Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Do you REALLY think they care about money? They may care about power, legacy & fame and they might like helping people but I don't think Hillary or Trump need money. Do you?8 years of hillary.You don't sound confident at all. I love it! Ric flare Whoooh!"Movers and shakers"? Lol. Do you expect or assume us liberals are anti wallstreet? No, in fact we want wallstreet to do well. In fact the economy always does better when we are in charge.
You've clearly got the anti hillary pitch down. I think it's hilarious. It's not going to work.
You'll live wondering should you have run kasich Cruz rubio jeb Romney or Carli
Pointing out that Hillary Clinton has taken millions from Wall Street fat cats is "anti Hillary"? I'm hard pressed to see the humor in electing someone who has so routinely proven that they are for sale! One wonders how humorous it will be for you liberals when you see what you're REALLY getting from a Hillary Clinton Presidency! I'm actually looking forward to that if it happens. Watching people like you scratch your heads in bewilderment will be worth four more years of awful leadership.
Tell me you're REALLY looking forward to four years of Hillary Clinton as our President, Sealy? Honestly? Is she the best you've got? That's a sad commentary on the modern progressive movement...isn't it?
She'll have cashed in enough in the first four that she won't need another term, Sealy! Haven't you figured out that's what the Clinton's were always about? Using political power to enrich themselves.
Poor Oldstyle. The last two elections have shown him telling all that would listen that Obama would loose. But each time, he was crushed. Poor sad little mind.8 years of hillary.You don't sound confident at all. I love it! Ric flare Whoooh!
Tell me you're REALLY looking forward to four years of Hillary Clinton as our President, Sealy? Honestly? Is she the best you've got? That's a sad commentary on the modern progressive movement...isn't it?
She'll have cashed in enough in the first four that she won't need another term, Sealy! Haven't you figured out that's what the Clinton's were always about? Using political power to enrich themselves.
Actually, as I am sure you read, it states clearly that sh had little to nothing to do with the start. Of the Great Republican DePression. That was the question. The question was not whether
We "complained" about Smoot Hawley because that legislation was one of the things that created The Great Depression! Tariffs did NOT create a strong and vibrant middle class in America! The strong middle class evolved during a remarkable boom in industrial production following WWII when the US was providing the goods to rebuild much of the rest of the world that had been devastated by that war.
" few economists think the Smoot-Hawley tariff (as it is most often known) was one of the principal causes of the Depression. Worse mistakes were made, largely out of a misplaced faith in the gold standard and balanced budgets. America's tariffs were already high, and some other countries were already increasing their own."
http://www.economist.com/node/12798595
If anyone is interested in seeing exactly what a buffoon, Rshermr is...click on his cite from the Economist and read the article he quoted from in it's entirety! He took one line out a long article which presented the Smoot Hawley tariffs in the following light:
"EVEN when desperate, Wall Street bankers are not given to grovelling. But in June 1930 Thomas Lamont, a partner at J.P. Morgan, came close. “I almost went down on my knees to beg Herbert Hoover to veto the asinine Hawley-Smoot Tariff,” he recalled. “That Act intensified nationalism all over the world.”
According to David Kennedy, an historian, Lamont was “usually an influential economic adviser” to the American president. Not this time. Hoover signed the bill on June 17th: “the tragic-comic finale”, said that week's Economist, “to one of the most amazing chapters in world tariff history…one that Protectionist enthusiasts the world over would do well to study.”
As well as this...
"Of all the calls on Hoover not to sign the bill, perhaps the weightiest was a petition signed by 1,028 American economists. A dozen years later Frank Fetter, one of the organisers, recalled their unanimity. “Economic faculties that within a few years were to be split wide open on monetary policy, deficit finance, and the problem of big business, were practically at one in their belief that the Hawley-Smoot bill was an iniquitous piece of legislation.”"
Why do you even try to argue history or economics with me, Georgie? You constantly demonstrate that you know NOTHING of either!
OS, OS, OS. You are such a clown. The question was never whether the bill was good or bad. Perhaps you need to re read the post you yourself made. The issue was were you correct in saying "that legislation was one of the things that created The Great Depression! ". You seem to be tripping over english, me boy. You constantly demonstrate that you know nothing of Economics or the English Language.
You see, oldstyle, the article refutes in quite clear terms that the bill had anything at all to do with the Great Republican Recession of 1929. Sorry to steal your thunder. You seemed so excited. I was so happy for you. But then, the same old thing. You proved yourself stupid again.
Why do you even try to argue history or economics with me, Dipshit? You constantly demonstrate that you know NOTHING of either!
How does that article "refute" that Smoot Hawley was one of the causes of The Great Depression? Did you even read it? You claim that few economists think Smoot Hawley was one of the principle causes of the Great Depression? Interesting that almost unanimously, economists at the time warned of dire consequences if it were passed. Were those 1028 American economists all mistaken?
Would you like to cite an article that actually back up your contention? Or are you sticking with the one that doesn't and pretending that it does?
