Reply - more liberal fail
Posted By: me on 2009-04-17
In Reply to: Small, harmless example - AR
Actually Cavuto didn't say Fox News. He said Fox.
Murdock and Fox have been in the business since 1985.
http://www.riehlworldview.com/carnivorous_conservative/2009/04/tea-party-more-liberal-fail.html
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
If the Big 3 fail........... Or the Big 2.... sm
I guess it should technically be called as Ford isn't asking for any money right now, then when the March deadline approaches and they are not able to show a viable plan to the White House, I guess it could be considered a bailout which will only end up postponing the inevitable and costing the tax payers money. In my opinion, there is really no difference.
It never goes to fail
If there is something negative about a democrat the dems always blame "the right wing" or "that reporter is a conservative", but the left wing media trashes a republican and that's okay. The dems say "oh he's just a reporter giving his insight".
This one sidedness is so unfair and quite nauseating.
The so called liberal media is not so liberal anymore...sm
Case and point Fox News is the #1 media outlet via ratings and hardhitting conservative anchors, pundits, and journalists. Other than Hardball, I don't know of another mainstream show that puts the liberal point of view out there and checks this administration and their policies.
liberal hit piece by a liberal deep thinker....
x
LOL....I think I would fail on all counts (sm)
as well as on grammar and my inability to multitask. I was talking on the phone when I wrote that last post, looked back at it after I posted it and was astounded. LOL 
What you fail to realize.....
is our leaders need to have private jets and helicopters (the helicopters, btw, were ordered by W) for their own protection. They have to fly more than one or with a squadron for protection. When they drive, it is a squadron of identical vehicles, so no one can identify which vehicle the govt personnel is riding in. We need to heal the wounds with our allies that W created. "Yur either with us or against us!" What cowboy horsesh*t. We need to restore some class to our govt - because of the crude, retarded way things were handled for the last 8 years.
That being said, what they fail to remember is this.....
Most of these programs are only going to be good for something like 2 years. So a state goes ahead and takes advantage of this money. Yea!!! New jobs are created, new beurocracies are created to administer these new jobs. Then POOF....all gone, bye-bye. So now you have a program that is no longer any good. But you still have to jump through the hoops because you took the bait (money) and ran with it.
And everybody knows that once something is put in place by a gov't body, any gov't body, it never goes away. It just lingers around for the rest of our lives.
And for what it is worth, our governor here in MI said that any states that don't want their stimulus money can give it to us. We'll put it to good use.
I fail to see how trickle up would work any better....sm
A lot of people I know who got their stimulus checks used it to pay their bills, put gas in their car, and buy a few groceries...and if there's any left, stuff it in their mattress for a rainy day (which is probably next week or next month).
Please explain to us how trickle up is going to work. I don't see how that chicken is going to stimulate the economy much at all.
You fail to mention the fact.......
that the dems aren't going after the Bush administration for war crimes - proven war crimes. War crimes our country has executed people for in the past.
Geneva convention? What's that?
I too want Obama's policies to fail. If anyone...
listened to the whole interview with Rush they would understand what he was talking about. Don't want the country to fail, which is happening right now before our very eyes.
Conservative Spin Fail
Cavuto was directly addressing coverage by cable news organizations when he made those quotes, directly comparing Fox News to CNN and MSNBC. (Watch the video clips.)
And, unless they covered it on Married with Children or the X-Files, there was no "Fox" coverage of the Million Man March because the only news broadcasts on Fox at that time were provided by local affiliates from other networks,and that was at the discretion of individual stations. They did not have a national nightly news broadcast.
I see your point but you fail to see mine.
If we are reading stories to our 5 year old about a same-sex couple who raises a baby together....to me that suggests more than tolerance. That is teaching acceptance that that lifestyle is okay and that is something I cannot condone.
I believe in God but others don't. I would appreciate it if people would tolerate my religion as it is a part of me but they don't have to accept my religion. That is their decision. My faith and religion cannot be taught in schools or even on school property because it is a controversial subject nowadays and I have tolerated that and continue to keep my "preachings" out of public schools. I would appreciate it as well if public schools would keep the teaching and acceptance of homosexuality out of public schools as well.
