The best in arts & entertainment, news, pop culture, and your mom since 2002.

[Total: 51    Average: 2.6/5]
95 Comments - View/Add
Hits: 7959
Rating: 2.6
Category:
Date: 03/15/12 08:05 PM

95 Responses to The Road We`ve Travelled

  1. Profile photo of madest
    madest Male 40-49
    7378 posts
    March 15, 2012 at 8:04 pm
    Link: The Road We`ve Travelled - Sweet 17-min documentary about President Obama`s first term thus far.
  2. Profile photo of tatripp
    tatripp Male 18-29
    1196 posts
    March 15, 2012 at 8:22 pm
    All he did was spend money, raise taxes, and increase the size of government
  3. Profile photo of OutWest
    OutWest Male 50-59
    546 posts
    March 15, 2012 at 8:22 pm
    Well made.... nice work.

    LOL.... Although, I feel like I just set through a high end Time Share presentation!

    If you like BO, you`ll love this. If you don`t you probably won`t.

    Tom Hanks is great isn`t he? I`m sold, our problems are not his fault. He`s just an unfortunate leader thrust into a dire situation. We are so lucky to have him, and for his unselfish courage!

    ... as I said, Time Share presentation.
  4. Profile photo of ivran
    ivran Male 18-29
    599 posts
    March 15, 2012 at 8:29 pm
    drat Obama. He has yet to bring back Arrested Development.
  5. Profile photo of OutWest
    OutWest Male 50-59
    546 posts
    March 15, 2012 at 8:29 pm

  6. Profile photo of Baelzar
    Baelzar Male 40-49
    1399 posts
    March 15, 2012 at 8:35 pm
    Not his fault? Is that what he`s gonna put on his new bumper stickers? NOT MY FAULT! My ass.
  7. Profile photo of diylobotomy
    diylobotomy Male 18-29
    1832 posts
    March 15, 2012 at 8:36 pm
    That non-nice individual took my guns!
  8. Profile photo of ivran
    ivran Male 18-29
    599 posts
    March 15, 2012 at 8:43 pm
    @Baelzar That`s all modern politics are.
  9. Profile photo of Rawrg
    Rawrg Male 18-29
    934 posts
    March 15, 2012 at 9:04 pm
    I like how they ignore the national debt doubling over his term, the unfunded mandate of Obamacare yet to come, and the massive increases in the power of government such as the NDAA.
  10. Profile photo of ivran
    ivran Male 18-29
    599 posts
    March 15, 2012 at 9:19 pm
    @Rawrg That would make him look bad. Why would they talk about it?
  11. Profile photo of Evil_Eye
    Evil_Eye Male 18-29
    1442 posts
    March 15, 2012 at 9:23 pm
    Will people just stop complaining about money problems in America with dept and spending? You make nearly three times as much as China, who is second.

    You came out of the credit crunch better then anyone and yet you still bitch about it. Cry me a damn river.
  12. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    March 15, 2012 at 9:28 pm
    We are not better off than we were 3 years ago, it`s time for him to go.
  13. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    March 15, 2012 at 9:33 pm
  14. Profile photo of ivran
    ivran Male 18-29
    599 posts
    March 15, 2012 at 9:34 pm
    @CrakrJak Problem is we don`t have a lot of options when it comes to replacing him, mostly due to our drated up bipartisan system.
  15. Profile photo of Baalthazaq
    Baalthazaq Male 18-29
    4548 posts
    March 15, 2012 at 9:46 pm
    "All he did was spend money, raise taxes, and increase the size of government"

    Taxes are lower. Not higher. Income tax for example is at 4% for the Median family under Obama, was 11% under Reagan, and 6% under Clinton.

    Obama`s current Tax plan is cheaper for 80% of the country than Romney`s.

    Government has 273K fewer employees than it did under Reagan (200K directly removed by Obama decisions).

    While we`re at it:
    Oil drilling is at an all time high. (The number of oil rigs has quadrupled)
    Deportation of illegal immigrants is at an all time high.

    The things that are wrong with Obama, and country, isn`t that when he disagrees with you. It`s that he agrees so damn often.

    Like Rawr`s complaints: NDAA (94% of Republicans voted in favor), Mandate (Put in to appease the right), etc.
  16. Profile photo of WakeToWood
    WakeToWood Male 30-39
    182 posts
    March 15, 2012 at 9:54 pm
    As soon as I saw the "Rahmfather" being filmed I had to stop watching. The state of Illinois is at the bottom of the spiral financialy. Watch the turds float to the surface.
  17. Profile photo of ShudBWorking
    ShudBWorking Male 18-29
    86 posts
    March 15, 2012 at 10:18 pm
    @CrakrJak: HUGE WIN!!! Hilariously true!
  18. Profile photo of rgu3t0
    rgu3t0 Male 18-29
    79 posts
    March 15, 2012 at 10:20 pm
    @mastinox...I`m sure those with the same eloquent spelling skills as yourself would do a much better job...
  19. Profile photo of Burgh
    Burgh Male 40-49
    300 posts
    March 15, 2012 at 10:20 pm
    <ObamaBush> The left and right taper of a particularly foul bowel movement.
  20. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    March 15, 2012 at 10:25 pm
    Baal: I don`t know where you are getting those supposed `facts`, but they are so made up that they are laughable.

