Not cause I agree in what hes doing,but just because I think it will happen.

A normal, large helping, of Obama hatred! I have two points: 1) Given the condition of the country due to Bush, there are people that would complain if he did nothing and people who would complain because of what he is doing. The only way he could win - according to those spewing hate - is if he did what the Republicans want, which brings me to 2) I firmly believe that the majority of the people lining up to vote against him will be made up mostly of two groups: Republicans and racists (I guess a person could be both). The fact that someone could follow a particular group of people all the time, Republican OR Democrat, is ignorant to say the least. The fact that so much racism, displayed more openly under the guise of something else is sickening.

Regardless of my vote on this rivalry, I don't think he will be re-elected and I don't think I will ever see a serious black candidate in my life again. For a large part of America, or larger part than some would like to think, the unthinkable has happened and they will make sure it never, ever happens again.

Please, understand where this is coming from. I'm someone who was born in 1970, after many of the worst hate crimes against blacks were committed. However, racism is still something I've endured; both open racism and overt racism. Until you walk in the next man's shoes...

Ryan, let's get real - we view America from two perspectives. You can't see my perspective because you haven't had the same experiences I've had. Many people look at him as a black man who is president and they hate it to their core! Now, you don't have to believe that, but it is reality. Another thing that shows the blatant racism in this country is the fact that he is just as much the next white president as he is a black president yet it is never mentioned in the media. Nobody has EVER considered him a white president. How can you possibly explain that if a ton of racism doesn't exist?

Nope, in America, if he is part black he is black period. The only way he could pass for being white in America is if he looked white AND didn't tell anyone he was part black.

You are right, we can only imagine what it must be like to be in each other's shoes. If you want to look at reality you must admit racism exists and the past election showed how much it still plays a part in how things are.

Can you show me a quote where someone, anyone, said Obama was just as much white as he is black?

Mr. Kazinec if you believe for one moment that I don't know for a FACT that the person to whom we are both referring won't eventually use at least one of those three programs then you are sorely mistaken. And by doing so, like I've stated before and will state to my dying breath, it IS HYPOCRISY!!!!! Do not shout you do not want the government deciding health care when you clearly have no problem depending on it for a monthly check in the past, present, or future! By the way, I have several gripes about the law myself, but I will not chastise it entirely when it will do millions of people some good. And now I will take note with you concerning "Ownership". Ownership of shares of a company does NOT mean you make the decisions for that company unless it is more than 50%, and you know that. That argument is simply trash. You can try an argument like that with someone of low intelligence, but remember it is me you are messaging!!!

LOL. Student loans are an unfortunate thing. Those I do not take issue with because clearly that is something that is now wholly owned by the government, but then again they are not a corporation or business I take issue or concern for except to say it's a good thing I didn't need one.

I never said I loved this new law, or for that matter that I even really liked it except for a few items, but I will say this. As with almost every bill that has been passed into law since the early 1920's by our Congress they all have been earmarked by ridiculous amendments and "add-ons" that clearly helped no one but themselves or the group that lobbied for them in the first place. In other words you sometimes have to take the good with the bad. And the reason for that is that neither party will really work with the other, and neither one truly knows what the word "compromise" really means anymore.

It took the very end Mr. Kaz before most die-hard Republicans finally gave up on Bush Jr., and I in turn will do the same. I'm just not ready to give up on my boy yet. I know you don't believe in him, but I do. I expect good things from him and I won't be happy until I see them.

LOL, I've been called many things Kaz, but naive is not one of them. You need to read what I typed a little better. When I said billions I meant to each nation, not as a whole. I'm very well aware of our debt to foreign nations. As for the national debt, yes we are compounding it year after year, but the amazing jumps in recent decades can be attributed to just a few circumstances. One of course is overspending by the government on a number of programs that neither work anymore or are a flagrant misuse of federal dollars. The other circumstance, and perhaps the biggest reason, is simply inflation. The only person being naive about that little fact is you. Our debt would have increased just as much under McCain, Obama, or anyone else for that matter. To blame Obama entirely for our current debt is just plain silly and NAIVE. As for Social Security Kaz, just use a little common sense for God's sake. The fact we paid out more this year than the revenue we took in is because unemployment was not expected to exceed 8.2%, but we are currently holding at 10%. Not to mention the fact that people are just living longer than they used to. People are still drawing checks at an age that most of us never thought we'd see. Here's a suggestion. Quit trying to drum up a conspiracy where none exists. Obama does not plan to ruin this country. That's just ignorant to believe something that foolish. Do you honestly believe that every person around him wants the same thing you think Obama wants. To run this country into the ground? No. They do not, and neither does he. I am optimistic because I'm tired of being pessimistic. And here's another suggestion. I lived through 8 years of perhaps one of the worst presidents in our nation's history. If I can endure Bush Jr. you can endure 8 years of Obama. I'm arrogant about Social Security because unemployment will go down, people will pay more into the program and sadly enough, people will die. By the way, as far as the report from Wikipedia concerning the "estimate" of the debt/gdp, even Wikipedia has a disclaimer at the top of the page that doubts the neutrality of the report and some who contributed to it. If you're going to cite pages please read them in their entirety first. It helps with the credibility of your statements.

