Is Barack Obama qualified to be President of the U.S.? Natural Born Citizen? - Page 6
 
 

       The Horse Forum > Life Beyond Horses > General Off Topic Discussion

Is Barack Obama qualified to be President of the U.S.? Natural Born Citizen?

This is a discussion on Is Barack Obama qualified to be President of the U.S.? Natural Born Citizen? within the General Off Topic Discussion forums, part of the Life Beyond Horses category

    Like Tree52Likes

     
    LinkBack Thread Tools
        04-16-2012, 11:13 PM
      #51
    Trained
    Faceman I hope your trip went well.
    I have seen many charts on unemployment and yes it is too high but those figures are going down and have been.
    Jobs are being created and that is due to an improving economy.
    We the people are already paying for healthcare for those that are uninsured. The cost are being passed on to those of us that have insurance and that cn pay. In the long run this will cut the governments cost.
    I too have heard from friends that are in the finacial business that some banks are still on shaky ground. I defer to your expertise on this one.
    However the auto industry is booming right now.
    Houses are being built and purchased.
    Faceman I think GW Bush was a man who was long on conviction and short on critical thinking. His father was the last republican I voted for and an honorable man. I don't think his presidency was a failure.
    As for foreign policy I have spent some time overseas and have family members that live in other countries. The policies of the Neo Cons in the bush administration and his my way or the highway style did damage our standing in the world. Hillary Clinton has done an excellent job as Sec of State and has regained the trust of most world leaders.
    The policies othe Obama Administration has been the same regarding Irsael as the past 30 years. Bush turned a blind eye to the problems in the Mideast in favor of Israel. Alienating the Arabs therfore allowing Hamas and Hizbollah to gain political clout.
    Good debating with you again. You bring up some valid points. Thanks for reading mine. Shalom
         
    Sponsored Links
    Advertisement
     
        04-17-2012, 08:23 AM
      #52
    Banned
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by dbarabians    
    Faceman I hope your trip went well.
    I have seen many charts on unemployment and yes it is too high but those figures are going down and have been.
    Jobs are being created and that is due to an improving economy.
    We the people are already paying for healthcare for those that are uninsured. The cost are being passed on to those of us that have insurance and that cn pay. In the long run this will cut the governments cost.
    I too have heard from friends that are in the finacial business that some banks are still on shaky ground. I defer to your expertise on this one.
    However the auto industry is booming right now.
    Houses are being built and purchased.
    Faceman I think GW Bush was a man who was long on conviction and short on critical thinking. His father was the last republican I voted for and an honorable man. I don't think his presidency was a failure.
    As for foreign policy I have spent some time overseas and have family members that live in other countries. The policies of the Neo Cons in the bush administration and his my way or the highway style did damage our standing in the world. Hillary Clinton has done an excellent job as Sec of State and has regained the trust of most world leaders.
    The policies othe Obama Administration has been the same regarding Irsael as the past 30 years. Bush turned a blind eye to the problems in the Mideast in favor of Israel. Alienating the Arabs therfore allowing Hamas and Hizbollah to gain political clout.
    Good debating with you again. You bring up some valid points. Thanks for reading mine. Shalom
    The only point I will argue with you here is on the health care. The other points have had both sides presented. Yes, we are already paying for the healthcare of those that don't have insurance out of our taxes. However, under Obamacare, there will (obviously) be far more people on government run healthcare than now. Hopefully you understand how incredibly inefficient the government is. There are many reasons for that inefficiency, which I won't go into here - that is another topic. Mrs. Face works for the VA healthcare system, and has for 15 years in several capacities. Although there are a handful of bright spots in the system, overall it is a black hole for tax dollars, waste fraud and abuse abounds, and the overall healthcare is mediocre at best - and then only at some facilities. Government is not as efficient as the private sector - that should be one of those "everyone knows" axioms. The more governmenet is involved, the less efficient and cost effective something is... that is not opinion, it is a simple fact - again, there are reasons for that that are another topic. So the bottom line is the more people on government assisted health care, the more the cost. Have you not seen the new numbers on Obamacare? The cost is far higher than originally "estimated" by the liberals that pushed it through - duh...big surprise. If you want to compare other features of Obamacare vs. the private sector, I will debate them with you, but the cost is not really debatable. It will be a higher cost to the taxpayer, and that is a fact. So it is absolutely invalid to use the argument that we are already paying for healthcare for those that don't have access to it. To intimate that the cost would be the same or less is like saying you can move a mountain with a shovel just because you moved a small mound of dirt with it...sorry, but you need a much bigger shovel....
         
