100% free online dating, chat, forums, and friends...

( new topic )

By ALAN CLENDENNING (AP Business Writer)

From Associated Press

March 13, 2008 3:04 PM EDT

SAO PAULO, Brazil - Antique store owners in lower Manhattan, ticket vendors at India's Taj Mahal and Brazilian business executives heading to China all have one thing in common these days: They don't want U.S. dollars.

Hit by a free fall with no end in sight, the once mighty U.S. dollar is no longer just crashing on currency markets and making life more expensive for American tourists and business people abroad; its clout is evaporating worldwide as foreign businesses and individuals turn to other currencies.

Experts say the bleak U.S. economic forecast means it will take years for the greenback to recover its value and prestige.

Negative dollar sentiment is growing in nations where the dollar was historically accepted as equal or better than local currency - and dollar aversion is even extending to some quarters in the United States.

You can read the rest here

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5j_7y40pioQ_W9XyKErK8YXaONWzQD8VCMTLO3

If you weren't concerned before, you should start paying attention to what this means.

Do you use Euros to buy your groceries?

LOL.......it's GOTTA be Bush's fault of course......in fact just this morning I was changing an electrical service on a house and broke a breaker....that damn Bush is effecting us everywhere we turn!!!! On my recent trip to Vegas we lost around $800.00, see how Bush makes us lose our money?? The nerve of that guy!!!

well...YEAH, but.....Robbie....

Tell Bush to help you guys find a WATERFALL-

lol

Of course I would expect a response like that from you Robbi. After all w/ you everything wrong is due to the liberals and everything that's right is because of the conservatives. After 12 years of Reaganoimics our economy was in bad shape and Clinton got us out.. But not in your eyes. It was the Republican party, not Clinton (who said he would turn the economy around and did)...

Well Bush has been running this country for almost 8 years now.. For over 4 of those years, both houses were run by the Republican majority.

This situation didn't start yesterday. This is from 7+ years of bad fiscal managment.

Even Greenspan (When he retired) politely commented that he didn't agree with what Bush was doing. I agree w/ the analysts that interpreted that comment to mean that Bush doesn't know what he's doing.

The state of our economy and the dollar falling like it has never done before is proof of that to me.

And everyday we spend 12 billion dollars in Iraq.

Spart, not everything you buy at the store is a consumable. Take a look at those products and see how many are manufactured abroad.

And everything you do buy is transported w/ gas. Farmers use a lot of gas to grow the food you eat.

Of course you're going to buy it with dollars. $2.50 - $3.00 today, but see what it costs you next month and each month there after.

When your currency isn't worth much, it takes more of it to purchase products with.

In the 20's in Germany, they needed billions of marks to buy food with, for that reason.

Try a little experiment Spart. Change a few hundred dollars or more into Euros this week and in a month see what the exchange rate is. You'll probably make more money dollar for dollar, on that investment than on a stock.

Did Hillary Clinton vote for or against the Iraq War?

I'll place some of the economics blame on our government (all of them politico's, lol) but I can't put a superman cape on Bush as being responsible for the whole thing. It took teamwork, lol.

To all you euro-people:

Please send your worthless U.S. Dollars/cash to 4313 Ludwick Blvd Columbia MO 65203 - Thanks in advance

What about giving thanks to the Democrats who funded the war too and voted all those bills up to the WH for signing?

How about Obama's votes for funding the war?

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2007/03/22/obama_defends_votes_in_favor_of_iraq_funding/

"Senator Barack Obama yesterday defended his votes on behalf of funding the Iraq war, asserting that he has always made clear that he supports funding for US troops despite his consistent opposition to the war."

I say GW is just supporting the troops too. Wheres the Difference. None of them are any good really.

Scorp, narrow your mind, discard all common sense, bias your opinion, and come to the conclusion that George Bush is single-handedly to blame.

Just kidding... but some people can really do it.

Raises hand... I'm one of those some people... Bush is soley to blame he's the Commander in Chief and regardless of congress has the authority to start and stop wars. That's one Bush that needs to be infected with some super STD so he can't reproduce anymore morons.

Respectable opinion, no doubt.... but was the war 100% responsible for the dollar's fall?

I think there were a lot of inter-mingling factors.

(No one's views are right or wrong, just different.)

Well in my opinion the war didn't help raise the value of the dollar... we have been done over there in Iraq for well over 2 years... in my opinion fuk those religous fanatics topple Saddam and get the fuk out! Or do like we did in the original 7 day war get in and get the hell out... staying and training their police force did nothing... absolutely nothing for our country but get a lot of good men and women killed and waste dollars sending more US victims for what purpose? The anomosity that was there in Iraq is still there and now it's even more profound world wide. If the general population as whole wanted us there in Iraq do you really think 2007 would have been our deadliest year since the war began? I understand some of the population may want our help but don't we have enough problems of our own to focus on before helping another to no avail? In my opinion, a countries growth, is much like that of an individuals growth... lessons will be learned through trial and error. You can't tell a person that doesn't want help its ok... do it this way... its for you own good and expect them to blindly listen. They are going to do what they think is right and learn from their mistakes, hopefully! Since countries are governed by people I'd have to say that is very relevant to how choices are made by governments, by people, that are fallible... and when they fail repetitively it's time for change! Oust Bush!

Oust Bush! Uh... then who takes charge (think about that a sec)?

Dick Cheny takes charge? Ouch! Stay in the frying pan bro', it is hot enough, don't jump out into the fire. We KNOW Cheny is a war-monger, Bush to a MUCH lesser degree.

The U.S. political system has a natural process of 'ousting' undesirables; Bush is gone after this year. But... when someone else is in office let's hope they initiate change, or, hell - people can just keep blaming Bush.

Anyhow, I've always said the Iraq War was a huge success up to the point where Saddam's sons were dead and Saddam was swinging from a rope with his head at a 90 degree angle. Mission accomplished. After that... anyone's guess as to the mission and what hasn't been accomplished.

The dollar's fall? I have a sneaky suspicion we all had something to do with it.

Outs bush was a figure of speech I am not for anarchy nor Cheney but on the other hand he couldnt really fuk things up too much more in the time alloted... we will still be there when the new administration takes over... I just hope beyond hope that someone follows through with the political rhetoric that they all push upon us to get our vote... highly doubtful after observing and voting in the last 6 presidential elections... they are all full of shit just some more than others... once again in my opinion.

So far as the dollars fall goes I will have to disagree on the "we" part you can take responsibility if you care to but I for one will not I spend the same way I alwys have with thought and consideration for what I'm buying and its inherent value to me. I spend no more and no less then I always have and myearnings remain the same... if I decide to sacrifice something for another purchase on "my budget" I will do that. I don't have control of a government exceeding its budget by spending on frivalous bullshit like the war in Iraq... once again like an individual the government in charge at any given time needs to sacrifice something for another thing they feel is right, but rather then do that they continue spending and diverting money from one thing to another but not staying withing the budget... If you don't have it to spend do without or find another way! Another note... Bush and his cronies are all about big business the war in Iraq profits those companies. He's full of shit and looking out for himself and his holdings not the American public at large... not that it is necessarily wrong to do so " look out for yourself" but as an elected official of the "degrading" strongest nation on earth he has a larger responsibility to do what is right for the country as a whole not just himself... and that's all I got to say on that for now. PS enjoyed the communication... but I'm bored with the politics... well see if ya can provoke another response LoL

Provoke? (Serious misunderstanding there.)

provoke wasn't meant to be inherently evil LoL it's just a word as in thought "provoking" see if you can make me want to even think about the plitics anymore Doh!

(Obviously I do not wish to do so.)

This is not about the war. Although the war factors into what is happening to our economy, not to mention what's not happening in Afghanistan.

This is about how this so called president has mismanaged our country into the proverbial toilet.

This oil man took over the presidency of our country and in less than 8 years, with the help of the Republican dominated Senate and Congress, took it from having a surplus in cash and a strong economy, to a country that now has a 9.2 TRILLION DOLLAR debt, gas prices that have quadrupled, a currency is fast becomes valueless and is now being replaced by the Euro as he international trade standard, taking the secure middle class of our society to one that is having trouble making ends meet as the economy teeters on the brink of recession or maybe worse.

When he came into office, Social Security was one of the hot button topics and to this date, there is no fix insight for Social Security. "Currently, there is more being payed into the Social Security Trust Fund than is being paid out to beneficiaries. What's left over is routinely being "borrowed" and used as if it were general budget revenue. Government agencies using that money promise to pay it back (IOUs)."

The acheivement of economic success and failure of a country does not happen overnight.

His father didn't create the economic problems that came to a head at the end of 1991 and beginning of 1992 and cost him re-election. That happened from 8 years of his predecessor stealing from one pot and putting it into another. His father's undoing came from doing nothing about it.

This Bush, had 6 years of unbridled partisanship support in both a Congress and a Senate dominated by a Republican majority in which to pursue his policies.

And what did he do? His administration pursued a course of isolationism and arrogance from the rest of the international community (a hubris that is often exhibited by a couple of the members of this web site that support him) and at home, refused to listen to people like Alan Greenspan and others.

Prices aren't going up gradually, they are jumping up. Gas rose over 30 cents in a week in some places.

There are people out there who are going to need to get their car fixed or an plummbing or electrical problem fixed and are not going to be able to afford that.

When his term finally ends, he will leave this country far worse (economically at home and strategically in the world) than when he arrived..

He cherry picked information and mislead America into a war it didn't need; saddling the U.S. tax payers with the bill at 12 billion dollars a day, while his V.P.'s "former" company Haliburton makes billions of dollars out of that money, he's been bad for the environment, bad for the economy, bad for international relations, his administration has done everything it could to subvert our civil rights (even John Ashcroft tried to stop him and eventually resigned). The hypocrisy of this administration goes to the point of trying to push our form of democracy upon the Mid East, while here at home, any sort of dissent voiced by a person of public prominence is either crushed via a public smear campaign, orchestrated by the neo con right wing that supports him or subverted politically (e.g. Valerie Plame) by those within his administration.

I can't see one good thing that he's done for this country and he will probably be long debated in history as to whether he was the worst president we have ever had.

He and the Republican party had the power to prove that their way was the right way for this country. Well the results are coming in and they aren't good.

And what do we get for an answer from his supporters, when this colossal failure is point out? Banal side stepping comments like this "in fact just this morning I was changing an electrical service on a house and broke a breaker....that damn Bush is effecting us everywhere we turn!!!!"

They can't face that the people and policies that they supported put us where we are today. But their sure quick to try and claim the success of others as their own ideas.

After 12 years of Reagan and a do nothing Bush we went into economic decline. After 8 years of this Bush, we are in an even worse economic decline, due to a Republican Senate and Congress. Economic decline following the last 3 Republican presidencies and their policies. That's not a coincidence.

Thank you George for proving yourself and the conservative right to be the idiots that we said you are. Unfortunately that revelation is at a price that America can't afford.

Cimm you pinko commie hippie anti-war brat!!!

(I think that was about the average Republican argument).

LMAO!

Bush is just a figurehead.

The other day when McCain was endorsed by Bush, John and George were on stage. John spoke to the audience and then George began his spiel. John looked stressed. You could see he was just waiting for the doomfas to shut up. McCain certainly doesn't need help like that.

As to the economy. Policy makesrs can claim it takes 4 years for their policies effects to be realized. This is an agreed upon consensus by many political analysts. Eight years out and there is no excuse.

I said this in another forum. Euros are as good as gold. I meant it. I give it 3 years to change. George in foreign policy and diplomacy is not good for the dollars image either. It's bad for business and that is what we are. George has made no friends. The world owes us no favors.

I agree TBT. From what I've seen, it takes about 4 to 6 years to effect a change in the economy, depending on the degree of decline. It took Clinton 6 years and Reagan about 4 years.

Right now, I'm looking at rolls of copper wire as gold for my contracting business.

The the wholesale price of #12 copper wire rose from $51.00 (a 500' roll) on Tuesday, to $65.40 today. I'm buying wire right now.. But look at gold! Two or three weeks ago it was a just over $700.00. a T.O.. This week it crossed the magic $1000.00.

I don't agree with you on Bush being a figure head. A figure head for who?

