Originally Posted by sperbonzo (Post 18314989)

Under Clinton, Halliburton got a lot of government contracts also. There a TONS of corporations and unions getting HUGE amounts of government help/money in return for their support during elections under this regime. THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE in the favors that are done from and for each side. Try scratching even a tiny bit past your own personal preferences for party and you will find the truth of what I'm saying..

Originally Posted by Dvae (Post 18315225)

I did not think you of all people would get this wrong.

Obamas 2012 Budget

From Wikipedia:

The President, according to the Budget and Accounting Act of 1921, must submit a budget to Congress each year. In its current form, federal budget legislation law (31 U.S.C. 1105(a)) specifies that the President submit a budget between the first Monday in January and the first Monday in February. In recent times, the President's budget submission, entitled Budget of the U.S. Government, has been issued in the first week of February. Thus, President George W. Bush submitted the FY2007 budget in February 2006. The President's budget submission, along with supporting documents and historical budget data, can be found at the Office of Management and Budget's (OMB) website. The President's budget contains detailed information on spending and revenue proposals, along with policy proposals and initiatives with significant budgetary implications.

Originally Posted by TheDoc (Post 18315242)

Does this mean Obama actually did submit a budget, and it was rejected?

Originally Posted by Vendzilla (Post 18315130)

Or the US made trucks that are assembled in Mexico? Why do we give them the jobs when they are giving us the workers?

Even Hilary when running for president said it needs to be rewritten

Originally Posted by ThunderBalls (Post 18315253)

You can thank Reagan for that, NAFTA has nothing to do with it.

Originally Posted by Robbie (Post 18314248)

I think that's the way a lot of people see him now. The word that comes to mind is: "disappointment"

He got elected talking a lot about changing stuff. Then he gets in and immediately seemed to bow down to Reid & Pelosi. And instead of jumping right away on the economy...they instead spent a year and a half on "healthcare" and that ended up being not much more than forcing Americans to buy insurance and making billions of more dollars for the insurance companies. They didn't even do one thing to actually make healthcare affordable (they even started the process by making a deal with the big pharmaceutical companies to ensure that Americans pay more than anybody else in the world for drugs)

In my mind...the fact that he wasted that first half of his term on a subject (healthcare) that wasn't the top priority of the American people really was a huge blunder. People are out of work and are losing their homes. With no money and no place to live, the only thing Obama offered them was: Now you HAD to buy insurance! And here's the great news...the insurance companies can't refuse to TAKE YOUR MONEY. Whoopty doo.

He seemed disconnected to the fact that a person with cancer and NO job and underwater on his mortgage can not afford insurance. He was supposed to do National Health Care...but the big insurance companies would be put out of business...so they sat his ass down and got things done in a way that will make them even more money.

And meanwhile the economy went further and further south.

I'm almost positive now that he is a one term president. I'm thinking we are going to have a President Romney in 2012. And I'm not sure that's a bad thing. I'd much rather have a President Ron Paul at this point...but the media is too set against him.

I wish Obama had more of a spine from the moment he walked into office and had done the things he said he was going to do. But I think he still looked up to the people in his party who were in power for so many years like Reid and Pelosi and took their advice instead.

Originally Posted by TheDoc (Post 18315247)

A quick google answered my own question... I see both sides kicked it back.

Obama's 2011 Budget Proposal
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2...us/budget.html


Edit: I see now the link Dvae shared has the 2012 budget on it as well.

Originally Posted by Dvae (Post 18315292)

Interesting that the NY Times calls it a proposal while the OMB calls it a Budget.
For all intents and purposes it is a proposal until it passes both houses of Congress and the POTUS signs it.

Originally Posted by Jesus H Christ (Post 18315193)

Rewritten to exclude loopholes her husband should of covered, but your reply is completely irrelevant to the actual problem and why we need NAFTA to balance an extremely lopsided trade imbalance.

It's like most people who'll spout out their views on politics when in fact, most haven't a clue or the bigger picture to make a valid point. I myself, get caught up in this or argue about the things we "should" of done when in reality it's just a symptom of a much greater problem we choose to ignore, or don't even know.

Originally Posted by mountainmiester (Post 18315238)

In fact, the Obama administration has added a significant amount of additional contracts to Halliburton through No Bid Contracts. Same crap just a new group doing it.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=2e1_1273440915

Originally Posted by ThunderBalls (Post 18315253)

You can thank Reagan for that, NAFTA has nothing to do with it.

Originally Posted by TheDoc (Post 18315655)

I think everyone here will love this....

Dennis Kucinich

Originally Posted by BFT3K (Post 18315692)

The government, today, announced that it will be changing the nations emblem from a Bald Eagle, to a condom, because it more accurately reflects the government's political stance. A condom allows for inflation, halts production, destroys the next generation, protects a bunch of dicks, and gives you a sense of security while you're being screwed.

Originally Posted by sperbonzo (Post 18314989)

Under Clinton, Halliburton got a lot of government contracts also. There a TONS of corporations and unions getting HUGE amounts of government help/money in return for their support during elections under this regime. THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE in the favors that are done from and for each side. Try scratching even a tiny bit past your own personal preferences for party and you will find the truth of what I'm saying.




.

Originally Posted by ******* (Post 18315780)

Most of you guys complaining about Obama will just vote for the next crop of puppets anyway:2 cents:

Originally Posted by raymor (Post 18316099)

Also when Gore did a paper and presentation on the right way for the government to work with private industry, he used Haliburton as the case study. Al Gore showed how Haliburton was able to get jobs done at lower cost and much more quickly than the government could do it itself.

In fact Presidents have been giving awards and props Haluburton since 1963 because when you need 700 oil well fires extinguished NOW or you need a prison built in a few weeks nobody else can do it like they can. I've watched them work so I se what Gore was taking about.

