‘The tried and true method of capitalism’
Lewis Hine | Library of Congress | Wikimedia Commons
Your daily Letter to the Editor – Feb. 28, 2013
The president has come out again with the left-wing rhetoric that Republicans care only about rich people.
This is not only patently false, it is insulting. As a proud conservative, I couldn’t care less if people make a lot of money and become rich as long as it is done legally. If not, then the law will take care of them.
What I, and my conservative brothers and sisters, care about is the perpetuation of this great nation by the tried and true method of capitalism.
Wealth creates jobs, jobs create income, income results in taxes and taxes pay for military protection, roads, bridges and other necessary infrastructure. These are the things the Constitution says the federal government is responsible for. How is that a bad thing?
How else do the president and his left-wing minions think these things get done?
Apparently, they think that taking all the money from the rich will do it.
Then what happens?
There are no rich, so there are no jobs, so there are no taxes and the country goes bankrupt, which is apparently what the left wing wants, as this is the direction we are headed.
Paula Doss
ROANOKE
February 28, 2013 - 1:30 PM
It’s a bad thing when those job creators take their jobs overseas, make multi-millions of dollars while paying slave wages, and then pay no taxes. Do away with the tax loopholes and credits for those who don’t need them and continue going after those who are hiding their money in offshore accounts.
Paula
Suppose your perfect world comes to pass and only conservatives are elected to public office. How long do you think it would be before all kinds of protections would be dismantled? My guess is it would not take long. Adios EPA. Fair labor practices, bye. Anti discrimination laws? Not for long. And it would all be done in the name of good business and job creation. Fact is, business people are motivated to maximize profits (or in some case just their own compensation). They will cut every corner they can to do that. It is naive to believe otherwise.
Is this really what you have in mind?
Debbie, before you vilify businesses that take jobs oversees why don’t you first ask yourself why they left in the first place. Once you take off your ideological blinders you might be in for quite a surprise as to the reasons..I can guarantee you it has nothing to do with being greedy.
“This is not only patently false, it is insulting.”
It’s pretty true. I can’t speak to the “insulting” part. And there’s nothing in our founding documents that says anything about “capitalism”. As for “capitalism” being “tried and true”, and whether or not wealth “creates jobs”, far less tax revenue…also doubtful, as we’ve seen in the last couple of years.
The closing sentence is pure nonsense. How can the right whine that the RT is a “liberal rag” when they give this sort of stuff ink?
http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2012/10/18/trouble-in-paradise-obama-has-offshore-investments-in-cayman-islands/
debbie, i hope you and your family have been able to begin working through the sudden and inexplicable loss of your brother. I wish you well.
you raise some good points, which i’ll expand on here, as well as add to.
the government creates the environment which leads companies to do the things you allege. i support eliminating any loopholes and credits for industries which “don’t need them” (the rub is in who determines which industries, and how?). if the folks who are “hiding” money off-shore are doing something illegal, then i agree with taking action against those folks. i believe the president should up-hold the laws of the United States, which include any illegal off-shore accounts, as well as any illegal immigration.
i think it’s sad that up until the last day or so, the president and his cronies were alleging that horrible things would befall the American people because of sequestration…then changed the tone of his message last night and today. i wonder why those illegal immigrants were released from federal jails in Arizona a couple days ago, when sequester doesn’t happen until tomorrow….and according to obama, it’s affects won’t be felt for at least several more weeks.
i think the picture Dan selected to lead this thread is inflamatory, which is what opinion journalists are prone to do. does he suggest that he thinks this is what “business” in America wants to do to children? if so, he’s much like obama, and braying falsehoods in order to foment low-information voter anger at business, and support for his cause..
“here’s nothing in our founding documents that says anything about “capitalism” “
–Kristen
Nope, but there is a general welfare clause which — imagine that! — was written by the founding fathers!
#2 OldBlue
You are confusing Conservatives with Libertarians.
“i think the picture Dan selected to lead this thread is inflamatory, which is what opinion journalists are prone to do. does he suggest that he thinks this is what “business” in America wants to do to children? if so, he’s much like obama, and braying falsehoods in order to foment low-information voter anger at business, and support for his cause..”
–Frank
Frank, I used the picture for purpose of making a point. Here’s the point: Capitalism, the best economic system there is, is not without significant flaws. And and as you know, these were well recognized bythe world’s greatest philosopher on the subject, Adam Smith. In Wealth of Nations, Smith was quite explicit that unregulated capitalism was bad, and that government regulation was absolutely necessary for capitalism to flourish. Children laboring in factories was a product of capitalism in years past. The capitalists fought tooth and nail efforts by reformers to enact child labor regulations, and when Congress finally did that, the capitalists fought it all the way through the Supreme Court, too. Plantation owners in the pre-Civil War south were capitalists, too, Frank. Some of their capital included human beings.
RWers, when they get on their soapbox about capitalism and the evils of regulation seem to conveniently gloss over these facts.
The rehetoric remains the same even as it remains incorrect. Our Nation does as our middle class does. It is not the wealthy and it is not the poor, it is the middle class that makes or breaks the Nation. In the 50s, 60′s and early 70s thhe middle class was strong and the Nation boomed. However, as Conservatives slowly gained control, tax laws were written to shift wealth from the middle class to the wealthy. This started under Reagan with his flattening the tax rates, corrected under Clinton, and then blown out of proportion under GWB. Obama has made only slight inroads in correct this mass transfer of wealth to the most wealthy from the middle class.
But even that is not the point of the most recent stalemate. Obama is asking removal of the carrying interest rules and the tax benefits for the Oil Companies. These two items are unfair to all, not just the middle class. For instance, a wealthy businessman working in a service or manufacturing business making 14% pays about 40% federal income tax. A Hedge Fund Manager making the same pays at most 15% federal income tax. The Hedge Fund Manager (Investment Banker) may even be doing the exact same thing as for instance your local stock broker. Yet, he gets a 25% tax break, that no one else gets for doing the same thing. This is a benefit bought by the Investments Bankers in cmapaign donations and lobby. Outragwous and yet the GOP will not budge.
The Oil Companies receive untold benefits from the federal government including low cost leases of mineral rights and protection. The government protects their business from intrusion by competiGDrs and foreign powers. Their profits each year equal the DGP of most countries. Yet, they also want and get special tax benefits that other companies do not get. They have an unfair tax advantage over all alternative energy, over manufacturing, over transportation. Why? Simply because they contribute to the campaigns of COngressmen.
Yes, we all saw how well those Bush tax cuts for the rich worked during the Great Recession. Epic fail, Paula.
Thank you, Frank. We’re having the memorial service tonight, and the funeral tomorrow. I had my grief under control, until an iin-law decided to share her batsh*t craziness with me today, in hope that I would forgive her after she shared that she berated my mom to the point of tears last night. She blamed it on stress she’s under, as if a 76 year old woman who lost a child isn’t under stress. I don’t know what she thought my reaction would be, but she added to my stress. I told her that I’m not a priest and I’m not a therapist, I don’t absolve guilt. Thanks for letting me unload, Dan, and for the regulars on here, please send good thoughts my way, because I desperately need them tonight and tomorrow.
You got it Debbie. Stay strong and know that we you are in our thoughts and prayers. I hope that your memories of the love in your family will sustain you all through the pain.
