NBC News: The Obama Presidency is over

[Clocker]

After a WSJ/NBC News poll showing strong public disapproval of virtually everything the president is doing, Chuck Todd of NBC News (http://washingtonexaminer.com/about-that-wall-street-journal-poll-is-the-public-saying-obamas-presidency-is-over/article/2549878), a long time supporter of the administration, says that the presidency is essentially over.

President Obama's approval rating has dropped to 41 percent, a majority of Americans disapprove of his handling of foreign policy issues, he has lost support from the Hispanic community and Americans actually think his administration is less competent than the Bush White House post-Hurricane Katrina, according to a new survey from the Wall Street Journal and NBC News.The survey would appear to be so bad, in fact, that NBC News' Chuck Todd said Tuesday that the poll basically means the public has declared the Obama presidency to be over.

"This poll is a disaster for the president," Todd said. "You look at the presidency here: Lowest job rating, tied for the lowest; lowest on foreign policy. His administration is seen as less competent than the Bush administration, post-Katrina."

"On the issue of do you believe he can still lead? A majority believe no. Essentially the public is saying your presidency is over," Todd added.

[tucker6]

Unfortunately, he can still create havoc through Executive Orders. He needs to be charged with treason.

[ArlJim78]

The formal aspect of this clownish presidency has been over for some time, but in no way is he finished with his primary mission of destroying the country. Like I said many times I picture he and Jarret going out like Saddam did in Quwait lighting all the oil wells on fire. His final presidential pardon will be one for the record books, and there is no telling how much additional damage he can do to the economy through regulations and executive orders. and with his deft touch with world affairs (lol). Things seem awful now and they are, but after another 2 1/2 years of this it can and will get a lot worse.

[classhandicapper]

Never in my lifetime did I think I'd see a worse president than Bush, but we have already far exceeded that goal. Bush had some borderline traitors advising him on foreign policy and he personally had a limited understanding of economics.

Obama has delusional incompetents advising him on every aspect of the economy and foreign policy and is outrageously naive and unprepared on everything himself. Given the current level of incompetence you would think he would do something right here or there by accident.

[tucker6]

Never in my lifetime did I think I'd see a worse president than Bush, but we have already far exceeded that goal. Bush had some borderline traitors advising him on foreign policy and he personally had a limited understanding of economics.

Obama has delusional incompetents advising him on every aspect of the economy and foreign policy and is outrageously naive and unprepared on everything himself. Given the current level of incompetence you would think he would do something right here or there by accident.
Great post. As to the bolded, a strong trend is never by accident. We only hope it is.

[RaceBookJoe]

Never in my lifetime did I think I'd see a worse president than Bush, but we have already far exceeded that goal. Bush had some borderline traitors advising him on foreign policy and he personally had a limited understanding of economics.

Obama has delusional incompetents advising him on every aspect of the economy and foreign policy and is outrageously naive and unprepared on everything himself. Given the current level of incompetence you would think he would do something right here or there by accident.

Good post , and amazing that there are clowns who actually defend his impotency.

[incoming]

The Washington General just won 3 in a row from the Harlem Globetrotters. :kiss:

[JustRalph]

By the time he gets done we might be fighting in the streets........or at least you guys in blue states will be.......

[BlueShoe]

When even NBC becomes cool things must be pretty grim. Like they say, even the rats are abandoning ship.

[Clocker]

When even NBC becomes cool things must be pretty grim. Like they say, even the rats are abandoning ship.

And one of the anchors at CNN called the IRS computer crash story a fairy tale. The end is near.

[boxcar]

Given the current level of incompetence you would think he would do something right here or there by accident.

Yikes! We can't even liken him to a blind squirrel. That's pretty bad.

Boxcar

[mostpost]

After a WSJ/NBC News poll showing strong public disapproval of virtually everything the president is doing, Chuck Todd of NBC News (http://washingtonexaminer.com/about-that-wall-street-journal-poll-is-the-public-saying-obamas-presidency-is-over/article/2549878), a long time supporter of the administration, says that the presidency is essentially over.
Did we amend the Constitution when I wasn't looking? The twentieth amendment states

1: The terms of the President and Vice President shall end at noon on the 20th day of January, and the terms of Senators and Representatives at noon on the 3d day of January, of the years in which such terms would have ended if this article had not been ratified; and the terms of their successors shall then begin.

