The Obama Deception HQ Full length version

[Straight Success]

Start fixing the greed. Obama market regulation...
Obama efforts to help mothers...
More jobs anyone...
Lending resumes...

If what you said about the problems stating in the '90's (which I have not found any solid facts) is true, then it's definately not going to be fixed in 7 months. Maybe a year or a year and a half. I really don't know how long it will take to fully recover. Just let Obama and Congress do what they have to in order to get us where we ought to be.

I will leave it here since I said he needs more time to work.

[Straight Success]

The problems didn't begin in the '90's as stated before.

This is just about the past when Clinton was in office. Look at the numbers. There was actually a decline in debt when he was in office. It definately wasn't the Clinton's Administration fault. It looks like the debt of the U.S. sky rocketed in the late '80's early '90's, and got worse during the era of the Bush Administration.

EDIT: ...and you damn sure can't blame this on the Obama Administration. He actually has to clean up the mess that 'they' created. That's messed up. He has to work extra hard to clean up the mess that the horrible presidents before him (excluding Clinton, read the link) made. Talk about unfair. He's still going to get it accomplished without getting bent out of shape.

[owequitit]

I don't have time to counter link this biased position just yet, but you can bet its coming.

Your facts are still distorted, and not fully there. We are making progress, but still have a LOOOOOOONG way to go.

You are still hand picking and choosing figures and stories that benefit your side of the story.

[verothacamaro]

I don't have time to counter link this biased position just yet, but you can bet its coming.

Your facts are still distorted, and not fully there. We are making progress, but still have a LOOOOOOONG way to go.

You are still hand picking and choosing figures and stories that benefit your side of the story.

Politics.

[zack_odom]

bumping this thread so I can read everything scott said lol...
Infowars is B.S. imho...

[HybridKyle]

Politics is always a crazy road to be on. Things seem to never be straight forward. It seems as though if we want one thing that's positive, we sometimes have to sacrifice something else to get there.

Let's take a look at the major concerns of today's nation.

1. The biggest topic that is a major factor in the lives of Americans is the ecomony. We have a shortage of jobs and people are broke and in debt. That's putting it straight forward. From what I see and what I read, I am able to conjure up two different views. I know I am in only one location at a time; however, I see people who have jobs and are living well in today's crisis. Then I also see people who can't get a job and others who have two and three jobs, and they are still struggling. Why is America that way right now? I honestly don't know all the facts or have all of the answers. I do know that we did not get here overnight, and damn sure didn't get here in the past 7 months. What can we do to fix it? Again I don't have all the answers, but it seems as if Obama is doing a lot to fix it. Stimulus packages, Cash for Clunkers, etc... He's trying to stimulate the flow of money in the economy to get us back on our feet. I've personally seen progress attributable to his efforts.

2. Health care. I've been reading up on this health care reform. I haven't taken a look at the 2000 page bill. I can only go on what others write about it (those in politics who have read it). I am getting two sides to this bill. I opted to go with the more positive one. There's always sacrifice with a plan of this magnitude. I honestly think the sacrifice of a small amount of extra money from the government, and a tiny tax hike for some is well worth it for every American. In the long, this helps us become stronger and healthier as a nation.

Where do you personally see progress in this "stimulus" plan? Everyone keeps saying they see progress but no one can say where...? Cash for clunkers was a bust, it ran out of money in 4 DAYS! Is that the kind of people you want running your health care LOL 8 out of the 10 top cash for clunker vehicles are foreign car manufacturers...NOW that being said hell Hondas are built in Ohio while "domestic" cars are built outside the country (another LMAO)

The president also said, no promised, that unemployment would not go over 8% if the stimulus package was approved, now it's over 9%. In unemployment terms thats a huge difference. I know I know, the "stimulus" money hasn't been spent yet....if people are smart, they won't spend it. It's probably close to the last thing they will get from the government...it would have been better to pay off everyones mortgage and give people that don't own their own home a fat check. That would have stimulated more than what we did...it's a joke!

States are holding on to stimulus money. Teachers are continually being laid off in hopes of saving money...but at what cost? We already have HORRIBLE schools. But here in my community I see it's things like fire teachers to save money, but high schools have enough money to build new football feilds, new schools even have HUGE stadium type feilds that are not NEEDED. That money can be allocated elsewhere more effectively.

