Got to wherever they have the news and read people's comments...sm
Posted By: ... on 2008-08-29
In Reply to: what websites? I'd love to read them - nm
CNN and MSNBC are the ones I go to the most. Some are just so hilarious.
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
Read the racist comments of Obama's pastor...
of his the pastor's hero Louis Farrakhan...and read the creed of Obama's church substituting "white" everywhere you see the word "black" and then we can have a discussion about racism as a way of life, not idle comments on a talk show. People need to wake up and smell the coffee before they put a racist in the White House.
Just read public comments on other websites...republicans are upset...sm
and either not voting or voting for Obama. McCain is looking like a true hypocrite with his VP pick. I couldn't stop laughing at all the comments. He made a HUGE mistake with Palin.
It is called "defending himself" from people with comments like yours!
x
That is if you can believe everything you read on the news.
The media that backs Barack will put a negative spin on the choice and the media that backs McCain will put a positive spin on it. Honestly, I wouldn't make any decisions based on anything I've read or heard in the news. It's so one-sided these days it's ridiculous. Truly hard to find unbiased journalism anymore.
News flash - yourself, you need to read
are the one trying to involve religion and "social issues."
Just read "Faux" news was the only one
who covered his arrival home. Hmmmmm, wonder why just Faux?
Don't need FOX news; I can read Obama's perversion
nm
Most people don't get the news from the
liberal media, i.e., NBC, CBS, ABC, any longer. News sources have shown their liberal bias for the last 8 years or so (coincidentally, when Bush became president). Olberhack can't hold a candle to O'Reilly, who was actually a newsman in his career, unlike ol' Keith who was a sports hack in LA, and still does NFL shows. Say what you will, the intelligent can figure out the media bias, such as Coulter's book alludes to, and also with Bernie Goldberg's new book, A Slobbering Love Affair Starring Barack Obama. The lefties can dish it out but can't take it when it's thrown back in their face. My point was that no one gives a crap what Olberhack says, he is a bomb thrower the likes that Coulter can be from time to time, but no on seems to mind...probably because not many watch and those that do are a bit befuddled anyway.
You didn't read the AP news story on Ogden?
I posted it below in a post yesterday.
Most people who hate fox news
are the same liberal nut jobs who like politicians to blow smoke up their butt and they follow blindly and willingly. They refuse to hear any other side and yet they spew about how fox news is one-sided. I'm sorry, but fox news is more fair than any channel or station I've seen or heard. Middle of the road people watch Fox. A lot more people are tuning into Fox than other stations that is for sure. So keep up your whining, screaming, and bad mouthing. People who have an open mind and want to see things from all sides, they watch Fox. People who refuse to hear or see anything but what they want to....watch MSNBC, etc.
As for Glenn Beck....he does get a little extreme sometimes, but he is a libritarian. He isn't pub or dem. He says what he means and means what he says which is a heck of a lot more than I can say for Obama and our government right now. They are too busy talking out of the sides of their mouths. I don't agree with everything Glenn says, but I do believe he actually cares. I don't agree with everything Bill O'Reilly says, but he does show things from both sides. He isn't a pub either, FYI. Sean Hannity.....I like his show because he gets both dems and pubs on there to talk. He is definitely conservative and I don't agree with everything he says either, but he is a good interviewer.
The people who refuse to watch Fox are also the same ones who blame pubs for everything while refusing to believe that the dems are to blame for our current situation as well. That is how blind they are. They are so stuck on party politics that all they can do is point fingers at the pubs and whine and refuse to hear anything else. Both parties are to blame.
The ratings prove everything. More and more people are tuning into Fox. Get a clue and stop your whining.
Our local news showed some people
who waited outside for 5-6 hours in freezing temps just to save maybe $50. Lord have mercy. I guess I'm thankful I don't need or want anything enough to do that!!
You're right about the me-me-me and it makes me sick. People will kill each other for a dollar!!
If some people on this board wasn't so against Fox News,
I never would have started watching it. I didn't even know I could get Fox on my TV. During the political campaign everyone complained about "Faux News", so I got curious, found it on my TV, and started watching.
