HomeFairfax General ForumArrest/Ticket SearchWiki newPictures/VideosChatArticlesLinksAbout
Fairfax County General :  Fairfax Underground fairfax underground logo
Welcome to Fairfax Underground, a project site designed to improve communication among residents of Fairfax County, VA. Feel free to post anything Northern Virginia residents would find interesting.
Pages: Previous12All
Current Page: 2 of 2
Re: Fairfax underground liberals are in hopeless denial
Posted by: Gerrymanderer ()
Date: March 17, 2013 03:16PM

Once he launched the wars in an economic downturn and also decreased taxes and increased deficits. Much of this was paid for by increased money supply. Artificially low rates were set to solidify the economy. The interests rates along with the increased money supply caused the housing market to absorb the inflation that was occurring. This created a housing bubble that when burst caused an economic calamity.

There's also the issue of the repealing of the Glass–Steagall Act which divided local from Wall Street banks and home mortgage loans. This was also another corrupt Republican banker buddy initiative that many say assisted in the eventual crisis.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Fairfax underground liberals are in hopeless denial
Posted by: Gerrymanderer ()
Date: March 17, 2013 03:20PM

Stabull Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Gerrymanderer Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Hey dipshit, a budget deficit is a combination
> of
> > spending and decreased revenue. You're blaming
> > Bush's cratering of the economy on the way out
> on
> > Obama. Why aren't you showing after 2010 as
> well
> > when he stabilized the situation and actually
> > brought about more deficit reduction in the
> > shortest period of time ever in the history of
> > this country?
> >
> > You dirty douche bags have no shame.
>
>
> Stablized when? lol!
>
>
> src="http://reason.com/assets/mc/_ATTIC/ngillespie
> 2/deficits.jpg">

Umm, it's 2013 right? That graph looks like the deficit is stabilizing to me. CBO future projections based on Washington dead lock aren't relevant.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Fairfax underground liberals are in hopeless denial
Posted by: More Bullsheet ()
Date: March 17, 2013 03:29PM

Gerrymanderer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Once he launched the wars in an economic downturn
> and also decreased taxes and increased deficits.
> Much of this was paid for by increased money
> supply. Artificially low rates were set to
> solidify the economy. The interests rates along
> with the increased money supply caused the housing
> market to absorb the inflation that was occurring.
> This created a housing bubble that when burst
> caused an economic calamity.
>
> There's also the issue of the repealing of the
> Glass–Steagall Act which divided local from Wall
> Street banks and home mortgage loans. This was
> also another corrupt Republican banker buddy
> initiative that many say assisted in the eventual
> crisis.


More bullshit. Revenues continually increased under Bush. And in fact they are higher now, not lower. The deficits and debt under Obama absolutely dwarf those under Bush. Neither of which much relate to either of them in particular and are due more to other outside circumstances, but if you're going to try to play that bullshit game then I'll shove it right back up your ass where you pulled if from. lol

Glass-Steagall was repealed under Clinton. And don't even try to say that it wasn't pushed by the Dems or I'll just make you look even more ridiculous.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Fairfax underground liberals are in hopeless denial
Posted by: And More Bullsheet ()
Date: March 17, 2013 03:40PM

Gerrymanderer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Stabull Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Gerrymanderer Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > Hey dipshit, a budget deficit is a
> combination
> > of
> > > spending and decreased revenue. You're
> blaming
> > > Bush's cratering of the economy on the way
> out
> > on
> > > Obama. Why aren't you showing after 2010 as
> > well
> > > when he stabilized the situation and actually
> > > brought about more deficit reduction in the
> > > shortest period of time ever in the history
> of
> > > this country?
> > >
> > > You dirty douche bags have no shame.
> >
> >
> > Stablized when? lol!
> >
> >
> > >
> src="http://reason.com/assets/mc/_ATTIC/ngillespie
>
> > 2/deficits.jpg">
>
> Umm, it's 2013 right? That graph looks like the
> deficit is stabilizing to me. CBO future
> projections based on Washington dead lock aren't
> relevant.


Ummmm, continuing to grow at an increasing rate isn't "stablizing." lol

The only reason that it even looks somewhat reasonable is due to the huge spending from TARP and the stimulus which blew out the curve 2009 - 2011. Take that out and the trend line STILL increases substantially vs any historical basis. The "deadlock" as you call it actually makes it look better dumbass. Even using Obama's own budget projections it's still a bad joke.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Fairfax underground liberals are in hopeless denial
Posted by: Gerrymanderer ()
Date: March 17, 2013 03:48PM

Oh, you mean the same stimulus that caused us to stop losing 700,000 jobs a month and reestablished revenue?

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Fairfax underground liberals are in hopeless denial
Posted by: You lose ()
Date: March 17, 2013 04:01PM

Gerrymanderer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Oh, you mean the same stimulus that caused us to
> stop losing 700,000 jobs a month and reestablished
> revenue?


Which, as typical for dumbfucks like you who attempt to go off on some other tangent after getting called on their bullshit, has little to nothing to do with the subject at hand.

The stimulus did essentially squat beyond a brief blip. Most of it hadn't even been spent by the time that you idiots started claiming that it was working. lol The vast majority of the recovery has been in spite of Obama's economic policy (or lack there of). Even that butt licker Chris Matthews called Obama out for playing political games by continually dragging out teachers and firemen all the time and not having any real economic growth strategy.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Fairfax underground liberals are in hopeless denial
Posted by: Liberal logic oxymoron ()
Date: March 17, 2013 04:03PM

Gerrymanderer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Oh, you mean the same stimulus that caused us to
> stop losing 700,000 jobs a month and reestablished
> revenue?


