obama administration gives away internet

[Tolken]

the_patriot2014 - How about we start with operation fast and furious, Benghazi, his outright assault on the constitution, obamacare is iffy.

 

No, not really looking for a fight so much as I'm quite tired of Obama bashing...especially from "Christians".  You are correct, I didn't ask the right question, then again it was foolish of me to ask as the same assertions frequent any old right wing blog.   And you didn't answer my question should Bush and cheney have been impeached?

 

Where we might agree is that instead of some hypocritical stance against Obama alone a judicious appraisal spanning all presidents would be in order.  Should Reagan have been tried with treason for Iran-Contra, EPA scandal, S & L crisis, etc. It seems the right turns a blind eye when it is one of it's own, and the dems on Clinton. ( Just like they do concerning Reagan's tax increases)

 

One might think that I am an Obama supporter, and they would be wrong.  However, the republican party is as fully culpable for the intransigence, nastiness,and impotence of this government...no comment on those thoughts? Finally given the current state of our government, and country in general, I see no reason not to complete the transfer of the internet to an international independent third party based on the 1998 agreement to do so.

[The_Patriot21]

so, we should stop standing against obama? since when is saying Obama is a traitor bashing him? last I checked thats the truth. Should bush and cheney have been impeached? well first off, I don't agree with everything they did, especially the patriot act, that was a horrible piece of legislator-but overall, I feel they at least had their heart in the right place, they were honestly trying to protect america and not destroy it like Obama. Secondly, my opinion about whether they should be impeached as well as yours-does not matter. They are no longer in office, that is past, what we have to deal with now is Obama and Biden, they are the ones we need to stand against, as they are the ones currently in control. We can't even attempt to change things for the better arguing the morals of a past president-but we can by removing the current one.

 

and thirdly, the republican party is not fully culpable for the impontence of the government thats an outright lie. Sure theyve played their part, but didnt your mother ever tell you-it takes 2 to fight, and in fact if anything theyre a little less guilty. I mean lets look at the fights-theyve all started after Obama wanted to do something stupid like obamacare, gun control, or put us further in debt. And they all started when the republicans said hey, thats not right, and tried to grow a backbone. Then the liberals jumped down their throats blamed the conservatives for everything and ultimatly won nearly every time. If anything, the republicans are only guilty of not having enough of a backbone, otherwise obama would be impeached and maybe wed have a balanced budget somehow. You seem to be following the age old "the person who struck second" is at fault, and its not true. sure, theyve been part of the problem, but the major issue here is Obama and his cronies-Im convinced theres been a few times hes intentionally stirred the pot just to push his agenda along.

[Tolken]

the_patriot2014 - Secondly, my opinion about whether they should be impeached as well as yours-does not matter.

 

Now see we are in almost complete disagreement as to Obama being a traitor and Bush/cheney having their hearts in the "right place" but rather then an endless cycle I will leave it at...the old - we'll agree (or not) to disagree. I will just add, few recall that a professor from the University of Chicago predicted the financial collapse of 2008, though totally dismissed by the large majority of economists, his prediction was  based on several factors one of which was income inequality. An interesting read is Hendrick Smith, or Hacker and Pierson's "Winner-Take-All Politics", and also Wendell Potter concerning healthcare.  Blessings....

Edited March 19, 2014 by Tolken

[The_Patriot21]

well, at least your honest now about being a solid Obama supportor. 

 

As far as the financial collapse the professor from chicago was a moron. Yes, our economy was going to collapse. The writing was on the wall, anyone with half a brain could see that-but it had nothing to do with income inequality, it had to do with Bush, or Clinton, or even Obama really, that was something that was coming for a long time. America has been in a very materialistic cycle for decades-people want more and more and more, and didn't want to pay for it, so they went more and more into debt-our government included. When you spend more then you make, ya doh your going to go bankrupt. When you have an entire country doing it, yes, sooner or later the economy is going to crash.That professor-was just trying to make up a lame excuse as to why it falls without putting blame where blame is due. Its passing the buck, and the professor is either willingly lying-or really shouldnt be a professor.

 

Free enterprise, has nothing to do with the economy collapse-in fact that income inequality is why we made it as long as we did without the crash. Thats a fact. Free enterprise is good for the economy. socialism and communism and other forms of "income equality" don't work. History has proven that time and time again, and doesn't solve anything-look at those countries, you have a ruling class-the goverment who are very wealthy and very oppressive-and everyone else, who yes may have "equal" income but are dirt poor with no freedom, and the economy is always lousy. "equality" sounds good, but doesnt work. 

