Slate: Obama Authorizes Assassination Of U.s. Citizen

[EagleD]

Not true. We collected more federal taxes in 2008 than we did in 2000, by about a half trillion dollars. That's what happens when you cut taxes, you end up increasing revenue due to increased economic activity.

Is that what happened at the end of the Bush administration, increased economic activity?

[UNT90]

The debt will continue to climb for a while--- until the disasters of 2008 correct themselves and they can't use those losses to offset current gains. It will help when employment improves those are paying taxes again instead of unemployemnt checks (which also is a problem to the government now).

The debt will continue to climb because Pres. Obama has qaudrupled Bush's spending in his first year and a half while increasing taxes. In just about every case, increasing federal taxes has led to a decrease in revenue for the federal government.

I don't try to portray you as anything. You do that (as do I) with what you post. It's funny how everything is directed at Bush, but yet you NEVER hold the current president accountable for his spending.

[SCREAMING EAGLE-66]

The debt will continue to climb because Pres. Obama has qaudrupled Bush's spending in his first year and a half while increasing taxes. In just about every case, increasing federal taxes has led to a decrease in revenue for the federal government.

I don't try to portray you as anything. You do that (as do I) with what you post. It's funny how everything is directed at Bush, but yet you NEVER hold the current president accountable for his spending.

---Bush increased the national debt as much as the first 42 Presidents COMBINED ... and you still think that is conservative..???. get real..How can you defend that. The HUGE debt sparked the T-Party movement. That explains my comments. Obama may do awful... who knows..?? ..but he inherited a total mess with the DOW down 5000, bail-outs had started in banking, ... the auto industry about to collapse, and unemployment climbing rapidly.... You ignor all of that. I am not a big supporter of Oboma but Bush proved he was no financial conservative as he claimed. He was not what you want him to be ..... At least the DOW has rebounded 3000 points since the change in administrations... Some other things have gotten better as well but things including employment still are not to the 2000 levels yet. The sectors that my kids work in are all much better now including the oil industry here in West Texas. Why do do you defend an administation that screwed up so many things including putting us into a war against a country that had no WMD as claimed and no real threat to us [no international terrorist came from there either, they are from Yemen, Syra, Saudi Arabia (Ben Laden), Libya etc.] .... face reality ... Bush was no financial wizard or finacial conservative. Things were much worse when he walked out the door than when he walked in.

-- It looks to me like you are again trying paint me as a big Obama supporter... not true... but I doubt he will do worse.... he has a very difficult situation to deal with..... No one can stop a speeding car in ten feet....it takes time.... he will need time to get things turned around... maybe he will or maybe he won't. It does no one any good to hope he fails...

Edited April 16, 2010 by SCREAMING EAGLE-66

[UNT90]

---Bush increased the national debt as much as the first 42 Presidents COMBINED ... and you still think that is conservative..???. get real..How can you defend that. The HUGE debt sparked the T-Party movement. That explains my comments. Obama may do awful... who knows..?? ..but he inherited a total mess with the DOW down 5000, bail-outs had started in banking, ... the auto industry about to collapse, and unemployment climbing rapidly.... You ignor all of that. I am not a big supporter of Oboma but Bush proved he was no financial conservative as he claimed. He was not what you want him to be ..... At least the DOW has rebounded 3000 points since the change in administrations... Some other things have gotten better as well but things including employment still are not to the 2000 levels yet. The sectors that my kids work in are all much better now including the oil industry here in West Texas. Why do do you defend an administation that screwed up so many things including putting us into a war against a country that had no WMD as claimed and real threat to us [no international terrorist came from there either, they are from Yemen, Syra, Saudi Arabia (Ben Laden), Libya etc.] .... face reality ... Bush was no financial wizard or finacial conservative. Things were much worse when he walked out the door than when he walked in.

Again with the Anti-Bush diatribe. News flash: He is no longer President. It's always the same thing. Whenever anyone points out that Pres. Obama is spending 4 times as much as Pres. Bush, all you want to do is revisit the Bush presidency and blast Bush for spending too much. But you NEVER even acknowledge the fact that Pres. Obama has quadrupled Pres. Bush's spending. To me, that's just not intellectually honest, and makes you just a cheerleader for your political team. If you were truly a financial conservative, you would be outraged at both Bush and Pres. Obama, but no, you just continually rant about Bush without ever addressing any of the fiscal irresponsibility of Pres. Obama.

