• 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!

SOTU Address:[W: 378; 1310; 1451]

"The insta-returns are in and the president knocked the State of the Union out of

the ballpark.”


" A CBS poll directly following the speech showed 91 percent of viewers approved of the proposals Obama made, while 9 percent disapproved. “No great surprises here,” Schlesinger writes. “The speech was well-delivered and seemed to be constructed not to pick partisan fights.”

Was President Obama

Well delivered ? It was absolute nonsense. Blame and irrelevent topics.

Gun control ? Climate change ?

Its clear by the poll that 91% of the people they polled were full blown morons.

With chronic joblessness, 8,500,000 people missing from the work force, massive structural debt put in place by Obama, not Bush, massive Central Bank Injections, massive defecit spending, record rises in dependence, food stamps, disabillity claims, a shrinking economy with increased spending, a ObamaCare law weighing down the private sector, he chose to talk about gun control.

I hope he gets 9 bucks an hour implemented because he knows what the end result of that stupid policy will be.

More dependence, more democrats but a hastened collapse.
 
Re: SOTU Address:

Cuts in the deficit are irrelevant when govt. spending increases which it has every year under Obama.

Oh good lord that is ****ing hilarious. Cutting the deficit is irrelevant!
 
Re: SOTU Address:

Bush 43? He turned a $200 billion surplus into a $400 billion deficit by the end of his first term, and a $1.2 trillion deficit by the end of his second term. Do the math.

By B. Furnas on Feb 20, 2009 at 3:49 pm. Yesterday, the New York Times reported that President Obama, in the budget he’s releasing next week, will not use “four accounting gimmicks that President George W. Bush used to make deficit projections look smaller.”

The changes: account for the Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan (“overseas military contingencies”) in the budget rather than through the use of “emergency” supplemental spending bills, assume the Alternative Minimum Tax will be indexed for inflation, account for the full costs of Medicare reimbursements, and anticipate the inevitable expenditures for natural disaster relief. These changes would make the debt over ten years look $2.7 trillion larger than the distorted Bush baseline, but that debt was always there. It was just being hidden. President Bush’s budgets hid billions with elaborate budget gimmicks. They took war-spending off the books, tried to eliminate the costs of wildly expensive tax cuts for the wealthy, and claimed savings through unrealistic, unspecified future cuts in vital discretionary spending.

I remember vividly when it was announced that Bush would remove the wars from the budget. I also remember as vividly that Obama would put them back on the books. And yes...it was hidden for eight years because so many people didn't even bother to ask questions. We went to war on lies and nobody asked questions. Why would you think that this was so hard to do?

Wow, what is it about liberalism that creates this kind of loyalty. You obviously have no concept of projected versus actual and need to stop drinking the kool-aid. You simply aren't getting the education the public is paying for through taxes. There was no surplus during the Clinton years, every year since Obama has been in office there has been a trillion dollar deficit and apparently the Bush deficits gave Obama the authority to put Bush spending on steroids. On budget and off budget items are still part of the yearly deficit, something a liberal refuses to admit.

By the way, the fiscal year of the United States runs from October to September meaning that Bush had control of the WH from October 1, 2008 to January 20, 2009 and Bush didn't spend all the 700 billion TARP money, didn't create a 840 billion dollar stimulus, program, bailout out GM/Chrysler, or create the Afghanistan surge. You simply are very misinformed

Government - Debt to the Penny (Daily History Search Application)
 
Oh good lord that is ****ing hilarious. Cutting the deficit is irrelevant![/
QUOTE]

It was one of Clintons big "victories".
( Thanks to a Republican House )

I mean I hear Libs bring it up at least once a day. Now its irrelevent ?
 
It was one of Clintons big "victories".
( Thanks to a Republican House )

I mean I hear Libs bring it up at least once a day. Now its irrelevent ?

Can I get you to put that in english for me please. As is I have no idea what exactly you are trying to say.
 
Re: SOTU Address:

Oh good lord that is ****ing hilarious. Cutting the deficit is irrelevant!

Let me know when the deficit gets under a trillion dollars and when the debt service isn't the fourth largest budget item? What is f***ing hilarious is how so many continue to buy the liberal rhetoric in light of the liberal failures and poor economic results.
 