    A few facts that he can`t deny, Unemployment is at an all-time high (since the great depression), Obamacare is now reportedly going to cost double what was estimated, More people are on food stamps than ever before, and gasoline prices are going to $6 a gallon very soon.
  21. Profile photo of I-IS-BORED
    I-IS-BORED Male 18-29
    2419 posts
    March 15, 2012 at 10:30 pm
    @Baalthazaq
    Lol and that`s ignoring the fact that "spend money, raise taxes, and increase the size of government" aren`t necessarily bad things. Doing the first without doing the second would be like starting a war and giving out tax cuts at the same time - oh wait...
  22. Profile photo of Rawrg
    Rawrg Male 18-29
    934 posts
    March 15, 2012 at 10:31 pm
    "Taxes are lower. Not higher. Income tax for example is at 4% for the Median family under Obama, was 11% under Reagan, and 6% under Clinton."

    Those taxes were actually lowered during the Bush administration (I`m not a fan of GWB by the way) and maintained by Obama. I however am not in the "Obama raised my taxes!" camp. He has undeniably increased spending however, and the debt has increased dramatically.

    I can`t speak for the policies, but I`d imagine part of that low income tax number on the median family is partially due to the fact that the median family income is lower due to unemployment, and therefore subject to a lower bracket.

    And on the NDAA, in the House, republican support was twice that of democrat, but in the Senate, More democrats than republican supported it. Either way, I`m more for a president who would veto that kind of dangerous legislation (Paul).
  23. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    March 15, 2012 at 10:33 pm
    WakeToWood: One of these days the SEIU and AFSCME workers in Illinois are going to wake up out of their daze and realize their pensions are completely dry. When that happens there will be a revolt the likes of which we haven`t seen since the labor riots of the 1930s. The Chicago gangster democrats have bled this state down to the marrow. It`s going to get ugly because they can`t hide their misfeasance and larceny of the state treasury, pension funds, lottery funds, and government funding.
  24. Profile photo of rgu3t0
    rgu3t0 Male 18-29
    79 posts
    March 15, 2012 at 10:34 pm
    Ummm...actually gas prices are going down in my neck of the woods...I`ll make sure not to travel to those mythical $6 a gallon areas
  25. Profile photo of Rawrg
    Rawrg Male 18-29
    934 posts
    March 15, 2012 at 10:36 pm
    In addition, Obama is increasing all of our taxes through Obamacare. By mandating that all employers offer health insurance, and that people either carry health insurance themselves or pay additional taxes at the end of the year, is a huge liability for all of us. Employers have to make ends meet and will either cut pay, or increase the products of their prices. Since it is across all industries, everyone will feel the sting.

    Meanwhile, medicine continues to be a hugely overpriced in this country, and instead of passing legislation to regulate excesses in the cost of medicine, we instead passed legislation that basically says, "Just pay for it." All of this despite the fact that we are very deep in the red as a nation, and already spend too much money on entitlements, the military, subsidies, etc.
  26. Profile photo of Rawrg
    Rawrg Male 18-29
    934 posts
    March 15, 2012 at 10:40 pm
    And yeah, GM`s and Chrysler`s jobs were saved, but what about all of the small businesses that folded over the last 5 years? Where was their bailout? Oh yeah, they didn`t have a lobby.

    GM and Chrylser should have failed. What would have happened? If it were a good investment, private investors would have gotten involved. If not, IT SHOULD FAIL. Propping up two companies that have made inferior products concurring with daft business strategies deserve to fail. Other business will rise up to take their place.
  27. Profile photo of tatripp
    tatripp Male 18-29
    1196 posts
    March 15, 2012 at 10:52 pm
    I-Is-Bored does have a point, that those aren`t necessarily bad but I have problems with these things right now. Unemployment is high, but teachers fire fighters and police don`t have cuts (according to the video). Why is it that everyone makes less money but the services don`t take any cuts. The public school system is so inefficient and needs to have cuts made. People have much less money but have to pay the same price so all these pervy LA teachers who molest children don`t get fired immediately. Increased government cannot be good because spending is out of control and they are way less inefficient than the private sector.

    That is my dose of politics for the week. I can`t stand hearing or arguing about this crap more than that.
  28. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    32785 posts
    March 15, 2012 at 11:09 pm
    8:10 "A fierce opposition, hostile to compromise" By this he means Democrats and the American Public, oh the lies in this video are just too much!

