Soviet Amerika

Truman · Post by **Truman** » Sun Jul 19, 2009 3:13 am

Mighty slow up in this bitch. Junk to consider....

“ You Americans are so gullible. No, you won’t accept communism outright, but we’ll keep feeding you small doses of socialism until you’ll finally wake up and find you already have communism. We won’t have to fight you. We’ll so weaken your economy until you’ll fall like overripe fruit into our hands.

-Nikita Khrushchev

BSmack, PSU, Mikey, and other unnamed otherwise moronic, shit-fer-brains Leftists,et el…

It's on, Asshats.

What a kollectiv bag of suck.

You people cannot possibly defend your vote without being seriously laughed right outta this Board.

Let's review:

In the space of six months, your freely-elected tree-swinging, banana-eating, nits-out-of-his-ass-eating Central Committee Chairman has done and/or proposed the following:

Assumed Federal control of Multi-National Banks.

Assumed Federal control of Financial Institutions.

Given tacit approval to the True Culprits of the Fanny/Freddie meltdown.

Quadrupled the Federal deficit.

Levied $767 Billion in porkulus spending for Special Interest Groups in the name of "Job Creation" and "Stimulus".

Co-opted two American automobile manufacturers.

Lied about raising taxes.

Jocked a suicidal "energy bill" in the name of Junk Science.

Administratively ignored blatant Election Fraud.

Nominated a Documented Racist to the Supreme Court.

Fired an Inspector General without Due Process per the Law He Co-Sponsored.

Closed a Terrorist Camp with zero forethought as to what to do with its prisoners.

And, oh yeah, fostered legistlation to seize easily 20% of the American economy in the name of "healthcare reform."

Never mind the present rampant unemployment, the plunging stock market, and the hundreds of thousands of other workers Ocommunist's proposed economic policies have and will push out of work.

So THIS is the "change" you Losers voted for? Really?

You people disgust me.

Oh, you'll call names… But you cannot possibly defend a single policy the Messiah has presented without having your ASS served to you on a plate.

Liberals always lose in the presence of logic.

Bring it, Bitches….

poptart · Post by **poptart** » Sun Jul 19, 2009 4:17 am

It all adds up failure, Truman.

The American people will feel it and will come to their senses -- most of them.

One term for B.O. -- if that.

Utter humiliation is in that guy's future.

Along with a lot of pain for Americans.

KC Scott · Post by **KC Scott** » Sun Jul 19, 2009 7:00 pm

Damn Tim - you're drinking the hatorade too?

I hope this was just a chain e-mail you copied to stir the pot

Truman wrote:
Assumed Federal control of Multi-National Banks.

Assumed Federal control of Financial Institutions.

Given tacit approval to the True Culprits of the Fanny/Freddie meltdown.

True but intitiated under the Bush regime

Quadrupled the Federal deficit.

Partially attributed to previous

Levied $767 Billion in porkulus spending for Special Interest Groups in the name of "Job Creation" and "Stimulus".

Some of it is good spending - I travel all over this country now and the infrastrure is a fucking wreck.

As for spending the money to stimulate bioscience & Alt energry - what industries do you think America will lead the world in?

Co-opted two American automobile manufacturers.

Totally fucked and stupid but was also initiated by the previous regime

Lied about raising taxes.

I think he said if you make under $250K your taxes wouldn't raise.
Can you explain specifically what taxes you're referring to?

Jocked a suicidal "energy bill" in the name of Junk Science.

It may be junk science or it may be a boom industry - If we are going to stimulate an industry, this and Bioscience would seem to have the greatest potential for global market

Administratively ignored blatant Election Fraud.

really reaching here - I could either remind you of Florida in the Gore election or just dismiss this as strawman BS

Nominated a Documented Racist to the Supreme Court.

As oppossed to Roberts who's an armband short of the 4th reich?

Fired an Inspector General without Due Process per the Law He Co-Sponsored.

WTFC

Closed a Terrorist Camp with zero forethought as to what to do with its prisoners.

SuperMax will be glad to take 'em and it will cost less

And, oh yeah, fostered legistlation to seize easily 20% of the American economy in the name of "healthcare reform."

Undecided if this will work out or not. Almost every major industrialized nation in the world, including all of our allies, has it.

Never mind the present rampant unemployment, the plunging stock market, and the hundreds of thousands of other workers Ocommunist's proposed economic policies have and will push out of work.

The Stock market started tanking under the previous regime as did the job losses. You bitch about the stimulus and then bitch about unemployment even though the stimulus will put some folks back on the job. BTW the Stock market is up substantially from it's bottom in March and the major banks - Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan reported outstand quarters. even Citi made money, though they are now discussing chpt. 11 to re-org their debt. Additionally Inel and IBM also had blowout quarters. The stock market is a 6-9 month precursor to the general economy as a whole - however i'm thinking it will be more of a "jobless" recovery. Hence the need to find what our next great export will be since I don't think derivatives are gonna be doing it anymore

Both parties suck. But at the end of the day it's the individuals that understand how to adapt and thrive that make it, regardless of policy.

The bitching about it is really just tose that haven't figured it out yet trying to make themselves feel better

PSUFAN · Post by **PSUFAN** » Sun Jul 19, 2009 9:50 pm

It's ok, Truman...get it all out. Imagine the rant you'd be posting had McCain won the election...probably the same rant, but likely twice as long.

Maybe being so frustrated with Obama will help the GOP find their way a bit? Then again, maybe not.

LTS TRN 2 · Post by **LTS TRN 2** » Mon Jul 20, 2009 4:55 am

Truman (the worst modern president, btw), I think you missed the whole parade!

