pro-healthcare. Based on that fact alone you have labeled me Libby Libtard. That only goes to show your shallowness and judgemental attitude. Nothing else.
i just find your posts to be void of facts, repeating the same statements and by and large baseless ridicule without making any valid point based on any logical reasoning.
I have posted on many articles on IJ and have provided many facts, sources, and links. However, Ron made his point and posted his link and I was commenting on it. I did not need to provide additional information on the subject, it was already provided. Like I said before, if I had had a differing opinion or set of facts I would have had no problem presenting them. I did not in this instance.
Again, you take a few posts on one article and make your snap judgement and then turn to ridiculing me. You must be pretty smug up there on your pedastal.
I’d love to bash Barry, but this time will just say that the only reason Obama is in a rush to implement one more piece of his trash unimplemented legislation, is because Glass Steagall support is on the rise.
How about sitting down with the IRS, and Firing those that targeted US Citizens for political reasons? Oh I forgot, he was the one who asked them to! Amazing he still has any supporters left!
Sarah. Please find work in another industry…please!!??
Sarge – helping out Sarah and censoring IJ Post reader. LOL!
Sarah, Your Progressive friends don’t seem to like your comments or any criticizm of their President.
Agent,
He is your President too. Unless you plan on renouncing your citizenship and moving to another country.
I respect the office, but not the man for what he has done to this country. Might I offer you a free one way ticket to Cuba or Venezuela? I think they have the ideal government that will suit you.
As soon as you renounce your citizenship and land in Somalia. They seem to have the ideal government, or lack there of, for you.
I never referred to any prior President as “their President”. I understand that the person holding the office will not make every decision the way I see fit. President Obama is far from perfect, but what quantifiable damage has he done? Hint: Polls, regardless of the source, do not count. Those are people’s preceptions and opinions, not facts.
Ron – Agent will never come up with facts or sources for his shoot-from-the-hip Obama slams. Because he can’t. I don’t know why we keep trying…
I will agree that he is far from perfect Ron. In fact, he is so far from perfect, it is a joke. Regardless of what you say about polls, his is in the toilet now and sinking rapidly. What is it now, 35% approval on the economy, 26% on taxes? He is sinking to GW’s lowest polls in the last year of his second term and he still has 3 1/2 years to go. How do you like that 1% growth and continual malaise we have had up to now? Only temp or part time jobs are being created and we have Obamacare looming in a few short weeks. See what the polls look like then when people wake up to see what has happened.
Agent,
Soooo, still no statistics to indicate President Obama has damaged the nation. Shocking. All you have are people’s opinions, valid or not, and slow growth which is a far cry from destruction.
For someone who claims to have earned an Economics degree, you are very short on facts to support your assertions or ability to cite your sources. All you have is, “Friedman is good and Keynes is bad”.
1. Quantitate easing, Twist. The buying up of banks bad debt so that they could buy properties at a low cost and then inflate the housing market selling them back at high costs to the consumer. That would be re-inflating the housing bubble. This will destroy the housing industry again in the future, and moreover, incomes did not increase they actually declined. He made it impossible for people to own homes.
2. Again, Quantitate easing, totaling about 4 trillion during his tenure in spending.
3. Spending/debt. Whether you want to admit it or not, (you actually tried to argue he didn’t increase the debt, because as a percentage it only rose minimally after Bush’s last year. This is a TERRIBLE BENCHMARK. The average during Bush’s presidency would be better. When we get to an unsustainable amount, we can’t continue to have ANY increases) Obama IS spending worse than Bush W. I don’t care if it’s been done before. It’s the wrong thing to do now, and is NOT helping the growth numbers.
3. Post and pre stimulus/sequester jobs numbers, look them up, I’m not posting the numbers for you.
Here’s a hint: Jobs growth so far after the sequester have outranked the previous year, except for one, which was 1,000 jobs less. So if we are having more jobs growth without stimulus, and actually, with cuts, WHAT THE HECK DO YOU THINK THIS SHOWS ABOUT OBAMA’S STIMULUS DEBT AS WELL AS HIS 1 TRILLION DEFICITS? They were not needed, and will end up costing us all huge taxes in the future. I call that not just wreck less, but extremely detrimental to the economy.
4. CBO itself stated that the long run net affect of the stimulus was a negative, and may only have short term benefits. Again, we did something bad in the long run for short term ratings approval.
To conclude: You’re 2%@$^$@ing ignorant argument that there is no evidence that he’s a bad president, would actually apply to all presidents, and is in fact your disingenuous method of arguing. Because agent can’t “prove” beyond a shadow of a doubt, Obama is just a normal president, how about Bush W? Just normal?
But I bet you always vote democrat. Meh they are all the same, but vote democrat right?
I know for a fact you are not an independent. The only people who make the arguments the way you do are younger democrats, who want to justify the fact that their current constituents are terrible and yet they vote for them anyway.
Grow up kid.
Bob,
The fact that you said, “I know for a fact you are not an independent. The only people who make the arguments the way you do are younger democrats, who want to justify the fact that their current constituents are terrible and yet they vote for them anyway.” tells me that you jump to conclusions based on limited information. Republican voters do the same thing with their representatives.
For your information, I actually vote for President Geoarge W Bush the first time. When he cut taxes during wartime and started to balloon our debt I realized that he was not the fiscal conservative for whom I voted. I was also very upset how his supporters tarnished Kerry’s war record when President Bush avoided the war all together.
I was planning on voting for Senator McCain until he, err the Conservatives, picked Sarah Palin as his running mate. That told me enough about his judgement.
Finally, as I have mentioned in several posts, I would have voted for Jon Huntsman, barring any new, radical information, if he was the Republican nominee.
I can only be awyed by quantifiable results, period. If all you have are predicitons, keep them to yourself.
As soon as Hillary was out of the running, I too was seriously contemplating McCain. Until he picked that nitwit as his running mate. At his age I couldn’t take the chance that he’s make it through his term. Yikes! The thought of it brings chills…
bob, did you mean “quantitative easing”?
Your not going to start crying like Boener are you Mr. Agent?
The Weeper of the House.
