Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
"From another list." To borrow a phrase from the Mormon.
2 views
Skip to first unread message
Hisler
May 4, 2012, 8:35:09 PM5/4/12
to
This is from one of the more hard core blogs, which was forwarded to me
by a friend in Arizona. I believe that it merits attention, FWIW.
"Hisler" / Steve from Colorado
alt.survival
http://globalgulag.us
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
“We are Preparing for Massive Civil War,” Says DHS Informant
Posted by Dominique de Kevelioc de Bailleul on May 03, 2012 | 1 comment
In a riveting interview on TruNews Radio, Wednesday, private
investigator Doug Hagmann said high-level, reliable sources told him the
U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is preparing for “massive
civil war” in America.
“Folks, we’re getting ready for one massive economic collapse,” Hagmann
told TruNews host Rick Wiles. Sign-up for my 100% FREE Alerts
“We have problems . . . The federal government is preparing for civil
uprising,” he added, “so every time you hear about troop movements,
every time you hear about movements of military equipment, the
militarization of the police, the buying of the ammunition, all of this
is . . . they (DHS) are preparing for a massive uprising.”
Hagmann goes on to say that his sources tell him the concerns of the DHS
stem from a collapse of the U.S. dollar and the hyperinflation a
collapse in the value of the world’s primary reserve currency implies to
a nation of 311 million Americans, who, for the significant portion of
the population, is armed.
Uprisings in Greece is, indeed, a problem, but an uprising of armed
Americans becomes a matter of serious national security, a point
addressed in a recent report by the Pentagon pentagon tis occupied
territory by CFR & ashkeNAIZI r dual isreal that do not act in Americas
best national iterestrs and highlighted as a vulnerability and threat
to the U.S. during war-game exercises at the Department of Defense last
year, according to one of the DoD’s war-game participants, Jim Rickards,
author of Currency Wars: The Making of the Next Global Crisis.
Through his sources, Hagmann confirmed Rickards’ ongoing thesis of a
fear of a U.S. dollar collapse at the hands of the Chinese (U.S.
treasury bond holders of approximately $1 trillion) and, possibly, the
Russians (threatening to launch a gold-backed ruble as an attractive
alternative to the U.S. dollar) in retaliation for aggressive U.S.
foreign policy initiatives against China’s and Russia’s strategic allies
Iran and Syria.
“The one source that we have I’ve known since 1979,” Hagmann continued.
“He started out as a patrol officer and currently he is now working
for a federal agency under the umbrella of the Department of Homeland
Security; he’s in a position to know what policies are being initiated,
what policies are being planned at this point, and he’s telling us right
now—look, what you’re seeing is just the tip of the iceberg. We are
preparing, we, meaning the government, we are preparing for a massive
civil war in this country.”
“There’s no hyperbole here,” he added, echoing Trends Research
Institute’s Founder Gerald Celente’s forecast of last year. Celente
expects a collapse of the U.S. dollar and riots in America some time
this year.
Since Celente’s ‘Civil War’ prediction of last year, executive orders
NDAA and National Defense Resources Preparedness were signed into law by
President Obama, which are both politically damaging actions taken by a
sitting president.
And most recently, requests made by the DHS for the procurement of 450
million rounds of hollow-point ammunition only fuels speculation of an
upcoming tragic event expected on American soil.
These major events, as shocking to the American people as they are, have
taken place during an election year.
Escalating preparatory activities by the executive branch and DHS
throughout the last decade—from the Patriot Act, to countless executive
orders drafted to suspend (or strip) American civil liberties “are just
the beginning” of the nightmare to come, Hagmann said.
He added, “It’s going to get so much worse toward the election, and I’m
not even sure we’re going to have an election in this country. It’s
going to be that bad, and this, as well, is coming from my sources. But
one source in particular said, ‘look, you don’t understand how bad it
is.’ This stuff is real; these people, the Department of Homeland
Security (DHS), they are ready to fight the American people.”
TruNews‘ Wiles asked Hagmann: who does the DHS expect to fight, in
particular? Another North versus South, the Yankees against the
Confederates? Hagmann stated the situation is far worse than a struggle
between any two factions within the U.S.; it’s an anticipated nationwide
emergency event centered on the nation’s currency.
“What they [DHS] are expecting, and again, this is according to my
sources, what they’re expecting is the un-sustainability of the American
dollar,” Hagmann said. “And we know for a fact that we can no longer
service our debt. There’s going to be a period of hyperinflation . . .
the dollar will be worthless . . . The economic collapse will be so
severe, people won’t be ready for this.
Read more:
http://www.beaconequity.com/we-are-preparing-for-massive-civil-war-says-dhs-informant-2012-05-03/#ixzz1tqdXHVm8http://www.beaconequity.com/we-are-preparing-for-massive-civil-war-says-dhs-informant-2012-05-03/--
I prefer dangerous FREEDOM to peaceful SLAVERY. - Thomas Jefferson
"Slaves cannot own Guns"
INTERSTATE? Don't go until you see this!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P8NwuPAXay4 You know we live in dark days
when common people fear the government more than criminals! FCO 06/14/2005
by a friend in Arizona. I believe that it merits attention, FWIW.
"Hisler" / Steve from Colorado
alt.survival
http://globalgulag.us
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
“We are Preparing for Massive Civil War,” Says DHS Informant
Posted by Dominique de Kevelioc de Bailleul on May 03, 2012 | 1 comment
In a riveting interview on TruNews Radio, Wednesday, private
investigator Doug Hagmann said high-level, reliable sources told him the
U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is preparing for “massive
civil war” in America.
“Folks, we’re getting ready for one massive economic collapse,” Hagmann
told TruNews host Rick Wiles. Sign-up for my 100% FREE Alerts
“We have problems . . . The federal government is preparing for civil
uprising,” he added, “so every time you hear about troop movements,
every time you hear about movements of military equipment, the
militarization of the police, the buying of the ammunition, all of this
is . . . they (DHS) are preparing for a massive uprising.”
Hagmann goes on to say that his sources tell him the concerns of the DHS
stem from a collapse of the U.S. dollar and the hyperinflation a
collapse in the value of the world’s primary reserve currency implies to
a nation of 311 million Americans, who, for the significant portion of
the population, is armed.
Uprisings in Greece is, indeed, a problem, but an uprising of armed
Americans becomes a matter of serious national security, a point
addressed in a recent report by the Pentagon pentagon tis occupied
territory by CFR & ashkeNAIZI r dual isreal that do not act in Americas
best national iterestrs and highlighted as a vulnerability and threat
to the U.S. during war-game exercises at the Department of Defense last
year, according to one of the DoD’s war-game participants, Jim Rickards,
author of Currency Wars: The Making of the Next Global Crisis.
Through his sources, Hagmann confirmed Rickards’ ongoing thesis of a
fear of a U.S. dollar collapse at the hands of the Chinese (U.S.
treasury bond holders of approximately $1 trillion) and, possibly, the
Russians (threatening to launch a gold-backed ruble as an attractive
alternative to the U.S. dollar) in retaliation for aggressive U.S.
foreign policy initiatives against China’s and Russia’s strategic allies
Iran and Syria.
“The one source that we have I’ve known since 1979,” Hagmann continued.
“He started out as a patrol officer and currently he is now working
for a federal agency under the umbrella of the Department of Homeland
Security; he’s in a position to know what policies are being initiated,
what policies are being planned at this point, and he’s telling us right
now—look, what you’re seeing is just the tip of the iceberg. We are
preparing, we, meaning the government, we are preparing for a massive
civil war in this country.”
“There’s no hyperbole here,” he added, echoing Trends Research
Institute’s Founder Gerald Celente’s forecast of last year. Celente
expects a collapse of the U.S. dollar and riots in America some time
this year.
Since Celente’s ‘Civil War’ prediction of last year, executive orders
NDAA and National Defense Resources Preparedness were signed into law by
President Obama, which are both politically damaging actions taken by a
sitting president.
And most recently, requests made by the DHS for the procurement of 450
million rounds of hollow-point ammunition only fuels speculation of an
upcoming tragic event expected on American soil.
These major events, as shocking to the American people as they are, have
taken place during an election year.
Escalating preparatory activities by the executive branch and DHS
throughout the last decade—from the Patriot Act, to countless executive
orders drafted to suspend (or strip) American civil liberties “are just
the beginning” of the nightmare to come, Hagmann said.
He added, “It’s going to get so much worse toward the election, and I’m
not even sure we’re going to have an election in this country. It’s
going to be that bad, and this, as well, is coming from my sources. But
one source in particular said, ‘look, you don’t understand how bad it
is.’ This stuff is real; these people, the Department of Homeland
Security (DHS), they are ready to fight the American people.”
TruNews‘ Wiles asked Hagmann: who does the DHS expect to fight, in
particular? Another North versus South, the Yankees against the
Confederates? Hagmann stated the situation is far worse than a struggle
between any two factions within the U.S.; it’s an anticipated nationwide
emergency event centered on the nation’s currency.
“What they [DHS] are expecting, and again, this is according to my
sources, what they’re expecting is the un-sustainability of the American
dollar,” Hagmann said. “And we know for a fact that we can no longer
service our debt. There’s going to be a period of hyperinflation . . .
the dollar will be worthless . . . The economic collapse will be so
severe, people won’t be ready for this.
Read more:
http://www.beaconequity.com/we-are-preparing-for-massive-civil-war-says-dhs-informant-2012-05-03/#ixzz1tqdXHVm8http://www.beaconequity.com/we-are-preparing-for-massive-civil-war-says-dhs-informant-2012-05-03/--
I prefer dangerous FREEDOM to peaceful SLAVERY. - Thomas Jefferson
"Slaves cannot own Guns"
INTERSTATE? Don't go until you see this!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P8NwuPAXay4 You know we live in dark days
when common people fear the government more than criminals! FCO 06/14/2005
bates2012
May 5, 2012, 2:17:48 AM5/5/12
to
On May 4, 7:35 pm, Hisler <his...@cocks.net> wrote:
> This is from one of the more hard core blogs, which was forwarded to me
> by a friend in Arizona. I believe that it merits attention, FWIW.
>
> "Hisler" / Steve from Colorado
> alt.survivalhttp://globalgulag.us
> This is from one of the more hard core blogs, which was forwarded to me
> by a friend in Arizona. I believe that it merits attention, FWIW.
>
> "Hisler" / Steve from Colorado
> I prefer dangerous FREEDOM to peaceful SLAVERY. - Thomas Jefferson
> "Slaves cannot own Guns"
>
> INTERSTATE? Don't go until you see this!http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P8NwuPAXay4You know we live in dark days
> "Slaves cannot own Guns"
>
> when common people fear the government more than criminals! FCO 06/14/2005
Well hell, I just posted a link to that article, then scrolled down
and see you had already posted about it. Maybe twice as many people
will see it, lol
NB
Stormin Mormon
May 5, 2012, 6:21:08 AM5/5/12
to
You know, this is fairly consistent with what I've been expecting. With the
loss of restrictions on government such as Patriot Act. And, the deficit
spending, and China buying treasury debt. I am expecting a lot of economic
problems, in the next few years. Combine that with our Community Organizer
in Chief's actions, and it's going to get rough.
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.
"Hisler" <his...@cocks.net> wrote in message
news:jo1sjk$2bf$1...@dont-email.me...
loss of restrictions on government such as Patriot Act. And, the deficit
spending, and China buying treasury debt. I am expecting a lot of economic
problems, in the next few years. Combine that with our Community Organizer
in Chief's actions, and it's going to get rough.
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.
"Hisler" <his...@cocks.net> wrote in message
news:jo1sjk$2bf$1...@dont-email.me...
Hisler
May 5, 2012, 8:03:54 PM5/5/12
to
was posting. I fixed it, so now there should be triple the number of
people who will see. Lock and load.
Stormin Mormon
May 8, 2012, 8:44:25 AM5/8/12
to
When a government removes freedoms, as fast and hard as this one. Deficit
spending, socialized med, and governing against the will of the people.
There will be some serious push back. Eventually, the masses figure out that
voting and writing to the congressman doesn't have much effect. Some where
along the line, someone will decide that voting, blogging, and writing isn't
doing much.
Someone, probably elderly vetran, will fire the shot heard round the
blogosphere. And, where it goes from there, who can tell?
"Hisler" <His...@cocks.net> wrote in message
news:jo4f59$861$1...@dont-email.me...
spending, socialized med, and governing against the will of the people.
There will be some serious push back. Eventually, the masses figure out that
voting and writing to the congressman doesn't have much effect. Some where
along the line, someone will decide that voting, blogging, and writing isn't
doing much.
Someone, probably elderly vetran, will fire the shot heard round the
blogosphere. And, where it goes from there, who can tell?
"Hisler" <His...@cocks.net> wrote in message
news:jo4f59$861$1...@dont-email.me...
On 5/5/2012 12:17 AM, bates2012 wrote:
> On May 4, 7:35 pm, Hisler<his...@cocks.net> wrote:
>> This is from one of the more hard core blogs, which was forwarded to me
>> by a friend in Arizona. I believe that it merits attention, FWIW.
>>
> On May 4, 7:35 pm, Hisler<his...@cocks.net> wrote:
>> This is from one of the more hard core blogs, which was forwarded to me
>> by a friend in Arizona. I believe that it merits attention, FWIW.
