patrick.net

Patrick, I don't think people hate oB ama, I think people hate the way he's dismanteling America. He's run up the debt to unimaginable levels which is akin to financial terrorism against American citizens. That is a violation of his oath of office to "protect and defend the constitution".

In reality, he's been trampleing and shredding the constitution. That's what people hate.

The PEOPLE elect leaders to protect the PEOPLE from corporate fraud etc. Today, leaders are protecting fraudulent corporations from honest PEOPLE. The settlements being paid for fraud, amount to vending machine change for most large banks. This news is intended to stroke the PEOPLE. Leaders are just EASILY influenced by those with the largest assets.
Obama is a much better actor than Bush. Hating is like tailgating. Doesn't really accomplish anything.
Impeachment may make an impression !
http://www.orphansongs.com/save-the-banks/

Obama's choice, Save the PEOPLE or the Banks.

Lies are more appealing than truth when they fit what you want to believe.

Or maybe its some kind of mind control.

marcus says

Lies are more appealing than truth when they fit what you want to believe

is that why libs still think man caused global climate change?

Bap33 says

is that why libs still think man caused global climate change?

Yes, all the scientists who are far more intelligent than you, and who work very hard at being unbiased and relying on logic, analysis and data, made an exception this time, and decided to be biased and reach their conclusions based on emotion,....why ?

Obviously it's because they were liberals, and they ascertained the huge benefits that would accrue to the science world if it were in fact true that global warming is caused by man's activity.

(they also conveniently ignore all of the average to below average intelligence types who have the common sense and gut feelings to know that the massively significant impact humans have on our atmosphere coinciding with climate change is just a coincidence.)

marcus says

Bap33 says

is that why libs still think man caused global climate change?

Yes, all the scientists who are far more intelligent than you, and who work very hard at being unbiased and relying on logic, analysis and data, made an exception this time, and decided to be biased and reach their conclusions based on emotion,....why ?

Obviously it's because they were liberals, and they ascertained the huge benefits that would accrue to the science world if it were in fact true that global warming is caused by man's activity.

(they also conveniently ignore all of the average to below average intelligence types who have the common sense and gut feelings to know that the massively significant impact humans have on our atmosphere coinciding with climate change is just a coincidence.)

Science has a well known liberal bias. The conservative viewpoint knows that God Did It and doesn't need any of this fancy research and experimentin'

and those responses show that the truth must hurt ... interesting.

Yes, the truth ( i.e. how stupid humans can be ) does hurt. It hurts a lot.

What is so bad about intelligence logic and facts anyway ?

The "science" behind the LIE of human caused climate change has been called bullshit by the same guys that Al Gore built his empire upon. Silly guys like me knew it was bullshit, and we also know that the focus of reduced fuel useage is ONLY to hurt America, since China will use all they can and ruin ecosystems without concern, and for some reason the greeny freaks ignore those facts.
So, in relation to the post you made, that people grasp unto whatever fits their personal point of view, even when it has been found to be false,,,, I agree. I agree with your point. I just gave an example that bothers you and others, but is factual. You chose to believe the absurd man-made climate change crap, because it fits your personal template. Right?

The only thing that bothers me is that you have no regard for facts, and you present yourself to be more stupid than I can possibly fathom. You're a good ol boy Bap and I'd love to have beer with you or go fishing with you, but man I can not believe the lies that you are willing to believe.

As Nomo said, it's a theory, but there is enough evidence to support it that a huge majority of scientist beleve it to be true (or likely true - which is enough to deserve attention and policy changes). Now, I understand that you feel your gut feeling or what you heard from right wing propaganda deserves equal consideration with what the majority of best sceintists believe, but dude don't you see how insane that is ?

I mean WHAT THE FUCK ?? really ?

Please share some sources. Let me guess, there's always that email scandal where a couple researchers were shown to want their research to support a conclusion. Omg !! Then it has to be false !!

Please, if you think

Bap33 says

even when it has been found to be false

Can you show me some evidence that isn't some right wing yahoo talking out of their ass ?

no, that is the only evidence that there is.

http://www.globalwarminghoax.com/news.php

there are a dozen or so easy reads listed here. None are Fox news or Rush's, so maybe they might get half-credit.

Dr. Nomo is correct. It is all theroy.

Know this my friend, I am a HUGE conservationist on the micro and local level. HUGE. And the big money greed of development groups joins forces with pro-growth groups found in education and medicine, and a conservationist like me gets slammed every time. Do you realize that my anti-invasion point of view is 50% grounded in conservation and resourse protection for my area?? It is. We feed the entire world from this valley, and greed and stupidity keeps building houses and schools and prisons where food should be growing. We need to build a few more dams and we need the homes and other town items to be built in the more "rocky" ground of the foothills, where only cattle, rabbit, and snakes hang out. But, the Golden Rule says that those who make the rules (growth pattern) hold the gold (the land they own (or buddy's own) is where groth is aimed). It is frustrating.

