Goodbye, democracy!!!

[GoldenRivet]

try as you might...

you will not outspend Obama and his Liberal/Socialist/Welfare state congress.

ok... I'll make it easy for TVM and Mookie...

compare the following numbers

$80,000,000 spent by these special interest groups on campaigning.
$1,000,000,000,000+ spent by this out of control congress.

which can my grandchildren live with?

Im going to have to go with $80M

[mookiemookie]

Originally Posted by GoldenRivet

try as you might...

you will not outspend Obama and his Liberal/Socialist/Welfare state congress.

ok... I'll make it easy for TVM and Mookie...

compare the following numbers

$80,000,000 spent by these special interest groups on campaigning.
$1,000,000,000,000+ spent by this out of control congress.

which can my grandchildren live with?

Im going to have to go with $80M

logical fallacy, much?

I love when the facts of Dem control is revealed it is called a falacy of logic, poor interpretation, unethical or unreliable polling, or some such thing.

I want to see these folks when mom and dad stop supporting them and they see when stealing from others isn't a good policy.

so sad.

[mookiemookie]

Originally Posted by The Third Man

I love when the facts of Dem control is revealed it is called a falacy of logic, poor interpretation, unethical or unreliable polling, or some such thing.

I want to see these folks when mom and dad stop supporting them and they see when stealing from others isn't a good policy.

so sad.

You love to play the "poor me, everyone picks on me" card. But when you make insulting posts like that, it's no wonder you get the treatment that you get.

I don't care for your politics, and while I can say that about many people on this board, the majority of them argue their point in mature fashion without resorting to pettiness or personal attacks.

You do not, and I therefore have absolutely zero respect for you.

Originally Posted by mookiemookie

You love to play the "poor me, everyone picks on me" card. But when you make inon sequitur nsulting posts like that, it's no wonder you get the treatment that you get.

I don't care for your politics, and while I can say that about many people on this board, the majority of them argue their point in mature fashion without resorting to pettiness or personal attacks.

You do not, and I therefore have absolutely zero respect for you.

You love to play the "poor me, everyone picks on me" card. But when you make inon sequitur nsulting posts like that, it's no wonder you get the treatment that you get.

Show me the examples. You cannot make me disrespect your opinion so long as they are honest and deeply felt. I guess that is a difference between us. You don't like honest, deeply felt opinion and would like it curtailed.

[mookiemookie]

Originally Posted by The Third Man

Show me the examples. You cannot make me disrespect your opinion so long as they are honest and deeply felt. I guess that is a difference between us. You don't like honest, deeply felt opinion and would like it curtailed.

There are respectful ways of expressing an opinion, none of which you seem to grasp.

I'm done here. Go topic spam another "In case you forgot in the five minutes since my last one, here's another 'I hate Obama' thread"

Originally Posted by mookiemookie

There are respectful ways of expressing an opinion, none of which you seem to grasp.

I'm done here. Go topic spam another "In case you forgot in the five minutes since my last one, here's another 'I hate Obama' thread"

But agreeing with your position isn't one of them in my mind. I'm no RINO/ liberal progressive.


Spam is the racist of the internet and is often used by those whose argument is lost.

But please post more. I want to hear what you have to say.

[Skybird]

Costs of Bush's Iraq adventure, military and follow up costs in American society until today: estimates range between 3 and 6 trillion. The crazy Iraq operation is being made responsible by some analysts to have helped the fincial crisis of 2008/2009 becoming more excessive than it would have been without the war. Seen that way, the costs of the Iraq adventure are even higher.

Costs of Obama's social security initiative: wide range of opinions, trying to calculate additonal costs ("up to 1 trillion") versus savings ("several billions per year"). Whatever, it is neither such a foreign political desaster nor such a tremendous finacial loss like the Gulf War.

Financially, Bush was the far bigger evil-doer, even if counting new debts to boost the economy by Obama are added to Obama'S score. Bush's campaign also set records for collecting financial donations - until Obama, if I recallit correctly.

