Washington Examiner: 27% Of Dems Don't Want Obama In 2012

Neither side is offering solutions. Both want to use this as an opportunity to play Santa Claus to their chosen ones.

residenttroll wrote: Problem is that the Democrats have ideas running out of their @#$es instead of their noses.

That's not really the problem and if you don't know that you're even more stupid that I gave you credit for.

It's not about getting a zinger in against the political opposition, as you constantly do. It's the two sides not working together to get America out of this downturn. That's what caused the S&P downgrade and that's what's going to sink us if we don't smarten up. Otherwise, we will go down blaming each other.

WayneH wrote:

residenttroll wrote: Problem is that the Democrats have ideas running out of their @#$es instead of their noses.

That's not really the problem and if you don't know that you're even more stupid that I gave you credit for.

It's not about getting a zinger in against the political opposition, as you constantly do. It's the two sides not working together to get America out of this downturn. That's what caused the S&P downgrade and that's what's going to sink us if we don't smarten up. Otherwise, we will go down blaming each other.

It's Obama way or the highway ...tell the knucklehead in the White House to come to the table with his party and compromise with the Republicans.

It's been this way ever since Obama took office. I don't believe it's Obamas actions that RT hates...it's Obama himself. RT would rather see the US go down in flames than have Obama succeed. Day one of the Obama administration RT started the anti Obama crusade. I never knew someone could hate America so much as to hope it fails just to get back at a president they don't like.

archer wrote: It's been this way ever since Obama took office. I don't believe it's Obamas actions that RT hates...it's Obama himself. RT would rather see the US go down in flames than have Obama succeed. Day one of the Obama administration RT started the anti Obama crusade. I never knew someone could hate America so much as to hope it fails just to get back at a president they don't like.

Archer are you reading Alinsky too? Calling me a racist....because he's an epic fail...

I didn't call you a racists, but I am curious why you would immediately think that is why you have hated Obama from day one. Guilty conscience?

archer wrote: I didn't call you a racists, but I am curious why you would immediately think that is why you have hated Obama from day one. Guilty conscience?

I didn't hate Obama...I hated his politics. Guilty as charge.

residenttroll wrote:

archer wrote: I didn't call you a racists, but I am curious why you would immediately think that is why you have hated Obama from day one. Guilty conscience?

I didn't hate Obama...I hated his politics. Guilty as charge.

Why did you immediately think I was calling you a racist when referring to your hatred of Obama?

WayneH wrote: Indeed, things could be MUCH worse than they are now.

Indeed they could, and they will get worse if we continue to try and make this nation the next social democracy patterned after the one in Greece with a central government acting as a central clearinghouse for the collection and distribution of the nation's charity. No one has a right to food for their belly, clothes on their back, a roof over their head and the services of a doctor when they are ill. None of these are rights owed to you. At a time when we are facing the downgrade of our credit rating because our current executive has managed to achieve in 2.5 years what he claimed was an unpatriotic level of debt that it took 8 years for his predecessor to reach we are really talking about the federal government picking up the tab for every school lunch served in this nation because it might prevent someone whose parents must rely on the free and reduced lunch program to feed their offspring from feeling self conscious about that fact? Really?

We have bridges collapsing, infrastructure that is approaching 100 years of age in many areas and we are so worried that a child may be self conscious about accepting charity that we are robbing these projects of funds to pay for the lunches of not only the children whose parents can't afford to feed them, but the children of the parents who can? What color is the sky in the world of the lunatic that thinks this is a national priority that needs federal funds? What color is the sky in the world of the lunatics that think the federal government should be collecting taxes from the citizens of Colorado for the benefit of the citizens in Mississippi?