Kaz, you know very well that the CBO document is simply an estimate that does not take into account legislation that may be in the near future. As far as the GDP/GNI is concerned I know that it has fallen 3%. This is not a good sign for the current economy, but if you look over the years we have recovered from periods where the GDP/GNI had fallen by 26% (1929-1937 The Great Depression). In fact, we have recovered from countless recessions and a depression every time. Now, let me say that I don't believe that at some point we shouldn't try to figure out how to balance the budget somehow, but statistically this country has gone into several recessions soon after experiencing a lowering of the national debt.

1817-1821: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 29%. Depression began 1819.
1823-1836: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 99%. Depression began 1837.
1852-1857: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 59%. Depression began 1857.
1867-1873: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 27%. Depression began 1873.
1880-1893: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 57%. Depression began 1893.
1920-1930: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 36%. Depression began 1929.
1998-2001: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 9%. Recession began 2001

Certainly I'm not saying we shouldn't address the issue of the federal budget at all, just that sharp decreases in the national debt over short periods of time seem to do more harm than good. We should act on the federal budget and national debt. Which by the way a Gallup poll shows is far more important to the American people by over 20% than health care reform. Come November of this year the American people aren't going to give a rat's behind about health care any more. The only figure that can hurt democrat's chances this fall will be that ugly 9.7% number. If they manage to bring that number down to around 8% or 7.5% before August I would say that the only change this fall will be republican strategies if they have any hope for taking Congress back. Basically you can argue about this percentage or that percentage where GDP/GNI is concerned because as time will tell it will increase over the next few years just as it has after every recession has ended. You can also argue the President's budget and the increases of the federal debt that are nothing more than estimates on a status quo Congress, but eventually new legislation will be introduced concerning the budget over the coming months and years that may very well decrease these numbers. Neither you nor myself carry a crystal ball that can ultimately predict the decisions of Congress or their lasting effects. Truth is that only time will tell if Obama's policies will work? I know where you stand, and you certainly know where I stand, and we can throw these figures around all day, but in the end I know our President is trying to do well. I believe in him, and always will. Only time can truly be a judge of a President's successes or failures.

Just something else for you to consider. I LOVE this site. It rocks. You and Mama Kaz keep me on my toes. I literally cannot wait to see what you guys post. :-)

You're welcome for the support, but are you really serious about the statement of doubling the national debt within ten years? Seriously, take a look at the following page to see what I mean.

http://www.treasurydirect.gov/

Here's just a few examples.

1838 3.3 million
1839 10.4 million 3 times the previous year

1862 524 million
1863 1.1 billion 2 times the previous year

1982 1.1 trillion
1986 2.1 trillion twice the debt in less than 5 years

2000 5.6 trillion
2007 9 trillion almost twice the national debt in less than ten years

Not only has it happened Kaz, but many times throughout our country's history we have doubled, even tripled the national debt in far less time than 10 years. Now I'm not saying we should just forget about it, or that we shouldn't try to resolve the national debt any time soon, but clearly their should be a long term plan to reduce the deficit. Short term plans, like that of Clinton's have only led to future recessions. Trying to balance the budget the way a lion goes after his morning snack is not the way to ensure financial stability in this country. It has always had awful, sometimes catastrophic affects in the long run.

I would love to see every American soldier come home, but that's just not a realistic venture. Lowering the amount of troops across the globe would certainly help both morale and deficits for the United States, but we have to have some form of front line defense. Cutting certain items from the defense budget would certainly help for sure. I would really like to see that. As I would hope you would agree, and I apologize for using such an obvious Trekkie comment, but I believe Quark from Deep Space Nine said it worst. "War is good for business." Yet if you look at year by year comparison of the national debt during every year of any major war the United States has seen fit to enter you would see the awful truth. War is definitely NOT good for business. I don't care if the next president is white, black, asian, republican, democrat, or independent. So long as he is not another War-mongering idiot that wishes to sacrifice soldier's lives for no good reason and drive our national debt into the ceiling.

Sorry, but I do beg to differ when it comes to this fall and upcoming elections. Though some may TRY to make it about the health care reform, the simple fact of the matter is that most Americans are far more concerned about the financial stability, or lack thereof than those who are concerned about the health care reform. And those polls are current. As time passes people will lose interest in the health care debate and more will focus on the debt and unemployment of this nation. As well they should. Time will tell.