Democrats Are The TRUE War Mongers

[DarkFury]

Folks, it breaks down to simple math and FACT.

Democrats love to point at 10 or 12 company owners and say THEY cause or support war when nothing could be farther from the truth. Ten or twelve company owners? Who we kidding here?

How about counting the 1.2 MILLION defense plant workers? You know those UNION DEMOCRATS? And just where does that UNION money go? Democrats.
Then democrats point to the profits those companies make, RAW PROFITS before UNION labor costs.

Union democrats and unions pull down more money then the companies. UNION democrats do NOT have to pay for R&D or property taxes or personal gain either.
Democrats support the industry because it's just one more way to rape the tax payer.

Democrats have also shown all through history that they are not only to lazy but to stupid to shift from a war time to a peace time economy. The last FULL shift was done post WW2. Carter did NOT pull the shift off post Nam, not even close if you recall interest rates.

So how does this apply to today you ask?
Democrats are putting us at risk on the world stage for a purpose. They WILL lose 2016 and we WILL go to war. THEN they can sit back and call Republicans war mongers while the democratic party and unions grow fat on THEIR war profits. All you have to do is follow the money, and the TRUE big money falls in the laps of the democrats BOTH in payroll and party and unions.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

what is says is this thread is heading for either the Rubber Room of the Conspiracy Forum

 

[Plasmaball]

stop trying to think, its not working well for you

 

[Wry Catcher]

Folks, it breaks down to simple math and FACT.

Democrats love to point at 10 or 12 company owners and say THEY cause or support war when nothing could be farther from the truth. Ten or twelve company owners? Who we kidding here?

How about counting the 1.2 MILLION defense plant workers? You know those UNION DEMOCRATS? And just where does that UNION money go? Democrats.
Then democrats point to the profits those companies make, RAW PROFITS before UNION labor costs.

Union democrats and unions pull down more money then the companies. UNION democrats do NOT have to pay for R&D or property taxes or personal gain either.
Democrats support the industry because it's just one more way to rape the tax payer.

Democrats have also shown all through history that they are not only to lazy but to stupid to shift from a war time to a peace time economy. The last FULL shift was done post WW2. Carter did NOT pull the shift off post Nam, not even close if you recall interest rates.

So how does this apply to today you ask?
Democrats are putting us at risk on the world stage for a purpose. They WILL lose 2016 and we WILL go to war. THEN they can sit back and call Republicans war mongers while the democratic party and unions grow fat on THEIR war profits. All you have to do is follow the money, and the TRUE big money falls in the laps of the democrats BOTH in payroll and party and unions.

I do remember the interest rates, I also remember Stagflation and the WIN program under Ford. Carter inherited a world in flux and an economy from Nixon/Ford which needed that new term to define it.

Don't try to rewrite history, to many of us the Johnson/Nixon/Ford Administrations were current events.

 

[DarkFury]

Folks, it breaks down to simple math and FACT.

Democrats love to point at 10 or 12 company owners and say THEY cause or support war when nothing could be farther from the truth. Ten or twelve company owners? Who we kidding here?

How about counting the 1.2 MILLION defense plant workers? You know those UNION DEMOCRATS? And just where does that UNION money go? Democrats.
Then democrats point to the profits those companies make, RAW PROFITS before UNION labor costs.

Union democrats and unions pull down more money then the companies. UNION democrats do NOT have to pay for R&D or property taxes or personal gain either.
Democrats support the industry because it's just one more way to rape the tax payer.

Democrats have also shown all through history that they are not only to lazy but to stupid to shift from a war time to a peace time economy. The last FULL shift was done post WW2. Carter did NOT pull the shift off post Nam, not even close if you recall interest rates.

So how does this apply to today you ask?
Democrats are putting us at risk on the world stage for a purpose. They WILL lose 2016 and we WILL go to war. THEN they can sit back and call Republicans war mongers while the democratic party and unions grow fat on THEIR war profits. All you have to do is follow the money, and the TRUE big money falls in the laps of the democrats BOTH in payroll and party and unions.

