June 17, 2008 8:32 AM
Marilyn Musgrave for President?
When John McCain announces in August that he can't accept the Republican nomination for President, the GOP could turn to a list of candidates including Rep. Marilyn Musgrave.
Sound like a Democratic fantasy? A bad dream after one too many chile rellenos for dinner?
Steve Rosenbaum of Huffington Post posits that proposition in a column that says the Republican Party will pull a real September Surprise when they nominate their candidate on Sept. 4.
At some point in mid August, John McCain will announce that he has decided that he can not accept his party's nomination for president. The reason will be health-related, and that may turn out to be the truth. Anyone who's seen him on stage these days knows he looks like he's about to keel over. And anyone who's been on a presidential campaign knows the physical demands are grueling and can be a challenge for a young man.But excuses or facts hardly matters. He won't be accepting his party's nomination.
The reasons are simple. He can't win. Now that Obama is the presumptive Democratic nominee -- the polls all show that McCain's pro-war stance and Bush endorsement make him a lost cause in November. That combined with soft stand on litmus test conservative issues make him an unpopular candidate among the base. I know some Democrats that think the Republicans are planning to let McCain lose and 'sit this one out' so that they can hang the democrats with a bad economy and a war that is a morass. But that just isn't how they play. They play to win every hand -- think about 2000 with a popular Democratic president and good economy and a solid VP running for president. Why did they put up Bush? And why did they fight so hard? Because, you don't ever throw a game. And they're not going to throw this one.
So who would the Republicans turn to?
Rosenbaum's list includes 13 likely candidates, most of them familiar - and includes Musgrave along with Mitt Romney, Condoleezza Rice, Mike Huckabee, Dick Lugar, Chuck Hagel and Mike Bloomberg.
Plausible? Fantasy? Think there's any chance McCain could have a health issue that would knock him out of the race? And why Musberg on that list?
June 17, 2008
9:28 AM
Tree writes:
jay, this answers your daily question to our favorite special person who won't answer.
I'm pulling the R handle because:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FiQJ9Xp0xxU
June 17, 2008
10:44 AM
Brittanicus writes:
Never seen millions of frustrated, angry Americans demonstrate in the streets, like they do in Europe and the rest of the world? If the U.S. grants amnesty and gives citizenship to 12 to 30 million illegal migrants, as Senators Obama and McCain propose, those naturalized citizens could possibly add 120 million U.S. and foreign-born relatives to the U.S. in the next 20 years, who all consume energy. Diversity Alliance for Sustainable America. www.earthtimes.org/ You must decide your children's future, your jobs by demanding Democrats sponsor the Federal SAVE ACT (H.R.4088 enforcement in the workplace) Call toll-free (2022243121 )
NUMBERSUSA.
June 17, 2008
10:47 AM
Brittanicus writes:
Never seen millions of frustrated, angry Americans demonstrate in the streets, like they do in Europe and the rest of the world? If the U.S. grants amnesty and gives citizenship to 12 to 30 million illegal migrants, as Senators Obama and McCain propose, those naturalized citizens could possibly add 120 million U.S. and foreign-born relatives to the U.S. in the next 20 years, who all consume energy. Diversity Alliance for Sustainable America. www.earthtimes.org/ You must decide your children's future, your jobs by demanding Democrats sponsor the Federal SAVE ACT (H.R.4088 enforcement in the workplace) Call toll-free (2022243121 )
NUMBERSUSA.
June 17, 2008
11:19 AM
Shaggy writes:
"Anyone who's seen him on stage these days knows he looks like he's about to keel over."
This is just BULL SHIT liberal propaganda that you have boughten into ...Good job Mark...Looks like you are following your marching orders from the far left nut jobs.
I have seen him on stage and he doesn't look at all like he going to "keel" over.
The more realistic scenario to happen is that another racist bomb shell will be dropped on Obamas head and all you foot soldiers that have man crushes on this immature idiot will be crying another Republican foul.
Heavens forbid you do a derogatory thread about the precious little man cub!!!!!
Someone might say something LIKE THE TRUTH about him and is unproud wife that no one can talk about.
June 17, 2008
11:29 AM
Shaggy dropped out of Special Ed. writes:
..."liberal propaganda that you have boughten into"...
Shag, you REALLY need to learn to write well. When you make mistakes like that it makes you look uneducated, which automatically discredits any argument you make.
June 17, 2008
11:39 AM
history buff writes:
McC sounds like Andy Rooney on his war commercial. He says, his family has been to war, he has been to war, he hates war, but he doesn't say what we should do about the Iraq War. I think we are supposed to infer that he will continue the Iraq War, but not because he is a warmonger. So, are we to conclude that McC will continue the Bush war policy in Iraq, but as a person, he is not a warmonger like Bush and Cheney.-, therefore his views are patriotic and not self-serving? As I said, he is rather obtuse, like Andy Rooney, but he looks as healthy as Tim Russert.
BTW, I like McCain's new campaign video. It really catches the vision thing.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u-FhczpCZ84
June 17, 2008
11:43 AM
Shaggy aka Obamas typical bitter white person writes:
This is a perfect example by what I have been saying.
The loons cannot debate the facts so they turn to attacking the messenger.
Good job foot soldier.
Did you know that the word "boughten" is past tense for "bought".
You are the one looking the fool.
June 17, 2008
11:49 AM
Mark Wolf writes:
Shaggy,
It wasn't the McCain/health angle that prompted me to put up the item, it was that Marilyn Musgrave was on his list of potential replacements. Hers seems to be the one name that jumps out.
June 17, 2008
11:54 AM
kodijack writes:
I cannot think of a worse case scenario then Musgrave for President, she is the almost exactly what this country does not need, another lying, cheating, homophobic retard, in a leader. Yikes.
At the same time I am still stunned that these are the two best candidates that this nation's political parties could come up with.
June 17, 2008
11:55 AM
Shaggy dropped out of Special Ed writes:
Too damn easy:
http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/boughten.html
June 17, 2008
11:58 AM
jay writes:
i don't blame mccain for wanting to run away from an election he's consistently polled to lose for months now.
"If the U.S. grants amnesty and gives citizenship to 12 to 30 million illegal migrants, as Senators Obama and McCain propose"
????
do you have any idea what it is you're trying to talk about? neither mccain nor obama want to grant citizenship amnesty to anyone.
lay off the rush.
"This is a perfect example by what I have been saying.
The loons cannot debate the facts so they turn to attacking the messenger"
LOL...that is awesome. shaggy is the guy who has consistently refused to debate the facts for MONTHS and now has the short term memory loss necessary to make that ridiculous claim.
too funny.
hey shag...if you're ready to debate the facts...why don't you finally tell us which bush accomplishments warrant a vote to continue his policies under mccain.
all i've seen from you shag is conspiracy theories about obama's "racism"
June 17, 2008
12:04 PM
M M writes:
Musgrave is the Queen of Hate. That she is in government at all is disgusting, the thought of her name in the same sentence as the word President makes me want to pull my own eyes out. Good god, that woman needs to go away!
