Barack Obama

[CCC]

I remember during Iraq War II I would hear Tony Blair say something, and it would sound beautiful, then I would hear Bush II say the EXACT SAME THING and it would sound like horseshit!!! A reasonable person might say I was guilty of being unfairly prejudiced against Bush, until a reasonable person figured out Bush was full of shit!!! While he read his prepared speeches, written by highly paid academic speechwriters, truckloads of cash ran nightly from the pockets of hard working Americans straight to the vaults of the Military Industrial Complex. So while Bush and Cheney were definately HORRID leaders, they sure were smooth businessmen!!!
Bush and Obama are servants to the exact same Constitution. Word for Word. You can stand poised to pounce on everything Obama says if you want to, but in seven years, the fruits of his actions will be evident. The truckloads of cash will be running all night, but in the opposite direction. Back to the people who work for a living. Hey, Obama, show 'em what you can do! You Watch!!!

WOW You are wacked out !!!! 7 YEARS? No way in the world will he be pres for 7 years. He'll be lucky to finish 1. There's truck loads of cash traveling every night right from the treasury printing presses to every Democrat whore willing to take it.

[TracyCoxx]

Tracy Darling, fly over to Germany for a couple weeks (if you can afford it) The Seniors there get two free weeks in Health Spas. The minimum wage is like twenty bucks an hour or something.

<link (http://www.working-in-germany.com/minimum-wage-germany-0179.html)>
In the last 10 years, according to a survey by the Institut Arbeit und Qualifikation, the percentage of low-income earners in Germany has increased from 15 to 22 %. That is around 6.5 millions of employees. That puts Germany on a top rank within Europe.

That unpleasant development, according to some experts, is fostered by the German legislation?s dropping of the compulsory minimum wage.
...
A minimum wage is supposed to guarantee employees a secure livelihood. This would mean that a full time worker no longer needs compensative government support, but instead can live on their earned money. What is being discussed is a minimum 1 hour?s wage of 5.00 to 8.00 Euros.
That's $7 - $11.50USD, but currently there is no required minimum wage there. Thanks for playing. Try again.

During WWII, we spent ONE THIRD of our gross national product on the development of the Atom Bomb. ONE THIRD! While at War!More like 1/10. It cost $2 billion, or $22 billion in today's dollars. Not all that much to bring an early end to WWII and save the lives of about 1 million Americans that would have died in an invasion of Japan than never had to happen. I see I'm going to have to double check all your facts for you.

How much did Germany's genocide of the Jews cost? Hmmm, maybe not that much since the Germans are efficient engineers and reused some body parts of the Jews for manufacturing of other goods. Sorry, but you did bring up Germany and WWII lol.

What are we going to have to pay back from the Bush years? How about that trillion we still owe China so we wouldn't have to raise taxes!Awww, you didn't keep BO's one month $2.7 trillion spending spree in mind as you talked about Bush's overspending. Remember that's 2.5 times what Bush & congress overspent during his 8 years. See, now we're all still wondering how the money will be flowing back to hard working Americans since BO is doing so much WORSE than Bush.

[jimnaseum]

Man, you delete my post for crude language on a tranny-porn site?

[smc]

Man, you delete my post for crude language on a tranny-porn site?

This post is my personal opinion as a general Forum member, and does not necessarily reflect the views of any other Moderator.

It is unfortunate that jimnaseum chose to post this rather than respond to the PM he received. The moderators are considering whether there should be a new rule for the Forum regarding the use of certain terms that go beyond what here is called "crude language." Of course, people on the Forum use -- and are free to use -- all sorts of terms of a sexual nature that may be considered "crude" in so-called "polite society." But there is another class of language, which includes specific words that are widely considered racist or anti-gay.

Forum Rule #3 states, in part: "We strive to make this a friendly place." It cannot be a friendly place if the use of particular terms is allowed, in my opinion.

This is not about being politically correct. Were PC the motivation, imagine the issues we'd be dealing with simply over the use of terms to describe various states of transgenderism!

[TracyCoxx]

Today's uproar in Washington is about Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's comments about Obama that came out in a book called Game Change coming out this week.

He [Reid] was wowed by Obama's oratorical gifts and believed that the country was ready to embrace a black presidential candidate, especially one such as Obama -- a 'light-skinned' African American 'with no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one,'

Reid is now undergoing all kinds of damage control today and the talk shows are all buzzing about it. He says "I deeply regret using such a poor choice of words. I sincerely apologize for offending any and all Americans, especially African-Americans for my improper comments." Michael Steel is of course calling for Reid's resignation. He does correctly bring up the hypocrisy, but I think comes up with the wrong conclusion.

Why? I don't get the problem, and I'm not just trying to be funny. Isn't he just stating a fact? The American public obviously was ready to embrace a black candidate, and I think he's correct in saying that Americans were more ready to accept a 'light-skinned' African American 'with no Negro dialect. And I don't think it's a secret that Obama brought out some of his ebonics when speaking to a black audience.

We're all adults here. Voters are technically adults. The people in the government are adults. Can't someone say what's on their mind, especially if it's fact without all the feigned outrage? American's attitude of freedom of speech was summed up with the quote "I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it." I'm sad to say this kind of freedom of speech is long dead, thanks to political correct bullshit.

[randolph]

Today's uproar in Washington is about Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's comments about Obama that came out in a book called Game Change coming out this week.



Reid is now undergoing all kinds of damage control today and the talk shows are all buzzing about it. He says "I deeply regret using such a poor choice of words. I sincerely apologize for offending any and all Americans, especially African-Americans for my improper comments." Michael Steel is of course calling for Reid's resignation. He does correctly bring up the hypocrisy, but I think comes up with the wrong conclusion.

Why? I don't get the problem, and I'm not just trying to be funny. Isn't he just stating a fact? The American public obviously was ready to embrace a black candidate, and I think he's correct in saying that Americans were more ready to accept a 'light-skinned' African American 'with no Negro dialect. And I don't think it's a secret that Obama brought out some of his ebonics when speaking to a black audience.

We're all adults here. Voters are technically adults. The people in the government are adults. Can't someone say what's on their mind, especially if it's fact without all the feigned outrage? American's attitude of freedom of speech was summed up with the quote "I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it." I'm sad to say this kind of freedom of speech is long dead, thanks to political correct bullshit.

Right on! This media "oh my" show is totaly ridiculous. :frown:

[TracyCoxx]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=662R2awSwPQ

[randolph]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=662R2awSwPQ

Yes, I viewed the video and yes the concerns are real. However, it is full of distorted rhetoric lies and nonsense. The Democrats are heading for a catastrophe next election. A return of Republicans? They are no more competent than the Democrats. California has failed and the Federal government is very close. So, what do we have to look forward to? Failed governments often lead to Fascism, is it just around the corner? Immersed in perpetual war the country would eventually go the way of all fascist countries. Our beautiful prosperous country is on the verge. :broken:

[TracyCoxx]

Yes, I viewed the video and yes the concerns are real. However, it is full of distorted rhetoric lies and nonsense. The Democrats are heading for a catastrophe next election. A return of Republicans? They are no more competent than the Democrats. California has failed and the Federal government is very close. So, what do we have to look forward to? Failed governments often lead to Fascism, is it just around the corner? Immersed in perpetual war the country would eventually go the way of all fascist countries. Our beautiful prosperous country is on the verge. :broken:

Failed governments can lead to anything, depending on why it failed and what's left over. Republicans have not given this country perpetual war. If you're whining that we were engaged in war after the 9/11 attacks I would tell you to get real. That is the obvious result after an attack like 9/11. If Bill Clinton was in office, we'd have the same war. I'd hate to see how BO would have handled it though. Hopefully we don't have to find out. Republicans are more likely to stand their ground rather than going around groveling, kissing hands and apologizing for anything and everything. This is a good thing. If a country shows weakness, other countries will be happy to trample over you. Now I am not advocating going to extremes and becoming a militaristic fascist state. There are ways to stand your ground via the moral highground, economically, diplomatically, and yes, a big stick (wasn't that a democrat who said that?).

I hope the republicans return to power after BO's BS. Competent or not they will be much better. I'm hoping for competence though because it can be a lot better, and this country can be put on the right track. What we need are real conservatives, not RINOS. We need replublicans who aren't afraid to stand their ground when their opposition is a black person. We need republicans who will deal with the illegal immigration problem - and not by making them US citizens. And among these awesome republicans, we need a leader who can connect with the American people. The problem is, I don't see those qualities in the republicans we have now. Maybe the teabaggers will find some, I don't know. But even a RINO is better than the dems we have now - a fact that would have saved this country if voters realized that last election.

BTW, the so called liberals in power now, are not really liberals. Liberal is closer to libertarian. The "liberals" we have now are the progressives (from the early 1900s) that have hijacked the party.

[randolph]

Hey Tracy, the Teabaggers are having a conference!

From Washington Monthly;

THE POWER OF STRANGE PEOPLE IN A LARGE GROUP.... After a series of bizarre, and often offensive, rallies in D.C., the Teabaggers are apparently going to get together in about a month for a convention.

The Tea Party Nation is gearing up for its first ever convention, to be held at the famed Opryland Hotel in Nashville next month. It's a confab designed to help the tea parties from across the country organize, with an agenda that sounds a lot like an attempt to form an official third party.

Organizers ask for local groups to "select their best to meet with their peers from across the nation" and who "have the most desire to move this process of organizing to the next level."

They'll have a workshop about "the importance of becoming Precinct Committee Chairs."

"Please join us, make and form strong bonds, network, and make plans for action. We are doing what we could not do alone, to preserve that which we value," organizers write.

The three-day event scheduled for the first weekend in February is already rubbing some conservative activists the wrong way -- the Tea Party Nation gathering is charging $549 per person. That's significantly more expensive than tickets to the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) -- traditionally the biggest right-wing event of the year -- which will be held two weeks later just outside D.C.

Of course, one explanation for the steep costs is Sarah Palin -- the former half-term governor will reportedly receive as much as $100,000 to speak to Tea Party Nation, while CPAC does not pay any of its speakers. (Palin was invited to appear at CPAC, but declined, perhaps because there was no money in it.)

And speaking of Palin, the guest list for Tea Party Nation is what drives home just how radical a group we're talking about here.

In addition to Palin, attendees will hear from, among others:

* World Net Daily's Joseph Farah

* Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.)

* Former Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore

* Religious right leader Rick Scarborough

This is not a group of mainstream Americans. Farah's conspiracy-driven website has taken the lead in peddling Birther nonsense; Bachmann is mad as a hatter; Moore is a theocrat who doesn't believe the Bill of Rights applies to the states and was removed from office for ignoring federal court orders he didn't like; and Scarborough is a radical preacher best known for being a Jerry Falwell acolyte, writing a book called Liberalism Kills Kids, and trying to establish his own mini-theocracy in Texas several years ago.

Sounds like a bunch of real winners.
So would you like these characters running the country?:eek:

[The Conquistador]

California has failed and the Federal government is very close. So, what do we have to look forward to? Failed governments often lead to Fascism, is it just around the corner? Immersed in perpetual war the country would eventually go the way of all fascist countries. Our beautiful prosperous country is on the verge. :broken:

America will disappear without a sound. Far too long the mentality of "Let someone else do it" and the notion of avoiding conflict have created a weak society that has become dependent on others rather than self sufficient. Our laziness and ungrateful attitudes as a whole is why Americans have thrown away their legacy and liberties so that they can take the easy way out in damn near every aspect of their lives.

[The Conquistador]

5 Myths About The Great Depression.


http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122576077569495545.html

[TracyCoxx]

Sounds like a bunch of real winners.
So would you like these characters running the country?:eek:
Sarah Palin, and Rick Scarborough... Hell no. Don't really know about the others. But sounds like the republicans that are driving the teabaggers to want to create their own party.

btw, the teabaggers take offense to the term teabaggers. I think they should embrace it. Like the yankees did. That was a derogatory term from the brits, but the yankees embraced it and it became a source of pride.

[randolph]

Sarah Palin, and Rick Scarborough... Hell no. Don't really know about the others. But sounds like the republicans that are driving the teabaggers to want to create their own party.

btw, the teabaggers take offense to the term teabaggers. I think they should embrace it. Like the yankees did. That was a derogatory term from the brits, but the yankees embraced it and it became a source of pride.

In order to have some balance in this country, we need a "good" Republican party. The likes of Ike, Earl warren and even Nixon(sort of) were good traditional Republicans. There adjenda was not to destroy the "new deal" but to make it better. Warren's "pay as you go" policy when he was governor of California was the best of times for the state. Ike's warning about the military/industrial complex are even more true today. Nixon's support of the EPA was a breakthrough policy.
Nowadays its who can be Californicated next. :coupling:
Its our country, we need to take it back.;)

[TracyCoxx]

Oh lovely. Our wonderful president has exempted union workers from paying tax for national health care. The rest of us will take up their share. You gotta hand it to him. He always remembers those who put him in office.

[randolph]

Oh lovely. Our wonderful president has exempted union workers from paying tax for national health care. The rest of us will take up their share. You gotta hand it to him. He always remembers those who put him in office.

The fate of politicians is to pander to their base. Nothing new there. :frown:

[randolph]

enough is enough!

NEW YORK (The Borowitz Report) - In the wake of his comments about the earthquake in Haiti, televangelist Pat Robertson has become a "public relations nightmare" and a "gynormous embarrassment to me, personally," God said today.

In a rare press conference at the Grand Hyatt in New York City, the usually reclusive Almighty said that He was taking the unusual step of airing His feelings in public because "enough is enough."

"I pray that his TV show would just go away, but of course, when you're me there's no one to pray to," God said, to the laughter of the packed room of reporters.

While God held out no hope that Rev. Robertson's "700 Club" would be cancelled any time soon, He did say, somewhat ruefully, "If Pat Robertson were on NBC he'd be replaced by Jay Leno by now.".

[randolph]

From LA Times.

CNN's determination to stick with the news stands in stark contrast to its competitors, particularly Fox News, that in prime time have increasingly been committed to building their brands with political commentary over straight reporting.

When critics accuse Fox of being a tool of the conservative political movement, the company's executives counter that they deliver serious news during much of the day.

But its prime-time headliners expose the values of the entire operation, and this week they've given abysmally short shrift to the biggest crisis in the world.

Why dwell on one of our closest hemispheric neighbors in its hour of dire need, when -- like both Sean Hannity and Glenn Beck -- you can conduct prolonged, frothy promotional interviews with Fox's newest contributor, Sarah Palin?

Why focus on all that misery, if, like Hannity on Wednesday, you can engage conservative virago Michelle Malkin in a soaring conversation about the Obama administration's "culture of corruption."

Bill O'Reilly played his no-Haiti card too, managing a gripping discussion Wednesday with Bo Derek about the threat to the West's wild horses. Not to mention those whales being hunted by the Japanese in the Southern Ocean.

Pathetic :(

[randolph]

Beyond stupid!

by Mark Silva, Washington tribune

Maybe radio's Rush Limbaugh was trying to provide the Rev. Pat Robertson with a little cover, when he suggested on-air that people don't need to contribute money to Haitian earthquake relief.

It was Robertson who first suggested that the people of Haiti are paying for "a pact with the devil'' made centuries ago.

But it was Limbaugh -- at a time when the president is asking Americans to contribute money to earthquake relief and directing them to the White House Website to learn where they can help, as the State Department reports more than $3 million in $10 donations for the Red Cross through its text-messaging network -- who told a caller that all helping out will do is get someone on Obama's campaign email list.

"We've already donated to Haiti,'' Limbaugh told the caller on his radio show (here it below) "It's called the U.S. income tax."

President Barack Obama today announced $100 million in direct aid to Haiti for earthquake relief.

And the president's press secretary, who already had commented on the ''stupid'' remarks that Robertson had made, was asked what he has to say about Limbaugh saying Americans shouldn't donate money.

"Again, I think in times of great crisis there are always people that say really stupid things,'' said Robert Gibbs, the press secretary, at today's press briefing.

"I don't know how anybody could sit where he does, having enjoyed the success that he has, and not feel some measure of sorrow for what has happened in Haiti. I think to use the power of your pulpit to try to convince those not to help their brothers and sisters is sad. My sense is that most people, though, because they understand we're part of an amazing world, won't listen, and instead will seek to help those that they know, because through no fault of their own, have suffered an unspeakable tragedy.''


Robertson is insane and Limbaugh is the biggest asshole in the world.:censored:

[randolph]

From Associated News

A Look at Some of the More "ugly" Quotes from the "voice" of the Republican Party
With the recent near-collapse of free-market capitalism and the departure of a very unpopular president, the GOP has been struggling the last few weeks to find relevancy and a leader. After CNN host, D.L. Hughley referred to Rush Limbaugh as that
leader, RNC Chair Michael Steele, decried that idea and called Rush merely and "entertainer" and referred to his show as "incendiary" and "ugly." Comments like these did not go unnoticed by Rush Limbaugh, and with 20 million listeners it's best not to make him angry if you're Michael Steele. As a consequence, Michael Steele apologized, most like in fear of alienating Rush's conservative listeners in such a doubtful time for the GOP. But why apologize when it's clear he was right? Let's take a look at some of the more "incendiary" and "ugly" comments made by Rush Limbaugh.

Let's start with the racist ones:

"Take that bone out of your nose and call me back." (to a female, African-American caller)

"They're 12 percent of the population. Who the hell cares?"

"You know who deserves a posthumous Medal of Honor? James Earl Ray [the confessed assassin of Martin Luther King]. We miss you, James. Godspeed."

"I mean, let's face it, we didn't have slavery in this country for over 100 years because it was a bad thing. Quite the opposite: slavery built the South. I'm not saying we should bring it back; I'm just saying it had its merits. For one thing, the streets were safer after dark."

Now, some misogynistic ones:

"Feminism was established to allow unattractive women easier access to the mainstream."

"She comes to me when she wants to be fed. And after I feed her -- guess what -- she's off to wherever she wants to be in the house, until the next time she gets hungry. She's smart enough to know she can't feed herself. She's actually a very smart cat. She gets loved. She gets adoration. She gets petted. She gets fed. And she doesn't have to do anything for it, which is why I say this cat's taught me more about women, than anything my whole life." --on his cat

This one is just ignorant and mean:


I wonder what he would have to say about transsexuals?

[CCC]

Try to remember this when thinking about the bashing of conservatives--they are the ones that are the owners of all these small companies that employ all the liberals that haven't found a job with the goverment or are on the dole. Those darm conservatives are also the ones that donate a shit load of money to all kinds of charities-not the democrat liberals-just check the record of your local democrat politicians-cheap bastards. Yeah Limbaugh can say some crazy things but most of it is really the truth. Alot of what he says is just sarcasim trying to make a point. And he does that well--by far the number 1 radio show. Now I have to sign off cause I have only worked 14 hours so far today in my own business--need to work more to provide for all the libs living off me. BYE

[TracyCoxx]

From LA Times.

Why focus on all that misery, if, like Hannity on Wednesday, you can engage conservative virago Michelle Malkin in a soaring conversation about the Obama administration's "culture of corruption."Pathetic :(You've seen Michelle Malkin right? What's the mystery?

[TracyCoxx]

Beyond stupid!

by Mark Silva, Washington tribune
Maybe radio's Rush Limbaugh was trying to provide the Rev. Pat Robertson with a little cover, when he suggested on-air that people don't need to contribute money to Haitian earthquake relief.

It was Robertson who first suggested that the people of Haiti are paying for "a pact with the devil'' made centuries ago.

But it was Limbaugh -- at a time when the president is asking Americans to contribute money to earthquake relief and directing them to the White House Website to learn where they can help, as the State Department reports more than $3 million in $10 donations for the Red Cross through its text-messaging network -- who told a caller that all helping out will do is get someone on Obama's campaign email list.

"We've already donated to Haiti,'' Limbaugh told the caller on his radio show (here it below) "It's called the U.S. income tax."


Robertson is insane and Limbaugh is the biggest asshole in the world.:censored:

Roberts is insane, no doubt. It's unbelievable that a civilized person in 2010 in the US would seriously say what he says.

But what Rush was saying is that if you want to help out Haiti, donate to them directly. And that BO has really made the choice to help them out for you by using your tax dollars to help them. So in effect we already are donating money to help them out.

I do support BO's aid to Haiti though. People donating on their own would not get naval ships to Haiti within days to help out.

[TracyCoxx]

From Associated News

A Look at Some of the More "ugly" Quotes from the "voice" of the Republican Party


I wonder what he would have to say about transsexuals?

