This is good

http://www.palinaspresident.us/

--
Scott
Reverse name to reply
Hak mir nisht ken tshaynik

On 23 Oct 2008 22:18:39 GMT, Scott Seidman
wrote:

http://www.palinaspresident.us/

hilarious!

hint: click everything - multiple times...especially the door...

/daytripper (dinosaurs roaming the DC oilfields?!? ;-)

daytripper wrote in
:

On 23 Oct 2008 22:18:39 GMT, Scott Seidman
wrote:

http://www.palinaspresident.us/

hilarious!

hint: click everything - multiple times...especially the door...

/daytripper (dinosaurs roaming the DC oilfields?!? ;-)



It says its going to change every day.

--
Scott
Reverse name to reply

On Oct 23, 3:48*pm, Scott Seidman wrote:
Sorting
Benito

"Scott Seidman" wrote in message
. 1.4...
http://www.palinaspresident.us/

--
Scott
Reverse name to reply
Hak mir nisht ken tshaynik

The sad part is we are going to get another spender as President.
Neither Obama or Biden is worth a crap. What is sad is all the young people
going for the Obama charisma. When they should be voting for someone who is
going to cut government spending and that includes Social Security. They
are supporting a policy forecasting a huge increase in spending and Federal
Government. Our generation will go down as one of the worst at leaving a
world much worse for our passing. These 35 and less kids have not been told
how much they are going to owe for our sins. Those $80k salaries for a
union flunky as well as the other inflated white color salaries and the
inflation they have caused is going to hurt our kids big time and the excess
spending for no infrastructure! And it is not all to blame on wars. And no
school is even mentioning it from what I can see. Both the major parties
candidates are worthless. Actually less than worthless. The only candidate
with a genuine message for "change" Is Barr and the Libertarians. He has
not got a snowballs chance in hell of winning, but it is the message the
Republicans should be pushing if they want to win. So we get a choice of
two Senators, who are members of a body that has only a 12% approval rating.
Obama, has no resume that lends itself to declaring he should be CEO of a
small company, let alone the CEO of the USA. And McCain at least has a
little more experience, but is still short on good ideas just like Obama.
We are screwed as a people. We may be really bankrupt after 4 years of
Obama / Reid / Pelosi. And the mortgage meltdown has it's real genesis in
previous administrations and Mr. Greenspan. I hope you young flyfishers
that are so backing Obama, make lots of money to share with the poor and us
retirees.

On Oct 24, 2:07*pm, "Calif Bill" wrote:
We may be really bankrupt after 4 years of
Obama / Reid / Pelosi. *And the mortgage meltdown has it's real genesis in
previous administrations and Mr. Greenspan. *

LOL. In your effort to blame things on people have not yet come to
power, and who were in power 8 years ago, you seemed to have skipped
over some important current players.

And speaking of cutting government spending; after the record deficits
run up in the past 8 years, I can't imagine ANY sort of spend-fest
that could possibly be anything BUT a cut in spending. I laugh at the
folks who still believe that the Republicans really are opposed to
'big government'. We got the biggest in-your-pocket, in-your-telephone
and in-your-rights government ever, under Bush.

I hope you young flyfishers that are so backing Obama, make lots of money to share with the poor and us retirees.

I do too, but I thought you conservative types were against social
welfare programs and 'spreading the wealth around'? Funny how it
changes when you're the one in the bottom 95%, eh?

But seriously...you stand a much better chance of having federal
assistance if this current mess does not resolve from a Democratic
administration than a Republican one. And all those corporate buddies
who got rich by luring you into investing in their ponzi pyramid
investment schemes get to foot the bill.

--riverman

Calif Bill wrote:



The sad part is blah, blah, blah...




given the deep economic hole we're in, without regard to who should be
blamed, how do you propose we cut taxes and spending? how do you
propose, as a society and country, that we treat our senior citizens and
the impoverished? i think you are wrong about obama and his ability and
his worth to our country. ... why do you think principled and
experienced republicans are endorsing obama?

jeff

"Calif Bill" wrote


The sad part is



whisper Pss... Bill, your senility is showing /whisper


How did the trip to Burney go? Did you fish the Fall River? I have an
Outback 'Fall River Special' Pram I bought 20++ years ago especially to fish
there, but I haven't been up there in at least 10. Last time I was there
the .. um, unnamed ... fly shop was 'guiding' it's Johns by drifting boats
sideways through pods of rising fish (putting them down of course) with big
bobbers and nymphs while the guide shouted "set, set" to said Johns ... so
pathetic and sickening, so 'how many' 'how many' 'how many' that I've
never had the desire to go back and be forced to witness it again.





BTW, I've supported Obama precisely because I feel he's the best hope for
rebuilding this country and giving my son's ( he's 21) generation a chance
to somewhat reverse our errors. But, the biggest challenges they face will
only be indirectly financial and it will take investment to have any prayer
of solving them.


I'm retired, and watching my personal security go down daily as markets
crumble, it's scary **** I agree, but no where near as scary as a future of
'more of the same' for my kid.

MY response to my fears? I sent a few more of my scarce buck$ to Obama last
night, it's an investment for my kid. NO, I don't expect that
investment to make big improvements in MY remaining life, and NO I see no
guarantees except that failure to wisely invest will destroy this country.
The problems on the horizon are huge and far more important than just GDP
and Wall Street. Because I love my kid ( most kids, really ;-) I'm
willing to cut back for them and I'm willing to gamble on a new direction
.... not much of a gamble really, since the old one is certain failure.




When it comes to government, "small" is always relative, it's always big by
definition, "smart" and "honest" are the keys to success ... Obama is smart
and honest, smart enough to see years down the path, smart enough to
surround himself with the very best in each field and of all pursuasions and
actually listen to them, and honest enough to actually give a **** about
representing the people and working for their benefit ... long term as well
as short.



"Your old road is rapidly aging, please get out of the new one if you can't
lend a hand" G


ASIDE: For years it's seemed to me that the Republicans ( not Joe the
Whatever, or the Churchy Moms that just vote R ... the smoke filled room
guys at the top of the party ) do NOT see themselves as "representatives of
the people" rather they see themselves as "the ruling class" Those two
things are very different.

Given the inconvenience of our system they have to get people to vote for
them. Like ruling classes over history they see the peasants as stupid and
treat them that way ... thus Palin and Bush II and 'policy' that appeals
to one issue sound bite accepting wingnuts ( 'get yo hand off my gun,'
'protect all babies until they are born, then to hell with em,' 'NO taxes' )
As long as those wingnuts don't fight more money and power going to the
already rich and too powerful, those rich and powerful 'rulers' are willing
to 'support' such crap, whether they believe it or not ( look how far
"socially right" McCain claims to have moved in the last 4 years as he's
prepared to run, does anyone actually believe that change is real, I don't
..... but I DO believe it's totally dishonest ).

END ASIDE:

"riverman" wrote in message
...
On Oct 24, 2:07 pm, "Calif Bill" wrote:
We may be really bankrupt after 4 years of
Obama / Reid / Pelosi. And the mortgage meltdown has it's real genesis in
previous administrations and Mr. Greenspan.

LOL. In your effort to blame things on people have not yet come to
power, and who were in power 8 years ago, you seemed to have skipped
over some important current players.

And speaking of cutting government spending; after the record deficits
run up in the past 8 years, I can't imagine ANY sort of spend-fest
that could possibly be anything BUT a cut in spending. I laugh at the
folks who still believe that the Republicans really are opposed to
'big government'. We got the biggest in-your-pocket, in-your-telephone
and in-your-rights government ever, under Bush.

I hope you young flyfishers that are so backing Obama, make lots of money
to share with the poor and us retirees.

I do too, but I thought you conservative types were against social
welfare programs and 'spreading the wealth around'? Funny how it
changes when you're the one in the bottom 95%, eh?

But seriously...you stand a much better chance of having federal
assistance if this current mess does not resolve from a Democratic
administration than a Republican one. And all those corporate buddies
who got rich by luring you into investing in their ponzi pyramid
investment schemes get to foot the bill.

--riverman
__________________________________________________ ___

The President is not the one who tells the government to spend money. It is
the Congress. They are the ones who pass spending bills, and the POTUS gets
to veto them. Unfortunately Bush failed in that miserably. Some years
ago, the Executive Branch helped to overcome excess spending by the Congress
by just not spending the money. That is a thing of the past as the Congress
got a judicial ruling that if they got a spending bill passed the money HAD
TO BE SPENT. And it has been a Democrat controlled Congress for more than a
year. So the Dem's get the blame also. I am a social liberal and a fiscal
conservative. Used to be a Dem, still registered that way, but this Dem
party is way to far to the left for us older Dem's. Hell, JFK would be a
moderate Republican now. And this financial meltdown is not really because
of Bush's policies. These policies were laid down before he came to office.
I lay a lot of the blame on Greenspan. One of the worst Fed Chairs ever.
He gave us the dot.bomb boom. And the easy money after that disaster led to
the cheap loans of the next mortgage.bomb. Clinton was not fiscal
conservative. He was a very lucky guy. Gets a Newt Contract with America
Congress, that slowed down spending, and then got a huge growth in income
from the dot.bomb that they could not spend fast enough. Clinton's first 2
years were fiscal disasters also until Newt came in. The spreading of the
wealth is only raising the money owed by the future generations. The
Federal revenue has come in at 20-22% of GDP for at least 50 years. No
matter if boom times or tight times. Used to be the Fed's spent about
20-22% of GDP. They are going towards the 30-38% level. You have a
Department of Education that controls education in America. Since their
creation in about 1980, we have had education take a nose dive. Take money
from the states, and send 75% back with lots of strings attached. Lowest
graduation rates in history. Lowest graduation rate of any industrialized
nation. In 1950 the total tax burden on an American family was about 22%.
Now it is about 48%. Are we better off? I do not think so. The Fed's in
the 1950's created a huge boom in the Infrastructure with the Interstate
highway system. Our infrastructure is in perilous decline, and the Fed and
states are spending gross amounts of money, but not on the infrastructure.
With Obama's background and declared socialist leanings and the Reid /
Pelosi veto proof Congress, our children and grandchildren are screwed.
Screwed worse than they are now. When did Social Security morf from the
Widows and Childrens Act to be the national Retirement plan? For a country
with 300 million citizens, we sure have a knack for picking the bottom of
the heap as to leadership. I am on Social Security, but Boxer wants my
401K's and IRA's also. Of the 2 candidates, McCain scares me less. In
Obama, you have a person who has already stated he is going to increase the
cost and size of governenment. And I did not vote for either Bush or Kerry.
Just could not vote for either of them. Maybe I learned my lesson when
voting for LBJ. That got me a draft notice and the US a greatly increased
SEA war.

"jeff miller" wrote in message
. ..
Calif Bill wrote:



The sad part is blah, blah, blah...




given the deep economic hole we're in, without regard to who should be
blamed, how do you propose we cut taxes and spending? how do you propose,
as a society and country, that we treat our senior citizens and the
impoverished? i think you are wrong about obama and his ability and his
worth to our country. ... why do you think principled and experienced
republicans are endorsing obama?

jeff

When you have little money in the family account, do you spend your way out
of debt?