Obama is "Unpatriotic"

[layoutshooter]

According to what candidate Barack Obama said in 2008, President Barack Obama is unpatriotic. You can watch the clip from the article below. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black................

"The problem is, is that the way Bush has done it over the last eight years is to take out a credit card from the Bank of China in the name of our children, driving up our national debt from $5 trillion for the first 42 presidents – #43 added $4 trillion by his lonesome, so that we now have over $9 trillion of debt that we are going to have to pay back — $30,000 for every man, woman and child. That’s irresponsible. It’s unpatriotic."

Senator Barack Obama

Flashback: Obama calls adding $4 trillion to national debt “unpatriotic”​

Yesterday, I wrote about the CBS News story showing that Barack Obama had added over $4 trillion to the national debt in less than three years, which puts the current President on track in one term (and probably less) to beat the record that took his predecessor two terms to set. Some called this an unfair attack, noting that Congress authorizes spending, a point I addressed yesterday and which does Democrats no good at all. But guess who else blamed rising national debt on a President? Why, it’s Candidate (and then-Senator) Obama,. who not only blamed George Bush for adding more national debt than his previous 42 predecessors combined, but also questioned Bush’s patriotism for the same policies that Obama accelerated as President himself:

The problem is, is that the way Bush has done it over the last eight years is to take out a credit card from the Bank of China in the name of our children, driving up our national debt from $5 trillion for the first 42 presidents – #43 added $4 trillion by his lonesome, so that we now have over $9 trillion of debt that we are going to have to pay back — $30,000 for every man, woman and child. That’s irresponsible. It’s unpatriotic.

“Credit card from the Bank of China”? That was a favorite phrase of Obama’s during the campaign. A quick search shows that he used it in an April 2008 debate, this June 2008 appearance, and others as well, usually tying it to tax cuts.

And what exactly has Obama done as President? Despite claiming that he has known that deficit reduction has been needed since the first day he took office, Obama has offered no deficit reduction proposals in his term as President. In fact, he has submitted budget proposals that have massively expanded deficit spending.

Just how patriotic is that? After all, if Obama can use the increase in the national debt to question Bush’s patriotism, doesn’t it follow that increasing deficit spending by 152% per month makes Obama 152% more “unpatriotic” than Bush?


Flashback: Obama calls adding $4 trillion to national debt “unpatriotic” « Hot Air

 

[greg334]

If one is to believe that a campaign viewpoint is valid, then one is to believe anything.

What Obama said before the election is not really important because come December 2008, when he met with Bush and was handed his a** on a platter, everything that he said didn't matter one bit.

 

[Tennesseahawk]

Yep... just like "no new taxes". Yet the Dems used that as their rally cry against Bush Sr.

He said it, Greg. It should be the right's rally cry. Regardless if he said it during campaigning, or it was the first thing out of his baby mouth. He said it!

 

[greg334]

True but the problem is he has said soooooo much and most of it means little to the guy or gal who is sitting looking for work and does not care what he said in the past but looks at what he has done in the now.

The right needs to come up with ways to convince people they are not the same as the left, one way maybe actually doing something instead of falling back on muckraking politics and stand firm on the issues that matter. I just don't see a campaign that will be less than 80% of Obama did or say this and more than 20% of what we can do for you.

 

[Tennesseahawk]

The right can do that. However, the Republicans can only say, "We'll cut your taxes." Fact is, people are afraid of change; especially when it comes from lessening governmental controls and powers. They believed in unicorn and fairy change from Obama, yet got Keynesian change in a bottle, for everyone to drink.

The guy or gal looking for work make up less than 10%. The right needs to relate to the 90%, and say we'll do our best to make the proper environment so you keep your job.

 

[greg334]

Well that's all true too, but it is both ends of the spectrum and one of the causes that I mentioned that is holding us back - not knowing what's going to happen.

HOWEVER we have closer to 15% unemployed who want to work and that is a real number which won't be going down anytime soon.

 

[layoutshooter]

True but the problem is he has said soooooo much and most of it means little to the guy or gal who is sitting looking for work and does not care what he said in the past but looks at what he has done in the now.

