Re: How about that Republican administration-created debt
MagneticEnergy
1921 The Infancy and Maternity Protection Act of 1921
1935 The Social Security Act (1939, 1950, and other amendments)
1944 GI Bill
1956 Disability amendments to SSI
1962 thru 1992 Aid to Dependent Children (Welfare) (in twenty five
years widowers went from 80% of recipients to 10%?) Kennedy and his
"New Frontier" (always some catchy phrase "you can believe in", to
distract you from the economic failures?)
1964 Economic Opportunity Act (with the "Poverty Czar")
(ambitious politicians assume millions of Americans want to
work, and they don't, otherwise Job Corps would have eliminated
unemployment?)
1964 Food Stamp Act
1965 Social Security Amendments
1970 Unemployment Insurance (after realizing Americans are lazy, this
was invented to get people to vote?) The AFL-CIO had its hands all
over this?
1972 Social Security COLA/WIC
1975 Employer Welfare Act (Earned Income Credit) a program that
raised the minimum wage by a sliding scale with the government giving
the "minimum raise" and calling it something totally different. Also
approved largely because of the intense debate over the "Tax Reduction
Act" they didn't have the energy to debate this on the floor of the
House?"
1983 More amendments to Social Security (the government is just
great at predicting numbers, huh?)
1988 thru 1994 Welfare reform (the Family Support Act)
By 1994, 14.2 million Americans were on AFDC, roughly 10% of the work
force? Aren't Democrat priorities just great? (Meanwhile evil
Americans were feeding plants Co2, a registered pollutant)
2000 Seniors Right to Work Act. Yes, more amendments to Social
Security. You know why? Because seniors outnumber poor high school
drop outs by 10 to 1? So they always dominate the political agenda?
And the Democrats are guess what, throwing seniors under the bus?
Left out is the general discussion of wasteful public spending
projects, preventable taxes, and of course, Time Magazine, which based
entire issues dedicated to global climate change simply based on one
set of numbers, from the United Nations?
Don't take my word for it, check all the sources used at Time
Magazine, who did they use? What pictures did they use? Why did they
use those pictures? Should we call state troopers in Missouri, and
say that Time magazine is lying, when it uses questionable comparisons
regarding ideological discussions based on emotions rather than
facts?
But you know what I like best about Time Magazine? Is when they
lament that the Earth only has less than 3% fresh water, and that
population problems will abound, and then God gives them several pages
to write about disasters related to guess what? Fresh water flooding?
Yes, I agree, man is lazy? Gee what did people do before 1912, go to
church, get to know their neighbors and help out?
All right, with that background, lets look at what the hope of Harry
wrote?
-----------------
This is complete projection.
Dylan as do most conservatives completely ignore the past 8 years.
(incoherent, I have no idea what Dylan means)
It was Bush Cheney that took us from $5 Trillion in debt to $11
Trillion in debt.
(No spending comparison rates, only summaries, and no justification
or result summaries)
It was Bush Cheney that took a budget surplus and gave it to the
wealthy elite in the form of massive tax breaks.
(A budget surplus would indicate that people are being over taxed)
It was Republicans coupled with some conservative Democrats that
deregulated the banking industry starting in 1999.
(Barny Franks (an angry homo?) had nothing to do with this?)
---------------------------------------------
Corporate Welfare was rampant under the Bush Cheney regime with
hundreds of billions of dollars handed out in the form of cost plus no
bid contracts to the likes of Halliburton, KBR, and BlackWater USA.
(No one else could do the job? Who would you have selected to bid?)
Nearly every major U.S. Department was stacked with a Loyal Bushy and
directed to basically deregulate where possible and do anything to be
more corporate friendly.
(If corporations employ people, why make it harder?)
From the EPA to the FDA to the CPA to the BLM we witnessed the
efficacy of the Federal Government eroded.
(incoherent)
This came to a head during Hurricane Katrina with Heckuva Job Brownie
at FEMA.
(Bush wanted to rebuild the death trap, which I fiercely oppose)
Many poor
could not evacuate based on Democrat utopian metro designs that
revolved
around mass transit (when those systems stopped, they were all
trapped)
Corporate bailouts started under Bush Cheney Republicans.