If you look at Robbi's post, you see that these people are in complete denial as to how wrong they are about many issues. They have what I view as permanent tunnel vision created by a fanatical idealism. You see that on both sides of the spectrum, but in Bush's case, they have a lot of money and their in power. They refuse to listen to those w/ experinece. Although, Reagan didn't completely ignore Paul Volker, but he did ignore his own budget director and anyone who was old enough at the time remembers' Reagan "taking him to the wood shed" for deriding Reagan's economic plan. Stockman eventually resigned.

But this bone head that we have for a president, doesn't understand or care about how an economy works both domestic or in relation to global economics.

And I don't believe that Obama or McCain has the grasp on economics that Hillary's husband has.

I thought that things were bad in 92 - 93, but I wasn't as worried as I am now.

Ahhh tonight, my typos are many and distinguished... but this one is easy "experinece" should read - experience.

rising fuel prices are the number one reason for the economy being what it is today. as a truck driver i can see this more clearly. when fuel prices rise, the retailers have to raise the prices to pay for the ever increasing shipping costs. it seems any time somthin happens in the oil industry like i pipe line breaks or a tanker gets stuck or some guy has ta take a sick day from a refinery they automaticly raise the price of oil. we all know thats a load of horse shit.until some one is put in office that will not back down from the oil cartells this will continue until the economy crashes and we are once again in a great depression.

It's true Rep. Everything we have got to us by way of something that needed oil or it's derivative.

And we buy our oil from abroad. But we are experiencing a simultaneous event now. It's not the dollar going down that is driving the price of oil up. The price of oil is going up, while at the same time, the dollar is going down.

What good is a country if the only thing that they have going for them is their military might? And how long will that last when thier economy tanks and their money becomes worthless?

Global economics is like a chess game. When you start losing, you pull in all of your pieces to protect your king. But we can't do that, because we have a president who doesn't understand economic strategy, because of it's nuances (remember he "doesn't do nuance" and at the same time, we have to keep putting ourself out there because of Iraq.

There is a limit as to how far into debt anything can go before it collapses.

Anybody have the feeling that what is happening to us is what happened to the Soviets? And as we spend ourselves into bankruptcy because of Iraq, the middle class will cease to exist. And all of this time, China is no longer waiting on the other side of the world. They are coming over the horizon as the new economic power in this world.

Cimm.....in all seriousness........Even my support of Bush is strained. The man has made many a blunder since being president. The war has cost him, however, I remember 9-11 and there was not a person in this country that didn't want to be avenged. Then everyone had the same information and wanted the war, not only Democrats and Republicans, but other countries as well. To even think Bush could've masterminded and fooled the world is ludicris. But, the war is not the sole economic woe we face in the future. The dollar is declining, did Bush play a part? As much as any president in office would have if they were there. Some things can't be stopped and this recession/depression can't be. It's the result of a balloned economy and a glutonous country. Over spending, over lending makes the dollar cheap. It's been going on for quite some time. I realize that lowering the interest rate etc. spurs spending and is good for the economy, I'm a fan of that thought process. However, lending to anyone and everyone cannot be good business. This issue is so complex that the statement "Thank you George Bush" is as ludicris as saying "he had nothing to do with it".

But, you got my point.........

****And I don't believe that Obama or McCain has the grasp on economics that Hillary's husband has.****

While I do agree with you Cimm that Bush mismanaged the Budget and also credit Clinton with paying down the debt you have to rememebr something.

When Clinton took office he enacted the largest income tax increase in US history and made it retro-active to the year before. Google it and see.

I'm no big fan of Bush's policies however, what is interesting is how short peoples memories are

Right after 9/11......do people remember weapons GRADE Anthrax being released into the public via NBC news? That case was never solved.

Within 9 months I think after 9/11 another jet liner fell from the skies in NYC with a tail section that came apart. For awhile everyone was in a panic again.

Bush had Clintons man Tennent in there gathering intelligence and what hapeened is this and nothing more.....a failure to perceive a real threat 9/11 turned into a failure to perceive a real good fake on Saddams part.

Under Clinton we bombed Iraq several times. We even started in on Al Qaeda in Afghanistan and backed off.

Now, if anyone has said what Sandy Berger took from the NSA files and burnt I'd like to know what was in it. PRes Clinton jokes about it saying anyone who knows Berger laughs about it....hahah....NOT FUNNY

So now, were on the cusp of new era. Looks to me as though Obama might get the nod. Do people think the big bad world is waiting to throw Obama and inaguration party ???? The Russians and the Chinese in particular , right after the Olympics are likely to push up on Obama to gauge where he is. Likewise with Iran.

Did anyone even bother to find out who Samantha Powers was? She was deadly!!! I heard her speak about a month ago and her ideas for US foreign policy were unusual at best.

I still say we have a mess coming at us and I do agree....Bush has made the road harder and not easier but guess what???

We voted him in there and he was at the helm doing the job he was asked to do. Same thing will happen next yr. At least its a given the next pres will have to be brighter than GW but no more well intentioned.

Personally speaking, I like to se us stop being the worlds police dept. Send out humanitarian aid sure, Respond with Naval Power to natural disators. Our fleet is the best in the world at providing fresh water to places that need it like right now!!!

...even interdict genocide but leave the rest of the world to their own devices. That is what they want anyway.

Bush definitely came into office at the wrong time, lol. Not much has gone right.

If someone is looking to 'vent' Bush can certainly serve as a good target.

But... whether Bush single-handedly orchestrated all of the problems or not - we remain exactly where we are. Venting may be good for the soul but it (and blame) solve very few (0) problems.

"Okay, Bush did it all... now what?"

"I thought that things were bad in 92 - 93, but I wasn't as worried as I am now."

I am with you there.

As for Bush as a figurehead. He is clueless. That is painfully obvious. That means others are making decisions concerning policy. He certainly can't make informed decisions. He's not informed or not interested. It's embarrassing to watch him on tv.

He has to be the most uninformed, clueless president we have ever had in office.

Thats why I said he is a figurehead. I feel that he is a tool for profit.

"Okay, Bush did it all... now what?"

Bush has no clue. Can't blame the clueless. I respect him in that he stands up for what he believes in, but he is a tool.

Clinton and George senior were no ones tools.

"Over spending, over lending makes the dollar cheap. It's been going on for quite some time. I realize that lowering the interest rate etc. spurs spending and is good for the economy, I'm a fan of that thought process. However, lending to anyone and everyone cannot be good business."

I don't know about anyone else but in my mind it's time for credit cards to go.

Now there's some forward thinking ^.

While your everyday citizen looking for a reason to bitch says 'blame Bush' (as though that helps anything at all), we've got some people who think to themselves, "Hmmm... Bush didn't tell so many people to max out their credit cards.... Bush didn't tell so many people to re-mortgage their houses.... Bush didn't tell people to overspend..."

Good post.

my propblem with Clinton was what he did to the timber industry and the farmer and ranchers in this country. well him and NAFTA

What Bush allowed Cheney to do with his Atty David Addington is frightful. The 'signings statements' Bush was permitted to add to Bills from Congresss essentially allowed Bush to disobey whichever laws he thought were unconstituional.

When Mc Cain had the "no torture" added to a Bill Bush put a signing statement to it which in effect nullified the bill.

Cheney consolidated power to the extent that the White House became overseer of the Constituion. What is the Supreme Court for? If the G-d Dam constituion doesnt guide this country we are in big trouble.

Theres an old latin law saying that when the facts dont support the Kings view, the facts must be changed because the King cannot be wrong. Throw out the federalist papers.....long live the King!!!

One blogger I like wrote....."9/11 changed everything, and made Cheney King.

The only law in this country for the past six years is, and hs been, Quod rex vult, lex fit.

And George ain't the rex...."

Google "Cheneys Law" and frontline episode and ask yourself, why is it the Republicans feel the constitution is so lacking that they should consolidate power in the White House and then have the gall to say the VP office is not part of the executive branch????

Oh Reallly????Duh!!! if the VP isnt a heartbeat away then who is?

This is the downright stupidity the Oval Office has had us chasing our tails with regards to ethics and politics.

They frown on anyone questioning them and doubt ones patriotism. That is sheer BS!!!

This isnt the blame game, its examine the facts of exactly what is behind the arogance of the Office and why they think they can railroad every dumb thing they want to do , down our throats and up our a$$'s

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/cheney/

Join the discusion

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/cheney/talk/

All credit cards are is a useless money middle man.

Doesn't make my life any easier. And it costs both the customer and the vendor.

Basically all credit cards do is devalue my dollar by 6-7% for someone else's profit.

They have the entire nation on float. We have banks and cash. Tried and true.

Keep it simple stupid goes a long way.

Yeah, I voted for Peroh. SP? That man would have had this country running strong.

Nafta was when we dropped the soap in the rain forest.

What's the point of this thread tck? I think that you can find that answer in the thread titled "So Whats the Point of This Verbal Exercise?".

Robbi, Iraq was not about 911. Bush stated that numerous times. What 911 was for Iraq was an excuse to invade them. And 911 made it easier for those powers that be to sell the American people on it.

There were weapons inspectors on the ground there and they were doing their job and told to get out by us... in order to pursue a plan that was put in place in the Pentagon two weeks after Bush took office. There was nothing that was going to stop the Bush Administration from invading Iraq. They let the U.N. inspectors in as a formality, without ever having a serious intent of considering their findings or letting them complete their mission.

Considering how informed you have told us you are about policy, I find it difficult to believe that you are or were not aware of that.

But while all of that is water under the bridge, what matters is that 3 Republican presidents left our economy in bad shape after they left office ( I realize that Bush hasn't left yet, but everyone gets my point). And That is something worth looking at. That is not water on the bridge, but an insight into what the politics of what the Replican party has done to America the last 3 or 4 times they have had presidential power.

The person who introduced the TRILLION DOLLAR DEBT to America was Ronald Reagan.

The person who whittled it down was Bill Clinton! And the moment the people forwarding his ideas are gone, we go up to a 9.2 Trillion dollar debt.

What has the Republican party done for America??

They support "big business" though tax breaks, land reform, environmental protection repeal and suppression of the minimum wage, in their efforts to become wealthier and more powerful.

The last good president from the Republican party was Eisenhower.

It's interesting to note that since Eisnehower, within 6 to 8 years of any president from the Republican party holding office, we've had an economic downturn.

That would be Nixon/Ford, Reagan, Bush and Bush.

I'm having trouble finding that to be a coincidence.

Tck said that this idiot that we have for a president came into office at the wrong time.. Lets see, the economy was strong. We had good relations with all of Europe,Russia and China. We weren't involved in a useless war.. So what was bad about the timing?

Sounds like more of the typical Republican response of pointing the finger (only this time at what??? the universe's timing?) and not accepting responsibility for an ideology based upon hubris instead of reality.

Unlike any other party, the Republican party had their shot to prove us all wrong (as they were telling anyone who disagreed with them) by having complete dominance of the executive branches of our government.

Bush came into office w/ promises of leading us to a better future. Will that future is here and for some reason it overlooked the average person and small business. But it certainly didn't overlook the rich and the large corporations, did it?

Companies like Haliburton and Exxon are enjoying making record profits off of an American populace that has at best a stagnant financial future to look forward to if not, a more likely a future that is desperate.

You wanted the Republican party to run this country? Bush was the crowning jewel of the Repbulican design. Well then don't complain if your lot is no better or worse than it was before you voted for them. And take a good look at the Richard Perles and Cheney's and the Robbi's and tck's who with their flippant attitudes can only come up with denials of shortsightedness and vague excuses as to why their ideals that they imposed upon America did'nt work out.

And as far as the HunterReps in this world are concerned, who needs forests to hunt in when you have rich friends who own huge ranches for the same purpose.

And as I remember it, Clinton went up against the huge logging interests. Companies who take our raw wood, from old growth forests and sell it to the Japanese, who take it and mill it on large ships out at sea. From there, what they don't use, the return to shore resell to the U.S..

The Democratic Party of Clinton was effective in so far as it taxed us up front and then performed WELL with what they took. BUT.....BUT

Clinton couldn't control his frigging hormones, acting like a high school virgin who had to get a Blow Job. NO ONE can tell me they are in control(when having an affair) and having the countries best interest at heart with a Terrorist cell DECLARING WAR on the US and then backing it up by bombing our Embassies and Navy.

