Page 4 of 13 FirstFirst 1234567891011 ... LastLast
Results 40 to 52 of 159
  1. #40
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    6,876
    Quote Originally Posted by Tool-Slinger View Post
    Actually, in Canada they beat seals with clubs for laughs. It may be strange, but it gets really cold up there and there is not much to do.
    Actually it is only in the Maritime provinces where this occurs. A friend was from there and his sister came to visit one summer. She said there were only three things to do there, fish, drink, and the third one was sexual in nature. And that they did a lot of all three.

  2. #41
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Northern Indiana
    Posts
    1,406
    Quote Originally Posted by whec720 View Post
    You are kinda missing my point. Deficit spending or not, a President survives into his second term if he is able to keep the unemployment numbers low. Or if they are high when he begins his first term, he has to see to it that they come down. If he doesn't do that, he is done....PERIOD. No second term, no passing go, no collecting 200 dollars.

    That is why Carter bit the dust and Reagan rode off in the sunset.

    Basically, Americans do not understand economics, be them micro or macro. They do understand the importance of earning a living and having money in their pocket though. Presidents live and die by this simple fact.
    THANK YOU!!!! and AMEN!!!!! Someone has nailed it here boys.

    Good job whec!

  3. #42
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    6,876
    Quote Originally Posted by whec720 View Post
    You are kinda missing my point. Deficit spending or not, a President survives into his second term if he is able to keep the unemployment numbers low. Or if they are high when he begins his first term, he has to see to it that they come down. If he doesn't do that, he is done....PERIOD. No second term, no passing go, no collecting 200 dollars.

    That is why Carter bit the dust and Reagan rode off in the sunset.

    Basically, Americans do not understand economics, be them micro or macro. They do understand the importance of earning a living and having money in their pocket though. Presidents live and die by this simple fact.
    And that is why we are in the mess we are in. Each president after Carter put in place policies that boosted employment but lefy the bill to future governments to solve. Well at some point the bubble burst and not much was left to build with.

    The problem with Obama was that he tried to fulfill his election promises rather than saying to the people that the country is in trouble and the first order of business would be the economy.

    The Republicans would have made hay if he did not try to fulfill his promises saying he promised one thing but served up a bunch of bad news instead. Damned if you do damned if you don't. Whoever won this term would have been screwed no mater what.

  4. #43
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Northern Indiana
    Posts
    1,406
    Quote Originally Posted by frostman View Post
    Nothing changes on this site I see. Still the same group of right wing nut jobs complaining about Obama, while, I presume, supporting even nuttier tea party candidates. Where is unemployment still so high? There's a handful of states where it's high that's keeping the rate up. In a lot of places it has fallen. Almost all of the people I know who lost their jobs are back to work. Most at the same job. As for Obama being a one term president, I think Obamas re-election chances will be greatly helped if the Republicans take back the house in November. If that happens it wont take the American people 3 months to realize it was a mistake putting the GOP back in charge, and Obamas numbers will go right back up. Obama isn't the greatest, but he sure beats any Republican out there, especially the ones in congress. You right wingers complain and complain, but i've yet to hear one thing from the right about how they would actually fix this mess. Putting people like Rand Paul in the senate is only gonna make the situation worse. Thankfully the American people are starting to reject the Tea Baggers, so I guess all hope isn't lost yet.

    Really??? Wow!!! Try this....turn down the sound on Kieth Olberman next time and learn to analyze and interpret ecomonic data for yourself.

    Also, try not to think of it as a Democrat/Republican issue because its not. Its about your ability and my ability to work in thrive in a free nation. As far as the boobs in Congress, you are right. However, your not paying attention to reality if you believe what you have written about Obama.

  5. #44
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    6,876
    Quote Originally Posted by daytonafan View Post
    THANK YOU!!!! and AMEN!!!!! Someone has nailed it here boys.

    Good job whec!
    See, there is a reason we beat these things to death.

  6. #45
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Andalucia
    Posts
    3,223
    Quote Originally Posted by pdrake65 View Post
    Clinton's numbers came under a Republican ruled congress.Not very often can a President take sole responsibility for policies. This is not the case for BO . HE says and Congress does for the most part.
    Using your logic lets revisit Reagan. Where the House was democratic all 8 years. And his best 2 years, 1987-88 the dems. had the house and senate.
    And of course we know Reagan was on top of things his last 2 years in office right?
    "War is cruelty,and you cannot refine it." Sherman to the leadership of Atlanta prior to burning the city.

    "Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen."
    Albert Einstein

    Romney campaign: "We're not going to let our campaign be ruled by fact-checkers,"

    Lindsey Graham: “We’re not generating enough angry white guys to stay in business for the long term.”

  7. #46
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Connectitaxed
    Posts
    2,644
    Quote Originally Posted by pageyjim View Post
    Using your logic lets revisit Reagan. Where the House was democratic all 8 years. And his best 2 years, 1987-88 the dems. had the house and senate.
    And of course we know Reagan was on top of things his last 2 years in office right?
    I don't recall discussing Ronald Reagan but go ahead. I assume you have a point to make. Was it the fact that he was a Democrat until 1962? How about his California Governor career? I had said that no Prez has easily pushed his agenda in recent history better than Obama...am I wrong?

  8. #47
    Unemployment numbers, regardless of whether they are at their current rate or not, will not be what decides who is elected president. If Sarah Palin is the republican nominee, Obama gets reelected in a cakewalk. If the republicans want to win the white house back, they had better run a candidate much better than John McCain....one who selects a running mate with an acute awareness of the issues. Palin was a monumental mistake that cost the republicans the election.

