Obama painted a bleak picture if lawmakers do nothing.
"This recession might linger for years. Our economy will lose 5 million more jobs. Unemployment will approach double digits. Our nation will sink deeper into a crisis that, at some point, we may not be able to reverse," Obama wrote in the newspaper piece titled, "The Action Americans Need."
He rejected the argument that more tax cuts are needed in the plan and that piecemeal measures would be sufficient, arguing that Americans made their intentions clear in the election.
"I reject these theories, and so did the American people when they went to the polls in November and voted resoundingly for change," he wrote.
-----------------------------------
So Barack is rejecting the arguments of democratically elected Senators because he won he election??
Really?! That is the non-partisan change we elected?
The American people didn't reject the legislative process... we rejected W. That doesn't give you the right reject other ideas that were also elected.
First off,
ReplyDeleteIf you remember any of the debates we had over Obama, you know that I'm not the typical liberal in terms of government involvement and spending. In fact, I believe my exact argument was something along the lines of "If we're going to spend massive amounts of money, I'd rather it be on domestic issues and not war"
Payback for Iraq? You can't possibly believe Barack is proposing the largest ever government spending project out of spite, can you? Disagree with it if you will, but you think this is some sort of revenge? Come on.
The war in Iraq is not over and so far it's cost something like $3 trillion (not to mention millions of Iraqi lives and thousands of American lives). We're dealing with numbers so large here it's hard to comprehend.
"The American people didn't reject the legislative process... we rejected W. That doesn't give you the right reject other ideas that were also elected. "
Well, actually it does. Obama is not breaking any laws here, HE DOES have the right to reject those ideas because the dems have a majority. It's frustrating being on the other side of things, no?
That said, I don't support all of the bailout, and quite frankly I'm not knowledgeable enough to know the best way to fix the mess that we're in. Furthermore, Obama has made some concessions to the Republicans.
I'm not saying Obama is perfect, I was skeptical from the beginning, before the beginning actually, as I would have been no matter who was elected.
Also, fear-mongering is convincing the American people that Sadaam Hussein was connected to 9/11 as an excuse to invade a country that was not a threat, as opposed to telling the American public that our economy is in the shitter. The difference? Well they're both scary, but only 1 is true.
-Matt
Throughout history, government spending has not helped recessions. It's actually prolonged them. If Obama was admitted to Harvard on his own merits instead of the color of his skin, he might understand that.
ReplyDeleteThere's only two things that help: time or wars.
Wars put people to work.
Digital to analog TV receivers, condoms, and community arts programs do not.
I don't through around the term "racist" too often, and I'm hoping that statement was at least partly in jest, but damn, that's racist!
ReplyDeleteAssuming Obama got into Harvard because he was black is ridiculous. Lots of people apply to Harvard, lots of people don't get in. A lot of the people that don't get in were perfectly qualified to go to Harvard, there is just limited space.
If it was a joke, the only people that joke about that are people who think it's at least somewhat valid. Affirmative action IS debatable, I have problems with it myself, but criticizing someone because of how affirmative action may or may not have affected them is racist, unless you know Obama's admissions officer and know something I don't. If you do know something I don't, then fine, otherwise you just said that no black people are qualified to go to Harvard.
We are currently waging the 2nd most expensive war in the history, in Iraq and Afghanistan, with WWII coming in first (note that the WW refers to WORLD WAR)
How much has that helped our economy? Are you suggesting we would be in worse shape economically right now if we weren't in Iraq?
Like it or not, both Republicans and Democrats want to spend a lot of money on government programs, the only issue is how much. You can't suggest that if you get rid of Digital to analog TV receivers, condoms, and community arts programs from the bailout that we'll be left with only tax cuts. There are 100s of billions of dollars of government spending that both republicans and democrats support. Let's debate what should of should not be in there, that's fine.
-Matt
*throw
ReplyDeleteI've worked in higher education for several years. I have friends teaching at ivy league schools. And I know for a fact that it is easier to get into a school when you are a minority. It's not a free ticket in, but it is a little bit easier. That's not racist, that's reality.
ReplyDeleteDo you think Obama would have been elected president if he was white?
If you think Yes, then you are in denial.
The media would never have backed a white man like they backed him. They would have backed Hillary since she is NEWS. "Historical" elections are much better for ratings.
The surveys even showed that many people voted based on race and the "historical" factor.
Race had nothing to do with my vote. I wish McCain was black. Then the whole race thing wouldn't have mattered. It would've been like Superbowl 41.
Matt, I was talking in jest that Pelosi (not Obama) was acting out of spite for big spending on the war.
ReplyDeleteBut I do think the Democrats feel that in some ways they are allowed to spend money in the magnitude of Iraq because now its their turn to run the country.