So Cimm, you can discount all that good talking BS about Clinton as far as I'm concerned. If you are involved with a woman go try a little experiment....Find some young thing who wants to polish your nob and try to keep your life together as you hide it from just your sig other.

Then extrapolate that to keeping the nation safe and see what happens.

Bill Clinton gets way too much credit for Kosovo when IN FACT it was Tony Blair's initiative to put NATO Troops in there. Clinton wanted to just keep bombing and the Russians were getting uneasy about that.

Clinton showed weakness when dealing with Al Qaeda and he paved the way for 9/11. Well in fact, it isn't Clintons fault what Binladin did but in fact CLinton's NSA had Alqaeda in site. Too afraid to bomb him because of collateral damage of killing a Prince. Screw a Prince!!! LAy down with dogs and you get bombed as far as I am concerned.

So Bush takes office at the precise wrong time. An incompetant who is going to rely on Cheney and Rumsfeld. Who in their right mind would ask a man of 80 something to prosecute a war in the 21st century.

It was TONY BLAIR who showed up in DC after 9/11 and was in attentance when Congress held special session.

Seems like you like to erase history where its convenient.

Thank you GW and Bill Clinton would be a better title for a forum on America. Both paries acted and their problems became synergistic and led to events that brought us to 9/11.

Clinton had no foresight. He didnt even show up in NYC when the WTC was bombed the first time. He gave it to the FBI.

Clinton had his chance to get Binladin in 96 and admitted as much.

From

http://www.papillonsartpalace.com/clintASSon.htm

"NewsMax.com

Sunday, Aug. 11, 2002 12:05 a.m. EDT

Mansour Ijaz, the Pakistani-American businessman who says he was rebuffed by the Clinton White House after negotiating a deal for the extradition of Osama bin Laden to the U.S. in 1996, has gained an important new witness who backs his story - none other than ex-President Clinton himself.

Former Clinton administration officials such as senior National Security Council aide Nancy Soderberg have described Ijaz as an unreliable witness. Former Clinton spokeswoman Jennifer Palmieri recently slammed him as "a liar" and "a crackpot."

But a tape recording obtained exclusively by NewsMax.com shows Clinton himself confirming all the key points of Ijaz's story.

In never-before-reported comments to a New York business group last February, the ex-president never mentioned Ijaz by name. But the events he related paralleled the freelance diplomat's story exactly.

"Mr. bin Laden used to live in Sudan," Clinton explained to a Feb. 15 Long Island Association luncheon.

"He was expelled from Saudi Arabia in 1991, then he went to Sudan. And we'd been hearing that the Sudanese wanted America to start meeting with them again.

"They released him," the ex-president confirmed.

"At the time, 1996, he had committed no crime against America so I did not bring him here because we had no basis on which to hold him, though we knew he wanted to commit crimes against America. <---THOUGH HE KNEW !!!???

"So I pleaded with the Saudis to take him, 'cause they could have," Clinton explained. "But they thought it was a hot potato and they didn't and that's how he wound up in Afghanistan."

There's more to read or google it for yourself. Clinton was too obessesed with his global friends and NAFTA. Both the Clintons and the Bush's had vast investments in the middle east. That should not be allowed.

Sponge Bob Square Pants for President ....!!!! could do no worse then either of them.

In addtion.....these candidates can say what they want NOW....

But after the lection reality will set in.

No matter who replaces Bush, the next president will find options in Iraq limited.

A good Op Ed Piece:

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/opinion/355058_iraqonline16.html

"You can say anything you want during the campaign right now," said former Pentagon official Anthony Cordesman, a defense analyst with the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a Washington think tank. "The real world here doesn't have all that much to do with political campaigns or anniversaries. It has to do with the facts on the ground when the president takes office......"

"....."If we are to have a reasonable debate about this we have to talk about long-term consequences," Cordesman said. "At this point in time the American people tend to really be confronted not by real options but by a very artificial debate with artificial timelines, which, in many ways, is devoid of the real world consequences of making those policy choices."

Once everyone figures out who is at fault (which is impossible) ask yourself how much further ahead we are as a result of knowing.

It is all the 100% fault of President Bush & 'the republicans'. Okay... now what?

***"It is all the 100% fault of President Bush & 'the republicans'. Okay... now what?"***

I thought you were an Agent, Doink? You figure it out, and then fill us in.

Personally, I have always voted republican...my entire life. I was taught early by my father that that was the way to go, and it's just always the mindset I had. I joined the Marines right after high school and had the "gungiest" attitude of anyone in my platoon....anyone even talked about the President being wrong about ANYthing got my dander up, I just didn't want to hear it. I equated it with patriotism, but one thing I've learned, finally after a lifetime of hardship, is that patriotism doesn't mean turning a blind eye and following everything just because you're told to, and believing everything you're told just because someone with authority tells it to you. You kind of have to do that when you're in the military, but when you're back to being a civilian it's no longer the case. I confess, I voted for Bush....BOTH times. But I've also watched over the years as the rich have gotten richer, and the poor have gotten poorer, and the gap between them only increases, year after year. People with the mindset of "it's everyone for themself" are usually the ones with the comfortable existence, and those people are always going to be averse to change because they don't NEED change. I still love my country, I'd still fight to defend it, and I still think it's WORTH defending...I just no longer believe in the path we've chosen, the direction we're headed, and the leadership we've chosen to get us there. I still think we needed to do something about Iraq...you'll never convince me that it's not time to come home.

I agree.

It is a foregone conclusion in my mind that no republican has even a remote chance of being elected president this time around. That's probably why no well known frontrunner republican is running.

Let's hope that when the leading democrat becomes president they WILL figure out a way to pull out of Iraq, they WILL find a way to turn the economy around, and they WILL NOT (please, please, please), NOT waste time placing blame on the past administration.

Blame places focus on the past. Blame hides attention from the actual problem.

Focusing on blame removes focus from moving on.

I agree with you Capt'n. Its time to defend America by taking care of Americans here at home not extending our military all over the world. However, withdrawal from Iraq has its consequences too.

I couldn't agree more with the idea that being a Republican has had its influences on what is patriotic and what isn't. Why is it they cant stand some questioning ?

There's absolutely nothing wrong in being a realist. Take the facts and use them to move the country forward. Do it without worrying about political fallout.

This forum is titled 'TY GW' So I'm sure we'll hear more of that tone but the reality is what has govt done for us lately.

I also think like TCK that the next president will be a Democrat. The numbers coming out to vote is staggering compared to the reps. Clinton's strong point is that she IS CAPABLE and I happen to agree with her on health care in so far as if you don't target everyone for insurance you will fall short.

Obama seems to transcend the burdens of being an insider but come on.....do people really believe his soul is so pure....that all this rhetoric from his church was not evident beforehand?

Sam Powers and Brzezinski on foreign policy is a formula for stepping away from Israel. The Israeli problem will continue to plague American Middle East woes. The fanatics in Iran and Lebanon are committed to the destruction of Israel.

I'm curious as to how CIMM feels about our Mideast policy with regards to Israel. Does anyone think that withdrawal from Iraq will solve all our problems over there?

Captain, the parties that we have today, both Republican and Democrat are not the same as they were in our parents day.

And in my opinion, both are shortsighted about the long term effects of some, if not all of their policies.

After Nixon, the Republicans appear to represent only the rich (while dangling the promise of more wealth to the lower classes in our country).

President Eisenhower, in his farewell adress to the country, warned the American people of the Military Industrial Complex that was beginning to take shape as a result of World War 2. That complex of which Cheney's "former" company, Haliburton and Blackwater contractors are a part of, is making billions and billions of dollars off of Iraq.

There were a number of reasons why Presidend Eisenhower specifically gave that warning in his farewell address.

But they are just a part of what is going on.

Perhaps you read or heard about The Carlyle Group taking a 16 billion dollar dive yesterday? The first of the financial mortage lenders to do so.

By Jessica Hall

PHILADELPHIA (Reuters) - "U.S. private equity firm Carlyle Group should emerge relatively unscathed by the cratering of affiliate Carlyle Capital Corp (CARC.AS: Quote, Profile, Research) (CCC), which invested in mortgage-backed securities and defaulted on about $16.6 billion of debt, analysts said on Thursday."

My understanding is that they are getting a bailout from the federal government. But I have only heard that, I haven't read it.

May I offer you this link to see who is on the board of The Carlyle Group:

http://www.hereinreality.com/carlyle.html

"I've also watched over the years as the rich have gotten richer, and the poor have gotten poorer, and the gap between them only increases, year after year. People with the mindset of "it's everyone for themself" are usually the ones with the comfortable existence, and those people are always going to be averse to change because they don't NEED change."

Thank you Captain for the honest testimony. Patriotism is also defending one's fellow citizens against economical injustice. Maybe the way to patriotism today is to try to build a nation where kids have equal rights to higher education, housing, and health; not only the equal right to die overseas (a right which richer folks' kids don't use anyway).

"Maybe the way to patriotism today is to try to build a nation where kids have equal rights to higher education, housing, and health; not only the equal right to die overseas (a right which richer folks' kids don't use anyway)."

Well said!

"I've also watched over the years as the rich have gotten richer, and the poor have gotten poorer, and the gap between them only increases, year after year."

Yes, That will never change. However, Here in the U.S. as in several other countries one has the opportunity to become rich. Not everyone can be though. Just the nature of reality.

The issue is the opportunities given to people with money give them more advantage which they need the least. The more money you have, the more people that want to give you perks and kiss your ass. Thats just the way people are.

...maybe the fact that unequal distribution of wealth in the US is stronger than that of Antic Rome is proof that we learned nothing from history...

STILL, one might consider other countries like Sweden or Norway where unequality is less spectacular, average wealth is higher, and luxury stuff like universal health insurance, going to college, or living in a house are RIGHTS.

I think that MW is absolutely right.

I think that the Scandinavian model is a good point too. I've been to Noway and Sweden many times and no one is poor. For an American, they are both easy countries to travel in, because most everyone speaks English. And that's because everyone has a good education.

Let's hope the next administration moves ahead toward these changes.

***Thank you Captain for the honest testimony. Patriotism is also defending one's fellow citizens against economical injustice. Maybe the way to patriotism today is to try to build a nation where kids have equal rights to higher education, housing, and health; not only the equal right to die overseas (a right which richer folks' kids don't use anyway).***

Yes Mike I agree and what about our fellows being slaughtered over in Sudan and our good "Friends" the French and all your promises to help but rhetoric isn't action Mike. Your Govt talks a lot and does little really.

***...maybe the fact that unequal distribution of wealth in the US is stronger than that of Antic Rome is proof that we learned nothing from history...***

I couldn't agree more and there are a number of books on the subject about the fall of Western Democracy. My Greek ancestors exported Democracy and failed. How is it we think we are so superior.

Your observations on Sweden and Norway have been observed by myself for some time however, Those countries haven't had the influx of so many different cultures. We have a huge strain on our economy with satisfying every one's special interest here. We cant concentrate I don't think.

Norway, isn't as pure as you all make it sound. They still haven't dealt with the Nazi Lebensborn issues yet. Only in the past few yrs have they even admitted it was a problem. How they abused those kids after WW2 is shameful, really.

Mike White...BTW I keep watching the BBC series on the Tudors. I cant help but be fascinated by European societies of the time.

I'm still dissecting how those Crowns of France and England were so closely tied.

Both Countries(Norway and Sweden) have been on my list to travel. My passport should be ready very shortly now. I tried last yr to get to Greece and find some family. Im definitely going this yr. I should have my new passport in about one month.

Theres more to life then accumulating money Taders. I love my Grand kids to death.....I had a long conversation with my eldest today...it was so cool because shes opened up to me as a friend talking about things shes afraid to say to her Mom.(MY Daughter) Mostly because I'm a big goof myself , she said its easier for her to talk to me. Put a price on that, if you can. I can not.

One thing about America I see as a real shortcoming and its how we get our news. I find that the BBC is so much more informative on world subjects and it gives me the view of the US from abroad. Far too many Americans are watching eithe left wing NBC or Faux News and dont get the real deal like the BBC provides.

BBC America rock!!!!

Whatever the next admin does, it's got be better than what the present one has done.

