Tuesday, October 18, 2011

Obama on the Campaign Trail...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny

For a President that has talked about unifying in the past it certainly seems this segment of the Presidents recent remarks focus more on divisiveness than unity. I guess politics are, after all just politics. It is more about building a base, telling people what you think they want to hear, and getting reelected than it is about telling the truth.

Unfortunately this can be said about both party's.

The President: "The Republican plan comes down to this, ‘Dirtier air, dirtier water, less people with health insurance.”

h/t: Real Clear Politics

"My plan says we’re going to put teachers back in the classrooms, construction workers back to work," President Obama said at a campaign event today. "Tax cuts for small businesses, tax cuts for hiring veterans, tax cuts if you give your workers a raise –- that’s my plan."

"The Republicans plan, Obama says, boils down to this: 'Dirtier air, dirtier water, less people with health insurance.'"

Via: Memeorandum


  1. How is Obama not telling the truth here?


  2. the rhetoric jmj, the rhetoric... politicians, and that is what Obama is a politician, lie...

  3. Politics: bamboozling the masses into liking you due to your clever tongue and the age-old tactic of telling folks what tickles their ears. If that fails, create a villain and speak harshly about them.

    We need less politics, (on BOTH sides, as Les pointed out), and more proper and true Constitutional governance.

    Is it really that much to expect and demand of our elected officials who work for us?

  4. Les, but Obama is saying what exactly the GOP is doing. Again, please, what is the lie?


  5. >what exactly the GOP is doing

    In your fantasy world, maybe. Not in the real world, though. Regardless of the whole postmodern hyperreality thing that is so prevalent today, there really is a world of difference between the two. Differentiating between them can be difficult when one is handicapped with an emo-delusional psychosis, as well as limited capacity for rational analysis, but keep at it and you might make some progress.
    You're still batting 0.000, by the way. Maybe you should try a different hobby.

  6. So far, no one has disputed the fact that the Republicans want to loosen environmental regulations, in fact, Michele Bachmann has said she would get rid of the EPA if she were elected, and Mitt Romney said he would repeal the ACA entirely.

    So how is Mr. Obama pointing out that Republicans are for dirty air and water and for taking away insurance from students and from people who have pre-existing conditions, which the ACA protects--how is that divisive? He's stating facts.

    No one, so far, has refuted the truth of what Mr. Obama said.

    Just saying it's a "lie" doesn't make it so. I've given you evidence that the leading GOP contenders have promised this.

  7. >no one has disputed the fact that the Republicans want to loosen environmental regulations

    Only an idiot or a liar would make the giant leap from there to the bizarre conclusion that "Republicans are for dirty air and water." So far, we have The Fop-in-Chief, Jersey McHitless, and Shaw Kenonsense placing themselves firmly and deeply in that category--as usual--all in one thread. Your intellectual sloth and lack of integrity are beyond astounding. Congratulations.

    If the three of you were honest, you would come right out and say "I'm afraid of you having your liberty and controlling your property. I'm too much of a coward to enslave you or steal from you myself, so I'm going to do everything I can to get the thuggery of government to do my dirty work for me, regulate your lives, and take your property and use it for some cause that gives me emotional satisfaction and makes me feel special. I'm emotionally needy and insecure, and you're going to pay for it." It's not like we don't already no that, but it would be refreshing for you to be honest, as unlikely as that is.

  8. Bastiat, again, you have no substantive refute to Shaw's and my assertions that the GOP is promoting policies that allow more pollution of the air, water and land.

    Just man up and admit it. You happen to think it's a good idea, so why are you so defensive.


  9. Whoa, Certainly much can be said in response to the above exchange. As it is late and I'm just getting in from work I shall make my response short and concise.

    1) I posted this because Obama is engaging in generalizations about conservatives while on what amounted to a campaign stop. The rhetorical slams with respect to republicans wanting dirty air and dirty water are just hyperbole. As for the ones who are voicing the EPA ought to be dismantled, well, they are living in LA LA land. That isn't going to happen and anyone thinking straight knows it and understands why.