        04-17-2012, 08:57 AM
      #53
    Foal
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by tlkng1    
    PRes Obama will more than likely get elected again for two reasons...first, there is always the old "better the devil you know than the one you don't" attitude and second, I don't think the Republican ticket can ever be made strong enough to sway the public..there are too many things going on with fanatic conservatives that are not helping the Republican ticket cause.
    That and the thought of President Romney, is enough to either make me laugh, or curl up and weep. Largely depending on the latest loony/terrifying thing he has said that day.

    And honestly I'd say that about all of the republican candidates that were running.
    Golden Horse likes this.
         
        04-17-2012, 09:15 AM
      #54
    Trained
    Being the spouse of an Active duty military member.. the fact that you (dbarabians) are saying that your retirement was not in jeopardy is a joke. When a budget couldn't get passed the my husband's paycheck had already be cut with the expectation that the budget would not pass and we were scrambling trying to figure out how to pay for him to get to an from work with him not having a paycheck... As the military and government weren't going to let the service members not work... they just weren't going to pay them for the work they were doing. Not only was that money earmarked for current salaries but for the retirement pay as well. Between my husband and I, we do not know of any active duty (and ADOS/NG) military members who have any respect for Obama and who wouldn't be glad to see the last of him in office.
    Faceman likes this.
         
        04-17-2012, 01:53 PM
      #55
    Banned
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by NdAppy    
    Being the spouse of an Active duty military member.. the fact that you (dbarabians) are saying that your retirement was not in jeopardy is a joke. When a budget couldn't get passed the my husband's paycheck had already be cut with the expectation that the budget would not pass and we were scrambling trying to figure out how to pay for him to get to an from work with him not having a paycheck... As the military and government weren't going to let the service members not work... they just weren't going to pay them for the work they were doing. Not only was that money earmarked for current salaries but for the retirement pay as well. Between my husband and I, we do not know of any active duty (and ADOS/NG) military members who have any respect for Obama and who wouldn't be glad to see the last of him in office.
    Yeah, that kind of stuff makes me sick - especially when you actually LOOK at the budget. When we don't have a budget, that doesn't mean tax and other revenues don't keep coming in - it just means there has been no agreement on how to spend it. There is always sufficient money to pay for the things we really need. And some things, like Social Security, are self funded, so don't need any money out of the general revenue fund. So what does Obama do? Threatens that without a budget, Social Security checks will stop - OUT OF A SELF FUNDED PROGRAM! He used it as a scare tactic, which honestly is BS. As you say, both civilian and military personnel were threatened with furloughs, which is par for the course, and retirees were also threatened.

    But as I said, there is sufficient money to pay all the necessities. The only reason we need a budget is to find ways to spend the money we don't have, and to decide how much to fund descretionary (spelled...N.O.T. N.E.E.D.E.D.) programs. Did you hear him threaten to shut off welfare? Heck no - the liberals would never do that. Their obvious preference is to pay the people that refuse to work and don't pay the people that work or have retired from working.

    All liberals don't feel that way of course, and we should remember that. There is nothing wrong about being liberal and conservatives shouldn't intimate there is or belittle them. But that is certainly the philosophy of the wacko radical liberals, and sadly, that is what is in power. I feel relatively certain that most liberals are opposed to many of the philosophies espoused by Obama and Pelosi and their kind - but still vote Democrat because Republican philosophy is too far removed from their own to support the Republican party.

    This points out what, in my opinion, is one of the two basic failures of our political system, and that is the nomination process. In this specific case, it is obvious Obama does not really represent his constituency. He wasn't in office for 6 months before he was at war with his own party if you remember. Hilary was/is far more representative of the majority of Democrats than Obama could ever be, but Obama obviously won the nomination, and he won it for personality reasons - looks, public speaking ability, and the likeability factor.

    Folks, and I am talking to you liberals, you need to someday come to the realization that electing a President for those reasons is like buying a horse for its color, mane, tail, and "kind eye", and those reasons have absolutely nothing to do with the horse's ability to do the job...
    NdAppy and FlyGap like this.
         
        04-17-2012, 08:48 PM
      #56
    Trained
    NDappy all military and retired military would have been paid in full if the government was to shut down, when the funding was restored. That was not the same as having your retirement cut off or reduced.
    That would never happen and it was the republicans especially those who claim Tea Party Affiliation that were refusing to negotiate the budget.
    If you can remember the government was shut down in the 90's. People were paid. One of the reasons the republicans lost the midterm elections. Bill Clinton won that round and presided over 8 years of economic growth.
    Faceman your right the far right of the republican party has far too much control and they are the reason most moderates and liberals have not supported the republican party.
    If you ask me I think if Jeb Bush wanted to run and distanced himself from his brother it might have been his election to lose.
    I like Micheal Bloomberg but he would not get the nomination because of his religion and his stance on social issues.
    Faceman you are not argueing with me this is a debate. We are not enemies we just have different views. Shalom
         
        04-17-2012, 08:58 PM
      #57
    Trained
    DB - what happened in the 90's has no bearing on this time around as they service members are no longer protected in that regard...

