₦airaland Forum

@pres-elect,

big spending and increased govt happened under bush more than any other president since i was born. obama's presidency is still on, we will judge him when it's done.

Obama is Bush on steroids. In one year, he has exceeded Bush's deficit in eight. Talk about profilgacy!

however, i'm a bit dissappointed that people always remember fiscal responsibility whenever there is a need to spend money that will benefit those wno need help most but when money is to be spent on war nobody talks

That is because war is a legitimate function of govt. I will raise my voice in protest the day the Red Cross starts fighting wars because that is not their legitimate role. The govt was not set up to be Robin Hood but to ensure that there is level playing field and justice. Not to rob from achievers and give to non-achievers. Privage citizens through the goodness of their own heart should give to their neighbours as they deem fit.

when money is lost on tax cuts nobody complains

What money was lost on tax cut? Please prove that to us under Bush or Reagan. More money came into Govt coffers during those tax cuts. What part of these don't you understand?

and pls tell your republican friends to be a little bit cerebral. everytime it looks like they are programmed by a higher unseen power. they just keep repeating stuff. they cant even change the words. . . ''step by step'' . . ''start over'' . . . . let them say something else pls

We don't need to say anything much. I thot we are a Party of NO. NO is enough. No to Obamacare. No to Socialism. No to wealth redistribution. No to Peelosi. No to Harry Reid. You don't negotiate with evil do you? You just simply say NO!

@John_Blaze,

You need to understand a phrase before you start using it. Do yourself and the rest of us a favour.  Go find out what it means when they say an object falls freely.  When you are done, please come back and explain to us how a rational mind will imply that the WTC experienced free-fall.

It also came down at free fall speed(less than 10 seconds)

And by the way, the unit of speed is not seconds (that is the unit of time).  When you talk about speed, you should be referencing m/s or ft/s as the case may be.  Do you know why 10m/s speed is being brandished about by the fake Professors you have staked your life upon here?  Again, it is related to the free-fall assignment I gave to you above.

Educate yourself a little bit, then come back here for some lessons.

@John_blaze,

Fine!! lets assume the building came down as a result of the impact of the plane.But how can you explain what happened to buidling to WTC 7 (Building 7) which is also part of the world trade center? It also came down at free fall speed(less than 10 seconds)

It is good to leave an issue when you have no understanding of it. I am a civil/structural engineer and I have discussed this issue at length on nairaland. I even went to the extent of providing sketches to educate people who will rather believe conspiracies than what they see and witness with their own eyes.

Just to address your statement above, the WTC did not collapse due tothe impact of the plane. There were other secondary issues that caused it to collapse. Do you know what it means when they say an object has a free-fall? For goodness sake, what part of the collapse of the WTC was free-fall?

This is Hulk Hogan Phase 2! He should be at the WWE! What an entertainer!

@pres-elect,

2 tax cuts and 2 wars  . . . . who did that?

You have turned me to a Prophet.  I knew it wont be too long before someone starts pointing accusing fingers at Gearge W. Bush.   While Bush should bear responsibility for the deficits accumulated under his watch, you will be deceiving yourself to attribute the deficit of Obama spending on him.

Now to educate you a little bit about tax cuts.  Whether under Reagan or George Bush, data shows that the tax cuts acutually increased govt recepits.  The problem was not tax cuts but excessive spending.  This is the issue people like us are crying about.  Freeze all these excessive govt spending and there will be no deficits.  It is that simple.

Please check out the following from http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2010/02/14/fareed-zakaria-bush-tax-cuts-largest-part-budget-deficit.

In fiscal 2000 before the Bush tax cuts, our government brought in $2.025 trillion in unified revenues while spending $1.789 trillion. Seven years later, before the recession hit, we received $2.568 trillion, a 27 percent increase. BUT, our expenditures rose to $2.729 trillion, a 53 percent rise.

What this means is that our spending grew at TWICE THE RATE as tax receipts.

And Zakaria and his ilk blame deficits on tax cuts!

To further illustrate the stupidity on display, even with tax cuts, receipts grew faster than the rate of inflation. BUT, if our elected officials would have kept spending to the rate of inflation during this period, our outlays in 2007 would have totaled $2.154 trillion resulting in a surplus of $414 billion!