This does not change because of a poll which probably surveyed less than 1,000 people. In November of 2012 there was a poll that 125 million Americans participated in. That poll told us Barack Obama would be President of the United States until Jan. 20, 2017. Deal with it.

[dylbert]

After a WSJ/NBC News poll showing strong public disapproval of virtually everything the president is doing, Chuck Todd of NBC News (http://washingtonexaminer.com/about-that-wall-street-journal-poll-is-the-public-saying-obamas-presidency-is-over/article/2549878), a long time supporter of the administration, says that the presidency is essentially over.For mostpost, did you miss word 'essentially'? Literally, Obama remains president as you described. Effectively, US has no president due to his inability to lead on matters, domestic or foreign.

[Clocker]

Literally, Obama remains president as you described.

Kind of like, literally, Harry Reid remains Majority Leader of the Senate, even though he does not lead anyone to do anything. He just stands at the podium of an empty Senate Chamber in front of a camera and rants about the Koch brothers, the Washington Redskins, Dick Cheney, and the evils of free speech.

[NJ Stinks]

Deal with it.

They are dealing with it - just not very well! ;)

[fast4522]

After fifteen posts in this thread it is a fun time to jump in. Who is dealing with what and how is just a matter of opinion. Dealing with matters in November as we should, God bless the republic. For both sides a good song that lightens thing up for the June time frame.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wvUQcnfwUUM

[rastajenk]

I don't think the words "lame duck" are in the Constitution, but it's a very real concept in Washington. Deal with it. :cool:

[BlueShoe]

I don't think the words "lame duck" are in the Constitution, but it's a very real concept in Washington. Deal with it. :cool:
If for some reason there was a presidential election in November instead of in 2016, Obama would lose to the GOP nominee. That is how badly his administration has unraveled and failed. This is the concept that the Left needs to deal with.

[Robert Goren]

If for some reason there was a presidential election in November instead of in 2016, Obama would lose to the GOP nominee. That is how badly his administration has unraveled and failed. This is the concept that the Left needs to deal with.The right wing conservatives were saying the same thing in 2014. If fact, several long time posters were so sure of an Obama loss that said they would quit posting here if he won. Most of them are missed by even us liberals here.

[JustRalph]

If for some reason there was a presidential election in November instead of in 2016, Obama would lose to the GOP nominee. That is how badly his administration has unraveled and failed. This is the concept that the Left needs to deal with.

Never happen. Too many takers. Divided country. We should be splitting the country. Not playing games

[classhandicapper]

The right wing conservatives were saying the same thing in 2014. If fact, several long time posters were so sure of an Obama loss that said they would quit posting here if he won. Most of them are missed by even us liberals here.

Its tough to lose to socialists when half the country is on some kind of government assistance.

If you are a socialist, all you have to do is promise and then deliver way more than the system can possibly deliver over the long term for as long as you possibly can. You will attract people to the country looking for handouts, and more importantly, eventually create more people to vote for you as your policies eat at the economy, investment capital leaves for greener pastures, and marginal people start falling into the category of needing assistance. It works great until you are a 3rd world country.

[Clocker]

Its tough to lose to socialists when half the country is on some kind of government assistance.



About 90% of those that signed up for ObamaCare on HealthCare.gov got a subsidy. The average subsidy is about 75% of the "list price" of the coverage. How many of those people approve of the job Obama is doing?

[Tom]

Never happen. Too many takers. Divided country. We should be splitting the country. Not playing games

We need to get rid of 47% of the nation.
That would make us a super power once again.
Can't sail the Battleship until the anchor is weighed.

[RaceBookJoe]

I don't think the words "lame duck" are in the Constitution, but it's a very real concept in Washington. Deal with it. :cool:

Replace "a" "e" "u" with "i" "p" "i" and that's not in the Constitution either, yet its also a very real concept in this govt.

