"It all paid for", just not by us, right now. I am insulted, and the
whole of America should be equally insulted. Contrary to popular belief, future
politicians are just as unreliable and self-absorbed as current politicians.
What makes you think "they" will be extra fiscally responsible to make
up for our current fiscal mess?
Boy, this is a real shocker. Obama with a plan that isn't paid for.
Was Obama trying to scam us, again? Promised serveral times "simulus"
#2 is paid for! Paid for by suggesting cuts in spending maybe, perhaps,might
happen in 10 years or so, but we will spend the cuts now! If you believe there
will be ANY spending cuts, you are being scammed!
"It will only be paid for if a committee he can't control does his bidding,
if Congress puts that into law and if leaders in the future the ones who will
feel the fiscal pinch of his proposals don't roll it back."Translation: THE BILL IS NOT PAID FOR!!! Underscore the word NOT!! So the
"anointed one" stands up there and repeats the silly phrase "PASS
THIS BILL" I think 15 times!! Holy smokes what gives?? So in other words,
pass this bill - never mind the fact that the bill isn't even written down yet
nor has anyone even read the bill. Oh and the bill really isn't paid for - just
joking folks. The super-duper committee from congress of which such intellectual
giants as John Kerry are members were supposed to find 1 trillion in deficit
savings over the next 10 years ... oh and now just add another half trillion to
that amount. This president has crossed the line into absurdity or insanity or
perhaps the more plausible is that he used this speech to kick of HIS
re-election campaign and he already started the blame game in his speech. What a
travesty this man is.
This seems more like a plan to prolong a recession...
This isn't the first time Obama has promised us things he can't deliver based on
economics that don't add up. If he did it 1,000 times some of his faithful few
would still buy it hook, line and sinker.A fact check on his speech
indicates his promises wouldn't be achievable even if everybody, including
Democrats, pulled together.
I guess his numbers will continue to TANK...given he has now resorted to LYING
and MISLEADING the American People!His Poll numbers resemble our
National Debt as well does his credibility!
This is clearly a campaign speech, not a real plan to improve the economy. He
extends promises that are impossible to keep, or unrealistic. This is the
classic definition of a campaign speech. How do politicians look us
in the eye and lie like this? Con artists like this are often read about on the
front page of the newspapers...as they are being arrested for scamming others
out of their money.
Oh NOW tax cuts have to be paid for. What happened to tax cuts create revenue?
Tax cuts aren't spending? Would you Obama haters stick to something.
The plan would be passed using paygo (something democrats like, and republicans
like until obama says he's for it) which requires that it be paid for one way or
another. Though they might just add it to the tab that that super-committee with
the debt ceiling deal will have to find cuts or tax increases for.
"Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different
result."__ A. EinsteinThrowing money at the problem won't
change anything.The reason he keeps doing this is because the banks keep
pulling his strings to borrow more money.
Mr. Obama wants American businessmen to hire people and the first thing he does
is to demand that they turn over all their money to HIM! What a plan. Would
someone please tell Mr. Obama that raising taxes will kill all new jobs - but
that seems exactly what he wants to do.
He does lie.
"Mr. Obama wants American businessmen to hire people and the first thing he
does is to demand that they turn over all their money to HIM!"Richards, can you please provide the quote, or the plan, where President Obama
demands that businessmen turn over all their money to him."Would someone please tell Mr. Obama that raising taxes will kill all new
jobs "Can you provide any objective study that backs up this
claim? Can you provide anything other then your opinion?The tax
rates prior to President Bush's tax cuts did not hamper job growth one bit. In
fact job growth was excellent under the rates President Obama is proposing.
Sounds like pandering to the uneducated to buy votes with a credit card that is
already over the limit to me.
re: Mark,Let's look at the facts. The Republicans aren't going to
give Mr. Obama what he wants. The Democrats, who hope to retain office, will
never ask Americans for another $487 BILLION. The last time Mr. Obama told us
that we had to give HIM authority to spend $800 BILLION, America LOST 3,000,000
jobs. Do you really think that Mr. Obama is going to get away with
it again? Do you have $1,500 to give him? That's your share of
this "stimulus" package. Do you have $1,500 for everyone in your
family to give him? 300,000,000 Americans are going to have to cough up $1,500
each to pay for his wild idea.The last time he tried to fool us,
some people actually believed in him. What evidence do you have that he's not
going to just squander another half-TRILLION $$?
The President should have used W's Iraq war strategy. Don't even mention the
cost, let alone how it will be paid for.
Don't worry Hutterite, Obama supporters don't have the ability to comprehend the
cost of something. That's why he's comfortable mentioning it freely.
Well Mike you changed the subject. So I take it you can't back up
either of the claims you made in your first post. You have zero evidence that
President Obama want's businessmen to "turn over all their money to
HIM!", or that "raising taxes will kill all new jobs". Well I
didn't think you would be able to give proof. As far as your
"facts" in your second post those are opinions, unless you really
think you have a crystal ball and can see into the future. But yeah, I would
agree with you, it's unlikely the Republicans will do anything but obstruct. It
really appears that they do not want to do anything to improve the economy.
