Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Contact Us | Home RSS
 
 
 

Obama trots out fear tactics again

January 18, 2013

Two years ago President Barack Obama warned that unless he got his way from Congress with an unqualified increase in the national debt ceiling, terrible things would happe....

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(45)

svensota

Jan-21-13 3:57 PM

MIT-O-Honorable-One: You're cheering for the SAN FRANCISCO 49ers?

Incredible!!!

Do you have any clue as to who lives in San Francisco?

Let me help you. Gays! Liberals! Arty-types! Lots of Asians, Mexicans--dang foreigners! People who support gay marriage. Gays who are married. Liberals who are gays. Gay liberal marrieds. Maybe even some Blacks and some poor. In other words, not your kind of folks.

Jeez, man. You should root for a Bible belt team, like the Falcons from 'lanta.

Oh, they lost.

Rats.

4 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

BackFromTheDead

Jan-21-13 3:06 PM

MT: "It's interesting how the Left uses the term "fear tactics" whenever the Right raises a legitimate issue."

Actually, it appears that this article was written by "The Right," and was very much using the term "fear tactics" in response to "The Left."

1 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Hopetoday

Jan-21-13 1:47 PM

The middle class worker in New Ulm and the area have minimum wage as take home pay. (Not Kraft & 3M or AMPI ect. which get a fair take home pay plus Ins.) Time to stand up for a human living wage for all working people in our area.

4 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

JReader

Jan-21-13 1:32 PM

Ok, Eaglesfan, just what has changed that gives Obama the justification for raising the debt limit today where it didn't apply in 2006 ? Congress approved both wars (including a majority of Democrats) and Obama ok'd the extension of the Bush tax cuts twice with the most recent revision kept in tact for everyone except the high earning $400,000 a year crowd.

So, just what is your point ?

Does requesting an increase in the debt limit really indicate failed leadership like you said in 2006 if so what is he going to do in 2013 to fix it ? Or, was he not being truthful in 2006 when he made those comments ?

2 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

EaglesFan

Jan-21-13 1:04 PM

Yeah, those two unfunded wars and tax cuts are a b!tch, aren't they, JReader?

5 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

JReader

Jan-21-13 9:55 AM

"I rise today to talk about America’s debt problem. The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. Government can’t pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government’s reckless fiscal policies."

These were spoken by Senator Barak Obama in 2006 before he voted against raising the debt ceiling.

So, what has changed since then where it now becomes critical for congress to vote yes in 2013 where he was fundementally opposed to raisning it in 2006 ?

The only change is he now occupies the Whitehouse. So, that in Obama's eyes is the only reason it now becomes justified.

Hypocricy at it's finest.

There are indeed some things that have changed. Record number of people on food stamps, jobless recovery, Highest debt level we've ever had, greatest level of deficits. Quite a legacy.

7 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

EaglesFan

Jan-21-13 9:46 AM

Michael, who do you think is already paying for healthcare coverage for all of your rich friends' minimum wage employees?

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Auntydem

Jan-21-13 9:03 AM

Empty: I see. You can simply divine political opponents’ actual motives, so something to back it up is not necessary for you, even as you demand it for what others say. You simply reject actions of republicans which match their stated positions as other people's inability to understand nuances. That makes it easy for you to ignore facts that interfere with your opinion and put down the people who disagree. We get it.

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MichaelT

Jan-21-13 7:55 AM

Anti: In response to your last comment - When it comes to our current President, I have learned that his true intentions and position are much more clearly seen in what he DOES than what he SAYS. They are sometimes quite the opposite.

Under Obama and his allies in the Senate and in the press, our national debt has risen to the point where it is now questionable whether we can ever dig ourselves out of the hole. When interest rates rise just 3-5%, as they inevitably will, the interest on the debt will skyrocket, leaving us with the choice of eliminating much of what we have come to expect from our government or defaulting.

Dems think ObamaCare is great, but once interest rates rise, you can forget about the "care" part -- we'll all have coverage, but only the rich will have care.

At that point, no one will have to say, "I told you so." The folly of our current course and its leader will be evident.

4 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Auntydem

Jan-20-13 10:17 PM

Empty: You stated "Obama is pushing the country to economic collapse, which is exactly what some people feel he is trying to do." Did you research his exact statements to see if he is being misrepresented, or did you just accept that one?

4 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

svensota

Jan-20-13 8:45 PM

MIT-O-Honorable-One: Please forgive me. Your analysis of the European economic situation versus the United States was enlightening.

I didn't realize that all the numbers were backwards, as you so carefully pointed out, because they are on celsius and we are on fahrenheit.

Oh, my gosh, had I only known!

Keep up the insightful thinking!!!

3 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MichaelT

Jan-20-13 8:34 PM

Anti: I have a hard time accepting anyone's word on their political opponents' positions. Before believing them, I like to check out their exact statements to see if they are being misrepresented.

