"Mark & Juanita" wrote in message
news

What exactly are The One's accomplishments that made him the leading
candidate from the Democrat party?

Lack of anyone better?

On May 2, 6:10*pm, "DGDevin" wrote:
Tim Daneliuk wrote:
"GIBSON: What insight into Russian actions, particularly in the last
couple of weeks, does the proximity of the state give you?

PALIN: They're our next door neighbors and you can actually see
Russia from land here in Alaska, from an island in Alaska.

THAT was her take on foreign affairs.

THAT was the take her handlers permitted.

Did the words come out of her mouth, or not? *Why would you cut her slack
you'd deny to someone from the other party, aside from the obvious reason?
Picking Palin was a brilliant tactical move as it reversed McCain's
declining fortunes for a time. *But strategically it became painfully
obvious why they kept her away from the press as much as they could, she was
as qualified to be VP as she is to be an NFL linebacker. *Eventually I think
enough people (those not hopelessly partisan) realized that, and it cost
McCain votes in the endgame. *It sure persuaded me, I was undecided until it
became clear how screamingly unsuitable she was, and with McCain's age and
health concerns there was no way I wanted her the proverbial heartbeat away
from the Oval Office.

I tended slightly towards Obama early on, while my wife leaned to
McCain. My primary worry in either case wasn't experience: in
executive roles, both candidates lacked that, but that's not unusual,
nor, in my experience, is it particularly a problem.

When Palin popped up on-screen, I scratched my head. Eveyrone thought
she was "hot," whatever that means, but nowhere was there a sign of
anyone claiming her to be suitable for the office she wanted. I
listened to her a couple of times, and read a few of her responses,
and need no more head scratching. She's a JAY. Just Another Yuppie.
But with tinges of Valley Girl airhead.

My wife listened to Palin a few times, and started tilting towards my
side of the column. We both ended up voting for Obama. Part of the
influence was simple. Added to my problems dealing with the fact that
McCain has a temper on a par with mine was his age.

McCain is a couple years older than I am, and his health marginally
the same. That was worrisome with a totally unqualified and unthinking
replacement in the wings. Jack Kemp was almost certainly in better
general health than either one of us, and he died of a fast growing
cancer a day or so ago, at 73.

Combine iffy health, age and a rotten temper not always controlled,
and there are problems. I often regret blowing my stack, but it's on a
person-to-person basis, usually causing no permanent damage (beyond a
couple of broken noses). That is not a box to check on a Presidential
qualification list, though.

While I don't really like some of the things Obama is planning to do
or has done, the transparency of his administration, and his openness
about almost everything in his background, have me staying in the
current two-thirds of U.S. citizens who generally approve of the job
he's doing.

Whether or not he is going to be successful is an unfinished story.
The guy has been in office a little over three months, trying to
correct, or at least improve, a situation that was many years in
building, yet people have stuck him with handles that are as asinine
as the ones stuck on "Ape" Lincoln shortly before and after he took
office. I realize that people such as Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter
are in it for the money and will say, and do, almost anything to
fatten their investment portfolios, but it is truly disheartening to
see the rancor they express become as widespread as it has among
people one would expect to have at least slightly better sense. I did
read somewhere yesterday that only 22% of Americans today classify
themselves as Republicans, which means that the noisy rancor comes
from a relatively tiny percentage, with a desire to scream about their
losses. I also note around here people are finally taking down the
McCain-Palin-Goode signs. I figure it's time for the next campaign to
begin!

I may not support all of President Obama's actions, and reserve the
right to bitch, whine, moan and whimper about thos individual actions,
in the meantime, I'm going to remain with the majority in supporting
his overall aims.

Unlike Limbaugh, I do NOT hope Obama fails.

On May 3, 12:18*am, "LD" wrote:
"Lew Hodgett" wrote in message

...



"Robatoy" wrote:

................................................ .......
You guys had your ass handed to you, now suck it up and try again.
Simply being against Obama for the sake of being contrary is a weak
position and laughable.
................................................ .

Based on today's numbers, it appears the ultra conservative Republican
point of view is now supported by less than 20% of the electorate.

What percent do you suppose support the Extreme Left?



Obama is running at about 66% support if you continue to class him as
Extreme Left. Most of us consider ourselves centrists.

On May 3, 4:38*am, "LD" wrote:
"Lew Hodgett" wrote in message

...



I previously wrote:

Based on today's numbers, it appears the ultra conservative Republican
point of view is now supported by less than 20% of the electorate.

