I Apologize

[saden1]

Originally Posted by GMScud

As far as the promise things goes, I guess it just depends on who you ask:

A Long Post: The Complete List of Obama Statement Expiration Dates - The Campaign Spot - National Review Online

Obama is spending at a terrifying rate. Your tax and spend comment is typical. Instead of acknowledging the problem stated, you create a scenario that would be worse and use it as a justification for the problem at hand. He's talking of helping future generations while effing them in the process.

If pointing out the obvious is typical i will gladly be typical. You know what else is typical? The National Review sucking the life out my brain with gems like this:

RAISING TAXES

STATEMENT: “No family making less than $250,000 will see any form of tax increase.” (multiple times on the campaign trail)

EXPIRATION DATE: Broken multiple times, including the raised taxes on tobacco, a new tax on indoor tanning salons, but most prominently on February 11, 2010: “President Barack Obama said he is ‘agnostic’ about raising taxes on households making less than $250,000 as part of a broad effort to rein in the budget deficit.”

[GMScud]

Originally Posted by saden1

If pointing out the obvious is typical i will gladly be typical. You know what else is typical? The National Review sucking the life out my brain with gems like this:

So instead of being amazingly stupid (W), it's cool to just be really stupid (Obama), and that's ok? Gotcha.

[saden1]

Originally Posted by GMScud

So instead of being amazingly stupid (W), it's cool to just be really stupid (Obama), and that's ok? Gotcha.

I have no problem with spending...especially in a depressed economy. There are things I would like to cut but I don't think you'd like what I would cut. The biggest mistake Obama has made IMO is not leaving the wars to save some $$$...everything else I'm fine with.

[GMScud]

Originally Posted by saden1

I have no problem with spending...especially in a depressed economy. There are things I would like to cut but I don't think you'd like what I would cut. The biggest mistake Obama has made IMO is not leaving the wars to save some $$$...everything else I'm fine with.

Yes, but don't you think he's apologized enough for America so far? After all we've done in Iraq and Afghanistan, you suggest that he just cut bait and haul ass? Even though he may not have entered those wars if it had been his decision, there is still an obligation to something we as a country started nearly 10 years ago (crazy it's been that long already).

Don't get me wrong, I'd love for our troops to come home, but in the international diplomatic eye, is it really viable to just bail out of both countries right now?

[saden1]

Originally Posted by GMScud

Yes, but don't you think he's apologized enough for America so far? After all we've done in Iraq and Afghanistan, you suggest that he just cut bait and haul ass? Even though he may not have entered those wars if it had been his decision, there is still an obligation to something we as a country started nearly 10 years ago (crazy it's been that long already).

Don't get me wrong, I'd love for our troops to come home, but in the international diplomatic eye, is it really viable to just bail out of both countries right now?

As far as cuts go I'd start with cutting defense spending by re-evaluate DoD contracts and projects and returning all troops home from Iraq and Afghanistan.

There is no right time to bailout, they will always something they'll need our help. In international diplomatic eyes I am sure they'll understand...like your co-workers understanding you're leaving the company for another company that pays you better. Besides, these countries need to step-up and start solving world security issues instead of relying on us.

If we don't leave we will be saying the same fucking thing 20 years from now. Plus you have to ask yourself if US presence is fueling the fighting.

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by saden1

As far as cuts go I'd start with cutting defense spending by re-evaluate DoD contracts

While we're at it we need to complete a Fed-wide evaluation on contracts and projects

and returning all troops home from Iraq and Afghanistan.

There is no right time to bailout, they will always something they'll need our help. In international diplomatic eyes I am sure they'll understand...like your co-workers understanding you're leaving the company for another company that pays you better. Besides, these countries need to step-up and start solving world security issues instead of relying on us.

If we don't leave we will be saying the same fucking thing 20 years from now. Plus you have to ask yourself if US presence is fueling the fighting.

I agree with you on getting our troops home. We need a Special Ops presence but our regular troops need to come home and get the targets off their backs. I'm a LeMay Doctrine guy, if we're committing troops it ain't as peace-keepers with ridiculous rules of engagement.

