Frankly, Im surprised no homeless, out of work, nothing to lose wackos havent tried taking him out already. Like said in the past, I hope not because ones in order of rank would take over and their even worse.
Your kidding in the Bush statement I hope. Obamas spent more money the government dont have in a few months than Bush did in 8 years. All your kids are going to be repaying that wasted money for the rest of their lives.
IP: Logged
07:49 AM
avengador1 Member
Posts: 35468 From: Orlando, Florida Registered: Oct 2001
Frankly, Im surprised no homeless, out of work, nothing to lose wackos havent tried taking him out already. Like said in the past, I hope not because ones in order of rank would take over and their even worse.
Your kidding in the Bush statement I hope. Obamas spent more money the government dont have in a few months than Bush did in 8 years. All your kids are going to be repaying that wasted money for the rest of their lives.
I disagree with Obama (considerably) on his "fundamental views" of America. But honestly... an assasination is the most aweful thing that could ever happen to this country. Whether we agree with him or not. Aside from the fact that it would be a tragedy to lose a president, the ramifications it would have to the country's unity at a time like this.
For everyone reading this thread who is seriously concerned, if you have a US Flag, fly it upside down 7 days a week, if you don't own a flag - buy one. You have a legal right to display it in this manner as a signal of dire distress and/or instances of extreme danger to life or property (send link below to everyone on your email list):
OK, so the national debt issue under Bush is bad? Obama has increased it significantly since Bush. So if Bush=bad, then how is it 2 x bad = OK?
I don't know--you tell me.
quote
Originally posted by fierobear 10-13-2005 10:10 PM :
Immediate danger from Iraq? Probably not. Long-term stability in the middle east? You betcha. Afghanistan was necessary, and that's a war. War wears down a country.
quote
Originally posted by fierobear 10-13-2005 06:38 PM : He is not running the country into the ground. Inflation is low, unemployment is low, and there is some deficit reduction on the horizon.
How many Americans heros have died since the invasion, moneys spent fighting the war(s), and no end in sight?
Isn't sad that a (lie) can lead countries into wars that will evenually wear down both sides and were the following administration has no choice but too dive into the murky waters.
[This message has been edited by madcurl (edited 06-20-2010).]
IP: Logged
01:48 PM
fierobear Member
Posts: 27106 From: Safe in the Carolinas Registered: Aug 2000
Originally posted by madcurl: Woops. How many Americans heros have died since the invasion, moneys spent fighting the war(s), and no end in sight?
Isn't sad that a (lie) can lead countries into wars that will evenually wear down both sides and were the following administrated has no choice but too dive into the murky waters.
Iraq, Afghanistan or both? Are you suggesting that Afghanistan was a lie, or was it necessary? Oh, and your quote from me doesn't discuss the deficit and national debt. I thought that's what we were (primarily) talking about?
As for a new administration "having no choice", Obama said he'd remove combat troops within 16 months. It's been longer. Things were already winding down before Bush left office, so that promise is pretty close to meaningless.
[This message has been edited by fierobear (edited 06-20-2010).]
IP: Logged
02:04 PM
htexans1 Member
Posts: 9115 From: Clear Lake City/Houston TX Registered: Sep 2001
How many Americans heros have died since the invasion, moneys spent fighting the war(s), and no end in sight?
.
Comrade Obama said he was going to end the war(s). He hasn't done anything but maintain the status quo. Thats on his head, not Bush's.
The DAY Obama said we were going to have ENERYONE out of IRAQ... I got orders to deploy to IRAQ. Obviously we are going to be in Iraq a lot longer then Obama said. So, dont tell me Obama is any better then Bush.
IP: Logged
02:08 PM
madcurl Member
Posts: 21401 From: In a Van down by the Kern River Registered: Jul 2003
"On the day President Bush took office, the national debt stood at $5.727 trillion. The latest number from the Treasury Department shows the national debt now stands at more than $9.849 trillion. That's a 71.9 percent increase on Mr. Bush's watch."
"The bailout plan now pending in Congress could add hundreds of billions of dollars to the national debt – though President Bush said this morning he expects that over time, "much if not all" of the bailout money "will be paid back."
IP: Logged
02:21 PM
fierobear Member
Posts: 27106 From: Safe in the Carolinas Registered: Aug 2000
"On the day President Bush took office, the national debt stood at $5.727 trillion. The latest number from the Treasury Department shows the national debt now stands at more than $9.849 trillion. That's a 71.9 percent increase on Mr. Bush's watch."
