…it causes me worry.
Its bad enough that for nearly 8 years, the most passionate on the American Left were reduced to one word declarations of their anger and frustration, leaving the rest of us cringing with the tortured cries of “CHENEY!” and “HALIBURTON!!!” constantly ringing in our ears like the buzzing of fluorescent lights casting an eerie green glow over the room.
Some of them were a bit more together, and attempted to express the juvenile and shallow shadows of thought trapped in their mushy skulls, like hamsters trapped on their own personal wheels. These comparative geniuses delighted in stringing their pointless and idiotic expressions together like “CHIMPYMCBUSHITLERHALIBURTON!!!!11!!!” Occaisionally, one would feel really profound and belch out a “NO BLOOD FOR OIL!!!11!!!” at the top of their lungs, before retreating to the high-fives of their equally submoronic compatriots, all apparently oblivious to the fact that they were paying more for gasoline than they were at the beginning of the second conflict in Iraq, with a steep rise occurring after the Democrats gained control of Congress in 2006 and crowned Queen Pelosi speaker.
When these same people got the opportunity to vote for a first-term Senator from Illinois who managed to have published two different biographies despite having accomplished nothing of import in his short life, but who happened to be black and managed to read a teleprompter with all the conviction of a modern-day Diogenes, they simply melted for this man whose only record was that of voting “present” unless he needed to protect the right to make sure that the children who survived their mothers’ attempts to kill them died alone, and without even basic comfort that he would surely offer to his Portuguese water dog. They were remarkably uncurious about his past. They couldn’t be bothered with the fact that his friends were questionable. They remained untroubled at his unfettered lack of loyalty to any associate whose politics and views could not be concealed or explained away. Every single body he tossed under the bus simply provided more traction for a campaign that occasionally slipped, and offered a view the real ideals swirling just beneath the smiling facade that constantly offered the vague promises of “HOPE!” and “CHANGE!”.
Reason no longer mattered, and the standards that any other candidate would be expected to meet with nary a question or protest simply didn’t apply. And 52% of the electorate, assisted by an uncertain percentage of voters like “Mickey Mouse”, registered by good public service organizations like ACORN, gave him his chance at the Big Chair. These true believers remain undeterred. They are still as eager as ever to repeat the lie, with all the conviction they deem necessary to sell it to the American people. Case in point? This lovely comedic piece from Cynthia Tucker, in which she asserts the amusing theory that Obama tried too hard to work with Republicans. Here’s the link, just so you know that I didn’t make that up.
Not one to lose the opportunity, Cynthia tossed the lie out in the opening paragraph:
Amplified by the right-wing message machine, Republicans paint President Obama as an unyielding left-winger, an unreconstructed liberal who refuses to compromise. The president’s critics have turned the truth inside out: One of Obama’s greatest political weaknesses has been his stubborn — and unrequited — love for bipartisanship.
No, Cynthia, no one had to paint him that way. He did a fine job all on his own. Who could forget this shining moment of bipartisanship, which came after Republicans had been shut out of the closed-door meetings where the Healthcare Takeover was being written, and then in an attempt to satisfy those pesky people who would just not forget that the President promised transparency in the process, called a meeting to which the Republicans were invited, but refused to go along with the script in which they were obviously expected to rubberstamp what the Dems had wrought, and nod in agreement to the lies coolly delivered by an accomplished liar.
Or maybe it was this moment of shining bipartisan spirit:
“…but don’t just stand there and say that “You’re not holding the mop right””…
Of course not. The Dems did it for much of the Bush Administration. Oh, the war is lost! The surge isn’t working! We can’t win! Declaration after declaration, but never the courage to actually act on such convictions. And when proved wrong, the most convenient cases of amnesia ever.
Or maybe she means this moment of bipartisanship:
What makes this especially funny is he’s including Patty Murray in this. I will be happy to vote for her opponent, Dino Rossi, in November so she isn’t there in DC helping this “Savior of the Economy” continue to spend trillions more than the government takes in so the 99th Congressional district in Montana can get millions in Spendulous ca$h.
The fact is that the Republicans haven’t had the numbers to stop a damn thing, so if something didn’t get passed, it had more to do with the members of the Dems own contentious and greedy family, as demonstrated by the success in getting health care passed after the special deals cut by Dems like Louisiana’s Mary “Will vote for special deal” Landrieu and Ben “Let’s make a deal” Nelson.
There really is so much in the piece worthy of mocking and ridicule, but for me, the money quote is this gem:
“Unlike Ronald Reagan, whose poll ratings were slightly lower than Obama’s just before the 1982 mid-term elections, Obama didn’t take every possible opportunity to pin the economic mess on his predecessor.”
[Emphasis Added.]
Apparently she’s forgotten the Obama Administration’s Mantra:
But as I read this article, and others like this, I wonder what people who are so deeply under the sway of such a deep delusion will do on November 3, 2010 when the cruelty of reality eats their lunch in a way they can no longer ignore.
Yes, the recession was Obama’s fault! The two wars were Obama’s fault! The huge debt? Obama’s fault!
Everything was hunky dory before that communist Obama took office. He ruined EVERYTHING!
Ben, I think you need to work on your reading comprehension.
The thrust of the piece being fisked is that the Chicago Messiah wasted time and opportunities by trying to work with the Republicans.
The point of me fisking it was to show that he’s done nothing of the sort, and it is silly to claim that his “failures” are the fault of Republicans who haven’t had the numbers to stop anything, but that hasn’t stopped him from waging a concerted campaign to demonize those who disagree with him, and do not wish to support his agenda. I didn’t even venture into his “Blame the Rich” campaign, and his strategy of fostering class envy as his plan to “Heal the holes in our souls” unfolds.
I’ve never blamed him for the recession, although it rests squarely on the shoulders of Democrats like Bwarney Fwanks who dismissed repeated warnings about Fannie and Freddie and pretended nothing was wrong while his boyfreind was one of many people (like Obama economic advisor Franklin Raines) who reaped enormous benefits from the lax regulations and the trade of mortgage-backed securities, and other Dems who used idiotic legislation like the Community Reinvestment Act, which was enacted due to faulty data during the Carter Administration and later used to bully and intimidate lenders into making bad loans that defied any intelligent business model or responsible banking practice and insured that there would be many more players in an overheated housing market than there would be in a market ruledy by sound business practices. Nevertheless, he knew or should have known what the job entailed when he asked us to hire him, and after we passed spendulous to hold the line on unemployment when the bill does nothing to address unemployment? Sorry, it’s his now. He owns this economy.