    As for the ACA, it ought to be repealed. Rather than trying to reinvent the wheel, and end up with a lemon, a real independent commission ought to study the Swiss plan, make a few trips and see how they have succeeded and how their plan might be adapted and implemnted in the USA.

    3) As a conservative/libertarian I certainly want a government that is responsive to the real needs of the country and yet governs based on the Constitutional and rule of law.

    Anyone who is seriously thinking realizes that government can spin out of control, and the greater the power vested in the government the greater the likelihood it may happen.

    Having said the above, government does play a significant role in maintaining safety on the roads and in the workplace. It also plays a significant role in maintaining the quality of environment, as well as administering many infrastructure issues vital to the nation.

    Anyone who doesn't recognize that government has a place in the broad scheme of our nation has truly lost touch with reality.

    Most people realize the above... So the question really is how to retain the maximum amount of individual liberty while insuring the issues that rest in the proper sphere of government are handled efficiently in the best manner of controlling costs to the taxpayer.

    4) Our government has duplicity in programs, we spend more on what I call foreign welfare than we ought: the money could be better spent here, on our own, the military industrial complex has grown beyond what it needs to be: national defense is one thing, being the policeman of the world is altogether a different tune (more later), this government spends too much and it needs to cut spending: where it makes good sense, we must end crony capitalism, corporatism, corporate welfare, and tell corporations bailouts for fiscal malfeasance has ended: either your business adheres to ethical and best practices our your history.

    5) (for business leaders) if your a business that wants tax incentives: then invest in America, bring jobs home, and while your considering where your long term interests really lay read Three Billion New Capitalists, it will do you well...

    6) And t Shaw and JMJ especially... I tagged Obama because e deserved it. So do the power brokers in the Republican party. There is plenty to go around. Sadly neither the republican (conservative) nor the democrat (liberal) party's have any real candidates of great substance and intgrity. It is a sign of the ties.

    In closing, the Tea Party folks (the ones of substance) had a good idea in the beginning, and the OWS folks (the ones of substance)have very valid concerns that many in the Tea Party share.

    If even for a brief six month period the good folks of both movements could select delegates and meet in Philadelphia during another hot summer to form a more perfect union...

    Never mind, we lack the caliber of individuals and politicians such an effort would require. Hell, we can't even seem to find common interest and cause when visiting blogs. As I see it liberals attract liberals, and conservatives attract conservatives to their sites so than cAn beat up on the other.

    I don't know about anyone else but I AM GROWING TIRED OF THE MERRY GO ROUND.

    Now that I have spoke my mind I'm going o bed. It's 3:30 AM.

    PS: Thanks for stopping by Shaw, I sincerely mean that.

  10. Another thing... Please forgive any poor grammar or misspelled words, I've been up 18 hours now.

  11. Judging from a quick cursory look around the web this morning seems the merry go round id doing quite well.

  12. Obama is one of the less than 99%: America's actual ruling class. The Federal Government elites. The ones that caused the economic meltdown by instituting the Fannie and Freddie regulations.

  13. Rational said: "Another thing... Please forgive any poor grammar or misspelled words, I've been up 18 hours now."

    Stay up another 20 hours or so and your performance level will start to become similar to that of our Chief Executive.

  14. So many on the right proclaim to be libertarians. Libertarians I always thought believed the safety and security of the American People was the most important role of government.

    Why then would you want to do away with the agencies that by definition protecting the safety and security of our water and environment my right leaning friends?

    Nice troll job by Dmarks by the way to blame the economic meltdown on regulations and not the real reasons. Karl Rove and the RNC have a pat on the back waiting for you buddy.

  15. Joe: I was only telling the truth. It is well documented: the economic meltdown was caused by over-regulation, not lack of regulation. Fannie and Freddie forced the banks to behave badly. Less regulation and a more free market would have meant probably no economic crisis.

