By Newt
-The Fence
If you ever wondered which side of the fence you sit on, this is a great test!
If a Republican doesn't like guns, he doesn't buy one.
If a Democrat doesn't like guns, he wants all guns outlawed.
If a Republican is a vegetarian, he doesn't eat meat.
If a Democrat is a vegetarian, he wants all meat products banned for everyone.
If a Republican is homosexual, he quietly leads his life.
If a Democrat is homosexual, he demands legislated respect.
If a Republican is down-and-out, he thinks about how to better his situation.
A Democrat wonders who is going to take care of him.
If a Republican doesn't like a talk show host, he switches channels.
Democrats demand that those they don't like be shut down.
If a Republican is a non-believer, he doesn't go to church.
A Democrat non-believer wants any mention of God and religion silenced.
If a Republican decides he needs health care, he goes about shopping for it, or may choose a job that provides it.
A Democrat demands that the rest of us pay for his.
If a Republican reads this, he'll forward it so his friends know how to vote in November!
A Democrat will delete it because he's "offended".
Well, I forwarded it!
-
-IF A REPUBLICAN WAKES UP IN THE MORNING THE FIRST THOUGHT IS WHO CAN I STEAL A DOLLAR FROM TODAY.
-SOME OLD PEOPLE WHO DON'T NEED IT, OR SOME CHILDREN WHO CAN'T USE IT,OR SOME POOR PEOPLE WHO DON'T DESERVE IT ,
-THE NEXT THING,IS,HOW MANY LAW'S CAN I PASS, SO I CAN GET MORE FROM THE GOVERNMENT ,AND SEND IT OVER SEA'S .
-THE NEXT THING IS WHERE CAN I START A WAR TODAY,SO I CAN SELL SOME MILITARY EQUIPMENT,GET A FEW THOUSAND KILLED.TO HELP THE ECONOMY.
-NEXT THING IS HOW CAN I STARVE SOME HOMELESS PEOPLE TO DEATH SO THE STREET'S WANT BE CLUTTERED.
-NEXT THING IS HOW CAN I DEPRIVE MILLIONS FROM HEALTH CARE SO THEY WANT LIVE AS LONG AS ME.SINCE I GET MINE FREE FORM THE MASTER I WORK FOR.
-IF A REPUBLICAN IS HOMOSEXUAL HE RUNS FOR PUBLIC OFFICE OR TEACHES SCHOOL.
-ALL REPUBLICAN'S ARE BELIEVERS -IN THAT THEY BELIEVE THAT EVERY DOLLAR PRINTED BELONG'S TO THEM.AND NO ONE BESIDES THEM SHOULD HAVE ANYTHING OR WANT ANYTHING.
-REPUBLICAN'S THINK THE ONLY TALK SHOW IS FOX TERRORIST NET WORK.
-YOU GUY'S ARE REALYL ,KIND TO YOUR FELLOW MAN,I GUESS THAT COMES FROM ALL THAT TIME IN CHURCH.
IF SOME ONE TELL'S YOU THEY ARE REPUBLICAN, LOCK UP YOUR KID'S YOUR WIFE AND YOUR WALLET.AS SOON AS POSABLE.
----------F----Y----I------------------------------------
Moderators: Pike Ridge Beagles, Aaron Bartlett
-
Pine Mt Beagles
- Posts: 7803
- Joined: Wed May 11, 2005 6:01 pm
- Location: Pineville Ky
Re: ----------F----Y----I------------------------------------
Last edited by Pine Mt Beagles on Mon Oct 04, 2010 11:18 am, edited 1 time in total.
If a man shuts his ears to the cry of the poor, he too will cry out and not be answered
-
Rabbithoundjb
- Posts: 4517
- Joined: Wed Jun 28, 2006 4:30 pm
- Location: Rocky Mount, NC
Re: ----------F----Y----I------------------------------------
MORE BULL$HIT FROM THE KING OF BULL$HIT, PMB.
-
Pine Mt Beagles
- Posts: 7803
- Joined: Wed May 11, 2005 6:01 pm
- Location: Pineville Ky
Re: ----------F----Y----I------------------------------------
How much of the bailout has been paid back?
Is bailing out companies some sort of anti-capitalism socialist decision? If so, why did the leaders of both political parties support such a move.
8 months ago
About 70% of Tarp funds that went to Banks have or are expected to be repaid by the end of the month and a tax will be put on Banks recover the rest plus the money lent to AIG by the fed that was used to meet their obligation to the banks.
During the crisis someone remarked that no one favors free markets during a financial crisis. The may not be entirely true but it is true of politicians so the leader in congress made sure it passed. If thay had said no they would have been blamed for the bad economy and it may have been a lot worse without the bailout.
