Iran Air pilots are joining the uprising

[NEDude]

I know many of the Republicans idolize Reagan. Reagan was a remarkable President during a remarkable time. But he left office 20 years ago and died five years ago. No matter how much they want it, there is no Republican out there that can hold a candle to Ronald Reagan. Regardless of whether you like his policies or not, Reagan acted like a President should act - confident, well spoken, dignified and exceedingly proud of our country. Every President since, Republican or Democrat, has been lacking in at least one of those areas. Bush 1 did not seem to have the confidence area down very well (the wimp issue), Clinton was confident and well spoken, but was certainly not dignified and some could question his pride in the country - at least he did not manifest it in a way Reagan did. Bush 2 was confident and exceedingly proud of our country, but I don't know of anyone who would accuse him of being well spoken , and that also hurt his ability to be dignified. Obama is confident, well spoken and dignified, but has yet to show exceeding pride in the country (again not that he is not proud of the USA, but he certainly has not shown it in a way Reagan did - Reagan set the gold standard for that.)

Just my humble observation.

 

[MountainFreak]

What was so horrible with what I said? Are you blind to the fact that BHO is turning this country into a Socialist country?
I doubt you're Military. Boy Scouts doesn't count.

More than 20 years and counting. Did Boy Scouts too though. Do I get a Socialist Merit Badge?

 

[BLUE BAYOU]

A healthy economy will = healthy tax revenues. This current administration's upcoming taxes on the "rich" will certainly complicate the economy's recovery. The largest growth in jobs has come from small businesses in the last 10 years-- who do think makes above $250,000 per year and is considered "rich"... Additionally, how much money is the "new" health care initiatives going to run the country, errr, the taxpayers???

 

[Draginass]

Yes, life under the Bush administration was just wonderful. Unchecked corporate greed leading to the worst recession since the 1930s, massive bank failures, government granting itself unchecked powers to detain and spy on its own citizens, a long war based on personal revenge and faulty intelligence that has cost thousands of American lives and hundreds of billions of dollars and hundreds of thousands of American jobs lost or shipped overseas. What fun, why can't we have more of it?

Stop watching Fox News and listening to Rush Limbaugh. It is amazing what happens when you do, I speak from experience.

Got news for you. The Dems were part of that also. Barney Frank and his ilk were personally responsible for killing a bill to reign in unchecked loans to people who obviously could not repay them. They're ALL responsible. The only difference is that the Dems are going to TRIPLE the national debt while complaining about Republican spending.

 

[BoilerUP]

The country was well on its way to entering a recession before Clinton left and Bush took office in early 2001.

What helped this country dive head-long into its current situation was also an energy crisis, namely a large spike in energy (oil). It took money out of people's pockets that they otherwise would have spent on goods and went into their gas tank, and to every other consumable because their costs went up dramatically as well.

Combine that with credit that was FAR too loose and the greed-slash-stupidity of lenders & borrowers alike putting people into homes they could never really afford, and BLAMMO big recession.

People smarter than those on FI.com are predicting the recession will officially end in September, give or take a month; of course, if there is another major spike in energy, a terrorist attack, a massive bank fails, or some other crazy geopolitical event all bets are off.

And yes, when that happens our country will be in SUBSTANTIALLY more debt than even before. Whether or not it was necessary will be left to scholars decades from now; what we'll be left with is tons of printed money leading to inflation and trying to figure out a way to pay down this massive debt (via spending cuts [yeah, right] or increased taxation [on health care benefits, income taxes, or God forbid a VAT]). And that's all before they try to reform healthcare and try to find a way to pay for that.

The answer isn't simply lower taxes and lower spending, nor is it spending on social programs and a war on wealth leading to higher taxation. The solution will be somewhere in the middle, creating some degree of pain for all involved.

 

[sat74]

MountainFreak[/B]]And to think I risk my life in the military protecting freedom of speech for a dip$hIt like you.
.

I forgot there were foreign forces lined up on our shoreline waiting to invade the USA and take over our country!

The biggest threat to freedom of speech is from within our own government who seem to have all forgotten what our Constitution stands for!