Ron, I have eyes and common sense. You have neither. If Obama knew how to make the economy grow, how do you explain his dismal record? He has had 4 1/2 years to get a grip on it and all he proposes is more spending that has done no good at all. $6 Trillion in new debt and little sign that real jobs are being created, forcing businesses to cut back on jobs with the looming Obamacare is not exactly going to put America back to work. The way to do this is to create more taxpayers, not tax takers. I will agree with you on one point. Friedman’s positions are far more palatable than Keynes which has been a disaster in the making. Too bad you didn’t learn much in school or you would have realized the error of Keynes philosophy.
Agent,
To me, when “eyes and common sense” is all you have, you have nothing. Did you ever write a paper in college based on statistical analysis? If so, were Eyes and Common Sense your only sources?
Do some research and come back with some data and a cited source.
I never said that Obama knows how to make the economy grow, I only said that it is not nearly as bad as you and other Republicans make it out to be. More importantly, it has been much worse in the past. Do you know who the Presidents were when the Great Depression and Great Recession began? I am not blaming anyone, just look at the facts.
When did I ever say I agreed with Keynes’ philosphy? You are the one that wants to increase government spending with these voter ID laws, not me.
Agent–you know as well as I do the this president doesn’t have time to grow the economy–he’s been campaigning for the past 4.5 years!! Just absolutely pathetic.
Patti,
Please tell me where in the Constitution that is says the President has complete autonomy over the economy to do whatever he/she would like.
HMMM. Would he get free health care then?
I think Sarah has more haters than me…
Funny how a liberal will always revert to an emotional outburst of ridicule when presented with facts. Dispute these!
FACT: The IRS under this President has targeted individuals and organizations that he does not agree with. When did the US become a nation that allows such actions. What would you liberals say if it were the ACLU or Green Peace that was targeted by Bush, and before you say that was the case, please present your facts.
FACT: Hillary Clinton put forth a blatant lie about a stupid movie causing the deaths of 4 Americans and our ambassador. While at the time, facts have shown that there was been no evidence of such a reason for the attack. “They Died and Hillary Lied”
FACT: The NSA has been spying on Americans in direct conflict with the 4th Amendment of our Constitution. If I am not mistaken Obama voted and campaigned against the Patriot Act, Now with the PRISM prgram, The Patriot Act is on Steroids. We also are allowing drones to be used by our law enforcement officers. Where is the ACLU on this one? Liberals are Hypocrites!
FACT: The Obama administration under Holder has illegally obtained information from journalists, (CBS & Fox) Then lied about it in a congressional hearing. Holder also let guns walk in Mexico to push their anti-gun agenda back in the US, knowing these guns would make their way back here and kill US citizens like the border agent who was shot with the fast and furious guns. He also would not bring forth action against the black panthers siting outside a polling station wielding a bully club. What if it were a KKK member with a white sheet and a bully club? Liberals are Hypocrites!
And just what emotional outburst was that, Sarah? I could care less what you have to say. You’re just as nasty as all the other right-wing, extremist, terrorist, dipsh*ts on this blog.
Too funny! Exhibit “A”
And BTW, there were not “black panthers” (plural) sitting outside a voting place with billy clubs. There was one guy and all he did was stand there. No billy club. Here’s the picture to prove it:
http://blogs.phillymag.com/the_philly_post/2012/11/06/black-panther-philadelphia-polling-place-201/
And another thing, this is America. If a Black Panther member wants to stand peacefully outside his local polling place, there is no law against it.
A picture is worth a thousand words, a video a million. lol…
2008 two guys, 2012 one guy. Both situations not legal!
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2012/11/06/new-black-panthers-back-at-the-same-08-polling-place-in-philadelphia/
Sarah,
Are you aware of any incidents where Conservatives have been hypocrites? In my experience, nearly every person has been guilty of hypocrisy at some point in their lives. Maybe President Obama learned the importance of the patriot Act provisions that have kept us relatively safe since 9/11. It is called personal growth, not necessarily hypocrisy.
I am sure every President would say that governing and making decisions from the back seat is far easier than actually driving the car. That is why I do not ever blame or give full credit to any President for everything that happens in the country. They are all giving their best effort to help the country with the tools that they have.
So let me get this straight,
Obama learned the importance of Gitmo. Just changed his mind. Had nothing to do with the election?
Learned the importance of the patriot act, nothing to do with the election.
Learned the importance of gay marriage, nothing to do with numbers.
Sequester, first it was good, then bad, first it was his idea, then it wasn’t (but actually has been confirmed to be his cabinet’s idea)
The reason you don’t give credit or blame is that you refuse to acknowledge a president’s impact.
Without Obama there would not have been QE. Without Obama there would not have been Twist. Without Obama homes would not have been reinflated. Without Obama there would have been no stimulus. Without Obama there would have been no dodd-frank act. These all had huge affects on the economy’s ability to recover.
Voting, MATTERS.
You try to act like it does not. Presidents are not the same.
Moving to Bush W:
Were it not for democrats we would have alternate forms of retirement plans. Ever heard of them? I doubt you even know the names. They involved tax credits for the poor for investments, tax deferred growth, tax free from your salary, tax free at removal. I want to know right now how that was a bad plan Ron. Immediately. Because the democrats blocked it. I want to know how this would not be a “different” path, and a definite different affect on the economy that a president would affect (it would for a fact be a president that would get this done)
We would have the option for vouchers to chose our healthcare, or to go with medicare (Romney plan, that you on the left said was the removal of medicare. It was both. More options, not less)
Without democrats, we could choose no payroll tax, no investment income taxes, and to go without social security in favor of a private option (republicans have been trying for years) or to go with traditional social security. More options rather than less. I like that. If you’re unfamiliar with this push, what do you think that shows about your political knowledge? All these aspects have been attempted.
You’re just a clueless kid, that I don’t like giving off the image of knowledge when in fact you are telling everyone “it doesn’t matter, just vote D! Just believe in Obama he’s not that bad!”
I prefer to focus on what we can do. Not how “everyone is the same”. Side comment, that “everyone is the same” mentality bull crap is a form of socialism, and it doesn’t work for economy or when it comes to how you regard politicians.
