Why are Republicans Wrong about Everything?


Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
Messages 42421 - 42440 of total 55263 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>

Social climber
Falls Church, VA
Apr 18, 2013 - 09:55am PT
smoking guns?


when american diplomats are murdered by terrorists and other americans die trying to rescue him, or when barry assassinates an american citizen without formal charges, a warrant, or trial, libs yawn

but pour a little water up a terrorist's nose or call a homosexual a homosexual, and libs howl about "evil"

winston smith is dead

Social climber
Falls Church, VA
Apr 18, 2013 - 10:18am PT

this is the government chavez created:


here's how barry responds to thatcher's death:


"That's a lower-level delegation than the one he sent to Caracas for the funeral of Venezuela's anti-American dictator Hugo Chavez last month, which saw a sitting congressman there to represent the U.S."

winston smith is dead

Social climber
Falls Church, VA
Apr 18, 2013 - 10:23am PT

but don't worry...barry assures us we don't have a debt problem, a deficit problem, or a spending problem

winston smith is dead

Somewhere out there
Apr 20, 2013 - 10:59pm PT
Why I find the republitards complete lunatics...


Congressman Says Bombings Reveal Danger Of Immigration Bill: ‘Radical Islamists…Are Trained To Act Hispanic’

By Igor Volsky on Apr 17, 2013 at 9:43 am
During an appearance on CSPAN’s Washington Journal on Wednesday, Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX) claimed that this week’s bombings of the Boston Marathon should give pause to immigration reform advocates who seek to reform the system.
“We have seen this in Israel,” Gohmert said of the Boston attacks and recalled visiting areas that had been struck by suicide bombers. “Finally the Israeli people said this is enough. They built a fence and the rest is a wall to prevent snipers from telling their kids. They finally stopped the domestic violence from people that wanted to destroy them. I am concerned we need to do that as well.”
The Tea Party favorite said he feared people entering the country illegally or posing as undocumented Hispanic immigrants could carry out “copycat things.” “We know Al Qaeda has camps on the Mexican border,” he said. “We have people that are trained to act Hispanic when they are radical Islamists.”
Gohmert criticized the bipartisan immigration bill unveiled by the Gang of 8 this week, arguing that it would give immigrants “a bit of amnesty.” “You have to understand that we want America to continue to be a haven for people that want to live free,” he added. “When you have the greatest liberties, you will draw people that want to destroy you.”
On Tuesday, Rep. Steve King (R-IA) also argued that the Boston attacks should slow down the immigration reform effort.

…. because they are just grasping at straws, completely making things up all the time…..

Apr 20, 2013 - 11:45pm PT
"Why I find the republitards complete lunatics..."

Don't worry - there will be 12 million more Hispanic voters in 2016 than there were in 2012 - and 12 million more than that in 2020.

And they vote 70-80% dem.

The Democratic Party should be renamed The Demographic Party

We're going to wipe them off the face of the earth.
Dr. F.

Big Wall climber
Topic Author's Reply - Apr 21, 2013 - 11:40am PT
Right wingers are doing a good job at killing themselves off with their recent uptick in terrorism and gun deaths.

They are stocking up on guns and ammunition so they can bring on Armageddon in the streets of America.
All we have to do to set it off is say "we are coming to take your guns" and it will all end in fire and brimstone, just like the bible prophesied.

Somewhere out there
Apr 21, 2013 - 10:55pm PT
For a good time, check out your favorite senators voting on any number of subjects having to do with the recent gun legislation offered for consideration…

Dr. F.

Big Wall climber
Topic Author's Reply - Apr 22, 2013 - 04:53pm PT
The Jobless Trap

Published: April 21, 2013
NY Times

F.D.R. told us that the only thing we had to fear was fear itself. But when future historians look back at our monstrously failed response to economic depression, they probably won’t blame fear, per se. Instead, they’ll castigate our leaders for fearing the wrong things.

For the overriding fear driving economic policy has been debt hysteria, fear that unless we slash spending we’ll turn into Greece any day now. After all, haven’t economists proved that economic growth collapses once public debt exceeds 90 percent of G.D.P.?

Well, the famous red line on debt, it turns out, was an artifact of dubious statistics, reinforced by bad arithmetic. And America isn’t and can’t be Greece, because countries that borrow in their own currencies operate under very different rules from those that rely on someone else’s money. After years of repeated warnings that fiscal crisis is just around the corner, the U.S. government can still borrow at incredibly low interest rates.

But while debt fears were and are misguided, there’s a real danger we’ve ignored: the corrosive effect, social and economic, of persistent high unemployment. And even as the case for debt hysteria is collapsing, our worst fears about the damage from long-term unemployment are being confirmed.

