| Parker Griffith | |
 | |
| Incumbent | |
| Assumed office January 3, 2009 | |
| Preceded by | Bud Cramer |
|---|---|
I would like to be one of the first bloggers to welcome Parker Griffith to the Republican Party. This is a blow to the Democratic Party but they did it to themselves by becoming socialist in idealogy. We have been telling our readers of the fall of the Democratic Party and this is even more proof that the Democrats are on their way down and the Republican Parties future looks much brighter then the Democrats does. What are the political repercusions of this move by a promenent Democrat? I mean Republican. Will this impact health care reform? Is this the beginning of the end of the liberal movement? And will the Democrats come back from this major blow?
I'm surprised there were any Democrats in Alabama to begin with... ;-)
ReplyDeleteHonestly...I hope we see more moves of this caliber in 2010, and before the next Presidential election in 2012.
You're right, Chris...they did it to themselves.
Only one Hypocrat is able to see the writing on the wall? I knew they were stupid, but I didn't realize they were completely brain-dead!
ReplyDeleteSeriously, this health care debacle and cap and TAX scam is kamikaze politics at their most outrageous. And they WILL sink this country if they have the chance, have NO doubt about that.
This is the first I've heard of this Chris. All day I've heard how upset people are with the Democrats. I don't think he will be the last Dem. to change parties. And I know of a lot of Democrat voters that wont vote that way again. I feel we have been sold out by the Democrats. Great blog Chris.
ReplyDeleteTo:
ReplyDeleteRep. Parker Griffith & Pres. Barack Obama
December 21, 2009
Deficit spending has NEVER been successful in long term economic stability. It takes production of consumable goods. Infrastructure projects are simply short tem band aids that prolong instability and more debt for future generations.
It is time to STOP SPENDING and balance each annual budget. That is what an individual must do; it is what companies must to do, and it is what governments must do. NO MORE DEFICIT SPENIDNG. GOT IT? That is why the tea parties have been so popular. Your spending is what has frightened the citizens, tax payers. The RESPONSIBLE legislators get it and are trying to pass that message on to you, while an IRRESPONSIBLE President and IRRESPONIBLE legislators cast despairing remarks at those who do not buy in to their IRRESPONSIBLE policies and agendas.
In December 2004, when a Republican was President, the Democratic leadership sent the President a letter stating the tax reform is urgent. Noting has changed that would reduce the urgency. On the contrary there is even more reason to act IMMEDIAELY to reduce taxes.
Permanent corporate tax cuts have worked in:
Soviet European satellite countries,- former
http://www.nationalreview.com/nrof_canto...
Austria,
http://www.lowtax.net/lowtax/html/offon/...
Switzerland,
http://www.finfacts.com/irelandbusinessn...
Ireland, is eating our economic lunch with a12.5 percent .corporate tax rate.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008...
http://www.internationaltaxreview.com/?P...
http://www.finfacts.ie/irelandbusinessne...
http://www.internationaltaxreview.com/?P...
America one year highly successful experiment -- irresponsibly not renewed
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB12148676...
Hunter Johnson
Huntsville , AL
He WONT be the Last! Also heard Four Democrats have already said this is their LAST TERM. I guess thats BETTER than The VOTERS telling them!
ReplyDeleteThis Country as we know it is Under seige from Socialist Communist and Marxist that this President has Surrounded himself with and WHOS advice he RELIES on.
wow, big deal a freshman congressman switches sides. Like it matters. the incumbent party always loses seats in the midterm election during the first term.
ReplyDeleteWatch out Al, the marxists are coming, the marxists are coming. Bet you think there is a monster in your closet at night too?
To, thats great, now do you have a take on things or just going to use op-eds your whole life?
ReplyDeleteHere's an op-ed back at ya....
Admittedly, there are counter-arguments to the necessity of government intervention. But as history and economic performance will likely demonstrate, the Fed's extraordinary actions, led by Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke, in conjunction with the bank bailout and related fiscal stimulus supports, prevented the U.S. financial system from veering into the abyss. In particular, the Fed's actions, in coordination with the Bank of England, the European Central Bank, the Bank of Japan, the Swiss National Bank, and other central banks, prevented a global financial collapse that would have plunged the U.S. and global economies into a deeper GDP hole than the 2008-2009 recession.
