Fido
 
  1  
Reply Fri 8 Apr, 2011 02:15 pm
@cicerone imposter,
cicerone imposter wrote:

All true, georgeob, but we didn't arrive at this point in our financial crisis by democrats alone. This was the accumulation of past spending including the doubling of our deficit by GW Bush during his eight years in office.

Trying to make out the democrats as the bad guys who threw money at social programs doesn't cut it; GW Bush expanded was is called The Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act[1] (also called the Medicare Modernization Act or MMA), a federal law of the United States, enacted in 2003.[2] It produced the largest overhaul of Medicare in the public health program's 38-year history.

Good try, but no cupie doll for you!



Agreed... Going into Iraq, the repubs reflected on the massive defecits Reagan had left the country, and the fact that the democrats had to pay the price for fixing it under Clinton and concluded that deficits don't matter... The defecits this country runs make the rich richer and the poor poorer... For the rich, they will never matter unless they need a handy excuse to deny entitlements... Look at every situation where entitlement and rights are denied because of the defecit, and there is a place where the people could simply deny the debt and reneg...
0 Replies
 
revelette
 
  1  
Reply Fri 8 Apr, 2011 03:53 pm
Is This Really All About Abortion?

Quote:
This morning Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid called the networks together and gave them an update on the negotiations (as I type this Reid is starting another press conference in the Senate). He said the issues have narrowed to one: abortion. Reid said House Speaker John Boehner is pushing a rider that would make Title X into block grants, thus enabling governors to do as they wish with the money. Most conservative governors would immediately defund Planned Parenthood. The group doesn't use federal money to provide abortions -- the federal money goes to mammograms, contraceptives and family planning for mostly poor women. But conservatives have never liked Planned Parenthood, which does, separately, provide abortion services.


So we are shutting down the government so that poor women can't get mammograms and birth control.




cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Fri 8 Apr, 2011 03:59 pm
@revelette,
That's the whole basket; they don't want women to get health services, because under federal law, taxpayer money cannot be spent for abortions, but that's what they say in fighting to reduce spending.

Are all republicans that dumb?
revelette
 
  1  
Reply Sat 9 Apr, 2011 07:28 am

Federal Budget Deal Reached, Government Shutdown Averted At Least Temporarily


Quote:
"Today Americans of different beliefs came together again," President Barack Obama said from the White House Blue Room, a setting chosen to offer a clear view of the Washington Monument over his right shoulder.

The agreement — negotiated by the new Republican speaker of the House, John Boehner, the president and the Senate Democratic leader, Harry Reid — came as the administration was poised to shutter federal services, from national parks to tax-season help centers, and to send furlough notices to hundreds of thousands of federal workers. It was a prospect that all sides insisted they wanted to avoid but that at times seemed all but inevitable.

Shortly after midnight, White House budget director Jacob Lew issued a memo instructing the government's departments and agencies to continue their normal operations.
Story continues below

Boehner said the agreement came after "a lot of discussion and a long fight," and he won an ovation from his rank and file, including the new tea party adherents whose victories last November shifted control of the House to the GOP.

Reid declared the deal "historic."

The deal marked the end of a three-way clash of wills, but it also set the tone for coming confrontations over raising the government's borrowing limit, the 2012 budget and long-term deficit reduction.

At the end of the day, all sides claimed victory — Republicans for the sheer size of the spending cuts and Obama and Reid for jettisoning Republican policy initiatives that would have blocked certain environmental regulations and made changes in a federal program that provides family planning services.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 9 Apr, 2011 08:36 am
@revelette,
It's good that they both claimed victory, but they actually both lost, because the American People are sick and tired of their politics. The GOP was holding the democrats hostage on Planned Parenthood - a non-budget issue; all politics and not $$$. The democrats cut spending by $39 billion, but hardly enough to make a dent in the government spending - while cutting jobs that'll affect some 100,000 government workers at a time when the economy can't afford to lose jobs.

They're both losers in my books.
H2O MAN
 
  -3  
Reply Sat 9 Apr, 2011 03:06 pm
@H2O MAN,
H2O MAN wrote:

PrezBO does not have republicans cornered - he lies.

Why is it that Obama democrats never offered up a budget for 2011 ???


How He Did It:
Three Keys to Boehner’s Budget Victory



0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  1  
Reply Sat 9 Apr, 2011 03:17 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Cycloptichorn wrote:

Portugal really ought to tell them to go to hell and just declare bankruptcy.

I should point out that they just REJECTED, in a national referendum, terms that the EU is now calling 'starting points only.'

Cycloptichorn

What do you suppose constitutes the "declaration of bankrupcy" by a sovereign government? There is no friendly court that will negotiate and arbitrate on their behalf with creditors. There is only default and the repudiation of foreign debts and the consequent loss of access to borrowed foreign money. When a country like Portugual (or the USA) becomes addicted to borrowed money, the withdrawl process is very painful.

Greece went through a similar process of denial and then accepted the bitter pill. Bad as the EU terms for assistance may be, they are a good deal better than national default and the loss of access to borrowed money.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 9 Apr, 2011 03:37 pm
@georgeob1,
I believe there are more consequences to declaring bankruptcy; no nation would dare have trade with that country, because they won't know if they'll get paid. Their economy will sink faster than any Great Depression.
georgeob1
 
  1  
Reply Sat 9 Apr, 2011 03:46 pm
@cicerone imposter,
It's been done. Argentina defaulted about a decade ago. and did it earlier under Peron. The consequences were severe, and they haven't fully recovered yet, but trade at some level did continue.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 9 Apr, 2011 03:58 pm
@georgeob1,
More recently, Iceland declared bankruptcy, but they seem to have recovered from their crisis quite quickly. They probably got loans from Ireland and the UK, but I'm only guessing from past readings about that country.

