View Full Version : The State of the Union Speech
The speech (imho) covered all the topics we endlessly discuss here, and if I may, offered some common sense solutions. I don't see him losing the next election.
I hope you're wrong about the election Penn.
Surgicalcric
01-24-2012, 21:46
...offered some common sense solutions...
I must have been "dropping off the kids at the pool" when he was offering common sense solutions...
Watch my hands and pay absolutely no attention to the man behind the curtain.
Actions speak louder than words in my opinion and his actions over the last few years speak volumes.
ZonieDiver
01-24-2012, 22:31
It was a pretty typical State of the Union address:
zzzzzzzzzzzz
His delivery has gotten worse these past few years.
Biden looked like he had NO clue where he was. (His wife is hot, though!)
WholeManin2010
01-24-2012, 23:26
Maybe it's just me, but so many of his speeches seem to come to "I'm willing to do whatever it takes to work with the other side for the greater good. By the way, fuck the other side."
I must have been "dropping off the kids at the pool" when he was offering common sense solutions...
Well heck you likely missed the whole speech then.. :p
Lets say I make over a million a year and pay no taxes; would you like to see that I pay my fair share?
That's a fallacy - you can't make more over a million a year and pay "no" taxes. Nice try though....
Ret10Echo
01-25-2012, 06:02
I hope you're wrong about the election Penn.
Never underestimate the stupidity of the American people.
If you're too lazy to go out and get yourself a pot to piss in and some guy promises to drop by the house and give you one - you'll vote for him - as long as you can vote absentee, early vote, get picked up in a van..............
Lets say I make over a million a year and pay no taxes; would you like to see that I pay my fair share?
I'd like to see damn near everyone pay something But if we're going down the road of "fair"...
What exactly does "fair" mean? - Would taxing those that have more income and giving credits to those that don't to the extent that all Americans have the same amount of after-tax income no matter what they do or produce then be the "most fair" end state?
Is it fair that the top 1% pay over 30% of all federal income taxes?
Is it fair that 50% of the population pay no federal income taxes?
Is the death tax fair?
Is it fair that Social Security benefits are taxed?
Dozer523
01-25-2012, 06:19
(His wife is hot, though!) This seems to come up a lot of late in your posts. Pol wives, felons etc
Dozer523
01-25-2012, 06:35
I'd like to see damn near everyone pay something But if we're going down the road of "fair"...
1. Is it fair that the top 1% pay over 30% of all federal income taxes?
2. Is it fair that 50% of the population pay no federal income taxes?
3. Is the death tax fair?
4. Is it fair that Social Security benefits are taxed?
1 Maybe when it is proportional to the income they make.
2 Is it fair that their income is so little?
3 It ain't a death tax (you can't take it with you) it more of a tax on passing it along to people who haven't earned it . . . sorta like those welfare cheats . . . HEY!
4 No, that wasn't the original deal.
I always get a kick out of the plug I hear on NPR for the Bill and Malinda Gates Foundation, "The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, dedicated to the belief that every person deserves the chance to live a healthy, productive lives."
a chance?
Streck-Fu
01-25-2012, 06:36
Lets say I make over a million a year and pay no taxes; would you like to see that I pay my fair share?
How many people actually earning $1M per year pay zero taxes?
What, exactly is fair?
The speech (imho) covered all the topics we endlessly discuss here, and if I may, offered some common sense solutions.
Shouldn't that be in pink? Okay, I have been over this transcript rather thoroughly. I almost spit my coffee all over my keyboard! You have got to be kidding.
1. Do a little research and you will see that the Dems were the ones who wanted to protect Fannie and Freddie so badly.
2. He doesn't want to ackowledge his mother or her family unless he is trying to feign support for the military.
3. HE IS THE ONE WHO DEMANDED ALL OF THOSE BAILOUTS AFTER HIS ELECTION!
4. Ford Motor Company was the ONLY motor company that DID NOT take any bailout money.
5. Until now, he has been AGAINST giving corporations more tax breaks.
6. Making multinationals pay a minimum tax will simply make them move out of the country.
7. He wants to establish ANOTHER gov't agency? (the TEU), Imagine that!
8. How are they going to assess teacher efficiency?
9. How is he going to MAKE kids stay in school until the graduate or turn 18?
10. His energy policy, yep. He supported and gave money to Solyndra but shut down the Keystone pipeline.
11. Get tough on the banks? Yea, AFTER you have spent billions of dollars bailing them out.
12. He wants Congress to give him more power? He has already trampled the Constitution and went around Congress numerous times!
