RE: Who Is Afraid Of Marco Rubio (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message


BamaD -> RE: Who Is Afraid Of Marco Rubio (6/11/2015 7:48:16 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy

You are BEYOND IGNORANT:

The most important achievement in political economy in the Clinton yeas was reducing the federal deficit. Just before his inauguration Clinton held an economic summit in Little Rock, at which academic, business executives, and financiers one after another moaned about how huge federal borrowing to cover debt was making capital too expensive to allow industry to grow. One year later Clinton had rammed through a tax-and -budget bill that turned a chronic deficit into a surplus.

The anti-deficit drive was controversial within the Democratic Party, because Clinton seemed to be truckling to financial markets rather than spending more for education and health. It was bitterly resisted by the Republicans; every single Republican member of Congress voted against the new taxes in the plan. It was an enormous gamble on Clinton's part: he had Al Gore cast the tie-breaking vote in the Senate. The historical judgment has to be that it paid off, for Clinton, and, of vastly more importance, for the country.

--James Fallows

But two things stick out so far from the normal that they will probably be remembered no matter what happens. One of them is the sheer insensate virulence of his critics. If size can be measured by the lip-frothing frustration of one's enemies, Clinton is right up there with Moby-Dick. The other is the five-minute standing ovation Clinton received at the UN at the height of the Monica madness. The applause couldn't all have been for adultery--not even the applause from the French Ambassador.

And even if, as his critics maintain, its was all a trick both at home and abroad, the trick had worked wonderfully well. But he couldn't have gotten all five minutes without Kenneth Starr.



So his greatest accomplishment was forced on him by the Republicans.




HunterCA -> RE: Who Is Afraid Of Marco Rubio (6/11/2015 7:54:30 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD


quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy

You are BEYOND IGNORANT:

The most important achievement in political economy in the Clinton yeas was reducing the federal deficit. Just before his inauguration Clinton held an economic summit in Little Rock, at which academic, business executives, and financiers one after another moaned about how huge federal borrowing to cover debt was making capital too expensive to allow industry to grow. One year later Clinton had rammed through a tax-and -budget bill that turned a chronic deficit into a surplus.

The anti-deficit drive was controversial within the Democratic Party, because Clinton seemed to be truckling to financial markets rather than spending more for education and health. It was bitterly resisted by the Republicans; every single Republican member of Congress voted against the new taxes in the plan. It was an enormous gamble on Clinton's part: he had Al Gore cast the tie-breaking vote in the Senate. The historical judgment has to be that it paid off, for Clinton, and, of vastly more importance, for the country.

--James Fallows

But two things stick out so far from the normal that they will probably be remembered no matter what happens. One of them is the sheer insensate virulence of his critics. If size can be measured by the lip-frothing frustration of one's enemies, Clinton is right up there with Moby-Dick. The other is the five-minute standing ovation Clinton received at the UN at the height of the Monica madness. The applause couldn't all have been for adultery--not even the applause from the French Ambassador.

And even if, as his critics maintain, its was all a trick both at home and abroad, the trick had worked wonderfully well. But he couldn't have gotten all five minutes without Kenneth Starr.



So his greatest accomplishment was forced on him by the Republicans.


Well, like I said, if he hadnt of been off raping, molesting and telling lies to grand juries it might have turned out differently.




Sanity -> RE: Who Is Afraid Of Marco Rubio (6/11/2015 8:19:09 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

Let's see, $174k a year as senator. Wife must have worked. House in home town, house in Capitol of Florida, house in DC. Pretty expensive. Obviously not trading influence for cash.


He would never make it as a Democrat. How much is Harry Reid worth now, compared to when he started his senate career?

How about Hillary... And her career in politics in general.




HunterCA -> RE: Who Is Afraid Of Marco Rubio (6/11/2015 8:38:21 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity


quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

Let's see, $174k a year as senator. Wife must have worked. House in home town, house in Capitol of Florida, house in DC. Pretty expensive. Obviously not trading influence for cash.


He would never make it as a Democrat. How much is Harry Reid worth now, compared to when he started his senate career?

How about Hillary... And her career in politics in general.


Hey! Don't go ragging on Hillary. Didn't you see she's good when she turned $1,000 into $100k on cattle futures?




BamaD -> RE: Who Is Afraid Of Marco Rubio (6/11/2015 8:43:05 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA


quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity


quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

Let's see, $174k a year as senator. Wife must have worked. House in home town, house in Capitol of Florida, house in DC. Pretty expensive. Obviously not trading influence for cash.


He would never make it as a Democrat. How much is Harry Reid worth now, compared to when he started his senate career?

How about Hillary... And her career in politics in general.


Hey! Don't go ragging on Hillary. Didn't you see she's good when she turned $1,000 into $100k on cattle futures?

lol




Aylee -> RE: Who Is Afraid Of Marco Rubio (6/11/2015 9:43:54 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA


quote:

ORIGINAL: Aylee


quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy

What kind of rube makes 2.38 Million Dollars from 1998-2008 only to come out of that period with a net worth of $53K? That is definition: FUCKED UP.




When did he get his book advance?


2012 it seems.


I thought that may explain some of the income, but after looking into it. . . Rubio seems rather ordinary with financial ups and downs.




Kirata -> RE: Who Is Afraid Of Marco Rubio (6/12/2015 1:05:23 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Aylee

Rubio seems rather ordinary with financial ups and downs.

[image]https://robjones3030.files.wordpress.com/2015/06/rubio-boat-hillary-pool.jpg[/image]

K.




tweakabelle -> RE: Who Is Afraid Of Marco Rubio (6/12/2015 4:33:47 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD


quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy

You are BEYOND IGNORANT:

The most important achievement in political economy in the Clinton yeas was reducing the federal deficit. Just before his inauguration Clinton held an economic summit in Little Rock, at which academic, business executives, and financiers one after another moaned about how huge federal borrowing to cover debt was making capital too expensive to allow industry to grow. One year later Clinton had rammed through a tax-and -budget bill that turned a chronic deficit into a surplus.

The anti-deficit drive was controversial within the Democratic Party, because Clinton seemed to be truckling to financial markets rather than spending more for education and health. It was bitterly resisted by the Republicans; every single Republican member of Congress voted against the new taxes in the plan. It was an enormous gamble on Clinton's part: he had Al Gore cast the tie-breaking vote in the Senate. The historical judgment has to be that it paid off, for Clinton, and, of vastly more importance, for the country.

--James Fallows

But two things stick out so far from the normal that they will probably be remembered no matter what happens. One of them is the sheer insensate virulence of his critics. If size can be measured by the lip-frothing frustration of one's enemies, Clinton is right up there with Moby-Dick. The other is the five-minute standing ovation Clinton received at the UN at the height of the Monica madness. The applause couldn't all have been for adultery--not even the applause from the French Ambassador.

And even if, as his critics maintain, its was all a trick both at home and abroad, the trick had worked wonderfully well. But he couldn't have gotten all five minutes without Kenneth Starr.



So his greatest accomplishment was forced on him by the Republicans.

The article that you are commenting on says:
"The most important achievement in political economy in the Clinton yeas was reducing the federal deficit. ........The anti-deficit drive was controversial within the Democratic Party, because Clinton seemed to be truckling to financial markets rather than spending more for education and health. It was bitterly resisted by the Republicans; every single Republican member of Congress voted against the new taxes in the plan."

Somehow you have managed to find this conclusion in those words: "So his greatest accomplishment was forced on him by the Republicans." Please note the bit above I have bolded, which seems to directly contradict your conclusion.

I am forced to conclude that either (a) you regard as 5 minute ovation at the UN as a greater "accomplishment" than turning the Federal Budget deficit into a surplus; or (b) you have completely misread/misunderstood the article, or possibly both (a) and (b). I am hoping there is another explanation that I have somehow missed.

IF there is please point it out to me. Because as things stand I am unable to see how it's possible to arrive at your conclusion (rationally) unless either or both (a) and (b) apply.




HunterCA -> RE: Who Is Afraid Of Marco Rubio (6/12/2015 9:07:06 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD


quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy

You are BEYOND IGNORANT:

The most important achievement in political economy in the Clinton yeas was reducing the federal deficit. Just before his inauguration Clinton held an economic summit in Little Rock, at which academic, business executives, and financiers one after another moaned about how huge federal borrowing to cover debt was making capital too expensive to allow industry to grow. One year later Clinton had rammed through a tax-and -budget bill that turned a chronic deficit into a surplus.

The anti-deficit drive was controversial within the Democratic Party, because Clinton seemed to be truckling to financial markets rather than spending more for education and health. It was bitterly resisted by the Republicans; every single Republican member of Congress voted against the new taxes in the plan. It was an enormous gamble on Clinton's part: he had Al Gore cast the tie-breaking vote in the Senate. The historical judgment has to be that it paid off, for Clinton, and, of vastly more importance, for the country.

--James Fallows

But two things stick out so far from the normal that they will probably be remembered no matter what happens. One of them is the sheer insensate virulence of his critics. If size can be measured by the lip-frothing frustration of one's enemies, Clinton is right up there with Moby-Dick. The other is the five-minute standing ovation Clinton received at the UN at the height of the Monica madness. The applause couldn't all have been for adultery--not even the applause from the French Ambassador.

And even if, as his critics maintain, its was all a trick both at home and abroad, the trick had worked wonderfully well. But he couldn't have gotten all five minutes without Kenneth Starr.



So his greatest accomplishment was forced on him by the Republicans.

The article that you are commenting on says:
"The most important achievement in political economy in the Clinton yeas was reducing the federal deficit. ........The anti-deficit drive was controversial within the Democratic Party, because Clinton seemed to be truckling to financial markets rather than spending more for education and health. It was bitterly resisted by the Republicans; every single Republican member of Congress voted against the new taxes in the plan."

Somehow you have managed to find this conclusion in those words: "So his greatest accomplishment was forced on him by the Republicans." Please note the bit above I have bolded, which seems to directly contradict your conclusion.

I am forced to conclude that either (a) you regard as 5 minute ovation at the UN as a greater "accomplishment" than turning the Federal Budget deficit into a surplus; or (b) you have completely misread/misunderstood the article, or possibly both (a) and (b). I am hoping there is another explanation that I have somehow missed.

IF there is please point it out to me. Because as things stand I am unable to see how it's possible to arrive at your conclusion (rationally) unless either or both (a) and (b) apply.



What an idiot. Yes the Republicans said no to new taxes and then forced bubba to balance the budget with no new taxes. What you've picked out merely shows your total lack of understanding. It's your typical little girl gotcha moment that's just so deep into fantasy and drama.




tweakabelle -> RE: Who Is Afraid Of Marco Rubio (6/12/2015 9:17:11 AM)

Hilarious. Now opposing something tooth and nail equals forcing its acceptance!

All I can say is wow! I wonder what enables such wondrous feats of intellectual gymnastics? Can I have 50 please?
[sm=rofl.gif] [sm=rofl.gif] [sm=rofl.gif]




HunterCA -> RE: Who Is Afraid Of Marco Rubio (6/12/2015 9:19:50 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD


quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy

You are BEYOND IGNORANT:

The most important achievement in political economy in the Clinton yeas was reducing the federal deficit. Just before his inauguration Clinton held an economic summit in Little Rock, at which academic, business executives, and financiers one after another moaned about how huge federal borrowing to cover debt was making capital too expensive to allow industry to grow. One year later Clinton had rammed through a tax-and -budget bill that turned a chronic deficit into a surplus.

The anti-deficit drive was controversial within the Democratic Party, because Clinton seemed to be truckling to financial markets rather than spending more for education and health. It was bitterly resisted by the Republicans; every single Republican member of Congress voted against the new taxes in the plan. It was an enormous gamble on Clinton's part: he had Al Gore cast the tie-breaking vote in the Senate. The historical judgment has to be that it paid off, for Clinton, and, of vastly more importance, for the country.

--James Fallows

But two things stick out so far from the normal that they will probably be remembered no matter what happens. One of them is the sheer insensate virulence of his critics. If size can be measured by the lip-frothing frustration of one's enemies, Clinton is right up there with Moby-Dick. The other is the five-minute standing ovation Clinton received at the UN at the height of the Monica madness. The applause couldn't all have been for adultery--not even the applause from the French Ambassador.

And even if, as his critics maintain, its was all a trick both at home and abroad, the trick had worked wonderfully well. But he couldn't have gotten all five minutes without Kenneth Starr.



So his greatest accomplishment was forced on him by the Republicans.

The article that you are commenting on says:
"The most important achievement in political economy in the Clinton yeas was reducing the federal deficit. ........The anti-deficit drive was controversial within the Democratic Party, because Clinton seemed to be truckling to financial markets rather than spending more for education and health. It was bitterly resisted by the Republicans; every single Republican member of Congress voted against the new taxes in the plan."

Somehow you have managed to find this conclusion in those words: "So his greatest accomplishment was forced on him by the Republicans." Please note the bit above I have bolded, which seems to directly contradict your conclusion.

I am forced to conclude that either (a) you regard as 5 minute ovation at the UN as a greater "accomplishment" than turning the Federal Budget deficit into a surplus; or (b) you have completely misread/misunderstood the article, or possibly both (a) and (b). I am hoping there is another explanation that I have somehow missed.

IF there is please point it out to me. Because as things stand I am unable to see how it's possible to arrive at your conclusion (rationally) unless either or both (a) and (b) apply.



You see Tweaka, that is how you become a racist. You focus on your hate, you read only what feeds your hate, then you rationalized ( which in your mind sounds like smart logic) based on your hate, limited information and emotive hysterical reasoning.

http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/no-bill-clinton-didnt-balance-budget



quote:

Let us establish one point definitively: Bill Clinton didn’t balance the budget. Yes, he was there when it happened. But the record shows that was about the extent of his contribution.



quote:

Now let us contrast this with the Clinton fiscal record. Recall that it was the Clinton White House that fought Republicans every inch of the way in balancing the budget in 1995. When Republicans proposed their own balanced-budget plan, the White House waged a shameless Mediscare campaign to torpedo the plan — a campaign that the Washington Post slammed as “pure demagoguery.” It was Bill Clinton who, during the big budget fight in 1995, had to submit not one, not two, but five budgets until he begrudgingly matched the GOP’s balanced-budget plan. In fact, during the height of the budget wars in the summer of 1995, the Clinton administration admitted that “balancing the budget is not one of our top priorities.”





HunterCA -> RE: Who Is Afraid Of Marco Rubio (6/12/2015 9:22:11 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

Hilarious. Now opposing something tooth and nail equals forcing its acceptance!

All I can say is wow! I wonder what enables such wondrous feats of intellectual gymnastics? Can I have 50 please?



Closed little minds don't make bright girls.

http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/no-bill-clinton-didnt-balance-budget



quote:

Let us establish one point definitively: Bill Clinton didn’t balance the budget. Yes, he was there when it happened. But the record shows that was about the extent of his contribution.



quote:

Now let us contrast this with the Clinton fiscal record. Recall that it was the Clinton White House that fought Republicans every inch of the way in balancing the budget in 1995. When Republicans proposed their own balanced-budget plan, the White House waged a shameless Mediscare campaign to torpedo the plan — a campaign that the Washington Post slammed as “pure demagoguery.” It was Bill Clinton who, during the big budget fight in 1995, had to submit not one, not two, but five budgets until he begrudgingly matched the GOP’s balanced-budget plan. In fact, during the height of the budget wars in the summer of 1995, the Clinton administration admitted that “balancing the budget is not one of our top priorities.”




mnottertail -> RE: Who Is Afraid Of Marco Rubio (6/12/2015 9:26:16 AM)

Here is one that has actual facts with it. (actual searchable facts).