Up until then, I was watching MSNBC including Chris Matthews and other opinionated commentators (who is going to lecture 5 miles from here today), ABC, NBC, CBS, etc.
Found out it doesn't matter if you watch the big 3 or the so-called MSNBC. They all had a sprinkling of news if it was broadcast at all, while Fox was usually FIRST with the news...and I mean real news, not just political news..They had exclusive reports and interviews with both sides, whereas the big 3 had 1-sided interviews.
Also, during the campaign, I was curious about O'Reilly, Hannity, Cavuto, and others. Started watching them to see what they were all about. Turns out I LIKE Hannity and Cavuto, but the one I really like is Bret Baier (sp).
Tried to watch Olberman and Matthews. Bitter, bitter guys and hardly truthful.
I still watch the big 3, but rely on Fox for truth and fairness. Say what you want, but view them with an open mind and you will be surprised.
Aren't people like that pathetic? FOX News is the
nm
I think all of these asinine news people who DO lay traps ONLY for the Republicans...sm
That's just a fact of life in politics these days.
If you're a Republican, they try to trap you, and if you fall for it, then it really is your own fault at times.
But if you're a democrat....just use your "pass go" card that is used all the time.
Democrats always given a free ride by the media.
Especially these days. Just look at Obama / Biden free pass parade, versus McCain / Palin.
It's really too bad most of this election has been run by the media, isn't it.....they have a lot of people fooled into thinking the election has already been won
I cant believe people cannot read
The point of the whole post is NOT whether I would allow my kids to do community service or not. I would. But I WOULD, NOT OBAMA WOULD. It is MY choice, my children's choice what we get involved in. I dont want government mandating to me or my children what we must do with our time. That is not freedom of choice.
I read about that - soon people making
30 and 40K is the ones he will consider rich and tax. I heard it was 250, then I heard 200, and now I'm hearing between 100 and 150K. I'll tell you Obama says it himself and they ignore it. Meanwhile the Martha Stewarts, Michelle & Barack Obama's, Pelosi, Edwards, Kerry and all those other rich democrats that have so many loopholes and their money hidden in non-taxable stuff will remain rich and we will feel the pain.
Great to know some people can read the mind of
nm
Another lame attempt to try to not get people to read the article
Your computer got a virus, yeah right!!!!
You don't like that I'm not drooling all over the O like you are then fine, but to come out and say that articles that are not praising your god gives your computer a virus is a bunch horse hockey.
Sheesh, I would have expected a better excuse than that.
P.S. - Am anxious to hear the supreme courts ruling. They are meeting on the 5th. Although I know that all the O worshippers will try and cut it down for some insane reason. The SC's ruling will determine it. Let's just wait and see.
Pulling things out of context when people can go read the whole thread proves nothing...
when someone says something posted from a court document with all the references in place is a lie simply because it was reprinted on a conservative website cares nothing about the truth. I said it and I meant it. That is not calling that person a liar. Stop twisting things to your advantage. Not all the liberals on this board play that game. Only a few of you do. Won't debate an issue, just say it is from a right wing rag (even if it is the original court document) and will absolutely not look at both sides of an issue. And based on what I have read about liberalism and what liberals posted on this very board in response to my question...that is the antithesis of true liberal behavior. So there are some of you who do not agree with the tactics either. So please...stop with the attacks. Does not look good on you.
I agree. How many people listen to sound bites, read just the headlines, or
listen to the partisan radio/TV personalities, and then go out and make up their minds. It only takes 10 minutes to visit a candidate's website and read their campaign platform. People need to stop expecting to be spoonfed information and take some initiative in this process.
