another obama vacation wtf

[Jim2Dokes 3]

The Bush and the left wing **** is getting very old. The Democrats have had control for the last six years while Bush was president and five years under Obama. Eleven straight years of control by the Democrats. The unemployment and inflation is because of the failed programs of the Democrats. All of the Housing problems and the high cost of insurance is caused by the Democrats. Obama let the Bush tax breaks expire on companies buying new equipment to expand and hire new employees.

Where is the pipe line from Canada? The same one that Obama said that he would approve the first week of his second term. Speaking of Canada, ask them what they think of National insurance. Government run insurance? I know you are joking with us when you said that.

 

You statements suggest you have no idea what your talking about. Our economy was in the tank after Bush, damn close to another depression. Housing market is now close to be back on track in many markets, stock market is thriving, more people will be insured than ever before, we are no longer at war (subjective), consumer confidence is high, and most of Obamas programs are being willing accepted by Republican run states (despite their initial reactions or political games). The AFA does not even truly take effect until October and insurance prices have been rising to all-tea highs for the last 30 years, where have you been? All of this, and you want to talk about a Pipeline? I want some damn high speed rail, better bridges, and more infastructure. Which would be "government jobs" but would transform the economy. Think Eisenhower. Not only that but we should be investing in cleaner energy and not pipelines. The oil and coal industry needed huge government grants to initially become efficient. So the right wing reasoning around not wanting cleaner energy because of govt costs and less efficiency is hypocritical. But that is generally how y'all roll.

Edited June 15, 2013 by Jim2Dokes

[AlabamaDuck 0]

Every single industrial nation on earth has rejected our health care model. Can you explain that?

 

As far as the right wings performance since Obama has become President, it has been obstruct everything. Make sure nothing gets done. Despite that he is getting things done and we are all better off than when he began. We would just be even better off if the right would just get rid of their extremism. Why on earth would we not criticize that.

 

I think the right's performance is best exemplified by their rejection of the grand bargain that David Brooks called the Mother of No brainers. People are still criticizing Bush and the right wing because they flat out earned it with their extremism. I am curious do you know that this present NSA upset is about Bush's Patriot Act where he allowed himself to spy on us with no oversight. Fortunately, OBama went for oversight to make sure there is a check and balance system in place. Odd, unfettered domestic spying on Americans by Bush to combat terrorism. The right says that was a good thing. Obama does the same but basically has to be monitored by a panel to protect citizens to combat terrorism. The right says the scandall of the century.

 

I am curious, did you notice that Bush cancelled an overseas trip recently because it was threatened that he would be arrested as a war criminal. I bet you're tired of the international sentiment that rejects him and our right wing as well. Seems to me you should spend more time looking into why virtually the entire world has rejected Bush's legacy and our right wing than being sensitive about attacks against the rights dogma.

 

 

Socialist countries can`t have Insurance competing against each other. They want their one and only National Insurance that they can set the price, coverage and penalties. They have a hard time understanding why I might want a different policy than the one you want.

The Patriot Act? Are you talking about the Idea of spying that was put before Congress to study, debate and to vote on? The one that still required permission from a Judge to place wire taps on American citizens?

No, you can not compare what Obama has done to the Patriot Act. He is spying on our elected officials as well as any group that voices different views.

I can tell by your post that if he told you to spy on your friends, you would. You would do what ever was asked of you by the Fuhrer. Stealing e-mails and personal phone calls from the people that he has sworn to protect, might get him impeached.

[REMND 0]

Here is a description of Bush's use of the Patriot Act to authorize warrantless spying on our citizens in country. It was stopped in 2007 or so when it was uncovered. Now, it has to be approved by a panel and the scope is limited. The right did not complain when the scope was broad and it was warrantless. Now that it it requires oversight with limited scope, they cry foul.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/NSA_warrantless_surveillance_controversy

 

You call all the industrialized countries on earth socialist!! What, the government owns all the means of production. You might tell their citizens that because it is news to them.

 

You think I sound like the fuhrer. Heck, I have never seen a right winger go down the 14 points of fascism without them embracing virtually all of them. At most I could only handle a few. Your projecting.

 

Again, no industrial country wants our health care system. You seem to think it is because of ideology. No, it is because their systems are delivering the care. Ours has been found wanting and right wing ideology is depriving us of the benefit the citizens of all industrial countries routinely enjoy at a fraction of the cost.

