Synthaholic
Diamond Member
Where was all this concern about the debt when Bush was president, racking it all up?Maybe Obama can look into the fact that we spend more then we take in.
His gesture here is sort of meaningless.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Where was all this concern about the debt when Bush was president, racking it all up?Maybe Obama can look into the fact that we spend more then we take in.
His gesture here is sort of meaningless.
I don't think you'll see many history books that rank Obama below Bush Jnr or Bush Snr.
Bush Senior was fine! No problem, even won his war. (Desert Storm)
It was Bush Jr. that was such a complete disaster.
It is true that so far Obama hasn't messed up quite as bad as George W did, though he has NOT unwound Bush's stupid wars nearly fast enough, and of course Obamacare is just socialism and he'd do a lot more socialism if he weren't blocked constantly by Congress, thank goodness. Obama can't be trusted, but if he is blocked in his socialist ambitions, so far he hasn't done much actual harm. He's perceived as weak abroad, of course, and that may lead to war with NK and Iran, that would be bad.
Frustration with the two-party system I completely understand - Americans should work hard to have that overthrown as soon as possible.
I also understand frustration with the cynicism of politics in general, and of course Obama is as open to accusation to that as anyone else. Whether the Monsanto Bill is right or wrong I wouldn't like to say, but I certainly understand people feeling concerned about it.
But the two-party system and the cyncism of US politics are not Obama's fault.
I don't think anyone ever accused Obama of that.
He is however the President and a central figure that people can direct their frustrations to. He represents the establishment, and a system that is becoming increasingly infiltrated with special interest monies and corporate influence. I'm no old buck, but I've read a few books in my lifetime and it appears things are getting worse (vs better).
I mean, in the 1990's we saw important banking regulations being ripped apart, paving the way for a Wall Street free for all that ended up collapsing our economy in 2006-2008. The Secretary of Treasury at the time (a former Goldman Sachs Chief) convinced the upper shelves of our Gov't to bail out the banks with US taxpayer money, and that's exactly what they did.
This bailout is still going on today with the Fed buying billions and billions in toxic assets from these banks every single flipping month.
And in comes Obama on his shining horse in 2008, talking about "fat cats" and holding these guys responsible. If he didn't say these things, he might not have gotten elected, but he did and I'm holding him accountable for that.
Not only did he not come through on his promise, he is actually turning out to be one of the laxest Presidents in history when it comes to prosecuting white collar crime - despite after all that's happened in the past 10 years. Yea, folks are upset, and obviously Wall Street has zero incentive to change any of their behavior. What does that mean? More fraud, more profits, and eventually another collapse (quick tidbit: banks still hold $700 trillion + of derivative risk on their books as of last year).
Kids are graduating with $50k in college debt and very few good jobs to chose from. The system is clearly not working very well and needs to be overhauled.
It's come to a boiling point.
.
.
Hello,
I feel like defending Obama is becoming an increasingly difficult task for our country's Democrats. If you still support, just wondering what your rationale is. I'm being 100% genuine here and just want to come to a better understanding.
"Included in the bill is a rider, Section 735, which says federal courts cannot intervene and halt biotech companies from planting and selling GMO goods to the public, even if testing proves them to be potentially hazardous to the greater public. Because the legislation largely shields agriculture giants Monsanto from litigation...
...after more than 250,000 people signed a petition asking the White House to intervene and ensure the bill was not passed, Pres. Obama nonetheless approved it last week"
Time to rethink Obama? The above is blatantly against the best interests of US Citizens.
Top senator apologizes for 'Monsanto Protection Act' after public outrage ? RT USA
.
I don't think you'll see many history books that rank Obama below Bush Jnr or Bush Snr.
Bush Senior was fine! No problem, even won his war. (Desert Storm)
It was Bush Jr. that was such a complete disaster.