"blah, blah, blah and reestablished revenue?" What the heck are you talking about? Have you looked at the record of the stimulus? Have you looked at how much each green job costs (hint: almost a million $$$$ per job)? Bernanke is keeping this economy afloat. He's doing it by driving any investment $$$$ into the stock market by keeping interest rates at zero. Obama's policies are just like any other politician: paying off large campaign donors, then paying off his special interest groups and finally, giving token goodies to his base. He's no different than Bush or Clinton, he just spends more faster.

You are blinded by partisanship fool.

.
Attachments:
Obamas-useful-idiots.jpg

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Fairfax underground liberals are in hopeless denial
Posted by: Gerrymanderer ()
Date: March 17, 2013 04:09PM

You lose Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Gerrymanderer Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Oh, you mean the same stimulus that caused us
> to
> > stop losing 700,000 jobs a month and
> reestablished
> > revenue?
>
>
> Which, as typical for dumbfucks like you who
> attempt to go off on some other tangent after
> getting called on their bullshit, has little to
> nothing to do with the subject at hand.
>
> The stimulus did essentially squat beyond a brief
> blip. Most of it hadn't even been spent by the
> time that you idiots started claiming that it was
> working. lol The vast majority of the recovery
> has been in spite of Obama's economic policy (or
> lack there of). Even that butt licker Chris
> Matthews called Obama out for playing political
> games by continually dragging out teachers and
> firemen all the time and not having any real
> economic growth strategy.

You can suggest that the stimulus didn't help stop the economic recession but we have examples of your policies around the world to reference because it was a global downturn.

Great Britain enacted Republican type austerity measures and has just entered a triple dip recession.

Greece and Spain are other examples. The fact is if Republicans had stayed in power. There would be no medicare, no social security, and no economy right now. Instead we'd have a few rich people, continued job losses and poverty stricken elderly without medical coverage.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Fairfax underground liberals are in hopeless denial
Posted by: Gerrymanderer ()
Date: March 17, 2013 04:16PM

Not only that, John Mccain would of appointed Joseph Lieberman as the Secretary of Defense and we may have engaged in a hot war with Iran during an economic downturn which may have increased the price of a barrel of oil at above $200 dollars a barrel. This would have exacerbated negative economic conditions and the country you see today may have looked like the Soviet Union after it's collapse by now.

Instead we have removed Iran's oil production completely from the global market minimizes market forces and placed extensive sanctions weakening the state. We have put in conditions that will allow for an allied military option with minimal economic consequences.

Minimizing economic consequences from potential war. A concept that also seems to allude you trigger happy Republicans.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Fairfax underground liberals are in hopeless denial
Posted by: Liberal logic oxymoron ()
Date: March 17, 2013 04:18PM

Gerrymanderer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You lose Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Gerrymanderer Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > Oh, you mean the same stimulus that caused us
> > to
> > > stop losing 700,000 jobs a month and
> > reestablished
> > > revenue?
> >
> >
> > Which, as typical for dumbfucks like you who
> > attempt to go off on some other tangent after
> > getting called on their bullshit, has little to
> > nothing to do with the subject at hand.
> >
> > The stimulus did essentially squat beyond a
> brief
> > blip. Most of it hadn't even been spent by the
> > time that you idiots started claiming that it
> was
> > working. lol The vast majority of the recovery
> > has been in spite of Obama's economic policy
> (or
> > lack there of). Even that butt licker Chris
> > Matthews called Obama out for playing political
> > games by continually dragging out teachers and
> > firemen all the time and not having any real
> > economic growth strategy.
>
> You can suggest that the stimulus didn't help stop
> the economic recession but we have examples of
> your policies around the world to reference
> because it was a global downturn.
>
> Great Britain enacted Republican type austerity
> measures and has just entered a triple dip
> recession.
>
> Greece and Spain are other examples. The fact is
> if Republicans had stayed in power. There would
> be no medicare, no social security, and no economy
> right now. Instead we'd have a few rich people,
> continued job losses and poverty stricken elderly
> without medical coverage.


Got to hand it to you, what you lack in common sense and honesty, you make up for in hyperbole and hate. LOL


.
Attachments:
CaptainHyperbole.jpg

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Fairfax underground liberals are in hopeless denial
Posted by: Liberl logic oxymoron ()
Date: March 17, 2013 04:36PM

Gerrymanderer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Not only that, John Mccain would of appointed
> Joseph Lieberman as the Secretary of Defense and
> we may have engaged in a hot war with Iran during
> an economic downturn which may have increased the
> price of a barrel of oil at above $200 dollars a
> barrel. This would have exacerbated negative
> economic conditions and the country you see today
> may have looked like the Soviet Union after it's
> collapse by now.
>
> Instead we have removed Iran's oil production
> completely from the global market minimizes market
> forces and placed extensive sanctions weakening
> the state. We have put in conditions that will
> allow for an allied military option with minimal
> economic consequences.
>
> Minimizing economic consequences from potential
> war. A concept that also seems to allude you
> trigger happy Republicans.


"Maybe"? LOL, what a moron. Maybe McLoser would have supported the Green revolution and the current regime would have fallen to student led democracy - remember when hundreds of thousands of Iranians marched to demand free and fair elections before they were gunned down in the street. Instead, we got Obama ignoring them as they begged for our help. Instead, he brings down Mubarak, who was aligned with US interests in the region and keep Israel's southern border secure. Instead, we have Iran on the verge of nuclear weapons while purchasing short range delivery systems such as subs and launchers.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/03/obama-iran-a-year-away-from-nuclear-weapon/

I wonder what you use to predict the "maybe" future. I think I have an idea...


o_0
Attachments:
magic8ball-apologize.jpg

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Fairfax underground liberals are in hopeless denial
Posted by: Liberal Logic 102 ()
Date: March 17, 2013 05:17PM

Young Curmudgeon Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Again, not worth getting into. Too many sides,
> mostly rhetoric, and not enough fact.

You can argue about what what created it or made the appearance of it, but the fact is it just simply wasnt there as it faded into the night as soon as he left office.

