Obama = magician

elprincipe

elprincipe

CAGiversary!
Feedback
60 (100%)
This article comes closest to my thoughts about Obamanomics:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/10/obamas_magic.html

I like this bit especially:

We're back now. And just watch the Great Obama perform a feat never yet managed in all history. He will create that enormous new government health program, spend billions to transform our energy economy, provide financial assistance to former Soviet satellites, invest in infrastructure, increase education spending, provide job training assistance, and give 95% of Americans a tax (ahem) cut -- all without raising the deficit a single penny! And he'll do it in the middle of a financial crisis. And with falling tax revenues! Voila!
Click to expand...

Nobody seriously believes Obama can do all he's promising to do (nothing new for a candidate for office), do they?
 
Hoover taxed the big business owners Just like Obama wants too and guess what we got......................... The Great Depression Just ask the 90 million dollar baby that gives him his finiancial advice made it by giving out the bad loans we got to pick up screw that Vote for the man who wanted to fix this stuff three yaers ago.
 
McCain's plan is far more unrealistic, financially... at least Obama is willing to admit we'll need a net tax increase. McCain pretends he'll find the funds as easily eliminated waste in congress. Obama's also the only candidate willing to admit the financial situation will have to result in compensatory program cuts, McCain is completely oblivious to the fact that a change in income should lead to a change in expense.

Yeah, both candidates (like all candidates) over-promise, but McCain's far, far worse about it... Obama's plan is relatively solid. Key word: relative (to McCain's).
 
[quote name='Koggit']McCain's plan is far more unrealistic, financially... at least Obama is willing to admit we'll need a net tax increase. McCain pretends he'll find the funds as easily eliminated waste in congress. Obama's also the only candidate willing to admit the financial situation will have to result in compensatory program cuts, McCain is completely oblivious to the fact that a change in income should lead to a change in expense.

Yeah, both candidates (like all candidates) over-promise, but McCain's far, far worse about it... Obama's plan is relatively solid. Key word: relative (to McCain's).[/quote]

Do I really have to respond to this? Alright.



BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
 
elprincipe;4968554Nobody seriously believes Obama can do all he's promising to do (nothing new for a candidate for office) said:
Of course not, but if anything is accomplished over the next 4 years, I'd rather see things go in Obama's direction than McCain's direction.

I'd rather see a "Tax and Spend" Liberal than a "Spend and Spend" Conservative.

The budget deficit over the past 8 years should tell you that the term "Conservative" has nothing to do with the economy any more.

~HotShotX
Click to expand...
 
[quote name='Koggit']McCain's plan is far more unrealistic, financially... at least Obama is willing to admit we'll need a net tax increase. McCain pretends he'll find the funds as easily eliminated waste in congress. Obama's also the only candidate willing to admit the financial situation will have to result in compensatory program cuts, McCain is completely oblivious to the fact that a change in income should lead to a change in expense.

Yeah, both candidates (like all candidates) over-promise, but McCain's far, far worse about it... Obama's plan is relatively solid. Key word: relative (to McCain's).[/QUOTE]

Yes, Obama admits he wants tax increases...but only on "them" (the rich and business owners).

I haven't heard Obama say he would cut programs, other than the nebulous "I'll cut programs that are not working" bullshit that every candidate puts out there (at least McCain has a record of trying to do so in Congress). In fact, the only thing I've really heard about that specifically is McCain say in the second debate that we are going to have to accept that Social Security and Medicare benefits won't be able to stay the same due to budgetary constraints. OTOH, in the same debate he called for another new massive government program to purchase mortgages...
 
[quote name='archangelreb']Hoover taxed the big business owners Just like Obama wants too and guess what we got......................... The Great Depression Just ask the 90 million dollar baby that gives him his finiancial advice made it by giving out the bad loans we got to pick up screw that Vote for the man who wanted to fix this stuff three yaers ago.[/quote]
Holy fucking run on sentence Batman.

For the record, Obama may not be able to do everything he says he will, but his bullshit is more palatable than McCain's.
 
McCain wants to give everyone free homes and Obama wants to give everyone health care.

This while we are over $10 trillion in debt, fighting two wars, and in (what some say) as the worst financial situation since the great depression. I doubt either candidate will do what they are now saying they will do.
 
[quote name='ananag112']McCain wants to give everyone free homes and Obama wants to give everyone health care.

This while we are over $10 trillion in debt, fighting two wars, and in (what some say) as the worst financial situation since the great depression. I doubt either candidate will do what they are now saying they will do.[/QUOTE]

Further evidence that in modern times, elections are run and won on what essentially boils down to who can offer the most lucrative, and believable, "free stuff" from the treasury.