I do remember the interest rates, I also remember Stagflation and the WIN program under Ford. Carter inherited a world in flux and an economy from Nixon/Ford which needed that new term to define it.

Don't try to rewrite history, to many of us the Johnson/Nixon/Ford Administrations were current events.

The WIN program was a failure as was Ford. BUT Carter could have shifted the economy IF he knew how which he did not.

 

[DarkFury]

what is says is this thread is heading for either the Rubber Room of the Conspiracy Forum

It's not my fault if you are to lazy to look up company profits {net} vs employee/union profits.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Folks, it breaks down to simple math and FACT.

Democrats love to point at 10 or 12 company owners and say THEY cause or support war when nothing could be farther from the truth. Ten or twelve company owners? Who we kidding here?

How about counting the 1.2 MILLION defense plant workers? You know those UNION DEMOCRATS? And just where does that UNION money go? Democrats.
Then democrats point to the profits those companies make, RAW PROFITS before UNION labor costs.

Union democrats and unions pull down more money then the companies. UNION democrats do NOT have to pay for R&D or property taxes or personal gain either.
Democrats support the industry because it's just one more way to rape the tax payer.

Democrats have also shown all through history that they are not only to lazy but to stupid to shift from a war time to a peace time economy. The last FULL shift was done post WW2. Carter did NOT pull the shift off post Nam, not even close if you recall interest rates.

So how does this apply to today you ask?
Democrats are putting us at risk on the world stage for a purpose. They WILL lose 2016 and we WILL go to war. THEN they can sit back and call Republicans war mongers while the democratic party and unions grow fat on THEIR war profits. All you have to do is follow the money, and the TRUE big money falls in the laps of the democrats BOTH in payroll and party and unions.

I do remember the interest rates, I also remember Stagflation and the WIN program under Ford. Carter inherited a world in flux and an economy from Nixon/Ford which needed that new term to define it.

Don't try to rewrite history, to many of us the Johnson/Nixon/Ford Administrations were current events.

The WIN program was a failure as was Ford. BUT Carter could have shifted the economy IF he knew how which he did not.

A midterm question in one of my lower division history blue book exams asked this question:

Does man make history, or does history make the man? Not as simple as it seems, for there is much nuance built into the question. But I digress.

What might Carter have done that hadn't been tried by Ford, or Nixon (see below)? You do realize a President has limited power to "shift" the economy, whatever the hell you mean by that.

Check this out, then tell me how Carter might have changed current events in 1977.

Remembering Nixon s Wage and Price Controls Cato Institute

 

[DarkFury]

Folks, it breaks down to simple math and FACT.

Democrats love to point at 10 or 12 company owners and say THEY cause or support war when nothing could be farther from the truth. Ten or twelve company owners? Who we kidding here?

How about counting the 1.2 MILLION defense plant workers? You know those UNION DEMOCRATS? And just where does that UNION money go? Democrats.
Then democrats point to the profits those companies make, RAW PROFITS before UNION labor costs.

Union democrats and unions pull down more money then the companies. UNION democrats do NOT have to pay for R&D or property taxes or personal gain either.
Democrats support the industry because it's just one more way to rape the tax payer.

Democrats have also shown all through history that they are not only to lazy but to stupid to shift from a war time to a peace time economy. The last FULL shift was done post WW2. Carter did NOT pull the shift off post Nam, not even close if you recall interest rates.

So how does this apply to today you ask?
Democrats are putting us at risk on the world stage for a purpose. They WILL lose 2016 and we WILL go to war. THEN they can sit back and call Republicans war mongers while the democratic party and unions grow fat on THEIR war profits. All you have to do is follow the money, and the TRUE big money falls in the laps of the democrats BOTH in payroll and party and unions.