I never blamed Obama for either war, although it does wrankle me that he tried to take credit for the result in Iraq after he talked against it and the successful strategy his predecessor undertook to get us the result that we did. I also found his dithering about the strategy in the war that he campaigned on as the “right” one to be predictable, but still disappointing.
As for the debt, he was in the Senate before he begged us to let him sit in the big chair. He knew what the score was during the campaign, and to start whining about what he inherited while at the same time spending more than every single previous adminstration combined in such a short period after taking office, and then passing a health care takeover bill that creates the single biggest entitlement ever? Yeah, we do get to needle him about the debt. In fact, when the higher taxes return and the hyperinflation descends upon us, I would suggest that the people protest by tossing stale bread at his speaking engagements, except people will be forced to eat it anyway. Not that he’d notice. He’ll be too busy flying somewhere on our dime to grab a cheeseburger and an arugula salad.
[are the fault of Republicans who haven’t had the numbers to stop anything]
You’re living in an alternate reality. The Senate Republicans filibuster EVERYTHING, which mean to get anything passed requires 60 votes.
The rest of your post is just mindless right-wing talking points with no grounding in reality. Face it… you’re a sheep. You get all your information filtered through right-wing media.
Pot meet kettle?
I would invite you to look to the Senate pre-2006. Explain that.
We have the President of the Freshman Class in the House- Gerry Connolly- putting out campaign material where he nevers once prints the word ‘Democrat’. I’m sure that’s because of the GOP…
Baaaaaaaaah
You’re living in an alternate reality. The Senate Republicans filibuster EVERYTHING, which mean to get anything passed requires 60 votes.
Piffle and Nonsense.
57 Democrats + 2 “Independents” + Snowe & Collins = 61 votes, Ben. And Sanders, Snowe, and Collins have all been very reliable for the Dems. When there’s been a problem, its been with Senators with the (D)umbass after their names.
The rest of your post is just mindless right-wing talking points with no grounding in reality.
Yes, all that inconvient truth, much of it from the mouth of the Chicago Messiah himself is certainly not grounded in reality, and amounts to mindless right-wing talking points. What color is the sky on your planet, Ben, and is there any intelligent life there?
*motions for the nice men from the Shady Acres Rest Home with the big net and points at Ben*
Concerning the “delusions” embraced by Tucker et alii, we speak here of the logical consequences of a set of religious assumptions:
1. That left-liberals are morally superior to conservatives;
2. That left-liberals are intellectually superior to conservatives;
3. That the above two superiorities justify ignoring all evidence to the contrary.
Religious assumptions – i.e., propositions taken on faith – can neither be proved nor disproved. Ergo, expect no changes in those stances no matter what results November 2’s balloting brings us. (As we mathematical types like to say — especially those of us who barely escaped the priesthood — quod demonstrandum est.)
“And Sanders, Snowe, and Collins have all been very reliable for the Dems”
Sanders is a self proclaimed socialists so he is a given.
Snowe and Collins vote more in line with the demomarxists than the Republicans. So they might as well have a D and they might when they run for reelection.
So really, whats the whining about a filibuster all about? And besides, did the Republicans filibuster everything? Dont recall them filibustering much if anything at all.
[Dont recall them filibustering much if anything at all.]
Of course you don’t. That’s because you don’t follow the news.
The filibuster is now routinely imposed on everything. Look it up. Every nomination and every bill is filibustered.
If memory serves, neither of Obama’s Supreme Court nominees was filibustered, and both Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan now sit on that Court.
I’d have liked to see ObamaCare filibustered, but the installation of Scott Brown as Senator from Massachusetts came a wee bit late for that, and the House voted to accept the Senate version — which passed 60-39 — without amendment.
How about the “stimulus” bill — the first one, passed in late January 2009? That wasn’t filibustered, though it should have been.
Ben, you’re either woefully misinformed or a terrible liar. I’m not sure which of those would be more flattering to you, so I’ll let you choose between them for yourself.
“The Senate Republicans filibuster EVERYTHING, which mean to get anything passed requires 60 votes.”
So nothing got passed in 2 years dumbass?
Of course what Ben ignores is the NDSWP had a filibuster proof majority from the time Specter defected and Franken’s theft of the Minnesota senate seat was sanctioned by the NDSWP controlled elections board in that woebegone state until the time of Scott Brown election earlier this year and a seventy seat advantage in the house.
The reason they couldn’t get anything through is that they weren’t making the pot sweet enough for certain principless whores which make up a portion of the NDSWP. They had to buy off Lieberman, Landrieu and Nelson in the Senate and give a meaningless promise to Stupak and his merry band of illiterates so they could try and cover their duplicitous asses for passing the seizure of the American health care system. In the house they had to determine exactly which members needed to be excused from party discipline so that the NDSWP capos would be able to hold on to their power in the house by getting these so-called blue dogs re-elected and when that looked like it might fail they were prepared to resort to parliamentary flimflammery.
Even now they can buy the support of several RINO krypto marxists if they just put in enough weasel words and pork to give them cover. These are the delusional members of the “party of stupid” who keep on stabbing their constituencies in the back so that maybe just maybe the ruling class will accept them as one of the clique. They are self centered power whores who put their own self interest above that of the country at large.
It says a lot about the health care fiasco that none of the usual suspects defected although as I remember at least one of the Maine ladies was in some cabal looking to emulate the “gang of fourteen” thinking it would seem enlightened and reasonable.
Helping to implement complete state control and subjugation of the citizenry to the whims of the bureaucracy is neither; It is just the arrogance and conceit of an out of control ruling class. Their stupidity is as legendary as their feelings of inadequacy. They didn’t learn the lesson taught by the McCain campaign: you get plaudits and approbation only so long as you do not oppose the totalitarian and subjugating polices of the NDSWP and their academic and media bag men then you become a cross between a mass murderer and a pedophile.
Lord Zero and the members of the ruling junta for their part were out there every day simply lying about the provisions of this vile and unconstitutional piece of legislation and when the lies failed to convince anyone because they were counteracted by actual facts and common sense reading of the provision they resorted to slander and claiming bad faith on the part of their opponents as all socialists do when their game is exposed. This is a modus operandus they employ time and again. Anyone who actually pays or has paid attention understands that the current rulers are all about their own ego as most despots are and will do whatever they have to to keep and extend their power.
Obama has blown his media invented cover as a “moderate” by reverting to his true nature(as disclosed by all the information ignored by the MSM and dismissed by his acolytes) an an America hating international socialist bent on turning this country into a third world pit.
