NIU17 Wrote:

7 Wrote:

Flames24Rulz Wrote:

Boowie Wrote:

7 Wrote:

In the words of Lou Holtz, "Hitler was a good speaker too."

God Bless America, it could be an awful day.

You're an ignorant piece of garbage. Go educate yourself.

Oh shut the hell up and get over it.

That picture was more tongue in-cheek than anything. I'm utterly shocked that someone like you would take that so seriously.

Yeah, not sure why people took it so seriously.

I'm new to this site, so I don't know all the different personalities. But this really made me angry when I first saw it. And some of your other posts didn't make it seem like tongue-in-cheek.

No offense, but if you didn't see that as a tongue-in-cheek picture, then you need to develop a sense of humor.

Flames24Rulz Wrote:

NIU17 Wrote:

7 Wrote:Yeah, not sure why people took it so seriously.

I'm new to this site, so I don't know all the different personalities. But this really made me angry when I first saw it. And some of your other posts didn't make it seem like tongue-in-cheek.

No offense, but if you didn't see that as a tongue-in-cheek picture, then you need to develop a sense of humor.

This was an ignorant post that isn't funny and wasn't meant to be. Go read his other posts. He never once said this was supposed to be a joke.

NIUJDK Wrote:Having lived through the Jimmy Carter years, and being self-employed I am quite confident that I am going to be unemployed in 2009 and my son is probably going to have to figure out a way to pay for his college himself. It could be 2011 or 2012 when other contracts begin flowing again in the capital investment arena. Worse, if he raises the capital gains tax, I and many self employed people are now going to have our standard of living significantly reduced. My worst fear is after telling my son I can't pay for his college is I have to sell my house and move into a small apartment. I can't believe many of you who lived through the Carter years don't know what is about to hit us. Unemployment is 6.1% now. I am going to guarantee you that unemployment rate is going to increase signficantly, maybe unemploying some of your parents. Then you can really celebrate.

no, everyone who's unemployed will get govt jobs, (maybe in the civilain army thats been proposed) that will require higher taxes to pay for. I only hope that congress grows a set and does not rubber stamp his ideas (which I fear they will) The last thing we need is socialized healthcare and enviro nazi's running the country. Start saving for your electric bills if he gets his way.

unemployment was projected to increase even before the election. a 2009 recession was going to happen regardless of who was in office

additionally, if you are unhappy with the results, look at (and blame) the republican party for straying from their core values. this election was a mandate by the AMERICAN PEOPLE that the last 4 years (possible 8 years) were completely unacceptable. the failure of the republican party is what helped put the democratic party in the White House, Senate, and House.

NIU17 Wrote:

Flames24Rulz Wrote:

NIU17 Wrote:

7 Wrote:Yeah, not sure why people took it so seriously.

I'm new to this site, so I don't know all the different personalities. But this really made me angry when I first saw it. And some of your other posts didn't make it seem like tongue-in-cheek.

No offense, but if you didn't see that as a tongue-in-cheek picture, then you need to develop a sense of humor.

This was an ignorant post that isn't funny and wasn't meant to be. Go read his other posts. He never once said this was supposed to be a joke.

Speaking of ignorant, tell me who in the past is closer to being a socialist ala the Soviet Union more than Obama? Who? Just because you don't want to acknowledge reality doesn't mean that he is by far the most liberal president we have EVER had. He is to the left of Vladamir Putin - seriously. You sir, are ignorant of history and based upon your post, going to repeat it.

Look up the economy during the Carter years and expect worse. You can get back to me later with the results of raising taxes, and creating more social programs that don't meet the expected outcome but we are supposed to feel good that we tried even though they are complete failures. Let's look at Lyndon Johnson's great society and eliminating poverty. All his policies did was eliminate the father from most black families and increase the number of people living off the government. When you are removing incentive and risk and reward from decisions, people become complacent. Remember all the people in the Soviet Union who eventually even showed up drunk at work from all the vodka they were drinking? No incentive to work harder, no penalty for being drunk, but just showing up was sufficient. It is enraging for me to see people who are lazy and wanting the government to do everything for them.

