#61
|
|||
|
|||
Trains
On Wed, 15 Oct 2008 05:40:08 -0700 (PDT), Bill C
wrote: Not that JT would believe it but here are local Democrats I do support, and have voted for, and plenty I would support on a National level: Stan Rosenberg, Peter V. Kocot, Dennis Gruyer, I don't believe you'd vote for them for president and here's why. Given what you know now, sure you'd vote for them. But in a presidential election the RNC would out all the bogeymen that work on you against these people and you'd pay attention to those rumours and distractions. You have again and again. And they'd probably work on you even for those people. Or to be more charitable *maybe* it's *possible* for you to vote for such a person but the only way you'd ever do it if you were so familiar with their record that you could see through the bogeyman. That is, it'd take particularly strong personal information on your part to overcome the "normal" mud slinging that works on you and again. If that's what it takes to overcome obvious BS in the wake of what you yourself have admitted has been a disastrous 8 years, then yeah, you're a right-winger. [quoting out of order] If activists, organizers, and get out the vote folks weren't also fighting to block having to provide picture ID, or other positiver identification, Here's another bogeyman that works on Bill C: voter fraud. In the Bush administration the Justice Department greatly expanded attempts to find any significant or substantial voting fraud and as far as I can tell they have had zero successful prosecutions. The fact is, all the best evidence shows there isn't any voter fraud. None or almost none. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/12/wa...n/12fraud.html http://www.usatoday.com/news/washing...d-report_x.htm Politicians nowadays have better and safer things to spend money on to affect elections, and if they want to do anything illegal or quasi-illegal it's way easier to spend it on voter suppression (as the phone-jamming case in New Hampshire is showing). [details of theoretical fraud snipped] Pretty easy to vote a few times with that. We don't have a good comprehensive system of checking the rolls, and a shortage of people to do it, Oh yeah, "it hasn't been checked." "It's slipping through." We don't have comprehensive systems of checking for a lot of other types of crimes and yet when the Justice Department wants to, it can at least find *some* examples of the crime and win at least a case. Where there's smoke there's fire. But in this case, the only smoke is Rush and Rove. No reality. No fire. But the right-wing has been trumpeting voting fraud over and over and now it works on Bill and guys like him. I can just see it -- some local Dem he voted for for local office is trying to become president and we start seeing ads linking him to nebulous voter fraud and "progressive" groups and Bill starts to have doubts. But hey, he considered voting democractic so he's really independent, right? |
Ads |
#62
|
|||
|
|||
Trains
In article , ST wrote:
UNTIL you jerks can tell me you are stupid enough to sign on to one of those mortgages where you pay interest only for 2 years and then your payment DOUBLES and you know your income will not THEN I will think you really believe in you rhetoric. Because the mortgage brokers told them that it would go up but only a little. They were not telling people that their mortgage payment would double. The low income people we're talking about overwhelmingly have not previously owned so they were inexperienced in the process of the paperwork involved and (as I've said before) since most people are raised to **trust banks and bankers**, they had no reason to doubt it when the broker told them stuff that turned out to be bull****. Richer people who got ARMs while buying McMansions or condos to flip should have known better but were stupid enough to think the price of the homes they were buying would always go up. They were wrong. And that is the group who are responsible for the largest part of the foreclosures. -- tanx, Howard Abandon the Creeping Meatball! remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok? |
#63
|
|||
|
|||
Trains
John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:
pointless stuff Barack Obama said "Hi" to a child molester once. That's all that really matters. |
#64
|
|||
|
|||
Trains
In article ,
SLAVE of THE STATE wrote: On Oct 15, 12:31*am, Howard Kveck wrote: Whether you can recognize it or not, those articles were backing up what I've said, ... No they don't. You are in denial. That won't change. That's good cuz I know I can drop out. I guess this is like when you sniffed that the "The "middle class" is vague. *It is code for growth of government." You decide how to define things and whether it has anything to do with reality is right out the window. Very curious but whatever. -- tanx, Howard Abandon the Creeping Meatball! remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok? |
#65
|
|||
|
|||
Trains
On Wed, 15 Oct 2008 16:52:10 -0700, Fred Fredburger
wrote: John Forrest Tomlinson wrote: pointless stuff Barack Obama said "Hi" to a child molester once. That's all that really matters. I don't mind that so much. I just wish he'd be more honest about it. What's he hiding? We deserve to know. |
#66
|
|||
|
|||
Trains
On Oct 15, 4:52*pm, Fred Fredburger
wrote: John Forrest Tomlinson wrote: pointless stuff Barack Obama said "Hi" to a child molester once. That's all that really matters. Oh yeah?! John McCain used to pal around with communist torturers! -Paul |
#67
|
|||
|
|||
Trains
On Oct 15, 6:15*pm, John Forrest Tomlinson
