PDA

View Full Version : Obama's Rating at All-Time High


rockdawg21
03-04-2009, 02:48 AM
So...people are excited that our government is 1.75 trillion dollars in debt?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29493021

Mac
03-04-2009, 03:20 AM
The people that approve are the same idiots that vote him in . They are just about inteligent enough to be happy about that deficit.

rockdawg21
03-04-2009, 03:29 AM
The people that approve are the same idiots that vote him in . They are just about inteligent enough to be happy about that deficit.
Well the article states:
In the survey, 68 percent have a favorable opinion of the president, including 47 percent whose opinion is "very positive" both all-time highs for Obama in the poll. Moreover, 67 percent say they feel more hopeful about his leadership and 60 percent approve of his job in the White House.

Yet the percentage of Americans who are confident that Obama has the right goals and policies for the country 54 percent is slightly smaller, suggesting that the president is more popular than his policies are. An example: 57 percent tend to support the stimulus, compared with 34 percent who tend to oppose it.
So, it's a little bit more than just those who voted for them. Lots of people are jumping on the press' positive portrayal.

NateR
03-04-2009, 03:30 AM
Just the fact that it comes from MSNBC means that it's most likely a lie. Polls can be skewed to say whatever you want them to say, it just depends on your sample group and how you word your questions.

rockdawg21
03-04-2009, 03:31 AM
Just the fact that it comes from MSNBC means that it's most likely a lie. Polls can be skewed to say whatever you want them to say, it just depends on your sample group and how you word your questions.
Yeah, I noticed that it didn't come from Fox News, lol

logrus
03-04-2009, 03:45 AM
Just the fact that it comes from MSNBC means that it's most likely a lie. Polls can be skewed to say whatever you want them to say, it just depends on your sample group and how you word your questions.

Who cares, it hasn't even been 2 months yet. Lets bring out the polls and see where its at in 6 months or a year. Its a new term with new ideas, sure its going to be high. If the country tanks and its still hig, then we need to worry.

I guess because I voted for Obama and have high hopes for him that makes me an idiot and a moron. Thanks Mac for calling me an idiot and unintelligent.

Neezar
03-04-2009, 03:48 AM
Do they call these people to survey them? Why doesn't anyone ever call me? Is anyone here on their calling list?

:laugh:

logrus
03-04-2009, 03:59 AM
Do they call these people to survey them? Why doesn't anyone ever call me? Is anyone here on their calling list?

:laugh:

They don't recognize people from the south I suppose.

NateR
03-04-2009, 04:00 AM
Who cares, it hasn't even been 2 months yet. Lets bring out the polls and see where its at in 6 months or a year. Its a new term with new ideas, sure its going to be high. If the country tanks and its still hig, then we need to worry.

I guess because I voted for Obama and have high hopes for him that makes me an idiot and a moron. Thanks Mac for calling me an idiot and unintelligent.

Well, I actually agree with Rush Limbaugh when he said, "I hope he fails." If Obama is trying to turn this nation into a socialist, nanny-state, then why in the world would any American want that to succeed? That's completely contrary to the values that our nation's founders fought and died for.

Obama is borrowing our future generations into bankruptcy, punishing the very people who create jobs with increased taxes and wealth redistribution, and giving handouts to those people who don't even work. There's nothing American about any of that.

Crisco
03-04-2009, 04:02 AM
It's too early yet. God help him though I hope he does find a way to help the economy along.

I didn't vote for him and I would have prefered Mccain but I'll stand behind him and pray for him. We may not agree with his methods but in the end I'll judge him by the results.

rockdawg21
03-04-2009, 04:09 AM
Well, I actually agree with Rush Limbaugh when he said, "I hope he fails." If Obama is trying to turn this nation into a socialist, nanny-state, then why in the world would any American want that to succeed? That's completely contrary to the values that our nation's founders fought and died for.

Obama is borrowing our future generations into bankruptcy, punishing the very people who create jobs with increased taxes and wealth redistribution, and giving handouts to those people who don't even work. There's nothing American about any of that.
You're wrong. By the time Obama and the press are done convincing everybody this is what we need, it will be American. God save us.

Buzzard
03-04-2009, 04:18 AM
Well, I actually agree with Rush Limbaugh when he said, "I hope he fails." If Obama is trying to turn this nation into a socialist, nanny-state, then why in the world would any American want that to succeed? That's completely contrary to the values that our nation's founders fought and died for.

Obama is borrowing our future generations into bankruptcy, punishing the very people who create jobs with increased taxes and wealth redistribution, and giving handouts to those people who don't even work. There's nothing American about any of that.


Out of curiosity, were you happy when Bush borrowed our future generations into bankruptcy?

logrus
03-04-2009, 04:21 AM
Out of curiosity, were you happy when Bush borrowed our future generations into bankruptcy?

Are you kidding me, Nates a Republican, Bush Jr could do no wrong.

NateR
03-04-2009, 04:25 AM
You're wrong. By the time Obama and the press are done convincing everybody this is what we need, it will be American. God save us.

Not the America that I spent 10 years of my life defending in the military. Fortunately, if and when Obama fails, then we might see a dramatic return to true conservatism and small government. Then we might see a return to the wisdom of Ronald Reagan:

In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem. From time to time we've been tempted to believe that society has become too complex to be managed by self-rule, that government by an elite group is superior to government for, by, and of the people. Well, if no one among us is capable of governing himself, then who among us has the capacity to govern someone else? All of us together, in and out of government, must bear the burden. The solutions we seek must be equitable, with no one group singled out to pay a higher price.
(emphasis added)

NateR
03-04-2009, 04:27 AM
Out of curiosity, were you happy when Bush borrowed our future generations into bankruptcy?

