Path:
eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september
.org!news.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!mx04.eternal-septemb
er.org!mx04.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Cade Larson 
Newsgroups: az.politics,rec.collecting.coins,dfw.politics
Subject: Re: Stop Obama
Date: Mon, 05 Nov 2012 22:02:20 -0700
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 138
Message-ID: 
References:  
 
 

Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2012 05:02:11 +0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: mx04.eternal-september.org;
posting-host="9f157503d7228febd39135f4cbffd2e4";
 logging-data="31251"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";
posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/6N3sPixHontFqchn9fwgqzkevGXPPgic="
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:10.0.10) Gecko/20121024
Thunderbird/10.0.10
In-Reply-To: 
Cancel-Lock: sha1:S/64B1cDaKzojHfGpjagrAgu9FE=
Xref: news.eternal-september.org az.politics:2749 rec.collecting.coins:5570
dfw.politics:363

On 11/5/2012 8:30 PM, R S H wrote:
> 1. There no longer is a white majority in the U.S.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_the_United_States

The U.S. population's distribution by race and ethnicity in 2010 was as 
follows

Americans 308,745,538 100.0 %
White or European American 223,553,265 72.4 %
Black or African American 38,929,319 12.6 %
Asian 14,674,252 4.8 %
American Indian or Alaska Native 2,932,248 0.9 %
Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander 540,013 0.2 %
Some other race 19,107,368 6.2 %
Two or more races 9,009,073 2.9 %

> 2. My net worth is higher than it was when Obama took office, after it dived
while Bush was in office.

http://online.wsj.com/

Negative $4,019
The Obama years have been brutal on middle-class incomes.

> 3. My stock holdings are back where they were before Bush drove them way
down.

Rich folk like you are lucky to hold any stocks.

> 4. As I recall it, Bush started the Stimulus, not Obama, and

Obama blew it, all 830 BILLION$$$ worth, with only 4% of it going to 
"shovel-ready" projects.

http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/STIMULUS_FINAL_0217.html


"If I don't have this done in three years, then there's going to be a 
one-term proposition"—President Obama, 2009.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4p4-vPrcDBo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-75KJkJiVRo&feature=related

Despite the rise of ATM's for banking in the 1980's. President Barack 
Obama says they are partly to blame for current unemployment.

> many of the tax increases and other rises in costs over the past 4 years have
> as much to do with Republican stands taken in the Congress as anything the
President might have done. Remember that the President cannot do
> anything legislative.

Nope:

http://online.wsj.com/

Even if Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan win on November 6, his agenda will be 
stymied if Republicans can't pick up at least three more seats than 
their current 47 and control the Senate. That's clear from the last two 
years, when Harry Reid's not-so-deliberative body became the graveyard 
for fiscal and other reform.

House Republicans won an historic midterm election in 2010, picking up 
63 seats. They also gained six Senate seats, but a handful of weak GOP 
candidates (Sharron Angle, Ken Buck, Christine O'Donnell) cost them 
control of the upper body. Back in charge in 2011, Mr. Reid proceeded to 
stop nearly everything that House Republicans passed. President Obama 
hasn't even had to sweat a veto fight because nothing escapes Mr. Reid's 
lost world.


Consider the record. In 2011 and 2012 the House passed more than 
three-dozen economic or jobs-related bills and with only a few 
exceptions they died in the Senate without a vote. The bills dealt with 
regulatory relief, tax reduction, domestic drilling for energy, offshore 
drilling, a jobs bill for veterans, repeal of ObamaCare and many more. 
Many passed the House with significant Democratic support, as the nearby 
list shows.

Then there is the Democratic failure on their constitutional obligation 
of passing a budget. House Republicans passed their budgets in each of 
the past two years in the spring. The latest one, crafted by Vice 
Presidential nominee Paul Ryan, contained $4.5 trillion in deficit 
reduction—at least twice as much as Mr. Obama's budget proposal.

By contrast, the Senate failed to pass any budget in 2012. Or 2011. Or 
2010. The Senate hasn't passed a budget in more than 1,200 days. Sorry, 
Harry, you can't blame that on a Republican filibuster, because it takes 
only 51 votes to pass a Senate budget resolution. In 2011 and 2012 the 
Senate Budget Committee never even drafted a budget, thus inspiring a 
House bill to dock the pay of Senate Budget Committee Members for not 
doing their job.

Mr. Reid even declared in 2011 that it would be "foolish for us to do a 
budget," no doubt because he thought that would allow voters to see that 
what Democrats really want is even more spending and higher taxes. This 
would have made life difficult for vulnerable Democratic incumbents who 
pass themselves off as moderates in election years, such as 
Pennsylvania's Bob Casey, Montana's Jon Tester and Florida's Bill Nelson.

So Democrats simply sat back and took shots at the Ryan budget. 
Meanwhile, these same incumbents are now campaigning at home as 
champions of domestic energy, lower taxes, spending restraint and 
regulatory relief—everything the Democratic Senate helped to kill.

Enlarge Image





> Congress has to pass bills and send them to the President, who then has to
approve them before they become law. This
> is called checks and balances. So you cannot blame Obama for anything that is
 due to the actions of Congress, as much as you might want to.

The Senate also failed in 2010 and 2012 to pass a single appropriations 
bill. According to an analysis by Senate Republicans, that hadn't 
happened before in the 150-year history of the current spending process. 
This year the Senate even failed to enact a national defense 
authorization bill, which almost never happens.

The House passed a bill to avert the tax cliff looming in January, but 
the Senate failed to act on that too. Last week Mr. Reid's chief Senate 
lieutenant, Chuck Schumer of New York, warned that Democrats will stop 
any attempt at bipartisan tax reform next year, calling the idea 
"obsolete." He's essentially promising pre-emptive gridlock in 2013 no 
matter who wins.

Voters can be forgiven for not knowing all this because the media mostly 
ignore Senate obstructionism these days. Instead, they dutifully follow 
Mr. Obama's lead when he says of Congress that "I think the American 
people will run them out of town because they are frustrated and they 
know we need to do something big and bold." He means Republicans.

> As for Begazzi and other foreign embassies and consulates, remember the the
Republicans refused

The Libyan embassy was attacked twice before and ALL its requests for 
additional security were denied by OBAMA!

The Dem lying is going to stop after tomorrow - and YOU will slink away 
like the paid DNC shill that we know you to be.
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.1