It makes conservatives’ heads spin when President Obama is compared to their idol, Ronald Reagan. It particularly drives them crazy when the comparison comes out in President Obama’s favor. So, let’s do it! Here are five ways that President Obama has been a better president than Ronny was.
5. No real scandals.
Oh sure. “Benghazi!” “IRS!” “Fast and Furious!” You hear those words come flying out of the mouths of Fox News talking heads, and others in right-wing media on an almost daily basis.
But consider this: After several years, and multiple investigations, those faux “scandals” that have been pumped up by the right have produced no evidence of wrong doing on the part of the president, or anybody in his administration. So far, not a single indictment of an Obama administration official has been handed down. In fact, in the main one of those events, Benghazi, a Republican led House panel largely said the Obama administration was telling the truth.
Compare that to the Iran-Contra scandal during the Reagan administration, that led to the indictments of several top Reagan administration officials. National Security Advisor John Poindexter, and Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger, were convicted of various offenses. CIA chief William Casey was implicated in wrongdoing, but died before he could be brought to trial.
4. Better unemployment numbers.
Both presidents Reagan and Obama had to deal with recessions. When Ronald Reagan took office in January 1981, unemployment stood at 7.5 percent. After holding steady, or declining a bit, over the first half of 1981, unemployment shot up, peaking at 10.8 percent in November and December of 1982, before beginning to drop again. At the beginning of Reagan’s seventh year in office, in January of 1987, the unemployment rate stood at 6.6 percent.
President Obama came into office with an unemployment rate of 7.8 percent. Like the rate during the beginning of the Reagan era, unemployment climbed before beginning to settle, in late 2010. Unemployment currently stands at 5.6 percent as President Obama begins his seventh year in office.
Consider this: President Obama has only seen one month in which unemployment was as high as 10 percent, and the rate has never gone higher than that. President Reagan presided over an unemployment rate that, for a few months, flirted with 11 percent, and remained at or above 10 percent for 10 straight months before beginning to decline.
3. Inflation remains under control.
Inflation has been so low in recent years that many people may have forgotten that it ran wild during the late 70’s and early 80’s. During the first year of Reagan’s first term, the inflation rate never went below 8.9 percent. It did begin to ease as the 80’s progressed, and, at the start of year number seven for Reagan, it was at 1.5 percent, before once again beginning to climb. That 1.5 percent inflation at the beginning of 1987 is actually an anomaly compared to the rest of the Reagan years. After inflation eased from the extremes of the early 80’s, the rate spent most of Reagan’s presidency between three and four percent.
How is President Obama doing? After seeing inflation approach four percent in 2011, it settled back to below two percent, where it remains. Inflation has never been above 3.9 percent during any single month of the Obama presidency.
2. Obama is better with the budget.
There are a lot of ways to look at how a president and his policies are doing when it comes to the federal budget. It’s not a simple equation; there are a lot of factors that figure in. For example, the budget is a collaborative process between the president and the congress. It’s also worth remembering that the budget isn’t set in stone. Various factors will cause unanticipated federal spending, including things like wars, and natural disasters. That said, no recent president, save Bill Clinton, has presided over a budget surplus.
Let’s get one thing out of the way right now: Reagan’s budget numbers were not hurt because of a “free spending” Democratic-controlled congress, as some have claimed. The Senate was under the control of Republicans for six out of Reagan’s eight years in office.
It makes a lot of sense to look at the budget deficit in terms of Gross Domestic Product, or GDP. That offers a snapshot of how much the government is spending in relation to the overall performance of the economy. When examined in that light, here’s how Reagan and Obama compare.
Ronald Reagan took charge of a deficit that was at 2.5 percent of GDP in 1981. After congress enacted the various “supply side” tax cuts that were the hallmark of Reagan fiscal policy, that deficit jumped to 3.9 percent for 1982, and 5.9 percent in 1983. An interesting sidelight for those who claim that Democrats caused Reagan’s deficits to be larger is this: the last two years of his presidency, when Democrats once again regained control of the Senate, produced the smallest deficit to GDP ratio of any of Reagan’s years in office, after 1981. Outside of that first year, the deficit to GDP ratio never fell below three percent during Reagan’s time in the White House.
And how is President Obama doing? After inheriting the economic mess left by the Bush administration, the deficit to GDP ratio, which had soared to 9.8 percent when Obama took office, has declined every year. The current estimates are for a deficit to GDP ratio of 3.1 percent for fiscal 2015, and 2.8 percent for 2016.
1. It’s the economy, stupid!
If you use the Dow Jones average as a measure of economic health, both Reagan and Obama did very well over their first six years. But, by this measure, Obama has done better. Between January of 1981, and January of 1987, the Dow Jones average increased by an impressive 111 percent. How has President Obama done? Over his first six years, the Dow has increased by a whopping 124 percent.
President John Adams once said:
Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.
Going by the facts above, it is likely that historians will regard the Obama era as a better one for America than the Reagan era — and Obama a much more effective president.
Look at all those conservative heads starting to spin. You might want to get a tarp handy before one of them explodes!
You forgot to mention that President Obama, NEVER COMMITTED TREASON!
But, Haniity told me three times about “Obama’s illegal and un-Constitutional” blah, blah… Sadly I was subjected to about five minutes of his radio show a while back. He repeated that comment three times in those few minutes. Kind of like fox ‘news’. If they repeat it enough times it becomes facts!
Actually, that was something Bush 2 said that let me know he was lying. He said, “You have to keep repeating the truth over and over for it to sink in.” Uh, no. That’s what you had to do with a lie.
Does that count with Obama and the lie of the year, “if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor”? He said that something like 30-40 times. Soooooooo… yea.
Exactly. And while we’re on the topic: remind me how many of those doctors were forced to give up their licenses to practice medicine as a result of the implementation of the ACA?
Go ahead and do some research. I’ll wait.
NONE is the answer. None were forced. They were not able to charge ridiculous prices such as $400 for a routine office visit and get paid that amount. No one forced the greedy doctors to resign they did because they were greedy uncaring swamp muck.
31Forever, I cannot stand the suspense. How many doctors loss their jobs? And please cite your sources. Thank you and have a good day!
Is that all you have? How about “Weapons of Mass Destruction!” I think that did a little more harm to our country than losing lousy insurance,
So you keep harping on all the petty crap you think Obama “LIED” about. Everything the GOP/TP Party tried to destroy him with, Benghazi, IRS, Fast and Furious, NONE of it came to fruition! NOTHING!
I’ve disagreed intensely on a few issues but over all Obama has been a very good president.
There is more to go. He’s not finished yet!
Because Bush was impeached for that. Yeah. Point is he lied, not that he wasn’t punished for it.
Not to mention the real reason we needed to lie about weapons of mass destruction. Its all about oil being sold via the us dollar. So when a country in the middle east says “nah, we’ll sell it in x currency” the united states has to step in and go rough some ppl up. The economy is being fueled by it. Try researching the petrodollar. It will give you a little insight into the middle east
You can keep your doctor. Try watching something besides Fox News sometime.
Hannity???
he has, he is and he will continue to commit treason every single day of his presidency starting with lying about where he was born, letting terrorists go free, allowing our American citizens to die when he could have done something to help and countless, way to many to count acts of treason. Oh and don’t forget about him and his administration of racist clowns are definitely trying and have succeeded to stir up racial tensions, you moron!
Well, Patso, if you can prove just ONE of your allegations,…….Oh, never mind.
You’re a hater.
You don’t need facts. Your hate compensates for reason.
Now, Patsy, one of the two of us is a moron.
You are a republican, so, that would be you.
All that is left of the republican party are the very, very rich and those like you, Patsy, STUPID enough to vote republican and against their own best interests.
for one thing, you have a lot of nerve calling me a hater after the comments you posted. You say you do your research, well I’m sure you are one of the people sitting at home, probably with mommy and daddy collecting benefits from you’re lord and savior Obama, so you have time to research on all the libtard sites that bow to the almighty barry, and when you grow up one day and become a responsible adult, you may change you’re opinion. Oh and you didn’t have to post this picture of yourself, although I’m sure it’s accurate.
I am an economist. Its my job. You are an idiot and have no idea what the world looks like in reality. You should be embarrassed.
hey sh*tbag,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
care to play with me?? Im a liberal centrist-
wanna play ‘BENGHAZI” 0r “KENYA” or “WAR ON CHRISTMAS” or “SPENDING”??
Hmmmmm??? come play with me so I can destroy your white trash regressive low IQ statements
Lol. Don’t start a post with “hey sh*tbag” and then bash someone’s IQ. Makes you look like an idiot.
You have fallen hook, line and sinker for the conservative propaganda machine. Every one of your allegations are worn cabalistic statements based on misinformation, distortion, bias, and even hatred. This nonsense is, often heard in the Republican Congress and on Fox False News. Every one of your allegations cannot be substantiated by the facts. Do some research so you won’t have to echo Fox False News as well as the drivel spewed out by so many conservative congressment, which seems to be what you are doing.
Brainwashed
you must be brain dead
Isn’t that what you are trying to do?!
So true!
for you and all white trash regressive republican scum
Try again buddy! .. and next time CHECK YOUR FACTS! He’s well OVER 6 trillion and counting! … He’s also wasted more of the taxpayers money on personal vacations then ANY OTHER PRESIDENT IN HISTORY! …MORON!
hey skank………………. enjoy this while U bemoan being micromastial and/ or steatopygous
=============================================
“moron”
eat this
How many are looking and what about how many jobs are available - please relate that to the job seekers seeking comparable employment. For example if I am a professional who was making $85,000 per year what does the graph look like for people like me now looking for work that pays me comparable salary?
OH STFU you ignorant Neanderthal
Still bowing down before the Fox sacrificial altar I see. Your “moron” status is clearing showing all that infusing of false information into your pea brain is working.
I’m not a conservative, but I am amazed at how naive you are! Once your spin is removed, the facts would offer the opposite conclusions on at least 4 of your 5 issues!
So spell it out for us. What 4 conclusions are wrong? Got a link?
If philly had a link sent from god, you would not believe it….. Well wait a minute if faux news said it was sent from god you would believe it.
Well don’t you sound silly. I did check the link and found it quite informative. Try not to assume that everyone with questions is unreasonable. Or a Fox viewer.
I posted a link earlier today. It pointed out that the Obama’s current unemployment rate is computed differently nowadays…much more in the government’s favor…i.e. lower than it actually is. If computed the same way as Reagan’s rates were, the actual unemployment rate is revealed as 23%, MUCH higher than Reagan’s or as the government pretends it is.
But my posting with the link was “lost” somehow after I clicked “post.”
So what is your conclusion regarding unemployment? Reagan’s single digit numbers or Obama’s 23%?
Ah - the good old “the government is lying.” Well in this case you are dead wrong. The U1 and U3 formulas used during Reagan and now are exactly the same. Apples to apples, Obama’s unemployment rate and job growth both far outpace Reagan’s.
How can 4 of the 5 issues which are based on empirical fact be wrong? Are you sure you are not a conservative, because most non-conservatives I know take empirical fact as, well, fact.
Taking facts out of context, using % instead of absolute numbers, and accepting a lack of evidence as evidence that the status quo is correct are all examples of using facts to twist conclusions, i.e. spin.
Actually, using a nominal dollar amount from 1988 and trying to compare it to a 2014 dollar would be using a fact to twist conclusions, as the two different nominal dollars have two different constant values. What this author and any credible person citing dollar amounts of deficit or debt in two different years will do is use the percentage of increase (which accounts for the nominal dollar changes by using a ratio rather than a nominal amount) or by using a debt to GDP calculation and the percent change in debt to GDP - the later is the best because it accounts both for growth and the changes in nominal dollars.
I am not sure where the absence of evidence claim is coming from. There is a great deal of evidence that Laffer was off his rocker, and that Reagan’s recession was caused by monetary policy and relieved by monetary policy, which is much, much different than what happened when Bush and Company crashed the economy.
So, without question, your claim is wrong. You cannot compare the nominal (the # of dollars at the time they were spent) of Reagan with the # of dollars with Obama. You would simply be comparing things that cannot be compared if you were to do so. Both as a percentage of GDP and as a percentage of outstanding debt, the debt Reagan built up is by far greater than the debt that Obama - and by Obama, I mean “that time George W. Bush deregulated the financial sector by executive order and executive action resulting in the worst financial system collapse since 1929” debt.
Ironically, your prefered method of calculating the relative debt created under the various Presidents would be doing exactly what you accuse this author of doing - lying with a truth. This is why we can’t have nice things. Dupes like you.
So in your 1st sentence, you agree with me that facts can be spun or twisted to reach different conclusions.
In your second paragraph, you are struggling to apply one of my examples used to misrepresent facts.
But in your 3rd paragraph, YOU take an absence of evidence and create your own evidence! By stating a specific claim I had made regarding comparing nominal dollars of Reagan’s vs. Obama’s nominal dollars was wrong, you put up a strawman to refute me. The only problem is I never said that or even anything remotely close. Where did I do that? There is no evidence. You’re making this up.
By making up evidence, you have NO credibility.
You continue riding that train of thought…the one you manufactured in your last paragraph before you end with an ad hominem attack with calling me a “dupe.” I’m going to disprove your assertion by not being duped by you and your assigning me a “prefered [sic] method of calculating the relative debt…” I never said that and you have NO evidence to show it is my preference in any way.
1. Yes I do, however this is not the case there.
2. Sorry, no I didn’t. There was no struggling. That is what happened and there is no question at all that that is what happened. Since you didn’t actually provide any examples above that you thought were unfair, or dishonest - I have no way of knowing what you think was lacking in context or accuracy. So far you have not been forthcoming.
3. Sorry - again. You absolutely said and I quote - “using % instead of absolute numbers” and I explained to you why doing what you claim to be more fair would in fact be less fair. Even if you adjust to constant dollars, it would still be an unfair explanation because there would be no anchor in terms of size of the economy. I most certainly did not make up evidence at all. You said you wanted the author to use absolute numbers. Period.
So with all of that, instead of this useless back and forth where you make broad sweeping accusations without any specifics, why don’t you tell me specifically what you object to. Based on the above, you don’t have the first clue.
Also - when you claim someone is making a claim absent evidence, you might want to consider the lack of precision in your post that led me to that reasonable conclusion. You said you preferred absolute rather than relative numbers - and I explained why your preference was misguided and lacking a logical foundation.
Still owned oldiugymnast
allow these silly US TREASURY FACTS
Your chart doesn’t include Obama 2011, Obama 2011, Obama 2012, Obama 2013, and Obama 2014. Nice. Incomplete facts spun from “the Office of the Democratic Leader.” Nice.
Great example supporting my point that “facts” can be spun.
correct!!! allow these silly FACTS; which show REDUCTION of DEBT to %pct% of GDP- which is easily the most important metric. SEE? debt is actually shrinking; as gross domestic product is truly what ” moves the chains” in establishing the wealth/strength of our economy. ALSO- please notice which administration(s) have the HIGHEST Pct DEBT INCREASES,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,HIGHEST PCT% DEBT INCREASES- which segues to : WHERE WERE THE TEA PARTY /GOP/REGRESSIVE crybabies when bush and Reagan started crushing us with DEBT??? answer: NOWHERE<<<<<<<<<<<<< so spin me back another web; ok spidey??
