pokerfied.com
Promoting poker discussions.

Main
Date: 14 Feb 2009 00:20:52
From: Irish Mike
Subject: Obama's bill - waht a joke
Well the Obama cluster fuck continues. The Democrats just pushed through a
partisan 1,071 page, $787 billion welfare and entitlement spending bill.
And here's the absolutely unbelievable part - not one of these Democrat
Congressional Reps or Senators have even read the bill! I kid you not.
These buffoons just voted for the biggest stimulus spending bill in this
country's history and not one of them has even read the fucking bill. Of
course the real reason the Dems pushed the bill through so fast is that the
more the American people found out about the staggering amount of pork in
this bill, the more they opposed it. Well so much for Obama and the Dem's
promise that there would be 48 hours to at least read the bill before the
vote. The sad thing is that this gigantic boondoggle isn't going to do jack
shit to really "jump start" the economy. For one thing, only about 20% of
this money will even be spend in the next 18 months. This Obama bill is an
absolute fucking disgrace and clearly demonstrates just how clueless this
guy really is when it comes to actually governing.

Irish Mike






 
Date: 14 Feb 2009 16:07:39
From: OrangeSFO
Subject: Re: Obama's bill - waht a joke
Mike:

Here's your lesson: ELECTIONS HAVE CONSEQUENCES


 
Date: 14 Feb 2009 10:46:24
From: BillB
Subject: Re: Obama's bill - waht a joke


"Irish Mike" <mjostar@ameritech.net > wrote in message
news:8Csll.10717$pr6.10387@flpi149.ffdc.sbc.com...
> Well the Obama cluster fuck continues. The Democrats just pushed through
> a partisan 1,071 page, $787 billion welfare and entitlement spending bill.

A measly $787 billion? From what I understand your beloved Republicans are
objecting to less than 10% of the contents, so that's about $80 billion (or
far less than 1% of national debt). Where was your shock, outrage and
revulsion while Bush and the Republicans were *doubling* the national debt,
Mike? This is an *economic emergency* for which the Democrats they are
raising national debt 10%. What was the Republican party's excuse for
raising it 100%?



  
Date: 14 Feb 2009 23:12:05
From: Travel
Subject: Re: Obama's bill - waht a joke
"BillB" Usenet Poster
bogus@shaw1.ca Post #32 of 44 (4 views) Copy Shortcut Feb 14, 2009,
1:46 PM
Re: Obama's bill - waht a joke Reply

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
---------



"Irish Mike" <mjostar@ameritech.net > wrote in message
news:8Csll.10717$pr6.10387@flpi149.ffdc.sbc.com...
> Well the Obama cluster fuck continues. The Democrats just pushed
through
> a partisan 1,071 page, $787 billion welfare and entitlement spending
bill.

"A measly $787 billion? From what I understand your beloved Republicans
are
objecting to less than 10% of the contents, so that's about $80 billion
(or
far less than 1% of national debt)...."
..............................................................

Right, "from what you understand". Which is about zero.

At least half the bill has nothing to do with stimulating the economy;
it's called pork spending and that's being kind. With all the money the
states will receive, (billions, and a huge part of the bill) as usual,
will comtain left wing agenda "strings attached". The left wing media
doesn't cover this: federal government control aspect, of course. Haley
Barbour, the Governor of Mississippi stated that, he may not take the
money or at least some of it, after weighing all the strings attached
against the financial benefit.

_________________________________________________________
Posted via the -Web to Usenet- forums at http://www.pokermagazine.com
Visit www.pokermagazine.com


 
Date: 14 Feb 2009 05:05:20
From: Bob T.
Subject: Re: Obama's bill - waht a joke
On Feb 13, 9:20=A0pm, "Irish Mike" <mjos...@ameritech.net > wrote:
> Well the Obama cluster fuck continues. =A0The Democrats just pushed throu=
gh a
> partisan 1,071 page, $787 billion welfare and entitlement spending bill.
> And here's the absolutely unbelievable part - not one of these Democrat
> Congressional Reps or Senators have even read the bill! =A0I kid you not.
> These buffoons just voted for the biggest stimulus spending bill in this
> country's history and not one of them has even read the fucking bill. =A0=
Of
> course the real =A0reason the Dems pushed the bill through so fast is tha=
t the
> more the American people found out about the staggering amount of pork in
> this bill, the more they opposed it. =A0Well so much for Obama and the De=
m's
> promise that there would be 48 hours to at least read the bill before the
> vote. =A0The sad thing is that this gigantic boondoggle isn't going to do=
jack
> shit to really "jump start" the economy. =A0For one thing, only about 20%=
of
> this money will even be spend in the next 18 months. =A0 This Obama bill =
is an
> absolute fucking disgrace and clearly demonstrates just how clueless this
> guy really is when it comes to actually governing.

How many Congresspeople read the Patriot Act before they voted for
it?

- Bob T.
>
> Irish Mike



  
Date: 14 Feb 2009 18:07:36
From: ~M~
Subject: Re: Obama's bill - waht a joke

"Bob T." <bob@synapse-cs.com > wrote in message
news:ec7624e9-8c3f-4f2b-a6a9-b12ab9b6f2e9@s9g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
On Feb 13, 9:20 pm, "Irish Mike" <mjos...@ameritech.net > wrote:
> > Well the Obama cluster fuck continues. The Democrats just pushed through
> > a

> How many Congresspeople read the Patriot Act before they voted for it?

I think your comparison to the Patriot Act speaks volumes. The Patriot Act
passed because of the politics of fear. Now, we have a new administration
that claims the election was a victory of hope over fear, yet this stimulus
package was is all about fear. It is basically the Patriot Act, economics
version.


--
"I think when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody."
- Barak Obama



   
Date: 15 Feb 2009 00:56:18
From: Senator Millionaire
Subject: Re: Obama's bill - waht a joke
On Feb 14, 11:42=A0pm, Travel <nine...@webtv.net > wrote:
> Let's stop the nonsense. The Democrats could have easily left out the
> obvious pork in the bill and they didn't. Even without the pork it's
> questionable if an all-stimulus oriented bill would work. After all,
> the $300 checks to everyone had zero effect on the economy.

Travel, the stimulus checks were negated by the summertime rise of $4
a gallon and the largest food price increase ever seen.



   
Date: 14 Feb 2009 22:42:11
From: Travel
Subject: Re: Obama's bill - waht a joke
Let's stop the nonsense. The Democrats could have easily left out the
obvious pork in the bill and they didn't. Even without the pork it's
questionable if an all-stimulus oriented bill would work. After all,
the $300 checks to everyone had zero effect on the economy.

The Republicans are right to protest all the pork in the bill, and have
never taken the position of "not doing anthing" or stoppng a stimulus
bill altogether.

Even the CBO Congressional Budget Office and the GAO (that read and
understand the bill) state that the bill is loaded with pork and
non-economy stimulus features. What more do you want?

The Republicans want a stimulus bill but without the left wing
government expanding pork and voter fraud promoting ACORN funding, etc.
What's so difficult to understand about that?

If the Democrats submitted a bill with all legitimate economy stimulus
provisions only, then no problem. As it is, Obama doesn't get his
bipartisan support, and the Democrats have to run for office trying to
defend this pork bill. You'd think that the left wing groupies would be
upset with the Democrat congress for not being able to do something
right for a change. The Democrats could always write separate spending
bills later on, but they want to deceitfully shove their usual
socialist agenda through on this economic emergency bill.

_________________________________________________________
Posted via the -Web to Usenet- forums at http://www.pokermagazine.com
Visit www.pokermagazine.com


  
Date: 14 Feb 2009 09:19:55
From: Bob T.
Subject: Re: Obama's bill - waht a joke
On Feb 14, 9:12=A0am, "da pickle" <jcpickels@(nospam)hotmail.com > wrote:
> "Bob T."
>
> Except for the bullet train to Las Vegas - I have it on high authority
> that that particular feature is not "pork".
> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D
>
> It is pork.
>
> 27% of the bill is tax cuts - those probably aren't "pork", either.
> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D
>
> Most of the "tax cuts" are misnamed, but you would not really believe tha=
t
> either. =A0If it called a "tax cut" ... it is a tax cut.
>
> Falls into the now discredited "negative income tax" idea bin that was
> thought to be gone forever. =A0Resurrection.
>
> As for the rest of it, of course there's pork in there - it's a
> spending bill. =A0Hopefully some of that pork will give us useful
> infrastructure that lasts for decades like some of FDR's pork
> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
>
> Everyone has their own definition of "pork" ... bridges to nowhere are pu=
re
> pork ... other pork has a little meat to it, but it is just unnecessary
> "improvements" ... some real infrastructure is just that ... reasonable
> functions of the government. =A0Hard to tell where one ends and the other
> begins.
>
> FDR's entitlement programs were the big long lasting thing that he should
> not have done in the way he did it. =A0But it is not all his fault, every=
one,
> no matter their affliliation, has made things worse and worse as we went
> along. =A0The new stuff is just orders of magnitude in effort. =A0It can =
get a
> lot worse.
>
> > If one believes that "spending" is the way to cure excessive spending,
> > then
> > this should work out great. Of course, it does not go near far enough .=
..
> > even more spending will have to be done to cure the excessive spending =
of
> > the previous administration.
>
> "Cure excessive spending"? =A0That is not what this bill is for. =A0The
> entire point of the bill is to jump-start the economy specifically by
> spending money. =A0The idea is that we fix the economy now, and worry
> about the deficit later. =A0I don't know whether or not that will work
> because I'm not an economist, but at least I follow the news enough to
> grasp the general idea.
> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
>
> I know what the "idea" is ... it is that excessive spending will jump sta=
rt
> the economy. =A0There is no attempt to eliminate waste nor is there any
> attempt to "solve" the problems that caused the latest economic downturn.
> We entered the last depression with a country that was generally not in d=
ebt
> ... as long as people believe that we will "worry about the deficit later=
"
> makes some sort of sense, we will never become fiscally responsible. =A0(=
Hint:
> later never comes )
>
> The Patriot Act did nothing to cure excessive spending either, but
> wouldn't it be demented to criticize it on those grounds?
> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D
>
> Did someone criticize the PA on excessive spending grounds?

