| Barack Obama is Brilliant Thread; HUH? | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Mar 3 2011, 11:12 PM (16,465 Views) | |
| LTC8K6 | Aug 15 2011, 09:16 PM Post #241 |
|
Assistant to The Devil Himself
|
Barry is really something... http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2011/08/obamas-run-of-bad-luck.php http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2011/08/obama-im-just-like-lincoln.php |
![]() |
|
| Baldo | Aug 15 2011, 09:36 PM Post #242 |
|
Obama & the Dems are leadership challenged The very first rule of Leadership is to take responsible for the situation you are in. As hard as it sounds if you want to lead the USA you must accept full responsible as President for whatever happens. Harry Truman said it best, "The Buck stops here!" This was on his desk ![]() For Obama the sign should read "The BUCK STOPS overseas due to the Arab Spring, the tsunami in Japan, and the European debt crises. PS Don't forget the Tea Party" The saying "the buck stops here" derives from the slang expression "pass the buck" which means passing the responsibility on to someone else. The latter expression is said to have originated with the game of poker, in which a marker or counter, frequently in frontier days a knife with a buckhorn handle, was used to indicate the person whose turn it was to deal. If the player did not wish to deal he could pass the responsibility by passing the "buck," as the counter came to be called, to the next player.* On more than one occasion President Truman referred to the desk sign in public statements. For example, in an address at the National War College on December 19, 1952 Mr. Truman said, "You know, it's easy for the Monday morning quarterback to say what the coach should have done, after the game is over. But when the decision is up before you -- and on my desk I have a motto which says The Buck Stops Here' -- the decision has to be made." In his farewell address to the American people given in January 1953, President Truman referred to this concept very specifically in asserting that, "The President--whoever he is--has to decide. He can't pass the buck to anybody. No one else can do the deciding for him. That's his job. The sign has been displayed at the Library since 1957. http://www.trumanlibrary.org/buckstop.htm Edited by Baldo, Aug 15 2011, 09:49 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Aug 15 2011, 10:25 PM Post #243 |
|
Deleted User
|
When Obama plays golf, who does he play with? Who wins? |
|
|
| kbp | Aug 15 2011, 10:41 PM Post #244 |
|
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> TOTAL BULL <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< ![]() It hit bottom in the first quarter of 2009 and turned before he had enacted anything ...unless he wants credit for just the idea of the failed Stimulus being his success story ...but then we'd need to consider the fact that the public had been informed of it the previous year! This is the same chart I posted in the Debt thread following the chart from the CBO on the estimate for what the Stimulus might do (using the numbers they provided the CBO). The CBO anticipated this turn around date when they were reviewing the Stimulus package back in mid-2008. |
![]() |
|
| Baldo | Aug 15 2011, 11:32 PM Post #245 |
|
He is losing it. Listen to him explain the individual Health-care mandate shouldn't be controversial Obama: Individual Health Insurance Mandate 'Should Not Be Controversial' http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vZG4uRjXz_8 Of course he forgets to mention he is the person forcing the insurance companies to accept everyone. |
![]() |
|
| cfochina | Aug 16 2011, 10:14 AM Post #246 |
|
More from Ulsterman Except "Even if it means the threat of race riots. They are willing to go that far – go down that road if need be. If the Obama team can’t guilt enough of White America into voting for them in 2012 – they are just fine with trying to scare the sh-t out of them to do it." Read more: http://newsflavor.com/politics/us-politics/white-house-insider-the-obama-plan-part-two/#ixzz1VClO9mtV |
![]() |
|
| kbp | Aug 16 2011, 11:37 AM Post #247 |
|
Thanks Cfochina, this is interesting to follow!
