The Question No PROG Will Dare Answer

[BullKurtz]

At least so far....maybe today we'll get a breakthrough.

HOW MUCH DEBT are you willing to allow the government shysters to put us in? What's the number when even the maoists say enough is enough? We're at $17T now....many economists think $20T is the tipping point. Obama has raised the debt-ceiling 7 times after screaming like a woman when Dubya did it. He's added $6T to the debt and continues to run $1T yearly deficits. After $20T, another financial meltdown of any kind, could tip us over into default. Surely you leftists don't believe Wall Street has stopped dealing in mortgage-based derivatives. Surely you don't believe criminal enterprises like Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley have stopped rigging the futures markets. So how much is enough....how close to the edge of diaster are you willing to tread?

 

[BullKurtz]

Crickets.....as I suspected.

BTW we've been OFFICIALLY BANKRUPT since the beginning of the year....when the debt surpassed the GDP for the year.....we are now at 107% debt-to GDP, which is every dollar we produce in a fiscal year.

U.S. National Debt Clock : Real Time

 

[Dutch]

At least so far....maybe today we'll get a breakthrough.

HOW MUCH DEBT are you willing to allow the government shysters to put us in? What's the number when even the maoists say enough is enough? We're at $17T now....many economists think $20T is the tipping point. Obama has raised the debt-ceiling 7 times after screaming like a woman when Dubya did it. He's added $6T to the debt and continues to run $1T yearly deficits. After $20T, another financial meltdown of any kind, could tip us over into default. Surely you leftists don't believe Wall Street has stopped dealing in mortgage-based derivatives. Surely you don't believe criminal enterprises like Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley have stopped rigging the futures markets. So how much is enough....how close to the edge of diaster are you willing to tread?

So you want more regulation on Wall Street? Okay, we are down with that.

 

[MACAULAY]

At least so far....maybe today we'll get a breakthrough.

HOW MUCH DEBT are you willing to allow the government shysters to put us in? What's the number when even the maoists say enough is enough? We're at $17T now....many economists think $20T is the tipping point. Obama has raised the debt-ceiling 7 times after screaming like a woman when Dubya did it. He's added $6T to the debt and continues to run $1T yearly deficits. After $20T, another financial meltdown of any kind, could tip us over into default. Surely you leftists don't believe Wall Street has stopped dealing in mortgage-based derivatives. Surely you don't believe criminal enterprises like Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley have stopped rigging the futures markets. So how much is enough....how close to the edge of diaster are you willing to tread?

So you want more regulation on Wall Street? Okay, we are down with that.

..................................................................................

The original post was a good one...poses a good question for discussion, but as usual has little hope of being legitimately addressed by the Board Bolsheviks.

The best you'll get is a dodge--change of topic like the one above; the worst you'll get is name calling like "nutter" and that's it. Certainly it won't be long before George Bush or Ronald Reagan gets blamed.

But, its a good try. We'll see what you get.

Now. This first response to the OP, is about regulation of Wall Street. That's a clear dodge of the OP, but it too is a legitimate question.

I am a Heartland Conservative and I think that Wall Street in New York City in the heart of Liberal Land is absolutely filled up with crooks who ought to be in jail....and it seems that the Board Bolshevicks actually agree. Perhaps everyone agrees. They nearly took down this country under Bush even though he tried to put a stop to the mortgage lending scam in 2006--and got shut down by Barney Frank and his Democratic controlled committee.

The person to prosecute the abuses and fraud from the meltdown was Obama and his bogus attorney general--- but they have done absolutely nothing BECAUSE IT IS WHERE A HUGE AMOUNT OF THEIR DONATIONS COME FROM.

Democrats blame Republicans for the Wall Street assholes and Republicans blame Democrats for them...but it looks like the fact is that both take their money and leave them conspicuously unprosecuted.

...............................................

So, this thread now has two legitimate questions:

1) What debt do you Bolsheviks believe that the U.S.A. can stand before it collapses like your last experiment in the Soviet Union, and

2) Who is most to blame for the Wall Streeters in Yankee Land collecting most of the wealth in this country, and if it is the Republicans, why? And why hasn't Obama/Holder done something about it after 5 years in control?

 

[Dutch]

At least so far....maybe today we'll get a breakthrough.

