White lady cop stops Ft. Hood rampage.
martin
A declining society means that persons will become more and more
responsible for their
personal security.
tt
PrivateParty
> http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/2009/11/06/2009-11-06_police...
>
> A declining society means that persons will become more and more
> responsible for their
> personal security.
>
>
Safety is a delusion. Peace of mind is achieved despite the dangers of
life after birth.
Too_Many_Tools
> http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/2009/11/06/2009-11-06_police...
>
> responsible for their
> personal security.
>
> tt
Also very interesting to see that ONE woman could get done what a ROOM
of men could not.
TMT
The Daring Dufas
You forgot to mention that she was armed and the room full of
men were not. Firearms are a great equalizer.
TDD
sr
"Too_Many_Tools" <too_man...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:8863d7c2-2809-45d3...@g1g2000vbr.googlegroups.com...
TMT
I was shocked to learn that bullets are not in guns inside the base, if you
are millitary
So,
I believe she must have been a civilian, working as security, therefore
having bullets in her gun?
haven't heard all details as of yet
Prescott Niles
She was not in the room of UNARMED PEOPLE, you idiot.
How long to wish to advertise your lack of learning?
Stephan Rothstein
She was an on duty Department of the Army Civilian Police officer,
responding with her partner to the call. The DACP officers are in the
process of replacing the Military Police for base law enforcement
duties, so the MP's can be assigned overseas. The MP Corps is the force
of choice for most of the duties in Iraq. The MP's on patrol also would
have had their pistols loaded.
Other than the MP's, soldiers on base are not even issued firearms
unless called for by that day's training schedule.
Steve Rothstein
Lookout
>
>"Too_Many_Tools" <too_man...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:8863d7c2-2809-45d3...@g1g2000vbr.googlegroups.com...
>On Nov 6, 10:14 am, martin <martin.secrest...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/2009/11/06/2009-11-06_police...
>>
>> A declining society means that persons will become more and more
>> responsible for their
>> personal security.
>>
>> tt
>
>Also very interesting to see that ONE woman could get done what a ROOM
>of men could not.
>
>TMT
>I was shocked to learn that bullets are not in guns inside the base, if you
>are millitary
Of course not. That are in the armories with the guns.
>So,
>I believe she must have been a civilian, working as security, therefore
>having bullets in her gun?
>haven't heard all details as of yet
All this has already been released to the news. You're lying
HeyBub
>
>> So,
>> I believe she must have been a civilian, working as security,
>> therefore having bullets in her gun?
>> haven't heard all details as of yet
> All this has already been released to the news. You're lying
Not necessarily. Some (many?) people do not listen to the "news" as
promulgated by the media, preferring instead to get their unfiltered and
unbiased information from blogs and newsgroups.
For example, here we have a radicalized Muslim, killing American soldiers as
a suicide-shooter, and not a single news organization is calling this a
"terrorist act," you've got to be skeptical of the news media.
Lookout
wrote:
It hasn't been proven yet. Why would they start a lie. Remember..the
news media are all liberals and it's the conservatives who love to
lie.
NotMe
"HeyBub" <hey...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote in message
news:ftmdnS1-nNM-BWnX...@earthlink.com...
CNN raised the question on several levels the only response was from Gen
Honre (spl) who opined that there was insufficient information to make even
a preliminary determination.
:
Stephan Rothstein
What has not been proven yet? There is conclusive proof that he was a
Muslim, having been one all his life. His internet postings show his
radicalization. He conclusively was the shooter and killed US Soldiers.
So, what are you going to say, that this was not an act of terrorism? I
guess you work for the FBI who also made that claim almost as soon as
the shooting occurred, even when they thought they had three shooters in
a coordinated attack.
Steve Rothstein
AndyS
> For example, here we have a radicalized Muslim, killing American soldiers as
> a suicide-shooter, and not a single news organization is calling this a
> "terrorist act," you've got to be skeptical of the news media.
Andy comments:
Wow ! To report a successful. act of terrorism Obama's watch, when
GWB
didn't have one for 8 years after 9/11......
... you've got to know the White House would have a hissy fit.
My guess is that reporting "terrorism" has to be cleared by the
White House....... The news media doesn't want to be put in
the same category as Fox News, and such an embarassment
would not be tolerated.
Andy in Eureka, Texas
PS I wonder which political party that Hassan belonged to ........
Wayne
"Too_Many_Tools" <too_man...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:8863d7c2-2809-45d3...@g1g2000vbr.googlegroups.com...
Not surprising at all. The woman was armed, the men were not. That's the
beauty of guns...levels out the playing field for those who would otherwise
be powerless.
sr
"Lookout" <mrLo...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:8359f5pgsv1066kls...@4ax.com...