People, check his voting record from 2005 - 2008. That speaks for itself. This speech was so full of BS, it is pathetic!
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/01/24/transcript-obamas-2012-state-union/
Dozer523
01-25-2012, 06:47
What, exactly is fair? Now that might explain why the tax codes run 50,000+ pages.
Streck-Fu
01-25-2012, 06:55
Now that might explain why the tax codes run 50,000+ pages.
The tax code is so complicated because they try to encourage the movement of money into certain areas or industries.
Our tax code needs to be greatly simplified with everyone paying in something.
Maybe it's just me, but so many of his speeches seem to come to "I'm willing to do whatever it takes to work with the other side for the greater good. By the way, fuck the other side."
It isn't just you.
ddoering
01-25-2012, 07:21
It was a pretty typical State of the Union address:
zzzzzzzzzzzz
His delivery has gotten worse these past few years.
Biden looked like he had NO clue where he was. (His wife is hot, though!)
Which is why I don't even bother to watch them anymore.....
She may be hot but her judgement is suspect.
JB has always been clueless.....
Streck-Fu
01-25-2012, 08:07
Fact checking from the AP: LINK (http://apnews.myway.com/article/20120125/D9SFO48G0.html)
FACT CHECK: Obama pushes plans that flopped before
Email this Story
Jan 24, 11:16 PM (ET)
By CALVIN WOODWARD
(AP) President Barack Obama delivers his State of the Union address on Capitol Hill in Washington,...
WASHINGTON (AP) - It was a wish list, not a to-do list.
President Barack Obama laid out an array of plans in his State of the Union speech as if his hands weren't so tied by political realities. There can be little more than wishful thinking behind his call to end oil industry subsidies - something he could not get through a Democratic Congress, much less today's divided Congress, much less in this election year.
And there was more recycling, in an even more forbidding climate than when the ideas were new: He pushed for an immigration overhaul that he couldn't get past Democrats, permanent college tuition tax credits that he asked for a year ago, and familiar discouragements for companies that move overseas.
A look at Obama's rhetoric Tuesday night and how it fits with the facts and political circumstances:
OBAMA: "We have subsidized oil companies for a century. That's long enough. It's time to end the taxpayer giveaways to an industry that's rarely been more profitable, and double-down on a clean energy industry that's never been more promising."
THE FACTS: This is at least Obama's third run at stripping subsidies from the oil industry. Back when fellow Democrats formed the House and Senate majorities, he sought $36.5 billion in tax increases on oil and gas companies over the next decade, but Congress largely ignored the request. He called again to end such tax breaks in last year's State of the Union speech. And he's now doing it again, despite facing a wall of opposition from Republicans who want to spur domestic oil and gas production and oppose tax increases generally.
---
OBAMA: "Our health care law relies on a reformed private market, not a government program."
THE FACTS: That's only half true. About half of the more than 30 million uninsured Americans expected to gain coverage through the health care law will be enrolled in a government program. Medicaid, the federal-state program for low-income people, will be expanded starting in 2014 to cover childless adults living near the poverty line.
The other half will be enrolled in private health plans through new state-based insurance markets. But many of them will be receiving federal subsidies to make their premiums more affordable. And that's a government program, too.
Starting in 2014 most Americans will be required to carry health coverage, either through an employer, by buying their own plan, or through a government program.
---
OBAMA, asking Congress to pay for construction projects: "Take the money we're no longer spending at war, use half of it to pay down our debt, and use the rest to do some nation-building right here at home."
THE FACTS: The idea of taking war "savings" to pay for other programs is budgetary sleight of hand. For one thing, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have been largely financed through borrowing, so stopping the wars doesn't create a pool of ready cash, just less debt. And the savings appear to be based at least in part on inflated war spending estimates for future years.
