Who do you support for U.S. Senate in...

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#37881 Feb 23, 2014
ChicknButt wrote:
.....
Thankfully we now have a Federal law requiring ALL citizens to carry insurance or face a fine, and insurance is available to them at affordable costs regardless of income.
Not to mention, you’re being intellectually dishonest. Most of those lost policies were re-offered with the necessary changes to meet compliance. They didn’t just go “poof”.
<quoted text>
Please take a look at the chart on this link and find the 113th congress. It mostly looks like they’re taking a nap when the country needs them to be doing their job.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/w...
The only one being intellectually dishonest here is you. Talk to all those Americans who received those "your policy is being canceled" letters from their insurance companies. Insurance companies don't "re-offer" policies with changes, it is too complicated to add riders, etc. If you the consumer want to change your policy, you get a whole new policy. Obamacare led to the insurance companies doing it first. So actually, they did "just go 'poof'".

Oh, and by the way, that fine is pretty much unenforceable. The IRS (by provisions in Obamacare itself) cannot garnish wages, they cannot put a lien against property. The only way they MIGHT be able to get the fine from you is to withhold the amount from your refund - assuming you're getting one. Otherwise, the government is depending on the average citizen's terror of the IRS and their subsequent compliance if they get a letter saying "pay or else" - hoping that Joe Public doesn't know the "else" is toothless.

==========
And as for your chart on the 106th Congress - Take it up with Harry Reid. The House has passed 209 bills that he will not allow onto the Senate floor for debate.

"In January, House Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-S.C.) suggested the Senate was out of touch with Americans, and did not differentiate between the two parties.

“[Senators] tend to see themselves as a House of Lords and they don’t seem to understand that those of us that go out there every two years stay in touch with the American people,”
....
Earlier this month in an MSNBC interview, House Democratic Caucus Chairman John Larson (Conn.) said,“There’s a host of things that we’ve passed already, and there needs to be action in the Senate, and people are tired of it,” adding that he was “glad the president cited the House” for making more progress than the Senate in his State of the Union address.

Read more: http://thehill.com/homenews/house/83059-senat...
time

Carnesville, GA

#37882 Feb 23, 2014
Aggie23 wrote:
<quoted text>Aren't you the one who keeps saying "weather isn't climate" and "climate isn't weather"? Well, debt isn't deficit and deficit isn't debt. A decreasing deficit is all well and good, but it is the debt that is going to bury this country.
1990-$3.3 Trillion
2000-$5.6 Trillion
2008-$10.6 Trillion
2012 -$16.4 Trillion
We currently stand at a national debt of over $17 TRILLION dollars. Current projections are $20 Trillion by 2016 and $26 Trillion by 2020 IF we don't make some DRASTIC changes.
==========

Quantitative easing is a whole new ball game for the US and it's very use is a sign of an economy in dramatically bad shape. It is NOT a tool that our fed has used before. But hey, look at what is did to post WWI Germany.(look it up, it ISN'T pretty) Funny thing is that the philosophy behind QE is basically supply side economics - you know, that "trickle down" theory that the Left loves to disparage. Only while trickle down from a capitalistic market actually does works it way down, QE is artificial "trickle down" that doesn't have such a good track record.
And your chart on the stock market is very pretty and does nothing but make my original point. And another "funny thing" - who is really benefitting from this artificial stock market bubble - those "evil rich" that the Left loves to disparage. But when it bursts it is going to be the little guy who still has his retirement in the stock market that is going to be hurt the most.
==

"rationalizations" on the jobs market - really?
Go tell it to CNN, they reported the labor participation rate at the end of January as 63%, the lowest level since 1978 - you know, right smack in the middle of Jimmy Carter's "malaise". And you might want to talk to one of Obama's economic advisers - Jason Furman - who called
the unemployment rate still "unacceptably high."
==

Regarding your oil production chart - again, pretty picture that does nothing to challenge my assertion that the oil production is up thanks to private lands. Oil leases and drilling permits on PUBLIC lands are down 42% and 37% respectively.
You slammed, debunked, and defeathered that chicken....
time

Carnesville, GA

#37883 Feb 23, 2014
Aggie23 wrote:
<quoted text>The only one being intellectually dishonest here is you. Talk to all those Americans who received those "your policy is being canceled" letters from their insurance companies. Insurance companies don't "re-offer" policies with changes, it is too complicated to add riders, etc. If you the consumer want to change your policy, you get a whole new policy. Obamacare led to the insurance companies doing it first. So actually, they did "just go 'poof'".