June 17, 2008
12:05 PM
M M writes:
Musgrave is the Queen of Hate. That she is in government at all is disgusting, the thought of her name in the same sentence as the word President makes me want to pull my own eyes out. Good god, that woman needs to go away!
June 17, 2008
12:05 PM
M M writes:
Musgrave is the Queen of Hate. That she is in government at all is disgusting, the thought of her name in the same sentence as the word President makes me want to pull my own eyes out. Good god, that woman needs to go away!
June 17, 2008
12:07 PM
JW writes:
"Did you know that the word "boughten" is past tense for "bought".
You are the one looking the fool."
"Too damn easy:
http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/boughten.html
"
LOL!
June 17, 2008
12:17 PM
history buff writes:
Mark, I've been trying to post my poem under the union amendment thread, but RMN won't let me. So, I'm posting it here.
Imagine there's no unions
It isn't hard to do
No OSHA or minimum wage
Or child labor laws too
Imagine all the people
Working for low pay
You may say that I'm a dreamer
But I'm not the only one
You all should work for nothing
Because work should be for fun
June 17, 2008
12:34 PM
Shaggy writes:
bought·en Audio Help (bôt'n) Pronunciation Key
v. A past participle of buy.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/boughten
Like I said, non of you can debate the facts so you turn to attacking non related issues.
All of you loons BUY INTO this Liberal propaganda BS.
Hey Mark, If you think it is appropriate to have a thread that suggests McCain keeling over I think we should have a thread about who Obama should pick just in case something happens to him like what happened to MLK.
Or is that off limits to talk about because it involves Obama??
June 17, 2008
12:42 PM
JW writes:
"Like I said, non of you can debate the facts so you turn to attacking non related issues."
Shaggy, the FACT is that you called someone a fool because they didnt know boughten was correct, then posted a link saying that boughten is in fact NOT correct. Moron.
Besides, the new link you post says its part of northern english DIALECT, and not proper english. In other words, its a product of uneducated people in the northern US, but NOT correct english.
As for the rest, youre just frothing at the mouth. Its been going on for DAYS. And its pathetic.
June 17, 2008
12:54 PM
jay writes:
still waiting on those FACTS, shaggy.
June 17, 2008
1:45 PM
jay writes:
brilliant
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FiQJ9Xp0xxU
June 17, 2008
2:35 PM
Amnesty Anyone? writes:
Another fine examples from our illegal friends:
http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/16630478/detail.html
June 17, 2008
3:06 PM
Shaggy writes:
jay,
This will not let me post a link for some reason.
Paste this
McCain is not the same as Bush
into your browser and go to the 13th web site, it is the one from the NYT's...it might be on page two depending on how many you have yours set to show on one page.
Now you will see the differences between McCain and Bush.
You are welcome
June 17, 2008
3:16 PM
Anonymous writes:
Interesting article ... anyone else see it?
file:///C:/Documents%20and%20Settings/david.ruthstrom/Local%20Settings/Temporary%20Internet%20Files/OLK56/view.htm
June 17, 2008
3:25 PM
Now it can be told! writes:
Now we know where Shaggy gets his distaste for factual information:
http://www.quotationspage.com/quote/279.html
He's emulating Reagan.
June 17, 2008
3:25 PM
JW writes:
LOL! Shaggy you are too much man.
From your NYT article...
McSame as Bush;
Abortion and Judges
Education
Diplomacy with Iran and Syria
Immigration
Iraq
Guantanamo
Healthcare
Medicare
Social Security
Same sex marriage
civil unions
taxes
Trade
Wiretapping and Executive privelage.
Where they differ;
Climate Change- Funny part about this is that the article says they differ because McSame supports a cap and trade system. I posted a quote just today of McSame saying he does NOT support this. Guess hes flip flopped on this, and become....MCSAME.
Energy and Oil- Drilling: McSame doesnt support drilling in ANWAR, but Bush does. They both support drilling off shore. McSame with ONE little difference.
Taxes- McSame and Bush are McSame, but McSame did say hes "Angry" at big oil for not investing in alternatives enough.
Renewable Energy-MCSAME
Federal Spending- McSame says he will cut all $18 billion in pork. Otherwise, MCSAME.
Interrogation Tactics- McSame was different, till he voted FOR torture. Now...just McSame.
Arms- Different policy in dealing with Russia and China. Different in dealing with N. Korea, because he wants to go back to Bush's FIRST policy for dealing with them. Mc....Same? Maybe not on this one single issue.
Pathetic. And its funny as hell that THIS article is the one you use to prove McSame is not McSame. You had to dig to find it...and it still says MCSAME!
June 17, 2008
3:36 PM
Anonymous writes:
Looking for the real link to the article at 3:16 since the link that was forwarded to me isn't the newspaper article ... sorry but will post if I can find it on the Springs paper. It's about oil shale in the US
June 17, 2008
3:37 PM
Shaggy writes:
What ever, He will be a much better President than Obama would have been.
June 17, 2008
3:42 PM
JMH writes:
JW, Great post... Shows McCain really is McSame in almost every way. But your wasting keystrokes if you think this would sink in to the NeoCons like shaggy...
He gets all his info from the right wing propaganda network that basically spews the classic response of the fossilized right-wing status quo when it comes to Democrats:
Create a grotesquely distorted caricature, broadcast the delusion at the top of your lungs, and hope that you manage to reinforce just enough cynicism and hopelessness to ensure the election of someone who truly cares only for funneling all of the country's wealth and power into the hands of a tiny, corrupt elite.
June 17, 2008
3:44 PM
Anonymous writes:
Found the article at the Daily Press ... I sure would like to know if the oil reserves they list are true:
http://www.vvdailypress.com/opinion/forget_6883___article.html/right_greens.html
June 17, 2008
3:45 PM
Kids, do NOT drop out of Special Ed... writes:
"He will be a much better President than Obama would have been"...
I think you mean that you think he WAS a better president, etc, etc..Unless you repubs plan to dig him up and run him again, although that may be the best option you clowns face, really...
June 17, 2008
3:50 PM
Hagel is interesting writes:
Here is the complete list.
Condoleezza Rice (Secretary of State)
Colin Powell (fmr Sec. of State)
Marilyn Musgrave (Colorado Congresswoman)
Mitt Romney (fmr Massachusetts Governor)
Mike Huckabee (fmr Governor of Arkansas)
Charlie Crist (Florida Governor)
Tim Pawlenty (Minnesota Governor)
Bobby Jindal (Louisiana Governor)
Mark Sanford: (Governor of South Carolina)
John Thune (Senator from South Dakota)
Dick Lugar (Senator from Indiana)
Chuck Hagel (Senator from Nebraska)
MIchael Bloomberg (NYC Mayor)
Chuck Hagel is someone I think I can trust
http: //www.salon.com/news/feature/2008/06/17/hagel_veep/index.html?source=yahoo
"Hagel's very public split with Bush and the rest of the GOP on the war in Iraq bolsters Obama's case about foreign policy -- that the administration has America on the wrong track vis-à-vis the rest of the world."
" As the war in Iraq dragged on, Hagel, Nebraska's senior senator, started to see more and more parallels with Vietnam, a war he -- like McCain -- experienced firsthand. But where McCain looked at the Bush administration's initial Iraq strategy and saw mismanagement hurting a noble cause, Hagel saw an idea he never liked much to begin with (though he voted to authorize it). He saw it getting worse as it went along, and he said so publicly. Two months before the 2004 election, Hagel called the reconstruction effort "beyond pitiful." Last summer, he told Esquire President Bush was "not accountable anymore" and that "before this is over, you might see calls for his impeachment."
The lifelong conservative -- who nearly ran for the GOP nomination himself before deciding, instead, to retire from the Senate -- is getting some buzz among Democratic activists and Beltway pundits as a possible running mate for Barack Obama"
"Still, most people who see Hagel as a good veep choice are only focusing on Hagel's record on Iraq (which, admittedly, is the reason for most of the press Hagel's gotten since he started speaking out). And many of them may not actually know much about what he stands for"
Not sure but He might just retire though
June 17, 2008
3:51 PM
JW writes:
"What ever, He will be a much better President than Obama would have been."
This is a great window into what really is "Shaggy".
Lets look at the statement;
"What ever" This tells us what Shaggy really thinks. "What ever". Doesnt matter "What" so its not understandable why Shaggy doesnt ever seem to understand POLICY discussions. Who needs to understand policy when you can just say "What ever" and follow it with....
"He will be a much better President than Obama would have been."
In order to understand this kind of thinking, one needs to add in just one little thing..."Because hes a Republican" If we do that...we get the root of all things Shaggy.
"What ever, He will be a much better President than Obama would have been because hes a Republican."
In other words;
Nothing matters, accept putting a Republican in office.
June 17, 2008
4:10 PM
Hogar De Vuelta (العودة) Republican, because not everyone can be on welfare. writes:
Tree,
You video was funny and well done.
Right back at you with a disclosure that this video uses some mild profanity, but it is very funny.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4SM3RJPrtYE
June 17, 2008
4:46 PM
Mark Mattison writes:
The Bush tax cuts are working! Higher income earners SHOULD pay less taxes.
People earning less than $250,000 are the ones WHO USE public schools, health clinics, and mortgages.
The middle class wants wealthy people to pay more taxes?!?!! Forget it.
McCain 08!!!!!!
June 17, 2008
4:54 PM
Shaggy writes:
Now your really digging..
McCain is not the same on all issues.
Not all of Bush's policies are bad like you loons seem to think.
Obama has massive tax increases on his plate.
Why is it that McCain seems to be hanging on tight in the poll numbers if he is the same as Bush?
btw fyi, the lead Obama has right now is the same lead Kerry had at this point in time of his election.
ooops another inconvenient fact.
oh and most of Iraq is stable now thanks to the surge...not good for Obama and his groupies.
Yet another inconvenient fact.
Ohh and McCain still doesn't have the conservative crowd on board yet....
June 17, 2008
5:34 PM
Yes McCain is inheriting occupation of the expensive kind writes:
Heres whats coming up next that McCain has not answer to.
http: //www.salon.com/news/feature/2008/06/17/iraq_bases_permanent/index.html
"In Iraq to stay
The press is finally reporting on the U.S. mega-bases in Iraq that the Bush administration wants to make permanent."
"billions have evidently gone into single massive mega-bases like the U.S. air base at Balad, about 60 miles north of Baghdad. It's a "16-square-mile fortress," housing perhaps 40,000 U.S. troops, contractors, special ops types, and Defense Department employees. As the Washington Post's Tom Ricks, who visited Balad back in 2006, pointed out -- in a rare piece on one of our mega-bases -- it's essentially "a small American town smack in the middle of the most hostile part of Iraq."
"A staggering percentage of Americans have never had the opportunity to see the remarkable structures their tax dollars have paid for, and continue to pay for, in occupied Iraq"
This week, in fact, they hit the front page of the Washington Post, due to protests by Iraqi leaders close to the Bush administration. They were angered by, and leaking like mad about, American strong-arm tactics in negotiations for a long-term Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) that would officially embed American-controlled bases in Iraq for the long-term, potentially tie the hands of a future American president on Iraq policy, and represent a sovereignty grab of the first order. (A typical comment from a pro-Maliki Iraqi politician in that Post piece: "The Americans are making demands that would lead to the colonization of Iraq…")
"Not surprisingly, this episode, too, is threatening to end in debacle. The Iraqi leadership is in virtual revolt. Across the political spectrum, as Tony Karon of the Rootless Cosmopolitan blog has written, the negotiations have forced upon the Iraqis "a kind of snap survey or straw poll… on the long-term U.S. presence, and goals for Iraq" from which the Americans are likely to emerge the losers"
"The administration's man in Baghdad, Prime Minister Maliki, has declared the initial U.S. proposal at a "dead end" and has even begun threatening to ask American forces to leave when their UN mandate expires at year's end. (Though much of this may be bluff on his part, what choice does he have? Given Iraqi attitudes toward being garrisoned forever by the U.S. military, no Iraqi leader could remain in a position of even passing power and agree to such terms. It would be like stamping and sealing your own execution order.)
The Sadrists are in the streets protesting the American presence and their leader has just called for a "new militia offensive" against U.S. forces. The pro-Iranian, but American-backed, Badrists are outraged. ("Is there sovereignty for Iraq -- or isn't there? If it is left to [the Bush administration], they would ask for immunity even for the American dogs.") The Iranians are vehemently voting no. Opinion in the region, whether Shiite or Sunni, seems to be following suit. The U.S. Congress is up in arms, demanding more information and possibly heading for hearings on the SOFA agreement and the bases. Presidential candidate Barack Obama has insisted that any deal be submitted to Congress, the very thing the Bush administration has organized for more than a year to avoid"
"And miracle of all miracles, the mainstream media is finally writing about the bases as if they mattered. Someday, before this is over, all of us may actually see what was built in our names with our dollars. That will be a shock, especially when you consider what the Bush administration has proved incapable of building, or rebuilding, in New Orleans and elsewhere in this country. In the meantime, the president appears headed for yet another self-inflicted defeat"
This really means never ending war. America never bargained for this. Bush has lied to everyone
"
"
June 17, 2008
5:41 PM
Shaggy writes:
Mark Wolf,
I still say this is about the stupidest hypothetical thread ever.
But hey, what else can they can do when they can't debate FACTS?
Maybe tomorrow we can do another hypothetical partisan thread on who Obama might pick if he "keels" over.
I'll give some candidates like this Liberal writer did.
The Racist Reverend Wright, The admitted Terrorist William Ayers, The convicted money launderer Tony Rezko, The other racist Reverend Micheal Pfleger. Hey how about Louis Farrakhan.
Not sure if his unproud wife is eligible but what the hell, we are talking about partisan hypothetical's and Mark put an open season sign on McCains head so lets go ahead and include her too.
Ohhh forgot..Obama told us we cannot bring her into the campaign even though she brought herself into it.
Can't wait for tomorrow, after all, I am sure Mark is not a one sided partisan hack....
And too all you grammatical Nazi's out there...get a grip!!!!
Debate the facts!!!
June 17, 2008
5:50 PM
Not a bitter either writes:
Shaggy
lets just simplify your talking points
Obama can't win because hes black and it makes you afraid.
There done.
June 17, 2008
6:16 PM
Shaggy writes:
5:50 just won the stupidest post of the year award...good job on playing the race card that Obama and his wife has already played and continue to play...a little late son.
I love how all of you who normally post with a designated name attack me with hiding behind a cloak because you still have those nagging inconvenient FACTS that back me up...
btw, that was jay!!!!!
June 17, 2008
6:23 PM
Tbone writes:
Ummmm....since none of those people are policians, or have any experience setting public policy, or even serving the public....
Then why would Obama want them as a running mate, shaggy?
Would mccain choose his fundraiser that said, in reference to a woman being raped: "if its inevitable, might as well lay back and enjoy it"?
Would mccain choose that guy for a VP?
Then why would Obama choose any of the people you listed?
Or are you just trying to be stupid? Seems to come easy.....
June 17, 2008
6:32 PM
Shaggy writes:
"grammatical Nazi's"
I like it, I think I'll give Websters a call.
I also see that the word "femdems" is becoming used more frequently.
I think I need to talk to History Buff and 11:55 and get a "Shaggy's Dictionary" in production.
btw, that was Buff!!!!
June 17, 2008
6:38 PM
Shaggy writes:
"Ummmm....since none of those people are policians, or have any experience setting public policy, or even serving the public....
Then why would Obama want them as a running mate, shaggy?"---Rump Roast
Good question...Why are we even talking hypothetical's in the first place????
You just made my point...thank you!!!
June 17, 2008
7:08 PM
not a bitter person writes:
"nagging inconvenient FACTS that back me up..."
What facts are you talking about?
Obama is black ?
he is half anyway
He went to Trinity?
that he did.
He was associated with Rev Wright?
Yep
He didn't wear a flag pin?
Ok he didn't
Hes kind of green?
Yep hes kind of green too.
Anything else?
What facts are you talking about? Nothing to debate. Hes going to win.
June 18, 2008
7:35 AM
JW writes:
"McCain is not the same on all issues."
You keep saying this Shaggy, over and over and over and over and over...
Repeating it doesnt make it true. And since you CANT give us examples of how McSame differs from Bush in any way that matters...its pathetic.
Just like your frothing at the mouth for the last few days.
Pathetic.
June 18, 2008
7:55 AM
Shaggy writes:
http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/06/17/america/mccain.php
June 18, 2008
8:19 AM
Shaggy writes:
"Anything else?"
Many many.
Voted twice to halt medical care to babies who are still alive after a botched abortion.
He says he doesn't want someone to "be punished by having a kid".
That alone tells you how far whacked this nut is.
Too immature to take a stance on issues so instead voted present over a thousand times in the senate...and he is still a rookie.
Has the most liberal voting record in the senate....any thing left of Kennedy is border line radical and yes..Obama is left of Kennedy.
Want to talk about his massive tax increases?
He wants to nearly double the tax on capital gains.
He wants to put a 25% windfall tax on oil companies.
Every expert that I have heard talk about this says it would be horrible for the people and the economy. That would just be another tax on the American people.
He wants to put additional taxes on gas, coal and oil, on top of the windfall tax.
Want to talk about how he wants to give drivers licenses to illegals?
Yes we could go on and on but I have too much work to do. Why don'y you do a little reasearch on him....your the one with a man crush.
June 18, 2008
8:34 AM
Tbone writes:
Shaggy-
Dude. Get some new lies, OK? We've already debunked your shit about a million times.
"Has the most liberal voting record in the senate...."
No, he doesn't. JW and I debunked the shit out of this one. BUT, McSame voted with bush 100% of the time last year.
"He wants to nearly double the tax on capital gains."
Oh noes! Rich people might have to pay their fair share of taxes!!! Nevermind that they currently pay a lower percantage than the rest of us proles.
"Every expert that I have heard talk about this says it would be horrible for the people and the economy"
Hmmm...Funny,.....I've heard the opposite. In fact, Obama's tax cut for the middle class is 3 times bigger than Mcsame's.
"Want to talk about how he wants to give drivers licenses to illegals"....
No, he doesn't, Shaggy.
But, I'm not surprised you cling bitterly to the same old talking points and lies. When you side has absolutely NOTHING to run on, you gotta sling as much poo as possible and see what sticks. See: Wright, Jermiah.
Now, should we talk about mcsame's flip-flops, and how they totally give him, like, tons of character?
Should we talk about how he denounced America?
How about his family values? Or his age? Or the fact that HE CAN'T EVEN USE FUCKING EMAIL? Or the fact that he graduated 5th from the bottom of his class at the naval academy?
Just what we need....another C+ Augustus.
Go ahead though, shagman. Keep telling those lies. I mean, we know them all already, but it won't stop ya.
June 18, 2008
8:35 AM
JW writes:
Shaggy, that article you just posted says McCain is indeed McSame on all the important issues. Just like the NYT article you posted yesterday.
Foaming...at....the...mouth.
June 18, 2008
8:35 AM
Wow I am impressed writes:
This is an interesting article shaggy gives
It says McCain differs from Bush
Iraq: Biggest defender of Bush but now says they will be home by 2013.
Flip Flop. Hes reacting to public distaste to this war.
Abortion: same
Climate change: "he has missed votes on toughening fuel economy standards, and has opposed tax breaks meant to encourage alternative energy - has nonetheless tried to highlight what he considers his stark environmental divide with Bush."
well hes getting better. sounds like hes reacting to public pressure
Foreign Policy: "On diplomacy, McCain has regularly distanced himself from the go-it-alone unilateralism of the Bush administration"
"On Iran and North Korea, the two nations whose nuclear programs will present the next president with tough choices, McCain has allied himself with the Bush administration"
He says one thing and then says the same as Bush
Thats straight talk for you.
Tax cuts: "McCain has reversed himself on some issues - most notably, embracing the Bush tax cuts after deriding them initially as fiscally risky and excessively skewed to the wealthy - and continues to adjust his positions on others. "
Another example of straight talk. Now hes McSame
Health Care: "Like Bush, McCain would shift the emphasis from insurance provided by employers to insurance bought by individuals, and would offer a tax benefit for families to do so. "
Economy: "THE ECONOMY: Although he once held very different views, McCain's biggest similarity to Bush is on the economy"
Yes I see John McCain is Very Different from Bush
He has white hair and is very honest.
June 18, 2008
9:40 AM
Bob Dylan writes:
Shaggy - Your blind obedience and acceptance of the Republican party is exactly what the party (and most cult leaders for that matter) want and expect. You would be far better served by thinking for yourself and questioning everything. Take what you are told with the proverbial grain of salt.