Dangerous Parallels to 1937
One of the ironies of "tea party"-style criticism and activism that the nation is currently witnessing is that the very actions the faction despises -- the stimulus, the Fed's unprecedented efforts to keep credit markets liquid, the bailout of the banks, General Motors, AIG (AIG) etc. -- stabilized the economic system, enormously benefiting plenty of people and institutions on the right.
Many of these tea partiers and other assorted anti-stimulus critics are now calling for a withdrawal of fiscal stimulus and monetary supports. Their complaints echo those from the mid-1930s, when President Franklin D. Roosevelt's opponents complained that the budget deficit was too large, the dollar had weakened too much, and that excess bank reserves would lead to rising inflation. FDR and the Fed gave in to the pressure, in part due to fears that Democrats were going to be hurt in the Congressional election of 1938. Similarities to the current day are striking. Back then, Congress cut spending and the Fed increased bank reserve requirements by about 50%. The federal budget went from New Deal stimulus-based deficits to essentially a balanced budget in 1938.
And what happened? The premature withdrawal of stimulus and Fed tightening were major factors that tipped the U.S. economy back into recession in 1937. Prices, which had experienced modest support from New Deal programs that increased demand, soon started falling. Deflation took hold, and the U.S. unemployment rate, which had fallen from more than 20% in 1933 when FDR took office to about 10% in 1937, started rising again in 1938. As most economists now agree, the premature removal of stimulus and monetary easing lengthened the Great Depression.
Joseph Lazzaro
http://www.dailyfinance.com/story/will-the-u-s-repeat-the-great-mistake-of-1937/19287174/
Come on now Joe, you don't really think this has no effect on the Democrats do you? Just look at the poll numbers over the last 11 months. 60% of Americans want our govt hands of health care now that the Dems had their hands in it. They also lost trust in the Democrats. It sure was short lived for ya,ah?
ReplyDeleteJoeC This ONE term President has MADE a Difference that I will Admit! He WOKE up VOTERS! At least you are AWARE of the Large turn over that will take Place I give you CREDIT for that!
ReplyDeleteHere is Direction to Marxist Joe See list of NOBAMAs Czars ,they along with Communist and Socialist advise NOBAMA.
Dont got to Worry about Monsters in the Closet Joe I will Deal with ANY Problem unlike LIB I do NOT need Government HELP!
Al, i saw how the right dealt with the Bush problems so i am figuring that head up arse is the standard way to hanlde the monsters too. Maybe you have decided to pull it out, but aftre 8 years its not like you should get award.
ReplyDeleteLol....socialists and marxists, least we knoww who advises the president and the VP this time around. I'd like you to get it straight though. Do we represent the bankers like the right is now claiming because of Tarp and the stimulus or do we represent the marxists? Can't do both.
JoeC You seem almost glad that we have Marxist and Socialist advising the President cause now YOU KNOW! Put your head back up your ass now and sniff the Stimulus cause thats about all any of that GOVERNMENT spending will get YA!
ReplyDeleteEvidently NOW Bribery is now Exceptable to LIBS using Tax Payers Money but should not SURPRIZE me LIBS have NO problem SPENDING Tax Payers Money!
Joe Bush LOST the Election, Get over it, Your Guys in Charge along with his MOB in the White House. Joe dont be a Richard Cranium with out Protection!
Joe TARP was as much a Democrat thing as it was a Bush thing.Don't forget who owned Congress and Bush only spent half of TARP.
ReplyDeleteJoe do you like the fact that Obama has so many self proclaimed socialist and marxist in his admin?
ReplyDeleteJoey, here is something you might find interesting about your socialist FDR:
ReplyDeleteFDR's policies prolonged Depression by 7 years, UCLA economists calculate
By Meg Sullivan August 10, 2004
http://newsroom.ucla.edu/portal/ucla/FDR-s-Policies-Prolonged-Depression-5409.aspx?RelNum=5409
Two UCLA economists say they have figured out why the Great Depression dragged on for almost 15 years, and they blame a suspect previously thought to be beyond reproach: President Franklin D. Roosevelt.
