President Obama's Speech-What did you think?

jpete wrote:

stockingfull wrote:
In the meantime, suck it up; ya sound like a bunch of babies.

Sounds like what the Tories might espouse.

Nothing like a flaming liberal to stifle opposition rather than explain why your way is better.

Why not just take 100% of all our money and let the government decide what to do with it? You don't seem to be able to think for yourself so by all means, put your life in the governments hands, cradle to grave.

Not at all. In fact, it's just what we "liberals" heard from the "wing-nuts-in-power" since about the time Newt staged his coup in 1994.

To paraphrase: "We're here to make changes. You may not like it. Too bad."

Besides, we just finished a campaign in which the entire debate was about why our way was better. And the voters made their choice convincingly. Too bad you didn't pay better attention last fall.

Yeah, why didn't I realize that tripling the budget with deficit spending and then telling the flock I was going to cut the deficit in half was the right thing to do?

You must love being lied to. You lap it up like mothers milk.

Once again, you either mischaracterize or misunderstand, or both.

What he's saying now is that there will be some combination of spending cuts and/or tax increases to accomplish the deficit reduction.

You may not like it, but it's not a lie.

The US GDP is around $13.8 trillion dollars.

US debt is around $10.8 trillion and growing at half a trillion a year. Add in SS and Medicare and it's WAY above this.

Obama's new budget is 3.1 trillion. And then I guess he'll do that loaves and fishes trick again and halve the debt.

You do the math.

You see, ever since "trickle-down" Reaganomics was invented, conservatives have completely lost credibility on that argument.

Because, as the wing-nut side of the argument goes, if we cut taxes, we'll stimulate the economy and business will grow, more people will be employed and paying taxes and more tax revenue will actually result.

Sound familiar? The only difference between that and the deficit-stimulus approach is that the gov't is spending money to create the deficit, instead of cutting taxes. A deficit is still a deficit, no matter how it's created.

So, unless you guys want to abandon your "cutting taxes will stimulate growth" philosophy, your opposition to a stimulus-created deficit has no cred. The only difference worth noting is in the outcome: a deficit created by spending at least has the benefit of stimulating the economy (which a tax cut won't do nearly as effectively in a down cycle), therefore it's much more likely to accomplish its purpose of generating economic activity.

As an historical note, if Reagan had been a true conservative and had really been against taxes and government spending, conservatives today wouldn't be viewed with the fish-eye they're now getting from the public. But Ronnie Ray-guns was no more genuine a conservative that he was a war hero, cowboy, or football star. He was a complete phony and the era when he was thought to be some kind of "visionary" is deservedly coming to an end. And, until true conservatives have the intellectual fortitude to repudiate him, they won't be taken seriously.

One of the reasons that Obama's budget is so high is that he is including the cost of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars in his proposal rather than to quietly hide the true costs with spending requests every few months like the previous administration. When the costs are out in the open it's harder to justify the money being spent.

beemerboy wrote:One of the reasons that Obama's budget is so high is that he is including the cost of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars

Excellent Point!
We taxpayers are just not used to being told the truth anymore! (well get used to the truth...That is one of the big CHANGES promised & delivered.

Devil505 wrote:

beemerboy wrote:One of the reasons that Obama's budget is so high is that he is including the cost of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars

Excellent Point!
We taxpayers are just not used to being told the truth anymore! (well get used to the truth...That is one of the big CHANGES promised & delivered.

Why not take all the off book stuff and put it on book. If any company ran at least three sets of books, the SEC and the Justice Department would be all over them, maybe.

You weren't being told the truth before, and you aren't being told the truth now. When Obama comes out and tells us that we are 65 trillion in the hole with no "hope" of ever climbing out of it, then I'll believe I'm being told the truth.

A lie of omission is still a lie.

