Printable View
http://content.usatoday.com/communit...gainst-obama/1
What are your opinions? Do you think Trump is just trying to stir up some trouble by hiring people to find out, without a doubt, where Obama was born? Or do you think his actions were brought on with good suspicion?
I don't see the relevance of where the guy was born. That Trump is trying to stir up trouble is a given; the only thing you might wonder is whether he intends for this to happen through the answer, or the question itself.
My bet is on the latter. This shit was thoroughly excavated when the guy ran for president the first time, and if that'd turned up anything we would know.
Donald Trump is not a birther, he is an opportunist. He is hanging on the birth certificate issue cause it keeps him in the news. If he thought it would keep him in the news he would claim Obama was a woman, gay, an alien or blue. If Trump really believes Obama is not a US citizen, he is an idiot, but honestly I don't think he cares about, much less believes, what he is saying beyond the press it generates.
what cafe said, but honestly who gives a shit?
I actually give a shit. Donald Trump is one of the leading Republican candidates for the primaries right now. I am hoping it is just a big publicity stunt, but in a two party system, we have to take it seriously. When left to decide if Trump is actively malicious or grotesquely uninformed, well it gets a little scary to think of him as a potential president. Romney and Huckabee may not be in line with my politics, but Trump seems actively destructive.
Oh, and for the record, everything Trump said was wrong.
Two party system. Yeah.
I know a solution to your seesaw 'democracy'. Pull the pivot, stand back, and laugh.
A funny side story, is that reporters asked Trump to show them his own
birth certificate, and the one he showed them lacked the proper
seals and signatures.
http://www.coloradopols.com/diary/15...ficate-invalid
So even Trump's piece of paper had flaws. Heck, he could have lost it too.
Just because you have a piece of paper is not a big deal.
He's just doing it for the publicity. Honestly, it just makes him look stupid.
A lot of money and power keeps that pivot in place. If we knew how to pop it, we woulda.Quote:
Originally Posted by Raza
Donald Trump as the president of the US of A.................no way people will vote for that much of an agressive take charge kind of guy
I hope he gets off that issue. Obama has a "Certificate of Live Birth" issued by the state of Hawaii. Just let it go. There does need to be aggressive scrutiny of the policies of both parties. Sideshows don't cut it. If he announces, I would lay pretty good odds that he will emerge as the nominee.
OEC
Trump's a fuckwit. Always has been, always will be.
5 bonus points for using the term "fuckwit"Quote:
Originally Posted by Bikerpunk
Well, seriously.
I mean, Trump's finances are all fucked up - right now he's game show host and running a multi-level-marketing trip.
Reason he dropped out is the requirement to come clean about all his finances, both what he owns and what his liabilities are. Apparently the balance sheet doesn't quite jive with his public persona as this great mogul.
Of course, given that he combs his back hair over his forehead, he's got nerve describing others as having something to hide
and as someone who's had to repeatedly seek bankruptcy protection, he's not one to be criticising the public use of funds neither.
"I wonder if he's a Kenyan Muslim" was for no other purpose than to get the gibbering hordes who call the President "Barkie the Darkie" and dislike a black man in power to grunt, fart and pound their collective chests.
The saddest thing is, the only two who give a shit about the economy in the coming election are unelectable. So it looks like Mr. MMM MMM MMM is gonna be able to run unopposed. God alone help us.
"We can certainly deal with the debt being run up in one year harder than Bush could in eight. All we have to do is get the evil rich to pay.... a little bit more."
Well, Trump's out, Gingrich is out, Palin isn't gonna run. Cain's unelectable, so is Santorum, so you'll probably end up with a Perry running against Obama.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cafe_Post_Mortem
You'll see two voting blocs rise - the usual bunch of treehuggers and people who have no idea how economics work and think socialism is a great idea voting for the Chicago gangster, and a bunch of mouthbreathing mongoloids voting for someone white, Texan and thumping a bible because they're racist throwbacks who want the (slang term for Hispanics) gone and the (slang term for black man) out of office.
In short, we're fucked. Just sit back and enjoy the ride.
My first thoughts: We have to get that gangster out. Then, I look at the republicans candidates. Ugh. Paul protest vote for me, I suppose.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bikerpunk
OEC
Do you mean Ron paul the libertatrian guy?
Ron Paul, yes. In 2008, I gave Nader the same send-off. I came to respect both men, although I have disagreement with both approaches. I originally had hoped Obama would serve as a balancing factor, but I consider him a complete failure.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Karl
OEC
Ron Paul, the "let's immediately go to the gold standard" guy.
Which is disastrous, for two reaons:
1) If you artificially limit the amount of currency you have to represent the goods and services in your economy by how much of a rare yellow metal you have, you can't "grow" or "shrink" your monetary system to suit the needs of the economy. Also, given things hold their value, there's no incentive to invest or keep working, to keep up with inflation.
2) America doesn't have any gold. We simply don't. Sold it years ago. No "petroleum reserve" either.
Actually Paul is for open competition amongst currencies. He takes issue with fiat money as it is easily manipulated. Personally, I would simply be for a strong dollar. The fed has conflicting goals regarding inflation and employment. I oppose methods such as quantitative easing, Expanding the money supply has not served us well. I would not go as far as Paul may wish to. I don't see that as a politically viable option. Here is his position: http://www.ronpaul.com/on-the-issues...ral-reserve-2/Quote:
Originally Posted by Bikerpunk
The United States Treasury owns approximately 261.5 Million troy ounces of gold: http://www.fms.treas.gov/gold/current.html
The Strategic Petroleum reserve stands at 726.5 million barrels. http://www.spr.doe.gov/dir/dir.html
Anyways, check your facts. The amount of gold and/or oil owned by the federal government is not relevant to why I believe Paul is the correct protest vote for me in 2012. He simply says "no".
we have libertarians here to....I think they're quite alright, a lot of pipe dreams but a very nice ideologoy(I think thats the word),
It really depends on the level of pragmatism they exercise. If you take some libertarian positions: an end to corporate subsidies, bailouts, and distortions in the tax code for example ... you have an issue to rally around. Other positions that lead to a minimalist state just are not politically palatable. It is a comprehensive ideology (right word), I would fall more in the left-libertarian category. In voting for President, that will inevitably result in a protest vote. I concentrate more on California politics. The initiative process is so powerful, you are remiss not to take a stand and vote at every election.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Karl
OEC
That's why California is ungovernable.
Do you all want free ice cream!?!?!? YES!!!!!!!!
Okay well, all our initiatives are costing money. We have to raise taxes to pay for this. Can we raise taxes. NO!!!!!!!!!!!!
Hey kids, do you want to have the taxes you pay right now lowered? YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Why is California bankrupt again?
Oh right, MEXICANS. Couldn't POSSIBLY be democracy.
I'm not sure what you are referring to as "that". You are correct on the initiative process. If that is what you meant by "that", I would agree. This is why I need to keep up to date on what is being proposed and what makes the ballot. California voters tend to vote for projects without funding them. I think the whole process is flawed. I am happy to pay more in state taxes to maintain our current level of government. While a state cannot go bankrupt, I would not attribute our current budget deficits to Mexico or Mexicans. I am somewhat hopeful that Governor Brown has the stones to close the gap, however. It has gone from 25.6 Billion to 9-14 Billion depending on how you score it. I do not believe an all cuts budget is wise at the state level. I do believe the federal government should be subject to serious austerity measures ... not "stimulus" "qe3" "bailouts" etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bikerpunk
OEC
Governor Brown?.........is that the same jerry brown? as in california uber alles?
Yup. He has cut the deficit in half, but the republicans are holding up a deal to put an extension of expiring tax rates on the ballot. I think they'll get it done though.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Karl
OEC
Exactly. That's the problem with democracy, which is what California has - direct vote on actions. So yes, they vote for spending, but not for the taxation which funds the spending. The Mexican comment is a bad joke, really - but it's what the right wing morons bring up whenever sane people point out that you have insane debts and deficits when you vote for spending but not taxes. "What about all these Mexicans costing us at the ER and rant rant rant" as if that's the real reason, and not earning $50 but spending $5000.Quote:
Originally Posted by One Eyed Cat
"Stimulus" was Barack Hussein paying off his cronies and all the people who got him elected. You don't think people gave him hundreds of millions in war chest spending to get elected to cut pork, do you?Quote:
I do not believe an all cuts budget is wise at the state level. I do believe the federal government should be subject to serious austerity measures ... not "stimulus" "qe3" "bailouts" etc.
OEC
As for QE2 and QE3, that was because we spend $1.7 TRILLION more than we make each year, and people have stopped lending us money. The Chinese sold off 97% of their USian holdings and others are following suit. So the US is "printing money" to buy treasuries. That's why the dollar is dropping like a rock and oil is going up, as is any other commodity. But Bernanke is deliberately skewing what goes into the "inflation" calculation. If you ignore gas prices, energy prices, and food prices, we're holding steady on inflation! Yes, but people eat food, use gas and buy things with copper in them.
Fascist racis.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bikerpunk
They need to modify the initiative system out here. There have been instances where it has been legit. If they don't pass a balanced budget today for 2011-2012, they forfeit their salaries until one is passed. That was a voter initiative. In a very California twist, the original balanced budget would have included a tax initiative. Jerry Brown is seriously trying to make us act as grownups. The new budget is flawed. I do love California and am still optimistic though. As insane as it is, the system always returns to an odd balance.
Uh you realise I'm riffing on the less than subtle racism coming from the Tea Party hanger-ons, right?Quote:
Originally Posted by Buster Friendly
That's not my own opinion regarding Mexicans.