|
|
| Re: Food for Thought For Liberals (468809) | |
 |
|
| Home > OTChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 9 of 11 |
||
|
| (469436) | |
Re: Food for Thought For Liberals |
|
|
Posted by AMoreira81 on Fri Jul 3 11:23:16 2009, in response to Re: Food for Thought For Liberals, posted by Train Dude on Fri Jul 3 11:21:02 2009. I wouldn't draw that conclusion about a Limbaugh listener though. |
|
|
| (469437) | |
Re: Food for Thought For Liberals |
|
|
Posted by Newkirk Plaza David on Fri Jul 3 11:24:12 2009, in response to Re: Food for Thought For Liberals, posted by Train Dude on Fri Jul 3 11:21:02 2009. Heck, Michael Savage hates Muslims, immigrants and whoever is recording a police incident. |
|
|
| (469439) | |
Re: Food for Thought For Liberals |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Fri Jul 3 11:24:57 2009, in response to Re: Food for Thought For Liberals, posted by AMoreira81 on Fri Jul 3 10:29:55 2009. Please, once again you liberal fools make no sense at all. Madoff is going to jail for the rest of his life for his swindle while Barney Frank, Danial Mudd and Chris Dodd are unscathed after a fraud that eclipses Madoff's sins by a factor of 10.Farnk - Democrat Mass. Dodd - Democrat Ct. Mudd - Frank' Gay Lover Or are these more lies? |
|
|
| (469440) | |
Re: Food for Thought For Liberals |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Fri Jul 3 11:25:31 2009, in response to Re: Food for Thought For Liberals, posted by AMoreira81 on Fri Jul 3 11:23:16 2009. All you fellow travelers do. |
|
|
| (469441) | |
Re: Food for Thought For Liberals |
|
|
Posted by AMoreira81 on Fri Jul 3 11:26:25 2009, in response to Re: Food for Thought For Liberals, posted by Train Dude on Fri Jul 3 11:17:42 2009. Common sense; a recession normally takes about a year to run its course. The problem is that for the numbers to go down, costs of doing business need to go down. But speculators wrongly guessed that demand would be there, and we are all paying for it now.Businesses need to jump-start the economy on their own. At some point, it becomes clear that they are doing this out of spite. BTW, it is true that businesses started laying off en masse after it became clear that McCain was going to lose; logic dictates that if it appeared close, they would have waited. |
|
|
| (469442) | |
Re: Food for Thought For Liberals |
|
|
Posted by AMoreira81 on Fri Jul 3 11:27:23 2009, in response to Re: Food for Thought For Liberals, posted by Train Dude on Fri Jul 3 11:18:28 2009. I don't actually (or not anymore), especially since they refuse to believe that the birth certificate is real, when all evidence points it to being such. |
|
|
| (469445) | |
Re: Food for Thought For Liberals |
|
|
Posted by AMoreira81 on Fri Jul 3 11:29:57 2009, in response to Re: Food for Thought For Liberals, posted by Train Dude on Fri Jul 3 11:24:57 2009. Since WHEN does the party out of power dictate policy in the House? If it does, it would be the first time EVER in 220 years.Ans a filibuster can ALWAYS be overcome (presume that the subject matter of the filibustered measure would become law if passed). Bill Frist just refused to do it. If it continues---shut down government and they will get the message very quickly. No two ways about it. As for claims that it could have been stopped in 2007, 2007 was five years too late. |
|
|
| (469446) | |
Re: Food for Thought For Liberals |
|
|
Posted by LuchAAA on Fri Jul 3 11:30:20 2009, in response to Re: Food for Thought For Liberals, posted by Newkirk Plaza David on Fri Jul 3 11:24:12 2009. These days, Savage hates wine swirlers more than anyone. He does not say much about Muslims. |
|
|
| (469447) | |
Re: Food for Thought For Liberals |
|
|
Posted by AMoreira81 on Fri Jul 3 11:30:57 2009, in response to Re: Food for Thought For Liberals, posted by Train Dude on Fri Jul 3 11:25:31 2009. Mistake #1: Thinking I am in that group. For the record, I don't listen to them; instead I get my info from CommonGround13's State of the Union forums. |
|
|
| (469448) | |