Ask yourself, do you remember everything that was just handed to you or the things that you worked hard to achieve and earned? Think about it. Collectively, personal responsibility and doing the best for yourself improves all of our standard of living. If I can do it, so can you. Encouraging people to do better and providing a level playing field is what government should do, NOT take money from people who earn money and give it to lazy people who don't earn.

The basic underlying question is do you want to make this country weaker for your kids and grandkids or not? Shrinking the size of the pie is absolutely going to kill their standard of living and make life harder on them. And I love my kid.

Lou Holtz always sounds as if he has a mouthful of mashed potatoes. The wingnuts are out in full force in this folder.

I'll take Socialism over the incompetent Imperialist Facism we've been stuck with the last 8 years.

7 Wrote:I hate it when people compare McCain to Bush. Yeah they agree on a lot of issues, but I never had a problem with Bush's stances. His problem was execution, in which case he was awful. I have faith that McCain would execute his gameplan better.

Yeah that Iraq invasion, cutting taxes during war time and allowing Wall Street to operate without regulation have worked out so well.

NIUJDK Wrote:Having lived through the Jimmy Carter years, and being self-employed I am quite confident that I am going to be unemployed in 2009 and my son is probably going to have to figure out a way to pay for his college himself.

You're just a ball of self confidence and motivation aren't you. What's wrong with your children working to pay for their education or saving $ by attending a local college.


It could be 2011 or 2012 when other contracts begin flowing again in the capital investment arena. Worse, if he raises the capital gains tax, I and many self employed people are now going to have our standard of living significantly reduced. My worst fear is after telling my son I can't pay for his college is I have to sell my house and move into a small apartment.

Ever heard of a home equity loan?

I can't believe many of you who lived through the Carter years don't know what is about to hit us. Unemployment is 6.1% now. I am going to guarantee you that unemployment rate is going to increase signficantly, maybe unemploying some of your parents. Then you can really celebrate.

Unemployment and the deficit have risen steadily during this administration, so obviously lowering taxes during wartime hasn't worked. Clinton raising taxes gave the US a multi billion dollar surplus and millions of jobs were created during his administration. Why you wingnuts ignore that or gloss over it is amazing.

huskiealum03 Wrote:unemployment was projected to increase even before the election. a 2009 recession was going to happen regardless of who was in office

additionally, if you are unhappy with the results, look at (and blame) the republican party for straying from their core values. this election was a mandate by the AMERICAN PEOPLE that the last 4 years (possible 8 years) were completely unacceptable. the failure of the republican party is what helped put the democratic party in the White House, Senate, and House.

what put the dems in the white house it the pathetic choices we get from the two party system. We had a choice between the same crap and new sh!t. either way is going to leave a bad taste in your mouth and make you sick. whats needed, and won't be allowed under the current system is someone whos looking out for the good of the country not themselves and their friends. As long as you have the dominant parties lying and telling people what they want to hear (then not following through) rather than telling people what they need to hear we'll have the same problems.

NIU17 Wrote:

7 Wrote:

Flames24Rulz Wrote:

Boowie Wrote:

7 Wrote:

In the words of Lou Holtz, "Hitler was a good speaker too."

God Bless America, it could be an awful day.

You're an ignorant piece of garbage. Go educate yourself.

Oh shut the hell up and get over it.

That picture was more tongue in-cheek than anything. I'm utterly shocked that someone like you would take that so seriously.

Yeah, not sure why people took it so seriously.

I'm new to this site, so I don't know all the different personalities. But this really made me angry when I first saw it. And some of your other posts didn't make it seem like tongue-in-cheek.