Bob,
I believe that once someone is actually in office and has to start making hard decisions that impact people’s lives, they may very well change their positions.
If the President has so much impact, why couldn’t President Hoover or President Bush stop the Great Depression and Great Recession respectively? Go ahead, blame the Democrats. Pick a side, is the President all powerful or not?
I am not saying that all Presidents are the same or that voting doesn’t matter. I am saying, “look at the results”.
I actually agreed with President Bush’s plan to help the poor save for retirement. I did not agree with the privatization of Social Security. If it wasn’t for the government raiding the fund, beginning with President Johnson and continuing throughout other adminstartions, it would be solvent for many, many years.
Saying, “You’re just a clueless kid, that I don’t like giving off the image of knowledge” is very disrespectful. You know absolutely nothing about me. All I do is present facts and cite my source, and request the same in return.
What have you done to implement your ideas of what we can do? All you do is criticize Democrats and spin every situation.
Bob said “Were it not for democrats we would have alternate forms of retirement plans.” Then goes on to say “it would for a fact be a president that would get this done.”
Make up your mind. Either a president gets it done or Congress gets it done. You can’t say “Democrats blocked it” and then blame the president.
Sarah, let’s not leave out the gun/missile running to Syria that was what caused Benghazi. 400 missiles are missing and no one knows where they went. These missiles can knock an airliner down since they are shoulder fired. The CIA are into this up to their necks and it needs to come out.
Agent, you are absolutely right, but. I find it very interesting that the liberals have no problem with Hillary’s idiotic statement over and over that our Embassy was attacked because of a stupid you tube video! What if it was Condolesa Rice or Collin Powell that said 9/11 was due to a video without any evidence of such. What did they say about the weapons of mass destruction even though every other countries intelligence said the same as our CIA, that Sadam had them, but hey! As Hillary says “WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE?”
WHAT Weapons of Mass Destruction? LOL!
You mean these WMD’s.
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/25546334/ns/world_news-mideast_n_africa/t/secret-us-mission-hauls-uranium-iraq/#.UhZVwdK1ESg
Yellowcake does not a WMD make. Any more than flour and chocolate make a chocolate cake. LOL!
The ones that the Syrian govt used against their own people.
Ummm….NOT
Agent, Sarah doesn’t have progressive friends.
Amen to that, brother!
Can you blame Sarah? Liberalism is a mental disorder–I don’t like being around it, either.
Exhibit “A” your response Libby. LMAO! too funny.
Ron, At least your response made some sense. Kudos to you. I agree that so called “conservatives” have been hypocritical in their criticism and their voting records on over spending. But the current situation with Obama and his supporters of the above civil liberty issues as well as blaten corruption, is way over the top. Its actually very funny to watch, so called liberals approve of the violations of civil liberties in such a fashion. BTW, I am not a republican, I actually hate the two party system. I am a Constitutional Libertarian, who is disgusted at the current assault on our rights, liberties, and freedoms and the creation of an entitlement society.
Sarah,
I would be very interested to see how a true Libertarian would govern as the President once they experience the realities of the world and the USA’s place in it. I think it is easy to say we should be isolationists and not get involved. I wonder how that would impact our manufacturing, energy, and export and import businesses. How many jobs would be lost if cut the military, from personnel to defense contractors? So many unintended consequences.
In addition, how many lives have been saved through surveillance used to stop terror plots? We may not like the programs used, but I would rather be alive to complain about them than a dead man with all of my rights, freedoms and liberties in tack.
When you do not have your liberties, freedom, privacy, opportunity for success or ability to express your opinions without reprisal. What good is being alive? I like our founders agree with “Give me liberty or give me death!
I fear our Government as much as I do terrorists. At least I know who they are.
Ron, I don’t see any good arguments here to not be isolationists.
Manufacturing? If anything it would improve. I don’t see how us meddling in others foreign affairs is helping American manufacturing. And it is not just wars which I think is harmful for obvious reasons.For example our rules(forgot the exact legislation name) that puts an increased rate on a foreign countries imports if that country refuses to inform the US of former citizens working in their countries. All so we can tax these citizens. There is really now way out, how free and American is that? And do you think other countries enjoy being bullied like that?
Military jobs? First of all, these jobs are basically public works on steroids and in my opinion provide very little real value. However that said there is a value in protecting out borders and defense. Isolationists don’t want to reduce the size of the military personnel just the military expansionism and cost associated with empire building. AKA bring them home and defend.
Exactly how many lives have been saved through surveillance? Take the other side of the coin. We are risking all our privacy for what? I don’t see any pay off from it. Just as others say “well I have nothing to hide so I don’t mind, it’s for our safety.” Well yeah odds are it won’t even affect you. But odds are you won’t win the lottery either but still buy tickets the fact remains that they can and probably eventually if not already will use it against an innocent person, either personally or politically. Maybe and most probably not “you” but does that make it right? As Snowden made evident whether you are for him or against him these are just people like you and me in control of this PRISM program and they can make their own rash decisions, like leaking information or perhaps using it for dirty politics or personal vendettas.
Also at the risk of seeming to into conspiracy theories, I wouldn’t be very surprised if it’s not that presidents “experience the realities” but rather are shown/coerced into “doing what we say or else.” *Cough* CIA *Cough* Lobbyist. Haha not a firm believe in that just saying wouldn’t be too surprised.
Sarah: You’re an idiot. There is no such thing as a “Constitutional Libertarian.” They are two separate parties. So make up your mind. Which one are you?
Talk about Idiot? Its not a party it is an ideological position. I believe in a very small government which obeys the US Constitution. WOW! you are out there Libby! Get a grip!
Constitutional Party, LOL… Wish there was one, I might join.
Here you go, you POS. LMFAO!!
http://www.constitutionparty.com/
So Libby, I guess you think “The Rent Is Too Damn High” , The New York political party is a legitimate political party too? C’mon, Let me say it a different way for your simple twisted mind. I am a Libertarian who believes that we should honor the Constitution and the Oath to uphold it that all politicians take. Get it now? Yikes….
