Republican leadership

Issues of a more global nature: National Politics, etc.
Forum rules
Please Click Here To View Rules ---- To contact the administrator please email admin@southshoreforums.com
Mac66
Citizen
Citizen
Posts: 4239
Joined: Jun Tue 06, 2000 1:01 am

Re: Republican leadership

Post by Mac66 » Mar Tue 08, 2011 3:10 pm

another puff ball:

regarding czars in American government. A Republican creation.
Nixon seems to have had the first in the modern era, and there were a couple under both Ronald Reagan and George Herbert Walker Bush and President Clinton had a few more.

lost cause
Pinnacle
Pinnacle
Posts: 6253
Joined: Mar Mon 26, 2007 9:55 am

Re: Republican leadership

Post by lost cause » Mar Tue 08, 2011 3:54 pm

Mac66 wrote:another puff ball:

regarding czars in American government. A Republican creation.
Nixon seems to have had the first in the modern era, and there were a couple under both Ronald Reagan and George Herbert Walker Bush and President Clinton had a few more.
Really it was my understanding that Woodrow Wilson (who created the first czars) and Franklin Roosevelt were Democrats.

"There've been so many czars over the last 50 years, and they've all been failures," New York University public-service professor Paul Light told the Wall Street Journal.

By the way neither George Bush 2 or Obama have been a success at the job, which may have something to do with the fact that they have appoint the most czars 33 and 37 respectively. Roosevelt had 11, nobody else was in double figures
Last edited by lost cause on Mar Tue 08, 2011 4:12 pm, edited 2 times in total.
America Built by Heroes, Ruined by Liberals

The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help.'

bobkat
Pinnacle
Pinnacle
Posts: 6903
Joined: May Mon 22, 2000 1:01 am
Location: just above Vinebrook

Re: Republican leadership

Post by bobkat » Mar Tue 08, 2011 3:57 pm

Lost cause after reading your post one thing jump out at me. This quote is not true. I will look at the other statements later.

lost cause wrote:How about this concentrating on failure
gm take over - gm had to eventually declare bankruptcy

You need to get your time frame straighten out. The only loans given to GM before Obama got his admins. working with Gm . They were 19.4 billion in late 2008. I believe President Bush was still in office. The Obama Admins. did not give any loans and did not have the government take over Gm until after bankruptcy was declared on June 1st 2009. . The government couldn't step in until the collapse GM. The bankruptcy of Gm triggered 30.1 billion loans. Gm has been saved . They are paying their bills and loans. They also made a profit.

lost cause
Pinnacle
Pinnacle
Posts: 6253
Joined: Mar Mon 26, 2007 9:55 am

Re: Republican leadership

Post by lost cause » Mar Tue 08, 2011 4:40 pm

bobkat wrote:Lost cause after reading your post one thing jump out at me. This quote is not true. I will look at the other statements later.

lost cause wrote:How about this concentrating on failure
gm take over - gm had to eventually declare bankruptcy

You need to get your time frame straighten out. The only loans given to GM before Obama got his admins. working with Gm . They were 19.4 billion in late 2008. I believe President Bush was still in office. The Obama Admins. did not give any loans and did not have the government take over Gm until after bankruptcy was declared on June 1st 2009. . The government couldn't step in until the collapse GM. The bankruptcy of Gm triggered 30.1 billion loans. Gm has been saved . They are paying their bills and loans. They also made a profit.
Wrong,

Barack Obama was sworn in as President on January 20, 2009. See below time line of the GM mess. By the way Bush was wrong as well with the whole TARP mess. By the way my count is 28 billion during the first 6 months of his presidency before they filed for bankruptcy.

July 10 (Reuters) - A new General Motors GMGMQ.PK emerged from bankruptcy protection on Friday, far more quickly than most industry-watchers had expected, as a leaner automaker aiming to win back American consumers and pay back taxpayers.

Here is a timeline of GM's recent struggles:

Oct. 23/24, 2008 - General Motors and Chrysler, which at the time were discussing a merger, pledge to cut jobs and close plants as the downturn in auto sales deepens.

Dec. 19 - The United States announces a $17.4 billion lifeline to Detroit carmakers from the $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief (TARP) program. GM is to receive $13.4 billion and
Chrysler $4 billion. Ford says it does not need a loan.

Feb. 17, 2009 - GM and Chrysler request nearly $22 billion in additional U.S. government loans.

