PDA

View Full Version : Making America Stronger Without Republicans


Ned Locke
04-20-2008, 02:02 PM
It's clear that the Country has turned against Republican mismanagement. The humorous thing is that the most Radical Element of the Republican tribe is in denial about that rejection.

They point to the contested Democratic Primary as proof that "All is not lost". Granting that the Primary is a wing dinger, they forget the fact that Hillary Clinton was considered a foregone conclusion and that with all the Clinton Party ties, she is in a fight for her life. It took an amazing movement to relegate Hillary to the position she finds herself in, which is on the outside looking in. She is hoping against hope she can smear her nomination rival and somehow pull this off. During this battle, McCain has had a pass. Though once the primary contest is over, McCain will be exposed through his own quotes pertaining to his ignorance upon the economy and his love of war.

There was bellweather election last month. It pertained to Dennis Hastert's open seat in Illinois. (The retired Republican Speaker of the House) It turns out Hastert had won elections in that district ten times, (he served 20 years), and each election was a landslide victory by general margins of 75% to 25%. Prior to Hastert that subject District had been in Republican hands since the time of Abraham Lincoln. Few Districts in the country were as solidly Republican. The District itself extends from West of Chicago all the way to the Mississippi River, through some of the most conservative farm communities in the Nation. Upstanding folks, who know the value of a dollar and believe in raising their children with solid values. That said, the District was "gerrymandered" by Republican State Legislators post new millennium to ensure that it stayed solidly in Republican hands for decades to come.

If Nancy Pelosi's liberal seat was lost to a Republican in a general election it would be all over the news and the Radical Republican element would be yelling at the top of their lungs that her defeat represented the rejection of her beliefs by the electorate.

All that can be said is that the future shock will make the final result all the more delicious. Be prepared for the next phase, which is prosecutions, post election. Americans are fed up with Representatives who betray them.

Oh, you want to know about Denny Hastert's Republican District?...It's now solidly in the hands of Patriots. It's Democratic.

Dave Schwartz
04-20-2008, 02:38 PM
It's clear that the Country has turned against Republican mismanagement.

LOL - Maybe in your world.

Tom
04-20-2008, 03:06 PM
The truth is, that while many people are turning away from the republicans, the demorcarts are by no means our solution to anything.
Remember the misery index from the Carter years? Remember Carter? You know, the guy over cuddling up to terrorists this week? Truly a traitor and the worst prez in our history. Brought to you by the DNC. Who have just introduced "Bizzaro Barry" Hussein.:lol:

GaryG
04-20-2008, 03:52 PM
The PA witness protection program just keeps growing. These trolls just get a new identity and they are off to the races"....:lol: :lol: :lol:

Tom
04-20-2008, 04:23 PM
It's a lot like Clark Kent/Superman, just put on a pair of glasses!:lol:

JustRalph
04-20-2008, 05:36 PM
Why would Howard Dean use "Ned Locke" ?

Marshall Bennett
04-20-2008, 05:39 PM
Yeah , and no matter how sophisticated they may seem , regardless of their excuses , you can more often than not cut to the bottom line of the bullshit and simply read it and fully understand , or was there really ever any doubt ?

Indulto
04-20-2008, 07:25 PM
It's clear that the Country has turned against Republican mismanagement. The humorous thing is that the most Radical Element of the Republican tribe is in denial about that rejection.

... Oh, you want to know about Denny Hastert's Republican District?...It's now solidly in the hands of Patriots. It's Democratic.NL,
It's refreshing to hear a new voice of reason. Welcome to the board.

What I also found humorous was the predictable lockstep resident right-recliner rejection of your post. Hope you stick around to celebrate in November.

DJofSD
04-20-2008, 07:30 PM
People are not turning away from or leaving the Republicans. If anything has changed, it is the Republican party. There is no longer a belief that less government is best, in fact, the republican party is just as much of a proponent of large government as the democratic party.

jballscalls
04-20-2008, 07:49 PM
People are not turning away from or leaving the Republicans. If anything has changed, it is the Republican party. There is no longer a belief that less government is best, in fact, the republican party is just as much of a proponent of large government as the democratic party.

couldnt agree with this more!! In theory, fiscally, the republicans are the way to go, less gov't involvement, less taxes, less everything. however, the repubs arent sticking to their strategies. I mean i think they are nutty on many of their social views, but lets get back to the fiscal conservatism!!

Tom
04-20-2008, 08:21 PM
NL,
It's refreshing to hear a new voice of reason. Welcome to the board.

What I also found humorous was the predictable lockstep resident right-recliner rejection of your post. Hope you stick around to celebrate in November.

Your reply was more lock step than ours. Clearly, I agreed many republican have lost faith in the party, but were not willing to turn to dems. If that is lock step, you need a new dictionary. I agreed with Ned Flanders to a point.
Your reply was the one that failed to recognize the discussion going on.

Tom
04-20-2008, 08:25 PM
couldnt agree with this more!! In theory, fiscally, the republicans are the way to go, less gov't involvement, less taxes, less everything. however, the repubs arent sticking to their strategies. I mean i think they are nutty on many of their social views, but lets get back to the fiscal conservatism!!

There is a large population out here who are not represented at all in the current political scene.

Lewis Black put it like this: The only thing worse than a democrat or a republican is when they work together! :bang:

He also said the dems were the party of no ideas and the repubs were the party of bad ideas. Bipartisan is when a repub stands up and says,"I have a bad idea...." and a dem stands up and says,"I can make that F@%#$^%G WORSE!"

God save us all!

wonatthewire1
04-20-2008, 08:52 PM
mcshame said that he'll continue to cut taxes but of course didn't say where the money was going to come fro to pay for the ever expanding and bloated govt.

No matter which dimcrat gets in of the three of them, we are going to be paying off these debts forever....


:p

ezrabrooks
04-20-2008, 10:16 PM
Ned Locke? Now that is amusing..

