Obama is having the best first year of any president since Franklin Roosevelt.

OBAMA-FAN

I can't wait to see how those who oppose Obama try to spin this.

There's no need to spin. The facts speak for themselves. Corrupt, clueless, and inept.

And now with the stimulus failing, he's got the Washington spin machine bull@!$%#ting the people about how many jobs were created and saved.

Never mind his first year. Within his first six months in office, Obama's proven himself to be a bull in a china shop, recklessly mortgaging our fiscal future to make himself look good.

You didn't actually think that replacing a Republican president with a Democratic one would improve the federal government, now did you?

1.2

if the truth fits. I am not worried about the chosen one getting anything done, he is to busy jet-setting and going on dates to get anything done...

Why did I know that the Obama lickspittle, Jakey Weisberg, wrote this steaming pile before reading the seed?

Rick,

Deny if you will that the stimulus has stopped this economy from being far worse than it could have been, and you would be wrong!

But economist Nigel Gault of IHS Global Insight told the Times, "I don't think it's right to look at it by saying, 'Well, the economy is still doing extremely badly, therefore the stimulus didn't work. I'm afraid the answer is, yes, we did badly but we would have done even worse without the stimulus."

Add that to the fact that only a quarter of the stimulus has been spent and it, and it looks to me (and many economists) that the stim did what it was supposed to do at this point! Republican talking points about "Mortgaging our fiscal future" do not help you! If you can't understand the difference between needing to spend money and spending money with no benefit to the the U.S. than that seems to be something you need to work on! Bush spent $3 Trillion (and Counting) on the Iraq war, and $2 Trillion on tax cuts to the wealth over 8-9yrs. That's $5 trillion WASTED, and you are talking about Obama risking our "fiscal future!?" Come on!!

You didn't actually think that replacing a Republican president with a Democratic one would improve the federal government, now did you?

So far it's done wonders for America's standing in the world! Money is actually being invested in America as opposed to being shipped by the boat load overseas! Health Care reform is in the grasp of Americans, and education is actually a genuine concern of the White House, so I'm going to answer with a big fat "YES" to your question!

Obama is having the best first year of any president since Franklin Roosevelt.

Yeah right, and Anna Nicole married for love and the Detroit Lions are going to win Super Bowl 44. So what the article is saying is that FDR was a failure?

I think the Lions have a higher approval rating.

So what the article is saying is that FDR was a failure?

Another person who reads the title and comments, instead of reading the entire article before they say something stupid!

Writing something stupid, Jakey Weisberg, and present company are synonymous terms.

OBAMA-FAN

Deny if you will that the stimulus has stopped this economy from being far worse than it could have been, and you would be wrong!

It's quite plausible that the stimulus has shored up some isolated areas of the economy. There's no indisputable evidence though to attribute the entire improvement since 2008 to the stimulus.

But economist Nigel Gault of IHS Global Insight told the Times, "I don't think it's right to look at it by saying, 'Well, the economy is still doing extremely badly, therefore the stimulus didn't work. I'm afraid the answer is, yes, we did badly but we would have done even worse without the stimulus."

LOL. Haven't you learned about economists yet? Not one I know of can forecast his way out of a paper bag. Not to mention they are among the worst groupthinkers around.

Add that to the fact that only a quarter of the stimulus has been spent and it, and it looks to me (and many economists) that the stim did what it was supposed to do at this point!

With rose-colored glasses everything looks good.

Republican talking points about "Mortgaging our fiscal future" do not help you!

If it's a "talking point", I'm unaware of that because I don't read Republican websites or get my opinions from FOXNews. That you cannot grasp that the national debt is real and at some point will become a disaster of its own doesn't make those facts any less true.

If you can't understand the difference between needing to spend money and spending money with no benefit to the the U.S. than that seems to be something you need to work on!

When you can prove that Obama's programs to "help" the U.S. are anything more than egregiously expensive and largely ineffective short-term bandaids that have become a gold mine for thieves, we'll have something to talk about. Speaking of things to work on, go back and read the links I posted in #1.1. Obama's not the saint you believe him to be.

Bush spent $3 Trillion (and Counting) on the Iraq war, and $2 Trillion on tax cuts to the wealth over 8-9yrs. That's $5 trillion WASTED, and you are talking about Obama risking our "fiscal future!?" Come on!!

Ahh the obligatory Bush bash. Speaking of talking points ...

Care reform is in the grasp of Americans,

Really now? Read this article of mine, and realize that if the feds get themselves into the mix our already dysfunctional system will become even worse. The most frail will die from lack of care. The next big job markets will be for undertakers and gravediggers.

Life isn't a Disney movie dude.

rickace
that is way weak but lets summarize.
1. you have zero evidence for except a donation.. might as well say the entire congress has sold out(which is mostly true) but then you cant single out obama. So #1 exists entirely in yoru own mind and you have exactly no proof that obama has sold a single vote. And whiule your at it.. can you please list every single vote obama took in the past 2 years that directly efffected frannae.
2. LOL we wouldnt have had to stimulate had yall not destroyed the economy. AT any rate there is a reason why the entire planet did the same thing. Obama only spent 700 billion and yes that is a lot but not when you look at bush admin. YOu actually are upset at that. WHY THE @!$%# WERE YOU QUIET WHEN THE GOP REPEALED PAYGO? 2 wars totally unfunded.. on top of that bush gave us two rounds of tax cuts costing us trillions.. and destroying the surplus. according to the gop lead cbo.. bush's first tax cut alone cost 1.7 trillion.. or way more than health care reform

the dems on the other hand brought back paygo.. you know like truelly fiscally conservative people would do. OR atleast smart economically. That is why they are pullign their teeth out looking for ways TO ACTUALLY PAY FOR HEALTH CARE.. which they are doing through cuts to medicare and taxes on the rich.. this is totally unlike the gop and their totally unfunded programs that yall never once complained about until bush was out of office.

3. you show your lack of understanding about the economy. See there is a reason the entire planet is doing the kensian deficit spending.. cause letting everything go bankrupt when we let them get too big to fail.. is the fast track to a depression. WE let yall do that the first time.. we had two back to back laize faire presidents.. once that caused the depression and the other that watched it happen.. much like bush.. who denied we were heading into a recession for an entire year. Funny you complain about the auto workers who were only in trouble cause credit dried up cause yall let the banks destroy the economy.

4. OK so your upset obama coppied REAGAN.. no seriously was reagan wrong to take over the s&l's? you do know we owned continental for years? right? NO seriously tell me reagan was a socialist,

5. give me a @!$%#ing break.. with logic like that congress cant pass any laws.. they arent taking over health care.. they are taking over the payment for 6 million of the most abject poor. Just like the us gov hasnt taken over colleges.,. they just provide grants and loans to go.

SO thats all youve got and your pissed? where the @!$%# were you for 8 years.

and BILL funny as @!$%# coming off a president that took more vacations than any other in history.. while america was in two wars and he was busy destroying our economy and bankrupting the fed.
no seriouly bill .. bush went on vacation more than any other president and you want to whine that obama took his wife out on a date.. ONCE.
LOLOLOLOLOL

If the Stimulus is so effective, how come I keep hearing about a "Double-dip recession"? It isn't just the economists talking about it; my local newspaper a few weeks back had an article that stated, in the headline, that Obama was predicting a "Double-dip recession" from all of the deficit spending. Now, if there is a double-dip recession, then the Stimulus would not have had any real effect on the economy except to give a small bump in the middle of the recession. So, in the end, the Stimulus would have FAILED as it was supposed to END the recession. Isn't that what stimulus packages are supposed to do?