Re: Food for Thought For Liberals |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Fri Jul 3 11:33:03 2009, in response to Re: Food for Thought For Liberals, posted by Newkirk Plaza David on Fri Jul 3 11:24:12 2009. And again, show where Savage has had the ear of the president or where Michael Savage has brainwashed anyone. I certainly can't but I can show you a president of the United States who, after sitting through 20 years of anti-white, anti-semitic and anti-American sermons, never expressed any disagreement with the messages until he found that it might cost him the election. That alone should be cause for concern - but if liberals and democrats see nothing wrong with an anti-white, anti-semitic and anti-American president, hey who am I to complain. |
|
|
| (469450) | |
Re: Food for Thought For Liberals |
|
|
Posted by AMoreira81 on Fri Jul 3 11:34:40 2009, in response to Re: Food for Thought For Liberals, posted by Train Dude on Fri Jul 3 11:24:57 2009. Chris Dodd, I will give you, since he is in the Senate.Contrary to popular belief, Barney Frank had at most a bit role, and this is why: 1. No one was calling for any regulation of the derivatives market, which would have stopped it. 2. Credit rating agencies were asleep at the wheel, blindly slapping AAA without paying attention to what was in these derivatives. 3. The minority party NEVER calls the shots in the House of Representatives. 4. If the minority party in the Senate filibusters, and the issue is of utmost importance, heavy-handed techniques such as a government shutdown should never be ruled out. |
|
|
| (469451) | |
Re: Food for Thought For Liberals |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Fri Jul 3 11:35:25 2009, in response to Re: Food for Thought For Liberals, posted by AMoreira81 on Fri Jul 3 11:26:25 2009. Hence, the rise in unemployment is directly related to obama's election. Quid Erat Demonstrandum |
|
|
| (469452) | |
Re: Food for Thought For Liberals |
|
|
Posted by AMoreira81 on Fri Jul 3 11:36:48 2009, in response to Re: Food for Thought For Liberals, posted by Train Dude on Fri Jul 3 11:33:03 2009. Expressing disagreement shouldn't have to be done, as the person through his actions showed that he didn't exactly agree with the messenger.Why should it be cause for concern though? Cap and trade is unlikely (noting that New Jersey Republicans were needed just to advance it from the House) and based on the trend, universal healthcare is likely right behind in death. |
|
|
| (469453) | |
Re: Food for Thought For Liberals |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Fri Jul 3 11:37:18 2009, in response to Re: Food for Thought For Liberals, posted by AMoreira81 on Fri Jul 3 11:29:57 2009. Hey, Bill Frist was banging the pots in 2004, was he not? |
|
|
| (469454) | |
Re: Food for Thought For Liberals |
|
|
Posted by AMoreira81 on Fri Jul 3 11:37:33 2009, in response to Re: Food for Thought For Liberals, posted by Train Dude on Fri Jul 3 11:35:25 2009. Which means that business owners are expressing spite. They made bad calculations. |
|
|
| (469457) | |
Re: Food for Thought For Liberals |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Fri Jul 3 11:39:30 2009, in response to Re: Food for Thought For Liberals, posted by AMoreira81 on Fri Jul 3 11:30:57 2009. You know who I'm referring to, though.Italianstallian Spaz WillD easy Selkirk and a few others. I don't include salaam for obvious reasons. |
|
|
| (469458) | |
Re: Food for Thought For Liberals |
|
|
Posted by AMoreira81 on Fri Jul 3 11:39:49 2009, in response to Re: Food for Thought For Liberals, posted by Train Dude on Fri Jul 3 11:37:18 2009. No he wasn't, for reasons stated prior. If he was banging the pots, he would have refused to pass the budget (Democrats at the time were filibustering ANWR drilling, and it was removed from that, and two military funding bills later on unrelated, to get the budget passed), which would have led to a government shutdown. Then take the issue directly to the voters explaining why the budget didn't get through---along with a selective shutdown of nonessential services to get the message across.Whatever works! |
|
|
| (469461) | |
Re: Food for Thought For Liberals |
|
|
Posted by AMoreira81 on Fri Jul 3 11:41:27 2009, in response to Re: Food for Thought For Liberals, posted by Train Dude on Fri Jul 3 11:39:30 2009. True enough. You can't get anywhere though with that style of posting in debating such matters on forums such as State of the Union, where I do post. |