Oh, and by the way, that fine is pretty much unenforceable. The IRS (by provisions in Obamacare itself) cannot garnish wages, they cannot put a lien against property. The only way they MIGHT be able to get the fine from you is to withhold the amount from your refund - assuming you're getting one. Otherwise, the government is depending on the average citizen's terror of the IRS and their subsequent compliance if they get a letter saying "pay or else" - hoping that Joe Public doesn't know the "else" is toothless.

==========
And as for your chart on the 106th Congress - Take it up with Harry Reid. The House has passed 209 bills that he will not allow onto the Senate floor for debate.

"In January, House Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-S.C.) suggested the Senate was out of touch with Americans, and did not differentiate between the two parties.

“[Senators] tend to see themselves as a House of Lords and they don’t seem to understand that those of us that go out there every two years stay in touch with the American people,”
....
Earlier this month in an MSNBC interview, House Democratic Caucus Chairman John Larson (Conn.) said,“There’s a host of things that we’ve passed already, and there needs to be action in the Senate, and people are tired of it,” adding that he was “glad the president cited the House” for making more progress than the Senate in his State of the Union address.

Read more: http://thehill.com/homenews/house/83059-senat...

And deep fried him with this one....
silver foxx

Donnellson, IA

#37884 Feb 23, 2014
TROLL MAN wrote:
<quoted text>
+1 very well stated
Except that he got it all wrong, fool.
silver foxx

Donnellson, IA

#37885 Feb 23, 2014
time wrote:
<quoted text>
You slammed, debunked, and defeathered that chicken....
Every single time & the idiot comes back for more.

Since: Jan 10

Location hidden

#37886 Feb 23, 2014
silver foxx wrote:
<quoted text>
Every single time & the idiot comes back for more.
+1

That's Skippy, just barking for attention...
time

Carnesville, GA

#37887 Feb 23, 2014
Bill in Dville wrote:
<quoted text>+1

That's Skippy, just barking for attention...


Maybe the dummy will see is as a Trio of singers.......

“Liberals are closet raaacists!”

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#37888 Feb 23, 2014
ZeeLastWerd wrote:
Go Susan go. Slap the crap out of Repukes:
Susan Rice defends 2012 Benghazi comments, warns Russia on Ukraine
By Michael A. Memoli
February 23, 2014, 10:12 a.m.
WASHINGTON -- National Security Advisor Susan Rice on Sunday defended controversial statements she made during a round of 2012 TV appearances about the attack on a U.S. mission in Benghazi, saying there was never an attempt to mislead the public.
During an interview on NBC’s “Meet The Press,” Rice also expressed hope that the chaos in Ukraine would soon lead to a unity government and warned Russia that it would be a "grave mistake" to intervene militarily in the conflict."
http://www.latimes.com/nation/politics/politi...
She's a liar.
Obama is a liar.
Not surprising that you think so much of liars.

“Liberals are closet raaacists!”

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#37889 Feb 23, 2014
ZeeLastWerd wrote:
Somebody please correct me but was it not DEMOCRAT President Bill Clinton that had the last BIG "budget surpluses". Geez.
BTW, Bush caused the current mess as well as blowing the "budget surpluses".
Geez again.
Wisconsin’s Walker Says E-Mails Old News Fanned by Democrats
"“They just want to keep pushing this issue into the forefront, because in the end, the folks running against us can’t counter our positive message when it comes to the economy and creating budget surpluses,” Walker said today on the “Fox News Sunday” broadcast.
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2014-02-23/w...
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Clinton have a Republican congress?
You used Liberal Whine #8...Bush's fault. rotfl
ChicknButt

Douglasville, GA

#37890 Feb 23, 2014
Aggie23 wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, debt isn't deficit and deficit isn't debt. A decreasing deficit is all well and good, but it is the debt that is going to bury this country.
1990-$3.3 Trillion
2000-$5.6 Trillion
2008-$10.6 Trillion
2012 -$16.4 Trillion
We currently stand at a national debt of over $17 TRILLION dollars. Current projections are $20 Trillion by 2016 and $26 Trillion by 2020 IF we don't make some DRASTIC changes.
It’s true that “debt isn't deficit and deficit isn't debt”, and I’m not confused or mistaken about that fact. The two, however, are intrinsically intertwined. Deficits lead to debt, and until deficits are removed, you’re not going to do much about debt. Obama’s track record so far in reducing the deficit is a necessary step towards paying principle on the debt.

