Page 226 of 288 FirstFirst ... 126176216222223224225226227228229230236276 ... LastLast
Results 3,376 to 3,390 of 4314

Thread: President Obama

  1. #3376
    Joined
    Aug 2003
    Location
    West Richland, WA
    Posts
    6,397

    Re: President Obama



    That's great!
    Brian

  2. #3377
    Joined
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Milwaukee, Wisconsin
    Posts
    6,010

    Re: President Obama

    I saw that. That whole exchange is weird. The whole thing is off putting. I don't really have an opinion about the missile shield but something about their exchange is weird. Maybe because it has to do with Obama, Vladimir Putin (the neo-dictator who somehow keeps getting elected to things in Russia after retiring about 5 times) and Putin's little buddy Medvedev.

    I actually like Medvedev as a person. He's a camera/gadget nerd and tweets about cell phones and cameras he likes. Right up my ally. But, policy wise, he's a liberal and apparently attached to Putin at the hip.

    I also hate the notion that nothing gets done in an election year. Ugh.

  3. #3378
    Joined
    Aug 2003
    Location
    West Richland, WA
    Posts
    6,397

    Re: President Obama

    I see it as something worse than just election year politics. I see it as deliberately subverting national security to make a possible deal with the Russians that he knows would ruin he re-election if he did it right now.
    Brian

  4. #3379
    Joined
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    74,684

    Re: President Obama

    Hard day in court for the Administration

    http://www.businessinsider.com/peopl...ay-2012-3?op=1

    The Supreme Court just wrapped up the second day of oral arguments in the landmark case against President Obama's healthcare overhaul, and reports from inside the courtroom indicate that the controversial law took quite a beating.

    Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/peopl...#ixzz1qL8v5t4n

  5. #3380
    Joined
    Mar 2002
    Location
    California
    Posts
    24,176

    Re: President Obama

    A few days ago from Politico via hotair.

    Politico: Those assumptions by Democrats on ObamaCare were way off, huh?

    Two years after the signing of ObamaCare by Barack Obama, it might be a little difficult to recall how political strategists in the Democratic Party predicted it would impact their party’s fortunes. Politico’s Carrie Budoff Brown walks through five assumptions publicly offered about the politics of the ObamaCare push that turned out to be, well … as accurate as its fiscal projections (via Jim Geraghty):

    President Barack Obama and his Democratic allies thought their political assumptions were airtight during the yearlong battle to overhaul the health care system.

    Voters would reward them, they thought, even if Democrats muscled a bill through without Republican support. It was just a matter of getting out of Washington and selling the law. Obama would lead the charge, and rank-and-file Democrats would proudly campaign on the achievement.

    None of it worked out that way.

    At the two-year mark Friday, nearly everything that Democrats believed about the politics of health care has turned out to be false. And the cost of those miscalculations has been huge. They have haunted Obama’s presidency, soured business as usual at the Capitol and upended the conventional wisdom peddled by political strategists, who have rarely been so wrong about something so big.
    In large part, these political strategists told themselves what they wanted to hear, in the hopes that wish fulfillment would follow. By the summer of 2009, the political trajectory of ObamaCare was evident, as angry voters flooded townhall meetings held by Democrats in Congress to express their disgust over the government takeover of health care. Rather than listen, Congressional Democrats simply stopped holding townhalls altogether to avoid the feedback, while claiming that the protests were just “Astroturf” on behalf of insurance companies — another assumption that proved false in the midterm elections.

    What else did Democrats tell themselves that summer? Brown has this quote from Howard Dean in late August 2009 from his appearance on MSNBC: “[A] lot of the things that have been done that have helped seniors in particular have been done without Republican support at all and there’s not going to be any political penalty. The only political penalty [that] will be suffered is if we don’t pass a bill, and the Republicans know that.” How wrong did this turn out to be? Dean wasn’t the only one making this point, but the end result showed that the only thing worse than not passing an unpopular bill once you’ve floated it is to actually pass it. As in the film War Games, the ultimate winning move is not to play.