First, the fundamental premise here is that the government is permitted to borrow against ANY % of GDP, let alone 25-34%! No, they don’t! If I make an additional $100 (adding to GDP), the government is not automatically ENTITLED to borrow another $25-$34.
Second, I noticed you did not include Reagan’s years in your graph above, Herr SpinDoktor!
Third, your ignorance of the Tea Party is showing. It started December 2007, as an off-shoot of Ron Paul’s campaign. Ron Paul was AGAINST government spending and he voted that way as a Congressman.
Your incomplete facts have been de-spun.
wrong again,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,you have attempted a strawman above; that’s what micropenile losers do when confronted with facts
====================================================
Reagan??? hows this ( added to iran contra and MORE Reagan people were indicted than ANY other administration/ see facts/ see scandals “s & l” etc)
where was tea party up until feb 2009??? no where,,,,,,,,,,,, a bunch of nothings until Obama hit the stage.
Reagan below—- edify me some more about Reagans greatness,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,and what HE did to our debt/ deficits and off shoring our manufacturing jobs
Can you explain why there wasn’t a single Nexus-Lexus reference to “Tea Party” that exists prior to 2008? Surely if what you state is true, then there must be some newspaper article that was written about it.
More importantly, why do you think that the Federal Government should never borrow? Given that there have been only a handful of years (all right before depressions, btw) when there was no budget deficit and only two that the debt was zero in our nation’s entire history, why do you think it would be best to never borrow. Can you explain it using economic theory? Something that smacks of thoughtfulness? If you owned an expanding business would you never borrow? Explain. Also explain why you think the Government does not have the ability or authority to borrow.
You are aware that since 2011, the deficit has been cut by over 50%? If those numbers were included, it would look even better for Obama, since in 2014 the debt actually shrank (we paid off more than we borrowed).
oldiugymnast, You got owned 😀
And this is why we can’t have nice things. People like you who think that a poorly thought out position that lacks an empirical or fact-based foundation is capable of “owning” a position that is. All Philly did was make a broad claim that he has so far been unable to back up or even adequately explain. And since he said in his original post that he objected to using % of debt and instead preferred using absolute numbers, he clearly shows that he doesn’t understand how to check a comparison to see if it is comparing like for like. Absolute numbers in this case would either be measuring dollars of different values, or measuring an economic capacity of different values and assuming they are both the same and therefore comparable. But I guess second order reasoning is too much to ask for from the typical right wing simpleton.
What this author is attempting to pass as facts is hilarious and a fantasy.
No scandals! Do you really think people are that brainwashed by you lies?
Less debt? What planet you live on Obama has increased our national debt more in his first term then all presidents combined. Better unemployment numbers? Wow yes there all on welfare or disabled because there unemployment ran out .you live in a fantasy world. and only a complete moron would buy it
really????? hows this???
The Republicans see their election into office as an opportunity to make more money by ripping off most of the people, rationalizing that it will trickle down and make society better, but that never happens. They are like a gang in a Western movie that takes over a town, terrorizes its citizens, has the mayor and sheriff in their pockets, and bribes the town officials to support them. In the movies, a hero, a Clint Eastwood type, comes into town and destroys the evil gang and reestablishes justice, prosperity and peace. This country needs such a hero.
correct,,,,,,,as shown
Yes but you left out the clown image of how the normal people see libs. Always telling a distorted part of one story…
” normal” people???? such as the “normal” religious regressive scum who want to keep Americans from equality? “normal” who want JEEEESUS in legislation ? “normal” who want gays and minorities an women as second class citizens ( see: recent republican legislative attempts)?
perhaps this- and many others I have- will edify us all as2what ” normal” is ; eh?
And yet you haven’t been able to explain how the story is distorted or missing parts. Shouldn’t - if this is actually true and not just your paranoid fantasy - be able to explain what was missing and explain logically what should be included?
Factually incorrect. Or less politely, a lie.
Prove otherwise
You can’t access FRED economic data yourself? Or the CBO? The fact is that MOST of the new debt happened during a budget that Obama had no control over, and happened due to the crash that was caused by the lax regulatory regime that Bush put in place.
allow this metric from the US TREASURY
hows this???
So, please pontificate on how holding interest rates down the last six years will benefit the future? Oh, wait that’s a set up to blame the next Republican president.
allow this …… DEBT as PCT % of “GDP” projected .
…………..next republican president?? president of what? do U ‘think’ America will vote in another slayer of economies such as Reagan and the bush boys??? really??? ( 9/11……..medicare part D,,,,,,housing bubble,,,,,,,, 2007-08 collapse….) really???? “tax cuts for billionaire job creators”??? Bring JEEEESUS into legislation???
=====================================================
please note : GDP was at 5% last quarter and is expected to be at 4.875% this quarter. Keep crying,,,,,,,,,,,and the FED is expected to raise rates soon as OUR economy is moving up ( see:GDP)
Because demand is too low due to to many people deleveraging. This is econ 101 stuff. By not getting back to full capacity of GDP and by wasting millions of man hours forever (every minute that a potentially productive human being sits idle is lost forever) we have reduced the capacity of our economy by over 4% compared to what the CBO and MIT had projected in 2010. If you have trouble understanding why wasting that work and wasting that productivity is a downside for our future - you are beyond help.
“next ” GOP president???
really????? maybe this loser???
and this???? ( us treasury)
You mean like obamacare
aca DBA ‘obamacare’
============================
keep crying: I will keep placing up facts
First, it’s THEY’RE. THEY ARE. Not THERE, as in; “It is sitting over THERE.” Which gives me some indication of your level of education.
Second… Facts hurt don’t they? The National Debt and the National DEFICIT are NOT the same thing. Learn the difference before you make an ass of yourself.
The DEBT is a function of every single administration that comes before it. In the past 100 years there have been TWO in which the country had no debt. It is a function of the DEFICIT. Which is the more critical of the two statistics. HOWEVER, It doesn’t matter that the deficit is BIGGER, what matters is what percentage of total income is it. In this case, the numbers are clear. The % of GDP is MUCH lower than it was under Bush. So while the DEBT is growing by larger pure numbers, it is growing by a lesser percentage. Which is the goal. Basic finance. When the DEFICIT become 0% or less, then we can start paying down the debt. Only DEMOCRATS have succeeded in doing that in the past 50 years (maybe before that, but I’m not taking time to research it).
THIRD: And this is important… if THEY’RE on welfare or disability…THEY’RE UNEMPLOYED and not working and thus not part of the calculation.
ONLY a complete MORON would hold on to their false beliefs when presented with clear, simple facts. That would be you JOE.
It’s “that ’70s and ’80s,” not “70’s and 80’s.” All you amateurs with your “your/you’re” bulllllllllllllllllllllll
Nope, sorry, according to the Chicago Manual of Style BOTH are correct and it is a matter of taste. HOWEVER - “’70s’ is both plural and possessive.”
AS IN: “The ’70s’ finest director was Martin Scorsese, particularly for his work on Alice Doesn’t Live Here Anymore and Taxi Driver.” (NOTE: and that’s the CMS’s example direct from their website)
(And according to ONE of my professors it’s as you say, and according to another of my professors it’s not… so this strikes me as one of those things that no one can agree upon. I prefer 70s over 70’s)
I prefer 70s over 70’s also. It is a simple rule: a plural ends with an “s.” Adding an apostrophe confuses the issue. But you can quibble forever over many things regarding English.
You were not using a possessive. You were using a plural. Plus, you said “70’s and 80’s”, not “70s’ and 80s'”. The apostrophe should be used to substitute for the “19” preceding the other two digits. In general, this is an example of people using apostrophes because they think they need to differentiate the noun from the “s” at the end of the word even though that is not a grammatical rule that has ever existed. It’s like when people are saying “The racecar’s are fast!” instead of “The racecars are fast!”.
I am actually in agreement with your relevant points. I was just poking fun at the irrelevant grammatical points being made.
The article was not using a possessive. It was using a plural. Plus, it
said “70’s and 80’s”, not “70s’ and 80s'”. The apostrophe should be used to substitute for the “19” preceding the other two digits. In general,
this is an example of people using apostrophes because they think they
need to differentiate the noun from the “s” at the end of the word even
though that is not a grammatical rule that has ever existed. It’s like people saying “The racecar’s are fast!” instead of “The
racecars are fast!”.
I am actually in agreement with your relevant points. I was just poking fun at the irrelevant grammatical points being made.
You could say that while the value is growing, the derivative is shrinking
I could, but do you really think Joe would understand that? I’m writing in consideration of my audience.
Don’t muddy the waters with actual information.
here is a photo of joe L
Nice to see bias is alive and well in the socialist party
perhaps this is more complete?
see: “bias”
So, you are admitting obama and his admin, incestuous media and gov’t workers are adjusting numbers to fit there outcome. Nice. justify much?
What? There is nothing in your post that is justified by the post you are commenting on. In what way do you come to this conclusion? And can you provide a single actual example of “cooking the books?”
I see the FACTS are making you upset. Another fact the author left out - and it’s a pretty big one - is that reagan armed and funded bin laden; obama had him exterminated.
Reagan armed and funded a number of evil regimes, such as the corrupt regime in El Salvador during its bloody civil war, among others.
Dont forget Osama Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein.
Where do you get your false information? Sounds like Fox Phony News as well as the drivel spewed out by Republican congressmen. Your comments cannot be substantiated by the facts. Do some research. Think a little.
TOTAL BS Joe! Cant stand the truth now can you?
The unemployment checks were STOPPED by Republicans, or I wouldn’t have had to retire earlier to save my HOME! The first time in history this has been allowed to happen during a recession. Gas is at it’s lowest in years, we import almost NO OIL. Renewable energy is available at a rate once thought impossible. The stock market has risen to record highs. Energy infrastructure for renewable energy is now a reality, cars get better mileage. We are no longer at war in Iraq and Afghanistan, our ground troops are OUT! Our economy is better than anywhere in the world. The national debt has gone down continuously under Obama. What the hell world are you in? You are OUT OF TOUCH!
What scandal can you name? No one under the Obama administration has been charged or convicted of a crime. Under Reagan, 232 people in his administration were charged or convicted, even Reagan had to report to congress for his actions. Obama fulfilled 80% of his campaign promises in his FIRST TERM. No other President since FDR has done that.
By the way, Dick Cheney, George Bush, Donald Rumsfeld and others were tried and found guilty for war crimes by an international tribunal.
Yes yes, we know. You watch Fox News and their “spin” on everything anti-Obama related.
So true Joe!
eat this— source??
US TREASURY
( see: lower right hand corner)
hey skank,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, why no reply to the posted FACTS which ridicule white trash regressive scum who “love” republican ‘leadership’???
PRAI$E JE$U$ !!!
eat this
Please explain how much debt this great president has paid down as of today and how the policies and laws he’s passed are going to pay down the debt.
Well, given that the current deficit, which includes all debt service, is shriking and now below “stable deficit” - we are already actually reducing the overall debt of the federal government. Also, you might try to understand that the concept of too much debt requires that you also understand how much capacity to pay you have. Most economists do this by comparing debt to potential GDP. The nominal (the actual # of dollars) of the debt is big, scary and completely meaningless unless anchored to the capacity of the GDP. For instance - if I make $60k and take on a mortgage for $300,000, I have debt problem. If I make $1M and take on a mortgage for $300,000, the debt service is a rounding error.
funny how JAFO4today went distinctly mute upon your above reply,,,
distinctly mute!! ( hes busy crying)
enjoy this ,,,,,,,my white trash regressive scumbag “patriots”
I can make or make up charts as well. Any elementary school child could make up this chart.
perhaps a CHART from the US treasury??? can your white trash regressive shitbag crybaby self make THAT up??? hmmmm?
please note the BOTTOM RIGHT HAND CORNER,,,,,,Hmmm?
Hey Einstein, please explain in simple math how 8 trillion out of 10 trillion is only a 16% increase in debt?
hey tesla,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, shouldn’t you be ‘arguing’ with THE US TREASURY? after all; it IS THEIR chart.
maybe the below one can help,,,its a projection of DEBT decreasing as a PCT% of GDP..
,,,,,,umm; you DO know what GDP is; and how its the most important statistic to review showing the health of an economy; donnnncha?? *( last quarter USA G.D.P. at 5%)
Nice of you to switch the argument when you are losing!
Answer JAF’s question: How is $8T/$10T = 16%?
ask the treasury- im placing up FACTS
mmmmmmmmmmmmmmm,,,,,,,, do u need the website address
wow…a complete lie. Federal Deficit at 2009 at 7 trillion…is at almost 20 trillion today….is this Common Core math you practice?
What a dumbass…
Because they rounded the numbers from 8.2 and 9.8. It isn’t hard to get the actual data if you aren’t too lazy.
In your dreams. Regressive whitetrash GOP scum has owned this conversation from the start. Not only is he NOT losing any argument, he’s making people like you and C Quella look like blind idiots that just make up your mind on something and then ignore all the contrary information.
Because most of that 8T was on the 08-09 budget that you guys keep trying to give to Obama even though he wasn’t POTUS when it passed or part of the “off budget” spending on the Iraq and Afghanistan adventures that happened from 2002-2008 but were not included in the official budget and therefore not in the official debt. This isn’t exactly hard. Also, chart above is “Debt to GDP” not Debt.
Please, oldiugymnast, don’t confuse “republican’ts, with facts.
What’s that say in the lower LEFT corner? It comes from the “Democratic Leader?” Is the “Democratic Leader” someone math-challenged?
don’t be obtuse,,,,,,,,,,,,,, shall I re-write so u can comprehend???
or,,,,,,,,,,,,,maybe this helps U see your hero???
gimme a shout out for Reagan!!!!
Now You and I both know you can’t confuse the Fascist Reich Wingers with the FACTS!!! Their eyes roll back in their heads they roll up in a “Fetal Position and start chanting “Benghazi, Benghazi, Benghazi”…etc…etc… You Can Not Confuse Them With The FACTS!!!!
One, you maybe white trash, I am not. I am saying this chart is inaccurate. I have taken statistics in college - statistics never lie, but you can lie with statistics. That’s Statistics 101.
hey Einstein,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
(a) I didn’t send U a message; ergo I did NOT call U white trash
(b) my above ” chart” (poster actually) is inaccurate? really??
hit me with some STATS
===================================================
and lets have some fun with “job creation”; OK?
you can have 20 yrs of Reagan and the bush boys…
—I will grab 14 yrs of Clinton and obama
========================================
statistically U have a 10/7 ratio advantage!!
now,,,,,,,,,,,lets begin “job creation” statistics 101
Yo GOP Scum,
Now You and I both know that I-Ronnie Contra and the Jr. Bush Regime created Millions of JOBS. But they were all in Mainland Communist RED CHINA!!!
donnncha LOVE how gerbils such as C Quella avoid responding when FACTS are placed above??
must be busy watching scott walker tell us how “tax cuts for job creators” is helping wisconsin
A Lie…..fabricated by the Teachers Unions who hate Walker for busting their monopoly and blatant statewide graft.