After scrutinizing Roosevelt's record for four years, Harold L. Cole and Lee E. Ohanian conclude in a new study that New Deal policies signed into law 71 years ago thwarted economic recovery for seven long years.
"Why the Great Depression lasted so long has always been a great mystery, and because we never really knew the reason, we have always worried whether we would have another 10- to 15-year economic slump," said Ohanian, vice chair of UCLA's Department of Economics. "We found that a relapse isn't likely unless lawmakers gum up a recovery with ill-conceived stimulus policies."
In an article in the August issue of the Journal of Political Economy, Ohanian and Cole blame specific anti-competition and pro-labor measures that Roosevelt promoted and signed into law June 16, 1933.
"President Roosevelt believed that excessive competition was responsible for the Depression by reducing prices and wages, and by extension reducing employment and demand for goods and services," said Cole, also a UCLA professor of economics. "So he came up with a recovery package that would be unimaginable today, allowing businesses in every industry to collude without the threat of antitrust prosecution and workers to demand salaries about 25 percent above where they ought to have been, given market forces. The economy was poised for a beautiful recovery, but that recovery was stalled by these misguided policies."
Using data collected in 1929 by the Conference Board and the Bureau of Labor Statistics, Cole and Ohanian were able to establish average wages and prices across a range of industries just prior to the Depression. By adjusting for annual increases in productivity, they were able to use the 1929 benchmark to figure out what prices and wages would have been during every year of the Depression had Roosevelt's policies not gone into effect. They then compared those figures with actual prices and wages as reflected in the Conference Board data.
In the three years following the implementation of Roosevelt's policies, wages in 11 key industries averaged 25 percent higher than they otherwise would have done, the economists calculate. But unemployment was also 25 percent higher than it should have been, given gains in productivity.
Meanwhile, prices across 19 industries averaged 23 percent above where they should have been, given the state of the economy. With goods and services that much harder for consumers to afford, demand stalled and the gross national product floundered at 27 percent below where it otherwise might have been.
"High wages and high prices in an economic slump run contrary to everything we know about market forces in economic downturns," Ohanian said. "As we've seen in the past several years, salaries and prices fall when unemployment is high. By artificially inflating both, the New Deal policies short-circuited the market's self-correcting forces."
Part 2:
ReplyDeleteThe policies were contained in the National Industrial Recovery Act (NIRA), which exempted industries from antitrust prosecution if they agreed to enter into collective bargaining agreements that significantly raised wages. Because protection from antitrust prosecution all but ensured higher prices for goods and services, a wide range of industries took the bait, Cole and Ohanian found. By 1934 more than 500 industries, which accounted for nearly 80 percent of private, non-agricultural employment, had entered into the collective bargaining agreements called for under NIRA.
Cole and Ohanian calculate that NIRA and its aftermath account for 60 percent of the weak recovery. Without the policies, they contend that the Depression would have ended in 1936 instead of the year when they believe the slump actually ended: 1943.
Roosevelt's role in lifting the nation out of the Great Depression has been so revered that Time magazine readers cited it in 1999 when naming him the 20th century's second-most influential figure.
"This is exciting and valuable research," said Robert E. Lucas Jr., the 1995 Nobel Laureate in economics, and the John Dewey Distinguished Service Professor of Economics at the University of Chicago. "The prevention and cure of depressions is a central mission of macroeconomics, and if we can't understand what happened in the 1930s, how can we be sure it won't happen again?"
NIRA's role in prolonging the Depression has not been more closely scrutinized because the Supreme Court declared the act unconstitutional within two years of its passage.
"Historians have assumed that the policies didn't have an impact because they were too short-lived, but the proof is in the pudding," Ohanian said. "We show that they really did artificially inflate wages and prices."
Even after being deemed unconstitutional, Roosevelt's anti-competition policies persisted — albeit under a different guise, the scholars found. Ohanian and Cole painstakingly documented the extent to which the Roosevelt administration looked the other way as industries once protected by NIRA continued to engage in price-fixing practices for four more years.