Agreed. It's ridiculous. People say things are tongue in cheek after someone calls them out on what they actually did.

calvin12 Wrote:

huskiealum03 Wrote:unemployment was projected to increase even before the election. a 2009 recession was going to happen regardless of who was in office

additionally, if you are unhappy with the results, look at (and blame) the republican party for straying from their core values. this election was a mandate by the AMERICAN PEOPLE that the last 4 years (possible 8 years) were completely unacceptable. the failure of the republican party is what helped put the democratic party in the White House, Senate, and House.

what put the dems in the white house it the pathetic choices we get from the two party system. We had a choice between the same crap and new sh!t. either way is going to leave a bad taste in your mouth and make you sick. whats needed, and won't be allowed under the current system is someone whos looking out for the good of the country not themselves and their friends. As long as you have the dominant parties lying and telling people what they want to hear (then not following through) rather than telling people what they need to hear we'll have the same problems.

oh now you complain about the current system. how did you feel in 2000 and 2004? i completely agree that it would be good to have more than a 2 party system. you may have seen it as 2 lousy candidates, but the dems surely didn't think that.

huskiealum03 Wrote:

calvin12 Wrote:

huskiealum03 Wrote:unemployment was projected to increase even before the election. a 2009 recession was going to happen regardless of who was in office

additionally, if you are unhappy with the results, look at (and blame) the republican party for straying from their core values. this election was a mandate by the AMERICAN PEOPLE that the last 4 years (possible 8 years) were completely unacceptable. the failure of the republican party is what helped put the democratic party in the White House, Senate, and House.

what put the dems in the white house it the pathetic choices we get from the two party system. We had a choice between the same crap and new sh!t. either way is going to leave a bad taste in your mouth and make you sick. whats needed, and won't be allowed under the current system is someone whos looking out for the good of the country not themselves and their friends. As long as you have the dominant parties lying and telling people what they want to hear (then not following through) rather than telling people what they need to hear we'll have the same problems.

oh now you complain about the current system. how did you feel in 2000 and 2004? i completely agree that it would be good to have more than a 2 party system. you may have seen it as 2 lousy candidates, but the dems surely didn't think that.

*now i complain*?? I've been saying this for years. 2000 and 04 were just as bad as this. Sadly bush was actually the better one, as sad as that was, in 2000. Kerry was pathetic but was at least better than bush. on 00 and 04 I voted but not for president, I couldn't, in good conscious, vote for either candidate in those elections.

calvin12 Wrote:

huskiealum03 Wrote:

calvin12 Wrote:

huskiealum03 Wrote:unemployment was projected to increase even before the election. a 2009 recession was going to happen regardless of who was in office

additionally, if you are unhappy with the results, look at (and blame) the republican party for straying from their core values. this election was a mandate by the AMERICAN PEOPLE that the last 4 years (possible 8 years) were completely unacceptable. the failure of the republican party is what helped put the democratic party in the White House, Senate, and House.

what put the dems in the white house it the pathetic choices we get from the two party system. We had a choice between the same crap and new sh!t. either way is going to leave a bad taste in your mouth and make you sick. whats needed, and won't be allowed under the current system is someone whos looking out for the good of the country not themselves and their friends. As long as you have the dominant parties lying and telling people what they want to hear (then not following through) rather than telling people what they need to hear we'll have the same problems.

oh now you complain about the current system. how did you feel in 2000 and 2004? i completely agree that it would be good to have more than a 2 party system. you may have seen it as 2 lousy candidates, but the dems surely didn't think that.

*now i complain*?? I've been saying this for years. 2000 and 04 were just as bad as this. Sadly bush was actually the better one, as sad as that was, in 2000. Kerry was pathetic but was at least better than bush. on 00 and 04 I voted but not for president, I couldn't, in good conscious, vote for either candidate in those elections.

well, if you're so unhappy about it, find a 3rd candidate you can get behind and stump for them. if this is to happen one day, someone has to start sometime w/ meager results. in 2000 i thought nader might have a decent start in getting 3rd parties involved, but no one really followed through in 2004 to at least keep that movement going.

7 Wrote:

In the words of Lou Holtz, "Hitler was a good speaker too."

God Bless America, it could be an awful day.

So let me ask you something here, 7; isn't John McCain also a socialist? I mean, has he ever had to actually PAY for this health insurance? Oh, wait a minute; he hasn't (military health care, US Senate/elected official health care).

Hmm, sounds like he has been pretty well taken care of by the government and the taxpayers if you ask me...

NIUJDK Wrote:

NIU17 Wrote:

Flames24Rulz Wrote:

NIU17 Wrote:

7 Wrote:Yeah, not sure why people took it so seriously.

I'm new to this site, so I don't know all the different personalities. But this really made me angry when I first saw it. And some of your other posts didn't make it seem like tongue-in-cheek.