Nice try but C QQuella will never believe it. To admit to the facts would mean admitting she has been on the wrong path, and some people are incapable of doing that.
you have just correctly painted the color of 95% of regressive republican religious trash in this country. They prefer to spin away with ” BENGHAZI” & “KENYA” & “WAR ON CHRISTMAS”,,,,,,,,,,,etc
Let’s not stoop to their level and call names. We’re better than that.
normally I would agree,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,but when I civilly present facts and they attempt aspersive dialogue; well- I begin my atavistic attacks
=====================================================
besides; I like annoying inept regressives
Please don’t try to use those fancy words. They only make you look like you’re trying to be smarter than you are.
Jesus, are you sure you’re not a Republican?
the words are perfectly applied.
—-they are NOT “fancy”—
Im a registered independent who leans progressive
===================================================
anything else?
Well, C Quella, your classmates in your elementary school, didn’t make THIS one up.
You smell republican. That would mean that “facts”, mean NOTHING to you. You just “FEEL”, that the chart is wrong. So, it must be wrong
he will either go mute or try to spin it
Except, I vote the person, not the party and I don’t go with ‘feelings’ when it comes to these things. If you were as smart as you think you are, you could do the very simple and easy research yourself. It seems to me, you are the one who follows blindly.
Well then, when was the last time that a republican did ANYTHING to better YOUR life?
Go ahead. Think about it.
republicans only think about the 1%. That’s who keeps them in office.
When the claim that they cut taxes, they cut taxes for the rich.
When they claim that there is too much regulation, they don’t want rules that protect you from the 1%.
When they say they want charter schools, they want nothing more than to bust the teachers unions.
When they say they want a pipeline, they want it to enrich the Koch brothers, the largest holders of tar sands oil, in Canada.
To republicans, you are nothing more than a useful tool.
All that is left of the republican party are the very, very rich and those like YOU, Cruella, stupid enough to vote republican and against your own best interests.
No one that cares about you is in the republican party. NO ONE.
I didn’t realize one of the three blind mice was named C Quella.
here is your vote,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, encapsulated
Wow…you’re a bigger sheeple than I thought.
C Quella - Really, how so? Who are talking to because if it is regressive whitetrash GOP scum, he obviously has done some research and has clearly posted it. Maybe your computer has some kind of virus that you don’t see these posts.
I can make truthful memes. Can you?
hey!!! that’s one of my faves!!
U owe me a dollar for copyrights!!!
🙂
hows this one?? Hmmmmm? this is when REPUBLICANS were worthy of a vote
I enjoy enjoy being white every morning I wake up in my safe republican town. Thanks for living on my taxes and not getting ahead on foodstamps and welfare. The best part of that is you will never be able to live near me. Funny how I can walk in my town at night and not one store has a gate pulled down. See, we don’t need to profile in our towns, like you have to in the hood. Your store owners know who will steal from them.
I live 352 yrds from atlantic ocean in pompano beach ( see: photo of what MY “HOOD” view is) in my PAID for condo-2200 sq ft
I agree that the best part is NEVER having2 live near you in whatever white trash regressive scumbag land locked state U are suffering in
=========================================================
try walking the pompano beach at 2 am at night with an indigo moonlit sky and the ocean breeze cascading about you with 67 degree weather; not a cloud in the sky——
Im loving such well-off REPUBLICAN states as Wisconsin and Kansas and the southern states which a re broke and un-educated VIA regressive republican policies
=========================================================
enjoy your frigid winter- this is where I walk ( and surf when waves are up)
MMMmmmmmmm…………………… winter in the land of my birth!
2200 square foot paid starter condo..wow! That’s impressive for a democrap ..but you’re a typical poor democrap. Interest rates at 3.5% and you have 100% equity in a condo, which has dropped in value by 50% since 2008. Maybe stop by a white thrash republicans home and ask him how his pool house is bigger than your condo? I’ve seen it a million times with idiots like you. It’s the same old story and it’s boring as hell. Enjoy your closet on the beach.
Subject: Re: Comment on 5 Reasons Why Obama Is A Much Better President Than Reagan (Or How To Make Conservative Heads Explode)
would this include the 4 ( 2 commercial/ 2 residential) properties I own OUTRIGHT which garner passive residual income??? Hmmm? why do I need to take care of a pool when I have the OCEAN to play in?? Hmmmm? I had the big(ger) home; sold it a HUGE profit in 2007 and bought 3 more properties ( including my no -maintenance ‘closet’) and rolled a ton of the profit into this stock market which im up 587% in just UNDER 7 yrs ( I do my OWN stock and option trading; been doing that since 1995)
NOTE: to further refute your infantile-and erroneous- claim as2my equity; all 4 rental properties are ( collectively using CMAs) up 68% as of dec 31; my ‘closet’ was purchased -and paid within 13 months- in 2012 @ 262K and already has adjoining ones selling ( not listing; SELLING ) at 310K — and im an END unit facing east
======================================================
shall we discuss what I drive and what I drive ( female)? Hmmm???
here is ONE of my 3 vehicles; getting 2.03 per gallon gas ( actually 2.42 premium) while my FEMALE holds my 14 month old pet TEGU
……………..I can only imagine the poor aesthetics you and ( if??) your female provide the planet to glimpse.
cry back and tell me how your winter coat fits your out-of-shape ass; and maybe we can discuss portfolios???
or,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,perhaps athletic endeavors????
“boring as hell”
YA da ya da. You live in a condo on the beach. Maybe someday you be able to afford a place of your own with all that monopoly money you have.
Subject: Re: Comment on 5 Reasons Why Obama Is A Much Better President Than Reagan (Or How To Make Conservative Heads Explode)
not on the beach- one block in; large hotels have the billion dollar properties adorning our sands
===================================================
monopoly money? Im enjoying my covering my long-time short on CLH15.NYM Thursday and now long,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
the little dickens is rocketing: as is ( as usual) the dow…….
damn that OBAMA stock market!!!
( on a sad note; pump gas prices rose 17 cents in one day here- so I expect the white trash regressive FOX “news”: scum to be blaming this administration for that!!!)
Reagan?? take a peek at this tapestry!
*********************************************************************************
cry back soon,,,,,,,,,,, tell me of thy 12000 sq ft “home” buried in harsh weather and having broken roads and a paucity of sunshine,,,,,,,,,,,,
see: “frozen pool”
Million dollar property in which you can only look at from your 100k condo paid in full. Enjoy the money rides you wasted on money on that deprecated 50% the day you purchased them. Wow! Three cars! That’s impressive! I hope you have enough parking spots in that condo complex. Condo’s is a lot like socialism, everyone shares in the same misery!,! Being a 1%er allows me to fly to my winter home anytime I want. It’s a great lake community with 6 golf courses. The best part is that the only democraps there are the ones carrying my golf bag.
Subject: Re: Comment on 5 Reasons Why Obama Is A Much Better President Than Reagan (Or How To Make Conservative Heads Explode)
“depreciated”
Hmmmmmm,,,,,,lemme check:
“NOPE”…………… up substantially!
“golf courses”
( ” burp”) I surf ; lift weights and play basketball
( “golf”)
1% er?? excellent!!
sounds to me that your female companionship has long dried up with your ostensible encroaching age AND your physical ineptitude VIS A VIS inert functionality!
“GOLF”
,,,,,,GOLF???? isn’t that what you white trash regressive crybabies bemoan the martian muslim Kenyan president’s play time?
“golf”,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Im willing 2 wager a nice chunk of $$$$$ that in addition 2 your “golf” U also are stuck in the vainglory of alcohol based quotidian temulence!!!
“golf”,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
(NOTE: 1972 MACH 1 showcar is comfortable in an air conditions storage; comes out on days bereft of our precipitation .)
“golf”……… bragging about that difficult but LOSER game is akin 2 bragging about catching a 1000 lb sturgeon from the “great lakes”
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
“golf”
(below) here is my view- got lucky with the rainbow I confess!
“golf”
When ignorance gets started it knows no bounds.
I’m busy now. Can I ignore you some other time?
All I heard was, “Blah blah blah, I’m an asshole.”
I will respond when you learn how to construct a sentence and spell! Omg! Taxpayers got their money’s worth with your public education!
Subject: Re: Comment on 5 Reasons Why Obama Is A Much Better President Than Reagan (Or How To Make Conservative Heads Explode)
thy implosion above seems complete
===================================
You bore me! It takes considerable knowledge just to realize the extent of your own ignorance.
Subject: Re: Comment on 5 Reasons Why Obama Is A Much Better President Than Reagan (Or How To Make Conservative Heads Explode)
awww,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,nothing by me misspelled; U spin away in humiliation
===================================
to quote tweety:
“,,,,U faw down an’ go BOOM”
Im is I’m moron! Punctuation is horrible but maybe it’s ok in EBONICS
Subject: Re: Comment on 5 Reasons Why Obama Is A Much Better President Than Reagan (Or How To Make Conservative Heads Explode)
see: spelling
See, the truth of the matter is this: Democratic policies are destroying our nation’s cities. If the voters in these cities are happy being poor and having little to no prospect of leaving poverty, then they are electing the right people. If they’d like the opportunity to climb out of poverty and build a middle-to-upper class legacy for their family, then they could start by electing people in whose interest it is to see them prosper — conservatives. Democrats win when the people are poor, conservatives win when the people prosper. That is the difference.
The black family survived centuries of slavery and generations of Jim Crow, but it has disintegrated in the wake of the liberals’ expansion of the welfare state.
Give a man a fish and eats for a day. Give a man food stamps, welfare checks, free cell phones and section 8 crack housing and he will vote democratic the rest of his/her life!
Subject: Re: Comment on 5 Reasons Why Obama Is A Much Better President Than Reagan (Or How To Make Conservative Heads Explode)
(a) ..A..G..A..I..N………………….. U are chattering about “cities” whilst I am discussing STATES ( see: socio-economic comparison)
(b) democrats won in 2008 when America was (becoming destructively) poor,,,same when 1994 rolled in Clinton.
(c) name some federal -or state for that matter — policies which helped ALL americans ( see: minorities and women and gays)
(d) for me boring you,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, you certainly reply in earnest with FOX “news” tattered diatribe!
Wow! What a shock! An angry black dude.
1994 with Clinton is your best example. I’m sure they didn’t teach you anything about the Community Reinvestment Act in the hood. In 1995 Clinton loosened housing rules, after not having sex that woman, by rewriting the Community Reinvestment Act, which put added pressure on banks to lend in low-income democrap neighborhoods. That certainly played a role in creating a permissive lending environment, which took years to explode.
Fox News? No time to watch TV. 1%ers have better ways to get their facts. READ! Watching NBC with Brian Williams will get you the true facts. You are just another angry BLACK Libtard, if you do not fall lockstep into your ideals. Much like communism. If you do not agree with them they want you dead.
The five states with the fastest-growing wages are all controlled by the GOP at the governor, state senate, and house levels.
But you point at the states and nothing about the top ten poorest and most dangerous cities are run by democraps. Who will you blame for that? The Republican G of that state. Blame blame blame……typical!
Liberals are weak-minded worthless imbeciles. They will do whatever their union tells them. Give a man a fish and eats for a day. Give a man ( angry blacks scum) food stamps, welfare checks, free cell phones and section 8 crack housing and he will vote democratic the rest of his/her life!
Years ago I wanted to move, so I strapped a Libtard to the roof of my car and drove until someone said, “What’s that?” That’s where I moved my business. No lazy Libtards in my office.
Subject: Re: Comment on 5 Reasons Why Obama Is A Much Better President Than Reagan (Or How To Make Conservative Heads Explode)
im caucasian ( see: my photos below)
,,,,,,,,you seem allergic to facts; thus- spinning away from the states getting financially crushed by regressive white trash religious GOP policies
……oh; and hows that rick perry indictment swimming??
OH— brian Williams is in some ( again) hot water with his lies
====================================
“angry black libtard”
amazing!!!!
(OK,,,,,,,,,now cry about my perfect-and UNCOLORED- hair; and maybe how Im in superb physical shape???))
“angry black libtard”
amazing!!!
You’re white and OJ didn’t kill his wife!!
Libtards, of course, laughs at that the ten poorest cities in the country are all run by Democrats. You just parrot the talking points of the liberal media ( Brian Williams and the Community Organizer’s race advisor Al Sharpton) about the poorest states being Republican, actually meaning something. The 10 poorest cities are longtime Democratic strongholds—and the data that libtards will be more inclined to cite—that the 10 poorest states are predominantly Republican, is that conservatives can point to actual policies that Democrats implemented that contributed to the impoverishment of the cities, while the liberals cannot point to specific GOP policies that have caused the poorer states to lag behind.
Democrat policies are destroying our nation’s cities. If the voters in these cities are happy being poor and having little to no prospect of leaving poverty, then they are electing the right people.
Democrats win when the people are poor, conservatives win when the people prosper. That is the difference.
Give a man a fish and eats for a day. Give a man food stamps, welfare checks, free cell phones and section 8 crack housing and he will vote democratic the rest of his/her life!
Helping those who have been struck by unforeseeable misfortunes is fundamentally different from making dependency a way of life.
Thomas Sowell
Subject: Re: Comment on 5 Reasons Why Obama Is A Much Better President Than Reagan (Or How To Make Conservative Heads Explode)
again,,,,,,,,,,,shall we compare GOP VS democrat policies-and the RESULTS of those policies,,,,,,,,,,,,upon ALL americans over the past 25 yrs??
Hmmmm?
lets start with the job creation
you get 20 yrs of Reagan and the bush boys,,,,,,,
I get 14 (soon to be 15) yrs of Clinton /Obama
care to thrust some numbers at me???
Hmmmmm????
( we can gravitate to dead americans after I abuuuuse U here)
NOTE: Sharpton is scum,,,,scum akin to beck and limbaugh
Thank you for sending me a response. I’ll waste no time reading it.”
When ignorance gets started it knows no bounds.
I’m busy now. Can I ignore you some other time?
All I heard was, “Blah blah blah, I’m an asshole.”
The black family survived centuries of slavery and generations of Jim Crow, but it has disintegrated in the wake of the liberals’ expansion of the welfare state.
Subject: Re: Comment on 5 Reasons Why Obama Is A Much Better President Than Reagan (Or How To Make Conservative Heads Explode)
seems U have been relegated to ‘cut & paste’ answers
=====================================
quite eructive of you!
“Thank you for sending me another mindless stupid email. I’ll waste no time reading it.” “DELETE!”
When ignorance gets started it knows no bounds.
I’m busy now working to pay for your foodstamps.. Can I ignore you some other time? All I heard was, “Blah blah blah, I’m an asshole.”
It takes considerable knowledge just to realize the extent of your own ignorance.
Subject: Re: Comment on 5 Reasons Why Obama Is A Much Better President Than Reagan (Or How To Make Conservative Heads Explode)
^^^yet^^^ANOTHER^^^white trash crybaby CUT & PASTE reply!!!
*******************************************************
Reagan? this( below) Reagan???
Hmmmmmm,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
THIS Ronnie headrest?
“Thank you for sending me another mindless stupid email. I’ll waste no time reading it.” “DELETE!”
When ignorance gets started it knows no bounds.