Anyways, most of the evidence is that the Stimulus has already failed, as it failed to stop the jobless rate from going over 8%, consumer confidence is still low, and most industries are still laying off workers. Also, Obama's job approval rating is the lowest ever for a first-term Presidency in the first year! So, how can it be stated that Obama is having the best first year of any President?

@rickace

Fortunately rickace, your ignore, does not extend to others.

Rick,

It's quite plausible that the stimulus has shored up some isolated areas of the economy. There's no indisputable evidence though to attribute the entire improvement since 2008 to the stimulus.

So what "indisputable" evidence do you have to the contrary???

Haven't you learned about economists yet? Not one I know of can forecast his way out of a paper bag. Not to mention they are among the worst groupthinkers around.

No one said to take their words for gospel, but use their opinion as part of what you base your opinion on! Can I say with all certainty that the stim is what caused the economic downturn to stop based on the economists opinion? No! i do know my history and what could have happened if the government didn't step in quickly though, i.e. THE GREAT DEPRESSION!

If it's a "talking point", I'm unaware of that because I don't read Republican websites or get my opinions from FOXNews. That you cannot grasp that the national debt is real and at some point will become a disaster of its own doesn't make those facts any less true.

This talking point is not exclusive to FOX news. If you've read any conservative source they all say the same thing! I never once in my comment even hinted to the fact that national debt is not "real", so i'm not sure where you got that from! The debt is very real, and that the money borrowed to put us in such debt over the last 8yrs has done nothing to make sure that we are fiscally independent in the future! Quite the contrary with this administration! See, the problem with you and most conservatives is you think that not spending money equals saving money! That is a naive and elementary point of view! In many situations you have to spend money in order to save money!

When you can prove that Obama's programs to "help" the U.S. are anything more than egregiously expensive and largely ineffective short-term bandaids that have become a gold mine for thieves, we'll have something to talk about. Speaking of things to work on, go back and read the links I posted in #1.1. Obama's not the saint you believe him to be.

And when you can prove that his policies have mad this country worse we'll have something to talk about. I highly doubt you can prove that in 10 months! No need to look at your link. You and other conservatives are the only ones with a misguided notion of the Presidents abilities, thus referring to him as "The one", "Messiah", or "Saint". Those of us who support president Obama know he is nothing more than a human being with his faults. The difference is, I support his policies. I believe in the importance of education in this country. I believe in using our military wisely as opposed to acting like this is an Xbox game and shipping our soldiers off to fight like there is a reset button! I believe in health care for all, and yes even those who may not be able to afford it! Policies! That's what I voted for, and that's what i support. You can call him what ever you want, but you still have to call him PRESIDENT!

Ahh the obligatory Bush bash. Speaking of talking points ...

No bashing, and you dismissing it as such only shows that you really have no intelligent rebuttal for facts! I simply posted that to show contrast! You people are complaining that Obama will cost us a trillion with his health care plan, but when i point out expenditures by the former president it's called "Bashing". Typical!

and realize that if the feds get themselves into the mix our already dysfunctional system will become even worse.

More talking points? Are you sure you don't watch FOX?? What I don't is the fact that you and others that spew this same talking point bile expect people to believe this! This a government plan! The government is not making private insurance illegal!! You can continue to buy insurance from private companies if you like! A plan is being offered to those who want it! regurgitating the "Government Health care Take over" nonsense is doing nothing for your credibility in this debate!

Life isn't a Disney movie dude.

Could have fooled me Goofy! LMAO!!! Sorry, but you set yourself up for that one!!

OBAMA-FAN

So what "indisputable" evidence do you have to the contrary???

You made the claim that the stimulus has been beneficial. The burden of proof lies with you, not with me.

No! i do know my history and what could have happened if the government didn't step in quickly though, i.e. THE GREAT DEPRESSION!

That we've not yet entered a depression isn't evidence that one isn't in the offing. You need to learn how to argue.

See, the problem with you and most conservatives is you think that not spending money equals saving money!

How arrogant of you to tell me what I think.

That is a naive and elementary point of view!

Except it's not mine, Einstein.

In many situations you have to spend money in order to save money!

Except the goal this time isn't to save money, it's to bring the economy out of a recession.

regurgitating the "Government Health care Take over" nonsense

I've regurgitated nothing. Did you even bother to read the article I linked in #1.10? All my own original thoughts.

Could have fooled me Goofy! LMAO!!! Sorry, but you set yourself up for that one!!

How old are you, twelve?

Welcome to my ignore list, as you have nothing more than distortions and red herrings to bring to the discussion.

Tow,

Although President Obama Warns of a “Double-Dip” Recession, Money Morning Expects U.S. Recovery to Continue

Money Morning Sees Little “Double-Dip” Risk

In a news-analysis story published earlier this month, Money Morning Contributing Writer Jon Markman said that a new research report concluded that the odds of a double-dip recession occurring right now are very low. That means that a drop back into recessionary conditions looks less and less likely even as unemployment creeps higher and has crossed the 10% threshold for the first time in a quarter century.

Deutsche Bank AG (NYSE: DB) economists – who conducted the research – reviewed U.S. economic history all the way back to the 1850s, and found that double-dip recessions are exceedingly rare: There have only been three episodes in which the economy has fallen back into recession within a year of a previous recession ending. And that’s out of 33 recessions that have taken place since 1854.

Obama is simply warning of what could happen! No one believes it's going to happen!

Obama's job approval rating is the lowest ever for a first-term Presidency in the first year!

You don;t even know that to be true because his first year is not even completed yet! Clinton ended his first year with a 45% approval rating, and he turned out to be the president that this country has seen the most prosperous economic times under!

Rick,

You made the claim that the stimulus has been beneficial. The burden of proof lies with you, not with me.

What is this, Amateur Night?? YOUfirst claimed that the stim was "failing".

And now with the stimulus failing,

You even went so far as to post a link to another Newsviner's comment pointing out failures of the stim! Now you are trying to pass the buck!! Unreal!

That we've not yet entered a depression isn't evidence that one isn't in the offing. You need to learn how to argue.

[sigh] This is really getting sad for you! I referenced the Depression because the government did not step in swiftly to prop up the U.S. economy and the Depression happened! The comment I posted from Economist Nigel Gault that says things would have been worse without the stim agrees with that assertion! And the fact that we are no longer on the brink of a depression IS evidence!

How arrogant of you to tell me what I think.

That's it? That's all you got? Based on your comments that is the conclusion I drew, and based on your response it was the correct conclusion!

Except it's not mine, Einstein.

Your answers are getting even less articulate and increasingly personal! LOL That's a tell tail sign of a conservative that can no longer argue their pathetically weak points!

Except the goal this time isn't to save money, it's to bring the economy out of a recession.

And it has done that and will continue to do that!! LOL

Welcome to my ignore list,

THANK GOD!! LOL

Known Stimulus Money Spent:

http://www.examiner.com/x-21433-Middlesex-County-Libertarian-Examiner~y2009m9d1-How-much-stimulus-money-has-been-spent-as-of-September-2009

Total spending as of today: $84,587,463 or 14.5%!