> All this has already been released to the news. You're lying What?
You don't live where I live, your experiences are not my experiences
You must to lovely to live with. Pity those that do
sr
"HeyBub" <hey...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote in message
news:ftmdnS1-nNM-BWnX...@earthlink.com...
Looks like there are playing the sympathy card for the killer rather than
the victims?
Looks like there are excuses being made for the killer.
Political correct world is gone to get us all killed.
Political correctness has even spread to the Military, I am afraid. Sad
>
>
sr
sr
"Stephan Rothstein" <sroth...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:RKGdnfBuVoWlDmnX...@earthlink.com...
Thank you for filling me in, very good explination, interesting.
I like your response much better than poster Lookout, --
sr
--When a liberal is presented with the Facts, they slink off
Lookout
<sroth...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>Lookout wrote:
>> On Fri, 6 Nov 2009 15:44:03 -0600, "HeyBub" <hey...@NOSPAMgmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Lookout wrote:
>>>>> So,
>>>>> I believe she must have been a civilian, working as security,
>>>>> therefore having bullets in her gun?
>>>>> haven't heard all details as of yet
>>>> All this has already been released to the news. You're lying
>>> Not necessarily. Some (many?) people do not listen to the "news" as
>>> promulgated by the media, preferring instead to get their unfiltered and
>>> unbiased information from blogs and newsgroups.
>>>
>>> For example, here we have a radicalized Muslim, killing American soldiers as
>>> a suicide-shooter, and not a single news organization is calling this a
>>> "terrorist act," you've got to be skeptical of the news media.
>>>
>> It hasn't been proven yet. Why would they start a lie. Remember..the
>> news media are all liberals and it's the conservatives who love to
>> lie.
>
>What has not been proven yet? There is conclusive proof that he was a
>Muslim, having been one all his life. His internet postings show his
>radicalization. He conclusively was the shooter and killed US Soldiers.
>
>So, what are you going to say, that this was not an act of terrorism?
Yes. You don't know why he did it. It could be simply that he was
freaked out about going.
> I
>guess you work for the FBI who also made that claim almost as soon as
>the shooting occurred, even when they thought they had three shooters in
>a coordinated attack.
>
>Steve Rothstein
Nah..I just like ALL the facts. You've reached a conclusion way to
early.
Too_Many_Tools
> "Too_Many_Tools" <too_many_to...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
Wrong...there were men who were armed.
TMT
Too_Many_Tools
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Maybe you should take a harder look at WHY he went off the deep end.
TMT
Too_Many_Tools
> b"Lookout" <mrLook...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> - Show quoted text -
When a conservative is presented with the Facts, they continue to lie.
TMT
Too_Many_Tools
> On Fri, 6 Nov 2009 11:13:38 -0800 (PST), Too_Many_Tools
> of UNARMED folks couldn't accomplish.
>
> __
>
> The last official act of any government is the looting of the nation.
So why didn't the ROOM of UNARMED folks rush the one ARMED person
shooting?
Wingers time after time tell us that is what we are supposed to do.
TMT
Strabo
Steve Rothstein, who is a cop, is polite, considerate and accurate.
Benj
> It hasn't been proven yet. Why would they start a lie. Remember..the
> news media are all liberals and it's the conservatives who love to
> lie.
The list of liberal lies is so long as to boggle the mind. They have
been doing it forever. But the latest wrinkle is to accuse all
conservatives of lying. That's the oldest trick in the book. The
criminal always accuses his victim of being the criminal.
You are obviously the liar here.
Curly Surmudgeon
Where you in hibernation from 2001-2008?
--
Regards, Curly
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Bible: Slavery Good, Gays Bad, Snakes Talk
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
pyotr filipivich
<sol...@uninets.net> reported Elvis on Fri, 6 Nov 2009 15:33:39
-0500 in misc.survivalism:
>
>"Too_Many_Tools" <too_man...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:8863d7c2-2809-45d3...@g1g2000vbr.googlegroups.com...
>On Nov 6, 10:14 am, martin <martin.secrest...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/2009/11/06/2009-11-06_police...
>>
>> A declining society means that persons will become more and more
>> responsible for their personal security.
>>
>of men could not.
>TMT
>I was shocked to learn that bullets are not in guns inside the base, if you
>are millitary
Been that ways since ... the invention of cartridges? gunpowder?
>So, I believe she must have been a civilian, working as security, therefore
>having bullets in her gun?
>haven't heard all details as of yet
She was civilian security. Her _job_ was to be armed. She was
also trained to be aggressive when confronting a shooter. She did
well, even though she took a hit.
Outside of basic, training, or a combat zone, soldiers don't
carry weapons, particularly when filling out paperwork.
pyotr
-
pyotr filipivich.
