Searching "comments":
| # | Comment | Survey |
|---|---|---|
| 21 | >
> You mentioned this czars thing a few times. I > guess I don't really understand why that's an > issue. 32 czars is a little out of control. And their backgrounds are shady. I found the link on a "Obama Czars" google search, it was the first one. It's Glen Beck, who is a right wing wacko - so don't read into too much of what he says about each one, but it's a list of all of them, who they report to, and what they are paid. Czars can act without congressional approval. Therefore, no checks and balances. I realize there have been czars before, but not to this magnitude. Obamanation found a loophole that gives him more power to create socialism. > My > point was more that Obama's bailout of GM was > not such a strange thing. There were reasons > for it and it was debatable either way. I would > have done it differently, but I can see their > reasons for bailing them out. It seem unfair > to vilify Obama over it. Obama gets the blame because he bailed them out, kicked out private investors, and handed the company over to the union. How do you get union votes? Give them a huge company that cannot be influenced by the private sector. The word mob comes to mind for some reason... not sure why. > An impression I get is that you've focused on > Obama being the one behind all these socialized > policies. I don't think he comes up with every syllable - but he sure is good at shoving it down my throat. > Many Democrats are more liberal, more on the left > than Obama as well. Obama is a puppet. >Obama is a moderate, similar > to Clinton. Oh man. He's got you snowed. > Take the health care bill, for example. > If it was a purely socialist thing, it would > have been pure government run single-payer (like > Canada or UK). Obama wanted a public option, > but that was along with private insurance. But, > he didn't even fight for the public option. It > wasn't his focus. His plan seems to be about > this "health care exchange" which is a kind of > hybrid approach, largely dependent on private > insurance. That's a moderate health care solution. > It's what Germany, France and Japan do. Obama's > solutions often incorporate market-based ideas. > They are hybrid approaches, compromises, and > thus moderate and not so far to the left. FLIP FLOP MAN In 2003 he said at an AFL/CIO conference, "I happen to be a proponent of single payer universal health care coverage. A single payer health care plan, universal health care plan. That's what I'd like to see." > I think corruption > is the real problem in our government. Any entity > with a lot of money has a lot of power. That's > what we need to keep in check. I'd love to, but there's a czar for that. > situation with the mortgage markets that triggered > the house of cards could have be averted fairly > easily with some simple/basic regulations (like > making banks keep 20% of the loans they make). > With banks selling off all of them, they had > no motivation to make good loans. A lot of people > got rich quick off that mortgage market. They're > still rich now too. They didn't have to think > long term, they suckered people the got out with > millions. That's thanks to Mr. Clinton. But Obama had his own fun. Cash For Clunkers. C4C is a classic example of Obama trying to hurt poor people. And at the same time telling them it's good for them. And getting their dependency. So I'm driving a 'clunker.' Runs good, I don't have to pay full coverage insurance, and I don't have a car payment. So I take my $1500 car and turn it in, get 35-4500 for the thing, and buy a 25,000 car. Great I have a new car. But because there is a loan on it, I have to have full coverage insurance. So lets say I financed 24k, cuz I had to pay my tax on my new car you know. So a five year loan is what about 480 a month? Insurance has to be another 100 a month. $600 a month to drive a new car that I didn't need. But thank God I'm driving it because my older car was such a polluter. So now my kids are starving and I can't put clothes on my back, but look at that shiny new Chevy! Mark my words - there is going to be a huge rift in the car repossession trend. People that were driving clunkers didn't have the $600 but were lured in by the program. They lose, their credit ratings lose. And the cars they turned in? Oh they're destroyed - not even used as parts. So that means all the other people that kept on driving their 'clunkers' are finding it hard to find used parts. So they're even paying more. I'm thinking of buying a tow truck because there's going to be a need for repo men. > Capitalism is clearly the engine that drives a > lot of positive things and I think it needs to > remain central to our lifestyle. But, it can > cause a lot of trouble too. We just need to manage > it and avoid disasters where we can. We need > some regulation. It regulates itself. If I build a crappy product, nobody will buy it. If I treat my workers like crap, they