for the new page:

Quote :

"+ a trillion and a half after that speech my god"

4/17/2013 6:03:36 PM

Palpable anger

4/17/2013 6:35:13 PM

what speech

[Edited on April 17, 2013 at 7:04 PM. Reason : nevermind, just saw it. i liked. ]

4/17/2013 6:46:59 PM

gun speech?

4/17/2013 8:38:31 PM

He pretty much nailed it.

4/17/2013 10:37:46 PM

Quote :

"“Under current rules, some wealthy individuals are able to accumulate many millions of dollars in these accounts, substantially more than is needed to fund reasonable levels of retirement saving,” the statement said.""

Who the hell are these people to dictate the success of my retirement savings? I earned it, I shall keep it. Next thing you know, the government will dictate how much you make per work hour with maximum wages; heaven forbid you make substantially more than what is needed to fund reasonable levels of daily living expenses.


[Edited on April 18, 2013 at 5:11 AM. Reason : .]

4/18/2013 5:10:21 AM

Quote :

"Who the hell are these people to dictate the success of my retirement savings? "

The same way they can limit tax free contributions to retirement plans.

4/18/2013 7:23:59 AM

Yeah, a lot of these proposals coming from the White House to cut spending are stupid. I realize they have to act like the debt is an actual problem and not a made up one in order to bring Republicans to the table, but come on. Chained CPI will save peanuts in comparison to real reforms. Social Security could be made solvent forever by just eliminating the cap on deductions. Same with Medicare, just renegotiate prescription drug prices. None of those things have even been proposed, let alone been brought up for serious debate. It's getting a little annoying.

4/18/2013 1:04:28 PM

They haven't been brought up because everyone knows they'll never even make it into a bill.

4/18/2013 2:54:14 PM

Quote :

"Who the hell are these people to dictate the success of my retirement savings? I earned it, I shall keep it."

You are property.

4/18/2013 4:35:29 PM

Quote :

"You are property."

Your property is property.

Quote :

"Who the hell are these people to dictate the success of my retirement savings?"

They can dictate how much of a tax advantage you get. You get that advantage for a reason, it's meant to encourage retirement savings, not general savings, that falls under it's own rules, which you have every right to have, but not to get tax advantages for.

[Edited on April 18, 2013 at 5:28 PM. Reason : ]

4/18/2013 5:24:58 PM

Quote :

"Who the hell are these people to dictate the success of my retirement savings? I earned it, I shall keep it. Next thing you know, the government will dictate how much you make per work hour with maximum wages; heaven forbid you make substantially more than what is needed to fund reasonable levels of daily living expenses. "

That rule will most likely not affect anyone's "earned" savings. The accounts it targets are people who inherit them (thus they start off with more, then add into it just like everyone else), or they roll it over in some other sneaky way as a tax shelter (ie a loophole).

At least that's my understanding. Feel free to show me where earned savings would get penalized by the new rule.

4/18/2013 6:56:12 PM

http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-children-killed-by-americas-drones-crimes-against-humanity-committed-by-barack-h-obama/5320570

4/18/2013 8:46:32 PM

4/28/2013 10:55:51 PM

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/04/30/presidential-proclamation-loyalty-day-2013

Loyalty day? Is this real life?

5/1/2013 6:47:16 PM

:face palm:

5/1/2013 7:03:01 PM

No, really. This is a guy that built his career by shitting on the Constitution and the founders, which is perfectly legitimate. Why continue a pointless tradition like this that's rooted in the Red Scare days?

5/1/2013 7:11:25 PM

Quote :

"NOW, THEREFORE, I, BARACK OBAMA, President of the United States of America, do hereby proclaim May 1, 2013, as Loyalty Day. This Loyalty Day, I call upon all the people of the United States to join in support of this national observance, whether by displaying the flag of the United States or pledging allegiance to the Republic for which it stands. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this thirtieth day of April, in the year of our Lord two thousand thirteen, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and thirty-seventh."

I know it's typical legislative gopplety gook language, but did they really need the all caps?

5/1/2013 7:58:27 PM

loyalty is way overrated

5/1/2013 9:27:43 PM

Quote :

"Carl Quintanilla ?@carlquintanilla 4m After accounting for census hiring, revised Feb #jobs number was best in almost 8 years. #NFP"

Along with today's report,

THANKS OBAMA

If this keeps up Hillary will win in a landslide and we can all look forward to First Gentleman Bill Clinton!

[Edited on May 3, 2013 at 11:36 AM. Reason : :]

5/3/2013 11:34:03 AM

Quote :

""Most of the guns used to commit violence here in Mexico come from the United States," President Obama said during a speech at Mexico's Anthropology Museum. "I think many of you know that in America, our Constitution guarantees our individual right to bear arms. And as president, I swore an oath to uphold that right, and I always will." "But at the same time, as I’ve said in the United States, I will continue to do everything in my power to pass common-sense reforms that keep guns out of the hands of criminals and dangerous people. That can save lives here in Mexico and back home in the United States. It’s the right thing to do," Obama added."

From the guy whose administration knowingly smuggled thousands of guns into Mexico.

5/3/2013 6:06:23 PM

nm, double post

[Edited on May 4, 2013 at 10:02 PM. Reason : ]

5/4/2013 10:01:31 PM

Yeah... Suggesting that we arm the Syrian rebels? What the fuck? Is he trying to get American aircraft shot down by giving anti-air missiles to people with known ties and associations with terrorist groups?

