Obama announces his Candidacy for 2012.

Sheik Yerbuti · Apr 6, 2011

Conservative said:
Are you sending your Bush tax cuts back after receiving your paycheck each month? Whether or not Bush was a failure will be up to historians to determine and serve no purpose now. What is on the table are the Obama results and if that is a success in your book, you have a serious problem understanding the definition of success. Losing jobs and raising the debt isn't a success.

Well Obama set out to create or save at least 3 million jobs by the end of last year. According to the numbers you posted, He surpassed that expectation by 500,000.

Success.

Conservative · Apr 6, 2011

Sheik Yerbuti said:
Here are the numbers I posted:

Jan 2001: 301,000
Mar 2003: 474,000
Jan 2009: 734,000
Mar 2011: 921,000

My numbers are the same as yours, where do you think I got them from?

Why do you think I need to defend Obama's record to someone who voted for Bush, whose record was worse than Obama's?

That is your opinion, Bush's strong economic growth, net job growth, and the tax cuts that helped the individual at this point in first term is better than Obama's. Obama's economic growth is less, his job creation is less, his unemployment remains higher than when he took office, he has a net job loss, more people have dropped out of the labor market, and the debt is up 4 trillion dollars. Case closed

Conservative · Apr 6, 2011

Sheik Yerbuti said:
Well Obama set out to create or save at least 3 million jobs by the end of last year. According to the numbers you posted, He surpassed that expectation by 500,000.

Success.

Saving Jobs is a term made up by Obama. No one believes that and it cannot be proven. the real numbers are jobs created and jobs lost, on both Obama is a failure.

Conservative · Apr 6, 2011

Sheik Yerbuti said:
Well Obama set out to create or save at least 3 million jobs by the end of last year. According to the numbers you posted, He surpassed that expectation by 500,000.

Success.

Are you sending your Bush tax cut back every time you receive a paycheck?

Sheik Yerbuti · Apr 6, 2011

Conservative said:
Losing jobs and raising the debt isn't a success.

Again, so what? Why do you suddenly care about that?

After 26 months in office, Reagan lost jobs and raised the debt. Yet in 1984, you voted to give him 4 more years.

After 26 months in office, GHW Bush lost jobs and raised the debt. Yet in 1992, you voted to give him 4 more years.

After 26 months in office, Bush lost jobs and raised the debt. Yet in 2004, you voted to give him 4 more years.

Now you suddenly care about performance. :roll:

Sheik Yerbuti · Apr 6, 2011

Conservative said:
Are you sending your Bush tax cut back every time you receive a paycheck?

No, why would I? Though I was in favor of letting the tax cuts expire, which would have raised my taxes.

Sheik Yerbuti · Apr 6, 2011

Conservative said:
Saving Jobs is a term made up by Obama. No one believes that and it cannot be proven. the real numbers are jobs created and jobs lost, on both Obama is a failure.

I have no doubt the people who still have a job who otherwise would have lost it are happy to still be working.

Conservative · Apr 6, 2011

Sheik Yerbuti said:
Again, so what? Why do you suddenly care about that?

After 26 months in office, Reagan lost jobs and raised the debt. Yet in 1984, you voted to give him 4 more years.

After 26 months in office, GHW Bush lost jobs and raised the debt. Yet in 1992, you voted to give him 4 more years.

After 26 months in office, Bush lost jobs and raised the debt. Yet in 2004, you voted to give him 4 more years.

Now you suddenly care about performance. :roll:

Probably because Reagan and Bush policies helped the average American with tax cuts that they are still getting today and neither added 4 trillion to the debt in two years.

Conservative · Apr 6, 2011

Sheik Yerbuti said:
I have no doubt the people who still have a job who otherwise would have lost it are happy to still be working.

You think it is Federal taxpayer responsibility, yours, to pay teachers in California, Illinois, or any other state than yours? If so what are property taxes and other state taxes for? Whose jobs did Obama save?

