The Latest on Sarah Palin

mb262200 wrote:

I remember Reagan as president but didn't pay much attention back then. I was pretty young, or young enough where I didn't care. But didn't Reagan cut taxes and cut government spending to a level that we have never seen before or since. Personaly I feel that is what we need these days. Cut taxes enough where it's going to put more money in peoples pockets, therefore, people will spend more which will help in the economy, and then of course...cut government spending drastically.Just my opinion.

trickle down economics does not work. it has been proven. tax cuts do not work. he cut them to the lowest rates i nhistory and don't you think that that has something to do with why we are in this situation today?

Gern Blansten wrote:

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

mb262200 wrote:

I remember Reagan as president but didn't pay much attention back then. I was pretty young, or young enough where I didn't care. But didn't Reagan cut taxes and cut government spending to a level that we have never seen before or since. Personaly I feel that is what we need these days. Cut taxes enough where it's going to put more money in peoples pockets, therefore, people will spend more which will help in the economy, and then of course...cut government spending drastically.Just my opinion.

trickle down economics does not work. it has been proven. tax cuts do not work. he cut them to the lowest rates i nhistory and don't you think that that has something to do with why we are in this situation today?

actually trickle down did work....the problem was they should have bumped taxes back up after a year or so

that was what i was getting at but i am at work and could not finish that post appropriately. thanks for posting that.

Gern Blansten wrote:

Yeah unfortunately no one had the balls to raise them again...except for Bush I....and look what happened to him

that's why I believe our country is destined to fail...anyone who wants to fix anything won't get voted in

and if they do get voted in, members of congress are either too partisan or too chickenshit to work with them...

Gern Blansten wrote:

yep....we're fucked

I haven't ruled out moving to Canada

neither have i, i hear vancouver and toronto are quite nice... 8-)

yeah....she needs to shut up....a lot of her followers are Family Guy faithful and they won't pick her over FG

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

porchmonkey77 wrote:

i stopped reading your post when you said "obama is the worst president in us history".
your post implies that you DO NOT think...to say a man is the worst in history after 13 months?? why not do a little google search and find out what i am talking about. if obama is the worst in history, you must be very young or very ignorant of the history of your own country....please give some examples for why the first year hs been a disaster on every level? everyone acts like our country is in the shitter right now, it is only because we are the leader of the free world and things are tough, things were much worse before we became a superpower...study your history and you will see how bad it has been before now. at least we are still one country and are not fighting each other in the streets...but with the obama hatred becoming hysterical these days i think we might not be far from it. i mean, texas was talking about secession less than a year ago...likewise, what was so great about reagan? you are roughly my age and people our age liked him because he was "like grandpa". what did he personally do to be held in such high regard by you and people our age, who admittedly knew NOTHING of politics or world affairs back then? is it nostalgia, or was there something concrete that he did to deserve it?? if he was so great, wouldn'y he be on our money or something??

lastly, your predictions are quite scary, do you have concrete evidence of this? what other predictions do you have??

How can you have concrete evidence of a prediction? Seems kinda hard to have concrete evidence of something that hasn't happened yet...hence the meaning of prediction.

I think it would be helpful to look at the cold hard facts about Reagan and compare them to Obama. Here's a few, you can ignore them if you want but they are fact:

1. As a % of GDP, Reagan's highest deficit was 5.88% in 1983, coming out of a recession that was arguably worse than the one that Obama inherited. Obama's deficits: 2009- 9.92%, 2010 10.64%.

2. Reagan tax cuts resulted in a net INCREASE in federal tax revenue. A huge increase. Using today's dollars, federal tax receipts in 1980 were $517 billion. In 1989 they were $991 billion. This should prove to everyone that tax cuts spur economic growth, resulting in a. (Those same numbers for the GWB admin? From about $2 billion in 2000 to over $2.5 billion in 2008. GWB never ran a deficit of more than 3.6% of GDP) Clearly, the Reagan tax cuts did not lead to an increase in the federal debt. And as far as Reagan cutting spending, he did not. Federal spending increased EVERY year of the Reagan administration. Maybe if he would have gotten spending under control we would have put him on our money or Mt. Rushmore by now.
Gotta run.

porchmonkey77 wrote:

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

porchmonkey77 wrote:

i stopped reading your post when you said "obama is the worst president in us history".
your post implies that you DO NOT think...to say a man is the worst in history after 13 months?? why not do a little google search and find out what i am talking about. if obama is the worst in history, you must be very young or very ignorant of the history of your own country....please give some examples for why the first year hs been a disaster on every level? everyone acts like our country is in the shitter right now, it is only because we are the leader of the free world and things are tough, things were much worse before we became a superpower...study your history and you will see how bad it has been before now. at least we are still one country and are not fighting each other in the streets...but with the obama hatred becoming hysterical these days i think we might not be far from it. i mean, texas was talking about secession less than a year ago...likewise, what was so great about reagan? you are roughly my age and people our age liked him because he was "like grandpa". what did he personally do to be held in such high regard by you and people our age, who admittedly knew NOTHING of politics or world affairs back then? is it nostalgia, or was there something concrete that he did to deserve it?? if he was so great, wouldn'y he be on our money or something??

lastly, your predictions are quite scary, do you have concrete evidence of this? what other predictions do you have??