    US Job Numbers
    Obamacare`s Cost Double
    9:23 Since Obamacare was passed, 23 million Americans have LOST their healthcare plans. Ugh!
  29. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    32785 posts
    March 15, 2012 at 11:16 pm
    Government has 273K fewer employees than it did under Reagan (200K directly removed by Obama decisions).
    The Federal Government, or ALL branches? Fed, State, Municiple? Because the Fed has not only grown by leaps and bounds, their wages went up quite a lot too.
    Oil drilling is at an all time high
    The number of rigs is NOT how you measure oil drilling @Baalth, it`s by barrels, and that`s DOWN. Directly because of Obama`s policies. 100 small rigs is NOT better than 25 huge ones.
    Deportation of illegal immigrants is at an all time high.
    They`re leaving the USA because there`s NO JOBS.

    Have some more kool-aid, it`ll cheer you up!
  30. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    32785 posts
    March 15, 2012 at 11:27 pm
    Oops, US Oil is up for 2009 & 2010: My Mistake Of course production is UP because the price is so high! Something they used to blame Bush for, eh?

    Total Gov`t Employees UP
  31. Profile photo of scapegoat7
    scapegoat7 Male 18-29
    210 posts
    March 16, 2012 at 12:25 am
    Most politicians are all the same. We`re losing our rights more and more everyday.
    NDAA, SOPA, Trespass Bill.....
    We`re all just little peasants that need shut up and behave. And do repubs honestly believe McCain and Palin would made that big of difference. The biggest difference is "Obamacare". Which was Romney`s idea, now that Obama`s picked it up, the repubs are all against. Wars never stopped (Iraq but only b/c they kicked us out), Syria/Iran are just the next names on a long list.
    Their all the same. Wake the F up. Ron Paul seems to be the only politician that doesn`t bow down to the establishment (and i don`t agree with everything he says) but it seems like most of us remain ignorant. Maybe he never stood a chance but not b/c he isn`t the right choice.
    Most people vote to who ever panders and seduces them for a vote. Who ever throws out those few second sound bites that talk to them-Hope and change, no taxes, gay bashing etc...
  32. Profile photo of Draculya
    Draculya Male 40-49
    14621 posts
    March 16, 2012 at 12:40 am
    Republicans should vote for him. He did more to move money from the hands of the 99% to the hands of the 1% than any other president.
  33. Profile photo of TheShgn2
    TheShgn2 Male 13-17
    626 posts
    March 16, 2012 at 1:16 am
    @Draculya
    It`s like he`s an undercover Republican.
  34. Profile photo of scapegoat7
    scapegoat7 Male 18-29
    210 posts
    March 16, 2012 at 1:26 am
    Wake up. The Republicans and Democrats are in bed together. Things will never change until we have a fundamental change in Washington.
    -End the FED- Presidents that resisted the central bankers were shot, while others shamefully caved in to their demands.
    -End the era of PAC influence on Washington.
    -De-personhood Corporations
    -Eliminate Fractional Reserve Banking
    -Re-install Glass- Steagall - separating the function of Savings Banks from Investment Banking.
    -Major Wall Street investment reform that outlaws Derivatives, Short Selling, Hedge Fund, and Algorithmic Trading.
    -Redefine Federal limits back to the Constitution, giving most of it`s present powers back to the State

