RSSState Run LEFT Media Talking Points … Obama-Pelosi Regime, “Congress the Most Productive Since Great Society”
The LEFTist state run media just cannot help them self doing the bidding for the Obama – Democrat regime …
The MSM find themselves in a game of political Texas Hold’em and are pot committed with Obama-Pelosi-Reid. While “We the People” say that the 111th Congress is the worst ever with a job approval at 13%; however, the liberal state run media usual suspects have been given their “marching orders” stating that the 111th “Congress the Most Productive Since Great Society”.
Listen to the liberal MSM talking points … hmm, I sense a pattern
Wait until you hear Obama’s whopper of a line that ends this VIDEO … “and it comes on the heals of the most productive two years that we have had in generations.” Most productive, hardly. Most expensive, YES! The state run medias most productive Congress has set a record, as stated at the Gateway Pundit, the 111th Congress added more debt than the first 100 Congresses combined … $10,429 Per Person!:
More at CNS News …
The federal government has accumulated more new debt–$3.22 trillion ($3,220,103,625,307.29)—during the tenure of the 111th Congress than it did during the first 100 Congresses combined, according to official debt figures published by the U.S. Treasury.
That equals $10,429.64 in new debt for each and every one of the 308,745,538 people counted in the United States by the 2010 Census.
Is it any wonder why the American people have given this Congress the lowest job approval ever and booted the Democrats out of power in the 2010 midterm elections in record numbers with a GOP +63 gain.
Posted December 28, 2010 by Scared Monkeys Barack Obama, Gallup, Government, House Elections, Media, Media Bias, Nancy Pelosi, Obamanation, Out of Control Spending, Polls | 18 comments |
If you liked this post, you may also like these:
Comments
18 Responses to “State Run LEFT Media Talking Points … Obama-Pelosi Regime, “Congress the Most Productive Since Great Society””
Leave a Reply
It would be funny if it wasn’t so damned scary! There are people who believe this hogwash.
A wrecking ball can be very productive as well, it all
depends on one’s perspective.
You can say the worst congress in history.
The worst congress that did not listen to We the People.
The worst congress that passed bills without reading most of them. How stupid is that?
The worst congress that took away more of our rights. Bush was part of that one.
The worst congress that destroyed American.
I could go on, but whats the point. They got the spot
[...] State Run LEFT Media Talking Points … Obama-Pelosi Regime, “Congress the Most Productive Since G… - Scared Monkeys [...]
[...] the Bill and Has There Ever Been a Better Argument Against Lame Duck Sessions? Scared Monkeys: State Run LEFT Media Talking Points … Obama-Pelosi Regime, “Congress the Most Productive Since G… Nice Deb: Panic at the Disco?: Tax Bill Pulled From House Floor Frugal Café Blog Zone: Paul Ryan [...]
Congress is productive? They have earmarked us into the Greatest depression of all time.
Unbeknownst to the casual observer, it is NOT the earmarked
stuff that is killing us at all. The real overarching problem is
the incredibly unsustainable service to the mounting debt we
are incurring in support of our unreasonably large fixed
programs such as entitlements, medicare, medicaid, lavish
promises for government and union retirements, education
structure (not accomplisments), social security, and healthcare.
Does a large volume of worthless legislation that the people didn’t need or want equal production?
The main stream media is no longer an effective news source since they have fallen into the propaganda mode.
i vote for “most destsructive” ever.
dennisintn
pro·duc·tive \pr?-?d?k-tiv, pr?-\ Adjective
1. Producing or able to produce large amounts of goods, crops, or other commodities.
So, all this means is that there was a lot created (bills & laws) that came out of the 111th Congress. You don’t have to like it, agree with it, or buy it; it is merely a matter of math regarding how much this session got done.
“the 111th Congress added more debt than the first 100 Congresses combined”
1. Why the disconnect between the 111th and 1st 100 congresses? What about the intervening congresses; why leave them out? After all, this missing period covers over $7 Trillion dollars of added deficit, during the Bush, Clinton, and Bush years. What is being hidden by this omission?
