Lowest of Any President ever
Lib Loo
Bill Sammon
FOXNews.com December 08, 2009
Obama's 47 Percent Approval Lowest of Any President at This Point
President Obama's job approval rating has fallen to 47 percent in the latest
Gallup poll, the lowest ever recorded for any president at this point in his
term.
Jimmy Carter, Gerald Ford and even Richard Nixon all had higher approval
ratings 10-and-a-half months into their presidencies. Obama's immediate
predecessor, President George W. Bush, had an approval rating of 86 percent,
or 39 points higher than Obama at this stage. Bush's support came shortly
after he launched the war in Afghanistan in response to the terror attacks
of Sept. 11, 2001.
White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said he doesn't "put a lot of
stock" in the survey by Gallup, which has conducted presidential approval
polls since 1938, longer than any other organization.
"If I was a heart patient and Gallup was my EKG, I'd visit my doctor," Gibbs
said in response to questions from Fox. "I'm sure a six-year-old with a
Crayon could do something not unlike that. I don't put a lot of stake in,
never have, in the EKG that is daily Gallup trend. I don't pay a lot of
attention to the meaninglessness of it."
Gallup Editor-in-Chief Frank Newport responded: "Gibbs said that if Gallup
were his EKG, he would visit his doctor. Well, I think the doctor might ask
him what's going on in his life that would cause his EKG to be fluctuating
so much. There is, in fact, a lot going on at the moment -- the health care
bill, the jobs summit, the Copenhagen climate conference and Afghanistan."
The new low comes as Obama struggles to overhaul the nation's health care
system and escalates America's involvement in the Afghanistan war. He is
also presiding over a deep and prolonged recession, with unemployment at 10
percent.
"There's no doubt Obama's 47 percent is mainly a result of the continuing
bad economy," said Larry Sabato, director of the University of Virginia's
Center for Politics. "But there is also a growing concern about government
spending and debt, and a sense that Obama is trying to do too much, too
soon."
He added: "President Obama has reason to be concerned about his ratings.
Even in tough times, presidents have usually been able to stay above the
critical 50 percent mark in the first year, when the public is most inclined
to give the new incumbent the benefit of the doubt."
Obama officials have not always shown disdain for Gallup. During last year's
presidential campaign, Obama adviser David Plouffe, trumpeted "the latest
Gallup poll" to reporters because it showed that 53 percent of Americans did
not find Obama Democratic rival, Hillary Clinton, "trustworthy."
When Gallup began taking presidential approval polls 71 years ago, Franklin
Roosevelt had been president for more than five years. During his remaining
time in office, his job approval rating never fell below 48 percent.
The next 11 presidents, both Democrats and Republicans, all had higher job
approval ratings than Obama at this stage of their tenure. Their ratings
were:
-- George W. Bush, 86 percent
-- Bill Clinton, 52 percent
-- George H.W. Bush, 71 percent
-- Ronald Reagan, 49 percent
-- Jimmy Carter, 57 percent
-- Gerald Ford, 52 percent
-- Richard Nixon, 59 percent
-- Lyndon Johnson, 74 percent
-- John Kennedy, 77 percent
-- Dwight Eisenhower, 69 percent
-- Harry Truman, 49 percent
The poll is an average of a three-day tracking of 1,529 adults taken Dec.
4-6. It has a margin of error of 3 percentage points.
hal
<heez...@crazymother.kom> wrote:
>http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/12/08/obamas-percent-approval-lowest-president-point/
>Bill Sammon
>FOXNews.com December 08, 2009
>
>
>Obama's 47 Percent Approval Lowest of Any President at This Point
The economy has never been in the shitter this bad since Hoover handed
FDR a shit sandwich like Bush gave to Obama. And if you rightards
weren't so desperate for Obama to fail then the decent people of
America might actually be able to accomplish what they need to.
Buerste
<hal> wrote in message news:4b1f9f5d...@news.newsguy.com...
I pray to GOD that Obammy fails in his radical-left agenda, and so does more
than half the country.
hal
wrote:
That's a total lie, of course. More than half the country does not
want America to fail.
F. George McDuffee
wrote:
>> The economy has never been in the shitter this bad since Hoover handed
>> FDR a shit sandwich like Bush gave to Obama. And if you rightards
>> weren't so desperate for Obama to fail then the decent people of
>> America might actually be able to accomplish what they need to.
>
>I pray to GOD that Obammy fails in his radical-left agenda, and so does more
>than half the country.
=======
Always be careful what you ask for as you just may get it.
While there may indeed have been [be] other/better approaches,
the failure of the Obama agenda, which may or not be radical-left
(just progressive), is likely to have very serious national
consequences, far beyond a simple Republican/Democrat contest.
Click here for sound byte of one possible outcome...
http://www.anesi.com/east/horstw.wav
http://www.anesi.com/east/horstw.htm
http://www.worldmilitaria.com/newsite/Media/HorstWesselLied.mp3
Unka' George [George McDuffee]
-------------------------------------------
He that will not apply new remedies,
must expect new evils:
for Time is the greatest innovator: and
if Time, of course, alter things to the worse,
and wisdom and counsel shall not alter them to the better,
what shall be the end?
Francis Bacon (1561-1626), English philosopher, essayist, statesman.
Essays, "Of Innovations" (1597-1625).
Too_Many_Tools
> On Tue, 8 Dec 2009 20:30:42 -0600, "Lib Loo"
>
> >http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/12/08/obamas-percent-approval-lo...
> >Bill Sammon
> >FOXNews.com December 08, 2009
>
> >Obama's 47 Percent Approval Lowest of Any President at This Point
>
> The economy has never been in the shitter this bad since Hoover handed
> FDR a shit sandwich like Bush gave to Obama. And if you rightards
> weren't so desperate for Obama to fail then the decent people of
> America might actually be able to accomplish what they need to.
Not only that, their wishes for disaster demonstrate how sick they
are.
It is obvious that Loo is sucking off the public tit and has been for
some time...has it occurred to him that if the economy gets much worse
the payments to his kind will be cut.
Then how will he afford his Internet bill?
As for food and rent, I suspect that he is living with his mother
based on his fantasies of mommies and perverted sexual interests.
As I have said before, anyone who doesn't want Obama and this Country
to succeed is a fool and an enemy of the United States.
TMT
TMT
Too_Many_Tools
> <hal> wrote in messagenews:4b1f9f5d...@news.newsguy.com...
> > On Tue, 8 Dec 2009 20:30:42 -0600, "Lib Loo"
>
> >>http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/12/08/obamas-percent-approval-lo...
> >>Bill Sammon
> >>FOXNews.com December 08, 2009
>
> >>Obama's 47 Percent Approval Lowest of Any President at This Point
>
> > The economy has never been in the shitter this bad since Hoover handed
> > FDR a shit sandwich like Bush gave to Obama. And if you rightards
> > weren't so desperate for Obama to fail then the decent people of
> > America might actually be able to accomplish what they need to.
>
> I pray to GOD that Obammy fails in his radical-left agenda, and so does more
> than half the country.
Then you are praying for the failure of the United States Tom.
Why do you hate the United States of America?
Traitor.
TMT
Too_Many_Tools
> > On Tue, 8 Dec 2009 20:30:42 -0600, "Lib Loo"
>
> >>http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/12/08/obamas-percent-approval-lo...
> >>Bill Sammon
> >>FOXNews.com December 08, 2009
>
> >>Obama's 47 Percent Approval Lowest of Any President at This Point
>
> > The economy has never been in the shitter this bad since Hoover handed
> > FDR a shit sandwich like Bush gave to Obama. And if you rightards
> > weren't so desperate for Obama to fail then the decent people of
> > America might actually be able to accomplish what they need to.
>
> I pray to GOD that Obammy fails in his radical-left agenda, and so does more
> than half the country.
Tom...if someone would inform your customers of your anti-American
views, do you think it would affect your sales?
TMT
Buerste
<hal> wrote in message news:4b1fc919...@news.newsguy.com...
Obammy's radical agenda and "America" are two TOTALLY different things.
Look at President Wee-Wee's poll numbers now down to less than 50%,
therefore more than half the country doesn't agree with his radical agenda.
You, are the liar!
hal
You're the liar. Obama's poll numbers are not down to less than 50%,
and Obama is America right now, loser, and if you wish for Obama to
fail you wish for America to fail because if Obama fails we all do.
you immoral piece of shit...
hal
<too_man...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>On Dec 9, 7:01=A0am, hal wrote:
>> On Tue, 8 Dec 2009 20:30:42 -0600, "Lib Loo"
>>
>> <heezb...@crazymother.kom> wrote:
>> >http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/12/08/obamas-percent-approval-lo...
>> >Bill Sammon
>> >FOXNews.com =A0December 08, 2009
>>
>> >Obama's 47 Percent Approval Lowest of Any President at This Point
>>
>> The economy has never been in the shitter this bad since Hoover handed
>> FDR a shit sandwich like Bush gave to Obama. =A0And if you rightards
>> weren't so desperate for Obama to fail then the decent people of
>> America might actually be able to accomplish what they need to.
>
>Not only that, their wishes for disaster demonstrate how sick they
>are.
>
>It is obvious that Loo is sucking off the public tit and has been for
>some time...has it occurred to him that if the economy gets much worse
>the payments to his kind will be cut.
>
>Then how will he afford his Internet bill?
>
>As for food and rent, I suspect that he is living with his mother
>based on his fantasies of mommies and perverted sexual interests.
>
>As I have said before, anyone who doesn't want Obama and this Country
>to succeed is a fool and an enemy of the United States.
>
Loo Loo is living off the public dole? How ironic !
I hope they cut his welfare and he ends up on the street.
>
>
>TMT
>
>TMT
Buerste
<hal> wrote in message news:4b20109e...@news.newsguy.com...