"Don't follow leaders, watch your parkin' meters"
June 18, 2008
9:46 AM
Shaggy aka Obamas typical bitter white person writes:
Anybody want to take a look at Obamas family.
http://www.rense.com/general82/obmmm.htm
June 18, 2008
10:24 AM
Hiram writes:
Oops, how did I get in here? It's like being at a punk rock concert and accidentally wandering into to the slam dance section. Ouch! Yikes, I'm oughta here!
June 18, 2008
11:31 AM
SirRealist writes:
Thanks for the link Shagman. They look like wonderful people, and I'm sure a few of the old-timers have some really great stories. I would love to talk with them.
I have to tell you that I initially was going to vote for McCain, because, well, I'm registered Republican and I think deep down that he's probably a decent human being. I mean, we've all made mistakes, said some things, been some places, not done things we should/could have, you know, acted human. And I kind of liked the idea of someone from the western US who knows more of the area being in the big house.
But what I'm really into now is considering the job the next president will do FOR the American people, not TO the American people. I've been done enough by the current SOB and I voted for him, because, you know, I'm a registered Republican. It's not that I think McCain would be 'exactly' like GW, but I'm concerned he'd be enough like him that we'd still be Iraq in 5 years, we'd still have a rough economy, we'd still be on foreign oil with few prospects of that changing, and all the rest.
The next person needs to be honest (as possible), have integrity, be moral (but if an intern is willing, that's up to the two of them). I don't care if he's white, black, green, or persimmon. I don't care if he's Christian, Jewish, Islamic, or agnostic. I don't care if he's over or under six feet tall. I don't give two hoots if he listens to rock or hip-hop. It makes not one difference if he (or she) has a minister or friend or relative who cusses, brews bad beer, admonishes America for things we've done wrong, or thinks people of other races might not treat another race fairly.
What I want is a president who gives a shit about the American people and this great, great land, won't send our troops into another country without absolutely JUSTIFIABLE cause, and who won't mention the fu**ing "T" word every other sentence, won't spend BILLIONS of our dollars getting our fine military forces killed for god-knows-what, and can speak fairly proper English. He needs to be a leader, and he needs to surround himself with good staff, and he'll be fine.
As I've mentioned, I'm a registered Republican, but I'm having to look past that Shaggy. Let me ask you something; what would happen in, say, roughly four-some years down the road if Obama is elected (and he likely will be) and things are really turning around? What if the economy was good and you had tons of work, no soldiers were in Iraq, all Americans were paying a pretty fair tax (or even the FairTax), and all things considered, stuff was pretty damned good? Obama is up for a second term, and you start thinking things over. Would you vote for him then? Maybe you would. Just maybe he deserves a fair shot now? Could he really, honestly be any worse than what we have now? Think about that my friend, and I think you'll have to say what I did; nobody could do a worse job than GW, so let's go with something genuinely different and see what happens. This country can't stand four more years of crappy leadership (is it even that good?).
June 18, 2008
12:06 PM
Hogar De Vuelta (العودة) Republican, because not everyone can be on welfare. writes:
Sureal,
Please be honest with yourself and register as a Democrat, or start the official RINO party.
Obama would make Carter look like a good president. Obama is only experienced in the political art of taking things from wealth producers and giving those resources to those who cannot create wealth but certainly know how to squander it.
June 18, 2008
12:13 PM
Bedtime Story writes:
America .. yes, I remember a bit now ... whatever happened to that shining beacon on the hill that the poor, huddled, hungry, enslaved masses around the world looked to, and wanted to make their home? Her countrymen stood idly by as she attacked other nations at will, raped the Earth's resources for the almighty buck, bullied the few friends and allies she had left into unspeakable collusion, until the rest of the world recognized the putrid stench of greed, manipulation, corruption, and plausible deniability, and decided to cut her off at the knees ... her people wept bitter tears because they could have changed their course with a vote, but they stood by as impotent as their so-called leaders .... therefore it was only fitting that they received their just desserts, and when the dream called "America" finally drew it's last breath, the rest of the world released a deep exhalation of relief, and then quietly wept at the loss of what might have been but for human weakness and avarice
June 18, 2008
12:25 PM
SirRealist writes:
I will gladly accept from you Hogar, your evidence that supports your claim that Obama would take things from wealth producers and give it to those who produce nothing. Remember that voting for programs that help people don't necessarily qualify because many Republicans vote for those measures as well.
And, you cut me to the quick with your suggestion that I defect. I am every bit the fiscal and governmental conservative you are. Can you honestly say you are happy with things? You're ok with these wars, a wrecked economy, a food situation that threatens many in the world, government representatives who are now caught in many, many lies, the manipulation and deception, and the rest? Do you think, honestly, that we're in good shape, and the people in our party deserve another four years at this time? If so, please explain it to me because I truthfully don't understand.
June 18, 2008
12:25 PM
And isn't that what REALLY mattered writes:
Story - But on the bright side, they were pacified with regular doses of "American Idol"
June 18, 2008
12:36 PM
Shaggy writes:
Thats alot of "if's" and uncertainties if you ask me to worrying about with someone we don't even know.
Listen, I am NOT a big McCain supporter. In fact I do not agree with him on several issues.
I am more of a true conservative while he is more of a Democrat or a Liberal Democrat in some cases.
Obama is very far left regardless of what some people here say. The proof is documented even though many refuse to believe it.
That said, I believe we are doing the right thing in Iraq by securing an ally in the middle east and keeping Iran out.
Can you imagine what would happen to gas prices IF Obama were elected and pulled all our troops out and Iran filled our void like they have said they would be happy to do.
Things are going well in Iraq and most of the country is under control.
If McCain picks Mitt, who btw has an MBA from Harvard, would be the perfect person for our economy.
When Obama runs around saying he is going to put a windfall tax on oil companies shows he has no idea what he is talking about. The oil companies have a right to make a fair profit, that scares the hell out of me and it should you to.
Obama is for big Government controlling the way we live our lives.
Hell Obama has already came out and told us what we can and cannot say....Does that scare you?
It should because this is his mentality, this is the way he thinks, the way he ticks.
Can he be any worse than what we have you ask..
Hell yes man, this guy could be a hundred times worse than Bush.
We don't even know who the hell he is but we sure do know who he associates himself with and we know his wife is a bitter black woman.
Obama seems to not want any to get to know who he real is, that is obvious.
If you are looking for an honest President, it sure isn't Obama, that is for sure.
He is still lying to us about him not knowing that his spiritual adviser of 20 years is a racist bigot.
I don't think America is in a position to take a chance on someones immaturity and inexperience to take over the reins.
I think all this will come out if Obama has the nuts to debate with McCain.
You know, Obama has never stood up to anyone and does terrible when he doesn't have a speech written down for him.
It isn't so much that I want to vote for Obama, it is that I need to vote for McCain to keep Obama out.
Remember when he said he would drop a nuke on Pakistan if he knew where Osama was?
He forgot that Pakistan is our ally.
We need someone tough on terror and not someone who says in his book if it came down to it, he would choose his Muslim heritage before any other.
Hog you are exactly right...Obama wants to take us back to the 60's and the Carter days.
June 18, 2008
12:39 PM
Shaggy writes:
Thats alot of "if's" and uncertainties if you ask me to worrying about with someone we don't even know.
Listen, I am NOT a big McCain supporter. In fact I do not agree with him on several issues.
I am more of a true conservative while he is more of a Democrat or a Liberal Democrat in some cases.
Obama is very far left regardless of what some people here say. The proof is documented even though many refuse to believe it.
That said, I believe we are doing the right thing in Iraq by securing an ally in the middle east and keeping Iran out.
Can you imagine what would happen to gas prices IF Obama were elected and pulled all our troops out and Iran filled our void like they have said they would be happy to do.
Things are going well in Iraq and most of the country is under control.
If McCain picks Mitt, who btw has an MBA from Harvard, would be the perfect person for our economy.
When Obama runs around saying he is going to put a windfall tax on oil companies shows he has no idea what he is talking about. The oil companies have a right to make a fair profit, that scares the hell out of me and it should you to.
Obama is for big Government controlling the way we live our lives.
Hell Obama has already came out and told us what we can and cannot say....Does that scare you?
It should because this is his mentality, this is the way he thinks, the way he ticks.
Can he be any worse than what we have you ask..
Hell yes man, this guy could be a hundred times worse than Bush.
We don't even know who the hell he is but we sure do know who he associates himself with and we know his wife is a bitter black woman.
Obama seems to not want any to get to know who he real is, that is obvious.
If you are looking for an honest President, it sure isn't Obama, that is for sure.
He is still lying to us about him not knowing that his spiritual adviser of 20 years is a racist bigot.
I don't think America is in a position to take a chance on someones immaturity and inexperience to take over the reins.
I think all this will come out if Obama has the nuts to debate with McCain.
You know, Obama has never stood up to anyone and does terrible when he doesn't have a speech written down for him.
It isn't so much that I want to vote for Obama, it is that I need to vote for McCain to keep Obama out.
Remember when he said he would drop a nuke on Pakistan if he knew where Osama was?
He forgot that Pakistan is our ally.
We need someone tough on terror and not someone who says in his book if it came down to it, he would choose his Muslim heritage before any other.
Hog you are exactly right...Obama wants to take us back to the 60's and the Carter days.
June 18, 2008
12:44 PM
JW writes:
"I will gladly accept from you Hogar, your evidence that supports your claim that Obama would take things from wealth producers and give it to those who produce nothing."
He can't. Hes a Republican...period. Doesnt matter what their policies are...Republican.
Hes an "any Republican will do" kind of Republican.
Understanding that a Democrat could actually be more fiscally conservative than a Republican is something that isnt possible for Hogar. I believe that if he ever did figure that out, his head would explode.
All that said, he is also a died in the wool social conservative, and this is his actual priority. Republicans can go on a rampant and irresponsible spending spree, weakening our dollar and our ability to deal with economic downturns to their hearts content for all he cares.
So long as Republicans promise to legislate individuals behavior as much as possible to conform to Hogar's ideas of what is acceptable behavior, he will vote for them, and damn the economic ramifications.
June 18, 2008
12:47 PM
am 760 writes:
And all that supposed logic from someone who voted for Bush twice. You have no credibility shag, never have, never will. You a right wing sheep who gets his marching orders from the right wing talking points every day. 2 ladies called in today to am 760 and gave a heart felt reason why they had changed to democrats from repubs. The 2nd woman was a disabled veteran who continues to get shafted by the right, not only for being a vet but a woman.
If only you could wise up shag...
June 18, 2008
12:49 PM
JW writes:
"Listen, I am NOT a big McCain supporter. In fact I do not agree with him on several issues.
I am more of a true conservative while he is more of a Democrat or a Liberal Democrat in some cases."
LOL! Proving yet again you dont know SHIT about the political spectrum Shaggy.
June 18, 2008
12:54 PM
SirRealist writes:
In my opinion Shaggy, your stated concern about Obama pulling the troops immediately worries me too. But hasn't he said it would be a measured draw-down? I believe his main intent is to get us out and turn things over to Iraq, stop the influx of billions of our dollars that we're never getting back, and minimize the deaths of our troops. Done right, I don't have a problem with that. Whether or not Iraq would ever be a true "ally" on down the road is highly questionable. But this is a valid concern.
I wouldn't agree with a large windfall tax on the oil companies, because you and I ultimately pay that. But that amount isn't what I've heard, though I could be wrong. There are a lot of numbers going around and it's hard to keep track.
By the way, if it was Mitt, I'd be pulling the R handle in the booth.
Shaggy, we could talk about Obama and his associates, but as it stands now I just can't get too over the edge about things. Honestly, do you think Farrakhan or his minister are going to advance their agendas through Obama? I just don't see that happening.
I look forward to the debates. And I will say this; if Obama falls on his face, and McCain is clearly the victor and steers away from a number of GW's works, the latter will get my vote. So let's see where it goes. I've not read his book, but perhaps I'll do some quick research at Dalton's on the way home.
June 18, 2008
1:09 PM
history buff writes:
McCain says he is actively recruiting Hillary voters to vote for him. Yesterday he was seen campaigning in a pants suit.
June 18, 2008
1:17 PM
Shaggy writes:
SirRealist,
I have no idea where Obama stands right now on troop withdrawl, he has been all over the place.
Hell I don't even know where he stands on terrorism right now...one minute he is saying he would kill Osama and the next he wants to try him in a an American court with rights...
Quit yer outing JW, McCain is not radically left like you are bud and to you little jay marvin ass wiper, please add to the subject at hand or don't address me dweeb.
June 18, 2008
1:35 PM
SirRealist writes:
I hadn't looked it up before Shaggy, but at this link - http://www.barackobama.com/issues/iraq/ - he states his view:
" * Barack Obama opposed the war in Iraq from the beginning. In 2002, as the conventional thinking in Washington lined up for war, Obama had the judgment and courage to speak out against the war. He said the war would lead to "an occupation of undetermined length, with undetermined costs and undetermined consequences." In January 2007, Obama introduced legislation to responsibly end the war in Iraq, with a phased withdrawal of troops engaged in combat operations.
* Obama has a plan to immediately begin withdrawing our troops engaged in combat operations at a pace of one or two brigades every month, to be completed by the end of next year. He would call for a new constitutional convention in Iraq, convened with the United Nations, which would not adjourn until Iraq's leaders reach a new accord on reconciliation. He would use presidential leadership to surge our diplomacy with all of the nations of the region on behalf of a new regional security compact. And he would take immediate steps to confront the ongoing humanitarian disaster in Iraq."
I'm not seeing problems with any of that. Drawing down one or two brigades a month might actually encourage cooperation from the factional forces there. Iran, I admit, could be a concern, but the only way we're going to know if to start an action and observe the response. Additionally, and I know this is something that didn't occur to GW it seems, is we might send an emissary to talk to Ahmadinejad (sp?) and see about him calling off the dogs while we're verifiably withdrawing. Just a thought.
June 18, 2008
1:56 PM
General Patton writes:
Aggression is absolutely, positively, undeniably the last option that should be exercised. Diplomacy and discussion are the traits of a civilized society, and war is the total lack of civility and compassion. It is sometimes necessary, but far less than it is used.
June 18, 2008
1:57 PM
Hogar De Vuelta (العودة) "Ask not what your country can do for you...." writes:
"I will gladly accept from you Hogar, your evidence that supports your claim that Obama would take things from wealth producers and give it to those who produce nothing. Remember that voting for programs that help people don't necessarily qualify because many Republicans vote for those measures as well."
Many RINOs vote for the same programs. The US has become more and more socialist and we think it is simply normal to steal from producers to fund anything that anyone wants but is unwilling to work for.
"And, you cut me to the quick with your suggestion that I defect. I am every bit the fiscal and governmental conservative you are."
Anyone who could vote for Obama is not conservative in any way shape of form.
"Can you honestly say you are happy with things?"
Of course not. Bush is a mediocre president in the Clinton tradition.
"You're ok with these wars,"
I'll take fighting these cockroaches in the desert over watching 110 story buildings collapse in Manahattan.
"a wrecked economy,"
By all objective measures, the economy is doing well overall, but there is certainly pain associated with the mortgage crisis and the gas price escalation, but the economy is hardly wrecked.
"a food situation that threatens many in the world,"
Stop paying farmers not to grow food and stop paying farmers to grow food for use as ethanol.
"government representatives who are now caught in many, many lies, the manipulation and deception, and the rest?"
You mean they are not snow white? But Obama is not prone to lying, manipulation and deception? Do you actually believe that he did not know Jeremiah Wright, the first person he thanked after being elected to the US Senate, even ahead of thanking the "mama of his babies?"
"Do you think, honestly, that we're in good shape,"
We are in about the same shape we were under Clinton, except Bush actually wants to kill the terrorists rather than give them the same rights as our citizens.
"and the people in our party deserve another four years at this time?"
No, but Obama would be far worse for the country than McCain would be. I would love to be voting for a real conservative, but when I have a choice between a socialist and a communist, I will vote for the socialist.
"If so, please explain it to me because I truthfully don't understand."
You need to look at the objective evidence of where the country is. We are better off on most fronts. The mortgage crisis is not the fault of Bush, oil prices are not the fault of Bush. Do you believe the rest of the world is getting cheap gas but we pay more because Bush is president? Crime is down, life expectancy is up and things are good. It could be better, but most of the problems relate to the fact that the rest of the world is competing for resources and we need to step up the pace to make sure we stay ahead.
Thank you for a reasonable and civil response.
June 18, 2008
2:17 PM
Shaggy writes:
SirRealist,
I think I would rather have the Generals in Iraq make the decision on who, when and how many should be withdrawn from Iraq, not some politician behind a desk who has no idea how to fight a war or bring peace to a nation.
Obama likes to impress people with speeches and promises yet he has no personal experience or substance to bring to the table.
This is the problem Obama has..He likes to talk like he knows what the hell he is doing yet he has no clue, he hasn't even been over to Iraq in what, two years now?
McCain has been trying to get him over there so he can see for himself that most of Iraq is under control and that our brave men and women are doing a wonderful job.
Obama blows smoke because he will win the votes who oppose this war.
I can't believe how many people are so naive to not see through his BS.
He aslo said it would be a good idea to give DL's to illegals...now why do you think he said that?
Yep, more votes.
This guy is not out for the good of the country, he is out for power, greed and control.
He is a narcistic elitist.
Everything he has done his whole life was done to gain power. Why do you think he joined that racist church to begin with?
He even told us so, to gain influence in the black community.
Listen, I am not racist but I highly question Obama and his wife..
20 years of looking and quaking like a duck pretty much says you are a duck.
June 18, 2008
2:21 PM
JW writes:
"By all objective measures, the economy is doing well overall, but there is certainly pain associated with the mortgage crisis and the gas price escalation, but the economy is hardly wrecked."
Ok, there was too much in your post to go after in one sitting, so Ill start here.
What is "objective" to you Hogar?
Do you think CFO's of major US corporations are "objective"?
http://money.cnn.com/2008/06/18/news/economy/duke_cfo/index.htm?postversion=2008061814
June 18, 2008
2:31 PM
SirRealist writes:
And thank you as well Hogar. It is nice to be able to discuss things.
Some of these things, I can at least agree with partially, and others, well, we'd have a little distance in perspective I think.
Perhaps some of it is your view that Obama is a Communist. What is the basis for this thought? Is there specific legislation or initiatives that he has sponsored or supported that lend toward a communistic perspective? Remember that the good of the people is not necessarily something that would qualify.
For example, health care for uninsured Americans. I think that I'd rather see a portion of the funds going into Iraq used for basic health care for them. Of course that's just my opinion, but in America, even as a conservative, I think people should have equal access to food, education, and health care. Not because someone should get something for nothing, but because that's how it ought to be in the greatest nation the Earth has ever known. Would the Almighty disagree with that? There are some things that a great society should strive for, not under a banner of communism, but rather as compassionate humans who wouldn't deny basics to their fellow citizens.
Of course, the other side of it is that if all Americans had great jobs, and could pay for everything including food, housing, health care, education, etc., that would be Utopian. But could it ever really be that way here or anywhere else?
I'll leave it there, but to say that there are economists who would likely disagree with Bush not being at least partially responsible for the mortgage mess, and the oil situation.
And, Shaggy, you'll get no argument from me on "our brave men and women are doing a wonderful job." But on the issue of illegals, don't McCain and Obama have a very similar view, which is to allow easier access than either you or I would like? Clearly, the system must be reformed.
June 18, 2008
2:47 PM
Lunatic Ravings? writes:
“But conventional thinking in Washington lined up for war. The pundits judged the political winds to be blowing in the direction of the President. Despite - or perhaps because of how much experience they had in Washington, too many politicians feared looking weak and failed to ask hard questions. Too many took the President at his word instead of reading the intelligence for themselves. Congress gave the President the authority to go to war. Our only opportunity to stop the war was lost.
I made a different judgment. I thought our priority had to be finishing the fight in Afghanistan. I spoke out against what I called 'a rash war' in Iraq. I worried about, ‘an occupation of undetermined length, with undetermined costs, and undetermined consequences.’ The full accounting of those costs and consequences will only be known to history. But the picture is beginning to come into focus.”
—Barack Obama, Clinton, Iowa, September 12, 2007
June 18, 2008
3:01 PM
Hogar De Vuelta (العودة) "Ask not what your country can do for you...." writes:
JW,
I think CFOs are the ultimate pessimists. You wil also note that my comments related to the things that are closer to the realm of things that a president can control. The mortgage crisis is primarily the fault of greedy bankers and irresponsible borrowers. Oil prices affect the entire world. We cannot tell China and India not to use oil because it is negatively affecting our cost of driving.
Here is a quote from your link. CFOs are trying to cry wolf as long as they can to convince the Federal Reserve not to raise the rates. You can't blame them for saying anything to make the cheap money last as long as possible, but that does not mean there words are objective.
"For the last several quarters, CFOs reported bad news and more bad news," said Campbell Harvey, the survey's founder. "This quarter, we're seeing bad news with a little bit of good news."