GT you fail to realize that you are not the only person with an opinion
Bush positives:
Saddam is gone.
The Taliban and Al Queda for all intenstive purposes are neutered.
The economy is booming despite all the major hurricanes.
Employment is up dramatically.
The Iraqis have a constitution.
These are but just a few.
What are the democrats doing besides witch hunts? Nothing of value for the country. No plans, no answers, just fingerpointing.
Bush is far from inept in my humble opinion, but of course, you don't validate anyone's opinions but your own.
Agreed. Empires are doomed to fail.
nm
No, Duck, not made up, and you fail to miss my point...
I think the dems are missing a LOT of points with Obama's plans for us...
They did not cause the housing crisis. They did, however, fail acknowledge the problem
and they most certainly failed to tackle the problem in a timely and effective way.
One of the major factors in the housing crisis was the repeal of Glass-Steagall and the implementation of Graham-Bliley Act. The lack of oversight, the deregulation that allowed lenders to lend without being subject to oversight rules because the type of financial institution they were doomed us.
The Bush administration backed off proposed crackdowns on no-money-down, interest-only mortgages years before the economy collapsed, buckling to pressure from some of the same banks that have now failed. It ignored remarkably prescient warnings that foretold the financial meltdown, according to an Associated Press review of regulatory documents. "Expect fallout, expect foreclosures, expect horror stories," California mortgage lender Paris Welch wrote to U.S. regulators in January 2006, about one year before the housing implosion cost her a job.
I am not a fan of Frank, Dodd, or Pelosi. I am not a fan of TARP, especially because there was/is no built-in oversight or accountability. Shoot, the some of the same predatory lenders that were put out of business by their own practices are up and running again, passing out toxic loans to desperate people, because they managed to get their hands on bailout money.
You fail to note that the Army Corp of Engineers....
is a federal entity and it was THEIR job to fix the levies, too bad W cut all the funding so he could play Monopoly in Iraq.
Either side can fail to deliver on promises. My only hope and prayer is that
I'm honestly not 100% sure either one of these candidates can do it so where do people like me fit into the picture? I'm not even sure I will be able to vote for either one, and that's based on my personal values. I don't feel Barack is the man, like many seem to, but I don't feel McCain is, either. I know I'm not alone. I don't believe socialized insurance is the answer, I believe in going after insurance companies that dictate what patients can have done and set premiums too high for people to afford and pharmaceutical companies that pay people off to push their drugs, whether it be doctors, groups, etc. I'd like to see all with tax cuts, not just big companies. Wonderful if they get a break for keeping jobs in the US, but that should be just one of many tax cuts for all, starting with taxes paid at the pump. What about public education? We pay fees and still have to buy extra books and other supplies for our kids' education, yet many children are less educated now out of public high school than ever before because they are too focused on the proficiency tests to actually teach a well-rounded fund of knowledge, so what are the proposals to fix that mess?
No matter who gets elected, they've got quite a job on their hands, and I sincerely doubt either will be able to live up to their promises. And no, I don't necessarily blame Bush for all the problems in this country, but rather I blame all presidents and congress, past and present. Somewhere along the way, it stopped being for the people, that's for sure, and more for their pocketbooks (both Dems AND Repubs). Since so many seem to see Barack as the second coming, I certainly pray that you are right, but I really doubt it. He's had zero experience so who is to say he won't buckle under the load once he realizes what he's gotten into? And McCain isn't my idea of perfection, either, so don't reply by bashing Republicans. I want to hear facts that aren't based on party views but honest-to-goodness facts on who has the best plan in line for these things. And how do you know who is being sincere and who is just making empty campaign promises?
Nope. Liberally-biased media wont let him fail.
nm
Dunces in bathrobes...drink some more O juice...your boy wonder will fail; it has started....
//
you 'right-wings' just hope, wish and wait to see O fail and fall.
God bless Obama and give him strength and wisdom!