Of course not, that would be silly because the Patriot Act is not
designed to cure excessive spending.

- Bob T.



  
Date: 14 Feb 2009 08:38:03
From: Bob T.
Subject: Re: Obama's bill - waht a joke
On Feb 14, 8:24=A0am, "da pickle" <jcpickels@(nospam)hotmail.com > wrote:
> "Bob T."
>
> > Most of the Patriot Act is perfectly fine, even for an old lefty like
> > me. It includes things like airport security that were obviously
> > necessary after 9/11. There are a number of features of the P.A. that
> > should be changed, but nobody is seriously suggesting that the entire
> > thing be repealed.
> > =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D
>
> > Sorry, I misunderstood your point.
>
> > I did not know that you liked most of the Patriot Act, after you found =
out
> > what was in it.
>
> "After"? =A0My opinion of the Patriot Act has remained the same since it
> was first rammed through.
> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D
>
> My bad again, I thought no one knew anything about the PA when it was vot=
ed
> on. =A0I did not know that you knew.
>
> There is a lot of good sensible stuff in
> there, some questionable things (was it really a good idea to create a
> new vast level bureaucracy called "Homeland Security"?), and a few
> despicable violations of civil rights. =A0Let's repeal the latter, and
> leave the rest alone. =A0Even if the Homeland Security Dept. was a bad
> idea, it would probably be a worse idea to re-organize again now.
> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
>
> This is consistent thought. =A0No matter how "bad" a government idea migh=
t be,
> we would not want to get rid of it.
>
> > Back to the subject ... you really have no opinion at all about whether
> > the
> > stimulus package sounds like a great idea ... at least what you think i=
t
> > might actually contain? Or are you just "trusting" the president and th=
e
> > legislature on this one without any idea of what they are talking about=
?
>
> Well, I think the stimulus package is probably a good idea in general,
> but I am not an economist so I have little to contribute on the
> subject. =A0If Krugman is right, the package doesn't go far enough. =A0If
> the House GOP is right, it goes way too far. =A0I just hope it all works
> out as well as possible.
> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D
>
> I am not an economist either. =A0I think it is filled with more pork than=
has
> ever been passed in one bill in the history of the USA.

Except for the bullet train to Las Vegas - I have it on high authority
that that particular feature is not "pork".

27% of the bill is tax cuts - those probably aren't "pork", either.
As for the rest of it, of course there's pork in there - it's a
spending bill. Hopefully some of that pork will give us useful
infrastructure that lasts for decades like some of FDR's pork
>
> If one believes that "spending" is the way to cure excessive spending, th=
en
> this should work out great. =A0Of course, it does not go near far enough =
...
> even more spending will have to be done to cure the excessive spending of
> the previous administration.

"Cure excessive spending"? That is not what this bill is for. The
entire point of the bill is to jump-start the economy specifically by
spending money. The idea is that we fix the economy now, and worry
about the deficit later. I don't know whether or not that will work
because I'm not an economist, but at least I follow the news enough to
grasp the general idea.

The Patriot Act did nothing to cure excessive spending either, but
wouldn't it be demented to criticize it on those grounds?

- Bob T.


   
Date: 14 Feb 2009 11:12:10
From: da pickle
Subject: Re: Obama's bill - waht a joke
"Bob T."

Except for the bullet train to Las Vegas - I have it on high authority
that that particular feature is not "pork".
=========================

It is pork.



27% of the bill is tax cuts - those probably aren't "pork", either.
=========================

Most of the "tax cuts" are misnamed, but you would not really believe that
either. If it called a "tax cut" ... it is a tax cut.

Falls into the now discredited "negative income tax" idea bin that was
thought to be gone forever. Resurrection.


As for the rest of it, of course there's pork in there - it's a
spending bill. Hopefully some of that pork will give us useful
infrastructure that lasts for decades like some of FDR's pork
=============================

Everyone has their own definition of "pork" ... bridges to nowhere are pure
pork ... other pork has a little meat to it, but it is just unnecessary
"improvements" ... some real infrastructure is just that ... reasonable
functions of the government. Hard to tell where one ends and the other
begins.

FDR's entitlement programs were the big long lasting thing that he should
not have done in the way he did it. But it is not all his fault, everyone,
no matter their affliliation, has made things worse and worse as we went
along. The new stuff is just orders of magnitude in effort. It can get a
lot worse.



> If one believes that "spending" is the way to cure excessive spending,
> then
> this should work out great. Of course, it does not go near far enough ...
> even more spending will have to be done to cure the excessive spending of
> the previous administration.

"Cure excessive spending"? That is not what this bill is for. The
entire point of the bill is to jump-start the economy specifically by
spending money. The idea is that we fix the economy now, and worry
about the deficit later. I don't know whether or not that will work
because I'm not an economist, but at least I follow the news enough to
grasp the general idea.
========================

I know what the "idea" is ... it is that excessive spending will jump start
the economy. There is no attempt to eliminate waste nor is there any
attempt to "solve" the problems that caused the latest economic downturn.
We entered the last depression with a country that was generally not in debt
... as long as people believe that we will "worry about the deficit later"
makes some sort of sense, we will never become fiscally responsible. (Hint:
later never comes )



The Patriot Act did nothing to cure excessive spending either, but
wouldn't it be demented to criticize it on those grounds?
=========================

Did someone criticize the PA on excessive spending grounds?




    
Date: 14 Feb 2009 11:22:08
From: mccard
Subject: Re: Obama's bill - waht a joke

"da pickle" <jcpickels@(nospam)hotmail.com > wrote in message
news:UaGdndP7Yc8fZgvU4p2dnAA@giganews.com...
> "Bob T."
>
> Except for the bullet train to Las Vegas - I have it on high authority
> that that particular feature is not "pork".
> =========================
>
> It is pork.
>
>
by reptile definition, everything in the bill that is not a tax cut for
business or rich people is pork.



     
Date: 14 Feb 2009 22:36:20
From: Kyle T. Jones
Subject: Re: Obama's bill - waht a joke
mccard, my dear, dear friend, there was this time, oh, 2/14/2009 11:22
AM or thereabouts, when you let the following craziness loose on Usenet:
>
> "da pickle" <jcpickels@(nospam)hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:UaGdndP7Yc8fZgvU4p2dnAA@giganews.com...
>> "Bob T."
>>
>> Except for the bullet train to Las Vegas - I have it on high authority
>> that that particular feature is not "pork".
>> =========================
>>
>> It is pork.
>>
>>
> by reptile definition, everything in the bill that is not a tax cut for
> business or rich people is pork.

How about we just open up the treasury and hand, oh, say a trillion or
so to the richest fat-cats on the planet?

Oops, been there done that - that's, like, so 2008!

Cheers.


  
Date: 14 Feb 2009 08:06:10
From: Bob T.
Subject: Re: Obama's bill - waht a joke
On Feb 14, 7:42=A0am, "da pickle" <jcpickels@(nospam)hotmail.com > wrote:
> "Bob T."
>
> Most of the Patriot Act is perfectly fine, even for an old lefty like
> me. =A0It includes things like airport security that were obviously
> necessary after 9/11. =A0There are a number of features of the P.A. that
> should be changed, but nobody is seriously suggesting that the entire
> thing be repealed.
> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D
>
> Sorry, I misunderstood your point.
>
> I did not know that you liked most of the Patriot Act, after you found ou=
t what was in it.

"After"? My opinion of the Patriot Act has remained the same since it
was first rammed through. There is a lot of good sensible stuff in
there, some questionable things (was it really a good idea to create a
new vast level bureaucracy called "Homeland Security"?), and a few
despicable violations of civil rights. Let's repeal the latter, and
leave the rest alone. Even if the Homeland Security Dept. was a bad
idea, it would probably be a worse idea to re-organize again now.
>
> Back to the subject ... you really have no opinion at all about whether t=
he
> stimulus package sounds like a great idea ... at least what you think it
> might actually contain? =A0Or are you just "trusting" the president and t=
he
> legislature on this one without any idea of what they are talking about?

Well, I think the stimulus package is probably a good idea in general,
but I am not an economist so I have little to contribute on the
subject. If Krugman is right, the package doesn't go far enough. If
the House GOP is right, it goes way too far. I just hope it all works
out as well as possible.

- Bob T.



   
Date: 14 Feb 2009 10:24:58
From: da pickle
Subject: Re: Obama's bill - waht a joke
"Bob T."

> Most of the Patriot Act is perfectly fine, even for an old lefty like
> me. It includes things like airport security that were obviously
> necessary after 9/11. There are a number of features of the P.A. that
> should be changed, but nobody is seriously suggesting that the entire
> thing be repealed.
> ===========================
>
> Sorry, I misunderstood your point.
>
> I did not know that you liked most of the Patriot Act, after you found out
> what was in it.

"After"? My opinion of the Patriot Act has remained the same since it
was first rammed through.
============================

My bad again, I thought no one knew anything about the PA when it was voted
on. I did not know that you knew.


There is a lot of good sensible stuff in
there, some questionable things (was it really a good idea to create a
new vast level bureaucracy called "Homeland Security"?), and a few
despicable violations of civil rights. Let's repeal the latter, and
leave the rest alone. Even if the Homeland Security Dept. was a bad
idea, it would probably be a worse idea to re-organize again now.
=============================

This is consistent thought. No matter how "bad" a government idea might be,
we would not want to get rid of it.


> Back to the subject ... you really have no opinion at all about whether
> the
> stimulus package sounds like a great idea ... at least what you think it
> might actually contain? Or are you just "trusting" the president and the
> legislature on this one without any idea of what they are talking about?

Well, I think the stimulus package is probably a good idea in general,
but I am not an economist so I have little to contribute on the
subject. If Krugman is right, the package doesn't go far enough. If
the House GOP is right, it goes way too far. I just hope it all works
out as well as possible.
=========================

I am not an economist either. I think it is filled with more pork than has
ever been passed in one bill in the history of the USA.