(which does not mean they should have been done at all)
---------------------------
Ronald Reagan ushered in the era of "break government" that has been
championed by Grover Norquist.
The conservative dream has been to make the government so bloated and
inefficient that it eventually collapses.
This started under Reagan who said "The nine most terrifying words in
the English language are: 'I'm from the government and I'm here to
help.'"
Reagan added trillions to our National Debt.
(because communism was being spread by the point of a gun,
including trapping people)
This continued under Bush I.
Under Clinton with a Republican Congress there was an effort to get
the deficit under control.
(What took them off track?)
Under Bush II we were right back to deficit spending and massive
borrowing.
(Democrats infiltrated the Republican Party and began their new era
of confusion?)
Bush Cheney were the ones who tried to undermine government by making
it more inefficient, less beneficial to The People, and by spending as
much money as possible.
(A more effecient government is one that does less? Every page of
legislation can put
another person in jail?)
It was all by design.
-----------------------------------
Resistance if futile, you must comply.......with the truth!
Can you smell el el el el el el el el el .........what the Rock of
Truth, who has the smartest eyebrow in the Universe, and the whitest
teeth known to man, is ............................cooking?
Being that this is the most exciting, most entertaining, fact finding,
brain busting, fun loving, liberal egg shell mind crunching,
invincible smacketh downeth erectus among us, you can't see the truth
coming, but you know it is anyway, sonic boom of Conservatism, and,
most powerful keyboard in the world,
Do you feel lucky?
-----------------------------------
Universal Disclaimer for the Public Domain, Version 1.4, dated Oct
10th, 2009
a) The views expressed by this website and the author to include all
electronic forms of communication are not representative of
advertisers, or other third parties that may store and or transmit the
messages from this private computer, which you may observe at your own
risk, with no liability to the authors, or any party related to
transmitting, storing, or any other aspect of the material involved,
including email correspondence, which is not necessary to the function
of the website, and may or may not be archived. No personal
information exchanged will be shared without your consent, or provided
to third parties with out the express permission of the parties and,
or, individuals concerned.
b) The author(s) of this content and those who may interact with it in
various known or unknown electronic methods do not give permission to
any third parties to share or provide private personal information who
may operate as part of the internet communications system, including
all parties, who may technically intercept communications due to the
nature of network conditions beyond both the author's legal and
physical control, unless those communications represent violations of
the law, upon which the author, and or web site will cooperate to
pursue any legal remedies.
c) The views expressed by the author or website may or may not contain
factual information, due to the use of sarcasm or parody. The views
may or may not be complete, either by design, to pre-empt being called
a liar even if telling the truth, or by error due to typographical,
grammer, or other technical communication problems not realized or
imagined, or the possibility of views based on false or missing
information, or with the intention of being used for entertainment
purposes only, and not as a definitive judgement on the actions,
character, or reputation of an organization, individual, or groups of
individuals, with the intent of communicating with a limited group of
people, and not the general public, however no distribution
restrictions apply for fair use purposes described by the US Copyright
Office, if no other restrictions are present or communicated, with all
commercial proceeds associated with the distribution of the content to
remain the sole possesion of the original author.
d) Any humor if used, is not intended to offend people, and may be
designed to apply the principals of peer pressure through reverse
examination to accomplish the communication of principals or ideas
that consist of traditional or proposed social values that are proven
to advance the common good, and are not meant to discredit, disparage
or demean any person or entities in any professional or personal
manner, by attempting to share through the eyes or opinion of the
author, for which it is expected that you read at your own risk, with
no liability held to the author or any third parties who may store,
transfer, or forward this message to others, in the traditions of free
speech, fair use, and to play a positive role in a society that
believes that graphically depicting male homosexuals having sex, and
other unusual sex acts is considered free speech or that the use of
abortion to limit Negros, Latinos, and other races from "spreading the
wealth around" as a "matter of privacy" (which the author does not
condone).
e)The use of humor is a known ingredient in providing teachable
moments, and to validate and even demonstrate artistic expressions
that are not shared by others, as demonstrated by many valuable
scientific observations that were scoffed at in the past, yet proven
to be quite valid decades later, upon which the humor used in all
electronic communications by the author are based, in the principals
and traditions of free speech and pursuit of happiness, and may not be
a representation of others, including God.