Crazy to burn so much money for stupid babbling and empty paroles.

[GoldenRivet]

Originally Posted by Skybird

Costs of Bush's Iraq adventure, military and follow up costs in American society until today: estimates range between 3 and 6 trillion. The crazy Iraq operation is being made responsible by some analysts to have helped the fincial crisis of 2008/2009 becoming more excessive than it would have been without the war. Seen that way, the costs of the Iraq adventure are even higher.

Costs of Obama's social security initiative: wide range of opinions, trying to calculate additonal costs ("up to 1 trillion") versus savings ("several billions per year"). Whatever, it is neither such a foreign political desaster nor such a tremendous finacial loss like the Gulf War.

Financially, Bush was the far bigger evil-doer, even if counting new debts to boost the economy by Obama are added to Obama'S score. Bush's campaign also set records for collecting financial donations - until Obama, if I recallit correctly.

Crazy to burn so much money for stupid babbling and empty paroles.

i see your point and raise you this contribution

Bush had a war in two countries initially backed by the majority of the people and the majority of the congress spanning him 8 years in office to aide him in spending 5 to 6 trillion dollars.

Obama is trying to wind these things down and still has managed to spend 1/5th or 1/6th of the previous administration's money in less than 2 years.

at this rate - god forbid America endures 2 terms of Obama... he will have outspent the previous administration by about 3 or 4 trillion dollars by the conclusion of his second term

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by GoldenRivet

i see your point and raise you this contribution

Bush had a war in two countries initially backed by the majority of the people and the majority of the congress spanning him 8 years in office to aide him in spending 5 to 6 trillion dollars.

No, the costs for Afghanistan were not that high in the first years, nor was the money I mentioned "spend" on the war in Iraq. To prominet parts it was, but the sum I mention also covers follow-up costs for the sopcial community in America: delcine of public fundings in the education sector, the follow-up costs from that for the economy of the forseeable future, additional interests for additional debts and more state bonds, etc.

Obama is trying to wind these things down and still has managed to spend 1/5th or 1/6th of the previous administration's money in less than 2 years.

at this rate - god forbid America endures 2 terms of Obama... he will have outspent the previous administration by about 3 or 4 trillion dollars by the conclusion of his second term

That would imply there is a linear relation between office time and spendings, but it is not that simple. There is no second 1 trillion social insurrance program coming, nor will over the next (1 or 3) 2-year-periods exactly as much money being spend on bailing out banks as was spend in the first 2-year period. On the other hand, the Fed is helpless, the politicians clueless, they try to artificially devalue the dollar and raising inflation, and I have no doubt that if majpor buddies (=companies fail in the future), they will be bailed out again indeed. I just complain about the linear relation you imply here.

That they now try to laucnh a trade war especially with China, is hardly good advise. It is campaign rumble for November, I assume. China has already started before that announcement to reorientate it's trading focus from foreign exports towards supplying the internal market demand. They are reducing their interest to export to the Us that way, and that also means they have less and lesser interest to artifically support the dollar by buying bonds.

As I see it, they are man euvering themsleves into finacial striking range - considering their tremendous dollar reserves of unofficially almost 3 trillion, officially 1.5 trillion. In August, officials of the Chinese bank for the first time ever voiced open threats that China could use these reserves as a weapon to politically and economicall crush the US by liquidising them in huge quantities and thus finishing off the dollar currency, with the most likely consequnces of the US economy totally collapsing. In that context, Clinton warned of America's vulnerability due to the fact that 44% of it's debts is controlled by foreign powers (China threatens nuclear option of dollar sales).

In such a weak position, you do not try to launch a trade war, no matter the Yuan's value. Pithy words don't win conflicts, especially not against the Chinese. They will not feel intimidated, but will calmly weigh their strengths versus their weaknesses, and then decide, no matter the US' desires. If Obama lets this thing really escalate, it could dramatically backfire on the US.

[GoldenRivet]

Originally Posted by mookiemookie

logical fallacy, much?

how so?