    Our society is blind, bashing and calling anyone that speaks against the banks, greedy corporations and even lobbyists extremists or hippies. Wake up...
  35. Profile photo of madest
    madest Male 40-49
    7378 posts
    March 16, 2012 at 3:20 am
    Baal, Baal please... Don`t let facts get in the way of republicans deluding themselves into thinking they have a chance at winning in November.
  36. Profile photo of simbha
    simbha Male 30-39
    412 posts
    March 16, 2012 at 5:50 am
    @5Cats: I`m not sure what graph you`re looking at, but the link you posted shows the total number of federal employees going down during Obama`s tenure as President - from just below 22.6 MM on January 20, 2009 to just under 22.0 MM today.
  37. Profile photo of I-IS-BORED
    I-IS-BORED Male 18-29
    2419 posts
    March 16, 2012 at 6:05 am
    @tatripp Your government operates under the same financial methods as the private sector. The private sector always borrows to invest, it`s leverage and sometimes it goes wrong.
  38. Profile photo of thosbeama74
    thosbeama74 Male 30-39
    17 posts
    March 16, 2012 at 6:06 am
    This is pure Obama propaganda. America is just as bad as it ever was unemployment is at 9% and the deficit is the largest it`s ever been. It`s great that he brought soldiers home, but now he`s downsizing the military and the people are getting out to no job. So if people think we are invading another country they are mistaken. The one thing I agree scapegoat7 is that we are losing our rights slowly to these lawyers in Washington. I think we need to vote them all out and start fresh. The politicians in Washington, in the past 20 years have done more damage to the America and they need to be removed.. all of them!!
  39. Profile photo of I-IS-BORED
    I-IS-BORED Male 18-29
    2419 posts
    March 16, 2012 at 6:16 am
    Just putting it out there, the only reason the U.S didn`t switch to public health insurance when everybody else did was because your corporations were tripping over each other to provide the best medical benefits they could. This clearly isn`t the case now. Used to be if you got sick in the U.S the insurance you had been paying for for years would disappear because now you had a medical condition so obviously you can`t be covered or they would have to pay you.
  40. Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10731 posts
    March 16, 2012 at 6:41 am
    Wake up. The Republicans and Democrats are in bed together. Things will never change until we have a fundamental change in Washington. Yep
    -End the FED- Presidents that resisted the central bankers were shot, while others shamefully caved in to their demands. Agreed
    -End the era of PAC influence on Washington. We are this way because of a LACK of PAC influence.
    -De-personhood Corporations By doing WHAT exactly?
    -Eliminate Fractional Reserve Banking That would just hurt the incentive to save money.
  41. Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10731 posts
    March 16, 2012 at 6:50 am
    -Re-install Glass- Steagall - separating the function of Savings Banks from Investment Banking. ...or rather just prohibit the Federal Government from bailing out bad banks.
    -Major Wall Street investment reform that outlaws Derivatives, Short Selling, Hedge Fund, and Algorithmic Trading. That`s rather nebulus, in most cases these activities are higly lucrative to all parties involved. I say reform over outright banning it.
    -Redefine Federal limits back to the Constitution, giving most of it`s present powers back to the State Not a bad idea, maybe update the constitution`s language, but definitely start by overturning Gonzales v Raich and Bowers v Hardwick.

  42. Profile photo of McGovern1981
    McGovern1981 Male 30-39
    14268 posts
    March 16, 2012 at 6:54 am

  43. Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10731 posts
    March 16, 2012 at 6:55 am
    Obama`s Agenda:
  44. Profile photo of McGovern1981
    McGovern1981 Male 30-39
    14268 posts
    March 16, 2012 at 6:56 am

  45. Profile photo of Gerry1of1
    Gerry1of1 Male 50-59
    36653 posts
    March 16, 2012 at 7:06 am

    Oil Prices ... more like Oil Price Gouging.
    U.S. imports only 12% of it`s oil from middle east yet if they go up in price our gas jumps disproportionately high.

    For the oil companies it`s any excuse for a profit which is okay in capitalism... but why are they getting billions in subsidies when they are so profitable?
  46. Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10731 posts
    March 16, 2012 at 7:15 am
    Gerry: Well first I`d like to say to blame greed for causing price increases would be like blaming gravity for plane crashes. But I think it`s better to ask why do we have subsidies in the first place?
  47. Profile photo of patchgrabber
    patchgrabber Male 30-39
    5812 posts
    March 16, 2012 at 7:16 am
    U.S. imports only 12% of it`s oil from middle east yet if they go up in price our gas jumps disproportionately high
    That`s the magic of the stock market. Fear drives prices due to investing and selling off of stock. Look at Goldman-Sachs, that lost billions in worth because one ex-employee tattled about their business practices and how they call their clients "muppets". Same for big oil: there`s instability in the middle east, investors get scared, prices get artificially high. Who benefits? Big oil.
  48. Profile photo of scapegoat7
    scapegoat7 Male 18-29
    210 posts
    March 16, 2012 at 7:34 am
    @Cajun
    Super PACs are responsible for a new flood of secret and unlimited cash infiltrating our political system. They have become more important and influential than the candidates or voters, and have fundamentally changed American politics.
    The amount of money they have spent is colossal but what is even more concerning than how much money the super PACs are spending is that most of that funding has come from a very small number of individuals and organizations. This makes small contributions from large numbers of Americans largely irrelevant, and multiplies the influence that the wealthiest Americans have over our political system.
    Candidates no longer need to persuade constituents to donate to their campaign because they believe in that candidate’s leadership. Instead, candidates focus on convincing a few extremely rich Americans that their interests will be attended to if the candidate wins.
  49. Profile photo of scapegoat7
    scapegoat7 Male 18-29
    210 posts
    March 16, 2012 at 7:35 am
    Make no mistake – expectations of advantageous policy positions come along with multi-figure checks.
  50. Profile photo of VileFiend
    VileFiend Male 18-29
    16 posts
    March 16, 2012 at 7:38 am
    I wish people would research stuff instead of making it up before they posted, conservatives and liberals both...