It is true that so far Obama hasn't messed up quite as bad as George W did, though he has NOT unwound Bush's stupid wars nearly fast enough, and of course Obamacare is just socialism and he'd do a lot more socialism if he weren't blocked constantly by Congress, thank goodness. Obama can't be trusted, but if he is blocked in his socialist ambitions, so far he hasn't done much actual harm. He's perceived as weak abroad, of course, and that may lead to war with NK and Iran, that would be bad.
I guess, if you want to call that a war.
It's easy to look good when the enemy lays down their weapons and surrenders by the hundreds at a time in the desert.Bush Senior was fine! No problem, even won his war. (Desert Storm)
It was Bush Jr. that was such a complete disaster.
It is true that so far Obama hasn't messed up quite as bad as George W did, though he has NOT unwound Bush's stupid wars nearly fast enough, and of course Obamacare is just socialism and he'd do a lot more socialism if he weren't blocked constantly by Congress, thank goodness. Obama can't be trusted, but if he is blocked in his socialist ambitions, so far he hasn't done much actual harm. He's perceived as weak abroad, of course, and that may lead to war with NK and Iran, that would be bad.
I guess, if you want to call that a war.
It was a war..and it was done brilliantly.
Same with Panama.
I didn't agree with either. But in terms of planning, execution and outcomes?
Flawless.
Hello,
I feel like defending Obama is becoming an increasingly difficult task for our country's Democrats. If you still support, just wondering what your rationale is. I'm being 100% genuine here and just want to come to a better understanding.
"Included in the bill is a rider, Section 735, which says federal courts cannot intervene and halt biotech companies from planting and selling GMO goods to the public, even if testing proves them to be potentially hazardous to the greater public. Because the legislation largely shields agriculture giants Monsanto from litigation...
...after more than 250,000 people signed a petition asking the White House to intervene and ensure the bill was not passed, Pres. Obama nonetheless approved it last week"
Time to rethink Obama? The above is blatantly against the best interests of US Citizens.
Top senator apologizes for 'Monsanto Protection Act' after public outrage ? RT USA
.
I'm not used to this level of dishonesty from you, Kevin. Is it desperation?Hello,
I feel like defending Obama is becoming an increasingly difficult task for our country's Democrats. If you still support, just wondering what your rationale is. I'm being 100% genuine here and just want to come to a better understanding.
"Included in the bill is a rider, Section 735, which says federal courts cannot intervene and halt biotech companies from planting and selling GMO goods to the public, even if testing proves them to be potentially hazardous to the greater public. Because the legislation largely shields agriculture giants Monsanto from litigation...
...after more than 250,000 people signed a petition asking the White House to intervene and ensure the bill was not passed, Pres. Obama nonetheless approved it last week"
Time to rethink Obama? The above is blatantly against the best interests of US Citizens.
Top senator apologizes for 'Monsanto Protection Act' after public outrage ? RT USA
.
ETA: OOPS! I was confusing you with Kevin Kennedy. Perhaps this IS your regular level of dishonesty.
Hello,
I feel like defending Obama is becoming an increasingly difficult task for our country's Democrats. If you still support, just wondering what your rationale is. I'm being 100% genuine here and just want to come to a better understanding.
"Included in the bill is a rider, Section 735, which says federal courts cannot intervene and halt biotech companies from planting and selling GMO goods to the public, even if testing proves them to be potentially hazardous to the greater public. Because the legislation largely shields agriculture giants Monsanto from litigation...
...after more than 250,000 people signed a petition asking the White House to intervene and ensure the bill was not passed, Pres. Obama nonetheless approved it last week"
Time to rethink Obama? The above is blatantly against the best interests of US Citizens.
Top senator apologizes for 'Monsanto Protection Act' after public outrage ? RT USA
.
I tend to be independent but I am curious how you can fault Obama for that provision? Is he supposed to shut down the entire Ag department over one provision he doesn't like. There is much not to like about Obama but trying to lay this at his feet instead of the home state Senator to Monsanto that stuffed this rider into the bill says more about you than Obama.