Not at all. Bush Jr. is partially responsible for making this mess worse. However, it was a Democratically controlled Congress who passed that first bailout in October. Y'know, the Democratically controlled Congress that had a lower approval rating than President Bush, of which Obama was a part.

logrus
03-04-2009, 04:47 AM
Not at all. Bush Jr. is partially responsible for making this mess worse. However, it was a Democratically controlled Congress who passed that first bailout in October. Y'know, the Democratically controlled Congress that had a lower approval rating than President Bush, of which Obama was a part.

An yet that same bailout was hugely endorsed by your candidate. A bailout that came in Oct of Bushs last few months in office under his second term. Bottom line is Bush did just as much damage to future generations as Barrack (might) do.

I guess Barrack should do nothing, borrow money, throw it into 2 wars but add a new one some place else. I mean its worked so great these past 4+ years. :unsure-1:

Besides Mccain if he was elected would have introduced his own stimulus package. So regardless we could very well be in the same boat.

Buzzard
03-04-2009, 04:57 AM
Not at all. Bush Jr. is partially responsible for making this mess worse. However, it was a Democratically controlled Congress who passed that first bailout in October. Y'know, the Democratically controlled Congress that had a lower approval rating than President Bush, of which Obama was a part.

Who was president when the first bailout money went out? Which president authorized it? Wasn't it Henry Paulson, the Republican Secretary of the treasury who was designated by Bush to help put the first bailout through? Obama inherited the crap left to him by Bush and his irresponsible running of our country for the 8 years prior to him taking office.



EDIT:

Some more great moments in the Bush Legacy.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/4228722/George-Bushs-20-worst-moments.html

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2009/01/08/damage/index.html

NateR
03-04-2009, 05:09 AM
Besides Mccain if he was elected would have introduced his own stimulus package. So regardless we could very well be in the same boat.

That's why I don't believe McCain was a true conservative. Conservatives aren't supposed to be about big government.

NateR
03-04-2009, 05:13 AM
Who was president when the first bailout money went out? Which president authorized it? Wasn't it Henry Paulson, the Republican Secretary of the treasury who was designated by Bush to help put the first bailout through? Obama inherited the crap left to him by Bush and his irresponsible running of our country for the 8 years prior to him taking office.


So, logically, if you hate Bush because of the first bailout and think it was a bad idea, then you must really hate Obama. If Bush Jr. started up the vehicle that is driving this nation to economic ruin, then Obama didn't jump in and shut the engine off, he put to the metal and shifted into 4th gear!

If Bush was irresponsible in his spending, the Obama is bordering on criminal.

NateR
03-04-2009, 05:18 AM
BTW, I'm closer to a Libertarian in my political views. The Republican party has just become too liberal for me.

Buzzard
03-04-2009, 05:24 AM
So, logically, if you hate Bush because of the first bailout and think it was a bad idea, then you must really hate Obama. If Bush Jr. started up the vehicle that is driving this nation to economic ruin, then Obama didn't jump in and shut the engine off, he put to the metal and shifted into 4th gear!

If Bush was irresponsible in his spending, the Obama is bordering on criminal.

I've never said I approved on either bailout. What would you do if you were in Obama's shoes and had inherited the most enormous debt to have been passed onto a newly elected president and an economy on the brink of collapse?

Edited to take out sarcasm.

NateR
03-04-2009, 05:36 AM
I've never said I approved on either bailout. Since you apparently seem to have all of the answers, what would you do if you were in Obama's shoes and had inherited the most enormous debt to have been passed onto a newly elected president and an economy on the brink of collapse?

I like the idea of eliminating the income tax for everybody for the year 2009. This would give everyone with a job an instant boost to their paychecks that would last all year. Then just start slashing government social programs, with a priority towards keeping our troops well supplied and safe overseas. Also, eliminate sales tax on basic food items and repeal the gas tax. Finally, reduce Welfare to only cover those who it was created for: widows and orphans of our troops who have lost their lives in combat.

Basically, retract government power and influence as much as possible because, to repeat my Ronald Reagan quote, "government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem."

Buzzard
03-04-2009, 05:54 AM
I like the idea of eliminating the income tax for everybody for the year 2009. This would give everyone with a job an instant boost to their paychecks that would last all year. Then just start slashing government social programs, with a priority towards keeping our troops well supplied and safe overseas. Also, eliminate sales tax on basic food items and repeal the gas tax. Finally, reduce Welfare to only cover those who it was created for: widows and orphans of our troops who have lost their lives in combat.

Basically, retract government power and influence as much as possible because, to repeat my Ronald Reagan quote, "government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem."

Dang, I was too slow in removing my sarcastic comment.

Interesting, though I think cutting the income tax for everyone would create a major cash drain and cutting the gas tax would be horrible for our roads and bridges that are in such an awful state of disrepair. Do you really think that individuals making 75k+ a year shouldn't pay any income tax? Don't get me wrong, I would love to not have to pay my taxes. If it means keeping the economy going I'll gladly (more like grudgingly) pay my fair share.

J.B.
03-04-2009, 06:53 AM
The idea of eliminating income tax completely is not reasonable. That revenue pays for a lot more than just social programs. While I agree completely with more focus on military spending, the reality is we need a lot of the programs that are in place. Not all of them, but a lot of them.

"Welfare" is a word that gets tossed around a little too loosely sometimes. While, yes there are plenty of "lazy people who won't get a job" living on welfare and food stamps, there are also a lot of hard working taxpayers who are just stuck in a hard situation and need some extra help from time to time.

I have been a part of charity that donates food and gift certificates to needy families for a long time, and I have seen it all. From crackheads and bums, to honest hard working people with families to feed. You know the ones who are just being lazy, because they keep coming back over and over, even using different names, but we know who they are. Our charity has been receiving money though FEMA and Catholic Charities for about 25 years now, and believe me it's not a lot of money. We have to fund a lot of the functions ourselves, and I even put together local rock shows to raise money from time to time. So that money from FEMA helps a lot, even though it's not very much.

