An ANSWER please?

[manifold]

Yeah, but...but...how can the government effectively run a military retirement program?

This from a staunch advocate of government run universal healthcare

 

[DiamondDave]

Of course the real answer is if a Republican does it we will bitch about it.
If a Democrat does it we will cheer about it.



It's just that simple little thing they put in the liberal kool aid.

Yeah, nimrodimus always like to talk shit about retied military, but at least we EARN ours while he's all for unions ...

The dude's a whackjob.

Oh please, gunny do spare me.

You and both know that a significant majority of lifers weren't worth the coffee they sucked up during their skylarking careers.

Now if you'll reread my post you'll note that I suggested that we'd be SCREWING those people and I sarcastically noted that they'd get their reward in heaven, too.

But please don't expect me to pretend that I think every retire military out there was worth his salt, because pal, I was there, remember?

With the exception of CONGRESS, you military boys have the best retirement plan in the world and not 1 in ten military folks work half as hard as the vast majority of people in the civilian world.

You are indeed talking out of your ass

 

[Ravi]

Yeah, but...but...how can the government effectively run a military retirement program?

This from a staunch advocate of government run universal healthcare

Hey, doofus...one I was being sarcastic, two since when have I been a staunch advocate of universal healthcare?

 

[WillowTree]

Bush gave money to banks unregulated like everything he has done in his Administration.

Obama actually has regulations in the pipeline and plans to track every dollar spent. Never mind the fact that Obama's idea will actually help the American people.

And before you ask, I was against the bailout of the banks, for the bailout of the auto industry.

yeah,, like the asshole saying lobbyists couldn't work in his administration. then what does he do? He hires lobbyists..

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

I really want an Obama supporter to explain how his plans to spend 3 times the amount of money we do not have over what Bush spent is a good thing, when you claim the money Bush spent we do not have was a bad thing?

Easy. You and bush wanted to spend a trillion dollars on Iraq. You wanted to rebuild shite and sunni religious schools, iraqi roads, and bridges.

We democrats want to spend money on american roads, bridges, and jobs.



Hope that clears it up for you.

ROFLMNAO... Gunny, did you expect anything else?

Bush spent money on national security... when what he SHOULD have been doing was SPENDING VASTLY MORE MONEY subsidizing the idiots here at home.

 

[manifold]

Yeah, but...but...how can the government effectively run a military retirement program?

This from a staunch advocate of government run universal healthcare

Hey, doofus...one I was being sarcastic, two since when have I been a staunch advocate of universal healthcare?

Since I've known you, or so I thought.

Hear that everyone? Ravi opposes universal healthcare. Duly noted.

 

[Ravi]

This from a staunch advocate of government run universal healthcare

Hey, doofus...one I was being sarcastic, two since when have I been a staunch advocate of universal healthcare?

Since I've known you, or so I thought.

Hear that everyone? Ravi opposes universal healthcare. Duly noted.

You've really been through the tissues today, I see.

I've never made my mind up on universal healthcare. Kirk supports it so there must be something wrong with it. I've yet to see a plan that makes sense.

 

[manifold]

Kirk supports it so there must be something wrong with it.

My nominee for best quote of the week!

 

[eots]

I really want an Obama supporter to explain how his plans to spend 3 times the amount of money we do not have over what Bush spent is a good thing, when you claim the money Bush spent we do not have was a bad thing?

Further explain exactly how a pork ladened bill that spreads millions to democratic supporters and Unions helps rescue the ailing economy?

its like Jesus and the fish and bread thing...you need to have faith in the Obama

 

[manu1959]

I really want an Obama supporter to explain how his plans to spend 3 times the amount of money we do not have over what Bush spent is a good thing, when you claim the money Bush spent we do not have was a bad thing?

Easy. You and bush wanted to spend a trillion dollars on Iraq. You wanted to rebuild shite and sunni religious schools, iraqi roads, and bridges.
We democrats want to spend money on american roads, bridges, and jobs.
Hope that clears it up for you.

as i recall dems voted to go to iraq and spend the money....and as i recall funding for foreign planned parenthood clincs was jsut passed.....so to say all yall are america first would be a tad missleading.....btw when do all the troops come home and outsourcing stop.....

