patrick.net

simchaland says

I've been thinking more this lately seeing that I'm about to willingly go into a Market that I know still has some skin to shed. At the Rate I'm paying and certainly about 60% less than peak.
Peak price was $450 for the house I'm buying now for $170. I expect it to go down some, and wouldn't be surprised if $120 becomes a reality that would be well into Early 90's value. For the house I'm buying.

For me at 4.50% rate, and a smaller Principal, and makes sense to pay off as much principal as quickly as possible, and pay even less in interest. Pay it off in 7 to 10 years. And end up paying 225K in total rather than

2200 a month
Dec-1-2019 Cumulative Totals: $210,653.54 $40,653.54 $170,000.00

Or just paying 1200 a month.
Dec-1-2040 Cumulative Totals: $319,248.17 $149,248.17 $170,000.00

That's a 100K savings, so it will be that much less I'll have in the place.

Even with out the extra 1K a month to build equity, my monthly nut would be no less than a homeowner buying at 120K with a healthy sustainable realistic interest rate.

here's a 120K mortgage at 7.75% a more realistic sustainable interest rate

Cumulative Totals: $309,490.09 $189,490.09 $120,000.00

Even paying 50K more right now, I'll be paying the same.

"There will not be abortion funded in this health bill"

Nomograph says

RayAmerica says

I’ll get back to you as soon as I have a couple of hours to kill.

Like every other AM talk radio junkie, all you seem to have is empty anger- and hatred-based arguments.
Book recommendation — “The Thinker’s Guide to Fallacies: The Art of Mental Trickery” by Richard Paul. I highly recommend you turn off the AM talk radio and learn something about critical thinking.

He can only read it if he puts down his magazine... Not likely to happen...

DickCheney says

I have a coworker that bought in 2005 and is DEEPLY in debt and underwater by -60%. He’s plans to hold onto it hoping we’ll see a recover. He does not even look at the housing articles that I send to him because he thinks it’s a waste of time to do any research. lol Idiots like him is what contributed to the housing boom.

They think it's a sort of temporary malaise that will pass by. A few years ago, that was cute. Now, it's pathetic.

Looking back to 2007, I heard this a few times: "I'm going to take my house off the market and sell next year when this buyer's market is over and things get back to normal"

rentalinvestor says

So far we haven’t applied for any investor loans. I hear you need around 30%.

LOL thats why I can't play this game, I got no seed money, especially after I lose my a$$ on my house I am selling. I am thinking of buying a duplex next, then at least I can get some rental income to help pay the mortgage. rentalinvestor, what is the rent to price ratio you use to evaluate an income property purchase? Is it 10X rent?

Nomograph says

AM talk radio junkie, all you seem to have is empty anger- and hatred-based arguments.

I can't think of a more perfect definition of ellie "I never, ever insult anyone" mae. Apparently she listens to lots and lots of talk radio.

permanent_marker says

“when will housing return to 2005-06 levels?”

When someone invents a Time Machine to travel back to 2005.

moneypitt says

It’s in bad neighborhood around north San Jose. Bought for $800K

Why would anybody pay $800k for a house in a bad neighborhood?

RayAmerica says

permanent_marker says

“when will housing return to 2005-06 levels?”

When someone invents a Time Machine to travel back to 2005.

LOL aint that the truth.

Sorry to say for the bubble buyers, you'll probably retire before prices go that high again. Better off focusing on paying the thing off. At least that's a realistic goal.

klarek says

moneypitt says
It’s in bad neighborhood around north San Jose. Bought for $800K
Why would anybody pay $800k for a house in a bad neighborhood?

Why would anyone pay $800K in SJ at all, unless your talking about Silver Creek?
Thats about what prices in SC will come down to.

Property History for 5285 APENNINES Cir
Date Event Price Appreciation Source
May 22, 2010 Listed $1,088,000 -- MLSListings #81025498
Mar 17, 1998 Sold (Public Records) $545,000 14.2%/yr Public Records
Apr 30, 1997 Sold (Public Records) $485,000 12.5%/yr Public Records
Jul 10, 1996 Sold (Public Records) $441,000 13.7%/yr Public Records
Jul 26, 1995 Sold (Public Records) $390,000 -- Public Records

