Printable View
And so the worst scenario for Obama did come true. As far as his agenda goes, he had been handcuffed since 2010. But now the soap opera goes into prime time. Shenanigans a-plenty coming your way for your entertainment. Hannity will reach cult status!
But never mind, it's just another piece of the puzzle that makes for America's greatness in the 21st century.
"The business of America is business" The market did not miss a beat.
[QUOTE=WorldTravel69;442119]Us 99%ers will be really fucked now.[/QUOTE]No Democratic president will allow legislation that will worsen income inequality. But we may have to wait beyond the next 2 years for legislation that will help address the issue. That's OK, we have gained some ground from provisions in the ACA, and the expiration of Bush tax cuts on high earners. The economy will likely continue to do well in the next 2 years. Stay tuned for another strong jobs report tomorrow.
[QUOTE=Jackson;442124]Wow man, you just don't get it.
The 1%ers, the Race Card, the War on Women, they all failed.[/QUOTE]Nonsense. But that's what Fox News wants you to believe.
Republicans clearly excelled at messaging in the 2014 midterms, while Democrats clearly sucked at messaging. And what we learned is good messaging works, even if it's short on substance and long on spin, distortion and emotion. Well, at least it worked with the segment that helped Republicans.
That segment was small, about 20% of eligible voters in the country. Near record-low turnout, tilted older and white. Many of the races were in Republican-leaning states, including Senate pickups that Dems won six years ago in the 2008 wave election. Expect more spin from Republicans about how hugely significant it is, but putting it in context it's not much to crow about.
Little has changed. Government and the country are still divided and nothing will change without finding common ground or compromise. Polling continues to show strong support for many progressive positions and a 2016 Democratic President. Notice the states that voted to increase the minimum wage and legalize marijuana last night.
I am philosophical about things. The ACA was more than enough progress for Obama's two terms. I felt that way in 2010 and I feel the same today. It's a net shift forward. It's unrealistic to expect more near-term, a period of assimilation is needed before the next push forward.
[QUOTE=Esten;442129]Republicans clearly excelled at messaging in the 2014 midterms, while Democrats clearly sucked at messaging. And what we learned is good messaging works, even if it's short on substance and long on spin, distortion and emotion. Well, at least it worked with the segment that helped Republicans.
That segment was small, about 20% of eligible voters in the country. Near record-low turnout, tilted older and white. Many of the races were in Republican-leaning states, including Senate pickups that Dems won six years ago in the 2008 wave election. Expect more spin from Republicans about how hugely significant it is, but putting it in context it's not much to crow about.
Little has changed. Government and the country are still divided and nothing will change without finding common ground or compromise. Polling continues to show strong support for many progressive positions and a 2016 Democratic President. Notice the states that voted to increase the minimum wage and legalize marijuana last night.
I am philosophical about things. The ACA was more than enough progress for Obama's two terms. I felt that way in 2010 and I feel the same today. It's a net shift forward. It's unrealistic to expect more near-term, a period of assimilation is needed before the next push forward.[/QUOTE]Jackson, you were exactly correct in stating Esten needed to get direction from the DNC before he could respond, nearly word for word response from the DNC.
Messaging? The Republicans ran on OBAMA's record and the dislike of his policies and the ACA, they did not run on any platform beyond they were not OBAMA.
Oh, the election does not count because a majority of the voters did not turn out therefore it did not represent the true view of the electorate. Then I guess neither of Obama's elections of 2008 and 2012 represented the majority view of the electorate either as he got just a bit more then 50% of the ballots cast in both elections but only 61% and 56% respectively of the electorate actually voted meaning only roughly 30% of the electorate supported Obama.
Then next thing we will here from Esten is the Republicans need to compromise. Yea, like the Democrats "compromised" the first 2 years and when they lost the House in 2010 they continued to "compromise".
Obama and the Democrats got their collective asses handed to them on Tuesday. Hopefully enough Democrats will be scared enough to provide the 2/3's majority in both houses to over ride Obama's veto's!
We the People got fucked.
Big Business rules.
That is why this was the most expensive election Ever.
[url]http://us7.campaign-archive2.com/?u=218404b9b7d17b8e087467c45&id=426bfe27de&e=edfb8e492c[/url]
[QUOTE=Jackson;442124]Wow man, you just don't get it.
The 1%ers, the Race Card, the War on Women, they all failed.
Thanks,
Jax[/QUOTE]
I hope Pres. Obama has some ballpoint pens with a lot of ink in them because he's going to spend the next 2 years vetoeing one bill after another. It will be gridlock to the max.
That Immigration bill they're talking about; forget it. We'll be worrying about unborn babies in the womb, gay marriage, whos fault it was for the Bengazi attack etc.
[QUOTE=BayBoy;442136]I hope Pres. Obama has some ballpoint pens with a lot of ink in them because he's going to spend the next 2 years vetoeing one bill after another. It will be gridlock to the max.
That Immigration bill they're talking about; forget it. We'll be worrying about unborn babies in the womb, gay marriage, whos fault it was for the Bengazi attack etc.[/QUOTE]Sure, what a great cap to his legacy of incompetence: Spending 2 years vetoing bills that have overwhelming public support.
First up: The Keystone Pipeline. I want to watch as the President justifies vetoing a bill that would create 20,000 high paying construction jobs, thousands of permanent refinery jobs, cement our relationship with our neighbors to the north, and enhance our energy independence, all to appease a few tree huggers.