    Either that or just ignore the post if it makes you so angry.
  51. Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10731 posts
    March 16, 2012 at 7:45 am
    @scapegoat7

    Be that as it may it has actually increased competitiveness among the candidates because you have MULTIPLE conflicting interests who want their candidate to win. If it weren`t for the Super PACs Mitt Romney would`ve already been the standard bearer for the GOP and Santorum and Gingrich would`ve already dropped out.
  52. Profile photo of scapegoat7
    scapegoat7 Male 18-29
    210 posts
    March 16, 2012 at 8:10 am
    @ cajun
    The reason Santorum and the grinch are still in it is b/c Romney is a lousy candidate who`s flip-flopped on every major position, pandering for votes from insanely stupid people.

    And as for Gingrich its not really multiple interests, just one rich billionaire, Adelson. W/out his sugar daddy Gingrich would`ve been done for months ago.
  53. Profile photo of randomxnp
    randomxnp Male 30-39
    1293 posts
    March 16, 2012 at 8:16 am
    Wow, scapegoat, it is amazing what will come out of the left-wing media, through you into type without the benefit of interaction with any thought whatever!
  54. Profile photo of Muert
    Muert Male 30-39
    152 posts
    March 16, 2012 at 8:35 am
    Just a link for everyone to keep an eye on.

    Fact Checking
  55. Profile photo of madest
    madest Male 40-49
    7378 posts
    March 16, 2012 at 8:40 am
    The Republicans and Democrats are in bed together. Things will never change until we have a fundamental change in Washington. -----
    The mantra of the mindless apparently. Money in politics is nothing new. This is the system we have. The pissing and moaning and saying both parties are the same is nonsense. You think this knowledge somehow makes you smarter than party affiliates? It does not. They are the players steering the ships and you are nothing but ripples in a sea of options you pretend to ignore. Shall there be abortion or not? Should womens reproductive health be decided by men in black robes who`ve never had sex? Or should we keep things as they are? Should we fix spending by cutting taxes for the rich and cutting services for the poor? Or should we tax the rich and measure our response to Iran? Grow or give the keys back to that other party that drove the country into a ditch?
    Both party`s are not the same. You`re only conning yourself if you think so.
  56. Profile photo of scapegoat7
    scapegoat7 Male 18-29
    210 posts
    March 16, 2012 at 8:47 am
    @randomxnp
    yea b/c the left-wing media wants to...
    -Vote for Ron Paul
    -Call out Obama for bills that take away Americans rights
    -End the FED
    -Stop Super PACS
    -Take powers away from Washington and give back to states.
  57. Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10731 posts
    March 16, 2012 at 8:50 am
    Scapegoat: John Kerry was a flip-flopper too yet he already clinched the nomination nine days after Super Tuesday in 2004. It`s almost a week later and Mitt Romney only has at least a third of the delegates.
  58. Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10731 posts
    March 16, 2012 at 8:57 am
    -Vote for Ron Paul
    -Call out Obama for bills that take away Americans rights
    -End the FED
    -Stop Super PACS
    -Take powers away from Washington and give back to states.
  59. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    March 16, 2012 at 9:05 am
    The pissing and moaning and saying both parties are the same is nonsense.

    Agreed, the democrats are the real gangsters of politics and although they claim to care about the `little man` all they really care about are their large campaign donors. They`d rather keep the peasants broke, dependent on government money, clueless, and under their perpetual control.

    Take a good look at what happened to the occupy protesters. The democrats used them until their usefulness was spent, then they rousted and arrested them when they were eventually considered a detriment. The occupy movement ultimately did nothing except exalt democrats, who in return did nothing for them. Not a single student loan was forgiven, not one tuition lowered, not one grant raised and not one law changed.

  60. Profile photo of scapegoat7
    scapegoat7 Male 18-29
    210 posts
    March 16, 2012 at 9:06 am
    @ madest
    I never said they were the same or that they believed in the same things. As you could guess i am more to the left then most and for all the reasons you stated. All im saying is that both sides have been chipping away at our rights.

    Rights to free speech, to protest, to have a fair trial, not be swindled by corporations and the rich (GE if you think its only repubs), wire taps, sound money, bailing out banks on the backs of the rest of us.

    Im just sick of having to choose between the lesser of two evils.
  61. Profile photo of scapegoat7
    scapegoat7 Male 18-29
    210 posts
    March 16, 2012 at 9:09 am
    @cajun
    Sarcasm buddy.
  62. Profile photo of Baelzar
    Baelzar Male 40-49
    1399 posts
    March 16, 2012 at 9:13 am
    From the CBO yesterday:

    +++President Obama’s 2013 budget would add $3.5 trillion to annual deficits through 2022, according to a new estimate from the Congressional Budget Office (CBO).

    It also would raise the deficit next year by $365 billion, according to the nonpartisan office.

    The CBO estimate is in sharp contrast to White House claims last month that the Obama budget would reduce deficits by $3.2 trillion over the next decade.+++

    That`s a 6.7 TRILLION math mistake on the part of your inept champion? -3.2 to +3.5 Trillion. I`m betting you lefties are just fine with that, too.
  63. Profile photo of scapegoat7
    scapegoat7 Male 18-29
    210 posts
    March 16, 2012 at 9:33 am
    @ Baelzar
    The "lefties` would shut up if...