Poor Oldstyle. The last two elections have shown him telling all that would listen that Obama would loose. But each time, he was crushed. Poor sad little mind.8 years of hillary.Tell me you're REALLY looking forward to four years of Hillary Clinton as our President, Sealy? Honestly? Is she the best you've got? That's a sad commentary on the modern progressive movement...isn't it?
She'll have cashed in enough in the first four that she won't need another term, Sealy! Haven't you figured out that's what the Clinton's were always about? Using political power to enrich themselves.
If Clinton wins we've got a sleazy liar who sells political favor like a street vendor! If Trump wins we've got a loudmouth New York billionaire who thinks his shit doesn't stink! The country is screwed either way.
Yes, well, so you would say. But you have no proof. Just a lot of republicans who have claimed she lies. But then, as you should well know, you never believe liars. And they are, me boy, all liars.
So, I never fully believe liars. Factcheck keeps count of the number of untrue statements by person. It was the president of the NRA. But now it is Trump. By a mile.
Poor Oldstyle. The last two elections have shown him telling all that would listen that Obama would loose. But each time, he was crushed. Poor sad little mind.8 years of hillary.Tell me you're REALLY looking forward to four years of Hillary Clinton as our President, Sealy? Honestly? Is she the best you've got? That's a sad commentary on the modern progressive movement...isn't it?
She'll have cashed in enough in the first four that she won't need another term, Sealy! Haven't you figured out that's what the Clinton's were always about? Using political power to enrich themselves.
Actually I told all that Obama "should" lose...not that he would lose! I believe I referred to him as an "empty suit"...someone who was nothing more than vague promises and catchy slogans who had really never accomplished anything exceptional since graduation from Harvard Law School! After nearly eight years in office I stand by that evaluation. Barack Obama's "legacy" is ObamaCare, a piece of legislation so flawed that it could only be passed with lies...ISIS, the JV team...and The Great Recession, that stretched on far longer than need be because Barry knew as much economic theory as you do!
So, there is Oldstyle who usually spends his time trying to modify republican history, now trying to modify his own history. You were sure and you stated over and over, in two elections, how happy you were to see that Obama would loose. And now, as a proven liar, you simply continue to lie.
It is really funny to see a person who has never accomplished anything in his entire life criticizing a person who came from a background with nothing to become the President of the United States. And, as a Bat Shit Crazy Conservative Troll, you have attacked him 24/7/365. With no economic arguments, just plain bat shit crazy conservative talking points.
The Great Republican Recession of 2008 was really, really important. Obama passed a bill that was really difficult to stop the economy from plunging into a depression. And on the very eve of the beginning of his term of President of the United States, Republican congressional leaders went into a secret meeting and agreed to block anything he tried to do. Unconditionally. And signed a pledge to never raise taxes. Unconditionally. And have done as they said they would. And have blocked every bill brought forward to help with the Great Republican Recession of 2008. And you, Oldstyle, have blindly supported their every move. Though what they did, and what you supported, badly hurt the middle class of your own nation. And you did not care, because you are a mindless Conservative Troll, uninterested and incapable of rational thought, or of rational economic argument. YOU ARE, AS A RESULT, TOTALLY IRRELEVANT. CONGRATULATIONS, YOU ARE A CONFIRMED MINDLESS TROLL.
BUT, ON THE OTHER HAND, YOU ARE CERTAINLY CAPABLE OF PLENTY OF LIES, AND PLENTY OF UNFOUNDED PERSONAL ATTACKS.
They don't realize they lose all credibility when the call him Barry[/QUOTE]Actually, as I am sure you read, it states clearly that sh had little to nothing to do with the start. Of the Great Republican DePression. That was the question. The question was not whetherWe "complained" about Smoot Hawley because that legislation was one of the things that created The Great Depression! Tariffs did NOT create a strong and vibrant middle class in America! The strong middle class evolved during a remarkable boom in industrial production following WWII when the US was providing the goods to rebuild much of the rest of the world that had been devastated by that war.
" few economists think the Smoot-Hawley tariff (as it is most often known) was one of the principal causes of the Depression. Worse mistakes were made, largely out of a misplaced faith in the gold standard and balanced budgets. America's tariffs were already high, and some other countries were already increasing their own."
http://www.economist.com/node/12798595
If anyone is interested in seeing exactly what a buffoon, Rshermr is...click on his cite from the Economist and read the article he quoted from in it's entirety! He took one line out a long article which presented the Smoot Hawley tariffs in the following light:
"EVEN when desperate, Wall Street bankers are not given to grovelling. But in June 1930 Thomas Lamont, a partner at J.P. Morgan, came close. “I almost went down on my knees to beg Herbert Hoover to veto the asinine Hawley-Smoot Tariff,” he recalled. “That Act intensified nationalism all over the world.”
According to David Kennedy, an historian, Lamont was “usually an influential economic adviser” to the American president. Not this time. Hoover signed the bill on June 17th: “the tragic-comic finale”, said that week's Economist, “to one of the most amazing chapters in world tariff history…one that Protectionist enthusiasts the world over would do well to study.”
As well as this...