“As a proud conservative, I couldn’t care less if people make a lot of money and become rich as long as it is done legally. If not, then the law will take care of them.”
-
Paula, here’s your real problem and lack of understanding of how things work in America these days. How many big time bankers who tanked the economy by taking undue risks are in jail today?
-
ZERO!
-
The law does not work for justice it works for the rich.
Debbie, from your brother’s obituary he seems to have had many friends and a fily that loved him. Ill be thinking of all of you tonight and tomorrow. I have my share of that sort of relative…good luck.
Richard J. Beason says:
“The Oil Companies receive untold benefits from the federal government including low cost leases of mineral rights and protection. The government protects their business from intrusion by competiGDrs and foreign powers. Their profits each year equal the DGP of most countries. Yet, they also want and get special tax benefits that other companies do not get. They have an unfair tax advantage over all alternative energy, over manufacturing, over transportation. Why? Simply because they contribute to the campaigns of COngressmen.”
Exxon paid an estimated $12 Billion in taxes in 2010 an effective tax rate of 42% while the highest individual tax rate is 35%. Do some homework and see how much Facebook paid last year and see if they truly get great tax benefits. Meanwhile special interest alternative Energy companies (Solyndra and others) received $16 Billion in subsidies.
Its just simpleminded to think that by taxing Oil companies more, the said companies will not pass the increase along to those (everyone) who buy fuel.
#13 You hit the nail on the head as to how many are in jail because of what Wall Street has done.
Cold n P
Nicely put.
This nation, under this President, is headed for socialism and just perhaps we have already had our last Presidential election. The question is why
would anyone embrace socialism when it has failed in every Country that tried it and these nations florished only when they turned away from socialism and started to practice capitalism.
Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it.
by the way, posts 12 and 13, who did obama’s new treasury secretary work for before he was obama’s chief of staff? what was Lew’s job with that “too big to fail” bank, whose “leader”, robert rubin, paved the way when HE was treasury secretary, for clinton to abolish glass-steagall? Citigroup. and, his signature gets put on US currency. it’s a sick world we live in, in that regard.
Paula Doss is clearly in the typical right wing denial float.
–
Since the president clearly is among “the rich” and doubtless has no notion to give that up, his “rhetoric” saying “that Republicans care only about rich people” is based in fact, deed, word and actions. It is not only not “patently false”, it is demonstrably true.
–
As a proud liberal, “I couldn’t care less if people make a lot of money and become rich” either. I do appreciate that she offers the caveat “as long as it is done legally” but then ruins that piece of cheer by claiming “If not, then the law will take care of them”. As if! That too is just not the reality for any but the most egregious and criminal.
–
What I, and my liberal brothers and sisters also “care about is the perpetuation of this great nation by the tried and true method of capitalism”. Which is why there is no effort to stop capitalism and all its glory from keeping our economy flowing. Our efforts are to hold it responsible just as Adam Smith, the father of capitalism advised us to do.
–
Demand creates jobs, jobs create income, income creates demand and results in taxes as well as prosperity. Gee, look how much we agree on! Nothing bad about it.
–
No one, including the rich President is trying to take the wealth from the wealthy, but the fact that they have continued to do so well as the rest of us have suffered, the fact that their pursuits and greed caused our economic collapse and their continued demands for special treatment has led us to this impasse of identified inequality and the need to rectify the faults in the system.
–
I will tell you how we and the president, as well as all fair minded people, “think these things get done”. We think the wealthy have their role as well as the rest of us, no more and no less. They are not the masters who control our future.
–
Apparently, Paula Doss thinks they do. Therefore, her opinion on “the direction we are headed” has so little to credit.
sheesh, dan, i suspect that the term “general welfare” back then meant for “everyone’s” benefit…gee, i wonder what “commonwealth” meant back then, dan?
hey Art at post #10,
do you forget what did the bill clinton government did to create the catalyst for the financial crash in 2008? can ya think of anything? how about abolish glass-steagall? do you REALLY want to go down this road, Art?
Jswift, do you have any substantiation for your claims about what Exxon paid? Because my understanding of what they paid is quite different from yours.
“Wealth creates jobs,..” is a most ridiculous statement.
—
It is not wealth that creates jobs, it’s the jobs that create wealth.
When the wealthy – by tax loopholes and creative accounting – retain all their money – when wealth resides with a few at the top – society and the economic structure of a democracy will break down. With a progressive tax structure, the tax burden is in proportion to the means to pay – ergo, the wealthy taxpayer would pay more than the middle class taxpayer.
—
The highest-growth decades in recent US history (the ’50s and ’60s) were the decades in which the top-bracket marginal tax rates were 90+% and 80+% – demonstrating that taxes on the wealthy did not squelch entrepreneurial initiatives, suppress profitability, nor cause massive migration of capital outside US borders. US companies are holding $1 trillion in cash assets, yet where are the jobs they are supposedly “creating”?
—
Taxing the people at the top leads to government revenue being reinvested back into the society – money for education, roads, bridges, and other fundamental services.
All of which the wealthiest among us also utilize – but often not paying any taxes toward them. So who then are the slackers? and the “takers”?
—
As citizen in our democracy, it is not just the middle class, but the wealthy that have an obligation to pay their fair share. Squirreling money offshore, hiding assets, and dodging taxes is fundamentally un-American and certainly not in a democratic spirit.
Frank at 7:35
No. The CRA did NOT cause the financial meltdown of 2008. The government may have required the banks to lend money to higher risk individuals. Risk is OK, and is present in any financial transaction. It was also OK for Fannie and Freddie to back those loans. What was patently NOT OK was for the banks to repackage the loans and misrepresent the risk of the underlying mortgages. And only the most naive would deny that they misrepresented the quality of the securities they were selling. I would call that fraud. Too bad none of them went to prison
Dan,
Check out this link:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/christopherhelman/2012/04/16/which-megacorps-pay-megataxes/
Your link provided some 2009 numbers. Did you notice how much taxes GE paid referenced in your article? It was negative $1.1 Billion. Let’s bash GE….Anyone with me? Right, didn’t think that would work.
DougThompson, on the lunatic fringe non-existent chance that you have any point at all…what about socialism makes you think that there would be no more “presidential elections”? Do you have an idea what “socialism” means?
Frank do you just enjoy having your butt handed to you? You’re a glutton for punishment.
Frank,
The sponsor’s names on the bill are all Republican. Of all those involved, including Bill Clinton, only Clinton has acknowledged signing the bill was a mistake. Weill is, as the article linked below suggests, is a hypocrite as best.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/defining-hypocricy-weill-who-led-repeal-glass-steagall-now-says-big-banks-should-be-broken
Easy to find exxon tax payments. Financials are published for the world to see.
For 2011 paid $31,000,000,000 and change in taxes on income before taxes of $73,500,000,000 and change for a tax rate of 42% in this case.
As a fellow tax payer i am thankful for the taxes they pay. Plus i suspect that the pensioners of federal, state and local governments and countless businesses plus those with some form of savings in mutual funds etc are all very thankful for the 43 billion in after tax earnings. Not like exxon is some evil entity, i would speculate that literally tens of millions have a stake it its success
“do you REALLY want to go down this road, Art?”
That’s hilarious Frank, even for you, the Bush recession was all Clinton’s fault. I’d steer clear of the bath salts if’n I were you.
Jswift Perhaps you should consider that the oil companies cannot increase prices higher yhan what the matket will bear. Oh and by the way, that is what they are charging now. Oh and Dan is correct about Exxon Mobile
I’m sure Paula believes everything she wrote.
Jswift, you’re the one who brought up Exxon. In the link I provided, they paid zero U.S. federal income taxes AND they got a $156 million refund from the federal government, go figure. But they paid $15 billion that year in FOREIGN taxes. You’re probably right that was 2009, though.
Nowhere in your link to the Forbes article does it suggest Exxon paid any U.S. taxes in 2010. It just says the company paid on lot in taxes. It’s fair to assume, based the 2009 numbers, that most of those 2010 Exxon taxes went to other countries, too. I wonder if they got another U.S. government refund that year, too?
Jshep, did Exxon pay ANY U.S. income taxes? Or were all the tax payments to foreign countries, as the were in 2009?
Wealth creates jobs Paula? No. Innovation creates jobs.
From Henry Ford to the Wright Brothers, Microsoft to Facebook, it is always the new inventions and their new industries that spawn jobs. When companies get big they only vie for market share and find ways to squeeze their low-level employees.
As for your assertion that the wealthy pay for our military “protection” with their taxes, this is absurd.
To begin with, protect us from who? WE are the terror of the whole Earth, smashing countries to force our corporate way of life on them… And done unfairly, too, as we install puppet governments and then extract their natural recourses for gross profits while they get a pitance.
And their taxes pay for it? Horseshti. The billionaires pay 14% tax while their corporations make twice that. Insult to injury, their servants and most of their employees pay DOUBLE the percentage of taxes they do.
Stop getting your world news from FOX, ABC, etc. Stop and think. If most of the stock of these networks is owned by billionaires and multi-millionaires (and it is), then who is it that elects the Boards of Directors? And who will their cherry picked people install as management? That’s right, people who will promote the agenda of the rich.
There is good reason that the super rich have tripled their net wealth in the last 40 years while the average man has actually lost ground. The evening news you think educates you has in fact brainwashed you into supporting the things that cheat you…. For example: We are the ONLY modern nation without universal health care. And what we do have costs twice as much. And don’t parrot the “ours is better” crap they told you to think, because our life spans are shorter than our peers!
The United States has become the most pompous, blowhard nation on Earth, clearly the most selfish of all the modern Western countries. Why? We were conquered by billionaires, whose dynasties go on and on, just like the kings and queens of yesteryear.
Turn the TV off and get a real education by exploring the world news sites of other nations. (A huge number of countries have English broadcasts.) You might also consider http://www.democracynow.org which is one of the better U.S. independent broadcasts.
Whatever you do, please don’t think watching mainstream media makes you educated. It makes you indoctrinated.
“consider http://www.democracynow.org which is one of the better U.S. independent broadcasts.”
BAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! It’s funded by a billionaires!!
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/printgroupProfile.asp?grpid=6891
Ad for Exxon there are two things to consider 1 they netted after tax 43 billion dollars. Think they might have a fime to spare? Look at their cash and holdings Think about that profit margin when you fill up. And you are worried they may try to go up if they are taxed more 2 Exxon has limited their expansion of drilling as they are comforyable where yhey are Accordingly they do not get the breaks some of the more active oil companies take
Kristen: I guess its the fact that Obama has raised his own private army, has deployed troops within the US with the express purpose of putting down any revolt. Has purchased enough ammunition for domestic agencies to last 30 years in Iran and Iraq, has consistently tried to ignore or dismantle the constitution of the US. Has a lock on over 50% of the voters because they receive most, if not all, their income from the government. Has started to take apart the defense system in the US making us weaker than the Chinese.
His next move will be to remove the two term limits for President, or extend the term limits to eight or more years. All of which has already been done by those who are socialists before. When it happens and it will perhaps you’ll start reading a bit about what this man has done to the US and what his plans are for the immediate future. Since you’re obviously on the far left you’ll enjoy it for awhile, then you’ll wish you were any where else but the US.
Ladies and gents, Suzie has introduced herself. Now we have a name!
“This nation, under this President, is headed for socialism and just perhaps we have already had our last Presidential election.”
-
Translation: I am permanently camped in the aluminum foil aisle at Kroger.
“Kristen: I guess its the fact that Obama has raised his own private army, has deployed troops within the US with the express purpose of putting down any revolt. Has purchased enough ammunition for domestic agencies to last 30 years in Iran and Iraq, has consistently tried to ignore or dismantle the constitution of the US. Has a lock on over 50% of the voters because they receive most, if not all, their income from the government. Has started to take apart the defense system in the US making us weaker than the Chinese.
His next move will be to remove the two term limits for President, or extend the term limits to eight or more years. All of which has already been done by those who are socialists before. When it happens and it will perhaps you’ll start reading a bit about what this man has done to the US and what his plans are for the immediate future. Since you’re obviously on the far left you’ll enjoy it for awhile, then you’ll wish you were any where else but the US.”
–Doug Thompson
This is all RWer mythology. Private army? Abolish term limits? Dismantle the Constitution? Every word of that stuff is full bore crazy.
Keep eating that “rainbow stew” Doug Thompson, and remember that the private army knows where you live.
Doug Thompson,
On the points you raised; wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong and wrong.
So out of seven you got a whopping goose egg. Thanks for playing, though. Don’t forget your tinfoil hat on the way out.
Whoa, make that the GIANT tinfoil aisle at Sam’s.
Obviously Kristen, Dan and Ron do very little research on their comments.
Google Obama’s private army and maybe you’ll open your eyes.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jAT-BbmqdXE
Doug Thompson, a 49-second youtube video of out-of-context snippets strung together by some conspiracy freak hardly constitutes “evidence.” And googling “Obama’s private army” hardly constitutes research.
who’s the general of the private army? How many troops does it have? Where are its barracks? Where have they been deployed, and when?
Holy Mackerel, we have a live one! That is just plain sad.
“I guess its the fact that Obama has raised his own private army, has deployed troops within the US with the express purpose of putting down any revolt…”
Ok, so you’re nuts. Conversation closed. YouTube, lmao. Join the rest of the country and watch a few Harlem Shake videos…it’s more productive.
hey Art,
…did the repeal of glass-steagall have much to do the the financial crash in 2008?
Debbie, very sorry for what you are going through and I’ll be thinking of you.
Oh, wow; Doug posted a youtube video, so it’s gotta’ be true. I guess that settles that. Doug really is a visionary. We’re not worthy.
Its moments like these that I wistfully recall the days of old when I could have virtually beaten poor Doug Thompson like a rented government mule for his transgressions against reason, logic and common sense; this blog’s new civility protocol prevents me from even using some of my old favorites terms that I could have seamlessly employed in a discussion about Doug’s education level, genetic heritage or hygienic practices. Oh, well; guess I have to behave myself along with everybody else now. Those were the days, I tell you…
OTOH, Doug Thompson is doing a pretty fair job of establishing his own intellectual bona fides without my assistance. Rave on, Doug!
Btw, everyone, I don’t believe the Doug Thompson posting here is the same guy who had the motorcycle accident last fall on U.S. 221. That’s got to be a different person.
hey frank @10:30,
…did the repeal of glass-steagall have much to do the the Benghazi?
Dan—– In answer to # 47. The general or rather generals in charge are the left wing control freaks. Those in such a powerful position that they can not be removed from power. They were never elected to it they wer APPOINTED to it or Inhereted it (see political appointments or The Kennedy, Bush, Rommney, ect. families) It is all one giant conspiricy designed to control the people, keep them divided and bickering between themself and they will be too busy to see through the the fog the tree that they are about to run into!
Ron May, at post #29,
your link goes straight to the guy who most wanted Glass-Steagall abolished….sandy weill. However, wanting it so, and making it happen, are two different things. While your link is an interesting snippet on a single hypocrite, I strongly suggest you read two books, in which you will find many, many more.
The first book is actually on sandy weill, written by Monica Langley and published by the WSJ in 2003…titled, “Tearing down the walls.” The reason why this book is most helpful, Ron, is because it’s written FIVE years before the crash, and is focused almost exclusively on Sandy Weill, and thus I believe is bereft of as much political bias as possible.
Bill Clinton’s Treasury Secretary, Robert Rubin, is the guy used by Sandy Weill to pull all the strings, including Clinton’s, to get the bill passed. Yes, republicans are the names on the new law, and were stupid to listen to Rubin. However, Clinton was even stupider to listen to Rubin, and I believe history will lay the abolition of Glass-Steagall squarely on his lap. And, by the way, just where do you think robert rubin landed after he left Treasury? Citigroup, and Sandy Weill.
The second book was written by New York Times Pulitzer Prize winner Grethen Morgenson in 2011, titled “Reckless Endangement….which catalogues in a professional, NYTs-writer’s effort to chronical the history of the crash and who the players were, both before and during.
Both books are interesting, and for me were very hard to put down. The first book reads some like a biography, some like a corporate expose, and some like a historical narrative. The second book might literally make you sick.
The most prominent government name in both books is robert rubin…followed by bill clinton.
If I can read those books inside of two days each, Ron, I suspect they won’t take too much time out of your busy day, or evening. I hope you read these books. That way, your posts regarding the responsibility for the financial crash will not be as lazy as your post is at #29.
oops. I misspelled a name above…should be “Gretchen”, not Grethen.
garland I, do you think there are any right wing “control freaks”? Specifically the vaginal-probe, what kind of sex you have, who you love and want to marry kind?
–
The only people in “such a powerful position that they can not be removed from power” are the mega wealthy whose tunes the GOTP dance.
–
In a nation of over 300 million, “control”, in the form of laws, regulations and oversight is what is demanded. That is what the Constitution and all that it sets in motion and upholds is all about.
–
WE are doing the “keep them divided and bickering between themself” all on our own.
Hey Doug Thompson, here’s a Youtube link that proves the Apollo Lunar landings were faked. It’s even narrated by some guy with a very refined and trustworthy English accent, so you know it’s got to be true.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t4tk-3KeYNQ
Thanks for really opening my eyes with this Youtube thingy; I’m really much better informed now since you turned me on to this stuff. Next I’m going to find me a video that proves conservatives aren’t gullible.
Wow, this blog took a turn to the sad and wierd. Is this really what the GOP stands for?
Hey Steve c at post #54,
Why as a matter of fact, they do!
bill clinton signed off on the repeal of Glass-Steagall so his buddy robert rubin could get his life-time desired cushy job doing nothing, …and then, bill’s wife let Benghazi happen as it did, did not even watch the attack “in real time” as her underlings did, then created the song and dance routine she and obama put out in that tax-payer-financed tv commercial shown in Pakistan, and which was also followed by susan rice on tv and obama at the UN….all the while knowing it was lies, lies, and more lies…and the film-maker gets trhown in jail!
to bill’s credit, maybe he was missing a routine daily activity that he had come to enjoy with that intern…maybe that’s why he wasn’t thinking so well, and did that favor for his buddy bob rubin, which ended up tanking our economy in 2008. i bet you were feeling sorry for the guy during that time, weren’t you, steve c?
ta da!!
Doug Thompson and garland I, you do realize that the private army in question, the Ready Reserve Corps, is composed of doctors, dentists, dieticians and veterinarians. It is a reserve component of the Commisioned Corps which is the uniformed service headed by the Surgeon General of the United States, that’s why he/she wears an uniform. I am as fiscally conservative as they come when it comes to government, but this is unadulterated nonsense.
Doug Thompson, you really believe “over 50% of the voters…receive most, if not all, their income from the government”? No wonder you can believe in the Obama private army stuff too. But to put your mind at ease, the Obama private army’s black helicopters are all left overs from the Clinton private army, and the soldiers are all illegal Latinos who don’t understand the orders given in English. Stand tall, patriot Doug!!!
Are you a Dylan fan, Hayfrank? Because every time I accidentally read one of your posts I hear strains of Idiot Wind.
Thank you, Miriam.
——
Good grief is all I can say about Doug Thompson’s comments.
Let’s call Frank by the name he’s chosen to post under, OK everybody?
Dan Casey | March 1, 2013 at 3:46 pm
Let’s call Frank by the name he’s chosen to post under, OK everybody”
Hay Dano! Aw! Do we really have to?
thank you dan. you realize, of course, that i think many of us would prefer to be able to twist some names. but, consistancy is the right way to do things. thanks.
you are truly one of the uninformed, art hill.
Frank, sadly I get it that you believe you are one of the informed. That is just plain sad. Don’t throw stones.
“you are truly one of the uninformed, art hill.”
I’m crestfallen. Maybe if you didn’t blow it out your butt so often…
Art Hill @ 2:56,
“Are you a Dylan fan, Hayfrank? Because every time I accidentally read one of your posts I hear strains of Idiot Wind.”
Funny, every time I read one of frank’s diatribes I hear “Dueling Banjo’s” in the back ground.
Hillary | February 28, 2013 at 8:12 pm
“Wealth creates jobs,..” is a most ridiculous statement.
—
It is not wealth that creates jobs, it’s the jobs that create wealth.
XXX Wealth creates jobs is a true statement. Wealth gives rise to
Capitalism and Capitalism is without a doubt the most powerful economic
engine to which any individual, locality, state or nation can hook it’s train.
Wealth is not necessarily monetary. Wealth can be good health, we call this healthy. Wealth can be ideas, we call this intellectual property. Wealth can be action, we call this execution or sometimes, persistence, perseverance or the Latin carpe diem. Wealth creates jobs. It can also solve a whole lot of problems of which our Country has a great many.
XXX Therefore, in the spirit of Capitalism and employing a modicum of wealth. . ..here is a problem (rather an opportunity) solved.
The Federal government should be celebrating the Sequester, not lamenting
it. An employment of a little thought wealth shoots right through the door, Biden style, to chase the evil Sequester effects away.
Malcolm Sparrow of Harvard University, a top specialist in health care fraud, argues that estimates by federal auditors do not measure all types of fraud. He believes that as much as 20 percent of federal health program budgets are consumed by fraud and abuse, which would be about $85 billion a year for Medicare.5 – See more at: http://www.downsizinggovernment.org/fraud-and-abuse#sthash.GuS9dcIn.dpuf
XXX $85 billion is a magic number. It’s the same number that Bernanke is printing and dumping into the economy each month. . . which, BTW is a much
bigger problem than any puny Sequester and certainly employs no wealth but
makes the wealth in our pockets less. Another problem solved by applying
wealth.
