I just had a need to be involved, even in this little way, with a thread that has Psych using the term F**k me Pumps. There, I feel better.
Is my avatar too aggressive?
-- Edited by BoxDog at 21:15, 2008-09-29
lol uh huh...i suppose we should be happy that she chose the double dare naughty monkey pumps rather than choosing from the nookie or cherry pop naughty monkey lines. i kid you not. check out the leopard print beauties at the bottom of the page. maybe she can wear those for the debate this week.
something that was just brought to my attention, shines a new light on Sarah, the population of Ft Worth, TX. is just a a smidgen less than the whole state of Alaska. The problems are vastly more complex in Ft worth. I am not sure I would trust the mayor of Ft Worth with world relations and I am sure with the complexities of a major yet still a cowtown, he isn't qualified. I just don't think mayor Montcrief is ready for that kind of position. just ponderings from the right side
__________________
my days left here may not be long, I wouldn't waste my time telling you nothing wrong, love is a flower that needs the sun and the rain, alittle bit of pleasure is worth a whole lot of pain. no pain no gain. betty wright
Yanno? When he was first elected president, Bill Clinton was younger than Barack Obama, and two years older than Sarah Palin.
JFK was a year younger than Palin.
Imagine, if you will, a man in Palin's position, saying things like Israel must be protected because we want to make sure another holocaust never happens. Imagine any man running for vice president of the United States saying that. Heck -- imagine, if you will, Hillary Clinton saying that! Imagine how such a comment would set the media wires ablaze. But I've heard not mention one about it, and know of it, only from reading the interview's transcript.
and you have to give the republicans credit for knowing how to frame the debate. on the one hand any criticism of palin is now looked at as misogyny and sexism and on the other hand they are playing up the "im only a girl thing" big time. really, you have to hand it to them for being able to pull that bit of cognitive dissonance off. oh yeah and all the while denying that there was any real sexism in the attitude toward hillary clinton.
Palin may be "a quick learner" (not sure how McCain et. al. knows that, really -- maybe they asked her?) but it does seem that where life experience leaves off, native intelligence takes over, and on that front, Sarah Palin is no John F. Kennedy... or Barack Obama.
exactly. the idea that she is a governor and not a senator and therefore she needs to get up to speed on all things international doesnt make sense when you consider how prepared bill clinton was for the task or even jimmy carter. as ineffective as carter was as a president he, at least, had a working knowledge of what was going on in the world internationally compare palins complete package to the packages of say romney or huckabee and she still comes up short. however, if her thing is to make fiscal and social conservatives happy in a way that mccain cannot, then whats happened with her coverage thus far must be making them very upset. her out there social values and faulty memory about things like the bridge to nowhere have kept any real discussion about her stances on the things that matter to those conservatives at bay. i still cannot help but wonder who is dressing her these day and why and who is donating of springing for the wardrobe. i dont think they send the men out in 2000 dollar jackets to speak about fiscal responsibility. i was doing the math on an outfit she was wearing the other day and in total it had to be in the neighborhood of 4k. not on the govs salary i suspect. even with the first dude chippin in. nor do they put the men in peek a book f*** me pumps as a selling point. im tellin ya i looked at the shoes and shook my head. nice shoes if youre pole dancing but to meet with middle eastern foriegn leaders? yikes.
It really seems to me as if almost all of America is playing an "The Emperor's Clothing" game with Palin; looking the other way, as if it's in poor taste to point out that this attractive, and in her own way engaging, woman just doesn't have the political acumen at this point in her life to be a heartbeat away from the presidency.
No way. Not even close.
But it could happen; has happened twice in my lifetime, with both LBJ and Gerald Ford.
For those who want "spunk" and eye candy, permit me to recommend Fox TV, where I'm sure they can find an abundance of both.
I thought I'd seen enough sexism with H Clinton's run for the presidency, to last a lifetime, but had no clue I'd be subjected to witnessing the kind of reverse sexism which John McCain has served up, and Sarah Palin has used to her advantage.
bingo. did camille paglia write this script? lets see, real feminism happens when women can celebrate their femaleness and power by dressing in their f*** me pumps even when with meeting middle eastern leaders who, in their own countries insist that women who show an ankle or a chin are akin to prostitutes.