"Of all the calls on Hoover not to sign the bill, perhaps the weightiest was a petition signed by 1,028 American economists. A dozen years later Frank Fetter, one of the organisers, recalled their unanimity. “Economic faculties that within a few years were to be split wide open on monetary policy, deficit finance, and the problem of big business, were practically at one in their belief that the Hawley-Smoot bill was an iniquitous piece of legislation.”"
Why do you even try to argue history or economics with me, Georgie? You constantly demonstrate that you know NOTHING of either!
OS, OS, OS. You are such a clown. The question was never whether the bill was good or bad. Perhaps you need to re read the post you yourself made. The issue was were you correct in saying "that legislation was one of the things that created The Great Depression! ". You seem to be tripping over english, me boy. You constantly demonstrate that you know nothing of Economics or the English Language.
You see, oldstyle, the article refutes in quite clear terms that the bill had anything at all to do with the Great Republican Recession of 1929. Sorry to steal your thunder. You seemed so excited. I was so happy for you. But then, the same old thing. You proved yourself stupid again.
Why do you even try to argue history or economics with me, Dipshit? You constantly demonstrate that you know NOTHING of either!
How does that article "refute" that Smoot Hawley was one of the causes of The Great Depression? Did you even read it? You claim that few economists think Smoot Hawley was one of the principle causes of the Great Depression? Interesting that almost unanimously, economists at the time warned of dire consequences if it were passed. Were those 1028 American economists all mistaken?
Would you like to cite an article that actually back up your contention? Or are you sticking with the one that doesn't and pretending that it does?
Pression
Poor Oldstyle. The last two elections have shown him telling all that would listen that Obama would loose. But each time, he was crushed. Poor sad little mind.8 years of hillary.Tell me you're REALLY looking forward to four years of Hillary Clinton as our President, Sealy? Honestly? Is she the best you've got? That's a sad commentary on the modern progressive movement...isn't it?
She'll have cashed in enough in the first four that she won't need another term, Sealy! Haven't you figured out that's what the Clinton's were always about? Using political power to enrich themselves.
Actually I told all that Obama "should" lose...not that he would lose! you lie again, because you said he would loose, time after time.I believe I referred to him as an "empty suit"...someone who was nothing more than vague promises and catchy slogans who had really never accomplished anything exceptional since graduation from Harvard Law School! After nearly eight years in office I stand by that evaluation. Barack Obama's Right, dipshit. You attacked the sitting president in every possible way 24/7/365 with empty accusations and lies. Because you are a conservative troll, with no ability to discuss things using logic. "legacy" is ObamaCare, a piece of legislation so flawed that it could only be passed with lies..Again, lying using standard con talking points. You do not admit that republicans mad many, many changes to the bill, than all voted against it. It must be cool to be able to believe what you want to believe, without any rational thought. For most it would be hell, for you it is heaven..ISIS, the JV team...and The Great Recession, that stretched on far longer than need be because Barry knew as much economic theory as you do!
So, how many posts is this now that have NO economic argument. Just dogma, and lies. There were many democratic bills brought to congress to address the lingering unemployment. All by Democrats. And all were voted down by Republicans. Every single one. Then, as a con troll, you blame the President for the length of the recession. But you know, and I know, that the ongoing recession was exactly what you and what the Republican congress wanted. And you, as I, know that with Republicans doing nothing except voting down bills, there was NO chance any president, even if he was the second coming of Christ, could do about the effects of the Great Republican Recession of 2008. Because congress controlled the process, completely. And because congress wanted the recession to continue for as long as possible. AS DID YOU. Because, you see, you do not care about the middle class, at all. BECAUSE YOU ARE A CON TROLL, AND LIKE ALL CON TROLLS, YOU CARE NOT AT ALL ABOUT THE MIDDLE CLASS. BECAUSE YOU ARE UN-AMERICAN. ANDA COMPLETE JOKE.
What is really, really funny is that a person who can not discuss economic theory accuses others of not understanding economic theory. All you ever, ever post is bat shit crazy con talking points. And make personal attacks.
For instance, you have no theory of what needs to be done about the recession aftermath, or what should have been done at the time of the worst of the Great Republican Recession of 2008. Nothing. Just Conservative Nut Case Talking Points. Which makes you irrelivent.
ANOTHER LIE, OLDSTYLE? WHAT A SURPRISE. I never, in my life, expected or claimed that any politician does not lie to some degree. What I do, however, is agree with Factcheck.org, which concluded that the person who tells the most lies is TRUMP. He is, indeed, the king of liars. But you would not notice, being a brain dead con troll.
If Clinton wins we've got a sleazy liar who sells political favor like a street vendor! If Trump wins we've got a loudmouth New York billionaire who thinks his shit doesn't stink! The country is screwed either way.
Yes, well, so you would say. But you have no proof. Just a lot of republicans who have claimed she lies. But then, as you should well know, you never believe liars. And they are, me boy, all liars.
So, I never fully believe liars. Factcheck keeps count of the number of untrue statements by person. It was the president of the NRA. But now it is Trump. By a mile.
Only you would claim the Hillary Clinton isn't a liar, Georgie! At this point it's not even debatable because she's been caught telling lies so often. Kind of like you, little buddy!