Contrary to popular belief among the lefties, other companies DID bid on the Iraq contingency contracts. Those other companies needed several months and billions of dollars to hire people and aquire large equipment. Haliburton was ready to go because that's what they do. They handle big projects right and they are always ready to go. Need a refinery? Haliburton can build you one quicker than any government agency can approve the paint color.

Originally Posted by 12clicks (Post 18316382)

hey now!
don't go confusing these failures with facts. Thats not what they're looking for.
At the end of the day, all these losers want is for someone other than them to pay for all the goodies the government promised they could have for free.

funny that the hangers on in this busienss still believe you can get things for free.:1orglaugh

Originally Posted by 12clicks (Post 18316382)

hey now!
don't go confusing these failures with facts. Thats not what they're looking for.At the end of the day, all these losers want is for someone other than them to pay for all the goodies the government promised they could have for free.funny that the hangers on in this busienss still believe you can get things for free.:1orglaugh

Originally Posted by TheDoc (Post 18316409)

It's amazing how idiots like yourself support taking your tax dollars and giving it to corps but you don't support your own tax dollars helping you out instead.

When you pay into something and take something out later, that's not free, it's your f'in money being used on you. Idiot.

Originally Posted by 12clicks (Post 18316486)

dear rabble, please stop pretending you make enough to pay income tax.
you get a free ride.

oh, and shit stain, the intelligent understand that "paying" a corp to do a job is not "giving" it to them.


no wonder your on the bottom.

Originally Posted by TheDoc (Post 18316515)

Damn, you're so poor you actually still pay income tax?

It's "giving" them our tax dollars when they don't pay it back, moron... the same exact way we would give welfare to someone, that doesn't pay it back.

I think the sun on the roof tops has baked your little brain a little too long.

Originally Posted by 12clicks (Post 18316522)

dear rabble, I understand life is bitter for you but we're not talking about your welfare eligibility. In fact, we weren't even talking to you. If you'd like to join the discussion, re-read our posts about haliburton.

or you know, remain as clueless as always.

you choice will not surprise us.:thumbsup

Originally Posted by TheDoc (Post 18316560)

Oh yeah, your words hurt so much coming from a day laborer that failed in porn long ago.

Could you point out where you actually discussed anything, anywhere, in this entire thread, about 'anything' other than the spew you always let out? Anywhere, just once, would be great... I need a good laugh and would like to see the blue moon myself.

It must be raining in your neck of the woods.... you're not at work already.

Originally Posted by 12clicks (Post 18316572)

as I said, we're not surprised at all.
so much bitterness and you don't even have the pressure of being the bread winner.
seriously son. you should be much more focused on the little picture. Once you have that in order you can waste time on your evil corporations rant.
The intelligent don't care about your idiot thoughts and the idiots who side with you can't help you.

Originally Posted by TheDoc (Post 18316662)

Damn, you don't even know what you've said in the last few posts, let alone this thread. :1orglaugh well, that's because your stupidity knows no bounds.

I guess we will never get to see you actually discuss a topic, but no worries champ, you've got the 3rd grader come backs down like nobody else on gfy, and that's something to be proud of!

Originally Posted by PR_Tom (Post 18314074)

More and more people feel they have no representation under the current system. Why pay taxes when you have no representation? Kind of rings a bell.

Originally Posted by Connor (Post 18314991)

The economic conditions in different countries aren't always the same, to state the obvious... so with Canada, it works pretty well because living conditions in Canada and the U.S. aren't too far apart. But when you consider countries without these living conditions ... like Mexico ... free trade allows large American corporations to effectively set up shop in these countries and leech off of the cheap labor there. This costs jobs in places where the labor force can't accept such low wages because of the cost of living. It seems to me that the end result from all this "free trade" is a reversal of all the standard of living increases that were hard won on the backs of early labor unions. Whether you feel labor unions went too far or not ... I don't think many people here want to go back to the labor conditions chronicled in, for example, The Grapes of Wrath.

Isn't it interesting that 50+ years ago a middle class family with a single income in America (and I'm assuming Canada too) could meet the basic necessities of life, and even grow a savings account and enjoy the occasional vacation. Now, you can accomplish the same with two incomes. That's not a horrible fate, especially given houses are better now and we have more comforts, but it's still a step back -- and it requires people in that position to depend on someone other than themselves. But unchecked free trade, I believe, threatens to put even that situation in jeopardy.

If I am competing with someone in another under-developed country for the same job, and that person shares a house with 8 other people in his family -- who can afford to accept the lowest wage, him or me? So my only response then is to downgrade my quality of life, unless I'm one of the fortunate who get to live an elite life of power afforded by the corporations who are pursuing all this shit.

Originally Posted by TheDoc (Post 18315655)

I think everyone here will love this....

Dennis Kucinich

Originally Posted by davecummings (Post 18315218)

I am, and have been for many years, a registered Libertarian; I vote in every election; I have no potential solutions to offer, but I hope somehow a magic wand appears and make my next paragraph happen.

I wish politicians would stop being political and making everything they do be intended to help their Re-election. Instead, they should work hard for the best thing for America, not a political party or their re-election:-(. I wish we had 2-5 year term limits for ALL offices at ALL levels, thus letting us get real "work" out of those elected, instead of subjective politics. Heck, with the aforementioned, we might even entice more qualified candidates to run for office, work hard for the good of America, and chuck politics/lobbying/re-election subjectivity/etc aside!?

Originally Posted by ajrocks (Post 18314149)

He came into office after biggest idiot in the world ran your country into the ground. Now you blame the guy after him? It doesn't matter who is in power now, or what they do, you can't come back from this.