8 months ago
Is bailing out companies some sort of anti-capitalism socialist decision? If so, why did the leaders of both political parties support such a move.
8 months ago
About 70% of Tarp funds that went to Banks have or are expected to be repaid by the end of the month and a tax will be put on Banks recover the rest plus the money lent to AIG by the fed that was used to meet their obligation to the banks.
During the crisis someone remarked that no one favors free markets during a financial crisis. The may not be entirely true but it is true of politicians so the leader in congress made sure it passed. If thay had said no they would have been blamed for the bad economy and it may have been a lot worse without the bailout.
8 months ago
If a man shuts his ears to the cry of the poor, he too will cry out and not be answered
-
Pine Mt Beagles
- Posts: 7803
- Joined: Wed May 11, 2005 6:01 pm
- Location: Pineville Ky
Re: ----------F----Y----I------------------------------------
How much bailout money will taxpayers get back?
The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has released their assessment of the Office of Management and Budget’s semiannual TARP report. That assessment estimates how much cash has gone out the door for each part of TARP, and how much CBO expects will ultimately be returned to the Treasury. I have converted CBO’s table (Table 1 on page 2) to a set of graphs. Looking at the Capital Purchase Program (CPP) in the bottom bar, $199 B has gone out the door in outlays, and CBO expects $174 B of that will be paid back. CBO calculates a subsidy rate for each program, which for CPP is 25 ÷ (174 + 25) = 13%. Taxpayers should expect to recoup 87% of the funds that were invested on their behalf in the Capital Purchase Program and lose the other 13%.
The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has released their assessment of the Office of Management and Budget’s semiannual TARP report. That assessment estimates how much cash has gone out the door for each part of TARP, and how much CBO expects will ultimately be returned to the Treasury. I have converted CBO’s table (Table 1 on page 2) to a set of graphs. Looking at the Capital Purchase Program (CPP) in the bottom bar, $199 B has gone out the door in outlays, and CBO expects $174 B of that will be paid back. CBO calculates a subsidy rate for each program, which for CPP is 25 ÷ (174 + 25) = 13%. Taxpayers should expect to recoup 87% of the funds that were invested on their behalf in the Capital Purchase Program and lose the other 13%.
If a man shuts his ears to the cry of the poor, he too will cry out and not be answered
Re: ----------F----Y----I------------------------------------
Proof positive that someone else is feeding you ALL your cut and paste masterpieces...you have absolutely NO IDEA what these numbers mean or stand for.Pine Mt Beagles wrote:How much bailout money will taxpayers get back?
The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has released their assessment of the Office of Management and Budget’s semiannual TARP report. That assessment estimates how much cash has gone out the door for each part of TARP, and how much CBO expects will ultimately be returned to the Treasury. I have converted CBO’s table (Table 1 on page 2) to a set of graphs. Looking at the Capital Purchase Program (CPP) in the bottom bar, $199 B has gone out the door in outlays, and CBO expects $174 B of that will be paid back. CBO calculates a subsidy rate for each program, which for CPP is 25 ÷ (174 + 25) = 13%. Taxpayers should expect to recoup 87% of the funds that were invested on their behalf in the Capital Purchase Program and lose the other 13%.
The 1st amendment allows the usual liberal narcissistic "I think.." which is how they start all their sentences.
The second amendment protects us from implementing "I think"
The second amendment protects us from implementing "I think"
Re: ----------F----Y----I------------------------------------
The bail out money was suppose to free up money from the banks to make loans to small business to create jobs, did not work, the bail out was suppose to help the housing market did not work, forclosures at a all time high. Where did the money go, simple in the pockets of the ceo"s known fact. Is the money going back to the tax paying american people, in your dreams pinenut, has the country's debt been reduced NO! Pinenut you are a piece of work, you can not escape studpiety in your sleep!!!
-
Pine Mt Beagles
- Posts: 7803
- Joined: Wed May 11, 2005 6:01 pm
- Location: Pineville Ky
Re: ----------F----Y----I------------------------------------
WASHINGTON -- President Barack Obama aims to usher in a new era of consumer protections and banking restrictions today, checking off another legislative victory just before election-year politics overtakes the rest of his major agenda.
The president was set to sign a sweeping overhaul of financial regulations, a signature achievement that comes nearly two years after Wall Street's failures knocked the economy into the worst recession since the Great Depression.
Associated PressPresident Obama is set to sign financial reform into law today.
The law assembles a powerful council of regulators to be on the lookout for risks across the finance system and creates a new agency to guard consumers in their financial transactions. It places shadow financial markets that previously escaped the oversight of regulators under new scrutiny and gives the government new powers to break up companies that threaten the economy.
Large, failing financial institutions would be liquidated and the costs assessed on their surviving peers. Borrowers will be protected from hidden fees and abusive terms, but also will have to provide evidence that they can repay their loans. The Federal Reserve will get new powers while at the same time coming under expanded congressional oversight.
The president was set to sign a sweeping overhaul of financial regulations, a signature achievement that comes nearly two years after Wall Street's failures knocked the economy into the worst recession since the Great Depression.
Associated PressPresident Obama is set to sign financial reform into law today.
The law assembles a powerful council of regulators to be on the lookout for risks across the finance system and creates a new agency to guard consumers in their financial transactions. It places shadow financial markets that previously escaped the oversight of regulators under new scrutiny and gives the government new powers to break up companies that threaten the economy.
Large, failing financial institutions would be liquidated and the costs assessed on their surviving peers. Borrowers will be protected from hidden fees and abusive terms, but also will have to provide evidence that they can repay their loans. The Federal Reserve will get new powers while at the same time coming under expanded congressional oversight.
If a man shuts his ears to the cry of the poor, he too will cry out and not be answered
-
Pine Mt Beagles
- Posts: 7803
- Joined: Wed May 11, 2005 6:01 pm
- Location: Pineville Ky
Re: ----------F----Y----I------------------------------------
Report this postReply with quoteRe: ----------F----Y----I------------------------------------
by bluemouse on Tue Oct 05, 2010 4:59 am
The bail out money was suppose to free up money from the banks to make loans to small business to create jobs, did not work, the bail out was suppose to help the housing market did not work, forclosures at a all time high. Where did the money go, simple in the pockets of the ceo"s known fact. Is the money going back to the tax paying american people, in your dreams pinenut, has the country's debt been reduced NO! Pinenut you are a piece of work, you can not escape studpiety in your sleep!!!
-
-YEP-GUESS WHAT HAPPENED-
-THE ANTI-AMERICAN PARTY GOT WIND OF IT.
Top Republican Mitch McConnell said Sunday he would still oppose Democratic plans to reform regulation of the US financial sector even if an alleged "bail-out" fund is stripped from the bill.
President Barack Obama has vowed to crack down on Wall Street to prevent a repeat of the global economic meltdown by creating a financial protection agency and reining in executive bonuses and risky investments.
McConnell, the top Republican in the Senate, has led opposition to the reforms on the basis of inaccurate charges that they would encourage future bailouts of banks deemed too big to fail.
In a bid to bring Republicans to sign on to the most sweeping overhaul of the finance industry since the 1930s, the Obama administration has offered to jettison the idea of the 50 billion dollar liquidation fund, which would in fact be paid for by the banks themselves and not taxpayers.
Despite an unusually direct attack from Obama in the president's weekly radio address basically accusing him of lying by saying that the reforms would support and enable further bailouts, McConnell refused to back down.
Sticking to his guns about the "bail-out" fund, the Senate Minority Leader went even further, and in language reminiscent of recent partisan clashes over health care reform suggested the Democrats go back to the drawing-board.
"There are other problems with the bill," McConnell told CNN's "State of the Union" program.
"We need to get back to the table and get it fixed. I don't know anybody in the Senate who thinks we ought not to pass a bill. The question is, what's it going to look like?"
by bluemouse on Tue Oct 05, 2010 4:59 am
The bail out money was suppose to free up money from the banks to make loans to small business to create jobs, did not work, the bail out was suppose to help the housing market did not work, forclosures at a all time high. Where did the money go, simple in the pockets of the ceo"s known fact. Is the money going back to the tax paying american people, in your dreams pinenut, has the country's debt been reduced NO! Pinenut you are a piece of work, you can not escape studpiety in your sleep!!!
-
-YEP-GUESS WHAT HAPPENED-
-THE ANTI-AMERICAN PARTY GOT WIND OF IT.
Top Republican Mitch McConnell said Sunday he would still oppose Democratic plans to reform regulation of the US financial sector even if an alleged "bail-out" fund is stripped from the bill.
President Barack Obama has vowed to crack down on Wall Street to prevent a repeat of the global economic meltdown by creating a financial protection agency and reining in executive bonuses and risky investments.
McConnell, the top Republican in the Senate, has led opposition to the reforms on the basis of inaccurate charges that they would encourage future bailouts of banks deemed too big to fail.
In a bid to bring Republicans to sign on to the most sweeping overhaul of the finance industry since the 1930s, the Obama administration has offered to jettison the idea of the 50 billion dollar liquidation fund, which would in fact be paid for by the banks themselves and not taxpayers.
Despite an unusually direct attack from Obama in the president's weekly radio address basically accusing him of lying by saying that the reforms would support and enable further bailouts, McConnell refused to back down.
Sticking to his guns about the "bail-out" fund, the Senate Minority Leader went even further, and in language reminiscent of recent partisan clashes over health care reform suggested the Democrats go back to the drawing-board.
"There are other problems with the bill," McConnell told CNN's "State of the Union" program.
"We need to get back to the table and get it fixed. I don't know anybody in the Senate who thinks we ought not to pass a bill. The question is, what's it going to look like?"
If a man shuts his ears to the cry of the poor, he too will cry out and not be answered
-
Pine Mt Beagles
- Posts: 7803
- Joined: Wed May 11, 2005 6:01 pm
- Location: Pineville Ky
Re: ----------F----Y----I------------------------------------
Senate Republicans Vote Against Helping Small Businesses
September 14, 2010 3:13 pm ET — Chris Harris
The crisis that rocked the world's financial systems in 2008 sent shockwaves through every corner of the economy. Terrified investors fled from the stock market and shaken financial firms on the verge of collapse refused to loan businesses money. Americans lost confidence in the economy and severely scaled back their spending habits in favor of saving money for an uncertain future. Consumers' sudden thriftiness hurt businesses everywhere which, unable to receive lines of credit from the teetering financial sector, were forced to lay off workers.
Layoffs caused further pessimism about the economy, which scared even more Americans to reel back their spending, which strained small businesses and led to additional layoffs. It is a cycle that, as we've seen, is very hard to break.
But today the Senate took an important step forward by advancing the Small Business Jobs and Credit Act to ensure America's job creators have access to lines of credit that will enable them to hire new workers and invest in the future. Or, to be more specific, Senate Democrats and retiring Republican Sens. George Voinovich (R-OH) and George LeMieux (R-FL) took an important step forward. The rest of the Republican caucus tried to kick small businesses to the curb by attempting to stop the bill from being voted on in the first place.
The bill gives investors a 100% exclusion from capital gains taxes on investments in small businesses, increases the amount businesses can expense on capital investments, and establishes new programs to help American small businesses export goods to other countries.
Perhaps most importantly, the Small Business Jobs and Credit Act also creates a Small Business Lending Fund that gives community banks — not Wall Street banks — the opportunity to increase lending to local small businesses, which the Independent Community Bankers of America says will create 500,000 jobs over the next two years.
Republicans opposed the bill because they believe November's election will be a referendum on the economy. In their view, the more they can obstruct economic progress, the more they'll be rewarded at the ballot box.
-ANOTHER REASON WHY AMERICA NEED'S SURGERY TO GET RID OF THE REPUBLICAN -CANCER-
September 14, 2010 3:13 pm ET — Chris Harris
The crisis that rocked the world's financial systems in 2008 sent shockwaves through every corner of the economy. Terrified investors fled from the stock market and shaken financial firms on the verge of collapse refused to loan businesses money. Americans lost confidence in the economy and severely scaled back their spending habits in favor of saving money for an uncertain future. Consumers' sudden thriftiness hurt businesses everywhere which, unable to receive lines of credit from the teetering financial sector, were forced to lay off workers.
Layoffs caused further pessimism about the economy, which scared even more Americans to reel back their spending, which strained small businesses and led to additional layoffs. It is a cycle that, as we've seen, is very hard to break.
But today the Senate took an important step forward by advancing the Small Business Jobs and Credit Act to ensure America's job creators have access to lines of credit that will enable them to hire new workers and invest in the future. Or, to be more specific, Senate Democrats and retiring Republican Sens. George Voinovich (R-OH) and George LeMieux (R-FL) took an important step forward. The rest of the Republican caucus tried to kick small businesses to the curb by attempting to stop the bill from being voted on in the first place.
The bill gives investors a 100% exclusion from capital gains taxes on investments in small businesses, increases the amount businesses can expense on capital investments, and establishes new programs to help American small businesses export goods to other countries.
Perhaps most importantly, the Small Business Jobs and Credit Act also creates a Small Business Lending Fund that gives community banks — not Wall Street banks — the opportunity to increase lending to local small businesses, which the Independent Community Bankers of America says will create 500,000 jobs over the next two years.
Republicans opposed the bill because they believe November's election will be a referendum on the economy. In their view, the more they can obstruct economic progress, the more they'll be rewarded at the ballot box.
-ANOTHER REASON WHY AMERICA NEED'S SURGERY TO GET RID OF THE REPUBLICAN -CANCER-
If a man shuts his ears to the cry of the poor, he too will cry out and not be answered
Re: ----------F----Y----I------------------------------------
Funny pinenut that the dems own both houses they do not need rep votes to pass, try another cut and paste.