Libby!! You are the first person the call someone out for calling people names…you, m’dear, are the biggest LIBERAL HYPOCRITE on this site…
I only reciprocate PC. You call me names and yes, I’ll retaliate.
Sarah, did you notice that Charlene Lamb and cohorts went back to work at the State Dept with no punishment and never missed a check. They played a large part of what happened in Benghazi and we have 4 dead Americans and almost a year has passed with no answers. I wonder what they will do when the next embassy is attacked. What will the next excuse be?
Agent,
Interesting that when we had credible intelligence that an attack was planned, nobody died. That is better than handling a situation like Benghazi. Don’t you think.
As a side note, I still hold President Obama and his administration, including Secretary Clintion, for the attack on and poor handling of the Benghazi attack. I want answers too.
I apologize, I still hold them accountable.
Forgot a word.
By the way, we really do not need a President who is in need of personal growth after he or she becomes President. I would next time look for those traits before electing a community organizer.
Sarah,
The Presdency is a very unique job and I would guess that every President experienced some personal growth during their term(s). That is why none of them ever keep all of their campaign promises, especially when elected to their first term.
Unless you have the opporunity to walk a mile in their shoes, you have no business judging them.
Ron, All I am saying is lets do a little more research in the leadership abilities of our President before we elect them. This guy was a one term Senator with a community organizational background. No leadership experience at all on his resume. Now all we get is a good speech, read on a teleprompter and nothing to back it up! It has become very apparent that he is way over his head in the job. I would give him an A in politics, but thats it!
Sarah,
I don’t think research was the problem. We all knew what all of the candidates brought to the table. President Obama did a better job of selling himself to the voting public than the other candidates. Either that or people voted against the other candidates.
Maybe if we were presented with a better candidate from the Libertarian Party we would not be in this mess. If their ideology is so superior, why can they not present a viable cnadidate who can sell the platform? I am an Independent who would love to have a reasonable third party candidate from from to choose. I would respect Ron Paul more if he did not run as a Republican and focused on the Libertarian party.
Ron, Unfortunate as it is, a third party candidate can not win the election. I like your idea but Ron Paul, Ross Perot or a Donald Trump or the likes could not win because they have not sold their soul to the political machine in Washington. The political parties along with their special interest who support the parties push their guy through the process and even they push the opposing candidate they want to win, ie; McCain. They knew Obama would beat him, thats why the media push McCain. Who do you think wrote the 2400 ACA? Obama? Ried? We all know Pelosi didnt even know what was in it! No, Physicans, Health Insurance Industry, Unions, AARP, These were the people who actually wrote the legislation. Make no bones about it!
Our political system is broke and we need both term limits and make all political donations illegal or something of the sort. It is pathetic to see rich politicians with their family full of lobbyists, ie; Harry Rieds son and daughter, Hillary’s business partners. Not just Dems either Virginias Governor (R) as well who accepted gifts after the election. These relatives and friends and business partners lobby for industries, unions etc. It is actually sickening!
Third Party Candidates can not win unless they identify with either the GOP or the DNC. It is a shame you have to sell your soul and future votes to the powers to be in DC. Otherwise you do not stand a chance. That is why both the DNC and the GOP do not like the so called “TEA Party” It is a threat to them and the DC Machine. They hate spending and the political machine of both parties in Washington DC loves it! 4.7 Trillion Dollars a year flows through DC and the Corporations, Unions, Lobbyist and Government workers all want more of it! A politician who is not beholden to them is not welcome in DC.
In a way, the Republicans had a third party candidate. His name was Jon Huntsman. It’s a shame they weren’t smart enough to support him, but he wasn’t ideologically extreme enough for them. I believe he would have done a good job.
“Our political system is broke and we need both term limits and make all political donations illegal or something of the sort. It is pathetic to see rich politicians with their family full of lobbyists.”
Finally! Something I can agree with Sarah about.
Don’t Call Me Shirley,
Thank you for posting that. I have made that point in the past as well. Based on what information I learned about Jon Huntsman I would have voted for him and know many other people, mostly Democrats, that also would have voted for him. I believe that he would have easily won the Presidency if the Republican party could have put aside their allegiance toward candidates who spoke in extremes and nominated him.
Sarah,
You correct about the political system being broken. I would be all for a system where 3 candidates, regardless of party affiliation, are selected based on experience (resume) and an interview from a panel (3-5 people depending on the office). Then each candidate receives the exact same air time, office space, staff, and advertising paid for with public money. No private money allowed. Then let the best candidate win.
Ron, Politics makes strange bedfellows. Democrats are great at running their opposition down, making up all kinds of lies and the complicit media will keep harping on them. It is almost impossible for a Conservative to get their message across in this environment. Ron Paul is the worst candidate ever. He was right on a few fiscal issues, but really goofy on most others including foreign policy. He even stated he had no problem with Iran getting Nukes. Hello! Republicans will never win again until they get a true Conservative with real ideas to run. They can’t win being moderate or being RINO’s. It is time for Ted Cruz to step forward, not Christie or even Rubio who was disappointing on the immigration issue.
Basically, he knew how to sell a slogan to the low information voters. The Republicans obliged him by putting up the worst possible RINO candidate and the rest is history. Those of us who were paying attention knew where he was coming from when he told Joe the Plumber that we had to spread the wealth around. If this President was looking after the citizens, he would have concentrated his efforts on the economy and getting it going instead of wasting 2 years ramming healthcare down our throats. A weak economy cannot stand another huge entitlement and this one will bankrupt the country.
Agent,
Please provide some staistical proof, with a cited source, that the wealth has been spread from the wealthy to the poor and middle class around.
Hint: The ACA does not count since it has not fully gone into effect.
If you want proof that the opposite has happened, see the stock market and stagnant wages.
I think being judged comes with being President! wouldn’t you say?
Gay Marriage, Iraq, Afghanistan, Gitmo, The Patriot Act, The Debt being unpatriotic? Those are just a few of his “personal growth issues” Obama has made Bush look like a wimp on the Patriot act that all liberals were up in arms about! It is just so hypocritical its really not even funny.
