phrodeau
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2002
- Posts
- 78,588
That's the TAPS. It was a big deal in the 70's; approved by Nixon.
The Obamagood Thread
- Thread starter IrezumiKiss
- Start date
Sean Renaud
The West Coast Pop
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2004
- Posts
- 59,600
So where is this sand hills that was so vital they avoid? It seems Nebraska is already pretty fucked. Either it's gonna happen or it's not but one more doesn't seem to make a difference.
NeverEndingMe
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Jun 20, 2011
- Posts
- 15,925
the racist regime is coming to an end.
we tried the obama experiment, it was a failure
we tried the obama experiment, it was a failure
IrezumiKiss
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2007
- Posts
- 74,229
Remember Republicans ranting that Obama would ruin U.S. auto industry? Sales now highest since 9/11
By Ian Reifowitz
Sunday Nov 08, 2015 1:30 PM EST
http://images.dailykos.com/images/9733/story_image/Obama_7.jpg?1352207113
Wrong again, Republicans.
On November 18, 2008, Mitt Romney wrote an op-ed piece for the New York Times titled "Let Detroit Go Bankrupt." Here's the lead paragraph:
If General Motors, Ford and Chrysler get the bailout that their chief executives asked for yesterday, you can kiss the American automotive industry goodbye. It won’t go overnight, but its demise will be virtually guaranteed.
Detroit got its bailout, starting with some emergency bridge loans issued in the final weeks of the George W. Bush administration. In the spring of 2009, President Obama implemented a much more comprehensive package that included the government taking a 60 percent ownership stake in General Motors.
Even before Romney spoke out, the Washington Post editorial board had opposed any bailouts, publishing an October 27, 2008 piece called "Welfare for Detroit." Once the bailouts were implemented, other voices weighed in from the right. Most of these echoed Romney, arguing in favor of letting the companies fail rather than the government getting involved. In June 2009, John Boehner sneeringly asked: "Does anyone really believe that politicians and bureaucrats in Washington can successfully steer a multi-national corporation to economic viability?" Other critics went well beyond economic arguments. The day the restructuring of General Motors was announced on March 30, 2009, Rush Limbaugh accused the president of simply wanting to "take over" the auto industry, so that it would "become another industry doing his bidding." As for how the bailout would work out, three months later Limbaugh added: "[Obama's] taking over more of these businesses and running them into the ground at the same time." The critics were having an effect. By June 2009, an NBC/Wall Street Journal poll found that the American people disapproved by a 53 to 39 percent margin of "the federal government providing loans and financial assistance to Chrysler and GM." Romney himself, on the campaign trail in early 2012, also accused the president of playing politics with the bailout, characterizing it as "crony capitalism on a grand scale," and added, "instead of doing the right thing and standing up to union bosses, Mr. Obama rewarded them." Were the critics right? Read on.
Of course not. I wouldn't ask you a trick question. As early as summer 2010, The Economist—a well-known bastion of 'free-market' ideology—declared:
An apology is due to Barack Obama: his takeover of GM could have gone horribly wrong, but it has not. Many people thought this bail-out (and a smaller one involving Chrysler, an even sicker firm) unwise. [snip] Yet the doomsayers were wrong.
By September 2012, even Limbaugh himself had flip-flopped. Rather than continuing to bash Obama over the bailout, he found a new tune to sing: It worked, but the credit belongs to George W. Bush alone. "George W. Bush did the auto bailout. Yeah, Obama asked Bush to, but Bush did it. It was already done by the time Obama got there." Bear in mind that in April 2009, Rush had claimed that Chrysler and GM "bent over, [and] grabbed the ankles" because "everybody's scared of Obama." Leaving aside the reprehensible connotations of rape, Limbaugh has the president somehow morphing from an intimidating bully into an essentially uninvolved bystander. Why bring all this up now? This past month, U.S. auto sales reached their highest levels since September 11, when companies offered 0% financing deals in order to bolster sales after the attacks. At the current pace, there will be more cars sold in 2015 than in any year since, well, ever. Boy, were the doomsayers wrong. But if we don't spread the word about the facts, it's far too easy for a lie to take hold. We saw that in Houston this past week, albeit on a different issue. We see it in the revisionist right wingers arguing that the New Deal didn't work—when of course, it absolutely did. Right-wing economic ideology purports that government shouldn't get involved in "picking winners and losers." They argue that a recession should weed out weaker companies, and that the "winds of creative destruction" blowing through an economy will—in the long run—produce a stronger set of circumstances than anything government intervention can achieve. Of course, as John Maynard Keynes noted, in the long run we're all dead. But even in the short run, it is clear that our government was right to save the auto industry. Specifically, Barack Obama was right when he acted more aggressively than any recent president to intervene in the running of a major industry. Doing so saved anywhere from two to four million jobs, and saved between $40 and $105 billion in net costs to the American people, according to an analysis done by the Center for Automotive Research. We must publicize and, yes, celebrate that success. We must do so because, despite all the evidence, despite the walk-backs and apologies issued by some who criticized the deal, the boogeyman is still out there. Marco Rubio, now considered by lots of smart people to be "the most likely candidate to win the Republican 2016 presidential nomination," had this to say just a few months ago about what the government did to save the auto industry:
I don't think that was the right way to handle it, but certainly our auto industry is important. Again, it was a problematic approach that the federal government took to doing it. But at the end of the day our industry has to be globally competitive. One of the things that makes them globally competitive ... is having a workforce that can do the work and also having tax policies, regulatory policies that ensures that America continues to be a place where all industries thrive including the auto industry.