March 19 - The U.S. Treasury pledges $5 billion to aid auto suppliers crucial to the survival of the industry.

March 29 - GM Chief Executive Rick Wagoner resigns.

March 30 - Canada offers C$4 billion ($3.2 billion) in bridge loans to the Canadian branches of GM and Chrysler. -- Russia pledges over $1 billion to its auto industry.

April 24 - GM draws another $2 billion in government aid.

April 27 - GM offers its final plan to reorganise outside bankruptcy by slashing bond debt, cutting a further 21,000-plus U.S. jobs and emerging as a nationalised automaker under
majority control of the U.S. government.

May 15 - GM drops up to 1,200 U.S. dealers.

May 22 - GM borrows another $4 billion from the U.S. Treasury, taking the total government funding to keep it afloat since the start of the year to $19.4 billion.

May 30 - Germany seals a deal with Canadian auto parts group Magna, GM and the U.S. government to save carmaker Opel from the imminent bankruptcy of its U.S. parent. -- Magna will take over parts of the new European Opel activities from GM. Germany will provide 4.5 billion euros ($6.27 billion) in loan guarantees and Magna will lend Opel 300
million euros to cover short-term liquidity needs.

May 31 - Investors holding about 54 percent of GM's $27.2 billion of bonds indicate support for a U.S. Treasury-brokered swap that may help speed the way through bankruptcy.

June 1 - GM files for bankruptcy. The United States will provide $30 billion of additional taxpayer funds to restructure the company so it can better compete with lower-cost Asian
automakers.

June 2 - Reaches a memorandum of understanding to sell its Hummer brand to Sichuan Tengzhong Heavy Industrial Machinery Co, a privately held Chinese heavy machinery maker.

June 5 - Reaches a preliminary agreement to sell its Saturn brand to Penske Automotive Group (PAG.N).

June 8 - Says it would cease production of medium-duty trucks by July 31 after attempts to sell the operation failed.

June 16 - Strikes a deal with Sweden's Koenigsegg, a niche manufacturer of some of the world's fastest and most expensive sports cars, to sell Saab Automobile.

June 25 - Receives final court approval to borrow up to $33.3 billion from the U.S., Canadian and Ontario governments.

July 6 - A senior U.S. official says GM will get the remaining $20 billion in government bankruptcy financing over the rest of 2009 and could be ready to launch an initial public
stock offering in early 2010.

July 6 - A U.S. judge approves GM's bankruptcy sale in a move that will allow the company's most profitable assets to exit bankruptcy protection under government ownership.

July 10 - Emerges from bankruptcy protection after the 40-day bankruptcy concludes with a deal that sold key operations and core brands, including Chevrolet and Cadillac,
to a new company, majority-owned by the U.S. Treasury.
America Built by Heroes, Ruined by Liberals

The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help.'

bobkat
Pinnacle
Pinnacle
Posts: 6903
Joined: May Mon 22, 2000 1:01 am
Location: just above Vinebrook

Re: Republican leadership

Post by bobkat » Mar Tue 08, 2011 4:49 pm

Lost cause
you stated that GM was taken over by the U.S. Government then went into bankruptcy. That just did not happen. The government took control of GM after June 1st 2009. Gm declared bankruptcy on June 1 st

User avatar
MCasper
Pinnacle
Pinnacle
Posts: 13955
Joined: Apr Thu 13, 2000 1:01 am
facebook ID: citrushills
Location: Hernando, FL USA
Contact:

Re: Republican leadership

Post by MCasper » Mar Tue 08, 2011 5:16 pm

Mac66 wrote: ... Whatever. If and when Obama is beaten out of the WH, that right will have to come up with an agenda that doesn't involve Obama-hating. Good luck with that.
If you look at my lifetime, you have
Nixon, Carter, Reagan, Clinton, Bush, Obama as the replacement of party at a POTUS election.

Only Bush and maybe Nixon were elected on more who they were ... rather than who they were not. And (Editorial comment:) certainly Carter and Obama prove that you can beat something with nothing. Most elections and almost all incumbent elections are a firing and/or rehiring decision. If people are in the mood to rehire BHO, it won't matter if we've nominated the very best candidate ... and if they want him out ... the reverse won't matter either (See Carter and Obama)
Image

lost cause
Pinnacle
Pinnacle
Posts: 6253
Joined: Mar Mon 26, 2007 9:55 am

Re: Republican leadership

Post by lost cause » Mar Tue 08, 2011 5:18 pm

My fault for not being clear in my post. The government never should have taken over GM or any other company. It is not the role of the government
America Built by Heroes, Ruined by Liberals

The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help.'