[AlabamaDuck 0]

Here is a description of Bush's use of the Patriot Act to authorize warrantless spying on our citizens in country. It was stopped in 2007 or so when it was uncovered. Now, it has to be approved by a panel and the scope is limited. The right did not complain when the scope was broad and it was warrantless. Now that it it requires oversight with limited scope, they cry foul.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/NSA_warrantless_surveillance_controversy

 

You call all the industrialized countries on earth socialist!! What, the government owns all the means of production. You might tell their citizens that because it is news to them.

 

You think I sound like the fuhrer. Heck, I have never seen a right winger go down the 14 points of fascism without them embracing virtually all of them. At most I could only handle a few. Your projecting.

 

Again, no industrial country wants our health care system. You seem to think it is because of ideology. No, it is because their systems are delivering the care. Ours has been found wanting and right wing ideology is depriving us of the benefit the citizens of all industrial countries routinely enjoy at a fraction of the cost.

 

No, I was calling Obama "Fuhere".

[REMND 0]

You statements suggest you have no idea what your talking about. Our economy was in the tank after Bush, damn close to another depression. Housing market is now close to be back on track in many markets, stock market is thriving, more people will be insured than ever before, we are no longer at war (subjective), consumer confidence is high, and most of Obamas programs are being willing accepted by Republican run states (despite their initial reactions or political games). The AFA does not even truly take effect until October and insurance prices have been rising to all-tea highs for the last 30 years, where have you been? All of this, and you want to talk about a Pipeline? I want some damn high speed rail, better bridges, and more infastructure. Which would be "government jobs" but would transform the economy. Think Eisenhower. Not only that but we should be investing in cleaner energy and not pipelines. The oil and coal industry needed huge government grants to initially become efficient. So the right wing reasoning around not wanting cleaner energy because of govt costs and less efficiency is hypocritical. But that is generally how y'all roll.

 

The clean energy issue has always bothered me. We were the leading country on that and then Reagan trivialized it to the point it all but disappeared. Now we are playing catch up. What a golden opportunity we lost, especially since new sources of energy usually trigger a jump in the economy. Imagine if we had developed renewable resources by now.

 

As far as using government resources for the infrastructure, I always point out the Rural Electrification Program. Without government leading the way, rural households would probably still be using candles for illumination. I bet it would be mostly dirt roads as well. I am not sure about sewage removal and storm drains. Just can't see the population density being sufficient enough to pay for it without government involvement.

Edited June 15, 2013 by REMND

[Jim2Dokes 3]

No, I was calling Obama "Fuhere".

 

Which doesn't help. It clearly states your view on things and any point of logical argument is pointless.

[potownhero 0]

The clean energy issue has always bothered me. We were the leading country on that and then Reagan trivialized it to the point it all but disappeared. Now we are playing catch up. What a golden opportunity we lost, especially since new sources of energy usually trigger a jump in the economy. Imagine if we had developed renewable resources by now.

 

As far as using government resources for the infrastructure, I always point out the Rural Electrification Program. Without government leading the way, rural households would probably still be using candles for illumination. I bet it would be mostly dirt roads as well. I am not sure about sewage removal and storm drains. Just can't see the population density being sufficient enough to pay for it without government involvement.

 

What's wrong with cheap natural gas or the new oil finds? Why are you so enamored with some fairy-tale that might not exist?

Edited June 18, 2013 by potownhero
sp.

[REMND 0]

What's wrong with cheap natural gas or the new oil finds? Why are you so enamored with some fairy-tale that might not exist?

 

Nothing is wrong with it. Why do you think it is an either or issue. It isn't.

 

T Bone Pickens has invested millions in wind farms. The projections right now are that over 20% of our electrical energy consumption will come from wind farms by 2030. China has made billions from the construction and sale of solar panels. We were the leaders of that industry before 1980. This is what you refer to as a fairy tale. How did you come to that conclusion when guys like T Bone Pickens disagree, china has developed a profitable industry off of solar and more.

 

Here is a fairy tale for you. Going from rockets barely getting of the launch pad to putting a man on the moon in ten years. No way can that be done.

