Posted on 02/27/2009 10:19:18 PM PST by Steelfish
ANALYSIS Obama's budget is the end of an era
The president's ambitious proposal breaks with the conservative principles that have ruled national politics since Reagan.
By Janet Hook February 27, 2009
Reporting from Washington -- Not since Lyndon B. Johnson and Franklin D. Roosevelt has a president moved to expand the role of government so much on so many fronts -- and with such a demanding sense of urgency.
The scope of President Obama's ambition was laid bare in the budget blueprint issued Thursday.
The budget would account for 24.1% of next year's estimated gross domestic product, one of the highest percentages since World War II, and would raise taxes, redistribute income, spend more on social programs than on defense, and implement policies that touch almost every aspect of Americans' lives -- their banks, healthcare, schools, even the air they breathe.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
And this is good news?
How are things going in North Korea these days? Was East Germany really better off than West Germany? There are many examples of government control of the economy. None turned out well. That even applies in the US.
FDR kept us in the Depression. LBJ’s “war on poverty” failed. In terms of its effects, it should have been called the “war on the black family” as it incentivized out of wedlock births among the poor. Since a large proportion of blacks are poor, there was a concentrated impact on the black community. It drove their illegitimacy rates sky high - around 85% if I remember right. Single parent families correlate with higher crime and incarceration. In other words, most of the problems blacks suffer today appear to have been caused by LBJ’s “war on poverty” and other government welfare.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/2136635/posts
Are you looking for a job?
Note: This thread is updated on a regular basis.
YEP...the DEMS (creators of the Klu Klux Klan and Jim Crow Laws) sure like to keep their “constituents” on the PLANTATION of Dependency, don’t they....
It’s all relative. Remember the scene in Schindler’s List when they were all herded into the Krakow ghetto ( had to look it up ), with many families sharing each house, and the man says to his wife, “Well, at least it can’t get any worse.” ?
It actually amazes me when I hear people reacting against Bush in the face of this onslaught, for not being a true conservative.
So you're saying, <Bush> == <Obama> == <Liberal> == <Communist>, ABSOLUTELY and CATEGORICALLY ?
Because this is the only way I can understand your remark.
Now perhaps it’s just that I was young (7 in ‘92, 15 in ‘00), but I would never casually throw Clinton and Barry in the same category. On the character front, yes he was a lying sleazeball. And yes, he was a lefty who liked stealing from those who work for a living to give handouts to deadbeats and dependents.
But (and correct me if I’m way off base here), he was not in the same league as Barry either in terms of policy or philosophy. He was a southern boy who (aw shucks) just wanted to help po’ folks out (come on, ya’ll can afford to give some more). Not that it’s right, but that’s a very different outlook than the Chicago thug we have now.
Barry virulently hates legitimate achievement. He is philosophically opposed to anyone who makes his way on his own labor, to those who are independent and have no need for a “community organizing” bureaucrat. His mission in life is to attack the individual freedoms that make people reject the commissars’ dictates, and turn them into dependents.
In my mind, I see Clinton taxing because that’s what it takes to give out the things he gives. Barry loves handouts to the non-earners, but even without them he would want crushing taxes *for the sake of taxes*—just to punish achievement. He wants a sniveling underclass of desperate, fearful subjects forced into urban high rise slums and begging for their government cheese.
Jimmy Carter was a terrible president, but he was more of a fool than actually evil. Clinton was more shrewd than Carter, but I’d put him much closer to Jimmy’s camp than the Barry-Pelosi-Jackson-Reid-Sharpton mentality.
National bankruptcy and Zimbabwe come to mind for some reason.
Whoopee for you. And the payoff you get ?
A clear conscience.
I agree with you. As horrible as Bill Clinton was and he was terrible with many issues, he did not hate America. I seriously don’t believe he did. Obama is the most anti-American President we have had. Jimmy Carter was a fool during his Presidency but has moved into the dangerous category the older he gets. He makes negative comments about America overseas...that is not good.
Actually, I think Hillary pretty much ran the show and she was a fan of Saul Alinsky as is Obama. Bubba was a “good ol’ boy wannabe” who was fairly unique-looking and rather cynical and insecure. He understood dependents and loved the gubmint paying his light bill. I don’t think he particularlly liked women, he just seemed to like being serviced with puerile sex by what he considered to be “good-looking” women. His lifestyle has pretty much burned him out and it shows. (He didn’t count on being caught in his disrespect for the Oval Office quite like he was. He was supposed to now be enjoying “elder statesman” status by people he really wishes respected him instead of liberal sycophants.)
Saturday, February 28, 2009
Buffett: Sees Economy In ‘shambles’ In ‘09
David B. Wilkerson
MarketWatch Pulse
CHICAGO — Berkshire Hathaway Chairman Warren Buffett told shareholders Saturday that 2008 was the company’s worst year on record, as the per share value of both the Class A and Class B stock fell 9.6%. In his annual letter, Buffett said neither he nor Charlie Munger, his partner in running Berkshire, can predict winning and losing years in advance, and that no one else can. “We’re certain, for example, that the economy will be in shambles throughout 2009 - and, for that matter, probably well beyond - but that conclusion does not tell us whether the stock market will rise or fall.” Commenting on the federal government’s actions to resolve the economic crisis, Buffett said: “Economic medicine that was previously meted out by the cupful has recently been dispensed by the barrel. These once-unthinkable dosages will almost certainly bring on unwelcome aftereffects.”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.