They don't realize they lose all credibility when the call him BarryActually, as I am sure you read, it states clearly that sh had little to nothing to do with the start. Of the Great Republican DePression. That was the question. The question was not whetherIf anyone is interested in seeing exactly what a buffoon, Rshermr is...click on his cite from the Economist and read the article he quoted from in it's entirety! He took one line out a long article which presented the Smoot Hawley tariffs in the following light:
"EVEN when desperate, Wall Street bankers are not given to grovelling. But in June 1930 Thomas Lamont, a partner at J.P. Morgan, came close. “I almost went down on my knees to beg Herbert Hoover to veto the asinine Hawley-Smoot Tariff,” he recalled. “That Act intensified nationalism all over the world.”
According to David Kennedy, an historian, Lamont was “usually an influential economic adviser” to the American president. Not this time. Hoover signed the bill on June 17th: “the tragic-comic finale”, said that week's Economist, “to one of the most amazing chapters in world tariff history…one that Protectionist enthusiasts the world over would do well to study.”
As well as this...
"Of all the calls on Hoover not to sign the bill, perhaps the weightiest was a petition signed by 1,028 American economists. A dozen years later Frank Fetter, one of the organisers, recalled their unanimity. “Economic faculties that within a few years were to be split wide open on monetary policy, deficit finance, and the problem of big business, were practically at one in their belief that the Hawley-Smoot bill was an iniquitous piece of legislation.”"
Why do you even try to argue history or economics with me, Georgie? You constantly demonstrate that you know NOTHING of either!
OS, OS, OS. You are such a clown. The question was never whether the bill was good or bad. Perhaps you need to re read the post you yourself made. The issue was were you correct in saying "that legislation was one of the things that created The Great Depression! ". You seem to be tripping over english, me boy. You constantly demonstrate that you know nothing of Economics or the English Language.
You see, oldstyle, the article refutes in quite clear terms that the bill had anything at all to do with the Great Republican Recession of 1929. Sorry to steal your thunder. You seemed so excited. I was so happy for you. But then, the same old thing. You proved yourself stupid again.
Why do you even try to argue history or economics with me, Dipshit? You constantly demonstrate that you know NOTHING of either!
How does that article "refute" that Smoot Hawley was one of the causes of The Great Depression? Did you even read it? You claim that few economists think Smoot Hawley was one of the principle causes of the Great Depression? Interesting that almost unanimously, economists at the time warned of dire consequences if it were passed. Were those 1028 American economists all mistaken?
Would you like to cite an article that actually back up your contention? Or are you sticking with the one that doesn't and pretending that it does?
Pression
Poor Oldstyle. The last two elections have shown him telling all that would listen that Obama would loose. But each time, he was crushed. Poor sad little mind.8 years of hillary.
She'll have cashed in enough in the first four that she won't need another term, Sealy! Haven't you figured out that's what the Clinton's were always about? Using political power to enrich themselves.
Actually I told all that Obama "should" lose...not that he would lose! you lie again, because you said he would loose, time after time.I believe I referred to him as an "empty suit"...someone who was nothing more than vague promises and catchy slogans who had really never accomplished anything exceptional since graduation from Harvard Law School! After nearly eight years in office I stand by that evaluation. Barack Obama's Right, dipshit. You attacked the sitting president in every possible way 24/7/365 with empty accusations and lies. Because you are a conservative troll, with no ability to discuss things using logic. "legacy" is ObamaCare, a piece of legislation so flawed that it could only be passed with lies..Again, lying using standard con talking points. You do not admit that republicans mad many, many changes to the bill, than all voted against it. It must be cool to be able to believe what you want to believe, without any rational thought. For most it would be hell, for you it is heaven..ISIS, the JV team...and The Great Recession, that stretched on far longer than need be because Barry knew as much economic theory as you do!
So, how many posts is this now that have NO economic argument. Just dogma, and lies. There were many democratic bills brought to congress to address the lingering unemployment. All by Democrats. And all were voted down by Republicans. Every single one. Then, as a con troll, you blame the President for the length of the recession. But you know, and I know, that the ongoing recession was exactly what you and what the Republican congress wanted. And you, as I, know that with Republicans doing nothing except voting down bills, there was NO chance any president, even if he was the second coming of Christ, could do about the effects of the Great Republican Recession of 2008. Because congress controlled the process, completely. And because congress wanted the recession to continue for as long as possible. AS DID YOU. Because, you see, you do not care about the middle class, at all. BECAUSE YOU ARE A CON TROLL, AND LIKE ALL CON TROLLS, YOU CARE NOT AT ALL ABOUT THE MIDDLE CLASS. BECAUSE YOU ARE UN-AMERICAN. ANDA COMPLETE JOKE.
What is really, really funny is that a person who can not discuss economic theory accuses others of not understanding economic theory. All you ever, ever post is bat shit crazy con talking points. And make personal attacks.
For instance, you have no theory of what needs to be done about the recession aftermath, or what should have been done at the time of the worst of the Great Republican Recession of 2008. Nothing. Just Conservative Nut Case Talking Points. Which makes you irrelivent.