f) Additional use of automated anonymous page use tracking computer
scripts (web page programs) may be licensed by www.google.com, for
bandwidth verification or potential advertisement opportunities or
incorporation of web master tools in the future.
g) Advertisements that may appear are not necessarily endorsed by the
author, either by admission, or by silence, nor are related links,
that may be provided for all or any of the following known or unknown
purposes, but not limited to, informational, educational, and for the
purpose of giving copy right credit referal information under the
terms outlined in the conditions applied to the term "fair use"
regarding conversations and print under US Copy Right Law.
h) It is the opinion of the author that effective 1 December, 2009,
the proposed regulations from the FTC violate the first and fifth
amendments of the United States Constitution, by infringing through
economic affliction the burden without compensation all financial
details concerning the communications of both free enterprise and
opinion, and other civil rights such as "punishment must be fair" and
not at the "discretion" of public officials, or that advertisers are
assumed to be guilty of deception when United States law provides that
you are innocent before being proven guilty, and are in fact
demonstrations that there are current members of Congress that neither
understand the spirit of the law our founding fathers made for the
United States of America, or understand how they work in the opinion
of the author, as of October 10th, 2009, especially in light of
anticipated, and hopefully defeated, legislative taxes relating to
energy use and the burden of publishers and advertisers to comply with
the law and manage the environment, and in light that there are
various consumer protection agencies, including the Better Business
Bureau, which has free consumer information.
i)Although the content provided meets or exceeds those new
requirements to the knowledge of the author, and modifications to
version 1.3 of this disclaimer is a result of the opinion of the
author that blogging is another definition for a potentially infinite
number or forms of electronic communication, as such the author will
retroactively apply this version, 1.4 to all forms of previous
communications, when and wherever possible, as time allows, in order
to properly convey the intention of the author and to demonstrate an
enthusiasm to comply with the law, and not enthusiastically pursue
getting high on cocaine as often as possible as Barack Hussein Obama
has admitted in his book (paraphrase, synopsis), according to (mmm,
mmm, mmm (sonic emphasis)) Rush Hudson Limbaugh, (mmm mmm mmm (sonic
emphasis)).
j) Use of this disclaimer for either personal or professional use is
permitted with no restrictions. These restrictions or disclaimers do
not prohibit the author from pursuing or communicating in a truthful
manner, or guarantee that the audience will understand all things as
intended, and, or result in being called incoherent, or even a Chicken
Chaser!
dave
> It was Bush Cheney that took a budget surplus and gave it to the
> wealthy elite in the form of massive tax breaks.
>
> (A budget surplus would indicate that people are being over taxed)
>
There is no such thing as a surplus if you are $10,000,000,000,000.00 in
debt.
MagneticEnergy
I didn't say there was a surplus, isn't it fun being right? How long
was it before they had to recant that claim? There will never be a
surplus, because someone would simply spend it before it appeared?
The right will just give a tax cut, and the left will not want to
admit it because all the Euro Pee in Your Dreams will accuse you of
raping the planet, and then come up with some social experiment that
trashes the economy all over again?
Millions of Americans do NOT want to work. Get used to it. Leave the
rest of us that WANT TO WORK, WANT TO SUCCEED, ALONE!
How did Jesus say that, let the dead bury the dead?
Different subject, same thought process?
cuh...@webtv.net
Guaranteed! www.ortho.com
I likes those two Ortho mouse traps I borts at teh Lowe's store thi
afernoon.Little doggy and I dun killed two mice already.I washed the
traps real good, then I baited them again with peanut butter.I will use
them over and over.
SIC em, doggy!
cuhulin
RHF
O.B.A.M.A. = One Big Absolute Mistake America !
.
One Year of Prez Obama Beats Eight Years
of Prez Bush by nearly a Trillion
http://www.oilandgasinquirer.com/blog/?p=35
.
Prez Obama's Trillions in First Year Dwarf Prez Bush's
Billions in 8-Years : That's 'Dangerous' Spending
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/politics/Obamas-trillions-dwarf-Bushs-dangerous-spending.html
.
Prez Obama 'Predicts' Many More Years
of Federal Deficits Over $1 Trillion
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/06/AR2009010602849.html
.
O.B.A.M.A. = One Big Absolute Mistake America !