User avatar
MCasper
Pinnacle
Pinnacle
Posts: 13955
Joined: Apr Thu 13, 2000 1:01 am
facebook ID: citrushills
Location: Hernando, FL USA
Contact:

Re: Republican leadership

Post by MCasper » Mar Tue 08, 2011 5:20 pm

bobkat wrote:Lost cause
you stated that GM was taken over by the U.S. Government then went into bankruptcy. That just did not happen. The government took control of GM after June 1st 2009. Gm declared bankruptcy on June 1 st
On June 9th to be exact. SO? Are you somehow saying these were unrelated incidents?
Image

User avatar
MCasper
Pinnacle
Pinnacle
Posts: 13955
Joined: Apr Thu 13, 2000 1:01 am
facebook ID: citrushills
Location: Hernando, FL USA
Contact:

Re: Republican leadership

Post by MCasper » Mar Tue 08, 2011 5:34 pm

Mac66 wrote:
devaluing the dollar all over the world because of massive debt & spending
We're talking about Obama here, not Bush.
Of course.
Image

bobkat
Pinnacle
Pinnacle
Posts: 6903
Joined: May Mon 22, 2000 1:01 am
Location: just above Vinebrook

Re: Republican leadership

Post by bobkat » Mar Tue 08, 2011 5:36 pm

MCasper wrote:
bobkat wrote:Lost cause
you stated that GM was taken over by the U.S. Government then went into bankruptcy. That just did not happen. The government took control of GM after June 1st 2009. Gm declared bankruptcy on June 1 st
On June 9th to be exact. SO? Are you somehow saying these were unrelated incidents?
Mcasper no I am not saying that . But lost cause statement sounds like Government took over GM . The way they ran the company cause it to go into bankruptcy. That just didn't happen.

User avatar
MCasper
Pinnacle
Pinnacle
Posts: 13955
Joined: Apr Thu 13, 2000 1:01 am
facebook ID: citrushills
Location: Hernando, FL USA
Contact:

Re: Republican leadership

Post by MCasper » Mar Wed 09, 2011 7:15 am

bobkat wrote:
Mcasper no I am not saying that . But lost cause statement sounds like Government took over GM . The way they ran the company cause it to go into bankruptcy. That just didn't happen.
Fair point.
Image

Mac66
Citizen
Citizen
Posts: 4239
Joined: Jun Tue 06, 2000 1:01 am

Re: Republican leadership

Post by Mac66 » Mar Wed 09, 2011 7:30 am

If people are in the mood to rehire BHO, it won't matter if we've nominated the very best candidate ...
I see your point, but I'm hoping a strong challenger emerges, one with an organization that doesn't implode (see Hiliary Clinton) or one so weak/disjointed its beaten from the start (McCain/Palin).

The stars lined up for Obama first time around. You're right; a lot of his appeal came from him not being GWB.

User avatar
MCasper
Pinnacle
Pinnacle
Posts: 13955
Joined: Apr Thu 13, 2000 1:01 am
facebook ID: citrushills
Location: Hernando, FL USA
Contact:

Re: Republican leadership

Post by MCasper » Mar Wed 09, 2011 8:39 am

Mac66 wrote:
If people are in the mood to rehire BHO, it won't matter if we've nominated the very best candidate ...
I see your point, but I'm hoping a strong challenger emerges, one with an organization that doesn't implode (see Hiliary Clinton) or one so weak/disjointed its beaten from the start (McCain/Palin).

The stars lined up for Obama first time around. You're right; a lot of his appeal came from him not being GWB.
1) Also hoping for the best candidate ... if they win, they will be our POTUS and I do want the best.
2) JSM was obviously not my 1st 2nd or 3rd choice ... however I will remind folks that if Lehman went down on on Nov. 13th instead of Sept. 13th, I think this could have gone the other way.
3) And GWB wasn't even running.
Image

Mac66
Citizen
Citizen
Posts: 4239
Joined: Jun Tue 06, 2000 1:01 am

Re: Republican leadership

Post by Mac66 » Mar Sun 13, 2011 8:35 pm

Someone talk to her, please.
"What I love about New Hampshire and what we have in common is our extreme love for liberty," the potential GOP presidential candidate said. "You're the state where the shot was heard around the world in Lexington and Concord. And you put a marker in the ground and paid with the blood of your ancestors the very first price that had to be paid to make this the most magnificent nation that has ever arisen in the annals of man in 5,000 years of recorded history."

