realjohnboy
 
  1  
Fri 12 Mar, 2010 08:13 pm
@Amigo,
I wonder who, if anyone, would be so naive to believe that the "University of California(?)," a public institution, would be able to donate $1,591,395 to the Obama campaign. And the Federal government contributed $494,820?
roger
 
  1  
Fri 12 Mar, 2010 08:21 pm
@realjohnboy,
I was wondering, too. The article does state that it was not the institutions themselves, but PACs. I'm not sure that answers my questions. How does it sound to you?
0 Replies
 
roger
 
  1  
Fri 12 Mar, 2010 08:25 pm
@realjohnboy,
realjohnboy wrote:

The "hawkish" view is that keeping interest rates low will cause inflation that could send us back into recession.


I think I tend toward a hawkish view, then. Artificially low interest rates seem to have been a factor in the run up of home prices. Various mortgage modifications seem to be directed at keeping home prices artifically high, rather than letting the market clear by letting prices drop to the point where they are bought, and removed from the market.
realjohnboy
 
  1  
Fri 12 Mar, 2010 08:54 pm
@roger,
Thanks, Roger, for a thoughtful response. It is bed time for me and my back is hurting more than a bit. I tried to report the story about the Fed vacancies as straight and as evenly as I could.
I come down on the "dovish" side. I am not worried right now about inflation.
Low interest rates are - albeit slowly- working. I think.
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  -3  
Mon 15 Mar, 2010 04:12 pm
THE SOLUTION FOR RESCUING OUR CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC AND CAPITALIST ECONOMY

The solution for rescuing our Constitutional Republic and capitalist economy is not to repeatedly sound alarms and repeatedly give the reasons for those alarms. The solution is to first impeach President Obama, or initiate his removal from the presidency some other lawful way. He is unlawfully leading the transfer of private property from those persons and from those organizations who have lawfully earned it to those persons and organizations who have not lawfully earned it.

Nowhere in the Constitution has the President, the Congress, or the Judiciary been granted the power to transfer private property from those who lawfully earned it to those who have not lawfully earned it. Any branch of the federal government that makes such private property transfers, violates both the "supreme law of the land," and their "oath or affirmation to support this Constitution" required by Article VI.

Making such property transfers is exercising powers not delegated by the Constitution of the United States to the federal government of the United States. According to Amendment X, the exercise of such undelegated powers violates the Constitution. Therefore, making such property transfers is an act of adhering to our domestic and foreign enemies by giving them aid and comfort. According to Article III Section 3, such an act is an act of treason against the United States.

Because President Obama is committing these treasonous acts, we have to elect members to the House of Representatives who will make, second, and debate a motion to impeach President Obama.
ican711nm
 
  -2  
Mon 15 Mar, 2010 04:40 pm
@ican711nm,
Quote:
Obama: Serving Ambitions, Not Citizens
By JR Dieckmann Friday, March 12, 2010 - Canada Free Press

This recession is not going to end as long as Obama is in office. The recession is an essential part of the “Progressive” plan to transform the foundation of the country from capitalism to socialism. The unemployment rate of 9.7 percent represents only about half of the workforce that would be working if jobs were available. Jobs in the private (productive) sector continue to decrease, while government and SEIU (Service Employees International Union)-type, taxpayer paid jobs continue to increase.

With less and less revenue from private sector production and more and more government dependence, you can see where this is headed. You can also see why our government keeps borrowing more money to pay for liabilities that aren’t being covered by tax revenue.

Eventually, the loan interest rate becomes unaffordable, or credit is denied altogether, and the nation’s economy collapses through default. That’s when the Socialists take over and begin confiscating 50% or more of your income in taxes as a necessary step toward economic recovery.

They’ll tell you it’s for “the common good” of the country, but if they cared about the common good of the country, they never would have caused this to happen in the first place. But they will gladly hold you and your income liable for their reckless policies and spending. We must hold them accountable first before this happens. We must elect a Congress in November that will put a stop to this abuse of the American citizens.