That debt, I should add, was largely accumulated by Republican policies enacted during the Bush years, many of which we still see the effects of today.

The Bush-Era tax-cuts, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the economic downtown at the end of Bush’s presidency are by a very large margin indisputably how the deficits, and thus the debt was created.

While the debt is a serious concern, and Americans decades from now will be paying the bill for failed Bush-Era policies, it should be noted that a significant portion of the debt numbers you’ve provided, a large portion of that debt is inter-governmental.

Despite your well-written words of deflection – this chart is still extremely important if you want to understand ANYTHING about what’s going on in America today. Despite your words, these are still factual CBO numbers that give an accurate depiction of how we got where we are, and it’s primarily Republican Policy that put us here. It’s crystal clear and can’t be denied, no matter how much you talk around it.

http://cloudfront.mediamatters.org/static/ima...
Aggie23 wrote:
<quoted text>
Quantitative easing is a whole new ball game for the US and it's very use is a sign of an economy in dramatically bad shape. It is NOT a tool that our fed has used before. But hey, look at what is did to post WWI Germany.(look it up, it ISN'T pretty) Funny thing is that the philosophy behind QE is basically supply side economics - you know, that "trickle down" theory that the Left loves to disparage. Only while trickle down from a capitalistic market actually does works it way down, QE is artificial "trickle down" that doesn't have such a good track record.
To call QE “supply side economics” is too simple. The Federal Reserve Act of 1913 was specifically intended to provide tools for an ‘elastic currency”. The money supply is intended to both expand and contract based on measures controlled by The Fed. They’ve used various tools for this for the last 100 years, the most common being interest rates. Quantative Easing was first used in the US in 2008 under the Bush Administration.

While you’re trying very hard to evoke images of $1000.00 loafs of bread in post WWII Germany, it has nothing to do with this. QE was first used by Japan in 2000 and again later. It’s been used by the Bank of England, and The European Central Bank, Nor am I making a case for QE as either a “good thing” or a “bad thing”. It’s just a second-line tool for dealing with expansion and contraction as needed to control inflation and deflation. Quantitative policy is here to stay as a tool in large sophisticated economies.

(Not to you Aggie – But it should be noted that QE is not “printing money” as many claim.)

My previous post stands. You’ve said absolutely nothing that invalidates it. Of course, we wouldn’t have had to pull that particular tool out of the drawer if Bush hadn’t tanked our economy with his Republican economic policies that clearly don’t work and which defy logic.
ChicknButt

Douglasville, GA

#37891 Feb 23, 2014
Aggie23 wrote:
<quoted text>
And your chart on the stock market is very pretty and does nothing but make my original point. And another "funny thing" - who is really benefitting from this artificial stock market bubble - those "evil rich" that the Left loves to disparage. But when it bursts it is going to be the little guy who still has his retirement in the stock market that is going to be hurt the most.
The “pretty” chart on the stock market used factual historical data, and I sincerely hoped you actually internalized the data rather than just looked at the pretty lines and colors. It clearly indicates that Obama has had a very good record with that markets which have far out-performed Bush’s miserable legacy.

So now you’re saying it’s a BAD thing that market is doing well, because it’s going to hurt the “little guy” should it go down? I have news for you Aggie – those people with retirement funds in the market would much rather see it up than down. They have first-hand experience with that from not too long ago. Remember when Bush tanked the economy? It was painful to almost everyone – and it irretreviably harmed millions of older people who were on the brink of retirement.