When the meltdown occurred about a year ago, it wasn't simply a result of the sub-prime mortgages being bundled into absurdly fake refracted derivatives (and everyone investing in them to the hilt

) Oh no, that was simply the final fatuous instrument to keep the Ponzi scheme going..and it ran out. You see, Karl Marx had predicted precisely that Capitalism was a shell game that would crap out not through violence or social chaos, but through the inevitable necessity of the government assuming all credit--and therefore industry. And...it's happened. Of course no one would have believed it possible only three years ago, but so what? Now, you can rightly say, "well how come these same shysters are still skimming and sucking all the dough?" And sure, good question--but a different topic. Marx had no consideration whatsoever for "Jews" or "Anglos" or any sort of international groups like the Bohemian Grove, etc. That's a whole different thing.

But, sure, socialism is here, not like anyone hoped for--inevitably, and let's hope the current absolute cluster fucked situation doesn't get a lot worse? Or what?...you think it can't?

Atomic Punk · Post by **Atomic Punk** » Mon Jul 20, 2009 6:22 am

Let me take a crack at this poli thingio for one time only...

The Capitalist system works if it isn't fucked up by amended laws.

Those that twist the pure concept of Capitalism are why it has failed as evidenced by the current administration. It's simple. You go away from what made this country to money interests/corruption... you get this result.

Am I blaming Republicans or Democrats? Yes. Both are at fault as they changed the Constitution to meet their personal agendas. Money = corruption. The people to blame aren't the politicians. The only people to blame are those dumb fucks that elected these pieces of shit to office.

Simple. Fuck off to the fat, uneducated, bloated McDonald's eating, unemployed construction workers with tats all over their body that show up to the Emergency Room on meth.

THAT is what is up Amerika!

poptart · Post by **poptart** » Mon Jul 20, 2009 7:33 am

AP wrote:Those that twist the pure concept of Capitalism are why it has failed

Yes, exactly so.

"Free Market Capitalism has failed" is not a logical conclusion anyone can come to, for the simple reason that we haven't had Free Market Capitalism for a very long time.

Hey, no system is without flaws and shortcomings, but Free Market Capitalism pounds the living shit out of Communism/Socialism.

It's not close.

Basic human nature dictates that Capitalism is a far better system to follow.

KC Scott · Post by **KC Scott** » Mon Jul 20, 2009 4:15 pm

This:

Atomic Punk wrote: Those that twist the pure concept of Capitalism are why it has failed as evidenced by the current administration. It's simple. You go away from what made this country to money interests/corruption... you get this result.

Then This:

Money = corruption. T

You do realize that all the deregualtion of the financial markets that finally lead to the meltdown occurred under the GOP Administration, right?

That includes but was not limited to credit default swaps which were unregulated and therefore backed by no assets.
When all of those loans went into foreclosure the credit default swaps became worthless.

Mike you'll need to count yourself among the uneducated americans until you realize there's a balance required between regualtion Govenment and business.

I've given up on Tart as he's entered the wolfman phase of his life

JMak · Post by **JMak** » Mon Jul 20, 2009 4:54 pm

KC Scott wrote:You do realize that all the deregualtion of the financial markets that finally lead to the meltdown occurred under the GOP Administration, right?

What "deregulation(s)" are you talking about? Specifically, please. Unintelligable crap about Gramm or Bush will not be accepted.

That includes but was not limited to credit default swaps which were unregulated and therefore backed by no assets.
When all of those loans went into foreclosure the credit default swaps became worthless.

So were these CDS's regulated and then became unregulated (i.e., deregulation)? If not, then get your story straight re: deregulation.

Mike you'll need to count yourself among the uneducated americans until you realize there's a balance required between regualtion Govenment and business.

And your next gem will be telling us that the sun rises in the East, right? LOL!

KC Scott · Post by **KC Scott** » Mon Jul 20, 2009 5:29 pm

CDS were introduced in the mid 1990's - and for all intent and purpose the same as insurance.
In other words, there should be assets to back the CDS - just like insurance.

The big difference is insurance is regulated and CDS were not due to substantail lobbying efforts from the financial interests that were selling them. This fit into the "keep Government out of Business" mindset that was prevalent at the time.

Of course when the derivatives market, based on the subprime loans, exploded early 2000, CDS were used to 'back" the worthless paper.
When the defaults started happening, and the CDS were called in - there were no assets. It was simply paper.

Here's are a couple video that explains it pretty well:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bHXuUx0vT0Q

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jHVnEBw93EA

The total exposure of the CDS is now 40-60 Trillion

JMak · Post by **JMak** » Mon Jul 20, 2009 6:29 pm

KC Scott wrote:CDS were introduced in the mid 1990's - and for all intent and purpose the same as insurance.
In other words, there should be assets to back the CDS - just like insurance.

Yeah, I know, I get what CDS's are.

The big difference is insurance is regulated and CDS were not due to substantail lobbying efforts from the financial interests that were selling them. This fit into the "keep Government out of Business" mindset that was prevalent at the time.

1) So Congress was going to regulate but then did not because "financial interests" successfully lobbied against such regulation? I'll take your word for it though I am skeptical.

2) So then CDS's were not the result of a regulated mechanism now becoming unregulated under a GOP administration. Hence, your initial point is rather irrelevant then. As well, whether the deregulation occurred under a GOP administration is quite irrelevant, too, given that, well, Congress, uh, exists.

Of course when the derivatives market, based on the subprime loans, exploded early 2000, CDS were used to 'back" the worthless paper.

Again, I won't argue with you about the root causes here, but you initially claimed that this meltdown was caused by financial deregulation that happened under a GOP administration. Now you've just pegged the beginning of CDS's to 2000 before Bush took office. Your argument is going off the rails.

When the defaults started happening, and the CDS were called in - there were no assets. It was simply paper.

Nice sun-rises-in-the-East analysis.

KC Scott · Post by **KC Scott** » Mon Jul 20, 2009 6:53 pm

This really isn't a quote fest - simply answering questions about the subject.

Watch the first video I linked - it addresses the issue of the dergulation 8 years ago very well.