Just about the time you finally see light at the end of the tunnel,
you find out it's a Government Project to build more tunnel.
Long Ranger
--
Men, it has been well said, think in herds; it will be seen that they go
mad in herds, while they only recover their senses slowly, and one by one
--Charles Mackay
"Too_Many_Tools" <too_man...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:362bdc8b-045e-4533...@p35g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...
Because we didn't "neutralize" him when he first acted up?
HeyBub
>>
>> -
>> Not surprising at all. The woman was armed, the men were not. That's
>> the
>> beauty of guns...levels out the playing field for those who would
>> otherwise
>> be powerless.
>
> Wrong...there were men who were armed.
>
Uh, no. Not a single one. Some armed men arrived AFTER the shooting begain,
but there were initially none in the vicinity. The first armed person on the
scene was the lady and she was responding to a radio call.
Stormin Mormon
guns.
--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.
"pyotr filipivich" <ph...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:c55af5lmbjf3j7och...@4ax.com...
Stormin Mormon
would have saved a lot of lives.
--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.
"Long Ranger" <worp...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:hd38hm$rr5$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
Lookout
Sure I was taught manners. I just think you're lying. Good enough?
Lookout
You're just pissed because I caught you lying.
Lookout
When a conservative want's to start a lie..he doesn't wait for all the
facts.
Lookout
wrote:
Shall I start with Reagan or Nixon. About the lying I mean. Or we can
start with bush if you like.
Lookout
I'm trying to explain that to these idiots, most of which didn't have
the balls to serve. Most soldiers don't see an M16 but twice a year at
weapons qualification. Don't forget only a small percentage of our
active duty force is actually seeing battle. The rest are resting
comfortable in barracks or at home every nite.
Lookout
<cayoung61**spamblock##@hotmail.com> wrote:
>What a shame. The government doesn't trust soliers with
>guns.
What a shame. You never served so you're completely ignorant.
Long Ranger
--
Men, it has been well said, think in herds; it will be seen that they go
mad in herds, while they only recover their senses slowly, and one by one
--Charles Mackay
"Lookout" <mrLo...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:f24bf59u9ppr73kb7...@4ax.com...
It's just a complete and utter shame that a smart guy like you wasn't
present during this tragedy to take command of the situation.
Gray Ghost
news:13145$4af4daeb$ccb5841a$11...@ispn.net:
The point they are hanging thier nonterrorist talking point on is that there
is no known or even suspected connection with any particular terror group.
Apart from radical Islam, of course.
--
�Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance and the gospel
of envy, its inherent value is the equal sharing of misery.� Winston
Churchill
Gray Ghost
@ispn.net:
After screeching profanities and adhominems.
Stephan Rothstein
Just for technical accuracy, I think you would need to go much further
back to find the first lying politician. In the US, I know it goes as
far back as Lincoln and would bet on it going back to Washington. And
that is just among the presidents, obviously. If we include the other
politicians (like the colonial governors), we could probably trace it
back as far as the Battle of Hastings.
Steve Rothstein
Lookout
I'm sure you think that's an insult. Actually it is..on your part An
insult because you prove you have no idea what you're talking about.
X-Complaints-To: ab...@eternal-september.org
And you're a nym shifting troll. Welcome to my filter.
RD (The Sandman)
> I missed the Staff Meeting but the Minutes record that "sr"
> <sol...@uninets.net> reported Elvis on Fri, 6 Nov 2009 15:33:39
> -0500 in misc.survivalism:
>>
>>"Too_Many_Tools" <too_man...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>news:8863d7c2-2809-45d3...@g1g2000vbr.googlegroups.com..
>>. On Nov 6, 10:14 am, martin <martin.secrest...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/2009/11/06/2009-11-06_police
>>> ...
>>>
>>> A declining society means that persons will become more and more
>>> responsible for their personal security.
>>>
>>Also very interesting to see that ONE woman could get done what a ROOM
>>of men could not.
>
>>TMT
>
>>I was shocked to learn that bullets are not in guns inside the base,
>>if you are millitary
>
> Been that ways since ... the invention of cartridges? gunpowder?
>
>>So, I believe she must have been a civilian, working as security,
>>therefore having bullets in her gun?
>>haven't heard all details as of yet
>
> She was civilian security. Her _job_ was to be armed. She was
> also trained to be aggressive when confronting a shooter. She did
> well, even though she took a hit.
She was also considered a weapons expert on the SWAT team.
> Outside of basic, training, or a combat zone, soldiers don't
> carry weapons, particularly when filling out paperwork.
>
>
> pyotr
> -
> pyotr filipivich.
> Just about the time you finally see light at the end of the tunnel,
> you find out it's a Government Project to build more tunnel.
