Originally Posted by Guest

How much do you think that deficit would be if we could deduct the expense of two unpaid-for wars? How about if we could deduct George Bush's unpaid-for Medicare Part D?

Do you believe that Barack Obama will leave behind the worst recession since the great depression when he leaves office?

The so-called two unfunded wars is an interesting supposition. You do realize that no wars are budgeted for, right? But, it is an interesting subject. According to what I have learned, the sum of the "two wars" does not equal a trillion bucks. As a matter of fact, all spending on national defense from 2003 through 2008 was $3.0 trillion. But, let's expand the war spending through 2011 and we might be able to round it off to a trillion. What percentage of the total defense spending budget? So, if you look at Bush's spending as percentage of GDP, his is lowest since 1940.

Now, addressing the Medicare D. That was a problem, right? The reason why he couldn't get Democrat support for it was because they felt he didn't go far enough. Example: Obamacare. Talk about "unfunded." Attempting to steal from our Medicare to fund it and still need a trillion bucks (unfunded).

As for the recession, it's easy to Monday morning quarterback now. However, Bush asked for an audit of Freddy and Fannie on more than one occasion and also pushed congress to regulate them. Barney Frank(D) stonewalled and blocked Bush at every request. Bush had no authority to force it.

The "repeal" of Glass Steagall, that happened in 1999 -- passed in the Senate by a vote of 90-8 and signed into law by President Clinton. As a matter of fact, let's look at some of the signers of that bill; Senators voting for that change included Chuck Schumer, John Kerry, Chris Dodd, John Edwards, Dick Durbin, Tom Daschle, and Joe Biden. Do you understand what this "repeal" meant?

Now, even though this has nothing to do with Obama being a "good" president, I thought I would answer your questions. I believe you were attempting that tired old defensive measure of blaming Bush for Obama's failures? If Obama needs you to defend his terrible record, then perhaps he is not as good as liberals seem to adamantly insist. It appears that the emperor's wardrobe is nonexistent.

By the way, if you want to "Dis" Bush on something, why not mention his tax cuts? I think that Bush made the largest mistake of his career by cutting the tax rate for almost 47% of the low earners to the point where they not only didn't pay a dime, but many of them got money back that they never paid into the system. If they don't pay taxes, they certainly aren't going to vote for the GOP that favors the earners. As long as the feeding hand tells them that the rich should pay more so that they would reap the benefits, then they will vote for the giver, not the taker. Personally, I think that Bush made a major blunder in that regard. He just handed the liberals control of the government. The Dems won't tax the little guy and the little guy will vote for them to ensure the gravy train. Everyone should have to pay something, in my opinion. But, Obama and his fellow socialists believe that the burden is in those that have the wealth.

Originally Posted by Guest

The so-called two unfunded wars is an interesting supposition. You do realize that no wars are budgeted for, right? But, it is an interesting subject. According to what I have learned, the sum of the "two wars" does not equal a trillion bucks. As a matter of fact, all spending on national defense from 2003 through 2008 was $3.0 trillion. But, let's expand the war spending through 2011 and we might be able to round it off to a trillion. What percentage of the total defense spending budget? So, if you look at Bush's spending as percentage of GDP, his is lowest since 1940.

Now, addressing the Medicare D. That was a problem, right? The reason why he couldn't get Democrat support for it was because they felt he didn't go far enough. Example: Obamacare. Talk about "unfunded." Attempting to steal from our Medicare to fund it and still need a trillion bucks (unfunded).

As for the recession, it's easy to Monday morning quarterback now. However, Bush asked for an audit of Freddy and Fannie on more than one occasion and also pushed congress to regulate them. Barney Frank(D) stonewalled and blocked Bush at every request. Bush had no authority to force it.

The "repeal" of Glass Steagall, that happened in 1999 -- passed in the Senate by a vote of 90-8 and signed into law by President Clinton. As a matter of fact, let's look at some of the signers of that bill; Senators voting for that change included Chuck Schumer, John Kerry, Chris Dodd, John Edwards, Dick Durbin, Tom Daschle, and Joe Biden. Do you understand what this "repeal" meant?

