Republicans in a Catch 22.

Dixie said:
No, you actually DON'T hope so, because it will mean the end of radical 60s liberalism forever. What you hope, is that your propagandists can convince enough stupid people to vote against candidates labeled as "TEA Party" candidates, by continuing to denigrate them and insinuate they are a stereotype. That's what you HOPE, let's just be honest about it.
Click to expand...

Tea-tards are doing a swell job of revealing their ignorance without any help from me.


You, for example, should be proud of the stellar work you've done.


You'd be surprised if I told you who's laughed at your "thoughts".


I've made sure your rants get as much circulation as possible on the internet.

When you see polls like this one (http://www.gallup.com/poll/147308/negative-views-tea-party-rise-new-high.aspx) that reveal that most Americans have a negative view of Teabaggers, pat yourself on the back. You earned it.

Dixie said:
Is that the same poll where they asked them first if they self-identified as TEA Party supporters, which they mostly didn't, but when they began running down the list of TEA Party issues, they were almost in solidarity with support for those? I thought that one was fascinating... No, they weren't TEA Partiers... but they supported 100% everything the TEA Party stands for... lol Just goes do show the power of pinhead propaganda and dirty politics.
Click to expand...




I guess looking at the survey yourself was too much like work?

Dixie said:
What you are going to have elected president in 2012, is a fiscal conservative... the question now is, will that be an Obama who has managed to morph himself into a distorted image of Ronald Reagan, or fool the people into THINKING he has undergone such a metamorphosis, OR... will the TEA Party elect a genuine fiscal conservative.
Click to expand...




One thing's for sure. It won't be this guy, will it?




hcain_hat_s.jpg






y9-srbf1qeuqnro3sopwtg.gif

​
 
Liberty said:
Obamas only offered cuts verbally.

What he's really saying is "give me what I want, and we will get to the details later".

He can go screw himself with this $4 trillion over the next 10-12 years crap.

Oh yes right!!!!! We're going to trust the next bunch of parasites (legislature) to hold to that kind of agreement.

They need to cut 2.5 trillion off of next years budget.

That means getting rid of a lot of socialism.
Click to expand...


Exactly......you saved me the trouble of posting this truth....
All the pinhead in the white house does is give speeches and repeat sound bites over and over, Ad nauseam ...
The meat is in the details and spewing general ideas is hardly a proposal to vote on.....
 
bravo said:
Exactly......you saved me the trouble of posting this truth....All the pinhead in the white house does is give speeches and repeat sound bites over and over, Ad nauseam ...The meat is in the details and spewing general ideas is hardly a proposal to vote on.....
Click to expand...

Poor Blabo.


Obama offered to cut nearly double what the Teatards want to cut, and it's "not specific enough"?


How much spending did George Bush cut?


How much spending did Ronald Reagan cut?


Now, go back to whining about 'spewing' and 'meat', you fucking idiot.
 
bravo said:
Exactly......you saved me the trouble of posting this truth....
All the pinhead in the white house does is give speeches and repeat sound bites over and over, Ad nauseam ...
The meat is in the details and spewing general ideas is hardly a proposal to vote on.....
Click to expand...

Every time you use the term 'pinhead' I question your mental age. Extremely childish, tedious in the extreme and almost meaningless.
 
(\(\(\/)/)/) said:
I didn't say that.


However, since it took him 8 years to turn a prosperous nation with nearly full employment and a record surplus into a nation with a collapsed economy with widespread unemployment and a record deficit, it may be just a bit unrealistic to expect the mess to be cleaned up in 3 years.


What will be interesting is the next round of Congressional elections.


The GOP already got their noses slapped in New York, where Paul Ryan's vision was soundly rejected by the voters.
Click to expand...

In all fairness, the surplus Bush inherited would have disappeared even without the tax cuts, due to the collapse of the dot-com bubble responsible for the "full employment."

Of course, cutting taxes without cutting spending didn't help matters.
 
(\(\(\/)/)/) said:
Poor Blabo.


Obama offered to cut nearly double what the Teatards want to cut, and it's "not specific enough"?


How much spending did George Bush cut?


How much spending did Ronald Reagan cut?


Now, go back to whining about 'spewing' and 'meat', you fucking idiot.
Click to expand...

Do you have any details of these Obama cuts?
 