LD asks:

What percent do you suppose support the Extreme Left?

Good question, may I ask why do you ask?

Today's Democratic party contains a broad spectrum of views from very
conservative to very liberal.

OTOH, near as I can tell, only the ultra onservative point of view is now
represented in the Republican party.

Everybody else has apparently bailed out.

Lew

You really think the Extreme LEFT has disappeared?

That's not what Lew said, and, in fact, he didn't even imply it.

Tim Daneliuk wrote in news:h4kvc6-7na.ln1
@ozzie.tundraware.com:

Please review the last $4 Trillion

I think all in all it is more than $4Gig, but that is besides the point. I
am really anxious what this is going to mean for the future payback, but
the REAL POINT is how would you otherwise have handled the results from
stupid excessive Greenspan-promoted spending and borrowing? Once we all
(the whole world) have been handed the problem, what is the best solution?
I do not think that letting all those companies and home lenders fail is
the solution. After all, the whole economy is based on consumer spending.
Either you reverse that, bail out the companies, or give each individual
between 50 and 100K taxfree. I would have preferred that last solution,
with the proviso that it be used to first pay off the loans, than to
purchase high-value consumer goods (not fake pieces of bank paper).


--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid

Lew Hodgett wrote:
I asked:

What ever happened to George?

"J. Clarke" responds:

McCarthy.

Huh?

Do you know the name "Joe McCarthy"?

-MIKE- wrote in news:gtitkj$gan$3
@news.motzarella.org:

Robatoy wrote:
You guys had your ass handed to you, now suck it up and try again.
Simply being against Obama for the sake of being contrary is a weak
position and laughable.

That's very true.

Thankfully, I have two very good reasons to be against him.

1. His domestic policy.

With what he has been handed, he is doing the best he can. The only
alternative would have been to hand out money directly to individuals to
clear their debts and after that had been done, to purchase high-value
consumer goods.

Investing in technologies that will be needed in the future is good
business sense.

To invest in technologies and policies that increase the cost-effective
use of healthcare in all its aspects is good economics and sensible.

etc, etc.

2. His foreign policy.

Cowboy-style wars are all good and well if you can make the "peace"
stick. Riling up the people against you is stupid. Going into Iraq with
no policy in place for a new government (including policing of the
populace and an economic plan to keep people - especially the former
soldiers - employed) is worse than stooopid. Doing all that in a fake
country (borders drawn after WWI with no regard for ethnic distributions)
with all that internbal strife and tribal revenge is just crazy. Etc,
etc.

Finally the Bush generals saw their errors, and the surge was 1
alternative that possibly can work. IF (really big if) you can get a
government working that is acceptable to all or most, can get the people
to work, and can get them to talk sense to each other. Apparent progress
is being made, but I would have to wait until the "coalition" troops are
indeed out to see what the "Iraqis" are making of it.

--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid

"HeyBub" wrote in news:QMKdnU-
:

It is in incontrovertible fact that during the Bush years, we had 23
consecutive quarters of economic growth

Based on fake bank paper and borrwing against faked value in our homes as
promoted by rating agencies and bankers. Economic growth isn't that if it
is based on false premises.

--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid

And the country will pay literally and figuratively for all those maimed
physically and mentally for decades and decades. Ask anyone caring for
veterans.

Oh the glory!

--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid

HeyBub wrote:
cm wrote:
Both parties are ****ing us equally. They just operate under different
agendas.


At least the Republicans want to get married first and, er, to opposite
sexes.


Take a look at http://online.logcabin.org/ for some info on Log Cabin
Republicans.

Lew Hodgett wrote:
I previously wrote:

Based on today's numbers, it appears the ultra conservative
Republican point of view is now supported by less than 20% of the
electorate.

LD asks:

What percent do you suppose support the Extreme Left?

Good question, may I ask why do you ask?

Today's Democratic party contains a broad spectrum of views from very
conservative to very liberal.

OTOH, near as I can tell, only the ultra onservative point of view is
now represented in the Republican party.

Everybody else has apparently bailed out.

Lew




No matter how many times you mutter this is still won't be true. The
problem with the Rs is that they've been infested by libs and moderates
and thus have no definable political philosophy. If they were run by the
right wingers, at least you could tell what they stood for.

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk
PGP Key: http://www.tundraware.com/PGP/

Charlie Self wrote:
On May 3, 12:18 am, "LD" wrote:
"Lew Hodgett" wrote in message

...