Now, let's look at what a recession and an almost unprecedented explosion in expenditures has done.

In 2009, we brought in $2.105 trillion in tax receipts. Bear in mind that even with a recession this was still greater than BEFORE the Bush tax cuts were implemented. BUT, we spent $3.517 trillion, or 97 percent more than BEFORE the Bush tax cuts.

If spending had been kept at the level of inflation during this period, outlays would have been $2.229 trillion producing a deficit of only $124 billion INSTEAD of the $1.413 trillion we generated.

You forgot to add racist whites, Sarah Palin and Joe the Plumber among those at fault.

my bad!!! And to think I left out the Tea Party as well.

4 Play:
It's not so much the existence of the deficits now that is the issue but the plan to keep piling up debt way into the future. This part caught my eye:
You forgot to add racist whites, Sarah Palin and Joe the Plumber among those at fault.

And to think there are viable alternatives out there.  Check out Paul Ryan's proposals here: http://money.cnn.com/2010/03/04/news/economy/paul_ryan.fortune/index.htm

@4Play,

Eye watering deficits and debt projected right into 2020

It's time to sit back and start watching the spin.

Here's a list of whom/what to blame for these deficits:
1. George W. Bush
2. George W. Bush
3. George W. Bush
4. Dick Cheney
5. Tax payers (apparently, they are not paying enough)
6. The recent snow in Washington
7. Wall Street "greedy" investors

And here's a list of whom/what will not be blamed
1. Barrack Hussein Obama (mmm, mmm, mmm)
2. Barrack Hussein Obama (mmm, mmm, mmm)
3. Barrack Hussein Obama (mmm, mmm, mmm)
4. Excessive spending
5. Tax hike

Can you add/remove from the list?

@Montelik,

Your bias is showing. So the young people who protested are "young intellectuals" despite the fact that they vandalized property, fought the police and created a general nuisance to other people. Do you know how many of them were arrested. But meanwhile despite all the shouts that tea partiers are a racist, violent, angry mob of individuals. I have yet to hear of any instances where they attacked other people or property whenever they have rallied. In fact I recall about a few thousand of them were said to have gone to D.C last year, and there was not 1 single arrest or police report. Look you might disagree with their politics,  but your statement is outrageous. There are genuine grievances with the way things have gone but you are making some rather far reaching assumptions. No offense

Gbam! Gbam! Gbam! Gbam! Gbam! Gbam! Gbam! Gbam! Gbam! Gbam! Gbam! Gbam! to the power of one million GBAMSSSSSS!!!!!!!!

Some of us are not surprised by the lack of depth and the sheer hypocrisy underlying the reasoning of liberals.  Can you imagine when someone who calls himself a community organizer, and the people who voted for him on that resume now find it intimidating when the community actually organizes?  I suppose they are livid because the community is not taking orders from them. 

Despite countless marches, the few times we find some form of violence is when the DNC supporters send their thugs to beat up on the Marchers.  They even planted people to destroy other people's property hoping to pin the blame on the Tea arty movement.  Who are the real hoodlums now? What a bunch of hypocrites!!!

And why are they so afraid of dialogue?  Check out a typical liberal NBC host interviewing a Tea Party leader on his show. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nObPplOGUdI&feature=player_embedded

@topic,

This is another money-making opportunity for Al Gore. We can expect some changes in global climate pattern due to this shift in the earth's rotation about its axis. Never mind that this climate change has nothing to do with man's activities, they will cry to high heavens that it is, in order to make more money. And so the cycle of corruption continues.

But come to think of it, if the US' HAARP lager beer is responsible for this, then maybe Al Gore has a point afteral.

@topic,

The extent that people will go to discredit the US. You mean the US is to blame for spending their money to deliver food to Somalis? You mean the US is asking too much by refusing to pay bribes? It takes a level of detachment from common sense to ignore the people who refuse to allow aid to flow to their people and yet condemn those who make the effort to get the aid to them. What is this world coming to?

@topic,

@Lagosboy,

Palestininan activist is called a terrorist

Shimon Perez is called a peacemaker

Ariel sharon would be called a statesman

What a world we live in

And you left out the fact that Yasser Arafat received a Nobel Peace Prize!

@topic,

Haba! This is nothing but a "disproportionate response" from the old guy.

