patrick.net

Would you ever say "BUSH-LOVING"

People Love'd them some Bush.

128 JG1 2012 Jul 14, 7:20am

Would you ever say "BUSH-LOVING" , i thought not.

This is cloaked racism to say "obama-loving" it's like saying n-lover.

More racists.

Sure, why wouldn't I? And I've certainly heard Clinton, Gore, and Obama supporters use that term. So you are really grasping at straws to find racism where none exists and none is intended. When Obama was elected, I didn't vote for him, but I predicted he would win when my democrat friends were still saying he can't win because he's (half) black. And I gave the guy the benefit of the doubt, and he was been awful ever since. I would like to see Condi for VP with Mitt, so how does that add up in your apparently race-obsessed worldview?

129

Tenpoundbass 2012 Jul 14, 7:31am

Yeah, Lord knows the Man is always trying to keep Obama down.
Chin up Obama, you'll catch a break, poor you.

Thank God he's not Tiger Woods, or I'd catch crap for the "Chin" remark!

130

Tenpoundbass 2012 Jul 14, 7:42am

Filibusters

MMMMMM Chocolate covered peanut Filibusters... agh ahh ah!

131 JG1 2012 Jul 14, 7:45am

obama-loving is code racism.

i don''t care what you predicted.

glad you gave a half-black guy the "benefit of the doubt??" seriously, your a racist ..

You say Obama has been awful? how? , Make sure you use George Bush as the mile stone.

Social Media Guru Since 1999

Only the race-obssessed would know that. And you're really stretching what isn't and is racism. And pulling the usual liberal trick, everything you don't like isn't just wrong or a different opinion, it's evil, racist, misogynist, etc. A tired old game.

132 sbourg 2012 Jul 14, 12:43pm

To JG1: You're awesome and I understand and agree with your very interesting thoughts before the '08 election.

To HRH: You don't even understand what JG1's saying.........and you don't know the difference between 'your' and 'you're', so we're not surprised you don't get it and call people (like JG1) racists.

To HRH again: Republican fiscal conservatives will vote for like-minded, smaller federal govt candidates, and we DON'T care about 'color' or 'race'. That's why SO many TeaParty folks were thrilled ( like me) with Herman Cain, Allen West, etc.
Liberals don't understand that conservatives are truly, POST-RACIAL. And when we see/hear of Liberals (like you) who don't understand and acknowledge that fact, we realize how stupid Liberals are. Period.

133 sbourg 2012 Jul 14, 1:03pm

Last major point to Liberals including Patrick on this blog:

Obama started Occidental College Sept '79, 4 months after I graduated from Oxy. So naturally I was curious what he stood for in '07 when he started getting serious vs Hillary. And what I discovered from many sources (even his 2 books), was that he detested capitalism (this was his commonality with Bill Ayers by the way) , and didn't understand how capitalism works to provide maximum wealth and opportunity. He never got it......because he thought the opposite, and he loved marxist-ideas (Roger Boesche was his favorite prof at Oxy)......etc.
Unfortunately, most Democrat-voters are just as economically-illiterate in their understanding of our country, and thus did NOT know what a dangerous Idealogue Obama would be.
But it was obvious to fiscal conservatives.

134 sbourg 2012 Jul 14, 1:16pm

To Patrick and his Liberal-like-minded, "wealth'-bashing, 'rich'-bashing, capitalism-bashing, small-govt-bashing.......drones.........read my previous posts on this blog, and this is my final point, after having considered and seen your lame, illogical, and for Patrick, non-existent rebuttals........this is what I have to say:
Touche........that's pronounced 'Touchaay'. Checkmate, Game over. You lost.
And hopefully you lose this November.

135

freak80 2012 Jul 14, 1:43pm

And pulling the usual liberal trick, everything you don't like isn't just wrong or a different opinion, it's evil, racist, misogynist, etc. A tired old game.

Yes, there is some of that on the far-left. I agree. Playing the "race card" is a classic example. Since 2004 they've been labeling anyone who disagrees with "gay marriage" as "homophobic."

136 sbourg 2012 Jul 14, 1:54pm

JG: Regarding 'gay marriage'........Liberals are so ill-informed, they don't know BJ Clinton signed the 'Defense of Marriage Act' in '95 that defined man/woman marriage for all federal law purposes.
And Democrats NOW, don't realize that if Obama cared about that issue, he Reid/Pelosi, could have changed that law in '09 when they had 60 Senate votes.
Democrat voters are incredibly uninformed and clueless. They should be angry that Obama didn't do that stuff in late '09 when they could've passed anything.

137 bob2356 2012 Jul 14, 4:10pm

Republican fiscal conservatives

Where are you going to find these mythical republican fiscal conservatives? The only difference between the parties used to be democratic tax and spend vs republican borrow and spend. The democrats have simply evolved with the election of Obummer.

138

Auntiegrav 2012 Jul 15, 1:38am

Dan8267 says

Yeah, it's called "one dollar, one vote", and it's the 'democracy' of the United States of America.

The voting system I described relies on everyone having equal "voting power" or "dollars" as you put it. As such, voting with your wealth in America isn't the same thing. Only a tiny minority has the wealth to really vote with dollars in our country.

Yup. That was kinda my point. The wealthy get to vote 'like' as many times as they want (in the millions and billions), vs. the one technical 'dislike' that a few actually exercise with any real thought.
The other part of my point is the comparison between how many votes even the poor make every day for junk food, gasoline, and Asian labor compared to their single vote for leadership (of any kind).
What's missing from America doesn't have to do with specific issues so much as a general lack of thoughtful representation by whomever sits in public offices. Most decisions are made the easy way: by the bottom line on a spreadsheet (or campaign contribution list) and Blind Faith in an Invisible Hand. Personally, I've tried to vote for who I thought was the most thoughtful candidates of either party (how would they act in a catastrophe? Would they make decisions or follow a script?), but lately, that doesn't seem to come out in the wash of useless crap covering every side. Just lizard after lizard after lizard, bought and paid for by the banks and advertisers.

139

Tenpoundbass 2012 Jul 15, 2:28am

And Democrats NOW, don't realize that if Obama cared about that issue, he Reid/Pelosi, could have changed that law in '09 when they had 60 Senate votes.

Yeah that's the one that gets me, every time I hear someone say...
"The Republicans wont let him." Insert issue here.

140

Dan8267 2012 Jul 15, 5:01am

Auntiegrav says

Yup. That was kinda my point. The wealthy get to vote 'like' as many times as they want (in the millions and billions), vs. the one technical 'dislike' that a few actually exercise with any real thought.

Then the system you are imagining is not the one I'm describing. Voting power would be allocated on a per person basis with all individuals having the same total voting power.

141 JG1 2012 Jul 15, 7:00am

sbourg says

Republican fiscal conservatives

Where are you going to find these mythical republican fiscal conservatives? The only difference between the parties used to be democratic tax and spend vs republican borrow and spend. The democrats have simply evolved with the election of Obummer.

OMG! Using the first letter of the last name of a person, combined with the word bummer is code racism. Patrick, when will this user forever be banned!?

HRH, I'm not going to waste my time debating with someone whose first move is to cry racism where none exists. (My black ex-girlfriends may find your accusations amusing.) But you can take just about any economic indicator and compare it to just about any point in time in the Bush Admin., and Obummer will compare unfavorably.

142 sbourg 2012 Jul 15, 9:00am

Hey Bob2356: Republican fiscal conservatives are not 'mythical'. They're alive and well and have passed good responsible legislation/budgets in the House of Reps. LIke last summer during the debt-ceiling debate. Boehner and budget chairman Paul Ryan passed an incredibly responsible long-term solution and budget proposal to reduce the annual deficit VERY significantly and responsibly. Guess what Harry Reid and the Democrat-controlled Senate did? They basically threw it in the trashcan. It didn't get a vote in the Senate.
That's a fact.