Most of these quotes are urban legend. Snopes says for most of them there is no source. Rather than trying to dig up some obscure quote that Rush may or may not have said, or 2nd hand left-wing journalists versions of what Rush said, just listen to him. He's on every day, and usually says exactly what he says ;)

[TracyCoxx]

Now I have to sign off cause I have only worked 14 hours so far today in my own business--need to work more to provide for all the libs living off me. BYE

Score one for CCC. Well said. :respect:

[TracyCoxx]

When are those rich guys going to start pulling their weight and paying taxes?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TtTbdHytlAc

[CCC]

When are those rich guys going to start pulling their weight and paying taxes?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TtTbdHytlAc

And that is why Obama is coming to Boston tomorrow afternoon to help Coakley. They need to draw out the bottom dwellers. All the urban welfare people who have that protected pie. Now people don't pic on me for being racist-far far from it- BUT they also need to get the black vote, the mulato vote, the spanish vote, the asian vote, etc You see the race is made up of two white people and Oakley being lilly white, blond and with no lips is a stark contrast from the vast majority of Boston's city dwellers. Here's hoping there are enough independant voters that can see thru all this BS. We are talking about the 41st seat-the regime breaker-the Obama nightmare--they are pulling out all the stops.

Vicky Kennedy came out to beg for you to vote for "Teddy's seat"--"don't let all of his life's work go for nothing". Brown says it is "the peoples seat" it belongs to no individual. Enough thinkers started saying-hey that isn't Teddy's -it does belong to me-the people. NOW Vicky is saying "vote for Oakley for the peoples seat". They can't even pump independantly.

Brown beat the tar out of her in the debate so immediately after the show-before midnight-the Dems started all thier prepared dirty commercials. Brown is staying clean :).

Absentee voting is up 4-6 times what it was in the primaries. People covering themselves in case we get one of our bad new England N'oreasters.

Remember that little itty piece of pie-the one that the bottom 50% of tax payers that only pay 3%---yeah well the 3%'ers have 50% or more of the votes. That is what Obama is going after- the less educated- the dependers of the dole.

Here's hoping he fails at this like he failed with the Olympics.

[TracyCoxx]

Here's hoping he fails at this like he failed with the Olympics.
To Obama's Failures! :turnon:

[randolph]

From Washington Monthly

The president's 53% approval rating is up a few points from December, and his personal qualities still remain relatively strong -- 57% believe Obama understands the problems of people like them, and 63% consider him a strong leader. A 58% majority have a favorable view of the president personally. Notwithstanding the assumptions of Dowd, Gerson, and other Villagers, 55% approve of the president's handling of the terrorist threat, and 62% approve of his handling of the failed Christmas-day terror plot. Looks like the Cheneys' efforts to undermine the administration fell flat.

For the White House, that's the good news. The bad news is the public remains in a deeply sour mood, and has grown increasingly impatient. Obama's numbers have dropped below the 50% threshold on the economy and health care, and the number of Americans who believe the country is on the right track is lower than it's been since February. Ouch.

But in keeping with the year-long trend, Republicans are simply not the beneficiary (pdf) of public discontent. Only 24% of the public has confidence in congressional Republicans "to make the right decisions for the country's future." The number for congressional Democrats is at least a little better at 32%, while the president's number is nearly double that of the GOP at 47%.

What's more, "when it comes to assigning blame for the nation's economic woes, about twice as many fault the George W. Bush administration as do Obama's."

Most people haven't forgotten that the mess we are in was caused by the lax regulation during the Bush administration.

[The Conquistador]

Most people haven't forgotten that the mess we are in was caused by the lax regulation during the Bush administration.

While the Bush Administration did obviously nothing to help out the economic situation, alot of this stuff was set into motion way before he got into office. Also, Zero's spending of 2 trillion dollars while there is a massive deficit is counterproductive.

[randolph]

While the Bush Administration did obviously nothing to help out the economic situation, alot of this stuff was set into motion way before he got into office. Also, Zero's spending of 2 trillion dollars while there is a massive deficit is counterproductive.

Most people would agree that we had to save the big banks. If we didn't, full economic collapse would have made the great depression look like a minor recession. Of course, many "conservatives" seem to think economic collapse with millions of people starving and dying might be a good thing, that the rich would survive without all those workers. Well, that kind of BS didn't quite work out that way in the French revolution and it wouldn't be that way here, heads would roll.
Actually, the real rich are far smarter than the so called "conservatives". They knew they were at risk and so did Obama and Congress, that's why the government bailed them out.

[CCC]

Randolph-Randolph -Randolph------I really feel for you if you thing that your data is accurate. Dems and Republicans are both politicians wich means they are liars, crocks and thieves BUT seeing that is what we have to run the goverment we are stuck with picking hopefully the lesser of two evils. In the present case the biggest crooks by far are the Dems headed by the all mighty hologram known as Obama. There is a great revolution starting in the this country. Republicans have wonin bluse staes of Virginia and New Jersey. In upper state NY and independant came within a few percentage points of beating the combines dem-republican candidate. And now in Massachusetts- I know how to spell it whereas Coakley doesn't.

Yesterday in Hyannis--Teddy's home town-Scott Brown had thousands of people show up at a rally at Tommy Doyle's Pub and surrounding area. Today Miss Screwed Up Coakley arrived at the same location (no originality at all) at 10 A.M. and no one was there to greet her--no one. You see the rally was scheduled for 11:30--so she waited at the bar. The rally had less than 100 people--they lined up to shake her hand and give her thier condolences just like family and friends at a wake. Literally many, many shook her hand while they told her that they were voting for Scott Brown because of her lies and her negative campaigning.

Did anyone see the article in the B oston Globe today about her highness? They originally backed her--now they can see the hand writing on the wall. The Blue Sate of Massachusetts will be changing to the color Brown.

[TracyCoxx]

Most people haven't forgotten that the mess we are in was caused by the lax regulation during the Bush administration.

Bullshit. Quit spreading the lies.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMnSp4qEXNM&feature=related

[The Conquistador]

Most people would agree that we had to save the big banks. If we didn't, full economic collapse would have made the great depression look like a minor recession.

Alot of the banks failures was due to government intervention and the formation of things like the Community Reinvestment Act which forced banks to give out loans to people with spotty credit history and could not pay back the money. That was instituted when Carter was in office and the cumulative effects of that legislation have just recently emerged.

Alot of these types of problems can be traced back to big government rather than big business.

[parr]

Oh lovely. Our wonderful president has exempted union workers from paying tax for national health care. The rest of us will take up their share. You gotta hand it to him. He always remembers those who put him in office.

If Brown get's in all these dirty deeds will pass.

[CCC]

If Brown get's in all these dirty deeds will pass.

Hey Parr--I think you have it ass backwards. If Brown gets in -- it stops the health care package in it's tracks because they lose the 60-40 vote needed to ream it up our asses.

[randolph]

Alot of the banks failures was due to government intervention and the formation of things like the Community Reinvestment Act which forced banks to give out loans to people with spotty credit history and could not pay back the money. That was instituted when Carter was in office and the cumulative effects of that legislation have just recently emerged.

Alot of these types of problems can be traced back to big government rather than big business.

From Businessweek.

Community Reinvestment Act had nothing to do with subprime crisis

Posted by: Aaron Pressman on September 29

Fresh off the false and politicized attack on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, today we?re hearing the know-nothings blame the subprime crisis on the Community Reinvestment Act ? a 30-year-old law that was actually weakened by the Bush administration just as the worst lending wave began. This is even more ridiculous than blaming Freddie and Fannie.

The Community Reinvestment Act, passed in 1977, requires banks to lend in the low-income neighborhoods where they take deposits. Just the idea that a lending crisis created from 2004 to 2007 was caused by a 1977 law is silly. But it?s even more ridiculous when you consider that most subprime loans were made by firms that aren?t subject to the CRA. University of Michigan law professor Michael Barr testified back in February before the House Committee on Financial Services that 50% of subprime loans were made by mortgage service companies not subject comprehensive federal supervision and another 30% were made by affiliates of banks or thrifts which are not subject to routine supervision or examinations. As former Fed Governor Ned Gramlich said in an August, 2007, speech shortly before he passed away: ?In the subprime market where we badly need supervision, a majority of loans are made with very little supervision. It is like a city with a murder law, but no cops on the beat.?



Lack of supervision fostered by the Bush administration was a major factor in the meltdown.

[TracyCoxx]

Polls show Brown ahead of Coakley 51% to 46%. I'm getting a :turnon:

[randolph]

Polls show Brown ahead of Coakley 51% to 46%. I'm getting a :turnon:

Careful sweety, you might cum too soon. :turnoff::lol:

[The Conquistador]

Community Reinvestment Act had nothing to do with subprime crisis

Lack of supervision fostered by the Bush administration was a major factor in the meltdown.

Haha! Good luck believing that!

http://mises.org/story/2963

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=94031

[randolph]

Haha! Good luck believing that!

http://mises.org/story/2963

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=94031


It is the mission of the Mises Institute to place human choice at the center of economic theory, to encourage a revival of critical historical research, and to advance the Misesian tradition of thought through the defense of the market economy, private property, sound money, and peaceful international relations, while opposing government intervention as economically and socially destructive.

Looks like they have a biased adjenda. The meltdown demonstrates conclusively that government intervention is necessary to regulate capitalism.

Who's Behind WorldNetDaily?
WND's board of directors has been mostly comprised of California conservatives -- plus a man on the lam for tax evasion.

By Terry Krepel
Posted 3/1/2007
Updated 3/2/2007, 7/12/2008

WorldNetDaily has been notoriously close-lipped about who its backers are. Back in 2002, ConWebWatch asked WND founder and editor Joseph Farah who owns his company and who put up the $4.5 million in startup money for it; he answered the first question (he and the Western Journalism Center he co-founded own a majority of it) but not the second.

In the face of Farah and WND refusing to offer a straight answer, we set off to find one. A ConWebWatch investigation of Delaware corporate records (WND is registered as a Delaware corporation) shows that the members of WND's board of directors -- many of whom have presumably kicked in money for the operation -- are, in contrast to Richard Mellon Scaife's backing of NewsMax, not household names; they are mostly California-based activists who quietly support conservative causes.
Related articles on ConWebWatch:
The 'O' Word
Update: Black Vox
NewsMax By the Numbers
The Masters of WorldNetDaily


The exception to those quiet, California-based traits is Robert Beale, a Minnesota-based technology firm owner who sat on the WND board of directors from 2000 to 2002. As ConWebWatch has noted, the only mentions of Beale by WND came in an April 2002 column by Farah thanking him (and many others) by name as Farah prepared to move from Oregon to the Washington area "to become more visible," and in a June 2003 article by Art Moore detailing Beale's complaint that Minnesota officials seized his $3 million, 30-room house for back taxes. Beale insisted he was not a Minnesota resident at the time and doesn't owe the taxes, but he refused to fight the seizure in state tax court because he denies its legitimacy. The end of the article states: "By way of disclosure, Robert Beale is a board member and stockholder in WorldNetDaily.com."

Beale, at one point, had a website (now defunct) that promoted Beale's case, designed by his son, Theodore Beale, who's better known to WND readers as columnist Vox Day.

Robert Beale's tax problems came to a head in August 2006, when he failed to appear for his trial on federal tax-evasion charges. He hasn't been heard from since.

So does this outfit have more credibility than Businessweek?

[CreativeMind]

From Washington Monthly...


Actually, the Washington Monthly article is a typical puff piece that plays the numbers to reach an end conclusion that they WANTED to reach versus discussing an actual truth.

For example, the article initially states this (bold accent is mine): 55% approve of the president's handling of the terrorist threat, and 62% approve of his handling of the failed Christmas-day terror plot. Looks like the Cheneys' efforts to undermine the administration fell flat.

Yet then it turns around and states this: The bad news is the public remains in a deeply sour mood, and has grown increasingly impatient. Obama's numbers have dropped below the 50% threshold on the economy and health care, and the number of Americans who believe the country is on the right track is lower than it's been since February. Ouch.

Well, that's a perfect example of an illogical connection. The truth is that people like the Cheneys -- as well as many other commentators -- continually harping on Obama obviously HAS had an undermining effect and DIDN'T fall flat, hence his falling approval numbers.

And that's the problem here. The article is cherry picking its words and numbers VERY tightly, because if you actually read between the lines what the numbers DO reveal is that (1) people are willing to say they like Obama personally, in other words they basically think he'd be an "okay guy" if he was your neighbor...

...But that said, (2) they ALSO show that more and more people feel he's a shitty President and they'll be glad when he's out of office and IS only a neighbor who is out mowing his law, and NOT someone in office that has any kind of say over your life.

In fact, as of today, Obama's approval rating stands at 50%. Which means that literally HALF of the country thinks he's doing okay and HALF of the country wishes we had a election today or a do-over for November to boot his ass out.

[CreativeMind]

From Washington Monthly...

Most people haven't forgotten that the mess we are in was caused by the lax regulation during the Bush administration.

Actually, here's another thing that makes me laugh about the news article you cited. It also states: But in keeping with the year-long trend, Republicans are simply not the beneficiary of public discontent. Only 24% of the public has confidence in congressional Republicans "to make the right decisions for the country's future." The number for congressional Democrats is at least a little better at 32%, while the president's number is nearly double that of the GOP at 47%.

See, there's a major problem with that. First of all, depending on which poll you look at, the Republican confidence number is actually higher -- in fact in most polls its only a mere point or so different than the Democrats. So the Washington Monthly... again to try and reach a predetermined conclusion about the Republicans... apparently decided to go with a low number.

That said, the far far far MORE TELLING thing that they DON'T bring up is that the Tea Party movement actually has a HIGHER approval rating than BOTH parties. So that's certainly not good news for the Dems or Obama. So, it was rather convenient of the Washington Monthly to leave THAT statistic out, basically because it wanted to run a few numbers to say "See! See! Obama has numbers twice as high as the Republicans!"

Which is only the more laughable when you consider that Sarah Palin now has an approval rating TIED with Obama, but I notice they conveniently left that number out TOO.

And finally, I find it hysterical that the article reached the conclusion that: when it comes to assigning blame for the nation's economic woes, about twice as many fault the George W. Bush administration as do Obama's...

...When in fact a poll taken at the start of the New Year ACTUALLY found that an EQUAL number of Americans right now (roughly 47%) would rather have BUSH back in office again, to guide the economy back, as opposed to trusting Obama with handling it anymore.

[The Conquistador]

The meltdown demonstrates conclusively that government intervention is necessary to regulate capitalism.



The meltdown was a result of government intervention, not capitalism. Using beauracracy to fix the mistakes brought on by the exact same bureaucracy is a losing strategy.


http://article.nationalreview.com/print/?q=YjgwYzI4Njg3OWMxOGUzYmY0ZDMwYzYwNzkzYjc1NDI

http://townhall.com/columnists/ThomasSowell/2009/02/18/upside_down_economics

[The Conquistador]

If you're a lender you risk losing FDIC and other government services if you don't lend in a way "serves the convenience and needs" of the broke-ass, low income people in "the community that you're chartered to do business."

Clinton's big change was that he opened the gates for Fannie and Freddie to buy mortgage backed securities. Originate the loan and sell it to a private investor or if the MBS is too shitty, Fannie or Freddie would have bought it. Read up:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_policies_and_the_subprime_mortgage_cris is#The_role_of_Fannie_Mae.2C_Freddie_Mac_and_the_F HLB_in_the_crisis

Can you really blame the banks for doing something that was profitable and given a gold stamp of approval by Uncle Sam? It became like a game of musical chairs, you knew it was going to all come crashing down at some point, but you always hoped it would be someone else who took the fall.

SEC. 802. (a) The Congress finds that--
(1) regulated financial institutions are required by law to demonstrate that their deposit facilities serve the convenience and needs of the communities in which they are chartered to do business;
(2) the convenience and needs of communities include the need for credit services as well as deposit services; and
(3) regulated financial institutions have continuing and affirmative obligation to help meet the credit needs of the local communities in which they are chartered.
(b) It is the purpose of this title to require each appropriate Federal financial supervisory agency to use its authority when examining financial institutions, to encourage such institutions to help meet the credit needs of the local communities in which they are chartered consistent with the safe and sound operation of such institutions.

Are the banks blameless?...Hell no, but the government holds more blame than any bank. Where did all of this start? Fannie and Freddie, the two most fucked "banks" there have ever been.

[The Conquistador]

Oh yeah. Pageflip! :eek:

[CreativeMind]

From Businessweek:
Community Reinvestment Act had nothing to do with subprime crisis


The Wall Street Journal would beg to differ with them...

Many monumental errors and misjudgments contributed to the acute financial turmoil in which we now find ourselves. Nevertheless, the vast accumulation of toxic mortgage debt that poisoned the global financial system was driven by the aggressive buying of subprime and Alt-A mortgages, and mortgage-backed securities, by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

The poor choices of these two government-sponsored enterprises (GSEs) -- and their sponsors in Washington -- are largely to blame for our current mess.

How did we get here?
Let's review:

In order to curry congressional support after their accounting scandals in 2003 and 004, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac committed to increased financing of "affordable housing." They became the largest buyers of subprime and Alt-A mortgages between 2004 and 2007, with total exposure eventually exceeding $1 trillion.

In doing so, they stimulated the growth of the subpar mortgage market and substantially magnified the costs of its collapse.

It is important to understand that, as GSEs, Fannie and Freddie were viewed in the capital markets as government-backed buyers (a belief that has now been reduced to fact). Thus they were able to borrow as much as they wanted for the purpose of buying mortgages and mortgage-backed securities. Their buying patterns and interests were followed closely in the markets. If Fannie and Freddie wanted subprime or Alt-A loans, the mortgage markets would produce them.

By late 2004, Fannie and Freddie very much wanted subprime and Alt-A loans. However, their accounting had just been revealed as fraudulent, and they were under pressure from Congress to demonstrate that they deserved their considerable privileges. Among other problems, economists at the Federal Reserve and Congressional Budget Office had begun to study them in detail, and found that -- despite their subsidized borrowing rates -- they did not significantly reduce mortgage interest rates.

In the wake of Freddie's 2003 accounting scandal, Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan became a powerful opponent, and began to call for stricter regulation of the GSEs and limitations on the growth of their highly profitable, but risky, retained portfolios.

If they were not making mortgages cheaper and were creating risks for the taxpayers and the economy, what value were they providing?

The answer was their affordable-housing mission...

[CreativeMind]

From Businessweek.
Community Reinvestment Act had nothing to do with subprime crisis

Lack of supervision fostered by the Bush administration was a major factor in the meltdown.



And a lack of supervision by the Obama administration -- or rather a willingness to look the other way, so these same bullshit low income ACORN type housing loans can continue -- is already poised to fuck the markets up even more, if not cause a complete repeat of history and set us up for yet another financial meldown, as once again Obama plays partisan politics and uses his power to inflate government and its role in home buying.

From the Wall Street Journal as well...

The government's move to ease the limits on the securities holdings of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac has ignited a debate among analysts about what the companies will do with their longer leash.

When the Treasury Department took over Fannie and Freddie last year, one of the requirements set for the companies required them to begin shrinking their portfolios of mortgages and related investments, which total a combined $1.5 trillion.

The idea was to rein in the companies' size and growth.

But last Thursday, the Obama Treasury Department quietly eased that restriction, meaning the companies now won't be forced to sell mortgages next year and instead can buy mortgages on the market, thus doing exactly the opposite of what they had been required to do. The Treasury also suspended for the next three years the $400 billion cap on the bailout subsidy that the government will offer. That could give them more flexibility to modify mortgages without worrying about taking losses.

Mahesh Swaminathan, senior mortgage analyst at Credit Suisse, said the firms could use their increased capacity to purchase delinquent loans from pools of mortgage-backed securities that they guarantee. Fannie and Freddie already purchase defaulted loans as they modify them under the administration's loan-modification program, but the additional breathing room means it is now a "slam-dunk for them to speed up" purchases of delinquent loans, Mr. Swaminathan said. New accounting rules that take effect next year also could make it more cost-effective for the companies to buy out bad loans and keep them in their investment portfolios.

"It's created a government-purchasing facility other than the Fed," said Karen Shaw Petrou, managing partner of Federal Financial Analytics, a research firm in Washington.

Meanwhile, a Freddie spokesman said the company will continue to use its investment portfolio as "an important tool" to "keep order in the housing and housing-finance markets." A Fannie spokesman declined to comment.