"Robatoy" wrote:
.................................................. .....
You guys had your ass handed to you, now suck it up and try again.
Simply being against Obama for the sake of being contrary is a weak
position and laughable.
.................................................
Based on today's numbers, it appears the ultra conservative Republican
point of view is now supported by less than 20% of the electorate.
What percent do you suppose support the Extreme Left?



Obama is running at about 66% support if you continue to class him as
Extreme Left. Most of us consider ourselves centrists.

As I understand it - and I do not have the cite - his approval ratings
at this early point in his presidency are among the *lowest* in modern
times. If I find the cite, I pass it along...

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk
PGP Key: http://www.tundraware.com/PGP/

Han wrote:
"HeyBub" wrote in news:QMKdnU-
:

It is in incontrovertible fact that during the Bush years, we had 23
consecutive quarters of economic growth

Based on fake bank paper and borrwing against faked value in our homes as
promoted by rating agencies and bankers. Economic growth isn't that if it
is based on false premises.


Oh my ... as opposed to the "Real Paper" that the ObamMessiah is printing
24 hours a day - so much so that even the Chinese are getting wary of
buying our bonds? Speaking of false premises ... oh never mind. You
folks are in love with a radical Marxist and deserve everything that's
coming...

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk
PGP Key: http://www.tundraware.com/PGP/

DGDevin wrote:
Tim Daneliuk wrote:

Bush was wrong about some things.

Yeah, some things, those Iraqi WMDs for example, four and half thousands
Americans have paid for that little mistake with their lives, not to mention
three billion bucks a week for six years.

Obama has been an order of
magnitude
worse in 100 days than Bush was in 8 years. Here's just one scorecard
(there are many others):

Bush - $28B Bear-Stearns

What interesting math, it seems to overlook that dear old George got behind
spending more like three-quarters of a trillion on top of the then record
deficit he'd already overseen. By why bother with details like what he
signed off on before his time ran out.

The Hopeium Dealer - $4 *Trillion* and counting in just a bit under
4 months.

I hear he's even including the costs of two wars in the actual budget
instead of making them a side-bet, outrageous!



At current pace, Captain Marvel will spend more by the end of next year in
the aggregate than Bush did in 8 years.

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk
PGP Key: http://www.tundraware.com/PGP/

Han wrote:
And the country will pay literally and figuratively for all those maimed
physically and mentally for decades and decades. Ask anyone caring for
veterans.

Oh the glory!


But we will pay - or our great grandchildren will - far more for far longer
to pick up the tab for Comrade Obama's spending spree to get reelected ...

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk
PGP Key: http://www.tundraware.com/PGP/

Han wrote:
Tim Daneliuk wrote in news:h4kvc6-7na.ln1
@ozzie.tundraware.com:

Please review the last $4 Trillion

I think all in all it is more than $4Gig, but that is besides the point. I
am really anxious what this is going to mean for the future payback, but

Debt, debt, debt and slow economic growth.

the REAL POINT is how would you otherwise have handled the results from
stupid excessive Greenspan-promoted spending and borrowing? Once we all

Let markets do their work and let bankruptcy courts do theirs. Quit giving
my money to the rich and to the poor.

(the whole world) have been handed the problem, what is the best solution?

Laissez Faire

I do not think that letting all those companies and home lenders fail is
the solution. After all, the whole economy is based on consumer spending.

So you'd rather steal from the middle class to bail out these companys.
Oh wait, I know. You want the *government* to own and run these countries
as Barak Marx has done. Because, as we know, the government has done such
a great job running everything else. You think corporate execs are bozos?
Wait 'till Barney Frank is a CEO of something.

Either you reverse that, bail out the companies, or give each individual
between 50 and 100K taxfree. I would have preferred that last solution,

Why on earth - with view like this - would you ever want to live in
a market environment? Your views are much more consonant with
that of the former Soviet Union, the current North Korea, or Maoist
China. Markets mean there will be winners AND losers. If every time
there is a big loser, the government (aka those of us actually productive)
have to bail them out, then there is no risk-reward feedback and no
honing of the marketplace via real competitive circumstances.

with the proviso that it be used to first pay off the loans, than to
purchase high-value consumer goods (not fake pieces of bank paper).



I think I'm beginning to see what's wrong here - you don't understand
much about money and modern economies. The pieces of paper in the
bank are not "fake" (unless outright fraud is taking place). They
are tokens of value whose actual worth can only be ascertained in a
real, honest, and transparent market. Markets are not real, transparent,
nor honest when the government distorts them and starts picking winners
and losers along some politically correct axis...