Now, some unemployment is inevitable in an ever-changing economy. Modern America tends to have an unemployment rate of 5 percent or more even in good times. In these good times, however, spells of unemployment are typically brief. Back in 2007 there were about seven million unemployed Americans — but only a small fraction of this total, around 1.2 million, had been out of work more than six months.

Then financial crisis struck, leading to a terrifying economic plunge followed by a weak recovery. Five years after the crisis, unemployment remains elevated, with almost 12 million Americans out of work. But what’s really striking is the huge number of long-term unemployed, with 4.6 million unemployed more than six months and more than three million who have been jobless for a year or more. Oh, and these numbers don’t count those who have given up looking for work because there are no jobs to be found.

It goes without saying that the explosion of long-term unemployment is a tragedy for the unemployed themselves. But it may also be a broader economic disaster.

The key question is whether workers who have been unemployed for a long time eventually come to be seen as unemployable, tainted goods that nobody will buy. This could happen because their work skills atrophy, but a more likely reason is that potential employers assume that something must be wrong with people who can’t find a job, even if the real reason is simply the terrible economy. And there is, unfortunately, growing evidence that the tainting of the long-term unemployed is happening as we speak.

One piece of evidence comes from the relationship between job openings and unemployment. Normally these two numbers move inversely: the more job openings, the fewer Americans out of work. And this traditional relationship remains true if we look at short-term unemployment. But as William Dickens and Rand Ghayad of Northeastern University recently showed, the relationship has broken down for the long-term unemployed: a rising number of job openings doesn’t seem to do much to reduce their numbers. It’s as if employers don’t even bother looking at anyone who has been out of work for a long time.

To test this hypothesis, Mr. Ghayad then did an experiment, sending out résumés describing the qualifications and employment history of 4,800 fictitious workers. Who got called back? The answer was that workers who reported having been unemployed for six months or more got very few callbacks, even when all their other qualifications were better than those of workers who did attract employer interest.

So we are indeed creating a permanent class of jobless Americans.

And let’s be clear: this is a policy decision. The main reason our economic recovery has been so weak is that, spooked by fear-mongering over debt, we’ve been doing exactly what basic macroeconomics says you shouldn’t do — cutting government spending in the face of a depressed economy.

It’s hard to overstate how self-destructive this policy is. Indeed, the shadow of long-term unemployment means that austerity policies are counterproductive even in purely fiscal terms. Workers, after all, are taxpayers too; if our debt obsession exiles millions of Americans from productive employment, it will cut into future revenues and raise future deficits.

Our exaggerated fear of debt is, in short, creating a slow-motion catastrophe. It’s ruining many lives, and at the same time making us poorer and weaker in every way. And the longer we persist in this folly, the greater the damage will be.


Social climber
Falls Church, VA
Apr 23, 2013 - 07:29am PT
first sweden:


now denmark:


when libs?

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Apr 23, 2013 - 07:52am PT
Booky... I noticed the 56% tax rate on the danes and according to the article they get a free college education while being the richest country on the planet..Does this mean you are advocating taxing the wealthy Americans at a higher rate....?

Social climber
Falls Church, VA
Apr 23, 2013 - 08:20am PT

yep, these are the people whom you believe will "reduce the cost of health care"

Social climber
Desolation Basin, Calif.
Apr 23, 2013 - 11:06am PT
From bookworm's link:
Sweden has reduced public spending as a proportion of GDP from 67% in 1993 to 49% today. It could soon have a smaller state than Britain. It has also cut the top marginal tax rate by 27 percentage points since 1983, to 57%, and scrapped a mare’s nest of taxes on property, gifts, wealth and inheritance. This year it is cutting the corporate-tax rate from 26.3% to 22%.

Wow, socialism is THAT successful in Sweden? Pretty cool. Just think, their socialist policies have allowed them to reduce the size of government and lower taxes. Sounds great. And you guys say socialism doesn't work.

Thanks for the proof of the Marxist way of thinking, bookie.

Social climber
Falls Church, VA
Apr 23, 2013 - 12:43pm PT
"By the administration’s own estimates, the rules it issued in FY2012 alone imposed more costs on the economy than all the rules issued during the entire first terms of Presidents Bush and Clinton, combined."

read it and weep:


Dr. F.

Big Wall climber
Topic Author's Reply - Apr 23, 2013 - 11:12pm PT

He Is Comfortable with Bush’s Inferno

by Ralph Nader
Published on Saturday, April 20, 2013 by Common Dreams

George W. Bush is riding high. A megamillionaire, from the taxpayer-subsidized Texas Rangers company, he makes $150,000 to $200,000 per speech, receives a large presidential pension and support facilities and is about to dedicate the $500 million George W. Bush Presidential Library and Museum on April 25.