Known TARP money spent:

http://money.cnn.com/2009/03/31/news/economy/tarp_review/index.htm?section=money_topstories

The increasing complexity of the program has also made it difficult to account for how much has been spent on the various bailout programs. Treasury officials confirmed that Barofsky's estimate of $109.5 billion remaining in the fund for existing or new programs is correct, but an actual accounting of how the funds have been spent has not yet been made available, despite requests from the oversight panels.

The government's a joke when it comes to handeling money.

Growth anywhere in the private sector is do to peoples hard work to stay afloat. Not government money. Government money went everywhere except where it should have gone, the private sector.

Shovel ready my butt. Most projects are still in the approval stages. If they were ready, they'd already would have been started.

This reminds me that Bush didn't even use the "R" word (recession) until a year into it. It refreshing to a pres. that tells it like it is.

Where were you guys when Bush ran up the deficit? I think its been asked several times, please pretty please can any of you answer that question? Bill? Rick? SR? any conservative?

Your answers are getting even less articulate and increasingly personal! LOL That's a tell tail sign of a conservative that can no longer argue their pathetically weak points!

I just wanted to repeat this. :)

Well...I for one, was a vocal opponent of Pres. Bush's spending.

Sup g,

Growth anywhere in the private sector is do to peoples hard work to stay afloat. Not government money. Government money went everywhere except where it should have gone, the private sector.

this seems like a contradiction!

You fail to see what was done for the private sector. You think just because the money didn't go directly to businesses that they did not benefit from the bail out! What about the banks that were able to continue these businesses lines of credit? I constantly hear, "give the money to the private sector" but never hear anything by way of logistics! How do you hand out this money to the businesses? Are you sure they are going to create jobs?

Where were you guys when Bush ran up the deficit? I think its been asked several times, please pretty please can any of you answer that question? Bill? Rick? SR? any conservative?

Complaining just as much, didn't get the press time, like conservatives don't get now. The MSM was more worried about getting Lefties on the news.

Notice my time start here on newsvine. Complained about Bush economic policies when I started here and before.

Obama has done nothing to curb my outrage on government spending.

@ OF!

Dude, how are you!

Trust me, based on my clients complaints, who have/had good credit, can't get loans right now, so, banks aren't giving credit at the moment.

Just came back from FORD, tried to trade in my expedition for a new truck, got turned down and was told, "Even though you have good credit, it's not good enough".

Another person who reads the title and comments, instead of reading the entire article before they say something stupid!

Another know-it-all. Another pot calling a kettle black. Another Obama fan comment posted before the posters brain caught up with his/her fingers. FYI smarter-pants, I read the article and stand by my comment. But you already knew that, right?

pan,

I read the article and stand by my comment.

O.K., I stand corrected. You read the article, you just didn't understand it!! No one with a brain could have read the entire article and come up with the comment that you did!

Greg,

@ OF!

Dude, how are you!

Trust me, based on my clients complaints, who have/had good credit, can't get loans right now, so, banks aren't giving credit at the moment.

Just came back from FORD, tried to trade in my expedition for a new truck, got turned down and was told, "Even though you have good credit, it's not good enough".

I'm doing well. hope you and the family had a great Turkey day! I didn't forget about that stupid shirt! LOL I ordered it with the free 7-10day delivery. I wasn't in a rush! LOL

I know several people who were able to procure financing in the past several months. lending is also based on collateral. Some may not posses the collateral to secure the loan amount they are looking for. As far as your trade in, that could have something to do with the amount of cash you are putting down, the value of your current vehicle, and the price of the new car.

Turkey was phenominal, and the left over's are the best. Hope you overstuffed yourself.

I think you and I talked about this once.

I have a 70T line of credit, used 24T of it, paid it down to 15T in one year, and the bank cut me off.

This TARP/Stimulus may help the big guy, but us little guys are hurting, and we follow the rules!

Can't wait to see you in your shirt. LOL!

SPIN SPIN SPIN. Nothing but SPIN. Did I mention SPIN?

Not SPAM. SPIN

Greg,

My mother-in-law had a $1 Million HELC, and they cut it off because she wasn't using it. Some banks cut off loans to free up capital to make more loans or to clear up their books.

This TARP/Stimulus may help the big guy, but us little guys are hurting, and we follow the rules!

Well if you consider being able to maintain their credit relationship with their current bank so they can make payroll, and in many case not fire employees "helping the big guys" then there's not much I can say.

Can't wait to see you in your shirt. LOL!

He didn't mean it like that people!!!!!! LMAO!!

GEEZ!

I've tried to use it since January. We used the intial money Nov. 2008 for renovations to our house, and, March 30th, they cut it off.

I don't care about anybody else, I earned that Line of Credit, and I don't want it going anywhere else but to me. They still show the 70T on my account, I just can't use it. A few grand would have helped immensely the last 3 month's, but we have fought through it.

I tried going to another bank, well, a bunch of banks, and they won't take over the line of credit I earned.

Is this another give to the poor thing again.

The game of the year is on tonight. Wish us luck!

Sorry to hear that man...

Is this another give to the poor thing again.

not sure what you mean by that. All banks that accepted Bailout money have to clean up their books. Meaning their loan to capital ration has to be low in order for them to be able to pay back the government. On the banks books it only shows that you owe $24k not that $70k. It sucks.

On the banks books it only shows that you owe $24k not that $70k. It sucks.

My bank shows the 70K, which I could use some. It didn't even change my monthly payment, as the payment was based on 70K based on my contract with them. I tried re-financing for the 24K for the 15 years as a final, and they won't even talk to me. It's still based on 70K for 15 years, when it comes to interest.

Now that would save money!

I hate Banks !!!!!!!!!!!!!

OUCH!!!

What bank is this??? I have a HELC for $50k and only used $30k. My payment is 1% of the balance and the interest is only based on the balance.

I'll Post it "REGIONS".

I'm still at 6% ( based on 70K) and they won't refinance me.

WOW!!! I would call the local news, and make a stink!!! That's crazy!!!

The Reports I've been hearing from other banks and the internet is Regions is closing branches, and they were one of the banks that were doing the, send the big checks through first (No matter what date), to fine the crap out of you.

I've been talking with Suntrust to try to get this transfered, along with the rest of my accounts.

Not sure you want to go with suntrust either. Part of what I do is mergers and acquisitions. A large portion of Suntrust (ALL Trustee Units) was purchased by U.S. Bank some years ago. I worked on the deal that transferred those assets to U.S. Bank. A few months later U.S. Bank acquired (relatively the same business) from Wachovia, and you see how they turned out. U.S. Bank is a client of mine.

Here's a link.

http://www.bondbuyer.com/news/-251217-1.html

Not sure you want to go with suntrust either

Great! That made me feel better.

Now tonights game is ruined.

Any ideas? I've tried to the point I want to stick my money in a mattress.

LOL....Well, i've used Chase for a while and I have no complaints. Before that WaMu, and HSBC. Didn't care for either. If there is a Chase near you, it may be worth a trip to speak to a bank manager.

If there is a Chase near you, it may be worth a trip to speak to a bank manager

There is, I'll give it a shot.

GO NEW ENGLAND PATRIOTS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I earned that Line of Credit

Greg - can you explain how you "earned" a line of credit.

Greg- BUY GOLD- even if the economy tanks, you can at least look good, and make the ladies happy!