If one believes that "spending" is the way to cure excessive spending, then
this should work out great. Of course, it does not go near far enough ...
even more spending will have to be done to cure the excessive spending of
the previous administration.




  
Date: 14 Feb 2009 07:30:25
From: Bob T.
Subject: Re: Obama's bill - waht a joke
On Feb 14, 5:26=A0am, "da pickle" <jcpickels@(nospam)hotmail.com > wrote:
> "Bob T."
>
> How many Congresspeople read the Patriot Act before they voted for
> it?
> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
>
> I'll play, even though you are changing the subject.

I'm not changing the subject at all. Mike was complaining that
Congress passed a bill without reading it. I was pointing out that it
has happened before (many times, I'm sure, but the Patriot Act is a
famous recent example.)
>
> How quickly did the current administration, with a completely compliant
> legislature, get that nasty old Patriot Act repealed?

Most of the Patriot Act is perfectly fine, even for an old lefty like
me. It includes things like airport security that were obviously
necessary after 9/11. There are a number of features of the P.A. that
should be changed, but nobody is seriously suggesting that the entire
thing be repealed.

- Bob T.


   
Date: 14 Feb 2009 09:42:53
From: da pickle
Subject: Re: Obama's bill - waht a joke
"Bob T."

Most of the Patriot Act is perfectly fine, even for an old lefty like
me. It includes things like airport security that were obviously
necessary after 9/11. There are a number of features of the P.A. that
should be changed, but nobody is seriously suggesting that the entire
thing be repealed.
===========================

Sorry, I misunderstood your point.

I did not know that you liked most of the Patriot Act, after you found out
what was in it.

Back to the subject ... you really have no opinion at all about whether the
stimulus package sounds like a great idea ... at least what you think it
might actually contain? Or are you just "trusting" the president and the
legislature on this one without any idea of what they are talking about?




    
Date: 14 Feb 2009 22:37:34
From: Dutch
Subject: Re: Obama's bill - waht a joke

"da pickle" <jcpickels@(nospam)hotmail.com > wrote in message
news:SfKdnWrffbIcewvURVn_vwA@giganews.com...
> "Bob T."
>
> Most of the Patriot Act is perfectly fine, even for an old lefty like
> me. It includes things like airport security that were obviously
> necessary after 9/11. There are a number of features of the P.A. that
> should be changed, but nobody is seriously suggesting that the entire
> thing be repealed.
> ===========================
>
> Sorry, I misunderstood your point.
>
> I did not know that you liked most of the Patriot Act, after you found out
> what was in it.
>
> Back to the subject ... you really have no opinion at all about whether
> the stimulus package sounds like a great idea ... at least what you think
> it might actually contain? Or are you just "trusting" the president and
> the legislature on this one without any idea of what they are talking
> about?

As opposed to having no idea and mistrusting him and concluding that he is
absolutely incompetent, against all reason, as IM has done? Yes.



  
Date: 14 Feb 2009 05:55:03
From: Bob T.
Subject: Re: Obama's bill - waht a joke
On Feb 14, 5:48=A0am, "Irish Mike" <mjos...@ameritech.net > wrote:
> "Bob T." <b...@synapse-cs.com> wrote in message
>
> news:ec7624e9-8c3f-4f2b-a6a9-b12ab9b6f2e9@s9g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
> On Feb 13, 9:20 pm, "Irish Mike" <mjos...@ameritech.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Well the Obama cluster fuck continues. The Democrats just pushed throug=
h a
> > partisan 1,071 page, $787 billion welfare and entitlement spending bill=
.
> > And here's the absolutely unbelievable part - not one of these Democrat
> > Congressional Reps or Senators have even read the bill! I kid you not.
> > These buffoons just voted for the biggest stimulus spending bill in thi=
s
> > country's history and not one of them has even read the fucking bill. O=
f
> > course the real reason the Dems pushed the bill through so fast is that
> > the
> > more the American people found out about the staggering amount of pork =
in
> > this bill, the more they opposed it. Well so much for Obama and the Dem=
's
> > promise that there would be 48 hours to at least read the bill before t=
he
> > vote. The sad thing is that this gigantic boondoggle isn't going to do
> > jack
> > shit to really "jump start" the economy. For one thing, only about 20% =
of
> > this money will even be spend in the next 18 months. This Obama bill is=
an
> > absolute fucking disgrace and clearly demonstrates just how clueless th=
is
> > guy really is when it comes to actually governing.
>
> How many Congresspeople read the Patriot Act before they voted for
> it?
>
> - Bob T.
>
> Liberal Translation:

Irish Translation:=A0

"I know that whenever Congress passes a thousand page emergency bill
that none of the people that voted for or against it will have
actually read it, but I will only complain about it when they are
Democrats."

> I know the Democrats have totally fucked this up and I
> can't refute any of the things you've said. =A0But I don't like what you =
said
> so I'll just post this "But Bush" one liner. =A0Come on Bob, I know you'v=
e an
> Obama supporter but I also know you're an intelligent guy. =A0Can you hon=
estly
> tell me that you approve of the Democrats passing the biggest spending-st=
imulus bill in American history when not a
> single one of them has even read it?

Just like the Patriot Act. Can you honestly tell me that you approve
of the Republicans passing the biggest security bill in American
history when not a single one of them had read it?

One difference between you and me, Mike, is that when I see both
parties behaving in exactly the same way I don't blame just one of
them.

- Bob T.
>
> Irish Mike- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -



   
Date: 14 Feb 2009 19:35:51
From: ~M~
Subject: Re: Obama's bill - waht a joke

"Bob T." <bob@synapse-cs.com > wrote in message
news:dd890661-6aee-4007-b11f-e46ecabd88b0@p23g2000prp.googlegroups.com...
On Feb 14, 5:48 am, "Irish Mike" <mjos...@ameritech.net > wrote:
> "Bob T." <b...@synapse-cs.com> wrote in message

> One difference between you and me, Mike, is that when I see both
> parties behaving in exactly the same way I don't blame just one of
> them.

They are both acting the same way, which, unfortunately, is idiotic. You
should not be looking for one to blame, you should be blaming both.


--
"Socialism is the ultimate destiny of the species, if we don't kill
ourselves first"
- Beldin the Sorcerer, 3/18/2008



   
Date: 14 Feb 2009 09:42:44
From: Irish Mike
Subject: Re: Obama's bill - waht a joke

"Bob T." <bob@synapse-cs.com > wrote in message
news:dd890661-6aee-4007-b11f-e46ecabd88b0@p23g2000prp.googlegroups.com...
On Feb 14, 5:48 am, "Irish Mike" <mjos...@ameritech.net > wrote:
> "Bob T." <b...@synapse-cs.com> wrote in message
>
> news:ec7624e9-8c3f-4f2b-a6a9-b12ab9b6f2e9@s9g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
> On Feb 13, 9:20 pm, "Irish Mike" <mjos...@ameritech.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Well the Obama cluster fuck continues. The Democrats just pushed through
> > a
> > partisan 1,071 page, $787 billion welfare and entitlement spending bill.
> > And here's the absolutely unbelievable part - not one of these Democrat
> > Congressional Reps or Senators have even read the bill! I kid you not.
> > These buffoons just voted for the biggest stimulus spending bill in this
> > country's history and not one of them has even read the fucking bill. Of
> > course the real reason the Dems pushed the bill through so fast is that
> > the
> > more the American people found out about the staggering amount of pork
> > in
> > this bill, the more they opposed it. Well so much for Obama and the
> > Dem's
> > promise that there would be 48 hours to at least read the bill before
> > the
> > vote. The sad thing is that this gigantic boondoggle isn't going to do
> > jack
> > shit to really "jump start" the economy. For one thing, only about 20%
> > of
> > this money will even be spend in the next 18 months. This Obama bill is
> > an
> > absolute fucking disgrace and clearly demonstrates just how clueless
> > this
> > guy really is when it comes to actually governing.
>
> How many Congresspeople read the Patriot Act before they voted for
> it?
>
> - Bob T.
>
> Liberal Translation:

Irish Translation:

"I know that whenever Congress passes a thousand page emergency bill
that none of the people that voted for or against it will have
actually read it, but I will only complain about it when they are
Democrats."

No Bob, I only complain about it when the bill includes spending $787
Billion in tax payer money for a bunch of liberal entitlement programs and
when one party jams it through congress without a single vote from the
opposing party.

> I know the Democrats have totally fucked this up and I
> can't refute any of the things you've said. But I don't like what you said
> so I'll just post this "But Bush" one liner. Come on Bob, I know you've an
> Obama supporter but I also know you're an intelligent guy. Can you
> honestly
> tell me that you approve of the Democrats passing the biggest
> spending-stimulus bill in American history when not a
> single one of them has even read it?

Just like the Patriot Act. Can you honestly tell me that you approve
of the Republicans passing the biggest security bill in American
history when not a single one of them had read it?

We had just been attacked on our own soild by muslim terrorists and they
murdered 3,000 American citizens. My only bitch about the Patriot Act is
that it didn't go far enough. If I had written that bill it would have been
a lot tougher.

One difference between you and me, Mike, is that when I see both
parties behaving in exactly the same way I don't blame just one of
them.

- Bob T.

I have already posted my list of the screw-ups made by the Bush
administration - and there were plenty of them. However, I have never had
my head so deep in any candidate's kool aid bucket that I refused to admit
his short-comings and mistakes. The free ride and lack of scrutiny Obama
was given by the press through out his two year campaign was unprecedented.
He was never challenged or really pressed to explain exactly what this
"change" would be or to provide the details of what his policies would be.
He is an unqualified, inexperienced and totally average left wing Democrat
who got away with running on empty campaign slogans. And now we're seeing
just how clueless he really is when it comes to governing.