The number of antitrust cases brought by the Department of Justice fell from an average of 12.5 cases per year during the 1920s to an average of 6.5 cases per year from 1935 to 1938, the scholars found. Collusion had become so widespread that one Department of Interior official complained of receiving identical bids from a protected industry (steel) on 257 different occasions between mid-1935 and mid-1936. The bids were not only identical but also 50 percent higher than foreign steel prices. Without competition, wholesale prices remained inflated, averaging 14 percent higher than they would have been without the troublesome practices, the UCLA economists calculate.
NIRA's labor provisions, meanwhile, were strengthened in the National Relations Act, signed into law in 1935. As union membership doubled, so did labor's bargaining power, rising from 14 million strike days in 1936 to about 28 million in 1937. By 1939 wages in protected industries remained 24 percent to 33 percent above where they should have been, based on 1929 figures, Cole and Ohanian calculate. Unemployment persisted. By 1939 the U.S. unemployment rate was 17.2 percent, down somewhat from its 1933 peak of 24.9 percent but still remarkably high. By comparison, in May 2003, the unemployment rate of 6.1 percent was the highest in nine years.
Part 3/3
ReplyDeleteRecovery came only after the Department of Justice dramatically stepped enforcement of antitrust cases nearly four-fold and organized labor suffered a string of setbacks, the economists found.
"The fact that the Depression dragged on for years convinced generations of economists and policy-makers that capitalism could not be trusted to recover from depressions and that significant government intervention was required to achieve good outcomes," Cole said. "Ironically, our work shows that the recovery would have been very rapid had the government not intervened."
73% of economists think FDR prolonged the Depression and made it worse not better joe.
ReplyDeleteCongressional Democrats now must choose whether to exclude taxpayer funding of abortion in their healthcare legislation or risk defeat of the entire bill.
ReplyDeleteUnder all existing federal health programs, taxpayer funds are not used for abortions and they do not subsidize private health insurance that pays for abortion either. However, the healthcare bill Democrats are poised to pass in the Senate authorizes federal subsidies for tens of millions of Americans to buy private health insurance that will cover abortion on demand.
Douglas Johnson, legislative director for National Right to Life, believes it is unlikely the bill that emerges from conference committee will include the House-approved Stupak amendment, which bars federal funding of abortion on demand in public and private health insurance plans. The Stupak amendment, he says, faces a "perilous" future.
"The conference committee will be directly controlled by top Democratic leaders from the House and Senate, almost all of whom are dead set against us -- and they will be working in close concert with President Obama and the White House, who have fought us every step of the way," Johnson explains.
"On the other hand, and this is the most important thing, they need to get a majority in the House and 60 votes in the Senate to pass the final bill. So if we can show that there are enough lawmakers, particularly in the House of Representatives, who will not vote for the final bill unless it contains the Stupak amendment, then they're going to have to make a hard choice."
The pro-life spokesman warns that Democratic leaders and the White House will be trying to "wear down" pro-life Democrats in the House and offer them different inducements so they will "get out of the way" and allow the bill to pass with abortion funding included.
chris i didn't blame bush for Tarp. I said that between Tarp and the stimulus the left has been accused of listening to the bankers too much. so how can it be that we are all marxists now if we listen too much to the free market types too.
ReplyDeleteJoey, I have to step in and give my opinion. If the "free market types" were listened to, the banks would have been allowed to fail and the stimulus bill would have never gone through. So I don't understand how passing a massive porkulus bill of, what, $747 billion, is listening too much to the free market types?!?!
ReplyDeleteAnon, prove it.
ReplyDeleteJohn, heres another argument for it.
Of course, I had recently heard snippets of this silly argument -- right-wing pundits are repeating it everywhere these days. But I had never heard it articulated in such preposterous terms, so my initial reaction was paralysis -- the mouth-agape, deer-in-the-headlights kind. Only after collecting myself did I say that such assertions about the New Deal were absurd. But then I was laughed at -- as if it was hilarious to say that the New Deal did anything but exacerbate the Depression.
