My point is that at least the Obama administration is doing something,
and something different. Continuing on the course of the past 8 years
is a road to disaster.


On Feb 10, 1:36 pm, frankg <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> "The real issue is not with what he said, but that he said it. "
>
> > I'll give you that...but just ignore the elephant in the room, ok?
>
> OK   :)
>
>
>
> >> "Funny thing about the stimulus effort is it really is exactly what
> >> the Bush administration was doing - out of control spending."
>
> > I believe there is a difference in spending billions overseas and
> > investing it at home. We've torn down and rebuilt Iraq's
> > infrastructure, now it's time to take care of our own.
>
> Under the Bush administration there was wild domestic spending as well
> as spending in Iraq. You can’t rack up the deficit they did without
> that.
>
>
>
> >> "Well, fine.. they SHOULD be in a modern school,
> >> and if their quality of education improves in the process, that's
> >> great. But HOW does this stimulate the economy?"
>
> > You can't put a price on an education, and you may not see the
> > benefits immediately, but they exist.
>
> I’m not disputing education is a top priority and yes, down the road
> superior education helps us. But that’s NOT what the stimulus package
> is supposed to be about. Projects such as this should be covered under
> the normal budget, within a balanced budget framework. The stimulus
> package must remain focused and not include these types of projects
> that do not meet the criteria.
>
>
>
> >> "A stimulus program has got to be able to kick start processes that
> >> can then become self-sustaining."
>
> > Please tell me how sending our money to the Middle East helps sustain
> > our economy.
>
> It doesn’t and I never said it does, nor do I see the relevance of
> your comment to mine. I’m talking specifically about elements
> contained in the stimulus package and what the criteria should be for
> inclusion. Spending money in the ME is NOT in the stimulus package.
>
> On Feb 10, 1:18 pm, wncs <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > "The real issue is not with what he said, but that he said it. "
>
> > I'll give you that...but just ignore the elephant in the room, ok?
>
> > "Funny thing about the stimulus effort is it really is exactly what
> > the
> > Bush administration was doing - out of control spending."
>
> > I believe there is a difference in spending billions overseas and
> > investing it at home. We've torn down and rebuilt Iraq's
> > infrastructure, now it's time to take care of our own.
>
> > "Well, fine.. they SHOULD be in a modern school,
> > and if their quality of education improves in the process, that's
> > great. But HOW does this stimulate the economy?"
>
> > You can't put a price on an education, and you may not see the
> > benefits immediately, but they exist.
>
> > "A stimulus program has got to be able to kick start processes that
> > can
> > then become self-sustaining."
>
> > Please tell me how sending our money to the Middle East helps sustain
> > our economy.
>
> > On Feb 10, 1:05 pm, frankg <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > I agree what Biden said has an element of truth. If the answers were
> > > obvious then anyone could be President. The real issue is not with
> > > what he said, but that he said it.
>
> > > Funny thing about the stimulus effort is it really is exactly what the
> > > Bush administration was doing - out of control spending. If government
> > > spending would ignite the economy then the economy should have been
> > > blazing like a super nova under Bush. My fear is there will be a brief
> > > improvement, but at the end of the two years, without continued
> > > spending by the government, we'll be right back where we are today but
> > > with a much larger deficit than before.
>
> > > One example; from last night's speech, Obama was talking about a SC
> > > school that was extremely old and how it's time these kids are taught
> > > in a modern school. Well, fine.. they SHOULD be in a modern school,
> > > and if their quality of education improves in the process, that's
> > > great. But HOW does this stimulate the economy? Oh sure, it's a
> > > construction job so for the time being it creates jobs. But once the
> > > school is done those jobs are gone. The money has been spent and from
> > > an economic perspective we are not at all improved.
>
> > > A stimulus program has got to be able to kick start processes that can
> > > then become self-sustaining. Government spending on road and bridge
> > > construction, schools, etc., is not self-sustaining. When the money
> > > runs out the jobs are gone. That's my concern with this stimulus plan
> > > - they are proposing to spend money where they feel it would be good
> > > to spend money rather than spending money on things that will create
> > > sustainable employment and growth.
>
> > > On Feb 10, 10:48 am, wncs <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > Sadly, what Biden said may have some truth in it, although I question
> > > > his putting an exact numeric percentage on the chance of failure. I
> > > > think what he's saying is that no one has a crystal ball; no one knows
> > > > with 100% certainty that the stimulus efforts will be that silver
> > > > bullet we're looking for. But the point is, the Obama administration
> > > > is doing *something*, and it is the best chance our economy has right
> > > > now.
> > > > I agree with your final paragraph though.
>
> > > > On Feb 10, 10:29 am, frankg <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > Biden: "If we do everything right, if we do it with absolute
> > > > > certainty, if we stand up there and we really make the tough
> > > > > decisions, there's still a 30 percent chance we're going to get it
> > > > > wrong."
> > > > > Obama: "You know, I don't remember exactly what Joe was referring to,
> > > > > not surprisingly."
>
> > > > > I think it was a fair question to ask Obama, even though Biden made
> > > > > the comment, because it pertains to Obama's administration and the
> > > > > expected performance of it according to Biden. Perhaps it wasn't
> > > > > throwing him under a bus in the clinical sense, but damn... Obama had
> > > > > to be pissed he had to respond to this. And to think the Democrats
> > > > > were making fun of Palin as VP choice.
>
> > > > > After 8 years of listening to Bush stumble his way thru speeches, it
> > > > > really is a pleasure to listen to someone as articulate as Obama. I
> > > > > just hope he doesn't have to spend an inordinate amount of time having
> > > > > to cover up for stupid Biden comments.
>
> > > > > On Feb 10, 9:57 am, wncs <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > Perhaps the reporter should have asked Joe Biden what he meant when 
> > > > > > he
> > > > > > spoke those words. I think that most people don't want to answer for
> > > > > > the words of another, but I don't see how you call that throwing
> > > > > > someone under the bus.
>
> > > > > > On Feb 10, 9:18 am, Philobealo <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > >http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/toby_harnden/blog/2009/02/10/barack_obam...
>
> > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to