---
OBAMA: "Through the power of our diplomacy a world that was once divided about how to deal with Iran's nuclear program now stands as one."
THE FACTS: The world is still divided over how to deal with Iran's disputed nuclear program, and even over whether the nuclear program is a problem at all.
It is true that the U.S., Europe and other nations have agreed to apply the strictest economic sanctions yet on Iran later this year. But the global sanctions net has holes, because some of Iran's large oil trading partners won't go along. China, a major purchaser of Iran's crude, isn't part of the new sanctions and, together with Russia, stopped the United Nations from applying similarly tough penalties.
---
OBAMA: "Tonight, I want to speak about how we move forward, and lay out a blueprint for an economy that's built to last - an economy built on American manufacturing, American energy, skills for American workers, and a renewal of American values."
THE FACTS: Economists do see manufacturing growth as a necessary component of any U.S. recovery. U.S. manufacturing output climbed 0.9 percent in December, the biggest gain since December 2010. Yet Obama's apparent vision of a nation once again propelled by manufacturing - a vision shared by many Republicans - may already have slipped into the past.
Over generations, the economy has become ever more driven by services; not since 1975 has the U.S. had a surplus in merchandise trade, which covers trade in goods, including manufactured and farm goods. About 90 percent of American workers are employed in the service sector, a profound shift in the nature of the workforce over many decades.
The overall trade deficit through the first 11 months of 2011 ran at an annual rate of nearly $600 billion, up almost 12 percent from the year before.
cont....
Streck-Fu
01-25-2012, 08:08
--
OBAMA: "The Taliban's momentum has been broken, and some troops in Afghanistan have begun to come home."
THE FACTS: Obama is more sanguine about progress in Afghanistan than his own intelligence apparatus. The latest National Intelligence Estimate on Afghanistan warns that the Taliban will grow stronger, using fledgling talks with the U.S. to gain credibility and stall until U.S. troops leave, while continuing to fight for more territory. The classified assessment, described to The Associated Press by officials who have seen it, says the Afghan government hasn't been able to establish credibility with its people, and predicts the Taliban and warlords will largely control the countryside.
---
OBAMA: "On the day I took office, our auto industry was on the verge of collapse. Some even said we should let it die. With a million jobs at stake, I refused to let that happen. In exchange for help, we demanded responsibility. We got workers and automakers to settle their differences. We got the industry to retool and restructure. Today, General Motors is back on top as the world's number one automaker. Chrysler has grown faster in the U.S. than any major car company. Ford is investing billions in U.S. plants and factories."
THE FACTS: He left out some key details. The bailout of General Motors and Chrysler began under Republican President George W. Bush. Obama picked up the ball, earmarked more money, and finished the job. But Ford never asked for a federal bailout and never got one.
---
OBAMA: "We can also spur energy innovation with new incentives. The differences in this chamber may be too deep right now to pass a comprehensive plan to fight climate change. But there's no reason why Congress shouldn't at least set a clean energy standard that creates a market for innovation."
THE FACTS: With this statement, Obama was renewing a call he made last year to require 80 percent of the nation's electricity to come from clean energy sources by 2035, including nuclear, natural gas and so-called clean coal. He did not put that percentage in his speech but White House background papers show that it remains his goal.
But this Congress has yet to introduce a bill to make that goal a reality, and while legislation may be introduced this year, it is unlikely to become law with a Republican-controlled House that loathes mandates.
---
OBAMA: "Right now, because of loopholes and shelters in the tax code, a quarter of all millionaires pay lower tax rates than millions of middle-class households."
THE FACTS: It's true that a minority of millionaires pay a lower tax rate than some lower-income people. On average, though, wealthy people pay taxes at a much higher rate than middle-income taxpayers.
Obama's claim comes from a Congressional Research Service report that compared federal taxes paid by people making less than $100,000 with those paid by people making more than $1 million. About 10 percent of families with incomes under $100,000 paid more than 26.5 percent in federal income, payroll and corporate taxes. And about a quarter of millionaire taxpayers paid a rate lower than that.
