Government Shutdown

Page 6 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
Fiat currency will be the death of every industrialized nation.

The Brits have quite a bit on their plate right now. We couldn't stop being friends with the English even if we wanted to, our economies are too deeply intertwined.

Do you think Obama still got an invite to the royal wedding? Im still waiting for mine..........Its probably still in the mail.
 

Ni hoi ma. I buy foxconn, or something like that.
 


What I meant was that to support infrastructure, offices, and utilities. I DO NOT SUPPORT government run programs where they take care of me. Heck, I don't like my SSN, but I have it...oh well.

There seems to be a lack of understanding to what i am saying,( but you might see it differently.) What needs to be done is the Military needs to find ways to be more efficient, so that funds are not sucked up. If we could create the worlds first and most economically efficient army that is great in standards, heck, that would shut us ALL up.

What the money needs to go to is helping small businesses. Not run them, but get them started. After that, capitalism is all that wil determine its fate.

No I do not watch MSNBC...too much liberal bat shyte.
 


I agree with you that the Republicans need a strong candidate - however I am not so sure that Palin or Romney would necessarily be a bad choice.

Yes, I saw Palin's embarrassing interview with Katie Couric where she really did a poor job in answering several questions - but consider this. Palin is an effective speaker like Obama. She is likeable, like Obama. She has the credentials of being a state governor - arguably better than Obama's "community organizer" and 24 months in congress credentials. Yes she is not a genius, but she is not stupid either. She has several kids, loves hockey and has the character to take care of a downs syndrome child. And yes, she even has family problems with her teenager daughter. She is what dogman asked for, an everyday person. Until her VP run, she struggled with financial issues like most Americans.

Romney at least has business and economic expertise - something Obama is sorely in need of. Romney's real weakness was that he helped found his state's government funded health cares system which is now failing financially. Obama care, which will fail like a hydrogen bomb, is too close to Romney's effort. Note that the Democrat's made Romney's system much more expensive than he

I think we are all looking for that special genius leader, thus many gullible Americans bought into the Democrat's shtick that Obama was the most intelligent man ever to run for president. This is somewhat laughable considering that he was not an engineer, scientist or a member of Mensa. Heck, he did not even release his GPA and considering he is is a law student - which is not the most challenging curriculum, I am not impressed. We don't even know if Obama was even academically brilliant!!!!!! We clearly know he never has started a business, run a business, met a payroll, held a demanding job that required exceptional skills (I don't count his short role as a senator as being a demanding job). He is a professional politician and we elected him - shame on us!!! He really is the most unqualified man ever elected to the office of president.

All this and he was still elected - why? Because he is very well-spoken and good (not great at communicating). If you want great at communicating you have to go to Ronald Reagan and then a long second away to Bill Clinton. Don't get me wrong, I pretty much despised Clinton, but I did admire his communication skills. His people skills.

Remember that Regan has spent nearly two decades dealing with our nation's problems and immersing himself in one of the most brilliant, conservative think-tanks before he was elected. He had worked with unions, worked as a life guard, an actor. He had been a soldier. He had real-world experience.

I have a BSCE in Civil Engineering with EIT certification. When I took the EIT exam it had a 50% failure rate and keep in mind that engineers with four year degrees were taking the exam and 50% were failing it. I have managed projects worth tens of millions of dollars as a construction project manager and last year I nearly lost my house because I could not find work. I started my own business, which by the way is much harder than getting an engineering degree, and I have struggled to make it a success.

What is my point? I have more real-world experience in solving all kinds of real-world problems than most candidates have but it takes more than
these qualifications to get elected. It takes, charisma, you have to be well-spoken. You have to be connected. Unfortunately, character seems to be way down the list.

The founding fathers were people like most hard working Americans. Many were self-made and had worked very hard for their businesses and livelihood. Yes some had inherited wealth but most were hard working, industrious men. They never meant for professional politicians to exist and thus they created a system of limited terms in the Constitution.

We need some real-world people to run for office who have struggled to make it. I am tired of billionaires, movie stars and smooth talkers. I think rich people should immediately be considered as limited in their candidacy unless they have other accomplishments to add to their wealth (at least Romney has run successful businesses).

