Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Social > Jet Blast
Reload this Page >

USA Politics - Hamster Wheel

Jet Blast Topics that don't fit the other forums. Rules of Engagement apply.

USA Politics - Hamster Wheel

Old 15th Oct 2012, 08:22
  #9281 (permalink)  

 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: BHX
Posts: 209
There you again SASless branding those who disagree with you as Liberals. I am certainly not a Liberal and have never voted that way but if it helps you in debating to place others in convenient boxes then do carry on Someone else took you to task regarding similar generalisations a few pages back I seem to recall.

Home | Costs of War

The blundering years of Bush, his tax cuts, his wars and the recession he handed over tend to increase national debt before it can be reduced as the Tories have found in this country. Especially you, as an ex Brit, adopted American, must see the parallels ?
LIMA OR ALPHA JUNK is offline  
Old 15th Oct 2012, 08:50
  #9282 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Grassy Valley
Posts: 2,123
You have no idea what you are talking about. The paper head of the dragon has effall to do with policy. The President of sny party is a neck on which to hang expensive neckties. What you see and hear is a representation of actions decided by people who are not elected, but have the power to elect, not the people.

God help us all if any President got up in the morning and started to think he had the power to have an idea. He (soon she ) is a totem, an embodiment. Of power. Mostly powerless actually.

As a Senator may represent half a State's people, so too a Pres fronts for perhaps several hundred, mostly anonymous, elites. Thank you, two party system....
Lyman is offline  
Old 15th Oct 2012, 12:47
  #9283 (permalink)  
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Somewhere between E17487 and F75775
Age: 76
Posts: 723
The Iraq war has been over how long

News to me. British TV reports on casualties from Iraq every day.

"" 1 Oct 2012 The Iraqi government released its official casualty figures for September. At 365 dead, the toll is the highest in two years. ""

Maybe that's not a "war", which must come as some consolation to the dead and injured.

Last edited by OFSO; 15th Oct 2012 at 12:48.
OFSO is offline  
Old 15th Oct 2012, 13:19
  #9284 (permalink)  
KAG
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: France
Posts: 750
Hells: just saw your post. What a twisted mind you have to believe I did write like that on purpose!!!! Internet/computer bug, never thought about that????????

This is the way I enlight my point, not in some weird ways only computer/internet bugs have the secret I or you cannot even reproduce, please buy yourself a brain!

1947???? Why you didn't go back to the Big Bang? The whole Europe went to bankruptcy at that time, wake up!

The post refered to: http://www.pprune.org/jet-blast/4388...ml#post7452229
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Concerning Iraq, it was a real burden Bush gave to Obama, Bush focused on the wrong goal, Ben Laden was the ennemy, not really Sadam Hussein, many other dictators around ( north Korea for example, but not only) we should attack them then! Bush got it all wrong and focused on the wrong priorities.
Obama when elected immediately started to decrease the effort in Iraq, increased it on Ben Laden, and of course found him.
Obama that day gave the world a message of hope and justice while Bush got everybody confused (especially in Europe Germany and France) with his war in Iraq.
Ben Laden was the priority, not Hussein, how something that simple was not even understood at that time??? Hussein didn't attack the US, Ben Laden was attacking the whole western world, the US to start with (September 11 anybody???).

Barack Obama has some brain, and works towards social justice, his action does make sense and are not commanded by the oil/private security companies and gun lobby, he is honest and clear, as an European, he has my trust.

Last edited by KAG; 15th Oct 2012 at 13:23.
KAG is offline  
Old 15th Oct 2012, 14:52
  #9285 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: "Deplorable but happy as a drunken Monkey!
Age: 72
Posts: 16,612
he is honest and clear, as an European, he has my trust.
I have a bridge to sell you too, KAG!
SASless is offline  
Old 15th Oct 2012, 15:31
  #9286 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: E.Wash State
Posts: 0
he is honest and clear, as an European, he has my trust.
A very succinct summary of the problem with re-electing Him.
obgraham is offline  
Old 15th Oct 2012, 15:36
  #9287 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Grassy Valley
Posts: 2,123
I think the president would prefer you keep your support for his re-election quiet. With friends like yourself.....
Lyman is offline  
Old 15th Oct 2012, 15:36
  #9288 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Detroit MI
Age: 62
Posts: 1,461
he is honest
Oh dear... He's a fekkin' politician!!!!
Airborne Aircrew is offline  
Old 15th Oct 2012, 15:47
  #9289 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Wayne Manor
Posts: 1,516
Barack Obama has some brain, and works towards social justice, his action does make sense and are not commanded by the oil/private security companies and gun lobby, he is honest and clear, as an European, he has my trust.
stuckgear is offline  
Old 15th Oct 2012, 15:54
  #9290 (permalink)  
Dushan
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Romney wins, in Canada

National post asked "Who would be better for Canada?"