@Ikomi,

Now that you have seen the true Agbero, u cant stand your grounds, cry cry baby.

Not so. The truth is that when I discuss politics on nairaland, I do so with the idea that I am exchanging ideas with people who hold similar values even though we differ in our approach. For example, I believe we all hate poverty and love to see it eradicated. While I believe there is one way to deal with tthat problem, others believe in another. This is when we exchange ideas.

However, when I find out that the person I am discussing with does not value the sacredness of parenthood, thn what is the point of having a discussion with such a person? Pur values are clearly different and there can be no compromise. You and I have both disagreed on almost everything on nairaland and have abused each other in the process. However, none of us ever crossed the line to the pint of abusing each other's parents. Even Agberos are guided by some frame of reference.

And by the way, I am surprised you will be addressing me when the person that clearly needs your sermon is the one who has no respect for his, or any other's parents. Like I said to him, he invites insults on his parents when he insults another's parents. I however, will honor his parents and not let them be an object of ridicule on a public forum.

@Davidylan,

Here's a novel idea.  Since people in your camp, acccording to Biden, believe that paying higher taxes is equivalent to patriotism, why don't Biden, Obama and co volunteer 90% of all their income to the govt.  I bet the deficit will be greately reduced if all the left wing billionaires like Warren Buffet and co give 90% of all their earnings to the god-like one, Obama. 

You guys need to start walking the walk and not just the talk.  Afterall, the rest of us are racists and hypocrites.  You can wait for us before you express your deep affection for the noble establishment called the Federal Govt.

By the way, I don't know if you realise that the pool of millionaires and billionaires is shrinking. So goodluck in taxing the few that are left to poverty in an effort to keeping feeding the ever growing beast.

@Davidylan,

Why are you fooled by this taxing the big corporation and the rich nonsense? Anyone who can think knows that the consumer of their products are the same people who will pay for those tax increases. Do you think the oil companies or walmart will absorb any future tax increases? No way, they will pass it unto you the consumer - whether you earn 250k per annum or not. Some of us can clearly see that, while others just want to live in denial.

Why are you blaming the deficits on Americans whose income are been confiscated at gun point by a govt who can not reign in spending? It's like blaming me for the misery of those on welfare because I do not give more of what I earn to them! Can you see the foolishness of such logic? The deficit was not caused by the tax cuts but rather by increased govt spending. Bush's tax cuts was not the problem but his spending. That is the lesson Obama and co needs to learn. And by the way, Obama voted for every spending increase ever proposed under Bush's admin. They are both birds of the same feather.

As for Reagan, do you know what happened when he cut taxes across board for everybody? Govt revenue increased because individual income tax revenues rose from $244 billion in 1980 to $446 billion in 1989 - http://www.house.gov/jec/fiscal/tx-grwth/reagtxct/reagtxct.htm. But of coourse liberal cooks do not want to hear that.

@topic,

Do you realise that Hitler started as a Socialist?

If Hitler has a chance of rising again, he will feel more at home with the Democratic Party! Go figure.

@RichyBlack,

Ibime:
If not for socialist free education in former Western region of Nigeria, Im sure both you and your parents would still be illiterates by now. . . . infact, Im pretty convinced both you and your parent are still illiterates now!

I believe you are still the moderator of this section on nairaland. I hope you will not dignify low-lifers like Ibime the priviledge of using this forum with such unwarranted attack on people's parents. I make no bones about the fact that I am deeply offended that he could stoop so low as to attack my parents in a discussion like this.

Let's know what your take on this is as I will not mind leaving this forum altogether if there is no saction to teach him the leassons that he has refused to learn growing up

@Ibime,

. . . and that is all Mr Obama is trying to say in your video

From David who declared that what Obama said is not relevant today, we now have a pseudo-intellectual who is trying to convince us that what Obama said is not actually what he meant. What cool aid fountain are you both drinking from?

By the way, while I know that the QALY limit in the UK is 30k pounds per year per individual, I am sure that for a low-life like you they will not even spend 3k pounds a year. Please keep your QALY quotas with your socialist countries. We prefer to live free and die free here. And that is the point you miss altogether. This is about what it means to be truly free. While socialism has encroached on the US to a great eextent too, we will still fight its advancement with everything we've got.