So, while I understand the displeasure with the government's handling of tax dollars, I still believe that some social programs are needed. We should not be so blinded by politics that we turn our backs on Americans who work hard and are truly in need, and that is regardless of the military backround in their family. We don't need to be socialists to help one another out, but there is no denying that many of the programs are in need of a complete overhaul.


Either way, the amount of pork in this stimulus package is more than all the pig roasts I have been to in my entire life. Obama has pretty much bet his presidency on this, and if it fails, so will the Dems in 2012. At this point I am just waiting for Barrack to start talking in third person like The Rock, that would be hilarious.

rockdawg21
03-04-2009, 11:28 AM
Either way, the amount of pork in this stimulus package is more than all the pig roasts I have been to in my entire life. Obama has pretty much bet his presidency on this, and if it fails, so will the Dems in 2012. At this point I am just waiting for Barrack to start talking in third person like The Rock, that would be hilarious.
It's only a matter of time.

Primadawn
03-04-2009, 11:36 AM
Back to the "approval poll" question: I think I've posted this before, but my husband was contacted by CBS news last year to be part of an ongoing poll for Bush's approval rating.
About 6 questions into the poll, he told them what they could do with their poll...
ALL of the questions were worded so that you essentially HAD to say something negative. For example, one of the questions was : Which of the following decisions by our President do you oppose most?

And more along those lines. There was not a single question asked that allowed for any sort of positive feedback. When he complained, the pollster said, "I know. It's really bad, I just work here.."

Tyburn
03-04-2009, 12:52 PM
So...people are excited that our government is 1.75 trillion dollars in debt?

:laugh: :laugh:

I'm sure I read that people his polls were dropping :blink:

Tyburn
03-04-2009, 12:56 PM
You're wrong. By the time Obama and the press are done convincing everybody this is what we need, it will be American. God save us.
Your Wrong...thats British

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZAc0Vcv5Gs4

:laugh:

GOD Bless = American
GOD Save = British

NateR
03-04-2009, 06:36 PM
Back to the "approval poll" question: I think I've posted this before, but my husband was contacted by CBS news last year to be part of an ongoing poll for Bush's approval rating.
About 6 questions into the poll, he told them what they could do with their poll...
ALL of the questions were worded so that you essentially HAD to say something negative. For example, one of the questions was : Which of the following decisions by our President do you oppose most?

And more along those lines. There was not a single question asked that allowed for any sort of positive feedback. When he complained, the pollster said, "I know. It's really bad, I just work here.."

Yeah, that's the problem, questions that only allow you to reinforce the opinions of the poll writers.

It would be like creating a poll to gauge how often domestic abuse occurs in the home and asking questions like this:
1. How often do you physically strike your wife?
A. once a month
B. once a week
C. several times a week
D. once a day

2. When you strike your children, do you use...?
A. a wooden rod
B. a belt
C. your fist
D. all of the above

mikthehick
03-04-2009, 06:38 PM
I like the idea of eliminating the income tax for everybody for the year 2009. This would give everyone with a job an instant boost to their paychecks that would last all year. Then just start slashing government social programs, with a priority towards keeping our troops well supplied and safe overseas. Also, eliminate sales tax on basic food items and repeal the gas tax. Finally, reduce Welfare to only cover those who it was created for: widows and orphans of our troops who have lost their lives in combat.

Basically, retract government power and influence as much as possible because, to repeat my Ronald Reagan quote, "government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem."

NateR for Prez 2012! :punch:

NateR
03-04-2009, 06:40 PM
While, yes there are plenty of "lazy people who won't get a job" living on welfare and food stamps, there are also a lot of hard working taxpayers who are just stuck in a hard situation and need some extra help from time to time.

That's why GOD created Christian charity. It's not the function of the government.

J.B.
03-04-2009, 07:22 PM
That's why GOD created Christian charity. It's not the function of the government.

Did you read my entire post? Where do you think a lot of the money that Christian charities donate comes from? Sure, a lot comes from private citizens, but the Government also provides a lot of money to local churches and charities to help people in need.

Nate, while I understand your view, and I agree that overall we do need less government in our lives. I just don't agree that at this point we cant just do away with every social program in existence. If we had it your way, our country would be in serious trouble. Crime rates would skyrocket, and people would be starving to death.

Do we not both agree that is a Christian nation? From the beliefs of our founding fathers to the the line "In GOD We Trust" printed right on that precious dollar bill. You cannot just simplify the situation and assume that all those in need are lazy bums looking to live off other people. We should WANT to help out those in need. We should not mind chipping in a little bit of our tax dollars to help out AMERICANS who NEED help.

BUT

I just think we need to be stricter on enforcing the rules and actually try to help those in need find employment instead of just blindly giving them money from now until the day they die. Not only that, but the way that the current system is set up, it is designed to favor minorities. So, in lamens terms, when the white people get turned down for food stamps, where do they go? TO CHURCH RUN CHARITIES THAT ARE STILL GETTING MONEY FROM THE GOVERNMENT. So what is the damn difference? Would you really not mind watching people starve and seeing our inner-cities slip into chaos just to protect a couple extra bucks on your paycheck and the principle "what's mine is mine"?

If we started getting stricter and started really helping people find work, a lot of the people who abuse the system would be weeded out. However, I would be outraged if I read somewhere that a needy family was denied some assistance simply because they never served in the military. That is just wrong on so many levels.

Now that I have engaged you, people around here who don't know better are going to think I am Karl Marx.

Crisco
03-04-2009, 07:39 PM
Did you read my entire post? Where do you think a lot of the money that Christian charities donate comes from? Sure, a lot comes from private citizens, but the Government also provides a lot of money to local churches and charities to help people in need.

Nate, while I understand your view, and I agree that overall we do need less government in our lives. I just don't agree that at this point we cant just do away with every social program in existence. If we had it your way, our country would be in serious trouble. Crime rates would skyrocket, and people would be starving to death.