Re: SOTU Address:

Wow, what is it about liberalism that creates this kind of loyalty. You obviously have no concept of projected versus actual and need to stop drinking the kool-aid. You simply aren't getting the education the public is paying for through taxes. There was no surplus during the Clinton years, every year since Obama has been in office there has been a trillion dollar deficit and apparently the Bush deficits gave Obama the authority to put Bush spending on steroids. On budget and off budget items are still part of the yearly deficit, something a liberal refuses to admit.

By the way, the fiscal year of the United States runs from October to September meaning that Bush had control of the WH from October 1, 2008 to January 20, 2009 and Bush didn't spend all the 700 billion TARP money, didn't create a 840 billion dollar stimulus, program, bailout out GM/Chrysler, or create the Afghanistan surge. You simply are very misinformed

Government - Debt to the Penny (Daily History Search Application)


Don't know if you just miswrote or what but DEBT is not the same as DEFICIT

FROM that well-known 'librul' source, National Review
Admirers of the GM bailout should bear in mind that it was the Bush administration that first decided to intervene at the firm
 
Re: SOTU Address:

Let me know when the deficit gets under a trillion dollars and when the debt service isn't the fourth largest budget item? What is f***ing hilarious is how so many continue to buy the liberal rhetoric in light of the liberal failures and poor economic results.

So now cutting the deficit is relevant. Could you make up your mind please?
 
Why would you oppose a $9 minimum wage? Do you want to keep people living in poverty? Most jobs pay more then the minimum amyway. This takes people barely over the poverty line.

Because as you so accurately stated 'Most jobs pay more then the minimum amyway'. Why bother? Further, this will have no effect on moving folks 'over the poverty line'...as income moves (up or down) so does the poverty line and these entry level earners are what creates this line.
 
Can I get you to put that in english for me
please. As is I have no idea what
exactly you are trying to say.

Clinton supposedly balanced the budget right ? In order to balance the budget the "irelevent " defecit would have to be lowered right ?

Maybe you can explain why reducing the Deficit is irrelevent
 
Clinton supposedly balanced the budget right ? In order to balance the budget the "irellevent " defecit would have to be lowered right ?

Clinton and congress got close to a balanced budget, though they never actually completely balanced it. A deficit indicates that the budget is not balanced.

Maybe you can explain why reducing the Deficit is irrelevent

I never claimed it was. I was laughing at Conservative for saying it was irrelevant.
 
Re: SOTU Address:

Don't know if you just miswrote or what but DEBT is not the same as DEFICIT

FROM that well-known 'librul' source, National Review

Do taxpayers pay debt service on the debt or the deficit. To take credit for a lower deficit than the previous year when that deficit is still over a trillion dollarsand the debt up to 16.5 trillion dollars and still showed debt service increases is typical liberalism that appeals to the poorly informed.
 
Re: SOTU Address:

So now cutting the deficit is relevant. Could you make up your mind please?

What economic policies did Obama implement that lowered the deficit? The Iraq War ended due to the Status of Force Agreement negotiated during the Bush Administration? The tax increases on those evil rich people hadn't even been implemented. Liberals like you always want to take victory laps over a reduction in the deficit but increase in the debt showing how little you know about the budget or economic policies.
 
Re: SOTU Address:

What economic policies did Obama implement that lowered the deficit? The Iraq War ended due to the Status of Force Agreement negotiated during the Bush Administration? The tax increases on those evil rich people hadn't even been implemented. Liberals like you always want to take victory laps over a reduction in the deficit but increase in the debt showing how little you know about the budget or economic policies.

Did I say Obama lowered the deficit? No. I laughed at you for saying the deficit was irrelevant. Don't put words in my mouth.
 
Re: SOTU Address:

Did I say Obama lowered the deficit? No. I laughed at you for saying the deficit was irrelevant. Don't put words in my mouth.

When the deficit is over a trillion dollars and the debt service goes up, the deficit reduction is irrelevant, very small and has nothing to do with anything Obama did.
 
Because I know many of those people. I've had people come into where I work during an interview where I gave them a tour and when they asked about the pay they were immediately turned off never to be heard from again. I know people who made more on unemployment than a minimum wage job would pay. Now I know you think, well thats reckless government spending. What I think is that it's deplorable that real jobs pay so little.

