A Guide to Obama Supporters

[GenSeneca]

Top,

Obama wants to take our troops out of Iraq and move them to Afghanistan... How is that going to save money?

Obama wants to make sure the US, with the highest Corporate taxes in the world, collects even more money from Corporations... Jobs will disappear as companies move overseas. BTW, there is no such thing as Corporate Welfare.

We need a change... we need it now... and not just by name.

Thats all you're gonna get from Obama... He won't change reality, just your perception of it.

 

[Federal Farmer]

Farmer... you love me... you took me off your ignore list... Yea!

No, I've just decided that the best way to deal with you is to consistantly point out all of your lies, and to keep doing it until you don't have ANY credibility with anyone on this board. You're either an idiot or a liar, and while I'm not sure which yet, I really don't care, because one is just as bad as the other, and I'm going to ENJOY embarassing you at every opportunity.

You are seriously clueless if you think this invasion and occupation built totally on lies is not expensive and the serious borrowing we are doing mainly from Communist China is good for our economy.

The only ones lying around here are you and your Libtard buddies. You have absolutely not the FIRST damned clue what you're talking about, whether it be the economy, GWOT, WMD's, Bush, or anything else. You're what Lenin called a "useful tool", and until you develop a bit of intellectualy integrity, that's all you'll EVER be, a "tool".

You don't have to be Mr. Wizard to figure out it's an ECONOMY KILLER. It's what Reagan did with deficit spending with "star wars". It will last living on credit for about two terms and then it tanks long & hard. It tanked on Bush #1 the exact same way.

You're obviously not Mr. Wizard either (althought I do suspect that that's about as far as you ever got with analytical thought), because you've swallowed the DNC Kool-Aide and actually believe that $500 Bn in Iraq spending, in 65 months is an "economy killer", but you don't think that $600 Bn A YEAR, EVERY YEAR, AND GROWING, on Social Security ALONE, isn't an "economy killer". It's blatantly obvious that you've never bothered to actually research the first Federal Budget, or have any idea what our tax dollars are spent on, otherwise you wouldn't keep repeating those same egregious LIES.

The only difference is that Bush #2 ain't all that good with math and it started tankin' early making him look like an idiot instead of the next guy!

If he's not "all that good with math", you're a drooling idiot who can't count past 10 without taking off your shoes.

Do you have any idea what the deficit is? Do you know what our debt is? Do you even know what our annual budget or GDP are?

Republicans couldn't run a good economy with two hands and a flashlight!

Yeah, right, that's why President Bush has had a budget, EVERY YEAR, that's a lower percentage of the GDP than all but the last 3 years of Clintons 8 years in office, and in fact, with the exception of those 3 years, is lower than ANY administration since President FORD in 1974!!!

Our average unemployment rate over the past 32 years is 6.2%, while since President Bush took Office in 2000, the unemployment rate has averaged 5.2%, since 2000, we've never had an inflation rate above 3.5%, and our interest rates have been among the lowest since the mid 60's, so I would LOVE to find out exactly what metric you're using to support your claims that we've had anything but a GREAT economy under President Bush.

Time to put up or shut up tg, because you've got NOTHING anymore, including room to breathe, because I'm going to be all over you like white on rice every time you spout your Libtard LIES!

 

[BigRob]

Senator Obama would do like Bill Clinton did. Put the tax levels back where they were and focus on deficit reduction. He would end the occupation much quicker in Iraq... huge savings. He would work to end some of the huge Tax Breaks (Corporate Welfare) for Corporations that are absolutely making a fortune already and would still be without them.

Except this ignores that the Clinton tax increases raised $270,000,000,000 over 5 years, while Obama is already promising over $1,4000,000,000,000 in spending increases. It does not add up.

Really the only thing in question is a National Healthcare System. And I'm not sure he'll be able to pull that off myself with all the debt that Bush is laying in his lap. But I'll tell you this it could have been done easily if we were in the same economic position we were under President Clinton. It's a goal.

The solution is to privatize the market. Not more government mandates like HMO's that drive the price to high levels. Bring back tax breaks for the individual to purchase their own plans, not set price controls with the government.