-
Pine Mt Beagles
- Posts: 7803
- Joined: Wed May 11, 2005 6:01 pm
- Location: Pineville Ky
Re: ----------F----Y----I------------------------------------
Republican Party Of No , The Party Of No ,
Email Comments 4 The experiment in post-partisan governance has not been met with much success in the realm of health care reform. We might be in a post, post-partisan world now, given that a solid phalanx of Republican opposition to health care reform threatens to wreck the valiant efforts of a most, most patient Democratic Senator Reid. It is disturbing, distressing and disgusting that the Republican Party has elected to behave in such a destructive, petty and vindictive way.
I have a problem with conservative orthodoxy in its current form and have voiced my concerns about conservatives many times in this forum. I have never directly attacked Republicans except to state how unfortunate it is that they have increasingly aligned themselves with some of the more radical elements of the right wing lunatic fringe. But just to be absolutely clear the depth of my dismay rests with conservatives regardless of their political party.
The party of "no" simply cannot bring itself to reveal any positive vision of how to proceed. Rather, the approach is one of no new taxes, no health care reform, no energy policy, no legal hearings for terrorists, no to closing Guantanamo Bay, no gay marriage, no stimulus, and the list goes on. No has become a policy issue, and doing nothing and opposing everything is the tactic. It should not be lost on anyone that the first two letters in nothing are n and o.
I would counter that the only appropriate issue where no is acceptable would be on the issue of unemployment. I could certainly live with the concept of no unemployment. However, this position does not work either because it is conservative economic dogma that a "full employment" economy is one containing anywhere from 4-7 percent unemployment. Contemporary conservative ideology certainly does smack of elitism, there simply are haves and have-nots, and whether or not it this is determined by the market or a tyrant the practical effect is the same.
The Republican Party today is completely devoid of practical solutions to policy problems. They, quite simply, have become the "No, nothing party". One could easily deduce from this position that either there are no problems or there is no political capital in devising solutions to problems that do exist. In either case serious questions are raised as to their suitability to govern. The obvious retort of course is that this question was more than adequately answered during their one party reign of power from 2000-2006. Surely they had ample opportunities to weigh in on health care reform but opted to do, well, nothing.
If their opposition were irrelevant it would not be an issue to waste ink over. However, because conservative ideology has found a room in the basement of the Democratic household, and because the majority in the Senate is so slim when considering the tactic of the filibuster, requiring that all Democratic Senators support the final product in order for it to become law, lock-step opposition from the Republican party is important and relevant. Few, I believe, appreciate the delicate balancing act that the President faces as he continues to push this crucially important reform issue.
Email Comments 4 The experiment in post-partisan governance has not been met with much success in the realm of health care reform. We might be in a post, post-partisan world now, given that a solid phalanx of Republican opposition to health care reform threatens to wreck the valiant efforts of a most, most patient Democratic Senator Reid. It is disturbing, distressing and disgusting that the Republican Party has elected to behave in such a destructive, petty and vindictive way.
I have a problem with conservative orthodoxy in its current form and have voiced my concerns about conservatives many times in this forum. I have never directly attacked Republicans except to state how unfortunate it is that they have increasingly aligned themselves with some of the more radical elements of the right wing lunatic fringe. But just to be absolutely clear the depth of my dismay rests with conservatives regardless of their political party.
The party of "no" simply cannot bring itself to reveal any positive vision of how to proceed. Rather, the approach is one of no new taxes, no health care reform, no energy policy, no legal hearings for terrorists, no to closing Guantanamo Bay, no gay marriage, no stimulus, and the list goes on. No has become a policy issue, and doing nothing and opposing everything is the tactic. It should not be lost on anyone that the first two letters in nothing are n and o.
I would counter that the only appropriate issue where no is acceptable would be on the issue of unemployment. I could certainly live with the concept of no unemployment. However, this position does not work either because it is conservative economic dogma that a "full employment" economy is one containing anywhere from 4-7 percent unemployment. Contemporary conservative ideology certainly does smack of elitism, there simply are haves and have-nots, and whether or not it this is determined by the market or a tyrant the practical effect is the same.
The Republican Party today is completely devoid of practical solutions to policy problems. They, quite simply, have become the "No, nothing party". One could easily deduce from this position that either there are no problems or there is no political capital in devising solutions to problems that do exist. In either case serious questions are raised as to their suitability to govern. The obvious retort of course is that this question was more than adequately answered during their one party reign of power from 2000-2006. Surely they had ample opportunities to weigh in on health care reform but opted to do, well, nothing.
If their opposition were irrelevant it would not be an issue to waste ink over. However, because conservative ideology has found a room in the basement of the Democratic household, and because the majority in the Senate is so slim when considering the tactic of the filibuster, requiring that all Democratic Senators support the final product in order for it to become law, lock-step opposition from the Republican party is important and relevant. Few, I believe, appreciate the delicate balancing act that the President faces as he continues to push this crucially important reform issue.
