PDA

View Full Version : Cheney "I don't Recall" 72 Times In Plame Outing?



Gayle in MD
11-02-2009, 10:01 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Today, after successfully winning a lawsuit against the Department of Justice, under court order, CREW received documents related to former Vice President Dick Cheney’s interview with the FBI in the investigation into the leak of Valerie Plame Wilson’s covert CIA identity. The transcript reveals that Mr. Cheney – generally credited with razor sharp intellect and recall – demonstrated an astonishing inability to recollect even simple facts much less the numerous conversations others have testified to regarding his involvement in the administration’s efforts to discredit former Ambassador Joe Wilson. Mr. Cheney’s memory frequently failed to improve, even when confronted with his own hand-written notes. The transcript does indicate however, that Mr. Cheney held Mr. Wilson in low regard and called the CIA’s decision to send Mr. Wilson to Niger “amateur-hour.”

Melanie Sloan, executive director of CREW said, “For years the American people have wondered what role Vice President Cheney played in outing former CIA officer Valerie Plame Wilson. While we may never know the whole story, with the release of these documents we are one step closer.” Sloan continued, “In his closing statement at Scooter Libby’s trial, Special Counsel Fitzgerald said a cloud remained over the vice-president. Mr. Cheney’s near total amnesia regarding his role in this monumental Washington scandal – resulting in the conviction of his top aide – shows why.”

Consistent with President Obama’s promise of transparency, the administration did not appeal the court’s order.

Click here to read the interview transcript, and read leak investigation notes here and here.

</div></div>

http://www.citizensforethics.org/node/43188

http://www.citizensforethics.org/node/43169


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Cheney FBI interview: 72 instances of can't recall
Source:
Pete Yost // Associated Press, as seen on WashingtonPost.com

Related Documents
10/30/09 - Cheney Interview Transcript
// 2 mb

10/30/09 - Leak Investigation Notes (1)
// 1.2 mb

10/30/09 - Leak Investigation Notes (2)
// 341.9 kb

10/5/09 - Minute Order
// 20.9 kb

More Related Documents »
Related News Releases
CREW LAWSUIT RESULTS IN RELEASE OF NOTES OF CHENEY'S FBI INTERVIEW IN WILSON LEAK CASE // 30 Oct 2009
COURT GRANTS DOJ 30-DAY EXTENSION OF OBLIGATION TO PRODUCE CHENEY INTERVIEW NOTES // 7 Oct 2009
CREW LAWSUIT RESULTS IN RELEASE OF PORTIONS OF FORMER VP CHENEY’S INTERVIEW WITH FBI IN WILSON LEAK INVESTIGATION // 1 Oct 2009
More Related News Releases »
Related News Coverage
Cheney to FBI: No Idea Who Leaked Plame's Identity // 31 Oct 2009
Associated Press, as seen on NYTimes

Cheney told FBI he did not know who leaked Plame's identity // 31 Oct 2009
CNN

Cheney was hazy on role in CIA leak, FBI notes from '04 show // 31 Oct 2009
Washington Post

More Related News Coverage »
Related Multimedia
Melanie Sloan Discusses Release of Notes of Cheney's FBI Interview in Wilson Leak Case on MSNBC's "The Rachel Maddow Show" // 30 Oct 2009
MSNBC's "The Rachel Maddow Show"

2 Nov 2009 // WASHINGTON -- Federal prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald famously declared in the Valerie Plame affair that "there is a cloud over the vice president." Last week's release of an FBI interview summary of Dick Cheney's answers in the criminal investigation underscores why Fitzgerald felt that way.

On 72 occasions, according to the 28-page FBI summary, Cheney equivocated to the FBI during his lengthy May 2004 interview, saying he could not be certain in his answers to questions about matters large and small in the Plame controversy.

The Cheney interview reflects a team of prosecutors and FBI agents trying to find out whether the leaks of Plame's CIA identity were orchestrated at the highest level of the White House and carried out by, among others, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, Cheney's chief of staff.

Among the most basic questions for Cheney in the Plame probe: How did Libby find out that the wife of Bush administration war critic Joseph Wilson worked at the CIA?

Libby's own handwritten notes suggest Libby found out from Cheney. When Libby discovered Cheney's reference to Plame and the CIA in his notes - notes that Libby knew he would soon have to turn over to the FBI - the chief of staff went to the vice president, probably in late September or early October 2003.

Sharing the information with Cheney was in itself an unusual step at the outset of a criminal investigation in which potential White House witnesses were being ordered by their superiors not to talk to each other about the Plame matter.

"It turns out that I have a note that I had heard about" Plame's CIA identity "from you," Libby says he told the vice president.

And what did Cheney say in response? Fitzgerald asked Libby in front of a federal grand jury six months later.

"He didn't say much," Libby replied. "You know, he said something about 'From me?' something like that, and tilted his head, something he does commonly, and that was that."

Cheney's version of the conversation, as related in the FBI interview summary?

Cheney "cannot recall Scooter Libby telling him how he first heard of Valerie Wilson. It is possible Libby may have learned about Valerie Wilson's employment from the vice president ... but the vice president has no specific recollection of such a conversation."

On another basic point, Cheney simply refused to answer.

Fitzgerald had gathered evidence that Cheney apparently persuaded President George W. Bush to hurriedly declassify portions of a prewar National Intelligence Estimate on weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. The declassification was followed by Libby providing the information to a New York Times reporter while simultaneously talking to reporters about Plame's CIA identity.

As Fitzgerald pressed the issue in the FBI interview, Cheney refused to confirm any discussion with Bush, saying that he must refrain from commenting about any private or privileged conversations he may have had with the president.

It was an instance of Libby, who had testified two months earlier to a federal grand jury, being more forthcoming than Cheney.

Prosecutors obtained information about the leaking of the declassified NIE from Cheney's chief of staff, who testified that he had talked to New York Times reporter Judith Miller about the National Intelligence Estimate following the "president's approval relayed to me through the vice president."

Cheney's FBI interview is a study in contrasts.

Expressing uncertainty on many areas he was being questioned about and refusing to discuss another area altogether, Cheney was emphatic on at least one basic point.

According to the FBI summary, Cheney said there was no discussion of using Plame's employment with the CIA to counter her husband's criticism that the Bush administration had manipulated prewar intelligence to exaggerate the Iraqi threat. There was no discussion, Cheney insisted, of "pushing back" on Joseph Wilson's credibility by raising the issue of nepotism, the fact that Wilson's wife worked for the CIA, the same agency that dispatched him to the African nation of Niger to run down the report of an agreement to supply uranium "yellowcake" to Iraq.

It was one example of Cheney being categorical and Libby seeming uncertain.

"In a prior FBI interview, you indicated it was possible that you may have talked to the Vice President on Air Force Two ... about whether you should share the information with the press about Wilson's wife?" the prosecutor asked Libby in his grand jury testimony.

"It's possible that would have been one of the times I could have talked to him about what I had learned," Libby replied.

"As you sit here today, do you recall whether you had such a conversation with the vice president on Air Force Two?" the prosecutor asked.

"No, sir. My, my best recollection of that conversation was what I had on my note card which we have produced which doesn't reflect anything about that," Libby replied.

Libby was indicted, tried and convicted for perjury, obstruction and lying to the FBI. The president commuted his 30-month prison sentence, but rejected Cheney's pleas in the last days of the administration to pardon the vice president's former chief of staff.

The Cheney interview summary was released Friday to the watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, which sued to get the material under the Freedom of Information Act.

---

</div></div>


/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smirk.gif

<span style="color: #000066">What a CROCK! Pure Treason! Obstruction Of Justice, and as usual, they hid behind Executive Priviledge.

Lying SOB's</span>

eg8r
11-02-2009, 10:17 AM
Consider Cheney a great student. After sitting through 8 years of the Clintons saying they could not remember Cheney learned that it worked.

eg8r &lt;~~~wonders when will the non-issue little secretary bit ever die

Qtec
11-02-2009, 10:31 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Consider Cheney a great student. After sitting through 8 years of the Clintons saying they could not remember Cheney learned that it worked.

eg8r &lt;~~~wonders when will the non-issue little secretary bit ever die </div></div>

In replying to a post about Cheney, you mention Clinton in the very first sentence and ignore the info provided by G. Typical

Q

pooltchr
11-02-2009, 10:44 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Consider Cheney a great student. After sitting through 8 years of the Clintons saying they could not remember Cheney learned that it worked.

eg8r &lt;~~~wonders when will the non-issue little secretary bit ever die </div></div>

As long as they can focus on the past, they don't have to deal with the reality that their guy is tearing the country apart.

The secretary was important. A huge energy tax (Crap and Trade) doesn't even get their attention.