Edited April 16, 2010 by UNT90

[SCREAMING EAGLE-66]

Again with the Anti-Bush diatribe. News flash: He is no longer President. It's always the same thing. Whenever anyone points out that Pres. Obama is spending 4 times as much as Pres. Bush, all you want to do is revisit the Bush presidency and blast Bush for spending too much. But you NEVER even acknowledge the fact that Pres. Obama has quadrupled Pres. Bush's spending. To me, that's just not intellectually honest, and makes you just a cheerleader for your political team. If you were truly a financial conservative, you would be outraged at both Bush and Pres. Obama, but no, you just continually rant about Bush without ever addressing any of the fiscal irresponsibility of Pres. Obama.

--True spending has increased.... but Quadruple..???? that is total BS....be honest about it... you are just making up "facts". Most of the increased spending is related to current situation we are in.. unemployemnt and poor economic conditions that he inherited.

[UNT90]

--True spending has increased.... but Quadruple..???? that is total BS....be honest about it... you are just making up "facts". Most of the increased spending is related to current situation we are in.. unemployemnt and poor economic conditions that he inherited.

There are excuses for spending everywhere. Bush had the war excuse. Pres. Obama has the "financial collapse" excuse. It appears you want to make excuses for your party, but not accept the excuses of the other party. Again, not intellectually honest. The health Care tax and spend bill had nothing to do with the economy, just with creating another massive beaurocratic entitlement program which will no doubt cost about 20 times as much as projected (see social security, medicade, medicare), but you keep on blaming Bush while the current President puts this country into a debt situation that will eventually ruin this economy. Here are some numbers to review on Pres. Obama's spending:

http://www.heritage....e-National-Debt

Funny how you rail against Bush's spending, but the only comment you have about Pres. Obama's spending is "True spending has increased." Really???

Edited April 16, 2010 by UNT90

[UNTFan23]

--True spending has increased.... but Quadruple..???? that is total BS....be honest about it... you are just making up "facts". Most of the increased spending is related to current situation we are in.. unemployemnt and poor economic conditions that he inherited.

I believe the biggest budget deficit Bush ever ran was about 500 billion. Obama is running a budget deficit of about 1.5 trillion ... so I guess a more accurate representation is Obama has tripled our deficit spending.

I believe Obama has added close to 4 trillion to our national debt in less than 2 years. 2 budgets with a deficit of about 1.5 trillion each plus his economic recovery spending bill that was almost 800 billion. How big was the national debt when he took office - 10 trillion?

Obama could almost double up our national debt in 4 years when it took Bush 8 to double our national debt. When you think about it, it's pretty awe inspiring in that Obama outspent Bush by a factor of about 4!

Edited April 16, 2010 by UNTFan23

[eeally]

I believe the biggest budget deficit Bush ever ran was about 500 billion. Obama is running a budget deficit of about 1.5 trillion ... so I guess a more accurate representation is Obama has tripled our deficit spending.

I believe Obama has added close to 4 trillion to our national debt in less than 2 years. 2 budgets with a deficit of about 1.5 trillion each plus his economic recovery spending bill that was almost 800 billion. How big was the national debt when he took office - 10 trillion?

Obama could almost double up our national debt in 4 years when it took Bush 8 to double our national debt. When you think about it, it's pretty awe inspiring in that Obama outspent Bush by a factor of about 4!

Really,

Bush took everyone's 401K s and gave it all to Wall Street. Then again bankrupted the middle class with inflated gas prices while in essence bailing out oil companies. Then he helped Several other private firms by hiring $120,000 per year merceneries to go to war. Thus bringing our economy to a halt. So go f yourself when you look at this administration's handling of the worse economy since the great depression.

Oh yea AIG, Goldman, Exxon Chevron, Halliburton.....all of these just topped the top 20 in Fortune 500.....Oh yea Chase, Bank of America, Deregulation led to their lending practices at 0% while sticking it to small business to the the tune of 17%--29% loans.....

What this admin is doing is reeling in the heavy losses suffered by the Middle Class to support the Boujous on Wall Street and in Texas. All in the name of 9/11 my friend.... don't be a sheep for the republicans or the democrats....by the way how did you spend your $300 bush stimulus check???

[UNT90]

Really,

Bush took everyone's 401K s and gave it all to Wall Street.

Yep, no one is personally responsible for their investments anymore, right? Pres. Bush seized your 401K and made you take those high risk funds. You had no option, right?

Wait... You could have educated yourself on where your money was invested and made an informed decision on where to invest your money. But it is just so much easier to blame the President that you hate for losing your money. Personal responsibilty be damned.