The idea that Ms Tucker would so bald facedly run out the idea that Obama is anything but a dyed in the wool totalitarian wanna be shows just how delusional the left is and how intrinsic the “Big Lie” theory is to so called progressive i.e. the subjugation of the populace to a self anointed elite policies and governance. Reason and intelligence has nothing to do with what Obama promotes. It is all about raw power and a sense of entitlement and grievance as the policies he promotes have NEVER succeeded no matter what brand name they have assumed(socialism, Keynesianism, facism, “social” democracy, welfare statism). They are all of the same ilk. They subscribe to the arbitrary notion that some should be penalized to the benefit of others based on some nebulous caprice such as “social justice” ie self justified theft cooked up by arrogant provacateurs who think they can distribute
sustenance more efficiently and effectively than the rational self interest of billions of autonomous people.
Kind of difficult to add anything to what has already been posted.
Excellent responses, and a truly great initial post!
Yep, they covered all the right-wing talking points. 🙂
Yada, yada, yada.
Do you have anything to say that isn’t fed to you by Keef Overbite or Radical Madcow?
Ben, can’t you do anything but blame Bush, or toss bombs anymore..? Once upon a time you engaged in true discourse. That just doesn’t appear to be the case anymore.
BIC does an excellent job of expressing his thoughts and just because they coincide with a whole lot of other people’s does not reduce them to mere talking points.
No, they are just right-wing talking points. Blame Fannie and Freddie for the mortgage crisis. Call Obama the messiah. Claim the Republicans don’t have the numbers to block anything (they are currently blocking the appointment of Nobel Prise winner Peter Diamond to the Federal Reserve Board of Governors), blame the Community Reinvestment Act for the collapse of our economy (amazing how it took over thirty years), complain about the debt (funny how the huge deficits weren’t a problem when Bush and Reagan were in office)
No, they’re just mindless right-wing talking points parroted by the sheep. You right-wingers get all your information filtered through conservative media so you’re not confused with actual facts that contradict the conservative narrative.
Ben, you are boring to the point of inducing a comatose state. Have you no intelligent arguments to offer?
Fuck Ben in the ass with the front bumper of my pickup.
God damned communist troll…
Ben, slap your dumbass parents for allowing your retarded ass to live.
I have shoes that are brighter than Ben. Ben fails to acknowledge the difference between a Senatorial hold on a nomination and a filibuster. Ben refuses to acknowledge that Obama ran as someone who would work with both sides and then transformed into Teh iWon and the most partisan president in modern history.
Either a socialist liar (redundant) or a delusional true believer. Either way, he’s boring me to tears.
Blame Fannie and Freddie for the mortgage crisis.
Ben, once again, your current address is nowhere near reality:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMnSp4qEXNM&feature=player_embedded#!
And from a different source:
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2010/10/14/the_descent_of_fannie_mae_and_freddie_mac/
Call Obama the messiah.
Just following his lead:
Claim the Republicans don’t have the numbers to block anything
Already asked and answered, Sparky.
blame the Community Reinvestment Act for the collapse of our economy (amazing how it took over thirty years)
There’s much more, Ben, but I don’t think you’re going to like it:
http://www.businessinsider.com/the-cra-debate-a-users-guide-2009-6#ixzz12Xtzi3lQ
complain about the debt (funny how the huge deficits weren’t a problem when Bush and Reagan were in office)
Ben, once again, you’re wrong. I had lots of problems with Bush’s spending, as did many conservatives I know.
http://taxes-stupidity-and-death.blogspot.com/2008/11/moving-forward.html
Ben, for every point you raise, I’ve offered proof otherwise.
I think before you try again, you bring something to back what you’re going to say, at least if you want to be taken seriously.
[Ben, for every point you raise, I’ve offered proof otherwise.]
No, you’ve offered mindless right-wing spin.
[In short, the lax lending standards created in response to the CRA had dug a pit that was waiting to get filled when the circumstances were right.]
So, what made the circumstances “right?” How about the repeal of Glass-Steagall in 1999? The Glass-Steagall Act prohibited any one institution from acting as any combination of an investment bank, a commercial bank, and an insurance company. After it was repealed, the commercial banks were free to engage in high stakes gambling, which encouraged them to lower their standards for lending.
[I think before you try again, you bring something to back what you’re going to say, at least if you want to be taken seriously.]
You have no intellectual curiosity. You only look to sources that reinforce the right-wing narrative. There are no credible economists who agree with your “proof” because it’s just spin. While Fannie and Freddie, and possibly even the CRA may have played a role, the ultimate blame can be placed on deregulation. Hell, you can even blame Clinton for signing it! He also signed the Commodities Futures Modernization Act of 2000 that led to high gas and food prices and contributed to the problem. Clinton signed the deregulation of media ownership that destroyed FM radio.
“So, what made the circumstances “right?” How about the repeal of Glass-Steagall in 1999? The Glass-Steagall Act prohibited any one institution from acting as any combination of an investment bank, a commercial bank, and an insurance company. After it was repealed, the commercial banks were free to engage in high stakes gambling, which encouraged them to lower their standards for lending.”
How? Specifically state how this pushed them towards lowering their standards.
Who Caused the Economic Crisis? http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/who_caused_the_economic_crisis.html
Hindsight regulation http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2008/09/hindsight-regulation/4122/
Villain Phil http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/225742/villain-phil/editors
You call the right sheep, but I’ve seen you do nothing but echo MoveOn.org and the DailyKos. You defend the CRA by saying it took over thirty years to happen. Based on that logic, it took some fifteen years for the GLB to impact the economy. The reality is that deregulation actually saved the system, rather than hurt it. I can’t even give you an A for effort, because you’re really not trying.
Since you want to defend CRA and the GSEs so much, please explain to us how they did not cause the Housing Bubble, or will you remain intellectually uncurious and rely on the left-wing talking points defending your failed policies and failed politicians.
[Since you want to defend CRA and the GSEs so much, ]
I didn’t defend them, you liar. On the contrary, I said they contributed to the crisis.
“Fannie and Freddie, and possibly even the CRA may have played a role…” – The Hoff
Ooooooooooo, ringing condemnation! How ever could I doubt your conviction in holding them accountable…
Yawn…
The repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act is a valid point when it comes to criticism of the baking industry. If you would lighten up on the “mindless right-wing spin”, “right-wing narrative” and personal attacks on those who disagree with you, your arguments would be more effective.
Notice the drone ignored my question? Thats why they are drones, they cant think for themselves.
“Ben, for every point you raise, I’ve offered proof otherwise.”
Doesnt matter how much proof you offer. The drone says the Republicans filibuster everything. But yet, the thug pretty much got everything he wanted except Cap and Trade.
Ha! You little sheep.
Thanks for proving my point jackass. Couldnt answer so go with Alinsky tactics.