How can you have concrete evidence of a prediction? Seems kinda hard to have concrete evidence of something that hasn't happened yet...hence the meaning of prediction.

I think it would be helpful to look at the cold hard facts about Reagan and compare them to Obama. Here's a few, you can ignore them if you want but they are fact:

1. As a % of GDP, Reagan's highest deficit was 5.88% in 1983, coming out of a recession that was arguably worse than the one that Obama inherited. Obama's deficits: 2009- 9.92%, 2010 10.64%.

2. Reagan tax cuts resulted in a net INCREASE in federal tax revenue. A huge increase. Using today's dollars, federal tax receipts in 1980 were $517 billion. In 1989 they were $991 billion. This should prove to everyone that tax cuts spur economic growth, resulting in a. (Those same numbers for the GWB admin? From about $2 billion in 2000 to over $2.5 billion in 2008. GWB never ran a deficit of more than 3.6% of GDP) Clearly, the Reagan tax cuts did not lead to an increase in the federal debt. And as far as Reagan cutting spending, he did not. Federal spending increased EVERY year of the Reagan administration. Maybe if he would have gotten spending under control we would have put him on our money or Mt. Rushmore by now.
Gotta run.

actually the tax cuts did increase the federal debt....in just took several years for it to happen

taxes should have been increased to keep up with spending....especially during the GWB years....didn't happen

Obama either had to institute a massive tax increase during the recession, cut spending on defense and education or submit a deficit budget.

Which would you prefer?

yes well remember that when Obama took office Bush's budget was still in effect.....Bush had used projections that the economy would recover slightly and that the revenues would be much higher than they were

Obama presented what appears to be a realistic budget

why can't you use the quote function correctly?

anyway....spending was obviously at large levels for Reagan as tax rates were very high....he stimulated the economy by cutting taxes drastically and yes that worked for a few years....

as I said...even GB1st was smart enough to realize that taxes needed to be increased....but look what happened...they crucified him

GB2nd obviously expanded the government spending tremendously and did not raise taxes

Now Obama is stating that we need to raise taxes and you turds are crapping your pants....we HAVE to raise taxes

I meant that in a very loving way.

i agree with Mr. Pitts, he hits it right on the head here...


Commentary: Run, Sarah, run
Leonard Pitts Jr. - The Miami Herald

http://www.bnd.com/editorial/story/1133216.html

Dear Sarah:

I hear you're pondering a run for the White House in 2012. Last week, you told Fox news it would be "absurd" to rule it out.

I'm writing to ask that you rule it in. I very badly want you to run for — and win — the Republican nomination for the presidency.

I know you're waiting for the punch line. Maybe you figure I think you'd be a weak candidate who would pave the way for President Obama's easy re-election.

That's not it. No, I want you to run because I believe a Palin candidacy would force upon this country a desperately needed moment of truth. It would require us to finally decide what kind of America we want to be.

Mrs. Palin, you are an avatar of the shameless hypocrisy and cognitive disconnection that have driven our politics for the last decade, a process of stupidification creeping like kudzu over our national life.

As Exhibit A, consider your recent speech at a so-called "tea party" event, wherein you dismissed the president as a "charismatic guy with a teleprompter." Bad enough you imply that teleprompter use is the mark of an insubstantial man, even though you and every other major politician uses them. But what made the comment truly jaw-dropping is that even as you spoke, you had penned on your left palm, clearly visible, a series of crib notes.

Mrs. Palin, if Obama is an idiot for reading a prepared speech off a teleprompter, what are you for reading notes you've inked on your hand like a school kid who failed to study for the big test?

In the Fox interview, you scored Obama for supposedly expecting Americans to "sit down and shut up" and accept his policies. But when asked when the president has ever said that, you couldn't answer. Obama, you sputtered, has just been condescending with his "general persona."

I found that a telling moment. See, ultimately what you represent is not conservatism. Heck, I suspect that somewhere, Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan are spinning like helicopter rotors at the very idea.

No, you represent the latest iteration of an anti-intellectualism that periodically rises in the American character. There is, historically and persistently, a belief in us that y'all just can't trust nobody who acts too smart or talks too good — in other words, somebody whose "general persona" indicates they may have once cracked a book or had a thought. Americans tend to believe common sense the exclusive province of humble folks without sheepskins on the wall or big words in their vocabularies.

I don't mock those people. They are my parents, my family elders, members of my childhood church. I honor their native good sense, what mom called "mother wit." But if it is insulting to condescend to them, it is equally insulting to mythologize them.

More to the point, something is wrong when we celebrate mental mediocrity like yours under the misapprehension that competence or, God forbid, intelligence, makes a person one of those "elites" — that's a curse word now --— lacking authenticity, compassion and common sense.

So no, this is not a clash of ideologies, but a clash between intelligence and its opposite. And I am tired of being asked to pretend stupid is a virtue. That's why I'd welcome the moment of truth your campaign would bring. It would force us to decide once and for all whether we are permanently committed to the path of ignorance, of birthers, truthers and tea party incoherence you represent, or whether we will at last turn back from the cliff toward which we race.

If the latter, wonderful, God bless America. If the former, well, some of us can finally quit hoping the nation will return to its senses and plan accordingly. Either way, we need to know, and your candidacy would tell us. If you love this country, Mrs. Palin, you can do it no greater service.

Run, Sarah, run.