I was right about the false two party paradigm. They did it to you AGAIN!!!

[Siete]

Hey Dot Com, calm down. You spent most of the thread attacking Republicans despite them agreeing the bill is bullshit and so are the Reps that voted for it.What you have not seen is what many of us point out, no libs coming on here to bitch about how Dems let them down.

It's a House bill, passed by a Republican House.

sssshhhhhhh ... don't confuse them.

Careful, Dot com might end up attacking you for trying to make this all about Republicans!!!! =D Or prolly not, as I stated. Or even more to my point, that if libs say anything, it will be in defense of Dems and blaming Reps, like you just did =D

Im not blaming anyone ... just giving credit where credit is due. ^^^^^^^^^^^^

 

[Avorysuds]

It's a 1600 page bill that has all kinds of good things in it.

Did you read it, or are you just parroting your favorite partisan media source?

Did you?

I have not made any claims about this bill. I did not claim it is full of vitamins and minerals and is good for you like OKTexas did.

I dono G5.... I don't remember making any claims about the bill.... I guess your comment whipped back and hit you in your hypocritical face eh?

Hey, dipshit. OKTexas claimed the 1600 page bill had all kinds of good things in it. So I asked HIM if he had read it.

I was talking to OKTexas. You inserted your dumb ass into the conversation.

OKTexas made a claim, dumbass, and I asked if he had read it or was he just parroting something he heard. I was not talking to you.

So what is your major malfunction, idiot?

I'll give it to you straight G5 because you need it.

You're a wannabe smart ass who ends up being an ironic hypocrite.

Fact is you are smart, you get most things and even better than I do (not that my level of "getting it is something special,.) But when you insult people you try and pretend you're smarter than others, you generally don't call people a "fuckass" or other simple insults, no, you try and make yourself sound smarter than. Somewhere along the way you seemed to forget you don't know everything and arrogantly make an ass of yourself.

For instance, I just got done pointing out that you hypocritically attacked me for saying you made claims about "the bill." You just keep motoring along rather than going "oh shit, I totally did just do what I condemned another for doing."

So I figure I'll waste my time to show were you once again make an ironically hypocritical attack.

My response to Dot Come (having nothing to do with you...

Me: Hey Dot Com, calm down. You spent most of the thread attacking Republicans despite them agreeing the bill is bullshit and so are the Reps that voted for it.What you have not seen is what many of us point out, no libs coming on here to bitch about how Dems let them down.

You: It's a House bill, passed by a Republican House.

Let me quote a great and wise shit talker in reply to your interjection in others conversations, especially when that interjection bars 100% no relevence on the topic one was rudely interjecting themselves into.

"I was talking to Dot Com. You inserted your dumb ass into the conversation. So what is your major malfunction, idiot?"

You owned yourself... Wondering if you can even accept that you did this or if further arrogance will ensue.

 

[g5000]

For instance, I just got done pointing out that you hypocritically attacked me for saying you made claims about "the bill." You just keep motoring along rather than going "oh shit, I totally did just do what I condemned another for doing."

Once again, dumbass, I was not talking to YOU. I was talking to OKTexas and you inserted yourself into the conversation. OKTexas made a claim, and I asked him if he had read the bill.

I think we all know he has not.

I can't help it if you are so retarded that you felt you needed to say you had made no claims about the bill when you weren't the one I was talking about or asking.

You got yourself confused. That is not hypocrisy on my part. It is idiocy on your part.

I don't mind you inserting yourself into the conversation, but I do mind when you get confused and think you are the one I was asking to support a claim.

Got it now?

 

[Dot Com]

Hey Dot Com, calm down. You spent most of the thread attacking Republicans despite them agreeing the bill is bullshit and so are the Reps that voted for it.What you have not seen is what many of us point out, no libs coming on here to bitch about how Dems let them down.

You are attacking the Republican voters for being used and then giving their party a pass, yet only Reps are here condemning their party... My question to you is why did it take so long for you to see Dems are just as bad as Reps? Obama started a new war in IRAQ LOLz! I mean where is the fucking war protest this time around? Spying all all american citizens, and allies.... Spending more on military and wars than Bush did... Lying more than any other president in the country's history, and getting caught repeatedly. What clicked over about this spending bill but not the rest of Obama's moronic policies?

I said BOTH parties backpedaler boi. What don't you understand about that?

 

[Avorysuds]

Hey Dot Com, calm down. You spent most of the thread attacking Republicans despite them agreeing the bill is bullshit and so are the Reps that voted for it.What you have not seen is what many of us point out, no libs coming on here to bitch about how Dems let them down.