It Is Done… Obama Promised to Kill the Coal Industry – Today His Administration Came Through on That Promise
http://gatewaypundit.firstthings.com/2010/10/it-is-done-obama-promised-to-kill-the-coal-industry-today-team-obama-came-through-on-his-promise/
A shame this wasnt filibustered.
No, you’ve offered mindless right-wing spin.
No, I’ve offered something that you obviously can’t refute.
So, what made the circumstances “right?” How about the repeal of Glass-Steagall in 1999? The Glass-Steagall Act prohibited any one institution from acting as any combination of an investment bank, a commercial bank, and an insurance company. After it was repealed, the commercial banks were free to engage in high stakes gambling, which encouraged them to lower their standards for lending.
Ben, this might surprise you, but having worked in retail banking in the mid-to late 90’s, I was no fan of repealing Glass-Steagall. Of course, because of my employment with the banks, I looked at the CRA notice posted in the bank one day during a snowstorm, and I asked “Are they f***ing kidding? That’s insane!”
However, the conditions also included things like this:
[Emphasis Added.]
http://www.realclearmarkets.com/articles/2009/09/16/acorns_a_creature_of_the_cra_97409.html
The left bears a disproportionate part of the blame for the result, Ben.
First, they pushed to pass the CRA based on bad data.
Then, as the author indicated, they used it as a cudgel against the banks to pressure them to make loans that would not be made under normal responsible banking practices. I was there. I saw the protests, and I saw the deals they extorted from these banks. It was another reason I left banking and went into law.
You have no intellectual curiosity.
Having read one post, you have no basis on which to base that remark. I’m perfectly aware of “sources” like the Huffington Poo, the Washington Post, and Media[Dramaminespin]Matters. The thing is, I know enough from actual training and experience to know that they either get it wrong or only tell half the story more often than they get it right.
There are no credible economists who agree with your “proof” because it’s just spin.
Name 4, and Paul “I’m a useful idiot” Krugman doesn’t count.
Name one credible economist who believes the CRA caused the banking crisis and I’ll give you five. Obviously you know there are many who place the blame on the repeal of Glass-Steagall or you wouldn’t have asked for four. I’m just asking for one.
Obviously you know there are many who place the blame on the repeal of Glass-Steagall or you wouldn’t have asked for four.
I asked for four because I didn’t think you could name two. Apparently, I was correct.
I’m just asking for one.
I don’t really care what you’re asking for. I’ve backed everything I’ve said. If only you could have done the same, then perhaps we might have had a meaningful exchange of ideas rather than you answering proofs with with an empty scorn. I find nothing more intellectually uncurious than someone who thinks that simply dismissing statements backed by evidence as “talking points” without providing their own proofs to the contrary is convincing for anyone. It really is a sad thing to behold, because without the effort to prove otherwise, it makes your shallow condescension all the more damaging to your “message”…kinda like that’s all you can bring. I guess when the only tool you have is a hammer…
You can’t name one legitimate economist who backs up your belief that the CRA caused the banking crisis. That verifies my belief that you’re just a sheep who gets his information filtered through right-wing media.
Ben,
Really, this shouldn’t be a difficult task, even for a lefty.
Think of it as being back in school.
Show.
Your.
Work.
Otherwise known as bring your PROOF.
You really think you are going to get through to this drone? Seriously?
Elric, shhhh.
He’s trying to find 3 credible economists to back what he said.
Blame Fannie and Freddie for the mortgage crisis.
Well, I’m sure this was all made up, too.
And Bwarney Fwanks in there advocating for Fannie and Freddie to continue unchecked when his boyfreind was an executive…I’m sure that isn’t a CONFLICT OF INTEREST or anything…
Guess he is still looking. 🙂
You check out his blog? What a nutjob. He makes Dodger seem sane.
In a moment of boredom, I looked.
He’s a true believer, alright, but then he’s weak on FACTS there, too, so I guess I shouldn’t be suprised that he isn’t backing anything here, either.
That’s the weakness with the true believers. Overbite and Madcow focus all their efforts on telling the what to say, so they never even think past regurgitating it in any conversation to the next step of bringing their proof.
So drone, nothing got passed in the “president’s” 1st 2 years?
“Name one credible economist who believes the CRA caused the banking crisis and I’ll give you five.”
Guess you couldnt name them so resorting to the leftist game. He asked first asshole.
Poll: What was the Obamateurism of the Week?
Obama goes golfing for 52nd time after scolding Democrats for not working hard enough on midterm elections
Obama puts himself up as a raffle prize for OFA
Obama’s choice of targets getting less and less worthy
“I didn’t run for president because I wanted to do what would make me popular.”
He realized too late that “there’s no such thing as shovel-ready projects” when it comes to public works.
http://hotair.com/archives/2010/10/17/poll-what-was-the-obamateurism-of-the-week-67/
Dont forget to vote 🙂
Ben,
Why wont you answer? Did nothing your “president” wanted get passed?
“You can’t name one legitimate economist who backs up your belief that the CRA caused the banking crisis.”
He asked you first jackass.
Ben will get an epiphany in about 16 days that his politics, his mindset, his “religion” or lack thereof, and his miserable existence have been rolled.
Ben is the definition of background noise…no longer even worthy of useful idiot.
I tuned out the lemmings like Ben from the Left long ago. Two years ago, Ben was fainting in front of Styrofoam Greek columns, peeing in his pants.
Less than three weeks from now, I predict Ben will be shitting in his pants.
No, I will be mourning the death of our Constitution, our liberties, our democracy, and everything our founding fathers had envisioned for our country. That will be the final nail in the coffin. And you youngsters will be the ones hurt most by it.
Are you stoned?
** GUFFAW **
The force is strong with this one.
Ben,
In case your miserable presence graces this well written blog again, perhaps you can help us wingers to better understand this contradiction and apparently fogged memory like only a Lib can.
http://gregmankiw.blogspot.com/2010/10/barney-frank-then-and-now.html
If you jackboots were as good at running the country as you were in making excuses and blame assessment, NObama and his toe suckers like would have put us “wingers” out of business by now.
Well, the Democrats are spineless wimps and the Republicans are corporatists whose only interest is helping corporations increase their power and profits. If the Democrats ever grow a spine, it will probably too late. This is the end of America.
Ben,
I hadn’t thought it possible for one person to be as saturated with stupid as you have proven yourself to be.
Republicans are not corporatists only interested in helping corporations. It wasn’t Republicans who decided to eschew government’s role as regulator to become a participant a la GM and Chrysler, ignore the rule of law nullify the law to screw over bond holders and give the companies to the collective entities that were front and center in their downfall.
It wasn’t the Republicans who passed legislation that allows government to determine what companies get to keep participating in markets where they have done business for decades, and which ones will not.
