• 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!

White House fires back at Rush Limbaugh

As do I. I fervently hope these things do not pass. Like I said, in that sense I hope they fail. I hope most of these plans never see the light of day.

But if they do, I hope the hell I'm wrong about them, because if I'm right, everything will be in the ****ter.
I have bad news:
You will be right. So will I.

Doom: It's not just a firey mountian in Mordor.
 
Indeed -- and if the 1994 AWB had no efect, what argument IS there for another ban?

Supportable argument, I mean.

I'm not really sure why this issue keeps coming back, myself. One only needs to look at Chicago to see that gun bans simply do not work. If they worked, Chicago would not be murder capital of the country.
 
But I can always hope I'm wrong, right?
Yes you can.

But, if I'm going to hope like that, I'm going to hope for the Ice Cream fairy to wisk me away to the land of Moose Tracks.
 
So you want America to fail, great.

I would turn this specious argument around and suggest that the Obama Administration wants America to fail. Why you ask; (1) the negative rhetoric of how bad things are in order to promote a major aggressive Government takeover of major segments of the Nations economy; (2) there passing of trillions of dollars without any debate about how to pay for it; (3) the false rhetoric that Government spending the nation in deep debt that will take decades to pay down is somehow a "stimulus" to the economy; (4) passing Carbon tax based credits which will serve to destroy industry in this country based on arbitrary Government standards.

I keep here Liberals and Democrats argue "but what if it succeeds?" Unfortunately, the historic record suggests that Governments that spend vast amounts of money they don't have turns their nation’s economies into third world like failures.

The question should be; "what do we do if it fails?" The risk far exceeds any analysis of success and this kind of reckless spending will more likely lead to failure. So what do we do after we spent $180 billion on AIG, $100 billion on GM and Chrysler, trillions on Government make work projects and when it is all done, these companies still file Chapter 7? What do we do when we print money to pay for the largess and inflation rages out of control? What do we do when we chase capital from our shores with this misguided populism?

What do we do when the stock market hits 5,000 and shows no signs of turning around? What do we do with a $2.5 trillion deficit and $15 trillion debt? The interest alone on our debt will be about $650 to one trillion dollars.

This reckless effort to spend this nation into a hole so deep that if we taxed every person 100% who makes more than $75,000 per year it would not pay for the amount of spending in these bills is almost criminal.
 
Irrelevant to the idea that Obama failing means America fails.

Look. If Bush's privatization of Social Security failed, which it did, then the worse case scenario was that Social Security would continue to be a public sector program.

In contrast, if Obama's stimulus and upcoming bank bailout fails, then as a country we risk sliding into a depression. So hoping that Obama fails when we are in a crisis like we are in, is essentially hoping America fails. So for your own well being, you had better hope that his economic agenda works.
 
Look. If Bush's privatization of Social Security failed, which it did, then the worse case scenario was that Social Security would continue to be a public sector program.

In contrast, if Obama's stimulus and upcoming bank bailout fails, then as a country we risk sliding into a depression. So hoping that Obama fails when we are in a crisis like we are in, is essentially hoping America fails. So for your own well being, you had better hope that his economic agenda works.





I think his pork plan is guaranteeing us a depression...


Nah, we will be out of this in 2010 despite obama's porkzilla plans
 
Logical fallacy:
Appeal to Popularity

We are debating the subjective here. Popularity and public approval are certainly valid arguments when one is debating who better represents Americans as a whole. Obama right now represents the mainstream and Limbaugh the extreme right.
 
Look. If Bush's privatization of Social Security failed, which it did, then the worse case scenario was that Social Security would continue to be a public sector program.

In contrast, if Obama's stimulus and upcoming bank bailout fails, then as a country we risk sliding into a depression. So hoping that Obama fails when we are in a crisis like we are in, is essentially hoping America fails. So for your own well being, you had better hope that his economic agenda works.

I'm sure somewhere in the recesses of your addled mind you have justified this massive spending as neccessary to stop Armaggedon. However, I am still free of such folly and recognize Porkulus for what it is: an over reaching shift toward socialism which has ALWAYS failed.
 
In contrast, if Obama's stimulus and upcoming bank bailout fails, then as a country we risk sliding into a depression. So hoping that Obama fails when we are in a crisis like we are in, is essentially hoping America fails.
This has been addressed in prior posts. You're wrong.
 
Odd. I haven't see anything subjective argued.

Someone made the statement that Obama does not "represent" America. That is a subjective statement. I merely pointed out that he far more represents America than Limbaugh.
 
I'm sure somewhere in the recesses of your addled mind you have justified this massive spending as neccessary to stop Armaggedon. However, I am still free of such folly and recognize Porkulus for what it is: an over reaching shift toward socialism which has ALWAYS failed.

I don't agree with all the spending in the Stimulus program. However, I am not stupid. I would rather be wrong than be destitute.
 
Someone made the statement that Obama does not "represent" America.

Wrong again. I did not say "Obama does not represent America" because clearly he does represent us as a servant to the people who elected him.

I said "Obama is not America" and that Obama failing does not translate to America failing.
 
Back
Top Bottom