No offense, but if you didn't see that as a tongue-in-cheek picture, then you need to develop a sense of humor.

This was an ignorant post that isn't funny and wasn't meant to be. Go read his other posts. He never once said this was supposed to be a joke.

Speaking of ignorant, tell me who in the past is closer to being a socialist ala the Soviet Union more than Obama? Who? Just because you don't want to acknowledge reality doesn't mean that he is by far the most liberal president we have EVER had. He is to the left of Vladamir Putin - seriously. You sir, are ignorant of history and based upon your post, going to repeat it.

Look up the economy during the Carter years and expect worse. You can get back to me later with the results of raising taxes, and creating more social programs that don't meet the expected outcome but we are supposed to feel good that we tried even though they are complete failures. Let's look at Lyndon Johnson's great society and eliminating poverty. All his policies did was eliminate the father from most black families and increase the number of people living off the government. When you are removing incentive and risk and reward from decisions, people become complacent. Remember all the people in the Soviet Union who eventually even showed up drunk at work from all the vodka they were drinking? No incentive to work harder, no penalty for being drunk, but just showing up was sufficient. It is enraging for me to see people who are lazy and wanting the government to do everything for them.

Ask yourself, do you remember everything that was just handed to you or the things that you worked hard to achieve and earned? Think about it. Collectively, personal responsibility and doing the best for yourself improves all of our standard of living. If I can do it, so can you. Encouraging people to do better and providing a level playing field is what government should do, NOT take money from people who earn money and give it to lazy people who don't earn.

The basic underlying question is do you want to make this country weaker for your kids and grandkids or not? Shrinking the size of the pie is absolutely going to kill their standard of living and make life harder on them. And I love my kid.

You can tell I'm ignorant because I didn't think his original post was tongue-in-cheek? How was McCain going to cut taxes or keep the same taxes for everyone and get us out of the mess we're in? We're in huge growing debt and a weak US economy hurts our military just as much. McCain supporters didn't want him being compared to Bush, but he is much more like Bush than Obama is to Carter. I bet you compared Clinton to Carter when he was running for office. All I know is my 401k has lost 40%, family members have lost their jobs, my kids' 529 plans have lost money. This is money I earned and Obama hasn't taken office yet. McCain was going to fix all that by cutting taxes? He was going to make it up by stopping all the programs for the lazy? How about the $12 million a month we spend in Iraq and he wants to continue to cut taxes. I applaud your knowledge of history, but your short-term memory is a little warped.

NIU17 Wrote:

NIUJDK Wrote:

NIU17 Wrote:

Flames24Rulz Wrote:

NIU17 Wrote:

7 Wrote:Yeah, not sure why people took it so seriously.

I'm new to this site, so I don't know all the different personalities. But this really made me angry when I first saw it. And some of your other posts didn't make it seem like tongue-in-cheek.

No offense, but if you didn't see that as a tongue-in-cheek picture, then you need to develop a sense of humor.

This was an ignorant post that isn't funny and wasn't meant to be. Go read his other posts. He never once said this was supposed to be a joke.

Speaking of ignorant, tell me who in the past is closer to being a socialist ala the Soviet Union more than Obama? Who? Just because you don't want to acknowledge reality doesn't mean that he is by far the most liberal president we have EVER had. He is to the left of Vladamir Putin - seriously. You sir, are ignorant of history and based upon your post, going to repeat it.

Look up the economy during the Carter years and expect worse. You can get back to me later with the results of raising taxes, and creating more social programs that don't meet the expected outcome but we are supposed to feel good that we tried even though they are complete failures. Let's look at Lyndon Johnson's great society and eliminating poverty. All his policies did was eliminate the father from most black families and increase the number of people living off the government. When you are removing incentive and risk and reward from decisions, people become complacent. Remember all the people in the Soviet Union who eventually even showed up drunk at work from all the vodka they were drinking? No incentive to work harder, no penalty for being drunk, but just showing up was sufficient. It is enraging for me to see people who are lazy and wanting the government to do everything for them.

Ask yourself, do you remember everything that was just handed to you or the things that you worked hard to achieve and earned? Think about it. Collectively, personal responsibility and doing the best for yourself improves all of our standard of living. If I can do it, so can you. Encouraging people to do better and providing a level playing field is what government should do, NOT take money from people who earn money and give it to lazy people who don't earn.

The basic underlying question is do you want to make this country weaker for your kids and grandkids or not? Shrinking the size of the pie is absolutely going to kill their standard of living and make life harder on them. And I love my kid.

You can tell I'm ignorant because I didn't think his original post was tongue-in-cheek? How was McCain going to cut taxes or keep the same taxes for everyone and get us out of the mess we're in? We're in huge growing debt and a weak US economy hurts our military just as much. McCain supporters didn't want him being compared to Bush, but he is much more like Bush than Obama is to Carter. I bet you compared Clinton to Carter when he was running for office. All I know is my 401k has lost 40%, family members have lost their jobs, my kids' 529 plans have lost money. This is money I earned and Obama hasn't taken office yet. McCain was going to fix all that by cutting taxes? He was going to make it up by stopping all the programs for the lazy? How about the $12 million a month we spend in Iraq and he wants to continue to cut taxes. I applaud your knowledge of history, but your short-term memory is a little warped.

The first half of you message deals with what taxes and tying McCain to Bush. By keeping the income tax rates where they are and cutting the capital gains rates, the economy will grow - especially given the freeing up of capital with the TARP legislation. Capital gains cut has been shown to increase economic acitivity in the past and will work in the future. McCain proposed decreasing this tax while Obama wants to increase this tax to be fair. I predict closer to a depression than a recession if he does increase capital gains rates.

Secondly related to the second half of your comment, the losses you cite also hit me and other Americans, but the sky is not falling. In order to balance the budget adn operate with a surplus we should kill many federal programs. Among the programs to kill are Bush's federal funding for education and eliminating Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac agencies. We can continue to improve taxpayer value by freezing the federal budget at a frozen level until it is met with inflation adjusted numbers from the 1980s, eliminating the indexing for the lowest levels so that more taxpayers have skin in the game and where the federal budget is spent. Currently 40% of U.S. citizens freeload of the others who are earning money. The money you have lost in your 401(k) and 529 are just paper losses of which you will recover if you remember 1987 crash. But thinking that Obama is the answer to this credit crisis is misguided at best. Bush created a lot of the current economic problems by not vetoing a lot of spending legislation, but McCain indicated that he will veto spending bills. The turn to the left you are about to witness is going to be breathtaking and remember who here accurately predicted the results when they occur. As to spending $12 million per month (I think it is more like $10 billion / month), are you suggesting that it is better to have Al Queda with a revenue stream from Iraqi oil reserves financing terrorist activity around the globe rather than remaining there to finish the job? Was it not Osama Bin Laden himself who indicated the war in Iraq is the central front for Al Queda? Why?

If you want to see military incursions going on about the world, sit back and watch. You are not going to believe what is about to happen. Russia into Georgia. Russia into the Ukraine. North Korea into South Korea. Iran and Syria into Israel. Congratulations - you voted for all that is upcoming.

NIUJDK Wrote:The first half of you message deals with what taxes and tying McCain to Bush. By keeping the income tax rates where they are and cutting the capital gains rates, the economy will grow - especially given the freeing up of capital with the TARP legislation. Capital gains cut has been shown to increase economic acitivity in the past and will work in the future. McCain proposed decreasing this tax while Obama wants to increase this tax to be fair. I predict closer to a depression than a recession if he does increase capital gains rates.