Irish Mike




  
Date: 14 Feb 2009 08:48:17
From: Irish Mike
Subject: Re: Obama's bill - waht a joke

"Bob T." <bob@synapse-cs.com > wrote in message
news:ec7624e9-8c3f-4f2b-a6a9-b12ab9b6f2e9@s9g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
On Feb 13, 9:20 pm, "Irish Mike" <mjos...@ameritech.net > wrote:
> Well the Obama cluster fuck continues. The Democrats just pushed through a
> partisan 1,071 page, $787 billion welfare and entitlement spending bill.
> And here's the absolutely unbelievable part - not one of these Democrat
> Congressional Reps or Senators have even read the bill! I kid you not.
> These buffoons just voted for the biggest stimulus spending bill in this
> country's history and not one of them has even read the fucking bill. Of
> course the real reason the Dems pushed the bill through so fast is that
> the
> more the American people found out about the staggering amount of pork in
> this bill, the more they opposed it. Well so much for Obama and the Dem's
> promise that there would be 48 hours to at least read the bill before the
> vote. The sad thing is that this gigantic boondoggle isn't going to do
> jack
> shit to really "jump start" the economy. For one thing, only about 20% of
> this money will even be spend in the next 18 months. This Obama bill is an
> absolute fucking disgrace and clearly demonstrates just how clueless this
> guy really is when it comes to actually governing.

How many Congresspeople read the Patriot Act before they voted for
it?

- Bob T.

Liberal Translation: I know the Democrats have totally fucked this up and I
can't refute any of the things you've said. But I don't like what you said
so I'll just post this "But Bush" one liner. Come on Bob, I know you've an
Obama supporter but I also know you're an intelligent guy. Can you honestly
tell me that you approve of the Democrats passing the biggest
spending-stimulus bill in American history when not a single one of them has
even read it?

Irish Mike




  
Date: 14 Feb 2009 07:26:43
From: da pickle
Subject: Re: Obama's bill - waht a joke
"Bob T."

How many Congresspeople read the Patriot Act before they voted for
it?
===================

I'll play, even though you are changing the subject.

How quickly did the current administration, with a completely compliant
legislature, get that nasty old Patriot Act repealed?




   
Date: 14 Feb 2009 22:34:23
From: Kyle T. Jones
Subject: Re: Obama's bill - waht a joke
da pickle, my dear, dear friend, there was this time, oh, 2/14/2009 7:26
AM or thereabouts, when you let the following craziness loose on Usenet:
> "Bob T."
>
> How many Congresspeople read the Patriot Act before they voted for
> it?
> ===================
>
> I'll play, even though you are changing the subject.
>
> How quickly did the current administration, with a completely compliant
> legislature, get that nasty old Patriot Act repealed?
>
>

Completely compliant? Jeez, I remember when filibustering was, like, so
not cool, until it was cool again.

Cheers.


   
Date: 14 Feb 2009 08:38:38
From: James L. Hankins
Subject: Re: Obama's bill - waht a joke

"da pickle" <jcpickels@(nospam)hotmail.com > wrote in message
news:DaidnQ9HBokKWwvU4p2dnAA@giganews.com...
> "Bob T."
>
> How many Congresspeople read the Patriot Act before they voted for
> it?
> ===================
>
> I'll play, even though you are changing the subject.
>
> How quickly did the current administration, with a completely compliant
> legislature, get that nasty old Patriot Act repealed?



Do you mind if he saves the economy first?




    
Date: 14 Feb 2009 11:05:50
From: Travel
Subject: Re: Obama's bill - waht a joke
BobTard wrote:

"One difference between you and me, Mike, is that when I see both
parties behaving in exactly the same way I don't blame just one of
them.

- Bob T.
.......................................................................
..

Really! When are your Obama and Democrat blaming posts going to begin?
Will there be a grand opening or something?

_________________________________________________________
Posted via the -Web to Usenet- forums at http://www.pokermagazine.com
Visit www.pokermagazine.com


    
Date: 14 Feb 2009 09:37:02
From: Joe Long
Subject: Re: Obama's bill - waht a joke
James L. Hankins wrote:
> "da pickle" <jcpickels@(nospam)hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:DaidnQ9HBokKWwvU4p2dnAA@giganews.com...
>> "Bob T."
>>
>> How many Congresspeople read the Patriot Act before they voted for
>> it?
>> ===================
>>
>> I'll play, even though you are changing the subject.
>>
>> How quickly did the current administration, with a completely compliant
>> legislature, get that nasty old Patriot Act repealed?

> Do you mind if he saves the economy first?

Do you really still expect Obama or the Democratic Congress to repeal
any part of the Patriot Act?


--
Joe Long aka ChipRider
Somewhere on the Range


     
Date: 14 Feb 2009 14:17:51
From: brewmaster
Subject: Re: Obama's bill - waht a joke
On Feb 14 2009 8:37 AM, Joe Long wrote:

> James L. Hankins wrote:
> > "da pickle" <jcpickels@(nospam)hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:DaidnQ9HBokKWwvU4p2dnAA@giganews.com...
> >> "Bob T."
> >>
> >> How many Congresspeople read the Patriot Act before they voted for
> >> it?
> >> ===================
> >>
> >> I'll play, even though you are changing the subject.
> >>
> >> How quickly did the current administration, with a completely compliant
> >> legislature, get that nasty old Patriot Act repealed?
>
> > Do you mind if he saves the economy first?
>
> Do you really still expect Obama or the Democratic Congress to repeal
> any part of the Patriot Act?
>

Or fix the economy?

>
> --
> Joe Long aka ChipRider
> Somewhere on the Range


Brew
--
Email me here: http://tinymail.me/k4r2nk

______________________________________________________________________
: the next generation of web-newsreaders : http://www.recgroups.com



      
Date: 14 Feb 2009 16:18:27
From: mccard
Subject: Re: Obama's bill - waht a joke

"brewmaster" <a163b@webnntp.invalid > wrote in message
news:fhsj66x2h4.ln2@recgroups.com...
> On Feb 14 2009 8:37 AM, Joe Long wrote:
>
>> James L. Hankins wrote:
>> > "da pickle" <jcpickels@(nospam)hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> > news:DaidnQ9HBokKWwvU4p2dnAA@giganews.com...
>> >> "Bob T."
>> >>
>> >> How many Congresspeople read the Patriot Act before they voted for
>> >> it?
>> >> ===================
>> >>
>> >> I'll play, even though you are changing the subject.
>> >>
>> >> How quickly did the current administration, with a completely
>> >> compliant
>> >> legislature, get that nasty old Patriot Act repealed?
>>
>> > Do you mind if he saves the economy first?
>>
>> Do you really still expect Obama or the Democratic Congress to repeal
>> any part of the Patriot Act?
>>
>
> Or fix the economy?
>
>
Give it a hell of a lot better try than Howdy Doody or was it Alfred E
Newman, you know the last president, the clown one.



 
Date: 13 Feb 2009 21:51:58
From: Abbey Johnsson
Subject: Re: Obama's bill - waht a joke
On Feb 14 2009 12:20 AM, Irish Mike wrote:

> Well the Obama cluster fuck continues. The Democrats just pushed through a
> partisan 1,071 page, $787 billion welfare and entitlement spending bill.
> And here's the absolutely unbelievable part - not one of these Democrat
> Congressional Reps or Senators have even read the bill! I kid you not.
> These buffoons just voted for the biggest stimulus spending bill in this
> country's history and not one of them has even read the fucking bill. Of
> course the real reason the Dems pushed the bill through so fast is that the
> more the American people found out about the staggering amount of pork in
> this bill, the more they opposed it. Well so much for Obama and the Dem's
> promise that there would be 48 hours to at least read the bill before the
> vote. The sad thing is that this gigantic boondoggle isn't going to do jack
> shit to really "jump start" the economy. For one thing, only about 20% of
> this money will even be spend in the next 18 months. This Obama bill is an
> absolute fucking disgrace and clearly demonstrates just how clueless this
> guy really is when it comes to actually governing.
>
> Irish Mike

shouldn't you be in therapy tonight?

_____________________________________________________________________
RecGroups : the community-oriented newsreader : www.recgroups.com




  
Date: 14 Feb 2009 06:34:23
From: mccard
Subject: Re: Obama's bill - waht a joke

"Abbey Johnsson" <ac68dc0@webnntp.invalid > wrote in message
news:uo2i66xnir.ln2@recgroups.com...
> On Feb 14 2009 12:20 AM, Irish Mike wrote:
>
>> Well the Obama cluster fuck continues. The Democrats just pushed through
>> a
>> partisan 1,071 page, $787 billion welfare and entitlement spending bill.
>> And here's the absolutely unbelievable part - not one of these Democrat
>> Congressional Reps or Senators have even read the bill! I kid you not.
>> These buffoons just voted for the biggest stimulus spending bill in this
>> country's history and not one of them has even read the fucking bill. Of
>> course the real reason the Dems pushed the bill through so fast is that
>> the
>> more the American people found out about the staggering amount of pork in
>> this bill, the more they opposed it. Well so much for Obama and the
>> Dem's
>> promise that there would be 48 hours to at least read the bill before the
>> vote. The sad thing is that this gigantic boondoggle isn't going to do
>> jack
>> shit to really "jump start" the economy. For one thing, only about 20%
>> of
>> this money will even be spend in the next 18 months. This Obama bill is
>> an
>> absolute fucking disgrace and clearly demonstrates just how clueless this
>> guy really is when it comes to actually governing.
>>
>> Irish Mike
>
> shouldn't you be in therapy tonight?
>

Dude, its his job. He gets paid to pump this vomit into newsgroups.



