Posts Made By: Dave Wagner

+1

Not that facts and logic will win any argument with the neo-leftists.

Dave Snope said:

Even the liberal Washington Press Corp is getting fed up and are starting to come out of the closet. Don't screw with the great liberal journalist hero Bob Woodward or they start turning against you. With the Clinton admin, you'd get and IRS audit if you crossed them. With Obama, you get vile threats. Here's some more:

Even Jonathan Alter — who frequently appears on the Obama-friendly MSNBC — came forward to say he, too, had been treated horribly by the administration for writing something they didn’t like.

“There is a kind of threatening tone that, from time to time — not all the time — comes out of these guys,� Alter said this week. During the 2008 campaign swing through Berlin, Alter said that future White House press secretary Robert Gibbs disinvited him from a dinner between Obama and the press corps over it.

“I was told ‘Don’t come,’ in a fairly abusive e-mail,� he said. “[It] made what Gene Sperling wrote [to Woodward] look like patty-cake.�


Is this the mostly blatantly evil admin in U.S. history? No wonder so many MSM stories delete embarassing statements from Obama stories and videos. They're scared.

“I had a young reporter asking tough, important questions of an Obama Cabinet secretary,� says one DC veteran. “She was doing her job, and they were trying to bully her. In an e-mail, they called her the vilest names — bitch, c–t, a–hole.� He complained and was told the matter would be investigated: “They were hemming and hawing, saying, ‘We’ll look into it.’ Nothing happened.�

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/beat_the_press_96lFrUNync5zuBZTiZ6aUL

Chicago THUGS. Put them in jail.

The next shoe SHOULD be that Pigford gets exposed!

On top of Self Employment taxes of 15%, and State taxes of 5.3%, and Fed Taxes of upwards of 30-35% (probably more if "Obama Nation" gets in, with his "wealth tax" proposals), and probably more if J-Mac gets in with his "I'm pretending to be a conservative republican gets in)

But, lets not forget other tax-like things that uniquely apply to the small business person/self-employed:

Healthcare (it's deductible, but still incredibly expensive per month for a family coverage plan) - Net cost: $700/mo after factoring deduction - and that's for plans with a $5000 deductible. Basically that is $13,000 per year...

Property Taxes: mine are $10,000 per year...

Local Taxes, user fees, and Vehicular excise taxes...

My net tax burden is well over 50%

No, I am afraid the ONLY way to cut the deficit is to cut spending, but that is something neither Party has shown themselves capable of doing...

With the crowd running now, we WILL be worse in 4 years, I'm afraid...

Just remember that "Change" is a bipolar condition by definition - "Change for the worse", or "change for the better". So it is incorrect to state "no matter who gets in we will be better" - it's a logical fallacy.

Maybe I'm old and naive, (or old and curmudgeonly!), but I just can't see voting for someone who is demonstrably unqualified, lacks any experience, and has no actual principles whatsoever...

I'll leave you all to figure that one out!

In the meantime, Clear Enough Skies
(maybe with energy costs skyrocketing, there'll be less night-time lighting???)

Joe Bergeron said:

Here's an equally biased item, only coming from the opposite direction:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/arianna-huffington/the-bailout-plan-welcome_b_128450.html

"Equally Biased". You compare ANYTHING on Huffington's "Puff post" site to Bloomberg News??? That is really reaching to make your point, IMO

Me, I don't trust any website that has details on Lindsay Lohan's "dating" situation! ROFLMAO Are liberals THAT desperate to avoid the real inconvenient truth that their icons (Chris Dodd, Obama, Clinton and more) are MORE in bed with the lobbyists from Fannie/Freddie than the Republicans are/were? This was a debacle created because THEY prevented its being addressed in a timely fashion! Even the NY Times has published the details on the many years of Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac "bribery" of top democratic Senators who could PREVENT inconvenient oversight, their prevention of the McCain sponsored oversight and re-capitalization rules, etc...

The reality is that 95% of our elected officials in Washington are out and out crooks. I'm no huge fan of McCain's; I don't trust him on issues that are of critical importance to me. But he did (demonstrably in this specific instance) at least try to stop Fannie/Freddie LONG before it was too late.

Anytime you give this much power to government office holders, regulators and over-seers, the ones who do the law making, over-seeing and the regulating become easy pickings targets for corruption and influence peddling... It would be shocking and scandalous if this didn't continually happen over and over again!

Today's mess is the result.