 

[Shadow]

Bush gave money to banks unregulated like everything he has done in his Administration.

Obama actually has regulations in the pipeline and plans to track every dollar spent. Never mind the fact that Obama's idea will actually help the American people.

And before you ask, I was against the bailout of the banks, for the bailout of the auto industry.

Must be why Oblah blah expired all of the regulations regarding welfare then...since he loves regulations so much...not.

 

[elvis]

It was Clinton who deregulated the banks and put pressure on them to give mortgage loans out to people who couldn't afford them.

 

[Chris]

Hey, doofus...one I was being sarcastic, two since when have I been a staunch advocate of universal healthcare?

Since I've known you, or so I thought.

Hear that everyone? Ravi opposes universal healthcare. Duly noted.

You've really been through the tissues today, I see.

I've never made my mind up on universal healthcare. Kirk supports it so there must be something wrong with it. I've yet to see a plan that makes sense.

We already have universal healthcare, just a really, really bad version of it. Everyone can be treated in the emergency room. We don't let people bleed to death on the street here. Not yet, anyway. So the rich get great healthcare, and the poor get no healthcare until they are at death's door. Does that sound like a good way to run a society? No, it doesn't. The ironic thing is that every other Western democracy has a single payer system, and they pay HALF per capita what we pay for healthcare. Why? Because they don't have to pay liability lawyers, insurance companies, and Big Pharma. There are inherent cost savings with a single payer system. The Germans have had one since 1886!

With a single payer system you would still pick your doctor, and your doctor would still own his practice. There would just be one insurance company, and that would be the government.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Yeah we are in this because of exceesive regulatory zeal and your people want to fix it with even more regulatory zeal. And please don't give me that crap about the 1999 bill again that bill wouldn't even have been necessary had not it been for the previous forty years of regualtions of the Mortgage and home building industry.

Might want to spell regulations right if you're going to try and talk me down about it.

No regulation is what partly goes us where we are now. If this situation has proven anything, no regulation doesn't work and Wall Street can't be trusted with much. (Both facts many of us knew beforehand).

No regulation started during the Clinton years and expanded further under Dubya to the point of where we got where we are now.

Except 3 times the Republicans tried to get MORE regulations and the Democrats shot it down. Bush tried twice and McCain tried once, Barney Frank and Chris Dodd lead the successful efforts to thwart the Republicans, hell those two were insisting even in early 2008 the Housing market was JUST fine. YOU may want to get YOUR facts straight.

 

[Chris]

Yeah we are in this because of exceesive regulatory zeal and your people want to fix it with even more regulatory zeal. And please don't give me that crap about the 1999 bill again that bill wouldn't even have been necessary had not it been for the previous forty years of regualtions of the Mortgage and home building industry.

Might want to spell regulations right if you're going to try and talk me down about it.

No regulation is what partly goes us where we are now. If this situation has proven anything, no regulation doesn't work and Wall Street can't be trusted with much. (Both facts many of us knew beforehand).

No regulation started during the Clinton years and expanded further under Dubya to the point of where we got where we are now.

Except 3 times the Republicans tried to get MORE regulations and the Democrats shot it down. Bush tried twice and McCain tried once, Barney Frank and Chris Dodd lead the successful efforts to thwart the Republicans, hell those two were insisting even in early 2008 the Housing market was JUST fine. YOU may want to get YOUR facts straight.

Phil Gramm's derivatives are what destroyed the system.

Get YOUR facts straight.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Might want to spell regulations right if you're going to try and talk me down about it.

No regulation is what partly goes us where we are now. If this situation has proven anything, no regulation doesn't work and Wall Street can't be trusted with much. (Both facts many of us knew beforehand).

No regulation started during the Clinton years and expanded further under Dubya to the point of where we got where we are now.