Steve

eg8r
11-02-2009, 12:07 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">In replying to a post about Cheney, you mention Clinton in the very first sentence and ignore the info provided by G. Typical
</div></div>You are right, I felt the need to set precedence. It is important to point out your hypocrisy instead of beating a dead horse, but that comes from the Department of Redundancy Department, right?

eg8r

wolfdancer
11-02-2009, 02:31 PM
Q, the more those two post, the worse they look.
They both lived in the past during the GWB, 8 year racketeering and raid on the National Treasury, Admin. They Focused on a stained dress, instead of addressing.... the failure of the Bush admin to prevent 9/11,the failure of the President to leap into action when the nation was under attack, the Katrina fiasco and the idiotic fly over by the washed out former pilot, the preconceived plans by Dick and I'm your puppet, George,
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I'm your puppet
I'll learn to love it
and I'll undress
if you need it
but please don't need it
if you need it
I'll scream out </div></div>
...George, the "War President", to lead the nation into war, and to enrich his cronies in the process, at the expense of a generation of our young men and women that they used, then tossed away, and for the most part,were forgotten about by those two, when they were injured, maimed, etc. Bringing back America's fallen under cover of darkness, and without fanfare, was the final insult.
Now, "they" are complaining about bringing up the criminal act of Dick Cheney, in outing a CIA agent, for political gain?????
Since I have zero respect for their opinions, and believe them both to be a sick, running joke, along with their "fearless leader" here....I seldom bother to read anything that they write. What really is unbelievable to me is that one of them wrote, replying to me that by my failure (sob) to read his posts, I was missing out on a chance to educate myself. I printed that out, then wiped my ass with it the next time I voided my bowels.
Now I'm wondering if I can have some of their best, re: worst posts, printed commercially for me on a roll of toilet paper....replies like that should not be just read and forgotten....they should serve a useful purpose, besides informing people how bigoted, biased, and brainwashed the authors were.

eg8r
11-02-2009, 02:42 PM
LOL, lapdog must be feeling a little spunky today.

eg8r

pooltchr
11-02-2009, 03:12 PM
His opinion is worth even less than a promise from Obama!

Wolfie and Granny have both jumped the shark, and have become completely irrelivent.

Steve

wolfdancer
11-02-2009, 03:47 PM
then don't bother to continually post behind me, if I am so irrelavant...makes you look like an idiot for wasting your valuable time by doing so.
I'm at least smart enough to realize that if I had some sick compulsion that requires me to reply to something that isn't worth replying to....I'd get some professional help.
But, maybe you believe you are earning some valuable "rep" points here? Here's the thing....lww, lotter, Ed, all got these superfragilisticexpialadocious...egos...and they ain't never going to let you be....
lead dog (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qa4WzE_CrdY) ...and, where you will fit in....the scenery isn't exactly scenic

pooltchr
11-02-2009, 04:17 PM
Once again you show your complete ignorance when you say something you know nothing about. I have no desire or compulsion to have a place in this so-called pecking order that you seem to have created for those you don't like.
But then, I don't have the over-inflated ego that you seem to have, either. You are so quick to classify others into your little pigeonholes. There is another poster who does the same thing here. And her opinions aren't worth any more than yours.

And just for the record, regarding your last rant. Had you paid attention, you would have noticed I didn't post to you..I replied to another poster.

Although I'm sure you would prefer that many of us not reply to your ignorant comments. It must be very humbling to have so many people show you just how often you are wrong.

Steve

Gayle in MD
11-02-2009, 07:01 PM
<span style="color: #000066"> <span style='font-size: 14pt'>And then....and this is really funny!

Weeks ago, The Neocons gave Libby and Cheney awards! Libby's? For "Service Above Self" LMAO! Republicans hand out awards to their fellow Repiglicans, who break the law, out covert agents, lie under oath, and commit treason! "Service Above Self??? Taking the fall for dickie the shooter. Bwa ha ha ha...too funny!

Their motto? Regardless of all the proof, act as though you've done nothing wrong, and our stupid followers will believe it.

Since they learned that the documentation was going to come out, they rushed into action, handing out AWARDS to their law breaking, lying P's OS!

Unbelievable!

G.</span> </span>

wolfdancer
11-02-2009, 08:07 PM
You ought to try "humble"....might be the ying to your "yang" (the overinflated assessment of yourself that you have of educating others here, with your own really important posts.)
All your posts seem to extol your alleged great intellect, while also claiming that anybody that disagrees with you must be stupid.....
I don't have that particular problem. Most of what I write is my opinion on things, events, and I don't as you, and a few others here do, ... try to pass them off as facts....
Gayle seems to be the only one here that backs up her posts, comments with supporting links.....and for that she is the recipient of vile insults....
But, I'm wasting my time replying to you...see, I don't care what you believe, nor how you vote; my beliefs seem to run counter to yours, and that seems to bother you....that I ain't buying into your doctrines, seeing as how you are so smart and
"what the left fails to understand, etc" crapola.
Therefore it is perplexing why, given your low opinions of my intellect, etc....why do you all waste your time posting behind me? Seems like it would be more important for your cadre to be getting the word out to "as many people as possible, etc" re: your own manifesto.
I'm really apolitical and I often wonder why if you, lww, llotter are so politically astute, why you folks are not sharing, not educating others, on some of the sites that focus on political commentary????....afraid that they'll "steal your lunch" maybe???

wolfdancer
11-02-2009, 08:28 PM
In his reply to you, he calls you a hypocrite for pointing that out. (I fail to see the connection there???) AND ...then goes on to trivialize the criminal wrongdoing of outing a CIA operative, a Federal Crime, and the real crime behind that, regardless if, as he insinuates, that Valerie's main job was to sharpen pencils and fetch donuts for the "real operatives".... was to impeach any testimony of Joe Wilson's. Sort up the updated version of Nixon's "dirty tricks"
Ed might have insider's info re Valerie's non importance in the CIA....but maybe America's enemies didn't, and she might have been considered a prime target for kidnapping, torture, execution, as I'm sure she could reveal under duress, some names of the real operatives.....whether her job was to walk Cheney's dog, or walk Cheney himself....they ended her career by possibly putting her life at risk.
AND....this, after 8 years of Edgrrr wanting Clinton removed from office for having a sexual affair...a non criminal act.
Now I ask you.....who is the real hypocrite????

pooltchr
11-02-2009, 08:57 PM
wolfie,
The sad truth is that it doesn't require any great intellect to pick your posts apart. All it takes is an average joe who pays attention to what goes on in the world.

If you would learn to judge people by their actions rather than their words, you might start to see the world differently.

But as long as you let others tell you what you think, you won't get it.

You don't have to be a lapdog...the choice is yours.

Steve

Gayle in MD
11-02-2009, 09:32 PM
LMAO! The director of the CIA requests an FBI investigation to determine who exposed the identity of a covert NOC CIA Secret Agent, and Ed denies her job description. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif

Q posts link after link, proving all of them wrong, and they deny government documentation.

Sworn testimony, backed up by numerous witnesses, and still they deny the facts.

Remember Bobbyrx, who argued with me for two weeks when I posted that we were in a recession? then it came out that we had been in a recession for a year before the Bush Administration would admit it?

LMAO!

Ronald Reagan...."There is nothing wrong with the economy!"

Bush one, "Read My Lips! No New Taxes!"

Bush W., "The economy is strong!"

McCain, "The fundamentals of the economy are strong!"

Lie, lie, then deny!

What a crew of lemmings who vote Republican. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/crazy.gif

sack316
11-02-2009, 11:47 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
<span style="color: #000066">What a CROCK! Pure Treason! Obstruction Of Justice, and as usual, they hid behind Executive Priviledge.

Lying SOB's</span> </div></div>

Well, ya did say he should STFU... guess this shows at some point he did /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif

Sack

sack316
11-02-2009, 11:54 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

Ronald Reagan...."There is nothing wrong with the economy!"

Bush one, "Read My Lips! No New Taxes!"

Bush W., "The economy is strong!"

McCain, "The fundamentals of the economy are strong!"

Lie, lie, then deny!

What a crew of lemmings who vote Republican. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/crazy.gif

</div></div>

All true enough.

Let us not forget, Obama (and team Obama) also said the fundamentals of the economy are strong... both in March of this year and September of last year as well.

Oh, and the pesky spending that has gone on and will continue to go on... AND he will somehow magically reduce the deficit AND not increase taxes save for the top few percent of incomes. I don't see a possibility of ALL of that happening, something would have to give somewhere.

Sack

wolfdancer
11-03-2009, 12:44 AM
please do yourself a favor and stop with the moronic homilies.....I already believe you to be dumber then dog poop...why not quit before everybody else catches on?
AS to your lapdog comment...I don't know what a f**Ken lapdog is, so why don't you fill me in genius, and explain how that fits?.....it's myspace sh*t, and only twits like you and Ed would think that is an adult type put down.
Any fool can call someone names....you got anything to back up your juvvy remark....? I didn't think so.
I've decided to write you off as some jerk just trying to impress the other apparatchiks here. I'm done though....can't believe I put up with your f**ken stupidity this long, but being as you are a pool player and instructor...i thought maybe, there was some hope you didn't need to act like a jerk 24/7....even tried to pass along what i thought was a useful app for you...sorry that it wasn't, sorrier still that I made the gesture.
This will be my last post/reply to you....so let me conclude with
GFY
I don't like you, have zero respect for you, believe you post like a teenager, and haven't seen one post of yours that has any useful commentary...just you trying to pump up your ego, like lww, and impress the rat pack with your moronic insults....
Did you ever stop and read your own posts....they consist entirely of trying to belittle either Gayle or myself.Robert Ruark wrote "Something of Value", perhaps you could borrow from that title....compile a pile of your dogpoop posts and call it "Nothing of Value"

wolfdancer
11-03-2009, 01:35 AM
Service above self...WTF is that? taking the fall for George, our beloved "War President" Rather then being awarded, they should both be charged with obstruction of justice, criminal conspiracy, and maybe racketeering, if they can piece together the paper trail leading to any kickbacks.

