![]() |
2nd Kook Seeks GOP Nomination
|
2nd Kook Seeks GOP Nomination
|
2nd Kook Seeks GOP Nomination
True North wrote:
"I_am_Tosk" wrote in message ... You call the tin hat, hyperbole you spew here a "response".. You are bat**** crazy... -- Team Rowdy Mouse, Banned from the Mall for life! ************* Boy.......... if imitation really is the sincerest form of flattery, you sure do have a 'hard-on' for Harry. No wonder you want to see him this summer..... that puppy love can be overpowering. You are his puppy, dummy - following him everywhere he goes. |
2nd Kook Seeks GOP Nomination
Harryk wrote:
True North wrote: "I_am_Tosk" wrote in message ... You call the tin hat, hyperbole you spew here a "response".. You are bat**** crazy... You think the little turd can still get a woody? And, if he did, would it be noticeable? :) It's very odd that you would be concerned with that. |
2nd Kook Seeks GOP Nomination
|
2nd Kook Seeks GOP Nomination
In article ,
says... On Mon, 16 May 2011 13:39:41 -0700, wrote: On Mon, 16 May 2011 14:05:22 -0400, wrote: On Mon, 16 May 2011 13:12:09 -0400, Harryk wrote: wrote: On Sun, 15 May 2011 23:09:40 -0700, wrote: On Sun, 15 May 2011 23:56:48 -0400, wrote: On Sun, 15 May 2011 13:09:46 -0500, Boating All Out wrote: In , says... Have you ever googled Santorum? ;-) Yes. And that's as sick as Santorum. Just shows how low we are. All poison, little common sense. That was actually Savage and his gay mafia that google bombed Santorum. You're defending Santorum??? Now that's funny! I am just pointing out a fact. I have no opinion either way You have no opinion on Nutcase Rick? :) Not really. He is about as important to me as the rest of the failed politicians who find a job on TV. As for google bombing, I often wonder why it is only conservatives who get google bombed. I am sure if it happened to a prominent democrat it would be a national scandal that the government have to do something about. I guess you never heard of Al Gore, Bill Clinton, and Obama. I have never seen the Gore, Obama or Clinton google bomb I just tried it and none of them resolve to frothy fecal matter. I am sure Larry and Sergey would take that down right away. Google is bought and paid for.. Try to Google anything remotely right partisan and see what you get. I tried to google Lies by the New York Times (knowing there are dozens a day) and all you get is NYT stories about republicans they are accusing of lying... Try to google anything bad about any democrat in power and you get similar results. Look at "the fairness doctrine", "card check", etc... The democrats win debates by silencing opposing viewpoints, they do this because they can't win on the facts. Why do you think Harry is such an asshat when anybody that doesn't support NAMBLA like he does, has an opinion. He stalks and smears until they leave the group. Shall we start a list? I think I will... -- Team Rowdy Mouse, Banned from the Mall for life! |
2nd Kook Seeks GOP Nomination
On Mon, 16 May 2011 23:45:55 -0400, wrote:
On Mon, 16 May 2011 18:01:59 -0400, wf3h wrote: On Mon, 16 May 2011 00:14:16 -0400, wrote: On Sun, 15 May 2011 16:07:44 -0400, wf3h wrote: On Sun, 15 May 2011 14:48:28 -0400, wrote: and yet the GOP got 70% of wall street money when the DEMS started to regulate wall street. and they got a pay off. the GOP is fighting any regulation at all. I guess 68 is close to 70 but the point is that it was the gop going off the reservation, fighting the bailout, so they needed the bribes. The dems were solidly in the bag. so it's OK when the GOP gets bribed to do wall street's bidding but when the dems tell wall street to shove it, that proves they'e doing what wall street wants uh....OK... I do not see the Dems telling anyone to shove it. They are the same to me when it comes to Wall Street. You saw where the money went in 08. Obama is doing exactly what the GOP would do and so did Clinton. That is why the big money didn't take a serious swing at either of them. Come on. MCain/Palin? Dole/Kemp? That is a party that didn't want it very bad. Really? Exactly the same? Wow. That's shockingly narrow-minded and total BS. I am not running from anything. There were plenty of neocon democrats who were eager to have a war with Iraq. \ how many were president? oh. zero. Congress has to pay for those wars and there are some war resolutions I can go look up if you really need the votes. and how many would have done so if bush hadn't LIED?? Clinton, Schumer and Lieberman were right behind him cheering him on. You have plenty of neocons on your side. Total BS. They were the same ones who criticized GHWB for not chasing the Iraqis all the way to Baghdad in 1991. These are the ones who are backed by AIPAC and have never seen a war against Muslims that they didn't like. and how many were president? oh. zero. how many were commander in chief? zero. See above. you bet Yeah the technical detain is OBL was in Pakistan and it was not a 