kapkomet

QUOTE (bmags @ Sep 24, 2009 -> 02:20 PM) BAHAHAHAHAHAHA is that what you actually think you are writing when you write : Your hands typing and what you think you are writing are completely different. Where did I say that Glenn Beck and Bachmann should be on trial? I said the EXACT opposite of this. If you think hate speech can't fuel some nasty violence, check out Rwanda. I know you didn't SAY that but what's the next step in saying that "they're responsible" for whoever this f***tard was that killed this guy? That's more or less what you were (perhaps unclearly) perpetuating when you wrote what I repeated.

QUOTE (Rex Kicka** @ Sep 24, 2009 -> 02:15 PM) No it's not. The brand of Reaganism that's being thrown around by the Glenn Becks and neocons of the world is a bastardization of the conservatism that Reagan ever preached. I'm no fan of his domestic policy choices - and some of his foreign policy, but Reagan may have said it, but his actions proved the opposite. Case in point, his tax hikes in 1982 and 1987. Case in point, the war on drugs. Case in point, increased defense spending. Hell, didn't he even work to preserve social security? MMMMMMkay. That's taking an inch and running a mile. He did think that government was the problem and was trying to streamline it but repeatedly got knocked down by Congress. And the last time I checked, the executive is EXPLICITLY to defend this country. Unlike the IMPLICIT million other pet projects that the current governent everything is the way crowd (auto, health care, banks, environment controls, social security, medicaid, medicare, war on poverty, etc. etc. etc.)

QUOTE (bmags @ Sep 24, 2009 -> 02:13 PM) kap, i don't understand what you read, if you read, who you argue against, what you are talking about...don't quote me if you are going to place my argument exactly the opposite of what I'm talking about. You said: Then you said that the murder and the quote above very well could be linked. And then I said to you that IMO that's a pretty ignorant statement and a lot of how this hate crap gets thrown around and perpetuated.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Sep 24, 2009 -> 01:38 PM) Somehow there's an argument for universal health care in there... In that picture? Yea. Ewwww.

QUOTE (bmags @ Sep 24, 2009 -> 02:09 PM) The Beckists aren't really republican as much as just completely anti-establishment. Bachmann is republican, and talking about how census workers will kill us all. This part time census worker was just hung with the words "Fed" scrawled on his chest. The conclusion that this somehow might be related is not completely insane. The fact that kapkomet and other republicans seem to take us saying it is personally is. This man/woman who did this is insane. He/She is not rational. He/She is not you. It doesn't mean the hysterical rhetoric from Bachmann/Beck could not have fueled this murder. It doesn't mean I want to throw them in jail for hate speech. But the voices who cry out against these lunatics should not be seen as illegitimate if stuff like this turns out to be true. Yep, Glenn Beck and Michele Baughmann should be on trial for the condoning of this murder. That's pretty much what you all are trying to propgate here, and it's ridiculous. f***tards are f***tards. I seriously doubt these people even know who the hell Beck and Baughmann are.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Sep 24, 2009 -> 10:09 AM) And what the heck is Obama doing addressing the UN? I thought he was too busy solving the health care crisis to do anything else? He's got to keep pimping the cameras. It's all he knows how to do.

QUOTE (Rex Kicka** @ Sep 24, 2009 -> 02:05 PM) Actually its not unprecedented at all. The shallow 2001 recession had the same effect although to a lesser extent. When a lot of the jobs that are lost in a recession never come back (re: manufacturing), this should be expected no? To a MUCH lesser extent. This is a whole different issue then the 2001 recession because it cuts across everything, except government of course, as it's the only solution.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Sep 24, 2009 -> 01:59 PM) You have other solutions to fixing the malpractice problem? Government's the only way. You all have proven your point so much that there is no other solution, even when they're offered.

QUOTE (Rex Kicka** @ Sep 24, 2009 -> 02:03 PM) Perhaps you should tell that to Glenn Beck, Ron Paul, and anybody who actually believed Ronald Reagan when he said "Government is the problem." Again, I'm a radical extremeist! Woot! GMAFB, people. When you say s*** like this, it's quite ignorant.

QUOTE (Cknolls @ Sep 24, 2009 -> 01:45 PM) But, extended unemployment claims rose by a very large 80k. This means that continuing claims would have been 80k worse except those unemployed people's normal unemployment benefits ran out. They are now no longer counted as continuing claims. In addition the exhaustion rate hit a record 52%: 52% of those on unemployment completely ran out of benefits and are on their own. They are no longer counted as unemployed(except for U-6 unemployment rate, which is not what everyone looks at). There's getting ready to be a s***load more of the 9.7% that come off. A s***load. So while we will only see marginal increases in the "9.7%" number that keeps getting spouted, the numbers in reality are MUCH higher because there's so many people that have exhausted benefits. That part is unprecedented. But the government can fix it.