It happened at the end of the clinton Administration, though both houses of congress were GOP contolled at the time

LTS TRN 2 · Post by **LTS TRN 2** » Mon Jul 20, 2009 8:03 pm

Weasel, do you enjoy getting your ass pounded like a jailhouse bitch?

Phil Gramm is in fact the lynch pin of the demented GOP philosophy of deregulation and "getting government off our backs" and similar nonsense. The results are painfully clear. As usual, you don't even have an argument to offer. What a joke.

poptart · Post by **poptart** » Mon Jul 20, 2009 10:30 pm

poptart wrote:"Free Market Capitalism has failed" is not a logical conclusion anyone can come to, for the simple reason that we haven't had Free Market Capitalism for a very long time.

Hey, no system is without flaws and shortcomings, but Free Market Capitalism pounds the living shit out of Communism/Socialism.

It's not close.

Basic human nature dictates that Capitalism is a far better system to follow.

Scott wrote:I've given up on Tart as he's entered the wolfman phase of his life

You disagree with what I said there?

War Wagon · Post by **War Wagon** » Mon Jul 20, 2009 10:52 pm

KC Scott wrote: You do realize that all the deregualtion of the financial markets that finally lead to the meltdown occurred under the GOP Administration, right?

You mean like the repeal of the Glass-Steagel Act, which really got the ball rolling on the financial meltdown, that Clinton signed into law in 1999? That GOP Administration?

You do realize you're a preposterously ill-informed dumbfuck, right?

KC Scott · Post by **KC Scott** » Mon Jul 20, 2009 10:55 pm

dave - you've become a dittohead as opposed to a thinker.

statements like this reinforce this conclusion:

"Free Market Capitalism has failed" is not a logical conclusion anyone can come to, for the simple reason that we haven't had Free Market Capitalism for a very long time

I just gave a perfect example of what happens with Free Market Capitalism when there are no federal checks or balances and you came back with the same blithering rush-babble.

It's like you're in pledge class, ankles grasped firmly in hand, shouting "Thank you sir, May I have Another?"

KC Scott · Post by **KC Scott** » Mon Jul 20, 2009 11:00 pm

War Wagon wrote:
You mean like the repeal of the Glass-Steagel Act, which really got the ball rolling on the financial meltdown, that Clinton signed into law in 1999? That GOP Administration?

It was noted in a previous post it was signed during the Clinton admin but also pointed out that:

The bill that ultimately repealed the Act was introduced in the Senate by Phil Gramm (Republican of Texas) and in the House of Representatives by Jim Leach (R-Iowa) in 1999. The bills were passed by Republican majorities on party lines by a 54-44 vote in the Senate[12] and by a 343-86 vote in the House of Representatives.[13] After passing both the Senate and House the bill was moved to a conference committee to work out the differences between the Senate and House versions. The final bill resolving the differences was passed in the Senate 90-8 (one not voting) and in the House: 362-57 (15 not voting). The legislation was signed into law by President Bill Clinton on November 12, 1999.

You should fall to your knees and thank your mythical being everday for the existance of Jim Rome, SC3 and finally this board as it no doubt has raised your IQ to the same level of various other primates.

War Wagon · Post by **War Wagon** » Mon Jul 20, 2009 11:56 pm

KC Scott wrote: It was noted in a previous post it was signed during the Clinton admin.

Look, you're the one who said it all started during a GOP administration, did you not? Yes, you did. Are you contradicting yourself?

When facts are thrown in your face you start to prevaricate and gloss over any and all involvement from the other side of the aisle.

Like a good knee jerk leftist: "GOP baaad, Dems goood."

Yes, Gramm sponsored it (and should be shot) but fact is that clusterfuck of a bill was widely supported by Dems as well and wouldn't have passed without their support.

poptart · Post by **poptart** » Tue Jul 21, 2009 12:07 am

Scott wrote:I just gave a perfect example of what happens with Free Market Capitalism when there are no federal checks or balances and you came back with the same blithering rush-babble.

ummm...

What example did you give me before I ... came back ... with those comments?

even though the stimulus will put some folks back on the job.

They were DEAD WRONG.

Look at the graph.

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=32191

BTW the Stock market is up substantially from it's bottom in March

The markets are basically ... even ... from the time B.O. took office.

Lay off the sauce, guy.

Atomic Punk · Post by **Atomic Punk** » Tue Jul 21, 2009 12:33 am

poptart wrote:
poptart wrote:"Free Market Capitalism has failed" is not a logical conclusion anyone can come to, for the simple reason that we haven't had Free Market Capitalism for a very long time.

Hey, no system is without flaws and shortcomings, but Free Market Capitalism pounds the living shit out of Communism/Socialism.

It's not close.

Basic human nature dictates that Capitalism is a far better system to follow.

Scott wrote:I've given up on Tart as he's entered the wolfman phase of his life
You disagree with what I said there?

He didn't answer your question really about Capitalism in its true sense. What he did is do the "blame game" rather than look at your original statement.

And Scott, it doesn't MATTER which side of the aisle caused this because both sides are to blame if you look at it. You also have to blame the dumb fucks that voted these assholes in. I don't give a fuck if it was Bush, Clinton, or anyone else. This is no longer a Capitalist society.

Now this push for his version of health care reform has to scare the shit out of you bro. I don't know how any rural hospital can stay in business with all of the illegals flooding the ER's at every hospital I've been to. It's an incredible drain on resources. However, YOU are paying for it with ridiculously high insurance premiums. That statement is assuming you can get insurance coverage at all. Now with double digit unemployment in this state, where is the money going to come from?

poptart · Post by **poptart** » Tue Jul 21, 2009 12:44 am

AP wrote:He didn't answer your question really about Capitalism in its true sense. What he did is do the "blame game" rather than look at your original statement.

Exactly.

He couldn't dispute my commensts, so he moved the goal post.

I said Free Market Capitalism is better than Communism/Socialism.

I hope our Scotty doesn't disagree with that.