It's a House bill, passed by a Republican House.

sssshhhhhhh ... don't confuse them.

Careful, Dot com might end up attacking you for trying to make this all about Republicans!!!! =D Or prolly not, as I stated. Or even more to my point, that if libs say anything, it will be in defense of Dems and blaming Reps, like you just did =D

Im not blaming anyone ... just giving credit where credit is due. ^^^^^^^^^^^^

I agree, the House is made up 100% of Republicans. When people Run for President and have been in the House or Senate their individual voting history plays no part in their odd of winning or losing an election. Good call, I hope the Senate and Obama don't give it the OK, cuz I'd hate to see Dems defend themselves with "we didn't want to shut down the Government."

 

[g5000]

Now where was I.

Ah, yes. The actual bill, which I have linked so you don't have to make any assumptions or drink the piss of whatever media filter you like.

We can see from the parts I quoted extensively that this spending bill contains some provisions which have fuck-all to do with setting a discretionary spending budget, and I would even venture to say that one of them borders on being unconstitutional, if not actually crossing that line. It is most certainly a vindictive and hypocritical provision.


So here's the thing. If I feed you a carrot laced with arsenic, how stupid would you have to be to say that carrot had all kinds of good things in it? While technically true, it is a retarded thing to say.

 

[Avorysuds]

Hey Dot Com, calm down. You spent most of the thread attacking Republicans despite them agreeing the bill is bullshit and so are the Reps that voted for it.What you have not seen is what many of us point out, no libs coming on here to bitch about how Dems let them down.

You are attacking the Republican voters for being used and then giving their party a pass, yet only Reps are here condemning their party... My question to you is why did it take so long for you to see Dems are just as bad as Reps? Obama started a new war in IRAQ LOLz! I mean where is the fucking war protest this time around? Spying all all american citizens, and allies.... Spending more on military and wars than Bush did... Lying more than any other president in the country's history, and getting caught repeatedly. What clicked over about this spending bill but not the rest of Obama's moronic policies?

I said BOTH parties backpedaler boi. What don't you understand about that?

You did, after I talked talked to you about it, grats on that. As I laid out, your started a thread entitled Reps and Dems fuck up, then proceeded to only attack Reps.... Don't fully understand why or how that is hard to follow.

Honestly I'm happy to see you seeing both parties for more of what they are, really.

 

[Avorysuds]

For instance, I just got done pointing out that you hypocritically attacked me for saying you made claims about "the bill." You just keep motoring along rather than going "oh shit, I totally did just do what I condemned another for doing."

Once again, dumbass, I was not talking to YOU. I was talking to OKTexas and you inserted yourself into the conversation. OKTexas made a claim, and I asked him if he had read the bill.

I think we all know he has not.

I can't help it if you are so retarded that you felt you needed to say you had made no claims about the bill when you weren't the one I was talking about or asking.

You got yourself confused. That is not hypocrisy on my part. It is idiocy on your part.

I don't mind you inserting yourself into the conversation, but I do mind when you get confused and think you are the one I was asking to support a claim.

Got it now?

Fair enough, but same to you and same to you for doing it first (to me) in this thread. Hope you learned from this =D Maybe I should have posted the timeline in the quotes... damn... If you want to look it up here's a hint, you will have to go back before I interjected myself into your conversation.

 

[g5000]

For instance, I just got done pointing out that you hypocritically attacked me for saying you made claims about "the bill." You just keep motoring along rather than going "oh shit, I totally did just do what I condemned another for doing."

Once again, dumbass, I was not talking to YOU. I was talking to OKTexas and you inserted yourself into the conversation. OKTexas made a claim, and I asked him if he had read the bill.

I think we all know he has not.

I can't help it if you are so retarded that you felt you needed to say you had made no claims about the bill when you weren't the one I was talking about or asking.

You got yourself confused. That is not hypocrisy on my part. It is idiocy on your part.

I don't mind you inserting yourself into the conversation, but I do mind when you get confused and think you are the one I was asking to support a claim.

Got it now?

Fair enough, but same to you and same to you for doing it first (to me) in this thread. Hope you learned from this =D

You are the one who made the mistake, so there is nothing for me to learn. Except to maybe speak to you in smaller and more digestible words.

 

[g5000]

This is where you went wrong Av,

I dono G5.... I don't remember making any claims about the bill.