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> “We are Preparing for Massive Civil War,” Says DHS Informant
>>
>> Posted by Dominique de Kevelioc de Bailleul on May 03, 2012 | 1 comment
>>
>> In a riveting interview on TruNews Radio, Wednesday, private
>> investigator Doug Hagmann said high-level, reliable sources told him the
>> U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is preparing for “massive
>> civil war” in America.
>>
>>
>> “We are Preparing for Massive Civil War,” Says DHS Informant
>>
>> Posted by Dominique de Kevelioc de Bailleul on May 03, 2012 | 1 comment
>>
>> In a riveting interview on TruNews Radio, Wednesday, private
>> investigator Doug Hagmann said high-level, reliable sources told him the
>> U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is preparing for “massive
>> civil war” in America.
>>
Jeff M
May 8, 2012, 9:00:28 AM5/8/12
to
On 5/8/2012 7:44 AM, Stormin Mormon wrote:
> When a government removes freedoms, as fast and hard as this one. Deficit
> spending, socialized med, and governing against the will of the people.
> There will be some serious push back. Eventually, the masses figure out that
> voting and writing to the congressman doesn't have much effect. Some where
> along the line, someone will decide that voting, blogging, and writing isn't
> doing much.
>
> Someone, probably elderly vetran, will fire the shot heard round the
> blogosphere. And, where it goes from there, who can tell?
We've already had elderly psychotic rightards go off the deep end and
> When a government removes freedoms, as fast and hard as this one. Deficit
> spending, socialized med, and governing against the will of the people.
> There will be some serious push back. Eventually, the masses figure out that
> voting and writing to the congressman doesn't have much effect. Some where
> along the line, someone will decide that voting, blogging, and writing isn't
> doing much.
>
> Someone, probably elderly vetran, will fire the shot heard round the
> blogosphere. And, where it goes from there, who can tell?
murder people. But it didn't go anywhere.
Winston_Smith
May 8, 2012, 12:10:50 PM5/8/12
to
On Tue, 8 May 2012 08:44:25 -0400, "Stormin Mormon"
<cayoung61***spam...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>When a government removes freedoms, as fast and hard as this one.
Google "Patriot Act" if you want to see professional liberty grabbing.
<cayoung61***spam...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>When a government removes freedoms, as fast and hard as this one.
Google "Homeland Security" if you want to see professional liberty
grabbing.
>Deficit spending,
The Bush deficit was the biggest in the history of the country until O
saw him and raised.
>socialized med,
Bush added drug benefits against all financial advice.
Romney wrote ObamaCare V1.0 and says he loves mandates to fund it.
>and governing against the will of the people.
is pure democracy where we lynch the folks whose color you don't like.
That is always fast and pure disaster.
>There will be some serious push back. Eventually, the masses figure out that
>voting and writing to the congressman doesn't have much effect. Some where
>along the line, someone will decide that voting, blogging, and writing isn't
>doing much.
can be hoodwinked for a decade or two yet.
>Someone, probably elderly vetran, will fire the shot heard round the
>blogosphere. And, where it goes from there, who can tell?
>Christopher A. Young
You certainly are.
Gunner Asch
May 8, 2012, 12:30:33 PM5/8/12
to
On Tue, 08 May 2012 09:10:50 -0700, Winston_Smith
<inv...@butterfly.net> wrote:
>On Tue, 8 May 2012 08:44:25 -0400, "Stormin Mormon"
><cayoung61***spam...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>When a government removes freedoms, as fast and hard as this one.
>
>Google "Patriot Act" if you want to see professional liberty grabbing.
>Google "Homeland Security" if you want to see professional liberty
>grabbing.
Care to point out the gun control actions in those?
<inv...@butterfly.net> wrote:
>On Tue, 8 May 2012 08:44:25 -0400, "Stormin Mormon"
><cayoung61***spam...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>When a government removes freedoms, as fast and hard as this one.
>
>Google "Patriot Act" if you want to see professional liberty grabbing.
>Google "Homeland Security" if you want to see professional liberty
>grabbing.
>
>>Deficit spending,
>
>The Bush deficit was the biggest in the history of the country until O
>saw him and raised.
Only when inflated dollars are used. One suggests you review FDRs
>>Deficit spending,
>
>The Bush deficit was the biggest in the history of the country until O
>saw him and raised.
spending on a dollar/corrected dollar scale is used.
>
>>socialized med,
>
>Bush added drug benefits against all financial advice.
>Romney wrote ObamaCare V1.0 and says he loves mandates to fund it.
>
>>and governing against the will of the people.
>
>You don't understand the concept of Republic. What you seen to want
>is pure democracy where we lynch the folks whose color you don't like.
>That is always fast and pure disaster.
>
>>There will be some serious push back. Eventually, the masses figure out that
>>voting and writing to the congressman doesn't have much effect. Some where
>>along the line, someone will decide that voting, blogging, and writing isn't
>>doing much.
>
>This is true. But my assessment is the R sheeples and the D sheeple
>can be hoodwinked for a decade or two yet.
>
>>Someone, probably elderly vetran, will fire the shot heard round the
>>blogosphere. And, where it goes from there, who can tell?
>
>Are you saying veterans are psychos or patriots ?
>
>>Christopher A. Young
>
>You certainly are.
--
>>socialized med,
>
>Bush added drug benefits against all financial advice.
>Romney wrote ObamaCare V1.0 and says he loves mandates to fund it.
>
>>and governing against the will of the people.
>
>You don't understand the concept of Republic. What you seen to want
>is pure democracy where we lynch the folks whose color you don't like.
>That is always fast and pure disaster.
>
>>There will be some serious push back. Eventually, the masses figure out that
>>voting and writing to the congressman doesn't have much effect. Some where
>>along the line, someone will decide that voting, blogging, and writing isn't
>>doing much.
>
>This is true. But my assessment is the R sheeples and the D sheeple
>can be hoodwinked for a decade or two yet.
>
>>Someone, probably elderly vetran, will fire the shot heard round the
>>blogosphere. And, where it goes from there, who can tell?
>
>Are you saying veterans are psychos or patriots ?
>
>>Christopher A. Young
>
>You certainly are.
"The danger to America is not Barack Obama but a citizenry
capable of entrusting a man like him with the Presidency.
It will be far easier to limit and undo the follies of an
Obama presidency than to restore the necessary common sense
and good judgment to a depraved electorate willing to have
such a man for their? president.. Blaming the prince of the
fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of
fools that made him their prince".
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Winston_Smith
May 8, 2012, 5:38:49 PM5/8/12
to
On Tue, 08 May 2012 09:30:33 -0700, Gunner Asch wrote:
>On Tue, 08 May 2012 09:10:50 -0700, Winston_Smith wrote:
be held incommunicado, indefinitely, without charges, without council,
and without trial. Ever. What is a non-combatant enemy or a
terrorist ? Anyone the president says so. Does he have to dirty his
own hands. Why no, he doesn't. It's been delegated to undisclosed
courts and agencies that only act in secret.
If they don't like you having a gun, or what you do with it, or just
the cut of your jeans or your haircut, you are no more. Never
existed. Black Maria. If you are very, very lucky, you don't get
renditoned. Pretty effective no.
Now about all those other pesky details in that "God damned piece of
paper" that you and I jokingly call the Bill of Rights .....
>>>Deficit spending,
>>
>>The Bush deficit was the biggest in the history of the country until O
>>saw him and raised.
>
>Only when inflated dollars are used. One suggests you review FDRs
>spending on a dollar/corrected dollar scale is used.
How about we compare him to Clinton. That puts it in the same
generation. That's the set of rules and conditions that Bush
inherited when he took office.
>On Tue, 08 May 2012 09:10:50 -0700, Winston_Smith wrote:
>>On Tue, 8 May 2012 08:44:25 -0400, "Stormin Mormon" wrote:
>>
>>>When a government removes freedoms, as fast and hard as this one.
>>
>>Google "Patriot Act" if you want to see professional liberty grabbing.
>>Google "Homeland Security" if you want to see professional liberty
>>grabbing.
>
>Care to point out the gun control actions in those?
For one. You can be declared a non-combatant enemy or a terrorist and
>>
>>>When a government removes freedoms, as fast and hard as this one.
>>
>>Google "Patriot Act" if you want to see professional liberty grabbing.
>>Google "Homeland Security" if you want to see professional liberty
>>grabbing.
>
>Care to point out the gun control actions in those?
be held incommunicado, indefinitely, without charges, without council,
and without trial. Ever. What is a non-combatant enemy or a
terrorist ? Anyone the president says so. Does he have to dirty his
own hands. Why no, he doesn't. It's been delegated to undisclosed
courts and agencies that only act in secret.
If they don't like you having a gun, or what you do with it, or just
the cut of your jeans or your haircut, you are no more. Never
existed. Black Maria. If you are very, very lucky, you don't get
renditoned. Pretty effective no.
Now about all those other pesky details in that "God damned piece of
paper" that you and I jokingly call the Bill of Rights .....
>>>Deficit spending,
>>
>>The Bush deficit was the biggest in the history of the country until O
>>saw him and raised.
>
>Only when inflated dollars are used. One suggests you review FDRs
>spending on a dollar/corrected dollar scale is used.
generation. That's the set of rules and conditions that Bush
inherited when he took office.
Winston_Smith
May 8, 2012, 5:42:42 PM5/8/12
to
On Tue, 08 May 2012 15:17:34 -0500, G. Morgan wrote:
>Stormin Mormon wrote:
>
>>When a government removes freedoms, as fast and hard as this one. Deficit
>>spending, socialized med, and governing against the will of the people.
>>There will be some serious push back. Eventually, the masses figure out that
>>voting and writing to the congressman doesn't have much effect. Some where
>>along the line, someone will decide that voting, blogging, and writing isn't
>>doing much.
>>
>>Someone, probably elderly vetran, will fire the shot heard round the
>>blogosphere. And, where it goes from there, who can tell?
>
>Ya know what is funny? We already have socialized medicine. The
>Stormin Mormon wrote:
>
>>When a government removes freedoms, as fast and hard as this one. Deficit
>>spending, socialized med, and governing against the will of the people.
>>There will be some serious push back. Eventually, the masses figure out that
>>voting and writing to the congressman doesn't have much effect. Some where
>>along the line, someone will decide that voting, blogging, and writing isn't
>>doing much.
>>
>>Someone, probably elderly vetran, will fire the shot heard round the
>>blogosphere. And, where it goes from there, who can tell?
>
>premiums paid by the insured are inflated to make-up the cost on
>the walk-ins to ERs that use it as their PCP.
>
>You make the insurance pool bigger, premiums go down.
In theory. If you have the government manage it, the premiums go up.
Take you pick - unjustified corporate profits from a monopoly they had
handed to them or massive waste in government bureaucracy. The
question no one can answer, is why do I care which one steals my money
and returns as little in the way of service as possible.
Winston_Smith
May 8, 2012, 7:38:25 PM5/8/12
to
On Tue, 08 May 2012 15:58:58 -0400, Deucalion wrote:
>On Tue, 08 May 2012 09:30:33 -0700, Gunner Asch wrote:
>>On Tue, 08 May 2012 09:10:50 -0700, Winston_Smith wrote:
>On Tue, 08 May 2012 09:30:33 -0700, Gunner Asch wrote:
>>>On Tue, 8 May 2012 08:44:25 -0400, "Stormin Mormon" wrote:
>>>
>>>>When a government removes freedoms, as fast and hard as this one.
>>>
>>>Google "Patriot Act" if you want to see professional liberty grabbing.
>>>Google "Homeland Security" if you want to see professional liberty
>>>grabbing.
>>
>>Care to point out the gun control actions in those?
>
>Gunner (the one trick pony) doesn't realize that there are many more
>>>
>>>>When a government removes freedoms, as fast and hard as this one.
>>>
>>>Google "Patriot Act" if you want to see professional liberty grabbing.
>>>Google "Homeland Security" if you want to see professional liberty
>>>grabbing.
>>
>>Care to point out the gun control actions in those?
>
>rights than the right to bear arms.
Gunner is a master of political debate. Especially if he can divert
the thread to one unrelated item and reduce it to a one line quip.
Stormin' wrote of "freedoms". I wrote of "liberty grabbing". Pretty
broad and complex topics. Gunner looked around and found one of many
components that he thought wasn't germane to the thread, and wrote
about "gun control".
That's classic of his way of backing a thread into an arena he wants.
Next in the thread, he wanted to compare Obama's deficit spending to
FDR. He had to go back over seventy years to find his reference.
He ignores that FDR was fighting the First Great Depression which he
inherited. He ignores that Bush created the Second Great Depression
and left it for Obama to inherit. He ignores that Bush's deficit tops
every president ever before Obama. Tops them all put together as a
matter of fact.
He ignores that FDR had almost no tools in place and had to make them
up on the fly. He ignores that Bush had all those tools, increased
and enhanced by 70 years of Rs and Ds in the presidency and Congress
and that Bush used every damn one of them, and succeeded at
accomplishing nothing except more debt.
