Blah, Blah, Blah

[VENTGtr]

how Could you not remember that troops under Clinton died when we sent troops to Haiti, Bosnia, and Kosovo.

The number of U.S. troops to die in Bosnia & Kosovo combined is...3. 2 were killed in
1999 in an auto accident, the last was killed in 2003. In Haiti, a whopping...0. Two U.N.
soldiers...Jordanians, I believe, were killed there.

Note. The uprising in Haiti was brought about because, AGAIN, in the 80s, we were
meddling in another nation's politics to promote U.S. business agenda.

[VENTGtr]

1. The budget is not the President's budget, its the House's budget.

We had a Congress for 7 years that signed everything that was put in front of them.
His agenda, his budget, his debt, his debacle.

2. The budget for the first year of an incoming administration was legislated and approved during the last year of the prior administration.

The first year's budget, yes. But, the U.S. Budget Surplus turned into a deficit within
his first couple of months in office. It WAS a real Surplus, then it was gone. Simply,
"Trickle Down Economics" is a concept the wealthiest people use to sell to suckers.

One of those things that people "Well, heck ya, that sounds simple enough" that. once
some thought goes into is....mmm...not so much.

Since 2001 , our foreign debt and trade deficit have exploded. Even the Chinese, who
hold a ton of that debt, told us at the Economic Conference in Brazil a couple of years
ago that we better get a control on things or they were going to start selling off our debt
in favour of the Euro.

[lonewolf]

STATE OF THE UNION SPEECH is supposed to tell us what the state of the union IS. He seemed to forget that. He in fact never mentioned what the state of the union is !

He shall from time to time give to the Congress information of the state of the union, and recommend to their consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient

Source: US Constitution, Article II, section 3

As with Amendments I and II of the Constitution, there is more than one phrase to consider.

[lonewolf]

1. The budget is not the President's budget, its the House's budget.

We had a Congress for 7 years that signed everything that was put in front of them.
His agenda, his budget, his debt, his debacle.

If that is true, then Pelosi & company must be Bush-mongers, right?

[lonewolf]

2. The budget for the first year of an incoming administration was legislated and approved during the last year of the prior administration.

The first year's budget, yes. But, the U.S. Budget Surplus turned into a deficit within
his first couple of months in office. It WAS a real Surplus, then it was gone.

Thank you for clarifying that. The budget deficit returned on a budget that was legislated and approved under the prior administration.

To keep things straight, the Bush tax cutting occurred two years later in 2003.

[tornandfrayed]

Don't you get it? No one worth having will serve as president. No one with integrity will enter politics. The American system has gone a stray.

200+ years ago a group of people got together and talked of taking back their country, of living free without the burden of a non caring, out of touch government. Those people had names like Paul Revere and George Washington. They are known now as Patriots.

We need to open up that conversation again, but we will be called terrorists. We need to take control of our own destines, but we will be called criminals. We need to walk away from the television and move outside of our lives that keep us focused on survival and start to think about our children and the future of our race, Humanity not Rep or Dem. We need to step away from accumulating items and start to accumulate love, accumulate relationships and make our priorities the salvation of our future. Unless this is done now these are "The good old days"

I will choose to be known as a "True American Patriot". I chose to know that we have to change things now. I chose to know that those in power will not let go without a fight. I chose to know that change is hard and can be very scary. No one has all the answers but we need to put down all the shit that keeps you occupied and get to the business of saving our world or it might be to late. Then we will be known as Humans, we can skip all the racist, demographic, territorial shit and get down to the business of life.

The future will judge ...

Do we need more cars or more trees?

Bigger TV's or Bigger hearts?

[VENTGtr]

LW,

As I'm sure you know, Pelosi wasn't part of the majority party in Congress until
2006. The then Majority passed everything (Not one veto in 6 years?).

Even Repubs like Chuck Hagel:

"Hagel, who considered running for the GOP presidential nomination as an
antiwar candidate, told the foreign policy experts that he would give the Bush administration “the lowest grade of any I’ve known.”

“I have to say this is one of the most arrogant, incompetent administrations
I’ve ever seen or ever read about. They have failed the country.”

Fell in line with what they were sent.

And there weren't the numbers to override. As I'm sure you also know, even
with a simple majority, that's not enough to override a veto. Plus, throw in
Leiberman and there's no majority as it is.

Secondly, you better believe I wish Pelosi was fighting more of this. The problem
is the public backlash. We, as a general rule, understand, and care, very little
about the actual processes, facts, etc. behind it all. Takes too much of a thought
process. THAT'S why ,at the end of the day, when we're screwed, WE let it happen
and it's our fault.

[VENTGtr]

To keep things straight, the Bush tax cutting occurred two years later in 2003.

