Don't see many liberals posting here anymore the past two weeks...

[James28]

No, Coach.  He's correct.  Believe it or not, and I know you won't hear that on Fox, but he's right. 

When you disagree you're showing that you haven't studied politics seriously nor have you even really followed it for very long.

I am not trying to put you down. 

Look at Reagan's policies and ask yourself, how would he be characterized (in terms of political orientation) these days? 

Coach will not answer you in a trillion years. He can't change his stance and years of 'the left, the left, liberals, the left, liberals, liberals, liberals, the left, liberals, the left, the left, liberals, liberals, the left, liberals, liberals, the left, the left, the left  the left, liberals, the left'. His standard answer.

He'll ask you a question in return to skirt the issue or at most, parrot headlines. Want an in depth conversation. He can't.

He's not a bad guy. I quite like his posts and humour. He's just not politically minded.

[RRKore]

People think I am a liberal and I have been posting.

I don't believe Obama has been dishonest with regards to people being able to keep their substandard current coverage. I think he promised something he had no ability to deliver on. I would suggest that he was ill advised. I know the medical insurance industry is going to do everything they can to ensure Obamacare doesn't work.

At this point there are so many problems with the rollout of Obamacare, I am not sure it will be successful, unfortunately. Something about how healthcare is delivered in the U.S. needs to change. We currently rank the worst of all developed nations when it comes to universal healthcare.

If I were younger, I would seriously consider moving to a different country, such as Germany where the healthcare system covers everyone, the medical costs are lower and one can become a doctor without having to spend nearly $1,000,000. on their advanced education achieve this because, guess what, Germany has a educational system which is also available to all, unlike here where it is for the rich or those willing to go into debt for most of the rest of their working lives.

Sweden is apparently a good one for immigrants, too. (And, simmer down, not just for Muslims.)

Immigrants in both Sweden and Germany, at least ones who come over as a result of marriage to a citizen, are given free language classes and other benefits in an effort to integrate the newcomer into society. 

I hear about this from my Thai wife who has internet friends that have married guys from those countries.  She tells me that in Sweden, they actually pay immigrants to take the language classes (and I joke that they have to because that language is a bitch to learn).  She also talks to women who've emigrated from Thailand to middle eastern countries and, unless the guy is really rich, their life SUCKS.

[240 is Back]

Why would Dems want to help Christie?
He's the Repubs only hope of winning the White House in 2016

I gotta disagree. 

Christie is a RINO.  Policy-wise, he's just like Romney and Mccain.

The only difference?  Romney looked like President, and Mccain was a war hero.  Christie looks like a fat office clerk with an anger problem... he looks like shit and he's not on the campaign trail 17 hours a day.   He's probably got a WORSE chance than mccain or romney.

No, the repubs CAN win with a far-right conservative, because their base will show up & donate like CRAZY.  they'll be like, FINALLY we have a true conservative again!!!  Most repubs on getbig hated romney.  They didn't campaign and donate to him as much, because of it.   Now, if they had a Rand/Cruz ticket... whew... look out!  Donate like crazy, volunteering - they'll realize they have a candidate that REALLY WILL chance things. 

Christie ain't gonna chance much... he's a RINO, no denying it, not even up for debate. 

[240 is Back]

"Obama is center right"

We have a live one here folks.

Obama is a liberal on domestic policy, and a neoconservative on foreign policy.

He's bush II when it comes to wars, economic issues, etc.  Nothing all that different.  Foreign leaders shit on Bush and they shit on Obama now too.   Obama kept all his policies and his new ones sure look a lot like they too.  We can nitpick details, but when you have 333386 condemning obama for too many people killedin pakistan with drone strikes lol... well, obama isn't a dem on foreign policy

Obama's damage has come from the welfare state he's embraced INSIDE our borders. 

[240 is Back]

I don't trust Christie either.

Dems LOVE Christie.  MSNBC is on his nuts so hard they might get pregnant. 

It's GOOD that you don't trust Christie.  He's pretty liberal.  He practically handed the 2012 election to dems by posing with Obama in the Sandy aftermath and giving the "I dont care about the election or Romney, this is about NJ..."