I heard someone condemning Senator Obama's speech yesterday. He was simply repeating as fact something a conservative media personality had said. This person had not listened to the speech nor read a transcript of it. He had simply let someone else make up his mind for him.
comments (sm)
PK, I agree with some things you say, certainly not all, but you talk about the righer Bush goes the lefter you go. My question is this, do you think it's healthy to let ONE PERSON change your whole ideology? I think that's way too much influence for one person to have on your life. I don't think it's healthy. You are most likely a wonderful person, but like many on the left you have let the fear of Bush really cloud your view. I don't think he's the greatest president we have ever had, but he's certainly on the scoundrel that you and others here make him out to be. I think the problem with leftward thinking as a whole is that it basically says I, as an upper middle-class taxpayer, have to take care of everyone's woes even if their woes are self-inflicted, criminally obtained, or the result of being just plain lazy. Really, in the end when I stand before God I'm only going to have to answer for myself. I do give to others, so I'm not a selfish hog, but I don't think its right for the government to tell me I have to take care of someone else who is capable taking care of themselves. I'm for helping the truly downtrodden, incapacitated, and mentally disabled, but social programs as a whole are sham and downright theft. I don't want that for Iraq or America. I think it's far time that Americans start taking responsibility for themselves and get over the victim mentality and expecting the nanny state to do everything for us.
Anyway, your post was enlightening, and really the first non-angry post I've ever read from you.
Comments
Didn't realize it was a nasty attack, thought I was addressing a point you made about videos being truth and the written word not the truth. Thinking back on the history of propanda films in this country as well as others I disagreed and was trying to use logic.....and some humor.
As far as cut and paste, unless the board administrator says we can no longer do this I will probably continue to do it on the LIBERAL board, especially if it provides documentation for a point I am trying to make. Researchers and newspapers do it often. That said, here's another cut and paste quote, but don't know who said it:
The US has become the new Webster's definition of irony: Even though most Americans, most American lawmakers, and most American military commanders had long protested the usefulness of their presence in Iraq, ironically they still considered their own government a democracy.
This reminds me of Cheney commenting that basically he didn't care what the American people thought of the war or what they wanted. I thought we were supposed to be his boss.....
Thank you for your comments....... sm
You proved my point right here.
"As far as the "man on the street" interviews, it's obvious there are a lot of people in the United States who are ill informed and/or just ignorant, to the point it would be funny if it weren't so tragic. Otherwise, they would have known Obama's views on choice and Iraq..."
These are the very people who put Obama in office. These are the people who saw a charismatic young leader, just as the uninformed or misled people in other countries who do not know our issues and/or who have only been allowed to see what their governments want them to see on television.
I don't think France feels too "friendly" towards America/Bush right now, and it hasn't been too long ago that Mexico was rising up stating that Texas was still theirs and they planned on taking it back.
I do enjoy a good debate and hope that you or anyone else takes what I say here personally. I think we all have America's best interests at heart based on our own opinions but just come at it from different backgrounds/situations. Have a blessed day!
Most of these comments.......
are just about 5 years old or older.......Saddam lived in a dangerous neighborhood, I'm sure he wanted his neighbors to think he had truckloads of weapons. BUT, when the CIA could find no evidence of WMDs - their information was quashed and our govt outed a CIA agent in retribution (Valerie Plame) which is treason. It took years for the real truth of the matter to come to light........maybe that's why Clinton didn't rush on in there and hang Saddam......Iraq had nothing to do with 911 - now look at the cluster in Afghanistan that got left to simmer in the meantime.............sheesh......I blame Bush - it wasn't about WMDs (or they wouldn't have hidden the fact there were none) - it was about OIL.
Here are some comments about this
Some comments I read are:
"It can’t be understated what an insult this is to the American People, Sovereign (whether any individual Citizen understands this, flees from the responsibility for this or would change this) over their nation and its government. It is a betrayal, and may, indeed, be treasonous.
It is appropriate that Obama has, in bowing to a foreign potentate in this picture, shown his @ss to the American People; an act that would have been a capital offense had his position been reversed. It would have been inappropriate for him to genuflect before the British monarch, no matter how many neo-Tories there may be among us.
This particular potentate has, among his titles, acknowledgment of his status as keeper of the Holy Places of Islam, and thus singling out Abdullah of the Saudis for such a sign of respect should disturb, deeply, any American left who understands the United States and its history.
It strains credibility to believe someone representing State didn’t tell Obama what constituted a proper stance. He much have overruled that advice, and singled out this particular potentate for this gesture."
Another poster wrote -
I’ve read elsewhere that some people attempt to rationalize this bow-to-the-Saudi-King by Barack Obama as Obama somehow participating in “another country’s protocol” — which is rubbish given the Office that Barack Obama holds (the President of the United States of America bows to no other country, no ruler, to no one — this represents our nation, the U.S.A., as a sovereign nation subservient to no one else, no ruler, no other nation, our nation as a republic unto itself).
These were quotes taken from the second link down on this website.
http://www.prolifeblogs.com/articles/aggregator.php?sid=1121
mccaffrey comments
Then we have General (or whatever his designation) Barry McCaffrey stating we should send our sons and daughters to war cause the country needs them..On Countdown with Olbermann, he stated the govt must ask the people to send their sons and daughters..I have an answer for him..NO, not my son, not my daughter..I could see if this was a legitimate war (are any wars really truly legitimate..cant we resolve our crises without murder and mayhem..geez) but the Iraq war?? Heck no..never..Bush, you and your idiotic murderous administration got us into this, send your daughters to Iraq.
More inappropriate comments.sm
Your neocon party rhetoric is disturbing.
Politician comments
This is one thread I can't help posting to. First, I want to say that I absolutely hate the new p.c. term "clearly." Clearly this, clearly that from news anchors, talk show hosts, you name it.
As for the comment by Michelle Obama, if she is proud of her country "for the first time" then she's running a little late in my opinion. I've been a Democrat all my life but no more. The color of the candidate's skin has nothing whatsoever to do with anything, I don't care if he is pea green with orange stripes. Obama scares the bejeezers out of me!! Read about him and listen to him and learn. I'll not be voting for him. I would not have voted for Hillary. Why? Doesn't matter if she's a woman or not. I have no respect for her. I certainly don't admire her for standing by her man.
As for McCain, his stupid comment I think speaks for itself and doesn't show a lot of intelligence. Secondly, he is too old. While I admire his military service, I think if we like the condition of our country now, we'll enjoy more of the same and worse under his leadership.
Listen to both politicians. They both want to give amnesty to illegal aliens and I am dead set against it. Reagan (and I'm no fan of his either) tried that and now we have at least twice as many to deal with as we did then. It is purely political, get the votes whereever they can.
Then there's the matter of our country being sold off to foreign investors one piece at a time and the huge national debt to China. What happens when they call in their mortgage? Will they demand, California, Texas and maybe Alaska or will they just take over the whole danged country?
As for voting in this election????? I probably will just stay home for the first time since I've been old enough to vote. We don't even have a candidate to vote for that is the lesser of the evils in my opinion. I think the last good leader we had was Harry Truman, "walk softly and carry a big stick."
Exactly! I see no comments from the Pubs.
nm
So did you have any intelligent comments about what you saw...
Or were you just posting to spew your schtick?
Yeah, we get it. You don't like conservatives.
Was that your point? Because that's old news and adds nothing to the convo.
And the comments toward Elizabeth...
Hasselbeck weren't rude??
With these comments - see message
I would rate you no different than Rush Limbaugh. He's such a pig, and your comment about what she wore shows me you have no idea of any of the substance of her debate.
The only thing you have correct is that she smiled and she looked sharp. Very much Vice Presidential. Play back the tape and you will not see one wink or smirk.
Biden on the other hand. He seems so uncomfortable the look on his face was so painful almost like he had hemorrhoids or a severe case of intestinal gas. Everytime she came back with a fact he had a blank look on his face and then he'd say something and snap his head towards her as if he thought he could intimidate her. She was intelligent enough not to take the bait and she does not get intimidated. Good for her! She showed me she can stand up to anyone.
Biden told at least 10 lies tonight. Wonder how he's going to explain that away (I'm sure he will find a way).
Gov. Palin was described as brilliant, and had a level of skill we haven't seen since President Regan. They said she explained things so articulately and in a fashion everyone understood.
What she has shown me tonight is she understands the economy and how to get things done and she and John McCain will be fighting for us. Not more of the same with O'No/Biden.