I do remember the interest rates, I also remember Stagflation and the WIN program under Ford. Carter inherited a world in flux and an economy from Nixon/Ford which needed that new term to define it.

Don't try to rewrite history, to many of us the Johnson/Nixon/Ford Administrations were current events.

The WIN program was a failure as was Ford. BUT Carter could have shifted the economy IF he knew how which he did not.

A midterm question in one of my lower division history blue book exams asked this question:

Does man make history, or does history make the man? Not as simple as it seems, for there is much nuance built into the question. But I digress.

What might Carter have done that hadn't been tried by Ford, or Nixon (see below)? You do realize a President has limited power to "shift" the economy, whatever the hell you mean by that.

Check this out, then tell me how Carter might have changed current events in 1977.

Remembering Nixon s Wage and Price Controls Cato Institute

Carter who also had the Senate and the House because if you remember post Nixon were bad days for Republicans.
He could have done what another had done before him and shifted those funds to education, home buying programs for vets.

That is part of the shift he AND the party missed. Post war employment numbers are always higher BUT proper refunding of peace time economy is paramount to a shift.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Folks, it breaks down to simple math and FACT.

Democrats love to point at 10 or 12 company owners and say THEY cause or support war when nothing could be farther from the truth. Ten or twelve company owners? Who we kidding here?

How about counting the 1.2 MILLION defense plant workers? You know those UNION DEMOCRATS? And just where does that UNION money go? Democrats.
Then democrats point to the profits those companies make, RAW PROFITS before UNION labor costs.

Union democrats and unions pull down more money then the companies. UNION democrats do NOT have to pay for R&D or property taxes or personal gain either.
Democrats support the industry because it's just one more way to rape the tax payer.

Democrats have also shown all through history that they are not only to lazy but to stupid to shift from a war time to a peace time economy. The last FULL shift was done post WW2. Carter did NOT pull the shift off post Nam, not even close if you recall interest rates.

So how does this apply to today you ask?
Democrats are putting us at risk on the world stage for a purpose. They WILL lose 2016 and we WILL go to war. THEN they can sit back and call Republicans war mongers while the democratic party and unions grow fat on THEIR war profits. All you have to do is follow the money, and the TRUE big money falls in the laps of the democrats BOTH in payroll and party and unions.

I do remember the interest rates, I also remember Stagflation and the WIN program under Ford. Carter inherited a world in flux and an economy from Nixon/Ford which needed that new term to define it.

Don't try to rewrite history, to many of us the Johnson/Nixon/Ford Administrations were current events.

The WIN program was a failure as was Ford. BUT Carter could have shifted the economy IF he knew how which he did not.

A midterm question in one of my lower division history blue book exams asked this question:

Does man make history, or does history make the man? Not as simple as it seems, for there is much nuance built into the question. But I digress.

What might Carter have done that hadn't been tried by Ford, or Nixon (see below)? You do realize a President has limited power to "shift" the economy, whatever the hell you mean by that.

Check this out, then tell me how Carter might have changed current events in 1977.

Remembering Nixon s Wage and Price Controls Cato Institute

Carter who also had the Senate and the House because if you remember post Nixon were bad days for Republicans.
He could have done what another had done before him and shifted those funds to education, home buying programs for vets.

That is part of the shift he AND the party missed. Post war employment numbers are always higher BUT proper refunding of peace time economy is paramount to a shift.

Hmmm... something Obama tried and the GOP/Tea Party opposed.

 

[DarkFury]

Folks, it breaks down to simple math and FACT.

Democrats love to point at 10 or 12 company owners and say THEY cause or support war when nothing could be farther from the truth. Ten or twelve company owners? Who we kidding here?

How about counting the 1.2 MILLION defense plant workers? You know those UNION DEMOCRATS? And just where does that UNION money go? Democrats.
Then democrats point to the profits those companies make, RAW PROFITS before UNION labor costs.

