Barack Obama

[randolph]

OH my god, Obama wants our kids to get smart and stop acting like us idiots.

[randolph]

If a man yells "you lie"in a room of politicians, who is he talking to?

[transjen]

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

That is how out of touch with reality you are. I've said several times in this thread and others that I'm an atheist. You have some vision of what I am and all the evidence to the contrary goes in one eye and out the other. This is the Jen's World I've brought up. It's all in your head. As are the recounts you think you saw that had Gore ahead. You can't provide any links that show that Gore won the election can you? That's because he didn't.

Look who's talking, Like Rush and Ann you forget half the facts which is unsupreme court justice Sandra Day O'Connor was sick of the recounts and wanted them stoped hence making W the president never mind the fact that thousands of votes would not be counted had those votes been counted AL GORE would have been the winner a fact you hate so tell me who's in there own dream world and since you love to point out the Jeb stayed out of the recount gee that was mighty big of him since the election was already fixed Jeb Bush was a weasel just like W but are tied as being the worlds biggest liar's, The fact that you continue to think that W did nothing wrong and nothing was ever W's fault and that he was a wonderful president proves you were off in your own dream world and have no sense of reality


Jerseygirl Jen

[TracyCoxx]

Originally Posted by randolph

OH my god, Obama wants our kids to get smart and stop acting like us idiots.

That's what the speech was after BO removed the assignment for the students to write a paper on what they can do to help the president. Then it gets into that gray area where the kids force-fed BO's policies. It's like prayer in schools. You don't make students pray or feel like they have to because they may be a completely different religion or none at all. But yes, it makes a funny cartoon when you ignore all that stuff and claim that all us idiot right wingers are like the moron in the cartoon.

Originally Posted by randolph

If a man yells "you lie"in a room of politicians, who is he talking to?

LOL Now that one is funny

[TracyCoxx]

Originally Posted by transjen

Look who's talking, Like Rush and Ann you forget half the facts which is unsupreme court justice Sandra Day O'Connor was sick of the recounts and wanted them stoped hence making W the president never mind the fact that thousands of votes would not be counted had those votes been counted AL GORE would have been the winner

Proof?

And while you're at it, don't forget this one:

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

There was a commission set up to find out what happened wasn't there? What were the results of that?

[randolph]

Aren't photos great?

[randolph]

Article by Paul Krugman

October 7, 2009, 8:58 am
Still chasing shadows?

This article on the continued troubles in credit markets was informative. But it raised a puzzle. Call me naive, but why does Fed policy seem to assume that the only way to repair credit markets is to return to the status quo ante, circa January 2007?

Here's how I think about what has happened these past 2+ years. I think in terms of a sort of flow chart, showing ways that savers can connect with borrowers:

Traditionally - i.e., before the 1980s - the public put its money in banks, and banks made loans to borrowers: thus the diagonal arrow from banks to borrowers represents traditional banking.

By 2007, however, much of this traditional channel had been supplanted by shadow banking: debt was securitized, and the securities sold to the public - the straight arrow across the bottom of the figure.

Then the crisis came. The public rushed for safety, which basically meant guaranteed deposits. One rough indicator is holdings of MZM - money of zero maturity - which is the sum of bank deposits and money-market deposits:

In effect, the public rushed back into the banks. But the banks weren't willing to lend out these excess funds. Instead, they accumulated deposits at the Fed:

To prevent a complete collapse of credit, the Fed in effect recycled these deposits back into private credit via the TALF and other securities-purchase programs. So funds now flow all around the first figure, getting to the public via "Bernanke banking" (my term.)

Everyone agrees that this is a stopgap, and we want to get the Fed out of the business of private lending over time.

But here's my question: why does it have to be a return to shadow banking? The banks don't need to sell securitized debt to make loans - they could start lending out of all those excess reserves they currently hold. Or to put it differently, by the numbers there's no obvious reason we shouldn't be seeking a return to traditional banking, with banks making and holding loans, as the way to restart credit markets. Yet the assumption at the Fed seems to be that this isn't an option - that the only way to go is back to the securitized debt market of the years just before the crisis.

Why? Are we still convinced that securitization is a far superior system to conventional banking, and if so why?

Inquiring minds want to know.

[new believer]

TracyCoxx, you at least know something that your critics don't. Law, Reality and facts behind rhetoric. The one remark about W being the one above all to be impeached showed their own lack of knowledge of law , their willingness to jump in with the 'ship of fools' and quite possibly could be benefitting from the smae folks who consistently raise our taxes to procure votes from those that don't pay taxes. And that group is getting larger daily.
But aside from W and impeachment, as recent I say EVERY person who knowingly allowed BO (he is NOT a Born American)to not only run but to grant him the office through the voter fraud should be impeached then executed for treason. And with B.Clinton, minimally two felony counts he was fined for by a federal judge of over 1/4 million dollars and barred from practicing and any connection of a law firm for 7 years should have been a automatic removal.(1-He willing lied & withheld information obstructing justice and 2- He tried to get others to alter their testimony. On #1,he could have pled the 5 admendment,but that was embarressing. It's the #2 that was most damaging) Finally, Congress had indeed impeached him. The Senate did not (which would have made gore President.)because by a very slim margin, the senators who voted against impeachment were warned not to. Does that explain the 'missing' FBI files?(Filegate) You know, the files that were taken illegally by a gutter bar bouncer hired by hillary and found a year later,after the hearings were over, with only her fingerprints on them on a table OUT IN THE OPEN. Funny how the media dropped that ball.

PS Tracy your now my 2/3 favorite person on this forum. You have brains and spunk.And if that is your pic on the avatar, beauty.