Laugh-laugh-laugh! You and the rest of the libtards are loosing on every
issue. In 2010 you WILL lose the House AND the Senate. In 2012, you WILL
lose the WH. Sucks to be you, you immoral pile of shit!
Buerste
"Too_Many_Tools" <too_man...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:aa32c6cc-670a-4ff1...@m16g2000yqc.googlegroups.com...
TMT
Anti-Obammy is PRO-American. The failure of his agenda is the best thing
that can happen to the US and the rest of the world. His healthcare plan is
crap, Cap-n-Tax is a proven scam and his spending is destroying the economy.
You may think Obammy = America, most people don't, only the radical fringe
like you do. His whole radical agenda is falling apart anyway. 2010 you
will lose the House and Senate and in 2012 President Wee-Wee WILL retire
back to the streets of Chicago.
rangerssuck
> "Too_Many_Tools" <too_many_to...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
I'll buy my brushes elsewhere. Thanks.
Stormin Mormon
but it does have some sodium chloride added?
--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.
"F. George McDuffee" <gmcd...@mcduffee-associates.us>
wrote in message
news:kurvh55lq37e3aras...@4ax.com...
Stormin Mormon
--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.
"Buerste" <bue...@wowway.com> wrote in message
news:hfof51$85j$1...@aioe.org...
Stormin Mormon
like his pull out and surrender in Iraq and Afghanistan to
fail, because the generals insist on pounding the enemy and
strengthen the friendly forces. I'd like his "bailout" and
"stimulus" to fail, and the money isn't confiscated and
forced away from working Americans under threat of violence.
I'd like his spending programs to fail, and we won't need to
raise taxes, again. I'd like his tax hikes to fail.
--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.
"F. George McDuffee" <gmcd...@mcduffee-associates.us>
wrote in message
news:kurvh55lq37e3aras...@4ax.com...
Always be careful what you ask for as you just may get it.
Stormin Mormon
country does not want the US to fail. And close to that
percentage wishes Obama to fail to destroy the USA.
--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.
<hal> wrote in message
news:4b1fc919...@news.newsguy.com...
> That's a total lie, of course. More than half the country
Stormin Mormon
before Oh Bomb Us, but not sure I'll be OK after he spends
the country to death.
--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.
"Buerste" <bue...@wowway.com> wrote in message
news:hfp82h$aa3$1...@aioe.org...
<hal> wrote in message
news:4b20109e...@news.newsguy.com...
Mark Rand
<cayoung61**spamblock##@hotmail.com> wrote:
>I'd like Oh Bomb Us to fail to pass socialied medicine. I'd
>like his pull out and surrender in Iraq and Afghanistan to
>fail, because the generals insist on pounding the enemy and
>strengthen the friendly forces. I'd like his "bailout" and
>"stimulus" to fail, and the money isn't confiscated and
>forced away from working Americans under threat of violence.
>I'd like his spending programs to fail, and we won't need to
>raise taxes, again. I'd like his tax hikes to fail.
"his bailout"???
Do you suffer from Alzheimer's Syndrome?
As for the tax hikes, you/we (collectively) did the borrowing, Now the loan's
due. Just like the rest of us in countries that thought one could create value
with a shell game.
Mark Rand
RTFM
F. George McDuffee
>While there may indeed have been [be] other/better approaches,
>the failure of the Obama agenda, ==>which may or not be radical-left
>(just progressive),<== is likely to have very serious national
>consequences, far beyond a simple Republican/Democrat contest.
>On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 18:05:06 -0500, "Stormin Mormon"
=======
<cayoung61**spamblock##@hotmail.com> wrote:
<snip>
>>That like saying the soup isn't loaded to hell with salt,
>>but it does have some sodium chloride added?
==========
While it may seem so to the hard right/reactionaries, in point of
fact the far/radical left would advocate the physical liquidation
of the banksters and broksters with forfeiture of their assets to
"the people," [just to be sure they don't miss any, they would
most likely include the legit bankers, brokers, and interns], and
the nationalization of the banks, with salary cuts and no bonuses
for anyone left alive.
The progressive position is to enact and enforce reasonable and
prudent regulation on the banks and quasi banks including a
"super" Glass-Steagal [super to compensate for the proliferation
of non-bank banks and novel financial instruments such as CDSs
and CDOs, e.g. AIG ], control of derivatives and securitization,
regulation/licensure of the rating agencies, leverage limits for
federally insured banks, strict control of stock, bond, commodity
and foreign exchange trading, elimination of "short" sales in the
stock, bond, commodity and foreign exchange markets, elimination
of speculation with borrowed money though strict oversight of
margin accounts and capital requirements in all markets, and
limiting the size of the financial organizations to "small
enough" to fail.
FWIW -- in order to keep the tax-man at least slightly honest,
interest and capital gains should be adjusted for inflation when
taxes are paid.
Unka George (George McDuffee)
.............................
Every gun that is fired, every warship launched,
every rocket fired, signifies, in the final sense,
a theft from those who hunger and are not fed,
those who are cold and are not clothed.
The world in arms is not spending money alone.
It is spending the sweat of its labourers,
the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children.
Dwight D. Eisenhower (1890-1969), U.S. general,
Republican politician, president. Speech, April 1953, Washington, D.C.
Curly Surmudgeon
Oddly enough these are the same people who claim exclusive title to being
"Patriots." Patriotism is working for our nation, not tearing it down
out of spite.
--
Regards, Curly
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2012 Run, John, Run! 2012
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Buerste
"Stormin Mormon" <cayoung61**spamblock##@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:hfpav5$ove$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
> If Obama fails, we all do? That's a crock. I did very well
> before Oh Bomb Us, but not sure I'll be OK after he spends
> the country to death.
>
>
Like the rest of us, you have to hold out until we throw the bums out. I
don't know anybody that was doing poorly before Obammy. I guess the country
has to shoot itself in the foot every so often.
Buerste
> Hal is a liberal, and a twister of words. More than half the
> country does not want the US to fail. And close to that
> percentage wishes Obama to fail to destroy the USA.
>
Hal's a youngster with no clue about economics, business, reality, etc. You
can tell by his potty mouth, limited vocabulary and inability to reason.
His mom should monitor his Internet use.
Lib Loo
"Buerste" <bue...@wowway.com> wrote in message
news:hfphuq$nrc$1...@aioe.org...
47% is indeed less than half of all Americans. Hal must be one of those
deniers that Algore was mentioning on the news today while bragging about
the Gore-bull Warming he invented.
Lib Loo
"hal" wrote in message news:4b20109e...@news.newsguy.com...
Obama is America like hal is Venezuela
Lib Loo
"F. George McDuffee" <gmcd...@mcduffee-associates.us> wrote in message
news:kurvh55lq37e3aras...@4ax.com...
>
> http://www.worldmilitaria.com/newsite/Media/HorstWesselLied.mp3
Yep, the weasel lied and that's the kind of song his party is singing in the
basement of the big house, only in Chinese this time. The flag was already
flying in the backyard. Three more years, we'll wait him out, and then
hopefully he will fade away. LOL, can't wait to sell bumper stickers in
front of his Presidential Library :)
Lib Loo
"Buerste" <bue...@wowway.com> wrote in message
news:hfp8gp$atc$1...@aioe.org...
It's called being a Patriot. The liberal loyalists have no clue what that
means. I, as well as many others, seek out like minded people to do business
with while hiring the liberals to clean their toilets.
Lib Loo
"Too_Many_Tools" <too_man...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:17557e70-3401-4b0f...@j4g2000yqe.googlegroups.com...
> On Dec 9, 7:01 am, hal wrote:
>> On Tue, 8 Dec 2009 20:30:42 -0600, "Lib Loo"
>>
>> <heezb...@crazymother.kom> wrote:
>> >http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/12/08/obamas-percent-approval-lo...
>> >Bill Sammon
>> >FOXNews.com December 08, 2009
>>
>> >Obama's 47 Percent Approval Lowest of Any President at This Point
>>
>> The economy has never been in the shitter this bad since Hoover handed
>> FDR a shit sandwich like Bush gave to Obama. And if you rightards
>> weren't so desperate for Obama to fail then the decent people of
>> America might actually be able to accomplish what they need to.
>
> Not only that, their wishes for disaster demonstrate how sick they
> are.
>
> It is obvious that Loo is sucking off the public tit and has been for
> some time...has it occurred to him that if the economy gets much worse
> the payments to his kind will be cut.
Not at all, this is only what you wish were true. My slums do a public
service for liberals like you. In the past year I have bought out many homes
from liberals that were being foreclosed on. I made them a great offer. They
could continue to live in their homes while paying me rent. The homes were
bought at a bargain and will be worth more than they were at their high when
it all turns around, after about 3 years or so.
The rents pay the mortgage and taxes, which were lowered due to the lower
price I paid for their homes. When the poor suckers need to work to pay
their rent, I pay them to clean toilets and sell "hope and change" and
"green" paraphernalia around Obamaland. While they are not the greatest
workers, my cracking the whip and keeping them hungry is enough incentive
for them. I actually make a very nice profit from the libs, that's why you
always hear me speak kindly about them.
They pay for my internet bill, my heat, air, phone, electric etc. plus they
keep their homes up just as if they were still their own. I couldn't ask for
better tenants. As for living with their mommies, no I don't allow that kind
of sick behavior and will not buy that kind of property if I know about it.
As you say, I do my homework. You should try it yourself some time.
In three years when the markets turn around, it will be time to sell and
kick their liberal asses back to the curb.
>
> Then how will he afford his Internet bill?
>
> As for food and rent, I suspect that he is living with his mother
> based on his fantasies of mommies and perverted sexual interests.
>
> As I have said before, anyone who doesn't want Obama and this Country
> to succeed is a fool and an enemy of the United States.
>
>
>
> TMT
>
> TMT
^ dork
Lib Loo
"hal" wrote in message news:4b201108...@news.newsguy.com...
