If you think that Barack Obama has been good for the poor and middle class, forget it! The US poverty rate has risen again this past year, has it has every year since Obama took office. The poverty rate jumped from 15.1% in 2010 to 15.7% in 2011, the highest level since the 1960s. Chronically high unemployment and an increasingly stagnant economy, already poised for a double-dip recession have impacted a wide range of socioeconomic groups, including not only inner city residents, but also those who live in the suburbs of major urban areas. By comparison, during the Internet boom years of the 1990s, the poverty rate still did not break the all-time low of 11.1% in 1973.
So despite trillions of dollars spent by the Obama administration on stimulus, and expansion of government assistance programs like food stamps, the situation is getting worse, not better for American families. The notion promoted by many Liberal Democrats that food stamps and unemployment checks are themselves stimulus is proven to be a lie. The sharp increase in the size of government by Obama, expanding to a stifling 24% of the nation′s GDP is actually choking off capital and investment, therefore business growth and job creation.
Not the least of our worries is the never ending additions of federal regulations making starting and running a business more difficult. As you may recall way back in 2008-09 during the Congressional hearings on bailing out the auto industry, the point was made that the single largest expense to manufacturers was not labor costs but compliance with government regulations. Many entrepreneurs of successful businesses, like Staples and Home Depot, have gone on the record to say that in today′s regulatory environment, they could never have started their companies.
So the anti-business policies of Barack Obama have continued to push the US poverty rate higher. The Obama administration has now raised the poverty rate to 15.7%, up from 15.1% in 2010, the highest level since the 1960s. One more reason for the poor and middle class not to vote to reelect Obama in November.
July 23rd, 2012 at 6:18 am
“US Poverty Rate Rises During Obama Depression”
OMG Andy, Snow Crash is gonna be on you like white on rice for that one.
July 23rd, 2012 at 6:42 am
That has been Obama’s plan. As he stated the night he won the election. He was going to tranform this country. I knew exactly what he was going to do. Destroy it. Dumb useful idiots voted for him. If he and his adminstration could, they would slaughter all those who produce, confiscate their wealth, have a ruling class(the elites, they think they are sooooooo smart). Russia, China, Cuba any one? Have forced abortions get a rice cooker gift and enjoy visting neighbors in 8 hour bread line in sub-zero weather. Cannot wait!!!! I know, I know Obama will do a better job than the other controllers. What about unintentional consequences? Controllers never plan from them. Who Knew??
July 23rd, 2012 at 6:57 am
Better hope he doesn’t win reelection Sue.
July 23rd, 2012 at 8:36 am
Since when do right wing conservatives and Republicans care about the poor? The general meme I hear from Republicans is, if you are poor, it’s your own fault. Seems that the only time Republicans care about the poor is when a Democrat [sic] president is trying to get relected. Then…oh my my my, isn’t it terrible? So much poverty.
If Republicans cared about the poor they would have 1) not filibustered every single thing the Obama administration tried to do during the first two years of his term in office, and 2) not blocked in the House everything the president has wanted to do the past two years.
The WORST thing that could happen to the poor would be if we turn the government over to the Republicans again this November. It doesn’t matter what the poverty rate is right now, I am sure of that.
July 23rd, 2012 at 8:52 am
So this means that Gokky worships at the shriveled feet of dingbat Harry Reid? Has lust in his myocardium tissue for BelaPeelooski?Thinks LBJ really fought for civil rights?
ROFL
July 23rd, 2012 at 9:06 am
KY
“Since when do right wing conservatives and Republicans care about the poor?”
There you go again.
I swear on a stack of Bibles I did not read the rest of your garbage.
Just that quote alone says vit all.
You’re being stupid, and you know it, and you dont care.
Whatever dignity you have left isworth chucking just so you can take the first opportunity to sucker punch those you disagree with.
Yet know nothing about.
To answer your question…
“Since when do right wing conservatives and Republicans care about the poor?”
…requires two responses that you can relate to.
1( We care about the poor because some of us republicans are poor as well as the rest of society that is becoming one that lives paycheck to paycheck due to rising cost of everything but not with commensurable wage increases or or job availability.
2( We care about everyone whos poor across the entire planet and back it up with more aid than the left ever has.
The right and Faith based operations are the most charitable (cash and otherwise) and altruistic bunch in America.
That number doubles if you look at the situation globally.
July 23rd, 2012 at 9:40 am
KY;
“If Republicans cared about the poor they would have 1) not filibustered every single thing the Obama administration tried to do during the first two years of his term in office,”
You had both houses in those first two years.
The President had still not presented a budget for the year, or remainder of it.
Also, this is important, so pay attention.
NO ONE ON THE LEFT COULD TELL US WHERE THE FCKIN MONEY WAS GOING TO COME FROM !
RAISING THE DEBT CEILING ?
(Something your boss said years earlier was the un-American thing to do)
BORROW FROM CHINA AT 40% ON THE DOLLAR ??
Try again
July 23rd, 2012 at 10:55 am
OMG Andy, Snow Crash is gonna be on you like white on rice for that one.
Nah, this is the kind of bullsh*t I’ve come to expect from Andy. Politicizing a tragedy and already pointing fingers mere hours after the incident is far more disgusting.
July 23rd, 2012 at 11:12 am
“Politicizing a tragedy and already pointing fingers mere hours after the incident is far more disgusting.”
This refers to Gabby Giffords–right?
July 23rd, 2012 at 11:57 am
“politicizing a tragedy ” ?
“hours after” ?
So, I guess poverty levels like this have nothing to do with politics ?
You keep telling yourself that and remember that “ALL” politicians will and must deal with this issue in the public eye for many reasons.
Votes, actually caring,ulterior self serving purposes,keep their job/career.
Oh, and dont forget the prophecy of Rahm Emanuel:
“You never want a serious crisis to go to waste. And what I mean by that is an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before.”
“Hours ?
Its been 3 1/2 years!!!
