YYYYYYYYYYYYEEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

Views: 35

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

derp
kilgoretrout45 said:
Now the republicans are going to have to kiss Obama's *** to try to make all the changes they promised. They will have a hard time over-riding a veto when they need 2/3's of the House to do it. Then their "change" is going to have to be approved by a liberal Supreme Court. LONG LIVE THE LIBERALS...and ENGLISH SOCCER FOOTBALL.
Well first of all it is Obama who said the Republican's can sit at the back of the bus so they do not need to to come to the middle. Second If they do not fund Obama Care we will not head into a depression. I do not care who is initially to blame. I did not like Bush and I do not like Obama. This election was really based on the economy and not tripling the deficit. Yes the libtards will argue that It was the Republican's that got us into this mess. May I remind everyone that congress is the one who sets spending and has the purse strings, and for the past six years its has been the hands of Prince Harry Reid and Nancy Strech Pelosi who are in bed with Sorros the NEA and the SEIU.

Which brings up the rich topic. You say republicans suck up to the rich, Have you heard of George Sorros one of the richest men in the US. He is a screaming socialist and all of the Dems suck up to him and do what he says.

There was a saying that I heard and I thought it was great. Do you remember Reagan. When he was in office we had Bob Hope and Johnny Cash. Obama is in office now and we have no Hope and no Cash. We need to not fund any of these programs. We need to stop spending and that is what the election was about.



kilgoretrout45 said:
That was not my point. I said if the Republicans want to change the country like they promised, it is going to take compromise. Basically, both sides will have to humble themselves(kiss butt). If the Republicans don't allocate any money, and this recession dips into a depression, we Americans will have B****....I mean Boehner to blame. Especially when the Reps suck up to the rich and screw the middle and lower class. Don't get me wrong, I am not completely happy with Obama either, but this bi-partisan polar garbage is only hurting the American people.

Aegeantyphoon said:
Well quite frankly they wont need to over-ride a veto all they have to do is not fund which is in their power. Remember it is the congress that allocates funds not the white house.



kilgoretrout45 said:
Now the republicans are going to have to kiss Obama's *** to try to make all the changes they promised. They will have a hard time over-riding a veto when they need 2/3's of the House to do it. Then their "change" is going to have to be approved by a liberal Supreme Court. LONG LIVE THE LIBERALS...and ENGLISH SOCCER.
One other point of interest also keep in mind that .42 cents of every dollar is borrowed so these entitlement programs like social security MUST be put on the chopping block in order for the US to get out of this mess.




Aegeantyphoon said:
Well first of all it is Obama who said the Republican's can sit at the back of the bus so they do not need to to come to the middle. Second If they do not fund Obama Care we will not head into a depression. I do not care who is initially to blame. I did not like Bush and I do not like Obama. This election was really based on the economy and not tripling the deficit. Yes the libtards will argue that It was the Republican's that got us into this mess. May I remind everyone that congress is the one who sets spending and has the purse strings, and for the past six years its has been the hands of Prince Harry Reid and Nancy Strech Pelosi who are in bed with Sorros the NEA and the SEIU.

Which brings up the rich topic. You say republicans suck up to the rich, Have you heard of George Sorros one of the richest men in the US. He is a screaming socialist and all of the Dems suck up to him and do what he says.

There was a saying that I heard and I thought it was great. Do you remember Reagan. When he was in office we had Bob Hope and Johnny Cash. Obama is in office now and we have no Hope and no Cash. We need to not fund any of these programs. We need to stop spending and that is what the election was about.



kilgoretrout45 said:
That was not my point. I said if the Republicans want to change the country like they promised, it is going to take compromise. Basically, both sides will have to humble themselves(kiss butt). If the Republicans don't allocate any money, and this recession dips into a depression, we Americans will have B****....I mean Boehner to blame. Especially when the Reps suck up to the rich and screw the middle and lower class. Don't get me wrong, I am not completely happy with Obama either, but this bi-partisan polar garbage is only hurting the American people.