Afterwards, suffering pangs of self-doubt, I wondered whether I and most of the country are the crazy ones. Sure, the vast majority of Americans think the New Deal worked well. But are conservatives right? Did the New Deal’s “massive government intervention prolong the Great Depression?”
Um, no.
Upon deeper examination, I discovered that the right bases its New Deal revisionism on the short-lived recession in a year straddling 1937 and 1938. But that was four years into Roosevelt’s term -- four years marked by spectacular economic growth. Additionally, the fleeting decline happened not because of the New Deal’s spending programs, but because Roosevelt momentarily listened to conservatives and backed off them. As Nobel-winning economist Paul Krugman notes, in 1937-38, FDR “was persuaded to balance the budget” and “cut spending and the economy went back down again.”
To be sure, you can credibly argue that the New Deal had its share of problems. But overall, the numbers prove it helped -- rather than hurt -- the macroeconomy.
“Excepting 1937-1938, unemployment fell each year of Roosevelt’s first two terms (while) the U.S. economy grew at average annual growth rates of 9 percent to 10 percent,” writes University of California historian Eric Rauchway.
What about the New Deal’s most “massive government intervention” -- its financial regulations? Did they prolong the Great Depression in ways the official data didn’t detect?
Nope.
According to Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke, “Only with the New Deal’s rehabilitation of the financial system in 1933-35 did the economy begin its slow emergence from the Great Depression.”
In fact, even famed conservative economist Milton Friedman admitted that the New Deal’s Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation was “the structural change most conducive to monetary stability since ... the Civil War.”
David Sirota
newsroom@vailadily.com
Joe aren't you the same person that bitched about cut and paste and using others op-eds? Nothing against op-eds just against hypocrits.
ReplyDeleteIsn't Ben Beryankme the guy that made mistake after mistake? And you use him in the op-ed? I'll call up Bush and ask him if he was the greatest president ever. You must have taken one too many to the head.
ReplyDeleteAnon, i don't like to use them but sometimes its okay. I present enough of my own work that i think i can suggest others who don't but op-ed bomb as i call it. Nothing hypocritical to suggest people should write mostly from their own thoughts.
ReplyDeleteFunny, what do you consider mistakes? please suggest them and then we can discuss. his theoretical work can be okay even if the laters years he makes actual mistakes.
JoeC Ben was one of the people that said he "never saw it coming". That is a big mistake. So Joe you have complained numerous times about people using op-eds. But now that you use them top help you make a point it's OK as long as you don't go past every once in a while. And I bet you are the only one that can define what "once in a while" is? How convenient that you think you are the ruling class. How long has Ben Bernanke been in his position? 12/04/09 Stockholm, Sweden – In yesterday’s confirmation hearing for his second four-year term as Federal Reserve chairman, Ben Bernanke received a thorough tongue-lashing from Senator Jim Bunning (R-KY). Here are a few highlights from the transcript as well as the video…
ReplyDelete* “…you put the printing presses into overdrive to fund the government’s spending and hand out cheap money to your masters on Wall Street, which they use to rake in record profits while ordinary Americans and small businesses can’t even get loans for their everyday needs.”
* “…you have decided that just about every large bank, investment bank, insurance company, and even some industrial companies are too big to fail. Rather than making management, shareholders, and debt holders feel the consequences of their risk-taking, you bailed them out. In short, you are the definition of moral hazard.”
* “Because you bowed to pressure from the banks and refused to resolve them or force them to clean up their balance sheets and clean out the management, you have created zombie banks that are only enriching their traders and executives. You are repeating the mistakes of Japan in the 1990s on a much larger scale, while sowing the seeds for the next bubble.”
* “From monetary policy to regulation, consumer protection, transparency, and independence, your time as Fed Chairman has been a failure.”
And Time mag. made him man of the year for being a failure. It's kind of like Obama getting the Noble Peace prize without doing anything. See the patern here Joe? As long as Ben has no transparancy and keeps printing our money out of thin air he's a hero to you on the left. You on the left ask so little of your people but you ask so much from the right and then you still say it isn't right.
