The Official Obama Scorecard Thread

[SCYUKON 0]

Ok, all you smug Richard Cranials, here ya go:fromhttp://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=climateclimate, clime (the weather in some location averaged over some long period of time) "the dank climate of southern Wales"; "plants from a cold clime travel best in winter"What else you have now, that one was pretty weaksauce.

[hblask 1]

Ok, all you smug Richard Cranials, here ya go:fromhttp://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=climateclimate, clime (the weather in some location averaged over some long period of time) "the dank climate of southern Wales"; "plants from a cold clime travel best in winter"What else you have now, that one was pretty weaksauce.

There's a thread on climate change, this one is for discussions of Obama's policies and proposed policies. If he has any specific proposal from him that you would like to discuss, this is the place for an analysis of its costs and benefits.

[Balloon guy 158]

this is true for the short term, but it's worth saying that because of the average life span of most cars, one shouldn't be especially concerned with driving around a 12mpg buick for fear of burning some coal to build a new prius.part of the problem with this sort of approach is that it fails to acknowledge that as more people show a preference for new, fuel efficient cars, the industry will use this trend to make the process of creating NiCd (or hopefully, soon, Li) batteries a whole lot more efficient than it is today. whether they are doing this to make money or reduce emissions doesn't really matter--they'll achieve the same end and everyone should be happy.the main reason to drive a 10 year old civic is to save money .

But old cars in America don't get recycled, they just down to Mexico where the pollution standards are much lower.therfore any Prius owners are just adding to the total emmision, not reducing it.

[Sheiky 0]

Good to expose the closet liberals. ;)At any rate, play with words all you wish. It is getting colder, not warmer. If you wish to now call it "Climate change" to mask this, go on deluding yourself. Enjoying the snow in Ontario, by the way?

Oh shit, it's cold in Ontario? Seriously?I mean, I used to think that global warming was a theory based on mass scientific study and empirical research, but now I've discovered that Ontario is cold, It's obvious i've just been duped by those ****ing liberals again.

[SCYUKON 0]

Oh shit, it's cold in Ontario? Seriously?I mean, I used to think that global warming was a theory based on mass scientific study and empirical research, but now I've discovered that Ontario is cold, It's obvious i've just been duped by those ****ing liberals again.

Yeah me too, until I checked out the science. My angst is that with Obama putting his policy in place, to me it is no longer worth debating the topic at all, since it is now full steam ahead since the US is now fully onboard. So yes, this is about Obama policy. Blast Bush all you wish, but at least he did not endorse this crap science.Oh well everyone, enjoy driving your Prius' using Windmill energy costing you 20¢/kW.h. Bunch of fools - I wonder what the next scam is going to be now that this scam is "settled".

[CaneBrain 95]

Yeah me too, until I checked out the science. My angst is that with Obama putting his policy in place, to me it is no longer worth debating the topic at all, since it is now full steam ahead since the US is now fully onboard. So yes, this is about Obama policy. Blast Bush all you wish, but at least he did not endorse this crap science.Oh well everyone, enjoy driving your Prius' using Windmill energy costing you 20¢/kW.h. Bunch of fools - I wonder what the next scam is going to be now that this scam is "settled".

lol. No, no.....we blasted Bush FOR ignoring this "science" stuff you are so upset with.Climate change is a fact......the only question left is what kind of impact it will have.

[Balloon guy 158]

lol. No, no.....we blasted Bush FOR ignoring this "science" stuff you are so upset with.Climate change is a fact......the only question left is what kind of impact it will have.

I thought the question was what can mankind do to change what is happening naturally.The answer is what we all differ on.

[CaneBrain 95]

I thought the question was what can mankind do to change what is happening naturally.The answer is what we all differ on.

'I think a lot more people are wondering if climate change will happen but it wont be a big deal. And I am not sure there is anything "natural" about the traffic in southern California.

[Balloon guy 158]

'I think a lot more people are wondering if climate change will happen but it wont be a big deal. And I am not sure there is anything "natural" about the traffic in southern California.