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk
PGP Key: http://www.tundraware.com/PGP/

Tim Daneliuk wrote:

Han wrote:
And the country will pay literally and figuratively for all those maimed
physically and mentally for decades and decades. Ask anyone caring for
veterans.

Oh the glory!


But we will pay - or our great grandchildren will - far more for far
longer to pick up the tab for Comrade Obama's spending spree to get
reelected ...

Yeah and what makes my stomach turn is that he's not done yet. He's just
started!!!
--
"You can lead them to LINUX
but you can't make them THINK"
Running Mandriva release 2008.0 free-i586 using KDE on i586
Website Address http://rentmyhusband.biz/

"J. Clarke" wrote:

Do you know the name "Joe McCarthy"?

Relavance?

Lew

Mark & Juanita wrote:
If they hadn't had the AG
pictures, all they needed was some pictures from Hollywood to convince AQ
recruits (conservative Muslims by definition) of the utter depravity of the
country occupying theirs.


I agree with everything you said until here. Defining AQ simply as
"conservative Muslims" isn't exactly fair to the billion or so
conservative Muslims who haven't swallowed the jihad coolaid.

And don't think for a second they actually care about depravity.
The terrorist pilots of 9/11 were regulars at the strip joint near
their pilot training school.


--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com

---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply

On May 3, 10:41*am, Tim Daneliuk wrote:
Han wrote:
And the country will pay literally and figuratively for all those maimed
physically and mentally for decades and decades. *Ask anyone caring for
veterans.

Oh the glory!

But we will pay - or our great grandchildren will - far more for far longer
to pick up the tab for Comrade Obama's spending spree............

He did what he had to do because what he inherited. It was a brave
thing to do.

and then you add:

to get reelected ...

and it is those jabs which put you in the 'asshole' column.

You ARE a Repuglican. A contrary nay-sayer. A sore loser. You got your
ass handed to you. The is no party left to counter what the entire
nation has endorsed as the path to the future.
Whine and bitch all you want...and guess what? That is ALL you do.
Every post is critique, a whine, a bitch, nothing constructive.

On May 3, 10:41*am, Tim Daneliuk wrote:
DGDevin wrote:
Tim Daneliuk wrote:

Bush was wrong about some things.

Yeah, some things, those Iraqi WMDs for example, four and half thousands
Americans have paid for that little mistake with their lives, not to mention
three billion bucks a week for six years.

*Obama has been an order of
magnitude
worse in 100 days than Bush was in 8 years. *Here's just one scorecard
(there are many others):

Bush * * * * * * * *- $28B Bear-Stearns

What interesting math, it seems to overlook that dear old George got behind
spending more like three-quarters of a trillion on top of the then record
deficit he'd already overseen. *By why bother with details like what he
signed off on before his time ran out.

The Hopeium Dealer *- $4 *Trillion* and counting in just a bit under
4 months.

I hear he's even including the costs of two wars in the actual budget
instead of making them a side-bet, outrageous!

At current pace, Captain Marvel will spend more by the end of next year in
the aggregate than Bush did in 8 years.

That is to repair the damage your buddy Bush has done. Get over it.
You had the place for 8 years, you screwed it up. Now let the majority
of your country get to work to fix your fukkup.

On May 3, 10:50*am, Tim Daneliuk wrote:


Why on earth - with view like this - would you ever want to live in
a market environment? *Your views are much more consonant with
that of the former Soviet Union, the current North Korea, or Maoist
China. * Markets mean there will be winners AND losers.

Oh stop the Boogy McCarthy-istic bull****, Tim. There are no commies
hiding under the bed or in the White House, no matter how convenient
it would be in order to try to scare the people back into your fold.
Your side blew it. There ain't no commies. Just honest hard-working
Americans who have taken it upon themselves to right all the wrongs
your side has done. *

Tim Daneliuk wrote in news:ein0d6-7na.ln1
@ozzie.tundraware.com:

The pieces of paper in the
bank are not "fake" (unless outright fraud is taking place). They
are tokens of value whose actual worth can only be ascertained in a
real, honest, and transparent market. Markets are not real, transparent,
nor honest when

I agree completely. WHen bankers and rating agencies obfuscate the true
value, the free market has to figure out the true value of those
"securities debt obligations".

