cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Tue 8 Jul, 2008 07:39 pm
They're juggling their books a little better than Bush.
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Tue 8 Jul, 2008 07:49 pm
cicerone imposter wrote:
They're juggling their books a little better than Bush.


Do you really believe that the dems can handle the finances of the entire country if they cant even handle the finances for their own convention?
0 Replies
 
old europe
 
  1  
Tue 8 Jul, 2008 08:00 pm
mysteryman wrote:
cicerone imposter wrote:
They're juggling their books a little better than Bush.


Do you really believe that the dems can handle the finances of the entire country if they cant even handle the finances for their own convention?


Well, let's look at it this way: The Republicans can't handle the finances of the entire country, but you still seem to be willing to trust them...
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Tue 8 Jul, 2008 08:02 pm
Not only that, but during democratic presidencies, our country did much better than when republicans ran it. That's a fact.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Tue 8 Jul, 2008 08:05 pm
May 9, 2005

REPUBLICANS vs. DEMOCRATS ON THE ECONOMY....Did you know that Democratic presidents are better for the economy than Republicans? Sure you did. I pointed this out two years ago, back when my readership numbered in the dozens, and more recently Michael Kinsley ran the numbers in the LA Times and came to the same conclusion.

The results are simple: Democratic presidents have consistently higher economic growth and consistently lower unemployment than Republican presidents. If you add in a time lag, you get the same result. If you eliminate the best and worst presidents, you get the same result. If you take a look at other economic indicators, you get the same result. There's just no way around it: Democratic administrations are better for the economy than Republican administrations.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Tue 8 Jul, 2008 08:06 pm
What was mm saying about the democrats and money?
0 Replies
 
okie
 
  1  
Tue 8 Jul, 2008 10:00 pm
Cycloptichorn wrote:
Foxfyre wrote:
Nobody ever bought me a car, healthy or otherwise Sad

I actually prefer to have the privilege and ability and opportunity to prepare myself to work and earn as much as I feel up to earning to buy my own though. Health care too.


Don't care what you prefer, really. We need a system which works well for all, not one in which some do very well and some do very poorly.

Cycloptichorn

So you want to expand the potential for more fraud, right?

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,378224,00.html

Dead Doctors Used to Scam Government Out of Medicare Money, Probe Finds
Sellers of wheelchairs, drugs and other medical supplies collected as much as $93 million in fraudulent Medicare claims based on prescriptions from doctors who actually were dead, some for 10 years or more, a congressional investigation has found.
0 Replies
 
okie
 
  1  
Tue 8 Jul, 2008 10:06 pm
teenyboone wrote:
okie wrote:
teenyboone wrote:
okie wrote:
Cycloptichorn wrote:
'Told who to vote for?'

You presume knowledge where you have none, Fox. How do you know these people are told who to vote for? Or that they actually vote for these people, once in the booth?

It's just another tired Republican trope, oft repeated but little verified.

FD is right - you don't know what you are talking about, in the slightest. I've done plenty of voter registration work myself, much of it in what would accurately be described as slums and ghettos, and we never told anyone who to vote for, ever. In fact, we weren't legally allowed to even talk about it with them unless they asked us direct questions about the candidate, iirc.

Cycloptichorn

Did you ask for ID's cyclops, and did you verify if they were already registered either there or somewhere else? How did you know you didn't sign up a bunch of people illegally? Or did you care?


In my precinct, you walk up to the registrar, state your name and that's it!
If you are registered, your name is in the book! Anything else is illegal!
If your name has been deleted, you can ask for a provisional ballot! That's it! Apparently no one has asked YOU to verify YOURSELF, so why should anyone else be asked? You've got a lot of nerve! These are the tactics used by "Jim Crow", throughout the South, before the Voting Rights Act was passed! Rolling Eyes

I wasn't referring to voting, I was referring to becoming registered to vote. It has been a long time since I registered, but I think I had to provide an I.D. to prove I was who I said I was, and that I was a resident of the county. Sheesh, what is so terrible about that, and unreasonable?

And providing I.D. to vote is not a bad idea as well, to show you are the person on the voter registration rolls.



#1 - You need to read the damn Constitution, then
#2 - Read the fricking Bill of Rights!

Are you so cowed that you don't know what your rights as a citizen are? Do you care? What a fool! Did you know that you can't be arrested for no reason or to be stopped for no reason? Cops are so corrupt until, they become judge and jury, while they kill people while in police custody!

Do you read the newspapers and have you heard of police brutality? That's YOUR tax dollars at work, while the "protect and serve", do everything BUT! They think they're above the law in New York. When guiliani was the mayor, the cops had tee-shirts that said, "We OWN the night", then pumped 41 bullets into an African, reaching for his wallet to ID himself and the cops claimed they thought his wallet was a gun!

Guilani and Bernard Kerik, 2 crooks with badges; "Perfect together", as we say in Jersey! Bernard Kerik; nominated for the Homeland Security chief, until they found out that he was involved in a shady "pay for play" scheme! The son of a prostitute and a philanderer! Guiliani hates Italians so much, he broke up the mafia, he was born into!

You need to read more. These are but 2 horror stories of the many that make up the NY/NJ area. If you can make it here, you can make it, anywhere! Cool

Teeny, what does Guiliani have to do with our discussion about verifying the person voting is registered or is actually a citizen or actually resides where that person is voting? Good grief! Get a life!
0 Replies
 
jpinMilwaukee
 
  1  
Wed 9 Jul, 2008 06:32 am
edgarblythe wrote:

Just look at the makeup of the Supreme Court, then ask again who compromises too much.