Indulto
04-20-2008, 10:39 PM
The PA witness protection program just keeps growing. These trolls just get a new identity and they are off to the races".... It's a lot like Clark Kent/Superman, just put on a pair of glasses! Why would Howard Dean use "Ned Locke" ?Yeah , and no matter how sophisticated they may seem , regardless of their excuses , you can more often than not cut to the bottom line of the bullshit and simply read it and fully understand , or was there really ever any doubt ?Eyes right! :lol:

Perhaps I should have said "Locke Step." ;)

jonnielu
04-20-2008, 10:43 PM
The truth is, that while many people are turning away from the republicans, the demorcarts are by no means our solution to anything.
Remember the misery index from the Carter years? Remember Carter? You know, the guy over cuddling up to terrorists this week? Truly a traitor and the worst prez in our history. Brought to you by the DNC. Who have just introduced "Bizzaro Barry" Hussein.:lol:

Tom,

It's actually a close race for worst with FDR in there with all of the damage he did thru the thirty's, and then his protege LBJ, at least Carter wasn't quite as active with ushering in the communism. Now, they are running the anti-christ and a liar, and calling themselves patriots. I used to wonder how their constituents handled such continuous insults to intelligence, then dumbassed me came to the conclusion that their constituents don't have any, and the Clinton's seem to be the most aware of that. They have to be the same people that scope out the car dealer ads, and pay sticker price.

jdl

lamboguy
04-20-2008, 10:58 PM
governor jesse "the body" ventura says that if they had a category to vote on called "none of the above" that would be the winner of this election.


for now i have not seen a presidential betting line in the last 3 weeks. it was mccain +1.55. i think that is a steal, if you get close to that i would suggest yo go all in on that ticket!

singletax
04-20-2008, 11:42 PM
There seems to be more passion for the Democrats this time around. The Dems are showing up at the polls in far greater numbers then the Republicans. New voters are registering Democratic not Republican.

People are fed up with the Republican nanny state. Even Ron Paul mocked the Republican candidates for borrowing from China to destroy Iraq then borrowing more from China to rebuild it. Most folks think this is insane except for the Republican primary voters who rejected the fiscal conservative Dr Paul.

McCain will have the usual head start locking up all the electoral votes from the Southern States but it will be a battle for the rest of the country. The Repubs are never out of a national election.

46zilzal
04-21-2008, 12:10 AM
Tom,

It's actually a close race for worst with FDR in there with all of the damage he did thru the thirty's

Just about every historian alive would disagree with you.

JustRalph
04-21-2008, 12:35 AM
Just about every historian alive would disagree with you.

You make a valid point. But what do the economists say?

That is the problem. Historians ? Like the Doris Kearns Goodwins of the world? You know, the ones who plagarize and copy from each other and stand around and act like "they know better"

PaceAdvantage
04-21-2008, 12:39 AM
If Democrats rule the country, can we expect more embarrassments like the great Eliot Spitzer, or his replacement?

Hank
04-21-2008, 12:59 AM
Just about every historian alive would disagree with you.

FDR's is actually rated one of the top 3 best presidents, by most presidiantal historians.The thing is these historians actually research and use critical thinking in their assessments.These poor neocons stoped thinking for themselves years ago.They have reduced themselves to... Dem Bad. neocon good.The actual performance or quality of the individuall is not revelant.Consider this hypothetical....There are no term limits on our presidents and the Dem flag bearer is an FDR caliber individuall, these poor neos would vote for pathetic W again. why ? [add neanderthal like grunt] Dem bad ...neocon good.:lol:

JustRalph
04-21-2008, 01:04 AM
FDR's is actually rated one of the top 3 best presidents, by most presidiantal historians.The thing is these historians actually research and use critical thinking in their assessments.These poor neocons stoped thinking for themselves years ago.They have reduced themselves to... Dem Bad. neocon good.The actual performance or quality of the individuall is not revelant.Consider this hypothetical....There are no term limits on our presidents and the Dem flag bearer is an FDR caliber individuall, these poor neos would vote for pathetic W again. why ? [add neanderthal like grunt] Dem bad ...neocon good.:lol:

you fail to see the change in the two parties. The Dems of FDR's era would be Republicans now............. you know.........like Ronnie Reagan, Charlton Heston............Joe Lieberman..........oops.......sorry, Joe hasn't made it official yet :lol: Hell, John Kennedy would be considered a right winger in some areas........nowadays.

Tom
04-21-2008, 07:47 AM
I'm going to give FDR every benefit of the doubt on any questionable acts. He was also faced with the dual Jap and Nazi menaces and the "War to end all wars."

I agree a lot of his economic polices still haunt us today, but more enduring is our freedom and the freedom of millions of others because he did what had to be done. I'll judge him on that and pass on the rest.Of all the stuff he dealt with, I would rather he got that one right! ;)

betchatoo
04-21-2008, 08:24 AM
you fail to see the change in the two parties. The Dems of FDR's era would be Republicans now............. you know.........like Ronnie Reagan, Charlton Heston............Joe Lieberman..........oops.......sorry, Joe hasn't made it official yet :lol: Hell, John Kennedy would be considered a right winger in some areas........nowadays.
By the same token, most of today's Republicans would consider Eisenhower and Nixon way too far to the left.

jballscalls
04-21-2008, 08:54 AM
If Democrats rule the country, can we expect more embarrassments like the great Eliot Spitzer, or his replacement?

embarrassment??? atleast spitzer was nailing a hot chick, now Clinton, that was an embarrassment!!!

What about Larry the foottapper Craig?? what about Sen. Vitter whose name appeared in call girl reports 5 times??? what about Tom Delay and his ethics?? what about Bryan Doyle of the homeland security department and his internet messages to someone he thought was a 14 year old girl. oops LOL

PA, you guys have just as many embarrasing characters as the Dems.

Lefty
04-21-2008, 11:57 AM
Jballs, Tom Delay? Name me anything he's been convicted of?

Wonatwire, You ask how does M'Cain get the money to pay for tax cuts? Are you serious are just don't know what happened when Reagan cut taxes and when GW cut taxes. Let me tell you: The Coffers more than doubled. Tax cuts pay for themselves because they generate more investment which in turn generates more money to pay taxes on.

jballscalls
04-21-2008, 12:17 PM
Jballs, Tom Delay? Name me anything he's been convicted of?
.

just ethics probes, ties to the Abramoff Scandal, Grand Jury indictments, etc. He hasnt been convicted of anything, neither has spitzer, i was just trying to make sure that both sides get equal representation of their idiocy.

Lefty
04-21-2008, 12:30 PM
jb, the big diff is, nothing been proven against delay. Most of his so called ethic probs just dem bs. Spitzer has been cght and no doubt of his guilt.
They have even tried to convict Delay of something that wasn't even a crime at time he did it. Retroactive guilt? Give me a break...

Indulto
04-21-2008, 03:18 PM
embarrassment??? atleast spitzer was nailing a hot chick, now Clinton, that was an embarrassment!!!