I really do wonder, sometimes, if people think they're voting, in November, for the next vice president of the United States, or the next American Idol.
i think people tend to think that one person doesnt have all the control over the situation and that if a mistake happens there will be others to reason with him/her. im guessing the seriousness of that 3am call was lost on them.
Here's another disturbing thing: maybe McCain picked her in part, because she makes him look so good.
i think he picked her because it threw obama off his momentum and it did. and i think he figgered that he could trot her out on occasion till the election and that nobody would notice that she didnt know all that much about the world. what was her answer when asked if shed ever traveled abroad?
Have we lost sight of who and what John McCain actually is?? I haven't, but then I've lived in his home state Arizona a long time, so it's hard for me to ignore.
thats how i feel about his pal joe. i cant believe that i once helped him campaign. ok it was like 30 years ago when he actually was a democrat...
I This presupposes a dangerous, and, I think, naive, fallacy. The rapturous notion of President John McCain is greatly overestimated. He will "fix" the nation's economic woes? Really?? Isn't Reagan's de-regulation in the name of less government, the genesis of what's going on right now? Didn't John McCain support that all the way down the line; support it yet? How is he going to now "make things better?" That he found it necessary to "suspend" his campaign <eyeroll> to run off to Washington to straighten things out is not high drama -- it's high comedy, bordering on theatre of the absurd.
isnt it? i did think obamas response was pretty darn good. the a president needs to be able to do more than one thing at a time was priceless.
And just as I did in '72, 00, and '04, all I can do is shake my head, and wonder what the American people are thinking, and then, reflect upon that, realizing maybe the simple truth is they just aren't.
i always reflect back on the republican debates prior to the 00 elections. i remember how awkward and weird W appeared and i actually felt kind of bad for him. it really seemed like he was out of his element. imagine my surprise when he somehow managed to get the nomination. and then again in 04? thats when i stopped believing that we the people elected these folks. honestly i dont believe it at all.
Again.
Makes it hard to be an optimist some days. Dang hard.
So what do you think? Who will win this game of chicken? Will Mighty Mouse just not show up, send his regrets, but insist he needs to stay in Washington and look presidential? I don't think so.
If he does? I think Obama should be given the entire time spot set aside for the debate.
That would end THAT discussion right quick, wouldn't it.
Will America allow Sarah Palin to "escape" the debates and still elect her? Am I even really asking this question, without sarcasm? Why, yes I am.
"Check, please."
I heard an interesting commentary last evening. I had the tube on in the background and was half listening so i cant tell you who said it but whoever it was suggested that mccains strategy throughout this campaign has been to throw something totally unexpected into the mix sort of in the way a basketball player passes off the ball to run down the clock. then too he focuses a lot of immediate attention on himself and his campaign which takes days to sort thru and in the meanwhile obama gets lost on page 80.
i do think he will show up if it happens. apparently their appearance at the white house summit today has thrown a monkey wrench into the plans and those in charge have gone on all day about how both mccain and obama have gotten in the way of this being a done deal. i suspect bush will prolly make him go to the debate or what was the threat? wed all be bankrupt by monday? lets hope not eh?
i do very much think that they would love to try anything to keep sarah palin away from the debate with biden. honestly i felt a bit sorry for her after watching the catie couric interview, especially the part where couric quizzes her on mccains previous stances and after the 3rd poke at her palin finally says she doesnt have any instances to back up her answer but shell find some and bring them to her. its clear from her responses that she had been taught to deflect questions that she didnt know the answer to. a well placed well thats interesting what makes you ask that or a gee good question why do you ask can go a long way but not with a reporter who is skilled in recognizing the deflection.
Yanno? When he was first elected president, Bill Clinton was younger than Barack Obama, and two years older than Sarah Palin.
JFK was a year younger than Palin.
Imagine, if you will, a man in Palin's position, saying things like Israel must be protected because we want to make sure another holocaust never happens. Imagine any man running for vice president of the United States saying that. Heck -- imagine, if you will, Hillary Clinton saying that! Imagine how such a comment would set the media wires ablaze. But I've heard not mention one about it, and know of it, only from reading the interview's transcript.