150,000 man army that got him., It was a small team of special ops people. That is what we should have been doing all along. and obama has been moving in that direction as well, which is why the number of these operations has increased, along with increased drone strikes. but you dont just cut and run How many GIs have to die before you decide it is a waste of capital. how many new yorkers have to die before you decide it wasnt? You are waging a war on people who had nothing to do with it. Bin Laden was in Afghanistan but he left almost 10 years ago. As far as we know Karzai was covering for him too and we are backing Karzai. So, you're claiming the Taliban didn't harbor OBL and was never involved in terrorism... wow. You sound like Nixon now. Do we want "Peace with Honor"? That cost us about 30,000 guys and we still lost. gee. i just missed being drafted for vietnam. i got over vietnam syndrome you havent Pity. The people who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it. and yet if we dont stablize afghanistan, the taliban will return, they will set up operations with al qaida and we'll have pakistin and afghanistan to deal with The taliban is going to return. We have no way to stop them. sure we do. we set up a dictatorship that's a ruthless killer. it's been done before how much luck did al qaida have in iraq? none. So now you are saying you like brutal dictatorships? Nice. Maybe we should have backed Mubarak and we should be backing Qdaffy. I guess we should have dusted off Saddam, made him promise to be good and put him back in the palace. No, we should have attacked him for being absolutely no threat to us or our allies. ... except he was giving the family of any suicide bomber who attacked Israel $25,000 Except that Israel was doing just fine. Feel free to keep justifying a war of choice and lying to the American people (and the world). The Taliban had nothing to do with 9-11. Most of them still have never even heard of it. sure they did. in fact, you lost all credibility when you made that statement OBL was living in kabul on 9/11. when mullah omar was ordered by the US to turn over OBL, he refused, saying OBL was a guest in afghanist so your statement is wrong. and it's like saying the japanese had no responsibility for hte attack on pearl harbor That is total bull****. The japs were flying the planes that attacked Pear Harbor. There were ZERO Taliban guys on the planes on 9-11, nor were they really involved in the plot at all. To use your logic, we should declare war on Pakistan today now let's see OBL was living in afghanistan he planned the attack from there with his conspirators you DO know that, if you are engaged in a conspiracy you are as guilty if you PLAN it as those who carry it out....that's the law. so you're an appeaser. you're the only moron ive seen who loves the taliban The Taliban is in Pakistan too, as was OBL. Do you want to attack them too? Sounds like you do. Are you even aware of the nuanced situation? Sounds like you aren't. If your excuse for invading Afghanistan was just that they sheltered OBL, what do you have to say about Pakistan? mullah omar was the HEAD Of the taliban. and there are no nukes in afghanistan. so there's NO eivdence the HEAD Of govt in pakistan knew ANYTHING about OBL. the ISI certainly did, but this just means we have to be at war with pakistan in a different way. So you think the only reason we attacked Afghanistan is because they don't have any nukes. that's a pretty good start. Killing taliban is like stepping on ants. It may make you feel like you are doing something but you are at war with their birth rate. Some day soon the population is going to throw Karzai out and they will blame us for letting him stay there so long ... just like the Egyptians depends. if karzai is content to kill taliban and they are willing to try and kill him, then we have a stand off. which is a win for us. as long as we deny afghanistan to the taliban, we win. Karzai is supporting theTaliban.That dog don't hunt. ROFLMAO!! they're trying to kill him and he's supporting them? uh...OK.. so far all you've told us is what great guys the taliban are and how OBL was innocent any other delusions you got? Karzai is for anyone who is paying him. If that is Taliban, he is Taliban |
2nd Kook Seeks GOP Nomination
On Mon, 16 May 2011 20:57:03 -0400, wrote:
On Mon, 16 May 2011 13:37:15 -0700, wrote: On Mon, 16 May 2011 14:19:26 -0400, wrote: On Mon, 16 May 2011 10:33:01 -0700, wrote: On Mon, 16 May 2011 12:17:14 -0400, wrote: On Sun, 15 May 2011 23:05:20 -0700, wrote: SS/Medicare would be broke, no matter what happened to the economy. There simply are not enough workers coming onto the bottom of the pyramid to support an 83 million person peak. This is completely untrue. Neither is broke and this is just a right wing talking point without merit. That is just denial. Any program that pays out more than it takes in is doomed to fail No. You're wrong. Many programs "pay out" more than they take in for some period of time and they do fine in the long run. You're the one in denial. Name one that is on this scale. Social Security. You have come back to where you started didn't you. SS generated huge surpluses for the first 75 years of it's existence, money we spent. That where it got the reputation for being successful. Now we are going to see how it works in deficit. Give me an example of a program that successfully runs for a significant time in deficit. SS hasn't run a deficit for a significant time and it's projected to do just fine with some minor changes. Feel free to keep ringing the gong of nonsense until your head hurts. You started out with 35 or 40 payers per retiree in 1935 and people were only expected to collect for a couple of years if they lived that long. Now we have 3 workers per retiree and they will collect for 18 years. It is simply unsustainable. The whole concept of a trust fund is fantasy, invented in 1939 to fund the build up for WWII. what's also unsustainable is the massive increase in healthcare costs we face, again, engineered by the 'free market' fundamentalism of the right. Health care cost is part of it but simply having 40 million medicare recipients is unsustainable and that will double in a decade. It's only unsustainable if no action is taken. Action is being proposed and the situation will turn around. More fear mongering isn't part of the solution. Do you have a 1.5 trillion dollar idea to fix the deficit. That is really what we are talking about here and it is not a long term problem it is a problem today. Medicare/SS are just another part of the deficit now since both are running in the red. I suggested several ways to start. We DON'T NEED TO FIX THIS TOMORROW. We need to get started... subsidies, military, tax rates. I know you don't like it and would prefer to think all is lost and the sky is falling. It isn't. The problem is this administration took a giant step in the wrong direction, cutting the FICA tax. When are they going to start? Not a giant step. Not compared to the budget busting of the last couple of decades. I agree we have made some big mistakes but this is going directly to the SS deficit and clipping 5% of the total revenue from the government. (payroll taxes are 36% and we took 14% of that away) So, you'd rather blame Obama for a relatively minor and recent error than blame Bush for nearly destroying the economy. Got it. BTW did you see how Geithner is extending the debt ceiling? He is taking money from the federal pension program. I am surprised nobody is raising hell about that. we have no choice but to extend the ceiling. our debt wouldnt be serviceable if we didnt The debt will be unserviceable when the interest rate doubles too and that is far more than likely. It is not "more likely." There's no credible evidence that interest rates will be doubling any time soon. More denial. At this point we are only paying 0.3% on our short bonds. That is not likely to continue very long. To think a fraction of a percent rate hike is impossible it just lunacy. Right now investors are not even covering the drop in the value of the dollar we pay them back with. There is NO EVIDENCE of a dramatic increase in interest rates. Total nonsense. It doesn't have to be a huge change to make a huge difference. Interest is now almost a third of our revenue. You said double. So, you're backpeddling on that? It is not unreasonable that the 0.3% rate we pay on short money would double. Feel free to let us know when there's a crisis. Every crash in history was caused by debt. If the US economy crashes it could quite easily be the end of the world as we know it. It could easily, in your view, start raining marbles. I notice you finally used the "end of the world" language. How else would you describe a failure of the dollar? That is what is at stake here. The dollar has not "failed." It's devalued against certain currencies, but it's far from failed. You act like nobody but you is aware of the situation. |
2nd Kook Seeks GOP Nomination
On Mon, 16 May 2011 20:59:09 -0400, wrote:
On Mon, 16 May 2011 13:38:23 -0700, wrote: On Mon, 16 May 2011 14:27:56 -0400, wrote: On Mon, 16 May 2011 10:33:42 -0700, wrote: I saw Bob Gates promoting everlasting war in Afghanistan. Maybe you saw another show. I never heard him say we could pull out and the Afghan government would survive. All they got out of him was "The troops can start to come home" but when pressed he said "it was premature" I'm sure you did. I'm also sure that no matter what anyone says or shows you, you know more than they. Do you want me to go get the transcript? Never mind, you would just change the subject if I did. He said it was premature to quickly reduce the forces. Feel free to get the transcript. |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:04 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com