Qtec
11-03-2009, 06:14 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">BILL MOYERS: Quoting anonymous administration officials, the TIMES reported that Saddam Hussein had launched a worldwide hunt for materials to make an atomic bomb using specially designed aluminimum tubes...

And there on MEET THE PRESS that same morning was Vice President Cheney.

DICK CHENEY (MEET THE PRESS NBC 9/8/02): There's a story in the NEW YORK TIMES this morning, this is-- and I want to attribute this to the TIMES -- I don't want to talk about obviously specific intelligence sources, but--

JONATHAN LANDAY: Now, ordinarily information-- like the aluminum tubes would-- wouldn't appear-it was top secret intelligence, and the Vice President and the National Security Advisor would not be allowed to talk about this on the Sunday talk shows. But, it appeared that morning in the NEW YORK TIMES and, therefore, they were able to talk about it.

<span style='font-size: 20pt'>DICK CHENEY (MEET THE PRESS NBC 9/8/02): It's now public that in fact he has been seeking to acquire and we have been able to intercept to prevent him from acquiring through this particular channel the kinds of tubes that are necessary to build a centrifuge and the centrifuge is required to take low grade uranium and enhance it into highly enriched uranium which is what you have to have in order to build a bomb."

BILL MOYERS: Did you see that performance?

BOB SIMON: I did.

BILL MOYERS: What did you think?

BOB SIMON: I thought it was remarkable.

BILL MOYERS: Why?

BOB SIMON: Remarkable. You leak a story, and then you quote the story. I mean, that's a remarkable thing to do.</span>

BILL MOYERS: And that's only part of it. Using the identical language of the anonymous sources quoted in the TIMES, top officials were now invoking the ultimate spectre of nuclear war -- the smoking gun as mushroom cloud.

CONDOLEEZA RICE (CNN 9/8/02): There will always be some uncertainty about how quickly he can acquire a nuclear weapon. But we don't want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud."

ERIC BOEHLERT: Those sorts of stories when they-- appear on the front page of the so called liberal NEW YORK TIMES. It absolutely comes with a stamp of approval. I mean if the NEW YORK TIMES thinks Saddam is on the precipice of-- some mushroom clouds. Then, there's really no debate.

BOB SCHEIFFER: (FACE THE NATION, CBS 9/8/02) We read in the NEW YORK TIMES today a story that says that Saddam Hussein is closer to acquiring nuclear weaponsÂ… Does he have nuclear weapons, is there a smoking gun here?

DONALD RUMSFELD: The smoking gun is an interesting phrase.

COLIN POWELL: Then as we saw in reporting just this morningÂ… </div></div> with video (http://crooksandliars.com/2007/04/26/moyers-and-russert-and-cheney-oh-my)

Cheney gets GW to declassify [ selected ] Top Seceret info and gets Libby to pass it on to Miller. On the SAME day the story is published, Cheney goes on Meet the Press and lies through his teeth.



Q


Also, those alu tubes that "were only really suited" for enrichment? Wonder if Miller got to see this.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> State/INR Alternative View of Iraq's Nuclear Program

The Assistant Secretary of State for Intelligence and Research (INR) believes that Saddam continues to want nuclear weapons and that available evidence indicates that Baghdad is pursuing at least a limited effort to maintain and acquire nuclear weapon-related capabilities. The activities we have detected do not, however, add up to a compelling case that Iraq is currently pursuing what INR would consider to be an integrated and comprehensive approach to acquire nuclear weapons. Iraq may be doing so, but INR considers the available evidence inadequate to support such a judgment. <u>Lacking persuasive evidence that Baghdad has launched a coherent effort to reconstitute its nuclear weapons program, INR is unwilling to speculate </u>that such an effort began soon after the departure of UN inspectors or to project a timeline for the completion of activities it does not now see happening. As a result, INR is unable to predict when Iraq could acquire a nuclear device or weapon.

In INR's view Iraq's efforts to acquire aluminum tubes is central to the argument that Baghdad is reconstituting its nuclear weapons program, but INR is not persuaded that the tubes in question are intended for use as centrifuge rotors. INR accepts the judgment of technical experts at the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) who have concluded that the tubes Iraq seeks to acquire are poorly suited for use in gas centrifuges to be used for uranium enrichment and finds <span style='font-size: 17pt'>unpersuasive the arguments advanced by others to make the case that they are intended for that purpose. INR considers it far more likely that the tubes are intended for another purpose,</span> most likely the production of artillery rockets. <span style='font-size: 20pt'>The very large quantities being sought, the way the tubes were tested by the Iraqis, and the atypical lack of attention to operational security in the procurement efforts are among the factors, in addition to the DOE assessment, that <u>lead INR to concluded that the tubes are not intended for use in Iraq's nuclear weapon program.</u></span> </div></div>

Gayle in MD
11-03-2009, 07:27 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sack316</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

Ronald Reagan...."There is nothing wrong with the economy!"

Bush one, "Read My Lips! No New Taxes!"

Bush W., "The economy is strong!"

McCain, "The fundamentals of the economy are strong!"

Lie, lie, then deny!

What a crew of lemmings who vote Republican. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/crazy.gif

</div></div>

All true enough.

Let us not forget, Obama (and team Obama) also said the fundamentals of the economy are strong... both in March of this year and September of last year as well.

<span style="color: #000066"> <span style='font-size: 17pt'>Obama wasn't on the inside. Bush was, and McCain, being Republican, should have been. If you think Bush turned over any solid information to the Obama people before he took office, you're dreaming. Everyone of the so called stewards of the financial industry, during the build up to the crash, was a Republican pawn for Bush. The one person who told the truth, a woman, BTW, was attacked by Greenspan, Paulson, and the rest of the Bush Administration "Free Market" zealots, AND stripped of her power. </span> </span>

Oh, and the pesky spending that has gone on and will continue to go on...

<span style="color: #000066"> <span style='font-size: 20pt'>Stupid comment, given the conditions prevailing. VERY STUPID!</span> </span>



AND he will somehow magically reduce the deficit AND not increase taxes save for the top few percent of incomes.

<span style="color: #000066">He stated from the start, that we should go back to the tax structure of the nineties. Anyone who would expect that we don't have a tough row to hoe to get out of this Bush Legacy, given two unfinished wars, a collapsed economy, huge job losses, which picked up steam under Bush, and were no doubt, steamrolling long before Obama got into power, and existed due to the economic picture Obama inherited, is stupid beyond words. What is stunning, is that suddently our former "Debts don't matter" RW Bushies on here, are suddently deficit hawks! What a total CROCK!</span>


I don't see a possibility of ALL of that happening, something would have to give somewhere.

Sack </div></div>

<span style="color: #000066"> <span style='font-size: 20pt'>Where was your scrutiny and vision during Bush's Free Market, ownership society, spending, losing, wasting, borrowing hey day? </span> </span>

<span style="color: #000066">If you can point out to me how our government could have avoided a global economic depression, without spending money, prevented hundreds of thousand of police, teachers, and firemen across this nation from being laid off by state and county gov.'s across America, and stimulated economic growth, again, all without spending money, I'd be very interested to hear it.

Bush began TARP, Toxic Assets Relief Program, before Obama got into office. NO? Economists across the world agreed that without the W.S. bailouts, a globel depression would result. No?
Bush stated that without those actions, a global depression, lasting as long as a decade, would cripple the world economy, including ours in particular. No? There was little or no oversight after those TARP funds were distributed to the W.S.crooks during Bush's remaining months in office. No? Obama came in and has tried to prevent further job losses, in the auto industry, which would have been a disaster, bTW, with as many as five million further job losses, and is now trying to create tougher oversight of the financial industry, as the right accuses him of taking over, and destroying the so called "Free market" ...F.M. being essentially a myth given the way Wall Street has been operating over the lasst several decades, and particularly from 2005, through to the end of 2007, with Bush's blessings, I might add, and after he was warned of the coming economic crash, over and over.

WTF did you think our government was going to do anyway? Just let credit totally freeze up? Let all of the banks go under, allow a run on every bank in America?

Here is what is so infuriating about reading these RW posts full of BS. IT IS THE DUTY of GOVERNMENT, to step in and take over when a financial, economic disaster threatens our national security.