It isn’t as though it matters, Ben. Being a Conservative, I’m no big fan of the Republican Party in recent years. And it is going to be Conservatives who will be unseating a good deal of corrupticrats in a few weeks.
Tex,
These drones are better mocked than engaged. I do give them a chance but when you know its futile, why continue trying to engage them? He whined about Republicans and the filibuster. The POS “president” got everything he wanted but Cap and Trade. Why is Ben whining like a little bitch?
Elric,
I am mocking them.
I give them an article that even the lamest of sycophants like Ben Hoffman can’t possibly explain demonstrating their insidious lying, then when they provide a feeble lemming answer, I give them the virtual kick in the nuts for their troubles.
Sometimes you’ve got to set them up for the drop kick…
“No, I will be mourning the death of our Constitution, our liberties, our democracy, and everything our founding fathers had envisioned for our country. That will be the final nail in the coffin. And you youngsters will be the ones hurt most by it.”
And yet, you continue to support these marxist thugs. Take your crocodile tears elsewhere moron.
[And yet, you continue to support these marxist thugs.]
Yep, that’s what you’re told to say, little sheep. The Obama administration is barely progressive. And to say those Democratic wimps are thugs is a comment on your own wimpiness. Obviously, if you think they’re thugs, you must be even wimpier.
“and the Republicans are corporatists whose only interest is helping corporations increase their power and profits.”
And yet, its the demomarxists taking over car companies, banks, student loans, energy, land and the health care industry. Either directly or by over regulation. Even for a drone you are one moronic POS.
No, I will be mourning the death of our Constitution, our liberties, our democracy, and everything our founding fathers had envisioned for our country.
The same Constitution that the geniuses who forced the health care takeover on us cannot cite for authority for what they did?
Everything our founding fathers envisioned? Like the rule of laws and not men that the left has been turning upside down for more than 40 years? A Nation with a charter that recognizes the real soveriegn from which unalienable rights issued, vs. a government of megalomaniacs who believe that the individual only has the rights government gives them. A nation with the same common moral frame of reference vs. the one the left has been forcing on us in degrees since 1949 in which a secular (not neutral) view has eclipsed a shared moral heritage largely due to judicial fiat supported by an historically ignorant reading of the Establishment Clause that fundamentally misunderstands the significance of Jefferson’s letter to the Danbury Baptists that was used to support this hijacking.
For someone who claims others are “intellectually uncurious”, you display a breathtaking ignorance of the Federalist Papers and Madison’s notes on the proceedings of the Consititutional Convention.
You really don’t want to play this game with this “youngster”, Ben. This “youngster”, like a great many others is less than pleased with the aging hippies who still behave badly and believe that they have the right to engage in special welfare with other people’s money. We have the perspective to see that 40 years of depravity and craven willingness to make others dependent on you with other people’s money under the auspices of compassion has been an abject failure at its stated purpose, and has done little but empower people who have horribly failed to comprehend everything our founding fathers have envisioned.
Ben, if I were you, and those who think like you, I’d be praying that people like me turn things around, restore a respect for the Constitution, and foster a general understanding of what the Founders and the Framers intended, because if we don’t, my kids will reach adulthood knowing exactly who destroyed their opportunities and stole their futures from them, and if that terrible day ever occurs, I don’t think there will be a hole deep enough and dark enough to protect any of you from your eggregious sins.
I got a kick out of that “youngsters” thing myself. I’m still waiting for his list of reputable economist’s BTW. It took me all of about two minutes to come up with a few…
I come right from the “hippie” generation and to be truthful? Nearly all of them have seen the light, and no, not from a tab of purple oz either. Most also went back to school, and learned that pie in the shy Keynesian economics have failed every single time that they have been tried.
Perhaps Atlas has indeed shrugged..?
[It took me all of about two minutes to come up with a few…]
A few that claim the CRA was responsible for the collapse of our banking system? I say you’re lying. Who are they?
Oh really Ben..? You know me well enough. I can back myself up. But..?
Seems you still need to respond to Elric66, then it might behoove me to accept your challenge.
I used “Google” and simply typed in “Economist opposed to Obama regime”
Awful lot of laureates and such popped up.
Ben? There was a time, years ago, that I actually believed that you were part of the “renowned” leftist intelligentsia.
Anymore, it looks like you do a big hit of crack, and then post. Calling me untruthful? Come now, you are better than that. Or, at least at one time you were.
Let’s have some substance Ben…
You might be a bomb thrower, but you certainly do lack the skill and expertise of “Che” and such! Stick with words…
And actually answer Elric66 once in a while…
I also find it outright funny that you didn’t comment at CLO on the post about the Tea Party…
Are you simply a loser? Ben..?
Who are these legitimate economists who believe the CRA caused the collapse of our banking system? It’s a simple question. How about just one. A name and a link to an article where that proves it.
You can’t do that because there are none. You’re a liar and a sheep to right-wing propaganda.
I provided several, you ignored it. Your call has been met, and you’ve failed.
Why don’t you stop calling people liars and actually practice what you preach- show your work.
Or were you lying?
Psst!
Try this for a start…
200..? And where the hells is your first?
No, that’s still zero.
I must say Ben is the most boring drone of them all. No style whatsoever.
Actually, I do answer all the time Patrick. The drone hasnt asked me to answer anything, just called me a sheep. The moron said the Republicans filibuster everything so I asked if that meant that the “president” got nothing passed in 2 years. The pussy still hasnt answered.
“The Obama administration is barely progressive.”
You really are stupid arent you? He barely took over GM. Barely took over health care. Barely took over student loans.
[I asked if that meant that the “president” got nothing passed in 2 years. ]
That’s a stupid question. To get anything passed requires 60 votes, which means watering down legislation to get a few Republicans and the conservadems to vote for it. That’s why the stimulus, the health care reform, and the banking regulation bills were all crap.
[He barely took over GM. Barely took over health care. Barely took over student loans.]
More mindless right-wing talking points. Saving GM saved thousands of jobs. What about the handout of 100s of billions of dollars to the banks, which funded millions of dollars in bonuses? That was done by the Bush administration.
You only get upset about the things you’re told to be upset about. You’re nothing but a mindless sheep.
Really ironic that some progressive drone whines about the Constitution and freedom.
Nice post, BIC – plenty of excellent details here, for those who are willing to notice them. Perhaps Ben and Cynthia Tucker could hook up and live happily ever after in blind ideology.
*ROARS LAUGHING*
Good one Maine.
Elric, I was referring to him not answering, not you.
Who are these legitimate economists who believe the CRA caused the collapse of our banking system? It’s a simple question. How about just one. A name and a link to an article where that proves it.
Ben,
You have yet to bring a single shred of evidence to back your statements and you demand proof from someone else?