What about Larry the foottapper Craig?? what about Sen. Vitter whose name appeared in call girl reports 5 times??? what about Tom Delay and his ethics?? what about Bryan Doyle of the homeland security department and his internet messages to someone he thought was a 14 year old girl. oops LOL

PA, you guys have just as many embarrasing characters as the Dems.jbc,
The Dems generaly do it at levels of higher executive authority due to lower extremity urges; violating laws they're supposed to enforce. Reps OTOH seem to do it at higher levels of perversion; violating laws they make. :D

Neither party seems to have a lock on politicians who violate laws of spiritual authority to which they publicly attribute ultimate correctness.

It will be interesting to see whether justice Delayed is justice denied in January.

jballscalls
04-21-2008, 03:50 PM
jbc,
The Dems generaly do it at levels of higher executive authority due to lower extremity urges; violating laws they're supposed to enforce. Reps OTOH seem to do it at higher levels of perversion; violating laws they make. :D

Neither party seems to have a lock on politicians who violate laws of spiritual authority to which they publicly attribute ultimate correctness.

It will be interesting to see whether justice Delayed is justice denied in January.

That was kind of my point in putting up some other names, both parties have equal amounts of stupidity. Just seems the righties on here are so quick to only give dem. examples.

riskman
04-21-2008, 04:04 PM
People are not turning away from or leaving the Republicans. If anything has changed, it is the Republican party. There is no longer a belief that less government is best, in fact, the republican party is just as much of a proponent of large government as the democratic party.

Bingo ! You have that right.

Tom
04-21-2008, 04:05 PM
Actually, there are far more threads started about right strayers than left ones.

riskman
04-21-2008, 04:37 PM
If Democrats rule the country, can we expect more embarrassments like the great Eliot Spitzer, or his replacement?

Spitzer got caught with his hand in the cookie jar. He was not the only big name on the list I can assure you. Spitzer talked out of both sides of his mouth and got slammed.

Politicians, celebrities even clergymen frequent these ladies regularly and then they stand up and condemn them. A little hypocritically in my opinion. At least his "replacement" got it for free!

JustRalph
04-21-2008, 04:44 PM
That was kind of my point in putting up some other names, both parties have equal amounts of stupidity. Just seems the righties on here are so quick to only give dem. examples.


The Difference is that the Dems re-elect them.

Indulto
04-21-2008, 05:29 PM
Actually, there are far more threads started about right strayers than left ones.Are you familiar with the word, "frequency?"

The left has more stayers than strayers. ;)

wonatthewire1
04-21-2008, 05:50 PM
Jballs, Tom Delay? Name me anything he's been convicted of?

Wonatwire, You ask how does M'Cain get the money to pay for tax cuts? Are you serious are just don't know what happened when Reagan cut taxes and when GW cut taxes. Let me tell you: The Coffers more than doubled. Tax cuts pay for themselves because they generate more investment which in turn generates more money to pay taxes on.


Lefty, Lefty, Lefty...nope, you can't just retort on part of the posting...

Govt keeps getting bigger and bigger and bigger - under both party's watch...

Can't keep getting bigger without borrowing a lot of money that we don't have...

Someday - you'll toss the pollyticians aside...might take awhile sounds like you're still believing some of them

"if they're breathing, they're lying"
:rolleyes:

GaryG
04-21-2008, 06:43 PM
The left has more stayers than strayers. ;)I suppose you have data on this?

jonnielu
04-21-2008, 06:45 PM
Just about every historian alive would disagree with you.

Yeah, them and every other commie pinko like them. More idiots working the democrat agenda of hear and obey. What do you need their opinions for anyway, are you unable to make up your own mind about history, or do you know so little about it that you need idiots to tell you what it was?

jdl

Indulto
04-21-2008, 07:30 PM
I suppose you have data on this?
First we'd have to define "stayers" which was merely a tweak of Tom's "strayers" and an off-hand respnse to JR's contention that Dem strayers get re-elected.

Bye, Bye, Republican Guy.
Said a prayer for the strayer, but his Chevy was dry.
Them good old boys don't get hints very fast.
Thinkin' their reign is goin' to last.

JustRalph
04-21-2008, 07:38 PM
Yeah, them and every other commie pinko like them. More idiots working the democrat agenda of hear and obey. What do you need their opinions for anyway, are you unable to make up your own mind about history, or do you know so little about it that you need idiots to tell you what it was?

jdl

Boy, you have really come out of your shell the last week or so.............. :ThmbUp:

bigmack
04-21-2008, 08:45 PM
Hillary talks of obliteration.

4u1nmGmtD18

Lefty
04-21-2008, 09:06 PM
Won, I guess because of my "youth" I'm just not as cynical as you.

Tom
04-21-2008, 10:47 PM
Yeah, them and every other commie pinko like them. More idiots working the democrat agenda of hear and obey. What do you need their opinions for anyway, are you unable to make up your own mind about history, or do you know so little about it that you need idiots to tell you what it was?

jdl


Absolutely!:ThmbUp::ThmbUp::ThmbUp:

Overheard here once...

"What do you think?"
"I don't know...my email is down." :lol:

46zilzal
04-22-2008, 12:33 AM
Yeah, them and every other commie pinko like them. More idiots working the democrat agenda of hear and obey. What do you need their opinions for anyway, are you unable to make up your own mind about history, or do you know so little about it that you need idiots to tell you what it was?



Isn't it interesting that all who continue to swallow the pablum don't every even change that well worn neural pattern that just has to label all who disagree commies.


Depends on the generation. Commies? that was the 1950's designation!

Lefty
04-22-2008, 12:42 AM
zilly, commies are anti religion, anti corpration, anti rich, the state is all. I rest my case.

46zilzal
04-22-2008, 12:47 AM
zilly, commies are anti religion, anti corpration, anti rich, the state is all. I rest my case.
Another form of the omnipresent BOOGEY MAN!!!

PaceAdvantage
04-22-2008, 02:43 AM
What about Larry the foottapper Craig?? what about Sen. Vitter whose name appeared in call girl reports 5 times??? what about Tom Delay and his ethics?? what about Bryan Doyle of the homeland security department and his internet messages to someone he thought was a 14 year old girl. oops LOL

PA, you guys have just as many embarrasing characters as the Dems.Yes, but Spitzer was the Dem GOLDEN BOY...future presidential material....he was looked upon in a much different light than any of the names you mention above.

If Spitzer were a Republican, do you know how many more threads would have been created here about what a F UP he was. But since he's a Democrat, none of the four horsemen will criticize his actions, his gross hypocrisy, or his lack of morals one bit....they're all silent as church mice....and I bet they won't dare bring up another case of Republican infidelity for quite some time.

PaceAdvantage
04-22-2008, 02:46 AM
At least his "replacement" got it for free!Did he? Or did he have to get her a state government job using his pull? Whatever happened to that story?

