Jump to content

The Democrat Thread


Rex Kickass

Recommended Posts

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Sep 16, 2008 -> 05:10 PM)
The question is...are those tens of billions of dollars a year the best way to spend the government's energy related investment dollars?

Anyone who acts like they are 100% sure of the answer there is lying.

 

edit: anything is better than "drill baby drill" though.

Edited by lostfan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 20.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • StrangeSox

    3536

  • Balta1701

    3002

  • lostfan

    1460

  • BigSqwert

    1397

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

QUOTE (lostfan @ Sep 16, 2008 -> 01:12 PM)
Anyone who acts like they are 100% sure of the answer there is lying.

 

edit: anything is better than "drill baby drill" though.

While you can't be sure of that answer...with nucular in particular there's a major problem still remaining, and that's the waste material. The federal government long ago promised nuclear plants that they'd put together an adequate place to store the stuff. The government has thus far reneged on that promise. And because of that, we're paying literally hundreds of millions of dollars per year already to the operators of those plants for them to store it themselves.

 

And there's another thing to consider...it's really not that hard to estimate the cost, lifetime, and output of those power plants and come up with best and worst case scenarios for how they compare to dumping money in to other power sources. I don't have the time to do it, but if you paid me a reasonable amount I could come up with them fairly quickly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LINK

 

The solution for the war in Iraq — by John McCain

Posted May 24th, 2006 at 2:49 pm

 

Spotlight | Permalink

 

Jason Horowitz reports in the New York Observer that John McCain met with an exclusive audience of very wealthy Republicans in New York late last week, shortly after getting booed relentlessly at the New School’s commencement ceremony. The students weren’t terribly impressed, but apparently McCain “saved some of his best material” for the elite crowd that gathered behind closed doors in the back of the Regency Hotel.

In a
s
mall, mirror-paneled room guarded by a
S
ecret
S
ervice agent and pac
k
ed with
s
ome of the city
s
wealthie
s
t and mo
s
t influential political donor
s
, Mr. McCain got right to the point.

 

One of the thing
s
I would do if I were Pre
s
ident would be to
s
it the
S
hiite
s
and the
S
unni
s
down and
s
ay,
S
top the bull
s
***,
s
aid Mr. McCain
, according to
S
hirley Cloye
s
DioGuardi, an invitee, and two other gue
s
t
s
.

Oh, so that’s what we need from the Oval Office. I’m sure the Iraqis will find this immediately persuasive and lay down arms thanks to the power of McCain’s personality and his desire to see the two sides get along. Somewhere, Bush is slapping his hand against his forehead, saying, “Why didn’t I think of that?”

 

Or, as Brendan Nyhan put it, “So honest! So bold! What an innovative diplomatic concept! If only John McCain were president, we’d have peace in Iraq!”

 

It’s worth noting, however, all sarcasm aside, McCain’s audience ate this up. DioGuardi, the wife of former Republican congressman Joseph DioGuardi, said McCain was “fantastic” and has “a vision for what should happen to this country.”

 

I don't know what's scarier. McCain's so-called solution or the fact that the audience ate it up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

from the article, had me dying:

 

"Sarah Palin was also the mayor of a very small town. To tell the truth, this is where my qualifications begin to outstrip even hers. I have never been the mayor of anything. I can’t even spell right. I had help with the above, but now— Murray, note to Murray: do not correct what follows. Lets shoe the people how I rilly spel Mooray and punshuate so thay can c how reglar I am, and ther 4 fit to leed the nashun, do to: not sum mistir fansy pans.

 

OK Mooray. Get corecting agin!

 

Thanks, Murray, you’re fabulous. Very good at what you do. Actually, Murray, come to think of it, you are so good, I suspect you are some kind of Élite. You are fired, Murray, as soon as this article is done. I’m going to hire someone Regular, who is not so excellent, and lives off the salt of the land and the fat of his brow and the sweat of his earth. Although I hope he’s not a screw-up. "

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After the 'lipstick on a pig' business, Obama spent a day explaining himself.

 

Have the Dems forgotten how to get pissed the f off? Maybe Obama should be calling President Clinton a lot more often.

 

There's no goddam anger in this campaign, no matter how egregious McCain gets. Sexism whining, the sex ed ad, the community organizer ridicule... How is it that the GOP knows how to Daley better than Daley's own party?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sure this is somehow sexist and offensive to many people, but I found it darn funny. The Sarah Palin family name generator.

Sarah Palin has picked out an All-American set of names for her children. There's Track, Trig, Bristol, Willow, and Piper.

 

Ever wonder, What would your name would be if Sarah Palin was your mother? Well now you can find out!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Rex Kicka** @ Sep 16, 2008 -> 12:03 PM)
McCain supporter and former CEO of Hewlett Packard on the radio in St. Louis this morning.

 

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/090..._to_run_HP.html

 

So, second most powerful job in the world? No problem! HP? Maybe not so much....

So, later yesterday, she clarified and said she didn't think that either McCain or Palin had the experience to run a large company (She won't be going on the tele too much anymore).

 

Here's the question though. Now that the U.S. government has bought itself the nation's largest insurance company...don't we need a president with the skill to be CEO of a large company?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Sep 17, 2008 -> 12:26 PM)
So, later yesterday, she clarified and said she didn't think that either McCain or Palin had the experience to run a large company (She won't be going on the tele too much anymore).

 

Here's the question though. Now that the U.S. government has bought itself the nation's largest insurance company...don't we need a president with the skill to be CEO of a large company?

 

She actually said all of the people on the major Presidential tickets couldn't run HP in the full story.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Sep 17, 2008 -> 12:46 PM)
Still a stupid thing to say as a surrogate. It's not like she ran HP very well.

John McCain spent 5 1/2 years as a POW in Vietnam. In the prison camp he was in, they didn't have surrogates. How dare you question the wisdom of a comment made by one of his surrogates.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

George Bush Becomes a Socialist

 

We live in a wonderfully ironic world. George W. Bush might have now nationalized more companies than Hugo Chavez. He certainly has nationalized companies with far greater worth. Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and now AIG. Let alone the bailouts of Bear Stearns and all the rest.

 

Who knew George Bush would turn out to be such a socialist? You might even argue, communist. What happened, I thought the government was unnecessary? I thought "unfettered" markets would do their magic if you just deregulated them. Why are you fettering?

 

It turns out, all that talk about not needing big government flies right out the window when the s*** hits the fan. Did we need government during Hurricane Katrina? Did we need the government during Sept. 11th? That was a day when we certainly could have used some more government help, like a president reading a briefing that said they were determined to attack us. And now, do we need the government when there is a financial meltdown?

 

You betcha. All of a sudden, the Republicans are huge advocates of big government coming to the rescue.

 

Why don't we toss a pair of bootstraps at AIG and see if that does the trick? Oh I see, that's just for poor and middle class people who need a little bit of help. They get the bootstraps and AIG gets the $85 billion government bailout.

 

So, now that we have basically bought these companies, what the hell are we going to do with them? Is the United States government going to run these companies indefinitely? Is the Bush administration saying that it's a terrible idea for the federal government to provide health insurance to everyone, but it's a great idea to provide other kinds of insurance? Remember, AIG is in the insurance business. Is health insurance the only kind of insurance the government shouldn't be involved in?

 

I'm for sensible government regulation of these industries, but I believe in capitalism. So, George Bush's socialism is wigging me out. He privatizes the army but socializes the mortgage industry. I understand how this came about, but does Bush have a plan? Do they have any idea how they are going to get out of this business or are they planning on running a quasi-socialist government from now on?

 

If other industries head south, will Bush nationalize those too? Who has more nationalized companies now -- the US or Russia?

 

Could George Bush's administration have been any more disastrous? He comes in promising to shrink the size of the government and let free markets reign supreme. He leaves while nationalizing more private companies than possibly any president in United States history. Could there be a clearer indication of the failure of conservative ideology?

 

LINK

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Change we can believe in...

 

McCain Attacks Wall Street Greed—While 83 Wall Street Lobbyists Work for His Campaign

 

In the past few days, as the economic crisis has deepened, Senator John McCain has been decrying the excesses of Wall Street. At a campaign rally in Tampa on Tuesday, he vowed that he and Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, if elected, "are going to put an end to the reckless conduct, corruption, and unbridled greed that have caused a crisis on Wall Street." He noted that the "foundation of our economy...has been put at risk by the greed and mismanagement of Wall Street and Washington."

 

[snip]

 

Several of McCain's most senior campaign aides have lobbied for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. And the Democratic National Committee, using publicly available records, has identified 177 lobbyists working for the McCain campaign as either aides, policy advisers, or fundraisers.

 

Of those 177 lobbyists, according to a Mother Jones review of Senate and House records, at least 83 have in recent years lobbied for the financial industry McCain now attacks. These are high-paid influence-peddlers who have been working the corridors of the nation's capital to win favors and special treatment for investment banks, securities firms, hedge funds, accounting outfits, and insurance companies. Their clients have included AIG, the newest symbol of corporate excess; Lehman Brothers, which filed for bankruptcy on Monday sending the stock market into a tailspin; Merrill Lynch, which was bought out by Bank of America this week; and Washington Mutual, the banking giant that could be the next to fall. Among these 83 lobbyists are McCain's chief political adviser, Charlie Black (JP Morgan, Washington Mutual Bank, Freddie Mac, Mortgage Bankers Association of America); McCain's national finance co-chairman, Wayne Berman (AIG, Blackstone, Credit Suisse, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac); the campaign's congressional liaison, John Green (Carlyle Group, Citigroup, Icahn Associates, Fannie Mae); McCain's veep vetter, Arthur Culvahouse (Fannie Mae); and McCain's transition planning chief, William Timmons Sr. (Citigroup, Freddie Mac, Vanguard Group).

Edited by BigSqwert
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll put this here rather than the economy thread. Anywho...

 

If, in January 2000, you'd said to yourself "Finally, a Republican President. We've got an MBa and a CEO in the White House (their slogan). We're finally going to have someone who doesn't screw around with the markets. I'm going to invest a bit"

 

Let's say you'd invested $1000 in a fund that followed the DJIA. Yes, not the biggest number I know, bear with me.

 

If you'd invested $1000 in the DJIA on January 20th, 2000, today that investment would be worth:

 

$1002.08.

 

The DJIA is barely 20 points above where it closed on January 20th, 2001.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Sep 17, 2008 -> 03:03 PM)
I'll put this here rather than the economy thread. Anywho...

 

If, in January 2000, you'd said to yourself "Finally, a Republican President. We've got an MBa and a CEO in the White House (their slogan). We're finally going to have someone who doesn't screw around with the markets. I'm going to invest a bit"

 

Let's say you'd invested $1000 in a fund that followed the DJIA. Yes, not the biggest number I know, bear with me.

 

If you'd invested $1000 in the DJIA on January 20th, 2000, today that investment would be worth:

 

$1002.08.

 

The DJIA is barely 20 points above where it closed on January 20th, 2001.

Which means you've lost money. Inflation and opportunity cost suck.

 

Of course, this is not something I blame on BushCo. I'd say they have only a very small amount of the blame for the current conditions.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...