In fact, the 1775 Battles of Lexington and Concord that marked the first military engagements of the American Revolution took place in Massachusetts. But Bachmann did not correct her error when she referenced the battles again later in her speech.

Bachmann's contorting of a basic fact about the fight for American independence was made all the more glaring because of her repeated references throughout her speech to the nation's founding.

The Republican Liberty Caucus of New Hampshire, which hosted the event, provided pocket-sized copies of the Declaration of Independence and United States Constitution on a table a few feet from where Bachmann spoke.

specialties
Pinnacle
Pinnacle
Posts: 12123
Joined: Jun Mon 15, 2009 11:27 am

Re: Republican leadership

Post by specialties » Mar Mon 14, 2011 5:43 pm

:mrgreen: Yeah, a difference of 60 miles misquote between the two Concords by someome from the mid-west rally trumps 14 trillion bux gone missing that your kids will have to find...

Good luck to you and the knit pickers too... Glad your priorities are in order...

How do you spell potatoe??

Guess this makes all the TEA Party folks evil... ( again )
First it was the CHURCH, then the FAMILY, and now the NATION...

Mac66
Citizen
Citizen
Posts: 4239
Joined: Jun Tue 06, 2000 1:01 am

Re: Republican leadership

Post by Mac66 » Mar Mon 14, 2011 8:38 pm

Guess this makes all the TEA Party folks evil... ( again )
Not at all; this one just needs American History 101. She wants the WH, after all. Pretty low bar, yes?

If Mitch Daniels runs and wins, I'll vote for him. Not the Democrat. Does that pass your test?

User avatar
Kurt Schluter
Citizen
Citizen
Posts: 4770
Joined: Apr Fri 07, 2000 1:01 am

Re: Republican leadership

Post by Kurt Schluter » Mar Tue 15, 2011 6:06 am

At least she knows there are 50 states, not 57.
Make America Great Again!
Trump/Pence 2016

specialties
Pinnacle
Pinnacle
Posts: 12123
Joined: Jun Mon 15, 2009 11:27 am

Re: Republican leadership

Post by specialties » Mar Tue 15, 2011 7:30 am

Not at all; this one just needs American History 101. She wants the WH, after all. Pretty low bar, yes?
I'll belay any outing of a fresh and American face... She did bring up the 106 billion $$ debakle; how is that being answered?? Does that not trump the 101 civics lessons??
Yes, the WH has seen it's share of low bars...

If Mitch Daniels runs and wins, I'll vote for him. Not the Democrat. Does that pass your test?
Ewww, interesting... Maybe we have consensus... TNX for that ray of light...
First it was the CHURCH, then the FAMILY, and now the NATION...

User avatar
MCasper
Pinnacle
Pinnacle
Posts: 13955
Joined: Apr Thu 13, 2000 1:01 am
facebook ID: citrushills
Location: Hernando, FL USA
Contact:

Re: Republican leadership

Post by MCasper » Mar Fri 18, 2011 11:21 am

Senate approves CR with $6 billion in cuts for 3 weeks

March 18, 2011

More than Democrats proposed to cut in 6 months.

Yeah ... they're both the same???
Image

lost cause
Pinnacle
Pinnacle
Posts: 6253
Joined: Mar Mon 26, 2007 9:55 am

Re: Republican leadership

Post by lost cause » Mar Fri 18, 2011 2:24 pm

Obama has now failed to lead in Gulf Oil Spill, Japan (nice touch saying our relationship has not shaken right after a devastating earthquake) and now has failed miserably in Libya, not to mention the other Arab uprisings as well.

The rest of the world is laughing because of your pathetic leadership Mr. President.
America Built by Heroes, Ruined by Liberals

The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help.'