[FantasticDan]

Replace "a" "e" "u" with "i" "p" "i" and that's not in the Constitution either, yet its also a very real concept in this govt.Just curious, but in your opinion, what was the last rough and tough administration? The one with an erection that lasted for more than four hours and wasn't gonna run to some damn doctor for it.. :blush: :ThmbUp:

[classhandicapper]

About 90% of those that signed up for ObamaCare on HealthCare.gov got a subsidy. The average subsidy is about 75% of the "list price" of the coverage. How many of those people approve of the job Obama is doing?

It's even worse than you can imagine.

I have a friend that is financially very well off, but he doesn't have much income because he chooses not to work. He qualified for a subsidy even though his net worth is 7 figures.

[RaceBookJoe]

Just curious, but in your opinion, what was the last rough and tough administration? The one with an erection that lasted for more than four hours and wasn't gonna run to some damn doctor for it.. :blush: :ThmbUp:

No clue and honestly don't care, I rarely waste my time thinking backwards. And for the record, my comment said govt not administration. So, "rough and tough"...how about the American Revolutionists just for kicks. im sure you can find a nice youtube video to link of them for all of us :)

[BlueShoe]

Never happen. Too many takers. Divided country. We should be splitting the country. Not playing games
This almost sounds like a call for revolution or civil war. Almost.

[mostpost]

For mostpost, did you miss word 'essentially'? Literally, Obama remains president as you described. Effectively, US has no president due to his inability to lead on matters, domestic or foreign.
Literally and essentially, Obama is still the President. It is Obama who secured the release of an American held prisoner by the Taliban. It is Obama who will decide our response to the situation in Iraq. Obama has lowered the unemployment rate by nearly four percent. Obama will continue to prevent the lunatic right from destroying this country.

If Obama does nothing more in the next thirty one months than veto legislation passed by the Republican troglodytes in Congress, he will be performing a great service for the country.

[Tom]

It is Obama who released the leader of ISIS.
It is Obama who release 5 terrorist planners/leaders.

[tucker6]

It is Obama who released the leader of ISIS.
It is Obama who release 5 terrorist planners/leaders.
I think you're being a little hard on Obama Tom. Obama was able to effect the glorious release of a traitorous soldier who got his own troops killed looking for him. It only cost us five leading terrorist masterminds to get such a valuable American back. Obama might even win another Nobel Peace Prize for this political stunt.

and yes, it was a political stunt. To my lefty friends, don't be so naive.

[Clocker]

It is Obama who secured the release of an American held prisoner by the Taliban. It is Obama who will decide our response to the situation in Iraq. Obama has lowered the unemployment rate by nearly four percent.


It was Obama who swapped the 5 most dangerous terrorists in Gitmo for an American deserter that his fellow soldiers in country would not attempt to recuse even when they knew where he was held.

It is Obama whose response to the Iraq crisis was to spend the weekend playing golf in Palm Springs and attending Democratic fund raisers, while his SecState attended a global warming conference.

It is Obama whose response to the Iraq crisis is to tell them to put their political house in order, and to send a few hundred "military advisers" to train the Iraq army without Congressional consent.

It was Obama whose economic policies decreased the unemployment rate by increasing the number of part time jobs and by greatly reducing the labor force participation rate.

[Clocker]

Literally and essentially, Obama is still the President.

Then why is he ignoring the problems, if not outright scandals, in his administration? Why can't the most transparent administration in history find some emails it is required by law to keep and provide? The IRS also appears to be acting as a lame duck agency, trying to skate by until 2016. The IRS is part of the Treasury Dept. Why is the Sec. of the Treasury doing nothing to clean his own house? Why is Obama doing nothing to stop this huge hit on his credibility? Even Hillary called this a scandal.

What is Obama doing about the V.A.? If there is anything he can get bipartisan Congressional support on, this is it. What has the administration done constructively?

What is he doing about the crisis on our southern border? Not a word on that out of our literal and essential leader.

[mostpost]

Its tough to lose to socialists when half the country is on some kind of government assistance.