>
--
Sleep well tonight,
RD (The Sandman)
Let's see if I have this healthcare thingy right. Congress is to pass
a plan written by a committee whose head has said he doesn't understand
it, passed by a Congress that hasn't read it, signed by a president who
hasn't read it, with funding administered by a Treasury chief who didn't
pay his taxes because he didn't understand TurboTax, overseen by an obese
Surgeon General and financed by a country that's nearly broke.
What could possibly go wrong?
HeyBub
>>
>> --When a liberal is presented with the Facts, they slink off
>>
> When a conservative want's to start a lie..he doesn't wait for all the
> facts.
That's a non-sequitur. A synonym for "conservative" is "truth teller."
HeyBub
>>
>> She was civilian security. Her _job_ was to be armed. She was
>> also trained to be aggressive when confronting a shooter. She did
>> well, even though she took a hit.
>
> She was also considered a weapons expert on the SWAT team.
>
There are those who are experts with gun and there are those who rush to the
sound of the guns.
Fortunately, in this case, the two characteristics overlapped.
RD (The Sandman)
news:f4-dnWdei_v0V2jX...@earthlink.com:
Yep, according to reports she not only responded, but she was shooting as
she closed with him. He charged her after her initial shot and she took
him down while she, herself, suffered wounds to her wrist, lower leg and
thigh. I don't know how many rounds she (or he) fired, but she got him
four times and stopped the carnage. She deserves every kudo she gets.
Lookout
wrote:
See? A lie!
pyotr filipivich
Rothstein <sroth...@earthlink.net> reported Elvis on Sat, 07 Nov
2009 11:29:45 -0600 in misc.survivalism:
Why stop there?
I recall an illustration, of a caveman standing on a rock,
addressing other cavemen. "Things have been pretty bad for a while,
but now that we have invented language, you're going to be hearing a
lot more about it."
Politicians are the same the world over. They promise a bridge
where there is no river. Nikita Krushchev.
-
pyotr filipivich
The two oldest cliches in the book are "The Good Old Days were
better." and "After all, these are Modern TImes."
pyotr filipivich
Mormon" <cayoung61**spamblock##@hotmail.com> reported Elvis on Sat, 7
Nov 2009 07:52:37 -0500 in misc.survivalism:
>What a shame. The government doesn't trust soliers with
>guns.
Yep. Too much experience with dumb soldiers.
pyotr filipivich
Sandman)" <rdsandman(spamlock)@comcast.net> reported Elvis on Sat, 07
Nov 2009 12:36:48 -0600 in misc.survivalism:
>
>>>I was shocked to learn that bullets are not in guns inside the base,
>>>if you are millitary
>>
>> Been that ways since ... the invention of cartridges? gunpowder?
>>
>>>So, I believe she must have been a civilian, working as security,
>>>therefore having bullets in her gun?
>>>haven't heard all details as of yet
>>
>> She was civilian security. Her _job_ was to be armed. She was
>> also trained to be aggressive when confronting a shooter. She did
>> well, even though she took a hit.
>
>She was also considered a weapons expert on the SWAT team.
If it looks stupid, but it works - it isn't stupid.
pyotr filipivich
<hey...@NOSPAMgmail.com> reported Elvis on Sat, 7 Nov 2009 05:51:14
-0600 in misc.survivalism:
Actually, as in all Gun Free Zones, the first armed person to
arrive was the one with criminal intent.
tschus
Demon Buddha
> On Nov 6, 11:14 am, martin <martin.secrest...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/2009/11/06/2009-11-06_police...
>>
>> A declining society means that persons will become more and more
>> responsible for their
>> personal security.
>>
>>
>
> life after birth.
Damn, a semi-intelligent statement! It's about time - all this flame
war shit is such a waste of time.
I might add that the peace of mind to which you refer is achieved as a
matter of conscious choice. We have the choice to live in morbid
fear... or not. I choose not to, as do many others. Then there are the
liberals...
HH&C
> On Nov 6, 4:41 pm, "Wayne" <mygarbage...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > "Too_Many_Tools" <too_many_to...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> >news:8863d7c2-2809-45d3...@g1g2000vbr.googlegroups.com...
> > On Nov 6, 10:14 am, martin <martin.secrest...@gmail.com> wrote:>>http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/2009/11/06/2009-11-06_police...
>
> > >> A declining society means that persons will become more and more
> > >> responsible for their
> > >> personal security.
>
>
> > >Also very interesting to see that ONE woman could get done what a ROOM
> > >of men could not.
>
> > >TMT
>
> > Not surprising at all. The woman was armed, the men were not. That's the
> > beauty of guns...levels out the playing field for those who would otherwise
> > be powerless.