What you are saying is that we should leave the finacial markets to the
speculators. We should all go back to the savings and loans to earn simple
interest at half or less market rate. Let the bnakers do the investing, so
the Savings and Loans can thrive. Oh, wait, we were there.

--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid

Tim Daneliuk wrote in
:

Charlie Self wrote:
snip
Obama is running at about 66% support if you continue to class him as
Extreme Left. Most of us consider ourselves centrists.

As I understand it - and I do not have the cite - his approval ratings
at this early point in his presidency are among the *lowest* in modern
times. If I find the cite, I pass it along...


So you believe the lying pollsters when they agree with your
preconceived prejudices. Great! Now we know for sure where you stand.
Who said that lies become truth if repeated often enough?

--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid

Robatoy wrote:
On May 3, 10:50 am, Tim Daneliuk wrote:

Why on earth - with view like this - would you ever want to live in
a market environment? Your views are much more consonant with
that of the former Soviet Union, the current North Korea, or Maoist
China. Markets mean there will be winners AND losers.

Oh stop the Boogy McCarthy-istic bull****, Tim. There are no commies
hiding under the bed or in the White House, no matter how convenient

No, they are not communists. They are Marxists.

it would be in order to try to scare the people back into your fold.

My "fold" is the Constitution of the US and the limitations on power
it imposes on the Federal government. It's tragic that any citizen
of this country has to be dragged back into it.

Your side blew it. There ain't no commies. Just honest hard-working

My side was never in power and thus has never had the chance to fix
or break anything.

Americans who have taken it upon themselves to right all the wrongs
your side has done.

The ObamMessiah and his evil minions are niether hard-working nor honest.
They are bottom feeding Chicago political scum. The people that voted
for them are one of naive, greedy, or stupid...


--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk
PGP Key: http://www.tundraware.com/PGP/

Robatoy wrote:
He did what he had to do because what he inherited. It was a brave
thing to do.


That's a tired, worn out, inaccurate argument.
If you're going with that, then you have to say that Bush inherited it
from Bill Clinton and Barney Frank. The Bush administration tried to
warn about the eminent Fannie/Freddie collapse 18 times over several
years. You can watch the hearings on youtube and see how Frank and his
cohorts tried to demonize the alarm ringers as racists and fear mongers,
saying "there's nothing wrong with Fannie/Freddie" over and over again.


--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com

---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply

Tim Daneliuk wrote in
:

Han wrote:
And the country will pay literally and figuratively for all those
maimed physically and mentally for decades and decades. Ask anyone
caring for veterans.

Oh the glory!


But we will pay - or our great grandchildren will

Yes, thanks to uncontrolled financial systems systems and uncontrolled
greed on all sides. And almost everyone is guilty, unless now they do
hold a useful job and have a positive net worth at the bottom of this
recession.

- far more for far longer to pick up the tab for Comrade Obama's
spending spree to get reelected ...

You just should NOT have re-elected that fake Bush, who charmed YOU into
a crusade against windmills instead of doing what should have been done.
How much have the wars cost us to date? How much do you think are all
those poor kids going to cost us for the next 50-60 years? Who reaped
the war profits?

--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid

Robatoy wrote in
:

On May 3, 10:41*am, Tim Daneliuk wrote:
DGDevin wrote:
Tim Daneliuk wrote:

Bush was wrong about some things.

Yeah, some things, those Iraqi WMDs for example, four and half
thousand
s
Americans have paid for that little mistake with their lives, not
to me
ntion
three billion bucks a week for six years.

*Obama has been an order of
magnitude
worse in 100 days than Bush was in 8 years. *Here's just one
scoreca
rd
(there are many others):

Bush * * * * * * * *- $28B Bear-Stearns

What interesting math, it seems to overlook that dear old George
got be
hind
spending more like three-quarters of a trillion on top of the then
reco
rd
deficit he'd already overseen. *By why bother with details like
what
he
signed off on before his time ran out.

The Hopeium Dealer *- $4 *Trillion* and counting in just a bit
under 4 months.

I hear he's even including the costs of two wars in the actual
budget instead of making them a side-bet, outrageous!

At current pace, Captain Marvel will spend more by the end of next
year i
n
the aggregate than Bush did in 8 years.

That is to repair the damage your buddy Bush has done. Get over it.
You had the place for 8 years, you screwed it up. Now let the majority
of your country get to work to fix your fukkup.

Don't forget about the damage that we will have to pay for for years to
come. At least Reagan won the cold war. Bush II "only" got us
spiritually, fiscally, and physically in hock.