Hence, the right can take their total BS about socialism, and government take overs, nationalization, and the rest of their illogical, unrealistic, ignorant ideology, and stuff it, as far as I'm concerned. AS much as I disliked Bush, Greenspan, Paulson, and the rest of the chief economic supposed stewards of our financial markets, for allowoing a threat, to turn into a disaster, I did have enough sense to understand that as much as I hated the very idea of giving any money to the very same greedy crooks on Wall Street that created this disaster, it had to be done, and without it, Middle Class America, would lose far more than it has already lost. Not an easy pill to swallow, but it was the reality.

The ignorance of those who post here who suggest that the correct decision would ahve been to just step back and let the market do it's thing, is just so totally absurd, it is beyond belief that anyone could be THAT damned stupid! No one here has railed against corporate corruption over the years like I have, and have been attacked for it left and right, by all of the right wing posters here. All I can say is...LOOK WHAT HAPPENED ON WALL STREET! If you righties haven't seen by now that unless we regulate those crooks, with tight regulations, and concentrated oversight, which is exactly where this administration is headed, and, BTW, exactly what the last one failed miserably to do, then my description of the nutty right, is not only apporpriate, but understated!

/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/crazy.gif

We Americans were bilked on every front, by BUSH et al, and their corporate cronies both here and abroad, who took advantage of the administrations exuberant protection of the "Free Market" for eight years. It was essentially a free for all for the corporate CEO's. If you can't see and acknowledge that, then you might just as well drop our of college right now and save yourself the trouble.

I am waiting for the answers to the specific questions above.</span>
/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/crazy.gif

Gayle in MD
11-03-2009, 07:51 AM
Nothing like the threat of a Mushroom Cloud to scare Americans into submission, including me.

Let's not forget, Republicans provided huge numbers of similar artillery rockets, to terrorists in Afghanistan, under Republican Administrations, which have since killed hundreds of American soldiers.

Saudi Arabians finance terrorism, period. What American family has been more involved with the Saudis, than any other?

/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/crazy.gif

I recall being called a terrorist lover, because I could not believe that the righties on here were all for Bush throwing out the inspectors, once he realized that they had found nothing, and were not likely TO find anything.

He lied, during a State Of The Union Address. That is a fact! They ALL lied to our country, and to the world.

Treason! Pure and simple treason!

They didn't care about "swatting at flies," because their plan was to use the next terror attack for their hidden agenda. Iraq.

pooltchr
11-03-2009, 10:49 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: wolfdancer</div><div class="ubbcode-body">This will be my last post/reply to you....so let me conclude with
GFY
</div></div>
If only I could believe that promise to be true...but you have shown an incredible lack of self control. Your obsession with me is well known.

But if it actually was your final comment, what could be more appropriate than a gutter level attack. It's what you do best!

I will expect you to keep your word as a gentleman and put me on total ignore....but I know better. You are neither a gentleman, nor a man of your word.

But it was a nice thought while it lasted.

Steve

eg8r
11-03-2009, 10:53 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Now I ask you.....who is the real hypocrite???? </div></div>Wow, you really are full of hot air aren't you. Let me be clear you certainly are not a fake hypocrite.

eg8r

eg8r
11-03-2009, 10:56 AM
How did gaylio ever get through life without ever believing in personal responsibility? It is always someone elses fault.

eg8r

DickLeonard
11-03-2009, 10:11 PM
Not remembering was Ronald Reagan ploy, he got away with it so good it is now in Every Lawyers play book for rehearsing their Clients.

Of course he had Dementia but they couldn't remove him because Bush wouldn't have been President.####

wolfdancer
11-03-2009, 10:27 PM
Ron R, our first "acting President", until GWB showed up.
I think Cheney must have been a big fan of "The Godfather " trilogy
that's where his line originated:
"I don't recall that, Senator"
And this:
"In five years the Bush family will be completely legitimate." (That was seven years ago.)
With a memory as bad as Cheney's, it's a good thing nuthin happened to GWB....or the WH daily conversation would go like this:
"No, Mr. President, we can not nuke the Chinese today,they are our friend now, and they are going to lend us some more money.
Yes, you will get your finder's fee deposited in your Dubai account. what's that...Nuke the Russians instead?....Stalin is dead Mr. Cheney, and we are now fighting a war for them in Afghanistan. No, sorry, but Harry Whittington does not want to go bird hunting with you today, never again, actually"

sack316
11-03-2009, 10:28 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
I am waiting for the answers to the specific questions above. </div></div>

Let me see if I can sift through it, but from what I saw skimming over it, none of it was anything that I haven't answered before.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Obama wasn't on the inside. Bush was, and McCain, being Republican, should have been. If you think Bush turned over any solid information to the Obama people before he took office, you're dreaming. Everyone of the so called stewards of the financial industry, during the build up to the crash, was a Republican pawn for Bush. The one person who told the truth, a woman, BTW, was attacked by Greenspan, Paulson, and the rest of the Bush Administration "Free Market" zealots, AND stripped of her power. </div></div>

Basically, Obama was making promises without knowing what he was talking about? You speak later on about how TARP rolled out under Bush, if I were Obama, regardless of what info I was or was not given, I might have taken this as a major sign. But I get it, Bush, McCain, etc. had to be lying when saying the fundamentals are strong. Obama, when saying the same thing, was just some poor guy who got fooled into saying it. And even IF your point is granted... he still said the same thing this year when none of those meany pants were around to hide the shame from him.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
He stated from the start, that we should go back to the tax structure of the nineties.</div></div>

AND he said he won't raise taxes on the middle and lower class AND that he will reduce the deficit as well... which is likely impossible all things considered "conditions prevailing" as you like to say. Do you deny the severe unlikelihood that we can spend as much as we are (justified or not), AND not raise taxes, AND reduce the deficit?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Where was your scrutiny and vision during Bush's Free Market, ownership society, spending, losing, wasting, borrowing hey day?</div></div>

When have I ever not had the same stance on spending? When have I ever defended Bush's spending? How many times have I said on here how bad Bush f'ed up? How many times have I said it to you directly on here? And how many times have I pointed out your misguided concept that I support and glorify all Bush did? That cop out of yours is getting old.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If you can point out to me how our government could have avoided a global economic depression, without spending money...(etc)</div></div>

I have said plenty of times, that we did have to spend. AGAIN, I will say it is HOW MUCH and HOW we spend that is an issue... especially "conditions prevailing" again... we have no money is also a "condition prevailing", we are massively in debt is also a "condition prevailing". Insane spending, bad under Bush, bad under Obama too... conditions prevailing. I'll gladly suffer a little more right now myself than to continue to sell out my future children's and grandchildren's future. How bout you?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Bush began TARP, Toxic Assets Relief Program, before Obama got into office. NO?</div></div>

Correct.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Economists across the world agreed that without the W.S. bailouts, a globel depression would result. No?</div></div>

Correct. (side note here... kinda funny but true thing. Have had a few PhD's tell me "if economists knew so much, they wouldn't be economists. They'd be investors, venture capitalists, etc. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif )

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Bush stated that without those actions, a global depression, lasting as long as a decade, would cripple the world economy, including ours in particular. No?</div></div>

Correct. But that guy lies about everything ya know? /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
There was little or no oversight after those TARP funds were distributed to the W.S.crooks during Bush's remaining months in office. No?</div></div>

Correct, was none then and still none now. Unless of course you count the CEO salary stuff. Poor CEO's, their salary will suck (for them). Luckily they'll get huge bonuses still and more perks to make up for it that aren't addressed. So nope, was no oversight then, and no effective oversight now.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Obama came in and has tried to prevent further job losses, in the auto industry, which would have been a disaster, bTW, with as many as five million further job losses... (etc)</div></div>

Wasn't a question here, but I had to address that. How do you quantify this? I don't mean just this, but I see all this "stimulus saved this many jobs" and so many different numbers thrown out on something that is known to be uncountable. Hocus Pocus. It's magic, rhetoric, and a nice pretty phrase said to make us feel good about things, but really can't be proven (or, granted, disproven either). To me, it's just a nice optimistic thing to say to distract from actual job losses... which are quantifiable. For example, the auto industry you mention he is saving... I presume you mean the homeland where unemployment is the highest in the US?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
WTF did you think our government was going to do anyway? Just let credit totally freeze up? Let all of the banks go under, allow a run on every bank in America?</div></div>

Well let's see what did happen, with the actions taken. Banks still closing at record paces, and I've posted links previously showing the outlook of this to continue at a rapid pace for some time. Credit is still pretty frozen up. Got a banker in one of my classes right now, and this became part of the topic of conversation in class just last night actually. "We just don't have money to give" (in a discussion about how small business is currently and will continue to suffer). so I don't know what "TF our government was going to do anyway". But I do know what it has done, perhaps with good intentions... but looking at it with an economic and finance mind, one must see what is happening and wonder why we're not stopping and finding another route. But hey, don't believe me, I'd understand if ya don't... just wait and see in another decade or so if we don't change course soon. (again, I emphasize I don't believe anything we are doing was not intended to be good originally... only misguided and uninformed).

OK, think I hit everything that had a question mark.

Sack

Qtec
11-04-2009, 09:05 AM
What about this,

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">BILL MOYERS: Did you see that performance?

BOB SIMON: I did.