From wiki re: that 1st term :

When Roosevelt was inaugurated in March 1933, the U.S. was at the nadir of the worst depression in its history. A quarter of the workforce was unemployed. Farmers were in deep trouble as prices fell by 60%. Industrial production had fallen by more than half since 1929. Two million were homeless. Due to the lack of employment, organized crime and outlaws were on the rise, such as John Dillinger. By the evening of March 4, 32 of the 48 states, as well as the District of Columbia had closed their banks.^[48] The New York Federal Reserve Bank was unable to open on the 5th, as huge sums had been withdrawn by panicky customers in previous days.^[49] Beginning with his inauguration address, Roosevelt began blaming the economic crisis on bankers and financiers, the quest for profit, and the self-interest basis of capitalism:

Neale,

I keeping with the reverence displayed here for FDR, he ordered the removal of the Gold Standard and criminalized possession of Gold Notes, according to Anthony Scaduto. This law proved useful in catching Bruno Richard Hauptmann who was found to be in possession of outlawed Gold Certificates used as ransom in the Lindburgh kidnapping.

Odd that the seeder would borrow from such a dark chapter of FDR's three terms for his comparison. Have any of the posters bashed Herbert Hoover yet?

OC

I'll Post it "REGIONS".

I HATE Regions Bank!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-jw-stickings/liberalism-revived-jacob_b_373923.html

It seems a consensus is building.

Wow Greg

I am impressed and have totally changed my mind about you - After reading your posts with Obama Fan, I've come to realize, you really are trying to understand and do have the knack for listening - Thank you for returning my faith in human beings.

and from one PATRIOT FAN to ANOTHER - GO PAT'S - Big game - New Orleans is unbeaten and after the fiasco of reffing at the Indi - Pat game which totally pissed me off - it wasn't a pass interference and Kevin Faulk did get the down just past the 30 yd. line - so I am anxious and can't wait to scream at my TV again.

GO PAT'S

Sorry for interrupting the debate - continue on please.

Inadequate performance is self-evident

Good job, Killfile. Killfile's the man.

Dumb

@ Prophat

Greg - can you explain how you "earned" a line of credit.

You earn a line of credit by having good credit, paying bills on time or before time, have colateral worth something (Had to work for that to), have kept the same job for 25 years etc...

That's how you earn it.

Banks are really not giving out money, no matter what the White House says, unless your worth a few billion. Us thousandaires aren't worth their time right now.

@ DEBKI:

I am impressed and have totally changed my mind about you - After reading your posts with Obama Fan,

OF and I are total opposites in the political world, but have been friends for awhile. We debate against each other constantly, but stay civil, with a few jabs here and there.

See, I'm not so bad. Depends on my mood.

New Orleans is just a great team (Superbowl bound and winners, if they keep playing like that). PATS need to get the Defence back to the 2007 era.

I was dissapointed, but had a feeling it would work out the way it did.

Does everyone who voted for Obama so worried about having made the wrong decision that they have to continuously post these kind of threads about him being the best ever in order to reassure themselves that they made the right choice.

Who cares if Obama is the BEST or WORST President. He is the current president. Obama fans.... you havent failed if he is second or third or fourth best so why not give up comparing him to whatever republican you think he is better than.

Im just saying.

I'm glad Obama is having a great first year since we will be paying for it for the next 75 years. Well, that is if he stops spending today. All Obama has done is spend and has accomplished nothing what so ever.

Hey Greg

I turned the TV off at 11:30 with total disgust - Where the hell is our defense- Vrabel, my hero "Bruuuuuski" (I miss him) and how can you trade Richard Seymour - geez. You are right - bring back my 2007 Team - dang it. You got to love Wilfork's as big as he is, he can move like a ballerina (jokie-joke).

Well on with the President Obama crisis #1,560.

You earn a line of credit by having good credit, paying bills on time or before time, have colateral worth something (Had to work for that to), have kept the same job for 25 years etc...

That's how you earn it.

Banks are really not giving out money, no matter what the White House says, unless your worth a few billion. Us thousandaires aren't worth their time right now.

Just because you do all of the things you mentioned doesn't mean the bank owes you a HELC! I'm not aware of ANY bank that hands out loans just because of the things you mentioned? Why should they?

A HELC that has a $0 balance isn't making them any money, it doesn't make any business sense for them to keep those lines open...

Gee Prophat:

bank owes you a HELC

Where did I say they owed me? I specifically said I earned it, the bank agreed and gave it to me, although they cut me off at 24K. Noting bad on my part, "According to them", it's just the new policy.

I think 6% interest is making the Bank money. That's what I pay on my 70K line of credit. You don't get 70K worth of credit just because you are!

@ DEBKI:

Time to re-invent the defence for the PATS! I'm happy with the offense!

That's basically what you are saying greg, "I earned it" so basically you believe that they owe you that HELC, and are now beating them up for taking it from you.

6% does make the bank money, IF AND ONLY IF that money is being used. Do you have a 70K balance on your HELC? Probably not, so they took 46K from your HELC and loaned it elsewhere.

6% does make the bank money

What ?????????????????

Do you have a clue what interset payments are?

I will second that GREG!!! what the hell do you mean that the bank isn't making any money at 6% they have it on loan from the fed for .25%, that is a hell of a markup, don't you think???

WOW, it's clear that neither of you read and comprehended my comment!

Like I said, the bank does make money at 6%. However, they don't make money on a line of credit UNLESS you are actually using the funds they have set aside for you.

I'll break the numbers down for you, since neither of you seem to get it.

First we will calculate the bank's total potential profit on that money.

1. greg's total HELC amount = $70,000

2. Simple interest on $70,000 at 6% for 1 year = $4200

3. $4200 is the total the bank would make per year on a $70,000 loan at 6%.

Now, let's calculate their actual profit.

1. greg's amount used from his HELC = $24,000

2. Simple interest on $24,000 at 6% for 1 year = $1,440

3. $1,440 is actual profit the bank is making per year on this $70,000 ($24,000 of that spent) loan at 6%.

That leaves us with $46,000, the amount leftover $70,000 - $24,000.

Now, let's calculate their lost profit.

1. Simple interest on $46,000 at 6% for 1 year = $2,760. The same as $4,200 (potential profit) - $1,440 (actual profit).

Therefore the bank isn't making even half of what they could on that money they loaned to greg! So they pulled that $46K from greg and gave it to somebody that will actually spend it so the bank can make the 6%!

3. $1,440 is actual profit the bank is making per year on this $70,000 ($24,000 of that spent) loan at 6%.

Profits Profit, and I had a contract on the 70K. (Read, Contract)

I have other clients who have been cut off, and these folks are million dollar developers with great credit.

So where did mine and the others money go?

If I went back on a signed contract, I'd be in court, being sued.

No where in the contract does it say "If you don't use the money, we can take it from you".

That's a completely different argument than the bank making money on that money at 6%!

If I went back on a signed contract, I'd be in court, being sued.

So take them to court, if you think they violated your contract.

No where in the contract does it say "If you don't use the money, we can take it from you".

You probably won't find verbage similar to that, but I'd be willing to bet that they had a legal means to terminate the contract.

So, based on your comment, The clients I have, and count on for my business, that had their lines of credit stopped, were all stopped because it must have been for legal reasons?

Pretty coincidental don't you think?

