Obama's pimpin' African vacation

[webberf1]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w70b0airyhE&feature=youtube_gdata_player

$100m pricetag? Congratulations America, you've obviously chosen to go from being a republic to a monarchy. Your king is ballin'. Even Q Lizzy can't top dat s**t.

[Spafranco]

So this idiot spouts about President Obama and his vacation and throws out a figure. Sounds like the 200 million a day trip he supposedly used

visiting India.

Oh. and how much did the vacations for the last president cost while he was cutting 'brush'?

[Mark]

Both the above posts are just noise. Didn't get a word.

[airshifter]

Short breakdown for Mark.

Webberf1 posts a lame link claiming the POTUS spent a lot of money on vacation. Spafranco doesn't believe it's true, yet points the finger at Bush. Politics as usual, neither dealing with facts they can back. :)

[keysersoze]

Oh. and how much did the vacations for the last president cost while he was cutting 'brush'?

It's not Webberf1's job to do your homework for you. He merely disclosed the reported cost of this trip. The link may have been lame (I didn't open it) but several agencies have estimated the price to be between 60-100 million.

Of course, all past trips by past presidents cost a lot of money, but the US wasn't 17 trillion in debt back then. Back then presidents didn't cancel White House tours in the name of saving money because of a sequester.

[Spafranco]

Short breakdown for Mark.

Webberf1 posts a lame link claiming the POTUS spent a lot of money on vacation. Spafranco doesn't believe it's true, yet points the finger at Bush. Politics as usual, neither dealing with facts they can back. :)

I love this right wing forum. Any mention of President Obama going on vacation with a "purported cost of $100 million" is lapped up by the media here in the US as they did with the India trip, and the Clinton haircut.

It's political as it is always Republicans that make the accusation and as such why on earth shouldn't I point to Bush. He spent more time in Crawford during his second term than he did in the White House.
I'm fed up with you Shifter with your snippy little half camouflaged comments defending Bush.

Henner, why would you of all people like his post. Curious.

As for you Shifter, don't underestimate my understanding or knowledge of current affairs or any subject you deem as "not dealing with facts". Look to the CAO.

[Spafranco]

It's not Webberf1's job to do your homework for you. He merely disclosed the reported cost of this trip. The link may have been lame (I didn't open it) but several agencies have estimated the price to be between 60-100 million.

Of course, all past trips by past presidents cost a lot of money, but the US wasn't 17 trillion in debt back then. Back then presidents didn't cancel White House tours

in the name of saving money because of a sequester.

That's almost funny if it were not so pathetic. You defend an assumption, claim I assume and then criticize what I posted while disclosing your true political slant. I am not ashamed to be a liberal democrat.

[Jag_Warrior]

This is just another one of those tempest in a teapot issues that people get fascinated by, for whatever reason. True, presidential trips are expensive. But even if you cancelled all of them, it would have zero affect on our fiscal situation.

As for Bush, Laura was spending so much time in Africa that many began to wonder if she didn't have a vacation house (or a boyfriend) over there. Didn't she take about five trips to Africa within two or three years? And the last trip that she went on was in 2007. I believe George was with her. I saw a picture of him talking to an elephant while Laura and one of the twins looked on. What was happening in 2007? Oh yeah, that's the year that the world went to hell economically.

Tempest. Teapot.

[keysersoze]

That's almost funny if it were not so pathetic. You defend an assumption, claim I assume and then criticize what I posted while disclosing your true political slant. I am not ashamed to be a liberal democrat.

Wow--I just read a bunch of gobbledygook.

[Gregor-y]

I just wish it didn't make Americans look so stupid. Most national front types in other countries are roundly ridiculed.

[airshifter]

I love this right wing forum. Any mention of President Obama going on vacation with a "purported cost of $100 million" is lapped up by the media here in the US as they did with the India trip, and the Clinton haircut.

It's political as it is always Republicans that make the accusation and as such why on earth shouldn't I point to Bush. He spent more time in Crawford during his second term than he did in the White House.
I'm fed up with you Shifter with your snippy little half camouflaged comments defending Bush.

Henner, why would you of all people like his post. Curious.

As for you Shifter, don't underestimate my understanding or knowledge of current affairs or any subject you deem as "not dealing with facts". Look to the CAO.

If you stated any facts in that post, quote it and bold them. All I saw was an opinion and some questions.

You'll also notice that even though Webberf1 posted a link, I called it out as lame due to the source as nothing I would consider highly credible. But I know in your mind everyone leans right and is out to get your and/or Obama. Hell from the way I read it Webberf1 was taking a jab at US policy in general, not any particular POTUS or party. But that is just my opinion, he could confirm or deny it as fact.

[Spafranco]

Wow--I just read a bunch of gobbledygook.

Why everything would be goobledygook when the one reading does not have the ability to comprehend basic language.

Of course I'm only joking ala Mr Limbaugh.

[Spafranco]

If you stated any facts in that post, quote it and bold them. All I saw was an opinion and some questions.

You'll also notice that even though Webberf1 posted a link, I called it out as lame due to the source as nothing I would consider highly credible. But I know in your mind everyone leans right and is out to get your and/or Obama. Hell from the way I read it Webberf1 was taking a jab at US policy in general, not any particular POTUS or party. But that is just my opinion, he could confirm or deny it as fact.

You're a mind reader?? Wow, may I PM you so that I can find out what I'm really thinking?

[keysersoze]

Why everything would be goobledygook when the one reading does not have the ability to comprehend basic language.

Of course I'm only joking ala Mr Limbaugh.

It's very telling that you spend bandwith attacking others' intelligence while at the same time talking about your own.

If you are intelligent, it should be clear by what you say. What you are suggesting is that you may not have enough confidence in your own thoughts, and your best way to deal with it is to try to diminish others while propping up yourself. Let others do that.

[Starter]

You're a mind reader?? Wow, may I PM you so that I can find out what I'm really thinking?
If PMing Airshifter will help you figure out what you are thinking, then, by all means do it. The rest of us are having quite a difficult time trying to figure what you actually mean.

[airshifter]

You're a mind reader?? Wow, may I PM you so that I can find out what I'm really thinking?

So you couldn't find any facts to quote and bold like I asked? :)

Strange how you quickly respond when someone else posts something that can't be proven, yet you take offense when others comment that you do the same.

Do you see the point yet?

[Spafranco]

It's very telling that you spend bandwith attacking others' intelligence while at the same time talking about your own.

If you are intelligent, it should be clear by what you say. What you are suggesting is that you may not have enough confidence in your own thoughts, and your best way to deal with it is to try to diminish others while propping up yourself. Let others do that.

Way to go there Freud.

[Daniel]

Short breakdown for Mark.

Webberf1 posts a lame link claiming the POTUS spent a lot of money on vacation. Spafranco doesn't believe it's true, yet points the finger at Bush. Politics as usual, neither dealing with facts they can back. :)

What did you say about my mother? :angryfire :

[Spafranco]

So you couldn't find any facts to quote and bold like I asked? :)

Strange how you quickly respond when someone else posts something that can't be proven, yet you take offense when others comment that yo

Do you see the point yet?

Didn't and preferred not to. I read you and Starter and all I can really surmise is that you are the types that a/ believe that President Obama spend $200million a day while on a trip to India. That you believe his is not American because of his birth certificate and that one of you posted and referred a comment to being made by me which I never made nor implied.
So off you go now and leave me alone. I feel perflunked.

[airshifter]

Didn't and preferred not to. I read you and Starter and all I can really surmise is that you are the types that a/ believe that President Obama spend $200million a day while on a trip to India. That you believe his is not American because of his birth certificate and that one of you posted and referred a comment to being made by me which I never made nor implied.
So off you go now and leave me alone. I feel perflunked.

Make all the incorrect assumptions you wish. If you see bias in my post you must be one of the people scared of black helicopters circling at night too. Have fun with that. :)

[Starter]

Didn't and preferred not to. I read you and Starter and all I can really surmise is that you are the types that a/ believe that President Obama spend $200million a day while on a trip to India. That you believe his is not American because of his birth certificate and that one of you posted and referred a comment to being made by me which I never made nor implied.
So off you go now and leave me alone. I feel perflunked.
Neither Airshifter nor I believe either of those things. The reason I called you out is you accused another poster of putting something up with no proof to back it up - and then you did exactly the same thing in the same post. I realize that this is a discussion board and that much of what is posted is opinion and is hardly carefully researched. Still, when you attempt to refute someone, it would be nice if you could put something factual up and not just more hyperbole from a different view. You also don't seem to mind accusing others of particular stances which are most definitely not in evidence - like the above quoted.


I am not ashamed to be a liberal democrat.
And you shouldn't be. I have a couple friends who are also and we have some "interesting" discussions. We're still friends though because we don't insult each other even though the thoughts expressed are fair game.

I don't have a lot of practical use for the liberal democrats or the right wing republicans in our government today. Both, IMO, have lost sight of their purpose and neither serve the real interests of the country. You might think on that a bit and also think on the idea that compromise and cooperation are far more effective tools in improving things.

[Spafranco]

So, here we are in this wonderful land. We have those on the right and those on the left. We have Airshifter accused me of stating a Fact when in reality I used the word "purported".

Now, you either understand the word or you don't. You ask for facts when I never sad anything that was in reality a proven reality. You and your buddy (Airshifter and Starter) and

Sigmund Keysertone or zone or what ever has to jump in. It's almost like a gaggle of geese. One jumps on a comment if it is not favorable to the other and then there is a domino

affect with the others.

Now, if you all read the same post and all concluded what I stated and did so using the word or words that indicate a fact. Show me or, dun do bheal.

[donKey jote]

dun do bheal.

oohhh, is dat pimpin' Irish ? :up: :p

[airshifter]

So, here we are in this wonderful land. We have those on the right and those on the left. We have Airshifter accused me of stating a Fact when in reality I used the word "purported".

Now, you either understand the word or you don't. You ask for facts when I never sad anything that was in reality a proven reality.

You're still confusing yourself with the very basis of a fact based discussion. I've never accused you of stating a fact, and with every message you post it becomes more and more clear that you tend not to deal with facts.

What I stated (in part) is below.


Politics as usual, neither dealing with facts they can back. :)

So you can continue debating with yourself and claiming the superior intellect, or you can accept as fact that you aren't dealing with facts. Please continue, it's the best laugh of the day. :)

[Spafranco]

You're still confusing yourself with the very basis of a fact based discussion. I've never accused you of stating a fact, and with every message you post it becomes more and more clear that you tend not to deal with facts.

What I stated (in part) is bel



So you can continue debating with yourself and claiming the superior intellect, or you can accept as fact that you aren't dealing with facts. Please continue, it's the best laugh of the day. :)

If you are not accusing me of a fact, then what in the name of what is good and holy are you fri**in talking and posting about?

And, in addition, why not ask your buddy or was it you, where I claimed to be so intelligent?

I know I'm not stupid and make many errors whilst typing etc, but I must have an iota of some intellect considering my work.

[keysersoze]

I know I'm not stupid and make many errors whilst typing etc, but I must have an iota of some intellect considering my work.

Yes--but just an iota. :dozey:

[airshifter]

If you are not accusing me of a fact, then what in the name of what is good and holy are you fri**in talking and posting about?

If you still aren't following along, I'm afraid the English language won't be of much help in further explaining things. Several have tried, and everyone else seems to understand.





And, in addition, why not ask your buddy or was it you, where I claimed to be so intelligent?

In this thread alone... and be glad I don't quote other threads:


So this idiot spouts about President Obama and his vacation and throws out a figure.

Whoever you are implying is an idiot provided more information to back their opinion than you did, yet you declare them an idiot. Bravo!



As for you Shifter, don't underestimate my understanding or knowledge of current affairs or any subject you deem as "not dealing with facts".

Obvious implication that I'm in the wrong for underestimating you. Yet you still haven't provided a single fact that backs your viewpoint, even after being invited to quote where it took place. Double bravo!


That's almost funny if it were not so pathetic.

Directed at another forum member. Pathetic that he doesn't think like you, isn't it? Triple bravo!


Why everything would be goobledygook when the one reading does not have the ability to comprehend basic language.

Another fine representation of superior intellect, but the member you directed this at seems to have no problems following along. No longer counting "bravos" yet I'm only on post 12 of the thread.


Way to go there Freud.

Apparently still unable to dispute the argument, resorting to insults once again. When dealing with facts this doesn't need to take place.... but it seems facts are still out of reach.


I read you and Starter and all I can really surmise is that.....

To surmise anything is to suppose it without evidence. I could read a single post by any user and surmise they are a cross dressing ballerina, who sings opera as a hobby, yet also enjoys boxing. That would be about as accurate a supposition as your unfounded statements about what you assume concerning my political beliefs. Well... really my example is more likely to be fact based.


So, here we are in this wonderful land. We have those on the right and those on the left. We have Airshifter accused me of stating a Fact when in reality I used the word "purported".

Now, you either understand the word or you don't. You ask for facts when I never sad anything that was in reality a proven reality.

I understood the word.... rather than attempt to insult my intelligence why not quote where I stated you were dealing with facts? Or where I attacked or defended any President? Your arguments are based on things not said by others, but your own paranoid assumptions. I especially like the part about the "right wing forum".... it adds comedy to the entire post.




I know I'm not stupid and make many errors whilst typing etc, but I must have an iota of some intellect considering my work.

i·o·ta [ahy-oh-tuh] Show IPA
noun1.a very small quantity; jot; whit.



I will gladly concede that intellect in a very small quantity is possible in some, but I would surely hope your work doesn't involve communication via email or other electronic means on a regular basis. :)

[Spafranco]

Yawn, you are so passionate about what you are sprouting you take up half a page trying to discredit me.
what you have a deft hand at doing is making these long boring screeds about what I said and what I did not do.
You know, it appears to me looking at and reading that last post of yours is a feeble attempt , unbeknownst to you to prov you are a smart man/women.

I never said I was. I do know a lot of things. Really,I do. for example Einstein is credited with inventing E=MC SQUARED. He did not. Now, off you go and Google :)

Why did you find it necessary to explain what the meaning of iota is? Was it for my benefit? Or do you think people here will be in awe at the fact that you can explain the meaning of a word commonly used in the English language. Would you prefer,a modicum of intelligence?

[Spafranco]

Erickson Slams Bachmann's Continued Defense Of India Trip Lie As 'Absurd', Says She Should Admit She's Wrong | ThinkProgress (http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2010/11/23/131819/erickson-bachmann-india-trip/?mobile=nc) = fact. Now will you apologize? I know you won't because that is how you are. Slam the poster and accuse them of not providing something that every informed American knew when occurred.

[joeyz_f1]

So basically the Internet War began when airshifter decided what Spafranco meant. Okay then.


Short breakdown for Mark.

Webberf1 posts a lame link claiming the POTUS spent a lot of money on vacation. Spafranco doesn't believe it's true, yet points the finger at Bush. Politics as usual, neither dealing with facts they can back. :)

[airshifter]

Yawn, you are so passionate about what you are sprouting you take up half a page trying to discredit me.
what you have a deft hand at doing is making these long boring screeds about what I said and what I did not do.
You know, it appears to me looking at and reading that last post of yours is a feeble attempt , unbeknownst to you to prov you are a smart man/women.

Far from it. I've simply proven the ability to quote things you have stated that answer your inquiry about where you claim to be intelligent. I think it's clear to anyone who reads the post that nobody need attempt to discredit you. Your statements speak for themselves. :)




Why did you find it necessary to explain what the meaning of iota is? Was it for my benefit? Or do you think people here will be in awe at the fact that you can explain the meaning of a word commonly used in the English language. Would you prefer,a modicum of intelligence?

Actually it was for your benefit, unless you intended to state you have a very small amount of intelligence. If you prefer to use modicum that is your choice. Certainly not words I would use to describe overall intelligence unless you don't think much of your abilities.

[airshifter]

Erickson Slams Bachmann's Continued Defense Of India Trip Lie As 'Absurd', Says She Should Admit She's Wrong | ThinkProgress (http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2010/11/23/131819/erickson-bachmann-india-trip/?mobile=nc) = fact. Now will you apologize? I know you won't because that is how you are. Slam the poster and accuse them of not providing something that every informed American knew when occurred.

Once again, you are confusing yourself. I've never accepted or rejected the cost of any Presidents visit to any country, nor have I defended or accused any President of excess vacations. While you are rattling on about the India trip, the trip in question from the OP was one that hasn't even taken place. Do you claim to know the total cost of this upcoming trip? :laugh:

When I brought up that neither of the first couple posts were fact based, it was obviously true. Unless yourself or WebberF1 claim to know the costs of the trip yet to happen, neither of you have any accurate accounting of total trip cost.

Should I apologize for dealing with facts? :laugh:

[keysersoze]

Post #27 Airshifter--bravo!

[Starter]

Erickson Slams Bachmann's Continued Defense Of India Trip Lie As 'Absurd', Says She Should Admit She's Wrong | ThinkProgress (http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2010/11/23/131819/erickson-bachmann-india-trip/?mobile=nc) = fact. Now will you apologize? I know you won't because that is how you are. Slam the poster and accuse them of not providing something that every informed American knew when occurred.
I also am wondering what you are talking about. With the exception of WebberF1's original post in this thread and your response in post #2, no one has stated or implied anything about the cost of Obama's trips. So I have to ask, what are you so upset about? That Bachmann is a fruitcake? We all already knew that. That you seldom, if ever, use actual facts when discussing something? If we didn't know that before, we sure do now. That this thread, essentially about nothing, has gone on for way, way too long? That should be apparent to all. ;) :p

[joeyz_f1]

Post #27 Airshifter--bravo!
You two should get a room...

[webberf1]

Uggghhhh... what have I created, lol.

Still making up my mind whether this (or the NSA thread) is worth replying back into, but then I'm always reminding myself of the age-old truth:

https://images.encyclopediadramatica.se/thumb/1/19/Arguing-on-the-internet.jpg/180px-Arguing-on-the-internet.jpg

[airshifter]

Uggghhhh... what have I created, lol.



I think you started a butthurt thing. I took your original post as a simple jab at US spending, but apparently some see it as a right wing conspiracy.

P.S. You have a new squadron of black helicopters at your disposal. They cost billions, so only use them to track and harass lefties. :)

[Spafranco]

You two should get a room...

Joey, to be quite frank, Airshifter , Starter and Keyersoze should look at some form of accommodation that requires one to be in the prone position for periods of time then, as the imagination takes over and the fun begins with the three of them.

This has gone round and round in circles and to have some blithering nean***thal explain through a dictionary what a word I , yes me, typed. It was so that I could understand.

He probably laughs on Friday when told a joke on Monday. As for the cheerleaders, their pom poms are never put away. They cheer even when he is bashing something they defend. Lol.
The rise and near demise of the "neanderthal tribes

[airshifter]

I'm so much more impressed with the level of intelligence displayed above. I shall eagerly await the "I'm rubber you're glue.." statement, or the implication that your father could beat up mine!

I actually find it quite comical that you stoop so low... sorry if I don't have the experience at that level of debate. We do have some neighboring kids in the lower grade levels, I'll see if I can get one to school me about kid level debate. :)

[Spafranco]

I also am wondering what you are talking about. With the exception of WebberF1's original post in this thread and your response in post #2, no one has stated or implied anything about the cost of Obama's trips. So I have to ask, what are you so upset about? That Bachmann is a fruitcake? We all already knew that. That you seldom, if ever, use actual facts when discussing something? If we didn't know that before, we sure do now. That this thread, essentially about nothing, has gone on for way, way too long? That should be apparent to all. ;) :p

Dear god in heaven. "Apart from the first two posts" So that gives you the ability to mock, deride, ridicule carte blanche what was stated.

I hope it was you that sent me a PM saying you were blocking my posts. That will alleviate the terrible headaches I seem to get reading the meandering commentary that is part of the posts.

[Spafranco]

I'm so much more impressed with the level of intelligence displayed above. I shall eagerly await the "I'm rubber you're glue.." statement, or the implication that your father could beat up mine!

I actually find it quite comical that you stoop so low... sorry if I don't have the experience at that level of debate. We do have some neighboring kids in the lower grade levels, I'll see if I can get one to school me about kid level debate. :)

Of course you are impressed. The only way to impress you is to post a sarcastic filled remark and then allow you the simple task of ridiculing it.

By the way, what the heck is this hangup you all seem to have with intelligence? Huh?

[D-Type]

Folks, please keep your personal squabbles off the forum. I don't want to have to take action

[/moderator]

[airshifter]

Thanks for the warning shot D-Type.

I'm simply defending Marks right wing forum! Really! :laugh:

[Daniel]

Of course you are impressed. The only way to impress you is to post a sarcastic filled remark and then allow you the simple task of ridiculing it.

By the way, what the heck is this hangup you all seem to have with intelligence? Huh?

Translation below

Trololo 10 hours - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sCNrK-n68CM)

[555-04Q2]

Obama came here, cr@pped on us about all the corruption, then left :p :

Instead of spending $100 million he could have just phoned us for 99c :p : :laugh:

[vhatever]

Obama came here, cr@pped on us about all the corruption, then left :p :

Instead of spending $100 million he could have just phoned us for 99c :p : :laugh:


You guys can keep him.

No, really.

[anthonyvop]

The 100 million "trip" is now gonna cost us Billions

Obama Unveils Plan to Boost Electric Power in Sub-Saharan Africa - Bloomberg (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-06-30/obama-announces-plan-to-boost-power-in-sub-saharan-africa.html)


I guess Solyndra never came up in the discussion.

[Rudy Tamasz]

The 100 million "trip" is now gonna cost us Billions

Obama Unveils Plan to Boost Electric Power in Sub-Saharan Africa - Bloomberg (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-06-30/obama-announces-plan-to-boost-power-in-sub-saharan-africa.html)


I guess Solyndra never came up in the discussion.

To be perfectly fair, I would like to emphasize that foreign aid does work. It expands markets and creates new partners for the U.S. This may as well be the case with Obama's plan for Africa. To make a judgment on whether this is a good investment or a waste of money, we need to know the details.

[Starter]

To be perfectly fair, I would like to emphasize that foreign aid does work. It expands markets and creates new partners for the U.S. This may as well be the case with Obama's plan for Africa. To make a judgment on whether this is a good investment or a waste of money, we need to know the details.
Some of the foreign aid is a waste on the face of it. The rest may very well be a wise spend. But you'll never know for sure until after the money is long gone.

[Rudy Tamasz]

Some of the foreign aid is a waste on the face of it. The rest may very well be a wise spend. But you'll never know for sure until after the money is long gone.

That's right. But you Americans have never been too shy to take risks, have you?

[Starter]

That's right. But you Americans have never been too shy to take risks, have you?
Hey, our Congress and Senate has never been shy about spending other people's money. It's what keeps them in office. :rolleyes:

[keysersoze]

Hey, our Congress and Senate has never been shy about spending other people's money. It's what keeps them in office. :rolleyes:

Many of them truly have the mentality that they are royalty. It's revolting.

For those unfamiliar with the D.C. landscape--here is a factoid for you. Some of the most expensive communities in the entire country--I'm talking villages and townships, not just neighborhoods--are in Washington D.C.. I'm talking people whose primary career goal is to keep getting elected so they can stay in Washington.

[Starter]

I'm talking people whose primary career goal is to keep getting elected so they can stay in Washington.
And the "civil servants" they empower to perform myriad unnecessary tasks.

[Rudy Tamasz]

Hey, our Congress and Senate has never been shy about spending other people's money. It's what keeps them in office. :rolleyes:

Seriously, though, if Obama commits to increasing aid to Africa, most likely he'll hire American contractors to do that and they will buy American stuff to supply it to Africa. That's gonna stimulate your economy, too, although I realize that gov't spending is not the healthiest way of stimulating the economy.

[airshifter]

Seriously, though, if Obama commits to increasing aid to Africa, most likely he'll hire American contractors to do that and they will buy American stuff to supply it to Africa. That's gonna stimulate your economy, too, although I realize that gov't spending is not the healthiest way of stimulating the economy.

Good point, but some would argue that somehow a country profits when doing such things. :)

[Starter]

Seriously, though, if Obama commits to increasing aid to Africa, most likely he'll hire American contractors to do that and they will buy American stuff to supply it to Africa. That's gonna stimulate your economy, too, although I realize that gov't spending is not the healthiest way of stimulating the economy.
That's a possibility, but it will depend on whether the assistance is in goods/services or just money.

[anthonyvop]

To be perfectly fair, I would like to emphasize that foreign aid does work. It expands markets and creates new partners for the U.S. This may as well be the case with Obama's plan for Africa. To make a judgment on whether this is a good investment or a waste of money, we need to know the details.


Taking my money by force to allow companies and people who financially supported the President's and his party campaign is a strange thing to say works and is morally wrong.

[Gregor-y]

By force, he says...

[Spafranco]

By force, he says...

In the minds of some force is only perceived when a Democrat is President. Now , when it is a Republican, the same person will argue until the cows come home that there is nothing wrong with it.

[anthonyvop]

Seriously, though, if Obama commits to increasing aid to Africa, most likely he'll hire American contractors to do that and they will buy American stuff to supply it to Africa. That's gonna stimulate your economy, too, although I realize that gov't spending is not the healthiest way of stimulating the economy.

So you still embrace Keynesian economics?

[anthonyvop]

In the minds of some force is only perceived when a Democrat is President. Now , when it is a Republican, the same person will argue until the cows come home that there is nothing wrong with it.

Nope.

It is by force no matter who is President. It is by Force on the State and Local level as well.

[keysersoze]

Nope.

It is by force no matter who is President. It is by Force on the State and Local level as well.

Please don't attempt to confuse the boy's already-made-up mind. :p :

This is for him: :rolleyes:

[Rudy Tamasz]

So you still embrace Keynesian economics?

Well, I don't. What I'm saying is that technically you can stimulate economy through government spending. You'll have to pay for it dearly in the long term perspective, though. It's a sort of addiction, which you can live with as long as you have assets to burn. When those are gone, you're in trouble. I'm not passing a judgment on whether this is good or bad. I only try to state the facts.

In general, however, both the Keynesian theory and the opposing laissez-faire theories are things of the past. They were applied to analyze the classic capitalism. The economy of the 21st century is a whole new beast and I have yet to see a theory that could plausibly explain it.

[Spafranco]

Please don't attempt to confuse the boy's already-made-up mind. :p :

This is for him: :rolleyes:

It is enlightening to see to see that the malcontents are never far away and quickly resort to insulting people rather than posting a rational comment.

It seems to me that geysersoze seems to have a libido issue and has to try to ingratiate himself to people like Tony so that he gets likes and PM's and thus will feel that tingle so sadly missing.
Truly, it is amusing.

[Spafranco]

Nope.

It is by force no matter who is President. It is by Force on the State and Local level as well.

Explain, as a citizen of the US how it is deemed by force if both parties elected by different mindsets are conducting their business by 'force'. It is a moot point if the majority carry out a task and accept rules, laws and regulations. Force is a non- issue in that instance.