The Prof · Apr 6, 2011

Sheik Yerbuti said:
Why do you think I need to defend Obama's record to someone who voted for Bush

LOL!

you better hope obama has a larger perspective

carry on

Sheik Yerbuti · Apr 6, 2011

Conservative said:
Probably because Reagan and Bush policies helped the average American with tax cuts that they are still getting today ...

We're talking about the unemployed here ... income tax cuts don't help them.

Conservative said:
... and neither added 4 trillion to the debt in two years.

Percentagewise, Reagan almost did. I know you hate percentages because they expose your hypocrisy, but comparing the dollar amount in 2011 dollars with the dollar amount in 1983 dollars means absolutely nothing.

Objective Voice · Apr 6, 2011

Conservative said:
Are you sending your Bush tax cut back every time you receive a paycheck?

Sheik Yerbuti said:
No, why would I? Though I was in favor of letting the tax cuts expire, which would have raised my taxes.

Besides all that, aren't Conservatives the ones who continue to lament, "tax cuts allow wage earners to keep more of what they earn?" Why should I give back "MY" money?

Ah! But wait!! The counter argument has become, "Well, if you're not for tax cuts you should give the money back." Tell you what, I'll give back my portion of the tax cut I received when large corporations like GE pay theirs. (And before I get derailed, let me once again go on record and say I have no problem with any individual or any company making loads of money, none whatsoever. But whenever a major corporation in America finds a way NOT to pay ANY federal taxes - ZERO (0), there's something fundamentally wrong with our tax codes!)

Conservative · Apr 6, 2011

Sheik Yerbuti said:
We're talking about the unemployed here ... income tax cuts don't help them.

Percentagewise, Reagan almost did. I know you hate percentages because they expose your hypocrisy, but comparing the dollar amount in 2011 dollars with the dollar amount in 1983 dollars means absolutely nothing.

You asked why I voted for Bush the second term and I told you. you don't like the answer, growing economy, growing employment, and less debt than obama's. Guess you won't be voting for Obama by your own standards. Percentage change means nothing, let me know when the employment gets back to pre 2008 levels. One would think by adding all that debt Obama would have generated better numbers. If he can add 4 trillion in debt in two years imagine what he can do with 6 more.

Sheik Yerbuti · Apr 6, 2011

Conservative said:
You think it is Federal taxpayer responsibility, yours, to pay teachers in California, Illinois, or any other state than yours? If so what are property taxes and other state taxes for?

I think it's the responsibility of all Americans to do what they can to help all Americans. If that includes the federal government helping out states which need the help, than yes, I'm for that.

Conservative said:
Whose jobs did Obama save?

I dunno, I'm going with the figures you posted. You said every job saved or created cost us $228,000.

Conservative · Apr 6, 2011

Objective Voice said:
Besides all that, aren't Conservatives the ones who continue to lament, "tax cuts allow wage earners to keep more of what they earn?" Why should I give back "MY" money?

Ah! But wait!! The counter argument has become, "Well, if you're not for tax cuts you should give the money back." Tell you what, I'll give back my portion of the tax cut I received when large corporations like GE pay theirs. (And before I get derailed, let me once again go on record and say I have no problem with any individual or any company making loads of money, none whatsoever. But whenever a major corporation in America finds a way NOT to pay ANY federal taxes - ZERO (0), there's something fundamentally wrong with our tax codes!)

Why, because it is hypocrisy to keep your own money when you are against the guy who gave it to you. Maybe you ought to take GE's lack of taxes with the guy on the Presidents Job creation committee, Jeff Immelt

Conservative · Apr 6, 2011

Sheik Yerbuti said:
I think it's the responsibility of all Americans to do what they can to help all Americans. If that includes the federal government helping out states which need the help, than yes, I'm for that.

I dunno, I'm going with the figures you posted. You said every job saved or created cost us $228,000.

Still on that merry-go-round, Obama's claim is a lie? Where were those jobs saved?

Conservative · Apr 6, 2011

Sheik Yerbuti said:
I think it's the responsibility of all Americans to do what they can to help all Americans. If that includes the federal government helping out states which need the help, than yes, I'm for that.