BILL MOYERS: What did you think?

BOB SIMON: I thought it was remarkable.

BILL MOYERS: Why?

BOB SIMON: Remarkable. You leak a story, and then you quote the story. I mean, that's a remarkable thing to do. </div></div>

Q

Gayle in MD
11-04-2009, 10:13 AM
Like I stated, Bush didn't leave us any easy disasters, just no win disasters. You bash him for spending, when all the economists, and history, proves that we HAVE to spend during economic collapse. Bush blew money on things he WANTED to do, not on things we HAD to do, and no one from the right, factors that in, including YOU~!

And, I still think that it takes a lot of nerve, for the Republicans, and those who voted twice for Bush, to be out there being critical, and obstructive, when their party, and their president created this mess by ignoring it completely, when they still had plenty of time to divert that crises, but didn't want to do it for political purposes.

They were in control for all of the years preceeding this economic disaster, as it built into an emergency situation. Every single economist says that, and says that it was a done deal, after 2005.

The point is the situation, which Obama inherited, was never going to go from a collapse, with the dangerous, potential of a decade long bad economy, to a suddenly thriving economy, in just a year or two. the jobs losses, for example, were a done deal, from the moment of the collapse. It is a domino effect, aconomically, that the right likes to pretend is an effect of Obama's poor management of Bush's no win disasters.

Obama said that from the very beginning, that it was going to take time. And nok he never promised no tax raises, just that they would be raising taxes on those making over $250,000. So far, nobody has had their taxes raised, so you're complaining about something that hsan't even happened.

What I see now, is Republicans, blocking everything that helps the Middle Class, like they always do, and protecting special interests, IOW, the same crooks who stole from the country. That is what they're doing with health care, protecting the Insurance industry, and leaving the public out to dry in their miseryable predicament, which is killing Americans, by the thosands every week, while the Republican Party, protects the murderers, the insurance industry.

Health care for profit is not a viable, successful policy. WE are the ONLY industrialized nation, which does not insure it's citizens of decent, affordable health care, and that is a disgrace on a moral level, IMO.

I can also understand why the current administration had to wait for a time, before lowering the boom on Walkl Stree, with tighter regulatory actions.

They are in the process of doing that now.

And as far as your blowing the bank closing out of proportions, what is it now, a hundred? A hundred and six or seven, how damn many banks do you think are in this country, anyway? That is a fraction, and it could, and WOULD have been much worse than that, without immediate actions, which did drive up our debts. But this is the greatest, and wealthiest country in the world, and regardless of what we spend to get out of this mess, we can still make a huge comeback, in a very reasonable amount of time, as long as we keep Republicans OUT OF OFFICE!

And Again, if you're going to try to tell me that you were as impatient, and as critical, with the Bush Administration, and the Republican leaeders, who allowed these milti messes, as you have been with Democratics, and Obama, then we'll just have to agree to disagree.

g.

LWW
11-04-2009, 11:17 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">as long as we keep Republicans OUT OF OFFICE!

g.</div></div>

How's that working out dear heart?

LWW

pooltchr
11-04-2009, 12:05 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Every single economist says that, and says that it was a done deal, after 2005.

g.

</div></div>

"Every single economist" won't agree that water is wet!!!

/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/crazy.gif

Steve

wolfdancer
11-04-2009, 12:42 PM
speaking of Cheney and his 72 convenient memory lapses.....how many times do you have to ask Steve to "f**k off, and leave you alone, before he gets the hint?
You post, and he automatically replies. I'm surprised that he doesn't sign up at AZB, where he could then run over like you-know-who, and proclaim another victory...with the implied message that he caused Granny to lose control of a major body function.
It wouldn't be so bad if he came on with something that actually countered what you wrote....like a link to validate his rebuttal.
Off topic (again)....interesting red/blue state map....especially the "welfare" states:
$$$ (http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.bradblog.com/Images/RedStateWelfareQueens.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.bradblog.com/index.php%3Fp%3D474&usg=__kRkOOaVVm45UMd4G-7HK0Q4V-HU=&h=318&w=350&sz=42&hl=en&start=7&um=1&tbnid=hl2_cD_WfKV7XM:&tbnh=109&tbnw=120&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dred%2Bstates%26hl%3Den%26client%3Dfir efox-a%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:en-US:official%26sa%3DX%26um%3D1)
How come they ain't got no group like this?
Go blue, then green (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QM-mfEMssy8)

Gayle in MD
11-04-2009, 12:46 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: wolfdancer</div><div class="ubbcode-body">speaking of Cheney and his 72 convenient memory lapses.....how many times do you have to ask Steve to "f**k off, and leave you alone, before he gets the hint?
You post, and he automatically replies. I'm surprised that he doesn't sign up at AZB, where he could then run over like you-know-who, and proclaim another victory...with the implied message that he caused Granny to lose control of a major body function.
It wouldn't be so bad if he came on with something that actually countered what you wrote....like a link to validate his rebuttal.
Off topic (again)....interesting red/blue state map....especially the "welfare" states:
$$$ (http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.bradblog.com/Images/RedStateWelfareQueens.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.bradblog.com/index.php%3Fp%3D474&usg=__kRkOOaVVm45UMd4G-7HK0Q4V-HU=&h=318&w=350&sz=42&hl=en&start=7&um=1&tbnid=hl2_cD_WfKV7XM:&tbnh=109&tbnw=120&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dred%2Bstates%26hl%3Den%26client%3Dfir efox-a%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:en-US:official%26sa%3DX%26um%3D1)
How come they ain't got no group like this?
Go blue, then green (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QM-mfEMssy8) </div></div>

Neither of them interest me.

Easiest thing to do is ignore them both. They are, well, you know, what we always say. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif

pooltchr
11-04-2009, 12:56 PM
Every time one of you posts, my BS sensor goes wild. You guys are too easy.

And I don't need validation from others to tell me that I am right. You and Gayle,however, seem to thrive on it.

It's pretty sad when you depend on others for your own self worth. I guess that's why you feel the need to keep attacking me, while propping each other up. But then, if my philosophy was as weak as yours, I'm sure I would want some extra support.

Steve

wolfdancer
11-04-2009, 01:30 PM
Geez, while I keep vowing to not reply to you....that post sounds like the exact opposite of my thoughts....
it wasn't validation from others....but some link to facts and not just your opinions, that I had in mind.
AS to attacking you....WTF do you think you are doing when you post behind Gayle or myself ...ALL the time....it's just quid pro quo....
As for your bs sensor....what happened to it during the 8 years of GWB?
too easy???? the laughable part of that is sounds like you are patting yourself on the back...."I really showed them..." you been reading too many lww post's...and it's rubbing off.
One of us, either you or I, has lost our grip on reality.....you believe you are doing a major put down on Gayle and myself....and all I see is another talking head...guilty of that myself most of the time, but then I don't run around bragging 'bout how I got all the answers and the other guy is too stupid to realize that. Dream on....

pooltchr
11-04-2009, 01:57 PM
Not anything like a major put down, but rather pointing out the factual inaccuracy of some of your posts.

I have to question comments that include phrases like "every single economist agrees" and other such nonsense that seem to get passed around here like facts. The Almighty himself can't find anything that "every single economist" would agree upon. How can she??????????

And you just jump to her defense for who knows what reason. If she is as intelligent as she would like us to think she is, I think she should be able to defend herself.

Steve

wolfdancer
11-04-2009, 03:21 PM
let me see if I got this correct. You, Ed and lww often attack her on the same thread, but you object to me voicing my opinion and/or support of Gayle on that very thread?....sounds fair to me. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/mad.gif
I think Gayle is armed with enough facts and has a big enough "set" /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif to deal with all of you by herself, but until you can get the admin here to inform me that I can't post....I'll reply whenever, and post whatever, despite your objections....I rule that "you are out of order" /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/crazy.gif
I'm not going to bother looking up the many times that you back up lww, or Ed's reply against Gayle....but believe you got a hell of a lot of nerve telling/ordering? me not to make comments which you believe are unfairly, in support of her /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/cry.gif .
In reality, she does fine with, or without my input....
But, if I were you, I would definitely complain to the admin....not about me so much, but about Gayle for handing you your lunch. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smirk.gif

wolfdancer
11-04-2009, 03:41 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">accepts the judgment of technical experts at the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) who have concluded that the tubes Iraq seeks to acquire are poorly suited for use in gas centrifuges to be used for uranium enrichment and finds </div></div>

Case closed!!

pooltchr
11-04-2009, 04:08 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: wolfdancer</div><div class="ubbcode-body">...I'll reply whenever, and post whatever, despite your objections..... /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smirk.gif </div></div>

And yet, you complain about when and where I post!

Hypocrite!

