Did you understand the deficit was reduced because, the prior year, the administration ran the biggest deficit in US history?
Do you understand that deficit was left by the Bush Administration?
For the tax cut: That's neither here nor there.
Can't let facts get in the way of Obama-is-a-tax-raiser storyline, can we?
The job creation thing: many, many people have pointed out this this is a totally unfalsifiable claim. There is simply no way to account for job creation in this manner. The only things we know for sure: (1) We've lost about 3.2M jobs;* and (2) The unemployment rate, post stimulus, is slightly higher than the rate the administration warned we would have if we *didn't* pass the stimulus.**
Because the stimulus was too small to get the job done....this isn't rocket science. If Obama was more interested in following FDR's lead than Hoover's, he could have put 16 million Americans back to work in 4 months in his first year in office.
A further critique is that the government, since it does not create wealth, cannot actually "create" a job. Any money it uses to "create" a job is money it must simply tax or borrow from the private sector to do so.
Another mantra that has no basis in reality. A job is a job is a job is a job. And in an extremely depressed economy, the only entity or group that can stimulate job growth and demand is the federal government.
You can't call someone crazy today, and expect them to support you tomorrow.
Calling them crazy was being polite. A more frank appraisal would be "moronic political hacks". Just how stupid do you have to be to stage tax protests against a president that just lowered your taxes? Were was your Concern over FEMA concentration camps when Bush was tapping your phones and holding American citizens in jail without charges? Where was your concern for spending when Bush was doubling the national debt?
Don't ask don't tell is being repealed, its happening. Just slower than you;d have liked.
Nevermind that it should have happened in Obama's first month in office. Nevermind that Obama could have halted the policy with the stroke of a pen. Nevermind that his public position - "DADT will be ended on my watch" - is directly contradicted by the DOJ's appeal in favor of continuing DADT. Nevermind that the proposed "fix" leaves the "repeal" up to the Pentagon - leaving it free to resume the discharges at a later date. Nevermind that there is no chance in hell that the Republicans will vote for a repeal now that they've picked up a bunch of Senate seats and taken over the House.
Obama's record on DADT is a gigantic FAIL, like most of his presidency. He could have accepted the lower court ruling that DADT was unconstitutional, while halting the policy via executive order, and pushed for a Congressional repeal as well - just as states have repealed their interracial marriage laws after they were all struck down by the Supreme Court.
Obama could have had an easy win-win-win: made a part of the Democratic base happy, kept well trained troops in the military while we are still bogged down in two wars, and established open service as the status quo instead of one of homophobia. Instead, he's got himself another loss-loss-loss while the Log Cabin Republicans are at the forefront of DADT repeal and even a majority of Republican voters favor ending the policy.
22% of Democrats believe Bush knew about 911... that is 1 out of 5, not some "occasional truther"
Probably because it's a known fact that Bush was not only warned point blank that Al Queda was "determined to strike the United States", but that it might use hijacked planes to do so.
This argument always conveniently ignores that the big corporations would not exist if the government was not involved in the market. The government created the corporations. If it wasn't for the government, it would just be people that were actually liable for their actions.
That's so stupid it makes my hair hurt. Governments aren't what creates or sustains corporate entities - profits do. Every government in the world could disappear tomorrow, and you'd still have big banks, big energy companies, big health care companies, and Blackwater.
Yeah I see it, but it's far far worse on the left (D) of US politics. After all it was the Democrats who met with Insurance Companies, struck a deal to help the companies boost their bottom line, and then passed this "you must buy insurance" law. It doesn't get any more fascist (corporatist) then that. The insurance companies threw a party.
You mean passing Romneycare?
Or passing the Heritage Foundation plan from 1992?
With the mandates proposed by the first president Bush?
Oh yeah, just TONS of leftist liberalism there. As opposed to Single Payer Health care that would have provided you better health care for a fraction of the cost.
It seems to me if you were so smart, you'd lend some of that prodigious mental firepower to persuading others to come around to your point of view, rather than alienating them with poisonous invective and crude sexual epithets.
Because just like global warming denialists and creationists, it's hard to explain something to a teabagger when his ideology is dependent on his not understanding it. So it's easier to skip all that BS and tell the dumb fat fucks that they are dumb fat fucks to their faces. Because that's what teabaggers are - where was the Concern for the national debt when Bush was doubling it? Were were the "don't tread on me" flags when Bush was tapping your phones without warrants? Just how stupid do you have to be to organize continued protests against a president that cut your taxes?
And what alternate reality do you live in where corporate tax rates have been restored to previous levels, capital gains went back to 50%, the top income tax bracket is back to 91%, we have universal health care, interest rates are capped at 8%, mortgage cramdown passed, Too Big To Fail banks got broken up, and jails are overflowing with banking, health insurance and energy executives facing RICO indictments.
It's also possible that they were just lying - like when the airlines insisted that it was against the law to board a plane without an ID, when that was not the case.
Anybody who thinks that multitouch helps usability hasn't tried explaining it to their mother.
