Obama is on the campaign trail pushing the 'Buffett Rule' on voters. Thoughts?
Washington Times
2012/04/11 18:11:53
|
|
|||||
|
1,407 votes
|
|
43% | |||
|
432 votes
|
|
13% | |||
|
1,147 votes
|
|
35% | |||
|
50 votes
|
|
2% | |||
|
98 votes
|
|
3% | |||
|
66 votes
|
|
2% | |||
|
16 votes
|
|
0% | |||
|
59 votes
|
|
2% | |||
















Stop and think about Obama's deal with Big Pharma giving them an exemption from Obamacare for ten years in return for an $80 billion in rebates knowing Big Pharma can still raise prices more than $80 billion to get their money back raising the cost of healthcare instead of reducing it. Then, by the time Obamacare kicked in (if it worked as promised), Big Pharma uses it's vast resources to lobby Washington DC to kill or amend the legislation. They supported the Democrats more than Republicans beginning at around 2007 and then shifted back to Republicans after Obamacare passed... if you are a Liberal, that should tell you I have been correct about this all the while and Obama's deal with big Pharma screwed you over.
Then there's the stimulus which almost everyone with any sense warned Obama supporters that the states would not invest the money and when it was gone, they would immediately fall into untold billions in debt and need to make cuts to almost every program including education... and it happened exactly as you were to...
Stop and think about Obama's deal with Big Pharma giving them an exemption from Obamacare for ten years in return for an $80 billion in rebates knowing Big Pharma can still raise prices more than $80 billion to get their money back raising the cost of healthcare instead of reducing it. Then, by the time Obamacare kicked in (if it worked as promised), Big Pharma uses it's vast resources to lobby Washington DC to kill or amend the legislation. They supported the Democrats more than Republicans beginning at around 2007 and then shifted back to Republicans after Obamacare passed... if you are a Liberal, that should tell you I have been correct about this all the while and Obama's deal with big Pharma screwed you over.
Then there's the stimulus which almost everyone with any sense warned Obama supporters that the states would not invest the money and when it was gone, they would immediately fall into untold billions in debt and need to make cuts to almost every program including education... and it happened exactly as you were told it would.
The stimulus offered promise only within a cyclical deficit where you spend money while you work to repair the economy. That didn't happen did it. What did happen is we fell into a structured deficit meaning inflation and all higher cost of living increases will be permanent making it even harder to recover the economy.
Are Republicans to blame for saying no? No, they aren't. When Democrats took control of Washington DC in 2008, they went on the attack against the political right telling Republicans to get on board or get out of the way because they didn't need them. In truth, had the Democrats remained united then they could have passed anything they wanted as they had a super majority and could pass what they wanted through cloture and Republicans didn't have the power to filibuster. they were told they weren't needed so Republicans united, said no to everything and told Democrats to do it if they could. But then, a strange thing happened as the political left did not limit their attacks to Republicans and began attacking rightwing Democrats splitting their party against itself, shifting rightwing Democrats to support the Republicans and eventually brought Republicans back to power. At times, Obama even turned Liberal Democrats against him such as over the Gitmo issue and his budgets.
The political left supporting Obama I call Obamacrats because they don't all support him blindly even if most do. Everything they were told would happen has in fact been happening and they have themselves to blame as they're the ones who went on the attack because Republicans were treating Obama like Democrats treated Bush... all except for one important exception named Barack Hussein Obama.
Obama voted for everything Bush wanted and never against. He voted for cloture to pass Bush legislation several times against an almost united Democratic Party and when Bush needed Democrat votes, because he didn't have enough Republican support, Obama was the one who got them for him. Then check his voting record as it's overwhelmingly rightwing and the only reason rightwingers don't like Obama is he may vote like a rightwinger, but he talks like a leftwinger as that's all it takes to win their vote. While the left point to things Obama has done over his career, they refuse to address his overall voting record and how he was not only a Bush Democrat as much to blame for the things they accuse Bush of as Bush himself, he actually supported Bush more than many Republicans... and yet, they think Obama supports change????
When GE owned NBC, where was all this talk about them then? Now that they are a minority owner in NBC / MSNBC, they have suddenly come under fire when they were receiving huge paybacks for decades. They shifted from the rightwing stance they had into the 1960's to a leftwing stance they have til today... or had as suddenly, they are now under attack from every direction by the left when they are as rich and rightwing now as they have always been... and Comcast, the new majority owner of NBC, is extremely rightwing yet for some reason are leaving NBC / MSNBC leftwing even though they've been losing millions every year for years now.
And they're not the only one as all the tv media networks are owned by rich rightwing corporations but only FOX is politically rightwing, the rest are leftwing. There can be only one reason for that and that is these corporations are using the networks to manipulate the left and to make them even more extreme as they otherwise might be helping maintain the dominance of the political right over the political left.
You could take every dime the rich possess and not make a drop in the bucket of our national debt.
The rich already pay a higher percentage of taxes than the poor and the problem Progressive Communists have is that when the poor pay their bills, they have little left over where the rich have wealth to spare. However, the Middle Class is the main problem because it's been split into Upper and Lower Middle Class. Upper Middle Class Americans control most communities and states earning anywhere from $250,000.00 to a million bucks a year... and this is Middle Class??? There is more collective wealth among the Upper Middle Class than the super rich because most corporations are owned by stockholders even if there are wealthy fatcats at the top employed to manage everything. Upper Middle Class Americans live the good life and while they have less than the super rich, they have more left over after paying their bills than the poor and their holdings are extravagant when compared to lower income classes.
Then examine leading Democrats, especially the leftwing Democrat leaders and what do you find??? They too are super rich no different than the Republicans and yet, the Progressive Communists only target the political right... that means it is political in nature and while that may be class warfare because they are playing one group against another, they clearly protect their own when it comes to the super rich or their own super rich political leaders.
I'm not saying the political right is innocent as they allow Plutocracy to have too much influence over their political views just as the political left allows Socialism to dominate their views.