Union democrats and unions pull down more money then the companies. UNION democrats do NOT have to pay for R&D or property taxes or personal gain either.
Democrats support the industry because it's just one more way to rape the tax payer.

Democrats have also shown all through history that they are not only to lazy but to stupid to shift from a war time to a peace time economy. The last FULL shift was done post WW2. Carter did NOT pull the shift off post Nam, not even close if you recall interest rates.

So how does this apply to today you ask?
Democrats are putting us at risk on the world stage for a purpose. They WILL lose 2016 and we WILL go to war. THEN they can sit back and call Republicans war mongers while the democratic party and unions grow fat on THEIR war profits. All you have to do is follow the money, and the TRUE big money falls in the laps of the democrats BOTH in payroll and party and unions.

I do remember the interest rates, I also remember Stagflation and the WIN program under Ford. Carter inherited a world in flux and an economy from Nixon/Ford which needed that new term to define it.

Don't try to rewrite history, to many of us the Johnson/Nixon/Ford Administrations were current events.

The WIN program was a failure as was Ford. BUT Carter could have shifted the economy IF he knew how which he did not.

A midterm question in one of my lower division history blue book exams asked this question:

Does man make history, or does history make the man? Not as simple as it seems, for there is much nuance built into the question. But I digress.

What might Carter have done that hadn't been tried by Ford, or Nixon (see below)? You do realize a President has limited power to "shift" the economy, whatever the hell you mean by that.

Check this out, then tell me how Carter might have changed current events in 1977.

Remembering Nixon s Wage and Price Controls Cato Institute

Carter who also had the Senate and the House because if you remember post Nixon were bad days for Republicans.
He could have done what another had done before him and shifted those funds to education, home buying programs for vets.

That is part of the shift he AND the party missed. Post war employment numbers are always higher BUT proper refunding of peace time economy is paramount to a shift.

Hmmm... something Obama tried and the GOP/Tea Party opposed.

NOT a true statement.
Expecting vets to use THEIR private insurance to cover war injuries.
Pink slipping them in the field of combat.
No Obama has just just about everything to demean our military.

 

[Liminal]

Folks, it breaks down to simple math and FACT.

Democrats love to point at 10 or 12 company owners and say THEY cause or support war when nothing could be farther from the truth. Ten or twelve company owners? Who we kidding here?

How about counting the 1.2 MILLION defense plant workers? You know those UNION DEMOCRATS? And just where does that UNION money go? Democrats.
Then democrats point to the profits those companies make, RAW PROFITS before UNION labor costs.

Union democrats and unions pull down more money then the companies. UNION democrats do NOT have to pay for R&D or property taxes or personal gain either.
Democrats support the industry because it's just one more way to rape the tax payer.

Democrats have also shown all through history that they are not only to lazy but to stupid to shift from a war time to a peace time economy. The last FULL shift was done post WW2. Carter did NOT pull the shift off post Nam, not even close if you recall interest rates.

So how does this apply to today you ask?
Democrats are putting us at risk on the world stage for a purpose. They WILL lose 2016 and we WILL go to war. THEN they can sit back and call Republicans war mongers while the democratic party and unions grow fat on THEIR war profits. All you have to do is follow the money, and the TRUE big money falls in the laps of the democrats BOTH in payroll and party and unions.

I'm a Democrat and I just love a good war, I can hardly wait for the next one. Let me go find my union card so I can exercise my blood lust with purpose.

 

[Wry Catcher]

I do remember the interest rates, I also remember Stagflation and the WIN program under Ford. Carter inherited a world in flux and an economy from Nixon/Ford which needed that new term to define it.

Don't try to rewrite history, to many of us the Johnson/Nixon/Ford Administrations were current events.

The WIN program was a failure as was Ford. BUT Carter could have shifted the economy IF he knew how which he did not.

A midterm question in one of my lower division history blue book exams asked this question:

Does man make history, or does history make the man? Not as simple as it seems, for there is much nuance built into the question. But I digress.

