Comments on: States Prepare To Sue Feds

By: Big Dog

Big Dog — Thu, 25 Mar 2010 00:22:07 +0000

Good points Lisa. We need our revolution to be a peaceful one at the ballot box.

By: Lisa Murdock

Lisa Murdock — Wed, 24 Mar 2010 23:47:28 +0000

The mass media can yep it up all they want and downplay the states filing suit against the Federal Government. Do I have to get out my time machine and take anyone back to 1862? Do I have to remind you that you have been brainwashed by history as to the real cause for the start of the civil war. Yes, slavery was bad. I am not going there. But it was not the cause of the civil war as many of you erroneously believe. It was a propaganda tool that was introduced long after the causes for the start of the civil war had arisen. It was a skillful tool because as we all know the South is referred to as the Bible Belt, and any moral cause was the perfect choice to divide and conquer. If you learned anything from your history professors in college, you would have learned that every war has either one of two causes, economic or religious, and then some will acknowledge that the religious wars are an economic war wrapped in religion. So it boils down to economics.

IN CASE YOU DIDN’T KNOW, THE CIVIL WAR STARTED BECAUSE OF UNFAIR TAXES THAT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT WAS PLACING ON COTTON EXPORTS, THE SOUTH’S PRIMARY SOURCE OF INCOME. Go to the library, the internet, really dig deep, and prove me wrong. Or, alternatively, you can continue to drink the kool-aid and just ask your child’s history teacher.

Sound familiar. UNFAIR TAXES IMPOSED BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AGAINST THE STATES CAUSED AMERICA’S ONLY INTERNAL WAR IN HISTORY. Those who ignore history are destined to repeat it.

Once again, it’s not about black or white, but it is about color. The color red. The color of Marxism.

By: Blake

Blake — Wed, 24 Mar 2010 14:54:44 +0000

“Bush’s crappy market”? I suppose that 14,000 was not a good figure, but 10,000 is?
Wow! I want to play poker with you- you will lose EVERY time with logic like that.
From 2000- 2006 (the primary Bush years) the market expanded- it was only when the Proggressive, traitorous Dems got into Congress, that the fall began.
Did Bush do everything right? God, no- bubt compared to lil’ Barry Soetoro, he is much better-

By: Big Dog

Big Dog — Wed, 24 Mar 2010 11:46:03 +0000

Isolate and attack. Nice Alinsky. Won’t work.

By: Big Dog

Big Dog — Wed, 24 Mar 2010 11:44:48 +0000

Yeah, that market dropped when Democrats took control of Congress. Clinton’s market went up when Republicans took control of Congress.

By: Big Dog

Big Dog — Wed, 24 Mar 2010 11:44:10 +0000

When I said no one I was referring to me. I have no idea what hannity or Rush said.

By: Darrel

Darrel — Wed, 24 Mar 2010 01:33:21 +0000

I watched a bit of Beck on Monday just for fun. I was hoping he would take the outrage to the next level and just put a gun in his mouth on TV. What a legacy. That would show some outrage.
I used to listen to him a bit on the radio. He has dumbed the material down considerably. Well, it is Fox. He was always shifty and dishonest with language but at least he was adlibing and there was some creativity involved. Now he is reading text and making up the emotion as he goes. What really stood out was that it was really, really, astonishingly stupid.

Jon Stewart tried to parody him the other day but I couldn’t watch it. He made some faces and cried a bit, it didn’t work. Beck can’t be made fun of. For those who know, he’s funny enough. For those who don’t… well, I have no idea how someone couldn’t see through Beck’s material.

D.
—————-
“I said, ‘Let’s start doing some Glenn Beck stuff but in praise of Glenn Beck,’” said Colbert. “But every time we do one, he will have done something dumber. He raised the stupid bar and now it’s nearly inapproachable.”

“…if somebody doesn’t believe what they’re saying, it’s very hard to out-stupid them,” said a decidedly analytical Colbert. “Because then there’s no place to sink our hook into, there’s no mountain to climb there. I can’t climb Glenn Beck since there’s nothing there.” –The Atlantic

By: Darrel

Darrel — Wed, 24 Mar 2010 01:21:50 +0000

Bigd: “Funny, when Bush was in the market was at 14,000 and that was bad to you guys.”>>

DAR
Not funny. I owned stock in Bush’s crappy market.

Rush railed against Clinton’s market as it rose 330%. I have an acquaintance that listened to Rush and the whole bunker mentality of the time. He consistently bet against Clinton’s market and lost his shorts. Then he got divorced.

Bush’s market *declined* 20%. An astonishing failure and resulting in the worst stock record for a decade, ever.

D.
—————
“In nearly 200 years of recorded stock-market history, no calendar decade has seen such a dismal performance as the 2000s.

Investors would have been better off investing in pretty much anything else, from bonds to gold or even just stuffing money under a mattress. Since the end of 1999, stocks traded on the New York Stock Exchange have lost an average of 0.5% a year thanks to the twin bear markets this decade….

This past decade looks even worse when the impact of inflation is considered.”

Link.

By: Adam

Adam — Wed, 24 Mar 2010 01:13:13 +0000

I guess the outrage meter can just snap off it’s peg and spin around and around?

By: Adam

Adam — Wed, 24 Mar 2010 01:06:29 +0000

No one said what? Hannity didn’t call it an Obama bear market but then ignore it when it started to rise? I bet we could find Limbaugh doing it too.

As for Bush, it being 14,093 might have been better had it not taken so long to climb to that (5 years) from a low of 7,528 and if it hadn’t plummeted even lower somehow to 6,626 shortly after.