July 23rd, 2012 at 12:18 pm
GOK says: “Since when do right wing conservatives and Republicans care about the poor?”
If you are including Christians in the conservative group, then I have to say that they care a lot for the poor. You might not agree with their core beliefs, but you can’t deny that they are the ones that help the poor the most, by far.
Moving on, making the poor dependent, instead of opening opportunities and teaching him to work, is the wrong way of “helping” him. In the end, you end up punishing the middle class to pay for those hand-outs, just like you see happenning right now.
July 23rd, 2012 at 12:46 pm
Republicans don’t even care about the middle class, much less the lower class. Check the congressional record. Republicans are rank and file against anything that might benefit common people, like maybe, a fair minimum wage, some sort of jobs programs? Forget it.
Ah, but when it comes to large corporations and the obscenely wealthy people who own and run them, then look out! It’s a different story.
I tell you what. Let’s take all those millions and millions of dollars of needless oil subsidites and give them to all the Christians you are talking about and let them pass the moola out to the poor. You and I won’t be paying out any more for it, but at least it will go to a good place instead of further lining the pockets of the rich.
You people just make me want to fall over laughing. You are totally fooled. Total dupes. You couldn’t see the truth if it was two feet away from your face. You are so much against “income redistribution.” You cannot see the forest for the trees. Anything the government is doing to assist the poor is just a very small fraction of the amount of our money that goes to the rich.
July 23rd, 2012 at 12:59 pm
GOK, it feels like you described yourself there. You are blind (voluntarily I guess) to the truth: look at the social reingeneering experiments you’ve had there, like the inner cities, and see how well did that go. No sir, you can’t merely put a new suit to improve man, you need to put a new man inside that suit. But now we have a culture that anything goes, values have become a bad word, the social fabric is unraveling with all the attacks on the family, and we are going soon to reap what we have planted.
July 23rd, 2012 at 1:52 pm
No no no no no. I have faith in human nature. I have faith in mankind. I have faith in ALL people, everywhere, no matter their condition. This is where conservatives and liberals part, more than anything else. We don’t need a “new man,” we need a man who has some opportunity, a man who has a chance, instead of the deck loaded against him. And this is where the government comes in.
It is a fitting and a correct function of government to help out the people, and the people who are lowest should get the help. This is not socialism. It is social justice. The vast majority of people everywhere are good people, with good values. But people get beat down when they are living in a system that excludes them.
July 23rd, 2012 at 2:03 pm
KY…
I guess since you wont respond to my last post can only mean you’re speechless or know the answers.
“Republicans don’t even care about the middle class,”
Yes, there are no middle class republicans. Were all stinking rich.
What you meant to say was ” the right cares about middle class and even upper middle class Democrats who are bleeding our economy dry by giving away other peoples money/property to a good portion who dont deserve it.
The rest of your rant is the typical bullsht as usual with nothing to back it up
“. I have faith in ALL people, everywhere,”
Except for those Republicans you told us all you wanted off the planet
July 23rd, 2012 at 2:43 pm
This refers to Gabby Giffords–right?
Yes, I wasn’t happy that the left did that and I commented about that here during that time. I don’t like it when either side does that, as I’ve said many times before.
However, the incident I’m speaking of was when Andy politicized and started pointing fingers mere hours after the recent massacre in Aurora, CO. What I find especially disgusting was he was using a tragedy to play his little game of ‘let’s rustle some feathers’.
Of course the mice here followed him like he was the piper despite being all peeved when the left pointed fingers at the right for the Gabby ordeal. Allegedly lowering oneself to that level is acceptable as long as the ‘other guys’ have done such. Hypocrites.
July 23rd, 2012 at 2:52 pm
Aside from the ridiculous and sophomoric argument as why the poor or middle class shouldn’t vote for President Obama as well as the nonsense that unemployment checks aren’t an economical stimulant (both which I’ll gladly and once again debunk if you’d like), and even the false statement about “never ending additions of federal regulations”, it would be interesting to know just how “unregulated” you’d like for businesses to be. It’s as if you want them 100% unregulated on any aspect. My understanding of a regulation is that it could be easily construed as a law. When I hear these screeches from the unhinged right about eliminating the EPA, OSHA, and all forms of regulations, that can be construed that you’re advocating a lawless nation for business owners. In your Crusades as a liaison for Corporate America, you seem to be selling the concept that a lawless nation will somehow provide us all with more freedom. You then blame the President for the shortcomings of the very policies that you’ve endorsed that has driven the middle class into slave wages for the masters you defend.
July 23rd, 2012 at 3:03 pm
Nah Ronald, let’s just back a couple of decades when we were a prosperous nation of laws. Liberals are famous for over the top rhetoric, but you should understand that it makes you sound small to the rest of us. I can’t name a useful federal law or federal government body that was created in the last 30 years and neither can you.
So back on topic, I find it awesomely ironic that Andy is reporting Obama’s own base suffers the most under his economic policies. Will they ever wake up from his hokus pokus? Nah. We just have to toss him out of office and put these poor people under our conservative wings in order to get them back on top.
July 23rd, 2012 at 4:41 pm
Snow:
“However, the incident I’m speaking of was when Andy politicized and started pointing fingers mere hours after the recent massacre in Aurora, CO. What I find especially disgusting was he was using a tragedy to play his little game of ‘let’s rustle some feathers’.”
Look, we all know just how sensitive a little honey you can be.
Now,if you feel like talking about it, if you’d tell the truth in its full “context” you’ll feel sooooooooooo much better.
And keep those tail feathers down
July 24th, 2012 at 4:25 am
Speaking of politicizing a tragedy within hours:
Brian Ross of ABC News.
NYC Mayor Mike Bloomberg RINO/Progressive
Sen. Frank Lautenberg of NJ – D
Sen. Robert Menendez of NJ – D
Former Gov. Ed Rendell of PA – D
Rep. Carolyn McCarthy of NY – D
etc..etc..etc…,
July 24th, 2012 at 4:26 am
It should also be pointed out how it appears as though ABC News may have taken statements from the suspect’s mother completely out of context.