---
OBAMA: "We can't bring back every job that's left our shores.... Tonight, my message to business leaders is simple: Ask yourselves what you can do to bring jobs back to your country, and your country will do everything we can to help you succeed."
FACT CHECK: Many of the jobs U.S. companies have created overseas won't return because they were never in the United States in the first place.
As Obama said in his speech, U.S. workers have become more productive and labor costs have fallen.
But there are powerful forces pushing the other way: Many of the overseas jobs in U.S. companies weren't transferred from the U.S. They were created in fast-growing markets in Latin America, Asia and elsewhere to serve customers in those markets. Companies in the Standard & Poor's 500 index now earn more than half of their revenue from overseas.
That has fueled more job creation abroad. U.S. multinationals cut more than 800,000 jobs in the United States from 2000 to 2009, according the Commerce Department. They added 2.9 million overseas in the same period.
---
OBAMA: "Anyone who tells you that America is in decline or that our influence has waned doesn't know what they're talking about ... That's not how people feel from Tokyo to Berlin; from Cape Town to Rio; where opinions of America are higher than they've been in years."
THE FACTS: Obama left out Arab and Muslim nations, where popular opinion of the U.S. appears to have gone downhill or remained unchanged after the spring 2011 reformist uprisings in the Middle East. A Pew Research Center survey in May found that in predominantly Muslim countries such as Turkey, Jordan and Pakistan, views of the U.S. were worse than a year earlier. In Pakistan, a major recipient of U.S. foreign aid that went unmentioned in Obama's speech, just 11 percent of respondents said they held a positive view of the United States.
greenberetTFS
01-25-2012, 08:14
This seems to come up a lot of late in your posts. Pol wives, felons etc
You know I've notice that too!!!...............;) :D
Big Teddy :munchin
Maybe it's just me, but so many of his speeches seem to come to "I'm willing to do whatever it takes to work with the other side for the greater good. By the way, fuck the other side."FWIW, that's the same sense I get, especially when he phrases a policy preference as a "no brainer" or as "common sense."
It is equally galling how he talks to Congress as if he's the legislative branch's boss. On general principle, the house and the senate should forgo ideological differences and do something on institutional lines to bring the man back down to earth. (IMO, now is as good a time as any for the long over-due showdown over presidential war powers.)
greenberetTFS
01-25-2012, 08:30
Maybe it's just me, but so many of his speeches seem to come to "I'm willing to do whatever it takes to work with the other side for the greater good. By the way, fuck the other side."
BTW,I also agree with Billy,it's not just you!!!!!!!..............:rolleyes:
Big Teddy :munchin
ZonieDiver
01-25-2012, 08:43
This seems to come up a lot of late in your posts. Pol wives, felons etc
Old age and a lack of hot ladies at the senior center is the cause, I guess. :p. I'm not sure about the "felons" part, though.
On a more serious note, is ANYone else as sick of hearing about "Warren Buffet's secretary" as I am? Dollars to doughnuts says her job title is NOT 'secretary'! Also, I'll bet (not a Mitt Romney $10,000, but $10...) her salary is in the six figures, and not the bare minimum six figures. I want Stewart, Colbert, et al to demand to see her tax return!
There, I'm done.
At least he didn't try to take credit for the extra cheese in Domino's cheesy bread.
The speech (imho) covered all the topics we endlessly discuss here, and if I may, offered some common sense solutions. I don't see him losing the next election.
God help us if you are right. :mad:
I'd like to see damn near everyone pay something But if we're going down the road of "fair"...
What exactly does "fair" mean? - Would taxing those that have more income and giving credits to those that don't to the extent that all Americans have the same amount of after-tax income no matter what they do or produce then be the "most fair" end state? Is it fair that the top 1% pay over 30% of all federal income taxes?
Is it fair that 50% of the population pay no federal income taxes?
Is the death tax fair?
Is it fair that Social Security benefits are taxed?
No, that would not be fair. That would be socialism. Which is the way we have been headed the last few years.