ReplyDeleteJoey, again you didn't address this: "Joey, I have to step in and give my opinion. If the "free market types" were listened to, the banks would have been allowed to fail and the stimulus bill would have never gone through. So I don't understand how passing a massive porkulus bill of, what, $747 billion, is listening too much to the free market types?!?!" HOW is this FREE MARKET?!?
ReplyDeleteAnd I saw you post that article earlier I think. It looks quite familiar to me.
So you are saying that UCLA is too conservative? You're saying that FDIC negates all of their findings? I guess I don't get the thrust of your posting. And Chris is right on about Bernanke being a little biased about the Fed!
But anyway, that's cool that you think Roosevelt doing things like encouraging monopolies, slaughtering millions of pigs and destroying untold amounts of crops while people were starving in the cities, in order to boost prices of those commodities, was a great way to get out of a depression. I guess we will never know if the government staying the hell out of the economy would have shortened the depression or this recession we are in right now. We DO know that the government sure doesn't PREVENT those, and in all likelihood CAUSES them. And we do know that the government never lets a good CRISIS go to waste, even if they have to invent one for their nefarious purposes.
I like this ad. Even the "progressives" are calling out OBAMANATION'S LIES:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/12/23/obama-accused-of-abandoni_n_401583.html
Well THIS is interesting:
ReplyDeleteDecember 23, 2009
"Amending Executive Order 12425"
http://www.smalldeadanimals.com/archives/012966.html
Andy McCarthy;
One week ago, President Obama quietly signed an executive order that makes [INTERPOL] immune from the restraints of American law.
[...]
Interpol's property and assets are no longer subject to search and confiscation, and its archives are now considered inviolable. This international police force (whose U.S. headquarters is in the Justice Department in Washington) will be unrestrained by the U.S. Constitution and American law while it operates in the United States and affects both Americans and American interests outside the United States.
Interpol works closely with international tribunals (such as the International Criminal Court — which the United States has refused to join because of its sovereignty surrendering provisions, though top Obama officials want us in it). It also works closely with foreign courts and law-enforcement authorities (such as those in Europe that are investigating former Bush administration officials for purported war crimes — i.e., for actions taken in America's defense).
Why would we elevate an international police force above American law? Why would we immunize an international police force from the limitations that constrain the FBI and other American law-enforcement agencies? Why is it suddenly necessary to have, within the Justice Department, a repository for stashing government files which, therefore, will be beyond the ability of Congress, American law-enforcement, the media, and the American people to scrutinize?
More at Threatswatch;
For an added and disturbing wrinkle, INTERPOL's central operations office in the United States is within our own Justice Department offices. They are American law enforcement officers working under the aegis of INTERPOL within our own Justice Department. That they now operate with full diplomatic immunity and with "inviolable archives" from within our own buildings should send red flags soaring into the clouds.
[...]
Ultimately, a detailed verbal explanation is due the American public from the President of the United States detailing why an international law enforcement arm assisting a court we are not a signatory to has been elevated above our Constitution upon our soil.
Chris, i have made a point to complain about op-eds because many of the people are not offering their own opinion, but op-ed'ing the threads. don't try to revise my history.
ReplyDeleteJohn, there's no such thing as an atheist in a foxhole, or a freemarket banker in a crisis, but we all know Wall street operates as a free market/de-regulation haven and that the Obama/democrats did succumb to cries from those ex-free marketeers (how ironic) to do both Tarp and the Stimulus.
ReplyDeleteAnd like the previous article said,
One of the ironies of "tea party"-style criticism and activism that the nation is currently witnessing is that the very actions the faction despises -- the stimulus, the Fed's unprecedented efforts to keep credit markets liquid, the bailout of the banks, General Motors, AIG (AIG) etc. -- stabilized the economic system, enormously benefiting plenty of people and institutions on the right
But here's where you nose must be pissing off your face because you wanted to chop it off and watch it bleed. Thankfully obama resisted the call and things look to be on the right track now. Housing sales up 3 months in a row, a positive GDP change last quarter. So much for extending the crisis.