Naturally, as I said earlier, I take it with a grain of salt. If "Insider" is actually a real person with the connections expressed in these alleged interviews, I'm surprised the part on the Obama crew being uncertain whether or not the "economy by summer of 2012" will help his campaign was included there. We saw what I'll say was a 'flash' in the recovery from Stimulus, which came after the natural rebound was well under way, but that 'flash' was only in the financial market and the JOBS issue never went away ....it actually grew worse than it was when he took office. JOBS = VOTES! With the idea that markets should recover at some point, the fact that the policies planted by this Administration really even took the natural rebound back down should make anyone even mentioning the idea that JOBS may come in the "summer of 2012" look like a fool. I find it diificult to swallow that political campaign managers in the WH would have considered such was even possible ...especially knowing that the GOP controls the House and no injection of artificial DEMAND was ever something they thought they'd have to spend on that effort. |
![]() |
|
| Baldo | Aug 16 2011, 12:00 PM Post #248 |
|
I am not a fortune teller, not by a long shot. If Obama thinks we will have a recovery by next summer pass that pipe around. To me he seems more detached, more out of touch in recent days. The auto maker truck remark, the bad luck on the economy remark, the I had turn the economy around, etc. Now he is heading off to Martha's vineyard for a 10 day expensive vacation hanging out with his rich buds. Michelle will wine & dine herself. Lobsters will become endangered. Interesting comments by Dick Morris http://www.dickmorris.com/blog/obamas-vacation-dick-morris-tv-lunch-alert/ I really think Obama is losing it. He is actually being held responsible for producing real world economic results and his arrogance can't stand failure so he explains it away on others. That Truck remark is really stupid, besides he is attacking the most popular vehicle in the USA. Popular as in the people. |
![]() |
|
| kbp | Aug 16 2011, 12:59 PM Post #249 |
|
A "keeper" from Drudge... This is the perfect source to toss back at any liberals arguing how Obama has helped us ...and be sure to point out that the costs for fines/fees our businesses have seen increase from added regulators is not even mentioned here ... that many liberals will understand or disapprove of the added cost from regulations! Regulation Business, Jobs Booming Under Obama By JOHN MERLINE, INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY If the federal government's regulatory operation were a business, it would be one of the 50 biggest in the country in terms of revenues, and the third largest in terms of employees, with more people working for it than McDonald's, Ford, Disney and Boeing combined. Under President Obama, while the economy is struggling to grow and create jobs, the federal regulatory business is booming. Regulatory agencies have seen their combined budgets grow a healthy 16% since 2008, topping $54 billion, according to the annual "Regulator's Budget," compiled by George Washington University and Washington University in St. Louis. That's at a time when the overall economy grew a paltry 5%. Meanwhile, employment at these agencies has climbed 13% since Obama took office to more than 281,000, while private-sector jobs shrank by 5.6%. Michael Mandel, chief economic strategist at the Progressive Policy Institute, found that between March 2010 and March 2011 federal regulatory jobs climbed faster than either private jobs or overall government jobs. (See chart.) Regulatory production is way up, too, if you measure that by the number of rules federal agencies churn out. The Obama administration imposed 75 new major rules in its first 26 months, costing the private sector more than $40 billion, according to a Heritage Foundation study. "No other president has imposed as high a number or cost in a comparable time period," noted the study's author, James Gattuso. The number of pages in the Federal Register — where all new rules must be published and which serves as proxy of regulatory activity — jumped 18% in 2010. This July, regulators imposed a total of 379 new rules that will cost more than $9.5 billion, according to an analysis by Sen. John Barrasso, R-Wyo. And much more is on the way. The Federal Register notes that more than 4,200 regulations are in the pipeline. That doesn't count impending clean air rules from the EPA, new derivative rules, or the FCC's net neutrality rule. Nor does that include recently announced fuel economy mandates or eventual ObamaCare and Dodd-Frank regulations. But what's good for regulators isn't necessarily good for the private sector, as compliance burdens impose ever-increasing costs on businesses. "Our economy is continuing to sink," Sen. Barrasso said, "and it's being weighed down by regulations coming out of this administration." By 2008, the cost of complying with federal rules and regulations already exceeded $1.75 trillion a year, according to a 2010 study issued by the Small Business Administration. Worse, the SBA found that small companies — which account for most of America's new jobs — spend 36% more per employee to comply with these rules than larger firms. Cass Sunstein, who runs the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, denies the regulatory upsurge, writing recently that "there has been no increase in rule making in this administration." He also notes Obama ordered a comprehensive regulatory review in January that uncovered $1 billion worth of needless red tape. But Progressive Policy Institute's Mandel says this review "doesn't go far enough" and that having regulators prune their own rules "has been tried repeatedly in the past, and it's always fallen far short of expectations." He favors an independent "regulatory improvement commission." Meanwhile, Rep. Geoff Davis, R-Ky., is pushing the REINS Act, which would require Congress to vote for and the president to sign off on all new major regulations. Not everyone in the Obama administration sees a problem. The EPA thinks new regulations can fuel the economy and hiring. The EPA wrote in February that "in periods of high unemployment, an increase in labor demand due to regulation may have a stimulative effect that results in a net increase in overall employment." ![]() |
![]() |
|
| kbp | Aug 16 2011, 01:07 PM Post #250 |
|
Bits from last post... …Worse, the SBA found that small companies — which account for most of America's new jobs — spend 36% more per employee to comply with these rules than larger firms So that tells liberals we’d save money if there was nothing but “larger firms” …subject to cooperation with or control by Big Brother so that they can keep growing! …Meanwhile, Rep. Geoff Davis, R-Ky., is pushing the REINS Act, which would require Congress to vote for and the president to sign off on all new major regulations. Dipstick! Quit passing the regulations or bills that allow the Executive branch to write them as they see fit. …The EPA wrote in February that "in periods of high unemployment, an increase in labor demand due to regulation may have a stimulative effect that results in a net increase in overall employment." A result of the initial ADDED costs. So their theory is to keep adding production costs to increase employment! That EPA memo should have been embarrassing even to write, no matter what side of the fence the scribe was on! |
![]() |
|
| kbp | Aug 16 2011, 03:17 PM Post #251 |
|
Sometimes I think we need an 'Obama Humor' thread, but I suppose the brilliance from him and all he has surrounded himself with is all open for a laugh ...when we're not crying!
