The GOP gave Reagan slack why not give it to Obama?

[TexTushHog]

Originally Posted by katinsa

The current president is not honorable.

He doesn't want us to be a strong nation. He doesn't want us to be independent. He doesn't want us to be free.

See. People are either so ill-educated, so gullible, or so viciously partisan that they are just deluded. It strains credulity that anyone could believe this.

Even as cynical as I am, I don't think that W didn't think that he was doing what was in the best interest of the country. He was crazy wrong about what was in fact in it's best interest, but even I, who have a loathing of W and his asinine policies that is unsurpassed, wouldn't accuse him of the sort of shit like this.

The two parties are so far apart that they share almost no common values. That is not a symptom. It's a cause. I see the nation fracturing, mainly along lines of education and religious affiliation. Those with HS education or less or low college education (except African Americans) and those who are fundamentalist Christians, are almost all Republicans. Likewise, a significant majority of those with college educations (and a greater number of those with graduate degrees) and the irreligious are in greater percentage Democrats (although the percentages are not as stark as in the Republican cohort).

The differences between these two groups are pervasive. Just to take two easy examples that are in the headlines these days -- immigration and economic policy. The lower SES group see our society disintegrating because of pluralism. The Democratic cohort celebrates our diversity and think it strengthens us. Similarly, economics policy in the Republican groups is 19th century, just like their values. They long to return to robber baron capitalism. They deny any economic doctrine adopted after the turn of the century (except EMH economics, but only a select few are even aware of that). The Democratic group understands the strengths and limits of capitalism, acknowledge the contributions of Keynes, and seek to integrate the government into a market economy, not banish it.

In short, the differences are not of degree, but of kind, and fundamental and are irreconcilable. Other than the civil war, I'm not sure that there has been a time in our history when that sort of split has existed. And now, the split is not just about one issue, but all issues.

[cptjohnstone]

Originally Posted by TexTushHog

See. People are either so ill-educated, so gullible, or so viciously partisan that they are just deluded. It strains credulity that anyone could believe this.

Even as cynical as I am, I don't think that W didn't think that he was doing what was in the best interest of the country. He was crazy wrong about what was in fact in it's best interest, but even I, who have a loathing of W and his asinine policies that is unsurpassed, wouldn't accuse him of the sort of shit like this.

The two parties are so far apart that they share almost no common values. That is not a symptom. It's a cause. I see the nation fracturing, mainly along lines of education and religious affiliation. Those with HS education or less or low college education (except African Americans) and those who are fundamentalist Christians, are almost all Republicans. Likewise, a significant majority of those with college educations (and a greater number of those with graduate degrees) and the irreligious are in greater percentage Democrats (although the percentages are not as stark as in the Republican cohort).

The differences between these two groups are pervasive. Just to take two easy examples that are in the headlines these days -- immigration and economic policy. The lower SES group see our society disintegrating because of pluralism. The Democratic cohort celebrates our diversity and think it strengthens us. Similarly, economics policy in the Republican groups is 19th century, just like their values. They long to return to robber baron capitalism. They deny any economic doctrine adopted after the turn of the century (except EMH economics, but only a select few are even aware of that). The Democratic group understands the strengths and limits of capitalism, acknowledge the contributions of Keynes, and seek to integrate the government into a market economy, not banish it.

In short, the differences are not of degree, but of kind, and fundamental and are irreconcilable. Other than the civil war, I'm not sure that there has been a time in our history when that sort of split has existed. And now, the split is not just about one issue, but all issues.

what are you drinking tonight TTH? this total total Bull Shit

as stated in another thread, I have an MBA and really question if there is a God. All of my GOP friends have college degrees or more and my neighbor who is President of Oklahoma State University is one of most respected Republicans around

where as everybody else just wants to blame GWB for all of their problems, including BHO

[TexTushHog]

Education:

http://www.gallup.com/poll/106381/ob...-election.aspx

http://chronicle.com/article/Educati...nked-to/43433/



Religion:

http://www.boston.com/news/local/art...on_and_th.html

http://pewresearch.org/pubs/1022/exi...lysis-religion

As I said, the correlation isn't as strong on education, but it's clearly there.

Age is also becoming a dividing line.

http://pewresearch.org/pubs/813/gen-dems

[Whirlaway]

Wellendowed:

Too many disputed "facts" in your OP to respond to. So let's look at the big picture.

In July of Regan's First (1983) term his approval rating was 43%...virtually the same as Obama's in July 2011 at 44%. Statisticaly the same according to Gallup.

But the killer statistic is the right track:wrong track polling by Rasmussen which puts Obama at 71% think we are on the wrong track.....during the worst of time in first term of the Regan presidency (unemployment at 10%), the data showed that ony 56% of Americans thought we were on the wrong track. And in November 1983 that number declined to 44%.