Time will tell, Cimm. Let's hope so. We both know that isn't true though.

That's my opinion tck.

Honestly, you don't see how things could get worse than they are now?

I respect your opinion, but do you really believe that, really?

(I sent you a message.)

No, on the contrary tck, I think that this is nothing compared to how it's going to get.

This is just the beginning. If people think it's bad now, just wait until this time next year. And that is nothing like I think it's going to be two years from now.

I don't think that any new president can fix this.

I wrote a post on this, in reply to your comment about "how much farther ahead are we by knowing".

But I don't think that what I write in here matters... And others, such as the Captain and MW (esp) have said things better than I could.

I still stand by my belief that while going into Iraq is a mistake, pulling out now is just as bad.

Obama's contention that we inflame the Muslim world by being there is moot point now. Pulling out isn't going to change that. I believe that if we leave:

#1. Iraq will supplant Afghanistan as a training ground for global terrorism

#2. It will lead to a civil war, with the Iranians making a push to bring Iraq under their control and the Saudi's banking the Sunni's to stop them and embracing the jihadists as an ally in that endeavor.

It wasn't until after the Taliban started to send their people to Iraq to learn and gain experience, that we started seeing the use of IED's and suicide bombings in Afghanistan.

What happens next in/with Iraq will most likely be in the hands of the next Commander-in-Chief. While I can't envision either Hillary or Obama serving as head of the military, one of them will most likely fill the position. The only saving grace is that I have NO control over what they do in that position.

I believe each of us, individually, has a lot of control over how we work & act to better our own situations AND the overall situation of the country though. Work ethic, morality, a sense of societical belonging, have all diminished over the past decade or so (in my view).

Many feel their jobs are a right, and that jobs exist solely to support the employee lifestyle. My own view is that jobs exist to support a company first, then the company can support the employee's lifestyle, supporting that lifestyle at a level that changes and flucuates with the current economic times. Without the overall support of the company by the employees, the company cannot in turn support the employees.

I am still a firm believer that we can each provide valuable input toward the economic health of the nation overall. I really feel that if people started going to work, to do work, working to the best of their ability, things would turn around QUICK.

I don't have much use for blame, I just try to see actions that can get us back on track, and then back on an upswing in the world leadership cycle.

(And it doesn't matter what we say & feel here, what will happen will happen regardless of our thoughts and views.)

"Without the overall support of the company by the employees, the company cannot in turn support the employees."

The door swings both ways. A company run by idiots or thieves is not worth working for. Idiot employees should be fired.

"I don't have much use for blame, I just try to see actions that can get us back on track, and then back on an upswing in the world leadership cycle."

The first step is to make it illegal for companies to close down operations in this country to move overseas. They may build new facilities. New companies must employ people here and enhance this country first. Companies should be mandated to produce enough product here to balance the trade deficit. Just like taxes. You owe this to your country first to be allowed to run a business here as a citizen. It is a privilege to profit and run a business from the safety of this country.

Then again, with the euro climbing as it is perhaps it will be a just matter of time before the rest of the world moves here to get cheap labor.

Rest assured they will not allow their own companies to shut down operations in their native lands. They are not that stupid.

***"Maybe the way to patriotism today is to try to build a nation where kids have equal rights to higher education, housing, and health; not only the equal right to die overseas (a right which richer folks' kids don't use anyway)."***

See, this hits home for me, and I'm going to try and equate it to the business world as well, though I'll probably fail miserably. You won't, for the most part, find the people who make the laws in this nation sending their own kids overseas to protect the country's interests. There are always exceptions, but I'm betting most of them are kids who take it upon themselves to do what they think is right in SPITE of what their parents think. So basically, you have young people signing up to defend their country, and lawmakers sitting in office deciding when and where they will use them for said purpose, while they are sending their own kids to preparatory colleges and ivy league universities, to further their education and continue the corporate climb their parents started with the contacts and support their parents garnered over the course of their lifetime.

On the other side, you have companies looking abroad to maintain productivity at a lower cost, while the companies that do remain here cut employees wages and benefits in an effort to keep up with the other companies. More and more demands are put on employees, concessions, extra job responsibilities, hiring more workers at a part time status to match the lower number of employees at fulltime status, and then reaping the rewards of not having to pay those employees the benefits that would have been due full time employees. More and more people have to get two or three jobs to keep up, and on top of that have to shell out their own money for benefits. The crux of the dilemma is blamed on the employees who become dissatsfied with their own positio, and more and more ramifications occur in the form of cutbacks, outsourcing, and restructuring of job titles, etc.

Harry Truman was fond of saying "the buck stops here." It was good enough for Harry, why is it no longer good enough for leadership today to take on that kind of accountability? The way we do business has changed because the way we THINK has changed, and that is what needs to be addressed first I believe. Sticking with the staus quo way of doing business is never going to change anything.

I agree Taders, there are definitely some companies not worth working for.

And it would be good if companies received a bonus for hiring employees, not a penalty.

Good post.

BTW Cimm....you completely disagreed with me recently on a domino effect....Do you also disagree with King Abdullahs observation that de-stabilizing Iraq and running will have set up the domino effect to see a wave of Shiite Cresent spread across the Middle East from Iran, Iraq, Lebanon into Palestine?

Robin Wright writes in her new Book titled "Dreams and Shadows" that King Abdullah spoke the word domino effect with regards to the Middle East policitcs and prices at the pump.

I should say this....Democaracy is about DIFFERENCES. We here in the US know this and accept it but in the Middle East they dont know diferences. They kill over differing opinions. This is where Bush was very short-sited.

Overthrowing Saddam was the easy part. Bob Baer wrote in his book that while he was CIA and stationed in Iraq, he came across a group who wanted to assininate Saddam. They asked for secure radioes and when the White Hosue got wind of it , they panicked. They called Baer a rogure loose cannon and called him home.

Hey Scorp, regarding Baer, he once told a reporter that if you want someone to be tortured, you send them to Syria, but if you want them to disappear forever, you send them to Egypt. What he should have added was that if you want someone to lose their job, send them to the U.S.

We (the USA) have to somehow un-attach ourselves from the 'world economy' situation and restore some level of sanity to the labor market.

The only jobs that appear to be secure right now are federal, state, county, and local government jobs. In order for those people to get their salaries, and retire with full medical benefits and a guaranteed pension with continual increases, for the rest of their lives, to the grave, no matter the cost, we the taxpayers have to foot the bill.

What happens when we can't foot the bill any longer? The time may come sooner than later.

"The only jobs that appear to be secure right now are federal, state, county, and local government jobs."

Ain't that a fact.

"What happens when we can't foot the bill any longer? The time may come sooner than later."

We will bleed profusely before that takes place. But then we would finally see results.

Poverty is an incentive.

"Poverty is an incentive."

Survival is an incentive.

"And it would be good if companies received a bonus for hiring employees, not a penalty."

There should be incentive to create jobs. But it has to be balanced by regs that prevent corporate take overs that dismantle companies or move jobs over seas and do the economy harm. there needs to be some real compromise in work related perks though. I have never collected unemployment. That is a cost that could be eliminated. Pay workers slightly more and no unemployment. There have to be other aspects like these where compromise could be made to bring worker expense to companies down.

I still say we as a nation could invest the nations money in stocks and bonds and manage it like a trust. From there we could fund national health care among other things. This should have been done with social security. Instead we pissed that away.

this country is in a recession, people are losing their jobs, ceo's are leaving with big bucks in their pockets and stocks, while middle america is getting the royal shaft. bernake is a asswipe, he and the feds knew what was coming down, but did nothing early on to stop this. what i find so appalling is that we give money, but we dont take care of our own. the richest country, but their is not healthcare for one and all. what about taking care of our senior citizens who worked long hard hours, cant even afford to live off their social security and pensions. but what i find interesting is that foreigners come over here they get medical care, money for housing, business loans, something is so wrong with this picture. its time to close the doors on letting everyone into this country, throw out the illegals, and get back to taking care of we the American People!!!

Amen.

Catp'n : "Hey Scorp, regarding Baer, he once told a reporter"

It's good to know someone else is up on Bob Baer....you have listened to Bernsten also. The man who had Binladin trapped in Tora Bora?

Between Baer and Bernsten we might have avoided musch of this BS really. IMO.

When the US went into Afghanistan, the first casualty of the war on terrroBesides those innocent victims was a man who was CIA. We sent TWO ment to meet with the Northern alliance. When they got The Taliban/Alqaeda to surrnder they never did a secure shake down for weapons in allthose rope they wear. So as the transpored them to a compound and separated a selected few to turn over to the Americans , they became fursios.

They hand hand grenades and the like. The essentially took over the compound and the Two CIA guys had a shoot out. This is alll documented by a German journalist who was there.

So, my point is this, how is it that the Worlds most power country sends in TWO CIA agents ? Does anyone else think this is just plain foolish? We didnt know that they would not shake dowen prisoners the way we do. They didnt do an efffective body search. It unthinkable to tkae rpisoners of that number and not searh them.

This was another US policy. Then we oursurced the escape route from Tora Bora to some other Afhghan rebel. zeezus krist, hoe incompetant can one be? Any one of us would probably say no to this kind of assault. The CIA guys ran out of ammo too. and one was killed. Streamlining to this low level just doesnt make sense....really, does it?

You may recall me ranting for months about how we should have nuked tora bora to get binladin. Bernstan said we had his radioes and listened in on him. He called for more boots on the ground and was denied but he did get a bombing run of the largest bomb in our arnsenal next to a nuke. a 15 000 war head. So power that even at 200 yardsa awy it would rip your sleen apart if you were laying on the ground for the concusion alone.

Why, we didnt go to the international community and force them to help bomb this area....We could have stack up british, French and Russian air planes and just annialated the valley. Sending a clear message to all that we are untied in this effort. We could have told them either you help or we go nuclear in the valley.....its not like it was a populated area and sure there wouldhave been some collateral damage but any more then we have now?

Manny:"our senior citizens who worked long hard hours, cant even afford to live off their social security and pensions"

Thnk you many for posting that. At least some in the healthcare system is shwoing some sense instead of being cold hearted.....Hey....I probably will message you about some thing medical concerning my mom to see if you know anything bout it...

have a nice wek, its gorgeous here.....Im working out a bit and even sitting here with no shirt on...I love too.

((((Dona))))

Seconds the Amen.

"what i find so appalling is that we give money, but we dont take care of our own. the richest country, but their is not healthcare for one and all. what about taking care of our senior citizens who worked long hard hours, cant even afford to live off their social security and pensions. but what i find interesting is that foreigners come over here they get medical care, money for housing, business loans, something is so wrong with this picture. its time to close the doors on letting everyone into this country, throw out the illegals, and get back to taking care of we the American People!!!"

I was going to post in here, until I read this by Babe.

'nuff said.

surely Bush has not got anything to do with Robbie breaking a breaker or losing 800 dollars in Las Vegas.

however, it is mainly his fault that right now the high amount of Americans who visit Europe are absolutely fuming and frustated because of the exchange rate (1 euro-1.52 dollars).

and they are even more fuming when visiting England or any British place as the exchange rate is even worse, remember that Britain still has the Sterling Pound (let us hope that the Brits embrace the Euro soon, for they are within and belong to what it is now called The European Union).

i would only thank Bush the fact that now everyone knows that even a drunk man can be the president of the US, lol even if it is terrible to think of someone with a bottle of whisky in his right hand, and the 'key' of nuclear weapons in his left hand.

Something wrong with whiskey drinkers?

there is nothing wrong with whisky drinkers as you say TCK, just like there is nothing wrong with red wine drinkers whilst enjoying a good meal.

however, there is of course something wrong with someone being pissed and having the bottle in his right hand, and the 'power' of nuclear weapons in his left hand (do not forget the former Russian president Boris Yeltsin and his beloved vodka)

You suggest that President Bush could get drunk and launch nuclear missiles?

(Pedro, friend to friend, you're not stupid enough to think that.)

Fact.. the falling dollar is making American products more attractive outside of the country. Ergo, more jobs for Americans. It aint all as bad some would like it to appear.

"Fact.. the falling dollar is making American products more attractive outside of the country. Ergo, more jobs for Americans. It aint all as bad some would like it to appear."