>
> Wrong...there were men who were armed.
>
There was only one armed man in there... the one that you want to have
say whether other people can own firearms or not.
How does it feel when your world crashes down on you?
Wayne
On Nov 6, 4:41 pm, "Wayne" <mygarbage...@verizon.net> wrote:
> "Too_Many_Tools" <too_many_to...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:8863d7c2-2809-45d3...@g1g2000vbr.googlegroups.com...
> On Nov 6, 10:14 am, martin <martin.secrest...@gmail.com>
> wrote:>>http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/2009/11/06/2009-11-06_police...
>
> >> A declining society means that persons will become more and more
> >> responsible for their
> >> personal security.
>
> >> tt
>
> >Also very interesting to see that ONE woman could get done what a ROOM
> >of men could not.
>
> >TMT
>
> -
> Not surprising at all. The woman was armed, the men were not. That's the
> beauty of guns...levels out the playing field for those who would
> otherwise
> be powerless.
<Wrong...there were men who were armed.
<
<TMT
Maybe another cop. But the group that was attacked was unarmed. Troops
moving around an army post don't carry loaded weapons unless the day's
activity calls for it.
--Wayne
<an unloaded weapon is the same as no weapon>
HeyBub
>> -
>> Not surprising at all. The woman was armed, the men were not. That's
>> the beauty of guns...levels out the playing field for those who would
>> otherwise
>> be powerless.
> **********
> <Wrong...there were men who were armed.
> <
> <TMT
> -
> Maybe another cop. But the group that was attacked was unarmed. Troops
> moving around an army post don't carry loaded weapons unless
> the day's activity calls for it.
There were no armed friendlies within a mile of the shooting. The first
armed help took three minutes to get to the scene, in a car, after receiving
a radio call.
tankfixer
3bb7f2...@p35g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>, too_man...@yahoo.com
says...
>
> On Nov 6, 8:26 pm, "sr" <solo...@uninets.net> wrote:
> > "HeyBub" <hey...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote in message
> >
> > news:ftmdnS1-nNM-BWnX...@earthlink.com...
> >
> >
> >
> > > Lookout wrote:
> >
> > >>> I believe she must have been a civilian, working as security,
> > >>> therefore having bullets in her gun?
> > >>> haven't heard all details as of yet
> >
> >
> > > Not necessarily. Some (many?) people do not listen to the "news" as
> > > promulgated by the media, preferring instead to get their unfiltered and
> > > unbiased information from blogs and newsgroups.
> >
> > > For example, here we have a radicalized Muslim, killing American soldiers
> > > as a suicide-shooter, and not a single news organization is calling this a
> > > "terrorist act," you've got to be skeptical of the news media.
> >
> > Looks like there are playing the sympathy card for the killer rather than
> > the victims?
> > Looks like there are excuses being made for the killer.
> > Political correct world is gone to get us all killed.
> > Political correctness has even spread to the Military, I am afraid. Sad
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
> >
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Maybe you should take a harder look at WHY he went off the deep end.
Crazy psychologist
Lookout
hahahaha
leonox1
> > > It hasn't been proven yet. Why would they start a lie. Remember..the
> > > news media are all liberals and it's the conservatives who love to
> > > lie.
>
> > -When a liberal is presented with the Facts, they slink off
That's not true! What they do is respond with some inane inappropriate
comment or plagiarize and distort a previously posted statement.
> When a conservative is presented with the Facts, they continue to lie.
See? Told you so.
>
> TMT
HH&C
> On Nov 6, 5:00 pm, Lookout <mrLook...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > It hasn't been proven yet. Why would they start a lie. Remember..the
> > news media are all liberals and it's the conservatives who love to
> > lie.
>
> been doing it forever. But the latest wrinkle is to accuse all
> conservatives of lying. That's the oldest trick in the book. The
> criminal always accuses his victim of being the criminal.
>
> You are obviously the liar here.
We're all supposed to be racists, too.
HH&C
> On Fri, 6 Nov 2009 20:59:36 -0800 (PST), Benj <bjac...@iwaynet.net>
You don't want to start with FDR??? Why not?
Bama Brian
The Democrat politician named Owens, who just won the congressional seat
in NY state, apparently broke four major campaign promises within the
first hour after assuming his duties.
http://www.gouverneurtimes.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=7623:owens-to-break-campaign-promises&catid=60:st-lawrence-news&Itemid=175
http://tinyurl.com/ygvghjg
> -
> pyotr filipivich
> The two oldest cliches in the book are "The Good Old Days were
> better." and "After all, these are Modern TImes."
--
Cheers,
Bama Brian
Libertarian
"Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it."