What might Carter have done that hadn't been tried by Ford, or Nixon (see below)? You do realize a President has limited power to "shift" the economy, whatever the hell you mean by that.

Check this out, then tell me how Carter might have changed current events in 1977.

Remembering Nixon s Wage and Price Controls Cato Institute

Carter who also had the Senate and the House because if you remember post Nixon were bad days for Republicans.
He could have done what another had done before him and shifted those funds to education, home buying programs for vets.

That is part of the shift he AND the party missed. Post war employment numbers are always higher BUT proper refunding of peace time economy is paramount to a shift.

Hmmm... something Obama tried and the GOP/Tea Party opposed.

NOT a true statement.
Expecting vets to use THEIR private insurance to cover war injuries.
Pink slipping them in the field of combat.
No Obama has just just about everything to demean our military.

Bull Shit. The Reagan Administration was the first to require vets to prove their physical or mental illness was service connected. Many Viet Vets were turned away from by VA because they could not prove their alcohol or other drug habit was service connected. I know 'cause the only treatment most of them received came after they were detained in jail, and latter when placed on probation and referred to out or in patient treatment.

 

[DarkFury]

The WIN program was a failure as was Ford. BUT Carter could have shifted the economy IF he knew how which he did not.

A midterm question in one of my lower division history blue book exams asked this question:

Does man make history, or does history make the man? Not as simple as it seems, for there is much nuance built into the question. But I digress.

What might Carter have done that hadn't been tried by Ford, or Nixon (see below)? You do realize a President has limited power to "shift" the economy, whatever the hell you mean by that.

Check this out, then tell me how Carter might have changed current events in 1977.

Remembering Nixon s Wage and Price Controls Cato Institute

Carter who also had the Senate and the House because if you remember post Nixon were bad days for Republicans.
He could have done what another had done before him and shifted those funds to education, home buying programs for vets.

That is part of the shift he AND the party missed. Post war employment numbers are always higher BUT proper refunding of peace time economy is paramount to a shift.

Hmmm... something Obama tried and the GOP/Tea Party opposed.

NOT a true statement.
Expecting vets to use THEIR private insurance to cover war injuries.
Pink slipping them in the field of combat.
No Obama has just just about everything to demean our military.

Bull Shit. The Reagan Administration was the first to require vets to prove their physical or mental illness was service connected. Many Viet Vets were turned away from by VA because they could not prove their alcohol or other drug habit was service connected. I know 'cause the only treatment most of them received came after they were detained in jail, and latter when placed on probation and referred to out or in patient treatment.

The WIN program was a failure as was Ford. BUT Carter could have shifted the economy IF he knew how which he did not.

A midterm question in one of my lower division history blue book exams asked this question:

Does man make history, or does history make the man? Not as simple as it seems, for there is much nuance built into the question. But I digress.

What might Carter have done that hadn't been tried by Ford, or Nixon (see below)? You do realize a President has limited power to "shift" the economy, whatever the hell you mean by that.

Check this out, then tell me how Carter might have changed current events in 1977.

Remembering Nixon s Wage and Price Controls Cato Institute

Carter who also had the Senate and the House because if you remember post Nixon were bad days for Republicans.
He could have done what another had done before him and shifted those funds to education, home buying programs for vets.

That is part of the shift he AND the party missed. Post war employment numbers are always higher BUT proper refunding of peace time economy is paramount to a shift.

Hmmm... something Obama tried and the GOP/Tea Party opposed.

NOT a true statement.
Expecting vets to use THEIR private insurance to cover war injuries.
Pink slipping them in the field of combat.
No Obama has just just about everything to demean our military.

Bull Shit. The Reagan Administration was the first to require vets to prove their physical or mental illness was service connected. Many Viet Vets were turned away from by VA because they could not prove their alcohol or other drug habit was service connected. I know 'cause the only treatment most of them received came after they were detained in jail, and latter when placed on probation and referred to out or in patient treatment.