If a man shuts his ears to the cry of the poor, he too will cry out and not be answered
-
Rabbithoundjb
- Posts: 4517
- Joined: Wed Jun 28, 2006 4:30 pm
- Location: Rocky Mount, NC
Re: ----------F----Y----I------------------------------------
LMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!! So I guess we have been better off since the dems rescued us in Jan. 2007. The same or worse dems than the ones who deregulated the CRA'S and repealed the GLASS/STEEGAL ACT. By the way those are the 2 pieces of legislation that crumbled the housing and banking financial markets.
I love all of the party of no talk, the only question I have is what legislation didn't the dems get passed by hook or by crook but they got it passed. A better question is what are the results of all of the legislation. Higher insurance premiums, higher unemployment, more foreclosures, poverty has increased 27% and so on.
TRUTH IS PMB YOU HAVE NOTHING BUT RHETORIC, NAME CALLING AND HEAD IN THE SAND NONSENSE.
I love all of the party of no talk, the only question I have is what legislation didn't the dems get passed by hook or by crook but they got it passed. A better question is what are the results of all of the legislation. Higher insurance premiums, higher unemployment, more foreclosures, poverty has increased 27% and so on.
TRUTH IS PMB YOU HAVE NOTHING BUT RHETORIC, NAME CALLING AND HEAD IN THE SAND NONSENSE.
Re: ----------F----Y----I------------------------------------
Its worse than you think with regards to Rufus...he is following very, VERY closely the language of the so called progressives that lately are advocating violent action against those that disagree with them. If you find some footage from that liberal rally that didnt even come close to the numbers that Beck drew in you will be able to hear them proposing armed, insurrection against CONSERVATIVES and CORPORATIONS...translated the RICH. Rufus will love this, I actually saw the footage on the Glenn Beck show TODAY...not a coincidence that Rufus is now claiming boastfully and proudly without shame or embarassment that someone should hang from the White House. The little douchebag on that footage today actually said that, and I have to paraphrase, "armed civil war is not only acceptable but expected as a natural response to conservatism and corporate interests. And since the progressives are so much more intelligent than conservatives, you really don't wanna see what happens when smart progressives begin shooting"...and I am paraphrasing, but the gist is fairly correct.Rabbithoundjb wrote:LMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!! So I guess we have been better off since the dems rescued us in Jan. 2007. The same or worse dems than the ones who deregulated the CRA'S and repealed the GLASS/STEEGAL ACT. By the way those are the 2 pieces of legislation that crumbled the housing and banking financial markets.
I love all of the party of no talk, the only question I have is what legislation didn't the dems get passed by hook or by crook but they got it passed. A better question is what are the results of all of the legislation. Higher insurance premiums, higher unemployment, more foreclosures, poverty has increased 27% and so on.
TRUTH IS PMB YOU HAVE NOTHING BUT RHETORIC, NAME CALLING AND HEAD IN THE SAND NONSENSE.
These people are emboldened to actually threaten violence and shootings towards other Americans simply because they disagree with the progressive agenda. Michael Savage was correct. The enemy is WITHIN...its called liberalism.
Last edited by bluegrass on Mon Oct 04, 2010 9:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.
The 1st amendment allows the usual liberal narcissistic "I think.." which is how they start all their sentences.
The second amendment protects us from implementing "I think"
The second amendment protects us from implementing "I think"
-
Pine Mt Beagles
- Posts: 7803
- Joined: Wed May 11, 2005 6:01 pm
- Location: Pineville Ky
Re: ----------F----Y----I------------------------------------
Billionaires Give 91 Percent of Funds for Republican's-!!!!!!!!!!!
-
-ONCE AGAIN REPUBLICAN'S, ARE SHOWING JUST WHO THEY SUPPORT,AND WHO SUPPORT'S THEM.REPUBLICAN'S, ARE OUT SPENDING DEMOCRAT'S 7 TO 1,AFTER THE REPUBLICAN, SUPREMICIST,COURT RULING,MOST OF THE MONEY IS LAUNDERED INTO REPUBLICAN HAND'S.IN SECRET.AND FOR GOOD REASON ,THE REPUBLICAN'S ,ARE RUNNING ON -NO- JUST PLIAN NO.SO THEY INTEND TO BUY THE ELECTION,I'AM SURE YOU GUY'S WILL NOT COST MUCH.
-
-SO FAR THEY ARE RUNNING ON.!!!!!!!
-TAKING AWAY HEALTH CARE.------
-STOPING SOCIAL SECURITY.
-RAISING THE THE RETIREMENT AGE.
-DOING AWAY WITH MINIMUM WAGE.
-PUTTING A 2000.00 CO-PAY ON MEDICARE.