They don't realize they lose all credibility when the call him BarryActually, as I am sure you read, it states clearly that sh had little to nothing to do with the start. Of the Great Republican DePression. That was the question. The question was not whetherIf anyone is interested in seeing exactly what a buffoon, Rshermr is...click on his cite from the Economist and read the article he quoted from in it's entirety! He took one line out a long article which presented the Smoot Hawley tariffs in the following light:
"EVEN when desperate, Wall Street bankers are not given to grovelling. But in June 1930 Thomas Lamont, a partner at J.P. Morgan, came close. “I almost went down on my knees to beg Herbert Hoover to veto the asinine Hawley-Smoot Tariff,” he recalled. “That Act intensified nationalism all over the world.”
According to David Kennedy, an historian, Lamont was “usually an influential economic adviser” to the American president. Not this time. Hoover signed the bill on June 17th: “the tragic-comic finale”, said that week's Economist, “to one of the most amazing chapters in world tariff history…one that Protectionist enthusiasts the world over would do well to study.”
As well as this...
"Of all the calls on Hoover not to sign the bill, perhaps the weightiest was a petition signed by 1,028 American economists. A dozen years later Frank Fetter, one of the organisers, recalled their unanimity. “Economic faculties that within a few years were to be split wide open on monetary policy, deficit finance, and the problem of big business, were practically at one in their belief that the Hawley-Smoot bill was an iniquitous piece of legislation.”"
Why do you even try to argue history or economics with me, Georgie? You constantly demonstrate that you know NOTHING of either!
OS, OS, OS. You are such a clown. The question was never whether the bill was good or bad. Perhaps you need to re read the post you yourself made. The issue was were you correct in saying "that legislation was one of the things that created The Great Depression! ". You seem to be tripping over english, me boy. You constantly demonstrate that you know nothing of Economics or the English Language.
You see, oldstyle, the article refutes in quite clear terms that the bill had anything at all to do with the Great Republican Recession of 1929. Sorry to steal your thunder. You seemed so excited. I was so happy for you. But then, the same old thing. You proved yourself stupid again.
Why do you even try to argue history or economics with me, Dipshit? You constantly demonstrate that you know NOTHING of either!
How does that article "refute" that Smoot Hawley was one of the causes of The Great Depression? Did you even read it? You claim that few economists think Smoot Hawley was one of the principle causes of the Great Depression? Interesting that almost unanimously, economists at the time warned of dire consequences if it were passed. Were those 1028 American economists all mistaken?
Would you like to cite an article that actually back up your contention? Or are you sticking with the one that doesn't and pretending that it does?
Pression
Poor Oldstyle. The last two elections have shown him telling all that would listen that Obama would loose. But each time, he was crushed. Poor sad little mind.8 years of hillary.
She'll have cashed in enough in the first four that she won't need another term, Sealy! Haven't you figured out that's what the Clinton's were always about? Using political power to enrich themselves.
Actually I told all that Obama "should" lose...not that he would lose! you lie again, because you said he would loose, time after time.I believe I referred to him as an "empty suit"...someone who was nothing more than vague promises and catchy slogans who had really never accomplished anything exceptional since graduation from Harvard Law School! After nearly eight years in office I stand by that evaluation. Barack Obama's Right, dipshit. You attacked the sitting president in every possible way 24/7/365 with empty accusations and lies. Because you are a conservative troll, with no ability to discuss things using logic. "legacy" is ObamaCare, a piece of legislation so flawed that it could only be passed with lies..Again, lying using standard con talking points. You do not admit that republicans mad many, many changes to the bill, than all voted against it. It must be cool to be able to believe what you want to believe, without any rational thought. For most it would be hell, for you it is heaven..ISIS, the JV team...and The Great Recession, that stretched on far longer than need be because Barry knew as much economic theory as you do!
So, how many posts is this now that have NO economic argument. Just dogma, and lies. There were many democratic bills brought to congress to address the lingering unemployment. All by Democrats. And all were voted down by Republicans. Every single one. Then, as a con troll, you blame the President for the length of the recession. But you know, and I know, that the ongoing recession was exactly what you and what the Republican congress wanted. And you, as I, know that with Republicans doing nothing except voting down bills, there was NO chance any president, even if he was the second coming of Christ, could do about the effects of the Great Republican Recession of 2008. Because congress controlled the process, completely. And because congress wanted the recession to continue for as long as possible. AS DID YOU. Because, you see, you do not care about the middle class, at all. BECAUSE YOU ARE A CON TROLL, AND LIKE ALL CON TROLLS, YOU CARE NOT AT ALL ABOUT THE MIDDLE CLASS. BECAUSE YOU ARE UN-AMERICAN. ANDA COMPLETE JOKE.
What is really, really funny is that a person who can not discuss economic theory accuses others of not understanding economic theory. All you ever, ever post is bat shit crazy con talking points. And make personal attacks.
For instance, you have no theory of what needs to be done about the recession aftermath, or what should have been done at the time of the worst of the Great Republican Recession of 2008. Nothing. Just Conservative Nut Case Talking Points. Which makes you irrelivent.
