Yes We (still) Can?

reply to post by neo96


And your grammar is beautiful.


The rest of the civilized world also has it!

en.wikipedia.org...:Universal_health_care.svg

Originally posted by Anonymous404
reply to post by abecedarian

 

Remember how much net change happened between clinton and obama.

Yeah. I had to go back to pizza delivery under Clinton, went into construction and manufacturing under BII, and have been mostly unemployed under Obama. Plenty of change, and no net.

Originally posted by abecedarian

Originally posted by Anonymous404
reply to post by abecedarian

 

Remember how much net change happened between clinton and obama.

Yeah. I had to go back to pizza delivery under Clinton, went into construction and manufacturing under BII, and have been mostly unemployed under Obama. Plenty of change, and no net.

DITTO here man , same story word for word

reply to post by SeventhSeal








Who ruined it?

Try again,

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by Anonymous404

 

Proved nothing if people love universal healthcare so much he there is always Canada and Cuba.

Second.

No need to love healthcare, universal or otherwise. Most states have existing laws stating hospitals must stabilize your condition without consideration of your ability to pay. You may get a bill later, but that may be forgiven depending upon your situation.

Yep. Healthcare is already on the books and "Obamacare" is completely unnecessary. Just ask the undocumented immigrants here in California.

reply to post by abecedarian


I was obviously talking about the national debt.

Not your personal indiscretions. I bet you're one of those guys that only blames things on the government when you don't agree with the candidate, but when it's someone else it's "personal responsibility."

Whereas I believe it's all up to "personal responsibility" because these politicians are all the same.

reply to post by Anonymous404




11,000 other readers of this site have no problems with my "grammar",.

reply to post by braindeadconservatives

Unemployment was over 10% in 1981 FYI

NOPE! Reference?

No out level of indebtedness went up 189% - he started the modern national debt.
If you are trying to be an intelligent human being and not just a shill get yourself
together and learn.

WOW!

Shill?

Look at your own damn source and defend Obama!!! The debt has risen more than all previous Presidents COMBINED!!

Reagan closed all the mental hospitals and set those poor people on the street, he
then turned around and gave tax cuts to millionaires. That is what got me down on
him, what a slimy thing to do, people get on me about my retarded avatar, hey,
I never put a person on the street.

Ridiculous! You’re talking about Gov Reagan! Do you want to talk about Obama’s pre-president history? Chicago (Tony Resco)? Kenya ? Where are his transcripts from Harvard? Could they show his history of alien status? If you want to go there we can!

The quality of life was so good under Reagan because he put so much on the credit card.

If I got to max out a credit card two times over, I'd be pretty good too.

The quality of life under Obama is so good that if you had $1,000,000 in the market when Bush was POTUS you’d now have $500,000 and you’d be taxed at a higher rate.

But see, that is what you don't seem to understand about conservatism... They talk
about debt, but they create it like mad and place the blame on other people. ATS did
not have all this debt talk while Bush cranked up the debt every year, simply because
conservatives were not directed to focus on it because it would destroy their own
politicians.

9/11? Bubbles? Who created the bubbles???? It wasn’t Bush!

Originally posted by seabag
A question for Obama supporters - Are you still buying it?

After almost 4 years of lies and broken promises have any of you seen any change in Washington? Is your hope still alive? Was it "change you can believe in" or just more of the same...be honest?

The brief videos below contain just some of the many lies and failed campaign promises of Barack Hussein Obama as well as the Orwellian, cult-like following he has.

The fact that he has even one supporter left saddens me. I hear an awful lot of criticism about Romney being a flip flopper but I don’t recall anyone in the history of American politics flip flopping on more issues and promises than Obama.

If flip flopping is the greatest sin a political figure can commit then why don’t you Obama supporters get behind Ron Paul?? I don’t recall RP flipping on a single issue throughout 30+ years in elected office. If I’m wrong then please provide evidence.

I think the real reason people still support Obama is because they still believe he’s going to provide for their every need.