Her comments are not hateful, considering
the general consensus is that Palin has hurt McCain more than his connection to Bush. By the way, MrsM never said she hated Palin, but she obviously has a strong opinion about her, and MrsM did not personally attack by namecalling anyone else on here for their opinion. And yet another example of twisting someone's words to suit their own agenda. McPalin has taught you well, Grasshopper.
Same comments made over and over
nn
Your comments are expected, ...the next
poster was correct...useless to talk to any Obama supporter sometimes at all. Why should I type out ad nauseum all of Obama's statements, when you don't remember them at all, and them blame me for "obviously not remembering." cheap shot, yet again.
You should really listen to Rush sometime. You might learn something and expand your mind. But wait, liberals think with their hearts, not their minds.
Cancel that. Just carry on with your own, bigoted opinions.
I would like to hear some comments
members of the 9/11 victims on this issue.
This is exactly the type of comments we don't need.
Discuss issues but don't post snide remarks. Simple as that. Worship has no place on this board.
Try following the trail of comments you are
Your ignorance is showing. If you notice the SUBJECT line I was responding to, you would understand. Try reading EVERYTHING before you spout off. You make yourself look very foolish.
Thanks. Here are just a couple comments
It is true. People can disagree without getting nasty. I think everyone gets in a dander when they feel they are being attacked for their beliefs/opinions.
I did vote for him and fully supported him while he was running against Hillary. All I knew was (to me) she was one of the worst people to run for office. She had no clue, road on the coattails of her husband. Everything good he did she claimed it as hers, but everything bad he did she had nothing to do with. Her lies were so blatant and then when she came out and told the public the reason she was staying in (in case something (too horrible to mention) happened to Obama, she'd be right there and even brought up JFK's name (or maybe it was RFK - one of the Kennedy's)). I just thought that was the worst worst worst ever. She may have been thinking and hoping for it but to actually say it just truly made me realize how much more I disliked her and the thought of her getting in literally made me nauseous. I also voted for Obama in the primaries because I said enough of the Clintons, they destroyed what little faith I had in the democratic party back then (I voted for Bill the first time but not the second) and all their crooked deals and illegal doings going on while they were in there, there was no way in you know where I wanted any of that crowd back (who knew Obama was going to bring them all back - Arrrrggggg - that's my word of frustration). After the primary's ended I started reading and hearing more and more about Obama's plans and speeches, etc. I thought to myself, well listening to his voice give speeches would be much better than listening to McCain with his "my friends" every other sentence he speaks, but then listening to Obama it got to a point where I'd just be counting how many uh, uh, umm, er, uh, uh. I even had some bets with friends who would get the closest number would buy the other a beer. HA HA. Anyway...I do say give the guy a chance, but I know that a lot of dems would be all over McCains back if he had gotten elected.
What I am seeing and hearing and reading is not very hopeful. I listen to the economist who know what's going on and have the solutions. It looks like a pretty dim future and I'm not blinded like a lot are with Obama's speeches. I want to know the truth and I'm not getting it from them (go figure).
What I don't like is that Obama is no different than all the other politicians out there. He lied to us during his campaign just like all the other presidents lied to us about what they would do. He kept boasting about change but he's not bringing change. He keeps spewing this hope message. Well its now time to put hope to work and stop talking about it as though he is still campaigning.
However, I respect anyone who has a difference of opinions. They (like me) are entitled to the way they feel. Like my mom used to say to me, I may disagree with you, but I respect you and people can have conversations without getting nasty.
Well..........your comments speak for themselves........
As per one of your earlier posts: "People in this country don't care if another attack happens on our soil, just as long as a democrat is sitting in office." What do you call that? How do you know what people care about? Seems as though you are only interested in your own "thoughts" and "feelings."
I agree with 'm',especially with her comments
about the animal kingdom.
When we say 'You live like an animal,' we mean this as an insult.
as an insult.
His comments were very clearly understood....can you
nm
Sorry, my comments were not meant s/m
to bring up all the Obama bashing that went on before the election. I am well aware of THAT. I meant to be honest and say what I think AFTER the election. I am not interested in delving up the no b/c, lack of experience, his being "Muslim" (which I DO NOT believe) or any of the other things Republicans used to bash him. I stand on what he is or is not doing now that he has had 6 months to show what he is going to do. Maybe his stimulus WILL work, I don't know. I don't think so but time will tell. Still, I do not regret for one minute not voting for McCain/Palin, if anything I think they would have been worse. Now that's just my opinion.