 

And since the economy collapse was due to overspending-which even I could have told you then it was going to collapse-do you really think Obamas the answer? how he refuses to follow the budget, has spent more money then probably the last 4 to 5 presidents combined with no end in sight, with less income then the last 4-5 presidents? How hes cutting down on enterprise-how his obamacare is cutting jobs, inflating the dollar, how the EPA is choking out work in natural resources such as coal and oil (I know, the EPA was started under Bush-but it has only gotten worse under Obama) So were left with fewer jobs, less profit, more companys going bankrupt because they cant stay afloat due to Obamas policies? All Obama would have to do is get the government to get out of the market and it would rebound on its own.

 

We do agree on two things. One is, we do completly disagree. Two, im pulling out to. You have yet to bring forth a single argument based upon facts, and continuing debate not based on facts isn't beneficial to anyone.

[Tolken]

the_patriot2014 - Two, im pulling out to. You have yet to bring forth a single argument based upon facts, and continuing debate not based on facts isn't beneficial to anyone.

 

Interesting, because all that I see above is your opinion...facts?  It is amusing that you dismiss the professor from UoC when in fact his predictions were dismissed..calling him a "moron" is your idea of fact. I would call it an ignorant comment. Obviously you have no idea what income inequality is being referred to, as it is not some sort of egalitarian philosophy. (Nice strawman) You erroneously jump to some sort of socialist view...I suggested some possible sources to enlighten you.

 

Wall St. Journal headline (hardly liberal) - if you need more such reports let me know.....Guess that professor isn't such a "moron" 10 or 12 years later.

 

"Stagnant Wages Are Crimping Economic Growth"...Wall Street is setting records but "Stagnant wages aren't only tough on workers — the American economy is paying a price, too. Living standards aren't rising. Consumer spending, which is 70% of the economy, is more restrained. And the recovery advances at a slower pace."  You really should check your source for facts. Interesting to  that the stock markets are breaking all time records...someone's making money.

 

 

(I know, the EPA was started under Bush-but it has only gotten worse under Obama)

 

The EPA was started under Nixon...fact.

 

how the EPA is choking out work in natural resources such as coal and oil

 

Really, and yet Exxon Mobil has had the largest profits of any corporation in history...Fact.

 

So if you want to continue I can post facts that show that the moron (and I guess you) predicted the worst recession since the 30's in deference to the majority of economists... and substantial facts regarding income inequality... not socialism.   

[The_Patriot21]

you sit there behind your desk reading the news, and yet have no clue of the real world. And its not ignorant-its fact. If I could foresee the economic collapse before hand, for what it is, he can to-so he is either less then intelligent, or lying. Its pretty common sense really you spend more then you make your going to tank. Doesnt take a PHD to figure that one out, and its pretty ignorant to suggest otherwise.

 

I know what income inequality is. Its when some people make more then others. Thats called free enterprise. A lot of people make a lot more money then me-big whoop. Thats life, get over it. the only way to really solve that is by making it equal, which is pretty much what communism and socialism are based around. it doesnt work, its that drive to make more money that keeps free enterprise going-its free enterprise that kept our economy going so long.

 

Yes stagnant wages are tough on workers. however let me point out if you improve the economy, the wages will improve on their own. The stagnant wages arnt what caused the economy to collapse theyre just a symptom of the problem thats making it worse-the answer is to back off the idustry and the wages will take care of themselves.

 

I stand corrected on the EPA. Doesnt change my point however.

 

Yes, exxon Mobile makes money. most oil companies do make money. However, that doesnt mean a thing-see I work in the oil field, I have actually lost 10s of thousands of dollars a year due to lack of work due to government sanctions. Fact is, exxon and other major oil companies make truck loads of money by overcharging for gas, and some of the high gas rates are due to government taxes. Fact is, we should have been the worlds leading producer of oil years ago. Easily. If the government had stepped out of the oil fields business years ago, and our government could follow a budget, we wouldn't even be in a economic downturn right now our country would be filthy rich and still have our AAA credit rating.

 

Whats funny is you say I dont deal in facts, yet you say you dont agree with me about him being a traightor, while ignoring the facts I gave you. I mean fast and furious alone would have gotten any other president impeached-and thats before we even get to benghazi, but like the news media instead of addressing those issues youve chosen to ignore those, and listen to liberal university professors who are trying to pass the buck.