 

[NEDude]

Got news for you. The Dems were part of that also. Barney Frank and his ilk were personally responsible for killing a bill to reign in unchecked loans to people who obviously could not repay them. They're ALL responsible. The only difference is that the Dems are going to TRIPLE the national debt while complaining about Republican spending.

During the first term of the Bush administration, with Republicans in virtually total control of the government - White House, Senate, House of Representatives, and a right leaning Supreme Court - government spending rose 33%. The Republican congress voted to increase spending by 27% on domestic programs they promised to eliminate back in 1995. The Republican congress actually voted to increase spending on domestic social programs even above the increases Bush proposed. On the last day of the Clinton administration the federal budget was 18.5% of GDP. On the last day of the first Bush term it had risen to 20.3% of GDP.

Again, this happened while the Republicans had virtually total control over the entire federal government. So tell me, where do the Republicans get off complaining about someone else spending money?

 

[PeanuckleCRJ]

Bush was a liberal in spending, no doubt about that. The fact is the republicans have totally lost their ideals of small government and responsible spending.

People tend to forget that it was the GOP that pushed Clinton (remember the government shutdown for a few days?) into the balanced budget.

The recession of 2001 was going to happen no matter who was in office. The dot com bubble had been ready to burst for months and months. A bunch of paper companies....

Same with the real estate bubble and massive loans given out in this last bubble- anyone who thought we could keep building and building and building is a certified moron.



This being said, it certainly doesn't make me support Obama anymore. Why would an idiotic republican president who lost the ideals of his party (as well as most of his constituents) make me support someone who spends even more? That's a stupid conclusion that some have made.

 

[boxjockey]

I feel like the underlying problem that many are failing to grasp is the SEVERE fiscal irresponsibility that we as Americans have nurtured for all of these years. And by years I mean nearly 30. Read my posts from a year ago. If the average family of 4 earns 49K, and carry 18K in UNSECURED debt, then their budget will never balance. If lenders truly do turn back to fiscal responsibility, similar to the period from the 40's to the 80's, then we may very well be in for a "lost decade". The other alternative is that the irresponsible masses quell their debts through the courts and defaults. The financial repercussions in this instance would also be dire. I'm not a doom-and-gloomer, but I see this situation being far worse than many media and government outlets would like us to believe. It is in their best interest for us to have confidence and spend, but what are most going to use for their purchases? Negative savings rate for how many years? Debt loads per person never before seen? In my mind we have had 25 years of VIRTUAL prosperity, and to unwind that will take a long time. Please input your ideas and how you see things shaking out. This is simply my belief. Good luck to us all!!

box

 

[Indy319FA]

Funny, Bush and the Republicans inherited a balanced budget from a Democrat and proceeded to spend the next eight years overseeing massive government expansion, writing blank checks and racking up record deficits. Now five months into the Obama administration the Republicans are suddenly fiscally responsible? Give me $@*&#@ break! It takes a lot longer than five months to undo the massive damage done by Bush.

You're forgetting that Clinton had a Republican Congress forcing him to balance the budget during the last six years of his presidency. Also Armey left in 2003 and Kasich left in 2001, and both of them were largely responsible for forcing budget discipline. The Republicans lost their way on spending, and were righfully punished for this.

Reagan blamed Carter for years but then again Reagan never did anything wrong according to the current conservatives. Where were all of you fiscal conservatives when Reagan, Bush I and II ran up the deficit?

One of the greatest dissapointments of the Reagan years was his inability to restrain spending. But its a little disengenous to put all the blame on Reagan for this with Tip O'Neill Jim Wright and Dan Rostenkowski writing all the spending bills. As far as Poppy Bush goes, he lost me when he caved to the Democrats on taxes and spending, and I didn't vote for him when he ran for re election. Bush II was an extreme dissappointment when it comes to spending, particularly in his last six months in office. Unfortunately the big spending Republicans and Bush blew the Republican coalition apart because the big tent was based on smaller government and lower taxes. He failed on both. Obama, however, has done more for the Republican Party than anyone else because he has governed from the far left, instead of the middle where he campaigned. It remains to be seen if Republicans can take advantage of this.