Now, even though this has nothing to do with Obama being a "good" president, I thought I would answer your questions. I believe you were attempting that tired old defensive measure of blaming Bush for Obama's failures? If Obama needs you to defend his terrible record, then perhaps he is not as good as liberals seem to adamantly insist. It appears that the emperor's wardrobe is nonexistent.

Excellent analyses ... but it's UNFAIR when you use facts, reason and logic to demolish liberals' "religious views" .... which is all they really are when you get down to it.

Bush asked for audits on Fanny and Freddie. He certainly did. In 2005, the Republican house passed a GSE reform act, which would have created stronger regulation of Fannie and Freddie, powers to increase capital at Fannie and Freddie, limit their portfolios, and deal with the possibility of receivership. Bush opposed the bill, and it died in the Senate. The author of the bill, a Republican, stated that if passed into law, it might have stopped the 2008 crash.

No one could have foreseen the games that large banks, and investment houses were playing with mortgages. Grouping 100 garbage mortgages together, selling them to mutual funds with A+ rating from rating companies. Dowd/Frank law tried to put a stop to this practice, and placed strong regulations on banks, and investment houses. It also established a Consumer Protection Agency. Elizabeth Warren was going to head it. The Republicans stalled her approval for ever. They paid for that one.

Nobody walks away from the 2008 great recession with clean hands.

My mistake. Elizabeth Warren was blocked by Republicans from the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, and not Consumer Protection Agency.

Originally Posted by Guest

Bush asked for audits on Fanny and Freddie. He certainly did. In 2005, the Republican house passed a GSE reform act, which would have created stronger regulation of Fannie and Freddie, powers to increase capital at Fannie and Freddie, limit their portfolios, and deal with the possibility of receivership. Bush opposed the bill, and it died in the Senate. The author of the bill, a Republican, stated that if passed into law, it might have stopped the 2008 crash.

No one could have foreseen the games that large banks, and investment houses were playing with mortgages. Grouping 100 garbage mortgages together, selling them to mutual funds with A+ rating from rating companies. Dowd/Frank law tried to put a stop to this practice, and placed strong regulations on banks, and investment houses. It also established a Consumer Protection Agency. Elizabeth Warren was going to head it. The Republicans stalled her approval for ever. They paid for that one.

Nobody walks away from the 2008 great recession with clean hands.

Never forget the impact of the Community Reinvestment Act. It had quite an impact and is oft ignored.

Again with the 47%! This is the breakdown of the 47% from Fox News. 10.3% elderly. This people are living on social security, and small pensions. Their combined income doesn't throw them into a tax payment situation.

6.9% non-elderly Either make less than $9,500. or do not work. They do not file income taxes.

28.3% They pay social security, and Medicare Taxes. They work at very low wages or part time jobs, which doesn't raise them to the level where they have to pay income taxes. They receive Earned Income Credit.

less 1% other.

The Bush tax cut lowered the tax rate for all tax brackets. There were some capital gains changes. The child credit went from $500. to $1,000. per child. These changes benefitted the higher tax brackets more than the all the others. Other than the child tax increase, it didn't do a damn thing to the 47% of people that pay taxes. First grade math any number multiplied by zero the answer is zero.

The 47% was a mistake by Romney. It might have cost him the election. A great number of the 47% live in Republican dominated states. The takers in these states certainly didn't change the outcome in these states. Concerning the Democrat states on each coast, these states are paying more in taxes than they are receiving back from the federal government. Your argument doesn't hold water.

Originally Posted by Guest

Again with the 47%! This is the breakdown of the 47% from Fox News. 10.3% elderly. This people are living on social security, and small pensions. Their combined income doesn't throw them into a tax payment situation.

6.9% non-elderly Either make less than $9,500. or do not work. They do not file income taxes.

28.3% They pay social security, and Medicare Taxes. They work at very low wages or part time jobs, which doesn't raise them to the level where they have to pay income taxes. They receive Earned Income Credit.

less 1% other.

The Bush tax cut lowered the tax rate for all tax brackets. There were some capital gains changes. The child credit went from $500. to $1,000. per child. These changes benefitted the higher tax brackets more than the all the others. Other than the child tax increase, it didn't do a damn thing to the 47% of people that pay taxes. First grade math any number multiplied by zero the answer is zero.