What American products? We don't manufacture things here anymore. That is why there is a deficit.

We are a full service economy now. We facilitate the manufacture of things overseas.

Hooray! soon we will be the third world country of the economic world!

I predict a future wave of Americans running south of the boarder to find jobs. flocking to China, the land of opportunity?

we're not allowed to flock south of the border or towards china - they have some pretty strict immigration laws

It goes in a cycle.

There will be a shift of jobs back to the U.S.A. in manufacturing when the work force is available to accept less pay. Then manufacturing will begin to rise again because of the low dollar making our manufactured goods price attractive.

The manufacturing jobs went somewhere else because it was less expensive to have the goods made elsewhere, largely due to cheaper labor costs. This 'cycle' has already taken place in my geographic region - workers were making $18.00 per hour, they all got laid off, the plants all closed. The workers unemployment expired after about a year, the workers decided that jobs earning $12.00 per hour were better than no jobs at all, they went back to work for $12.00 per hour. The plants slowly started into production again.

American ingenuity is incredibly resilient.

We ALWAYS find a way to succeed. We will make it happen.

"We ALWAYS find a way to succeed. We will make it happen."

Yes, we will change our notions of success and learn to live with less.

We will make it happen

Soon we will be exchanging dollars for pesos and working on farms south of the border.

A job for food and shelter is better than no job at all.

We will make it happen. lol

On the flip side perhaps the Mexican/South American tourist dollar will bolster border state economies. Invest in service related stocks now.

Raises the American mop High to catch the breeze.

Fries with that senior?

Thank you for shopping at walmart.

lmao :P

A job for food and shelter is better than no job at all.

People in other countries think so. We aren't any better than the human beings in Mexico, China, India, and other countries. We weren't born with a birthright to wealth and materialism. There is nothing in the human rule book guaranteeing that our nation will not collapse. It is interesting to see the viewpoint of some Americans who feel they are 'deserving' of a comfortable lifestyle. Where do they get that idea?

Do any of us truly feel that poorer nations will willingly remain poor, just so that Americans can prosper?

If we don't want the jobs in America you can bet you last dollar that another country will. In fact, many are betting their last dollar.

what ever happened to "moon-lighting" to "make ends meet"

...as kids we thought our dad "moon-lighted" to make ends "meat" like "ends meat" was some kind of special treat (later, our mother "fessed" up that "ends meat" was only bologna, lol)

but then again, she also had us convinced that cottage cheese was a dessert food which we called "milk pudding" and that her famous "hobo-dinner" (one large can of cold pork'N'beans with 4 spoons) was NOT a big deal and she made it up.

ahhhhhhh ole'mom......... that reminds me - my brother and I need to call her and remind her WHO decides which nursing home she goes to!

TCK you made a good comment, but you failed to say that those who accept low salaries are mainly immigrants. if you are used to get 18 dollars per hour, surely you will not stoop so low accepting 12, will you? it will mainly be an immigrant who will accept it.

businessmen and rich owners don't give a shite whether it is you or an immigrant who gets the job, they only care about getting someone to do what is to be done, receiving the low salary.

not only in Spain but in the whole of Europe many factories, etc have 'disappeared' because we get high wages(according to the different European costs of living), so our bosses, businessmen, etc prefer China because of the low salary the Chinese get.

and if a factory finally does not move to China, its workers will not get paid less (maybe in the US, but not in here). here in Spain there is a law which states that salaries must be increased at the beginning of the year at least, the increase of the cost of living.

therefore, it would be illegal to lower a salary from 18 to 12 dollars, and no-one will accept it.

as for Bush, well no-one really knows what someone is to do when being pissed, lol

"TCK you made a good comment, but you failed to say that those who accept low salaries are mainly immigrants. if you are used to get 18 dollars per hour, surely you will not stoop so low accepting 12, will you? it will mainly be an immigrant who will accept it."

Immigrants and Americans who have been unemployed for a long period of time accept 'low salary' positions. Those $12.00 per hour jobs look real good after a year of no working (during which time many complain about how they 'deserve' so much more).

The U.S.A. was built on the efforts of immigrants. Immigrants are people, Americans are people. Humans with no differences other than a citizenship.

It may be time for many Americans to ask themselves what they 'deserve' versus what they need to 'earn' for themselves.

I really mean it when I ask, "Do Americans really think other countries will remain intentionally poor so that the USA can continue to prosper?"

(Not just no, but 'Hell No', the other countries are going to go after what we've got.)

(Not just no, but 'Hell No', the other countries are going to go after what we've got.)

Yes, and into that vacuum stepped people to take advantage. They gave away our jobs for profit. Facilitating and speeding the growth of other countries at their personal gain and our expense. We allow it to happen.

Something that bothered me about the Republican revolution of 1994, was all of the cuts in spending on social programs. Everything from PBS and Sesame Street, to Mid Night basketball at parks in lower income areas.

We were told by these officials that America didn't need to be burdened with this spending from the federal government aand that these programs would have to seek funding elsewhere. I thought it interesting, that people whose only way to afford to see cultural events, travel the world and learning through educational programs, was via public television and government funded programs that traveled the country, would have that denied to them, by a bunch of legislators who atttend $50,000.00 a plate fund raising dinners.

Well where did all of that saved money from those program cuts go to? And I mention this, because, as I previously posted, the results of the policies of that "revolution" along w/ this president has had the effect of weakening our middle and lower classes of our society, while the rich are having no problem paying for those $50,000.00 a plate dinners.

What were they serving for $50,000 a plate anyhow?

That's what I'd like to know.

I need to get into the restaurant business serving up some of that.

Taders... there seems to be this common theme of eveyone seeking 'profit'. The workers want 'profit', the unions want 'profit', the corporations want 'profit', the stockholders want 'profit', hell, even people on welfare want 'profit'.

Everyone is an evil profit monger.

(Do you want 'profit'?)

If it was food, I'm sure it wasn't worth 50 grand.

But 50k can buy someone some influence.

C'mon... Eliot Spitzer didn't even pay $50 grand for it.

Everyone is an evil profit monger.

(Do you want 'profit'?)

What do you mean by profit? A place to sleep and clothes on your back?

I never said every company is directed by evil profit mongers.

However, not one individual involved in moving operations over seas to the detriment of this country or taking over companies to liquidate them for improved profit is worth the sweat off my balls. They are no better than scum slackers at work who get the union to defend them every time they whine. Just people using people. Leaches of the world.

We each need to earn a profit in order to have clothes on our backs and a place to sleep.

I think I am just pointing out that profit making is a world conspiracy.

Believe me, there are some people in this world who would point the finger at you & me, saying our profits are too excessive. We can all look at those who we feel are 'excessive'.

Buying goods made in China (and overseas) is the same as moving those jobs overseas, in my eyes. And we all do it.

Nothing personal, just an observation.

the american economy will recover.

some people think that a strong Euro over a fragile Dollar is always better for us Europeans.............only at first sight or when travelling to the US i would say!

some weeks ago the head of EADS (the European company which manufactures military equipment) said that the company did not have benefits last year because they pay with Euros (their factories are in Europe with workers getting paid with Euros), whereas most equipment, above all the giant Airbus 380? are sold with dollars to foreign customers outside Europe).

right now the exact exchange rate is 1 Euro per 1.54 Dollars.

so how many euros is a beer in a bar in spain?

how many euros is a pack of cigarettes in spain?

how many euros is a liter of gas in spain?

as for the beer, it depends on whether it is in a pub, bar or restaurant, and what you are asking for. if you ask for 'un tercio' (a bottle) it is 2 or 3 euros. if asking for a 'cana' (just a simple glass)in a bar it is usually 1 euro.

as for the fags, it depends on whether it is Marlboro or any other name.

as for the gas, gas? you mean petrol, don't you? well it depends......

Well, when seeking profit, which we all do, I suppose what you have to know which "bottom line" you are talking about. Such as financial, or emotional, or social. Easiest way to sell an ethical decision to someone in business is to sell it in terms of the bottom line. It is possible to lose financially but gain socially. (Donation, perhaps?) Or lose financially and gain peace of mind. Investors call it "selling to the sleeping point". Dealing with uncertainty by foregoing profits. Etc. So when I make a difficult decision which is largely based on opinion, gut feel etc I like to stand back and myself what it costs me emotionally, for instance. Thinking like this can clarify the issue, even if there is no hard fact to go on.

On the other side, the car business has sth called the four square approach. This entails preserving the profit margin by hiding the (monetary)profit where the customer isn't looking. If you want a low deposit, I work the difference into the monthly payment. If you want a low monthly payment, I extend the term of the loan. You get the idea.

While not totally unethical, it certainly isn't "transparent" to the customer, and may well lead someone to buy something one can't afford.

As Robert A. Heinlein said: TANSTAAFL. (There ain't no such thing as a free lunch). So in any deal just ask yourself who is paying for your lunch, and how, and that should help to avoid getting suckered into obvious cons.

And cry, guys. I can buy a bottle for 0.75 Euro. But I only have Namibian Dollars. Damn. Well, I can still get drunk. Cheers.

"whereas most equipment, above all the giant Airbus 380? are sold with dollars to foreign customers outside Europe."

It is actually probably worse than that. The price was negotiated on the assumption that the Dollar would do "x" over so many years, at a time when depression was not assumed. Now the dollar has crashed, so a lot of the profit "evaporates" with the exchange rate.. But I am betting the customers are smiling.

"Robert A. Heinlein" Githy...another Heinlein fan? I am not big on sci-fi but my friend loves the guy's body of work. I too find him very impressive with a great imagination but its just not my interest.

I prefer Robert Ludlum.

"Administration rejects regulating greenhouse gases

By DINA CAPPIELLO (Associated Press Writer)

From Associated Press

July 11, 2008 8:10 PM EDT"

"WASHINGTON - The Bush administration, dismissing the recommendations of its top experts, rejected regulating the greenhouse gases blamed for global warming Friday, saying it would cripple the U.S. economy.

In a 588-page federal notice, the Environmental Protection Agency made no finding on whether global warming poses a threat to people's health or welfare, reversing an earlier conclusion at the insistence of the White House and officially kicking any decision on a solution to the next president and Congress.

The White House on Thursday rejected the EPA's suggestion three weeks earlier that the 1970 Clean Air Act can be both workable and effective for addressing global climate change. The EPA said Friday that law is "ill-suited" for dealing with global warming."

This administration is determined to go down in flames as the worst presidency that we have ever had in our country..

the senate makes the laws........... Bush could veto it, they could over-ride it

that's the way it works

President - executive branch

Congress - $$$$$$ (and finances/money/budget are their ONLY "true defined" responsibility)

Senate - laws

if each branch would actually WORK within their defined responsibilities, there'd be a lot less problems and a lot more solutions WORKING.

and as far as congress? your state has 53........ TX has 32, NY has 29, FL has 25

http://www.thegreenpapers.com/Census00/FedRep.phtml?sort=Hous

I'll get in touch with my 9 (MO) and have them call your 53 (CA)

they could do lunch and solve the whole thing

"they could do lunch and solve the whole thing"

That was VERY funny!!!

we have no senators in the state of oregon, we do however have crooked assholes acting as senators.

"This administration is determined to go down in flames as the worst presidency that we have ever had in our country.."

thats gonna be hard to beat carter or clinton

"Those who would trade our freedom for the soup kitchen of the welfare state have told us that they have a utopian solution of peace without victory. They call their policy accommodation. And they say if we only avoid any direct confrontation with the enemy, he will forget his evil ways and learn to love us. All who oppose them are indicted as warmongers. They say we offer simple answers to complex problems. Well, perhaps there is a simple answernot an easy one, but a simple oneif you and I have the courage to tell our elected officials that we want our national policy based upon what we know in our hearts is morally right... [E]very lesson in history tells us that the greater risk lies in appeasement, and this is the specter our well-meaning liberal friends refuse to face." Ronald Reagan

Robbi, what does have to do with the topic of this forum? NOTHING!

It doesn't even relate.. Unless you have a way to correlate the Iran Contra scandal with this criminal administration that we have in place right now.. You know the one's who manipulated intelligence to justify a way to invade Iraq. The ones who outed a CIA operative to get even for presenting the truth on their Nigerian Yellow cake claims. The ones who have isolated us from our allies in Europe. The ones who are trying to manipulate science to try and convince people that Global Warming doesn't exist. The ones who want to sell out our environment to big oil and the big mineral interests and let it go to ruin so that those billion dollar corporations can get even richer. You know the ones that pat the big oil companies on the back while they make billions off of the backs of the American people. The ones that have let the dollar sink into decline, making it worthless across the globe and life more expensive here at home. The ones who took away our surplus cash and have put America deeper into debt than your good ole Ronnie ever did (the first president to run up a 3 trillion dollar debt). The ones who have let our country go to hell and will wipe out the middle class if they stay in power, leaving only their rich friends to run this country off of the hard work of the rest of Americans. And the ones that I'm writing about would be George Bush, his administration and all of those politicians that are right wing neo cons.

And those are THE ONES THAT YOU STILL SUPPORT, Robbi!

Like I wrote, you fu.ckers had power for 12 years in the Senate and the Congress with 8 years of almost absolute power with a Republican president.. And you put America in the toilet!!!

Wake the fu.ck up!!!

"We now return you to your normal programming"

"All men make mistakes, but a good man yields when he knows his course is wrong and he repairs the evil. The only sin is pride"

- Sophicles

Didn't relate it to anything Cimm....just chose an old dead thread to post it instead of starting a new one and adding to the clutter in the threads. So with that in mind it's a stand alone post that applies to todays politics. The last sentence of the quote sums it up nicely. Obama is NOT the man we need in Washington. Whether the current or past Republican have screwed things up is not the question, the question you have to ask is can Obama handle the highest office in the land without turning us into a third world country. I think you need take a serious look around at what's available. Don't cast a vote just because you hate republicans, or hate conservatives, or like black people or like Democrats or lean liberal. Vote according to the best man for the job at hand and since National Security is tremendously important, we have got to take a good look of the availble experience.

BTW Cimm......the "you's" in this post are not personal "you's". Meaning the whole post isn't to or about you.......they are synomous with "we".

While Robbi and I differ completely on politics and we might go after each other over our views, I don't consider him to be garbage (like I do you), imstupid5.

I don't know that I'm voting for Obama. I didn't vote for him for the democratic nomination. Personally, I think that he knows all of the right things to say, but lacks the experience to understand how to get things done.

I liked Hillary, because she's strong on policy. But she's not the presumptive nominee.

I used to like McCain until he started back tracking on just about everything.. In that regard, I agree with everything that Arianna Huffington has to say about him..

But non of this matters... I don't think that there is a solution out there for complex issues that face this country.. We are beyond that... Like I said before, the state of our economy and the state of our country feels like skydive gone bad, we're heading towards the ground and just went below 350' agl with nothing out.. No matter what we do, it's too late now.. we're "going in". We can't fight the forces of gravity or nature.

Yes imsexydouchebag5, that food order was "to go" - can I have extra ketchup/catsup with that?

Robbi, I hate to tell you this, but we are well on our way to becoming just like the 3rd world countries. A place where the poor stay poor and the rich get richer as they run everything. And that is from the policies of those who care more about getting tax breaks for the rich than for the working class.

A country doesn't get run into the ground over night. In our case, it started with NAFTA and which opened the door for those who came to power in 2001.

Anyway, my original post to you still stands. Reagan's view have nothing to do with todays world. He is from another time that doesn't exist anymore.

Clinton Helped to make Nafta even worse, as far as his wife is concerned, i dont know if or who i am voting for yet, i am an independant, but if that wrinkled ass bitch had won the demo nomination, i would be voting for McCain

You Rock Rep!

My attitude was that if Obama won, I was going to vote for McCain, in spite of his shoot from the hip attitude... But McCain's flip flops have been very disappointing.

Actually NAFTA was not Clinton's baby. He just ushered it in and with bipartisan approval and fanfare. As we all know, the only "politician" to speak out against it, was a business man named Ross Perot...

And where is Ross now?? I often wonder why he's been so quiet all of these years...

Already they are starting to turn buildings into monuments that honor him:

SAN FRANCISCO, California (AP) -- A measure seeking to commemorate President Bush's years in office by slapping his name on a San Francisco sewage plant has qualified for the November ballot.

The measure certified Thursday would rename the Oceanside Water Pollution Control Plant the George W. Bush Sewage Plant.

Now the asshole is trying to repeal the Endangered Species Act..

.

For 'once a bonehead, always a bonehead' value...shuffle

in my eyes bush jr took off where dad left it at we r fighting a war for what reson? everything bush said that was there was not found hmmmmm dad must be pround of son for taking care of where he left off...fukk the bushes they r rich and dont give a ratts ass for us !!!

After the fall of 2000 and the elections, a number of books where written on the Founders. How did they come up with this idea of government?

Joseph Ellis won a Pulitzer Prize for "Founding Brothers: The Revolutionary Generation". He found himself asking the question, how was it that We had GW Bush and AL Gore to choose from when the Founders had John Adams and Thomas Jefferson to choose between? Obviously omitting Washington who was unchallanged as the first President and got all the electoral College votes

After 9/11 Bush-Cheney gave us Renditions, Torture and Constitutional Signings which usurp Congressional as well as Supreme Court Powers and these acts would have been the EXACT thing all of the Founders would have lined up AGAINST, not along political lines but rather for LIBERTY. And when the facts dont line up with what the "King" says to be true, the facts must be changed.

Newt Gingrich used to love to Tout the Federalists. Alexander Hamilton was one who wrote huge amounts of essays on Government. Going as far back to the Magna Carta

"It has been several times truly remarked that bills of rights are, in their origin, stipulations between kings and their subjects, abridgements of prerogative in favor of privilege, reservations of rights not surrendered to the prince. Such was Magna Charta obtained by the barons, sword in hand, from King John."

(Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers)

"No free man shall be taken or imprisoned or dispossessed, or outlawed or exiled, or in any way destroyed, nor will we go upon him, nor will we send against him except by the lawful judgement of his peers or by the law of the land."(Magna Carta)

Bush has said a number of times hes been reading about George Washingtons Presidency. Its hard for me to understand how he could have missed a key important duty of his office. Foreign Affairs. Washington, after taking office had this huge problem....

Indian Affairs. We won the War for Independance and all this land was ours now...but oh wait!!!!Holy Crap...almost forgot, we werent here first.

With once scratch of a pen in Paris all Indians East of the Mississippi would become extinct, they were considered conquered people, even though they could not comprehend European arrogance. But Washington along with Knox and Jefferson who somehow put Indians as Equals to white Men in every regard came to write a treaty and Signed it with the Creek Nation located along the southern borders in Georgia and had vast tracts of lands and warriors. The Treaty of New York was signed and shortly afterward the Creek Nation was overrun with White Settlers and there was little Washington could do.

But he tried and he lamented that if America could not control its own borders and government how could it deal with other Nations on the World Stage?

Washington also wrote during the long Revolutionary War that a long protracted War, no matter how much Patriotism was infused at the start, could not sustain itself for very long without Citizens being interestd in "The Cause". At that time I think he was refering to new troops and supplies however, one could apply the same thinking towards any long drawn out war. Kids grow up and people move on with their lives, all the while our bravest-the Warrior Culture we need to defend this country from direct attack is being asked to do tour after tour. This is an observation and not necessarily my own feelings on the War in Iraq.

I havent come to these opinions very easily. There is alot about President Bush I like. However, He and Cheney have proved to be a very dangerous pair.

Its not just them. The White House doesnt control events. My major concern, is that in an increasingly aware World, by way of information and press access, we need to re-align ourselves with Republican Ideas. Not the party ideas but Restoring the Republic to the ideals it was founded on, namely that "We The People" decided to govern ourlseves by ways of a bicameral legislature in a system that allows for ongoing debate. It may look as if nothing gets resolved and there are competing powers but no one body has all the power.

The larger point I would like foreign entities to feel by way of our policy is that we Govern this way by consent and NOT by coercion. A true Republic consents and As the US Heads of States go round the world preaching or spreading the seeding of democracy, I hope they deliver the message that the US is NOT the Executive Branch of world Democracies.

Looking at the fast swift Choice of Mc Cain's VP, its stunning to think we might have to tolerate such archaic views on subjects that have been settled by way of Supreme Court Decisions.

so where did you cut and paste that from library-boy?

The problem that people see with Bush is that every time he has had the chance to sign a bill that could show some semblence of helping the American people, he appears to have taken the side of big business and vetoed it..... I dont know if thats because he just a rich jerk trying to protect his own money or because the bills in question were so full of pork barrel spending, he had to veto it. The news doesnt report those kinds of things.... Thats why I think the president should have line item veto power. That way the president's intentions would at least seem a little clearer.

.

bump

"The problem that people see with Bush is"

Its not just Bush...its most of Washington. Just today they bail out Freddie and Fannie. I'd love to see someone challenge that authority. Where in the Constitution does Either Branch of the Govt get the power to bind the American People to any foreign entity?

Listen to the words from Paulsen...we'ere so enterwoven within the Global economy, mening foreign powers that Bush is binding us to them.

If that isnt an act of treason, its dam close to it BUT, no one notices cause no one studies the actual conception of the Constitution and what the founders real thoughts were...

Why did Andrew Jackson oppose the Bank of the United States?

* it was unconstitutional (its charter rested on the elastic clause)

* it concentrated an excessive amount of the nation's financial strength into a single institution

* it exposed the government to control by "foreign interests"

* it exercised too much control over members of the Congress

You have to go way into the Federalists papers to find some obscure abiguity on what powers where enumerqated and implied.

Hey Freckld !...

thats right it is most of washington, which is what most of my post is about... since the president lost line item veto during the clinton administration, it has been a wet dream in washington.. now congressmen and senators can load an otherwise noble bill with all kinds of pet projects (many of them frivolous) then headline it with a high profile concern to get the president to sign it. its a two edged sword... if the president signs the bill then he is supporting pork barrel spending, if he doesnt, then he looks like he dont give a damn about the american people..... its true.... its not all the presidents fault... its just been made to look that way.... and bush hasnt fallen for it, no matter how wrong he may have been.

and btw im not a bush supporter, but lets be realistic folks. ONE person cant be responsible for EVERYthing this country has had to deal with. Sure he rushed us into a war we probably should not have started at the time, but we would have needed to end up out in Iraq at some point anyways. As for high energy prices, lets face it, the demands of China and India have grown rapidly in the past 3-4 years. We cant ignore that just to pin the blame on Bush, no matter how much we would like to. This problem may not exist if we would have learned the right lessons from the Arab oil embargo of the early '70's, and invested more aggressively in alternative energy sources.

If you read my "cimm-a-rant" of 3/13/08 you'll see that I don't blame this soley on this president. I blame it entirely on both this president AND the neo-con right wing that had majorities in both the Congress and the Senate. At the same time, Bush is listening to Cheney, Rove, Wolfowitz and Addington (who, when it comes to our civil rights, is probably the scariest man you've never heard of).

The first thing that Bush did on HIS OWN was replace Rumsfeld with Gates. He did that without consulting Dick Cheney (much to Dick's chagrin). It seemed like finally he opened his eyes for a second or his father or someone from his father's admin helped. And by doing that, he got rid of the Defense Policy Board that Rumsfeld consulted with everyday (made up of the behind the scenes players Richard Perle, Newt Gingrich and Dan Quayle, among others) and that were shaping or should I say ruining our (U.S) foreign policy.

And now we have a Senate controlled by a bunch of do nothing Democrats.. with not much bark and few with any bite. Add to that, the possibility of electing either one man for president who stands for something new, but has never done much since he arrived in Washington or the other who represents business as usual and has flip flopped on the ideals and principles that he used to stand for.

The blame can be far and upon ourselves because we elected them.

"The blame can be far and upon ourselves because we elected them" should read:

The blame can be spread far and upon ourselves as well, because we elected them

As reality TV has shown us, when you place a group of people in a certain situation, even for a short period of time, alliances and rivalries are formed. Knowing that would suggest that it is the same way up in Washington. I think that if every incumbent from every state in every branch were replaced by all new faces, something useful might actually get done (in the first session anyway) before all the alliances and rivalries are formed.