Property History for 5379 LIGURIAN Dr
Date Event Price Appreciation Source
Feb 28, 2010 Listed $1,388,000 -- MLSListings #81009314
Aug 09, 2006 Sold (Public Records) $1,425,000 14.4%/yr Public Records
Jul 13, 2006 Delisted * -- Inactive MLSListings #1
Jul 08, 2006 Price Changed * -- Inactive MLSListings #1
Jun 26, 2006 Listed * -- Inactive MLSListings #1
Jul 15, 2004 Sold (Public Records) $1,080,000 11.1%/yr Public Records
Jun 18, 2004 Delisted -- -- Inactive MLSListings #80393463
Apr 28, 2004 Listed ** -- Inactive MLSListings #80393463
Apr 17, 1996 Sold (Public Records) 455,000 -- Public Records

the bad parts of San Jose will take a while to go back up.
Especially if the only people buying are investors prices will be strictly tied to rental income.
Eventually prices will go up along with rents.

Go back UP to what ?????

Rents/Job ?????

Vanishing Public Companies Lead To The Incredible Shrinking Silicon Valley

http://www.siliconbeat.com/2010/02/17/vanishing-public-companies-lead-to-the-incredible-shrinking-silicon-valley/

One of the most significant trends I’ve been watching over the past decade is the dramatic drop in public companies in Silicon Valley. Naturally, that number was artificially inflated during the dot-com bubble when it reached 417 in 2000. For our purposes, Silicon Valley includes San Mateo and Santa Clara counties, and the southern half of Alameda County.

But the number of public companies has dropped for nine straight years now. Even when IPOs briefly reappeared in 2006 and 2007, they weren’t enough to overcome the net loss of public companies through acquisitions or bankruptcy.

In 2008, the number had fallen to 261. We just updated our records and the latest figure is 241.

That’s not just less than the dot-com era, that’s well below the 315 public companies the valley had in 1994 when the Mercury News started keeping track.

Companies go public to sell themselves off, or to bring in cash. Since this isn't a great time for IPO's, they're not setting themselves up to do this. Once a company goes public, it has a huge liability on it's hands. It's an accounting and legal nightmare to keep a public company going.

companies vs companies or
new private companies vs new private companies or
venture capital spending vs venture capital spending

Those might give you a better idea of what is happening. I'm not saying that public companies isn't a good indicator, but in an economy like we have now, it's better to buy a known brick and mortar company than an upcoming company that may or may not make it.

pkennedy says

Once a company goes public, it has a huge liability on it’s hands. It’s an accounting and legal nightmare to keep a public company going.

Rubish! I done three public offerings. What you have today are chicken shit retarded MBA types who rushed into the valley over the past 10 years and dont know squat how to run public or private companies. You have old times like Andy Grove from Intel saying the same. Liability is the same both private or public. Shareholder can be the public or private placement, its the same.

The crux is we are back to mid 90s type economy rather than peak at 2000.

tatupu70 says

How about this. Post a quote from Obama that you think shows him as a liar. Not a link to a video. An actual quote.

I sincerely feel the need to apologize. I originally thought it would take, as I said, “a couple of hours” to document a list (along with links) of Obama’s lies. It actually only took about 5 minutes. Please accept my apology. If you’d like more, I probably can provide it when I have more time to kill. Enjoy.

http://obamalies.net/list-of-lies

So how about using those other numbers? If they're useless like you just said at getting companies public, then... you're numbers wouldn't be a good indicator, would it?

Thomas--

You have to admit that it's more expensive to run a public company at least, correct? And expensive to go public?

Pkennedy is correct that in this environment (last 2 years) many companies have held off going public.

Ray--

Again. Did you read that list? Here is one example:

"I will not rest until the BP Oil Spill stops"

Don't you agree that calling that a LIE is a bit of a stretch? I find it a bit ridiculous...

Here's another:

"I got the message from Massachussets"

How do you call that a lie?? Really, that's the best you (this stupid site) can come up with?

I could keep going with the stupidity but I think you get the point. Come up with a real lie, then get back to me.

Ok, I had to click on the link.

What a joke.

This is a list of useless one line quotes that has been put together. Things such as "There are no more places to drill oil"?? Well there aren't. We can drill in the same fields we're currently drilling in, but there aren't new ones. Brazil had the last large find. But if you change it to an absolute sentence and remove any logical thinking, I could see how an uneducated person might get confused and tricked into believing this word for word.

Bring the troops home? Bush had no plans. The military had no plans. He said he would bring the troops home, but that doesn't mean he would put them on the next flight out and get them home. It meant he would get out of there in a timely manner, and put into position a way for them to exit those countries as quickly as possible. Do you really think any educated person would say "We'll have them on the next flight out"? No. No one said that.

