quote:Originally posted by CashCowMoo: Why is it always Bush's fault?
blame belongs where blame is due.
when Bush was confronted with the his deficit? his reponse was that (relative to GDP) it was not really increasing.
fact is?
the current spending policy is absolutely required to save our way of life.
does that seem like a "turnabout" for me?
it is. here's why, if you think of the whole US economy like a big business, (it is) you have to recognise that somebody had to step up to the plate to unjam the credit crunch.
all business in America is dependant on relatively easy credit. ` the whole of Wall St is about providing that credit.
i don't really feel like writing a five page essay on how Wall St works, but basically it's there to create liquidity for business.
Wall St fell down, the Govt had no choice but to step in.
Bush's policies and the polices created by the GOP Congresses under Clinton and Clinton himself set the stage for this tumble.
do i like the bailouts and spending? no. but blaming Obama is pure propaganda.
people ask me for proof, you and seeking freedom have both done so. i've provided what i can,
but there is never going to be proof, any more than there would be proof that switching two trains heading towards each other onto the same track will cause a wreck until the wreck happens.
i even heard Kudlow today using the word collapse for our system. even he agrees with my diagnosis, and i don't agree with him very often.
it collapsed. the Debts incurred in the repair are not the fault of the people who borrowed the money to fix it, they are the fault of the people caused it.
you'll recall that i was strongly opposed to Hillary? that's because as far as i'm concerned the Clintons bear much of the responsibility too.
the GOP didn't even bother to try to follow the ideals they claimed. there's alot of talk about the economy turning around already, i'm skeptical, but i will say that there would be no talk about it at all without the (Govt) spending that's been done.
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.
IP: Logged |
posted
Oh im not blaming Obama for anything right now. He is dealing with a mess. I just dont agree with some of his approaches. It is still too early.
However, the turnaround is inevitable in my opinion and the economy will fix itself in time. Then Obama will parade himself as the hero of the nation for saving it. That I do NOT want. He should take credit for any assistance, but he should be able to prove it not claim it. His administration throws out numbers like crazy. "We saved so many hundred thousand jobs" REALLY? How do you REALLY know if your action you just took sved 325,000 jobs? They dont...they just make up numbers and throw them out there.
I dont like that either.
-------------------- It isn't so much that liberals are ignorant. It's just that they know so many things that aren't so.
IP: Logged |
posted
Then Obama will parade himself as the hero of the nation for saving it.
well, that's inevitable cash.
what i see as the cause of the collapse was banks at war with each other. playing each other for suckers, which it's now obvious many were (suckers).
that's freemarketism.
but the middle class becomes the collateral damage, and the govt's job really is to stop the collateral damage.
they have done a rather poor job of that.
the Great Depression ended with WW2. not before. so don't be so sure that it would have fixed itself. or that what would have come out of it would have been good for what makes America Gret and that is a vibrant middle class. ALL third world countries have a few very wealthy people and a few people in the middle class, but what makes them third world countries is the huge poor class compared to the middle class.
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by glassman: Then Obama will parade himself as the hero of the nation for saving it.
well, that's inevitable cash.
what i see as the cause of the collapse was banks at war with each other. playing each other for suckers, which it's now obvious many were (suckers).
that's freemarketism.
but the middle class becomes the collateral damage, and the govt's job really is to stop the collateral damage.
they have done a rather poor job of that.
the Great Depression ended with WW2. not before. so don't be so sure that it would have fixed itself. or that what would have come out of it would have been good for what makes America Gret and that is a vibrant middle class. ALL third world countries have a few very wealthy people and a few people in the middle class, but what makes them third world countries is the huge poor class compared to the middle class.
So then why is the Obama administration coming out saying they cant rule out raising taxes on the middle class anymore after promising relief? Is that change I can believe in?
IP: Logged |
posted
do you know what Reagan paid in taxes during and right after WW2?