    It is not a "Troll". Kari Rove and the RNC have nothing to do with this. Barney Frank and Chris Dodd, both on the left, had everything to do with it.

    Here is one of the many articles about how this happened. It is in a left-wing publication. NPR News also claims that the bad policies of F&F caused the mortgage crisis.

    I don't see why you referred to Karl Rove, unless it is poor reading comprehension on your part, and you made a big goof and were answering someone else's comment in yours to me.

  16. dmarks - when in industry one must do what is expected of one. Even when it inconveniences one.

    Been doing it 40 years.

    Bush must have done a lot of 38 hours then I guess ;)

  17. In some ways we are over regulated. In others not so. The key is in finding a balance that makes sense.

    But I suppose that requires honest discussion. Something politicians and businesses are not readily prone to do.


  18. dmarks, I have never seen anyone so deluded by ideology. You don't have a clue in the world what caused the mortgage meltdown or the recession. You repeat the same little sound bytes we hear on Fox News, the WSJ, Republicans, and conservative talk radio - not one original thought of your own.

    F&F didn't "force" anyone to do anything. It is not at all within their purview, dmarks. You don't even know what F&F are, do you?

    Sure, they made a convenient tool for backing bad paper, but even then, in 2006, the height of the bubble, F&F only backed 6% of the bad paper. So again, you just don't have a clue.

    All ideology, no reality.


  19. @JMJ,

    Even when dmarks gives you the factual information regarding F&F, you still deny.


    You simply do not wish to acknowledge that Dodd and Frank are culpable in the economic nightmare we now face as a nation. It must burn your butt that GWB tried to regulate F&F,(one of the few smart things he did), but was shot down by the Dems in Congress.

    Shall I link all this to you, or will you refuse to read it and learn?

  20. JMJ: I am sticking to the facts, not ideology. I followed the Fannie and Freddie situation starting YEARS ago, before it took the economy down with it.

    "I have never seen anyone so deluded by ideology. You don't have a clue in the world what caused the mortgage meltdown or the recession."

    I described it exactly.

    "You repeat the same little sound bytes we hear on Fox News, the WSJ, Republicans, and conservative talk radio"

    Did you even read my comment? I used as sources the Village Voice (a venerable left/liberal newspaper) and NPR.

    Why did you even mention Fox News? JMJ, this was such a sloppy comment from you. It was like you didn't bother to read or think sometime. Find one comment where I use conservative talk radio as a source. You won't.

    "F&F didn't "force" anyone to do anything."

    It did. It forced banks to make bad loans to undeserving people who could not pay them.

    "You don't even know what F&F are, do you?"

    Yes. They are the government agencies that caused the economic crisis.

    "F&F only backed 6% of the bad paper. So again, you just don't have a clue."

    It doesn't take much to cause a crisis. You are acting like you haven't done any research in this.

    "All ideology, no reality."

    Actually, I am sticking to historic facts. Nothing to do with ideology. And the reality is that very bad regulation, instituted through two government agencies, caused the economic meltdown.

    You goofed up with your comment. I'll give you a do-over. Once you show you have some idea of what you are talking about, I will provide some damning quotes from Barney Frank, who strongly resisted efforts to prevent the meltdown, if you wish.

  21. To JMJ,

    From US News September 10, 2008:
    (This is an excerpt only)

    In fact, here's a New York Times story from September 2003, clearly showing that the first substantive Fannie and Freddie reform from inside government came from the Bush administration. Spurred by worries that Fannie and Freddie were cooking their books and taking too many risks, Treasury Secretary John Snow proposed placing the companies under Treasury oversight with strict controls over risk and capital reserves. The NYT labeled the proposal "the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago" and noted:

    Mr. Snow said that Congress should eliminate the power of the president to appoint directors to the companies, a sign that the administration is less concerned about the perks of patronage than it is about the potential political problems associated with any new difficulties arising at the companies.