|
|
| (469463) | |
Re: Food for Thought For Liberals |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Fri Jul 3 11:43:14 2009, in response to Re: Food for Thought For Liberals, posted by AMoreira81 on Fri Jul 3 11:34:40 2009. Barney frank went public and touted FannyMae as solvent and a good investment while he knew that it was ready to tank and with it, take the real estate market and then the economy. Why did Barney Frank, do this? Hmmmmmm - do we really need to go there? What Izzy Madoff did was as abhorrent a crime as there is and he deserves what he got and then some but if it were not for the actions of Dodd, Frank and Mudd - and their bubble bursting, Madoff would likely still be in business. |
|
|
| (469465) | |
Re: Food for Thought For Liberals |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Fri Jul 3 11:45:00 2009, in response to Re: Food for Thought For Liberals, posted by AMoreira81 on Fri Jul 3 11:36:48 2009. Didn't actually agree? Are you saying that the president of this country didn't exactly agree with anti-white, anti-semitic and anti-American rhetoric? Thank you, that certainly is a comfort. |
|
|
| (469466) | |
Re: Food for Thought For Liberals |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Fri Jul 3 11:46:06 2009, in response to Re: Food for Thought For Liberals, posted by AMoreira81 on Fri Jul 3 11:37:33 2009. No! They know obama's penchant for anti-business taxes and they contracted their business as an act of self-preservation. |
|
|
| (469467) | |
Re: Food for Thought For Liberals |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Fri Jul 3 11:50:40 2009, in response to Re: Food for Thought For Liberals, posted by AMoreira81 on Fri Jul 3 11:39:49 2009. Perhaps this will change your mind about 2004! |
|
|
| (469469) | |
Re: Food for Thought For Liberals |
|
|
Posted by AMoreira81 on Fri Jul 3 11:52:56 2009, in response to Re: Food for Thought For Liberals, posted by Train Dude on Fri Jul 3 11:43:14 2009. However...at the same time, Barney Frank, as a member of the minority party at the time (2005) doesn't dictate policy. He could be cut out of the loop altogether.I can give you Chris Dodd, since he is in the Senate, and a filibuster can be launched. But a filibuster at the end of the day can always be countered by taking it to the voters and turning public opinion against those filibustering (depending on the particular issue, of course), in which case an indefensible stance will have to be explained. As for Madoff, that is just epic proportions transcending party lines to the point where if he didn't exist, you would have to make him up. I have no explanation for him other than to say that lots of regulators were sleeping at the wheel (the first signs came out in the late 1990s). |
|
|
| (469470) | |
Re: Food for Thought For Liberals |
|
|
Posted by Osmosis Jones on Fri Jul 3 11:53:35 2009, in response to Re: Food for Thought For Liberals, posted by AMoreira81 on Fri Jul 3 11:41:27 2009. Hey AMoreira81 do you think CNN or MSNBC is better? |
|
|
| (469471) | |
Re: Food for Thought For Liberals |
|
|
Posted by AMoreira81 on Fri Jul 3 11:53:50 2009, in response to Re: Food for Thought For Liberals, posted by Train Dude on Fri Jul 3 11:46:06 2009. At the end of the day though, if such things (anti-business taxes) fail to materialize---how will they explain themselves? |
|
|
| (469472) | |
Re: Food for Thought For Liberals |
|
|
Posted by Osmosis Jones on Fri Jul 3 11:54:05 2009, in response to Re: Food for Thought For Liberals, posted by Osmosis Jones on Fri Jul 3 11:53:35 2009. I mean which one is better, Anderson Cooper seems like a cool guy. |
|
|
| (469473) | |
Re: Food for Thought For Liberals |
|
|
Posted by AMoreira81 on Fri Jul 3 11:54:15 2009, in response to Re: Food for Thought For Liberals, posted by AMoreira81 on Fri Jul 3 11:53:50 2009. Obama will correctly blame them for prolonging things. |
|
|
| (469474) | |
Re: Food for Thought For Liberals |
|
|
Posted by AMoreira81 on Fri Jul 3 11:55:40 2009, in response to Re: Food for Thought For Liberals, posted by Train Dude on Fri Jul 3 11:50:40 2009. Saw that---and it actually convinced me THE OTHER WAY, when common sense and logic factor into the equation. In 2004, Nancy Pelosi and Barney Frank (and others in the House) had no say in formulating policy...and a filibuster ONLY stands when the party in power lets it stand). |
