patrick.net

MarsAttacks! says

What happened to my post on that? It just up and disappeared.

I deleted it, because less than two minutes of research showed it was not true. That fee was REQUESTED by the National Christmas Tree Association:

http://hosted2.ap.org/COGRA/e109e277e48c4e219e07a1d4710177b3/Article_2011-11-09-Christmas%20Tree%20Fees/id-25935d56aedb4ecca67d6b1377e47962

If you hate him because he's black, just say so. It would be much more honest.

Obama is doing EVERYTHING (and then some) to KEEP HOUSE PRICES ARTIFICIALLY HIGH and I'm renting and want to own.

Thats a pretty big issue. Explain how 'union rights' or some BS are more important than that?

PockyClipsNow says

KEEP HOUSE PRICES ARTIFICIALLY HIGH

thing is, Pocky guy, being in a situation were house prices were cheaper would wipe out the entire economy via a deflationary cross-default collapse.

http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/HHMSDODNS

that's not fake money, that's peoples' pension plans, savings accounts, not to mention future taxes should we continue bailing out the system the hard way.

There are no easy answers now. The major mistakes were committed 2003-2006.

I really don't think that cheap house prices would wipe out the entire economy!

Sure, the Federal Reserve has a big motive in protecting the big banks that own the Federal Reserve. Those banks could lose big with cheaper housing prices.

But less mortgage debt would also free up millions of people to buy houses with cash, and to get by just as well on lower incomes.

I really don't think that cheap house prices would wipe out the entire economy!

Sure, the Federal Reserve has a big motive in protecting the big banks that own the Federal Reserve. Those banks could lose big with cheaper housing prices.

But less mortgage debt would also free up millions of people to buy houses with cash, and to get by just as well on lower incomes.

When was the last time we had a strong economy AND falling home prices?

If you hate him because he's black, just say so. It would be much more honest.

I don't think most anti obama people hate him because he's black.

They hate him because:

- He's a democrat (they said the same basic things about Clinton)

- He represents things that they don't like ("liberalism")

- He's succeeding where the guy they supported failed.

There are definitely people who hate Obama because he's black, but I think they're (thankfully) a minority.

I hate the crony capitalistic nature of both parties.

I think this cronyism is too much entwined in the system that there cannot be a meaningful way to get rid of it. Special interests (whoever they may be - financiers, industry lobbyists whatever) get the Govt to work for them.

General public is screwed, regardless of who's in power.

Here's why. Let me add artificially inflated house prices.

Yeah, because the majority of people who hate Obama are pro Ron Paul

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.

Until I see you delete a post that is an out right bullshit and a lies on the GOP, then I'm not buying that you are some crusader interested in the Truth. But more a perpetuation of why such a disastrous person could elected in this country in the first place.

If you hate him because he's black, just say so. It would be much more honest.

Un freaking believable!

So Patrick come clean, how much is ACORN giving you these days? I noticed a lot of donations the day you suspended TOT's account. You used to be your own man, in fact through most of 2008 race you were a stanch supporter of Ron Paul.
I don't remember you having any opinion on Obama through out the whole campaign.

White House spokesman Matt Lehrich said the USDA would delay the program, but defended it, saying it was not a tax.

"I can tell you unequivocally that the Obama administration is not taxing Christmas trees," Lehrich said. "What's being talked about here is an industry group deciding to impose fees on itself to fund a promotional campaign."

That said, Lehrich added, "USDA is going to delay implementation and revisit this action."

"That said, Lehrich added, "USDA is going to delay implementation and revisit this action.""

Here let me paraphrase...

"We were going to tax trees, but after TOT's comment, we felt kind of refaced, BUT!!! We may still... maybe, perhaps..."

Pat you're getting dishonest with your new found friends it's not becoming on you.

Kevin says

Yeah, because the majority of people who hate Obama are pro Ron Paul

And many of them voted for Obama and now support Ron Paul.

Anonymousone says

Kevin says

Yeah, because the majority of people who hate Obama are pro Ron Paul

And many of them voted for Obama and now support Ron Paul.

Maybe I should have used sarcasm tags?

austrian_man says

General public is screwed, regardless of who's in power.

EVERYBODY'S a "special interest" somehow.

I like Barry, I hate the effcts of progressive/leftist/liberal/socialist/communist political activity in America.

Bellingham Bill says

EVERYBODY'S a "special interest" somehow.

Not the general public, unless we're talking about a socialistic society, which the US is NOT. A special interest group is one that can buy its influence in the Government and take care of its own needs at the expense of the public.

austrian_man says

A special interest group is one that can buy its influence in the Government

You mean farmers, servicemen, realtors, lawyers, academics, AARP members, the insurance industry, community organizers, media concerns, energy companies, transportation companies, education lobbies, healthcare professionals.

Everybody's got their interest.

Now, some interests might be more special than others, but welcome to politics.

Bill has it right. Nearly every group is a "special interest".

I don't "hate" Obama. But I find that what he was advertised to be (articulate) just didn't pan out.

He called the firing of teachers a good thing and that police acted stupidly when they had to investigate a break in. Why he commented on local politics is beyond me.

Here in the northeast many college/university campuses were filled with people that thought the following

1) we'd pull out of iraq
2) we'd pull out of afghanistan
3) we'd end the war on drugs
4) we'd close camp x ray
5) there would be some amnesty thing for illegals
6) that there'd be single payer health care
7) that unemployment would go down
8) the patriot act would be repealed
9) sanctions would be lifted on cuba
etc

Hardly any of these happened

Now Bush practically ignored the media so I was under the impression that obama would have press conferences on the same level as clinton...nope. I can go weeks if not months without seeing Obama on tv.
I know it's 2011 and we have the internet but when you get on tv it still makes someone appear to be serious. It's almost like he isn't even trying.

It's one thing to tick off an opposing side but obama ticks off his base. To argue that he's doing "the best he can" is a joke.

The sad thing is technically is Obama gets a free ride in the primaries..although incumbents always win primaries I'm surprised the left hasn't put anyone up to it..

When Clinton was in he made being president easy. He could lean against republicans and his own party to get some things done..but now there are no real ideas.

Obamacare is based on Romneycare and we're putting it on a ballot to remove it next year..if it gets removed then what?

The trouble with the democrats is that they always want to promote the "popular" one to become president. Obama won the primary because he could say the iraq war went bad and he didn't vote for it. Republicans have people that usually spend some time (governorship, vice president for awhile etc)

Chris Rock said in a recent statement that there was pain on the left after Bush but the was no "revenge". He also said in a 2nd term he'd do more but he wasn't specific. Reelections are always referendums.