16 Months later under the Democrats
Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: 16 Months later under the Democrats

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Battle Creek Mi
    Posts
    1,853

    Thumbs up 16 Months later under the Democrats

    16 Months later under the Democrats


    Part 1 In just 16 months. Remember the election in 2006? Thought you might like to read the following:

    A little over 16 MONTHS ago:


    1) Consumer confidence stood at a 2 1/2 year high;
    2) Regular gasoline sold for $2.19 a gallon;
    3) The unemployment rate was 4.5%.



    Since voting in a Democratic Congress in 2006 we have seen:



    1) Consumer confidence plummet to the lowest point in over 75 years;
    2) The cost of regular gasoline soar to over $4.50 a gallon;
    3) Unemployment is up to 5% (a 10% increase);
    4) American households have seen $2.3 trillion in equity value evaporate (stock and mutual fund losses);
    5) Americans have seen their home equity drop by $1.2 trillion dollars;
    6) 1% of American homes are in foreclosure.



    America voted for change in 2006, and we got it!



    Remember it is Congress that makes laws; not the President. He has to work with what's handed to him.



    Quote of the Day........'My friends, we live in the greatest nation in the history of the world. I hope you'll join with me as we try to change it. ?? -- Barack Obama


    Part 2:

    Taxes.. Whether Democrat or a Republican you will find these statistics enlightening and amazing.

    The Tax Foundation - U.S. Federal Individual Income Tax Rates History, 1913-2008

    Taxes under Clinton 1999............................Taxes under Bush 2008
    Single making 30K - tax $8,400.....................Single making 30K - tax $4,500
    Single making 50K - tax $14,000...................Single making 50K - tax $12,500
    Single making 75K - tax $23,250 ..................Single making 75K - tax $18,750
    Married making 60K - tax $16,800.................Married making 60K- tax $9,000
    Married making 75K - tax $21,000.................Married making 75K - tax $18,750
    Married making 125K - tax $38,750...............Married making 125K - tax $31,250

    Obama will return to the higher tax rates. It is amazing how many people that fall into the categories above think Bush is screwing them and Bill Clinton was the greatest President ever. If Obama is elected, he said he will repeal the Bush tax cuts and a good portion of the people that fall into the categories above can't wait for it to happen.

    This is like the movie The Sting with Paul Newman; you scam somebody out of some money and they don't even know what happened.



    PART 3:

    You think the war in Iraq is costing us too much? Boy, am I confused. I have been hammered with the propaganda that it is the Iraq war and the war on terror that is bankrupting us.

    I now find that to be RIDICULOUS.

    I hope the following 14 reasons are forwarded over and over again until they are read so many times that the reader gets sick of reading them. I have included the URL's for verification of all the following facts.



    1. $11 Billion to $22 billion is spent on welfare to illegal aliens each year by state governments.
    Verify at: FAIR: Immigration and Welfare

    2. $2.2 Billion dollars a year is spent on food assistance programs such as food stamps, WIC, and free school lunches for illegal aliens.
    Verify at: http://www.cis..org/articles/2004/fiscalexec.html

    3. $2.5 Billion dollars a year is spent on Medicaid for illegal aliens.
    Verify at: http://www.cis..org/articles/2004/fiscalexec.html

    4. $12 Billion dollars a year is spent on primary and secondary school education for children here illegally and they cannot speak a word of English!
    Verify at: http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIP.../01/ldt.0.html

    5. $17 Billion dollars a year is spent for education for the American-born children of illegal aliens, known as anchor babies.
    Verify at CNN.com - Transcripts

    6. $3 Million Dollars a DAY is spent to incarcerate illegal aliens.
    Verify at: CNN.com - Transcripts

    7. 30% percent of all Federal Prison inmates are illegal aliens.
    Verify at: http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIP...01/ldt.01.html

    8. $90 Billion Dollars a year is spent on illegal aliens for Welfare & social services by the American taxpayers.
    Verify at: cnn.com/TRANSCIPTS/0610/29/ldt.01.htmlhref