A Treasury official said the more generous portfolio limits were offered to avoid forcing the companies to actively sell their holdings, and they didn't intend for Fannie and Freddie to be active buyers of mortgages.

Ms. Petrou said that the recent moves "make sense in a short-term way because you avoid market volatility, but the prospect of limitless aid will make it harder to extricate Fannie and Freddie from the government."

"In a long-term way, it promotes nationalization of U.S. mortgage finance. We have increasingly gigantic, increasingly federal agencies eating up every mortgage out there," she said.

[jimnaseum]

Putting Republicans back in charge is like giving Leno back the Tonight Show. There's no accounting for taste.

[The Conquistador]

Putting Republicans back in charge is like giving Leno back the Tonight Show. There's no accounting for taste.

Republicans and Democrats are just two different sides of the same shit mountain.


[Insert Barf Icon Here]

[jimnaseum]

Republicans and Democrats are just two different sides of the same shit mountain.



It's a two-party system. Republican or Democrat the USA is fucked for the next decade no matter what because Bush-Cheney stole every cent they could.

If you're really into being apathetic, consider the number of years we have before THE nuclear war. Fifty? A hundred? Two Hundred? Yeah.

[randolph]

It appears that there is a poll and post for every taste.
Obama polls vs Palin polls opinions not to waste
evidence here and evidence there bad guys everywhere
what shall we do and where shall we go
keep looking keep searching somebody will know
the answers my friend are they blowing in the wind
the winds will be strong and we will be long gone

[The Conquistador]

It's a two-party system. Republican or Democrat the USA is fucked for the next decade no matter what because Bush-Cheney stole every cent they could.

If you're really into being apathetic, consider the number of years we have before THE nuclear war. Fifty? A hundred? Two Hundred? Yeah.

It's a multiple party system. Otherwise I wouldn't have been able to vote for Ron Paul. Dems and Repubs just happen to dominate the political scene.

I'm not apathetic; I just generally tend to hate most everyone with the exception of trannies and their cohorts who enjoy their company.

[jimnaseum]

Ron Paul? You waited in line to vote for Ron Paul? Polls? I hang up when a pollster calls. Obama is perfect. Obama is God. When will you morons aknowledge this? I'll tell you when. NEVER!

[TracyCoxx]

Obama is perfect. Obama is God. When will you morons aknowledge this? I'll tell you when. NEVER!
Wow... you'll probably love this then:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iq4c2lFMmmU

And this photo definitely confirms that Obama is God!

[tslover586]

anyone who says that obama is a much different choice then mcain should understand this very important fact. the same people contibuted campaign contributions to both parties.
so even though they are two different parties, youre still getting the same person for the job. its been this way for years. gm, exxon, bank of america and citi group own this country.
and until we demolish the party system, and stop putting buisness men and lawyers in political positions and start putting actual represenatives of the majorities views and opionions, and continually educate the masses to properly make educated decisions and not propoganda indused ones, america will still belong to the wealthy one percent.
and we will continue to work to pay off the debt that we incure by bying things we cant afford, and our government forces on us by borrowing more money(debt) from the federal reseve.

[randolph]

anyone who says that obama is a much different choice then mcain should understand this very important fact. the same people contibuted campaign contributions to both parties.
so even though they are two different parties, youre still getting the same person for the job. its been this way for years. gm, exxon, bank of america and citi group own this country.
and until we demolish the party system, and stop putting buisness men and lawyers in political positions and start putting actual represenatives of the majorities views and opinions, and continually educate the masses to properly make educated decisions and not propoganda indused ones, america will still belong to the wealthy one percent.
and we will continue to work to pay off the debt that we incure by bying things we cant afford, and our government forces on us by borrowing more money(debt) from the federal reseve.

You got it right.
The founding fathers were very concerned about news and a well informed electorate. In fact in the early days, the government subsidized the newspaper industry believing it essential to provide the public with information to make intelligent voting decisions. No restrictions were placed on the opinions expressed in the press, however.
Now, we have Fox news spewing conservative BS day in and day out along with Russ and other opportunists playing to the ignorance of a poorly informed public. Why? because it makes money for the media. PBS and Bill Moyers provide some honest news and the BBC also is good. Most of the US media is crap particularly TV media. The popularity of Sarah Palin testifies to the ignorance and anti intellectual bent of the public. The "news" is just another form of entertainment for a brain dead public. :censored:

[The Conquistador]

Damn near every media outlet has it's own political bias, not just Fox news. Even good ol' PBS and BBC...

[jimnaseum]

The Obama machine and the Bush machine have taken all that stuff into consideration, believe me, and it's all accounted for. In a country that is supposed to be based on the Freedom of the American voter, nowhere in the world has the Art of Manipulating the Consumer flourished more than right here, and if Massachusetts votes with it's ass instead of it's head tonight, not only will Teddy be spinning in his grave, so will Washington, Jefferson, and every freethinking American who loves or tolerates the sexual liberties the Republicans and Conservatives want to destroy.

[randolph]

Damn near every media outlet has it's own political bias, not just Fox news. Even good ol' PBS and BBC...

Bias toward the public good sounds good to me. That what a Democracy is supposed to be about, the public good.
Not the rich, or the conservatives, or the liberals, or the ultra religious, or the atheists, just whats good for the country and the people living in it.

[The Conquistador]

Bias toward the public good sounds good to me. That what a Democracy is supposed to be about, the public good.
Not the rich, or the conservatives, or the liberals, or the ultra religious, or the atheists, just whats good for the country and the people living in it.

A democracy is about the whims and wants at a particularly given point of a society and is never usually long-lived. A republic is about justice and law previously agreed upon for the benefit of the society, both present and future. But I digress...

All these media outlets have some sort of political bias whether or not you would like to acknowledge it or not. Just because it is subtle and not blatantly obvious does not mean that it is not present. And most don't care about the "public good" or any such thing. Long gone are the days of objective reporting.

[TracyCoxx]

Polls show Brown ahead of Coakley 51% to 46%. I'm getting a :turnon:
Careful sweety, you might cum too soon. :turnoff::lol:I just came all over myself. HAHAHA I knew 2010 was going to be a good year :coupling: One down, 36 more to go this year.

With Massachusetts being one of the bluest states with democrats outnumbering republicans 3 to one, it makes you progressives here wonder just how far left you are doesn't it?

[franalexes]

A lot of Dem's started vomitting last night. I understand everything came up Brown.:lol:

[randolph]

A lot of Dem's started vomitting last night. I understand everything came up Brown.

Yes, the Democrats and Obama fucked up big time. They had an opportunity to reform the government and clean up the mess left by years of Republican malfeasance. Now we can watch the rich get richer and the poor get poorer as the country descends into third world status.

[jimnaseum]

I guess the worms always win in the end.

[randolph]

From Drew Westen, Huffington Post



The White House has squandered the greatest opportunity to change both the country and the political landscape since Ronald Reagan. It should have started with a non-watered-down stimulus package big enough to stop the bleeding in the job market -- and a smack-down of any Republican who dared to utter the word "deficit" after 8 years of reckless, unpaid Republican spending. It should have followed with stringent regulations on Wall Street and protection of homeowners and small businesses instead of with a jobs creation program inside the administration for failed bankers and failed regulators. A stimulus -- including a jobs program -- strong enough to prevent the hemorrhaging of 700,000 jobs a month and a muscular approach to the bad actors who had crashed the economy would have gotten the public firmly behind the President and the Democrats, demonstrating to the average voter that they have a choice between one party that's on their side and another that's not. Instead, the White House just blurred the lines between the parties so the average American couldn't tell the difference.
With all its efforts to tack to the center, the White House missed the point. The issue isn't about right or left. It's about whose side you're on. In Massachusetts, the voters believe they know. It's now up to the President and his party to convince the American people otherwise.

Probably too late. :frown:

[CCC]

A lot of Dem's started vomitting last night. I understand everything came up Brown.:lol:

Shall we start keeping track of every state that goes from BLUE to RED and relabel them BROWN?

Just watched Pelosi talking---she looks like she is having a nervous breakdown.

And OBAMA the idiot--says Mass went for Brown because they are still pissed at Bush---that just proves he is an idiot.

[TracyCoxx]

From Drew Westen, Huffington Post

... It should have started with a non-watered-down stimulus package big enough to stop the bleeding in the job market -- and a smack-down of any Republican who dared to utter the word "deficit" after 8 years of reckless, unpaid Republican spending.... At this point I don't see why you kept reading. Because how many more times did BO overspend than Bush's 8 years after only one month? All together kids... 2.5 times more. So obviously the writer is clueless. If I were you I wouldn't associate myself with the clueless. It doesn't look good ;)

[TracyCoxx]

Just watched Pelosi talking---she looks like she is having a nervous breakdown.

LOL I would have given anything to spend the day with ol Nancy today :lol:

And OBAMA the idiot--says Mass went for Brown because they are still pissed at Bush---that just proves he is an idiot.LOL well you know if they paid any attention to reality they wouldn't have done %90 of the stuff they did over the last year.

[CCC]

Yes, the Democrats and Obama fucked up big time. They had an opportunity to reform the government and clean up the mess left by years of Republican malfeasance. Now we can watch the rich get richer and the poor get poorer as the country descends into third world status.

Idiot Obama says Brown's winning shows that people of Mass are still pissed about Bushes reign for the last eight years. He is so delusional. And you idolize him?????

[randolph]

Idiot Obama says Brown's winning shows that people of Mass are still pissed about Bushes reign for the last eight years. He is so delusional. And you idolize him?????

Hey? Where do you come up with I idolize him? Originally, I felt we had an opportunity to improve Washington. As time went on it became increasing obvious that Obama and Congress were not working for the American people but for the bankers and corporate interests. I am disillusioned with Obama and Congress. Washington is dysfunctional. The vote in Massachusetts reveals the frustration of all of us.
On that note does anybody seriously believe the Republicans can do any better?

[CCC]

[quote=CCC;128800]

Hey? Where do you come up with I idolize him? Originally, I felt we had an opportunity to improve Washington. As time went on it became increasing obvious that Obama and Congress were not working for the American people but for the bankers and corporate interests. I am disillusioned with Obama and Congress. Washington is dysfunctional. The vote in Massachusetts reveals the frustration of all of us.
On that note does anybody seriously believe the Republicans can do any better?

Unfotuneately we have a choice between the two parties ONLY. What we need to do is get new people in there--run them 2 terms max and kick em out. The is what the original fathers said to do and it is the best.

[The Conquistador]

Unfotuneately we have a choice between the two parties ONLY. What we need to do is get new people in there--run them 2 terms max and kick em out. The is what the original fathers said to do and it is the best.

Vote independent.

[CCC]

Vote independent.

If you have a Democrat, a Republican and an Independant running and you vote for the independant you really have jsut given your vote to the Dems.
I will repeat A VOTE FOR AN INDEPENDANT IS A VOTE FOR A DEMOCRAT it happens every single time.

[randolph]

If you have a Democrat, a Republican and an Independant running and you vote for the independant you really have jsut given your vote to the Dems.
I will repeat A VOTE FOR AN INDEPENDANT IS A VOTE FOR A DEMOCRAT it happens every single time.

Wait, wait, wait! Who do you think elected Brown?
It was the INDEPENDENTS!

[TracyCoxx]

On that note does anybody seriously believe the Republicans can do any better?
Yes. Even the RINOs will not overspend by $3 trillion per year. They will not spend millions to give our rights to terrorists. They will not punish those who are trying to protect America. They will not attempt to steal 1/6 of the American economy without the acceptance of the American people. They do not support criminal groups like ACORN. They do not associate themselves with communists and other groups who want to start a revolution in America. They would not try and move the US census to the Executive Branch. They realize people who are able should work for a living.

There are some of them who think man lived with the dinosaurs, but that's a small price to pay. And BOTH sides have a severe problem when it comes to illegal aliens but again, the republicans are not quite as bad as the democrats who would eventually insist that we pay for the health care of the millions of illegal aliens that are here.

[TracyCoxx]

[QUOTE=randolph;128805]

Unfotuneately we have a choice between the two parties ONLY. What we need to do is get new people in there--run them 2 terms max and kick em out. The is what the original fathers said to do and it is the best.
Yes, unfortunately it must be two parties. Otherwise the vote would be split. BUT... what we can do is what the progressives have done. They hijacked the democrats party. If they can do that, then conservatives can retake the republican party.

Wait, wait, wait! Who do you think elected Brown?
It was the INDEPENDENTS!No, what CCC is saying is don't vote for an independent, not the other way around. Brown ran as a republican.

[jimnaseum]

The Republicans achieved NOTHING in their 8 year term. NOTHING!!! Can you believe that shit?

[TracyCoxx]

The Republicans achieved NOTHING in their 8 year term. NOTHING!!! Can you believe that shit?

This is a ridiculous statement.

[randolph]

The Republicans achieved NOTHING in their 8 year term. NOTHING!!! Can you believe that shit?

Are you kidding!
Lets see now;
Clinton left them a healthy surplus which was promptly turned into a deficit.
They gave a huge tax break to the rich.
Passed a huge expensive drug bill with no funding.
Went to war in Irak costing billions.
Corrupted all of the regulatory agencies which contributed to the meltdown.
Oh, well the list is endless.:censored:

[jimnaseum]

This is a ridiculous statement.

Gimme a ridiculous answer.

[TracyCoxx]

Gimme a ridiculous answer.

Your purposefully ignorant remark gives me no reason to think you want an answer.

[randolph]

I just watched an interview on World News discussing why China pulled itself out of recession while we have not. The consensus is that the stimulus funds China poured into its banking system were used to loan money to industry while the taxpayer money we poured into our banking system stayed in the banks. Meanwhile our banks are paying their CEOs huge bonuses. Somebody (Obama) is fucking up bigtime by not clamping down on our banks. The public (including me) is outraged. Now all of a sudden Obama is talking tough, we shall see if anything comes of it. :frown:

[jimnaseum]

Every body back off and let a BLACK MAN throw down!!!!! ACT I scene II -stay tuned!!! I told you that Barack was a baaaaaaaad Mutha (shut my mouth!)

[TracyCoxx]

Every body back off and let a BLACK MAN throw down!!!!!Let's not be racist ok?

[jimnaseum]

What chew talkin' bout, Willis? I'm not Newt Gingrich! I'm Harry Reid!

Where's the nekkid shemales??!!!??

[randolph]

Have the fat cats finally gone too far?



By Alex Brummer (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/search.html?s=y&authornamef=Alex+Brummer)
Last updated at 10:39 AM on 22nd January 2010
Hard to imagine, isn't it, that just 15 months ago the chairman of Goldman Sachs was chasing around like a headless chicken trying to save his company from collapse.

In the end Lloyd Blankfein's finance house was saved by a ?6.25billion loan from legendary investor Warren Buffett and a bailout credit from Washington.
There was also a change in status from broker-dealer to bank holding company that allowed Goldman to borrow directly from the Federal Reserve.
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2010/01/21/article-1245143-07D969A7000005DC-792_468x323.jpg Rescued: Goldman Sachs chairman and chief executive Lloyd Blankfein

The result of this rescue is that Goldman Sachs has revealed one of the most profitable years in its history, clearing some ?8billion.
This outcome was achieved after the bank set aside ?9.99billion in pay and bonuses, representing an average of ?308,000 for everyone at the bank from Mr Blankfein down to his chauffeur and the security guards in London.



The remarkable aspect of this figure, a 57 per cent rise on the pay and bonuses of the previous year, is that it came after Goldman sought to calm the political storm engulfing its reputation by paying no bonuses at all for the final three months of the year and stepping up its charitable contributions.

It is the first time in Goldman's recent history that it has shown any recognition that the bank is in danger of becoming a political pariah around the world.

But the contrition from the 'Masters of the Universe' has come a little late. The global investment banks now face the double whammy of super-taxes and regulations which will make it far more difficult to make bonanza profits.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2010/01/21/article-0-07F5D6CA000005DC-348_233x406.jpg Getting tough: Mr Obama yesterday

Finally President Obama has recognised that allowing the banks to rampage untrammelled has been a political disaster.

In the U.S. it is seen as a key reason for the shock loss of the former Kennedy Democratic Senate seat in Massachusetts.

Mr Obama is recognising that ordinary taxpayers and bank depositors should not be funding risky dealings on the financial markets.

He is asking Congress to reform regulation so that no bank in the U.S. can be involved in high-risk hedge fund, private equity or share and commodity dealings on their own account.

The President's views echo those voiced last year by Mervyn King, the governor of the Bank of England. He suggested it was time to separate casino banking - of the kind described by Mr Obama - from the utility banking of taking deposits and making business and personal loans.

At the same time Mr Obama has recognised that some Wall Street finance houses have become too big and powerful and made it clear that the White House no longer wants to see any more major financial mergers.

The measures he outlined have a striking similarity to Glass-Steagall, the law passed in the midst of the Great Depression of the 1930s, which forced the separation of risk-taking finance from traditional commercial banking.
If Goldman Sachs has hoped to insulate itself and Wall Street from criticism by curtailing its bonus culture in the final months of the year then its concession has come too late.

By setting the bonus bar so high in the first nine months of the year Goldman is privately blamed by the financial services, including Britain's HSBC and Barclays, for the new bonus taxes and fees being imposed by governments around the world.

Alistair Darling led the way with a 50 per cent one-off bonus tax in his Pre-Budget Report last month. This was quickly matched in France by President Sarkozy.

President Obama announced a fee designed to ensure 'every last dime' of the ?430billion bank bailout is repaid to the U.S. Treasury. The movement for super taxes on the banks is gathering momentum with Sweden this week proposing a European-wide tax policy to punish the banks for their extravagant bonuses.

If Mr Obama and Congress succeed with their reforms it could be the end of the multi-billion bonus pots at Goldman, Barclays Capital and others.

In 2009 the big upsurge in income at Goldman and other banks largely came from casino banking and trading - much of it on the bank's own account.

The figures just published show that revenues from this source climbed to ?14billion last year against just ?1billion the year before.
This is precisely the kind of 'casino' trading which Mr Obama wants to ban.

The President's sensational intervention could mean that the door is slammed on the 'fat cat' banking which brought the world to the precipice.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1245143/Alex-Brummer-Have-fat-cats-finally-gone-far.html#ixzz0dMfcEUur

[jimnaseum]

The Battle lines have been drawn. PEOPLE vs. MONEY. Talk is over, it's ON now, it's war. It will be hilarious to hear Fox and Rush defend the freedom of the Wall St. thieves.

[CCC]

The Battle lines have been drawn. PEOPLE vs. MONEY. Talk is over, it's ON now, it's war. It will be hilarious to hear Fox and Rush defend the freedom of the Wall St. thieves.

YES THE WAR IS ON----That A-Hole Obama with his idiots now wants to destroy banking because they don't control it like they control your mind. The stock market just dropped 3 days ina row because of his big mouth---you happy?--you friggin liberal idipots don't realize that it's the businesses in this country that pay your wages and pay all the taxes. Remember the bottom half of income earners only pay 3% of the taxes to run this country and 90% or better of them are flaming loser liberals. Does that include you?

[Bionca]

YES THE WAR IS ON----That A-Hole Obama with his idiots now wants to destroy banking because they don't control it like they control your mind. The stock market just dropped 3 days ina row because of his big mouth---you happy?--you friggin liberal idipots don't realize that it's the businesses in this country that pay your wages and pay all the taxes. Remember the bottom half of income earners only pay 3% of the taxes to run this country and 90% or better of them are flaming loser liberals. Does that include you?

Look at taxes by state and general liberal/conservative leanings. Then look at tax burden in these states. You will find the majority of federal tax PAYING states vote liberal, while the most conservative voting states tend to be higher tax RECIPIENTS.

For example - Vermont = liberal = federal tax excess. Okalhoma = conservative = tax burden.

[TracyCoxx]

The Battle lines have been drawn. PEOPLE vs. MONEY. Talk is over, it's ON now, it's war. It will be hilarious to hear Fox and Rush defend the freedom of the Wall St. thieves.

Well the banks have paid back the bailout they took... with interest. Oh well... go get em BO

[jimnaseum]

it's the businesses in this country that pay your wages and pay all the taxes. Remember the bottom half of income earners only pay 3% of the taxes to run this country and 90% or better of them are flaming loser liberals. Does that include you?

Hey Genius, where do you think the businesses and banks GET their money? From the LOSERS? The middle class pays for EVERYTHING!!!

[CCC]

Hey Genius, where do you think the businesses and banks GET their money? From the LOSERS? The middle class pays for EVERYTHING!!!

I am going to try to play nice here BUT all the businesses and banks get all thier money from everyone---winners and losers---whether they be black, white, pink or purple. The problem is the dang liberal dems need a welfare class to vote to keep them in business--that is why there are more liberals in the cities and especially where there are universities.

Just a thought--could it be as a person gets more successful in the city that they try to escape to the country to get away from the libs??? Just a thought :innocent:

[randolph]

Look at taxes by state and general liberal/conservative leanings. Then look at tax burden in these states. You will find the majority of federal tax PAYING states vote liberal, while the most conservative voting states tend to be higher tax RECIPIENTS.

For example - Vermont = liberal = federal tax excess. Okalhoma = conservative = tax burden.

Isn't ironic that the most conservative anti liberal states are the poorest and least educated and require the most government assistance? Of course that is Pat Roberts, Russ Limbaugh, Fox News territory.

[Bionca]

Isn't ironic that the most conservative anti liberal states are the poorest and least educated and require the most government assistance? Of course that is Pat Roberts, Russ Limbaugh, Fox News territory.

The disconnects in the American voter is an odd odd thing. The base of the Conservative movement here is two-pronged. You have the "values voters" and "Free market folks". Ultimately these two will have to sort out their own laundry since "values voters" require welfare, state funding of religion, onerous laws and in short, MASSIVE government.

Free market dudes just want to remove child labor laws, government foreign aid, the Family Medical Leave Act, medical research and education grants.

Sooner or later they will realize they are their own worst enemy. The Free market dudes will eventually hive off, the values crowd will hook up with the Blue Dog Dems (good to see them go), and we can finally have an actual Liberal party as an option.

[Bionca]

Just a thought--could it be as a person gets more successful in the city that they try to escape to the country to get away from the libs??? Just a thought :innocent:

Population trends say... NO, not really. The most liberal cities tend to have massive housing shortages (even after the housing bust) while suburban and rural housing no such shortages (one could even say surplus given the current market)

[smc]

The disconnects in the American voter is an odd odd thing. The base of the Conservative movement here is two-pronged. You have the "values voters" and "Free market folks". Ultimately these two will have to sort out their own laundry since "values voters" require welfare, state funding of religion, onerous laws and in short, MASSIVE government.

Free market dudes just want to remove child labor laws, government foreign aid, the Family Medical Leave Act, medical research and education grants.

Sooner or later they will realize they are their own worst enemy. The Free market dudes will eventually hive off, the values crowd will hook up with the Blue Dog Dems (good to see them go), and we can finally have an actual Liberal party as an option.

That American voters so consistently vote against their real interest is actually not such a mystery. It becomes understandable when one considers the unique "ideology" that is instilled in American children from an early age ... an ideology that is largely unknown in the rest of the world. Specifically, those who control the wealth in this country figured out a long time ago that the so-called "American dream" (e.g., anyone can become rich, anyone can grow up to be president, etc.) was a powerful tool to use in avoiding having to do some of the things that the European welfare states have had to do, specifically have strong social safety nets in essentially capitalist countries. If you hammer into people's heads, at a young age, the notion that it is their own responsibility to pull themselves up by their own bootstraps, you gradually erode within society the sense of social solidarity that is common to Europeans. It makes it easy to argue against the essential human reality that -- when it comes to living socially and ensuring a good life for all, especially in a wealthy land like the United States -- and injury to one is an injury to all.

I remember once when I was living in Paris for a short while that I would walk by, in my neighborhood, a creche (daycare center) every day on my way to work. There seemed to be about 30 or so children who were taken care of at this particular place. One morning, I walked by and found a large crowd, about 400 people, demonstrating. Many of them had their children with them, and few (obviously) were the parents of the actual children who attended the daycare center. The government had announced a cutback the day before, and the entire neighborhood came out in protest -- even the relatively wealthy people who had children with nannies! I asked some of my neighbors why they were there and they said that it was their civic duty to defend the interests of the people who needed this government-provided assistance. That was it. Simply put and simply true.

American "individualism" is a trick used by those who seek to control the wealth. But it is so deeply ingrained that you can find people voting and acting against their own economic interests and those they share with their neighbors at every turn.

[jimnaseum]

The "wink wink" factor you will never hear any politician talk about is the perception that Republicans are white and Democrats are black. And Republicans want you to keep the money you earn while the Dems want you to "spread it around" to welfare mothers. The perception is your one choice is to hang with the white people, or hang with the black people. While this is partly true, the greater truth is that if you make less than $100,000/yr, you ARE a black person!!!! And unless you are one of the very small percentage of people that strike it rich, the HOUSE will always win, and you lose. The game is fixed. The Republican plan is that every cent a working man earns goes towards "goods and services" ...and, oh yeah, (wink wink) they control all the "goods and services"
A strong middle class equals a strong America. Don't you worry about the rich people, they'll be fine.

[Talvenada]

The "wink wink" factor you will never hear any politician talk about is the perception that Republicans are white and Democrats are black. And Republicans want you to keep the money you earn while the Dems want you to "spread it around" to welfare mothers. The perception is your one choice is to hang with the white people, or hang with the black people. While this is partly true, the greater truth is that if you make less than $100,000/yr, you ARE a black person!!!! And unless you are one of the very small percentage of people that strike it rich, the HOUSE will always win, and you lose. The game is fixed. The Republican plan is that every cent a working man earns goes towards "goods and services" ...and, oh yeah, (wink wink) they control all the "goods and services"
A strong middle class equals a strong America. Don't you worry about the rich people, they'll be fine.


JIM:

Bush 41 left a deficit for Clinton, Clinton left a surplus for Bush 43, Bush 43 left a whopping deficit for Obama.

Conse 'Pubs put us in a hole with tax cuts, and The Dems have to pay the bill. Then, Conse 'Pubs say we cut taxes, and Dems raise taxes. Will that Conse 'Pub vote be cash or charge?


TAL

[Mel Asher]

From England I fear for Obama. I just hope he isn't given the ' bum's rush ' before he has an opportunity to show what he is capable of. We are still suffering in the U.K. from the aftermath of Flim-Flam endless-promises Tony Blair, but we hope that Obama doesn't end up being coralled down the same reformist route that Clinton did ( and I'm NOT referring to his sex life either ! )

Obama can be a great president given time and luck, that's as I see it.

[smc]

A strong middle class equals a strong America. Don't you worry about the rich people, they'll be fine.

There's no such thing as a "middle class." You either sell your labor, or you profit off the labor of others. Where's the middle in that?

[jimnaseum]

In Olde Europe, people followed leaders who were "Father Figures" and were trusted to serve them. American Leaders are civil servants. Taxes pay for goods and services: Schools, military, medicare, social security, etc. The problems arise when our leaders are not civil servants, but servants to Big Oil, Insurance Companies, Pharmaceutical companies, and Banks.
In the Garden of Eden, God owned the Tree of Knowledge. In the USA, the People own it. Oh, Shit!!

[jimnaseum]

There's no such thing as a "middle class." You either sell your labor, or you profit off the labor of others. Where's the middle in that?

The middle class are the MAJORITY of Americans who make between x-dollars and y-dollars a year. LOTS of small business owners fit in this category. The more money the middle class has, the more money goes to the poor and the rich, TRICKLE OUT. You starve the middle class like Bush did, everything goes to Hell.

[jimnaseum]

JIM:
Bush 41 left a deficit for Clinton, Clinton left a surplus for Bush 43, Bush 43 left a whopping deficit for Obama.


Yes, and in a Court of Law, case closed. That's all the evidence you need.
Of course, Jimmy Carter kind of screwed things up. JFK took us toe to toe with WWIII. And Reagan took Moscow.
And if a quake ever hits California like it did Haiti, we're all fucked.

[smc]

The middle class are the MAJORITY of Americans who make between x-dollars and y-dollars a year. LOTS of small business owners fit in this category. The more money the middle class has, the more money goes to the poor and the rich, TRICKLE OUT. You starve the middle class like Bush did, everything goes to Hell.

I truly believe that until Americans understand class distinctions, and understand them as a scientific concept provable by economic law, there is little hope for achieving long-term solutions to any of the problems various members of the Forum raise. Yes, we can achieve this or that incremental improvement, perhaps for a limited time, but ultimately the choice is a fundamental reshaping of society or barbarism.

[randolph]

This is the main threat to our liberty"

From: Huffington Post
Anis Shivanic

Corporatism is a dirty word in the American lexicon because of its close historical association with fascism, but we can recognize marked neofascist or authoritarian or extreme right-wing tendencies, of which someone like Sarah Palin is the leading edge. The new corporatist state as it has arisen under Bush and Obama thrives on reserve constitutional powers (unlimited executive authority) allied with a permanent state of emergency (the war on terror), both indispensable starting principles of authoritarian regimes. On the whole, the judiciary, with respect to the protection of civil liberties, came off reasonably well in the last decade; but this may have been the aftereffect of the more libertarian eighties and nineties, and the courts may begin to reflect the strong public preference for indefinite detention and torture (viz. the hue and cry over the planned Khalid Sheikh Muhammad trial in New York, and majority support for torture following the failed underwear bombing). The Department of Homeland Security can be viewed as the crystallization of all the police services under effective national command. Almost a decade after the annihilation of the Bill of Rights after 9/11, it is clear that the Bill of Rights is not going to be revived in anything resembling its previous state; this does not portend well for the future. :frown:

The Supreme Court decision makes this even stronger.

[Hedonistman]

it's a bird, it's a plane,,,,it's Obamaman,,, lol. Well it's good to see so many folks here take the time to comment on the guy. What's a shame though is how so very many believe what the mass media 'feeds' them. I could spend hours listing all Obamamans' ills, but I'll just mention 1,,,he's not even an American. Wait now,, b4 consigning me to the ranks of the wild and crazy folk, consider a few facts: he's spent 2 mil and counting fending off numerous suits to basically keep ALL his personal records 'top secret'. In his race for the Senate he tacitly admitted he was NOT born American. Those are verified facts. What's interesting though is 'why', he do that, lol. I mean all he need do is take off 1 sock and shoe, and give the American people a footprint. Case closed either way.... hardly seems so invasive a way to prove he has the right to BE the President of the USA.
Ok, let it rip, lol.

[Talvenada]

it's a bird, it's a plane,,,,it's Obamaman,,, lol. Well it's good to see so many folks here take the time to comment on the guy. What's a shame though is how so very many believe what the mass media 'feeds' them. I could spend hours listing all Obamamans' ills, but I'll just mention 1,,,he's not even an American. Wait now,, b4 consigning me to the ranks of the wild and crazy folk, consider a few facts: he's spent 2 mil and counting fending off numerous suits to basically keep ALL his personal records 'top secret'. In his race for the Senate he tacitly admitted he was NOT born American. Those are verified facts. What's interesting though is 'why', he do that, lol. I mean all he need do is take off 1 sock and shoe, and give the American people a footprint. Case closed either way.... hardly seems so invasive a way to prove he has the right to BE the President of the USA.
Ok, let it rip, lol.

HEAD:

Yes, and Bush 43 was honest, transparent & bi-partisan to a fault.


Talking with Conse 'Pubs on this site is depressing.


TAL

[jimnaseum]

Can we PLEASE get some Republicans on this site like Pat Buchanan? I just saw him sitting next to that nauseating Fox parrotcunt Monica Crowley, admitting that the Republicans have NO platform, and don't need one. He then admitted that as soon as the new wonderboy from Massachusetts gets to DC, he's going to be sat down in a back room and EXPLAINED a few things.....
I just hope Scalia has a history of heart disease in his family. What a prick.....

[randolph]

Can we PLEASE get some Republicans on this site like Pat Buchanan? I just saw him sitting next to that nauseating Fox parrotcunt Monica Crowley, admitting that the Republicans have NO platform, and don't need one. He then admitted that as soon as the new wonderboy from Massachusetts gets to DC, he's going to be sat down in a back room and EXPLAINED a few things.....
I just hope Scalia has a history of heart disease in his family. What a prick.....

Ah, the perfect wonderboy candidate. Posing nude and presenting his bikini clad daughters as "available". If he teams up with Sarah the Republicans will have a perfect team for the next presidential campaign. A stud and a bimbo, isn't that great! :lol:

[Talvenada]

Ah, the perfect wonderboy candidate. Posing nude and presenting his bikini clad daughters as "available". If he teams up with Sarah the Republicans will have a perfect team for the next presidential campaign. A stud and a bimbo, isn't that great! :lol:

RANDY:

Yeah! Palin-Brown brought to you by Foreign & Big Oil.


TAL

[Talvenada]

Buy enough members of the house and senate to impeach Obama right after the 2010 election.

Permanent Conse 'Pub governance is fair and balanced.

[TracyCoxx]

Can we PLEASE get some Republicans on this site like Pat Buchanan? I just saw him sitting next to that nauseating Fox parrotcunt Monica Crowley, admitting that the Republicans have NO platform, and don't need one. He then admitted that as soon as the new wonderboy from Massachusetts gets to DC, he's going to be sat down in a back room and EXPLAINED a few things.....
I just hope Scalia has a history of heart disease in his family. What a prick.....

Mmmmm... Monica :turnon:

[randolph]

Mmmmm... Monica :turnon:

Humm, Monica looks very good, do you still have some hot for girlies?

[TracyCoxx]

Humm, Monica looks very good, do you still have some hot for girlies?

I love hot women. :coupling: If they have a cock, even better.

[randolph]

I love hot women. :coupling: If they have a cock, even better.

Yeah, don't you love it when these hot babes show up for interviews on tv, sit on the couch with their legs crossed and you keep wondering if they are going to pull a Sharon Stone right in front of the camera. ;)

[CreativeMind]

Bush 41 left a deficit for Clinton,
Clinton left a surplus for Bush 43,
Bush 43 left a whopping deficit for Obama.

Conse 'Pubs put us in a hole with tax cuts, and The Dems have to pay the bill.
Then, Conse 'Pubs say we cut taxes, and Dems raise taxes.
Will that Conse 'Pub vote be cash or charge?


Well, if Bush left a "whopping deficit for Obama", just what is Obama leaving the next president?
Or all of us, as citizens, for that matter?
As Tracy CORRECTLY pointed out in another thread...



Bush with mixed congress: $11B deficit
Bush with Republican congress: $339B deficit

Bush with Democratic congress: $704B deficit

Obama with Democratic congress: $2.7 Trillion deficit

I'm blaming Bush and the Republican congress for the $339B deficit.
The $704B deficit with the Democratic congress, not so much.
And I'm definitely blaming BO and the Democratic congress for the $2.7 trillion deficit.

Tell me where I am wrong?

[jimnaseum]

The day the Bush administration took over from President Bill Clinton in 2001, America enjoyed a $236 billion budget surplus -- with a projected 10-year surplus of $5.6 trillion. When the Bush administration left office, it handed President Obama a $1.3 trillion deficit -- and projected shortfalls of $8 trillion for the next decade. During eight years in office, the Bush administration passed two major tax cuts skewed to the wealthiest Americans, enacted a costly Medicare prescription-drug benefit and waged two wars, without paying for any of it.

To put the breathtaking scope of this irresponsibility in perspective, the Bush administration's swing from surpluses to deficits added more debt in its eight years than all the previous administrations in the history of our republic combined. And its spending spree is the unwelcome gift that keeps on giving: Going forward, these unpaid-for policies will continue to add trillions to our deficit.

This fiscal irresponsibility -- and a laissez-faire attitude toward the excesses of the financial industry -- helped create the conditions for the deepest economic catastrophe since the Great Depression. Economists across the political spectrum agreed that to deal with this crisis and avoid a second Great Depression, the government had to make significant investments to keep our economy going and shore up our financial system.

That is why President Obama and Congress crafted the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. It is widely accepted that the difficult but necessary steps Obama took have helped save our economy from an even deeper disaster. It was President Bush -- not Obama -- who signed into law the $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program bailout for banks, the Obama administration's rigorous stewardship added transparency and accountability that have cut the expected cost of that program by two-thirds.

Obama has proposed billions of dollars in cuts, and he'll continue to fight for them and others in the upcoming budget. Obama had been more successful in getting his proposed cuts through Congress than his predecessor was in any of his eight years in office.

And even as Obama has pursued landmark health insurance reforms that will hold the insurance industry accountable and expand coverage to working Americans, he has insisted from the beginning that any reform legislation must not add to the federal deficit and must help reduce it over time. According to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, the legislation making its way through Congress upholds this principle. As the president has said, the federal budget is like an ocean liner, not a motor boat, and it will take time to redirect its course. But the course correction that was so badly needed after the previous administration has begun in earnest.

There's an old saying that everyone is entitled to his own opinions, but not his own facts.

[CreativeMind]

The day the Bush administration took over from President Bill Clinton in 2001, America enjoyed a $236 billion budget surplus -- with a projected 10-year surplus of $5.6 trillion.

See, that's where you've already gone off the rails. But at least you used the right word to try and sneak one through.

When Bill Clinton left office, he did the exact same thing that ALL presidents are required do: namely, he submitted a 5 year PROJECTED budget report based on the economic indicators that HE (as current president) was basically GUESSING the way the economy would go, if Congress pursued his suggestions in the future.

The only problem for Clinton is that he basically guessed WRONG on pretty much everything across the board. In his 5 year projection, he stated (for example) that the boom "dot coms" that were currently blossoming at the time and making people overnight multi-millionaires would continue and grow the economy...when in fact the "dot com" bubble actually burst and NEVER lived up to Clinton's projections. Likewise Clinton predicted that energy costs would drop and thus trim the budget...except than the direct OPPOSITE happened and energy coasts literally SOARED, coupled by energy companies like Enron even going bankrupt due to financially fake book-keeping.

And before anyone on the Left tries to pull the old bullshit line about Bush being in the pocket of companies like Enron, keep it mind that it was UNDER CLINTON that Enron grew in size and doctored its books and went unchecked. Why? Because Clinton wanted to cite and incorporated their profit numbers as proof that his economic plan was working.

The crock of this being that during the 1980 presidential debates, Bush literally POINTED to the fact that far too many companies were doctoring their books...that far too many of Clinton's numbers were actually waaaaay off and misleading...which prompted an infamous historical exchange in the debates where Gore accused Bush of trying TO CREATE a recession by talking down the economy. Those on the Left love to conveniently forget that in 1980 Bush WARNED that a recession was looming, while Gore (and the running candidate) and Clinton said it was all nonsense and the economy was perfectly sound...

...At which point it turned out Bush was right, and we did enter a recession. And Bush was right again as companies like Enron went under. And for all the talk on the left how Bush was in the pocket of Enron, let the record show that it was BUSH and HIS justice department that went after Ken Lay and Enron, to throw them into jail and to expose the bookkeeping corruption that was going on.


When the Bush administration left office, it handed President Obama a $1.3 trillion deficit -- and projected shortfalls of $8 trillion for the next decade. During eight years in office, the Bush administration passed two major tax cuts skewed to the wealthiest Americans, enacted a costly Medicare prescription-drug benefit and waged two wars, without paying for any of it.

Which the Democrats ALSO continually voted for as well.
So your point? Or are you admitting the Dems have no clean hands as well?

As for Bush handing Obama a $1.3 trillion deficit after 8 years, given your indignation, how do you feel about Obama QUINTUPLING that amount in only ONE year?

[CreativeMind]

To put the breathtaking scope of this irresponsibility in perspective, the Bush administration's swing from surpluses to deficits added more debt in its eight years than all the previous administrations in the history of our republic combined. And its spending spree is the unwelcome gift that keeps on giving: Going forward, these unpaid-for policies will continue to add trillions to our deficit.

Nice try, but as a historical TRUTH that is actually a well-documented and proven FACT about Obama. The bottom line: in only ONE YEAR in office, Obama has now SPENT MORE THAN EVERY PRECEDING PRESIDENT IN U.S. HISTORY COMBINED.

That is why President Obama and Congress crafted the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. It is widely accepted that the difficult but necessary steps Obama took have helped save our economy from an even deeper disaster.

Actually, it's NOT "widely accepted" anymore. In fact, just as many economists -- and even polls of the American people themselves -- now show that a majority of people feel Obama basically "scared" people into allowing him (and the Democrats in Congress) to break the national piggy bank and to spend like drunken sailors on shore leave, by constantly labeling the crisis "the worst disaster since the Great Depression."

As many economists have noted -- including even people like Paul Krugman, noted LIBERAL economist, who of late has likewise turned on Obama -- how can you call it "the worst crisis since the great depression" when all it took was a one time cash infusion to right the system, and in only ONE YEAR the veru same banks Obama was claiming were on the verge of total collapse have not only paid their loan money back, but are now likewise posting RECORD PROFITS?

It was President Bush -- not Obama -- who signed into law the $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program bailout for banks....

You're right. So congratulations on proving my point. Even if you DO want to call it "the worst crisis since the Great Depresssion", then the CREDIT for saving the banks and re-stabilizing the system should NOT go to Obama, but should actually belong to -- yes -- George Bush!

...the Obama administration's rigorous stewardship added transparency and accountability that have cut the expected cost of that program by two-thirds.

I call bullshit on that one. It's not that Obama CUT the cost by 2/3 through any stewardship. And the idea that ANYTHING Obama does can be called transparent is laughable. The reason there was a savings is because they never NEEDED to spend all the allocated money -- which dovetails right back into my point above, that the banks righted themselves to a large degree and are now even back to posting profits.

[CreativeMind]

He (Obama) has insisted from the beginning that any (health care) reform legislation must not add to the federal deficit and must help reduce it over time. According to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, the legislation making its way through Congress upholds this principle.

Not true at all. What the CBO report states is that it would INITIALLY save money, but that only a mere 5 years out costs start to rise -- and 10 years out the program is running a huge deficit, nearly a whopping $2 trillion.

In fact, even the CBO's assertion that there will be some initial savings were highly dubious and could only be derived through Enron-like doctoring of the books, which EVEN THE CBO ACKNOWLEDGED IN THEIR REPORT.

Basically, to pay for a $1 trillion health care plan, Obama simply CLAIMED he would come up with $500 billion of that through Medicare cuts (in other words, that's how he'd literally find HALF of the money for his progam) -- and yet to this day O-dumba (and the Democrats) still can't actually name where these so-called cuts are going to come from. Instead, they just SAID they'd magically find HALF A TRILLION in savings, and then decided to add that money -- still sight unseen -- into the pile.

Tell you what.
I can play the Democratic game of creative accounting too.
Here's how it works...

I have bills to pay... I need to save money this year... but hey, no problem!
Since I work in Hollywood, I'm SURE that I'm gonna sell a $1 MILLION screenplay this year.
I'm SURE things will break my way the best way imaginable!

What's that? You want to know if I have a $1 million offer on the table now?
Uh...no...I don't. But, hey, I'm thinking positive, and that's all that counts -- right?
So since I'm SURE it's gonna happen, I'm just gonna go ahead
and add that million bucks into my bank account, BEFORE I've even made it.

WOW! LOOK AT THAT!
Once I toss a mythical million dollars into my bank account, I have no more debt!
Wow, that sure was easy to balance my check book.
Guess I won't have to worry about any bills this year after all!

And, yes, that's EXACTLY how Obama and the Democrats did their health care reform math...

[Talvenada]

Well, if Bush left a "whopping deficit for Obama", just what is Obama leaving the next president?
Or all of us, as citizens, for that matter?
As Tracy CORRECTLY pointed out in another thread...


C-MIN:

Tracy is correct and she just happens to agree with you? I'm not going to engage with you, because I don't want to read a short story.

Conse 'Pubs have the POV that any pol who isn't
a Conse 'Pub will FAIL, and a Conse 'Pub who fails isn't Conse enough. Can it be any more narrow that? Make it short or don't reply.


TAL

[jimnaseum]

OWWWCH!!! Another post deleted?
OK, lets wrap this up...Would SOMEBODY tell me Bush's greatest achievement?

[Talvenada]

OWWWCH!!! Another post deleted?
OK, lets wrap this up...Would SOMEBODY tell me Bush's greatest achievement?




That's so easy: TAX CUTS.

The best way to buy a vote legally.

[TracyCoxx]

OWWWCH!!! Another post deleted?
OK, lets wrap this up...Would SOMEBODY tell me Bush's greatest achievement?

For the country? Taking the fight to Al Qaeda after 9/11 and keeping America safe from 9/11 till the end of his presidency. This is something Obama has failed at. He's lost soldiers at Fort Hood because of domestic terrorism and came dangerously close to losing hundreds of American civilians on xmas from that underwear-bomber. You will say why didn't Bush stop 9/11, and I'll remind you the hijackers were already in the country before Bush took office. And something else you probably didn't know is that he went from Clinton's neglect of Al Qaeda to signing an order for military action against Al Qaeda on September 10th, 2001. It might have been sooner if his transition into office hadn't been delayed by Gore's antics.

What else is his greatest achievement from my perspective? Initiating the Moon/Mars exploration program at Nasa. It's been 38 years since we've been beyond low Earth orbit and there's still several years to go, but we're finally on track.

[ila]

For the country? Taking the fight to Al Qaeda after 9/11 and keeping America safe from 9/11 till the end of his presidency. This is something Obama has failed at. He's lost soldiers at Fort Hood because of domestic terrorism and came dangerously close to losing hundreds of American civilians on xmas from that underwear-bomber......

I like reading your posts, Tracy. You bring a sane perspective to all the antiBush rantings that are so common throughout your country. I would like to know though why you blame Obama for what happened at Fort Hood. I don't think that anyone could have prevented that except those in the army.

[randolph]

For the country? Taking the fight to Al Qaeda after 9/11 and keeping America safe from 9/11 till the end of his presidency. This is something Obama has failed at. He's lost soldiers at Fort Hood because of domestic terrorism and came dangerously close to losing hundreds of American civilians on xmas from that underwear-bomber. You will say why didn't Bush stop 9/11, and I'll remind you the hijackers were already in the country before Bush took office. And something else you probably didn't know is that he went from Clinton's neglect of Al Qaeda to signing an order for military action against Al Qaeda on September 10th, 2001. It might have been sooner if his transition into office hadn't been delayed by Gore's antics.

What else is his greatest achievement from my perspective? Initiating the Moon/Mars exploration program at Nasa. It's been 38 years since we've been beyond low Earth orbit and there's still several years to go, but we're finally on track.

Oh boy! Tracy, you are amazing! How can such an intelligent person be so biased and then actually blame Gore for 9/11! :rolleyes:

[The Conquistador]

I like reading your posts, Tracy. You bring a sane perspective to all the antiBush rantings that are so common throughout your country. I would like to know though why you blame Obama for what happened at Fort Hood. I don't think that anyone could have prevented that except those in the army.

It is more of Clintons fault than anything. When he was in office, he mandated that on any military installation, any weapon not in use for training be locked up, effectively disarming everyone on base. Before that, people could carry sidearms on base. Had another troop been armed, alot less people would have been hurt and the Major would have had a couple more orifices to breathe out of. That and Clintons EO policies which if you aren't "tolerant" towards other people's feelings or background, could get you canned or possibly sent to Leavenworth. Had anyone protested or questioned the Major's recent evangelical and radical positions, odds are, he could have complained about them being "racist" or "xenophobic" and ruined that persons career.


Feel free to blame "Bubba" for Ft. Hood.

[The Conquistador]

Oh boy! Tracy, you are amazing! How can such an intelligent person be so biased and then actually blame Gore for 9/11! :rolleyes:

Read it again Mr. randolph. She said nothing of the like.

[Talvenada]

Oh boy! Tracy, you are amazing! How can such an intelligent person be so biased and then actually blame Gore for 9/11! :rolleyes:

RANDY:

Didn't you know that according to Dana Perino, there were no domestic attacks on Bush's term.

St. Rudy of 9-11 said there were no attacks under Bush and 1 under Obama, but then his staff changed it to after 9-11. He forgot, no doubt. Or he meant to say, or he meant.

Mary Matilin said Bush inherited 9-11.

We were attacked under Clinton & Obama, while Bush-Cheney kept us safe.

Rush Limbaugh blamed Obama for the economy in 9/08, and like Palin said about us: Quit making things up.


You and I have opinions, and so do they. One of them on this board feels Obama is not an American. He's an illegal alien who plotted his way into office. and fooled all but a few Conse 'Pubs. He needs to be arrested and imprisoned. Now, if I was a rich Conse 'Pub, I'd buy a majority in the house and senate to impeach and convict Obama after the 11/4/10 election. Just buy what you need to convict and imprison Obama for deliberately trying to ruin the country, like Coulter knows for a fact. Conse 'Pubs on The SC have evened the playing field that was unfair to Conse 'Pubs, no doubt.

TAL

[Talvenada]

ILA:

We south of the border have an interesting dynamic of debate: honest and political. In an honest debate you deal in only facts or bluffs. In a political debate a Conse 'Pub (conse-rvative re-pub-lican) can claim that Obama is NOT an American, and that is an EQUAL opinion.

Using that yardstick, any attack that occurred on American soil is due to Clinton or Obama. Conse 'Pubs feel insulted when they are mocked, and they feel outrage over Obama on a daily basis for what he last did or will do or is doing. We used to have this only during election time, we now have it every day, and it used to be called silly season.

TAL

[Talvenada]

ILA:

According to Cheney, hundreds of thousands of lives were saved, because of their policies.



TAL

[randolph]

Read it again Mr. randolph. She said nothing of the like.

Tracy--"It might have been sooner if his transition into office hadn't been delayed by Gore's antics."

The implication of this statement is that if Bush had had more time, he could have prevented 9/11. This is total BS!

[The Conquistador]

You will say why didn't Bush stop 9/11, and I'll remind you the hijackers were already in the country before Bush took office. And something else you probably didn't know is that he went from Clinton's neglect of Al Qaeda to signing an order for military action against Al Qaeda on September 10th, 2001. It might have been sooner if his transition into office hadn't been delayed by Gore's antics.

1) The attack would have happened regardless of who was in office. They were already here so the finding of the terrorists would have been a job for our alphabet agencies. That shows failure of our security measures and our policies which were emplaced by Clinton who knew about the threat and brushed it aside.

2) He recognized a threat and did not casually blow it off. Could he have found the terrorists had his order been signed earlier? Probably not. Our measures are more defensive and reactive in nature. Bush actually had an offensive mindset and took the fight to them rather than bending over and taking it in the ass.

3) I guarantee you that if Gore won, he would blow off the threat of Al-Qaeda just like his predecessor and once we were attacked, he would try to engage in "peaceful dialogue" and "empathy" or "understanding" with Al-Qaeda. Meanwhile his little tip-toeing would present the country as spineless and invite even more attacks against us.

[randolph]

1) The attack would have happened regardless of who was in office. They were already here so the finding of the terrorists would have been a job for our alphabet agencies. That shows failure of our security measures and our policies which were emplaced by Clinton who knew about the threat and brushed it aside.

2) He recognized a threat and did not casually blow it off. Could he have found the terrorists had his order been signed earlier? Probably not. Our measures are more defensive and reactive in nature. Bush actually had an offensive mindset and took the fight to them rather than bending over and taking it in the ass.

3) I guarantee you that if Gore won, he would blow off the threat of Al-Qaeda just like his predecessor and once we were attacked, he would try to engage in "peaceful dialogue" and "empathy" or "understanding" with Al-Qaeda. Meanwhile his little tip-toeing would present the country as spineless and invite even more attacks against us.

This was from the NY Times, 2004
Senior Clinton administration officials called to testify next week before the independent commission investigating the Sept. 11 attacks say they are prepared to detail how they repeatedly warned their Bush administration counterparts in late 2000 that Al Qaeda posed the worst security threat facing the nation -- and how the new administration was slow to act. They said the warnings were delivered in urgent post-election intelligence briefings in December 2000 and January 2001 for Condoleezza Rice, who became Mr. Bush's national security adviser; Stephen Hadley, now Ms. Rice's deputy; and Philip D. Zelikow, a member of the Bush transition team, among others.
One official scheduled to testify, Richard A. Clarke, who was President Bill Clinton's counterterrorism coordinator, said in an interview that the warning about the Qaeda threat could not have been made more bluntly to the incoming Bush officials in intelligence briefings that he led.
At the time of the briefings, there was extensive evidence tying Al Qaeda to the bombing in Yemen two months earlier of an American warship, the Cole, in which 17 sailors were killed.
''It was very explicit,'' Mr. Clarke said of the warning given to the Bush administration officials. ''Rice was briefed, and Hadley was briefed, and Zelikow sat in.'' Mr. Clarke served as Mr. Bush's counterterrorism chief in the early months of the administration, but after Sept. 11 was given a more limited portfolio as the president's cyberterrorism adviser.




You guys seem to have rather short memories.:rolleyes:

[jimnaseum]

President Clinton took the fight to Bin Laden when he dropped a cruise missile in his camp in August '98. Missed him by two hours. Republicans called this a publicity stunt to divert attention from Monica Lewinski. It was actually this attack that probably prompted 9-11.

[TracyCoxx]

I like reading your posts, Tracy. You bring a sane perspective to all the antiBush rantings that are so common throughout your country. I would like to know though why you blame Obama for what happened at Fort Hood. I don't think that anyone could have prevented that except those in the army.

Thank you :) I blame Obama indirectly. He is the one who sets the tone of political correctness that we can't allow to get in the way of security. See here (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,573469,00.html).

Oh boy! Tracy, you are amazing! How can such an intelligent person be so biased and then actually blame Gore for 9/11! :rolleyes:What? I didn't blame Gore for 9/11. I said Gore antics delayed Bush's transition.

Tracy--"It might have been sooner if his transition into office hadn't been delayed by Gore's antics."

The implication of this statement is that if Bush had had more time, he could have prevented 9/11. This is total BS!

How? Considering that Bush had a certain amount of time to work on the Al Qaeda problem, and that it progressed to the point that he signed an order for military action on September 10th. Obviously if he started working on the problem sooner, he would have initiated military action sooner. When you look at the fact that Bush was delayed in receiving funds to start his administration, and putting together his cabinet because of the contested election, you have to realize that that delayed any action against Al Qaeda. Or am I a Time Lord and therefore the only one able to see such complexities in SpaceTime?

Senior Clinton administration officials called to testify next week before the independent commission investigating the Sept. 11 attacks say they are prepared to detail how they repeatedly warned their Bush administration counterparts in late 2000 that Al Qaeda posed the worst security threat facing the nation -- and how the new administration was slow to act.
Yes, they did warn Bush. But later than they would have if Bush had been given the win earlier. Also, Bush was unable to assemble a team to act on the information. Also remember who the source is. Bill Clinton does not want to look like they dropped the ball. But if they had such urgent warnings, why didn't they act on it? Why didn't they at least hand Bush their draft of a plan of attack?

[schiff]

There's no such thing as a "middle class." You either sell your labor, or you profit off the labor of others. Where's the middle in that?
What is labor? Is work with your brain considered labor? Cause I'll tell ya, physics & calculus are pretty laborious....

[tslust]

I like reading your posts, Tracy. You bring a sane perspective to all the antiBush rantings that are so common throughout your country. I would like to know though why you blame Obama for what happened at Fort Hood. I don't think that anyone could have prevented that except those in the army.

The Ft. Hood shooter had a questionable record. First he lied on his papers to get into the Army (under nationality he listed palestinian, when he was born and raised in Virginia), he repeatedly stated that he admired the suicide bombers, when he interned at Walter Reed he was trying to convert his patients and other staff to islam, and he was already under investigation for posting on terrorist websites. Every time someone raised a concern about him, it was ignored.

[The Conquistador]

What is labor? Is work with your brain considered labor? Cause I'll tell ya, physics & calculus are pretty laborious....

Yes. If you are a drafter and get paid to doodle all day, all the effort you put into designing is considered labor. You are getting compensated for your effort by the way of money.

I don't think I'd ever be able to grasp calculus or physics. I was reading something on quantum physics and it was so mind boggling that I went into my Keanu Reeves mode...

"Whoa!"

[TracyCoxx]

I don't think I'd ever be able to grasp calculus or physics. I was reading something on quantum physics and it was so mind boggling that I went into my Keanu Reeves mode...

"Whoa!"Kinda like when you turn an electron around 360 degrees, it doesn't look the same. You have to turn it around another 360 degrees before you're back to where you were.

[TracyCoxx]

Obama is expected to call for a spending freeze for the next free years on "non-security" budget items. How convenient, now that he's finally getting around to figuring out what to do with the space program.

[smc]

What is labor? Is work with your brain considered labor? Cause I'll tell ya, physics & calculus are pretty laborious....

Yes, work with your brain is labor. The point is about whether you get paid the full value of your labor, or whether someone else who does none of the labor succeeds in boosting the "price" of the labor to profit in some way.

[schiff]

Yes, work with your brain is labor. The point is about whether you get paid the full value of your labor, or whether someone else who does none of the labor succeeds in boosting the "price" of the labor to profit in some way.
Engineers get paid pretty damn well. BAM! Solution found.

[The Conquistador]

Kinda like when you turn an electron around 360 degrees, it doesn't look the same. You have to turn it around another 360 degrees before you're back to where you were.

I meant more like the math behind all that. I understand the basic concepts; I'm just not a whiz kid when it comes to the math part.

[smc]

Engineers get paid pretty damn well. BAM! Solution found.

I guess if your looking for a simplistic measure, to which little thought has been given, you could say that. But if you want to grasp the complexity, you need to be a bit more scientific. One's wage level is decidedly not the criterion.

[Talvenada]

Conse 'Pubs will savage Obama's speech.

They will say this proves the people have realized Obama was a mistake.

[jimnaseum]

Polling has proven the American People want Change, but they want somebody to change things for them, "The Party of No" is what the people want right now, Obama knows this. Ignore the State of the Union Address, the state of the union sucks. Even with losses in the House and Senate this year, "The Party of No" has no legs, and certainly has no leaders. Obama knows it's always darkest before the dawn, and he's manipulated the Republicans into cowering together in the dark. When Dawn breaks, the Truth will be seen by all, and the remaining stench of the Bush/Cheney Death March will be expunged.

[TracyCoxx]

Polling has proven the American People want ChangeThat idiotic ambiguous line isn't going to work next election. People will have seen what 'Change' means and they won't want it. TMF will be forced to talk about issues and that's the last thing he wants to discuss.

Ignore the State of the Union Address, the state of the union sucks.Thank your president.

Even with losses in the House and Senate this year, "The Party of No" has no legs, and certainly has no leaders.
That's because it's a true grass roots uprising that's pushing the dems out.

[jimnaseum]

You're a good cheerleader, Tracy, but your team is fucked, and they know it. Corporate America isn't so sure it wants Repunlicans back, seeing as how THEY ALMOST DESTROYED THE STOCK MARKET!!!!!!!
You saw Corporate America rear it's ugly head in 2000, when they gave little Bush the election, 5-4. You just saw them come out of the shadows again last week when they suceeded in enacting a Law that will enable them to skip any possibility of them losing power, 5-4.
There are two kinds of power: PEOPLE and MONEY. Each needs the other. The face of the Republican party is Sarah, Rush, and Glenn. That has Corporate America shitting it's pants! They want a sleepy president, like Reagan, or Daddy Bush.
The question is will Corporate Money back Romney, a sure loser? No, they'll pick up nickel and dime candidates now and wait til 2016, after Obama has fixed the Economy. The Republicans have no platform and they know it. If the terrorists attack again, Obama WILL become FDR! People will flock behind the President then. They always do.

[CCC]

Oh my god--Jimnaeium--is that how liberals think !!!!! You have everything all mixed up. And then you think Obama is going to save the world ?? And you think we are going to sit around til 2016 while your guy and his gang destroy my country?? Didn't you see what happened in New Jersey or Virginia or upper New York state and then BROWN whopping Coakley and the dem/liberal/Kennedy bunch. Your team saw it and they are panicing. Your team is dropping by the wayside and you are still cheering them on. I suggest you start listening to TracyCoxx--she's got it going on. Now I suggest also that you resign yourself to the fact the Obama is going to join Jimmy Carter with one term and lucky we don't run him out of town.

"Obama WILL become FDR!" You are right about that if we let him. Couple of the worst presidents ever were Woodrow Wilson and FDR--unthinking liberals to a tee. Want to see what a Liberal Run country would be like--look at some big cities that are always dem liberal run--Detroit--New Orleans--Chicago.

Get your rest now---2 hours and your Messiah speaks---I'll get my barf bag.

Have a good night.

[Talvenada]

Get your rest now---2 hours and your Messiah speaks---I'll get my barf bag.



CCC:

Messiah was invented by Rush Limbaugh to create an expectation of a miraculous fixing of all problems in no time, like fixing the economy by 12/1/08.

Anything short of that is a disastrous failure, and Conse 'Pubs deserve 8 years to fix what Obama broke? Aren't Conse 'Pubs the best?

TAL

[TracyCoxx]

You're a good cheerleader, Tracy, but your team is fucked, and they know it. Corporate America isn't so sure it wants Repunlicans back, seeing as how THEY ALMOST DESTROYED THE STOCK MARKET!!!!!!!

Oh yes, republicans screwed up everything and it's all under control now. BO has Corporate America under control now huh... BO's own secretary of treasury, Tim Geithner, allowed Steven Friedman to oversee Goldman Sachs. Who's Friedman? Former chairman of Goldman Sachs and was on the board of directors. Geithner OK'd this conflict of interest. Geithner also allows Friedman to keep his 52000 shares of Goldman Sachs stock while he oversees Goldman Sachs. Oh, and btw, Goldman Sachs stock rose from $78/share to $167 per share over the last year.

There's a new lobbyist for Goldman Sachs. Michael Pease. He's joining the director of government affairs. They hired him because their previous lobbyist, Mark Patterson, has been named the chief of staff for Timothy Geithner. Michael Pease is now in Barney Frank's office.

Gee I'm so glad Obama is keeping banks and corporate america under control now.

[TracyCoxx]

CCC:

Messiah was invented by Rush Limbaugh to create an expectation of a miraculous fixing of all problems in no time, like fixing the economy by 12/1/08.

Apparently liberals have this expectation...
Obama is perfect. Obama is God. When will you morons aknowledge this?

[randolph]

Oh yes, republicans screwed up everything and it's all under control now. BO has Corporate America under control now huh... BO's own secretary of treasury, Tim Geithner, allowed Steven Friedman to oversee Goldman Sachs. Who's Friedman? Former chairman of Goldman Sachs and was on the board of directors. Geithner OK'd this conflict of interest. Geithner also allows Friedman to keep his 52000 shares of Goldman Sachs stock while he oversees Goldman Sachs. Oh, and btw, Goldman Sachs stock rose from $78/share to $167 per share over the last year.

There's a new lobbyist for Goldman Sachs. Michael Pease. He's joining the director of government affairs. They hired him because their previous lobbyist, Mark Patterson, has been named the chief of staff for Timothy Geithner. Michael Pease is now in Barney Frank's office.

Gee I'm so glad Obama is keeping banks and corporate america under control now.

It seems just the other day all you guys were screaming Obama was a, gasp, SOCIALIST!
Told Ya!

[TracyCoxx]

Waiting for TMF to speak. Give'em hell Joe!

[randolph]

Waiting for TMF to speak. Give'em hell Joe!

Do it Obama!

[Talvenada]

Apparently liberals have this expectation...

TRACY:

You've used this link before to prove you--no doubt--are right, as usual.

The quote appears to be cherry-picked, taken out of context, and/or it was a sarcastic comment.

I cannot tell without the whole text. It's kind of like Sotomayor being a blatant racist after Conse 'Pub pols cherry-picked statements over 20 years to pick one that could be misrepresented. Out of context and misrepresented?

Sorry, Conse 'Pubs have really poisoned things for me.

TAL

[Talvenada]

Waiting for TMF to speak. Give'em hell Joe!


TRACY:

Joe Wilson defines what it is to be a Conse 'Pub, like you.

TAL

[TracyCoxx]

TRACY:

You've used this link before to prove you--no doubt--are right, as usual.

The quote appears to be cherry-picked, taken out of context, and/or it was a sarcastic comment.

I cannot tell without the whole text. It's kind of like Sotomayor being a blatant racist after Conse 'Pub pols cherry-picked statements over 20 years to pick one that could be misrepresented. Out of context and misrepresented?

Sorry, Conse 'Pubs have really poisoned things for me.

TAL

I'm not trying to hide the context. Just putting in the relevant part of the quote. To see where the quote came from, the whole quote, just click on the check box after the name in the quote. Or click here

http://forum.transladyboy.com/showthread.php?p=128440#post128440

[TracyCoxx]

TRACY:

Joe Wilson defines what it is to be a Conse 'Pub, like you.

TAL

Before, I merely despised him. Seeing as how BO has now targeted my job and lifelong goal I am in a particularly foul mood when it comes to him today.

[Talvenada]

I'm not trying to hide the context. Just putting in the relevant part of the quote. To see where the quote came from, the whole quote, just click on the check box after the name in the quote. Or click here

http://forum.transladyboy.com/showthread.php?p=128440#post128440

TRACY:

It was an over-the-top back-and-forth with The Angry Postman, and was out of context in the course of the conversation. You didn't take the post out of context, but it was out of the context of the back-and-forth conversation.

See why I feel poisoned?

TAL

[Talvenada]

Before, I merely despised him. Seeing as how BO has now targeted my job and lifelong goal I am in a particularly foul mood when it comes to him today.

TRACY


So, you ONLY despised him from when? 9/08?

Do you know how many people lost their jobs in 2008?

Cheney told Bush that they had to do something to avoid being Hooverized.

You blame Obama, and Limbaugh blamed him for the economy in 9/08.

Your opinion appears to be colored (influenced) by your ideology, while I prefer facts. Bush had 116 questionable actions in 8 years, which is more than 1 a month. I'm different: If Obama pulled the same stunts, I'd bust on him but good. I'm a Mod Dem, but I don't buy blind allegiance to anybody. The man shows me he'll do his best, and that's all a realistic person can ask for.




TAL

[TracyCoxx]

TRACY:

It was an over-the-top back-and-forth with The Angry Postman, and was out of context in the course of the conversation. You didn't take the post out of context, but it was out of the context of the back-and-forth conversation.

See why I feel poisoned?

TAL
Not really...

TRACY


So, you ONLY despised him from when? 9/08?

Do you know how many people lost their jobs in 2008?

Cheney told Bush that they had to do something to avoid being Hooverized.

You blame Obama, and Limbaugh blamed him for the economy in 9/08.

Your opinion appears to be colored (influenced) by your ideology, while I prefer facts. Bush had 116 questionable actions in 8 years, which is more than 1 a month. I'm different: If Obama pulled the same stunts, I'd bust on him but good. I'm a Mod Dem, but I don't buy blind allegiance to anybody. The man shows me he'll do his best, and that's all a realistic person can ask for.

He's trying his best to go against the will of the country.

[Talvenada]

Not really...



He's trying his best to go against the will of the country.

TRACY:

The will of the people is blurred. It is distorted by claims, like Fox, where I've heard that the majority of the people feel like Conse 'Pubs. The rub is that they've felt that way for most of Obama's term, like they gave him a month. That's what Beck did: He started his 9-12 project (tea parties) after 1 month, and they marched on DC for tax day. That will is distorted by carefully worded polls, and slanted audiences. Distortion example from Hannity: Bush won '04 in a landslide, but almost 50 million people voted against Obama. The latter sounds like he lost the election.

TAL

[TracyCoxx]

TRACY:

The will of the people is blurred. It is distorted by claims, like Fox, where I've heard that the majority of the people feel like Conse 'Pubs. The rub is that they've felt that way for most of Obama's term, like they gave him a month. That's what Beck did: He started his 9-12 project (tea parties) after 1 month, and they marched on DC for tax day. That will is distorted by carefully worded polls, and slanted audiences. Distortion example from Hannity: Bush won '04 in a landslide, but almost 50 million people voted against Obama. The latter sounds like he lost the election.

TAL

Yeah... what happened after a month into BO's term? He spent 2.5 times as much as Bush did during his entire 8 years! And that includes Bush's $700 billion Wall Street bailout! And it wasn't Glenn Beck that started the Tea Parties. This is what started it:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yEDlod2V80U

[Talvenada]

Yeah... what happened after a month into BO's term? He spent 2.5 times as much as Bush did during his entire 8 years! And that includes Bush's $700 billion Wall Street bailout! And it wasn't Glenn Beck that started the Tea Parties. This is what started it:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yEDlod2V80U


TRACY:

So, what would you have done? Nothing or more tax cuts? Why didn't Bush do nothing or more tax cuts? I put tea parties in parenthesis, because of the tax-day protest and not the founding of. Sorry, I wasn't totally clear on that which was a Ron Paul Libertarian design.

TAL

[jimnaseum]

Fuzzy Math and Teabagger IQs aren't going to sink the Democrats, it's going to sink the Republicans. The baggers are already bickering with Sarah Palin because she's supporting McCain over some wacko DJ in Arizona. Every time any serious Republican candidate is pressed on the birthers, or death panels, or evolution, or Rush Limbo, you can see them disappear before your eyes. The Democrats don't need ACORN, but the Republicans need Glenn Beck. Good luck with that.
BTW, wasn't Obama magnificent last night?

[TracyCoxx]

TRACY:

So, what would you have done? Nothing or more tax cuts? Why didn't Bush do nothing or more tax cuts? I put tea parties in parenthesis, because of the tax-day protest and not the founding of. Sorry, I wasn't totally clear on that which was a Ron Paul Libertarian design.I think Ron Paul had it right. We should never have done the Wall Street bailout in the first place because we can't afford it. If you're deep in debt, anyone with a brain knows you don't put yourself further in debt. That's obvious and I can't believe it has to be explained.

And you don't do nothing. The budget MUST BE BALANCED! This is another thing that is so obvious it shouldn't need explaining. There's tons of pork that we're paying for, and everybody knows it. Cut that crap out.

We need to transform the country so that we produce actual goods, not just services. When we export goods, we lower our deficit. And the way to do that is NOT by increasing taxes on corporations. They will scale their production down, go bankrupt or leave the country.

Yes, it will be painful for a few years. Pain is the only way to lower the deficit, but when we do, we will be much stronger as a nation. What BO is doing is propping up every bad idea that has failed so that it stays with us and continues to screw us.

And btw, even doing nothing would be better than what BO has done. The economy started to recover before the stimulus package had a chance to go into effect.

[Talvenada]

I think Ron Paul had it right. We should never have done the Wall Street bailout in the first place because we can't afford it. If you're deep in debt, anyone with a brain knows you don't put yourself further in debt. That's obvious and I can't believe it has to be explained.

And you don't do nothing. The budget MUST BE BALANCED! This is another thing that is so obvious it shouldn't need explaining. There's tons of pork that we're paying for, and everybody knows it. Cut that crap out.

We need to transform the country so that we produce actual goods, not just services. When we export goods, we lower our deficit. And the way to do that is NOT by increasing taxes on corporations. They will scale their production down, go bankrupt or leave the country.

Yes, it will be painful for a few years. Pain is the only way to lower the deficit, but when we do, we will be much stronger as a nation. What BO is doing is propping up every bad idea that has failed so that it stays with us and continues to screw us.

And btw, even doing nothing would be better than what BO has done. The economy started to recover before the stimulus package had a chance to go into effect.


TRACY:

So, you don't believe Cheney when he said they had to do the bailout to avoid a Great Depression?


TAL

[TracyCoxx]

TRACY:

So, you don't believe Cheney when he said they had to do the bailout to avoid a Great Depression?No. We weren't heading for a great depression. Tough times, yes, but not a great depression. Free market is a system of profit and loss. When the government tries to hide the loss, it fucks with the system and turns it into something else.

Oh, and another thing. We have to get back on the gold standard.

[Talvenada]

No. We weren't heading for a great depression. Tough times, yes, but not a great depression. Free market is a system of profit and loss. When the government tries to hide the loss, it fucks with the system and turns it into something else.

Oh, and another thing. We have to get back on the gold standard.

TRACY:

Are you aware of the electronic run on the banks in mid-September '08?

TAL

[TracyCoxx]

TRACY:

Are you aware of the electronic run on the banks in mid-September '08?

TAL

Yes, very aware.

[jimnaseum]

Let's get down to facts, shall we?
The GOP is going to vote on a "Purity Resolution" today, proposing that all Republican Candidates must adhere to at least 8 out of 10 Conservative Values (taxes, illegal immigrants, guns, gays, etc) or be denied GOP funding. It is an attempt to bring the TRUE BELIEVERS and the REPUBLICAN PARTY together.
Now,.....my money says the party of NO is going to say no to this.
Looks like business as usual over at the GOP.

[Talvenada]

Yes, very aware.

TRACY:

So, Bush was wrong to do the bailout?

That means if Obama does nothing or what you wanted, you'd be happy?

If things failed doing things your way, you would not criticize Obama?


TAL

[CCC]

Let's get down to facts, shall we?
The GOP is going to vote on a "Purity Resolution" today, proposing that all Republican Candidates must adhere to at least 8 out of 10 Conservative Values (taxes, illegal immigrants, guns, gays, etc) or be denied GOP funding. It is an attempt to bring the TRUE BELIEVERS and the REPUBLICAN PARTY together.
Now,.....my money says the party of NO is going to say no to this.
Looks like business as usual over at the GOP.

You should be complaining about them copying the Dems..... agree to my stuff or I cut you off. At least GOP gives you free speech.

[Talvenada]

You should be complaining about them copying the Dems..... agree to my stuff or I cut you off. At least GOP gives you free speech.


CCC:

No, it gives YOU freedom of speech.

Cheney said it is unpatriotic to question Pres. Bush during wartime! In other words, say nothing!!!

However, when Cheney criticizes Obama, it's his right to question him.

Yeah, the freedom of speech to buy elections courtesy of The SC.


TAL

[jimnaseum]

You should be complaining about them copying the Dems..... agree to my stuff or I cut you off. At least GOP gives you free speech.

Sure, you can have all the free speeches you want. But you better check yourself before you wreck yourself. The Republican Party is embarassed by you. You're a TOOL to them. They LAUGH at you behind closed doors. But they sure appreciate your vote. There's no MONEY in teabagger beliefs. That's why the Republicans will never fund it. It's too much like giving money to hard working Americans.

[randolph]

Let's get down to facts, shall we?
The GOP is going to vote on a "Purity Resolution" today, proposing that all Republican Candidates must adhere to at least 8 out of 10 Conservative Values (taxes, illegal immigrants, guns, gays, etc) or be denied GOP funding. It is an attempt to bring the TRUE BELIEVERS and the REPUBLICAN PARTY together.
Now,.....my money says the party of NO is going to say no to this.
Looks like business as usual over at the GOP.

Some quotes from George Carlin.

"Conservatives say if you don't give the rich more money, they will lose their incentive to invest. As for the poor, they tell us they've lost all incentive because we've given them too much money." :lol:

"Have you ever wondered why Republicans are so interested in encouraging people to volunteer in their communities? It?s because volunteers work for no pay. Republicans have been trying to get people to work for no pay for a long time." :lol:

"Once you leave the womb, conservatives don't care about you until you reach military age. Then you?re just what they?re looking for. Conservatives want live babies so they can raise them to be dead soldiers." :eek:

[Talvenada]

Some quotes from George Carlin.

"Conservatives say if you don't give the rich more money, they will lose their incentive to invest. As for the poor, they tell us they've lost all incentive because we've given them too much money." :lol:

"Have you ever wondered why Republicans are so interested in encouraging people to volunteer in their communities? It?s because volunteers work for no pay. Republicans have been trying to get people to work for no pay for a long time." :lol:

"Once you leave the womb, conservatives don't care about you until you reach military age. Then you?re just what they?re looking for. Conservatives want live babies so they can raise them to be dead soldiers." :eek:



RANDY:

Conse 'Pubs are for the military and honor, except when it comes to giving them more than the minimum increase in pay and benefits. Why? We cannot afford it!

TAL

[CCC]

Some quotes from George Carlin.

"Conservatives say if you don't give the rich more money, they will lose their incentive to invest. As for the poor, they tell us they've lost all incentive because we've given them too much money." :lol:

"Have you ever wondered why Republicans are so interested in encouraging people to volunteer in their communities? It?s because volunteers work for no pay. Republicans have been trying to get people to work for no pay for a long time." :lol:

"Once you leave the womb, conservatives don't care about you until you reach military age. Then you?re just what they?re looking for. Conservatives want live babies so they can raise them to be dead soldiers." :eek:

And that is why Carlin is a great comedian and a friend of the family ha ha

[randolph]

Jimmy got that right.

"After President Obama spoke, the Republicans gave their rebuttal, during which they pointed out that Obama has repeatedly failed to solve any of the problems they created under President Bush (http://politicalhumor.about.com/od/georgewbush/tp/george-bush-jokes.htm)." -Jimmy Kimmel

[The Conquistador]

“Liberals seem to assume that, if you don't believe in their particular political solutions, then you don't really care about the people that they claim to want to help”-Thomas Sowell

"One of the most pervasive political visions of our time is the vision of liberals as compassionate and conservatives as less caring."-Thomas Sowell

"People who identify themselves as conservatives donate money to charity more often than people who identify themselves as liberals. They donate more money and a higher percentage of their incomes."-Thomas Sowell

[jimnaseum]

"Thomas Sowell has his head up his ass"-Thomas Jefferson
sorry, George Jefferson

[The Conquistador]

Obviously you cannot provide a valid and coherent arguement against Thomas Sowell's reasoning and must therefore resort to ad hominem attacks.


My Sowell beats your Kimmel.

[jimnaseum]

Obviously you cannot provide a valid and coherent arguement against Thomas Sowell's reasoning and must therefore resort to ad hominem attacks.

Sorry, "Sowell has his head up his ass" -Jim Nauseum.

Bill Gates gives 2 billion to charity. Where do you think he got that money? Do you think he worked 200 hours a day? That 2 billion came from average citizens that shelled out hard earned money for windows. And once he got that money he multiplied it on the stock market. Whether you know it or not, all that money made on Wall st. was created by people who work 40 hour weeks for peanuts. Rent and food and a car.

1% of the people own 50% of the money. If you voted for that 1% to be in control, You;re their Bitch!!!! Not me.......

[The Conquistador]

Sorry, "Sowell has his head up his ass" -Jim Nauseum.

Bill Gates gives 2 billion to charity. Where do you think he got that money? Do you think he worked 200 hours a day? That 2 billion came from average citizens that shelled out hard earned money for windows. And once he got that money he multiplied it on the stock market. Whether you know it or not, all that money made on Wall st. was created by people who work 40 hour weeks for peanuts. Rent and food and a car.

1% of the people own 50% of the money. If you voted for that 1% to be in control, You;re their Bitch!!!! Not me.......

Bill Gates is an opportunist who marketed a product towards other people. Had there not been a demand for his product, he wouldn't be as successful as he is now. If you don't like someone's product, don't buy it.

Buying into rampant consumerism and bitching about it afterwards shows a lack of personal restraint and an innate hatred of anyone who may be more successful than you. Lest I remind you, you are probably typing your messages on either a Windows or Apple computer so you did indeed give away your money to either Bill Gates or Steve Jobs and that does in fact make you their Bitch. You did what is known as "voting with your dollar".

[randolph]

Sorry, "Sowell has his head up his ass" -Jim Nauseum.

Bill Gates gives 2 billion to charity. Where do you think he got that money? Do you think he worked 200 hours a day? That 2 billion came from average citizens that shelled out hard earned money for windows. And once he got that money he multiplied it on the stock market. Whether you know it or not, all that money made on Wall st. was created by people who work 40 hour weeks for peanuts. Rent and food and a car.

1% of the people own 50% of the money. If you voted for that 1% to be in control, You;re their Bitch!!!! Not me.......


Yep, half of the people in this country "love" their "daddy" as he screws them day and night. :coupling: Wall street rules!:censored:

[randolph]

Drew explains why people vote against their interests.



In his book The Political Brain, psychologist Drew Westen, an exasperated Democrat, tried to show why the Right often wins the argument even when the Left is confident that it has the facts on its side.
He uses the following exchange from the first presidential debate between Al Gore and George Bush in 2000 to illustrate the perils of trying to explain to voters what will make them better off:
Gore: "Under the governor's plan, if you kept the same fee for service that you have now under Medicare, your premiums would go up by between 18% and 47%, and that is the study of the Congressional plan that he's modelled his proposal on by the Medicare actuaries."
Bush: "Look, this is a man who has great numbers. He talks about numbers.


"I'm beginning to think not only did he invent the internet, but he invented the calculator. It's fuzzy math. It's trying to scare people in the voting booth."
Mr Gore was talking sense and Mr Bush nonsense - but Mr Bush won the debate. With statistics, the voters just hear a patronising policy wonk, and switch off.
For Mr Westen, stories always trump statistics, which means the politician with the best stories is going to win: "One of the fallacies that politicians often have on the Left is that things are obvious, when they are not obvious.
"Obama's administration made a tremendous mistake by not immediately branding the economic collapse that we had just had as the Republicans' Depression, caused by the Bush administration's ideology of unregulated greed. The result is that now people blame him."
Reverse revolution
Thomas Frank, the author of the best-selling book What's The Matter with Kansas, is an even more exasperated Democrat and he goes further than Mr Westen.
He believes that the voters' preference for emotional engagement over reasonable argument has allowed the Republican Party to blind them to their own real interests.
The Republicans have learnt how to stoke up resentment against the patronising liberal elite, all those do-gooders who assume they know what poor people ought to be thinking.
Right-wing politics has become a vehicle for channelling this popular anger against intellectual snobs. The result is that many of America's poorest citizens have a deep emotional attachment to a party that serves the interests of its richest.
http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/47164000/jpg/_47164509_turkeys_frank,thomascwendyedelberg.jpg Thomas Frank thinks that voters have become blinded to their real interests

Thomas Frank says that whatever disadvantaged Americans think they are voting for, they get something quite different:
"You vote to strike a blow against elitism and you receive a social order in which wealth is more concentrated than ever before in our life times, workers have been stripped of power, and CEOs are rewarded in a manner that is beyond imagining.
"It's like a French Revolution in reverse in which the workers come pouring down the street screaming more power to the aristocracy."
As Mr Frank sees it, authenticity has replaced economics as the driving force of modern politics. The authentic politicians are the ones who sound like they are speaking from the gut, not the cerebral cortex. Of course, they might be faking it, but it is no joke to say that in contemporary politics, if you can fake sincerity, you have got it made.
Yep, Rush, Glenn and Fox News have fucked the voters. :frown:

[jimnaseum]

[QUOTE=TheAngryPostman;130499] don't buy it
QUOTE]

I seem to remember Microsoft facing an Antitrust Rap in 1998, this is your Sowell hero. Your point was that corporations were charitable, my point is they have more money to be charitable. And then of course there is tax shelters.
This all comes down to UNION vs MANAGEMENT. If the people bond together, and refuse to eat shit, that's business, right? It's also called voting with your dollar.

The Health Industry is rampant profiteering leeched onto a noble cause. Parasites. Should Schools be an individual responsibility?
Any person who is Noble, Republican or Democrat, he's going to be OK, everyone he deals with will be OK. The better debater will win our debate. This has nothing to do with Cheney having all the Oil Execs in his office for a top secret meeting a week before gas prices soar!!! Take it or leave it? YOU take it!!!

[jimnaseum]

Politics is psychology . :frown:

And there you are.

[The Conquistador]

[QUOTE=TheAngryPostman;130499] don't buy it
QUOTE]

I seem to remember Microsoft facing an Antitrust Rap in 1998, this is your Sowell hero. Your point was that corporations were charitable, my point is they have more money to be charitable. And then of course there is tax shelters.
This all comes down to UNION vs MANAGEMENT. If the people bond together, and refuse to eat shit, that's business, right? It's also called voting with your dollar.

The Health Industry is rampant profiteering leeched onto a noble cause. Parasites. Should Schools be an individual responsibility?
Any person who is Noble, Republican or Democrat, he's going to be OK, everyone he deals with will be OK. The better debater will win our debate. This has nothing to do with Cheney having all the Oil Execs in his office for a top secret meeting a week before gas prices soar!!! Take it or leave it? YOU take it!!!

Read again Jimbo. I said that people who know what work actually is tend to be more charitable versus those that complain and bitch and ask for handouts all the time.

The Microsoft Antitrust case was because Microsoft packaged IE with the OS. You are obviously talking about things way outside your pay grade.

Unions set the wages for the workers and decrease any incentive for quality because they are going to get paid anyways. Why do you think GM and Chrysler went under? Low productivity, low quality and exorbitant expenses that were incurred by the unions as "benefits" for their workers led to their bankruptcy and ultimately put the workers out of a job; the very same workers that they were "supposed" to protect. Unions are by nature, communist. No matter how productive you are, you do not get paid your worth; they determine it for you. They determine your wages, your benefits and even how productive you are supposed to be. Unions were fine if you were a coal miner in 1880 or a steel worker in 1906 but nowadays, they are just counter productive.

Schooling is also something that should not be public. Look at the standards nowadays. A Bachelors Degree today is equal to a High School Diploma from the 1950's. Standards today are incredibly dumbed down because of idiots crying that their stupid kids are smoking pot and being lazy rather than getting an education. Today's average man is already a retard by 1900's standards.

Is it the schools fault that Little Johnny is a dipshit and has no discipline in his life? No. If it was the teachers fault and it was indeed the teacher who was not doing their job, then usually the teacher would be fired. But since they are employed by the Teachers Unions, anything other than molesting students, the teachers will continue to collect a paycheck and do very little.

And Jimbo, ad hominem has no place in a rational debate. Please do further to strengthen your arguements.


And yes, people banding together and boycotting certain legitimate wrongdoings in a business is indeed a form of "voting with your dollar". Why continue to buy something if it violates what you stand for?

[jimnaseum]

And Jimbo, ad hominem has no place in a rational debate. Please do further to strengthen your arguements.


I can't speak for the others, but I was more amusing myself at your expense than debating.

EVERY ONE of you points has one fatal flaw. George W Bush. He cost you all your credibility. I'm with Obama all day. I smelled Bush coming all the way. I've run into his kind a thousand times. That crap you're spouting DOESN'T WORK.*

*2000-2008

See, I gave you a footnote to prove my arguement.{sic}

[The Conquistador]

I can't speak for the others, but I was more amusing myself at your expense than debating.

EVERY ONE of you points has one fatal flaw. George W Bush. He cost you all your credibility. I'm with Obama all day. I smelled Bush coming all the way. I've run into his kind a thousand times. That crap you're spouting DOESN'T WORK.*

*2000-2008

See, I gave you a footnote to prove my arguement.{sic}

What does Bush have to do with anything I've said? I've stated multiple times on this forum that I am a conservative Libertarian. Thus any attempt of yours to make some kind of ideological connection is invalid.

[TracyCoxx]

TRACY:

So, Bush was wrong to do the bailout?

That means if Obama does nothing or what you wanted, you'd be happy?

If things failed doing things your way, you would not criticize Obama?
Of course I would criticize him.... on his foreign policy.

CCC:

No, it gives YOU freedom of speech.

Cheney said it is unpatriotic to question Pres. Bush during wartime! In other words, say nothing!!!Reference?


Sure, you can have all the free speeches you want. But you better check yourself before you wreck yourself. The Republican Party is embarassed by you. You're a TOOL to them. They LAUGH at you behind closed doors. But they sure appreciate your vote.
And I laugh at their religious beliefs, but I appreciate them not turning this country into a socialist country. So they have my vote.

There's no MONEY in teabagger beliefs. That's why the Republicans will never fund it. It's too much like giving money to hard working Americans.No money? Tell that to Senator Brown.

What does Bush have to do with anything I've said? I've stated multiple times on this forum that I am a conservative Libertarian. Thus any attempt of yours to make some kind of ideological connection is invalid.Don't you know the liberal mantra? BUSH DID IT!

[randolph]

Of course I would criticize him.... on his foreign policy.

Reference?



And I laugh at their religious beliefs, but I appreciate them not turning this country into a socialist country. So they have my vote.

No money? Tell that to Senator Brown.

Don't you know the liberal mantra? BUSH DID IT!

Of course, THE TRUTH SHALL SET YOU FREE! :lol:

[jimnaseum]

What does Bush have to do with anything I've said? I've stated multiple times on this forum that I am a conservative Libertarian. Thus any attempt of yours to make some kind of ideological connection is invalid.

OK, Joe the Plumber, whatever, so who is your Leader? I have Barack Obama. Who do you have? Does your soapbox have wheels? Without a representative, you're just some guy mumbling to himself. Did you vote for McCain?

[The Conquistador]

OK, Joe the Plumber, whatever, so who is your Leader? I have Barack Obama. Who do you have? Does your soapbox have wheels? Without a representative, you're just some guy mumbling to himself. Did you vote for McCain?

Look and ye shall find...

[Talvenada]

Look and ye shall find...

ANGRY:

Palin!

TAL

[The Conquistador]

ANGRY:

Palin!

TAL

Nope. Guess again Tal.

Although I would not hesitate to analize both her and her daughter...:turnon:






HINT: It is a couple pages back in this very thread!

[TracyCoxx]

Of course, THE TRUTH SHALL SET YOU FREE! :lol:

So will lobotomizing yourself apparently :lol:

[TracyCoxx]

Looks like TARP is failing. What a waste of money.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/01/31/watchdog-bailouts-created-risk/
The problems that led to the last financial crisis have not yet been addressed, and in some cases have grown worse, says Neil Barofsky, the special inspector general for the trouble asset relief program, or TARP. The quarterly report to Congress was released Sunday.

The government's bailout of financial institutions deemed "too big to fail" has created a risk that the United States could face a worse fiscal meltdown in the future, an independent watchdog assigned to review the program told Congress on Sunday.

The Troubled Assets Relief Program, known as TARP, has not addressed the problems that led to the last crisis and in some case those problems have festered and are a bigger threat than before, warned Neil Barofsky, the special inspector general at the Treasury Department.

"Even if TARP saved our financial system from driving off a cliff back in 2008, absent meaningful reform, we are still driving on the same winding mountain road, but this time in a faster car," Barofsky wrote.

Barofsky wrote the $700 billion financial bailout has encouraged more risk-taking because bank executives, who are still receiving massive bonuses, figure the government will come to the rescue the next time they steer their ships nearly aground.

"The market mentality now seems fixed that the U.S. government will continue to step in and bail out giant financial institutions," said Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, ranking member of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee. "The IG's findings confirm my decision to oppose releasing $350 billion in TARP funds last year and my recent vote to terminate the program altogether."


Anymore questions TAL?

I said it a year ago... Obama had better learn the lessons of why the financial crisis happened in '08 and prevent them from happening again. And I'm talking about the REAL reasons Randy & Jim. Not this Bush-Did-It crap. Because that line may fool liberal voters but it doesn't address the real problem. And until we confront the real problem, it will not go away!

[TracyCoxx]

BO breaks another campaign promise. He promised many times during his campaign to crack down on the use of no-bid contracts. So why is a no-bid contract awarded for $24 million to Checchi and Company Consulting? Because it's owned by Democratic Party donor Vincent Checchi? This is yet another promise that BO has broken. He also pledged to close Gitmo within a year of taking office. Thankfully he broke that one.

Didn't he also say we would be out of Iraq within 6 months of him taking office? LOL

And here's another statement (http://www.barackobama.com/pdf/policy/Space_Fact_Sheet_FINAL.pdf) from him during his campaign:
Embracying Human Space Exploration
Human spaceflight is important to America?s political, economic, technological, and scientific leadership. Barack Obama will support renewed human exploration beyond low earth orbit. He endorses the goal of sending human missions to the Moon by 2020, as a precursor in an orderly progression to missions to more distant destinations, including Mars.

Here's the reality:
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/space/os-no-moon-for-nasa-20100126,0,2770904.story
Obama aims to ax moon mission
NASA's plans to return astronauts to the moon are dead. So are the rockets being designed to take them there ? that is, if President Barack Obama gets his way.

When the White House releases his budget proposal Monday, there will be no money for the Constellation program that was supposed to return humans to the moon by 2020. The troubled and expensive Ares I rocket that was to replace the space shuttle to ferry humans to space will be gone, along with money for its bigger brother, the Ares V cargo rocket that was to launch the fuel and supplies needed to take humans back to the moon.

There will be no lunar landers, no moon bases, no Constellation program at all.

TMF would say anything to get elected. Either he was too naive to do what he wanted, or he would outright lie to get himself into office. And he's still lying when he says he wants to increase our competitiveness, increase skills in math and science, create jobs...

There will be no lunar landers, no moon bases, no Constellation program at all.

[jimnaseum]

Obama had better learn the lessons of why the financial crisis happened in '08and prevent them from happening again. And I'm talking about the REAL reasons Randy & Jim. Not this Bush-Did-It crap.

Lemme guess, the solution to all our problems would be to let Sean Hannity call all the shots.

[jimnaseum]

Is there ANYBODY who can save us?

[randolph]

Elephant lobotomies

[randolph]

A republican found a magic genie's lamp and rubbed it. The genie said : "I will grant you one wish." He said : "I wish I were smarter". So the genie made him smarter. The next day he became a Democrat.

"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid, it is true that most stupid people are conservative." :lol:
John Stuart Mill

"Republicans want to punish work and reward wealth; hence the high payroll tax and the low dividend tax. Said one Bush economic adviser, if we can't help wealthy investors and screw working people, what's the point in being a Republican?"
Paul Begala

[TracyCoxx]

Lemme guess, the solution to all our problems would be to let Sean Hannity call all the shots.
Why, was Hannity against the bailout?

A republican found a magic genie's lamp and rubbed it. The genie said : "I will grant you one wish." He said : "I wish I were smarter". So the genie made him smarter. The next day he became a Democrat.And when he saw the country was in a financial crisis he said "We need to put ourselves $4 trillion deeper into debt". And the Genie came back and said "WTF??? My apologies I forgot that the democratic party had been hijacked by progressives!" And so he turned the politician into a conservative libertarian, and all was well :yes:

[TracyCoxx]

"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid, it is true that most stupid people are conservative."

Well yes, there is Palin, Hannity and Dave Ramsey (who uses the Bible as a source for financial strategies). But I think there are one or two exceptions. Like the woman who thought BO would pay for her gas & mortgage...
Oh, and except for BO who's solution to the financial crisis is to put us further into debt. Plus his awesome quote "I?ve now been in 57 states? I think one left to go?"
And uh, then there's Howard Dean who claims Bush let 9/11 happen.
Oh yeah, and Louis Farrakhan: "I heard from a very reliable source who saw a 25 foot deep crater under the levee breach. It may have been blown up to destroy the black part of town and keep the white part dry."
Oh, and don't forget Michael Moore.
And Rosie O'Donnell who doesn't think fire can get hot enough to melt steel
And good ol Joe Biden - at least he's entertaining.
Oh yeah, and Kayne West (many examples)
And MCA of Beastie Boys who complains that Bush puts American's ahead of people in other countries.
And of course Al Sharpton (many many examples)
And Al Gore who claims to have invented the internet, and many more examples.
Oh yeah, and Mike Wallace: ?I couldn?t be happier for the privilege of sitting down with the president of Iran.?
And then there's Jimmy Carter, for his presidency, and for tireless work promoting the causes of Lebanon and Hezbollah.
And let's not forget John Edwards for obvious reasons.

Well this is getting lengthy so I'll cut it short...

[randolph]

I just read a survey showing Us Californians haven't a clue where the state's money comes from and what it is spent for. Even the legislators haven't a clue. The state is bankrupt, is there anybody here to get us out of this mess? Hello, any body there? :(

[jimnaseum]

is there anybody here to get us out of this mess? (

"I'll pay ze Rent"

[TracyCoxx]

Looks like there's some kind of error in BO's budget. There's $1.6 trillion in unfunded expenses. How did that happen. Do they have a calculator?

[randolph]

Just to be fair. :eek:

[randolph]

Where is it coming from? Gulp!

[The Conquistador]

I just read a survey showing Us Californians haven't a clue where the state's money comes from and what it is spent for. Even the legislators haven't a clue. The state is bankrupt, is there anybody here to get us out of this mess? Hello, any body there? :(

Legalize pot. You'll see a surplus in no time.

[The Conquistador]

Good news everybody!

Nixon's grandson is running for Congress!

http://townhall.com/columnists/DavidRStokes/2010/01/31/a_race%e2%80%94and_candidate%e2%80%94to_watch?page =1

[jimnaseum]

Lets break for a word from our sponsor.

FOX NEWS announces "She's Back!!!!"

With fresh wholesome milk-filled boobs, MEGYN KELLY is back to soothe tired CNN eyes and MSNBC lies, keep your TVs tuned to FOX weekdays at ONE!

Keith Olberman said-
"I'll give you three Rachel Maddows for one Megyn Kelly!!!"

Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab said-
"She makes a bomb go off in my underpants!!!"

Brian Williams announced-
"Brilliant! Hee Haw meets Walter Conkrite!"

[randolph]

Ahem, what about this little filly?:turnoff::rolleyes:

[TracyCoxx]

Ahem, what about this little filly?:turnoff::rolleyes:

Move her to the back of the bus.

[Talvenada]

Ahem, what about this little filly?:turnoff::rolleyes:

RANDY:

Good one! Right person, right thread!!

TAL

[TracyCoxx]

In announcing its $19.0 billion FY 2011 NASA budget today, the Obama Administration has made it very clear that it intends to attempt a paradigm shift in the way that America explores and utilizes space.

Oh wonderful. The ex-community organizer from Chicago is going to play rocket scientist. Yes, please Obama. Tell the organization who literally wrote the book on going to the moon and then went there how it should be done. Tell thousands of us engineers with advanced degrees in aerospace, computer science, mathematics, physics, mechanical & electrical engineering how it's supposed to work. Because we're just too stupid.

Hi I'm Barack Obama. I stayed at a Holiday Inn and I can show you guys how to really run a space program.

Let's cancel Ares 1 and Orion, Nasa's next rocket, which has actually flown, in favor of another rocket that hasn't flown yet. And even if it does fly it won't measure up to what Orion could be capable of.

Let's also cancel Ares V, the heavy lift launch vehicle we need to get beyond low earth orbit, because low earth orbit is our goal. Let's research how to build heavy lift vehicles and partner with other countries because we can learn so much from their non-existant heavy lift launchers. Pay no attention to that Saturn V on display over at JSC and KSC that was built using technology from 45 years ago.

Let's cut Nasa's space exploration program, which was only short $3 billion, and end Nasa's shuttle fleet. THEN we can add a $billion to Nasa's budget and direct them to take temperature readings and research rocket technologies they already know about for some nebulous undefined far off mission. That way for $2 billion less we can have nothing instead of a lunar program which we can use to learn to harness the resources of the solar system and tap in to Helium-3 from the moon which could power the US for a year using 40 tons of the stuff.


.....

Dumbass

[jimnaseum]

Ahem, what about this little filly?:turnoff::rolleyes:

yngh.......AAAHH!!!!!

[jimnaseum]

Oh wonderful. Who wrote the book on going to the moon?


"Who cares about putting a man on the moon? Let's see about putting a man on Condi Rice" -Dave Letterman

[TracyCoxx]

"Who cares about putting a man on the moon? Let's see about putting a man on Condi Rice" -Dave Letterman

Is there anyone with a brain left in this country?

[randolph]

Oh wonderful. The ex-community organizer from Chicago is going to play rocket scientist. Yes, please Obama. Tell the organization who literally wrote the book on going to the moon and then went there how it should be done. Tell thousands of us engineers with advanced degrees in aerospace, computer science, mathematics, physics, mechanical & electrical engineering how it's supposed to work. Because we're just too stupid.

Hi I'm Barack Obama. I stayed at a Holiday Inn and I can show you guys how to really run a space program.

Let's cancel Ares 1 and Orion, Nasa's next rocket, which has actually flown, in favor of another rocket that hasn't flown yet. And even if it does fly it won't measure up to what Orion could be capable of.

Let's also cancel Ares V, the heavy lift launch vehicle we need to get beyond low earth orbit, because low earth orbit is our goal. Let's research how to build heavy lift vehicles and partner with other countries because we can learn so much from their non-existant heavy lift launchers. Pay no attention to that Saturn V on display over at JSC and KSC that was built using technology from 45 years ago.

Let's cut Nasa's space exploration program, which was only short $3 billion, and end Nasa's shuttle fleet. THEN we can add a $billion to Nasa's budget and direct them to take temperature readings and research rocket technologies they already know about for some nebulous undefined far off mission. That way for $2 billion less we can have nothing instead of a lunar program which we can use to learn to harness the resources of the solar system and tap in to Helium-3 from the moon which could power the US for a year using 40 tons of the stuff.


.....

Dumbass

Unfortunately, when politicians are trying to save their ass. Yeah, layoff skilled engineers developing future technologies so we can feed the winos, politician logic. Pathetic :censored:

[jimnaseum]

WT? One day you whine about a trillion dollar deficit, the next day you want to colonize Mars?

OBOMMUNISM:

1) Borrow 3 trillion from ourselves. Feed it directly to Mr. and Mrs. 40K/yr. (The people who buy groceries. The people who buy cars. The people who work 9-5 m-f ) Oh, yeah, (the people who vote)
2) Get out of Iraq, Afghanistan, let Bush tax cuts for the rich expire. Cut Military spending on TOYS.
3) Put the Clinton Economic team on projected Chicken Little Deficit, reduce it to zero.
40 Don't hire any chubby interns.

[randolph]

[quote=jimnaseum;130904]WT? One day you whine about a trillion dollar deficit, the next day you want to colonize Mars?

You don't understand, our interest in Mars is to do what the English did when they colonized Australia. We would send our misfits to Mars! ;)

[jimnaseum]

If,......in the history of all mankind.....you needed to find a place to realistically generate the largest pile of cash that ever existed.....these UNITED STATES would still be the place. WARNING: Do not build pyramids, invade Poland, or get into bed with guys from Enron or Exxon.... Avoid temptation, and it would actually be pretty easy to not only erase the deficit, but engineer a sound rational economy that is tooled to do the most good for the most people.

There is no high, no gold medal, no achievement thinkable.......that would make President Barack Obama feel closer to God.....than gazing over the highest standard of living that has ever existed on this planet and saying "LOOK WHAT A M@THERF&CKIN" BLACK MAN DID!!!!!!!"

[TracyCoxx]

WT? One day you whine about a trillion dollar deficit, the next day you want to colonize Mars?

I'm not talking about a $trillion. I'm talking about just $2 billion more. Something that fits well within our resources if it weren't for literally $trillions being wasted on crap. And I'm talking about a program that will have massive payoffs if it's done right.

[TracyCoxx]

and saying "LOOK WHAT A M@THERF&CKIN" BLACK MAN DID!!!!!!!"

Stop being racist.

[TracyCoxx]

At least Obama knows his place. Here he is bowing to the mayor YES THE MAYOR of Tampa Florida :lol:

Next he'll be bowing to the Burger King :lol::lol:

[jimnaseum]

(sigh) Eisenhower learned about nation-building by taking Nazi Germany apart. He had a real fondness for their Autobahn and replicated it in the US in the fifties. It's still a large part of our commerce and economy INFRASTRUCTURE. He also made it a point to parade the German townspeople through the concentration camps because "They'll try to say this never happened" THEY were the Industrial Military Complex he warned us about.
The Industrial Military Complex is a very important part of the Republican Party. They have a Propoganda machine and factories and ideas and plans. There followers are very loyal.
The Obama is going to show everyone that we didn't need IraqII and that we didn't need Cheney. We don't need to serve BIG OIL. The Obama is going to REDISTRIBUTE the money to the PEOPLE. He's going to do EXACTLY what the Republicans SAID they wanted to do, but never had any intention to do.
Haven't Fox viewers ever seen that Republican plans for a Rich Vital America always lean toward giving power to the rich and powerful? Obama's the new Sherriff in town. He gonna tear that Fox Station DOWN!

[Talvenada]

I'm not talking about a $trillion. I'm talking about just $2 billion more. Something that fits well within our resources if it weren't for literally $trillions being wasted on crap. And I'm talking about a program that will have massive payoffs if it's done right.

TRACY:

Conse 'Pubs are linguists, no? Here are some examples I've heard!

That is $300,000 that he's going to waste on that! Do you know how much money that is?

That program will cost $200B for 3 or 4 years! That's almost a trillion dollars!!
$600B to $800B is almost what? In other words, 60% to 80% is almost 100%.

It's not trillions; it's ONLY $2B!

TAL

[jimnaseum]

Stop being racist.

The "other" white meat.

[TracyCoxx]

The Obama is going to REDISTRIBUTE the money to the PEOPLE. He's going to do EXACTLY what the Republicans SAID they wanted to do, but never had any intention to do.I'm a PEOPLE. Certainly not one of those who make over $200,000. And BO will be taking money away from me. So much for that plan.

[randolph]

Marshall Auerback explains how the deficit works


A Few Overlooked Facts on Deficits
Where to begin? Since the days of George Washington?s administration, national budget deficits and increased public debt have been the rule on all but about six very short occasions. And the US has generally prospered. Why? Far from being a burden, the deficits, and the corresponding government bonds, constitute the foundation of private financial wealth in any nation that creates its own sovereign currency for use by its citizens. Debt owed by the government yields net income to the private sector, unlike all purely private debts, which merely transfer income from one part of the private sector to another. In basic national accounting terms, government deficits equal non-government savings surpluses.
Private holdings of government bonds also constitute an income source ? that is, the government interest payments on its outstanding debt constitute another avenue for stimulus. So when the government retires debt, it reduces private incomes ? just as when it runs budget surpluses, it constrains private sector demand directly by reducing private income and access to adequate currency. Just ask any pensioner if he/she is happy when the income stream from annuities has declined.
Take away that debt, and you take away income. It is no coincidence that the budget surpluses of the Clinton years (wrongly trumpeted as a great fiscal triumph by President Obama) subsequently led to recessions: government budget surpluses ultimately restrict private sector demand and income growth and force greater reliance on PRIVATE debt. Does anybody think it is a coincidence that two of the longest and largest periods of budget surpluses in America history ? the periods of 1997-2000 and 1927-1930 ? were followed by calamitous economic collapses?
There are ample analyses which explain how government surpluses drain aggregate demand (here (http://neweconomicperspectives.blogspot.com/2009/06/will-run-up-in-government-debt-doom-us_17.html/), here (http://bilbo.economicoutlook.net/blog/?cat=11), and here (http://www.amazon.com/Understanding-Modern-Money-Employment-Stability/dp/1845429419/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1264881374&sr=8-1)). Suffice to say, a government budget surplus has two negative effects for the private sector: the stock of financial assets (money or bonds) held by the private sector, which represents its wealth, falls; and private disposable income also falls as tax demands exceed income. And, as Stephanie Kelton has noted, the case of Japan illustrates that despite a debt-to-GDP ratio in excess of 100%, the Bank of Japan never lost the ability to set the key overnight interest rate, which has remained below 1% for about a decade. And, the debt didn?t drive long-term rates higher either.


Obama?s Deficit Confusion
Let?s consider a real world example to demonstrate the President?s conceptual confusion on government deficits. We?re in a recession. Our American citizen who was working in a pie shop has lost his job even though his productivity was just as high during the boom years. As the recession intensified, pie demand fell, as did consumer demand in general. Fearing that their wealth holdings are not going to appreciate as quickly as they did in prior periods, households are saving more money out of their income flows.
The pie guy wants to exercise his freedom to work hard for money. So do 152 million other people. But there are jobs available for only 138 million of them, given current business perceptions of money profit prospects from production now and in the future. The pie guy is stuck with over 15 million other people who would like to exercise their freedom to work hard for money. Over 6 million of those people have been trying to exercise that freedom for over half a year, with no luck. They are dumpster diving for leftover pie scraps.
In desperation, the pie guy has gone back to the pie shop to offer his services for a lower money wage, but unit pie demand is still down, even though the owner has cut pie prices. However, the pie owner, facing lower prices per pie, decides to hire the pie guy back at a lower wage and fires one of his other workers to scratch his way to a little higher profit. Are we all any better off? I suppose pies are cheaper, but then so to are incomes earned by pie makers lower.
In that situation, someone else has to take up the spending slack. Fortunately, we live in an economic system in which a government can freely spend and fill the gap left by the private sector. It has the unique capacity to spend without the constraint of a private firm on productive job creation, thereby increasing output, not just redistributing it. Just giving the pie firm a payroll tax cut on new hires is not going to generate more jobs. Rather, giving it to all employees will lead to more pie sales. Instead of decrying the government deficits, then, the President should be celebrating them as a form of economic salvation.
The problem obviously isn?t about money which a government can always create. The ultimate irony is that in order to somehow ?save? public funds for the future, as the President appears to be advocating, what we do is cut back on expenditures today, which does nothing but set our economy back and cause the growth of output and employment to decline. Worse yet, the great irony is that the first thing governments generally cut back on is education ? the one thing the mainstream agrees should be done that actually helps our children 50 years down the road. Education cutbacks ? as any Californian can tell you ? are something that does hurt us, as well as harming our children AND our grandchildren down the road. This is the true ?intergenerational theft?, not ?runway? government spending.
The False Household Budget Analogy
Like many other people who embrace the nostrums of the Concord Coalition (http://www.concordcoalition.org/) (an advocacy group supporting the deficit hawk themes), the President continues to view government spending through a false household budget analogy:
?There are certain core principles our families and businesses follow when they sit down to do their own budgets. They accept that they can?t get everything they want and focus on what they really need. They make tough decisions and sacrifice for their kids. They don?t spend what they don?t have, and they make do with what they?ve got.?
Yes, it?s true: If households spend more than their income now, they have to borrow. To pay the loan back they have to ensure that they can dedicate adequate income in the future, either by increasing incomes somehow or diverting existing income from consumption. If a household borrows too much, it will face major corrections in its balance of income and expenditure and consequently may have to seriously forgo spending later.
That is the logic that the users of the currency have to consider every day. They have to finance every $ they spend and so planning is required to ensure they don?t blow out their personal balance sheets. If all households attempt to net save by spending less than they are earning, and businesses attempt to net save (reinvesting less than their retained earnings), then private sector incomes and real output will decline absent an increase in government spending.
But it?s not the same for a government. The government is the creator of a currency. It can spend now. It can also spend later. And it can service and pay back the debt without compromising anything. A government, unlike a household or a private business, can choose to exact greater tax revenues by imposing new taxes or raising tax rates.
Notwithstanding the obvious reality that sovereign governments have no solvency risk because they create their own currency, most financial commentators (and the President?s own advisors) still waste their time talking about sovereign default risks. Unfortunately, the President implicitly legitimizes this sort of talk when he speaks about the need for government to embrace budgeting like a household does. This is what we presume he has in mind when he discusses the long term dangers of government deficits. Firms, households, and even state and local governments require income or borrowings in order to spend. But the federal government?s spending is not constrained by revenues or borrowing. It is constrained only by what our population chooses as national goals.
Getting Past the Deficit Myth


The President, unfortunately, has yet to put the pieces of the puzzle together. He also fails to understand the idea that a government like the United States ? i.e. one that issues a sovereign currency ? can meet any and all outstanding financial obligations, provided the debts are denominated in the national currency. In this regard, the size of the national debt is irrelevant. This myth, and this myth alone, underpins arguments by orthodox economists against government activism in macroeconomic policy. The President does his Administration and the country no service by continuing to jump on this mythical bandwagon.
Myths may constitute good grounds for literature, but they are a horrible foundation for sound economic policy.
Roosevelt Institute Braintruster Marshall Auerback (http://www.newdeal20.org/?author=48) is a market analyst and commentator.

[TracyCoxx]

TRACY:

Conse 'Pubs are linguists, no? Here are some examples I've heard!

That is $300,000 that he's going to waste on that! Do you know how much money that is?

That program will cost $200B for 3 or 4 years! That's almost a trillion dollars!!
$600B to $800B is almost what? In other words, 60% to 80% is almost 100%.

It's not trillions; it's ONLY $2B!

TAL
No, republicans are talking about how the programs funded in this budget will leave us with a debt of over $20 trillion in ten years. You can call that linguistics, but it still means we're fucked.

I'm talking about an extra $2 billion. You know, like last year when the cash for clunkers program needed an extra $2 billion. Congress instantly says, sure no problem. Here you go. But maintain the US's lead in space? Invest in future technologies that will provide literally worlds of resources, no that's too expensive.

[TracyCoxx]

The "other" white meat.

What are you talking about? You sound like a broken record with this race crap. Why are you bringing up peoples color?

[TracyCoxx]

(sigh) Eisenhower learned about nation-building by taking Nazi Germany apart. He had a real fondness for their Autobahn and replicated it in the US in the fifties. It's still a large part of our commerce and economy INFRASTRUCTURE. He also made it a point to parade the German townspeople through the concentration camps because "They'll try to say this never happened" THEY were the Industrial Military Complex he warned us about.
The Industrial Military Complex is a very important part of the Republican Party. They have a Propoganda machine and factories and ideas and plans. There followers are very loyal.
The Obama is going to show everyone that we didn't need IraqII and that we didn't need Cheney. We don't need to serve BIG OIL. The Obama is going to REDISTRIBUTE the money to the PEOPLE. He's going to do EXACTLY what the Republicans SAID they wanted to do, but never had any intention to do.
Haven't Fox viewers ever seen that Republican plans for a Rich Vital America always lean toward giving power to the rich and powerful? Obama's the new Sherriff in town. He gonna tear that Fox Station DOWN!

Jimbo, Hitler's naziism and conservatism are not related. He's more closely related to Progressives of the early 1900s and their re-emergence under Obama. The Nazis aimed to control every aspect of its citizens lives. That sounds more like the universal health care they tried to pass (something hitler wanted), and like how they're taking control of industries. Nazis were a cradle to grave welfare state. At the beginning Hitler's right-hand man Johseph Gobells claimed that Lenin was a great man 2nd only to Hitler, and that the differences between Naziism and Communism was very slight. In the late 19th century to the early 1900s upper class british and US progressives embraced eugenics, saying millions had to be marched off into gas chambers and liquidated. George Bernard Shaw said we should play classical music while people are marched into the gas chamber. The Germans didn't invent genocide, they only perfected it and actually put it into practice. So how are the Nazis more like right wingers?

[jimnaseum]

Tracy, I'm BAITING you with the race and right wing nazi crap, and Randolph, those 800 word essays hurt my comic book mind. I did see in the paper today that deficits have been THE norm in the modern era I think they could have surplus they really wanted to, but that would just mean some needy people didn't get funded. Which brings me to the mystery of what Obama really is up to.
If he cannot turn around jobs by October, uh oh. He's got MOST of the stimulus left to spend, so he can pour that into the economy through small business inticements, I bought a new Honda last summer, $4500 off!
I didn't even want a new car! When it comes to people, I'm a commie. When it comes to cash, I'm John Dillinger. I don't see any conflict with that.
Here's the thing- What you see about Obama is what he wants you to see. Bush was too stupid and corrupt to pull that off, anyway, he took orders from The Skull and Crossbones guys. Obama is smart as shit and I swear to God he is trying to do the right thing for this country, but he's got cards in his hand nobody knows about. THAT IS THE STORY HERE. He's not playing the EXCITING cards yet, and Republicans have cards too. Hillary would never be as AUDACIOUS as Obama. Before this whole thing is over, your going to see Obama throw down some WILD CARDS!!! Sean Hannity will be pissing his pants!
PS Tracy, my hate and total disgust for Fox news is totally genuine.

[TracyCoxx]

Tracy, I'm BAITING you with the race and right wing nazi crapOk, you never know who you're dealing with on here.

If he cannot turn around jobs by October, uh oh. He's got MOST of the stimulus left to spend, so he can pour that into the economy through small business inticements, I bought a new Honda last summer, $4500 off!
I didn't even want a new car! When it comes to people, I'm a commie. When it comes to cash, I'm John Dillinger. I don't see any conflict with that.
Here's the thing- What you see about Obama is what he wants you to see. Bush was too stupid and corrupt to pull that off, anyway, he took orders from The Skull and Crossbones guys. Obama is smart as shit and I swear to God he is trying to do the right thing for this country, but he's got cards in his hand nobody knows about. THAT IS THE STORY HERE. He's not playing the EXCITING cards yet, and Republicans have cards too. Hillary would never be as AUDACIOUS as Obama. Before this whole thing is over, your going to see Obama throw down some WILD CARDS!!! Sean Hannity will be pissing his pants!
PS Tracy, my hate and total disgust for Fox news is totally genuine.

It doesn't matter what cards he has. The bottom line is he's burying this country in debt.

BTW, you owe me .00128 cents for your Honda.

[jimnaseum]

Don't bet against Obama.
Once this Insurance Bill is passed in ANY form, you'll have Schools, Social Security, Healthcare. All paid for in the budget. Once the people get it, they're not going to give it up, unamerican or not. Republicans will rise again, eventually, but with rising healthcare costs, education costs, retirement costs, there won't be much pie left to steal.

[Talvenada]

TRACY:

Conse 'Pubs feel they have every right to be outraged if Obama drops $10,000 to go to the theater, but $2B is ONLY $2B.

Do you feel that people have the right to demand Obama's birth certificate?

TAL

[TracyCoxx]

Don't bet against Obama.
Once this Insurance Bill is passed in ANY form, you'll have Schools, Social Security, Healthcare. All paid for in the budget. Once the people get it, they're not going to give it up, unamerican or not. Republicans will rise again, eventually, but with rising healthcare costs, education costs, retirement costs, there won't be much pie left to steal.

If you buy something with your credit card, you don't consider it paid for do you? LOL

If the budget isn't balanced, it's not all paid for. And these costs will show up again and again in up coming budgets. And you're right. Once they're in there, they are there to stay. The debt will skyrocket. It will be clearly impossible for the US to repay the debt. China and other countries will see this and stop buying our debt. They will decouple their economies from the US dollar and our economy will implode.

This is the obvious conclusion, so the only thing that makes sense is that you want this for some reason?

[TracyCoxx]

Conse 'Pubs feel they have every right to be outraged if Obama drops $10,000 to go to the theater, but $2B is ONLY $2B.Are you being willfully ignorant? What potential benefit to our economy is there if BO goes to the theater?

Do you feel that people have the right to demand Obama's birth certificate?Why not? When anyone is hired they have to show their social security card. Not a website with an image of it... the actual card. The requirements for president are that you have to be a US citizen among other things. This is just procedure and shouldn't be an issue.

When BO fouled up the words to the oath of office, he retook the oath soon after. That wasn't even required. He went above and beyond procedure just to remove any ammunition from critics. If he's conscious of how something like that is perceived, I think it's odd that he wouldn't even follow procedure in another case.

[jimnaseum]

This is just procedure and shouldn't be an issue.


Jeez, the hustle never ends.

[Talvenada]

Are you being willfully ignorant? What potential benefit to our economy is there if BO goes to the theater?

Why not? When anyone is hired they have to show their social security card. Not a website with an image of it... the actual card. The requirements for president are that you have to be a US citizen among other things. This is just procedure and shouldn't be an issue.

When BO fouled up the words to the oath of office, he retook the oath soon after. That wasn't even required. He went above and beyond procedure just to remove any ammunition from critics. If he's conscious of how something like that is perceived, I think it's odd that he wouldn't even follow procedure in another case.

TRACY:

I think you should review the tape. It was Roberts who flubbed the oath.

If Obama has to prove he's an American, Conse 'Pubs will back off of nothing, because they have not even backed off of that.

So, Obama cannot spend a dime on himself, but only on things Conse 'Pubs want? No wonder you want him impeached and convicted.

TAL

[TracyCoxx]

TRACY:

I think you should review the tape. It was Roberts who flubbed the oath.Yeah it was Roberts who flubbed it, but it caused BO to flub it as well, which is why he redid it. My point remains.

If Obama has to prove he's an American, Conse 'Pubs will back off of nothing, because they have not even backed off of that.What are you talking about? I'm just saying there's a procedure to follow like anyone else when they start a job. It's just paperwork. No reason to make a big thing of it.

So, Obama cannot spend a dime on himself, but only on things Conse 'Pubs want? No wonder you want him impeached and convicted.You're putting a lot of words in my mouth. Did I say BO couldn't spend a dime on himself? You're the one who brought up the theater thing, and it had nothing to do with my reasoning for having him impeached.

[Talvenada]

Yeah it was Roberts who flubbed it, but it caused BO to flub it as well, which is why he redid it. My point remains.

What are you talking about? I'm just saying there's a procedure to follow like anyone else when they start a job. It's just paperwork. No reason to make a big thing of it.

You're putting a lot of words in my mouth. Did I say BO couldn't spend a dime on himself? You're the one who brought up the theater thing, and it had nothing to do with my reasoning for having him impeached.

TRACY:

Name one issue that Conse 'Pubs have backed off of since 9/08?

(Citizenship, Bill Ayers, Jeremiah Wright and The Fairness Doctrine)
In other words, Obama is an illegal alien, a terrorist, a racist, and against freedom of speech.

Is Obama deliberately ruining the country?

TAL

[Talvenada]

TRACY:

So, Roberts' flub caused Obama to flub, which brings Obama's citizenship and motives into question? Any reasonable person would agree with you that Obama needs to be questioned, because it's so obvious?

TAL