Do we not both agree that is a Christian nation? From the beliefs of our founding fathers to the the line "In GOD We Trust" printed right on that precious dollar bill. You cannot just simplify the situation and assume that all those in need are lazy bums looking to live off other people. We should WANT to help out those in need. We should not mind chipping in a little bit of our tax dollars to help out AMERICANS who NEED help.

BUT

I just think we need to be stricter on enforcing the rules and actually try to help those in need find employment instead of just blindly giving them money from now until the day they die. Not only that, but the way that the current system is set up, it is designed to favor minorities. So, in lamens terms, when the white people get turned down for food stamps, where do they go? TO CHURCH RUN CHARITIES THAT ARE STILL GETTING MONEY FROM THE GOVERNMENT. So what is the damn difference? Would you really not mind watching people starve and seeing our inner-cities slip into chaos just to protect a couple extra bucks on your paycheck and the principle "what's mine is mine"?

If we started getting stricter and started really helping people find work, a lot of the people who abuse the system would be weeded out. However, I would be outraged if I read somewhere that a needy family was denied some assistance simply because they never served in the military. That is just wrong on so many levels.

Now that I have engaged you, people around here who don't know better are going to think I am Karl Marx.


I agree with you on pretty much all points. The social programs we have for the most part are good they just need to be improved and monitored better.

NateR
03-04-2009, 08:06 PM
Would you really not mind watching people starve and seeing our inner-cities slip into chaos just to protect a couple extra bucks on your paycheck and the principle "what's mine is mine"?

I see you've been sipping on the Kool-Aid.:tongue0011:

But, you're exactly right. I want to see millions of Americans starve to death just so I can afford to go eat out at a fancy restaurant more often. Why did it take you so long to figure that out? :rolleyes:

Maybe if you don't want people to think you're Karl Marx, then you should stop talking like him. This class warfare crap is getting old.

Miss Foxy
03-04-2009, 08:39 PM
First of all he went in office with a deficit so is he like supposed 2 say "abbra cadabbra" and the recession will be over?
Secondly we have most of the world hating us Americans we might not approve of our leaders, however STAND UNITED & WE SHALL NOT FALL......we should be patriotic all days of the year not just when we lose a soldier or we are attacked... Peace n love....

J.B.
03-04-2009, 08:40 PM
I see you've been sipping on the Kool-Aid.:tongue0011:

But, you're exactly right. I want to see millions of Americans starve to death just so I can afford to go eat out at a fancy restaurant more often. Why did it take you so long to figure that out? :rolleyes:

Maybe if you don't want people to think you're Karl Marx, then you should stop talking like him. This class warfare crap is getting old.


I'm not sipping any Kool-aid, thats for people on welfare. :tongue0011:

You were the one who said you wanted to completely do away with social programs and income tax. I am just telling you what would happen if you did. Maybe you don't have real grasp on how much those programs are needed. If you think it's "kool-aid" to say that taking away all social programs would raise the crime rate, then you don't know much about big cities.

Sorry if I rub you the wrong way by disagreeing from time to time, but you are NOT always right. Even though most of the forum won't say that. Nobody is using "class warfare", you are just irked because I raised some valid points that you don't have a real answer to. I have been posting here for a while and I presented a respectful view that happens to disagree with you. So now, I am newest member of "left" on this forum. Thats how it seems to work around here, disagree with Nate, end up a liberal. :laugh:

medic92
03-05-2009, 12:10 AM
First of all he went in office with a deficit so is he like supposed 2 say "abbra cadabbra" and the recession will be over?

Sure he went into office with a deficit, but he also went into office on campaign promises to fix the deficit. So far all he's done is show that his campaign promises are as empty as his head.

He promised no earmarks -- his spending bill has over 9000 earmarks.

He promised to rein in wasteful spending -- the stimulus plan is wasteful spending on a level that is absolutely unprecedented in world history.

He promised an ethical administration -- he can't seem to find anyone who isn't a tax cheat to fill his cabinet.


Secondly we have most of the world hating us Americans we might not approve of our leaders, however STAND UNITED & WE SHALL NOT FALL......we should be patriotic all days of the year not just when we lose a soldier or we are attacked... Peace n love....

I'm a military veteran from a family of veterans that has a history of military service going back to the Revolutionary War. I'm patriotic 24/7 regardless of our world standing or who happens to be our president. I pray for my president every day, but I will not support his efforts to push us over the edge to socialism. It's not an expression of disloyalty to disagree with our leadership, especially when that leadership is taking us so far away from the principles on which this country was founded.

Obama is an imminent danger to our country and our Constitution. I will continue praying that he reverses his dangerous policies and pray for his well-being but I won't sit here and support him just so we look united and pretty for other countries.

Buzzard
03-05-2009, 12:34 AM
Sure he went into office with a deficit, but he also went into office on campaign promises to fix the deficit. So far all he's done is show that his campaign promises are as empty as his head.

He promised no earmarks -- his spending bill has over 9000 earmarks.

He promised to rein in wasteful spending -- the stimulus plan is wasteful spending on a level that is absolutely unprecedented in world history.

He promised an ethical administration -- he can't seem to find anyone who isn't a tax cheat to fill his cabinet.




I'm a military veteran from a family of veterans that has a history of military service going back to the Revolutionary War. I'm patriotic 24/7 regardless of our world standing or who happens to be our president. I pray for my president every day, but I will not support his efforts to push us over the edge to socialism. It's not an expression of disloyalty to disagree with our leadership, especially when that leadership is taking us so far away from the principles on which this country was founded.

Obama is an imminent danger to our country and our Constitution. I will continue praying that he reverses his dangerous policies and pray for his well-being but I won't sit here and support him just so we look united and pretty for other countries.

How did you feel when Bush ignored the principles of the constitution when he suspended habeas corpus, allowed torture, and basically wiped his butt with what was left of it?