|
|
| (469475) | |
Re: Food for Thought For Liberals |
|
|
Posted by Newkirk Plaza David on Fri Jul 3 12:05:10 2009, in response to Re: Food for Thought For Liberals, posted by Train Dude on Fri Jul 3 11:33:03 2009. No, you should be concerned just as I am. Wright can be compared to Farrakahn easily. |
|
|
| (469477) | |
Re: Food for Thought For Liberals |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Fri Jul 3 12:13:08 2009, in response to Re: Food for Thought For Liberals, posted by Newkirk Plaza David on Fri Jul 3 12:05:10 2009. Thank you! I have no problem with a Louis Farrakahn or Jeremiah Wright preaching any message they want to preach to those who want to hear that message. My problem is when a person in a policy making position becomes a believer and then bring that belief to the decision making process. Phoney disassociations after the fact do not impress me or ease my fears. |
|
|
| (469478) | |
Re: Food for Thought For Liberals |
|
|
Posted by Fred G on Fri Jul 3 12:20:57 2009, in response to Re: Food for Thought For Liberals, posted by Train Dude on Fri Jul 3 11:13:55 2009. None of which has anything to do with the concept that Rush Limbaugh is speaking for the GOP. Again, it's just a tit for tat statement that's got nothing to do with the subject at hand, nor does it prove the claim that Rev. Wright is speaking for anyone other than Rev. Wright.your pal, Fred |
|
|
| (469480) | |
Re: Food for Thought For Liberals |
|
|
Posted by f179dj on Fri Jul 3 12:28:55 2009, in response to Re: Food for Thought For Liberals, posted by Train Dude on Fri Jul 3 11:35:25 2009. Sorry, quod erat...Transit was my second career; classical languages my first. My "cringe-meter" went off the scale, lol. |
|
|
| (469489) | |
Re: Food for Thought For Liberals |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Fri Jul 3 12:41:21 2009, in response to Re: Food for Thought For Liberals, posted by Fred G on Fri Jul 3 12:20:57 2009. Message deleted without being read! |
|
|
| (469490) | |
Re: Food for Thought For Liberals |
|
|
Posted by Fred G on Fri Jul 3 12:42:10 2009, in response to Re: Food for Thought For Liberals, posted by Train Dude on Fri Jul 3 11:46:06 2009. Those would be pretty poor businessmen, running in fear like that over supposing something might happen.your pal, Fred |
|
|
| (469491) | |
Re: Food for Thought For Liberals |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Fri Jul 3 12:42:21 2009, in response to Re: Food for Thought For Liberals, posted by f179dj on Fri Jul 3 12:28:55 2009. Found it both ways as a matter of fact! However, if it bothers you I'll be perfectly willing to use your version. |
|
|
| (469493) | |
Re: Food for Thought For Liberals |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Fri Jul 3 12:43:00 2009, in response to Re: Food for Thought For Liberals, posted by Fred G on Fri Jul 3 12:42:10 2009. Message deleted without being read |
|
|
| (469494) | |
Re: Food for Thought For Liberals |
|
|
Posted by Osmosis Jones on Fri Jul 3 12:43:16 2009, in response to Re: Food for Thought For Liberals, posted by Osmosis Jones on Fri Jul 3 11:54:05 2009. Lol I knew it, Moreira killfiled me for some reason. |
|
|
| (469495) | |
Re: Food for Thought For Liberals |
|
|
Posted by Fred G on Fri Jul 3 12:43:57 2009, in response to Re: Food for Thought For Liberals, posted by Osmosis Jones on Fri Jul 3 12:43:16 2009. Maybe he didn't see your post. Can't catch 'em all.your pal, Fred |
|
|
| (469496) | |
Re: Food for Thought For Liberals |
|
|
Posted by AMoreira81 on Fri Jul 3 12:44:42 2009, in response to Re: Food for Thought For Liberals, posted by Osmosis Jones on Fri Jul 3 11:53:35 2009. CNN---isn't even close! |
|
|
| (469498) | |
Re: Food for Thought For Liberals |
|
|
Posted by AMoreira81 on Fri Jul 3 12:47:13 2009, in response to Re: Food for Thought For Liberals, posted by Osmosis Jones on Fri Jul 3 11:53:35 2009. CNN.On that subject, there are some in conservative America questioning why GE got TARP money because it owns MSNBC (they believe that the money would go to prop up MSNBC, when in fact GE's most profitable business is banking). |