> The Taliban were protecting Bin Laden; they had
> nothing to do with 9/11. Therefore, you could make
> a case (albeit a poor one) that both wars had
> nothing to do with 9/11. However, I agree that we
> had to invade Afghanistan, despite the knowledge
> that no army has ever done so successfully.

If they knew his location but didnt want to reveal it you could make that case. The fact that he was physically there running operations out of there really shreds that to pieces. I agree that it takes a special kind of nut job to try and argue that, really the type of person that would refer to the hijackers as freedom fighters.

The real mistake was trying to westernize them overnight. 2000+ years of war wont be undone overnight, 90 percent of them cant even read and just thought we were invading not knowing about 9-11. We should have let them live their culture, eradicated the terrorists and kept a security presence. Also announcing a pull out just enables the enemy and the media seemed to be their cheerleaders as well. Our losses really have not been substantial considering its a war, they are tragic but compared to other wars are minimal and I come from a military family. If WWII happened today Europe would be speaking German.

> Medicare part D did not have good intentions. In
> many ways, it's just a shill for pharmaceutical
> companies. It bans the importation of drugs made
> in Canada BY US COMPANIES UNDER THE SAME
> STANDARDS. Not yelling, just pissed off. Iraq can
> go to hell. As soon as we leave, things are going
> to devolve into Malaki becoming Saddam II. We
> overthrew a dictator, but we put an Iran-friendly
> one in his place. Saddam may have been the lesser
> of the evils.

Im a big believer that insurance should stop paying for drugs all together. If no company paid for them and they had to be paid out of pocket you would see prices plummet. Theyre basically insanely expensive without insurance because they can be. They can just charge whatever knowing that insurance companies pick up the bill which Im sure they get some kick backs from.

I get they were trying to help American companies banning Canadian drugs but it makes no sense cus you can still get Indian drugs. You either have to say no to all of them not US or allow them all. Id much rather have Canadian drugs than Indian personally.


> I disagree with the idea that Keynesian economics
> do not work. The Great Depression was greatly
> ameliorated by the basic principles. Getting
> people back to work was a huge reason the
> Depression ended. There are other factors, but I
> firmly believe that Keynesian economics did more
> to end the Depression than most people would give
> credit for. People are going to point at World War
> II and say that World War II ended it. Keynesian
> economics allowed for the kind of economic growth
> we saw during World War II and the 1950s. If the
> infrastructure had not been in place, nothing
> would've happened.

Its arguable what impact they really had. They helped out some people giving them work, but it was a decade of them were it really took WWII to completely turn everything around. The War effort would have provided the growth regardless as the building had to be done. Countless plants ect were converted for the war effort, the dams from the Depression built may have provided some power but they werent building things that directly correlated to the war effort.

Its also unclear whether or not the recovery we saw was just a natural bounce back considering it was in place for a decade or if it did help how much it did. If that theory was as good as touted the depression would have been much shorter. Not to mention that it started setting the stage of big government that can solve everyones problem which is the worse thing that has ever happened to the country.

> The stimulus was spent improperly. I'm not sure
> how much of it has been spent, to be honest. I'd
> imagine that most of it went to things like
> Solyndra, green energy, and the like. We need to
> repair our infrastructure. It's incontestable. We
> cannot continue to neglect it the way we are. If
> we invest 2 trillion over 10 years in it, we'll
> fix it. This is what the stimulus should've dealt
> with. Not some dumb pet projects.

I can agree with that. If were going to spend that kind of money we should spend it on meaningful things. The problem is that its just another example that shows how improperly money is being handled by the government right now and that does start at the top with leadership. At least on the left no one is advocating tightening up how money is spent, its all just we need to take more from people. People who believe that cant be trusted with extra money or well get more of the same.


> That's the way it is in most countries with
> universal healthcare; it never was mentioned
> during the passage of the bill.

Which is why universal healthcare is something that may sound good in theory but is terrible in practice. The idea should be to get people into the current system, not lower the system down so theyll take anyone. At some point personal responsibility should come into it as well.



> I disagree. Most polls show the opposite. Nobody
> wants to pay taxes, but everyone wants services.
> The main issue with the federal government is that
> it's so worried about re-election that it doesn't
> deal with the issues. Waste is an issue, but there
> are other things we need to cut or eliminate.

Nobody wants to do it, but people would do it IF they felt it actually would be used properly. Almost no one right now believes the government uses the money it has properly so why give them more. The money is there is we start trimming the fat and get back to the idea that the government is supposed to provide essential services and not run everyones life. But yes it is a big issue that people have figured out they can just vote themselves free stuff.


> There's waste in every part of the government. If
> we crack down on Medicare fraud, allow Medicare to
> bargain, stop the "green energy" subsidies,
> eliminate these conferences, and prevent Marie
> Antoinette (aka Michelle Obama) from taking $40
> million vacations, then we'll fix a lot of the
> issues. Romney made a very good point during the
> election. Liberals love to scream about corporate
> welfare. Obama gave more welfare to Solyndra than
> Exxon-Mobil has received since 1960.

I couldnt agree more. Its the double standard where if a liberal does it its okay but if a GOP member does the same thing theyre a reincarnation of Hitler. The current liberal leadership is willing to waste billions and billions just to advance their agenda. If green energy was so great or viable it would have been done already.

We physically cannot provide enough energy from green sources for the country to run. Those donations have been more kickbacks to supporters than anything.


> There are good elements in the bill. Eliminating
> preexisting conditions and lifetime spending caps
> is tremendous. Forcing insurance companies to pay
> 80% of all revenue as benefits is even better.