For example, you speak of a Republican wanting to "end" child labor laws. That makes it sound like he or she wants to completely eliminate all child labor laws. That sounds extremely unlikely. I'd have to research the person and his/her statements before accepting that one.

4 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MichaelT

Jan-20-13 8:30 PM

EaglesFan: Do you have any hard evidence that the limits that have been placed on PUBLIC employee unions will be followed by action to eliminate PRIVATE sector unions? Any statements by any public leader? If not, isn't it just pro-union propaganda?

5 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Auntydem

Jan-20-13 5:30 PM

Empty: And yet Haley repeatedly said "unions", Bachmann and Paul did not stutter, and at least one republican (as you requested) proposed a law to end child labor laws in her state. I believe that puts her in the "against" column.

5 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

EaglesFan

Jan-20-13 5:28 PM

The problem with your live of right to work us that the unions are still legally required to represent the workers who chose to not pay dues. Will the Chamber of Commerce represent a business that doesn't become a member?

My mother in law is a Walker supporter and was a union worker in the public health care industry. he was not living high on the hog before, mind you. They have now taken away Saturday overtime from her, but she still has to work (for straight time). Why didn't Scotty take the right to collective bargaining away from police officers?

Public unions are just a start, private ones will be next. Then you will see distinguished companies like Kraft and 3M who realize that if they compensate their workers fairly, the unions will stay away, begin to lower the compensation packages of their workers.

Hold on Michael, we're in for a wild ride. The early 1900's will resurface.

4 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MichaelT

Jan-20-13 5:13 PM

One more thought. When you characterize Nicky Haley as being "against unions," that also is not accurate. She was not speaking against the existence of unions; she was speaking against "closed shops", where one must join the union as a condition of employment. That is not being against unions per se; it is only against giving union members a monopoly on employment in a certain place.

6 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MichaelT

Jan-20-13 5:09 PM

Second half is on now. I'm rooting for the 49ers.

4 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MichaelT

Jan-20-13 5:07 PM

Many Dems either are not capable of understanding nuances, or they intentionally ignore them in order to erect a straw man.

Example: Including Scott Walker among the list of Republicans who "oppose unions." In making this assertion, they fail to differentiate between PUBLIC and PRIVATE unions. While unions in the PRIVATE sector serve the public fairly well, those in the PUBLIC sector do not. What Walker did in Wisconsin was try to undo some of the damage that public sector unions had done to their state economy. Walker's actions were perfectly in line with Democrats of the past, including FDR.

6 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MichaelT

Jan-20-13 4:59 PM

Note - There is a difference between not being in favor of something and calling something unconstitutional. Some things that may be allowable and even desireable on a state or local level are unconstitutional on the federal level. It's all a matter of the federal government being limited to the areas of concern enumerated within the Constitution, and leaving the rest to the states and individual citizens, as demanded by the Ninth and Tenth Amendments.

3 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MichaelT

Jan-20-13 4:55 PM

Not tongue tied - just tied to the tv during the NFC championship game.

3 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

EaglesFan

Jan-20-13 4:52 PM

Michael is looking in his Bible right now for a verse that says that workers should not have rights, that slavery is a good thing.

5 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

middleclassworker

Jan-20-13 4:30 PM

Tongue tied, MT?

5 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Auntydem

Jan-20-13 4:08 PM

Please name one republican who wants to eliminate child labor laws.------- Missouri State Senator, Jane Cunningham (R), introduced S.B. 222 which eliminates age requirements for child labor, restrictions on hours worked, restrictions on industries where they may work, and removes the authority of the state Labor Division to inspect records on child employees.

Wendy Long GOP candidate for US Senate (NY) held the Tea Party view that child labor laws, overtime, minimum wage, and labor protections in general are unconstitutional. The Congressional Tea Party caucus had 59 members (all GOP) prior to the recent elections. Member Sen. Mike Lee has called child labor laws unconstitutional.

3 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Auntydem

Jan-20-13 3:42 PM

Name one republican who wants to eliminate unions.-----------“I love that we are one of the least unionized states in the country…We don’t have unions in South Carolina because we don’t need unions in South Carolina…And we’ll make the unions understand full well that they are not needed, not wanted, and not welcome.” Nikki Haley, SC gov, who also spoke against unions in her speech at the Republican convention.

4 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Auntydem

Jan-20-13 3:22 PM

Please name one Republican who advocates eliminating minimum wage.----------Ron Paul was asked “Do you advocate getting rid of a minimum wage?” and replied, “ Absolutely, and it would help the poor.” Michele Bachmann - “Literally, if we took away the minimum wage— if conceivably it was gone — we could potentially virtually wipe out unemployment completely.” Republican John Raese of West Virginia (candidate for president ) advocated ending minuimum wage laws.

4 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 45 comments Show More Comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 

 

I am looking for:
in:
News, Blogs & Events Web