Forum Home Forum Home > Topics not related to music > General discussions
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Political discussion thread
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedPolitical discussion thread

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 5051525354 303>
Author
Message
horsewithteeth11 View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: January 09 2008
Location: Kentucky
Status: Offline
Points: 24598
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 28 2009 at 16:01
Originally posted by Slartibartfast Slartibartfast wrote:

Originally posted by birdwithteeth11 birdwithteeth11 wrote:

Originally posted by Slartibartfast Slartibartfast wrote:

Originally posted by IVNORD IVNORD wrote:

Bill Clinton made millions from foreign sources
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090127/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/clinton_finances

Who would you rather pay to speak Clinton or GW Bush?  I guess we'll see in the coming years. Wink

Can I pick neither?LOL


Yes, you can.  Anyway I wouldn't have any spare money to hear either of them speak, and I'm not interested in buying any tickets either.  However, a mud wrestling match...

Now that would be an even to see!Wink
Back to Top
Slartibartfast View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator / In Memoriam

Joined: April 29 2006
Location: Atlantais
Status: Offline
Points: 29630
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 28 2009 at 18:39
Say no more:

He was just resting his eyes, yeah that's the ticket. LOL


Here's a few more funnies to spare folks from actually having to visit bartcop.com:






Edited by Slartibartfast - January 29 2009 at 15:06
Back to Top
IVNORD View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: December 13 2006
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 1191
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 28 2009 at 21:54
Originally posted by Slartibartfast Slartibartfast wrote:

Originally posted by IVNORD IVNORD wrote:

Bill Clinton made millions from foreign sources
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090127/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/clinton_finances

Who would you rather pay to speak Clinton or GW Bush?  I guess we'll see in the coming years. Wink


I would rather pay for both of them to shut up.
Back to Top
IVNORD View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: December 13 2006
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 1191
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 28 2009 at 21:56
Originally posted by The T The T wrote:

Originally posted by IVNORD IVNORD wrote:

Bill Clinton made millions from foreign sources
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090127/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/clinton_finances
 
So what? Should he be prohibited of making millions with his speeches? Why don't we prohibit Bush from making millions with his businesses then?
Oh yeah? Speeches? Who would pay $200K just to hear him speak?
Back to Top
The T View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: October 16 2006
Location: FL, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 17493
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 28 2009 at 22:01
Originally posted by IVNORD IVNORD wrote:

Originally posted by The T The T wrote:

Originally posted by IVNORD IVNORD wrote:

Bill Clinton made millions from foreign sources
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090127/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/clinton_finances
 
So what? Should he be prohibited of making millions with his speeches? Why don't we prohibit Bush from making millions with his businesses then?
Oh yeah? Speeches? Who would pay $200K just to hear him speak?
 
I'm not saying you have to attend his speeches or even that they're any good. I'm just quite amazed at your surprise and bewilderment and the quick notice you have given us about this irrelevant fact.
Back to Top
IVNORD View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: December 13 2006
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 1191
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 28 2009 at 22:34
Originally posted by The T The T wrote:

Originally posted by IVNORD IVNORD wrote:

Originally posted by The T The T wrote:

Originally posted by IVNORD IVNORD wrote:

Bill Clinton made millions from foreign sources
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090127/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/clinton_finances
 
So what? Should he be prohibited of making millions with his speeches? Why don't we prohibit Bush from making millions with his businesses then?
Oh yeah? Speeches? Who would pay $200K just to hear him speak?
 
I'm not saying you have to attend his speeches or even that they're any good. I'm just quite amazed at your surprise and bewilderment and the quick notice you have given us about this irrelevant fact.
What irrelevant fact? Those speech payments are disguised lobbying fees.
Back to Top
The T View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: October 16 2006
Location: FL, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 17493
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 29 2009 at 13:46
Originally posted by IVNORD IVNORD wrote:

Originally posted by The T The T wrote:

Originally posted by IVNORD IVNORD wrote:

Originally posted by The T The T wrote:

Originally posted by IVNORD IVNORD wrote:

Bill Clinton made millions from foreign sources
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090127/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/clinton_finances
 
So what? Should he be prohibited of making millions with his speeches? Why don't we prohibit Bush from making millions with his businesses then?
Oh yeah? Speeches? Who would pay $200K just to hear him speak?
 
I'm not saying you have to attend his speeches or even that they're any good. I'm just quite amazed at your surprise and bewilderment and the quick notice you have given us about this irrelevant fact.
What irrelevant fact? Those speech payments are disguised lobbying fees.
 
Oh I understand... Bring forth the evidence sir... I guess this is exclusive of democrats, the lobbying thing, isn't it?
Back to Top
Slartibartfast View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator / In Memoriam

Joined: April 29 2006
Location: Atlantais
Status: Offline
Points: 29630
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 29 2009 at 14:36
Originally posted by IVNORD IVNORD wrote:

Originally posted by Slartibartfast Slartibartfast wrote:

Originally posted by IVNORD IVNORD wrote:

Bill Clinton made millions from foreign sources
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090127/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/clinton_finances

Who would you rather pay to speak Clinton or GW Bush?  I guess we'll see in the coming years. Wink


I would rather pay for both of them to shut up.


I'd suspect that might work better with GW than Bill.  Nukeular nukeular nukeular.  Ah feel your paihn. LOL

DO WE HAVE TO LISTEN TO THIS
FOR THE NEXT 4 (8) YEARS?







Edited by Slartibartfast - January 30 2009 at 11:52
Back to Top
IVNORD View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: December 13 2006
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 1191
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 29 2009 at 19:52
Originally posted by The T The T wrote:

Originally posted by IVNORD IVNORD wrote:

Originally posted by The T The T wrote:

Originally posted by IVNORD IVNORD wrote:

Originally posted by The T The T wrote:

Originally posted by IVNORD IVNORD wrote:

Bill Clinton made millions from foreign sources
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090127/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/clinton_finances
 
So what? Should he be prohibited of making millions with his speeches? Why don't we prohibit Bush from making millions with his businesses then?
Oh yeah? Speeches? Who would pay $200K just to hear him speak?
 
I'm not saying you have to attend his speeches or even that they're any good. I'm just quite amazed at your surprise and bewilderment and the quick notice you have given us about this irrelevant fact.
What irrelevant fact? Those speech payments are disguised lobbying fees.
 
Oh I understand... Bring forth the evidence sir... I guess this is exclusive of democrats, the lobbying thing, isn't it?
Not at all. It's a well-known fact that presidents make money when they leave office
Back to Top
stonebeard View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: May 27 2005
Location: NE Indiana
Status: Offline
Points: 28057
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 29 2009 at 23:53
Cartoons...........so..............unfunny.............must.............not.....................kill.................again.
Back to Top
Henry Plainview View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: May 26 2008
Location: Declined
Status: Offline
Points: 16715
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 30 2009 at 04:21
Originally posted by stonebeard stonebeard wrote:

Cartoons...........so..............unfunny.............must.............not.....................kill.................again.
Give in.....together....we.......can.....become.....more.....powerful.........than........they........can......imagine.
if you own a sodastream i hate you
Back to Top
Slartibartfast View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator / In Memoriam

Joined: April 29 2006
Location: Atlantais
Status: Offline
Points: 29630
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 30 2009 at 11:52
Bwahahahahaha. Evil Smile

Edited by Slartibartfast - February 02 2009 at 16:13
Back to Top
JJLehto View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: April 05 2006
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Status: Offline
Points: 34550
Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 02 2009 at 15:55
I wish we could all just out our political differences aside.
Let's have a party.

A communist party!


Back to Top
Slartibartfast View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator / In Memoriam

Joined: April 29 2006
Location: Atlantais
Status: Offline
Points: 29630
Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 02 2009 at 16:03
Thanks for posting that, I love that cartoon (seen it before). 

From our local paper's daily feature called The Vent:

If there's one upside from
that Gove. Rod Blagojevich
fisaco in Illinois, it's that we
learned how to pronounce
his previously unpronouncable
name.






Edited by Slartibartfast - February 03 2009 at 14:19
Back to Top
Slartibartfast View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator / In Memoriam

Joined: April 29 2006
Location: Atlantais
Status: Offline
Points: 29630
Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 03 2009 at 14:19


cartoon


Edited by Slartibartfast - February 08 2009 at 02:16
Back to Top
Padraic View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: February 16 2006
Location: Pennsylvania
Status: Offline
Points: 31169
Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 03 2009 at 14:23
Ah, yes.  "Bipartisanship", or as I see it, "Drop all your arguments and do what we tell you to do."
Back to Top
horsewithteeth11 View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: January 09 2008
Location: Kentucky
Status: Offline
Points: 24598
Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 07 2009 at 12:18
Charley Reese has been a journalist for 49 years.


 545 PEOPLE
By Charlie Reese
Politicians are the only people in the world who create problems and then campaign against them.

Have you ever wondered, if both the Democrats and the Republicans are against deficits, WHY do we have deficits?

Have you ever wondered, if all the politicians are against inflation and high taxes, WHY do we have inflation and high taxes?

You and I don't propose a federal budget.  The president does.

You and I don't have the Constitutional authority to vote on appropriations. The House of Representatives does.

You and I don't write the tax code, Congress does.

You and I don't set fiscal policy, Congress does.

You and I don't control monetary policy, the Federal Reserve Bank does.

One hundred senators, 435 congressmen, one president, and nine Supreme Court justices  545 human beings out of the 300 million are directly, legally, morally, and individually responsible for the domestic problems that plague this country.

I excluded the members of the Federal Reserve Board because that problem was created by the Congress.   In 1913, Congress delegated its Constitutional duty to provide a sound currency to a federally chartered, but private, central bank.

I excluded all the special interests and lobbyists for a sound reason. They have no legal authority.  They have no ability to coerce a senator, a congressman, or a president to do one cotton-picking
 thing.  I don't care if they offer a politician $1 million dollars in cash.
The politician has the power to accept or reject it. No matter what the lobbyist promises, it is the legislator's responsibility to determine how he votes.

Those 545 human beings spend much of their energy convincing you that what they did is not their fault.   They cooperate in this common con regardless of party.
 
What separates a politician from a normal human being is an excessive amount of gall.   No 
normal human being would have the gall of
 a Speaker, who stood up and criticized the President for creating deficits.   The president can only propose a budget.   He cannot force the Congress to accept it.

The Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land, gives sole responsibility to the House of Representatives
 for originating and approving appropriations and taxes.   
Who is the speaker of the House?   Nancy Pelosi.  She is the leader of the majority party.  She and fellow House members, not the president, can approve any budget they want. If the president vetoes it, they can pass it over his veto if they agree to.

It seems inconceivable to me that a nation of 300 million can not replace 545 people who stand convicted -- by present facts -- of incompetence and irresponsibility.   I can't think of a single
 
domestic problem that is not traceable directly to those 545 people.  When you fully grasp the plain truth that 545 people exercise the power of the federal government, then it must follow that what exists is what they want to exist.
 
If the tax code is unfair, it's because they want it unfair.

If the budget is in the red, it's because they want it in the red .

If the Army & Marines are in   IRAQ , it's because they want them in  IRAQ 

If they do not receive social security but are on an elite retirement plan not available to the people, it's because they want it that way.

There are no insoluble government problems.

Do not let these 545 people shift the blame to bureaucrats, whom they hire and whose jobs they can abolish; to lobbyists, whose gifts and advice they can reject; to regulators, to whom they give the power to regulate and from whom they can take this power.   Above all, do not let them con you into the belief that there exists disembodied mystical forces like "the economy," "inflation," or "politics" that prevent them from doing what they take an oath to do.
 
Those 545 people, and they alone, are responsible.
 
They, and they alone, have the power.

They, and they alone, should be held accountable by the people who are their bosses.  Provided the voters have the gumption to manage their own employees.

 We should vote all of them out of office and clean up their mess!
 
 Charlie Reese is a former columnist of the Orlando Sentinel Newspaper.   What you do with this article now that you have read it.......... is up to you.
Back to Top
Slartibartfast View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator / In Memoriam

Joined: April 29 2006
Location: Atlantais
Status: Offline
Points: 29630
Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 08 2009 at 02:12

Collapse Of Antarctic Ice Sheet Would Likely Put Washington, D.C. Largely Underwater

University of Toronto and Oregon State University geophysicists have shown that should the West Antarctic Ice Sheet collapse and melt in a warming world – as many scientists are concerned it will – it is the coastlines of North America and of nations in the southern Indian Ocean that will face the greatest threats from rising sea levels.The catastrophic increase in sea level, already projected to average between 16 and 17 feet around the world, would be almost 21 feet in such places as Washington, D.C., scientists say, putting it largely underwater. Many coastal areas would be devastated. Much of Southern Florida would disappear, according to researchers at Oregon State University.


Edited by Slartibartfast - February 08 2009 at 02:26
Back to Top
crimhead View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar
VIP Member

Joined: October 10 2006
Location: Missouri
Status: Offline
Points: 19236
Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 08 2009 at 02:20
Originally posted by Slartibartfast Slartibartfast wrote:

Collapse Of Antarctic Ice Sheet Would Likely Put Washington, D.C. Largely Underwater

University of Toronto and Oregon State University geophysicists have shown that should the West Antarctic Ice Sheet collapse and melt in a warming world – as many scientists are concerned it will – it is the coastlines of North America and of nations in the southern Indian Ocean that will face the greatest threats from rising sea levels.The catastrophic increase in sea level, already projected to average between 16 and 17 feet around the world, would be almost 21 feet in such places as Washington, D.C., scientists say, putting it largely underwater. Many coastal areas would be devastated. Much of Southern Florida would disappear, according to researchers at Oregon State University.
 
Wash DC I'm not worried about......Florida would suck. There is a lot of nice beach front property there.


Edited by crimhead - February 08 2009 at 02:21
Back to Top
Slartibartfast View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator / In Memoriam

Joined: April 29 2006
Location: Atlantais
Status: Offline
Points: 29630
Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 08 2009 at 02:25
Originally posted by crimhead crimhead wrote:

Originally posted by Slartibartfast Slartibartfast wrote:

Collapse Of Antarctic Ice Sheet Would Likely Put Washington, D.C. Largely Underwater

University of Toronto and Oregon State University geophysicists have shown that should the West Antarctic Ice Sheet collapse and melt in a warming world – as many scientists are concerned it will – it is the coastlines of North America and of nations in the southern Indian Ocean that will face the greatest threats from rising sea levels.The catastrophic increase in sea level, already projected to average between 16 and 17 feet around the world, would be almost 21 feet in such places as Washington, D.C., scientists say, putting it largely underwater. Many coastal areas would be devastated. Much of Southern Florida would disappear, according to researchers at Oregon State University.
 
Wash DC I'm not worried about......Florida would suck. There is a lot of nice beach front property there.

But on the other hand I wouldn't have to drive as far from Atlanta to get to a beach. LOL
Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...

Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 5051525354 303>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.484 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.