If you are a socialist, all you have to do is promise and then deliver way more than the system can possibly deliver over the long term for as long as you possibly can. You will attract people to the country looking for handouts, and more importantly, eventually create more people to vote for you as your policies eat at the economy, investment capital leaves for greener pastures, and marginal people start falling into the category of needing assistance. It works great until you are a 3rd world country.

Your whole premise is flawed, but your first sentence is particularly bogus. To begin with I am sure you are including Medicare and Social Security in that figure. That is not government assistance. Medicare and Social Security are insurance programs which we paid premiums for all of our working lives. If you never worked and never paid into those programs, you are not eligible for their benefits.

And don't forget, even though your employer matched your contributions, that was a part of your compensation package. In reality you were paying that also,

If you are retired and have Medicare Part B or Part D, you are still paying premiums for Medicare.

What about other so called entitlements? Unemployment benefits are paid from contributions your employer makes. As before, your employer takes these into account when offering you your salary.

Food Stamps? 47 million people currently receive food stamps. That is fifteen percent of the total population. But we only spend two percent of our annual budget on Food Stamps. And we only spend 2.3% on ADFC.

But your real flaw is your belief that everyone except you is a lazy bum who expects everything for nothing. I understand that makes you feel better about yourself. Some of us don't need to pull others down to build ourselves up.

[Tom]

But your real flaw is your belief that everyone except you is a lazy bum who expects everything for nothing.

Not everyone, just 47%.

[Clocker]

Not everyone, just 47%.

That's 55% if you just look at the US Senate.

[AndyC]

If you never worked and never paid into those programs, you are not eligible for their benefits.

So if you have been married and a homemaker your entire life and never paid into the SS system you would be unable to collect SS and get medicare? Seems like you might want to check your facts before playing the "you don't know what you're talking about card".

[classhandicapper]

Your whole premise is flawed, but your first sentence is particularly bogus. To begin with I am sure you are including Medicare and Social Security in that figure. That is not government assistance. Medicare and Social Security are insurance programs which we paid premiums for all of our working lives. If you never worked and never paid into those programs, you are not eligible for their benefits.

And don't forget, even though your employer matched your contributions, that was a part of your compensation package. In reality you were paying that also,

If you are retired and have Medicare Part B or Part D, you are still paying premiums for Medicare.

What about other so called entitlements? Unemployment benefits are paid from contributions your employer makes. As before, your employer takes these into account when offering you your salary.

Food Stamps? 47 million people currently receive food stamps. That is fifteen percent of the total population. But we only spend two percent of our annual budget on Food Stamps. And we only spend 2.3% on ADFC.

But your real flaw is your belief that everyone except you is a lazy bum who expects everything for nothing. I understand that makes you feel better about yourself. Some of us don't need to pull others down to build ourselves up.

First I'll address your significant point.

I do not think everyone except me is a lazy bum that expects things for nothing. There are some people like that and others are encouraged to be like that via poor policy. But that's a secondary issue.

I think that if an economically incompetent, delusional, corrupt group of moral relativist politicians are in charge of making policy for long enough they can turn what would otherwise be a booming and upwardly mobile country where people are incentivized to work, save for the future, invest in our growth, and create jobs etc.. into a debt riddled moral and economic cesspool where capital leaves, jobs leave, the economy stagnates, savings get inflated away, needless consumption runs rampant, capital is used inefficiently, and we all suffer in the end. In an environment like that, even educated hard working Americans will struggle and have reduced standards of living. That's the path we are on. We are dragging more and more down and attracting more and more that are either ill equipped or unwilling to succeed.

On your other point, I was talking about the infamous 47% (which has probably now grown to over 50% over the last 6 or so years).

You can't cut government programs to sustainable levels when you have promised people way more than the system can deliver and way more than they have contributed to the programs they are entitled to. Not only will they not accept cuts or slower growth, they will want even more! Sure many of the people that are collecting SS and Medicare etc.. made contributions, but they are taking massively more out than they put in and won't accept less. That means you, I, and everyone else is screwed when the chickens come home to roost. To continue that is easy. Just promise more, borrow more, print more, take more from whoever is still dumb enough to be here, and drag everyone into the cesspool. They'll vote for you - until all that is left is the cesspool.