Secondly related to the second half of your comment, the losses you cite also hit me and other Americans, but the sky is not falling. In order to balance the budget adn operate with a surplus we should kill many federal programs. Among the programs to kill are Bush's federal funding for education and eliminating Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac agencies. We can continue to improve taxpayer value by freezing the federal budget at a frozen level until it is met with inflation adjusted numbers from the 1980s, eliminating the indexing for the lowest levels so that more taxpayers have skin in the game and where the federal budget is spent. Currently 40% of U.S. citizens freeload of the others who are earning money. The money you have lost in your 401(k) and 529 are just paper losses of which you will recover if you remember 1987 crash. But thinking that Obama is the answer to this credit crisis is misguided at best. Bush created a lot of the current economic problems by not vetoing a lot of spending legislation, but McCain indicated that he will veto spending bills. The turn to the left you are about to witness is going to be breathtaking and remember who here accurately predicted the results when they occur. As to spending $12 million per month (I think it is more like $10 billion / month), are you suggesting that it is better to have Al Queda with a revenue stream from Iraqi oil reserves financing terrorist activity around the globe rather than remaining there to finish the job? Was it not Osama Bin Laden himself who indicated the war in Iraq is the central front for Al Queda? Why?

If you want to see military incursions going on about the world, sit back and watch. You are not going to believe what is about to happen. Russia into Georgia. Russia into the Ukraine. North Korea into South Korea. Iran and Syria into Israel. Congratulations - you voted for all that is upcoming.

Good post! As far as the paper money - depending on when he needs the money from the 401k or 529 plans determines how much it will affect him. And the last paragraph. I don't see that happening. we don't have the means (troops or $) to do anything about it if they did it now.

NIU17 Wrote:

NIUJDK Wrote:

NIU17 Wrote:

Flames24Rulz Wrote:

NIU17 Wrote:

7 Wrote:Yeah, not sure why people took it so seriously.

I'm new to this site, so I don't know all the different personalities. But this really made me angry when I first saw it. And some of your other posts didn't make it seem like tongue-in-cheek.

No offense, but if you didn't see that as a tongue-in-cheek picture, then you need to develop a sense of humor.

This was an ignorant post that isn't funny and wasn't meant to be. Go read his other posts. He never once said this was supposed to be a joke.

Speaking of ignorant, tell me who in the past is closer to being a socialist ala the Soviet Union more than Obama? Who? Just because you don't want to acknowledge reality doesn't mean that he is by far the most liberal president we have EVER had. He is to the left of Vladamir Putin - seriously. You sir, are ignorant of history and based upon your post, going to repeat it.

Look up the economy during the Carter years and expect worse. You can get back to me later with the results of raising taxes, and creating more social programs that don't meet the expected outcome but we are supposed to feel good that we tried even though they are complete failures. Let's look at Lyndon Johnson's great society and eliminating poverty. All his policies did was eliminate the father from most black families and increase the number of people living off the government. When you are removing incentive and risk and reward from decisions, people become complacent. Remember all the people in the Soviet Union who eventually even showed up drunk at work from all the vodka they were drinking? No incentive to work harder, no penalty for being drunk, but just showing up was sufficient. It is enraging for me to see people who are lazy and wanting the government to do everything for them.

Ask yourself, do you remember everything that was just handed to you or the things that you worked hard to achieve and earned? Think about it. Collectively, personal responsibility and doing the best for yourself improves all of our standard of living. If I can do it, so can you. Encouraging people to do better and providing a level playing field is what government should do, NOT take money from people who earn money and give it to lazy people who don't earn.

The basic underlying question is do you want to make this country weaker for your kids and grandkids or not? Shrinking the size of the pie is absolutely going to kill their standard of living and make life harder on them. And I love my kid.

You can tell I'm ignorant because I didn't think his original post was tongue-in-cheek? How was McCain going to cut taxes or keep the same taxes for everyone and get us out of the mess we're in? We're in huge growing debt and a weak US economy hurts our military just as much. McCain supporters didn't want him being compared to Bush, but he is much more like Bush than Obama is to Carter. I bet you compared Clinton to Carter when he was running for office. All I know is my 401k has lost 40%, family members have lost their jobs, my kids' 529 plans have lost money. This is money I earned and Obama hasn't taken office yet. McCain was going to fix all that by cutting taxes? He was going to make it up by stopping all the programs for the lazy? How about the $12 million a month we spend in Iraq and he wants to continue to cut taxes. I applaud your knowledge of history, but your short-term memory is a little warped.

not unless you are silly enough to sell now. Now is the time to pump money in. that's what I've been trying to do.