Preexisting conditions was a myth. If you didnt have insurance they were excluded for a period of 10 months to prevent people from just getting healthcare when they need it. If you already had insurance you were free to upgrade your plan at anytime without having anything excluded, I just went through that a year ago and it was a very painless easy process. The lifetime caps depended on the plan. If you had a yearly plan your lifetime max reset every year and was set at millions of dollars, if you reached it you probably arent going to be around much longer anyway.

Forcing them to pay 80% just insures that the small companies will go out of business and create less competition. It also sets them up to collapse like the banks did if a mass health crisis happens because they arent allowed to sit on cash as a rainy day fund. Its basically insures they wont be fiscally responsible.

There were some things in the bill that werent bad, but there is WAY to much garbage in there. It was doing something for the sake of doing something and got rammed through with pork and barrel spending to buy votes even though he had a super majority at the time. Nothing should ever be passed that hasnt been read through

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Fairfax underground liberals are in hopeless denial
Posted by: Basements are moldy. ()
Date: March 17, 2013 05:21PM

Liberal Logic 102 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Young Curmudgeon Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> > Again, not worth getting into. Too many sides,
> > mostly rhetoric, and not enough fact.
>
> You can argue about what what created it or made
> the appearance of it, but the fact is it just
> simply wasnt there as it faded into the night as
> soon as he left office.
>
> > The Taliban were protecting Bin Laden; they had
> > nothing to do with 9/11. Therefore, you could
> make
> > a case (albeit a poor one) that both wars had
> > nothing to do with 9/11. However, I agree that
> we
> > had to invade Afghanistan, despite the
> knowledge
> > that no army has ever done so successfully.
>
> If they knew his location but didnt want to reveal
> it you could make that case. The fact that he was
> physically there running operations out of there
> really shreds that to pieces. I agree that it
> takes a special kind of nut job to try and argue
> that, really the type of person that would refer
> to the hijackers as freedom fighters.
>
> The real mistake was trying to westernize them
> overnight. 2000+ years of war wont be undone
> overnight, 90 percent of them cant even read and
> just thought we were invading not knowing about
> 9-11. We should have let them live their culture,
> eradicated the terrorists and kept a security
> presence. Also announcing a pull out just enables
> the enemy and the media seemed to be their
> cheerleaders as well. Our losses really have not
> been substantial considering its a war, they are
> tragic but compared to other wars are minimal and
> I come from a military family. If WWII happened
> today Europe would be speaking German.
>
> > Medicare part D did not have good intentions.
> In
> > many ways, it's just a shill for pharmaceutical
> > companies. It bans the importation of drugs
> made
> > in Canada BY US COMPANIES UNDER THE SAME
> > STANDARDS. Not yelling, just pissed off. Iraq
> can
> > go to hell. As soon as we leave, things are
> going
> > to devolve into Malaki becoming Saddam II. We
> > overthrew a dictator, but we put an
> Iran-friendly
> > one in his place. Saddam may have been the
> lesser
> > of the evils.
>
> Im a big believer that insurance should stop
> paying for drugs all together. If no company paid
> for them and they had to be paid out of pocket you
> would see prices plummet. Theyre basically
> insanely expensive without insurance because they
> can be. They can just charge whatever knowing
> that insurance companies pick up the bill which Im
> sure they get some kick backs from.
>
> I get they were trying to help American companies
> banning Canadian drugs but it makes no sense cus
> you can still get Indian drugs. You either have
> to say no to all of them not US or allow them all.
> Id much rather have Canadian drugs than Indian
> personally.
>
>
> > I disagree with the idea that Keynesian
> economics
> > do not work. The Great Depression was greatly
> > ameliorated by the basic principles. Getting
> > people back to work was a huge reason the
> > Depression ended. There are other factors, but
> I
> > firmly believe that Keynesian economics did
> more
> > to end the Depression than most people would
> give
> > credit for. People are going to point at World
> War
> > II and say that World War II ended it.
> Keynesian
> > economics allowed for the kind of economic
> growth
> > we saw during World War II and the 1950s. If
> the
> > infrastructure had not been in place, nothing
> > would've happened.
>
> Its arguable what impact they really had. They
> helped out some people giving them work, but it
> was a decade of them were it really took WWII to
> completely turn everything around. The War effort
> would have provided the growth regardless as the
> building had to be done. Countless plants ect
> were converted for the war effort, the dams from
> the Depression built may have provided some power
> but they werent building things that directly
> correlated to the war effort.
>
> Its also unclear whether or not the recovery we
> saw was just a natural bounce back considering it
> was in place for a decade or if it did help how
> much it did. If that theory was as good as touted
> the depression would have been much shorter. Not
> to mention that it started setting the stage of
> big government that can solve everyones problem
> which is the worse thing that has ever happened to
> the country.
>
> > The stimulus was spent improperly. I'm not sure
> > how much of it has been spent, to be honest.
> I'd
> > imagine that most of it went to things like
> > Solyndra, green energy, and the like. We need
> to
> > repair our infrastructure. It's incontestable.
> We
> > cannot continue to neglect it the way we are.
> If
> > we invest 2 trillion over 10 years in it, we'll
> > fix it. This is what the stimulus should've
> dealt
> > with. Not some dumb pet projects.
>
> I can agree with that. If were going to spend
> that kind of money we should spend it on
> meaningful things. The problem is that its just
> another example that shows how improperly money is
> being handled by the government right now and that
> does start at the top with leadership. At least
> on the left no one is advocating tightening up how
> money is spent, its all just we need to take more
> from people. People who believe that cant be
> trusted with extra money or well get more of the
> same.
>
>
> > That's the way it is in most countries with
> > universal healthcare; it never was mentioned
> > during the passage of the bill.
>
> Which is why universal healthcare is something
> that may sound good in theory but is terrible in
> practice. The idea should be to get people into
> the current system, not lower the system down so
> theyll take anyone. At some point personal
> responsibility should come into it as well.
>
>
>
> > I disagree. Most polls show the opposite.
> Nobody
> > wants to pay taxes, but everyone wants
> services.
> > The main issue with the federal government is
> that
> > it's so worried about re-election that it
> doesn't
> > deal with the issues. Waste is an issue, but
> there
> > are other things we need to cut or eliminate.
>
> Nobody wants to do it, but people would do it IF
> they felt it actually would be used properly.
> Almost no one right now believes the government
> uses the money it has properly so why give them
> more. The money is there is we start trimming the
> fat and get back to the idea that the government
> is supposed to provide essential services and not
> run everyones life. But yes it is a big issue
> that people have figured out they can just vote
> themselves free stuff.
>
>
> > There's waste in every part of the government.
> If
> > we crack down on Medicare fraud, allow Medicare
> to
> > bargain, stop the "green energy" subsidies,
> > eliminate these conferences, and prevent Marie
> > Antoinette (aka Michelle Obama) from taking $40
> > million vacations, then we'll fix a lot of the
> > issues. Romney made a very good point during
> the
> > election. Liberals love to scream about
> corporate
> > welfare. Obama gave more welfare to Solyndra
> than
> > Exxon-Mobil has received since 1960.
>
> I couldnt agree more. Its the double standard
> where if a liberal does it its okay but if a GOP
> member does the same thing theyre a reincarnation
> of Hitler. The current liberal leadership is
> willing to waste billions and billions just to
> advance their agenda. If green energy was so
> great or viable it would have been done already.
>
>
> We physically cannot provide enough energy from
> green sources for the country to run. Those
> donations have been more kickbacks to supporters
> than anything.
>
>
> > There are good elements in the bill.
> Eliminating
> > preexisting conditions and lifetime spending
> caps
> > is tremendous. Forcing insurance companies to
> pay
> > 80% of all revenue as benefits is even better.
>
> Preexisting conditions was a myth. If you didnt
> have insurance they were excluded for a period of
> 10 months to prevent people from just getting
> healthcare when they need it. If you already had
> insurance you were free to upgrade your plan at
> anytime without having anything excluded, I just
> went through that a year ago and it was a very
> painless easy process. The lifetime caps depended
> on the plan. If you had a yearly plan your
> lifetime max reset every year and was set at
> millions of dollars, if you reached it you
> probably arent going to be around much longer
> anyway.
>
> Forcing them to pay 80% just insures that the
> small companies will go out of business and create
> less competition. It also sets them up to
> collapse like the banks did if a mass health
> crisis happens because they arent allowed to sit
> on cash as a rainy day fund. Its basically
> insures they wont be fiscally responsible.
>
> There were some things in the bill that werent
> bad, but there is WAY to much garbage in there.
> It was doing something for the sake of doing
> something and got rammed through with pork and
> barrel spending to buy votes even though he had a
> super majority at the time. Nothing should ever
> be passed that hasnt been read through