What I find to be a mystery is the fact that the Euro and British pound seems to be gaining on the US dollar when both the Euro countries and the UK are in pretty bad economic straights.

I also find it interesting that gold prices have gone over $1,450 per ounce; something that seems to tell the world that most actively traded currencies are over-valued.

What's next?
georgeob1
 
  1  
Reply Sat 9 Apr, 2011 04:51 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Interesting. Financial crises arising from one time events in otherwise productive and well-managed countries & governments, like the banking bailouts in Iceland and Ireland, appear to permit relatively quick, if temporarily very painful, recoveries. However, when the core problem is a combination of low productivity and high expectations for social spending from a paternalistic government, the process appears to take much longer and involve multiple stages of denial and political disruption. Greece, Portugual and lately the United States are examples.
Fido
 
  1  
Reply Mon 11 Apr, 2011 05:39 am
@cicerone imposter,
cicerone imposter wrote:

That's the whole basket; they don't want women to get health services, because under federal law, taxpayer money cannot be spent for abortions, but that's what they say in fighting to reduce spending.

Are all republicans that dumb?
I think the attitude is that if those who vote democratic in the expectation of getting some good out of government will not vote democratic if they can get no good from it...

The anti tax, anti government spirit of republicans is based upon a great ignorance... They have not considered what their country would look like without hospitals, good roads, or universities... Their mental problems are common enough... They use their ideas to avoid thought rather than as an aid to thought... They are not knowledgable nor thoughtful... They want pat answers, and pat answers are given to them... Instead of risisting those people they should be elected to every office in the land... Sure; they will screw up everything, but unless their own throw them out it will look like a democratic conspiracy...

Ultimately this is all a democratic party problem... Since the democrats play to play while the republicans play to win the dems are doomed... If the democrats have no long term solutions they will never capture the imagination of the people... If they have not the courage to meet the moral arguments of the right head on, and call a spade a spade they will never deserve a vote... They will never say that the difference between a repub candidate and a democrat is only a matter of degrees, and that the dems accept as much the failed ideology of capitalism and so must live within the limits of that failing system... Neither side has solutions, but the repubs have the advantage in being offensive toward the whole society, and the only danger to them is that the party of everyone else will appeal to enough of the rest to vote them out..
Fido
 
  1  
Reply Mon 11 Apr, 2011 05:44 am
@cicerone imposter,
cicerone imposter wrote:

It's good that they both claimed victory, but they actually both lost, because the American People are sick and tired of their politics. The GOP was holding the democrats hostage on Planned Parenthood - a non-budget issue; all politics and not $$$. The democrats cut spending by $39 billion, but hardly enough to make a dent in the government spending - while cutting jobs that'll affect some 100,000 government workers at a time when the economy can't afford to lose jobs.

They're both losers in my books.
The republicans in attacking everything had to democrats trying to cover too much territory with too little troops... The dems ought to give the repubs everything they ask for so the people realize once in a while why they have things like planned parenthood, and the epa and the food and drug administration.. If the dems became even for a short time more republican than the repubs, the repubs would find themselves on the other side of the issue... Get rid of the minimum wage... Get rid of social security... Get rid of equality for minorities... Without the funding there is no point in the law...
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 11 Apr, 2011 10:12 am
@georgeob1,
I do not agree with all social spending, but the core of education and infrastructure upkeep are necessary for our economy to remain competitive.

The dems protect too much social spending when revenue cannot keep up with that spending, and the republicans want to destroy everything with their cut all spending and reduce taxes meme. Who do you think has the right goals? Both parties are wrong, and we can see that with the give and take in congress on non-issues that have no impact on the real problems facing Americans. It's all ridiculous show for the masses while they watch this theater that threatens our very future.
0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  -1  
Reply Mon 11 Apr, 2011 11:04 am
@revelette,
Harry Reid is a tool.
0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  -1  
Reply Mon 11 Apr, 2011 11:07 am
@Fido,
Nothing good has come from the democrats in many years, but the dumbmasses keep voting for dems
thus proving what everyone knows - democrats appeal to the least intelligent, most ignorant Americans.
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Mon 11 Apr, 2011 11:16 am
@H2O MAN,
Quote:
democrats appeal to the least intelligent, most ignorant Americans.


The fact that you wrote that is a refutation of your "argument", h2oboy.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 11 Apr, 2011 11:19 am
@JTT,
When waterboy uses intelligence in any of his writings, it's a contradiction of the term; he has none to spew such nonsense.
0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  -1  
Reply Mon 11 Apr, 2011 11:24 am
The opinions of Obama apologists like imposter & jtt are both funny and sad.
It would be a true miracle if either of them had an original thought.
JTT
 
  0  
Reply Mon 11 Apr, 2011 11:30 am
@H2O MAN,
Quote:
It would be a true miracle if either of them had an original thought.


Now that's original, h20boy! Man, you are really quite impressive this morning, aren't you? Keep them coming, those original thoughts of yours.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.06 seconds on 11/16/2024 at 04:40:35