Who is the economic genius who thought it would be a good idea to collect taxes from the folks who were working to provide benefits for the people who were retired? I mean, I understand why that might have been necessary for the first 20 years of the program, but why in the world are we continuing to operate that way 70 years later? Why are we still using a Ponzi model, which everyone knows will eventually collapse, for what many believe is one of the most important social safety nets? Ponzi's only last for as long as you can get the current investors to shell out enough money to pay the earlier investors what they were promised. What happens when the current investors refuse to donate 20% of their wages for the benefit of someone else? Do you really believe that every succeeding generation is going to be as willing as the boomers were to be taxed at twice the rate on twice the amount of income to keep the Ponzi funded? Where was it written, or promised for that matter, that the rest of the taxpayers would provide you with enough money you didn't have to move in with your kids when you got old and who was dumb enough to make that promise if in fact it was ever made?

We aren't in trouble because we are spending too much money on roads and bridges, or enforcing the laws for clean air and water, or providing those who are willing to volunteer to keep our liberties safe the very best tools for that purpose; we are in trouble because we are spending the majority of the revenue the federal government realizes from taxes on everything but these things. I'm sorry, but that is the simple unvarnished truth of the matter. When we hit the Great Depression FDR doubled the percentage of GDP spent by the government for his New Deal - from 5% to 10%. DC is now expecting 2.5x that amount annually, and that's only the beginning. By 2021, presuming for the sake of argument that interest rates remain unchanged between now and then, we are looking at an annual interest expense, a true "mandatory" spending item, in excess of $750 Billion dollars a year - simply for the annual interest expense on the amount of money we have spent in excess of the amount that has been collected. Think we can pay for all the Boomers Social Security and Medicare costs, plus the additional hundreds of billions of dollars a year ObamaCare is going to cost at that point, plus the school lunch for every child, plus the rest of the welfare state, plus the "discretionary" budget items, plus $750 Billion dollars a year in interest? You really think we can collect $5 or $6 Trillion in tax revenue a decade from now? The big 3 - Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid - will be running at an annual cost, adjusted for inflation of course, of $2.2 Trillion dollars - that's 100% of the total tax revenue in 2011. Those 3 programs alone are going to cost us $21 TRILLION dollars in the next decade.

According to Obama's projected budgets, in 8 years of his stewardship the nation will accumulate an additional $9.9 Trillion dollars in debt - 300% more than the "unpatriotic" $3.3 Trillion accumulated by his predecessor during his 8 years - and that's if everything goes as planned, which to date it hasn't come close. In 1970 the Big 3 cost the taxpayers about 4% of GDP - by 2050 that figure will rise to over 18% of GDP - nearly the identical percentage of GDP that the federal government has collected on average over the last 70 years - and by the end of this century the cost of these programs in projected to be over 24% of GDP each and every year. That's just the entitlements folks - we haven't even begun to factor in the interest costs for all the debt, the cost of defending our liberty, the cost of keeping our air and water clean, the cost of the benefits for our military veterans, the pension costs for federal employees, the Depts of Education, HHS, HUD, State, Treasury, Justice, Interior, Commerce, Labor, Energy, Homeland Security and any of the others I might have overlooked, not to mention the ones that might get added in the next 90 years that no one even knows about at this point.

So yeah Wayne, I think it's time to try something other than more consolidation of power within the federal government.

archer wrote:

residenttroll wrote:

archer wrote: I didn't call you a racists, but I am curious why you would immediately think that is why you have hated Obama from day one. Guilty conscience?

I didn't hate Obama...I hated his politics. Guilty as charge.

Why did you immediately think I was calling you a racist when referring to your hatred of Obama?

Well, perhaps because you inferred that his aversion was based upon who Obama was as a person instead of the policies he advocates. If the aversion isn't due to political policies and is instead personal, what personal qualities of Obama has the left consistently been accusing the right of finding distasteful other than the color of his skin? That he is a poor husband and father? Haven't seen that one even once. His taste in fashion? Michelle's perhaps, but not Barack's. No, the consistent charge leveled by the left for the last 3 years is that the right doesn't like him because he is black. Maybe that's why it is the first presumption when someone is accused of not liking the man instead of limiting the scope of their accusation to simply the man's politics.