143 bob2356 2012 Jul 15, 12:08pm

says

LIke last summer during the debt-ceiling debate. Boehner and budget chairman Paul Ryan passed an incredibly responsible long-term solution and budget proposal to reduce the annual deficit VERY significantly and responsibly.

Which one, there were like half a dozen. I didn't see any that I would call incredibly responsible. Where was all this responsible legistlation/budgets from 2000 to 2008 with a Republican president, senate, and congress. The debt grew like crazy. So now these same people are incredibly responsible? There is only the demapublican party now. I don't like the democrats much, but at least pre obama they would raise taxes to pay for their foolishness. Obama is just bush's third term.

144 sbourg 2012 Jul 15, 9:12pm

Bob2356: Your opinion and my opinion are surely different on what is 'incredibly responsible'.......but the Republicans passed responsible budgets.
As for the '01 to '08 years, remember that Reid and Pelosi controlled the Congress starting Jan '07.......the deficit each year was NOT a reckless, unsustainable disaster under Bush and the Republican Congress in Bush's 6 years. You forgot that Reid & Pelosi took over Jan '07......and BOY did they HATE Bush. They announced and were proud to say how irrelevant they were ready to make Bush regarding federal spending and policy decisions. Remember that.
My next post in a minute will show the federal budget.

145 sbourg 2012 Jul 15, 9:21pm

Bob2356: See this chart of spending and let it sink in. During the 6 years of Bush-Republican budgets, federal annual deficits averaged $300B/year. Then even FY 9/30/08 was not so bad. But look at federal spending madness and annual deficits as they jumped to $1.2T/year.
Federal govt spending $1.2T/year MORE than revenue (the annual deficit for 4 yrs in a row now), is the equivalent of pumping money into the economy (BORROWED from our CHILDREN's working careers!) and is so large it's enough each year to give $20,000 to 60 MILLION people. That buys alot of votes Bob.....mostly Democrat voters! If you have children you should be pissed and worried:
http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts/displayafact.cfm?Docid=200

146

CL 2012 Jul 16, 9:57am

http://www.youtube.com/embed/Gc-LJ_3VbUA

http://www.amazon.com/Rush-Limbaugh-Big-Fat-Idiot/dp/0440508649

That was a great book! I liked "Operation Chickenhawk".

And of course, Supply Side Jesus

147 sbourg 2012 Jul 16, 9:46pm

Hey JG1 and Honest Abe: Check out the book recommended by CL !!!!!!!!!!!

It's Al Franken's unserious, supposedly comic........trash. I perused it for 15 minutes at the bookstore. Here's my review:

Franken's book is childish humor filled with name-calling and with the obvious message that Conservatives are wrong on everything. But Franken's economic, fiscal understanding of our country is absolute zero. He proves nothing, supports nothing, yet slams conservatives like a typical Libtard.

And he doesn't even undestand Rush LImbaugh. The quotes he slams Rush for, are quotes that Rush meant to be funny. Rush jokes alot on his show and Franken doesn't understand that. Our country became alot worse in July '09 when Franken was seated as the 60th non-Republican in the Senate.

This is an important book for Leftists. Figures.

148

CL 2012 Jul 17, 2:58am

Hey JG1 and Honest Abe: Check out the book recommended by CL !!!!!!!!!!!

Someone is not very good at reading comprehension! I quoted JG1 (that's what that "JG1 says" part means).

Unlike Limbaugh fans, I don't get my vital information from comedians or rodeo clowns. That said, I think Franken has been a great Senator and am glad I donated money to his successful campaign!

149

freak80 2012 Jul 17, 3:29am

Where are you going to find these mythical republican fiscal conservatives? The only difference between the parties used to be democratic tax and spend vs republican borrow and spend.

Fiscal conservative Republicans died out a long time ago. They have to buy the "old vote." Example: Medicare D.