In his weekly radio address, Obama said he had a meeting with insurance executives who were unable to tell him (to his understanding) why insurance rates keep going up. Why does Obama have to ask them this question?
Answer: because Obama doesn’t understand how business works, and health insurance is a business. It is a product provided to those who can afford it, no different from buying a car. It is not a right, anymore than owning a car is a right.

Insurance company rates are directly proportional to insurance company costs. Rates go up because the costs go up and because the value of the dollar continues to decline as government policy keeps borrowing and printing more currency. In spite of a rise in insurance company rates, their profit margin still remains under 3.5% which goes to the stock investors who are the American people.

That’s not much profit and certainly doesn’t show corporate greed. Obama’s healthcare plan does nothing to reduce the costs, but instead attempts to subsidize them with taxpayers’ money, which will only make the problem worse.

Obama feels the need to demonize insurance companies and anyone else in the private sector that he wants to destroy in order to promote his socialist agenda. Sure, there are some problems with insurance companies for the chronically ill and those with pre-existing conditions, but then the insurance companies have a responsibility to their stockholders to show a profit, not a loss. If they have to pay for costs that exceed income, then the rates have to go up!

Obama accuses them of greed for trying to meet their costs and would have them operate at a loss and drive them out of business to force more people to look to government for their healthcare. That is not the American way.

A large portion of those increasing costs come from lawyers constantly filing frivolous medical lawsuits. Even if the cases never go to court, it still costs a lot of money to defend them and settle out of court. If we really want to lower the costs of healthcare then we need to get James Sokolov, and others like him, off of our TVs, and put a stop to this television advertising for medical lawsuits. By doing so, we remove the cause of expensive defensive medicine being practiced by doctors, which adds even more to the costs.

This synthetic president said in his State of the Union address that “we were sent here to serve our citizens, not our ambitions.” Maybe Obama needs to start listening to his own speeches. He has done nothing but serve his own ambitions and special interests since taking office! He must be aware that nationalized healthcare is not popular with the American people, yet he continues to push it. How is that “serving our citizens?” Is he really listening to anyone other than Andy Stern, president of the SEIU?

“If the power of persuasion doesn’t work, then we’ll use the persuasion of power.”"Andy Stern, another Marxist advising Obama and influencing national policy. As the communist USSR president, Nikita Khrushchev, once said: “We will take you over from the inside!” At the time, in the late 1960s, few took him seriously. They should have. The communists now have their man in the White House.

With Obama in office and a Progressive-controlled Congress, the goals of a communist takeover are now within sight. But this opportunity won’t last for long, and that is why we are seeing this urgent and forceful push toward socialism now.

We must fight with every resource we have to restore the constitutional limits placed on an out-of-control federal government - one that is no longer a constitutional government bound by the founding documents.

We can’t afford to have our government unionized by the SEIU or any other union. This is supposed to be a government of the people, not of unions which prevent the firing of worthless employees and demand that they be paid twice what the private sector is paid for the same work. Remember when Civil Service jobs were low paying, last resort jobs, and taxes were affordable? Obama needs to clean up his own house before demonizing others.

It’s almost a sure bet that Republicans will take over Congress next year. If this healthcare gets passed into law in any form, Republican candidates should campaign on a platform of repealing it as soon as they are in power. No matter in what form it may pass, Obama will sign and applaud it as a huge success and accomplishment of his administration. The citizens will see it for what it is - a loss of freedom and liberty.

However, the danger of this healthcare bill is that it is so massive that repealing it would be nearly impossible after the bureaucracy has been installed, the money allocated, private insurers going out of business, and the system transformed. The next Congress must begin the repeal process immediately, before more irreversible damage is done.

Obama has been talking about “my healthcare plan,” but it turns out that Obama’s healthcare plan doesn’t even exist. It was nothing more than an outline, which couldn’t even be scored by the CBO for lack of any details.

I suspect that it was the plan written and submitted to Obama by Andy Stern and the SEIU which laid down the guidelines for the Senate and House bills.
The process now being used by Obama and Congress is unconstitutional. The Constitution requires that all bills that raise revenue for the government must originate in the House:

Article I, Section 7: “All bills for raising revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with amendments as on other Bills.”

