"Hurricane" May Delay Jobs Report.....

[Jungle Shift Jet]

Originally Posted by WestCoastOffensive

Why bother with knee-jerk jerks that read knee-jerk jerknalism?

How much knee could a knee-jerk off,
if a knee-jerk could jerk knee?

[HessStation]

Originally Posted by Jungle Shift Jet

I'll make it short and simple for you, Hessian

There's nothing educated about supporting Ronpaulstiltskin or his crackpot gimcrackery.

Run far away from all those dopes you know "who would agree with him" or you'll end up like them too.

The End.

But I agree with a lot of what Paul has to say...as far as his basic Foreign Policy what's so wrong about continuing to build defense while nonintervention?

[Jungle Shift Jet]

Originally Posted by HessStation

But I agree with a lot of what Paul has to say...as far as his basic Foreign Policy what's so wrong about continuing to build defense while nonintervention?

He ain't "building" jacksh!t Jack.

http://spectator.org/archives/2011/0...-neoliberal-re

[HessStation]

Originally Posted by Jungle Shift Jet

He ain't "building" jacksh!t Jack.

http://spectator.org/archives/2011/0...-neoliberal-re

but I'm not a conservative on foreign or social matters.

[AlbanyJet]

"I have determined that the source of this Hurricane Sandy is a Youtube video."

President Barack Obama

[Jungle Shift Jet]

Originally Posted by HessStation

but I'm not a conservative on foreign or social matters.

Then you're no different from the average (D) acolyte then.

(D) is gutting the military and going all in on entitlements.

The vast majority of Conservatives of any degree are intelligent and don't want a OweBowMao 2nd term - they won't waste their vote on hot unelectable 3rd/4th/8th party garbage.
Might as well vote for Sheehan/Barr if you're gonna be spiteful.

The useful idiots will act as usual then continue to decry the things that stay unchanged that they could have effected change on but didn't.

They deserve the parasitic world of B. Hussein but the rest of us don't

[HessStation]

Originally Posted by Jungle Shift Jet

Then you're no different from the average (D) acolyte then.

(D) is gutting the military and going all in on entitlements.

The vast majority of Conservatives of any degree are intelligent and don't want a OweBowMao 2nd term - they won't waste their vote on hot unelectable 3rd/4th/8th party garbage.
Might as well vote for Sheehan/Barr if you're gonna be spiteful.

The useful idiots will act as usual then continue to decry the things that stay unchanged that they could have effected change on but didn't.

They deserve the parasitic world of B. Hussein but the rest of us don't

But I don't agree cutting military defense I just don't agree with our involvement...and I don't agree with any (D) economic policies. What should I do? Who should my guy be? I'm voting Romney and feel most akin to Dr. Paul.

[HessStation]

This forum is awesome btw! Gives me all the reason in the world to maintain my independent/moderate view that both sides are nuts. LOL cheers to you and much respect. All your hearts are in the right place....imo

[PlumberKhan]

Originally Posted by HessStation

But I don't agree cutting military defense I just don't agree with our involvement...and I don't agree with any (D) economic policies. What should I do? Who should my guy be? I'm voting Romney and feel most akin to Dr. Paul.

Don't vote for Obama.

He negotiated with Iran and traded weapons with them.


Sent from my Double-Wide using Semaphore...

[HessStation]

Originally Posted by PlumberKhan

Don't vote for Obama.

He negotiated with Iran and traded weapons with them.


Sent from my Double-Wide using Semaphore...

Just b/c I'm not as informed as some of you doesn't mean you need to get snarky.

[Jungle Shift Jet]

Originally Posted by HessStation

But I don't agree cutting military defense I just don't agree with our involvement...and I don't agree with any (D) economic policies. What should I do? Who should my guy be? I'm voting Romney and feel most akin to Dr. Paul.

I will take your question seriously and respond politely. As an experienced Governor and businessman Romney is not only more than capable to right the sinking ship economically he also has Paul Ryan to ably assist him. That is an almost unfair advantage vs. the opposing ticket who are strictly political idealogues and economically incompetent/reckless as they have an indelible record of said incompetence.

Johnson, Paul or anyone else other than Romney cannot and will not win this election besides Obama so if you don't like Obama's policies you have no other realistic, practical choice to even begin to attempt to change things at the Federal level but selecting Romney and/or (R) Congressmen. As it is undoing the needless, feckless damage of the last 4 years will be difficut enough if the Senate is held by (D). We had the So-called Blue Dog (D) Conservatives who claimed to have economic resposibility to check the radicals but ultimately caved and rolled over...like obedient dogs.