    9. $200 Billion Dollars a year in suppressed American wages are caused by the illegal aliens.
    Verify at: http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIP...01/ldt.01.html

    10. The illegal aliens in the United States have a crime rate that's two and a half times that of white non-illegal aliens. In particular, their children, are going to make a huge additional crime problem in the US.
    Verify at: http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIP...12/ldt.01.html

    11. During the year of 2005 there were 4 to 10 MILLION illegal aliens that crossed our Southern Border also, as many as 19,500 illegal aliens from Terrorist Countries. Millions of pounds of drugs, cocaine, meth, heroin and marijuana, crossed into the U. S. from the Southern border.
    Verify at: Homeland Security Report: http://tinyurl.com/t9sht

    12. The National Policy Institute estimated that the total cost of mass deportation would be between $206 and $230 billion or an average cost of between $41 and $46 billion annually over a five year period.
    Verify at: http://www.nationalpolicyinstitute.o...eportation.pdf

    13. In 2006 illegal aliens sent home $45 BILLION in remittances back to their countries of origin.
    Verify at: Wooldridge - How Much Further Into This Nightmare?

    14. 'The Dark Side of Illegal Immigration: Nearly One Million Sex Crimes Committed by Illegal Immigrants In The United States.
    Verify at: http://www.drdsk.com/articleshtml The total cost is a whopping $ 338.3 BILLION DOLLARS A YEAR.

  2.   
  3. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    4,650
    Yes, yes, yes! Bush is such a WONDERFUL president isn't he?

    What else is there to say about a President whose approval ratings have hovered in freezing range for most of the past year and a half, who has annointed himself "The Decider," who is running perhaps the most secretive administration in history, was appointed by the Supreme Court over his opponent who received a half million more popular votes than he did, has presided over a war of choice for which his rationale gets shakier and shakier by the day, and which he continues to justify by insisting that he will "stay the course," (his way of saying that victory is nowhere in sight), has authorized the use of torture against detainees, who authorized a secret warrantless wiretapping program against his own citizens, and has asserted what he believes is his right to ignore portions of laws with which he disagrees. I could go on and on, but I've already made my point clear. George Bush is the second worst president of my lifetime (behind Jimmy Carter) and if he keeps it up, his administration is headed for colossal historical disgrace, perhaps one of the five worst in history, ranking down there with the dubious likes of Buchanan, Harding, Carter, and Johnson.

    Furthermore, you blame the current economic downturn on the Democratic Congress, on the premise that Congress makes the laws. While on paper that is true, remember, it is the president who is in charge, and all of this happened under his watch; twenty years from now when historians evaluate this period in history, they'll look at the last two years of the Bush presidency (rightfully so, because he, not Congress, was in charge), not the 110th Congress. The same goes for other events in American history; does anyone blame the secession of the southern states and the resulting Civil War on the failure of Congress to pass a law outlawing secession? Of course not? Buchanan gets the blame. Does anyone blame the signing over of the Panama Canal on the failure of Congress to pass a law against it? No; Carter gets the blame. Does anyone blame the enactment of the Alien and Sedition Acts (which were passed by Congress) on Congress? Nope; John Adams is typically seen as the villain who allowed this. Finally, when the Treaty of Versailles did not get ratified by the Senate, did people blame the Senate? No; the blame has historically fallen on Woodrow Wilson for his resolute stubbornness to accept any compromises.

    The same goes for when things go right. When the United States emerged victorious from World War II, did anyone give credit to Congress for providing all the funding the troops needed to get the mission accomplished? Of course not; President Roosevelt received the credit. Did anyone give credit to Congress for providing the funds for the Louisiana purchase that doubled the size of the United States? No; Thomas Jefferson received the credit, as he should have. Finally, when the U.S. emerged victorious over the Soviet Union in the Cold War, did anyone give credit to Congress? Of course; President Reagan gets the credit, and his legacy will be determined largely by this.