By the way, when are you going to line up at the next govt office to demand that they provide you with some intelligence. Afterall, you want the govt to take care of everything for you baa? There is something called personal responsibility. Go figure!

@David,

What nonsense . . . combining Obama's quotes from 2003 to justify a misquote in 2010? Dude maybe you need to read a book or drink water.

So what Obama said a ffew years back don't matter. Heck, what he said last week doies not even matter to you. What matters is keeping an image which you are here to defend to the last on nairaland. Once an Obamabot, always an Obamabot.

France has single payer health care . . . it has been the NO. 1 nation for health care indices for so many yrs. Keep drinking your cool aid.

So what is your point. On one hand you are defending your lord that he does not mean to put a single-payer system in place in the US, and now you are trying to convince us of the virtue of a single-payer system. Such single payer system is so good that Canada's elite cross the border to the US for their medical needs. Keep living in lala land.

@Davidylan,

you've been bleating about "what Obama has now admitted was a fraud" in the health care bill, can you EXPLICITLY show us where you found it in the bill or are you just (like all other low information repukes out there) regurgitating right wing talking points?

Do you think your Socialist friends are dumb enough to just write in the bill that the govt will take over your healthcare?  The bill was written such that it will crowd out the private healthcare providers in the end.  That achieves Obama's objectives that he said some time ago that his intention was not to get rid of other healthcare providers immediately but to do it in a matter of a few years.  The bill was of course written to achieve that purpose.

Obama himself admitted this much to be true and you are here asking me to refer you to pages in the bill.  If you can't even interprete what Obama just said on face value, what is the point of trying to prove anything else to you.

In the mean time, you might want to listen to Obama and his cohorts here again about the single payer system and how their plan will eventually eliminate other healthcare providers.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p-bY92mcOdk

Now combine that with Obama saying that: "if you want to keep the health insurance you got, you can keep it, that you're not going to have anybody getting in between you and your doctor in your decision making. And I think that some of the provisions that got snuck in might have violated that pledge"  If these are not evidence enough to convince you then onlyObama's apparition can convince you.  Given his enormous powers, I do not doubnt this is possible.

@David,

Taken a single line out of context? Could you please tell us what Obama was talking about? Mind you, there was a pretecxxt to that statement!

@David,

the stupidity in a lot of this right wing chatter is simple - congress writes the bills not the president.

The stupidity is in condemning the Republicans for opposing what Obama has now admitted was a fraud on the part of the Democratic House and Senate in conjunction with the leader of the Democratic Party - President Barack Obama.

The Republicans are racist for pointing out what Obama has now admitted to be the truth? 

If you look at the package that we've presented

Did you notice that Obama used the word "we" and not the Congress which you are now trying to shift the blames to? I'm telling you, only Obama can wake you up from this self-inflicted delusion!

@David,

I'm tired of debating as well.  Here's a link with Obama's admission.  Hopefully, you will start to pull the wool in your eyes.

The last thing I will say, though -- let me say this about health care and the health care debate, because I think it also bears on a whole lot of other issues. If you look at the package that we've presented -- and there's some stray cats and dogs that got in there that we were eliminating, we were in the process of eliminating. For example, we said from the start that it was going to be important for us to be consistent in saying to people if you can have your -- if you want to keep the health insurance you got, you can keep it, that you're not going to have anybody getting in between you and your doctor in your decision making. And I think that some of the provisions that got snuck in might have violated that pledge. http://realclearpolitics.blogs.time.com/2010/01/29/obamas-stunning-admission/

@David,

which is all he needed to run on . . . America isnt color blind and we know it. Get yourself a reality check.

You mean Democrats are not colour-blind? Ask Chris Matthews and co.

So were the Independents color blind during the Presidntial election but are now racist in just about 1 year? You are deluded!

@David,

What absolute baloney. Obama has been going it alone probably because the right wont even bother to meet him halfway. they threw away the health care bill struggling to get the votes of Susan Collins and the old hag Olympia Snowe. Guess what the other repukes told Obama when he came out with the health care bill? STUFF IT

And you do not think the opposiition was because of the content of the bill?  Why did Snowe vote for the bill to go to debate but now regrets ever giving the Dems such leverage when they are obviously just trying to use her?  Even Obama is out now saying the Republican's fears about govt take over was true.  have you heard that?