All the good volcanoes went dormant, we had to do something to keep things on a consistant level

[El Guapo 8]

Has anyone here actually driven a Prius. If you have, it should answer your questions and all these previous debates would go away.

[Sheiky 0]

Yeah me too, until I checked out the science. My angst is that with Obama putting his policy in place, to me it is no longer worth debating the topic at all, since it is now full steam ahead since the US is now fully onboard. So yes, this is about Obama policy. Blast Bush all you wish, but at least he did not endorse this crap science.Oh well everyone, enjoy driving your Prius' using Windmill energy costing you 20¢/kW.h. Bunch of fools - I wonder what the next scam is going to be now that this scam is "settled".

This evaluation of decades of scientific endeavour from a guy who bases his evidence on the weather in Ontario is really useful. Thank you for your contribution, i hope those dastardly politicians listen to you and stop this evil conspiracy that is caring about the environment.

[SCYUKON 0]

This evaluation of decades of scientific endeavour from a guy who bases his evidence on the weather in Ontario is really useful. Thank you for your contribution, i hope those dastardly politicians listen to you and stop this evil conspiracy that is caring about the environment.

Hey pal, check out the Daniel gushing over Al Gore thread - I blew my wad there. Let the search button be your friend, idiot.

[Sheiky 0]

Hey pal, check out the Daniel gushing over Al Gore thread - I blew my wad there. Let the search button be your friend, idiot.

What are you even talking about??

[strategy 4]

What are you even talking about??

he's not sure what he's talking about, but he's ANGRY

[Jeepster80125 0]

he's not sure what he's talking about, but he's ANGRY

RAGE!!!!1

[Zealous Donkey 0]

Oh shit, it's cold in Ontario? Seriously?I mean, I used to think that global warming was a theory based on mass scientific study and empirical research, but now I've discovered that Ontario is cold, It's obvious i've just been duped by those ****ing liberals again.

Is this the same mass scientific study and empirical research which said that the east coast of the US should have been under water in the mid 1990s? I can understand anyone who isn't buying the whole climate change arguement, especially the way it is presented by the democratic party and the MSM. To anyone alive in the 1980s all this should sound familiar. FWIW, I do believe the planet is warming, but don't believe in the doomsday scenerio of Al Gore and co. I do believe cleaner water and air would be a good thing but I don't think you have to strangle the economy to accoplish this.

[gobears 0]

Plus 1 for Obama - he's curtailing Bush's policy on preemption over states rights. Of course this opens up some issues for many businesses who will have to deal with states having different laws/regulations (I noticed that one of the trial lawyers was giddy with the decision) States Rights

[Jeepster80125 0]

Negative 5 for this one...

The End of Capitalism as We Know ItArguably the most fundamental, crucial element to a civil society is the rule of law. A corollary to this notion is that of contract rights - when two or more people enter into a valid agreement that they intend to be honored, the agreement should indeed be honored. In the U.S., contract law is sacrosanct and it would not be facetious to say that the entire world’s economy depends on America’s respect for its laws and contracts.All contracts are important in some way, but credit contracts are particularly important to a functioning capitalist system. That’s why Article V of the U.S. Constitution prohibits states from interfering with the obligation to pay debts. And Article 1, Section 8 reinforces this point by delegating to the federal government the sole authority to enact “uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcies.”Under these long standing bankruptcy laws - enacted and enforced by the federal government under the Constitution - a secured creditor is entitled to first priority under the “absolute priority rule.” Other nonsecured creditors have “junior” priority. The purpose of this rule should seem clear. When you offer credit to some one or some thing, and do so on the condition that it is secured by an asset, you should be first in line to collect before those providing credit without such security. Unfortunately President Obama’s actions throughout the Chrysler bankruptcy have trampled over these well worn bankruptcy laws, contract rights, and even the rule of law.One of Chrysler’s secured creditors was the State of Indiana, or more particularly, pension funds administered by the state. But now that Chrysler has filed for bankruptcy, Indiana and other secured creditors are being forced to the back of the line so that unions can proceed to the front. For every dollar of secured creditors’ claims, they’re receiving only 30 cents. Compare that the the United Auto Workers union, an unsecured junior creditor, who will get 50 cents on the dollar.Why? It’s not because any contract, agreement or bankruptcy law calls for it, but because the federal government decided it was politically convenient. Of course, we’ve become far too familiar with the government robbing Peter to pay Paul, but in this instance the government is violating the rule of law to do it. The arbitrary whims of Obama’s administration threaten the very foundation of capitalism.Henceforth lenders will hesitate to provide credit, and eager entrepreneurs and businessmen will struggle to find it, because any credit can now apparently be confiscated by government greed regardless of the law or the existence of a binding contract. Simply put, the price of borrowing will now go up because lenders must account for a new risk - government intervention.Obama has assisted the UAW in this instance, an entity which just so happened to be crucial to his election. But how many union workers in the future will be laid off - or never hired in the first place - because their employer couldn’t find credit or loans for expansion?Thousands upon thousands of people are getting steamrolled by this outrageous affront to the credit system, but only Indiana has objected, and its efforts appear to be fruitless thus far. I fear that President Obama’s actions in the Chrysler bankruptcy signal the dawn of a new era in which powerful political interests trump capitalism and the sanctity of contracts. May God have mercy on us all.