Aegeantyphoon said:
Well quite frankly they wont need to over-ride a veto all they have to do is not fund which is in their power. Remember it is the congress that allocates funds not the white house.



kilgoretrout45 said:
Now the republicans are going to have to kiss Obama's *** to try to make all the changes they promised. They will have a hard time over-riding a veto when they need 2/3's of the House to do it. Then their "change" is going to have to be approved by a liberal Supreme Court. LONG LIVE THE LIBERALS...and ENGLISH SOCCER.
What bipartisanship?


kilgoretrout45 said:
That was not my point. I said if the Republicans want to change the country like they promised, it is going to take compromise. Basically, both sides will have to humble themselves(kiss butt). If the Republicans don't allocate any money, and this recession dips into a depression, we Americans will have B****....I mean Boehner to blame. Especially when the Reps suck up to the rich and screw the middle and lower class. Don't get me wrong, I am not completely happy with Obama either, but this bi-partisan polar garbage is only hurting the American people.

Aegeantyphoon said:
Well quite frankly they wont need to over-ride a veto all they have to do is not fund which is in their power. Remember it is the congress that allocates funds not the white house.



kilgoretrout45 said:
Now the republicans are going to have to kiss Obama's *** to try to make all the changes they promised. They will have a hard time over-riding a veto when they need 2/3's of the House to do it. Then their "change" is going to have to be approved by a liberal Supreme Court. LONG LIVE THE LIBERALS...and ENGLISH SOCCER.
The "trickle down theory" does not work. We had a recession in 1987 that the republicans seem to have forgotten about. Our budget was great when Clinton left office, Bush starts a war on false information, the reps deregulate and we are screwed. Now, are the reps taking us back there again? I don't like politicians in general...Poli=many and ticks=blood sucking insects. The problem is also with the people. Everyone is taking sides and closing off any possibility that other people might have a point. Way too much anger during this decade.

Aegeantyphoon said:
Well first of all it is Obama who said the Republican's can sit at the back of the bus so they do not need to to come to the middle. Second If they do not fund Obama Care we will not head into a depression. I do not care who is initially to blame. I did not like Bush and I do not like Obama. This election was really based on the economy and not tripling the deficit. Yes the libtards will argue that It was the Republican's that got us into this mess. May I remind everyone that congress is the one who sets spending and has the purse strings, and for the past six years its has been the hands of Prince Harry Reid and Nancy Strech Pelosi who are in bed with Sorros the NEA and the SEIU.

Which brings up the rich topic. You say republicans suck up to the rich, Have you heard of George Sorros one of the richest men in the US. He is a screaming socialist and all of the Dems suck up to him and do what he says.

There was a saying that I heard and I thought it was great. Do you remember Reagan. When he was in office we had Bob Hope and Johnny Cash. Obama is in office now and we have no Hope and no Cash. We need to not fund any of these programs. We need to stop spending and that is what the election was about.



kilgoretrout45 said:
That was not my point. I said if the Republicans want to change the country like they promised, it is going to take compromise. Basically, both sides will have to humble themselves(kiss butt). If the Republicans don't allocate any money, and this recession dips into a depression, we Americans will have B****....I mean Boehner to blame. Especially when the Reps suck up to the rich and screw the middle and lower class. Don't get me wrong, I am not completely happy with Obama either, but this bi-partisan polar garbage is only hurting the American people.

Aegeantyphoon said:
Well quite frankly they wont need to over-ride a veto all they have to do is not fund which is in their power. Remember it is the congress that allocates funds not the white house.



kilgoretrout45 said:
Now the republicans are going to have to kiss Obama's *** to try to make all the changes they promised. They will have a hard time over-riding a veto when they need 2/3's of the House to do it. Then their "change" is going to have to be approved by a liberal Supreme Court. LONG LIVE THE LIBERALS...and ENGLISH SOCCER.
Actually, with all due respect, you are quite wrong. Trickle down did work, it was a very prosperous time. And if you remember correctly, when Clinton was in office, he balanced budget with a Republican Congress in play and moved more to the center. They did work together to balance the budget but again it was a republican congress. Now I am NOT a republican I am a conservative constitutionalists. You are right they are all blood suckers. Quite frankly I do not think much will get done but it will be good because they wont raise the taxes. Now take a look at California how in the heck could they elect Brown. I remember when he was governor he did not do a thing I remember the interview and have it on VHS when he said he lied. A bit of trivia on that though is that California elected the youngest Governor and the oldest and they were both Brown. And it is best to deregulate and let the markets take over.






kilgoretrout45 said:
The "trickle down theory" does not work. We had a recession in 1987 that the republicans seem to have forgotten about. Our budget was great when Clinton left office, Bush starts a war on false information, the reps deregulate and we are screwed. Now, are the reps taking us back there again? I don't like politicians in general...Poli=many and ticks=blood sucking insects. The problem is also with the people. Everyone is taking sides and closing off any possibility that other people might have a point. Way too much anger during this decade.