If releected Obama will surely look to that win, however razor's edge narrow as a mandate to continue on the road to full socialism and you can expect attempts at raising taxes, mediocre economic growth at best with the healthcare disaster (which has already jacked up premiums the last few years running) providing a inferior level of rationed care. Whatever cant be legislated will be backdoored by executive order.
If the Bush tax cuts expire, that is an immediate tax hike that will also have a negative effect. Furthermore, another Obama term will probably mean at least one SCOTUS appointment that is less like the Ron Paul ideal than more that will provide a majority to perpetuate liberal ideals with NO term limit.
Is that what "principled" voters really want?

We do not have snap elections, coalition governments and the like in America. There is no overwhelming write-in , by crayon or otherwise, tide of a Ron Paulian tertium quid, a 3rd party sentiment as the GOP has depending on your amount of cynicism either adopted or co-opted the TP platform, which despite a media disdain and coverage blackout led to the (D) midterm trouncing. Nothing is more cynical IMO than a purportedly serious candidate such as Johnson, a former Governor no less, advising you to "waste your vote on me".

Ron Paul and his entire platform was very well known and understood by Republican voters. As such, he was rejected by not merely a small margin but a resounding, overwhelming majority-not completely without influence as his economic probity message is endorsed in a general way and this election is focused on economics as it should be. Little if any of Paul's social or defense views are held by the majority of registered (R) - those views as noted are much more akin to (D).

I'll table that discussion for now - it is worth discussing the degree of "involvemen" in global affairs - but anecdotally having been part of a NYC TV panel back in '08 I was struck by how universally unpopular the Dr. was with all of the GOPers on the panel - no one wants another 9/11 or worse brought to us as we are constantly being targeted by irrational people and putting it very mildly the curiously anti-Israel, blame America 1st mentality does not play well even in the predominantly RINO-ish NY/NYC GOP.

Looking to the future, I could see Rand Paul possibly having greater influence on the GOP but some of his votes are indistinguishable from his father's

[HessStation]

Originally Posted by Jungle Shift Jet

I will take your question seriously and respond politely. As an experienced Governor and businessman Romney is not only more than capable to right the sinking ship economically he also has Paul Ryan to ably assist him. That is an almost unfair advantage vs. the opposing ticket who are strictly political idealogues and economically incompetent/reckless.

Johnson, Paul or anyone else other than Romney cannot and will not win this election besides Obama so if you don't like Obama's policies you have no other realistic, practical choice to even begin to attempt to change things at the Federal level but selecting Romney and/or (R) Congressmen. As it is undoing the needless, feckless damage of the last 4 years will be difficut enough if the Senate is held by (D). We had the So-called Blue Dog (D) Conservatives who claimed to have economic resposibility to check the radicals but ultimately caved and rolled over...like obedient dogs.

If releected Obama will surely look to that win, however razor's edge narrow as a mandate to continue on the road to full socialism and you can expect attempts at raising taxes, mediocre economic growth at best with the healthcare disaster (which has already jacked up premiums the last few years running) providing a inferior level of rationed care. Whatever cant be legislated will be backdoored by executive order.
If the Bush tax cuts expire, that is an immediate tax hike that will also have a negative effect. Furthermore, another Obama term will probably mean at least one SCOTUS appointment that is less like the Ron Paul ideal than more that will provide a majority to perpetuate liberal ideals.
Is that what "principled" voters really want?

We do not have snap elections, coalition governments and the like in America. There is no overwhelming write-in , by crayon or otherwise, tide of a Ron Paulian tertium quid, a 3rd party sentiment as the GOP has depending on your amount of cynicism either adopted or co-opted the TP platform, which despite a media disdain and coverage blackout led to the (D) midterm trouncing. Nothing is more cynical IMO than a purportedly serious candidate such as Johnson, a former Governor no less, advising you to "waste your vote on me".

Ron Paul and his entire platform was very well known and understood by Republican voters. As such, he was rejected by not merely a small margin but a resounding, overwhelming majority-not completely without influence as his economic probity concept is endorsed in a general way and this election is focused on economics as it should be. Little if any of Paul's social or defense views are held by the majority of registered (R) - those views as noted are much more akin to (D).

I'll table that discussion for now but anecdotally having been part of a NYC TV panel back in '08 I was struck by how universally unpopular the Dr. was with all of the GOPers on the panel - no one wants another 9/11 or worse brought to us as we are constantly being targeted by irrational people and putting it very mildly the curiously anti-Israel, blame America 1st mentality does not play well even in the predominantly RINO-ish NY/NYC GOP.

Looking to the future, I could see Rand Paul possibly having greater influence on the GOP but some of his votes are indistinguishable from his father's

Although I put a little bit a damsel in distress flavor to it I was asking for a serious answer and appreciate your answer/opinion. But this is all why I'm voting for Romney as previously stated. I actually like Romney specifically on his economic platform, I also believe him to be a social moderate and think/hope he would institute a more qualified Secretary of State, preferably somebody with a strong military background. I'm all on board with Romney. Also a big fan of Ron Paul though. Sure maybe a bit more theoretically than in practicality.