It's obvious that you're never going to have PURE FMC, and I don't advocate NO regulation.

We're not close to FMC and we haven't been for a very long time.

We need to move in that direction.

B.O. is taking us a 180 from where we need to go, in my estimation.

KC Scott · Post by **KC Scott** » Tue Jul 21, 2009 12:50 am

Once again you reflect badly on the Kansas City educational system and basic reading comprehension in General

War Wagon wrote:
Yes, Gramm sponsored it (and should be shot) but fact is that clusterfuck of a bill was widely supported by Dems as well and wouldn't have passed without their support.

The bills were passed by Republican majorities on party lines by a 54-44 vote in the Senate and by a 343-86 vote in the House of Representatives

Dave - On party lines does not mean they shared a telephone number with the trailer next door.

Your confusion is duly noted

------------------------------------------------

dave.2: (what is it with dudes named dave here anyway?)

poptart wrote: What example did you give me before I ... came back ... with those comments?

Babylon? it's not just a city in Iraq anymore.

Seriously - you're going wolfie now and need to get checked by Kim Doc Soon

They were DEAD WRONG.

Look at the graph.

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=32191

A projected graph?

A projected graph by innocentbystander.com?

A projected graph by innocentbystander.com to try and rebute this statement:

though the stimulus will put some folks back on the job

although I also said in the same paragraph:

The stock market is a 6-9 month precursor to the general economy as a whole - however i'm thinking it will be more of a "jobless" recovery.

T-B: poptart - comprehendable argument

And finally this Gem

BTW the Stock market is up substantially from it's bottom in March

The markets are basically ... even ... from the time B.O. took office.

I said the Stock Market is up since March bottom - not since January 20, but even in that case your still wrong:

S&P 500
Date Open High Low Close Volume Adj Close*
20-Jul-09 942.07 951.62 940.99 951.13 4,853,150,000 951.13
20-Jan-09 849.64 849.64 804.47 805.22 6,375,230,000 805.22

You've obviously been eating from the plate of dave.1's stupid stew.

For the love of your imaginary sentinent being, quit now lest you forever be known in the permenent same company

War Wagon · Post by **War Wagon** » Tue Jul 21, 2009 1:04 am

KC Scott wrote: The bills were passed by Republican majorities on party lines by a 54-44 vote in the Senate and by a 343-86 vote in the House of Representatives

Bullshit. 54-44 was the initial vote and didn't pass muster.

The House passed its version of the Financial Services Act of 1999 on July 1st by a bipartisan vote of 343-86 (|Republicans 205–16; Democrats 138–69; Independent/Socialist 0–1),[3] [4] [5] two months after the Senate had already passed its version of the bill on May 6th by a much-narrower 54–44 vote along basically-partisan lines (53 Republicans and one Democrat in favor; 44 Democrats opposed).[6] [7] [8] [9]

When the two chambers could not agree on a joint version of the bill, the House voted on July 30th by a vote of 241-132 (R 58-131; D 182-1; Ind. 1–0) to instruct its negotiators to work for a law which ensured that consumers enjoyed medical and financial privacy as well as "robust competition and equal and non-discriminatory access to financial services and economic opportunities in their communities" (i.e., protection against exclusionary redlining).[10]

The bill then moved to a joint conference committee to work out the differences between the Senate and House versions. Democrats agreed to support the bill after Republicans agreed to strengthen provisions of the anti-redlining Community Reinvestment Act and address certain privacy concerns; the conference committee then finished its work by the beginning of November.[8] [11] On November 4th, the final bill resolving the differences was passed by the Senate 90-8,[12] [13] and by the House 362-57.[14] [15] This legislation (whose voting margins, if repeated, would easily have overcome any Presidential veto) was signed into law by Democratic President Bill Clinton on November 12, 1999.[16]

Do your own fucking research and then get your facts straight next time instead of trying to spin the numbers to suit your agenda.

poptart · Post by **poptart** » Tue Jul 21, 2009 1:38 am

Scott,

1. You still don't have the balls to own up to the fact that you could NOT dispute my original comment about pure Free Market Capitalism v. Communism/Socialism

I'm sure nobody's noticed.

2. There is no projecting the FACT that B.O. & Co. were DEAD WRONG about the unemplyoment stats -- with or without the stimulus.

That's FACT.

Look at the graph and compare it to what we were told.

If you drink the kool-aid about economic recovery, that's your business.

I see bad times ahead.

3. Dow is up 9% since inauguration
S & P is up 9%
Naz is uo 8%

I admit my "even" comment was off a bit.

The markets are up some ... right now ... and that is fact.

KC Scott · Post by **KC Scott** » Tue Jul 21, 2009 2:36 am

dave.1 continues to embarass those of us that actually went to school here in the midwest:

On November 4th, the final bill resolving the differences was passed by the Senate 90-8,[12] [13] and by the House 362-57.[14] [15] This legislation (whose voting margins, if repeated, would easily have overcome any Presidential veto) was signed into law by Democratic President Bill Clinton on November 12, 1999.

You're stupid. and posting the entire wiki paragraph makes you look JTR stupid. You just showed that not only did both houses sweep it in, the vote made it veto proof. Dude, seriously - stop raging.

My point has already been made in Tru's attmpt to hook all the dittoheads - The right want to throw rocks at BO, without acknowledging how or why the current mess came into being. I don't expect you to understand anything since your 201K is bleeding and folks aren't ordering forms and your scared beacuse the little pink houses just happening like the song said it would, but step back and don't go to any gun shows.

poptart wrote:Scott,

1. You still don't have the balls to own up to the fact that you could NOT dispute my original comment about pure Free Market Capitalism v. Communism/Socialism

I'm sure nobody's noticed.

Congrats dave.2 - you've convinced yourself if you say something inane enough times, it may make sense or someone may notice.

OK dave.2 - FMC better than C/S

Let's find some other captain obvious observations shall we?