Half a dozen letters said Obama, 30 said Romney, and 6 said neither. This is from the country that was right behind 200,000 screaming Germans telling us all how Obama would be great.

Letters: Romney will be good for Canada | Letters | Full Comment | National Post

I cannot think of an instance in which Barack Obama might be better for Canada, or any other country in the free world. He might be a friend if we instilled a leftist leader, but thankfully we have a leader who is both morally and practically superior. Mitt Romney has some understanding of Canada and will be a friend, while first and foremost looking out for American interests, which is understandable.
Barry Lubotta, Toronto.
This is a difficult choice. Would I rather have Barack Obama who helps our enemies in the Middle East and hinders and disses our friends in that area, or have Mitt Romney, who says he will support our friends and protect us from our enemies. A tough question.
Jonathan Usher, Toronto.
The Obama administration has proven, again, that socialism does not work. The sooner the U.S. gets back to business with a leadership that can do the math, the better. As an escapee from failed socialism in Europe and a recent witness to similar demise in Ontario, the prospect of another Obama term is frightening.
Russell Thompson, Victoria.

Last edited by Dushan; 15th Oct 2012 at 15:54.
 
Old 15th Oct 2012, 16:26
  #9291 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: The Land of Beer and Chocolate
Age: 52
Posts: 794
Hells: just saw your post. What a twisted mind you have to believe I did write like that on purpose!!!! Internet/computer bug, never thought about that????????

This is the way I enlight my point, not in some weird ways only computer/internet bugs have the secret I or you cannot even reproduce, please buy yourself a brain!

1947???? Why you didn't go back to the Big Bang? The whole Europe went to bankruptcy at that time, wake up!
Dear little KAG, don't you even remember your own post #9310? Or are you going to accuse someone of modifying your post so it looked like that?

Oh, and the bit about France in 1947 was in reply to you not knowing that France was the first recipient of loans from the World Bank and IMF, and you can see why I posted that if you actually look at things.



stuckgear

When I look at what was posted, I reckon we've got a good reason to ban wei jing before GMO's. It's obvious that stuff does funny things to memory and thought processes.........
hellsbrink is offline  
Old 15th Oct 2012, 16:58
  #9292 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Where I'm pointing...
Posts: 583
Originally Posted by KAG View Post
Concerning Iraq, it was a real burden Bush gave to Obama
I think a picture I saw from Sassy summed it up best.

Obama did not inherit anything from Bush, nor did Bush give or force anything on Obama.

Obama ASKED for, Campaigned, begged for all those situations so that he could make them better in the way only he could.

Except that now 3.5years in he has not been able to do the things he promised, and is blaming it on inheriting the situation he begged to be given the opportunity to fix in the first place.

Last edited by birrddog; 15th Oct 2012 at 17:00.
birrddog is offline  
Old 15th Oct 2012, 17:01
  #9293 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Grassy Valley
Posts: 2,123
Quote:
"Barack Obama has some brain, and works towards social justice, his action does make sense and are not commanded by the oil/private security companies and gun lobby, he is honest and clear, as an European, he has my trust."

Of course he has some brain. The quantity is an unknown, and we think it may have been overestimated.

His works toward social justice? "I'll take your money, and give it to others, Okay?"

Clearly not fond of petroleum, and American security, we know that....

Honest and clear? Both demonstrably false.....

Obama did not inherit anything from Bush, nor did Bush give or force anything on Obama.

Yep. Obama is on thin Ice, because he is playing the victim, here.....If America had a brain, she would recoil at a Leader who says "It's not MY fault"

Last edited by Lyman; 15th Oct 2012 at 17:04.
Lyman is offline  
Old 15th Oct 2012, 17:07
  #9294 (permalink)  

 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: BHX
Posts: 209
It will be fun watching the usual suspects, should Romney win, not bleating about legacies that they feel need fixing in a 4 year term
LIMA OR ALPHA JUNK is offline  
Old 15th Oct 2012, 17:13
  #9295 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Seattle
Age: 60
Posts: 164
The gap is truly narrowing where it matters.

