| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#61
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
2nd Kook Seeks GOP Nomination
On Sun, 15 May 2011 12:57:47 -0300, "True North"
wrote: "wf3h" wrote in message ... On Fri, 13 May 2011 12:29:20 -0400, Harryk wrote: Ron Paul, the Texas congressman, declared his (third) candidacy for president Friday on ‘Good Morning America.’ The ‘intellectual grandfather’ of the tea party movement is a constitutional purist who’s as popular among his fervent followers as he is disliked by the GOP establishment. He’s a dark horse pushing for an upset victory. - - - Ah, yes...Crazy Ron...about as much chance of winning the presidency as, say, Newt, the Donald, the Sara, the Michele, the Mitt, et cetera. the GOP is so far right that ronald reagan would be unelectable today. ******************* I guess it's every man for themselves... and those lucky enough to be the winners like it like that. What I find hard to understand is why people at the bottom of the barrel would still go out and support that system. You'd think self interest would kick in for them just as it does for the ruling elite. it's absolutely amazing how fundamentalist they are...in social values, with rick santorum talking about 'collective' moral values that enforce religion...and fundamentalist supply side economics which views salaries as a drain on the economy, and only the rich need to have money |
|
#63
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
2nd Kook Seeks GOP Nomination
In article ,
says... On Sun, 15 May 2011 01:29:52 -0400, wrote: On Sat, 14 May 2011 23:56:39 -0400, wf3h wrote: On Sat, 14 May 2011 23:40:18 -0400, wrote: On Sat, 14 May 2011 21:32:43 -0400, wf3h wrote: On Sat, 14 May 2011 17:14:09 -0400, wrote: If you are a big business, Wall Street, insurance company, medical conglomerate, neocon war mongering kind of republican you have to love Obama. So far he is GW Bush with a tan. (the 5th Bush Brother) let's see... obama proposed a single payer system that would put the insurance companies out of business Yet he brags about a system that did little but bring another 40 million customers to the same insurance companies that you hate at the point of a government gun uh wrong 1. he gives a subsidy to low income earners to buy insurance 2. he removes the policy of excluding pre existing conditions if he'd had his way our healthcare system would be more efficient. but folks like you objected because it didnt make the rich richer Uh what part of what I said was wrong. Where did those 40 million have to go? To the same insurance companies who still really have no limits to what they charge. All we did was put the government in the position of having to borrow money to pay for it. we were already borrowing the money. or they were. someone was paying. this delusion on the part of the right that healthcare is free is another of your urban myths This is a "mandate", in other words the government makes you go to those insurance companies. we already have mandates. i have no kids. but i have to pay higher taxes than those who do. that's a mandate. this is another urban myth of the right. you guys build your entire ideology on myths . Exactly ZERO republicans voted for that bill or had anything to do with writing it. It was democrats in the senate that killed single payer. lotsa right wing democrats Then look inside your party. That is my point the fact that the right has turned america into a plutocracy where only the rich have a voice is something that is finally dawning even on the myth loving right wing obama proposed strong regulations on wall street Yet the democratic senate came up with a fin reg bill that left most of the abuses like too big to fail in place. Maybe it was because they took more money from Wall Street than the republicans did. actually the dems didnt. in the last election, 80% of wall street money went to the GOP Cite that. I see this http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/indus.php?ind=F07 sorry. part of your myth making is that you dont pay attention to the news http://gothamist.com/2010/02/08/wall...ates_to_re.php http://mydd.com/2010/2/24/wall-streee you gotta keep up with the news if you're gonna argue facts oh. i forgot. you're right wing you dont do facts You seem to be the one who pulls numbers out of your ass. go ahead. read the news, right winger. then whimper away to lick your wounds if you were an adult and had the facts at your fingertips you'd hunt right wingers with dogs and pitchforks the fact is the right thinks everything is OK with america because the wealthy are getting richer and power is concentrating in the hands of a few progressives look at the EVIDENCE and see LACK of opportunity in a system increasing dominated by a small class of people and want to RESTORE american opportunity. that's