Tom
04-22-2008, 07:35 AM
Another form of the omnipresent BOOGEY MAN!!!

Right up there with global warming. Booooooooooooo!:eek:

ljb
04-22-2008, 08:13 AM
Yes, but Spitzer was the Dem GOLDEN BOY...future presidential material....he was looked upon in a much different light than any of the names you mention above.

In your eyes.

jballscalls
04-22-2008, 08:30 AM
If Spitzer were a Republican, do you know how many more threads would have been created here about what a F UP he was. But since he's a Democrat, none of the four horsemen will criticize his actions, his gross hypocrisy, or his lack of morals one bit....they're all silent as church mice....and I bet they won't dare bring up another case of Republican infidelity for quite some time.

Is there somebody out there defending what Spitzer did?? the guy got sent through the wash, even by the "liberal" media.

And what BS about if Spitzer were a republican there would be more threads. I did a search for Eliot Spitzer on this website and 6 pages worth of stuff came up. but basically 1.5 pages of stuff actually involved.

Search Larry Craig and 1.5 pages come up, basically .5 pages of stuff that was really about the topic, and most of it is the FAB FIVE talking about how "if this were a dem, blah blah blah"

ljb
04-22-2008, 09:01 AM
Is there somebody out there defending what Spitzer did?? the guy got sent through the wash, even by the "liberal" media.

And what BS about if Spitzer were a republican there would be more threads. I did a search for Eliot Spitzer on this website and 6 pages worth of stuff came up. but basically 1.5 pages of stuff actually involved.

Search Larry Craig and 1.5 pages come up, basically .5 pages of stuff that was really about the topic, and most of it is the FAB FIVE talking about how "if this were a dem, blah blah blah"
Like many here know. this site is right dominant.

Hank
04-22-2008, 10:46 AM
Yes, but Spitzer was the Dem GOLDEN BOY...future presidential material....he was looked upon in a much different light than any of the names you mention above.

If Spitzer were a Republican, do you know how many more threads would have been created here about what a F UP he was. But since he's a Democrat, none of the four horsemen will criticize his actions, his gross hypocrisy, or his lack of morals one bit....they're all silent as church mice....and I bet they won't dare bring up another case of Republican infidelity for quite some time.

Not true, Vitter was seen as a rising star the party.

Hank
04-22-2008, 10:55 AM
Boy, you have really come out of your shell the last week or so.............. :ThmbUp:

:lol:That inane rant[decide for yourself about history..without historians]
gets a big thumbs up.You guys could put Letterman and Leno out of business. :lol::lol:

hcap
04-22-2008, 02:10 PM
Yeah, them and every other commie pinko like them. More idiots working the democrat agenda of hear and obey. What do you need their opinions for anyway, are you unable to make up your own mind about history, or do you know so little about it that you need idiots to tell you what it was?

jdl
Step 1: Buy this

http://www.accoutrements.com/images/products/11681.jpg

Step 2: Apply to anyone who disagrees with your crap.
Step 3: Feel good and superior
Step 4: Deactivate what remains of small remaining cerebellum

46zilzal
04-22-2008, 03:00 PM
That was your best one all year long!

hcap
04-22-2008, 03:39 PM
I think I should have stocked up on these......

http://static.anytimecostumes.com/images/products/large/012660046.jpg
http://www.anytimecostumes.com/ecommerce/control/product/~product_id=012660046

Mask PL087: Vice President Cheney
$24.99

Could have resold them for a handsome profit to some die hard administration supporters here. I am beginning to suspect the last 28% per centers who support George W Churchill exist only on this off topic board. :rolleyes:

Lefty?????

46zilzal
04-22-2008, 03:41 PM
The mask is better looking, and infinitely SAFER, than the real thing.

bigmack
04-22-2008, 04:54 PM
http://www.macjams.com/filemgmt_data/snaps/23317_cut-n-paste.jpg

Zilly & ljb - Sharpen up those scissors and untwist the orange cap on your Elmers.

Here are your instructions for what to think for the next month or so. Don't try and think for yourselves, it's been done for you.

What to think 1 (http://www.linkcrusader.com/antiwar.htm)

What to think 2 (http://www.iuptown.com/WatchDubya/BillsBestLinks.htm)

What to think 3 (http://www.radiopower.org/liberal_links.html)

hcap
04-22-2008, 05:04 PM
No need today to visit ANY lib or con, or even some shady conspiratorial website.

Check with Gallop or USA Today polls.
In fact any poll from any outfit.

It is common knowledge that George W. Churchill is a failed preznit.

http://www.bartcop.com/tunnel-light-2009.jpg

At last!!!

Lefty
04-22-2008, 08:25 PM
Another form of the omnipresent BOOGEY MAN!!!
Instead of these constant stupid statements please tell me specifically where I am wrong. You mean Commies aren't anti God? You mean they aren't anti-capitalist? You mean they don't want the state to run everything and put down individualism? Just what the HELL do you mean, zilly. Do you even know?

Lefty
04-22-2008, 08:27 PM
hcap, nobody polled me. Did anybody else get polled? My poll says GW had some failures but overall a better Pres than Gore would have been. There ya go...

46zilzal
04-22-2008, 08:29 PM
There is a very old maneuver that magicians and politicians use to good measure: called the plausible diversion. BOTH use it to take attention away, by a dramatic though dead end maneuver, then, while that attention is removed, they do their dirty work. The politician uses a common perceived enemy to do as they please. Depending upon the way the wind blows the boogey man changes names but serves the same purpose: to screw over the electorate by drawing their attention to some perceived, usually, NON-existent enemy.

It will take MORE than removing the Rutabaga to set things on a positive course.

Lefty
04-22-2008, 09:55 PM
Right you are zilly. A will take a Repub Pres and a big majority Repub Congress. Please do not respond with your usual b.s. unless you are ready to man up and debate your positions.

46zilzal
04-22-2008, 10:00 PM
Right you are zilly. A will take a Repub Pres and a big majority Repub Congress. Please do not respond with your usual b.s. unless you are ready to man up and debate your positions.
Man up?? what a farce.
It is the best ideas from the person who can get positive things done who should be at the helm. NO WHERE is that person to be found.

Lefty
04-22-2008, 10:09 PM
C'mon, zilly, you like to make statements; you won't defend them. You are a little man.
M'Cain says he'll cut taxes, win the war in Iraq. Sounds good to me.
Hilly and Obama will give Iraq back to the terrorists and raise taxes. Sometimes, zilly, you just gotta make a choice. If you're unwilling to make that choice, then you should just shut the frig up!