You get points for gall. It doesn’t make up for what you’ve lost based on sheer inanity. Proclaiming the beauty of the Emperor’s New Clothes doesn’t make you serious or smart; it just gives us something else to laugh at.
There was a time, years ago, that I actually believed that you were part of the “renowned” leftist intelligentsia.
“Leftist intelligentsia”…that’s quite an oxymoron.
I’m not sure of the self-appointed cognoscenti have anyone other than themselves convinced of their keen intellect and overwhelming expertise anymore.
To get anything passed requires 60 votes, which means watering down legislation to get a few Republicans and the conservadems to vote for it.
Thank you for admitting that the Dims have problems with other Dims. Now maybe you can abandon the tired and false excuse that the Pubs are just blocking the Savior President’s agenda. Go ahead, Ben. Put the lie down. The sun will still rise in the East tomorrow. I promise.
Saving GM saved thousands of jobs.
And the Gubbmint owning shares means that the UAW now has a straw attached directly to the taxpayers’ wallets, instead of that of the shareholders, who got the prison shower treatment without even dinner or the pretense of foreplay. Propping up a bad business model that is hindered by enormous legacy costs isn’t saving anyone from anything. It just means that when the crash comes, it will hurt even more people. I wouldn’t expect the government to understand that, given the fact that it does much the same with Social Security and Medicare, but people who’ve actually had to work for a living know that this won’t work. While we’re on the subject, Ben, perhaps you can tell me where in the Constitution that you claim to be so concerned about government is empowered to “save” some corporations, but not others?
What about the handout of 100s of billions of dollars to the banks, which funded millions of dollars in bonuses? That was done by the Bush administration.
I was against it. Still am. But it wasn’t the Bush administration that decided to convert that debt to equity in the banks. No, that little bit of genius is owned lock, stock, and barrel by the Chicago Messiah and his merry band of thugs n thieves.
That’s why the stimulus, the health care reform, and the banking regulation bills were all crap.
Sorry, I missed this little bit of delightful revisionism on the first go-round.
No, Ben.
The stimulous was crap because the dems chose their priorities (spending money for their pet causes) over doing something that wasn’t going to flush a whole lot of money we didn’t have down the toilet.
Health Care Reform is crap because IT ISN’T IN THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT’S AUTHORITY TO INTERVENE IN THIS AREA, and it has no authority to force anyone to enter into private contracts with anyone else. Period.
And the banking regulation bill is crap because it was written by Dims, who were bent on making things more expensive without addressing anything that was actually the cause of the trouble to begin with, but hey, the Dims could say they passed a law, so that made it worthwhile.
70 responses in and a lefty has yet to bring any proofs, yet demands proofs from others.
I wonder what subject in some LS&A school Hoffman teaches. Or what subject he lets his TA present for him, while he posts on blogs with the college computer.
So nothing was filibustered? Thanks for playing drone.
“What about the handout of 100s of billions of dollars to the banks, which funded millions of dollars in bonuses? That was done by the Bush administration.”
That was done under a demomarxist house and Senate jackass. Did your “president” as Senator say no? Then STFU drone.
Obama administration to press bans on all cell-phone use while driving?
http://hotair.com/archives/2010/10/18/obama-administration-to-press-bans-on-all-cell-phone-use-while-driving/
Feel the fascism.
So, if I have this straight…
Profligate spending under Bush = Bad!
6 times the spending under Obama = TEH AWESOME!!!
Verily, the hypocrisy of a die-hard Obamatard is truly a thing of wonder.
[6 times the spending under Obama = TEH AWESOME!!!]
You’re saying the budget increased sixfold under Obama? You’re completely delusional (probably living in Glennbeckistan).
The yearly additional deficit has increased more than 300% under the auspices of Obama. That much is not disputable…
And for our troubles, we’ve lost another 3+MM jobs with real unemployment sitting somewhere between 16-20%. Even Paul Krugman, your Nobel Laureate flunky and former Enron economic adviser is confused.
You’re saying the budget increased sixfold under Obama? You’re completely delusional (probably living in Glennbeckistan).
That’s it? That’s all the response you could muster? Really?
As usual, the wise and sooper-intelligent lib completely ignores the point by being a childish pendant about one tiny little factoid.
Powerful stuff, Benny. Powerful stuff indeed.
Are you honestly trying to say that spending has not increased astronomically under Obama?
Because that, my dim-witted friend, would be the true definition of “delusional.”
How about addressing just one person’s position with an actual response, as opposed to simply being yet another simple-minded name-caller.
Do you even have that capability? Based on everything you’ve written here, I am guessing “no.”
Prove me wrong.
[Are you honestly trying to say that spending has not increased astronomically under Obama?]
Bush’s final budget was $3.1 trillion. The budget for Obama’s first year was $3.6 trillion. That’s an astronomical increase?
[The yearly additional deficit has increased more than 300% under the auspices of Obama. That much is not disputable…]
Sure it is. That’s a lie. Bush’s final fiscal year deficit was $1,279.6 billion. Obama’s first fiscal year had a deficit of 1,386.1 billion.
You guys are either totally brainwashed or pathological liars. Or a combination of both.
Wiserbud,
I guess we are to assume that Ben Hoffman must believe that about 70% of America too stupid to understand the nuances and wisdom of Barry Hussein Obama and his statist positions. Like the profundity of Hope and Change and my favorite, “Yes We Can!”.
I think it was the speeches in front of Styrofoam Greek columns and Europeans peeing in their pants over Obama that gave me the second heads up maybe Obama a malignant narcissist and liar – the first being that he had never heard his spiritual adviser say any of those nasty anti-American, anti-white cliches in Barry’s 20 years of attendance at Trinity. 🙄
Reminds me of another blogger telling me we just didn’t understand Obama because, well it’s too complicated.
Yeah, that’s it! 😈
[I guess we are to assume that Ben Hoffman must believe that about 70% of America too stupid to understand the nuances and wisdom of Barry Hussein Obama and his statist positions.]
Well, you certainly are too stupid to understand anything.
Well, you certainly are too stupid to understand anything.
Once again, I stand in awe of your incredible debating skillz.
You certainly are the precocious one, aren’t you?
And the thing is its the spending is what got the Republicans to lose the House and Senate.
>>>And the thing is its the spending is what got the Republicans to lose the House and Senate.
Which, if one were to apply logic here, would pretty much prove that we were not happy with the spending even when the Republicans were doing it!
But, as is typical with the average leftist, that sort of logic and analysis never gets in the way of a childish little retort like “You’re only upset with out-of-control spending now because Obama is black! RACIST!!”