I support your right to vote for whoever you want and for whatever reason but I must know - What’s your justification for voting to re-elect Obama after everything he's done and failed to do during his first term? Do you think 4 more years of Obama is REALLY the answer to the problems facing America?

edit on 21-5-2012 by seabag because: (no reason given)

edit on 5/21/2012 by tothetenthpower because: --Mod Edit--Removed T&C Violation.

edit on 21-5-2012 by seabag because: (no reason given)

Gave you a star for koolaid man. Hilarious.

Originally posted by Anonymous404
reply to post by abecedarian

 

I was obviously talking about the national debt.

Not your personal indiscretions. I bet you're one of those guys that only blames things on the government when you don't agree with the candidate, but when it's someone else it's "personal responsibility."

Whereas I believe it's all up to "personal responsibility" because these politicians are all the same.

Quite frankly, I believe everyone is responsible for themselves. Yet, I take little issue with someone utilizing the system WHEN NECESSARY, and take offense when the system is abused.

Everything Obama has done, and feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.... Everything Obama has done has placed more people in to the system than he has taken out, unless of course you count those that are no longer eligible for extended benefits and haven't found work yet. Yet the current admin touts the "decreasing" number of people eligible for unemployment benefits as people entering the workforce.

Again, correct me if I'm wrong.

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by Anonymous404

 

11,000 other readers of this site have no problems with my "grammar",.

Honestly, we do take issue with it, but many of us are sufficiently intelligent so as to understand what you mean and forgive your transgressions... unlike the pedantic minority.

Originally posted by abecedarian
reply to post by braindeadconservatives

 

How is it that ... from your source...

Reagan went from $1,028,729,000,000 debt to $2,684,392,000,000 debt...
(net difference of $1.6 trillion)
and
Obama went from $12,311,349,677,512 debt to $15,125,898,976,397 debt...
(net difference of $2.8 trillion)

Reagan had 8 years, and Obama has only had 3.... yet somehow Reagan is worse?

edit on 5/21/2012 by abecedarian because: (no reason given)

Yes, you are not taking inflation into account inflation,

GDP in 1980

was 2.7 Trillion Dollars

GDP in 2010

is 14.2 Trillion dollars

Reagans Total expansion of debt was 189%

Obama's is 41%

I am not making this up, it's not magic or fudged propaganda

reply to post by SeventhSeal

What truly amazes me is that people actually bash the President for not fixing the economy 100%. Really? It's been four years and he's one man. When you have a Congress controlled by immature, ignorant, idiotic JACKASSES, it's a bit difficult to get anything constructive done while at the office.

One man can't fix the economy, but one man can ruin it.

He had a super majority for his first two years!!

What did he do? He passed OBAMACARE; the giant spending bill that further killed the economy! Who did that??



That’s right!! Obama!!

reply to post by abecedarian


Honestly



back to YES WE CAN!

Originally posted by SaturnFX


Obama is the only person in this candidate that either isn't a fairy tale or not completely owned by a very few narrow corporate interests. Sorry, but thems the facts. now, spin away.

HAH!! So it's better to be owned by a MULTITUDE of corporate interests?

Don't vote for Obromney OR Rombama . Figure something else out. No seriously, not another word about having to chose the lesser of two evils. FIGURE SOMETHING ELSE OUT

reply to post by braindeadconservatives


Reaganomics undid the liberal nightmare of the 70’s. If you don’t know, maybe you should study history…

Reagan did the following:

1. Cut tax rates to restore incentives for economic growth, which was implemented first with a reduction in the top income tax rate of 70% down to 50%, and then a 25% across-the-board reduction in income tax rates for everyone. The 1986 tax reform then reduced tax rates further, leaving just two rates, 28% and 15%.

2. Spending reductions, including a $31 billion cut in spending in 1981, close to 5% of the federal budget then, or the equivalent of about $175 billion in spending cuts for the year today. In constant dollars, nondefense discretionary spending declined by 14.4% from 1981 to 1982, and by 16.8% from 1981 to 1983. Moreover, in constant dollars, this nondefense discretionary spending never returned to its 1981 level for the rest of Reagan’s two terms! Even with the Reagan defense buildup, which won the Cold War without firing a shot, total federal spending declined from a high of 23.5% of GDP in 1983 to 21.3% in 1988 and 21.2% in 1989. That’s a real reduction in the size of government relative to the economy of 10%.