Aegeantyphoon said:
Well first of all it is Obama who said the Republican's can sit at the back of the bus so they do not need to to come to the middle. Second If they do not fund Obama Care we will not head into a depression. I do not care who is initially to blame. I did not like Bush and I do not like Obama. This election was really based on the economy and not tripling the deficit. Yes the libtards will argue that It was the Republican's that got us into this mess. May I remind everyone that congress is the one who sets spending and has the purse strings, and for the past six years its has been the hands of Prince Harry Reid and Nancy Strech Pelosi who are in bed with Sorros the NEA and the SEIU.

Which brings up the rich topic. You say republicans suck up to the rich, Have you heard of George Sorros one of the richest men in the US. He is a screaming socialist and all of the Dems suck up to him and do what he says.

There was a saying that I heard and I thought it was great. Do you remember Reagan. When he was in office we had Bob Hope and Johnny Cash. Obama is in office now and we have no Hope and no Cash. We need to not fund any of these programs. We need to stop spending and that is what the election was about.



kilgoretrout45 said:
That was not my point. I said if the Republicans want to change the country like they promised, it is going to take compromise. Basically, both sides will have to humble themselves(kiss butt). If the Republicans don't allocate any money, and this recession dips into a depression, we Americans will have B****....I mean Boehner to blame. Especially when the Reps suck up to the rich and screw the middle and lower class. Don't get me wrong, I am not completely happy with Obama either, but this bi-partisan polar garbage is only hurting the American people.

Aegeantyphoon said:
Well quite frankly they wont need to over-ride a veto all they have to do is not fund which is in their power. Remember it is the congress that allocates funds not the white house.



kilgoretrout45 said:
Now the republicans are going to have to kiss Obama's *** to try to make all the changes they promised. They will have a hard time over-riding a veto when they need 2/3's of the House to do it. Then their "change" is going to have to be approved by a liberal Supreme Court. LONG LIVE THE LIBERALS...and ENGLISH SOCCER.
We will never agree on the trickle down economics, but there was a recession in 1987. However; you have made some valid points. Congress was Republican during Clinton's term(s) which is an important point. That was the same Congress that said "cut and run" when we were in Somalia. We probably will not get much done. There is a lot of polarization going on right now which is too bad, since this country is really needing some cooperation in D.C. Now, if Poizner had run for Governor he might have had my vote, but as a teacher, I can't let Whitman destroy our union, which is what she would have tried to do. This was a bad election for California since there was really no strong candidates running for Governor. I fail to understand how de-regulation will work. That seems to be one of the major factors that got us into this mess.

Aegeantyphoon said:
Actually, with all due respect, you are quite wrong. Trickle down did work, it was a very prosperous time. And if you remember correctly, when Clinton was in office, he balanced budget with a Republican Congress in play and moved more to the center. They did work together to balance the budget but again it was a republican congress. Now I am NOT a republican I am a conservative constitutionalists. You are right they are all blood suckers. Quite frankly I do not think much will get done but it will be good because they wont raise the taxes. Now take a look at California how in the heck could they elect Brown. I remember when he was governor he did not do a thing I remember the interview and have it on VHS when he said he lied. A bit of trivia on that though is that California elected the youngest Governor and the oldest and they were both Brown. And it is best to deregulate and let the markets take over.






kilgoretrout45 said:
The "trickle down theory" does not work. We had a recession in 1987 that the republicans seem to have forgotten about. Our budget was great when Clinton left office, Bush starts a war on false information, the reps deregulate and we are screwed. Now, are the reps taking us back there again? I don't like politicians in general...Poli=many and ticks=blood sucking insects. The problem is also with the people. Everyone is taking sides and closing off any possibility that other people might have a point. Way too much anger during this decade.

