Prediction - The Strangest Feeling

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Roger,

To add to that thought about President Bush's graciousness, after the 9-11 attack, nobody heard a peep out of him that this possibility grew under his predecessor—that he essentially inherited the Islamist terrorism problem.

All we hear from President Obama is that he inherited the budget problem from his predecessor.

I have serious differences with President Bush, but the USA has not had a finer example of graciousness in the Oval Office than him.

Michael

[Christopher]

Errrmmm,... Let's be objective about this, shall we? I've been to several websites comparing presidencies to national debt, they demonstrate a similar message, and here's one of the clearer presented summaries (http://angrybear.blogspot.com/2007/07/comparing-presidents-national-debt.html):

Table 1. Read Federal Debt per Capita

start end admin % change rank

8870 7630 Ike_____ -1.86% 2

7630 7235 JFK/LBJ_____ -.066% 5

7235 6722 Nix/Ford_____ -.91% 3

6897 6664 Carter_____ -.085% 4

6664 12207 Reagan_____ 7.86% 8

12207 14290 GHW_____ 4.02% 7

14290 12061 Clinton_____ -2.10% 1

12061 13702 GW_____ 2.15 6

The most common arguments against this evidence:

1. but what about congress?? My answer: seriously, didn't you notice that the president almost always introduces & leads the biggest spending plans

2. but what about national protection? My anser: Ummm... warmongering then? Perhaps overzealous expenditures on wars? A desire to live luxuriously while spending for self-protection (lack of balance)? Take your pick

The objective fact is: the government has expanded most significantly under Republican administrations. I don't care what they say, the facts are clear.

Chris

Edited February 27, 2009 by Christopher

[Selene]

"All we hear from President Obama is that he inherited the budget problem from his predecessor."

Well Michael you know that he is an "outsider" , he just basically spontaneously appeared in Washington on January 20th, 2009.

And Christopher, a question, would you be able to provide us with the web site you pulled the statistics from?

I always used to teach my students and share with my friends the complete conjugation of "lie":

lies.......

damned lies...........and

STATISTICS

Adam

[Christopher]

And Christopher, a question, would you be able to provide us with the web site you pulled the statistics from?

I always used to teach my students and share with my friends the complete conjugation of "lie":

lies.......

damned lies...........and

STATISTICS

Statistically speaking, there are only a small percentage of statistical reports that actually detract from the truth.

The URL is in the post, and a quick confirmation can be done by going to yahoo and typing in presidencies national debt and pulling up any of the first few pages.

[Selene]

Oh that's true...

global warming

the gallop poll

the NY Times poll

You are correct

Adam

[Barbara Branden]

Roger: "Also, I think there is a very real possibility that there will be a further power grab, when (not if) these huge spend/borrow/tax programs crash and burn. One Party system? Quite possibly."

Roger, this is precisely the possibility that has been worrying me. And I'm afraid that such possibilities have no reality for most Americans, who cannot really believe the extent of the danger we face. To me, one of the most attractive qualities about Americans had been their innocence -- by which I mean their difficulty in recognizing that evil does exist in the world and does threaten them; it is an innocence that even 9/11 did not destroy. But today I see that innocence as, potentially, fatally dangerous. Government control of the economy -- fascism -- is not sneaking up on us as it has been doing for many years; now, with the Obama regime, it is galloping. It can be stopped only if it is recognized.

Barbara

[Alfonso Jones]

Also, I think there is a very real possibility that there will be a further power grab, when (not if) these huge spend/borrow/tax programs crash and burn. One Party system? Quite possibly. We'll see what happens in the mid-term Congressional elections in 2010.

I suggest that the expanding spending/borrowing/taxing is a massive power grab, the largest in US history. We're up over 8 trillion so far - and that's if you assume that the budget expansions are one-time only, and not additions to the baseline for future years also.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2009/02...ls-graphic.html

Of course, the other ugly prospect to which you refer is that of movement to a one-party system. I concur that there is reason to fear such action.

