• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Poll: Voters Viewing Occupy Wall St. Unfavorably

AdamT said:
Yes, I'm pointing out the ridiculous irony of you steadfastly refusing to admit that Obama inherited an absolute hellish economy from Bush while you argue that Bush inherited a recession from Clinton. Amazing hypocrisy.

For my part, I never denied that Bush inherited a recession from Clinton. That's obvious, just as it's obvious that Obama inherited one from Bush. Of course the one Obama inherited was magnitudes worse, and Obama had far fewer tools at his disposal because Bush had already cut taxes and doubled the national debt.
Click to expand...

What is amazing is that here we are three years after Obama took office and yet you ignore the results generated still blaming Bush. Obama inherited something that he helped create and the results today after adding 4.5 trillion dollars to the National Debt the unemployment is higher than when he took office, the employment is lower, the labor force is lower, and the misery index higher than when he took office. That is reality and you need to live with it.
 
Conservative said:
What is amazing is that here we are three years after Obama took office and yet you ignore the results generated still blaming Bush. Obama inherited something that he helped create and the results today after adding 4.5 trillion dollars to the National Debt the unemployment is higher than when he took office, the employment is lower, the labor force is lower, and the misery index higher than when he took office. That is reality and you need to live with it.
Click to expand...

I'm not blaming Bush. I'm simply noting the context in which Obama's performance must be judged. Without context the numbers are meaningless.
 
AdamT said:
I'm not blaming Bush. I'm simply noting the context in which Obama's performance must be judged. Without context the numbers are meaningless.
Click to expand...

Context has limitations, and three years is plenty of time for the "smartest man ever to hold the office" with total control of the Congress to make a difference but the problem is the difference is negative.
 
it freakin amazes me how scared all the Conservatives are that their perfect American empire might be challenged by these people. Fine, continue to turn a blind eye to the problems we face, just keep attacking one man, Obama, who is only really a small part of a larger problem. The only large movement that is going in the right direction is the Occupy Movement, and yeah its not perfect, but I'll continue to support its goals.
 
Conservative said:
Context has limitations, and three years is plenty of time for the "smartest man ever to hold the office" with total control of the Congress to make a difference but the problem is the difference is negative.
Click to expand...

Don't want to burst any bubbles here but I'm PRETTY sure that Obama didn't have control of congress (that included the house and senate) for 3 years. Even for the small time democrats controlled the house, Obama didn't have any kind of TOTAL CONTROL as you seem to think.
 
Conservative said:
Context has limitations, and three years is plenty of time for the "smartest man ever to hold the office" with total control of the Congress to make a difference but the problem is the difference is negative.
Click to expand...

Did you just make up that quote?

He also had control for two years and it's obvious by how many filibusters were used that it wasn't "total" control.
 
FFDP666 said:
it freakin amazes me how scared all the Conservatives are that their perfect American empire might be challenged by these people. Fine, continue to turn a blind eye to the problems we face, just keep attacking one man, Obama, who is only really a small part of a larger problem. The only large movement that is going in the right direction is the Occupy Movement, and yeah its not perfect, but I'll continue to support its goals.
Click to expand...

What is fricken amazing is that anyone would support the OWS protests that did nothing but cost the taxpayers millions, led to rapes, civil unrest, drug dealing, and hundreds of arrests. its goals violate the very principles upon which this country was built. Redistribution of wealth and class warfare serve no one.
 
iliveonramen said:
Did you just make up that quote?

He also had control for two years and it's obvious by how many filibusters were used that it wasn't "total" control.
Click to expand...

What economic policy was filibustered in 2009-2010? name for me the economic policy that obama wanted but didn't get his first two years in office and then explain to me why Harry Reid is holding up 15 GOP job bills and the budget which would create jobs. Keep buying the Obama rhetoric
 
Conservative said:
What economic policy was filibustered in 2009-2010? name for me the economic policy that obama wanted but didn't get his first two years in office and then explain to me why Harry Reid is holding up 15 GOP job bills and the budget which would create jobs. Keep buying the Obama rhetoric
Click to expand...

The filibuster had an impact on every bill passed during those two years. If your goal is to pass legislation...then you put forth a bill that you know can beat a filibuster. Every bill passed had to pass a "super majority" because of Republican threats of filibuster.

Rhetoric is the GOP house passing bills they know will never see the night of day instead of working with Dems and passing things they know will get enough support to pass.
 
iliveonramen said:
The filibuster had an impact on every bill passed during those two years. If your goal is to pass legislation...then you put forth a bill that you know can beat a filibuster. Every bill passed had to pass a "super majority" because of Republican threats of filibuster.

Rhetoric is the GOP house passing bills they know will never see the night of day instead of working with Dems and passing things they know will get enough support to pass.
Click to expand...

The GOP didn't have enough votes in the House to make a difference in 2009-2010 but it appears you want to ignore those two years so i am still waiting on the legislation that Obama wanted that was filibustered in the Senate his first two years in office?
 