[AlabamaDuck 0]

You statements suggest you have no idea what your talking about. Our economy was in the tank after Bush, damn close to another depression. Housing market is now close to be back on track in many markets, stock market is thriving, more people will be insured than ever before, we are no longer at war (subjective), consumer confidence is high, and most of Obamas programs are being willing accepted by Republican run states (despite their initial reactions or political games). The AFA does not even truly take effect until October and insurance prices have been rising to all-tea highs for the last 30 years, where have you been? All of this, and you want to talk about a Pipeline? I want some damn high speed rail, better bridges, and more infastructure. Which would be "government jobs" but would transform the economy. Think Eisenhower. Not only that but we should be investing in cleaner energy and not pipelines. The oil and coal industry needed huge government grants to initially become efficient. So the right wing reasoning around not wanting cleaner energy because of govt costs and less efficiency is hypocritical. But that is generally how y'all roll.

 

 

The Dems had control the last 6 years under Bush. Pelosi told Congress to make housing affordable and people were given loans for twice as much as they could afford. Bush tried to stop it twice, writing letters to Pelosi and Reed. The housing market was destined to fail.

The Democrats have had full power the last eleven years and if the had completed 1/10th of what they promised we would be much better off.

The spending under Bush was used mainly for the Military that Clinton had gutted. The spending under Obama is give a ways to his supporters. The out of control massive spending has damaged our country more than any other single event. But all you hear is that it is Bush`s fault.

We can give our Muslim friends New fighter Jets and Tanks but the Pipeline that would create jobs thousands of jobs here in the USA is just a pipe dream.

Has Obama done anything that helps our country? This is a serious question.

[Scotty88 0]

China has made billions from the construction and sale of solar panels. We were the leaders of that industry before 1980.

 

Carter actually had solar panels on the White House.

 

Too bad Reagan immediately removed.

[REMND 0]

http://pleasecutthecrap.typepad.com/main/what-has-obama-done-since-january-20-2009.html

 

 

http://whatthe****hasobamadonesofar.com/

 

 

Plus he repaired our international creds.

 

The whole economy is better under him despite an absolute refusal by repubs to cooperate with him in hopes they could maintain a tanked economy and keep Americans in dire straights so they could elect Romney.

 

Republican governors who first refused the AFA are now wanting in to help their citizens so affordable health care will be available to their citizens where it was not before.

 

As far as Clinton negatively impacting our military, how? We were paying more than the rest of the world combined. That is one of the most bizarre stats that I know of where 5% of the worlds population pays more for its military than 95% of the world.

 

If anyone trashed the military it is Bush. Repair of the equipment we used and the injuries we incurred in the Iraq and Afghanistan war may cost more than the dollars spent in the war. I could understand the Afghanistan war but not Iraq.

[ND3 0]

The Dems had control the last 6 years under Bush.

 

This is simply false.

 

Can we please get some sources for all these "facts" that you guys keep posting? I am inclined to believe absolutely nothing that anybody says on an internet message board if they don't supply a source for their information.

 

For example: http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0774721.html

 

Composition of Congress by Year

 

2001-2003

Senate- 50 Dem, 50 Rep

House- 212 Dem, 221 Rep, 2 Ind

 

2003-2005

Senate- 48 Dem, 51 Rep, 1 Ind

House- 205 Dem, 229 Rep, 1 Ind

 

2005-2007

Senate- 44 Dem, 55 Rep, 1 Ind

House- 202 Dem, 231 Rep, 1 Ind, 1 Vacant

 

2007-2009

Senate- 49 Dem, 49 Rep, 2 Ind

House- 223 Dem, 198 Rep, 4 Ind

 

2009-2011

Senate- 57 Dem, 41 Rep, 2 Ind

House- 257 Dem, 178 Rep, 1 Vacant

 

2011-2013

Senate- 51 Dem, 47 Rep, 2 Ind

House- 193 Dem, 242 Rep

 

2013-2015

Senate- 54 Dem, 45 Rep, 1 Ind

House- 201 Dem, 234 Rep

 

Also, it's important to remember that you need 60 votes to stop a filibuster in the Senate.

[echo88 74]

Yes, I agree.

 

The NSA super snoop center.

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/14/nsa-utah-data-facility

 

That place is gonna be awesome. I really wish the public wasn't so misinformed about what is done with all of that data. I guess that's what happens when a disgruntled employee takes it upon himself to disclose sources and methods that will allow threats to escape detection. It should be clear after his last few leaks that his agenda has nothing to do with informing/protecting the public. It puts us in a really tough spot because, in order to explain how the privacy of innocent Americans is still preserved, it requires more disclosure of details that are classified for a reason--not because Americans would fear it, but rather because our enemies can bypass incredibly genius methods of identifying them...

[REMND 0]

Carter actually had solar panels on the White House.

 

Too bad Reagan immediately removed.

 

Its true and he cut the government credits by 2/3rds or so to discourage investment there. Then we fell behind. He opted for additional drilling for oil.

The CAF standards by Ford, the focus on using coal instead off oil for electricity production and then the additional oil from drilling resulted in a brief period of freedom from foreign oil. We got a brief short term benefit at the cost of long term energy independence with renewable resources.

 

When a guy like T Bone Pickens makes billions on oil production and then gambles it on wind farms, people ought to take some notice that it is not some pie in the sky dream.

[Scotty88 0]

This is simply false.

 

Can we please get some sources for all these "facts" that you guys keep posting?

 

No, that's why the discussion goes off topic and then becomes nothing more than name calling.

 

The vacation "wtf" got debunked then it became a scary narrative of liberals phone tapping friends and family at the behest of our president, then the go-to "socialist" barb.

[potownhero 0]

Nothing is wrong with it. Why do you think it is an either or issue. It isn't.

 

You're the one trying to force the decision. You're saying that there must be both. Why not let the free market and personal choice make the determination?

So where would you have gotten the funds for financing this pipe dream of yours? Why can't it survive on it's own?

 

(1)T Bone Pickens has invested millions in wind farms. (2)The projections right now are that over 20% of our electrical energy consumption will come from wind farms by 2030. (3)China has made billions from the construction and sale of solar panels. We were the leaders of that industry before 1980. This is what you refer to as a fairy tale. How did you come to that conclusion when guys like T Bone Pickens disagree, china has developed a profitable industry off of solar and more.

 

Yeah a fairy-tale because the industry wouldn't be anything without the economic distortions / inefficiencies forced by government.

 

1) Yeah TBoone did; so what. That was his and his investor's choice to do what they want with their money...and they're lobbying DC to get funds for that cause. Where's your distaste for the environmental lobby buying political influence?

(2) Projections? Are you really going off of projections being put out by the left? How have they fared on (a) Medicare costs (b) Obamacare costs © the sea level rise and etc.

(3) Yeah, China can see that our (and other Western) idiotic political class was going to waste money subsidizing this and not consider ROI or other economic common sense. If logic and common sense prevailed in DC then neither China nor anyone else would be making money off the industry.

 

Here is a fairy tale for you. Going from rockets barely getting of the launch pad to putting a man on the moon in ten years. No way can that be done.

 

Wish we had more democrats like Kennedy who believed that the best way to create economic activity is through a more competitive corporate tax rates. Kennedy wouldn't be allowed to be in the Democratic party nowadays.

[REMND 0]

You're the one trying to force the decision. You're saying that there must be both. Why not let the free market and personal choice make the determination?

So where would you have gotten the funds for financing this pipe dream of yours? Why can't it survive on it's own?

 

 

 

Yeah a fairy-tale because the industry wouldn't be anything without the economic distortions / inefficiencies forced by government.

 

1) Yeah TBoone did; so what. That was his and his investor's choice to do what they want with their money...and they're lobbying DC to get funds for that cause. Where's your distaste for the environmental lobby buying political influence?

(2) Projections? Are you really going off of projections being put out by the left? How have they fared on (a) Medicare costs (b) Obamacare costs © the sea level rise and etc.

(3) Yeah, China can see that our (and other Western) idiotic political class was going to waste money subsidizing this and not consider ROI or other economic common sense. If logic and common sense prevailed in DC then neither China nor anyone else would be making money off the industry.

 

 

 

Wish we had more democrats like Kennedy who believed that the best way to create economic activity is through a more competitive corporate tax rates. Kennedy wouldn't be allowed to be in the Democratic party nowadays.

 

No it is not a fairy tale. Only free market evangelists think so. My personal choice is that we have both. Million feel that way. Stop interfering with our free choice. I take it you want to get rid of the oil subsidies mentioned in this link since they are clearly not free market programs. http://priceofoil.org/fossil-fuel-subsidies/.