5/4/2013 10:01:52 PM

he's the one holding back on it

5/4/2013 10:07:40 PM

Arming the rebels is probably a bad idea, but it might be the only way to intervene.

If we don't pick a side. We'd end up fighting both sides.

5/4/2013 11:17:31 PM

Fuck um, let them all fight each other, than we take the winner.....tournament style

[Edited on May 4, 2013 at 11:49 PM. Reason : .]

5/4/2013 11:48:59 PM

it's not just "probably" a bad idea. It's the worst idea. If we want to stop the shit, we need to go in with aircraft and take their shit out, then send in troops. But we don't have the balls or the resources for that. So, we should just stay the fuck out and stop making things worse.

5/5/2013 12:19:08 AM

which is why obama is holding back from doing so even though the right is criticizing him

5/5/2013 8:14:19 AM

obama:

Quote :

": Unfortunately, you’ve grown up hearing voices that incessantly warn of government as nothing more than some separate, sinister entity that’s at the root of all our problems. Some of these same voices also do their best to gum up the works. They’ll warn that tyranny always lurking just around the corner. You should reject these voices. Because what they suggest is that our brave, and creative, and unique experiment in self-rule is somehow just a sham with which we can’t be trusted. "

i guess we should reject world history too

5/7/2013 6:57:56 AM

Link?

5/7/2013 7:20:51 AM

^ohio state speech

5/7/2013 7:25:20 AM

Yeah, that was a disturbing speech. The worst atrocities in history have been committed under the banner of "we" and "us". Don't be fooled by rhetorical tricks like that.

5/7/2013 9:04:56 AM

Indeed, it's much easier to inflict tragedy on billions of people when you distribute culpability among everyone under the banner of "I".

Seriously, though, Obama's dead on when you read it in context and understand who he's talking about, people like you, destroyer, who are fundamentally anti-Democracy and cry like Chicken Little not because of a sincere, practical fear of tyranny but because of an ideological commitment to opposing the State in all forms. Some of us are acquainted enough with that rhetoric to see through it, luckily.


[Edited on May 7, 2013 at 10:44 AM. Reason : .]

5/7/2013 10:41:41 AM

Quote :

"Indeed, it's much easier to inflict tragedy on billions of people when you distribute culpability among everyone under the banner of "I"."

You're speaking gibberish. If you're assigning blame to everyone, you're not assigning blame to individuals. If you assign blame to individuals, you're not assigning blame to everyone. Get back to me when you have your thoughts together.

5/7/2013 10:50:57 AM

but you don't like the State in any form, you are an anarchist, so you can't really have an objective discussion about actions of the State

5/7/2013 10:57:45 AM

but you don't like rape in any form, you are anti-rapist, so you can't really have an objective discussion about actions of rapists

5/7/2013 10:59:01 AM

thanks for proving my point

5/7/2013 11:00:47 AM

My thoughts are together, destroyer, let me try to spell them out less succinctly:

Global Capitalism inflicts tragedy on billions of people, but because it does so by the aggregate behaviors of self-interested individuals, there is no single person you can direct blame to. Hence the spreading of culpability over everyone participating. When everyone is to blame, noone is to blame.

That's why Mao has a death toll to his name, but Reagan doesn't.

Do you understand what I meant now? Whether you agree or not, I just wanna know you're processing the point I'm making.

5/7/2013 11:01:21 AM

Lmao destroyer is not an anarchist, it's historical revisionism to call anything he believes in anarchism. He's just a fundamentalist propertarian.

5/7/2013 11:02:13 AM

The IRS has been targeting conservative groups. Probably just a part of his effort for the rich to "pay their share"

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/05/13/irs-scrutiny-went-beyond-tea-party-criteria-broader-than-thought/

Can't deny that this is not a good look.

5/13/2013 9:55:51 AM

Honest question, what does that have to do with President Obama's credibility?

5/13/2013 9:58:02 AM

You don't think that actions of govt agencies might be influenced by the man ostensibly in charge of them?

5/13/2013 6:44:28 PM

If Reagan can get off the hook for Iran-Contra, then Obama can't even be touched here.

5/13/2013 6:52:15 PM

You won't find me excusing Reagan for that, lol

5/13/2013 7:02:15 PM

So then you agree that there is no precedent for being so petty towards the president?

5/13/2013 7:07:57 PM

Quote :

"If Reagan can get off the hook for Iran-Contra, then Obama can't even be touched here."

Your little lefty buddies better condemn this statement.

Conservatives on this board get slammed constantly for similar logic.

5/13/2013 7:16:19 PM

I'm not stating my position on this issue. I'm simply highlighting the blatant hypocrisy of conservatives.

5/13/2013 7:17:52 PM

I thought the IRS ran independently within the treasury department

5/13/2013 7:18:22 PM

Quote :

"You don't think that actions of govt agencies might be influenced by the man ostensibly in charge of them?"

So Bush is at fault for 9/11? or did you laugh at people who suggested that previously?

5/13/2013 7:18:40 PM

^whaaa? In what world does that make any sense?

[Edited on May 13, 2013 at 7:20 PM. Reason : What]

5/13/2013 7:20:08 PM