The most significant impact of World War II on the individual income tax was to transform it to a mass tax that was broadly based and progressive. In 1941, changes were made to both rates and base. Higher tax rates were adopted and lower exemptions were allowed, thus expanding the base. Higher tax rates were adopted again in 1942. With the inclusion of a surtax, tax rates ranged from 13 percent on the first $2000 of taxable income to 82 percent on taxable income in excess of $200,000.
Obama may have promised to not raise taxes on the middle class.
can he keep it? i dunno. don't care.
taxes are at the lowest rates since the war.
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by glassman: Then Obama will parade himself as the hero of the nation for saving it.
well, that's inevitable cash.
what i see as the cause of the collapse was banks at war with each other. playing each other for suckers, which it's now obvious many were (suckers).
that's freemarketism.
but the middle class becomes the collateral damage, and the govt's job really is to stop the collateral damage.
they have done a rather poor job of that.
the Great Depression ended with WW2. not before. so don't be so sure that it would have fixed itself. or that what would have come out of it would have been good for what makes America Gret and that is a vibrant middle class. ALL third world countries have a few very wealthy people and a few people in the middle class, but what makes them third world countries is the huge poor class compared to the middle class.
So then why is the Obama administration coming out saying they cant rule out raising taxes on the middle class anymore after promising relief? Is that change I can believe in?
It's change I can believe. Instead of sticking his head in the sand like Uncle George did, taxes will be raised if it is needed. Uncle George, cut taxes while trying to fund a war. That was insanity. Ideology is one thing but a Leader needs to adapt to the situation.
I have to say that I respect George Sr because even though he gave us the famous line of "Read My Lips" no new taxes, he had enough intestinal fortitude to do what was right for the country at the time even though he knew it would probably cost him re-election.
The raising of taxes is not party specific. Yes, the Politico's would like the masses to believe it is but it is actually driven as much by outside sources as the parties them self.
IP: Logged |
posted
For ‘Death Panels’ Before She Was Against Them? Palin Endorsed End Of Life Counseling As Governor In recent weeks, right-wing groups have been pushing the myth that health care reform will somehow kill seniors. One of the most high profile voices pushing this lie has been Sarah Palin, who claimed President Obama will institute bureaucratic “death panels.” Today, again on her Facebook page, she continued the attack. Though some Republicans have rebuffed this absurd, inaccurate notion — like Johnny Isakson (R-GA), who called such talk “nuts” — others, like Newt Gingrich, have piled on to agree with Palin.
However, on April 16th 2008, then Gov. Sarah Palin endorsed some of the same end of life counseling she now decries as a form of euthanasia. In a proclamation announcing “Healthcare Decisions Day,” Palin urged public facilities to provide better information about advance directives, and made it clear that it is critical for seniors to be informed of such options:
WHEREAS, Healthcare Decisions Day is designed to raise public awareness of the need to plan ahead for healthcare decisions, related to end of life care and medical decision-making whenever patients are unable to speak for themselves and to encourage the specific use of advance directives to communicate these important healthcare decisions. [...]
WHEREAS, one of the principal goals of Healthcare Decisions Day is to encourage hospitals, nursing homes, assisted living facilities, continuing care retirement communities, and hospices to participate in a statewide effort to provide clear and consistent information to the public about advance directives, as well as to encourage medical professionals and lawyers to volunteer their time and efforts to improve public knowledge and increase the number of Alaska’s citizens with advance directives.
WHEREAS, the Foundation for End of Life Care in Juneau, Alaska, and other organizations throughout the United States have endorsed this event and are committed to educating the public about the importance of discussing healthcare choices and executing advance directives.
Though this proclamation is now deleted from the Alaska governor’s website, it shows that Palin’s current fear-mongering is purely political. Palin is not the only conservative leader completely flip-flopping on this issue. Merely months ago, Gingrich too endorsed end of life counseling. At a conference in April of this year, Gingrich said advance directives can “save money” while also helping to “decrease the stress felt by caregivers.”
-------------------- Wise men learn more from fools than fools from the wise.
IP: Logged |
posted
British Growing Tired of GOP Lies About UK Health Care It’s too bad that repeated, endless, flagrant dishonesty doesn’t do much of anything to damage a politician’s ability to be taken seriously as a sober-minded centrist deal-maker, or Chuck Grassley would be in a world of pain:
Sen. Edward M. Kennedy would be refused treatment for his brain tumor in England — at least according to one of the allegations lobbed at Britain’s state-funded health-care service recently by critics of President Obama’s proposed health-care reforms. Such claims have irked British health officials, who say they are misleading, exaggerated and sometimes just plain wrong. [...]
One of the most surprising of these was the rumor — given an airing by Senate Finance Committee Chairman Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa) — that Kennedy, 77, would not receive treatment for his brain tumor if he were in England because he is too old.
“That’s just wrong,” a British Health Department spokesman said. “The NHS in England provides health services on the basis of clinical need, irrespective of age or ability to pay.”
Note that there’s actually a two-fold lie here. First Grassley falsely implies that congressional Democrats are proposing to create an NHS-like system. Second, he lies about how the NHS operates. And he pays no price for it. He’ll still be Max Baucus’s key partner in crafting health care legislation. Comments 80 SharePermalink
-------------------- Wise men learn more from fools than fools from the wise.
IP: Logged |
August 12, 2009, 6:01 pm Stephen Hawking Defends Care in Britain By Bernie Becker
The physicist Stephen Hawking is defending Britain’s National Health Service after an editorial in Investor’s Business Daily said Mr. Hawking “wouldn’t have a chance in the U.K.,” where the health service would have deemed his life “essentially worthless.”
The problem with the editorial, of course, is that Dr. Hawking, the author of “A Brief History of Time,” is very much a Briton — born in Oxford and currently a professor at the University of Cambridge.
it's getting to be so ridiculous that reasonable people might just give trying to point out all the lies huh?
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.
IP: Logged |
Bush signs Schiavo legislation Fate of brain-damaged woman once again in a judge's hands
updated 6:45 a.m. CT, Mon., March. 21, 2005
PINELLAS PARK, Fla. - The fate of Terri Schiavo once again was in the hands of a judge early Monday following an extraordinary, day-long political fight over the brain-damaged woman that consumed both chambers of Congress and prompted the president to rush back to the White House.
Taking the Senate’s lead, the House early Monday passed a bill to let the woman’s parents ask a federal judge to prolong Schiavo’s life by reinserting her feeding tube. President Bush signed the measure less than an hour later.
An attorney for her parents, Bob and Mary Schindler, later arrived at federal district court in Tampa and filed a request for an emergency injunction to keep their daughter fed.
the whole GOP Govt got involved in making these decisions.
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.
IP: Logged |
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Monday, August 10, 2009 4:20 PM PT
Health Care: There might not be a "death panel," as Sarah Palin described it, but federal bureaucrats will be making end-of-life decisions. That's why state-run medicine is a leading cause of death in Britain and Canada.
A post on the former Alaska governor's Facebook page has caused a stir by discussing openly what many privately fear and something we have written about. End-of-life counseling and efforts to measure cost-effectiveness of treatment will combine in a perfect storm to ration care in a way that lets the government decide who lives and who dies.
Former Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean's response was, "She made that up." Oregon resident Barbara Wagner might beg to differ — as she begs to stay alive. Last year, the 64-year-old received news that her cancer, which had been in remission, had returned. Her only hope was a life-extending drug that her doctor prescribed for her.
The problem was that the drug cost $4,000 a month. The state-run Oregon Health Plan said no, that it was not cost-effective. Oregon's equivalent of a "death panel" sent her a letter saying it would cover drugs for a physician-assisted death. Those drugs would cost only $50 or so. Oregon could afford that.
"It was horrible," Wagner told ABCNews.com. "I got a letter in the mail that basically said if you want to take the pills, we will help you get that from the doctor and we will stand there and watch you die.
"But we won't give you the medication to live."
The $4,000 could be better spent on someone else.
what they don't tell yo is that the drug is Tarceva. it is NOT a cure in any sense and does not result in remission.
it extends life by weeks.
it's also a very new hence expensive drug and i happened to play the news on it a few years back (OSIP) it was quite a ride....
the WSJ ran a negative article on it but it hink they did that to get short action going when it overran
UPDATE: Key Tarceva Study May Disappoint Amid Cancer Data - WSJ.com The Tarceva study, known as Saturn, measures the therapy's use in lung cancer as a maintenance therapy - when it is given after chemotherapy but before new ... Alexa Traffic Rank for http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20090514-721367.html: 345online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20090514-721367.html - Cached - Similar
that article is now unavailable...
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.
IP: Logged |
posted
then there's the issue of "privatising" social security, boy that plan would have been just great huh? but hey, the govt can't do anything right and the private industry is so much better...
it's really odd to hear that coming from elceted representatives now...
the IBD ran an editorial demonising the AARP for getting in bed with Obama, then when Obama said they were endorsing health care reform? the AARP said they were not endorisng it...
Geezers With Pitchforks Vs. The AARP
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Friday, August 07, 2009 4:20 PM PT
Having paid into the system all their lives and now AARP dues, they are upset that illegal aliens will be covered by legislation that eliminates any proof-of-citizenship requirement. And they are furious that AARP would support "reform" that includes "end-of-life counseling" as if they're being encouraged to get out of the way.
They know that the administration's plan is one big government "do not resuscitate" order for seniors, and they don't want some government bureaucrat looking at some spreadsheet pulling their plug.
quote:And they are furious that AARP would support "reform" that includes "end-of-life counseling" as if they're being encouraged to get out of the way.
They know that the administration's plan is one big government "do not resuscitate" order for seniors, and they don't want some government bureaucrat looking at some spreadsheet pulling their plug.
Is that really in an Investors Business Daily article?
-------------------- Nashoba Holba Chepulechi Adventures in microcapitalism...
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ace of Spades: Is this a joke???
a whole thread about 3 planes??
....You could talk about spending too much in Iraq
....You could talk about spending too much on the bailouts
....You could talk about speding too much on Obamas frickin new allergy-friendly dog for all I care
but why even waste an ounce of energy on something so petty.
Who in their right mind....would try and compare the auto companies' executives flying on private jets to a hearing to request billions in auto bailouts.........to the 3 planes the the top officials are buying
An acurate comparison would be if the United States never did the bailouts that Both Bush and Obama pushed.....and the U.S. did in fact fall into financial ruins, and Obama flew to china in a brand new billion dollar plane built by NASA, and begged China for a huge bailout to save the U.S. economy. China's top governmen officials would look at obama like he's a f'n Nut.
But that's not what is happening here...I bet in some way, shape, or form....Someone connected to the Auto Industry is behind that article......it's deffinately not anybody with a clue.
Listen up people, if this isnt a prime example of blatant hypocrisy by our government then tell me what is. The only reason it is getting cold shouldered is because the Obama administration is in power, and we wouldnt want to be critical. If this was 2005,2006, etc....wow it would all be Bush's fault just like everything else is today according to some.
I remember watching those hearings when those congressmen were blasting the auto CEOs for flying in on corporate jets while asking for bailouts. NOW....the government needs tax payer bailouts of itself and yet it is BUYING jets let alone using what they have!
Hypocrisy is the problem, and blatant hypocrisy was the point of the thread. Not even a partisan issue. How it is being played down is though. Im not saying they shouldnt fly jets. I could care less, but when I fly into your neck of the woods on one dont come after me.
Cash Cash Cash....what are we going to do with you.
Are you pulling our leg...or do you realy not have the ability to see the difference here.
Bro...You're comparing apples with organges
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by T e x: too effin' rrrridiculous...
quote:And they are furious that AARP would support "reform" that includes "end-of-life counseling" as if they're being encouraged to get out of the way.
They know that the administration's plan is one big government "do not resuscitate" order for seniors, and they don't want some government bureaucrat looking at some spreadsheet pulling their plug.
Is that really in an Investors Business Daily article?
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[BadOne]](graemlins/headbash.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