I look for National Healthcare to take quite awhile. But I also think with a Democratic President and Democratic Congress several things to lower prices can be done almost immediately.

Like government mandates. Price controls do not work. Historically they are a complete disaster.

I've said this before. Republicans spend just as much or more than Democrats. Look it up. Spending tends to go up more under Republicans. The only difference is where they spend it. If you want a real small government you need to go Libertarian.

I agree Republicans spend a lot. But Obama is already promising the biggest increase in spending ever. So either he is a liar, or he will spend more than anyone ever.

Also, spending goes up the most when the President is the same party as the Congress. So given that, we can again (based on history) expect Obama to spend even more than he promised.

What you think is true is actually a recipe for old age homelessness. I've said this before. If you really believe that everyone investing on their own is as good... FDIC Insure it. Make it guaranteed that you can't lose more than the current benefit. But you can't because the whole point is their IS risk!

You cannot FDIC insure the stock market. If you have a problem putting it in the stock market, put it in CD's or a high yield savings account. These are in fact FDIC insured and generate far greater returns than social security does. So, problem solved, your issue is a non-starter.

 

[top gun]

GenSeneca;57606]Top,

Obama wants to take our troops out of Iraq and move them to Afghanistan... How is that going to save money?

A fighting force in Afghanistan (where the 9-11 guys have been all along by the way) is in no way even close to the numbers and expense of controlling and occupying a whole country the size of Iraq.

Hopefully with the correct focus we can wrap that up in fairly short order as well. A well defined mission to kill terrorists cells and then leave. Not stay and build Holiday Inns.

Obama wants to make sure the US, with the highest Corporate taxes in the world, collects even more money from Corporations... Jobs will disappear as companies move overseas.

Rolling back the Bush tax cuts to the rich to the level of the economically prosperous Clinton years and either removing oil company subsidies or creating a windfall profits tax on Big Oil is absolutely fine with me. Bush lined their pocket obscenely for 8 straight years... time to give back a small portion. Remember we still have to PAY FOR Bush's Nation Building campaign somehow.

BTW, there is no such thing as Corporate Welfare.

Obviously not for Republicans there isn't!

What happened to personal responsibility. Making it on your own. Not relying on the government to give you a hand out to make it! Why in the world would we give BILLIONS in Tax Breaks an subsidies to a business that's making record profits? Making more per year in profits than some small countries in their entirety bring in.

It's totally unfair that the regular worker who's a taxpayer and has to make those tax breaks up out of his or her paycheck. It is Welfare... but to people that in no way need it.

We need a change... we need it now... and not just by name.

Thats all you're gonna get from Obama... He won't change reality, just your perception of it.

You think that because you're a REPUBLICAN'T...

There will be a major change of direction on many fronts. If not you wouldn't be so against him.

And the alternative is clear to see... he brags about it himself... I John McCain support Bush policy.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0NLX-YwTWQk

 

[GenSeneca]

A fighting force in Afghanistan (where the 9-11 guys have been all along by the way) is in no way even close to the numbers and expense of controlling and occupying a whole country the size of Iraq.

I guess its a good thing for Obama that his supporters don't care about details, logistics and math... Go ahead an ballpark a figure on how much you think we will save under Obama's plan, I'm curious. Should you want to go all out, provide the logistical data you're working from, links too please, and I'll provide mine... We can compare.

Hopefully with the correct focus we can wrap that up in fairly short order as well. A well defined mission to kill terrorists cells and then leave.

Thats not what we do according to you guys on the Left.... We "Air raid villages and kill civilians", we "torture" and create more terrorists, we "terrorize kids women and children in the dark of night"...

Rolling back the Bush tax cuts to the rich to the level of the economically prosperous Clinton years and either removing oil company subsidies or creating a windfall profits tax on Big Oil is absolutely fine with me. Bush lined their pocket obscenely for 8 straight years... time to give back a small portion. Remember we still have to PAY FOR Bush's Nation Building campaign somehow.

"Rolling back" is a nice way to say RAISE TAXES on the rich, nothing like class warfare to energize the base...