The uneducated are the only ones being fooled by these sites, and it's unfortunate.

tatapu ... pk ....

Feb 26, 2008 Democratic Debate in Cleveland:

OBAMA: No, there is a difference. I do provide a mandate for children, because we have created programs in which we can have greater assurance that those children will be covered at an affordable price. BUT WE DON’T WANT TO PUT ADULTS IN A SITUATION IN WHICH, ON THE FRONT END, WE ARE MANDATING THEM, WE ARE FORCING THEM TO PURCHASE INSURANCE, AND IF THE SUBSIDIES ARE INADEQUATE, THE BURDEN IS ON THEM, AND THEY WILL BE PENALIZED. And that is what Sen. Clinton’s plan does.

Obama Lies about 5 days to Review Healthcare Bill

Obama Lied about giving the public 5 days to look at the health care bill before signing it.

Moving to a different point, how about the lack of effective policy response to unemployment? He's not doing so good on that issue, number 1 issue in my mind. This from Robert Reich in the Business Insider:

We’re not in a double-dip recession yet. We’re in a one and a half dip recession.

Consumer confidence is down. Retail sales are down. Home sales are down. Permits for single-family starts are down. The average work week is down. The only things not down are inventories – unsold stuff is piling up in warehouses and inventories of unsold homes are rising – and defaults on loans.

The 1.5 dip recession should be causing alarm bells to ring all over official Washington. It should cause deficit hawks to stop squawking about future debt, blue-dog Democrats to stop acting like Republicans, and mainstream Democrats to get some backbone.

The 1.5 dip recession should cause the President to demand a large-scale national jobs program including a new WPA that gets millions of Americans back to work even if government has to pay their wages directly. Included would be zero-interest loans to strapped states and locales, so they didn’t have to cut vital services and raise taxes. They could repay when the economy picked up and revenues came in. The national jobs program would also include a one-year payroll tax holiday on the first $20,000 of income.

The President should stop talking and acting on anything else – not the deficit, not energy, not the environment, not immigration, not implementing the health care law, not education. He should make the whole upcoming mid-term election a national referendum on putting Americans back to work, and his jobs bill. Are you for it or against it?

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/lets-call-it-a-one-and-a-half-dip-recession-2010-7#ixzz0uRqGrnEe

January 24, 2008

Barack Obama claimed he "barely knew" Toney Rezko.

Having a hard time keeping track of the facts? Here are eight things to know:

1. They met in 1990. Obama was a student at Harvard Law School and got an unsolicited job offer from Rezko, then a low-income housing developer in Chicago. Obama turned it down.

2. Obama took a job in 1993 with a small Chicago law firm, Davis Miner Barnhill, that represents developers -- primarily not-for-profit groups -- building low-income housing with government funds.

3. One of the firm's not-for-profit clients -- the Woodlawn Preservation and Investment Corp., co-founded by Obama's then-boss Allison Davis -- was partners with Rezko's company in a 1995 deal to convert an abandoned nursing home at 61st and Drexel into low-income apartments. Altogether, Obama spent 32 hours on the project, according to the firm. Only five hours of that came after Rezko and WPIC became partners, the firm says. The rest of the future senator's time was helping WPIC strike the deal with Rezko. Rezko's company, Rezmar Corp., also partnered with the firm's clients in four later deals -- none of which involved Obama, according to the firm. In each deal, Rezmar "made the decisions for the joint venture," says William Miceli, an attorney with the firm.

4. In 1995, Obama began campaigning for a seat in the Illinois Senate. Among his earliest supporters: Rezko. Two Rezko companies donated a total of $2,000. Obama was elected in 1996 -- representing a district that included 11 of Rezko's 30 low-income housing projects.

5. Rezko's low-income housing empire began crumbling in 2001, when his company stopped making mortgage payments on the old nursing home that had been converted into apartments. The state foreclosed on the building -- which was in Obama's Illinois Senate district.

6. In 2003, Obama announced he was running for the U.S. Senate, and Rezko -- a member of his campaign finance committee -- held a lavish fund-raiser June 27, 2003, at his Wilmette mansion.

