Guess you have an axe to grind. CA created
many of its own problems. The state is going bankrupt. Obama and the fed govt are not to blame here.
Jeb wrote:
Guess you have an axe to grind. CA created
many of its own problems. The state is going bankrupt. Obama and the fed govt are not to blame here.
Oh yes he is to blame and so is the entire liberal mentality that the government can be all things to all people all of the time. See the problems you people cause. This is just the beginning.
Are you better off today?
That's the only questions voters need to ask themselves.
Who the hell is better off today?????
Our country is a lot better off today. Not bleeding jobs, winding down 2 expensive wars...
National debt, $5 gas, $Libya wrote:
Who the hell is better off today?????
I am.
National debt, $5 gas, $Libya wrote:
Who the hell is better off today?????
Just to recap . . .
Bush left us in the worst recession of the past 80 years, and yet:
1. Unemployment is back to where Bush left it, and dropping steadily (whereas it was spiraling out of control as Bush left office).
2. Now at 23 consecutive months of private sector job growth:
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-03-10/u-s-payroll-gain-caps-job-market-s-best-six-months-since-2006.html3. All this even as the public sector shrinks, which should delight conservatives:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/february-jobs-report-lets-call-it-a-recovery/2012/03/09/gIQADJ8B1R_blog.html4. Corporate earning are at all-time highs, as are dividend payments to stockholders:
http://pages.stern.nyu.edu/~adamodar/New_Home_Page/datafile/spearn.htm5. "Obama budget gets deficit under 3% of GDP: CBO
Both parties say analysis backs their claims":
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/obama-budget-gets-deficit-under-3-of-gdp-cbo-2012-03-16?link=MW_home_latest_news(Note: the deficit was at 3.6% of GNP BEFORE Bush started the 2nd Iraq War.)
California is a terrible example to use for a barometer of Obama's policies. California is so screwed up and has been for many years. Seriously, they thought Arnold was a good choice. That's not a slam on him being a Republican, it's the fact that he's Arnold. I love his movies, well, some of them, but why on Earth would anyone think he was a qualified governor.
As to being better off, I am far better off than I was four years ago. My job depends on people having disposable income and people seem to have a lot more than they did four years ago. I still think all our options for president and congress are poor ones but I'm glad I'm not where I was in 2008.
Touche wrote:
why on Earth would anyone think he was a qualified governor.
Probably for the same reason(s) they thought Reagan was.
A record 44.7 million people -- or 1 in 7 Americans -- were on food stamps last year.
If you think about it, Schwarzenegger was no less qualified than anyone else. What does it take to be a good governor? Nobody really knows. Certainly not your degrees, or political experience. He was actually not bad as governator, especially compared to his predecessors.
California's problem is that the people kept voting to increase spending but voted down tax increases for years. Guess what eventually happens?
Obviously you are not from California. Arnold was terrible. But starting out saying political experience does not qualify you as governor kind of shows what you know right there. Wilson and Brown, while not incredible governors, were both far better than Arnold largely because of their experience.
Jersey Bias wrote:
If you think about it, Schwarzenegger was no less qualified than anyone else. What does it take to be a good governor? Nobody really knows. Certainly not your degrees, or political experience. He was actually not bad as governator, especially compared to his predecessors.
California's problem is that the people kept voting to increase spending but voted down tax increases for years. Guess what eventually happens?
yeah,
sba wrote:
Jeb wrote:Guess you have an axe to grind. CA created
many of its own problems. The state is going bankrupt. Obama and the fed govt are not to blame here.
Oh yes he is to blame and so is the entire liberal mentality that the government can be all things to all people all of the time. See the problems you people cause. This is just the beginning.
Yes, it's all Obama's fault. You're as idiotic as the blame Bush-ers.
It's so funny that the very people who voted for Obama have been fired.
98% of the blacks voted for Obama. Are they better off?
Yes Obama reduced the jail time for crack dealers, but he hasn't much else for the blacks.
webby wrote:
5. "Obama budget gets deficit under 3% of GDP: CBO
Both parties say analysis backs their claims":
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/obama-budget-gets-deficit-under-3-of-gdp-cbo-2012-03-16?link=MW_home_latest_news
plans are plans.
promises are promises.
projections are projections.
all subject to reality.
A couple of years back the obamacare price tag was pegged at $900 bils. Today it's 1.8 trils. Next estimate's going to be 4 trils.
Borrowing 10% of GDP yearly to purchase 2% growth in GDP. Super performace. Should be fired on the spot.
Touche wrote:
Obviously you are not from California. Arnold was terrible. But starting out saying political experience does not qualify you as governor kind of shows what you know right there. Wilson and Brown, while not incredible governors, were both far better than Arnold largely because of their experience.
I think the fact that my name is Jersey Bias should've tipped you off that I'm not from California in the first place.
Why was Arnold so bad? At least he wasn't corrupt, and attempted in good faith to fix your state's situation. It's not his fault that CA lawmakers aren't willing to do anything to fix your state.
Borrowing at near 0% to create GDP growth of 2%-3%. And to rescue the economy from the morass you fools left it in.
This is inevitable when people keep voting for more public expenditure while simultaneously voting for lower taxes.