[WestCoastOffensive]

Originally Posted by Jungle Shift Jet

. That is an almost unfair advantage vs. the opposing ticket who are strictly political idealogues and economically incompetent/reckless as they have an indelible record of said incompetence.


If releected Obama will surely look to that win, however razor's edge narrow as a mandate to continue on the road to full socialism and you can expect attempts at raising taxes, mediocre economic growth at best with the healthcare disaster (which has already jacked up premiums the last few years running) providing a inferior level of rationed care. Whatever cant be legislated will be backdoored by executive order.

If the Bush tax cuts expire, that is an immediate tax hike that will also have a negative effect. Furthermore, another Obama term will probably mean at least one SCOTUS appointment that is less like the Ron Paul ideal than more that will provide a majority to perpetuate liberal ideals with NO term limit.
Is that what "principled" voters really want?

LOL; the banks and Wall Street "marketed up"* this economic mess; and they ****ed up big time. They left the middle to fend for themselves. The guy currently in charge seems to get that.

Scare tactics to drive the election of a guy that is "economically qualified"? More of the same. Romney is no leader; he's a Wealth Manager.

*As a former CA licensed broker, I have BOXES of collateral material from all kinds of former Big Bank jackbags that "want you to be an instant millionaire".

They knew what was coming; bank on it.

[Jungle Shift Jet]

Originally Posted by WestCoastOffensive

LOL; the banks and Wall Street "marketed up"* this economic mess; and they ****ed up big time. They left the middle to fend for themselves. The guy currently in charge seems to get that.

Scare tactics to drive the election of a guy that is "economically qualified"? More of the same. Romney is no leader; he's a Wealth Manager.

*As a former CA licensed broker, I have BOXES of collateral material from all kinds of former Big Bank jackbags that "want you to be an instant millionaire".

They knew what was coming; bank on it.

Of course "they" had to repackage loser DOA never ever to be paid back subprime CRA loans,
they just didn't know that the strawberry pickers "they" gave no dinero down mortgage loans would cash out their piggybacked HELos so fast....

The guy currently in charge did nothing about Blankfein Fuld Mozilo etc.
Still walkin' the streets while smaller fish are harassed;
Made it easy for the deadbeats to be bigger deadbeats by signin Dodd-Frank;
Then squeezin' Wells Fargo to accede to penalties for stuff THEY dint do....
The "middle" didnt get those loans, nor did they stop paying theirs...

~Then~

The guy currently in charge spent lots o' money on a stimulus that didnt stimulate anything except public sector bank accounts;
Laffed about "shovel-ready" jobs that never existed

An unnecessary "Healthcare" plan;

The guy currently in charge skirted an eternity of US bankruptcy laws to hand ownership of US car companies to the UAW /foreigners and screw share/bond/debt holders...with both of these motorized basket cases still a hairbreadth away from another bankruptcy with US taxpayers on the hook for billyuns

Then the guy in charge just destabilised 1/2 the ME without Congreshunal or UN or anyones approval, for some o' his fellow radical Muslims and kept 4 Americans not so safe, I mean dead. There are Libyan SAMs in places like Mali and Iraq's WMDs in Syria...teh Muslim in Chief attacks Islamic extremism like the Sorcerer's Apprentice...makes it 100x worse...but he got bin LAden! but was afraid to desecrate His sacred dead body by showin' it...if you're gonna be capo di tutti musulmani tehn you gotta show the dead guy with his eye shot out!
(apologies to Ralphie)

All the while with months of millions of unemployed Americans and lousy GDP growth.

Not to mention aiding and abetting a ridiculous unAmerican atmosphere of race and class warfare...along with his own junior SA, the Occufilth

So.... when is the guy in charge actually gonna *be* in charge of stuff?

Don't get me started on the "guy in charge"!

[sg3]

Thank you, Rush..


Never mind...you're absolutely right again


DAMN that Obama for causing the financial collapse and lost jobs and homes that reached it's bottom in December 2008 and has slowly and steadily been improving since...

Damn you socialist muslim commie kenyan...damn you for messing up that economic boom Bush left us in

Sent from my SGH-T999 using Tapatalk 2

[WestCoastOffensive]

Originally Posted by Jungle Shift Jet

Of course "they" had to repackage loser DOA never ever to be paid back subprime CRA loans,
they just didn't know that the strawberry pickers "they" gave no dinero down mortgage loans would cash out their piggybacked HELos so fast....