As for the "Do nothing Democrat", its probably because instead of actually drafting a legitimate bill for their project, the choose to slip it into an existing bill as an earmark. The rules for earmarking should require that a project has been drafted as a bill before it is elegible to be earmarked. The problem with most earmarks is that they would never see the light of day if they ever were bills, which is why they are slipped in at the last minute to begin with.

Bush should not have been elected. But he was and the American people have nobody else to blame but themselves for the damage Bush and Cheney have done.

******so where did you cut and paste that from library-boy****

THE QUESTION BEGS,,,,WHATS WITH THE OBESSION?

You make opening a book and reading sound like a bad thing. Firt of all I was refering the FOunders, and for your information, John Adams wrote and read many Books...nonde of which I m sure youve bothered to read.

In an age of visual media, its good to read. Im a little sick of your childish bullshit to be honest. Youve put out enough ill informed statements to reveal at least to me, your a fraud in the inteeligence..community as we both know.

Anyone who didnt know about theose Tiomcats...and then the next so called genius revelation....Bush 41 never held elected office....do you make this stuf up?

Im concerned with American History, what the founders thought, did and what the future holds.

People like yourslef give out that high schoool shit what it come to what branch of Govt does what when in fact, theres a multitutde of stories behinfd the scenes worth reading.

Right now, I reeading about just how the America people could vote for and ratify Income taxes....You got any ideas there grenius...lets ee the depth of what you know since you want to knock csomeone who chooses to look for the truth.

Everything I wrote came directly from Washingtons Papers. Apparentll someone never told you nor taught you the rules of citation...copy and paste coppy and paste....

want to know the real reason I do it....cause most people, not mentioning anyone in particular are too lazy to read it for themselves and like a great prophet wrote......

Half of what I say makes no sense, but I say it anyway in the hopes that the other half reaches you. (Kahlil Gibran)

Christo: "President - executive branch

Congress - $$$$$$ (and finances/money/budget are their ONLY "true defined" responsibility)

Senate - laws"

Shallow , and ill informed...second grsde stuff. Just exaclty how potent was the executive branch at the founding? Does the Supreme Court actually have the same powers as the other two....Congress was the most powerful arm at first.

Now Cheney has carved out a spaced in the White like weve never seen. This is all part of the ongoing debate.

Chirsto...who were the fathers of this country? Washington and Jefferson or, Madison and Adams? And can you explain why?

sCRAPio (since you're too ignorant to even copy my name correctly, lol) - you won't find an argument nor a debate from me here or anywhere else

since you're clearly too ignorant to understand why I posted what I posted, I'll clear it up for you (and I'll type VERY VERY SLOWLY so you can keep up, lol)

your post where I responded "so where did you cut and paste that from library-boy" was simply a joke on your illiteracy

as anyone can see by the above post, when YOU "create, think, and write" a post without cut/pasting/copying from something, it's filled with so many spelling, grammar, and "illiteracies" that it's barely legible - hence you're clearly the author....

...and when you cut/paste/copy someone else's "work" - the post is NOT filled with misspellings, grammar errors, etc (as in the post I was refering to)

get it?

did I type it slow enough for you?

maybe get someone to read it to you and explain it to you later, eh?

So....... enjoy the public library, or Kinko's or wherever else they offer a little free or "low-rent" time on the computer

HINT: cut/paste/copy your OWN writings into a draft email or microsoft word/notes, et.al and PROOF-READ what you are trying to COMMUNICATE (and use spell-check if you want; that's why it's there) before "posting" "previewing" and "minglerizing" in an effort to show some pride in what you actually know.

a statement or post like "I are smrat" clearly indicates differently

in the mean time, wait for that guy "Chirsto" to respond to your ignorance and illiteracies

Scorpio you've posted before without any typos.. but sometimes when you write, it's like you're on something and it's almost totally unreadable.

Alan Greenspan didn't have anything good to say about George's understanding of economics.. And now more major financial institutions are falling..

How much attention was this administration paying to what was going on economically with this country and the housing market. And is this Bush's fault or does he share blame w/ the Federal Reserve?

the federal reserve is there for the reason and i want to say that they were sleeping on the job. greenspan apparently warned the bush admin in 2002-2003 that this was going to happen, but the admin & the public ignored it... yet still, the reserve did not make any outstanding gestures to properly warn the public.

the blame lies with all of us if were are going to point the finger. just my humble opinion & hope this makes sense.

btw, im a newbie to the forums, im in pain, and on drugs nursing an injured shoulder at the moment. so, please be gentle for i recognized a few grammatical mistakes in my last post here...(we aries tend to be pretty anal about that kind of stuff)

anyways, HELLO MINGLERS. & hugs.

Welcome to the forums MsAries!

Thank you Cimmaron. Hugs.

Cimm.....how is it that you cant say anything that isnt a verbal insult.....?

For one, I was trying to copy something rather than paraphrasing. Unfortunately the book isnt online yet. I have just finished reading it.

The point is and was that far too many people just pass along info that was taught to us, including myself in High School. I love history, I continually read it because it is being re- examined as time and more material comes in.

As far as incomprehensible....I'll only add this...I"d rather sift thorugh a though that someone is trying to share that is relevant and doesnt include who 36 is or if TCK is back.

Finally, if you or anyone want to know how Govt has highjacked the original intent of thhe founders, why not explore their intent....thats alll Im doing.! Period.

For instance, ever wonder why in Gods name the American People would agree to the 16th amendment IE income tax? or How is it that under Wilson he Amended the Const. 4 times....its about time people ask these questions.

As far has your insinuations that I am on "something" thats a loew blow for sure...You havent a clue as to the meds I take. I did indeed openly say, they resorted to admin a heavier dose to relieve my pain but, given the carnivorous nature of you and your Coterie here, I keep it out of forums these days.

I dont have for anyones baby bullshit, Got it. Either enter into a somewhat intellectual discussion or scroll past my post, its not that hard really.

Ya know Cimm, I dont have anything in particualr against you per se, except for one thing, youre immature and you dont know when to let by gones be just that.

As far as Christo goes, in case you dont notice, he cant help but post behind me, its his past time here.

Want a good book to see how all this Housing went awry...its by Peter Wallison "Serving Two Masters, Yet Out of Control: Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and Privatizing Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the Federal Home Loan Banks:"

He worked under Reagan and coincidentally his book just came out as the market crashed...its so timely its kinda spooky.

Anything you dont understand about this....and PS....Cimm, whatever it is you hasve against me, its in your own mind. I give little to no thought about Mingles when I log off except to call a few frinds and wonder how a few other friends are.....

See, I dont have the time nor the inclination to go spell checking, and why would I when I have to many in my fan club doing it.

"N. Korea preparing to restore nuclear reactor"

And if YOU were president, what would you do??

I would blow up their soy sauce factory. If that did not bring them to their knees, I'd threaten to broadcast the Opra Winfry show in N. Korea 24/7.

You might be on to something Spart.......LOL

The president is responsible for the financial stability of our country. That was one of the points that Ronald Reagan made when he ran against Carter. It was something that weighed heavily on his mind in 82, when his cuts didn't work and things got worse and his budget director, David Stockman was telling him that he would have to cut his defense budget or raise taxes.

"[A] lapse into fiscal indiscipline on a scale never before experienced in peacetime."

--David Stockman (Reagan's budget director) describing the 1980's, The Triumph of Politics: Why the Reagan Revolution Failed

"The epitaph of the Reagan presidency will be: 'When Ronald Reagan became President, the United States was the largest creditor nation. When he left the presidency, we were the world's largest debtor nation.'"

--Lester Thurow, MIT professor of economics

What will George's epitaph be?

"He didn't do one thing right and is the worst president in American history"?

It'll be interesting what the history books say 30-40 years from now. It could be that he is the one that started the downfall of terrorism in the world.....then Obama came to office and talked them all to death.......LOL

Or you could be right Cimm......worst......not one thing right. Or he could be saved by an author that researches and finds out that it really wasn't GW, but Congress, and the politco's that are watching their own interests.

Whatever it is...it'll be interesting.......

Whatever it will be, by then, I'll be happy if I can remember my name, not to mention who the 43rd president of the U.S was.

LOL......Yeah I'm hoping to be around and not slobbering on myself......

*****It'll be interesting what the history books say 30-40 years from now. It could be that he is the one that started the downfall of terrorism in the world.....then Obama came to office and talked them all to death.......LOL***

NOw that is funny Robbie.

""He didn't do one thing right and is the worst president in American history"?

Without a doubt, the most challenged President considering the ever increasing diverse nature of the public.

Even Secty Gates is back tracking and recently condemned the Pentagon for its prosecution of the War.

Who ever becomes President, it would do us all a great favor to leave Gates as the Sec of Defense. His credentails are great as an historian and the only person to rise from entry level to Director of the CIA besides the fact he has a Doctorate in Russian Studies.

Geez Cimm, you gonna delte my opinionated post along withj my reotrts to your insults too? While I do appreciate that you deleted yourself as well as mine, I know I posted to the topic of the forum.

No Scorpio, I would delete your post, for the same reason I deleted your others in here: because for 8 months you've been hurling insults at me. Initially I ignored them for a and then after a few months I warned you to stop after you ruined a fun thread.

And I didn't insult you here. All I did was say that there have been posts by you, where one could't understand what you were writing. But you denied it and wrote some more insults, so I showed you a post of yours and you went off again.

There have been a lot of good posts in here by everyone..

You want to post on this topic? I think that's great. You want to go off topic with insults, find the appropriate thread.. there are plenty of them around. But in this thread, I'll treat you like tck..

"A new national poll suggests that three out of four Americans feel President Bush's departure from office is coming not a moment too soon.

Twenty-eight percent of those polled say President Bush is the worst president in U.S. history.

Twenty-eight percent of those polled say President Bush is the worst president in U.S. history.

Seventy-five percent of those questioned in a CNN/Opinion Research Corp. survey released Friday said they're glad Bush is going; 23 percent indicated they'll miss him.

CNN senior political analyst Bill Schneider added, "As President Bush prepares to leave office, the American public has a parting thought: Good riddance. At least that's the way three-quarters feel."

"Earlier this year, Bush scored some of the lowest presidential approval ratings we've seen in half a century, so it's understandable that the public is eager for a new president to step in," said Keating Holland, CNN polling director."

Let's hope that the election of this idiot stands as a lesson if a neo con ever runs for nomination again.

Each time we have elected one, our economy has been left in bad shape.

Then we got a Republican Senate and a Republican Congress to match the White House and what did we get? An economic disaster unseen in 100 years.

But wait.. who was at the helm when we went into The Great Depression? Hoover, another Republican.

It's funny how the Republicans always talk about not spending money and now look how much Bush is spending on bail outs and war.

Someone here once said that "no one has made money when a Democrat was president". I seem to remember a lot of middle class Americans elevating their income status when we had Clinton as president.

From what I have seen in recent history (Reagan/Bush and Bush) no one who wasn't rich already every made money behind a Republican president. And now not only have people not made money, but they've been robbed of their money.

I find it appropriate that on his way out, Bush gets a symbolic boot, with an Iraqi throwing his shoes at him.

Too bad he missed!

its sooo bad maybe everybody should drop there internet sevice,say a little money.YA HOOOOO

heres the thing though, each president has done his part over the last 28 years to screw this country.Bush Jr. made mistakes, but we can all thank Clinton for Nafta, i know he didnt make it but he implemented it.

In one way you're right, Rep.

But no president in our history, has done what this smug tool of the neo cons has done or tried to do to our country.

And the polls reflect that. Not even Truman (the last unpopular president) generated such feelings feelings of dislike from the American people.

It was pure neo conism all the way, which is,. that everything that is done , is done for greed.

From manipulating intelligence on Iraq to justify an invasion (in recent interviews, Bush has avoided answering the question on "if the intelligence had suggested otherwise, would you have still invaded Iraq" ); to invading Iraq and not for reasons of terrorism and ideology (which is what I originally thought was the reason) but for oil and greed, killing thousands of our troops and destabilizing the region while using U.S. security for their justification; to trying to subvert and undermine our civil rights (once again, using security as their reasoning); to alienating America from the rest of the world,; to destroying our economy. The neo cons and this so called president, had 8 years to fix or change whatever they perceived as being economically unsound for America. "But why fix something if it ain't broke?". And for them it wasn't broke.. Because who made out like bandits during his presidency? The oil companies, and all of the U.S contractors in Iraq and other corporations tied into that infrastructure. And just not to the tune of 100's of millions of tax payer dollars, but 10's of billions of tax payer dollars, while ordinary Americans are loosing their homes, their 401k's and their pension plans.