What lies,

1. There will be no ear marks added to bills by anybody!

2. The public will be able to view stimulus bill for 5 days before vote.

3. The stimulus bill will be bi partisan.

4. This stimulus bill will benefit all.

5. We are in a crisis the worst ever.

6. I "BO" will cut the deficit in 1/2 in 2 years.

7. No more ear marks Oh thats right they're asking for another 400+ billion dollars to run government for 6 months.

8. Sorry forgot 1 Do away with the Lobbyists

How many lies do you have to tell to be a liar.........................................................................1

But I know the answer the republicans did it so we're going to do it in spades again you guys win you've tripled our debt
and there's no end in sight how do you justify yourselves. The world financial system is on a verge of collapsing
and is watching our example you need to tell them it's Bushs fault and we're going to spend our way out of it with
"magic money" that appears from nowhere like the big bang theory "something from nothing. I'm absolutely
astounded that you argue over pure nonsense on whose right when simple math will tell the whole truth. There's no doubt
we are accomplishing nothing but getting farther and farther in debt. We need to admit neither party is doing their job
that's why we're are here there is no debate it's getting worse. The Constitution does not allow what our government is
doing for the last decade so WE THE PEOPLE need to reinstate our Constitution and Bill of rights. The power always
was WE THE PEOPLE's responsibility not the socialists or socialist government. Mr. Putin of the USSR has already warned
us socialism doesn't work and he should know and he strongly stated we should avoid it at all costs. So for you people who
think socialism is the way to go and you can do it better learn from the expert Mr.Putin it won't work. So keep up the
foolishness and learn nothing from those who know and who have lived it and continue down the path of destruction.


Bill S.

Well, Bill, it is true that "people who live in glass houses can't be throwing stones."

Barry Goldwater, the last legitimate small-gov't, low-tax Conservative (with a capital "C") would have given all these neo-con, foreign-invading, gov't expanding, earmark-attaching, bedroom-snooping modern Republicans -- particularly including Ronnie Ray-guns -- a failing grade at best and a flogging at worst.

You know what the largest, most expensive ($768 Million) gov't building in DC is? The "Ronald Reagan Building." See the irony?

What it proves is that modern conservatives have proved not only no less corrupt than their "liberal" predecessors -- to the contrary, actually more so. Because at least the "liberals" told us that they were going to expand the government, while these phony neo-cons literally "conned" their supporters with tax-reduction, smaller gov't talk while putting it to all of us.

So there's a BIG credibility gap the Republican party has to deal with -- on economic policy alone. They have to choose whether to return to true Goldwater Conservatism or stick with the discredited, phony "trickle-down," spend-but-don't-tax deficit practices which Reagan started and have led us to this point. Whichever choice they make, a BIG chunk of Republicans will be unhappy, which is why so many are talking these days about the crisis in the GOP.

Well, I see you've at least heard of Goldwater. Being Ron Paul guy, I'd thank you not to refer to "your side" anymore. Because these neo-cons are no more "my" side than they are yours.

I actually enjoyed listening to Ron Paul back in the primaries; at least he gave us all something to think about.

But the problem both Goldwater and Paul discovered is that the public isn't smart enough to recognize the benefits of true, capital "C" Conservatism and then vote for those benefits. Hence their electoral failures.

The bastardization of Conservatism, first by Reagan's "trickle-down" deficit economics, then by the corrupt coalition he forged with the nut-job religious right, and finally by the Bush-era neo-con adventures, has ruined it. And, no matter what course is chosen to fix those problems, there will be a lot of Republicans who think it's the wrong path and will be unmotivated to follow.

Ron Paul is Exhibit "A".

So deficit spending is bad unless your side does it? I don't get you. You seem to know what works and what doesn't yet you are four square behind something that doesn't work.

No, actually what I'm saying is that so-called "conservatives" who believe in "trickle down" deficit economics have no credibility arguing that a spending stimulus is wrong.

Converse of your argument as to deficits.

But, as I've noted before, cutting taxes may work in good times, but it won't "stimulate" in bad times. People just pocket the $$.

danzig wrote:tvb hey dick head I went to a private Catholic school up until High School. I experienced both sides of the system. There was no comparision.
Put your money where your mouth is (what is left of it) and shut up.

When one resorts to name calling one has admitted defeat in the discussion. One would have thought Catholic school would have taught you respect for others. Your comments are uncalled for and unworthy of response. Ad hominem attacks are base.