    The Republican candidate was actually conservative. That doesn`t mean he just cuts taxes for the rich, while spending remains out of control.
    There`s really only one candidate that would do that. Only one that`s truly conservative. Only one that would stop these trillion dollar wars. Only one that would stop giving away our money and weapons to dictators we`ll want to over throw in ten/twenty years. But it seems like most republicans are going for the flip-flopping, gay bashing, or wife cheating douche-bags, who are so damn fake.
  64. Profile photo of madest
    madest Male 40-49
    7378 posts
    March 16, 2012 at 10:11 am
    Baelzar, Concern over spending would drive you to vote republican? We`ve gone the trickle down economics route and indeed it trickled down the drain. The only party that has a decent track record with spending are the democrats. I don`t know how the republicans plan on fixing the economy by giving tax breaks to the wealthy and controlling birth control but it`s their plan. The plan of stupidity.
  65. Profile photo of Jury1of1
    Jury1of1 Male 30-39
    132 posts
    March 16, 2012 at 10:37 am
    @Baelzar
    Oh come on. Nobody wants to muddy the waters with all those "facts."
  66. Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10731 posts
    March 16, 2012 at 11:00 am
    @CrakrJak

    As if Republicans haven`t been bought out by their own special interests? Puh-leaze, McGovern`s post Friday, March 16, 2012 6:54:25 AM IAB standard time sums up this idea in a nice allegorical way.
  67. Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10731 posts
    March 16, 2012 at 11:02 am
    Sarcasm buddy.

    Okay then :/
  68. Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10731 posts
    March 16, 2012 at 11:05 am
    We`ve gone the trickle down economics route and indeed it trickled down the drain.

    No, since FDR it`s been the other way around it wasn`t until the late 70s did we say less regulation.

    The only party that has a decent track record with spending are the democrats.

    BS both the Republitards and Dummocrats have a bad history of spending binges. Take for example the most recent Bush-Obama spending binge.
  69. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    32785 posts
    March 16, 2012 at 12:11 pm
    Some Truth (vid) for a change.
  70. Profile photo of mcboozerilla
    mcboozerilla Male 30-39
    646 posts
    March 16, 2012 at 12:34 pm
    The Tea Party racists have collapsed and cons are doomed.
  71. Profile photo of Fatninja01
    Fatninja01 Male 30-39
    25420 posts
    March 16, 2012 at 2:16 pm
    17 mins... im just watching the star trek fan. I dont have that much time.
  72. Profile photo of grindinblade
    grindinblade Male 18-29
    234 posts
    March 16, 2012 at 2:28 pm
    Not sure why so many here are blaming Obama for the price of gas, it is absurd to think that the president can control it. The large increase in the oil prices is largely due to oil speculators believing that Iran will cut off the straight of Hormuz through which a large portion of the world`s oil supply travels. Despite the fact that oil production is rising and demand falling (which under normal economics would drive price down) we see the price increasing. After the housing crash and ensuing economic crisis a large portion of wall street banks began trading in commodities, mostly oil. However under prior law speculators were limited in commodities trading, but this was waived for large banks by the SEC. The gas prices now are due to over buying of oil creating a bubble, once the bubble pops and everyone begins to sell prices will hit rock bottom.
  73. Profile photo of ivran
    ivran Male 18-29
    599 posts
    March 16, 2012 at 3:00 pm
    @mcboozerilla Nice profiling, bro.
  74. Profile photo of Grendel
    Grendel Male 40-49
    6158 posts
    March 16, 2012 at 3:18 pm
    grindinblade-"Not sure why so many here are blaming Obama for the price of gas,"

    Well, seeing as SENATOR Obama blamed BUSH for high gas prices in 2008, we`re just holding him to his own standard?

    So, did Obama lie? Or is he just incompetent (or both)?

    grindinblade-"it is absurd to think that the president can control it."

    Well, Hillary Clinton, Pelosi, Wasserman Schultz, Reid, Rahm Emanuel and other democrats, and a good part of the media, said that `The President` controlled the gas prices. Of course, that was when Bush was `The President`. Now that Obama is `The President`, they are strangely silent (or still blaming Bush).

    Could it be that Obama is just not as influential as Bush was?
  75. Profile photo of Grendel
    Grendel Male 40-49
    6158 posts
    March 16, 2012 at 3:20 pm
    mcboozerilla-"The Tea Party racists... "

    Anything after that statement can pretty much be ignored.