"Fair" IMHO would be each and every wage earner paying the SAME percentage of their income in taxes, ie, 15% or 10% or whatever it takes to run the country.
Can't watch that crap any more. Watched the DIY network instead. Listening to Obama is like nails on a chalkboard to me and I immediately change the channel. Did listen to and enjoyed Daniels response.
Ret10Echo
01-25-2012, 11:38
These little tidbits are fun...
Compliments of The Weekly Standard:
Obama 2010: "It's time for colleges and universities to get serious about cutting their own costs.
Obama 2012: "Colleges and universities have to do their part by working to keep costs down."
***
Obama 2010: "We can't wage a perpetual campaign."
Obama 2012: "We need to end the notion that the two parties must be locked in a perpetual campaign."
***
More here (http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/havent-we-heard_618462.html)...along with video
Change...yup, that's some change....
FWIW, that's the same sense I get, especially when he phrases a policy preference as a "no brainer" or as "common sense."
It is equally galling how he talks to Congress as if he's the legislative branch's boss. On general principle, the house and the senate should forgo ideological differences and do something on institutional lines to bring the man back down to earth. (IMO, now is as good a time as any for the long over-due showdown over presidential war powers.)
You know, for the first time, I actually agree 100% with you.
Nothing in government is based on common sense-progress is the opposite of congress. Government common sense is like a special power that a Marvel Comics superhero might wield. I have more faith that genetic engineering will produce a pill that lets me shoot spiderweb silk from my ass before I expect to see congress (either house-either party) do something that shows overt common sense leveraged in favor of the honest to goodness best interest of the nation.
...not holding my breath
Doc Diego
01-25-2012, 17:22
Unfortunately, my son had to do a report on this SOTU speech. This speech was rated at an 8th grade comprehension level this morning. It appears Obama and his speech writers know their audience. Class warfare and Govt. "fairness" are not solutions to our problems.
The Reaper
01-25-2012, 20:28
Lets say I make over a million a year and pay no taxes; would you like to see that I pay my fair share?
I would like to see the 49% who currently pay zero Federal Income taxes paying their fair share.
In fact, some get money back after paying none in. WFT??
What do you think would be a fair tax ON EVERYONE?
If you earned $1,000,000 and paid 15% with all deductions eliminated, you would owe $150,000.
If they made $20,000, they would owe $3,000. Seems fair to me.
Otherwise, rich people hide their money, or move to a less-taxing country.
That is the main problem with socialism. Eventually, you run out of other people's money to give away.
TR
TR, we are on the same page. So, (hold on now) does that mean you agree with President Obama?
IMO, now is as good a time as any for the long over-due showdown over presidential war powers.)
The War Powers Act of 1973 was reactionary, responding to immediate national “emotional” sentiment over the VN conflict. Clinton, Bush, and now Obama have ignored it.
The constitution addresses Presidential authority directly with the regard on the use of force, by requiring a declaration of war by congress. Congress does not possess the testicular fortitude to milk itself, let alone act in the national interest. Do you honestly believe that they would have, or could have defined an enemy to DW on after 9/11. Or, insure our strategic oil supply in 2003?
No, in an increasingly ambiguous world the President must act, and Congress must dance around the WPA of 1973. We all know this, So, what has been the compromise? The WPA requires a President to “notify congress” by filing reports and has 60 days in which to do so. By that time the action is well lubricated, the media colonic has pass judgment for the public enema, and all that s left is investment portfolios and the process: nice and slow boys.
The world is a mess, congress cannot pull the trigger, and someone must have that ability to act.
Penn, the issue is that you - like the President - are obfuscating the facts. The 15% number is the capital gains rate for investment income that has been already taxed at the relevant rate. So, if you are a gazzillionaire and paying 39% on your income, you then have to pay an additional 15% on invested assets of that already-taxed income. You are effectually paying 54% at the Federal level for that asset. Just what is "fair" about that...??
How is it "fair" that one class of people pay more than another class?/ How is it "fair" that some people pay nothing??
Don't go down the road of "affording it", that has nothing to do with fairness.
Whenever I hear democrats mew about "fairness", I cinch my belt and look for a corner 'cause I know a screwing is coming.