Mac66
Citizen
Citizen
Posts: 4239
Joined: Jun Tue 06, 2000 1:01 am

Re: Republican leadership

Post by Mac66 » Mar Fri 18, 2011 3:14 pm

Perhaps he's thinking that managing and funding 3 wars concurrently is just crazy. The country is broke, and you want another military operation, this time in North Africa?

lost cause
Pinnacle
Pinnacle
Posts: 6253
Joined: Mar Mon 26, 2007 9:55 am

Re: Republican leadership

Post by lost cause » Mar Fri 18, 2011 4:13 pm

Mac66 wrote:Perhaps he's thinking that managing and funding 3 wars concurrently is just crazy. The country is broke, and you want another military operation, this time in North Africa?
Whether I want it or not, it is going to happen. He needed to address the situation before it was 30 days old. We don't need to put boots on the ground as it stands, but the people of Libya could have used the Support
Last edited by lost cause on Mar Sat 19, 2011 9:39 am, edited 1 time in total.
America Built by Heroes, Ruined by Liberals

The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help.'

User avatar
MCasper
Pinnacle
Pinnacle
Posts: 13955
Joined: Apr Thu 13, 2000 1:01 am
facebook ID: citrushills
Location: Hernando, FL USA
Contact:

Re: Republican leadership

Post by MCasper » Mar Sat 19, 2011 8:05 am

The call by the Arab League for Western military intervention in an Arab state in this case asking that a UN no-fly zone be imposed over Libya “ is not only without precedent but it puts in formal terms what Governor Palin stated three weeks ago should have been Americas response to the political and humanitarian crisis now unfolding there.

The former GOP vice presidential candidate was being interviewed on February 23rd on national television by Sean Hannity on a range of issues. On the Libya crisis, she proposed a no-fly-zone to protect the armed and unarmed opposition to the Qaddafi regime.
Image

kingstrider
Tourist
Tourist
Posts: 202
Joined: Mar Thu 10, 2011 9:59 am

Re: Republican leadership

Post by kingstrider » Mar Sat 19, 2011 11:31 am

I find this just amazing.

People verbally assaulting the president for not intervening in Libya.
They in the same breath state that we need to cut spending. I do not thing intervening would be free.

Also, it has been three weeks since this internal conflict began.

In August 1990 Iraq invaded an ally, Kuwait.
Our response was to go to the U.N. to seek a coalition, we did not intervene till January, 1991, 5 months later and most people consider that a success.

lost cause
Pinnacle
Pinnacle
Posts: 6253
Joined: Mar Mon 26, 2007 9:55 am

Re: Republican leadership

Post by lost cause » Mar Sat 19, 2011 2:15 pm

kingstrider wrote:I find this just amazing.

People verbally assaulting the president for not intervening in Libya.
They in the same breath state that we need to cut spending. I do not thing intervening would be free.

Also, it has been three weeks since this internal conflict began.

In August 1990 Iraq invaded an ally, Kuwait.
Our response was to go to the U.N. to seek a coalition, we did not intervene till January, 1991, 5 months later and most people consider that a success.
Nobody is screaming for us to launch an invasion, but Obama should have come out in support of the people who are trying to find out what it would be like to live in a free society. Also if for nothing else then it would have made Clinton's job a hell of a lot easier.

By the way you can't compare the two situations as they are about as completely different as you can get. Remember Libya is an African Country and the ruler is despised through out the world. When you have both European and Arab leaders screaming in unison for the UN to stop the Libyan Government you don't sit on the bench and do nothing.
America Built by Heroes, Ruined by Liberals

The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help.'

User avatar
MCasper
Pinnacle
Pinnacle
Posts: 13955
Joined: Apr Thu 13, 2000 1:01 am
facebook ID: citrushills
Location: Hernando, FL USA
Contact:

Re: Republican leadership

Post by MCasper » Mar Sun 20, 2011 7:01 am

kingstrider wrote:I find this just amazing.

...
Let me be clear. My interest in posting that quote wasn't to take a position on the wisdom of this move, not to be critical of BHO for taking so long to make the move. It is simply to point out that the "super smart" POTUS took 3 weeks to come to the same conclusion as the "air head" former Governor of Alaska. The woman "too stupid" to lead our country. Neither media driven narrative is helpful nor accurate.

I support what we are doing because we are doing it. As I did in 1991, after thinking it was a bad idea, then again in the Bosnian adventure. I have taken a position that I am not privy to the same info as a POTUS so I try to be respectful of their national security moves knowing that there is much I do not know.

There is a famous soliloquy in the movie A Few Good Men ...
Son, we live in a world that has walls, and those walls have to be guarded by men with guns. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Lt. Weinburg? I have a greater responsibility than you could possibly fathom. You weep for Santiago, and you curse the marines. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know.


