KENNEDY HAS A BRAIN TUMOR

POSTED BY: AURaptor
UPDATED: Saturday, June 14, 2008 05:36
VIEWED: 10557
PAGE 6 of 10

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NEXT PAGE

CITIZEN

Wednesday, May 21, 2008 8:32 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Like George Soros ?

j/k Seriously, you lost me on this one. Care to elaborate ?

I mean, if party allegiance over allegiance to ones country is treasonous, then what about harming ones country, or at least putting the interests of one's rich friends, above that of the general populace?

George Bush inherited a Government with an annual surplus, instigated tax cuts, that largely helped the rich and his campaign promoters, and when the US economy faltered, and the Government went into deficit, he carried on with the same plan, unchanged save for packaging it as economic and job stimulus.

But my point is wider than that. Republican Politicians are forever saying Democrats are anti-American, and don't have their countries interests at heart. But as far as I can see your average Republican politician is every bit as self serving as any other, but they seem to be a lot quicker to call the kettle black, eh.

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

AURAPTOR

Wednesday, May 21, 2008 9:56 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:

I mean, if party allegiance over allegiance to ones country is treasonous, then what about harming ones country, or at least putting the interests of one's rich friends, above that of the general populace?

George Bush inherited a Government with an annual surplus, instigated tax cuts, that largely helped the rich

.. rich and middle class, who had been paying too much ..

Quote:
and his campaign promoters, and when the US economy faltered, and the Government went into deficit, he carried on with the same plan, unchanged save for packaging it as economic and job stimulus.

The 2001 recession began LONG before any of Bush's economic polices took place. Bush's tax cuts stimulated the economy and did create positive growth for virtually his entire 2 terms as President.

Quote:
But my point is wider than that. Republican Politicians are forever saying Democrats are anti-American, and don't have their countries interests at heart. But as far as I can see your average Republican politician is every bit as self serving as any other, but they seem to be a lot quicker to call the kettle black, eh.

A screaming AlGore (D) , accusing Bush of " play(ing) on our fears! " when no facts what so ever suggest that in the least - Dick Durbin (D) equating our troops to NAZIS and the Khmer Rouge at Gitmo, before having even gone down to SEE for himself - Jack Murtha ( D ) calling a group of Marines cold blooded killers, before they had even been CHARGED of any crimes in Haditha,( I think most, if not all Marines, have been exonerated ), etc....

No, Republicans politicians aren't accusing their 'friends' on the opposite aisle of being anti-American, they don't have the backbone to do anything like that, but Democrats do so none the less by their very own actions.

The claim that the GOP went to war so their rich buddies could line their pockets is vastly over blown and has never been substantiated. If military action does break out, there's not a long list of companies from which to choose from, and Congress doesn't choose contracts depending which party is in power. Democrats are every bit as likely to 'benefit' from war as are Republicans, this isn't a case where the outcomes is determined by who is in power. Boeing, located in heavily Democratic state of Washington, benefits greatly from military contracts. It would be erroneous to assume that since Boeing is situated in a Democratic state that the Dems favor the military. Same goes for the GOP. This isn't a case where one can judge outcome with intent.

It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

SIGNYM

Thursday, May 22, 2008 12:13 AM

Quote:
The 2001 recession began LONG before any of Bush's economic polices took place. Bush's tax cuts stimulated the economy and did create positive growth for virtually his entire 2 terms as President.

Wow. He created a 2.5% average growth rate, which has not been seen since... hmmm, Clinton's was 3.6%... Daddy Bush's was 2.8%... Reagan's was 4.2%... huh, guess I'll have to go back farther in history to find someone as BAD as Bush (43)!

AND he only needed to bankrupt the nation, lean on a complicit Federal Reserve for low interest rates, and sink the USA dollar in order to achieve it! Wow. I'm impressed.

'Crapter, you really should stop playing with numbers. They're a danger to you!

---------------------------------
Let's party like it's 1929.

KWICKO

Thursday, May 22, 2008 2:26 AM

Quote:

.. rich and middle class, who had been paying too much ..

Odd, if you cut taxes for the rich and the middle class, and the lower class don't pay taxes anyway, AND you increase spending... well, how the hell are you going to pay for it all?