Incorrect my friend.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases ... 10607.html

[Baceman Spiff]

[lonewolf]

Yep, I stand corrected, there were some tax cuts in 2001. As I recall, that was a bi-partisan agreement. Remember, the neocons did not control both houses of congress under Bush until 2003 for a total of 4 years, not 7.

I was referring to the much larger controversial tax cuts that are now in place and are scheduled to expire in 2010. It seemed more like the context to which you were writing.

[VENTGtr]

Well, they had the majority since '94. With that and the Executive branch, there's
little the opposition can do. Granted, there are filibusters, but the way that's seen
by people is, again, part of our general public's lack of understanding of the process.
Guess that's a crazy thing as it is, eh?

Regardless, although I don't agree with the ideology of what Conservatism is (Just
doesn't work), I think there are a lot of people on "that" side who go in wanting to
make positive change. I'm not now, nor...hopefully... will I ever go by the idea that
every politician is a "bad" person. Nowadays more than ever, I DO think they're
stuck having to pander to those funding campaigns and trying to raise money and
less allowed to legislate. No matter which side the person is on.

Although I wish those like Hagel would have said more while they were in office
(I think that's their job and responsibility), that they ended up resigning, or being
forced out (Depending on what information you go by) is a sad state. While the
2 party system is pretty lousy...it's better than a 1 party system.

Have you read the book about Lincoln and how he brought into his cabinet people
with differing policy views? Think you'd like it. Forget what it's called at the moment.

[lonewolf]

I think the most significant political events that occurred last night were the camera shots of Barack Obama sitting next to a semi-conscious Ted Kennedy.

[VENTGtr]

Did Ted keep nodding off?

In between snores there was overheard some mumbling about Chaps and Quiditch...
or something...I dunno? Mebbe he's a fan of cowboy movies and Harry Potter books?

Guess not everyone'll get that...but still...

[PStl]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I-16u9x3tfE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OS2fI2p9 ... re=related

We're all in this together, education of the situation is very important.
Rep. and Dem. both love to spend my money. I'd like to keep more of it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KIgrxpp9 ... re=related
Unfunded commitments. The US GOV can't stop spending my money.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5f_cNXL5p3s
Young people, start now thinking that there won't be social security, as we know it, when you are old enough to need it. Save your money while you're young, I wish I would have known how to when I started working. Still, I've been fortunate enough to say that I might be able to get along without it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vjd_jeh8 ... re=related

Socialism is still not the answer.

[Hawk]

Ok read my words. The person who blames current deficits on any one side of the political isle is a FOOL and an IDIOT. If you are blaming only Bush and/or Reagan for them then you qualify and have revealed yourself as a political moron and should be prohibited from voting as you are not responsible enough to make an informed choice.

Our current deficits are the result of BOTH parties in congress spending like drunken sailors and the American public is not taking them to task. Sure there is "Bush's" war, but do you really know what democrats are spending these days? I doubt it. When the democrats took over the house and senate and put forward legislation to bring the troops home does anyone know how the tried to make it work? The bill was laden with so many billions upon billions of dollars of ear marks (that's frat boy speak for PORK) political bribes, that it was embarrassing. The Dems figured that the legislation would have been so popular that it was going to pass and everyone piled on to get some cash for their districts back home. Sick. Those would have contributed to deficits too. Both sides of the isle are handling our money like this.

Every modern administration has run deficits going back to the turn of the century. Politicians grab for as much cash as they can get and gamble that the economy will expand and those deficits will be easy for the next generation to pay. The 2000$ house a post WWII GI purchased seemed like a mountain to pay off to him. It's a bargain to us. That's the way it works with the deficits. BOTH sides of the isle are willing to borrow against our future. Under Bush both sides have borrowed like their is no tomorrow.

FYI: Clinton basically paid down Reagan's deficits due to the economic growth from the Internet. As the .COM bubble receded at the end of Clinton's terms, Bush found himself with Clinton's recession as he took office. 911 then should have buried our economy. Under Bush the economy has grown at a near record pace, inflation and unemployment have remained at historic lows, all while dealing with the burden of a horribly mismanaged Irag. This is actually a bit of an economic miracle. That hasn't slowed either side from writing checks they hope us and our kids can cover. It's only seemed to encourage them.

It's time to give credit where its due and hold everyone to task, especially when it's our own party or candidate and we may not like it. It's time to be responsible for our future and put an end to this stupid political speak that sips its own favored flavor of kool aid. Both sides are guilty and our politicians have become their own brand of aristocrats that do as they see fit on the back of hard working Americans like us. Let's not help them bend us any further.

You do realize the value of the dollar has decreased lately. And the price of oil is based on the dollar. The value has gone down because of our constant borrowing from the likes of China. And we print money at will, no longer based on the gold standard.