http://images.dailykos.com/images/174341/large/us-auto-sales-skitch.jpg?1446741513
The above graph—which doesn't even include the new sales record set just last month—proves that Marco Rubio is as wrong as a pickup truck with five wheels. In reality, Rubio's the perfect Republican nominee, because, to paraphrase Mark Twain, the GOP never lets the truth stand in the way of a good story.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/11/8/1444619/-Remember-Republicans-ranting-that-Obama-would-ruin-U-S-auto-industry-Sales-now-highest-since-9-11
By Ian Reifowitz
Sunday Nov 08, 2015 1:30 PM EST
http://images.dailykos.com/images/9733/story_image/Obama_7.jpg?1352207113
Wrong again, Republicans.
On November 18, 2008, Mitt Romney wrote an op-ed piece for the New York Times titled "Let Detroit Go Bankrupt." Here's the lead paragraph:
If General Motors, Ford and Chrysler get the bailout that their chief executives asked for yesterday, you can kiss the American automotive industry goodbye. It won’t go overnight, but its demise will be virtually guaranteed.
Detroit got its bailout, starting with some emergency bridge loans issued in the final weeks of the George W. Bush administration. In the spring of 2009, President Obama implemented a much more comprehensive package that included the government taking a 60 percent ownership stake in General Motors.
Even before Romney spoke out, the Washington Post editorial board had opposed any bailouts, publishing an October 27, 2008 piece called "Welfare for Detroit." Once the bailouts were implemented, other voices weighed in from the right. Most of these echoed Romney, arguing in favor of letting the companies fail rather than the government getting involved. In June 2009, John Boehner sneeringly asked: "Does anyone really believe that politicians and bureaucrats in Washington can successfully steer a multi-national corporation to economic viability?" Other critics went well beyond economic arguments. The day the restructuring of General Motors was announced on March 30, 2009, Rush Limbaugh accused the president of simply wanting to "take over" the auto industry, so that it would "become another industry doing his bidding." As for how the bailout would work out, three months later Limbaugh added: "[Obama's] taking over more of these businesses and running them into the ground at the same time." The critics were having an effect. By June 2009, an NBC/Wall Street Journal poll found that the American people disapproved by a 53 to 39 percent margin of "the federal government providing loans and financial assistance to Chrysler and GM." Romney himself, on the campaign trail in early 2012, also accused the president of playing politics with the bailout, characterizing it as "crony capitalism on a grand scale," and added, "instead of doing the right thing and standing up to union bosses, Mr. Obama rewarded them." Were the critics right? Read on.
Of course not. I wouldn't ask you a trick question. As early as summer 2010, The Economist—a well-known bastion of 'free-market' ideology—declared:
An apology is due to Barack Obama: his takeover of GM could have gone horribly wrong, but it has not. Many people thought this bail-out (and a smaller one involving Chrysler, an even sicker firm) unwise. [snip] Yet the doomsayers were wrong.