46zilzal
04-22-2008, 10:14 PM
If you're unwilling to make that choice, then you should just shut the frig up!
Never when I have to listen to the continued adventures in Fantasyland. Entertaining to say the least.

WIN the war?? what a joke.

JustRalph
04-22-2008, 10:21 PM
I feel like I am watching a Tennis Match.............

Tom
04-22-2008, 10:58 PM
I can't tell the difference between 46 and the miseralble litte POS coward woosie Dingy Harry.

Lefty
04-22-2008, 11:44 PM
I feel like I am watching a Tennis Match.............
How can that be? Zilly has no balls...

JustRalph
04-22-2008, 11:52 PM
How can that be? Zilly has no balls...


that is funny on a couple of levels. Metaphorically I believe you are referring to his lack of facts and discussion...............but it works both ways............ :lol:

Lefty
04-23-2008, 12:16 AM
J.R., don't get what you said. I have the facts, but he doesn't want to discuss them. Isn't it a fact that when taxes have been cut that more money comes into govt coffers? When popinjays like zilly and lbj tell me i live in fantasyland i damn well expect them to back up those words. I'm tired of these stuffed shirt and their hit and run tactics. They are not men but wimps.

46zilzal
04-23-2008, 12:44 AM
facts? from Faux? those are fantasies.

Like this stupid war has any validity? Incompetence on a grade A scale.

Outsourcing so corporations pay little to no tax giving sub-par service.

Giving millions away for OVER-priced pharmaceuticals when there are cheaper effective options? Squandering more and wasting lives in that never ending joke of a quagmire of Iraq?

Those fantasies?

chickenhead
04-23-2008, 01:07 AM
Isn't it a fact that when taxes have been cut that more money comes into govt coffers?

I am not an economist. Your boy Bush has appointed Ben Bernanke to be the chief economic poo-bah. Before that, Alan Greenspan. In Bush we trust.

Here is their take on tax cuts paying for themselves (from Congressional testimony):

REED: ...Chairman Greenspan has explained as recently as last fall that it's, in his words, "Very rare and very few economists believe that you can cut taxes and you will get the same amount of revenues. When you cut taxes, you gain some revenue back. We don't know exactly what this is, but it's not small, but it's also not 70 percent or anything like that," closed quote. You don't subscribe to the view that tax cuts pay for themselves, do you?
BERNANKE: Senator, the offset, the revenue cost of a tax cut depends on the structure of the tax cut, whether it's one that improves economic growth or not and so on. I think that generally the tax cuts, if they're well-designed, do increase growth and therefore do partially offset the revenue loss. But I think it's unusual for a tax cut to completely offset the revenue loss.

My main problem with your point Lefty, is that it is no fact at all that "tax cuts" pay for themselves. That it is not a fact, is a fact.

Both Greenspan and Bernanke are unabashedly for low taxes, as low as possible, so none of this argues against "low taxes"...

Lefty
04-23-2008, 01:08 AM
facts? from Faux? those are fantasies.

Like this stupid war has any validity? Incompetence on a grade A scale.

Outsourcing so corporations pay little to no tax giving sub-par service.

Giving millions away for OVER-priced pharmaceuticals when there are cheaper effective options? Squandering more and wasting lives in that never ending joke of a quagmire of Iraq?

Those fantasies?
Yes, this war has validity. Those terrorists want to kill us all if we don't submit. The price is too high to leave Iraq to Al Qaeda and Iran.
Outsourcing has been going on before this admin. It has many causes. One is the high price of labor. It's more complex than your oversimplifications. Tax the coporations and they pass it along to us. Why is that so hard to grasp?


You lost me. What's cheaper and more effective. Tell us, please.
This last was was mentioned in the first. My wife had a chance to speak to some of these soldiers doing RR in Vegas before they go back to Iraq. They do not want to leave the country to theterrorists. They are winning this war and are saddened that it's not being properly reported.

Lefty
04-23-2008, 01:10 AM
chick, it's a fact. The math doesn't lie. The govt revenues increased when taxes were cut. Hey if you wanna pay more frkn taxes just send them more money.
and "your boy Bush?" How disrespectful to the President.

chickenhead
04-23-2008, 01:15 AM
chick, it's a fact. The math doesn't lie. The govt revenues increased when taxes were cut. Hey if you wanna pay more frkn taxes just send them more money.

Wow Lefty, it's a fact that when I went outside this morning the sun came up. I guess it's a fact I control the sun.

I will be paying all the taxes later on for the gov't services that you aren't paying for today.

No need to thank me, just send me the money.

PaceAdvantage
04-23-2008, 01:44 AM
Search Larry Craig and 1.5 pages come up, basically .5 pages of stuff that was really about the topic, and most of it is the FAB FIVE talking about how "if this were a dem, blah blah blah"Larry Craig? How in the world is Larry Craig on par with Eliot Spitzer? Nobody had ever heard of Larry Craig before his bathroom break.

Lots of folks knew of Eliot Spitzer, even before he became governor....like I said, his aspirations were presidential, and he was definitely being groomed....

PaceAdvantage
04-23-2008, 01:46 AM
http://www.bartcop.com/tunnel-light-2009.jpgWhat if the light at the end of the tunnel is an oncoming locomotive?

riskman
04-23-2008, 01:57 AM
Did he? Or did he have to get her a state government job using his pull? Whatever happened to that story?

He used something-- but it was not called "pull" unless thats a new word for "Pitching a tent " :)

Lefty
04-23-2008, 02:13 AM
chick, i don't think your analogy makes much sense. Why should I thank you? Don'tyou think I paid my share of taxes getting to 71. As for govt services, I'd like to see all the social prgms eliminated or cut to the bone. You know, food stamps, housing subsidies all the freakin nonsense. BTW, i'm still paying my share through my woife who is only57 so we'll be paying a while longer. No need to thank ME!

The Judge
04-23-2008, 09:44 AM
I would like to see subsidies and bail-outs ended for millionairs and billionaires.

chickenhead
04-23-2008, 10:00 AM
Don'tyou think I paid my share of taxes getting to 71. As for govt services, I'd like to see all the social prgms eliminated or cut to the bone. You know, food stamps, housing subsidies all the freakin nonsense. BTW, i'm still paying my share through my woife who is only57 so we'll be paying a while longer. No need to thank ME!

Considering the mountain of debt this country built up in your time, no, you obviously haven't paid your fair share of taxes. That's a fact.



