mnealtx 0 #26 April 29, 2009 QuoteQuoteI thought Obamer was going to change things in Washington? What the fuck is "Obamer" supposed to mean? Is John really so stupid that he thinks that is how it's spelled, or is there actually a meaning to it? Someone help me out here, please! As much meaning as there was in "shrub" "dumbya" "chimpy" etc etc etc...Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chuckakers 426 #27 April 29, 2009 QuoteQuoteNews:Treasury needs record $361B April-June borrowing The Treasury Department said Monday it will need to borrow $361 billion in the current April-June quarter, a record amount for that period. (The $361 billion estimate for borrowing this quarter compared with borrowing needs of just $13 billion in the year-ago period.) It's the third straight quarter the government's borrowing needs have set records for those periods. Treasury also estimated it will need to borrow $515 billion in the July-September quarter. The administration is projecting the federal deficit for the entire budget year ending Sept. 30, will total a record $1.75 trillion. A deficit at that level would nearly quadruple the previous record of $454.8 billion set last year...Source: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090427/ap_on_bi_go_ec_fi/us_treasury_borrowing Go, Obama, go! Spend, Obama, spend! "It's the third straight quarter the government's borrowing needs have set records for those periods." 2 of the those 3 quarters were under a Republican administration. Can you link to the posts that you decried Bush for setting spending records. I don't know about posts here that decried any, but the press had a field day with every dollar Bush spent that they deemed wasteful, starting with the cost of innaugaral parties on the very day he took office. Funny - Obama set spending records for that too - several times over the cost of Bush's parties - and all the press would talk about is B.O. making his rounds at every ball. Jus' point'n out the obvious.Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gawain 0 #28 April 29, 2009 Quote>cut gov spending OK. What would you cut? I want a shot at this one: 1. Eliminate "Department of Homeland Security" - distribute functions to NSA, DOD, CIA and FBI. Ensure policy allows communication across departments within current frame work and specialties. 2. Eliminate further "stimulus" infusions. 3. Streamline Dept of Agriculture and reform the subsidies in a manner that do not manipulate the commodities markets. 4. Dismantle Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, privatize completely, streamline remaining GSEs. 5. Streamline procurement processes for DoD, cut programs that are overdue/under performing pre-deployment. Limit incremental programs that delay next generation projects. 6. Stop discretionary spending of the Social Security Trust fund. 7. Devote minimal appropriations to not only pay the interest on, but actually begin paying down debt. 8. Begin phased draw down of entitlement programs (HHS) as the environment is created to utilize private sector solutions. 9. Real insurance reform, change the paradigm of health insurance. Reduce costs to providers through elimination of overhead caused by insurance industry induced regulation. 10. Bring forward an environment that brings fresher representation in Congress, find a solution to get more people involved. Too many "long time veterans" that know the system too well, that causes way more abusive spending. Quotep>hold those accountable for the financial disaster . . . Who, and how would you "hold them accountable?" A special prosecutor would have his hands full with these four: Dodd, Frank, Paulson, Bernanke. Quote>send most of the illegals home . . . "Most?" So you'd let some stay? Which ones? Streamline the process for people to come here. Eliminate the appeal of crossing the river. Create the incentive to come through border crossing points - make it easier, get bio-info, pictures, etc. Quote>stop giving billions to foriegn governments . . . OK. Which ones would you stop supporting? There is benefit, I think, to the aid we provide to our strategic relationships. Maybe we are better served by throwing a few more strings in there. ...off the top of my head... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
riddler 0 #29 April 29, 2009 One can only wonder what the 2012 Presidential Race will look like: Obama: "I really would like to encourage everyone to vote for my opponent. As I found out from my first term, this really is a sinking ship, and I couldn't bail water fast enough." Republican candidate: "No way, dude. We've spent the last four years blaming you for Bush's screw-ups. The new, reformulated Republican Party is smart enough to not take elected office until after the financial armageddon next week." Nader: "I'll do it." Obama: "Shut up, Ralph. I'm resigning either way, so suck it up and vote Republican." Republican candidate: "From now on, consider the U.S. a one-party government. The Democratic Party." Nader: "I'll do it." Obama and Republican candidate (both): "Shut up, Ralph!"Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FallingOsh 0 #30 April 29, 2009 Quote One can only wonder what the 2012 Presidential Race will look like: Obama: "I really would like to encourage everyone to vote for my opponent. As I found out from my first term, this really is a sinking ship, and I couldn't bail water fast enough." "Help! I need an adult! Blaming shit on Bush for 4 years didn't help at all. My half term as a Senator wasn't even close to preparing me for this. At least Olberman and Chavez still love me." -------------------------------------------------- Stay positive and love your life. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #31 April 29, 2009 QuoteQuoteI thought Obamer was going to change things in Washington? What the fuck is "Obamer" supposed to mean? It's supposed to mean "Obama", as pronounced by some of those oh-so-proper British Broadcasting Corporation talking heads. For some reason, they like to add "r"s to the end of words. I guess it's some kind of British accent thing. "Cuba" becomes "Cuber", "Law" becomes "Lawr", and "Obama" becomes "Obamer". But mostly I spell it that way just because it drives the Obamites absolutely crazy, and they don't even understand why. They can't claim it's racism. They don't have a clue as to why they are offended by it - they just are. And that's tremendously amusing. Just like watching this whole predictable partisan thread unfold from a single seed message. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JackC 0 #32 April 29, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteI thought Obamer was going to change things in Washington? What the fuck is "Obamer" supposed to mean? It's supposed to mean "Obama", as pronounced by some of those oh-so-proper British Broadcasting Corporation talking heads. For some reason, they like to add "r"s to the end of words. I guess it's some kind of British accent thing. "Cuba" becomes "Cuber", "Law" becomes "Lawr", and "Obama" becomes "Obamer". But mostly I spell it that way just because it drives the Obamites absolutely crazy, and they don't even understand why. They can't claim it's racism. They don't have a clue as to why they are offended by it - they just are. And that's tremendously amusing. Just like watching this whole predictable partisan thread unfold from a single seed message. So trolling then. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Caitlin89 0 #33 April 29, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteI thought Obamer was going to change things in Washington? What the fuck is "Obamer" supposed to mean? It's supposed to mean "Obama", as pronounced by some of those oh-so-proper British Broadcasting Corporation talking heads. For some reason, they like to add "r"s to the end of words. I guess it's some kind of British accent thing. "Cuba" becomes "Cuber", "Law" becomes "Lawr", and "Obama" becomes "Obamer". But mostly I spell it that way just because it drives the Obamites absolutely crazy, and they don't even understand why. They can't claim it's racism. They don't have a clue as to why they are offended by it - they just are. And that's tremendously amusing. Just like watching this whole predictable partisan thread unfold from a single seed message. What's tremendously amusing is lurking in here long enough to witness you and RushLimbaugh AKA mc (in addition to others) making such ridiculous comments regarding our current administration. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TomAiello 26 #34 April 29, 2009 Quote>cut gov spending OK. What would you cut? I like Gawain's cuts for starters. I'd also make large cuts in defense spending. I'm envisioning a de-militarizing of the economy along the lines of a shift from war- to peace-time, which also necessitates removing our forces from their numerous foreign entanglements. I understand that it would take years to make those changes, but I think that if ever their was a time for it, it's when the anti-war vote has just swept the democrats to power, and they can use their popularity to end the various wars we're involved in. I continue to be dumbfounded that in the most major area where I preferred Obama to McCain, it's Obama who has turned out to be a third term for the Bush policies. What was that nickname that the Obama campaign came up with for McCain? "McSame"? I think I'm going to start using "Obushma" instead. Quote>hold those accountable for the financial disaster . . . Who, and how would you "hold them accountable?" I'd suggest making them face the actual dollar losses they incurred by refusing to give any government funding to cover the losses. I think that ought to apply to everyone, from the biggest fat cats on wall street (who, because they appear to have the Treasury in their hip pocket aren't having to face any consequences for their actions) all the way down to the smallest homeowner on main street. The best way to hold people accountable for their financial mistakes is to make them actually face up to them--rather than trying to paper them over with the collusion of the government. What was it that Warren Buffet said? "The market, unlike the Lord, does not forgive those who know not what they do." I guess he should have added "...but the US Treasury will." Quote>send most of the illegals home . . . "Most?" So you'd let some stay? Which ones? I'd create a common sense immigration policy that allows new immigrants to enter the country seeking work, including low paid labor positions. I'd then create a "registration period" during which you'd grant amnesty to anyone currently in the country illegally, provided they came forward and registered under the new policy (which would allow them to stay if they were working). I'd then eliminate welfare payments (of all kinds) to the resident aliens, explaining that if they want to come and work, that's great, but don't expect any government assistance. In my opinion, the vast majority of illegal aliens would jump at this opportunity (most of them just want to work and earn some money anyway), and it would weed out a few bad apples who are trying to ride the current system (and giving the majority of hardworking immigrants a bad rap). Quote>stop giving billions to foriegn governments . . . OK. Which ones would you stop supporting? All of them. Right now. Seriously. We can't pay for our own government, and we certainly can't afford to pay for other peoples'. When money is tight, you need to cut back, and giving handouts is pretty stupid when you're already maxing out your credit card. edit to add picture of Obushma-- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #35 April 29, 2009 They didn't 'really' want you or Gawain to put forth any common sense propositions... BV puts that out to pitch the "it's much too complicated to fix with spending reductions - therefore we have to spend more to cover the fat in the government because the important stuff is too important" argument. Showing that's a bad argument isn't very tolerant. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,100 #36 April 29, 2009 You've gotten a lot more angry and bitter in the last few months. You used to post some funny stuff; now it's all the standard right-winger putdowns. I liked the old Rehmwa better. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #37 April 29, 2009 QuoteYou've gotten a lot more angry and bitter in the last few months. You used to post some funny stuff; now it's all the standard right-winger putdowns. I liked the old Rehmwa better. 1st answer - nonsense, I'd say the whole crowd in general has gotten more serious and a bit more sensitive overall - it's mainly the repetitiveness of the debate tactics that's going dry. I'd love to see some new tactics and angles to play with. - I'll try to revamp that old cynicism and sarcasm for more fun, though. my alternate answer is: I like to think of it as being "edgy" and "XtrEmE" - you just aren't celebrating the diversity of my presentations edit: I'd be more worried about Quade lately, he's in a retro angry mode and it's not typical for such a nice guy ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