Except 3 times the Republicans tried to get MORE regulations and the Democrats shot it down. Bush tried twice and McCain tried once, Barney Frank and Chris Dodd lead the successful efforts to thwart the Republicans, hell those two were insisting even in early 2008 the Housing market was JUST fine. YOU may want to get YOUR facts straight.

Phil Gramm's derivatives are what destroyed the system.

Get YOUR facts straight.

And yet MY FACTS are correct, 3 TIMES the Republicans tried to add regulations and the Democrats opposed and defeated them and as late as spring 2008 Frank and Dodd were openly claiming the Housing Market was JUST FINE. Fucking MORON.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Since I've known you, or so I thought.

Hear that everyone? Ravi opposes universal healthcare. Duly noted.

You've really been through the tissues today, I see.

I've never made my mind up on universal healthcare. Kirk supports it so there must be something wrong with it. I've yet to see a plan that makes sense.

We already have universal healthcare, just a really, really bad version of it. Everyone can be treated in the emergency room. We don't let people bleed to death on the street here. Not yet, anyway. So the rich get great healthcare, and the poor get no healthcare until they are at death's door. Does that sound like a good way to run a society? No, it doesn't. The ironic thing is that every other Western democracy has a single payer system, and they pay HALF per capita what we pay for healthcare. Why? Because they don't have to pay liability lawyers, insurance companies, and Big Pharma. There are inherent cost savings with a single payer system. The Germans have had one since 1886!

With a single payer system you would still pick your doctor, and your doctor would still own his practice. There would just be one insurance company, and that would be the government.

ROFLMNAO... Oh GOD... Now THAT'S PRECIOUS!

It's as if she actually believes that... just too TOO...

 

[elvis]

Except 3 times the Republicans tried to get MORE regulations and the Democrats shot it down. Bush tried twice and McCain tried once, Barney Frank and Chris Dodd lead the successful efforts to thwart the Republicans, hell those two were insisting even in early 2008 the Housing market was JUST fine. YOU may want to get YOUR facts straight.

Phil Gramm's derivatives are what destroyed the system.

Get YOUR facts straight.

And yet MY FACTS are correct, 3 TIMES the Republicans tried to add regulations and the Democrats opposed and defeated them and as late as spring 2008 Frank and Dodd were openly claiming the Housing Market was JUST FINE. Fucking MORON.

kirky lewinsky being a moron again?

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Might want to spell regulations right if you're going to try and talk me down about it.

No regulation is what partly goes us where we are now. If this situation has proven anything, no regulation doesn't work and Wall Street can't be trusted with much. (Both facts many of us knew beforehand).

No regulation started during the Clinton years and expanded further under Dubya to the point of where we got where we are now.

Except 3 times the Republicans tried to get MORE regulations and the Democrats shot it down. Bush tried twice and McCain tried once, Barney Frank and Chris Dodd lead the successful efforts to thwart the Republicans, hell those two were insisting even in early 2008 the Housing market was JUST fine. YOU may want to get YOUR facts straight.

Phil Gramm's derivatives are what destroyed the system.

Get YOUR facts straight.

Phil Grams' derivatives? ROFLMNAO...

Just to be cruel, I am hereby directly and unambiguously challenging you to explain SPECIFICALLY, first: how GRAM is responsible for derivatives... particularly where you're making reference to a bill which passed both houses of congress with bi-partisan support... and second how derivatives were 'responsible for the meltdown.'

Now for the record I am stating that it is a 100% certainty that you'll be unable to show Gram being anything REMOTELY responsible for derivatives OR that derivatives are responsible for the meltdown...

And naturally, when you fail, you'll have once again exposed yourself as a prattling fool.

But anywho... best of luck, I personally would like to see ya come up with somethin'... as finding a leftist that is capable of supporting a word they post would be a wonderful change of pace.

 

[midcan5]

Bush's deficits were not supported by increased revenues, nor increased taxes on those who could easily pay, Obama's plan places money into the American infrastructure in hopes of spurring spending and into the pockets of the average American. Worked before, should work again but will take time.

The Great Depression, to 1935

Summary