President Obama will be at the dedication, continuing to legitimize Mr. Bush, as he did from the outset by announcing in 2009 there would be no investigations or prosecutions of the Bush officials for their crimes.

In an interview with the New York Times, Mr. Bush continued to say he has no regrets about his Presidency. “I’m comfortable with what I did,” he said, “I’m comfortable with who I am.” He added, “Much of my presidency was defined by things that you didn’t necessarily want to have happen.”

But he and Dick Cheney made them happen, although Mr. Bush attributed some military events to Providence. One of the “things” he is comfortable with was his criminal, unconstitutional invasion and occupation of Iraq, which took over one million Iraqi lives – children, women and men – created 5 million refugees and committed overall sociocide on that country which posed no threat to the U.S. The carnage continues to this day by a militarized al-Qaeda-in-Iraq that didn’t exist before his invasion.

Apparently, Mr. Bush is “comfortable” with the price paid by the U.S. soldiers and their broken families – over 5,000 fatalities and suicides, 200,000 injuries, illnesses and traumatic syndromes – and by U.S. taxpayers, who over time will pay an estimated 3 trillion dollars according to Nobel Laureate and economist, Joseph Stiglitz.

Former Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) has said repeatedly that Bush and Cheney “lied us into invading Iraq.” Such an understatement. Bush and Cheney not only lied about Saddam’s weapons of mass destruction, they also deceived, covered-up, corrupted or intimidated the mass media, bullied an abdicatory Congress, and delivered a false address to the United Nations with the now regretful Secretary of State Colin Powell.

Two secretary generals of the UN subsequently declared Bush’s war of aggression against Iraq to be a violation of international law.

Bush suffers no qualms about the brutal realities of his war and his recidivist violations of our Constitution, federal statutes and international treaties. “One of the real challenges of life is when you complete a chapter, you don’t atrophy, that you continue to find ways to contribute,” said Bush in an interview with The Dallas Morning News. Army veteran Tomas Young is atrophying from his massive wounds in Iraq. Before he decides to end his devastated life, possibly this month, he summoned his moral energy to write Mr. Bush a poignant letter calling him to account for his war crimes. Bush, however, never responds. After all he’s “comfortable” and that bloody “chapter” is closed.

The American people have yet to come to terms with the reality that presidents are above the law. Presidents can commit repeated crimes in an outlaw presidency so long as they can invoke, however falsely and vaguely, national security.

Were presidents to engage in personal crimes or obstruction of justice, like Nixon with the burglary of the Democratic Party’s Watergate offices, the law and Congress can hold them accountable. But Bush and Cheney had bigger fish to fry with their destruction of justice. As the ancient Roman historian Tacitus wrote: “The worst crimes were dared by a few, willed by more, and tolerated by all.”

Fortunately, for our fragile democracy, there were dissenters. After 9/11, leading civil liberty groups objected to provisions in the Patriot Act that allowed searches of your home and businesses without telling you for 72 hours. And, the muzzling of librarians and custodians of your financial medical records from even telling you that the feds are retrieving them. And warrantless snooping on millions of Americans.

In the months leading to the invasion of Iraq in March 2003, more than three hundred retired generals, admirals, high ranking officers, national security officials and diplomats spoke out against any invasion.

Retired General and former Director of the National Security Agency Bill Odom called the invasion the most strategic military blunder in our history. Bush’s father was privately opposed to the invasion, urging his top retired advisors, James Baker and Brent Scowcroft to speak and write against the pending invasion.

The venerable, conservative American Bar Association weighed in with three White Papers declaring Bush’s many signing statements – that he was not bound by legislation – domestic surveillance and treatment of enemy combatants were unconstitutional actions. Bush never acknowledged these reports. And this week, a bipartisan report by the Constitution Project concluded that Bush/Cheney approved torture practices at Guantanamo.

All the above plus mass anti-war rallies in Washington, D.C. and elsewhere did not slow the march to war. The protests were not strong enough to penetrate the political and electoral systems. Until that happens, criminal unconstitutional actions regularly conducted at top levels of our government will not, as a practical matter, trigger either the application of the rule of law or the impeachment authority of the U.S. Congress. To the contrary, each succeeding President feels free to push the illegal, unconstitutional envelope further.

The Presidential outlawry continues as a bipartisan dissolution of our constitutional system because the vast majority of “we the people” are not demanding our constitutionally sovereign power. They give truth to Tacitus’ dictum.