And while the Iraq war has cost $3trillon you have to remember that about 50% of that would have been spent keeping the military idle. Its like having a car and making car payments. If it sits in your garage you still have to make the car payments, but if you drive it around you have to pay for gas and repairs.
Being white and having a problem with affirmative action or being critical of a minority who benefited from affirmative action can never be racist.
ReplyDeleteMatt, by saying so you eliminate white people from debating the merits of affirmative action.
Affirmative action IS racist by definition. Bill Cosby will tell you that, so don't be angry with James (white) for saying something that many black leaders feel too. But that is a whole other debate...
"so don't be angry with James (white)"
ReplyDeleteI'm actually only as white as Obama: 50%
I am white also, and I have problems with affirmative action. I made that very clear in my post. However, criticizing someone by saying the only way they were able to succeed was because of affirmative action is crazy and unknowable.
ReplyDeleteJay, you've proposed to things.
1) Black people are not smart enough to go to Harvard and because Barack Obama is black and incapable of the type of reasoning that non-black Harvard graduates are capable of, he doesn't understand economics.
2) Barack Obama would not be president if he were not half black.
There is no way to debate any of that rationally. I'm super down to debate affirmative action, in fact we'd probably agree, but you can't go around saying craziness like that, not because it's incredibly politically incorrect, but because it has no potential to create anything constructive. It's like trying to produce useful data from an experiment with multiple uncontrolled variables.
-Matt
Michael,
ReplyDelete"Being white and having a problem with affirmative action or being critical of a minority who benefited from affirmative action can never be racist.
Matt, by saying so you eliminate white people from debating the merits of affirmative action."
Michael, I agree. I am critical of affirmative action and I am white. My main problem being that equality based on the unequal treatment of unequal people is in conflict with the idea of equality. Yeah, I have big problems with that.
I also have a problem with people bad-mouthing minorities by claiming that the only way they were able to pretend to be as smart as white people was because white people let them. I don't know Barack Obama personally, and neither do any of you. You have no idea what his LSAT scores were. Let's debate affirmative action, not how it maybe effected someone. That's silly, Barack Obama has nothing to do with the affirmative action aspect of this argument. He applied to law school just like everyone else and after that it was completely out of his hands.
PS Michael, you can make most things racist if you try hard enough.
-Matt
Michael,
ReplyDelete"And while the Iraq war has cost $3trillon you have to remember that about 50% of that would have been spent keeping the military idle."
Where did you come up with that figure? I'm not saying it's necessarily wrong, but the info I've found states otherwise.
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0904490.html
The US is spending about $500 billion/year on military since about 2000, up from around $350 billion/year during the 90s. That leaves about $2.5 trillion dedicated to Iraq and Afghanistan.
"Barack Obama would not be president if he were not half black...There is no way to debate any of that rationally."
ReplyDeleteSo you believe that we would have elected a junior senator with a joke of a resume if he was white? Get real man. You live in a fantasy world. He's a symbol.
"Like it or not, both Republicans and Democrats want to spend a lot of money on government programs, the only issue is how much. You can't suggest that if you get rid of Digital to analog TV receivers, condoms, and community arts programs from the bailout that we'll be left with only tax cuts. There are 100s of billions of dollars of government spending that both republicans and democrats support. Let's debate what should of should not be in there, that's fine."
1) Republicans are not backing this spending bill. This is entirely on the Democrats.
2) How about handouts for purchasing homes? House prices are low as hell right now. In some areas of Vegas, houses are literally half off compared to 2007. If people can't afford these low prices without government handouts, maybe they shouldn't buy a house. Do we want to repeat the housing crisis by giving a bunch of Obama supporters loans and down payments?
Matt,
ReplyDeleteI pulled that number out of my ass based on what I had heard... but your numbers seem to back that up.
This article says it is costs approx $7bil a month in Iraq
This is definitely a debate for a separate post. It is also something that is difficult to nail down, there are so many ways to slice and dice the costs. But my point was just that the cost of the war needs to reflect the cost of the average military budget. (need to do the subtraction to get the additional cost of Iraq). The military is funded to be war-ready in peace time, so actually fighting the war costs more money, but thats not the whole picture.
"So you believe that we would have elected a junior senator with a joke of a resume if he was white? "
ReplyDeleteJay makes a great point there. Think about how Palin was laughed off the stage for her inexperience.
Even ask black voters... I think the number was something astronomical like 80% of black voters voted for Barack BECAUSE HE WAS BLACK.
So Matt while I agree with you that you can't say he was elected President or made it into Harvard solely because he was black the converse is also true, you also can't say that his race didn't play a factor (a major one) in his success.
شركة تنظيف مجالس بالاحساء
ReplyDeleteشركة تسليك مجارى بالهفوف