    I could go on and on, but this post is already long enough. The point I want to make is, that just because Congress is under the control of Democrats, that fact should not absolve the President, who is in charge, of any responsibility in all of this. If the person who is in charge is doing their job poorly, it does not matter which political party his subordinates (Congress) belong to, things will go bad; if they do their job well, things will go well, again, regardless of which political party the subordinates belong to. I believe the examples I have provided are more than adequate evidence of this.
    Last edited by tattedupboy; 07-23-2008 at 01:53 AM.

  4. #3
    The fact is our leaders both Demon crats and Republacrats to a large degree are doing a number on the American public. As long as we continue to pick only from the two headed beast for our leaders we will get more of the same.
    The federal reserve act of 1913 and the following have done more to destroy our way of life than anything else. How many buracrats in either party talk about doing away with either. There is plenty of blame to go around for both parties

    The present federal income tax dates from the act signed by President Wilson on October 3, 1913. That act was made possible by the ratification of the Sixteenth Amendment to the Constitution adopted on February 3, 1913. Earlier federal income tax laws had been repealed or held unconstitutional.
    By faith Noah,being warned of God of things not seen as yet, moved with fear,prepared an ark to the saving of his house;by the which he condemned the world,and became heir of the righteousness which is by faith Heb.11:7

  5. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    60
    Quote Originally Posted by tattedupboy View Post
    Yes, yes, yes! Bush is such a WONDERFUL president isn't he?

    What else is there to say about a President whose approval ratings have hovered in freezing range for most of the past year and a half, who has annointed himself "The Decider," who is running perhaps the most secretive administration in history, was appointed by the Supreme Court over his opponent who received a half million more popular votes than he did, has presided over a war of choice for which his rationale gets shakier and shakier by the day, and which he continues to justify by insisting that he will "stay the course," (his way of saying that victory is nowhere in sight), has authorized the use of torture against detainees, who authorized a secret warrantless wiretapping program against his own citizens, and has asserted what he believes is his right to ignore portions of laws with which he disagrees. I could go on and on, but I've already made my point clear. George Bush is the second worst president of my lifetime (behind Jimmy Carter) and if he keeps it up, his administration is headed for colossal historical disgrace, perhaps one of the five worst in history, ranking down there with the dubious likes of Buchanan, Harding, Carter, and Johnson.

    Furthermore, you blame the current economic downturn on the Democratic Congress, on the premise that Congress makes the laws. While on paper that is true, remember, it is the president who is in charge, and all of this happened under his watch; twenty years from now when historians evaluate this period in history, they'll look at the last two years of the Bush presidency (rightfully so, because he, not Congress, was in charge), not the 110th Congress. The same goes for other events in American history; does anyone blame the secession of the southern states and the resulting Civil War on the failure of Congress to pass a law outlawing secession? Of course not? Buchanan gets the blame. Does anyone blame the signing over of the Panama Canal on the failure of Congress to pass a law against it? No; Carter gets the blame. Does anyone blame the enactment of the Alien and Sedition Acts (which were passed by Congress) on Congress? Nope; John Adams is typically seen as the villain who allowed this. Finally, when the Treaty of Versailles did not get ratified by the Senate, did people blame the Senate? No; the blame has historically fallen on Woodrow Wilson for his resolute stubbornness to accept any compromises.

    The same goes for when things go right. When the United States emerged victorious from World War II, did anyone give credit to Congress for providing all the funding the troops needed to get the mission accomplished? Of course not; President Roosevelt received the credit. Did anyone give credit to Congress for providing the funds for the Louisiana purchase that doubled the size of the United States? No; Thomas Jefferson received the credit, as he should have. Finally, when the U.S. emerged victorious over the Soviet Union in the Cold War, did anyone give credit to Congress? Of course; President Reagan gets the credit, and his legacy will be determined largely by this.