But this unconstitutional president is telling the House to pass a bill that raises hundreds of billions of dollars in taxes and borrowing from foreign countries, but originated in the Senate.

On top of that, they intend to use reconciliation in the Senate to get the bill passed with only 51 votes. Reconciliation was created to resolve budget issues because the Constitution requires Congress to pass a budget every year. It was never intended, nor has it ever been used, to get policy issues passed.

Pelosi doesn’t have enough votes to pass the Senate version of the bill, so to get enough Democrat votes in the House, they were told that the bill will be “fixed” after it has been passed into law. This would result in the law created by this bill being something different from what was passed by Congress. Senate Republicans are telling the House members “don’t count on that 'fix' ever happening.”

Latest subversion of constitutional law by Rep. Louise Slaughter:
Now, the latest subversion of constitutional law comes from Rep. Louise Slaughter who is suggesting a new rule that would consider the bill passed if the House passes a “corrections bill” that would make changes to the Senate bill. This means that the House wouldn’t actually have to vote on the healthcare bill at all; just pass it.

The Constitution is very clear on this point:
“…But in all such cases, the votes of both Houses shall be determined by yeas and nays, and the names of the persons voting for and against the bill shall be entered on the journal of each House respectively.”

Obama is becoming desperate. He is becoming unglued, knowing that his signature legislation is failing, instead of becoming the most important accomplishment (the only accomplishment) of his career. He is demanding that Congress pass this abomination by March 18 before they go on Easter recess.

He knows what lawmakers are going to face in their local communities from their constituents who do not want this legislation passed, and he knows it will effect their willingness to vote for this unpopular bill. He knows it won’t stand a chance of passing after lawmakers hear from their constituents face to face.

If this bill fails, Obama will be seen as the failure that he is. If it passes, he will be seen as the enemy of American freedom, liberty, and prosperity. He has already crossed the line, so now he has only one way to go. Force his socialism upon America and make it permanent and irrevocable while he still has the power of the presidency.

He is determined to get this done at any cost or violation of the law. To Obama, the “status quo” is constitutional government. He has always hated our Constitution and intends to change or abolish it to suit his Marxist ideology.

This will be done by making small changes here and there along with big ones like this healthcare bill, the Cap & Trade bill, to be followed by the Immigration Reform bill. All of these issues have been rejected by the American people, but Obama doesn’t care what the American people want.
Obama’s transformation of the country means serving his own ambitions of a socialist dictatorship. The citizens of America must continue to show their disapproval of Obama, his communist ideology, and his socialist healthcare agenda.

Never before has America faced an enemy more dangerous to our freedom and liberty than we face now.

As for our prosperity, that is pretty much already gone, as is the prosperity of our future generations who will be strapped with the Obama debt. This political pervert in the White House must be stopped now and forever. We must elect officials who are willing to serve the citizens, not their own ambitions and those of their campaign contributors both foreign and domestic.


Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Mon 15 Mar, 2010 05:15 pm
@ican711nm,
Just as a note to our fellow readers,

'Canada Free Press' is a right-wing website devoted to attacking Liberalism, not an actual print journal with actual editorial standards.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  -2  
Mon 15 Mar, 2010 06:05 pm
@ican711nm,
Cycloptichorn, what evidence do you have that this article and this excerpt are false?
Quote:
Obama: Serving Ambitions, Not Citizens
By JR Dieckmann Friday, March 12, 2010 - Canada Free Press
...
Never before has America faced an enemy more dangerous to our freedom and liberty than we face now.
...
djjd62
 
  1  
Mon 15 Mar, 2010 06:17 pm
@ican711nm,
http://scrapetv.com/News/News%20Pages/Politics/images-2/communist-party-poster.jpg
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  2  
Mon 15 Mar, 2010 09:57 pm
@ican711nm,
Your article is an opinion piece - it isn't something that evidence would prove wrong.

However, I submit that the writer is a fool if he thinks anything happening now is the 'most dangerous enemy to freedom and liberty' that our country has faced. And if you agree with him, you too are a fool.