Aegeantyphoon said:
Well first of all it is Obama who said the Republican's can sit at the back of the bus so they do not need to to come to the middle. Second If they do not fund Obama Care we will not head into a depression. I do not care who is initially to blame. I did not like Bush and I do not like Obama. This election was really based on the economy and not tripling the deficit. Yes the libtards will argue that It was the Republican's that got us into this mess. May I remind everyone that congress is the one who sets spending and has the purse strings, and for the past six years its has been the hands of Prince Harry Reid and Nancy Strech Pelosi who are in bed with Sorros the NEA and the SEIU.

Which brings up the rich topic. You say republicans suck up to the rich, Have you heard of George Sorros one of the richest men in the US. He is a screaming socialist and all of the Dems suck up to him and do what he says.

There was a saying that I heard and I thought it was great. Do you remember Reagan. When he was in office we had Bob Hope and Johnny Cash. Obama is in office now and we have no Hope and no Cash. We need to not fund any of these programs. We need to stop spending and that is what the election was about.



kilgoretrout45 said:
That was not my point. I said if the Republicans want to change the country like they promised, it is going to take compromise. Basically, both sides will have to humble themselves(kiss butt). If the Republicans don't allocate any money, and this recession dips into a depression, we Americans will have B****....I mean Boehner to blame. Especially when the Reps suck up to the rich and screw the middle and lower class. Don't get me wrong, I am not completely happy with Obama either, but this bi-partisan polar garbage is only hurting the American people.

Aegeantyphoon said:
Well quite frankly they wont need to over-ride a veto all they have to do is not fund which is in their power. Remember it is the congress that allocates funds not the white house.



kilgoretrout45 said:
Now the republicans are going to have to kiss Obama's *** to try to make all the changes they promised. They will have a hard time over-riding a veto when they need 2/3's of the House to do it. Then their "change" is going to have to be approved by a liberal Supreme Court. LONG LIVE THE LIBERALS...and ENGLISH SOCCER.
Well I will not voice my opinion of the Union. You should be able to figure that out. You are right that we need cooperation. Realistically though I do not see much coming. I do not like either party. We are going to be in this mess until we start to cut and that means salaries, entitlement programs, and government employees. If we want to end up like Greece lets keep spending like drunken sailors. We need these cuts. Just for instance did you know that the California education system gets an automatic 8% increase per year and nothing can be done about it. That means every 7 years the budget doubles. We have to stop that. Also a friend of mine works for DWP. He took a promotion for 95,000/year for one year then went back to his previous position with a lesser rate, the reason, he said is because his pension will a percentage of his highest salary not an average. That is ridiculous. Anyway enough said. I do not want this to get into union anti union babble. No matter what we both lose.


kilgoretrout45 said:
We will never agree on the trickle down economics, but there was a recession in 1987. However; you have made some valid points. Congress was Republican during Clinton's term(s) which is an important point. That was the same Congress that said "cut and run" when we were in Somalia. We probably will not get much done. There is a lot of polarization going on right now which is too bad, since this country is really needing some cooperation in D.C. Now, if Poizner had run for Governor he might have had my vote, but as a teacher, I can't let Whitman destroy our union, which is what she would have tried to do. This was a bad election for California since there was really no strong candidates running for Governor. I fail to understand how de-regulation will work. That seems to be one of the major factors that got us into this mess.

Aegeantyphoon said:
Actually, with all due respect, you are quite wrong. Trickle down did work, it was a very prosperous time. And if you remember correctly, when Clinton was in office, he balanced budget with a Republican Congress in play and moved more to the center. They did work together to balance the budget but again it was a republican congress. Now I am NOT a republican I am a conservative constitutionalists. You are right they are all blood suckers. Quite frankly I do not think much will get done but it will be good because they wont raise the taxes. Now take a look at California how in the heck could they elect Brown. I remember when he was governor he did not do a thing I remember the interview and have it on VHS when he said he lied. A bit of trivia on that though is that California elected the youngest Governor and the oldest and they were both Brown. And it is best to deregulate and let the markets take over.






kilgoretrout45 said:
The "trickle down theory" does not work. We had a recession in 1987 that the republicans seem to have forgotten about. Our budget was great when Clinton left office, Bush starts a war on false information, the reps deregulate and we are screwed. Now, are the reps taking us back there again? I don't like politicians in general...Poli=many and ticks=blood sucking insects. The problem is also with the people. Everyone is taking sides and closing off any possibility that other people might have a point. Way too much anger during this decade.