In other words, if I make $50,000 a year, and I want a $500,000 Ferrari, can't I just pay it off over the next seven hundred years or so?

Wasn't this the party that used to claim to be "fiscally responsible"? How is spending so much money that your great-great-grandchildren are still going to be paying on the interest fiscally responsible?

It's not that I'm against lower taxes; I'm not. Frankly, I'd LOVE to have that 30% of my income back. What I'm against is this enormous growth in spending WHILE LOWERING TAXES, while pretending that it's money that we're never going to have to pay back. THAT is the problem I have with Bush's economic policies. They're not sound economics, and they're not sound policies. His daddy referred to it as "voodoo economics" when Reagan proposed it, and he was right.

Think about it. The Bush way of doing things is this: If we spend more, we'll MAKE more. So by that rationale, the only thing keeping me from being a millionaire is the fact that I haven't spent enough money, bought enough crap, or dug myself deep enough into debt. Prosperity is just a couple of billion dollars away! Is that what "the American Dream" is nowadays? Is that what you want it to be, what you want to teach your children?

Just curious...

Mike

"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence[sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions

I can't help the sinking feeling that my country is now being run by people who read "1984" not as a cautionary tale, but rather as an instruction manual. - Michael Mock

AURAPTOR

Thursday, May 22, 2008 2:58 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
Quote:
The 2001 recession began LONG before any of Bush's economic polices took place. Bush's tax cuts stimulated the economy and did create positive growth for virtually his entire 2 terms as President.
Wow. He created a 2.5% average growth rate, which has not been seen since... hmmm, Clinton's was 3.6%... Daddy Bush's was 2.8%... Reagan's was 4.2%... huh, guess I'll have to go back farther in history to find someone as BAD as Bush (43)!

AND he only needed to bankrupt the nation, lean on a complicit Federal Reserve for low interest rates, and sink the USA dollar in order to achieve it! Wow. I'm impressed.

raptor, you really should stop playing with numbers. They're a danger to you!

Not me whose playing w/ the numbers. I'm just dealin in the facts. Never said W didn't expand Gov't or raise the debt, now did I ? Nope. But the economy did grow after the recession that W inherited. Grew every quarter since his tax cuts went into effect.

It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

VILAVON

Thursday, May 22, 2008 1:48 PM

Ahh, the obligatory gay bashing begins. Not concerned about political correctness when it doesn't serve your ends?

Vilavon AKA Claude

KWICKO

Thursday, May 22, 2008 2:55 PM

Quote:
KWICKO - hmmmmm, looks like someone can dish it out, but gets really bent when it gets thrown back.

Really? Let's look at it in chronological order...

You made a "funny" about Cheney & Kennedy. I responded with my own quip about Cheney & "Slippery Bill" Clinton. You went utterly batshit ballistic, referring to me as a - and I quote - "Cock-sucking halfwit". Since you decided to take the low road, I made a conscious decision to meet you down there and responded in language I thought just maybe you could understand. So I'M the one who got really bent? Who blew up and went personal in their attack? You did. I simply responded in kind.

Hell, I'm not bent about anything. I'm having fun with you. You think you offended me with your talk about my daughter? That IS funny - especially considering that I don't even have kids! Those "daughters" (and it WAS plural, but you're too fucking stupid to even notice that. Reading comprehension problem, fucktard?) were hypothetical, like your hunting trip and joyride with Cheney and Kennedy. You were stating that IF YOU HAD TO CHOOSE, you'd rather one than the other. I said the same thing - If I had daughters, and I had to choose, I'd rather Clinton shot 'em in the face than Cheney. Last I checked, Cheney's buddy hadn't turned his traumatic experience into a paid speaking tour; Monica has.

But anyway, thanks for playing. See ya in the funny papers!

Mike

"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence[sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions

I can't help the sinking feeling that my country is now being run by people who read "1984" not as a cautionary tale, but rather as an instruction manual. - Michael Mock

SIGNYM

Thursday, May 22, 2008 3:21 PM

Quote:
But the economy did grow after the recession that W inherited. Grew every quarter since his tax cuts went into effect.

And the economy grew after the recession that Bill Clinton inherited. And when Bill Clinton left office, we had a surplus not a deficit. Your 'facts' are very narrowly selected. It's like looking at 10 pixels of a 2MB picture: what's the point?

