Don't paint everyone with the failings of Obama, remember it is what he is that got him the job
|
Don't paint everyone with the failings of Obama, remember it is what he is that got him the job
Black? Narcissist? Experienced? Qualified? What?Quote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
There you go, calling names again to fit your own views as being better than ours and justify your... DISLIKE!Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
He is no different than any other who has held the job, but he has made the loonies come out of the closet, and the easily outraged to look for anything they can pick at. I have found that the right is so much more right that they see Obamas RIGHT wing ideas as LEFT, but those on the left scratch their heads in disbelief because he is NO leftie.Quote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
Don't paint everyone with the failings of Obama, remember it is what he is that got him the job
So let me correct you Clete since our politics escapes you, it was WHO he is that got him the job, NOT what! There are subtle differences in your assertions that you have missed entirely.
Narcissistic is an adjective, not a name.Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
It goes to character, not policy. And its your opinion, of which I don't agree with, as I prefer to argue policy and facts rather than explore the emotions evoked by a picture someone else has produced. It was quite artistic to me.
Just my opinion. And right now I am trying to keep Tom from burying me in the basement, so excuse my being... DISTURBED!!
Character matters. So does policy, and he doesn't seem too anxious to run on his failed policies. In fact his campaign theme has changed again to "do-over."Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
P.S. Am I the only one capable of beating the un-managed team? Maybe when he runs out of pitching starts you'll catch up to him.
All of the above but you left out orator, he has the ability to speak well in contrast to his predecessor, he isn't coming out of the back woodsQuote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
He doesn't exactly speak well at least not without a teleprompter. And he has made some pretty big mistakes. Wasn't Poland one of them just last week on his misquote ?Quote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
Yes misquote as distinct from not being able to put two words together coherently. I doubt all his speeches are off a teleprompter otherwise there is no excuse for getting it wrong, fire the speechwriter. He would look much better if he had had some of his policies accepted, being a lame duck can't be fun
You mean like build/repair bridges roads and schools? The bridges and roads that corporations use for commerce? Paid for by taxes of 01% of incomes over a million dollars? How many jobs created? He tried that, and the right poo-pooed. The ones in congress any way. The rest of the nation was for it. Even the conservatives.
Obama says 'Pass this jobs bill.' But what's actually in the bill? - CSMonitor.com
Wait until the truth comes out about all those scary regulations that corporations are fighting against.
Obama tightens oil and gas drilling regulations - Apr. 18, 2012
So forget the crap the politicians are talking about, all the facts are on line. Its science, not politics. But of course some don't think corporations or banks should be regulated, and when they screw up, poor people and the middle class suffer.
Why are we suffering with this high unemployment while banks, corporations, wall street are making more money than they ever have in history. Its like nobody even reads the rights budget proposal The Ryan plan, endorsed by Romney), yet they slobber all over it, yet it really enslaves our children and grand children, all except the ones who benefit from our labors.
Additional Reforms | A Roadmap for America's Future | The Budget Committee Republicans
Believe In America: Mitt Romney's Plan For Jobs And Economic Growth
Cause, and Effect.
Look the answer to high corporate profits is higher tax if they can make the money then let them contribute to the debt and repairing roads and bridges is only common sense but what will give the economy a boost is inceasing confidence and that comes when the population knows they have a government that can get things done even in the face of opposition, right now you have stalemate or is that stallmate so the recovery stalls. There is a lot of self defeating prophesy around today and it could be solved by letting a government do what it is elected to do, otherwise why not align the terms of the politicians so you get out of this nightmare of do nothing and they all sink or swim together
Your corporate tax rate is lower than the US . The truth is that we have one of the top corporate rates in the developed world.
That's a myth perpetrated by the right: Warren Buffett: 'It Is A Myth' That U.S. Corporate Taxes Are High | ThinkProgressQuote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
The American High Corporate Taxes Myth - Marc Erickson - Open Salon
Rubbish the prima face rate isn't what it is about, your net corporate tax is very lowQuote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
In fact your corporations pay less than half ours and the mining tax will impact the big corporations from July 1 Don't peddle your republican myths here Tom, we have the ability to catch you out. We also give the lie for the need for a low taxing regime for corporations to prosper
Then you will continue to lose out to your nearest competitors like Hong Kong ,Singapore ,and even Malaysia... forget about the larger global market. But then again ,you are content to be the mining pit of China. Maybe they will be willing to invest capital when they are taxed 35% .