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.radio.shortwave/msg/244b71e8dcd31438
The ObamaNation© Creating a Culture of Joblessness,
Dependency and Controlling Your Every Day Life
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.radio.shortwave/msg/75314971ad0bb2ab
+plus+ Taxing Every Part of Your Daily Life* :
That's Obama-Tax-Slavery© !
* For all those Americans that still have Jobs
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.radio.shortwave/msg/fd2bc713ce1e20fa
.
Insane Political Pay-Back Is a B-I-T-C-H ~ RHF
-ps- In 2009 It's Now Blame Prez Obama Time !
-cause- The ObamaSter© is the President
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.radio.shortwave/msg/d258661bafb39d97
.
.
>
> read more »
Nick Danger
> One Year of Prez Obama Beats Eight Years
> of Prez Bush by nearly a Trillion
> Prez Obama's Trillions in First Year Dwarf Prez Bush's
> Billions in 8-Years : That's 'Dangerous' Spending
> Prez Obama 'Predicts' Many More Years
> of Federal Deficits Over $1 Trillion
Yes, he's spending money...but you may want to look at the reason WHY so
much is being spent.
It just might have something to do with trying to dig us out from the
two bogus 'wars' and from the Depression that he (we) inherited from W.
dave
>
> Millions of Americans do NOT want to work. Get used to it. Leave the
> rest of us that WANT TO WORK, WANT TO SUCCEED, ALONE!
>
But you are not alone. You are part of a society. If that society is
failing some it will fail all, eventually. Either you are one out of
many or you aren't, but to be an American means to feel an affinity for
other Americans, no matter what your superficial differences.
Success is doing what you like and getting paid for it. Maybe the
people in your example need a little vocational help.
liberal
Do you have a job? Is your savings account larger than it was 12
months ago?
Trick question: Do you have a house with a mortgage?
Trick question #2: Why are reichtards so arrogantly stupid?
dxAce
liberal wrote:
> On Nov 1, 8:56 pm, dave <d...@dave.dave> wrote:
> > MagneticEnergy wrote:
> > > It was Bush Cheney that took a budget surplus and gave it to the
> > > wealthy elite in the form of massive tax breaks.
> >
> > > (A budget surplus would indicate that people are being over taxed)
> >
> > There is no such thing as a surplus if you are $10,000,000,000,000.00 in
> > debt.
>
> Do you have a job?
No.
> Is your savings account larger than it was 12
> months ago?
Yes.
> Trick question: Do you have a house with a mortgage?
Yes.
> Trick question #2: Why are reichtards so arrogantly stupid?
Not as stupid as you dumbass Liberals!
MagneticEnergy
Part of society? Really? When you are not left alone, when you are
not given the freedom to bounce around within the boundaries, you are
not a part of society, you are a prisoner. They tried the Job Corps
for almost five years, and then they implemented welfare because
people do not want to be told what to do. Millions of Americans do
not want to work, and it makes little sense to shoot yourself in the
foot because you refuse to admit that we are surrounded by idiots.
Giving away money can remove your need and ability to use patience?
So yes, I have a deep affinity for idiots, by describing how stupid
they are in as many ways as I can possibly think of, to humiliate
them, to motivate them to stop blaming others for their problems, when
ever they ask to so humiliated or communicated to. Perhaps you are
describing the word "patience" by "superficial differences", and I
have a deep affinity for those who refuse to use patience, by calling
them stupid (which I am frequently guilty of, not being patient).
Oh, and success is not doing what you want to do. Sometimes you have
to do what people pay you to do, and it is only a deep drug induced
coma to suggest that society will reward everyone who just does
whatever they feel like doing. That is ideological insanity. You can
experiment with that process, but there are no guarantees, yet there
is always something to be done, and we are surrounded by wealth.
Leadership requires that we overcome the idiots who do not understand
this process, and create the successful way to the future.
Disclaimer:
MagneticEnergy
wrote:
> In article <2d736$4aee3567$18f55223$11...@allthenewsgroups.com>,
>
> Neolibertarian <cognac...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Dummy, the US economy isn't centrally planned...yet.
>
> > It isn't a matter of "which president is to blame for the economic
> > downturn."
>
> It is supposed to be centrally regulated. Bush decided not to his job, hence
> Bernie Madoff and the rest.