That's how I look at these things. It is easy for the protesters to yell, Blood for Oil, Wag the Dog, or Bush lied us into war. They do have the luxury of not knowing what GHWG, WJC, GWB or BHO, knew or in this case ... know.

Let's give our POTUS a chance here, before we run down his decision. I will not be dishonest and not acknowledge as I did in 1991, that from what I do know, it seems we could be moving in the wrong direction ... but on troop deployments ... I will as always choose to give our POTUS the benefit of all doubt.
Image

kingstrider
Tourist
Tourist
Posts: 202
Joined: Mar Thu 10, 2011 9:59 am

Re: Republican leadership

Post by kingstrider » Mar Sun 20, 2011 10:20 am

I was not referring to you, there have countless attacks on the president for waiting "so long" to do something.

I was pointing out the irony.

specialties
Pinnacle
Pinnacle
Posts: 12123
Joined: Jun Mon 15, 2009 11:27 am

Re: Republican leadership

Post by specialties » Mar Sun 20, 2011 4:00 pm

Repubs can't get this one right either, oops, commies...

http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/03/ ... ening.html

Best WE ALL pay attention to this commentary. The author is DEAD ON.

Looks like the town cryer is back, eh?? :mrgreen:
First it was the CHURCH, then the FAMILY, and now the NATION...

User avatar
Kurt Schluter
Citizen
Citizen
Posts: 4770
Joined: Apr Fri 07, 2000 1:01 am

Re: Republican leadership

Post by Kurt Schluter » Mar Sun 20, 2011 4:44 pm

I agree with the author and Ron Paul. We should not be involved in Libya. Its a civil war.
Where are the liberal anti-war protesters???

Where are the liberals on this forum? Do they support Obama???
Bridges?? Marshead?
For or against our 3rd war??
Make America Great Again!
Trump/Pence 2016

User avatar
Phil
Pinnacle
Pinnacle
Posts: 9943
Joined: Jun Sun 11, 2000 1:01 am
facebook ID: phil.shannon
Location: Earth

Re: Republican leadership

Post by Phil » Mar Sun 20, 2011 10:30 pm

In 2011 the dems and left are taking hypocricy to levels never seen before
The difference is this: in almost the exact same set of circumstances, Bush was called "Hitler" by the Left. Leftists wrote plays and stories and movies about killing him. Democratic Party politicians, like Sen. Dick Durbin, likened our troops to "Nazis." Democratic Senators like John Kerry and Hillary Clinton, who voted for the military action, accused the president of lying. Mass demonstrations and protests, sponsored by the communist and socialist Left, broke out in the U.S. and Great Britain. Antiwar groups like Code Pink staged demonstrations at military recruiting stations, and had to be dragged shrieking from the halls of Congress. Opponents of the war shouted that Saddam's Iraq never attacked us, and that our military action was a violation of international law. The Left cried for the impeachment of Bush and Cheney.

President Obama has just committed American forces to engage in acts of war against Moammar Qaddafi. Where are the protesters? Where are the accusations that Obama is a liar and a Nazi? Where are the groups of "artists" wishing death upon the "warmonger" Obama? Where are the cries for Obama's impeachment? There aren't any, and there won't be any, either. Obama - who made a fetish out of his opposition to the "surge" in Iraq, yet ordered a "surge" of his own in Afghanistan - has just committed American forces to combat action against a third Muslim country. No matter. He won the Nobel Peace Prize a priori. The Left regards him as a man of peace in its own mind; the facts are irrelevant.

The Left's hypocrisy on matters of war and peace is sickening. When the Democratic Party is in power, it routinely commits America to war. When Republicans are in power, Democrats engage in shameless demagoguery and paint the Republicans as bloodthirsty warmongers.
http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/03/ ... ening.html
Government's first duty is to protect the people, not run their lives.
Image

Mac66
Citizen
Citizen
Posts: 4239
Joined: Jun Tue 06, 2000 1:01 am

Re: Republican leadership

Post by Mac66 » Mar Mon 21, 2011 7:08 am

American response:

no boots on the ground-
supporting, not leading, a NATO coalition effort-
preventing an insane leader from killing his own-
air attacks only-
not a war of occupation-
and yes, the end game has to be defined much more clearly.
and yes, spending money we don't have to attack a 3rd Muslim country.