leave, or sue. If I do something stupid, my company is boycotted. > > > |> So what? I think a depression would be > awesome. > >  > feel like we need a kick in the butt. Still, > I think this sort of anti-socialism thing can > be taken too far. If you let the rug get pulled > out from under millions of people, you're going > to have problems like major crime spikes that > you'll need to throw money at one way or another. No we wouldn't. Eventually people would learn to pick themselves up and get to work making themselves better, rather than sitting around waiting for Obama to hand them something. > > I'm surprised you're whining about corporate bonuses. > Isn't that just Capitalism? You're not suggesting > that we regulate corporate salaries and compensation. No- not whining. Just pointing out that Obama speaks out of both sides of his mouth. If the rich are so bad, why does he keep making the rich richer? I think we need more rich people. They own businesses. Businesses employ people. > A lot of conservative Republicans have been critical > of this Medicare bill. I'm not pulling this out > of my ass or siding with Democrats. Frankly, > I'm shocked you think it was a swell idea given > everything else you're saying. It seems inconsistent. > This Medicare bill is exactly the kind of thing > you're criticizing Obama for. No not really... The 2003 bill isn't something I would have written for sure. But it opened doors to privatization. But of course that all got f-ed up in the final version. I wouldn't have signed it - but then I don't need votes either. > |> Nope, when you cut taxes, people have more > money to spend. When they > |> have more money to spend, the government > makes more money. > > Yeah, unless the economy tanks. Then, not so > much. The economy can't take if people have money and there are jobs. > Bush spent trillions on Medicare and Iraq and > also cut taxes. Is that how you'd run your business? > Is that conservative? What ever happened to > "don't spend money you don't have"? I'm not > against tax cuts, but if you cut taxes, then cut > spending too. Or better yet, cut spending first, > then save a little and then cut taxes when you're > in good shape. That's all I'm saying. My business doesn't have money rolling in whether I produce my product or not. I have to produce something in order to make money. The government gets paid whether it sits on it's ass or nukes Afganistan. It'd be nice to run the government like a business, but it's a different color horse. I'm all for cutting spending. But if you start with cutting taxes, people succeed. How about this? Every time the government decides it needed to raise taxes there was a ballot. You and I and the rest of the country gets to vote. Are you going to go next Tuesday and vote for more to be taken out of your check? You might - if you felt strongly about where the money was going. But most times I think you'd pass since all the pork that would be attached to the bill. Of the people, for the people, by the people. Oh and that representation thing. "The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not." Thomas Jefferson > Though, to be fair, Reagan did a lot of deficit > spending. And, that's basically what Obama is > doing too. Also, unemployment was over 10% during > Reagan's term too. Spending yes. But Obama spending? From the Washington Post 
> I actually think they've done well at avoiding > that. Though, I give credit more to Geithner > and Bernanke. They've tried to do more with loans > and so forth, instead of straight take-overs and > bailouts. The S&L bailout from the late 80s (near > the end of Reagan's term) cost something like > $150 billion. There's a good chance the recent > bailouts could end up being less. Given how much > worse this crisis was, I think that's impressive. I'll bet ya nickle it'll be way, way, way more. > indefinitely. That's a lot of power. That kind > of power needs checks and balances. That's what > due process is all about, human rights and freedom. But we're dealing with an enemy that has no respect for human rights or freedom. They have no checks and balances. We can't defeat an enemy by applying rules to a rule-less game. > 9/11 was a wake up call. But, if our reaction > is to throw away our ideals, then we lost before > we even got started. America is great because > we believe in freedom and justice. If someone > punches us in the nose and our reaction is to > sloppily grab people off the street and torture > them, we've lost our way and maybe we deserve > to get punched in the nose. Nuh uh. If we don't stand up to the bullies in the playground our human rights and morals will be destroyed. If we keep being nice innocent Americans will die. > I can't really tell if your pro-war or not. Obama > seems to be fairly pro war. He has increased > troops in Afghanistan (as he promised in his campaign). > And, he has also been doing a lot more bombing > of terrorist sites, more than Bush surprisingly. > That