    The service members paychecks had already been reduced in the expectation that the budget would not go through the service members were informed that they still had to continue working for no current pay... I can probably dig up my husband's LES from from if you don't believe me, but it is true. Service members were not/are not protected/do not get paid if a budget is not decided.
         
        04-17-2012, 09:32 PM
      #58
    Trained
    NDappy your husband was paid in full once the budget was passed. Am I not correct? That reduction only applied to active duty military not retirees as the person that I was responding to claimed.
    I have a problem with the new policy and have voiced my opinionwith every one of my elected officials in Washington. I also am vocal about veteran benefits and volunteer at the Dallas VA.
    My mother was the wife of a military officer I know first hand how much support she gave my father.
    Americans not only owe those that serve they owe you and every spouse of a service member also. Shalom
         
        04-18-2012, 08:57 AM
      #59
    Banned
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by dbarabians    
    That would never happen and it was the republicans especially those who claim Tea Party Affiliation that were refusing to negotiate the budget.
    Now, now. That depends upon which side of the fence you are on. I can make the same argument from the right. Come on, you are intelligent - you should be able to perceive the Dems just don't want to cut government spending, which is an absolute necessity under ANY budget scenario - whether taxes are cut via the Republicans, or increased via the Dems.

    Some things are not negotiable. Cutting the rampant increase in debt is one of them. And neither is raising taxes that will further stifle the economy...that is pretty elementary economics.

    I am not much on mantras, but the Republican mantra in this particular case (certainly not in all cases), is exactly correct: We don't have a tax problem - we have a spending problem. Believe me - I don't agree with some of the stuff the far right Republicans are coming up with...some of it is just as scary as what you hear from the far left. But on this, I fully concur, and fail to see how any reasonable person could be on board with runaway spending. While ignorant people take the ignorant position that the government can just print more money, you and I both know that is not true...the money has to come from somewhere...


    ETA: It's a bit off topic, but I just want to add that if the government and politicians would put their "stop the waste, fraud, and abuse" rhetoric into action, we wouldn't have a budget problem to begin with. As you, I was in the military, my father was a lifer so I was raised with the military, I was a federal civil service employee for 15 years, and Mrs. Face has been a civil service employee for 15 years, and despite the rhetoric I can tell you from direct experience that our government could probably be run MORE efficiently on 20% less budget with the right changes. You do the math and see how many sheckles that 20% represents...
         
        04-18-2012, 09:47 AM
      #60
    Trained
    Faceman, I'm glad you think I'm inteligent I was beginning to wonder. LOL
    I agree spending must be cut. Where do we start? How many people and or programs are we willing to eliminate from the federal dole?
    That is a hard question and it cannot happen overnight.
    No matter what happens some deserving individuals will go without.
    Some programs that are worthy will be drastically cut or eliminated.
    Faceman I work with a organization that provides assistance for the homeless.
    Once we help you secure employment and housing we start to ease you into full independence. If you are physically and mentally able to enter the program.
    For the first 3 months we pay 100% of you housing. Next 3 months 75%, then50% then 25% for 1 year.
    That program was working well and transitioning people into full members of soceity. Our funding was cut drastically.
    I think this program could be implemented for all individuals on assistance.
    This is a program that was working and IMO deserved not only to be fully funded but increased. We now have a waiting list over a year.
    Certain pr0grams WORK.
    I do not think education nor healthcare should ever be cut.
    The benefits of both are important to the long term health of our economy.
    As for the Tea Party the rhetoric they have voiced here in Texas and nationally about defunding the entire government is absurd.
    Let me remind you that here in Texas the republicans are far more conservative than most of those nationally. They cloud my judgement I will admit.
    Good day Shalom
         

    Thread Tools

    Similar Threads
    Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
    Barack Obama study- Agree or Disagree? Vogue24 General Off Topic Discussion 220 04-04-2012 09:54 PM
    Could you be a citizen of the USA? Spastic_Dove Games 6 08-23-2009 10:56 AM
    President Obama Kills Fly During Interview Jehanzeb Jokes and Funnies 12 06-26-2009 02:09 PM



    All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:02 PM.


    Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
    Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
    Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0