2. I’m not so sure these kind of statistics are all that meaningful anyways. For example, for the 8 FY budgets submitted under Reagan, the total deficit was double the debt just prior to those budget years. Also, for the 8 FY budgets submitted under G.W. Bush, the total deficit was equal to the debt just prior to those budget years.
In other words, the Reagan and Bush budgets had deficits that were either twice or just as big as all the debt before them (respectively).
3. The comparison used in the post uses current dollars, as reported historically by the treasury. However, you need to adjust these figures to account for inflation or deflation so that they are restated in constant dollars. Otherwise it is an apples and oranges comparison, and therefore meaningless, possibly intentionally misleading.
_____________
SM” There is a reason why the 111th Congress has a 13% approval ratings. 13%!!! Sorry, but this Democrat lead Congress was a friggin disaster and the reason why there was a +63 GOP pickup in 2010. Nancy Pelosi was nothing more than a rotton partisan hack. She did nothing to listen to the people and for her actions … the Dems lost control.
R
SM (#11)
AFAIK, the 13% approval applies to all members of Congress, not just Democrats. What portion of the disapproval can be allocated to the “just say ‘NO’” GOP members.
What about the obstructionist GOP senators, who block debate with worthless cloture votes, then sometimes later on pass the legislation with very strong majorities (well above 60%). How many surveyed had disapproval for that reason?
What about the GOP announcing a near 100% “no compromise” position following (and only slightly fewer prior to) the mid-terms? How many Independents disapprove of this failed tactic (Congress not getting things done).
Unless and until a survey includes any statistics on why the public approves or disapproves of Congress, assigning any meaning is pure speculation (BS).
An as I recall after the mid-terms (and echoed in these numbers), there is no great love for the GOP, so I don’t know why anyone is touting these results.
______________
SM: NO $HIT Sherlock, really. Wow, I am so enlightened by your brilliance.
Do you live in a liberal vaccume? I mean really dude, do you actually pay attention and read all sides or just your liberal BS? Have you seen the polls that America wanted the GOP to block Obama and the Dems?
Are you really that cluless an individual or are you just a troll hired to spread liberal propaganda?
The GOP was not the party of “NO” … THE AMERICAN PEOPLE WERE THE PARTY OF NO.
If you think that Democrats were not to blame, as they were in control of Congress, then maybe you would like to explain the asskicking that they just received in the 2012 midterm elections. Hmm?
+63 GOP controll in the House, a +6 pickup in the Senate, +5 governors and +680 state legislature seats. Let alone the ones that switched to GOP after the election.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2010/house/2010_elections_house_map_final_results.html
(Maybe you would like to dazzel us with you BS as to how this was a positive for Obama and Democrats?)
Democrats lost badly in OH, PA … Obama will never win these states in 2012. Nor will he win VA, NC or FL as he did in 2008. Because of the 2010 Census, the 2010 midterm election state wins and redistricting and the fact that America does not want Obama’s liberal polices to succeed … he is running out of electorial voted to even attempt to win.
R
SM (#12)
I probably read as much of both sides as any other reader of this blog. And no, i don’t recall any polls that addressed pointless obstructionist tactics, just so an overwhelming vote to pass could be held later. All the excessive cloture votes achieve is slowing down the business of the Senate.
I clearly did not say that “Dems were not to blame” (reread my first sentence). And if you think the Dems were in control of Congress, then there wouldn’t have been the record cloture votes to overcome. I grant that several Dem senators took advantage of the cloture situation to wield personal power (with impunity, I might add), which assisted the 40-41 GOP senators in blocking cloture.
You and I know that there is enough fear, uncertainty, and doubt on the airwaves to sway low information voters to reject the status quo. Just look at the “never heard of” numbers from the CNN poll for congressional leaders. Not all people are keenly aware of American politics. I have have no idea why Christine O’Donnell was able to get 36% of the vote in Delaware. No thinking person could ever vote for her.
In general, I will easily admit the was a huge electoral swing in Nov for the GOP. I do know of one theory why this may be a positive for Obama and the Dems: the GOP will have to govern well enough to demonstrate why they should be reelected. If not, a case may be made that could ping-pong the next election back to the Dems. Perhaps unlikely, but a theory nonetheless.
I’m really not a predictor of the future so much, and two years is at once a ways off, yet just around the corner. Time will tell.