    I could go on and on, but this post is already long enough. The point I want to make is, that just because Congress is under the control of Democrats, that fact should not absolve the President, who is in charge, of any responsibility in all of this. If the person who is in charge is doing their job poorly, it does not matter which political party his subordinates (Congress) belong to, things will go bad; if they do their job well, things will go well, again, regardless of which political party the subordinates belong to. I believe the examples I have provided are more than adequate evidence of this.
    WOW, great post..

    Nice job.. :)

    I agree that this country is split right down the middle and the two sides are so far apart that they can not see each other. A fracture this big could take decades to fix. The question is will we destroy ourselves before we can fix it?

  6. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    4,650
    While I'm at it, I'll also take a swipe at Bill Clinton. While I wouldn't rank Clinton among the five worst Presidents, I do believe that he belongs in the bottom ten. Let me explain why.

    One fact that tends to be ignored by the Bush-hating media is the fact that prior to 9/11, al Qaeda had struck the U.S. five times during the Clinton presidency.

    -The first World Trade Center attack (first attack). What was the Clinton administration's response? He treated this act of war as if it were a crime and put the FBI in charge of finding the perpetrators. The U.S. military, which Clinton had already begun dismantling, played no role whatsoever.

    -The Khobar Tower attacks (second attack). What was Clinton's response to this act of war? None. In fact not a single indictment was handed out until 2001, when President Bush was in office. Once again, the U.S. military played no role whatsoever. Osama bin Laden is believed to be responsible.

    -The U.S. embassy attacks in Kenya and Tanzania (third and fourth attacks). Clinton's response? A cruise missile attack on Sudan and Afghanistan that accomplished nothing except to destroy a pharmaceutical factory in Sudan. Osama bin Laden is believed to be responsible.

    -The attack on the USS Cole. (the fifth attack). Clinton's response? None.

    Other than the cruise missile response, the U.S. military played no significant role in responding to these attacks upon our country. Now please understand I'm no fan of George Bush, but I'd bet the farm that neither he nor Ronald Reagan would have allowed us to be attacked five times. Furthermore, I would go even further and say that if either of them had been in office after the first of these attacks (which, by the way, happened in the post Cold War era, so it's not as if there would have been any other foreign policy distractions), the problem would have been nipped in the bud right away and September 11 would never have happened.

    None of the Bush haters who adore Clinton so much has ever taken any of this into consideration. They are just so blinded by their hatred of Bush that they can't see anything else.

    This is exactly why I am a registered independent. There have been crummy presidents from both major parties, and I refuse to allow myself to believe that any one party is better than the other.

    Clinton chose to use the United States military to intervene in crises in Haiti, Rwanda, and Bosnia, conflicts that had absolutely no bearing on U.S. security or other interests. As far as I'm concerned, if we're going to put the lives of American soldiers on the line, American interests had better be at stake.
    Last edited by tattedupboy; 07-24-2008 at 03:47 PM.

  7. #6
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Falls Church, Va
    Posts
    43
    Quote Originally Posted by tattedupboy View Post

    Clinton chose to use the United States military to intervene in crises in Haiti, Rwanda, and Bosnia, conflicts that had absolutely no bearing on U.S. security or other interests. As far as I'm concerned, if we're going to put the lives of American soldiers on the line, American interests had better be at stake.
    tattedupboy,

    Thank you for showing both sides of the issue.

    I only take this part of your statement because I was in the military during all of this, and we kept asking why?

    While I do not agree with everything President Bush does, nor Congress, my belief is that we live in America, and if we do not like something we have the right to try and change it responsibly.

    Carl
    Pack your bags, were going on a guilt trip!

  8. #7
    I served in the military for over 20 years.

    I have seen both democratic and republican presidents.

    Under one president the country flourished, and the country was strong, and we had a strong presence in the world.

    Under another president, the country hid, and we were weak, prices rose and people complained.

    I didn't mention democrat or republican for a specific reason, but these statements are all too real.

    Who do you want to have most of your money??? Do you think YOU can control your money? or perhaps you think the government is best at managing your money...

    Not hard for me to answer.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Quantcast