why the right hates teh middle class, unions and progressives. WE want to RESTORE american greatness. YOU are the agents of the status quo. and the GOP fought the regulations against wall street. in fact the GOP fought ANY regulations. The Democrats had a filibuster proof senate, the house and the White House. Why didn't they do something? Oh it was YOUR right wing democrats. well no they didnt. in fact the GOP racked up MORE filibusters and threats than in any time in our nation's history. again your belief in myth is what makes you right wing http://newsjunkiepost.com/2010/03/02...f-filibusters/ obama is getting us out of iraq On the Bush schedule ... if he can actually pull it off. I will believe it when I see it. HAHAHA uh bush didnt HAVE a schedule. guess you just pulled THAT one out of your....ahem... Maybe you were in a cave but there was a schedule, the same one we are currently on.. uh no. sorry. more mythology. we will leave. obama said, when it's PRUDENT to do so and iraq? a TRILLION spent there by the liar bush. 4400 US troops between bush's WARS and his SPENDING and his TAX CUTS for the RICH HE bankrupted us, NOT the black guy sorry, right winger. the facts destroy your belief in MYTH He doubled down in Afghanistan gee. wonder why that was now let's see...how many islamists terrorirsts in iraq? oh. zero Having nothing to do with the double down in Afghanistan. There were less than 150 terrorist suspects in Afghanistan and we sent 150,000 guys in after them. HAHAHAHA this guy thinks that ONLY al qaida are terrorists!! the FACT is the HAQQANI NETWORK of the PAKISTAN TALIBAN maintains CLOSE relationships with the AFGHAN taliban AND with AL QAIDA ****, you dont even know who the terrorists are! there are LOTS of taliban groups. you're just uneducated. no wonder you're right wing! bush never got close and you're just not bright enough to understand why we're fighting the taliban you're just not very bright at all Insults do not enhance the credibility of your argument. The fact is there are more Taliban now than there were in 2002 but the vast majority of them have no interest in attacking the US, they just want us out of their country, just like they wanted the Soviets out. We somehow feel the need and the right to impose our culture on them and they don't like it. so the right hates obama so much they believe our ENEMIES I WAS IN NY after 9/11 with the USCG. i saw what they did. i saw what the TALIBAN and their allies, al qaida did mayby you right wingers, with your fundamentalist devotion to increasing the power of the rich will ally yourselves with our enemies but i never, never, will. either the taliban agree NEVER to ally with al qaida and other enemies again, or we destroy them YOU want to appease them tell it to czechoslovakia You say the right has done all this. Look at the facts. In the last forty years, most of the time the democrats have had control of at least two of the three (congress, senate, oval office), and sometimes all three, the "right" has never had that. I do clearly remember Pelosi though calling herself the leader of the "do nothing congress" making sure that even though the right had been voted in, their hands were tied with investigations and other bull****... -- Team Rowdy Mouse, Banned from the Mall for life! |
|
#64
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
2nd Kook Seeks GOP Nomination
On Sun, 15 May 2011 12:24:12 -0400, wrote:
On Sun, 15 May 2011 11:06:17 -0400, wf3h wrote: what i said was that obama had no choice. the right, again, gamed the system to protect their interests to ensure that we chose the most expensive way to get healthcare for everyone which is what I said. How did the republicans "game the system" when it was the senate that wrote the bill (actually Max Baucus and 2 WellPoint lobbyists according to Howard Dean) and it was passed without any GOP votes? you know, when i see right wingers make this argument i wonder what their SPO2 reading is because it's obvious they live in a vacuum uh...the dems wrote the bill. it took them over a YEAR why? well because the right hemmed and hawed, shucked and jived...and the GOP filibustered ANY single payer provision, ANY provision that would enable terminal patients to get info on palliative care, etc. and STILL...after ALL these concessions were made, the right STILL wouldn't support it. do you DENY obama wanted a SINGLE payer option? where is it? oh. the right cut it out. we got the bill that the right wanted, insofar as it still allows the uninsured to get coverage. YOU GUYS...the RIGHT engineered this to make it benefit the wealthy and to make it as inefficient as possible, even while expanding coverage cant help you dude. YOU guys did this. a SINGLE PAYER system would have been MORE effective and MORE effiicient but the right blocked it. This is