In the movie "Dave" an ordinary man becomes president and he calls in his accountant to review the nation's financial "books." His accountant says that he would be arrested if he ran is business like Congress was running the country. I think we need a Dave. Someone who really loves our country, is intelligent but not necessarily a genius and genuinely has character. He (or she) would not cheat on their spouse, would have worked hard for a living would call their accountant to Washington when they were elected to president ha, ha. This is the kind of man our founding fathers intended to be elected.

That's who would solve our nation's problems. A real person who has solved real problems. Not a "community organizer."
 
@flong:
Sir, what you have just demonstrated was the ability to go above what the average American does in his/her lifetime. You demonstrated the capacity to process, rather than argue, the facts. We need people like you in office, not whiny little 3rd graders running our Country.
 
The main aim of the power elite is to continue the status quo ... the other power elite retain controls on the means of production.

The facade of actually caring for the great unwashed is important, but only in terms of getting reelected, and in order one needs to be reasonably popular ... .

Behind closed doors these people don't give a toss about any of you unless your a 100% organ match and they have a need.

The best you can hope for is the delusion that what you do and say actually matters beyond your own social milieu ...

Iv'e been reading too many posts i nthe French Toms Hardware Site ... look what they have done to me !!!

Wine anyone ??
 
The confirmation bias is strong in this thread, as is the revisionist history and propaganda.

I particularly liked portraying Ronald Raygun as a *critical thinker*. I chortled.

I also enjoyed the *Blame Obama* hate for everything from the gov't shutdown, the deficit, the worst economic disaster in 80 years, and most likely kidnapping the Lindbergh baby.

The VooDoo 'Tax Cut' Economics / *Starve the Beast* record of Fail speaks for itself over the last 30 years. Feel free to spin that as you please.

'Trickle-Down' succeeded alright; it succeeded in driving the middle class into oblivion. The Top 1% control nearly 40% of the net worth of America -- The Top 5% over 70% of the net worth. One hundred million people in the United States now have zero or negative net worth, and over 10 million of them will ultimately lose their homes.

Good job, Cons. I'm just happy this house of cards imploded on Dubs Watch. Think of the blame that black dude in the White House would have gotten if it happened six months later when he came into office.
 


So. Yah got nothing, eh? Not a surprise.

In case you missed (or ignored it), the Implosion of the United States of America began in August of 2007 when central banks around the World (including the Federal Reserve) undertook major efforts to prop up a failing financial system.

And in case you missed (or ignored it), the United States of America incurred $1.16 trillion in debt from October, 2007, to October, 2008.

Not surprisingly, in the last 365 days of the presidency of George Bush, the United States of America incurred over $1.4 trillion in debt. Kinda hard to turn that ship around when Federal revenues are at their lowest level of GDP since 1940.

Stop me when you find something that the Bush White House/GOP Congress paid for:

1) The 2001 Tax Cuts;
2) The War in Afghanistan;
3) The War in Iraq;
4) 'No Child Left Behind';
5) The 2003 Tax Cuts;
6) A 70% increase (over inflation) in defense spending;
7) Medicare Part D;
8) Katrina; and
9) On ad nauseum ...


What say you, Big Guy?

What propaganda will you bring forth, Dr. Goebbels?
 
This is getting interesting ... I am not sure there is sufficient evidence to suggest either the Democrats or the Republicans have done much in the past 20 years to reign in your debt in the US.

I personally wouldn't invest in anything US owned at the moment as your finances are not stable enough ... you have your own Fukishima to deal with.

Stop giving out any foreign aid for a start ... let these other 3rd rate places go to pot ...

Stop saving everyone else's asses and save your own first.

Takeover (and I mean take it over) or Nuke the next country that tries a terrorist attack on you ... why muck around?

You Americans are just too nice ... take a page out of the French and English books on diplomacy (from the past not the present as now they are just a cheap franchise of what they once were).
 
What propaganda will you bring forth, Dr. Goebbels?
Click to expand...