Cycloptichorn
ican711nm
 
  -2  
Tue 16 Mar, 2010 10:45 am
@Cycloptichorn,
Cycloptichorn wrote:
Your article is an opinion piece - it isn't something that evidence would prove wrong.

However, I submit that the writer is a fool if he thinks anything happening now is the 'most dangerous enemy to freedom and liberty' that our country has faced. And if you agree with him, you too are a fool.

Yes, the article is an opinion piece, AND yes it is something that evidence--if it existed--could prove wrong, if it were wrong.

You generally resort to personal libeling of those with whom you disagree, when you lack evidence to support your disagreements.

You, like Barach Obama, are behaving in accord with Alinsky Principles.

You have repeatedly claimed Alinsky Principles have not influenced your behavior. I suspect you were nonetheless influenced by those principles fed to you by some teacher or teachers in your educational history that at the time failed to identify and attribute those principles to Alinsky.

AGAIN!
I think your posts are based on your and other's false opinions and sophistic arguments, and that these false opinions and sophistic arguments appear to be derived from those persons who are desciples of Saul Alinskiy--a person, who based on his writings, was a sociopath.

Saul Alinsky wrote:
The revolutionary’s purpose is to undermine the system by taking from the haves and giving it to the have-nots, and then see what happens;
The radical organizer does not have a fixed truth"truth to him is relative and changing; everything to him is relative and changing;
Radicals should be political relativists and should take an agnostic view of means and ends;
The radical is not a reformer of the system but its would-be destroyer;
The most basic principle for radicals is lie to opponents and disarm them by pretending to be moderates and liberals;
The issue is always the revolution;
The stated cause is never the real cause, but only an occasion to advance the real cause which is accumulation of power to make the revolution;
The radical is building his own kingdom, a kingdom of heaven on earth.


Cycloptichorn
 
  2  
Tue 16 Mar, 2010 10:50 am
@ican711nm,
Quote:
You have repeatedly claimed Alinsky Principles have not influenced your behavior. I suspect you were nonetheless influenced by those principles fed to you by some teacher or teachers in your educational history that at the time failed to identify and attribute those principles to Alinsky.


Horse ****!

None of my teachers in primary, secondary, high school or college were the least bit interested in teaching us to be 'liberals.' None of them. We didn't discuss politics in any classes that I took at all. This is one the reasons I was so against Foxfyre in the stupid 'equality in everything but thought' thread for several years: in my experience, the concept of 'liberal indoctrination' in college is a joke.

There's nothing to 'prove' wrong in your opinion piece you posted. The writer isn't basing his opinion on facts, but instead on fear and paranoia. He also is grossly ignorant of history. It isn't worth my or anyone else's time to spend 'proving' anything.

Cycloptichorn
djjd62
 
  1  
Tue 16 Mar, 2010 11:10 am
@ican711nm,
ican711nm wrote:
Yes, the article is an opinion piece, AND yes it is something that evidence--if it existed--could prove wrong, if it were wrong.


Shocked Wink Drunk
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  0  
Tue 16 Mar, 2010 02:15 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Cycloptichorn wrote:
There's nothing to 'prove' wrong in your opinion piece you posted. The writer isn't basing his opinion on facts, but instead on fear and paranoia. He also is grossly ignorant of history. It isn't worth my or anyone else's time to spend 'proving' anything.

Cyclo, your opinion isn't based on facts, so what is your opinion based on? Fanstasy?
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Tue 16 Mar, 2010 02:53 pm
@ican711nm,
ican711nm wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:
There's nothing to 'prove' wrong in your opinion piece you posted. The writer isn't basing his opinion on facts, but instead on fear and paranoia. He also is grossly ignorant of history. It isn't worth my or anyone else's time to spend 'proving' anything.

Cyclo, your opinion isn't based on facts, so what is your opinion based on? Fanstasy?


My opinions are, in fact, based on a combination of facts and logic.

This is rather pointless, let me just finish my end of this by stating that your breathless correspondent is full of **** and is really just channeling the common Republican 'terror! fear!' attitude towards a new opponent, now that international terrorism has fallen off of the radar somewhat.