July 24th, 2012 at 4:31 am
Hey GOK,
Who was it who opposed slavery? Republicans, not Democrats. Who was it who helped pass the Civil Rights Act since the ‘Dixie-crats’ all opposed it? Republicans! Who is trying to stop abortions, most of which murder poor and Black babies? Republicans! Who wants people to have jobs and work instead of being on welfare? Republicans!
I think Klo needs to get laid. Maybe by Flo-bot?
July 24th, 2012 at 4:40 am
Ronald,
There have been many estimates as to the cost of federal regulations. Some put the cost of compliance on businesses between $400 billion to $1 Trillion dollars per year. One study reports that the average American worker violates a federal regulation once every 7 hours they work.
Given that the average capital investment of $20,000 creates one new job in the private sector (as opposed to Obama spending some $400,000 per job save or created by federal stimulus money), the compliance costs on businesses is retarding job growth by at least 200,000 new jobs per year, and probably closer to 500,000.
With Dodd-Frank making venture capital more restrictive, those numbers will get much worse.
July 24th, 2012 at 5:23 am
Ron;
“Aside from the ridiculous and sophomoric argument as why the poor or middle class shouldn’t vote for President Obama as well as the nonsense that unemployment checks aren’t an economical stimulant (both which I’ll gladly and once again debunk if you’d like), ”
( This I gotta see )
Caffeine is a stimulant as well.
But we paid 7.00 for it at Starbucks.
But,not to worry, I hear with Obamacare Ritalin will be sold otc and free to those maKing less than 250 large a year
The return on unemployment/welfare checks (taxes being taxed) to the private sector is a joke. The processing alone is a cost burden
If it were so great a stimulant…
…what happened Nancy ?
July 24th, 2012 at 12:56 pm
P.Mc, A.Z., and Micky, you follow a usual evasive pattern of running from an argument. But then again, Andrew does present a mixed bag of Obama bashing rants in order to conclude that the economic downturn began 1/21/2009 and that the sole drivers of poverty are the EPA, etc which by your logic (or denial, or intentional misleading, or an invented justification for your bigoted mind set, I mean, who knows?), are all contributed to the “anti-business policies of Barack Obama”. The reality is that the poverty numbers are a direct result of GOP policies.
President Clinton left office in 2001, leaving a $236 billion budget surplus with a projected 10-year surplus of $5.6 trillion. President Bush left office in 2009, handing President Obama a $1.3 trillion deficit and projected shortfalls of $8 trillion for the next 10 years. The Clinton era produced 23 million jobs while President Bush left the country hemorrhaging with a staggering record job losses per month. Need I even go into the debt numbers? When President Obama took office the economy was in free fall, there was a housing crises, 2 wars, the White House plagued with scandals, our global reputation in the gutter, an auto industry hanging by a string, and a scared and angry electorate.
But to humor Andrew’s specious arguments, let’s pretend that the Bush era was just a bad dream and the economy went sour on Obama’s watch. What role did the GOP play? Republicans have always said a payroll tax cut would help create jobs but under the Obama admin, they opposed their very own idea. Most supported TANF funding but not under Obama, that changed. They’ve always said the Economic Development Administration grows the economy but have now changed their minds. Republicans have traditionally supported infrastructure investment but that idea has seemed to disappear. And historically, they’ve always promoted unemployment insurance extensions as an economic stimulus but now flip flop on that as well.
But it goes deeper as they’ve unanimously blocked qualified nominees to important positions such as the Treasury Department and Federal Reserve, positions that they agree could also help improve the economy and have admitted to not having a problem withthese people. They have refused to allow the Fed to do anything to promote economic activity. Their push has been for Congress and the White House to take money out of the economy and eliminate public-sector jobs, something that they’ve never adamantly pushed before. They have reversed course on raising the debt limit, making non-budget political demands that they could never acquire through legislation, and damaging our credit rating in the process. They have done all of this with a clear admission that their top priority is to unseat President Obama.
But we can’t dismiss the Bush era as a bad dream as it was quite real. As mentioned above, the super-majority GOP took us through an era that even the more conservative pundits agree was a “drunken spending spree”. Even worse, they started 2 expensive wars and at the same time, lowered tax rates to the lowest in 60 years, something completely unprecedented and historically foolish. Abe Lincoln understood this as he raised taxes to offset the Civil War, as did McKinley for the Spanish-American War, Wilson for WWI, and both Democrat and Republican leaders alike for WWII, Korea, Vietnam, and Kuwait. Yet today’s GOP refuses to acknowledge this huge hole they’ve created while blaming Obama for their very own shortcomings. And 10 years later, these tax breaks have proven to be failed policies. Yet, the GOP cling to the very failures that drive people into poverty, giving conservative hacks like Andrew and his sockpuppet clones fodder to spew their unfounded rhetoric.
Another reality that’s omitted is that the Obama economy, despite intentional GOP obstruction, has seen 2 years of steady return on jobs and an auto industry that has turned around.
Anyway you slice it, the rise of U.S. poverty is a direct result of GOP policies.
July 25th, 2012 at 5:18 am
Ronald,
Not only are you wrong but you are a wind-bag also. If you cannot make your argument in 500 characters or less, then you are just flailing.
I have stated before why I call this the Obama Depression. The economy began to tank once Obama completed his theft of the nomination from Hillary and it became quite clear that he was going to defeat McCain. From late June through July, we saw a great deal of capital being drawn out of equity markets. Some well known people, including Kelsey Grammer, considered to be one of Hollywood’s more savvy investors, specifically said he sold all his stocks because of concerns that Obama would raise capital gains tax rates.