Aegeantyphoon said:
Well first of all it is Obama who said the Republican's can sit at the back of the bus so they do not need to to come to the middle. Second If they do not fund Obama Care we will not head into a depression. I do not care who is initially to blame. I did not like Bush and I do not like Obama. This election was really based on the economy and not tripling the deficit. Yes the libtards will argue that It was the Republican's that got us into this mess. May I remind everyone that congress is the one who sets spending and has the purse strings, and for the past six years its has been the hands of Prince Harry Reid and Nancy Strech Pelosi who are in bed with Sorros the NEA and the SEIU.

Which brings up the rich topic. You say republicans suck up to the rich, Have you heard of George Sorros one of the richest men in the US. He is a screaming socialist and all of the Dems suck up to him and do what he says.

There was a saying that I heard and I thought it was great. Do you remember Reagan. When he was in office we had Bob Hope and Johnny Cash. Obama is in office now and we have no Hope and no Cash. We need to not fund any of these programs. We need to stop spending and that is what the election was about.



kilgoretrout45 said:
That was not my point. I said if the Republicans want to change the country like they promised, it is going to take compromise. Basically, both sides will have to humble themselves(kiss butt). If the Republicans don't allocate any money, and this recession dips into a depression, we Americans will have B****....I mean Boehner to blame. Especially when the Reps suck up to the rich and screw the middle and lower class. Don't get me wrong, I am not completely happy with Obama either, but this bi-partisan polar garbage is only hurting the American people.

Aegeantyphoon said:
Well quite frankly they wont need to over-ride a veto all they have to do is not fund which is in their power. Remember it is the congress that allocates funds not the white house.



kilgoretrout45 said:
Now the republicans are going to have to kiss Obama's *** to try to make all the changes they promised. They will have a hard time over-riding a veto when they need 2/3's of the House to do it. Then their "change" is going to have to be approved by a liberal Supreme Court. LONG LIVE THE LIBERALS...and ENGLISH SOCCER.
the only way to help the US economy at this point would be to buy american products...the problem being there just aren't many. we got no industry, and a service based economy has nothing else to fall back on.



Aegeantyphoon said:
Well I will not voice my opinion of the Union. You should be able to figure that out. You are right that we need cooperation. Realistically though I do not see much coming. I do not like either party. We are going to be in this mess until we start to cut and that means salaries, entitlement programs, and government employees. If we want to end up like Greece lets keep spending like drunken sailors. We need these cuts. Just for instance did you know that the California education system gets an automatic 8% increase per year and nothing can be done about it. That means every 7 years the budget doubles. We have to stop that. Also a friend of mine works for DWP. He took a promotion for 95,000/year for one year then went back to his previous position with a lesser rate, the reason, he said is because his pension will a percentage of his highest salary not an average. That is ridiculous. Anyway enough said. I do not want this to get into union anti union babble. No matter what we both lose.


kilgoretrout45 said:
We will never agree on the trickle down economics, but there was a recession in 1987. However; you have made some valid points. Congress was Republican during Clinton's term(s) which is an important point. That was the same Congress that said "cut and run" when we were in Somalia. We probably will not get much done. There is a lot of polarization going on right now which is too bad, since this country is really needing some cooperation in D.C. Now, if Poizner had run for Governor he might have had my vote, but as a teacher, I can't let Whitman destroy our union, which is what she would have tried to do. This was a bad election for California since there was really no strong candidates running for Governor. I fail to understand how de-regulation will work. That seems to be one of the major factors that got us into this mess.