Frustration with the two-party system I completely understand - Americans should work hard to have that overthrown as soon as possible.
I also understand frustration with the cynicism of politics in general, and of course Obama is as open to accusation to that as anyone else. Whether the Monsanto Bill is right or wrong I wouldn't like to say, but I certainly understand people feeling concerned about it.
But the two-party system and the cyncism of US politics are not Obama's fault.
I don't think anyone ever accused Obama of that.
He is however the President and a central figure that people can direct their frustrations to. He represents the establishment, and a system that is becoming increasingly infiltrated with special interest monies and corporate influence. I'm no old buck, but I've read a few books in my lifetime and it appears things are getting worse (vs better).
I mean, in the 1990's we saw important banking regulations being ripped apart, paving the way for a Wall Street free for all that ended up collapsing our economy in 2006-2008. The Secretary of Treasury at the time (a former Goldman Sachs Chief) convinced the upper shelves of our Gov't to bail out the banks with US taxpayer money, and that's exactly what they did.
This bailout is still going on today with the Fed buying billions and billions in toxic assets from these banks every single flipping month.
And in comes Obama on his shining horse in 2008, talking about "fat cats" and holding these guys responsible. If he didn't say these things, he might not have gotten elected, but he did and I'm holding him accountable for that.
Not only did he not come through on his promise, he is actually turning out to be one of the laxest Presidents in history when it comes to prosecuting white collar crime - despite after all that's happened in the past 10 years. Yea, folks are upset, and obviously Wall Street has zero incentive to change any of their behavior. What does that mean? More fraud, more profits, and eventually another collapse (quick tidbit: banks still hold $700 trillion + of derivative risk on their books as of last year).
Kids are graduating with $50k in college debt and very few good jobs to chose from. The system is clearly not working very well and needs to be overhauled.
It's come to a boiling point.
.
.
I agree but don't you think the Republican Party shares plenty of the blame?
Case in Point: Carried Interest Exemption
Hedge fund managers take a significant share of their compensation for running the fund as a percentage of the profits. It is a variable compensation plan just like a sales rep would have. So a young hard working sales rep makes 90k trying to support a family and pays 32% marginal tax.
For the Hedge fund manager, he takes 20% of profits which like the sales rep makes up about 2/3's of his income. But unlike the sales rep the Hedge Fund manager has friends in Congress so he counts his income as capital gains and only pays 15% tax on his profits.
This slimy deal has been protected by the Republican Party for years and is one of the things Obama wants to eliminate in exchange for entitlement reform but the Republicans say no.
Probably the only affirmative defense of Obama is the only defense that matters:
US voters chose Obama over a man who destroyed more money for more people than he made for himself. It was the smartest vote America had made in four years.
That is all that matters at this point.
While I must support Obama in opposition to any Republican (corporatist) I completely agree with your assessment.Hello,
I feel like defending Obama is becoming an increasingly difficult task for our country's Democrats. If you still support, just wondering what your rationale is. I'm being 100% genuine here and just want to come to a better understanding.
[...]
Hello,
I feel like defending Obama is becoming an increasingly difficult task for our country's Democrats. If you still support, just wondering what your rationale is. I'm being 100% genuine here and just want to come to a better understanding.
"Included in the bill is a rider, Section 735, which says federal courts cannot intervene and halt biotech companies from planting and selling GMO goods to the public, even if testing proves them to be potentially hazardous to the greater public. Because the legislation largely shields agriculture giants Monsanto from litigation...
...after more than 250,000 people signed a petition asking the White House to intervene and ensure the bill was not passed, Pres. Obama nonetheless approved it last week"
Time to rethink Obama? The above is blatantly against the best interests of US Citizens.
Top senator apologizes for 'Monsanto Protection Act' after public outrage ? RT USA
.