Reply
Any so-called knowledge can later prove to be wrong. There are very few absolutes in this world. I do know that the 1990s saw a dessimation in our human intelligence gathering. We need to get back to being good at that. If a threat is there, I'm not willing to wait until people die to do something about it. If you are, then I hope it's not one of my loved ones in the next airplane or subway or building. As for Al-Qaeda, there has been much damage done to that organization. Of course the news doesn't play that up very much, but it's happening. We're still looking for Bin Laden, we're still chasing Al-Qaeda, and we're planting a seed in the middle east that will hopefully someday (and it may take longer than your of my lifetime to accomplish) make a change in the middle east that will hopefully keep the horror of terrorism at least under control. We fought the Japanese, we fought the Nazis... I think we can handle Iraq and Al-Qaeda. As for N. Korea, you can't do anything there because they already HAVE the nukes. At least we can cross Iraq off the list for sure in the nuke department.
Thanks for the reply. (nm)
nm
Reply....
You missed my point also, because you are still harping on abortion "against God's will." No matter how many times I say it, you will not hear it, because it does not further your agenda to hear it.
I am not against abortion because it is against God's will. I am against abortion because it is murder, and it is murder of the most innocent life that exists. That is a deeply moral issue, and it does not stem from what or what is not God's will. You said you and God parted company a long time ago, but I am willing to bet your morality did not part and go with God...you kept it, right? Of course you did. Because we all have basic morality, whether or not you choose to believe in God. Belief in God validates and enhances that morality, but even those of you who do not believe in God have morals...right? Of COURSE you do. There are people who are NOT religious who oppose abortion on a strictly moral level. As that article said that I posted, if I lost my faith today, I would still morally oppose abortion. Yet it is more comfortable for you to claim that I am against abortion "in the name of God." I am against abortion because it is morally wrong. PERIOD.
Being pro choice does mean being pro abortion. If you vote for the right to choose, you are putting the okay stamp on it. You can spin it however you like, but the truth remains. It is your choice to do so, yes, but at least have the guts say so.
I have already said that I work toward supporting women who decide to make a choice for life. If they decide to go ahead with the abortion, they do not get condemnation from me, but they certainly know were I stand, and they also respect what I am doing and understand why I am doing it. Much unlike you ladies.
Again....try to let this sink into your closed mind. I am trying to give the CHILD a choice. The CHILD has no voice. You are taking that away from them. They have no recourse, no place to run, no place to hide. All they can do is endure being sliced and diced to have their brain sucked out. You want the MOTHER to have the choice, the voice, the power. I am merely saying that the CHILD deserves SOMETHING here, doesn't it? Doesn't something in your moral structure scream out to you that the CHILD deserves SOME consideration in all this?? That is where I and others like me come in. Because we believe the child DOES deserve consideration, DOES deserve to have a voice.
You say "I have intolerance for those who cannot take another's opinion or perception without tearing it down." Is that not EXACTLY what all your posts do to my opinions and perceptions? Including completely ignoring what I am actually saying and trying to put words in my mouth to suit your anti-God agenda.
You can't see the forest for the trees.
my reply
was meant in a humorous, light tone. Sorry you are so unhappy with current events.
reply
As far as who can accomplish all these goals -- a journey begins with a single step. Barack is willing to start the journey. McCain stubbornly refuses to change course. If he does not live up to his hopes - another election in 4 years.
Experience -- time and time again current events have proven Barack's thoughtfulness and judgment have proven true. Even the current administration is following the course for a time-table that Barack proposed so long ago.
I do not see Barack as a savior -- I see a fine man with a vision for our country that matches my own.
Reply...
THE FACTS: McCain's phrasing exaggerates both of these claims. Palin is governor of a state that ranks second nationally in crude oil production, but she's no more "responsible" for that resource than President Bush was when he was governor of Texas, another oil-producing state. In fact, her primary power is the ability to tax oil, which she did in concert with the Alaska Legislature. And where McCain called Alaska the largest state in America, he could as easily have called it the 47th largest state — by population.
MORE FACTS: She is responsible for negotiating any drilling of those resources. "Primary power" may be taxation, but she also has to oversee environmental issues, etc. She cracked the monopoly and forced oil companies to bid again, and she made a necessary portion of the bid that they address environmental issues. That was left out of the FACTS. While the population of the state may not be in proportion to the size of the state, her latest approval rating is 86%. That is unheard of. None of the other candidates enjoy that as senators from their respective states. That was also left out of the FACTS.
THE FACTS: While governors are in charge of their state guard units, that authority ends whenever those units are called to actual military service. When guard units are deployed to Iraq or Afghanistan, for example, they assume those duties under "federal status," which means they report to the Defense Department, not their governors. Alaska's national guard units have a total of about 4,200 personnel, among the smallest of state guard organizations.
MORE FACTS: When the National Guard is called up within a state, the governor does have the primary responsibility of mobilization and oversight. Since she is 50 miles from Russia, having control of the National Guard in that state is certainly central to our national security. And the operative word is AFTER the unit is deployed. Making the decision to call them up and send them to war IS her decision, and DOES affect national security.
THE FACTS: A Back-to-the-Future moment. George W. Bush, a conservative Republican, has been president for nearly eight years. And until last year, Republicans controlled Congress. Only since January of 2007 have Democrats have been in charge of the House and Senate.
MORE FACTS: This is true. But if Democrats truly believe in hope and change, they have had since January to actually do it. Have seen zip, zilch, nada. Got news for you...Bush is not a true conservative, especially fiscally obviously. McCain is.
THE FACTS: It's true that Obama voted "present" dozens of times, among the thousands of votes he cast in an eight-year span in Springfield. Illinois lawmakers commonly vote that way on a variety of issues for technical, legal or strategic reasons. Obama, for instance, voted "present" on some abortion measures to encourage wavering legislators to do the same instead of voting "yes." Their "present" votes had the same effect as "no" votes and helped defeat the bills. Voting this way also can be a way to duck a difficult issue, although that's difficult to prove.
MORE FACTS: Nice spin. He still voted "present." If he can't make a decision on those bills, he is going to be able to make the big ones to run the country? You can't vote present in the oval office. However, he did show up to vote NO to the Infants Born Alive act...twice.
THE FACTS: The Tax Policy Center, a think tank run jointly by the Brookings Institution and the Urban Institute, concluded that Obama's plan would increase after-tax income for middle-income taxpayers by about 5 percent by 2012, or nearly $2,200 annually. McCain's plan, which cuts taxes across all income levels, would raise after tax-income for middle-income taxpayers by 3 percent, the center concluded.
Obama would provide $80 billion in tax breaks, mainly for poor workers and the elderly, including tripling the Earned Income Tax Credit for minimum-wage workers and higher credits for larger families.
He also would raise income taxes, capital gains and dividend taxes on the wealthiest. He would raise payroll taxes on taxpayers with incomes over $250,000, and he would raise corporate taxes. Small businesses that make more than $250,000 a year would see taxes rise.
MORE FACTS: Look at this and digest it. First paragraph...Obama's plan will raise income for middle income taxpayers by 5% by 2012...he does not define "middle class." McCain's plan is going to CUT taxes across all levels and still raise the "middle income" by 3%. I think I will take the tax cut and the 3%. No brainer.
Obama wants to provide 80 billion in tax breaks to people who already pay almost 0 taxes. Where, pray tell, is that $80 billion going to come from?? Taxing the "rich" which will trickle down to loss of jobs and depression of the economy. Won't work. Never works. Case in point..small businesses that make more than $250,000 would see taxes rise. That is about every small family business in this country, who employ a lot of people. Just throw them all under the bus in order to cut taxes for people who pay the least taxes of all of us ANYWAY.
NO THANKS.
Reply
You know what truly amazes me? EVERYONE srcutinizes Obama for EVERY LITTLE THING from the b/c issue to his education, whether he is muslim, is he a terrorist, does he believe in this or that,etc but while GWB did pretty much whatever he wanted especially outside of the law whether it be national/international and the level of scrutiny bestowed upon him when he was first elected to office up until now has been been pretty much nonexistent.. or people saying 'i don't trust him', ' he frightens me' 'he is scary'. Should have been afraid of Bush and truly fear what you MAY NEVER know regarding the true state of this country of the last eight years..truly amazing
reply
Throw that hood in the wash, its getting dingy. 12 year olds, we know what you are saying there.
I made no "moral judgment" on SP's premarital pregnancy - merely pointing out the historical precedent she set.
I did reply, it is below....but I will reply again here...
I cannot find anything where Republicans voted for this issue before they voted against it. If you can, present it. I looked. In the case when McCain co-sponsored the bill that I have posted information about, where he predicted this exact thing happening, it never made it out of the committee. All the Republicans on the comittee voted for it, all of the Democrats on the comittee voted against it.
This is what the bill would have done:
1) in lieu of the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight of the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), an independent Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Agency which shall have authority over the Federal Home Loan Bank Finance Corporation, the Federal Home Loan Banks, the Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae), and the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (Freddie Mac); and (2) the Federal Housing Enterprise Board.
Sets forth operating, administrative, and regulatory provisions of the Agency, including provisions respecting: (1) assessment authority; (2) authority to limit nonmission-related assets; (3) minimum and critical capital levels; (4) risk-based capital test; (5) capital classifications and undercapitalized enterprises; (6) enforcement actions and penalties; (7) golden parachutes; and (8) reporting.
Sounds like the bailout bill doesn't it? Would have been nice if they had not blocked the legislation that would have fixed the problem and not stuck us with it?
I did not reply to it because I have not seen it -
I have not been on the news or TV today so am not aware of what you are talking about. Will, however, before I go to bed, find out what is going on so that I can discuss it later...
reply
poster says duh? Exactly. Overwrought rhetoric destroys the validity of any discussion.
In reply...
Let me just address a couple of points:
Science isn't a "numbers" game where if you line up 1000 scientists on your side and I line up 1500 on my side, I win. The history of science is rife with examples of the majority of scientists being wrong. It might even be argued that at the moment any scientific discovery is made, the person who makes the discovery is, DE facto, a minority of one. The majority of scientists once thought the world was flat, that the sun revolved around the earth, and that human disease was caused by invisible gases or by imbalance of the "four elements", and scoffed at the notion of "germs". If we left science up to a vote and counted heads to determine what is true, we'd have never moved one inch beyond the stone age.
The real problem, though, is that it really doesn't take much information about the methods used by the "global warmists" (my term) for even a layman to recognize that they are far from conclusive, and in many cases their methods are highly questionable. And since there is an enormous cost to all of us (or, enormous flow of money to the "warmists") to do battle with this "problem" - if it is one - it only makes sense to get the science right rather than jumping off the deep end and starting a lot of things in process that might very well be entirely unnecessary. Before we get the villagers all up in arms with torches and pitchforks, let's bother to find out if there really is a dragon in the cave. So far, I'm afraid that the best we can say is that all we have is rumors and that no one has actually seen the dragon.
Let's not conflate global warming with alternative energy, though. Although there is some connection, they are really separate issues. If there is global warming, it seems now that some scientists think that worm flatulence causes more warming than hydrocarbons, so on that basis we should be attacking worms, not fossil fuels.
Certainly, we should be pursuing every realistic form of alternative energy, but for one simple reason which you have correctly stated: There is only so much fossil fuel of any kind in the ground. We're going to run out of it. This means that even if oil were clean and cheap as water, we must seek alternatives.
However, oil isn't as cheap as water, and we don't own most of it even if it were, so the second reason we must seek alternatives is that we cannot continue to send $billions to foreign countries, many of whom don't like us very much and who are using our own dollars to finance the operations of our enemies. It's simply madness to finance our own destruction.
Not even worth a reply -
Above was in reply to Hmmm (nm)
z
Thanks for your reply, Lurker
Thought I'd switch back over to this board.
Thanks for your reply to my question about your leaving Florida. It sounds like a big transition in many ways, both geographically and emotionally. I had inquired because I have similar thoughts myself and so far I keep moving farther and farther north and away from civilization. Anyway, good luck and it would be good to hear when you're settled in.
Thanks for your reply. I was thinking that the more...
moderate and even conservative leaning Independents might be swayed. Enough of them swayed to vote him back in as an Independent as a senator. I realize that is only one state, but there are others of like mind across the country who are pretty sick of the Democratic Party and the Republican Party...and McCain is more moderate, as is Lieberman...not hard right or hard left. That is very appealing to some people right now who are tired of the infighting and the extremes. I think Lieberman is VERY astute and realizes this.
As to the war in Iraq...both Clinton and Obama have said they would not be for immediate withdrawal of troops. The only candidate I have heard who said they would end the war immediately is Ron Paul. Which, I know is an unpopular stance you. The only thing I can say at this point is that for whatever reason we went...which we cannot change...we are there. And you can't unscramble eggs. We need to do the best fix we can in the shortest time possible, and Petraeus is doing that. Amazing strides have been made. Hopefully they will continue and we are able to get most of our forces out of there in a year or two. Which is better than the 5-6 years they used to talk about. And to me, that is an amazing stride.
At any rate, thanks for your answer. I won't hold my breath to hear you, DW, being criticized as a one-issue voter (you said that you would not vote for McCain because of his stand on the war). lol.
Have a great day!
short reply
So the success in Iraq apparently means nothing. Wow.
See me reply to your post.
nm
Typical lib reply
The name-calling. You wear it so well.... Classy, honey.
How many times are you going to reply
about my name, does it bother you this much? You really got too much time on your hands!
LOL! Good reply!!!
*
Just got a generic reply
lol go figure.
I got generic reply, too... sm
When I sent him an email of condolence on his grandmother's passing. Might not have been the proper place to send such an email, but I certainly didn't think I would get an email that told me where to go for answers about the "false and malicious emails" that were circulating about him. It even gave me a helpful link that revealed the "hidden attacks" of the McCain campaign. Very appropriate...NOT!
Thank you - just read your reply
Oh my gosh - I get so exacerbated trying to explain the same thing over and over. I can't understand what is so difficult to understand. Even my children who are in the 6th grade understand the situation and why it is important to defend and obey the Constitution. They said they like Obama(they think he's cute), but they said "Mom just cos your cute doesn't mean you can break the law". I guess the country is getting pretty bad when 6th graders understand right from wrong but adults do not.
P.S. - I don't have the patience to write anything more than what I do on this site.
Should be posted in reply to jm.
x
You should know a stupid reply...
How can Clinton by accused of something that didn't happen on his watch? I don't think being psychic is a job requirement to be president. Though I could be wrong...
What a witless reply. sm
You post, you're asking for replies. Don't post, you won't get replies. I can have my 5-year-old neighbor explain it to you in simple terms if you'd like.
Reply to ok, Trying to figure this out...
... I know we don't want to digress, but please stop blaming the fact that we have to resort to these measures on the current administration
Here’s what a lot of us believe: We don't 'have' to print or borrow money to buy our way out of this mess. That is the thing most people will not acknowledge. The mortgage crisis and the housing ‘bubble’ were caused by government meddling with Fannie/Freddie loan standards. That sent the whole house of cards tumbling and the cascade of threatened failures that resulted. More government meddling will not fix this. You cannot shore up a house of cards. It's still cards. It should have been allowed to fall and be rebuilt, even if that meant starting from the ground up. Sucks to be us.
Foolish people who bought too much house for their means must be allowed to lose them. Bad companies have to be allowed to fail. Bad politicians with worse ideas also should to be allowed to fail; I'm doing my part not to get in their way.
I don't think anyone can name three things government does as efficiently and/or cheaply as private industry. Now government will part owners in AIG, banks, and other failing concerns. Now government wants to control health care? And all of this - plus much more - was put in an 1100-page document nobody who voted on it could even read?
Even though this is all mostly a done deal, I still cannot go along with the can't-we-all-get-along; wait-and-see crowd. Of course we’ll all just have to ‘sweat it out’ now, what choice? This is so reminiscent of the FDR New Deal 70 years ago that I cannot believe we have learned nothing from history. What am I saying? Of course I can believe it. We’re still idiots!
Tell me if any of this sounds familiar:
‘We seldom know six weeks in advance, what we are going to do.’ ‘It is common sense, to take a method and try it: if it fails, admit it frankly and try another. But above all, try something.’ FDR
Some of the things he tried:
National Recovery Act (fixed prices and wages). Forced smaller companies out of business, since lower wages and prices where the only way they could compete with big companies.
A law in Washington, DC, mandating a minimum monthly wage for women (only), resulting in women losing their jobs to men who were willing to work for much less than that guaranteed wage.
Agricultural Adjustment Act (subsidized farms by taking acreage out of production and fixed prices). Designed to curb overproduction and support prices. In reality production rose because farmers used their cash subsidies to buy fertilizer, and they had taken their worst acreage out of production anyway. They switched to the crops whose prices were guaranteed, hence, even more overproduction.
Works Progress Administration (to provide employment and improve infrastructure). Turned into a giant political patronage system to reward supporters with ‘shovel-leaning’ jobs and to punish detractors. To get most such jobs, you had to declare your political party, ‘vote right’ and ‘tithe’ to the D party.
Emergency Relief Act (made available to governors to assist the needy in their states). Since it was supported by huge tax increases, it all but shut off voluntary charitable contributions that traditionally went to the needy.
Excise taxes arbitrarily levied on a few luxury items of the rich such as yachts, furs and jewelry, but also on cars, gasoline, radios, cosmetics, cameras, bank checks, long-distance phone calls and movie tickets used by lower-income groups.
Tariffs on imported goods, which caused other countries to retaliate by taxing or not buying our goods and damaged our export business.
Top income tax bracket for the too-rich (only) 79% and the IRS was used as a weapon to harass and punish the wealthy, as well as critics of New Deal policies. Roosevelt was incensed that the wealthy (though he was born to wealth) used tax loopholes such as charitable deductions and business losses to legally avoid taxes, so he instructed the IRS and Congress to close them. Meanwhile, FDR himself used such loopholes to deduct the value of materials he donated for his own future presidential library. He took business losses and farm losses on his personal tax returns.
Roosevelt was one of those silver-spoon guys, subsidized by someone else’s money (his mother’s) his entire life. He failed repeatedly in businesses financed by family money. He had a solid record of picking losers; he thought the airplane was a fad. He had a lackluster academic career. Never held a ‘real’ job. His only talents were his personality and charisma.
Yes, FDR inherited the beginnings of the Great Depression from Herbert Hoover in 1933, but Roosevelt’s repeated ‘try something’ efforts to fix it kept it going until World War II.
Any of this starting to sound familiar? We’ve been at this exact pivotal point before and we are blowing it again. Elected another snake oil salesman. Way to go.
Reply....and some advice. sm
First, the advice. You never want to put yourself out on a limb like this by crowing over a one-day move in the stock market.
Now, the reply. It's odd to me that the very people who have discounted the idea that there is any "meaning" to stock market movements when the market is crashing would turn around and now propose that we garner some significance from the fact that it has recently had a rally.
Second, there are always rallies during bear markets, just like there are always down moves in bull markets. No market moves straight up or straight down.
Third, I see the markets are back down today.
Fourth, the problems that Obama's budget and bank bailout proposals will cause won't show up today or tomorrow. They'll be a long time coming...but mark my words, they're coming.
Fifth, a small percentage uptick in existing home sales from its previous disastrous levels means virtually nothing.
Sixth, it's very common these days to see even so-called sophisticated financial analysts wax poetic every time there is the slightest bit of "positive" news. They are, after all, in the investment industry and their jobs and incomes depend - even more so than yours or mine - on "things getting better". It's been rather funny, although pathetic, to watch them throughout this whole mess, grasping at every straw. You should pay less attention to them - they have an axe to grind.
It is possible that in time Obama will grow into this job. Every American has reason to hope so. To date, however, he has shown very little leadership, has stumbled badly on both the domestic and world diplomatic stage, and has shown himself to be impulsive and rather inept. So far, the American people aren't sure whether they have a man or a boy (and please, no "PC" comments) in the White House.
In my personal opinion, the President of this country is actually Nancy Pelosi, and Obama is little more than her obedient puppet.
ok, please read my reply
to you closer to the top of this board this date. I personally am blaming him for using this situation as a power grab to insert himself into control over every aspect of our lives. Not like we don't have historical precident for all this, and how very badly it went.
Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both. Benjamin Franklin
|