I guess Obama supporters don't do history either. Bush's tax cuts brought in MORE MONEY than the "Prosperous Clinton Years" managed to bring in...

Since you don't seem to know history, and you have avoided looking at the logistics and math on such proposals, I don't know if pointing out the historical results of Windfall Profits Taxes would be of any use... They result in less money and greater dependence on foreign oil.

What happened to personal responsibility. Making it on your own. Not relying on the government to give you a hand out to make it! Why in the world would we give BILLIONS in Tax Breaks an subsidies to a business that's making record profits? Making more per year in profits than some small countries in their entirety bring in.

It's totally unfair that the regular worker who's a taxpayer and has to make those tax breaks up out of his or her paycheck. It is Welfare... but to people that in no way need it.

Wow, what sheer ignorance and hypocrisy... I think you should read up on logical fallacies.
1. You're judging ALL the oil companies in America, some 200, as if they were all Exxon... They are not. All but FOUR are small companies who could use those tax breaks, which are for exploration and infrastructure, to be competitive with the big four - helping to prevent Monopolies and providing competition.
2. Oil companies PAY far more in taxes than they get in tax breaks. When "Big Oil" puts $20 into the kitty and "Big Gov" cuts them a break and gives back $1 for every $20 (with strings attached), thats not costing the taxpayers any money. What does cost the taxpayers money, is raising taxes on the oil companies... which Democrats LOVE to do.
3. Personal Responsibility... LOL... Why does Personal Responsibility apply to "Big Oil" but not to average Americans?
4. Corporate Welfare:

According to the Cato Institute, the U.S. federal government spent $92 billion on corporate welfare during fiscal year 2006. Recipients included Boeing, Xerox, IBM, Motorola, Dow Chemical, and General Electric.

Exxon ALONE brought in almost 90 BILLION in TAXES to the Government... as much as the bottom 50% of taxpayers.

You think that because you're a REPUBLICAN'T...

I'm no Republican, I'm ={CaLiCo}= and the only "Can't" about me, is that I can't stop thinking critically long enough to believe the political smoke and mirrors are reality.

There will be a major change of direction on many fronts. If not you wouldn't be so against him.

There will be major change....

Major decline in US power, economic and militarily...
Major Growth of Government...
Major unemployment....
Major Taxation....
Major Debt....

The best thing about an Obama presidency would be...
He'd make Bush look good.

 

[Federal Farmer]

A fighting force in Afghanistan (where the 9-11 guys have been all along by the way) is in no way even close to the numbers and expense of controlling and occupying a whole country the size of Iraq.

TG, are you on drugs? Seriously now! I just love you armchair generals who have never served a day in uniform talking as if you knew a damned thing about the military, or planning operations. Have you ever seen a map of Afghanistan? DUMBASS, it's MOUNTAINS!! Do you have any idea what it's like trying to hump a 90lb. rucksack, PLUS your weapon and ammo up mountains like that? NO, YOU DO NOT! Why in God's name would we even WANT to fight in that AFU terrain when we can fight in Iraq where it's nice and flat and open, and the bad guys don't have NEARLY as many places to hide?

WE chose the battlefield instead of letting our enemy choose it, and as such, WE chose the order of battle, which is why WE have kicked the everlovingsh!t out of them.

Hopefully with the correct focus we can wrap that up in fairly short order as well. A well defined mission to kill terrorists cells and then leave. Not stay and build Holiday Inns.

And exactly what is wrong with Holiday Inn? After sweating your balls off all day long killing sheet-headed terrorists, it's nice to be able to get a shower, and kick back and relax a little bit in an air conditioned room and watch a little cable!

Rolling back the Bush tax cuts to the rich to the level of the economically prosperous Clinton years and either removing oil company subsidies or creating a windfall profits tax on Big Oil is absolutely fine with me. Bush lined their pocket obscenely for 8 straight years... time to give back a small portion. Remember we still have to PAY FOR Bush's Nation Building campaign somehow.

You're a ***** tg, go to the OMB website and look at the REAL numbers, because the ones you keep pulling out of your butt...well,...THEY STINK!