Extrapolating Mr. Sparrow’s estimates to the Federal Government and all it’s
myriad programs, departments and commissions should yield a number that
resolves any need for QE and will also resolve the elephant in the room; $16 trillion in debt. We even know where to start. . .Green Energy programs are
proving wasteful and fraudulent to the tune of billions upon billions wasted.
Think; the whole government is out of control. . .the GAO “cannot complete an AUDIT!”
Why not make the government accountible? Why settle for the “most transparent government” ever when we, by law, require both. This begs
another wealthy thought. . .someone else already put it into action with
the creation of the constitution. . .we are a goverment of laws; not men (and women for the PC).
The crisis charade must cease; a wealthy thought whether one be liberal progressive or clingy conservative. Why do we tolerate a government that
lies to us; we are the government. As a country, we need to stop believing
the lies we tell ourselves and eradicate this corruption that calls itself our
Government.. The Sequester amounts to a fart in a windstorm compared to
the rampant fraud and corruption that is foisted on American citizens by the
Federal Government..
The wealth of our country is the constitution. . .and look how very many
jobs it has created in it’s history. Yet, those running our government
are insistent on fixing what is not broken via regulation, executive order and
bypassing Congress.
J and Dan Have either of you checked the prices on gas lately. They are currently passing the cost of doing business on to us. Mr Obama said in his first term he would keep gas prices low. WRONG in his 2nd campaign he said he wouldnt let sequestration happen WRONG he signed it into action yesterday. WAKE UP people we have a 2 faced idiot for a president he is a liar and 2 faced.
#73 Hey, Leon, great to see you back, especially since I’ve been waiting for you to tell us more about why it is you think the writings of Leo Donfrio prove that doubts about Obama’s ellgibility to be president have some sort of merit. In that context perhaps you can also explain to us exactly what this passage by the same Leo Donofrio means.:
-
“My real name is The Paraclete. And Reni IS The Messiah. The Paraclete aka The Spirit of Truth, aka The Holy Spirit is the third person of Trinity. As Jesus stated in the Gospel of John, he has sent me to condemn Satan and glorify the Messiah.
-
The Holy Spirit concept derives from the word “Paraclete” which translates as “advocate” or “lawyer.” I am a lawyer, God’s lawyer. They never told you “he” would come as a man, they lied about me denying me a place in the world of men. But Jesus made it clear he would send a man. Do your homework because he said he’d send “another” like him, another man. That’s me people. Freaky? Yes. True? You bet your sweet human ass that mine is divine. I speak with a mandate from Heaven.
-
At this moment in time, the name for the body I am using has been changed to Jet Wintzer. I am spreading the prophecies given to me by God, the Father, to the world through my asskicking new band Schizo FunAddict.”
Robert Doyle,
Can you provide a source for the statement “Mr Obama said in his first term he would keep gas prices low.” Or is that simply something everybody knows is true?
gdad, you’re starting to act like Frank, by repeating ad nauseum crazy crap and repeatedly asking others about it.
I think this blog can handle only one act like that!
Mr. Doyle…No sense in providing a `source` for any liberal….The truth is simply ignored by these folks. But, while you are at it, why don`t you list ALL of the things obama said he would do and lied about ? I know that would be a long and laborious task………I know something else…the $380,000.00/hour that it cost the taxpayer for obama to play golf with Toger would sure feel nice back in our `wallet`..that is for sure !
What creates wealth? Not hoarding all the money at the top 1%, that’s a fact.
-
Here’s a real good paper with a common sense approach to how wealth is created:
“Schooling is the single most important correlate of national wealth. The larger the percentage of children in school, the greater the national wealth. Schooling is probably both cause and effect; schooling increases national wealth and national wealth provides the means to build and staff schools.
The second most important correlate of national wealth is income equality. Equality is probably also a cause and effect of national wealth. Income equality means there is full employment, which improves the supply of goods and services; full employment widely distributes purchasing power which improves effective demand.”
The paper focuses on 13 predictors of wealth and well being. Here’s the rest of the paper:
http://www.siue.edu/~rblain/natlweal.htm
“Schooling is the single most important correlate of national wealth. The larger the percentage of children in school, the greater the national wealth. Schooling is probably both cause and effect; schooling increases national wealth and national wealth provides the means to build and staff schools.”
–Cold in P
But wait . . . schooling comes from teachers . . . and teachers are commie-libs, right? Which means . . .
WEALTH COMES FROM COMMUNISTS!!??
It can’t be!
/snark off
Actually,
Obama’s private army isn’t anything like the one Doug Thompson refers too.
It’s even more frightening.
It’s not humans he’s deploying, it’s space aliens. It’s taken since Rosewell, but the government has finally managed to breed a stock of these extraterrestrials and promised them a ride back the mother ship if they will do Obama’s bidding. They are more than willing to comply and will use their considerable space alien skills to create really spooky natural phenomena and scare the pubic into more government. The ultimate goal is to make the US a socialist utopia and to clone Obama so that his identical cloned twin can reign supreme in perpetuity.
It’s already started. You don’t think that meteor in Russia or the poor dude in Florida who was sucked into a sink hole was an accident do you? Hurricane Sandy? Let’s get real people, how clear can it be?
You know it has to be true because there’s even less proof for it than Doug Thompson provides. I mean, if the private army theory was a secret, how would people know about and put the information on Youtube? Duh. Total smoke screen for the real threat.
There’s even less proof for the space aliens, so it has to be true, and I don’t think there’s anything we can do to stop it now. Sad.
#78 Awood, I’d sure like all the money back that Bush spent flying back and forth to Texas for no reason. Can you help with that? Or maybe the trillions and hundreds of thousands of wasted lives he spent on a useless war in Iraq? Can you make some arrangements there? Thanks.
Back on the Wednesday OPEN thread, “Wally W” made this statement:
“Since day one, Obama has and is still working from his European socialist wish list, instead of addressing pressing ssues….the economy and the debt. Now he’s fast tracking gun control, putting criminals to the front of the line to immigrate, and trying to make CA change a law that they voted on so gays can marry. This is exactly what you get when you elect a president that has never had a REAL private sector job. He just doesn’t get it!!”
At the risk of coming across as unkind, I wish to point out the following facts:
1. Obama has cut the growth of federal government spending more than any president since Eisenhower.
-
2. Obama’s first priority was addressing pressing issues:
A) The flagging economy;
B) A healthcare system that is heading toward crisis;
C) Banking re-regulation in the wake of the 2008 financial collapse;
-
AND NOW he’s addressing immigration.
-
ALL of those are pressing issues.
-
3. In the years after his graduation from Columbia, and before he ever ran for political office, Obama held many different jobs. Among those were:
A) Working for Business International Corp., a private company.
B) Working at Sidley & Austin, a private law firm.
c) Working at Hopkins & Sutter, a private law firm.
D) Teaching constitutional law at the University of Chicago Law School, a private institution.
E) Working at Davis, Miner, Barnhill & Galland, a private law firm.
-
(He also worked for New York Public Interest Research Group; Developing Communities Project, a Catholic Church-sponsored community organization; the Gamaliel Foundation, and Project Vote. It’s from these employers that he’s gained the RWer rap as a “community organizers.” Obama also served on the boards of directors of several private foundations.)
-
Thus, it’s 100 percent untrue that Obama “has never had a REAL private sector job.” But it certainly is part of the RWer mythology.
#77 Well you see, Dan, I was merely trying to make a point about the quality of a source Leon provided for us in an effort to prove his ridiculous contention that Obama isn’t a citizen. The craziness came from Leon and from the fellow he linked to. I didn’t make it up.
-
Frank, OTOH, tends to chase people around threads with some bizarre and twisted question that he made up out of whole cloth, often in an effort to redirect the conversation from a point that he can’t answer or has been proven wrong about.
-
So while I see quite a difference in the way Frank and I post, or at least in our purpose for doing it that way, I’ll refrain from asking Leon again to comment on his proof.
Republican President goes out and plays 800 rounds of golf during his tenure and gets elected the the Golf Hall of Fame.
-
“As our golfer in chief, President Dwight D. Eisenhower brought golf to the White House lawn and played nearly 800 rounds while in office. Not since Mary Queen of Scots has a head of state done so much to popularize the game. Fred Corcoran, the legendary golf promoter, once said Eisenhower’s devotion to golf was “the greatest thing that ever happened to the game.”
-
For being the game’s unofficial ambassador, Eisenhower was selected for induction to the World Golf Hall of Fame in the Lifetime Achievement Category.”
http://golfweek.com/news/2009/nov/02/dwight-d-eisenhower-golf-white-house/
-
Obama plays a round, says it’s the only time he feels relaxed and he’s portrayed as lazy and not doing his job. What’s going on here?
hey folks, this is the best Art Hill has to say, as noted in his post at #71:
………..”maybe if you didn’t blow it out your butt so often…”………..
Spoken like a true-blue low-information lib. I mean, REALLY, Art?
Mr. Doyle, you are simply and completely wrong and apparently do not understand how gas is priced and how the government works. That would mean it is not Obama that is the idiot.
–
Awood/Applewood, there is plenty of reason right wingers are hesitant to share their source. It is almost always right wing media BS as opposed to the truth and you all know it. If any of you could manage to bring the truth here, that would certainly bolster your lacking credibility. And whining about the president or his family when they have leisure time is so petty and telling. Did you whine over Bush or Reagan activities? Never-mind, we know the answer.
–
Leon I cannot fathom a CPA saying or believing that “Wealth gives rise to
Capitalism”. Did Adam Smith say that? Never-mind, I know he did not. For a CPA not to understand the very system he supports proves your partisan mind has over-powered the education you have had.
–
Your soliloquy on what wealth is was moving, but no one was speaking of that kind of wealth in this discussion and you know that.
–
Since we do not have a pure Capitalism system, and no one here is advocating changing the system we have, what pray tell is your point, or even Paula Doss’? No one is attacking Capitalism, we are seriously questioning the corruption and harm from some of its practitioners. So do you when it is convenient.
–
Where do you suppose that medical or other fraud comes from? Could it be some corrupt capitalists?
–
The government is not the liar we need to worry about IMO.
Sandi, let’s pose the same questions to you, shall we?
.
When gas prices fluctuated under ‘W’, if I recall, liberals said it was because he was in bed with big oil.
.
It seems to me that an equally important question to ask in determining hypocrisy would be not only did conservatives whine when Bush played golf, but did liberals, the same liberals who are strangely silent when Obama commits many, if not most, of the same transgressions for which they railed so ruthlessly against Bush. Don’t kid yourselves. Liberals are equally adept at hypocrisy and blind partisanship as are conservatives.
.
No one here is attacking capitalism? Really? Oh Scott M., where are you?
.
As much as liberals and their media lapdogs want to convince everyone that “it as the fault of the obstructionist Republicans”, the truth is, both sides are equally to blame. Neither side is willing to bend an inch. These blogs are an almost perfect microcosm. No one here wants to talk about issues, problems or solutions. They just want to point fingers, call names and blame “the other side”. Newsflash people. “The other side” is China and the longer we act like petulant children, the more likely we are to lose.
“When gas prices fluctuated under ‘W’, if I recall, liberals said it was because he was in bed with big oil.”
Funny, I don’t seem to recall any “secret energy taskforce” involving this president. And hey Frank, I try never to match wits with an unarmed opponent.
Leon | March 2, 2013 at 12:08 am
—
Capitalism is based on steps – developing the idea that there may be a need for a service or product; creating the product or service to meet the demand – which may ultimately lead to a privately held and profitable enterprise.
—
From the very beginning, it was labor that came before a product – product before profit – profit before wealth. Wealth is the caboose of the “labor train” following behind the “engine” of entrepreneurship.
—
Jobs are created as a result of an entrepreneur’s success [labors] – jobs are created to allow that entrepreneur’s wealth to be maintained or increased. The process is a bottom up, NOT a top down flow. Jobs create wealth.
—
Only if the wealthy “reinvest” to increase their own profits can they be categorized as a job-producing enterprises. Many times, like Romney and Bain Capital, the profits are taken, pocketed or shipped overseas, and the “enterprise” is closed, adding only to a net loss of jobs. A great many “wealthy” individuals inherit their $millions – invest outside the country – and never “create jobs”.
—
Sadly this discussion is simply a “chicken and egg” dilemma, no?
—
Leon if you comment, please stick to one topic and not go off on a tangent…don’t go off on the government, the President, Joe Biden…. The subject was ‘do the wealthy create jobs’?
—
gdad | March 2, 2013 at 10:31 am
#77 Well you see, Dan, I was merely trying to make a point about the quality of a source Leon provided for us in an effort to prove his ridiculous contention that Obama isn’t a citizen. The craziness came from Leon and from the fellow he linked to. I didn’t make it up.
XXX Gdad, As to any other articles written by Leo Donofrio; other than the one I specifically linked which does provide the detail behind why a great many people question Obama’s eligibility with reasonable cause to do so; i personally do not have a clue nor, apparently, do you. As to the eligibility issue (not a birther issue) please note the following:
1) The 1875 SC decision in Minor vs Happersett required the court to determine the plaintiff’s citizenship. In covering this base they defined
natural born citizen as mentioned in the constitution as a requirement to
be POTUS. This definition specified being born of two US citizen parent(S). . .two, dos, 2, II, . . .plural.
2) In a post subsequent to mine Dan indicated the felt the 19th amendment overuled the Minor decision which case did involve a question of voting rights.
IMO, and as indicated by the article, while the 19th amendment might overrule the outcome of the case relative to voting rights it would not change the definition of NBC as determined in the decision which is SC precedent.
One must be born of two US citizen parents to be a NBC and eligible, therefore, to be POTUS. Hence, by his own admissions in his book(s), verbal
statements and posted birth certificate (proven to be fraudulent by exhaustive
investigation); Obama is not President; only Resident.
At the moment I am not going further other than to say that there does exist
a reasonable basis for doubt that Obama is eligible. There is much more evidence that the Minor case and his personal ambitions. Investigations and
litigation continue on this matter in numerous jurisdictions.
IMO, citizens of the US has a right, as well as a responsibility to know whether Obama is eligible. At present we do not as records have been sealed and to date, Obama has spent in excess of $5.0 million on attorney’s fees to block records access and defend against litigations in this matter.
This certainly begs the question. . .why?
If he is eligible why not provide the proof and be done with the issue. This
he has not done. . .again, begs the question. . .why?
If he is not, in fact, eligible the ramifications of such scenerio are mind boggling. Certainly a case of high treason as well as monumental criminal
conspiracy are approriate. The US would have a literal constitutional crisis.
Nevetheless, IMO, US citizens have a right and responsibility to know; the
government belongs to the people.
Gdad@75 and 77. . .since you liked Leo Donofrio sooooooooo mucho. . .have a bite of Mario Apuzzo. . .http://puzo1.blogspot.com/
“1) The 1875 SC decision in Minor vs Happersett required the court to determine the plaintiff’s citizenship. In covering this base they defined natural born citizen as mentioned in the constitution as a requirement to be POTUS. This definition specified being born of two US citizen parent(S). . .two, dos, 2, II, . . .plural.”
–Leon
-
Leon, this is as INCORRECT as it possible could be. Previously, I quoted the relevant paragraph of the SCOTUS opinion to you, in an effort to set you straight. Have you READ the opinion? It EXPLICITLY says they’re not going to pass any judgment on the natural born-ness of anyone who has one parent who’s not a citizen.
-
I suggest you read the opinion (or re-read it, if you already have). The only way you could make such a claim after re-reading it is if you were lying. There’s no wiggle room there.
Dan@93
From Minor vs Happersett,
The Constitution does not, in words, say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common-law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. Some authorities go further and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their parents. As to this class there have been doubts, but never as to the first. For the purposes of this case it is not necessary to solve these doubts. It is sufficient for everything we have now to consider that all children born of citizen parents within the jurisdiction are themselves citizens. The words “all children” are certainly as comprehensive, when used in this connection, as “all persons,” and if females are included in the last they must be in the first. That they are included in the last is not denied. In fact the whole argument of the plaintiffs proceeds upon that idea.
http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/minorvhapp.html
Dan,
IMO, the above is the operative clause which defines Natural Born Citizen. Note; “parents” not “parent” applies. As the case focused on the voting rights of women other issues defining citizenship were not addressed once the court satisfied it’s inqury relative to the plaintiffs specific citizenship
status. They moved on to the voting issue and determined the Constitution
did not grant women the right to vote. This was subsequently changed by’
the 19th amendment but; not the definition of natural born citizen above.
Obama, or anyone else, can be a citizen without being a natural born citizen.
The definition of natural born citizen is clearly indicated in this case. As far
as I know the only place where the difference between citizen and natural born citizen matters is holding the office of POTUS. The constitution clearly
states that being a natural born citizen is a requirement to be eligible for the office. As defined by the court and his own admissions Obama isn;t an NBC.
On this one Dan, we’ll just have to agree to disagree. It would appear to be
clear, however, IMO that the American people do have a right to know whether someone is eligible to hold the office of POTUS. At least we can get rid of the “birther” label as it is plain that it matters not where Obama was born and I thank you for not using such.
It is also notable that there are other challenges to eligibility stemming from
Obama residence in Indonesia, a country that does not recognize dual citizenship. If US citizenship were forfeited in order to become a citizen of
Indonesia such US citizenship could be regained through naturalization. But
naturalized citizens are not natural born citizens.
I acknowledge that it is doubtful a decision on the matter of eligibility will ever
be rendered. To date the SC has avoided hearing such cases, of which there are many, for undisclosed reasons.
Art Hill at post #89,
As evidenced by your posts, Art, you don’t engage in anything constructive, particularly thinking.
” It would appear to be clear, however, IMO that the American people do have a right to know whether someone is eligible to hold the office of POTUS”
Listen, birther, Obama has now been cleared to run for president twice. Not even his opponents questioned that right. People who continue to question it are just desperately loony.
Leon,
All you need to read in the passage from the opinion that you’ve quote above is this:
“For the purposes of this case it is not necessary to solve these doubts. It is sufficient for everything we have now to consider that all children born of citizen parents within the jurisdiction are themselves citizens.”
They were saying, “”For the purposes of this case, we do not need to deal with the question (of the status of children who do not have two citizen-parents) at all.”
Figuratively they were saying, “we know apples are a fruit”. Your peculiar logic is taking that phrase and twisting it into, “Since they did not declare oranges are a fruit, then oranges must be a vegetable.”
That is nuts.
gdad | March 3, 2013 at 10:18 am
” It would appear to be clear, however, IMO that the American people do have a right to know whether someone is eligible to hold the office of POTUS”
Listen, birther, Obama has now been cleared to run for president twice. Not even his opponents questioned that right. People who continue to question it are just desperately loony.
XXX Gdad = wrong. Obama was never vetted per the Congressional Research Service: http://www.examiner.com/article/research-arm-of-the-u-s-congress-confirms-obama-s-eligibility-never-vetted
Leon, you’re linking to garbage again.
Dan Casey | March 3, 2013 at 10:54 am
Leon,
All you need to read in the passage from the opinion that you’ve quote above is this:
“For the purposes of this case it is not necessary to solve these doubts. It is sufficient for everything we have now to consider that all children born of citizen parents within the jurisdiction are themselves citizens.”
They were saying, “”For the purposes of this case, we do not need to deal with the question (of the status of children who do not have two citizen-parents) at all.”
Figuratively they were saying, “we know apples are a fruit”. Your peculiar logic is taking that phrase and twisting it into, “Since they did not declare oranges are a fruit, then oranges must be a vegetable.”
That is nuts.
XXXX Nice attempt at misconstruction Dan. . .the dog won’t hunt.
The SC determined the status of the plaintiffs citizenship. This determination
was required to make subsequent determination of the voting rights issue.
In making the determination of citizenship status the court defined what a
natural born citizen is; born of two, 2, Dos, II US citizen parents.
You are correct in that the court did not consider other types of US citizenship issues as they had already determined that the plaintiff was
a NBC, There are mutliple types of citizenship. One can be born in the USA
ot foreign parents and be a citizen. (thing Obama). One can also be naturalized and become a US citizen. Neither of these two examples equate to a “natural born citizen”.
Obama, by his own admission, cannot be a natural born citizen.
I realize the concept that this could be true; that we have a Resident in the White House; not a President; is difficult to comprehend. IMO a determination should be made; the citizens of America have a right to know.
Dan Casey | March 3, 2013 at 1:40 pm
Leon, you’re linking to garbage again.
Dan,
Is this really your style. . .can’t refute the points made; therefore, attack the source.. BTW; there are about ten pages of internet sources and at lease on full blown book about Obama not being vetted. Pick one that suits you. The bottom line is Gdad is wrong. Obama has never been vetted.
Seems like vetting would be a good idea for the position he occupies.
BTW. . .the first one’s to raise the eligibility issue. . .were Bill and Hillary Clinton during the primaries leading up to the 2008 elections. The issue
flared and then, was quietly dropped.
This is like the bank run in the fall of 2008. . .which created, the first of
oh so many financial crisises. . .which also never happened to get investigated.
Non-investigation of critical issues is a hallmark of this administration. . .Fast & Furious; Solyndra; GM-Delphi; Benghazi; and now. . .Sequestration & release of the previously incarcerated illegal aliens. Certainly makes one wonder. . .what is the end game?
Garbage in, garbage out. Proved here every day with virtually every right wing post.
@95
You’re a troll, “Frank.” Most blogs ban trolls, but not this one. I would posit you drive off more traffic than you bring. I won’t waste time entertaining someone who’s sole purpose is to disrupt honest debate with inane blather.
Leon, you are wrong. They weren’t determining whether the plaintiff was a natural born citizen. They were determining whether she was a citizens.
Scotus found that she was, and then denied her the right to vote.
Leon, this is just so much clap-trap. I can’t believe someone who supposedly passed the CPA exam is so delusional that they actually believe this nonsense. President Obama won the two longest most intensive campaigns in the history of this world. No one has been more vetted than him; it’s just the delusional hayseed tea-party fools that are still holding out for some thread of non-existent hope.
Leon, allow me to rephrase:
1) You provided the link as some sort of proof of what you were talking about; it is to a nonreputable source, a website where anybody can write anything they want, where none of the material is vetted by the way.
2) The author earns 6/10ths of a penny every time someone reads his article. That’s the way The Examiner works. For all we know, he is a liberal and a realist whose goal was to make some money putting up a spurious article he knew was false but would be read by millions of conspiracy-minded nuts. In other words, he could make money fueling their delusions.
3) The fact that the Congressional Research Service has not vetted Obama’s eligibility means nothing, nada, zip. As you are well aware, nothing in the constitution requires such a vetting by the CRS. Nor does the CRS routinely vet presidential candidates. Did they vet Romney? No. Does that prove Romney is ineligible? No.
Leon, more or less you are arguing that nobody in Virginia can be a CPA until the the State Board of Veterinary Medicine has examined their credentials.
It’s loony-tunes stuff. As a licensed CPA I’m shocked you don’t realize that.
Right, Leon. One of the Clinton’s lackeys raised the issue. They they dropped it because it was obviously dumb and a bad move.
Why can’t you let go? All of the other same people have.
Dan Casey | March 3, 2013 at 4:47 pm
Leon, you are wrong. They weren’t determining whether the plaintiff was a natural born citizen. They were determining whether she was a citizens.
Scotus found that she was, and then denied her the right to vote
XXX CORRECT Dan; they also established Supreme Court precedent for the definition of natural born citizen = born of two US citizen parents.
Sandi@103, Steve C@106 and Dan@105, 107 and 108. . .it’s crystal clear that anything that doesn’t fit your liberal progressive vision of the world upsets you. It also clear you don’t like sources other than guaranteed “we
buy in to the liberal lie” variety. Good news is. . .you get to believe whatever
you want as it is yet a free country. Bad news is. . .whether you like it or not
there is more than enough evidence, Supreme Court precedent and verbage
and written statements by both Obama and others close to him to cast a reasonable doubt as to whether he is eligible and such is not going away.
IMO it should be resolved; it does matter. What evidence do you have that
he is in fact eligible save for someone else just saying so? American citizens know less about the background of Obama than any other prior President and the first Executive Orders he issued were to seal his records. Dan based
on your journalism background it would seem you would think in terms of the
five Ws. . .but then, journalism is dead in this country as a profession as it has
corrupted itself to the liberal lie. . .propoganda.
Leon I cannot fathom a CPA saying or believing that “Wealth gives rise to
Capitalism”. Did Adam Smith say that? Never-mind, I know he did not. For a CPA not to understand the very system he supports proves your partisan mind has over-powered the education you have had.
Sandi Saunders | March 2, 2013 at 12:39 pm
XXX My guess. . .there’s a whole lotta stuff you cannot fathom. Adam Smith
is a taxi driver in Philly; Adam West. . .was Batman. Go figure some mo. LOL, LOL
I don’t have time for Leon any more. Few, if any, links he’s offered up to support his cockamamie beliefs are anything more than prime examples of RWer nutzoid pap.
Um, Leon….accountants “support” capitalism? Of all the bizarre stuff you’ve posted, this could be the weirdest.
Speaking of “capitalism”…here’s how the gun-loving Swiss feel…
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/03/swiss-rip-off-initiative_n_2801278.html
“Swiss lawmakers will now have to draft a law giving shareholders the right to hold a binding vote on all compensation for company executives and directors. The law will also ban “golden hellos” and “goodbyes” – one-off bonuses that senior managers sometimes receive when joining or leaving a company.”
Dan Casey | March 3, 2013 at 9:08 pm
I don’t have time for Leon any more. Few, if any, links he’s offered up to support his cockamamie beliefs are anything more than prime examples of RWer nutzoid pap.
XXX I concur, I have no more time to throw at it either. . .time will tell and the truth will out. Investigations continue and court cases keep working there way
to the SC. BTW. . .recent discovery. . .Barack Soetoro and Barry Obama were both at Columbia at same time. . .had same address. Guess they were
roommates. LOL.
It would help your case time if you had some evidence or links to support eligibility. . .guess these are in short supply.
Kristen | March 3, 2013 at 9:21 pm
Um, Leon….accountants “support” capitalism? Of all the bizarre stuff you’ve posted, this could be the weirdest.
XXX LOL, not really bizarro Kristen, the vast majority of accountants I know,
have known and do business with are a conservative lot . . .plus they all like
green eye shades. Keep your pencil sharp!
Wonder how much she who shall not b e named is paying Leon and Frank
to keep alive the mantra of the loony bin while she’s on vacation in the Bahamas pretending to be observing Lent?
wayne goodman | March 4, 2013 at 12:33 am
Wonder how much she who shall not b e named is paying Leon and Frank
to keep alive the mantra of the loony bin while she’s on vacation in the Bahamas pretending to be observing Lent?
XXX A low information voter breaks wind!
Leon, only in your dreams are you “making points”. In reality, you are slinging mud and sounding unstable. No wonder all of you right wingers have to stay anonymous. No one of sound mind would sign their name to the drivel you all push here daily. Trying to refute insanity is pointless so we no longer try.
Leon is so correct, the libbie coms are the unstable ones as they can’t see the truth for the communist resident..both parents wee commies, his ‘mentor’ was a commie, his ‘friends’ wherever THEY are, were and so were the profs in the college barry and barack attended. He himself stated he followed marxist readings and now he is proving it..you guys are limp wristed low info voters and we all see it , too bad you dont.
Sandi Saunders | March 4, 2013 at 9:02 am Leon, only in your dreams are you “making points”. In reality, you are slinging mud and sounding unstable. No wonder all of you right wingers have to stay anonymous. No one of sound mind would sign their name to the drivel you all push here daily. Trying to refute insanity is pointless so we no longer try.
xxx And what Sandi is your point. You refute no point made. You offer no
supporting info supporting the Residents eligibility. Oh, I get it. . .you can
break wind like Wayne. . .foul point.
No Leon, you don’t “get it”, THAT is my point. You and pammala are in a parallel universe and there is nothing to refute whatever “point” it is you believe you have made. Shadow box with yourself.
“Trying to refute insanity is pointless so we no longer try.”
Ignore these clowns and they’ll go away. Just sayin’…
Why does this thread make me feel that a time machine has zoomed me back to the 1950′s during the “red scare” – with “commies” under every bed? Some of the most asinine comments have been posted above.
—
I’m with Dan – I refuse to have a “battle of wits” with unarmed people …
Leon | March 4, 2013 at 3:22 am
wayne goodman | March 4, 2013 at 12:33 am
Wonder how much she who shall not b e named is paying Leon and Frank
to keep alive the mantra of the loony bin while she’s on vacation in the Bahamas pretending to be observing Lent?
XXX A low information voter breaks wind!
My apologies folks. I let a Leon.