Palin may be "a quick learner" (not sure how McCain et. al. knows that, really -- maybe they asked her?) but it does seem that where life experience leaves off, native intelligence takes over, and on that front, Sarah Palin is no John F. Kennedy... or Barack Obama.
A couple of weeks ago I read a column by a respectable journalist -- a conservative one, at that, who suggested McCain's picking Palin was an act bordering on treason. I confess, unless Homeland Security guarantees a few dozen surplus cases of duct tape to insure she doesn't say a word for four years, I'm somewhat inclined to agree. Her comment about Putin would more than justify the expenditure... and from that specific department.
Truly, McCain would have done better with Harriet Meyers. Maybe not better for his campaign, but better for this country. Harriet Meyers didn't have the "stuff" to make her worthy of a high court seat, but she has to be smarter than Sarah Palin.
It really seems to me as if almost all of America is playing an "The Emperor's Clothing" game with Palin; looking the other way, as if it's in poor taste to point out that this attractive, and in her own way engaging, woman just doesn't have the political acumen at this point in her life to be a heartbeat away from the presidency.
No way. Not even close.
But it could happen; has happened twice in my lifetime, with both LBJ and Gerald Ford.
For those who want "spunk" and eye candy, permit me to recommend Fox TV, where I'm sure they can find an abundance of both.
I thought I'd seen enough sexism with H Clinton's run for the presidency, to last a lifetime, but had no clue I'd be subjected to witnessing the kind of reverse sexism which John McCain has served up, and Sarah Palin has used to her advantage.
I really do wonder, sometimes, if people think they're voting, in November, for the next vice president of the United States, or the next American Idol.
Here's another disturbing thing: maybe McCain picked her in part, because she makes him look so good.
Have we lost sight of who and what John McCain actually is?? I haven't, but then I've lived in his home state Arizona a long time, so it's hard for me to ignore.
It seems the course of the election process has almost now stipulated John McCain is the greatest thing since sliced bread, and the question, the real question, is whether or not we're willing to buy into the Palin candidacy, in order to be fortunate enough to "get" him -- if we're willing to make that trade off.
This presupposes a dangerous, and, I think, naive, fallacy. The rapturous notion of President John McCain is greatly overestimated. He will "fix" the nation's economic woes? Really?? Isn't Reagan's de-regulation in the name of less government, the genesis of what's going on right now? Didn't John McCain support that all the way down the line; support it yet? How is he going to now "make things better?" That he found it necessary to "suspend" his campaign <eyeroll> to run off to Washington to straighten things out is not high drama -- it's high comedy, bordering on theatre of the absurd.
And just as I did in '72, 00, and '04, all I can do is shake my head, and wonder what the American people are thinking, and then, reflect upon that, realizing maybe the simple truth is they just aren't.
Again.
Makes it hard to be an optimist some days. Dang hard.
So what do you think? Who will win this game of chicken? Will Mighty Mouse just not show up, send his regrets, but insist he needs to stay in Washington and look presidential? I don't think so.
If he does? I think Obama should be given the entire time spot set aside for the debate.
That would end THAT discussion right quick, wouldn't it.
Will America allow Sarah Palin to "escape" the debates and still elect her? Am I even really asking this question, without sarcasm? Why, yes I am.
"Check, please."
I heard an interesting commentary last evening. I had the tube on in the background and was half listening so i cant tell you who said it but whoever it was suggested that mccains strategy throughout this campaign has been to throw something totally unexpected into the mix sort of in the way a basketball player passes off the ball to run down the clock. then too he focuses a lot of immediate attention on himself and his campaign which takes days to sort thru and in the meanwhile obama gets lost on page 80.
i do think he will show up if it happens. apparently their appearance at the white house summit today has thrown a monkey wrench into the plans and those in charge have gone on all day about how both mccain and obama have gotten in the way of this being a done deal. i suspect bush will prolly make him go to the debate or what was the threat? wed all be bankrupt by monday? lets hope not eh?
i do very much think that they would love to try anything to keep sarah palin away from the debate with biden. honestly i felt a bit sorry for her after watching the catie couric interview, especially the part where couric quizzes her on mccains previous stances and after the 3rd poke at her palin finally says she doesnt have any instances to back up her answer but shell find some and bring them to her. its clear from her responses that she had been taught to deflect questions that she didnt know the answer to. a well placed well thats interesting what makes you ask that or a gee good question why do you ask can go a long way but not with a reporter who is skilled in recognizing the deflection.