The last time the oil countries got together they said they HAD to raise the price per barrel just to keep their profit level as the US dollar looses value. They also considered starting their own monetary system OR they are considering basing the price of oil on the Euro.

It is a fact that a HUGH percentage of our deficit (I did know exactly but I forgot, I think it's about 75%)came under Reagan, Bush I and Bush II .

Now any idiot would realize this is a major reason for our downturn in the economy . Wouldn't you ? I mean come on, wouldn't the maroon be the one who can't see this ?

In many threads (and I don't expect you to know this) I am against ear marks. They come from both sides of the isle and contribute a great deal to federal spending.

Unemployment is steady ? What country are you in ? Minimum wage jobs have increased while life sustaining jobs have decreased. Sure, if you just count the people working. But where are all the good paying jobs at ?

Inflation facts are easy to play with and spin. Things are costing ME more, I don't know about you.

[Hawk]

STATE OF THE UNION SPEECH is supposed to tell us what the state of the union IS. He seemed to forget that. He in fact never mentioned what the state of the union is !

He shall from time to time give to the Congress information of the state of the union, and recommend to their consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient

Source: US Constitution, Article II, section 3

As with Amendments I and II of the Constitution, there is more than one phrase to consider.

I love it Jeff ! You are the man with the facts.

[Merge]

Apology accepted, Hawk.

[Hawk]

Apology accepted, Hawk.

Cool

[lonewolf]

how Could you not remember that troops under Clinton died when we sent troops to Haiti, Bosnia, and Kosovo.

The number of U.S. troops to die in Bosnia & Kosovo combined is...3. 2 were killed in
1999 in an auto accident, the last was killed in 2003. In Haiti, a whopping...0. Two U.N.
soldiers...Jordanians, I believe, were killed there.

Note. The uprising in Haiti was brought about because, AGAIN, in the 80s, we were
meddling in another nation's politics to promote U.S. business agenda.

Here's the official numbers in a pdf file. Fight nice.

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL32492.pdf

[Merge]

Very enlightening, Lonewolf.

[Colton]

[hijack][/hijack]

[Hawk]

how Could you not remember that troops under Clinton died when we sent troops to Haiti, Bosnia, and Kosovo.

The number of U.S. troops to die in Bosnia & Kosovo combined is...3. 2 were killed in
1999 in an auto accident, the last was killed in 2003. In Haiti, a whopping...0. Two U.N.
soldiers...Jordanians, I believe, were killed there.

Note. The uprising in Haiti was brought about because, AGAIN, in the 80s, we were
meddling in another nation's politics to promote U.S. business agenda.

Here's the official numbers in a pdf file. Fight nice.

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL32492.pdf

For some stupid reason my PC wants to close when I link to a PDF file. Any help with that anybody ?

If the number you linked is different than 76, it could be skewed. There is a higher number listed but it includes all military deaths during the Clinton administration. But only 76 can be attributed to hostile actions.

[lonewolf]

For some stupid reason my PC wants to close when I link to a PDF file. Any help with that anybody ?

If the number you linked is different than 76, it could be skewed. There is a higher number listed but it includes all military deaths during the Clinton administration. But only 76 can be attributed to hostile actions.

Right click on the link and save it to your hard drive. When its done, click "open" and see if Adobe Acrobat Reader opens it. If it opens it, click "HELP" and then click "REPAIR ADOBE READER INSTALLATION" and follow the directions. Make sure to plug it into your browser.

If it doesn't open it, you need to download and install the latest Acrobat Reader for your operating system and make sure it plugs into your browser.

As for the numbers in the document, that document is the official congressional document put together for the present Congress. Any other numbers are officially wrong.

[VENTGtr]

0 in Kosovo/Bosnia

4 in Haiti (All Non Hostile)

Actually, it's still not listing the sole soldier killed in Kosovo in 2003/4.

[Blue Reality]

Hawk,

Every Administration both democrat and republican runs deficits. Are they larger under the republicans? Yes. But deficits occur as a coordinated effort by the President and Congress. One cannot do this without the consent of the other. Blaming this on Bush or any president doesn't identify the source of the problem. Both sides are guilty here and IMO if someone says this is Bush's fault, I want to ask do you really want to deal with this and get at the source or do you just want to vent? Venting solves nothing.

Nothing will change here until people are ready to come to terms with reality and give credit where it's due on the "other" side and hold your own party to task.

To me this election cycle is the worst yet. Each party can do no wrong in their own eyes and the other is the worst top to bottom. Who really sees the world like this? No one. Rep. & Dem. have got to admit where they fall short and deal with it and each other.

We can start by saying both parties are spending like a drunken sailor, both are responsible for deficits and it's time to stop.