So your "authority" on Barack Obama's accomplishments is a website from India? Typical, Rshermr...
ANOTHER LIE, OLDSTYLE? WHAT A SURPRISE. I never, in my life, expected or claimed that any politician does not lie to some degree. What I do, however, is agree with Factcheck.org, which concluded that the person who tells the most lies is TRUMP. He is, indeed, the king of liars. But you would not notice, being a brain dead con troll.
If Clinton wins we've got a sleazy liar who sells political favor like a street vendor! If Trump wins we've got a loudmouth New York billionaire who thinks his shit doesn't stink! The country is screwed either way.
Yes, well, so you would say. But you have no proof. Just a lot of republicans who have claimed she lies. But then, as you should well know, you never believe liars. And they are, me boy, all liars.
So, I never fully believe liars. Factcheck keeps count of the number of untrue statements by person. It was the president of the NRA. But now it is Trump. By a mile.
Only you would claim the Hillary Clinton isn't a liar, Georgie! At this point it's not even debatable because she's been caught telling lies so often. Kind of like you, little buddy!
And,as you know, you have never proven that I lie. Because, as you know, I never, ever lie. Never. Just you making personal attacks with no proof.
So your "authority" on Barack Obama's accomplishments is a website from India? Typical, Rshermr...
So your "authority" on Barack Obama's accomplishments is a website from India?
DID YOU HAVE A PROBLEM WITH WHAT THE SOURCE SAYS?
DID YOU THINK THAT THEY ARE NOT AN AUTHORITY?
CAN YOU EXPLAIN WHAT YOUR PROBLEM IS, ME BOY?
ARE YOU JUST BEING A CON TROLL AGAIN?
ARE THERE ACCOMPLISHMENTS LISTED THAT ARE UNTRUE THAT YOU CAN NAME?
ARE THERE TOO FEW ACCOMPLISHMENTS?
DID YOU FEEL THAT A WEBSITE FROM THE US WOULD BE BETTER ABLE TO LIST HIS ACCOMPLISHMENTS?
CAN YOU PROVE THAT SOMETHING IS UNTRUE IN THE LIST OF ACCOMPLISHMENTS?
[/QUOTE]ANOTHER LIE, OLDSTYLE? WHAT A SURPRISE. I never, in my life, expected or claimed that any politician does not lie to some degree. What I do, however, is agree with Factcheck.org, which concluded that the person who tells the most lies is TRUMP. He is, indeed, the king of liars. But you would not notice, being a brain dead con troll.
If Clinton wins we've got a sleazy liar who sells political favor like a street vendor! If Trump wins we've got a loudmouth New York billionaire who thinks his shit doesn't stink! The country is screwed either way.
Yes, well, so you would say. But you have no proof. Just a lot of republicans who have claimed she lies. But then, as you should well know, you never believe liars. And they are, me boy, all liars.
So, I never fully believe liars. Factcheck keeps count of the number of untrue statements by person. It was the president of the NRA. But now it is Trump. By a mile.
Only you would claim the Hillary Clinton isn't a liar, Georgie! At this point it's not even debatable because she's been caught telling lies so often. Kind of like you, little buddy!
And,as you know, you have never proven that I lie. Because, as you know, I never, ever lie. Never. Just you making personal attacks with no proof.
You prove that you're a liar whenever you post here, Georgie! You claim to be things that you obviously are not...like a college graduate with a degree in economics. You're "Mr A-B=Jobs Saved"...just one more of your fabrications! You're "Mr Conditions"! You're "Mr I Have You On Ignore"! You're "Mr My Secretary Edits My Writing"!
Nobody comes close to the history of lies that Hillary Clinton has provided, Rshermr but you surely do try!
They don't realize they lose all credibility when the call him BarryActually, as I am sure you read, it states clearly that sh had little to nothing to do with the start. Of the Great Republican DePression. That was the question. The question was not whether
Why do you even try to argue history or economics with me, Georgie? You constantly demonstrate that you know NOTHING of either!
OS, OS, OS. You are such a clown. The question was never whether the bill was good or bad. Perhaps you need to re read the post you yourself made. The issue was were you correct in saying "that legislation was one of the things that created The Great Depression! ". You seem to be tripping over english, me boy. You constantly demonstrate that you know nothing of Economics or the English Language.
You see, oldstyle, the article refutes in quite clear terms that the bill had anything at all to do with the Great Republican Recession of 1929. Sorry to steal your thunder. You seemed so excited. I was so happy for you. But then, the same old thing. You proved yourself stupid again.
Why do you even try to argue history or economics with me, Dipshit? You constantly demonstrate that you know NOTHING of either!
How does that article "refute" that Smoot Hawley was one of the causes of The Great Depression? Did you even read it? You claim that few economists think Smoot Hawley was one of the principle causes of the Great Depression? Interesting that almost unanimously, economists at the time warned of dire consequences if it were passed. Were those 1028 American economists all mistaken?
Would you like to cite an article that actually back up your contention? Or are you sticking with the one that doesn't and pretending that it does?