Bill P

Edited March 1, 2009 by Bill P

[galtgulch]

Roger: "Also, I think there is a very real possibility that there will be a further power grab, when (not if) these huge spend/borrow/tax programs crash and burn. One Party system? Quite possibly."

Roger, this is precisely the possibility that has been worrying me. And I'm afraid that such possibilities have no reality for most Americans, who cannot really believe the extent of the danger we face. To me, one of the most attractive qualities about Americans had been their innocence -- by which I mean their difficulty in recognizing that evil does exist in the world and does threaten them; it is an innocence that even 9/11 did not destroy. But today I see that innocence as, potentially, fatally dangerous. Government control of the economy -- fascism -- is not sneaking up on us as it has been doing for many years; now, with the Obama regime, it is galloping. It can be stopped only if it is recognized.

Barbara

Barbara,

Of course a minority of citizens do recognize it. Just as happened in pre revolutionary days back in the Eighteenth Century Committees of Safety were formed among the colonists.

http://www.committeesofsafety.org/

Now it is a race against time.

gulch

[Christopher]

Roger: "Also, I think there is a very real possibility that there will be a further power grab, when (not if) these huge spend/borrow/tax programs crash and burn. One Party system? Quite possibly."

Roger, this is precisely the possibility that has been worrying me. And I'm afraid that such possibilities have no reality for most Americans, who cannot really believe the extent of the danger we face. To me, one of the most attractive qualities about Americans had been their innocence -- by which I mean their difficulty in recognizing that evil does exist in the world and does threaten them; it is an innocence that even 9/11 did not destroy. But today I see that innocence as, potentially, fatally dangerous. Government control of the economy -- fascism -- is not sneaking up on us as it has been doing for many years; now, with the Obama regime, it is galloping. It can be stopped only if it is recognized.

Barbara

I have no love for the economic policies that Obama is introducing. I had no love for many of the policies the Bush adminstration showed. I want to stay on this two-party politics for the moment though, because so many people on this forum seem to assume Republicans in government act better than democrats. That's simply not true. I think we really benefit by having a two-party system precisely because when both parties are simultaneously in power (congress/white house), nothing gets done... and that's what we all really want, eh.

Some 8 years ago, I recall there was a newscaster or some well-known individual who predicted that the Democratic party was at an end. Clearly it was not, so I assume that the Republican party ain't gonna die either.

How is this for a personal opinion:

1. Statistics show that having a Republican versus a Democrat in the White House leads to greater expansion in government. These results are what individuals in the academic field call "statistically significant." Therefore, a democrat should be in the White House (plain and simple).

And because:

A. If it's a Republican president and a Republican congress, congress goes along party lines dumb and blind to a president's leadership

B. If it's a Republican president and a Democratic-controlled congress, congress is for spending just as long as they can spend some on their own pet projects

2. Having a Republican-controlled congress is better than a Democratic-controlled congress precisely because the Republican congressmen actually acknowledge a desire to act against government spending.

And because:

A. if it's a Democrat in the White House, the Republicans stop him from spending

Just my thoughts...

Christopher

[Alfonso Jones]

If we consider the two questions:

Which party controls congress?

Which party holds the presidency?

then we have a total of four possibilities. I would content that the worst of the four is a Democratic president with a Democratic-controlled congress.

Bill P

[Robert Campbell]

To get back to Michael's original post,

President Obama is what I call a political butterfly. He lands on something unpleasant, but then flies off it. As a subordinate, you can do that and remain above it all. As leader, you can't without serious punishment from followers.

I noticed today a comment from a White House staffer that President Obama is planning to issue some statement of "principles" for his impending national health care scheme—but will let "Congress" decide all of the specifics.

If this is for real, Obama didn't just farm most of the "stimulus" bill out to the Democratic barons of the House and the satraps of the Senate—and the 2009 omnibus appropriation act, with all of the earmarks still in it—he's going to farm out his health care scheme, too?

What's he going to do when it starts coming back to bite him? Complain that it was all Nancy Pelosi's fault? Or David Obey's? Or Barney Frank's? Or Henry Waxman's? Or Teddy Kennedy's?