After all, if the economy improves President Obama is a sure thing for a second
term.As far as your "fact" that the first stimulus cost
three million jobs, as you imply, that's very arguable, and you know I can
provide many sources that say you are wrong.Do I have $1500.00 for
everyone in my family? Yeah. So what?I don't agree that the first
stimulus was squandered money.
It's a stupid plan. Businesses plan for what's going to happen, not a temporary
tax credit. If plans like this worked, the trillion dollar 'stimulus' would
have worked. Businesses know that taxes are going up in 2013 and Obamacare is
coming in 2014. You can make all the 'shovel ready' projects you want, it isn't
going to fix the overall problem. This is what happens when you let a community
organizing lawyer and his friends mess with the economy. Unemployment started
going up in 2007 when it was clear that a Democrat was coming to the White
House. It won't get better until he leaves.
The stock market tanks another 300 plus points, and the beat goes on. Anyone who
doesn't think he is in campaign mode is kidding themselves - and he gets free
air time courtesy of American tax payers. Pagan - where are you? I
am disappointed you haven't posted 6 times with all those liberal news releases
that support your boy.
It's apparent no one so far is wondering if they're going to have a place to
live next month or food next week, or a job tomorrow. Good. And nobody so far
seems to need medical care or has any problems than they can't buy themselves
out of. So they must all fall into the income level that worries about the
President listening to Warren Buffet's suggestion that he and those making as
much money as he does should pay more taxes than his secretary, whose taxes are
nearly twice Mr. Buffet's. I'm happy for them all. But I and my friends do not
have such luxuries, and we'd really like to see some cooperation out of
Congress, if you please. It can be done, let's have it again. And in case anyone
wants to know, there is a term limit--it's called the vote. We have one and will
use it when we have to fire our Congressional employees.
"Unemployment started going up in 2007 when it was clear that a Democrat
was coming to the White House."Really B? It couldn't have
anything to do with the fact that we were going through the worst economic
collapse since the great depression. No, of course not, it was cause a Democrat
was going to be president. Seesh. Conservatives.
Mark: how many more years until it isn't Bush's fault anymore?? Your boy has
made the "economic collapse" even worse. Seesh.
@MarkAverage unemployment under Bush was 5.5%. I understand that
the economy goes in cycles and that we were going into a regular contraction in
the economy in 2007. I also understand that it was made worse by the financial
meltdown. But seriously, businesses and markets don't expand in times of
uncertainty. Obama and the Democratic party in general are adverse to the
private sector. They view it as a necessary evil. Obama says and does things
that constantly create uncertainty. If you were a business owner, could you be
confident expanding knowing your taxes were going up? I think it was a perfect
storm in 2008 and Obama took a bad situation and compounded it. The economy
will get better as soon as confidence comes back. Confidence will come when tax
cuts are made permanent and Obamacare is repealed.
All infrastructure projects require a couple of year of EA planning before they
can start. Congress has tied its own hands on this one with all their silly
regulations. But collectivley they are to stupid to realize it.
Tom, could you show me in my comment where I placed blame for unemployment
numbers initially increasing anywhere other then on the recesion? You see B was
claiming that unemployment went up just because a Democrat won the White House.
That's a ridiculous statement, that's what I was responding to. You didn't
understand that? I really had to spell it out for you? But, since
you ask: the resecion will remain President Bush's fault for ever. Why in the
world would you think that the truth of a situation would change with time? Oh
wait, that's right, Republicans love revisionist history. You are just hoping
that enough time will pass that people will forget the awful impact President
Bush's policys had on this country. -B, yeah I wouldn't want to try
to defend the statement you made about unemployment going up because a Democrat
won the White House either. So of course you would just change the subject. The Bush tax cuts were a terrible mistake. No way should they be made
permanent. Taxes, historically, fluctuate. Businesses adjust to them constantly,
with confidence. Nothing that President Obama has done would
indicate he is adverse to the private sector. Nothing.
Gee, where, oh where, are all the dozens of liberal posters?Buehler?
Buehler? Anyone?...Yes, there are a few but it seems when the
article lays out facts that are, well, indisputable facts, the liberals see they
have no ammo and run away bravely. As somebody mentioned above, even everyone's
favorite, 'Pagan', is nowhere to be found here.One liberal poster
above said that Republicans were hypocritical because these tax cuts weren't
"paid for". Paid for? Since when do you have to "pay for"
a tax cut? You simply sign a bill into law that says "if you paid X
dollars in taxes last year, this year you will be less than X taxes".
Done.Conservatives aren't happy because Obama's tax cuts don't take
effect for a while and the spending he proposed would be paid for and won't
increase the deficit will not actually be paid for and will actually increase
the debt.All I can say is, how many days until November 2012? The
guy in the Whitehouse, as well as the Dems in control of the Sentate, have
clearly GOT to go.
Re: Screwdriver | 3:22 p.m. Sept. 9, 2011 When Obama makes promises
he can't keep and the American people aren't going to give him a free ride
anymore.Obama hasn't done the Democratic Party any favors and now
that the Republicans in Congress have found they can push him around they are
going to make his life miserable.
Excellent article. It's nice to see an AP story that is not left