Silly fool, the public dole is for libs, why do you think they keep voting
for democrats, er, public dole presidents? Ask yourself.
hal
<cayoung61**spamblock##@hotmail.com> wrote:
>If Obama fails, we all do? That's a crock. I did very well
>before Oh Bomb Us, but not sure I'll be OK after he spends
>the country to death.
>
Why don't you go back to counting your rotten food and figuring out
how to keep pipes from freezing and not worry about big boy stuff.
Find yourself a nice Mormon virgin and have yourself 8 or 10 kids or
something.
Lib Loo
"hal" wrote in message news:4b206104...@news.newsguy.com...
Boy, his words must have some truth to them if it upset you so much to go
off-topic and hurl insults. Does that mean you forfeit the argument? Of
course it does!
F. George McDuffee
wrote in message
news:kurvh55lq37e3aras...@4ax.com...
>>Obama agenda, which may or not be radical-left
>>(just progressive),
On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 18:05:06 -0500, "Stormin Mormon"
<cayoung61**spamblock##@hotmail.com> wrote:
>That like saying the soup isn't loaded to hell with salt,
>but it does have some sodium chloride added?
===========
For a *MODERATE* left response to the banking/financial
situation, i.e. no no socialization of the banks and/or
executions of the bankers with asset forfature see
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=a8xEsjTikfm8&pos=2
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financetopics/budget/6770019/Pre-Budget-report-about-20000-bankers-expected-to-be-snared-by-50pc-tax.html
Hawke
>>> On Tue, 8 Dec 2009 20:30:42 -0600, "Lib Loo"
>>>
>>>> http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/12/08/obamas-percent-approval-lowest-president-point/
>>>> Bill Sammon
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Obama's 47 Percent Approval Lowest of Any President at This Point
>>> The economy has never been in the shitter this bad since Hoover handed
>>> weren't so desperate for Obama to fail then the decent people of
>>> America might actually be able to accomplish what they need to.
>> than half the country.
>>
> want America to fail.
Every single ahole republican does.
Hawke
Stormin Mormon
for the massive spending habits of Oh Bomb Us?
--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.
"Mark Rand" <ra...@internettie.co.uk> wrote in message
news:knf0i5l4nglhkv2ke...@4ax.com...
Stormin Mormon
--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.
"Buerste" <bue...@wowway.com> wrote in message
news:hfpi8j$o58$1...@aioe.org...
Curly Surmudgeon
<cayoung61**spamblock##@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Ah, you might be a liberal? Blaming the American population for the
> massive spending habits of Oh Bomb Us?
>
> --
> Christopher A. Young
> Learn more about Jesus
> www.lds.org
Ah, might you be a Moron? Conveniently ignoring the fact that Bush began
and conducted these wars for 7 years but now they're the new guy's fault?
Somebody, please, cut the land lines to/from Utah...
Hawke
> fail. Those who do don't know what they are hoping for.
Those are they guys who brought us George Bush. And they want him back.
He didn't mess things up enough for them. They want to do exactly what
Bush did; cut taxes, increase defense spending, privatize everything
they can, don't regulate the banks and financial institutions, and allow
corporations to do anything they want, oh and don't forget, deny health
care to millions. Yep, those were the good old days to the right
wingers. Obama trying to reverse all that stuff is just driving them
crazy. He's succeeding too and all they can do is whine about him
spending too much money. Which is a real hoot considering what the
republicans did with the money when they were in office. They left the
country and Obama with a 1.3 trillion dollar deficit and now they are
all of a sudden real concerned about too much spending. Worst hypocrites
you'll ever see. Can't run a government worth a shit either. The right
wingers are now in hell, Obama is satan, and they are in agony. Isn't it
great?
Hawke
Hawke
> I'd like Oh Bomb Us to fail to pass socialied medicine. I'd
> like his pull out and surrender in Iraq and Afghanistan to
> fail, because the generals insist on pounding the enemy and
> strengthen the friendly forces. I'd like his "bailout" and
> "stimulus" to fail, and the money isn't confiscated and
> forced away from working Americans under threat of violence.
> I'd like his spending programs to fail, and we won't need to
> raise taxes, again. I'd like his tax hikes to fail.
>
Now you know how the rest of us felt from 2001 to 2008. Everything we
didn't want to see happen Bush did. The result was a national disaster.
It's your turn now to have everything you are against done. That's not
fun. The only difference is that what you don't want to see done is what
is best for America. You are just too dumb to know that. You were one of
the people who thought an MBA would do a great job as president. So you
were 100% wrong on that score and you're also wrong on all the other
things you mentioned. Lucky for us you don't get your way again or we'd
all be living under bridges.
Hawke
Hawke
> "Too_Many_Tools" <too_man...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> Tom...if someone would inform your customers of your anti-American
> views, do you think it would affect your sales?
>
> TMT
>
> Anti-Obammy is PRO-American. The failure of his agenda is the best
> thing that can happen to the US and the rest of the world. His
> healthcare plan is crap, Cap-n-Tax is a proven scam and his spending is
> destroying the economy. You may think Obammy = America, most people
> don't, only the radical fringe like you do. His whole radical agenda is
> falling apart anyway. 2010 you will lose the House and Senate and in
> 2012 President Wee-Wee WILL retire back to the streets of Chicago.
I'll bet you are already on Medicare aren't you? You are getting single
payer government supplied health care, and if you aren't right now it'll
be no time at all until you do. But you don't want to see all of your
fellow citizens with the same thing. Yep, that qualifies you as a
republican, I mean hypocrite.
Hawke
Hawke
Why do you and "others" always wear the white robes and pointed white
hats when you get together?
Hawke
Lib Loo
"Hawke" <davesm...@digitalpath.net> wrote in message
news:hfso73$far$3...@aioe.org...
Black robes. Wait till you try pulling your liberal shit in front of a black
robe.
Stormin Mormon
Now you know how the rest of us felt from 2001 to 2008.
Everything we
didn't want to see happen Bush did.
CY: Actually, that might be correct. Seeing the nation
forced in a direction I believe to be wrong. You suggest,
however, that I liked the Bush II actions. The truth is that
I oppose government take over, and loss of freedom. Whether
it's done fascist style or socialist style.
The result was a national disaster.
CY: Agreed.
It's your turn now to have everything you are against done.
That's not
fun.
CY: What do you mean my turn, now? I've had loss of freedom
done for the last several years under GWB.
The only difference is that what you don't want to see done
is what
is best for America.
CY: I don't believe that massive tax and spend "stimulus"
and "bail out" are the American way. I also know with
certainty that socialized medicine is not the American way.
You are just too dumb to know that.
CY: You are making personal attacks.
You were one of
the people who thought an MBA would do a great job as
president.
CY: You are very mistaken.
So you
were 100% wrong on that score and you're also wrong on all
the other
things you mentioned.
CY: Of course, we can disagree what's "right" for America.
Lucky for us you don't get your way again or we'd
all be living under bridges.
CY: And, you're very mistaken as to what my desires are.
Hawke
Mark Rand
Top posting corrected.
>>
>>"Mark Rand" <ra...@internettie.co.uk> wrote in message
>>news:knf0i5l4nglhkv2ke...@4ax.com...
>>
>>"his bailout"???
>>
>>
>>Do you suffer from Alzheimer's Syndrome?
>>
>>As for the tax hikes, you/we (collectively) did the
>>borrowing, Now the loan's
>>due. Just like the rest of us in countries that thought one
>>could create value
>>with a shell game.
>>
>>Mark Rand
>>RTFM
>>
>Ah, you might be a liberal? Blaming the American population
>for the massive spending habits of Oh Bomb Us?
>
>--
>Christopher A. Young
>Learn more about Jesus
> www.lds.org
>.
>
No, Moron. indicating that it wasn't Obama's bailout:-
<quote>
Bush Signs Off US Bank Bail-Out
10:00pm UK, Friday October 03, 2008
The revised $700bn bail-out plan for the US financial system has become law
after being passed by the House of Representatives and signed by President
Bush.
</quote>
The borrowing to which I referred was the living beyond your means by
inventing "profit" with smoke and mirrors.
Mark Rand
RTFM
Hawke
If what you say is true then you are truly screwed. For people like me,
we had to live through two terms of Bush hell. Now, we're happy with
Obama for the most part. You, on the other hand, are equally unhappy
with both. That's a heads I win tales you lose situation for you.
The other difference between us is that I do believe the "socialist"
changes that Obama is making, or trying to, are good for Americans. I
just witnessed what the republican/Bush changes did for the average
American. I think we can agree that Americans got screwed in the last 8
years. I say that is the direct result of republican policy. Now Obama
is reversing those policies. In my view, the things he's trying to do
will make the lives of "average" Americans much better. I only wish
people would give him a few years to see if what he does works or fails
before passing judgment. I'm waiting to see if his policies make the
country better. Others, who criticize him unmercifully, have only one
goal, to ruin his presidency and return a republican to the White House.
I understand that but most people don't seem to get that. There is
legitimate criticism and then what the right wing does.
Hawke
Stormin Mormon
economy means that were are no longer the USA under the US
constitution. I can't imagine that being good.
--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.
"Hawke" <davesm...@digitalpath.net>
wrote in message news:hfutj9$g5i$1...@aioe.org...
Bill McKee
maybe your life will be better, richer, etc. Problem is your children,
grandchildren and great grandchildren will be paying the money for your
better life.
Curly Surmudgeon
wrote:
> On Fri, 11 Dec 2009 00:34:50 -0500, "Stormin Mormon"
> <cayoung61**spamblock##@hotmail.com> top posted:
>
> Top posting corrected.
>
>
>>>"Mark Rand" <ra...@internettie.co.uk> wrote in message
>>>news:knf0i5l4nglhkv2ke...@4ax.com...
>>>
>>>"his bailout"???
>>>
>>>
>>>Do you suffer from Alzheimer's Syndrome?
>>>
>>>As for the tax hikes, you/we (collectively) did the borrowing, Now the
>>>loan's
>>>due. Just like the rest of us in countries that thought one could
>>>create value
>>>with a shell game.