I tend to be independent but I am curious how you can fault Obama for that provision? Is he supposed to shut down the entire Ag department over one provision he doesn't like. There is much not to like about Obama but trying to lay this at his feet instead of the home state Senator to Monsanto that stuffed this rider into the bill says more about you than Obama.
Hey, it's a point, but has Obama been an anti-Monsanto President? Didn't he recently appoint Michael Taylor (former Monsanto exec) to a top spot within the FDA?
And you know what, I don't accept that Obama has to sign this document despite the rider. We have checks and balances for a very good reason, and I think it's his job to be on the lookout for us. If there's a provision that seriously threatens the health and safety of our nation, and/or a provision that was clearly pushed through by Senators/Representatives that are bought by corporations (and have an ulterior agenda), than it's up to the President to reject the document. I mean, is that too much to ask?
Isn't that why we have the President sign this in the first place? Why even bother?
.
.
I tend to be independent but I am curious how you can fault Obama for that provision? Is he supposed to shut down the entire Ag department over one provision he doesn't like. There is much not to like about Obama but trying to lay this at his feet instead of the home state Senator to Monsanto that stuffed this rider into the bill says more about you than Obama.
Hey, it's a point, but has Obama been an anti-Monsanto President? Didn't he recently appoint Michael Taylor (former Monsanto exec) to a top spot within the FDA?
And you know what, I don't accept that Obama has to sign this document despite the rider. We have checks and balances for a very good reason, and I think it's his job to be on the lookout for us. If there's a provision that seriously threatens the health and safety of our nation, and/or a provision that was clearly pushed through by Senators/Representatives that are bought by corporations (and have an ulterior agenda), than it's up to the President to reject the document. I mean, is that too much to ask?
Isn't that why we have the President sign this in the first place? Why even bother?
.
.
You don’t have to look at this bill alone though TBH. Just because this was a rider is rather meaningless.
The patriot act, the NDAA, Obamacare (no matter where you are on this he forced the use of insurance companies which was counter to what the left envisioned) the CPA (creating permanent bank bailout funds) and on and on and on.
Obama has essentially been Bush over again with a different foreign policy
Probably the only affirmative defense of Obama is the only defense that matters:
US voters chose Obama over a man who damaged more lives than he benefited.
It was the smartest vote America had made since 2008.
That is all that matters at this point.
Hello,
I feel like defending Obama is becoming an increasingly difficult task for our country's Democrats. If you still support, just wondering what your rationale is. I'm being 100% genuine here and just want to come to a better understanding.
"Included in the bill is a rider, Section 735, which says federal courts cannot intervene and halt biotech companies from planting and uselling GMO goods to the public, even if testing proves them to be potentially hazardous to the greater public. Because the legislation largely shields agriculture giants Monsanto from litigation...
...after more than 250,000 people signed a petition asking the White House to intervene and ensure the bill was not passed, Pres. Obama nonetheless approved it last week"
Time to rethink Obama? The above is blatantly against the best interests of US Citizens.
Top senator apologizes for 'Monsanto Protection Act' after public outrage ? RT USA
.
I tend to be independent but I am curious how you can fault Obama for that provision? Is he supposed to shut down the entire Ag department over one provision he doesn't like. There is much not to like about Obama but trying to lay this at his feet instead of the home state Senator to Monsanto that stuffed this rider into the bill says more about you than Obama.
Hey, it's a point, but has Obama been an anti-Monsanto President? Didn't he recently appoint Michael Taylor (former Monsanto exec) to a top spot within the FDA?
And you know what, I don't accept that Obama has to sign this document despite the rider. We have checks and balances for a very good reason, and I think it's his job to be on the lookout for us. If there's a provision that seriously threatens the health and safety of our nation, and/or a provision that was clearly pushed through by Senators/Representatives that are bought by corporations (and have an ulterior agenda), than it's up to the President to reject the document. I mean, is that too much to ask?
Isn't that why we have the President sign this in the first place? Why even bother?
.
.