Okay, have your mother try web browsing with a multitouch web browser that makes zooming in and out easy, vs one from say LG that requires button presses or menus to gradually zoom in and out. No contest whatsoever.
The problem isn't with multitouch, the problem is that your family sucks. Because Ray Charles would be able to figure out multitouch within a matter of seconds, as opposed to your mother. And Ray Charles is blind.
I wish you (and other posters) would stop saying "the right" as if we all think with one hive mind.
That's because you are a part of a hive mind, if you haven't yet realized that the entire right wing has been a failure at every level on every issue. Wars, taxation, regulation, the economy, morality....Fail, Fail, Fail, Fail.
Don't include me in your 2-minute hate, because I was NEVER sided with them.
Sure, sure. Just like there are now a few million hippies that went to Woodstock, now there are millions of Republicans that "never" liked Bush and "never" voted for him.
BTW there are also a lot of people on "the left" who were pro-war. Go back and look at the Congressional Authorization for War in 2001.
Except that Democratic != "the left". Obama is far to the right of where Nixon was in the 70's, is already to the right of Herbert Walker Bush, and might well finish his term in office to the right of Reagan at this rate. Remember that Reagan increased income taxes, which isn't on Obama's table (no, letting tax cuts expire is not an "increase". Reagan declared amnesty for immigrants while Obama has increased deportations since Bush left office. And most of all, Reagan signed a treaty requiring the prosecution of torture - a treaty that Obama has been in violation of for nearly two years.
Simple: Al Jazeera would be looking to spin the story against the USA, whereas ABC would be more likely to spin it in favor of the USA. Therefore, I used ABC in an attempt to potentially lowball the estimate and not piss people off via exaggeration.
Then you should go with an international source like the BBC or Reuters, since most American media (and ABC are no exception) are knee-jerk war supporters and unquestioningly parrot whatever the military-industrial-contractor-surveillance complex tells them to parrot.
Agree with him or not, Jobs rattles off qualitative differences between the Android and iPhone platforms. Where, exactly, is the "lashing out"? He's criticizing, not throwing chairs here.
Michael Moore is an ass. He trashed his own credibility by massaging reality and making a spectacle of himself. I could live with that, but in doing so he damaged the credibility of the things he was arguing most of which were and still are real problems that need to be addressed.
You can a lot about critics by the substance to noise ratio. Michael Moore attacks his targets with a lot of substance (My Pet Goat, communist fucking Cuba having the same level of health care as the United States for 1/37th as much $$$ per patient, etc). Whereas a lot of critics of Michael Moore hit him with empty word salads without a single citation, counter argument, or a bit of logical reasoning.
In other words, they're either lazy or full of crap, or both.
I think the biggest problem with Wikileaks was not the idea itself (a site dedicated to government transparancy), but that Assange instead chose to use the information as a weapon to advance his personal views about the wars.
Is this more of the "why doesn't he present both sides" bullshit that Micheal Moore gets hit with? On one side you have the U.S. government and a media that loves to parrot it's claims, and on the other you have a few people dumping documents on a web site. Where is your Concern for a media that refuses to call torture, torture when the U.S. does it?
Slashdot Mirror
No, I'm sure he's got a masters degree in faith-based economics from Ron Paul University.
I question your projection.
Do you understand that deficit was left by the Bush Administration?
Can't let facts get in the way of Obama-is-a-tax-raiser storyline, can we?
Because the stimulus was too small to get the job done....this isn't rocket science. If Obama was more interested in following FDR's lead than Hoover's, he could have put 16 million Americans back to work in 4 months in his first year in office.
Another mantra that has no basis in reality. A job is a job is a job is a job. And in an extremely depressed economy, the only entity or group that can stimulate job growth and demand is the federal government.
Calling them crazy was being polite. A more frank appraisal would be "moronic political hacks". Just how stupid do you have to be to stage tax protests against a president that just lowered your taxes? Were was your Concern over FEMA concentration camps when Bush was tapping your phones and holding American citizens in jail without charges? Where was your concern for spending when Bush was doubling the national debt?
Nevermind that it should have happened in Obama's first month in office. Nevermind that Obama could have halted the policy with the stroke of a pen. Nevermind that his public position - "DADT will be ended on my watch" - is directly contradicted by the DOJ's appeal in favor of continuing DADT. Nevermind that the proposed "fix" leaves the "repeal" up to the Pentagon - leaving it free to resume the discharges at a later date. Nevermind that there is no chance in hell that the Republicans will vote for a repeal now that they've picked up a bunch of Senate seats and taken over the House.
Obama's record on DADT is a gigantic FAIL, like most of his presidency. He could have accepted the lower court ruling that DADT was unconstitutional, while halting the policy via executive order, and pushed for a Congressional repeal as well - just as states have repealed their interracial marriage laws after they were all struck down by the Supreme Court.