-INVESTIGATING EVERY BILL THAT HAS BEEN PASSED.
-IMPEACHING THE PRESIDENT.
-GIVING TAX BREAKS TO THE BILLIONARE'S.
-TAXING THE WORKING PEOPLE (YOU GUY'S )MORE.
-DOING AWAY WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION .
-DOING AWAY WITH THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY.
-DOING AWAY WITH MSHA.-MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH ADMINISTRATION.
-DE-REGULATING OIL COMPANIES.
-DOING AWAY WITH OSHA.
-JUST TO NAME A FEW OF THE ANTI-AMERICAN PARTY GOAL'S.
-
-ONCE AGAIN REPUBLICAN'S, ARE SHOWING JUST WHO THEY SUPPORT,AND WHO SUPPORT'S THEM.REPUBLICAN'S, ARE OUT SPENDING DEMOCRAT'S 7 TO 1,AFTER THE REPUBLICAN, SUPREMICIST,COURT RULING,MOST OF THE MONEY IS LAUNDERED INTO REPUBLICAN HAND'S.IN SECRET.AND FOR GOOD REASON ,THE REPUBLICAN'S ,ARE RUNNING ON -NO- JUST PLIAN NO.SO THEY INTEND TO BUY THE ELECTION,I'AM SURE YOU GUY'S WILL NOT COST MUCH.
-
-SO FAR THEY ARE RUNNING ON.!!!!!!!
-TAKING AWAY HEALTH CARE.------
-STOPING SOCIAL SECURITY.
-RAISING THE THE RETIREMENT AGE.
-DOING AWAY WITH MINIMUM WAGE.
-PUTTING A 2000.00 CO-PAY ON MEDICARE.
-INVESTIGATING EVERY BILL THAT HAS BEEN PASSED.
-IMPEACHING THE PRESIDENT.
-GIVING TAX BREAKS TO THE BILLIONARE'S.
-TAXING THE WORKING PEOPLE (YOU GUY'S )MORE.
-DOING AWAY WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION .
-DOING AWAY WITH THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY.
-DOING AWAY WITH MSHA.-MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH ADMINISTRATION.
-DE-REGULATING OIL COMPANIES.
-DOING AWAY WITH OSHA.
-JUST TO NAME A FEW OF THE ANTI-AMERICAN PARTY GOAL'S.
If a man shuts his ears to the cry of the poor, he too will cry out and not be answered
-
Pine Mt Beagles
- Posts: 7803
- Joined: Wed May 11, 2005 6:01 pm
- Location: Pineville Ky
Re: ----------F----Y----I------------------------------------
: ----------F----Y----I------------------------------------
by bluegrass on Tue Oct 05, 2010 12:24 pm
Rabbithoundjb wrote:
LMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!! So I guess we have been better off since the dems rescued us in Jan. 2007. The same or worse dems than the ones who deregulated the CRA'S and repealed the GLASS/STEEGAL ACT. By the way those are the 2 pieces of legislation that crumbled the housing and banking financial markets.
I love all of the party of no talk, the only question I have is what legislation didn't the dems get passed by hook or by crook but they got it passed. A better question is what are the results of all of the legislation. Higher insurance premiums, higher unemployment, more foreclosures, poverty has increased 27% and so on.
TRUTH IS PMB YOU HAVE NOTHING BUT RHETORIC, NAME CALLING AND HEAD IN THE SAND NONSENSE.
Its worse than you think with regards to Rufus...he is following very, VERY closely the language of the so called progressives that lately are advocating violent action against those that disagree with them. If you find some footage from that liberal rally that didnt even come close to the numbers that Beck drew in you will be able to hear them proposing armed, civil insurrection against CONSERVATIVES and CORPORATIONS...translated the RICH. Rufus will love this, I actually saw the footage on the Glenn Beck show TODAY...not a coincidence that Rufus is now claiming boastfully and proudly without shame or embarassment that someone should hang from the White House. The little douchebag on that footage today actually said that, and I have to paraphrase, "armed civil war is not only acceptable but expected as a natural response to conservatism and corporate interests. And since the progressives are so much more intelligent than conservatives, you really don't wanna see what happens when smart progressives begin shooting"...and I am paraphrasing, but the gist is fairly correct.
-
-NOT ONLY AM I SAYING HE SHOULD BE HUNG,BUT SOON ,HE IS TEACHING THE EXACT PROPAGNDA,B.S. AS HITLER STARTED WITH.AND -THE ONE NATION RALLY -WAS TWICE AS BIG,AS THE ANTI- AMERICAN RALLY,BECK HELD, BUT MORE IMPORTANT THEY WERE AMERICAN'S.ARMED CIVIL WAR IS WHAT BECK IS PREACHING .YOU KNOW THIS ,AND ANY ONE WITH A BRAIN, THE SIZE OF, ONE OF THE RAT'S, THE REPUBLICAN'S, SAY THE GOVERNMENT IS EXPERMENTING ON ,(YOU KNOW THE RAT'S WITH HUMAN BRAIN'S )THE REPUBLICAN'S ARE RAVING ABOUT.