How 'bout you shoot your family and blow your brains out like your role mode Goebbels the communist did. Before you do, suggest the idea to the loon friends putting the lame, yet oddly exciting ideas in your half brain head then knock yourself out.


1) The 2001 Tax Cuts;
2) The War in Afghanistan;
3) The War in Iraq;
4) 'No Child Left Behind';
5) The 2003 Tax Cuts;
6) A 70% increase (over inflation) in defense spending;
7) Medicare Part D;
8) Katrina; and
9) On ad nauseum ...
Click to expand...

Let's apply some basic liberal ideaology to solving Katrina...for exmple and leave 'on ad nauseum' for your leaders Obama, Reid, Pelosi, Clinton, Boxer and the rest of the particularily ugly people in government. Pardon me while I laugh. Bwhahahahahahahahahaha! Throw Afghanistan and Libya in your list and consider the five trillion in new debt the current rubbish elitist administration has amassed in two years.


1. The earth is running out of land, resources, and energy. People are destroying the environment. "private property rights" time has passed.

2. Most people are not capable of managing their own lives and need to be "handled" by politicians. (Freedom is over-rated)

3. Religion is a quaint idea who's time has past. Government must replace religion in peoples lives and take over the role of wellfare and charity.


Some reading material for you Goebbels.

http://www.foxnews.com/interactive/politics/election-map-2010/#race=postElePolMakeup&pres=false


A postcard reminder to scuk everytime you post on the forum.





Mark your calender.



Pin up poster for 'ya.

 
This is getting interesting ... I am not sure there is sufficient evidence to suggest either the Democrats or the Republicans have done much in the past 20 years to reign in your debt in the US
Click to expand...

Social note. Clinton balanced the budget in his first term. Of course his failed foreign policy agenda caused the Iraq war and that was the end of a balanced budget. You should have seen it on Clinton News Network and MSNBC, ABC, CBS, NBC and the rest of the liberal driven media. It was code named Blame it on Bush.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=457jp8VGhEE
 


*EDIT* - Sheesh, I had replied at work (with IE 6) and somehow it merely quoted your reply... Sorry 'bout that :)

Anyway, I agree with your assessment of Ronald Reagan - IMO, he was the greatest president since FDR. Contrast his proclamation standing in front of the Berlin Wall "Mr. Gorbachev, take down this wall!" in honor of the 25th anniversary of JFK's pronouncement "Ich bien ein Berliner", with Bill Clinton's "Depends on what the meaning of is, is" in his defense of his lying to the public about having sex with Monica Lewinsky.

The leftwing nutjobs dispute this, but I credit RR with bringing down the Soviet Union, mainly by busting their economy trying to match the USA's initiatives such as the 'Star Wars' missile defense program. According to Wiki:

Analyst Jeffrey W. Knopf has explained why Reagan went beyond everyone else:

"Reagan stands out in part because he believed the Soviet Union could be defeated. For most of the Cold War, Republican and Democratic administrations alike had assumed the Soviet Union would prove durable for the foreseeable future. The bipartisan policy of containment aimed to keep the Soviet Union in check while trying to avoid nuclear war; it did not seek to force the dissolution of the Soviet empire. Ronald Reagan, in contrast, believed that the Soviet economy was so weak that increased pressure could bring the Soviet Union to the brink of failure. He therefore periodically expressed confidence that the forces of democracy 'will leave Marxism-Leninism on the ash heap of history'."
Click to expand...
 


Um..... financial bailout created under Bush?
 
But if we HAVE to spend money (By being basically at gun point by by large banks) why are you so upset / surprised?

Bush created the housing bubble (Under his watch) and we had to spend to keep our economy from collapsing.
 
I have a BSCE in Civil Engineering with EIT certification. When I took the EIT exam it had a 50% failure rate and keep in mind that engineers with four year degrees were taking the exam and 50% were failing it. I have managed projects worth tens of millions of dollars as a construction project manager and last year I nearly lost my house because I could not find work. I started my own business, which by the way is much harder than getting an engineering degree, and I have struggled to make it a success.
Click to expand...