Volt said:
In all fairness, the surplus Bush inherited would have disappeared even without the tax cuts, due to the collapse of the dot-com bubble responsible for the "full employment."

Of course, cutting taxes without cutting spending didn't help matters.
Click to expand...

*sigh* ...there was NEVER any surplus! This has to be one of the biggest hoodwinks ever pulled off by government, and it is stunning how many people, left and right, continue to be completely duped regarding the so-called "Clinton Surplus."

It was an accounting gimmick, actually. The CBO projects 10 years out, based on the current trends. At the time, there was a massive market growth in the new internet dot com business, hundreds of billions of dollars... it appeared, by the trend, this was going to generate enormous amounts of revenue over the next 10 years, and this is what was counted as "the surplus" everyone talks about. The money never existed, it was a projection, a prediction... it didn't come true.

Clinton gets credit for balancing the budget, but this had more to do with Newt and the '96 Republican sweep of Congress and Contract With America. But there was never a true surplus, it was a projection which didn't materialize.
 
Dixie said:
*sigh* ...there was NEVER any surplus! This has to be one of the biggest hoodwinks ever pulled off by government, and it is stunning how many people, left and right, continue to be completely duped regarding the so-called "Clinton Surplus." It was an accounting gimmick, actually. The CBO projects 10 years out, based on the current trends. At the time, there was a massive market growth in the new internet dot com business, hundreds of billions of dollars... it appeared, by the trend, this was going to generate enormous amounts of revenue over the next 10 years, and this is what was counted as "the surplus" everyone talks about. The money never existed, it was a projection, a prediction... it didn't come true. Clinton gets credit for balancing the budget, but this had more to do with Newt and the '96 Republican sweep of Congress and Contract With America. But there was never a true surplus, it was a projection which didn't materialize.
Click to expand...



fargle-bargle-harry-on-back_design.png









​
 
Liberty said:
You fail again. Provide some details.
Click to expand...



Poor Liability.


Can't use a search engine without your Special Education teacher to help you?


It certainly seems that (P)Rick Perry needs to provide more resources for the Textards infesting his state, but perhaps there are so many sharing your affliction it's not possible without raising taxes.


Tell you, what, I'll help you. I won't even pray for you, which is all (P)Rick Perry would do for you.


Just listen to the questions and the President will explain the answers.


You won't have to read any big words this way, but you may wonder what the big words mean, Liability. Just let me know which ones you don't understand, and I'll explain.




http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/07/11/president-obama-deficit-reduction-if-not-now-when
 
(\(\(\/)/)/) said:
Poor Liability.


Can't use a search engine without your Special Education teacher to help you?


It certainly seems that (P)Rick Perry needs to provide more resources for the Textards infesting his state, but perhaps there are so many sharing your affliction it's not possible without raising taxes.


Tell you, what, I'll help you. I won't even pray for you, which is all (P)Rick Perry would do for you.


Just listen to the questions and the President will explain the answers.


You won't have to read any big words this way, but you may wonder what the big words mean, Liability. Just let me know which ones you don't understand, and I'll explain.




http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/07/11/president-obama-deficit-reduction-if-not-now-when
Click to expand...

Big mouth, but no details. Like usual.

I want to say "you're not stupid enough to think that I would vote for Perry", but judging by your statement about him, I'd say you are.
 
Liberty said:
Big mouth, but no details. Like usual.

I want to say "you're not stupid enough to think that I would vote for Perry", but judging by your statement about him, I'd say you are.
Click to expand...



That's because you didn't watch and listen to the nice President answering the questions, Liability.


I know you didn't, because the video is 41:32 in length, and you responded 11 minutes after I posted the link.


Did you take your Ritalin today?


I know it's hard for you retarded people to focus for very long when you skip your medication.
 
(\(\(\/)/)/) said:
That's because you didn't watch and listen to the nice President answering the questions, Liability.


I know you didn't, because the video is 41:32 in length, and you responded 11 minutes after I posted the link.


Did you take your Ritalin today?


I know it's hard for you retarded people to focus for very long when you skip your medication.
Click to expand...

You say that you know, but you won't give any details.

Or maybe you lied.

Looks like you lied dude.
 
Liberty said:
You say that you know, but you won't give any details. Or maybe you lied. Looks like you lied dude.
Click to expand...



Poor Liability.


You begged me for details and I gave them to you.


What didn't you understand?


Have you voted for yourself as King of the Retards yet?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top