On April 25, George W. Bush will bask in the fawning media sunlight of his presidential library and museum. The devastated people of Iraq and the soldiers of America, sent to kill and die in Bush’s illegal, boomeranging war, may have some exhibits, pictures and artifacts to suggest for the museum’s collection.

Social climber
Some Rehab in Bolivia
Apr 23, 2013 - 11:19pm PT

That's a good read Dr F...


Trad climber
Greeley Hill
Apr 24, 2013 - 01:31am PT
Why this is even news beats me...

As economy recovers, the richest get richer, study shows

Wealth inequality widened dramatically during the first two years of the economic recovery, as the upper 7 percent of American households saw their average net worth increase 28 percent, while the wealth of the other 93 percent declined, according to a report released Tuesday.

The study by the Pew Research Center underscored other data showing that the economic growth that has followed the Great Recession has benefited mainly those at the top. The uneven recovery has only accelerated a decades-long trend of growing wealth inequality in the country, despite rising popular and political awareness of the dynamic.

From 2009 to 2011, the average net worth of the nation’s 8 million most-affluent households jumped from an estimated $2.7 million to $3.2 million, Pew said. For the 111 million households that form the bottom 93 percent, average net worth fell 4 percent, from $140,000 to an estimated $134,000, the report said.

The changes mean that the wealth gap separating the top 7 percent and everyone else increased from 18-to-1 to 24-to-1 between 2009 and 2011. Overall, the most affluent 7 percent of households owned 63 percent of the nation’s household wealth in 2011, up from 56 percent in 2009.

Social climber
Falls Church, VA
Apr 24, 2013 - 07:05am PT
Credit: bookworm

and what's the lib response?


what's that they say about trying the same solution over and over again and expecting different results?

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Apr 24, 2013 - 08:01am PT
A library for W. Bush...That's rich...! When did he learn to read...?

Social climber
Falls Church, VA
Apr 24, 2013 - 08:29am PT

but barry kept giving them money because that's what politicians do because it's easy to spend OTHER PEOPLE'S MONEY especially when nobody holds you accountable

like education:

1) Revenues collected by governments for public education in the United States totaled $593.7 billion. About $261.4 billion came from local sources, $258.2 billion from state sources, and $74 billion from federal sources.

2) That’s about $1,922 from each and every American.

3) Or $2,531 from each adult, 18 and older.

4) Or $4,567 from each non-farm American worker on a payroll.

5) That amounts to 11.4 percent of the average worker’s salary, or $2.20 per hour.

6) The average American employee thus works almost one hour every day to fund public schools.

7) It would take the entire salary of 14,842,500 employees to pay for U.S. public schools, equivalent to the entire retail trade workforce.

All the figures cited are for 2010, courtesy of the National Center of Education Statistics, the Bureau of Labor Statistics, and the U.S. Census Bureau.

Social climber
Desolation Basin, Calif.
Apr 25, 2013 - 12:21am PT
To answer Dr. F's original question:

Because they are shameless corporate whores.
WASHINGTON — Republicans have stepped up their pressure to limit the wide-ranging powers of the nation's watchdog over consumers' money matters.

The head of a key House committee overseeing the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau said he would no longer accept the testimony of Richard Cordray, the bureau's director, before his panel because he doesn't believe Cordray was legally appointed to his post.

Cordray, who delivered his semi-annual report to the Senate Banking Committee on Tuesday, was set to do the same in coming weeks in the House, as required by law.

But Rep. Jeb Hensarling (R-Texas), chair of the House Financial Services Committee and a leading critic of the bureau, contended that President Obama's recess appointment of Cordray last year was unlawful because the Congress, technically, was not in recess.

The bureau has been under attack by congressional Republicans and other opponents since it was created in 2010, over the GOP's strenuous objections, as the centerpiece of the Dodd-Frank overhaul of financial regulations.

Republicans have tried since to rein in the bureau's authority, arguing that the bureau was too powerful and posed a threat to the health of banks and the rights of consumers. Nearly all Senate Republicans have blocked the confirmation of any nominee to the post until the administration agrees to curtail the bureau's authority.

"No other regulator has more influence over the daily financial lives of Americans," Hensarling said. "How is it fair to American consumers that one unelected, unaccountable bureaucrat in Washington has the power to decide what kind of mortgage, car loan or credit card they can or cannot have?"

My apologies to whores for lumping them in with GOP politicians.
Messages 42421 - 42440 of total 55263 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
Our Guidebooks
Check 'em out!
SuperTopo Guidebooks

Try a free sample topo!

SuperTopo on the Web

Review Categories
Recent Route Beta
Recent Gear Reviews