Does anybody believe Obama will get his numbers down to 44% by November of this year?

Spin as you might. Obama is a failed Presidency. You can blame whomever you want.....but you are just whistling past the graveyard !

The American public knows it; and they will show this slacker the door come November 2012. Just like Carter got the boot.

BTW. The community organizer-Slacker In Chief, has played his 41st round of golf as of last week....

[WTF]

Originally Posted by Whirlaway

Spin as you might. Obama is a failed Presidency. You can blame whomever you want.....but you are just whistling past the graveyard !

The American public knows it; and they will show this slacker the door come November 2012. Just like Carter got the boot.

BTW. The community organizer-Slacker In Chief, has played his 41st round of golf as of last week....

It is way to early to tell if it is a failed term.....if they work a big deal on tax increase and budget cuts, you will be wrong for sure. That is why the Repub's do not want to do a deal.

Now I will bet you a session with your favorite vs my favorite lady that Obama will be re-elected.

Here is mine....let me know if you have one, if it is a guy no problem. I am a so called lib and will not judge you!

http://www.ninasastri.net/

[nevergaveitathought]

Originally Posted by TexTushHog

In short, the differences are not of degree, but of kind, and fundamental and are irreconcilable. Other than the civil war, I'm not sure that there has been a time in our history when that sort of split has existed. And now, the split is not just about one issue, but all issues.

may be it would go like this:

two nations: 1. the middle of the country and the south, 2. the northeast, the far west and some northern states

nation 1. adopts the old u.s. constitution in whole with the addition of a balanced budget amendment, the constitution is accepted as it is written and with the words original intent. nation 2. cannot decide on a constitution, finally they appoint a professional board of insiders (only the smartest, most well educated people) to make all final decisions.

nation 1. changes tax laws and government policies to encourage liberty and economic freedom. believing that all citizens have pride and that with everyone having equal worth, it is understood that all should contribute something to the nations purse, no one is exempt from any tax, although in absolute dollars there is a vast difference in amount.

nation 2. would raise tax rates on the "wealthy", those earning $250,000 and more, expand the earned income tax credit removing the word earned, raise the minimum wage, expand unemployment by removing expiration date, immediately institute nationwide free healthcare and begin building mass transit rail.

nation 1. begins drilling in alaska's anwar, reopens the gulf for drilling, lessens restrictions on shalegas production and begins to be a net exporter of energy.

nation 2. builds wind farms only near poor peoples property

nation 1. begins to make so much money from energy production, they lower income tax rates.

nation 2. finds that the number of people making $250,000 or more is decreasing, so they raise the tax rates on the remaining wealthy.

nation 1. finds that people are streaming to their consulates, trying to apply for work visas and in an orderly fashion to enter legally.

nation 2. finds more and more people (they don't have "citizenship" per se, they have open citizenship) leaving their nation, so they find direction from some old German laws that had required any Jew leaving the country to pay this years and next years taxes in advance and they institute that law for all people attempting to leave and that all real property is owned by the state.

more and more people are leaving nation 2., nation 2. builds a fence to keep them in.

everyone in nation 2. becomes a member of a union to try to protect their own "rights", even the "rich" form a union. fights begin with baseball bats at every public event between rival unions. soon enough baseball is outlawed in an attempt to keep baseball bats out of the hands of the people. soon enough only outlaws have baseball bats and they have to go to counseling if caught with one.

nation 1. is making so much money from exports and productivity, they lower tax rates.

nation 2. finds that they arent raising near enough money from taxation as productivity keeps decreasing, but they supplement the shortfall with just expanding the money supply, they never have to vote on raising the debt ceiling as they just print bonds and money as they see fit.

nation 1. begins a foreign aid program to nation 2.

theres so much more but you get the drift

[wellendowed1911]

Originally Posted by Whirlaway

Wellendowed:

Too many disputed "facts" in your OP to respond to. So let's look at the big picture.

In July of Regan's First (1983) term his approval rating was 43%...virtually the same as Obama's in July 2011 at 44%. Statisticaly the same according to Gallup.

But the killer statistic is the right track:wrong track polling by Rasmussen which puts Obama at 71% think we are on the wrong track.....during the worst of time in first term of the Regan presidency (unemployment at 10%), the data showed that ony 56% of Americans thought we were on the wrong track. And in November 1983 that number declined to 44%.

Does anybody believe Obama will get his numbers down to 44% by November of this year?

Spin as you might. Obama is a failed Presidency. You can blame whomever you want.....but you are just whistling past the graveyard !

The American public knows it; and they will show this slacker the door come November 2012. Just like Carter got the boot.

BTW. The community organizer-Slacker In Chief, has played his 41st round of golf as of last week....