7. A few months after Obama became a U.S. senator, he and Rezko's wife, Rita, bought adjacent pieces of property from a doctor in Chicago's Kenwood neighborhood -- a deal that has dogged Obama the last two years. The doctor sold the mansion to Obama for $1.65 million -- $300,000 below the asking price. Rezko's wife paid full price -- $625,000 -- for the adjacent vacant lot. The deals closed in June 2005. Six months later, Obama paid Rezko's wife $104,500 for a strip of her land, so he could have a bigger yard. At the time, it had been widely reported that Tony Rezko was under federal investigation. Questioned later about the timing of the Rezko deal, Obama called it "boneheaded" because people might think the Rezkos had done him a favor.

8. Eight months later -- in October 2006 -- Rezko was indicted on charges he solicited kickbacks from companies seeking state pension business under his friend Gov. Blagojevich. Federal prosecutors maintain that $10,000 from the alleged kickback scheme was donated to Obama's run for the U.S. Senate. Obama has given the money to charity.

cdw7503 says

If you think housing prices will be coming back to 06′ levels then you are living in a dream world. The housing boom which caused the high prices happened because of extremely loose loan underwriting standards and foolish borrowers who took loans out they couldn’t pay. Borrowers are still foolish, but underwriting standards are now at the opposite extreme.

I agree housing prices will not go back to the previously unthinkable highs of the first half of this decade, but I dislike all the talk about foolish borrowers. Where is the accountability of the banking industry, they are the ones who essentially offered a hang mans rope to people who couldn't afford the homes that they bought and now all I hear about are these dumb borrowers. The banking system is to blame for the housing crash not the people. They have come up with cleaver ways to tempt buyers into buying home they couldn't pay for, look at the alt-a mortgages and the ARM that are about to reset. In the places that been hit the worst you might be looking at 6-10 years before prices go to a place where owners can make money on RE again.

RayAmerica says

Feb 26, 2008 Democratic Debate in Cleveland:
OBAMA: No, there is a difference. I do provide a mandate for children, because we have created programs in which we can have greater assurance that those children will be covered at an affordable price. BUT WE DON’T WANT TO PUT ADULTS IN A SITUATION IN WHICH, ON THE FRONT END, WE ARE MANDATING THEM, WE ARE FORCING THEM TO PURCHASE INSURANCE, AND IF THE SUBSIDIES ARE INADEQUATE, THE BURDEN IS ON THEM, AND THEY WILL BE PENALIZED. And that is what Sen. Clinton’s plan does.

I'll remind you that the healthcare plan that finally passed Congress was VASTLY different than the plan Obama proposed during his Presidential run. Not because he wanted things different, but because idiots in Congress were bought and paid for by the healthcare industry.

So your quote can't be compared to the actual healthcare bill that passed as you are trying to do...

Moving to a different point, how about the lack of effective policy response to unemployment?

what can he do that isn't teh socialism? Other than cut taxes, which didn't work so good 2001-2008 of course.

The core problem of the economy is that the lower four and a half quintiles used the Home ATM to boost consumption 2004-2006.

Here's a pretty graph that I'm proud of:

Non-wealthy people are stuck with a $4T debt overhang from that bubble still.

There are no easy answers. Dismantling the Federal Government appeals to some people, but to paraphrase President Eisenhower, these people are idiots.

We could cut the Federal governement spending in half, down to $1.8T (what Clinton passed to Bush, btw), but $1.8T isn't just being consumed in a fire, that's millions of paychecks involved, either directly or indirectly.

$1.8T is twenty million jobs at $90,000 per, so the actual footprint is more like forty or fifty million given the median salary and the velocity of money multiplier. So large that I really can't comprehend the scale of this.

We're not in Kansas any more.

RayAmerica says

tatupu70 says

How about this. Post a quote from Obama that you think shows him as a liar. Not a link to a video. An actual quote.

I sincerely feel the need to apologize. I originally thought it would take, as I said, “a couple of hours” to document a list (along with links) of Obama’s lies. It actually only took about 5 minutes. Please accept my apology. If you’d like more, I probably can provide it when I have more time to kill. Enjoy.

http://obamalies.net/list-of-lies

Did you read it ? CBOETrader, did you read these ? SO many terrible lies there. I could find a couple that might be lies, in the sense that he couldn't do what he thought he could. But jeez Ray, are you trying hard to give us pro-Obama propaganda, or is that just the unintended consequence.

@ray
"Barack Obama claimed he “barely knew” Toney Rezko."