QUOTE (DukeNukeEm @ Sep 24, 2009 -> 01:34 PM) Lately the distinction between the two has become a lot more blurred. Woot! I'm a radical extremeist!

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Sep 24, 2009 -> 11:12 AM) Here's a good read on the malpractice issue that keeps coming up. It tries to cover both sides...yes, there's probably some additional spending due to the fact that we haven't fixed the malpractice system, this author estimates about $60 billion annually (about 3% of health care costs, not something to sneeze at but not anywhere near the difference between us and the rest of the world). But at the same time, there's an awful lot of malpractice going on that could be fixed, is never dealt with because the barriers to doing anything about it have been set so high, and also makes people more sick and more injured. Yes, and we know the only thing that can fix it is the government.

QUOTE (KipWellsFan @ Sep 23, 2009 -> 10:29 PM) What Khamenei think isn't secondary. And he's not going to let Achey keep spouting that s*** over and over for years if he didn't want it out there.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Sep 23, 2009 -> 09:13 PM) Had John McCain been elected this would have been his official policy towards Russia. Well then obviously you and Balta both are Glenn Beck worshipers.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Sep 23, 2009 -> 04:23 PM) "Suddenly" my big white hairy butt - I always ask sources for something like that, and always question when the source is a highly biased site with no actual quotes of the word or bill at hand. Which is why I appreciated the Fact Check site as being a bit better, and responded to that. Ewwww.

QUOTE (bmags @ Sep 23, 2009 -> 02:57 PM) yes. I am a rain God. IIRC, you're pretty far south, right? If I remember my Brazil geography, Sao Paulo is south... I've had conference calls with folks from there, that's about it.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Sep 23, 2009 -> 02:12 PM) I'd rather that be said than the outright lies about not funding it. I mentioned Enron on purpose in my last post. Their strategy of creating shell companies to absorb losses, while being funding with Enron stock is pretty much exactly what the federal government is going to do here. They are self-admittedly creating separate entities outside of the realm of the bill that gets passed here so that they can say they aren't funding abortions, even though the same tax dollars are indeed being shuffled to another place to do exactly that. Kind of like social security. And medicare. And medicaid. Oh wait - the government is altruistic. I keep forgetting that.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Sep 23, 2009 -> 03:17 PM) Democrats never, and I mean NEVER claimed we weren't going to go negative on there for decades And it's not Democrats; its the Social Security Trustees. They've always projected 2015ish as the date to begin tapping the trust fund; it's 2010 because of the banking collapse. Of course, it's also worth noting that they predicted earlier this year we'd tap it briefly in 2010, then it would turn around, and then we'd resume tapping it in 2016. And the trustees report still gives you nearly 30 years before the fund is tapped out in the pessimistic growth scenario (High-growth still makes the fund solvent for all time with zero changes). You're really, really, really off the mark on who you're blaming here and what you're blaming them for. They've stolen that money out of the trust fund long before now. But yes, like usual, you defend the government's actions as altrusitic and noble, protecting us from ourselves and all that bologna.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Sep 23, 2009 -> 01:31 PM) You should know the obvious error here. He's FEARMONGERING!

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Sep 23, 2009 -> 01:33 PM) And here is how abortions are getting funded... http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=PR09I05&f=PR09I05&t=e YOU LIE!!!

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Sep 23, 2009 -> 01:02 PM) Can either of you draw a free-hand 50 state map as good as Franken? I don't think anyone can. That is just a Stuart trait.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Sep 23, 2009 -> 12:14 PM) For real. My parents still take nude photos of me. You are a sick dude.

QUOTE (bmags @ Sep 22, 2009 -> 04:08 PM) on the weeks it's so rainy here I'm on soxtalk more than when I left It could be because you're in a darn rainforest.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Sep 23, 2009 -> 11:32 AM) This is of course exactly the problem. You see absolutely no negatives associated with military action. Or at least you see the negatives as so limited that it's not worth giving up our "Be a d**che" foreign policy. The negatives of any sort of military action are huge. Our media doesn't show the charred civilian corpses that come out when bombings happen, but that doesn't mean the rest of the world doesn't see them. Military action should be the very, very, very last resort. It shouldn't be the default we go to every time we find someone doing something we don't like. We ignored the consequences of military action repeatedly over the last few decades, and every time we've assumed that using the military will be clean, easy, and free of consequences, we've been proven wrong. And you, of course, think that there should never be that carrot (military) hanging over any decision.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Sep 23, 2009 -> 11:20 AM) Let me put it this way. If you believe Obama's green shoots, this would be a good way for the banks to get healthy. If we ended up double dipping, it is going to get ugly. I can't see how we don't double down on the recession. The reason the bond market is "ok" is because the US treasury keeps buying its own bonds with the money that they keep printing. It cannot work that long.