There's that excuse for it having been a "consensus"! WTH did he think the reason for TARP was? They have weekly, maybe daily, numbers available on unemployment and GDP. His excuse is even a line of BS. He's probably writing a book on how the subprime crash came from the 'trickle down' that destroys our markets and how 'trickle up' will save it ...since he figures he has at least a year to write it now! |
![]() |
|
| Kerri P. | Aug 16 2011, 03:32 PM Post #252 |
|
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/08/16/white-house-considers-government-reogranization-amid-big-spending-criticism/?test=latestnews White House Considers Government Reorganization Amid Big-Spending Criticism Published August 16, 2011 FoxNews.com As President Obama borrows from the Republican playbook -- slamming the GOP for blocking a payroll tax holiday extension -- the White House is looking to downplay reports that a host of new economic programs are aimed at bringing big government back. On Tuesday, White House aides rejected suggestions that a new department focused on creating jobs will turn into another new behemoth agency. A new department -- potentially merging the Commerce Department, the office of the U. S. Trade Representative and some economic divisions at the State Department -- is an idea first brought up by the president during the State of the Union address earlier this year, aides say. In that address, the president called for a reorganization of government into a leaner, meaner and more responsive asset. snip.... |
![]() |
|
| RighteousThug | Aug 16 2011, 07:06 PM Post #253 |
|
Obama's always reminded me of the punchline of that old joke, to wit: Hippie on airplane: We're OK, we still have 2 parachutes left. The self-proclaimed 'world's smartest man' just jumped out of the plane with my knapsack on!' |
![]() |
|
| kbp | Aug 16 2011, 09:01 PM Post #254 |
|
Same ole sh**, different day ...make that 'different NAME'! The day of the local banker that knows the local borrower and the local house they want is about gone. The construction industry often leads the way in recoveries, for the larger percentage of the unemployed is less educated, more skilled labor. I hate to admit it, but this will be needed ...if they'll get rid of the BS that came about with the subprime loans to not only cover the down payment but also the primary mortgages. A cure to some problems would be to force the mortgage holders to carry 5-10% of any loss before the GSE coverage kicks in, along with holding the mortgage broker responsible for some potential loss by way of a bond to secure that they did their job prperly. That would make them review and verfiy the mortgages a little better, keep the ex-car salesmen from opening up mortgage brokerage offices on every corner. I just hope it doesn't come before about April or May next year at the earliest. Though it is not an instant cure, I'd like it to be too late to influence the increase in jobs we see every spring. We've learned that even 8.9% unemployment is a successful recovery in Obama's mind. |
![]() |
|
| Mason | Aug 16 2011, 09:30 PM Post #255 |
|
Parts unknown
|
. lmao.. He is charading I think he really is a mean, petty man. The Real Obama was the guy in Virginia when the DEMS had their retreat. He told the Republicans he would let them on the Bus, but they were going to sit in the back and shut-up. The Full time job of the staff is to hide his real (radical) ideas and his pettiness and resentment. . |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · LIESTOPPERS UNDERGROUND · Next Topic » |










2:34 PM Jul 11