He ignores that his most recent example of an R-god, inherited a
decent economy near the top of a long growth and he inherited a
balanced budget, albeit by smoke and mirrors. Gunner ignores that
Bush kept every damn one of those smoke and mirrors, added more, and
still went from a surplus to a deficit. He did it with the age old
route to disaster - guns and butter. (Something FDR stoutly refused
to do.) Bush started an undeclared, unfunded war with the wrong
country to the tune of a trillion dollars at the same time he gave
away a trillion dollar tax cut to the richest of his supporters.
He could have eked out either with some difficulty, but not both. As
deficits mounted, Bush denied there was any problem for years until it
collapsed almost overnight. Then he responded by giving away
trillions of dollars to the richest banks with absolutely no controls
and no requirement they use it to stimulate the economy by lending.
They kept it and they invested it. For themselves. In government
bonds, which produces zero stimulus. They bought bonds that were
paying the going interest with borrowed money they were getting at
near zero interest. Bush's bankers pocketed the difference and gave
themselves bonuses for being such clever managers.
Nope. Gunner yells "gun control" and swaggers off thinking he has won
some sort of debate by a clever rhetorical trick. Guess, what. He's
wrong.
SaPeIsMa
May 8, 2012, 8:31:37 PM5/8/12
to
"G. Morgan" <seal...@osama-is-dead.net> wrote in message
news:lmviq7h0out99diqc...@Osama-Is-Dead.net...
> Stormin Mormon wrote:
>
>>When a government removes freedoms, as fast and hard as this one. Deficit
>>spending, socialized med, and governing against the will of the people.
>>There will be some serious push back. Eventually, the masses figure out
>>that
>>voting and writing to the congressman doesn't have much effect. Some where
>>along the line, someone will decide that voting, blogging, and writing
>>isn't
>>doing much.
>>
>>Someone, probably elderly vetran, will fire the shot heard round the
>>blogosphere. And, where it goes from there, who can tell?
>
>
>>When a government removes freedoms, as fast and hard as this one. Deficit
>>spending, socialized med, and governing against the will of the people.
>>There will be some serious push back. Eventually, the masses figure out
>>that
>>voting and writing to the congressman doesn't have much effect. Some where
>>along the line, someone will decide that voting, blogging, and writing
>>isn't
>>doing much.
>>
>>Someone, probably elderly vetran, will fire the shot heard round the
>>blogosphere. And, where it goes from there, who can tell?
>
> Ya know what is funny? We already have socialized medicine. The
> premiums paid by the insured are inflated to make-up the cost on
> the walk-ins to ERs that use it as their PCP.
>
> You make the insurance pool bigger, premiums go down.
>
Not when it involves government inefficiency
> premiums paid by the insured are inflated to make-up the cost on
> the walk-ins to ERs that use it as their PCP.
>
> You make the insurance pool bigger, premiums go down.
>
That, with very few exceptions ALWAYS makes the price go up
Just look at England and Canada for classic examples of that.
Stormin Mormon
May 8, 2012, 9:10:37 PM5/8/12
to
With less intelligent people thinking "this is free, now!" the usage of all
levels of medical care will go way up. Combine that with several other
government maxims, and the result will be increase in price.
Free market forces such as Reaganomics would provide better quality care, at
lower prices.
I had a stick of CareFree gum, but it didn't work. I felt pretty
good while I was blowing that bubble, but as soon as the gum
lost its flavor, I was back to pondering my mortality. -Mitch Hedberg
levels of medical care will go way up. Combine that with several other
government maxims, and the result will be increase in price.
Free market forces such as Reaganomics would provide better quality care, at
lower prices.
"G. Morgan" <seal...@osama-is-dead.net> wrote in message
>When a government removes freedoms, as fast and hard as this one. Deficit
>spending, socialized med, and governing against the will of the people.
>spending, socialized med, and governing against the will of the people.
Ya know what is funny? We already have socialized medicine. The
premiums paid by the insured are inflated to make-up the cost on
the walk-ins to ERs that use it as their PCP.
You make the insurance pool bigger, premiums go down.
--
premiums paid by the insured are inflated to make-up the cost on
the walk-ins to ERs that use it as their PCP.
You make the insurance pool bigger, premiums go down.
I had a stick of CareFree gum, but it didn't work. I felt pretty
good while I was blowing that bubble, but as soon as the gum
lost its flavor, I was back to pondering my mortality. -Mitch Hedberg
Winston_Smith
May 8, 2012, 10:00:13 PM5/8/12
to
On Tue, 8 May 2012 21:10:37 -0400, "Stormin Mormon"
<cayoung61***spam...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>With less intelligent people thinking "this is free, now!" the usage of all
>levels of medical care will go way up. Combine that with several other
>government maxims, and the result will be increase in price.
For one thing that optician you browbeat into measuring the glasses
<cayoung61***spam...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>With less intelligent people thinking "this is free, now!" the usage of all
>levels of medical care will go way up. Combine that with several other
>government maxims, and the result will be increase in price.
you bought mail order from China, will have to increase his price for
the next paying customer to make up for what he lost on you.
Don't even pretend for one second you do not support socialized
medicine.
>Free market forces such as Reaganomics would provide better quality care, at
>lower prices.
China. Paid for by some responsible American that paid for what you
took for free from the optician. Your lenses were not made by an
American in an American factory because you didn't want to pay a
living wage for them. I doubt Reagan told us to buy Chinese, it's the
American thing to do.
>Christopher A. Young
>Learn more about Jesus
milking the system for what he can get.
Gunner Asch
May 12, 2012, 3:38:51 PM5/12/12
to
On Tue, 08 May 2012 16:38:25 -0700, Winston_Smith
<inv...@butterfly.net> wrote:
>
>Next in the thread, he wanted to compare Obama's deficit spending to
>FDR. He had to go back over seventy years to find his reference.
Odd that you and the Left claim that Bush got the record for spending.
<inv...@butterfly.net> wrote:
>
>Next in the thread, he wanted to compare Obama's deficit spending to
>FDR. He had to go back over seventy years to find his reference.
Which is hardly true. You bunch seem to forget WW2 AND Korea (which was
war at a bargain price given that 3/4 of the US inventory got tossed
between WW2 and Korea.
Then we had the 10,000 Day War..Vietnam..another Democrat spending spree
both in dollars and American lives.
Take the formula for 194x dollars and compare them to Bush's dollars.
But no..its more than a single president back..so you cockbites declare
it to be none existant.
Fuck you and your Leftwing buddies Whiney.
Gunner
Gunner Asch
May 12, 2012, 3:40:34 PM5/12/12
to
>He ignores that his most recent example of an R-god, inherited a
>decent economy near the top of a long growth and he inherited a
>balanced budget, albeit by smoke and mirrors. Gunner ignores that
>Bush kept every damn one of those smoke and mirrors, added more, and
>still went from a surplus to a deficit. He did it with the age old
>route to disaster - guns and butter.
And again our old Leftwing buddy Whiney declares Clinton had a "surplus"
>decent economy near the top of a long growth and he inherited a
>balanced budget, albeit by smoke and mirrors. Gunner ignores that
>Bush kept every damn one of those smoke and mirrors, added more, and
>still went from a surplus to a deficit. He did it with the age old
>route to disaster - guns and butter.
Sorry Comrade..zero surplus. Nada. Nope, None, Nyet, Hasidata
Why dont you simply declare your love for the Obamassiah and be done
with it?
Gunner
Message has been deleted
Winston_Smith
May 12, 2012, 6:27:27 PM5/12/12
to
On Sat, 12 May 2012 12:40:34 -0700, Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>On Tue, 08 May 2012 16:38:25 -0700, Winston_Smith
><inv...@butterfly.net> wrote:
>
>>He ignores that his most recent example of an R-god, inherited a
>>decent economy near the top of a long growth and he inherited a
>>balanced budget, albeit by smoke and mirrors. Gunner ignores that
>>Bush kept every damn one of those smoke and mirrors, added more, and
>>still went from a surplus to a deficit. He did it with the age old
>>route to disaster - guns and butter.
>
>And again our old Leftwing buddy Whiney declares Clinton had a "surplus"
>
>Sorry Comrade..zero surplus. Nada. Nope, None, Nyet, Hasidata
How very biased of you, hey there is a surprise, that you ignore the
"albeit by smoke and mirrors" to rewrite history and what people post
to serve is own propaganda.
It's especially noted that your beloved R-god used those same smoke
and mirrors and you find his performance stellar.
>Why dont you simply declare your love for the Obamassiah and be done
>with it?
Because I'm not a dim witted, lying, party loyalist. You? Sorry,
can't say the same.
wrote:
>On Tue, 08 May 2012 16:38:25 -0700, Winston_Smith
><inv...@butterfly.net> wrote:
>
>>He ignores that his most recent example of an R-god, inherited a
>>decent economy near the top of a long growth and he inherited a
>>balanced budget, albeit by smoke and mirrors. Gunner ignores that
>>Bush kept every damn one of those smoke and mirrors, added more, and
>>still went from a surplus to a deficit. He did it with the age old
>>route to disaster - guns and butter.
>
>And again our old Leftwing buddy Whiney declares Clinton had a "surplus"
>
>Sorry Comrade..zero surplus. Nada. Nope, None, Nyet, Hasidata
"albeit by smoke and mirrors" to rewrite history and what people post
to serve is own propaganda.
It's especially noted that your beloved R-god used those same smoke
and mirrors and you find his performance stellar.
>Why dont you simply declare your love for the Obamassiah and be done
>with it?
can't say the same.
Winston_Smith
May 12, 2012, 6:46:16 PM5/12/12
to
On Sat, 12 May 2012 12:38:51 -0700, Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com>
wrote:
I wrote about DEFICIT, not SPENDING.
And THAT was after you changed the subject from "freedoms" and
"liberty grabbing" to gun control so you could wiggle out of your
first bind.
So here we are talking deficits from 80 years ago instead of Bush's
rush on liberty. Don't you consider that "odd".
FDR put the nation on a war time budget while Bush followed Johnson's
example and declared we could have guns and butter. Not surprising,
the economy collapsed for Bush just like it did at the end of
Johnson's war. Damn liberals never learn. Always thing this time is
different. And driods like Gunner keep believing them.
You also ignore that FDR was fighting a world war. Virtually paying
the bills for all of the allies who were fiscally strapped by years of
war before we entered.
Remind me, what was Bush's excuse for massive spending. Oh yes, I
remember - a personally declared war against the wrong country that
was going to be over in "six days, six weeks, I doubt six months".
That and he cut taxes for his rich buddies radically below what they
were in FDR's day. Got a neat bomber jacket though, so it was a
bargain.
>Which is hardly true. You bunch seem to forget WW2 AND Korea (which was
>war at a bargain price given that 3/4 of the US inventory got tossed
>between WW2 and Korea.
Another un-necessary war. Why are you defending Truman? Has no one
told you he is an evil D.
Tossed. Why did the Republican president do that?
>Then we had the 10,000 Day War..Vietnam..another Democrat spending spree
>both in dollars and American lives.
Very true. Enthusiastically continued by Nixon. And, just like the
Korean War, fought on the Domino theory and sold to the sheeples with
a phony attack.
>Take the formula for 194x dollars and compare them to Bush's dollars.
Yeah, Bush dollars ARE pretty tiny and wimpy. Thanks to the inflation
of him and his predecessors. Take the dollars printed by each
president might be more instructive. Nixon taking us off the gold
standard certainly got that ball rolling.
>But no..its more than a single president back..so you cockbites declare
>it to be none existant.
You forgot to compare it to Genghis Khan's war budget. How about
Caesar, Alexander, Agamemnon? How about Lincoln for god's sake.
>Fuck you and your Leftwing buddies Whiney.
In your dreams, old buddy. Like nine out of ten men who try Camels, I
prefer women.
>Gunner
wrote:
>On Tue, 08 May 2012 16:38:25 -0700, Winston_Smith wrote:
>
>>Next in the thread, he wanted to compare Obama's deficit spending to
>>FDR. He had to go back over seventy years to find his reference.
>
>Odd that you and the Left claim that Bush got the record for spending.
Changing the subject as usual. Gunner likes to do that.
>
>>Next in the thread, he wanted to compare Obama's deficit spending to
>>FDR. He had to go back over seventy years to find his reference.
>
>Odd that you and the Left claim that Bush got the record for spending.
I wrote about DEFICIT, not SPENDING.
And THAT was after you changed the subject from "freedoms" and
"liberty grabbing" to gun control so you could wiggle out of your
first bind.
So here we are talking deficits from 80 years ago instead of Bush's
rush on liberty. Don't you consider that "odd".
FDR put the nation on a war time budget while Bush followed Johnson's
example and declared we could have guns and butter. Not surprising,
the economy collapsed for Bush just like it did at the end of
Johnson's war. Damn liberals never learn. Always thing this time is
different. And driods like Gunner keep believing them.
You also ignore that FDR was fighting a world war. Virtually paying
the bills for all of the allies who were fiscally strapped by years of
war before we entered.
Remind me, what was Bush's excuse for massive spending. Oh yes, I
remember - a personally declared war against the wrong country that
was going to be over in "six days, six weeks, I doubt six months".
That and he cut taxes for his rich buddies radically below what they
were in FDR's day. Got a neat bomber jacket though, so it was a
bargain.