Yes. Over EIGHT YEARS. That means Obama and the Democratic congress has spent $3.201 TRILLION - in a year and a half. That represents spending of $1.534 trillion per year. If Obama and the Democrats were to maintain power for 8 years, their projected spending would be $12.272 trillion. Since "Bush spent" (Presidents don't spend money, congress does, but we'll go by your standard, false as it may be, for comparison purposes) $4.122 trillion in 8 years, that means that Obama and the Democrats would be spending THREE TIMES as much as "Bush spent".
So...if you don't approve of the amount Bush spent, you should be positively outraged at how much Obama is spending. Right?
quote
"The bailout plan now pending in Congress could add hundreds of billions of dollars to the national debt – though President Bush said this morning he expects that over time, "much if not all" of the bailout money "will be paid back."
Only if you judge her on her record and not on the crap you hear from Tina Fey. But then again, no one who voted for Obama gave one minute's consideration to his record, or associations, or affiliations. Instead he was voted on because the media said he was a superstar.
so how confident are you now in the media's painting of Palin now?
Or is your ideology too entrenched to stand up to self examination?
IP: Logged
02:40 PM
madcurl Member
Posts: 21401 From: In a Van down by the Kern River Registered: Jul 2003
Comrade Obama said he was going to end the war(s). He hasn't done anything but maintain the status quo. Thats on his head, not Bush's.
The DAY Obama said we were going to have ENERYONE out of IRAQ... I got orders to deploy to IRAQ. Obviously we are going to be in Iraq a lot longer then Obama said. So, dont tell me Obama is any better then Bush.
Come-on. If the troops pack their bags and leave--you complain, right? You know, "dog with it's tail between his leg." If american stays and fights-you'll complain about the national debt and
"On the day President Bush took office, the national debt stood at $5.727 trillion. The latest number from the Treasury Department shows the national debt now stands at more than $9.849 trillion. That's a 71.9 percent increase on Mr. Bush's watch."
"The bailout plan now pending in Congress could add hundreds of billions of dollars to the national debt – though President Bush said this morning he expects that over time, "much if not all" of the bailout money "will be paid back."
Curly, please don't use sophistry. Budget issues are the responsibility of Congress. Bush was not responsible for the debt of the 2000s anymore than Clinton was responsible for the balance budget of the 90s. YES, the GOP held control of Congress through 2006 at which time the debt climbed 3 trillion...MUCH to my disgust and the disgust of other Republicans who watched with pleasure at Newt Gingrich's reduction of the debt and deficit in the 90s. It is for this reason the GOP lost contol of the house and Senate. But In just 4 short years the DEMs have not only beat that growth they have plans which will double it before 2012!!
So I ask a simple question Curly, what is your goal? more debt or less?
IP: Logged
02:49 PM
madcurl Member
Posts: 21401 From: In a Van down by the Kern River Registered: Jul 2003
Ah, you forgot the Big Three and what was Bush plan for the two wars?
About the "Big Three", I assume you mean GM, Chrysler and Ford? Only 2 of the 3 were bailed out. The bailout was another loan package. Obama made it a "takeover package".
In case you're having trouble keeping your facts straight, here was the plan at the time:
WASHINGTON — The emergency bailout of General Motors and Chrysler announced by President Bush on Friday gives the companies a few months to get their businesses in order, but hands off to President-elect Barack Obama the difficult political task of ruling on their future.
The plan pumps $13.4 billion by mid-January into the companies from the fund that Congress authorized to rescue the financial industry. But the two companies have until March 31 to produce a plan for long-term profitability, including concessions from unions, creditors, suppliers and dealers.
So, what did Obama do? Took over GM, and allowed them to tell their creditors and investors "F*** YOU", and gave the company to the unions.
The agreement, rushed to meet a government-imposed April 30 deadline, would give the UAW retiree health care trust fund a nearly 40 percent stake in GM and a 55 percent majority stake in Chrysler, the latter having declared bankruptcy yesterday. That fund - a voluntary employee beneficiary association (VEBA) set up a year and a half ago - is set to go into effect January 1, 2010. There is irony in all this. It was crushing union-negotiated health care costs, retirement costs and restrictive work rules that helped drive these companies into federal dependency, a condition that Ford barely has avoided. Even emergency federal loans made by the Bush and Obama administrations - GM's share alone has risen to $15.4 billion - haven't been enough.
Now the union and the government get to call most of the shots. An unnamed GM official quoted in April 30 American Spectator Online put it this way: "The U.S. Treasury will be able to elect all of our directors and to control the vote on substantially all matters brought for a stockholder vote." As it is, the government has forced the respective CEOs of GM and Chrysler, Rick Wagoner and Robert Nardelli, out the door.