   
Date: 14 Feb 2009 08:42:44
From: Irish Mike
Subject: Re: Obama's bill - waht a joke

"mccard" <no_won@no_won.none > wrote in message
news:3Tyll.445$EO2.339@newsfe04.iad...
>
> "Abbey Johnsson" <ac68dc0@webnntp.invalid> wrote in message
> news:uo2i66xnir.ln2@recgroups.com...
>> On Feb 14 2009 12:20 AM, Irish Mike wrote:
>>
>>> Well the Obama cluster fuck continues. The Democrats just pushed
>>> through a
>>> partisan 1,071 page, $787 billion welfare and entitlement spending bill.
>>> And here's the absolutely unbelievable part - not one of these Democrat
>>> Congressional Reps or Senators have even read the bill! I kid you not.
>>> These buffoons just voted for the biggest stimulus spending bill in this
>>> country's history and not one of them has even read the fucking bill.
>>> Of
>>> course the real reason the Dems pushed the bill through so fast is that
>>> the
>>> more the American people found out about the staggering amount of pork
>>> in
>>> this bill, the more they opposed it. Well so much for Obama and the
>>> Dem's
>>> promise that there would be 48 hours to at least read the bill before
>>> the
>>> vote. The sad thing is that this gigantic boondoggle isn't going to do
>>> jack
>>> shit to really "jump start" the economy. For one thing, only about 20%
>>> of
>>> this money will even be spend in the next 18 months. This Obama bill
>>> is an
>>> absolute fucking disgrace and clearly demonstrates just how clueless
>>> this
>>> guy really is when it comes to actually governing.
>>>
>>> Irish Mike
>>
>> shouldn't you be in therapy tonight?
>>
>
> Dude, its his job. He gets paid to pump this vomit into newsgroups.

Liberal Translation: I know the Democrats have totally fucked this up and I
can't refute any of the things you've said. But I don't like what you said
so I'll just post this sophmoric one liner and say every thing you say is
"vomit".
Well bucko, any one who tries to defend Democrats voting for a $787 billion
they didn't even read is the one who is, to use your words, "pumpig vomit".

Irish Mike




    
Date: 16 Feb 2009 02:31:19
From: RGP Loner
Subject: Re: Obama's bill - waht a joke
On Feb 14 2009 6:42 AM, Irish Mike wrote:

> "mccard" <no_won@no_won.none> wrote in message
> news:3Tyll.445$EO2.339@newsfe04.iad...
> >
> > "Abbey Johnsson" <ac68dc0@webnntp.invalid> wrote in message
> > news:uo2i66xnir.ln2@recgroups.com...
> >> On Feb 14 2009 12:20 AM, Irish Mike wrote:
> >>
> >>> Well the Obama cluster fuck continues. The Democrats just pushed
> >>> through a
> >>> partisan 1,071 page, $787 billion welfare and entitlement spending bill.
> >>> And here's the absolutely unbelievable part - not one of these Democrat
> >>> Congressional Reps or Senators have even read the bill! I kid you not.
> >>> These buffoons just voted for the biggest stimulus spending bill in this
> >>> country's history and not one of them has even read the fucking bill.
> >>> Of
> >>> course the real reason the Dems pushed the bill through so fast is that
> >>> the
> >>> more the American people found out about the staggering amount of pork
> >>> in
> >>> this bill, the more they opposed it. Well so much for Obama and the
> >>> Dem's
> >>> promise that there would be 48 hours to at least read the bill before
> >>> the
> >>> vote. The sad thing is that this gigantic boondoggle isn't going to do
> >>> jack
> >>> shit to really "jump start" the economy. For one thing, only about 20%
> >>> of
> >>> this money will even be spend in the next 18 months. This Obama bill
> >>> is an
> >>> absolute fucking disgrace and clearly demonstrates just how clueless
> >>> this
> >>> guy really is when it comes to actually governing.
> >>>
> >>> Irish Mike
> >>
> >> shouldn't you be in therapy tonight?
> >>
> >
> > Dude, its his job. He gets paid to pump this vomit into newsgroups.
>
> Liberal Translation: I know the Democrats have totally fucked this up and I
> can't refute any of the things you've said. But I don't like what you said
> so I'll just post this sophmoric one liner and say every thing you say is
> "vomit".
> Well bucko, any one who tries to defend Democrats voting for a $787 billion
> they didn't even read is the one who is, to use your words, "pumpig vomit".
>
> Irish Mike


Gee mike, where was all this talk about reading a meaning full bill when
the pat act was jammed down our throats?

------
: the next generation of web-newsreaders : http://www.recgroups.com



     
Date: 16 Feb 2009 09:08:20
From: Irish Mike
Subject: Re: Obama's bill - waht a joke

"RGP Loner" <aaaa0db@webnntp.invalid > wrote in message
news:nsrn66xbvr.ln2@recgroups.com...
> On Feb 14 2009 6:42 AM, Irish Mike wrote:
>
>> "mccard" <no_won@no_won.none> wrote in message
>> news:3Tyll.445$EO2.339@newsfe04.iad...
>> >
>> > "Abbey Johnsson" <ac68dc0@webnntp.invalid> wrote in message
>> > news:uo2i66xnir.ln2@recgroups.com...
>> >> On Feb 14 2009 12:20 AM, Irish Mike wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> Well the Obama cluster fuck continues. The Democrats just pushed
>> >>> through a
>> >>> partisan 1,071 page, $787 billion welfare and entitlement spending
>> >>> bill.
>> >>> And here's the absolutely unbelievable part - not one of these
>> >>> Democrat
>> >>> Congressional Reps or Senators have even read the bill! I kid you
>> >>> not.
>> >>> These buffoons just voted for the biggest stimulus spending bill in
>> >>> this
>> >>> country's history and not one of them has even read the fucking bill.
>> >>> Of
>> >>> course the real reason the Dems pushed the bill through so fast is
>> >>> that
>> >>> the
>> >>> more the American people found out about the staggering amount of
>> >>> pork
>> >>> in
>> >>> this bill, the more they opposed it. Well so much for Obama and the
>> >>> Dem's
>> >>> promise that there would be 48 hours to at least read the bill before
>> >>> the
>> >>> vote. The sad thing is that this gigantic boondoggle isn't going to
>> >>> do
>> >>> jack
>> >>> shit to really "jump start" the economy. For one thing, only about
>> >>> 20%
>> >>> of
>> >>> this money will even be spend in the next 18 months. This Obama
>> >>> bill
>> >>> is an
>> >>> absolute fucking disgrace and clearly demonstrates just how clueless
>> >>> this
>> >>> guy really is when it comes to actually governing.
>> >>>
>> >>> Irish Mike
>> >>
>> >> shouldn't you be in therapy tonight?
>> >>
>> >
>> > Dude, its his job. He gets paid to pump this vomit into newsgroups.
>>
>> Liberal Translation: I know the Democrats have totally fucked this up
>> and I
>> can't refute any of the things you've said. But I don't like what you
>> said
>> so I'll just post this sophmoric one liner and say every thing you say is
>> "vomit".
>> Well bucko, any one who tries to defend Democrats voting for a $787
>> billion
>> they didn't even read is the one who is, to use your words, "pumpig
>> vomit".
>>
>> Irish Mike
>
>
> Gee mike, where was all this talk about reading a meaning full bill when
> the pat act was jammed down our throats?

My only complaint about the Patriot Act is that it wasn't strong enough.
And it got a hell of a lot more Democrat votes than Obama's boondoggle
entitlement spending bill got Republican votes.

Irish Mike




    
Date: 14 Feb 2009 22:33:39
From: Kyle T. Jones
Subject: Re: Obama's bill - waht a joke
Irish Mike, my dear, dear friend, there was this time, oh, 2/14/2009
7:42 AM or thereabouts, when you let the following craziness loose on
Usenet:

>> Dude, its his job. He gets paid to pump this vomit into newsgroups.
>
> Liberal Translation: I know the Democrats have totally fucked this up and I
> can't refute any of the things you've said. But I don't like what you said
> so I'll just post this sophmoric one liner and say every thing you say is
> "vomit".
> Well bucko, any one who tries to defend Democrats voting for a $787 billion
> they didn't even read is the one who is, to use your words, "pumpig vomit".
>
> Irish Mike
>
>

Sorry, Mike. No bucks for cut-n-paste repetition, bucko.

Cheers,
The GOP


  
Date: 14 Feb 2009 01:59:30
From: Irish Mike
Subject: Re: Obama's bill - waht a joke

"Abbey Johnsson" <ac68dc0@webnntp.invalid > wrote in message
news:uo2i66xnir.ln2@recgroups.com...
> On Feb 14 2009 12:20 AM, Irish Mike wrote:
>
>> Well the Obama cluster fuck continues. The Democrats just pushed through
>> a
>> partisan 1,071 page, $787 billion welfare and entitlement spending bill.
>> And here's the absolutely unbelievable part - not one of these Democrat
>> Congressional Reps or Senators have even read the bill! I kid you not.
>> These buffoons just voted for the biggest stimulus spending bill in this
>> country's history and not one of them has even read the fucking bill. Of
>> course the real reason the Dems pushed the bill through so fast is that
>> the
>> more the American people found out about the staggering amount of pork in
>> this bill, the more they opposed it. Well so much for Obama and the
>> Dem's
>> promise that there would be 48 hours to at least read the bill before the
>> vote. The sad thing is that this gigantic boondoggle isn't going to do
>> jack
>> shit to really "jump start" the economy. For one thing, only about 20%
>> of
>> this money will even be spend in the next 18 months. This Obama bill is
>> an
>> absolute fucking disgrace and clearly demonstrates just how clueless this
>> guy really is when it comes to actually governing.
>>
>> Irish Mike
>
> shouldn't you be in therapy tonight?

Liberal Translation: I know the Democrats have totally fucked this up and I
can't refute any of the things you've said. But I don't like what you said
so I'll just post this sophmoric one liner and say you should be in therapy.
Well bucko, any one who tries to defend Democrats voting for a $787 billion
they didn't even read is the one who needs therapy.