TexasRN
03-05-2009, 12:46 AM
How did you feel when Bush ignored the principles of the constitution when he suspended habeas corpus, allowed torture, and basically wiped his butt with what was left of it?


Shoot, that was the theme of my last party. :party0006:

Oh and I drink Kool-aid. My favorite flavors are lemonade, orange, and purple. I refuse to buy any red or clear kinds. I've never been on welfare but it sounds like fun.

~Amy

medic92
03-05-2009, 12:48 AM
How did you feel when Bush ignored the principles of the constitution when he suspended habeas corpus, allowed torture, and basically wiped his butt with what was left of it?

Great rhetoric and leftist talking points. Provide some specific examples proving your accusations and I'll address them.

I wasn't a big fan of Bush. His refusal to address our illegal immigration problems, willingness to allow the spending to go unchecked and his tendency to let the democrats have their way in the name of bipartisanship bothered me quite a bit.

Once again, back up your claims with some actual proof. I'm really not interested in more of the unbridled, unprecedented and unnecessary hatred of Bush the leftists have heaped upon us for eight solid years. Frankly, it's boring.

huan
03-05-2009, 01:18 AM
I trust words in Russia's Pravda more than anything I see or read from MSNBC.

I'll see their all-time-high rating and raise them the running gallup poll which also shows an all-time-high disapproval rating:

http://www.gallup.com/poll/113980/Gallup-Daily-Obama-Job-Approval.aspx

The only direction his approval rating is going to be going is down.

Jeff Crow
03-05-2009, 01:20 AM
:ninja:

NateR
03-05-2009, 01:26 AM
you are just irked because I raised some valid points that you don't have a real answer to.

Well, it's nice of you to tell me how I think, but you're wrong. I don't think your point is valid at all. At the rate we're going, the government is going to bankrupt itself and every social will have to be shut down. Why not sacrifice those social program now while there is still a chance to save the nation as a whole?

Again, charity is not the job of the government.

NateR
03-05-2009, 01:30 AM
How did you feel when Bush ignored the principles of the constitution when he suspended habeas corpus

Abraham Lincoln did the same thing during the Civil War. Why did he do it? Because he wanted to win the war, of course. It's not unheard of.

Hughes_GOAT
03-05-2009, 01:46 AM
Abraham Lincoln did the same thing during the Civil War. Why did he do it? Because he wanted to win the war, of course. It's not unheard of.
Lincoln didn't have the security Bush had while in office :laugh:

NateR
03-05-2009, 01:49 AM
Lincoln didn't have the security Bush had while in office :laugh:

It's also a matter of common sense. Why risk sending enemy combatants back out onto the battlefield to kill more of your soldiers? In our case, why risk the lives of the American people by freeing known terrorists?

Hughes_GOAT
03-05-2009, 02:09 AM
It's also a matter of common sense. Why risk sending enemy combatants back out onto the battlefield to kill more of your soldiers? In our case, why risk the lives of the American people by freeing known terrorists?
i was actually referring to Lincoln doing what Bush would later do.....except Lincoln was killed, probably in part to that, and Bush wasn't even attempted.

J.B.
03-05-2009, 02:48 AM
Well, it's nice of you to tell me how I think, but you're wrong. I don't think your point is valid at all. At the rate we're going, the government is going to bankrupt itself and every social will have to be shut down. Why not sacrifice those social program now while there is still a chance to save the nation as a whole?

Again, charity is not the job of the government.

Do forgive me for speculating on your thoughts, but it's the only thing I could think seeing as how you basically avoided responding to the points I made and accused me of "class warfare", as if I was trying to make the debate personal. Again, I do apologize for stepping on your toes...:rolleyes:

You still have failed to provide a real answer. You are using a hypothetical to try and argue what is REALITY. I also don't see how you think the Government is going to bankrupt itself when it is taking MORE of our tax dollars to pay for this stimulus. If you think it's kool-aid to believe that shutting down all social programs is a bad idea than frankly you have been drinking a bit of kool-aid yourself. You just keep saying charity is not the job of the government, but at the same time you fail to realize why it is needed on some levels.

Do you have any idea how many Christian charities use government money?

rockdawg21
03-05-2009, 02:57 AM
I'm not sipping any Kool-aid, thats for people on welfare. :tongue0011:
I always said, those on welfare drink Flavor-Aid because it's cheaper than Kool-Aid.

NateR
03-05-2009, 03:03 AM
Do forgive me for speculating on your thoughts, but it's the only thing I could think seeing as how you basically avoided responding to the points I made and accused me of "class warfare", as if I was trying to make the debate personal. Again, I do apologize for stepping on your toes...:rolleyes:

You still have failed to provide a real answer. You are using a hypothetical to try and argue what is REALITY. I also don't see how you think the Government is going to bankrupt itself when it is taking MORE of our tax dollars to pay for this stimulus. If you think it's kool-aid to believe that shutting down all social programs is a bad idea than frankly you have been drinking a bit of kool-aid yourself. You just keep saying charity is not the job of the government, but at the same time you fail to realize why it is needed on some levels.

Do you have any idea how many Christian charities use government money?

I'm not speaking hypothetically, I'm dealing in reality. I've lived in poverty most of my life and we were even on food stamps for a while when I was a kid. However, like breaking an addict of a drug addiction, sometimes the best way to break people of dependence on government handouts is with a clean break.

Anyways, when you refer to Christian charities using government money, what exactly are you talking about?

Miss Foxy
03-05-2009, 03:05 AM
Sure he went into office with a deficit, but he also went into office on campaign promises to fix the deficit. So far all he's done is show that his campaign promises are as empty as his head.

He promised no earmarks -- his spending bill has over 9000 earmarks.

He promised to rein in wasteful spending -- the stimulus plan is wasteful spending on a level that is absolutely unprecedented in world history.

