New America Foundation to US - The World's Changed: Get Over It

[xoxoxoBruce]

They don't own us, they just hold the mortgage on our future.

[tw]

Originally Posted by warch

Doesn't China own us now? Didn't the neocons mortgage the country? Perhaps I'm too alarmist.

The last Clinton budget was about $1.8 trillion - maybe 20% of the economy. The last George Jr budget is $3.1 trillion (and ignores costs from "Mission Accomplished") or about 27% of the economy.

Meanwhile, George Jr projected that the American government will have a budget surplus of $48 billion in 2012. What American believes that? Wacko extremists are not preaching to intelligent people. George Jr's budget and projected surplus is for consumption by wacko extremists who blindly believe any myth justified by their political agenda.

China's economy is something like $2.3 trillion. Obviously China cannot own America. But as long as anti-Americans (wacko extremists) even believe "Mission Accomplished" is being won AND fear to ask the damning question ("When do we go after bin Laden"), then America is also discounted for sale.

To pay for increased government spending and unjustified tax cuts, America must be sold to China, et al. And at discounted rates due to a dropping dollar. Chinese, Japanese, and Europeans buying up America are not the anti-Americans - despite outcries from the naive. Those who make America so cheap - wacko extremists with their political agenda ... Well, notice increasing government spending and debt - and a projected 2012 surplus that only an extremist (mental midget) would believe.

Damning numbers. Those who hate America would believe George Jr's projected budget surplus. Those who are patriotic because they use intelligence know the scumbag president is lying again. When does he not lie? When UG rewrites history?

[classicman]

Originally Posted by tw

the scumbag president is lying again. When does he not lie?

Hmmm......

[deadbeater]

The neocons say, 'Relax and bow to the new landlords, five times a day, towards the ENE preferably (towards Mecca--has something to do with the curvature of the Earth).'.

[xoxoxoBruce]

China owns Mecca too?!?

[Urbane Guerrilla]

Tw, you're doing that thalidomide-playing-bagpipes thing again. Get this into your understanding or you'll never be well: the

fear to ask the damning question ("When do we go after bin Laden")

does not exist, did not exist, and will not exist, and furthermore you cannot show it existing. It is a delusional construct of your own mind and no other -- it reflects your own desires that the character of rightwingers devolve until it is no better than your own, you crank.

Your immature thinking still makes you believe it's all personalized, that our troubles with Islamofascists will vanish when we get bin Laden. No; it's bigger than he is.

The rest of the world sees tw as the hater of America, for he never ever calls for action in the Republic's best interest, but always, always tries to sell us something out of the old Soviet propaganda playbook. Dumb dumb dumb, left left left, socialist socialist socialist, immature even, and let's add passe'. Tw is an example for me of how the Left thinks, and I say no thank you. The Left won't allow its adherents to grow or become intelligent.

[warch]

No; it's bigger than he is.

Well sure......now.

[classicman]

The 30% is his approval rating right? Then what about congresses approval rating which is less than that? Why not call them out as well? You seem very selective to attack W and let their shitty records go? Why is that? Anyone? (yes I'm seriously asking)

I'm sorry tw - Its just a point that you have been hammering home for so very very long that its pointless to waste your time typing or our time reading the same words anymore - Its over, the end is in sight - Move the heck on both as an individual and a country - k?

[aimeecc]

tw, you really need to get over yourself. Calling anyone and everyone that does not support your position as anti-American , uneducated, ignorant, and a variety of other barages is completely reprehensible.

Its about a free exchange of ideas and opinions on this board, and no insulting labels should be attached to anyone who makes an informed opinion/decision on an issue - whether you or I or anyone else agrees or disagrees.

[Happy Monkey]

Originally Posted by classicman

The 30% is his approval rating right? Then what about congresses approval rating which is less than that? Why not call them out as well? You seem very selective to attack W and let their shitty records go? Why is that? Anyone? (yes I'm seriously asking)

Because Bush is a person, and Congress is a group. Bush's decisions are on him, but if Congress does something bad, attacking Congress as a whole can be cathartic but is otherwise meaningless. You have to track down whoever pushed the bad thing, or prevented improvement, and blame them. Especially in the Senate, it's easy for small numbers of people to drastically affect the product of the group, and then fade into the woodwork when the time for blame comes around. So Congress gets poor approval, and (I would guess) just about all Senators and Representatives have much higher approval than Bush.

Originally Posted by aimeecc

tw, you really need to get over yourself. Calling anyone and everyone that does not support your position as anti-American , uneducated, ignorant, and a variety of other barages is completely reprehensible.

Heh. It's funny to see this complaint about someone other than UG in an argument involving UG, no less.

[classicman]

Originally Posted by Happy Monkey

Because Bush is a person, and Congress is a group. Bush's decisions are on him, but if Congress does something bad, attacking Congress as a whole can be cathartic but is otherwise meaningless. You have to track down whoever pushed the bad thing, or prevented improvement, and blame them. Especially in the Senate, it's easy for small numbers of people to drastically affect the product of the group, and then fade into the woodwork when the time for blame comes around. So Congress gets poor approval, and (I would guess) just about all Senators and Representatives have much higher approval than Bush.

Seems like you are saying they get a free pass because its easier to blame an individual instead of a group. Based upon your assumption then, they would all be doing a bang up job for their own selfish interests, yet not overall for the country. Hmmm... more thought required. Not sure that makes sense yet.

[icileparadise]

This is exciting, Romney folds and he is so good. Very eloquent and very smart and very rich ,he could have gone on but why did he fold today?

[Happy Monkey]

Originally Posted by classicman

Seems like you are saying they get a free pass because its easier to blame an individual instead of a group.

No, it's easier to blame a group than an individual, but it is useless to do so. That's why Congress's approval rating is so low, and the people responsible for the displeasing behavior are doing fine in the polls. That's how pork gets in. Everybody does it, so blame Congress, not your own Congressman.

Also, people can agree that Congress has problems, but disagree on what those problems are.

Let's say that one reason for disapproving of Congress these days is that they are "do nothing".

Democrats are disappointed in Congress, but they support the Democrats who are trying to do stuff.
Republicans disapprove of Congress because it is under Democratic control, but approve of the Republicans who are threatening filibusters and upholding Bush's vetos.

The Republican members who block all Democratic legislation are from areas where people want Democratic legislation blocked, so they get high approval.

Democratic members are voting for bills that Democratic voters approve of, so they get high approval.

But bills are vetoed and filibustered at record levels, so Congress gets blamed for being "do nothing".

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Happy Monkey

Because Bush is a person, and Congress is a group. Bush's decisions are on him, but if Congress does something bad, attacking Congress as a whole can be cathartic but is otherwise meaningless. You have to track down whoever pushed the bad thing, or prevented improvement, and blame them. Especially in the Senate, it's easy for small numbers of people to drastically affect the product of the group, and then fade into the woodwork when the time for blame comes around. So Congress gets poor approval, and (I would guess) just about all Senators and Representatives have much higher approval than Bush.
Heh. It's funny to see this complaint about someone other than UG in an argument involving UG, no less.

That would be total bull shit. Congress is in the driving seat. Congress' approval rating is 23% and that has been consistantly below Bush's for months.

http://www.pollster.com/

Congress during Bush's reign is at much fault as is Bush himself, if not more, for any of the mess we are in. The Demoncrats ran on a platform of change and have been in office nearly 2 years, doing absolutely nothing. They are in the drivers seats, they get the blame.

[Happy Monkey]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

That would be total bull shit.

No.