Yes, Mr. "corpseman" who visited 57 states on his way to the "Polish death camps" is a great orator.Quote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
Corporate taxes here are local, and there are so many loop holes in the federal tax code, corporations pay almost nothing, Supply side economic models are always subject to seasonal booms, and busts, and while corporations have flexibility to cutback, lay off, and slowdown, have devastating effects on people, and communities that are dependent on those who need that living wage.
History tells us that government must be as effective, and flexible as the times and conditions indicate, to adjust to these changes. We cannot have idealogical BS that gums up the works for extended periods. Especially one that renders all branches of government helpless to address the issues before it.
The day Obama was sworn in, Republicans had already vowed to obstruct him at all costs, even at the expense and welfare of the country, the economy, and the common man, while they spew the gloom and doom, and fear, and distract us from the robbery they perpetrate over the middle class, for their plutocratic masters. No matter what this President does they pounce like hyenas and run to the cameras to decry and lay blame for his efforts, no matter how the rest of the country says it's a good idea.
Remember how they said that rising gas prices were his fault? As they come down has anyone said "good job"? When Bin Laden was killed Cheney and Rumsfeld took credit, though they abandoned the search years ago. Romney after hollering let them go bankrupt has stepped up to say the President did what he would have done, and wants credit for the auto industry coming back.
When the dismal jobs numbers came in, the republicans wanted us to know how failed the policies were of the President, while they have stifled and filibustered all his policies. They lie about the money spent, they lie about the deficit, they lie about, there own motives and play the politics of obstruction, while they starve the common man of the true motives behind their actions.
Get the democrats out of the way, so they can make the rich richer, the poor poorer, and continue the Bush policies to extract the wealth from the rest of the world. (the much sought after New World Order)
The business model has already undermined and weakened the government of the people, and made it a tool of the rich, who need the right wing votes to succeed and under guise of their interpretation of the constitution, want to dictate how you live, who you live with, who is an American, who is NOT, and who is allowed to vote, who doesn't, who is a FIRST class citizen, who is NOT. Who works, who doesn't. With the help of low informed ideologues, stuck in their own kitchens, republicans have effectively stopped the circulation of the life blood of America, HARD WORK, and FREEDOM to pursue our own happiness, and accept terms tantamount to slavery, and domination of an elite ruling class.
The business model is broken, misguided, used and abused, and blamed on those lazy a$$es that wash dishes, and need a bath. While the ones that benefit from weak government and broken business models, get fat and happy. They suffer nothing, nor do their children, but yours, ours, suffer greatly.
That's why Mitt wants to be President, to make sure his kids can stay in the ruling class, and have a country of slaves to rule over, and have the whips they need to herd them into submission, and mindless compliance. That's his version of the American Dream... and the nightmare of the dwindling middle class.
Yeah 100 years of progressive folly is enough.Quote:
History tells us that government must be as effective, and flexible as the times and conditions indicate, to adjust to these changes. We cannot have idealogical BS that gums up the works for extended periods. Especially one that renders all branches of government helpless to address the issues before it
I recall the Bush years very well. His only reprieve from the left undermining his Presidency was 9-11 ;and when he reached out to essentially introduce new domestic spending like NCLB and the Medicare Part D.Quote:
The day Obama was sworn in, Republicans had already vowed to obstruct him at all costs, even at the expense and welfare of the country, the economy, and the common man, while they spew the gloom and doom, and fear, and distract us from the robbery they perpetrate over the middle class, for their plutocratic masters. No matter what this President does they pounce like hyenas and run to the cameras to decry and lay blame for his efforts, no matter how the rest of the country says it's a good idea.
I remember him saying that the President can't influence gas prices . (untrue ). Why should we give him credit for it dropping ? What did he do besides sabotage the economy driving down demand?Quote:
Remember how they said that rising gas prices were his fault? As they come down has anyone said "good job"?
Untrue . What the left refuses to accept is that the pursuit of OBL did not end . All the President did was reluctantly pull the trigger after years of intel work came to fruitition. Besides ;I did give him credit for his part.Quote:
When Bin Laden was killed Cheney and Rumsfeld took credit, though they abandoned the search years ago.
But have you notices how the major dinosaurs are upset with him about his LBJ like micromanagement of drone targeting ?