The Libyan lunatic had to go. Would it have been right to stand by and watch him regain power? Think of the reprisals. Think of Iraq, 1991.

kingstrider
Tourist
Tourist
Posts: 202
Joined: Mar Thu 10, 2011 9:59 am

Re: Republican leadership

Post by kingstrider » Mar Mon 21, 2011 1:41 pm

I think the hypocricy is on both sides. If this were a republican president, those on the other side of the aisle would be cheering the move and not questioning it.

In addition, it has been about three days, give it time, there will be protests. Do you not recall the protests in 66,67 and 68 and the names that LBJ was called?

User avatar
GoingCoastal
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 3781
Joined: Aug Thu 17, 2000 1:01 am
facebook ID: 1381994333
Location: Kingston MA
Contact:

Re: Republican leadership

Post by GoingCoastal » Mar Tue 22, 2011 11:30 am

Mac66 wrote:From WSJ profile of Mitch Daniels. I hope he runs for President.

Some nuggets:

Social Security? Jack up the retirement age and end it entirely for wealthier Americans;

Medicare? Turn it into a voucher system and let people buy their own health insurance;

Health care? has suggested the government put limits of end of life care (a Republican suggesting death panels? Lock and load, SP.)

Education? a voucher system.

Time to "grab every third rail there is, all the things that people say, "well, you just can't do that politically."

Of course he was Bush's budget director when the government saw a surplus turn into years of deficit spending, and when Mr. Bush launched his Medicare Part D subsidy, which now comes in at 60 Billion per year - the largest expansion of entitlements for the elderly in decades. (This is the WSJ, talking, talk to them.)

Anyway, real interesting article. He seems like the only guy from either side really willing to tackle entitlements. Not a TP guy.
I wonder why?
http://www.politico.com/morningscore/
The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee is hoping to make vulnerable House Republicans run for reelection with Paul Ryans budget plan hanging around their necks. In a new offensive launching today, the DCCC will target 10 Republican lawmakers “ including eight freshmen “ with newspaper ads, e-mails and automated and live phone calls, tying them to the House Budget chiefs pledge to overhaul Social Security and Medicare. Cutting retirement benefits but protecting big oil? one newspaper ad reads. Paul Gosar and his leaders want to CUT your hard-earned Social Security and Medicare benefits rather than cutting big tax breaks for big oil. The DCCC has also created a website to serve as an online hub for the new offensive: www.stopbenefitcuts.com
Joe McDonald

bobkat
Pinnacle
Pinnacle
Posts: 6903
Joined: May Mon 22, 2000 1:01 am
Location: just above Vinebrook

Re: Republican leadership

Post by bobkat » Mar Tue 22, 2011 2:33 pm

The Republicans have done a good spin job about Social Security. But the truth is that Social Security doesn't contribute one penny to the debt or deficit.

User avatar
GoingCoastal
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 3781
Joined: Aug Thu 17, 2000 1:01 am
facebook ID: 1381994333
Location: Kingston MA
Contact:

Re: Republican leadership

Post by GoingCoastal » Mar Tue 22, 2011 2:50 pm

1.
bobkat wrote:The Republicans have done a good spin job about Social Security. But the truth is that Social Security doesn't contribute one penny to the debt or deficit.
2.
bobkat, on another thread wrote:when it comes to issues about the government ,Republicans, and Dems. There is only one place to look for the truth .

http://factcheck.org/
3.
Factcheck.org wrote:Democrats Deny Social Securitys Red Ink
Some claim it doesn't contribute to the federal deficit, but it does.
...

Some senior Democrats are claiming that Social Security does not contribute "one penny" to the federal deficit. Thats not true. The fact is, the federal government had to borrow $37 billion last year to finance Social Security, and will need to borrow more this year. The red ink is projected to total well over half a trillion dollars in the coming decade.
http://www.factcheck.org/2011/02/democr ... s-red-ink/
Joe McDonald

bobkat
Pinnacle
Pinnacle
Posts: 6903
Joined: May Mon 22, 2000 1:01 am
Location: just above Vinebrook

Re: Republican leadership

Post by bobkat » Mar Tue 22, 2011 3:50 pm

Joe I stand by my statement
The Democrats are right that the Social Security is self funding and does not contribute to the red ink. The U.S. citizens have paid their Social Security taxes into the Trust Fund and they should have every expectation that they would be paid back.
From the same web site. The problem both parties have raided the Social Security Trust fund since 1958. The money the fed's are putting back into the trust fund is from IOU's they put in before. Social Security is self funding.