 

[vyo476]

 

[top gun]

GenSeneca;57820]I guess its a good thing for Obama that his supporters don't care about details, logistics and math... Go ahead an ballpark a figure on how much you think we will save under Obama's plan, I'm curious. Should you want to go all out, provide the logistical data you're working from, links too please, and I'll provide mine... We can compare.

There's no need to play dueling statistics here. We both know we can cite anything we want by going to the favorable source.

The bottom line and a very common sense one. Occupying an entire country the size of Iraq and all the financial support to that country that goes with that is at not even in the same ballpark as a good size seek and destroy force in Afghanistan.

Thats not what we do according to you guys on the Left.... We "Air raid villages and kill civilians", we "torture" and create more terrorists, we "terrorize kids women and children in the dark of night"...

Well we do torture under the current Republican administration which is always wrong. As far as collateral damage it is something that happens in war and is not always avoidable. You try to keep that to a minimum.

"Rolling back" is a nice way to say RAISE TAXES on the rich, nothing like class warfare to energize the base...

I guess Obama supporters don't do history either. Bush's tax cuts brought in MORE MONEY than the "Prosperous Clinton Years" managed to bring in...

Since you don't seem to know history, and you have avoided looking at the logistics and math on such proposals, I don't know if pointing out the historical results of Windfall Profits Taxes would be of any use... They result in less money and greater dependence on foreign oil.

And if we had no taxes a 1% tax would be an increase... what's your point. It's your Republican Party that has for almost two full terms of Republican Bush spent like drunken sailors at home and in a War totally founded on lies. Now nobody wants to pay for anything just push the disaster off on our kids. How irresponsible!

We can and should remove all subsidies to Big Oil (Corporate Welfare). They are making record profits and would still be making huge profits without them. It's like a Welfare Mom expecting to collect that government check way after she's went out and secured a job as a chief heart surgeon. It's ridiculous!

Same thing with windfall profits tax. Big Oil could voluntarily keep their prices lower and still make good profits. But they don't and won't. We need to seriously diversify as well as crank up mileage standards and not be so beholding to both Foreign Oil or American Big Oil.

You're a Republican't... but we really can... and will. We're Americans we can get the job done.

 

[top gun]

Federal Farmer;57824]TG, are you on drugs? Seriously now! I just love you armchair generals who have never served a day in uniform talking as if you knew a damned thing about the military, or planning operations. Have you ever seen a map of Afghanistan? DUMBASS, it's MOUNTAINS!! Do you have any idea what it's like trying to hump a 90lb. rucksack, PLUS your weapon and ammo up mountains like that? NO, YOU DO NOT! Why in God's name would we even WANT to fight in that AFU terrain when we can fight in Iraq where it's nice and flat and open, and the bad guys don't have NEARLY as many places to hide?

I've forgotten more about Afghanistan than you know right now! I don't need to have served in the military to understand terrain or understand EXACTLY what the fighting in Afghanistan did to the Soviets. As you'll recall my wife is an expert in Soviet history including the battlefield configuration you speak of as well as an ex-Army Military Intelligence Officer herself specializing in Russian. I'm sure you'll recall we were supporting the Bin Laden side last the time.

I never said that the fighting conditions were favorable. And the fact our wonderful & brave soldiers carry heavy loads addresses no point of mine...

That however bad and expensive it is it is only made that much worse by our guys being spread so thin in some ridiculous Nation Building plan in Iraq! This isn't me talking this is top brass in that theater saying that. We need more troops in Afghanistan!

And as I've told you my best friend in the worlds son has done 1 tour in Kuwait and 3 in Iraq. So please spare me the righteous indication like nobody but you cares dip wad!

WE chose the battlefield instead of letting our enemy choose it, and as such, WE chose the order of battle, which is why WE have kicked the everlovingsh!t out of them.

If you're talking about kicking ass in Iraq... absolutely. Our team can kick anybodies ass in a conventional ground/air fight. But that has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that we are in the wrong theater my friend!

It in no way excuses the fact that Iraq had nothing to do whatsoever with 9-11 and Hussein was telling the truth when he said over & over he had ZERO WMD's.

