The Republican Nomination For President: The Race For The Race For The White House

@spendius,

I don't have the time nor inclination to read the same posts you read; if you're following somebody's else train of thought, it's not up to the reader to have read the same posts you have. It's called reality, and personal time management.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

You're impossible. I don't know how people put up with you at close quarters.

1 Reply

@spendius,

I'm impossible? ROFLMAO

The only social friends you have are at the local pub, and that's sort of your entire world.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

Come on!! You make a sarcastic crack about my reply to JustBrooke and you hadn't even read her post and justified that by saying you can't read all the posts on A2K. Sheesh!!!

1 Reply

@spendius,

spendius wrote:

Come on!! You make a sarcastic crack about my reply to JustBrooke
and you hadn't even read her post and justified that by saying you can't read all the posts on A2K. Sheesh!!!

U shoud KNOW by now
that C I is a hopelessly stupid poster.
U can 't expect much better from him.
What r the chances that he will become smarter ???

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

I don't believe that what you wrote here is an accurate description of CI. I've met him on more than one occasion, and can report that he is not stupid in the slightest; let alone 'hopelessly stupid.'

Cycloptichorn

2 Replies

WASHINGTON —
Entering 2012, President Barack Obama's re-election prospects are
essentially a 50-50 proposition, with a majority saying the president
deserves to be voted out of office despite concerns about the Republican alternatives,
according to a new Associated Press-GfK poll.

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Cycloptichorn wrote:

I don't believe that what you wrote here is an accurate description of CI. I've met him on more than one occasion, and can report that he is not stupid in the slightest; let alone 'hopelessly stupid.'

Cycloptichorn

I 'll accept that as a friendly amendment:
except in person, but posting as a fool.

David

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

I in 100% agreement with you in re: CI. Very bright. Very thoughtful. The other two regulars who are part of this silly debate carry a great deal of baggage. One was probably an abused child while the other is probably a drunkard.

1 Reply

@plainoldme,

I will refrain from speculating what you probably are despite you having so graciously granted me permission to do so.

You have obviously not seen ci.'s performance regarding a reply of mine to JustBrooke's post on the OWS thread.

0 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

cicerone imposter wrote:

That's the reason why your post doesn't make any sense; they must be self-explanatory without expecting everybody to have read every post on a2k.

cicerone imposter wrote:

That's the reason why your post doesn't make any sense; they must be self-explanatory without expecting everybody to have read every post on a2k.

Really?

If I hadn't read the last several posts, this one of yours would make no sense.

Considering that spendi's post was in direct response to JB's and a link to JB's post is contained in spendi's response, your argument is woefully frail.

Why don't you just admit you that you erred and popped off without reading the exchange very closely, or JB's reply with comprehension? I think you were so excited with the "Here here!" comment you stopped reading the rest.

You're certainly not stupid, but it was a stupid reply.

1 Reply

I could be wrong but I recall that NRO quasi-endorsed Romney, Huntsman and Santorum.

It's not a coincidence that these are the three Republican candidates with the best chance of beating Obama in the general election.

Like Obama, Gingrich is a narcissist. He's a narcissist with, overall, better ideas and policy positions, but he loves the visage staring back at him from the pond as much Barrack does.

Actually Obama's ego runs a few degrees hotter than Newt's.

Newt sees himself as a Great Man of History; worthy of the same number of paragraphs in Wikipedia as Jefferson, Lincoln, Churchill and Augustus Caesar.

Obama sees himself as a member of a pantheon of gods replete with attendant prophecy, fanaticized parentage and divine powers. Remember that we heard His Words telling us that his receiving the Democrat's nomination for president of the United States would mark the moment "...when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal..."

Newt is anything but a limited government conservative. He believes that with the right Leader, government can be the solution to many problems.

If he can win the White House he will likely rule like a mad king.

Still, I would prefer to have Ludwig of Bavaria as our head of state than the current incarnation of the divine Nero who plays golf while the country burns. At least we might end up with some fancy buildings.

1 Reply

@Finn dAbuzz,

So, I didn't read JB's post. If you didn't understand what I said, you're the one who doesn't understand comprehension. If my post didn't make any sense to you, you have more problems than just your ignorance.

I can provide you with many examples, but that'll just be a waste of my time.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

When you find yourself in a hole...stop digging.

0 Replies

@Finn dAbuzz,

Quote:

He believes that with the right Leader, government can be the solution to many problems.

That's a basic tenet of facism isn't it (forgive my lack of booklurnin in politics) - apart from a program of 'forced' nationalism.

1 Reply

@roger,

roger wrote:

By golly, this just might be our first political/economic disagreement.

Since I use Medicare, and am very unlikely (trust me) to be impacted by any kind of means testing, it's kind of an emotional response. We paid for this program from the day it was started. I mean, anyone eligible for Medicare at the present time was almost certainly paying for it at the time the program was started. It's a kind of elegant system. You pay for it; you get it when you are 65. Now, all of a sudden it's going to be subject to means testing? There is a distinction between entitlements and welfare. Entitlements are paid for or otherwise earned. We're going to wake up some fine day and discover we've all been converted to welfare recipients.

Sure, it is kind of distasteful to see the wealthy <the article says "middle class", by the way> pull down exactly the same benefits as I, but let's not forget there is no cap on Medicare earnings. The plan is to pay more into the program than others, and come up with higher premiums anyway. Doesn't sound quite right, especially since the people I consider rich aren't really concerned with which doctor and which facility accepts Medicare in the first place.

If my short term memory serves, everyone will face the same situation by 2018, anyway.

I have the same objection to payroll tax cuts for Social Security as I do for Medicare. So each account is made whole by additions from general revenues. Sounds like a really big welfare program to me.

If I ever get some spare time again I'd like to start a separate thread to have this discussion. It's important and will become more important going forward regardless of who becomes the nominee or the President. In short, the idea of entitlements is all well and good when the inputs are calculated to meet the needs of the outflows. That's not the case here. Folks paid in while others were taking out MUCH more than they, or their children, were depositing on their behalf. Now it's a matter of math. There's very little money left and as the baby boomers retire there's no one coming up behind them who can ever cover the medical needs of a average 65 year old living to 90, or beyond. How much do you estimate you paid in over your lifetime, Roger? How much do you think you're entitled to take out and how much medical care will that get you?

2 Replies

@JPB,

It's the same with most govrnment pension funds; they're under funded, because the government people promised a level of benefits without understanding that economies can suffer recessions and depressions, and the return on investments are not guaranteed. The taxpayers become responsible to make up the shortage - even at the expense of needed government services.

0 Replies

@hingehead,

It's a basic tenet of Statism and an underlying principle of the excellent "Liberal Facism" written by Jonah Goldberg.

Don't tell me you are anti-intellectual?

Read some fukkin books why don't you?

0 Replies

@JPB,

Never tried to calculate it, but if there's supposed to be a guilt trip in there, keep in mind that we were forced into the system.

2 Replies

@roger,

Huh? No, no intended guilt trip. It's just math. Folks paid in, other folks took out more than was being paid in and now, just as the first of the boomers are ready to retire, the piggy bank is nearly empty. We were never asked to pay in enough to support what we're taking out. Not our fault, other than we didn't exactly audit the books very well, but the money is gone. Now what?

2 Replies

The Republican Nomination For President: The Race For The Race For The White House

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know