As a matter-of-fact, now that you mention it, I feel Obama is rather two-faced seeing as he, a smoker himself, goes against those who suffer the same addiction as he does. Puppet? Yeah.
I'm always happy to discuss politics but I will only discuss issues. I've been away from this board for quite some time as I got tired of reading the same old anti-Obama, pro-Mccain rhetoric. There are plenty of issues to discuss and neither the Republican nor the Democrat parties will look out for those in the middle class. Soooooo if this board can only discuss issues they discussed before the election, then I don't care to participate. Obama is our president, like it or not, and nothing is likely to change that for at least the next 4 years.
I hadn't heard about Ben's comments either..sm
And one place I read that happened 5 years ago.
Your comments were straightforward and clear.
I hope anyone reading this will go back and look at the post I quoted from, as well as all your other posts and form their own impressions.
thanks for your comments, totally agree
Just wanted to let you know you had support here. Buchanan IS a racist and I don't think he even realizes it. I find his article extremely offensive and I'm not even black.
Yes, and did you hear the comments about Lieberman...
"We wrote him off a long time ago." "He will find it very difficult from now on." Geez. And they call themselves the Democratic party (I am talking about the DNC, the power brokers..who seem to speak for everyone tho)
Ron Paul's comments on the bailout. sm
Dr. No is still working for us in Congress.
Dear Friends:
The financial meltdown the economists of the Austrian School predicted has arrived.
We are in this crisis because of an excess of artificially created credit at the hands of the Federal Reserve System. The solution being proposed? More artificial credit by the Federal Reserve. No liquidation of bad debt and malinvestment is to be allowed. By doing more of the same, we will only continue and intensify the distortions in our economy - all the capital misallocation, all the malinvestment - and prevent the market's attempt to re-establish rational pricing of houses and other assets.
Last night the president addressed the nation about the financial crisis. There is no point in going through his remarks line by line, since I'd only be repeating what I've been saying over and over - not just for the past several days, but for years and even decades.
Still, at least a few observations are necessary.
The president assures us that his administration "is working with Congress to address the root cause behind much of the instability in our markets." Care to take a guess at whether the Federal Reserve and its money creation spree were even mentioned?
We are told that "low interest rates" led to excessive borrowing, but we are not told how these low interest rates came about. They were a deliberate policy of the Federal Reserve. As always, artificially low interest rates distort the market. Entrepreneurs engage in malinvestments - investments that do not make sense in light of current resource availability, that occur in more temporally remote stages of the capital structure than the pattern of consumer demand can support, and that would not have been made at all if the interest rate had been permitted to tell the truth instead of being toyed with by the Fed.
Not a word about any of that, of course, because Americans might then discover how the great wise men in Washington caused this great debacle. Better to keep scapegoating the mortgage industry or "wildcat capitalism" (as if we actually have a pure free market!).
Speaking about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the president said: "Because these companies were chartered by Congress, many believed they were guaranteed by the federal government. This allowed them to borrow enormous sums of money, fuel the market for questionable investments, and put our financial system at risk."
Doesn't that prove the foolishness of chartering Fannie and Freddie in the first place? Doesn't that suggest that maybe, just maybe, government may have contributed to this mess? And of course, by bailing out Fannie and Freddie, hasn't the federal government shown that the "many" who "believed they were guaranteed by the federal government" were in fact correct?
Then come the scare tactics. If we don't give dictatorial powers to the Treasury Secretary "the stock market would drop even more, which would reduce the value of your retirement account. The value of your home could plummet." Left unsaid, naturally, is that with the bailout and all the money and credit that must be produced out of thin air to fund it, the value of your retirement account will drop anyway, because the value of the dollar will suffer a precipitous decline. As for home prices, they are obviously much too high, and supply and demand cannot equilibrate if government insists on propping them up.