isn't getting a lot of media coverage, though. > I think because it is being done in secret. > But, anyway, I would think you'd like that. > ...except that somehow I assume you'll twist this > so that Obama is just doing that to trick us into > thinking he tough or terrorist. Well if the man could stop flip flopping and lying maybe I'd understand what you mean. What I think may be the biggest factor of all is that Americans seem to think the country's problems, from the economy to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, are so complex that Obama should be given a lot of leeway in searching for solutions. And he sells it. And he grows the government. Smiling all the way. | What did you think of President Obama's State of the Union Address? |
| 22 | > I thought it was ironic that the union ended up
> owning GM. Do you think that was a good deal > for the union? Absolutely. They now control one of the big three. Which is too close to comfort for me. Wait and see. > So, Obama changed his stance on health care from > the left to something more moderate and in the > middle. And, for this you call him a socialist > puppet? Absolutely. He'll change again back towards the left. Then the middle. Then the left. Then somewhere in space. Then the middle. Then deny that he ever changed his opinion at all. In the last 10 years there are way too many quotes from him saying that this country needs a government provided health care system. We all know what he believes, yet for some reason people believe what he says? > It seems like no matter what he does, you'll criticize > it. If Obama did exactly what you wanted, you'd > find fault in it. I could never find fault in his resignation. > You just seem absurdly biased against him. It > makes you seem like a puppet of the right wing > pundits. Aren't you just regurgitating their > BS? If that's what you think, then yes. I believe in this country. I believe in people. I think socialist programs take the 'drive' out of people. Someone loses their job, they collect unemployment for a year or so. I'm ok with 3 months max. Crap happens. At 3 months it's cut off. Trust me, you'll work at Mc Donalds if you have to. Scrape crap, whatever. I've been there. So when I dog about Obama and his policies and I sound like the right wing - well maybe that's because the core of conservatism is the belief that if a person is given a chance they can succeed. These government programs remove the desire for success, just a desire to walk to the mail box and get the money that I paid in. Drives me nuts. Anyway, I don't consider it BS to say get off your ass America and stop following smiley guy blindy - he's gonna screw you. > C4C was part of the economic stimulus package. > It was just about trying to get people buying > stuff and in particular cars because of American > car companies being in trouble. Ford was helped > tremendously by C4C, by the way. No one forced > people to trade in their cars either. It's unfair > and unjustified to blame Obama for this. The Wall St Journal said, "How do we elect these people? What the clunker policy really proves is that Americans aren’t stupid and will let some other taxpayer buy them a free lunch if given the chance." And that is the core of what pisses me off about Obama. And yes I can blame him. Once again he gets on his horse with something like, "Okay, yeah, we're the only ones can fix it. The government's the only entity big enough to handle all this." BULLCRAP! Put the money in the American people's pockets and watch the economy fly. And you can't do it by writing them a check - crap that's crazy - I never agreed with GWB's 'rebate' check either. Cut the damn taxes, let the american worker who is actually earning a living take home more money each week. C4C is 100% Obama screwing the little guy. > You can't complain about 10% unemployment in one > breath then say the answer is unregulated Capitalism > in the next. Unchecked Capitalism resulted in > a big economic collapse and justified bailouts > and stimulus packages worldwide. Ok full unregulation may be extreme. But my point is that where we are now, the shackles that business wears, makes it tough for a company to succeed. > I don't know. Just cutting taxed and not spending > seems to create large deficits and that has meant > China loans our government money. I don't see > the positive side of that. It's irresponsible > and damaging to not cut spending. Of course it is - but what's important is to let our economy fix it self. Because you know the economy is you and me, right? It's not some thing that was beamed here from space, the economy is the American citizen. 