He promised an ethical administration -- he can't seem to find anyone who isn't a tax cheat to fill his cabinet.




I'm a military veteran from a family of veterans that has a history of military service going back to the Revolutionary War. I'm patriotic 24/7 regardless of our world standing or who happens to be our president. I pray for my president every day, but I will not support his efforts to push us over the edge to socialism. It's not an expression of disloyalty to disagree with our leadership, especially when that leadership is taking us so far away from the principles on which this country was founded.

Obama is an imminent danger to our country and our Constitution. I will continue praying that he reverses his dangerous policies and pray for his well-being but I won't sit here and support him just so we look united and pretty for other countries.
Just an FYI.. I am a military brat and also ex-military spouse, oh and also my brother is in the military along with a lot of relatives so no need to go back to the Revolutionary War...

huan
03-05-2009, 03:06 AM
I also don't see how you think the Government is going to bankrupt itself when it is taking MORE of our tax dollars to pay for this stimulus.

Taxing more doesn't prevent that when spending still exceeds revenue.

NateR
03-05-2009, 03:10 AM
Taxing more doesn't prevent that when spending still exceeds revenue.

Agreed. The government could raise the taxes of every single American citizen to 95% of their income and it still wouldn't pay for Obama's stimulus plan in our lifetimes.

rockdawg21
03-05-2009, 03:15 AM
Sure he went into office with a deficit, but he also went into office on campaign promises to fix the deficit. So far all he's done is show that his campaign promises are as empty as his head.

He promised no earmarks -- his spending bill has over 9000 earmarks.

Obama is an imminent danger to our country and our Constitution. I will continue praying that he reverses his dangerous policies and pray for his well-being but I won't sit here and support him just so we look united and pretty for other countries.
He opened his mouth and made a promise to the American public repeated times. "I will go line through line and cut each earmark bill." It was almost a freaking credo of his campaign. The public ate it up and now the whole country is going to suffer because of this irresponsibility.

Buzzard
03-05-2009, 03:19 AM
Great rhetoric and leftist talking points. Provide some specific examples proving your accusations and I'll address them.

I wasn't a big fan of Bush. His refusal to address our illegal immigration problems, willingness to allow the spending to go unchecked and his tendency to let the democrats have their way in the name of bipartisanship bothered me quite a bit.

Once again, back up your claims with some actual proof. I'm really not interested in more of the unbridled, unprecedented and unnecessary hatred of Bush the leftists have heaped upon us for eight solid years. Frankly, it's boring.

Habeas Corpus
http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/rightsandfreedoms/a/habeuscorpus.htm

Torture

http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/rightsandfreedoms/a/habeuscorpus.htm

I'm sure that you must have heard something on the news about Bush's policies regarding torture. Yes, I believe that waterboarding is a form of torture.

Bush on the Constitution

One specific example, illegal wiretaps.

http://www.gnn.tv/threads/10799/Bush_on_the_Constitution_It_s_just_a_goddamned_pie ce_of_paper

Medic, you seem like a well informed, rational person. Off the top of my head I have listed and linked to information for you. Believe it or not, I liked Bush in the beginning. He quickly made me rethink my opinions of him.

NateR
03-05-2009, 03:22 AM
Bush on the Constitution

One specific example, illegal wiretaps.

http://www.gnn.tv/threads/10799/Bush_on_the_Constitution_It_s_just_a_goddamned_pie ce_of_paper


I would have to question the credibility of that source; but if it's true, then it's a real shame.

Who are the people claiming that Bush said that?

J.B.
03-05-2009, 03:43 AM
I'm not speaking hypothetically, I'm dealing in reality. I've lived in poverty most of my life and we were even on food stamps for a while when I was a kid. However, like breaking an addict of a drug addiction, sometimes the best way to break people of dependence on government handouts is with a clean break.

Anyways, when you refer to Christian charities using government money, what exactly are you talking about?


I agree, but using the comparison to drug addicts is not really fair. People should not be dependent, but when honest people need help at times, it should be there. I never said I advocated being completely dependent on the government, just that we cannot eradicate ALL social programs. I think welfare needs major reform and stricter guidelines. We had this discussion on the old forum, and I said I even agreed with drug testing of people on government aid.

As for Christian charities using government money, it's all over the place. LOTS of church and faith based charities receive money from the government. As I touched on in my first response, I have worked with a charity that my grandparents started pretty much my entire life and since they passed on my mother has continued to run it. We receive money every year from FEMA by way of Catholic Charities. I have a giant book of charities that help people out with everything from food to money for rent and bills, all sorts of stuff. All of them are privately run charities by different church groups. Most of, if not all, of those charities receive money, and grants, and no doubt tax-breaks from the government. These charities are good, and they help people in need.

Like I said, I have seen the people who try to abuse the system, and it's sick, but some people are just hard working people who really need help. Obviously you know, you have been there.

Chuck
03-05-2009, 04:05 AM
Like I said, I have seen the people who try to abuse the system, and it's sick, but some people are just hard working people who really need help. Obviously you know, you have been there.

Absolutely brilliant way to phrase that!


Hey... congrats on getting Kurt back!!!!

But don't let me sidetrack your convo... we can PM about it!! :)

medic92
03-05-2009, 04:16 AM
Just an FYI.. I am a military brat and also ex-military spouse, oh and also my brother is in the military along with a lot of relatives so no need to go back to the Revolutionary War...

Glad to see we have similar family histories. I wasn't attacking you, only giving a brief overview of my family and personal history relative to patriotism and dedication to country. Just a way of showing you that you can be a patriot and still have significant differences with the leaders of the country.

logrus
03-05-2009, 04:26 AM
ehhh

Chuck
03-05-2009, 04:27 AM
Just a way of showing you that you can be a patriot and still have significant differences with the leaders of the country.