[Naked_Cowboy 0]

Negative 5 for this one...

Yeah, for some reason when i brought this up in the chrysler thread, it was just dismissed out of hand like it's completely standard and not a big deal to treat unsecured creditors as more important than secured creditors in one of the biggest bankruptcies in history. Yeah, nothing frees up credit like telling banks the government can redistribute the collateral securing their loans on a whim.

[El Guapo 8]

Yeah, for some reason when i brought this up in the chrysler thread, it was just dismissed out of hand like it's completely standard and not a big deal to treat unsecured creditors as more important than secured creditors in one of the biggest bankruptcies in history. Yeah, nothing frees up credit like telling banks the government can redistribute the collateral securing their loans on a whim.

If this persists and rolls over to other companies, this will crush Senior Secured Debt funds.

[vbnautilus 48]

I forgot I never tallied this to the score when it happened last month, but Obama got +100 points from me for this address to the National Academy of Sciences, in which he pledged to increase science funding to 3 percent of GDP -- to reach the highest ever proportion of GDP spent on science ( we were at 3% back in the mid sixties). --Federal funding in the physical sciences as a portion of our gross domestic product has fallen by nearly half over the past quarter century. Time and again we've allowed the research and experimentation tax credit, which helps businesses grow and innovate, to lapse.Our schools continue to trail other developed countries and, in some cases, developing countries. Our students are outperformed in math and science by their peers in Singapore, Japan, England, the Netherlands, Hong Kong, and Korea, among others. Another assessment shows American 15-year-olds ranked 25th in math and 21st in science when compared to nations around the world. And we have watched as scientific integrity has been undermined and scientific research politicized in an effort to advance predetermined ideological agendas.We know that our country is better than this. A half century ago, this nation made a commitment to lead the world in scientific and technological innovation; to invest in education, in research, in engineering; to set a goal of reaching space and engaging every citizen in that historic mission. That was the high water mark of America's investment in research and development. And since then our investments have steadily declined as a share of our national income. As a result, other countries are now beginning to pull ahead in the pursuit of this generation's great discoveries. I believe it is not in our character, the American character, to follow. It's our character to lead. And it is time for us to lead once again. So I'm here today to set this goal: We will devote more than 3 percent of our GDP to research and development. We will not just meet, but we will exceed the level achieved at the height of the space race, through policies that invest in basic and applied research, create new incentives for private innovation, promote breakthroughs in energy and medicine, and improve education in math and science.This represents the largest commitment to scientific research and innovation in American history. Just think what this will allow us to accomplish: solar cells as cheap as paint; green buildings that produce all the energy they consume; learning software as effective as a personal tutor; prosthetics so advanced that you could play the piano again; an expansion of the frontiers of human knowledge about ourselves and world the around us. We can do this.The pursuit of discovery half a century ago fueled our prosperity and our success as a nation in the half century that followed. The commitment I am making today will fuel our success for another 50 years. That's how we will ensure that our children and their children will look back on this generation's work as that which defined the progress and delivered the prosperity of the 21st century. http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office...Annual-Meeting/

[SCYUKON 0]

This represents the largest commitment to scientific research and innovation in American history.