[UNTFan23]

Really,

Bush took everyone's 401K s and gave it all to Wall Street. Then again bankrupted the middle class with inflated gas prices while in essence bailing out oil companies. Then he helped Several other private firms by hiring $120,000 per year merceneries to go to war. Thus bringing our economy to a halt. So go f yourself when you look at this administration's handling of the worse economy since the great depression.

Oh yea AIG, Goldman, Exxon Chevron, Halliburton.....all of these just topped the top 20 in Fortune 500.....Oh yea Chase, Bank of America, Deregulation led to their lending practices at 0% while sticking it to small business to the the tune of 17%--29% loans.....

What this admin is doing is reeling in the heavy losses suffered by the Middle Class to support the Boujous on Wall Street and in Texas. All in the name of 9/11 my friend.... don't be a sheep for the republicans or the democrats....by the way how did you spend your $300 bush stimulus check???

And the demonizing of business continues. The one group who will help us get out of the ditch and some people insist on throwing them under the bus every chance they get.

With my $300, I paid down debt and saved the other half. How's that for stimulating the economy? Until the outlook of our economy improves, which indicators say it won't for several more years, people will be hording money and paying down their debt. Despite the recent small increases in consumer spending, I'm really curious to see how spending will look when people's tax returns have been all spent up. Q2 and Q3 should be interesting if energy prices spike like they always do over the summer.

I feel some people have unrealistic expectations in our economy given that much of our growth stemmed from debt spending by consumers. IMO, we'll never hit the gangbuster consumer spending levels when the economy was at its peak again without a dramatic increase in take home pay or the cost of doing business goes way down. If the recent announcements by companies such as AT&T, Verizon, and others are any indication, the cost of doing business is not going down.

[forevereagle]

Yep, no one is personally responsible for their investments anymore, right? Pres. Bush seized your 401K and made you take those high risk funds. You had no option, right?

Wait... You could have educated yourself on where your money was invested and made an informed decision on where to invest your money. But it is just so much easier to blame the President that you hate for losing your money. Personal responsibilty be damned.

Careful, this can be played both ways.

[KRAM1]

Really,

Bush took everyone's 401K s and gave it all to Wall Street. Then again bankrupted the middle class with inflated gas prices while in essence bailing out oil companies. Then he helped Several other private firms by hiring $120,000 per year merceneries to go to war. Thus bringing our economy to a halt. So go f yourself when you look at this administration's handling of the worse economy since the great depression.

Oh yea AIG, Goldman, Exxon Chevron, Halliburton.....all of these just topped the top 20 in Fortune 500.....Oh yea Chase, Bank of America, Deregulation led to their lending practices at 0% while sticking it to small business to the the tune of 17%--29% loans.....

What this admin is doing is reeling in the heavy losses suffered by the Middle Class to support the Boujous on Wall Street and in Texas. All in the name of 9/11 my friend.... don't be a sheep for the republicans or the democrats....by the way how did you spend your $300 bush stimulus check???

My 401K is doing just fine thank you. I am squarely in the middle class and am not bankrupt. I didn't get a Bush stimulus check...but had I, I would have saved it. Hard to believe you really believe this dribble you put out. I tend to think you are just having some fun being the "anti Bush-anti business" poster. I do find it hard to believe that even you believe the stuff you post. I never made any loan to any small business at 17-29% in over 40 years of lending. I wonder where you have been banking or are you just drinking the left-wing kool-aid and believing all that crap you are reading in the NY Times. If you own a small business and have been borrowing at those rates I would be happy to look over your financials and business plan and see if I can't point you in the direction of a better lender. If you have a solid and profitable business going, and a solid credit background, in spite of the rhetoric you seem to believe, there are willing lenders available to you. happy to help.

[eulessismore]

Hmmm, I thought this thread was about killing some dude.

[cwb]

Hmmm, I thought this thread was about killing some dude.

No, it's about bootie.

[eulessismore]

No, it's about bootie.

Ok. Sorry if I seemed insensitive.

[Cerebus]

Wow, this went off track.

I have stated what I want, and if I haven't convinced you by now, I won't be able to, so I have zero interest in either restarting the first argument or getting entangled in this new one. I will say this however:

All politicians want your money and/or your freedom, it's up to you to keep both of those. If you rely on any one else to do it for you because you are too busy watching American Idol or the NFL, then you deserve to lose them both.

[UNT90]

Wow, this went off track.

I have stated what I want, and if I haven't convinced you by now, I won't be able to, so I have zero interest in either restarting the first argument or getting entangled in this new one. I will say this however:

All politicians want your money and/or your freedom, it's up to you to keep both of those. If you rely on any one else to do it for you because you are too busy watching American Idol or the NFL, then you deserve to lose them both.