[transjen]

Originally Posted by new believer

TracyCoxx, you at least know something that your critics don't. Law, Reality and facts behind rhetoric. The one remark about W being the one above all to be impeached showed their own lack of knowledge of law , their willingness to jump in with the 'ship of fools' and quite possibly could be benefitting from the smae folks who consistently raise our taxes to procure votes from those that don't pay taxes. And that group is getting larger daily.
But aside from W and impeachment, as recent I say EVERY person who knowingly allowed BO (he is NOT a Born American)to not only run but to grant him the office through the voter fraud should be impeached then executed for treason. And with B.Clinton, minimally two felony counts he was fined for by a federal judge of over 1/4 million dollars and barred from practicing and any connection of a law firm for 7 years should have been a automatic removal.(1-He willing lied & withheld information obstructing justice and 2- He tried to get others to alter their testimony. On #1,he could have pled the 5 admendment,but that was embarressing. It's the #2 that was most damaging) Finally, Congress had indeed impeached him. The Senate did not (which would have made gore President.)because by a very slim margin, the senators who voted against impeachment were warned not to. Does that explain the 'missing' FBI files?(Filegate) You know, the files that were taken illegally by a gutter bar bouncer hired by hillary and found a year later,after the hearings were over, with only her fingerprints on them on a table OUT IN THE OPEN. Funny how the media dropped that ball.

PS Tracy your now my 2/3 favorite person on this forum. You have brains and spunk.And if that is your pic on the avatar, beauty.

Oh brother another loyal Bush fanactic, So you think lieing to congress and the citizens of the USA not grounds for imoeachment go back and watch W's state of the union where W claims IRAQ is prepareing to go nuclear and he gave congress the same cock and bull story to start the IRAQ war wasting trillions of tax dollars and thousands of US troops there lives for W's lies.
Then you give the standard GOP crap about taxes, What did Reageans trickle down accomplish in the 80s nothing but the rich getting richer and a sea of red ink in which the GOP didn't give a rat's ass about until Clinton became president then lo and behold the GOP wouldn't stop complaining about the sea of red ink Regan and Bush created and now it's the same crap coming from the right and agian this mess was created by trickle down econmics tax cuts only for the rich all from W and what did it accomplish agian the rich got richer and a sea of red ink that only now are you raising a stink, If the GOP really cared then they would call for the Bush tax cuts to be repeeled but we all know that we never happen because they'll say raising taxes on the rich will destory the ecomy So what jobs were created by tax cuts for the rich? Trickle down didn't work in the 80s and it didn't work for W and yet tax cuts for the rich is still the GOP's answer for everything
Jerseygirl Jen

[transjen]

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

Proof?

And while you're at it, don't forget this one:

Guess you mean the BS 9/11 commision spear headed by loyal GOP member Tom Kane the same comis the took testamony from Candi Rice who was never made to take an oath and where W answered while holding hands with the vice pres and agian both didn't take an oath yeah we can trust there findings


Jerseygirl Jen

[CreativeMind]

Originally Posted by transjen

Yes the recounts showed AL GORE won

Jerseygirl Jen

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

Do you have a link for this earth shattering information?

Actually, the recounts showed NO such thing.

In fact, what they DID show, is that Bush's margin of victory was actually LARGER than originally recorded. In the end, his total actually went UP. And that's even going by the recount method that Gore and his team wanted to use. And, yes, I have a link...

George W. Bush would have won a hand count of Florida's disputed ballots if the standard advocated by Al Gore had been used, the first full study of the ballots reveals. Bush would have won by 1,665 votes — more than triple his official 537-vote margin — if every dimple, hanging chad and mark on the ballots had been counted as votes, a USA TODAY/Miami Herald/Knight Ridder study shows.

The study is the first comprehensive review of the 61,195 "undervote" ballots that were at the center of Florida's disputed presidential election.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politic...loridamain.htm

[CreativeMind]

Originally Posted by randolph

Aren't photos great?

LOL that is great.
But videos can be even better AND really tell the truth!

http://www.hulu.com/watch/99945/satu...-obama-address

[randolph]

THE NOBEL PEACE PRIZE???

How do all you Obama bashers feel about that?

Frankly, I am amazed, what has he done other than rejoin the world community.
We still have the Middle East. It seems to be based on a lot of hope

[The Conquistador]

I think it was a very bold move by the Nobel Committee to secure their irrelevence. Seriously.......he won the Nobel Prize for calling for calling for a reduction in Nuclear arms and stockpiles.....yet N Korea has the bomb and Iran will soon? Has the world seriously gotten safer and less likely to engage in a nuclear conflict since Obama was elected? THAT is the rationale for giving him the Nobel Peace Prize?

this commenter has it right--
Craig Bills wrote:
The Noble Peace Prize, the Pulitzers, the Academy Awards, have all become politized. They're now just awards from Leftists to Leftists for being Leftists.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/w ... 867711.ece

[transjen]

And what did W do to keep the world safe? during his watch both IRAN and NORTH KOREA went nuclear. Yeah W did a lot to more endanger the world and did nothing to keep us safe
Jerseygirl Jen

[The Conquistador]

Originally Posted by transjen

And what did W do to keep the world safe? during his watch both IRAN and NORTH KOREA went nuclear. Yeah W did a lot to more endanger the world and did nothing to keep us safe
Jerseygirl Jen

Did I mention W? If not, then please stop spouting your contstant "W did this and W did that! King George! King George!" nonsense.

FYI Jen, North Korea and Iran have been obtaining nuclear materials way before "King George"ever assumed command. Obama has done nothing at all except talk and won a prestigious award for it.

Oh well. I guess if Yasser Arafat can win one...

[Excaliborg]

Originally Posted by TheAngryPostman

Did I mention W? If not, then please stop spouting your contstant "W did this and W did that! King George! King George!" nonsense.

FYI Jen, North Korea and Iran have been obtaining nuclear materials way before "King George"ever assumed command. Obama has done nothing at all except talk and won a prestigious award for it.

Oh well. I guess if Yasser Arafat can win one...

then i can win one also? i hear theres a nice little stipend that goes along with it.

