|Comment count is 40|
|Caminante Nocturno - 2008-09-08 |
I love how the only way a Republican ticket can think of selling itself is by claiming that they opposes their own party, and that the only way they can do that is by lying.
HURF BLURF DUH
So Billy, you're now admitting that the last eight years of Republican leadership have been corrupt? So corrupt and criminal that the Republican nominee for President has NO CHOICE but to march right alongside the Democrats in demanding change?
How any Republican can even think about this campaign without their head spinning around fast enough to cause wind burns is beyond me.
Billy was anti-Bush before he assumed the mantle of Right Wing Troll.
These last eight years of Republican leadership have been embarrassing, but not corrupt. We've expanded government's role instead of reducing it, increased spending, and refused to close the border or repeal affirmative action when we had the chance. When I say embarrassing, I mean it.
HOWEVER, I started taking Bush's side after I started reading about the international efforts with Iraq, and how the entire world agreed with the multinational intelligence reports (many of which are still considered legitimate) and David Kay's reports about how Saddam was way more dangerous than we ever imagined. Also, after realizing that Ted Kennedy wrote "No Child Left Behind," and how our unemployment rates are better now than through half of the "booming" 90's, I understand that Bush's low approval rating has more to do with constant media harassment and denial of detail, instead of actual ineptitude.
Republicans have nothing to be ashamed of.
By "nothing to be ashamed of," I mean, "no serious corruption to be ashamed of."
By half of the 90s, you mean the first half after the first bush tanked the economy?
How about all the dick sucking your anti-gay idols do?
Abrhamof? Forgot him already?
You're such an idiotic little troll, it's sad how much you delude yourself
You're right, SolRo! Bush was definitely behind the Savings and Loan Crisis and all the imprudent lending that caused it. He also was responsible for the Democratically controlled congress (if I remember correctly) passing legislation to keep troubled savings and loan associations from being detected, which made the crisis even worse.
I'm so glad you're here to point these things out.
Also, President Clinton personally caused the dot-com crash.
By the way, SolRo, a scandal occurs when Jefferson gets caught with bribery money in his freezer, not when someone turns out to be gay. A man turning out to be gay doesn't specify corruption in office, because it's not like he's had the Gaystapo forcing him to make laws that threaten churches with lawsuits or losing tax-free status if they don't marry queers. This is the opposite of finding cash in a freezer, which indicates that someone hasn't been doing their job right because of their problems.
Wait, Billy, you're saying Obama's goal is to change the Democratic party? The one which has had no power and been the underdog for the last eight years? Well shit, maybe Ralph Nader should run on a "change the green party" platform
You can't possibly be telling me that one of Obama's "big selling points" isn't that he's an "outsider."
I envy you billy, I wish I was so amazingly vacuous and retarded that I could filter out and forget all the corrupt shit the republicans have done to this country in the last 8 years.
So... you're going on the offensive now because I totally clobbered you with those two responses above. And now you're calling names, while making unspecific references. Typical!
Here's a partial list, ends at 2005, dumbass.
You couldn't clobber a comatose premie baby
Ohh, and this one
FIVE pages worth of republican pedos alone, in the past 10 years!
Thanks for the link that doesn't work... from SALON??? You faggot.
And what're you trying to prove, anyway? Any kid could pull up a similar list for democrat offenders.
I give you a well cited, dated website filled with dozens of pages of you corrupt pig fuckers from the past 10 years alone, and the best you can do is an uncited website listing the past 30 years worth of dem crime, which only adds up to 2 pages max.
Good job proving your own stupidity and your party's corruption.
It wasn't the best I could do. It was the first thing I saw, and even YOU can agree that it was half-assed. So what would a REAL one look like?
And by the way, this volley clearly illuminates your "logic."
"If some people commit scandals in the party that most closely endorses your values, then you must abandon your values and vote for the other party. I would. I am SolRo."
Billy, Billy, the point of trolling is to get people to write a lot in response to you writing little. You've got it backwards here.
I just made SolRo look like an idiot. Don't ruin this for me!
I guess the immigrants are fucking up the statistics or something.
LABOR FORCE.......EMPLOYED......UNEMPLOYED...... NEMP RATE
2008 153,937,000 145,661,286 8,275,714 5.4%
2007 153,167,750 146,093,917 7,073,833 4.6%
2006 151,427,583 144,427,000 7,000,583 4.6%
2005 149,297,833 141,707,250 7,590,583 5.1%
2004 147,401,000 139,252,000 8,149,000 5.5%
2003 146,510,000 137,736,000 8,774,000 6.0%
2002 144,863,000 136,485,000 8,378,000 5.8%
2001 143,734,000 136,933,000 6,801,000 4.7%
2000 142,583,000 136,891,000 5,692,000 4.0%
1999 139,368,000 133,488,000 5,880,000 4.2%
1998 137,673,000 131,463,000 6,210,000 4.5%
1997 136,297,000 129,558,000 6,739,000 4.9%
1996 133,943,000 126,708,000 7,236,000 5.4%
1995 132,304,000 124,900,000 7,404,000 5.6%
1994 131,056,000 123,060,000 7,996,000 6.1%
1993 129,200,000 120,259,000 8,940,000 6.9%
1992 128,105,000 118,492,000 9,613,000 7.5%
1991 126,346,000 117,718,000 8,628,000 6.8%
1990 125,840,000 118,793,000 7,047,000 5.6%
1989 123,869,000 117,342,000 6,528,000 5.3%
1988 121,669,000 114,968,000 6,701,000 5.5%
1987 119,865,000 112,440,000 7,425,000 6.2%
1986 117,834,000 109,597,000 8,237,000 7.0%
1985 115,462,000 107,150,000 8,312,000 7.2%
1984 113,544,000 105,005,000 8,539,000 7.5%
1983 111,551,000 100,834,000 10,717,000 9.6%
1982 110,204,000 99,526,000 10,678,000 9.7%
1981 108,670,000 100,397,000 8,273,000 7.6%
1980 106,940,000 99,303,000 7,637,000 7.1%
***NOTE UNEMP IN REAGAN TO BUSH YEARS***
POVERTY IN THE
• In 2007, 37.3 million people were
in poverty, up from 36.5 million in
• Poverty rates in 2007 were statisti-
cally unchanged for non-Hispanic
Whites (8.2 percent), Blacks (24.5
percent), and Asians (10.2 percent)
from 2006. The poverty rate
increased for Hispanics (21.5 per-
cent in 2007, up from 20.6 percent
• The poverty rate in 2007 was
lower than in 1959, the first year
for which poverty estimates are
available (Figure 3), while statisti-
cally higher than the most recent
trough in 2000 (11.3 percent).