[cj's dad]

He should be impeached for this alone-

[NJ Stinks]

So if you have been married and a homemaker your entire life and never paid into the SS system you would be unable to collect SS and get medicare? Seems like you might want to check your facts before playing the "you don't know what you're talking about card".

If you are married and never worked or don't have enough SS credits, you are eligible for SS because of your spouse's work. If you are single and never worked or don't have enough SS credits, no soup for you.

If you are married and never worked or don't have enough SS credits, you are eligible for Medicare because of your spouse's work. If you are single and never worked or don't have enough SS credits , you can pay a monthly premium for Medicare Part A and Part B.

Not much of a gotcha IMO, Andy.

[fast4522]

Literally and essentially, Obama is still the President. It is Obama who secured the release of an American held prisoner by the Taliban. It is Obama who will decide our response to the situation in Iraq. Obama has lowered the unemployment rate by nearly four percent. Obama will continue to prevent the lunatic right from destroying this country.

If Obama does nothing more in the next thirty one months than veto legislation passed by the Republican troglodytes in Congress, he will be performing a great service for the country.


I hate to say when mostpost is right because it is such an screwy feeling, but the job at hand is to turn out in November in such a way that all the news media are using verbiage of disbelief so that mostpost feels the need to correct them. Now some of you think that he is a pretty smart guy, well and others well you know. Myself I do not think Barack Hussein Obama should be the focus here, the United States Congress should be.

[AndyC]

If you are married and never worked or don't have enough SS credits, you are eligible for SS because of your spouse's work. If you are single and never worked or don't have enough SS credits, no soup for you.

If you are married and never worked or don't have enough SS credits, you are eligible for Medicare because of your spouse's work. If you are single and never worked or don't have enough SS credits , you can pay a monthly premium for Medicare Part A and Part B.

Not much of a gotcha IMO, Andy.

It goes to the point that you don't have to work to get SS. There are millions of spouses receiving SS on a spousal benefit.

Is SS a handout to a nonworking spouse? Does the working spouse pay in 150% of what a single individual with the same income has to pay in?

[AndyC]

I hate to say when mostpost is right because it is such an screwy feeling, but the job at hand is to turn out in November in such a way that all the news media are using verbiage of disbelief so that mostpost feels the need to correct them. Now some of you think that he is a pretty smart guy, well and others well you know. Myself I do not think Barack Hussein Obama should be the focus here, the United States Congress should be.

Of course Obama should be the focus. He is the leader of our country. If Congress did nothing for the next 2 years I think we would all be better off. I don't judge a Congress by how many new laws it votes in.

[mostpost]

1. It was Obama who swapped the 5 most dangerous terrorists in Gitmo for an American deserter that his fellow soldiers in country would not attempt to recuse even when they knew where he was held.

2. It is Obama whose response to the Iraq crisis was to spend the weekend playing golf in Palm Springs and attending Democratic fund raisers, while his SecState attended a global warming conference.

3. It is Obama whose response to the Iraq crisis is to tell them to put their political house in order, and to send a few hundred "military advisers" to train the Iraq army without Congressional consent.

4. It was Obama whose economic policies decreased the unemployment rate by increasing the number of part time jobs and by greatly reducing the labor force participation rate.

1. I will wait until we have all the facts before I condemn Bergdahl. The opinions of a couple of grunts really has no meaning. That Bergdahl was not popular among his fellow soldiers does not mean that he was a deserter or a traitor.

2 and 3. There would not be an Iraq crisis right now if the Neocons had not lied about weapons of mass destruction so that they could attack Iraq. Even after that, there would have been not crisis if they had not disbanded the Iraqi army. There would not have been a crisis if the current Iraqi government had included all factions. Congress has no right to micromanage troop deployment.

4. There is no increase in the number of part time jobs, either in absolute terms or in relation to the number of full time jobs.