But there is more to the story…
July 25th, 2012 at 5:22 am
Ronald,
You say that Clinton left us with a budget surplus. He also left office handing GW Bush a recession, too! The Dot-Com bubble burst, crashing the NASDAQ. The whole point of the Bush Tax Cuts was to stimulate the economy after the Clinton Recession. Then 9/11 happened and further hit us with about a trillion dollar loss in GDP. After the Bush Tax Cuts were fully implemented, America enjoyed 57 consecutive months of terrific job growth, pushing the unemployment level to historic lows.
July 25th, 2012 at 5:27 am
Two last items, Ronald,
1st, the housing market bubble was a direct result of Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton forcing banks to issue subprime loans.
2ndly, I laughed out loud when you listed WWI, WWII, Korea, and Vietnam as examples for raising taxes. Maybe if Democrats did not sucker us into WWI, Korea and Vietnam, we would not have needed to raise taxes?
July 25th, 2012 at 6:44 am
Andy, you not only flip flop on every front but you cheery pick your talking points while ignoring how the GOP intentionally sabotaged the economy which you say is a result of “anti-business policies of Barack Obama”.
Instead of manning up to the reality of the Bush/GOP drunken spending era, you make some jaw dropping claim that suggest we had some robust/solid ground economy that went sour as a result of Obama being nominated. That’s just so dumb that it doesn’t deserve a response but it is understandable that if your arguments have no legs, just make some silly shit up.
You then bypass the Bush years and lay blame on the “anti-business policies of Barack Obama” with fabricated attacks on Carter and Clinton. I’m looking for some logic here and obviously coming up short.
The abject partisan blindness in you rings loud and clear in your last paragraph. You actually and I assume seriously wrote ” Maybe if Democrats did not sucker us into WWI, Korea and Vietnam, we would not have needed to raise taxes?”. Along with the Bush era, did you forget our encounter with Iraq??? Talk about being suckered? And even in that audacious, hypocritical, and stupid statement, there’s an admission that taxes were needed but were only needed because of those damn Democrats. Now that the Bush Admin suckered us into the most costly war in history, you stand by the Bush/GOP tax cuts.
I try to avoid personal or childish attacks but your blind partisan loyalty seems to forbid you from seeing anything you don’t want to see. Your wheels of intellect are stuck in a rut, unable to free themselves from the channel they follow.
July 25th, 2012 at 7:08 am
Micky,
Look, we all know just how sensitive a little honey you can be.
Alright, if some massacre happened in Hawaii which you were personally affected by (other than the fact that it happened just a few miles away from where you live) and I were to start saying how it must be some Christian or right-winger then I’m sure you would get a little upset at me. If you say otherwise than you are full of sh*t.
July 25th, 2012 at 7:49 am
I dont like to post on here because it supports the right but i must give Kudos to Ronald i couldnt have said it better myself.
Andy is this the best comeback that you had
“Not only are you wrong but you are a wind-bag also. If you cannot make your argument in 500 characters or less, then you are just flailing ” LMAO
July 25th, 2012 at 8:04 am
But steering back to the poverty level issue, GOP policies contribute to this more than Democrats. Granted, there are arguments but history pretty much proves it.
The concept of the right seems to be that the more money businesses make, the better the economy and I suppose, the less poverty. In some ways, that sounds reasonable but history tells us otherwise. The northern steel mills did quite well prior to the civil war but workers worked for food and a tent to live in. Many coal miners worked for “the company store”. The industrial revolution brought fortunes to businesses but workers worked in “sweat shops” for “slave wages” and lived in poverty. Unions, minimum wages, prevailing wages, and yes, those pesky government regulations helped create the middle class which in turn, drove the economy.
I find it interesting that many conservatives agree that unions were “needed in their day” but have outlived their use. That just defies reality.
The problem with today’s GOP is that they’re corporately owned and refuse to admit the need of any balance for the American workers.
Instead of working with Unions, they want to destroy them. That’s not an Obama policy.
They continue to try to inject legislation to eliminate minimum wage or overtime for certain worker. Truth is, they’d like to annihilate them all together if possible. That’s not an Obama policy. We’re hearing this talk of deregulating business, not fixing things like the EPA or OSHA but just ending them. Not an Obama policy.
Today’s reality that corporations are sitting on more cash than ever in history proves that the trickle down theory doesn’t work (and please, spare me from invoking the confidence fairy as if that has credence). Look at the Walmart explosion of wealth in the past few years. It didn’t nor will it trickle down. This isn’t an Obama policy.
And then of course, there are the above issues of how the GOP have intentionally sabotaged the economy in order “to make Obama a 1 term president”.
The Bush tax cuts have proven to be an abject failure and are actually drivers of the political downturn. Around 30 of the Fortune 500 companies paid NEGATIVE taxes last year while the majority paid less than 1 or 2%. There’s no need to reinvest, hire, or give raises as there’s no tax penalty. When they were in a “use it or lose it” situation, they would purchase or build and accordingly, drive the economy.
It seems that political hacks such as Andrew have some binary political mindset that says you must kowtow to being a corporate loyalist on every front least you adhere to anti-business policies which by his definition, makes you guilty of everything he can find wrong in past or present economics.
Such sophomoric rhetoric has no place in any realistic conversation.
July 25th, 2012 at 11:22 am
“Alright, if some massacre happened in Hawaii which you were personally affected by (other than the fact that it happened just a few miles away from where you live) and I were to start saying how it must be some Christian or right-winger then I’m sure you would get a little upset at me. If you say otherwise than you are full of sh*t.”
No, because I would of included the tail end that mentioned potential gang involvement.
You’re looking at one suggestion thru a tunnel too small to see all included.
===============================================
“But steering back to the poverty level issue, GOP policies contribute to this more than Democrats. Granted, there are arguments but history pretty much proves it.”
Maybe in your revisionist history.
Had it not been for individual land ownership and private property (conservative staples) we wouldn’t be here.
How’d “The New Deal” work out ?
You’re very well spoken, much like Obama
July 25th, 2012 at 2:17 pm
Whatever Mick, I’ve seen you get worked up over me saying that telling kids Santa is a lie is a good thing, I’m sure this would russel your feathers. Your full of sh*t and you know it.
