Log in to WRAL.com with one click using your favorite social network:
OR
Log in using your WRAL.com account:



Wrong email/password combination.

Forgot password?

Register with WRAL.com using your favorite social network:
OR
Register for a WRAL.com account using our web form.

11:29 p.m. • 5-22-13

Weather Forecast for Raleigh

  • Thu: Thunderstorm.
    • Hi: 83° F
  • Fri: Partly Cloudy.
    • Hi: 74° F
  • Sat: Clear.
    • Hi: 72° F

Other Locations

> 7 Day Forecast

Doppler Image

Comments :: Obama rallies support for jobs plan in Asheville

263 Comments


WRAL.com welcomes your comments on this story. All comments are moderated prior to publication based on our posting guidelines. Please review them prior to posting and if your message is not approved.

This story is closed for comments. Comments on WRAL.com news stories are accepted and moderated between the hours of 8 a.m. and 8 p.m. Monday through Friday.


page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7
<prev    next>
sort order: oldest first | newest first

"they'll find a way to waste it on something. And we all know Barrycare is going to be a cluster, but we are boned with it now" CrumpsBr0ther

Hmmm... I didn't know that "we all know it will be a cluster" was such a precise forecasting method. Regardless, there is just no substitute for the simple elegance of language in the conservative mantras.

Here's an idea: For every dollar of increased employee compensaton required to be paid by employers, reduce the amount of welfare paid out by a dollar. I mean, now that people can make more money they should be taking advantage and start working, therefore no longer needing welfare. fatchanceimwrong

that doesn't make any sense at all...

For one thing, there's only ~4.3 million people on welfare total.

More than half of those are children, who wouldn't be working anyway.

He should instead be talking with (note I using 'with' not 'to') congress about what he wants to do. - Z Man

every time he has done that he was just told no.

So now he's trying a different strategy- where he tries to convince regular people to pressure their congressmen into action on his agenda.

I don't know that it'll work any better, but it's unlikely to work any worse.

Here's an idea: For every dollar of increased employee compensaton required to be paid by employers, reduce the amount of welfare paid out by a dollar. I mean, now that people can make more money they should be taking advantage and start working, therefore no longer needing welfare.

No he doesn't. It doesn't matter whether he visited or not (on the taxpayers dime none the less). His campaign format speeches do not sway anyone one way or the other. You either support him or (like me) you do not. He should instead be talking with (note I using 'with' not 'to') congress about what he wants to do. It's the congress that obutthead has to impress, not the citizens. And stop hemorrhaging our tax money on campaign-like trips.

First, most provisions don't start till 2014, second, CBO says it will SAVE money (small amt). junkmail5

they'll find a way to waste it on something. And we all know Barrycare is going to be a cluster, but we are boned with it now

The overall weakening of the economy really built up steam during the Clinton administration. That's when certain Dem folk pushed the banks to extend mortgage credit on the faith that the market will never implode. That and the NAFTA agreement signed into life that allowed companies to move their operations to other countries. Here's some more insight into that topic: http://tjhancock.wordpress.com/housing-bubble-financial-crisis-detailed-comprehensive-assessment/ Offshore

Subprime loans were less than 10% of all loans under Clinton.

Under bush they were more than 1/3rd of all loans.

For a bit...broader...perspective on this and the CRA under each president, try this-

http://prospect.org/article/dont-blame-community-reinvestment-act

If you did Blame them , I never read from what you Write- bmac813

then you're not reading much.

I've mentioned Obama being an awful president in a bunch of threads. This one included.

It is always we are wrong- bmac813

Because you are among the group I was talking about. People being upset with Obama for imaginary things that never happened.

Those people ARE always wrong. At least, they're wrong on the things I correct them on. For example-

Obama and Bush both had a Democratic Controlled House and Senate Who control 80% of the Spending- bmac813

Congress controls 100% of the spending. Not a single dime is spent from the US Treasury without congress approving it. That's a basic tenet in the US Constitution, which the always wrong folks seem never to have read.

BUT Obama and his Health Care- bmac813

Yet again- Virtually 0 current debt is the "fault" of Obamacare. First, most provisions don't start till 2014, second, CBO says it will SAVE money (small amt).

The overall weakening economy junkmail5

The overall weakening of the economy really built up steam during the Clinton administration. That's when certain Dem folk pushed the banks to extend mortgage credit on the faith that the market will never implode. That and the NAFTA agreement signed into life that allowed companies to move their operations to other countries. Here's some more insight into that topic: http://tjhancock.wordpress.com/housing-bubble-financial-crisis-detailed-comprehensive-assessment/

If you did Blame them , I never read from what you Write. It is always we are wrong No matter what and your Lib Friends are always right. All the things that Obama Promised in 2008 he never came across on, SO What makes you think he is Telling you the Truth Now. By the Way we never said Obama alone cause the Debt, Obama and Bush both had a Democratic Controlled House and Senate Who control 80% of the Spending. BUT Obama and his Health Care, and all The Money he gave to his Bankrupt Friends helped, Plus no Hiring and Job Creation. When you create Jobs you Create Tax Money, Call Obama and tell him That. Bush for SIX and OBAMA for TWO, NOW you People want to Controll Both Houses? WOW

page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7
<prev    next>
sort order: oldest first | newest first