Most people have lives, LL102. Try it sometime.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Fairfax underground liberals are in hopeless denial
Posted by: Young Curmudgeon ()
Date: March 17, 2013 06:50PM

Basements are moldy. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Most people have lives, LL102. Try it sometime.

He's willing to provide thoughtful responses to my statements. You're not, so move on.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Fairfax underground liberals are in hopeless denial
Posted by: Young Curmudgeon ()
Date: March 17, 2013 06:54PM

Gerrymanderer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You can suggest that the stimulus didn't help stop
> the economic recession but we have examples of
> your policies around the world to reference
> because it was a global downturn.

See, the issue with the stimulus is that most of the money was either spent very poorly or not spent at all. I remember reading something along the lines of over 80% of stimulus money had not been spent almost a year after its passage.

> Great Britain enacted Republican type austerity
> measures and has just entered a triple dip
> recession.

Great Britain has a lot of other issues as well. However, yes, the British have seen all economic growth effectively stop.

> Greece and Spain are other examples. The fact is
> if Republicans had stayed in power. There would
> be no medicare, no social security, and no economy
> right now. Instead we'd have a few rich people,
> continued job losses and poverty stricken elderly
> without medical coverage.

Romney constantly said "We're on the road to Greece." He was very wrong. As a percentage of our GDP, the debt is actually not that large, relative to other countries. Japan's debt is 200% of its GDP. I think that Medicare would've been fundamentally altered had McCain won, and that the economy would've been in worse shape than it is. I don't see any regulation like Dodd-Frank coming along to protect consumer interests.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Fairfax underground liberals are in hopeless denial
Posted by: lastsandtrapwasacunt ()
Date: March 17, 2013 08:58PM

Seems to me people worship God or government. Worst possible case for someone who values liberty and private property is a church full of god-squad bureaucrats who worship both.

Rev. Doe might be a blowhard or a Tuesday afternoon womanizer (behind the little woman's back). But he doesn't have the power to loot half of what I've earned. Or break my door down at 3 a.m. and murder my dogs. Then the courthouse types brush it off with, "they followed procedure. Sucks to be you."

Where can someone go to find folk who think for themselves?

The problem is theists who think they have the right to run our lives. If you believe X, live by it. Fine. Just don't try to ram it down our throats. For example, when the pope walks on water Ill think he is any holier than you are.

On the public front, the problem is statists. aka collectivists. Same thing. Those who worship government authority and think we are here to serve it. There is no political party that isn't statist first. Social welfare or warfare welfare both amount to big government.

Almost everyone I"ve met in the last several years is on the public payroll one way or another. Including govt contractors, journalists, trainers and lobbyists.
Is there no private sector in northern virginia?

So where can one go to find people who think for themselves?