[Tolken]

the_patriot2014 - Yes stagnant wages are tough on workers. however let me point out if you improve the economy, the wages will improve on their own. The stagnant wages arnt what caused the economy to collapse theyre just a symptom of the problem thats making it worse-the answer is to back off the idustry and the wages will take care of themselves.

 

I will continue this tomorrow, as I sit "behind my desk reading news", and since clearly you know absolutely nothing about me perhaps you should rethink making comments without appropriate information.

 

I know what income inequality is. Its when some people make more then others.

 

Actually, you don't as it is not simply spending more than one makes. Further, since you weren't aware, worker wages have been virtually stagnant for some 30 years.  At the same time executive pay has increased exponentially.  What you aren't aware of is that at one time workers were considered stakeholders so that as the company succeeded so did the workers/employees. So your assertion is totally wrong as proven by the WSJ article and many others. If Wall St. is at an all time high, if corporate profits are at an all time high, and if executive pay is at an all time high, then why do tell are worker wages stagnant.  Also, have you checked the healthcare cost percentages over time? 

 

I stand corrected on the EPA. Doesnt change my point however.

 

Yes, tell the people in Arkansas how wonderful oil pipelines are, lousy EPA who needs a clean environment....so oil companies overcharge so that they may make record setting profits. 

 

As to the debt please check into the fact that tax rates are the lowest i 30 years...but norquitrian republicans refuse to touch taxes.  Fast and furious/Iran-contra ... patriot act, Iraq, Geneva convention, if you want I can list 20 scandals under Bush.  I know his heart was in the right place...wherever that is.

 

I would be glad to pick this up tomorrow since you refused my offer to just agree to disagree. (For your information I worked in management for some 20 plus years in publishing/printing. For the past 20 years I've run my own business in music post production and graphics... when I'm not sitting behind my desk reading news.) 

[The_Patriot21]

hmmm. you tell me I dont know what income inequality, no I know, and I gave you the definition. not my fault you ignored it and took something else I said out of context. I never said it was spending more then one makes, I said it was some people making more then others. So please, actually read what I have to say. 

 

As far as stagnant, I dont see it. Sure if all you do is flip burgers and refuse to better yourself, chances are your never going to make more money. Ive been in the work force for over 10 years now and I know make over quadruple what I did when I started. The opportunitys are there. Sure, not everyones going to get there, not everyone has the same opportunities, but welcome to free enterprise. Its not fair, but neither is life.

 

Never mind the fact that the only reason taxes are so low is because the economy is so lousy no one can afford them. Also funny how, again I didnt even bring up taxes-you did, in order to dodge the scandals Obamas been directly again. let me make some points.

 

Bush didnt try to cover up the patriot Act.

 

Bush was justified about Iraq. Ive talked to the soldiers that have come back-they did find strong evidence that hussein was indeed making chemical weapons as well as in the beginning process of nukes. It was even released to the media, where it got one article-yet another example of a biased media covering up the truth.

 

the geneva conventions been around for much longer then Bush, so I fail to even see your argument there.

 

as far as the EPA, yes, sometimes accidents happen in the oil field. some accountability is good to make sure they clean up their mess. Im not sure what happened in arkansas, but stuff happens. The EPA, has gone way past accountability and is into control. I mean serious lets just look at the trucking aspect-our vehicles have some of the cleanest exhaust in the world-yet the EPA TAXES, thats right TAXES how many miles we drive. hmmm. Want further proof of that? check this out 

 

And unlike Obama, nothing Bush did got americans killed. Look at fast and furious, sure bush tried it to-but bush shut it down when he realized it wasnt working, before anyone got killed. Obama was far sloppier, didnt shut it down, got people killed, then covered it up. Then lets look at Benghazi where Obama just left them out to dry-again something else Bush never did. But, its all a moot point were not talking about Bush, were talking about Obama. Like Ive stated previously, whats happened in the past doesn't matter-we can't change that, its whats happening now, that we can. How can you stand behind a president who is wrecking our economy and leaving americans out to die, and then covering it up? how can you? this isnt about Bush or nixon, this is about our current president, side stepping the current issues doesnt make them go away or make them right.

 

Finally, last I checked an agreement to agree to disagree is just that, an agreement to agree to disagree, not a I agree to disagree but im going to add another little argument in here at the end. Which ironically, I responded in kind. So you cant blame me for not taking your offer-I said I agreed with it, just added my .02 cents to the end like you did. So put blame where blame is due. You want to walk away? agree to disagree? then do so. 