    Not that Obama took this lying down, either. In January 2010, two months before the bill came to a vote, Obama urged his fellow Democrats to muscle up and pass the bill — and that he would protect them by making the sale: “[T]hat’s why I’ll be out there waging a great campaign from one end of the country to the other, telling Americans with insurance or without what they stand to gain; about the arsenal of consumer protections; about the long-awaited stability that they’re going to begin to experience.” And how well did that work out? The midterms tell you all you need to know — the loss of 68 seats in the House in the worst midterm drubbing for a President since 1938.

    Jim Geraghty says that the lessons Brown lays out should give us even more pause about the impact of the policy:

    If professional politicians completely misjudged the politics of the legislation they were passing, think about how well they assessed the policy implications of what they passed!
    They didn’t turn out to be geniuses after all, eh? Small wonder that two-thirds of Americans want the bill rolled back in part or in whole. And small wonder that Democrats now want to talk about almost anything else but ObamaCare.

    Meanwhile, the NRCC gets in on the ObamaCare anniversary with this ad parody:
    The (D)ems screwed the pooch from start to finish on this POS. There is no political win in this for the libtards, well those still in office after the last mid-terms anyway. If by some astronomic fluke the mandate is not struck down, the bill will be the impetus to removing every (D) that stands in the way of getting it repealed.
    "The most dangerous myth is the demagoguery that business can be made to pay a larger share, thus relieving the individual. Politicians preaching this are either deliberately dishonest, or economically illiterate, and either one should scare us...
    Only people pay taxes, and people pay as consumers every tax that is assessed against a business."


    -The Gipper


  6. #3381
    Joined
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    74,684

    Re: President Obama

    From what I read..if the mandate fails..the whole thing caves in on itself because the mandate generates part of the funding to make the rest work.
    Looking back..and simply my opinion..if insuring 45 million folks was the basic objective this has been an overreach. Wouldnt take the 2nd or 3rd smartest people on earth to get some private compny like Walmart to set up an insurance company and get folks enroled quickly.
    At least Walmart is able to grasp the concept of cost containment.

  7. #3382
    Joined
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Home
    Posts
    6,731

    Re: President Obama

    Quote Originally Posted by jimzinsocal View Post
    From what I read..if the mandate fails..the whole thing caves in on itself because the mandate generates part of the funding to make the rest work.
    Now you're just talking silly, jim. Since when has a lack of funding ever represented an impediment to our politicians of either party?

  8. #3383
    Joined
    Mar 2002
    Location
    California
    Posts
    24,176

    Re: President Obama

    Quote Originally Posted by jimzinsocal View Post
    From what I read..if the mandate fails..the whole thing caves in on itself because the mandate generates part of the funding to make the rest work.
    Looking back..and simply my opinion..if insuring 45 million folks was the basic objective this has been an overreach. Wouldnt take the 2nd or 3rd smartest people on earth to get some private compny like Walmart to set up an insurance company and get folks enroled quickly.
    At least Walmart is able to grasp the concept of cost containment.
    Pretty much. But I'd still like the next congress and prez make it official by repealing it. Icing on the cake would be to repeal it using reconciliation. Perhaps do a nice gavel walk across the mall to top off the day reminicent of queen twit



    When CNSNews.com asked House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) on Thursday where the Constitution authorized Congress to order Americans to buy health insurance--a mandate included in both the House and Senate versions of the health care bill--Pelosi dismissed the question by saying: "Are you serious? Are you serious?"
    Serious as a heart attack you freaking hag.
    "The most dangerous myth is the demagoguery that business can be made to pay a larger share, thus relieving the individual. Politicians preaching this are either deliberately dishonest, or economically illiterate, and either one should scare us...
    Only people pay taxes, and people pay as consumers every tax that is assessed against a business."


    -The Gipper


  9. #3384
    Joined
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    74,684

    Re: President Obama

    ^^Yeah her too. Seems like all the liberal lawyers are heading ti the bar after work today after having the SCOTUS actually question the word of Ra.

  10. #3385
    Joined
    May 2002
    Location
    Twain Harte, CA
    Posts
    17,040

    Re: President Obama

    Quote Originally Posted by jimzinsocal View Post
    From what I read..if the mandate fails..the whole thing caves in on itself because the mandate generates part of the funding to make the rest work.
    Looking back..and simply my opinion..if insuring 45 million folks was the basic objective this has been an overreach. Wouldnt take the 2nd or 3rd smartest people on earth to get some private compny like Walmart to set up an insurance company and get folks enroled quickly.
    At least Walmart is able to grasp the concept of cost containment.
    I remember those days. Nobody even knew how many folks were uninsured. It was 30 million one day, 45 million the next. Do we count illegals? Do we count self-insured?