Here are some numbers:
People holding part time jobs for economic reasons in January 2010: 8,388,000
May 2014: 7,199,000
In case you can't do simple math, that means that 1,189,000 fewer people are working at part time jobs now as compared to Jan. 2010

People holding full time private sector jobs in January 2010: 106,212,000
May 2014: 115,257,000.
Again I will do the math for you. 9,045.000 new full time jobs.

So you are once again wrong about the increase in the number of part time jobs. That number has gone down. Even if you include the number of part time jobs for non economic reasons-where there has been an increase-the total number of part time jobs is still down 735,000.

Other than that you are.......wrong.

But, my numbers do come from the BLS, so how accurate can they be? :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

[mostpost]

If you are married and never worked or don't have enough SS credits, you are eligible for SS because of your spouse's work. If you are single and never worked or don't have enough SS credits, no soup for you.

If you are married and never worked or don't have enough SS credits, you are eligible for Medicare because of your spouse's work. If you are single and never worked or don't have enough SS credits , you can pay a monthly premium for Medicare Part A and Part B.

Not much of a gotcha IMO, Andy.
Thanks for that clarification, NJ. Although it should have been obvious to everyone. Apparently Andy does not understand the legal ramifications of marriage.

[fast4522]

Ousting Eric Cantor was a job well done, I look forward to incremental positive aspects to follow. While we vary on what the focus should be, we need a new speaker in the House of Representatives to have the stones to go after articles of impeachment if needed. I would prefer that this President played more golf until he leaves office, the United States will survive this leadership intact.

[NJ Stinks]

It goes to the point that you don't have to work to get SS. There are millions of spouses receiving SS on a spousal benefit.

Is SS a handout to a nonworking spouse? Does the working spouse pay in 150% of what a single individual with the same income has to pay in?

I doubt there are millions of spouses today who did not earn enough credits to collect SS based on their own work. In years gone by, I'm sure there were many.

I mean - how many spouses don't work 10 years nowadays? The ones I knew have all passed away.

[mostpost]

He should be impeached for this alone-
What I see in that picture is a man interested in keeping fit and being environmentally responsible. Hardly an impeachable offense.

Do you see the bent tube extending from the back of Barack's bicycle and out of frame? Most likely that tube connects to smaller bicycle such as would be used by a child. So what we have here is a father enjoying quality time with one of his children. Again not an impeachable offense.

[AndyC]

Thanks for that clarification, NJ. Although it should have been obvious to everyone. Apparently Andy does not understand the legal ramifications of marriage.

Silly me. I didn't see the asterisk next to your statement saying "If you never worked and never paid into those programs, you are not eligible for their benefits."

With SS being paid to millions of non contributors and with gay marriage adding many more non contributors to the mix you don't seem to grasp the ramifications of a free ride.

[AndyC]

I doubt there are millions of spouses today who did not earn enough credits to collect SS based on their own work. In years gone by, I'm sure there were many.

I mean - how many spouses don't work 10 years nowadays? The ones I knew have all passed away.


Added to the millions who didn't work enough years are the many who worked 10 years but take a higher amount based on their spouses benefits.

[Clocker]

The opinions of a couple of grunts really has no meaning. That Bergdahl was not popular among his fellow soldiers does not mean that he was a deserter or a traitor.

Military commanders said that they did not order rescue operations when they knew where Bergdahl was being held because they did not want to risk troops for a deserter.



There would not be an Iraq crisis right now if the Neocons had not lied about weapons of mass destruction so that they could attack Iraq. Even after that, there would have been not crisis if they had not disbanded the Iraqi army.

How is this relevant? Obama inherited a mess, granted. He made it worse. Period. And he is not dealing with it. Period.

The mistakes of the previous administration did not make Obama an ineffective leader. He attained that on pure natural talent.

He inherited a bad economy. His fixes did not work. He presided over the worse recovery from a recession since the great depression. Your numbers mean nothing, because they show no causal link. He did nothing to decrease unemployment. It decreased in spite of him and his policies. It would have decreased faster if he had done nothing.