...Unless it's this FANTASTIC health care everyone keeps talking about, that will make everyone stronger and better....yeah right! Look at ANY country that has government health care and see what theirs looks like. Canada, Europe....it SUCKS!

How can you take what other people say...? This is the problem today, you want to just accept whatever someone tells you because it sounds good...WTF? Why would they tell you it's bad if it's what THEY want? Do you honestly think the government is going to give up ANY money...and a SMALL tax hike? It would have to be fairly large, in one way or another. Another thing that was said wouldn't happen.

I would agree to States taking care of their own, a member run health care...options. NOT to control, but choices. What this country was originally founded upon, or did we forget that?

As for the debt of the country....he didn't start it by far! BUT, the first rule of holes comes to mind here. NOT to keep spending by the BILLIONS

[HybridKyle]

so you're one of those "birthers" eh? were you a truther too?

No, LOL I love the "ers" on everything there! LMFAO

I am a American"er", Veteran"er", Fath"er", Taxpay"er", Lov"er" of my constitutional rights! ....someone who gives a shit about what this country stands for and is becoming. I am NOT blaming all of that on Obama

[quakerjoe]

I know I know, the "stimulus" money hasn't been spent yet....if people are smart, they won't spend it.

I completely agree with this statement. Anyone that knows anything about economics knows that the rate of inflation is going to sky rocket because of all of the money they're trying to dump into the economy. If congress was smart then they would repeal the stimulus bill and the spending bill. Who cares if they promised people money. They promised my no pork in the bills any longer.

It's probably close to the last thing they will get from the government...it would have been better to pay off everyones mortgage and give people that don't own their own home a fat check.

Here's the problem with this. As much as I would agree with you on it. I'm sure there would be a flood of people running out to drive up their bills before congress was able to do so or a string of lawsuits might insue because many people may not feel like it was fair that one person got $1 million dollars from the government where they only got $12,000. You know someone would try and pull it. There's something seriously wrong with some of the people in the country. (It's like they don't appreciate anything anymore.)

[HybridKyle]

True, I did forget about the "my coffee was hot, I'm suing you" group of people...

[owequitit]

Here is a little bit about the Credit Default Swap market that led to Lehman Brother filing bankruptcy, Enron a few years back, and ultimately the bailout of AIG:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Credit_default_swap

http://www.investopedia.com/terms/c/...efaultswap.asp

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodi...on_Act_of_2000

Notice a couple of things about the market and the bill that created it:

1) It was introduced and sponsored by both Republicans and Democrats.

2) It was supported widely through the system. Just because these people may not have foreseen the issue (you would think someone would have), does NOT mean they aren't responsible for it. Every mature adult is forced to be responsible for the unintended consequences of their reactions, including politicians. Notice that it was also passed by both Republicans and Democrats, and passed the Senate unanimously.

3) Note that it was signed into law by BILL CLINTON.

4) Note that credit default became prevalent in the late 1990's when Bill Clinton was President, NOT George Bush, and NOT Barrack Obama.

5) While it seems easy and convenient to blame George Bush for everything because he was president when it happened, it was clearly NOT his fault because A) he didn't introduce it or have anything to do with its creation, and B) he didn't sign it or make it law. The ONLY fault you would be able to extend to him would be not trying to change it while he was in office, but generally, that is NOT the President's job. The President does not run Congress.

6) This is the market that Obama is being more or less FORCED to regulate, because if he doesn't it threatens to bankrupt the entire economy again.

7) It is impossible to be informed and NOT blame Bill Clinton for at least part of the mess. The problem is that you looked solely at the national debt as though that is the only indicator of anything, when actually, it is but one of a million different variables that people affect. You also apparently assume that while it didn't happen while he was in office, it must not be his fault. The problem with that logic and the reason it is completely and fundamentally flawed is because it takes time for such things to filter their way through the system.