Obama could have had an easy win-win-win: made a part of the Democratic base happy, kept well trained troops in the military while we are still bogged down in two wars, and established open service as the status quo instead of one of homophobia. Instead, he's got himself another loss-loss-loss while the Log Cabin Republicans are at the forefront of DADT repeal and even a majority of Republican voters favor ending the policy.
Now that's some weak-assed weak leadership.
Probably because it's a known fact that Bush was not only warned point blank that Al Queda was "determined to strike the United States", but that it might use hijacked planes to do so.
That's so stupid it makes my hair hurt. Governments aren't what creates or sustains corporate entities - profits do. Every government in the world could disappear tomorrow, and you'd still have big banks, big energy companies, big health care companies, and Blackwater.
Too damned bad. You have the right to your opinions, but not the right to your own set of facts. Anarchists on the right - on what planet is that?
You mean passing Romneycare?
Or passing the Heritage Foundation plan from 1992?
With the mandates proposed by the first president Bush?
Oh yeah, just TONS of leftist liberalism there. As opposed to Single Payer Health care that would have provided you better health care for a fraction of the cost.
Because just like global warming denialists and creationists, it's hard to explain something to a teabagger when his ideology is dependent on his not understanding it. So it's easier to skip all that BS and tell the dumb fat fucks that they are dumb fat fucks to their faces. Because that's what teabaggers are - where was the Concern for the national debt when Bush was doubling it? Were were the "don't tread on me" flags when Bush was tapping your phones without warrants? Just how stupid do you have to be to organize continued protests against a president that cut your taxes?
And what alternate reality do you live in where corporate tax rates have been restored to previous levels, capital gains went back to 50%, the top income tax bracket is back to 91%, we have universal health care, interest rates are capped at 8%, mortgage cramdown passed, Too Big To Fail banks got broken up, and jails are overflowing with banking, health insurance and energy executives facing RICO indictments.
It's also possible that they were just lying - like when the airlines insisted that it was against the law to board a plane without an ID, when that was not the case.
Not the same size. Try again.
Why don't you read up on that word, "innovation", and try that again. Hint: innovation != invention.
It's to make the case stronger, with fewer parts to bend or break.
And I've never seen a plane crash, therefore plane crashes aren't a problem and we can disband the FAA.
Okay, have your mother try web browsing with a multitouch web browser that makes zooming in and out easy, vs one from say LG that requires button presses or menus to gradually zoom in and out. No contest whatsoever.
The problem isn't with multitouch, the problem is that your family sucks. Because Ray Charles would be able to figure out multitouch within a matter of seconds, as opposed to your mother. And Ray Charles is blind.
And dead.
DIVX, not DivX.
...and speaking of empty word salads...
I can't comment on that one as I haven't seen Roger & Me...but got anything newer than a 21 year old movie?
Pretended how? Some Canadians do, indeed, leave their doors unlocked.
It's called making a point.
That's because you are a part of a hive mind, if you haven't yet realized that the entire right wing has been a failure at every level on every issue. Wars, taxation, regulation, the economy, morality....Fail, Fail, Fail, Fail.
Sure, sure. Just like there are now a few million hippies that went to Woodstock, now there are millions of Republicans that "never" liked Bush and "never" voted for him.
Except that Democratic != "the left". Obama is far to the right of where Nixon was in the 70's, is already to the right of Herbert Walker Bush, and might well finish his term in office to the right of Reagan at this rate. Remember that Reagan increased income taxes, which isn't on Obama's table (no, letting tax cuts expire is not an "increase". Reagan declared amnesty for immigrants while Obama has increased deportations since Bush left office. And most of all, Reagan signed a treaty requiring the prosecution of torture - a treaty that Obama has been in violation of for nearly two years.
Then you should go with an international source like the BBC or Reuters, since most American media (and ABC are no exception) are knee-jerk war supporters and unquestioningly parrot whatever the military-industrial-contractor-surveillance complex tells them to parrot.
It's the same for movie buffs that compare Citizen Kane to Biodome, forgetting that comparisons could also be made between Spielberg and Ed Wood.
Agree with him or not, Jobs rattles off qualitative differences between the Android and iPhone platforms. Where, exactly, is the "lashing out"? He's criticizing, not throwing chairs here.
You can a lot about critics by the substance to noise ratio. Michael Moore attacks his targets with a lot of substance (My Pet Goat, communist fucking Cuba having the same level of health care as the United States for 1/37th as much $$$ per patient, etc). Whereas a lot of critics of Michael Moore hit him with empty word salads without a single citation, counter argument, or a bit of logical reasoning.
In other words, they're either lazy or full of crap, or both.
Is this more of the "why doesn't he present both sides" bullshit that Micheal Moore gets hit with? On one side you have the U.S. government and a media that loves to parrot it's claims, and on the other you have a few people dumping documents on a web site. Where is your Concern for a media that refuses to call torture, torture when the U.S. does it?
So your selective poutrage is duly noted.
Uh, why are you comparing the price of a refurbished PC laptop to a new Mac laptop?