KNOW'S THAT WE ARE BETTER OFF THAN THE END OF 2008-
-AND I HAVE TRUTH AND FACT'S ON MY SIDE -BUT YOU WOULD NOT KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THAT.
-
-BLUE GRASS- YOU ARE SIMPLY TRASH .REPUBLICAN'S, HAVE FLAT OUT SAID THEY WILL RESORT TO THEIR SECOND AMENDMENT RIGHT'S IF THE ELECTION GOES AGAINST THEM .I IGNORED YOUR POST'S ,FOR A LONG TIME ,I HAD FORGOTTEN JUST WHAT KIND OF HIPPOCRIT,YOU ARE,I HAVE BUT ONE WISH AND THAT IS THAT YOU, SOME DAY FEEL THE PAIN OF THE PEOPLE YOU HATE .AMERICAN'S-SOMETHING YOU WILL NEVER BE.
-
by bluegrass on Tue Oct 05, 2010 12:24 pm
Rabbithoundjb wrote:
LMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!! So I guess we have been better off since the dems rescued us in Jan. 2007. The same or worse dems than the ones who deregulated the CRA'S and repealed the GLASS/STEEGAL ACT. By the way those are the 2 pieces of legislation that crumbled the housing and banking financial markets.
I love all of the party of no talk, the only question I have is what legislation didn't the dems get passed by hook or by crook but they got it passed. A better question is what are the results of all of the legislation. Higher insurance premiums, higher unemployment, more foreclosures, poverty has increased 27% and so on.
TRUTH IS PMB YOU HAVE NOTHING BUT RHETORIC, NAME CALLING AND HEAD IN THE SAND NONSENSE.
Its worse than you think with regards to Rufus...he is following very, VERY closely the language of the so called progressives that lately are advocating violent action against those that disagree with them. If you find some footage from that liberal rally that didnt even come close to the numbers that Beck drew in you will be able to hear them proposing armed, civil insurrection against CONSERVATIVES and CORPORATIONS...translated the RICH. Rufus will love this, I actually saw the footage on the Glenn Beck show TODAY...not a coincidence that Rufus is now claiming boastfully and proudly without shame or embarassment that someone should hang from the White House. The little douchebag on that footage today actually said that, and I have to paraphrase, "armed civil war is not only acceptable but expected as a natural response to conservatism and corporate interests. And since the progressives are so much more intelligent than conservatives, you really don't wanna see what happens when smart progressives begin shooting"...and I am paraphrasing, but the gist is fairly correct.
-
-NOT ONLY AM I SAYING HE SHOULD BE HUNG,BUT SOON ,HE IS TEACHING THE EXACT PROPAGNDA,B.S. AS HITLER STARTED WITH.AND -THE ONE NATION RALLY -WAS TWICE AS BIG,AS THE ANTI- AMERICAN RALLY,BECK HELD, BUT MORE IMPORTANT THEY WERE AMERICAN'S.ARMED CIVIL WAR IS WHAT BECK IS PREACHING .YOU KNOW THIS ,AND ANY ONE WITH A BRAIN, THE SIZE OF, ONE OF THE RAT'S, THE REPUBLICAN'S, SAY THE GOVERNMENT IS EXPERMENTING ON ,(YOU KNOW THE RAT'S WITH HUMAN BRAIN'S )THE REPUBLICAN'S ARE RAVING ABOUT.
KNOW'S THAT WE ARE BETTER OFF THAN THE END OF 2008-
-AND I HAVE TRUTH AND FACT'S ON MY SIDE -BUT YOU WOULD NOT KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THAT.
-
-BLUE GRASS- YOU ARE SIMPLY TRASH .REPUBLICAN'S, HAVE FLAT OUT SAID THEY WILL RESORT TO THEIR SECOND AMENDMENT RIGHT'S IF THE ELECTION GOES AGAINST THEM .I IGNORED YOUR POST'S ,FOR A LONG TIME ,I HAD FORGOTTEN JUST WHAT KIND OF HIPPOCRIT,YOU ARE,I HAVE BUT ONE WISH AND THAT IS THAT YOU, SOME DAY FEEL THE PAIN OF THE PEOPLE YOU HATE .AMERICAN'S-SOMETHING YOU WILL NEVER BE.
-
If a man shuts his ears to the cry of the poor, he too will cry out and not be answered