HOW MUCH DEBT are you willing to allow the government shysters to put us in? What's the number when even the maoists say enough is enough? We're at $17T now....many economists think $20T is the tipping point. Obama has raised the debt-ceiling 7 times after screaming like a woman when Dubya did it. He's added $6T to the debt and continues to run $1T yearly deficits. After $20T, another financial meltdown of any kind, could tip us over into default. Surely you leftists don't believe Wall Street has stopped dealing in mortgage-based derivatives. Surely you don't believe criminal enterprises like Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley have stopped rigging the futures markets. So how much is enough....how close to the edge of diaster are you willing to tread?

So you want more regulation on Wall Street? Okay, we are down with that.

..................................................................................

The original post was a good one...poses a good question for discussion, but as usual has little hope of being legitimately addressed by the Board Bolsheviks.

The best you'll get is a dodge--change of topic like the one above; the worst you'll get is name calling like "nutter" and that's it. Certainly it won't be long before George Bush or Ronald Reagan gets blamed.

But, its a good try. We'll see what you get.

Now. This first response to the OP, is about regulation of Wall Street. That's a clear dodge of the OP, but it too is a legitimate question.

I am a Heartland Conservative and I think that Wall Street in New York City in the heart of Liberal Land is absolutely filled up with crooks who ought to be in jail....and it seems that the Board Bolshevicks actually agree. Perhaps everyone agrees. They nearly took down this country under Bush even though he tried to put a stop to the mortgage lending scam in 2006--and got shut down by Barney Frank and his Democratic controlled committee.

The person to prosecute the abuses and fraud from the meltdown was Obama and his bogus attorney general--- but they have done absolutely nothing BECAUSE IT IS WHERE A HUGE AMOUNT OF THEIR DONATIONS COME FROM.

Democrats blame Republicans for the Wall Street assholes and Republicans blame Democrats for them...but it looks like the fact is that both take their money and leave them conspicuously unprosecuted.

...............................................

So, this thread now has two legitimate questions:

1) What debt do you Bolsheviks believe that the U.S.A. can stand before it collapses like your last experiment in the Soviet Union, and

2) Who is most to blame for the Wall Streeters in Yankee Land collecting most of the wealth in this country, and if it is the Republicans, why? And why hasn't Obama/Holder done something about it after 5 years in control?

Are we Maoist's or Bolsheviks? Two vastly different political ideologies. It's hard to keep up with you mouthbreathers, democrats have been called Nazis, Maoists, and Bolsheviks.
What's next Trotskyite? On to your questions: although question number 2 is a valid one, the topic of question number 1 is so asinine that any response by me would fail to get through that whackadoodle mind of yours.

 

[Steven_R]

Are we Maoist's or Bolsheviks? Two vastly different political ideologies. It's hard to keep up with you mouthbreathers, democrats have been called Nazis, Maoists, and Bolsheviks.
What's next Trotskyite? On to your questions: although question number 2 is a valid one, the topic of question number 1 is so asinine that any response by me would fail to get through that whackadoodle mind of yours.

None of the above. What we have in the US is a vague notion of government is somehow the answer coupled with pandering for votes and bribing American citizens with our own money. The Maoists and Bolsheviks and Trotskyites and all those at least has some real hard political thought process to hang their hats on. There may be a few people in the US that are guided by some real political doctrine, but we have nothing of the sorts. I mean, where are the great Democrat thinkers and their debates, either public or private, on the best political thought of the day?

Simply put, the real followers of Marxism had a plan. We're making it up as we go along toward some nebulous end state.

 

[BullKurtz]

Are we Maoist's or Bolsheviks? Two vastly different political ideologies. It's hard to keep up with you mouthbreathers, democrats have been called Nazis, Maoists, and Bolsheviks.
What's next Trotskyite? On to your questions: although question number 2 is a valid one, the topic of question number 1 is so asinine that any response by me would fail to get through that whackadoodle mind of yours.

C'mon you gutless fucking troll....what's the NUMBER....simple enough question and one you'll run from like a scalded poodle.

 

[BullKurtz]

None of the above. What we have in the US is a vague notion of government is somehow the answer coupled with pandering for votes and bribing American citizens with our own money. The Maoists and Bolsheviks and Trotskyites and all those at least has some real hard political thought process to hang their hats on. There may be a few people in the US that are guided by some real political doctrine, but we have nothing of the sorts. I mean, where are the great Democrat thinkers and their debates, either public or private, on the best political thought of the day?