Aegeantyphoon said:
Actually, with all due respect, you are quite wrong. Trickle down did work, it was a very prosperous time. And if you remember correctly, when Clinton was in office, he balanced budget with a Republican Congress in play and moved more to the center. They did work together to balance the budget but again it was a republican congress. Now I am NOT a republican I am a conservative constitutionalists. You are right they are all blood suckers. Quite frankly I do not think much will get done but it will be good because they wont raise the taxes. Now take a look at California how in the heck could they elect Brown. I remember when he was governor he did not do a thing I remember the interview and have it on VHS when he said he lied. A bit of trivia on that though is that California elected the youngest Governor and the oldest and they were both Brown. And it is best to deregulate and let the markets take over.






kilgoretrout45 said:
The "trickle down theory" does not work. We had a recession in 1987 that the republicans seem to have forgotten about. Our budget was great when Clinton left office, Bush starts a war on false information, the reps deregulate and we are screwed. Now, are the reps taking us back there again? I don't like politicians in general...Poli=many and ticks=blood sucking insects. The problem is also with the people. Everyone is taking sides and closing off any possibility that other people might have a point. Way too much anger during this decade.

Aegeantyphoon said:
Well first of all it is Obama who said the Republican's can sit at the back of the bus so they do not need to to come to the middle. Second If they do not fund Obama Care we will not head into a depression. I do not care who is initially to blame. I did not like Bush and I do not like Obama. This election was really based on the economy and not tripling the deficit. Yes the libtards will argue that It was the Republican's that got us into this mess. May I remind everyone that congress is the one who sets spending and has the purse strings, and for the past six years its has been the hands of Prince Harry Reid and Nancy Strech Pelosi who are in bed with Sorros the NEA and the SEIU.

Which brings up the rich topic. You say republicans suck up to the rich, Have you heard of George Sorros one of the richest men in the US. He is a screaming socialist and all of the Dems suck up to him and do what he says.

There was a saying that I heard and I thought it was great. Do you remember Reagan. When he was in office we had Bob Hope and Johnny Cash. Obama is in office now and we have no Hope and no Cash. We need to not fund any of these programs. We need to stop spending and that is what the election was about.



kilgoretrout45 said:
That was not my point. I said if the Republicans want to change the country like they promised, it is going to take compromise. Basically, both sides will have to humble themselves(kiss butt). If the Republicans don't allocate any money, and this recession dips into a depression, we Americans will have B****....I mean Boehner to blame. Especially when the Reps suck up to the rich and screw the middle and lower class. Don't get me wrong, I am not completely happy with Obama either, but this bi-partisan polar garbage is only hurting the American people.

Aegeantyphoon said:
Well quite frankly they wont need to over-ride a veto all they have to do is not fund which is in their power. Remember it is the congress that allocates funds not the white house.



kilgoretrout45 said:
Now the republicans are going to have to kiss Obama's *** to try to make all the changes they promised. They will have a hard time over-riding a veto when they need 2/3's of the House to do it. Then their "change" is going to have to be approved by a liberal Supreme Court. LONG LIVE THE LIBERALS...and ENGLISH SOCCER.
That is a nice thought, but again realistically it is the consumer that denotes where the product is going to be manufactured. It is the consumer that demands lower prices and by doing so have forced manufacturing overseas.

To put it perspective, why should I buy an U.S. Made product for 100.00 when I can get a comparable product made elsewhere for much less.

Also you really have to think globally. In order for a company to adequatly compete in the global economy they have to manuacture overseas to reduce costs not only in the manufacturing process but also in the shipping cost. A company also needs to compete against other companies abroad. By manufacturing overseas they can compete. It is the natural progression. Yes there is the argument that employees are not making as much and the working conditions are poor but those issues are being addressed bt the WTO.

Just some ideas and insight that all. Very good pont but I ust do not see that happening.


SPAZMATIK1 said:
the only way to help the US economy at this point would be to buy american products...the problem being there just aren't many. we got no industry, and a service based economy has nothing else to fall back on.



Aegeantyphoon said:
Well I will not voice my opinion of the Union. You should be able to figure that out. You are right that we need cooperation. Realistically though I do not see much coming. I do not like either party. We are going to be in this mess until we start to cut and that means salaries, entitlement programs, and government employees. If we want to end up like Greece lets keep spending like drunken sailors. We need these cuts. Just for instance did you know that the California education system gets an automatic 8% increase per year and nothing can be done about it. That means every 7 years the budget doubles. We have to stop that. Also a friend of mine works for DWP. He took a promotion for 95,000/year for one year then went back to his previous position with a lesser rate, the reason, he said is because his pension will a percentage of his highest salary not an average. That is ridiculous. Anyway enough said. I do not want this to get into union anti union babble. No matter what we both lose.