Cycloptichorn
Advocate
 
  1  
Tue 16 Mar, 2010 03:02 pm
There is little doubt that Obama will go down as one of the best presidents. He may even be the best. Now, despite all his other activities, he is addressing the fact that we are way behind on cyberspace. Eastern Slovakia is way ahead of us relative to this.
roger
 
  1  
Tue 16 Mar, 2010 03:18 pm
@Advocate,
<He's serious, you know?>
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  0  
Tue 16 Mar, 2010 03:19 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Cycloptichorn wrote:
My opinions are, in fact, based on a combination of facts and logic.

This is rather pointless, let me just finish my end of this by stating that your breathless correspondent is full of **** and is really just channeling the common Republican 'terror! fear!' attitude towards a new opponent, now that international terrorism has fallen off of the radar somewhat.

Cyclo, you claim your opinion IS based on facts and logic, so what are the facts and logic on which your opinion is based? Or is your claim merely your fanstasy?

ican711nm
 
  0  
Tue 16 Mar, 2010 03:26 pm
@Advocate,
Advocate wrote:
There is little doubt that Obama will go down as one of the best presidents. He may even be the best.


Smile Wink Sad Surprised Confused Cool Laughing Rolling Eyes Exclamation
ican711nm
 
  0  
Tue 16 Mar, 2010 03:37 pm
@ican711nm,
JUDGE DAVID KITHIL wrote:
"I have reviewed selected sections of the bill, and find
it unbelievable that our Congress, led by Speaker Nancy Pelosi, could come up with a bill loaded with so many wrong-headed elements."
"Both Republicans and Democrats are equally responsible
for the financial mess of both Social Security and Medicare programs."
"I am opposed to HB 3200 for a number of reasons.
To start with, it is estimated that a federal bureaucracy of more than 150,000 new employees will be required to administer HB3200. That is an unacceptable expansion of a government that is already too intrusive in our lives. If we are going to hire 150,000 new employees, let's put them to work protecting our borders, fighting the massive drug problem and putting more law enforcement/firefighters out there."


JUDGE KITHIL continued: "Other problems I have with
this bill include:

** Page 50/section 152: The bill will provide insurance
to all non-U.S. residents, even if they are here illegally.

** Page 58 and 59: The government will have
real-time access to an individual's bank account and will have the authority to make electronic fund transfers from those accounts.

** Page 65/section 164: The plan will be subsidized (by
the government) for all union members, union retirees and for community organizations (such as the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now - ACORN).

** Page 203/line 14-15: The tax imposed under this
section will not be treated as a tax. (How could anybody in their right mind come up with that?)

** Page 241 and 253: Doctors will all be paid the same
regardless of specialty, and the government will set all doctors' fees.

** Page 272. section 1145: Cancer hospital will ration
care according to the patient's age.

** Page 317 and 321: The government will impose a
prohibition on hospital expansion; however, communities may petition for an exception.

** Page 425, line 4-12: The government mandates
advance-care planning consultations. Those on Social Security will be required to attend an "end-of-life planning" seminar every five years. (Death counceling.)

** Page 429, line 13-25: The government will specify
which doctors can write an end-of-life order.

HAD ENOUGH???? Judge Kithil then goes on:

"Finally, it is specifically stated that this bill will not
apply to members of Congress. Members of Congress are already exempt from the Social Security system, and have a well-funded private plan that covers their retirement needs. If they were on our Social Security plan, I believe they would find a very quick 'fix' to make the plan financially sound for their future."

Honorable David Kithil
Marble Falls, Texas
 

Related Topics

So....Will Biden Be VP? - Question by blueveinedthrobber
My view on Obama - Discussion by McGentrix
Obama/ Love Him or Hate Him, We've Got Him - Discussion by Phoenix32890
Obama fumbles at Faith Forum - Discussion by slkshock7
Expert: Obama is not the antichrist - Discussion by joefromchicago
Obama's State of the Union - Discussion by maxdancona
Obama 2012? - Discussion by snood
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Obama '08?
  3. » Page 1598
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 2.55 seconds on 01/06/2025 at 04:55:53