Patrick.net

Please educate me about these regulations

By marcus   Follow   Sun, 10 Jun 2012, 11:57am   3,001 views   42 comments
In Glendale CA 91206   Watch (1)   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike  

I heard a republican talking head and hack author on one of the Sunday morning talk shows making a frequent assertion I hear about how Obama is so terrible for business because of the detrimental regulations he has put in place.

As we get ready for all of the blind assertions of the Presidential campaign, can anyone please educate me on what these regulations are ?

I'm not looking to hear Abe or Shrek or FW simply repeat the assertions that THEY FEEL must be true because Rush Limbaugh or Fox News said so, or simply because they need to hate Obama.

What I would really like is a thoughtful analysis, giving both sides or even just objectively looking at one side: the regulatory case against Obama. This is 2012, the information age, surely there must be some quality work out there I could read to catch up on this issue. Please just point me to some good links and spare me the emotion.

« First     « Previous     Viewing Comments 3-42 of 42     Last »     See most liked comments

1. thomas.wong1986 Follow Befriend 16 threads 4,426 comments

   3   4:10am Mon 11 Jun 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike (1)   On a plus side for Obama, we may have some new Nuclear Plants permits approved in recent years. Not the move the Left are too happy about.

2. Honest Abe Follow Befriend (41) 91 threads 1,806 comments

   4   7:06am Mon 11 Jun 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike (2)   http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/new-report-cites-regulatory-tsunami-under-obama Regulatory TSUNAMI under Obummer

3. Honest Abe Follow Befriend (41) 91 threads 1,806 comments

   5   7:09am Mon 11 Jun 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike (2)   http://blog.heritage.org/2012/03/13/morning-bell-obamas-new-regulations-cost-billions/ "Endless miles of red tape". "Small business under siege".

4. Honest Abe Follow Befriend (41) 91 threads 1,806 comments

   6   7:12am Mon 11 Jun 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike (2)   http://blog.heritage.org/2012/03/13/morning-bell-obamas-new-regulations-cost-billions/ "Regulation Nation" "Drowing in Regulations"

5. Honest Abe Follow Befriend (41) 91 threads 1,806 comments

   7   7:15am Mon 11 Jun 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike (2)   Marcus, what other help do you need today? The great, wonderful and caring Honest Abe.

6. tts Follow Befriend 2 threads 470 comments

   8   7:24am Mon 11 Jun 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   thomas.wong1986 says So the JOBS act does little... what do you see thats meaningful ? You don't know what you're talking about. http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/taibblog/why-obamas-jobs-act-couldnt-suck-worse-20120409 The "Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act" (in addition to everything else, the Act has an annoying, redundant title) will very nearly legalize fraud in the stock market. In fact, one could say this law is not just a sweeping piece of deregulation that will have an increase in securities fraud as an accidental, ancillary consequence. No, this law actually appears to have been specifically written to encourage fraud in the stock markets. Ostensibly, the law makes it easier for startup companies (particularly tech companies, whose lobbyists were a driving force behind its passage) to attract capital by, among other things, exempting them from independent accounting requirements for up to five years after they first begin selling shares in the stock market. The law also rolls back rules designed to prevent bank analysts from talking up a stock just to win business, a practice that was so pervasive in the tech-boom years as to be almost industry standard. Even worse, the JOBS Act, incredibly, will allow executives to give "pre-prospectus" presentations to investors using PowerPoint and other tools in which they will not be held liable for misrepresentations. These firms will still be obligated to submit prospectuses before their IPOs, and they'll still be held liable for what's in those. But it'll be up to the investor to check and make sure that the prospectus matches the "pre-presentation." The JOBS Act also loosens a whole range of other reporting requirements, and expands stock investment beyond "accredited investors," giving official sanction to the internet-based fundraising activity known as "crowdfunding." But the big one, to me, is the bit about exempting firms from real independent tests of internal controls for five years. When I first read this, I asked myself: how does a law exempting a Silicon Valley startup from independent accounting actually encourage investment? If American companies have to have their internal processes independently verified before and after they go public, doesn't that give investors all around the world a big reason to put their money here, instead of investing in, say, Mobbed-Up Siberian Aluminum LLC, or Bangalore Sweatshop Inc.? In other words, how does letting www.investonawhim.com go to market (and stay on the market for five years!) without publishing real numbers actually help the industry attract more financing in general, when the whole point of all of these controls is to make investment a less risky experience for the investor? The JOBS act exempts new IPO's from most regs, including SOX for up to 5 years. It also greatly expands "fundraising" opportunities by allowing uneducated avg. Joe 6 Packs to "invest" money into them. All based on info. generated by the very same IPO none of which they can be held accountable for and none of which is subject to any sort of 3rd party oversight. It basically creates opportunities for all sorts of new and interesting variants of pump n' dump schemes that take advantage of most people's ignorance. Its not going to do anything to spur new small and innovative companies. It certainly doesn't do a damn thing to create jobs. Except perhaps for a few high $$$$ lawyers.

7. bdrasin Follow Befriend 6 threads 490 comments Alameda, CA

   9   8:41am Mon 11 Jun 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike   Honest Abe says http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/new-report-cites-regulatory-tsunami-under-obama Regulatory TSUNAMI under Obummer I skimmed the article. It references a soon-to-be-released report (maybe it's released by now, I have no idea) which I don't have time to read. The only concrete example it gives is a bill passed before Obama became president, concerning lead paint regulations in homes. This seems like pretty weak tea to me, and I don't see how it constitutes a problem for businesses.

8. rooemoore Follow Befriend 41 threads 917 comments Larkspur, CA

   10   9:07am Mon 11 Jun 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike (1)   bdrasin says Honest Abe says http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/new-report-cites-regulatory-tsunami-under-obama Regulatory TSUNAMI under Obummer I skimmed the article. It references a soon-to-be-released report (maybe it's released by now, I have no idea) which I don't have time to read. The only concrete example it gives is a bill passed before Obama became president, concerning lead paint regulations in homes. This seems like pretty weak tea to me, and I don't see how it constitutes a problem for businesses. It actually is pro business as it forces homeowners to spend more money during renovations. This is just another bogus line of attack. Did the current administration enact new regulations that affect business? Definitely. Have the amount or the scope of Obama's regulations been significantly greater than any modern administration? Absolutely not. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-10-25/obama-wrote-5-fewer-rules-than-bush-while-costing-business.html

9. bdrasin Follow Befriend 6 threads 490 comments Alameda, CA

   11   9:26am Mon 11 Jun 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Honest Abe says http://blog.heritage.org/2012/03/13/morning-bell-obamas-new-regulations-cost-billions/ "Endless miles of red tape". "Small business under siege". This doesn't give concrete examples. The closest it comes is a vague mention of "five major rules" from the EPA (doesn't say what they are or why they will be expensive for businesses). I'm not even sure what it means when it talks about a "regulation"; certainly its not laws or executive orders. What is the economic cost of "employer requirements for posting federal labor rules"? Give me a break.

10. Honest Abe Follow Befriend (41) 91 threads 1,806 comments

    12   9:53am Mon 11 Jun 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike (1)   More denial, as usual. New regulations costing businesses an additional $46 Billion annually seems kinda weak to you??? The cost for each individual business, of any size, on average, is $161,000 per year. Those are costs a non-business owner would have no comprehension of.

11. bdrasin Follow Befriend 6 threads 490 comments Alameda, CA

    13   9:58am Mon 11 Jun 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike   Honest Abe says More denial, as usual. New regulations costing businesses an additional $46 Billion annually seems kinda weak to you??? The cost for each individual business, of any size, on average, is $161,000 per year. Those are costs a non-business owner would have no comprehension of. Great, please list exactly what those regulations are and how the business cost was calculated and we can have a discussion. The articles you cited don't do that, sorry.

12. Honest Abe Follow Befriend (41) 91 threads 1,806 comments

    14   10:04am Mon 11 Jun 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike (2)   http://www.inc.com/news/articles/2010/09/federal-regulations-cost-small-businesses-more-than-large-ones.html bdrasin, don't be a lazy liberal like the rest of your kind, look it up yourself. Sorry but true.

13. rooemoore Follow Befriend 41 threads 917 comments Larkspur, CA

    15   10:12am Mon 11 Jun 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike (1)   Honest Abe says More denial, as usual. New regulations costing businesses an additional $46 Billion annually seems kinda weak to you??? The cost for each individual business, of any size, on average, is $161,000 per year. Those are costs a non-business owner would have no comprehension of. Obama's regulations fall in line with all modern (post WWII) administrations. And if you look at them in detail, many are needed. Like bullshit hidden bank & credit card fees. There are lots of reasons that you can use to hate the guy, but when you use FALSE reasons, it diminishes your overall argument against him. Bogus arguments like these against Obama are like the nut-jobs who said we shouldn't vote for Bush because he was a fascist. Why not just admit the real reason you don't like the guy? He's black.

14. rooemoore Follow Befriend 41 threads 917 comments Larkspur, CA

    16   10:19am Mon 11 Jun 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike (1)   Honest Abe says http://www.inc.com/news/articles/2010/09/federal-regulations-cost-small-businesses-more-than-large-ones.html bdrasin, don't be a lazy liberal like the rest of your kind, look it up yourself. Sorry but true. As RR would say, "There you go again!" "The data for this study only goes through 2008" You do realize Obama started in 2009, right?

15. rooemoore Follow Befriend 41 threads 917 comments Larkspur, CA

    17   10:21am Mon 11 Jun 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (2)   Dislike (1)   We will all sit by patiently while you furiously search the internets looking for something, anything that will in some small way validate your bogus premise. After you present it we will easily shoot it down.

16. bdrasin Follow Befriend 6 threads 490 comments Alameda, CA

    18   10:46am Mon 11 Jun 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike   Honest Abe says bdrasin, don't be a lazy liberal like the rest of your kind, look it up yourself. Sorry but true. I am a liberal and I am fairly lazy, but I'll be happy to engage with an argument if you present it, and I'm willing to change my mind if I see some convincing evidence. Asking me to do your research for you is a bit rich though...essentially you've just asserted that you are sure that the evidence is out there somewhere and it's my job to find it.

17. Honest Abe Follow Befriend (41) 91 threads 1,806 comments

    19   11:14am Mon 11 Jun 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike (2)   bdrasin. Got it. Its always puzzled me why there is so much compelling evidence against so much of the liberal agenda, yet the liberals deny, deflect, duck and dodge reality (the 4 D's). I know you're going to say the exact opposite to me, am I right? Regulations, however, do cost time, money, and jobs, unless you simply deny it. And actually it is your job to look it up and find out for yourself. To be a self actualized adult, it is your responsibility to determine right from wrong and act upon it. Is it right or wrong to kill human fetus's? Is it right or wrong to take from one group of people and gift it to another? Is it right or wrong to invade the sovereignty of other nations? Is it right or wrong to debase our countries currency? Is it right or wrong to establish a system of double standards? Is it right or wrong to set up a nation wide system of dependency? Etc. Etc. Etc. Once you do your job of seeking the truth, and if you have a brain and a conscience, you won't remain a liberal. Its that simple.

18. bdrasin Follow Befriend 6 threads 490 comments Alameda, CA

    20   11:34am Mon 11 Jun 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike   Honest Abe says bdrasin. Got it. Its always puzzled me why there is so much compelling evidence against so much of the liberal agenda, yet the liberals deny, deflect, duck and dodge reality (the 4 D's). I don't see it that way at all. I'm open to evidence and I try my best to draw conclusions from what I see and experience. I'm really not ideological in the sense of drawing my opinions from any predetermined ideology, or at least that's the way I try to be. Honest Abe says I know you're going to say the exact opposite to me, am I right? Regulations, however, do cost time, money, and jobs, unless you simply deny it. Sure, of course they can! That's why any rational discussion has to include a trade-off between cost and benefit. So if, for example, regulating lead-based paint in homes will impose an aggregate cost of $10 million dollars but prevent 10 million cases of cancer I'd say that's a good trade-off (I just made up those numbers, obviously). Some people will yell that this is nanny-statism; to me those people are the ideologs who put ideology before evidence. Since neither you nor the articles you cite have put forward any examples of regulations passed under Obama there's no way for me to do a cost-benefit analysis and decide on whether or not I agree with them. If you are just ideologically driven to always regard the government as a bad actor then you don't have to worry about specifics and you can just count regulations and assume they are all bad...but then you'd be obliged to extend that assumption to every previous administration. Honest Abe says Is it right or wrong to kill human fetus's? Sometimes. Have to consider the circumstance. Honest Abe says Is it right or wrong to take from one group of people and gift it to another? Sometimes. Have to consider the circumstance. Honest Abe says Is it right or wrong to invade the sovereignty of other nations? Sometimes. Depends on the circumstance. Get it? Evidence matters to me. I don't think you can just treat all matters of policy as logical syllogisms.

19. Vicente Follow Befriend (8) 209 threads 4,511 comments Davis, CA

    21   2:26pm Mon 11 Jun 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike (1)   rooemoore says We will all sit by patiently while you furiously search the internets looking for something, anything that will in some small way validate your bogus premise. You give them too much credit. They will "cut and run" when cornered and move on to vague assertions of another sort.

20. rooemoore Follow Befriend 41 threads 917 comments Larkspur, CA

    22   3:23pm Mon 11 Jun 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike (1)   Vicente says rooemoore says We will all sit by patiently while you furiously search the internets looking for something, anything that will in some small way validate your bogus premise. You give them too much credit. They will "cut and run" when cornered and move on to vague assertions of another sort. “Eagles are dandified vultures” - Teddy Roosevelt You're right. Honest Abe and few others here are simpletons. It is fun to tease them, but it's bordering on cruelty.

21. thomas.wong1986 Follow Befriend 16 threads 4,426 comments

    23   3:23pm Mon 11 Jun 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike (1)   tts says You don't know what you're talking about. Well since i am in the Accounting profession, working in tech industry, know the SEC regulations, have filed 10k/10q's, not to mention S-1 for the IPOs i worked on. and keep up on the accounting pronouncements... YES I DO KNOW WHAT IM TALKING ABOUT... using Rolling Stones as a source is pathetic. Nothing will change since the board of directors of any start up will always use independent auditors to do audits at year end. Obama wont change anything. You just didnt expect someone who actually did an offering to give you a thumbs down!

22. rooemoore Follow Befriend 41 threads 917 comments Larkspur, CA

    24   3:25pm Mon 11 Jun 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (2)   Dislike (1)   thomas.wong1986 says . YES I DO KNOW WHAT IM TALKING ABOUT... Say it louder, and it is so much more believable. Sorry, but there are no vitamins for IQ deficiency.

23. thomas.wong1986 Follow Befriend 16 threads 4,426 comments

    25   3:37pm Mon 11 Jun 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike (1)   tts says Even worse, the JOBS Act, incredibly, will allow executives to give "pre-prospectus" presentations to investors using PowerPoint and other tools in which they will not be held liable for misrepresentations. These firms will still be obligated to submit prospectuses before their IPOs, and they'll still be held liable for what's in those. But it'll be up to the investor to check and make sure that the prospectus matches the "pre-presentation." The JOBS Act also loosens a whole range of other reporting requirements, and expands stock investment beyond "accredited investors," giving official sanction to the internet-based fundraising activity known as "crowdfunding." Have a read... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulation_D_(SEC)

24. thomas.wong1986 Follow Befriend 16 threads 4,426 comments

    26   3:48pm Mon 11 Jun 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike (2)   tts says The JOBS act exempts new IPO's from most regs, including SOX for up to 5 years. It also greatly expands "fundraising" opportunities by allowing uneducated avg. Joe 6 Packs to "invest" money into them. All based on info. generated by the very same IPO none of which they can be held accountable for and none of which is subject to any sort of 3rd party oversight. again SOX isnt an issue.. its common sense! if your a president of a small business, dont you review, or hire staff to review the financial activity of your business. Dont you segregate the duties of recording journals, custody of cash/checks/assets, and authorization/approval of contracts/payments. Dont you have written process and procedures on all of this.. its not rocket science.. it very easy! Internal Control over Financial Statements has been around for a long time. http://www.bizmanualz.com/?gclid=CNyemY-ix7ACFQF6hwodEElIYA Joe six pack isnt going to have $5M to cough up for a start up. Nor will he be willing to take a gamble of losing all it !

25. thomas.wong1986 Follow Befriend 16 threads 4,426 comments

    27   3:52pm Mon 11 Jun 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike (1)   Go build a plant in Silicon Valley of any other parts of California... Why else, have we lost so many mfg in SV alone ? http://pressheretv.com/?p=2710 Like the idea of chemicals and acids being used here ? But thats what you need to create stuff! What does it take to make semiconductors.

26. bob2356 Follow Befriend 3 threads 2,564 comments

    28   4:01pm Mon 11 Jun 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike (1)   Honest Abe says bdrasin, don't be a lazy liberal like the rest of your kind, look it up yourself. Sorry but true. I'm not lazy or liberal and I don't like Obama. But I can't find any evidence that regulation or the cost of regulation is going up any faster than it ever did. If you truly KNOW that this is not true, as opposed to FEELING it because your ideology requires it, or BELIEVING it because rush/glen/amradio says so, then you should have no trouble whatsoever substantiating it. You obviously must have read and analyzed the documents the provided this knowledge so producing them should be at best a few keystrokes. I have always believed the classic shrek you look it up defense actually translated to I'm talking out my ass. Sorry but true. Please feel free to prove me wrong in this case.

27. HEY YOU Follow Befriend (4) 352 threads 965 comments

    29   4:05pm Mon 11 Jun 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike (1)   Glass- Steagall's gone & that worked out great & then McCain voted for TBTF.

28. Honest Abe Follow Befriend (41) 91 threads 1,806 comments

    30   6:35am Tue 12 Jun 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike (1)   Bob2468, seriously. If you can't find any evidence that government regulations are wasting billions of dollars and billions of man hours to comply with, you're simply not looking. Or you support those policies. Or you don't care. Or you're in denial, which is willful and deliberate ignorance. End of line.

29. bdrasin Follow Befriend 6 threads 490 comments Alameda, CA

    31   7:16am Tue 12 Jun 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Good grief. An assertion that evidence exists is not the same thing as providing evidence. I'm done here unless someone really has some facts they want to discuss.

30. Honest Abe Follow Befriend (41) 91 threads 1,806 comments

    32   12:36pm Tue 12 Jun 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike (1)   Its simply a lack of personal responsibility, that's all. Why would a self-actualized adult rely on someone else to do something they can do for themselves? MOMMY.

31. bob2356 Follow Befriend 3 threads 2,564 comments

    33   12:50pm Tue 12 Jun 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike (1)   Honest Abe says Bob2468, seriously. If you can't find any evidence that government regulations are wasting billions of dollars and billions of man hours to comply with, you're simply not looking. Or you support those policies. Or you don't care. Or you're in denial, which is willful and deliberate ignorance. End of line. What I I can't find is any evidence supporting your statement that there has been a "tsunami" (your words) of new regulations under Obama. I keep asking you to provide any shred of evidence of this. Is english your first language or I need to word my request in a different language so it is more clearly understood? Or you could just give up and admit that Obama (who I don't even like) is no worse of better than Bush II, Clinton, Bush I, or Reagan for adding regulations and regulatory expenses. Na, why bother to look up facts when you can just listen to someone tell you what to think. Absolutely nothing I wrote concerns my opinions about the desirability of the current level of government regulations so whether I support (I don't), care, am n denial, or willful and deliberate ignorance is totally irrelevant.

32. tatupu70 Follow Befriend (3) 15 threads 5,718 comments

    34   1:04pm Tue 12 Jun 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike (1)   thomas.wong1986 says Go build a plant in Silicon Valley of any other parts of California... Why else, have we lost so many mfg in SV alone ? You think it's because of regulations about which chemicals can be used?? Are you kidding me?

33. Honest Abe Follow Befriend (41) 91 threads 1,806 comments

    35   2:35pm Tue 12 Jun 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike (2)   Bob - google it yourself and see what you find - its that easy. Abe.

34. bob2356 Follow Befriend 3 threads 2,564 comments

    36   1:29am Wed 13 Jun 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (2)   Dislike (1)   Honest Abe says Bob - google it yourself and see what you find - its that easy. Abe. It's that easy. Then it's obviously that easy to give it to me. I can't find it. Where is the tsunami of new regulations? Simple request repeated again and again. Where's the beef?

35. ArtimusMaxtor Follow Befriend (3) 803 comments

    37   4:06am Wed 13 Jun 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   His names Hussien Obama, Hussien Obama, Hussien Obama. Ah der yep George what does dat mean ah George dat der Hussien Obama what does dat mean George. Tell, tell me about the rabbits again George yea the rabbits George tell about the rabbits just one more time will you George please. I want to go back to da school George so's I can learn how to stack popcorn boxes at that store George. So I can stack them real high George gee them are a lot of popcorn boxes isn't they George? Then you can look at the big stack of popcorn boxes I made George. That the the there would be nice wouldn't it George?

36. Paralithodes Follow Befriend 1 threads 530 comments

    38   6:59am Wed 13 Jun 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike (2)   rooemoore says It actually is pro business as it forces homeowners to spend more money during renovations. Using this logic, then pretty much all regulation is "pro-business" as long as the costs can be passed to the consumer. What you are missing here is: 1. The requirement for certification for lead paint remediation means that small businesses, including any independent contractors or handyman businesses of any size must take the time away from actually running their business to take the training and get certified, etc. For a very small business, even one day away can make a difference. 2. The increased cost for homeowners of older houses (even if there actually is no lead paint) may simply make many of them put off doing remodeling projects in the first place. I'll bet you one thing, though... I bet that new home builders were in absolutely full support of this regulation. Perhaps we should follow along with additional "pro-business" regulation, since apparently EPA regulation is designed to be pro-business: Anyone who gets service on a car that is older than X years must get the emissions tested every time. Anyone who gets a replacement HVAC in their home (for any reason) must have a full energy audit and if the attic is not at R-60, must have have loose fill cellulose insulation blown into their attic up to R-60. Separately, There is existing FDA regulation requiring that manufacturers of medical devices must pay a ~$2000 fee each year? What is $2000 to a big medical manufaturer? barely loose change. What is it to a small company just breaking even or trying to get a living-level profit? Is it pro-business?

37. bob2356 Follow Befriend 3 threads 2,564 comments

    39   7:58am Wed 13 Jun 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (3)   Dislike (1)   Honest Abe says http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/new-report-cites-regulatory-tsunami-under-obama Whine, whine, whine, Poor bob 1234 says: "MOMMY, I can't find it by myself, find it for me". OK bob, and this is the LAST TIME I'm going to do anything you can clearly do for yourself. Liberal tactic - "prove it" Well lazy boy, look it up yourself. Unless you're mentally incapable, which seems to be the case with you and your kind. Wonderful, a blog by the chief political correspondent of the washington examiner (a freebe giveaway paper distributed at subway stations in DC since 2006) about a report produced by http://republicans.oversight.house.gov, now that's certainly unbiased highly respected set of resources if I've ever seen one. Where do you dig this stuff up, is there a obama haters tin hat network? You are incorrect, you do have to do this for me, I really couldn't find things this obscure. How about this bloomberg business week piece (national distribution since 1929) quoting the GAO ( the non partison government agency in charge of producing ACCURATE numbers). http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-10-25/obama-wrote-5-fewer-rules-than-bush-while-costing-business.html Says that Obama's first term isn't any worse than Bush and is actually better than Reagan's. I realize that you are totally unfamiliar with the genre, but this article is an example of actual reporting. It gives the facts, includes dissenting opinions, and makes a reasonable summary. I realize in your world things like source, veracity, integrity, research, or even simple common sense don't matter, just finding someone that writes something that conforms to your very warped world view is all you desire. Me and my kind, which would be middle of the road or slightly to the right (aka screaming fag, pinko, commie, liberal, baby killing, anti american, tree hugging, whale watcher to abe who has to look left to find adolf hitler) are perfectly mentally capable of looking up a variety of reasonable sources written by reasonable people who have differing opinions then deciding where we stand on an issue. I am not at all mentally capable of reading or listening to total idiocy from the extreme wacko fringes and accepting it as the guiding light of my life.

38. marcus Follow Befriend (5) 171 threads 5,211 comments

    40   6:58pm Wed 13 Jun 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike (1)   bob2356 says I am not at all mentally capable of reading or listening to total idiocy from the extreme wacko fringes and accepting it as the guiding light of my life. haha. Then I reckon you and Abe (also you and Ruki (aka Shrek)) just won't ever be simpatico. What a shame.

39. marcus Follow Befriend (5) 171 threads 5,211 comments

    41   7:06pm Wed 13 Jun 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike (1)   I have heard the assertion several times from "conservative" commentators or Republican politicians (aka lapdogs for the 1%ers), about Obama and his regulations, and that what is stifling the economy is the uncertainty brought about by this regulatory environment. I think it's mostly bs. The only way I see that they might have a point is regarding Obama care, that is that it can cause uncertainty about future health care costs, especially considering the propaganda. But ultimately it's just an excuse. Corporate profits are at record highs. I wish they would redo Obama care and go for "single payer" which is a no brainer really. Unfortunately we're too corrupt for that. Ironic isn't it, that republicans current plan for health care is to go back to how it was, with all of the uninsured either getting care at the emergency room (expensive) or waiting until their health issues blow up and are far more costly.

40. Honest Abe Follow Befriend (41) 91 threads 1,806 comments

    42   7:40am Tue 26 Jun 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike (3)   http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/new-report-cites-regulatory-tsunami-under-obama Whine, whine, whine, Poor bob 1234 says: "MOMMY, I can't find it by myself, find it for me". OK bob, and this is the LAST TIME I'm going to do anything you can clearly do for yourself. Liberal tactic - "prove it" Well lazy boy, look it up yourself. Unless you're mentally incapable, which seems to be the case with you and your kind.

« First     « Previous comments