[randolph]

An Open Letter to Americans Who Are Annoyed at Obama's Nobel Prize

Category: Barack Obama - Politics
Posted on: October 9, 2009 3:28 PM, by Greg Laden

If you are a right wing Republican conservative Yahoo, this letter is NOT for you. If you are a moderate, progressive, liberal, centrist, or anyone associated with the legitimate (i.e., not FOX News) press, this IS for you.

Dear Disgruntled Sisters and Brothers,

Many people are beside themselves, or at least a little annoyed, or in some cases simply bemused, because Barack Obama was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize but he "seems to have not done anything yet." There are so many misconceptions behind that sentiment that I don't know where to start.

If you are one of the people who does not like the fact that Barack Obama was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, please consider the following.

Some people say that this was a political act. Well, duh. In fact, double duh. The ultimate goal, and perhaps only noble goal, of politics is to find and support peace, within and between nations. Were you thinking there was some other objective, or that politics, ideally and in its most expansive form, was for something else?

The committee awarded this prize to Obama because of his efforts to enhance international diplomacy, but especially because of his vision to have a nuclear free world and his efforts to achieve this. In so doing, the Oslo committee has endorsed nuclear disarmament and probably moved us substantially towards that goal. Is this a problem for you?

President Obama had engendered a new international political climate. He has brought multilateral diplomacy back from George Bush's scrap heap as a a viable strategy, and has reemphasized the role of the United Nations and other international institutions. This underscores and gives much needed credibility to the use of dialogue and negotiation to resolve international conflicts. This is a change from previous American policy of unilateral strong-arming, which as so far been singularly ineffective, and even if sometimes effective is over the long term destructive to our position in this world and generally immoral. In just a few moves, over a short amount of time, Obama has reversed (for the better) American foreign policy. Do you not think this is a good thing?

Real nuclear arms control negotiations are finally happening because of Obama's initiative, with the US playing a salient role. Surely, you must think that is worth something.

For the first time in a decade, the US is seriously involved in the international conversation regarding climate change. Is that a problem for you?

While it is true that every single human rights objective we would like to see met has not yet been addressed, for the first time in years the US is actually positioned to realistically be involved in positive advancement of democracy and human rights, instead of just playing a game to provide cronies of the leadership with more defense contracts. Why does this bother you?

Hardly ever does someone come along, as Obama has done, to capture the world's attention and give everyone real hope for a better future. If, as an American, you are having a problem understanding why Obama was awarded this international award, then perhaps you should consider the possibility that you do not have the same large scale and international perspective that the Oslo committee has. As an exercise in self appraisal, try this. Of the following individuals, which ones can you identify as to what country they are affiliated with, what they may have done to be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize (they all were), or what job they had?

Adolfo Pérez Esquivel, Albert Lutuli, Albert Schweitzer, Alfonso García Robles, Alfred Hermann Fried, Al Gore, Alva Myrdal, Andrei Dmitrievich Sakharov, Aristide Briand, Arthur Henderson, Auguste Marie François Beernaert, Aung San Suu Kyi, Austen Chamberlain, Bertha von Suttner, Betty Williams, Carlos Filipe Ximenes Belo, Carlos Saavedra Lamas, Carl von Ossietzky, Cecil of Chelwood, Charles Albert Gobat, Charles Gates Dawes, Christian Lous Lange, Cordell Hull, Dag Hjalmar Agne Carl Hammarskjöld, David Trimble, Desmond Mpilo Tutu, Eisaku Sato, Élie Ducommun, Elie Wiesel, Elihu Root, Emily Greene Balch, Ernesto Teodoro Moneta, Ferdinand Buisson, Frank B. Kellogg, Frederik Willem de Klerk, Fredrik Bajer, Fridtjof Nansen, Friends Service Council, George Catlett Marshall, Georges Pire, Grameen Bank, Gustav Stresemann, Henri La Fontaine, Henry A. Kissinger, Hjalmar Branting, Jane Addams, Jean Henry Dunant, Jimmy Carter, Jody Williams, John Hume, John, Lord Boyd-Orr of Brechin, John Raleigh Mott, Joseph Rotblat, José Ramos-Horta, Kim Dae Jung, Klas Pontus Arnoldson, Kofi Annan, Lars Olof Jonathan (Nathan) Söderblom, League of Red Cross societies, Lech Wałęsa, Lê Ðức Thọ, Léon Jouhaux, Léon Victor Auguste Bourgeois, Lester Bowles Pearson, Linus Carl Pauling, Louis Renault, Ludwig Quidde, Mairead Corrigan, Martin Luther King, Jr., Martti Ahtisaari, Médecins Sans Frontières, Menachem Begin, Mikhail Sergeyevich Gorbachev, Mohamed Anwar Al-Sadat, Mohamed ElBaradei, Mother Teresa, Muhammad Yunus, Nelson Mandela, Nicholas Murray Butler, Norman E. Borlaug, Óscar Arias Sánchez, Paul-Henri-Benjamin d'Estournelles de Constant, Philip J. Noel-Baker, Ralph Bunche, René Cassin, Rigoberta Menchú Tum, Seán MacBride, Shimon Peres, Shirin Ebadi, Sir Norman Angell (Ralph Lane), Tenzin Gyatso, Theodore Roosevelt, Tobias Michael Carel Asser, Wangari Muta Maathai, William Randal Cremer, Willy Brandt, Woodrow Wilson, Yasser Arafat, Yitzhak Rabin.

Seriously. Read through that list. The people who awarded this prize can explain who each of these individuals is and why they were given the Nobel. Chance are, as a moderately to very well educated American, you can barely identify one in ten of these individuals. So please consider the possibility that you have, as many of us do, too narrow a perspective to be shooting your mouth off about what kind of job the Oslo committee did.

Obama understands that diplomacy is effective only if based on the concept of finding shared values. Compared to George Bush, he not only knows how to lead in this regard, but clearly thinks it actually matters that the US president DOES lead in these matters. The Oslo committee is pretty much with the rest of the world in wanting to recognize this. Is there some reason that you are against this?

Obama in his policies and actions well represents 108 years of tradition by the Oslo Nobel Committee, working to enhance and reward these policies and attitudes. Obama is the world's leading spokesman for this new international diplomacy. When the Nobel Committee endorsed Obama's statement that "Now is the time for all of us to take our share of responsibility for a global response to global challenges." .... why did that not make you feel proud to be an American? For once?

Your Blogger,

Greg

[The Conquistador]

Originally Posted by randolph

An Open Letter to Americans Who Are Annoyed at Obama's Nobel Prize

Category: Barack Obama - Politics
Posted on: October 9, 2009 3:28 PM, by Greg Laden

If you are a right wing Republican conservative Yahoo, this letter is NOT for you. If you are a moderate, progressive, liberal, centrist, or anyone associated with the legitimate (i.e., not FOX News) press, this IS for you.

Dear Disgruntled Sisters and Brothers,

Many people are beside themselves, or at least a little annoyed, or in some cases simply bemused, because Barack Obama was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize but he "seems to have not done anything yet." There are so many misconceptions behind that sentiment that I don't know where to start.

If you are one of the people who does not like the fact that Barack Obama was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, please consider the following.

Some people say that this was a political act. Well, duh. In fact, double duh. The ultimate goal, and perhaps only noble goal, of politics is to find and support peace, within and between nations. Were you thinking there was some other objective, or that politics, ideally and in its most expansive form, was for something else?

The committee awarded this prize to Obama because of his efforts to enhance international diplomacy, but especially because of his vision to have a nuclear free world and his efforts to achieve this. In so doing, the Oslo committee has endorsed nuclear disarmament and probably moved us substantially towards that goal. Is this a problem for you?

President Obama had engendered a new international political climate. He has brought multilateral diplomacy back from George Bush's scrap heap as a a viable strategy, and has reemphasized the role of the United Nations and other international institutions. This underscores and gives much needed credibility to the use of dialogue and negotiation to resolve international conflicts. This is a change from previous American policy of unilateral strong-arming, which as so far been singularly ineffective, and even if sometimes effective is over the long term destructive to our position in this world and generally immoral. In just a few moves, over a short amount of time, Obama has reversed (for the better) American foreign policy. Do you not think this is a good thing?

Real nuclear arms control negotiations are finally happening because of Obama's initiative, with the US playing a salient role. Surely, you must think that is worth something.

For the first time in a decade, the US is seriously involved in the international conversation regarding climate change. Is that a problem for you?

While it is true that every single human rights objective we would like to see met has not yet been addressed, for the first time in years the US is actually positioned to realistically be involved in positive advancement of democracy and human rights, instead of just playing a game to provide cronies of the leadership with more defense contracts. Why does this bother you?

Hardly ever does someone come along, as Obama has done, to capture the world's attention and give everyone real hope for a better future. If, as an American, you are having a problem understanding why Obama was awarded this international award, then perhaps you should consider the possibility that you do not have the same large scale and international perspective that the Oslo committee has. As an exercise in self appraisal, try this. Of the following individuals, which ones can you identify as to what country they are affiliated with, what they may have done to be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize (they all were), or what job they had?

Adolfo Pérez Esquivel, Albert Lutuli, Albert Schweitzer, Alfonso García Robles, Alfred Hermann Fried, Al Gore, Alva Myrdal, Andrei Dmitrievich Sakharov, Aristide Briand, Arthur Henderson, Auguste Marie François Beernaert, Aung San Suu Kyi, Austen Chamberlain, Bertha von Suttner, Betty Williams, Carlos Filipe Ximenes Belo, Carlos Saavedra Lamas, Carl von Ossietzky, Cecil of Chelwood, Charles Albert Gobat, Charles Gates Dawes, Christian Lous Lange, Cordell Hull, Dag Hjalmar Agne Carl Hammarskjöld, David Trimble, Desmond Mpilo Tutu, Eisaku Sato, Élie Ducommun, Elie Wiesel, Elihu Root, Emily Greene Balch, Ernesto Teodoro Moneta, Ferdinand Buisson, Frank B. Kellogg, Frederik Willem de Klerk, Fredrik Bajer, Fridtjof Nansen, Friends Service Council, George Catlett Marshall, Georges Pire, Grameen Bank, Gustav Stresemann, Henri La Fontaine, Henry A. Kissinger, Hjalmar Branting, Jane Addams, Jean Henry Dunant, Jimmy Carter, Jody Williams, John Hume, John, Lord Boyd-Orr of Brechin, John Raleigh Mott, Joseph Rotblat, José Ramos-Horta, Kim Dae Jung, Klas Pontus Arnoldson, Kofi Annan, Lars Olof Jonathan (Nathan) Söderblom, League of Red Cross societies, Lech Wałęsa, Lê Ðức Thọ, Léon Jouhaux, Léon Victor Auguste Bourgeois, Lester Bowles Pearson, Linus Carl Pauling, Louis Renault, Ludwig Quidde, Mairead Corrigan, Martin Luther King, Jr., Martti Ahtisaari, Médecins Sans Frontières, Menachem Begin, Mikhail Sergeyevich Gorbachev, Mohamed Anwar Al-Sadat, Mohamed ElBaradei, Mother Teresa, Muhammad Yunus, Nelson Mandela, Nicholas Murray Butler, Norman E. Borlaug, Óscar Arias Sánchez, Paul-Henri-Benjamin d'Estournelles de Constant, Philip J. Noel-Baker, Ralph Bunche, René Cassin, Rigoberta Menchú Tum, Seán MacBride, Shimon Peres, Shirin Ebadi, Sir Norman Angell (Ralph Lane), Tenzin Gyatso, Theodore Roosevelt, Tobias Michael Carel Asser, Wangari Muta Maathai, William Randal Cremer, Willy Brandt, Woodrow Wilson, Yasser Arafat, Yitzhak Rabin.

Seriously. Read through that list. The people who awarded this prize can explain who each of these individuals is and why they were given the Nobel. Chance are, as a moderately to very well educated American, you can barely identify one in ten of these individuals. So please consider the possibility that you have, as many of us do, too narrow a perspective to be shooting your mouth off about what kind of job the Oslo committee did.

Obama understands that diplomacy is effective only if based on the concept of finding shared values. Compared to George Bush, he not only knows how to lead in this regard, but clearly thinks it actually matters that the US president DOES lead in these matters. The Oslo committee is pretty much with the rest of the world in wanting to recognize this. Is there some reason that you are against this?

Obama in his policies and actions well represents 108 years of tradition by the Oslo Nobel Committee, working to enhance and reward these policies and attitudes. Obama is the world's leading spokesman for this new international diplomacy. When the Nobel Committee endorsed Obama's statement that "Now is the time for all of us to take our share of responsibility for a global response to global challenges." .... why did that not make you feel proud to be an American? For once?

Your Blogger,

Greg

Hey randolph! Thanks for the laugh; I needed it!

[TracyCoxx]

Originally Posted by new believer

TracyCoxx, you at least know something that your critics don't. Law, Reality and facts behind rhetoric. The one remark about W being the one above all to be impeached showed their own lack of knowledge of law , their willingness to jump in with the 'ship of fools' and quite possibly could be benefitting from the smae folks who consistently raise our taxes to procure votes from those that don't pay taxes. And that group is getting larger daily.

Thanks New Believer. That group that doesn't pay taxes is getting close to 50%. The way things are going they will be more than 50%. Do you know what it's called when a majority votes for a minority to pay all the taxes? Taxation without representation.

And about law... it seems that it's usually the conservatives who know the law, and liberals couldn't give a damn about it. Sure, some right wingers break the law, but they get busted and do their time. If someone on the left breaks the law, people tend to ignore it. Or you're called a racist if you dare bring up the fact that they're breaking the law. How many times did ACORN break the law before their image started to get merely tainted? Literally hundreds. After being charged with voter fraud in a national election in 14 states, after registering people to vote 87 times, after registering Mickey Mouse to vote, they were granted $4 billion and allowed to help do the census. In what world does this make any sense? It wasn't until video after video showing they're an organization filled with criminals that they finally got their money yanked away. And what was their response when they were caught red handed? They threatened to sue the reporters that showed what kind of organization they are. Congress voted to pull their funding, yet somehow money that was supposed to go to firefighters in Louisiana is now going to ACORN.

When BO was accused of not being a naturally born US citizen, his response was 'how dare you accuse me of that' and spent millions on lawyers to keep from showing his birth certificate in court, rather than take 5 minutes to just put the matter to rest. If I'm a janitor at Wal-Mart, I have to show my social security card, but a candidate for President of the United States doesn't have to show his credentials? Bullshit!

Black Panther members were charged with intimidating voters with weapons. They were tried and convicted. BO overturned it.

White Americans are expected to make their mortgage payments. If they can't they lose their house. They are pissed, embarrassed, depressed, etc, but they accept it because that is how the system works. But not if they're black. Then it's those racist bankers taking their house away.

Many liberal politicians and 'community activists' make a career out of telling minorities the law does not apply to them.

These liberals form their own world with versions of facts and rules that are not based on reality. And anything that goes on in the real world simply does not apply in their world. And our society is more and more frequently letting them get away with it.

[TracyCoxx]

Originally Posted by transjen

Oh brother another loyal Bush fanactic, So you think lieing to congress and the citizens of the USA not grounds for imoeachment go back and watch W's state of the union where W claims IRAQ is prepareing to go nuclear and he gave congress the same cock and bull story to start the IRAQ war wasting trillions of tax dollars and thousands of US troops there lives for W's lies.

Enough Jen. You have zero credibility with this claim until you can answer this question:

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

There was a commission set up to find out what happened wasn't there? What were the results of that?

I know your world probably doesn't recognize any such commission. Be brave though and take a look at reality.

Originally Posted by transjen

So what jobs were created by tax cuts for the rich?

Well, look at unemployment rates after Reagan became president, and compare them to unemployment rates after he left office. There's your answer.

[TracyCoxx]

Originally Posted by transjen

Guess you mean the BS 9/11 commision spear headed by loyal GOP member Tom Kane...

Not that commission, this one: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_In...nce_Commission

I'm sure you'll find fault with that one too, but tell me why Jen's commission is better.

[TracyCoxx]

Originally Posted by randolph

THE NOBEL PEACE PRIZE???

How do all you Obama bashers feel about that?

Frankly, I am amazed, what has he done other than rejoin the world community.
We still have the Middle East. It seems to be based on a lot of hope

It's obviously ridiculous, but I'm honestly not surprised. This is just more of the Obama worship that's been going around were people are drooling over a guy who hasn't actually done anything. He was nominated for the peace prize when he was president for 12 days?? That must have been the one of the most amazing first 12 days of any US president. I somehow can't remember what he did to create world peace in his first 12 days though can you?

I think Michael Steele had a pretty good response:

Originally Posted by Michael Steele

It was unfortunate that the president's star power has outshined tireless advocates who have made real achievements working towards peace and human rights.

This response was even better:

Originally Posted by Rep. Gresham Barrett

I'm not sure what the international community loved best; his waffling on Afghanistan, pulling defense missiles out of Eastern Europe, turning his back on freedom fighters in Honduras, coddling Castro, siding with Palestinians against Israel, or almost getting tough on Iran

I've heard that they awarded the prize to Obama because of his potential. So if a guy gets a 4.5 GPA for a PhD in physics are they going to give him the nobel prize in physics because of his potential?

It's obviously a BS award anyways. I mean, come on... Yassir Arafat? LOL

Originally Posted by tslust

Ouch, a little vicious, but I like it.

Not as vicious as taking mentally retarded kids from their parents to be suicide bombers, among plenty of other things! Trust me, we should go Jacques Massu on these bastards.

[Naked Freedom]

a nobel peace prize for being quiet.......i suppose...

[The Conquistador]

I should get the Nobel Prize for Excessive Masturbation. By staying home and whacking to trannies, I am not causing problems elsewhere, thereby contributing to the greater peace. Plus I'll get 1 million so I can go to Thailand, Brazil and Denmark and meet lovely transsexuals!

[transjen]

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

look at unemployment rates after Reagan became president, and compare them to unemployment rates after he left office. There's your answer.

So you credit trickle down for that ok then why didn't it work for W? More jobs were lost then were created under hiw watch and W with full support of the GOP brought back Reaganomics so where were the jobs? And last i checked none of the Bush tax cuts have been done away with so Reaganomics are still in effect so where are the jobs? Regeanomics = massive debit and nothing else


Jerseygirl Jen

[TracyCoxx]

Originally Posted by transjen

So you credit trickle down for that ok then why didn't it work for W? More jobs were lost then were created under hiw watch and W with full support of the GOP brought back Reaganomics so where were the jobs? And last i checked none of the Bush tax cuts have been done away with so Reaganomics are still in effect so where are the jobs? Regeanomics = massive debit and nothing else


Jerseygirl Jen

Probably because Bush and/or his democrat congress spent too much. And yes, I've said Bush has over spent before - partially because of good reason. We were at war, and security and intelligence gathering had to be increased. And partially because in some areas they just over spent. But as I've said before, Bush is a rank amateur compared to Obama when it comes to overspending.

[transjen]

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

Probably because Bush and/or his democrat congress spent too much. And yes, I've said Bush has over spent before - partially because of good reason. We were at war, and security and intelligence gathering had to be increased. And partially because in some areas they just over spent. But as I've said before, Bush is a rank amateur compared to Obama when it comes to overspending.

So you are saying W's massive job losses was do to his overspending????At the time Reagan's debit was the biggest in history only topped by the debit created by the first George Bush and yet you credit them for there massive job creation, Sorry i can't blame W's over spending on this one i blame it on 20 years of NAFTA and massive outsourcing of jobs overseas for cheap labor as nothing is made here in the US anymore


Jerseygirl Jen

[TracyCoxx]

Originally Posted by transjen

So you are saying W's massive job losses was do to his overspending????At the time Reagan's debit was the biggest in history only topped by the debit created by the first George Bush and yet you credit them for there massive job creation, Sorry i can't blame W's over spending on this one i blame it on 20 years of NAFTA and massive outsourcing of jobs overseas for cheap labor as nothing is made here in the US anymore


Jerseygirl Jen

W didn't have massive job losses. His unemployment numbers were pretty respectable overall. They could have been better though. And yes, Reagan's debt was the biggest in history. So was Clinton's, and Carter's, and Ford's, and Nixon's. It's been growing the whole time, except I think for Eisenhower.

Jobs are going over seas because it's cheaper to operate there. We need to cut taxes here. Before you dispute that, read this:
Ballmer Says Tax Would Move Microsoft Jobs Offshore

Originally Posted by Balmer

It makes U.S. jobs more expensive. We’re better off taking lots of people and moving them out of the U.S. as opposed to keeping them inside the U.S.

[randolph]

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

W didn't have massive job losses. His unemployment numbers were pretty respectable overall. They could have been better though. And yes, Reagan's debt was the biggest in history. So was Clinton's, and Carter's, and Ford's, and Nixon's. It's been growing the whole time, except I think for Eisenhower.

Jobs are going over seas because it's cheaper to operate there. We need to cut taxes here. Before you dispute that, read this:
Ballmer Says Tax Would Move Microsoft Jobs Offshore

Balmers statments are standard Microsoft b--s. Go to Redmond Washington if you don't believe me. the place is swarming with Indians and other Asians working for Microsoft. If their foreign profits were taxed higher, they would bring more Indians into the country to work here.

[violet lightning]

Even though I love politics and lively discussion, I usually shy away on this forum because of people like tj and hhl.
There is no real discussion or give and take. They have their opinion, and its the correct one.
Everyone else is wrong-a Nazi, Bush loving Bozo or a religious nut.
(watch for the counter attack)

It backs up my theory of why liberal-based talk radio never has done well.
Conservatives, moderates, centrists and even open-minded Liberals like discussing politics, like being informed, like to challenge and be challenged and like to think.
Most are generally open to other opinions. Most love America and want to see it do well.

Why has Air America consistently done so poorly? Obviously, liberals (in general) just aren't very interested in talking/discussing/learning the issues.
(thats a fact of ratings-either that or else Liberals just don't listen to radio)) Whereas conservative talk radio has blossomed and grown exponetially, Air America has teetered on the brink of bankruptcy.
Radical Libs love to talk the talk, but the reality is they don't walk the walk. Thats why instead of learning the facts and becoming truly informed, they can become rigidly opinionated, emotional and resort to personal insults and Bush bashing.

To a large degree, I blame the media for polarizing us. We're probably 80% in agreement on most issues, and they make it seem like we're from different planets. They focus on the few things that divide us, not the many things that should unite us.This last election the media went nuts on both sides. Completely biased and unprofessional. Never seen anything like it.
And don't get me wrong--I think Right Wingers like Shawn Hannity on the right can be just as bad. Since the moment BO took office, its been a constant daily drumbeat of what he feels he is doing wrong. I can't see how that kind of negativity can be good for America. Constructive criticism is OK. Destructive criticism is just bad.

:D As for the Nobel Peace Prize - It took me by suprise. (my first thought was: "Was it for the "Cash for Clunkers" Program?!")
And , did you read about the guy the oddsmakers favored 20:1 to win the award?
Amazing accomplishments.

[randolph]

Originally Posted by TheAngryPostman

I should get the Nobel Prize for Excessive Masturbation. By staying home and whacking to trannies, I am not causing problems elsewhere, thereby contributing to the greater peace. Plus I'll get 1 million so I can go to Thailand, Brazil and Denmark and meet lovely transsexuals!

Here is an idea. I think a-rab males are highly frustrated sexually because of Islamic laws. Instead of spending trillions fighting them why don't we pass out internet cell phones prewired to log into transladyboy. They would be so busy fapping they would forget about blowing up innocent people.

[randolph]

Originally Posted by violet lightning

Even though I love politics and lively discussion, I usually shy away on this forum because of people like tj and hhl.
There is no real discussion or give and take. They have their opinion, and its the correct one.
Everyone else is wrong-a Nazi, Bush loving Bozo or a religious nut.
(watch for the counter attack)

It backs up my theory of why liberal-based talk radio never has done well.
Conservatives, moderates, centrists and even open-minded Liberals like discussing politics, like being informed, like to challenge and be challenged and like to think.
Most are generally open to other opinions. Most love America and want to see it do well.

Why has Air America consistently done so poorly? Obviously, liberals (in general) just aren't very interested in talking/discussing/learning the issues.
(thats a fact of ratings-either that or else Liberals just don't listen to radio)) Whereas conservative talk radio has blossomed and grown exponetially, Air America has teetered on the brink of bankruptcy.
Radical Libs love to talk the talk, but the reality is they don't walk the walk. Thats why instead of learning the facts and becoming truly informed, they can become rigidly opinionated, emotional and resort to personal insults and Bush bashing.

To a large degree, I blame the media for polarizing us. We're probably 80% in agreement on most issues, and they make it seem like we're from different planets. They focus on the few things that divide us, not the many things that should unite us.This last election the media went nuts on both sides. Completely biased and unprofessional. Never seen anything like it.
And don't get me wrong--I think Right Wingers like Shawn Hannity on the right can be just as bad. Since the moment BO took office, its been a constant daily drumbeat of what he feels he is doing wrong. I can't see how that kind of negativity can be good for America. Constructive criticism is OK. Destructive criticism is just bad.

:D As for the Nobel Peace Prize - It took me by suprise. (my first thought was: "Was it for the "Cash for Clunkers" Program?!")
And , did you read about the guy the oddsmakers favored 20:1 to win the award?
Amazing accomplishments.

A very good post, cheers.

[tslust]

Originally Posted by randolph

Here is an idea. I think a-rab males are highly frustrated sexually because of Islamic laws. Instead of spending trillions fighting them why don't we pass out internet cell phones prewired to log into transladyboy. They would be so busy fapping they would forget about blowing up innocent people.

I love that idea.

[raconteur]

Well ...

W didn't win the election, our Founding Fathers did! That's why they created the Electoral System ... to prevent morons from being President!

Bussein is the biggest B.S. artist since Judas! Acorn stuffed the ballot boxes! I say, no ID, no vote ... comprende? !!!

George Soros bought Bussein the NBP. They should rename it now to the NWC (not worth crap) !!!

The inmates have taken over the asylum and they will make us all crazy, and broke!

All illegal aliens should get is a bill or a one-way ticket home!

The financial meltdown was hatched in the Carter and Billary administrations! Don't believe it ... then watch the documentary on MSNBC! Even the liberal MSNBC couldn't gloss over the facts!

We need to support our very brave young men and women in Afghanistan! Please call your Senators and Congressperson (please excuse the PC lapse) and instruct them to tell Bussein to get off his fat ass and give the Generals, and our great troops, whatever they want, to win!

Were it not for that coward, CPowell, Bush 41 would have laid waste to Iraq and Iwar no. 2 could have been avoided!

Have you calculated your share of our quickly rising national debt lately?

Take a chance and watch Fox News!

I am not PC oriented, so I don't care what PCpeople think!
Please spare me the liberal diatribe, I heard it all in the sixties. It didn't make sense then, and it makes no sense now! Sarah for President in 2012!

[The Conquistador]

Originally Posted by randolph

Here is an idea. I think a-rab males are highly frustrated sexually because of Islamic laws. Instead of spending trillions fighting them why don't we pass out internet cell phones prewired to log into transladyboy. They would be so busy fapping they would forget about blowing up innocent people.

I've been over there. They have sex with women only for procreation. Any pleasure/recreational sex is either done with another man or a farm animal. I once caught 2 Iraqi nationals working on the base hugging in a bathroom with their pants down and in a very sexual manner.

Another time, I was in the TOC and I heard over the radio from a group of infantry guys that they saw an Iraqi dude doing something suspicious near a concrete barrier and they were requesting permission to engage him. A couple minutes later, they burst out laughing; turns out the Iraqi dude was not fiddling with a bomb or anything. He was fucking a goat behind a concrete traffic divider!

I don't know how tolerant they'd be towards transsexuals. However, if we invade Iran, I'm sure there would be lots of beautiful transsexuals just waiting to get the hell out of there. Persian chicks are smoking hot and it would make sense that their trannies would be just as goregeous, if not more.

[randolph]

Originally Posted by raconteur

Well ...

W didn't win the election, our Founding Fathers did! That's why they created the Electoral System ... to prevent morons from being President!

Bussein is the biggest B.S. artist since Judas! Acorn stuffed the ballot boxes! I say, no ID, no vote ... comprende? !!!

George Soros bought Bussein the NBP. They should rename it now to the NWC (not worth crap) !!!

The inmates have taken over the asylum and they will make us all crazy, and broke!

All illegal aliens should get is a bill or a one-way ticket home!

The financial meltdown was hatched in the Carter and Billary administrations! Don't believe it ... then watch the documentary on MSNBC! Even the liberal MSNBC couldn't gloss over the facts!

We need to support our very brave young men and women in Afghanistan! Please call your Senators and Congressperson (please excuse the PC lapse) and instruct them to tell Bussein to get off his fat ass and give the Generals, and our great troops, whatever they want, to win!