wrote: On Wed, 15 Oct 2008 05:40:08 -0700 (PDT), Bill C wrote: Not that JT would believe it but here are local Democrats I do support, and have voted for, and plenty I would support on a National level: Stan Rosenberg, Peter V. Kocot, Dennis Gruyer, I don't believe you'd vote for them for president and here's why. Given what you know now, sure you'd vote for them. *But in a presidential election the RNC would out all the bogeymen that work on you against these people and you'd pay attention to those rumours and distractions. You have again and again. *And they'd probably work on you even for those people. Or to be more charitable *maybe* it's *possible* for you to vote for such a person but the only way you'd ever do it if you were so familiar with their record that you could see through the bogeyman. That is, it'd take particularly strong personal information on your part to overcome the "normal" mud slinging that works on you and again. If that's what it takes to overcome obvious BS in the wake of what you yourself have admitted has been a disastrous 8 years, then yeah, you're a right-winger. * [quoting out of order] *If activists, organizers, and get out the vote folks weren't also fighting to block having to provide picture ID, or other positiver identification, Here's another bogeyman that works on Bill C: voter fraud. In the Bush administration the Justice Department greatly expanded attempts to find any significant or substantial voting fraud and as far as I can tell they have had zero successful prosecutions. The fact is, all the best evidence shows there isn't any voter fraud. *None or almost none. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/12/wa...n/12fraud.html http://www.usatoday.com/news/washing...-fraud-report_... Thanks for those links, but now do a google for vote fraud US history, and you get 430,000 hits. The complaints come from both wings and parties, depending on who thinks they got screwed. Here's a good study: http://www.demos.org/pubs/analysis_voter_fraud.pdf It's not currently a huge problem, but how'd Florida work out for Gore? How much does it take to sway an election? http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...mostly-absent/ http://www.military.com/NewsContent/...150477,00.html Bill C Fair, open, accountable, and honest is what elections should be. |
#68
|
|||
|
|||
Trains
On Oct 15, 8:18*pm, John Forrest Tomlinson
wrote: On Wed, 15 Oct 2008 16:52:10 -0700, Fred Fredburger wrote: John Forrest Tomlinson wrote: pointless stuff Barack Obama said "Hi" to a child molester once. That's all that really matters. I don't mind that so much. I just wish he'd be more honest about it. What's he hiding? We deserve to know. Here's a decent piece that sort of starts to sum up the ACORN bit: http://tinyurl.com/5ybeyl Evidence points to Acorn's sloppiness, but not fraud By Greg Gordon, McClatchy Newspapers 1 hour, 6 minutes ago That seems to be the reality of that particular situation from a bunch of different sources. So JT which Republicans, or moderates have you voted for and supported? Just asking. Might give you something better to do than throwing lies about me at the wall until they stick. Seems you learned some things from Rove. Bill C |
#69
|
|||
|
|||
Trains
On Oct 15, 5:06 pm, Howard Kveck wrote:
In article , SLAVE of THE STATE wrote: On Oct 15, 12:31 am, Howard Kveck wrote: Whether you can recognize it or not, those articles were backing up what I've said, ... No they don't. You are in denial. That won't change. That's good cuz I know I can drop out. I guess this is like when you sniffed that the "The "middle class" is vague. It is code for growth of government." You decide how to define things and whether it has anything to do with reality is right out the window. Very curious but whatever. If you think you can claim Gordon debunked Dilorenzo and Liebowitz, and really just for the point of deflecting all discussion to mean evil racists, then you are simply in the tank and no amount of reason or facts could possibly sway you. You are in the tank. Just admit it -- you are not open-minded in the least bit. The whole thing is a pyramiding of credit off the Fed. This is a basic fact and it is always bound to crash, although all you partiers are god damn drunk and stupid on credit when the cops show up. Fannie and Freddie were undercapitalized, as were the credit default swaps. The CRA did indeed help seed and drive the problem. You just don't want to admit it because it is a pet special interest program that buys your party votes in the pork wars. You screech about "big bad corporations," but that is all the Fed is: the realized dreams of big banking and credit interests. You support policies that *cause* corporatization, not limit its damages, but yet you cry "evil big business." A little cognitive dissonance goes a long way. Due to things *you* support, now they are "too big to fail." Next step: guvmint ownership of corporations because "capitalism can't be trusted." You are going to get what you want. Mises.org, along with Ron Paul have been warning about exactly this for a long long time. You just didn't want to listen. It was inevitable. Hayek, Mises, and Benjamin Anderson all warned about the impending major crash before the Great Depression. No one listened. You never will. There is the the guvmint pork market to win, that is why you are in the tank. You are all a bunch of drunk idiots. Liebowitz: http://www.independent.org/pdf/polic...trainwreck.pdf "Trainwreck" is a good title for a train thread. Really good for all rbr political threads. |
#70
|
|||
|
|||
Trains
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
trains | ray | Australia | 4 | January 25th 08 08:06 AM |
Bikes on trains and DRL | Alex Potter | UK | 9 | December 15th 06 11:27 PM |
Recumbents on trains? | Pedaldog | UK | 20 | January 17th 06 09:01 AM |
Bikes on Trains | Tony Raven | UK | 4 | October 16th 05 10:15 AM |
Cycles on trains | al Mossah | UK | 11 | October 2nd 05 09:42 PM |