Romney is a fool for backing down on this. The right move was a managed bankruptcy . The American people are the big losers for the GM bailout . Obama has permanently destroyed the rule of law regarding bankruptcy law .Quote:
Romney after hollering let them go bankrupt has stepped up to say the President did what he would have done, and wants credit for the auto industry coming back.
Polishing that tin oil hat again ? If the business model is broken (which it is not ) then the blame goes to progressive policies over the years that fundamentally changed American business to a similar model of the state socialist model. It is years of abusing the Constitution's Commerce Clause that has brought us to this point .Quote:
Get the democrats out of the way, so they can make the rich richer, the poor poorer, and continue the Bush policies to extract the wealth from the rest of the world. (the much sought after New World Order)
The business model has already undermined and weakened the government of the people, and made it a tool of the rich, who need the right wing votes to succeed and under guise of their interpretation of the constitution, want to dictate how you live, who you live with, who is an American, who is NOT, and who is allowed to vote, who doesn't, who is a FIRST class citizen, who is NOT. Who works, who doesn't. With the help of low informed ideologues, stuck in their own kitchens, republicans have effectively stopped the circulation of the life blood of America, HARD WORK, and FREEDOM to pursue our own happiness, and accept terms tantamount to slavery, and domination of an elite ruling class.
The business model is broken, misguided, used and abused, and blamed on those lazy a$$es that wash dishes, and need a bath. While the ones that benefit from weak government and broken business models, get fat and happy. They suffer nothing, nor do their children, but yours, ours, suffer greatly.
That's why Mitt wants to be President, to make sure his kids can stay in the ruling class, and have a country of slaves to rule over, and have the whips they need to herd them into submission, and mindless compliance. That's his version of the American Dream... and the nightmare of the dwindling middle class.
You need to read 'How Progressives Rewrote the Constitution' by Professor Richard Epstein .It is their warped reading of the Constitution that created government approved cartels and businesses too big to fail .
You just can't help yourself can you? You get the bull by the tail and get covered in B/S and you feel you must spread it around. They don't have to invest Tom we have corporations and individuals with sufficient resources and willingness to develop the mines. They are lining up to invest Tom because they understand the importance of stable government that can do what it says it is going to do, and while our investment rules upset them a little they keep coming. I was't aware that Hong Kong Malayasia and Singapore had the ability to compete with us in agriculture and mining, they don't scare us TomQuote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Tom, this is just another take on Original Intent. A exposition on how 'Progressives' have moved the Constitution away from the Locke/Madison understanding into something completely differentQuote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
In other words, the changing of the Constitution into something that reflects the wisdom of the intellectuals of today, rather than reflecting the wisdom of intellectuals of the Classical Period.
Epstein is choosing a starting point for his Originalism. In his case it seems to be somewhere between Locke and Madison. I have asked these questions before. Why choose Locke/Madison? Why not choose the actual ratification process as a starting point? Why not, as I do and choose the very beginning ( Natural Laws). We can choose any point we like.
As I said before, the reason anyone chooses a starting point is because it reflects their political beliefs. It has very little to do with substance and everything to do with ideology.
They just got #2 man in al Qaeda, and his henchmen, Thank God for Cheney, and Rumsfeld!
Abu Yahya al-Libi, al Qaeda deputy leader, killed in U.S. drone strike - CBS News
Clearly if you are chosing a point of orginalism then you would chose the ratification if the topic was Constitution. In his case ,Epstein notes that Hamilton ;who was as close to the progessives vision of big government as any of the founders, still understood that national government intervention in the commerce was restricted to the clear language of the Constitution. The founders intent ;which was undestood before the progressive era ,was that interstate commerce was pretty much a free trade zone. It was only with laws like the ones that Filburn objected to ,that the government breached into a central managed economy imposing price controls and creating government approved private cartels . Epstein of course goes into greater detail into the legislative and judicial history that lead us to today's national socialist economy in America.
Bigger than my beef in the direction the nation has taken is the clear distortion of the legal document that brought us to this point. The clear constitutional way to "reform " society would've been through the amendment process If they wanted Constitutional restrictions to the power of the central government revoked then they should've amended the language of the Constitution rather than distort the meaning of the language beyond all recognition.