Irish Mike




   
Date: 14 Feb 2009 01:14:22
From: Pepe Papon
Subject: Re: Obama's bill - waht a joke
On Sat, 14 Feb 2009 01:59:30 -0500, "Irish Mike"
<mjostar@ameritech.net > wrote:

>
>"Abbey Johnsson" <ac68dc0@webnntp.invalid> wrote in message
>news:uo2i66xnir.ln2@recgroups.com...
>> On Feb 14 2009 12:20 AM, Irish Mike wrote:
>>
>>> Well the Obama cluster fuck continues. The Democrats just pushed through
>>> a
>>> partisan 1,071 page, $787 billion welfare and entitlement spending bill.
>>> And here's the absolutely unbelievable part - not one of these Democrat
>>> Congressional Reps or Senators have even read the bill! I kid you not.
>>> These buffoons just voted for the biggest stimulus spending bill in this
>>> country's history and not one of them has even read the fucking bill. Of
>>> course the real reason the Dems pushed the bill through so fast is that
>>> the
>>> more the American people found out about the staggering amount of pork in
>>> this bill, the more they opposed it. Well so much for Obama and the
>>> Dem's
>>> promise that there would be 48 hours to at least read the bill before the
>>> vote. The sad thing is that this gigantic boondoggle isn't going to do
>>> jack
>>> shit to really "jump start" the economy. For one thing, only about 20%
>>> of
>>> this money will even be spend in the next 18 months. This Obama bill is
>>> an
>>> absolute fucking disgrace and clearly demonstrates just how clueless this
>>> guy really is when it comes to actually governing.
>>>
>>> Irish Mike
>>
>> shouldn't you be in therapy tonight?
>
>Liberal Translation: I know the Democrats have totally fucked this up and I
>can't refute any of the things you've said. But I don't like what you said
>so I'll just post this sophmoric one liner and say you should be in therapy.
>Well bucko, any one who tries to defend Democrats voting for a $787 billion
>they didn't even read is the one who needs therapy.

Translation: Yes, I ought to be in therapy but I'm in such denial I
would never admit it to myself, much less to you.


 
Date: 13 Feb 2009 23:45:26
From: James L. Hankins
Subject: Re: Obama's bill - waht a joke

"Irish Mike" <mjostar@ameritech.net > wrote in message
news:8Csll.10717$pr6.10387@flpi149.ffdc.sbc.com...
> Well the Obama cluster fuck continues. The Democrats just pushed through
> a partisan 1,071 page, $787 billion welfare and entitlement spending bill.
> And here's the absolutely unbelievable part - not one of these Democrat
> Congressional Reps or Senators have even read the bill! I kid you not.
> These buffoons just voted for the biggest stimulus spending bill in this
> country's history and not one of them has even read the fucking bill. Of
> course the real reason the Dems pushed the bill through so fast is that
> the more the American people found out about the staggering amount of pork
> in this bill, the more they opposed it. Well so much for Obama and the
> Dem's promise that there would be 48 hours to at least read the bill
> before the vote. The sad thing is that this gigantic boondoggle isn't
> going to do jack shit to really "jump start" the economy. For one thing,
> only about 20% of this money will even be spend in the next 18 months.
> This Obama bill is an absolute fucking disgrace and clearly demonstrates
> just how clueless this guy really is when it comes to actually governing.
>
> Irish Mike



YOU haven't read the bill either, Bucko; yet, you seem to know all about it.
You seem to be delivering a lot of condemnation of things that have not come
to fruition. This is about the 20th time you've cried wolf, but nothing
much has really happened yet in the Obama administration.




  
Date: 14 Feb 2009 08:50:32
From: Bob T.
Subject: Re: Obama's bill - waht a joke
On Feb 14, 8:44=A0am, Joe Long <nos...@spam.com > wrote:
> Jerry Sturdivant wrote:
> > Now get the hell out of the way and let somebody try something that jus=
t
> > might work.
>
> At least you seem to understand that it might not work.
>
> The problem is that, although it might do some good, that good will be
> at a great cost -- and it might do more harm than good. =A0In fact, IMO i=
t
> is likely to do more harm than good, but there is no way I can prove that=
.

Even if it doesn't do the economy all that much good, we'll still have
that train to Vegas, kids will still have the benefit of that
increased Head Start funding, and we will still have the benefit of
the tax cuts that comprise 27% of the bill.
>
> There's another part of the problem. =A0If the economy continues to tank
> despite the passage of this bill, we will know that it didn't work. =A0Bu=
t
> if the economy improves we won't know if this bill worked and helped, or
> if this bill didn't work and the economy would have improved even more
> without it. =A0There will be no way to know.

Since there is still disagreement about the effectiveness of the New
Deal, apparently we will never "know" for sure the effect of any
economic stimulus.
>
> What we can be sure of is that if the economy improves, Democrats will
> say that the stimulus package caused the improvement, and Republicans
> will say that it didn't.

Except for that bullet train to Vegas, of course ;-}

- Bob T.
>
> --
> Joe Long aka ChipRider
> Somewhere on the Range



   
Date: 15 Feb 2009 00:17:00
From: Joe Long
Subject: Re: Obama's bill - waht a joke
Bob T. wrote:
> On Feb 14, 8:44 am, Joe Long <nos...@spam.com> wrote:

>> The problem is that, although it might do some good, that good will be
>> at a great cost -- and it might do more harm than good. In fact, IMO it
>> is likely to do more harm than good, but there is no way I can prove that.
>
> Even if it doesn't do the economy all that much good, we'll still have
> that train to Vegas, kids will still have the benefit of that
> increased Head Start funding, and we will still have the benefit of
> the tax cuts that comprise 27% of the bill.

Practically all government expenditures do things some people think are
good or beneficial. And yes, the tax cuts are good.

One of the interesting things about this bill is that we're being told
that we need the spending to fix the bad economy, while the years
leading up to this bad economy saw the highest government spending in
our history. How is doing more of the same going to fix the problem?

>> There's another part of the problem. If the economy continues to tank
>> despite the passage of this bill, we will know that it didn't work. But
>> if the economy improves we won't know if this bill worked and helped, or
>> if this bill didn't work and the economy would have improved even more
>> without it. There will be no way to know.
>
> Since there is still disagreement about the effectiveness of the New
> Deal, apparently we will never "know" for sure the effect of any
> economic stimulus.

Yep. Politicians depend on that.

>> What we can be sure of is that if the economy improves, Democrats will
>> say that the stimulus package caused the improvement, and Republicans
>> will say that it didn't.
>
> Except for that bullet train to Vegas, of course ;-}

I disapprove of the Feds building that train, as I disapprove of all
such pork projects. I do admit, though, that this one will benefit me
personally even though I don't live in California or Nevada.


--
Joe Long aka ChipRider
Somewhere on the Range


    
Date: 15 Feb 2009 06:04:53
From: Jerry Sturdivant
Subject: Re: Obama's bill - waht a joke

"Joe Long"

> One of the interesting things about this bill is that we're
> being told that we need the spending to fix the bad economy,
> while the years leading up to this bad economy saw the highest
> government spending in our history. How is doing more of
> the same going to fix the problem?

Spending it on, to, and for the benefit of, our own civilians. Giving
billions to Halliburton (including the $1 billion dollars they 'lost,' the
Democrats in congress requested be investigated; and the Republicans
blocked) enriched Dick Cheney's future golden parachute. Giving billions to
the military industrial complex only helped defense contractors donate more
to the politicians. Dumping zillions into Iraq didn't help.



>> Except for that bullet train to Vegas, of course ;-}

> I disapprove of the Feds building that train,
> as I disapprove of all such pork projects.

Pork projects are for local folks to build and maintain a museum to honor
some local politician or his butterfly collection with federal dollars; or a
Bridge To Nowhere On The Other Side Of Town and does nothing to build
something useful that benefits the citizens. An interstate rail system that
saves expanding highways and more gas stations isn't pork.

And yea, there's some pork in this bill.


Jerry 'n Vegas






     
Date: 15 Feb 2009 10:49:18
From: James L. Hankins
Subject: Re: Obama's bill - waht a joke

"Jerry Sturdivant" <jerryst@cox.net > wrote in message
news:ciVll.7510$7r7.3789@newsfe25.iad...


> Pork projects are for local folks to build and maintain a museum to honor
> some local politician or his butterfly collection with federal dollars; or
> a
> Bridge To Nowhere On The Other Side Of Town and does nothing to build
> something useful that benefits the citizens. An interstate rail system
> that
> saves expanding highways and more gas stations isn't pork.



I guess I'm confused then. Is the bullet train from L.A. to Las Vegas the
initial stage of an interstate rail system? That detail hasn't come up
until just now. It's been presented thus far as a one-time deal.

Hey, instead of building the bullet train from LA to LV, I want a bullet
train from OKC to Dallas so I can go to big D in 30 minutes instead of
driving there in 3.5 hours. You with me?




      
Date: 15 Feb 2009 11:20:48
From: Jerry Sturdivant
Subject: Re: Obama's bill - waht a joke

"James L. Hankins"

>> Pork projects are for local folks to build and maintain a museum
>> to honor some local politician or his butterfly collection with
>> federal dollars; or a Bridge To Nowhere On The Other Side
>> Of Town and does nothing to build something useful that
>> benefits the citizens. An interstate rail system that saves
>> expanding highways and more gas stations isn't pork.

> I guess I'm confused then.

Of course, were talking about our federal government here.


> Is the bullet train from L.A. to Las Vegas
> the initial stage of an interstate rail system?

Maglev system, yes. Like the BART system in the Bay Area. Its slowly been
expanded to additional cities.


> That detail hasn't come up until just now.

No, its been there. Just like when the first highway was built; or the
first RR track laid.


> It's been presented thus far as a one-time deal.

I guess I didnt see that. Now weve get three or four individual systems in
Vegas between selected hotels. None of which can run on the other if
connected.


> Hey, instead of building the bullet train from LA to LV,
> I want a bullet train from OKC to Dallas so I can go to
> big D in 30 minutes instead of driving there in 3.5 hours.
> You with me?

You bet. Is it one of the systems under consideration along with the Vegas
to LA system?