Where is the repuklican plan?

This is a very stupid question. You've been asking this for a long time.  There were at least 3 different bills pushed forward by Republicans that were summarily dismissed by Obama and co.  Besides, all that was needed was for them to be allowed in writing the bill.  That was not the case.

Obama campaigned on that too but the house dems want that war over. You  know what it took for Obama to send 30000 new troops there? Go read and stop watching Hannity my friend.

It was not just Obama's campaign.  That was the DNC's position.  Here's an article with Nancy Pee-losi (the House's leader) and Schumer (the De Facto Senate leader) supporting the troop surge and even more in Afghanistan.  http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=33419.  Your denial beggars belief.

@Davidylan,

this is absolute rubbish. No one is "deluded" about Obama, infact he has disappointed me in trying too hard to placate repukes thus putting his own agenda on the ropes

You are deluded I'm telling you! Since the first bailout vote, Obama has been going it alone without any Republican vote in both the House and the Senate. He planned to go it alone with the Healcare Bill, he just raised the debt ceiling without any Republican backing. If anybody was cventer, it was Bush. Obama has been far-left.

Take the war in Afghanistan . . . left to Dems and those on the left, America shld be back home ASAP.

That is a lie. Dems consistently declared Afghanistan a war of necessity priore to th eection. It was Iraw they called Bush's war. Why the revision of history now?

I do not ignore the independents in MA . . . i see that election less a reflection of Obama than it is a reflection of America's problems dealing with its own hypocrisy.

Not a reflection on Obama? Yet Brown ran not against Coakley, but against Obama. He ran declaring that he will be the 41st vote agaisnt Obamacare. I have said you need to wake up from this self-imposed delusion.

In your world, Republicans who oppose Obama are racist while Independents who do are hypocrites. Talk about an Obamabot!

@Davidylan,

Where are the "ideological differences"? Obama has tried to govern to the center.

Do those "ideological differences" include hypocrisy for example?

This yourstance about Obama bothers on delusion.  Obama governing to the center?  Can you tell me one thing he did that reflects this?  Even while in the Senate, he was consistently regarded as the 2nd most liberal Senator in the 100-member strong body?  Stop deceiving yourself.

Why do you ignore the Independents in MA in your response?  Are these also hypofcrites or racists?

@Davidylan,

you know . . . the funny thing is i keep asking you repukes for this "conflict of agenda" and all we get are spurious lies and nauseating hypocrisy. When you can accurately tell me what this "conflicts" are then maybe i'll change my mind.

What's the point when you have already made up your mind. The mere fact that Obama is a Democrat suggest huge ideological differences to Republicans. And since you Libs took opposition to such bitter and extremely shameful levels during Bush, it is only fitting that the Republicans return the favour in Obama.

If however you want more proof that this is about policy, take a look at Massachussetts and Senator Brown. Independents that voted overwhelmingly for Obama opposed him at the Ballot in MA. Are these people racists too? Did they they vote agaisnt Obama's pigmentation or his Govt run healthcare proposal?

@Davidylan,

Never overlooked them for a second . . . the elephant in the room that you dont wish to see is that all the above 3 are working hard for this administration regardless of the color of Obama's skin. the repukes on the other hand?

Perhaps their agenda is all that keeps them working for a person they consider inferior to them through race. Does that excuse their racism? And has it ever crossed your mind also that those who oppose Obama may have done that because of a conflict of agenda irrespective of race? Do you think they would have opposed Clinton (Hillary or Bill) any less if they suspect them of such radical agenda as Obama?

You opened a thread to accuse Republicans of racism based on very inconclusive data and yet overlook something so glaring because it does not agree with your politics? Common, you can do better.

@topic,

1. Harry Reid declares that he is more comfortable with a light-skinned Negro without Negro accent compared to the dark-skinned ones with accent.

2. Bill Clinton declared that Obama being black would have only been priviledged to serve Whiteys like him coffee a few years ago.

3. Chris Matthews said he forgot Obama was black for an hour.

Common thread in these statements? They are all racist and spoken by Democrats. Only Davidylan will excuse and overlook these statements while stretching some irrelevant data to force-fit his predisposition that Republicans are racists.

@topic,

You gotta be kidding me menh. Is this for real? You just gotta be kidding me!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!