When he starts getting chomped on, I don't think fleeing Washington to bring his dog and pony show to another burg in the hinterlands wlll help him much.

Robert Campbell

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

I think President Obama's problems are going to occur much, much sooner than I anticipated. He has promised too often one thing in public and is now blatantly doing another, while stonewalling the criticism and even saying he isn't really doing that.

For instance, this earmark bill. He promised over and over he would not put up with earmarks, yet here is a bill in hog heaven. If the public does not grok the principles in more complex cases, here is one that is so in-your-face blatant that it is practically impossible not to understand what is going on.

This is the same procedure that made people turn against President Bush in his justifications for the Iraq war.

The reason people on the fence voted for President Obama was to get away from politicians who haughtily treat public honesty and honoring one's word as not worth bothering with and treating the the public as if it were stupid, while they undertake major projects like a war or a humongous debt. Here is President Obama now doing this while piling on debts unheard of in size throughout the history of mankind.

Even friendly media like CNN and ABC are starting to complain about the explicit inconsistency between his campaign promises and his present acts, and his selective use of data to justify himself to the point of error.

This is a credibility snowball that is hard to stop once it starts rolling. I don't recall ever seeing one get this big so soon in a new President's administration.

President Obama's credibility with the public at large is on much thinner ice than he imagines. I predict it will be shot to hell in a few short months. Then I expect rumblings of impeachment as the start of a new snowball.

Michael

[Selene]

Michael:

I understand what you mean. What primarily terrifies me is that:

1) he believes that his ends justify this type of complete refusal to address these contradictions; or

2) he is the completely empty "voicebox" that is either being manipulated by the "puppet masters" or rumbling forward on leftist fumes.

Meanwhile, back in the really mean, hard and cruel world:

1) China has just finished three (3) straight years of increased "defense" spending [adding up to approximately a 50% increase] and much of the spending is totally off public budget [which O'Biwan has now been nice enough to voluntarily disclose to our enemies];

2) Iran has launched a satellite successfully. Let's see is it easier to "drop" a bomb from a satellite or to launch it from the ground into a set defense system?

3) Chavez is probing and pushing his power sphere to Bolivia and Cuba;

4) Our friendly Russian glasnost buds have just commissioned a fleet of state of the art and technology nuclear subs. They are working on their own SDI systems. They know O'Biwan is weak;

5) India is extending it's power spheres dramatically out into the seas and the sea routes;

6) Oh yes, no big deal, but Gates announced that we would be sending military "advisers" to Vietnam, oops sorry we did that [the water supply routes were a pain] Mexico! Ahh, well it's a good thing that will not lead to a ground war in Asia at least. Well once we secure Mexico we have a much smaller southern land border to build a fence on.

And those are just off the top of my head.

This stumbling pitiful paralysis economically projects absolute weakness to our enemies.

The apparent damage that his lack of leadership domestically and internationally is exponentially growing.

If he is as evil as I believe him to be, the Reichstag option becomes the next card to play.

Adam

[galtgulch]

If he is as evil as I believe him to be, the Reichstag option becomes the next card to play.

Adam

Adam,

"The Reichstag option!" has an ominous ring. Curious how you expect that would play out? How do they get past the metal detectors ?

gulch

[Selene]

Gulch:

Not literally like V the movie and Parliament, or the Congress. The Minnesota Mall or hell the mid town tunnel and Lincoln would be the equivalent of the Reichstag.

The key is the propaganda machine being in place to immediately push for serious national control. A soft tyranny of ID's, cameras and chips for starters and of course the segregation of folks that we are not quite "sure about".

Adam

[anonrobt]

Gulch:

Not literally like V the movie and Parliament, or the Congress. The Minnesota Mall or hell the mid town tunnel and Lincoln would be the equivalent of the Reichstag.

The key is the propaganda machine being in place to immediately push for serious national control. A soft tyranny of ID's, cameras and chips for starters and of course the segregation of folks that we are not quite "sure about".

Adam

Interestingly, a number of folk thought this would be the case with Bush, to keeping on beyond the two terms...

[Selene]

Well I gave up tin foil hats when I was about 8 - that was never a possibility.