Options: ReplyQuote
Man, this thread is EPIC!
Posted by: Gordon Blvd ()
Date: March 18, 2013 08:45AM

stale tactic Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Gordon Blvd Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> > yep, that's the WINNING attitude to have there,
> > son. "He disagrees with me currently - so I
> > should not even bother to create dialogue as he
> > might make fun of me" - yeah, you guise are
> > GREAT LoLz
>
> It isn't winning or losing. It is the fact. An
> attempt to create dialogue has clearly been made.
> You have deflected and resorted to personal
> insults. I ask you simple questions and refuse to
> answer.
>

protip: instead of wasting time complaining about your perception of the past, try to focus on the present task at hand. ;)




> > funny you should mention this LoLz
> >
> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/01/fiscal-cl
>
> > iff-deal-passed-_n_2394022.html
>
> Is this your attempt at a response? Is this what
> qualifies as dialogue with you? How does this link
> answer the question I posed to you? It doesn't.
>


sayz it was yr boys holding up the deal

>
> > Why has the White House failed to
> > > produce its FY 14 budget this year? It was
> due
> > > over a month ago?
> >
> > funny you should mention this LoLz
> >
> http://thehill.com/homenews/house/287919-hoyer-hav
>
> >
> ing-obama-budget-would-be-helpful-but-not-possible
>
>
> So, a Democrat made a lame excuse for the White
> House's inability to do its job? Refresh my
> memory, when did the sequester become law?
>

here's a general timeline for ya - http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/02/sequester-timeline-when-will-the-cuts-be-felt/ - hope that helps ;)


> Here is an easy one for you to answer. When was
> the last time the Obama Administration submitted a
> Budget on time? If they were ever late what was
> their excuse then? The sequester lolz, indeed.
>
>
> > and gee............I wonder who will win in
> 2016
> > since they are actually CAPABLE OF DOING TWO
> > THINGS AT ONCE unlike apparently, GOP? (i.e.
> > why's it always gotta be either/or with
> > y'all-dontcha know how to multi-task already?)
>
> You have yet to Demonstrate the Democrats have
> actually taken their job ov governing seriously.
> The Senate is required by law to pass a budget
> every year. When was the last time they did that?
> Answer the question or take your trollin'
> somewhere else.

LoLz I dont really have to demonstrate a damn thing, son. I'm not a democrat and I'm not trying to earn anybody's vote!! ROFLMAO@U thinking you know who I am ha ha ah ah ha aha!

pic unrelated



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/18/2013 08:46AM by Gordon Blvd.
Attachments:
and+if+you+d+look+below+massive+butthurt+for+hours+on+_3d73db26495a9823cbddb51099013b91.png

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Man, this thread is EPIC!
Posted by: stale tactic ()
Date: March 18, 2013 10:15AM

Gordon Blvd Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> protip: instead of wasting time complaining about
> your perception of the past, try to focus on the
> present task at hand. ;)

Says the whiner who cried about conservatives calling him names during the election season. Get over it, son. It was over four months ago. You still seem butthurt about it.

> > > funny you should mention this LoLz
> > >
> >
> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/01/fiscal-cl
>
> >
> > > iff-deal-passed-_n_2394022.html
> >
> > Is this your attempt at a response? Is this
> what
> > qualifies as dialogue with you? How does this
> link
> > answer the question I posed to you? It doesn't.
>
> >
>
>
> sayz it was yr boys holding up the deal

But it has nothing to do with passing a budget. This is like if I asked you what day of the week it is and you responded with the fact that grass is green. You aren't wrong, but you're still stupid.

Again, go figure out what budget resolution is.

> > > Why has the White House failed to
> > > > produce its FY 14 budget this year? It was
> > due
> > > > over a month ago?
> > >
> > > funny you should mention this LoLz
> > >
> >
> http://thehill.com/homenews/house/287919-hoyer-hav
>
> >
> > >
> >
> ing-obama-budget-would-be-helpful-but-not-possible
>
> >
> >
> > So, a Democrat made a lame excuse for the White
> > House's inability to do its job? Refresh my
> > memory, when did the sequester become law?
> >
>
> here's a general timeline for ya -
> http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/02/seque
> ster-timeline-when-will-the-cuts-be-felt/ - hope
> that helps ;)

Actually, it doesn't help at all. Show me in that article where it tells you which date the sequester became law. It doesn't. Again, you think you are being smart and it ends up exposing your stupidity. I asked a pretty simple question and you completely whiffed.

Here is the answer: August 2, 2011: The President signed the Budget Control Act of 2011. This act provided that, if the Joint Select Committee did not produce bipartisan legislation, across-the-board spending cuts would take effect on January 2, 2013

So, the White House knew the sequester existed for 18 months before the FY 2014 Budget was due to Congress yet couldn't get a budget submitted on time?

> > Here is an easy one for you to answer. When
> was
> > the last time the Obama Administration submitted
> a
> > Budget on time? If they were ever late what
> was
> > their excuse then? The sequester lolz, indeed.
> >
> >
> > > and gee............I wonder who will win in
> > 2016
> > > since they are actually CAPABLE OF DOING TWO
> > > THINGS AT ONCE unlike apparently, GOP? (i.e.
> > > why's it always gotta be either/or with
> > > y'all-dontcha know how to multi-task
> already?)
> >
> > You have yet to Demonstrate the Democrats have
> > actually taken their job ov governing seriously.
>
> > The Senate is required by law to pass a budget
> > every year. When was the last time they did
> that?
> > Answer the question or take your trollin'
> > somewhere else.
>
> LoLz I dont really have to demonstrate a damn
> thing, son.

Oh, but you have clearly demonstrated plenty here. There is enough evidence to see how moronic you are.

> I'm not a democrat and I'm not trying
> to earn anybody's vote!!

What is your point?

> ROFLMAO@U thinking you
> know who I am ha ha ah ah ha aha!