  9. #48
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Andalucia
    Posts
    3,223
    [QUOTE=pdrake65;7236972]I don't recall discussing Ronald Reagan but go ahead. I assume you have a point to make. Was it the fact that he was a Democrat until 1962? How about his California Governor career? I had said that no Prez has easily pushed his agenda in recent history better than Obama...am I wrong?[/

    Unbelievable, you were making a point that the Clinton economy wasn't his to claim because of a rep. congress. So I, using your logic pointed out same under Reagan. It was your point and your logic and if you can't see that there's no helping you.

    And you are wrong. This is not the stimulus bill he would have wanted and this is not the healthcare bill he would have wanted etc... but it became what we had to settle for. Where what he would have wanted would have been better for the nation.
    "War is cruelty,and you cannot refine it." Sherman to the leadership of Atlanta prior to burning the city.

    "Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen."
    Albert Einstein

    Romney campaign: "We're not going to let our campaign be ruled by fact-checkers,"

    Lindsey Graham: “We’re not generating enough angry white guys to stay in business for the long term.”

  10. #49
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Western NY
    Posts
    4,356
    Quote Originally Posted by printer2 View Post
    And that is why we are in the mess we are in. Each president after Carter put in place policies that boosted employment but lefy the bill to future governments to solve. Well at some point the bubble burst and not much was left to build with.

    The problem with Obama was that he tried to fulfill his election promises rather than saying to the people that the country is in trouble and the first order of business would be the economy.

    The Republicans would have made hay if he did not try to fulfill his promises saying he promised one thing but served up a bunch of bad news instead. Damned if you do damned if you don't. Whoever won this term would have been screwed no mater what.
    Well there are two main schools of thought on that. One being, reduce government taxation and regulation to rev up entrepreneurship. This would create new industries, thus increase new areas of tax revenues.

    The other, increase government regulation. Force mandates and guidelines to rev up entrepreneurship. Increase taxation to pay for the larger government needed to enforce it. The new industries created from this, increase new areas of tax revenues.

    Both are designed to increase employment and stuff more money in the US Treasury. Its been like that way before Reagan.
    "Excellence is the gradual result of always striving to do better"
    -Pat Riley

  11. #50
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Connectitaxed
    Posts
    2,644
    [QUOTE=pageyjim;7237272]
    Quote Originally Posted by pdrake65 View Post
    I don't recall discussing Ronald Reagan but go ahead. I assume you have a point to make. Was it the fact that he was a Democrat until 1962? How about his California Governor career? I had said that no Prez has easily pushed his agenda in recent history better than Obama...am I wrong?[/

    Unbelievable, you were making a point that the Clinton economy wasn't his to claim because of a rep. congress. So I, using your logic pointed out same under Reagan. It was your point and your logic and if you can't see that there's no helping you.

    And you are wrong. This is not the stimulus bill he would have wanted and this is not the healthcare bill he would have wanted etc... but it became what we had to settle for. Where what he would have wanted would have been better for the nation.
    I think you need to read my post again. First off it is not my logic it is fact.I never said Clinton could not claim...all the Presidents do...I merely pointed out that they cannot take sole responsibity for policies. I did not discuss Reagan but you keep bringing him up as if I did. If you want to compare Presidents go ahead .I was comparing Clinton to Obama. Lastly I am not wrong. Obama has gotten his policies thru congress. No bill ever gets thru without some changes to get more votes.

  12. #51
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Dacula, GA
    Posts
    12,601
    Quote Originally Posted by pageyjim View Post
    Unbelievable, you were making a point that the Clinton economy wasn't his to claim because of a rep. congress. So I, using your logic pointed out same under Reagan. It was your point and your logic and if you can't see that there's no helping you..............................
    There is no helping you period. The simple fact is that Clinton had to go along with the majority Republicans in Congress because they stuck to their principles and improved the economy.

    Regan forced the liberal but not socialist (read commie loving) Democrats to cut taxes because they wanted to be reelected in districts where the majority of voters were true Americans and not poisoned with the welfare socialist's mindset. But that is over your head or like most socialists refuse to admit it. Thank you very much
    Last edited by glennac; 07-18-2010 at 11:54 AM.
    "I could have ended the war in a month. I could have made North Vietnam look like a mud puddle."
    "I have little interest in streamlining government or in making it more efficient, for I mean to reduce its size. I do not undertake to promote welfare, for I propose to extend freedom. My aim is not to pass laws, but to repeal them. It is not to inaugurate new programs, but to cancel old ones that do violence to the Constitution."
    Barry Goldwater

  13. #52
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    6,876
    Quote Originally Posted by glennac View Post
    There is no helping you period. The simple fact is that Clinton had to go along with the majority Republicans in Congress because they stuck to their principles and improved the economy.

    Regan forced the liberal but not socialist (read commie loving) Democrats to cut taxes because they wanted to be reelected in districts where the majority of voters were true Americans and not poisoned with the welfare socialist's mindset. But that is over your head or like most socialists refuse to admit it. Thank you very much
    Why can you not be a true American and yet have a socialist mindset? I am sure there are those that love their country, have laid down their lives for it, and yet view the union as more than a collection of states without a shared concern for its citizens.


    Not to go off on a tangent here, just stating a view.

Page 4 of 13 FirstFirst 1234567891011 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Comfortech Show Promo Image

Related Forums

Plumbing Talks | Contractor Magazine
Forums | Electrical Construction & Maintenance (EC&M) Magazine
Comfortech365 Virtual Event