Corporate bondholders are the biggest losers. GM currently has $27.2 billion in unsecured bonds held by mutual funds, pension funds, hedge funds and retail investors. How much of that are they going to see? Under Monday's government offer arranged by Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner and his auto bailout task force czar, Steven Rattner, it won't be much. Bondholders would exchange their securities for just 10 percent of the stock of the restructured company. That might wind up being less than five cents on the dollar.
I guess it's a good thing you didn't own any GM stock, huh?
IP: Logged
02:57 PM
htexans1 Member
Posts: 9115 From: Clear Lake City/Houston TX Registered: Sep 2001
Come-on. If the troops pack their bags and leave--you complain, right? You know, "dog with it's tail between his leg." If american stays and fights-you'll complain about the national debt and
I'd be the last to complain. I would like the truth though. Are we leaving or staying in Iraq? Don't give me orders to Iraq on the same DAY your saying were all going to leave... Either we are leaving, or were staying. Either way I dont care, but tell me the truth.
Is that to much to ask?
no.
IP: Logged
03:04 PM
Jun 21st, 2010
avengador1 Member
Posts: 35468 From: Orlando, Florida Registered: Oct 2001
The best way to know you are succeeding in changing Washington is when you get attacked by the FEC.
And attack us they have!
I'm writing you this letter today not to scare you or to cry wolf. I'm writing to let you know that our success has its price, and that price right now is the wrath of the Obama Administration and its attack dogs at the Federal Election Commission.
I urge you to read this message and then sign the Declaration of Support (in which I ask for your advice on a critical legal and moral question), as we are forced into battle with federal agencies and courts. You see, this isn't theoretical. They've already come after us in multiple cases, alleging that Campaign for Liberty has acted illegally merely by putting the candidates on the record and reporting their positions.
My attorneys tell me we are under a gag rule and cannot go in to too many details or even tell you with what we have been charged and where the charges originated.
But I can say there have been at least two complaints filed in two different states against our issue discussion activities.
They claim we are in violation of various FEC rules and laws.
Their allegations are completely false. And we must fight back now, or they will win and be able to silence our movement.
You see, the Washington, D.C., establishment doesn't like to be challenged. They hate it when we fight back.
They are absolutely BESIDE themselves when we are winning.
In less than 2 years, your Campaign for Liberty has become a major force on the American political landscape.
I can give you a list of our accomplishments, talk about our growth (we are approaching half a million members), and show you press coverage from across the nation on our efforts.
But nothing shows our success more than how our enemies react when challenged.
When that happens, they do what they do best: use the power of the federal government to attack us.
They want to do one of two things: shut us up, or shut us down.
This battle is over a very fundamental idea - that Campaign for Liberty and our members should have a voice in lobbying their legislators and exposing the radical views of candidates for office.
Exposing what they're up to - that's what the powers that be can't stand. That's because they don't want Americans to know:
** Congress is spending at a record pace and has now left us over 13 TRILLION dollars in debt, with no end in sight.
** The out of control FED has not accounted for nearly 2 trillion dollars and has doubled our monetary base, risking our entire economy.
** The federal government has imposed a mandate that every American either purchase a health care product the Feds approve of, costing tens of thousands of dollars, or risk fines and jail time.
** The federal government has attempted to take away your 1st, 2nd and 4th Amendment rights, all in the past year, with more certainly to come.
We're exposing them - and holding them accountable as they come back home to seek reelection.
Of course, this may not sound like the end of the world. But just think: the FEC has an ARMY of lawyers and a budget of nearly $70 MILLION dollars.
That's a lot of lawyers.
And add to it the fact that this group of people is adamantly against free speech under the First Amendment, and well, you have a recipe for trouble.
Subpeonas. Depositions. Fishing expeditions that cover tens of thousands of documents.
Legal fees just to defend our right to free speech.
Thousands of hours of staff time to comply with their demands.
You can see where this is going.
If FEC radicals succeed, I will not even be allowed to tell you and your neighbors how candidates for the House and Senate (or for President in the future) have voted on Liberty issues, so you can put the heat on them when they are most likely to listen.
Let me explain that a bit more.
For the first time ever, there is a nationwide group that is dedicated to holding politicians accountable for their votes on Liberty issues. It's Campaign for Liberty, and our over 450,000 members are doing battle across the country to hold the politicians' feet to the fire.
Whether it is getting more than 300 sponsors for Audit the Fed, or lobbying to stop Cap and Tax and Real ID schemes, Campaign for Liberty is making a difference.
And we're prepared to make an even bigger difference this fall, as the time comes to inform the people where their candidates stand.
So the statists in Washington are out to make sure that doesn't happen.