Oh, I know who you are. I accurately pegged you as a troll

> pic unrelated

3654262140_1e453fc003_o.jpg

Options: ReplyQuote
I musta butthurt you pretty bad in the past if yr that into wanting to show everyone how stupid I am LoLz
Posted by: Gordon Blvd ()
Date: March 18, 2013 10:32AM

ROFLMAO@anyone who doesnt know I'm stupid by now

you can call me troll all you want but I still remember two summers ago no matter how you wanna whitewash the reality of the 174 Republican Congresspeople who also signed off on that dealie.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/renee-parsons/budget-sequestration_b_2806906.html

y'all remember summer 2011? Everyone was afraid of the EXACT SAME THING was gonna happen back then and they pulled that thing out their ass at the last minute?

But whateves, it's only one person's fault, not ALL of them. I gotcha, stale. GOP is angels and sweet roses, innocent of ANY wrongdoing. No prob.

All I know is that yr more into attacking me personally than showing me GOP is worthy of my vote which is what I asked originally. Which is kinda a funny thing to me since theres NOT A SOUL ON THIS SITE who doesnt know I'm also ugly and my mommy dresses me funny LoLz

pic unrelated
Attachments:
boring gordon lecure.jpg

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: I musta butthurt you pretty bad in the past if yr that into wanting to show everyone how stupid I am LoLz
Posted by: stale tactic ()
Date: March 18, 2013 10:42AM

Gordon Blvd Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ROFLMAO@anyone who doesnt know I'm stupid by now
>
> you can call me troll all you want

If the shoe fits.

> but I still
> remember two summers ago no matter how you wanna
> whitewash the reality of the 174 Republican
> Congresspeople
who also signed off on that
> dealie.


protip: instead of wasting time complaining about your perception of the past, try to focus on the present task at hand. ;)

> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/renee-parsons/budget
> -sequestration_b_2806906.html
>
> y'all remember summer 2011? Everyone was afraid
> of the EXACT SAME THING was gonna happen back then
> and they pulled that thing out their ass at the
> last minute?
>
> But whateves, it's only one person's fault, not
> ALL of them. I gotcha, stale. GOP is angels and
> sweet roses, innocent of ANY wrongdoing. No
> prob.

I said this where? You are straying on a tangent here. I asked who is the only body to put their budget forward on time as required by the law. You started making up some sequester excuses. I simply pointed out that the sequester had been law since 2011 and that it was a shitty excuse to not have a budget.

This lead to your current irrelevant and illogical rant. You are welcome for the recap.

> All I know is that yr more into attacking me
> personally than showing me GOP is worthy of my
> vote which is what I asked originally.

I am attacking you now? LoLz.

Again, facts have been presented to you. Again, you ignore them or don't understand them. Again, you really aren't interested in being convinced to vote for the GOP.

You are just a troll.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Fairfax underground liberals are in hopeless denial
Posted by: Gordon Blvd ()
Date: March 18, 2013 11:29AM

@state

1) was responding to yr point about the Budget Control Act of 201. I'm sorry I confunsed you by making you think I was bringing up a past event. You had just mentioned in yr earlier post that "The President signed the Budget Control Act of 2011. This act provided that, if the Joint Select Committee did not produce bipartisan legislation, across-the-board spending cuts would take effect on January 2, 2013" - something you had posted in present time, about 10-20 minutes before I responded. Sorry you misunderstood that ;)

2) no, if I misunderstood you, my bad :)

3)dunno if yr attacking or not. If so, that's cool. If not, I apologize for thinking you are.

still intersted in what you have to say if yr serious. You can call me a troll all you want if it'll make ya feel better though..........eitherway LoLz

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Fairfax underground liberals are in hopeless denial
Posted by: S tactic ()
Date: March 18, 2013 11:31AM

Troll.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Fairfax underground liberals are in hopeless denial
Posted by: Gerrymanderer ()
Date: March 18, 2013 11:48AM

We gotta vote these fuckers out of the house and state government and the damn Governorship this election. I really don't believe this state can swoop as low as other states have and elect someone like Cuccinelli. Boy is it gonna get ugly after that.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Fairfax underground liberals are in hopeless denial
Posted by: stale tactic ()
Date: March 18, 2013 11:52AM

Gordon Blvd Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> @state
>
> 1) was responding to yr point about the Budget
> Control Act of 201. I'm sorry I confunsed you by
> making you think I was bringing up a past event.
> You had just mentioned in yr earlier post that
> "The President signed the Budget Control Act of
> 2011. This act provided that, if the Joint Select
> Committee did not produce bipartisan legislation,
> across-the-board spending cuts would take effect
> on January 2, 2013" - something you had posted in
> present time, about 10-20 minutes before I
> responded. Sorry you misunderstood that ;)

It was pointed out to show that Hoyers nonsensical defense is horse crap. If the Administration knew for 18 months, that sequestration was the law, why can't they submit a budget on time? Why hasn't the Senate passed a budget in years? You have yet to explain those.


> still intersted in what you have to say if yr
> serious.

No your not and you never have been. You haven't answered a single question and you have ignored what has been presented to you. You respond with irrelevant links.

> You can call me a troll all you want

I call it like I see it.

> ifit'll make ya feel better
> though..........eitherway LoLz

It doesn't make me feel anything. A fact is a fact and I just state them.

Options: ReplyQuote
ROFLMAO at those who think they "know" Gordon Blvd so well ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
Posted by: Gordon Blvd ()
Date: March 18, 2013 12:05PM

@stale

1) I understand why you point out the Budget Control Act of 2011. But then when I engaged you on that with the fact that BOTH White House and GOP Congress made that deal, you stated that instead of wasting time complaining about my perception of the past, that I should try and to focus on the present task at hand. That is why I stated that I'm sorry I confunsed you by making you think I was bringing up a past event, as I was only referencing back to you mentioning in yr earlier post that "The President signed the Budget Control Act of 2011. This act provided that, if the Joint Select Committee did not produce bipartisan legislation, across-the-board spending cuts would take effect on January 2, 2013" - something you had posted in present time. Again, sorry you misunderstood that.