Class warfare is the lowest form of debate and nothing more than a refuge of scoundrels.
ddoering
01-26-2012, 05:36
How is it "fair" that one class of people pay more than another class?/ How is it "fair" that some people pay nothing??
Don't go down the road of "affording it", that has nothing to do with fairness.
Whenever I hear democrats mew about "fairness", I cinch my belt and look for a corner 'cause I know a screwing is coming.
"Fair" is the end result of an education system that tells everyone that they are all winners..... Last I looked, even at the Olympics, there was always only one winner and at least two losers standing there at the end of every event.
Ret10Echo
01-26-2012, 06:05
At the risk of hijacking...but along the discussion on education. There just seems to be a disjointed approach to all that is mentioned.
One the one hand, there is discussion on the COST and the associated (presumed) debt that a student exits the system with.
On the other hand, is the lamenting over U.S. falling behind in the Mathematics, Engineering and Sciences?
Nevertheless, note that there is no incentive for a student to pursue those areas of study that the "experts" say we are lacking. Most students out of High School look at those particular areas of study and realize the commitment is significant. Not a lot of free time in an Engineering program... Other courses of study....I would suggest that there is less of a burden.
So what is wrong with incentivizing those areas? If my tax money is getting spent on handing out student loans, I'd rather produce a civil engineer, chemist or a teacher than (at the risk of darts being thrown) student of Pre- Mesopotamian aquatic horticulture and basketry.
So give the students moving into the areas of study that are "needed" better deals... Make those missed toga parties and Ska-dance club meetings worth their while.
Yeah, I know, it goes against the plain vanilla mediocrity that has become our nation's education system.
“Being smart 'ain't cheap” So let's invest in what is needed perhaps?
(Now back to our regularly scheduled programming)
The problem is that "stupid" should be painful. If you want to go and study under-water basket weaving, go for it. just don't expect me to subsidize you when you can't find a job. Don't expect me to hand-waive your racking up enormous debt in pursuit of YOUR goal. Choices have consequences - if you choose to enter into a field with little to no employability, you better enjoy eating popcorn and cutting coupons.
The entitlement society being foisted upon us by democrats is morally, psychologically and fiscally bankrupt. if you ameliorate the poor choices of people (or subsidize imprudent decisions), you will get more "stupid". I don't like paying for stupid, (I do that enough for my own-dam-self).
The lack of engineers or scientists will self-level when kids figure out that they really AREN'T all "special" and that not everyone will walk into a 100K per year job fresh out of college majoring in Victim studies.
mjacquard
01-26-2012, 07:04
Advantages to living in the UK:
1. OJT for living in a "nanny state."
2. Great preview of what it will be like to live in a socialist society.
3. Get to witness first-hand what it's like to live in a place where only criminals have guns (and knives).
4. SOTU address comes on while we are asleep.
Advantages to living in the UK:
1. OJT for living in a "nanny state."
2. Great preview of what it will be like to live in a socialist society.
3. Get to witness first-hand what it's like to live in a place where only criminals have guns (and knives).
4. SOTU address comes on while we are asleep.
Mr Jacquard - 1st posts belong in the intro thread.
Aren't you the one who used to run an old 3/5th Forum?
Sounded like this (atchd) to me...
Here's the CATO Institute's response to the speech.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=eQdwr-xNJIU
Richard :munchin
mjacquard
01-26-2012, 09:19
Mr Jacquard - 1st posts belong in the intro thread.
Aren't you the one who used to run an old 3/5th Forum?
Pete: Sorry, I did it backasswards. And yes, I still have the Yahoo group for any 3/5th member, past or present.
alright4u
01-26-2012, 15:47
This is true. Add the fact that unions took precedence over every class of investor and creditor.
alright4u
01-26-2012, 16:12
Lets say I make over a million a year and pay no taxes; would you like to see that I pay my fair share?
Buffet paid about 45% and that is fact. His income was already taxed at the corporate level before he received it and reported capital gains. Try the 45 % I stated.
GratefulCitizen
01-26-2012, 18:12
Taxing "the rich" will never work.