I never said you had. OKTexas said it had all kinds of good things in it, and I asked if he had read it.

See, when someone says a bill has all kinds of good things in it, that's a claim. I wanted to know upon what this claim was based. Had he read it for himself, or was he just being a parrot?

Got it? At no point did I say YOU had made a claim.

 

[g5000]

We now know for a fact the spending bill has some very partisan provisions in it that have nothing to do with keeping the government running.

It is up to each person to decide whether those provisions belong in a spending bill, and to decide if they are good or bad provisions.

If they are poison, then the carrot is laced with arsenic and no amount of vitamin K in it will make a difference.

 

[Harry Dresden]

How does it feel knowing that you are voting for & paying those puppet's salaries to funnel money to the top. Rubes

why dont you tell us.....you do it enough.....Rube....

 

[g5000]

In my opinion, the provision allowing banks to go back to selling the same exotic swaps and derivatives which caused the last crash, while allowing their fuckups to be backstopped by the American taxpayer, is extremely toxic.

The banks which survived the crash are even bigger than they were before the crash. They are not longer Too Big To Fail. They are Too Big To Save.

And what will happen if a Too Big To Save institution fucks up and crashes?

Ponder that.

 

[Harry Dresden]

you vote for either major party & you're a dupe PERIOD!!!

Sneak Attack Congress Slips Controversial Measures into Spending Bill - NBC News

The second measure Congress snuck into the spending the bill will be more galling to some, because it amounts to a pay raise for the two unpopular political parties: It raises the $32,400 maximum that donors could give the Democratic National Committee or Republican National Committee to a whopping $324,000 per year, gutting what's left of the McCain-Feingold campaign-finance law. The Washington Post says this was inserted on page 1,599 of a 1,603-page bill (!!!). These two measures -- and probably more like them -- will become law because they were jammed into a must-pass spending bill to keep the government open. Remember all the grumbling about transparency? All the grumbling about gigantic bills that many members of Congress never read? Given that, what happened last night was mind blowing.

You Republicrats must feel pretty foolish about now

nah, the Rw's are too stupid to feel foolish. Being on the long end of their own hypocrisy is one of their favorite things.

you vote for either major party & you're a dupe PERIOD!!!

Sneak Attack Congress Slips Controversial Measures into Spending Bill - NBC News

The second measure Congress snuck into the spending the bill will be more galling to some, because it amounts to a pay raise for the two unpopular political parties: It raises the $32,400 maximum that donors could give the Democratic National Committee or Republican National Committee to a whopping $324,000 per year, gutting what's left of the McCain-Feingold campaign-finance law. The Washington Post says this was inserted on page 1,599 of a 1,603-page bill (!!!). These two measures -- and probably more like them -- will become law because they were jammed into a must-pass spending bill to keep the government open. Remember all the grumbling about transparency? All the grumbling about gigantic bills that many members of Congress never read? Given that, what happened last night was mind blowing.

You Republicrats must feel pretty foolish about now

nah, the Rw's are too stupid to feel foolish. Being on the long end of their own hypocrisy is one of their favorite things.

do you even realize that the dipshit you are agreeing with.....does the exact same thing he is getting on the right about?....well maybe not you are fairly new....

 

[Avorysuds]

For instance, I just got done pointing out that you hypocritically attacked me for saying you made claims about "the bill." You just keep motoring along rather than going "oh shit, I totally did just do what I condemned another for doing."

Once again, dumbass, I was not talking to YOU. I was talking to OKTexas and you inserted yourself into the conversation. OKTexas made a claim, and I asked him if he had read the bill.

I think we all know he has not.

I can't help it if you are so retarded that you felt you needed to say you had made no claims about the bill when you weren't the one I was talking about or asking.

You got yourself confused. That is not hypocrisy on my part. It is idiocy on your part.

I don't mind you inserting yourself into the conversation, but I do mind when you get confused and think you are the one I was asking to support a claim.

Got it now?

Fair enough, but same to you and same to you for doing it first (to me) in this thread. Hope you learned from this =D

You are the one who made the mistake, so there is nothing for me to learn. Except to maybe speak to you in smaller and more digestible words.

And there is that arrogance making an ass of yourself lol. And all I did was ask if you read the bill, that's all. You're being pissy and I don't even know why. I didn't even "inject myself into your conversation, I simply asked if you YOU read the bill. I didn't take sides, I didn't talk to Oktexas, it was a question directed at you alone just out of curiosity seeing that you usually do read things and usually do make good points. You simply took it bad.