From a purely political perspective, I cannot help but see this 'not unforeseen, but certainly abrupt' crumbling of the American economic status quo, as anything other than "Advantage: Obama" -- perhaps so much so, it will ultimately decide who moves into the White House, come January.
Without wanting to appear ghoulish, and not discounting at all, the tragic implications of this situation, if the Obama camp doesn't seize this "opportunity" (and I do use that word advisedly) then frankly, they don't deserve to win the election. No way, no how.
It's beyond absurd, after the last eight years, any presidential race against a republican should even have been close ever; this may be the apparently necessary "act of God" Obama has needed, to win this election. Time will tell, I guess...
this has so many plot twists, doesnt it? tonights big story, mccain would like to postpone the debate and go back to washington to solve the economic problem and hes called on obama to respond in kind. obama at this point has said no, and really this seems such a shameless ploy and his suggested reschedule? why the vp debates of course.
So what do you think? Who will win this game of chicken? Will Mighty Mouse just not show up, send his regrets, but insist he needs to stay in Washington and look presidential? I don't think so.
If he does? I think Obama should be given the entire time spot set aside for the debate.
That would end THAT discussion right quick, wouldn't it.
Will America allow Sarah Palin to "escape" the debates and still elect her? Am I even really asking this question, without sarcasm? Why, yes I am.
I get the concept of the bail out, but I don't buy it, on a number of levels. First, you have to convince me that sending more Americans into more debt by issuing more loans is a good idea. Doesn't that just perpetuate the problem?
Second, if loans are the answer, as I said before, the economy won't improve if the banks won't lend money out. How can you buy a house without a mortgage? You can't. How can you get a mortgage if the banks won't approve you? You can't.
my understanding of this is that if the bailout doesnt happen all of those bad loans will result in a sell off of homes for pennies on the dollar. add to that the two areas that encompass the wealth of the other 97% of america who havent plundered and pillaged these last 8 years and the wealth for these folks lies in peoples homes and retirement accounts. aside from those things most americans do not have any other source of wealth. if they are lucky in addition to those items they have maybe 6 months of salary saved for an emergency. and where is it saved? in banks, in cds and money market funds. if the price of housing isnt propped up and the stock market tanks back into the 8's 97 percent of america will be flat out busted. banks will close and tho those banks accounts that people have placed their life savings into are insured up to 100K. people who have accounts in excess of that which will not be covered. and if 1000 banks fail what will that cost the taxpayers as in the end the insurance backing those banking investments is the full faith of the us govt. as people try and move their money to safer places (under the mattress) a run on the bank happens which snowballs the whole thing. i dont see an alternative to this in the short run BUT what i want to know is what happens to those bank assets? if the idea is to not sell them at a loss tailspinning the financial sector then the alternative is what? hold onto them until things are less volitile? then sell them and if so who then gets the money? who do those assets now belong to? will the create a federal agency to sell off those assets? how much is that gonna cost? or will they let the banks manage those assets for a small fee of course.
if they bail out the financial sector they free up money for new loans, no new loans the economy stagnates, housing drops, new jobs arent created, prices rise as demand begins to exceed supply and all of that. we should all be pissed. and we should demand that someone look into the transfer of wealth that has happened here and demand that it be reversed.