Rich better than poor
Pretty better than ugly
Breathing better than drowning

kudos on your significant breakthrough in linear thought

2. There is no projecting the FACT that B.O. & Co. were DEAD WRONG about the unemplyoment stats -- with or without the stimulus.

That's FACT.

Look at the graph and compare it to what we were told.

It's a made up graph - and go find "what we were told" - not that i really care, but you obviously have way too much time on your hands in between trying to convert the godless slants or checking on the BBQ puppies you're having for dinner.

More importantly - this has nothing to do with what I said - which is the stimulus will put "some" folks back to work and fix "some" of the infrastructure that is crumbling.

If you have some other nugget of wisdom that has nothing to do with this, please feel free to share that also.

If you drink the kool-aid about economic recovery, that's your business.

I see bad times ahead.

I'm much smarter than you, about many, many things.
This has been proven many times over our long association, but like v.1, you must continue to try and impress he who you cannot impress.

Trust one thing that history has proven - the Stock Market is 6 - 9 months ahead of economic recovery.

This helps you prove my point here:

3. Dow is up 9% since inauguration
S & P is up 9%
Naz is uo 8%

I admit my "even" comment was off a bit.

The markets are up some ... right now ... and that is fact.

Now we can debate what constitutes an economic recovery - my definition is an increase in the GDP for 2 consecutive quarters.
My definition is an upward trend in the markets which means businesses are making money and investing to expand.
Unfortunetly for quite a few folks this recovery won't replace all the jobs that have been lost in this debacle.
They are gone and not coming back - hence the need for the US to find what it can create and export in the global economy.

It sure as fuck won't be derivatives or credit default swaps.

poptart · Post by **poptart** » Tue Jul 21, 2009 2:52 am

Scott wrote:OK dave.2 - FMC better than C/S

Then why are you in here sucking B.O. off?

Is he not taking us more ... MUCH ... more, toward communism/socialism than FMC?

Talk about asinine.

Scott wrote:It's a made up graph - and go find "what we were told"

It's right in front of your friggin' face, guy, if you bothered to look at the EVIDENCE I showed you.

LOL

-------------

Joe Biden, Feb. 6, 2009: "If we do everything right, if we do it with absolute certainty, there's still a 30 percent chance we're going to get it wrong."

Joe Biden, June 5 2009: "We misread how bad the economy was..."

B.O. & Co. predicted that the unemployment rate in June would be about 7.9% if the "stimulus" plan was passed. They also predicted that the unemployment rate would be about 8.7% if the plan was NOT passed.

The plan passed. The unemployment rate is 9.5%, 1.2% higher than if we did nothing at least according to our genius in charge.

-----------

KC NOT wrote:I'm much smarter than you

:facepalm:

KC Scott · Post by **KC Scott** » Tue Jul 21, 2009 2:59 am

mvscal wrote:
KC Scott wrote:More importantly - this has nothing to do with what I said - which is the stimulus will put "some" folks back to work and fix "some" of the infrastructure that is crumbling.
Nice except that it has not and will not ever do either of those things. That's not what it is for.

I'm seeing it.

Just from our stanpoint our Govt. Business is up 200% + over 2008.
I'm also seeing a significant amount of work done in airports and the military bases.
We just won a significant contract at camp lejeune today.

War Wagon · Post by **War Wagon** » Tue Jul 21, 2009 3:10 am

KC Scott wrote: You're stupid. and posting the entire wiki paragraph makes you look JTR stupid. You just showed that not only did both houses sweep it in, the vote made it veto proof. Dude, seriously - stop raging.

Did you just land on the moon?

Again, must I throw your words back in your face?

You SAID the meltdown was ALL on the former GOP administration.

I showed where it was NOT.

THEN you SAID it was because of a GOP controlled Congress.

I patiently showed where it was NOT.

The right want to throw rocks at BO, without acknowledging how or why the current mess came into being.

I'm on the right side of the aisle, but I'm not a rock thrower. Jeebus, how many rocks have you thrown at Bush lately? You're starting to come across like TVO without the spellcheck. Actually, you've been that way for quite some time.

I find your continued attempts at condescending arrogance amusing since you don't have one bit of room for either. Quite tedious, in fact.

Physician, heal thyself.

Truman · Post by **Truman** » Tue Jul 21, 2009 3:15 am

KC Scott wrote:Damn Tim - you're drinking the hatorade too?

I hope this was just a chain e-mail you copied to stir the pot

Mixes nicely with the Good Captain. Besides, I never did handle well the bitter taste of the Jim Jones Juice that some Opologist-types on this Board are currently drinking.

KC Scott wrote:
Truman wrote:
Assumed Federal control of Multi-National Banks.

Assumed Federal control of Financial Institutions.

Given tacit approval to the True Culprits of the Fanny/Freddie meltdown.
True but intitiated under the Bush regime

…And I would hope that YOU are simply trolling.

Bush did it first?

Seriously, Scott? That's all you got?

Since when do brain-dead no-accountability, no-strings-attached loans make for an unprecedented Official Federal Government Takeover?

KC Scott wrote:
Quadrupled the Federal deficit.
Partially attributed to previous

Bush: $482 billion
Obama: $1.3 trillion

That's like saying Buddy Biancalana "partially attributed" to the 1985 Royals World Series victory.

Out Loud.

KC Scott wrote:
Levied $767 Billion in porkulus spending for Special Interest Groups in the name of "Job Creation" and "Stimulus".
Some of it is good spending - I travel all over this country now and the infrastrure is a fucking wreck.

…And most of it is a flaming pile of shit.
Click the link. The detailed list of pork alone would make this thread even more scroll-worthy.

Clearly, SOMEBODY has a great big chunk of GE stock. Through June, 14.7 million people were out of work. Wonder how many of those poor souls can count on being called back to industry to build Bird Cuisinarts? And be sure to let me know how far along we are in building that energy grid to deliver Kansas wind to power the City of Chicago….