July 25th, 2012 at 4:12 pm
I’m with Snow on the Santa thing. When kids do finally learn the truth, it is their first experience realizing that their parents are liars. Save their innocence and tell them the truth — that toys come from Obama.
Ronald, buy a paragraph break key for your keyboard. I think it is funny that you painstakingly assemble your important reader comment in Word before pasting them, but while composing your great prose … space them please, or even better find a copy editor to make them more cogent.
cooo, you are welcome to come down from your professorial perch and interact with the little people any time you like.
July 25th, 2012 at 5:51 pm
“Whatever Mick, I’ve seen you get worked up over me saying that telling kids Santa is a lie is a good thing, I’m sure this would russel your feathers. Your full of sh*t and you know it.”
Santa is not a lie.
He actually existed and drew a tradition that was followed. Many today carry his tradition.
Thats how I explained it to my kids.
You left out half the story, just like you left omitted Andys gang mention.
Be honest.
Ya see, back in my days, if some liberal teacher said my parents were lying to me and Santa didnt exist her ass would be fired.
I was quite happy believing in Santa and just as joyful when I was told he was actually a tradition.
Besides, if you were offended by your parents fairy tales when you found out the deal with Santa and you blew away a sht load of people.
You’re stupid.
Most kids did the math on their own and just played along with mom n dad.
So, they were all bad parents whos kids turned into mass murderers.
You could say the same for religion.
But, when taken out of context and cherry picked like you did with Andy, sht starts happening.
Take a midol.
I’ve been in the middle of shootouts.
Its the shttiest feeling in the world layin on a 7-11 floor with 3 teen girls and their mom sobbing away crawling to a back room.
And yeah, the first fckin thing thru my mind was a radical Muslim, an Occupy Wall Street anarchist or a supporter of Barack Hussein Obama?”
Those people weren’t even an issue during the L.A. riots.
I was absolutely right thinking it was gangsters because they’d done this sht a million times before.
Today,in a theater, I might think it were a radical Muslim, or an Occupier/Anarchist.
Because “TODAY” these people have proven to have done this sht a million times.
What some thought at first was a prank were not wrong for that assumption.
I can see Anarchist, terrorists,or radical parties wanting to make a huge public scare.
But you failed to mention Andys inclusion of gangs.
And thats a mitigating factor for Andy.
Certainly not your feigned outrage.
And why are you defending Muslim terrorists for being a supposed initial suspect ?
As far as Giffords goes, that was politics, one party blaming another, to your credit, you protested.
So Andy mentioned the gangs, this is fact.
But how many gangs have their shootouts in dark theaters ?
If you’d pull yours out.
You’d notice theres less people with their head up their ass than you think
July 25th, 2012 at 6:37 pm
Ronald.
You remind me of Brian
(inside joke)
July 26th, 2012 at 2:14 am
@ Ronald
“Bush/GOP drunken spending era”??? LOL! You slay me, Ronald with your myopic view.
Obama has spent more in three years than Bush did in 8, so how drunk is Obama? I should also add that with the GDP and employment growth we had thanks to the Bush Tax Cuts, the nation was on track to return to surpluses with the last GOP passed federal budget of 2006. Then Pelosi and Reid got control of Congress and trashed that plan.
As for “fabricated attacks on Carter and Clinton”, it is documented FACT that the Community Reinvestment Act, started under Carter and expanded under Clinton, created the whole housing bubble and subprime mortgage mess. Add to that Clinton’s Treasury Secretary, Robert Rubin, expanding the derivatives market, opening the door to toxic assets like credit default swaps and traunches of mortgage-backed securities, and you land where we are today.
July 26th, 2012 at 2:20 am
As for Iraq, Ronald, do I really need to remind you that every single major intelligence service on the planet, from France to Russia, from China to Israel, all believed Saddam was working on WMDs? That Saddam admitted after his capture that he deliberately pretended to be building WMDs to spread fear to his neighbors like Iran?
I suppose the FACT that Iraq was still not complying with the UN’s 17-point terms of the cease fire agreement from Gulf War I means nothing either to you.
July 26th, 2012 at 2:29 am
If, Ronald, your grasp of economics is as poor as your grasp of history, then there is little point in countering your foolish comments in Wind-Bag #32.
Again, the Bush Tax Cuts did get us out of the Dot-Com/9-11 recession, with some 57 consecutive months of job growth of 300K+/month. The national unemployment rate by late 2005 was under, UNDER 5%. The average GDP growth rate was more than 4%/year.
Oh, was Iraq really our most expensive war, adjusted for inflation?
July 26th, 2012 at 7:18 am
I guess I missed the Santa argument but it seems to come into play in Andy’s response as he insist on seeing what he wants to see regardless of reality. Like Micky’s #36 post, he finds a glimmer of substance to use as evidence that “Santa is not a lie”.
^ Happy Patrick? We could haggle how or why the deficit grew under Obama but the bulk of it points back to he Bush era policies. You and I know this. We could look at bailouts and stimulus but that was a result of picking up the pieces of previous admin.
You say “the nation was on track to return to surpluses with the last GOP passed federal budget of 2006. Then Pelosi and Reid got control of Congress and trashed that plan”. This is the same ole non sequitur garbage that is so often tossed from conservative hacks after their arguments fall flat (well, not the “the nation was on track to return to surpluses”, that’s just outright bull crap). You disregard history and then assign blame to Dems simply because voters tossed Rs out of office and handed power over to them. I assume you’re using the same rationale here as you did with Obama (“the economy began to tank once Obama completed his theft of the nomination from Hillary and it became quite clear that he was going to defeat McCain”) and that your implied solid ground/robust/on the road to surplus crashed due to their very existence. That’s just intellectually dishonest as well as intellectual laziness. If that’s your argument, I’m sure you believe in the Easter Bunny as well. But I’ll ask you the same as I’ve asked many. If the 2006 Dem takeover contributed to the economic downturn, please point to any legislation to validate that claim. What legislation(s) or law(s) were they and how did it change the dynamics of the economy? If you want to stick with your “they were just there” theory, why not blame them for the KY ice storm, ID flood, or CA fires, all of which happened during that era and under their watch. It has equal credence.