+2

[KRAM1]

+2

I'll give this a + ! I'm liking this "personal responsibility" thing. Too bad it doesn't go for lots of other areas in our current society as well.

[stebo]

Allow me to play a little devil's advocate and get back to the original discussion... Would our enemies wait to catch us "in the act" before killing us? Do terrorists even care if they are killing soldiers or their own people for that matter. Our resolve to respect civilian life on foreign soil has been honorable but hasn't that hindered our ability to actually "fight" the good fight?

Do Terrorists fight a dirty war? How do you win when the enemy has nothing but time to kill and has shown patience?

I think of the early Americans and how we were able to turn around the momentum during the revolutionary war. Like our founders, these enemy combatants have great resolve. They also have a religious calling in many of their minds. The British were so damn frustrated that the militias wouldn't line up nicely in a row so that they could trade shot for shot... and eventually their inability to adapt to guerilla warfare was their downfall. Should we wait for the terrorists to be lined up cleanly in a row - ready to go shot for shot? Is that realistic?

War is ugly and make no mistake - we are AT WAR. You can't win a war playing nice. Anyone watching the HBO series "The Pacific"? Were we living up to the "American Spirit" and winning over the hearts and minds of the Japanese people when we dropped the bombs that finally brought peace? Were those people tried in a court of law? Had they all declared war on the U.S. or were they simple casualties of war?

Does the U.S. do a nice job of helping to rebuild countries after we fight the terrorists that occupied that land? We can demostrate the American spirit when the enemy is dead. One last set of questions - what would our enemy do? Would they try our soldiers or simply cut their heads off and post it on the internet? Would they take out our President at the very first chance? I believe so. It is terrible that we are at war - but we can't forget that this IS a war and a high level commander of the enemy (regardless of where he was born) should be treated as any other enemy. We don't send all enemies back to the U.S. for trial - we kill them. If the opportunity arises, we should kill him.

I suggest that you all go back and watch the footage of that day (9/11) and remember the reason why we are at war. Now that we are actually fighting the right enemy (rather than creating and escalating new ones) - I am very supportive of a President that treats war as war. Terrible decisions have to be made during war - or else we will lose the war. Our entire financial system has been brought down by these wars. We have spent trillions trying to keep Americans safe. I like that he would send a message to other rogue leaders that we aren't a bunch of pansies and that we won't wait to catch them with the actual gun in hand. Just my $0.02

Edited April 22, 2010 by stebo

[Cerebus]

Good call Stebo, we should abandon our principles and take up our enemies. I mean, I guess the American ideals don't mean anything after all.

We should also stone people to death on secret testimony in religous courts, choose a state religion and enforce it on everyone, the cheerleaders will look a little funny in burquas but they'll get used to it, of course the religous police will proably cane anyone who shows up to the games anyway.

But if we totally sink to the lowest levels of any enemy we encounter, and use the Constitution as toilet paper, we will defeat our enemy, forget the fact we will defeat them anyway.

PS: Reductio ad absurdum, hyperbole, confusion by misdirection and bandwagoning are fun to use, but they don't really add anything to a debate, and we should probably avoid them.

[stebo]

Good call Stebo, we should abandon our principles and take up our enemies. I mean, I guess the American ideals don't mean anything after all.

We should also stone people to death on secret testimony in religous courts, choose a state religion and enforce it on everyone, the cheerleaders will look a little funny in burquas but they'll get used to it, of course the religous police will proably cane anyone who shows up to the games anyway.

But if we totally sink to the lowest levels of any enemy we encounter, and use the Constitution as toilet paper, we will defeat our enemy, forget the fact we will defeat them anyway.

PS: Reductio ad absurdum, hyperbole, confusion by misdirection and bandwagoning are fun to use, but they don't really add anything to a debate, and we should probably avoid them.

I don't think that you even considered my points. You dismissed them immediately because they were not hopping aboard your own bandwagon. This perfect picture of American ideals that you speak of is a farce. It does not exist in times of war. It never has - and trying to make it exist during this war on terror is why we have struggled. Embedded reporters... Making everyone feel comfy about our mission.... Trying to prove to our own people that we are the "good guy"... That is confusion, misdirection, and bandwagoning - which is fun fun fun... but not reality in times of war. War sucks. My grandfather fought all through the Pacific and was in the first group on Guadacanal. He didn't like to talk about it - but I am learning about what he went through now in the HBO series. It has been so long since we fought a real war that Americans do not feel they need to sacrifice or respect the struggle that comes with war. Killing the enemy is the number one point of war and making that the mission by the Commander in Chief is a quality of leadership, not cowardice.