Just Saying

Mineola, NY

#3786 Feb 12, 2013
Yet despite the title of this thread, Fox continues to be the top-rated cable news network over CNN, MSNBC, etc.

Wrong again, ZCs!

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#3787 Feb 12, 2013
.."News" is an identity, thrown around rather freely.....
shameless-li

Denver, CO

#3788 Feb 12, 2013
why is it that all of these FOX faithful viewers never seem to show up on election day ???
Felonious

Lindenhurst, NY

#3789 Feb 13, 2013
shameless-li wrote:
why is it that all of these FOX faithful viewers never seem to show up on election day ???
Convicted felons can't vote

“The No Troll Zone”

Since: Jan 13

Where it's at.

#3790 Feb 13, 2013
Just Saying wrote:
Yet despite the title of this thread, Fox continues to be the top-rated cable news network over CNN, MSNBC, etc.
Wrong again, ZCs!
Everybody loves a good bullshit story.
Teddy R

Houston, TX

#3791 Feb 13, 2013
The Anti-Troll wrote:
<quoted text>
Everybody loves a good bullshit story.
So true. The last election proved this yet again.

No better bullshitter than our present Incompetent-in-Chief - although Bubba was, and still is, in a class by himself.
shameless-li

Denver, CO

#3792 Feb 13, 2013
Teddy R wrote:
<quoted text>
No better bullshitter than our present Incompetent-in-Chief - although Bubba was, and still is, in a class by himself.
hill and bill/2016
Teddy R

Houston, TX

#3793 Feb 13, 2013
shameless-li wrote:
<quoted text>
hill and bill/2016
An amusing notion.

The most powerful and most sought-after office in that scenario in 2016 would clearly be Speaker of the House, since Hill would be 69 and Bubba 70 on assuming office. They should have already stopped buying green bananas as it is.

Actuarial odds are better than 1/5 that Hill would die in office sometime over the following 8 years, and Bubba's odds are even worse - he'd have less than a 2/3 chance of surviving two terms.

Those are the average death odds - actual life expectancies for Hill and Bill in one of the most stressful jobs on the planet would of course be substantially worse than the average person's.

And that's just death - the odds are even higher still than one or both of them would be rendered incapable of discharging their offices by some debilitating geriatric disease, stroke, senile dementia, etc.

So why spend hundreds of billions on a Presidential campaign with lower odds of winning the office of POTUS than simply running for a House seat and the Speaker's gavel on a shoestring budget and then just being patient for a couple years and having it handed to you?

“The No Troll Zone”

Since: Jan 13

Where it's at.

#3794 Feb 13, 2013
Teddy R wrote:
<quoted text>
So true. The last election proved this yet again.
No better bullshitter than our present Incompetent-in-Chief - although Bubba was, and still is, in a class by himself.
Three words.

NO NEW TAXES

“The No Troll Zone”

Since: Jan 13

Where it's at.

#3795 Feb 13, 2013
Teddy R wrote:
<quoted text>
An amusing notion.
The most powerful and most sought-after office in that scenario in 2016 would clearly be Speaker of the House, since Hill would be 69 and Bubba 70 on assuming office. They should have already stopped buying green bananas as it is.
You do realize that your little GOP "hero" Reagan was the same age when he was elected, right? Or do you "not remember" that?
Teddy R

Houston, TX

#3796 Feb 13, 2013
The Anti-Troll wrote:
<quoted text>
You do realize that your little GOP "hero" Reagan was the same age when he was elected, right? Or do you "not remember" that?
1) You seem to have mistaken me for a member of the GOP. I am not. I am a Mugwump with sympathies for certain parts of the Conservative, Libertarian, and TEA Party agendas.

2) Reagan? Sure - everybody knows that. Oldest POTUS in US history. I didn't know you were such a fan of his. So what's your point? Electing POTUSs with higher likelihood of developing early-stage senile dementia/Alheimers during their term of office is a great idea? The nation needs to elect more superannuated candidates like Reagan? Or was your post just another inane troll? If so - apologies for taking you seriously.
lying prez

New York, NY

#3797 Feb 13, 2013
Teddy R wrote:
<quoted text>
An amusing notion.
The most powerful and most sought-after office in that scenario in 2016 would clearly be Speaker of the House, since Hill would be 69 and Bubba 70 on assuming office. They should have already stopped buying green bananas as it is.
Actuarial odds are better than 1/5 that Hill would die in office sometime over the following 8 years, and Bubba's odds are even worse - he'd have less than a 2/3 chance of surviving two terms.
Those are the average death odds - actual life expectancies for Hill and Bill in one of the most stressful jobs on the planet would of course be substantially worse than the average person's.
And that's just death - the odds are even higher still than one or both of them would be rendered incapable of discharging their offices by some debilitating geriatric disease, stroke, senile dementia, etc.
So why spend hundreds of billions on a Presidential campaign with lower odds of winning the office of POTUS than simply running for a House seat and the Speaker's gavel on a shoestring budget and then just being patient for a couple years and having it handed to you?
Well, I believe both are well on their way to dementia.
shameless-li