July 26th, 2012 at 10:44 am
Happy dance! I could read your first two paragraphs, only giving up this time when I saw the third.
July 26th, 2012 at 2:20 pm
” Like Micky’s #36 post, he finds a glimmer of substance to use as evidence that “Santa is not a lie”.”
I’ve got more faith in those that carry on a tradition that brings joy to billions of children than I do any of that alphabet soup you puked up on our screens
Let them be kids for Crust sake you fckin ass hole.
“A glimmer of substance” ?
Dont try on substance, it doesnt fit you well.
Your snide discounts of others is not substantial debate.
Yeah, I’m with Patrick, you’re babbling & boring and know nothing of foreign affairs or at least the last 10 years economics.
Your posts make as much sense as growing corn for ethanol during a drought.
Saint Nicholas (Greek: Ἅγιος Νικόλαος, Hagios ["Saint", literally "Holy", Latin: Sanctus] Nicolaus ["victory of the people"]) (270 – 6 December 343),[3][4] also called Nikolaos of Myra, was a historic 4th-century saint and Greek[5] Bishop of Myra (Demre, part of modern-day Turkey) in Lycia. Because of the many miracles attributed to his intercession, he is also known as Nikolaos the Wonderworker (Νικόλαος ὁ Θαυματουργός, Nikolaos ho Thaumaturgos). He had a reputation for secret gift-giving, such as putting coins in the shoes of those who left them out for him, and thus became the model for Santa Claus, whose modern name comes from the Dutch Sinterklaas, itself from a series of elisions and corruptions of the transliteration of “Saint Nikolaos”. His reputation evolved among the faithful, as was common for early Christian saints.[6] In 1087, part of the relics (about half of the bones) were furtively translated to Bari, in southeastern Italy; for this reason, he is also known as Nikolaos of Bari. The remaining bones were taken to Venice in 1100. His feastday is 6 December [O.S. 19 December].
The tradition has been handed down
July 26th, 2012 at 2:40 pm
“US Poverty rate Rises during Obama Depression”
Thats the title of this article.
Blame game aside—IT’S TRUE.
July 26th, 2012 at 7:03 pm
Actually Faye, there was never a depression during the Obama administration. Blame game aside, false. I just stayed away from that one because there was so much ammo available. Thanks for the opportunity to force yet another lie front and center.
July 26th, 2012 at 7:38 pm
“there was never a depression during the Obama administration. Blame game aside, false”
Yeah, there wasnt one during Bush’s term either. Being disingenuous will getcha on my shtlist every time.
A couple of the bail outs were on Bush, granted.
But not nearly as many as Obama applied,and as many trillions wasted.
Obamas on record saying he saved us from a depression prolly a couple hundred times.
Since there never was one on either ones watch and what recession we did have in 08 Dickhead only made worse, 4 times over, I’d say your petty argument sux pretty much.
Most everyone would say so too, except for those vested in Barryworld or far left moonbats in denial.
At this point, we are as close to a full blown depression as weve ever been since the thirties.
The private sector will save us.
Its simple.
The private sector is not as morally, ethically, and financially broke as our government.
(present staff included “”big time bro”")
July 26th, 2012 at 9:28 pm
Ron is one of those moonbats who use the term “summer of recovery”.
ROFL
July 27th, 2012 at 4:11 am
A whole lot of people find Obama depressing…
Aside from that, the GDP certainly did contract during Obama’s first, and hopefully only term in office.
July 27th, 2012 at 4:14 am
Way back in the 1970s there was the National Lampoon Radio Show. They did a skit about Santa Karl, the Soviet-Commie version of Santa Claus. He would visit homes and leave folks gifts of hammers, strips of leather and bits of cloth.
July 27th, 2012 at 5:00 am
And I’ve laid out and explained in detail Micky, our economic situation is a direct result of GOP policy. If we are, as you say, “as close to a full blown depression as weve ever been since the thirties” or even if the economy hasn’t picked up as one would like, it’s a result of the GOP demanding the continuation of failed policies, filibustering key appointees (which they’ve admitted were qualified), changing directions on policies they used to say would help the economy, holding corrective economic legislation hostage while demanding the inclusion of legislation that promoted their political agenda, and intentionally sabotaging the economy with an admission that the goal was to “insure that Obama is a one term President”.
Even the very topic, “US Poverty Rate Rises During Obama Depression”, is blatantly distorted and an outright lie. The rise of poverty is a result of the very policies you and conservatives advocate. This is a result of weakened Union representation, failure to increase minimum wages, pulling jobs and money from the public sector, the push for austerity, the continuation of the failed trickle down plan, and stagnating economic growth by removing tax burdens from corporations, all of which are the very policies that you endorse.
July 27th, 2012 at 5:58 am
You are such a dope, Ronald! “our economic situation is a direct result of GOP policy”? Really? LBJ expanding the federal government, blowing some $15 Trillion dollars on fighting poverty all for naught? LBJ, and FDR, severing direct ties to between our currency with gold and silver did not create an inflationary spiral which made the minimum wage pointless?
These are the policies of the Progressive movement. Sure, a few Republicans, too many in fact, subscribe to the Progressive form of Socialism. But overall, Democratic administrations have added some $8.5 Trillion to the National Debt whereas GOP administrations added $7.5 Trillion. Mostly because of programs instituted by Democrats.
July 27th, 2012 at 9:15 am
“And I’ve laid out and explained in detail Micky, our economic situation is a direct result of GOP policy.”
So fckin what ?
You left out the part where Jimmy Carter whipped up the CRA forcing banks to provide mortgages to those who could not afford them.