a "mandate", in other words the government makes you go to those insurance companies. we already have mandates. i have no kids. but i have to pay higher taxes than those who do. that's a mandate. this is another urban myth of the right. you guys build your entire ideology on myths Again you are diverting the subject. This is the first time they have made people buy health insurance. how do they 'make' them? oh. they dont. they simply pay a tax if they dont buy insurance just like i pay an additional tax if i dont have kids. so you're wrong. That "tax" starts out being low but raises to the cost of buying insurance. GOAL POST MOVING FIRST you denied there were 'mandates' prior to this situation NOW you're bitching about the SIZE of 'mandates'. the FACT is 'mandates' have ALWAYS been in the tax code. THIS one is no different. HAHAHAHA gee whiz where did i EVER say the dems were innocent? a PLUTOCRACY, by DEFINITION, doesnt depend on parties. So you agree with me, OK so you agree with me. OK not familiar with the term, are you? it's the RIGHT that's dong so much to kill the US. regardless of party. and there's little choice. when the system is rigged, it really doesnt matter what party is in power the dems have MORE of an orientation for the middle class but their effects are mitigated by right wing myths like those you believe and which i have demonstrated are false. They talk a good game but they act the same as the gop. really? what healthcare bill did the GOP propose? oh. none. Cite that. I see this http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/indus.php?ind=F07 sorry. part of your myth making is that you dont pay attention to the news http://gothamist.com/2010/02/08/wall...ates_to_re.php http://mydd.com/2010/2/24/wall-streee I do not see that 80% you cited but I agree it is not as much in 2011 as it was in 2008 but in 2008 the democrats were the ones getting 65-70% MOVING THE GOALPOSTS what i said was that What you said was EIGHTY PERCENT. what YOU said was 30%! so i was off by 10% you were off by 30% gee. wall street decided to shift its money when the DEMS pushed regulation it doesnt matter HOW much was given. that's really irrelevant Then why pull a lie out of your ass. says the guy who INSISTED the split was either MORE for the dems or an even split. golly. the FACT is the GOP got the money from wall street because wall street realized the right wing would help them continue destroying the US. The reason they shifted to the GOP was because it was the GOP that was opposing the bailout. the GOP AUTHORED THE BAILOUT. it was DEVISED by HENRY PAULSON, bush's treasury secretary even some dems believe right wing mythology. you're not immune. no reason there arent stupid democrats. we have LOTS here in PA. Like I said look inside YOUR party. like i said, look inside YOUR ideology and iraq? a TRILLION spent there by the liar bush. 4400 US troops between bush's WARS and his SPENDING and his TAX CUTS for the RICH HE bankrupted us, NOT the black guy sorry, right winger. the facts destroy your belief in MYTH You didn't cite any facts, only a baseless tirade. really? bush didnt start the iraq war? Again he did that with a lot of democrat votes, including the current Sec of State. HAHAHAHA let's see...bush LIED about WMD's. and you IGNORE that!! i love it when you right wingers RUN from your history! bush didnt have 2 tax cuts, in 2001 and 2003? That Obama just extended,. That is now the Obama tax cut along with an additional 2% cut in FICA which insured SS would never see a surplus again. guess you FORGOT obama TRIED to have tax cuts ONLY for those making LESS than 250K but the RIGHT, with their urban myth of 'supply side' economics, INSISTED it be extended to the rich or they wouldnt vote for it why do RIGHT WINGERS ALWAYS RUN from their own history? and under bush? oh. 150,000 gee. i guess if you're right wing 150,000 is the same as 50,000 Obama just moved them to another quagmire in Afghanistan tell it to bin laden. he'd disagree oh. wait...there's a technical detail... uh...why? could the presence of US troops be a deterrent? golly. go figure. and where is the taliban? ummmm...in pakistan. so you want us to go to war with pakistan if our troops can make it through the nukes. You still have not said why we are at war with Afghanistan if all of the enemies are in Pakistan you have still not said why you think we should invade pakistan Think Somalia, Yemen and Eastern Libya. Egypt may end up being the economic center of the terrorists since they are nuzzling up to Iran as we speak. HAHAHAHAA there are NO taliban in somalia. the taliban are PASHTUNS...about 40% of afghanistan is pashtun. somalia has al shabab...a COMPLETELY DIFFERENT group I thought this was a war on terrorism. The taliban is only interested in getting us out of Afghanistan and you know that