>Which is hardly true. You bunch seem to forget WW2 AND Korea (which was
>war at a bargain price given that 3/4 of the US inventory got tossed
>between WW2 and Korea.
told you he is an evil D.
Tossed. Why did the Republican president do that?
>Then we had the 10,000 Day War..Vietnam..another Democrat spending spree
>both in dollars and American lives.
Korean War, fought on the Domino theory and sold to the sheeples with
a phony attack.
>Take the formula for 194x dollars and compare them to Bush's dollars.
of him and his predecessors. Take the dollars printed by each
president might be more instructive. Nixon taking us off the gold
standard certainly got that ball rolling.
>But no..its more than a single president back..so you cockbites declare
>it to be none existant.
Caesar, Alexander, Agamemnon? How about Lincoln for god's sake.
>Fuck you and your Leftwing buddies Whiney.
prefer women.
>Gunner
Gunner Asch
May 13, 2012, 3:34:27 AM5/13/12
to
On Sat, 12 May 2012 15:27:27 -0700, Winston_Smith
<inv...@butterfly.net> wrote:
>On Sat, 12 May 2012 12:40:34 -0700, Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 08 May 2012 16:38:25 -0700, Winston_Smith
>><inv...@butterfly.net> wrote:
>>
>>>He ignores that his most recent example of an R-god, inherited a
>>>decent economy near the top of a long growth and he inherited a
>>>balanced budget, albeit by smoke and mirrors. Gunner ignores that
>>>Bush kept every damn one of those smoke and mirrors, added more, and
>>>still went from a surplus to a deficit. He did it with the age old
>>>route to disaster - guns and butter.
>>
>>And again our old Leftwing buddy Whiney declares Clinton had a "surplus"
>>
>>Sorry Comrade..zero surplus. Nada. Nope, None, Nyet, Hasidata
>
>How very biased of you, hey there is a surprise, that you ignore the
>"albeit by smoke and mirrors" to rewrite history and what people post
>to serve is own propaganda.
Sorry Lumpy..but I post truth not bullshit. Want the cites that render
<inv...@butterfly.net> wrote:
>On Sat, 12 May 2012 12:40:34 -0700, Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 08 May 2012 16:38:25 -0700, Winston_Smith
>><inv...@butterfly.net> wrote:
>>
>>>He ignores that his most recent example of an R-god, inherited a
>>>decent economy near the top of a long growth and he inherited a
>>>balanced budget, albeit by smoke and mirrors. Gunner ignores that
>>>Bush kept every damn one of those smoke and mirrors, added more, and
>>>still went from a surplus to a deficit. He did it with the age old
>>>route to disaster - guns and butter.
>>
>>And again our old Leftwing buddy Whiney declares Clinton had a "surplus"
>>
>>Sorry Comrade..zero surplus. Nada. Nope, None, Nyet, Hasidata
>
>How very biased of you, hey there is a surprise, that you ignore the
>"albeit by smoke and mirrors" to rewrite history and what people post
>to serve is own propaganda.
your statements utter buffoonery?
http://finance.townhall.com/columnists/craigsteiner/2011/08/22/the_clinton_surplus_myth/page/full/
http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2011/07/deficits
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_much_surplus_did_the_US_have_when_Clinton_left_office
Clinton ran deficits throught all 8 years of his term, and one can go to
the US Treasury Department and looking through the history of the total
outstanding debt through Clintons term.
Every year Clinton was in office, the total national debt continued to
climb.
How Clinton managed to claim a surplus was that while the general
operating budgets ran deficits but Clinton borrowed from numerous off
budget funds to make the on budget fund a surplus.
For example, in 2000, Clinton claimed a $230B surplus, but Clinton
borrowed
$152.3B from Social Security
$30.9B from Civil Service Retirement Fund
$18.5B from Federal Supplementary Medical insurance Trust Fund
$15.0B from Federal Hospital Insurance Trust Fund
$9.0B from the Federal Unemployment Trust Fund
$8.2B from Military Retirement Fund
$3.8B from Transportation Trust Funds
$1.8B from Employee Life Insurance & Retirement fund
$7.0B from others
Total borrowed from off budget funds $246.5B, meaning that his $230B
surplus is actually a $16.5B deficit.
($246.5B borrowed - $230B claimed surplus = $16.5B actual deficit).
If there is ever a true surplus, then the national debt will go down.
the national debt did not go down one year during the Clinton
administration.
Read more:
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_much_surplus_did_the_US_have_when_Clinton_left_office#ixzz1ujUtclCc
>
>It's especially noted that your beloved R-god used those same smoke
>and mirrors and you find his performance stellar.
>
>>Why dont you simply declare your love for the Obamassiah and be done
>>with it?
>
>Because I'm not a dim witted, lying, party loyalist. You? Sorry,
>can't say the same.
You are a confused halfassed buffoon with delusions of being a centrist.
>>Why dont you simply declare your love for the Obamassiah and be done
>>with it?
>
>Because I'm not a dim witted, lying, party loyalist. You? Sorry,
>can't say the same.
Pity about that. But hey...the average Democrat is far more mentally
ill than you.
Gunner Asch
May 13, 2012, 3:36:19 AM5/13/12
to
On Sat, 12 May 2012 15:46:16 -0700, Winston_Smith
<inv...@butterfly.net> wrote:
>On Sat, 12 May 2012 12:38:51 -0700, Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>>On Tue, 08 May 2012 16:38:25 -0700, Winston_Smith wrote:
>>
>>>Next in the thread, he wanted to compare Obama's deficit spending to
>>>FDR. He had to go back over seventy years to find his reference.
>>
>>Odd that you and the Left claim that Bush got the record for spending.
>
>Changing the subject as usual. Gunner likes to do that.
>
>I wrote about DEFICIT, not SPENDING.
So the "deficit spending" was not from you..but was a radically
<inv...@butterfly.net> wrote:
>On Sat, 12 May 2012 12:38:51 -0700, Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>>On Tue, 08 May 2012 16:38:25 -0700, Winston_Smith wrote:
>>
>>>Next in the thread, he wanted to compare Obama's deficit spending to
>>>FDR. He had to go back over seventy years to find his reference.
>>
>>Odd that you and the Left claim that Bush got the record for spending.
>
>Changing the subject as usual. Gunner likes to do that.
>
>I wrote about DEFICIT, not SPENDING.
idiosyncric combination of sunspot effects and several million wild
photons?
Wow dude! Heavy!!!
Message has been deleted
Winston_Smith
May 13, 2012, 2:48:10 PM5/13/12
to
On Sun, 13 May 2012 00:34:27 -0700, Gunner Asch wrote:
>On Sat, 12 May 2012 15:27:27 -0700, Winston_Smith wrote:
>>On Sat, 12 May 2012 12:40:34 -0700, Gunner Asch wrote:
>>>On Tue, 08 May 2012 16:38:25 -0700, Winston_Smithwrote:
what you wish to talk about. ALWAYS trying to shift yourself from a
losing position to some advantage.
>Want the cites that render your statements utter buffoonery?
>http://finance.townhall.com/columnists/craigsteiner/2011/08/22/the_clinton_surplus_myth/page/full/
>http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2011/07/deficits
>http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_much_surplus_did_the_US_have_when_Clinton_left_office
All of which reflect what you WANT to talk about, not what I wrote
about.
>Clinton ran deficits throught all 8 years of his term,
http://www.factcheck.org/2008/02/the-budget-and-deficit-under-clinton/
Oh look at that. Says clear and simple "Gunner is full of it."
>and one can go to
>the US Treasury Department and looking through the history of the total
>outstanding debt through Clintons term.
(Yet another Gunner switcheroo. First you switched "liberty grabbing"
to "gun control" and then jumped from "gun control" to "FDR's
deficits". Having gotten your ass whooped again, you now switch to
"Clinton's deficits" and proceed to confuse DEFICIT with DEBT and lie
about both. Is this good debating technique or can't you focus on a
single idea for longer than ten seconds.)
>Every year Clinton was in office, the total national debt continued to
>climb.
Let's have a look.
http://zfacts.com/p/318.html
The debt went down under EVERY president starting with Truman until
Reagan/Bush started it up. It went down again under Clinton and up
under ShruBush, and Lord Oh.
Look at that tasty little projection. If we hadn't had Bush/Reagan
Voodoo Economics, the ShruBush would have inherited a ZERO debt.
Pretty great performance by the Gunner team, no? Of course Obama
would be screwing up even that.
(Yes, Gunner, I noticed that "total" you snuck in for a future
rebuttal. See below how you have just now come around to what I wrote
in the first place. Another gunner switcheroo from "national debt" to
"total debt".)
>How Clinton managed to claim a surplus was that while the general
>operating budgets ran deficits but Clinton borrowed from numerous off
>budget funds to make the on budget fund a surplus.
And here, children, Gunner - running in a circle like a heat struck
dog - has managed to come full circle and bite himself in the ass. I
WROTE ABOUT "SMOKE AND MIRRORS" YOU IDIOT. Now Gunner says the EXACT
SAME THING. He expands on what the smoke and mirrors were. Somehow
it proves he is right and I am wrong. Only in Gubbers fantasy world
of whack-a-mole debating.
By the way Gunnerboy, ShruBush used all those smoke and mirrors and
added some more (as I've already pointed out in earlier posts). If we
take them away from Clinton, then the ShruBush numbers get far, far
worse than they are.
snip - lots of Gunner patented cut and paste supporting what I wrote
in the first place.
>On Sat, 12 May 2012 15:27:27 -0700, Winston_Smith wrote:
>>On Sat, 12 May 2012 12:40:34 -0700, Gunner Asch wrote:
>>>On Tue, 08 May 2012 16:38:25 -0700, Winston_Smithwrote:
>>>
>>>>He ignores that his most recent example of an R-god, inherited a
>>>>decent economy near the top of a long growth and he inherited a
>>>>balanced budget, albeit by smoke and mirrors. Gunner ignores that
>>>>Bush kept every damn one of those smoke and mirrors, added more, and
>>>>still went from a surplus to a deficit. He did it with the age old
>>>>route to disaster - guns and butter.
>>>
>>>And again our old Leftwing buddy Whiney declares Clinton had a "surplus"
>>>
>>>Sorry Comrade..zero surplus. Nada. Nope, None, Nyet, Hasidata
>>
>>How very biased of you, hey there is a surprise, that you ignore the
>>"albeit by smoke and mirrors" to rewrite history and what people post
>>to serve is own propaganda.
>
>Sorry Lumpy..but I post truth not bullshit.
The only bullshit here is when you switch what people wrote about to
>>>>He ignores that his most recent example of an R-god, inherited a
>>>>decent economy near the top of a long growth and he inherited a
>>>>balanced budget, albeit by smoke and mirrors. Gunner ignores that
>>>>Bush kept every damn one of those smoke and mirrors, added more, and
>>>>still went from a surplus to a deficit. He did it with the age old
>>>>route to disaster - guns and butter.
>>>
>>>And again our old Leftwing buddy Whiney declares Clinton had a "surplus"
>>>
>>>Sorry Comrade..zero surplus. Nada. Nope, None, Nyet, Hasidata
>>
>>How very biased of you, hey there is a surprise, that you ignore the
>>"albeit by smoke and mirrors" to rewrite history and what people post
>>to serve is own propaganda.
>
>Sorry Lumpy..but I post truth not bullshit.
what you wish to talk about. ALWAYS trying to shift yourself from a
losing position to some advantage.
>Want the cites that render your statements utter buffoonery?
>http://finance.townhall.com/columnists/craigsteiner/2011/08/22/the_clinton_surplus_myth/page/full/
>http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2011/07/deficits
>http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_much_surplus_did_the_US_have_when_Clinton_left_office
about.
>Clinton ran deficits throught all 8 years of his term,
Oh look at that. Says clear and simple "Gunner is full of it."
>and one can go to
>the US Treasury Department and looking through the history of the total
>outstanding debt through Clintons term.
to "gun control" and then jumped from "gun control" to "FDR's
deficits". Having gotten your ass whooped again, you now switch to
"Clinton's deficits" and proceed to confuse DEFICIT with DEBT and lie
about both. Is this good debating technique or can't you focus on a
single idea for longer than ten seconds.)
>Every year Clinton was in office, the total national debt continued to
>climb.
http://zfacts.com/p/318.html
The debt went down under EVERY president starting with Truman until
Reagan/Bush started it up. It went down again under Clinton and up
under ShruBush, and Lord Oh.
Look at that tasty little projection. If we hadn't had Bush/Reagan
Voodoo Economics, the ShruBush would have inherited a ZERO debt.
Pretty great performance by the Gunner team, no? Of course Obama
would be screwing up even that.
(Yes, Gunner, I noticed that "total" you snuck in for a future
rebuttal. See below how you have just now come around to what I wrote
in the first place. Another gunner switcheroo from "national debt" to
"total debt".)
>How Clinton managed to claim a surplus was that while the general
>operating budgets ran deficits but Clinton borrowed from numerous off
>budget funds to make the on budget fund a surplus.
dog - has managed to come full circle and bite himself in the ass. I
WROTE ABOUT "SMOKE AND MIRRORS" YOU IDIOT. Now Gunner says the EXACT
SAME THING. He expands on what the smoke and mirrors were. Somehow
it proves he is right and I am wrong. Only in Gubbers fantasy world
of whack-a-mole debating.