....younger woman...you dirty dog :ThmbUp:

Tom
04-23-2008, 10:09 AM
He paid his fair share. it's just that the government spent far more than it should have. That is the true bi-partisanship - both parties do not understand it is not their money, it is ours.

chickenhead
04-23-2008, 10:19 AM
He paid his fair share. it's just that the government spent far more than it should have. That is the true bi-partisanship - both parties do not understand it is not their money, it is ours.

But Lefty never criticizes spending so long there is an R next to the name of whoever is doing it. It has been a monumental failure of conservatives the last 8 years to not hold Republicans true to what are supposed to be their ideals.

To me a budget very close to balance needs to be a prerequisite. Taxes and spending should always be the same issue...we can all debate how big or small the government should be....but we all need to agree that we need to pay for it.

We don't have to run a surplus or pay off the debt, we just need it to stop growing faster than GDP.

Lefty
04-23-2008, 11:08 AM
chick, not true. The spending has to stop. Theearmarks has to stop. Hiding pork in important bills has to stop. These social prgms that are top loaded with costs to run them have to stop. But who do you think more likely to do anything to curtail some of them. Hillary? No. Obama? No. Mcain? Maybe. Our only chance.

Lefty
04-23-2008, 11:09 AM
Chick: All of this debt accrued in my time? What are you, fresh born?

chickenhead
04-23-2008, 11:12 AM
Reagan, Bush I and Bush II each oversaw an increase in our ratio of debt to GDP, every liberal oversaw a decrease. This is over the last 50 years That's just another fact.

When it comes to paying for what you spend, the track record of liberal Presidents is much better than conservatives. I consider that the first prerequisite, a requirement before we can even talk about taxes and spending. So until the Republicans figure that part out, they get :ThmbDown: :ThmbDown: from me in this department.

Lefty
04-23-2008, 11:16 AM
Yeah, chick, whatwe need is another Jimmy Carter.

chickenhead
04-23-2008, 11:17 AM
Chick: All of this debt accrued in my time? What are you, fresh born?

The vast majority of the increases come from 1980-1992, and 2000 on. I wasn't old enough to vote (or pay taxes) for the first bit, and I didn't vote for the guy in the second stint.

I'd say on balance, your generation is responsible for building this debt, not mine. Mine will pay for it, of course.

chickenhead
04-23-2008, 11:20 AM
Yeah, chick, whatwe need is another Jimmy Carter.

can't deal with the facts...that's a what i thought. It's easy to be flip when you aren't the one stuck with the bill.

Tom
04-23-2008, 11:27 AM
I'd say on balance, your generation is responsible for building this debt, not mine. Mine will pay for it, of course.

Thank you. Youda man!:kiss::lol:

chickenhead
04-23-2008, 11:37 AM
Thank you. Youda man!:kiss::lol:

Seriously, I find the idea abhorrent that the younger generation would have to pay for me. I'm more than willing to NOT get social security, to NOT get medicare, just so they wouldn't have the burden of that. I want my generation to pay MORE than our fair share, so the next doesn't have to.

If people actually thought about what they are doing, in real terms, of running up big bills to be left to later generations....it's just about as irresponsible as you can be. How anyone can be "ok" with that is beyond me.

Anyone who relies on Social Security, but preaches personal responsibility, needs to have their heads examined. Economists call it a "Generational Wealth Transfer Program"...that is it's proper name. Anyone currently receiving a SS check should give it to their kids. That is who they are taking the money from.

Lefty
04-23-2008, 11:38 AM
Flip? You're the one that lovesthe dimsso much. I voted for everyone that run up the debt? Well, I didn't vote for any of those dims that were in congress that's for sure. Who instituted all of those wasteful social prgms, hmmmm? Nowthey get automatically increased every year due to baseline budgeting.
During Carter Interest rates were sky high. I paid 19% to finance a new mobilehome. High interest rates and high taxes bother me more than the national debt. Since Reagan it came down and during Bush it came down and is now back up, i guess, not paying that much attention. Cause it goes up and down.
Were paying highgas prices at least partly because we haven't done any new drilling in this country or built any new refineries in over 30 years. Were paying more for food inlarge part because we're making inefficient ethanol.
Yeah it's all the R's fault. So chick, you vote dims and i'll vote R's. That's America, son. You gets your choice. But it's true, both parties need to do more. This social spending has got to stop. SS has to be partially privatised or you and my grandkids will never see a penny of it. My advice to you and my grandkids is to not count on it and start making preparations for your own futures now.

Lefty
04-23-2008, 11:42 AM
chick, then this should cheer you up. I'm getting less than half of the SS that the average gets and my wife still working and paying.

Lefty
04-23-2008, 11:55 AM
The vast majority of the increases come from 1980-1992, and 2000 on. I wasn't old enough to vote (or pay taxes) for the first bit, and I didn't vote for the guy in the second stint.

I'd say on balance, your generation is responsible for building this debt, not mine. Mine will pay for it, of course.
Hmm, so we did bad, huh? Riddle me this. If things were so bad after 1980 then how come we have approx 4 times more millionaires after 1980 than before? That would also spk to the fact that all boats have risen since then except of coursethe people you dims insist we feedand shelter because more too lazy or addicted to take care of themselves.

46zilzal
04-23-2008, 12:28 PM
Hmm, so we did bad, huh? Riddle me this. If things were so bad after 1980 then how come we have approx 4 times more millionaires after 1980 than before?
Tax law LOOPHOLES for the fat cats, inflation and more people.

Just because there are millionaires means nothing about the entire country.

chickenhead
04-23-2008, 12:31 PM
Hmm, so we did bad, huh? Riddle me this. If things were so bad after 1980 then how come we have approx 4 times more millionaires after 1980 than before? That would also spk to the fact that all boats have risen since then except of coursethe people you dims insist we feedand shelter because more too lazy or addicted to take care of themselves.

First of all, I'm not a Democrat. These aren't sports teams that we "root" for. I don't know who told you that you must either be a Democrat or a Republican. Both parties policies are largely wrong on the majority of issues from where I sit. It's not a dialectic. There aren't only two policy choices for any given problem, there are many.

You do understand that stealing money from the generation to come WILL have the effect of making people NOW richer. That is kind of why they bother to do it.

But, considering that things are so great, why do we bother to give your generation, or the boomers, Social Security? Haven't you saved enough to feed and shelter yourself? Social Security is just a welfare program with a fancy name. That is actually what I favor, scrapping Social Security and just letting welfare take over. If you're old and poor, you can get food stamps and a welfare check. No need to give it to those who don't need it.