I dunno, I'm going with the figures you posted. You said every job saved or created cost us $228,000.

How do you know the states couldn't have saved those jobs as they weren't forced to do that. Obama took credit for saving state jobs before giving the states the opportunity to do that. Why do you think it is my responsibility to pay for a teacher's job in California?

Sheik Yerbuti · Apr 6, 2011

Conservative said:
You asked why I voted for Bush the second term and I told you. you don't like the answer, growing economy, growing employment, and less debt than obama's.

WTF?? You voted for Bush in 2004 because he added less debt than Obama?? In 2004, how did you know how much debt Obama would add??

As far as the other factors, the economy is now growing as well. GDP in 2009 was -2.6%, in 2010 it was +2.9%. employment fell in 2009 by 3.7 million and grew by 812,000 in 2010.

Conservative said:
Guess you won't be voting for Obama by your own standards.

As I've said, I won't be deciding who to vote for until I know who all of the candidates are. But if I vote for Obama, I certainly hope you understand if I do so using your standards? Which is to vote for a candidate who raises unemployment and raises the debt and the deficit.

<queue up Glory, Glory, Hallelujah> ♪♫ And to boot, if Obama lets his guard down and 4 planes get hijacked inside America within an hour and are used by terrorsists as missiles, blowing up land marks and the Pentagon, killing 3,000 people in the process, then using your standard, he's definately getting my vote. And if he warns us that unless we invade a country with WMD, we might end up with a mushroom cloud over an American city; only that country doesn't really have WMD, then again, using your standard, I'm going to lobby for the repeal of the 22nd Amendment. ♫ ♪ <end music>

Sheik Yerbuti · Apr 6, 2011

Conservative said:
Still on that merry-go-round, Obama's claim is a lie? Where were those jobs saved?

Those are the numbers you posted. I'm sorry you don't like them.

Objective Voice · Apr 6, 2011

Conservative said:
Why, because it is hypocrisy to keep your own money when you are against the guy who gave it to you. Maybe you ought to take GE's lack of taxes with the guy on the Presidents Job creation committee, Jeff Immelt

On the contrary. I would think any hardworking, tax paying citizen who followed the law and received a tax refund should keep what is rightfully his. He'd be a fool to give it back because you can rest assured if the reverse happens - the individual owed the government - they'd be coming to collect faster than you could blink an eye!

Interestingly enough, the argument from your side concerning tax cuts for the wealthy runs along the same line. My problem with it is in the "inequality" in the tax code that allows the "haves" to hide their money. I've heard the arguments but it appears that Conservatives refuse to accept the fact that "trickle down economics" can never work as long as the wealthiest among us hoard their money onto themselves instead of re-investing it into businesses as the theory outlines. Thus, it is a proven fact that the more you earn, the more you spend. As such, wealthy individuals don't reinvest their "earnings" back into their business ventures in the large numbers some either would like them to or as "expected of them to do." They reinvest their "profits" which can be very different. It's the main reason why one can review a company's quarterly statements and see that their profits were down, yet the CEO just walked away with a heft severage package stuffed with millions in stock options. This is what gets the average Americans so upset with corporate America.

For me it's not jealousy or envy but rather an issue over ethics. But I suppose what's "right" for one person is "wrong" for the next.

The Prof · Apr 6, 2011

Objective Voice said:
I'll give back my portion of the tax cut I received when large corporations like GE pay theirs.

which makes obama's choice of immelt, expert tax avoider and offshore mover extraordinaire, all the more bizarre

and that's the point---it's not about platitudes, it's not about personalities and petty gotchas

it's about obama's RECORD

like the promotion of mr immelt to JOBS CZAR

have you met obama's other czars---the racist hater and truther petitioner, the health care guy who favors rationing and redistribution, the sci guy who's advocated forced sterilization and abortion to control population, the regulator who wants to ban hunting and thinks animals have legal standing to sue their owners, the safe schools czar whose glsn produced fistgate...

pretty odd collection of cohorts, many americans would say

just WHO would PROMOTE such peculiar players to hi profile positions of power and prestige

it's all about obama, y'see

know the MAN

stay up

unless you don't want to, it's y'all's call

The Prof · Apr 6, 2011

Sheik Yerbuti said:
If that includes the federal government helping out states which need the help, than yes, I'm for that.

total non starter anywhere inside this particular federal govt

more power to you, of course

Conservative · Apr 6, 2011

Sheik Yerbuti said:
WTF?? You voted for Bush in 2004 because he added less debt than Obama?? In 2004, how did you know how much debt Obama would add??