Many large banks, including Bank of America (BAC: 15.90, +0.05, +0.31%), Citigroup's (C: 4.10, -0.01, -0.24%) Citibank, J.P. Morgan Chase (JPM: 42.22, -0.27, -0.63%), Countrywide (CFC) and Washington Mutual (WM: 33.20, +0.36, +1.09%), have confirmed that they're reviewing HELOCs and are either decreasing available lines or closing them altogether. To determine which HELOCs to suspend, lenders are using monitoring systems that flag accounts in areas where home values have dropped significantly.

My line of credit was based on my paid for home. Values have dropped, but even the new standards for home evaluation don't even come close to my line of credit. The value is way more than the credit line. I use this, as a small business owner, for capital and emergencies and always pay on time. Of course, the bank won't let me pay ahead of time, to save some month's, when I have the money to do so.

Where is this great jump start Obama is praised for. I know, it's with the billion dollar companies.

OC- Outlawig private ownership of gold was just ONE of the many ways FDR screwed over the American citizen. Foisting off SSI, Welfare, and the entire entitlement mindset of today's Americans is even worse. But that is why he is the Democrat icon he is. And I will bet that in 25 years, we will see him get credit for saving America from SOMETHING, no matter what the final outcome of this recession actually turns out to be. FDR never saved us from anything but freedom from ridiculous taxation, and personal freedoms (GCA 1938 is just one example). To me, being compared to him is no better than being compared to Stalin, Mao, or Castro.

So, based on your comment, The clients I have, and count on for my business, that had their lines of credit stopped, were all stopped because it must have been for legal reasons?

No greg, that's not what I said. Here's my comment again for you.

You probably won't find verbage similar to that, but I'd be willing to bet that they had a legal means to terminate the contract.

Meaning that they could terminate the contract they had with you legally - without penalty.

Killfile - WOW - talk about jumping to conclusions and making assumptions!

I never said that we need to (or that we should) dismiss his opinion. I was simply pointing out who this author is, just like the left does with Fox News, Coulter, Malkin, Hannity, Limbaugh, etc. The reason I had to point out this author is because he is an unknown compared to the people that you listed in your post.

I said, "Wow, a liberal journalist (and friend of John Kerry) praising Pres. Obama." next time you quote me, at least get it right.

What the left does is point to Rush's, Hannity's, Beck's, etc arguments in an attempt to discredit them.

It's clear that you haven't read any of the seeds regarding, Rush, etc. If you have, you would know that your buddies on the left do nothing but attack Rush personally.

I bet the farm that the personal attack posts outnumber the honest debate of ideas posts by 5 or 6 to 1!!!

And all I did was point out this seed's political beliefs and ONE association! Hardly a personal attack on the man!

No, I despise Limbaugh, not for the fact that he's on the right, but for his blatant bias and determination to foment divisiveness for no reason other than to increase his bankroll. He's a radio show host. For all the glorification he gets, he's a radio entertainer. And he only deserves my respect insofar as he earns it.

There's a good example of a personal attack for you killfile. "but for his blatant bias and determination to foment divisiveness for no reason other than to increase his bankroll". He is not arguing Rush's points, he blasts him for his "blatant bias" and "to increase his bankroll". Do you listen to Rush? If you have, you would have heard him beat up Pres. Bush and the Republicans on many occasions.

"I despise Limbaugh"

Why the hatred paul? Isn't that a little harsh for a man you've probably never met, probably never will, and probably don't even listen to on a regular basis?

Why is the left so full of hatred all the time?

interesting how the right has latched onto the word "hatred" and upchucks it every time someone disagrees with them.

I don't hate Rush. I despise him. I said what I meant. And I don't care which side he's going after. And it's for the reasons I stated.

"...for his blatant bias and determination to foment divisiveness for no reason other than to increase his bankroll."

I apologize for not reading beyond the headline, I had a major laughing episode & couldn't see for the tears.

I don't hate Rush. I despise him. I said what I meant. And I don't care which side he's going after. And it's for the reasons I stated.

Gotta love it when Liberals start creating their own definitions of words!!!

Sorry to be the one to tell you paul, but hate is synonymous with despise. Here are two links for your reference. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/despise, http://www.dict.org/bin/Dict?Form=Dict2&Database=*&Query=despise

interesting how the right has latched onto the word "hatred" and upchucks it every time someone disagrees with them.

Really paul, did you read your own post?

I despise Limbaugh, not for the fact that he's on the right, but for his blatant bias and determination to foment divisiveness for no reason other than to increase his bankroll.

No competent writer would ever use the two interchangeably. You may use them as you wish.

Yes I did read it. I didn't use the word "hate". Only my critics did.

It's only been in the last six months or so that suddenly, in a purely defensive response, the far right has started spitting "hate!" every time someone disagrees with them. It's actually sadly entertaining and indicative of the darkness inhabiting the soul of the faction. I will heave a sigh of heavy relief when the Republican party is rescued from the fringes by reasonable people with well informed and civil political interests. I may even re-join them.

There is no equivalency to Limbaugh saying "Take that bone out of your nose and call me back" and me saying "I despise Limbaugh for his blatant bias and determination to foment divisiveness for no reason other than to increase his bankroll."

No competent writer would ever use the two interchangeably. You may use them as you wish.

Yes I did read it. I didn't use the word "hate". Only my critics did.

paul, a competent writer would review the dictionary before making a statement like yours above. It's clear that they have a similar meaning.

It's only been in the last six months or so that suddenly, in a purely defensive response, the far right has started spitting "hate!" every time someone disagrees with them.

That statement is disingenuous at best. I haven't heard any Republicans say that somebody hates them because they disagree with Republican policies. On the other hand, the Democrats have called ANYBODY that disagrees with Pres. Obama's policies a racist and hate monger.

There is no equivalency to Limbaugh saying "Take that bone out of your nose and call me back" and me saying "I despise Limbaugh for his blatant bias and determination to foment divisiveness for no reason other than to increase his bankroll."

You are right, one was a joke, and one is hateful.

Limbaugh's statement was a joke (admittedly a racist one). So the question is, does telling a racist joke make a personal hateful? No.

Your comment on the other hand is one of hate. Does a comment like, "I despise whomever" make a person hateful? Yes.

"Does telling a racist joke make a personal hateful? No."

I know you can't see it, but YOU are the problem. It runs so deep in the fibre of your being that you are incapable of discerning between the many colors of hatred, and "humour".

We will never change each others' minds.

Killfile, just because someone opposes Obama's policies does not make them a "doomsayer". Grow up.

it's easy to say @!$%# with zero facts to back you up.

IF the gop are elected they will force dog owners to become cat owners and then look out somalia here we come.

Tell me vicki of midland michigan.. how much have the dems spent this year.
when did the fiscal year start? how much was spent between then and when obama took over?
Is the government taking over health care or are they going to pay for 6 million of the most poor leaving 41 million without coverage?
Is healthcare being paid for or at least being attempted to be paid for?
Do you remember bush trying to pay for medicare plan d? do you remember bush trying to pay for no child left behind? do you remember bush trying to pay for the wars?

How come the dems who actually made a law that you have to find a way to pay for everything you enact.. are called bad with money.
where the gop who removed that same law.. so that they could enact huge govermnet programs and instead of paying for them.. give everyone a tax cut on top of it.. are called fiscally smart by people like you?