Sarah,
How many Americans have died in terrorist attacks since the Patriot Act was signed? I am influenced by results, not ideology. As far as I know, none of my freedoms, rights or libertied have been infringed upon. If they feel a need to listen to my boring phones calls and read my emails about my kids activities to keep me and my family safe, go for it. If they stop doing those things causing death to me and/or my family, then I would be mad.
Ron, Ask the families of the Ft Hood shootings how many died. Don’t bother to tell us it was workplace violence. Hasan was as big a Terrorist as we have had in this country. I fault the Army for letting him go with political correctness. That is a travesty of biblical proportions. By the way, more could have died had the bombers been better at their job. Do you remember the Times Square bomber, the underwear bomber, Ft Dix? Of course, those brothers in Boston did a number on the innocent, didn’t they? We have cells all over this country and they are just waiting for orders.
Agent,
The terrible terrorist act commited by Hasan would have happened regardless and we all feel for the victims and their families. Obviously we cannot stop every terrorist act, but we have not seen anything near the scale of 9/11. That is thanks to both the Bush and Obama administrations and in part to all of the increased surveillence.
I find it hysterical that most people, not saying you in particular, who applauded Presdient Bush for keeping us safe since 9/11 are now up in arms over President Obama using the same methods and achieiving very similar rsults.
We can tell you haven’t undergone any personal growth lately, Sarah.
Libby, another factless and baseless emotional outburst of ridicule! You are over the top irrelevant with your comments.
Ditto. Libtard ring a bell?
WOW. you two should get together for some mud wrestling.
Libby, your pictures are selective. There was two guys at the voting poll in 2008 one at the same poll in 2012. What if it was a KKK in a white sheet with a night stick? BTW, It is illegal to stand and intimidate people at a polling station while they are voting. Isnt it funny how a liberal would justify voter intimidation and not want a voter to present an ID when voting. You are a Hypocrite as well Libby! LMAO at you!
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2012/11/06/new-black-panthers-back-at-the-same-08-polling-place-in-philadelphia/
Didn’t look like intimidation to me. Looked like he was just standing there. That said, no I am not for voter intimidation or voter fraud. And BOTH parties have been guilty of it. Not just the Dems. Get your own house in order before you LYAO at someone else, toots.
Looked like a Black Panther with a night stick to me! When you see someone from the KKK in white sheets with a night stick, or a Democrat Politician voting for Voter ID come forth, Please let me know. Otherwise please be quiet Libby, You are a hyprocrite.
I wasn’t aware there was a vote on Voter ID. If there was, I would have voted for it. So, I let you know. Now you can be quiet, Sarah.
Sarah, I was glad to see NC pass a new voter law. Must present a valid ID, can’t register at the last minute. Of course, Holder will have to sue them now saying they are being unfair.
Just about 30 States have a voter ID law and to my knowledge very few democrats have voted for such a measure.
Libby, I understand, like all liberals, you have a hard time with facts and following on what is really going on legislatively in the country other than what news you get from MSNBC, CBS or ABC and CNN. But, here are the States and their voter ID laws concerning voters presenting an ID. These states are just verifying these voters truly exist. They have enacted these laws to prevent what happened in 2008 with ACORN and the dead people voting in Illinois and Ohio and all of the other fake and fraudulent voters who supported Obama and other liberals collected by ACORN, Unions, etc.
http://www.ncsl.org/legislatures-elections/elections/voter-id.aspx
Sarah,
I see some hypocrisy in your position on voter ID laws. Doesn’t that limit the freedom to vote for those who do not have a government issued ID? Will the Gopvernment provide ID’s to eligible voters who currently do not have one? Will people need to go somewhere to obtain an ID? How far will they need to travel and at what cost? Sounds like an additional tax to be able to vote which is against the 24th Amendment.
So you are now OK with the government dictating the paramteters of your right to vote? I would think as a Libertarian you would be against any law that might restrict an eligible voter from exercising their right to vote.
yes all states that require a photo ID will issue you a photo ID, in Florida you can get one at the DMV, you need a photo ID to board an airplane, buy beer, I see no problem with it, if it stops people like ACORN who violated the law hundreds if not thousands of dead people voting, or those that voted many different times.
They will issue the ID, but at whose cost? The individual or the taxpayers?
Sounds like there will be an additional cost or burden on someone who is eligible to vote and does not currently have a government issued photo ID. Not everyone boards a plane or buys beer. There are many inner city people, mostly the elderly and minorities, who never needed a driver’s license or any other ID so they never obtained one. Government officials should be at the polling places ready to issue the IDs, at no cost, to anyone who does not have one.
Question, how many confirmed incidents of in-person voter fraud have occured in the U.S.? Please cite your source.
The ACORN issue was about obtaining false registrations, not actual votes.
The Bush Administration found 23 cases of ineleigible or multiple voting over the course of 5 years. I would wager big money that the voter ID laws will keep more than 23 eligible voters from voting. Sounds like an overreaction by big government.
http://www.factcheck.org/2008/10/acorn-accusations/
Please get your facts straight.
Its free in every state that has a photo ID law. Tell that to the polling stations in Ohio who had people register using dead peoples names. Or the thousands of voters who voted twice using false names that were fraudulently registered. If there were fraudulent voters registered it’s only logical to assume there were fraudulent votes cast. I wonder how many of those ACORN registered voters voted for McCain?
ACORN’s voter registration drives, which it has conducted since the 1980s, has been frequently mischaracterized by supporters of Republican candidates as “voter fraud”. ACORN received significant negative publicity in the wake of the 2009 production and publication of videos, which were later found to be partially falsified and selectively edited, by two conservative activists, James O’Keefe and Hannah Giles. The activists used hidden camera recordings to portray low-level ACORN employees as engaging in criminal activity, apparently advising them on how to hide prostitution activities and avoid taxes.[9] A nationwide controversy ensued, immediately resulting in a loss of funding from government and private donors,[10][11][12] including legislative amendments to spending bills in the United States House and Senate prohibiting government funding of the group.