Whirl now you are getting to see the picture. The GOP is scared shitless of Obama- Do you think people like you and me don't deserve tax breaks???? Do you think it's such a bad idea that the richest country in the world has one of the worst health care systems? Do you not agree that Obama's plan to reduce 4 trillion was a better proposal than Boehner 2 trillion plan?
As someone mentioned the GOP is hell bent on just opposing EVERYTHING good Obama puts on the table- just to satisfy their base and to satisfy the Tea Party. The GOP instead of doing the right thing they rather do the wrong thing as long as it keeps their supporters happy. Obama has been across party lines several times- in order to be bi-partisan.

Whirl got a question for you- what was the GOP's plan for Health Care??? All they did was critique Obama's plan but never put forth a solid plan of their own even though they admitted the health care system in America was broken.

I am going to say this one final time- only way Obama loses is a financial meltdown happens just before Nov of 2012 because it's not the Tea party nor the Dems or Republicans who will decide the next election it will be Independents once again and trust me the Independents I know can see right through the GOP's plan- they can see that they did very little to work with the current administration- this debt ceiling no matter how it plays out is going to back fire and bite the GOP in their ass.

Oh Whirl have you checked the latest polls yet? Tell me now since we are a week away from the deadline of raising the debt ceiling- which party the majority of Americans are behind and which party are more Americans angry at over not getting anything done?

[Munchmasterman]

Originally Posted by nevergaveitathought

may be it would go like this:

two nations: 1. the middle of the country and the south, 2. the northeast, the far west and some northern states

nation 1. adopts the old u.s. constitution in whole with the addition of a balanced budget amendment. the constitution is accepted as it is written. nation 2. cannot decide on a constitution, finally they appoint a professional board of insiders (only the smartest, most well educated people) to make all final decisions.

nation 1. changes tax laws and government policies to encourage liberty and economic freedom. believing that all citizens have pride and that with everyone having equal worth, it is understood that all should contribute something to the nations purse, no one is exempt from any tax, although in absolute dollars there is a vast difference in amount.

nation 2. would raise tax rates on the "wealthy", those earning $250,000 and more, expand the earned income tax credit removing the word earned, raise the minimum wage, expand unemployment by removing expiration date, immediately institute nationwide free healthcare and begin building mass transit rail.

nation 1. begins drilling in alaska's anwar, reopens the gulf for drilling, lessens restrictions on shalegas production and begins to be a net exporter of energy.

nation 2. builds wind farms only near poor peoples property

nation 1. begins to make so much money from energy production, they lower income tax rates.

nation 2. finds that the number of people making $250,000 or more is decreasing, so they raise the tax rates on the remaining wealthy.

nation 1. finds that people are streaming to thier consulates, trying to apply for work visas and in an orderly fashion to enter legally.

nation 2. finds more and more people (they have open citizenship) leaving their nation, so they find direction from some old German laws that had required any Jew leaving the country to pay this years and next years taxes in advance and they institute that law for all people attempting to leave and that all real property is owned by the state.

more and more people are leaving nation 2., nation 2. builds a fence to keep them in.

nation 1. is making so much money from exports and productivity, they lower tax rates.

nation 2. finds that they arent they arent raising near enough money from taxation as productivity keeps decreasing, but they supplement the shortfall with just expanding the money supply, they never have to vote on raising the debt ceiling as they just print bonds and money as they see fit.

nation 1. begins a foreign aid program to nation 2.

Since this is fantasy land you can make it any way you want. But remember to try and make something out of the real world. It is where you live.

[Munchmasterman]

Originally Posted by wellendowed1911

I am going to say this one final time- only way Obama loses is a financial meltdown happens just before Nov of 2012 because it's not the Tea party nor the Dems or Republicans who will decide the next election it will be Independents once again and trust me the Independents I know can see right through the GOP's plan- they can see that they did very little to work with the current administration- this debt ceiling no matter how it plays out is going to back fire and bite the GOP in their ass

Fuckin' aye, bud.

The mid-terms have come and gone. When the leader of the gop says his main goal is to see that Obama is a one term president and he promises if we put a repub congress and president in place that then he will fix America (like those tax cuts would increase revenue is only near-historical low taxes were lowered even more), I hope he had fun in his only 2 years as Speaker.

[nevergaveitathought]

Originally Posted by Munchmasterman

Since this is fantasy land you can make it any way you want. But remember to try and make something out of the real world. It is where you live.

maybe we do or don't agree ideologically, but you dont seem to have any bitterness or irrationalism. that was all done in an attempt at good humor. thanks

[Jackie S]

I would not go so far as to say President Obama is a total failure as a President. Keep in mind, historically, we have had some that were absolutly terrible.