Simply put, the real followers of Marxism had a plan. We're making it up as we go along toward some nebulous end state.

The progs don't think the debt affects them....they think a bunch of rich GOPers will lose their shirts which they're thrilled about. And when they lose their worthless jobs, they truly believe they can live as well on welfare. Where will the welfare come from? The same rich GOPers who lost their shirts....there is no dumber animal on the planet than an American democrat.

 

[Dutch]

Are we Maoist's or Bolsheviks? Two vastly different political ideologies. It's hard to keep up with you mouthbreathers, democrats have been called Nazis, Maoists, and Bolsheviks.
What's next Trotskyite? On to your questions: although question number 2 is a valid one, the topic of question number 1 is so asinine that any response by me would fail to get through that whackadoodle mind of yours.

C'mon you gutless fucking troll....what's the NUMBER....simple enough question and one you'll run from like a scalded poodle.

When you start a thread calling Democrats Maoist when clearly you have no idea what a Maoists is, then there is no use debating with you. Sit in your bunker, eat your MRE's, and let the adults solve the big problems.

 

[MACAULAY]

So far, no one with the stones to answer your question, Bull.

Still a good one though.

I've got kids. I'd like to know where it stops.

Another poster aptly said:

"The parasites are consuming the host."

 

[Politico]

Print baby print! And send me a few thousand would ya?

 

[RandallFlagg]

So you want more regulation on Wall Street? Okay, we are down with that.

..................................................................................

The original post was a good one...poses a good question for discussion, but as usual has little hope of being legitimately addressed by the Board Bolsheviks.

The best you'll get is a dodge--change of topic like the one above; the worst you'll get is name calling like "nutter" and that's it. Certainly it won't be long before George Bush or Ronald Reagan gets blamed.

But, its a good try. We'll see what you get.

Now. This first response to the OP, is about regulation of Wall Street. That's a clear dodge of the OP, but it too is a legitimate question.

I am a Heartland Conservative and I think that Wall Street in New York City in the heart of Liberal Land is absolutely filled up with crooks who ought to be in jail....and it seems that the Board Bolshevicks actually agree. Perhaps everyone agrees. They nearly took down this country under Bush even though he tried to put a stop to the mortgage lending scam in 2006--and got shut down by Barney Frank and his Democratic controlled committee.

The person to prosecute the abuses and fraud from the meltdown was Obama and his bogus attorney general--- but they have done absolutely nothing BECAUSE IT IS WHERE A HUGE AMOUNT OF THEIR DONATIONS COME FROM.

Democrats blame Republicans for the Wall Street assholes and Republicans blame Democrats for them...but it looks like the fact is that both take their money and leave them conspicuously unprosecuted.

...............................................

So, this thread now has two legitimate questions:

1) What debt do you Bolsheviks believe that the U.S.A. can stand before it collapses like your last experiment in the Soviet Union, and

2) Who is most to blame for the Wall Streeters in Yankee Land collecting most of the wealth in this country, and if it is the Republicans, why? And why hasn't Obama/Holder done something about it after 5 years in control?

Are we Maoist's or Bolsheviks? Two vastly different political ideologies. It's hard to keep up with you mouthbreathers, democrats have been called Nazis, Maoists, and Bolsheviks.
What's next Trotskyite? On to your questions: although question number 2 is a valid one, the topic of question number 1 is so asinine that any response by me would fail to get through that whackadoodle mind of yours.

How does the word "Traitor" work for you?

 

[Borillar]

Does it really matter? The debt will never be paid off. Republicans only care about it when a Democrat is President. Then there are fiscal cliffs and disasters looming. When a Republican is President, they spend like drunken sailors (only they borrow every penny instead of through taxation). When a Democrat becomes President, suddenly they discover that there is a debt, although they deny any responsibility in creating it. If a Republican becomes President in 2016, the debt will cease being a problem once again.

 

[BlindBoo]

None. I'd like a balanced budget amendment with a plan to pay off the debt.

I also propose strict term limits on both Houses of Congress.

 

[Moonglow]

At least so far....maybe today we'll get a breakthrough.