kilgoretrout45 said:
We will never agree on the trickle down economics, but there was a recession in 1987. However; you have made some valid points. Congress was Republican during Clinton's term(s) which is an important point. That was the same Congress that said "cut and run" when we were in Somalia. We probably will not get much done. There is a lot of polarization going on right now which is too bad, since this country is really needing some cooperation in D.C. Now, if Poizner had run for Governor he might have had my vote, but as a teacher, I can't let Whitman destroy our union, which is what she would have tried to do. This was a bad election for California since there was really no strong candidates running for Governor. I fail to understand how de-regulation will work. That seems to be one of the major factors that got us into this mess.

Aegeantyphoon said:
Actually, with all due respect, you are quite wrong. Trickle down did work, it was a very prosperous time. And if you remember correctly, when Clinton was in office, he balanced budget with a Republican Congress in play and moved more to the center. They did work together to balance the budget but again it was a republican congress. Now I am NOT a republican I am a conservative constitutionalists. You are right they are all blood suckers. Quite frankly I do not think much will get done but it will be good because they wont raise the taxes. Now take a look at California how in the heck could they elect Brown. I remember when he was governor he did not do a thing I remember the interview and have it on VHS when he said he lied. A bit of trivia on that though is that California elected the youngest Governor and the oldest and they were both Brown. And it is best to deregulate and let the markets take over.






kilgoretrout45 said:
The "trickle down theory" does not work. We had a recession in 1987 that the republicans seem to have forgotten about. Our budget was great when Clinton left office, Bush starts a war on false information, the reps deregulate and we are screwed. Now, are the reps taking us back there again? I don't like politicians in general...Poli=many and ticks=blood sucking insects. The problem is also with the people. Everyone is taking sides and closing off any possibility that other people might have a point. Way too much anger during this decade.

Aegeantyphoon said:
Well first of all it is Obama who said the Republican's can sit at the back of the bus so they do not need to to come to the middle. Second If they do not fund Obama Care we will not head into a depression. I do not care who is initially to blame. I did not like Bush and I do not like Obama. This election was really based on the economy and not tripling the deficit. Yes the libtards will argue that It was the Republican's that got us into this mess. May I remind everyone that congress is the one who sets spending and has the purse strings, and for the past six years its has been the hands of Prince Harry Reid and Nancy Strech Pelosi who are in bed with Sorros the NEA and the SEIU.

Which brings up the rich topic. You say republicans suck up to the rich, Have you heard of George Sorros one of the richest men in the US. He is a screaming socialist and all of the Dems suck up to him and do what he says.

There was a saying that I heard and I thought it was great. Do you remember Reagan. When he was in office we had Bob Hope and Johnny Cash. Obama is in office now and we have no Hope and no Cash. We need to not fund any of these programs. We need to stop spending and that is what the election was about.



kilgoretrout45 said:
That was not my point. I said if the Republicans want to change the country like they promised, it is going to take compromise. Basically, both sides will have to humble themselves(kiss butt). If the Republicans don't allocate any money, and this recession dips into a depression, we Americans will have B****....I mean Boehner to blame. Especially when the Reps suck up to the rich and screw the middle and lower class. Don't get me wrong, I am not completely happy with Obama either, but this bi-partisan polar garbage is only hurting the American people.

Aegeantyphoon said:
Well quite frankly they wont need to over-ride a veto all they have to do is not fund which is in their power. Remember it is the congress that allocates funds not the white house.



kilgoretrout45 said:
Now the republicans are going to have to kiss Obama's *** to try to make all the changes they promised. They will have a hard time over-riding a veto when they need 2/3's of the House to do it. Then their "change" is going to have to be approved by a liberal Supreme Court. LONG LIVE THE LIBERALS...and ENGLISH SOCCER.
does anyone here hate both parties?

I don't consider my self a republican in the modern sense, but defiantly in the retro sense, as in Thomas Jefferson/Ron Paul.

Reply to Discussion

RSS

Weezer Bootlegs

SOCIAL

  • Weezer Links

Weezer Mailing List

Music

Loading…

© 2014   Created by Weezer.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service

Offline

Live Video