"Harvey said the improved ratio potentially indicates stabilization. But he warned that the worst is still not over, and encouraged the Federal Reserve not to raise its key funds rate just yet."
CFOs are only happy if things are going gang busters. Normal effects of the influence of other economies and normal cycles are rarely given a proper treatment by them. They live and die on fiscal quarters, which is not a good way to judge an overal economy.
If you look at the Consumer price index from 1992 to 2000 and then from 2000 to 2008, both periods result in about a 20% gain in the dollar. No big difference.
http://www.measuringworth.com/uscompare/
June 18, 2008
3:06 PM
Shaggy writes:
Like I said, I differ with McCain on several issues.
I will not deny the FACT that he needs to get the Conservatives on board or he will have a tough time winning.
June 18, 2008
3:34 PM
Hogar De Vuelta (العودة) Somebody needs to castrate our Federal government writes:
Sir Real,
Karl Marx said "from each according to their ability, to each according to their need." Sounds like a nice idea, but when you bring the guns out and force that on people, it quickly deteriorates into what we saw in the USSR and China. Both those countries are moving toward a market economy having actually tasted the poison fruit of Communism, but we seem to think that it is better to move in that direction.
The Bible says:
2 Thessalonians 3:10
For even when we were with you, we used to give you this order: if anyone is not willing to work, then he is not to eat, either.
In Soviet times, Russians had an expression - we pretend to work; they pretend to pay us.
Any system which removes work from the equation of reveiving something is bound to fail. That does not mean that people should not engage in charity, but when government uses its power to take from one to give to another that is immoral. Obama beleives just the opposite. If you are successful in your work, he believes it is evil for you to actually get the rewards of your work.
June 18, 2008
3:42 PM
JW writes:
"I think CFOs are the ultimate pessimists."
You can think that if you like. Reality says they better be "realists" or they are going to get fired.
"You wil also note that my comments related to the things that are closer to the realm of things that a president can control."
Bah. You said we were as well off as we were under Clinton. Blanket statement. Didnt quallify it period.
"The mortgage crisis is primarily the fault of greedy bankers and irresponsible borrowers."
True.
"Oil prices affect the entire world. We cannot tell China and India not to use oil because it is negatively affecting our cost of driving. "
True. But we could be fiscally conservative, maintain the strength of our dollar, and not cause extra spiking in the price of oil (as it is traded in dollars). This oil spike wouldnt be as bad without Bush's fiscal mismanagement of the last 8 years. I know I know, you dont think debt matters so this isnt gona get through to you. No worries. Vote McSame.
"Here is a quote from your link. CFOs are trying to cry wolf as long as they can to convince the Federal Reserve not to raise the rates."
Ohhh. Thast not a quote. Thats your opinion.
"You can't blame them for saying anything to make the cheap money last as long as possible, but that does not mean there words are objective. "
And I cant blame you for thinking what CFO's say is going to determine what the Fed does. Its a ridiculous statement, but I dont blame you for saying it. Lack of education. Thats what I blame.
"Harvey said the improved ratio potentially indicates stabilization. But he warned that the worst is still not over, and encouraged the Federal Reserve not to raise its key funds rate just yet."
Uh huh. Reporting, and you, without the education to ask the question "Does what this CFO say really effect what they do at the FED?" You just buy that it does, and make incorrect assumptions because of it.
"CFOs are only happy if things are going gang busters. "
Makes their decisions a bit easier. Ill give you that.
"Normal effects of the influence of other economies and normal cycles are rarely given a proper treatment by them. "
Hmm. Well, Im gona have to say you dont know what youre talking about here. Sorry.
"They live and die on fiscal quarters, which is not a good way to judge an overal economy."
Yea, again, Im gona have to say you dont know what youre talking about here.
"If you look at the Consumer price index from 1992 to 2000 and then from 2000 to 2008, both periods result in about a 20% gain in the dollar. No big difference. "
Look man, agregate time averages doesnt change the weakness of the dollar right now, doesnt change the rapid rise in prices for food and oil, etc. And its not a good predictor of economic health either. We could be facing what happened in 01, a six month recession, no biggie. We could be facing what we got in the early 90's, a longer, deeper recession. Given that the overall situation is much more comparable to that early 90's time...
But you can just rattle on thinking everything is great and vote McSame. Obama is gona win, and we will see what happens.
Or...McSame may win, and we will see what happens.
If they start messing up too much...Im out, and you guys can deal with it.
Hell, I may be out anyway. Being paid in pounds or euros looks pretty damn good right about now.
June 18, 2008
3:58 PM
Shaggy writes:
"A young Muslim woman said she and another woman were refused seats directly behind Barack Obama — and in front of TV cameras — at a Detroit rally because they wear head scarfs."
Still cannot post a link
What happened to diversity Obama?
What a phony jerk you are.
You are the farthest thing from a uniter.
If McCain did something like the shit you do and say on a daily basis, people would want his head.
June 18, 2008
4:19 PM
Hogar De Vuelta (العودة) "Ask not what your country can do for you...." writes:
JW,
My opinion was followed by the quote which I actually put in quotes to distinguish it from my comments.
I am willing to wait and see how things shake out. I don't believe that either candidate can make a significant positive contribution to the economy, but I beleive that Obama would have a great negative impact in the long run because he is in love with communist principles.
No way to prove which one would actually be better, because we can't run parallel experiments on the country.
June 18, 2008
4:50 PM
JW writes:
"I don't believe that either candidate can make a significant positive contribution to the economy, but I beleive that Obama would have a great negative impact in the long run because he is in love with communist principles."
You ever notice that what you believe tends to skew what you think about info?
For example, Obama is a communist. This is just laughable. The man is a fiscal conservative, period. In the same mould as Bush Sr. and Clinton. He is a bit less conservative than those two, but compared to McSame he is just a plain old conservative. That just doesnt jive with what you think, so you ignore it.
Same with that stuff about CFO's. If they are saying the economy is hurting, well then you just say they are really just pessimists. But if they were to say the economy is rocking and rolling, then all of a sudden they are legitimate sources of info.
And thats your central flaw. Information doesnt change what you "think" (really, what you want to believe). When info disagrees with what you "think" you discount it somehow. When it agrees with what you "think", you see it as proof. Really doesn't matter how valid that info is in either case.
But you have a right to be a complete jackass.
June 18, 2008
9:27 PM
Anonymous writes:
Shaggy:
"Listen, I am NOT a big McCain supporter. In fact I do not agree with him on several issues."
But you are a Bush supporter and agree with him on all the issues right? (he he he)
"
That said, I believe we are doing the right thing in Iraq by securing an ally in the middle east and keeping Iran out"
What if they ask us to get the hell out? They want to be like Iran and don't want our bases there either.
"If McCain picks Mitt, who btw has an MBA from Harvard, would be the perfect person for our economy."
Bush has an MBA too. (he he he)
"We need someone tough on terror and not someone who says in his book if it came down to it, he would choose his Muslim heritage before any other"
YEAH RIGHT