By the way Gunnerboy, ShruBush used all those smoke and mirrors and
added some more (as I've already pointed out in earlier posts). If we
take them away from Clinton, then the ShruBush numbers get far, far
worse than they are.
snip - lots of Gunner patented cut and paste supporting what I wrote
in the first place.
Gunner Asch
May 13, 2012, 7:25:31 PM5/13/12
to
On Sun, 13 May 2012 11:48:10 -0700, Winston_Smith
<inv...@butterfly.net> wrote:
>On Sun, 13 May 2012 00:34:27 -0700, Gunner Asch wrote:
>>On Sat, 12 May 2012 15:27:27 -0700, Winston_Smith wrote:
>>>On Sat, 12 May 2012 12:40:34 -0700, Gunner Asch wrote:
>>>>On Tue, 08 May 2012 16:38:25 -0700, Winston_Smithwrote:
>>>>
>>>>>He ignores that his most recent example of an R-god, inherited a
>>>>>decent economy near the top of a long growth and he inherited a
>>>>>balanced budget, albeit by smoke and mirrors. Gunner ignores that
>>>>>Bush kept every damn one of those smoke and mirrors, added more, and
>>>>>still went from a surplus to a deficit. He did it with the age old
>>>>>route to disaster - guns and butter.
>>>>
>>>>And again our old Leftwing buddy Whiney declares Clinton had a "surplus"
>>>>
>>>>Sorry Comrade..zero surplus. Nada. Nope, None, Nyet, Hasidata
>>>
>>>How very biased of you, hey there is a surprise, that you ignore the
>>>"albeit by smoke and mirrors" to rewrite history and what people post
>>>to serve is own propaganda.
>>
>>Sorry Lumpy..but I post truth not bullshit.
>
>The only bullshit here is when you switch what people wrote about to
>what you wish to talk about. ALWAYS trying to shift yourself from a
>losing position to some advantage.
Sorry Lumpy..if I pick something erroneous in your post and work with
<inv...@butterfly.net> wrote:
>On Sun, 13 May 2012 00:34:27 -0700, Gunner Asch wrote:
>>On Sat, 12 May 2012 15:27:27 -0700, Winston_Smith wrote:
>>>On Sat, 12 May 2012 12:40:34 -0700, Gunner Asch wrote:
>>>>On Tue, 08 May 2012 16:38:25 -0700, Winston_Smithwrote:
>>>>
>>>>>He ignores that his most recent example of an R-god, inherited a
>>>>>decent economy near the top of a long growth and he inherited a
>>>>>balanced budget, albeit by smoke and mirrors. Gunner ignores that
>>>>>Bush kept every damn one of those smoke and mirrors, added more, and
>>>>>still went from a surplus to a deficit. He did it with the age old
>>>>>route to disaster - guns and butter.
>>>>
>>>>And again our old Leftwing buddy Whiney declares Clinton had a "surplus"
>>>>
>>>>Sorry Comrade..zero surplus. Nada. Nope, None, Nyet, Hasidata
>>>
>>>How very biased of you, hey there is a surprise, that you ignore the
>>>"albeit by smoke and mirrors" to rewrite history and what people post
>>>to serve is own propaganda.
>>
>>Sorry Lumpy..but I post truth not bullshit.
>
>The only bullshit here is when you switch what people wrote about to
>what you wish to talk about. ALWAYS trying to shift yourself from a
>losing position to some advantage.
that..it doesnt mean that the rest of your buffoonery is exempt. It
only means I picked the most egregious bit of buffoonery and worked with
it.
>
>>Want the cites that render your statements utter buffoonery?
>>http://finance.townhall.com/columnists/craigsteiner/2011/08/22/the_clinton_surplus_myth/page/full/
>>http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2011/07/deficits
>>http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_much_surplus_did_the_US_have_when_Clinton_left_office
>
>All of which reflect what you WANT to talk about, not what I wrote
>about.
>
>>Clinton ran deficits throught all 8 years of his term,
>
>http://www.factcheck.org/2008/02/the-budget-and-deficit-under-clinton/
>Oh look at that. Says clear and simple "Gunner is full of it."
ROFLMAO...so you pick the leftwing example and ignore the other 3 fact
>>Want the cites that render your statements utter buffoonery?
>>http://finance.townhall.com/columnists/craigsteiner/2011/08/22/the_clinton_surplus_myth/page/full/
>>http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2011/07/deficits
>>http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_much_surplus_did_the_US_have_when_Clinton_left_office
>
>All of which reflect what you WANT to talk about, not what I wrote
>about.
>
>>Clinton ran deficits throught all 8 years of his term,
>
>http://www.factcheck.org/2008/02/the-budget-and-deficit-under-clinton/
>Oh look at that. Says clear and simple "Gunner is full of it."
filled cites in some inane hope that folks will bleeve your spew?
ROFLMAO!! It must be giving you a bad rash to have your ass spanked so
badly....
>
>>and one can go to
>>the US Treasury Department and looking through the history of the total
>>outstanding debt through Clintons term.
>
>(Yet another Gunner switcheroo. First you switched "liberty grabbing"
>to "gun control" and then jumped from "gun control" to "FDR's
>deficits". Having gotten your ass whooped again, you now switch to
>"Clinton's deficits" and proceed to confuse DEFICIT with DEBT and lie
>about both. Is this good debating technique or can't you focus on a
>single idea for longer than ten seconds.)
>
>>Every year Clinton was in office, the total national debt continued to
>>climb.
>
>Let's have a look.
>http://zfacts.com/p/318.html
>The debt went down under EVERY president starting with Truman until
>Reagan/Bush started it up. It went down again under Clinton and up
>under ShruBush, and Lord Oh.
Dept went down certainly. But "surplus"???? Hardly. And Ive provided
>>and one can go to
>>the US Treasury Department and looking through the history of the total
>>outstanding debt through Clintons term.
>
>(Yet another Gunner switcheroo. First you switched "liberty grabbing"
>to "gun control" and then jumped from "gun control" to "FDR's
>deficits". Having gotten your ass whooped again, you now switch to
>"Clinton's deficits" and proceed to confuse DEFICIT with DEBT and lie
>about both. Is this good debating technique or can't you focus on a
>single idea for longer than ten seconds.)
>
>>Every year Clinton was in office, the total national debt continued to
>>climb.
>
>Let's have a look.
>http://zfacts.com/p/318.html
>The debt went down under EVERY president starting with Truman until
>Reagan/Bush started it up. It went down again under Clinton and up
>under ShruBush, and Lord Oh.
the cites to show your buffoonery writ large.
>
>Look at that tasty little projection. If we hadn't had Bush/Reagan
>Voodoo Economics, the ShruBush would have inherited a ZERO debt.
>Pretty great performance by the Gunner team, no? Of course Obama
>would be screwing up even that.
Laugh laugh laugh..so you are now admitting that Clintons Clusterfuck
>Look at that tasty little projection. If we hadn't had Bush/Reagan
>Voodoo Economics, the ShruBush would have inherited a ZERO debt.
>Pretty great performance by the Gunner team, no? Of course Obama
>would be screwing up even that.
really wasnt a surplus.
>
>(Yes, Gunner, I noticed that "total" you snuck in for a future
>rebuttal. See below how you have just now come around to what I wrote
>in the first place. Another gunner switcheroo from "national debt" to
>"total debt".)
Debt is debt..no matter how much you and your Leftwing buddies try to
>(Yes, Gunner, I noticed that "total" you snuck in for a future
>rebuttal. See below how you have just now come around to what I wrote
>in the first place. Another gunner switcheroo from "national debt" to
>"total debt".)
finagle it.
>
>>How Clinton managed to claim a surplus was that while the general
>>operating budgets ran deficits but Clinton borrowed from numerous off
>>budget funds to make the on budget fund a surplus.
>
>And here, children, Gunner - running in a circle like a heat struck
>dog - has managed to come full circle and bite himself in the ass. I
>WROTE ABOUT "SMOKE AND MIRRORS" YOU IDIOT. Now Gunner says the EXACT
>SAME THING. He expands on what the smoke and mirrors were. Somehow
>it proves he is right and I am wrong. Only in Gubbers fantasy world
>of whack-a-mole debating.
you have done that? Snicker..because it proved you were talking out
your ass.
>
>By the way Gunnerboy, ShruBush used all those smoke and mirrors and
>added some more (as I've already pointed out in earlier posts). If we
>take them away from Clinton, then the ShruBush numbers get far, far
>worse than they are.
>
>snip - lots of Gunner patented cut and paste supporting what I wrote
>in the first place.
Snicker...laugh laugh laugh....denial is not a river in Egypt ol spurt.
>By the way Gunnerboy, ShruBush used all those smoke and mirrors and
>added some more (as I've already pointed out in earlier posts). If we
>take them away from Clinton, then the ShruBush numbers get far, far
>worse than they are.
>
>snip - lots of Gunner patented cut and paste supporting what I wrote
>in the first place.
Laugh laugh laugh!!!!
Winston_Smith
May 14, 2012, 12:51:15 PM5/14/12
to
On Sun, 13 May 2012 16:25:31 -0700, Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>Sorry Lumpy..if I pick something erroneous in your post and work with
>that..it doesnt mean that the rest of your buffoonery is exempt. It
>only means I picked the most egregious bit of buffoonery and worked with
>it.
The trouble is, you never comment on my "something erroneous"; you
always jump topic and babble on in some new direction. I can't
remember the last time you replied to someones post with something
related to what they said. That's how you never get pinned in a
corner; you keep moving the corner.
It's like the old whack-a-mole game. Knock the fool down in one hole,
he pops up in some other.
wrote:
>Sorry Lumpy..if I pick something erroneous in your post and work with
>that..it doesnt mean that the rest of your buffoonery is exempt. It
>only means I picked the most egregious bit of buffoonery and worked with
>it.
always jump topic and babble on in some new direction. I can't
remember the last time you replied to someones post with something
related to what they said. That's how you never get pinned in a
corner; you keep moving the corner.
It's like the old whack-a-mole game. Knock the fool down in one hole,
he pops up in some other.
pyotr filipivich
May 14, 2012, 4:01:55 PM5/14/12
to
Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com> on Tue, 08 May 2012 09:30:33 -0700
typed in alt.survival the following:
NOW, I can see FDR running the debt up to levels in excess of the GDP,
but he was fighting (and intending to win) a Real War(tm).
--
pyotr filipivich
Old farts these days - not like when I was a boy! We used to
have us Real Geezers in those days! Now, they'll let anybody
with a little gray hair be an old fart!
typed in alt.survival the following:
>
>Care to point out the gun control actions in those?
>>
>>>Deficit spending,
>>
>>The Bush deficit was the biggest in the history of the country until O
>>saw him and raised.
>
>Only when inflated dollars are used. One suggests you review FDRs
>spending on a dollar/corrected dollar scale is used.
It is even more "interesting" to compare the National Debt to GDP.
>Care to point out the gun control actions in those?
>>
>>>Deficit spending,
>>
>>The Bush deficit was the biggest in the history of the country until O
>>saw him and raised.
>
>Only when inflated dollars are used. One suggests you review FDRs
>spending on a dollar/corrected dollar scale is used.
NOW, I can see FDR running the debt up to levels in excess of the GDP,
but he was fighting (and intending to win) a Real War(tm).
--
pyotr filipivich
Old farts these days - not like when I was a boy! We used to
have us Real Geezers in those days! Now, they'll let anybody
with a little gray hair be an old fart!
Gunner Asch
May 14, 2012, 4:58:32 PM5/14/12
to
Ive commented each and every time on your "somethine erroneous"..and
thats whats pissing you off so badly. Now I could have spend a great
deal of time blistering your ass for all the other erroneous buffoonery
you tend to spew at times..but I have no desire to sit picking holes in
each and every one of your postings. Frankly...it would bore me to
tears.
Now you have two choices. Three rather. 1. Grin and bear it. (I do when
Im disovered to be wrong) 2. Stop posting buffoonery. 3 Put me in your
kill file.
Take your choice. Personally, I dont give a shit which one you take. If
I continue to see buffoonery in your posts, Im likely to comment on it
if Im in the mood. If you pick option 3, you will not see my comments.
However..everyone else will. So I suggest you take a strong..strong
look at option 2. Seriously.
But hey..its your choice. Use it wisely
Gunner Asch
May 14, 2012, 5:09:52 PM5/14/12
to
http://www.usinflationcalculator.com/
$20 in 1945 now equals $254.88 in 2012
Its said that WW2 cost America $288,000,000,000
In todays dollars..thats $3,000,670,272,000,000
Im having trouble wrapping my head around that number..what is
it..trillions or quadrillions?
http://costofwar.com/en/
$1.3 trillion to date for the US in the Middle East since 2001
Bit different..eh wot?
Gunner
Winston_Smith
May 14, 2012, 9:39:25 PM5/14/12
to
On Mon, 14 May 2012 13:58:32 -0700, Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>Now you have two choices. Three rather. 1. Grin and bear it. (I do when
>Im disovered to be wrong)
I can't remember you ever acknowledging you were wrong. Probably
grinned and bared it in private. (Not a pretty mental picture come to
think of it.)