They are rich because they know how to spend less than they earn.
If you reduce their earnings through taxation, they will reduce spending to compensate.
This, in turn, will result in reduced earnings (or joblessness) for others.
The net effect will be a drop in prices (usually a rapid one).
When prices get low enough, "the rich" leverage up and buy like mad.
Now they own all the stuff.
They won't sell until prices rise again.
Government and central banks desperately try to boost employment (which boosts prices).
Any money the "non-rich" manage to accumulate gets hoovered up by the increased prices.
"The rich" profit from the cycle.
Politicians bemoan the inequity and start the cycle again...
Growing personal wealth (or not growing it) is a function of a behavior: spending less than you earn.
Tax policy will not change the outcome of this behavior.
Did listen to and enjoyed Daniels response.
Agree. I so wish he would have run for President. One of my favorite comments...
“The President’s grand experiment in trickle-down government has held back rather than sped economic recovery. He seems to sincerely believe we can build a middle class out of government jobs paid for with borrowed dollars. In fact, it works the other way: a government as big and bossy as this one is maintained on the backs of the middle class, and those who hope to join it.
TR, we are on the same page. So, (hold on now) does that mean you agree with President Obama?\
NOPE! Obama wants to give even more to the 49% that don't pay into the system and that more would come from everyone else paying into the system.
TR nailed it.
Sounded like this (atchd) to me...
Here's the CATO Institute's response to the speech.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=eQdwr-xNJIU
Richard :munchin
Very interesting Sir. Good post!
The Reaper
01-26-2012, 20:47
NOPE! Obama wants to give even more to the 49% that don't pay into the system and that more would come from everyone else paying into the system.
TR nailed it.
Exactly.
TR
Exactly.
TR
TR Sir,
PA-LEEEEESE run for President!!!:)
TS can be your SecDef, and the whole world would benefit!!!:lifter (You know I'm right!):o
Imagine the possibilities!
Holly........JMHO...
TR Sir,
PA-LEEEEESE run for President!!!:)
TS can be your SecDef, and the whole world would benefit!!!:lifter (You know I'm right!):o
Imagine the possibilities!
Holly........JMHO...
Can I be in charge of throwing out the garbage. ;)
greenberetTFS
01-27-2012, 07:42
Can I be in charge of throwing out the garbage. ;)
Absolutely not,I'd request to debate you to discuss who'd be more qualified for a post as important as that!!!............:eek:
Big Teddy :munchin
mark46th
01-27-2012, 10:05
FWIW- Warren Buffet's secretary makes a reported $500,000.00 per year...
ZonieDiver
01-27-2012, 11:03
Unfortunately, my son had to do a report on this SOTU speech. This speech was rated at an 8th grade comprehension level this morning. It appears Obama and his speech writers know their audience. Class warfare and Govt. "fairness" are not solutions to our problems.
I suffered through it the night it was delivered. The next day found me substitute teaching two 90 minute block classes at our alternative school: economics and government. The assignment? Have them watch the C-span video of the speech, take notes on some topics the teacher wanted them to find (teacher was young, male, long-haired, 'granola eater' type)... and then discuss.
There were a total of 32 student in the two classes, and only a handful were impressed. These students are primarily Hispanic and lower income - inner city. Only one had seen it the night before. Some were quite vociferous in their opposition to the President. One actually said, "He's full of crap!"
I was nearly catatonic by the third time experiencing it. Incidentally, one student noticed a sound asleep 'congress-critter' at about 9:12 into the C-span video. (Though another student thought he appeared to be dead.)
Blitzzz (RIP)
01-27-2012, 12:02
Speech was, same old BS, more Government agencies for us to endure, "Fair, Fair, Fair", the routine crock of shit he always produces, ..Basically his' was a "Nothing ventured nothing gained"...and he did neither. God help us should he win...The shit is rapidly headed toward the fan...Dave
Ret10Echo
01-27-2012, 12:57
...one student noticed a sound asleep 'congress-critter' ...(Though another student thought he appeared to be dead.)
Given Congress' record of performance, is there a difference?