nankerphelge wrote on May 29^th, 2009 at 6:52pm:

Besides showing how STUPID Obalama is, this conversation also indicates that he really doesn't give a flying fig what this guy does or how he lives his life.

Five Guys is a pretty good place.

Quote:

nankerphelge wrote on May 30^th, 2009 at 9:30am:


Egad !

I for one, am absolutely appalled to learn that 5 Guys obviously doesn't implement the proper children's height safety measures in order weed out the lil' bitch bush geeks

Simply atrocious!

"My lil' teleprompter thingy tells me to tell you that my Supreme Court nominee is not racist, that she merely used a poor choice of words to convey her position that white men cannot make as informed a decision as a Latina woman because all whitey knows about is white man thangs, like money and land and slaves and evil corporations and pollution.  So it isn't really racism, because it just reflects our reality of the world.  I hope that helps end this nonsense."

Imagine my shock when I read the opening lines of this article in the paper.



I mean it's not like the MSM has been exactly drawing attention to the fact that Barry is an outright Marxist. No doubt, I, and several other posters on this site that have a real sense of the truth, have pointed this out repeatedly. Like all the other Obamadrones in the world most liberal posters here just laugh it off, and throw around useless idiotic shit like "Bush Geek" ad nauseum. However, I gotta say that when an official "paper of record" comes right out and underscores everything that the more intelligent amongst us have known all along it feels like pretty strong vindication.

Plus given the fact that the "paper of record" here is one that knows a thing or two about Marxism, having lived under it's boot for sixty plus years.


What paper?

Oh yeah, this one right here--->http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/107459-0/


Wake up you Obamdrone ultra partisan fucks! Your country, and your liberties are being stolen from you right in front of your god damned eyes! You are selling the next four generations of Americans wealth and freedom out because you have fallen under the spell of a god damned far left ideological half wit! Everyone of you Kool aid drinking fuckups should go to your kids and say your sorry for fucking them! Your sorry for handing them a country that is completely unrecognizable from the one that your parents handed you! Apologize to them for falling for a smooth talking huckster that shuns the history and traditions that made the USA the single greatest nation on earth. Apologize for abdicating your responsibility of being a parent, and to strive to make their future easier than yours was. Apologize, more than anything else, for being so hateful of Bush that you blindly sold the very values that made this country great right down the shitter just because some con man hard left ideological Marxist fuckup can read a teleprompter. You idiots deserve to be laughed at! Long, hard, and often! When Pravda laughs at you you know you deserved to be laughed at! Wake up morons!


Wake up and read the article that the Obama cock sucking US media would never dare print! Namely, the truth.


Riffy

Riffhard wrote on May 31^st, 2009 at 4:33pm:



LMAO! Excellent source as usual Riffy.

Here are some other gems from your source:

http://english.pravda.ru/science/mysteries/03-10-2007/98123-moon-0

http://english.pravda.ru/science/mysteries/104631-tunguska_meteorite-0

http://english.pravda.ru/science/mysteries/27-02-2007/87801-underground-0

Does California have a $12 to $40 billion deficit right now? Maybe Arnie should get a handle on that & leave the jokes to Leno. Rush is actually below 200.

Riffhard wrote on May 31^st, 2009 at 4:33pm:



http://english.pravda.ru/science/mysteries/07-02-2007/87167-alien_monster-0

Three Gulfstream planes & a chopper to go to NYC for a play?
Couldn't they have taken in a play when he was in NYC on bidness?
Isn't this a bit excessive?

Reagan Did It

By PAUL KRUGMAN
Published: May 31, 2009

“This bill is the most important legislation for financial institutions in the last 50 years. It provides a long-term solution for troubled thrift institutions. ... All in all, I think we hit the jackpot.” So declared Ronald Reagan in 1982, as he signed the Garn-St. Germain Depository Institutions Act.


He was, as it happened, wrong about solving the problems of the thrifts. On the contrary, the bill turned the modest-sized troubles of savings-and-loan institutions into an utter catastrophe. But he was right about the legislation’s significance. And as for that jackpot — well, it finally came more than 25 years later, in the form of the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression.

For the more one looks into the origins of the current disaster, the clearer it becomes that the key wrong turn — the turn that made crisis inevitable — took place in the early 1980s, during the Reagan years.

Attacks on Reaganomics usually focus on rising inequality and fiscal irresponsibility. Indeed, Reagan ushered in an era in which a small minority grew vastly rich, while working families saw only meager gains. He also broke with longstanding rules of fiscal prudence.

On the latter point: traditionally, the U.S. government ran significant budget deficits only in times of war or economic emergency. Federal debt as a percentage of G.D.P. fell steadily from the end of World War II until 1980. But indebtedness began rising under Reagan; it fell again in the Clinton years, but resumed its rise under the Bush administration, leaving us ill prepared for the emergency now upon us.

The increase in public debt was, however, dwarfed by the rise in private debt, made possible by financial deregulation. The change in America’s financial rules was Reagan’s biggest legacy. And it’s the gift that keeps on taking.

The immediate effect of Garn-St. Germain, as I said, was to turn the thrifts from a problem into a catastrophe. The S.& L. crisis has been written out of the Reagan hagiography, but the fact is that deregulation in effect gave the industry — whose deposits were federally insured — a license to gamble with taxpayers’ money, at best, or simply to loot it, at worst. By the time the government closed the books on the affair, taxpayers had lost $130 billion, back when that was a lot of money.

But there was also a longer-term effect. Reagan-era legislative changes essentially ended New Deal restrictions on mortgage lending — restrictions that, in particular, limited the ability of families to buy homes without putting a significant amount of money down.

These restrictions were put in place in the 1930s by political leaders who had just experienced a terrible financial crisis, and were trying to prevent another. But by 1980 the memory of the Depression had faded. Government, declared Reagan, is the problem, not the solution; the magic of the marketplace must be set free. And so the precautionary rules were scrapped.

Together with looser lending standards for other kinds of consumer credit, this led to a radical change in American behavior.

We weren’t always a nation of big debts and low savings: in the 1970s Americans saved almost 10 percent of their income, slightly more than in the 1960s. It was only after the Reagan deregulation that thrift gradually disappeared from the American way of life, culminating in the near-zero savings rate that prevailed on the eve of the great crisis. Household debt was only 60 percent of income when Reagan took office, about the same as it was during the Kennedy administration. By 2007 it was up to 119 percent.

All this, we were assured, was a good thing: sure, Americans were piling up debt, and they weren’t putting aside any of their income, but their finances looked fine once you took into account the rising values of their houses and their stock portfolios. Oops.

Now, the proximate causes of today’s economic crisis lie in events that took place long after Reagan left office — in the global savings glut created by surpluses in China and elsewhere, and in the giant housing bubble that savings glut helped inflate.

But it was the explosion of debt over the previous quarter-century that made the U.S. economy so vulnerable. Overstretched borrowers were bound to start defaulting in large numbers once the housing bubble burst and unemployment began to rise.

These defaults in turn wreaked havoc with a financial system that — also mainly thanks to Reagan-era deregulation — took on too much risk with too little capital.

There’s plenty of blame to go around these days. But the prime villains behind the mess we’re in were Reagan and his circle of advisers — men who forgot the lessons of America’s last great financial crisis, and condemned the rest of us to repeat it.

Riffhard wrote on Jun 1^st, 2009 at 6:50am:



Dear Mr. Riffhard,

  I'm so happy to see you've finally found something to be positive about.  All of the yelling about sucking c oc ks gets to be a little disturbing after awhile. Your new-found respect for Pravda took some of us by surprise, but you're right - just because they print a lot of articles about UFO aliens doesn't mean that the one article you agree with isn't 100% on the money.

While you were pedaling your  Schwinn around town delivering today's Pravda, did you happen to catch this article?  Since it bad-mouths Obama  I guess it's also one you agree with.  After all, who knows more about torture than the people who lived under Stalin?



*************************************
BREAKING NEWS

The United States of Torture


I have some good news and some bad news.

First, the good news: After a thorough and diligent investigation, I have solved twenty-five unsolved murders. I know who the murderers are, I know how they committed their crimes, and I have more than enough evidence to convict them.

 
Now for the bad news: I am not going to release any of this evidence or demand that any of these murderers be prosecuted.

While this may seem anathema to the fundamental concept of justice, I have five reasons for my actions:

Reason Number One: If you want these murderers to be prosecuted, you are seeking vengeance, not justice;

Reason Number Two: Putting these murderers on trial might implicate other, more “important,” people who should remain above the law;

Reason Number Three: All of these murders occurred only after the murderers engaged in a “well-thought out” debate about whether or not to commit them;

Reason Number Four: If you want crimes of the past to be prosecuted, you are “looking backward,” when you should be “looking forward”;

Reason Number Five: These twenty-five murders were not really murders at all. They were simply extroverted suicides.

If any, or all, of these reasons seem ludicrous to you, then welcome to America’s so-called “debate” over whether the individuals who engaged in, encouraged or authorized the use of torture during the criminal reign of George W. Bush should be prosecuted.

Reason Number Five is the semantic argument propagated by Bush himself: Torture isn’t really torture when the politically powerful refuse to label it as such. According to this logic, members of Joseph Stalin’s NKVD never used torture. They only applied “physical pressure.” And the Bush dictatorship never used or sanctioned the use of torture. It simply authorized and utilized “expanded interrogation techniques.”

Reason Number Four is the argument being disseminated by America’s current president Barack Obama. Obama’s claim that Americans should “look forward, not backward” is now being cited to defend the alleged architects of the Bush-era torture policies, including former United States attorney general Alberto Gonzales.

Yet, ironically, Gonzales himself implicitly rejected this argument during his own tenure in office when he announced, with much ceremony, that the Justice Department was investigating and seeking to bring to justice the persons responsible for decades-old crimes committed during America’s civil rights era.

http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/01-06-2009/107654-change-0

Some Guy wrote on Jun 1^st, 2009 at 1:00pm:



boozing it up at "The Loving Cup"

this entire thread should be renamed "Can of Worms"