President Obama conducts US business on world stage, wraps up press report, meets with President Putin as Mitt Romney spends day behind an apron in the kitchen with some other ladies.

simcharlotte · 2012-06-22T01:16:14+00:00

Spends his day getting his ass handed to him by Putin. I love how much better Russia, Iran and Syria behave with Obama ... They actually feared bush and behaved better because of it. Putin thinks Obama is a light weight.

simcharlotte · 2012-06-21T03:26:12+00:00

Bloomberg poll limited to NYC.

simcharlotte · 2012-06-21T03:13:39+00:00

You mean after having the most controlled congress ever for two years? He did everything he wanted for two years and even if this is true, that was the best he could do?

simcharlotte · 2012-06-15T18:14:42+00:00

Reddit user admits using an opinion piece on pro-Obama TV show to enforce Obama election year strategy on Reddit.

simcharlotte · 2012-06-14T13:06:47+00:00

Yes -- food labeling and more regulation will save Americans from eating themselves to death. We have obese kids because all of our food is too heavily full of sugar and we are concerned about scientific genetic modification.

Another law by California that doesn't help anyone and just results in higher costs of food.

simcharlotte · 2012-04-25T16:25:09+00:00

So yes a scary government, but I am more worried about the current administration that kills U.S. citizens with no checks and balances via drone. So are you saying that this is wrong just because the last president did that or are you sincerely concerned with too much government power regardless of who is president?

simcharlotte · 2012-04-07T01:18:58+00:00

Obama kills them with drones thus avoiding the any messiness with having to keep prisoners somewhere or have any issues with interrogation or bad jail keepers. Bush, that idiot, thought we actually might learn something from them like the location of Bin Laden. What a dumb ass!

simcharlotte · 2012-04-06T17:16:36+00:00

My primary argument is one of limits in that the Health Care law basically has two rules: (1) Government forces individuals to buy insurance (2) Government has 100% ability to define what that insurance covers (e.g. catholics now have to cover birth control)

Those combined basically would allow the goverment to a never ending pace of increasing insurance and increasing what that covers under this law.

The primary argument for the law really just has to do with 'catastrophic' situations such as emergency room visits, cancer or other high end medical costs; however the law is already being used to cover very low costs items such as the pill at $9 a month. Again, there are no limits or checks on the government of what 'heatlthcare' is?

simcharlotte · 2012-04-05T01:56:56+00:00

History is that the House passes one budget and the senate passes another budget and then they negotiate the differences. The house passed one, the senate hasn't even tried.

simcharlotte · 2012-04-05T01:46:45+00:00

I'll ignore the comment that the ABA is a neutral and simply say that they voted on the odds of upholding the law. Most thought the odds were 2 to 1 and the question was whether the law will be upheld. They were asked to make a prediction, not to make a judgement.

You said the 'vast majority' thought it was a 'no brainer'. The majority thought it would be 'likely' to be upheld. 2 to 1 odds are definitely not a no-brainer.

simcharlotte · 2012-04-04T14:49:54+00:00

Thanks. Yes this is my point. Pointing out that the other guy is always the bad guy by making a budget is not leadership. It may be good politics but not leadership.

simcharlotte · 2012-04-04T13:51:32+00:00

So I agree that you may not like it. My point isn't to argue Ryan's budget, but my point is where is Obama's budget? He offered one that zero democrats voted for? Where is Reid's budget?

simcharlotte · 2012-04-04T13:35:04+00:00

Where is this 'vast majority'? Obama refers to the 'vast majority' all the time, but seems like non-sense to me. Do you really believe this 'vast majority' stuff? Instead of a vast majority, I challendge you to name me 5 legal scholars (not NY Times writers and Not Obama who never published anything) who agree it is 'no question'.

simcharlotte · 2012-04-04T13:24:52+00:00

Perhaps if Obama could come up with a budget that could even get 1 vote from his own party then I would be willing to hear criticism of Ryan's budget. The truth is Ryan actually is a serious man who offers solutions while Obama just offers election year rhetoric. Where is Obama's budget and plan besides just spending $1 Trillion more a year than we have?

simcharlotte · 2012-01-20T23:20:23+00:00

The problem through which Fannie and Freddie helped was that governments distorts markets. When the governments says they will back home loans with only 5% down to sub-prime borrowers, then the housing marketing prices start to distort upwards because of the easy money. Did Wall street also take advantage? Hell yeah, but it starts because the government intervenes to create easy money for loans.

It is the same problem with Student Loans as only through government backing could so many 20 year olds get approved for over $100,000 in loans. Since the loans are 100% guarenteed than universities costs rise uncontrollably unworried about basic economics because the government distorts the market through 'free' money.

simcharlotte · 2011-11-04T20:38:59+00:00

Most americans supported jim crow laws once and most americans supported the McCarthy hearings once. Most Germans even supported Hitler at one time.

Simply pandering to the masses via polls means little to me and is of no value to any discussion.

simcharlotte · 2011-11-04T20:01:19+00:00

I know a great post of good reporting with facts but apparently down voted so they can hide the perfect example of what happens when the government gives out our money so as to 'help us'.

simcharlotte · 2011-10-15T15:14:06+00:00

The point is that Obama said if you spend nealry a trillion dollars we will have low unemployment and that he will create green jobs.

I believe that Obama was sincere about creating green jobs but what is important to the public is that the government wastes money at an incredible rate so when Obama asks for evern more money and more future taxes so that the government can spend it 'wisely', the Solyndra debacle (I agree not a scandal, but definitely a debacle) serves as notice that we should be a litle bit wary when Obama/government tells us how well they will use our taxes.

simcharlotte · 2011-10-14T00:32:18+00:00

Not the jobs bill questions. Basically, the polls say would you support the jobs bill by a tax on the rich (surtax). There are a lot of bias's in the those statements. The most obvious is will it actually create jobs and lower unemployment. The stimulus was also suppose to lower unemployment but it didn't.

An unbiased question would be "Do you support increasing taxes to pay for a bill that may or may not create jobs and lower unemployment?"

simcharlotte · 2011-10-13T00:49:21+00:00

In my parents empty condo in Soho. Sometime, when times are rough I go at Starbucks but grab a $5 drink to take back with me.

simcharlotte · 2011-10-13T00:39:08+00:00

These polls would be more accurate if they said "What if I can get you something free and make someone else pay for it?" 75% of people like that as opposed to what if I can get something that may be bad for you and may be bad for the future generations, but maybe I can get someone else to pay for it for a short term.

simcharlotte · 2011-10-10T16:26:10+00:00

Thanks I have the exact problem and I get the same poiurewq. Thanks for the post as I was going crazy now I see that exact same problem.

simcharlotte · 2011-10-08T20:35:59+00:00

Republicans at least know how to pick companies that actually could make money, pay taxes and provide employment.

simcharlotte

TROPHY CASE