I saw the speech last night and caught that 10 year thing as well. I remember back in the 90s when I bought my first and second home, I was limited to the amount of house I could buy to the debt to income ratio. My mortgage payment was not allowed to be more than 30% of my income. 27% if I went FHA. I remember these percentages from the real estate exam I took in Pennsylvania in 1994. I bought my second home in 1999, we were still subject to the same rules. I used to have a mortgage calculator, where I could program in the debt/income ratios and calculate the amount of house a buyer could get.
the following kinda rambles, but the formula for buying a house is there someplace. My mother was a realtor and what I posted isn't from a book it is from listening to her talk. I am sure it was something she learned from the CA realtors code of ethics. Yes, the loan institutions were/are corrupt BUT they were giving the people what the people were asking for.
maxwil (milo) posted on wwet last night:
just wondering, do you ever go find out how your senators and congress people vote? I check at the very least once a week to see what Kay Bailey Hutchinson and Ralph Hall are doing over there in Washington. Kay votes as a moderate republican, often votes against the old GOP guard.
When the presidential election is all over, do you still keep track of congress and the senate? I do, you can too. Write them, hold their feet to the fire. I can tell you this,,,,,,,, the lobbist are on the phone, and emailing their little fingers off reminding politicans how much money they "donated", and I am in the mail and email reminding them, that without indivduals who vote, all that lobby money doesn't mean jack. If we the people don't keep at them they think we don't either know or care.
All the shell stations in this area are out of gas, wantta know the real reason? The gas companies are going to use Ike as an excuse to run regular gas, nation wide, up to five bucks a gallon. They have gas reserves stock piled for just such emergencys. They are holding them back in order to price gouge.
There is a formula realtors used to use to figure the price home a family can afford, the major wage earners yearly salary times 2.5, it isn't the combined earnings, because something could happen to cut the second income. Overtime and part time jobs don't count. That is what an ethical realtor or loan officer will tell you. so if I make $33,000 yearly on my regular job I can afford, $82,500 for a house. What we have now is people with a combined income of $50,000 buying $250,000 homes, it was bound to fail.
I cannot see how anyone can balme Bush and the republicans because people are greedy and stupid. I don't like Bush and his machine, but the economy goes way deeper than political parties. I damned sure can't see either party as innocent. I also see that people want more than they can afford. I see stock holders demanding unheard of profits.
I will always adhear to the principal that before you complain about the litter in my yard, ya need to clean yours.
Big business and politicians are only as corrupt as we the people allow.
__________________
my days left here may not be long, I wouldn't waste my time telling you nothing wrong, love is a flower that needs the sun and the rain, alittle bit of pleasure is worth a whole lot of pain. no pain no gain. betty wright
I got this in email from one of my republican buddies, grin.
After receiving this from ??? I sent it to the media. I think if you all did the same in your area, it might bring about change of thinking. What say you?
Here's a better plan than the $85 BILLION bailout of AIG. I'm in favor of giving $85,000,000,000 to America in a "We Deserve It" dividend. To make the math simple, let's assume there are 200,000,000 bona fide U.S. citizens, aged 18+.
Our population is about 301 million counting every man, woman and child. So, 200,000,000 might be a fair stab at adults 18 and up. Now, divide 200 million, 18+ adults into $85 billion - that equals $425,000.00 each! Yes, my plan is to give that $425,000 to every adult as a "We Deserve It" dividend.
Of course, it would NOT be tax free. So, let's assume a tax rate of 30%. Everyone would pay $127,500.00 in taxes. That sends $25.5 billion right back to Uncle Sam! It also means that every adult 18+ has $297,500.00 in their pocket. A husband and wife would have $595,000.00!
What would you do with $297,500.00 to $595,000.00?
Pay off your mortgage housing crisis solved. Repay college loans what a great boost to new grads. Put away money for college it'll really be there. Save in a bank create money to loan to entrepreneurs. Buy a new car create jobs . Invest in the market capital drives growth. Pay for your parent's medical insurance health care improves. Enable deadbeat parents to come clean or else.
Remember this is for every adult U.S. citizen, 18 and older (including the folks who lost their jobs at Lehmann Brothers and every other company that is cutting back) and of course, for those serving in our Armed Forces.
If we're going to re-distribute wealth let's really do it! Instead of trickling out a puny $1,000.00 "economic incentive".
If we're going to do an $85 billion bailout, let's bail out every adult U.S. citizen!
As for AIG liquidate it.
Sell off its parts. Let American General go back to being American General. Sell off the real estate. Let the private sector bargain hunters cut it up and clean it up.