---------------------------------
Let's party like it's 1929.

KWICKO

Thursday, May 22, 2008 4:17 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Vilavon:
Ahh, the obligatory gay bashing begins. Not concerned about political correctness when it doesn't serve your ends?

Vilavon AKA Claude

Claude: My sincere apologies for any gay-bashing I was a part of. It was certainly not intended in that spirit; my aim is to bash not gays, but the hypocrites who ARE gay, but will vote at every turn against gay rights and their own interests. And it turns out they're generally a repressed, Republican bunch.

Again, sorry 'bout that. I've got no problem at all with gay folk. Anyone who can find someone to love and hold onto in this crazy damn world... more power to 'em.

Mike

"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence[sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions

I can't help the sinking feeling that my country is now being run by people who read "1984" not as a cautionary tale, but rather as an instruction manual. - Michael Mock

CITIZEN

Thursday, May 22, 2008 4:49 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
.. rich and middle class, who had been paying too much ..

Irrelevant. George Bush took on huge government expenditure, and cut Government revenue. If you're planing on cutting taxes, you cut back on spending, it doesn't take a two year old to run the math, the math that apparently the leader of the free world couldn't manage. The real depressing part is that if a Democrat wins this coming election, they will have to increase taxes. Lets get real. The US government is, I believe, currently the biggest debtor in the world, it's currently running a huge deficit pushing up that debt annually. And when this hypothetical Democrat puts up taxes, Republicans are going to say "see, tax and spend democrats!", when the only reason for putting up those taxes in the first place, is the fiscal irresponsibility of the preceding Republican.

You can't have your cake and eat it, at least not forever. You can't spend money you haven't got forever either, because eventually the credit runs out. George Bush has been spending big on credit, and made no provision for paying it all off. As a friend remarked, he's like that kid that stole his dad's credit card, and spent all that money. Only difference is he's going to leave the White House scot free and the American people are going to have to pick up the tab.

Quote:
The 2001 recession began LONG before any of Bush's economic polices took place. Bush's tax cuts stimulated the economy and did create positive growth for virtually his entire 2 terms as President.

It's all borrowed money AU. It's a bubble. The recession never ended. The Dollar has been on the rebound every day since 2003. Economies can still grow during a recession, they're just not growing as much, but either way the growth in this case is more like an illusion. It's like funding a lavish lifestyle with a minimum wage job and a credit card. It's all on credit, and one day that credit runs out and your in a worse position than you started off in. And you know what, America's credit is near used up. Sure, one way to look at it is too say "we were doing really well there for a time, I got a Ferrari!"

Another would be to say you brushed the critter under the rug hoping someone else would deal with it, and it's now coming back as a monster. Luckily for George it seems it's just about the right time for someone else to come along and deal with it...

Quote:
A screaming AlGore (D) , accusing Bush of " play(ing) on our fears! " when no facts what so ever suggest that in the least

No facts? Pulling one example out, did George Bush not raise the spectre of Weapons of Mass Destruction and their imminent use in order to legitimise the war in Iraq? I'm pretty sure he did. Even if there were WMDs in Iraq (I think we can put it to bed by now that there wasn't) he was most certainly playing on peoples fears. The whole War on Terror thing, whether you agree with the measures or not, it's lynch pin, for some quite unsavoury methods, is the fear of the terrorist. Absolutely there's evidence that George Bush has been playing on peoples fears.

Quote:
Dick Durbin (D) equating our troops to NAZIS and the Khmer Rouge at Gitmo, before having even gone down to SEE for himself - Jack Murtha ( D ) calling a group of Marines cold blooded killers, before they had even been CHARGED of any crimes in Haditha,( I think most, if not all Marines, have been exonerated ), etc....

We were talking about what Democrats have said about Republicans, this is rather out of place.

Quote:
No, Republicans politicians aren't accusing their 'friends' on the opposite aisle of being anti-American, they don't have the backbone to do anything like that, but Democrats do so none the less by their very own actions.

You've not shown that Democrats are anti-American, you've not shown that Republicans are All-American Hero's, you've not shown, even that which you set out too, Democrats calling Republicans anti-American. And even if what you p

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NEXT PAGE