There's no question that scumbag politicians (like Al Gore) will do anything for money. And there's plenty idiotic propaganda out there (a la "The Day After Tomorrow")

But the science is solid:

1) global temperatures really are rising, regardless of the cause
2) when you burn carbon-based stuff, you get co2
3) atmospheric co2 has been rising steadily with fossil fuel use
3) co2 is one of the greenhouse gasses

Now there's a lot of debate over:
1) how much of the observed warming is directly from the extra co2
2) how much warming will occur in the future
3) the effects of warmer temperatures on extreme weather, agriculture, etc
4) what can be done to reduce co2

But the basic science is well understood and not really in doubt. It's not a big conspiracy by environmental wackos.

Marcus,

It's much more serious than your cartoon would imply. We are very dependent on fossil fuels for the lifestyle you and I take for granted.

Hopefully this will change. Maybe someone will get fusion power to work. Or maybe solar energy collection and storage technology will get much better. Smart people are working on stuff like this.

But in the short term we are very dependent on fossil fuels. Sad, but true.

If you want to see what it would take to get a country like Britain off fossil fuels with current technology, see:
http://www.withouthotair.com/
And that doesn't even take into account the economic/financial/social/political aspects involved.

Bap, I know you would probably have about as much respect for the commie pinko fags at greenpeace as I have for globalwarminghoax.com, but I ran accross this looking to see who funds that site.

Greenpeace presents evidence of the energy industry funding climate change denial with their Exxon Secrets project.[35][36] A further Greenpeace study from 2011 claims that 9 out of 10 climate scientist who claim that climate change is not happening, have ties to ExxonMobil and that Koch industries in the past 50 years have invested more than US$50 million dollars in spreading doubts about climate change.[37][38][39] ExxonMobil announced in 2008 that it would cut its funding to many of the groups that "divert attention" from the need to find new sources of clean energy, although it continues to fund over "two dozen other organisations who question the science of global warming or attack policies to solve the crisis."[40] A survey carried out by the UK Royal Society found that in 2005 ExxonMobil distributed US$2.9 million to American groups that "misinformed the public about climate change," 39 of which "misrepresented the science of climate change by outright denial of the evidence".[40]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming_conspiracy_theory

You do know that anyone can make a website, right ? I have one.

It would seem that the individuals behind globalwarminghoax.com want to keep their identities secret.

marcus says

It would seem that the individuals behind globalwarminghoax.com want to keep their identities secret.

It's probably Astroturf.

@marcus +5 points for the (really close) reference to "Uneasy Rider" by Charlie Daniels Band "..... he's a friend of those long haird hippie type pinko fags...."

Nomograph says

Why do you prefer lies to truth, TMAC? Are you afraid of the truth?

In case you forgot ONE of the many of your leaders attempts to correct real estate prices. I am sure it is more denial than selective memory.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2009/02/17/us-obama-idUSTRE51G5X720090217

ps. Yes I am afraid Obama is selling us out.

Nomograph says

You are getting off-topic again.

tarp harp hamp hemp wtf. We choose new captains to steer our ship AWAY from icebergs. Our latest will contest them for personal ego.

The topic "why we hate B.O." ?
My answer... He knew real property prices could NOT be saved.
Still, he wastes trillions kickin the can down the road.
Did you ever believe gubmint could curtail the correction of real estate value ?
Or was you just hoping really hard ?
http://www.whatamimissinghere.com/archives/13522

Nomograph says

TMAC54 says

In case you forgot ONE of the many of your leaders attempts to correct real estate prices.

You are getting off-topic again. You claimed that Obama "bailed out the banks" when TARP was a Bush program.

Why do you prefer lies to the truth, TMAC? The truth will set you free. Are you afraid of freedom?

Yes, the bank bailout AND the GM bailout originated with Bush.

Chrysler had been going downhill for a number of years before that. They were essentially handed over to Fiat. Chrysler as an American entity is disappearing. We've already seen a number of Chrysler dealerships here change their names to Fiat.

What you say is true.

That's precisely why I say all of what we've seen was preordained. McCain was an awful candidate in 2008 just as Dole was as bad or worse in 1996. Mondale and Dukakis were essentially straw dogs.

We've lost our sovereignty. Obama was put there to shepherd the bailouts through Congress. In return, we gave him Bob Dole's healthcare bill from the nineties. Whether or not it passes muster at the Supreme Court is anyone's guess but from the way he treated Roberts and Alito, I would say they'll find any excuse they can to throw out the mandate. That was a rookie move and he should have known better.

Obama is no longer needed. The danger is past and now we need a President and Congress (and Fed chief) capable of cleaning all this up.

My father made A LOT of money working in the insurance business between 1976-1980. I'm wondering if this is a similar period coming upon us now.

[...]

Nomograph says

You are getting off-topic again. You claimed that Obama "bailed out the banks" when TARP was a Bush program.

That's just it. Both Bush and Obama bailed out the banks. On economic issues, there isn't much difference between the two. The only difference is on Gays, Guns, n' God.