Jerry (waitn by the station) n Vegas








      
Date: 15 Feb 2009 10:51:31
From: garycarson
Subject: Re: Obama's bill - waht a joke
On Feb 15 2009 11:49 AM, James L. Hankins wrote:

> "Jerry Sturdivant" <jerryst@cox.net> wrote in message
> news:ciVll.7510$7r7.3789@newsfe25.iad...
>
>
> > Pork projects are for local folks to build and maintain a museum to honor
> > some local politician or his butterfly collection with federal dollars; or
> > a
> > Bridge To Nowhere On The Other Side Of Town and does nothing to build
> > something useful that benefits the citizens. An interstate rail system
> > that
> > saves expanding highways and more gas stations isn't pork.
>
>
>
> I guess I'm confused then. Is the bullet train from L.A. to Las Vegas the
> initial stage of an interstate rail system? That detail hasn't come up
> until just now. It's been presented thus far as a one-time deal.

It's pork. Almost the entire bill is pork.

That's not a bad thing though. For spending to be effective it needs to
be targeted, things are worse in LV than some other places so building som
intastructure that improves tourist access to LV is a good thing for
economic stimulus.

But it's pork and Obama is just lying when he says it's not.

When Obama voted for the Bush bailout I would have voted for McCain except
he voted for it too. My thought then was just that we were doomed. I
still think that.


>
> Hey, instead of building the bullet train from LA to LV, I want a bullet
> train from OKC to Dallas so I can go to big D in 30 minutes instead of
> driving there in 3.5 hours. You with me?

I want a bullet from Cushing to Tulsa. Or a greyhound from Cushing to
OKC. Or a casino bus from Cushing to Durant. Or a car rental agent in
Cushing.

_______________________________________________________________________
* kill-files, watch-lists, favorites, and more.. www.recgroups.com



      
Date: 15 Feb 2009 10:53:39
From: Susan
Subject: Re: Obama's bill - waht a joke

"James L. Hankins" <jhankins5@cox.net > wrote in message
news:dIXll.10907$lk5.10883@newsfe13.iad...
>
> "Jerry Sturdivant" <jerryst@cox.net> wrote in message
> news:ciVll.7510$7r7.3789@newsfe25.iad...
>
>
>> Pork projects are for local folks to build and maintain a museum to honor
>> some local politician or his butterfly collection with federal dollars;
>> or a
>> Bridge To Nowhere On The Other Side Of Town and does nothing to build
>> something useful that benefits the citizens. An interstate rail system
>> that
>> saves expanding highways and more gas stations isn't pork.
>
>
>
> I guess I'm confused then. Is the bullet train from L.A. to Las Vegas the
> initial stage of an interstate rail system? That detail hasn't come up
> until just now. It's been presented thus far as a one-time deal.
>
> Hey, instead of building the bullet train from LA to LV, I want a bullet
> train from OKC to Dallas so I can go to big D in 30 minutes instead of
> driving there in 3.5 hours. You with me?

I'm with you as long as I get Nashville to Tunica.




  
Date: 14 Feb 2009 02:06:51
From: Irish Mike
Subject: Re: Obama's bill - waht a joke

"James L. Hankins" <jhankins5@cox.net > wrote in message
news:QTsll.935$aZ3.833@newsfe01.iad...
>
> "Irish Mike" <mjostar@ameritech.net> wrote in message
> news:8Csll.10717$pr6.10387@flpi149.ffdc.sbc.com...
>> Well the Obama cluster fuck continues. The Democrats just pushed through
>> a partisan 1,071 page, $787 billion welfare and entitlement spending
>> bill. And here's the absolutely unbelievable part - not one of these
>> Democrat Congressional Reps or Senators have even read the bill! I kid
>> you not. These buffoons just voted for the biggest stimulus spending bill
>> in this country's history and not one of them has even read the fucking
>> bill. Of course the real reason the Dems pushed the bill through so
>> fast is that the more the American people found out about the staggering
>> amount of pork in this bill, the more they opposed it. Well so much for
>> Obama and the Dem's promise that there would be 48 hours to at least read
>> the bill before the vote. The sad thing is that this gigantic boondoggle
>> isn't going to do jack shit to really "jump start" the economy. For one
>> thing, only about 20% of this money will even be spend in the next 18
>> months. This Obama bill is an absolute fucking disgrace and clearly
>> demonstrates just how clueless this guy really is when it comes to
>> actually governing.
>>
>> Irish Mike
>
>
>
> YOU haven't read the bill either, Bucko; yet, you seem to know all about
> it.

I know that there wasn't one single Democrat who would say he had actually
read the bill, let alone analyzed or studied it. All they could do was
mumble some lame bull shit about how their staffers had read parts of it.
This bill is nothing but a gigantic liberal spending boondoggle.

> You seem to be delivering a lot of condemnation of things that have not
> come to fruition. This is about the 20th time you've cried wolf, but
> nothing much has really happened yet in the Obama administration.

" nothing much has really happened yet in the Obama administration. "

You've got that right, other than him appointing a bunch of crooks, left
over Clinton hacks and tax cheats to his administration. Obama and the
Demcorats ran a pretty slick campaign but it has become painfully clear that
when it comes to actually governing they don't have a fucking clue what
they're doing.

Irish Mike




   
Date: 14 Feb 2009 06:55:46
From: Jerry Sturdivant
Subject: Re: Obama's bill - waht a joke



> Waa! Waa! They didnt read the bill so its no good! Waa! Waa!

Grow up. Did you read every word of your mortgage? Do you know the traffic
code inside and out? Does it need to be explained to you that you generalize
to the staff what you want and they fill in the legalese? Then you read the
chapter headings and headlines. (But then, interpretation requires a little
brains).

Whimpering about generalities becomes another dodge by the did-nothing
do-nothing dont-know-what-to-do licking-their-election-wounds
conservatives.

Now get the hell out of the way and let somebody try something that just
might work.

Jerry n Vegas









    
Date: 16 Feb 2009 12:41:41
From: John_Brian_K
Subject: Re: Obama's bill - waht a joke
> Grow up. Did you read every word of your mortgage? Do you know the traffic
> code inside and out? Does it need to be explained to you that you generalize
> to the staff what you want and they fill in the legalese? Then you read the
> chapter headings and headlines. (But then, interpretation requires a little
> brains).
>
> Whimpering about generalities becomes another dodge by the did-nothing
> do-nothing dont-know-what-to-do licking-their-election-wounds
> conservatives.
>
> Now get the hell out of the way and let somebody try something that just
> might work.
>
> Jerry n Vegas

Sorry Jerry not sure where I stand in terms liking you or not, but this is
the stupiedest thing I have ever read. They just (and by 'they' I mean
everyone who voted for it) pushed through a bill and never read it. I
spent 3 hours the other day going through the propossed bill. How can
someone, with a straight face, come out and say it is not a big deal that
they didnt read the bill?

Man we deserve everything we get when we have people say something like
that.

It is our money and it is not going to fix anything that is in 'our'
interest. Well 'anything' may be strong, but there is plenty in there
that is not going to help us at all.

==========================================
You must not think me necessarily foolish because I am facetious,
nor will I consider you necessarily wise because you are grave.
==============================
47.5% of all statistics are made up on the spot.
JBK

____________________________________________________________________
* kill-files, watch-lists, favorites, and more.. www.recgroups.com



     
Date: 16 Feb 2009 16:27:18
From: Jerry Sturdivant
Subject: Re: Obama's bill - waht a joke

"John_Brian_K"

>> Grow up. Did you read every word of your mortgage? Do you know the
>> traffic
>> code inside and out? Does it need to be explained to you that you
>> generalize
>> to the staff what you want and they fill in the legalese? Then you read
>> the
>> chapter headings and headlines. (But then, interpretation requires a
>> little
>> brains).

>> Whimpering about generalities becomes another dodge by the did-nothing
>> do-nothing don't-know-what-to-do licking-their-election-wounds
>> conservatives.

>> Now get the hell out of the way and let somebody try something that just
>> might work.

>> Jerry 'n Vegas

> Sorry Jerry not sure where I stand in terms liking you or
> not, but this is the stupiedest thing I have ever read.
> They just (and by 'they' I mean everyone who voted for
> it) pushed through a bill and never read it.

How do you know that?

My point was, the Republicans waving the complete bill in the air and
claiming nobody read it all the way through. That's lame. One needn't read
it, "all the way through." The media did a rather good job of summarizing
what was in it.


> I spent 3 hours the other day going through the propossed
> bill. How can someone, with a straight face, come out and
> say it is not a big deal that they didnt read the bill?

What more did you learn in 3-hours that you wouldn't have known with a
summary?


> It is our money and it is not going to fix anything that is in 'our'
> interest.

How is not creating jobs going the wrong way?


Jerry 'n Vegas








    
Date: 14 Feb 2009 11:15:35
From: Travel
Subject: Re: Obama's bill - waht a joke
"Jerry Sturdivant" Usenet Poster
jerryst@cox.net Post #15 of 24 (3 views) Copy Shortcut Feb 14, 2009,
9:55 AM
Re: Obama's bill - waht a joke Reply

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
---------




> Waa! Waa! They didnt read the bill so its no good! Waa! Waa!

Grow up. Did you read every word of your mortgage? Do you know the
traffic
code inside and out? Does it need to be explained to you that you
generalize
to the staff what you want and they fill in the legalese? Then you read
the
chapter headings and headlines. (But then, interpretation requires a
little
brains).

Whimpering about generalities becomes another dodge by the did-nothing
do-nothing dont-know-what-to-do licking-their-election-wounds
conservatives.

Now get the hell out of the way and let somebody try something that
just
might work.

Jerry n Vegas

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

Ummmm, they're congressmen, they make the laws in the first place.
They're supposed to read the laws they make, get it?

The Congressional Budget Office, however, has read it, and they pretty
much say that even with all the pork, the bill couldn't stimulate an
ass-fucking at a BobTard camping trip. That's pretty bad.