Pathetic. And further evidence that we are in total denial of our socialist nanny state we've been in for decades now.
 
[quote name='KingBroly']Do I really have to respond to this? Alright.



BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA[/QUOTE]

Your post was almost as idiotic as the OP article.

I cannot believe cons are attempting to go after Obama for not being able to completely fix the mess they created.
 
[quote name='Msut77']Your post was almost as idiotic as the OP article.

I cannot believe cons are attempting to go after Obama for not being able to completely fix the mess they created.[/quote]
Thats what they specialize in. Seriously no one is going to be able to do everything they promise. At least Obama realizes that everything is not gonna be possible.
 
[quote name='Sc4rfac3']Thats what they specialize in. Seriously no one is going to be able to do everything they promise. At least Obama realizes that everything is not gonna be possible.[/QUOTE]

What do you mean he realizes it? If so, he sure never admits as such. In the debate, he said we might have to delay (unspecified) plans, and Biden said they would maybe give up doubling foreign assistance (it's unpopular anyway, so surprise). Not that McCain is any better, other than the brief mention I noted earlier; Palin said during the VP debate, for example, that they hadn't promised anything they couldn't deliver (yeah right).

Face it, Obama (like McCain) if full of shit about their completely fantasyland plans. At least you admit he's lying in campaign speeches, like McCain does, about all these new and wonderful programs the government is going to fund with nonexistent money to take care of you since you can't do so yourself. :roll:
 
[quote name='elprincipe']Face it, Obama (like McCain) if full of shit about their completely fantasyland plans.[/QUOTE]

Uh McCain was the one blathering about a spending freeze and buying up a brazilian dollars worth of bad mortgages.

Since you and yours sum total of plans is "I dun like taxes" you might want to check your accusations out first.
 
It's a simple fix: Pull the troops out of Iraq, end the war, and stop spending $10 BILLION a month over there. But hell, what do I know, I'm a botanist, not a politician or economist.
 
[quote name='SoonerMatt']It's a simple fix: Pull the troops out of Iraq, end the war, and stop spending $10 BILLION a month over there. But hell, what do I know, I'm a botanist, not a politician or economist.[/QUOTE]

I'm thinking the same thing at this point. Yeah, it'd be incredibly irresponsible to up and leave after having mucked around in that country for so long, but at this point it's the only option. F 'em and worry about more pressing matters on the home-front.
 
IMO we need to stop acting like a bunch of arrogant pricks who wave American flags and balance M4s on our fully erect penises while downing apple pie. We need to start participating in a global community and actually listen to the rest of the nations in the world. We don't always know best, and I think Iraq is a pretty good example of the rest of the world being right.
 
[quote name='SoonerMatt']We need to start participating in a global community [/QUOTE]

Quite the opposite! People seem to not have any interest in us trying to maintain world peace and order so in that regard we should just take an isolationist stance, and just let the world burn around us.
 
[quote name='bigdaddy']Bush could send an extra 5-6 trillion to the debt, but Obama can't?[/QUOTE]

Only Democrats ever have to pay for anything.
 
[quote name='HotShotX']Of course not, but if anything is accomplished over the next 4 years, I'd rather see things go in Obama's direction than McCain's direction.

I'd rather see a "Tax and Spend" Liberal than a "Spend and Spend" Conservative.[/QUOTE]

This.

[quote name='Nogib']Quite the opposite! People seem to not have any interest in us trying to maintain world peace and order so in that regard we should just take an isolationist stance, and just let the world burn around us.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, and since people hate corrupt cops, we should abolish the police department.
 
There is no such thing as a "Spend and spend" conservative. That's the point. If they are "spend and spend", then they aren't conservative, even if they call themselves one.
 
[quote name='trq']This.



Yeah, and since people hate corrupt cops, we should abolish the police department.[/QUOTE]
Yup, and heck, maybe we should live in total anarchy ^_^
 
[quote name='depascal22']Our priority should be Osama Bin Laden.[/quote]

How many billions should be wasted on this figurehead?

Sure, catching OBL is good press, but there are so many bigger problems then Al Queda being ignored until they kill as many people as Memorial Day weekend on US interstates.
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']There is no such thing as a "Spend and spend" conservative. That's the point. If they are "spend and spend", then they aren't conservative, even if they call themselves one.[/QUOTE]

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

[quote name='boozi']Yup, and heck, maybe we should live in total anarchy ^_^[/QUOTE]

Shush. I'm trying to be "sub-tile" here.
 
[quote name='trq']Shush. I'm trying to be "sub-tile" here.[/quote]

We could get by with a lot fewer cops. It would require people learning how to wipe their own asses again and the government would have to accept a large loss of control over the masses, but it could be done.
 