[Soul Crusher]

Dems LOVE Christie.  MSNBC is on his nuts so hard they might get pregnant. 

It's GOOD that you don't trust Christie.  He's pretty liberal.  He practically handed the 2012 election to dems by posing with Obama in the Sandy aftermath and giving the "I dont care about the election or Romney, this is about NJ..."

Im w rand

[whork]

I came here to drop a line to Strawman but this...

The word is 'testimony' not 'testament'.

Second, the ACA is at heart a republican idea and the only reason the republicans hate it is b/c it's put forth by a jigaboo.

Third, there is no debate on this forum.  Posting link after link after link with 'Boom' or 'LMFAO' is not debate.  That is a personality disorder.

Finally, this:

Will Sen. Rand Paul, misunderstanding the voices of the undead, block the appointment of Janet Yellen to head the Federal Reserve Board?

No joke. Tea Party fave Paul told The Wall Street Journal he would have preferred Milton Friedman, the free-market fanatic, to the liberal-ish Yellen. But, as a stunned Journal reporter informed the senator, Milton Friedman is, alas, some years dead.

Unbowed, Paul contends he is channeling Friedman from beyond the grave, invoking the Nobel Prize economist to support the senator's quest against Yellen's well-known commitment to easy money policies at the Fed.

Paul has written, "One need not be an economist or mathematician to wonder whether printing money out of thin air is a sound way to help the economy."

You're more than correct, Senator. If you don't know why America is printing more dollar bills, then you definitely are not an economist nor a mathematician.

As a former student of the late professor Friedman, I'm quite certain that Milty would have been thrilled by Yellen's push to mainline more greenbacks into the US economy.

If you return to your séance, Senator, and ask Friedman's ghost about "printing money out of thin air," you'd find out he all but invented the idea. Or, throw away the Ouija Board and read Friedman's A Monetary History of the United States 1867-1960, his Nobel-winning work, in which he argued convincingly that the Federal Reserve could have prevented the Great Depression had it radically pumped up the money supply.

Friedman's - and Yellen's - greatest fear is not inflation, but deflation, a disastrous fall in prices because of starving the economy of dollars.

Senator Paul moans that, since the market crash of 2008, the Federal Reserve has printed $3.6 trillion and dumped these dollar bills, ink still wet, into the financial system. Paul is waiting for the day when the printing of all these dollars suddenly will cause the price of a can of tuna to soar to $7,000.

But despite the Fed's smoking-hot printing press, the price of tuna is perilously close to falling. Price inflation today stands at a teeny-weeny 1.2 percent.

It's time for Senator Paul and daddy Congressman Ron Paul and their followers in gold-foil hats to admit that adding trillions to the money supply has not caused hyper-inflation. After a quarter-century of hysterical warnings from the two Pauls, the hyperinflation spaceship never landed and little green dollar men did not eat up the planet.

An Idiot's Guide to Gold-Buggery

The Pauls have told us horror stories of the German hyper-inflation of the early 1920s, when you had to schlep a wheelbarrow full of currency to buy a loaf of bread. The cure Paul père hawks, is a return to the gold standard, raising zombie economic theories from the grave, where Friedman buried them.

As Friedman warned, there's something far worse than having to pay for a loaf of bread with bags of currency, and that's having to pay for a loaf of bread with a bag of gold.

Notably, the Tea Party, not the guys in the goofy wigs on Fox TV, but the real one in Boston in 1773, was formed principally to protest King George's reimposing the gold standard on the colonies.

The colonies faced a crisis. Bricks of gold don't have babies; and so, when an economy grows rapidly as did early America, there simply is not enough money to represent that new trade and wealth because the currency is limited by a fixed and arbitrary amount of metal.

Here's why. When the money stock stays flat as production and work force grows, each dollar buys more of that production. Sounds good? No way. A monstrous fall in prices and wages means workers and businesses get less for their output and can't pay off old loans. To simplify: When a farmer borrows $100 for land and seed then sells his corn for $50, the farmer goes bust.

The American colonies faced such ruin when gold-backed currency was insufficient to fund our massive expansion. A revolutionary leader of the time explained the insurgent solution, "Happy for us that we fell upon the Project of giving a Credit to Paper."