_________________________________________________________
Posted via the -Web to Usenet- forums at http://www.pokermagazine.com
Visit www.pokermagazine.com


     
Date: 14 Feb 2009 09:21:29
From: Bob T.
Subject: Re: Obama's bill - waht a joke
On Feb 14, 9:15=A0am, Travel <nine...@webtv.net > wrote:
> "Jerry Sturdivant" =A0 Usenet Poster
> jerr...@cox.net =A0Post #15 of 24 (3 views) Copy Shortcut =A0Feb 14, 2009=
,
> 9:55 AM =A0
> Re: Obama's bill - waht a joke =A0 Reply =A0
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> ---------
>
> > =93Waa! Waa! They didn=92t read the bill so it=92s no good! Waa! Waa!=
=94 =A0
>
> Grow up. Did you read every word of your mortgage? Do you know the
> traffic
> code inside and out? Does it need to be explained to you that you
> generalize
> to the staff what you want and they fill in the legalese? Then you read
> the
> chapter headings and headlines. (But then, interpretation requires a
> little
> brains). =A0
>
> Whimpering about generalities becomes another dodge by the did-nothing
> do-nothing don=92t-know-what-to-do licking-their-election-wounds
> conservatives. =A0
>
> Now get the hell out of the way and let somebody try something that
> just
> might work. =A0
>
> Jerry =91n Vegas =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0
>
> ..................................................
>
> Ummmm, they're congressmen, they make the laws in the first place.
> They're supposed to read the laws they make, get it?
>
> The Congressional Budget Office, however, has read it, and they pretty
> much say that even with all the pork, the bill couldn't stimulate an
> ass-fucking at a BobTard camping trip. That's pretty bad.

Travel still can't help fantasizing about my ass. Stalker!

- Bob T.
>
> _________________________________________________________
> Posted via the -Web to Usenet- forums athttp://www.pokermagazine.com
> Visitwww.pokermagazine.com



      
Date: 14 Feb 2009 11:28:42
From: da pickle
Subject: Re: Obama's bill - waht a joke
"Bob T."

Travel still can't help fantasizing about my ass. Stalker!

You may be on to something ... no pun intended.

Is there a subtle code to stalk-er?




       
Date: 14 Feb 2009 22:12:03
From: Travel
Subject: Re: Obama's bill - waht a joke
"da pickle" Usenet Poster
jcpickels@(nospam)hotmail.com Post #29 of 38 (1 views) Copy Shortcut
Feb 14, 2009, 12:28 PM
Re: Obama's bill - waht a joke Reply

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
---------

"Bob T."

Travel still can't help fantasizing about my ass. Stalker!

You may be on to something ... no pun intended.

Is there a subtle code to stalk-er?
.......................................................................
.

There's your boyfriend Pickel now BobTard, right on cue, lol.

So, when are these Obama and Bush blaming posts of yours going to
start? That question seemed to have bothered you "for some reason"....

_________________________________________________________
Posted via the -Web to Usenet- forums at http://www.pokermagazine.com
Visit www.pokermagazine.com


    
Date: 14 Feb 2009 09:44:39
From: Joe Long
Subject: Re: Obama's bill - waht a joke
Jerry Sturdivant wrote:

> Now get the hell out of the way and let somebody try something that just
> might work.

At least you seem to understand that it might not work.

The problem is that, although it might do some good, that good will be
at a great cost -- and it might do more harm than good. In fact, IMO it
is likely to do more harm than good, but there is no way I can prove that.

There's another part of the problem. If the economy continues to tank
despite the passage of this bill, we will know that it didn't work. But
if the economy improves we won't know if this bill worked and helped, or
if this bill didn't work and the economy would have improved even more
without it. There will be no way to know.

What we can be sure of is that if the economy improves, Democrats will
say that the stimulus package caused the improvement, and Republicans
will say that it didn't.


--
Joe Long aka ChipRider
Somewhere on the Range


     
Date: 14 Feb 2009 22:31:11
From: Kyle T. Jones
Subject: Re: Obama's bill - waht a joke
Joe Long, my dear, dear friend, there was this time, oh, 2/14/2009 10:44
AM or thereabouts, when you let the following craziness loose on Usenet:

> What we can be sure of is that if the economy improves, Democrats will
> say that the stimulus package caused the improvement, and Republicans
> will say that it didn't.
>

Or, in the context of the trillion or so doled out to loyal i-dots on
Wall Street immediately before Obama arrived, the arguments will be
reversed.

Oops, shhhhh, I wasn't supposed to mention the *bailout*, was I?

Cheers.


      
Date: 15 Feb 2009 01:49:54
From: Pepe Papon
Subject: Re: Obama's bill - waht a joke
On Sat, 14 Feb 2009 22:31:11 -0600, "Kyle T. Jones"
<KBfoMe@realdomain.net > wrote:

>Joe Long, my dear, dear friend, there was this time, oh, 2/14/2009 10:44
>AM or thereabouts, when you let the following craziness loose on Usenet:
>
>> What we can be sure of is that if the economy improves, Democrats will
>> say that the stimulus package caused the improvement, and Republicans
>> will say that it didn't.
>>
>
>Or, in the context of the trillion or so doled out to loyal i-dots on
>Wall Street immediately before Obama arrived, the arguments will be
>reversed.
>
>Oops, shhhhh, I wasn't supposed to mention the *bailout*, was I?

Of course not. Mentioning the bailout is subject to dismissal as a
"But Bush".


       
Date: 16 Feb 2009 07:41:52
From: Travel
Subject: Re: Obama's bill - waht a joke
"
"Travel, the stimulus checks were negated by the summertime rise of $4
a gallon and the largest food price increase ever seen."
.......................................................................

It could have been negated by credit card debt, saving the money, etc,
what's your point? It didn't make a difference in the economy when
Jimmy Carter gave everyone a cash chech, either.

_________________________________________________________
Posted via the -Web to Usenet- forums at http://www.pokermagazine.com
Visit www.pokermagazine.com


     
Date: 14 Feb 2009 15:48:02
From: garycarson
Subject: Re: Obama's bill - waht a joke
On Feb 14 2009 11:44 AM, Joe Long wrote:

> Jerry Sturdivant wrote:
>
> > Now get the hell out of the way and let somebody try something that just
> > might work.
>
> At least you seem to understand that it might not work.

I think it probably won't work.

I also think that the democrats bad/republicans good makes things worse,
less likely to work.

>
> The problem is that, although it might do some good, that good will be
> at a great cost -- and it might do more harm than good. In fact, IMO it
> is likely to do more harm than good, but there is no way I can prove that.

Focus on the plan, stop insulting the people making the plan. All the
insults accomplish is to psychologically firm up the support of a bad plan.

>
> There's another part of the problem. If the economy continues to tank
> despite the passage of this bill, we will know that it didn't work.

Movement of stock market indexes is not movement of the economy.

But
> if the economy improves we won't know if this bill worked and helped, or
> if this bill didn't work and the economy would have improved even more
> without it. There will be no way to know.
>
> What we can be sure of is that if the economy improves, Democrats will
> say that the stimulus package caused the improvement, and Republicans
> will say that it didn't.

This is not a baseball game, stop picking favorite teams.

_______________________________________________________________________
RecGroups : the community-oriented newsreader : www.recgroups.com




      
Date: 15 Feb 2009 00:24:30
From: Joe Long
Subject: Re: Obama's bill - waht a joke
garycarson wrote:
> On Feb 14 2009 11:44 AM, Joe Long wrote:

...
>> The problem is that, although it might do some good, that good will be
>> at a great cost -- and it might do more harm than good. In fact, IMO it
>> is likely to do more harm than good, but there is no way I can prove that.
>
> Focus on the plan, stop insulting the people making the plan. All the
> insults accomplish is to psychologically firm up the support of a bad plan.

What insults? I've been talking about the plan.

>> There's another part of the problem. If the economy continues to tank
>> despite the passage of this bill, we will know that it didn't work.
>
> Movement of stock market indexes is not movement of the economy.

I said "economy" not "stock market."

> But
>> if the economy improves we won't know if this bill worked and helped, or
>> if this bill didn't work and the economy would have improved even more
>> without it. There will be no way to know.
>>
>> What we can be sure of is that if the economy improves, Democrats will
>> say that the stimulus package caused the improvement, and Republicans
>> will say that it didn't.
>
> This is not a baseball game, stop picking favorite teams.

It's not about favorite teams, I made an observation about how
politicians (of both parties) behave. Nevertheless, I find the
principles espoused by Republicans to be more consistent with my own
than those espoused by Democrats. Too bad the Republicans abandoned
those principles over the last dozen years or so, spending like drunken
sailors, with a President unwilling to restrain it (that's part of what
got us into this mess).


--
Joe Long aka ChipRider
Somewhere on the Range


     
Date: 14 Feb 2009 10:29:31
From: Jerry Sturdivant
Subject: Re: Obama's bill - waht a joke

"Joe Long" <nospam@spam.com > wrote

>> Now get the hell out of the way and let
>> somebody try something that just might work.

> At least you seem to understand that it might not work.


Of course. But some smart economists think it might. And "it might" is
better than doing nothing (or more tax cuts for the rich; or Bush's, 'send
everybody a check.').


> The problem is that, although it might do some good, that
> good will be at a great cost -- and it might do more harm
> than good.

Yea, that, too. But our government's already hocked us (and our grandkids)
up to our eyeballs. Sitting on our hands while spiraling into a great
depression won't help.


> In fact, IMO it is likely to do more harm than
> good, but there is no way I can prove that.

You can be giving it a try. What do we lose by doing nothing?


> There's another part of the problem. If the economy continues
> to tank despite the passage of this bill, we will know that
> it didn't work.

If a sub, heading down toward crush-depth, begins slowing down, it tells you
something's beginning to work. You just hope it turns around in time.


> But if the economy improves we won't know if this bill worked
> and helped, or if this bill didn't work and the economy
> would have improved even more without it. There will be
> no way to know.

It may be hard to read the glide slope, but ya' gotta do something.


> What we can be sure of is that if the economy improves,
> Democrats will say that the stimulus package caused the
> improvement, and Republicans will say that it didn't.

Finger pointing (and giving the finger) is what Washington does. As much as
I hate Karl Rove, even he's telling Republicans to get on board with
something or be left holding the blame-bag.


Jerry 'n Vegas