Electoral vote:

Obama 201
Romney 191


The people are beginning to see the light!
CityofFlight is offline  
Old 15th Oct 2012, 17:29
  #9296 (permalink)  

Aviator Extraordinaire
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Oklahoma City, Oklahoma USA
Age: 73
Posts: 2,395
It will be fun watching the usual suspects, should Romney win, not bleating about legacies that they feel need fixing in a 4 year term
Not really, if Romney should win, in essence he will have been hired to fix the problem, if he does not in four years, as Obama as not, we'll do our best to fire him and find someone who will.

As Reagan turned a worse economy, inherited from Carter, around in four years, we know it can be done.

Can Romney do it? I don't know, I believe that due to his background he has a much better chance. But sure as hell Obama has not turned the economy around in the same time Reagan did. Time for Obama to go and be replaced by someone that knows how to run a business/government.

At least Romney knows what a budget is. The only time Obama tried to pass a budget, it recieved zero votes, including not recieving any votes from his own Party. When your own party will not surpport your budget, you should realize at that point, you may be in over your head because you don't what the hell you are doing.

Obama had his chance, he blew it.
con-pilot is offline  
Old 15th Oct 2012, 19:24
  #9297 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Middle America
Age: 80
Posts: 1,158
con-pilot,
As Reagan turned a worse economy, inherited from Carter, around in four years, we know it can be done.
It took Reagan 8 years to turn the economy around, not 4. Reagan was President 1/20/81 - 1/20/89. From Carter he inherited an economy that had high interest rates and high inflation (the two always go together). By the summer of 1981, people had difficulty borrowing money for homes and cars, and many business people could not borrow money to invest in growth. Automobile sales declined. The economy went into recession. In 1982 business failures were triple what they were in 1979, and unemployment by the end of 1982 was at 10.8 percent, its highest since the 1930s. In 1982 the economy declined by 2.2 percent growth. In January 1983 his approval rating was down to 35 percent, with 56 percent disapproving -- as the economy was beginning to recover (sound familiar?). Interest rates fell from over 20 percent down to 10 percent, and in the first three months of 1983 the economy had a rate of growth equivalent to 2.6 percent per year. From a high of 10.8% in December 1982, unemployment gradually improved until it fell to 7.2% (not so different from today's rate) on Election Day in 1984.

The Reagan administration had inherited a budget deficit that was 2.5 percent of the economy, with an interest payment rate on the national debt (defined) at $69 billion. When Reagan left office in 1989 the budget deficit had increased to 5 percent of the economy, and budget deficits had contributed to a larger national debt. Interest payments on the national debt had increased to $169 billion. The national debt had been at 32.5 percent of GDP when he took office -- the lowest since World War II. It was at 43.8 percent when he left. Reagan left office with a job approval rating of 64 percent and disapproval 27 percent, close in approval to where Eisenhower and Kennedy ended and where Clinton, at 65 percent, would end in 2001.

Reagan had high inflation rates and high interest rates to play with and lower to bring the economy back, he made his Federal Reserve Chairman make it happen. Obama does not have high rates to play with. Reagan "spent" his way to success at the expense of the national debt just as Obama has done. It wasn't until Clinton became President that unemployment reached average levels.

Nice try though.

TD
Turbine D is offline  
Old 15th Oct 2012, 19:54
  #9298 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: East of LGB
Age: 65
Posts: 619
I seem to remember that Kennedy had a disapproval rating of 100%, by one bloke at least.
11Fan is offline  
Old 15th Oct 2012, 19:59
  #9299 (permalink)  
Hardly Never Not Unwilling
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 481
Reagan spent some money, but he won the Cold War. That was part of the calculation for me.
BenThere is offline  
Old 15th Oct 2012, 20:04
  #9300 (permalink)  

Aviator Extraordinaire
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Oklahoma City, Oklahoma USA
Age: 73
Posts: 2,395
That does not change the fact, yes fact, that Reagan had made great gains in his first four years in improving the economy, Obama has done squat.

But, then again, that was then, this is now and Obama has failed to do what he promised to do if elected in 2008. He has failed, now he says he needs more time, so was he lying then, or now?

Don't forget that for Obama's first two years he had a filibuster proof Congress to pass any damn thing he wanted down our throats, but he and his Democratic Party controlled Congress could not even get a budget passed, hell, they didn't even try to, because 2010 was an election year they were afraid to and the Democratic controlled Senate had not attempted to pass a budget since.

Giving credit where credit is due, at least Obama tried to pass a budget, but it was so bad even the Democrats refused to vote for it, his own party.

If you want to bring more of the past, go for it, then I and others here will replay some of Obama's past promises and statements. Such as, 'it is treasonous to ask for a debit increase', same for borrowing money from China, etc, etc.

People died and Obama lied.
con-pilot is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.