That is much the same reason many economists, who specialize in this stuff, are doubtful of the "stimulous." It takes time for that money to filter through the system and have an effect. Unfortunately, the economy is already showing signs of recover, we have spent less than 2% of the stimulous and once we DO spend most of it, it won't be felt for 6 months to a year at the earliest. That basically means that the economy is already starting to recover and it is NOT because of Obama's stimulous. That is just the plain fact of it. Even if the money took effect immediately, you can't attribute it to the stimulous because it hasn't been spent yet.

Obama on charitable donations:

http://www.gazette.com/articles/char...ma-budget.html

http://philanthropy.com/news/updates...wealthy-donors

http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/..._whammy_1.html

1) If you want to encourage donation, why would you penalize those who give most of it?

The reality of income taxes and expenditures in the US:

http://www.irs.gov/taxstats/index.html?portlet=5

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122385651698727257.html

http://www.barackobama.com/taxes/

You will notice his little blurb in there about "tax cuts for 95% of Americans." This was the one where he was going to eliminate your income taxes for the year until the cut either equaled $500 or $1,000 by giving you the $14 or $28 a paycheck back. Yeah, that lasted for me for about 1 check and then my taxes came back. Why? Obama and his team decided that they would have to rescind some of the tax cuts. So not only did I not get my $500 tax cut, but my income taxes actually went UP by about 1.5% when they started reassessing taxes to my paycheck. So, really, I didn't even get my $14 tax cut, because by the time the year is over, I will have paid more than $14 in extra taxes. I made the same as last year, slightly less in fact, and I am well within the bottom region of "middle class," so it isn't like I am rich or anything. This news debuted about 2-3 weeks after the cuts went into effect. I will have to search to see if I can still find a news article that old.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_public_debt

I have reposted your link. Notice a few things.

1) Under Clinton, the debt increased more than it decreases, so while there was a small decrease for approximately 1 year, there was still a net increase.

2) Under Obama, it is projected that debt will match GDP, which is an unsustainable level.

3) By 2030 to 2040 at current rates of growth, 100% of our tax revenues will be taken up by entitlement programs and funding the national debt. How are we supposed to increase and make available healthcare for all, if we can't even service the programs we currently have? Do you want 70% of YOUR income to go to taxes? I sure as hell don't.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_...Administration

http://www.ssa.gov/

http://origin.www.gpoaccess.gov/usbu...df/summary.pdf

http://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/facts...ng_stats08.pdf

http://price.house.gov/issues/upload...lsecurity2.pdf

1) In 2004 there were approximately 47 million people collecting Social Security benefits

In December of 2008, that number had risen to nearly 51 million.

2) As provided in the FY 2010 Federal budget you will notice that medicare and medicade cost taxpayers just under $750 billion. In one year.

http://www.webmd.com/news/20081104/o...or-health-care

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/...as_health.html

http://www.ncpa.org/pub/ba628/

http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/104xx/doc...Prevention.pdf

http://www.cbo.gov/publications/collections/health.cfm

A couple of questions that should be asked based on this data:

1) There are currently 45 million uninsured Americans and 63 million underinsured Americans. If we currently have 51 million people relying on the government for healthcare and medicine, and we currently pay $750 billion dollars a year for that coverage, how can we expect to double the number of people benefitting, but not also double the cost? Even if we manage to see drastic efficiency gains, what is the likelihood that we will go from spending $750 billion per year for half as many people, to $1 trillion over 10 years for twice as many people?

2) As outlined in Obama's plan, the proposal is to fine and tax any company that does not provide coverage. Obama swears up and down that the costs will only be passed onto "big corporations" but the reality is that the majority of employers that don't offer coverage are small businesses. It seems counterintuitive to be able to fine business for not providing coverage, and not penalize small business simultaneously as they are inexorably linked together.

3) According to the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office, whose job is to determine the true cost of all government regulations and expenditures, the government option healthplan is going to increase spending, cause people to lose their other coverage that they have and like, and add trillions to the national debt.

http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2009/...on.html?csp=34

http://budget.senate.gov/democratic/..._Testimony.pdf

http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/104xx/doc...02-HELPltr.pdf

Expenditure estimates of the CBO are often somewhat optimistic:

http://www.forbes.com/2009/08/12/pub...rss_popstories

I am sure I can find plenty more evidence of under estimation, which is probably one reason we nearly always go over-budget on everything.