Steve

sack316
11-04-2009, 06:13 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Like I stated, Bush didn't leave us any easy disasters, just no win disasters. You bash him for spending, when all the economists, and history, proves that we HAVE to spend during economic collapse. Bush blew money on things he WANTED to do, not on things we HAD to do, and no one from the right, factors that in, including YOU~!</div></div>

I do factor it in. It sucks. It's unfair to the country and the current admin to have to deal with failures of the past admin. Unfortunately, those things are there... and we haven't taken our foot off the gas yet... just continuing on down the same failed path. I'm sorry that you can't seem to see that

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">And, I still think that it takes a lot of nerve, for the Republicans, and those who voted twice for Bush, to be out there being critical, and obstructive, when their party, and their president created this mess by ignoring it completely, when they still had plenty of time to divert that crises, but didn't want to do it for political purposes. </div></div>

That's actually probably a pretty fair statement. However, just because it takes nerve doesn't mean it is without merit.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">They were in control for all of the years preceeding this economic disaster, as it built into an emergency situation. Every single economist says that, and says that it was a done deal, after 2005.</div></div>

Every single one? lol

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The point is the situation, which Obama inherited, was never going to go from a collapse, with the dangerous, potential of a decade long bad economy, to a suddenly thriving economy, in just a year or two. the jobs losses, for example, were a done deal, from the moment of the collapse. It is a domino effect, aconomically, that the right likes to pretend is an effect of Obama's poor management of Bush's no win disasters. </div></div>

*sigh* OK, just wait and see. I don't have the energy to try to explain any of that again.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Obama said that from the very beginning, that it was going to take time. And nok he never promised no tax raises, just that they would be raising taxes on those making over $250,000. So far, nobody has had their taxes raised, so you're complaining about something that hsan't even happened.</div></div>

Nobody has had their INCOME taxes raised <u>yet</u>. In the mean time, start taking a look around elsewhere. From the "sin" taxes, being expanded beyond just tobacco and alcohol to other less 'evil' products, check heating bills this winter, check a/c bills next summer, watch gas and all energies... watch a lot of things... and then tell me if the lower and middle class don't pay more in taxes. And, I still do believe, income tax is yet to come. Please, if you can, do tell me how you see the deficit being reduced with what we are spending without taxes being raised. Please do, because it would definitely ease my mind greatly... and many others.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What I see now, is Republicans, blocking everything that helps the Middle Class, like they always do, and protecting special interests, IOW, the same crooks who stole from the country.</div></div>

With what power that they hold do they block this right now? Wasn't that why 60 was celebrated, because they couldn't anymore? Now the dems aren't getting it done themselves. period.

And special interest groups? Oh, like the lobbyists scavenging around the places Obama said they wouldn't be in anymore. Those kind?


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> That is what they're doing with health care, protecting the Insurance industry, and leaving the public out to dry in their miseryable predicament, which is killing Americans, by the thosands every week, while the Republican Party, protects the murderers, the insurance industry.</div></div>

The republicans can't. They don't have the numbers... again, remember the whole celebration? You want health care, and I'm happy for you that you do. Just start telling your party to come together and it will be done, nobody can stop it then. They've got a year left with their great advantage... if it doesn't get done it's on them.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">And as far as your blowing the bank closing out of proportions, what is it now, a hundred?</div></div>

A hundred since February, yes. 20 just last month. Point is, it's not slowing down and is not projected to anytime soon either.

But hey, if I'm blowing it out of proportion... what was all the hubbub about then? Why did we need so much action?

Sack

Gayle in MD
11-04-2009, 07:50 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sack316</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Like I stated, Bush didn't leave us any easy disasters, just no win disasters. You bash him for spending, when all the economists, and history, proves that we HAVE to spend during economic collapse. Bush blew money on things he WANTED to do, not on things we HAD to do, and no one from the right, factors that in, including YOU~!</div></div>

I do factor it in. It sucks. It's unfair to the country and the current admin to have to deal with failures of the past admin. Unfortunately, those things are there... and we haven't taken our foot off the gas yet...



just continuing on down the same failed path. I'm sorry that you can't seem to see that


<span style="color: #000066">And I'm sorry that you don't seem to understand that if we don't spend money to stimulate the economy, we will go under. Also sorry that you and the rest of the right can't seem to get it throuygh you heads that health care costs are a huge part of our financial problems, as is energy costs. and you seem either too uninformed, or too thick, to realize that it's going to cost money up front to save money in the long run.</span>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">And, I still think that it takes a lot of nerve, for the Republicans, and those who voted twice for Bush, to be out there being critical, and obstructive, when their party, and their president created this mess by ignoring it completely, when they still had plenty of time to divert that crises, but didn't want to do it for political purposes. </div></div>

That's actually probably a pretty fair statement. However, just because it takes nerve doesn't mean it is without merit.

<span style="color: #000066">It is without merit because the country has had a history of Republican Administrations spending us into a pit, causing recessions, launching un-necessary wars, and running up health, fuel, pharmaceutical and insurance costs, by blocking regulations. </span>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">They were in control for all of the years preceeding this economic disaster, as it built into an emergency situation. Every single economist says that, and says that it was a done deal, after 2005.</div></div>

Every single one? lol


<span style="color: #000066">Yes, every single one of the economists that were front and center throughout the debate over how to divert the depression, agreed, that spending too little would be more disastrous than spending too much. Granted, I didn't check to see what Palin and McCain thought, nor Rush and Coulter...Hannity nor O' Reilly..Rove nor Wolfowitz
</span>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The point is the situation, which Obama inherited, was never going to go from a collapse, with the dangerous, potential of a decade long bad economy, to a suddenly thriving economy, in just a year or two. the jobs losses, for example, were a done deal, from the moment of the collapse. It is a domino effect, economically, that the right likes to pretend is an effect of Obama's poor management of Bush's no win disasters. </div></div>

*sigh* OK, just wait and see. I don't have the energy to try to explain any of that again.

*sigh* neither do I! AND, I already did wait and see, and things went just as I predicted, Bush F-ed up the whole country.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Obama said that from the very beginning, that it was going to take time. And nok he never promised no tax raises, just that they would be raising taxes on those making over $250,000. So far, nobody has had their taxes raised, so you're complaining about something that hsan't even happened.</div></div>

Nobody has had their INCOME taxes raised <u>yet</u>. In the mean time, start taking a look around elsewhere.

<span style="color: #000066">Wah Wah Wah...Eyore! </span>


From the "sin" taxes, being expanded beyond just tobacco and alcohol to other less 'evil' products,

<span style="color: #000066">Wah Wah Wah, none of that has passed. Anyway, looks like we're going to have to do something since the military is saying our kids are too fat and too dumb, to serve, so what the F, will all of you rah rah war people do without any soldiers? </span>

check heating bills this winter, check a/c bills next summer, watch gas and all energies...

<span style="color: #000066">LMAO! Hey, it was YOUR PARTY, that blocked all the energy reforms, not the Democratics. REagan, the guy that threw all the Carter solar panels off the W.H. Roof, REMEMBER? Now, you're goig to whine about that TOO!???? </span>

watch a lot of things... and then tell me if the lower and middle class don't pay more in taxes.

<span style="color: #000066">Ha ha ha...they've been paying for for the last eight years anyway! </span>





And, I still do believe, income tax is yet to come. Please, if you can, do tell me how you see the deficit being reduced with what we are spending without taxes being raised. Please do, because it would definitely ease my mind greatly... and many others.


<span style="color: #000066">TAXES ARE GOING TO GO UP!<span style='font-size: 17pt'> Now, you tell me how we were going to pay off Bush's massive deficits, without raising taxes?</span></span> /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/crazy.gif


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What I see now, is Republicans, blocking everything that helps the Middle Class, like they always do, and protecting special interests, IOW, the same crooks who stole from the country.</div></div>

With what power that they hold do they block this right now? Wasn't that why 60 was celebrated, because they couldn't anymore? Now the dems aren't getting it done themselves. period.
<span style="color: #000066">Yep, we've got twelve righwingers from the idiocracy states, where they think like RW Republicans, and they are a royal pain in the arse! Blocking progress, right along with the idiot Republicans, in the take, right along with them. </span>
And special interest groups? Oh, like the lobbyists scavenging around the places Obama said they wouldn't be in anymore. Those kind?


<span style="color: #000066">Did you think he should barr them from Washington D.C.? LMAO, I can just hear what you'd be writing then! </span>


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> That is what they're doing with health care, protecting the Insurance industry, and leaving the public out to dry in their miseryable predicament, which is killing Americans, by the thosands every week, while the Republican Party, protects the murderers, the insurance industry.</div></div>

The republicans can't. They don't have the numbers... again, remember the whole celebration? You want health care, and I'm happy for you that you do. Just start telling your party to come together and it will be done, nobody can stop it then. They've got a year left with their great advantage... if it doesn't get done it's on them.

<span style="color: #000066">yep, I agree, they need to tell the Republicans to go take a flying ****! Forget this bi-partisan BS, and stuff it right down their throats. </span>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">And as far as your blowing the bank closing out of proportions, what is it now, a hundred?</div></div>

A hundred since February, yes. 20 just last month. Point is, it's not slowing down and is not projected to anytime soon either.

<span style="color: #000066">LMAO, oh, it's not slowing down? Go back and read the statistics on the rate of closures beginning from a year ago... </span> /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smirk.gif

But hey, if I'm blowing it out of proportion... what was all the hubbub about then? Why did we need so much action?