A reminder from the CNN poll:
. . . that while a majority of the public says Republican control of the House of Representatives is good for the country, only one in four say the GOP will do a better job running things than the Democrats did when they controlled the chamber.
Sixty-one percent of people questioned in the poll say they hope the president’s policies will succeed.
_______________’
SM: Greg, what you are not comprehending is that an overwhelming majority of Americans were against pretty much everything that the democrats were for. Americans were against Obamacare, Cap & Trade, Stimulus, Amnesty for illegals …
The Democrats basically gave the middle finger to America. Thus the reason why there was a landslide in 2010. The spending has been beyond ridiculous. Of course those that are Republicans are to blame as well for the poor ratings. They spent like druken sailors as well. Thus the reason why many Republicans were tossed out in the primaries.
The 2010 election is just the begining of taking America back and making politicians responsible to the people they represent. No longer will it be forgot for the votes they take. If the Democrats want to continue their suicide mission, its up to them.
I have to laugh when I think back at the Dem talking points that GWB squandered the good will and his political advantage with the war in Iraq. Really? No President has ever wasted a greater opportunity than Obama. This clown came into office with a huge approval rating. He claimed he was doing to reach across the aisle. He claimed there was no red ro blue states, only the United States. What a lie and fraud that he has been proved to be.
Obama is the most partisan President since WWII.
The bloom is off the rose and his lies will no longer be accepted. Obama will try to run in 2012 as a DC outsider. What a joke. In two years this President has worn out his welcome.
R
Gerg:
you’ve been here.
you should know that its all Obama’s fault
we skip the fact that the bailout was done by the bush admin and that the economy was already down the drain.
I liked the last GOP reasoning…extend those richman taxcut or we will not extend unemployment benefits, veteran benefits and others.
you got to love those crocodile tears by Boehner
WRONG DOLT and GREG…
It’s quite simple….the health of the economy is jobs…nothing more nothing less.
Bush left office with unemployment between 6-7%…
Obama pushed Stimulus and promised it wouldn’t go past 8%….
It’s now 9.8% at national average;but if you go to liberal run down places like Detroit; it’s actually closer to 20%.
You second to last comment is false…Veterans will get their money through the VA you dope.
We shouldn’t have extended unemployment benefits because it’s been proven it actually HURTS economic growth. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure that one out.
Yeah..I’m sure their crocodile tears you souless heartless foreign douche bag!
#15
Jobs are very, very important to the economy. Too bad they are moving overseas in very large numbers, even being helped by tax policy that the GOP didn’t want to see changed (Nice!).
The larger economy has a slow recovery underway, but jobs are lagging. It seems to me that with goods being made overseas, business activity can grow and Americans are left holding the bag. From the numbers I’ve heard, there is a lot of money sitting on the sidelines, which I believe is a key factor in holding back job growth. perhaps someone knows how we can create jobs here when goods are manufactured anyplace but here.
As far as UE, imagine if the economic downturn had happened mid-term, with Bush still in office. Do you really think that UE would have stayed at 6-7% for Bush under the economic circumstances that Obama faced? Hardly, I think.
You say Obama promised a limit on UE in the 8% range. If he did, it was not a well thought out promise. However, if it was more of a prediction (or target or planned limit), that would be a softer statement. In any case, the number went higher, unexpectedly. I guess if this (UE) was highly predictable and accurate, then the blame can be easily assigned. If it is not so simple a job to state this type of number, then more leeway should be possible.
I’m glad you mention the proven nature of how extended UE hurts the economy. I’m interested in learning about this, and would like to know more about the proof of this effect.
yep…you looked at his voting record?
crocodile tears.
oh..prove by you doesn’t hold up in the real word…scott
and a big FYI: promises by politicians don’t mean anything.
#7
It’s interesting you lump Medicare and Social Security in with a discussion on the debt.
In fact, neither of these programs has any association with the debt, being held in their own separate trust funds. On a positive note, they are both carrying a surplus balance.
However, I do agree that earmarks are not the problem they are often described as. With or without earmarks, the appropriation funds in bills are unaffected. An earmark is merely a specification of how to spend already appropriated funds.