--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid

Lew Hodgett wrote:
"J. Clarke" wrote:

Do you know the name "Joe McCarthy"?

Relavance?

Take your meds.

Robatoy wrote:
On May 3, 10:41 am, Tim Daneliuk wrote:
Han wrote:
And the country will pay literally and figuratively for all those
maimed physically and mentally for decades and decades. Ask anyone
caring for veterans. Oh the glory!
But we will pay - or our great grandchildren will - far more for
far longer to pick up the tab for Comrade Obama's spending
spree............

He did what he had to do because what he inherited. It was a brave
thing to do.

Whatever was inherited and for whatever reason, it was plainly stupid
to do what he did. It will fix *nothing*. Just as FDRs asinine New
Deal (aka "Bad Deal") actually *delayed* the recovery from the Great
Depression, so too will Commander Hopium's spending spree.


and then you add:

to get reelected ...

and it is those jabs which put you in the 'asshole' column.

I am deeply distraught over your assessment of me, particularly given
the gentle tone, kindness, and intellectual sophistication you've
demonstrated here over the years.

All Obama knows how to run is his mouth. He uses it to constantly
run for office. His rhetoric is not that of a leader, it is that
of a politician seeking approval. When he is taken off-script/
off teleprompter he is a stammering idiot. He has hired the most
inept cabinet seen in years - perhaps ever. His Sec. Treasury
cannot even manage to pay his own taxes, and that's just the tip
of the iceburg. He has used political appointments to buy of
the extreme left of his part for whom full Marxism cannot come fast
enough. All this guy is focused on is "how do I get four more years?"



You ARE a Repuglican. A contrary nay-sayer. A sore loser. You got
your

I didn't vote for McCain either. I realize that in your tiny little
world there is only room for two possibilities politically. Among
thoughtful people, there are many other variations possible. Neither
the Ds nor the Rs respect the Constitution. Neither want to preserve
liberty. Both want to pillage the middle to pay off the crack whores
and the ultra rich. Both are revolting parties. The Rs were slightly
less obnoxious when they at least had some principle as regard to
staying out of the private sector and exhibiting some self-control
fiscally. But both of these are long in the rearview mirror.


ass handed to you. The is no party left to counter what the entire
nation has endorsed as the path to the future.

The "entire nation" was just under 53% of the popular vote. For
historic reasons (i.e., reasons you won't be able to grasp) the
electoral college it wired to give the appearance of far more
unanimity than actually exists in the larger voting block. No, the
"entire nation" does not speak even remotely with a single voice.

Whine and bitch all you want...and guess what? That is ALL you do.
Every post is critique, a whine, a bitch, nothing constructive.

Oh, I'm doing considerably more than this - more to the point it's
what I am *not* doing. I am not hiring people. I am not growing my
business. With only one or two exceptions I am not contributing to
charity any longer. As of last week I am not buying another GM product
even though I've been a lifelong fan. I am avoiding - to the degree
possible - buying new things, preferring used items where I can. In
short, I'm on strike and so are a lot of other folks I know. We who
actually keep the wheels turning are tired of getting shafted by the
pigs at the bottom and at the top of the economic ladder. You have no
idea how many people I run into that feel *exactly* the same way. More
and more people I know are preserving cash, not using consumer debt in
any form. Let the greedy little pigs in the culture and in the
government find out what happens when their lackeys refuse to
cooperate ...



--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk PGP Key:
http://www.tundraware.com/PGP/

Robatoy wrote:
On May 3, 10:41 am, Tim Daneliuk wrote:
DGDevin wrote:
Tim Daneliuk wrote:
Bush was wrong about some things.
Yeah, some things, those Iraqi WMDs for example, four and half thousands
Americans have paid for that little mistake with their lives, not to mention
three billion bucks a week for six years.
Obama has been an order of
magnitude
worse in 100 days than Bush was in 8 years. Here's just one scorecard
(there are many others):
Bush - $28B Bear-Stearns
What interesting math, it seems to overlook that dear old George got behind
spending more like three-quarters of a trillion on top of the then record
deficit he'd already overseen. By why bother with details like what he
signed off on before his time ran out.
The Hopeium Dealer - $4 *Trillion* and counting in just a bit under
4 months.
I hear he's even including the costs of two wars in the actual budget
instead of making them a side-bet, outrageous!
At current pace, Captain Marvel will spend more by the end of next year in
the aggregate than Bush did in 8 years.