Do you think we can add new services and give everyone a tax cut at the same time.. every time?
it's kinda liek buying a new car and exprecting th edealership to pay you the monthly payments rather than the other way arround.

wake up turn off beck and learn something.

obama hasnt spent @!$%#.
the dems have paygo and will pay for all non emergency bills.. unliek the gop whoes goal was to bankrupt the fed.. in their quest for states rights. by enacting huge programs that had no funding and giving away all the surplus and removing paygo.

Killfile, just because someone opposes Obama's policies does not make them a "doomsayer". Grow up.

No, but leaping over every other industrialized nation in the world to get to the USSR status, does make you one.

Or is there some magical community chest card we dont know about?

You know the one that health care reform pulls? The one that doesn't let us pass GO or collect $200 before we go directly to communism?

I might ask why republicans thought stopping it would break Obama? Apparently they thought it was important.

we tried to fix health care in 1996.. yall fought it with the same nonsence.. yall claimed that the free market would fix it.. yall had the government for 12 years.
premiums have doubled.. putting a huge strain on the middle class.
60% of all bankrupcies are from health issues
(THIS IS ONE HUGE REASON WE ARE IN A HUGE RECESSION)
but hey you like recessions right.

if we keep status quo.. health care premiums are set to double again in less than 10 years.
the middle class can NOT afford that.

we will end up with 100 million uninsured.. and the only insured will be the people that could afford their own healthcare without insurace.

OH all that and medicare will bankrupt us unless we get rid of medicare of bring down the high costs of heatlh care.

reddirthippy

I might ask why republicans thought stopping it would break Obama?

Who knows? Obama has demonstrated he's quite capable of breaking himself. Just let him do his thing.

JoulesBeef

we tried to fix health care in 1996.. yall fought it with the same nonsence.. yall claimed that the free market would fix it.. yall had the government for 12 years.
premiums have doubled.. putting a huge strain on the middle class.
60% of all bankrupcies are from health issues
(THIS IS ONE HUGE REASON WE ARE IN A HUGE RECESSION)
but hey you like recessions right.

if we keep status quo.. health care premiums are set to double again in less than 10 years.
the middle class can NOT afford that.

we will end up with 100 million uninsured.. and the only insured will be the people that could afford their own healthcare without insurace.

OH all that and medicare will bankrupt us unless we get rid of medicare of bring down the high costs of heatlh care.

"it's easy to say @!$%# with zero facts to back you up."

Texasguy01

Why is a National Health System so important?

As a conservative who disagrees with the FDR and Obama worshippers (yes, I worship Jesus) I will take a genuine stab at answering your question and I have seen no one in the media articulate it; I believe that the answer is here:

FDR and his cadre of envelope-pushing, Ivy, think-tankers entered Government as idealists seeking to go where their similar professors had pointed them. In one sense, you could call it an unrealized "dream." [I will be pleased to illustrate how it does not conform to Jesus' teachings whenever it is not voluntary and originate from the individual's heart].

But I am describing secular idealists/humanists who reject the intent of the Declaration's phrase "pursuit of happiness." These dreamers want outcomes pre-determined. They reject the concept of blind justice (like to have the statue and judges "peeking") and level playing fields at any point in America's history.

These foundational "dreamers," armed with their unrealized dream for universal happiness as determined by law and compulsory income redistribution, issued forth dreamers who also became professors and teachers - some would say indoctrinators of FDR's dream; others would say disciples of a man.

The New Deal made its mark, but failed to realize the "dream."

The proponants wanted the Great Society to embody and fulfill the "dream." It too made its mark, but fell short.

Daniel Patrick Moynihan turned on the crowd of dreamers by coldly illustrating how generations of dependent families had become "hooked" on the welfare system and he was perceived by some of the "dreamers" as one who was endangering the fulfillment of "the dream."

So there has been an unspoken undercurrent regarding "the dream" and every jot written against it is perceived as threatening what the "dreamers" are hoping to be the dream's fulfillment. Using 1932 as the start date ( the Profs. at the Ivys were probably all over "the dream" long before 1932; arguably it's part of Post-Modernism thought - the aspect of mandates through compulsory income redistribution to accomplish do-good-ism) some of the people on the Hill have been nurtured in "the dream" environment for three or more generations. They currently see it as the brass ring and they are getting very close - especially after the "dream" was dashed in 1993. Those "dreamers" want their moment to recall all the people from their past that instilled and cultivated the "dream."

While FDR is collectively given the mantle for originating "the dream," it is probably traced back to earlier thinkers who put ideas into the heads of students and they graduated and became FDR's "brain trust."

This may be an answer that even the other side may confess to; proudly, of course.

From "The Epic of America" James T. Adams 1931 where the phrase The American Dream is believed to have originated

"that dream of a land in which life should be better and richer and fuller for everyone, with opportunity for each according to ability or achievement. It is a difficult dream for the European upper classes to interpret adequately, and too many of us ourselves have grown weary and mistrustful of it. It is not a dream of motor cars and high wages merely, but a dream of social order in which each man and each woman shall be able to attain to the fullest stature of which they are innately capable, and be recognized by others for what they are, regardless of the fortuitous circumstances of birth or position."

Brandon,

Thank you, the reference you provided was not in my consciousness, but I may have read it long ago.

I was writing about the "dream" of compulsory, universal health care, accomplished through laws and income redistribution in a way that borrowed from Dr. King's "Dream" which was given birth on an August day in 1963 at the Lincoln Memorial.

The FDR "dream" would pre-date King's and be distinctly different from King's.

Just as thousands of people today want to keep King's "dream" alive, untarnished, moving towards complete fulfillment - and they fear backsliding and anything that would get in its way...so to large quantities of people bring similar levels of "worship" to FDR and the unmet dream for forced universal health care.

Thank you!

you dont have any proof at all for anything you just said.
Obama hasnt spent @!$%# .
Bush had more czars than obama.. i really usggest you quit getting news from glenn beck.

no seriously list out obamas spending.. in jan 20th we had a deficit of 1.2 trillion. left by bush.(check the dates)
sept 30th was the end of fiscal year 2009.
we were 1.4 trillion in deficit.
DO the math,
'

is it too much to ask to base your anger on reality.. link to real numbers please.. or stop being so upset at imaginary things.

amazing yall didnt squeak when the gop got rid of paygo and chenney said deficits dont matter as yall got rid of the surplus and turned it into debt. Only after they left office suddenly every conservative never really liked bush ever.. he spent too much liek a liberal and they were all really upset the entire time.. it was just hard to tell while they were singing bush;s praises for 8 years.

I love how people know so little about political realities.

I love how people know so little about political realities.

You must be speaking of yourself based on your comments on this thread!

OBAMA-FAN

Hey Obama bootlicker. Here's a little clue for you. Watch the stock market. It's been going up since March in a bear market rally. In case you don't know what that term means, it's a countertrend move within a larger one, namely the Bear Market From Hell, which began in late 2007.

When the market starts to head down again, that's your clue that the economy will start imploding again, and it won't be just a few banks and automakers this time.

What, pray tell will your savior do to "help" the U.S. then?

Mister harrison.. care for some links.
you will notice the right hyperventilates but hardly ever links.. cause then they would have to back up theri bull@!$%#.