The right needs to come up with ways to convince people they are not the same as the left, one way maybe actually doing something instead of falling back on muckraking politics and stand firm on the issues that matter. I just don't see a campaign that will be less than 80% of Obama did or say this and more than 20% of what we can do for you.

Greg, IF you choose to use left and right, fine. I then contend that we have NO right wing or even center in our major parties. Only far left and no quite so are left.

What this little thing DID show is that Obama is just another lying dog. ANYONE who would believe him is none to bright.

I don't want a candidate to tell me what they can do FOR me. ANY TIME an American candidate states that they are going to do something "for" me they mean what they are going to do "TO" me. What they do to us is almost always bad.

I want a candidate to explain how he/she/it is going to get the federal government OUT of my life and OUT of my way. How he/she/it is going to get rid of the Department of Education, the EPA, The Small business administration and so on and so forth. I want them to tell me how they are going to STOP allowing departments to regulate, like the DOT. THEN I would finally see a candidate who MAY be worth voting for.

 

[greg334]

What this little thing DID show is that Obama is just another lying dog. ANYONE who would believe him is none to bright.

Well why are you all doing the same thing - bringing up things we already know about?

As for the regulations, having congress take back the power to approve regulations will be a very good thing but the DOT is here to regulate interstate commerce and us.

 

[Pilgrim]

The unemployment numbers are actually worse than that. These figures get distorted because our politicians use a goofy formula to define "the unemployed" as people out of work that are actually looking for work. If they give up looking for a job the govt regards them as no longer unemployed - this alternate reality could only exist in Washington.

The more realistic figure is the Labor Force Participation Rate - the number of civilians (non-military) over 16, not in prison or some other institution, that are able and available to work. That number for July 2011 was 63.9% - the lowest it's been in the past 10 years according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics: Databases, Tables & Calculators by Subject

It's no wonder that houses, cars and other durable goods aren't selling and the rate of foreclosures on home mortgages is at an all time record. Too many people are unemployed or underemployed, and those that are fortunate to have a job are holding back on expenditures in case they're the next to get their pink slip.

Private industries need to be able to grow their businesses without govt interference, excessive taxes and stifling regulations. Only when this happens will we start to see these employment numbers reverse the current trend.

 

[layoutshooter]

Well why are you all doing the same thing - bringing up things we already know about?

As for the regulations, having congress take back the power to approve regulations will be a very good thing but the DOT is here to regulate interstate commerce and us.

Well Greg, there are still people that believe that Obama is the savior. There are still people who believe that the ReBumLiCans are the answer, just as there are people who believe that the Dumb-O-Crats are.

I agree, DOT is not going to give up it's power to regulate. The ONLY way to remove power from the departments is to get rid of everyone in Congress. NOTHING is going to change.

 

[greg334]

Well I used 15% because I just did. Yes it is a lot worse.

Private industries need to be able to grow their businesses without govt interference, excessive taxes and stifling regulations. Only when this happens will we start to see these employment numbers reverse the current trend.

The biggest issue isn't the interference, the excessive taxes or the regulations - a lot ... I mean a lot of execs of the companies who are holding on to their cash say the same exact thing ... 'we do not know what tomorrow will be like' and they refuse to make any capital expenditures so to move on hiring people or expanding their product lines. IF we can get back to both the administration and congress both setting up policies that are clear with the intent for long term (4 years) implementation, we will see the money flowing again. BUT until then, we are just going to be in the same holding pattern.

Layout, the dot can't give up the regulation of interstate trucking - it is their job.

 

[layoutshooter]

"Layout, the dot can't give up the regulation of interstate trucking - it is their job."

They should ONLY have the power to suggest regulation. I pay my congressman and senators to represent me. I expect THEM and ONLY them to have the power of making law.

 

[greg334]

DOT suggest?

They are regulators who enforce the laws and regulations. The regulations that they enforce used to be partially written by the congress sub-committees and then sometimes voted on or approved by those committees making them binding.