KC Scott wrote:
Co-opted two American automobile manufacturers.
Totally fucked and stupid but was also initiated by the previous regime

Get back to me with the part where Bush crafted a deal with the Unions and the Italian government to build Matchboxes in the name of Green technology. BTW, Scotty, unless you've got a bank of solar panels out back, the 'lectricity to re-charge the battery on your Ford F-250 hybrid most-likely is gonna come from a coal-fired plant.

KC Scott wrote:
Lied about raising taxes.
I think he said if you make under $250K your taxes wouldn't raise.
Can you explain specifically what taxes you're referring to?

Scotty wanna cracker? You're parroting the Company Line.

The CEO of KCP&L has readily conceded that your personal energy bill will double by 2010 with Senate passage of Crap on Trade. That in of itself - a manifestation of shit legislation written in the name of unproven junk science - will be a major hit to the average Joe-six-pack American taxpayer.

Secondly, 90% of American businesses have less than 20 employees and are responsible for over 97 percent of all new jobs created in America. How many tens-of-thousands of those Companies do you suppose file sub-chapter S?

So a small business owner that realizes a modest profit of $300K pays himself a living wage of $80 thousand and looks to expand his operation by plowing the remainder of his profits back into his business can now look forward to paying the highest corporate tax in the industrialized world? How many jobs will THAT scenario stimulate? Better yet… How many jobs will Mr. Small Business Taxpayer have to cut to meet President Oblamabush's tax bill?

And unless you're collecting your pay in "loonies" these days, I'd look for a brand-new line item somewhere between "FICA" and "Medicare" on your paystub as your fair share contribution towards Socialized Medicine. So yeah – I'd categorize that as lying about raising taxes,

KC Scott wrote:
Jocked a suicidal "energy bill" in the name of Junk Science.
It may be junk science or it may be a boom industry - If we are going to stimulate an industry, this and Bioscience would seem to have the greatest potential for global market

No, it IS junk science. Flip on your coal-fired electricity to heat your pool this past record-setting-low-temperature July weekend, Scott, or did you all swim in the cold? We have readily un-tapped energy reserves in the ground and off our coasts that would ensure our energy independence, and the technical expertise to build energy-efficient nukes that would heat our cities for pennies on the Green dollar, and you wanna do things the hard way. Free markets dictate themselves. Green energy and bioscience will flourish – or fail – on their own merits – without the help of a ruinous and suicidal legislation levied upon the backs of the American taxpayer.

KC Scott wrote:
Administratively ignored blatant Election Fraud.
really reaching here - I could either remind you of Florida in the Gore election or just dismiss this as strawman BS

The Gore election? Lemme get this straight: You still got the red-ass for a SCOTUS decision slamming a state populated by voters too stupid to figure out a simple punch-out ballot? I'll see your Florida, and raise you an ACORN. Put down the tin-foil hat, Scott… It doesn't suit you.

KC Scott wrote:
Nominated a Documented Racist to the Supreme Court.
As oppossed to Roberts who's an armband short of the 4th reich?

Care to post the Link where Roberts suggested that he would hope that a Wise White Man with the richness of his experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a Latina who hasn't lived that life… Seven-fucking-times? Fail.

KC Scott wrote:
Fired an Inspector General without Due Process per the Law He Co-Sponsored.
WTFC

Oh I dunno… Constitutionalists who still believe in the Rule of Law?

KC Scott wrote:
Closed a Terrorist Camp with zero forethought as to what to do with its prisoners.
SuperMax will be glad to take 'em and it will cost less

And provide a ready springboard for recruiting Domestic Terrorists? Cost less than what? Las Vegas? Los Angeles? Are you truly this daft?

KC Scott wrote:
And, oh yeah, fostered legistlation to seize easily 20% of the American economy in the name of "healthcare reform."
Undecided if this will work out or not. Almost every major industrialized nation in the world, including all of our allies, has it.

A patently stupid argument on too many fronts. Almost every major industrialized nation in the world - including all of our allies - does NOT enjoy the same freedoms we do. Healthcare is not a Constitutional right. You want it, you pay for it. If you don't, you shouldn't be penalized for opting out. I am not obligated for the well-being of your family. I AM, however, obligated to the well-being of my own.

KC Scott wrote:...The Stock market started tanking under the previous regime as did the job losses. You bitch about the stimulus and then bitch about unemployment even though the stimulus will put some folks back on the job. BTW the Stock market is up substantially from it's bottom in March and the major banks - Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan reported outstand quarters. even Citi made money, though they are now discussing chpt. 11 to re-org their debt. Additionally Inel and IBM also had blowout quarters. The stock market is a 6-9 month precursor to the general economy as a whole - however i'm thinking it will be more of a "jobless" recovery. Hence the need to find what our next great export will be since I don't think derivatives are gonna be doing it anymore

…And 56 million American households that do not own stock could give flying rat's ass. Tell that to the nearly 15 million American workers currently out of a job.

What I bitch about is a stimulus that doesn't, multiple crises that isn't, and steward "leadership" that hasn't.

Both parties suck. But at the end of the day it's the individuals that understand how to adapt and thrive that make it, regardless of policy.

Rugged American Individual Exceptionalism. But haven't you heard? Obama is smarter than you. Such Thinking will likely find you subjugated…

The bitching about it is really just tose that haven't figured it out yet trying to make themselves feel better

Well, there's that… And few hearty souls out there who might just actually give a shit about their country.

War Wagon · Post by **War Wagon** » Tue Jul 21, 2009 3:25 am

Put down the tinfoil hat, Scott... It doesn't suit you.

A clownsuit does.

Atomic Punk · Post by **Atomic Punk** » Tue Jul 21, 2009 4:20 am

Rack Truman and the others that make sense.

Here's a question though... How come Louisiana's Governor Bobby Jindal isn't considered a Presidential candidate? He makes sense and seems reasonable. Other than that, I am just disgusted with this current CIC. What a disgrace.

Diego in Seattle · Post by **Diego in Seattle** » Tue Jul 21, 2009 12:32 pm

Atomic Punk wrote:Here's a question though... How come Louisiana's Governor Bobby Jindal isn't considered a Presidential candidate? He makes sense and seems reasonable.

Yeah....real reasonable. If you want to call deeming a disaster warning system a waste of money when hordes of money is spent his state for disaster forecasting "reasonable."

Atomic Punk · Post by **Atomic Punk** » Tue Jul 21, 2009 1:49 pm

Diego in Seattle wrote:
Atomic Punk wrote:Here's a question though... How come Louisiana's Governor Bobby Jindal isn't considered a Presidential candidate? He makes sense and seems reasonable.
Yeah....real reasonable. If you want to call deeming a disaster warning system a waste of money when hordes of money is spent his state for disaster forecasting "reasonable."

You mean like satellites and the modified P-3's that fly into the storms aren't enough? Not sure why you even responded other than you want to shout out to the world and be acknowledged as a more capable pedo than Michael Jackson. Surely you must think he's out of the way and you like your chances by now?

STFU and crawl back under your rock.

KC Scott · Post by **KC Scott** » Tue Jul 21, 2009 6:13 pm

* note to self - don't get into quote war with Tim - quoting quoted quotes not a productive use of keystrokes

First and foremost a reality check for dave.1 & 2 and my old friend Tru. I get you don't like BO. He's a dem and a nog and he doesn't play for the Raiders or Chiefs. I also get that no one wants to pay taxes or support anything that doesn't directly benefit them. Furthermore, there's a great deal of anger about the mess the country is in and of course that anger needs a specific target. It doesn't really matter if it's the right target. It does matter your angry as hell and your not going to take it anymore.

Rush, Michael Savage, O'Reilly, Coulter and Glenn Beck, to name a few, have done the job of getting you to close your eyes to why we're where we are today. You've managed to blame every single issue in Tim's original post to the current administration, completely ignoring that in 2000 you had a GOP in the White house till January and full control of both houses till 2004. Prior to that Republicans had control of both houses in Clinton's last term.

Sorry, but I'm just not angry. I didn't vote for BO - but support what he's trying to do even if don't fully agree with the methods. More to the point, bitching about the methods becomes tedious and doesn't really accomplish anything. But I suppose if you're going to waste time it may as well be worth the effort. I'll leave it to you to convince me that BO is the devil and we're headed towards the Armageddon Road Warrior society. Except of course that all the road warriors will be nubian and have taken all the white womens as concubines.

Here's d.2's stellar post that he really, really wanted acknoweldged:

poptart wrote:
AP wrote:Those that twist the pure concept of Capitalism are why it has failed
Yes, exactly so.

"Free Market Capitalism has failed" is not a logical conclusion anyone can come to, for the simple reason that we haven't had Free Market Capitalism for a very long time.

Hey, no system is without flaws and shortcomings, but Free Market Capitalism pounds the living shit out of Communism/Socialism.

It's not close.

Basic human nature dictates that Capitalism is a far better system to follow.

So really d.2 - I just laugh at the obviousness and the implication. The obviousness is yes - Capitalism is better than Socialism / Communism. I think I gave you some Money > Dirt examples to show my agreement. So I can only assume you're really far more worked up about the implication. You've boarded the "America is headed to socialism" train and there's no brakes. You obviously think that bailing out the banks and automakers (neither of which I supported BTW) are the begining. If that's the case, then I can only say your too far gone to have any further rational discussion with.

d.1 is desparate just to get a single point. He's like the Royals bunting a runner to second while trailing 8-0 in the 9th inning.

War Wagon wrote:
THEN you SAID it was because of a GOP controlled Congress.

I patiently showed where it was NOT

Sorry, but the GOP controlled both houses in 1999 when the Glass-Steagel Act was repealed. Clinton Signed it. End. of. Story.
I will allow you to sacrifice the runner to third however - since I did say GOP Administration in a previous post.
Congrats.

And then we get to main event -

…And I would hope that YOU are simply trolling.

Bush did it first?

Seriously, Scott? That's all you got?

Since when do brain-dead no-accountability, no-strings-attached loans make for an unprecedented Official Federal Government Takeover?

This is where you totally disregard what really happened - The first loan to the Banks - made by Bush & Paulson was given with no strings attached: http://www.nbcwashington.com/news/busin ... Study.html

But you've assigned that to BO? Why?

You did the same thing with the Automakers bailout - but again here's the reality: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28311743/

Now if you said BO continued a stupid policy initiated by Bush - I'd have said yea....

So now let's look at this:

So a small business owner that realizes a modest profit of $300K pays himself a living wage of $80 thousand and looks to expand his operation by plowing the remainder of his profits back into his business can now look forward to paying the highest corporate tax in the industrialized world? How many jobs will THAT scenario stimulate? Better yet… How many jobs will Mr. Small Business Taxpayer have to cut to meet President Oblamabush's tax bill?

You've taken two different things and made them into a single argument. In your example Mr. small business owner won't pay anymore on the 80K he paid himself. End of story.

The $230K profit? yes, he'll pay 35% on that if he doesn't reinvest it into the business. If however he uses that $230K to buy new equipment / facilities / pay for his own and employees benefits / etc.

Here's a nice list for small business owners of all the possible deductions: http://www.nolo.com/resource.cfm/catID/ ... 1/277/235/

Seriously - to not include that in your take is Joe the Plummerish at best

We have readily un-tapped energy reserves in the ground and off our coasts that would ensure our energy independence, and the technical expertise to build energy-efficient nukes that would heat our cities for pennies on the Green dollar, and you wanna do things the hard way. Free markets dictate themselves. Green energy and bioscience will flourish – or fail – on their own merits – without the help of a ruinous and suicidal legislation levied upon the backs of the American taxpayer.

And I've always said drill the fuck out of everything. That said, if you're going to throw our tax dollars at R&D (which I disagree with) it may as well be something US companies can market around the globe. Whether it is cheaper solar panels, hydrogen or whatever - we need to be the country that develops it, builds it and sells it.

I'll see your Florida, and raise you an ACORN.

ACORN is bullshit - and yea, they need to kill any PAC funding for them. But yet you can't dispute that Bush (who I voted for) would have lost the election to Gore had FL not gone GOP. BO on the other hand won 365 electoral votes: http://elections.nytimes.com/2008/resul ... t/map.html

Do you still want to fight that point?

About closing Gitmo you wrote:

And provide a ready springboard for recruiting Domestic Terrorists? Cost less than what? Las Vegas? Los Angeles?

Dude - are you thinking the Muzzies can "recruit" domestic terrorists in a US Prison? - You must be thinking of OZ

Furthermore, they're likely destination is Super Max and since you're obviously not familiar with how SM works - watch this vid:
http://podblanc.com/matt-hales-florence ... on-of-hell

And yea, I think it would also cost less to lock em there than Gitmo - but if you can dig up some figures to compare go for it

About the stock market / Jobs you wrote:

…And 56 million American households that do not own stock could give flying rat's ass. Tell that to the nearly 15 million American workers currently out of a job.

And what do you reasonably expect those people to do?

Earlier you espoused cutting corp taxes. The major coporations that would truly benefit the most from that tax cut have been outsourcing white collar jobs to India for the last 10 years. Of course all the major manufacturing has gone to the far east.

Let's also remember that America hasn't done a good job of educating itself. Lynn sees the US recruits day in and day out in the accounting and finance field that have lower GPA's and single majors vs. the Asian kids who Double Majored with 3.5s while working a job to pay for school themselves. It's another whole discussion but it's sickening to see how lazy this country has become.

And finally......

Well, there's that… And few hearty souls out there who might just actually give a shit about their country.

Don't try and confuse anger and rhetoric, or the lack thereof, with caring.
But do understand that divisevness and hate are doing far more damage to getting this country back to where it should be.

OCmike · Post by **OCmike** » Tue Jul 21, 2009 6:24 pm

Your healthcare info is way off-base. Obama has zero interest in socializing care for all Americans...just the bottom 25%. It's something that needs to be fixed, as the insured, insurance cos and hospitals currently absorb the losses.

The real problem is how he's going about it. He's funding care through Medicaid, which grossly under pays doctors and is rife with fraud. He plans on transitioning costs to states over time, and because of the way he's disregarding the valid complaints of Governors, clearly plans on states ultimately burdening the vast majority (if not all) of the costs in the future.

His program also does not require any incentive for beneficiaries to get off of gov't funded care or limiting their access (such as requiring copays), and requires employers to pay for care, which effectively penalizes them for hiring new workers.

Most importantly, Obama does nothing to address the off-the-charts abuse of the legal system by lawyers. Their retarded lawsuits have driven up malpractice insurance to the point that doctor's pay 40% of their income (o average) to premiums. Guess who ultimately pays that bill...

If you think malpractice suits are bad now, wait until the fed starts playing the role of insurer. The HMOs are currently a favorite target of TVO's ilk, as they contract with "in-network" providers and have deep pockets. No doubt seedy lawyers are getting a nervous eye twitch in anticipation of suing the feds for not screening doctors better or warning patients about the potential hazards associated with medical care. Doctor's offices will soon be wallpapered with disclaimers and warnings to inform the stupid. :rollem:

Mikey · Post by **Mikey** » Tue Jul 21, 2009 6:34 pm

You can't sue the Government, can you?

OCmike · Post by **OCmike** » Tue Jul 21, 2009 7:14 pm

Mikey wrote:You can't sue the Government, can you?

I'm sure you've heard about Balboa Naval Hospital's fondness for leaving surgical instruments inside patients, right? About a year ago they did something similar to some dude's wife and congress was lookingat allowing lawsuits for malpractice by dependents. Didn't hear what the resolution was, but if the gov't gets in the healthcare providing business, based on the current suots going forward based on precedent, they assume some liability.

No doubt they'll punt to the states, since doctors are licensed by the state they practice in, but either way you and I will be footing the bill for some ghetto-dwellers lottery ticket. No way Barry (or any other lawyer pol) is going to take that payday away from another attorney.

poptart · Post by **poptart** » Tue Jul 21, 2009 10:03 pm

KC Scott wrote:You've managed to blame every single issue in Tim's original post to the current administration, completely ignoring that in 2000 you had a GOP in the White house till January and full control of both houses till 2004. Prior to that Republicans had control of both houses in Clinton's last term.

I don't ignore it.

Government out of control is nothing new.
Ignoring the Constitution is nothing new.

But B.O. has taken that and put it on steroids.

No thanks, not IN.

So really d.2 - I just laugh at the obviousness and the implication. The obviousness is yes - Capitalism is better than Socialism / Communism.

Which one is B.O. taking us more toward, smart guy?

your too far gone to have any further rational discussion with.

We'll revisit this comment when you answer the simple question above.

Wolfman · Post by **Wolfman** » Tue Jul 21, 2009 10:31 pm

B.O. is well liked by these folks--- any wonder ??

http://www.cpusa.org/

KC Scott · Post by **KC Scott** » Tue Jul 21, 2009 10:41 pm

poptart wrote:

So really d.2 - I just laugh at the obviousness and the implication. The obviousness is yes - Capitalism is better than Socialism / Communism.
Which one is B.O. taking us more toward, smart guy?

*shakes head*

dave - in your mind any government program is socialist isn't it?

Social Security - yea, that takes more from the rich and distributes it across society
Medicare - same there
Medicaid - no doubt
Education - Public schools would count since they're supported with tax dollars and yet poor kids get to use them

Maybe that's taking it too far? - OK then tell me where you drawn the Red Line -