Seriously? How would you define barely knew? Do you barely know your neighbors? Can you tell me their names? Can you tell me where they work? Can you tell me when they got married? What kind of investments are they in? You've got about 5-8 "neighbors" in all likelihood. A couple beside you, a couple on the other side of the street. How well do you know each of them? You sure as hell know them really well, I already know that because you are NEIGHBORS, which means you know everything about them. You're around them every day, you sleep within 500 feet of them every day!

How about your boss? His wife's name? What kind of activities does the wife like to do? Where does she buy her food? What can you tell me about her? You work with your boss, surely you know all this stuff! You can't claim barely know him, because that is an obvious lie on your part!

I'll call you a liar if you can't answer all of those questions, because you can't claim you barely knew your neighbors, they are your neighbors!

Word games, nothing more. Taking 2 words and expanding them like you know exactly what they mean and then creating these "facts" to prove those 2 words are lies. I've just shown you, you can be next to someone, work with them and barely know them. It's a huge and open ended phrase.

@jljoshlee3
Energy/Environment can generate a lot of jobs in itself. People working on installing, building, and designing new products. There aren't many new areas that we can explore and expand on easily, this seems to be a pretty good area to actually work on. Digging ditches gets old pretty quick. Building new bridges works for awhile. Building a new industry, like the internet, will create lots of new jobs. Not only jobs, but it will put the US on track to being a leader in those areas. Other countries such as China are destroying themselves with pollution currently. They're going to have to resolve their problems shortly, and if the US is there with the products and the know how, they will be the people making the sales. So it's a win/win there. Lots of opportunities. Jobs in all categories. From inception, design, manufacturing, installation. Digging a ditch has far fewer people involved, and mostly low paying jobs. There isn't a hope they're going to figure out how to dig a ditch better. At least with what he's pushing there is a chance.

Everything he is currently working on seems to have some potential to create jobs. Education, immigration, and health care all seem to have lots of potential for possible growth. Although alternative energy and environment really seem to be the best bets for future growth.

I think he's starting to really figure out how political politics is at his level. He's no longer trying to bring everyone into the room and say lets all work on this, and create a utopia government, he's getting agreement and consensus in his ranks and pushing things through, no matter how unpopular they are. When he tried to get everyone to play along, they just dragged their feet, like every government has done.

thomas.wong1986 says

pkennedy says

Once a company goes public, it has a huge liability on it’s hands. It’s an accounting and legal nightmare to keep a public company going.

Rubish! I done three public offerings. What you have today are chicken shit retarded MBA types who rushed into the valley over the past 10 years and dont know squat how to run public or private companies. You have old times like Andy Grove from Intel saying the same. Liability is the same both private or public. Shareholder can be the public or private placement, its the same.
The crux is we are back to mid 90s type economy rather than peak at 2000.

Disgree,

Companies don't go public because cost/benefit is not there. In 2000, Facebook would sure be listed. In 2010, they are not for cost/benefit reasons.

Costs go way up going public. Having been involved firsthand with VISA, it requires restatements of income statements, back filing, Hire staff for financial reporting, systems capability, SOX procedures, 3x more audit scrutiny from more sources and exponentially more professional fees, listing fees, SEC exposure, CEO, CFO, COO devoting time to non-productive conference and analysis calls, investor relations staff, shareholder meetings and communications and dozens of other costs associated with going public. What do you get, higher underwriting cost eaten up by Goldman Sachs and selling more company for way less money than in the 1990's and it is a recipe for why companies choose not to go public.

Having said that, there were close to 6000 companies listed on the nasdaq in 2000 vs 2934 today, so it is not a silicon valley issue, it's just that there are less public companies today for various reasons (liquidations, Mergers and less IPO replacement). That is somewhat probamatic but half the story. However, the public companies today are a lot bigger and in many lines of business. Intel has companies making flash chips and not processors, Seagate has companies that don't make hardrives and eBay has companies in payment processing and not auctions. It's just an evolution and I would not link the demise of silicon valley based just on the shrinking of the absolute amount listed.

SF ace says

In 2000, Facebook would sure be listed. In 2010, they are not for cost/benefit reasons.

Well, that and all the dumb money chasing dotcoms then.

SF ace says

Costs go way up going public. Having been involved firsthand with VISA, it requires restatements of income statements, back filing, Hire staff for financial reporting, systems capability, SOX procedures, 3x more audit scrutiny from more sources and exponentially more professional fees, listing fees, SEC exposure, CEO, CFO, COO devoting time to non-productive conference and analysis calls, investor relations staff, shareholder meetings and communications and dozens of other costs associated with going public. What do you get, higher underwriting cost eaten up by Goldman Sachs and selling more company for way less money than in the 1990’s and it is a recipe for why companies choose not to go public.