The real cause? Social Utopians thinking that "everyone has a right to own their own home"! What a load of steaming matter! Like, really? Everyone? Even if they can't afford it? Who pays for it? Ah yes, well, it turns out (if this bailout goes through) EVERY SINGLE AMERICAN THAT WORKS FOR A LIVING AND PAYS TAXES AND THEIR BILLS AND MORTGAGES PAY FOR IT!

I guess all the honest, hard-working REAL Americans should have just borrowed 300% more than we could repay, so that we could get bailed out AND protected from our own "stupidity".

And now the Dodd's and Frank's and Obama's want to "protect all those innocent people who are about to lose their homes!" Q'uell Horror!

I remember well when Barney Frank (one of our "not so distinguished" congressmen from here in MA) went on a rant that attempts to overseen Fannie and Freddie and tighten the rules would mean "that many poor people would be prevented from owning their own home and having a chance at the American dream"

EXACTLY! If you can't afford something, loaning you more than you can ever afford to repay is NOT a good thing. It inevitably leads to "bubbles"... and when bubbles pop, people get splattered.

I say let EVERYONE involved take their lumps:

Execs that collateralized this junk - JAIL and take back ALL their profits and bonuses

Congress/Senators/Oversight agencies - heads roll, and prosecution when possible ("follow the money!")

People that default because they bought $400K houses on underqualified incomes (or non-qualified), pr gambling that prices would continue to go up, should default and be repossessed.

There is NO free lunch in life, and each/every time we try and let government somehow "change" that reality, it leads to a debacle.

Me? I'm bunkering down for a serious dose of hyper-inflation, ala 1970s.

Because the sad reality is that this is so big, they unfortunately really don't have any choice but to monetize all that debt. Because, as scary as Inflation and debt are, deflation is MUCH uglier...

We need some serious Perp Walking!

Deja-vu anyone?

Les Chambers said:

I find your statement:

"If they were the CEOs of corporations, their sorry asses would have been fired long ago for squandering their money" more than just a tinge ironic. It is afterall these same CEOs and investment executives who created this mess. So much for holy business weeding out incompetence.

Actually, the ROOT cause was the federal government, starting with the Community Redevelopment Act (under Clinton and the Democrats) passing laws that REQUIRED lenders to lend money to those "disadvantaged, minorities, etc." whom they KNEW could NEVER pay the loans back...

The poster child for this was when BofA wanted to buy Boston's biggest bank, Fleet. One of the "legal conditions" was that BofA then lend money to 1000's of poor in urban Boston to buy houses. Barney Fwank was the chief antogonist in that little "situation"...

So, the "compromise" (so that the Banks would NOT immediately give all their campaign contributions towards getting the Dems - then in charge - outta power?)... Ah, yes, we'll just have Fannie/Freddie take OVER those loans, in a swoop, converting them from JUNK to AAA rated...

Then, the financial backers of the biggies piled on by ensuring (again through donations) that derivatives against those bad (but now "perfumed" by Fannie/Freddie) mortages would NOT be regulated... and the Ponzi scheme snowballed...

What I hate the most is, when a few (and it was only a few) of the Republicans (strangely enough led by McCain) tried to "call out" Fannie/Freddie - they were accused, again by leading democrats including Barney, Nancy - the succubus - Pelosi, Chris Dodd and others of BEING RACIST because the head of Fannie/Freddie (can't remember just now which, but it really doesn't matter) happened to be BLACK.

I.e. it was just those evil republicans trying to screw those poor blacks out of their right to housing!

It's all a load of C---

Guess who was the leading recipient of campaign contributions in 2006 from Fannie/Freddie, etc.? Yep, The Obamination! (And Chris Dodd was number two as I recall)...

anytime you give any government (republican, democratic, whatever) the POWER to legislate the market, this is the ultimate result... Always has been, always will be...

They are ALL (well almost all) in it up to their wazoo!

"Got ENOUGH Change?"

Les Chambers said:

Paul McCarty said:


There's a few more sides than just Dems and Repubs.

No sh*t. Did anyone else pick up on the Chinese Finance Premier's "warning" (his word) last week to the United States to stop with the deficit spending because it threatens the PRC's $2 Trillion in assets by devaluing the Dollar? Then today the BBC is reporting that the Chine Premier is "suggesting" that the Dollar be replaced as the benchmark currency in the IMF.

Every dollar the govt borrows to finance these bailouts comes from China. If they decide not to buy any more U.S. Treasury Bills, the good ole' U.S. of A. is up the proverbial creek because no other govt has the economic wherewithal to buy the amount of debt we need to sell. Accordingly, decisions by our govt are dictated, not by U.S. interests, but by what is good for Beijing. It'd be very interesting to know what the PRC's stake in AIG is.