By September 2012, even Limbaugh himself had flip-flopped. Rather than continuing to bash Obama over the bailout, he found a new tune to sing: It worked, but the credit belongs to George W. Bush alone. "George W. Bush did the auto bailout. Yeah, Obama asked Bush to, but Bush did it. It was already done by the time Obama got there." Bear in mind that in April 2009, Rush had claimed that Chrysler and GM "bent over, [and] grabbed the ankles" because "everybody's scared of Obama." Leaving aside the reprehensible connotations of rape, Limbaugh has the president somehow morphing from an intimidating bully into an essentially uninvolved bystander. Why bring all this up now? This past month, U.S. auto sales reached their highest levels since September 11, when companies offered 0% financing deals in order to bolster sales after the attacks. At the current pace, there will be more cars sold in 2015 than in any year since, well, ever. Boy, were the doomsayers wrong. But if we don't spread the word about the facts, it's far too easy for a lie to take hold. We saw that in Houston this past week, albeit on a different issue. We see it in the revisionist right wingers arguing that the New Deal didn't work—when of course, it absolutely did. Right-wing economic ideology purports that government shouldn't get involved in "picking winners and losers." They argue that a recession should weed out weaker companies, and that the "winds of creative destruction" blowing through an economy will—in the long run—produce a stronger set of circumstances than anything government intervention can achieve. Of course, as John Maynard Keynes noted, in the long run we're all dead. But even in the short run, it is clear that our government was right to save the auto industry. Specifically, Barack Obama was right when he acted more aggressively than any recent president to intervene in the running of a major industry. Doing so saved anywhere from two to four million jobs, and saved between $40 and $105 billion in net costs to the American people, according to an analysis done by the Center for Automotive Research. We must publicize and, yes, celebrate that success. We must do so because, despite all the evidence, despite the walk-backs and apologies issued by some who criticized the deal, the boogeyman is still out there. Marco Rubio, now considered by lots of smart people to be "the most likely candidate to win the Republican 2016 presidential nomination," had this to say just a few months ago about what the government did to save the auto industry:
I don't think that was the right way to handle it, but certainly our auto industry is important. Again, it was a problematic approach that the federal government took to doing it. But at the end of the day our industry has to be globally competitive. One of the things that makes them globally competitive ... is having a workforce that can do the work and also having tax policies, regulatory policies that ensures that America continues to be a place where all industries thrive including the auto industry.
http://images.dailykos.com/images/174341/large/us-auto-sales-skitch.jpg?1446741513
The above graph—which doesn't even include the new sales record set just last month—proves that Marco Rubio is as wrong as a pickup truck with five wheels. In reality, Rubio's the perfect Republican nominee, because, to paraphrase Mark Twain, the GOP never lets the truth stand in the way of a good story.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/11/8/1444619/-Remember-Republicans-ranting-that-Obama-would-ruin-U-S-auto-industry-Sales-now-highest-since-9-11
Last edited:
NeverEndingMe
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Jun 20, 2011
- Posts
- 15,925
one day closer to the termination of the regime.
hopefully we will have an American for POTUS next time
hopefully America will have a POTUS that respect the constitution
hopefully America will have a POTUS that is a lover of the free market
hopefully we will have an American for POTUS next time
hopefully America will have a POTUS that respect the constitution
hopefully America will have a POTUS that is a lover of the free market
IrezumiKiss
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2007
- Posts
- 74,229
Sean Renaud
The West Coast Pop
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2004
- Posts
- 59,600
This statement comes from whom?
IrezumiKiss
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2007
- Posts
- 74,229
Oops, my bad! Should've credited it directly after.
It's from Senior White House adviser Ben Rhodes:
Top Obama Adviser to Haaretz: Israel to Face Growing Pressure Over Settlements, Peace Process Impasse
Ben Rhodes tells Haaretz the inside story on White House efforts to achieve a breakthrough in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
phrodeau
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2002
- Posts
- 78,588
Well, if he's on Obama's payroll, nobody on the right will pay any attention to what he says.
Sean Renaud
The West Coast Pop
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2004
- Posts
- 59,600
I'm not really in the habit of taking a cheerleader's opinion on her team. At least not when it's positive.
NeverEndingMe
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Jun 20, 2011
- Posts
- 15,925
IrezumiKiss
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2007
- Posts
- 74,229
Yeah, but this cheerleader happens to be Jewish, so he does has some legit skin in this assessment.
RacyRaconteur
Virgin
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2015
- Posts
- 9
Good to see that Washington's propaganda machine is working exactly as it was intended.
How's the Kool-aid?
How's the Kool-aid?
IrezumiKiss
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2007
- Posts
- 74,229
Wouldn't know. I drink gins, bourbons and whiskeys when I'm not drinking water.
Looks like you're brand new. Congrats on your first post! Since this thread is about a specific topic, there's lots of other threads in this forum to talk about other political stuff you may want to opine on, or you can simply make your own and start up a discussion that way. Enjoy!
RacyRaconteur
Virgin
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2015
- Posts
- 9
Thank you for your generous welcome.