You are comparing an apple to an orange.
Yes they had to prove their issue was war related. And in many cases it was NOT. Agent Orange SHOULD have been but drug addiction and drinking are NOT. They are personal choice.

Obama refused to pay for ANYTHING insisting their private insurance should pay. Like I said apple to orange.

 

[Wry Catcher]

A midterm question in one of my lower division history blue book exams asked this question:

Does man make history, or does history make the man? Not as simple as it seems, for there is much nuance built into the question. But I digress.

What might Carter have done that hadn't been tried by Ford, or Nixon (see below)? You do realize a President has limited power to "shift" the economy, whatever the hell you mean by that.

Check this out, then tell me how Carter might have changed current events in 1977.

Remembering Nixon s Wage and Price Controls Cato Institute

Carter who also had the Senate and the House because if you remember post Nixon were bad days for Republicans.
He could have done what another had done before him and shifted those funds to education, home buying programs for vets.

That is part of the shift he AND the party missed. Post war employment numbers are always higher BUT proper refunding of peace time economy is paramount to a shift.

Hmmm... something Obama tried and the GOP/Tea Party opposed.

NOT a true statement.
Expecting vets to use THEIR private insurance to cover war injuries.
Pink slipping them in the field of combat.
No Obama has just just about everything to demean our military.

Bull Shit. The Reagan Administration was the first to require vets to prove their physical or mental illness was service connected. Many Viet Vets were turned away from by VA because they could not prove their alcohol or other drug habit was service connected. I know 'cause the only treatment most of them received came after they were detained in jail, and latter when placed on probation and referred to out or in patient treatment.

A midterm question in one of my lower division history blue book exams asked this question:

Does man make history, or does history make the man? Not as simple as it seems, for there is much nuance built into the question. But I digress.

What might Carter have done that hadn't been tried by Ford, or Nixon (see below)? You do realize a President has limited power to "shift" the economy, whatever the hell you mean by that.

Check this out, then tell me how Carter might have changed current events in 1977.

Remembering Nixon s Wage and Price Controls Cato Institute

Carter who also had the Senate and the House because if you remember post Nixon were bad days for Republicans.
He could have done what another had done before him and shifted those funds to education, home buying programs for vets.

That is part of the shift he AND the party missed. Post war employment numbers are always higher BUT proper refunding of peace time economy is paramount to a shift.

Hmmm... something Obama tried and the GOP/Tea Party opposed.

NOT a true statement.
Expecting vets to use THEIR private insurance to cover war injuries.
Pink slipping them in the field of combat.
No Obama has just just about everything to demean our military.

Bull Shit. The Reagan Administration was the first to require vets to prove their physical or mental illness was service connected. Many Viet Vets were turned away from by VA because they could not prove their alcohol or other drug habit was service connected. I know 'cause the only treatment most of them received came after they were detained in jail, and latter when placed on probation and referred to out or in patient treatment.

You are comparing an apple to an orange.
Yes they had to prove their issue was war related. And in many cases it was NOT. Agent Orange SHOULD have been but drug addiction and drinking are NOT. They are personal choice.

Obama refused to pay for ANYTHING insisting their private insurance should pay. Like I said apple to orange.

Do you have any proof to defend your allegation? An executive order or a regulation will do. The VA was a mess under the GWB Administration, little has been heard since Obama took office. Why is that (and don't claim it's the MSM protecting him - that dog won't hunt).

BTW, Combat creates PTSD in many, commonly understood today. Agent Orange was not the only misfeasance of the Reagan Administration. PTSD and Just Say No caused great harm to vets and family's too.

Anyway, even if your allegation is true, wouldn't that make Obama a hero to callous conservatives? He would only be following Reagan's ideology in saying the most terrifying words in the English Language are, " I'm from the government and I'm here to help.".

 

[ClosedCaption]

Hahahahaha. The fact that he has to say Dems are the "True" warmongers shows you thats bullshit