Conservative said:
What economic policy was filibustered in 2009-2010? name for me the economic policy that obama wanted but didn't get his first two years in office and then explain to me why Harry Reid is holding up 15 GOP job bills and the budget which would create jobs. Keep buying the Obama rhetoric
Click to expand...

You've got to be joking. Republicans have blasted the record for filibusters to smithereens. Just as one example, the repeatedly filibustered the Dodd-Frank financial reform bill. Then, when they could no longer sustain a filibuster, they indicated that they would filibuster Obama's preferred candidate to run the Consumer Protection Bureau. Now that she's dropped out they're filibustering Obama's new nominee despite the fact that he's supported by a majority of Republican state attorneys general and is generally regarded as highly qualified. In fact Republicans have constantly filibustered Obama's nominees, to the point where it's affected agency performance, and even that wasn't enough. Then they tried the unprecedented maneuver of pretending to never go out of session to prevent Obama from making recess appointments. This is, without question, the most obstructive minority in modern history.
 
AdamT said:
You've got to be joking. Republicans have blasted the record for filibusters to smithereens. Just as one example, the repeatedly filibustered the Dodd-Frank financial reform bill. Then, when they could no longer sustain a filibuster, they indicated that they would filibuster Obama's preferred candidate to run the Consumer Protection Bureau. Now that she's dropped out they're filibustering Obama's new nominee despite the fact that he's supported by a majority of Republican state attorneys general and is generally regarded as highly qualified. In fact Republicans have constantly filibustered Obama's nominees, to the point where it's affected agency performance, and even that wasn't enough. Then they tried the unprecedented maneuver of pretending to never go out of session to prevent Obama from making recess appointments. This is, without question, the most obstructive minority in modern history.
Click to expand...

What exactly does any of that have to do with the economic problems this country faces? Did any of those create the 4.5 trillion dollar debt, net job losses, declining labor force, and increase in misery index?
 
Conservative said:
What is fricken amazing is that anyone would support the OWS protests that did nothing but cost the taxpayers millions, led to rapes, civil unrest, drug dealing, and hundreds of arrests. its goals violate the very principles upon which this country was built. Redistribution of wealth and class warfare serve no one.
Click to expand...

The only reason it costs taxpayers millions of dollars is because of the idiots in charge that attacked the Occupy Movement like they were invaders from another nation. Led to rapes? When a large amount of people gather for an extended period of time in an inner city area, yeah the chance for rape is increased dramatically, but the only problem for your disgusting attack on these people, is the rapists had nothing to do with the movement. Civil Unrest in case you are unaware is part of Civil Disobedience, and those people were arrested but it in no way shames the movement at ALL, in fact it shows that they are courageous and brave people who are willing to be arrested and draw attention to such an important issue(s). All that crap you listed involves such as small minority of the people involved, AND I DIDN'T REALIZE THE PRINCIPALS THAT THIS COUNTRY WAS FOUNDED UPON WAS SO THAT GIANT PROFIT MAKING MACHINES COULD DESTROY POLITICAL SYSTEM WITH MILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN LOBBYING AND POLITICAL INFLUENCE, AND FRAUDULENT INVESTMENT BANKING PRACTICES THAT COLLAPSE OUR ENTIRE ECONOMY?
 
Conservative said:
What exactly does any of that have to do with the economic problems this country faces? Did any of those create the 4.5 trillion dollar debt, net job losses, declining labor force, and increase in misery index?
Click to expand...

It has a whole lot to do with it, insofar as Republicans have done everything possible to prevent Obama from taking measures to address the crisis. If Democrats had acted this way there never would have been Reagan or Bush tax cuts and we would be worrying about depleting the national surplus instead of worrying about adding to the insane debt.
 
FFDP666 said:
The only reason it costs taxpayers millions of dollars is because of the idiots in charge that attacked the Occupy Movement like they were invaders from another nation. Led to rapes? When a large amount of people gather for an extended period of time in an inner city area, yeah the chance for rape is increased dramatically, but the only problem for your disgusting attack on these people, is the rapists had nothing to do with the movement. Civil Unrest in case you are unaware is part of Civil Disobedience, and those people were arrested but it in no way shames the movement at ALL, in fact it shows that they are courageous and brave people who are willing to be arrested and draw attention to such an important issue(s). All that crap you listed involves such as small minority of the people involved, AND I DIDN'T REALIZE THE PRINCIPALS THAT THIS COUNTRY WAS FOUNDED UPON WAS SO THAT GIANT PROFIT MAKING MACHINES COULD DESTROY POLITICAL SYSTEM WITH MILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN LOBBYING AND POLITICAL INFLUENCE, AND FRAUDULENT INVESTMENT BANKING PRACTICES THAT COLLAPSE OUR ENTIRE ECONOMY?
Click to expand...

Aw, i can see how successful you are going to be when you get out of school. Doesn't appear to me that you understand a thing about OWS or the right way to go about changing the direction of this country and that would be through the Representative Democracy we have. What purpose does it serve protesting Wall Street when the laws are made in D.C. and Democrats have controlled Congress from 2007-2011?
 