|
|
| (469504) | |
Re: Food for Thought For Liberals |
|
|
Posted by Osmosis Jones on Fri Jul 3 13:10:54 2009, in response to Re: Food for Thought For Liberals, posted by Fred G on Fri Jul 3 12:43:57 2009. You're right I spoke too soon, my mistake. |
|
|
| (469505) | |
Re: Food for Thought For Liberals |
|
|
Posted by Osmosis Jones on Fri Jul 3 13:12:28 2009, in response to Re: Food for Thought For Liberals, posted by AMoreira81 on Fri Jul 3 12:47:13 2009. Thanks for answering man, although I will admit that the question was asked to see if my suspicions of being killfiled by you were true or not. |
|
|
| (469506) | |
Re: Food for Thought For Liberals |
|
|
Posted by Fred G on Fri Jul 3 13:12:35 2009, in response to Re: Food for Thought For Liberals, posted by Train Dude on Fri Jul 3 12:41:21 2009. Hahahaha, you were down to name calling anyway.your pal, Fred |
|
|
| (469507) | |
Re: Food for Thought For Liberals |
|
|
Posted by docstox on Fri Jul 3 13:13:12 2009, in response to Re: Food for Thought For Liberals, posted by AMoreira81 on Fri Jul 3 11:26:25 2009. They have laid off and will refuse to re-hire waiting to see the results of the Cap and Trade and Health Bill which will impact businesses severely if they pass.Businesses sense a very anti-business environment setting up with total Democrat control. |
|
|
| (469508) | |
Re: Food for Thought For Liberals |
|
|
Posted by docstox on Fri Jul 3 13:15:41 2009, in response to Re: Food for Thought For Liberals, posted by Train Dude on Fri Jul 3 11:33:03 2009. Good point.Wright married Obama and baptized his two children.Obama threw Wright under the bus when it benefitted Obama in the polls.There's a real stand up guy, he'll stick with you through thick and thin,LOL! |
|
|
| (469509) | |
Re: Food for Thought For Liberals |
|
|
Posted by f179dj on Fri Jul 3 13:18:45 2009, in response to Re: Food for Thought For Liberals, posted by Train Dude on Fri Jul 3 12:42:21 2009. No problem. Quid is the interrogative pronoun; quod is the relative pronoun (both neuter here). So, quid would be used in the sense of "what had to be demonstrated?" Quod, as geometry theorems drilled, is the "Q" in QED ("that which had to be demonstrated"). (Do students still have to memorize theorems for the NYS Regents exam in geometry? I recall waiting for the Q2 with the pink and black Amsco book memorizing them).Anyway, hope I did not bore too many people with the grammar lesson, lol. As transit fades from my memory, I hope to return to classics. Torn between two loves, sigh. |
|
|
| (469510) | |
Re: Food for Thought For Liberals |
|
|
Posted by AMoreira81 on Fri Jul 3 13:22:07 2009, in response to Re: Food for Thought For Liberals, posted by docstox on Fri Jul 3 13:13:12 2009. If both fail, and I believe at least Cap-and-Trade will, and they refuse to re-hire, then we know what their motives are---to hold the economy hostage.However, post-midterm, Democrats will have the keys to redrawing congressional districts in many cases, even if they lose the House. |
|
|
| (469511) | |
Re: Food for Thought For Liberals |
|
|
Posted by AMoreira81 on Fri Jul 3 13:23:54 2009, in response to Re: Food for Thought For Liberals, posted by docstox on Fri Jul 3 13:13:12 2009. In other words---businesses are saying that if Republicans had at least one chamber, they would be hiring? That appears to be playing politics with the lives of America, and I really somewhat wonder if they are on our side or not. |
|
|
| (469512) | |
Re: Food for Thought For Liberals |
|
|
Posted by AMoreira81 on Fri Jul 3 13:26:08 2009, in response to Re: Food for Thought For Liberals, posted by docstox on Fri Jul 3 13:13:12 2009. Forgive the third response---but are they essentially saying is that if we vote Democrat, they will start cutting back, even if the fears are unfounded (in this case, I believe that they are indeed unfounded, and that to some extent, the business owners are coming to the wrong conclusions). |
|
|
| (469514) | |
Re: Food for Thought For Liberals |
|
|
Posted by Fred G on Fri Jul 3 13:36:07 2009, in response to Re: Food for Thought For Liberals, posted by docstox on Fri Jul 3 13:13:12 2009. They'll hire if they need people, trust me.your pal, Fred |
|
|
|
Page 9 of 11 |
||