That is to repair the damage your buddy Bush has done. Get over it.
You had the place for 8 years, you screwed it up. Now let the majority
of your country get to work to fix your fukkup.


It is a sign of profound dishonesty and the evidence of no defensible position
when your only counterpoint is to: A) Attack the person of your debating
partner and B) Promote things you know to be a lie to make your case.
I am not now a Republican. I have rarely voted for Republicans. I dislike
the party in its current form more than ever. The only thing that ever
makes the Republicans look good is even a casual interview with almost
any Democrat ...


--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk
PGP Key: http://www.tundraware.com/PGP/

-MIKE- wrote:
Mark & Juanita wrote:
If they hadn't had the AG
pictures, all they needed was some pictures from Hollywood to convince AQ
recruits (conservative Muslims by definition) of the utter depravity
of the
country occupying theirs.


I agree with everything you said until here. Defining AQ simply as
"conservative Muslims" isn't exactly fair to the billion or so
conservative Muslims who haven't swallowed the jihad coolaid.

I keep hearing this, but I don't buy it - i.e. That it is the minority
of Islam that is the problem. It is certainly true that the minority
of Islam is willing to act in the manner of the AQ suicide bombers and
other paramilitary operators. However, I would suggest that there is
tacit and quiet support for them that reaches well into that
population of 1+ Billion people. Where was the outcry from the Muslim
Imams around the world after Kobar Towers, Somalia, WTC I, 9/11, Danny
Pearl, etc.?? A few brave enlightened Muslim leaders spoke out, but
there were very much the minority.

You want to see the heartbeat of Islam today? Listen to their leaders
in the UK, Spain, and the rest of Continental Europe. They are
declaring Jihad and a new Caliphate daily. Fortunately their own
internecine rivalries make this all but impossible. But the idea that
"it's just a few baddies in a much bigger bowl of people" is naive. If
the Islamic world really was structured that way, there would be vast
help in stopping AQ in Malaysia, Indonesia, The Philippines, Somalia,
the whole of the Middle East, good parts of Africa, and the Muslims of
the West. It ain't happening because a whole lot of the 1+ Billion to
NOT see AQ as having done much all that wrong.

But it's all gonna be just fine. Our Apology In Chief has already
bent down in a whiny act of begging forgiveness thereby tacitly
blaming his own country for the murder of their fellow citizens.




And don't think for a second they actually care about depravity.
The terrorist pilots of 9/11 were regulars at the strip joint near
their pilot training school.




--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk
PGP Key: http://www.tundraware.com/PGP/

"J. Clarke" wrote:

Take your meds.

"J. Clarke" AKA: "The Clueless"

IOW, more crap that doesn't stick.


Lew

Han wrote:
Tim Daneliuk wrote in news:ein0d6-7na.ln1
@ozzie.tundraware.com:

The pieces of paper in the
bank are not "fake" (unless outright fraud is taking place). They
are tokens of value whose actual worth can only be ascertained in a
real, honest, and transparent market. Markets are not real, transparent,
nor honest when

I agree completely. WHen bankers and rating agencies obfuscate the true
value, the free market has to figure out the true value of those
"securities debt obligations".

What you are saying is that we should leave the finacial markets to the
speculators. We should all go back to the savings and loans to earn simple
interest at half or less market rate. Let the bnakers do the investing, so
the Savings and Loans can thrive. Oh, wait, we were there.


What I'm saying is way simpler than this: The government's only role
in markets is to ensure their transparency and integrity, and to
interdict in matters of fraud. Period. It is NOT the government's
job to "encourage" bankers to lend to welfare recipients. It is NOT
the government's job to decide what a "Fair" credit card policy is.
It is NOT the government's job to bail out companies that have
committed financial suicide. It is NOT the government's job to
steal money from bond holders that have lent such companies money
and turn around and give it to the lazy union slobs that take no
risk of their own. It is NOT the job of government to decide how
much any citizens should be permitted to earn - whether CEO or
aforementioned union slob.

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk
PGP Key: http://www.tundraware.com/PGP/

Han wrote:
Tim Daneliuk wrote in
:

Charlie Self wrote:
snip
Obama is running at about 66% support if you continue to class him as
Extreme Left. Most of us consider ourselves centrists.
As I understand it - and I do not have the cite - his approval ratings
at this early point in his presidency are among the *lowest* in modern
times. If I find the cite, I pass it along...