 

[Avorysuds]

In my opinion, the provision allowing banks to go back to selling the same exotic swaps and derivatives which caused the last crash, while allowing their fuckups to be backstopped by the American taxpayer, is extremely toxic.

The banks which survived the crash are even bigger than they were before the crash. They are not longer Too Big To Fail. They are Too Big To Save.

And what will happen if a Too Big To Save institution fucks up and crashes?

Ponder that.

So seeing that I have not read the bill and honestly don't even understand the process of the bill being passed. Question: is the bill passed or was it a vote on allowing it to be voted on? What do you think the odds of the Senate passing it would be and further do you see Obama slapping it down?

I usually (not always) give myself a week or so form an opinion about "news" of any kind as the story seems to always be an extreme of both left or right opinion at first.

 

[g5000]

The bill will pass because the alternative is a shutdown.

And because Wall Street owns most of the Democrats and Republicans. And our President.

 

[Siete]

you vote for either major party & you're a dupe PERIOD!!!

Sneak Attack Congress Slips Controversial Measures into Spending Bill - NBC News

The second measure Congress snuck into the spending the bill will be more galling to some, because it amounts to a pay raise for the two unpopular political parties: It raises the $32,400 maximum that donors could give the Democratic National Committee or Republican National Committee to a whopping $324,000 per year, gutting what's left of the McCain-Feingold campaign-finance law. The Washington Post says this was inserted on page 1,599 of a 1,603-page bill (!!!). These two measures -- and probably more like them -- will become law because they were jammed into a must-pass spending bill to keep the government open. Remember all the grumbling about transparency? All the grumbling about gigantic bills that many members of Congress never read? Given that, what happened last night was mind blowing.

You Republicrats must feel pretty foolish about now

nah, the Rw's are too stupid to feel foolish. Being on the long end of their own hypocrisy is one of their favorite things.

you vote for either major party & you're a dupe PERIOD!!!

Sneak Attack Congress Slips Controversial Measures into Spending Bill - NBC News

The second measure Congress snuck into the spending the bill will be more galling to some, because it amounts to a pay raise for the two unpopular political parties: It raises the $32,400 maximum that donors could give the Democratic National Committee or Republican National Committee to a whopping $324,000 per year, gutting what's left of the McCain-Feingold campaign-finance law. The Washington Post says this was inserted on page 1,599 of a 1,603-page bill (!!!). These two measures -- and probably more like them -- will become law because they were jammed into a must-pass spending bill to keep the government open. Remember all the grumbling about transparency? All the grumbling about gigantic bills that many members of Congress never read? Given that, what happened last night was mind blowing.

You Republicrats must feel pretty foolish about now

nah, the Rw's are too stupid to feel foolish. Being on the long end of their own hypocrisy is one of their favorite things.

do you even realize that the dipshit you are agreeing with.....does the exact same thing he is getting on the right about?....well maybe not you are fairly new....

go back to sleep HD, if I need you I'll ring a bell or something.

 

[Avorysuds]

In my opinion, the provision allowing banks to go back to selling the same exotic swaps and derivatives which caused the last crash, while allowing their fuckups to be backstopped by the American taxpayer, is extremely toxic.

The banks which survived the crash are even bigger than they were before the crash. They are not longer Too Big To Fail. They are Too Big To Save.

And what will happen if a Too Big To Save institution fucks up and crashes?

Ponder that.

"They are not longer Too Big To Fail. They are Too Big To Save" QFT~

 

[g5000]

A bank makes a loan to a homebuyer in the amount of $200,000.

I am a neighbor of the homebuyer and I think he is a dipshit. So I buy an insurance policy (Credit Default Swap) from that same bank that is a bet the homebuyer will default on his loan.

The bank thinks the loan is solid, and so it sells me the insurance policy because they think I am stupid and am giving them free money.

Nine other people also buy insurance policies betting against my neighbor. The bank takes all their bets. Mo' money! Mo' money!

Then my neighbor defaults. How much money has the bank lost?

Instead of losing $200,000 for making a bad loan, the bank has now lost $2.2 million, minus whatever it can recoup by selling the house.

The bank can't absorb that loss, but it has an ace in the hole. The bankers knew all along that if they made a colossal fuckup, they would be bailed out by the government.

This is how derivatives brought down the planet.

After the crash, Dodd-Frank prevented banks which were insured by the government from selling these exotic derivatives like CDS.

This spending bill just removed that barrier.

Happy times are here again for bankers.