[nebula]

It should be quite obvious to rational minds that the vitriol spewed in politics has had a demonstrably deleterious effect on government, and American culture. There actually was a time when representatives, and the public, could converse and discuss politics in a civilized manner.  Amazingly things got done, and compromise in politics is not a dirty word.

And you are blaming average American citizens for this?

Of course with the insertion of tea party ideologues into the republican party compromise is defined as my way or no way.  When mcconnell can pronounce that the goal of the republican party is to make Obama a one term President...that pretty much sums up the anti-American attitude of current republican party...and they have held to that commitment. Both sides of the aisle hold to the priority of party first, self second, corporate interests third, and America a distant fourth.

You are blaming the Tea Party? Have you not heard how the Left has been operating? Have you not heard the hatred spewed by Liberals at George Bush? I can't count the number of times I heard a Liberal say they wish George Bush would get assassinated. Did you see and hear how George Bush was treated the day Obama was first inaugurated? Talk about childish! Or have you not heard the smear campaign against Sarah Palin?

It is quite clear how one-sided you are are; so please quit acting as if you are not.

[Tolken]

Part 1:

 

the_patriot2014 -So please, actually read what I have to say. So please, actually read what I have to say. 

 

“America has been in a very materialistic cycle for decades-people want more and more and more, and didn't want to pay for it, so they went more and more into debt-our government included. When you spend more then you make, ya doh your going to go bankrupt.”

 

That is what you stated initially, I appreciate that you backtracked after my comments.

 

As far as stagnant, I dont see it.

 

Obviously you haven’t been looking. And anecdotal “fact” of a personal account hardly extrapolates into the broader issue. 

“These data underscore that there is a bigger story than public versus private compensation and a more penetrating set of questions to ask than who has more than whom. The ability of the economy to produce more goods and services has not translated into greater compensation for either group of workers. Why has pay fared so poorly overall? Why did the richest 1% of Americans receive 56% of all the income growth between 1989 and 2007, before the recession began (compared with 16% going to the bottom 90% of households)? Why are corporate profits 22% above their pre-recession level while total corporate sector employees’ compensation (reflecting lower employment and meager pay increases) is 3% below pre-recession levels? The answers lie in an economy that is designed to work for the well off and not to produce good jobs and improved living standards.¹

Essentially, economic policy has not supported good jobs over the last 30 years or so. Rather, the focus has been on policies that were thought to make consumers better off through lower prices: deregulation of industries, privatization of public services, the weakening of labor standards including the minimum wage, erosion of the social safety net, expanding globalization, and the move toward fewer and weaker unions. These policies have served to erode the bargaining power of most workers, widen wage inequality, and deplete access to good jobs. In the last 10 years even workers with a college degree have failed to see any real wage growth.”

http://www.epi.org/publication/the_sad_but_true_story_of_wages_in_america/

If you would like I can post myriad sites, books, and such that support the same exact scenario...wages are stagnant.

Bush was justified about Iraq. Ive talked to the soldiers that have come back-they did find strong evidence that hussein was indeed making chemical weapons as well as in the beginning process of nukes. It was even released to the media, where it got one article-yet another example of a biased media covering up the truth.

No, he wasn’t justified, and if that is what your “soldier” friends told you they were wrong. No media cover-up...as if fox news would cover such a story up.

“ISG found no direct evidence that Iraq, after 1996, had plans for a new BW program or was conducting BW-specific work for military purposes."

“Experts from the three nations failed to document any existent biological or nuclear weapons and discovered only a few random chemical weapons. The ISG concluded that contrary to what most of the world had believed, Iraq had abandoned attempts to produce WMDs. In his congressional testimony, the head of the ISG, Charles Duelfer, admitted, "We were almost all wrong" on Iraq.”

“The ISG report was sufficient to convince the Bush administration that there were no WMDs to be found; they called off the search in 2005.”

Call President Bush...he will tell you that no weapons were found.  The war was a total fabrication of falsehoods and there was no media cover-up, a convenient way around the truth.

the geneva conventions been around for much longer then Bush, so I fail to even see your argument there.

Shouldn’t Bush/cheney be held accountable?

“The head of US Central Command, General David Petraeus said Friday that the US had violated the Geneva Conventions in a stunning admission from President Bush’s onetime top general in Iraq that the US may have violated international law.”

http://www.alternet.org/story/140352/us_violated_geneva_conventions,_bush_iraq_commander_says/