 

Your projecting on Kennedy. Kennedy would be called a socialist today by the Right wingers. He would demand a huge tax increase to get to his proposed rates. http://www.ontheissues.org/celeb/John_F__Kennedy_Tax_Reform.htm

 

The dems are a big tent. They go all the way from liberals to Rockefeller republicans and everything in between. Moderate republicans are considered RINOs and out of the dialogue. That leaves the uber extreme right wingers as the only republicans with creds to their members. Heck they have even accused the conservative Pat Buchanon as being a RINO in the past. The right wing is the most intolerant group I have ever seen since radical feminists of yesteryear who I consider to be the mirror image of today's republican party. Both think they are right on all issues with metaphysical certitude and any member who disagrees is a traitor.

[nickman54 0]

I appreciate your opinion on some of the clean energy stuff that you want. I actually work for a company that considers itself to be renewable. I have to disagree with you on wind and solar though. I have a wind farm about ten miles to the east of me and I have seen the negative effects that it has had on the area. The company that came in offered big money to the farmers that owned a lot of the ground in the area, and they all bought in. The farm went up and is fully functional now. It has become an eyesore for the locals and most people that live near or on the farm have seen there property values drop up to 25% to comparables in the area. Also most of the wind turbines have a short life of usefulness, which coupled with the initial cost makes them a bad investment. Solar is much like wind in this regard as well. If you do a quick google search on T Boone and his wind farm you will see that he has abandoned his "investment". T Boone himself also said that Obama has no energy policy and discussed his support for the Keystone Project that Obama has rejected as well.

[REMND 0]

I appreciate your opinion on some of the clean energy stuff that you want. I actually work for a company that considers itself to be renewable. I have to disagree with you on wind and solar though. I have a wind farm about ten miles to the east of me and I have seen the negative effects that it has had on the area. The company that came in offered big money to the farmers that owned a lot of the ground in the area, and they all bought in. The farm went up and is fully functional now. It has become an eyesore for the locals and most people that live near or on the farm have seen there property values drop up to 25% to comparables in the area. Also most of the wind turbines have a short life of usefulness, which coupled with the initial cost makes them a bad investment. Solar is much like wind in this regard as well. If you do a quick google search on T Boone and his wind farm you will see that he has abandoned his "investment". T Boone himself also said that Obama has no energy policy and discussed his support for the Keystone Project that Obama has rejected as well.

 

Your comments about the wind farms totally need to be in the national debate on wind energy. As far as Obama having no energy policy, you must mean none that you agree with. That is not a lack of an energy policy. Plus, I thought he was approving the Keystone pipeline years ago. Then the Gulf oil spill and the unrelenting political obstructions of the right made it impossible to do politically.

 

I think Keystone is just a matter of time but we will see. In general, conservation, wind energy and the like will provide us with far more energy security in the future and that is what we need. Oh, don't forget, groundwater is critical. The pipeline, fracking and the like is not very friendly to groundwater. Groundwater is every bit as important in my mind as Oil, especially when you have conservation, wind power, solar power and more that can save us barrels of oil. A saved barrel is more important to me than a new one. It is not an either or though. Right now it is a both and with the future goal slanted toward renewable.

[nickman54 0]

Your comments about the wind farms totally need to be in the national debate on wind energy. As far as Obama having no energy policy, you must mean none that you agree with. That is not a lack of an energy policy. Plus, I thought he was approving the Keystone pipeline years ago. Then the Gulf oil spill and the unrelenting political obstructions of the right made it impossible to do politically.

 

I think Keystone is just a matter of time but we will see. In general, conservation, wind energy and the like will provide us with far more energy security in the future and that is what we need. Oh, don't forget, groundwater is critical. The pipeline, fracking and the like is not very friendly to groundwater. Groundwater is every bit as important in my mind as Oil, especially when you have conservation, wind power, solar power and more that can save us barrels of oil. A saved barrel is more important to me than a new one. It is not an either or though. Right now it is a both and with the future goal slanted toward renewable.

 

1-Where has the right objected at any point to the Keystone Project, every one of them has encouraged it that I have seen, even the "RINOS"?

 

2-At what cost to the end consumer? It is easy to say you are for these types of energy, but are you willing to pay 8 to 20 cents per KW for them, that's what they were seeing in Oklahoma.

 

The company I work for sells HVAC units that are five times more "efficient" than any natural gas furnace on the market, but everything is "rated" using a different ISO standard. This confuses consumers, just as the whole energy debate is. People think they are buying the most efficient and in a lot of circumstances they are not, because most aren't product engineers.