Following the publication of the videos and withdrawal of funding, four different independent investigations by various state and city Attorneys General and the GAO released in 2009 and 2010 cleared ACORN, finding its employees had not engaged in criminal activities and that the organization had managed its federal funding appropriately, and calling the videos deceptively and selectively edited to present the workers in the worst possible light.
Sarah,
For someone who gets most of their information online, it should be very easy for you to cite your source(s). I want proof and convictions for voter fraud, not voter registration fraud, before I will agree that the additional burden created by voter ID laws justify the additional expenses (legislators, court costs, state attorneys, etc) to me, as a taxpayer.
As a Libertarian I would think you would want the same justification of additional government spending.
Sarah – a state ID is not free. It costs the same as a driver’s license.
The idea Ron is to permit only citizens the right to vote in elections. It is not that hard to get a valid ID to prove you are a citizen. It is not that hard to register as a voter. Why would you want someone to vote that came here illegally, has no ID or registration? I see a lot of hypocrisy in your position and it is idiotic.
Hypocrisy? What’s hypocrital about his statement? For many people it IS that hard to get a valid ID. Poor and elderly folks in rural areas have no way to get to the DMV for an ID. And they have no need for one. Many don’t even have proof of citizenship because they were born at home with no birth certificate. Does that make them illegal??? Why are you so fixated on illegals trying to scam the system? I doubt they try to vote anyway. Why would they?
Agent,
Until you can provide documented proof that there is more in-person VOTER fraud, not to be mistaken with VOTER REGISTRATION fraud, than the potential for disenfranchising eligible voters, stop spending my money on a non-issue. For someone so against bigger government and more spending, you have no problem with this?
Maybe it’s because Republicans believe this is their only chance of winning elections.
While you’re at it, how about providing some credible information, including source, about illegals obtaining medicaid, unemployment, social security disability, and all the other benefits you say they are abusing? Every single one I have met is hard working and consciencious. How many have YOU met?
Go stand in the ER in Chicago on a hot summer night.
Better than getting all my news from one source. FoxNews ring a bell?
i get most of my information on line. I try to find factual unbiased information without leading questions or polls asked in a way to influence the answers. Unlike NBC, MSNBC, CNN, etc.
Fair and unbiased. Yeah, right.
I see you have been watching Fox, Good for you!
And you’re not a Republican! Ha! You’re just embarrassed to admit it. I would be, too.
See anything funny about the map of states? NY? CA? MA? hmm…..
I see why they call the rest of the map the Red States. The real reason we are in the “Red”. Big hand outs to defense contractors, excessive number of military bases, Big Farming and Big Oil subsidies, predominantly in Redville.
iloveinsurance,
Here is one of my favorite charts.
http://www.economist.com/blogs/dailychart/2011/08/americas-fiscal-union
I am sure the righties on this blog will spin away, but the bottom line is that most traditionally red states have a federal tax deficit where most traditionally blue states have a federal tax surplus.
Who are the makers and takers again?
Wow! Eye opening.
Why don’t you give us up to date info Ron? Your favorite chart ends in 2009, the first year of Obama. It would be interesting to see what has happened after $6 Trillion in new debt has been added since then. Please explain if the trillion dollar Stimulus that didn’t create jobs would be added into the mix. It is well known that no shovel ready jobs were created and it was merely a political payoff to supporters. Most of the money received by States, counties and cities was promptly blown to pay legacy costs of pensions and other entitlements and they are still in the same boat, all at taxpayer expense.
The chart is from 2011. How long do you think it takes the IRS to compile this data and disseminate it to the public?
Agent,
If you can find updated info, please provide and cite your source. I cannot control how often data is gathered and presented. At least I am able to present facts with a cited source.
Can you dispute the data in the chart?
How about that quantitative proof that President Obama is DESTROYING our economy and country? Remember to cite your source.
I read in one of the local papers within the past week that Kentucky (A RED STATE) gets $1.57 back for every $1.00 sent to the federal government in taxes. Imagine that.
You can thank New York and California. Or as Sarah says, Wall Street and Los Angeles. LOL!
Kind of like the silly 60 billion in emergency aid for Sandy, that they actually spent only 5 billion in aid, and the rest to be used later for infrastructure and other areas not associated with the storm. Pathetic!
All politicians have sold out to unnecessary spending to get votes, all the while leaving our children holding the bag of debt.
NY and NJ were just tapping part of the $237 billion surplus they built up from 1990 to 2009 with the federal government.
And your data is old Ron and doesn’t cover the past 4 years. Anyone with a brain knows what has gone on in the past 4 years. Only you can trust data that is this old. Find a current one and we will talk again.
Agent,
I am sick of doing all of the work. Why don’t you find some recent data? When is the last time you provided any statistics with a cited source? You are the laziest person on this blog.
Tell that to Detroit, Chicago, New York, LA. All are either bankrupt or will be soon!
extremely misleading, this is Federal spending and tax revenue. What about the states, city and municipal revenues and spending and legacy debt, pensions are all way under funded, most of these liberal cities will not be able to sell bonds unless the Feds back them somehow. That is the secret bailout that they will get from the Fed until this bubble bursts.
Sarah,
I am just showing the hypocrisy of the Republicans, of which I know you are not. Most of the red states that complain about spending and debt are actually in the red take more than they contribute. If we ran the country as a business, all of the states in the red would be shut down. Of the 24 state that voted for Romney, only AR, GA, NE and TX contributed more than they recieived. Whereas 18 of the 26 states the voted for President Obama contributed more than they received.
You believe it is misleading because the data does not support your position. If you have other data, please provide and cite your source.
its just logical that CA, NY and the North East pay much more in taxes than does Alabama. Like I said before look at those cities and state revenues and expenses and legacy costs their financial houses are not in order at all, as is our federal governments. That is just a fact! Not opinion. As Major Bloomberg stated last week, NYC will be the next Detroit if they do not reform their pension plans for government workers and drastically reduce their spending. Look at Chicago, they will actually beat NYC to bankruptcy. The whole State of CA is pretty much bankrupt. The only thing keeping them standing on their feet is low interest rates and bond funds still buying their bonds. I think Detroit might have a problem selling their bonds now, don’t you think?
