Comments on: Obama’s centrist shift evaporates

By: hhps

hhps — Mon, 28 Feb 2011 04:35:10 +0000

Obama is clearly and without doubt a MARXIST. Just review his past and present associations.

COMMUNISM is alive and well in the U.S.A.

Americans need to wake up and see that liberals have bankrupted the country with entitlement programs that are too costly for American taxpayers, rich and poor alike.

It’s time to cut government spending by 50% STARTING AT THE EXECUTIVE AND LEGISLATIVE BRANCHES OF GOVERNMENT.

A TAXPAYER REVOLT IS COMING!

By: tomwinans

tomwinans — Fri, 25 Feb 2011 15:20:50 +0000

So … do the numbers speak for themselves? I listened directly to the State of the Union. These comments – whether talking points from others or not – appear to be quite consistent with words directly out of the President’s mouth.

I was quite unimpressed with the “cuts” he recommended, because – as the article underscores – they are not cuts.

Why do folks trivialize the article as a Republican vs. Democrat article? Such trivialization is simply intellectually stupid – irrespective of what Mssrs Reagan and Bush advocated. The FACT is that our budget is not well managed, is laden with initiatives that should not be funded, and requires leadership from the top and in all of Congress – by people who have a much better view of lines in the budget – to take a stand on what is truly needed, and what is not.

For example: did you know there is almost $350M in cuts for Planned Parenthood? I believe that whole group should NOT have government funding. If Planned Parenthood cannot self-fund their expansion, they should not get govt funding. Public broadcasting? Same fate. I’ll bet I could walk through areas of our national budget and cut out billions of wasted funding and be, quite possibly, far more effective than Mr. Obama.

This article represents far more than a trivial political contest. And it points to the head of a leadership team who seems quite willing to, with sleight of hand that is less and less convincing, say one thing and do another.

Readers can judge this article as regurgitation. It may be. But is it wrong when judged by the numbers? No. In fact, it understates the travesty being perpetrated by the current leadership team.

By: Cal13

Cal13 — Fri, 25 Feb 2011 02:34:59 +0000

There is no “centrist shift” on Obama’s part because he’s ALWAYS been in the center. The fiction that Obama’s ever been anything but a centrist is a creation of his conservative enemies who wish to marginalize him.

By: Batchain

Batchain — Tue, 22 Feb 2011 10:20:50 +0000

What the hell is a “centrist” anyway? To me it’s a fiction that is used to avoid being branded “liberal” or “conservative” but nonetheless a fabrication for the purposes of serving personal political expedience with no meaning reality to it at all.

But is Mr. Pethokoukis as serious as I’ve heard many others seriously express the same absurd sentiment dubbing President Obama everything from a “socialist” to a “communist” which is as grossly absurd as saying, “the poor and their entitlement programs are breaking this country’s back!” Or is this a persistent idiocy that only means, “The Illusory Reagan Revolution part two, the conclusion?” With a blanket policy of “deregulation” masquerading as “free-market, level field capitalism” with its disastrous Savings and Loan debacle as a consequence which took billions to bail out these institutions no one ever dared to call Reagan a “socialist” for bailing those bastards out. Unthinkable!

Enjoy what you you get “post-Omama”

By: vietnam2

vietnam2 — Tue, 22 Feb 2011 09:00:09 +0000

James and my fellow repugnant Americans. Please do America a favor and report on the gramm-leach-bliley act, CFMA and the repeal of the Glass Steagal Act. Tell the American people about the derivative and credit-default mess and how much money has been traded since 2000. Explain that much of the money(67%)was laundered into sub-prime and mortage loans by investment banking firms, with no derivative regulations. Thanks phil gramm. If you are honest with the American people and try to educate them so they(repugs)will understand it is stupid to discuss deficits after they understand how much money was traded. Also, Americans should understand what the republicans have truly done to our country and the world economy. Explain to the millions that have lost their homes and jobs what repugnants have done. Explain the Obama deficit is so small compared to the money traded with derivatives, its probably not worth mentioning by republicans. Perhaps you can help report on the people that created this mess and have these traitors sent to prison. That would be worth reporting? RIGHT!!! Just imagine James, if someone in Egypt had reported 20 years ago all the money Mabarak was stealing from the people. It might have changed history earlier before people had to go to the streets and die. Before you can be critical of Obama, you must inform the American people of the reason we had to bail out the banks and AIG, etc. Reagan started this hugh deficit (cheney said so)and was responsible for the American classrooms problems with his republican budget cuts on education. I guess repugs forget teachers had to start buying books and supplies for the kids out of their own pockets. Reagan also gave us 25-30% usury on credit cards. I thought usury was against the bible? I guess when you worship Cremation of Care at the Bohemian Club, the bible doesn’t matter.

By: vietnam2

vietnam2 — Tue, 22 Feb 2011 08:58:31 +0000

By: ecogabriel1

ecogabriel1 — Tue, 22 Feb 2011 00:21:05 +0000

I would love to have a job like yours James -writing nonsense and being paid for it.

Obama the “most extreme liberal”? PROVE IT WITH ILLUSTRATIONS, NOT WITH EMPTY BUZZWORD!

I have to remind you that Ronald Reagan was the one that turned the U.S. from the world’s largest CREDITOR into the world’s largest DEBTOR; all done within its leadership. Was he a liberal?

Wtih regards to “obamacare” you claim to know better than the non-partisan CBO. Besides, your intellectual dishonesty is just atrocious; W. Bush never bothered with including the expenditures from TWO WARS into the budget.

David Stockman is intellectually honest; just read it maybe you’ll learn something (I doubt it)
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/01/opinio n/01stockman.html

Rosy economic projections? Yeah, tell that to the millions that are unemployed. And let’s see what happens once the states adjust their budgets with the “rosy projections”

By: DunaDad

DunaDad — Mon, 21 Feb 2011 23:20:43 +0000

The 1930s to 1970 Glory Days Of US Liberalism….Also the last time middle class wages were rising. Unions are the protectors of the Middle Class. Without Unions we will all be working for minimum wages as 1099 contractors with no benefits. Forget payed holidays, forget paid vacations, forget a pension, forget health care. We will all be indentured servants wondering what happened to the American Dream.

By: tfranzman

tfranzman — Mon, 21 Feb 2011 22:10:56 +0000

Just another bubble boy.

By: caliguy55

caliguy55 — Mon, 21 Feb 2011 19:39:53 +0000

A number of commenters have hit the nail on the head. The downward slide of the U.S. began under Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush, was halted and then reversed under William J. Clinton, who left office with surpluses reaching $200 Billion annually, and then really took a nose dive under George W. Bush, who doubled the federal debt from $5 Trillion to $10 Trillion as he cut taxes for the wealthy while starting not one but two wars of choice. It’s obvious that the first step toward returning to fiscal sanity is allowing the Bush Tax Cuts to expire. At the same time, the defense department budget could easily be slashed by 50% without in anyway endangering the security of the United States. Finally, a surtax could be placed on millionaires and billionaires so that they do their fair share in restoring to the treasury a huge amount of wealth given them by the Republican Party. This country is in great danger because of past policy mistakes made by conservatives, when they held power. It’s time to fully reverse those policies and go back to what we know works, i.e., a very progressive tax structure to bring in the revenues needed to bring the federal debt under control.