[GMScud]

Originally Posted by saden1

If pointing out the obvious is typical i will gladly be typical. You know what else is typical? The National Review sucking the life out my brain with gems like this:



I have no problem with spending...especially in a depressed economy. There are things I would like to cut but I don't think you'd like what I would cut.

Try me.

See, thing is, in case you haven't noticed, in general I really don't care for a lot of Democratic policy. But I'm not a party-lines guy. I have no deep seeded loyalty to the GOP. I tend to agree with them more than the left, but truth be told, I'm a fiscal conservative and more liberal socially (I'm probably more Libertarian than anything else). Really I just want what's good for this country. And the good I speak of is not relative.

[GhettoDogAllStars]

Originally Posted by GMScud

Try me.

See, thing is, in case you haven't noticed, in general I really don't care for a lot of Democratic policy. But I'm not a party-lines guy. I have no deep seeded loyalty to the GOP. I tend to agree with them more than the left, but truth be told, I'm a fiscal conservative and more liberal socially (I'm probably more Libertarian than anything else). Really I just want what's good for this country. And the good I speak of is not relative.

Sorry, couldn't resist

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by GhettoDogAllStars

Sorry, couldn't resist

Sorry but the president does not control spending so you have to look at who had control of congress. Who ever made that chart does not understand government and the function of each house and the president. Also those numbers seem very low compared to the first year of Obama and a democrate controled congress.

[GhettoDogAllStars]

Originally Posted by firstdown

Sorry but the president does not control spending so you have to look at who had control of congress. Who ever made that chart does not understand government and the function of each house and the president. Also those numbers seem very low compared to the first year of Obama and a democrate controled congress.

I know what you're saying -- it's just a dumb cartoon. I will say that the President always has the chance to veto any spending bill, although it's usually not so black and white.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by GhettoDogAllStars

I know what you're saying -- it's just a dumb cartoon. I will say that the President always has the chance to veto any spending bill, although it's usually not so black and white.

Yes the president does but the problem is that they always stick spending in other bills so to get it passed. That was never more true then with RR as the Dem's. loaded every bill with more spending. I think that every bill should stand on its own and everything gets voted on separately.

[The Goat]

Originally Posted by firstdown

Sorry but the president does not control spending so you have to look at who had control of congress. Who ever made that chart does not understand government and the function of each house and the president. Also those numbers seem very low compared to the first year of Obama and a democrate controled congress.

Wow. That's just unbelievable. The notion the President doesn't drive spending and the overall budget via his 1) agenda 2) ties on Capital Hill 3) party politics and 4) oh yeah he's the President.

C'mon man. Any President who wants to balance the budget can veto any bill, spending or otherwise, in a heartbeat. Then Congress must pass said bill by 2/3 to override veto. The pt is any President who really wants to put the hammer down can do so.

The notion Reagan and the retarded Bush were fiscal conservatives is just asinine nonsense.

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by The Goat

The notion Reagan and the retarded Bush were fiscal conservatives is just asinine nonsense.

The notion that Reagan WASN'T a fiscal conservative is asinine nonsense.

Bush agree with you on that one, but most conservatives understand Bush 2 wasn't a fiscal conservative.

[The Goat]

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

The notion that Reagan WASN'T a fiscal conservative is asinine nonsense.

Bush agree with you on that one, but most conservatives understand Bush 2 wasn't a fiscal conservative.

This is exactly the kind of thing that makes me lose faith in our citizenry and the collective future. We had a President who oversaw roughly $3 TRILLION IN NEW NATIONAL DEBT BECAUSE HE SLASHED TAXES AND DRASTICALLY INCREASED SPENDING (NOT ON THE PUBLIC BUT SOLELY ON THE MILITARY-INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX) AND YET PEOPLE SOMEHOW WANT TO HOLD ONTO A FANTASY OF FISCAL CONSERVATISM.

I mean that's just nonsense. Why waste time w/ insipid, stupid fantasies that contradict the historical record? I'm not even creative but I can think of more exciting fairytales on a whim!

[MTK]

Originally Posted by GhettoDogAllStars

Sorry, couldn't resist

word