I’m busy now working to pay for your foodstamps.. Can I ignore you some other time? All I heard was, “Blah blah blah, I’m an asshole.”
It takes considerable knowledge just to realize the extent of your own ignorance.
Subject: Re: Comment on 5 Reasons Why Obama Is A Much Better President Than Reagan (Or How To Make Conservative Heads Explode)
actually; U—as do all white trash regressive republican crybabies do- LIED
**************************************************************
you again replied; thus showcasing thy nugatory life
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
or—-did I mess up and you DID NOT reply???
Hmmmmm?
now—- about my perfect “ZPeLleNg”
NBC’s Brian Williams is a great example of a Libtard lying! Shot down in helicopter! Lololol!! He must have gotten that story from Hillary after she lied about dodging bullets on a runway. The best example of a Libtard lying is the Community Organizer, ” If you like your insurance, you can keep it!” “If you like your Dr, you and keep him or her!! That was the biggest LIE of the year!!! Typical Libtard, you forgot about those!
Subject: Re: Comment on 5 Reasons Why Obama Is A Much Better President Than Reagan (Or How To Make Conservative Heads Explode)
Billion dollar properties owned by Repubicans. You should join and you will get out of condo life! Omg!! I’d almost rather vote for a democrap than live in a condo!!
Subject: Re: Comment on 5 Reasons Why Obama Is A Much Better President Than Reagan (Or How To Make Conservative Heads Explode)
that’s your reply????
buried in your landlocked state; “enjoying” this nice ( here anyway) winter???
Keep voting regressive republican!
and remember: the PRIOR GOP administration had an amazing effect upon America as a whole!
( see: my avatar for the 1st installment of that luminary 8 yrs of BUSH /CHENEY!)
GOP leadership? hmmmm,,,,, perhaps this photo will assuage thy socio-economic historical ineptitude- and anti American profligacy-
There is nothing so stupid as the man, if you get him off the thing he was educated in. Winter skiing is great. Summer beach is also great. The cause of your death will be stupidity.
The five states with the fastest-growing wages are all controlled by the GOP at the governor, state senate, and house levels
Give a man a fish and eats for a day. Give a man food stamps, welfare checks, free cell phones and section 8 crack housing and he will vote democratic the rest of his/her life!
If a Republican doesn’t like guns, he doesn’t buy one. If a Democrat doesn’t like guns, he wants all guns outlawed. If a Republican is a vegetarian, he doesn’t eat meat. If a Democrat is a vegetarian, he wants all meat products banned for everyone. If a Republican is homosexual, he quietly leads his life. If a Democrat is homosexual, he demands legislated respect. If a Republican is down-and-out, he thinks about how to better his situation. If a Democrat is down-and-out he wonders who is going to take care of him. If a Republican doesn’t like a talk show host, he switches channels. A Democrat demands that those they don’t like be shut down. If a Republican is a non-believer, he doesn’t go to church. A Democrat non-believer wants any mention of God and religion silenced. If a Republican decides he needs health care, he goes about shopping for it, or may choose a job that provides it. If a Democrat decides he needs health care, he demands that the rest of us pay for his. If a Republican reads this, he’ll forward it so his friends can have a good laugh. A Democrat will delete it because he’s “offended”.
Subject: Re: Comment on 5 Reasons Why Obama Is A Much Better President Than Reagan (Or How To Make Conservative Heads Explode)
“Maddow blog”?? You’re kidding, right?
hey lemming,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, are U disputing the above photo?
enjoy this— he was the most recent quality republican president …. NONE since
Can you make a chart showing amounts? It would look very different!!
this may help but U should go online to us treasury and CBO for numerical facts
From a Maddow blog….pure hogwash…
Why is it Liberals have to lie about everything….?
But, but, but… Obummer is destroying ‘Merika! Don’t confuse me with facts.
Hmm…Obama….facts….lets look at the facts:
1. Scandals:
1. IRS targets Obama’s enemies: The IRS targeted
conservative and pro-Israel groups prior to the 2012 election. Questions
are being raised about why this occurred, who ordered it, whether there
was any White House involvement and whether there was an initial effort
to hide who knew about the targeting and when.
2. Benghazi: This is actually three scandals in one:
The failure of administration to protect the Benghazi mission.
The changes made to the talking points in order to suggest the attack was motivated by an anti-Muslim video
The refusal of the White House to say what President Obama did the night of the attack
3. Watching the AP: The Justice Department performed a massive cull of Associated Press reporters’ phone records as part of a leak investigation.
4. Rosengate: The
Justice Department suggested that Fox News reporter James Rosen is a
criminal for reporting about classified information and subsequently
monitored his phones and emails.
5. Potential Holder perjury I: Attorney
General Eric Holder told Congress he had never been associated with
“potential prosecution” of a journalist for perjury when in fact he
signed the affidavit that termed Rosen a potential criminal.
6. The ATF “Fast and Furious” scheme: Allowed
weapons from the U.S. to “walk” across the border into the hands of
Mexican drug dealers. The ATF lost track of hundreds of firearms, many
of which were used in crimes, including the December 2010 killing of
Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry.
7. Potential Holder Perjury II: Holder
told Congress in May 2011 that he had just recently heard about the
Fast and Furious gun walking scheme when there is evidence he may have
known much earlier.
8. Sebelius demands payment: HHS
Secretary Kathleen Sebelius solicited donations from companies HHS
might regulate. The money would be used to help her sign up uninsured
Americans for ObamaCare.
9. The Pigford scandal: An
Agriculture Department effort that started as an attempt to compensate
black farmers who had been discriminated against by the agency but
evolved into a gravy train delivering several billion dollars in cash to
thousands of additional minority and female farmers who probably didn’t
face discrimination.
10. GSA gone wild: The
General Services Administration in 2010 held an $823,000 training
conference in Las Vegas, featuring a clown and a mind readers. Resulted
in the resignation of the GSA administrator.
11. Veterans Affairs in Disney World: The agency wasted more than $6 million on two conferences in Orlando. An assistant secretary was fired.
12. Sebelius violates the Hatch Act: A
U.S. special counsel determined that Sebelius violated the Hatch Act
when she made “extemporaneous partisan remarks” during a speech in her
official capacity last year. During the remarks, Sebelius called for the
election of the Democratic candidate for governor of North Carolina.
13. Solyndra: Republicans
charged the Obama administration funded and promoted its poster boy for
green energy despite warning signs the company was headed for
bankruptcy. The administration also allegedly pressed Solyndra to delay
layoff announcements until after the 2010 midterm elections.
14. AKA Lisa Jackson: Former
EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson used the name “Richard Windsor” when
corresponding by email with other government officials, drawing charges
she was trying to evade scrutiny.
15. The New Black Panthers: The
Justice Department was accused of using a racial double standard in
failing to pursue a voter intimidation case against Black Panthers who
appeared to be menacing voters at a polling place in 2008 in
Philadelphia.
16. Waging war all by myself: Obama
may have violated the Constitution and both the letter and the spirit
of the War Powers Resolution by attacking Libya without Congressional
approval.
17. Biden bullies the press: Vice
President Biden’s office has repeatedly interfered with coverage,
including forcing a reporter to wait in a closet, making a reporter
delete photos, and editing pool reports.
18. AKPD not A-OK: The
administration paid millions to the former firm of then-White House
adviser David Axelrod, AKPD Message and Media, to promote passage of
Obamacare. Some questioned whether the firm was hired to help pay
Axelrod $2 million AKPD owed him.
19. Sestak, we’ll take care of you: Former
White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel used Bill Clinton as an
intermediary to probe whether former Rep. Joe Sestak (D-Pa.) would
accept a prominent, unpaid White House advisory position in exchange for
dropping out of the 2010 primary against former Sen. Arlen Specter
(D-Pa.).
20. I’ll pass my own laws: Obama has
repeatedly been accused of making end runs around Congress by deciding
which laws to enforce, including the decision not to deport illegal
immigrants who may have been allowed to stay in the United States had
Congress passed the “Dream Act.”
21. The hacking of Sharyl Attkisson’s computer:
It’s not clear who hacked the CBS reporter’s computer as she
investigated the Benghazi scandal, but the Obama administration and its
allies had both the motive and the means to do it.
22. An American Political Prisoner:
The sudden decision to arrest Nakoula Basseley Nakoula on unrelated
charges after protests in the Arab world over his anti-Muslim video is
an extraordinarily suspicious coincidence. “We’re going to go out and
we’re going to prosecute the person that made that video,” Hillary
Clinton allegedly told the father of one of the ex-SEALs killed in
Banghazi.
23. Get rid of inconvenient IGs: Corporation
for National and Community Service Inspector General Gerald Walpin was
fired in 2009 as he fought wasteful spending and investigated a friend
of Obama’s, Sacramento Mayor and former NBA player Kevin Johnson. The
White House says Walpin was incompetent.
24. Influence peddling: An
investigation is underway of Alejandro Mayorkas, director of the U.S.
Citizenship and Immigration Services, who has been nominated by Obama
for the number two post at the Department of Homeland Security. Mayorkas
may have used his position to unfairly obtain U.S. visas for foreign
investors in company run by Hillary Clinton’s brother, Anthony Rodham.
2. Unemployment:
between 2008 and 20010 more than 20 million jobs were….less than 6 million have been regained. You can not count the “Under-employed and the White House refuses to acknowledge the people who stopped looking for a job…over 90 million Americans remain unemployed under Obama….Food Stamp recipients doubled…and are almost now tripled. The REAL unemployment numbers hit over 20%.
3. Inflation:
The percentage rate that Banks borrow money is being artificially held down to )%….while Banks are refusing to loan money at a decent low rate to small businesses and People in need….super rich who do not need the money borrow at super low rates and invest the money, making huge profits and Faux-boosting the stock Markets.
4. Obama Budget:
This is painfully laughable…under Obama the National Debt has almost doubled….from 10 billion to approaching 20. Also…See # 3.
Oh, yeah, Obama is wonderful. 93 Americans are unemployed. They aren’t counted because they have stopped looking for a job…….because there are NONE. 75% of jobs “created” are PART TIME and according to the Labor board ALL new jobs have gone to IMMIGRANTS both legal and illegal. So, he’s replacing American workers with foreign workers.
He’s the first President who IGNORED an Ambassador’s pleas for more security and wasn’t present while the Ambassador was being murdered, THEN LIED about what happened. Oh, yeah, there are no scandals. The IRS is being used as an enforcement, punishment arm of the WH. I know people who were targeted by the IRS. And some were not just targeted by the IRS, they were targeted by NUMEROUS Federal agencies.
Statistics can be twisted to say anything you want them to. The graph “regressive whitetrash GOP scum” (how charming) posted shows the percentage of increase in the debt under a POTUS. The increase under Reagan was FIRST OF ALL, increased by a Democrat majority Congress and SECOND the debt was $2 trillion. Obama has increased the debt to $18 TRILLION!!
The Left will SPIN the truth where ever they can.
And yes, mark.saylor, Obama HAS acted illegally and unConstitionally. The Constitution doesn’t allow Presidents to act “alone”. That’s why we have three EQUAL branches of government……or have you ever read the Constitution. If Obama was a Republican you’d be screaming at his actions.
Um. You are living in the past. The past year has seen about 80% of the new jobs be full time. Also, the IRS was enforcing the law and were more likely to catch liberal groups abusing 501(c)3 rules than conservatives, primarily because the conservative groups were good at working the refs. Benghazi - seriously? Even the Republican committee admitted they couldn’t find anything even remotely related to wrongdoing.
Here is where you go completely off the rails. You are trying to compare nominal 1988 dollars with nominal 2014 dollars. A well-trained chimpanze could understand why this is a horrible error in logic and reasoning. Dollars lose value over time, and you cannot compare a number that is related to another (like debt to gdp) without both a numerator and a denominator. As a comparison to the size of our economy, Reagan’s debt increase was the greatest by far. Also, our national debt is not 18T. Where are you getting that absurd number?
Lastly, you must have been asleep since before WWII - actually before the Civil War - because the President has a great deal of ability to act on his own. There is the War Powers Act, the Executive Order and the signing statement (invented by Mr. Bush II, who included more signing statements than any President and is likely to keep that record for all of eternity) and the ability to control the executive branch agencies. No serious Constitutional scholar believes that the President has done anything that is wildly outside of what his predecesors have done - and furthermore, in terms of executive orders, Obama is well behind Bush, Reagan and Nixon.
You have what is called epistemic closure. You cannot take in new information and then modify your positions. You have this problem because you are a rube. You get all your info from Fox or right wing radio - and they both serve a singular purpose. To get all the marks in one place so it is easy to fleece them. How many multi-level marketing scams are you losing money on? How much gold have you bought for a $500 an ounce mark up? Do you have a silver filter or a bottle of iodine pills? Have you purchased 6 months worth of rejected by the army dried food meals or MREs? My guess is that at least one of these is true. And you wasted your money - because you are willing to believe that which a person with two eyes and two ears should not.
Absolutely not true. The IRS wasn’t enforcing the law and NO, Liberal groups were not targeted. There were a few Liberal groups but too few to count.
I KNOW the difference in the value of money over the years. You and the article completely ignored the fact that it was a DEMOCRAT held majority that passed the budgets. Reagan believed in a “representative government” and that he needed to respect what the majority wanted. Obama has no such belief….as he never had the approval of the governed to pass Obamacare.
You misrepresent what Executive Orders can do. They can address problems implementing laws ALREADY passed by Congress, they cannot make law. That is Congresses job.
Again. 100% verifiably, empirically not true. The ONLY group to actually be denied designation was a liberal group, and more liberal groups, as a percentage of applications, were scrutinized than conservative groups. This is part of the Republican’s own report! FYI, even though they received the designation, not one single tea party group qualifies to be a 501(c)3.
Also, again, you have your facts wrong. The Democrats CUT each and every budget request by Reagan.
Also, Obama does respect what the majority wants. It is Republicans that have blocked popular policies for the past 7 years, not Democrats. And Obamacare - if you look at the policies, rather than just the name “Obamacare” it turns out that it IS supported by the governed, and furthermore, it is working.
And last but not least, you prove, once again, that you couldn’t pass a high school civics class. Executive orders most definitely do change policies and can/have resulted in parts of laws not being enforced, or parts of laws being enhanced. This is the case with the smattering of executive orders filed by this President, which are a fraction of what other Presidents have done.
You have no factual basis for your beliefs. Even with a very tiny bit of research, you would have not made these mistakes - but instead, you only seek information from places that confirm your already deeply held beliefs. It is sad really, because about 20% of the population has this problem. You are a useful idiot to people that are using you to screw you and your friends and neighbors over, and you are too rigid to figure it out. Sad.
Sorry, verifiably, empirically true. I can name FOUR that I personally know. American Freedom Alliance, San Fernando Valley Patriots, True the Vote, Tea Party Patriots. They have approved them now, AFTER legal challenges. In fact, the way they ended the law suits was to approve their status.
Yes, the Democrats made cuts or the budgets would have been EVEN BIGGER.
What “popular” policies have Republicans blocked? They had no ability to block anything.
I do a great deal of research and your insults don’t prove you right. Sorry, but it’s Liberal who only look for what supports what they believe.
