Featured The Success of Barak Hussein Obama

"RELIEF"??? ...Ha ha ha ha ha.....you gotta be kidding me! This guy is a disaster

 

Yea...they are liquidating the military to pay for all the food stamps and welfare programs.:BangHead:

 

Yes, just like other advanced countries. Its a bit of a "darned if you do, darned if you don't" situation for poor mothers, both married and unmarried. Ignoring the repulsive practice of abortion, these women are condemned if they try to avoid pregnancy by demanding access to contraceptives since obviously that's just an excuse for rampant fornication. If they do have children they are condemned as welfare queens and accused of having children just to receive benefits. If they don't work to take of the children they are condemned for being lazy, if they do work outside the home they are condemned for undermining traditional family roles nevermind that its increasingly difficult for one wage-earner to support a middle-class lifestyle.

Considering I'm a traditional social democrat in the tradition of Wilhelm Drees and Hugh Gaitskell who has sparred with actual Marxists several times online, your amusing theory fails to hold any water. For that matter, I haven't ever accused you of being a paid shill of the Koch Bros in order to trick working-class whites to vote against their economic self-interest because the Democrats are all secret Commie Ayrabs, but that's probably at least partially because I think the Koch Bros could buy off someone who could make better arguments than your gloating paens to reactionary Know Nothingism.

You don't think an unprecedented recession had anything to do with the rising debt.

Yes,apparently cutting military spending from 729 billion dollars to 716 billion dollars (not counting veterans' benefits) is equivalent to the complete gutting of military spending, never mind we spend over three times China does on its military. Never mind too that we spent by comparison less than 80 billion on food stamps and 18 billion dollars on "welfare" (ie TANF).

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/01/07/everything-chuck-hagel-needs-to-know-about-the-defense-budget-in-charts/

 

I'm sorry, that's pathetic. You only strengthened my resolve, knowing what it is you folks actually want subsidized. Ridiculous.

 

Amen:thumbs:

 

Care to respond to my refutation?

 

Perhaps, he got what he wanted.

But he is an absolute total failure at doing anything good for America.

He's still batting zero. If he's proud of his record, he's a very sick man.

 

False premise. No one is "condemned" for "demanding access" to something that is covered under all healthcare plans, and gladly so. You're making stuff up, starting from an erroneous dynamic and running with it, kinda like Roy Riegels. Look him up.

Anyway, that tactic negates this whole section of your post, since starting from there is the only way you can get to the end of that diatribe.

Nice try, but Marxists aren't pure socialists, and Drees was one of the leading socialists in Nederlands history. He oversaw the establishment of the Dutch welfare state that nearly bankrupted the country. Sounds familiar.

Among other things, he got the Occupational Pensions Fund Act passed after WWII, which required union membership and pension fund benefits as mandatory for all laborers. He got the Old-Age Pensions Act passed as well, which guaranteed flat-rate retirement of all persons age 65 with no strings attached. I'm sure you don't see those as bad things, but today's Nederlands citizenship that nearly watched their country become a debtor nation because of those two destructive socialist programs -- hand-in-hand with the disastrous healthcare laws that came later -- would disagree. And that is your tradition? You need a new one, and your perspective is warped until you get one.

My, my! That sounds almost angry. Over a political philosophy? Wow.

Sure it does. But the recession only became "unprecedented" because Obama's sociopolitical agenda to turn this country into the Nederlands of the 1950s-60s prevented a smooth recovery that would have mitigated the damage he and his crony social engineers are foisting off on us either by badly written legislation, or his "pen and phone" dictatorship.

Impressive numbers. Too bad it doesn't reflect the facts.

The U.S. isn't spending $716 billion on defense, and it never spent $729 billion, either. And the next several countries combined are spending a lot more than that. Here's a chart showing U.S. military spending the last 13 budgets.



How about everyone else? China, for one thing, lies. She claims expenditures of $164 billion in 2012. But it was probably much higher, according to Time Magazine. In addition, she started an ambitious aircraft carrier building program last year that will add four ships to the fleet. Aircraft carriers alone cost billions of dollars, and China is building four of them. So much for her "small military budget."

Russia? You can't invade Crimea on a shoestring. Though she reports only a $90 billion budget, $9 billion of that alone is to build a new drone program, and she's adding 40 new ships to the fleet this year alone. Figure twice the budget she's reporting.

Consider the relative costs to the economy. China's gross domestic product (GDP) in 2012 was $8.3 trillion. Russia's was $2.1 trillion. The U.S.? $16.8 trillion. So relative to GDP, who's spending more?

Nice try, General, nice try. But epic fail. You're a socialist, and we're spending more of our GDP on domestic programs than any other nation in the world. We're done here.

 

In summary, Obama is the most successful of all Democrat presidents because he accomplished his agenda completely and the results of his handiwork are everywhere, overseas and at home.

Off the subject, I also think that he is the greatest of all Democrats because of his success. All history books will have to mention him for the Nobel Prize, the overhaul of the economy and the complete change of course on foreign policy.

Other Democrats will have to defer to the one who fulfilled the dreams of Woodrow Wilson. Hillary, for example, will have to promise to continue in the footsteps of Obama. Future Democrat candidates will have to be rebels without a cause, like the master.

 

A thought - make Odrama federal money raiser in chief - the country will be debt free in short order.

 

I thought that I was the only one against Ethanol. It is bad for the environment, expensive for the taxpayer, inefficient as a fuel but it makes the farmers rich. They all have remodeled their homes and added on, not to mention all the new huge machines and the fleets of new cars in the driveways.