The guy currently in charge did nothing about Blankfein Fuld Mozilo etc.
Still walkin' the streets while smaller fish are harassed;
Made it easy for the deadbeats to be bigger deadbeats by signin Dodd-Frank;
Then squeezin' Wells Fargo to accede to penalties for stuff THEY dint do....
The "middle" didnt get those loans, nor did they stop paying theirs...

~Then~

The guy currently in charge spent lots o' money on a stimulus that didnt stimulate anything except public sector bank accounts;
Laffed about "shovel-ready" jobs that never existed

An unnecessary "Healthcare" plan;

The guy currently in charge skirted an eternity of US bankruptcy laws to hand ownership of US car companies to the UAW /foreigners and screw share/bond/debt holders...with both of these motorized basket cases still a hairbreadth away from another bankruptcy with US taxpayers on the hook for billyuns

Then the guy in charge just destabilised 1/2 the ME without Congreshunal or UN or anyones approval, for some o' his fellow radical Muslims and kept 4 Americans not so safe, I mean dead. There are Libyan SAMs in places like Mali and Iraq's WMDs in Syria...teh Muslim in Chief attacks Islamic extremism like the Sorcerer's Apprentice...makes it 100x worse...but he got bin LAden! but was afraid to desecrate His sacred dead body by showin' it...if you're gonna be capo di tutti musulmani tehn you gotta show the dead guy with his eye shot out!
(apologies to Ralphie)

All the while with months of millions of unemployed Americans and lousy GDP growth.

Not to mention aiding and abetting a ridiculous unAmerican atmosphere of race and class warfare...along with his own junior SA, the Occufilth

So.... when is the guy in charge actually gonna *be* in charge of stuff?

Don't get me started on the "guy in charge"!

Ironic that you lead off with CRA, because that was the "government approval" needed for Wall Street as Glass Steagall was shattered. The CRA loans were almost laboratories for the banks; that's where they learned (not financial engineering) but, that they were free to do as they pleased. Greenspan thought it good for our economy; only the commie libs were up in arms about the pending balloon (of 2008).

[Jungle Shift Jet]

Originally Posted by sg3

Thank you, Rush..


Never mind...you're absolutely right again


DAMN that Obama for causing the financial collapse and lost jobs and homes that reached it's bottom in December 2008 and has slowly and steadily been improving since...

Damn you socialist muslim commie kenyan...damn you for messing up that economic boom Bush left us in

Sent from my SGH-T999 using Tapatalk 2

Lemme guess Skippy G...You is a...Trust fund baby? Choomunity Organizer? Or overall Know-Nothing.

Anyone say B. Hussein CAUSED the (D) bankers repackaging of bad loans they were forced to give to deadbeat (D) constituents by (D) lawmakers
guaranteed by (D)-run GSEs Cloward-Piven style financial collapse?

I said he made things WORSE. Let me know how all has been made better since OweBowMao parted the seas. Take your time.

[WestCoastOffensive]

LOL on the Zimmy!

[Jungle Shift Jet]

Originally Posted by WestCoastOffensive

Ironic that you lead off with CRA, because that was the "government approval" needed for Wall Street as Glass Steagall was shattered. The CRA loans were almost laboratories for the banks; that's where they learned (not financial engineering) but, that they were free to do as they pleased. Greenspan thought it good for our economy; only the commie libs were up in arms about the pending balloon (of 2008).

No no no mah man. CRA was Carter's (D) Congress deal.

"You banks theah, no moah redlinin'! The poah must have whut
they can-NOT afford, because it is un, I say, UN-dignified foah
them to live in apahtments"

Repackaging started in the very end of GHWB and skyrocketed under Clintoon. Why didnt Bubba stop it.
Glass-Steagall, you wouldn't know from the Phil-Pitt Steagles.
Nothing to do with the repackaging and de facto ended with
Greenspan in 87 with the Citi-Travelers deal long before the collapse.

Reed: http://www.tomwoods.com/blog/repeal-...th-the-crisis/

'an
http://www.cpcsarnialambton.ca/defau...135&menuID=135

I was just thinking, it was/is really bad to do all of my banking insurin' and investing in the same place.Bad that the working / middle class had
access to financial paper/investments that not too long before were unavailable to them without huge outlays and load fees. Bad that the vaunted "middle" actually became stockholders. It exposed them to too much risk and an exercise of free will. 2% interest in savings with nothing but home equity increasing at 3% YOY shouldve been good enuf for the masses. BAD BAD BAD!!!!!

Oh..an' only Commie Libs up in arms about a balloon?



Barney Fwank: Fweddie Mac is not in a Cwisis

[sg3]

I give up Rush...youve got it all figured out.

No sense wasting time on you.

And the good news
After next Tuesday you'll have FOUR MORE YEARS to bay at the moon like a crazed mongoloid and show everybody what an ignorant wild eyed fascist nutjob you are



Sent from my SGH-T999 using Tapatalk 2