I can only hope they spend some of this money fixing all the errors in the IPCC reports. That may be one of the greatest things ever done, should it come to pass.

[strategy 4]

Yeah, for some reason when i brought this up in the chrysler thread, it was just dismissed out of hand like it's completely standard and not a big deal to treat unsecured creditors as more important than secured creditors in one of the biggest bankruptcies in history. Yeah, nothing frees up credit like telling banks the government can redistribute the collateral securing their loans on a whim.

you're right, it's out of sorts and incredibly unfair. it's unfortunate that a bunch of people got squeezed for the sake of the UAW, but this is one of those occasions where the lender has to take at least some of the blame. this was HIGHLY politicized from the get-go.

[brvheart 1,752]

hahahah

In a sobering holiday interview with C-SPAN, President Obama boldly told Americans: "We are out of money."C-SPAN host Steve Scully broke from a meek Washington press corps with probing questions for the new president.SCULLY: You know the numbers, $1.7 trillion debt, a national deficit of $11 trillion. At what point do we run out of money?OBAMA: Well, we are out of money now. We are operating in deep deficits, not caused by any decisions we've made on health care so far. This is a consequence of the crisis that we've seen and in fact our failure to make some good decisions on health care over the last several decades.So we've got a short-term problem, which is we had to spend a lot of money to salvage our financial system, we had to deal with the auto companies, a huge recession which drains tax revenue at the same time it's putting more pressure on governments to provide unemployment insurance or make sure that food stamps are available for people who have been laid off.So we have a short-term problem and we also have a long-term problem. The short-term problem is dwarfed by the long-term problem. And the long-term problem is Medicaid and Medicare. If we don't reduce long-term health care inflation substantially, we can't get control of the deficit.So, one option is just to do nothing. We say, well, it's too expensive for us to make some short-term investments in health care. We can't afford it. We've got this big deficit. Let's just keep the health care system that we've got now.Along that trajectory, we will see health care cost as an overall share of our federal spending grow and grow and grow and grow until essentially it consumes everything...SCULLY: When you see GM though as “Government Motors,” you're reaction?OBAMA: Well, you know – look we are trying to help an auto industry that is going through a combination of bad decision making over many years and an unprecedented crisis or at least a crisis we haven't seen since the 1930's. And you know the economy is going to bounce back and we want to get out of the business of helping auto companies as quickly as we can. I have got more enough to do without that. In the same way that I want to get out of the business of helping banks, but we have to make some strategic decisions about strategic industries...SCULLY: States like California in desperate financial situation, will you be forced to bail out the states?OBAMA: No. I think that what you're seeing in states is that anytime you got a severe recession like this, as I said before, their demands on services are higher. So, they are sending more money out. At the same time, they're bringing less tax revenue in. And that's a painful adjustment, what we're going end up seeing is lot of states making very difficult choices there...SCULLY: William Howard Taft served on the court after his presidency, would you have any interest in being on the Supreme Court?OBAMA: You know, I am not sure that I could get through Senate confirmation...

[hblask 1]

I forgot I never tallied this to the score when it happened last month, but Obama got +100 points from me for this address to the National Academy of Sciences, in which he pledged to increase science funding to 3 percent of GDP -- to reach the highest ever proportion of GDP spent on science ( we were at 3% back in the mid sixties). -

Because 3% is exactly the correct amount? Or is 2.5%? Or is 1%? 20%?Why is this good? Because the government has such a long track record of efficient spending?There doesn't seem to be a lot to be said for this except that spending on science is better than spending on war, but that's an extremely weak argument.