Barack Obama, our next President

[Chicagoan by Birth]

shinningelectr0n wrote:

<quoted text>
If your head were to be turned inside-out, you'd look like a Sh*t Lollipop.

What you meanum... Head turned inside-out, all you gots to do is shave it....

[RealDave]

killtaker wrote:

<quoted text>
"WASHINGTON — Two days after the shooting deaths of 26 people at a Newtown, Conn., elementary school, Sen. Dianne Feinstein pledged Sunday that she would introduce new gun-control legislation at the beginning of next year’s congressional session.
“It [the bill] will ban the sale, the transfer, the transportation and the possession,” the California senator said on NBC’s “Meet the Press.”“Not retroactively, but prospectively. And it will ban the same for big clips, drums or strips of more than 10 bullets.”
http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-fe...
"White House spokesman Jay Carney said Obama would support U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein's effort to craft legislation to reinstate an assault weapons ban..."
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/12/18/us-...
You are relying on Social Security and you call me stupid...

See,you are a f*cking idiot.

Banning certain assault rifles & high capacity magazines is NOT banning all guns.

[carol]

DBWriter wrote:

I hear the pundits and politicians talk about how the middle class is being protected.
bullshit.
No spending cuts means inevitable collapse of the government. Thus, the middle class gets anihilated.
No cuts... no deal.

Maybe it's time we took to the streets again demanding reforms and government accountability - and not politicizing it this time.

[DBWriter]

The deal....

Increased spending.
600 billion dollars additional revenue over 10 years.
Reality:
We have a deficit of 1.3+ trillion with no plan to reduce it.
Without the economic burden of ObamaKare, the already obscene debt doubles in 10 years. When ObamaKare starts sucking every dollar out of the economy, that 16 trillion dollar debt will probably double in half that time.

The only problem we have is government spending. The only thing that cuts government spending is the fiscal cliff. Let it come.

[RealDave]

DBWriter wrote:

<quoted text>
That was her specific job, dufus. And, you're right. She didn't verify anything. If she did, then Clinton wouldn't have bombed Iraq every other goddam day.
Valerie Plame was the managing director for the CIA's intelligence operation on Saddam Hussein's WMD programs.
Vallerie Plame reported to Bill Clinton that Saddam Hussein had viable WMD programs. Valerie Plame reported to Bush43 that Saddam Hussein had viable WMD programs.
Valerie Plame was responsible for the WMD part of the 18 UN resolutions being ignored justification to remove Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq.
That was her assigned job. She headed the operation. She generated all analysis given to Clinton, who used it to bomb Iraq every other day, and to Bush 43, who used it to remove Saddam Hussein from power.

If she never verified the intel Bush used to go to war, how was it her fault??? Bush should have not used the intel until it was verified.

But hey, that would take common sense. Something a dumbass like you knows nothing about.

[DBWriter]

RealDave wrote:

<quoted text>
See,you are a f*cking idiot.
Banning certain assault rifles & high capacity magazines is NOT banning all guns.

Semantics.
The Constitution doesn't say anywhere that the government society has a different set of rights than the non-government society.
It is unarguable that every private citizen has every right to possess every weapon any agency in government can possess.
You have to get rid of the Constitution and the concept of civillian government to change that.

That's ok with me. If the police think the only thing they need to protect me is a .22 single-shot crack-barrel rifle, then let that be the case.

[carol]

DBWriter wrote:

<quoted text>
Who knows what they will do. Boehner is a Democrat. So, he will do whatever he can to prevent any cuts to government spending.
There is no reason to hurry this. This can be addressed at any time and any agreement can be made retroactive to the first of the year.
There is some hidden reason why everyone is being led to believe this is an emergency. This is just like when ObamaKare was rushed through without anyone even reading it. Even today nobody knows what's in that law.
The government doesn't have a revenue problem. It has a spending problem. Cut govenment spending first. After government spending is cut, then let's talk about revenue issues... like increasing the number of people paying income taxes.
Any country that lets half the population mooch off the other half won't last long.
The only way to fix the insanity in our government is to have everyone dependent on their decisions. EVERYONE should have to pay income taxes. If everyone paid income taxes, the wouldn't be voting for a bunch of criminal frauds flying a Marxist flag, that's for sure.

