|
Winning elections is not good enough
jps wrote:
On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 11:33:15 -0500, I am wrote: In articleQoKdnQ0dOd8PAcPQnZ2dnUVZ_g6dnZ2d@earthlink .com, payer3389 @mypacks.net says... On 2/18/11 11:15 AM, Frogwatch wrote: The lefties do not recognize elections and routinely attack any dissent and then blame everyone else. Their own shot Gifford and they blamed Palin. Lefties eventually always resort to mass murder as Obama's best friend Bill Ayers said he wanted when he said he wanted to kill 20 million Americans. You're still crazy after all these years, birther. Now everyone who doesn't believe in Harry's exact view of things is a birther.....WAFA Plonk! That, too. Cut and run. No debate. |
Winning elections is not good enough
jps wrote:
On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 08:43:48 -0800 (PST), Frogwatch wrote: On Feb 18, 11:33 am, I am wrote: In articleQoKdnQ0dOd8PAcPQnZ2dnUVZ_g6dn...@earthlink .com, payer3389 @mypacks.net says... On 2/18/11 11:15 AM, Frogwatch wrote: The lefties do not recognize elections and routinely attack any dissent and then blame everyone else. Their own shot Gifford and they blamed Palin. Lefties eventually always resort to mass murder as Obama's best friend Bill Ayers said he wanted when he said he wanted to kill 20 million Americans. You're still crazy after all these years, birther. Now everyone who doesn't believe in Harry's exact view of things is a birther.....WAFA The next step is for those who refuse to accept the results of elections to leave Lunatic. Moron. |
Winning elections is not good enough
On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 16:20:04 -0700, Canuck57
wrote: The liberal lefties up here are the same. Irrational zealots of telling others they will pay for their welfare. Nosy types too he's RIGHT! let's do what the conservatives say! welfare ONLY for the RICH! starve the middle class! |
Winning elections is not good enough
On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 19:43:29 -0500, Moose wrote:
Are you the only fool that thinks government is doing a good job? and how's wall street doing after sucking 10 trillion out of the economy in the last 3 years? we back at full employment? |
Winning elections is not good enough
jps wrote:
On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 14:11:11 -0500, wrote: "Union/Obama thugs." Further proves your blind partisan idiocy. Can't post under your own ID? Plonk! When will you? |
Winning elections is not good enough
On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 22:57:25 -0500, wrote:
On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 16:50:36 -0800, wrote: Please tell us which part of government you'd like to do without. TSA Homeland Security Department of Energy Department of education Sure... no airport security Sure... no security coordination Sure... no energy policy or research Sure... no coordinated education shall I go on? You're quite a humanitarian and patriot. These functions were handled better before we created a bloated bureaucracy to do it Really? How's that? Who's going to do all those functions? And then there is DEA that serves no function at all except to pioneer new ways to take our rights. expanded unwarranted searches surveillance beyond the worst things NSA does So, we shouldn't worry about meth and drug gangs. Power of the market don't you know. Name some examples of unwarranted searches. Maybe you have some personal experience you'd like to share? More nonsense about your "privacy" rights, but you don't mind when all your personal data is shared by banks and corporations. Of course, you don't want to regulate those groups. property abuses Swat raids that kill innocents etc ?? Where/when? Oh, I get it.. you're still fixated on Ruby Ridge. ... and doing absolutely nothing to stem the flow of drugs Nothing at all or just not very well? More right-wing, pseudo libertarian nonsense |
Winning elections is not good enough
On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 22:44:30 -0500, wrote:
On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 13:29:01 -0800, wrote: We better get used to questions like this because the whole country has a "Greece" moment coming. I doubt our protests will be as peaceful as Egypt or even Greece. It might be more like Warsaw 1944 except the populace is better armed. ;-) There's no "Greece" or Egypt "moment" coming. That's a paranoid fantasy. I guess you were absent the day they taught arithmetic. Why don't you find something a little more biting if you're trying to insult me. I apologize, that was snarky. Apology accepted. Are you denying the deficit is a problem and that the entitlements are unsustainable? Never denied it. What I'm denying is that it's a short-term problem. It's a long-term problem. Obama's recent budget addressed it in the long term to the tune of $1.1 T (some things I don't agree with, but that's another story). Of course Sen. Sessions said it didn't go deep enough, but of course he proposed nearly the exact same deficit reduction amount a short while ago. $1.1T is trivial compared to the problem. That barely covers where we are now and there are only a small fraction of the boomers on the public dole. If he can't touch the current deficit, how will he handle the hockey stick that is in the next decade? I don't think the GOP is really talking about it either. They're talking about when it suits them. Sessions was talking about it along with the rest of the right-wing nuts. They would love to gut all the social programs. I'd say that it's in their DNA, except they don't believe in science. That is what brought down the Greek economy We are not Greece... I know that's an incredible statement for some people... No we are not Greece. The world could survive a total collapse of Greece. When the US gets a cold, the world gets pneumonia. We are not even close to a "collapse"... guess you didn't hear but the economy is getting better. |
Winning elections is not good enough
On Sat, 19 Feb 2011 00:38:38 -0500, wrote:
On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 20:25:37 -0800, wrote: Are you denying the deficit is a problem and that the entitlements are unsustainable? Never denied it. What I'm denying is that it's a short-term problem. It's a long-term problem. Obama's recent budget addressed it in the long term to the tune of $1.1 T (some things I don't agree with, but that's another story). Of course Sen. Sessions said it didn't go deep enough, but of course he proposed nearly the exact same deficit reduction amount a short while ago. $1.1T is trivial compared to the problem. That barely covers where we are now and there are only a small fraction of the boomers on the public dole. If he can't touch the current deficit, how will he handle the hockey stick that is in the next decade? I don't think the GOP is really talking about it either. They're talking about when it suits them. Sessions was talking about it along with the rest of the right-wing nuts. They would love to gut all the social programs. I'd say that it's in their DNA, except they don't believe in science. I have said many times the GOP doesn't want to address this either. If they cut every dime out of the discretionary budget it would not cover the deficit in the very early out years. Scroll down to the total spending section. The agencies you listed would still have to be covered elsewhere. What you're suggesting cutting would be miniscule. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Un...federal_budget That is what brought down the Greek economy We are not Greece... I know that's an incredible statement for some people... No we are not Greece. The world could survive a total collapse of Greece. When the US gets a cold, the world gets pneumonia. We are not even close to a "collapse"... guess you didn't hear but the economy is getting better. No I didn't. If you did it was a puff piece. We are no where near replacing the jobs we have lost over the last few decades. Bob has this one right. We don't make anything here, at least not in any quantity sufficient to employ the middle class. Check again. Things are getting better. Jobs need to come back, but most other indicators are doing better. Nothing you suggested doing would improve the job situation. We also do not have a clue how we are going to handle the exploding entitlements. That is what is going on in California and this week, Wisconsin. They have thousands of government retirees with unfunded pensions they can't cover. The problem with the federal government is 80 million boomers entering Social Security/Medicare who want the same deal their parents got. It ain't gonna happen but we still won't tell them. Again and again... this is a LONG TERM problem not a short term problem. Taxing the rich sounds like an attractive idea and I hope they do it but it is still chump change compared to the size of the problem. If you took the total net worth of the Forbes 400 richest Americans it would still barely cover the deficit next year and you would have killed the goose that lays the eggs because you would have liquidated all of their companies. The top 400 people make as much as the bottom 50%... that's what 100M people vs 400! That money is not real anyway. Bill Gates has 40 billion in Microsoft stock but it he tried to sell it, the price would drop to zero pretty fast. Most of their fortunes are funny money ... like the SS trust fund or the crap that passed for money in the mortgage business a few years ago. It is paper people call money, until you actually try to get it out and spend it. I have no idea what point you're trying to make. So what? That is also the fatal flaw in privatizing Social Security. You could certainly see big increases in apparent value but that would fall off pretty fast as soon as you cashed it in. We simply do not have enough money coming into the system to support the boomers. It doesn't matter it is social security or your 401k. You still have 2-3 kids supporting each old person. Defense spending needs to be decreased. Some taxes (on the top earners) needs to go up. SS/Medicare need to have changes over time. |
Winning elections is not good enough
In article ,
says... On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 15:53:49 -0500, I am Perfect wrote: In article , says... In article , says... On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 11:21:48 -0800 (PST), Frogwatch wrote: On Feb 18, 2:17*pm, jps wrote: On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 11:11:29 -0800, wrote: On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 12:26:17 -0500, wrote: On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 09:00:23 -0800, jps wrote: You think using a majority to supress the people and votes of the opposition is fair play? Oh like the 111th congress? You folks said the republicans should suck it up and go along. When they didn't you said they were obstructionists. Aren't the Wisconsin democrats shutting down the government? Where is your outrage? I wonder what their constitution says about legislators who abandon their jobs? Perhaps the governor can simply replace them. In real life, I imagine all they have to do is walk through and spit in the lobby to demonstrate that they are still working. We are going to be entering uncharted territory though. Nobody really knows what happens when a state files for bankruptcy. How do they discharge their debts when they don't have the money and they can't just print it like the federal government does. Will they try to print some kind of scrip and see if people would take it? Are they just going to tell their debtors to sue them? We better get used to questions like this because the whole country has a "Greece" moment coming. I doubt our protests will be as peaceful as Egypt or even Greece. It might be more like Warsaw 1944 except the populace is better armed. *;-) There's no "Greece" or Egypt "moment" coming. That's a paranoid fantasy. For some it's a sexual fantasy involving their big guns. A true liberal, jps wishes violence against those he disagrees with. Do the Libs really want to incite violence against those who support the constitution? Ah, yes, wrap yourself in the flag and the constitution. You'd better because you've got no clothes otherwise. Accusing libs of wanting to incite violence is laughable. It's the knee jerk wingers who resort to threats and violence when they can't win. Who are the idiots who open carry when the president is coming to visit? Are those liberals or "conservatives?" Who marches with signs about blood being necessary to keep the tree of freedom alive? Those are liberals? For someone with a brain, you sure have some insane ideas. If you're an idiot savant, your gift is surely not in understanding politics or people. One guy with a long gun, compared to this? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=71gsn...layer_embedded Here is another "brave" liberal, attacking old women... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AVFdaz_VUJE Here is another advocate of "free speech" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OBDqG...1&feature=fvwp I wonder if our friend Donnie was in this crowd? http://www.breitbart.tv/hate-rally-p...ca-with-trash- left-behind/ Plonk away, but these are the facts. Liberals including the one in the Whitehouse are doing everything you have suggested above. Here it is in full color. The best you have is Pelosi lying about something she said happened on the steps of congress and one guy with a long gun that saw a rally and stopped by as far as you know. You keep saying the conservatives are the ones pushing violence and destruction yet the video shows just the opposite. Please show what facts you have that Pelosi lied. I sure hope that was a joke. No, I'd like you to tell me how you know that Pelosi lied about something happening on the steps of congress. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:40 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com