  11. #3386
    Joined
    Mar 2002
    Location
    California
    Posts
    24,176

    Re: President Obama

    Pretty good rundown on the attitudes of the "mob" that carried the SCOAMF into the WH and how what caused them to rage then is now "meh".

    Beware of the Mob

    Our Modern Lynch Mob

    Democracies are in general prone to fits of the mob. Just read the Thucydidean account of the debate of Mytilene. Or watch a 1950s Western as the lynch party heads for the town jail. Fear of democratically sanctioned madness is why the Founders came up not just with classical tripartite government to check and limit power between the judicial, legislative, and executive branches, but also now generally disdained notions of allowing states to impose property qualifications for voting, the Electoral College, two senators guaranteed per state regardless of population, and senators originally selected without direct votes.

    They were not concerned that under Athenian-style democracy the proverbial “people” and their populist Rottweilers in government and the press could not check the power of capital and birth, but were worried, as Juvenal later quipped, over who would police the police. So there had to be checks on the mob as well — a fickle and unpredictable force as we saw in the last eight years.

    2006 Evil Guantanamo/ 2009 Good Guantanamo

    Sometime around 2005, the anger of the mob over the Bush-Cheney anti-terrorism protocols peaked. Preventative detention, renditions, military tribunals, Guantanamo, Predators, wiretaps, and intercepts were all considered unlawful, unnecessary, and immoral. The Bush-Cheney “terror state” seemed capable of almost anything, as it shredded the Constitution while claiming to “protect” us from non-existent terrorists. •••• Cheney went from a respected and perennial Washington insider, given his due by both liberals and conservatives as a sober and judicious administrator over the past thirty years, to a pernicious Darth Vader.

    The Left never really adduced any evidence to support its charges, but such serial attacks went largely unanswered. Candidate Barack Obama both benefited from and whipped up the venom, only as president to embrace or expand all of what he had once so vehemently denounced. He soon became predator-in-chief, increasing targeted assassinations eightfold, as he joked about them being unleashed at any potential suitors of Malia and Sasha.

    The Bush-Cheney anti-terrorism policies were quietly reinvented as necessary (given that no post-9/11 plot [and there were many] had succeeded) and continue on today as if no one ever had questioned their utility or legality. The fist-shaking mob apparently decided that what was truly bad before 2009 [1] was mostly good afterwards, or at least not bad enough to question an Obama presidency. So it threw down the torches and drifted on home, wanting the proverbial prisoner in the jail freed and canonized rather than hanged.

    Today we are left with either one of two liberal assumptions: the Bush-Cheney protocols are still bad, but to continue to criticize them would now be to weaken the liberal agenda of their present adherent Barack Obama; or, why get riled over politics? — every out-party attacks the in-party any way it can, so get over it.

    Planet Warming on Hold

    One of the most venomous lines of attack against George W. Bush was his supposed failure to address climate change. These were the mob days of the anguished Al Gore, still smarting over having won the popular, but not the electoral, vote in 2000, damning Bush as a liar, as he created Gore, Inc. — a near organic-growing merchandising empire of several hundred millions of dollars.

    Gorism both hyped a global carbon threat and then offered the consulting and expertise to address it. His carbon footprints and “offsets” followed the medieval model of selling exemptions. In such holy work, there were no such things as conflict of interest, influence peddling, or simple bad manners. Gore rode his Earth in the Balance [2] / Inconvenient Truth [3] express train to a Nobel Prize, a sizable fortune — and a general impression that he had become unhinged, whether in his incarnation as a “crazed sex poodle” or a vein-bursting screaming “he lied!” mental patient.

    No matter, Barack Obama came into office on the shoulders of this screaming mob. His team lectured us on the wisdom of withholding oil leases, on the desirability of European-level gas prices, and on why we must soon pay skyrocketing energy prices. Obama-sanctioned cap-and-trade passed the Democratic-held House.