You’re calling the ecomomy propped up and “artifical” due to quantitative easing, which was introduced to the US under a Republican president, and now want to blame Obama for having a good stock market? That’s utterly insane Aggie, and you know it.
You write a good sentence, but the logic and facts aren’t behind you.
Aggie23 wrote:
<quoted text>
"rationalizations" on the jobs market - really?
Go tell it to CNN, they reported the labor participation rate at the end of January as 63%, the lowest level since 1978 - you know, right smack in the middle of Jimmy Carter's "malaise". And you might want to talk to one of Obama's economic advisers - Jason Furman - who called
the unemployment rate still "unacceptably high."
I don’t think anyone would disagree that the unemployment rate still isn’t what we would like it to be. Those numbers took a MAJOR hit during the Bush years, and it took some time to turn around the effects of that trend.

You’ve said absolutely nothing to invalidate my position, to invalidate the FACT based on historical data that I presented to you. Again – more than a “pretty chart”– factual numerical data that proves Obama has done a good job of taking us out of the tailspin Republican policy left this country in. Did you notice on that chart that progress flat-lined the minute the Republicans took over the House? Where’s that jobs bill? Where are the Republican proposals to do something about those jobs? They don’t exist. They actually want unemployment numbers to be as bad as possible so they can use that as a tool to try to gain back the presidency. They are actually working against Americans. This is what is happening right now – and why the Congress is doing so little. It’s a crime.
ChicknButt

Douglasville, GA

#37892 Feb 23, 2014
Aggie23 wrote:
<quoted text>
Regarding your oil production chart - again, pretty picture that does nothing to challenge my assertion that the oil production is up thanks to private lands. Oil leases and drilling permits on PUBLIC lands are down 42% and 37% respectively.
Again – you’re words do absolutely NOTHING to invalidate what I originally said. US oil production has risen considerably under Obama’s administration compared to Bush The Oilmans administration.

Let’s examine what you said a bit further as well. Public Land is owned by the people of the United States. It’s their land, it’s their asset, in the hands of the government to protect. Oil profits are privatized – why should they pull resources from our PUBLIC lands for that when currently we have both protection of public lands and increased production? Clearly what you are saying is that Obama has one heck of a successful set of policies in place. There’s no other spin you can put on that.

Sorry Aggie – good attempt at spin – but facts really are facts. You’ve invalidated not a single one of my contentions.
time wrote:
<quoted text>
You slammed, debunked, and defeathered that chicken....
One might think that - if they were an idiot without reading comprehension. Let’s see who rode that bus: time, Silver Foxx, Dull Bill ….

Now go back and look at those charts again. You might learn some actual fact and truth.
ChicknButt

Douglasville, GA

#37893 Feb 23, 2014
Here are the original FACTS I posted without all the discussion:

Here are some facts that are true since Obama took office after the last Republican president we had destroyed the economy:

- The economy has stabilized.
- The stock market is doing wonderfully.
- The housing market has stabilized.
- Unemployment numbers have gone dramatically down.
- Job losses have completely turned around.
- The annual deficit is declining.
- We haven't gotten in any new wars.
- We're producing more energy than we ever have.
- More people have access to health insurance.
- More immigrants are being deported than ever before.

Those are facts. These things are true, provable, and a result of Obama, his administration, and his policies.

Facts.
ChicknButt

Douglasville, GA

#37894 Feb 23, 2014
Synergy wrote:
<quoted text>
You used Liberal Whine #8...Bush's fault. rotfl
Time to let that go. I know it tickled you when you read that "facebook-level" political commentary. But it was honestly pretty lame, and now you've over-used it.

Bush is responsible for the things Bush did. The passage of time doesn't make that not true.
The really insane thing is that both Romney and McCain wanted to enact those same failed policies all over again - when the scab hasn't even healed from the last time those Republican Policies decimated America. Insane, huh?
time

Carnesville, GA

#37895 Feb 24, 2014


A lot of words above..........the effort to portray Obama as a godsend over a repub will never work against folks who know the truth about liborids, and their actions..........all can be negated with these numbers..........

A lie is a lie...whether on purpose or through ignorance..........