Tom
04-23-2008, 12:42 PM
No is going to give ME SS....I earned, it is mine, and I don't care how well off I am then, I WANT MY MONEY.

I did not set up the system, but I paid into it all my life, while 48% of the people pay NOTHING, yet still drink my milkshake. Let's stop giving it to non-contributors and only those who put in get to take out.

Anyone else, feel free to sneak over the border into Mexico.

chickenhead
04-23-2008, 12:52 PM
It's not a pension plan or a retirement plan, there is nothing to pay into. You paid the welfare costs for your parents and grandparents generation. You financed their retirement. You da man! ;)

hcap
04-23-2008, 01:28 PM
The vast majority of the increases come from 1980-1992, and 2000 on. I wasn't old enough to vote (or pay taxes) for the first bit, and I didn't vote for the guy in the second stint.

I'd say on balance, your generation is responsible for building this debt, not mine. Mine will pay for it, of course.

Attention Lefty!

Debt as a percentage of GDP
http://www.cedarcomm.com/~stevelm1/usdebt.htm

http://www.cedarcomm.com/~stevelm1/USDebt_files/image002.jpg

"The ratio of debt to GDP had been generally dropping since the end of World War II. When Mr. Reagan entered office the percent of US debt relative to GDP was down to 33.3%. He argued vociferously to reduce the level of all that liberal spending. However the only real effort he pursued was to get taxes cut while increasing spending. You can see in Figure 2 above that cutting taxes and increasing spending predictably made the debt increase - in real dollars and as a percent of GDP. During his eight years in office the percentage of debt to GDP grew to 51.9%. This amounts to a 64% increase in debt relative to GDP while Reagan was in the White House -- a rather significant increase by anyone’s measure.


The percentage of debt to GDP continued to grow until 1996, when Mr. Clinton began to get government spending under control. The US debt peaked at 67.3% of GDP under his administration. By the end of the Clinton administration this percentage had dropped to 57.6%. Debt as a percent of GDP dropped almost 10% in four years under a Democratic President with a hostile Republican Congress. Mr. Clinton showed steadfast fiscal leadership against all odds and in spite of right-wing attacks and misinformation.


Mr. Bush II inherited a shrinking government and debt in 2001. With his first budget he managed to increase the debt to GDP ratio to 60.0%, by cutting taxes but not spending. By 2004 this ratio had risen to 63.7%, as a result of additional tax cuts but no significant corresponding cuts in spending. Government estimations (which are notoriously low) predict that the debt to GDP ratio will grow to 69.3% by 2008, two percent higher than the previous peak in 1996. Mr. Bush will completely wipe out the gains we made under a fiscally responsible Democratic President.


Some of Mr. Bush’s debt can be blamed on the justified and almost forgotten Afghan war, and the ill-conceived Iraqi war and occupation. Now, years later, with a so called “booming” economy, per the mantra of tax cutting logic the debt ratio should be going down. Yet it is still growing. Using government projections, US debt will double under Mr. Bush’s leadership (or lack of it) in real dollars. The nation has to wonder when the fiscally conservative side of Mr. Bush will reveal itself. He only has a few months left in office and while he talks about reducing the debt, the fact is that he has so far only increased it. He keeps telling us that cutting taxes will pump up the economy and thus generate more revenue for the government. The facts do not support his, the Gipper’s, his Dad’s or Hoover’s unsubstantiated trickle down claims on this point.

hcap
04-23-2008, 01:31 PM
MORE
http://www.cedarcomm.com/~stevelm1/usdebt.htm

....No matter how you choose to look at the massive debt that the liberal spending Republicans are generating, it is creating an oppressive burden on this nation. (Even the conservative Mr. Greenspan agrees with that conclusion.) Under Republican leadership the debt has doubled in size relative to the GDP. To call the doubling of our debt insignificant is at best demonstrating a gross misunderstanding of the situation. At worst it is an out right lie designed to mislead the public into accepting tax and trade policies that will ruin our future economy for the sake of short term gains for the very wealthy, meanwhile devastating the Middle Class.

Isn’t Congress In Charge of Spending?

“All bills for raising revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with amendments as on other bills…”

US Constitution, Article 1, Section 7

“The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United Sates; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States:…”

US Constitution, Article 1, Section 8

The Constitution makes it clear that Congress theoretically holds the purse strings of government. However the Presidents set the direction for the country, and have great power to push the nation in whatever direction they choose. During the time span covered by this paper, history has shown that Congress tends to follow much more than it leads.

A larger clearer version of the above graph.
http://zfacts.com/metaPage/lib/National-Debt-GDP.gif

Lefty
04-23-2008, 08:28 PM
So, chick, zilly and Hcap, are you guys trying to tell me that tax raises are good? Seems so.

Tom
04-23-2008, 09:25 PM
It's not a pension plan or a retirement plan, there is nothing to pay into. You paid the welfare costs for your parents and grandparents generation. You financed their retirement. You da man! ;)

I don't wanna be the man!:(

chickenhead
04-23-2008, 09:32 PM
So, chick, <> are you guys trying to tell me that tax raises are good? Seems so.

Show me where I said anything remotely like that. Please.

Lefty
04-23-2008, 09:43 PM
Tax law LOOPHOLES for the fat cats, inflation and more people.

Just because there are millionaires means nothing about the entire country.
I'm not surprised you missed my point. It is, that more people became millionaires during the time of this so called high deficit than did in the periods where the deficit was lower. There ya go.

Lefty
04-23-2008, 10:48 PM
Show me where I said anything remotely like that. Please.
Well, I say lower taxes are good and you take me on, so i have to infer you think raising taxes are good. So what is it with you; not clear to me. Do you think next Pres should raise taxes or lower them.

chickenhead
04-23-2008, 10:57 PM
If that's as far into the discussion as we are at this point, there's not much point continuing. Never mind, my man.

riskman
04-24-2008, 12:09 AM
The vast majority of the increases come from 1980-1992, and 2000 on. I wasn't old enough to vote (or pay taxes) for the first bit, and I didn't vote for the guy in the second stint.

I'd say on balance, your generation is responsible for building this debt, not mine. Mine will pay for it, of course.

You may be interested in this:

http://www.lewrockwell.com/north/north621.html

Watch the video of David Walker, Comptroller General of the United States, which aired on CBS's "Sixty Minutes" on January 16, 2008. http://www.garynorth.com/public/department79.cfm

Lefty
04-24-2008, 03:35 AM
chick, you challenge me when I praise lower taxes and the implication is they cause high deficits. So then I ask you and others if that means tax raises are good and you say you never said that. Then I ask whether the next pres should raise or lower taxes and now you won't commit to a position. Weak as water, don'tcha think? Really kinda reminds me of some of the runarounds i've gotten from lbj and zilly although i've never put you that low. So i'm perplexed.

chickenhead
04-24-2008, 08:27 PM
it's because I don't look at things that way Lefty.