4 liberals that always vote the same way. 4 conservatives that always vote the same way. And the swing vote Kennedy.

What's your point?
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Wed 9 Jul, 2008 07:00 am
cicerone imposter wrote:
May 9, 2005

REPUBLICANS vs. DEMOCRATS ON THE ECONOMY....Did you know that Democratic presidents are better for the economy than Republicans? Sure you did. I pointed this out two years ago, back when my readership numbered in the dozens, and more recently Michael Kinsley ran the numbers in the LA Times and came to the same conclusion.

The results are simple: Democratic presidents have consistently higher economic growth and consistently lower unemployment than Republican presidents. If you add in a time lag, you get the same result. If you eliminate the best and worst presidents, you get the same result. If you take a look at other economic indicators, you get the same result. There's just no way around it: Democratic administrations are better for the economy than Republican administrations.


Your still peddaling this horse squeeze?
0 Replies
 
real life
 
  1  
Wed 9 Jul, 2008 07:36 am
McGentrix wrote:
cicerone imposter wrote:
May 9, 2005

REPUBLICANS vs. DEMOCRATS ON THE ECONOMY....Did you know that Democratic presidents are better for the economy than Republicans? Sure you did. I pointed this out two years ago, back when my readership numbered in the dozens, and more recently Michael Kinsley ran the numbers in the LA Times and came to the same conclusion.

The results are simple: Democratic presidents have consistently higher economic growth and consistently lower unemployment than Republican presidents. If you add in a time lag, you get the same result. If you eliminate the best and worst presidents, you get the same result. If you take a look at other economic indicators, you get the same result. There's just no way around it: Democratic administrations are better for the economy than Republican administrations.


Your still peddaling this horse squeeze?


That's a kind assessment.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Wed 9 Jul, 2008 08:17 am
The truth is, with the possible exception of Jimmy Carter coupled with an irresponsible Democratically controlled Congress, no president has 'wrecked' the economy. The fluctuations within any given administration can be quite dramatic as this graph shows:

MISERY INDEX 1948 TO PRESENT

Bill Clinton's administration did quite well actually, but he benefitted from the economy coming out of a moderately deep recession at the time he took office coupled with having a responsible GOP controlled Congress for six of his eight years. Even considering 9/11, the Iraq war, and a much higher than average number of natural disasters, GWB has done pretty well considering that he has been saddled with an irresponsible GOP controlled Congress for 2 years and an equally irresponsible Democratically controlled Congress for the last 2. He gets the credit for pushing tax cuts that provided good economic stimulus, but he can't be excused for his role in encouraging some bad legislation and signing irresponsible spending bills though.

All in all no President can control global influences outside their authority and as the graph shows, all administrations incur the ups and downs of these.

Playing the 'whose is blackest' game serves no good purpose. It is worth looking at which candidate's policies are likely to have the most positive effect to reduce the misery index in the next four years, however.
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Wed 9 Jul, 2008 08:44 am
I don't know what is wrong with c.i. I just write it off as inhaling too many fumes from his taxi and then the shoe business.
0 Replies
 
Gargamel
 
  1  
Wed 9 Jul, 2008 08:50 am
cjhsa wrote:
I don't know what is wrong with c.i. I just write it off as inhaling too many fumes from his taxi and then the shoe business.


Maybe he should be a volunteer model for proctologists in training--just like you!
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Wed 9 Jul, 2008 08:56 am
Doesn't matter who we vote for, like Zappa said, "Don't fool yourself... it's going right up your poop chute".

Guy was prescient.
0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  1  
Wed 9 Jul, 2008 09:37 am
Big Tobacco needed a new poster boy to market their drugs
Well, Obama does set a good example for America's youth to emulate Laughing



http://www.angrywhiteboy.org/wp-content/uploads/2007/02/windowslivewritersmokeemifyougotem-12634obama-smoking2.png
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Wed 9 Jul, 2008 09:48 am
Re: Big Tobacco needed a new poster boy to market their drug
H2O_MAN wrote:
Well, Obama does set a good example for America's youth to emulate Laughing



http://www.angrywhiteboy.org/wp-content/uploads/2007/02/windowslivewritersmokeemifyougotem-12634obama-smoking2.png


While I think Obama is still smoking--he hasn't quite admitted it but he hasn't denied it either--I think this is a photo shop scam. When is the last time you saw a lit cigarette that didn't emit any smoke?
0 Replies
 
okie
 
  1  
Wed 9 Jul, 2008 09:59 am
What is the latest on Obama smoking, anyway? That isn't exactly politically correct nowadays, or a good role model, as H2OMAN pointed out. If he is intellectual, he should instead be smoking a pipe. Of course cigars would be a no no for sure, as Rush Limbaugh smokes those, and they are usually associated with the rich and arrogant, such as fat oil men sitting around a conference table.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Wed 9 Jul, 2008 10:00 am
He's admitted to having a drag or two since he quit.

As a former cig smoker, I can tell ya - it isn't easy to quit, and certainly not during a pressure situation...

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Diest TKO
 
  1  
Wed 9 Jul, 2008 10:02 am
What does "political correct(ness)" have to do with smoking okie?

T
K
O
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

So....Will Biden Be VP? - Question by blueveinedthrobber
My view on Obama - Discussion by McGentrix
Obama/ Love Him or Hate Him, We've Got Him - Discussion by Phoenix32890
Obama fumbles at Faith Forum - Discussion by slkshock7
Expert: Obama is not the antichrist - Discussion by joefromchicago
Obama's State of the Union - Discussion by maxdancona
Obama 2012? - Discussion by snood
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Obama '08?
  3. » Page 971
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.18 seconds on 07/22/2025 at 01:22:22