LOL rickace.. first yall blame the stockmarket drop on obama before he took office.. and now you say the rise is fake. and remembe rthis info is coming from the party that said the recession was all in our minds and that we were a nation of whiners.. now suddenly they know the market is in a bear market rally. same peopel that said deriviatives did not need regulating and warran buffet was an idiot for calling them economic wmds.. but this good dow is all fake..

SO rickace.. UE tends to lag behind economic recovery by 2-3 quarters.
If UE started to impove before 2010.. WTF WILL YOU DO THEN? WIll you actually say obama did a good job?
I suspect you will claim the jobs came back as a delayed effect from bush;'s tax cuts.. much like yall tried to claim the clinton surplus really came from reagans tax cuts despite they actually gave us record deficits.

So will you quit calling obam the devil and the messiah if UE improves next year?

OBAMA-FAN,

There are no 'facts' that the economy is recovering. GDP numbers, especially ones heavily manipulated by the Gov't have very little correlation to the actual strength of the economy.

The facts are, the economy has started to recover.

Here's a fact for you Mr. Obama Worshipper:

On Inauguration Day, the Debt stood at $10.626 trillion. The latest posting from the Treasury Department shows that as of July 31st, the debt hit $11.669 trillion. During the last administration, it took over 2 ½ years for the National Debt to increase a trillion dollars.

SOURCE:http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/08/03/politics/politicalhotsheet/entry5209497.shtml

FACT................DEAL WITH IT

There are no 'facts' that the economy is recovering. GDP numbers, especially ones heavily manipulated by the Gov't have very little correlation to the actual strength of the economy.

If you're not even willing to consider the evidence in the first place, you might as well be the ranting lunatic on the street corner.

rickace, i'm assuming you are a billionaire since you can predict the future

Those numbers you posted are vague,

Are you mentally retarted or simply in that much denial that you refuse to accept the truth for what it is.

The numbers I posted are from a CBS News Story. The national debt increased by a trillion dollars cfrom the day Obama was inaugurated unitl July 31st, if you have a @!$%#ing problem digesting that, try some Mylanta.

FACT: Obama spent a TRILLION DOLLARS PLUS in the first 6 months of his presidency and I don't give a rat's ass if you don't like it or not, facts are facts, something you're obviously unfamiliar with kid.

Dylan,

Why do i feel like i spend half the time I'm on the Vine correcting your comments???

The article shows that over a trillion was spend during the Obama administration. FACT! What it doesn't say is that the $410 Billion Bush Omnibus bill is tagged to Obama even though he had nothing to do with it!! It also does not mention that it includes the $700 bail out bill that Bush signed in October of 2008! Obama spent $350 billion of that. $350 billion was spent by bush! Then there's the stimulus bill which $109 billion has yet to be spent! GENIUS!! Try understanding the facts you post! I am proud of you though for finally posting facts, even if your ignorance still overshadows them!

Sog,

Evidence(or lack there of), is all that I am considering. If you have some evidence that I am unaware of, I would be very interested in knowing what it is.

Obama BOY

Do you understand what the letters F.O. mean?

You couldn't correct me if you had a PhD.

Now go lay by your dish.........................

So, CBS news or not, Dylan, that's still a giant pile of bull@!$%# you're shoveling over there.

Take it up with CBS News Killfile, all I did was post a story I copied directly from their website.

While your at it, as the moderator of this thread, it would be appreciated if you would admonish Obama Fan to cease with attacks like the one in #6.8, to wit:

IDIOTS OF A FEATHER

No need for that type of @!$%#, agreed? This kid instigattes alot and never gets called for it although those who respond in kind do.

If he wants to have a discussion fine, but the fact remains that his attitude is condescending at best and he brings alot of attacks upon himself with his bull@!$%#, or can you justify for me allowing him to call other vincers idiots on your thread?

Dylan,

Why are you crying???? Geezz!!!

Yours & Rick's words, right?

Mr. Obama Worshipper:

Hey Obama bootlicker.

If you can't take it, don't dish it, and certainly do not go crying to the seeder. That's just sad, especially after posting the following in your comment:

Obama BOY

Do you understand what the letters F.O. mean?

LOL

If he wants to have a discussion fine

You've never been able to have a discussion, which is why i don;t understand for the life of me why you would respond to my comments! if i bother you so much, leave me alone! Don't start something and go hide behind the seeder!

Oh I can take it alright, but YOU are the one who started it and I simply want to make sure what's good for the goose is good for the gander. However, take caution in what you wish for youngster, you just might get it......................

Obama signed the $787 billion stimulus package Feb. 17 in Denver. It was not in Bush's 2009 budget.

YOU are the one who started it

Fine, then I'm ending it!!

Killfile,

Dylan has a point

Obama-Fan, respect the COH.

I never disrepected the COH, but you feel a need to appease this guy, go right ahead!

Not a problem. I won't cry about it like some people! LOL

Again, great seed.

Amen

Actually, he has probably already exceeded that number. The formula for calculating the unemployment rate has changed dramatically since FDR. Currently, the formula does not consider people that were dropped from the unemployment compensation rolls as being unemployed, despite not having a job. Find out that number and a few other items that aren't used in the calculation, then you will get the real unemployment rate.

[yawn]

robyn,

do you really want to go there with me? Seriously? Read my comments on this thread then you decide! If you want to debate the topic, say something a little more substantive that your previous post! If not, move on and stop trolling!

OF, trust me I've read all I can stomach. obama's spending is out of control. He's only been in office 11 months.

I can somewhat understand the healthcare bill, something needs to change.

But cap n trade is complete bullsh**.

obama, pelosi, and reid are "idots of a feather" (to coin OF's phrase) and anyone who blindly follows and believes them is the same.

And tell me again how many jobs obama created...oopps, I mean saved? He keeps backpedaling it's hard to keep up.

[yawn]

Is this what you call substansive? *more laughter*

Killfile:

I'm simply getting a kick from all the comments from your feed!

Great time!

BTW - might need to distribute boxing gloves next time!

WHEW

Robyn,

But cap n trade is complete bullsh**.

Please forgive my ignorance, but exactly how much money has Obama spent on Cap & Trade thus far???? Saying Obama's spending is "out of control" is a talking point! Can you list what Obama has spent money on? Can you factually discuss Obama's spending, and what has been charged to his administration??

obama, pelosi, and reid are "idots of a feather" (to coin OF's phrase) and anyone who blindly follows and believes them is the same.

I don't think there is a person in this country that blindly follows any of them! There are many who are ignorant to politics and the implementation of policies, but no one blindly follows them! You think, because I agree with the presidents policies that i blindly follow him, and that's a ridiculous assumption!

And tell me again how many jobs obama created...oopps, I mean saved? He keeps backpedaling it's hard to keep up.

As soon as you give me the job creation numbers for every president in their first 10 months! See the problem here is you think you know, but you don't know! Obama said the stim would create and save 3.5 million jobs over 2 years!

The official benchmark estimates from the White House: 3.5 million jobs will be created or saved over the next two years, and over 90% of them will be in the private sector. (See the White House's state-by-state estimates of how many jobs could be created or saved in the map at right.)

Why you are complaining 10 months later is beyond me! Holding someone accountable for something they never promise is not so smart!

Is this what you call substansive? *more laughter*

No, but it was an appropriate response to the originating comment!

robynlewisTX, please respect the COH.

Does the same go Obama-Fan?