And if the strike was a Bush era attack no doubt your party line would be that the US is violating sovereign Pakistani territory. I on the other hand give kudos to the attack that took out that scum regardless of who is the CIC . I'll give the President his moment to spike the football . Maybe he can make hay running on a tough war on terrorism platform now that he is surrendering the "war of necessity" . Oh wait... we don't have a war on terrorism anymore .We have overseas contingency operations.Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
If Hamilton, Madison or Epstein don't like it, there is a process to get heard by the Supreme Court. The only authorized interpreter of the Constitution.
Anything else is opinion, speculation, and high hopes.
Or high crimes
Yeah that after the Supreme Court seized such power in Marbury V Madison. The fact that such a ruling has not been challenged doesn't make it sacrosanct.Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
So challenge it.
This is what Thomas Jefferson said of Marbury.
The Constitution on this hypothesis is a mere thing of wax in the hands of the judiciary, which they may twist and shape into any form they please.
Indeed they have elevated themselves to a branch of government that is not at all co-equal.
Clearly it is too late to reverse Marbury ,but I would amend the Constitution to put term limits on the black robed oligarch political appointees . Why the judiciary has been elevated to the level of power they've obtained is beyond all recognition of the republican and democratic ideas of the founders.
Apparently we don't have state secrets any more either.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Senate Democrats blast national security leak about cyberattack against Iran
But who cares as long as it makes Obama look tough, eh? And by the way, these cyberattacks were a Bush program - something else for the Great Obama to take credit for.
Now Tom let's not have sour grapes, one President starts something and the next either cleans up the mess or exploits the opportunity, it was ever so. Obama is still wearing some Bush decisions, it is only right he gets some kudos out of things that go right once in a while.Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
I think his micromanagement might be a mistake, if it backfires he cannot distance himself
I'm not tom.Quote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
I predicted that he would essentially follow the Bush template in the War against Jihadistan .In some areas he has done so and I've given credit . Where he has deviated ,I've generally disapproved (the snatching defeat from the jaws of victory in Iraq... his attempt to engage the 12'ers... his surge and then quick announcing a date certain for defeat in Afghanistan [the necessary war in his rhetoric]) .
I'm thrilled he has continued the counter-terrorist attacks in Pakistan ,in the Arabian peninsula ,and in sub-Sahara Africa. I suspected his rhetoric was all bluster about closing GITMO ;and he has of course given up on the ridiculous notion of trials for foreign Jihadists in civilian court .
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Sorry Tom, but what else do you expect if you are a common law country with an overriding civil code. Given the passage of time this was always going to be a problem.
The real question here is who governs the country the supreme court or the congress, the executive doesn't seem to get a look in. It surely was not the intention of the constitution that the supreme court should govern the country
The president governs through presidential powers. The congress can make laws to govern the people and the supreme court can seek placement of the laws. The president is the one who can sign a bill into law that has been passed through congress and if the president vetos then congress can overide by vote.Quote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
The supreme court is there to meet the constitutional test of the law. Each are a separate yet identical branch of the government with respective powers.
Sorry Clete, but the Koch brothers govern the country.
Koch family - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Billionaire Koch Brothers' War Against Obama : The New Yorker
Koch Brothers Flout Law Getting Richer With Secret Iran Sales - Bloomberg
Koch Industries - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is the god the right wing worships, and pays tribute to. Now you know!
Tal is just upset that there is a special interest to match the power of the special interests behind the Democrat machine.
Thanks Tal that is clear now I thought it was BurfettQuote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Hi Tom,
I think we have been down this path before. You seem to be using Originalism and Original Intent as being one and the same. This is not a valid comparison. However, leaving that aside
You say:
"......interstate commerce was pretty much a free trade zone". Is this an example of clear language? How would you define, pretty much?
I don't think the Commerce Clause is an example of clear and precise language. In fact I don't think we can go past the word, 'commerce' before we run into trouble. You have an exact definition for the word, 'commerce?'
Before you throw in Humpty Dumpty in will repeat my previous argument. Those who control the language control the reality. In this particular instance, and every other, those who control the language are the people of that particular age.
The people who control the language of this age are the general public. Or what, reasonable people understand by the meaning of words. People of a different age would have had a sightly different meaning for the word. It is possible that 'commerce' as it applied to the past may prove to be incompatible or even a contradiction when examined in light of today's meaning.
Tut
Indeed, commerce in the eighteenth century included the trade in slaves so a loose intrepretation of the commerce clause would suggest the trade in slaves is permitted even if failure to pay people for the work they do isn't, or holding people against their will isn'tQuote:
Originally Posted by TUT317
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:39 AM. |