Pression
Poor Oldstyle. The last two elections have shown him telling all that would listen that Obama would loose. But each time, he was crushed. Poor sad little mind.She'll have cashed in enough in the first four that she won't need another term, Sealy! Haven't you figured out that's what the Clinton's were always about? Using political power to enrich themselves.
Actually I told all that Obama "should" lose...not that he would lose! you lie again, because you said he would loose, time after time.I believe I referred to him as an "empty suit"...someone who was nothing more than vague promises and catchy slogans who had really never accomplished anything exceptional since graduation from Harvard Law School! After nearly eight years in office I stand by that evaluation. Barack Obama's Right, dipshit. You attacked the sitting president in every possible way 24/7/365 with empty accusations and lies. Because you are a conservative troll, with no ability to discuss things using logic. "legacy" is ObamaCare, a piece of legislation so flawed that it could only be passed with lies..Again, lying using standard con talking points. You do not admit that republicans mad many, many changes to the bill, than all voted against it. It must be cool to be able to believe what you want to believe, without any rational thought. For most it would be hell, for you it is heaven..ISIS, the JV team...and The Great Recession, that stretched on far longer than need be because Barry knew as much economic theory as you do!
So, how many posts is this now that have NO economic argument. Just dogma, and lies. There were many democratic bills brought to congress to address the lingering unemployment. All by Democrats. And all were voted down by Republicans. Every single one. Then, as a con troll, you blame the President for the length of the recession. But you know, and I know, that the ongoing recession was exactly what you and what the Republican congress wanted. And you, as I, know that with Republicans doing nothing except voting down bills, there was NO chance any president, even if he was the second coming of Christ, could do about the effects of the Great Republican Recession of 2008. Because congress controlled the process, completely. And because congress wanted the recession to continue for as long as possible. AS DID YOU. Because, you see, you do not care about the middle class, at all. BECAUSE YOU ARE A CON TROLL, AND LIKE ALL CON TROLLS, YOU CARE NOT AT ALL ABOUT THE MIDDLE CLASS. BECAUSE YOU ARE UN-AMERICAN. ANDA COMPLETE JOKE.
What is really, really funny is that a person who can not discuss economic theory accuses others of not understanding economic theory. All you ever, ever post is bat shit crazy con talking points. And make personal attacks.
For instance, you have no theory of what needs to be done about the recession aftermath, or what should have been done at the time of the worst of the Great Republican Recession of 2008. Nothing. Just Conservative Nut Case Talking Points. Which makes you irrelivent.
You two claim that I said Obama would lose? Show me where that took place! I consistently pointed out why I thought he SHOULD lose but unlike you, I'm a realist who grasped that it's hard to win an election when the main stream media is totally in the tank for your opponent.
So your "authority" on Barack Obama's accomplishments is a website from India? Typical, Rshermr...
So your "authority" on Barack Obama's accomplishments is a website from India?
DID YOU HAVE A PROBLEM WITH WHAT THE SOURCE SAYS?
DID YOU THINK THAT THEY ARE NOT AN AUTHORITY?
CAN YOU EXPLAIN WHAT YOUR PROBLEM IS, ME BOY?
ARE YOU JUST BEING A CON TROLL AGAIN?
ARE THERE ACCOMPLISHMENTS LISTED THAT ARE UNTRUE THAT YOU CAN NAME?
ARE THERE TOO FEW ACCOMPLISHMENTS?
DID YOU FEEL THAT A WEBSITE FROM THE US WOULD BE BETTER ABLE TO LIST HIS ACCOMPLISHMENTS?
CAN YOU PROVE THAT SOMETHING IS UNTRUE IN THE LIST OF ACCOMPLISHMENTS?
"Over the period of one year, a total of nearly 3.7 million new private-sector jobs were created."
Let's start with that one. Show me where Barack Obama created 3.7 new private sector jobs his first year in office!
ANOTHER LIE, OLDSTYLE? WHAT A SURPRISE. I never, in my life, expected or claimed that any politician does not lie to some degree. What I do, however, is agree with Factcheck.org, which concluded that the person who tells the most lies is TRUMP. He is, indeed, the king of liars. But you would not notice, being a brain dead con troll.
If Clinton wins we've got a sleazy liar who sells political favor like a street vendor! If Trump wins we've got a loudmouth New York billionaire who thinks his shit doesn't stink! The country is screwed either way.
Yes, well, so you would say. But you have no proof. Just a lot of republicans who have claimed she lies. But then, as you should well know, you never believe liars. And they are, me boy, all liars.
So, I never fully believe liars. Factcheck keeps count of the number of untrue statements by person. It was the president of the NRA. But now it is Trump. By a mile.
Only you would claim the Hillary Clinton isn't a liar, Georgie! At this point it's not even debatable because she's been caught telling lies so often. Kind of like you, little buddy!
And,as you know, you have never proven that I lie. Because, as you know, I never, ever lie. Never. Just you making personal attacks with no proof.