Were it not for that coward, CPowell, Bush 41 would have laid waste to Iraq and Iwar no. 2 could have been avoided!

Have you calculated your share of our quickly rising national debt lately?

Take a chance and watch Fox News!

I am not PC oriented, so I don't care what PCpeople think!
Please spare me the liberal diatribe, I heard it all in the sixties. It didn't make sense then, and it makes no sense now! Sarah for President in 2012!

I hope this post is a put on, either way, it is laughable.

[raconteur]

Originally Posted by randolph

I hope this post is a put on, either way, it is laughable.

Trying to insult a poster is not polite! Everyone has an opinion and is entitled to it, like it or not.

While there are some nuggets of truth in what I said, you caught me stirring the pot!

I know better than to discuss either religion or politics!

Carry on with the political humor ... sorry to interrupt!

[randolph]

I guess that's the main reason.

[petreski]

I dont respeact Obama at all

[raconteur]

Originally Posted by petreski

I dont respeact Obama at all

In the spirit of dry humor ...

OIC ... IMHO, I suspect you meant that you don't respect him.

OK then, you probably need to get some Oust Obammer gear:

http://tinyurl.com/CPOOGear


That way you can let the world know how you feel about Busein!

Party on ...

[BananaBanana]

I think Obama is a fucking liar, like almost all american presidents.
so crew him too.

[randolph]

Originally Posted by raconteur

In the spirit of dry humor ...

OIC ... IMHO, I suspect you meant that you don't respect him.

OK then, you probably need to get some Oust Obammer gear:

http://tinyurl.com/CPOOGear


That way you can let the world know how you feel about Busein!

Party on ...

Obama is a well educated intelligent black Democrat.
This drives conservatives completely bonkers. They like third rate movie stars (Reagen) and business losers (Bush) and complete idiots (Palin). Apparently they like someone who matches there own capabilities to be our president.

[The Conquistador]

Originally Posted by randolph

Obama is a well educated intelligent black Democrat.
This drives conservatives completely bonkers. They like third rate movie stars (Reagen) and business losers (Bush) and complete idiots (Palin). Apparently they like someone who matches there own capabilities to be our president.

No. Obama is a smooth talking narcissist who hasn't done jack squat since he got in office except talk. I say give Zero the boot and elect Thomas Sowell in his place.

[randolph]

Originally Posted by TheAngryPostman

No. Obama is a smooth talking narcissist who hasn't done jack squat since he got in office except talk. I say give Zero the boot and elect Thomas Sowell in his place.

Sowell was born in North Carolina. His father died before he was born. In his autobiography, A Personal Odyssey, he recalled that his encounters with whites were so limited he didn't believe that "yellow" was a hair color. He moved to Harlem, New York City with his mother's sister (who, at the time, he believed was his mother). Sowell attended Stuyvesant High School, but dropped out at age 17 because of financial difficulties and a deteriorating home environment.[2] To support himself he worked at various jobs, including in a machine shop and as a delivery man for Western Union. He applied to enter the Civil Service and was eventually accepted, which prompted a move to Washington DC. He was drafted in 1951, during the Korean War, and was assigned to the US Marine Corps. Due to prior experience in photography, he worked in a photography unit.


Bio on Thomas Sowell
After discharge, Sowell passed the GED examination and enrolled at Howard University. He transferred to Harvard University, where in 1958 he graduated magna cum laude with a Bachelor of Arts degree in Economics. He received a Master of Arts in Economics from Columbia University in 1959, and a Doctor of Philosophy in Economics from the University of Chicago. Sowell initially chose Columbia University because he wanted to study under George Stigler. After arriving at Columbia and learning that Stigler had moved to Chicago, he followed him there.[3]

Sowell has taught Economics at Howard University, Cornell University, Brandeis University, and UCLA. Since 1980 he has been a Senior Fellow of the Hoover Institution at Stanford University, where he holds a fellowship named after Rose and Milton Friedman.[4]

If the Republican party can get its act together and nominate an intelligent guy like Sowell, that would be good for the country.

[ila]

Originally Posted by randolph

Obama is a well educated intelligent black Democrat.
This drives conservatives completely bonkers. They like third rate movie stars (Reagen) and business losers (Bush) and complete idiots (Palin). Apparently they like someone who matches there own capabilities to be our president.

Randolph, are you trying to say that you're a conservative? (note the text in bold)

[randolph]

Originally Posted by ila

Randolph, are you trying to say that you're a conservative? (note the text in bold)

Yeah, I gues I have a consurvatev gene when it cums to spellig.

Actually it's my liberal genes that give me the most trouble. I believe when politicians go to Washington they will be honest and do what is best for the citizens of this country. They will not be bought off by the military/industrial complex. They will not be bought off by the drug companies. The Republicans and Democrats will band together in times of crisis to solve the countries problems. They will avoid backbiting and petty lies to further personal political advantage. So you see my problem, how naive can you get?

[The Conquistador]

Originally Posted by randolph

Actually it's my liberal genes that give me the most trouble. I believe when politicians go to Washington they will be honest and do what is best for the citizens of this country. They will not be bought off by the military/industrial complex. They will not be bought off by the drug companies. The Republicans and Democrats will band together in times of crisis to solve the countries problems. They will avoid backbiting and petty lies to further personal political advantage. So you see my problem, how naive can you get?

Unfortunately, our elected representatives and legslators, Democrat or Republican, do not give a damn about the rest of the populace.

These 2 quotes sum up America today:

"Only a few prefer liberty;the majority seek nothing more than fair masters"-Sallust

"A democratic government is the only one in which those who vote for a tax can escape the obligation to pay it.

Democracy and socialism have nothing in common but one word, equality. But notice the difference: while democracy seeks equality in liberty, socialism seeks equality in restraint and servitude.

The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money"- Alexis de Tocqueville (economic "stimulus" plan anyone?)

[raconteur]

Bingo ... !!!