Happy days ended when the British Parliament counterattacked with the Currency Act of 1764 that, "renders our Paper Money no legal Tender." King George, to shackle the States to the crown's metal-based currency, required purchasing a tax-stamp for each case of tea, which had to be paid for in His Majesty's "pounds sterling."

So the dissidents threw the tea into the ocean.

A century and a half later, after World War I, the British Parliament did it again, reimposing the gold standard. The United States and most of the world joined Britain in the golden noose. Economies strangled and dangled. The Great Depression eased only when FDR, in one of his first acts of office, rescued the United States, setting the dollar free of gold and letting fly the "Federal Reserve Note," created out of thin air - just like America itself.

And while your beloved Friedman did not care for the government caring for people's welfare via New Deal programs, my professor did praise FDR's printing press for expanding the money supply.

In today's hearing, Janet Yellen might remind the Senate of economist J.M. Keynes warning about, "Madmen in authority, who hear voices in the air, distilling their frenzy from some academic scribbler of a few years back."

Senator Paul, if you are going to listen to the voices of deceased economists, at the least, listen carefully.

http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/20034-rand-pauls-zombie-nomics-versus-janet-yellen

Why that?  B/c the rightwing filth on this board is just like its wig-wearing frontman...long on mouth and short on brains

Simply awesome.

[Coach is Back!]

Coach will not answer you in a trillion years. He can't change his stance and years of 'the left, the left, liberals, the left, liberals, liberals, liberals, the left, liberals, the left, the left, liberals, liberals, the left, liberals, liberals, the left, the left, the left  the left, liberals, the left'. His standard answer.

He'll ask you a question in return to skirt the issue or at most, parrot headlines. Want an in depth conversation. He can't.

He's not a bad guy. I quite like his posts and humour. He's just not politically minded.

You can't be serious. You must not pay attention to my post as much as you think. Youmight not think I'm politically minded, but you can't deny my record of being right about my predictions and Obama have been more dead on than any lib that has posted 9n here since that clown started to run for presidents. What I say stands, the left can't argue progressive policy nor defend it without demonizing or name calling, ironically thats how Obama "won" (I use that word loosely)the election. He got destroyed on policy and saying he's a criminal would be an understatement. So tell me, what is it about him that makes you want to defend him?

[avxo]

I don't trust Christie either.

Trust? You're the guy who recently made a post about how the "Republic of Kenya" birth certificate proved Obama was not a citizen (a document that was proven to be fake over a year ago), and the guy who buys the shit that Joe Arpaio and Orly Taitz peddle.

If you "trust" the sun rises in the East, the safe bet is that it rises in the West.

And remember: don't accuse me of being a leftist or a liberal; you tried that last time and got your ass handed back to you on a platter.

[AndreaRyc]

Absurd.  He's about as far left as you can get and still be elected in DC, both socially and fiscally.  Class warfare, bigger government, spending, taxing, etc.  Socially, he's a liberal down the board.   

You call yourself a moderator you sonofabitch?

You certainly don't have to respond like an adult pal. 'Cause the good news is -- you're fired. Oh, have I got your attention now? Good. You get the picture? You're laughing now? You can't moderate, you can't close shit, you ARE shit, hit the bricks pal and beat it 'cause you are going out!!!
(see Mamet)

Anyway, you really are a disgrace as a moderator old man and just because you put on a smiley face next to your comments does not dull the shine from the evil underneath.  Look at your comment above.  Total wishful thinking supported by nothing.

[headhuntersix]

Sounds like a whiny bitch to me.....do somebody hurt your poor widdle feelings lib douche.....

[dario73]

You call yourself a moderator you sonofabitch?

You certainly don't have to respond like an adult pal. 'Cause the good news is -- you're fired. Oh, have I got your attention now? Good. You get the picture? You're laughing now? You can't moderate, you can't close shit, you ARE shit, hit the bricks pal and beat it 'cause you are going out!!!
(see Mamet)

Anyway, you really are a disgrace as a moderator old man and just because you put on a smiley face next to your comments does not dull the shine from the evil underneath.  Look at your comment above.  Total wishful thinking supported by nothing.

[headhuntersix]

That post should be the wiki example of meltdowns..but then he's hving a very bad couple of weeks.

[OzmO]

Forum Rules:

Quoting Sources:  If your thread or post uses material created from another source, you must provide a link to the source.  Do not post full articles; only copy a portion of the source material with a link to read the rest.


But im the troll Is this the twilight zone or something?

Just to help out here......

What BB posted was his opinion not material from an article.

Absurd.  He's about as far left as you can get and still be elected in DC, both socially and fiscally.  Class warfare, bigger government, spending, taxing, etc.  Socially, he's a liberal down the board. 

 

Now, BB can choose NOT to back up his opinion like some on the board often do.  But what he posted was his opinion none the less and it wasn't an material from another source

What we don't want is people posting articles claiming things without a link to back it up.  For example Thread title:  "Obama lied about blah blah blah" and then something that looks like an article with no link.  (Sometimes people even mislead with the thread title as it is not what the article says)

[Coach is Back!]

Trust? You're the guy who recently made a post about how the "Republic of Kenya" birth certificate proved Obama was not a citizen (a document that was proven to be fake over a year ago), and the guy who buys the shit that Joe Arpaio and Orly Taitz peddle.

If you "trust" the sun rises in the East, the safe bet is that it rises in the West.

And remember: don't accuse me of being a leftist or a liberal; you tried that last time and got your ass handed back to you on a platter.

Like I said, I'm right most of the this MIGHT be one of the times I'm wrong. Don't get your panties in a wad. I'm still not 100% convinced. Hes underhanded, a liar, a cheat, a communist and a criminal. I trust him in no way shape or form nor do I have one ounce of respect for this fraud

[Coach is Back!]

Besides, last I checked I'm not the one running for office.

[Straw Man]

Just to help out here......

What BB posted was his opinion not material from an article.
 

Now, BB can choose NOT to back up his opinion like some on the board often do.  But what he posted was his opinion none the less and it wasn't an material from another source

What we don't want is people posting articles claiming things without a link to back it up.  For example Thread title:  "Obama lied about blah blah blah" and then something that looks like an article with no link.  (Sometimes people even mislead with the thread title as it is not what the article says)

Bums claim of "bigger government, spending" is not an opinion but a provably false statement

[Straw Man]

I gotta disagree. 

Christie is a RINO.  Policy-wise, he's just like Romney and Mccain.

The only difference?  Romney looked like President, and Mccain was a war hero.  Christie looks like a fat office clerk with an anger problem... he looks like shit and he's not on the campaign trail 17 hours a day.   He's probably got a WORSE chance than mccain or romney.

No, the repubs CAN win with a far-right conservative, because their base will show up & donate like CRAZY.  they'll be like, FINALLY we have a true conservative again!!!  Most repubs on getbig hated romney.  They didn't campaign and donate to him as much, because of it.   Now, if they had a Rand/Cruz ticket... whew... look out!  Donate like crazy, volunteering - they'll realize they have a candidate that REALLY WILL chance things. 

Christie ain't gonna chance much... he's a RINO, no denying it, not even up for debate. 

do you also believe in leprechauns and fairies too because the idea that there is this secret army of teabagger just sitting on their hands until a sufficiently hard right candidate shows up is a fairy tale that your side likes to tell each other

They don't exist and you've watched more than enough teabaggers win in the primary only to get crushed in the general election to learn this point by now

I hope that Repubs nominate Cruz or Paul or fuck, why not Santorum or Bachmann.  For every wing nut you get off the couch you'll lose 2 or 10 sane Republicans who will not put a loon into the most powerful position on planet earth

Nothing will please me more than than to see the confused and bewildered teabaggers on November 9th trying to figure out why that elusive teabagger vote didn't show up to save the day

[Dos Equis]

You call yourself a moderator you sonofabitch?

You certainly don't have to respond like an adult pal. 'Cause the good news is -- you're fired. Oh, have I got your attention now? Good. You get the picture? You're laughing now? You can't moderate, you can't close shit, you ARE shit, hit the bricks pal and beat it 'cause you are going out!!!
(see Mamet)

Anyway, you really are a disgrace as a moderator old man and just because you put on a smiley face next to your comments does not dull the shine from the evil underneath.  Look at your comment above.  Total wishful thinking supported by nothing.

[Dos Equis]

Just to help out here......

What BB posted was his opinion not material from an article.
 

Now, BB can choose NOT to back up his opinion like some on the board often do.  But what he posted was his opinion none the less and it wasn't an material from another source

What we don't want is people posting articles claiming things without a link to back it up.  For example Thread title:  "Obama lied about blah blah blah" and then something that looks like an article with no link.  (Sometimes people even mislead with the thread title as it is not what the article says)

That was way too much effort.  I like my pictures better.   

[JOHN MATRIX]

I gotta disagree. 

Christie is a RINO.  Policy-wise, he's just like Romney and Mccain.

The only difference?  Romney looked like President, and Mccain was a war hero.  Christie looks like a fat office clerk with an anger problem... he looks like shit and he's not on the campaign trail 17 hours a day.   He's probably got a WORSE chance than mccain or romney.

No, the repubs CAN win with a far-right conservative, because their base will show up & donate like CRAZY.  they'll be like, FINALLY we have a true conservative again!!!  Most repubs on getbig hated romney.  They didn't campaign and donate to him as much, because of it.   Now, if they had a Rand/Cruz ticket... whew... look out!  Donate like crazy, volunteering - they'll realize they have a candidate that REALLY WILL chance things. 

Christie ain't gonna chance much... he's a RINO, no denying it, not even up for debate. 

Exactly!!!!

[Straw Man]

Exactly!!!!

I'll be looking forward to your confusion and disappointment on November 9th

[RRKore]

Obama is a liberal on domestic policy, and a neoconservative on foreign policy.

He's bush II when it comes to wars, economic issues, etc.  Nothing all that different.  Foreign leaders shit on Bush and they shit on Obama now too.   Obama kept all his policies and his new ones sure look a lot like they too.  We can nitpick details, but when you have 333386 condemning obama for too many people killedin pakistan with drone strikes lol... well, obama isn't a dem on foreign policy

Obama's damage has come from the welfare state he's embraced INSIDE our borders. 

Mixed bag, for sure.  But isn't it even more complicated than this (domestic issue lib, foreign policy conservative)?

When the NSA spies on folks (correction:  EVERYONE) in the USA, that would seem to be a domestic issue but it sure isn't what you'd expect from a liberal. 
The lack of prosecution of the folks in the finance industry for grave injuries to our economy also doesn't seem like the (in)action of the liberal that Fox would like you to believe that Obama is.

Of course right-wing media sources aimed at the more simple-minded among us uniformly say that Obama is a socialist.  If you take a look at what the smarter conservatives are saying, though, this is not the case.  (This is not to say that you won't find any intelligent conservatives saying that Obama is a strict leftist, however.)

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/is-barack-obama-a-republican-realist/
...

In a way, much of what Obama has been advocating on domestic policy is not very different from what a Bush I administration (or Nixon, Ford or Eisenhower) would be doing, ranging from raising taxes, reforming immigration policy, or protecting the environment. Obama, in short, is not a socialist or a even a social-democrat, just a good old centrist Republican.

[RRKore]

That post should be the wiki example of meltdowns..but then he's hving a very bad couple of weeks.

Righties here should be grateful when AndreaRyc posts angrily vs. when he just posts his analysis (of politics, this board, whatever).

Maybe I'm too partial to objectively comment but from what I've seen, his analytic posts have absolutely brutalized some of y'all.

[tu_holmes]

You guys are still arguing this shit?

Wow...

Obviously Obama hasn't been the big government spender that people say he is... That's bullshit. He is however raising some taxes... I don't appreciate it of course, but I'm not rich, so they aren't affecting me so much.

If the worse thing people have to bitch about is that their healthcare in the wake of a system overhaul, then you must be doing ok.

The thing Obama pisses me off about is civil liberties... He's every bit the crusher of those as any Republican Neo-Con ever was.

That is the ONLY thing I can't stand about him... Another dislike is his continuous military intervention... Don't like it.

Didn't like it under Bush II, don't like it now.