If the market established wages, many people would be working for even less than what minimum wage is now. You can't live off of current wages yet you think people should make even less? That's just sickening. Truly truly sickening.

I am still waiting for you to define those who are making minimum wage including how many, who they are, and how long they make minimum wage. Then after taking your foot out of your mouth tell us how increasing the minimum wage to $9 an hour puts people above the poverty level?
 
Re: SOTU Address:

When the deficit is over a trillion dollars and the debt service goes up, the deficit reduction is irrelevant, very small and has nothing to do with anything Obama did.

The goal of 4 trillion over 10 years, which is 400 billion a year on average, would make a significant cut. Even the >2 trillion we are at would make a difference. Sorry, but cutting the deficit is not irrelevant.
 
I am still waiting for you to define those who are making minimum wage including how many, who they are, and how long they make minimum wage. Then after taking your foot out of your mouth tell us how increasing the minimum wage to $9 an hour puts people above the poverty level?
who said a $9 minimum wage would take those earners out of poverty
you are attempting to conflate the minimum wage with a living wage ... other than being defined in monetary terms, they are quite different
 
I am still waiting for you to define those who are making minimum wage including how many, who they are, and how long they make minimum wage. Then after taking your foot out of your mouth tell us how increasing the minimum wage to $9 an hour puts people above the poverty level?

This is simply an attempt by the left to mandate that users of low wage labor pay a "tax penalty" for not paying a "living wage".
 
More sickening comments from conservatives. EVERYONE that works full time hours should have a basic living wage. It's called being human and having empathy.

I can't believe how little people here care about others. It's all everyone for themselves. So disgusting. It makes me literally sick to my stomach that people actually think this way.
Give us a break with the pontification. Define basic living wage. We already feed the hungry, clothe the naked, and house the homeless. I'm not about to guarantee success for every working human. I can't. You can't. Nobody can. Not every human effort is rewarded. Go yell at the heavens about it.
 
Re: SOTU Address:

The goal of 4 trillion over 10 years, which is 400 billion a year on average, would make a significant cut. Even the >2 trillion we are at would make a difference. Sorry, but cutting the deficit is not irrelevant.

Then you shouldn't have any problem showing where that 400 billion a year is going to come from by listing the actual cuts? Has Obama proposed any actual spending cuts or are we still going to increase spending hopefully to be paid for by tax increases? You don't think tax increases impact human behavior thus spending? How does cuts in spending affect govt. revenue? Name for me one economic prediction Obama has made that has been accurate? He keeps spewing the rhetoric and supporters continue to buy that rhetoric
 
Maybe it's just that you aren't smart enough to understand anything. The latest election results actually bear that out. You're completely out of step. You're trying to move backward when the rest of us are moving forward. I'm sure the term "liberish" was coined by a conservatoid, so we shouldn't tax our brain with a "catchy phrase" now should we?
Nope. And no, I certainly wouldn't want you to tax your brain. Why start something like that now?
 
who said a $9 minimum wage would take those earners out of poverty
you are attempting to conflate the minimum wage with a living wage ... other than being defined in monetary terms, they are quite different

Answer the question that has been posed, how many workers are making minimum wage, who are they, how long do they make minimum wage? When will liberals get out of the way and let private industry work? Liberals like you ought to start your own businesses and pay that "liveable wage" you are calling for.
 
Answer the question that has been posed, how many workers are making minimum wage, who are they, how long do they make minimum wage? When will liberals get out of the way and let private industry work? Liberals like you ought to start your own businesses and pay that "liveable wage" you are calling for.

i have. many, actually
and i do. it's good business to hire the smartest employees you can afford
 
Re: SOTU Address:

Then you shouldn't have any problem showing where that 400 billion a year is going to come from by listing the actual cuts? Has Obama proposed any actual spending cuts or are we still going to increase spending hopefully to be paid for by tax increases? You don't think tax increases impact human behavior thus spending? How does cuts in spending affect govt. revenue? Name for me one economic prediction Obama has made that has been accurate? He keeps spewing the rhetoric and supporters continue to buy that rhetoric

Can you not do your homework? Report: Our Debt Problems Are Far From Solved | Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget
 
Back
Top Bottom