Don’t condescend to me. I have traveled to DC seven times in the last six years to lobby Congress. I have read the ACA and know what’s in it. I have met the people actually involved in making policy.
You aren’t sad, you’re funny, borrowing the “useful fool” term from Conservative talk shows. LOL!
And not one single one of them should have received designation because they are not primarily providing services to the poor!
You don’t get it that Reagan wanted more and the cuts were a compromise? Seriously?
Um. The Republicans blocked over 330 nominations for judicial and high level executive appointments, many of which were blocked to extract pork for the Southeastern States. They filibustered a huge record number of bills. What planet do you live on! There is no denying this!!!!!
The next paragraph is purely projection. This is evidenced by your posts. You even agreed that Reagan asked for more, but still find a way to believe that Democrats were to blame for Reagan’s deficits!
Do you know how to do research? I find it hard to believe that you do, since you continue to believe things that are demonstrably not true.
You deserve condescension and derision. You lobbied? Or you went to a dorky tea party protest. Those are not the same thing. You have read ACA? So surely you know that most of the oft quoted 2000 pages is 2000 pages of minor amendments to existing laws, or references to existing laws. My guess is you never read it.
Useful idiots was a term coined by Mr. Lenin - not by right wing media. Further proof that you have little in terms of education or critical thinking skills. I would expect a poor performing senior in high school to know the origin of that term. You should be embarrassed. You have been wrong, proven wrong and yet you think you are right.
Again, no. 5013c is not for providing services for the poor. And yes, most were denied first and had to sue. It wasn’t just delayed, and the only reason they finally got the denials reversed was because they had been outed and there were investigations and law suits.
I’d LOVE for you to go through what these people went through and spend the money they had to spend and see how you like it. Many groups had no money to sue, so they had to shut down.
Apparently, you aren’t aware Harry Reid changed the rules so they couldn’t filibuster judicial appointments. What planet do YOU live on? And FYI, Democrats filibustered all of Bush’s judicial nominations too.
Here’s some FACTS for you:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/21/part-time-job-creation_n_3788365.html
http://cis.org/all-employment-growth-since-2000-went-to-immigrants
http://contraryinvesting.com/federal-reserve/bernanke-admits-qe2-is-about-juicing-the-stock-market/
http://jobs.aol.com/articles/2015/01/09/workforce-participation-rate-hits-record-low/
I have enjoyed this debate between Michael Greer and oldiugymnast. I do hope you guys can shake hands and be friends, something I wish both sides of the aisles in Congress would do. And so, who won this debate? I’ll tell you later.
agreed,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, please review the graphs/ charts I gave “mr” greer and Im willing 2 wager he either doesn’t answer or he SPINS a FOX “news” web of BENGHAZI/KENYA/ SHARIA LAW poop,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
The Tea Party groups are money laundering operations! They take largess from right wing groups and turn it into salaries. You are a dupe!!!! Also, right from the IRS’ page on 501c3:
“To be tax-exempt under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code, an organization must be organized and operated exclusively for exempt purposes set forth in section 501(c)(3), and none of its earnings may inure to any private shareholder or individual. In addition, it may not be an action organization, i.e., it may not attempt to influence legislation as a substantial part of its activities and it may not participate in any campaign activity for or against political candidates.
The exempt purposes set forth in section 501(c)(3) are charitable, religious, educational, scientific, literary, testing for public safety, fostering national or international amateur sports competition, and preventing cruelty to children or animals. The term charitable is used in its generally accepted legal sense and includes relief of the poor, the distressed, or the underprivileged; advancement of religion; advancement of education or science; erecting or maintaining public buildings, monuments, or works; lessening the burdens of government; lessening neighborhood tensions; eliminating prejudice and discrimination; defending human and civil rights secured by law; and combating community deterioration and juvenile delinquency.”
So once again, you are wrong. Given that the primary purpose of the Tea Party groups is political organizing, they are NOT ELIGIBLE to be a 501c3 and should not have been given that designation. If you dig into the activities of these groups, they are primarily a way to funnel money tax free into the pockets of rich guys.
read my replies to “mr” greer with that factual graphs and charts
“facts”
,,,,,,,,,,, you really are easy to destroy
Oh, you are a lobbyist. A briber and part of the problem.
Not allowing a vote is blocking.
You actually believe the BS you spew?? It’s as if no liberal has ever done anything wrong. You are truly a pathetic person and I’m sure many will agree with me. By thinking that uber wealthy limousine liberals really give a rats butt about you shows how really misinformed, low info and ignorant you and others like you really are !!
Can you make a cogent argument against any point I made? Did I ever claim that no liberal has ever done anything wrong? Did I say that rich liberals care about me? If I am “misinformed” and “low info” then surely you can come up with some empirically based article that shows that to be the case - right? I find it interesting that you cannot come up with a single argument against any of my statements and you had to argue against statements I never made.
What’s the use, you’re impossible to reason with. You blame all our ills on the R’s and never bring D’s into the equation so you must think their perfect. And to think bo is a better president than any other is just ludicrous, demeaning and downright stupid !! THE END !!
At no point in our back and forth have you offered anything remotely resembling reason. Sorry - and I never said that Ds or perfect, we are discussing whether or not Barack Obama or Ronald Reagan were better Presidents based on the metrics described above. You have not provided a counter argument, but rather have stuck your toddler fingers in your ears and pretended to not be able to hear the argument being made. And furthermore, when presented with evidence, you have not only not been able to come up with counter evidence, but you have just wholesale dismissed the evidence as presented. If you think you are doing something that approaches reasoning, you need to go back to school.
With what evidence? Evidence from a POS liberal site? Yeah, good luck wi’dat !! This is a joke at best, too bad you’re not as smart as you think you are but that’s the case with most liberals. With your media otlets, your heroes are protected and sheltered from all that is bad while R’s are crucified and hung for the smallest of transgressions. How pathetic is that?
The CBO is a POS liberal site? FRED is a liberal site (Federal Reserve clearing house of Economic Data? And surely you are aware that Bezos owns the Post and has a editorial board made up of 8 staunchly conservative people and one liberal. NYtimes has 7 staunchly conservative people on their editorial board. What about these sources makes you think they are liberal?
And as a matter of objective fact, what you claim here is simply not true. In fact, in the interests of objectivity, all of the sources I prefer tend to give meritless conservative ideas (those that don’t comport with reality like “expansionary austerity” or that QE by definition causes price inflation under all circumstances) too much credence.
And once again, you have not presented a cogent argument against anything this article references or anything that I have stated. An ad hominem argument against the source is by very definition an error in rhetoric and in reasoning.
Now I know for sure you’re brainwashed. And clueless and ignorant also. Good luck in life, you need it !!
I can assure you that I do just fine in life. I do so because I read, understand the world and don’t pretend reality doesn’t exist. I am sure that any person reading this can understand just how badly you have lost here today. Sadly, you are so lacking in skill that you don’t know yourself. Good luck to you as well, it must be very, very difficult going through life with such little grasp of reality.
please enjoy this
,,,,,,,,,,,silly little facts
repub transgression?? really?????
Ive got tons: here is a recent one
Total leftist, bitter crybaby union propaganda BS ! And you believe it !! How sad, pathetic, gullible and naïve is that?? lmfao
How so. I went to the Wisconsin state website and looked at their projected revenues and expenditures and the deficit is 2.2B dollars. Why would the state’s own website post bitter crybaby union propaganda?
Have you really still not figured out that you are not making an argument and not providing any data to support your position and therefore are losing this debate in a stunning fashion?
refute them with corroborative numbers,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,until U do; keep crying
enjoy this also-
( silly little facts)
hows this taste??
US TREASURY facts
Yeah, I believe them like I believe what the IRS and EPA or any other BIG BRO agency spews !! You pathetic libs love BIG BRO so much for reasons that I’ll never comprehend ( because that’s all they do is LIE )and will fall for anything that makes bo and the rest of the limousine liberal thugs look good and nothing could be further from the truth. liberal facts are indeed, NOT FACTS !!
so,,,,,,,,,,,,, the smaller GOVT that you clowns demand: will this include GOVT telling us what religion we MUST have? GOVT telling us that women cannot have an abortion? GOVT telling us women MUST get a taxpayer-funded — and useless- ultrasound procedure B4 an abortion? GOVT telling us we need to hav TAX CUTS for billionaires?? GOVT telling us we should have GAYS illegal and NOT sharing the EQUALITY of all (other) americans??/
GOVT making states such as Wisconsin and Ncarolina and other GOP states go bankrupt so wealthy can get more money??
=================================================
that “little” government??? help me out here with some FACTS
Why do you low info, repetitious and boring liberals spew the same old BS over and over again like you have for the past 50 years. BTW why should BIG BRO have to pay for an irresponsible woman’s abortion and WI and NC are doing fine and would be way better off without free handouts to people quite capable of taking care of themselves. And we’d also be a lot better off if all states get rid of forced unionism like they did in WI and make it a RIGHT TO WORK state. Do you understand that? Never mind, I bore of you and the same old boring talking points you morons always spew so don’t bother to reply
Right to work states have 1. Lower median income. 2. Lower educational attainment rates. 3. Lower mobility. 4. More government transfers to individuals. and 5. Lower life expectancies.
I guess you have a different idea regarding what “better off” means than I have. And once again, at no time, ever has the government paid for an abortion! Also - what makes you think irresponsibility is the primary driver of abortions? We all know that you are more concerned with controlling women than you are with precious little babies - but seriously, have ever bothered to think through the reasons that women get abortions? Maybe you should talk to a few and instead of being a judgemental prick, you could listen and learn.
BS, do you want to be FORCED to join a union or for that matter, be forced to do anything? Then you’re nothing but a liberal puppet being led around by his intolerant, ignorant and close minded puppeteer……. the libs. What is it with you libs and your love for BIG BRO? BTW, what is planned parenthood about? Did you ever read up on the history of that hideous org.?
If you want the union benefits and the union salary, yes, you should have to join the union to work in a union shop! You are a freeloader if you don’t. Planned Parenthood primarily provides women with womens health services and education. Only about 2% of their patients ever get an abortion. I guess your history comment is due to Margret Sanger being somewhat of a proponent of eugenics - well, as it turns out most educated people in the early 1900’s were. It was a sign of the times. Those ideas have long ago been rejected by society as well as Planned Parenthood.
I think it is funny that you think I am intolerant and ignorant and following a puppeteer after all the times you have demonstrated a lack of tolerance, shocking ignorance and fear based following behavior on this thread. Are you completely lacking in the ability to be introspective? I am by no means perfect, but at least I try to get things right and have developed the tools to do so.
Still - over 30 posts and you still have not made a cogent argument against what is presented above.
What if you don’t want to join a crooked and criminal union run by intimidation by thugs. You shouldn’t have to be forced to do anything, much less join a union. Unions are the main cause of so many jobs going offshore. I know you’ll come up with some more bogus figures to dispute that but don’t bother. BTW, how are you a freeloader if you don’t want to be FORCED to join a union? Some people are smart and aren’t big crybabies and don’t need to be protected by union thug morons. With your way of thinking about sanger, I guess that it being the sign of the times, it makes it alright. I realize in the grand scheme of things, there is no reasoning with a liberal because they lack any common sense or sense of reality and believe all that is told to them when it fits their agenda………. and you’re a perfect example of that !! See that, perfection is possible.
If you want the money and benefits that they negotiated on your behalf, you have to join to work there. If you don’t then you are a freeloader. You are getting a benefit that you don’t deserve. How hard is that to understand. And why do you think Unions are thugs, but don’t think Union busting corporations who use intimidation, violence and economic sanction to bust unions are not? My guess, given your poor language skills, bad reasoning and constant illogical statements, is that you don’t have enough skill to join the handful of remaining unions. I am not a union member because I am not commodity labor. But the fact is that when you compare two like jobs, one union and one not, the union member gets paid more and has better benefits. If you work in a union shop and get union negotiated compensation, you are a freeloader if you aren’t a member. Period.
Did I say that Sanger was right? Not at all! She was wrong - but at that point in time, this was a commonly held belief among white folks all over the world. You can hardly smear an entire organization because of what one of its founders believed in 1912. And apparently on top of being innumerate, you are also illiterate because I am simply repeating myself here.
Now onto your tirade about how liberals are lacking in reason, common sense and that liberals believe whatever their told as long as it fits their agenda. As has been pointed out to you - frequently and with sources, this is simply “projection,” which is the phenomenon of a person ironically believing that others are engaging in what you yourself are. As Voltaire once said, Common sense is neither common nor is it sense. You get your info from demonstrated liars. And do so because you have what us pointy-headed people with advanced degrees call “Motivated Reasoning.” And by definition, motivated reasoning is the opposite of reasoning because you are making an ideological assumption.
You still - after all of these posts - have not been able to point to a single verifiable source, have not been able to string together a few words and make a cogent argument against the article above, and you have not demonstrated that you have the capacity to engage in a reasoned debate in which we can agree on the facts around us, but maybe not on the right policy prescriptions. Instead, you make up your facts, smear lots of hard working decent people with the label “thug,” and make constant errors in logic and reasoning. And yet, I bet you think you won the exchange. Sad.
My thug comment was directed at the union bosses because the peons in the union aren’t smart enough to see what they’re all about and are too dependent on them. At one time unions served a good purpose but are an antiquated system in the real world today. To me, all unions seem to do is protect pathetic workers in their rank and file that more than likely, should be fired. Believe me, I know quite a few.
In case this wasn’t clear - NOBODY is forced to join a union. If you don’t want to be in a union, go work someplace that doesn’t have one. Sure, you get paid less and get fewer benefits, but if that is how you like it - bully for you!
Right to work is all about stopping forced unionism, look it up. Closed shops should not be allowed, Period !!
No it isn’t. It is about BUSTING Unions and always has been. Why do you think it is so strongly supported by corporate interests? And if you get the benefits provided by Union negotiations without joining the union, you are the very definition of a freeloader. Period. Why do you think you are entitled to the wages and benefits that were earned by the blood, sweat and tears of union members without paying your share?
It is funny to me how the Republicans always talk about personal responsibility and then castigate people who are temporarily unemployed and collecting insurance benefits that they paid for by working as freeloaders - when it appears to me that the entire Republican philosophy is built on avoiding paying your own fair share.
No that’s the democratic philosophy, wanting something for doing nothing !! Welfare, foodstamps, free college, unending unemployment benefits, free phones, I could go on but choose not to. It seems to me as if you really believe liberals do no wrong and conservatives do no right !! How unrealistic and clueless is that? Your love for BIG BRO is really pathetic and pitiful and is a threat to a free society and that sickens me to no end.
So you don’t really understand the philosophy at all. That is a little helpful to the discussion. First of all, having a safety net is not the same as wanting something for doing nothing. If I have the misfortune of, say, having my legs run over by a bus, I PAY for SSDI benefits that will assist me in surviving that tragedy. I think every person - no matter how poor - should have the opportunity to succeed in life. Given that at least 2 years of college are required in the modern world, I want every one to get that leg up. This is called making an investment in our future. And clearly you must be someone born after 1978 - because going to a State school was free or nearly free in most states up until about 1996 or so. University of California was about $300 a semester for tuition until the late 1980s - and that is a great big part of why we had the tech boom. Nobody gets free phones - that is magical thinking. There are people who are poor who get a subsidy for their service and are provided a phone by the service provider.
And on the subject of clueless - almost everything you believe is simply bullshit. And to make it worse, you don’t have the reasoning skills to understand how free or reduced cost education (which we used to have until conservatives stole the money to give to prisons, police and military contractors) can actually increase productivity, living standards and reduce crime and the attendant costs. You simply have not thought anything through. I am tired of explaining it to you - especially given the “Big Bro” in every post - seeing as how the Department of Homeland Security and the Patriot Act were 100% inventions of the conservatives.
My God man, you really do talk out of your ass. You pen so much without really saying anything which is so typical of liberals. And you probably think msnbc, cnn, nbc, cbs ,abc,nyt,wapo et al are all fair and balanced and don’t love bo and his cronies and don’t despise R’s. You need to stop listening to liberal idiots and join the real world. And that’s not what I mean by BIG BRO but I can see you’re too blind and ignorant to see that, as is par for the course. Toodles and tata’s
You’re cute. You think a reasoned discussion involves nothing but invectives and believe that “fair and balanced” is being directly between well considered thought out ideas and ludacris fear mongering and stupidity. As it turns out, that is not the case. See - when you use this never used by right-wingers tool known as empiricism, you can actually figure some stuff out.
And sense - in what, like 50 posts - you haven’t been able to string together a cogent thought or develop an idea, maybe you would like to explain what exactly you mean by “BIG BRO.” What does that mean to you exactly? I mean, there is an orwellian construct known as “Big Brother” - but clearly that isn’t what you mean, since nobody on the left wants to scrub history of history (but the right wing surely has made a lot of efforts in that regard) and nobody on the left wants to police your thoughts - what exactly do you mean?
BTW, have you noticed it’s the urban areas that are the downfall of many states and we all know who they’re run by, don’t we?
Right - you have tried really hard to understand this. We can tell. It is incredible how much effort you have put into understanding decline. Also, you might note that while Detroit has had its struggles, by in large, Democratically controlled cities do way, way better than those controlled by Republicans. Of all the midwestern states, WI is doing the worst - so you might want to rethink that. At no time has the Federal Government paid for abortions. Do you have single opinion that is based on fact?
Also - you might note that the Federal Reserve is not the same as the IRS, and it is not a government entity. Also - what the FED, CBO, and other government entities that are set up to be free from political manipulation publish is always very close (so close as to be impossible to tell the difference in a substantive way) to what Oxford, Harvard, MIT, University of Chicago, Northwestern University, University of Michigan and Rutgers economic schools publish. Funny you calling people that actually think and study and try to understand things morons - what with the numerous errors of fact and logic that you make repeatedly.
Wrong, wrong and wrong again. First off, you better start getting your news and info from more reliable sources than liberal run POS rags and blogs. Opinions can’t be based on fact. An opinion is an opinion and a fact is a fact but maybe not in your fantasy world. Tell me one dem city that s doing better but for the life of me, I can’t think of a major city run by an R. Can you? But the funniest and most pathetic thing you posted is that you want me to believe anything any of the universities you mentioned have any realistic credibility at all being that they’re left of lenin and maybe even more communist. You slay me with you’re alleged intelligence when that’s all you do is bring up the same old tired and pathetic liberal talking points. Now be gone, you really bother me and are a huge waste of time !!! And yes, you still are a liberal moron, a pathetic one, but nonetheless, a moron !!!
Once again - it is not the source of facts, but rather the underlying facts themselves which can be accurate or not. The CBO, FRED, MIT and all of the various sources of info that I use are neither political or “blogs.”
And then you go really off of the rails. Opinions can, and frankly should, be based on facts. Surely, it can be your opinion that the earth is 6,000 years old - but outside of a chronology of the bible written by a 5th century monk based upon the official cannon of the Catholic Church, there is no evidence whatsoever. And given the fact that most of that was written during the late stone age/early bronze age - I would hardly call that evidence. You can opine that Barack Obama was engaged in some great deception since months prior to his birth to maintain natural born status so he could one day be POTUS - but that opinion would be lacking any foundation and worth less than dirty toliet paper. You could opine that we have the greatest national debt in our countries history and that it spells doom, but you couldn’t do this with evidence given that we are neither at a historically high debt to income ratio nor is their any evidence that high debt causes weak economics (the evidence all points to weak economics causing high debt). You could claim that Harry Houdini died due to a ill-timed punch in the gut, but it isn’t true. An opinion that has no factual foundation is still an opinion - but it has no validity. And it turns out that poor reasoning, unfounded opinions and loud protestations regarding the truth lying in said opinions is the snake oil of morons. Lap it up.
San Jose, Cupertino, Fremont, San Francisco, Palo Alto, Berkeley, Madison, Bloomington, Columbus, NYC, Miami and Austin all have overwhelmingly Democratic Leadership and all have a higher per capita income and wealth than ANY city with primarily Republican leadership. And guess what - it took me less than 3 minutes to get that data from the Census Factbook. But even so - you missed, entirely, my point. Detroit isn’t struggling because it has Democratic leadership - it is due to the erosion of tax base due to white flight and the unconscionable decision by the big 3 automakers to spend the better part of 3 decades making mostly vehicles that not only were not wanted, but were poorly designed. And as it turns out - the MANAGEMENT of all three companies were - during their downfall from 1970-2000 almost entirely run by republicans. Have you ever researched local disinvestment and the drivers? I think we all know the answer.
And still - you have nothing. Nothing at all. Not a single cogent example. Not a single well reasoned, logical statement in support of your position. No data. Nothing. You have simply the ability to call people names and to make overly strident claims that have no merit.
Blah, blah, blah. It’s amazing, you rant and say nothing. Are there any cities with an R mayor?
From this post we can learn that 1. You don’t understand how City Government Works. 2. That you are too lazy to do your own research and 3. That once again, you are incapable of making a cogent point of to express yourself in a way that allows others to understand you.
You didn’t answer the Q. I know exactly how city gov’t works. All the idiots vote for the dems and then the city goes to hell. I know, I lived in one and I got out !! How smart is that?
So once again, you prove you don’t know what you are talking about. Mayors have very limited power. Except in the Northeast. Those R led cities in the southeast are doing well because they get the lions share of federal dollars to supplement their budgets. Here in CA, I donate 29 cents of every dollar in federal taxes I spend to the freeloading states in the Southeast. Thanks taker!
You are so full of crap, you reek !!! BTW, I’m not from the SE. You are nothing but a effing lying liberal who lies to advance his agenda like all liberals do !! It makes me fu*ck*ng sick that you’re allowed to breathe and vote
And yet you cannot actually point to a lie. You cannot make a cogent explanation of your position and to top it all off, you don’t have the capacity to explain even why you are so mad at liberals. Why don’t you even try? Too afraid to be torn to shreds again? I would do a victory dance, but I sort of feel like I have been repeatedly slapping a defenseless animal. Except you and your ideas are so dangerous to our community and our nation…..
In your mind, do R’s do anything right and do dems ever do anything wrong? You seem to be a one way with no way out……. and that’s pretty damn sad.
They used to. But it has been a long time. And how is it “sad” to use my own rationality and to analyze what the R’s and D’s want to do and to chose which is mostly aligned with my policy preferences. You seem to be like a Cowboys Fan who roots for the R’s because - well you always have. Regardless of the outcomes of their ideas. But the fact remains, the R’s policy preferences are not aligned with the best interests of all but about 125,000 American families - whether you like it or not. They also are selling snake oil - which I find abhorrent. There is no evidence that supply side economics works under any conditions and tons that under the current conditions they are detrimental to the economy. There is no evidence that regulations cost jobs - in fact the opposite is true. There is no evidence that busting unions helps workers - again, tons of evidence that the opposite is true. There is no evidence that restricting women’s access to birth control and health services improve the conditions of life for Americans, in fact - once again - the opposite is true. So what policies that Republicans support are you excited about and why? Because reading your posts indicates to me that you are afraid and therefore voting for a reactionary party that seeks purely to maintain older power structures - whether they are good for us or not.
And it has been proven that you can’t tax yourself into prosperity. You vote for the party that promises to give the people what they want and all for nothing. Now free college?? One of these days there will be no money for the freebies and then you’ll see what happens. You libs work on emotions, feelings and good intentions and you know what they say about good intentions. You need common sense and logic to make things work, which liberals do not possess. BTW, conservatives, not really an R anymore, are all about responsibility and accountability for your own actions and not blaming anything that goes wrong on somebody else like liberals do i e, it’s Bush’s fault. Why you libs think BIG BRO is the know all and end all just truly goes to show you how low info and ignorant to reality you really are. Think 1984.
It has? Are you sure about that? Because we used to have much, much, much higher taxes that were more weighted towards corporations and very wealthy people (like the top .1%). Instead, what we now have are basically a flat tax structure from about the bottom 12% to the top 1% - and the top and bottom ends pay a very low percentage of their income as taxes.
If you actually were studying and really trying to understand the policy implications of what we are doing as a nation, you would understand that $1 spent on education results in $6 not spent elsewhere. As you righties always claim when you are cutting rich guys and corporate taxes and raising taxes/cutting services for everybody elses - this isn’t a zero sum game.
My favorite part of this very emotion driven, immature post, is that you actually think that the more liberal side of this discussion is basing decisions on emotion - when time and time again, we have shown you the cold hard facts, only to have you reject them out of hand because those facts conflict with your reactionary position. You actually believe that the conservative side of the aisle really is about personal responsibility, when as you have evidenced, what the conservatives really want is to skate on the hard work of others.
Your repeated invocation of the socialist democrat author George Orwell’s 1984 only further solidifies my opinion of you - someone who reasons like a 6 year old, believing in magical beings and seeing conspiracies behind everything. You have clearly never read the book - nor are you willing to look at the rather Orwellian conservative backed policies of “be scared of the guy living in the 16th century with a critical eye. And you think I am sad?
Yes, I believe you’re SAD!! All you do is double talk and lie. Hell, you’re so SAD, you actually believe the liberal seminar BS you post. But now I bore of you so GTFA and STFU and keep on believing that filthy rich limousine liberals really give a rats butt about you when nothing could be further from the truth !! FOOL !!
So sense I double-talk and lie, surely you can come up with examples, right? Please do so. Be clear.
At no time have I ever said that limousine liberals care about me - but still have no idea what you consider limousine liberalism, nor have you been able to make a clear statement about what you mean by that.
Your posts are mostly word salad, so you might not want to point fingers. I just want you to explain to me what you think are good policies that will benefit you, your community and our nation. Then explain the mechanism for these policies to actually create benefit.
your attempted spinning away from the topic ( BIG GOVT) is noted….
care to stay on the F*CKING topic of BIG GOVT???
***********************************************************************
hughhhhhhhh lewwwwwwwz
Obama had the same majority of the “representative government” to pass the ACA as reagan had to pass the budget. Obama has made no laws
enjoy,,,,,and pass along to regressive republicans
Wow Michael Greer, you have a lot of pent up hate to go with your incredible amount of misinformation. First to get the 93 million non-working Americans, and non-working is key, it includes retired individuals, (which by the way the US workforce has been shrinking since 1999 due to baby boomers retiring.), people ages 16 and up so it’s including high school and college kids, not many high school kids holding full time jobs or really any! It includes disabled, stay at home parents, people that have chosen to stay out of the work force, and unemployed. Plus that number was from Jan of 2014 so you have not adjusted for last years employment numbers. So a little perspective please!
Please show me where you get your figure of 75% of jobs created are part time and that ALL of them are going to immigrants. Baseless and I call BS!
Um, wrong about the plea for more security, in fact Ambassador Stephens twice said no to additional security for himself. As for the compound that was a CIA sight under the disguise of the State Dept and all of this is a pissing match and finger pointing because the CIA didn’t want to be outed for running operations out of that facility. And as every congressional investigation to date has found, there was no way to usher in additional forces that evening.
The IRS was doing it’s job! God there is no evidence anywhere indicating White House involvement. Next, I hope the IRS would investigate any organization trying to claim tax free status! Or do you like people and organizations cheating and not paying their fair share of taxes? Or better yet LYING about what their organization does to cheat the public out of taxes? They should be doing it with EVERY organization filing for that status.
WRONG AGAIN about the Reagan years. The Republicans held the Senate for the first 6 years he was in office. God you might want to actually look up some easy facts some time, google is a wonderful tool. AND Reagan did triple the debt under his watch with huge amounts of deficit spending. In fact WE are still paying on it! And the combination of his delusional economic model, H.W. Bush and W. Bush with the compounding interest actually accounts for over $10 TRILLION of the current debt. Once again, google and through in a calculator will serve you a lot better than believing your political dogma and idiots like Rush and Hannity.
And in the case of immigration, yes the Constitution does give very sweeping powers to the Executive Branch. Funny thing, you righties didn’t have an issue with it when Reagan and HW Bush did the same thing, and don’t give me the BS line “they were cleaning up legislation” because in Reagan’s term they never passed an updated immigration bill and under HW Bush expansion it took Congress 2 more years and 3 different votes to do the very same thing Obama did.
Just a few “facts” for you.
So called liberal facts don’t count as real facts. They’re always skewed so they are in fact, not facts !!!
As it turns out, you are wrong. Reality and empiricism support liberal ideas much more so than the tautology of the Republican Party - which sadly has been captured by blowhards that couldn’t graduate high school.
And calling a fact liberal or conservative is indicative of what is wrong with your reasoning. Facts are facts. You cannot have a liberal or conservative fact - just a fact. And tired just laid out a whole bunch of dead on accurate reality and your are too lazy and stupid to figure it out.
see: facts
shall these also be called “twisted”???
You cannot skew the truth. You can twist statistics only to a point. The numbers never lie. Making up numbers is the only way to make statistics lie.
Your reply contradicts itself as is regular practice for liberals.
I don’t think the word “contradicts” means what you think it does.
It certainly does. Evidently you don’t know the meaning. You say, the numbers never lie and then say making up numbers is the only way to lie…… DUH !!
Oh - so you don’t understand the difference between “data” and made up numbers. Gotcha. No wonder you are so easily duped. You are innumerate.
You can make data say anything. Are you really that naïve, gullible and stupid all in the same breath?? Maybe you’re just brainwashed? I don’t the hell know and I sure as hell don’t care. You’re a lost soul in a sea of lost souls.
So basically you are saying you can’t know anything. Well, outside of not understanding data, do you have a reason for objecting other than you don’t like the source? Can you explain how the data as presented was manipulated? In several of the cases above, we are talking about hard numbers like “How big is the GDP?” or “How big is the National Debt.” These are not numbers that are easy to manipulate because so many different independent people do the calculations.
And given your lack of anything closely approaching cogent argument, you might want to do a little bit of work on self-improvement and study up on ideas such as “motivated reasoning” and “epistemic closure.” Because you have both in spades.
And you have your head up your ass but then again, don’t all liberals !!
Well that was a well reasoned response. Thanks for playing and so wonderfully demonstrating who you are and how thoroughly wrong you are.
can U help me remove mine???
im blinded by FACTS
im lost in these soul-less facts
is this also “made up”???
,,,,,,,,keep crying
None of theirs were for major issues such as illegal immigration. BTW, what don’t liberals understand about the word illegal. It’s ok for you guys but nobody else?
Um - Ronald Reagan provided amnesty to several million undocumented immigrants in the US by executive order. But who’s counting.
wrong answer,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, REAGAN used it for the same thing: don’t U look at historical facts????? see: 1986/87………get back to me with more oligophrenial bavardage
more for U 2 weep over
( see: spending)
Wooowwww, more liberal skewed numbers. I have to say this, you’re about as dumb as a rock and so naïve and gullible to boot !!
Can you provide better numbers and from a better source? If not, then you, as is par for the course, have NOTHING. You couldn’t pass an econ 101 class! Oh - and the source of those numbers was the CBO.
awww,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, your crying again!!
….where; pray tell O sage: are YOUR charts ad numbers??? Hmmmmmmm????????
regardless of the number of unemployed in this country, there are two facts that Republican’s cant escape. #1 under Bush, new job creation didn’t keep up with the birth rate even when it was going ‘good’ Anemic job growth is actually a loss of net jobs if more people are created than jobs. not too hard to figure out.
And secondly, Bush’s policies lost 700k jobs a month in 07 and 08 and a large part of Obama’s first term. I don’t understand how you can overlook the fact that the loss of all those jobs occurred before obama was sworn in (by YEARS).
But apparently in republicanland the economy crashed the day obama took office because he was elected, rather than the reality which is that he was elected because the economy was in a free fall.
You are so right about everything Michael, Obama has committed sooo many illegal actions and there have been so many scandals in his administration it would take forever to count all of them.
Please delineate all of Obana’s “illegal” actions if you are going to make a blatant statement like, “Obama has committed sooooo many illegal actions. . . scandals. . . .” You make allegations. The burden of proof is always upon the shoulders of the accuser. Your statement is absolutely meaningless unless you can back it up and substantiate your claims, meaningless.
He/she hasn’t been able to answer because delineate was too hard of a word.
And so will the Right. Statistics can be twisted, up to a limit, as long as they remain in the realm of truth. Making up false numbers is not statistics. You comments cannot be well substantiated. You misunderstand the economics. If I may quote for another comment here: “The DEBT is a function of every single administration that comes before it. In the past 100 years there have been TWO in which the country had no debt. It is a function of the DEFICIT. Which is the more critical of the two statistics. HOWEVER, It doesn’t matter that the deficit is BIGGER, what matters is what percentage of total income is it. In this case, the numbers are clear. The % of GDP is MUCH lower than it was under Bush. So while the DEBT is growing by larger pure numbers, it is growing by a lesser percentage. Which is the goal. Basic finance. When the DEFICIT become 0% or less, then we can start paying down the debt. Only DEMOCRATS have succeeded in doing that in the past 50 years). THIRD: And this is important… if THEY’RE on welfare or disability…THEY’RE UNEMPLOYED and not working and thus not part of the calculation.”
A GOP committee concluded the administration did NOT lie.
Bush acted alone 392 times, where is the outrage over that?
EAT THIS………………
IRS??? EAT THIS
”PART TIME / FULL TIME” metric,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, eat this
more facts to quell your lies
source? BLOOMBERG NEWS
Consider the source of this info morons !! They’re very good at lying and skewing !! bo’s time will come and it won’t be good !!!
The hayshakers and rubes check in! Substance please.
That’s all I want from liberals is substance, just a snippet once in a while, not fluff and good intentions all the time !! But alas, it will never happen. Woe is me and the rest of the reasonable and sensible people !!!
You sure do post a lot of nothing. This article sources its numbers. The sources are unimpeachable. How is it reasonable or sensible to say that facts are not facts based upon the source or based upon how closely they relate to your own beliefs? Speaking of which, do you have the capacity to examine those beliefs? Do they mesh well with reality? Do you find yourself going to places that very clearly make stuff up like zerohedge or shadowstats to find (fake) data that supports your world view? If so, you are neither reasonable or sensible.
I read the article twice. Tell me where a source was given for these “factual numbers” and “facts” in general.
Um - in each and every paragraph there is a link or two that will take you to the source of the data. Seriously? You needed to ask this?
No. Not a single link……..
You might want to look at that again. Hit refresh. Something. I am not calling you a liar - but the post above on my browser shows 6 links, all of which go to other articles with a whole lot more that lead you right to the raw data.
eat this—————
source: US TREASURY……….
( see below right hand corner)
Libs always skew things, are you really that ignorant, naïve and gullible?? I’m going to guess yes !!
Again - I have posted a bunch of actual substance. What have you got? And given that you get all of your information from people who primarily are trying to sell you fear assuaging products that are mostly junk, or in the case of gold - way over priced, you may not want to paint others with naive and/or gullible. You get your “news” from a network that spent nearly a billion dollars to get the blessing of the Supreme Court to lie and call it news.
Don’t watch that network and I’ll bet you get your info from skewed, lying, liberal biased networks like msnbc, cnn, nbc, cbs,abc et al that are great at reporting by omission !! Give me one lie by Fox that you actually heard or saw.
Well, day before yesterday a Fox “expert” claimed that Birmingham, UK was entirely Muslim and nobody who wasn’t Muslim was allowed in the city center. There was that one. There were a multitude of lies about Benghazi. I don’t watch Fox, but there are several websites that are primarily dedicated to pointing out the lies, misstatements and half-truths that are trotted out as facts. This is undeniable as is the fact that Fox went to the Supreme Court to get legal blessing to lie and call it news.
I get my information from newspapers and primary sources. NYTimes, Washington Post, San Francisco Chronicle, LA Times and the Chicago Tribune mostly. On economics, I get it from a myriad of economic blogs.
All news sources that are uber liberal and protect liberals at all cost mostly by reporting by omission. Way worse than Fox but you wouldn’t know about that because you’re brainwashed into believing what these rags report. Sucks to be you, eh?
Back to your problem. You think that 5 newspapers of record, none of which that are particularly liberal are lying because you believe that there are liberal and conservative facts. You are getting information from people that exist to assemble gullible and stupid people in one place to sell them junk, and think that that is valid information.
he just answered your question,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, and U spun away with a strawman
ok,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
is this a LIE??
or maybe just a ‘fib’?
hows this??
Hey Bagger, you are entitled to your own beliefs but you are not entitled to your own facts. Refute the data with facts. That is what educated people do.
No, you prove these POS leftist bogus LIES as being factual, then we’ll talk.
Um. The links are right there in the article. I know - learning is hard!
How bout THIS for fact - reagan armed and funded bin laden, and obama had him killed.
bo’s time will come????
hmmmmm,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Little Paulie Ryan??? This is your thinker?
“Virtually everything GOP critics have told us would follow from the policies put in place has not come to pass. You would think that this would occasion a few mea culpas, some rethinking, an admission of poor prognostication. But, alas, it continues. Rep. Paul Ryan is now warning in a column that Obamacare “is weighing down our economy and discouraging hiring” and will ultimately “collapse under its own weight.”
in late 2010. Unemployment currently stands at 5.6 percent as President Obama begins his seventh year in office. LOL didn’t know in 2015 Obama is in his 12th year in office. Incredible fact-checking here.
It’s “that ’70s and ’80s,” not “70’s and 80’s.” All you amateurs with your “your/you’re” bullllllllllllllllllllll
Well, you repeated a whole bunch of debunked Hate Radio claims.
.
So yeah, when people see a post that references F&F, the IRS, and BenghAAAAAAAzi (!) all in one paragraph, they just assume they’re dealing with a hater and not a Knower Of Facts.
.
That’s going to be the way things are; might as well get used to it. Sorry.
F&F, the IRS, and BenghAAAAAAAZI are a conservative mantra.
During Reagan we were not hated by our own allies, we were not the laughing stock of the world as er are now. You forgot to mention that under Reagan the national debt was at an all time low since before WWII , under Obama it is almost as high as it was in 1949. Never did Reagan go around Congress and make his own laws. I would rather have Reagan then Obama any day.
What ‘own laws” are you referring to?
1. Sorry - you are wrong about being hated by our own allies. We had plenty of allies that openly mocked Reagan as being a lightweight intellectually and out of his depth in international affairs.
2. The national debt was at its all time low during the beginning of the Nixon Administration. It was roughly 22% of GDP by the time Reagan took office. It was nearly 70% by the time he left.
3. Our current national debt is about 75% of GDP. The Debt to GDP in 1949 was 120%.
4. Reagan absolutely did go around Congress, and the way he did so is outlined in this article (one of the ways). First off, Reagan issued more than 3x as many executive orders as Obama. Second, he created an off budget revenue source running drugs and guns in Central America and used this money to give weapons to Saddam Hussein and Osama Bin Laden (did you know that OBL was a CIA asset AND the key general in the Mujahideen?), and did so in very open violation of the law. You right wingers are so dense that you tune into the program of the primary perpetrator of this illegal and traitorous activity, Olliver North.
The stock market is being ”propped up” by foreign investment in our economy.Cheap exported labor.and also the recovery of our economy.
The Huffington Post is to the internet as Fox News is to the media. Don’t believe everything you read. Consider the source.
1. Yes - nobody has argued that the workforce participation is as high as it should be, but if you dig a little it isn’t hard to understand that the greatest factor determining the low participation is the high number of retired people.
2. This is a 2 year old article. Things have changed since then. You can go to FRED and get the current numbers.
3. This is what is known as an article/study that seeks to arrive at a conclusion and then wedges the data in such a way as to support the conclusion they wanted. Since, unlike you, I am not innumerate, it took me less than 2 minutes to see their data/math error. Can you figure it out? Actually, it isn’t really an error - it is just presenting data in such a way that you think their conclusion was that an outsized portion of new jobs went to immigrants, when that isn’t at all what the data supports.
4. This is a pretty common mistake among the “financial services” industry papers. They don’t understand economics and why the stock market is going up. The reason that the market is going up so much has nothing at all to do with printing money. Almost all of the change in the money supply is sitting on computers at the Federal Reserve and it has almost nothing to do with the rise in the stock market. And your last sentence indicates you have never bothered to understand monetary policy or money even. The reason the market is hot is because we have been, for going on 7 years now, at what is known as the “lower zero bound.” This means that the rate at which our nation’s safest asset is being sold is for an interest rate that is near or below zero. For 7 quarters out of the last seven years a 5 year TIPS has been selling for a net negative interest rate. This means that the economy is not producing enough “safe” assets and since people that have money are trying really hard not to spend it, they invest in what is perceived as the next safest thing. That happens to be “safe” stocks - which are through the moon. But like I said, you are innumerate and as a result you are easily fooled by an article that is written by a man who has been predicting run-away inflation for 6 years. Any day now.
Obama is what used to be known as a moderate Republican. And yes, I have read Keynes. Heck, I read Samuelson, Friedman, Marx and Galbraith too. How about you?
Obama couldn’t carry Reagan’s briefcase…
correct,,,,here is why
Reagan is so many light years ahead of Obama that any reply to this would only dignify a ridiculous claim…
So you got nothing then?
You already got owned by PhillyFreedom… I could not have put it any better… Just go worship Obama… Another years and he’s gone! 😀
Again - you don’t have a single cogent response that includes analysis or data. Reagan was awesome because you say so? I am supposed to take that at face value. And you think I got owned. Funny.
“light years”
They are deleting comments that disagree with this article. Just your tipical left wing liberal…
Yes Obama had one Bengasi and Bush had 11 Ben Ghazi’s and Reagan had seven Benghazi is
Are you kidding me? obama has spent more money than all the past presidents combined - yes, beginning with Washington. I wouldn’t know where to begin to dispute this - the possibilities are endless. You and so many of the people commenting wouldn’t understand anyway. You and those like you, whether conservative, liberal, or somewhere in between are a huge problem. You don’t care about facts and logic. You support someone blindly. I don’t vote straight party and I cross party lines - I investigate each candidate - just in case you wanted to scream conservative.
So did each and every President prior. This means nothing. Also, much of the debt attributed to Obama was when he brought the Iraq and Afghanistan wars back on budget, rather that hiding it like Bush and company did. Simple facts. Also - except FY09-10 and FY10-11 Obama’s budget has not been higher than the 08-09 Budget of Bush.
And if you care so much about facts and logic, why don’t you understand this?
That’s as about as delussional as you can get. 5. Benghazi, IRS, “Fast and Furious,” which caused the deaths of untold numbers, are infinitely worse in that Obama uses his stooge Holder to squash any prosecution. 4. Real unemployment is at 12 percent. Obama admin. fudges numbers by not counting those who have quit looking for work. Workforce participation is at all time low, foodstamp enrollment at all time high. Without the current oil boom, which is being fought by Obama, were at 400k job loss. 3. Everyone knows Obama admin. lies about inflation, but it’s funny this writer discounts Reagan’s 1.5 %. 2. This one is hilarious since Obama and his congress have NEVER had a budget. The “mess” Obama inherited was created by a Demcrat Congress that Bush failed to fight. 1. The Dow Jones is not the gauge of an economy. But, if you want, the Dow’s numbers, which is no secret, have been accelerated by overseas profits. No one is making money in the US as corps have been moving ops overseas because of oppressive taxes and regulations. Obvious this writer is an economic ignorant.
5. FF was GW Bush’s program and was being run by GW Bush’s political appointee - but even beyond that - there is little evidence that what the RRM folks say is accurate about that program. The IRS was enforcing - rather weakly - the law. Benghazi - even the Republican’s own report says that the White House, State Department, CIA did nothing at all wrong.
4. The UI number used by the CBO (not the Obama Administration - this is an independent agency) are exactly the same formula now as was used throughout Reagan’s tenure. Sorry - but not true. Also, while I agree the workforce participation is too low, that is largely because of the Republican austerity agenda - which can be proven with math. Obama is not fighting the oil boom - simply not true. Food stamp enrollment hit a record high in 2010 and has been steadily decreasing since - but Republicans have done everything they can to not put people back to work. And your oil boom number is so far off - there aren’t even 400k net new jobs total in that industry, let alone millions.
3. Again, the headline and core inflation number is reported by the CBO, which is an independent agency, not by the President. And it matches almost exactly the MIT Billion Price Index, the Log of Headline and about 15 other independent measures of inflation done at academic institutions in the US and UK. So, no, Obama doesn’t lie about inflation. They use core because it isn’t’ as volatile. If the FED made decisions based on Headline - they would act in ways that would cause a great deal of economic damage by responding to noise. Of course, understanding this requires understanding data and research, which you clearly do not. Also, the writer is reporting the average inflation during Reagan’s Presidency. It isn’t discounted. Where do you get this?
2. Obama has submitted a budget every year. How do you suppose a single Democrat in Congress was able to instruct the banking regulators to not enforce the law? I am pretty sure that that was done by executive order. Or are you one of those that still believes that utter BS that it was all Freddie and Fannie - which would require that they had a time machine.