Their main weapon is the Federal Election Commission.
The FEC has always been against free speech and a tool of the powerful elite in Washington, who desperately seek to hang on to power.
But as bad as the FEC has been since its inception, with the Obama Administration in power, you and I face even more aggressive assaults on our free speech.
My attorneys have warned me that the puppets at the Federal Election Commission are ordering me to stop mobilizing hundreds of thousands of Americans against power grabs in Congress.
In doing so, they are trying to cripple our ability to stop dangerous legislation in Congress. If we continue to oppose these Liberty-stealing bills as we have in the past, I face the danger of multimillion-dollar fines and even a jail term!
In fact, I may even be questioned in court for writing this letter tonight.
I must make a decision soon. Should I allow the Federal Election Commission to tie my hands during this crucial election year?
Or should I defy their gag-rule regulations . . . and face prosecution from the out of control federal authorities for exercising our right to political speech?
Please give me your answer by filling out the Declaration of Support.
If you and other members want me to proceed with our efforts to inform the public of the positions of your candidates on Liberty issues, and to oppose legislation in the Congress (and I hope you do), I will also need your financial help.
So please consider making a generous contribution - even if you can only afford to chip in $10 - to help Campaign for Liberty continue this fight.
The fact is the enemies of Liberty are preparing for a political attack far more serious than their election power grab of 2008, in which they put in power some of the biggest enemies of freedom and promoters of Big Government in a generation.
Our program to stop more statist takeovers in Congress is simple. By mobilizing our grassroots army, we can put a lot of heat on individual Congressmen and Senators.
The FEC insists we can't do that during election years.
They say by telling you where your Congressman and Senators stand, I may influence your vote. The FEC election regulators contend that's illegal electioneering.
Basically, government bureaucrats and their out of control regulations insist I dismantle our lobbying operation during election years -- precisely at the time it would have its greatest impact.
Top legal experts tell me that this harassment by the FEC and any attempts to shut down our program violate several decisions by the U.S. Supreme Court and are flatly unconstitutional.
But they also warn me that if I challenge the FEC ruling, I may face a huge, tax-funded lawsuit which could stretch on for decades and cost us as much as a million dollars.
In addition to potential million-dollar fines and legal penalties, I also face an enormous funding challenge.
Our program to fight back in Congress will require at least $3.2 million.
So there are a lot of decisions to make, and I wanted to be sure I have your support as we move forward.
If I am to proceed with this effort (which I am hoping you will allow), I will need more than just your authorization. I will need your financial support as well.
I'm hoping you will be able to help with a special contribution - even if you can only afford to chip in $10 - to help Campaign for Liberty continue this fight.
Every dollar, every quarter, every dime will be used to defeat dangerous Liberty-stealing schemes in Congress and in all 50 states.
John, please respond soon.
This is one of the most far-reaching questions I have ever had to pose to you. The future of Campaign for Liberty is at stake.
If our people are heard, I am sure Liberty will once again thrive in our country. And we are making great strides in even just the past year.
So please, act today. If you believe our voices should be heard, and that the federal government CANNOT be allowed to silence them, it's vital you answer today.
Please fill out Declaration of Support, and consider making a generous contribution - even if you can only afford to chip in $10 - to help Campaign for Liberty continue this fight.
Thank you for all you do for Liberty.
In Liberty,
John Tate
President PS: Your Declaration of Support and your maximum possible contribution today will ensure Campaign for Liberty will be able to keep fighting this election year.
Just like in 2008, the establishment and statists are desperate to shut us up or shut us down. They don't want to have their records exposed.
You and I cannot give them the playing field. We must fight back today.
IP: Logged
09:30 AM
Pyrthian Member
Posts: 29569 From: Detroit, MI Registered: Jul 2002
I'm not predicting Pelosi . I am just hoping. I can't think of a better person to **** it all up faster.
I can dream can't I?
What scares me is that Obama is doing so much so fast to piss almost everyone off that he won't get re-elected and then we will have more years of stagnation and promises. Lets go up or lets go down but I don't want to waste years doing nothing slowly.
You must in the back of your mind see us coming back up though, when the voters learn their lesson. Whats to say this isn't what they want? A bunch of entitlement minded people who define freedom much differently than the constitution intended, could eventually be the same mentality of the folks who looked the other way when the jews got rounded up in Europe. Who cleaned up that mess, the USA did for teh most part, who will clean us up when we turn into a mess? I'm not ready to try and make it worse hoping for a turnaround when people open their eyes.
IP: Logged
01:53 PM
Rickady88GT Member
Posts: 10655 From: Central CA Registered: Dec 2002
$13,050,418,063,231.27