95% of our citizens haven't seen much from the trillion spent on them. Kinda like when you were a little kid at Christmas and you opened a present and it was socks or a sweater or something. You get all excited about the present, but even though socks are handy, you don't really want them as much as a fire engine. Obama loves telling us about how bad he's got it, and how he's not going to quit, and this is going to be so wonderful and fairies are going to be flying around. But it's socks. Funny, but I think that goof ball Ross Perot said it best, "It's like building a bridge half way across the river. A lot of work gets done but nothing gets accomplished." > Bush's stimulus checks didn't > help much either. Putting cash in people's hands > may help a little, but it doesn't seem to fix > everything. Thats because those checks were written from our already broke government as a good will gesture to improve ratings. Those checks were a joke. I'd rather have seen him cut $10 from everyone's weekly taxes. Now I have 40 extra bucks each week, the government didn't have to go into debt to give it to me, and guess what? I'm spending it. And they're getting their taxes that way. Sales tax, the taxes that businesses pay to produce whatever it was I bought for that $40, etc. It comes back in fold. > > I'd also think it would be nice if everyone had > to file quarterly taxes. You probably do that > for you business right? I do too. It sucks. > I have to write this big fat check to the federal > government every 3 months. I really feel it. > They are taking my hard earned money! I think > the automatic deduction from paychecks that most > workers have hides taxes too well. They just > don't feel the loss. It's better to have the > money be put in their pocket, then taken out by > the federal government. If people really felt > that pain, I think, they'd understand better what > it's really costing them. RIGHT ON BROTHER!!= > Even if you > removed the stimulus bill (that would have happened > with Obama or not; even the senate Republicans > had a $700 billion stimulus proposal), the deficit > would still be huge. > > It's unfair and unjustified to blame Obama for > this. Oh I blame him. And he blames himself - evident by the fact that 'phase 2' of the <cough cough> stimulus package doesn't kick in until after 2012... next election. > We have to be better than them. If we fight dirty > like them, we're not better than them. Either we fight dirty or we lose. And many more Americans die. Me thinks you grin all the way through this devils advocate boy. Maybe not on the war stuff, I'm kinda radical there.  I think this is the most level headed political discussion ever held here at S.C. Do we get an award for not getting mad at each other or calling each other names?  | What did you think of President Obama's State of the Union Address? |
| 23 | I hear you, and you have a good point. Nothing you or I are going to do is going to change the fact that Obama is our leader. But since I got my butt in my truck and drove down to the voting both I feel like I have a voice. People that don't vote and complain really annoy me - I just stop listening to them because they obviously have no opinion.
So unless Obama stops spending money like it's free, stops selling our country to communist countries, and takes his new 1.6 trillion dollar spending spree off the table I'm gonna dog. But you notice I don't complain about him much on here - you and I had a discussion. It all started from me saying I didn't watch the speech, on purpose, because I don't like him. You asked why. A novel later maybe you still don't understand. My wife... ok everyone that knows me... say I'm pretty bull-headed. My Grandpa was too, I think I get my conservative values from him, the stubbornness from my Mom... which is technically through him. But anyway. I believe what Obama is doing is going to destroy this country. The way he delivers his speeches like the American people are all idiots drives me nuts. I get a LOT of thumbs up when I'm on the road in my truck (4 inch letters across tailgate One Big Ass Mistake America) I've counted 3 that gave me a thumbs down... but they had to pass me cuz the gas pedal in their prius was stuck. <grin> Anyway, great chat Bill! | What did you think of President Obama's State of the Union Address? |
| 24 | About 15 minutes ago when Jodi left for work. | When was the last time you said "I Love you"? |
| 25 | Guess. | When is the last time you wore pantyhose or stockings? |
| 26 | When it's cold out, I wear warm stuff. When it's warm out I wear less stuff. But I always wear a baseball cap - usually with Ford or John Deer logo's on em. | What's your personal style in clothing, shoes, jewelry, etc. Do you normally wear clothing that reflects your personality (when not dressed for work, if applicable)? |
| 27 | 
| Socks or Barefoot-- Which do you prefer? |
| 28 | I eat what tastes good. | Where do you get your information about what food is best to eat? |
| 29 | Put on a brand new pair of hose. Hue brand - never tried them before, and they're pretty nice. | What is the most exciting thing that you've done since you last woke up? |
| 30 | I pooped. And it was a good one! | What is the most exciting thing that you've done since you last woke up? |