>>>
>>>Mark Rand
>>>RTFM
>>>
>>>
>>Ah, you might be a liberal? Blaming the American population for the
>>massive spending habits of Oh Bomb Us?
>>
>>--
>>Christopher A. Young
>>Learn more about Jesus
>> www.lds.org
>>.
>>
>>
> No, Moron. indicating that it wasn't Obama's bailout:-
That's not an insult, he's proud of being a Mor(m)on...
> <quote>
> Bush Signs Off US Bank Bail-Out
>
> 10:00pm UK, Friday October 03, 2008
> The revised $700bn bail-out plan for the US financial system has become
> law after being passed by the House of Representatives and signed by
> President Bush.
> </quote>
>
> The borrowing to which I referred was the living beyond your means by
> inventing "profit" with smoke and mirrors.
>
>
> Mark Rand
> RTFM
--
Curly Surmudgeon
wrote:
> I just witnessed what the republican/Bush changes did for the average
> American.
So did we tonight.
Leaving the Mexican restaurant in Sacramento, in the pouring rain, was a
street person begging for money or food. This wasn't your typical bum
but a world class bicyclist, Chad Gerlach, who now lives on the streets
pan handling and eating leftovers.
This is not a cyclic recession but a full-fledged depression brought on
by the same fools who now resist recovery. Not just resist but work to
make Obama, and by extention, our collective nation fail.
I've got some real gripes about Afghanistan and a few other issues but
the health and well-being of our nation must come before my bitching.
Our economy is still too fragile to risk bringing down the house of cards
that Bush built by deregulation and crony capitalism.
I do not like public funds being used to bail out corporate corruption,
misdeed and failures. The alternative is worse, much, much, worse so I
give my reluctant support to Obama for the time being.
The fools who wish Obama to fail are traitors.
Curly Surmudgeon
<cayoung61**spamblock##@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Turning a constitutional republic into a socialist command economy means
> that were are no longer the USA under the US constitution. I can't
> imagine that being good.
Why can you not imagine that, you brag about magick sky faeries...
Curly Surmudgeon
<bmckee...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> Actually I want neither of what the major parties are doin. As to
> Obama, maybe your life will be better, richer, etc. Problem is your
> children, grandchildren and great grandchildren will be paying the money
> for your better life.
I'm in somewhat of the same position but recognize the extreme danger to
everyone should Obama fail and our nation collapses from the malfeasance
of the Bush Years... It's not as though any alternatives were left Obama.
There is plenty of time for a mid-course correction after the economy
recovers. All else is secondary to the economy.
Curly Surmudgeon
wrote:
> hal wrote:
>>On Tue, 8 Dec 2009 20:30:42 -0600, "Lib Loo" <heez...@crazymother.kom>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/12/08/obamas-percent-approval-
lowest-president-point/
>>>Obama's 47 Percent Approval Lowest of Any President at This Point
>>
>>The economy has never been in the shitter this bad since Hoover handed
>>FDR a shit sandwich like Bush gave to Obama.
>
> He's been in office a year now. He SAID he had a PLAN. What's his plan
> and when do you think he will start?
Oh cut it out Winston, you know damn well what Obama's plans are. He's
elucidated them clearly and has been following that script to the
letter. Earlier you claimed Obama wasn't keeping his promise to get us
out of Afghanistan, Obama never promised that. In fact that was one of
his principle campaign positions, that Bush had fucked up royally by
invading Iraq and let Osama get free. Obama promised to elevate
Afghanistan to a top priority and he's doing precisely that.
Neither of us like many of his programs but don't misrepresent events.
Nor is a change in priority on some issues a "lie." Would you rather
that our nation collapse entirely? Whoever the "next guy" was there were
no alternatives left by Bush/Cheney. The entire system was so fucked up
that the "next guy" inherited more crisis' than you can shake a stick at.
Bitch about the little shit later. For the moment the economy must be
top priority. And those who truly love our nation must participate in
rebuilding our nation, not tearing it down. We do not have the latitude
to fail on this issue.
F. George McDuffee
<not_...@bogus.net> wrote:
<snip>
>Yeah there were alternatives. Let the crappy business models and the
>bankster con-men fail and take their losses.
<snip>
Sounds good, but the fact of the matter is that the U.S. economy
is now a jury built fire-trap condo, the sprinkler and fire alarm
systems have been removed and sold for scrap, and unless the
fires raging in the bankster's/brokster's units [possibly
resulting from explosions in the meth labs they were running] are
controlled, the entire complex is going up in smoke with the
result that everyone loses everything [except the banksters and
broksters with off site storage].
We have allowed the con-men to become so integral to the
operation of the U.S. economy, it is almost impossible to remove
them or curtail their operations without very serious
financial/fiscal disruptions, e.g. government bond sales.
Unka George (George McDuffee)
..............................
The past is a foreign country;
they do things differently there.
L. P. Hartley (1895-1972), British author.
The Go-Between, Prologue (1953).
Lib Loo
"Hawke" <davesm...@digitalpath.net> wrote in message
news:hfutj9$g5i$1...@aioe.org...
> The other difference between us is that I do believe the "socialist"
> changes that Obama is making, or trying to, are good for Americans.
> Hawke
You will definitely be the first to go with talk like that.
Lib Loo
"Curly Surmudgeon" <CurlySu...@live.com> wrote in message
news:hfv46s$p88$4...@news.eternal-september.org...
> On Fri, 11 Dec 2009 19:10:42 -0800, "Bill McKee"
> <bmckee...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
>> Actually I want neither of what the major parties are doin. As to
>> Obama, maybe your life will be better, richer, etc. Problem is your
>> children, grandchildren and great grandchildren will be paying the money
>> for your better life.
>
> I'm in somewhat of the same position but recognize the extreme danger to
> everyone should Obama fail and our nation collapses from the malfeasance
> of the Bush Years... It's not as though any alternatives were left Obama.
>
> There is plenty of time for a mid-course correction after the economy
> recovers. All else is secondary to the economy.
>
>
He already failed. All we can do is bite our lip and wait out the next three
years.
Lib Loo
"Winston_Smith" <not_...@bogus.net> wrote in message
news:2a16i514sid47sks8...@4ax.com...
> hal wrote:
>>On Tue, 8 Dec 2009 20:30:42 -0600, "Lib Loo"
>><heez...@crazymother.kom> wrote:
>>
>>>http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/12/08/obamas-percent-approval-lowest-president-point/
>>>Obama's 47 Percent Approval Lowest of Any President at This Point
>>
>>The economy has never been in the shitter this bad since Hoover handed
>>FDR a shit sandwich like Bush gave to Obama.
>
> He's been in office a year now. He SAID he had a PLAN. What's his
> plan and when do you think he will start?
LOL, remember Kerry said he had a plan too. His plan was to say "I have a
Plan".
Papillon had a plan too. Kerry kept his plan in the same place Papillon did.
Lib Loo
"Winston_Smith" <not_...@bogus.net> wrote in message
news:6l66i5122g5c9nk1j...@4ax.com...
> Curly Surmudgeon <CurlySu...@live.com> wrote:
>>On Fri, 11 Dec 2009 19:52:57 -0700, Winston_Smith wrote:
>>> hal wrote:
>>>>On Tue, 8 Dec 2009 20:30:42 -0600, "Lib Loo" wrote:
>>>>
>>>>><http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/12/08/obamas-percent-approval-lowest-president-point/?
>>>>>Obama's 47 Percent Approval Lowest of Any President at This Point
>>>>
>>>>The economy has never been in the shitter this bad since Hoover handed
>>>>FDR a shit sandwich like Bush gave to Obama.
>>>
>>> He's been in office a year now. He SAID he had a PLAN. What's his plan
>>> and when do you think he will start?
>>
>>Oh cut it out Winston, you know damn well what Obama's plans are. He's
>>elucidated them clearly and has been following that script to the
>>letter. Earlier you claimed Obama wasn't keeping his promise to get us
>>out of Afghanistan, Obama never promised that. In fact that was one of
>>his principle campaign positions, that Bush had fucked up royally by
>>invading Iraq and let Osama get free. Obama promised to elevate
>>Afghanistan to a top priority and he's doing precisely that.
>
> He said he was going to spend our way to prosperity. I find that a
> rather poorly defined plan.
>
>>Neither of us like many of his programs but don't misrepresent events.
>>Nor is a change in priority on some issues a "lie." Would you rather
>>that our nation collapse entirely?
>
> We must consider that it may collapse entirely BECAUSE of Obama and
> his massive spending.
>
>>Whoever the "next guy" was there were
>>no alternatives left by Bush/Cheney. The entire system was so fucked up
>>that the "next guy" inherited more crisis' than you can shake a stick at.
>
> Yeah there were alternatives. Let the crappy business models and the
> bankster con-men fail and take their losses. Obama has simply
> extended what Bush did in the way of "solutions". If that's a good
> thing, then it would not matter if we kept Bush, elected McBush, or
> went for the third clone Obama.
>
>>Bitch about the little shit later. For the moment the economy must be
>>top priority. And those who truly love our nation must participate in
>>rebuilding our nation, not tearing it down.
>
> You can not rebuild a house on fire. Some times you have to clear the
> rubble and start new.
>
>>We do not have the latitude to fail on this issue.
>
> I know you really believe this. We, all of us in the beginning, gave
> Bush the benefit and look where it led? I'm in no way comparing Obama
> and Hitler but the same argument was made back then. We are in deep
> shit, let the guy try, even if his methods are a little off the wall.
>
> Sorry, I just don't buy letting politicians run loose without their
> leashes.
>
> You are quite aware I gave Bush full measure of his well deserved
> lumps. Obama deserves some too. I'm willing to give them. You have
> made another choice.
Don't mind Curly, he is an apologist for Obama. Obama apologizes to everyone
about how the US behaves, and Curly apologizes for Obama.
