Unreal!... Obama Says "We've Gotta Get Serious About Living Within Our Means Instead of Leaving Debt For Children & Grandchildren" UnReal
Does this guy just make this stuff up as he goes along or does he just read it from the Teleprompter without actually knowing what he is saying. I'll vote for the last part. I dare say he can't recall what he read 30 minutes after reading it.
15 comments:
Ticker,
The One certainly does possess a flair for irony . . .
Jeff Dreibus
Shaking my head and still simply amazed that people actually voted for the guy. Whew!
Lanner
How many different versions of the push for the "stimulus package" did we hear, and now this. Pathetic.
Old Rose
Yea, Lanner, me too. You know you seldom see an Obama sticker on a car here in my neck of the woods. Of course that could be because many of them were repoed when they failed to make the payments saying dat de Prez say he gonna takes care dat.
Ticker,
And think, it's only February.
We gots fo mo years of dis!
Edge, Unfortunately! However I will be enjoying watching those who voted for "the One" and who are among those he announced that would be disappointed.
And the alternative is another 4/8 years of McCain Palin.
The country would be trully bankrupt then and you would have no civil liberties left as everything you do would be monitored by the government as Cheney wanted.
Ticker: You know that I'm not shy about diving into discussions.
Right now, at this particular point in economic time, I believe that an argument can be made that we as individual consumers need to become more frugal and save, and do without some things that might be termed "unnecessary;" but that someone or entity needs to spend to stimulate the economy.
I believe that one of the contributing factors to our economic difficulties as a nation is that far too many of us began to pursue leisure time, free time, vacations, shorter work weeks, more time with the family, and other quality of life issues, while simultaneously seeking more toys, boats, recreational equipment, time shares that we didn't live in, 60" screen
TVs, and multiple cars exceeding the number of people in our house.
Can't do both simultaneously.
Other hungrier folks willing to sacrifice "quality of life," such as living 15 abreast in one house with one TV, and work 15 hours a day for $2.75 per hour, will beat you out. Every time. And you know that business will find them.
This is a corrective time. We need to rethink how we got here, not just repeat our past conduct, no matter which side of the aisle we may be on. None of the old ways apparently have worked to any degree of certainty. If we were so certain about them, we would have adopted them and made them permanent fixtures.
Now, do I want Government to provide the stimulus? No. Do I believe that it is the best way in normal economic times? No. Do I believe that government is efficient and effective in using taxpayer funds? No.
However, government lives off the back of business. No business, no jobs, lack of business confidence, and you have a problem. Business has retreated, even the healthy ones, because it is a prudent thing to do. Their obligation is to their shareholders, not the American public, as we have well seen.
Lest I be understood, I was a business owner for many years. There is very little that Democrats ever enacted that was good for my business. They made running it a nightmare.
However, I still say that the problem with the Republican tax cut proposal, having been a business man myself for many years, is that there is virtually no way a prudent business person, who just saved money from tax cuts, would put it back into the economy, thus providing its stimulating effect, UNTIL he or she was sure that the worst was behind us and the prospects were the future were pretty good. Until then, I am going to hold on to my money, and simply save it, not providing a stimulating effect.
It would be an economic Mexican stand-off, with businesses waiting to see what the next business was going to do, internationally.
That being said, someone has to do it, namely stimulate. Who else is out there, the non-profits?
So back to my original point. I can understand the President sayng that we need to tighten the purse strings and change our pattern of spending, at the same time that this tremendously costly bill is being pushed forward.
Here's my final issue. I do have a problem with the PR aspect of this bill. The President and the Democrats should return to the drawing board with the Republicans, and come up with a proposal which can be supported by at least 75% of our elected officials. We need a super-majority of our leaders behind this for the American public to buy into it. The Democrats may have won the battle, but they may have lost the war, or get defeated by the downward forces.
This is bigger than taking sides.