My wfe and I have been in private practice for the past twenty-five years. That's in addition to a private corporation and an additional small business start up that each did very well for over a decade. I mention this because to listen to Obama's ideas of how the government should implement his administratiions rubbish elitist policy is beneath my level of education and knowledge. I want to throw up when I hear his voice. I'll keep it short and say Obama's poor judgement and lack of rectitude make him beneath any prior president in history since I have been alive. Community Organizer...ef that. Let me qualify this social note by saying I have an undergraduate degree in education and my wife is a doctor for the past 36+ years.
 


Remember that Clinton was almost forced to deal with the budget deficit because of the "Republican Revolution" that swept in Republican control of both houses in Congress. All of Clinton's budgets were higher than the Republican controlled House budgets and so he was forced to "compromise" and spend less. It is not accurate to say that Clinton balanced the budget - it is more accurate to say that he was dragged kicking and screaming to spend less and the Congressional Republicans balanced the budget.

Do not forget that a basic premise of the Democratic Party is that government is good (almost sacred) and more government is better. Also remember that Government does nothing well and it is inefficient and unbelievably expensive. Therefore the Democrats basic premise of bringing government into everything undermines any possibility of them dealing with the national debt because to effectively deal with the debt, huge cuts to government must be made.

The Democrat's label as the "tax and spend" party is well earned.
 
Cut/Less spending and not raising taxes is the answer for the curent budget situation. A concept Obama does not grasp.

Edit. Excellent points regarding Clinton balancing the budget. True. Noted.
 


And he took a $320 billion annual surplus in the Unified Budget, borrowed over $1 trillion from Social Security, and passed on a $1.4 trillion annual deficit (and a failing financial system, crushing job losses and the 'Great Recession') to the next guy :lol:

If you look closely ....

1) The 2001 Tax Cuts;
2) The War in Afghanistan;
3) The War in Iraq;
4) 'No Child Left Behind';
5) The 2003 Tax Cuts;
6) A 70% increase (over inflation) in defense spending;
7) Medicare Part D;
8) Katrina; and
9) On ad nauseum ...

This 'spending' and policy occurred before 2007, Mr. Wing Nut Full-of-Excuses.


 


As a conservative, I am no fan of Bush's overspending either, however the TARP program is actually working, at least somewhat (I know, I thought that I would never say that a government program is working ha, ha).

To date, nearly all of the money that is involved in TARP has been paid back and it is only something like $40 billion in the red. Banks are still paying back the loans that were made WITH INTEREST and so TARP will probably at least break even and it might even make some money for the government (whew I never thought I would say that either LOL). TARP is not the problem that caused the debt crisis.

Bush did overspend and that is why the Republicans got kicked out of Congress. But nothing compares to the Democrat's spending - "double down" is not accurate, they have increased spending almost five times over anything budget that Bush was involved with.

If we want to have any hope of reigning in the national debt, we must first and foremost get rid of Democrats. Second, we must elect fiscally conservative Republicans. Third we must avoid third-party splinters which will elect Democrats. In the entire history of our nation, third party candidates have repeatedly lost nearly all major elections.
 


My uncle is a Bishop and an official of the church in SLC. He pretty much runs the small town He retired to and provides jobs for over one hundred residents of that town. he also has over one hundred parishners He personally sees after. Me? My religious beliefs? Glad you asked. ...I'm a Buddist in theory by day and a fundamental polygamist by night. Call me a victim of circumstance with great multitasking ability.

*Inserts Rev. Wright youtube video, Wright BTW is a man I consider my personal spiritual leader and in addition I diligently followed his teachings for almost 20 years, which states what I really believe about America.*

Edit for Writer's embellishments.
 


Re-invent history, much?

Perhaps you should consider the Budget Enforcement Act of 1990 which required PayGo and budget sequester order to address deficits, and the Deficit Reduction Act of 1993 which ultimately every Republican in Congress voted against the bill.

And, by-the-way, Clinton's proposed FY1995 Budget was less than $1.3 trillion, and continued a cap on discretionary spending. 'Your' GOP Congress ultimately approved total spending of more than $1.5 trillion.

Got some more propaganda and obfuscation?

Tell us some more about that Reagan critical thinking :lol:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom