Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: TerminalPower on October 08, 2008, 07:15:46 PM
-
Perhaps a bit of all three.
Part 1 - Obama's Ties to Socialism, Marxism, and Communism
1. Obama's Father Wrote About Socialism - His father wrote a paper called "Problems With Our Socialism" that advocates 100% taxation of the rich, communal ownership of land and the forced confiscation of privately controlled land. Source: Greg Ransom, PrestoPundit
2. Obama's Mother Was a "Communist Sympathizer" - " Friends describe her as a "fellow traveler", that is, a communist sympathizer, from her youth, according to a March 27, 2007, Chicago Tribune report" Source: Spengler, Asia Times "The values she taught me continue to be my touchstone when it comes to how I go about the world of politics - Barack Obama" Source: Tim Jones, Chicago Tribune
3. Obama's Parents Met in a Russian Class (Back then it was the Communist USSR) - "His mother, Stanley Ann Dunham (her father always wanted a son), was white and just 18 when they met in a Russian class" Source: Sharon Cohen, St Louis Times
4. Obama's Teen Mentor was Frank Marshall Davis (a known CPUSA member) - "...through Frank Marshall Davis, Obama had an admitted relationship with someone who was publicly identified as a member of the Communist Party USA (CPUSA). The record shows that Obama was in Hawaii from 1971-1979, where, at some point in time, he developed a close relationship, almost like a son, with Davis, listening to his poetry and getting advice on his career path. But Obama, in his book, Dreams From My Father, refers to him repeatedly as just Frank." Source: Cliff Kincaid, Accuracy in the Media "Kathryn Takara of the University of Hawaii, who wrote a dissertation on the life of Frank Marshall Davis, confirming Davis was a significant influence on Obama when the senator attended Punahou prep school in Hawaii from 1975 to 1979" Source: Jim Corsi, WorldNetDaily based on Communism in Hawaii and the Obama Connection (Cliff Kincaid and Herbert Romerstein)
5. Obama's Brother Roy and Cousin Odinga are Marxists - "Barack Obama's older brother, Abongo "Roy" Obama. He is a Luo activist. militant Muslim and a Marxist." Source: Barbara Busby, 180people.com “The person who made me proudest of all,” Obama wrote, “was Roy Source: Bill Sammon, The Examiner "Odinga is a Marxist who reportedly has made a pact with a hard-line Islamic group in Kenya to establish Shariah courts throughout the country" Source: Invenstor's Business Daily
6. Obama Attended Socialist Conferences at Cooper Union - "He went to socialist conferences at Cooper Union and African cultural fairs in Brooklyn and started lecturing his relatives until they worried he'd become "one of those freaks you see on the streets around here." Source: H Kennedy, NY Daily News
7. Obama Was Hand Picked by Alice Palmer to Succeed Her in the Illinois State Senate - "Nine years before Palmer picked Obama to be her successor, she was the only African-American journalist to travel to the Soviet Union to attend the 27th Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, according to an article Palmer wrote in the CPUSA newspaper, People's Daily World, June 19, 1986." Source: Jim Corsi, WorldNetDaily based on Communism in Chicago and the Obama Connection (Cliff Kincaid and Herbert Romerstein)
8. Obama's Run for the Illinois State Senate was Launched by a Fundraiser Organized at Bill Ayers' and Bernardine Dorhn's Chicago Home - Ayers and Dorhn are former terrorists from the Weather Underground who's SDS organization received financial contributions from the CPUSA. "Obama's run for the Illinois state Senate was launched by a fundraiser organized at Ayers' and Dorhn's Chicago home by Alice Palmer. Palmer had named Obama to succeed her in the state Senate in 1995, when she decided to run for a U.S. congressional seat." Source: Jim Corsi, WorldNetDaily based on Communism in Chicago and the Obama Connection (Cliff Kincaid and Herbert Romerstein)
9. Obama Had a Close Relationship with the "Anti-Capitalist" Group ACORN - "Obama has had an intimate and long-term association with the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (Acorn)...Chicago Acorn appears to have played a major role in Obama’s political advance...Acorn’s radical agenda sometimes shifts toward “undisguised authoritarian socialism.” Source: Stanley Kurtz, National Review
10. Obama Attended Several Meetings with the Democratic Socialists in Chicago and Was even Endorsed by Them - "Obama’s socialist backing goes back at least to 1996, when he received the endorsement of the Chicago branch of the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) for an Illinois state senate seat. Later, the Chicago DSA newsletter reported that Obama, as a state senator, showed up to eulogize Saul Mendelson, one of the “champions” of “Chicago’s democratic left” and a long-time socialist activist. Obama’s stint as a “community organizer” in Chicago has gotten some attention, but his relationship with the DSA socialists, who groomed and backed him, has been generally ignored." Source: Cliff Kincaid, Accuracy in the Media "In its broadest sense, democratic socialism could refer to any attempts to bring about socialism through democratic means as opposed to violent insurrection." Source: Wikipedia
11. Obama Endorsed Openly Socialist Senator Bernie Sanders - Video " "Sanders is the first self-described socialist to be elected to the U.S. Senate." Source: Wikipedia
12. Many Obama Supporters Idolize Che Guervara - Obama Campaign Worker Seen With Communist Cuba Flag Depicting Marxist Che Guevara on it. Source: David Benzion, Lone Star Times
"Guevara later served as Minister of Industries, in which post he helped formulate Cuban socialism...Guevara played a key role in bringing to Cuba the Soviet nuclear-armed ballistic missiles that precipitated the Cuban Missile Crisis in October 1962. During an interview with the British newspaper Daily Worker some weeks later, he stated that, if the missiles had been under Cuban control, they would have fired them against major U.S. cities." Source: Wikipedia
-
I love your posts dude. Unfortunately I give you another year before you realize most of the idiots on getbig are lefty's with less knowledge of politics than your average koala and they don't listen to facts and reason.
-
I love your posts dude. Unfortunately I give you another year before you realize most of the idiots on getbig are lefty's with less knowledge of politics than your average koala and they don't listen to facts and reason.
I post for those who cherish freedom, love America, aren't terrorist sympathizers, and desire truth.
Thanks Bro!
-
Which part(s) of Obama's political platform is socialist?
-
Which part(s) of Obama's political platform is socialist?
Punishing people for making money, discouraging success in general, wealth redistribution, increased subsidies and hand-outs, and gov't expansion.
But since you're of the same ilk I don't expect you to admit the same.
-
Socialism: A political theory advocating state ownership of industry.
An economic system based on state ownership of capital. All communists are socialists.
GBers, under George W Bush the government has now taken ownership of the mortgage industry, insurance industry and banking industry.
Nuff said.
NT
10/09 WASHINGTON - The Bush administration is considering taking ownership stakes in a number of U.S. banks as one option it might use to deal with a serious credit crisis, an administration official said Thursday.
-
Bad move on Bush's part. I completely disagree with taxpayers bailing out a failing industry and funding the elements of gov't that caused it to happen.
And you think electing a socialist like Obama will help? I think not.
-
Which part(s) of Obama's political platform is socialist?
Where do you want me to begin?
-
Bad move on Bush's part. I completely disagree with taxpayers bailing out a failing industry and funding the elements of gov't that caused it to happen.
And you think electing a socialist like Obama will help? I think not.
George W Bush = no bigger Socialist in the history of America.
Banking system = socialized under Bush
Insurance industry = socialized under Bush
Mortgage industry = socialized under Bush
and you're pointing fingers at Obama ? ::)
amazing.....
NT
-
George W Bush = no bigger Socialist in the history of America.
Banking system = socialized under Bush
Insurance industry = socialized under Bush
Mortgage industry = socialized under Bush
and you're pointing fingers at Obama ? ::)
amazing.....
NT
No one is defending Bush. He sucks.
Obama, however, well this is a whole new level of disaster.
-
Obama is a Democrat
-
In the aftermath of World War Two, America stood alone as the worlds sole superpower and the worlds preeminent economic power.
In the last sixty years, America has been overtaken by a plethora of newly developed countries (ie: countries that have developed since WW2). All of these countries overtaking the US have done so by adopting socialist policies and strict regulation of the capitalist factors of their economies.
Don't take my word for it:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_Human_Development_Index
UN Human Development Index (data from 2005, published in 2007)
1* Iceland ...becoming more socialist all the time
2* Norway ...the MOST socialist country in the world
3* Australia ...formerly a penal colony
4* Canada ...formerly part of the British monarchy
5* Ireland ...where I live, only an independent state since 1922 and chronically socialist
6* Sweden ...chronically socialist
7* Switzerland
8* Japan ...nuked and bombed to shit during WW2, bounced back by dumping the Emperor for socialism
9* Netherlands
10* France ...chronically, fervently socialist and the butt of Republican jokes
11* Finland ...chronically socialist
12 United States ...Go "Fuck-You" Capitalism!
13* Spain ...formerly a dictatorship under Franco
14* Denmark
15* Austria
16* United Kingdom ....a monarchy in name only, now a socialist parliamentary state
17* Belgium ...formerly a monarchy
18* Luxembourg
19* New Zealand
20* Italy ...formerly fascist under Mussolini, bounced back through socialism
...in the top twenty, the COUNTRY (not countries, but country... singular!) that isn't socialist is the United States.
Twelve SOCIALIST countries have overtaken the US since the end of WW2, is it any wonder that they are also some of the most socialist countries out there?
How are socialist countries living better than Americans with only a fraction of America's GDP?
How would the French do with America's GDP?
More importantly, who convinced Americans that socialism was something to be avoided? (FOX News?)
The Luke
-
Punishing people for making money, discouraging success in general, wealth redistribution, increased subsidies and hand-outs, and gov't expansion.
But since you're of the same ilk I don't expect you to admit the same.
Taxation is not socialism.
All Governments redistribute 'wealth'. That's not socialism,
Increased subsidies and handouts? Increased? Increased over what?...Bush's record setting drunken sailor spending?
Do you know how much money Obama will save this country by disposing of the Iraq mistake?
-
No one is defending Bush. He sucks.
Obama, however, well this is a whole new level of disaster.
NT pointed out what socialism looks like...Bush is full of it.
Where's the Socialism with Obama? His UHC plan works with the existing private insurers. That's not socialism.
-
DEMOCRAT
-
Wow.. call Obama out on being extreme left and watch all the liberal venom come out and falsely attack... BUSH!!!!!
What a surprise ::)
Liberal democrats have stood in the way of every principle of capitalism for the last 30 years. No wonder we're falling behind.
-
Taxation is not socialism.
All Governments redistribute 'wealth'. That's not socialism,
Increased subsidies and handouts? Increased? Increased over what?...Bush's record setting drunken sailor spending?
Do you know how much money Obama will save this country by disposing of the Iraq mistake?
Gimmie a break.. Excessive taxation for redistribution is socialism. Obama will not SAVE any money. Whatever money comes from ending the majority of defense spending will be used for his own SOCIALIST agenda.
-
Where's the Socialism with Obama?
ah HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
hahahahaah....lol "good one" ;D
-
George W Bush = no bigger Socialist in the history of America.
Banking system = socialized under Bush
Insurance industry = socialized under Bush
Mortgage industry = socialized under Bush
and you're pointing fingers at Obama ? ::)
amazing.....
NT
I think we can ALL agree that Bush is no conservative.
-
Gimmie a break.. Excessive taxation for redistribution is socialism. Obama will not SAVE any money. Whatever money comes from ending the majority of defense spending will be used for his own SOCIALIST agenda.
Is excessive borrowing for redistribution socialism? Big Mac thinks that's a great idea.
Taxation is not socialism.
All governments (even democratic republics) are redistributive.
Socialism = the people owning the means of production. Or as NT pointed out, the gov (We the People) owning private enterprise--the bailouts/
You shout "SOCIALISM" and "OBAMA" and it has no meat on the bone. "Obama's a socialist...well, gee, just b/c he is!" That might fly at repub. rallies but not in the real world.
Obama will start paying the nation's bills that Big Mac/Bush have been deferring with the help of Red China.
Borrow and spend is a much worse proposition than tax and spend.
Do you really believe that McCain's economic plan (deep tax cuts) is going to help?
http://www.johnmccain.com/Images/Issues/JobsforAmerica/briefing.pdf
McCain's plan could work if: Taxes run economic performance (they don't); he can control spending (he won't); debt doesn't matter anymore (it does).
-
Is excessive borrowing for redistribution socialism? Big Mac thinks that's a great idea.
Taxation is not socialism.
All governments (even democratic republics) are redistributive.
Socialism = the people owning the means of production. Or as NT pointed out, the gov (We the People) owning private enterprise--the bailouts/
You shout "SOCIALISM" and "OBAMA" and it has no meat on the bone. "Obama's a socialist...well, gee, just b/c he is!" That might fly at repub. rallies but not in the real world.
Obama will start paying the nation's bills that Big Mac/Bush have been deferring with the help of Red China.
Borrow and spend is a much worse proposition than tax and spend.
Do you really believe that McCain's economic plan (deep tax cuts) is going to help?
http://www.johnmccain.com/Images/Issues/JobsforAmerica/briefing.pdf
McCain's plan could work if: Taxes run economic performance (they don't); he can control spending (he won't); debt doesn't matter anymore (it does).
Re-read my post. Excessive taxation is socialism. This holds especially true when the money goes to benefit more of those could contribute less, which is yet another Obama platform. All governments may practice a form of redistribution but it is the EXTENT to which it is practiced that makes it a positive or negative policy. Obama seeks to increase that even further along with growing an already wasteful and bureaucratic government.
Obama is not a socialist "because I said so." He is because of his voting record and his statements along with those of his campaign. Are you so far removed from reality as to not see that? Oh wait... I forgot. You are ALSO a socialist lib. My bad. :-P
Cutting taxes has spurred growth and prosperity time after time yet you're so up your own ass with liberalism you won't be honest enough with yourself you admit it. That may fly at a flag burning but not in the REAL world where REAL Americans support free market capitalism, lower taxes, smaller gov't, and overall individual freedom to decide where our own money should be spent. ;D
-
Re-read my post. Excessive taxation is socialism. This holds especially true when the money goes to benefit more of those could contribute less, which is yet another Obama platform. All governments may practice a form of redistribution but it is the EXTENT to which it is practiced that makes it a positive or negative policy. Obama seeks to increase that even further along with growing an already wasteful and bureaucratic government.
Socialism is people/gov. owning the means of production.
HIgh taxation is high taxation. It's not socialism.
You don't know what socialism is.
Obama is not a socialist "because I said so." He is because of his voting record and his statements along with those of his campaign. Are you so far removed from reality as to not see that? Oh wait... I forgot. You are ALSO a socialist lib. My bad. :-P
Again, it's not socialism just b/c you say so. I am a socialist liberal. You obviously have a problem with that.
Cutting taxes has spurred growth and prosperity time after time yet you're so up your own ass with liberalism you won't be honest enough with yourself you admit it.
Bull plop. Reagan cut taxes....and he raised them 7 times in 8 years including the largest tax increase in history.
Tax cuts do not govern a country's economic performance.
Tax cuts are a type of Keynesian spending without direction or object. Here's money everyone, do with it whatever you want! The rich hoard and the poor spend.
Tax cuts are a redistribution of wealth. Is that socialism?
Tax cuts generally spur some sort of economic growth but the gov. is left in debt b/c the tax cuts do not pay for themselves.
That may fly at a flag burning but not in the REAL world where REAL Americans support free market capitalism, lower taxes, smaller gov't, and overall individual freedom to decide where our own money should be spent. ;D
Free market capitalism exists for the low and middle class. The rich live in a socialist dream where costs are subsidized and profits privatized. Small government? That's never going to happen. That's an anachronistic dream from colonial times. Let it go already. And low taxes only happen if economic happenstance and some degree responsiblity are part of the equation: Republicans are the most irresponsible lot I've seen in some time. You're part of the same group that thinks, "paying taxes is not patriotic" and to me those are the words of someone looking for a free ride. Why? B/c america's the best country on the planet....I just won't support it with my money! SElfish.
-
Cutting taxes has spurred growth and prosperity time after time yet you're so up your own ass with liberalism you won't be honest enough with yourself you admit it.
...any evidence for this?
Reagan cut taxes (for the rich)... that effectively destroyed Americas unions and manufacturing base, which in turn led to massive unemployment.
George H Bush... "Read my lips, NO MORE TAXES!" well he did somewhat raise taxes, but he cut them for the rich and unemployment was the result.
Bill Clinton... raised taxes and introduced socialist policies. "Big Government" and "tax 'n spend" policies led to the record employment; a balanced budget and a hefty surplus. Neither Reagan, nor Bush Sr, nor Dubya managed to produce a surplus with their "fiscal conservatism"... instead they produced massive deficits.
George W Bush... Google the word "failure"
Look at my first post in this thread (further up the page), socialism works... republican policies don't.
The Luke
-
Socialism is people/gov. owning the means of production.
HIgh taxation is high taxation. It's not socialism.
You don't know what socialism is.
Again, it's not socialism just b/c you say so. I am a socialist liberal. You obviously have a problem with that.
Bull plop. Reagan cut taxes....and he raised them 7 times in 8 years including the largest tax increase in history.
Tax cuts do not govern a country's economic performance.
Tax cuts are a type of Keynesian spending without direction or object. Here's money everyone, do with it whatever you want! The rich hoard and the poor spend.
Tax cuts are a redistribution of wealth. Is that socialism?
Tax cuts generally spur some sort of economic growth but the gov. is left in debt b/c the tax cuts do not pay for themselves.
Free market capitalism exists for the low and middle class. The rich live in a socialist dream where costs are subsidized and profits privatized. Small government? That's never going to happen. That's an anachronistic dream from colonial times. Let it go already. And low taxes only happen if economic happenstance and some degree responsiblity are part of the equation: Republicans are the most irresponsible lot I've seen in some time. You're part of the same group that thinks, "paying taxes is not patriotic" and to me those are the words of someone looking for a free ride. Why? B/c america's the best country on the planet....I just won't support it with my money! SElfish.
I wasn't defining socialism. I was ascribing the attribute that socialism and higher taxes go hand-in-hand.
The rich don't "hoard", they make sound economic decisions while the poor make POOR economic decisions. Tax cuts are not a redistribution. They are people keeping more of the money they earn. Only someone with such a skewed and backwards view of economics could believe the nonsense coming out of you.
Tax cuts have benefited the US economy EVERY TIME. Gov't spending ALSO has to be lessened or controlled so as to facilitate the cuts. Neither Obama and McCain are great candidates to support that but given the choice I would rather not vote for the man guaranteed to up spending, raise taxes, and expand. McCain, at least, MIGHT do something about it. Obama sits there and convinces the retards who support him that he will cut taxes for the middle class. It's a falsehood. Everything Obama will do with raise costs of living and inflation and the tax structure will only serve to keep the middle class from moving upwards. Capital gains alone is hugely destructive and will be much worse under Obama.
America is best country on the planet because the working populace still has some degree of control and freedom to choose where our money goes. Obama and those like yourself seek to ruin that and make those decisions for us. That's not freedom.
-
Tax cuts have benefited the US economy EVERY TIME.
...can you illustrate this point with an example? (see my previous post)
The Luke
-
I wasn't defining socialism. I was ascribing the attribute that socialism and higher taxes go hand-in-hand.
No they don't. There is no connection btn the two other than the one you've created.
The rich don't "hoard", they make sound economic decisions while the poor make POOR economic decisions. Tax cuts are not a redistribution. They are people keeping more of the money they earn. Only someone with such a skewed and backwards view of economics could believe the nonsense coming out of you.
How on earth is a tax cut pay out not a form of redistribution of governmental assets? Please explain.
Tax cuts have benefited the US economy EVERY TIME. Gov't spending ALSO has to be lessened or controlled so as to facilitate the cuts. Neither Obama and McCain are great candidates to support that but given the choice I would rather not vote for the man guaranteed to up spending, raise taxes, and expand. McCain, at least, MIGHT do something about it. Obama sits there and convinces the retards who support him that he will cut taxes for the middle class. It's a falsehood. Everything Obama will do with raise costs of living and inflation and the tax structure will only serve to keep the middle class from moving upwards. Capital gains alone is hugely destructive and will be much worse under Obama.
Tax cuts also are a NET LOSS EVERY TIME b/c the permanent loss of tax revenue is never recouped by the attendant rise in production due to the cut.
You are near hysterics with your histrionical claims: 'Everything Obama will do with raise the costs of living and inflation...."
Do you have any evidence at all to support your wild conclusions? I think not.
Remember, taxes don't much matter to the Nation's economy. It really is that simple.
America is best country on the planet because the working populace still has some degree of control and freedom to choose where our money goes. Obama and those like yourself seek to ruin that and make those decisions for us. That's not freedom.
I don't know what you mean by the working populace having freedom b/c it can decide where to spend its money. I don't think freedom is determined by economics. I do think consumer choice in the market place is a bastardization of the concept of sweet, terrible freedom.
But this is what I expect from a country whose citizenry is conditioned to think acquisitive success is the pinnacle of free living. It's not.
-
...can you illustrate this point with an example? (see my previous post)
The Luke
http://www.house.gov/jec/fiscal/tx-grwth/reagtxct/reagtxct.htm
-
-
-
"and we just love cheap plastic crap from China" ahahahahahaha
-
How on earth is a tax cut pay out not a form of redistribution of governmental assets? Please explain.
Tax cuts also are a NET LOSS EVERY TIME b/c the permanent loss of tax revenue is never recouped by the attendant rise in production due to the cut.
You are near hysterics with your histrionical claims: 'Everything Obama will do with raise the costs of living and inflation...."
Do you have any evidence at all to support your wild conclusions? I think not.
Remember, taxes don't much matter to the Nation's economy. It really is that simple.
I don't know what you mean by the working populace having freedom b/c it can decide where to spend its money. I don't think freedom is determined by economics. I do think consumer choice in the market place is a bastardization of the concept of sweet, terrible freedom.
But this is what I expect from a country whose citizenry is conditioned to think acquisitive success is the pinnacle of free living. It's not.
Typical liberal. You label taxes "governmental assets" when the reality is that money is the taxpayers. It is GIVEN to the gov't (in theory). You even try to contort the situation by calling it a "pay out" when a tax cut is simply taking LESS from the citizenry in the first place.
Obama is an outright tax and spend lib. You can bitch about my reasons for thinking that but it is painfully obvious.
Freedom is very heavily determined by economics. When socialists (like Obama) want everyone to depend on the gov't for everything and have less and less control over their own money I don't see how you can claim otherwise unless you support the same (which is obvious you do). Conservatism preaches accountability to the tax payer. Our money should be used to support the causes the tax PAYER supports not the causes of the elite who want to dictate where and how our money is spent. People like you only serve to destroy that accountability. If you want to give more of your money to a wasteful and gov't feel free but the whole idea behind a "free" country is that people like you shouldn't be able to pick-pocket the rest of us.
-
Typical liberal. You label taxes "governmental assets" when the reality is that money is the taxpayers. It is GIVEN to the gov't (in theory). You even try to contort the situation by calling it a "pay out" when a tax cut is simply taking LESS from the citizenry in the first place.
Obama is an outright tax and spend lib. You can bitch about my reasons for thinking that but it is painfully obvious.
Freedom is very heavily determined by economics. When socialists (like Obama) want everyone to depend on the gov't for everything and have less and less control over their own money I don't see how you can claim otherwise unless you support the same (which is obvious you do). Conservatism preaches accountability to the tax payer. Our money should be used to support the causes the tax PAYER supports not the causes of the elite who want to dictate where and how our money is spent. People like you only serve to destroy that accountability. If you want to give more of your money to a wasteful and gov't feel free but the whole idea behind a "free" country is that people like you shouldn't be able to pick-pocket the rest of us.
wonder how many times a day this guy says Lib or liberal?
-
wonder how many times a day this guy says Lib or liberal?
As many times as Obama has to hide his post campaign agenda for fear of showing his true nature.
-
wonder how many times a day this guy says Lib or liberal?
Or better yet as many times as you say we're melting down cause our side is losing yet I see you in a posting frenzy jumping to every thread with Osam.. er, Obamas name on it to defend his honor. :-* ;D
-
Typical liberal. You label taxes "governmental assets" when the reality is that money is the taxpayers. It is GIVEN to the gov't (in theory). You even try to contort the situation by calling it a "pay out" when a tax cut is simply taking LESS from the citizenry in the first place.
The gov in the US is The People. The people have budgetary needs--bills to pay. The people have a national interest in having those bills paid.
It's no wonder economic imbeciles like Reagan and Bush are elected and re-elected by people like you. In your world, there is no responsibility for debt. So the US ends up living like welfare queens on maxed out credit. NOw is that prudent? Is that wise? Or is that simplistic head-in-the-sand selfishness?
Obama is an outright tax and spend lib. You can bitch about my reasons for thinking that but it is painfully obvious.
Tax and spend v. borrow and spend. Which one costs more? Why it's borrow and spend and that is hallmark of the REagan/Bush model of economics. That's horrible for America.
Freedom is very heavily determined by economics. When socialists (like Obama) want everyone to depend on the gov't for everything and have less and less control over their own money I don't see how you can claim otherwise unless you support the same (which is obvious you do). Conservatism preaches accountability to the tax payer. Our money should be used to support the causes the tax PAYER supports not the causes of the elite who want to dictate where and how our money is spent. People like you only serve to destroy that accountability. If you want to give more of your money to a wasteful and gov't feel free but the whole idea behind a "free" country is that people like you shouldn't be able to pick-pocket the rest of us.
I've never seen a case of projection as bad as yours. The 'elite' you refer to are likely the elected politicians mandated by our constitution comprising a democratic republic...a democratic republic which serves THE PEOPLE. So do you have a problem with America? It sure looks like you do.
Conservatism is not concerned with accountability at all. If by 'conservatism' you mean the last 30 or so years of republican economics. Borrowing and spending the US into debt largely owned by the REd Chinese and Japanese is not responsible. Trickle down economics is a free lunch....if it worked, which it doesn't. If by 'accountability' you mean the politicians's fidelity to their constituency, then you shouldn't be complaining. You got your fucking tax cuts, you got your foreign war expenditures, you got your big business bailouts....what the hell are you complaining about? Just look at what your economic choices have wrought on this country.
And how do you respond to that recipe for failure? Let's do it again with McCain!
-
The gov in the US is The People. The people have budgetary needs--bills to pay. The people have a national interest in having those bills paid.
It's no wonder economic imbeciles like Reagan and Bush are elected and re-elected by people like you. In your world, there is no responsibility for debt. So the US ends up living like welfare queens on maxed out credit. NOw is that prudent? Is that wise? Or is that simplistic head-in-the-sand selfishness?
Tax and spend v. borrow and spend. Which one costs more? Why it's borrow and spend and that is hallmark of the REagan/Bush model of economics. That's horrible for America.
I've never seen a case of projection as bad as yours. The 'elite' you refer to are likely the elected politicians mandated by our constitution comprising a democratic republic...a democratic republic which serves THE PEOPLE. So do you have a problem with America? It sure looks like you do.
Conservatism is not concerned with accountability at all. If by 'conservatism' you mean the last 30 or so years of republican economics. Borrowing and spending the US into debt largely owned by the REd Chinese and Japanese is not responsible. Trickle down economics is a free lunch....if it worked, which it doesn't. If by 'accountability' you mean the politicians's fidelity to their constituency, then you shouldn't be complaining. You got your fucking tax cuts, you got your foreign war expenditures, you got your big business bailouts....what the hell are you complaining about? Just look at what your economic choices have wrought on this country.
And how do you respond to that recipe for failure? Let's do it again with McCain!
So why not take 100% of our pay and give it to the thives in govt and they can send the balance back??????????
What a joke. When I go to work, its my money, not yours, not the govt, no some lazy slob whino on welfare. The govt spends too much already and needs to be cut drastically across the board, in all departments, at every level.
If you want to move to a communist or socialist state, do yourself a favor and go move to Cuba or China. We already pay insane taxes and you make it as though we are paying too little.
You are either a college kid or low income person yourself who does not pay alot in taxes to espouse such nonsense.
-
Funny, Luke put Iceland on the list.
http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/wire/sns-ap-eu-iceland-meltdown,0,4444319.story
We are following in there footsteps
Can anyone disagree that our country has gotten worse and worse?
If you have not noticed the more liberal this country becomes it also gets worse.
Hmmmmm I would have to say the 2 go hand and hand....
-
Obama policies are nothing more than huge increases in the size and power of the federal government. these policies are going to result in slower economic growth, higher taxes and a much higher cost of living for everyone.
-
So why not take 100% of our pay and give it to the thives in govt and they can send the balance back??????????
What a joke. When I go to work, its my money, not yours, not the govt, no some lazy slob whino on welfare. The govt spends too much already and needs to be cut drastically across the board, in all departments, at every level.
If you want to move to a communist or socialist state, do yourself a favor and go move to Cuba or China. We already pay insane taxes and you make it as though we are paying too little.
You are either a college kid or low income person yourself who does not pay alot in taxes to espouse such nonsense.
We don't have to approach this topic with manic swings of having 100% income tax rate. That illustrates nothing.
The price of admission to the US is tax dollars based on the ability to pay. You want in, you pay.
Since our income tax is based on an ability to pay, I want the rich paying more. I also want the estate tax reinstituted.
We have bills to pay and you don't like that. Who does? This is what separates the responsible people from the borrow-n-spenders.
We're in this mess b/c of spending and debt. We have debt for the wrong reasons: bridges to nowhere, an insane military budget, wars of choice and bailouts. The spending must be reigned in and directed towards more constructive ends.
Debt for the right reasons is fine b/c it pays off dividends in the end--infrastructure, education etc.
-
[...]The rich don't "hoard", they make sound economic decisions while the poor make POOR economic decisions.[...]
You have to have some of the biggest balls in the history of ball-making to say something like this. Although I must admit it astonishes me every time I read it, it is a weapon in the arsenal of the ignorants: The poor are poor because they want to be poor.
I guess that peels away any ethics and removes any humane barriers that may pose a threat to the profit-at-all-costs crowd. Once you make such a stupid point I guess what follows is of the "the rich are rich because they want to be rich" caliber.
-
Obama policies are nothing more than huge increases in the size and power of the federal government. these policies are going to result in slower economic growth, higher taxes and a much higher cost of living for everyone.
We already have all those things thanks to Bush and McCain's economic approach. You conjecture while I show you proof.
-
You have to have some of the biggest balls in the history of ball-making to say something like this. Although I must admit it astonishes me every time I read it, it is a weapon in the arsenal of the ignorants: The poor are poor because they want to be poor.
I guess that peels away any ethics and removes any humane barriers that may pose a threat to the profit-at-all-costs crowd.
His comment on the poor being poor b/c of bad choices just illustrates that he sees what he wants to see. Life's as simple as we make it.
As for the rich hoarding money, they won't spend unless they have to or want to....there's a tremendous market for tax deferred vehicles to...hoard money.
-
First and foremost I am not a Bush supporter or a McCain supporter.
I am against a racist anti American being the president.
Bush lost my support when he started pandering to the left, and became a lib.
Which happend towards the end of his first term.
As for McCain.... lol I have never liked him.
So you can say what you want about Bush economics. I will not try to defend him.
Or McCain for that matter.
If you compre the plans of McCain or Obama both lean toward socialism. Obama more so then McCain. They lead us down the same path. They are jus taking us there using to dif routes. The only diff is one, is faster then the other.
-
His comment on the poor being poor b/c of bad choices just illustrates that he sees what he wants to see. Life's as simple as we make it.
As for the rich hoarding money, they won't spend unless they have to or want to....there's a tremendous market for tax deferred vehicles to...hoard money.
So if it is not the poors fault that they are poor then whos fault is it?
Are you saying that rich people need to be forced to give up there money?
That they (or anyone else for that matter) should be told how and when to use there money.
-
First and foremost I am not a Bush supporter or a McCain supporter.
I am against a racist anti American being the president.
Bush lost my support when he started pandering to the left, and became a lib.
Which happend towards the end of his first term.
As for McCain.... lol I have never liked him.
So you can say what you want about Bush economics. I will not try to defend him.
Or McCain for that matter.
If you compre the plans of McCain or Obama both lean toward socialism. Obama more so then McCain. They lead us down the same path. They are jus taking us there using to dif routes. The only diff is one, is faster then the other.
Sounds like a pretty bad future eh? BUSH sucked, McCain Sucks, Obama sucks.
-
So if it is not the poors fault that they are poor then whos fault is it?
Are you saying that rich people need to be forced to give up there money?
That they (or anyone else for that matter) should be told how and when to use there money.
That's the reality of taxation. How does one escape taxation in the modern world? Everyone is forced to give up money one way or another.
-
His comment on the poor being poor b/c of bad choices just illustrates that he sees what he wants to see. Life's as simple as we make it.
As for the rich hoarding money, they won't spend unless they have to or want to....there's a tremendous market for tax deferred vehicles to...hoard money.
Honestly, someone who makes simplistic observations (of the enemy vs friend, friend or foe caliber) of a vastly chaotic system shouldn't even be read. To them wellfare is embodied in a perfectly capably Puerto Rican male having 50 kids in order not to have to work, and the like. This is exactly what prevents any legislation from even hinting at being somewhat people-friendly from being passed. They've embodied everything they hate into the "liberal" term, so everytime they call you "liberal," consider yourself insulted.
-
So if it is not the poors fault that they are poor then whos fault is it?[...]
The circumstances maybe?????????????
It amazes me that when talking about the crisis and the 850 billion dollar bail out package noone wants to hear any criticism about those who put us ALL in this economic conumdrum but yet want to concentrate on the ways to solve the problem.
Yet, when it comes to a single mother who had a child in her teens and could not make it to college... all of a sudden there are NO FUCKING SOLUTIONS.
Well, yes, there is a solution: You fucked and got pregnant when you were 18 and now your poor because of it. It's your problem. Well, if we're gonna use that type of save-the-profit-foundation rhetoric then let's tell the CEOs and the VPs: You made the wrong decisions while you were the capi di tuti capi now ITS YOUR FUCKING PROBLEM. FIX IT!!
-
We don't have to approach this topic with manic swings of having 100% income tax rate. That illustrates nothing.
The price of admission to the US is tax dollars based on the ability to pay. You want in, you pay.
Since our income tax is based on an ability to pay, I want the rich paying more. I also want the estate tax reinstituted.
We have bills to pay and you don't like that. Who does? This is what separates the responsible people from the borrow-n-spenders.
We're in this mess b/c of spending and debt. We have debt for the wrong reasons: bridges to nowhere, an insane military budget, wars of choice and bailouts. The spending must be reigned in and directed towards more constructive ends.
Debt for the right reasons is fine b/c it pays off dividends in the end--infrastructure, education etc.
Its not your money you greedy slob. There should be a across the board flat tax the same for everyone. The more you make the more you pay period. no deductions, no credits,. 10 or 15% of your income and thats it.
The same govt that can run the Iraq War or Katrina, cant run health care or anything else for that matter.
The govt caused this financial mess by its stupid social engineering and is only going to make matters far worse by taxing the people who create jobs more.
You liberals amaze me. You complain about big business, want to punish them, etc etc, yet beg for more jobs and expect them to pay you more. Well how can they more in salaries and wages if you want to take more of their income away?.
-
[...]You liberals amaze me. You complain about big business, want to punish them[...]
Dude, who said anything about "punishing" Big Business?? All Big Business is being asked to do is to stay out of politics, pay its fair share in taxes and clean up its own mess. Is that "punishing" Big Business??
-
Dude, who said anything about "punishing" Big Business?? All Big Business is being asked to do is to stay out of politics, pay its fair share in taxes and clean up its own mess. Is that "punishing" Big Business??
Asking anyone to pay more taxes in a bad ecomonic environment is punishing.
Also, the govt should clean up itsd own mess since it is mostly to blame for this mess and starting the tsunami of bad loans defaulting.
Dodd, Frank, Raines, Bush, should all share a cell for what they did in this mortgage mess.
-
Asking anyone to pay more taxes in a bad economic environment is punishing.
Also, the govt should clean up itsd own mess since it is mostly to blame for this mess and starting the tsunami of bad loans defaulting.
Dodd, Frank, Raines, Bush, should all share a cell for what they did in this mortgage mess.
Wow, wow, hold on now!
Who is going broke here, Big Business because their finances are shit or the government? If memory serves me right, it is the government (hence you and I) BAILING OUT Big Business. And not viceversa.
Companies don't go broke because people don't pay their mortgages, they go broke because they've structured their businesses in such a half assed way that any small crisis will throw out their numbers. The victim of choice nowadays is the mortgage business, but I'd really like to see an independent study done on the matter in order to be able to say that yes, the mortgage business debacle was the precursor and the cause of the crisis. Look at what happened with the internet bubble: Was it people that brought down all these companies or just a handfull of idiots funding even more idiotic ideas (which eventually culminated in people losing all trust in the internet sector)?
By the looks of it, I doubt it. I'd say that it's mostly getting caught with your pants by your ankles, in an economic sense of course.
-
The gov in the US is The People. The people have budgetary needs--bills to pay. The people have a national interest in having those bills paid.
It's no wonder economic imbeciles like Reagan and Bush are elected and re-elected by people like you. In your world, there is no responsibility for debt. So the US ends up living like welfare queens on maxed out credit. NOw is that prudent? Is that wise? Or is that simplistic head-in-the-sand selfishness?
Tax and spend v. borrow and spend. Which one costs more? Why it's borrow and spend and that is hallmark of the REagan/Bush model of economics. That's horrible for America.
I've never seen a case of projection as bad as yours. The 'elite' you refer to are likely the elected politicians mandated by our constitution comprising a democratic republic...a democratic republic which serves THE PEOPLE. So do you have a problem with America? It sure looks like you do.
Conservatism is not concerned with accountability at all. If by 'conservatism' you mean the last 30 or so years of republican economics. Borrowing and spending the US into debt largely owned by the REd Chinese and Japanese is not responsible. Trickle down economics is a free lunch....if it worked, which it doesn't. If by 'accountability' you mean the politicians's fidelity to their constituency, then you shouldn't be complaining. You got your fucking tax cuts, you got your foreign war expenditures, you got your big business bailouts....what the hell are you complaining about? Just look at what your economic choices have wrought on this country.
And how do you respond to that recipe for failure? Let's do it again with McCain!
The gov't is supposed to be controlled by the people. That's accountability. You're fooling yourself if you think that the politicians in DC are as concerned about remaining in office as they should be. You're right that most Americans are too dumb to know who should be elected. That's exactly why liberals keep getting elected.
You're whole post makes the assumption that I said we should pay for the debts which we incur. I never said anything close but typical liberal talks without knowing anything. WE ALREADY PAY A GREAT DEAL OF TAXES.. especially the "evil" rich. A, we're not getting our moneys worth because gov't is so massive and wasteful, and B, democrats continually want more and more out of the pockets of the American people to expand the waste and the bureaucracy.
You obviously have no concept of conservatism. We should pay as little taxes to the gov't as necessary to supply the debts we incur nationally and locally AND those debts should be controlled with accountability. That's it.
And here comes Obama to do all the worst of everything only to benefit himself, his causes, and the everlasting and all-knowing US gov't thanks to people like you.
-
You have to have some of the biggest balls in the history of ball-making to say something like this. Although I must admit it astonishes me every time I read it, it is a weapon in the arsenal of the ignorants: The poor are poor because they want to be poor.
I guess that peels away any ethics and removes any humane barriers that may pose a threat to the profit-at-all-costs crowd. Once you make such a stupid point I guess what follows is of the "the rich are rich because they want to be rich" caliber.
"The poor are poor because they want to be poor."
Good job, moron. ;D
The poor are poor because they are stupid with their money. Hmm... maybe you fall into this category?
-
marxist Leninist, it's the only way to go!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-
Wow, wow, hold on now!
Who is going broke here, Big Business because their finances are shit or the government? If memory serves me right, it is the government (hence you and I) BAILING OUT Big Business. And not viceversa.
Companies don't go broke because people don't pay their mortgages, they go broke because they've structured their businesses in such a half assed way that any small crisis will throw out their numbers. The victim of choice nowadays is the mortgage business, but I'd really like to see an independent study done on the matter in order to be able to say that yes, the mortgage business debacle was the precursor and the cause of the crisis. Look at what happened with the internet bubble: Was it people that brought down all these companies or just a handfull of idiots funding even more idiotic ideas (which eventually culminated in people losing all trust in the internet sector)?
By the looks of it, I doubt it. I'd say that it's mostly getting caught with your pants by your ankles, in an economic sense of course.
The govt started this mess by encouraging the banks to give out bad loans. They made it worse when Fannie and Freddy bought these liar loans and sold them off to other banks.
Who ran Fanny and Freddy???? Democrats like Raines, Gorelick, johnson.
Who did they donate to: Obama, Dodd, etc.
Who carried their water in the congress? Dodd, Frank, etc.
The stupid banks are to blame for bad decisions, yes, but they did not create the problem. They made a bad problem worse.
-
Sounds like a pretty bad future eh? BUSH sucked, McCain Sucks, Obama sucks.
These asshats are a product of US. We make them - the public.
Fuck the public.
Fuck hope.
-
Obama is a socialist.
Bush is a communist.
McCain is trying to be a populist.
-
The gov't is supposed to be controlled by the people. That's accountability. You're fooling yourself if you think that the politicians in DC are as concerned about remaining in office as they should be. You're right that most Americans are too dumb to know who should be elected. That's exactly why liberals keep getting elected.
The politicians are accountable to their consitituencies: They bring home the bacon. Fed. Spending means more jobs. The people love more jobs. That gets them to vote. You just don't like that fact. It's the people, not the system.
You're whole post makes the assumption that I said we should pay for the debts which we incur. I never said anything close but typical liberal talks without knowing anything. WE ALREADY PAY A GREAT DEAL OF TAXES.. especially the "evil" rich. A, we're not getting our moneys worth because gov't is so massive and wasteful, and B, democrats continually want more and more out of the pockets of the American people to expand the waste and the bureaucracy.
67% of amercian large corporations pay ZERO in taxes. In fact, they get money back due to creative accounting. ZERO in taxes. The income tax a wonderfully divisive tax b/c the true blue bloods make their money in capital gains and not earned income. The right wingers, such as yourself, exploit this by claiming those in the top marginal bracket are not rich. And you are correct to an extent. To get a truly fair share of tax from the plutocrats, a wealth tax should be implemented.
I know what you mean by accountability. It's not accountability to the people. It's accountability to BrixtonBulldog and his demagoguery. I'm sorry if the people do not share your extreme rightwing beliefs when it comes to gov. spending, but they don't. If you don't like it, vote and create a coalition to change the tax system.
Government is not automatically wasteful ipso facto. Gov. is much more efficient than private business in many administrative respectes--especially SS administration compared to private insurers. The gov. is huge. Bigger than most could imagine.
You obviously have no concept of conservatism. We should pay as little taxes to the gov't as necessary to supply the debts we incur nationally and locally AND those debts should be controlled with accountability. That's it.
Oh my god. Now you sound like the "true socialism has never been tried yet" crowd. I follow the Burkean idea of what a conservative is or should be. I have no idea from what think tank sewer you dredge your interpretations.
We have accountability. The politicians bring home federal spending which means jobs. The people love jobs. So they vote the politician back into office to bring home more federal spending. I think your problem lies with the selfish, irresponsible People.
And here comes Obama to do all the worst of everything only to benefit himself, his causes, and the everlasting and all-knowing US gov't thanks to people like you.
The worst of everything.... Yeah, b/c stopping an illegal war/occupation or guaranteeing insurance for the uninsured are really examples of Obama's self-serving exploitation of the american public.
-
-
If fed spending means more jobs then we should have more jobs in this country then in the history of mankind.
A wealth tax....
Your out of your mind. I am not wealthy by any means. But I do not think anyone should have to pay anymore then anyone else. A certain % of your pay is fair. Being punished for being successful is crazy.
And when it comes to Universal health care. I am against pretty much any social programs. Its not yours or my responsibility to provide anyone else with anything in any sitituation.
Its a decision we should be able to make on our own.
But if your so convinced why dont you start picking up some randem bums up, and start paying for there health insurance. Maybe it will catch on, but I doubt it.
As for you saying the govnt is efficient I would like to believe you are joking.
-
If fed spending means more jobs then we should have more jobs in this country then in the history of mankind.
A wealth tax....
Your out of your mind. I am not wealthy by any means. But I do not think anyone should have to pay anymore then anyone else. A certain % of your pay is fair. Being punished for being successful is crazy.
And when it comes to Universal health care. I am against pretty much any social programs. Its not yours or my responsibility to provide anyone else with anything in any sitituation.
Its a decision we should be able to make on our own.
But if your so convinced why dont you start picking up some randem bums up, and start paying for there health insurance. Maybe it will catch on, but I doubt it.
As for you saying the govnt is efficient I would like to believe you are joking.
The same fools who complain that the government screwed up Katrina, Iraq, etc somehow think that the govt can get health care right.
The ignorance and lack of understanding history by these fools is just amazing. The govt screws up EVERYTHING it touches and some reason these people beg for more.
-
The govt started this mess by encouraging the banks to give out bad loans. They made it worse when Fannie and Freddy bought these liar loans and sold them off to other banks.
Who ran Fanny and Freddy???? Democrats like Raines, Gorelick, johnson.
Who did they donate to: Obama, Dodd, etc.
Who carried their water in the congress? Dodd, Frank, etc.
The stupid banks are to blame for bad decisions, yes, but they did not create the problem. They made a bad problem worse.
Banks have gone through problems like these for centuries on end. The only problem is that banks were not "forced" or "encouraged" to do anything. In fact, banks have lobbyed FOR YEARS for the regularization of the industry, and I suspect making money available to low-income families was one of the trade-offs. Now, this does not take away from the fact that banks should've had some type of internal mechanism in place to avoid what is now happening. And insinuating that Clinton and the rest of the democrat's intention was to throw the "banks to the wolves" by encouraging loans to high-risk individuals or families is just preposterous.
In fact, back in the mid to late 90s banks made out like banshees with these risky loans. The housing market went through the roof, people were buying houses, fixing them up and putting them back in the market after 1-2 years. Meanwhile the banks were collecting interest-only money for years on end. Until the gravy train stopped and they got caught with their pants by their ankles.
-
The same fools who complain that the government screwed up Katrina, Iraq, etc somehow think that the govt can get health care right.
The ignorance and lack of understanding history by these fools is just amazing. The govt screws up EVERYTHING it touches and some reason these people beg for more.
The government = The People. What Big Business means when saying "the government is inefficient" is that you and I are inefficient. That should be a RED FLAG.
In fact government IS NOT inefficient. It should also be noted that those who run on the "government is inefficient" slogan usually end up doubling the size of government. That should also be another RED FLAG. The bullshit factor if you will.
Government is indeed inefficient... the way conservatives run it of course. Which is sort of like opening the hen house and letting all the foxes in, the way they do it of course.
And by the way, the very same "inefficient" crowd just bailed out the "efficient" crowd. You connect the dots. Don't ask me for help.
I tell you, some people... ::)
-
First offf Cons are NOT running the government.....Bush is in no way a Coonservative. The answer is not allowing dipshits like the guys who drove Fannie/Freddie and Leman Brothers into the ground, to now run our government. All those guys were Dems and advise Obama. Good job Barry.
-
The government = The People. What Big Business means when saying "the government is inefficient" is that you and I are inefficient. That should be a RED FLAG.
In fact government IS NOT inefficient. It should also be noted that those who run on the "government is inefficient" slogan usually end up doubling the size of government. That should also be another RED FLAG. The bullshit factor if you will.
Government is indeed inefficient... the way conservatives run it of course. Which is sort of like opening the hen house and letting all the foxes in, the way they do it of course.
And by the way, the very same "inefficient" crowd just bailed out the "efficient" crowd. You connect the dots. Don't ask me for help.
I tell you, some people... ::)
Oh I forgot - which states are in the worst shape in this country??????????????? The ones run by who????????
Californria, NJ, NY, MI, etc are all high tax states all in the whole because they are run by socialists like Bush, Pelosi, Obambi, Corzine, et al. Bush is no conservative.
He is DAMIEN THORN!!!!!!!!!
-
Stop with the facts.......
-
Its not your money you greedy slob. There should be a across the board flat tax the same for everyone. The more you make the more you pay period. no deductions, no credits,. 10 or 15% of your income and thats it.
The same govt that can run the Iraq War or Katrina, cant run health care or anything else for that matter.
The govt caused this financial mess by its stupid social engineering and is only going to make matters far worse by taxing the people who create jobs more.
You liberals amaze me. You complain about big business, want to punish them, etc etc, yet beg for more jobs and expect them to pay you more. Well how can they more in salaries and wages if you want to take more of their income away?.
Well said
-
Oh I forgot - which states are in the worst shape in this country??????????????? The ones run by who????????
Californria, NJ, NY, MI, etc are all high tax states all in the whole because they are run by socialists like Bush, Pelosi, Obambi, Corzine, et al. Bush is no conservative.
He is DAMIEN THORN!!!!!!!!!
"Worst shape"? What in the world are you talking about?
New York, California and Jeisy are amongst the most advanced states, IN EVERY SENSE, in the world.
-
Real life facts to libs is like garlic to vampires.
-
Real life facts to libs is like garlic to vampires.
Sure, if your facist kind would tell me what what "worst shape" means... Saying that which 3333386 said is really nothing you shuld be proud of. If I were a republican I would'n back his comments.
-
Median household income:
States ranked by median household income in order
Median Household Income by State: 2007 [1]
Maryland – $68,080
New Jersey – $67,035
Connecticut – $65,967
Alaska – $64,333
Hawaii – $63,746
New Hampshire – $62,369
Massachusetts – $62,365
California – $59,948
Virginia – $59,562
Minnesota – $55,082
Washington – $55,591
Colorado – $55,212
Utah – $55,109
Nevada – $55,062
Delaware – $54,610
District of Columbia – $54,317
Illinois – $54,124
Rhode Island – $53,568
New York – $53,514
Wyoming – $51,731
United States of America – $50,740
Wisconsin – $50,578
Vermont – $49,907
Arizona – $49,889
Georgia – $49,136
Oregon – $48,730
Pennsylvania – $48,576
Michigan – $47,950
Florida – $47,804
Texas – $47,548
Kansas – $47,451
Indiana – $47,448
Iowa – $47,292
Nebraska – $47,085
Ohio – $46,597
Idaho – $46,253
Maine – $45,888
Missouri – $45,114
North Carolina – $44,670
North Dakota – $43,753
Montana – $43,531
South Dakota – $43,424
South Carolina – $43,329
Tennessee – $42,367
Oklahoma – $41,567
New Mexico – $41,452
Louisiana – $40,926
Alabama – $40,554
Kentucky – $40,267
Arkansas – $38,134
West Virginia – $37,060
Mississippi – $36,338
Puerto Rico – $17,741
Democrat states are doing baaaaaad man!
You do da math.
-
First offf Cons are NOT running the government.....Bush is in no way a Coonservative. ...
Is Obama considered a Coonservative?
-
It's funny seeing all these "conservatives" lugging BUSH. A year ago they wouldn't be.
-
It's funny seeing all these "conservatives" lugging BUSH. A year ago they wouldn't be.
no doubt.. you know they all voted for him
-
Oh I forgot - which states are in the worst shape in this country??????????????? The ones run by who????????
Californria, NJ, NY, MI, etc are all high tax states all in the whole because they are run by socialists like Bush, Pelosi, Obambi, Corzine, et al. Bush is no conservative.
He is DAMIEN THORN!!!!!!!!!
The republican fallacy that Gov. is the problem and is inherently incompetent is a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Reagan and Bush wanted to prove gov.'s incompetence by installing incompetent people in important governmental slots.
That's why Brownie the horse lawyer ended up in charge of FEMA.
Does everyone see this? Are we in agreement about this fundamental fact of republican governance?
If not, look to the 1930s and 40s when government was stocked with the best and brightest. Look at the achievements. We were the envy of the world.
-
Barack Obama is the Lord Jesus Christ. I love Barack with my heart and soul.
-
Sure, if your facist kind would tell me what what "worst shape" means... Saying that which 3333386 said is really nothing you shuld be proud of. If I were a republican I would'n back his comments.
CA is looking for a bailout from the fed govt because it is broke due to spending too much. NY is the highest taxed state in the nation where I live. Tax hell.
NJ just got the worst rating for business taxes in the nation.
Liberals like yourself who dont pay taxes could care less. The rest of us who pay for you do.
-
CA is looking for a bailout from the fed govt because it is broke due to spending too much. NY is the highest taxed state in the nation where I live. Tax hell.[/i]
I live in Westchester county, in the very same hamlet Hillary and Bill live in. I pay close to 15 grand per year in property taxes alone. I love this county. I love the school system (one of the best in the country). The streets are clean beyond belief. The people are warm and friendly. Every dirt spot is filled with flowers from the local "old hoes" club. You can basically eat off of the floor, kids have about a million activities and the community is well organized: The Chappaqua library hosts informative talks with many prominent intellectuals about anything you can think of, from turning your house into a "green" house with solar panels and all to why Bush is the biggest republican fuckup, etc. Do I mind paying my fair share? Not for a second!!
NJ just got the worst rating for business taxes in the nation.
Do I give a shit about business taxes? Nope. In any case, Jersey City has "attracted" most of the companies that are quickly leaving Manhattan, so the taxes can't be THAT bad.
Liberals like yourself who dont pay taxes could care less. The rest of us who pay for you do.
No, that's the thing, I do pay taxes. It's your fascist kind that thinks otherwise, so akin to generalizations and reducing everything to whether something is profitable or not. Like I said, $ 15,000 alone in property taxes. Last year my wife and I paid about $ 30,000 in taxes. Do I mind? No. Do I care where my tax dollars are spent? You betcha!
You see, the local municipality... I got nothing to worry about with them, if they pass a mandate we do not like, we, the community, grill them in the town halls and they happily comply since they know WE are the boss. State laws are a little harder to fight because there is no face, no single individual to fight with, but we usually find "common ground". It's the federal government I have the biggest beef with. They collect the most money from me and I have no say whatsoever in how those taxes are distributed.
You see, I, like the immense majority of gringos, would like to see all that money being spent in Iraq brought back home and put to good use here in the U.S.A. If that is wrong... then I don't wanna be right.
In the end, we're all soldiers in the army of the Lord.
-
The politicians are accountable to their consitituencies: They bring home the bacon. Fed. Spending means more jobs. The people love more jobs. That gets them to vote. You just don't like that fact. It's the people, not the system.
67% of amercian large corporations pay ZERO in taxes. In fact, they get money back due to creative accounting. ZERO in taxes. The income tax a wonderfully divisive tax b/c the true blue bloods make their money in capital gains and not earned income. The right wingers, such as yourself, exploit this by claiming those in the top marginal bracket are not rich. And you are correct to an extent. To get a truly fair share of tax from the plutocrats, a wealth tax should be implemented.
I know what you mean by accountability. It's not accountability to the people. It's accountability to BrixtonBulldog and his demagoguery. I'm sorry if the people do not share your extreme rightwing beliefs when it comes to gov. spending, but they don't. If you don't like it, vote and create a coalition to change the tax system.
Government is not automatically wasteful ipso facto. Gov. is much more efficient than private business in many administrative respectes--especially SS administration compared to private insurers. The gov. is huge. Bigger than most could imagine.
Oh my god. Now you sound like the "true socialism has never been tried yet" crowd. I follow the Burkean idea of what a conservative is or should be. I have no idea from what think tank sewer you dredge your interpretations.
We have accountability. The politicians bring home federal spending which means jobs. The people love jobs. So they vote the politician back into office to bring home more federal spending. I think your problem lies with the selfish, irresponsible People.
The worst of everything.... Yeah, b/c stopping an illegal war/occupation or guaranteeing insurance for the uninsured are really examples of Obama's self-serving exploitation of the american public.
Those "extreme right wing beliefs" are the same ones Washington, Jefferson, Franklin, Hamilton and the like founded the country on, dumb shit.
Of course businesses don't pay taxes. They pass them on to consumers. The object behind business is to make a profit not pay for other people to get handouts. That was the whole idea behind free market capitalism creating prosperity.. don't know if anyone told you that. ;D
And thinking gov't spending creates jobs is absurd. Private enterprise creates jobs. C'mon, I know you're not that dumb. We don't have accountability, we have socialists attempting to decide what other people should do with their own money (you) and voting people into office who serve this purpose.
-
Median household income:
States ranked by median household income in order
Median Household Income by State: 2007 [1]
Maryland – $68,080
New Jersey – $67,035
Connecticut – $65,967
Alaska – $64,333
Hawaii – $63,746
New Hampshire – $62,369
Massachusetts – $62,365
California – $59,948
Virginia – $59,562
Minnesota – $55,082
Washington – $55,591
Colorado – $55,212
Utah – $55,109
Nevada – $55,062
Delaware – $54,610
District of Columbia – $54,317
Illinois – $54,124
Rhode Island – $53,568
New York – $53,514
Wyoming – $51,731
United States of America – $50,740
Wisconsin – $50,578
Vermont – $49,907
Arizona – $49,889
Georgia – $49,136
Oregon – $48,730
Pennsylvania – $48,576
Michigan – $47,950
Florida – $47,804
Texas – $47,548
Kansas – $47,451
Indiana – $47,448
Iowa – $47,292
Nebraska – $47,085
Ohio – $46,597
Idaho – $46,253
Maine – $45,888
Missouri – $45,114
North Carolina – $44,670
North Dakota – $43,753
Montana – $43,531
South Dakota – $43,424
South Carolina – $43,329
Tennessee – $42,367
Oklahoma – $41,567
New Mexico – $41,452
Louisiana – $40,926
Alabama – $40,554
Kentucky – $40,267
Arkansas – $38,134
West Virginia – $37,060
Mississippi – $36,338
Puerto Rico – $17,741
Democrat states are doing baaaaaad man!
You do da math.
Sure, I'll do the math.
$47K in Florida will get you farther than $68K in Maryland due to costs of living and taxes in the Peoples Democratic Republic of MD. Gotta love these blue states.. :(
-
Those "extreme right wing beliefs" are the same ones Washington, Jefferson, Franklin, Hamilton and the like founded the country on, dumb shit.
Not really Buddy. Check your history again. Your right wing nonsense is not jeffersonian just b/c you shout, "small government"....that ship sailed decades ago and it ain't coming back. And today is 2008 not 1775, times change and so do philosophies. Try to philosophize in this century.
Of course businesses don't pay taxes. They pass them on to consumers. The object behind business is to make a profit not pay for other people to get handouts. That was the whole idea behind free market capitalism creating prosperity.. don't know if anyone told you that. ;D
Wrong-O Mary Lou, businesses pay taxes. If the businesses pass the cost of taxation on to the consumer, that's fine with me. Why? B/c that's like insurance where the cost of coverage is spread amongst the many instead of being borne by a few. So the money paid by the consumers patronizing the corporation is in turn used to pay gov taxes which are then allocated according to the needs of the people.
Free market capitalism does not need any rationale behind it for implementation b/c FMC is merely the law of the jungle. I don't know if anyone's told you that--pure free market capitalism is predatory to its bone.
And thinking gov't spending creates jobs is absurd. Private enterprise creates jobs. C'mon, I know you're not that dumb. We don't have accountability, we have socialists attempting to decide what other people should do with their own money (you) and voting people into office who serve this purpose.
The government is the country's largest employer. Doesn't that sound like job creation to you? That's gov. spending to create jobs.
When is the last time this country had a quasi-socialist president? You know, one that removes 'accountability.'
Do you understand that the concept of government rests on the idea that ALL GOVERNMENTS REDISTRIBUTE NATIONAL WEALTH ACCORDING TO the PERCEIVED NEED of THE PEOPLE?
Can we clear that up right now?
-
Westchester County has the highest property taxes in the nation. In fact, look it up for yourself, the lower hudson region has lost more young people than any other region in the country due the high costs and taxes.
BTW - maybe you dont realize this, but the high taxes make your home less marketable now.
-
Not really Buddy. Check your history again. Your right wing nonsense is not jeffersonian just b/c you shout, "small government"....that ship sailed decades ago and it ain't coming back. And today is 2008 not 1775, times change and so do philosophies. Try to philosophize in this century.
Wrong-O Mary Lou, businesses pay taxes. If the businesses pass the cost of taxation on to the consumer, that's fine with me. Why? B/c that's like insurance where the cost of coverage is spread amongst the many instead of being borne by a few. So the money paid by the consumers patronizing the corporation is in turn used to pay gov taxes which are then allocated according to the needs of the people.
Free market capitalism does not need any rationale behind it for implementation b/c FMC is merely the law of the jungle. I don't know if anyone's told you that--pure free market capitalism is predatory to its bone.
The government is the country's largest employer. Doesn't that sound like job creation to you? That's gov. spending to create jobs.
When is the last time this country had a quasi-socialist president? You know, one that removes 'accountability.'
Do you understand that the concept of government rests on the idea that ALL GOVERNMENTS REDISTRIBUTE NATIONAL WEALTH ACCORDING TO the PERCEIVED NEED of THE PEOPLE?
Can we clear that up right now?
The govt jobs are mostly nothing more than another form of welfare and patronage. Most agencies are bloated, inept, inefficient, and could easily do with 50% cut across the board.
Your last sentence is pure communistic garbage. Taking from me to give to someone else is called theft by any other name.
-
Not really Buddy. Check your history again. Your right wing nonsense is not jeffersonian just b/c you shout, "small government"....that ship sailed decades ago and it ain't coming back. And today is 2008 not 1775, times change and so do philosophies. Try to philosophize in this century.
Wrong-O Mary Lou, businesses pay taxes. If the businesses pass the cost of taxation on to the consumer, that's fine with me. Why? B/c that's like insurance where the cost of coverage is spread amongst the many instead of being borne by a few. So the money paid by the consumers patronizing the corporation is in turn used to pay gov taxes which are then allocated according to the needs of the people.
Free market capitalism does not need any rationale behind it for implementation b/c FMC is merely the law of the jungle. I don't know if anyone's told you that--pure free market capitalism is predatory to its bone.
The government is the country's largest employer. Doesn't that sound like job creation to you? That's gov. spending to create jobs.
When is the last time this country had a quasi-socialist president? You know, one that removes 'accountability.'
Do you understand that the concept of government rests on the idea that ALL GOVERNMENTS REDISTRIBUTE NATIONAL WEALTH ACCORDING TO the PERCEIVED NEED of THE PEOPLE?
Can we clear that up right now?
So because the US is wealthier, more populated, and more powerful than ever we should sacrifice the conservative principles of the founding fathers for socialism? I think not.
That's what I meant when I said that businesses don't pay taxes. Every time libs seek to tax the shit out of business (Obama is all about doing this) all it does it hurt consumers, esp low and middle classes.
Do you not understand the the gov't is continually finding more and more reasons to take more tax payer money? No one is more guilty of this than dems who never want to let the people keep more of their own money and shrink wasteful elements of gov't. Just because services and funding come out of taxes in no way means the gov't should continually looking for MORE reasons to take more of my paycheck or expand to the grossly overweight level it has reached today. This is especially true when we don't need hugely wasteful and bureaucratic gov't programs sucking tax dollars for politicians to spend on people who don't deserve it. Why should we have to pay to bail out poor business practices, pay for people who don't work, or pay for benefits for illegal immigrants? That is all money we could have kept.
-
The govt jobs are mostly nothing more than another form of welfare and patronage. Most agencies are bloated, inept, inefficient, and could easily do with 50% cut across the board.
Your last sentence is pure communistic garbage. Taking from me to give to someone else is called theft by any other name.
Don't take this the wrong way but you are delusional. I can't think of one sane man that would characterize the fundamental operation of government taxation as stealing. You've divorced yourself from the reality of what a government is and what it does.
50% cuts? Why not 100%. In fact, let's dissolve the government entirely. Let's get rid of these quaint notions of law and order. Let's go with free market governance! Where men are free, justice comes at the end of a gun barrel and everyone gets what they deserve!
Now that's some fucking Disneyland.
-
Decker hits it out of the park once again!
Brixtonbulldog, ideological discussions are for smart people.
The Luke
-
So because the US is wealthier, more populated, and more powerful than ever we should sacrifice the conservative principles of the founding fathers for socialism? I think not.
The last time those principles worked was when the country was an aggregation of farmers and puritans battling Indians....I'm sorry, Native Americans. Times change and so do philosophies.
If 1775 ever comes back, you'll have the answers.
That's what I meant when I said that businesses don't pay taxes. Every time libs seek to tax the shit out of business (Obama is all about doing this) all it does it hurt consumers, esp low and middle classes.
How is Obama seeking to tax the shit out of business? Didn't he claim that we'd shut down tax loopholes?
Do you not understand the the gov't is continually finding more and more reasons to take more tax payer money? No one is more guilty of this than dems who never want to let the people keep more of their own money and shrink wasteful elements of gov't. Just because services and funding come out of taxes in no way means the gov't should continually looking for MORE reasons to take more of my paycheck or expand to the grossly overweight level it has reached today. This is especially true when we don't need hugely wasteful and bureaucratic gov't programs sucking tax dollars for politicians to spend on people who don't deserve it. Why should we have to pay to bail out poor business practices, pay for people who don't work, or pay for benefits for illegal immigrants? That is all money we could have kept.
I understand that politicians need to reign in spending for the common good.
However, the common good is characterized as "Socialism" or "Communism" by your political ilk. Selfishness and 'gov. is the enemy' holds sway over a great number of our fellow americans. They couldn't sacrifice for this country if they had a fucking gun to their heads. When a politician brings home federal spending--his constituents eat it up like candy. It becomes a vicious cycle.
Then those same people complain about another state's spending. The problem is the people and not the system.
Why do we pay for bail outs? B/c the crooks that run the financial scheme knew that by roping in 'joe six pack' the government would have to step in and guarantee the unsecured mortgages. By involving a good portion of the american public in the crime, it became the perfect crime. It's too big to fail without wrecking our nation's economy. Same thing happened with the S&L scandal. A different Bush, but the same result.
Welfare works. The vast majority of people are on welfare temporarily. For an economy, such as ours, that depends on a plastic/elastic workforce which NECESSITATES an unemployment rate btn 1-5%, welfare is the right thing to do. Without that 1-5% unemployment, inflation would set in and we'd be in a mess.
-
Westchester County has the highest property taxes in the nation. In fact, look it up for yourself, the lower hudson region has lost more young people than any other region in the country due the high costs and taxes.
BTW - maybe you dont realize this, but the high taxes make your home less marketable now.
;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
Holy shiiiit!!
;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
YOU ARE TELLING ME!!
Hahahahahahahahahaha!!
Lookey here homeboy, I just told you: I, MEANING ME, OTHERWISE KNOWN TO MYSELF AS MYSELF, pay close to $15,000 in property taxes per year and I DO NOT MIND. These tax moneys are being put to good use (education, cleaning up streets, etc). I know this not because you're just informing me of it, I KNOW IT FROM PERSONAL EXPERIENCE. Meaning I've lived and are living through it.
I know there are few "young people" around here, but that is because there isn't really anything to do around this neck of the woods except hiking, cycling and raising your kids. Yes, it is a VERY expensive place to live in, but I LOOOOOOOOOOVE it. We are a very active community and I LOOOOOOOOOVE it. I LOOOOOOOVE seeing those 15 grand coming out of my pocket and being put to good use. I LOOOOOOVE it. I love it for many reasons, one of them is that my kids will get topnotch education, will travel around the world a few times before yours venture out to Panama City to get drunk, etc.
And I do not give two shits that the marketability of my house is not as attractive as many other places because of the high taxes. In fact, that is precisely why many open minded professionals like myself move to this hamlet: raise kids in a stable environment so that they do not end up hanging people from trees and get the best of educations so that they don't make they "high-caliber" observations you just made.
-
Sure, I'll do the math.
$47K in Florida will get you farther than $68K in Maryland due to costs of living and taxes in the Peoples Democratic Republic of MD. Gotta love these blue states.. :(
Well, you do have choices: Move to Florida.
-
The last time those principles worked was when the country was an aggregation of farmers and puritans battling Indians....I'm sorry, Native Americans. Times change and so do philosophies.
If 1775 ever comes back, you'll have the answers.
How is Obama seeking to tax the shit out of business? Didn't he claim that we'd shut down tax loopholes?
I understand that politicians need to reign in spending for the common good.
However, the common good is characterized as "Socialism" or "Communism" by your political ilk. Selfishness and 'gov. is the enemy' holds sway over a great number of our fellow americans. They couldn't sacrifice for this country if they had a fucking gun to their heads. When a politician brings home federal spending--his constituents eat it up like candy. It becomes a vicious cycle.
Then those same people complain about another state's spending. The problem is the people and not the system.
Why do we pay for bail outs? B/c the crooks that run the financial scheme knew that by roping in 'joe six pack' the government would have to step in and guarantee the unsecured mortgages. By involving a good portion of the american public in the crime, it became the perfect crime. It's too big to fail without wrecking our nation's economy. Same thing happened with the S&L scandal. A different Bush, but the same result.
Welfare works. The vast majority of people are on welfare temporarily. For an economy, such as ours, that depends on a plastic/elastic workforce which NECESSITATES an unemployment rate btn 1-5%, welfare is the right thing to do. Without that 1-5% unemployment, inflation would set in and we'd be in a mess.
The founders constructed the principles of this country to be timeless. And frankly the more those principles are allowed to flourish the better of we are. We skyrocketed to the #1 most successful nation in a mere 200 years under those principles. Unfortunately you scum bags have been throwing wrenches in free society for 40 years. This economic mess initiated by liberals and continued by liberals is a perfect example. We do not HAVE to bail out anyone. Failing businesses should fail and vv... Period. Bailing out failures only tells investors that bad business practices and pure corporate greed will be saved by the all-powerful gov't and therefore become more reluctant to invest for fear of reckless and cowboy executives. This is hammered home when those in gov't that encouraged or even caused the failures are not brought to justice (frank, reed, etc). That was proven today along with a few more free market principles.
And don't act like Obama isn't going after big business which, coincidently, is a large part of why this country is as great as it is. They're just another "evil" corporate entity to everyone in his constituency seeking to take a slice for themselves in the false name of "fairness." I'm sure your side will get your wish as liberals continue to make the US more and more hostile to successful business they will continue to move overseas. There goes all those jobs you mentioned.
Please, you don't know jack about sacrificing for your country. You're probably in the bottom 40% that doesn't even pay taxes. Welfare doesn't work. It must be another proven principle that has failed you. If you subsidize failure you will get more of it. Baltimore is testament to that fact.
-
Well, you do have choices: Move to Florida.
That's alright. We're about to vote Ehrlich back into office and watch baltimores libs slit their wrists, lol. ;D
-
That's alright. We're about to vote Ehrlich back into office and watch baltimores libs slit their wrists, lol. ;D
Sweeet. Keep the dream alive.
-
;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
Holy shiiiit!!
;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
YOU ARE TELLING ME!!
Hahahahahahahahahaha!!
Lookey here homeboy, I just told you: I, MEANING ME, OTHERWISE KNOWN TO MYSELF AS MYSELF, pay close to $15,000 in property taxes per year and I DO NOT MIND. These tax moneys are being put to good use (education, cleaning up streets, etc). I know this not because you're just informing me of it, I KNOW IT FROM PERSONAL EXPERIENCE. Meaning I've lived and are living through it.
I know there are few "young people" around here, but that is because there isn't really anything to do around this neck of the woods except hiking, cycling and raising your kids. Yes, it is a VERY expensive place to live in, but I LOOOOOOOOOOVE it. We are a very active community and I LOOOOOOOOOVE it. I LOOOOOOOVE seeing those 15 grand coming out of my pocket and being put to good use. I LOOOOOOVE it. I love it for many reasons, one of them is that my kids will get topnotch education, will travel around the world a few times before yours venture out to Panama City to get drunk, etc.
And I do not give two shits that the marketability of my house is not as attractive as many other places because of the high taxes. In fact, that is precisely why many open minded professionals like myself move to this hamlet: raise kids in a stable environment so that they do not end up hanging people from trees and get the best of educations so that they don't make they "high-caliber" observations you just made.
How elitest of you. So the poor people in yonkers and mt. vernon do not deserve as good an education than your kids because they can't afford it right????? Screw them right??? How about your kids get bussed to /yonkers or /new /rochelle and have to play nice with the minorities like Judge Sand made the people of yonkers????
You would be the first person to scream about it yet people like yourself pointed the finger of racism to the people in middle class people in Yonkers who objected to this social engineering.
-
The founders constructed the principles of this country to be timeless. And frankly the more those principles are allowed to flourish the better of we are. We skyrocketed to the #1 most successful nation in a mere 200 years under those principles. Unfortunately you scum bags have been throwing wrenches in free society for 40 years.
Hahaha. And when, my precious little Brixton, did the US become a world leader? Was it in the 1770s....the 1870s...or after FDR's socialist reign which catapulted this country into world power status.
Do take your time answering that question, b/c I know you will not like the answer. C'mon, it's easy. I already gave you a hint above.
This economic mess initiated by liberals and continued by liberals is a perfect example. We do not HAVE to bail out anyone. Failing businesses should fail and vv... Period. Bailing out failures only tells investors that bad business practices and pure corporate greed will be saved by the all-powerful gov't and therefore become more reluctant to invest for fear of reckless and cowboy executives. This is hammered home when those in gov't that encouraged or even caused the failures are not brought to justice (frank, reed, etc). That was proven today along with a few more free market principles.
The unsecured housing scandal is a product of unchecked selfinterest, i.e., greed. That's the foundation ofyour rightwing capitalistic bullshit.
Then you pathetically project your insanities upon the democrats. I do agree with you on the bailout. I think it should be a bottom-up pay out and not a top down payout. However, since the super vast majority of the 700 billion bailout is directed at private bankers (not freddie and fannie), they hold more sway with out politicians than joe six pack.
And don't act like Obama isn't going after big business which, coincidently, is a large part of why this country is as great as it is. They're just another "evil" corporate entity to everyone in his constituency seeking to take a slice for themselves in the false name of "fairness." I'm sure your side will get your wish as liberals continue to make the US more and more hostile to successful business they will continue to move overseas. There goes all those jobs you mentioned.
This country WAS great b/c the people came together during the FDR years to rise up and make us a world power. The 1950s were the product of that united effort. The single greatest decade of middle class prosperity due to national effort...not the effort of big business screwing its workforce to maximize profits in the hands of the CEOs.
Please, you don't know jack about sacrificing for your country. You're probably in the bottom 40% that doesn't even pay taxes. Welfare doesn't work. It must be another proven principle that has failed you. If you subsidize failure you will get more of it. Baltimore is testament to that fact.
If you want to engage in personal attacks, ok.
But you are like a lot of other rightwingers on this web site. You have no idea what you're talking about but yet you push UNSUPPORTED conclusions that merely show your own prejudice.
Sorry sunshine, Welfare does work. "Baltimore is testament to that fact" ? If by 'testament', you mean testimony, you're full of shit again. I'm discussing AFDC and you bring up a city.
You can't even respond to this stuff intelligently so I'll have to carry your sorry ass once again.
In the 1920s, when laissez faire economics (unregulated free market) brought this country to its knees--1/2 of all americans could not make ends meet (ends meet is not a cheap cut of meat fyi)--with the great depression, FDR's social spending saved us. By the 1950s, poverty was reduced to 20%. After Johnson's Great Society in the 1970s, poverty was further reduced to about 10%.
Most recipients are off of the welfare rolls within a year...50-60% within a year.
And since your precious capitalistic system necessarily requires 1-5% of the workforce to be UNEMPLOYED, don't you think it's wise to keep the worker pool intact with welfare?
-
Hahaha. And when, my precious little Brixton, did the US become a world leader? Was it in the 1770s....the 1870s...or after FDR's socialist reign which catapulted this country into world power status.
Do take your time answering that question, b/c I know you will not like the answer. C'mon, it's easy. I already gave you a hint above.
The unsecured housing scandal is a product of unchecked selfinterest, i.e., greed. That's the foundation ofyour rightwing capitalistic bullshit.
Then you pathetically project your insanities upon the democrats. I do agree with you on the bailout. I think it should be a bottom-up pay out and not a top down payout. However, since the super vast majority of the 700 billion bailout is directed at private bankers (not freddie and fannie), they hold more sway with out politicians than joe six pack.
This country WAS great b/c the people came together during the FDR years to rise up and make us a world power. The 1950s were the product of that united effort. The single greatest decade of middle class prosperity due to national effort...not the effort of big business screwing its workforce to maximize profits in the hands of the CEOs.
If you want to engage in personal attacks, ok.
But you are like a lot of other rightwingers on this web site. You have no idea what you're talking about but yet you push UNSUPPORTED conclusions that merely show your own prejudice.
Sorry sunshine, Welfare does work. "Baltimore is testament to that fact" ? If by 'testament', you mean testimony, you're full of shit again. I'm discussing AFDC and you bring up a city.
You can't even respond to this stuff intelligently so I'll have to carry your sorry ass once again.
In the 1920s, when laissez faire economics (unregulated free market) brought this country to its knees--1/2 of all americans could not make ends meet (ends meet is not a cheap cut of meat fyi)--with the great depression, FDR's social spending saved us. By the 1950s, poverty was reduced to 20%. After Johnson's Great Society in the 1970s, poverty was further reduced to about 10%.
Most recipients are off of the welfare rolls within a year...50-60% within a year.
And since your precious capitalistic system necessarily requires 1-5% of the workforce to be UNEMPLOYED, don't you think it's wise to keep the worker pool intact with welfare?
If you could pick time periods, which you really can't, I would say after the Span/Am War and then again after WW2 when was production moved to manufacturing. If you want to give the same prez that failed to end the depression credit for that than I think it's pretty clear you have no objectivity. Those "laissez faire" economics would have done well to end the depression but to you libs your kind can do no wrong. Again, typical. And now we're cursed with many of the pathetic policies of that era including the regular theft of huge chunks of our paychecks. Dems have spent decades trying to get everyone to be able to vote and now this country's political system is undermined by those who "vote" for the gov't to give them other peoples money. The founding fathers never meant for this country to operate that way either but here come all your kind to take from those who actually produce, contribute, influence, and often succeed by doing so. Democrats love the american dream up to $250k, then your to be publicly flogged.
UH-oh.. here comes the "evil capitalists" again. hahahahah.. moron.
How is 50% "most"? Of course I would bring up a city but god forbid you have to acknowledge that failure of welfare by taking a hard look at a prime example. And then you further show your ignorance by claiming those on welfare are the "worker pool" ?!!? lol, what ass bag. So many choose to STAY on welfare. Why work when you can get PAID and scrimp by? I think it's hilarious you bring up unemployment and yet you thank FDR for making us "better." Fail
-
Decker is right Brixtonbulldog.
Read my previous post in this thread regarding the FACT that socialism has allowed all many European countries to overtake America.
Japan, a country America DEFEATED in 1945; economically ruined and bombed to shit... overtook America from a standing start in just 45 years through socialism.
Now China, recently an overpopulated Third World country is overtaking America through a socialist mix of strictly regulated and manipulated capitalism and communist ideology.
America is sliding DOWN all the positive living indices... check the UN reports.
China? China is progressing better than America. Dude, seriously... take off the "USA #1!" giant foam finger and do a little research WITHOUT the Republican interpretive filter.
The Luke
-
Decker is right Brixtonbulldog.
Read my previous post in this thread regarding the FACT that socialism has allowed all many European countries to overtake America.
Japan, a country America DEFEATED in 1945; economically ruined and bombed to shit... overtook America from a standing start in just 45 years through socialism.
Now China, recently an overpopulated Third World country is overtaking America through a socialist mix of strictly regulated and manipulated capitalism and communist ideology.
America is sliding DOWN all the positive living indices... check the UN reports.
China? China is progressing better than America. Dude, seriously... take off the "USA #1!" giant foam finger and do a little research WITHOUT the Republican interpretive filter.
The Luke
You people are amazing. China has slave labor, no envirinmental regs, no lawsuits, etc and you wonder why our businesses have a hard time competing???
BTW - Europe is in worse shape than we are financially and losing population due to low birth rates. Many of those countries also have as bad immigration problems as we do.
You fools clamoring for socialism dont realize that the countries you point to have a different history, different population base, and dont apply to our country.
-
333386,
Obviously neither you nor Brixtonbulldog read my previous post... so I'll repeat it here:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the aftermath of World War Two, America stood alone as the worlds sole superpower and the worlds preeminent economic power.
In the last sixty years, America has been overtaken by a plethora of newly developed countries (ie: countries that have developed since WW2). All of these countries overtaking the US have done so by adopting socialist policies and strict regulation of the capitalist factors of their economies.
Don't take my word for it:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_Human_Development_Index
UN Human Development Index (data from 2005, published in 2007)
1* Iceland ...becoming more socialist all the time
2* Norway ...the MOST socialist country in the world
3* Australia ...formerly a penal colony
4* Canada ...formerly part of the British monarchy
5* Ireland ...where I live, only an independent state since 1922 and chronically socialist
6* Sweden ...chronically socialist
7* Switzerland
8* Japan ...nuked and bombed to shit during WW2, bounced back by dumping the Emperor for socialism
9* Netherlands
10* France ...chronically, fervently socialist and the butt of Republican jokes
11* Finland ...chronically socialist
12 United States ...Go "Fuck-You" Capitalism!
13* Spain ...formerly a dictatorship under Franco
14* Denmark
15* Austria
16* United Kingdom ....a monarchy in name only, now a socialist parliamentary state
17* Belgium ...formerly a monarchy
18* Luxembourg
19* New Zealand
20* Italy ...formerly fascist under Mussolini, bounced back through socialism
...in the top twenty, the COUNTRY (not countries, but country... singular!) that isn't socialist is the United States.
Twelve SOCIALIST countries have overtaken the US since the end of WW2, is it any wonder that they are also some of the most socialist countries out there?
How are socialist countries living better than Americans with only a fraction of America's GDP?
How would the French do with America's GDP?
More importantly, who convinced Americans that socialism was something to be avoided? (FOX News?)
The Luke
-
The fact that UN publisjed that garbage means nothing. They also ignored Darfur and genocide all over the world and have no credibility as an organization.
Most of those countries have tiny populations and dont have the issues we do. Also, they have the many different racial and social groups we do.
Europe and the USA are two different places entirely.
-
Decker is right Brixtonbulldog.
Read my previous post in this thread regarding the FACT that socialism has allowed all many European countries to overtake America.
Japan, a country America DEFEATED in 1945; economically ruined and bombed to shit... overtook America from a standing start in just 45 years through socialism.
Now China, recently an overpopulated Third World country is overtaking America through a socialist mix of strictly regulated and manipulated capitalism and communist ideology.
America is sliding DOWN all the positive living indices... check the UN reports.
China? China is progressing better than America. Dude, seriously... take off the "USA #1!" giant foam finger and do a little research WITHOUT the Republican interpretive filter.
The Luke
America is failing largely due to having little to no economic protectionist policies, unchecked immigration, and increases in an uneducated populace. America is not failing because Japan, China, and some European nations are doing so many things right or partaking in socialist or communist philosophies.
Europe, particularly Western Europe, is in extremely deep trouble, strong currency or not. All of their populations are well below Birth Replacement Rate and are rapidly aging. The "unborn" native populace are replaced by the grateful hordes of Middle Eastern and African populations who flood into the region by the millions, bringing with them a culture and religion that to it's core cannot and will not assimilate to Western progressive values and culture. Unless something drastic happens, areas such as the UK, France, and Germany WILL be Islamic strongholds.
China is overpopulated and polluted. It is unable to feed and water it's populations. It's industry is unregulated......at least until kids die from lead paint or have their kidneys seize up from tainted milk. It's population suffers a tremendous amount of human rights abuses and violations under this great socialist and communist government. China, despite the numerous advancements made in various technological industries(and many copied from US and Russian sources), cannot become a First World nation because the bulk of its nation suffers and are dirt poor. Sending a satellite into space while it's people work for meager earnings in brutal factory conditions a great nation does not make.
Japan is very nationalistic and were able to penetrate the US markets with little to no opposition. Due to companies like Toyota and Honda, the very US companies that had helped to build the war machine that leveled Japan's forces in the Pacific are now going under and suffering huge debts.....while just down the street, a Toyota plant is shitting out brand new Prius's by a non-Union workforce. Japan in the near future will also experience some of what Europe nowadays faces, an aging population, decreasing younger populations, and tough decisions as to whether to import foreign workers.
Japanese men will eat only local Kobe beef, but will pick their teeth with toothpicks made from American Pine trees. That's why they are ahead, but, all is not entirely well in Japan.
-
Finally, someone with some sense on this board.
Our corrupt education establishment is largely to blame for our decline. They have dumbed down the population so far so fast that people now need a college education to get what used to be taught in high school decades ago.
These boards themselves are evidence of this when have of these self professed commies have no understanding of civics, laws, the constitution, and how things really work.
As Michael Savage says, liberalism truly is a mental disorder.
-
The fact that UN publisjed that garbage means nothing.
...the UN statistics office isn't reliable? WTF? What is that, some kind of massive conspiracy theory?
Sounds more like irrational reactionary dismissal to me.
They also ignored Darfur and genocide all over the world and have no credibility as an organization.
...ignored? No.
Hamstrung by the vetoing of America and the other superpowers? Yes.
Most of those countries have tiny populations and dont have the issues we do. Also, they have the many different racial and social groups we do.
...Sweden? Sweden has a 15% immigrant population.
15% of people living in Sweden weren't born in Sweden. That would be equivalent to 45 million border jumping Mexicans running around the US.
Regarding population size: Will you still be using this argument when India and China overtake the US?
They're climbing the list... America is slipping.
Issues? What would the peculiar negative issues affecting America and America alone be?
Huge oil reserves? Vast natural resources? Cheap oil? A monopoly (and the will to abuse it) in many aspects of world economics?
Europe and the USA are two different places entirely.
...I doubt you could find Europe on a map.
The Luke
-
JBGRAY,
I think you are actually agreeing with me somewhat... some excellent points though.
I limited my remarks to the Human Development Index as measured by the UN report as it illustrates what will become more important during these times of crisis: social cohesion.
Wealth disparity; segregation; oppression of minorities... all of these things work against America.
If another Great Depression is triggered the French (lowest inequality) would bitch about low wages and high unemployment while muddling through. Whereas America would tear itself apart... armed, oppressed minorities and cultural division. It would be the LA Riots on a national scale.
I ignored the demographic and immigration issues as borders can be closed and the demographic problem relates to America too (level playing field) as 50% of the US population is 50 or older. During the 80s in my homeland of Ireland for example 75% of the population was under 25.
The fact that socialist countries are living better on less GDP (per capita) doesn't bode well for America... the Chinese are indeed oppressed and brutalised, but overall they have it better now than they did twenty years ago and they are all too aware of it.
The countries overtaking America since 1950 all have one thing in common, socialism.
The Luke
-
Decker is right Brixtonbulldog.
Read my previous post in this thread regarding the FACT that socialism has allowed all many European countries to overtake America.
Japan, a country America DEFEATED in 1945; economically ruined and bombed to shit... overtook America from a standing start in just 45 years through socialism.
Now China, recently an overpopulated Third World country is overtaking America through a socialist mix of strictly regulated and manipulated capitalism and communist ideology.
America is sliding DOWN all the positive living indices... check the UN reports.
China? China is progressing better than America. Dude, seriously... take off the "USA #1!" giant foam finger and do a little research WITHOUT the Republican interpretive filter.
The Luke
Ha! Most of China is in the dirt. Peasantry can't get enough to eat. Babies are dying through poisoned milk. Fake "eggs" with no nutritional value starving a majority of the populace and WE'RE behind?!!??! Laughable.
-
Ha! Most of China is in the dirt. Peasantry can't get enough to eat. Babies are dying through poisoned milk. Fake "eggs" with no nutritional value starving a majority of the populace and WE'RE behind?!!??! Laughable.
...learn to read. You've conflated future with present tense.
The Luke
-
...learn to read.
I did.. right around the same time I realized liberals are the dumbest jokes god ever drop-shitted onto the planet.
-
I did.. right around the same time I realized liberals are the dumbest jokes god ever drop-shitted onto the planet.
Which god specifically? There are hundreds of them... and I made up a couple more this morning.
The Luke
-
Which god specifically? There are hundreds of them... and I made up a couple more this morning.
The Luke
Ok, let me rephrase.
Liberals were drop-shitted.. by whom I have to assume a deity of some kind. ;D
-
-
Still falling short of the elusive "intelligent rebuttal" aren't you? ;D
-
Ok, let me rephrase.
Liberals were drop-shitted.. by whom I have to assume a deity of some kind. ;D
...just once you don't invoke the name of Jebus.
You know Jesus was a liberal himself. Suppose that makes you some kind of pagan, Brixtonbulldog.
The Luke
-
If you could pick time periods, which you really can't, I would say after the Span/Am War and then again after WW2 when was production moved to manufacturing. If you want to give the same prez that failed to end the depression credit for that than I think it's pretty clear you have no objectivity. Those "laissez faire" economics would have done well to end the depression but to you libs your kind can do no wrong. Again, typical. And now we're cursed with many of the pathetic policies of that era including the regular theft of huge chunks of our paychecks. Dems have spent decades trying to get everyone to be able to vote and now this country's political system is undermined by those who "vote" for the gov't to give them other peoples money. The founding fathers never meant for this country to operate that way either but here come all your kind to take from those who actually produce, contribute, influence, and often succeed by doing so. Democrats love the american dream up to $250k, then your to be publicly flogged.
UH-oh.. here comes the "evil capitalists" again. hahahahah.. moron.
How is 50% "most"? Of course I would bring up a city but god forbid you have to acknowledge that failure of welfare by taking a hard look at a prime example. And then you further show your ignorance by claiming those on welfare are the "worker pool" ?!!? lol, what ass bag. So many choose to STAY on welfare. Why work when you can get PAID and scrimp by? I think it's hilarious you bring up unemployment and yet you thank FDR for making us "better." Fail
Come on BB everyone knows the US did not become a superpower until after FDR's reign. For god's sake even Wikianswers notes that historical fact:
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Did_the_US_become_a_superpower_after_World_War_2
But for you right wingers, you are on the fringe of valid debate. In your world the facts are reshaped to fit your prejudice. You just did it above. You do it with supply side nonsense. You do it with global warming. You bullshit yourself so often that you start to believe your own rationalizations.
Capitalism is not evil if it is moderated. Your wild, wild west capitalism of the 1700s and 1800s is nothing more than survival of the fittest predatory practices resulting in economic depressions and national emergencies.
Again, you offer no facts, just your insane prejudicial conclusions...no support...just blather.
I'm starting a thread that looks at the delusion of the tax protester. Stop by. You'll fit right in.
-
Come on BB everyone knows the US did not become a superpower until after FDR's reign. For god's sake even Wikianswers notes that historical fact:
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Did_the_US_become_a_superpower_after_World_War_2
But for you right wingers, you are on the fringe of valid debate. In your world the facts are reshaped to fit your prejudice. You just did it above. You do it with supply side nonsense. You do it with global warming. You bullshit yourself so often that you start to believe your own rationalizations.
Capitalism is not evil if it is moderated. Your wild, wild west capitalism of the 1700s and 1800s is nothing more than survival of the fittest predatory practices resulting in economic depressions and national emergencies.
Again, you offer no facts, just your insane prejudicial conclusions...no support...just blather.
I'm starting a thread that looks at the delusion of the tax protester. Stop by. You'll fit right in.
Winning WW2 made us a superpower, not welfare programs that delayed the depression for years.
FDR was a true patriot and never envisioned the welfare state we have today. He wanted to win WWII, not retreat and self defeat like Obama.
ZERO is no patriot by the way. From Rev. Wright, to Ayeres, to Farakhan, to Rezko, to his support for Raila Odinga in Kenya, ZERO is a marxist stooge and sleeper cell for radical elements in this society.
-
...just once you don't invoke the name of Jebus.
You know Jesus was a liberal himself. Suppose that makes you some kind of pagan, Brixtonbulldog.
The Luke
You libs aren't even religious so don't play like you have any relationship with jesus, god, allah, etc.
He was jewish so that isn't surprising. However his father is known to have a better knack for application of justice and equality. The rest of us jews choose to follow that example instead.
Next comes the pontious pilate/jesus quote.. gimmie a break.
-
Again, you offer no facts, just your insane prejudicial conclusions...no support...just blather.
Oh wiki said it? I guess it HAS to be true!!! ;D hahahahahahaaha.. good god.
Funny, this is what you've been doing the entire thread. Weakest arguments on getbig from a clearly radical socialist assbag.
-
-
Winning WW2 made us a superpower, not welfare programs that delayed the depression for years.
FDR was a true patriot and never envisioned the welfare state we have today. He wanted to win WWII, not retreat and self defeat like Obama.
ZERO is no patriot by the way. From Rev. Wright, to Ayeres, to Farakhan, to Rezko, to his support for Raila Odinga in Kenya, ZERO is a marxist stooge and sleeper cell for radical elements in this society.
No. The CCC, TVA and other programs lifted millions out of abject poverty and made a victory in Europe and Japan even possible. We had a citizenry back on its feet again instead of crawling for peach pits in trash cans. Imagine trying to take down the Germans and the Japs with a depleted citizen army.
FDR's programs and Keynesian spending policies didn't delay the depression, they ended the depression which was likely created by the laissez faire gambling of Wall Street and the gov. pathetic job at regulation during the Wilson, Coolidge and Hoover years. Truth is, nations all over the world were experiencing economic depression. It wasn't until the US gov. adopted Keynesian economic management that the depression was defeated.
Obama. McCain is a Bush rerun. All his policies scream that. We cannot afford 4 more years of ineptitude. At least Obama thinks on his feet and has a platform that is semi appealing to me.
-
You libs aren't even religious so don't play like you have any relationship with jesus, god, allah, etc.
...don't you think that it's comical that Evangelical Christians are pro-death penalty and anti-liberal when Jesus himself was anti-death penalty and pro-liberal?
The Luke
-
No. The CCC, TVA and other programs lifted millions out of abject poverty and made a victory in Europe and Japan even possible. We had a citizenry back on its feet again instead of crawling for peach pits in trash cans. Imagine trying to take down the Germans and the Japs with a depleted citizen army.
FDR's programs and Keynesian spending policies didn't delay the depression, they ended the depression which was likely created by the laissez faire gambling of Wall Street and the gov. pathetic job at regulation during the Wilson, Coolidge and Hoover years. Truth is, nations all over the world were experiencing economic depression. It wasn't until the US gov. adopted Keynesian economic management that the depression was defeated.
Obama. McCain is a Bush rerun. All his policies scream that. We cannot afford 4 more years of ineptitude. At least Obama thinks on his feet and has a platform that is semi appealing to me.
Both McCain and Obama are so out of touch with reality its scary as far as taxes and economics go.
The debates have shown both know next to nothing about economics.
I am grudgingly voting for McCain, i liked Romney. I am doing so because Obamna flat out scares the heck out of me:
1. ACORN - he was their lawyer and recently gave them 800k.
2. Rev. Wright. - a hypocritical anti-semite and anti-american. Obama lied about that.
3. Ayers - no need for discussion. Anyone who hangs out with the left wing equivolent of Timothy McVeigh is dangerous and a radical by definition.
4. Rezko - in jail for fraud, etc and was Obama's main campaign contributor.
5. Raila Odinga - A marxist radical in Kenya who Obama campaigned for while in the US Senate on our dollar.
6. Farakhan- called Obama the messiah.
7. Abortion - he pushed for a barbaric law forbidding a doctor to give assistance to a live born viable babies in cases where abortions went wrong. Truly disgusting.
8. Taxes - Obama has no clue even what capital gains taxes are, and is pushing for tax hikes that will affect everyone. His 95% figure is utter nonsense.
9. Guns - there is no doubt with Pelosi and Reid running the show, he will sign any anti-gun legislation across his desk.
10. Judges - believes the constitution is a "living document" WTF does that mean and when the does the constitution die if it is living?
11. Foreign Policy - he will get rolled by Iran and Putin.
12. Congress - with Pelosi running the house and Reid running the Senate, Obama will rubber stamp anything out of those two.
McCain absolutely stinks, but to me Obama is absolutely unfathomable.
-
Both McCain and Obama are so out of touch with reality its scary as far as taxes and economics go.
The debates have shown both know next to nothing about economics.
I am grudgingly voting for McCain, i liked Romney. I am doing so because Obamna flat out scares the heck out of me:
1. ACORN - he was their lawyer and recently gave them 800k.
2. Rev. Wright. - a hypocritical anti-semite and anti-american. Obama lied about that.
3. Ayers - no need for discussion. Anyone who hangs out with the left wing equivolent of Timothy McVeigh is dangerous and a radical by definition.
4. Rezko - in jail for fraud, etc and was Obama's main campaign contributor.
5. Raila Odinga - A marxist radical in Kenya who Obama campaigned for while in the US Senate on our dollar.
6. Farakhan- called Obama the messiah.
7. Abortion - he pushed for a barbaric law forbidding a doctor to give assistance to a live born viable babies in cases where abortions went wrong. Truly disgusting.
8. Taxes - Obama has no clue even what capital gains taxes are, and is pushing for tax hikes that will affect everyone. His 95% figure is utter nonsense.
9. Guns - there is no doubt with Pelosi and Reid running the show, he will sign any anti-gun legislation across his desk.
10. Judges - believes the constitution is a "living document" WTF does that mean and when the does the constitution die if it is living?
11. Foreign Policy - he will get rolled by Iran and Putin.
12. Congress - with Pelosi running the house and Reid running the Senate, Obama will rubber stamp anything out of those two.
McCain absolutely stinks, but to me Obama is absolutely unfathomable.
"living" document means that times change and the constitution must adapt to those changes--the framers couldn't foresee automatic weapons, nuclear weapons, the internet, and a lot of other stuff. Therefore the constitution must be amenable to adaptation to these changed circumstances. It's changing and not static.
As for the character stuff and Obama, that really doesn't matter to me. I look more at the platform. I like his tax idea. I'm not crazy about his health plan (he's trying to be all things to all people...triangulation). I like his stance on the Iraq war. I think he's pretty intelligent and to a degree a comforting soul--like a well-worn sweater. That's insane but it's how I view him.
-
"living" document means that times change and the constitution must adapt to those changes--the framers couldn't foresee automatic weapons, nuclear weapons, the internet, and a lot of other stuff. Therefore the constitution must be amenable to adaptation to these changed circumstances. It's changing and not static.
As for the character stuff and Obama, that really doesn't matter to me. I look more at the platform. I like his tax idea. I'm not crazy about his health plan (he's trying to be all things to all people...triangulation). I like his stance on the Iraq war. I think he's pretty intelligent and to a degree a comforting soul--like a well-worn sweater. That's insane gay but it's how I view him.
fixed
na im just jokin
-
fixed
na im just jokin
hahaha...I told my wife that same thing Obama and she started in with the gheyness talk too. Shit.
-
Oh wiki said it? I guess it HAS to be true!!! ;D hahahahahahaaha.. good god.
Funny, this is what you've been doing the entire thread. Weakest arguments on getbig from a clearly radical socialist assbag.
My point was that the assertion that the US did not become a superpower until after FDR is such common knowledge that nobody misses it except for you and your ongoing delusions re taxation and the federal government.
I'm trying to help you and you're fighting me...and proving my points as you go along.
"the narcissist is unable to work out through fantasy is simply repressed, put out of mind and kept from awareness. Beyond these, narcissists invent alibis, excuses, and “proofs” that seem [to themselves] plausible and consistent, and convince them of their continued stature and perfection. These flimsily substantiated rationalizations are offered with an air of confidence and authority. As noted earlier, however, narcissists may never have learned to be skillful at public deception; they usually said and did what they liked without a care for what others thought. Their poorly conceived rationalizations may, therefore, fail to bring relief and, more seriously, may evoke scrutiny and deprecating comments from others. At these times narcissists may be pushed to the point of employing projection as a defense. Unable to disentangle themselves from lies and inconsistencies, and driven by their need to maintain their illusion of superiority, they may begin to turn against others, accusing the latter of their own deceptions, their own selfishness, and their own irrationalities."
Theodore Millon, Ph.D., “Disorders of Personality; DSM-III: Axis II,” p. 168 (John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 1981).
projection.
-
...don't you think that it's comical that Evangelical Christians are pro-death penalty and anti-liberal when Jesus himself was anti-death penalty and pro-liberal?
The Luke
Yep.. and he's not my role model.
I have huge moral issues with evangelicals but as long as they are voting conservative we have bigger fish to fry.
-
My point was that the assertion that the US did not become a superpower until after FDR is such common knowledge that nobody misses it except for you and your ongoing delusions re taxation and the federal government.
I'm trying to help you and you're fighting me...and proving my points as you go along.
"the narcissist is unable to work out through fantasy is simply repressed, put out of mind and kept from awareness. Beyond these, narcissists invent alibis, excuses, and “proofs” that seem [to themselves] plausible and consistent, and convince them of their continued stature and perfection. These flimsily substantiated rationalizations are offered with an air of confidence and authority. As noted earlier, however, narcissists may never have learned to be skillful at public deception; they usually said and did what they liked without a care for what others thought. Their poorly conceived rationalizations may, therefore, fail to bring relief and, more seriously, may evoke scrutiny and deprecating comments from others. At these times narcissists may be pushed to the point of employing projection as a defense. Unable to disentangle themselves from lies and inconsistencies, and driven by their need to maintain their illusion of superiority, they may begin to turn against others, accusing the latter of their own deceptions, their own selfishness, and their own irrationalities."
Theodore Millon, Ph.D., “Disorders of Personality; DSM-III: Axis II,” p. 168 (John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 1981).
projection.
Only leftys or people who haven't really looked at what happened think FDR was beneficial in the long run. Honestly, the huge mess that started as WW2 and became the largest shift from national success to private enterprise had much more to do with it. It's like the asinine argument that Bush caused the economic mess when every policy that led to the current market was in Dem hands all the way back to Carter. FDR failed to cure the depression, encouraged massive unemployment, and cursed us with socialist policies indefinitely.
You haven't proven anything. I reject your premises and show you how absurd they are and you ignore it and try to paint me as something I'm not. Again.. fail.
-
Winning WW2 made us a superpower, not welfare programs that delayed the depression for years.
FDR was a true patriot and never envisioned the welfare state we have today. He wanted to win WWII, not retreat and self defeat like Obama.
ZERO is no patriot by the way. From Rev. Wright, to Ayeres, to Farakhan, to Rezko, to his support for Raila Odinga in Kenya, ZERO is a marxist stooge and sleeper cell for radical elements in this society.
HAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAH AHA
-
[ Invalid YouTube link ]
-
No one is defending Bush. He sucks.
Obama, however, well this is a whole new level of disaster.
boom for everyone saying I knee padded bush.
-
boom for everyone saying I knee padded bush.
what are you drinking tonight?
-
what are you drinking tonight?
had a few vodka on ice.
-
had a few vodka on ice.
a few = I'm guessing ~ 6 or 7 ?
-
a few = I'm guessing ~ 6 or 7 ?
3.
-
BUMP
-
I have no doubt that at the very least Obama's world view is heavily inspired by Marxism.