So you believe the lying pollsters when they agree with your
preconceived prejudices. Great! Now we know for sure where you stand.
Who said that lies become truth if repeated often enough?


I believe his approval ratings are being more-or-less correctly
reported. My only comment was that putting this in context of
other administrations at this early point in the presidency
show The One to be well in the lower quartile (or so I have read/heard,
but not confirmed). If so, this makes me quite happy. He needs to
fail loudly and visibly so that naive voters will retire Marxism for
another generation or two. I look forward to seeing is approval
ratings fall further - hopefully very deeply - in that cause.


--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk
PGP Key: http://www.tundraware.com/PGP/

Han wrote:
Tim Daneliuk wrote in
:

Han wrote:
And the country will pay literally and figuratively for all those
maimed physically and mentally for decades and decades. Ask anyone
caring for veterans.

Oh the glory!

But we will pay - or our great grandchildren will

Yes, thanks to uncontrolled financial systems systems and uncontrolled
greed on all sides. And almost everyone is guilty, unless now they do
hold a useful job and have a positive net worth at the bottom of this
recession.

- far more for far longer to pick up the tab for Comrade Obama's
spending spree to get reelected ...

You just should NOT have re-elected that fake Bush, who charmed YOU into
a crusade against windmills instead of doing what should have been done.
How much have the wars cost us to date? How much do you think are all
those poor kids going to cost us for the next 50-60 years? Who reaped
the war profits?


Nowhere near what Captain Feelgood is going to cost us.

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk
PGP Key: http://www.tundraware.com/PGP/

Tim Daneliuk wrote in news:0r31d6-i5t1.ln1
@ozzie.tundraware.com:

The government's only role
in markets is to ensure their transparency and integrity, and to
interdict in matters of fraud.

Now that smacks of really good (=beneficial to society and individuals)
regulation and laws. I could vote for that.

I also would vote for compassion. The fact that Dad can pay for kids
education should not mean that poor Joe and Jill can't get an education.

--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid

Tim Daneliuk wrote in news:mv31d6-7na.ln1
@ozzie.tundraware.com:

I believe his approval ratings are being more-or-less correctly
reported. My only comment was that putting this in context of
other administrations at this early point in the presidency
show The One to be well in the lower quartile (or so I have read/heard,
but not confirmed). If so, this makes me quite happy. He needs to
fail loudly and visibly so that naive voters will retire Marxism for
another generation or two. I look forward to seeing is approval
ratings fall further - hopefully very deeply - in that cause.

I could not believe that Bush II could get re-elected on his record, but
his effort was definitely better than his opposition's, despite my vote.

It is the economy, stupid, was one of the cries before, and it sure has an
effect - whether the economy reports truly or is subverted.

--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid

Tim Daneliuk wrote in
:

Han wrote:
Tim Daneliuk wrote in
:

Han wrote:
And the country will pay literally and figuratively for all those
maimed physically and mentally for decades and decades. Ask anyone
caring for veterans.

Oh the glory!

But we will pay - or our great grandchildren will

Yes, thanks to uncontrolled financial systems systems and
uncontrolled greed on all sides. And almost everyone is guilty,
unless now they do hold a useful job and have a positive net worth at
the bottom of this recession.

- far more for far longer to pick up the tab for Comrade Obama's
spending spree to get reelected ...

You just should NOT have re-elected that fake Bush, who charmed YOU
into a crusade against windmills instead of doing what should have
been done.
How much have the wars cost us to date? How much do you think are
all
those poor kids going to cost us for the next 50-60 years? Who
reaped the war profits?


Nowhere near what Captain Feelgood is going to cost us.

That will be impossible to separate in separate columns. The war now
needs to be concluded and that is going to cost. Whoever is going to
claim credit for the next boom, will not concede to be responsible for
the next bust.

--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid

On May 3, 2:19*pm, Tim Daneliuk wrote:


What I'm saying is way simpler than this: The government's only role
in markets is to ensure their transparency and integrity, and to
interdict in matters of fraud. Period.

That's right. You had the Repuglicans look after 'transparency' and
'integrity'.

No administration has been more secretive on all issues than BushCo.
So much for transparency. Say hello to Mr. Paulson.
The words Bush administration and the word integrity.... I'm sorry.. I
can't make a sentence with both words in it.
There has never been a more corrupt bunch of greedy *******s in a
single administration than in the last one, and you want those foxes
to guard the hen house?

Now I KNOW you've lost your mind, Timbo.