I like this thread. It's a rather cozy little echo chamber.
IrezumiKiss
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2007
- Posts
- 74,229
Not a chamber so much as a partitioned lounge section away from the main dance hall. It's cozy because the sofas are plush and there's a better top shelf bar.
Still, you should get out there and dance. Mingle some, meet some folk. Raconteurs make terrible wallflowers, you know!
NeverEndingMe
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Jun 20, 2011
- Posts
- 15,925
we have to understand that the obama kind are mentally defective. KingofAssTards is a fucking idiot. IzzyWhat'sitsName is a racist welfare pile of pig crap
IrezumiKiss
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2007
- Posts
- 74,229
Marco Rubio Promoted Core Tenets Of Obamacare And Obama Energy Policies
In 2006 GOP presidential candidate Marco Rubio wrote a book urging expanded government-run healthcare.
http://s1.ibtimes.com/sites/www.ibtimes.com/files/styles/v2_article_large/public/2015/11/10/marco-rubio.jpg
As he announced his presidential campaign in April, Florida Sen. Marco Rubio promised to “repeal and replace Obamacare.” Rubio has been advocating repeal since 2013, helping him build support among the GOP’s conservative base that is key to winning Republican presidential primaries. Yet only a few years before he was elected to the U.S. Senate, Rubio was aggressively promoting some of the core policies of the Affordable Care Act.
In 2006, Rubio released a book called “100 Innovative Ideas for Florida’s Future.” In the book’s section on healthcare, Rubio decried the fact that “more than 3 million Floridians lack health insurance and may face barriers in accessing needed health services.” As a solution, Rubio pressed to expand government-run healthcare programs and create an insurance exchange -- both core tenets of Obamacare.
For instance, he lamented that at one government-funded health program in Florida “enrollment has dropped by over 130,000 from its peak several years ago, primarily due to the tightening of eligibility screening procedures.” When it came to the government-run State Child Health Insurance Program, Rubio criticized the fact that “Florida has underspent its federal SCHIP allocations by more than $450 million.”
Rubio also touted other government-run health programs in Florida, writing: “A variety of programs and services exist to meet the healthcare needs of low-income and uninsured residents. These efforts include Florida KidCare, the Florida Health Insurance Plan, Health Flex, community-based free clinics, and other safety-net programs. The state should expand these efforts.” He added: “Florida should make it easier for qualified, uninsured children to get coverage through Florida KidCare.”
As for private insurance, Rubio said, “Florida should launch a marketplace of affordable health insurance.” He also wrote that “to further jumpstart this program, the state could also provide a partial subsidy for a limited number of qualified subscribers.”
Two of the key tenets of the ACA -- which is anathema to conservatives -- are the expansion of state-based Medicaid programs and the creation of insurance exchanges.
Rubio has slammed the Obama administration’s energy policy. In his 2013 State of the Union rebuttal, he said that “solar and wind energy should be a part of our energy portfolio” but that “God also blessed America with abundant coal, oil and natural gas.” He attacked the Obama administration for “wasting more taxpayer money on so-called clean energy companies like Solyndra.” But Rubio’s 2006 book criticized reliance on fossil fuels and supported renewable energy initiatives.
In one section, he wrote that government should “promote the development and use of alternative energy sources” and argued that “substitution of alternative energy sources for fossil fuels is critical to reducing our dependence on imported oil.” He also expressed concern about a potential “overreliance” on fossil fuels, noting that “fossil fuels represent 86 percent” of Florida’s energy generating capacity. He declared that “dependence on oil jeopardizes Florida’s continued economic prosperity” and said that Florida should “build energy-efficient buildings that meet environmental standards.”
The Florida GOP spent roughly $575,000 to promote Rubio’s book, according to the Palm Beach Post. Rubio also set up a nonprofit to promote it.
The book’s promotion of themes echoed by Obama could intensify recent efforts by Rubio’s rivals to peel away conservative voters flocking to his campaign. Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush’s campaign in particular recently called Rubio "a GOP Obama."
There’s just one problem for Bush: He backed Rubio’s book with a back-cover endorsement and a foreword.
http://www.ibtimes.com/political-capital/marco-rubio-promoted-core-tenets-obamacare-obama-energy-policies-2177585
https://d.gr-assets.com/hostedimages/1380222758ra/410729.gif
In 2006 GOP presidential candidate Marco Rubio wrote a book urging expanded government-run healthcare.
http://s1.ibtimes.com/sites/www.ibtimes.com/files/styles/v2_article_large/public/2015/11/10/marco-rubio.jpg
As he announced his presidential campaign in April, Florida Sen. Marco Rubio promised to “repeal and replace Obamacare.” Rubio has been advocating repeal since 2013, helping him build support among the GOP’s conservative base that is key to winning Republican presidential primaries. Yet only a few years before he was elected to the U.S. Senate, Rubio was aggressively promoting some of the core policies of the Affordable Care Act.
