Nothing Has Changed

[Bungalow Bill]

Maybe she could have taken a cue from Bush I's playbook, Message: These are CIA talking
points. She gave the answer that at the time represented what the government thought
had happened, which turned out to be incomplete. She also mentioned that an FBI
investigation was under way and that would provide more information on what happened.
In any case, she was not lying, which was the wingnut theme for many weeks in their
attempt to make the Benghazi attack into a political liability for Obama.

[Supsalemgr]

Obama has been quite active with changes (This is for O Really) as well). I have been disparaged about regulations on this board as if the current administration has not governed by regulation. Well here is proof.

http://www.regulations.gov/#!home

Over the past 90 days there have been 5,894 new federal regulations. One does not have to lead if they choose to dictate.

[Stinger]

Obama has been quite active with changes (This is for O Really) as well). I have been disparaged about regulations on this board as if the current administration has not governed by regulation. Well here is proof.

http://www.regulations.gov/#!home

Over the past 90 days there have been 5,894 new federal regulations. One does not have to lead if they choose to dictate.

Over the past 90 days, there have been 5,894 new federal regulations proposed.

Hot Air only has regulations going up 7.4% under Obama -- nowhere near supporting a claim of ruling by regulation ... unless Bush did it too. And Hot Air could only achieve that figure by using the tired old con trick of blaming Obama for a bunch of Bush regulations passed at the last minute. LINK

Unless you have proof that there has been a significant increase in federal regulations during the Obama administration, you're just making ignorant and wrong assumptions . . . again.

[Supsalemgr]

Just pointing out the intent.

[Stinger]

Just pointing out the intent.

You haven't pointed out anything. You tried to make a claim that Obama was being a dictator because federal agencies make regulations.

You failed. You have no supporting evidence. The evidence that there is doesn't support you.

SSDD.

[Supsalemgr]

Stinger continues in his denial mode. Stick with it. He just doesn't like Obama being exposed for what he is.

[Wneglia]

Obama has been quite active with changes (This is for O Really) as well). I have been disparaged about regulations on this board as if the current administration has not governed by regulation. Well here is proof.

http://www.regulations.gov/#!home

Over the past 90 days there have been 5,894 new federal regulations. One does not have to lead if they choose to dictate.

Over the past 90 days, there have been 5,894 new federal regulations proposed.

Hot Air only has regulations going up 7.4% under Obama -- nowhere near supporting a claim of ruling by regulation ... unless Bush did it too. And Hot Air could only achieve that figure by using the tired old con trick of blaming Obama for a bunch of Bush regulations passed at the last minute. LINK

Unless you have proof that there has been a significant increase in federal regulations during the Obama administration, you're just making ignorant and wrong assumptions . . . again.

The 7.4% increase is based upon the number of additional pages in the Federal Code of Regulation, not the number of new regulations.

There has been a significant increase in both the number of major regulations, and the cost associated with them under Obama. Link

[O Really]

See, that's the problem with Super-S's side - they see any regulation as "bad" and all regulations equal to each other in significance. And does anybody know how these "cost" figures are calculated? Cost to whom? Companies? Taxpayers? I'm perfectly happy to discuss the efficacy of any given regulation or set of regulations, including whether it's needed, well-written, worthless, whatever. But just saying a bunch of regulations are proposed and claiming that as something inherently awful is just bullshit.

[neoplacebo]

It appears my post got the libs really going tonight. O Really I am not going to play your game. How many times do I have to post it is not my or the GOP's call?

Just for fun, I will say John Bolton for SOS and Oliver North for SOD. See how non serious those are in your world? Think they would fit in with Obama, Holder and Jarrett?

North for Secretary of Defense? Brilliant. How about we get his former window dressing Fawn Hall as Deputy?

[Crock Hunter]

Plus, tons of regulations are proposed by industry itself in order to promote safety, professionalism, economy, quality, etc. and thus consumer confidence, or to otherwise boost its bottom line and/or to limit shady operators.

e.g. ISO 9000 . . . Six Sigma . . . .

of course there's nothing wrong with government working to insure that someone's effluence doesn't pollute my corner of the world.. in fact among other things.. I expect government to do just that.. .

[neoplacebo]

Plus, tons of regulations are proposed by industry itself in order to promote safety, professionalism, economy, quality, etc. and thus consumer confidence, or to otherwise boost its bottom line and/or to limit shady operators.

I bet there's more than a few who wish that the compounding company in MA had been regulated with, uh, some type of regulation.

[Reality]

"What?" No counter attack on Wneglia's post?

[O Really]

Any of these appeal to you, Super-S?

White House Chief of Staff Jack Lew is a likely candidate for the Treasury and former Sen. Chuck Hagel, a moderate Republican, is under consideration for secretary of defense, administration insiders told Politico.

UN Ambassador Susan Rice, a favorite to succeed Clinton as Secretary of State, would likely face hurdles in the Senate confirmation process, noted the AP, which means she could end up as Obama's national security adviser instead.

The AP said other possible candidates for Clinton's job include Tom Donilon, the current national security advisor, Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman John Kerry, former Republican presidential candidate and Obama's ambassador to China Jon Huntsman, and William Burns.

[Reality]

Yep, nothing's changed.

"I am not going to budge,"

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/1 ... d%3D234267

Still no counter attack on Wng's post except a feeble attempt to twist by the infamous twister.

[O Really]

"What?" No counter attack on Wneglia's post?

What's to attack? Even making the unlikely assumption that the article is true and accurate, it didn't make any argument against any particular regulation except it cost something and was a regulation. Of the ones enumerated, there was no detail. The titles looked good, though.

From Doc's article...
The 32 regulations that increased regulatory burdens adopted by federal agencies in 2011 covered a broad range of activity, including energy standards for fluorescent ballasts, refrigerators, freezers, clothes dryers, and air conditioners; testing and labeling requirements for toys; limits on automotive emissions of “greenhouse gases”; employer requirements for posting federal labor rules; more explicit warnings for cigarette packaging; health plan eligibility standards under Obama’s health care legislation; expanded employment requirements for the disabled; and higher minimum wages for foreign workers.

The largest proportion of regulations by far stemmed from the 2010 Dodd–Frank financial-regulation statute, which was responsible for 12 major rules increasing burdens in 2011, including six from the Securities and Exchange Commission, five from the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, and one from the Federal Reserve. Hundreds more Dodd–Frank rules remain to be written.

The most expensive regulation of 2011 was imposed by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), which issued a total of five major regulations at a cost of more than $4 billion annually. Among the new regulations are three that impose stricter limits on industrial and commercial boilers and incinerators, at a total cost of $2.6 billion annually for compliance and $5.8 billion for one-time implementation costs.

[O Really]

I would welcome informed commentary from Reality, Super-S, et.al. regarding the content of the regulations in Doc's article, and promise to respond courteously.

[Stinger]

Obama has been quite active with changes (This is for O Really) as well). I have been disparaged about regulations on this board as if the current administration has not governed by regulation. Well here is proof.

http://www.regulations.gov/#!home

Over the past 90 days there have been 5,894 new federal regulations. One does not have to lead if they choose to dictate.

Over the past 90 days, there have been 5,894 new federal regulations proposed.

Hot Air only has regulations going up 7.4% under Obama -- nowhere near supporting a claim of ruling by regulation ... unless Bush did it too. And Hot Air could only achieve that figure by using the tired old con trick of blaming Obama for a bunch of Bush regulations passed at the last minute. LINK

Unless you have proof that there has been a significant increase in federal regulations during the Obama administration, you're just making ignorant and wrong assumptions . . . again.

The 7.4% increase is based upon the number of additional pages in the Federal Code of Regulation, not the number of new regulations.

There has been a significant increase in both the number of major regulations, and the cost associated with them under Obama. Link

No one was talking about major regulations or costs associated with them. The "major regulations" you're referring to were mainly due to passed legislation -- Affordable Health Care and Dodd-Frank.

From your source:

The total number of rulemaking proceedings during the first three years of the Obama Administration (10,215) is slightly less than the total undertaken during the first three years of the Bush Administration (10,674).

Soupy was trying to claim that Obama is "dictating" his will through legislation. Nothing shows that Obama "dictates" his will any more than Bush did. The evidence suggests the opposite.

Regulations that necessarily arise from passed egislation are not "dictating" by regulation.

[Stinger]

...The AP said other possible candidates for Clinton's job include Tom Donilon, the current national security advisor, Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman John Kerry, former Republican presidential candidate and Obama's ambassador to China Jon Huntsman, and William Burns.

I know you asked Supsalemgr, but -

Tom Donilon - Might be okay.
John Kerry - Has the credentials and experience, would be a political firestorm.
I mentioned earlier that appointing Kerry would be giving a senate seat to Scott Brown. Maybe not a good idea.
Jon Huntsman - Yes.
William Burns - Maybe, wanna learn more.

[Reality]

Keep it up Barry. Your "my way or the highway" philosophy isn't working.

"The Street was looking for him to say some magic buzzwords about avoiding the 'fiscal cliff,' about cooperation," said Sal Arnuk of Themis trading, a New Jersey brokerage. Instead, Arnuk said, the remarks were "unyielding."

http://www.dailyfinance.com/2012/11/14/ ... d%3D234664

[Reality]

Don't worry Barry, Vred still loves you.

U.S. Stocks Tumble To Lower Level Since Late July

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/1 ... -east_n_21