ObamaCare has been a tremendous drag on the recovery. Business surveys by the Federal Reserve and others have shown this over and over. There is no empirical evidence to show that any Obama policy had any positive impact on employment. It happened under his administration. It did not happen because of his administration.

GDP shrunk last quarter, in the 5th year of his "recovery". Quite an accomplishment.

[Grits]

Silly me. I didn't see the asterisk next to your statement saying "If you never worked and never paid into those programs, you are not eligible for their benefits."

With SS being paid to millions of non contributors and with gay marriage adding many more non contributors to the mix you don't seem to grasp the ramifications of a free ride.

Forgive me while I suggest there's far more you don't grasp than the ramifications of a free ride.

Tell us, are you still able to drag your spouse across the floor of your cave by her hair?

Has she always been, you know... such a ball and chain?

[mostpost]

It is Obama who released the leader of ISIS.
It is Obama who release 5 terrorist planners/leaders.
Obama released al Baghdadi in 2009 in compliance with an agreement signed in 2008 by President George W. Bush. Once again you fail to vet what you read.
Once again you are made to look foolish. In the immortal words of Herman Cain, don't blame me; Blame yo'self!!!

[Grits]

Oh, and AndyC, you think gays are a drain, too? Well, I'll be damn. I figured they owned every hair salon, interior design firm, and florist in North America by now.....but what do I know compared to you.

Lord, I'm behind times. :lol:

I've never read such drivel in my life. -- So silly and NARROW.

[porchy44]

47 percent
47 percent

probably 99% of people on this board (complaining about the 47%)
will one day or already become one of the 47%. YOU WILL BE DRAWING SOCIAL SECURITY TOO. Hello, anyone home ?

Getting tired of hearing about people drawing social security who paid into it all their working lives, getting lumped in together with someone who lived their whole life on the dole.

That remark cost Romney big during the election.

[JustRalph]

47 percent
47 percent

probably 99% of people on this board (complaining about the 47%)
will one day or already become one of the 47%. YOU WILL BE DRAWING SOCIAL SECURITY TOO. Hello, anyone home ?

Getting tired of hearing about people drawing social security who paid into it all their working lives, getting lumped in together with someone who lived their whole life on the dole.

That remark cost Romney big during the election.

Nobody is lumping social security recipients in with the undeserving poor. And if they are, they're fools.

I've never seen anybody criticize anybody for taking SS after they were retired. Especially any conservative leaders (try finding one, it's really hard)

But if you are going to count every item that contributes to the downfall of the economy, you have to add SS into the mix, because it has an effect. And if not handled properly, it will damn sure swing some things out of balance. The numbers just don't work. It's a ponzi scheme that will not survive the baby boomers. Unless altered.

The gay population is said to be 2% of the population. It will have an effect on SS, but it will be a pebble in a pond. There are much bigger fish to fry, in the same pond............

As Foghorn Leghorn would say........."that's a metaphor boy!"

[davew]

ponzi scheme? PONZI SCHEME?


it will still work as long as most of the young can find jobs and work...

and with 0care, the average age in US will be declining...

[Tom]

Originally Posted by mostpost
Thanks for that clarification, NJ. Although it should have been obvious to everyone. Apparently Andy does not understand the legal ramifications of marriage.

Those being you don't have to work to get SS or medicare if you are married or gay.

Sounds pretty unfair to me. Biased against single or straight people.
But this is how you libs roll, isn't it?

[Dark Horse]

Never in my lifetime did I think I'd see a worse president than Bush, but we have already far exceeded that goal. Bush had some borderline traitors advising him on foreign policy and he personally had a limited understanding of economics.


Same here. But, as you must realize, they are just puppets. The same corporate fascist program rolls on, only faster now. The two party system is just to divide and conquer an unsuspecting public.

The way this world works can't be understood without understanding its economics. This may be among the most important documents online: http://www.iamthewitness.com/books/Andrew.Carrington.Hitchcock/The.History.of.the.Money.Changers.htm

Studying this simple theme will allow people to gradually see though the political fog, and connect the dots between otherwise inexplicable and unrelated events.