Curly Surmudgeon
wrote:
> Curly Surmudgeon <CurlySu...@live.com> wrote:
>>On Fri, 11 Dec 2009 19:52:57 -0700, Winston_Smith wrote:
>>> hal wrote:
>>>>On Tue, 8 Dec 2009 20:30:42 -0600, "Lib Loo" wrote:
>>>>
>>>>><http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/12/08/obamas-percent-approval-
lowest-president-point/?
>>>>>Obama's 47 Percent Approval Lowest of Any President at This Point
>>>>
>>>>The economy has never been in the shitter this bad since Hoover handed
>>>>FDR a shit sandwich like Bush gave to Obama.
>>>
>>> He's been in office a year now. He SAID he had a PLAN. What's his
>>> plan and when do you think he will start?
>>
>>Oh cut it out Winston, you know damn well what Obama's plans are. He's
>>elucidated them clearly and has been following that script to the
>>letter. Earlier you claimed Obama wasn't keeping his promise to get us
>>out of Afghanistan, Obama never promised that. In fact that was one of
>>his principle campaign positions, that Bush had fucked up royally by
>>invading Iraq and let Osama get free. Obama promised to elevate
>>Afghanistan to a top priority and he's doing precisely that.
>
> He said he was going to spend our way to prosperity. I find that a
> rather poorly defined plan.
No, Obama did *not* say that.
>>Neither of us like many of his programs but don't misrepresent events.
>>Nor is a change in priority on some issues a "lie." Would you rather
>>that our nation collapse entirely?
>
> We must consider that it may collapse entirely BECAUSE of Obama and his
> massive spending.
The economy, and our nation, may well indeed collapse but not because of
Obama's spending. The economy, and nation, was headed in that direction
when he took office.
We are in uncharted territory and _any_ action "may" fail but doing
nothing, or following the Bush/Cheney programs, would have assured that
finale.
>>Whoever the "next guy" was there were no alternatives left by
>>Bush/Cheney. The entire system was so fucked up that the "next guy"
>>inherited more crisis' than you can shake a stick at.
>
> Yeah there were alternatives. Let the crappy business models and the
> bankster con-men fail and take their losses. Obama has simply extended
> what Bush did in the way of "solutions". If that's a good thing, then
> it would not matter if we kept Bush, elected McBush, or went for the
> third clone Obama.
That is not the case, there is a qualitative difference.
>>Bitch about the little shit later. For the moment the economy must be
>>top priority. And those who truly love our nation must participate in
>>rebuilding our nation, not tearing it down.
>
> You can not rebuild a house on fire. Some times you have to clear the
> rubble and start new.
Poor analogy, this is not one house in an immense world.
>>We do not have the latitude to fail on this issue.
>
> I know you really believe this. We, all of us in the beginning, gave
> Bush the benefit and look where it led? I'm in no way comparing Obama
> and Hitler but the same argument was made back then. We are in deep
> shit, let the guy try, even if his methods are a little off the wall.
Agreed.
> Sorry, I just don't buy letting politicians run loose without their
> leashes.
Nor I.
> You are quite aware I gave Bush full measure of his well deserved lumps.
Not in dispute.
> Obama deserves some too. I'm willing to give them. You have made
> another choice.
Yes, and I detest being in this position but I will not ride the nation
down the toilet by following Bush's program or to do nothing. Obama is
the only man on earth that has a possibility of resurrecting America and
I will not submarine his programs.
Lib Loo
"Curly Surmudgeon" <CurlySu...@live.com> wrote in message
news:hfvjv9$9s5$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
Apologist.
Hawke
> Turning a constitutional republic into a socialist command
> economy means that were are no longer the USA under the US
> constitution. I can't imagine that being good.
>
Has it ever been tried yet? So how do you know it'll be a failure if you
don't try it first? That's why they call the method trial and error. We
just tried things the republican way. I'd call what happened from two
terms of Bush an error. Now we try something else. Problem is you guys
are too scared to try anything new. All you want to do it the same thing
even when it has proven to fail. That's stupid in my book.
Hawke
F. George McDuffee
<not_...@bogus.net> wrote:
<snip>
>I have great reservations on the nature of the new structure. We
>dodged the bullet by just the smallest degree by having FDR in office
>and a lot of folks will disagree with me on that one. One of the
>Republican candidates to run against FDR was quoted as saying he
>wouldn't mind putting the Constitution on a high shelf and forgetting
>about it at least until the emergency was over. Now reflect on just
>how popular Huey Long, Father Conklin, and their ilk were.
>
>We may not dodge the bullet this time. Most of Europe didn't on the
>last go-round.
===========
The problem is that this may well be the outcome of a "natural"
cycle for human society/culture, more or less like the weather,
i.e. spring, summer, fall, and winter. Totalitarianism may well
be the wave of the future, even though it has failed in the past
because of the change in the human season. One example is the
PRC. This can be summarized in the folk wisdom "If god did not
want them sheared, he would not have made them sheep."
What is different this time is "globalization" where the vast
majority of societies/cultures are "synched," and the speed with
which the socio-cultural changes are occurring [being imposed]
because of the improvements in transportation and communication.
Technology has also greatly improved the ability of governments
to repress and control, e.g. smart ID cards and central
databases.
Remember we are dealing with "true believers," whose motto is "if
at first you don't succeed, try, try again," and the
socio-economic/cultural climate has definitely changed in the
majority of countries.
For a discussion see
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704240504574585881108040134.html
http://www.amazon.com/Last-Exit-Utopia-Socialism-Post-Soviet/dp/1594032645
F. George McDuffee
<not_...@bogus.net> wrote:
<snip>
>>> He's been in office a year now. He SAID he had a PLAN. What's his
>>> plan and when do you think he will start?
>>
>>LOL, remember Kerry said he had a plan too. His plan was to say "I have a
>>Plan".
>>
>>Papillon had a plan too. Kerry kept his plan in the same place Papillon did.
>
>crap instead of demanding the plan be put on the table for debate?
===========
For the same reason that they are not allowed to know the Federal
Reserve Policies, how much money the Fed has printed or how much
tax payer money the Fed has committed and to who/why.
William Wixon
wondering if china would fall under that category. they seem to be doing
pretty good with it right now. maybe after obama is booted out and palin
takes over she'll drive the u.s. into the ground and some of those cheap
labor jobs will start coming back to the states. or, maybe that was
bush/cheney/mccain/palin's plan, to force american labor to it's knees and
beg for $1.00/hr. jobs (with no benes, no health care, like in the good old
days, before roosevelt).
b.w.
Hawke
> On Fri, 11 Dec 2009 19:10:42 -0800, "Bill McKee"
> <bmckee...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
>> Actually I want neither of what the major parties are doin. As to
>> Obama, maybe your life will be better, richer, etc. Problem is your
>> children, grandchildren and great grandchildren will be paying the money
>> for your better life.
>
> I'm in somewhat of the same position but recognize the extreme danger to
> everyone should Obama fail and our nation collapses from the malfeasance
> of the Bush Years... It's not as though any alternatives were left Obama.
>
> There is plenty of time for a mid-course correction after the economy
> recovers. All else is secondary to the economy.
>
What's maddening is that the right wingers seem to have conveniently
forgotten the condition the country was in on January 20th. We already
had a 1.3 trillion dollar debt plus the fact that Bush doubled our
country's total debt in a five year period. Obama's been on the job less
than a year and all he's doing is trying to put out the fire that Bush
started. The minute he starts to do something to fix the problems all we
hear is slow down, don't go into debt. Well, it's a little late for
that. It's like them saying not to use the hose on the fire because
it'll damage the house. If he's going to fix things Obama has to go into
massive debt to do it. He doesn't want to but he has to. But again, most
of the criticism is just partisan right wingers trying to ruin him. If
they were in charge they would be going into debt too. Hell, there's
never been a year that republicans haven't gone into debt.
Hawke
Hawke
Easy for you to say. A lot harder for you to actually do. In fact, in a
contest between you and me I'd wager you would go a lot sooner than me.
I have a lot more experience at surviving than you do. I also have all
the tools I need to do it too.
Hawke
Hawke
> Too_Many_Tools <too_man...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> On Dec 9, 7:01 am, hal wrote:
>>> On Tue, 8 Dec 2009 20:30:42 -0600, "Lib Loo"
>
>>>> http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/12/08/obamas-percent-approval-lo...
>>>> Obama's 47 Percent Approval Lowest of Any President at This Point
>>> The economy has never been in the shitter this bad since Hoover handed
>>> weren't so desperate for Obama to fail then the decent people of
>>> America might actually be able to accomplish what they need to.
>> Not only that, their wishes for disaster demonstrate how sick they
>> are.
>
> Sadly, we ARE getting the disaster. Obama will kiss it and make it
> all better ?? Yeah, right. That's going to happen.
You want another republican to do it? Like they know how to do anything
but bankrupt us.
Hawke
Hawke
That's because you are not a right winger. Those guys would gladly sink
the ship as long as they take down Obama. They don't want to give him a
chance to succeed. What will that mean to them if he does? If Obama
succeeds it means they and everything they say is wrong. They would
rather go down with the ship than have that happen. That is because they
don't have the balls to admit it when they are wrong.
Hawke
Lib Loo
"Hawke" <davesm...@digitalpath.net> wrote in message
news:hg16ih$59k$1...@aioe.org...
> Curly Surmudgeon wrote:
>> On Fri, 11 Dec 2009 19:10:42 -0800, "Bill McKee"
>> <bmckee...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Actually I want neither of what the major parties are doin. As to
>>> Obama, maybe your life will be better, richer, etc. Problem is your
>>> children, grandchildren and great grandchildren will be paying the money
>>> for your better life.
>>
>> I'm in somewhat of the same position but recognize the extreme danger to
>> everyone should Obama fail and our nation collapses from the malfeasance
>> of the Bush Years... It's not as though any alternatives were left
>> Obama.
>>
>> There is plenty of time for a mid-course correction after the economy
>> recovers. All else is secondary to the economy.
>>
>
>
> What's maddening is my inability to use paragraphs
Back to school then, 12 wasted years.
Lib Loo
"Hawke" <davesm...@digitalpath.net> wrote in message
news:hg16pa$59k$2...@aioe.org...
What are you basing your fantasies on pansy boy? Your time as a paralegal?
Maybe it's the drugs or alcohol that make you feel brave enough to post
about the goodness of socialism on Usenet, but my prediction is that you
will slip up and say something in 3D real life and someone will pop you
quickly. Your third all-seeing eye. You won't even make it to the Great
Cull. Don't make any idle threats without posting your address, otherwise
you join the wimp ranks of Curly Albert, Douchebag, and TMT. For the record,
that was a threat, right junior?
Lib Loo
"Winston_Smith" <not_...@bogus.net> wrote in message
news:7qp7i5d2aqah7su2r...@4ax.com...
> Curly Surmudgeon <CurlySu...@live.com> wrote:
>>On Fri, 11 Dec 2009 21:31:53 -0700, Winston_Smithwrote:
>>> Curly Surmudgeon <CurlySu...@live.com> wrote:
>>>>On Fri, 11 Dec 2009 19:52:57 -0700, Winston_Smith wrote:
>>>>> hal wrote:
>>>>>>On Tue, 8 Dec 2009 20:30:42 -0600, "Lib Loo" wrote:
>
>>>>>>><http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/12/08/obamas-percent-approval-lowest-president-point/>
>>>>>>>Obama's 47 Percent Approval Lowest of Any President at This Point
>>>>>>
>>>>>>The economy has never been in the shitter this bad since Hoover handed
>>>>>>FDR a shit sandwich like Bush gave to Obama.
>>>>>
>>>>> He's been in office a year now. He SAID he had a PLAN. What's his
>>>>> plan and when do you think he will start?
>>>>
>>>>Oh cut it out Winston, you know damn well what Obama's plans are. He's
>>>>elucidated them clearly and has been following that script to the
>>>>letter. Earlier you claimed Obama wasn't keeping his promise to get us
>>>>out of Afghanistan, Obama never promised that. In fact that was one of
>>>>his principle campaign positions, that Bush had fucked up royally by
>>>>invading Iraq and let Osama get free. Obama promised to elevate
>>>>Afghanistan to a top priority and he's doing precisely that.
>>>
>>> He said he was going to spend our way to prosperity. I find that a
>>> rather poorly defined plan.
>>
>>No, Obama did *not* say that.
>
> Yes he did.
Yep, he sure done did. Curly is an Obama apologist, don't mind the ninny
tang.
Lib Loo
"Hawke" <davesm...@digitalpath.net> wrote in message
news:hg17a1$63f$1...@aioe.org...
He already failed, and so did you. You make me drowsy.
Steve B
Yeah. I agree 5,000%. I think he just needs to spend more to get the debt
down. Just like he's been doing. But in the meantime, while distributing
all that cash, see that some comes my way instead of to his cronies and
pals.
And I agree that Bush screwed up leaving all that money around for Obama to
screw up on.
Maybe they could get a loan from Dodd, Raines, and Frank.
Steve
Steve B
"Hawke" <davesm...@digitalpath.net> wrote
> You want another republican to do it? Like they know how to do anything
> but bankrupt us.
>
> Hawke
Psssssssssst. Obama is a Democrat, and he's the one driving us to the poor
house.
Lib Loo
"Winston_Smith" <not_...@bogus.net> wrote in message
news:ivq7i59snrm1brsri...@4ax.com...
> "Lib Loo" <heez...@crazymother.kom> wrote:
>>"Winston_Smith" <not_...@bogus.net> wrote
>>> hal wrote:
>>>>On Tue, 8 Dec 2009 20:30:42 -0600, "Lib Loo"
>>>><heez...@crazymother.kom> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>><http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/12/08/obamas-percent-approval-lowest-president-point/>
>>>>>Obama's 47 Percent Approval Lowest of Any President at This Point
>>>>
>>>>The economy has never been in the shitter this bad since Hoover handed
>>>>FDR a shit sandwich like Bush gave to Obama.
>>>
>>> He's been in office a year now. He SAID he had a PLAN. What's his
>>> plan and when do you think he will start?
>>
>>LOL, remember Kerry said he had a plan too. His plan was to say "I have a
>>Plan".
>>
>>Papillon had a plan too. Kerry kept his plan in the same place Papillon
>>did.
>
> And Nixon's "secret plan" to end Viet Nam. Why DO voters buy this
> crap instead of demanding the plan be put on the table for debate?
It was kind of innovative when Nixon did it. However the libs, who are so
lacking in originality, could not pull off the same bluff. Libs are like bad
reruns and smell bad too.
Curly Surmudgeon
wrote:
> Curly Surmudgeon <CurlySu...@live.com> wrote:
>>On Fri, 11 Dec 2009 21:31:53 -0700, Winston_Smithwrote:
>>> Curly Surmudgeon <CurlySu...@live.com> wrote:
>>>>On Fri, 11 Dec 2009 19:52:57 -0700, Winston_Smith wrote:
>>>>> hal wrote:
>>>>>>On Tue, 8 Dec 2009 20:30:42 -0600, "Lib Loo" wrote:
>
>>>>>>><http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/12/08/obamas-percent-
approval-lowest-president-point/>
>>>>>>>Obama's 47 Percent Approval Lowest of Any President at This Point
>>>>>>
>>>>>>The economy has never been in the shitter this bad since Hoover
>>>>>>handed FDR a shit sandwich like Bush gave to Obama.
>>>>>
>>>>> He's been in office a year now. He SAID he had a PLAN. What's his
>>>>> plan and when do you think he will start?
>>>>
>>>>Oh cut it out Winston, you know damn well what Obama's plans are.
>>>>He's elucidated them clearly and has been following that script to the
>>>>letter. Earlier you claimed Obama wasn't keeping his promise to get
>>>>us out of Afghanistan, Obama never promised that. In fact that was
>>>>one of his principle campaign positions, that Bush had fucked up
>>>>royally by invading Iraq and let Osama get free. Obama promised to
>>>>elevate Afghanistan to a top priority and he's doing precisely that.
>>>
>>> He said he was going to spend our way to prosperity. I find that a
>>> rather poorly defined plan.
>>
>>No, Obama did *not* say that.
>
> Yes he did.
>
> A desperate thing to say
> <http://theautomaticearth.blogspot.com/2009/12/december-9-2009-
desperate-thing-to-say.html>
> He really said it. The nation must "continue to spend our way out of
> this recession".
Without verifying that blog I'll accept the quotes "continue to spend our
way out of this recession". That is not what you said previously, "He
said he was going to spend our way to prosperity. I find that a rather
poorly defined plan."
>>>>Neither of us like many of his programs but don't misrepresent events.
>>>>Nor is a change in priority on some issues a "lie." Would you rather
>>>>that our nation collapse entirely?
>>>
>>> We must consider that it may collapse entirely BECAUSE of Obama and
>>> his massive spending.
>>
>>The economy, and our nation, may well indeed collapse but not because of
>>Obama's spending. The economy, and nation, was headed in that direction
>>when he took office.
>
> Agreed. But you do not pour gasoline on a fire. It rarely puts it out
> in my experience. The meat (us) gets charred and tastes funny instead
> of nicely browned.
Don't use metaphors or analogies, this is a unique situation,
catastrophe, in the history of mankind. There is no previous event of
this magnitude except the Great Depression.
>>We are in uncharted territory and _any_ action "may" fail but doing
>>nothing, or following the Bush/Cheney programs, would have assured that
>>finale.
>
> We have 1922 and 1929/1933 for examples of two different approaches.
Give me your vision of 1922. 1929/1959 is a better time scale for the
Great Depression. Look specifically at 1937 when FDR tried to balance
the budget by reducing expenditures, the economy went back to its
decline. Only after opening the financial floodgates again did the
economy return to an upward curve.
Ugly, nasty, but it worked and that is substantiated by the current
pseudo-recovery. Only the deep pockets of the United States Treasury is
capable of repairing the damage Bush wrought. Iirc Europe and Asia have
pumped even more (collectively) than the United States into the world
economy and financial bailouts. It's working, still fragile, but it's
working.
I don't like it either but am able to put aside my opinions and anger for
the benefit of our nation. For the moment.
>>>>Whoever the "next guy" was there were no alternatives left by
>>>>Bush/Cheney. The entire system was so fucked up that the "next guy"
>>>>inherited more crisis' than you can shake a stick at.
>>>
>>> Yeah there were alternatives. Let the crappy business models and the
>>> bankster con-men fail and take their losses. Obama has simply
>>> extended what Bush did in the way of "solutions". If that's a good
>>> thing, then it would not matter if we kept Bush, elected McBush, or
>>> went for the third clone Obama.
>>
>>That is not the case, there is a qualitative difference.
>
> TARP 1 (Bush) vs. TARP 2 (Obama). Stimulus 1 (Bush) vs. Stimulus 2 and
> 3 (Obama). Reduce withholding for individuals, which they will have to
> cough up with on 4/15 (Bush). Reduce tax temporarily for companies,
> which they will have to cough up with later (Obama). Bush said we hit
> bottom and things are on the way back. Obama says the same thing. What
> is the "qualitative difference"? Heck, Hoover and FDR said the same
> thing too.
Obama's stimulus funds required ownership or signed loan committments.
Already BofA has repaid their $45 Billion and GM is doing so rapidly,
years earlier than the loan contract. Bush just threw money out not
caring where it landed and without collateral.
>>>>Bitch about the little shit later. For the moment the economy must be
>>>>top priority. And those who truly love our nation must participate in
>>>>rebuilding our nation, not tearing it down.
>>>
>>> You can not rebuild a house on fire. Some times you have to clear the
>>> rubble and start new.
>>
>>Poor analogy, this is not one house in an immense world.
>
> This is the whole world in trouble. For much the same reasons because
> banksters are greedy and interlocked and because governments world wide
> let them get away with it for decades. The same was true in 1929.
>
> Massive changes in financial and political structures resulted -
> communist Russia, Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy, even our very own Huey
> Long and assorted brown shirt movements. I for one do not want to see
> the 1933 model followed by WW3.
Nor I. Poverty causes war, I want a functioning economy where willing
people can find jobs sufficient to wean them off hte dole instead of
stealing or killing to eat and survive.
>>>>We do not have the latitude to fail on this issue.
>>>
>>> I know you really believe this. We, all of us in the beginning, gave
>>> Bush the benefit and look where it led? I'm in no way comparing Obama
>>> and Hitler but the same argument was made back then. We are in deep
>>> shit, let the guy try, even if his methods are a little off the wall.
>>
>>Agreed.
>>
>>> Sorry, I just don't buy letting politicians run loose without their
>>> leashes.
>>
>>Nor I.
>>
>>> You are quite aware I gave Bush full measure of his well deserved
>>> lumps.
>>
>>Not in dispute.
>>
>>> Obama deserves some too. I'm willing to give them. You have made
>>> another choice.
>>
>>Yes, and I detest being in this position but I will not ride the nation
>>down the toilet by following Bush's program or to do nothing.
>
> As I see it, we ARE following Bush's program. That is just the trouble.
We disagree. Bush deregulated markets and enabled corporate
conglomerates to construct monopolies that are too big to fail. Obama
has already floated plans to break up the financial sector and GM/
Chrysler have been broken up.
>>Obama is
>>the only man on earth that has a possibility of resurrecting America and
>>I will not submarine his programs.
>
> I have great reservations on the nature of the new structure. We dodged
> the bullet by just the smallest degree by having FDR in office and a lot
> of folks will disagree with me on that one. One of the Republican
> candidates to run against FDR was quoted as saying he wouldn't mind
> putting the Constitution on a high shelf and forgetting about it at
> least until the emergency was over. Now reflect on just how popular
> Huey Long, Father Conklin, and their ilk were.
>
> We may not dodge the bullet this time. Most of Europe didn't on the
> last go-round.
I'm not happy with events either but the options are/were extremely
limited. Obama is following the least evil for the greatest number. I
support that and reserve my criticism on less important issues for the
time being.
Curly Surmudgeon
R.I.P M3:
http://www.federalreserve.gov/Releases/h6/discm3.htm
Discontinuance of M3
On March 23, 2006, the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System
will cease publication of the M3 monetary aggregate. The Board will also
cease publishing the following components: large-denomination time
deposits, repurchase agreements (RPs), and Eurodollars. The Board will
continue to publish institutional money market mutual funds as a
memorandum item in this release.
Measures of large-denomination time deposits will continue to be
published by the Board in the Flow of Funds Accounts (Z.1 release) on a
quarterly basis and in the H.8 release on a weekly basis (for commercial
banks).
M3 does not appear to convey any additional information about economic
activity that is not already embodied in M2 and has not played a role in
the monetary policy process for many years. Consequently, the Board
judged that the costs of collecting the underlying data and publishing M3
outweigh the benefits.
Curly Surmudgeon
wrote:
>> Yes, and I detest being in this position but I will not ride the nation
>> down the toilet by following Bush's program or to do nothing. Obama is
>> the only man on earth that has a possibility of resurrecting America
>> and I will not submarine his programs.
>>
>>
>
> That's because you are not a right winger.
True, I am an economic conservative and a social liberal. "Wingers" and
"Libs" are neither.
> Those guys would gladly sink the ship as long as they take down Obama.
That's the part that I find reprehensible. Perhaps it is my years and
education, a failed nation-state is to be avoided at any cost.
> They don't want to give him a
> chance to succeed. What will that mean to them if he does? If Obama
> succeeds it means they and everything they say is wrong. They would
> rather go down with the ship than have that happen. That is because they
> don't have the balls to admit it when they are wrong.
The real measure of maturity is knowing your limitations and admitting
fault. By this definition followers of either party are not mature.
> Hawke
Hawke
>>> You will definitely be the first to go with talk like that.
Is this a threat?
>> Easy for you to say. A lot harder for you to actually do. In fact, in
>> a contest between you and me I'd wager you would go a lot sooner than
>> me. I have a lot more experience at surviving than you do. I also have
>> all the tools I need to do it too.
>>
>> Hawke
>
> What are you basing your fantasies on pansy boy? Your time as a
> paralegal? Maybe it's the drugs or alcohol that make you feel brave
> enough to post about the goodness of socialism on Usenet, but my
> prediction is that you will slip up and say something in 3D real life
> and someone will pop you quickly. Your third all-seeing eye. You won't
> even make it to the Great Cull. Don't make any idle threats without
> posting your address, otherwise you join the wimp ranks of Curly Albert,
> Douchebag, and TMT. For the record, that was a threat, right junior?
You can take it any way you like, punky. What I am saying is that you
are sadly mistaken if you think I am some weak, little, left wing
weenie. I'm about as far from that as one can get. I have been around a
long time, and nobody gives me a hard time. Maybe that's because I'm
over 6' and weight more than 250 lbs., have been a lifelong athlete,
have practiced martial arts for many years, and my hobby is shooting.
Oh, and I lift weights all the time too. I don't have to make anything
up. I do nothing to hide behind false nyms or in any other way. I'm in
the phone book. Anybody can look me up any time they feel like it. I'm
easy to find. So your bright idea that people who think your point of
view is pretty damn ignorant and foolish are weaklings is totally out to
lunch. But then just about everything you post is nothing but really
ignorant prattle. You don't have to believe me, but after reading a few
of your posts you don't come across as very bright, informed, or well
educated. But you do come across as an angry, right winger that doesn't
know much about anything and isn't very well educated. Now, isn't that
about right on the money?
Hawke
Hawke
Hey, we were already there the day he got the job. You didn't notice
that until now? I guess you missed it but 2008 was a fairly bad
year(understatement). You're pretty slow on the uptake if you just now
figured out the country has been on the wrong track and didn't know we
were already on the way down even in 2007.
Hawke
Lib Loo
"Hawke" <davesm...@digitalpath.net> wrote in message
news:hg1i8n$i2e$1...@aioe.org...
Nobody cares, or asked about your physique. With those limp wrists of yours,
we are not surprised that you've dropped weights on your head, and doubt you
could shoot straight. At 250 lbs, you make for a nice fat target for those
who may be inclined to share your hobby. As for being bright, try explaining
again how promoting socialism in the U.S. is a good survival strategy, for
all of the survivalists in the newsgroup. We are curious to hear some of
this wisdom you pretend to have, especially the parts about how we should
carry the weight of your fat liberal asses for you. Feel free to use more
than one paragraph if you dare.
Curly Surmudgeon
wrote:
> Curly Surmudgeon <CurlySu...@live.com> wrote:
> By some metrics it is worse than the Great Depression. You had no
> trouble at all when I called it Bush's Even Greater Depression. Things
> have certainly not improved but now it's a much more minor deal to read
> what you write.
If I've given the impression that today's economic situation is anything
but dire then let me correct that error. We have been teetering on the
brink of a black hole for years, only in Oct 2007 did sheeple begin to
recognize the calamity for what it is. Remember, I liquidated in 2004/5
and moved offshore. That was not a decision taken lightly and has been
extraordinarily tough.
>>>>We are in uncharted territory and _any_ action "may" fail but doing
>>>>nothing, or following the Bush/Cheney programs, would have assured
>>>>that finale.
>>>
>>> We have 1922 and 1929/1933 for examples of two different approaches.
>>
>>Give me your vision of 1922. 1929/1959 is a better time scale for the
>>Great Depression.
>
> I meant the related events of 1929 and 1933 as contrasted to the event
> of 1922. Your time range includes a major world war. That mucks things
> up a bit. In fact that is exactly what pulled the world out of
> depression. As I see it, the recovery was basically put off until the
> needs of the war were over. Put off and made possible by it. Commerce
> could not act freely until the material shortages and troop supply
> priorities were past tense.
Ok, let's use 1929 until the beginning of WWII. Check this chart:
http://www.housingbubblebust.com/GDP/Depression.html
Note the 1937 dip. That is due to FDR tightening the federal purse
strings to balance the budget while the recovery was still fragile. This
is why I expect the Federal government to continue spending like a drunk
sailor. Why they _must_ continue deficit spending. If a balanced budget
were adhered to right now we'd slip back into the abyss.
>>Look specifically at 1937 when FDR tried to balance the budget by
>>reducing expenditures, the economy went back to its decline. Only after
>>opening the financial floodgates again did the economy return to an
>>upward curve.
>
> After he had pumped it up for almost a decade. Yes, you can't abandon
> the air pump once the economy has gone down that road or the balloon
> starts losing air. If you don't start pumping, the weak stuff burns off
> in reasonable order and the remainder picks up and goes on. Goes on
> stronger because the artificial competition is gone.
Do you agree then that reining in stimulus measures would drive the
nation, and world, back into a nasty depression?
>>Ugly, nasty, but it worked and that is substantiated by the current
>>pseudo-recovery. Only the deep pockets of the United States Treasury is
>>capable of repairing the damage Bush wrought. Iirc Europe and Asia have
>>pumped even more (collectively) than the United States into the world
>>economy and financial bailouts. It's working, still fragile, but it's
>>working.
>
> You are right about central banks around the world. In fact China may
> be in a serious state created bubble inside it's own borders right now.
>
> Yet it was awful when Bush did virtually the same thing to address the
> collapse for the same reasons. Either Bush was right and Obama is smart
> to follow his lead, or Bush was wrong and Obama is wrong to go down the
> same useless road. Pick one.
Bush was wrong in encouraging events which precipitated the crisis. The
pot boiled on his watch. I was against his first $700,000,000,000.00
bailout. I still am for it had no controls and was just a give-away. At
that time I was furious for the asshole creating the conditions which
caused the economic disintegration and did not think beyond events.
After study I realize that throwing federal money at the calamity was the
only solution. I still don't like it. At least Obama is attempting to
leverage some clawback.
I'd go further than Obama has. With the stimulus funds and bail out
repayments I'd recreate the WPA.
>>I don't like it either but am able to put aside my opinions and anger
>>for the benefit of our nation. For the moment.
>
> I'm not angry. My opinion concerns how to benefit the nation. And it
> says what's happening now will harm it in the long run. We don't differ
> in motive, only in our opinion.
I am angry. No, I'm furious. I'm furious that the leaders of our nation
lied us into multiple international conflicts and simultaneous nation-
building experiments which America is required to continue. I'm furious
that the nation that I love so dearly has been hammered by politicians
into incessantly squabbling special interests vying for control so they
can rape the treasury for their tribe. I'm furious that the wacko right
wing waged war on anyone who raised their hand and questioned the schemes
of Bush/Cheney. I'm furious with the war on science that the
religionists have successfully waged.
Even though my fury simmers I recognize that distasteful solutions are
required.
> And their creditors told to take a hike ignoring all bankruptcy laws on
> the books. Hell, I can solve anyone's finance problem by handing them
> stacks of money and telling their creditors tough luck. Nation of laws
> - BS.
That is not Obama's doing:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
Bankruptcy_Abuse_Prevention_and_Consumer_Protection_Act
Special interests lobbied Congress, Bush and Cheney to overturn the
intent of bankruptcy making it impossible, for instance, to discharge
credit card debt while giving the conglomerates carte blanc. Is it any
surprise that Kmart was taken from the stockholders as a worthless hulk
in a forced foreclosure yet was somehow able to purchase Sears six months
later?
>>>>Obama is
>>>>the only man on earth that has a possibility of resurrecting America
>>>>and I will not submarine his programs.
>>>
>>> I have great reservations on the nature of the new structure. We
>>> dodged the bullet by just the smallest degree by having FDR in office
>>> and a lot of folks will disagree with me on that one. One of the
>>> Republican candidates to run against FDR was quoted as saying he
>>> wouldn't mind putting the Constitution on a high shelf and forgetting
>>> about it at least until the emergency was over. Now reflect on just
>>> how popular Huey Long, Father Conklin, and their ilk were.
>>>
>>> We may not dodge the bullet this time. Most of Europe didn't on the
>>> last go-round.
>>
>>I'm not happy with events either but the options are/were extremely
>>limited. Obama is following the least evil for the greatest number. I
>>support that and reserve my criticism on less important issues for the
>>time being.
>
> See above, this post and my last. Obama is following Bush policy. They
> must both be good presidents or both bad presidents. McSame wanted the
> same policies. Why bother with elections? Same result either way
> except for who gets to make fun of who.
We disagree. I shan't shove my opinion down your throat but please be
careful with your attacks so I don't have to defend a president who I am
not happy with to begin with.
Hawke
> Nobody cares, or asked about your physique. With those limp wrists of
> yours, we are not surprised that you've dropped weights on your head,
> and doubt you could shoot straight. At 250 lbs, you make for a nice fat
> target for those who may be inclined to share your hobby. As for being
> bright, try explaining again how promoting socialism in the U.S. is a
> good survival strategy, for all of the survivalists in the newsgroup. We
> are curious to hear some of this wisdom you pretend to have, especially
> the parts about how we should carry the weight of your fat liberal asses
> for you. Feel free to use more than one paragraph if you dare.
If I dare! That's funny. Notwithstanding the fact that your assumptions
about me are miles from reality, and that if anyone is a limp wristed
pansy, it's you, I'll be glad to explain to you how "socialism" in the
U.S is a good survival strategy. We just tried Bush's anti socialist
plan for eight years and you see how lousy that turned out. First of
all, the U.S. is already a socialist country. All the entitlement
programs like Medicare, Medical, Social Security, and the V.A. are all
socialistic programs for the public, and there are many more. They have
been part of a social safety net for decades. And for decades the
country has been moving more and more towards a European style
democratic socialism. In fact, both Europe and the U.S. have basically
the same system only the degree of the socialism is different. Once we
have the universal health care, and we will, the U.S. will be even more
of a socialist country. The reason for this is because it works. It
works better for the majority of the public. Which is what socialism is
intended to do. It's a system where the larger society takes
responsibility for all the individuals in the nation. All you have to do
is open your eyes and you will see that we have changed from an
individualistic society to a collective one. Whether it's caring for the
handicapped, or the old, or the retarded like you, the country kicks in
and takes care of the weak and downtrodden. For most people it works
better than anything else devised. It's not a perfect system but it
makes a better life for more people than any other. Just look at the
Scandinavian countries and you see how it works. Most people live better
lives under that kind of system. We are doing many of the same things
they are and it has made life better here. Without the socialistic
safety net we built I can tell you this would be a lot worse of a place
to live than it is now although it's not all that great for a hell of a
lot of people these days. The reason for that is due to the stupid
policies we just had foisted on us by Bush and his cronies.
What I'm going to enjoy is hearing your excuses in a year or two when
the country gets going good again. You blame everything on Obama even
though Bush is the guy who ruined us, but when Obama has things turned
around you'll never give him credit because that's the kind of guy you
are. Just look at you now. Obama's only been in charge for not even 11
months and all you can do is bellyache about why he hasn't fixed all our
problems yet. Boy, if you had the same standard for republicans you'd
have to run your mouth 24/7 instead of just all day long.
Hawke
Steve B
And all I hear from you and your ilk is how Obama is going to save us all.
Well, let's see SOMETHING. ANYTHING. How about some of the jobs he
promised? Oh, sorry, he did give out some jobs, but that was in the
governmental sector, and those went to ACORN and SEIU people. I mean real
blue collar jobs to real Americans. It's time to see him get off his
airplane, and off his skinny ass, and out of the immensely expensive catered
meals, and off his $150,000 dates with Michelle, and out of his sudden
luxurious lifestyle and put some meat on American tables.
Where's the beef?
Steve
Larry Jaques
<desert...@dishmail.net> scrawled the following:
I'd simply like one single Obama-worshiper to give me ONE single thing
the man has accomplished at President of the USA. Just ONE solid,
_valid_ accomplishment.
His national record for voting "present" in Congress doesn't count.
His pissing off every ally and apologizing for the US to our enemies
doesn't count.
His Cabinet selection of large numbers of tax-evaders doesn't count.
His pissing away multiple trillions of dollars doesn't count.
His complete failure to put millions of Americans back to work doesn't
count.
Allowing (or telling?) Eric Holder to allow KSM to go free _certainly_
doesn't count. (Speaking weasels will have the case thrown out of
court for violating KSM's civil rights by not having Mirandized him on
his day of capture, leading to a reverse lawsuit for torture and false
detainment. Mark my words.)
His flying around the country and world on a daily basis, wasting
fuel, keeps some oil workers busy, but it's not creating jobs.
Yeah, so far, I'm ill impressed by our new President's track record.
--
Don't forget the 7 P's:
Proper Prior Planning Prevents Piss-Poor Performance
John R. Carroll
Lib Loo
"Hawke" <davesm...@digitalpath.net> wrote in message
news:hg1psa$qde$1...@aioe.org...
>
>> Nobody cares, or asked about your physique. With those limp wrists of
>> yours, we are not surprised that you've dropped weights on your head, and
>> doubt you could shoot straight. At 250 lbs, you make for a nice fat
>> target for those who may be inclined to share your hobby. As for being
>> bright, try explaining again how promoting socialism in the U.S. is a
>> good survival strategy, for all of the survivalists in the newsgroup. We
>> are curious to hear some of this wisdom you pretend to have, especially
>> the parts about how we should carry the weight of your fat liberal asses
>> for you. Feel free to use more than one paragraph if you dare.
>
> If I dare! That's funny. Notwithstanding the fact that your assumptions
-snip of poorly structured response-
Trying to reed your run-on post my eyes glaze over. Care to try again? Try
reading this first:
http://www.unc.edu/depts/wcweb/handouts/paragraphs.html
Hawke
>> Hey, we were already there the day he got the job. You didn't notice that
>> until now? I guess you missed it but 2008 was a fairly bad
>> year(understatement). You're pretty slow on the uptake if you just now
>> figured out the country has been on the wrong track and didn't know we
>> were already on the way down even in 2007.
>>
>> Hawke
>
> And all I hear from you and your ilk is how Obama is going to save us all.
> Well, let's see SOMETHING. ANYTHING. How about some of the jobs he
> promised? Oh, sorry, he did give out some jobs, but that was in the
> governmental sector, and those went to ACORN and SEIU people. I mean real
> blue collar jobs to real Americans. It's time to see him get off his
> airplane, and off his skinny ass, and out of the immensely expensive catered
> meals, and off his $150,000 dates with Michelle, and out of his sudden
> luxurious lifestyle and put some meat on American tables.
>
> Where's the beef?
>
> Steve
>
>
Can you at least try to be fair for once? You made excuses galore for
Bush's boo boos. You gave him year after year to make things right. Now
Obama takes over a country that is in the crapper and you expect a
miracle from him. Exactly how long did you think it would take to get us
out of the mess we are in? So far it looks like you think the country
should be well on it's way out of the worst recession in 70 years in
less than a year. Is that how fast you think we should get back on our
feet, a year? Is that realistic? Can you not see that with the severity
of our economic problems it will take many years to get things right
again? I guess you must think Obama is some kind of superman. You
expected him to have everything hunky dory in a matter of months. Shit,
I think he's good but even I don't think he's a miracle worker like you
do. Or are you just looking for things to bitch about because he's a
Democrat?
Hawke