AdamT said:
It has a whole lot to do with it, insofar as Republicans have done everything possible to prevent Obama from taking measures to address the crisis. If Democrats had acted this way there never would have been Reagan or Bush tax cuts and we would be worrying about depleting the national surplus instead of worrying about adding to the insane debt.
Click to expand...

like what? Still waiting?

Regarding tax cuts, you seem to really have a problem keeping more of what you earn? Apparently in your world have a Govt with a surplus is a good thing. Doesn't appear that you understand the role of the Govt. which isn't to create the nanny state you seem to want.
 
And this class warfare nonsense, the class war was started by those in the top percent, not us, they were the ones who bought our politicians and lobbied to get an easier tax code for themselves, get rid themselves of pesky laws and regulations in the financial market, when the free trade crap was passed and they could send more jobs overseas and hide more money in offshore banks, yeah there is a class war going on.
 
Conservative said:
The GOP didn't have enough votes in the House to make a difference in 2009-2010 but it appears you want to ignore those two years so i am still waiting on the legislation that Obama wanted that was filibustered in the Senate his first two years in office?
Click to expand...

Ummm....why exactly are we talking about the House? I never mentioned the House as an issue. It has to go through the Senate which is where the filibusters were threatened.

He didn't attempt to pass legislation that he knew would be filibustered. He modified it to gain support from Moderate Republicans. He did not have "total control". Do I really need to list all the articles where Republicans threatened a filibuster on legislation from Frank-Dodd to the Stimulus?
 
Conservative said:
Context has limitations, and three years is plenty of time for the "smartest man ever to hold the office" with total control of the Congress to make a difference but the problem is the difference is negative.
Click to expand...

1st, presidents don't have control. Congress has more, but still limited and not able to fix the problems we ahve. Government is not the answer, especially limited government. If you want to hold government responsible, you have to give government control. I don't advise that. You seem to be arguing for government control, and I don't think you realize it.

Second, it's not a bad thing to be smart. So, criticising Obama for being smart is kind of silly. That said, being smart doesn't mean you do things outside your ability or what is allowed by law.

Just saying.. . . :coffeepap
 
Conservative said:
Aw, i can see how successful you are going to be when you get out of school. Doesn't appear to me that you understand a thing about OWS or the right way to go about changing the direction of this country and that would be through the Representative Democracy we have. What purpose does it serve protesting Wall Street when the laws are made in D.C. and Democrats have controlled Congress from 2007-2011?
Click to expand...

Wow, look at you, the big "grown up" telling me what i should think because you know better? Look at you making a personal attack at me, about how I'll do after I'm "out of school"...Yeah Liberals and all they can do is personlly attack people because those Liberallls have no facts to back up what they say. And In case you have not noticed there is an Occupy DC movement as well, but its a two part issue, a circle of corruption, the politicians are paid off by the people in Wall street, the people in wall street are the ones who make the decisions with other peoples money that collapsed our economy, while DC let them do it.
 
FFDP666 said:
And this class warfare nonsense, the class war was started by those in the top percent, not us, they were the ones who bought our politicians and lobbied to get an easier tax code for themselves, get rid themselves of pesky laws and regulations in the financial market, when the free trade crap was passed and they could send more jobs overseas and hide more money in offshore banks, yeah there is a class war going on.
Click to expand...

you are going to be battling for a long time because it does appear that you will never achieve that top 1% even though you have a chance in this country to do that.
 
iliveonramen said:
Ummm....why exactly are we talking about the House? I never mentioned the House as an issue. It has to go through the Senate which is where the filibusters were threatened.

He didn't attempt to pass legislation that he knew would be filibustered. He modified it to gain support from Moderate Republicans. He did not have "total control". Do I really need to list all the articles where Republicans threatened a filibuster on legislation from Frank-Dodd to the Stimulus?
Click to expand...

Someone needs to explain to Conservative that there are no filibusters in the House. :lol:

For the complete list of filibusters in the 111th Congress, including scores of economic measures:

U.S. Senate: Reference Home > 111th
 
iliveonramen said:
Ummm....why exactly are we talking about the House? I never mentioned the House as an issue. It has to go through the Senate which is where the filibusters were threatened.

He didn't attempt to pass legislation that he knew would be filibustered. He modified it to gain support from Moderate Republicans. He did not have "total control". Do I really need to list all the articles where Republicans threatened a filibuster on legislation from Frank-Dodd to the Stimulus?
Click to expand...

So then the answer is nothing, there is no legislation that has been proposed by Obama that would have benefited the economy that the Republicans filibustered. Typical liberal talking points.
 
Conservative said:
Aw, i can see how successful you are going to be when you get out of school. Doesn't appear to me that you understand a thing about OWS or the right way to go about changing the direction of this country and that would be through the Representative Democracy we have. What purpose does it serve protesting Wall Street when the laws are made in D.C. and Democrats have controlled Congress from 2007-2011?
Click to expand...

What are the things that Occupy Wall Street is about? Regulating the financial market, raising taxes on the rich TO PREVIOUS LEVELS, getting the special interest money out of politics, these are things most Americans agree on, OWS has brought a lot of attention to it but at the same time, people are getting sick of OWS because its dragged on for so long and their getting sick of it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom