As Gomer Pyle says, Ssupprisse, Sssuppprise, SSSuprisse.

Or as HL Menken said, the American people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard.

Or as Forrest Gump said, stupid is as stupid does.

quote:

... On who's watch did this happen? There are three branches in this government. The SC doesn't count since supposedly non biased. That leaves the other two. Admin and legislative. So we have one guy, Bush. He runs the administrative. The other is controlled by the Democrats. You still want to argue this point?

Yes, I want to argue this point. Because after sifting through the cobweb of your last post, I found this part to be most amusing.

One guy, Bush, runs the "administrative" role in government? I'm curious if you've ever heard of "separation of powers" and "checks and balances" principles in a democracy. If not then a quick review of Articles I, II, and III of the constitution is in order!

The three branches, with equal powers, are there that we have in real life now: The executive (not Administrative! yes, that one guy has the power to approve/veto laws made by Congress with his Cabinet) enforces, carries out, or executes laws; the legislative (Congress with the House and Senate chambers) makes the laws of the land; and the judiciary (Supreme Court and inferior Courts) interprets, explains, and reviews laws (see Marbury v. Madison).

And now the country's mess is the Dems' fault because they've regained the 110th Congressional majority in 2006, from GOP's dominance since 104th in 1994? While that "one guy, Bush's" two terms started in January 2001? What happened to our mathematics here?

And I'm sorry I neither have the enthusiasm nor the time to look into the anatomy of the current financial meltdown. Nor do I have the appetite to engage in the unending, circular, and nonconstructive blame game. If Allan Greenspan and the rest of the masters were shocked, where does that leave somebody like me?!?!

I'd rather not look back to find the 'WHYs,' but forward to look at the 'WHY NOTs!'

Yet from among the articles that I have glossed over, I found this one by BusinessWeek to be the most objective, incisive, and analytical.

http://www.businessweek.com/investor/content/oct2008/pi...ampaign_id=rss_daily

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Rough Neighbor,

I'll make this brief. When did the economy take a dive? That would be sometime during 2006. Which is when the dems took over. Case closed. Anytime the dems control the legislative branch history repeats itself.

That article you posted deserved nothing more than the 'glossing' you gave it. There wasn't anything printed worth reading. Just named a few names with loose connections to events. Zippo substantiated facts.

When your paycheck hits zero will you still not have time or enthusiam to learn something more than a mediocre apologist accounting of nobody knows?

But you did catch my word swap of admin versus exec. More apparent enthusiasm for that than your financial future. But hey, your a dem. What do you care. Its all going to be free. The great one promised heaven.

I was going to ask if perhaps you understood the obama tax plan. All your cohorts came up empty handed as to how it will benefit America. But, I already know. No enthusiasm or time to care. You should re-post that icon with the blindfold. Its perfect for this time in history

Play it again davdah. It's all the Dems fault!

Get with the times. Vinyl is out.

"That article I posted deserved nothing more than the 'glossing' I gave it?" And that: "There wasn't anything printed worth reading?" Translation: not enough blame is there leveled on the Democrats. What I said was that from among the articles that I have glossed over, I found ˜that one' to be the most objective, incisive, and analytical. Or, it has made the most ˜comprehensive' view of the whole mess. But, yes, I forgot, the GOP mentality hates anything comprehensive. You just think and act 5% of the time and call it performance or leadership. Look at the economy. Look at Iraq. The crowns of the administration past on its death bed!

"Just named a few names with loose connections to events. Zippo substantiated facts?" Names with loose connections to events? Where have you been? Where are you looking at? If the article delved on the involvement of people from the Federal Reserve masters down to the "NINJAs" (those with no income, no jobs, no assets) or your next door "foreclosees," and everyone in between, who to you are ˜loosely connected' – who else is there left? The extraterrestrials? People on Mars? I'll do it for you. There weren't enough Dem culprits there mentioned. That's what's wrong with that article. Haha! Truth hurts.

"But I did catch your word swap of admin versus exec?" Word swap? Hmm... I think that's too innocent and harmless a description. That's an elementary knowledge swap. A federal-level blunder even. But I do understand and I easily forgive that. For that's characteristic of the Bush Administration apologists for its Cheney/Rumsfeld/Rove/Bush bully politics abroad and indifference/deregulation/incompetence at home.

I and the rest are empty handed? Hmm... that's another way of saying that you are the opposite. Yes, indeed, you come on this forum with hands filled with them: sour grapes, scapegoats, wrath and anger, and most especially, nonsense. Do they count?

Let me put it the other way. What characterize yours and the GOP's arrogance and stupidity? They've got no limits. And what's wrong with that? Here: even how hard you spin, twirl, twist, rock, rattle, roll or cloak a failed platform with sugarcoated, twisted, crooked rhetoric, still, it appears to be so: nonsensical and a bitter failure.

And what's terribly wrong with that? It can't be concealed for long and it's bound to be exposed. Not that you're a bunch of low-class cheats. No you're not. But it is more because we, the people or particularly, the electorate are vigilant and decisive.

And what characterize our time and tolerance? They're limited! The day of reckoning has just come to pass. But the housekeeping, cleaning up, and rebuilding chores ahead are tedious and challenging, if nothing else, just because you messed it all up so very well.

Did I say before that we didn't expect much on the outset from small heads-strong backs incompetent bullies, who turned the huge budgetary surplus to whopping deficits? That we made sufficient warnings and that our words are now vindicated?

But unlike you, we're all up for a renewal of hope and vigor in the wake of man-made ruins (translation: GOP ruins). That's what we are. That's what we do best.

Got it now? Did I make myself comprehensively clear? Haha! But please note that, don't hesitate, further explanation is available upon formal request. Tee-he-he!

A LiE CaN TrAvEl hAlF WaY ArOuNd tHe wOrLd wHiLe tHe tRuTh iS PuTtInG On iTs sHoEs

Rn, your a character all right. The posting and article are descriptive of the simplistic understanding most have. And with it the blinders and voluntary ignorance. Add to that the hope that by calling an opinion nonsense that truth will remain hidden.

The nature of the mortgage and economic issues are far more complex and to use a few paragraphs and names to critique it reveal the lack of knowledge. Even a cursory honest observation reveal some surprising character traits of various groups. Coincidentally there are specific details removed or conveniently not recorded to hide things not said in public.

In standard democrat form accept no liability and hurl slander across the aisle. I expected that. When you say 'we' it includes all those who fell for the Hollywood version of an election. Not one democrat I asked was able to explain the correcting affect the obama tax plan will have. Not one was able to explain how universal health care could be implemented without bankrupting this country. In short, 'we', fell for it.

Want to know what the plan is? It was said, briefly , trickle down economics didn't work. Yes it did. When Clinton took over he came in when Reagannomics was in full affect. As you know a significant tax plan will take a few years to see the results and will last for several more. Not withstanding any punctuated events, 9-11, it would have continued. In mirror form the obama tax plan is hoping that by giving to people on the lower end of the earnings curve it will prompt more consumer spending. That's it.

Will it work? Probably not. Reason being its already been tried. On average it will result in maybe $2000 for each of these households. When was it tried? What did Bush try last year and how much affect did it have? The reason it won't work is called economic leverage. When a business owner gets a tax break they will take that and use it to create a job or two. For every $2000 he gets it creates a job worth about $30,000. That additional 30,000 versus the obama $2000.00 handout will have a more significant impact. Which is why reaganomics worked and this will fail.

The rest of us who critiqued the situation realize blame belongs in many places and understand the fix isn't in a celebratory performance.

quote:

Originally posted by ALLFAIR:
A LiE CaN TrAvEl hAlF WaY ArOuNd tHe wOrLd wHiLe tHe tRuTh iS PuTtInG On iTs sHoEs

But just recently, it's the truth that electrified and traveled around the world and back in just a few moments...

While the lie was unable to get off the ground, just miserably fell flat on its face...

And whose thoughts, feelings, sentiments, words, and actions are left tangled back in the campaign trail, unable to live life beyond November 3rd...

So I say: Let's give change a chance... Let's give the chance to change...

After all, the hope, the promise, for this great nation to regain its old grandeur is inevitable and contagious...

Not yet that easy for some this early, but eventually it would be, or soon enough, simply because the choices left are glaring and apparent: country or party?

Seriously, it's time...

(This would be my last comment about the elections).

RN, what do you think of Diane Wood for the Supreme Court?

Perhaps later, to be honest. I would like to see her taking on the Cabinet post from Michael Chertoff. Her antitrust, business, and federal procedures background would do a lot of good for the country in the short term. She's relatively young.

Other names with just as resplendent careers are there anyway, Sonia Sotomayor of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, and Elena Kagan, the dean of Harvard Law School.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Rough Neighbor,

Your final post? Oh, but wait oh humble and meak one. Is it necessary to make an announcement such as this? Does that imply an audience in need of finality or some authority to bring closure.

BTW, Ginsbeg has the women post on the SC already.

Anyhow, the change adveritsed is a pending disaster if acted out. A country doesn't run on hopes and dreams. It runs on action. A viable plan creates the hope of progress. In this it was the glitz and glamor of a Roman stage. Story book speechs and the drumming of that overplayed word, change. Now, where is the plan? Any answers, anyone?

Now, now davdah, I think it's time for your happy pills

quote:

Originally posted by davdah:
Your final post? Oh, but wait oh humble and meak one. Is it necessary to make an announcement such as this? Does that imply an audience in need of finality or some authority to bring closure.

BTW, Ginsbeg has the women post on the SC already.

Anyhow, the change adveritsed is a pending disaster if acted out. A country doesn't run on hopes and dreams. It runs on action. A viable plan creates the hope of progress. In this it was the glitz and glamor of a Roman stage. Story book speechs and the drumming of that overplayed word, change. Now, where is the plan? Any answers, anyone?

Final post?

This was what I said: (This would be my last comment about the elections).

Yet another example of your spinning and twisting ways?

I'll recant. You're irresistible.

Where is the plan?

It will come about, believe me. We took the first step. We voted into office those who we believe can fix the top quality mess you left behind.

Why, you have? I'm 100% sure you don't have. You voted erroneously. That's the first telltale sign.

At least you admit there is no plan. Odd, how can people fall for hype and neglect to notice there is no method behind the madness?

The mess 'I' left behind. How so? The market and economy began diving shortly after your people took over the government. Remember, things didn't start sinking until 2007.

Although my guy didn't win it isn't an indication of fultility. In any contest of popularity the winner doesn't guarantee better. My guy was also the same guy for nearly half of the voters. We're all erroneous? No, I don't think so. But we're not asking for someone else's money. That is one connecting dot amongst us.

Irresistable? Well, that depends on who you ask, LOL...

Ron Paul is the best. Rest will sell the country. Ron Paul opposes VAWA.

Death to VAWA, Death to IMBRA.

Oh yeah, 2007? As if the economic collapse is an event. No, it's not. It's a chain-like process borne out of indifference, deregulation, and incompetence. Reminds me of the much ballyhooed "success" of the recent military surge in Iraq. As if the war started last year. Funny.

With respect to the market. Fluctuations within a year is an event. From near 15,000 down to the low 8000's is a free fall.