2)Um, I'm not having to answer anything cause I'm not trying to sway anyone's opinion - you dont seem to understand how elections work, my friend. Aint gonna earn any new votes by yelling "TROLL" and getting butthurt by ppl who dont always agree with ya 100% ;)

3) Fact is, if you aint capable of even convincing and OBVIOUS idiot like me to vote GOP when they're going "hey, I'm willing to vote for you - tell me why" then I'm not too sure how yr gonna be able to get other ppl smarter than me to vote for ya LoLz

pic unrelated
Attachments:
le romney.png

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: ROFLMAO at those who think they "know" Gordon Blvd so well ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
Posted by: Liberal Logic 102 ()
Date: March 18, 2013 12:08PM

Gordon Blvd Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> 3) Fact is, if you aint capable of even
> convincing and OBVIOUS idiot like me to vote GOP
> when they're going "hey, I'm willing to vote for
> you - tell me why" then I'm not too sure how yr
> gonna be able to get other ppl smarter than me to
> vote for ya LoLz


You can lead an idiot to water but you cant make it drink. For your sake I honestly hope you are trolling at this point, otherwise you are too stupid for your own good aka the perfect liberal

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: ROFLMAO at those who think they "know" Gordon Blvd so well ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
Posted by: stale tactic ()
Date: March 18, 2013 12:14PM

Gordon Blvd Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> @stale
>
> 1) I understand why you point out the Budget
> Control Act of 2011.

Saying you understand it doesn't mean you actually understand it.

> But then when I engaged you
> on that with the fact that BOTH White House and
> GOP Congress made that deal,

Which is irrelevant. The point is that the law was on the books for 18 months. You can't use it as an excuse not to have a budget ready, which is what the Democrats are attempting to do. You fell for it.


> 2)Um, I'm not having to answer anything cause I'm
> not trying to sway anyone's opinion -

And whose opinion am I trying to sway. You seem to think I am interested in swaying your opinion.

> you dont
> seem to understand how elections work, my friend.

Understand them perfectly.

> Aint gonna earn any new votes by yelling "TROLL"
> and getting butthurt by ppl who dont always agree
> with ya 100% ;)

1. You ARE a troll.
2. Defintely not butthurt.
3. I am not really interested in your vote as it isn't up for grabs no matter how much you claim that it is.

> 3) Fact is, if you aint capable of even
> convincing and OBVIOUS idiot like me to vote GOP
> when they're going "hey, I'm willing to vote for
> you - tell me why" then I'm not too sure how yr
> gonna be able to get other ppl smarter than me to
> vote for ya LoLz

You aren't capable or willing of holding an intelligent conversation about it. You respond with links that are not relevant. You don't bother to educate yourself about the issues.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: ROFLMAO at those who think they "know" Gordon Blvd so well ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
Posted by: stale tactic ()
Date: March 18, 2013 12:16PM

stale tactic Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> > 2)Um, I'm not having to answer anything cause
> I'm
> > not trying to sway anyone's opinion -

Look up the Socratic method. I am asking you questions in order to get you to think for yourself and arrive at the factual conclusion.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Fairfax underground liberals are in hopeless denial
Posted by: Gordon Blvd ()
Date: March 18, 2013 01:04PM

what;s really funny is that someone else had to point out to me what's happening on this thread - good job, stale - you got me LoLz
Attachments:
successful-troll-is-successful_original.jpg

Options: ReplyQuote
why are you responding to troll threads, Gordo? LoLz
Posted by: Gordon Blvd ()
Date: March 18, 2013 01:50PM

stale tactic Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> stale tactic Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > > 2)Um, I'm not having to answer anything cause
> > I'm
> > > not trying to sway anyone's opinion -
>
> Look up the Socratic method. I am asking you
> questions in order to get you to think for
> yourself and arrive at the factual conclusion.


in other words, you got nothin... ......................

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Fairfax underground liberals are in hopeless denial
Posted by: bX4Ku ()
Date: December 04, 2016 07:08AM

MLK republican Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I've read liberal's posts on this forum refer to
> tea party people as teabaggers..whatever that
> means. From the context of everything those libs
> wrote I acertained that the term was used in a
> very derogatory sense.
>
> The fact is, the tea party consists of people with
> actual common sense. They are people with courage
> and great love for their country. They face the
> truth and want our children and grandchildren to
> have a good life.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Fairfax underground liberals are in hopeless denial
Posted by: Xucb4 ()
Date: December 04, 2016 07:24AM

Gerrymanderer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Once he launched the wars in an economic downturn
> and also decreased taxes and increased deficits.
> Much of this was paid for by increased money
> supply. Artificially low rates were set to
> solidify the economy. The interests rates along
> with the increased money supply caused the housing
> market to absorb the inflation that was occurring.
> This created a housing bubble that when burst
> caused an economic calamity.
>
> There's also the issue of the repealing of the
> Glass–Steagall Act which divided local from Wall
> Street banks and home mortgage loans. This was
> also another corrupt Republican banker buddy
> initiative that many say assisted in the eventual
> crisis.

Options: ReplyQuote
Pages: Previous12All
Current Page: 2 of 2


Your Name: 
Your Email (Optional): 
Subject: 
Attach a file
  • No file can be larger than 75 MB
  • All files together cannot be larger than 300 MB
  • 30 more file(s) can be attached to this message
Spam prevention:
Please, enter the code that you see below in the input field. This is for blocking bots that try to post this form automatically.
 **     **  ********  ********    *******   ********  
 ***   ***  **        **     **  **     **  **     ** 
 **** ****  **        **     **         **  **     ** 
 ** *** **  ******    **     **   *******   **     ** 
 **     **  **        **     **         **  **     ** 
 **     **  **        **     **  **     **  **     ** 
 **     **  **        ********    *******   ********  
This forum powered by Phorum.