    Yes, the Tea Party (who`s membership includes all races) is `racist`, but you `forgive the party that says these:
    -`typical white person`, Obama
    -`He’s married to a white woman. He wants to be white.`-D. Watson-Dem
    -`This city will be chocolate at the end of the day` -Gov.Nagin, Dem. New Orleans
    -`I’ll have those n*ggers voting Democratic for the next 200 years.`-LB Johnson

    You probably consider the Tea Party `violent`, too. Like those Tea Party gatherings where no violence occurred? Wheras the `peaceful` Occupy movement had: Murder, Rape, Suicide, TB, Assault, Violence, Drugs and Riots and has cost the taxpayer MILLIONS to clean up and repair the damage. (and yet the Media would have you beleive the Tea Party is the violent one).

    So, what flavor is the kool-aid today?
  76. Profile photo of grindinblade
    grindinblade Male 18-29
    234 posts
    March 16, 2012 at 3:49 pm
    @MeGrendel Bush was not to blame for the gas increase during his presidency, nor is Obama to blame now. Republicans under Bush said that gas prices can`t be controlled by the president, now the roles are just switched.
    This isn`t a matter of incompetency it is political pandering and partisanship. Republicans will blame Democrats for problems they know can`t be controlled when a dem is office, and the reverse is true when a Republican is office. I guess the main reason why there was more hype around Bush was due to his and Cheney`s connection to oil companies and Halliburton, and their war in Iraq.
  77. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    32785 posts
    March 16, 2012 at 3:50 pm
    @grindinblade: Obama`s Own Words This (and 100 other examples) is why conservatives say the MSM is 100% biased, eh?

    And in case you think these are "cherry picked" try to find:
    Praise for Bush / Criticism for Obama over gas prices at any MSM station.
  78. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    32785 posts
    March 16, 2012 at 3:55 pm
    Oh lookie: Obama`s Own Advertising blaming Bush and McCain (?!?) for high gas prices.
    Say Barak, where`s that "windfall tax" you promised? Where`s the $1000 energy rebate?
    The MSM has zero intrest in covering THIS! Too busy with Sandra Fluke...
  79. Profile photo of grindinblade
    grindinblade Male 18-29
    234 posts
    March 16, 2012 at 3:59 pm
    @5cats I`m not saying that criticism on Bush for oil prices was deserved, and don`t doubt the MSM bias. My point is that criticism on gas prices from either party is pointless party pandering. Just because dems criticized bush unfairly about gas prices doesn`t mean that we should continue the trend with Obama. There are legitimate criticisms for both sides for the opposing party, gas prices aren`t one of them.

    I for one am furious over the drone killing of an American citizen and the MSM not really seeming to care about it.
  80. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    32785 posts
    March 16, 2012 at 4:17 pm
    Good for you then, @grindinblade, to be consistant is good!
    I add that the Dems have been opposing more drilling for decades now. If drilling had started decades ago, Middle Eastern oil would not even be required! Canadian oil yes, but Obama has BLOCKED that too!
    So yes, I think the Dems as a party and Obama as a President ARE to blame for high prices and dependance on Saudi oil.
  81. Profile photo of grindinblade
    grindinblade Male 18-29
    234 posts
    March 16, 2012 at 4:29 pm
    @5cats it wouldn`t matter if the oil we get came from the middle east, canada, or the US. The market is what dictates oil prices, and with the problems in the middle east who produces the most oil, prices largely hinge on what is going on there. Just because the US is producing more oil doesn`t mean that prices will suddenly drop as if we are buying all of oil from US suppliers the market doesn`t work that way.
  82. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    32785 posts
    March 16, 2012 at 4:41 pm
    Partly true @grindinblade, but more supply (overall) means lower (overall) prices, eh?

    US production has gone up a bit lately (much to my surprise!) and also it is importing less forign oil too! A LOT more US production would mean a LOT less forign oil, and less "sensitivity" to international fluctuations.

    Just `Into Economics` really.
  83. Profile photo of simbha
    simbha Male 30-39
    412 posts
    March 16, 2012 at 7:17 pm
    @5Cats: You`re right, in theory - but that (increasing production to contribute to global economic production, in order to offset price movements) can`t last long.

    The US currently has between 19 and 21 billion bbl in proven reserves, is currently producing around MMbpd and consumes around 18-19 MMbpd.

    At the current rate of production - without replacement - the US will use up all its in-ground proven reserves in about seven years. Certainly, new finds will stretch this out, but it`s impossible to tell now what that will be.

    Increasing production significantly - let`s say by 40% - would certainly have a short-term impact on oil production, adding about 3 MMbpd to the global market; however, this is only about 4% of the total 88 MMbpd that`s produced globally. The price impact of this is unclear.


  84. Profile photo of simbha
    simbha Male 30-39
    412 posts
    March 16, 2012 at 7:19 pm


    Furthermore, it`s highly likely that OPEC or one or more of its member countries (independently) would significantly decrease production in the somewhat longer term, thereby maintaining global supply at today`s levels and resetting prices again to what we`re seeing now.