>2. Stop posting buffoonery.
Sorry, I post reality and that's what you call buffoonery because it
always deflates you BS party loyalist positions.
>3 Put me in your kill file.
Nope. You are just to damn entertaining. Hey, I put up with Stromin'
and you at least can construct a sentence and format your news client.
I love The Twilight Zone and Outer Limits and you are a third view of
alternate universes that never existed.
wrote:
>Now you have two choices. Three rather. 1. Grin and bear it. (I do when
>Im disovered to be wrong)
grinned and bared it in private. (Not a pretty mental picture come to
think of it.)
>2. Stop posting buffoonery.
Sorry, I post reality and that's what you call buffoonery because it
always deflates you BS party loyalist positions.
>3 Put me in your kill file.
and you at least can construct a sentence and format your news client.
I love The Twilight Zone and Outer Limits and you are a third view of
alternate universes that never existed.
STEADY EDDY
May 14, 2012, 11:13:41 PM5/14/12
to
On May 4, 11:17 pm, bates2012 <bates2...@hushmail.com> wrote:
> On May 4, 7:35 pm, Hisler <his...@cocks.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > This is from one of the more hard core blogs, which was forwarded to me
> > by a friend in Arizona. I believe that it merits attention, FWIW.
>
> > "Hisler" / Steve from Colorado
> > alt.survivalhttp://globalgulag.us
>
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> > “We are Preparing for Massive Civil War,” Says DHS Informant
>
> > Posted by Dominique de Kevelioc de Bailleul on May 03, 2012 | 1 comment
>
> > In a riveting interview on TruNews Radio, Wednesday, private
> > investigator Doug Hagmann said high-level, reliable sources told him the
> > U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is preparing for “massive
> > civil war” in America.
>
> > “Folks, we’re getting ready for one massive economic collapse,” Hagmann
> > told TruNews host Rick Wiles. Sign-up for my 100% FREE Alerts
>
> > “We have problems . . . The federal government is preparing for civil
> > uprising,” he added, “so every time you hear about troop movements,
> > every time you hear about movements of military equipment, the
> > militarization of the police, the buying of the ammunition, all of this
> > is . . . they (DHS) are preparing for a massive uprising.”
>
> > Hagmann goes on to say that his sources tell him the concerns of the DHS
> > stem from a collapse of the U.S. dollar and the hyperinflation a
> > collapse in the value of the world’s primary reserve currency implies to
> > a nation of 311 million Americans, who, for the significant portion of
> > the population, is armed.
>
> > Uprisings in Greece is, indeed, a problem, but an uprising of armed
> > Americans becomes a matter of serious national security, a point
> > addressed in a recent report by the Pentagon pentagon tis occupied
> > territory by CFR & ashkeNAIZI r dual isreal that do not act in Americas
> > best national iterestrs and highlighted as a vulnerability and threat
> > to the U.S. during war-game exercises at the Department of Defense last
> > year, according to one of the DoD’s war-game participants, Jim Rickards,
> > author of Currency Wars: The Making of the Next Global Crisis.
>
> > Through his sources, Hagmann confirmed Rickards’ ongoing thesis of a
> > fear of a U.S. dollar collapse at the hands of the Chinese (U.S.
> > treasury bond holders of approximately $1 trillion) and, possibly, the
> > Russians (threatening to launch a gold-backed ruble as an attractive
> > alternative to the U.S. dollar) in retaliation for aggressive U.S.
> > foreign policy initiatives against China’s and Russia’s strategic allies
> > Iran and Syria.
>
> > “The one source that we have I’ve known since 1979,” Hagmann continued.
> > “He started out as a patrol officer and currently he is now working
> > for a federal agency under the umbrella of the Department of Homeland
> > Security; he’s in a position to know what policies are being initiated,
> > what policies are being planned at this point, and he’s telling us right
> > now—look, what you’re seeing is just the tip of the iceberg. We are
> > preparing, we, meaning the government, we are preparing for a massive
> > civil war in this country.”
>
> > “There’s no hyperbole here,” he added, echoing Trends Research
> > Institute’s Founder Gerald Celente’s forecast of last year. Celente
> > expects a collapse of the U.S. dollar and riots in America some time
> > this year.
>
> > Since Celente’s ‘Civil War’ prediction of last year, executive orders
> > NDAA and National Defense Resources Preparedness were signed into law by
> > President Obama, which are both politically damaging actions taken by a
> > sitting president.
>
> > And most recently, requests made by the DHS for the procurement of 450
> > million rounds of hollow-point ammunition only fuels speculation of an
> > upcoming tragic event expected on American soil.
>
> > These major events, as shocking to the American people as they are, have
> > taken place during an election year.
>
> > Escalating preparatory activities by the executive branch and DHS
> > throughout the last decade—from the Patriot Act, to countless executive
> > orders drafted to suspend (or strip) American civil liberties “are just
> > the beginning” of the nightmare to come, Hagmann said.
>
> > He added, “It’s going to get so much worse toward the election, and I’m
> > not even sure we’re going to have an election in this country. It’s
> > going to be that bad, and this, as well, is coming from my sources. But
> > one source in particular said, ‘look, you don’t understand how bad it
> > is.’ This stuff is real; these people, the Department of Homeland
> > Security (DHS), they are ready to fight the American people.”
>
> > TruNews‘ Wiles asked Hagmann: who does the DHS expect to fight, in
> > particular? Another North versus South, the Yankees against the
> > Confederates? Hagmann stated the situation is far worse than a struggle
> > between any two factions within the U.S.; it’s an anticipated nationwide
> > emergency event centered on the nation’s currency.
>
> > “What they [DHS] are expecting, and again, this is according to my
> > sources, what they’re expecting is the un-sustainability of the American
> > dollar,” Hagmann said. “And we know for a fact that we can no longer
> > service our debt. There’s going to be a period of hyperinflation . . .
> > the dollar will be worthless . . . The economic collapse will be so
> > severe, people won’t be ready for this.
>
> > Read more:http://www.beaconequity.com/we-are-preparing-for-massive-civil-war-sa...
> > I prefer dangerous FREEDOM to peaceful SLAVERY. - Thomas Jefferson
> > "Slaves cannot own Guns"
>
> > INTERSTATE? Don't go until you see this!http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P8NwuPAXay4Youknow we live in dark days
> > when common people fear the government more than criminals! FCO 06/14/2005
>
> Well hell, I just posted a link to that article, then scrolled down
> and see you had already posted about it. Maybe twice as many people
> will see it, lol
> NB
Uh the dollar has risen 12 straight sessions. Oil is declining because
of the strong currency. I guess that just about shoots down the major
points in this article. The fact is that foreign investment will
increase because our markets are more stable. As usual we will lead
the world out of the decline and our currency will increase in value.
This will make foreign goods less expensive and the secondary
economies will expand.
> On May 4, 7:35 pm, Hisler <his...@cocks.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > This is from one of the more hard core blogs, which was forwarded to me
> > by a friend in Arizona. I believe that it merits attention, FWIW.
>
> > "Hisler" / Steve from Colorado
> > alt.survivalhttp://globalgulag.us
>
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> > “We are Preparing for Massive Civil War,” Says DHS Informant
>
> > Posted by Dominique de Kevelioc de Bailleul on May 03, 2012 | 1 comment
>
> > In a riveting interview on TruNews Radio, Wednesday, private
> > investigator Doug Hagmann said high-level, reliable sources told him the
> > U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is preparing for “massive
> > civil war” in America.
>
> > “Folks, we’re getting ready for one massive economic collapse,” Hagmann
> > told TruNews host Rick Wiles. Sign-up for my 100% FREE Alerts
>
> > “We have problems . . . The federal government is preparing for civil
> > uprising,” he added, “so every time you hear about troop movements,
> > every time you hear about movements of military equipment, the
> > militarization of the police, the buying of the ammunition, all of this
> > is . . . they (DHS) are preparing for a massive uprising.”
>
> > Hagmann goes on to say that his sources tell him the concerns of the DHS
> > stem from a collapse of the U.S. dollar and the hyperinflation a
> > collapse in the value of the world’s primary reserve currency implies to
> > a nation of 311 million Americans, who, for the significant portion of
> > the population, is armed.
>
> > Uprisings in Greece is, indeed, a problem, but an uprising of armed
> > Americans becomes a matter of serious national security, a point
> > addressed in a recent report by the Pentagon pentagon tis occupied
> > territory by CFR & ashkeNAIZI r dual isreal that do not act in Americas
> > best national iterestrs and highlighted as a vulnerability and threat
> > to the U.S. during war-game exercises at the Department of Defense last
> > year, according to one of the DoD’s war-game participants, Jim Rickards,
> > author of Currency Wars: The Making of the Next Global Crisis.
>
> > Through his sources, Hagmann confirmed Rickards’ ongoing thesis of a
> > fear of a U.S. dollar collapse at the hands of the Chinese (U.S.
> > treasury bond holders of approximately $1 trillion) and, possibly, the
> > Russians (threatening to launch a gold-backed ruble as an attractive
> > alternative to the U.S. dollar) in retaliation for aggressive U.S.
> > foreign policy initiatives against China’s and Russia’s strategic allies
> > Iran and Syria.
>
> > “The one source that we have I’ve known since 1979,” Hagmann continued.
> > “He started out as a patrol officer and currently he is now working
> > for a federal agency under the umbrella of the Department of Homeland
> > Security; he’s in a position to know what policies are being initiated,
> > what policies are being planned at this point, and he’s telling us right
> > now—look, what you’re seeing is just the tip of the iceberg. We are
> > preparing, we, meaning the government, we are preparing for a massive
> > civil war in this country.”
>
> > “There’s no hyperbole here,” he added, echoing Trends Research
> > Institute’s Founder Gerald Celente’s forecast of last year. Celente
> > expects a collapse of the U.S. dollar and riots in America some time
> > this year.
>
> > Since Celente’s ‘Civil War’ prediction of last year, executive orders
> > NDAA and National Defense Resources Preparedness were signed into law by
> > President Obama, which are both politically damaging actions taken by a
> > sitting president.
>
> > And most recently, requests made by the DHS for the procurement of 450
> > million rounds of hollow-point ammunition only fuels speculation of an
> > upcoming tragic event expected on American soil.
>
> > These major events, as shocking to the American people as they are, have
> > taken place during an election year.
>
> > Escalating preparatory activities by the executive branch and DHS
> > throughout the last decade—from the Patriot Act, to countless executive
> > orders drafted to suspend (or strip) American civil liberties “are just
> > the beginning” of the nightmare to come, Hagmann said.
>
> > He added, “It’s going to get so much worse toward the election, and I’m
> > not even sure we’re going to have an election in this country. It’s
> > going to be that bad, and this, as well, is coming from my sources. But
> > one source in particular said, ‘look, you don’t understand how bad it
> > is.’ This stuff is real; these people, the Department of Homeland
> > Security (DHS), they are ready to fight the American people.”
>
> > TruNews‘ Wiles asked Hagmann: who does the DHS expect to fight, in
> > particular? Another North versus South, the Yankees against the
> > Confederates? Hagmann stated the situation is far worse than a struggle
> > between any two factions within the U.S.; it’s an anticipated nationwide
> > emergency event centered on the nation’s currency.
>
> > “What they [DHS] are expecting, and again, this is according to my
> > sources, what they’re expecting is the un-sustainability of the American
> > dollar,” Hagmann said. “And we know for a fact that we can no longer
> > service our debt. There’s going to be a period of hyperinflation . . .
> > the dollar will be worthless . . . The economic collapse will be so
> > severe, people won’t be ready for this.
>
> > Read more:http://www.beaconequity.com/we-are-preparing-for-massive-civil-war-sa...
> > I prefer dangerous FREEDOM to peaceful SLAVERY. - Thomas Jefferson
> > "Slaves cannot own Guns"
>
> > INTERSTATE? Don't go until you see this!http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P8NwuPAXay4Youknow we live in dark days
> > when common people fear the government more than criminals! FCO 06/14/2005
>
> Well hell, I just posted a link to that article, then scrolled down
> and see you had already posted about it. Maybe twice as many people
> will see it, lol
> NB
Uh the dollar has risen 12 straight sessions. Oil is declining because
of the strong currency. I guess that just about shoots down the major
points in this article. The fact is that foreign investment will
increase because our markets are more stable. As usual we will lead
the world out of the decline and our currency will increase in value.
This will make foreign goods less expensive and the secondary
economies will expand.
Gunner Asch
May 15, 2012, 1:26:35 AM5/15/12
to
On Mon, 14 May 2012 20:13:41 -0700 (PDT), STEADY EDDY
<steady...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>Uh the dollar has risen 12 straight sessions. Oil is declining because
>of the strong currency.
Odd that the value of the dollar continues to decline and the price of
<steady...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>Uh the dollar has risen 12 straight sessions. Oil is declining because
>of the strong currency.
fuel is rising again like a rocket.
Gunner Asch
May 15, 2012, 1:30:50 AM5/15/12
to
Pity about that.
Gunner Asch
May 15, 2012, 11:12:12 AM5/15/12
to
A Censored Race War?
Thomas Sowell
Thomas Sowell
May 15, 2012
A Censored Race War?