Les

The good news, if you can think of it that way (which is hard to do), is that "the USA is too BIG to fail" in the same way that AIG is... If we go under, we drag China down with us...

It's all rather sick frankly... but then again, why do you think so many in government want to take away our guns? They're afraid it'll reach the point where we all actually consider using them - on them...

"Got ENOUGH Change?"

Luca Grella said:

Don Barar said:

And why did humans get smarter? Certainly not because somebody in government said this is the direction were heading boys [snip]

I'll bet the people in the coal states that mine coal for a living will will be absolutely thrilled to learn that they are going to be put out of business.
[snip]

Papa Obama will put you on the government doll at the poverty level while you are waiting for new energy sources that might not come.

Rich liberals are always eager to offer solutions !!!!

Warmest regards,

Don

Don,
Obama has been voted by an unprecedented landslide, the goverment is us, you and me included.
What the goverment says is what the people says. Basic democratic concept.
The american people has decided clearly about the energy policy.
The people who worked in the coal mines will be happy to find better jobs elsewhere,
since other opportunities will arise.
The rich
speculators on the coal worker's health will have to speculate on something else.

The last Presidents who came from an elite was one from the hollywood elite
and the other one from the oil elite, while Obama comes from the foodstamp elite



Regards and clear unpolluted skies

this is classic evidence of liberals inability to understand REALITY.

"voted in by an unprecedented landslide"... WTF???? You are either a) HIGH, b) a liberal Obama-apologist, or c) both... I suspect "c", but will graciously give you the benefit of the doubt.

he won by less than 5% of the vote, that does NOT a landslide make...

"What the goverment says is what the people says. Basic democratic concept." maybe I shouldn't have given you that benefit of the doubt. You're clearly both...

The "people" (in Germany) also wanted, and got National Soccialism (and Hitler); they WANTED to blame everything on the Jews... It was "democratic" so it must have been ok, by YOUR logic! BTW we are NOT, and have NEVER BEEN a "democracy"... Nice try and thanks for playing though... Look up "Republic" sometime.

"The people who worked in the coal mines will be happy to find better jobs elsewhere,
since other opportunities will arise." Yep, you are definitely stoned. Just WHERE are all those jobs going to come FROM (in those locations where they do mining?). Who is going to create them? How? When? If they have to MOVE to where the "new jobs" are, who is going to PAY FOR THAT? By what right do YOU presume to decide what THEY will be HAPPY about? - complete, total, liberal fantasy!

You were right on one thing, Obama DID come from "the foodstamp elite"; worthless, craven, opportunistic, and oh so very, VERY smooooottthhhhhh

Luca Grella said:

First of all the government is us the taxpayer including you, it is not some entity coming from mars.
The government, thus us, had to do what has been doing only to keep those companies in bussiness.
But the governemnt, us that is, cannot keep the people who bankrupted their own companies since that would have been incoherent.
The bonuses were paid even if they were not earned.
It had to take ownership because the taxpayer is doing and investmenmt believeing that the american industry will prevail, that is the modern center right part
For the russians prewar of the soviet union it was 6 month in jail if you only just arrived late at work.
Stalin wouldd have sent all those people who have run those bussiness into the ground to siberia including their parents relatives and friends,
and then he would have burned their towns to the ground, that is the comunist part.

Luca, you're clearly missing an important point here:

1) you say "the government is us the taxpayer..." Would that you were correct. But you are WRONG. it is "the organization which best embodies the majority of VOTERS" (albeit in an imperfect sense... Oh, if ONLY the people actually PAYING taxes were the majority!) Alas, it is now farther from the truth than it has ever been in the history of the USA. In fact, early on in the US, the government most closely DID reflect the will of the tax payers... but it has been slipping for a LONG, time now...

You see, the liberal/left has finally now succeeded in changing enough laws (and breaking enough others, via ACORN, etc.) such that the majority are now not actually PAYING taxes, or there are enough additional (stupid?) tax PAYERS that are willing to vote for THEIR (economic) death-warrant combined with the non-payers that they are the majority! Once the Illegal Aliens are granted "amnesty" and permitted the vote, it is ALL over, and there will be no recovering. The Rubicon of "mob rule" will have been crossed...

Go check out the IRS tables on who actually still PAYS freaking taxes sometime! What a laugh. People who actually PAY for things typically make rational decisions... people who only GET FINANCIAL BENEFITS FROM the Govermnment, without PAYING in only vote for their own selfish, snout in the gravy train trough!