BTW, apparently you didn't get the memo: The "War on Women" is over, and the liberals lost. Nobody gives a fuck about "unborn babies in the womb" or "gay marriage".
Thanks,
Jax.
Speaking of lost, I guess the conservatives lost the gay marriage issue. Its legal now in over 30 states, all their efforts were a waste of time.
The Keystone Pipeline will make the Canadiens happy and the big oil refinery companies in Louisiana will be real happy. After the refining the oil will then be shipped to Japan, China, India etc. So what do Americans get?
[QUOTE=BayBoy;442138]The Keystone Pipeline will make the Canadiens happy and the big oil refinery companies in Louisiana will be real happy. After the refining the oil will then be shipped to Japan, China, India etc. So what do Americans get?[/QUOTE]The USA imports about 9 million barrels oil per day of oil and refined products, and exports 4 million barrels per day. Net imports are 5 million barrels per day. The Canadians have alternatives to the Keystone pipeline. They can build a pipeline to the Canadian west coast and export to China, Japan, etc. Or to their east coast and export to Europe, the USA, etc.
What do Americans get if the pipeline goes through the USA? Given that we will always be a net importer of oil / refined products, the answer is energy security. We would not be as compelled to intervene and spill blood every time there's a conflagration in the Middle East that would shut off oil supplies. It's a no brainer, even if you're an American tree hugger. The oil will be produced either way. If I were in Obama's shoes, I'd be doing everything I could to make sure North American oil production could stay in North America in the event of a worldwide crisis, like the 1967 and 1973 Arab oil embargoes.
Right now we have a glut of oil in the USA, that's why the price has been coming down lately. Theres drilling for shale oil in the Dakotas, Colorado and Wyoming etc. We don't need oil from Canada.
These drilling permits were approved by the Interior Dept. During the Obama years.
I saw an interview on C-Span with the executives from all the big oil producers here in the USA. They all said they couldn't guarantee that the refined oil from the Keystone Pipeline would be used here. All lot of it would be going to foreign countries.
Investing in additional infrastructure to produce and transport fossil fuels is counterproductive, because fossil fuels are on the way out. It would be like buying additional desktop computers. You'd see brief fiscal stimulus from the short to mid-term jobs created. I'm not sure we need fiscal stimulus now. Maybe five years ago. I'd rather see infrastructure dollars spent on bridge repair and flood repair/reclamation right now, maybe wildfire mitigation if that's even possible. That's assuming it can't be spent on producing say wind energy.
[QUOTE=BayBoy;442138]Speaking of lost, I guess the conservatives lost the gay marriage issue. Its legal now in over 30 states, all their efforts were a waste of time.
The Keystone Pipeline will make the Canadiens happy and the big oil refinery companies in Louisiana will be real happy. After the refining the oil will then be shipped to Japan, China, India etc. So what do Americans get?[/QUOTE]Shows how uninformed you are. The XL is primarily going to TEXAS Gulf Coast refineries.
What do the American people get?
High paying skilled jobs and money from the sale of refined products to other countries. That money will be coming to the US not to Saudi, Iran, et al.
[QUOTE=BayBoy;442138]So what do Americans get?[/QUOTE]High-paying refinery and dockworker jobs, you ******* obtuse pinhead!
[QUOTE=BayBoy;442141]Right now we have a glut of oil in the USA, that's why the price has been coming down lately. Theres drilling for shale oil in the Dakotas, Colorado and Wyoming etc. We don't need oil from Canada.
These drilling permits were approved by the Interior Dept. during the Obama years.
I saw an interview on C-Span with the executives from all the big oil producers here in the USA. They all said they couldn't guarantee that the refined oil from the Keystone Pipeline would be used here. All lot of it would be going to foreign countries.[/QUOTE]Once again, you ******* obtuse pinhead, the Keystone Pipeline oil is not currently intended for domestic consumtion. It is expected to be refined in the USA (thus the high-paying refinery and dockworker jobs) and the subsequently value-added product will be exported, although that could be changed overnight should it be warranted by our national security interests.
I can't believe these ******* liberals. They can't get behind even the most obvious idea no matter how much common sense it makes.
Jax.
[QUOTE=BayBoy;442141]Right now we have a glut of oil in the USA, that's why the price has been coming down lately. Theres drilling for shale oil in the Dakotas, Colorado and Wyoming etc. We don't need oil from Canada.
These drilling permits were approved by the Interior Dept. During the Obama years.
I saw an interview on C-Span with the executives from all the big oil producers here in the USA. They all said they couldn't guarantee that the refined oil from the Keystone Pipeline would be used here. All lot of it would be going to foreign countries.[/QUOTE]The vast majority of new production is taking place on PRIVATE not GOVERNMENT controlled land.
[QUOTE=Dickhead;442143]Investing in additional infrastructure to produce and transport fossil fuels is counterproductive, because fossil fuels are on the way out. It would be like buying additional desktop computers. You'd see brief fiscal stimulus from the short to mid-term jobs created. I'm not sure we need fiscal stimulus now. Maybe five years ago. I'd rather see infrastructure dollars spent on bridge repair and flood repair/reclamation right now, maybe wildfire mitigation if that's even possible. That's assuming it can't be spent on producing say wind energy.[/QUOTE]I support the idea of increasing government infrastructure spending, but that doesn't apply here because the Keystone Pipeline is to be built with private money, not government funds.