Obama is just bush's third term.

150

Peter P 2012 Jul 17, 3:32am

USD is still a preferred "risk off" currency. America is still great.

151 JG1 2012 Jul 17, 3:59am

wthrfrk80 says

Fiscal conservative Republicans died out a long time ago. They have to buy the "old vote." Example: Medicare D.

Rand Paul will be interested to hear that.

152

freak80 2012 Jul 17, 4:01am

Peter P says

USD is still a preferred "risk off" currency. America is still great.

You have a point. Maybe the US is the worst country on earth, except for all the others.

I'm tempted to think some of the northern European countries are better, but of course they rely on Uncle Sam to defend them. They're like the adult children that live at home rent free. What happens when the parents go bankrupt and can no longer afford to be "guardians"?

153

freak80 2012 Jul 17, 4:04am

Rand Paul will be interested to hear that.

One (or two) politicians does not a party make.

And if the Paul's had their way, we'd be right back to the Gilded Age (assuming we're not back there already).

154 bob2356 2012 Jul 17, 5:11am

Bob2356: See this chart of spending and let it sink in. During the 6 years of Bush-Republican budgets, federal annual deficits averaged $300B/year. Then even FY 9/30/08 was not so bad. But look at federal spending madness and annual deficits as they jumped to $1.2T/year.

Federal govt spending $1.2T/year MORE than revenue (the annual deficit for 4 yrs in a row now), is the equivalent of pumping money into the economy (BORROWED from our CHILDREN's working careers!) and is so large it's enough each year to give $20,000 to 60 MILLION people. That buys alot of votes Bob.....mostly Democrat voters! If you have children you should be pissed and worried:

http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts/displayafact.cfm?Docid=200

Only 300b AVERAGE deficit a year in the middle of the greatest bubble/boom economy in the history of the nation? When they took over it was plus 230. So the fiscally responsible republican's in total charge took 230+ turned it into average 300- while the economy boomed?

You're right, my definition of responsible fiscally conservative republican is a lot different than yours. Fiscal responsibility like this is why I became independent after 30 years as a republican in 2002.

What relevance does Obama's mess have to to with it? We were talking about responsible fiscally conservative republicans. At least Obama has the excuse of the greatest crash since the depression. What excuse is there for the Bush years?

155

freak80 2012 Jul 17, 5:20am

So the fiscally responsible republican's in total charge took 230+ turned it into average 300- while the economy boomed?

I wouldn't say the economy ever boomed during the Bush years. Unless you consider the artificial boom of the housing bubble.

The last time we had a real "boom" was back in the late 90s when the internet and computers changed everything. Even much of that boom was a bubble, as we all know.

But you're correct that fiscal conservatism is dead. Republicans have to buy votes too, particularly the votes of Old People, a major Republican constituent group.

156 JG1 2012 Jul 17, 6:04am

Only 300b AVERAGE deficit a year in the middle of the greatest bubble/boom economy in the history of the nation? When they took over it was plus 230. So the fiscally responsible republican's in total charge took 230+ turned it into average 300- while the economy boomed?

Bob - U have to realize and account for GOP fights for lower budgets, less spending, except on the item for which the federal government was primarily created to handle in the first place - national defense - but they are almost always saddled with Dems who have a majority or at least not a fillibuster-proof minority in one or both houses of Congress. And the Dems won't hesitate to accuse the GOP of racism, ageism, throwing granny off a cliff, etc. in the name of avoiding spending cuts. So it's a compromise. The last time the GOP really got its way, 1994, we had budget surpluses.

157

freak80 2012 Jul 17, 7:34am

The last time the GOP really got its way, 1994, we had budget surpluses.

Fair enough, but what spending was the GOP really able to cut? There was welfare reform, but how much money did that actually save? Didn't Clinton successfully play the "grandma will be eating dog food" card and turn public opinion against the Republicans?

158 JG1 2012 Jul 17, 10:27am