Boehner walks a very thin line between hard-right conservatives and hard-left liberals and the demands of both with the country's best interests hanging in the balance. You should cut him a little slack.

He risks republicans being labeled obstructionists and democrats ending up smelling like a rose.

Which is exactly what the democrats are counting on. He has no choice right now but to compromise.

We have a good chance to come out on top in 2014 and 2016 by playing the democrats' game for a while.

The repubicans succeeded in upping the tax increases. It ain't over til it's over.

[DBWriter]

carol wrote:

<quoted text>
Maybe it's time we took to the streets again demanding reforms and government accountability - and not politicizing it this time.

I'm hoping it doesn't come to that. Everyone on our side works for a living and don't have the time.
We definitely need a new Speaker of the House. Boehner is unquestionably a Democrat. We have no chance of reducing spending with him as Speaker.

[DBWriter]

RealDave wrote:

<quoted text>
If she never verified the intel Bush used to go to war, how was it her fault??? Bush should have not used the intel until it was verified.
But hey, that would take common sense. Something a dumbass like you knows nothing about.

.. dufusses....

Because it was her job to verify that intel. She took money from you with the understanding that she would verify intel about Saddam Hussein's WMD program.
What she did was, she falsified the analysis. Valerie Plame was a critical piece in the ploy to keep the UN's oil-for-food scam going. She falsified intel so the 18 UN sanctions being ignored would remain in place, and the oil-for-food scam would continue.

[Death of Tenzing]

carol wrote:

<quoted text>
As long as you keep repeating that...
We never had a surplus under Clinton. Clinton got lucky with the dot.com bubble. It then burst. The Republican Congress led the way to a more balanced budget. The unraveling of the housing mortgage loan crisis began under Clinton. We were hit by 9/11 under Bush disrupting the economy. Democrats also supported the war effort. Democrats ignored the warnings by Bush and Bernacke of an impending housing market crisis as much, if not more, than Republicans.
...I'm going to keep repeating this.
Your oversimplified version is much too understated and consistently inaccurate.

You keep flogging that lie no matter how many times its disproven. You and the idiot DBWronger, two pieces of sht in a pod.

[carol]

DBWriter wrote:

<quoted text>
I'm hoping it doesn't come to that. Everyone on our side works for a living and don't have the time.
We definitely need a new Speaker of the House. Boehner is unquestionably a Democrat. We have no chance of reducing spending with him as Speaker.

Don't think that's going to happen either. Most of us are still shell-shocked from the last election and are now just biding our time hoping that some sanity will return in the next two elections.

Politicizing the Tea Party movement was a bad idea and no one wants more derisiveness than we already have in this country thanks to this current administration.

Unfortunately, Romney was not the right messenger. Obama just got lucky. Hopefully, Americans will be paying more attention to the failed policies of what will be this two-term president the next time.

Obamacare will be in full swing by 2016. People are in for a huge wake-up call. Maybe our taxes didn't go up this year but every single one of us will be paying for that monstrosity in four years.

[Realtime]

RealDave wrote:

<quoted text>
So.
Iran has always had the capabilities to ply havoc with the world oil markets.
Unfortunately for them, they depend on these oil markets.
It would take little effort to use military fore to destroy their oil industry & cripple their economics even further than the sanctions.

The, cough, news media is simply playing head games with the likes of I M and Carol. The Iranian navy was conducting maneuvers near the Straights of Hormuz and was "warning" planes and warships in the area, namely ours, to stay clear.

The five day drill dubbed Velayat-91 included the launch of several land based Ghader missiles and video of same was released by a semi official news agency.

Without the video there is no story__what else is new?

[Death of Tenzing]

carol wrote:

Happy New Year everyone.
At least all our taxes won't go up this year.
Hopefully, the Democrat Senate won't kick the budget can down the road another four years and spend us into oblivion in the meantime.
Thankfully, another election is around the corner.
Let's hope Americans will get it right this time and elect a Republican Congress to finish out this two-term presidential fluke.
If there's even a glimmer of a chance Americans will wake up to the reality that Democrats are looking out for the future of the Democrat Party and not the country's, there's hope.
...and the beat goes on.