It's the same destructive strategy that government tried during the Great Depression: prop up prices at all costs. The Depression went on for over a decade. On the other hand, when liquidation was allowed to occur in the equally devastating downturn of 1921, the economy recovered within less than a year.
The president also tells us that Senators McCain and Obama will join him at the White House today in order to figure out how to get the bipartisan bailout passed. The two senators would do their country much more good if they stayed on the campaign trail debating who the bigger celebrity is, or whatever it is that occupies their attention these days.
F.A. Hayek won the Nobel Prize for showing how central banks' manipulation of interest rates creates the boom-bust cycle with which we are sadly familiar. In 1932, in the depths of the Great Depression, he described the foolish policies being pursued in his day - and which are being proposed, just as destructively, in our own:
Instead of furthering the inevitable liquidation of the maladjustments brought about by the boom during the last three years, all conceivable means have been used to prevent that readjustment from taking place; and one of these means, which has been repeatedly tried though without success, from the earliest to the most recent stages of depression, has been this deliberate policy of credit expansion.
To combat the depression by a forced credit expansion is to attempt to cure the evil by the very means which brought it about; because we are suffering from a misdirection of production, we want to create further misdirection - a procedure that can only lead to a much more severe crisis as soon as the credit expansion comes to an end... It is probably to this experiment, together with the attempts to prevent liquidation once the crisis had come, that we owe the exceptional severity and duration of the depression.
The only thing we learn from history, I am afraid, is that we do not learn from history.
The very people who have spent the past several years assuring us that the economy is fundamentally sound, and who themselves foolishly cheered the extension of all these novel kinds of mortgages, are the ones who now claim to be the experts who will restore prosperity! Just how spectacularly wrong, how utterly without a clue, does someone have to be before his expert status is called into question?
Oh, and did you notice that the bailout is now being called a "rescue plan"? I guess "bailout" wasn't sitting too well with the American people.
The very people who with somber faces tell us of their deep concern for the spread of democracy around the world are the ones most insistent on forcing a bill through Congress that the American people overwhelmingly oppose. The very fact that some of you seem to think you're supposed to have a voice in all this actually seems to annoy them.
I continue to urge you to contact your representatives and give them a piece of your mind. I myself am doing everything I can to promote the correct point of view on the crisis. Be sure also to educate yourselves on these subjects - the Campaign for Liberty blog is an excellent place to start. Read the posts, ask questions in the comment section, and learn.
H.G. Wells once said that civilization was in a race between education and catastrophe. Let us learn the truth and spread it as far and wide as our circumstances allow. For the truth is the greatest weapon we have.
In liberty,
Ron Paul
Your comments about dropping "ing,"
"dude", and "six pack joes" were condescending and elitist. You infer that these people are inferior in your view, that their intelligence is lacking simply because they drop the "ing." I guess you know your are pointing fingers at the entire southern tier of this country and in most rural areas. Are you saying no one from those areas is "fit" to be VP?
And to answer your question, YES, I would be very comfortable with her running this country. How could she possibly do worse than all those experienced "pleasant speaking no drop the 'ing'" folks up there in Washington? Look where we are right now! In a mell of a hess, right??
I know what she ISN'T. She did not go to a racist church for 20 years, she has not been linked to home grown terrorist, and she is NOT a socialist. Obama IS. Does his history, 20 years in a church that preaches black liberation theology and economic parity worry YOU at all? I suppose not, if you want to live in a socialist country.
I would much rather hear "dude" and people dropping the "ing" than a socialist society. What about his global poverty program and wanting a set percentage of our tax dollars going to combat povery all over the world...can't we take care of America first? We already give millions in aid...we have to earmark our tax dollars to go overseas? In the interest of globalization? You go ahead and vote for "citizen of the world" Obama. I myself will vote for "Country First" McCain, and the only one of the 4 who has a clue what life is like in the real world, Sarah Palin.
Have a good day now! :)
i've seen plenty of comments
regarding religion... obama and mccain.... seen it a bit more with obama with good reason, when you hear what his pastor of 20 years has said.
Poster below is right...your comments here are ugly.
|