That's damn near a definiton of being a patriot in my book....

medic92
03-05-2009, 04:39 AM
Habeas Corpus
http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/rightsandfreedoms/a/habeuscorpus.htm

Torture

http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/rightsandfreedoms/a/habeuscorpus.htm

I'm sure that you must have heard something on the news about Bush's policies regarding torture. Yes, I believe that waterboarding is a form of torture.

Bush on the Constitution

One specific example, illegal wiretaps.

http://www.gnn.tv/threads/10799/Bush_on_the_Constitution_It_s_just_a_goddamned_pie ce_of_paper

Medic, you seem like a well informed, rational person. Off the top of my head I have listed and linked to information for you. Believe it or not, I liked Bush in the beginning. He quickly made me rethink my opinions of him.

I appreciate the information. Concerning the suspension of Habeus Corpus, I took this from the article you referenced:

The Act only suspends the accused person's right to present writs of habeas corpus until after their trial before the military commission has been completed.


So Bush didn't actually suspend habeus corpus, he only changed the order of things. I can see how you could disagree with it, but it hardly rises to the level of "wiping his butt with the Constitution.

As far as the torture issue, it's a difference of opinion. You specifically said you "believe" waterboarding is a form of torture. I don't. So we have a difference of opinion. Still no "wiping his butt with the Constitution".

Onward to the illegal wiretaps. Where's the proof? You referenced an article (which was actually an opinion piece by Doug Thompson) where Bush called the Constitution a *** piece of paper. I'd suggest you research your sources. That piece was written by Doug Thompson, who explains that this wasn't actually true in another piece you can read at http://www.journalisnt.com/content/view/18/. Here's a brief excerpt:

When I first received an email claiming President Bush called the Constitution a "*amned piece of paper," I jumped on it as a great story. Two other emails followed and I was so sure I had it nailed. Others warned me to check it out further.

"It might be wishful thinking," my newsmagazine friend and sometimes editor said. "Somebody could be playing you."

I didn't listen. "Who cares? It makes a great story," I claimed. I was wrong. Nobody else ever confirmed the story and I've since learned the "sources" were simply repeating something they heard second and third hand.

So while you're entitled to your opinions, I don't really see where Bush did all the awful things you outlined, and one story you referenced was admitted to be a lie by the author himself.

Tyburn
03-05-2009, 11:52 AM
That's why GOD created Christian charity. It's not the function of the government.
prey tell how much you give in Christian Charity?

The thing about that is, its voluntary, and not everyone will engage in it, remove the taxation and you'll only have a few christians who are charitable about anything...that wont be enough to support the populas.

Your trouble Nathan is your too much an idealist...its a lovely principle, but it wont work in practise, so suggest a workable alternative :)

Tyburn
03-05-2009, 11:53 AM
I see you've been sipping on the Kool-Aid.:tongue0011:

But, you're exactly right. I want to see millions of Americans starve to death just so I can afford to go eat out at a fancy restaurant more often. Why did it take you so long to figure that out? :rolleyes:

Maybe if you don't want people to think you're Karl Marx, then you should stop talking like him. This class warfare crap is getting old.

Its also, unfortunately real. There is a class system in every country based on wealth, dont tell me your too blind to recognise that, because I dont believe you :mellow:

Primadawn
03-05-2009, 12:54 PM
prey tell how much you give in Christian Charity?

The thing about that is, its voluntary, and not everyone will engage in it, remove the taxation and you'll only have a few christians who are charitable about anything...that wont be enough to support the populas.

Your trouble Nathan is your too much an idealist...its a lovely principle, but it wont work in practise, so suggest a workable alternative :)

Dave, are you listening to yourself? :huh:

Neezar
03-05-2009, 02:03 PM
i was actually referring to Lincoln doing what Bush would later do.....except Lincoln was killed, probably in part to that, and Bush wasn't even attempted.

You are right. Lincoln's enemy had a gun and Bush's could only get in with his shoe.

:laugh:

Neezar
03-05-2009, 02:06 PM
If we started getting stricter and started really helping people find work, a lot of the people who abuse the system would be weeded out.

Just out of curiousity, JB, what would you do with those that were abusing the system and weeded out?

Neezar
03-05-2009, 02:13 PM
I have to say that I haven't read the whole thread but some comments.

I do believe in reform of welfare and stricter guidelines. But then what do you do with the ones who don't meet the requirements? Give them a sleeping bag and point them to the overpass? Let them starve?
Wouldn't this also have the crime rate and starvation rate skyrocketing?

What if Obama created all these job openings he promised and offered them to the head of household on welfare? Take the job or take a hike?
:laugh:

Shouldn't they have to do something for that welfare check?

Miss Foxy
03-05-2009, 02:21 PM
I have to say that I haven't read the whole thread but some comments.

I do believe in reform of welfare and stricter guidelines. But then what do you do with the ones who don't meet the requirements? Give them a sleeping bag and point them to the overpass? Let them starve?
Wouldn't this also have the crime rate and starvation rate skyrocketing?

What if Obama created all these job openings he promised and offered them to the head of household on welfare? Take the job or take a hike?
:laugh:

Shouldn't they have to do something for that welfare check? I agree 100% its like somethings gotta give huh? Politically and economically I have my opinion of providing temporary assistance vs providing a way of life. Some families get on hard times and need our help, others sell they're food stamps and use welfare just for spending money when they have nicer clothes and cars than working people!!

Tyburn
03-05-2009, 04:43 PM
You are right. Lincoln's enemy had a gun and Bush's could only get in with his shoe.

:laugh:
:laugh: :laugh:

Tyburn
03-05-2009, 04:44 PM
Dave, are you listening to yourself? :huh:
I'll admit I havent read the entire thread yet :mellow:

J.B.
03-05-2009, 11:22 PM
Just out of curiousity, JB, what would you do with those that were abusing the system and weeded out?

I think that is something that would have to be looked at on a case by case basis. I don't have one clear answer for you.