You're arguing semantics, thrust. Yes, it is an oxymoron but that doesn't stop the Republican Party from doing it. Bush has doubled our deficit and while that doesn't fit fiscal conservativism, you can't find anyone on the street that won't call Bush a conservative. Republicans have been very smart to brand themselves as Social Conservatives while abandoning all fiscal responsibilities.
 
I'm sure I'm in a minority, but I don't consider Republicans conservative. Yes, they are more socially conservative than Democrats, but that isn't saying much. Republicans stay in business by trying to convince people that consider themselves conservative that the party is conservative. This is how they've stayed in power the last 10 years or so. But people are waking up to the fact that there really isn't too much in the way of conservative values that Republicans have.

I could run around and call myself a Liberal, and tell everyone I was a Liberal. But if I was anti-abortion, strong on border security, and big into cutting government spending substantially, deregulation, and cutting taxes, people are going to catch on to the BS I'm selling sooner or later.
 
[quote name='fatherofcaitlyn']We could get by with a lot fewer cops. It would require people learning how to wipe their own asses again and the government would have to accept a large loss of control over the masses, but it could be done.[/QUOTE]

Maybe, but a) disbanding the police force doesn't flow from "we should do something about corrupt cops," and b) it was just a metaphor. Point is: bye bye, baby and bathwater.

[quote name='thrustbucket']I'm not sure what you are getting at. My statement stands. A spending conservative is an oxymoron in my book. That's like trying to say "puring dog". Dogs don't pur. And if they did, they aren't dogs.[/QUOTE]

More or less what Depascal said. It may be true that no true Scotsman would drink white wine, but if *all* Scotsmen actually *do* drink white wine, it may be time to accept that Scotsmen drink white wine.

If basically *every* major elected conservative in my lifetime has talked out of the side of their mouth on this subject, it may be time to accept that *that's* what conservatism is, and that people who *genuinely* want a small government deserve a better term.

[quote name='depascal22']You're arguing semantics, thrust. Yes, it is an oxymoron but that doesn't stop the Republican Party from doing it. Bush has doubled our deficit and while that doesn't fit fiscal conservativism, you can't find anyone on the street that won't call Bush a conservative. Republicans have been very smart to brand themselves as Social Conservatives while abandoning all fiscal responsibilities.[/QUOTE]
 
[quote name='trq']
More or less what Depascal said. It may be true that no true Scotsman would drink white wine, but if *all* Scotsmen actually *do* drink white wine, it may be time to accept that Scotsmen drink white wine.

If basically *every* major elected conservative in my lifetime has talked out of the side of their mouth on this subject, it may be time to accept that *that's* what conservatism is, and that people who *genuinely* want a small government deserve a better term.[/QUOTE]

So I guess what you are saying is if a group or term is hijacked so well, it's time to give up on fighting for it's original intent.

I guess I can buy that. But it still makes me cringe when people use Conservative and Republican in the same sentence.
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']So I guess what you are saying is if a group or term is hijacked so well, it's time to give up on fighting for it's original intent.

I guess I can buy that. But it still makes me cringe when people use Conservative and Republican in the same sentence.[/quote]

You've hit the nail on the head. The Republicans keep telling everyone the same lie and they believe it.
 
[quote name='trq']If basically *every* major elected conservative in my lifetime has talked out of the side of their mouth on this subject, it may be time to accept that *that's* what conservatism is, and that people who *genuinely* want a small government deserve a better term.[/QUOTE]

I'm with trq here, and not solely based on party allegiance. thrust, even you've admitted there's not been a Goldwater since...well, Goldwater. 40+ years ago.

Also, there is a term. Libertarian.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']I'm with trq here, and not solely based on party allegiance. thrust, even you've admitted there's not been a Goldwater since...well, Goldwater. 40+ years ago.

Also, there is a term. Libertarian.[/QUOTE]

It seems I'm late to the party. Thank you for the introduction, Myke.
 
[quote name='trq']
Shush. I'm trying to be "sub-tile" here.[/QUOTE]
Kinda late and random XD
Ah.. The ultimate pla..... Whoops, carry on :p *Will shut up now*
 
[quote name='trq']
If basically *every* major elected conservative in my lifetime has talked out of the side of their mouth on this subject, it may be time to accept that *that's* what conservatism is, and that people who *genuinely* want a small government deserve a better term.[/QUOTE]

To give credit where credit is due, you're right. It exactly how the left has co-opted the term "Liberal" to connotate that freedom=socialism. Today's so-called "conservatives," aren't.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top