It is not just what they pay, but what they do NOT receive back from the federal government. Do you know what the term surplus means? I was talkng about who benefits more from federal spending in relation to what they contribute. What part of that do you not understand. If you ran the country like a business, would you keep open the states that are losing money?
I wonder how many of those cities run by Republicans receive federal dollars to help balance their budgets.
Here is a chart that explains exactly why New York with Wall Street, and California with its 9th largest economy in the world pays more than it takes in benefits. Do you think that New York without Wall Street would be paying more into the feds than it recieved? You really need to look at revenue. A great deal of the States costs are Medicaid, Unemployment and Education and Services. These cost are not mentioned in your federal example.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_tax_revenue_by_state
My point is this, If you look at the real problem with our Government is that the Federal Government thinks it can keep printing money, borrowing 40% of every dollar they spend without any reprisal.
It doesn’t matter WHY, Sarah. The fact is Red states take more federal funds than Blue states. Yet they are the ones that complain about the Federal government printing money and having to pay 40% to borrow more. Are you in a Red state or a Blue state? Let me guess…
It depends Libby, Soon with the promise of “entitlements” (gosh I hate that word) we will all be blue states and living in a third world. Just look at Venezuela!
I bet you will be happy though!
Why would I be happy about that? I’m not some liberal wingnut. I happen to have liberal social views, which I thought Libertarians were all for, but conservative fiscal views, another Libertarian value. Just because I feel healthcare is a basic human right that every American deserves does not mean I for irresponsible spending and borrowing. People are so judgmental on this blog.
Sarah, I like your chart a lot better than Ron’s outdated one. It is easy to identify the heaviest taxed states on your chart. However, no matter how much they take in, they always seem to find a way to spend more than that. They also have a complicit Fed which prints money 24/7 on their “quantitative easing” plan which does nothing but lower the value of the dollar. This bubble is about to burst, but I am sure they will blame Republicans for their demise.
“no matter how much they take in, they always seem to find a way to spend more than that.”
Are you blind or just dumb? They paid in MORE than they spent. That’s what the chart shows. And I see no reason that a 10 year trend would change over the past 4 years. Even if federal funding increased, it would take alot to eat through a $237 billion (with a B) surplus.
Ron’s graph is right even now. But I am just trying to explain the reasons for it. Wall Street, although all liberals would disagree pays a tremendous amount of taxes. and those lower populated agriculture states lack those revenues to support their states. If you look at the states and City budgets you will find a total different story.
Agent,
I normally avoid Wikipedia as a source, but if that is what you like, then let’s tell the whole story.
14 of the 19 states that are net contributors and 12 of the 31 net takers voted for President Obama in both elections. 1 contributor and 1 taker voted for Obama in 2008 then Romney in 2012.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_taxation_and_spending_by_state
Considering that you are a business owner, isn’t profit all that really matters at the end of the day?
So Sarah, you’re saying that the contributers should subsidize the takers because they are fiscally incapable of supporting themselves. Isn’t that a libtard, socialist viewpoint?
its not just Dems, but the vast majority are DEM mayors.
http://www.nationalreview.com/exchequer/255836/americas-most-bankrupt-mayors
We’re not talking about cities, we’re talking about states.
I am talking about both city and State, Ron is talking about the Federal Government, You are talking out your A**. Thats how I see it!
Only cities have mayors, Sarah. A city operates completely separate from the State. Now that I’ve given you your civics lesson for the day, kindly shut it.
Libtard,, I mean Libby, Yes, I know what a city and a state is. Again, Ron is making a point about the federal spending, I am explaining why NY with Wall Street takes in more than it spends and you again are talking out your A**. Yes, I know Cities are the only one with a mayor. But for some strange reason you keep bringing up irrelevant issues, topics etc.
What’s irrelevant is bringing up cities when we are talking federal funding of STATES. And I’ll say it again, because you seem to have difficulty in comprehending: “It doesn’t matter WHY, Sarah. The fact is Red states take more federal funds than Blue states. Yet they are the ones that complain about the Federal government printing money and having to pay 40% to borrow more.”
Got it? Good. Now shut it.
So let me get this right, you cant think of an argument for yourself to make on its own merits you keep stating Ron’s. FYI, I have already agreed that Ron’s Graph is correct, I was just explaining why! States pay for the services more than the Federal Government. States with Agriculture and lower populations and lower wages will pay less taxes. So find your own graph, facts or opinions instead of just your leftwing ideological rants. At least Ron is presenting facts and logical opinions, I just happen to disagree with some his but not all. Unlike yours!
So Sarah, you’re saying that the contributers should subsidize the takers because they are fiscally incapable of supporting themselves. Isn’t that a libtard, socialist viewpoint?
And why do I need to provide a graph on this issue? Do you find it efficient to re-create the wheel? If I had a different viewpoint or opinion, I would have no problem providing a source.
Is that all you got? Shut it.
Libby, your ideological rants have no meaning anymore. I tried to explain but you are hell bent on talking like Ron’s Parrot. Done with you.
Yes I agree that some of the so called Red States that do not have a Chicago, Los Angeles, San Francisco or or NYC with Wall Street. Collect more in Farm and crop subsidies, National Flood programs and other benefits. And still they want to curb spending! Wow! They want to sacrifice what they get for you! Isn’t that great! You should be happy!
Sarah,
You said, “Yes I agree that some of the so called Red States that do not have a Chicago, Los Angeles, San Francisco or or NYC with Wall Street. Collect more in Farm and crop subsidies, National Flood programs and other benefits. And still they want to curb spending!”. Where has nany represenatative from a red state say they want to spend less in their district/state? Therein lies the problem. They want to curb spending, just not their own. That goes for the blue states as well. Everyone wants someone else to spend less.
Whatever, Sarah. You explained nothing. You only brought up some irrelevant information to support your position – which is red states deserve more because they don’t have big cities. You’re ridiculous. LOL!