United States

#3798 Feb 14, 2013
Teddy R wrote:
<quoted text>
An amusing notion.
The most powerful and most sought-after office in that scenario in 2016 would clearly be Speaker of the House, since Hill would be 69 and Bubba 70 on assuming office. They should have already stopped buying green bananas as it is.
Actuarial odds are better than 1/5 that Hill would die in office sometime over the following 8 years, and Bubba's odds are even worse - he'd have less than a 2/3 chance of surviving two terms.
Those are the average death odds - actual life expectancies for Hill and Bill in one of the most stressful jobs on the planet would of course be substantially worse than the average person's.
And that's just death - the odds are even higher still than one or both of them would be rendered incapable of discharging their offices by some debilitating geriatric disease, stroke, senile dementia, etc.
So why spend hundreds of billions on a Presidential campaign with lower odds of winning the office of POTUS than simply running for a House seat and the Speaker's gavel on a shoestring budget and then just being patient for a couple years and having it handed to you?
then i guess it was a good thing that mc cain lost to obama...he was 72 when he attempted to make his run.

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#3799 Feb 14, 2013
shameless-li wrote:
<quoted text>
then i guess it was a good thing that mc cain lost to obama...he was 72 when he attempted to make his run.
Old for a President, yet young for a Pope....lol....

“Lovely year for a Guinness”

Since: Dec 07

Daytona Beach

#3800 Feb 14, 2013
Teddy R wrote:
<quoted text>
So true. The last election proved this yet again.
No better bullshitter than our present Incompetent-in-Chief - although Bubba was, and still is, in a class by himself.
and to honor President's Day on Monday, you know Monica will be wearing 'the dress'. You have to be smart to be a good bullshitter. Obama is nincompoop; any attempt is easily detectable. Bubba's bullshit was better; even had me fooled a couple of times.
ZCs

Brooklyn, NY

#3801 Feb 14, 2013
Just Saying wrote:
Yet despite the title of this thread, Fox continues to be the top-rated cable news network over CNN, MSNBC, etc.
Wrong again, ZCs!
Everything takes time. There is no set time but Fox is going down.

Hitler and the mighty Rome thought they would rule forever but they

didn't.They had a gun run and went down and Fox Will follow.

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#3802 Feb 14, 2013
Guinness Drinker wrote:
<quoted text>
and to honor President's Day on Monday, you know Monica will be wearing 'the dress'. You have to be smart to be a good bullshitter. Obama is nincompoop; any attempt is easily detectable. Bubba's bullshit was better; even had me fooled a couple of times.
Read's more like...you is nincompoop.....
ZCs

Bronx, NY

#3803 Feb 16, 2013
Fox News suggested that unemployment benefits and other government assistance programs contribute to the nation's unemployment numbers, and even claimed that people are quitting their jobs to become eligible for benefits. In truth, unemployment benefits stimulate the economy and create jobs.

Reporting on news that jobless claims dropped by 27,000 last week, America's Newsroom host Bill Hemmer wondered if "government programs might be keeping unemployment rates higher than they should actually be."

Fox correspondent Doug McKelway answered that "some small business owners" say that "it's not unusual at all for people to quit work these days, because they know they can get more from unemployment and other benefits than from hard work."

He continued, "Americans are not working as much today, and there is ample evidence that it's not just an economy stuck in neutral but it may be the increasing government incentive not to work."

Despite Hemmer and McKelway's claims, studies show that unemployment benefits stimulate the economy and create jobs. In 2010, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) determined that increasing aid to the unemployed would have a bigger impact on the economy than reducing taxes.

The Economic Policy Institute's Lawrence Mishel explained that unemployment insurance is "such good stimulus" because "virtually every dollar spent on extending unemployment insurance benefits goes directly, and immediately, toward the purchase of local goods and services, providing an extremely efficient demand boost."

And near the end of 2012, the CBO concluded that extending unemployment benefits through 2013 would create 300,000 more new jobs than would otherwise be created.

What's more, the notion that one could quit work in order to receive unemployment benefits is crazy -- In order to be eligible for unemployment insurance (UI), the Labor Department makes clear, you must be "unemployed through no fault of your own (determined under State law)." In other words, if you just quit your job to get unemployment, they deny you unemployment benefits.
Teddy R

Mclean, VA

#3804 Feb 16, 2013
Zero Comments the Serial Plagiarizer wrote:
(Ridiculous plagiarized rubbish snipped)
That's the stupidest thing I've read all week.

Hey! Why not just get rid of the middleman - those pesky people - altogether! Then the Government can buy all that consumer shit directly, creating fake economic demand with even more fake money that doesn't actually exist!!

A pure Potemkin economy!!

That SO rocks - only a supreme idiot could possibly not laugh out loud at such a moronic argument.

And in your post we seem to have found one ...
Black Zilla

United States

#3805 Feb 17, 2013
Teddy R The Racist, you are still an ignorant racist dope.

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.

Jackson-Heights Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
HILLARY will be THE BEST PRESIDENT EVER (Dec '14) 1 min DBWriter 5,726
Time to go? 1 min Citizen 2,561
Mets talkback (Dec '07) 1 min Mets fan 36,427
Yankee talk back 4, or is it 5 (Aug '08) 1 min NYStateOfMind 319,393
News Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision (Jan '08) 1 min spocko 310,365
News Coast Guard chopper makes emergency landing on ... 1 min beatlesinafog 9
Run,Run, Run, The Republicans are Coming! (Jan '11) 45 min Two Dogs 1,937
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Jackson-Heights Mortgages