And exactly what is wrong with Holiday Inn? After sweating your balls off all day long killing sheet-headed terrorists, it's nice to be able to get a shower, and kick back and relax a little bit in an air conditioned room and watch a little cable!

Well that would be fine but it's not our guys that are using the Holiday Inns. Our guys are busy out getting electrocuted in faulty military contractor built showers on base.

You have a lot to learn my friend...

 

[BigRob]

There's no need to play dueling statistics here. We both know we can cite anything we want by going to the favorable source.

The bottom line and a very common sense one. Occupying an entire country the size of Iraq and all the financial support to that country that goes with that is at not even in the same ballpark as a good size seek and destroy force in Afghanistan.

What would the mission in Afghanistan be under an Obama administration? If it is solely seek and destroy, then yes it would be cheaper, but if it is securing a nation to rid it of the Taliban, than we should expect a much higher cost.

Well we do torture under the current Republican administration which is always wrong. As far as collateral damage it is something that happens in war and is not always avoidable. You try to keep that to a minimum.

I believe we are doing a fine job "keeping it to a minimum".

]And if we had no taxes a 1% tax would be an increase... what's your point. It's your Republican Party that has for almost two full terms of Republican Bush spent like drunken sailors at home and in a War totally founded on lies. Now nobody wants to pay for anything just push the disaster off on our kids. How irresponsible!

Yes that would be an increase, except Obama has no proposed a 1% tax increase, what he has proposed is much higher.

I am also not sure how Obama plans to pay for all of his promised spending. So far he has promised well over 1.4 trillion in domestic spending, as well as an additional 800 billion to the UN. Obama plans to "pay" for all of this by rolling back the Bush tax cuts. Yet this ignores that the Clinton tax increases (considered largest ever) only generated 270 billion over a 5 year period.

So, where is Obama going to come up with the 2.2 trillion dollar shortfall?

(note: these numbers only include 111 of the 178 proposed programs that Obama has promised to the voters)

We can and should remove all subsidies to Big Oil (Corporate Welfare). They are making record profits and would still be making huge profits without them. It's like a Welfare Mom expecting to collect that government check way after she's went out and secured a job as a chief heart surgeon. It's ridiculous!

I agree we can remove their subsidies, as well as any subsidies for any alternative fuel as well. We should let the market work it out.

Same thing with windfall profits tax. Big Oil could voluntarily keep their prices lower and still make good profits. But they don't and won't. We need to seriously diversify as well as crank up mileage standards and not be so beholding to both Foreign Oil or American Big Oil.

You're a Republican't...[/B] but we really can... and will. We're Americans we can get the job done.

Windfall profit taxes send the wrong message to business. They basically say "you as the business take all the risk, and should the market dictate that your product cost more, we will punish you for it."

If we want to do away with subsidies, we need to do away with all of them, not just for oil. Further, US oil companies do not control the price of oil.

If we really want to combat the price of oil, I believe that we need to work to limit inflation and get a stronger dollar. That is my plan.

So, since you are a "demo-can" please explain to me how Obama will fund his spending plans.

 

[Federal Farmer]

I've forgotten more about Afghanistan than you know right now!

TG, you're a FU(KING *****. You never served in the military, everything you know about it comes from someone who never humped a ruck a day in her life after Basic, and you think you're going to tell me ANYTHING???

You are the biggest joke on this entire Forum. Now run along and hide behind your womans skirts before the "Boogy Man" gets you.

 

[vyo476]

Farmer, Top Gun, the two of you need to calm down, now.

I had sincerely hoped that we'd put his kind of juvenile insult-trading behind us.

 

[Federal Farmer]

Farmer, Top Gun, the two of you need to calm down, now.

I had sincerely hoped that we'd put his kind of juvenile insult-trading behind us.

Sorry vyo, but when dealing with barking moonbats, who have NO idea what they're talking about, yet insist on acting like they do, and since this is the internet and I can't physically smack him upside the suckhole, I'm left with very few options.

Looks like I'm going to have to add ANOTHER gutless surrender monkey to the IGNORE list.