In Carol's alternate universe spending originates in the Senate.

[Chicagoan by Birth]

carol wrote:

<quoted text>
Maybe it's time we took to the streets again demanding reforms and government accountability - and not politicizing it this time.

I'm with you, If we stood across from the White House for weeks on end. Not working so that the bloated beauracracy didn't have anything to confiscate, I wonder how long it would take them to heave to... Ain't gonna happen though, the real workers won't hit the streets....

[DBWriter]

carol wrote:

<quoted text>
Boehner walks a very thin line between hard-right conservatives and hard-left liberals and the demands of both with the country's best interests hanging in the balance. You should cut him a little slack.
He risks republicans being labeled obstructionists and democrats ending up smelling like a rose.
Which is exactly what the democrats are counting on. He has no choice right now but to compromise.
We have a good chance to come out on top in 2014 and 2016 by playing the democrats' game for a while.
The repubicans succeeded in upping the tax increases. It ain't over til it's over.

I started cutting him some slack. Then, I watched the debt ceiling go up and up, and no spending cuts coming from him whatsoever, and lettinug Obama and Holder push him around like he's nothing... when the fact is he's the goddam Speaker of the House. He has the authority to bring the weight of the entire government to bear in any direction he chooses. Yet, he chose to act as if he's impotent.

No spending cuts with Boehner.
Increased debt with Boehner.
No investigation of obvious crimes in the Executive.

Our problems:
Uncontrolled spending.
A debt beyond the ability to pay.
Criminal activity in the Executive.

We need to change the Speaker. If we don't change the Speaker, we have no chance to change anything that's been happening since he became Speaker.
If for no other reason, just the fact, at the request of Nancy Pelosi, he forced the 112th Congress to name him the Speaker for the 113th Congress should be shouting at you that he needs to go.
And nobody told you this happened....

[carol]

The tax increase going from $200,000/$250,000 to $400,000/$450,000 is actually a big deal. Considering the alternative and the GOP refusing to give Obama and Reid everything they wanted.

A lot of small business owners are breathing again today.

[DBWriter]

carol wrote:

<quoted text>
Boehner walks a very thin line between hard-right conservatives and hard-left liberals and the demands of both with the country's best interests hanging in the balance. You should cut him a little slack.
He risks republicans being labeled obstructionists and democrats ending up smelling like a rose.
Which is exactly what the democrats are counting on. He has no choice right now but to compromise.
We have a good chance to come out on top in 2014 and 2016 by playing the democrats' game for a while.
The repubicans succeeded in upping the tax increases. It ain't over til it's over.

Carol, he is the Speaker of the House. He controls the institution that controls all revenue, spending and borrowing. He doesn't need to compromise on anything.
Republicans are a majority in the House.
It's time that majority actually started solving our problems.
We have a spending problem. Solution: cut spending.
It's that simple.
The fiscal cliff cuts spending. Problem solved... well, almost. Spending cuts is poison to the Democrats. And, lo and behold, here we have McConnell and Boehner promoting the Democrat agenda.

NO CUTS... NO DEAL.
Period. End of statement.

[Chicagoan by Birth]

RealDave wrote:

<quoted text>
So.
Iran has always had the capabilities to ply havoc with the world oil markets.
Unfortunately for them, they depend on these oil markets.
It would take little effort to use military fore to destroy their oil industry & cripple their economics even further than the sanctions.

Gee Whiz Davey, you're about 12 yrs late to the party, where ya been?? We should have told them 30 yrs.ago to "Drink a bowl of oil"? We didn't and here we are....

[Waxman]

Death of Tenzing wrote:

<quoted text>
In Carol's alternate universe spending originates in the Senate.

Why do bozo's like you feel the need to make up $hit?

[carol]

Death of Tenzing wrote:

<quoted text>
In Carol's alternate universe spending originates in the Senate.

The House Republicans produced a budget right after being sworn into office in 2011 if you recall. The Senate Democrats wouldn't even bring it up for a vote.

The Democrat-controlled Congress did not produce a budget for 3 long years. I'm sure you recall that as well.

The Senate Democrats voted against the president's budget - unanimously...almost...99 to 0.