You prove that you're a liar whenever you post here, Georgie! You claim to be things that you obviously are not...like a college graduate with a degree in economics. You're "Mr A-B=Jobs Saved"...just one more of your fabrications! You're "Mr Conditions"! You're "Mr I Have You On Ignore"! You're "Mr My Secretary Edits My Writing"!
Nobody comes close to the history of lies that Hillary Clinton has provided, Rshermr but you surely do try!
They don't realize they lose all credibility when the call him BarryActually, as I am sure you read, it states clearly that sh had little to nothing to do with the start. Of the Great Republican DePression. That was the question. The question was not whetherWhy do you even try to argue history or economics with me, Georgie? You constantly demonstrate that you know NOTHING of either!
OS, OS, OS. You are such a clown. The question was never whether the bill was good or bad. Perhaps you need to re read the post you yourself made. The issue was were you correct in saying "that legislation was one of the things that created The Great Depression! ". You seem to be tripping over english, me boy. You constantly demonstrate that you know nothing of Economics or the English Language.
You see, oldstyle, the article refutes in quite clear terms that the bill had anything at all to do with the Great Republican Recession of 1929. Sorry to steal your thunder. You seemed so excited. I was so happy for you. But then, the same old thing. You proved yourself stupid again.
Why do you even try to argue history or economics with me, Dipshit? You constantly demonstrate that you know NOTHING of either!
How does that article "refute" that Smoot Hawley was one of the causes of The Great Depression? Did you even read it? You claim that few economists think Smoot Hawley was one of the principle causes of the Great Depression? Interesting that almost unanimously, economists at the time warned of dire consequences if it were passed. Were those 1028 American economists all mistaken?
Would you like to cite an article that actually back up your contention? Or are you sticking with the one that doesn't and pretending that it does?
Pression
Poor Oldstyle. The last two elections have shown him telling all that would listen that Obama would loose. But each time, he was crushed. Poor sad little mind.
Actually I told all that Obama "should" lose...not that he would lose! you lie again, because you said he would loose, time after time.I believe I referred to him as an "empty suit"...someone who was nothing more than vague promises and catchy slogans who had really never accomplished anything exceptional since graduation from Harvard Law School! After nearly eight years in office I stand by that evaluation. Barack Obama's Right, dipshit. You attacked the sitting president in every possible way 24/7/365 with empty accusations and lies. Because you are a conservative troll, with no ability to discuss things using logic. "legacy" is ObamaCare, a piece of legislation so flawed that it could only be passed with lies..Again, lying using standard con talking points. You do not admit that republicans mad many, many changes to the bill, than all voted against it. It must be cool to be able to believe what you want to believe, without any rational thought. For most it would be hell, for you it is heaven..ISIS, the JV team...and The Great Recession, that stretched on far longer than need be because Barry knew as much economic theory as you do!
So, how many posts is this now that have NO economic argument. Just dogma, and lies. There were many democratic bills brought to congress to address the lingering unemployment. All by Democrats. And all were voted down by Republicans. Every single one. Then, as a con troll, you blame the President for the length of the recession. But you know, and I know, that the ongoing recession was exactly what you and what the Republican congress wanted. And you, as I, know that with Republicans doing nothing except voting down bills, there was NO chance any president, even if he was the second coming of Christ, could do about the effects of the Great Republican Recession of 2008. Because congress controlled the process, completely. And because congress wanted the recession to continue for as long as possible. AS DID YOU. Because, you see, you do not care about the middle class, at all. BECAUSE YOU ARE A CON TROLL, AND LIKE ALL CON TROLLS, YOU CARE NOT AT ALL ABOUT THE MIDDLE CLASS. BECAUSE YOU ARE UN-AMERICAN. ANDA COMPLETE JOKE.
What is really, really funny is that a person who can not discuss economic theory accuses others of not understanding economic theory. All you ever, ever post is bat shit crazy con talking points. And make personal attacks.
For instance, you have no theory of what needs to be done about the recession aftermath, or what should have been done at the time of the worst of the Great Republican Recession of 2008. Nothing. Just Conservative Nut Case Talking Points. Which makes you irrelivent.
You two claim that I said Obama would lose? Show me where that took place! I consistently pointed out why I thought he SHOULD lose but unlike you, I'm a realist who grasped that it's hard to win an election when the main stream media is totally in the tank for your opponent.
NO NEED TO GO BACK 4 TO 8 YEARS. NOT EVEN SURE YOU CAN. BUT IF YOU COULD, YOU SHOULD DO SO. BY THE WAY, OLDSTYLE, WHEN I ACCUSED YOU OF LYING AND COULD GO BACK AND PROVE YOU DID, YOU EVEN THEN CLAIMED YOU WERE NOT LYING. THAT IS YOUR MO. I BELIEVE THE LIMIT IS JUST OVER 3 YEARS, BUT NOT SURE.
AND IT IS FUNNY THAT YOU HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO RESPECT FOR THE "MAINSTREAM MEDIA". STANDARD FUNNY BAT SHIT CRAZY CON TALKING POINT. BUT YOU LOVE THE BAT SHIT CRAZY CON SOURCES. FOX, ETC. YOU ARE, AGAIN, IRRELEVANT.