The 47% was a mistake by Romney. It might have cost him the election. A great number of the 47% live in Republican dominated states. The takers in these states certainly didn't change the outcome in these states. Concerning the Democrat states on each coast, these states are paying more in taxes than they are receiving back from the federal government. Your argument doesn't hold water.

The 47% was used as an estimated number. No one said different. If you figure the numbers though, with the changes in the tax rates, and deductions, plus the idea of EITC, many folks filed and received gov money that they never paid into the system. If you do the math, a family of four making $50K per year, paid $0. I know for a fact that some folks received hundreds in money not deducted from their income.

It's ok for Obama or other liberals to generalize and scoff off any critical comments when pointed out, but heaven help a conservative if he/she makes a sweeping comment or estimate.

The fact is that Bush's tax breaks, although good for the economy, made it hard for conservatives running for election. Those NOT paying taxes will jump on the liberal band wagon when it comes to unfairly taxing the wealthy. And fairness is when ALL are treated EQUALLY. You want to be fair in taxation, then do away with income tax and go to a federal sales tax.

Originally Posted by Guest

Bush asked for audits on Fanny and Freddie. He certainly did. In 2005, the Republican house passed a GSE reform act, which would have created stronger regulation of Fannie and Freddie, powers to increase capital at Fannie and Freddie, limit their portfolios, and deal with the possibility of receivership. Bush opposed the bill, and it died in the Senate. The author of the bill, a Republican, stated that if passed into law, it might have stopped the 2008 crash.

No one could have foreseen the games that large banks, and investment houses were playing with mortgages. Grouping 100 garbage mortgages together, selling them to mutual funds with A+ rating from rating companies. Dowd/Frank law tried to put a stop to this practice, and placed strong regulations on banks, and investment houses. It also established a Consumer Protection Agency. Elizabeth Warren was going to head it. The Republicans stalled her approval for ever. They paid for that one.

Nobody walks away from the 2008 great recession with clean hands.

GSE was not passed because of ONE Democrat vote, according to what I read. I believe McCain was involved in pushing the reform, more than once. But, I agree that there are a lot of dirty hands. But, to blame Bush is quite a stretch. He had no authority (unlike emperor Obama) to dictate a change.

Originally Posted by Guest

I'm a conservative but I think Obama might be right. It all boils down to who can deliver the most "something for nothing" and doesn't ask for any kind of sacrifice. Most posters in this forum have no idea of the hole that has been dug by our generation, long before Obama. He is just convenient.

Unbelievable!

I'm a progressive/liberal loon but I think that Obama is an idiot, socialist, Muslim.

"good" ??? As compared to what/whom? I guess it is all dependent on one's perspective of oneself. I am a good citizen, a good father, a good neighbor, a good driver.

All the posts I've read supporting Obama seem to condone his continual lies half truths and failure to enforce the law. Those in his support either don't pay attention or are very happy being a socialist with Washington controlling their life , all supporters please tell us what Obama has accomplished for the good of the country. The Clintons were broke when elected and now multi millionaires , Obamas broke when elected and now multimillionaires ,how has either one of these Presidents improved you wages?

Do we really need an inept, pathological lying narcissist, who destroys our economy, turns the Middle East into an inferno, allows China & Russia to attack our servers, expand their military, threaten its neighbors, give Iran the nuke, enrage the Jews befriend Islamic terrorists, polarize & incite racial tensions then lecture us when rioters have looted & burned the town. This is a man with infinite tolerance for the misery of others. He goes golfing after someone loses his head, goes campaigning after an ambassador & 3 Americans are killed in Benghazi. It it wasn't for the cover of the Corrupt Lib Media more people would know how destructive the Commie Kenyan is.

For sure he would win a 3rd term....all he has to do is come up with more freebies and of course all the dems would approve and borrow the money from China to buy the votes. Rush Limbaugh said it the best "YOU CAN"T BEAT SANTA CLAUS!!!!" If you do not agree then you can not handle the truth!

Obama has said a lot of ludicrous things. Why take him seriously now?