BUT like other things, we got lazy and allowed congress not to do their jobs and look .... no more oversight into how regulations are written or approved.

The issue isn't whether or not the feds have the right, they surely do and it is one of just a few that are specifically written in the constitution but rather the issue is whether or not people need to deal with some of the stuff they face with the regulations and try to change them through the same method that the constitution allows.

The EOBR issue is a good one, you don't like it because you have to pay for it, Phil doesn't like it because he feels it is an intrusion, many others don't like it because of this illusion of freedom on the road but it is something that is used to augment safety which is directly part of the hours of service regulations we have to deal with when we choose to be a driver who makes a living off of crossing state lines. We can't choose not to log our HOS, can we? Should we?

Whether or not an EOBR or a log sheet is used, the problem is just the same - there are regulations that should be followed in order to work.

This holds true with the other things in our lives, but always comes back to what the congress needs to do to fulfill their obligation to the country and more importantly what we failed to do to meet our obligations to ourselves by keeping them on the right path.

So could it be that we are all unpatriotic by allowing ourselves to become lazy?

 

[layoutshooter]

DOT suggest?

They are regulators who enforce the laws and regulations. The regulations that they enforce used to be partially written by the congress sub-committees and then sometimes voted on or approved by those committees making them binding.

BUT like other things, we got lazy and allowed congress not to do their jobs and look .... no more oversight into how regulations are written or approved.

The issue isn't whether or not the feds have the right, they surely do and it is one of just a few that are specifically written in the constitution but rather the issue is whether or not people need to deal with some of the stuff they face with the regulations and try to change them through the same method that the constitution allows.

The EOBR issue is a good one, you don't like it because you have to pay for it, Phil doesn't like it because he feels it is an intrusion, many others don't like it because of this illusion of freedom on the road but it is something that is used to augment safety which is directly part of the hours of service regulations we have to deal with when we choose to be a driver who makes a living off of crossing state lines. We can't choose not to log our HOS, can we? Should we?

Whether or not an EOBR or a log sheet is used, the problem is just the same - there are regulations that should be followed in order to work.

This holds true with the other things in our lives, but always comes back to what the congress needs to do to fulfill their obligation to the country and more importantly what we failed to do to meet our obligations to ourselves by keeping them on the right path.

So could it be that we are all unpatriotic by allowing ourselves to become lazy?

I don't like EOBR's because I have to pay for them, they are an intrusion, they are used to enforce bad HOS laws and I have to pay for them in Mexican trucks as well as my own.

I have always said that WE, the PEOPLE are to blame for the mess we are in. WE have not controlled congress, we have allowed them to control us. We MUST take back our rightful control over them.

 

[Pilgrim]

The biggest issue isn't the interference, the excessive taxes or the regulations - a lot ... I mean a lot of execs of the companies who are holding on to their cash say the same exact thing ... 'we do not know what tomorrow will be like' and they refuse to make any capital expenditures so to move on hiring people or expanding their product lines.

I think we're saying the same thing, only from different perspectives. A lot of the uncertainty you mention is caused by the govt interference and regulations, which seem to grow daily emanating from the Obama administration. A couple of obvious examples people see every day in the news are
(1) the energy companies that could play a major role at taking the lead in pulling the country out of recession. The EPA and the Obama administration have stifled the country's ability to harvest it's own resources like oil, natural gas and coal. Remember - one of Obama's campaign promises was to put the coal mining industry out of business. Just last week it was announced that Exxon was having to go to court to fight the Obama bureaucrats over routine lease renewals for one of our largest oil field discoveries ever. The EPA is heaping even more regulatory obstacles on the companies trying to develop huge natural gas deposits of the Marcellus Shale in Appalachia.
And (2), by now everyone has heard the story of the NLRB's attempt to kill Boeing's new plant in South Carolina because they opened this new facility in a right-to-work state. How can businesses expand and open new plants when they have to worry about placating the unions with every move they make?