When two white newspaper reporters for the Virginian-Pilot were driving
through Norfolk, and were set upon and beaten by a mob of young blacks
-- beaten so badly that they had to take a week off from work -- that
might seem to have been news that should have been reported, at least by
their own newspaper. But it wasn't.
"The O'Reilly Factor" on Fox News Channel was the first major television
program to report this incident. Yet this story is not just a Norfolk
story, either in what happened or in how the media and the authorities
have tried to sweep it under the rug.
Similar episodes of unprovoked violence by young black gangs against
white people chosen at random on beaches, in shopping malls or in other
public places have occurred in Philadelphia, New York, Denver, Chicago,
Cleveland, Washington, Los Angeles and other places across the country.
Both the authorities and the media tend to try to sweep these episodes
under the rug as well.
In Milwaukee, for example, an attack on whites at a public park a few
years ago left many of the victims battered to the ground and bloody.
But, when the police arrived on the scene, it became clear that the
authorities wanted to keep this quiet.
One 22-year-old woman, who had been robbed of her cell phone and debit
card, and had blood streaming down her face said: "About 20 of us stayed
to give statements and make sure everyone was accounted for. The police
wouldn't listen to us, they wouldn't take our names or statements. They
told us to leave. It was completely infuriating."
The police chief seemed determined to head off any suggestion that this
was a racially motivated attack by saying that crime is colorblind.
Other officials elsewhere have said similar things.
A wave of such attacks in Chicago were reported, but not the race of the
attackers or victims. Media outlets that do not report the race of
people committing crimes nevertheless report racial disparities in
imprisonment and write heated editorials blaming the criminal justice
system.
What the authorities and the media seem determined to suppress is that
the hoodlum elements in many ghettoes launch coordinated attacks on
whites in public places. If there is anything worse than a one-sided
race war, it is a two-sided race war, especially when one of the races
outnumbers the other several times over.
It may be understandable that some people want to head off such a
catastrophe, either by not reporting the attacks in this race war, or
not identifying the race of those attacking, or by insisting that the
attacks were not racially motivated -- even when the attackers
themselves voice anti-white invective as they laugh at their bleeding
victims.
Thomas Sowell
Thomas Sowell
May 15, 2012
A Censored Race War?
When two white newspaper reporters for the Virginian-Pilot were driving
through Norfolk, and were set upon and beaten by a mob of young blacks
-- beaten so badly that they had to take a week off from work -- that
might seem to have been news that should have been reported, at least by
their own newspaper. But it wasn't.
"The O'Reilly Factor" on Fox News Channel was the first major television
program to report this incident. Yet this story is not just a Norfolk
story, either in what happened or in how the media and the authorities
have tried to sweep it under the rug.
Similar episodes of unprovoked violence by young black gangs against
white people chosen at random on beaches, in shopping malls or in other
public places have occurred in Philadelphia, New York, Denver, Chicago,
Cleveland, Washington, Los Angeles and other places across the country.
Both the authorities and the media tend to try to sweep these episodes
under the rug as well.
In Milwaukee, for example, an attack on whites at a public park a few
years ago left many of the victims battered to the ground and bloody.
But, when the police arrived on the scene, it became clear that the
authorities wanted to keep this quiet.
One 22-year-old woman, who had been robbed of her cell phone and debit
card, and had blood streaming down her face said: "About 20 of us stayed
to give statements and make sure everyone was accounted for. The police
wouldn't listen to us, they wouldn't take our names or statements. They
told us to leave. It was completely infuriating."
The police chief seemed determined to head off any suggestion that this
was a racially motivated attack by saying that crime is colorblind.
Other officials elsewhere have said similar things.
A wave of such attacks in Chicago were reported, but not the race of the
attackers or victims. Media outlets that do not report the race of
people committing crimes nevertheless report racial disparities in
imprisonment and write heated editorials blaming the criminal justice
system.
What the authorities and the media seem determined to suppress is that
the hoodlum elements in many ghettoes launch coordinated attacks on
whites in public places. If there is anything worse than a one-sided
race war, it is a two-sided race war, especially when one of the races
outnumbers the other several times over.
It may be understandable that some people want to head off such a
catastrophe, either by not reporting the attacks in this race war, or
not identifying the race of those attacking, or by insisting that the
attacks were not racially motivated -- even when the attackers
themselves voice anti-white invective as they laugh at their bleeding
victims.
Winston_Smith
May 15, 2012, 12:39:04 PM5/15/12
to
On Tue, 15 May 2012 08:12:12 -0700, Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com>
wrote:
So far in this thread - in a desparate attempt to find a winning
position - Gunner has shifted the topic from
liberty grabbing to gun control
Clinton's deficits to national debt
name calling to personal attacks (his favorite off your meds ploy)
Continuing the never ending journey, he now shifts it to race wars and
censorship. Stay tuned, folks, to see if it ever ends.
wrote:
So far in this thread - in a desparate attempt to find a winning
position - Gunner has shifted the topic from
liberty grabbing to gun control
gun control to FDR's deficits
FDRs deficits to Clinton's deficits
Clinton's deficits to national debt
national debt to total debt
total debt to name calling
name calling to personal attacks (his favorite off your meds ploy)
Continuing the never ending journey, he now shifts it to race wars and
censorship. Stay tuned, folks, to see if it ever ends.
pyotr filipivich
May 15, 2012, 3:09:53 PM5/15/12
to
Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com> on Mon, 14 May 2012 14:09:52 -0700
typed in misc.survivalism the following:
$1 in 1940 is 16.43 today
$288 in 1945 is $3,681.36 today
mere $3,681,504,000,000 but close enough for government work.
"clumped" before the invention of decimal points and "commas". In some
countries (eg the US) the name changes every 1000 "units" because "in
the old days" long numbers were written 123 321 123 123. In others,
the next larger name is every thousand thousand 123456 654321. So in
the US 288e10^11 is a two hundred eighty eight billion while in
England it is a two hundred eighty eight thousand milliard.
So what you have is three quadrillion dollars in the New York
Times, or three billion dollars (one billion eight hundred seventy
trillion pounds) as reported in the British Press.
OTOH, $288,000,000,000 is 2.88e11 dollars. Times 12.78 (or
1.267e1) is $3,681,504,000,000 or $3.68e12. Which is in a NYT
headline is "three trillion six hundred and eight billion dollars" but
in the Mail "three thousand six hundred and eight billion dollars (two
thousand two hundred twenty nine billion Pounds)"
>http://costofwar.com/en/
>
>$1.3 trillion to date for the US in the Middle East since 2001
>
>Bit different..eh wot?
About a third of the dollar amount (3.7 trillion vs 1.3 trillion),
but the man power costs, have been much smaller. ~12 million men in
the army and navy then vs 1.4 million today. "Typical Americans,
spending money on technology, not on the troops."
So, the current round of warfare has cost a third the dollars,
while covering three times the time. Hmmm.
Oh, US Debt to GDP in 1945 was 116%. But it started dropping the
next year. "Funny that." It _was_ 65% in 2007 - five years ago - the
last date I found for GDP data.
That ratio gets worse as the data gets more current.
tschus
pyotr
typed in misc.survivalism the following:
>On Mon, 14 May 2012 13:01:55 -0700, pyotr filipivich
><ph...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>>Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com> on Tue, 08 May 2012 09:30:33 -0700
>>typed in alt.survival the following:
>>>
>>>Care to point out the gun control actions in those?
>>>>
>>>>>Deficit spending,
>>>>
>>>>The Bush deficit was the biggest in the history of the country until O
>>>>saw him and raised.
>>>
>>>Only when inflated dollars are used. One suggests you review FDRs
>>>spending on a dollar/corrected dollar scale is used.
>>
>> It is even more "interesting" to compare the National Debt to GDP.
>>NOW, I can see FDR running the debt up to levels in excess of the GDP,
>>but he was fighting (and intending to win) a Real War(tm).
>>
>
><ph...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>>Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com> on Tue, 08 May 2012 09:30:33 -0700
>>typed in alt.survival the following:
>>>
>>>Care to point out the gun control actions in those?
>>>>
>>>>>Deficit spending,
>>>>
>>>>The Bush deficit was the biggest in the history of the country until O
>>>>saw him and raised.
>>>
>>>Only when inflated dollars are used. One suggests you review FDRs
>>>spending on a dollar/corrected dollar scale is used.
>>
>> It is even more "interesting" to compare the National Debt to GDP.
>>NOW, I can see FDR running the debt up to levels in excess of the GDP,
>>but he was fighting (and intending to win) a Real War(tm).
>>
>
>I guess it is time to once again, post this link:
>
>http://www.usinflationcalculator.com/
>
> $20 in 1945 now equals $254.88 in 2012
$1 in 1945 is 12.78 in 2012
>
>http://www.usinflationcalculator.com/
>
> $20 in 1945 now equals $254.88 in 2012
$1 in 1940 is 16.43 today
$288 in 1945 is $3,681.36 today
>
>Its said that WW2 cost America $288,000,000,000
>
>In todays dollars..thats $3,000,670,272,000,000
I think you fat fingered a calculator button. S/B closer to a
>Its said that WW2 cost America $288,000,000,000
>
>In todays dollars..thats $3,000,670,272,000,000
mere $3,681,504,000,000 but close enough for government work.
>
>Im having trouble wrapping my head around that number..what is
>it..trillions or quadrillions?
Long count or short count? Goes back to how long numbers were
>Im having trouble wrapping my head around that number..what is
>it..trillions or quadrillions?
"clumped" before the invention of decimal points and "commas". In some
countries (eg the US) the name changes every 1000 "units" because "in
the old days" long numbers were written 123 321 123 123. In others,
the next larger name is every thousand thousand 123456 654321. So in
the US 288e10^11 is a two hundred eighty eight billion while in
England it is a two hundred eighty eight thousand milliard.
So what you have is three quadrillion dollars in the New York
Times, or three billion dollars (one billion eight hundred seventy
trillion pounds) as reported in the British Press.
OTOH, $288,000,000,000 is 2.88e11 dollars. Times 12.78 (or
1.267e1) is $3,681,504,000,000 or $3.68e12. Which is in a NYT
headline is "three trillion six hundred and eight billion dollars" but
in the Mail "three thousand six hundred and eight billion dollars (two
thousand two hundred twenty nine billion Pounds)"
>http://costofwar.com/en/
>
>$1.3 trillion to date for the US in the Middle East since 2001
>
>Bit different..eh wot?
but the man power costs, have been much smaller. ~12 million men in
the army and navy then vs 1.4 million today. "Typical Americans,
spending money on technology, not on the troops."
So, the current round of warfare has cost a third the dollars,
while covering three times the time. Hmmm.
Oh, US Debt to GDP in 1945 was 116%. But it started dropping the
next year. "Funny that." It _was_ 65% in 2007 - five years ago - the
last date I found for GDP data.
That ratio gets worse as the data gets more current.
tschus
pyotr
Waldo Tunnel
May 17, 2012, 1:22:32 AM5/17/12
to
On May 12, 12:38 pm, Gunner Asch <gunnera...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 08 May 2012 16:38:25 -0700, Winston_Smith
>
> On Tue, 08 May 2012 16:38:25 -0700, Winston_Smith
>
> <inva...@butterfly.net> wrote:
>
> >Next in the thread, he wanted to compare Obama's deficit spending to
> >FDR. He had to go back over seventy years to find his reference.
>
> Odd that you and the Left claim that Bush got the record for spending.
You got your clocked cleaned again, Gunnybunny.
>
> >Next in the thread, he wanted to compare Obama's deficit spending to
> >FDR. He had to go back over seventy years to find his reference.
>
> Odd that you and the Left claim that Bush got the record for spending.
Waldo Tunnel
May 17, 2012, 1:38:13 AM5/17/12
to
On May 12, 3:46 pm, Winston_Smith <inva...@butterfly.net> wrote:
> On Sat, 12 May 2012 12:38:51 -0700, Gunner Asch <gunnera...@gmail.com>
>
> And THAT was after you changed the subject from "freedoms" and
> "liberty grabbing" to gun control so you could wiggle out of your
> first bind.
Oh man.
> FDR put the nation on a war time budget while Bush followed Johnson's
> example and declared we could have guns and butter.
It was worse. Johnson at least raised taxes (a surtax on upper incomes
I believe) while Bush cut taxes-- both during war time.
>Not surprising, the economy collapsed for Bush just like it did at the end of
> Johnson's war.
It was worse. Much worse.
> Damn liberals never learn.
LOL.
> Always think this time is different. And droids like Gunner keep believing them.
> You also ignore that FDR was fighting a world war. Virtually paying
> the bills for all of the allies who were fiscally strapped by years of
> war before we entered.
> Remind me, what was Bush's excuse for massive spending. Oh yes, I
> remember - a personally declared war against the wrong country that
> was going to be over in "six days, six weeks, I doubt six months".
He also said that Clinton's surpluses were a sin. Ok, I doubt he said
that but I think he implied that surpluses indicated excessive
taxation (on the wealthy)
Bravo, Mr. Smith.
> On Sat, 12 May 2012 12:38:51 -0700, Gunner Asch <gunnera...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >On Tue, 08 May 2012 16:38:25 -0700, Winston_Smith wrote:
>
> >>Next in the thread, he wanted to compare Obama's deficit spending to
> >>FDR. He had to go back over seventy years to find his reference.