I would class him as almost mediocre at this point. But he is trying like all heck to displace Jimmy Carter as the worst post WW2 President.

I still think Abe Lincoln is the best, simply because he had the guts to fight the war that saved The United States. The War Between the States war was, in reality, just as unpopular as any war we have fought since WW2. There was a good chance he would have only been a one term President if it had not been for Gettysburg.

Franklin D Roosevelt and George Washington are about tied for second, one for using his brilliant political mind to steer the Country through the depression and WW2, and the other for using His statesmanship to make sure the Country got off to the right start.

As much as it irks my Progressive Friends, I still believe Ronald Reagan was at least in the top 5. The simple fact that he had the courage to use this Countries might to finally bring down the Easter Europe Iron Curtain.

Many forget that all through the 50's, 60's and 70's, we lived in utter fear of the Soviets Military Might. President Reagan finally said, "put up or shut up". His shining moment was not the "Mr. Gorbechev, tear down this wall" speech, but when he left Gorbechev standing on the tarmac in Iceland, because He was tired of the Russian's shit.

We have, in reality, had many more mediocre and bad Presidents as Good and Great ones. Often, they are a victim of circumstances they have no controle over.

I am willing to give President Obama a chance, but he cannot help being a product of the very system he was brought up in. Chicago Thug Politics.

[wellendowed1911]

Originally Posted by Jackie S

I would not go so far as to say President Obama is a total failure as a President. Keep in mind, historically, we have had some that were absolutly terrible.

I would class him as almost mediocre at this point. But he is trying like all heck to displace Jimmy Carter as the worst post WW2 President.

I still think Abe Lincoln is the best, simply because he had the guts to fight the war that saved The United States. This war was in reality just as unpoular as any war we have fought since WW2. There was a good chance he would have only been a one term President if it had not been for Gettysburg.

Franklin D Roosevelt and George Washington are about tied for second, one for using his brilliant political mind to steer the Country through the depression and WW2, and the other for using His statesmanship to make sure the Country got off to the right start.

As much as it irks my Progressive Friends, I still believe Ronald Reagan was at least in the top 5. The simple fact that he had the courage to use this Countries might to finally bring down the Easter Iron Curtain.

Many forget that all through the 50's, 60's and 70's, we lived in utter fear of the Soviets Military Might. President Reagan finally said, "put up or shut up". His shining moment was not the "Mr. Gorbechev, tear down this wall" speech, but when he left Gorbechev standing on the tarmac in Iceland, because He was tired of the Russians shit.

We have, in reality, had many more mediocre and bad Presidents as Good and Great ones. Often, they are a victim of circumstances they have no controle over.

Honestly do you think Obama was worst than Carter or Bush? Bush W- is by far the worst and I mean by far- you get handed a booming economy- no wars- a budget surplus and you leave it with what....?

Obama I think is doing good based on the crap he inherited- No one aside of God could have turned things around to normal in this time period based on what George w left- I keep saying this over and over if Obama was a failure than we would have been in a Depression- so he gets a lot of props from me for not putting us in a Depression- because in all fairness things are not great now by any means- but they are far better than 2008 and 2009 and the numbers show that- the basis of my topic- was at this same period in Reagans terms things weren't great- Reagan didn't improve or show great results until his 2nd term.
So the mere fact that Obama does not have us in a Depression despite the crap he had to work with I give him a lot of credit.

It would be a helluva different situation if on day 1 Obama walked in the oval office with a low UE rate, no wars and a booming economy- based on what Obama walked in with- I think he deserves another shot.

[Jackie S]

If I remember correctly, the economy was doing just fine untill the Democrats took over Congress mid way through Bush W's tenure.

And kept it untill the election of Nov 2010.

[david1978]

Originally Posted by wellendowed1911

It would be a helluva different situation if on day 1 Obama walked in the oval office with a low UE rate, no wars and a booming economy- based on what Obama walked in with- I think he deserves another shot.

+1

[wellendowed1911]

Originally Posted by Jackie S

If I remember correctly, the economy was doing just fine untill the Democrats took over Congress mid way through Bush W's tenure.

And kept it untill the election of Nov 2010.

Let me guess who told you that Beck, RUSH, or Hannity? Whom are you kidding? The Economy hasn't been booming since the Clinton years. So are you telling me the DEMS only are responsible for the 2 wars? The DEMS are responsible for the BUSH TAX CUTS??? Ask yourself when was the last time you remember gas prices being affordable? When was the last time the government had a surplus? How much money was spent on this so called "War on Terror"?
What party typically kept blocking minimum wage increases but turned around and gave a tax break to the richest 2 percent??? Do you not see something wrong with a political party that doesn't want to increase minimum wage by 2 dollars but will give tax breaks to the Super Rich??? Something is just wrong with that scenario.