In 2006, Rubio released a book called “100 Innovative Ideas for Florida’s Future.” In the book’s section on healthcare, Rubio decried the fact that “more than 3 million Floridians lack health insurance and may face barriers in accessing needed health services.” As a solution, Rubio pressed to expand government-run healthcare programs and create an insurance exchange -- both core tenets of Obamacare.
For instance, he lamented that at one government-funded health program in Florida “enrollment has dropped by over 130,000 from its peak several years ago, primarily due to the tightening of eligibility screening procedures.” When it came to the government-run State Child Health Insurance Program, Rubio criticized the fact that “Florida has underspent its federal SCHIP allocations by more than $450 million.”
Rubio also touted other government-run health programs in Florida, writing: “A variety of programs and services exist to meet the healthcare needs of low-income and uninsured residents. These efforts include Florida KidCare, the Florida Health Insurance Plan, Health Flex, community-based free clinics, and other safety-net programs. The state should expand these efforts.” He added: “Florida should make it easier for qualified, uninsured children to get coverage through Florida KidCare.”
As for private insurance, Rubio said, “Florida should launch a marketplace of affordable health insurance.” He also wrote that “to further jumpstart this program, the state could also provide a partial subsidy for a limited number of qualified subscribers.”
Two of the key tenets of the ACA -- which is anathema to conservatives -- are the expansion of state-based Medicaid programs and the creation of insurance exchanges.
Rubio has slammed the Obama administration’s energy policy. In his 2013 State of the Union rebuttal, he said that “solar and wind energy should be a part of our energy portfolio” but that “God also blessed America with abundant coal, oil and natural gas.” He attacked the Obama administration for “wasting more taxpayer money on so-called clean energy companies like Solyndra.” But Rubio’s 2006 book criticized reliance on fossil fuels and supported renewable energy initiatives.
In one section, he wrote that government should “promote the development and use of alternative energy sources” and argued that “substitution of alternative energy sources for fossil fuels is critical to reducing our dependence on imported oil.” He also expressed concern about a potential “overreliance” on fossil fuels, noting that “fossil fuels represent 86 percent” of Florida’s energy generating capacity. He declared that “dependence on oil jeopardizes Florida’s continued economic prosperity” and said that Florida should “build energy-efficient buildings that meet environmental standards.”
The Florida GOP spent roughly $575,000 to promote Rubio’s book, according to the Palm Beach Post. Rubio also set up a nonprofit to promote it.
The book’s promotion of themes echoed by Obama could intensify recent efforts by Rubio’s rivals to peel away conservative voters flocking to his campaign. Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush’s campaign in particular recently called Rubio "a GOP Obama."
There’s just one problem for Bush: He backed Rubio’s book with a back-cover endorsement and a foreword.
http://www.ibtimes.com/political-capital/marco-rubio-promoted-core-tenets-obamacare-obama-energy-policies-2177585
https://d.gr-assets.com/hostedimages/1380222758ra/410729.gif
NeverEndingMe
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Jun 20, 2011
- Posts
- 15,925
obama is a criminal ... its just that simple
NeverEndingMe
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Jun 20, 2011
- Posts
- 15,925
anyone with intelligence can see the bullshit the obama does. therefore, obama is anti American
IrezumiKiss
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2007
- Posts
- 74,229
NeverEndingMe
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Jun 20, 2011
- Posts
- 15,925
how mentally damaged does one have to be, in order to support the terrorist obama?
RacyRaconteur
Virgin
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2015
- Posts
- 9
Not a chamber so much as a partitioned lounge section away from the main dance hall. It's cozy because the sofas are plush and there's a better top shelf bar.
Still, you should get out there and dance. Mingle some, meet some folk. Raconteurs make terrible wallflowers, you know!
Oh, don't worry. I plan to trot in and out of as many threads as I possibly can. I just have a soft spot for isolated areas where everyone thinks alike.
So safe.
NeverEndingMe
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Jun 20, 2011
- Posts
- 15,925
remember, that jackass is a racist asshole. its one of the obama kind. unable but more importantly, unwilling to work
IrezumiKiss
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2007
- Posts
- 74,229
Similar threads