Does the same go Obama-Fan?

LOL...How about worrying about your own backyard! Point out where I didn't respect the COH (unprovoked), or just move on!!

LOL...How about worrying about your own backyard! Point out where I didn't respect the COH (unprovoked), or just move on!!

How about minding your own business.......................and provoked, unprovoked or otherwise, respecting the code of honor is respecting the code of honor.

How about minding your own business

Keep my name out of your comments and it will no longer be my business!

chorvat

when it comes down to it, we really cant judge about the first year of this term

Really now? He already established a horrible track record in his first six months.

just like i go about my work, if your going to do something, do it right the first time

With this administration and Congress, you can bet it will be done wrong the first time. On a grand scale no less.

except putting yourself to sleep.

No your comments do that for me!

Dennis P. McCann

complain about the guy who's fixing his mess.

Obama's not "fixing" anything. He's bollixing up just about everything he can as quickly as he can.

I'll just sit back and watch the economy recover and Americans finally get health care.

That's a Disney pipe dream. First, the economy is still laden with excesses and pitfalls, most of which don't make it to the MSM because they're "gloom and doom", which turns off audiences and hurts advertising revenue. The credit bubble inflated during the Greenspan era has far more to go before it deflates, and the consequences to credit markets will only get worse. The arcane market in credit default swaps that burned AIG to the tune of tens of billions of dollars remains another accident waiting to happen.

Regarding health care, Congress has never undertaken a step of this magnitude since perhaps the FDR era, and can't possibly be expected to succeed on a wing and a prayer becuase they have no grasp of the unintended consequences. No one ever dares to pose the question, "What if the feds deploy their plan and things get worse?" Like Rep. Tom Price envisions in this short video, Americans will have access to an ability to get in line. When people can't get to see their physicians in time for urgent care, suffering will only increase. The worst cases could even die.

And I'll smile the whole time.

I won't be joining you.

So... What do all those numbers mean?

It means the US Government will spend about $10,800 dollars per citizen this year to pay for your military, primary education, roads, disaster relief...

($3.55 trillion/330 million citizens)

that 105 billion other...is that where they Bribe democrats on the fence on the healthcare issueit clear that the last administration was bad on spending but this is nothing compared to Obama

Umm Billy, that is Obama's budget for this fiscal year. And the "Other" probably includes payments to countries such as Israel, Mexico, Canada etc...

Canadian Dave

Hey Wingnuts

Hey Mr. Talking Points!

We keep hearing you criticize the stimulus

Yes, and we have the facts to prove that it's panning out to be a miserable failure. Obama's already got his Washington spin machine bull@!$%#ting the public about how many jobs were created or saved. That's no surprise of course, as it was brought to us by the same Chicken Little Congress that engaged in fearmongering ("too big to fail" and "systemic risk") to get that epic turd called TARP enacted. What an expensive turkey THAT turned out to be.

and whine about the unemployment numbers.

I don't whine. I'm unemployed and I deal with it like a man.

But what would YOU have done to stabilize and then re-energize the economy?

There's nothing that could have been done. The economy is as President Bush once described a house of cards. It's going to crumble under its own weight whether the feds act or sit on their hands.

It will dawn on you one day that the government isn't your fairy godmother. There are some problems it just can't cope with. A depression is one of them.

You think that a Stimulus that gives the money DIRECTLY TO BIG BUSINESS is better than a Stimulus that REDUCES the amount the COMMON person has to pay the government in taxes? I'm sorry, but I'd rather see the money in the hands of the CONSUMER (read TAXPAYER) than in the hands of a business that won't really put it in the areas that need it most: The general buying and selling of goods and services. A BIG Corporation, like AIG and GM, usually can buy and sell goods and services from itself. That means that there is really no net stimulus to the general economy, which is what EVERYONE looks at to determine how healthy a country is.

rickace - So...YOU would have done NOTHING. Yeah, that would probably be the wingnut way. After all, disciples of the party of "no" can be counted on to do "no"thing.

Canadian Dave

rickace - So...YOU would have done NOTHING.

How did you ever earn two degrees from U of M without learning to read for comprehension and thinking critically? All I said what that there's nothing that could have been done. From that you can infer nothing about what I'd have advocated.

Yeah, that would probably be the wingnut way. After all, disciples of the party of "no" can be counted on to do "no"thing.

I see you've mastered the left-wing slurs (wingnut) and talking points (the party of "no"). Unfortunately that's about 2nd grade level and you'd need to be at least a high school junior to debate me.

I suggest you argue with a anvil. You can trot out all those kiddie slurs and talking points to demean Republicans, conservatives, and anyone else you detest and the anvil will listen patiently without making even one objection.

Me, I'm not fond of lowbrow bigoted speech so welcome to my ignore list.

rickace -

...so welcome to my ignore list.

Oh, my broken heart!

We were not at war during the Great Depression. WWII didn't come along until FDR's third term as pres.

And your point being?

My point is that the FDR administration's New Deal plan was under way and the US was well on its way to better times when WWII started. In affect that stimulus was working but the results of which are complicated because of WWII's impact on the economy.

The TARP and ARRA are very similar to New Deal ideas. They just need time to work.

By what standard do you consider that FDR's stimulus was working? After 9 years of stimulus(12 if you count the 3 years Hoover threw money at the problem), unemployment was still double digits at the time we entered the war.

FDR's stimulus prolonged the liquidation necessary to restructure the economy, just as the Bush bailouts and the Obama stimulus are currently prolonging the liquidation necessary for the current economy to restructure.

Yes unemployment was at double digits (14%) when the war began. But that was down from 25% in 1933. It went down to 14% in 1937 but rose to 19% in 1938.

The rise in '38 is attributed to the government spending decreases forced by the republicans. FDR decided to ignore repubs, and spent money, sending unemployment down again.

Killfile,

Yes Killfile, 34% unemployment is worse than 11%(I have no idea where the 34% is coming from). And 34% unemployment is also worse than 20%, and 30%, and 33%, and every number in between. So I guess as long as unemployment stays below - say 54% then we are in the lower 50% of the 'double digits' so it's all good. After all, it's only a number, right?

Brandon,

Yes unemployment was at double digits (14%) when the war began. But that was down from 25% in 1933. It went down to 14% in 1937 but rose to 19% in 1938.

Much of the decline in unemployment in 1935 and 1936 can be attributed to the SCOTUS outlawing NRA(National Recovery Administration) and AAA(Agricultural Adjustment Act). Voidance of the NRA immediately reduced labor costs and raised productivity as it permitted labor markets to adjust. The death of AAA reduced the tax burden of agriculture and halted the shocking destruction of crops.

The rise in '38 is attributed to the government spending decreases forced by the republicans.

Only by people who are fans of Keynesian Theory. Others would consider that the Wagner Act, and the Undistributed Profits Tax of 1936 played an important role.

Only by people who are fans of Keynesian Theory. Others would consider that the Wagner Act, and the Undistributed Profits Tax of 1936 played an important role.

Yes, the "others" being business owners whose production was up but profits were not growing at same rate.

Lets just call it equal, because in the end with both New Deal legislation and Republican fight back, the US came out OK. I'll let the economists who have been arguing over that era for years figure it all out.

So, lets get our sides to sit down at the table and figure this eras problems out.

Yes, Presidink Obama, we all love the butt screwing you're giving us and America.