George Santayana
freeisbest
> On Nov 7, 10:20 am, Lookout <mrLook...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > Shall I start with Reagan or Nixon. About the lying I mean.
> > Or we can start with bush if you like.
>
> You don't want to start with FDR??? Why not?
Bless you for the chance to talk about a real president, one who
actually believed in his duty to the American people. But thank you,
we need to concentrate on the reason we ended up with a lame-duck
president handing away the last wealth to his banker buddies, and that
calls for taking on the unpleasant task of talking about various
mindless Repub politicians. It a dirty job, but we'll keep being
robbed by bankers and oil companies unless we get to work right now.
So... we need maybe just a little background on such "Deficits
Don't Matter"*, the always-amusing setpiece pseudo-economics known as
"Trickle Down Economics", and the sadly prophetic, "Voodoo Economics".
Here's what the Washington Post had to say, one day in June,
about Reagan, Cheney, and deficits:
* Economic Legacy
Reagan Policies Gave Green Light to Red Ink
By Jonathan Weisman
Washington Post Staff Writer Wednesday, June 9, 2004; Page A11
The line is not likely to make this week's eulogies to Ronald
Reagan, but when Vice President Cheney allegedly declared, "Reagan
proved deficits don't matter," he summed up an enduring argument from
the former president's economic legacy.
[...]
Benjamin M. Friedman, a Harvard University economist who lamented
Reagan's fiscal policies in his 1988 book "Day of Reckoning," said the
expansion of foreign credit has tempered the feared hikes in long-term
interest rates that he thought would cripple the economy. But, he
said, "that doesn't let deficits off the hook."
"It's important to realize that interest rates are set on world
capital markets; therefore, a large deficit need not impact capital
formation," he said, referring to economic investments in new plants
and equipment that drive growth. "But that's identical to saying we
will continue to do capital formation, but we'll do it by forever
borrowing abroad."
And that spells trouble, said Niskanen of Reagan's Council of
Economic Advisers. Debt does have to be repaid, and foreign investors
-- primarily the central banks of Japan, Britain and China -- own $1.7
billion of federal debt. That, he said, has made the country "terribly
dependent" and "terribly vulnerable."
That is a bipartisan fear. "The key point is, even if it were
sustainable, it's not desirable," said Orszag, a prominent Democratic
economist. "We still will owe the money to foreigners. We're still
mortgaging our future national income. Just because you can take out a
larger mortgage to buy a bigger house doesn't mean you should."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A26402-2004Jun8?language=printer
----------------------------------------------------------------
We no longer have to wait a century to find out whose economic
policies work and whose don't. Reagan/Bush/Cheney and their economics
apologists were wrong.
Friedman, Orszag, Krugman, and a host of sane economics are
right.
Deficits are only a magic wand for rightwingers who don't care
what happens to our nation, only that they make profits and loudly
deny the fact that it is our economy they steal from.
HH&C
> On Nov 8, 10:12 am, "HH&C" <hot-ham-and-che...@hotmail.com> wrote:> On Nov 7, 10:20 am, Lookout <mrLook...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> -snip-
>
> > > Shall I start with Reagan or Nixon. About the lying I mean.
> > > Or we can start with bush if you like.
>
> > You don't want to start with FDR??? Why not?
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Bless you for the chance to talk about a real president, one who
> actually believed in his duty to the American people. But thank you,
No, no. Please tell us about FDRs lies.
RD (The Sandman)
news:dYWdnZ68k6HHjmvX...@earthlink.com:
And that was the two cops.
HeyBub
> Bless you for the chance to talk about a real president, one who
> actually believed in his duty to the American people. But thank you,
> we need to concentrate on the reason we ended up with a lame-duck
> president handing away the last wealth to his banker buddies, and that
> calls for taking on the unpleasant task of talking about various
> mindless Repub politicians.
Well who SHOULD he have handed the last wealth to? It would be kinda stupid
if he handed it away to his SEIU adversaries, wouldn't it?
tankfixer
claypo...@gmail.com says...
Amazing.. a politician who is a lying whore..
Who would have thunk it..
Stephan Rothstein
How about this big one:
The Social Security number will never be used as a federal ID for Americans.
Steve Rothstein
HH&C
Or, as a question... Is social Security an Insurance Policy or a Tax?
pyotr filipivich
<paul.c...@gmail.com> reported Elvis on Sun, 8 Nov 2009 13:30:17
-0800 in misc.survivalism:
Damital - don't say that.
At least the whore provides a useful service ...
>Who would have thunk it..
pyotr filipivich
Nov 2009 12:17:45 -0600 in misc.survivalism:
>"HeyBub" <hey...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote in
>news:dYWdnZ68k6HHjmvX...@earthlink.com:
>
>> Wayne wrote:
>>>> -
>>>> Not surprising at all. The woman was armed, the men were not. That's
>>>> the beauty of guns...levels out the playing field for those who
>>>> would otherwise
>>>> be powerless.
>>> **********
>>> <Wrong...there were men who were armed.
>>> <
>>> <TMT
>>> -
>>> Maybe another cop. But the group that was attacked was unarmed.
>>> Troops moving around an army post don't carry loaded weapons unless
>>> the day's activity calls for it.
>>
>> There were no armed friendlies within a mile of the shooting. The
>> first armed help took three minutes to get to the scene, in a car,
>> after receiving a radio call.
>
>And that was the two cops.
When seconds count - the cops are only minutes away.
Not to say anything bad about their response, but that is the
nature of the beast. In a no-gun zone, the first armed person on the
scene is usually the one intending violence.
Fiftycal
<hot-ham-a...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> The Social Security number will never be used as a federal ID for Americans.
>>
>> Steve Rothstein
>
>Or, as a question... Is social Security an Insurance Policy or a Tax?
Neither. It's an "entitlement". And since mine is about to kick in,
it's one that will NEVER be overturned.
Jeff M
It's welfare, and a tax, and it just may be overturned one day. It's a
darn good thing the Bush administration wasn't able to privatize it, though.
HH&C
FDR was telling the country that it was Insurance, his attorneys were
telling the SCOTUS that it was a tax.
Were they both lying?
Jeff M
Today's Social Security, after 75 years, barely resembles the original
plan. Originally, it sorta' resembled a mutual insurance plan, self
funded through a separate tax, but no longer.
Anyolmouse
"Stephan Rothstein" <sroth...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:nKCdnZYpSL1VxmrX...@earthlink.com...
My card has that phrase printed on it. I showed it to the TPWD and they
weren't
impressed. <g> Had it since 1954 I think.
--
We have met the enemy and he is us-- Pogo
Anyolmouse
Long Ranger
--
Men, it has been well said, think in herds; it will be seen that they go
mad in herds, while they only recover their senses slowly, and one by one
--Charles Mackay
"HH&C" <hot-ham-a...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:2c2f3b0e-e2a9-45e4...@r5g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
Were they both lying?
No, it was a "win-win" situation for the government, in that it was a tax,
that was floated as insurance. The feds took us to the cleaners with that
one!
Stephan Rothstein
What makes you think this is an either/or type question? It is both, a
tax and an insurance policy. As far as I can tell, it is also
unconstitutional, as there is no authority in the Constitution for this
as a federal program (and FDR did worry that SCOTUS would overturn it -
that part I found records of).
Steve Rothstein
Curly Surmudgeon
How about that one?
Why do you think it was a "lie"?
--
Regards, Curly
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Bible: Slavery Good, Gays Bad, Snakes Talk
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gunner Asch
wrote:
>>
>> It's welfare, and a tax, and it just may be overturned one day. It's a
>> darn good thing the Bush administration wasn't able to privatize it,
>> though.
>
>FDR was telling the country that it was Insurance, his attorneys were
>telling the SCOTUS that it was a tax.
>
>Were they both lying?
>
>No, it was a "win-win" situation for the government, in that it was a tax,
>that was floated as insurance. The feds took us to the cleaners with that
>one!
Its actually a very long term Ponzi Scheme.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ponzi_scheme
"IMHO, some people here give Jeff far more attention than he deserves,
but obviously craves. The most appropriate response, and perhaps the
cruelest, IMO, is to simply killfile and ignore him. An alternative, if
you must, would be to post the same standard reply to his every post,
listing the manifold reasons why he ought to be ignored. Just my $0.02
worth."
Demon Buddha
>> How about this big one:
>>
>> The Social Security number will never be used as a federal ID for
>> Americans.
>>
>> Steve Rothstein
>
> How about that one?
>
> Why do you think it was a "lie"?
Are you serious?
>
freeisbest
> Curly Surmudgeon wrote:
> >> How about this big one:
>
> >> The Social Security number will never be used as a federal
> >> ID for Americans.
> > How about that one?
>
> > Why do you think it was a "lie"?
>
> Are you serious?
----------------------------------------------------------
So, whatever happened to the topic of post-Bush economics? Wait -
did some forgetful old white guys wander in and start whining about
FDR? Boy oh boy, they've been doing that for the 50 years I've been
paying attention. They are a problem when adults try to talk about
the real world - they won't talk about anything else and they won't go
away.
Curly Surmudgeon
Absolutely.
--
Regards, Curly
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2012 Run, Sarah, Run! 2012
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RD (The Sandman)
news:e0ref5tm3ak31vd8i...@4ax.com:
Particularly in areas where guns are banned or tightly controlled. See
Virginia Tech, Columbine, University of Arizona or Ft Hood.
RD (The Sandman)
It even says on the card "For Social Security purposes Not for
Identification"
RD (The Sandman)
news:CdadnUSmj8Ug7GrX...@giganews.com:
He never tried to privatize it. Only 10 to 15% of it.
RD (The Sandman)
It still is a separate tax, however, the monies end up in the general
fund.
RD (The Sandman)
news:hd8as1$1oa$2...@news.eternal-september.org:
> On Sun, 08 Nov 2009 18:01:13 -0600, Stephan Rothstein
> <sroth...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>> HH&C wrote:
>>> On Nov 8, 12:37 pm, freeisbest <demeter547op...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>> On Nov 8, 10:12 am, "HH&C" <hot-ham-and-che...@hotmail.com> wrote:>
>>>> On Nov 7, 10:20 am, Lookout <mrLook...@yahoo.com> wrote: -snip-
>>>>
>>>> > > Shall I start with Reagan or Nixon. About the lying I mean. Or
>>>> > > we can start with bush if you like.
>>>>
>>>> > You don't want to start with FDR??? Why not?
>>>>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> ---
>>>> Bless you for the chance to talk about a real president, one
>>>> who
>>>> actually believed in his duty to the American people. But thank
>>>> you,
>>>
>>> No, no. Please tell us about FDRs lies.
>>
>> How about this big one:
>>
>> The Social Security number will never be used as a federal ID for
>> Americans.
>>
>> Steve Rothstein
>
> How about that one?
>
> Why do you think it was a "lie"?
>
It is used for identification purposes.
Curly Surmudgeon
So? Changes by others do not prove that the original speaker lied.
Curly Surmudgeon
<rdsandman(spamlock)@comcast.net> wrote:
> Stephan Rothstein <sroth...@earthlink.net> wrote in
> news:nKCdnZYpSL1VxmrX...@earthlink.com:
>
>> HH&C wrote:
>>> On Nov 8, 12:37 pm, freeisbest <demeter547op...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>> On Nov 8, 10:12 am, "HH&C" <hot-ham-and-che...@hotmail.com> wrote:>
>>>> On Nov 7, 10:20 am, Lookout <mrLook...@yahoo.com> wrote: -snip-
>>>>
>>>> > > Shall I start with Reagan or Nixon. About the lying I mean. Or
>>>> > > we can start with bush if you like.
>>>>
>>>> > You don't want to start with FDR??? Why not?
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> -----
>>>> Bless you for the chance to talk about a real president, one who
>>>> actually believed in his duty to the American people. But thank you,
>>>
>>> No, no. Please tell us about FDRs lies.
>>
>> How about this big one:
>>
>> The Social Security number will never be used as a federal ID for
>> Americans.
>
> It even says on the card "For Social Security purposes Not for
> Identification"
No argument, SSN's are misused. That does not prove that FDR lied.
RD (The Sandman)
@news.eternal-september.org:
I saw that in an earlier post by you. I didn't look at it so much as FDR
lied as I did the government lied.
RD (The Sandman)
@news.eternal-september.org:
> On Mon, 09 Nov 2009 12:38:17 -0600, "RD (The Sandman)"
> <rdsandman(spamlock)@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>> Stephan Rothstein <sroth...@earthlink.net> wrote in
>> news:nKCdnZYpSL1VxmrX...@earthlink.com:
>>
>>> HH&C wrote:
>>>> On Nov 8, 12:37 pm, freeisbest <demeter547op...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Nov 8, 10:12 am, "HH&C" <hot-ham-and-che...@hotmail.com> wrote:>
>>>>> On Nov 7, 10:20 am, Lookout <mrLook...@yahoo.com> wrote: -snip-
>>>>>
>>>>> > > Shall I start with Reagan or Nixon. About the lying I mean. Or
>>>>> > > we can start with bush if you like.
>>>>>
>>>>> > You don't want to start with FDR??? Why not?
>>>>>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> -----
>>>>> Bless you for the chance to talk about a real president, one
who
>>>>> actually believed in his duty to the American people. But thank
you,
>>>>
>>>> No, no. Please tell us about FDRs lies.
>>>
>>> How about this big one:
>>>
>>> The Social Security number will never be used as a federal ID for
>>> Americans.
>>
>> It even says on the card "For Social Security purposes Not for
>> Identification"
>
> No argument, SSN's are misused. That does not prove that FDR lied.
>
Already answered you, Curly.
Lookout
<rdsandman(spamlock)@comcast.net> wrote:
The government lied? Get over it. If you don't like your government
lying then leave...but I warn you it will happen in every government.
HH&C
So if it was a lie then, it's no longer a lie now?