As far as the other factors, the economy is now growing as well. GDP in 2009 was -2.6%, in 2010 it was +2.9%. employment fell in 2009 by 3.7 million and grew by 812,000 in 2010.

As I've said, I won't be deciding who to vote for until I know who all of the candidates are. But if I vote for Obama, I certainly hope you understand if I do so using your standards? Which is to vote for a candidate who raises unemployment and raises the debt and the deficit.

<queue up Glory, Glory, Hallelujah> ♪♫ And to boot, if Obama lets his guard down and 4 planes get hijacked inside America within an hour and are used by terrorsists as missiles, blowing up land marks and the Pentagon, killing 3,000 people in the process, then using your standard, he's definately getting my vote. And if he warns us that unless we invade a country with WMD, we might end up with a mushroom cloud over an American city; only that country doesn't really have WMD, then again, using your standard, I'm going to lobby for the repeal of the 22nd Amendment. ♫ ♪ <end music>

You see, your cup is always half empty with Bush whereas it is always half full with Obama. You totally ignore that Bush had an attack on our soil, a recession and still grew jobs during 2004 along with had strong economic growth. That plus his tax cuts which benefited my family and faced with the opportunity of getting Kerry, the choice was very easy. I compare the Bush economic pollicy to Obama's and they are the exact opposite although Obama did extend the Bush tax cuts after promising to eliminate them for those evil rich people. Really is too bad that you have different standards for Obama than you had for Bush. Your choice, your vote. I live in TX and cannot offset it. My vote won't matter as Obama will lose TX by more than 3 million votes.Texans understand personal responsibility, too bad that is a lost art with liberalism.

Conservative · Apr 6, 2011

Objective Voice said:
On the contrary. I would think any hardworking, tax paying citizen who followed the law and received a tax refund should keep what is rightfully his. He'd be a fool to give it back because you can rest assured if the reverse happens - the individual owed the government - they'd be coming to collect faster than you could blink an eye!

Interestingly enough, the argument your side concerning tax cuts for the wealthy runs along the same line. My problem with it is in the "inequality" in the tax code that allows the "haves" to hide their money. I've heard the arguments but it appears that Conservatives refuse to accept the fact that "trickle down economics" can never work as long as the wealthiest among us hoard their money onto themselves instead of re-investing it into businesses and such as the theory outlines. Thus, it is a proven fact that the more you earn, the more you spend. As such, wealthy individuals don't reinvest their "earnings" back into their business ventures. They reinvest their "profits" which can be very different. It's the main reason why one can review a company's quarterly statements and see that their profits were down, yet the CEO just walked away with a heft severage package stuffed with millions in stock options.

For me it's not jealousy or envy but rather an issue over ethics. But I suppose what's "right" for one person is "wrong" for the next.

But, but, but that caused the debt increase and we all know the govt. can spend the money better than the people can when they keep their own. Where is that liberal compassion? We have to help our fellow Americans by giving it to the govt. so they can spend it the way they see fit. You seem like a heartless conservative to me who wants to starve kids, kill seniors, and pollute the air by keeping more of your own money.

Conservative · Apr 6, 2011

Sheik Yerbuti said:
Those are the numbers you posted. I'm sorry you don't like them.

So Obama didn't tell the CBO that he created or saved 3.5 million jobs? I asked you where those jobs were saved because it is obvious that he didn't create 3.5 million jobs meaning that he had to save a great portion of those. Show me where those jobs were saved?