Shutdown

Subject never changed. "You liberals" is the tag you choose ? Really, like we should be offended, naw not so much. You're just scrapping now, ran out of gas haven't you ? Personal attack ? I am just concerned about your well being. You need to be around when the GOP caves as I said they would.
You have a nice day. I'm going to go find some liberal things to do. :) Like go open my business so my employees and I can make a living.
 
quote:

Originally posted by bobalong

And to paraphrase Mixman, never has a statement on here ever been so true (go up to his short, recent statement) "Always follow the money it will lead you to the truth" AMEN brotha. "We are all pawns" probably. The money in this situation being votes . . .which = $$$
Politicians are not voting their conscience, they are voting for pac money, party backing and reelection votes. Which, yep = $$$
Bad news is even if they lose their seat, yep they still reap a paycheck, $$ then take a job as a lobbyist $$.






It goes further than that. Again I ask as to how Harry Reid made his fortunes? How is Nancy Pelosi so rich? It seems to me many people associate "Wall Street" with the GOP. Yet many of the super-wealthy there are actually big Democratic doners. Both parties seem to be quite "purchased". With this current situation, however, I'm with the notion that it's time to stop kicking the can down the road. No more debt increases!
 
NBR is for the most part a very ugly place if you happen to be other than a GOP extreemist. Having participated on this site over some time now, I am very familiar with what NBR is all about and can totaly relate to why some would not want to pay $20 to be a part of what NBR represents and a lousy $20 is nothing compared to their principle of not supporting NBR in any fashion.
As it is, "Ask the Captain" is one of the "free" forums that is supposed to be for boating related topics and open to all who have boating topics to discuss.
From time to time, however, we will have postings on Ask the Captain that are nothing more than trolling atempts bleeding over from the NBR forum in an attempt to expand their political agenda into what is supposed to be a boating only forum.
OK, fair enough as long as Les (who owns this site) allows it, but don't berate those "un-anchored" forum members who wish to participate in discussion on this forum.
If it bothers those trolls from NBR when non-NBR members participate in these discussions the anser is very simple, keep NBR topics in NBR.
 
quote:

Originally posted by bobalong

I am just concerned about your well being. living.






Thank you for worrying about my "well being" And to think, I always believed liberals were heartless, uncaring bastards...

You needn't worry, I am in very good health.
 
quote:

Originally posted by stmbtwle

"Bush started wars? You mean the wars congress authorized and funded even when both houses were a democrat controlled super majority?..."

bull$*%t!!!

Here are the senate and house memberships for every Congress while Bush was in office (Jan 2001-Jan 2009).
I don't see a "supermajority" anywhere, much less a Democratic one. See for yourself.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/107th_United_States_Congress
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/108th_United_States_Congress
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/109th_United_States_Congress
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/110th_United_States_Congress

Someone has been watching too much Faux Noise...





I guess I did not break the sentences up small enough for you.

Congress voted for us to go to war in Iraq. The president can not do that. He can only direct the troops once authorized. Even then the majority of Democrats in the Senate also voted to go to war.

Party Ayes Nays No Vote
Republican 48 1 0
Democratic 29 21 0
Independent 0 1 0
TOTALS 77 23 0

Congress controlled both the house and the Senate during the last two years of Bush's presidency and the first two of Oweblamer's and yet they continued to fund the war in Iraq.

Perhaps it is you who is watching fake news? Or you are just perhaps fall into one of my two previously described categories.
 
quote:
Originally posted by bobalong

And Mr meierhofer suggests, if you want to disagree with the Boatered Republican "Rat Pack" you have to pony up $20 bucks for an anchor to go to NBR. I chose at the last renewal deadline not to pay up because of the 'herd' mentality down there. It's like going to a Republican convention to express a Democrat viewpoint. Playing field seems a little more level up here.

Probably because to many of the liberals are to cheap to pay $20 and debate head to head. Hey, that is your call. Nice that you changed your post. Better that Hogan captured it before you did so I had an opportunity to see it.

For the record. I am not a republican. I have not been for quite some time.
 
quote:

Originally posted by rtribble

I am very familiar with what NBR is all about and can totaly relate to why some would not want to pay $20 to be a part of what NBR represents and a lousy $20 is nothing compared to their principle of not supporting NBR in any fashion.






You don't seem to have a problem throwing in your political beliefs in this thread.

And neither do those un-anchored with such high moral standards. In fact, they are the reason the thread keeps going. It was the un-anchored that called out the conservatives in the first place.

So take your high and mighty BS and play it somewhere else.
 
quote:

Originally posted by onthecreek

who can name the speaker of this quote?...
"Increasing America’s debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means the buck stops here. Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better. Therefore I intend to oppose the effort to increase America’s debt limit."






Our government is spending way too much money. I feel really bad for my kids. I know the government is not a business but you still have to spend what you make and "everyone" should pay their fair share. The more you tax the "rich" the bigger the problem is going to be. You tax them too much and they will move their investing to somewhere else. Neither party has the right answer, the answer is somewhere in between. "Leadership" should bring the parties closer together not pull them further apart. Too bad because we are all losing in the end, especially our kids.
 
Got this in the email. One reason I look forward to the govt going bankrupt.

Learning from Obituaries....
It seems that every couple of days New Orleans or Chicago loses one of its treasured
ENTREPRENEURS .

[Sorry the Obituary didn't paste but the rest tells the story...]

Let’s get the players straight before we go on with this..

LARMONDO "FLAIR" ALLEN

His Companion : Kawanner Armstrong
His Sons : Christian Allen
Kwan Allen
Larmondo Allen, Jr.

His Daughters : Deidra Allen
Larmenshell Allen
Lamonshea Allen
Larmomdriel Allen
Larmerja Allen
Korevell Allen

AT AGE 25 - He had 9 Children.

His Father: Burnell Thompson
His Mother: Esther Allen
His Stepfather: Bruce Gordy

His Brothers: Burnell Thompson
Edgar Thompson
Wil Willis
Danta Edwards
Reshe Edwards
Mattnell Allen
Burnell Allen
Lester Allen

His Sisters: Shannail Craig
Lekiksha Thompson
Gwendolyn Carter
Jessica Willis
Katina Gordy

Grandparents: Delors Allen
J.C. Allen
Anna Laura Thompson
Will Thompson

GOT THE ABOVE ALL STRAIGHT?
********************
NOW, THE REST OF THE STORY

He was 25 and had 3 sons and 6 daughters.
NINE welfare recipients collecting $950 each ....
That equals $8,550 a month !!! Now add
Food Stamps ,
Free medical, Free school lunches,
And on and on
Do the math... $102,000+ /year .
Anyone out there, sittin' on their butt while reading this e-mail, making A HUNDRED GRAND doing nothing?
Now that, to me, is a real Entrepreneur. (ALSO, BECAUSE OF THEIR FATHERS DEATH, ALL OF THE KIDS WILL COLLECT
SOCIAL SECURITY UNTIL THEY ARE 18) EVEN BETTER...IF "FLAIR'S" THIRTEEN BROTHERS & SISTERS FOLLOWED HIS ENTREPRENEURIAL STRATEGY--THAT'S AN ADDITIONAL $1.3 MILLION PER YEAR BUT WAIT...THERE'S MORE! IF ALL THIRTEEN BROTHERS AND SISTERS CAN DUPLICATE HIS FEAT OF 9 WELFARE STRATEGISTS THAT BREEDS 117 NEW RECIPIENTS COLLECTING $100,000/YR!!...OR AN ADDITIONAL $11,700,000 PER YEAR... &THAT'S ONE DAMN FAMILY (And demands 100% the Taxes Paid by 1,000 avg. Taxpayers)

And THAT is why this once great country is BANKRUPT!! ANY QUESTIONS?
 
that "email" has been around for years and its not true
 
The email itself is not true, but I would be willing to bet you could find several "families" that this can be applied to.
 
the problem with the email is that the amounts are way wrong. So find some "families" on welfare and show me how they make $100K
 
You wanna figure out the total cost of welfare to the gubberment.
 
quote:


"Bush started wars? You mean the wars congress authorized and funded even when both houses were a democrat controlled super majority?..."






Well, actually Congress did not fund those two wars. While Bush was lying to the Congress about Weapons of Mass Destruction, and that Saddam was involved in the 9/11 attack, he was also cutting taxes on the wealthy.

That is why we are in such terrible financial shape.

I never start political discussions with right-wingers, but when I see blatant errors of fact I enjoy correcting the errors.

Fact: when Clinton was sworn in the National Debt was $4.18 Trillion, the Dow was 3,241 and the S&P was 433.

Fact: when Bush was sworn in the ND was $5.72 Trillion, the Dow was 10,578 and the S&P 1,342.

Fact: when Obama was sworn in, the ND was $10.62 T, the Dow was 7949 and the S&P was 805.

And we had a GDP of Minus 8.9% in Dec. 2008, Bush's last month in office. That, and the fact that the Bush administration had the worst job creation record in all of US recorded history, is what Bush left Obama.

So today the ND is $16.7 Trillion, the Dow is 14,838 and the S&P is 1660. The annual deficit is down by by more than 50% over Bush's last year.

Obama doubled my wealth (actually more) in less than 5 years, bringing me back to where I was under Clinton, plus some more. And you think that Republicans are good for business?

Really?

Remember, you are getting your "facts" from the same media that told you that Romney was going to win the election and the polls were rigged. Did you actually believe that?
 
Obama doubled your wealth? Really? He personally wrote you a check?

You need to figure in the actual value of your gains over the last few years - not your paper gains.
 
quote:

Originally posted by jtybt15

You wanna figure out the total cost of welfare to the gubberment.






way more than it should be. I just hate seeing blatant lies propagated when the truth is bad enough.
 
quote:

Originally posted by easttnboater

Obama doubled your wealth? Really? He personally wrote you a check?

You need to figure in the actual value of your gains over the last few years - not your paper gains.






...don't forget the value of the dollar in that analysis.

as to who caused the mess of a recession, let's not forget the role democrats played with wanting homeownership for people who would not have otherwise qualified.

funny how Bush was personally responsible for so much while Obama is just a victim. typical.
 
MarcelR wrote: "The annual deficit is down by by more than 50% over Bush's last year"

Not true. Bush's last year, the budget deficit was 459 billion. Obama's best year is this year, 750 billion (projected but not real, his best real number is 1 trillion). Now you could say that 2009 was "Bush's last year, but....Obama was sworn in January 2009 and he added a 969 billion dollar stimulus plan after he was inaugurated and that number was added to the 2009 budget which was passed under Bush. Thus the total budget deficit for 2009 was 1.413 trillion, 969 billion of it was under Obama's stimulus plan.

Here are the numbers, anyone who believes Obama "cut the budget deficit by half", does not know the facts (and why you don't start arguments with right wingers). Even more important, simple math. There is no way given that all US president's have run up a tab of 10 trillion in national debt, and in 5 years Obama has rang up up 7 trillion. A simple "napkin calculation" proves the claim not true.

http://www.usgovernmentdebt.us/federal_deficit_chart.html
 
quote:

Originally posted by MarcelR
[]

While Bush was lying to the Congress about Weapons of Mass Destruction, and that Saddam was involved in the 9/11 attack,

Fact: when Obama was sworn in, the ND was $10.62 T, the Dow was 7949 and the S&P was 805.

So today the ND is $16.7 Trillion, the Dow is 14,838 and the S&P is 1660.

The annual deficit is down by by more than 50% over Bush's last year.






Pity

You cannot show the quotes of President Bush's "lies" and where he ever said SODAMM was responsible for 9/11. Nope did not happen, except in the minds of the misinformed

The DOW is at 14,838? Look at the stocks that comprise the DJ Industrial average. Take out the winners that were put in and then put back the losers that were taken out in the last five years and tell me what the real Induatrial Average is?

Take a look at CITIBANK and tell me what it was 5 years ago and what it is today in real terms. By the way I looked it up.

When we have a 17 TRILLION dollar debt there is just no other statistic that is satisfactory.
 
MarcelR wrote:

<<....."While Bush was lying to the Congress about Weapons of Mass Destruction ..."....>>>

MarcelR -

It's been a while, so I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you just forgot, or maybe that you read and watch news that selectively edits out some crucial information. It's not your fault. Many people fell for the revisionist "Bush lied about WMDs" line. The thousands of Kurds who were gassed and killed with Saddam's WMDs would beg to differ with the "There were no WMDs" line. Anyway, here's a complimentary refresher for you: ......

Democrat Quotes on Iraq Weapons of Mass Destruction

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
--President Bill Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
--President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998

"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
--Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
--Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton, signed by:
-- Democratic Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others, Oct. 9, 1998

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
-Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
-- Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999

"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."
Letter to President Bush, Signed by:
-- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), and others, Dec 5, 2001

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and th! e means of delivering them."
-- Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
-- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
-- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."
-- Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
-- Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force -- if necessary -- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
-- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
-- Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002

"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do"
-- Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members ... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
-- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction."
-- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real..."
-- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003
 
Back
Top