Logis:
I find the audacity of it all being that he calls for everyone else to live within their means while at the same time he is pushing for and will soon sign the biggest boondoggle of a wasteful PORKULUS spending bill in the history of mankind. It's time for him to call for the Government to live within it's means as that would be great leadership that the Dems so proudly claimed he possessed. Well , I haven't seen it or instead of calling for all this "payback" spending he would call for stop spending at the Federal level. All the failed programs of the Great Society are being resurrected and funneled more money than even Johnson funded them with. The Welfare Reform plan that the Republican Congress put together and Bill Clinton signed is being thrown to the wayside in favor of more incentives for those who don't work not to work and for those now working at menial jobs to quit and take advantage of the welfare. It's called vote buying , pure and simple. In the old days they gave the voter a half pint of cheap whiskey and a dollar or two dollars and a marked ballot and told them to go vote. Much cheaper than spending billions in giveaway programs to garner a few votes from the trifling, the lazy, the ignorant and uninformed.
Instead of allowing Harry Reid to throw in a few billion for another failed rail line from Disney Land to Vegas "His Highness" should have called his hand and said NO!
No, his call can not be defended in any manner.
As far as saving, yes people need to save but that should have been called on years ago instead of today. It's kind of like closing the door on the barn after the horse has run out.
I am a saver, have been for most of my life except when I thought that I could spend like the rest of the folks and still get by in ragged time. Didn't work so I am back to being frugal. I learned it from my parent but unfortunately parents today don't teach that nor model it. All that is seen today is I want it now and I am going to have it now regardless. Instant everything except the money to pay for the things needed and wanted. Too often we have allowed the things wanted to become things needed just like in this so called Stimulus bill. One out of 12 dollars in the entire bill goes for things needed, the rest goes for things wanted. And "the One" wonders why folks don't live within their means.
I wrote a blog post sometime ago on the subject called a Different Approach to Spending. Take a look at it. (http://afticker.blogspot.com/2008/09/different-approach-to-personal-finances.html)
The government could very well learn from this. In Luke 14:28 we find these words written: "Suppose one of you wants to build a tower. Will he not first sit down and estimate the cost to see if he has enough money to complete it?
There is no question that the policies and initiatives from the Great Society and other similar programs never worked. Based on where we stand today, it could be argued that very little worked as planned.
Back to my original point. The top Republican and Democratic leaders should go to the President and suggest a modified bill which can be supported by at least 75% of our leaders and more of the American public. I may be wrong but my sense that Obama is pragmatic and interested in something that will work and be supported by a "super-majority" of the American people and its leaders, not just something that the Democrats pushed through. However, he will obviously take what is before him without some intervening act by the party leaders.
Logi. The problem is the Democrats will not do anything like this as we have already seen by Queen Pelosi's shutting the Republicans in the house total out of the planning and not a heck of alot of give or take was done in the Senate when it comes down to it. The Elephass's that voted for it are not Republican's except in name only. The come from the liberal New England area and will vote Democrat way most of the time as is evidenced by their records.
Specter would sell his Momma for 15 seconds of fame but I believe it will come back to bite him in the butt next election.
If Obama were any kind of leader , which he is not because he had ZERO experience leading anything and is a puppet pawn to begin with, he would have thrown the entire thing back to his party and said, this is not what the majority of the folks in this country want or need so fix it before you send it back for my signature because as is I will not sign it. No, the bill was exactly what Obama wanted and what the Dems wanted, a payback bill and a wishlist that they have failed to get for the last two years or actually the last 8 years so now they are going to screw over the American people for spite because they still hate Bush. You would think that the Libs would be happy with the victory but they are the gloomist bunch I have ever ran across. Mad because Bush is gone and now they don't have anyone to blame when this mess blows up in their face. They of course will continue to say it was all caused by Bush but well, we know different even though he really didn't do a lot to help the situation, it started long before his time. The lib mentality is never one of happiness and joy because they are always looking around for someone to blame in case they get caught or something goes wrong. Obama is the same way and will throw anyone that gets in his way under the bus in a heartbeat.
You know, you're absolutely correct about Obama needing to exercise leadership, and refuse to sign the bill until it garners more support. Absolutely correct. Might delay things a week or two, but much better way to handle this mess. This is not a good start, no matter which side of the aisle on which you sit.
Post a Comment