    And then?

    Snow fell [4]. Ice still formed outside the kitchen window. Chicago, as is its habit, got both really hot and really cold. Volvos still needed gas. People in Malibu still liked central heating. Philology adjusted accordingly. Global warming begat climate change and the latter begat climate chaos: if the planet were not hotter, then snow and ice were symptoms of such heating; and if even that were insufficient proof for us dunces, then tornados, earthquakes, and hurricanes would have to do.

    Yet the mob mentality began to fade, as revelations about everything from doctored research, politicized grant-giving, and false conclusions about glaciers, Greenland, and polar bears began appearing in the liberal news — suggesting that if such scandal made even the mainstream media, then the phrenology-like fad was nearing an end.

    Obama had done his part in postponing the Keystone pipeline, putting oil on federal lands off-limits, and talking up boondoggles like the Chevy Volt and Solyndra. But the idea of $5 a gallon gas [5] makes even the most liberal Santa Monica Volvo driver edgy, and now the global-warming movement has collapsed [6]. Bush is in Texas, not the White House. Obama now blames Solyndra on Republicans, brags about entrepreneurial wildcatters in the Dakotas, does photo-ops in front of derricks, and promises to allow bits and pieces of the Keystone pipeline.

    And the mob? Why hurt the liberal cause by going after Obama? Suddenly, the would-be-lynchers have left the sheriff’s office porch and are in twos and threes heading back home.

    Postmodern Ethics

    The mob, of course, had once tried to storm the jail to get at Bush over presidential ethics and decorum. It was a valiant effort. “Rovian politics” had polluted the national scene. PACs, the revolving door, lobbying, earmarks, and mega fundraising had ruined American politics. An Enron-insider mentality had warped the White House. “Swift-boating” was Rove-inspired character assassination.

    Now? We live in an age of Peter Orszag, the OMB to Citibank monorail, and $1 million sent to the Obama PAC from the misogynist Bill Maher whose “t—t” and “c—t” are the sorts of popular smears against women [7] that Obama does not wish his daughters to experience.

    The idea of a Democrat running for president according to the rules of public campaign financing was destroyed four years ago by none other than Barack Obama. His genius lies in demonizing his donors [8] as “fat cats”, “one-percenters,” and “corporate jet owners,” while they fork over cash, again on a medieval principle that the more you lecture the usurer or money-changer, the more he purchases penance for his soul by giving the church a marble block or two for the dome of the cathedral. Or is the shakedown not a shakedown, but rather a simple connivance for the big money guys — Obama is dead even in the polls, so why not keep a stiff upper lip and hedge your bets?

    I think it was around January 2009 when ethics in government ceased to be an issue. Insider influence peddling suddenly became the necessary price of getting green energy. Bundling and corporate giving were vital to getting universal health care passed. And $35,000-a-head private dinners were a sort of castor oil, a bad-tasting medicine that led to better air and water for all of us. In those happy days, John Edwards was a populist idol. Jon Corzine put his financial expertise to work for hoi polloi. Steven Chu’s Nobel Prize-winning physics mind would be let loose on the pernicious carbon lobby.

    Then it was all over. The Obama team of Goolsbee, Orszag, Romer, and Summers headed back to tenured berths or big money or both. “Millionaires and billionaires” meant skipping the insignificant former and concentrating on shaking down the important latter. Today, we just shrug when Obama lectures us at 9 a.m. on paying our fair share, and then does a $40,000-a-plate fundraiser in the Upper West Side or Palm Beach at noon.
    "The most dangerous myth is the demagoguery that business can be made to pay a larger share, thus relieving the individual. Politicians preaching this are either deliberately dishonest, or economically illiterate, and either one should scare us...
    Only people pay taxes, and people pay as consumers every tax that is assessed against a business."


    -The Gipper


  12. #3387
    Joined
    Mar 2002
    Location
    California
    Posts
    24,176

    Re: President Obama

    ^^^ Cont.

    The Old Race Card

    The same hang-the-suspect hysteria breaks out over race only to dissipate as if it never happened. Before 9/11 it was the reparations movement. Then it was the Bush neglect of the underclass. Then it was the preppie white non-rapists at Duke [9]. Then it was Eric Holder’s lectures about “cowards,” “my people,” and the racists who wanted answers about Fast and Furious.

