Obama officially opens his run for reelection today. Today is also Karl Marx's Birtday. Obama's official reelection slogan is "Forward" a slogan dating back to the earliest writing by Marx-Engles & frequently used by Communist rags world wide.

This is going to be an interesting election...

Originally Posted by viper2007

This is going to be an interesting election...

Really I am already bored with it.

Originally Posted by MontyB

Really I am already bored with it.

I cannot, in good faith, disagree with you, friend.

I guess the American people have to make a choice, between this two persons. Both do not really match up to anyone's expectation, but choice need to be made.

I miss the likes of Kennedy, Ronald Reagan, Roosevelt...

Originally Posted by viper2007

I cannot, in good faith, disagree with you, friend.

I guess the American people have to make a choice, between this two persons. Both do not really match up to anyone's expectation, but choice need to be made.

I miss the likes of Kennedy, Ronald Reagan, Roosevelt...

I do too viper.

I am not sure if it will be an interesting election... Not to be cocky, but I believe we all already know who is likely to win this.

It would be interesting to me if it was something close. I have a general belief that Democrats handles the economy better, as I don't believe reducing taxes and wild spending cuts is actually a good idea. Not to mention I don't see republicans advocating huge investments in other energy. People in U.S still want change.

There should be a cap for Campaign spending imo. It would make it a little more fair, so no one can spend their way into popularity.

Originally Posted by RayManKiller3

I have a general belief that Democrats handles the economy better, as I don't believe reducing taxes and wild spending cuts is actually a good idea. Not to mention I don't see republicans advocating huge investments in other energy. People in U.S still want change.

There should be a cap for Campaign spending imo. It would make it a little more fair, so no one can spend their way into popularity.

the Housing Bubble, that collapsed the economy, was caused by dems forcing banks/morgage companies to reduce their loan standards & then ridiculing McCain in '05 when he tried to do something about it. Obama has squandered hundreds of millions, if not billions, on "alternate energy" schemes that seem to have ended up in the pockets of his political backers/bundlers/cronies.

Originally Posted by George

the Housing Bubble, that collapsed the economy, was caused by dems forcing banks/morgage companies to reduce their loan standards & then ridiculing McCain in '05 when he tried to do something about it. Obama has squandered hundreds of millions, if not billions, on "alternate energy" schemes that seem to have ended up in the pockets of his political backers/bundlers/cronies.

The word "forced" misplaced me as that is not completely correct. That is also not the only major cause that enabled the Housing Bubble. Deregulation is part of the reason for the Housing Bubble, that is correct, but they were not "forced" to make really high risk loans and when they did make such loans, they bet against those who they loaned for. I would say the banks and morgages are more responsible than the government. I don't even pin that on Bush or Clinton (those who allowed the deregulation).

That just goes to show that regulations are required a good deal of the time. Oil companies, who make huge profits (Exxon just outdone Wal-Mart) wants more deregulation and lower taxes! Are they for real? lol

The only alternative energy company that I have known to go down with tax-payer money that was under Obama was Solyndra. Do not forget that both democrats and republicans benefit from these schemes and trying to pin something on one party while the other is doing it was well, is not sensible. Alternative energy is at a disadvantage against oil by price (upfront costs mainly), but we can not wait until oil shoots up high before figuring out alternative ways to get energy.

So no, I don't believe you pinning things on Democrats is correct and I still believe they are better on the economic side at this current moment. Obama wanted to cut spending (not too huge of cuts though) and increase revenue, but when he tried it was blocked time and time again.


You should watch "South Park: Douch and Turd" to get rid of what I see as a strong party affiliation. There is no reason to be democrat or republican imo. George Washington wanted U.S to stay away from the party system. This is why I consider myself Independent and will always critisize complete party blaming (unless of course I can't defend a certain party's actions).

We Americans have disobeyed a very smart leader.... We broke ALL 3 of his wishes for U.S.

Originally Posted by RayManKiller3

The word "forced" misplaced me as that is not completely correct. That is also not the only major cause that enabled the Housing Bubble. Deregulation is part of the reason for the Housing Bubble, that is correct, but they were not "forced" to make really high risk loans and when they did make such loans, they bet against those who they loaned for. I would say the banks and morgages are more responsible than the government. I don't even pin that on Bush or Clinton (those who allowed the deregulation).

That just goes to show that regulations are required a good deal of the time. Oil companies, who make huge profits (Exxon just outdone Wal-Mart) wants more deregulation and lower taxes! Are they for real? lol

The only alternative energy company that I have known to go down with tax-payer money that was under Obama was Solyndra. Do not forget that both democrats and republicans benefit from these schemes and trying to pin something on one party while the other is doing it was well, is not sensible. Alternative energy is at a disadvantage against oil by price (upfront costs mainly), but we can not wait until oil shoots up high before figuring out alternative ways to get energy.

So no, I don't believe you pinning things on Democrats is correct and I still believe they are better on the economic side at this current moment. Obama wanted to cut spending (not too huge of cuts though) and increase revenue, but when he tried it was blocked time and time again.


You should watch "South Park: Douch and Turd" to get rid of what I see as a strong party affiliation. There is no reason to be democrat or republican imo. George Washington wanted U.S to stay away from the party system. This is why I consider myself Independent and will always critisize complete party blaming (unless of course I can't defend a certain party's actions).

We Americans have disobeyed a very smart leader.... We broke ALL 3 of his wishes for U.S.

The lower loan requirements were passed during the Carter Admin, but not really inforced untill the Clinton Admin was pressured by ACORN & other groups.
Exxon-Mobil Yeah, they have huge profits in dollars, but the actuall profit margin is typically only 8-9%, high tech firms like Micro-sift typically make 25-30%. you need to realize that no company actually pays taxes, they're an expense that is passed on to the taxpayer(that's why we are called taxpayers) that's the only way the books can be balanced.
Solyndra; Solyndra is the one that got the publicity, but it goes beyond them, do some research.

Originally Posted by George

The lower loan requirements were passed during the Carter Admin, but not really inforced untill the Clinton Admin was pressured by ACORN & other groups.
Exxon-Mobil Yeah, they have huge profits in dollars, but the actuall profit margin is typically only 8-9%, high tech firms like Micro-sift typically make 25-30%. you need to realize that no company actually pays taxes, they're an expense that is passed on to the taxpayer(that's why we are called taxpayers) that's the only way the books can be balanced.
Solyndra; Solyndra is the one that got the publicity, but it goes beyond them, do some research.

Then you admit that the banks and morgage folks were not forced to loan to those they considered extreme risk?

Yes, I know the profit margin is not all that great, but their profit is great nonetheless. They do not need a reduce in taxes. I am also aware that the taxes are pushed on the consumer, that is why one shouldn't tax to oblivion, the companies. I do not believe they need a tax reduction not to mention, Exxon's famous tax avoidance. The point I was saying is they request a tax reduction despite the amount of money they get and I highly doubt it would decrease gas prices in any significance.

So what about it though? Are you suggesting we stop trying for alternate energy just because we get bumps in the road?