There are also agendas on both sides of the fence:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090819/...BlY2lhbGludGVy

http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/200...xyb2QzOXN0aQ--

Even Obama's own HHS Director has said that public run health care is not a necessity for reform:

http://www.3news.co.nz/White-House-a...ticleID=116858

Of all of this, the good thing that has come out of it is the fact that both sides are still trying to work together.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090819/...VsbG5ic3BzdG9y

The Republicans have not been in a position to maintain the status quo for awhile now, while the Democrats are no longer in a position to force through a partisan, special interest, idealogical piece of legislation. Democratic party ratings have plummeted, and Republican ratings have been low since Bush left office.

With both parties unpopular, it seems like now would be an opportune time for more rational people in the middle to start building a strong indendent party, but hey, what do I know?

[HybridKyle]

WOW....I love it! GREAT information man

[verothacamaro]

Where do you personally see progress in this "stimulus" plan? Everyone keeps saying they see progress but no one can say where...? Cash for clunkers was a bust, it ran out of money in 4 DAYS! Is that the kind of people you want running your health care LOL 8 out of the 10 top cash for clunker vehicles are foreign car manufacturers...NOW that being said hell Hondas are built in Ohio while "domestic" cars are built outside the country (another LMAO)

The president also said, no promised, that unemployment would not go over 8% if the stimulus package was approved, now it's over 9%. In unemployment terms thats a huge difference. I know I know, the "stimulus" money hasn't been spent yet....if people are smart, they won't spend it. It's probably close to the last thing they will get from the government...it would have been better to pay off everyones mortgage and give people that don't own their own home a fat check. That would have stimulated more than what we did...it's a joke!

States are holding on to stimulus money. Teachers are continually being laid off in hopes of saving money...but at what cost? We already have HORRIBLE schools. But here in my community I see it's things like fire teachers to save money, but high schools have enough money to build new football feilds, new schools even have HUGE stadium type feilds that are not NEEDED. That money can be allocated elsewhere more effectively.

...Unless it's this FANTASTIC health care everyone keeps talking about, that will make everyone stronger and better....yeah right! Look at ANY country that has government health care and see what theirs looks like. Canada, Europe....it SUCKS!

How can you take what other people say...? This is the problem today, you want to just accept whatever someone tells you because it sounds good...WTF? Why would they tell you it's bad if it's what THEY want? Do you honestly think the government is going to give up ANY money...and a SMALL tax hike? It would have to be fairly large, in one way or another. Another thing that was said wouldn't happen.

I would agree to States taking care of their own, a member run health care...options. NOT to control, but choices. What this country was originally founded upon, or did we forget that?

As for the debt of the country....he didn't start it by far! BUT, the first rule of holes comes to mind here. NOT to keep spending by the BILLIONS

The only reason we're not in a depression is because we spent what we did.

Whether you like it or not, we spent over a trillion dollars on the Iraq/Afghanistan war.


Why the fuck are people against spending money on the country they're actually a citizen of as opposed to a country they've never set foot on?

In my opinion, it's a matter of perception and lack of attention to the current events.

The 'stimulus' package bears a misleading name, but many economist will come to the consensus that we'd be off in a much worse situation today without that huge influx of money.

In fact, the one thing many 'liberal' economists praise George W. Bush for is actually signing the 'Bailout' into law.

I agree and as much as I hate giving my money to those that abused the system, I can't imagine the situation the US would have been without it.

There are many other countries that decided to invest in their own societies and have had positive results.

Don't let that 'free market' mentality get in the way of viable solutions that can be implemented to plug leaky holes.

[owequitit]

Just to reiterate my stance to hopefully keep this discussion tracking along the path of reality, it is important to note that BOTH sides are equally to blame for our situation, and unfortunately, we as citizens and taxpayers are going to have to, at some point get off our idealogical horses and clean up this mess. One way or another it is GOING to bite us in the ass. We can either deal with it voluntarily before it blows up, or we can wait until the system fails, in which case we will have to deal with it mandatorily.

I am more than willing to give Obama credit where credit is due, but I can not in good conscience give him credit where credit is not due. Contrary to popular reality right now, he is not solely responsible for saving anything, nor is solely responsible for ruining anything. Unfortunately, we will not know the true effects of his decisions for roughly another 4-8 years.