Carter, Clinton, Bush Sr. are all to blame for a situation that eventually caught up with itself because 40 year sof defaults came to a head. Befor, or at least by 07 the banks could not absorb anymore shtty mortgages and started selling them off to play catch up. As we all know, (except for you and your ilk)theres collateral kinetic damage connected to struggling banks and Wall st. buying up junk.
Both Bush Jr. and McCain are on record asking the 111th (Dem majority) congress to do something quick.
Dickhead Barney, basically told them everythings fine. The housing sector is doin just great.
So, spare me your recent headline knowledge. You’re embarrassing yourself with your cheap headline talking points.
GOP did not borrow trillions wasted on govt. ventures rendering nada,zip zilch.
July 27th, 2012 at 11:26 am
If I’m not mistaken, this thread is about bashing President Obama for the rise in poverty. You’re now threadjacking your very own topic.
Historically, conservatives have been accused of coddling the rich while enslaving the workers. Today’s obvious push for Plutocracy and Social Darwinism from the right validates that claim. My writings here brought up the fact that historically, while the pre civil war steel mills, coal companies, early century industrial revolution companies, not to mention early rail roads, all profited quite well yet poverty prevailed. Unions, minimum wage laws, and protective legislation for working Americans gave us the middle class. Now that GOP policies have crushed union power, prevented minimum wage raises, lobbied against health care, and once again, coddle the wealthy on every front, we’re seeing a demise of the middle class and a rise of poverty.
You’ve cowardly avoided these facts just as you’ve cowardly avoided the GOP’s intentional sabotaging of the economy in order to, which they’ve admitted to, make Obama a one term President.
July 28th, 2012 at 4:27 am
Ronald, you are either totally clueless or just a liar.
“Historically, conservatives have been accused of coddling the rich while enslaving the workers.”
HELLOOOOO??? Which political party HISTORICALLY supported slavery? Which political party is HISTORICALLY connected to the KKK? Which political party is HISTORICALLY connected to segregation and Jim Crow laws?
DEMOCRATS, that’s who!
July 28th, 2012 at 4:29 am
Oh, and BTW, Ronald, who did all those ultra-rich, greedy Wall Street bankers and traders support by overwhelming margins of cash in 2008? O-B-A-M-A.
July 28th, 2012 at 7:35 am
Andy, you again ignore the arguments I’ve presented, cheery picked in order to create your own arguments out of thin air, and then claim victory for your fabricated argument.
We can argue your minute points to death and I could counter with how the GOP pretends to care when it comes to abortions, yet cheer when a candidate advocates that those without insurance just go home and die. We could talk about their moral stance on one issue but look at the abject unconcern for the needy. I could write pages of hypocrisy as can you but that really isn’t the issue. The issue is your very post which not only intentionally misleads that President Obama has created a depression (which is an indisputable and out right lie, dishonesty at it’s highest level), but you incorrectly blame the President for the increased poverty that’s a result of GOP policies.
1) The failed trickle down plan.
Promoting lowering corporate taxes for companies that are already paying negative taxes.
2) Austerity.
3) Weakening workers right to bargain.
4) Eliminating or cutting back social programs.
5) Pushing Plutocracy and Social Darwinism.
6) Demanding that health care is unattainable for millions.
7) Preventing minimum wage increases.
9) Discouraging educating the poor by cutting back on Pell Grants.
10) Intentionally sabotaging the economy with a clear admission of the political gain of unseating Obama.
And I could go on and on.
None of these are Obama policies.
All of them are directly or indirectly GOP policies.
All of these encourages or promotes poverty.
I’ve elaborate extensively on these but you’ve ignored them, countering instead with non sequitur babble about everything from blaming LBJ to Carter to Clinton to flip flopping that it’s all due to “Obama completed his theft of the nomination from Hillary” (which is yet another lie as he won the votes but even the very argument is divorced from reality). You later conclude that it’s all a result of Dems taking power in 06 but as I expected, you failed to produce any legislation supporting that. It’s as if you can just make up any stupid shit at any time, flip flop from one claim to another at will, and still expect to be taken seriously.
July 28th, 2012 at 8:59 am
Look dude.
We can go on and on.
Bottom line is, this moron tool a shtty situation and made it worse.
Fact is, most people trust republicans with the economy.
After 911 Bush took what could of been a serious recession and put usback on track in no time.
He didnt start bailing out Air Lines or using the lull as an excuse to do progressive favors.
Were done.
Mostly because you’re ideologically bigoted with your teams interest at heart. Which makes honest conversation impossible
July 28th, 2012 at 10:15 am
Ronald;
“10) Intentionally sabotaging the economy with a clear admission of the political gain of unseating Obama.”
You’re sick.
Who made any “clear admission” ?
So, what you’re saying is that as soon as the Bush administration found out about Obamas intention to run for pres way back in 07 they intentionally set a bad economy in motion just to make him and Democrats look bad for four years ?
You’re right.
Bush also masterminded 911.
Hopefully, after that exposure, most readers here will ignore your idiocy.
After reading your crap for the last week its plain to see pot calling the kettle
I broke my word earlier claiming I wouldn’t respond to you anymore. It wont happen again.
July 28th, 2012 at 12:34 pm
It would likely be in your best interest to avoid responding as each time you do, you only look more foolish.
For example, you state that “Bush took what could of been a serious recession and put usback(sic) on track” and then say that Obama took a shitty economy and made it worse. Flip flop much? Which was it? How could it have been shitty when Bush put it on the right track?
You keep asking the same things while avoiding what I’ve already said, as in post #25 paragraphs 3 and 4. And that’s just getting started.
It’s not surprising that when your arguments fail to stand up to scrutiny and your weak tea talking points have been debunked, to see you resort to a sophomoric tactic of pretending you didn’t hear or read anything while claiming to have won.
I suppose, as you say, “were done”.
July 29th, 2012 at 4:39 am
@ Ronald
1) “failed trickle down plan” Are you referring to government spending? Stimulus? At least the GOP version of trickle down allows individuals to trickle their own money as they choose, not have it confiscated and then redistributed.