3. Anti-inflation monetary policy restraining money supply growth compared to demand, to maintain a stronger, more stable dollar value.

4. Deregulation, which saved consumers an estimated $100 billion per year in lower prices. Reagan’s first executive order, in fact, eliminated price controls on oil and natural gas. Production soared, and aided by a strong dollar the price of oil declined by more than 50%.

So were Reagan’s policies successful? History says they were!

These economic policies amounted to the most successful economic experiment in world history. The Reagan recovery started in official records in November 1982, and lasted 92 months without a recession until July 1990, when the tax increases of the 1990 budget deal killed it. This set a new record for the longest peacetime expansion ever, the previous high in peacetime being 58 months.

During this seven-year recovery, the economy grew by almost one-third, the equivalent of adding the entire economy of West Germany, the third-largest in the world at the time, to the U.S. economy. In 1984 alone real economic growth boomed by 6.8%, the highest in 50 years. Nearly 20 million new jobs were created during the recovery, increasing U.S. civilian employment by almost 20%. Unemployment fell to 5.3% by 1989.

Forbes


But there’s only a slight difference in the two men with regard to message, inspiration and actual accomplishment?

Nobody who took office could have fixed this mess. The Economy of the world couldn't have been fixed within seven years let alone less than four. I don't think the progress is that bad considering the state it was in. Trouble is we just buried some of the deceit with more deceit instead of fixing it. Congress did address some of the things but fought over things too much.

There is no way that a Republican president could have done any better. When Americans start to wake up they will find that the dream we were in was not real. I wasn't aware that the leaders of our country had created such a mess till about four years ago when I started investigating things. I'm sure that some here knew this for many years more than I did. I was so busy looking after my own business that I failed to see the deceit in our political system. I guess my blindness was shared by Congress and the White House too.

It's funny that the people who caused this mess are blaming it on Obama. McClain seemed like he almost threw the election. He's a smart man and his actions were not portraying his intellect. How convenient to have a Democratic President to blame things they caused on. That's the way our Government works.

Originally posted by seabag

How in the world would someone consider their negative actions (NDAA and Obamacare come to mind) and lack of achievement (still in a recession and unemployment is still high) worthy of 4 more years???

Do you mean the same NDAA that Romney said he would have passed? And the same Obamacare that was modeled after Romney, so you know sure as hell Romney would have passed it too?

Come on man.. Romney would be NO DIFFERENT than Obama. None difference. Absolutely no different.

What's funny is that while you try to use this whole "let's at least let somebody else get a chance at driving the bus" explanation.. the reality is that if Romney gets elected, and it comes to pass that indeed he's ABSOLUTELY NO DIFFERENT THAN OBAMA.. you'll be back in 2016 making some weak argument about why we should re-elect Romney anyway and let him keep trying for another 4 years.

You're caught up in the right/left. Break through, and please hurry

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by abecedarian

 

Honestly

back to YES WE CAN!

That was not fair! I came close to spitting my union-made beer on the monitor because of you!

Originally posted by bacci0909

Do you mean the same NDAA that Romney said he would have passed? And the same Obamacare that was modeled after Romney, so you know sure as hell Romney would have passed it too?

Come on man.. Romney would be NO DIFFERENT than Obama. None difference. Absolutely no different.

What's funny is that while you try to use this whole "let's at least let somebody else get a chance at driving the bus" explanation.. the reality is that if Romney gets elected, and it comes to pass that indeed he's ABSOLUTELY NO DIFFERENT THAN OBAMA.. you'll be back in 2016 making some weak argument about why we should re-elect Romney anyway and let him keep trying for another 4 years.

You're caught up in the right/left. Break through, and please hurry

Best known Karl Marx quotes “From each according to his abilities
to each according to his needs”.
Any president who supports a
redistribution of wealth is in essence
following the teachings of Marx
Obama has said on many occasions
that we need to “spread the wealth around”.
How he plans to achieve that would determine
he deserves the title “Marxist”.
Have to pick a side at some point.
No one will want you after they have seen you
slimeball to slimeball to each side or the other