To which I usually respond “Using that logic, it’s obvious that you’re only okay with Obama’s spending, when, apparently, you were so upset at Bush’s spending, because Obama’s black. Now who’s the racist?”
He isnt black, he is biracial. But otherwise you are correct. 🙂
Now you see why I call them drones?
That’s easily proven by Bush’s approval rating and why it got so low.
Republicans and certainly Conservatives, when the aggregate considered, are far more intellectually honest than 99% of Libs like Ben Hoffman. Obama’s approval rating will never go much below 40% no matter how bad it gets, because the party of Imam Obama is made up of dishonest shills like Ben.
[Republicans and certainly Conservatives, when the aggregate considered, are far more intellectually honest than 99% of Libs like Ben Hoffman.]
You claimed Obama increased spending sixfold. And you’re calling me a liar? Then again, you may simply be delusional from all the brainwashing.
You claimed Obama increased spending sixfold. And you’re calling me a liar?
It’s called exaggeration in order to make a point, dumbass. Deal with it.
And I don’t consider you as much a liar as I do a coward and a bullshit artist. You haven’t answered a single question put to you and, instead, simple toss out the same old tired insults and invective.
Trust me, you are not unique, you are not witty and, based on your unwillingness to provide a single ounce of proof for any of your puerile, you are not really all that smart.
But, just so I understand, you’re still good with Obama’s level of spending, regardless of how much more it is than Bush’s, right?
And, I assume, you’re also good with the projected increases in his spending to record levels, right?
http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/charts.html
And you’re okay with his astronomical increase in the deficit, which, in 2009 alone, was more than five times the deficit he “inherited” when he was ordained as President, right?
http://tinyurl.com/38c9pr5
Please, tell me, Ben, is this level of insane spending only okay when you beloved Won does it?
Get’s your facts straight hack and yeah, I’m calling you a liar. I never said anything about six fold – I said three fold. I’ll stand corrected – El Bongo has only more than doubled the deficit in his first two years in comparison to Bush’s last two years, all the while running the real unemployment rate to 17%. Add that fact to your messiah’s abysmal failure. Here is the historical deficit numbers Gramps with your majority Democratic Congress
http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/histdebt/histdebt_histo5.htm
09/30/2010 13,561,623,030,891.79
09/30/2009 11,909,829,003,511.75
09/30/2008 10,024,724,896,912.49
09/30/2007 9,007,653,372,262.48
09/30/2006 8,506,973,899,215.23
Believe that makes it Mullah Obama’s aggregate deficit 233% greater than Bush’s last two years. Dispute that dickhead and note Bush managed that feat with your feckless Dimocratic majority Congress who are soon going to be frogmarched to the curb.
What do you do? Make shit up? And don’t give me that crap about Bush creating the outrageous deficit in 2009. He left Jan 2009 – that’s porkulus, welfare and the works gramps. 😉
Did I mention health care costs have gone up dramatically since BongoCare? How about 47% increase in Connecticut – hopefully, you live there.
2009 was Bush’s final fiscal year, dummy. Did you eat paint chip containing lead when you were a kid?
[Did I mention health care costs have gone up dramatically since BongoCare?]
It went up dramatically every year before the health care bill was passed, too, dummy.
2009 was Bush’s final fiscal year, dummy. Did you eat paint chip containing lead when you were a kid?
bzzzzt!
wrong. please try again.
El Bongo has only more than doubled the deficit in his first two years in comparison to Bush’s last two years, all the while running the real unemployment rate to 17%.
actually……..
http://tinyurl.com/38c9pr5
2009 was Bush’s final fiscal year, dummy.
2009 was Bush’s final fiscal year, dummy.
So it ws under Bush that they passed the worthless and ineffective $900billion stimulus package?
Ben, look at my thumb.
.
.
.
Gee, you’re dumb.
Hey dickhead. This isn’t the budget. This is the actual debt that occurred. Bush didn’t budget for porkulus sport. And Bongo was President in 2009 asshole, lest you forget his dismal failures.
I got a question for you dummy since you skipped my first one from above like the coward you are.
If Bongo’s programs so successful, so good, from stimulus to health care, why is not one (that’s 1 to you) Dimocrat campaigning on all the accomplishments worm?
Answer that one creep and don’t cower off this time like a some progressive pussy.
2009 was Bush’s final fiscal year, dummy.
So, I guess I shouldn’t expect an answer from you to my questions above?
Big surprise.
before Ben comes back and throws out his truly cutting “liar” repsonse again, I meant $800b, not $900b, which is what Obama wanted in the first place, btw.
But that’s okay, I’m sure they’ll fix that during the lame duck session, as the Dems who get tossed on Nov 2nd roll across town to the cushy lobby positions they will be creating for themselves.
What’s that, you say?? Lobbyists are teh suxxor? Silly one, under Barack “No lobbyists will be allowed to work for my administration!” Obama, Democrat lobbyists are teh ROXXOR!!!
/typical hypocritical leftist
[So it ws under Bush that they passed the worthless and ineffective $900billion stimulus package?]
Yes, the stimulus was passed during Bush’s final fiscal year, which ended Sept. 30, 2009, dummy. The stimulus only contributed about $100 billion to the 2009 fiscal year. The rest is all on Bush.
Who’s delusional now?
Did I mention health care costs have gone up dramatically since BongoCare? How about 47% increase in Connecticut – hopefully, you live there.
Damned evil insurance companies, trying to stay in business…..
Don’t they realize they should simply lock their doors and give in to the Obama/Pelosi/Reid plan for government-run healthcare?
How DARE they????
Here Goosestepping Herr Hoffman,
Dispute these projected budget deficits courtesy of Bongo:
http://www.agoyandhisblog.com/2010/04/05/romer-america-is-too-stupid-to-understand-my-superfantastic-advanced-math-skillz1/
And make sure you page down to get a good pictorial gander…
Okay, so what bills did the Democrats pass that made the deficit increase so dramatically? You can’t answer that because you’re a liar. The decreased revenues due to the recession and increased spending on defense caused it.
You also had Bush’s bailouts:
March 2008
$29 Billion Stimulus Package – Wall Street Bailout
May 2008
$178 Billion Stimulus Package – Average American Bailout
July 2008
$300 Billion Stimulus Package – Homeowners Bailout
September 2008
$200 Billion Stimulus Package – Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Bailout
September 2008
$50 Billion Stimulus Package To Guarantee Money Market Funds
September 2008
$25 Billion Stimulus Package – Automakers Bailout
September – November 2008
$150 Billion Stimulus Package – AIG Bailout
October 2008
$700 Billion Stimulus Package – Banks Bailout
http://www.stimuluspackagedetails.com/time.html
I notice you left out the rest of the story there, Benny.