Some people are truly guilty of abusing the system on a criminal level, and those people should be punished. A huge chunk of people are addicted to drugs and alcohol, and it's no question that is a huge part of the problem, but that is where I start to draw the line. I don't think we need to invest hundreds of millions of dollars into putting people through rehab. As harsh as this may sound, I think those people have a choice to make in life; Get clean, or die on the streets. There HAS to be a point where the government ceases to provide to individuals who have made no progress on their own.

Of course, at that point, those people will turn to private charities, and those will always be around. However, as I said before, MANY private charities are getting government money and tax breaks, so in a way, the taxpayers still bear some of the burden, even though it is a relatively SMALL burden.

Hughes_GOAT
03-05-2009, 11:29 PM
You are right. Lincoln's enemy had a gun and Bush's could only get in with his shoe.

:laugh:

and a weak arm

Neezar
03-06-2009, 02:49 AM
and a weak arm

:laugh:

Definitely didn't have his aim on.

timmyja
03-06-2009, 01:34 PM
LMAO that guy should have waatched Austin Powers.. It would have been hilarious if W. would have said "Who throws a frickin shoe? Really?"

Crisco
03-06-2009, 01:47 PM
LMAO that guy should have waatched Austin Powers.. It would have been hilarious if W. would have said "Who throws a frickin shoe? Really?"

What kind of a man throws a soe??? Honestly....

huan
03-06-2009, 06:31 PM
http://mybfolder.org/albums/userpics/10001/bushlazerjf2.gif

Neezar
03-06-2009, 06:55 PM
http://mybfolder.org/albums/userpics/10001/bushlazerjf2.gif


:scared0011:

I LOVE IT!

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

rearnakedchoke
03-06-2009, 09:36 PM
:laugh:

Definitely didn't have his aim on.

Good aim, better head movement on Dubya though ....

rearnakedchoke
03-06-2009, 09:38 PM
What kind of a man throws a soe??? Honestly....

a man that has just been thoroughly checked by SS and knows he couldn't slip anytype of weapon past them but his shoes .... and haven't you seen Austin Powers .... doesn't Joe Son use his shoe for something?

NateR
03-06-2009, 10:01 PM
In the Arab world, throwing your shoe at someone is the ultimate insult. I don't know if we even had an equivalent to it here in America.

Tyburn
03-06-2009, 10:02 PM
In the Arab world, throwing your shoe at someone is the ultimate insult. I don't know if we even had an equivalent to it here in America.
its like giving someone the finger :laugh:

rearnakedchoke
03-06-2009, 10:58 PM
its like giving someone the finger :laugh:
some how i don't see that as the equivalent .... i'd rather get flipped the bird then get hit in the head with a wing tip .... or is it the act of throwing the shoe that is insulting? or do you you actually have to hit someone for it to count? is this case, dubya wickedly avoiding getting hit, while keeping a hilarious look on his face, like it was a game ... this guy ended up looking like the loser in it all ... LOL

medic92
03-06-2009, 11:18 PM
It's interesting how people let Obama slide on claiming he inherited the deficit from Bush, despite the fact (provable with video evidence if anyone wants it) that the Bush administration was warning that something needed to be done with Fannie Mae and Bernie Mac from 2001 until the present. 17 times in eight years the Bush administration warned of the upcoming problems, while democrats (Barney Frank in particular) told the Bush administration everything was fine, nothing needed to be addressed in the mortgage industry and it should be left alone.

Funny how the person who claimed Bush called the Constitution a "***damned piece of paper" has yet to address the fact that his source admitted that it was a lie and Bush never said any such thing. What's up Obama supporters? :wink:

que
03-07-2009, 03:40 AM
So...people are excited that our government is 1.75 trillion dollars in debt?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29493021

he's only been in office for 45 days... the national crisis has nothing to do with him as of right now.

it won't be for couple years until we know if he was able to help fix it

J.B.
03-07-2009, 08:08 AM
he's only been in office for 45 days... the national crisis has nothing to do with him as of right now.

it won't be for couple years until we know if he was able to help fix it

Actually it does have something to with him. He was a member of congress when things started getting really bad, and now as president his policies are making people on Wall Street panic. So, Obama has been a part of this problem.

I do agree that it won't be for a year or two until we see if his policies even have a smidgen of the impact that he claims it will.

rockdawg21
03-07-2009, 01:29 PM
he's only been in office for 45 days... the national crisis has nothing to do with him as of right now.

it won't be for couple years until we know if he was able to help fix it
Well as a member of Congress who helped pass some of Bush's bad spending, he is still responsible. But he slammed Bush for bumping the deficit, then effectively increased it by 75% with one bill and now he's looking to do increase it by another 400 billion with this bill that's loaded with 9000 earmarks. Those are the same earmarks he promised to eliminate "line by line".

I personally hate the idea of all that bailout crap. Bad companies should fail, simple as that. If Ford, GM, and Chrysler can't compete, they should fail so they could be overtaken by other good companies. If a mom & pop store can't compete with Wal-Mart, they don't get a bailout. The gov't has no business socializing in the private sector and every single one of those business leaders should know better.

And you're right, we don't know for sure if his plan will work, but spending 1 million dollars worth of taxpayers' money to build a disc golf course in Austin, TX, (they already have 5 courses) isn't going to create more jobs (this was as a part of the 787 billion stimulus). Same with passing 9,000 earmarks in this next bailout. Also, lawyers and people with limited governmental experience (he served, what, 2 years in the Senate? but mostly just campaigned), aren't the best economists.

NateR
03-07-2009, 05:51 PM
he's only been in office for 45 days... the national crisis has nothing to do with him as of right now.

it won't be for couple years until we know if he was able to help fix it

Actually the "stimulus" bill he just signed and the fact that his actions keep causing the stock market to crash, mean that he has everything to do with the national crisis right now.