Sack </div></div>



<span style="color: #000066">y
Yep, you like to muddy it all up, don't you, you are now going back and forth between the huge financial and banking industry on Wall Street, to the neighorhood banks?

No thanks, not interested in that muddied up, Quagmired F-ed up line of thought.

G. </span>

wolfdancer
11-04-2009, 10:03 PM
Gayle, haven't you heard....the economy was in great shape until the " moron" took over.....Bush good, Obama Bad!
That's what you are dealing with here.
You might as well beat your head against a brick wall then to try to discuss the economy here with the local Economists.
At least when you stop beating you head it no longer hurts, but the pain in the a** from dealing with these we know everything people, is continuous, and ever increasing. I was a nice church going Catholic "Boy" when I signed on here a few years ago, now I am thinking of burning down the church, am a raging alcoholic that flips off nuns, people with walkers, and blind people if they delay me in traffic by crossing the street in front of me. I tell mothers their babies are ugly, and advise them to have their tubes tied so they can't reproduce, and that's just some of the nice things that I do. Stop the dialogue with them before you too become afflicted. You might even catch the know it all syndrome from them....it is spreading rapidly over there.....I think lww introduced the disease here and there is no known cure

As for my own economic espertise... I know as much about Milton Friedman theories as I know about Milton Bradley's.
I just finished reading Adam Smith's theories, only to discover that since they were written in 1776, they are out of date.
I've been trying now for 20 years to get a grasp on that modern day Economist GHB, who wrote the "Read my lips, no new taxes, trickle down" theory....I'm still waiting for that windfall to hit me. It's kind of like a waterfall at the top end, and by the time it reaches you 5 miles away, it is a trickle, and the water is now polluted.

sack316
11-05-2009, 12:53 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">LMAO, oh, it's not slowing down? Go back and read the statistics on the rate of closures beginning from a year ago... </div></div>

already did

As you request, from a year ago:
October 2008: 4
November 2008: 5
December 2008: 3
January 2009: 6
February 2009: 10
March 2009: 5
April 2009: 8
May 2009: 7
June 2009: 9
July 2009: 24
August 2009: 15
September 2009: 11
October 2009: 20

I hope I don't need to create a scatterplot or graph or anything to show the trend of bank closures accelerating. And they are projected to continue accelerating.

So to answer that one question "LMAO, oh it's not slowing down?" No my dear, it is not. I will try to get to the rest of your post another time.

Oh, but to address the muddying up of the waters comment, and TRY to explain to you why this is important:

As I would hope you know, unemployment is pretty high.

Also, as I would hope you know, small business employs over half of the private sector.

The big important firms, those that are too big to fail, don't have time to worry and sweat the small stuff. Mom and Pop up the street ain't walking into Chase and getting the time of day. They generally will need to go to (insert small town name) Bank, where their business is needed as a mutual benefit. Ma and Pa need money, small bank can't compete with big bad banks for the huge national accounts to stay afloat. They need each other.

Small local bank closes down (worst case) or if they are lucky, get taken over by big bank. Ma and Pa try to go in, but need to put down 20-30pts (according to a banker in discussion the other night) on what they need, which they do not have.

The vicious cycle has begun.

This is why pointing out bank closings, big or small, is not muddying up the waters. Sure the big boys are most visible, and their failing will provide immediate devastation upon their collapse. Getting them "safe" is good. But there's that undercurrent that also needs to be watched out for that is not so visible on the surface, and isn't "big" enough to catch in any news. But as we continue on the "recovery path", and we say "well gee, the economy is looking better, but jobs are still lacking"... even beyond that usual lag period, this will be why. And if we're not careful, it will lead us right back to square one.

Sack

pooltchr
11-05-2009, 08:19 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: wolfdancer</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Gayle, haven't you heard....the economy was in great shape until the " moron" took over.....Bush good, Obama Bad!
</div></div>

Have you ever had an original thought in your entire life???????

Steve

Gayle in MD
11-05-2009, 09:12 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sack316</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">LMAO, oh, it's not slowing down? Go back and read the statistics on the rate of closures beginning from a year ago... </div></div>

already did

As you request, from a year ago:
October 2008: 4
November 2008: 5
December 2008: 3
January 2009: 6
February 2009: 10
March 2009: 5
April 2009: 8
May 2009: 7
June 2009: 9
July 2009: 24
August 2009: 15
September 2009: 11
October 2009: 20

I hope I don't need to create a scatterplot or graph or anything to show the trend of bank closures accelerating. And they are projected to continue accelerating.


<span style="color: #000066">LMAO! No, you don't have to do that, it's pretty easy to figure out at a glance... </span>


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">October 2008: 4
November 2008: 5 <span style="color: #000066">Up, by one point. </span>
December 2008: 3 <span style="color: #000066">Down by two. </span>
January 2009: 6 <span style="color: #000066">Up by three </span>
February 2009: 10 <span style="color: #000066">Up again, by four more. </span>
March 2009: 5 <span style="color: #000066">Down by half </span>
April 2009: 8 <span style="color: #000066">Up by less than half, three. </span>
May 2009: 7 <span style="color: #000066">Down by one. </span>
June 2009: 9 <span style="color: #000066">Up by two. </span>
July 2009: 24 <span style="color: #000066">Up by fifteen. </span>
August 2009: 15 <span style="color: #000066">Down by ten. </span>
September 2009: 11 <span style="color: #000066">Up by four. </span>
October 2009: 20 <span style="color: #000066">Up by nine. And probably down again next month...get it? Up, AND down. It is fluctuating, as would be expected in this recovery from Bush's Depression.</span>
</div></div>



So to answer that one question "LMAO, oh it's not slowing down?" No my dear, it is not. I will try to get to the rest of your post another time.


<span style="color: #000066">Actually, it's peaking, my dear, and we will follow this up in a few months, during which, I predict, the numbers will show a downward trend... </span>

Oh, but to address the muddying up of the waters comment, and TRY to explain to you why this is important:

As I would hope you know, unemployment is pretty high.

<span style="color: #000066"> </span>

Also, as I would hope you know, small business employs over half of the private sector.

The big important firms, those that are too big to fail, don't have time to worry and sweat the small stuff. Mom and Pop up the street ain't walking into Chase and getting the time of day. They generally will need to go to (insert small town name) Bank, where their business is needed as a mutual benefit. Ma and Pa need money, small bank can't compete with big bad banks for the huge national accounts to stay afloat. They need each other.

Small local bank closes down (worst case) or if they are lucky, get taken over by big bank. Ma and Pa try to go in, but need to put down 20-30pts (according to a banker in discussion the other night) on what they need, which they do not have.

The vicious cycle has begun.

<span style="color: #000066">Yep, and it is a cycle, that's the point, an expected cycle, and when the Federal powers begin to address it, by putting some of their weight into the situation, the right will be screaming about nationalization, and socialism, and communism, you can bet. </span>

This is why pointing out bank closings, big or small, is not muddying up the waters.

<span style="color: #000066">Well, it is, IMO since there are trends when we are recovering from the most critical financial disaster in history, and most reasonable people would expect these failures, and a time of rising unemployment, but those who have done their homework, and don't have a political agenda, would also know that most things, right now, would likely have been far, far worse, without the steps that have been taken, and they would also realize that this nest few years are going to be one step forward, and two steps back, for a while, anyway.

We are still doing far better than we were, as most of the economic figures, prove, and deny it, or muddy it up, all you may. Jobs are the last thing to recover. The most major fact, is that we have avoided Bush's Depression, predicted to last over a decade. I'd say, all and all, thing are improving. </span>


Sure the big boys are most visible, and their failing will provide immediate devastation upon their collapse. Getting them "safe" is good.

<span style="color: #000066">Yep, distasteful, infuriating, particularly to those who have a p9olitical agenda, and refuse to factor in what might have happened, and what history has taught us about depressions and recessions. But it was a necessary step, which is now being used for political pusposes, by the right, against both Republican and Democratic actions, which in both cases, were necessary and critical to avoiding a depression. </span>


But there's that undercurrent that also needs to be watched out for that is not so visible on the surface, and isn't "big" enough to catch in any news.

<span style="color: #000066">Yep, well, that's always there, right? The corporate fascist crooks are always schelpping about, doing their greedy dirty work, behind the scenes, that's why we need reform, away from the Republican Ideology, that the free market solves everything, that corporations will regulate themselves, for the common good, and do what is right, but as we have seen,that Republican ideology was wrong, as Greenspan admitted, because they were so damn greedy, and corrupt, and morally irresponsible, that they actually cut their own thoats, and all of ours as well...hence, we need a crack down, and bet your life, Republicans will be the very ones out there screaming about it when it comes, and it IS coming. </span>
But as we continue on the "recovery path", and we say "well gee, the economy is looking better, but jobs are still lacking"... even beyond that usual lag period, <span style="color: #000066">Well, we haven't come near the end of the lag period yet, and in fact, those who are bitching right now, are out of touch, refusing to acknowledge where we might have been right now, if government had done NOTHING. That's why I say, the right, has a lot of nerve, bitching about job losses, when we faced the worst depression in history, just over a year ago.