"I have a right to a job" - really, what if you are incompetent?
"I have a right to healthcare" - really, whence cometh this right and who pays?
"I have a right to a mortgage, just like those rich white folks" - really, even if you can't pay it back?
"I have a right to keep my house even though I couldn't pay the mortgage" - really, even though letting you keep it means we bring down the economy?
"I have a right to food!" - really, who pays for it?
"I have a RIGHT to

Nope Sorry, you don't have a right to anything other than "life, liberty and the PURSUIT of Happiness", and that only because we have "all been endowed by our CREATOR" with said inalienable rights...

Rights, my friends, don't come from Government...

I believe it was Oswald Spanglar (spelling?) (or was it Lafayette?) who famously said something along the lines of "as soon as a citizenry finds out it can vote itself largesse from the public treasury, its government and economic strength is not long for this world"... (I may be wrong on the reference, but it it highly germane, since that is precisely where we are).

The lefties have won, with a bare 4% majority, and are now proceeding to "legally" Loot the Economy...

2) "The government had to do what has been doing only to keep those companies in bussiness (sic)"... LOL... You mean like PENALIZE GM, FORD and CHRYSLER for building the vehicles that were PROFITABLE to them? (under government CAFE regulations - they were penalized for building fuel-inefficient cars, which, unfortunately, most Americans actually WANTED!... And now, the governments plan (under Obama and the 'I vant to suck your vallet, Bela Pelosi led leftists in Congress) is to use their "ownership stake" (yes, Luca THAT is the textbook definition of Socialism, btw) to FORCE GM/Chrysler to build the exact cars (high mileage econo-boxes) they have already proven they cannot compete with foreigh companies, only in order to a) keep union jobs, and b) work out their utopian ideals of what should be built and driven - even though most Americans didn't buy them...

Where have we seen THAT scenario play out... can you say; "cool, lets all run out and buy Yugo's or Lada's... ROFMLAO

yep, they'll bumble along for a while, but building small, lower quality cars which aren't profitable isn't a recipe for GM/Chrysler success... you heard it here first.

3) "The government cannot keep the people who bankrupted their own companies since that would be incoherent"? Um... do you actually know WHY GM/Chrysler went bankrupt? And why Ford isn't (yet)? Mostly really bad TIMING on their parts in terms of when they accessed capital on the private markets... Ford (lucky for them) had already obtained long term loans they needed, when the Financial Markets melted down and "froze credit". W/o Credit GM and Chrysler were TOAST.

What was the reason behind their horrible cash flow? Can you say "Unions" and the unbelievable unfunded pension liabilities that went along with those Union contracts? Sure, knew you could...

Does that bring to mind any OTHER unfunded pension liabilities?.... Hmmm, Can you say "Social Security?"... Good for you!

4) "... the taxpayer is doing and investmenmt believeing that the american industry will prevail, that is the modern center right part" (sic)...

Ok I'll ignore the spelling/grammar part...

Taxpayers doing "investing" in private companies:

a) is NEVER Center, let alone Right... it is, and always has been, a tenet of the LEFT (the old, Government owning means of production thing).

b) it has, and never will, WORK... the government (not the "TAXPAYERS" Luca - see #1 above) will always favor protecting jobs, or something more immediately relevant to getting VOTES, than making smart investments in capital investment decisions... Not to say that the leadership of GM and Chrysler (and Ford for that matter) made smart decisions, but at least they were self-interested to the extent that they were trying to build the capital value of the companies involved... to the extent they failed, they must be allowed to totally FAIL - i.e. bankruptcy... sell off the assets (to a PRIVATE bidder) and let the chips fall where they may...

See this is the part the government finds it "hard to do" (making TOUGH decisions that mean that Union workers get laid off...) or Plants get closed, or assets get sold... nope, these companies will die long, lingering, horribly expensive and scelerotic deaths... kept on the life support of "government finances" until even the loonies of the left realize there's no "there there!"...

Your earlier post on the Nazi's being "socialist" is also a bit off the mark... just because they called themselves "National Socialists" doesn't MAKE them Socialists... they were actually more of a right-wing dictatorship of sorts, than "socialist" in the truest sense of the word...

Just like today's "Liberals" are anything but the classic definition of Liberal...

both modern parties are a total disgrace... It's time for another American Revolution.

This time, we shouldn't let anyone who doesn't a) own land, and b) pay taxes VOTE!

Just what are all you lefties and socialists going to do where there are NO more Rich, and no more people working/paying taxes... whence cometh the golden eggs THEN?

Nope, unless things turn around in the mid-terms (unlikely considering the depths to which the once Grand GOP have sunk), US is toast...

But, you caught me on an optimistic day!