Congrats, you listed why many local SV companies are ill prepared for IPO, regardless if they are profitable or not. Few are! A successful IPO will have already in place for several years, properly stated audited Financials in GAAP format, with internal controls in place to pass SOX testing. Its not rocket science, this should already be in place. Staffing may be lean but its not a issue if you staff it with veterns and grow headcount wisely (few do!). The rest regarding current filings (S-1 reg, prospectus) are a no brainer and they fall right in place. Ongoing regulator compliance isnt a problem either. Thats how we did it back in the 90s, passed Audits and SEC review.

At the end of the day, we do need to see higher listings of public SV companies anyway you cut it. Otherwise, investment dollars will not flow into tech fueling growth and incomes.

This is NOT good...Another one bites the dust in a different way! Maybe?

Thursday, July 15, 2010
VeriSign mulls headquarters move to Northern Virginia from California
Washington Business Journal - by Sarah Krouse

The Symantec deal is expected to close later this month or early next month

RayAmerica says

Nomograph says

AM talk radio junkie, all you seem to have is empty anger- and hatred-based arguments.

I can’t think of a more perfect definition of ellie “I never, ever insult anyone” mae. Apparently she listens to lots and lots of talk radio.

I think it's cute how you think about me all the time, rayray. But I prefer grownups.

pkennedy says

@ray
“Barack Obama claimed he “barely knew” Toney Rezko.”
Seriously? How would you define barely knew? Do you barely know your neighbors? Can you tell me their names? Can you tell me where they work? Can you tell me when they got married? What kind of investments are they in? You’ve got about 5-8 “neighbors” in all likelihood. A couple beside you, a couple on the other side of the street. How well do you know each of them? You sure as hell know them really well, I already know that because you are NEIGHBORS, which means you know everything about them. You’re around them every day, you sleep within 500 feet of them every day!

Amazing example of the liberal convoluted thought process. Leave it to one of these Obamabots to make a connection between YOUR neighbors and Obama's Crook-Friend that he "barely knows." Too bad the evidence proves that the corrupt Chicago Politician Obama knew this crook very, very well and benefited from his friendship with him.

RayAmerica says

Too bad the evidence proves that the corrupt Chicago Politician Obama knew this crook very, very well and benefited from his friendship with him.

How do you figure? I see no such evidence. Your earlier post showed nothing of the sort.

> Amazing example of the liberal convoluted thought process. Leave it to one
> of these Obamabots to make a connection

Oh good god giggles, okay fine, your logic is crushing. I think it was the 43rd or 43th time you said "Obamabot" that really clued me in: I am a fool.

All the facts and all of the logic, all the articles and context that has been brought to bear on this point is simply swept away in face of this crushing weight of yours, this power with words you bring to the table... though it escaped me for a while because of the dexterity and subtlety of the points you make you've convinced me with the clear truth and simple goodness of your arguments and it has indeed won out in the end.

So yes I see now its true, Obama is basically the source of all woes facing the US today. He is an evil, a scourge unlike any other faced by the country ever before, he is a menace. Never has there been and possibly (OMG, hopefully) ever will be again such an insidious (dare I say it a Darth Insidious) force undermining the great goodness that existed here before this pale rider came skimming into town.

My lord, how could I not have seen it? It took the great power of your arguments to bring it tol ight and how I now long for what I now realize was the pure and undiluted goodness of the Bush years - the years where men were men, and truth was simple and pure. Like you.

Thank you for continuing this good fight and staying the course with the great logic and intelligence of your arguments. We need more men like you sir, to help us through this darkness.

tatupu70 says

How do you figure? I see no such evidence. Your earlier post showed nothing of the sort.

But he found his talking points on the Internets and all, so they must be true. Right Rayray?

@Troy,
that graph and your comments are simple - direct - and one of your best short-shot entires ever. I agree 100%.

simchaland says

But he found his talking points on the Internets and all, so they must be true. Right Rayray?

I would be totally and completely shocked if you ever posted even a half truth regarding your little messiah. Just keep on drinking your Kool-Aid and everything will work out for you.

Giggles, I've got it - you're actually not a human being, you're an automated Turing program. You've deceived me.