    Unless US production were actually limited to transport within the US itself, an increase in domestic oil production would not likely result in a long-term reduction in prices. What it would do, however, is reduce the amount of proven reserves available in the US much faster than would occur today - thus resulting in even more influence by foreign entities in the not-so-far-flung future.
  85. Profile photo of simbha
    simbha Male 30-39
    412 posts
    March 16, 2012 at 7:20 pm


    "is currently producing around MMbpd and consumes around 18-19 MMbpd."

    should be...

    "is currently producing around MMbpd and consumes around 18-19 MMbpd."
  86. Profile photo of elkingo
    elkingo Male 30-39
    5436 posts
    March 16, 2012 at 7:41 pm
    Madest rule activated: If you vote less than 4.0 on this submission, you are an ignorant racist hate monger conservative white bigot. He has "research" that backs it up.
  87. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    32785 posts
    March 16, 2012 at 7:50 pm
    Wiki: World Oil scroll down for charts.
    Proven Reserves By Country

    So yes, the USA seems to have 10 years of pumping left, but Canada has 170+! lolz!

    Interesting: I thought the UK and Mexico had a fair amount of oil, but not according to these charts!

    It`s all a shell game really. Oil goes up? They make money. Oil goes down? They make money.
  88. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    32785 posts
    March 16, 2012 at 7:52 pm
    @elkingo: Creationist, Veteran, bitterly clinging to your guns and Bible! Red-necked, Faux-News watching, Limbaugh worshiping HILLBILLY!

    Did I miss anything @madest?

    Oh yeah, fat, I forgot fat.
  89. Profile photo of elkingo
    elkingo Male 30-39
    5436 posts
    March 16, 2012 at 7:59 pm
    You forgot the "research" part. It is backed up by "research".

    (Although, I have seen this research before... it is not real research of course... but you know, it still counts.)
  90. Profile photo of simbha
    simbha Male 30-39
    412 posts
    March 16, 2012 at 8:29 pm
    @5Cats: the UK has a decent amount in the Shetland Islands but it`s largely fragmented, making it economically infeasible to tap without either (i) a significant increase in oil prices to compensate operators (oil companies) or (ii) significant advancements in multi-directional drilling and production facilities. The latter`s likely, but it probably won`t become commercially viable at this scale for at least 3-5 years.

    Mexico`s issue is really one of political infighting.

    The term `proved reserves` doesn`t indicate everything that`s been discovered. It`s a measure of those reserves which can be considered feasible for production given expected technological and price trajectories. There are some geological formations which contain oil but are currently not expected to contribute to future supply, given current technological progress and expectations of future crude prices. They`re not likely to be developed, but who knows?
  91. Profile photo of simbha
    simbha Male 30-39
    412 posts
    March 16, 2012 at 8:37 pm


    For example, Mexico`s proved reserves include the Chicontepec field, which it`s estimated contains around 130-140 billion bbl... roughly half of Saudi Arabia`s reserves. However, the vast majority of this cannot be produced with current technology... AND the political situation in Mexico is such that the government looks at Pemex (the national oil company, which is the only company authorized to produce crude in the country) as a governmental revenue source - and thus siphons loads of money away from it, essentially allowing it to operate but never to invest in infrastructure of technological development.

    In my opinion, that`s a poor sovereign strategy - but it`s not my country, so what relevance is it to me? What will likely happen is that Pemex will be unable to maintain its current revenue stream for much longer - and the government will have to either allow it to invest in technology/capital or open the country`s reserves to fore
  92. Profile photo of robosnitz
    robosnitz Male 40-49
    2737 posts
    March 16, 2012 at 10:08 pm
    WOW! What a bunch of horsesh*t propaganda.Can I get Tom Hanks to narrate my life from 2008 to now?
  93. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    32785 posts
    March 16, 2012 at 10:37 pm
    That`s what I mean @simbha, I thought they both had lots of proven reserves, but it`s largely "potential" reserves. Live & learn at IAB!
    From what I`ve read, Mexico`s "plan" is to keep their fields under-developed until oil is REALLY high, so it`s worth a fortune (in the future). idk how that`s better than getting money NOW in a poverty striken nation, but like you say, it`s not MY country!

    Agreed @robosnitz, Tom Hanks makes anything `sound good` eh?
  94. Profile photo of Rtaylor32
    Rtaylor32 Male 30-39
    9 posts
    March 17, 2012 at 1:48 pm
    Thanks for protecting our liberties Barock!?!!1!4! You Rock. . .

    http://www.aclu.org/ blog/national-security /angry-about-national-defense -authorization-act
  95. Profile photo of Zeegrr60
    Zeegrr60 Male 40-49
    2106 posts
    March 17, 2012 at 10:00 pm
    Well, I`m not voting against him.

Leave a Reply