>
> --
> Damn the living - It's a lovely life. I'm whoever you want me to be.
> Silver silverware - Where is the love? At least I can stay in character.
> Oval swimming pool - Where is the love? Annoying Usenet one post at a time.
> Damn the living - It's a lovely life. We support you, Sarah.
That's an ideological hard reach considering that all crooks get
caught, even in China. If China was so well "centrally regulated"
then why does it export? Crooks always think they are smarter than
the other guy, don't they?
So what came first, the freedom, or the planning? The Chicken, or the
Egg?
No the crooks never have to defend their ideology, they just want to
make us all their prisoners?
Guess we got to get "edge you micated." (playing dumb is the first
rule of knowing your opposition?)
disclaimer
lab~rat >:-)
<liber...@gmail.com> puked:
>> There is no such thing as a surplus if you are $10,000,000,000,000.00 in
>> debt.
>
>Do you have a job? Is your savings account larger than it was 12
>months ago?
Mine's double. Just sayin'...
--
lab~rat >:-)
Do you want polite or do you want sincere?
Lamont Cranston
> <liber...@gmail.com> puked:
>
>>> There is no such thing as a surplus if you are
>>> $10,000,000,000,000.00 in debt.
>>
>>Do you have a job? Is your savings account larger than it
>>was 12
>>months ago?
>
> Mine's double. Just sayin'...
It's now $10?
lab~rat >:-)
<Lamont....@EvilWatcher.com> puked:
No, it's a little more than that, but I stopped the lavish vacations
and pissing money away. I cut WAY back on my charitable
contributions, all of our cars are paid off since then, just hunkering
down waiting for Obama to attack...
liberal
Ahhhh, you inherited your money. So you have no idea what working for
a living means.
Otoh, we liberals could be stupider than you reichtards, but at least
we're not arrogantly stupid. Oh wait, being arrogantly stupid
logically implies ya gotta be the stupider of the two of us. No doubt
that conclusion is beyond your limited capacity for thought.
dxAce
liberal wrote:
> On Nov 2, 3:48 pm, dxAce <dx...@milestones.com> wrote:
> > liberal wrote:
> > > On Nov 1, 8:56 pm, dave <d...@dave.dave> wrote:
> > > > MagneticEnergy wrote:
> > > > > It was Bush Cheney that took a budget surplus and gave it to the
> > > > > wealthy elite in the form of massive tax breaks.
> >
> > > > > (A budget surplus would indicate that people are being over taxed)
> >
> > > > There is no such thing as a surplus if you are $10,000,000,000,000.00 in
> > > > debt.
> >
> > > Do you have a job?
> >
> > No.
> >
> > > Is your savings account larger than it was 12
> > > months ago?
> >
> > Yes.
> >
> > > Trick question: Do you have a house with a mortgage?
> >
> > Yes.
> >
> > > Trick question #2: Why are reichtards so arrogantly stupid?
> >
> > Not as stupid as you dumbass Liberals!
>
> Ahhhh, you inherited your money.
Wrongo, dumbass!
> So you have no idea what working for
> a living means.
Wrongo, dumbass!
> Otoh, we liberals could be stupider than you reichtards, but at least
> we're not arrogantly stupid. Oh wait, being arrogantly stupid
> logically implies ya gotta be the stupider of the two of us. No doubt
> that conclusion is beyond your limited capacity for thought.
Obviously your limited capacity is that of saving money.
liberal
Golly, what a elightened dissection of my post....you gotta be a
reichtard. I base my conclusion on the quality of your counterpoint.
Ima
Just wait till he gets cancer or heart problems. His job and insurance
will be gone in weeks. Then his savings will be gone in a year.
Stupid people are soon separated from their money- when they have it.
D. Peter Maus
>
>
> liberal wrote:
>> So you have no idea what working for
>> a living means.
>
My uncle was a CPO in the Navy. Lifer.
When he retired, he said that there are few in the world who work as
hard as those who work below decks.
My grandfather was an officer. And one of the things he said
consistently was that an officer may make the decision to point the
ship, but it's the men who work for a living that make it go.
You don't need to agree with Steve. But he, better than most of
us, knows what it's like to work for a living.
He's earned his retirement.