We deserve the money and AIG doesn't. Sure it's a crazy idea, but can you imagine the coast-to-coast block party?!
How do you spell Economic Boom? W-e D-e-s-e-r-v-e I-t d-i-v-i-d-e-n-d! I trust my fellow adult Americans to know how to use the $85 Billion "We Deserve It" dividend more than do the 'geniuses' at AIG or in Washington, D.C..
And remember, my plan only really costs $59.5 billion because $25.5 billion is returned instantly in taxes to Uncle Sam. Good idea? I think so..
-- Edited by milo at 07:54, 2008-09-25
__________________
my days left here may not be long, I wouldn't waste my time telling you nothing wrong, love is a flower that needs the sun and the rain, alittle bit of pleasure is worth a whole lot of pain. no pain no gain. betty wright
Psych Lit wrote: this has so many plot twists, doesnt it? tonights big story, mccain would like to postpone the debate and go back to washington to solve the economic problem and hes called on obama to respond in kind. obama at this point has said no, and really this seems such a shameless ploy and his suggested reschedule? why the vp debates of course. that will keep sarah p from having to debate joe biden. listening to the talking heads tonight who say there is nothing for mccain to do here and in fact his presence may be detrimental to the process. it does play well in peoria tho where it appears his doing this is for the good of country. how many days till the election? how long does he think he can postpone a real head to head discussion on the issues? and did anyone catch bush's speech today? did you notice the time frame he offered up? not something that happened on his watch of course, he dumped it right in clintons lap.
I saw the speech last night and caught that 10 year thing as well. I remember back in the 90s when I bought my first and second home, I was limited to the amount of house I could buy to the debt to income ratio. My mortgage payment was not allowed to be more than 30% of my income. 27% if I went FHA. I remember these percentages from the real estate exam I took in Pennsylvania in 1994. I bought my second home in 1999, we were still subject to the same rules. I used to have a mortgage calculator, where I could program in the debt/income ratios and calculate the amount of house a buyer could get.
Bush's speech had all the typical Bushisms - panic, fear, devastation...must act now. He encourages and discourages bank runs at the same time.
I get the concept of the bail out, but I don't buy it, on a number of levels. First, you have to convince me that sending more Americans into more debt by issuing more loans is a good idea. Doesn't that just perpetuate the problem?
Second, if loans are the answer, as I said before, the economy won't improve if the banks won't lend money out. How can you buy a house without a mortgage? You can't. How can you get a mortgage if the banks won't approve you? You can't.
The banks will take the government's money and sell them the bad notes. But, they've been burned and don't want to get burned again. So, even high interest loans don't look attractive anymore if it means ending up with a bad note and an empty house. So, they will hold onto their money and lend to only those who are truly worthy, while the others still lose their homes and their jobs, because the banks are still strangling the market.
From a purely political perspective, I cannot help but see this 'not unforeseen, but certainly abrupt' crumbling of the American economic status quo, as anything other than "Advantage: Obama" -- perhaps so much so, it will ultimately decide who moves into the White House, come January.
Without wanting to appear ghoulish, and not discounting at all, the tragic implications of this situation, if the Obama camp doesn't seize this "opportunity" (and I do use that word advisedly) then frankly, they don't deserve to win the election. No way, no how.
It's beyond absurd, after the last eight years, any presidential race against a republican should even have been close ever; this may be the apparently necessary "act of God" Obama has needed, to win this election. Time will tell, I guess...
this has so many plot twists, doesnt it? tonights big story, mccain would like to postpone the debate and go back to washington to solve the economic problem and hes called on obama to respond in kind. obama at this point has said no, and really this seems such a shameless ploy and his suggested reschedule? why the vp debates of course. that will keep sarah p from having to debate joe biden. listening to the talking heads tonight who say there is nothing for mccain to do here and in fact his presence may be detrimental to the process. it does play well in peoria tho where it appears his doing this is for the good of country. how many days till the election? how long does he think he can postpone a real head to head discussion on the issues? and did anyone catch bush's speech today? did you notice the time frame he offered up? not something that happened on his watch of course, he dumped it right in clintons lap.