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/12/16/390988/gingrich-four-balanced-budgets-false/

Gingrich has glossed over a pair of tax-raising bills that made a difference, and that Gingrich opposed, including the 1990 budget deal (in which President George H.W. Bush broke his "no new taxes" pledge), and the 1993 budget vote, which cost many Democratic lawmakers their seats in the 1994 Republican landslide.

"Like most things in life, what caused the budget to be balanced was multi-factorial, most important of which was the tech boom and the surging economy," said Steve Ellis, vice president of Taxpayers for Common Sense. "You can partially credit the 1997 Balanced Budget Act, but you could also credit the 1993 and 1990 bills that Speaker Gingrich opposed. It's a little too simple to say that the 1997 Balanced Budget Act ‘balanced the budget.’ "

So, spending and taxes to balance.


http://bancroft.berkeley.edu/ROHO/projects/debt/1993reconciliationact.html


Lets not blame smoot-hawley for the depression here, low information people.




BamaD -> RE: Who Is Afraid Of Marco Rubio (6/12/2015 10:24:40 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

Hilarious. Now opposing something tooth and nail equals forcing its acceptance!

All I can say is wow! I wonder what enables such wondrous feats of intellectual gymnastics? Can I have 50 please?
[sm=rofl.gif] [sm=rofl.gif] [sm=rofl.gif]

Clinton opposed it tooth and nail, the Republicans forced him to accept it so no there is no claim that A = B. I thought that they spoke English down under.




HunterCA -> RE: Who Is Afraid Of Marco Rubio (6/12/2015 10:32:55 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD


quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

Hilarious. Now opposing something tooth and nail equals forcing its acceptance!

All I can say is wow! I wonder what enables such wondrous feats of intellectual gymnastics? Can I have 50 please?
[sm=rofl.gif] [sm=rofl.gif] [sm=rofl.gif]

Clinton opposed it tooth and nail, the Republicans forced him to accept it so no there is no claim that A = B. I thought that they spoke English down under.



It's a nice day out. I'm gonna fling some hot lead down range and contemplate exactly how much hate it takes in a persons heart to read clearly written language and twist it to a prejudiced viewpoint. It's so sad to waste any mind, even a little one. I'm working on a load for my 22-250. It already does a quarter of minute of angle and I'm fascinated with what I might be able to wring from it as a pure production rifle.




BamaD -> RE: Who Is Afraid Of Marco Rubio (6/12/2015 10:53:41 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD


quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

Hilarious. Now opposing something tooth and nail equals forcing its acceptance!

All I can say is wow! I wonder what enables such wondrous feats of intellectual gymnastics? Can I have 50 please?
[sm=rofl.gif] [sm=rofl.gif] [sm=rofl.gif]

Clinton opposed it tooth and nail, the Republicans forced him to accept it so no there is no claim that A = B. I thought that they spoke English down under.



It's a nice day out. I'm gonna fling some hot lead down range and contemplate exactly how much hate it takes in a persons heart to read clearly written language and twist it to a prejudiced viewpoint. It's so sad to waste any mind, even a little one. I'm working on a load for my 22-250. It already does a quarter of minute of angle and I'm fascinated with what I might be able to wring from it as a pure production rifle.

Careful the new regs that the administration wants to put in makes it illegal to post such information without government approval.




HunterCA -> RE: Who Is Afraid Of Marco Rubio (6/12/2015 11:32:14 AM)

W
quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD


quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD


quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

Hilarious. Now opposing something tooth and nail equals forcing its acceptance!