    So five years ago, there was one of those rare moments in Washington when the branches and personalities of government—in this case, the Bush administration—are less interested in protecting or expanding their turf than in fixing a looming catastrophe. What was Frank's response to the proposal?

    "These two entities—Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac—are not facing any kind of financial crisis," said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. "The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing."

    As Frank mentions in his press release today, two years after it was first proposed, the House finally voted on a bill reforming the mortgage giants. Alas, the legislation was watered down to the point of being meaningless—that's why it passed the House with such wide margins (122 Democrats and 209 Republicans). But even then, and despite his high regard for bipartisanship now, Barney Frank wasn't among the yeas.

    So can we now move past this delusion that Frank and F&F were not responsible (the genesis of) for the current economic crisis?

    Awesome. (Sorry to cut in front of you, dmarks. I simply couldn't wait any longer to show JMJ the truth.)

    Original article here:

  22. President Obama is actually only 94.5% accurate with the assertion Republicans want dirterie air and dirtier water. This is based on HR 2018, the Republican bill to eliminate the Clean Water Act of 1972 (hmmm, that commie Nixon) which 223 of 236 Republicans voted for.

  23. "For a President that has talked about unifying in the past it certainly seems this segment of the Presidents recent remarks focus more on divisiveness than unity."

    The President has bent over for the cooperation of the Republicans, and has been rebuffed even to the point when Republicans voted against an issue they have voted for, for decades. This attempt at unity has hurt Obama with the left. The stated goal of Republican leaders, is not to help Americans, but to defeat Obama. Your above comment that the President is dividing America, is your uneducated opinion, not based in the facts. Keep up the misinformation ploy. It seems to work on the idiots in your echo chamber.

  24. Anon: "The stated goal of Republican leaders, is not to help Americans, but to defeat Obama."

    The two goals are very closeley related.

    Obama can be counted on to act in the public interest only some of the time (look at how he increased the national debt 50% and unemployment 20%), so Americans can only hope for a change: a different President who will actually help Americans.

  25. BTW, Grunge. I read HR 2018. It does not eliminate any Clean Water Act.

  26. dmarks,

    You didnt read HR 2018, because what the bill does is move the power to the states eliminating the EPA's ability to enforce the clean water bill. Hence it eliminates it because if Indiana votes to allow BP to dump mercury, benzene and other toxic elements into Lake Michigan I and millions of others have no recourse.

  27. dmarks,

    Please tell me what you think Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae do.


    Please tell me how exactly the mortgage metdown happened.

    I'm not biased about these kinds of things. I study the subject, because it's important and therefore fascinates me, and then I come to a conclusion. Please, for Christ's sake, explain to me how F&F "forced" anyone to do anything, and explain to me how any GOP attempt to "reform" them even happened.

    Really, I'd love to hear you explain that. I'd give a finger just to hear you sit at a table of intelligent men and explain these notions of your's. The laughter would add ten years to my life.


  28. Jersey: I already know what they do. It's not controversial. Look up "Fannie Mae" on Wikipedia or something.

    Grunge: I read HR 2018 on the actual Congressional site. It moves some power to states, not all. And leaves the Clean Water Act intact. Changing the responsibilities is not an elimination.

  29. @JMJ,

    Sorry, my liberal princess. I am done explaining anything to you. Jesus told me to not be so foolish as to throw pearls before swine, and of course, He was right.



As this site encourages free speech and expression any and all honest political commentary is acceptable. Comments with cursing or vulgar language will not be posted.

Effective 3/4/18 Anonymous commenting has been disabled and this site has reverted to comment moderation. This unfortunate action is necessary due to the volume of Anonymous comments that are either off topic or irrelevant to the post subject.

While we appreciate and encourage all political viewpoints we feel no obligation to post comments that fail to rise to the standards of decency and decorum we have set for Rational Nation USA.

Thank you for your understanding... The management.