Size of gross debt    Federal account debt
Before Reagan           1 trillion          250 billion
Ronald Reagan          2.9 trillion          677 billion
George H.W. Bush          4 trillion          1 trillion
Bill Clinton          5.6 trillion          2.2 trillion
George W. Bush          10.6 trillion          4.3 trillion
Barack Obama          16.4 trillion          4.9 trillion
Size of gross debt           Federal account debt
Before Reagan           33 percent           7 percent
Ronald Reagan          53 percent           12.5 percent
George H.W. Bush           64 percent           16 percent
Bill Clinton           56.5 percent           24 percent
George W. Bush          77 percent           30 percent
Barack Obama           105 percent          31 percent




time

Carnesville, GA

#37896 Feb 24, 2014
and those numbers are from year 2013..........another trillion has been added since..........



time

Carnesville, GA

#37897 Feb 24, 2014

And now for the morning news on Global Warming..........


"It is often reported that the temperature of the earth is higher the past 20 years than it has ever been in history. This is simply not true, nor has it ever been. Hundreds of research studies using ice cores, pollen sedimentation, tree rings, etc. have shown that there were dozens of periods in the past 11,000 years (generally called the Holocene period) that earth's temperature was significantly warmer than it is today. Earth's temperature was very much warmer at least four times during the current interglacial period. The polar bears did just fine during those warmer periods."


http://www.globalwarmingclassroom.info/images...


time

Carnesville, GA

#37898 Feb 24, 2014

So much from truth from the libroid camp..........


"Although Al Gore's video, The Inconvenient Truth has been show in almost every middle and high school in America, it is very biased and error ridden. The former Science Advisor to Prime Minister Thatcher was so alarmed at the errors, biases and exaggerations that he sued the British government to keep it from being shown in England. After the British High Court reviewed all the evidence, they ruled against Gore outlining 9 serious errors (there are over 30 errors totally). The Inconvenient Truth cannot be shown in public schools today without a disclaimer that is a political film with numerous scientific errors."


http://www.globalwarmingclassroom.info/images...


time

Carnesville, GA

#37899 Feb 24, 2014


"
One of the most exaggerated claims made in The Inconvenient Truth is that if half of Antarctica's and half of Greenland's icecaps were to melt, sea levels would rise twenty feet or more, flooding coastal cities and islands. The images used in the video are very graphic and alarming. While Gore's claim is technically more or less correct, the message he gives that it could happen in the next few decades is completely false. First, as noted above, earth has experience much warmer temperatures in the past and neither icecap melted. It would take thousands of years at these temperatures for that to happen. Second, even the highly political and biased reports from the IPCC say that at the very most, ocean levels might rise 23 inches in the next 100 years, and only then if warming continued to increase at the rates experienced in the last quarter of the twentieth century. Third, we are likely entering a cooling period, so the issue is no longer relevant. In fact, Greenland's icecap is not losing ice mass, and the rise in ocean levels has slowed significantly."


http://www.globalwarmingclassroom.info/images...


time

Carnesville, GA

#37900 Feb 24, 2014


"Although global warming models show that both polar regions should warming with CO2-caused global warming, the various stations maintained in Antarctica show Antarctica to be cooling over the past two decades. One research paper in 2008 allegedly showing Antarctica to be warming is being accepted with skepticism by the scientific community, even by those who still maintain that global warming is caused by human activity. The main criticism centers on the use of highly questionable equations to fill in temperature data between the widely scattered weather stations in Antarctica. It appears to many to be a repeat of the infamous hockey stick curve fiasco of the early 2000s.

The only place Antarctica has shown true warming is along Western Antarctica and the Antarctic Peninsula. This is where pictures of massive ice chucks breaking off of Antarctica come from that are shown on the news every couple of years. Research published in 2007-2008 found that this warming is NOT due to global warming, but to volcanic activity under the ocean and ice flows."


http://www.globalwarmingclassroom.info/images...

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Brunswick Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News N.B Power targets Saturday for full restoration... (Dec '13) Jun 26 thenox 2
Speed Trap along the I-95 corridor in Mcintosh ... (Nov '15) Jun 26 Treyleon71 41
where can we catch shrimp in Darien with a thro... Jun 18 mac 8
Jeannie Stamey (Jul '15) Jun 16 Farrell Landon 4
where in Darien can i use draw net to catch shr... Jun 12 mac 2
Looking for Brian flanders Jun 10 Wondering 4
Daisy mae Jun 9 Xx_DARK_GOKU_666_xX 2

Brunswick Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Brunswick Mortgages