Only an idiot would have expected jobs to recover this soon, gioven the threat we face little more than a year ago, or just an angry partisan blowhard, who is still trying to avoid facing the fact that the impending Bush depression, grew, and expanded, on Bush's watch, as he, AND his appointees, IGNORED the warnings, for political purposes. Those who would think that we're not going to continue to leak jobs, until things are stable enough, to start to build again, are just plain stupid, IMO.

AND, also, they seem to be too stupid to realize that clean, renewable energy, is the path to take toward building our manufacturing base back up, not Drill Baby Drill, which is why, China is, and has been, gearing up to try to corner the global clean energy market, and why, with their own technology and manufacturing, AND ....<span style='font-size: 20pt'>once again...</span>, we can see how Republican anti-clean, renewable energy policies, and their protection of the greedy oil corporations, who overcharge us to the hilt, and helped bring down a many a family with their ridiculous price gougeing, compliments Bushy and Cheney, have hurt us for quite some time now. Since Reagan, to be exact.

Hence, JOBS ARE ALWAYS THE LAST SEGMENT OF THE ECONOMY TO RECOVER. AND, both Energy research and development, and rebuilding our infrastructure, (which was woefully neglected by the last administration whle he F-ed around in the Middle East) are taking, and should, take the forefront, in this new Democratic push for energy, reform, and as well, health reform, which is dreaining American citizens tremendously, and has been doing so for over a decade...and the beloved "Nation Building" and "Spreading Democracy" around to the illiterate, tribesmen, was the worst thing we could have gotten stuck in, as was Reagan's stupidty, also for the corporate thieves, when he decided that throwing all the solar palels that Carter put in, out on the White House Lawn would send the right message.</span>
/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/crazy.gif

this will be why.


<span style="color: #000066">Yep, what I just wrote! </span> /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif



And if we're not careful, it will lead us right back to square one.

Sack

</div></div>

<span style="color: #000066">Well, little eyore, you had better get behind the Democratic ideology, then because if we don't get it right this time, believe me, no REPUBLICAN Administration, is going to do it, and we can see that right now, in their votes, trying to block health care reform, and above all, prevent universal health care, for all, so that we can compete with other countries, who have already figured out, that it is the only way a country can have a healthy, productive society, which is an economic plus,. AND NOW.... we're seeing that the military is saying that our youth is too stupid and too fat, too join!

So what is the Republican response to that????
They are screaming about socialism, and communism, while the government points out that given our health costs from obesity, and the warnings from the military, we MUST address the issue of obesity in this country, and put education back on the forefront, of our spending, unlike Bush, who cut the funds for education.

You really should try to remove your partisan ideology long enough to focus on what really is critical, and what really isn't in our interests.

Wasting time and votes on those who prefer business as usual, the status quo, for the corporate thieves, and the oh so FREE market, without regulatory limits, is really a tragedy, IMO. Time to take action against the "Drill baby drill" idiots.</span>

Gayle in MD
11-05-2009, 09:22 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: wolfdancer</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Gayle, haven't you heard....the economy was in great shape until the " moron" took over.....Bush good, Obama Bad!
That's what you are dealing with here.


<span style="color: #000066">LOL, so true. </span>
You might as well beat your head against a brick wall then to try to discuss the economy here with the local Economists.
At least when you stop beating you head it no longer hurts, but the pain in the a** from dealing with these we know everything people, is continuous, and ever increasing.


<span style="color: #000066">Well, that's why I have reduced them down to just two or three, and thrown the juvenile idiots out. I get to fire any of the idiots, anytime I wish, cause I have an ignore button. Best thing on this site. </span> /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

I was a nice church going Catholic "Boy" when I signed on here a few years ago, now I am thinking of burning down the church, am a raging alcoholic that flips off nuns, people with walkers, and blind people if they delay me in traffic by crossing the street in front of me. I tell mothers their babies are ugly, and advise them to have their tubes tied so they can't reproduce, and that's just some of the nice things that I do. Stop the dialogue with them before you too become afflicted. You might even catch the know it all syndrome from them....it is spreading rapidly over there.....I think lww introduced the disease here and there is no known cure

<span style="color: #000066">BWA HA HA HA, that's got to be one of your funniest! Again, you've got me ROTFLMAO! </span>

As for my own economic espertise... I know as much about Milton Friedman theories as I know about Milton Bradley's.
I just finished reading Adam Smith's theories, only to discover that since they were written in 1776, they are out of date.
I've been trying now for 20 years to get a grasp on that modern day Economist GHB, who wrote the "Read my lips, no new taxes, trickle down" theory....I'm still waiting for that windfall to hit me. It's kind of like a waterfall at the top end, and by the time it reaches you 5 miles away, it is a trickle, and the water is now polluted. </div></div>


<span style="color: #000066">Excellent analogy, friend...yep, but Bush one wasn't near as damaging as Reagan, IMO, and of course, Bush two was the worst in history. He's now a motivational speaker! LMAO!!!! My stiduies point to that organization as just one big scam, and we know, Little Bushy could never resist a good scam...the speaker list was a REpublican who's who!

LMAO!!! too funny!</span>

Bobbyrx
11-05-2009, 11:22 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Remember Bobbyrx, who argued with me for two weeks when I posted that we were in a recession? </div></div> That was about the same time you were extolling the virtues of John Edwards /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif

wolfdancer
11-05-2009, 11:26 AM
George Walker Bush.....is now a motivational speaker???? WTF.
Talk about taking the honor out of honorariums.
Honorariums is just a cutesy name for being paid the kickbacks, that you "earned" while in office, but couldn't accept them for fear that the sweetheart deals that you made would be discovered.
In Bush's case , they probably give him the $$ up front, then pray that he will call in sick. Who could sit and listen to that Moron, when you no longer have to now that he is an "ex-"

wolfdancer
11-05-2009, 11:36 AM
Gee, I must have my own recollection problems. I was informed that it is not Kosher for me to be posting in what could be considered support, of you. This from someone who tends to reply to every insulting post that is directed towards you, expressing his admiration for that poster, and then throws in a few more insults of his own. And here I am posting again, replying to you.
I told him to complain to the admin, propriety preventing me from advising him what to do with his cue stick, after first chalking up. We wouldn't want any miscues /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif

Gayle in MD
11-05-2009, 11:37 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: wolfdancer</div><div class="ubbcode-body">George Walker Bush.....is now a motivational speaker???? WTF.
Talk about taking the honor out of honorariums.
Honorariums is just a cutesy name for being paid the kickbacks, that you "earned" while in office, but couldn't accept them for fear that the sweetheart deals that you made would be discovered.
In Bush's case , they probably give him the $$ up front, then pray that he will call in sick. Who could sit and listen to that Moron, when you no longer have to now that he is an "ex-" </div></div>


<span style="color: #000066">Well, we already know he was getting money from Terrorist financiers, for decades...in bed with the bin Ladens, and the Saudis? Imagine, if a Demoratic had the history of the Bush cartel! </span>

Gayle in MD
11-05-2009, 11:44 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Bobbyrx</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Remember Bobbyrx, who argued with me for two weeks when I posted that we were in a recession? </div></div> That was about the same time you were extolling the virtues of John Edwards /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif </div></div>

<span style="color: #000066">More of your Bs, Bobby....I never was for Edwards, just stated that he made an honest living as an attorney, and was being slandered for it, by someone here who scams unsuspecting naive' people on a regular basis... </span>

/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif

<span style="color: #000066">I think, I wrote the first post on here, bashing him for his behavior, too. I have alwasy admired his wife, and still do. As for Edwards, he's shown all of us what a POS he is for what he did to his wife and family...much like W., whose wife nearly left him over his drug and alcohol abuse, and other less reported sins against his marriage, but then, like father like son, and no question, his father had a mistress in Virginia for decades, which he refused to answer questions about...just as Bush Jr., refused to answer about his cocaine addiction, and his DWI....but then, the documentation came out, and he had to admit to his lies about the DWI... </span>

Bobbyrx
11-05-2009, 11:52 AM
easy, didn't you see the /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif

wolfdancer
11-05-2009, 11:58 AM
Look a the big fuss they made over his past relationship with Ayers, and to the best of my Knowledge, Prof. Ayers did not commandeer any airplanes and fly them into skyscrapers, at least not in the USA, as say a family member of GW's business partner planned and carried out....But he did contribute $200 to Obama's 2001 campaign. "off with their heads!!"
What are the odds of a sitting President having at least tenuous links to a terrorist? Or for his Grandaddy, Precott having more then tenuous links .....
This explains it all:
Family business (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IHjaW9sXl7s)

Gayle in MD
11-05-2009, 12:03 PM
/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif

hey, no playing the anthem of the southern white boys!

wolfdancer
11-05-2009, 12:07 PM
Hey, this is the neatest video....look at that kid perform at age 4
!!!! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=57sfRo26fAc&feature=related)

Gayle in MD
11-05-2009, 12:12 PM
What a little doll! Too cute.