Add to all this the fact that the US has the 2d highest corporate tax rate in the world at 39.25%, only slightly behind Japan at 39.54%. Plus, looming over the calendar's horizon is ObamaCare and its detrimental effects on the nation's health industry. The only way to cure these problems is to defeat Obama and the Democrats in 2012. If he gets a 2d term giving him another 4 years to operate without the limitations of re-election prospects, there's no telling what kind of damage he can do to our economic system and our way of life as we've known it.

 

[clcooper]

If one is to believe that a campaign viewpoint is valid, then one is to believe anything.

What Obama said before the election is not really important because come December 2008, when he met with Bush and was handed his a** on a platter, everything that he said didn't matter one bit.

and people wonder why there is so many stupid VOTERS .

so it is ok for a salesman to say there is nothing wrong wirh the item and if it does break he will stand behind it and fix it . for free .

then after you buy the item it breaks . you take it back to the salesman and he tells you that he only told you that so you would buy from him . so now you bought it what he said before doesnt matter anymore .

if i remember that type of sales man was called a USED CAR SALES MAN .

so glad we got that type of people in the government .

 

[clcooper]

I want a candidate to explain how he/she/it is going to get the federal government OUT of my life and OUT of my way..

i agree

How he/she/it is going to get rid of the Department of Education, the EPA, The Small business administration and so on and so forth. I want them to tell me how they are going to STOP allowing departments to regulate, like the DOT. THEN I would finally see a candidate who MAY be worth voting for.

but why did these departments start in the first place ??
Department of Education do you think it has something to do with the poor wasnt able to aford to go to school . and the rich was able to and since the rich had a Education they were able to get better paying jobs .and didnt get taken advanaged of .

we need the EPA to . how many companies have dumped waste in our waters made it unsafe to drink . killed the fish off that we were able to fish for and feed our families with .


Small business administration the small guy needs help to compete with the big guys . like i said before remember the tucker car .

and with DOT we do need them to keep the bad drivers off the road

are all of these departments good YES . are they doing what they are to be doing NO . there is to much greed and corruption .

most regulations today are being made to make it harder for the small company to stay in business or even to start in the business

 

[tbubster]

Well why are you all doing the same thing - bringing up things we already know about?
.

Thats funny right there,I dont care who you are thats funny right there.


All true and would be worse if we allowed it. I have yet seen Obama present a package that is the same as the Patriot act and makes me wonder why people don't get upset with Bush's attempt to do the same things that they claim Obama is doing.

Wasn't this done under Bush too?

As for Obama, really Syria is a problem for Syria as much as Libya is a problem for Libya. I think we would still be in the same situation with Bush as we are with Obama.

says the guy who can not seem to help but to bring a guy into the thread who has been out of office for 2 1/2 years when there is no other defence for the unbeatable one.

See greg just two weeks ago there was a post where someone said they were voting for Obama and a big reason was that he has kept most of his campaign promises.This is why what he said on the campaign trail is very important.Also one has to be very blind not to see that it was those promises that got him elected and not his record of voting present 130 times in his short senate career.Now I know those that belive that Obama is unbeatable do not like when ARTICLES like this are printed.As they bring to light to the many sheep that the great one is in fact no more standing with those he says he cares about then the wall street rich are.

YES greg what he said on the campaign is very important.You see Obama and his campaign staff will be using the fact he promised to reform healthcare and he did.Any little thing he can use from his 08 campaign he will have to use because lets face it he can not really use his record as president to bolster hi re-election bid.

 

[clcooper]

DOT suggest?

They are regulators who enforce the laws and regulations. The regulations that they enforce used to be partially written by the congress sub-committees and then sometimes voted on or approved by those committees making them binding.

BUT like other things, we got lazy and allowed congress not to do their jobs and look .... no more oversight into how regulations are written or approved.

The issue isn't whether or not the feds have the right, they surely do and it is one of just a few that are specifically written in the constitution but rather the issue is whether or not people need to deal with some of the stuff they face with the regulations and try to change them through the same method that the constitution allows.

The EOBR issue is a good one, you don't like it because you have to pay for it, Phil doesn't like it because he feels it is an intrusion, many others don't like it because of this illusion of freedom on the road but it is something that is used to augment safety which is directly part of the hours of service regulations we have to deal with when we choose to be a driver who makes a living off of crossing state lines. We can't choose not to log our HOS, can we? Should we?