2) “Austerity” Is being responsible bad? Is living within your limits bad?
3) “Weakening workers right to bargain” It’s not the GOP doing this, but the Free Market. The American economy is no longer as dependent on heavy industry. Recent legislation is geared towards ending the Democrat policy of irresponsible public employee contracts which cannot be sustained.
4 & 5) I’ll do these two together as they point out your own hypocrisy, Ronald. In #4 you chastise the GOP for cutting back on “social programs” and in #5 you chastise the GOP for their own “social programs.” Maybe the idea here is to just get the government out of our lives as much as possible?
July 29th, 2012 at 4:58 am
@ Ronald:
6) “Demanding that healthcare is unattainable for millions.” Who exactly is saying this? Give me names and precise quotes! The GOP stance is that healthcare would be more affordable and practical if the Free Market were more involved. In Michigan, the state government only allows for 6 insurance companies to provide coverage. In Texas, its about 200 companies. Guess where the rates are cheaper?
7) Minimum wage, as I said before, is pointless since our currency is not stable nor fixed to a standard of value. When we still had a ‘bimetallic’ monetary system, the minimum wage meant something and was in fact quite livable. One could buy a new car in a year or even a starter home in 3 years. Progressive policies have destroyed our currency. Now, raising the minimum wage only makes it harder for small businesses to hire new employees. BTW, a whole lot of jobs, such as flipping burgers at MacDonalds, pays well above the minimum wage and yet nobody seems to want to work?
9) Government funded education is a disgrace! Nearly every major urban area has major problems with their public school systems. The universities are not much better as, thanks to government student loans, they increase their tuition costs at rates well above inflation. Instead of badgering oil companies on price gouging, Congress should drag in the deans of every college in America.
10) “Intentionally sabotaging the economy…” is what Obama is doing, not the GOP. Might I remind you, and the other moonbats for the millionth time, that Obama and the Democrats had TOTAL control of government up until Scott Brown was elected in 2010. Obama wanted to transform America using Spain as a model for a ‘Green Economy.’ Just look at Spain now! Thanks to Obama, we are Spain!
July 29th, 2012 at 5:32 am
As a political writer of this blog, I find it questionable that you are confused on the meaning of “trickle down”. I suppose that out of desperation to save face, you come up with some disingenuous way of pretending not to understand the context. Well after 10 years, Bush tax cuts, as previously explained, as history has proven, and as the reality of the economy speaks for itself, has not worked. It is a failed policy. You can point all you like, spin it all you like, or close your eyes to it all you like but it just has not worked nor has it ever worked. Just this week, 40 top economists from both parties agreed and added that the GOP has abandoned economic realty.
Are you advocating Plutocracy and Social Darwinism as a way of getting the government out of peoples lives?
July 29th, 2012 at 5:37 am
“For example, you state that “Bush took what could of been a serious recession and put usback(sic) on track” and then say that Obama took a shitty economy and made it worse. Flip flop much?”
Not at all ya fckin ass hole.
Things were great for years after 911 tolerable until Bushs last year.
Then, I mentioned McCain n Bush Beggin BVarney Frank and the 111th congressto deal with housing, remember ?
Of course not.
You’re just an argumentative punk who thinks his over-poised idiocy is a gift.
When really you’re just a wordy troll
Read that again, thats honesty.
If I do respond to you from now on it will be concise,rude, nude, crude and sharp.
Might even make you cry.
Fck you and goodbye, and I pray no bodily harm comes to you.
Sounds difficult enough for you the way things are.
When two men conversing are well aware one is full o sht, its entertainment.
And you’re fckin hilarious dude…
Asta La Vista
July 29th, 2012 at 5:53 am
“It’s not surprising that when your arguments fail to stand up to scrutiny and your weak tea talking points have been debunked,”
Really ?
What arguments have you debunked so far ?
What claims have you proven ?
Any documents to back your bullsht up ?
Nope, just projections and theories with no teeth.
” you are confused on the meaning of “trickle down”. I suppose that out of desperation to save face, you come up with some disingenuous way of pretending not to understand the context. Well after 10 years, Bush tax cuts, as previously explained, as history has proven, and as the reality of the economy speaks for itself, has not worked. It is a failed policy.”
Seen 2001-2005-6 recovery numbers ?.
Those tax breaks worked.
Which is why Dickhead wants them to stay(all of a sudden)but he’ll call them something else and take credit much like he has for many of Bushs policies he sht on during his campaign, but found very necessary, tasty and useful later.
Drone programs, renditions, Gitmo
You’re a joke
July 29th, 2012 at 6:24 am
Ronald,
When the Bush Tax Cuts were first introduced, they provided certainty and stability. If you are a business owner, or an investor, you want to know that you can plan on rates and other factors remaining the same for the next ten years. These silly extensions of one or two years are doing NOTHING to help!
“40 top economists”??? Oh really? Please name them. You are the one being dishonest here.
As for “Social Darwinism”, Planned Parenthood has a monopoly on that. Margaret Sanger really did base her views on depopulating blacks and other ‘inferiors’ (her term, not mine) based on the works of Charles Darwin. Lenin, too, was a big fan of Chucky.
Nothing says “Plutocracy” more than the Liberal elitist mentality. The concept that the government knows better than you do how to spend your money, how best to redistribute it in a fair and ‘just’ manner.
July 29th, 2012 at 8:41 am
Andy;
“Planned Parenthood”
This gives me a chuckle each time its mentioned.
What Parenthood ?
They have a crystal ball telling folks when they can stop killing their parasites ?
If it weren’t for Unplanned Parenthood think of all the jobs we’d lose.
Anyway, lets just put Ron in the GOK category and move on from this one man circle jerk
July 29th, 2012 at 8:58 am
Speaking of poverty.
I know all the Paramedics on my side of the isle. Plus, my pain manager understands what my inventory needs to look like, and why.
My son opened our survival first aid kit and sht his pants.
Ron,I could probably re-attach your head and it would work. Better.