Clear Skies

Kevin Conville said:

I dunno Don,
I think some very good things came out of the New Deal.
WPA, Social Security, Fair Labor Standards, FDIC, FHA, TVA, SEC. To name a few.
Don't blame FDR if some of them have run amuck, he's been dead a long time.

You neatly dodged my questions though.
Why was W better? Here's a little history he ignored...
Evoking the word "crusade" when speaking of our intents in the Mid East.
Not knowing that Iraq is a man-made political expedience and not really a country occupied by essentially three different regions and tribes that hate each other held together by a dictator that when deposed would allow chaos to reign.
That Putin came out of the KGB, with all it's implications.
That Saudi Arabia is one of the most oppressive regimes in the Mid East and a factory for the terrorists who hate us, all the while playing kissy face (literally) and holding hands with Faud.

I'll stop here as this will get to be a very long list.

The other question you ignored is who is representing Buckleyesque politics for you? I get that Barack Obama's not your guy. Who IS your guy(s).

FWIW I'm not in lock step with Obama either and have been disturbed by the continuance of some of the economic decisions initiated by Paulson (Bush) and now Geithner. These guys were a big part of the problem. Your assertions about W however are insanely off base though, IMO.

Just read ALL of Don's posts - on this thread, and he didn't mention Bush once... So why the Bush-rant??? (so once again the "Bush Lied, people died" contingent get's itself in a lather and try's to make everything about Bush - who isn't even in power anymore...???)

Did BUSH just nationalize two of the big 3 automakers? - nope, that's Obama thank you
Did BUSH try to socialize medicine? - nope, again, hmm, lets see... yeah, Obama again...
Did BUSH push the governmental invalidation of private contracts? - Bingo! Obama
Did BUSH spend $1B (with $2B more to follow) to GIVE to people to Buy new cars? - nope...
Did BUSH just more than triple the committed national debt in record time? - I think I see a TREND here...

There, I just mentioned BUSH for you

Now, you can legitimately begin your anti bush rant, though it has nothing to do with Don's points (on this thread) nor on why many DO in fact feel more scared for our country than at any point in our adult lives.

You list Social Security as a "good thing that came out of the new deal" it is PRECISELY Social Security, and it's follow on "children" Medicare and Medicaid that have CAUSED the explosion of DEBT in this country. SS was the first LEGAL Ponzi-scheme in history. There is NO "Social Security Trust Fund" (the money has always come out of governmental General Ledger receipts. NOTHING was EVER invested, so now that birthrates are declining precipitously, it is rapidly becoming UNFUNDABLE. SS was always a complete JOKE. A massive transfer from those who HAVE to those who don't.

SEC - yeah, they really had their eyes on Goldman Sachs and the whole CDO mortgage debacle didn't they? ROFLMAO

Nobody said (on this thread) that Bush was better, I certainly don't (and never did) feel that way. But Obama and Nancy (I Vant to Suck your Vallet) Pelosi and rest of the socialists now in charge are, quite literally, proceeding down a path that will make the artifically extended Great Depression (extended precisely BECAUSE of New Deal programs!) seem short in duration. They are RUINING our economy (what is left of it after the Goldman Sachs Oligarchs and BOTH parties got through with raping it, that is).

You can't print/borrow money that doesn't exist without a huge, downstream impact. The piper must be paid, at some point.

THAT is, I suspect, why most responders of the poll did so in the fashion they did. Most are old enough to understand certain fundamental truths:

1) you CANNOT get something for NOTHING (ever - there is always a PRICE)
2) If you dis-incent investment, productivity, work and profit - you WILL always get LESS of it
3) It has always, and will always be, investment of Capital, that creates jobs, profit and increase in the general standard of living

Obama and the current socialists in dominance, simply do not understand any of the above 3; in any way/shape or form. And that WILL have down-stream consequences that are quite easy to understand.

I suggest remembering the "golden rule" - he who has the gold, makes the rules...

Then again, I really could get into a "cash for colorful clunkers" for Astronomers; Government subsidies to give all of us up to $4500 to replace those nasty, false color Achromats (that are causing "global eye pollution") with new, high-end Apochromats made here in the good old USA... It'd be really good for jobs in a certain Illinous city anyway!

Nah, nevermind, if they did that, it would only drive the prices UP, what with all that government "free money" chasing limited supply of goods...

Hmmmm, wonder what happened with all that Medicaid and Medicare money (free to recipients) do the Prices of Healthcare since the 1960's..... yep, drove THOSE prices up also!

At least a total depression WILL impact light pollution, so...

clear enough skies