Ron, What I meant was that the Feds spend money more money on Federal Subsidies for Farming, Flood Insurance, Yes I would always agree that every politician will go for the pork. My point was you also have to look at the revenue when you make conclusion as to why there may be a surplus. Revenue collected from each state and why does one state collect more revenue than another. Not just which states collect more than they receive. A better way to look at it would be, How much taxes do Conservatives pay vs Liberals. Not to get off track but, Kind of like how much do Conservatives donate to charity vs liberals. I think your intention was to show that Red States take more than they give? How about how much of the tax revenues are paid by Democrats vs Republican on a per capita basis? Huh? 47% pay no federal taxes at all.
Not talking to you Libby, Libtard!
Another emotional outburst by Sarah. Shutty.
I guess I left Libby Libtard babbling and bewildered. She does not understand when someone is using logic and reason versus emotion and ridicule.
Sarah,
I understand the role revenue plays and why the surpluses and deficits exist for each state. I was approaching it more from a business standpoint where maximizing profit is the number one goal. That is why I believe spending needs to be a part of the conversation.
I think it is hypocritical that the people who rail aginst federal spending and the national debt tend to come from states that are exacerbating the problem and blaming the people that voted for President Obama even though those states are helping to lower the debt.
I actually fall into that 47% and is one the of the reasons I could not vote for Romney. I have never accepted any government assistance, never felt like the government owes me anything, put myself through school through earning my Master’s degree in Management, married with three children who attend a Catholic school.
Thepeople who think I need to pay Federal Income tax in order to have skin in the game should change the tax code. Just realize this; I live paycheck to paycheck. Therefore every dollar that goes to the government is taken out of the pocket of the private sector. If you think the government deseves my money more than your business, fine. Just understand that is what will happen.
“Not talking to you Libby, Libtard!”
Too funny! Exhibit “A”. LOL!
Conservatives certainly wouldn’t be donating to charity like they do if they couldn’t write it off that’s for sure. If there wasn’t a financial gain to be made, it wouldn’t be worth their time. They will always tell you how much they gave to charity but don’t tell you about their ulterior motive behind it. Kinda like the mega churches they join. If they can’t write off their tithes and network out of it, what would be the point? Then again they are holier than thou.
iloveinsurance,
I thought liberals were for religious tolerance, oh wait that is only for radical Islamist. BTW, you can not write off an expense that you do not have. So there is nothing really to gain from donating to any charity except for the tax amount on the money. Your argument does not make sense from an accounting point of view.
Ron,
I just believe that those that pay for the benefits for others should not be made out to be a greedy unappreciated people. I do not believe in income envy, and that is exactly the way liberals come across. You can not legislate wealth, or give to those that do not earn their money without first taking from someone who does. I really do have a problem with those that actually get more back in taxes than they pay in. Those should find their way into the welfare lines instead. The tax code is not a welfare code.
I do hand it to you for providing for your family and earning your income. I hope you understand I have not attacked you or your opinions as they have been respectful and logical in nature. Time for me to go back to earning money and paying taxes.
“Respectful and logical.” Not at all like you, Sarah.
Sarah,
I agree with most of your points. I think it is incredible that one thing both sides seem to agree on is updating the tax code, but no one wants to take it on because nearly every constituency group takes advantage of the current tax code and politicians from both sides are worried more about their jobs than the country.
I never took any of your comments as personal attacks as mine were not intended as such to you. I have no problem with a healhty, respectful debate. I only get frustrated with those who misinterpret what I write, make assumptions about me, and label me without even knowing me, i.e Agent and Bob. I would also like to see more facts with cited sources from others, especially those two. However, I am becoming more resigned to the fact that they have nothing to support their positions.
Enjoy earning your money and have a nice evening.
Wow, what a cat fight between Sarah & Libby. I read all the comments about who was paying what in taxes and who was receiving the most in benefits between the states. I saw no mention that the Federal Government spends $1 Trillion+ more than it takes in each year. It really makes no difference which pot it comes from. Our politicians from both parties have failed the American People miseerably over a very long time. They aren’t interested in fiscal responsibility and are totally drunk on spending. That is why there is so much pork attached to every spending bill. Somehow, they think spending more than they take in will somehow make it all better and it is a disaster. $17 Trillion in debt with $6 Trillion in the past 4 years. Unfortunately, liberals think this is a successful strategy. It has never worked in the history of the world and repeating the same mistakes over and over and hoping for a different result is not a wise strategy.
I agree with you agent. Spending has been bad with both parties for too long. I wish President Reagan hadn’t turned us into a debtor nation. His economical experiment has failed this country creating the largest wealth gap in the history of the world. We need a different approach to Capitalism. It’s time to throw in the towel on the myth of trickle down. Even Alan Greenspan admits Reaganomics failed:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5GQecQ06xus
If you do not think there is money to be made in Government, Look at the figure for the District of Columbia on the tax revenue paid there. LOL>…… Washington is drunk on our money!
My point was Ron has intelligence, I disagree with his ideology but unlike you, he can formulate a point of view using logic and reasoning unlike your babbling and irrational, illogical diatribes that you put forth
My postings are not babbling, irrational, or illogical. And I usually am respectful until someone feels a need for insults and put-downs. Then I can dish it out too, sister.
You just disagree with me because I am pro-healthcare. Based on that fact alone you have labeled me Libby Libtard. That only goes to show your shallowness and judgemental attitude. Nothing else.
i just find your posts to be void of facts, repeating the same statements and by and large baseless ridicule without making any valid point based on any logical reasoning.
I have posted on many articles on IJ and have provided many facts, sources, and links. However, Ron made his point and posted his link and I was commenting on it. I did not need to provide additional information on the subject, it was already provided. Like I said before, if I had had a differing opinion or set of facts I would have had no problem presenting them. I did not in this instance.
Again, you take a few posts on one article and make your snap judgement and then turn to ridiculing me. You must be pretty smug up there on your pedastal.
Agent says “Wow, what a cat fight between Sarah & Libby”
You two are off the charts today. Just an observation.
I’d love to bash Barry, but this time will just say that the only reason Obama is in a rush to implement one more piece of his trash unimplemented legislation, is because Glass Steagall support is on the rise.