• The poverty rate increased for chil-
dren under 18 years old (18.0 per-
cent in 2007, up from 17.4 percent
in 2006), while it remained statisti-
cally unchanged for people 18 to
64 years old (10.9 percent) and
people 65 and over (9.7 percent).23
Race and Hispanic Origin
At 8.2 percent, the 2007 poverty rate
for non-Hispanic Whites was lower
than the rate for Blacks and Asians—
24.5 percent and 10.2 percent,
respectively (Table 3). For all three of
these groups, the number and the
percentage in poverty were statisti-
cally unchanged between 2006 and
2007. In 2007, non-Hispanic Whites
accounted for 43.0 percent of people
in poverty while representing 65.8
percent of the total population.
Among Hispanics, 21.5 percent (9.9
million) were in poverty in 2007,
higher than the 20.6 percent (9.2 mil-
lion) in 2006.
In 2007, both the poverty rate and
the number in poverty increased for
children under 18 years old (18.0 per-
cent and 13.3 million in 2007, up
from 17.4 percent and 12.8 million in
"Poverty rose in the recession of the 1990s and for a few years during the weak recovery that followed. But then ensued a period of lasting, steep declines in poverty rates. Median income follows a similar pattern, with particularly sizable gains for African American households.
These patterns appeared to repeat themselves through the 2001 recession and jobless recovery. But instead of reversing course, the trends essentially stagnated through last year, which represented the last opportunity for improvements in this recovery. Had the incomes of middle-class households continued to rise at the rate that prevailed over the 1990s, their income would have been ,600 higher in 2007 compared to 2000, instead of 0 lower."
-Economic Policy Institute \ Census Bureau
And stop picking on SolRo. It's a statement on your feelings of inadequacy that you would choose to pick on the weakest possible link in the chain of facts that refute everything you've ever said.
Baleen, I don't disagree with anything you've copied here. You forgot to mention all the market corrections and crises we've had during these periods, though, and how they had little to do with policy, and how they all fell during Republican leadership. And yes, immigrants are contributing to all of this crap.
You know what I just realized, Baleen? You're completely right. If we'd just had higher taxes and more regulations during those serious market crashes, we would've recovered even faster, since giving people less reason to invest always helps the market. Thanks so much for letting me realize this.
Economics for Republicans: The numbers don't mean anything, except where they make republicans look good, and government can't affect the economy unless it's a republican law improving it or democratic law making things worse.
If things get worse during a democratic period, it's their fault, but if they get better, it was becasue of the republican government years earlier. If things get worse during a republican period, it's the fault of what the democrats did years earlier, and if they get better it's thanks to the government right now.
You fucking retard.
For christ's sake take this to POEN
What is means is that trickle down economics was a failure. Republicans continue believing in it for some reason.
We've had extremely low taxes and people are poorer, except the top 1%, who's wealth has increased 75%. And the housing market can be controlled and regulated with good policy. Unpatriotic, selfish greed corrupts free markets. Certainly you can see the folly of your blanket economic policy. Capital is fluid, laborers are not.
Sorry, Spit Spingola, but this loses a star for every time I have to hit Page Down.
"Republicans have nothing to be ashamed of." Billy might be the dumbest motherfucker alive today.
|SecretJunk - 2008-09-08 |
Every time I see the McCain logo I get hungry for some oven chips.
|chumbucket - 2008-09-08 |
:19 thumbs up and talk to the hand poses tells me all I need to know about these two
|voodoo_pork - 2008-09-08 |
I keep imagining John McCain's swollen left gland will one day burst and thousands of baby spiders will just pour out.
|Rodents of Unusual Size - 2008-09-08 |
I can't say what I want for McCain as it's illegal.
|StanleyPain - 2008-09-08 |
SUCH A MAVERICK HE DOESN'T EVEN WEAR UNDERWEAR...YEAH...THAT'S RIGHT. FUCK YOU.
|IrishWhiskey - 2008-09-09 |
I think of myself as a fairly cynical person, and yet the blatant lying about Palin's record still manages to catch me off guard. Every statement they made about her is not much short of "1+1=3" and "Canada is a province of Australia".
She was for the Bridge to Nowhere, increased pork barrel spending, is a darling of oil companies, and supports the indicted Ted Stevens.
You can't even call it spin anymore, no semblance of truth remains to be spun.
| Register or login To Post a Comment|