    We went from the beer summit to Trayvon Martin’s resemblance to the boy the president never had. In each case, facts did not matter: Bush increased Great Society spending, and sent $15 billion to save black Africans from the ravages of AIDS. If there were any voting fraud, it came as a result of Acorn, Chicago wards, and the SEIU get-out-the vote machine, not Karl Rove with levers and gears.

    The Cambridge police did not act stupidly. And if police do stereotype, it may be because 12% of the population commits almost half the violent crime in the nation. In the case of rare black/white and white/black murdering (94% of murdered African-Americans were killed by other African-Americans), a minority is more likely to commit murder (and rape) against a majority than the majority is against the minority.

    As I write, the hysteria (is there any other word for it when Spike Lee twitters the address of George Zimmerman or the New Black Panther Party publishes a wanted poster [10] or the mayor of Philadelphia calls the death an “assassination”?) is beginning to die down, somewhat.

    The initial moblike news (in this regard, Fox News’s Shepard Smith was especially culpable in whipping up frenzy when he did not have the evidence to support his allegations) that a white, Germanic-named vigilante ran down and executed a small African-American child (at least Mr. Martin seemed so from his adolescent photos in the press) eating candy while strolling in an exclusive gated community is not quite the entire story. At least it has morphed into an account of an excitable, gun-carrying Hispanic neighborhood-watch volunteer, in a mixed community, prompting (?) a fist fight with an unarmed 17-year-old, 6’2” youth in a hoodie. Mr. Zimmerman apparently lost the struggle, and then pulled out a gun and fired — even as the narrative seemed to change with new information every day. The case is not helped by presidential editorializing that now, after the beer summit and Sandra Fluke, seems a gambit to divert attention from $4 a gallon gas and 8% plus unemployment (17% in Fresno County).

    The Trayvon Martin tragedy is not over. We do not know all the facts; bad judgment, racism, and ill-intent may well have led to manslaughter or even second-degree murder or, then again, in theory, self-defense, but to speculate about any such charges without evidence is to become mob-like. My own view is that carrying a weapon requires greater forbearance, but I was not there and still have no idea what transpired. As I write this, the account will be out-of-date by tomorrow’s disclosures. What we are left with are no rules of national anguish: When ten African-Americans are murdered by other African-Americans in a single weekend, is it news or not news? When the occasional African-American murders a white person, as in a recent car-jacking, is it a sign of something the nation must note? When an Hispanic shoots an African-American, is it news to the degree he has a European name, but had he been Jorge Martinez with an Anglo mother, it would not have been news?

    The role of a president is to rein in the mob, not to unleash it. The latter is what community organizers do; the former is what makes statesmen. Yet on issue after issue — anti-terrorism, global warming, government ethics, and racial relations — a frenzied mob, egged on by the media and demagogues like Barack Obama, have almost stormed the jail, only to dissipate when met by either evidence, or the knowledge that the incarcerated was one of their own — as if they had never screamed and threatened in the first place.
    "The most dangerous myth is the demagoguery that business can be made to pay a larger share, thus relieving the individual. Politicians preaching this are either deliberately dishonest, or economically illiterate, and either one should scare us...
    Only people pay taxes, and people pay as consumers every tax that is assessed against a business."


    -The Gipper


  13. #3388
    Joined
    May 2002
    Location
    A Little South of Sanity
    Posts
    6,905

    Re: President Obama

    ^ Bravo! Well written piece.
    "Walk Heavy, Stand Tall, Carry a Big Stick"
    Daily Driver - ASUS CROSSHAIR Atholn 64 X2 6400+ - Liquid Cooled
    A/V Mastering & Processing - ASUS A8N32-SLI Opteron 180
    Print/File Server - ASUS A7V880 XP-3200 Barton
    System Specifications

  14. #3389
    Joined
    May 2002
    Location
    Twain Harte, CA
    Posts
    17,040

    Re: President Obama

    ^^^ I'll second that. VDH writes some good stuff and bookmark worthy.

    His piece on the drought created by the Delta Smelt is what started me on his stuff. Always worth reading.

  15. #3390
    Joined
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    74,684

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •