Gibbs Takes Off Gloves to Challenge Reporters, Hosts Who Cross Obama

[windcatcher]

Until Obama's plan has had a chance to take effect. We won't see the tax breaks until April and the money for the infrastructure projects has to trickle down several levels of Government.

However, look at it this way, if you're the captain of a ship that begins to sink. You quit and a new captain takes over the wheel yet the ship is still sinking, wouldn't you still get credit for the sinking ship? What, you gone to blame it on the new captain who took over a ship half sunk?

Rediculous!

Obama voted for the bailout during his presidential challenge! He rediculed his opponent for making the suggestion that a time out from campaigning was worth taking to consider the weightier 'emergency legislation' to author or study the bailout before passing. As a Senator, Obama was already on your hypothetical ship! As a Senator, he had more influence over the passage of the bailout and this current economy, and passing enabling bailouts back to the institutions which caused the breach in our economy so they can repeat their 'mistakes'.

The power of the President is in enforcing law and recommending law. He can do nothing to make law...... without declaring an emergency...... which Congress still has the power to impede. Nance Pelosie did nothing but rubber stamp...... and Obama did the same!

So, deny all you want...... Obama and the pork politics in his past are as much a part of this problem, which by accident of election, you claim he also 'inherited'. If he didn't want to accept his responsibility in contributing to the current economy then and now....... perhaps he could have done us all a favor and not run....... but he didn't.

 

[rbell]

Obama... And all the conservatives like Rush who hoped it would fail...

hmmm...so even when a liberal fails, it will be a conservative's fault.

How convenient that must be for you.

 

[rbell]

Here's the thing:

I was quite critical (and still am) of President Bush for spending so much, he gave drunken sailors a bad name. (I'll always grant wise expenditures for national defense...but Bush wasn't frugal anywhere)

I'll also be critical of President Obama for taking Bush's faults as a careless spendthrift to a new level.


Look folks...let's say I want some new toys. I have no money...BUT, I can borrow the money, and pay it back later. A few lines of credit, a credit card or three, a home equity loan, and the like...man, I can get some NICE stuff.

And...until the payments come due, I'll have fun. And for a while, I might even manage the payments.

But eventually, my financial situation will collapse, because of my foolishness. And somebody...my kids, wife, me, the bank, someone...will have to pay the bill. That particular scenario has been played out millions of times in this country.

It works in private finance that way. It works on the big scale that way. You can't borrow your way out of spending trouble. And I sure as heck wish we'd quit getting financial advice from broke people.

 

[targus]

Nothing he's done has taken effect yet so the worsening you see is the residual from the last administration.

That's not true.

Telling us what he is going to do has pushed the stock market down.

So it has taken effect already.

 

[LeBuick]

What policies has Rush written that would make you blame him ?

Take yer time, I grabbin' a bite.......

It is not what policies he wrote, it is the 20 million people he leads into being anti-policy. It doesn't always have to be a bad plan that fails, sometimes it's a bad effort at making the plan work.

 

[LeBuick]

hmmm...so even when a liberal fails, it will be a conservative's fault.

How convenient that must be for you.

Yep, if they don't roll up their sleeves and help with the cause then it is their fault of we fail.

 

[LeBuick]

Obama voted for the bailout during his presidential challenge!

And the bailout cause what problem? Do you even know where the money went?

He rediculed his opponent for making the suggestion that a time out from campaigning was worth taking to consider the weightier 'emergency legislation' to author or study the bailout before passing. .

That's not true, he said a candidate should be able to do both since there will be many times when the president will need to multi-task. IOW you shouldn't have to stop your campaign to sit in on the stalemate on the hill, you should be able to do your due diligence and campaign at the same time.

 

[Pastor Larry]

It is not what policies he wrote, it is the 20 million people he leads into being anti-policy.

It's a bad policy. The remarkable thing is not that that 20 million are against the policy. It is that anybody supports it. This is so blatantly bad, it is hard to imagine that Obama is not sitting in his oval office laughing his head off at the suckers out there. I don't think he even thinks it will work.

It doesn't always have to be a bad plan that fails, sometimes it's a bad effort at making the plan work.

Yes, but sometimes, it's just a bad plan. And that's what we have here.

 

[Berean]

Jim Cramer. Rush Limbaugh. Rick Santelli.

What do they all have in common? Most likely, none of them is getting invited to the White House Christmas party.
============================================================
All the BRU_HA-HA with Limbaugh reminds me of an amusing story;Two deacons met and after exchanging greetings one asked the other "hows your church doing?" to which the other replied "great we've got a new pastor." What happened to the other one? reply; "Oh we got rid of him he kept telling us to repent or we were going to hell" Well doesn't the new preacher do the same?" Yes but he doesn't seem to enjoy doing it as much.

 

[LeBuick]

It's a bad policy. The remarkable thing is not that that 20 million are against the policy. It is that anybody supports it. This is so blatantly bad, it is hard to imagine that Obama is not sitting in his oval office laughing his head off at the suckers out there. I don't think he even thinks it will work.

Yes, but sometimes, it's just a bad plan. And that's what we have here.

Here is the deal, when the boat is sinking in the middle of the ocean, we can all drown arguing over what plan is best or we can let the leader decide on a plan and we all give our best to make it work. When there are a 1000 people on the boat, that generally means there at least 1000 ideas how to get out of the mess so there is a reason we have a captain.

Having 20% of the people fold their arms and stick out their lips while the 80% give their best effort to make the solution work is not giving the solution 100% effort. Even a bad plan has some chance of success if we can get 100% participation. Any plan, even the very best plan will fail without enough participation. So unless our plan is do nothing and drown, I think it's time for all hands on deck and the last thing we need is someone assembling and leading a mutiny. That is a loose, loose in this situation.

We all shall reap what we sow...

 

[Revmitchell]

The motor is sputtering but the boat is not sinking. But Odrama and his boss Pelosi need simple people to believe that so they can pass what other wise would never make it. Get everyone all feared up and anything looks good.

Evidence of this is:

1.Not wanting typical debate ever the "stimulus"
2.Not giving time to read it
3. Using pork as a "stimulus"

 

[LeBuick]

The motor is sputtering but the boat is not sinking. But Odrama and his boss Pelosi need simple people to believe that so they can pass what other wise would never make it. Get everyone all feared up and anything looks good.

Evidence of this is:

1.Not wanting typical debate ever the "stimulus"
2.Not giving time to read it
3. Using pork as a "stimulus"

I know y'all felt Obama was over dramatizing this situation but step back and look at the facts for yourself. They are now saying 12% of home loans in in default. Close to 8% unemployment. Loosing over half a million jobs per month. GDP down. Market, lowest in years... You can call this a sputtering motor all you want, this ship is going down unless something is done and it doesn't take a genius to see the truth.

Now as for you other three points, 1. when has a president ever "debated" his legislation? 2. The TARP went through faster, was just as large and was given equal opportunity to be read. No one accused Bush like this. 3. These are projects that needed to be done.

I saw a report of a bridge they began working on in MO. It is the first project to break ground. While the reporter was making the report a large chunk of concrete fell from the bridge just as a big truck rolled by. They turned the camera up toward the bridge and you could see the rebarb in many places. I know you guys are stingy and want less government but I don't call public safety pork... As a pro-lifer, I wouldn't think you would either...

 

[Pastor Larry]

Here is the deal, when the boat is sinking in the middle of the ocean, we can all drown arguing over what plan is best or we can let the leader decide on a plan and we all give our best to make it work. When there are a 1000 people on the boat, that generally means there at least 1000 ideas how to get out of the mess so there is a reason we have a captain.

Yes, and when that captain says, "The boat is sinking, let's pump more water into the boat," shouldn't you throw the captain board?

The country is sinking in debt. The solution is to pump more debt. Think about it for a change.

Having 20% of the people fold their arms and stick out their lips while the 80% give their best effort to make the solution work is not giving the solution 100% effort.

I agree. But this is completely irrelevant since the solution is a bad solution. Do you want 80% agreeing to pump more water into the boat?

Even a bad plan has some chance of success if we can get 100% participation.

In a word, No.

So unless our plan is do nothing and drown, I think it's time for all hands on deck and the last thing we need is someone assembling and leading a mutiny.

We need people to stand up and exercise some common sense. We have to say, "Bad solution, we don't want it." And we need all hands on deck to say it. This plan by Obama is causing more problems, not less. The stock markets are not doing better, and that isn't affecting rich people. It means you and I have less money to retire on, and less money to pay taxes on. This year, I am paying less taxes than I have paid since I started working, and is is primarily due to low capital gains.

We all shall reap what we sow...

Yes, indeed. We have sown big debt, and now we are reaping the problems from it. Sowing more big debt won't help.

The government is spending $30-40,000 for you (some say as much as $150,000). Wouldn't you rather have that money so you could spend it? I guarantee you I would.

 

[just-want-peace]

LB sez:

----so there is a reason we have a captain.

Very true, but when a Captain is assigned, it's because he knows how to command, lead and do a specific job; not for some "" feel good reasons.

Therefore, when the true "Captain" speaks, it pays to listen!

Not so in this case -(and you guys complained about Sarah's inexperience - UNBELIEVABLE!):BangHead:

 

[LeBuick]

The country is sinking in debt. The solution is to pump more debt. Think about it for a change..

Are you saying the national debt caused this crises?

 

[LeBuick]

Not so in this case -(and you guys complained about Sarah's inexperience - UNBELIEVABLE!):BangHead:

I didn't laugh at her inexperience, I laughed at her trying to call AK proximity to Russia foreign policy experience. I laughed every time I heard her say she was against the bridge, knowing it was after she was for the bridge. I laughed at her having to get back with Catie on the "what periodical do you read" question. She didn't need Tina Fey, the real Sarah was hilarious...

 

[Pastor Larry]

Are you saying the national debt caused this crises?

No. I am saying debt in general caused the crisis. Look at the home mortgage business ... That's debt. Credit card debt, all of it, including national debt.

At the low end of estimates, the government just took out a $30,000 loan in your name. The loan is probably much higher. And now you have to pay it back. It would have been far smarter to give that money to me and you and others. It could have been used to pay mortgages, to invest, to buy things we need or want.

Let's face it: More and more people are recognizing what some of us knew all along -- This was a bad bill created by bad leadership and because Obama is in over his head and didn't surround himself with good people, he didn't veto it and demand something that would work. He caved. And now we will be paying the price for years to come.

 

[windcatcher]

Are you saying the national debt caused this crises?

Listen to Larry. He's got it right.

The Bible teaches us to be wary of debt.

But our whole economy has been running on a philosophy of consumer debt for a long time now. So, now our government is digging the hole deeper. Holes like this are more apt to cave in ontop of us instead of getting us out.

 

[windcatcher]

No. I am saying debt in general caused the crisis. Look at the home mortgage business ... That's debt. Credit card debt, all of it, including national debt.

At the low end of estimates, the government just took out a $30,000 loan in your name. The loan is probably much higher. And now you have to pay it back. It would have been far smarter to give that money to me and you and others. It could have been used to pay mortgages, to invest, to buy things we need or want.

Let's face it: More and more people are recognizing what some of us knew all along -- This was a bad bill created by bad leadership and because Obama is in over his head and didn't surround himself with good people, he didn't veto it and demand something that would work. He caved. And now we will be paying the price for years to come.

One solution which we are not being told....... is that this debt is all planned to become coupled with "inflation" as our money looses value........onlly that it will not be the ordinary type of inflation as in the past.

Is it just possible....... even remotely possible....... that this 'ceiling of tax income' to the tune of 39% for $250,000...... could actually be the entering 'moderate' income level? Could it be possible that whatever the government counts as 'poverty' level now..... could, itself rise to $70,000-$100,000 annual income but provide even less than those living on minimum wages have now?

Then........perhaps we can begin paying off what has grown of the national debt to produce this inflation with the inflationary dollars:
However, by that time, we have allowed the government to not only expand the debt through its own special pork projects..... but also expands its committment and expansion of services and regulations so that it perpetuates itself in need of increasing revenue, and our enslavement to it.

All tax which goes for debt is taking from us the value of our labor and leaving us with nothing....... not even government services on which some are counting to be there for them!

 

[LeBuick]

No. I am saying debt in general caused the crisis. Look at the home mortgage business ... That's debt. Credit card debt, all of it, including national debt.

I agree debt was a part of this, but it was not the total cause unless you also include the predatory practices of the lenders. I believe some credit must also be given to the number of jobs that went overseas. That reduced our dollar churn which caused even more unemployment and now we find ourselves at 8.1% and can't stop the climb.

Let's face it: More and more people are recognizing what some of us knew all along -- This was a bad bill created by bad leadership and because Obama is in over his head and didn't surround himself with good people, he didn't veto it and demand something that would work. He caved. And now we will be paying the price for years to come.

What fact are you presenting here? I thought the majority still believed Obama was doing the right thing.