[fast4522]

Interesting article, Adolf Hilter funded by who?

"In only a few weeks from the day of the crash, 3 billion dollars of wealth vanished. Within a year, 40 billion dollars of wealth vanished. However, it did not simply disappear, it just ended up consolidated in fewer and fewer hands, as was planned. An example of this is Joseph P. Kennedy, John F. Kennedy's father. In 1929 he was worth 4 million dollars, in 1935 that had increased to over 100 million dollars.
This is why depressions are caused. As stated previously the top bankers and their friends got out of the stock market and purchased gold just before the crash, which they shipped over to London. This meant that the money lost by most Americans during the crash didn't just vanish, it just ended up in these people's hands.

It also was spent overseas, as whilst the Great Depression was occurring, millions of American dollars was being spent on rebuilding Germany from damage sustained during World War I, in preparation for the bankers World War II. Republican Louis T. McFadden, Chairman of the House Banking & Currency Committee from 1920 to 1931, stated the following in relation to this,

"After World War I, Germany fell into the hands of the German International Bankers. Those bankers bought her and now they own her, lock, stock, and barrel. They have purchased her industries, they have mortgages on her soil, they control her production, they control all her public utilities.

The international German bankers have subsidized the present Government of Germany and they have also supplied every dollar of the money Adolph Hitler has used in his lavish campaign to build up a threat to the government of Bruening. When Bruening fails to obey the orders of the German International Bankers, Hitler is brought forth to scare the Germans into submission ..."

[tucker6]

Guys,

Stop with these conspiracy theories. There's no collusion amongst the corporate criminals. They hate each other as much as they hate policies that go against their wallet. The driving force behind what business leaders and politicians do is power and money. There's no mystery. They each have something the other wants, and also that each person on their side has. No love among criminals. Business wants to be able to influence the regulatory arm of govt and their power to persuade where all that money goes. On the flip side, the politicians want the donations that come from rich contributors, and the power business leaders have in generating their own wealth. Business leaders and politicians vie against one another for personal gain, but join hands through lobbyists to push through laws for the "common good" of those leaders.

Those who stand in the way of that does so at their own risk. Human nature is to swerve to miss the ongoing truck to prevent a head on collision. Those are the new politicians joining the game and the cycle continues. Take away most or all donations, and you remove an essential ingredient to the cycle.

[PaceAdvantage]

Interesting article, Adolf Hilter funded by who?

"In only a few weeks from the day of the crash, 3 billion dollars of wealth vanished. Within a year, 40 billion dollars of wealth vanished. However, it did not simply disappear, it just ended up consolidated in fewer and fewer hands, as was planned. An example of this is Joseph P. Kennedy, John F. Kennedy's father. In 1929 he was worth 4 million dollars, in 1935 that had increased to over 100 million dollars.
This is why depressions are caused. As stated previously the top bankers and their friends got out of the stock market and purchased gold just before the crash, which they shipped over to London. This meant that the money lost by most Americans during the crash didn't just vanish, it just ended up in these people's hands.

It also was spent overseas, as whilst the Great Depression was occurring, millions of American dollars was being spent on rebuilding Germany from damage sustained during World War I, in preparation for the bankers World War II. Republican Louis T. McFadden, Chairman of the House Banking & Currency Committee from 1920 to 1931, stated the following in relation to this,

"After World War I, Germany fell into the hands of the German International Bankers. Those bankers bought her and now they own her, lock, stock, and barrel. They have purchased her industries, they have mortgages on her soil, they control her production, they control all her public utilities.

The international German bankers have subsidized the present Government of Germany and they have also supplied every dollar of the money Adolph Hitler has used in his lavish campaign to build up a threat to the government of Bruening. When Bruening fails to obey the orders of the German International Bankers, Hitler is brought forth to scare the Germans into submission ..."In data analysis terms, you would call the above story one of backfitting the data to match results.

[fast4522]

Heck Mike, I am not one to hide my viewpoints.
I figure your right more than your wrong, and can't recall when that was if ever.
I liked the piece because of its multiple connections.