Greed and power are synonymous. Just like politics and economics are.

Thanks dubya. History will prove you right. You told the truth about global warming among other things. So I'm also thankin ya for whoopin ol Algore, the man who couldn't carry his own state.

i disagree with ya one one thing, cimm, i thing Carter was way worse then Truman

Thank you George for the era of "mass hallucination"

Maybe we'll there will be a realistic view of George's and Dick's history and we'll see them get tried for criminal misconduct.

Or if their lucky, 40 years from now, history will simply say "that if they tried "that" now, they would go to jail".

Either way, I would be surprised if we find George going out on 6 figure speaking engagments.. esp. since it seems that his mass of supporters are following the lead that the rest of the world took long ago.. distancing themselves from him... unlike what has happened to Al Gore and Clinton.

I wonder why the world feels that way about our 43rd pres.???

Jr. may go the way his dad did, Sr. did some speaking engagments but not a ton, Clinton was and still is way more active then Reagan or bush SR ever were

Actually, I'd like to find out if GW has any good hunting on that ranch in Texas. Would love to have permission to hunt as long as Cheney wasn't around.....lol

Yes "thank you" G Dubya for being G Dubya...cause if not for you we would never have had the Shoe Throwing incident, that entertained us all...hahahaha

I think it would be a wise investment to pay GW to speak in public, I could use the humour!!

amen^^ lol

Reagan was wealthy enough long before public office to never have to go raise money like that

so are ALL the Bush families (and they were all that wealthy long before ever holding public office)

Carter (who had to declare bankrupty on his peanut farm not long after leaving office) wasn't a "bad" president, just naive.... he's one helluva' statesman now

the clintons? when they left the white house, they didn't even own a home and couldn't even AFFORD one - they had to get a friend to lend "special financing (and had NEVER owned a home before, lol) and bill HAD to run the "public speaking circuit" just to pay his legal fees/bills - they never HAD money until the "book" deals and the speaking circuit

is there anyway we can get Cheney to take toyman hunting?

One last thank you to George Bush, for spending the last 8 years, validating all those in these forums, who called him an idiot and the worst president we could possibly have.

Now if only the next 3 presidents can undo all of the damage he's done, we might see America stable before I leave this earth.

Cya and good riddance to that smug garbage and his power insane, neo con administration and their greedy friends..

Hey Man, I noticed this thread started with a story by AP. Is that the same AP you discounted in the other thread about inaugural spending? Some one backed this one up with 100 links? Just wondering. I want to be sure and "read" the validated one.

^ *just pullin yur chain*

It's whatever suits him at the time......he doesn't read liberal rags though, just in case you were thinking something like that.....lol

I think MTV should hire GW to host spring break in Florida just like the old days,,great ratings!

Unlike you Robbi, it's not whatever suits me.

In spite of the labels that all neo cons and their organizations like to throw at any news source that doesn't agree with their line of thinking or refuses to be spoon fed their information fabricated from their opinions (as their blog readers are) , the AP is not a liberal rag. And neither is Rueters, NPR, PBS, CBS, ABC, CSPAN, NBC, CNN or any of the other numerous objective, journalistic news organizations. Unlike anything to do with FoxNews, objective journalism is the key word here.

Which is why Dan Rather was fired from CBS. Because unlike Edward Murrow in his bias, he did not objectively seek out the truth.

There are many things that I've read that sounded plausible to me as an argument in favor of my beliefs, but upon further reading turned out to be false or unproven. I've learned from people like you that exist on my side of the argument to leave those out. Because they only take away from what is really the truth.

Shop, I won't even bother to play with you on your comments.

Anyway, it was great to see the Marine helicopter lift off and permanently remove this utter disaster that we've had for a president.

At least that burden has been lifted from our country.

You just did! LOL

I agree with Cimm, Manny, and Mike! Couldn't of said it better myself!

Ladies get your razors out, No more Bush! LOL

What a GREAT day!

Bush is gone! The vermin growth has been removed! Celebrate!

Tomorrow is a NEWER and BRIGHTER day because Bush is GONE...!!!

(Kinda reminds me of how much greater Iraq became the day Saddam left office, lol.)

Tomorrow is Wednesday January 21, 2009... be sure you take note of how much different tomorrow is than last Wednesday or the Wednesday before that. Be sure to eagerly 'feel better'... and REJOICE...! It will still be just another Wednesday for me... regardless of who sits in the throne.

Just my humble opinion... but I am about 1000% more excited to see Obama becoming the new president than I am about the former president leaving.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DQc4iG2T-bM&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jgqoczYC_fk&feature=related

today is a historic day indeed, Mr. Bush leaving office and Mr Obama walking into the white house, built by a black man, wow i almost thought this will never come true. greatness is the U.S.A. God bless America

Bush couldn't wait to leave office, do you know why?

may be we should ask cheeney. when he rode the wheel chair instead of the armored limo. hehhehehehe

Obama no free bear ok?

her Obama just a special request, want myhead on the $5,000 bill what do you say pal?

whats the new topic?

blessed are the ones, who dreams about been great, and wakes to be great.

wow what a man you really are. my hero Obama, i just want to say i'm infested by your mania.

rossjoy to Obamania

The lefties, NPR types and Demos will miss Bush the most. Who they gonna blame?

for all those that dont like Bush thats fine, but do not act like he is the only reson this country is in the crapper, it all began with Clinton weather you demos like it or not.we all know that those stupids pricks Gore and Kerry would have done nothing about the terrorists like Bush did. when the countey does not turn around like ya'll thinks it going to cause yall think that Obama is the second coming then who you gonna blame? wha are you gonna do when those of us come in here and laugh at how Obama has done nothing to turn this country down.its mkinda funny how ya say Bush was not your President but ya rag on us who say we will not support Obama unti he proves he an be suported.

LET IT GO ALLREADY!!!!!!Bush did morefor this country then that pussy Clinton

i think the funniest part about this whole thing is on 03 90% of you were all for going into Iraq, then all of a suddemn bcause one thing and one thing only was not found, even though they found evidence of the WMD's, ya'll just forget about the other reasons we were there and start calling for Bush's head.

HYPOCRITES

I disagree Rep.

It began with Reagan and the first Trillion Dollar Deficit.

And as far as going into Iraq.. I remember when the class idiot of this site started a thread titled "Let the Ass Kicking Begin". ..... and I had a few well chosen words for him about how many people were going to die because of George ( I support the rich) Bush and his band of fools.

Actually, I'm just trying to cover myself with the above post.. cause we all know that I stood right by Brookman's side at the beginning of the invasion as he defended our "commander and chief" while Brook simultaneously protected all of us in America as a "government engineer" in his tireless pursuit to design the perfect the perfect parking lot.

I thought that "perfect" bore repeating...

maybe so cimm, but Clinton really screwed this country as well. NAFTA, cutting the military even more, destroying the timber industry. we here in Oregon are still hurting from that.

We should also thank him AND esp. Cheney for lying to Congress and the Senate in order to persuade them to vote to invade Iraq, by having George Tenet provide non conclusive intelligence that Iraq was actively involved in making WMD.

And of course we can also thank the political machine of the right wing neo conservative republicans for developing a media machine to support Georgie boy, by branding anyone as being unconcerned with the security of the American people, if didn't vote for the resolution to invade. It smacked of pure McCarthyism.

And of course we'll hear oft repeated rhetoric from the neo cons, that America hasn't had a terrorist attack on our soil since 9/11 trying to get people to believe that George's decision to (go along with Dick, Don and Paul's idea of) invading Iraq had something to do with that.

Pffffftt

I would like to thank W for ridding the world of the likes of Saddam, and sending a strong message to others. It was time for a statement to be made. As far as the controversy about what happened when, well caca happens. All the rest of you whining liberals that feel ashamed of your country can just go sit in the corner and suck your thumbs.

spart, you miss the point, we probably could have caught Osama Bin Laden by now if Bush didn't divert our attention toward Saddam Hussein. But then again, Bush was pretty tight with the Bin Ladens too, so what can we expect? Back in about 1998, I was kinda hoping for a Republican president but those hopes were dulled when I found out that their choice was W. We need a Republican like Reagan, he made us feel good about being Americans even if his policies were not all that great.

That's exactly right gtr.

The CIA and the SAS had him trapped in Tora Bora and Rumsfeld and Cheney, who were miffed that the CIA had a game plan at the start of 9/11 (and were way ahead of the DOD) refused to listen to the men on the ground and didn't move any troops into place to block bin Laden from escaping.

Within a few weeks after bin Laden's escape, the DOD starting moving the majority of their spec. ops into Iraq. Almost a full year before Colin Powell appeared before the UN and the Senate voted on it.

A very good DVD to rent on this is "Frontline: The Darkside".

It has interviews with most of the CIA players that were involved in Afghanistan and Iraq (like David Kay) as well as DOD people and Tommy Frank's second in command, people from the State Department.

And all of them fault the Bush administration and specifically Cheney and Rumsfeld for botching both Afghanistan and Iraq.

Spart, you and your opinions belong to a very small minority of radicals in this country, known as the neo conservatives.

But since you're here, posting in an attempt to make legitimate statements look like "whinning", perhaps you would care to tell us how getting rid of Saddam affected your life in the physical world (and not your imaginary one)?

Anyway, like I said in this forum months ago, Bush and the neo cons (and all of their supporters like you) had the chance to prove all of us liberals wrong. And in 8 years what did you do????

YOU PROVED US RIGHT!!!!

We're not sucking thumbs as you're accusing us of. But I can see why you're writing that, because you know that we know what you've been sucking.. and it's not a thumb and it's not yours.

But I'm sure you'd try to Spart, if you were flexible enough...

On another positive.......GW was instrumental in ending the civil war in Sudan, he stepped up about Darfur and recognized it for what it was.

GW also gave billions to fight AIDS and malaria in Africa.....

He probably helped save millions of lives by his actions.......

"ending the civil war in Sudan"?????

What are you talking about Robbi?

He didn't end the war. It's still going on. And Bush was "roundly" criticized by both parties in the Senate and the Congress on his inaction on Darfur.

Then in 2005 Colin Powell came out and said that what was happening there was indeed "genocide".

And that put some pressure on him, where Bush finally came out and called it that. And he did impose some sanctions. But that wasn't until late last year.

Then early this month, his admin put on the table the possibility of bombing the Sudanese military aircraft as well as blockades.

But that too was thought by the people involved in trying to stop the conflict, as something that would have made it worse. Including angering the Chinese because of the oil and mineral rights that they have bought up there. It just shows that it's not something that he has really looked at closely... Which is no different than anything else that he made decisions on.

Here is a cut and paste from the Boston Globe posted last Feb.:

"Bush move on Darfur law criticized

Critics say he undercuts law on divestment; President cites his policy role

Email|Print| Text size + By Charlie Savage

Globe Staff / February 9, 2008

WASHINGTON - Lawmakers and human rights activists sharply criticized President Bush yesterday for issuing a signing statement that they said has undermined congressional efforts to pressure the Sudanese government to crack down on rebels responsible for the genocide in Darfur.

At a House Financial Services Committee hearing, members of both parties denounced a signing statement that Bush issued Dec. 31.

The statement challenged the constitutionality of the Sudan Accountability and Divestment Act, which makes it easier for states and municipalities to divest their pension funds from companies that do business with Sudan.

"Apparently we have an admnistration so wedded to the notion of ever-increasing executive power that it is willing to put its interest in enhanced executive power and diminished ability for others in this country to speak up ahead of commitment to ending the genocide in Darfur," said the committee chairman, Representative Barney Frank, Democrat of Massachusetts.

The act authorizes state and local efforts to divest from companies with certain business ties to Sudan, such as in power production, mining, oil drilling, and the production of military equipment. The act also forbids investors from suing a mutual fund's managers for breach of fiduciary duty if divesting from such companies causes the fund to earn less money."

You can read the rest of it here:

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2008/02/09/bush_move_on_darfur_law_criticized/