At this point, it is unclear what his stimulus will achieve, but so far, based on the assessments of experts in the field, it looks as though it will have less than intended affects, and put a large burden of debt on the people.

Which brings me to another point. We, as a country, have GOT TO reign in the wasteful spending and the believing it is OK to spend beyond our means. Right now the big kick in Congress is who did what wrong and who is to blame for the housing crisis, when they in fact, are doing the EXACT same thing average citizens did, which was spending beyond their means. The only difference is that they have the ability to work with more cash than the average individual, and as such, the same process will take longer. If nothing changes, we will be at that point by about 2019. We are on a path of unsustainability. It needs to be LAW that Congress can't spend more than they make. Unless it is a time of national emergency, and there should be legal stipulation about what exactly constitutes a national emergency, and perhaps even a popular vote put in place to determine worthiness of such problems. There needs to be a LAW that says Congress must reign in the spending and reduce the debt to a suitable level by XX/XX/XXXX, or by a suitable % each year. They have no problem passing laws that hold regular citizens accountable for anything and everything, and yet, they have absolutely no reigns whatsoever. It is out of control. Our lawmakers are spending us into oblivion while perpetuating their sensationalist propaganda bullshit, which leaves most people pointing blame and fingers, instead of solutions. In the end, it doesn't really matter who was wrong, because once the money is gone, we all go down together.

I for one am tired of the bullshit.

[quakerjoe]

Yes, yes and YES!

[HybridKyle]

Just to reiterate my stance to hopefully keep this discussion tracking along the path of reality, it is important to note that BOTH sides are equally to blame for our situation, and unfortunately, we as citizens and taxpayers are going to have to, at some point get off our idealogical horses and clean up this mess. One way or another it is GOING to bite us in the ass. We can either deal with it voluntarily before it blows up, or we can wait until the system fails, in which case we will have to deal with it mandatorily.

I am more than willing to give Obama credit where credit is due, but I can not in good conscience give him credit where credit is not due. Contrary to popular reality right now, he is not solely responsible for saving anything, nor is solely responsible for ruining anything. Unfortunately, we will not know the true effects of his decisions for roughly another 4-8 years.

At this point, it is unclear what his stimulus will achieve, but so far, based on the assessments of experts in the field, it looks as though it will have less than intended affects, and put a large burden of debt on the people.

Which brings me to another point. We, as a country, have GOT TO reign in the wasteful spending and the believing it is OK to spend beyond our means. Right now the big kick in Congress is who did what wrong and who is to blame for the housing crisis, when they in fact, are doing the EXACT same thing average citizens did, which was spending beyond their means. The only difference is that they have the ability to work with more cash than the average individual, and as such, the same process will take longer. If nothing changes, we will be at that point by about 2019. We are on a path of unsustainability. It needs to be LAW that Congress can't spend more than they make. Unless it is a time of national emergency, and there should be legal stipulation about what exactly constitutes a national emergency, and perhaps even a popular vote put in place to determine worthiness of such problems. There needs to be a LAW that says Congress must reign in the spending and reduce the debt to a suitable level by XX/XX/XXXX, or by a suitable % each year. They have no problem passing laws that hold regular citizens accountable for anything and everything, and yet, they have absolutely no reigns whatsoever. It is out of control. Our lawmakers are spending us into oblivion while perpetuating their sensationalist propaganda bullshit, which leaves most people pointing blame and fingers, instead of solutions. In the end, it doesn't really matter who was wrong, because once the money is gone, we all go down together.

I for one am tired of the bullshit.

I agree 100%

We will all go down, and I think thats how it will become government run....people will just give up. Hell they almost have now.

I also think the cash for clunkers deal....same as the housing market did. People saw that $3500-$4500 and went out and got something they didn't need nor could afford. I am not saying everyone who used it cannot afford it, but for the most part it wasn't the smartest thing to do...




My only other concern at the moment is the name calling and fighting...and the politicians who are encouraging and causing some of it. Vote what the people want, they are the ones who put you into the position you are in, you might want to take that into account.

We are all Americans, be proud of that, remember what you stand for...why you stand for it. The people who have paid the price for you to have your opinions and choices...remember that please.