HOW MUCH DEBT are you willing to allow the government shysters to put us in? What's the number when even the maoists say enough is enough? We're at $17T now....many economists think $20T is the tipping point. Obama has raised the debt-ceiling 7 times after screaming like a woman when Dubya did it. He's added $6T to the debt and continues to run $1T yearly deficits. After $20T, another financial meltdown of any kind, could tip us over into default. Surely you leftists don't believe Wall Street has stopped dealing in mortgage-based derivatives. Surely you don't believe criminal enterprises like Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley have stopped rigging the futures markets. So how much is enough....how close to the edge of diaster are you willing to tread?

So you want more regulation on Wall Street? Okay, we are down with that.

..................................................................................

The original post was a good one...poses a good question for discussion, but as usual has little hope of being legitimately addressed by the Board Bolsheviks.

The best you'll get is a dodge--change of topic like the one above; the worst you'll get is name calling like "nutter" and that's it. Certainly it won't be long before George Bush or Ronald Reagan gets blamed.

But, its a good try. We'll see what you get.

Now. This first response to the OP, is about regulation of Wall Street. That's a clear dodge of the OP, but it too is a legitimate question.

I am a Heartland Conservative and I think that Wall Street in New York City in the heart of Liberal Land is absolutely filled up with crooks who ought to be in jail....and it seems that the Board Bolshevicks actually agree. Perhaps everyone agrees. They nearly took down this country under Bush even though he tried to put a stop to the mortgage lending scam in 2006--and got shut down by Barney Frank and his Democratic controlled committee.

The person to prosecute the abuses and fraud from the meltdown was Obama and his bogus attorney general--- but they have done absolutely nothing BECAUSE IT IS WHERE A HUGE AMOUNT OF THEIR DONATIONS COME FROM.

Democrats blame Republicans for the Wall Street assholes and Republicans blame Democrats for them...but it looks like the fact is that both take their money and leave them conspicuously unprosecuted.

...............................................

So, this thread now has two legitimate questions:

1) What debt do you Bolsheviks believe that the U.S.A. can stand before it collapses like your last experiment in the Soviet Union, and

2) Who is most to blame for the Wall Streeters in Yankee Land collecting most of the wealth in this country, and if it is the Republicans, why? And why hasn't Obama/Holder done something about it after 5 years in control?

So does this post make you a Proletariat or Bourgeois?

 

[LordBrownTrout]

Does it really matter? The debt will never be paid off. Republicans only care about it when a Democrat is President. Then there are fiscal cliffs and disasters looming. When a Republican is President, they spend like drunken sailors (only they borrow every penny instead of through taxation). When a Democrat becomes President, suddenly they discover that there is a debt, although they deny any responsibility in creating it. If a Republican becomes President in 2016, the debt will cease being a problem once again.

It's no problem for O either as he's rung up 7 trillion in four years.

 

[BullKurtz]

Does it really matter? The debt will never be paid off. Republicans only care about it when a Democrat is President. Then there are fiscal cliffs and disasters looming. When a Republican is President, they spend like drunken sailors (only they borrow every penny instead of through taxation). When a Democrat becomes President, suddenly they discover that there is a debt, although they deny any responsibility in creating it. If a Republican becomes President in 2016, the debt will cease being a problem once again.

Again no number. Does it really matter? Uh yeah, it does because the interest payments on the debt are approaching the lion's share of the imaginary budget Harry Reid won't allow to pass so the budget is being paid by supplimentals. Do you know what that means? Here's a hint.....we won't be able to afford Social Security payments. Or medicare payments. Or a military. Or an EPA. Or money to support infrastructure like highways and bridges. Any of this getting through the fog yet?

 

[RandallFlagg]

None. I'd like a balanced budget amendment with a plan to pay off the debt.

I also propose strict term limits on both Houses of Congress.

I couldn't agree more. Unfortunately, neither will ever happen. We haven't had a budget since the day Barry came into office - just a CR that allows them to go on spending like crazy. Congressmen and Senators vote themselves raises in the dead of night (when the rest of America is sleeping) and live in luxury in Georgetown.

Term limits? You'll never see them.

 

[Moonglow]

If you would stop acting the ass you might get what you want. Remeber you will get more honey with bees than with a fly.

 

[BullKurtz]

None. I'd like a balanced budget amendment with a plan to pay off the debt.

I also propose strict term limits on both Houses of Congress.

What departments and/or programs would you be willing to cut to go along with the monstrous tax increases I suppose you'd want.