>
> >Odd that you and the Left claim that Bush got the record for spending.
>
> Changing the subject as usual. Gunner likes to do that.
Nailed it.
>
> >On Tue, 08 May 2012 16:38:25 -0700, Winston_Smith wrote:
>
> >>Next in the thread, he wanted to compare Obama's deficit spending to
> >>FDR. He had to go back over seventy years to find his reference.
>
> >Odd that you and the Left claim that Bush got the record for spending.
>
> Changing the subject as usual. Gunner likes to do that.
>
> I wrote about DEFICIT, not SPENDING.
Hahahahaha!
> I wrote about DEFICIT, not SPENDING.
>
> And THAT was after you changed the subject from "freedoms" and
> "liberty grabbing" to gun control so you could wiggle out of your
> first bind.
>
> So here we are talking deficits from 80 years ago instead of Bush's
> rush on liberty. Don't you consider that "odd".
I think I do.
> So here we are talking deficits from 80 years ago instead of Bush's
> rush on liberty. Don't you consider that "odd".
> FDR put the nation on a war time budget while Bush followed Johnson's
> example and declared we could have guns and butter.
I believe) while Bush cut taxes-- both during war time.
>Not surprising, the economy collapsed for Bush just like it did at the end of
> Johnson's war.
> Damn liberals never learn.
LOL.
> Always think this time is different. And droids like Gunner keep believing them.
> You also ignore that FDR was fighting a world war. Virtually paying
> the bills for all of the allies who were fiscally strapped by years of
> war before we entered.
> Remind me, what was Bush's excuse for massive spending. Oh yes, I
> remember - a personally declared war against the wrong country that
> was going to be over in "six days, six weeks, I doubt six months".
that but I think he implied that surpluses indicated excessive
taxation (on the wealthy)
Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess
May 17, 2012, 1:50:46 AM5/17/12
to
--
Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess
"The most precious things in speech are pauses."
-- Ralph Richardson
Waldo Tunnel
May 17, 2012, 2:04:36 AM5/17/12
to
Hahahahaha! Too classic.
On May 13, 11:48 am, Winston_Smith <inva...@butterfly.net> wrote:
> On Sun, 13 May 2012 00:34:27 -0700, Gunner Asch wrote:
> >On Sat, 12 May 2012 15:27:27 -0700, Winston_Smith wrote:
> >>On Sat, 12 May 2012 12:40:34 -0700, Gunner Asch wrote:
> >>>On Tue, 08 May 2012 16:38:25 -0700, Winston_Smithwrote:
>
> >>>>He ignores that his most recent example of an R-god, inherited a
> >>>>decent economy near the top of a long growth and he inherited a
> >>>>balanced budget, albeit by smoke and mirrors. Gunner ignores that
> >>>>Bush kept every damn one of those smoke and mirrors, added more, and
> >>>>still went from a surplus to a deficit. He did it with the age old
> >>>>route to disaster - guns and butter.
>
> >>>And again our old Leftwing buddy Whiney declares Clinton had a "surplus"
>
> >>>Sorry Comrade..zero surplus. Nada. Nope, None, Nyet, Hasidata
>
> >>How very biased of you, hey there is a surprise, that you ignore the
> >>"albeit by smoke and mirrors" to rewrite history and what people post
> >>to serve is own propaganda.
>
> >Sorry Lumpy..but I post truth not bullshit.
>
> The only bullshit here is when you switch what people wrote about to
> what you wish to talk about. ALWAYS trying to shift yourself from a
> losing position to some advantage.
>
> >Want the cites that render your statements utter buffoonery?
> >http://finance.townhall.com/columnists/craigsteiner/2011/08/22/the_cl...
> >http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2011/07/deficits
> >http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_much_surplus_did_the_US_have_when_Clint...
You better surrender Gunnybunny. You are getting your fat ass royally
kicked.
On May 13, 11:48 am, Winston_Smith <inva...@butterfly.net> wrote:
> On Sun, 13 May 2012 00:34:27 -0700, Gunner Asch wrote:
> >On Sat, 12 May 2012 15:27:27 -0700, Winston_Smith wrote:
> >>On Sat, 12 May 2012 12:40:34 -0700, Gunner Asch wrote:
> >>>On Tue, 08 May 2012 16:38:25 -0700, Winston_Smithwrote:
>
> >>>>He ignores that his most recent example of an R-god, inherited a
> >>>>decent economy near the top of a long growth and he inherited a
> >>>>balanced budget, albeit by smoke and mirrors. Gunner ignores that
> >>>>Bush kept every damn one of those smoke and mirrors, added more, and
> >>>>still went from a surplus to a deficit. He did it with the age old
> >>>>route to disaster - guns and butter.
>
> >>>And again our old Leftwing buddy Whiney declares Clinton had a "surplus"
>
> >>>Sorry Comrade..zero surplus. Nada. Nope, None, Nyet, Hasidata
>
> >>How very biased of you, hey there is a surprise, that you ignore the
> >>"albeit by smoke and mirrors" to rewrite history and what people post
> >>to serve is own propaganda.
>
> >Sorry Lumpy..but I post truth not bullshit.
>
> The only bullshit here is when you switch what people wrote about to
> what you wish to talk about. ALWAYS trying to shift yourself from a
> losing position to some advantage.
>
> >Want the cites that render your statements utter buffoonery?
> >http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2011/07/deficits
> >http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_much_surplus_did_the_US_have_when_Clint...
>
> All of which reflect what you WANT to talk about, not what I wrote
> about.
>
> >Clinton ran deficits throught all 8 years of his term,
>
> http://www.factcheck.org/2008/02/the-budget-and-deficit-under-clinton/
> Oh look at that. Says clear and simple "Gunner is full of it."
>
> >and one can go to
> >the US Treasury Department and looking through the history of the total
> >outstanding debt through Clintons term.
>
> (Yet another Gunner switcheroo. First you switched "liberty grabbing"
> to "gun control" and then jumped from "gun control" to "FDR's
> deficits". Having gotten your ass whooped again, you now switch to
> "Clinton's deficits" and proceed to confuse DEFICIT with DEBT and lie
> about both. Is this good debating technique or can't you focus on a
> single idea for longer than ten seconds.)
>
> >Every year Clinton was in office, the total national debt continued to
> >climb.
>
> Let's have a look.http://zfacts.com/p/318.html
> All of which reflect what you WANT to talk about, not what I wrote
> about.
>
> >Clinton ran deficits throught all 8 years of his term,
>
> http://www.factcheck.org/2008/02/the-budget-and-deficit-under-clinton/
> Oh look at that. Says clear and simple "Gunner is full of it."
>
> >and one can go to
> >the US Treasury Department and looking through the history of the total
> >outstanding debt through Clintons term.
>
> (Yet another Gunner switcheroo. First you switched "liberty grabbing"
> to "gun control" and then jumped from "gun control" to "FDR's
> deficits". Having gotten your ass whooped again, you now switch to
> "Clinton's deficits" and proceed to confuse DEFICIT with DEBT and lie
> about both. Is this good debating technique or can't you focus on a
> single idea for longer than ten seconds.)
>
> >Every year Clinton was in office, the total national debt continued to
> >climb.
>
kicked.
Winston_Smith
May 17, 2012, 2:32:30 AM5/17/12
to
On Sun, 13 May 2012 00:36:19 -0700, Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com>
from Gunner has he tap dances on quick sand in a failing attempt to
salvage at least one debating point.)
Spending is one issue. An important one to be sure but it's own
issue. Spending within your resources is one thing. It's whatever
the sheeple will stand in taxes. It's whether they accept what's
being bought and for how much. Specifically, it's a political issue.
Deficit spending is money you don't have, living beyond your means,
putting it on the plastic. That is a whole separate topic. It's much
more important than supported spending because it can bring your whole
world crashing down around your ears. Specifically, it's a fiscal
issue. Somehow, you tell us when Bush did that, it was just fine and
dandy.
Now, children, do you see the difference between spending and
deficits? Write a short essay to demonstrate your newly mastered
insight.
wrote:
>On Sat, 12 May 2012 15:46:16 -0700, Winston_Smith
><inv...@butterfly.net> wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 12 May 2012 12:38:51 -0700, Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com>
>>wrote:
>>>On Tue, 08 May 2012 16:38:25 -0700, Winston_Smith wrote:
>>>
>>>>Next in the thread, he wanted to compare Obama's deficit spending to
>>>>FDR. He had to go back over seventy years to find his reference.
>>>
>>>Odd that you and the Left claim that Bush got the record for spending.
>>
>>Changing the subject as usual. Gunner likes to do that.
>>
>>I wrote about DEFICIT, not SPENDING.
>
>
>So the "deficit spending" was not from you..but was a radically
>idiosyncric combination of sunspot effects and several million wild
>photons?
>
>Wow dude! Heavy!!!
Heavily stupid on your part, my friend. (And yet another topic shift
>On Sat, 12 May 2012 15:46:16 -0700, Winston_Smith
><inv...@butterfly.net> wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 12 May 2012 12:38:51 -0700, Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com>
>>wrote:
>>>On Tue, 08 May 2012 16:38:25 -0700, Winston_Smith wrote:
>>>
>>>>Next in the thread, he wanted to compare Obama's deficit spending to
>>>>FDR. He had to go back over seventy years to find his reference.
>>>
>>>Odd that you and the Left claim that Bush got the record for spending.
>>
>>Changing the subject as usual. Gunner likes to do that.
>>
>>I wrote about DEFICIT, not SPENDING.
>
>
>So the "deficit spending" was not from you..but was a radically
>idiosyncric combination of sunspot effects and several million wild
>photons?
>
>Wow dude! Heavy!!!
from Gunner has he tap dances on quick sand in a failing attempt to
salvage at least one debating point.)
Spending is one issue. An important one to be sure but it's own
issue. Spending within your resources is one thing. It's whatever
the sheeple will stand in taxes. It's whether they accept what's
being bought and for how much. Specifically, it's a political issue.
Deficit spending is money you don't have, living beyond your means,
putting it on the plastic. That is a whole separate topic. It's much
more important than supported spending because it can bring your whole
world crashing down around your ears. Specifically, it's a fiscal
issue. Somehow, you tell us when Bush did that, it was just fine and
dandy.
Now, children, do you see the difference between spending and
deficits? Write a short essay to demonstrate your newly mastered
insight.
Doc Smartass
May 17, 2012, 4:59:08 AM5/17/12
to
Waldo Tunnel <waldo...@gmail.com> wrote in news:0104442c-3f65-41b8-bd0c-
d4f04d...@o3g2000pby.googlegroups.com:
Gummer's still posting? Hadn't noticed.
--
Doc Smartass, BAAWA Knight of Heckling aa # 1939
Kooks! http://kookclearinghouse.blogspot.com/
Books! http://jw-bookblog.blogspot.com/
Proud to be everything the right wing hates.
d4f04d...@o3g2000pby.googlegroups.com:
--
Doc Smartass, BAAWA Knight of Heckling aa # 1939
Kooks! http://kookclearinghouse.blogspot.com/
Books! http://jw-bookblog.blogspot.com/
Proud to be everything the right wing hates.
pyotr filipivich
May 18, 2012, 11:54:37 PM5/18/12
to
pyotr filipivich <ph...@mindspring.com> on Tue, 15 May 2012 12:09:53
And I found a source for more recent data, and the projections for
the next few years.
http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/spending_chart_2007_2017USb_XXs1li111mcn_H0f
Should Hit >100% GDP any day now.
--
pyotr filipivich
Next month's Panel: Graft - Boon or blessing?
the next few years.
http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/spending_chart_2007_2017USb_XXs1li111mcn_H0f
Should Hit >100% GDP any day now.
--
pyotr filipivich
Next month's Panel: Graft - Boon or blessing?
Gunner Asch
May 19, 2012, 3:16:53 AM5/19/12
to
Gunner Asch
May 19, 2012, 3:17:37 AM5/19/12
to
Keep dreaming Wildo
JerryD(upstateNY)
May 19, 2012, 6:10:50 AM5/19/12
to
Some uninformed person wrote..........The debt went down under EVERY
That's quite a spin you have on the budget,
The House holds all the purse strings, not the president.
The Democrats controlled the House all during the Reagan years.
They could have passed any size budget they wanted.
The DEMOCRATS decided to pass the deficit budgets, not Reagan.
The DEMOCRATS passed deficit budgets all during the terms of Reagan and Bush
41.
The reason the budgets went down during the Clinton years is
because the REPUBLICANS won the House for the first time in many years.
--
JerryD(upstateNY)
president starting with Truman until Reagan/Bush started it up.
It went down again under Clinton and up under Bush, and Lord Oh.
That's quite a spin you have on the budget,
The House holds all the purse strings, not the president.
The Democrats controlled the House all during the Reagan years.
They could have passed any size budget they wanted.
The DEMOCRATS decided to pass the deficit budgets, not Reagan.
The DEMOCRATS passed deficit budgets all during the terms of Reagan and Bush
41.
The reason the budgets went down during the Clinton years is
because the REPUBLICANS won the House for the first time in many years.
--
JerryD(upstateNY)
0 new messages