Bush was a lib spender like crazy on too many social programs, but a he was conservative defender of all Americans, including Code Pink. Lord Barry only defends the folks he feels best fit his needs. Black Panthers get defended, but the soldiers that were shot by Hassain in Texas get no defense ..... the border agents shot by the weapons handed out by Holder get no defense .... it's a pick and choose system. Where has Code Pink went?

curious2 says

Having opposed Hillary's Plan when it was named for a white woman, why would people support it when it gets re-named for a black man who had previously opposed it?

Or the white guy called Kennedy who has been pushing it for how many decades ? Its all the same plan...

Game Over, maybe Patrick has LOTS of red shirts. I don't see anything wrong with red - although I seldom agree with Patrick on matters of politics.

You know what they say about the Irish: Strong backs, Weak minds. Haha [I get to say that because I'm part Irish]

BTW, BO supports the wealth takers, not the wealth makers.

[...]

Nomo,

Where'd you get that graphic that shows the spending under Bush vs. Obama?

I'm not saying I don't believe it. But I don't see a "source" on there anywhere.

I'll answer for him. That graphic has been around for a while

http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2011/07/24/opinion/sunday/24editorial_graph2.html

Thanks.

It just goes to show that Fiscal Conservatism really is DEAD.

Democrats = Tax and Spend

Republicans = Borrow and Spend More Than Democrats

That makes the Democrats more fiscally responsible than the Republicans.

wthrfrk80 says

That makes the Democrats more fiscally responsible than the Republicans.

By far.

Obviously if we paid for what we spent we would have to make the tough decisions.

But it's not that hard to understand the strategy behind republicans borrow and spend. Run up deficits so high that democrats can't afford their programs in the future (aka "starve the beast"). I guess the possible financial ruin of our country is just a risk they are willing to take, if it helps avoid spending on social programs in the future.

(oh and besides - side benefit: for now the rich get richer)

marcus says

But it's not that hard to understand the strategy behind republicans borrow and spend. Run up deficits so high that democrats can't afford their programs in the future (aka "starve the beast").

A totally insane strategy. But then again, politicians aren't known for thinking past the next election cycle. So you're probably correct.

Of course, Bush gave us Medicare D. So even the Republicans will do social spending if they can buy votes with it (in that case the senior citizen vote).

What a joke. Obama is not any better than Bush. They have the same policies across the board. I notice they are putting both wars on Bush's side and the bank bailouts even though Obama has pushed for and continued all the same policies. Both parties are the same. The sooner people realize this, the better.

Nomograph says

Honest Abe says

He's run up the debt to unimaginable levels which is akin to financial terrorism against American citizens.

This has been discussed but it bears repeating. Most of the debt is the result of Conservative policies and actions, Obama policies have added very little:

Of course, Dishonest Abe will refuse to address this and will vote Republican just like he has voted Republican in every other election.

He will continue to believe whatever he hears on AM talk radio.

This chart has somehow left out just a tiny bit of math i.e.

Obama Care which the CBO is now stating a minimum of
2.1 trillion.

TALF
HALP
PIPP
TWIST
Bail out of Fanne #2
Opening the discount windo to any instituion
Giving the banks 0% so they can buy treasuries @ 3%
Extended unemployment
Increased food stamp program

Other acronyms that are just boring to go into

Corporate Bail outs

During nine month periord in 2009 Mr. Obama let the Government hand out...................................Wait for it..............................Wait for it...................................7 Trillion,
Thats right 7 Trillion, confirmed by Bloomberg and the WSJ
through a Freedom of Information Act request.

Look over there at the discrimination, see the shinney ball. Look at the evil conservatives, wow listen to that loud noise.

It's all misdrection Patrick, both parties are pros at getting there followers to believe and look at what they want them to.
Obama lost the following of cross over republicans and independents when the health care bill got shoved thru in the middle of the night on a weekend, that gave literal birth to the Tea Party, and the sweeping change in the midterm election. It had nothing to do with black.

He had tons of crossover voters supper excited in '08 about "Hope and Change" "Transperency" but instead they got bullying, Presidential Executive orders and regulations up the whahzooo, as well as 15 Trillion in dept as it stands right now.

Follow the money Patrick it's always about the money, nothing else.

I'm a huge fan and have been for years, thank you for all your efforts.

The problem with the graphic is it says new programs...

It is highly misleading given that Obama allowed the bush tax cuts to continue and frankly has done little to actually change bush policies.

And the other factor is that congress controls spending. In all due respect it generally is a bad thing to have congress controlled by the same party as the president..six of eight years of bush were like this and two of clintons and pretty much one of obamas.

Gridlock isn't that bad as it blocks spending..that's what the 90's taught us.

How about because he could club baby seals to death before breakfast and it wouldn't make the front page?

TPB says

I said when he was campaigning in 2008.

The Man is a media product, he has not intentions on changing anything but making more rich Washington insiders even richer.

I said he was not a presidential candidate wining on his merit by words he believed and owned. I was convinced he was the front runner then, because he had endless air time by the Liberal media, some believed his lies, and some part of his lies.

I deleted it, because less than two minutes of research showed it was not true.

Huh! Turns out I wasn't a racist after all...

I should get a Civility Credit for 2008 and 2011, they beat the hell out of me for telling the truth. They were facist bastards then.