I don't want the debt to keep growing faster than the economy. That's in about as simple words as I can put it what I have as a basic expectation of the President and Congress.

If you want really low taxes, you're reasonably going to have to cut:

Social Security
Medicare/Medicaid
Defense.

Those, along with the interest on the debt, is 75% of the spending (and growing fast). Those 4 items dominate the budget.

I already came out in support of some pretty draconian SS reforms that would allow us to cut taxes. I'm all for it. Just find me the candidate.

WinterTriangle
04-24-2008, 08:56 PM
this site is right dominant.

Maybe I can help shift that ratio? :)



By way of introduction, I'm new here, just came over to learn and talk about horseracing, but couldn't resist looking in here.

While in the present political climate (both sides) it's difficult NOT to want to define yourself as middle-of-the-road (just to keep from being thought of as insane :D )----I lean liberal/progressive.

Ya'll have a great board, looking forward to interacting.

Tom
04-24-2008, 09:42 PM
Chick...neither party has a clue of how to cut taxes because neither party has a clue what is like to be a normal human being. they arae all spoiled rotten elitists who care only about themselves and not us, not htis country, not a thing.

While the three stooges vie for the next presidency, Shemp ( Bush) is meeting with Canada and Mexico selling out our coutnry with his North American Union BS and parising NAFTA. The man has morphed into Jimmiy Carter Part Duex.

Forget finding a candiate - there are none and will never be any.

chickenhead
04-24-2008, 10:25 PM
Watch the video of David Walker, Comptroller General of the United States, which aired on CBS's "Sixty Minutes" on January 16, 2008. http://www.garynorth.com/public/department79.cfm

Thanks for that. You would think this sort of thing would get a little more attention. It's been talked about for what, a decade or two now? I guess the good news is we will start seeing it actually happen relatively soon, and won't be able to be ignore it.

I don't talk much about Medicare/Health Care, mainly because the problem is so big, and I don't know enough to even have an idea on what to do. But it's rife with ugly choices to be made.

riskman
04-25-2008, 12:47 AM
Thanks for that. You would think this sort of thing would get a little more attention. It's been talked about for what, a decade or two now? I guess the good news is we will start seeing it actually happen relatively soon, and won't be able to be ignore it.

I don't talk much about Medicare/Health Care, mainly because the problem is so big, and I don't know enough to even have an idea on what to do. But it's rife with ugly choices to be made.

GWB and Congress appear to have dropped all pretenses of trying to control federal spending. With huge new expenditures on everything from Medicare to boondoggles like No Child Left Behind to their foreign war in Iraq, the spending habits of the gang presently in control make the Clintonistas look like rank amateurs by comparison!

Neither Democrats nor Republicans have the will to fix this mess. That much is clear. Our system, focused on the next election, is structurally flawed. It encourages quick-fixes and makes strategic, long-term thinking extremely difficult for anyone on the inside. Most potentially decent politicians – making the admittedly tall assumption that that’s not a contradiction in terms – are quickly corrupted by the culture in Washington.

Is the situation hopeless? With the resources available via the Internet, the truth is getting out to a small number of people.That is what we need now, and within the next four years: a critical mass of people who are both able and willing to break with the Demopublicans, with the prevailing economic philosophy of consumption and debt (and, of course, also with the mainstream media and the prevailing system of government-sponsored education), and steer themselves towards intellectual and financial independence.

And then they will need to brace themselves for a very rough ride – because the illogic and irresponsibility of the past several decades will exact a price. It’s not a matter of if but when. The longer it takes, the worse the train wreck will be. Not to mention the possibility of a day, once the emergency sets in or possibly sooner, when dissent may cause an internal crisis.

46zilzal
04-25-2008, 04:45 PM
In sore need of a third party.

Lefty
04-25-2008, 09:48 PM
If Ross Perot failed with his 3rd party, don't see one coming anytime soon.

Valuist
04-25-2008, 11:27 PM
goes up and down.
Were paying highgas prices at least partly because we haven't done any new drilling in this country or built any new refineries in over 30 years. Were paying more for food inlarge part because we're making inefficient ethanol.
Yeah it's all the R's fault. So chick, you vote dims and i'll vote R's. That's America, son. You gets your choice. But it's true, both parties need to do more. This social spending has got to stop. SS has to be partially privatised or you and my grandkids will never see a penny of it. My advice to you and my grandkids is to not count on it and start making preparations for your own futures now.

While I agree with much of what you said, Bush has been one of the strongest backers of ethanol, which has proven to be a terribly wasteful energy source.

Lefty
04-26-2008, 12:09 AM
valuist i agree, but a lot of people have been sold a bill of goods about ethanyl.
We still should develop the resources wehave in this country, oil, gas and coal.

Tom
04-26-2008, 11:05 AM
Using a food source for fuel is the studipidest thing mankind has ever done....ever!

Lefty
04-26-2008, 11:39 AM
Tom, I agree. The wackos are selling their fear and stupidity everywhere.
ALGORE has become the most dangerous wacko on the planet.

Tom
04-26-2008, 12:36 PM
Yes, Lefty, Global Warming might just kill us all - the selling of it.
If it were so urgent as bimbos like ALLGORE say it is, how can this bottom feeder possible justify all the exemptions of Kyoto and all the credits being sold? Not one candiate or supported of Global Ignorance has sood up and called for Zero Credit......shows how much they really believe it.

He is a fraud, bottom line.

JustRalph
04-28-2008, 03:30 AM
While driving back from Churchill tonight I heard a show on XM about Ethanol.

25% of the corn market is now being used toward ethanol.

Corn is over 6 bucks a bushel they said.

The new gas requirements enacted by Congress in 2007 require all gas to be 10% ethanol by July 1st or something like that. It will bump the corn crop use for ethanol up to 35% later this year. 8 dollars a bushel is predicted after that ocurrs. You think food is expensive now..............lookout.

Btw, they also said that Ethanol has now been found to be worse than regular gas for the air.................... as Yakov Smirnov used to say........

"what a country!!"

Tom
04-28-2008, 07:56 AM
Price of wheat triples this year.
Beer is at risk because hops is now in short supply!:(

Many crops are being ignored to switch to corn.
This is pure stupidity, and a nice sneak peak at a lib controlled government.
Airheads one and all.