The juvenile attitude of spending money we dont
Posted By: have is only going to bury the USA for good.nm on 2009-03-21
In Reply to: I will be happy to handle this... - Shirley U. Jest
nm
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
Yep, just keep spending money we dont have, O
nm
Charging is not spending money...it is spending someone elses money!
When you are debt free (as we are) THEN you spend money...anything else is just going into debt. I highly doubt he pays cash for anything.
Printing money we dont have? Borrowing money
nm
And spending money
we don't have is going to save the country? What I want to know is this.....we are all about finding alternative fuel sources and we want to end our dependency on foreign oil right? So if we are going to spend and invest money, why not spent it on drilling for oil now as well as starting alternative fuel sources. Think about how many jobs that would create and they would be longterm jobs because we will constantly need energy. To me that would seem like a smart thing to spend money on instead of the pet projects and crap that congress just voted for...jerks.
People would get jobs and could then afford healthcare. That would mean less people needing government assistance....but wait......Obama and the democrats want the American people dependent on government....my bad.....so that wouldn't work for their personal agenda of having more control and power over us little people.
but it's not his money he's spending...
it is taxpayer money. that's they problem. I don't care if he spends a hundred grand on his date - if he's money. But when it's taxpayer money and he's spending it for fun, I see a problem.
The only attorneys spending money here are
the ones preying on the witch hunt delegation and receiving funds via internet extortion schemes. Obama does not have to lift a finger, just sit on the sidelines and watch the SC strike them down, one after another.
The poor are spending money, sure
but they didn't earn that money. That money could be used for education or healthcare instead of making sure poor people circulated it. I'm middle class. I have been a single mom since my son was born, no Welfare, he is 19 now. I have NEVER asked for a handout. Are you telling me that I don't spend money? I have paid for everything I have. I own a house and I haven't even received 1 dime in child support. I barely make it, but I do make it and I work my butt off to do it. It isn't fun, but who are you to tell me that I would spend more money and boost the economy more if I was on Welfare instead. My son didn't grow up with a Welfare mom and I'm sure he won't get mad at me for not helping the ecomony because of it. He doesn't even know I'm broke. For him, there is a sense of pride in earning. He is in college now and excited to be among the working class because he was never taught there was any other way, you WORK. He will get a student loan, which he will have to pay back someday. This isn't free money. He did get a Pell grant, so I guess he got a little bit of a handout, but to qualify for that, you still have to do something, go to school. The Pell grant is less than what most people get for Welfare and they don't have to do anything at all. Seriously? Poor people make this country work, who knew? And here I thought this country was built on the sweat and tears of the middle class and the hard working folks who believed in capitalism and not socialism.
So if my neighbor gives me a $1000 bucks and I go spend it, does that mean I helped my neighbor? Do I have to pay him back? Just curious.
Top bailout recipients spending money
on federal lobbying. This makes me furious at both the companies and the government. ARGH!
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/04/22/bailed-firms-money-lobbying/
It is waste alright! You dont spend taxpayer money
nm
Dear Miss Thang. If you dont like it, dont watch.
nm
rational to one is irrational to another..dont like it, dont read it
Rational posts? Well, maybe you would think that, however, I disagree..but, what the heck, from your continual posts attacking me over the past few months, it is obvious that we dont agree on anything. Gotta tell ya, no one chases a person from a chat board..that is a lame excuse for someone who obviously was not able to hold his/her own with the smart liberals who post on this liberal board. So gt chased her/him away. On please! If a poster is getting to you, you just ignore their posts..dont click on them..Viola! It is that easy! Or dont come on the liberal board if you do not like liberal ideology! Viola! It is that easy! So, Im here all the time am I? Well, punkin, I see your handle always on both this board and the dinosaur board..er..I mean conservative board. Is this what your debating has gotten down to? Lets count and see who is here more often? How ridiculous, how childish, how so....republican. **BIG HUG**
I dont hate Obama. I just dont see him as qualified
nm
And, once again, very juvenile!
Who is more resentful, more persecuted and nurses a perceived grudge worse than a teenager? Adults are just out to keep him from getting the good stuff (they selfishly keep it all for themselves) or from having any fun. And when he grows up, ''Things are gonna be way different, just wait and see. I'll show them! I'll make them sorry.''
Does it get anymore juvenile than this?
Or is it just party dumb we see here?
Way too juvenile to address this flap.
nm
Democrats seem to be the most childish, juvenile
nm
Completely juvenile. This is the mentality on here now though...
:-(
You dont get it. Most dont want O to fail, they feel
nm
With all the juvenile name calling and finger pointing
exactly who introduced the use of the word "idiots" into the post. BTW, for you first, second and third responder(s), posting the same thing 2 or 3 times makes for a pathetic majoriy of one. Read my lips. PA-THE-TIC.
I forgot to say and don't even come back with a juvenile comment like Sam is my problem.
too juvenile.
Stop the juvenile name calling and refute what I post....
if you can.
How juvenile...why don't you throw yourself on the floor and kick your feet
x
That looked like a juvenile high school posting
nm
Thank you for the elitist, condescending, loyal-to-the-party post...but the juvenile playground name
should be left on the playground.
Bottom line...Joe Biden is a liar. Whether he lied about being John McCain's friend or he lied when he attacked him...he lied. He is a liar. Look it up in your Funk and Wagnall's. If being devoid of character is what floats your boat, great. If loyalty to the party means checking your integrity at the door, so be it. If people want to associate with people of that "ilk" (your word, not mine), so be it. You might try looking up honesty and integrity while you are at it.
You criticize Bush for saying you are with us or you are against us, but isn't that exactly what you are saying here? If you aren't willing to do whatever it takes to put forward the party, then we don't want you...you're against us. Hey kettle..you are as black as the pot.
Your two posts are much more acidic than mine ever thought about being. Exactly what principles are you loyal to? I always thought honesty and integrity were principles. Hmmm. Well I guess not part of your party principles.
No, au contraire, I am sure you are a proud democrat. I am sure liberals are proud to be liberals. That is not in question. Whatever the cost, no matter what lies have to be told, what friends cast under the bus...
And in case you had not noticed, there are a lot of Americans out here who are not tied to the "party" like you are. This is probably the same kind of talk that was abounding in the National Social German worker's party. Look THAT up in your Funk and wagnall's while you are at it.
And before your head spins around and you spit fire...I don't think for a minute, thank GOD, that all Democrats share your hard line loyalty to the party at all costs.
Lady, you're scary.
I dont WANT war. Dont judge me!
nm
It takes money to make money. nm
You were the one who had the whatever attitude.sm
-It happens all the time...move on.-
I beg to differ.
What an attitude!
I can see by reading along that you are simply not able to have a logical conversation with ANYONE despite my being respectful. And for your information, the reason I made the statement that we cannot agree is that we are speaking from different basic ethical and moral stands and neither of us is willing to budge. I will choose life and you will choose to end life. You really should not fall back on your religious convictions to explain your belief system, though. I am sure there are pro-choice Christians and I am careful to separate my personal feelings from all of Christianity. This is something you seem unable or unwilling to do. I am not quite sure why anyone would attempt to debate someone such as yourself, but I am sure I will not make that mistake again. It seems you have effectively silenced anyone who does not agree with you often in your lifetime. How nice for you.
what an attitude....
That's your only criterium for voting for the President of the United States?
And you are rich.
This is pathetic.
Dem vs. GOP spending
You can look this all up, but thought this might help. We'll see if it works. This doesn't even include the last 2 years. Note the very first column - 37 presidents over 198 years.
If they don't like spending.......
Where did over $10 trillion go over the last 8 years?
I'm sorry but spending more and more
money is the path to destruction. The reason Bush's tax cuts didn't work was because we were still spending WAY too much money in government. More government programs will only cost us more money, raise our taxes, and the American people will be hurting more. Businesses that employ people will cut back knowing taxes are going up and more people will lose jobs. Some businesses will go under and more people will lose jobs. I just do not see this spending spree and government programs helping us at all. I do not want a bigger government. I do not want government to have more control because God knows they can't even do their part without screwing something up. We have too many corrupt people in Washington who are trying to pay off the special interest groups that got them elected in the first place. If Obama signs this omnibus bill, that will be the final nail in his coffin for me. I gave him a chance and all I've seen is lie after lie. I truly feel that he is running this country even more into the ground.
If I am wrong, I will gladly admit that, but I will have to see a major turn around in order for me to admit that. Right now....all I can see more government control and future bankruptcy for our country and it scares the dickens out of me.
It's not condescending attitude that
turns you away from Obama, it is your refusal to think for yourself and to vote for your own best interests.
No reason for that attitude.
She was just posting those as examples of things that have been said that are false and that what the OP posted about was yet another one of those rumors that just aren't true.
And this is exactly the kind of attitude
that I feel will ruin us if Obama is elected. Oh...if you don't want to pay your fair share.....just don't make as much. Why should people feel like they have to lower their income. It will make hard working people not want to work hard because the government just takes what they earn. Then you have the people who don't make anything and are living off of the government and that number will grow. The more government assistance given, the more they want and the more they will take. It will make spending for these programs outrageous. Why should we enable people to mooch off of the government?
I understand there are people who legitimately need help. People who are truly disabled and can't work. However, there are many others who are literally just mooching so they don't have to work.
I have to think of MY future. I have two kids who will go through college. One boy is a freshman now so college really isn't too fair away. I have a house I'm paying for. I have a special needs child that requires more of my money. I want to put my hard earned money back for my kids and myself for a rainy day. I don't want it taken from me and given to people who I don't know and who I don't know whether they truly need it or are just lying and mooching off of the government.
The bottom line is this, making more money is an incentive to work hard. You take their money away and give to people who don't work hard and what does that show.....it shows that you don't have to work hard because the government will pick of the tab and it shows the hard workers....why bother. I don't want that for my country. I don't want my kids raised in that kind of life thinking that hard work doesn't pay off.
what a sourpus attitude.
What a condescending attitude.
.
You have the typical dem attitude of it's everyone
nm
Well, with an attitude like that, you're probably right.
Ever heard of innovation? Trying new things? Evolution? Going with the flow? Growth? Change? Hope? Faith?
Cut military spending!
How about we spend less on war and more on the citizens of the United States? Those who have family members in the military whose livelihood depends on war may call this socialism, but I call it common sense!
How about spending all that energy doing
Sorry if you call what you have been doing work, but it shouldn't surprise me. Most O lovers aren't worried about hard work, just free money.
Spending under control...huh?
Yeah.....an 825 billion dollar stimulus package that won't really work....sounds like spending is under control to me. Holy crow people! Nothing like adding that to our huge deficit now and how many days as he been in office? Is that like a new record of making the deficit shoot up so fast within the first month of a presidency. Impressive....NOT.
This spending is just a drop
in the pocket at what they will actually have to spend to buy us out of this mess. We can't afford to spend our way out of this. They are going to have a spend a lot more money realistically do create the jobs they are talking about. Plus, all this money won't be going into the system right away. To me this package is crap.
At least with major tax cuts businesses could work their way out without government controlling them. I do not like the idea of our government controlling so much.
With all the spending he is proposing
to make government bigger.......he will bankrupt this country.
Runaway Spending
Meet the Press: GOP Whip Cantor Hides Behind Troops to Explain Runaway Spending
by: Scott Isaacs
GOP House Whip Eric Cantor (R - Virginia) gave a gem of a performance today on NBC's Meet The Press, this site's parent company which is ultimately owned by General Electric. Cantor's job was to criticize the administration while trying to convince David Gregory, and by extension the American people, that his own personal behavior in Congress as well as the collective behavior of the GOP in Congress prior to the Obama administration was immaterial to the current situation.
First up on Cantor's checklist was to attack the administration on not having a concrete plan yet to remove troubled assets from the balance books of American banks. When confronted with the fact that the Republicans had no current plan and that the previous Republican administration was completely befuddled by the whole issue of the troubled assets and how to value & remove them Cantor insisted that it was important that America look forward, not backward.
Second was to go on the offensive against the administration in the name of wasteful spending. Whilst criticizing the Obama administration's stimulus plan, Cantor loudly lamented (while holding up a sheaf of papers) that the poor Republicans had a plan of their own but it was totally ignored by the press and, thus, ignored by the public. Cantor then went to bat on the 2009 budget bill that Obama signed into law criticizing the earmarks and the dreadful deficit spending. David Gregory then asked Cantor "People are wondering where these fiscal conservative convictions were when Republicans in Congress were complicit in President Bush's spending." Cantor's reply was quick and predictable: Of course they did! But it was for a good cause: the troops! How dare anyone question a massive budget bill in which a fraction of the massive spending goes towards outfitting our troops? Cantor slyly avoided the point that the regular Pentagon money was in the runaway budgets that the Republican Congresses approved but the specific money to operate the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan were specifically appropriated as emergency measures so that they would not have to be tabulated all together and give the public a sticker shock and awe campaign over how much our Arabian adventure was actually costing. Nor did he give the Democrats that voted for this last budget the same out that he himself took: they were just doing it for the troops because we should all take care of our troops and that is what a patriotic American would do: okay anything with even a fraction of military spending in it even if the rest is massive and unneeded pork barrel spending. Despite the fact that we are still very much at war in Afghanistan, which apparently slipped Cantor's mind, he left the blame to lay squarely on Congressional Democrats. It got more entertaining when Gregory asked Cantor if it was true, as the Democrats had presented data to show, that Cantor had supported 46,000 earmarks in his time in Congress. It was at this point that Cantor said with heartfelt sincerity that there was more than enough blame to go around but that now was the time to be forward-looking and heed his and Minority Leader John Boehner's call for a moratorium on earmarks. Cantor also generously offered the Republicans in Congress' help in supporting any veto that President Obama wanted to use on a Democratic-written bill and, if need be, the Republicans would even move on Obama's behalf to repeal any legislation that Obama feels was a bad idea. It was a very touching moment of bipartisanship... a member of the other party selflessly offering to help the President undo everything he has done over the past 50 days.
Gregory then brought up the specter of government stabilization of the financial system through buying up the troubled assets. Cantor specifically said that this was priority #1. Gregory asked Cantor if he would be willing to deviate from the current Republican stance of rigid fiscal conservatism to spend the money needed to gather up these troubled assets and remove them from the game board until they had recovered to the point that they were not toxic on the banks' balance sheets anymore. Cantor hemmed and hawed saying it would depend how much it would cost and so on. Gregory then hit him with the Big "T": $2 trillion. Cantor demurred as best he could, avoiding an answer from then until the end of the interview.
Pundits and Republicans both label Cantor as one of the up-and-coming rising stars in the Republican Party. He seems to need more experience on Meet The Press before he takes a serious spokesman role. If David Gregory can roll you, Tim Russert (bless his soul, I miss him) would have eaten you with some fava beans and a nice Chianti.
Spending..AND not even reading what they are
nm
Yes, YOUR attitude is one our forefathers envisioned, huh?! lol
geez.
It we adopt that attitude, we will be plunged into war
for the foreseeable future. I certainly do not want that, and I wouldn't think you would either. I have worked very closely with people from the middle east, mostly from Jordan and Pakistan, and I can most assuredly say that it is not US, the American people that they hate, it is our governmental policies that they hate. Those same policies of interference when it is not warranted that have created this chasm. It is not about cultural differences or about religion, the resistance is coming from that sector of radicalism. We have used and manipulated the peoples and governments of the middle east for our own ends for generations.
Your words are not acceptable to me because they tell me that there is no hope and to just give up and give in to the fact that we are going to be embroiled in war forever. I don't want that for my children or for my children's children.
Yes, i have plenty to keep me busy. Your attitude
just makes you seem somewhat sexist and I really was just curious? 
Why do you say Obama has a condescending attitude? I think he is ...sm
much more understanding of the problems of the average American than McCain is.
No, Francie has the attitude. SHE turns me away
nm
|