yeah, it started TEN years ago according to dubya. And HIS proposal is one to allow the people the confidence in which AGAIN begin borrowing so they may have the cash to keep their businesses and companies up and running with "confidence". MORE lending? That seemed to me his primary goal, jump start the lending, just with a little more stringent application. The flipping and scandalous appraisals with susbequently ill advised lending only started five years ago. I don't recall why or how or who was the first to be approved for a mortgage 5 or 6 times their salary, but I remember very clearly when it happened. Sure, it's probably one of the grandest and most frightening abuses of bad times and a scare tactic beyond belief ever used by the gop for political gain and blame. But, did anyone hear Obamas response to NOT returning to Washington to work on the details of this? He said "the candidate who has to deal with this mess in another, forty or so days..." Guess he plans on moving in early. Oh yeah and Bidens speech about how fdr had to deal with the crash of 29', and televised. It was neither FDR's watch or was tv yet invented. But SP has now, officially met every single leader who's name I can't pronounce. And they all thought she was a cutie. And she seems just fine with that being a reasonable credential. Blech, every last one of these clowns. But too, is Congress in a coma? While all of this was going on the nations largest Chevy dealership closed it's doors. Out of money. Neither Cheverolet or the Feds stepped up to help them, now all 13 of their nationwide branches closed their doors yesterday. Locally? Puts another 100 people out of work just in this already battered market. Somehow I can't possibly tie Clinton to any of this, George.
September 23, 2008 The White House President George W. Bush
Good evening, my fellow Americans.
I come to you tonight with grave news regarding our economy. Intelligence has been gathered over the last few days, and there can now be no doubt: we have located, on Wall Street, weapons of mass destruction, which threaten all of civilization.
I am taking this moment to exercise my presidential authority to give a guy I appointed $700 billion of money taxpayers will have to cover, to protect the money lenders who will take a big nose dive in their portfolios, if the stock included in their severance packages drops in value.
Because this is an urgent situation, I'm going to first see if I can (again) by-pass congress and acquire more power for the exective branch. If that does not work, I will again ask congress to approve my taking power which I shouldn't have, and wouldn't, were it not for this emergency.
I want all you people who aren't rich to know I feel for you. That's a real bummer, losing your houses. I only ask that you remember that the state of the trickle down economics is strong, and some day, you may be able to again feed your families.
The road before us is long. The transition won't happen overnight, and it'll be hard going for the next couple of years, but I know the American people can tighten their belts and do what is necessary to save the lenders who have gouged you with interest rates so high you can't afford to pay your mortgage.
In the next few weeks I will also be firing all the jutsit--- justict--- justicies on the Supreme Court who legislate from the bench. These men and this woman are evil doers and I will use my new presidential powers to get rid of them, so that our nation might remain strong. It doesn't really matter, though. The economy is what matters now, and those weapons of mass destruction.
Together we can get through this difficult time. This is not the time for red tape. Just let the guy I picked have your money and everything will be OK again.
Thank you, good night, and God Bless America
The preceding announcement has been brought to you by Haliburton; Haliburton: for when all the money in the world just isn't quite enough.
From a purely political perspective, I cannot help but see this 'not unforeseen, but certainly abrupt' crumbling of the American economic status quo, as anything other than "Advantage: Obama" -- perhaps so much so, it will ultimately decide who moves into the White House, come January.
Without wanting to appear ghoulish, and not discounting at all, the tragic implications of this situation, if the Obama camp doesn't seize this "opportunity" (and I do use that word advisedly) then frankly, they don't deserve to win the election. No way, no how.
It's beyond absurd, after the last eight years, any presidential race against a republican should even have been close ever; this may be the apparently necessary "act of God" Obama has needed, to win this election. Time will tell, I guess...
this has so many plot twists, doesnt it? tonights big story, mccain would like to postpone the debate and go back to washington to solve the economic problem and hes called on obama to respond in kind. obama at this point has said no, and really this seems such a shameless ploy and his suggested reschedule? why the vp debates of course. that will keep sarah p from having to debate joe biden. listening to the talking heads tonight who say there is nothing for mccain to do here and in fact his presence may be detrimental to the process. it does play well in peoria tho where it appears his doing this is for the good of country. how many days till the election? how long does he think he can postpone a real head to head discussion on the issues? and did anyone catch bush's speech today? did you notice the time frame he offered up? not something that happened on his watch of course, he dumped it right in clintons lap.
How convienent, and typically short-sighted of him. Reaganomics has come home to roost.
From a purely political perspective, I cannot help but see this 'not unforeseen, but certainly abrupt' crumbling of the American economic status quo, as anything other than "Advantage: Obama" -- perhaps so much so, it will ultimately decide who moves into the White House, come January.
Without wanting to appear ghoulish, and not discounting at all, the tragic implications of this situation, if the Obama camp doesn't seize this "opportunity" (and I do use that word advisedly) then frankly, they don't deserve to win the election. No way, no how.
It's beyond absurd, after the last eight years, any presidential race against a republican should even have been close ever; this may be the apparently necessary "act of God" Obama has needed, to win this election. Time will tell, I guess...
this has so many plot twists, doesnt it? tonights big story, mccain would like to postpone the debate and go back to washington to solve the economic problem and hes called on obama to respond in kind. obama at this point has said no, and really this seems such a shameless ploy and his suggested reschedule? why the vp debates of course. that will keep sarah p from having to debate joe biden. listening to the talking heads tonight who say there is nothing for mccain to do here and in fact his presence may be detrimental to the process. it does play well in peoria tho where it appears his doing this is for the good of country. how many days till the election? how long does he think he can postpone a real head to head discussion on the issues? and did anyone catch bush's speech today? did you notice the time frame he offered up? not something that happened on his watch of course, he dumped it right in clintons lap.
And again, without any disrespect to the opinions of anyone else, I do believe we are all equal. Equally f*cked.
I fully agree, we are screwed,,,,,,,,, and we ain't gonna get kissed!
__________________
my days left here may not be long, I wouldn't waste my time telling you nothing wrong, love is a flower that needs the sun and the rain, alittle bit of pleasure is worth a whole lot of pain. no pain no gain. betty wright
From a purely political perspective, I cannot help but see this 'not unforeseen, but certainly abrupt' crumbling of the American economic status quo, as anything other than "Advantage: Obama" -- perhaps so much so, it will ultimately decide who moves into the White House, come January.
Without wanting to appear ghoulish, and not discounting at all, the tragic implications of this situation, if the Obama camp doesn't seize this "opportunity" (and I do use that word advisedly) then frankly, they don't deserve to win the election. No way, no how.
It's beyond absurd, after the last eight years, any presidential race against a republican should even have been close ever; this may be the apparently necessary "act of God" Obama has needed, to win this election. Time will tell, I guess...
If I did believe in a god, I'm quite certain that god would not be supporting BO. Specifically in conjunction with a heavily weighed democrat congress. BTW, the old saying, "there's no where to go but up"? Yeah, well that's off the table in this case. Just peek back to the JC days and there's plenty of room to continue this downward spiral. If the economy goes any further south we won't need a lick of worry about social issues, human rights, fair trade agreements. None of it matters if the economy falls further to crap. And if anyone really believes Capt Crap stands a rats chance in hell of saving the day with a bag full of rhetoric a toothy smile and a shytload of two dollar campaign contributions you're only fooling yourselves. Of course, that's just one angry womans opinion. And again, without any disrespect to the opinions of anyone else, I do believe we are all equal. Equally f*cked.
From a purely political perspective, I cannot help but see this 'not unforeseen, but certainly abrupt' crumbling of the American economic status quo, as anything other than "Advantage: Obama" -- perhaps so much so, it will ultimately decide who moves into the White House, come January.
Without wanting to appear ghoulish, and not discounting at all, the tragic implications of this situation, if the Obama camp doesn't seize this "opportunity" (and I do use that word advisedly) then frankly, they don't deserve to win the election. No way, no how.
It's beyond absurd, after the last eight years, any presidential race against a republican should even have been close ever; this may be the apparently necessary "act of God" Obama has needed, to win this election. Time will tell, I guess...