February 2009 $787 Billion Stimulus Package – Average Americans Bailout
February 2009 $275 Billion Stimulus Package – Homeowners Bailout
March 2009 $30 Billion Stimulus Package – AIG Bailout
March 2009 $15 Billion Stimulus Package – Small Business Loans
March 2009 $1 Trillion “Toxic Asset” Program
March 2009 $22 Billion Stimulus Package
April 2009 $1 Trillion Stimulus Package – G-20 World Leaders Stimulus
Let’s do some math, shall we?
Bush bailouts and other spending bills you referenced: $1.632 Trillion
Obama Bailouts and spending: $3.129 Trillion
Nearly double. Both suck, but guess what? It sucks more under Obama!!!!
Shocking.
I ask you again, do you only have a problem with out-of-control spending when a Republican does it?
The decreased revenues due to the recession and increased spending on defense caused it.
*looking back for defense spending anywhere in there…..
*looking…..
*looking………………….
Nope, don’t see it. Please feel free to correct me if I’m wrong.
By the way, Bush’s numbers would have been much lower if only he hadn’t had to bail out FM/FM. But, of course, thanks to people like Chuckie Schumer (D) and Barney “Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are SOUND!” Frank (D), that was inevitable.
Lucky for Obama, the inevitable crash of those two institutions happened prior to his administration, huh?
[I ask you again, do you only have a problem with out-of-control spending when a Republican does it?]
I have a problem with all those bailouts, which were the result of deregulation and lack of enforcement of existing regulation during the Bush administration.
I don’t have a problem with the stimulus bill, without which unemployment would be around 11%. It also boosted GDP and improved our infrastructure.
You sheep hate any spending that makes our country better but don’t mind bailing out corporations and dumping money into wars with no end.
Oh, and what has all that “stimulus” spending gotten us, according to Gallup?
10%+ unemployment. And rising.
http://tinyurl.com/2ch8zwx
Keep spinning, Benny. Facts be damned, huh?
And just wait until the nightmare known as “Healthcare Reform” (another additional $1trillion+, minimum, unless we assume that history repeats itself, which it always does) really kicks in.
http://tinyurl.com/yf2huu5
$1trillion. $2.5 trillion. Whatever, it’s just money, right?
http://tinyurl.com/ykz5ptg
I don’t have a problem with the stimulus bill, without which unemployment would be around 11%.
So, instead, it’s only 10%+ and it only cost nearly $1 trillion dollars! What a bargain!!!
By the way, it’s really interesting how the CBO has so quickly changed their estimates. Originally,we were told that unemployment would rise to 8.5% without the stimulus. Yet it rose to 10% Now, the story is it would have gone to 11% without it.
“Experts agree that if nothing is done, the unemployment rate could reach double digits,” Mr. Obama said in a January 24 radio address. “If we do not act boldly and swiftly, a bad situation could become dramatically worse.” The same month, his economic advisors released a report saying that, without the stimulus, unemployment would hit around 8.5 percent by April 2009, and 7.8 percent with it.
http://tinyurl.com/y8t893h
Yet more CYA bullshit from the left. Too bad for you that the internet is forever, huh?
You sheep hate any spending that makes our country better but don’t mind bailing out corporations and dumping money into wars with no end.
You’re lack of reading comprehension is precious.
By the way, just in case you forgot, the vote to go to war in Afghanistan in the Senate was 99-1.
If Obama was in the Senate at the time, I guess it would have been 98 for, 1 against and 1 “present.”
“2009 was Bush’s final fiscal year, dummy.”
You mean Pelosi fiscal year. The House controls the spending dumbass.
Wow, you guys got a live one (brain dead, but lively) on the line this time. Keep the tip up and the line tight so he doesn’t throw the hook.
Of course, if you do manage to reel it all the way in, you’ll just have to cut the line and throw it back, like you do with all
crapcarp.Afghanistan: American Troop Morale Plummets as ROE Continue to Tighten, “They Won’t Let us Fight – War is War and This is No War, I Don’t Know What This is”…
http://weaselzippers.us/2010/10/19/afghanistan-american-troop-morale-plummets-as-roe-continue-to-tighten-they-wont-let-us-fight-war-is-war-and-this-is-no-war-i-dont-know-what-this-is/
And you wonder why I show no respect for this “president”
Damn Ben, you’re even thicker than I first thought…I’ll let the Wall Street Journal try to explain it to you. Your inanity bypasses my ability to explain it to an Obama toady. For starters, don’t you realize El Bongo reigned over 1/2 the bank bailout? When does your expiration date run out on making feeble excuses? You’re an abysmal failure – face it.
I’ll bet you’re still contending the porkulus saved millions of jobs too.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703906204575027181656362948.html
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703294904575385481462433508.html?KEYWORDS=Mid-Session+Review
No matter how you spin it moron, under your Dimcratically controlled Congress and assuming you understand that Congress controls the purse strings (a big assumption), the deficit has increased almost 5 trillion since Jan 2007.
That’s why lying and cowardly asswipes like you are going to get frogmarched out the back door in 14 days. If I had anything to do with, we’d put out the welcome mat for the jolly jihadists to meet you at home. 😈
Hey BiC,
I’ve got one hung in the queue, waiting hot off the press to answer the insufferable Ben’s bogus facts…
But it appears Wise beat me to it. Ben’s almost as easy a target as Yeller Dawg.
Why aren’t any of you talking about the REAL unemployment numbers?
From my old home :
https://www.bestplaces.net/County/Genesee-Michigan.aspx
I already lived through that under Carter there. It never really recovered. It is now like the third world, and they still vote Dummycrat there.
Why aren’t any of you talking about the REAL unemployment numbers?
I didn’t want to confuse L’il Benny.
I was hoping to make Bongwater Ben’s head explode.
I have a problem with all those bailouts, which were the result of deregulation and lack of enforcement of existing regulation during the Bush administration.
All of which has been debunked throughout this thread.
I was hoping to make Bongwater Ben’s head explode.
Explosions require mass.
The best you would get out of L’il Ben’s empty head is a loud “pop.”
“You sheep hate any spending that makes our country better but don’t mind bailing out corporations and dumping money into wars with no end.”
You think our country is better since the demomarxist majority took over and that POS became”president”? Seriously?
Myth: Lib’s heads explode.
Fact: Lib’s heads implode – think the vacuum of deep space. The sound one hears is due to the effects of global warming gasses leaving their tympanic membranes.
Tex,
I’ll take either one.
Kinda weird Ben is obsessed with sheep. Just like his jihadist allies.
Bertrand Russell~ Man needs for his happiness not only the enjoyment of this or that but hope and enterprise and change.