http://www.factcheck.org/2011/03/factch ... feb-22-28/

User avatar
GoingCoastal
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 3781
Joined: Aug Thu 17, 2000 1:01 am
facebook ID: 1381994333
Location: Kingston MA
Contact:

Re: Republican leadership

Post by GoingCoastal » Mar Tue 22, 2011 4:46 pm

bobkat wrote:Joe I stand by my statement
The Democrats are right that the Social Security is self funding and does not contribute to the red ink. The U.S. citizens have paid their Social Security taxes into the Trust Fund and they should have every expectation that they would be paid back.
From the same web site. The problem both parties have raided the Social Security Trust fund since 1958. The money the fed's are putting back into the trust fund is from IOU's they put in before. Social Security is self funding.

http://www.factcheck.org/2011/03/factch ... feb-22-28/
Um, bobkat, do you see that portion of your link wherein is contained "-mailbag-"? Might that give you a clue that what you posted is a letter to FactCheck.org and not any commentary FROM FactCheck.org?

Whoever Douglas Stene,Lakeville, Minn, is, I'm sure he is a nice guy. I don't think that in the other thread you meant to imply that he is the only place to go for the truth?
Joe McDonald

bobkat
Pinnacle
Pinnacle
Posts: 6903
Joined: May Mon 22, 2000 1:01 am
Location: just above Vinebrook

Re: Republican leadership

Post by bobkat » Mar Tue 22, 2011 5:48 pm

Going Coastal
I know what I copied and posted. Let me ask you a simple question. If Social Security trust fund was not touched to balance the rest of the Federal Budget (by a bunch scum bags on both sides). Do you think Social Security would be running a surplus or a deficit.


here is a good story on Social Security.

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/aug ... ut-more-it

User avatar
GoingCoastal
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 3781
Joined: Aug Thu 17, 2000 1:01 am
facebook ID: 1381994333
Location: Kingston MA
Contact:

Re: Republican leadership

Post by GoingCoastal » Mar Tue 22, 2011 8:49 pm

bobkat wrote:Let me ask you a simple question.
Let me preempt your question with a couple of my own. You had stated on another thread that FactCheck.org was THE ONLY place to go for THE TRUTH.

Then you were confronted with the fact that FactCheck disavowed your statement viz a viz Social Security and the deficit.

So you copied a snippet of a letter to the editor at FactCheck that kinda sorta agreed with your viewpoint.

So...

1. When you say that you "stand by your statement", does that mean that you no longer stand by your statement that FactCheck is the only place to go for the truth?

2. Where do I find your retraction of that statement?

3. Has the above statement been replaced with "FactCheck is the only place to go for the truth if it proves that republicans are liars but if it disagrees with me I am allowed to resort to letters sent to FactCheck to prove the validity of my claim"?

4. A little while ago you called Sarah Palin a dumb liar because a third rate blogger told you that she had made conflicting statements about her dad and bowling. Despite the fact that you were shown how her statements were not, in fact, conflicting and that your third rate blogger got his facts wrong, you never retracted your claim. What are we to make of your conflicting claims about FactCheck and Social Security?

5. How do you reconcile the fact that you must now retract one of your claims?

6. What would you say about Sarah Palin if it were her facing the conundrum of #5?
Joe McDonald

User avatar
MCasper
Pinnacle
Pinnacle
Posts: 13955
Joined: Apr Thu 13, 2000 1:01 am
facebook ID: citrushills
Location: Hernando, FL USA
Contact:

Re: Republican leadership

Post by MCasper » Apr Sat 16, 2011 12:19 pm

The property tax bill on the typical Wisconsin home would rise by less than 1% annually over the next two years under Gov. Scott Walkers proposed budget, the Legislatures nonpartisan budget office reported Friday.

The Legislative Fiscal Bureau also said Walkers plan would put the states finances in the best shape theyve been in for more than 15 years.

It found the so-called structural deficit “ the imbalance between spending and tax revenue as laid out in state law “ for the 2013-15 budget would be $31 million. That assumes Walkers budget passes the Legislature without new spending increases or tax cuts that would add to the deficit.

Under its existing form, Walkers budget leaves the state with a fraction of the structural deficits seen in the past eight budget cycles. The next lowest structural deficit in recent years was $1.5 billion, or 48 times as much as what Walkers proposing.

http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolit ... 28064.html
While the unions try to burn down the house ... Walker is busy shoring it up for the future ... That's Republican Leadership.
Image

Post Reply