how?? they MURDERED 3000 americans and here you are telling us what patriots they are! not too familiar with current affairs, i see Yeah I do watch current affairs. I assume you don't know a hot bead of Al qaeda is Eastern Libya, the same people we are backing in that war. so qaddhafi says guess you dont know the BIGGEST threat to the US is AQAP. bet you never even heard of it. If you understand terrorism at all you will understand Afghanistan is a very small part of the problem but it is where we are putting most of our people. and yet afghanistan is where the attack on the WTC was launched from go figure Most of the planning was done in Western Europe and the critical training was done in the US. HAHAHAHA and i'm sure it had the approval of the respective govts like bin laden did in afghanistan, right? is THIS how the right argues?? in every single statement you've made, you LEAVE OUT CENTRAL POINTS All OBL did was have the concept and the money. That money was from Saudi Arabia. We are nation building, no more, no less. That is also what we are doing in Iraq and have been since "mission accomplished". oh. so BUSH's policy failed Yes it did and Obama is continuing it. You are not reading are you. really? obama is pursuing a very practical policy of NOT building afghanistan except for the security services. and he's planning on bringing 5000 troops back. and are we 'nation building' or simply training a replacement for our troops witha corrupt govt then getting out? oh. you dont know that Yes I do know that and the latter is true ... in both countries. It is probably worse in Afghanistan. Karzai is totally corrupt, yet we are still trying to prop him up. yep. and that's fine. as long as he kills the taliban i dont care how much he impoverishes his own people We will "win" in Afghanistan the same way we did in Vietnam. HAHAHAHA really? gee. the taliban controls about 3% of afghan territory now. it may be a stalemate but that's BETTER than vietnam We control the cities and we do it with overwhelming force. When we leave they will be right back in there. You said it yourself. guess you missed the part where i said our ONLY role there should be in building a military dictatorship. you simply cant think for yourself you believe in 'supply side economic's...which failed I never said that. sure you did. you HIDE the role of the right in continuing to turn the US into a plutocracy. you complain about the healthcare bill WITHOUT acknowledging it was the RIGHT that gutted the single payer system you complain about the 'bailout' while hiding the fact it was the GOP that authored it you complain about the depression while HIDING the fact it was the MYTH of supply side economics that caused it. you believe that NOTHING has changed in healthcare when we just got it for 40 MILLION americans... We still have a monopoly health care system with their hand in the taxpayers pocket now. gee. so what. that will NOT change unless the RIGHT starts to admit we need checks and balances on wall street the citiznes united decision was a clarion call by the RIGHT that our election system is for sale and THAT decision was supported by ALL FIVE CONSERVATIVE justices and OPPOSED by ALL FOUR moderate judges you dont know that the most recent election saw wall street money go to the dems so try to shift the goalposts to PREVIOUS elections Read what you typed. I will give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you meant GOP. I also told you why. It was the GOP who was fighting the bailout and Wall Street was trying to buy them back The dems were in the bag. the GOP NEVER fought the bailout because it was HENRY PAULSON who AUTHORED IT and GEORGE BUSH who implemented it. last time i checked, BOTH were republicans. and the bailout was NECESSARY because the RIGHT has SOCIALIZED risk and PRIVATIZED rewards. there is NO system of checks and balances on corporate power because the RIGHT will NOT permit it you dont know that this happened because the DEMS pushed regulation while the GOP continues its failed policy of fundamentalist deregulation The regulation was toothless. thanks to the american RIGHT WING. they opposed ANY regulation at all. you IGNORE this you dont know we have reduced our footprint in iraq and it's OUR decision whether to stay We seem to be stuck at 50,000 according to Gates you dont know we're already talking about withdrwwing 5000 troops from afghanistan Oh wow, a 3% withdrawal. That will teach them. What do you think it will level off at? 50,000?, 100,000? gee. it's going in the opposite direction from bush. and this after only 2 years of obama. bush was there for 7 years |
|
#65
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
2nd Kook Seeks GOP Nomination
|
|
#66
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
2nd Kook Seeks GOP Nomination
wrote:
On Sun, 15 May 2011 11:55:08 -0400, wrote: On Sun, 15 May 2011 11:33:51 -0400, wrote: On Sun, 15 May 2011 11:09:34 -0400, wrote: On Sun, 15 May 2011 10:24:00 -0400, wrote: On Sun, 15 May 2011 06:48:25 -0400, wrote: I gave you the numbers for 2101 and your assertion that the GOP got 80% was bull****. It was about even. SEVENTY PERCENT TO THE GOP that's a shift. gee...you're wrong as usual It wasn't "80%" was it? It wasn't even 70%, it was 68 but don't let facts get in the way of a good rant. HAHAHAH FIRST you said MOST money went to the DEMS THEN you backpedaled and said it was about EVEN and NOW you're all upset over 70 vs 80?? ROFLMAO!!! No I am talking about 68 vs 80 They switched their money from the dems because the dems were solidly in the bag for them It was the gop fighting the bailouts. the gop fighting the bailouts??? HENRY PAULSON AUTHORED THEM!! paulson was BUSH'S TREASURY SECRETARY and the bailouts were NECESSARY because the RIGHT ensured that we SOCIALIZED the RISK while PRIVATIZING reward in order to keep this bull**** MYTH of the 'american dream' alive you simply can't understand it, can you? it blows your head off your shoulders to think YOU have screwed america The bailouts were opposed by most on the right, in spite of Bush proposing them. It is also interesting that Goldman (Paulsons old company) gave 75% of their money to the democrats in 2008. That may have shaded the decision of who to throw over the side. Lehman probably should have upped their bribe. $1.3 million won't attract much attention these days (what they gave Democrats in 08) I hear you lefties bitching about money going to the top and CEO pay and bonuses but the financial industry has most of the millionaires and they made huge bonuses on the federal bailout money we gave them. Right now it is the right fighting the bailouts. lefties?? i believe in CAPITALISM. a WELL REGULATED FREE MARKET YOU RIGHT WINGERS believe in PLUTOCRACY and YES they made BILLIONS. because when OBAMA said this was IMMORAL the RIGHT said it was SOCIALISM to even TALK about CEO salaries JUST like the RIGHT was OFFENDED when obama slammed BP. the RIGHT DEFENDED OIL COMPANIES. Changing the subject again? (oil) That is usually a sign that you lost. Obama said it was immoral but he did go along with banks borrowing government money at 0.3% and then lending it out to credit card customers at up to 29.9% interest instead of doing the business loans they were supposed to be making with the money. It is no wonder they are making record profits.. As for Obama, he is far more vulnerable from the left than he is from the right.That is why the right has to come WRONG. there is NO LEFT in america. up with such stupid stuff to oppose him like the birther bull****. A guy like Bernie Sanders could seriously hurt him in a primary if he tried. The dems are just happy to keep their name on the white house, even if the guy there is a big business republican in democrat clothing. HAHAHAHA bernie sanders...you should have been a stand up comic! you right wingers turned this country over to wall street THEN got offended when they BANKRUPTED THE COUNTRY If there are no liberals in the democratic party, why are you a democrat? That's a really stupid question, Gregg. The Democratic Party is more moderate than I like. The Republicans are in the far outer space regions of right-wing lunacy. |
|
#67
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
2nd Kook Seeks GOP Nomination
On Sun, 15 May 2011 12:55:23 -0400, I_am_Tosk
wrote: In article , says... either the taliban agree NEVER to ally with al qaida and other enemies again, or we destroy them YOU want to appease them tell it to czechoslovakia You say the right has done all this. Look at the facts. In the last forty years, most of the time the democrats have had control of at least two of the three (congress, senate, oval office), and sometimes all three, the "right" has never had that. I do clearly remember Pelosi though calling herself the leader of the "do nothing congress" making sure that even though the right had been voted in, their hands were tied with investigations and other bull****... let's see..the GOP had TOTAL control of congress under bush. result? a depression. the economy grows FASTER under DEMS than it does under the GOP: http://www.eriposte.com/economy/other/demovsrep.htm |
|
#68
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
2nd Kook Seeks GOP Nomination
On Sun, 15 May 2011 13:07:29 -0400, wrote:
On Sun, 15 May 2011 11:55:08 -0400, wf3h wrote: On Sun, 15 May 2011 11:33:51 -0400, wrote: It wasn't "80%" was it? It wasn't even 70%, it was 68 but don't let facts get in the way of a good rant. HAHAHAH FIRST you said MOST money went to the DEMS THEN you backpedaled and said it was about EVEN and NOW you're all upset over 70 vs 80?? ROFLMAO!!! No I am talking about 68 vs 80 and i'm talking about YOUR view that the GOP only got 30% when it actually got 70%. They switched their money from the dems because the dems were solidly in the bag for them It was the gop fighting the bailouts. the gop fighting the bailouts??? HENRY PAULSON AUTHORED THEM!! paulson was BUSH'S TREASURY SECRETARY and the bailouts were NECESSARY because the RIGHT ensured that we SOCIALIZED the RISK while PRIVATIZING reward in order to keep this bull**** MYTH of the 'american dream' alive you simply can't understand it, can you? it blows your head off your shoulders to think YOU have screwed america The bailouts were opposed by most on the righ more bull**** uh...was henry paulson a card carrying republican? george bush? t, in spite of Bush proposing them ah. bush proposing them so it's right wing if it's not and not right wing if it is. uh huh. the bailout was proposed by BUSH"S treasury secretary and supported by PRESIDENT BUSH NEITHER of whom is a 'leftist' . It is also interesting that Goldman (Paulsons old company) gave 75% of their money to the democrats in 2008. GOALPOST MOVING. the FACT is, as you ADMITTED, wall street gave 70% to the GOP in 2010 I hear you lefties bitching about money going to the top and CEO pay and bonuses but the financial industry has most of the millionaires and they made huge bonuses on the federal bailout money we gave them. Right now it is the right fighting the bailouts. lefties?? i believe in CAPITALISM. a WELL REGULATED FREE MARKET YOU RIGHT WINGERS believe in PLUTOCRACY and YES they made BILLIONS. because when OBAMA said this was IMMORAL the RIGHT said it was SOCIALISM to even TALK about CEO salaries JUST like the RIGHT was OFFENDED when obama slammed BP. the RIGHT DEFENDED OIL COMPANIES. Changing the subject again? (oil) That is usually a sign that you lost. says the guy who ignores the fact we had an election in 2010 because that's when wall street shoveled cash to the GOP Obama said it was immoral but he did go along with banks borrowing government money at 0.3% and then lending it out to credit card customers at up to 29.9% interest instead of doing the business loans they were supposed to be making with the money. It is no wonder they are making record profits.. HAHAHAH progressives fought to LIMIT credit card interest rates the RIGHT FOUGHT THIS the RIGHT FIGHTS ANY BUSINESS REGULATIONS AT ALL. you keep telling me what obama CANT do but you never tell us WHAT blocks his way golly. it's the RIGHT WING HAHAHAHA bernie sanders...you should have been a stand up comic! you right wingers turned this country over to wall street THEN got offended when they BANKRUPTED THE COUNTRY If there are no liberals in the democratic party, why are you a democrat? gee. there are millions of dems. liberals are 21% of the country. right wingers? about DOUBLE that THAT is why this country is bankrupt |
|
#69
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
2nd Kook Seeks GOP Nomination
wrote:
On Sun, 15 May 2011 12:11:21 -0400, wrote: wrote: As for Obama, he is far more vulnerable from the left than he is from the right.That is why the right has to come up with such stupid stuff to oppose him like the birther bull****. A guy like Bernie Sanders could seriously hurt him in a primary if he tried. The dems are just happy to keep their name on the white house, even if the guy there is a big business republican in democrat clothing. Bernie Sanders isn't going to challenge Obama for the nomination. Period. The "right" comes up with the birther **** because the base of the GOP is composed of racist leftovers from the Southern Strategy days. The righties down at the bottom of the intellectual scale are easy to manipulate by the Trumps, the Palins, et cetera. Look at who the birthers *here* have been...the intellectual ciphers who couldn't get into an open admissions community college. I just picked Sanders because he seems to be the moral left of your party. I am not sure who else would qualify. That was my point. When you have neocons like Hillary and Schumer in leadership positions it is hard to tell the difference between democrats and republicans if you don't look at the superficial diversions. Obama has even ducked the guns and god issues so you are really only left with abortion and gays. They may bring out emotional responses on both sides but nobody is going to say either of them is what brought down the republic. I think the real power brokers are so happy with the way things are going they are not really interested in beating Obama so they keep sending clowns like Trump and Palin to the front of the pack. That is why I say he may be the most vulnerable from the left ... if the left actually wanted change. In that regard you might actually find someone from the Libertarian side of the world who could rally the people who want to see something change. I really think the debt is going to shrink the size and scope of government so you will not have that one to fight about. In social issues you are probably closer to Ron Paul than you are to most democrats and he is on the kooky side of libertarian. Even with that Chris Matthews says he agrees with the Paul foreign policy. There's no way I could support libertarians like the Pauls who oppose the Civil Rights Act of 1964 because it places human rights ahead of property rights. And, while I find Ron Paul charming if uninformed on many significant issues, I think his son Rand is bat**** crazy, and totally without charm. Further, I favor a single payer system. So, which libertarian should I support? :) |