Whether or not an EOBR or a log sheet is used, the problem is just the same - there are regulations that should be followed in order to work.

This holds true with the other things in our lives, but always comes back to what the congress needs to do to fulfill their obligation to the country and more importantly what we failed to do to meet our obligations to ourselves by keeping them on the right path.

So could it be that we are all unpatriotic by allowing ourselves to become lazy?

no we did not get lazy . they took the power from us . they have become the BULLIES ON THE PLAY GROUND . and the only way we are going to get OUR play ground back is to stand up to them . beside each other . weather you are from the left or the right . black or white or brown . male or female . old or young . you need to stand up now .

i agree with parts of what greg and layout are saying . put both of what they are saying togeather and it will work better then it is now and more will be happier too .

 

[clcooper]

I think we're saying the same thing, only from different perspectives. A lot of the uncertainty you mention is caused by the govt interference and regulations, which seem to grow daily emanating from the Obama administration. A couple of obvious examples people see every day in the news are
(1) the energy companies that could play a major role at taking the lead in pulling the country out of recession. The EPA and the Obama administration have stifled the country's ability to harvest it's own resources like oil, natural gas and coal. .

gas was under 1.50 for what 50 years . but in 1 year it jumped 1.50 why in 1 year did it jump so much when it took 50 to get there . the energy companies are one of the problems why we are haveing the problems we are today . why we are over in iraq now is for the oil and only the oil . the millitary is big and better enough we should of been in there no more then 5 years but because somebody is makeing a profit they do things to keep the millitary over there longer . Vietnam how many times did they take contral of a place only to leave it and come back later to fight for contral agian .

Remember - one of Obama's campaign promises was to put the coal mining industry out of business. .

because he is bought and paid for by the oil companies

Just last week it was announced that Exxon was having to go to court to fight the Obama bureaucrats over routine lease renewals for one of our largest oil field discoveries ever. The EPA is heaping even more regulatory obstacles on the companies trying to develop huge natural gas deposits of the Marcellus Shale in Appalachia. .

so if somebody does work for you and does a crappy job you will hire them again . how many oil spills has EXXON had . because the were to lazy and cheap . so you saying that is ok they can save money and help their profits . but i dont care what the land looks like after they are done . or even if the land will ever be livable on agian . because i will only be here for 60 some years . then i dint need to worry about it any more .

And (2), by now everyone has heard the story of the NLRB's attempt to kill Boeing's new plant in South Carolina because they opened this new facility in a right-to-work state. How can businesses expand and open new plants when they have to worry about placating the unions with every move they make?.

do you know what right to work means ?? yep you wear your faverate sports team in to work one day . guess what your boss hates that team he fires you . you wear a blue shirt . your boss can fire you . even if he tells you to do something unsafe and you say no he can fire you . if he tells you to drive that truck with no brakes and bald tire . you say no he can fire you .
yes a boss should be able to fire you if you show up late . dont even show up , dont do your job , catches you sleeping on the job . haveing sex on the job .

yes i agree the unions went to crap . but remember what started the unions . because the workers were forced to live in company houses and forced to buy from the company store . and if the worker didnt work for the company any more they had to move in a very short time . (days ) and at the store the prices were so high they had to get credit to get stuff to live on . had to work in unsafe condtions . unsafe amount of hours .

Add to all this the fact that the US has the 2d highest corporate tax rate in the world at 39.25%, only slightly behind Japan at 39.54%. Plus, looming over the calendar's horizon is ObamaCare and its detrimental effects on the nation's health industry. The only way to cure these problems is to defeat Obama and the Democrats in 2012. If he gets a 2d term giving him another 4 years to operate without the limitations of re-election prospects, there's no telling what kind of damage he can do to our economic system and our way of life as we've known it.

it is just not obama it is 99.9% that is in there now . and the lobbiest too . they need to start listening to the WE THE PEOPLE not we the big businesses .