All I can say is wow! I wonder what enables such wondrous feats of intellectual gymnastics? Can I have 50 please?
[sm=rofl.gif] [sm=rofl.gif] [sm=rofl.gif]

Clinton opposed it tooth and nail, the Republicans forced him to accept it so no there is no claim that A = B. I thought that they spoke English down under.



It's a nice day out. I'm gonna fling some hot lead down range and contemplate exactly how much hate it takes in a persons heart to read clearly written language and twist it to a prejudiced viewpoint. It's so sad to waste any mind, even a little one. I'm working on a load for my 22-250. It already does a quarter of minute of angle and I'm fascinated with what I might be able to wring from it as a pure production rifle.

Careful the new regs that the administration wants to put in makes it illegal to post such information without government approval.


I saw that. The most open Administration ever is changing a law to make it required to submit and obtain approval before disseminating information. Then, of course, they never respond to the submisttals effectively controlling the information available. It's very Stalinistic. I'm sure Tweaka would approve. She wouldn't have to blindly ignore things she didn't believe, the government would do it for her. Nice huh? Good example of the government and the people working harmoniously together.




BamaD -> RE: Who Is Afraid Of Marco Rubio (6/12/2015 11:36:24 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD


quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD


quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

Hilarious. Now opposing something tooth and nail equals forcing its acceptance!

All I can say is wow! I wonder what enables such wondrous feats of intellectual gymnastics? Can I have 50 please?
[sm=rofl.gif] [sm=rofl.gif] [sm=rofl.gif]

Clinton opposed it tooth and nail, the Republicans forced him to accept it so no there is no claim that A = B. I thought that they spoke English down under.



It's a nice day out. I'm gonna fling some hot lead down range and contemplate exactly how much hate it takes in a persons heart to read clearly written language and twist it to a prejudiced viewpoint. It's so sad to waste any mind, even a little one. I'm working on a load for my 22-250. It already does a quarter of minute of angle and I'm fascinated with what I might be able to wring from it as a pure production rifle.

Careful the new regs that the administration wants to put in makes it illegal to post such information without government approval.


I saw that. The most open Administration ever is changing a law to make it required to submit and obtain approval before disseminating information. Then, of course, they never respond to the submisttals effectively controlling the information available. It's very Stalinistic. I'm sure Tweaka would approve.


Only, of course, because it would guarantee the the wrong people never learned about firearms.
Of course you could still go online and learn how to make poison gases and nukes, but that is different. I will now cease my derailment.




mnottertail -> RE: Who Is Afraid Of Marco Rubio (6/12/2015 12:30:48 PM)

quote:


I saw that. The most open Administration ever is changing a law to make it required to submit and obtain approval before disseminating information. Then, of course, they never respond to the submisttals effectively controlling the information available. It's very Stalinistic. I'm sure Tweaka would approve.


Yeah, a rightwing shiteating propaganda slobbering site posted that and it made the rounds, but it is not true. It is for national defense and only national defense, and public weapons and private citizens are specifically exempt. Read the actual rules, not the hysterical emotional harangue of derail and propaganda of the demonizing right.




HunterCA -> RE: Who Is Afraid Of Marco Rubio (6/12/2015 12:47:31 PM)

Lol, now we see why Harry Read never allowed a vote in the Senate

A) it allowed Obama to say, "Look, it's all the Republicans fault, it's Bush's fault, they won't do anything.

B) it allowed all of the Democrats avoid taking a position they'd have to defend back home.


http://www.nationaljournal.com/congress/republicans-watch-with-bewilderment-as-democrats-flounder-on-trade-20150612



quote:

"I think the great irony of this whole situation is that you know a high percentage of my fellow Republicans and a high percentage of folks back home distrust the president, but it's fascinating that a higher percentage of Democrats distrust him," says Rep. Frank Lucas, R-Okla.




Page: <<   < prev  9 10 11 [12] 13   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.0625