|
#70
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
2nd Kook Seeks GOP Nomination
In article ,
says... On Sun, 15 May 2011 13:07:29 -0400, wrote: On Sun, 15 May 2011 11:55:08 -0400, wf3h wrote: On Sun, 15 May 2011 11:33:51 -0400, wrote: It wasn't "80%" was it? It wasn't even 70%, it was 68 but don't let facts get in the way of a good rant. HAHAHAH FIRST you said MOST money went to the DEMS THEN you backpedaled and said it was about EVEN and NOW you're all upset over 70 vs 80?? ROFLMAO!!! No I am talking about 68 vs 80 and i'm talking about YOUR view that the GOP only got 30% when it actually got 70%. They switched their money from the dems because the dems were solidly in the bag for them It was the gop fighting the bailouts. the gop fighting the bailouts??? HENRY PAULSON AUTHORED THEM!! paulson was BUSH'S TREASURY SECRETARY and the bailouts were NECESSARY because the RIGHT ensured that we SOCIALIZED the RISK while PRIVATIZING reward in order to keep this bull**** MYTH of the 'american dream' alive you simply can't understand it, can you? it blows your head off your shoulders to think YOU have screwed america The bailouts were opposed by most on the righ more bull**** uh...was henry paulson a card carrying republican? george bush? t, in spite of Bush proposing them ah. bush proposing them so it's right wing if it's not and not right wing if it is. uh huh. the bailout was proposed by BUSH"S treasury secretary and supported by PRESIDENT BUSH NEITHER of whom is a 'leftist' . It is also interesting that Goldman (Paulsons old company) gave 75% of their money to the democrats in 2008. GOALPOST MOVING. the FACT is, as you ADMITTED, wall street gave 70% to the GOP in 2010 I hear you lefties bitching about money going to the top and CEO pay and bonuses but the financial industry has most of the millionaires and they made huge bonuses on the federal bailout money we gave them. Right now it is the right fighting the bailouts. lefties?? i believe in CAPITALISM. a WELL REGULATED FREE MARKET YOU RIGHT WINGERS believe in PLUTOCRACY and YES they made BILLIONS. because when OBAMA said this was IMMORAL the RIGHT said it was SOCIALISM to even TALK about CEO salaries JUST like the RIGHT was OFFENDED when obama slammed BP. the RIGHT DEFENDED OIL COMPANIES. Changing the subject again? (oil) That is usually a sign that you lost. says the guy who ignores the fact we had an election in 2010 because that's when wall street shoveled cash to the GOP Obama said it was immoral but he did go along with banks borrowing government money at 0.3% and then lending it out to credit card customers at up to 29.9% interest instead of doing the business loans they were supposed to be making with the money. It is no wonder they are making record profits.. HAHAHAH progressives fought to LIMIT credit card interest rates the RIGHT FOUGHT THIS the RIGHT FIGHTS ANY BUSINESS REGULATIONS AT ALL. you keep telling me what obama CANT do but you never tell us WHAT blocks his way golly. it's the RIGHT WING HAHAHAHA bernie sanders...you should have been a stand up comic! you right wingers turned this country over to wall street THEN got offended when they BANKRUPTED THE COUNTRY If there are no liberals in the democratic party, why are you a democrat? gee. there are millions of dems. liberals are 21% of the country. right wingers? about DOUBLE that THAT is why this country is bankrupt The numbers are skewed because dishonest democrats are embarrassed to call themselves, "liberals" and dead dog ideologues like yourself JPS and Harry, think they are middle of the road. snerk -- Team Rowdy Mouse, Banned from the Mall for life! |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| KOOK DAY IS NIGH!!! | General | |||
| VOTE! Usenet Kook Awards, September 2008 | General | |||
| Are you being stalked, abused and harassed by the Kook hunters? Readthis | ASA | |||
| [threat] Nomination - "Miguel" for Bullis Foam Duck #27 { NOMINATION -- Kadaitcha Man for Hammer of Thor} | ASA | |||
| kook awards | ASA | |||
![wf3h[_2_] is offline](https://www.boatbanter.com/images/SultanThemeVB3R/statusicon/user_offline.gif)
Linear Mode
