So will lobotomizing yourself apparently :lol:

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

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010...-created-risk/
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!

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 from him during his campaign:
Here's the reality:
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/...,2770904.story
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...

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

Is there ANYBODY who can save us?

fuck the middle class
 

Elephant lobotomies

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

Why, was Hannity against the bailout?

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:

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...

calfornicated
 

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? :(

"I'll pay ze Rent"

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?

Taxes
 

Just to be fair. :eek:

Trillions
 

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

Good news everybody!

Nixon's grandson is running for Congress!

http://townhall.com/columnists/David...o_watch?page=1

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!"

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

Move her to the back of the bus.

RANDY:

Good one! Right person, right thread!!

TAL

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

"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?

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:

[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! ;)

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.

Stop being racist.

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:

(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!

Unreal!!
 

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

The "other" white meat.

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.

The deficit
 

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, here, and here). 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 (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 is a market analyst and commentator.

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.

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

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?

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.

Ok, you never know who you're dealing with on here.

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.

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.

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

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?

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.

Jeez, the hustle never ends.

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

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

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