1. You are right that foreign investment has helped drive the rise in the DOW, but you are inummerate if you think that is MOST of the change. You are also incorrect about corporations fleeing the US due to taxes. We are a relatively low tax country and our corporate EFFECTIVE tax rate is 37th out of industrialized nations. Corporations are moving to places where they can have slaves and have all their externalities for free. And if you don’t understand the world externalities, you are too poorly educated to be engaged in this conversation.
And given all the logical and factual errors in your post, you might not want to call someone else an economic ignorant. Let’s give you a quick economics quiz and find out. No cheating!
1. What is marginal utility?
2. Why should you smooth noisy data when trying to determine a trendline?
3. What is an externality? Can you expect more negative or positive externalities in an economy? Why?
4. What are some market mechanisms currently in place to price externalities. What are some of the non-market mechanisms?
5. Please explain what happens when the interest rate - either market or Fed set - reaches zero or nearly zero. Why would the FED lower the interest rate as a countercyclical strategy.
6. What caused the Reagan recession in 1982? What caused it to end?
Your as delusional as the author. No sense arguing with fools. You voted for these crooks and thieves and you’re going to defend them no matter what. That’s okay, just we all are suffering and voters have made it quite clear it has to stop.
You don’t argue because you cannot. You are ill equiped just like all the other teatards. You believe fairytales and never make a cogent post. Plus, when you vote for a party that literally hands out checks from lobbyists on the floor of the House of Representatives, you might not want to point fingers - glass houses being what they are.
This is exactly why I don’t argue with Liberals. All you know how to do is call someone names because you can’t argue facts.
If you had a cogent response or were capable of backing up your assertions you would do so. But you don’t. You are not educated enough to understand why your 12% UI rate you got from Zerohedge or Shadowstats was computed by a different formula than the one being used here and one that counts college students and retired people as unemployed. You don’t provide a source for your claim that Obama lies about inflation, because you don’t understand how inflation is calculated for core and headline, and you also don’t understand why. And not for nothing, but you called me delusional. You can’t back up your facts, I can and from multiple sources that don’t have a dog in the hunt. You haven’t argued facts - you have argued made up bull that allows your bankrupt world view to exist without inspection. If you have numbers - show them. If you don’t - try looking at your ideas and see how closely they comport with reality. It might shake you up a little, but you will be a better person for it.
Here you go Mr. Delusional. http://www.forbes.com/sites/louisefron/2014/08/20/tackling-the-real-unemployment-rate-12-6/
They didn’t like my link - but you are confusing the marginal rate (meaning the highest amount that any dollar is taxed) rather than the effective rate. Talk about using the truth to sell a lie! As I stated before - we do have a high marginal rate, in fact the highest of the OEDC nations. But we are dead last in effective. Effective is the median tax rate of all corporations. One is a real number and the other is theoretical. Can you guess which one you are using????
Again, this stuff is not hard to find if you just open you eyes…”
The marginal corporate tax rate in the United States is 35% at the federal level and 39.2% once state taxes are accounted for, according to the 2013 OECD Tax Database. The global average is much lower, at 25%.
I posted proof twice. “If You Only News” engaged in censorship and didn’t let my posts show. They may not let this one show either.
Then tell us the source. I will look it up.
I’m not sure about other numbers but I can speak about unemployment! … Your numbers are BULL SHIT sir! … Those numbers clearly do not include people who were on unemployment and then “fell off” even though they had still not found a job! …. Can you tell me how many people fell off of unemployment that were CLEARLY not a part of your numbers?
Can you PROVE what you’re asserting is true? He provides a means by which you can check the numbers.
And by the way, little stupid girl, the plural of “anecdote” is NOT data. Your so-called stories of so-called people you purportedly “know” are just your uninformed spittlings.
I can’t tell is this is satire, or if you’re actually stupid enough to believe that any of this is true, because clearly and demonstrably, it is not.
is this true????
Yeah - nobody should come around and show up with facts and numbers that make Ronald Reagan’s carefully crafted mythology look - well - mythic.
Sorry if this spoils your nightly Reagan fap session. Mf mf mf.
hows this taste?
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
the most recent great repub president
Oh my old friend Paul. He once was a good economist. But as you can see he is relying on Shadowstats for his # and they are, as it were, wrong. They made up a new formula that is not the same as the same U1 and U3 that the CBO has been using since 1972. Sorry - but you are getting your info from people that are lying to you.
As a Hoosier - that is my favorite Kentucky joke! Thanks for adapting it for these purposes!
Just in case my comment with links isn’t approved - all one needs to do is google “Shadowstats Debunked” and you will get a whole pile of actual economists who have checked Mr. Williams numbers and found them to be - well, pulled directly from his rectum. In fact, that 23% number is impossible to arrive at using anything remotely related to data. Here is a takedown that a well known, and actually well respected economist wrote. And before we get to that - There is no planet on which Mr. Williams is “well-respected.” Well, maybe inside the libtard/teatard universe - but not in the reality based world.
Now let’s go through some math in an attempt to explain Mr. Williams chart.
Starting with the U-6 we have: 12,032,000 unemployed+7,988,000 part time for economic reasons+2,588,000 marginally attached workers=22,608,000
So now the labor force is 155,524,000+2,588,000 marginally attached=158,112,000(These figures can be found in Table 1)
Dividing 22,608/158,112 gives us 14.3% which is the U-6.(Underutilization rates can be found in Table 15)
Now we can derive how he got his 23.5% figure by adding it into the equation (22,608+x)/(158,112+x)=.235
Therefore X=19,017
In other words he is stating there are 19,017,000 people who would like to have jobs, are available to work, and have not searched for work in the previous 12 months. We can call them the ‘very’-marginally attached for the sake of this exercise. He even goes further though and says his figure represents only the discouraged subset of this ‘very’-marginally attached group, not all of them, which must mean he somehow thinks there are millions more that are very-marginally attached and he is just not including them(which makes his analysis all the more ridiculous). So where on earth is he coming up with the 19,017,000 figure?
Table 38 shows there are 90,100,000 TOTAL not in the labor force. 83,528,000 of those explicitly state they do not want a job. 3,264,000 fall into the marginally attached category which means the total # of people who A) want a job and B) did not search for work in the previous year is 3,578,000 NOT 19,017,000.
***The numbers used in the figures above came from the BLS’s report. These are preliminary #s subject to revision the next couple months so if 5 months from now you look on the BLS site and notice that the BLS February #s don’t match up exactly with the ones I listed, its because of revisions.
Add “intelligent”, “gets things done”, does not have a “shadow government”, and is not a puppet of traitors.
WHEN REAGEN TOOK OFFICE THE NATIONAL DEBT WAS 700 BILLION
WHEN HE LEFT IT WAS 3 TRILLION,,,DOUBLE DIDGET UNEMPLOYMENT MARKS HIS TWO
TERMSWe’re all tired of being told endless lies about how ‘great’ Ronald Reagan
was, when he armed our future enemies, ran up the biggest federal deficits in history, and made the rich a
lot richer, and all at the expense of working class America. But former CIA
boss George HW Bush was really running the show, and thirty years of Bush /
Reaganomics has left America in ruins. The grand illusion (give all the money
to the wealthy and you will be richer) It is amazing anyone bought the lie then
and it is even more amazing that anyone buys that lie now.”
Anyone that believes any of this crap has got to be either totally brainwashed or too dumb to research the truth.
Obama is no where even a good president just check out the rankings of presidents and see the truth.
Joe, you are the perfect republican.
You are an illiterate.
If I’m not mistaken, that’s you in the photo above, isn’t it?
Gee, did you wake up this morning determined to be as stupid and sucking ignorant as possible? Cacking imbecile. That’s just the truth, sugar. You’re welcome. Not everyone would tell you the TRUTH.
Only losers post links without using the information therein to make their argument. What you’re basically doing, little suckmoron, and are too cacking stupid to realize, is asking other people to make your argument for you.
That’s not how intelligent adults debate. But you’re neither, are you?
Are you retarded (he asked rhetorically, already knowing the answer)? My entire comment is using information from that post, dumbass. If you had actually clicked on the link, or possessed critical thinking skills, you’d have figured that out. This is clearly too much to expect of a Leftist, however.
Only LOSER post links without any accompanying pull quotes.
I’ve quite frequently found that Loser Linkers often post links that actually CONTRADICT their assertions.
That’s why Loser Linkers only post links, not arguments. A link is not an argument. It’s just what LOSERS do.
Only losers post links, not arguments. Links by themselves prove exactly NOTHING, which is what you’ve got in your mingy little walnut brain.
Well, name callers have no arguments either. So, I guess we’re both losers.
Not being a fan of Reagan or Obama (don’t feel any president’s skirts are clean), I’d say the comparison of the unemployment numbers is disingenuous at best and downright criminal at worst. It’s impossible to compare the numbers accurately between the time frames in question. The actual unemployment rate currently is closer to 25% in U.S. The discrepancy is due to the changes in method(s)/(data included) for economic calculations. A lot of factors included during Reagan’s time are just not included anymore (many say to make the numbers look better - I agree). Anyone that says we’re economically better off (as a whole) now is either delusional or an outright liar. As a whole, I find this entire article; which is based mostly on economic data, to be patently inaccurate due to that which I’ve alluded to above.
Spot on, if unemployment was really under 6% and no inflation then you would think people would stop taking the food stamps. Maybe if we got rid of the food stamps and brought back the soup lines it would be an eye opener for sure.
Reagan won the Cold War. #Checkmate, #DropMic
Obama got Bin Laden. #DoubleDrop
Facts are stubborn things, which is why you have to manipulate them in order to make the claim that Obama is better than Reagan.
How’s that labor participation rate?
How’s that longest stretch of below 3% GDP growth?
How is that income inequality thing going these days?
How’s that whole Mulsim terrorist thing working out?
Lose your health care plan? Higher health care costs and larger deductibles?
If THIS GUY is a good president, Lord help us if we get a bad one.
All those are real scandals. Unemployment looks better because many americans have simply given up and left the work force so they are not counted in the unemployment numbers. Obama has created more debt for this country than all the other presidents combined. Sooooo……. This article is crap.
Created more debt? The first major addition to the debt was paying Bush’s bill!! You can whine all you want about that, but it is true. How is that on Obama?!!! But wait, I thought your team said deficits don’t matter? Is that only when the president isn’t a republican? Those scandals are not real at all, especially compared to Reagan’s crimes. How about budgets? How about inflation? No? Just “Benghazi!!!!” You people are hilarious.
What do you mean “you people?” I didn’t vote for Bush. Yes, they are all scandals. You can say all you want that they were not, but they are. No matter how big or small the media makes them out to be, they are still scandals. Bush’s bills? From what I recall, most of the debt he created was to pay back the people who helped him get elected in the form of “Stimulus.”
Wow. You are full-on Alex Jones bait aren’t you? So the stimulus didn’t help anything? It only went to Obama’s friends? Benghazi is a sad event. It is one of many similar events that have happened throughout the modern era of US history. Why are these so scandalous? What specifically did Obama do that you think warrants (let me guess) impeachment or jail? You didn’t vote for Bush because you were only ten years old, right?
Funny.
Better than Reagan? So what? Obama is still a mass-murdering war criminal who has done more to destroy civil liberties, turn the US into a semi-fascist police state and entrench perpetual war as the driver of American foreign policy than any president in history.
Wow all of you are brain washed into think that this government is on your side. Obama may not be the worst president, bush 2 gets that spot, but he has lied to the people a few times already. Sure he didn’t start the war on terrorism but he made it worse. And just because there are no facts to prove that he didn’t doesn’t mean anything, they are the government they can hide thing from the people very easily. Wake up people!!!
We are Anonymous
We do not forget
We do not forgive
Expect us
yes sir…….feel free to look it up online,,,,,,,,,
You’re a worthless idiot. I can’t even read your BS. Take off your tinfoil hat and join the real world.
The 11 trillion was attributed to Bush? you’re a cartoon. Bush added about $6 trillion to the roughly $5 trillion owed at the end of Clinton’s term, a 101% increase for Bushy. At the end of Bush’s term, he hadn’t paid for his wars and the economy had tanked, requiring massive injections, which is the basis for a lot of the early spending. Now that the economy has rebounded, the deficits are at historical levels and the debt can almost be reduced. This is after two terms of “deficits don’t matter” republicans. You must be drunk or a child. Or both.
If things were so great wouldn’t Pelosi and Reid control both houses???
That Pakistan doctor is who helped us get binladen, but of course Obama left him in pakistan to die while letting all these illegals stay, makes no sense.
You are full of it up to your eyes brows. Obama is a communist. No president could be worse than Obama and no president could be better than Reagan.
Wow, this article follows the liberal mantra to a “T”. Don’t let the facts get in the way of a good lie. Especially 5 of them. You went full potato. Lol!!!
You’re retarded aren’t you? Your facts are wrong, your statements have so much bias, and you are being laughed at all over the globe by real new stations and universities citing this article as a “what not to do in journalism” study.
Please don’t quit your day job, because this absolutely is not your profession.
What a load of BS, only liberals are dumb enough to believe this. The stupidity and overall low level of education of liberal voters is many times proven fact.
5. The Economy:
See # 3 and # 4
Liberals miss a lot of points…
Considering you don’t have any “points,” liberals can miss a few now and then. BTW, you’re beating a dead horse on the ACA thing. Low-information is a disease best combatted by taking in more information, but not from Fox Entertainment or Breitbart or some other supplier of GOP propaganda. Try cold, hard facts from non-partisan sources. Then come back and continue your armchair quarterback sessions equipped with some semblance of intelligent discourse. I believe you can start with this: The ACA has been in force, in varying degrees, for 5 years now. Not one GOP member of Congress has propounded an alternative. Now why is that (hint: the insurance lobby $aw nothing wrong with the way thing$ were).
ACA created death panels and rationed care, cash for clunkers took great cars off the street, the national debt skyrocketed under Obama and is destroying America, and Obama created ISIS and is killing good American Citizens with drones, and he owns it all now, GW was the best president this Country has ever known. Lookout Obama plans to invade Texas next. Some very good conservative points!
You can’t be serious.
Conservatives have no points. Just bs.
he never did a deal that sold drugs for guns and gave them to the enemy
And YOU miss the point. You can’t force a person to practice medicine; or, quite frankly, anything else. Those doctors have the freedom to leave their practice behind. Isn’t that what you “Conservativees” are all about, freedom?
And what, exactly, are you conserving, anyhow?
I have heard of no one who had to give up their doctor except when they wanted to. If your doctor would not accept ACA then yes you would have to pay him out of pocket, or you had a real lousy insurance policy. Stop telling the lies. They are old old lies. ACA is working, has cost less than expected. You right wing Ya-hoos just cannot give up on the lies can you?
When all conservatives have been brainwashed to believe in nonsense how do you debate with them?
Obama is a great President. All Reagan did was demonize poor people and minorities, triple the national debt, kick off the massive inequality we have today and explode the prison population by locking up millions of non-violent offenders with his ‘War on Drugs’.
Fox News, Rush Limbaugh and the rest are the ones lying. Conservatives are so gullible, they can’t even tell when they’re being manipulated.
You may compare both presidents any way you wish skewing data (e.g., unemployment figures) however you wish; but there is one big difference between the two. Reagan never won any “Liar of the Year” awards.
Well that certainly is an intelligent rational and logical response