Joe Where is that Transparentsy and Open Government that this President Promised. You know C Span would Cover all DEBATE on Bills and all that CRAP! they must have Forgot to CALL C Span on those LATE night Closed door Meeting with NO oppisition Present!
ReplyDeleteI also thought when the President signed the STIMULUS Bill that he was NOT happy with ALL the Pork in it and said he WOULD NOT sign any other Legislation that CONTAIN PORK! Joe you could have a PIG ROAST for all 535 Elite in Washington and STILL have PORK left,with this Health Care Bill So does OUR leader REFUSE to sign the Health Care Bill if and when its gets to his desk or does he DO what he ALWAYS does SAY one thing and DO another,that is his STYLE to this POINT. Chicago Politic plane and SIMPLE that much is TRANSPARENT!
Al, far as i can see CSpan in covering people calling to say they wonder if they got the wrong Senator when they prayed one would die.
ReplyDeleteCALLER: "Yeah doctor. Our small tea bag group here in Waycross, we got our vigil together and took Dr. Coburn’s instructions and prayed real hard that Sen. Byrd would either die or couldn’t show up at the vote the other night.
How hard did you pray because I see one of our members was missing this morning. Did it backfire on us? One of our members died? How hard did you pray senator? Did you pray hard enough?"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a9qzP8MV5nk
bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha....
intercessionary prayers for Senators deaths. Is that what the Tea Party is about?????
the Ballwashers party praying for people to die. such good christians soliders in the war of partisanship.
ReplyDeleteReminds me why i won't join a church. Despicable people.
That call really took the cake, didn't it JoeC?
ReplyDeletePraying for a Democrat to die, what kind compassionate group of people.
Joey, as I recall the banks in general did NOT ask for government bail outs. As I recall, the FED FORCED the banks to take the bailouts. If you don't believe me, read this: http://www.businessinsider.com/uncovered-tarp-docs-reveal-how-paulson-forced-banks-to-take-the-cash-2009-5 or do your own searches for FACTS.
ReplyDeleteAgain, Joey, HOW is that allowing the free market to work?!?! My question ONCE AGAIN "If the "free market types" were listened to, the banks would have been allowed to fail and the stimulus bill would have never gone through. So I don't understand how passing a massive porkulus bill of, what, $747 billion, is listening too much to the free market types?!?!" HOW is this FREE MARKET?!?"
I don't care about atheists in foxholes, nor do I care about your bullshit straw men Joey. Government intervention is NOT free market.
And furthermore, I posit that the economy would recover faster and stronger without useless government intervention. What exactly did the government intervention do Joey?!?!
And EVEN furthermore, a majority of people were against the TARP AND the stimulus. Myself included. How is that cutting off my nose to spite my face, which is what I THINK you're trying to get at, but you are making no sense. Are you drinking again?
Hey FAILk, yeah, wishing the worst on someone IS very shitty thing to do, like this comment YOU yourself made to me:
ReplyDelete"Here's hoping that you develop high blood pressure, diabetes, high cholesterol while you are in the private market and then you try to buy insurance and get reject by every company out there and you have to figure out how to pay for any health emergency with NO INSURANCE, or you thought you had insurance until the insurance company finds out you had something you didn't put down on your application and rescinds your coverage after a visit to the hospital.
http://bpannebecker.blogspot.com/2009/12/voters-want-better-more-accountable.html?showComment=1261259398831#c3388329583250544515
Joey, yet another strawman. Al asked you about the Hypocrats changing their tune on transparency. This is fact, that they all said that deliberations would be televised on C-SPAN for the world to see, and where are they Joey?!?!
ReplyDeleteYou lieberal Hypocrats got taken in by a caller on C-SPAN. If you even bother to read the description, it says:
ReplyDeleteOn Tuesday, a C-SPAN caller appeared to mock Senate Republicans and specifically Sen. Tom Coburn of Oklahoma for a speech he made that seemed to wish death upon Democratic Senator Robert Byrd.
That was a shithead lieberal Hypocrat wasting everyone's time just so he could sucker Joey and Bruce! BWAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Wow, Joey and Bruce Failk, you guys will stoop to any level to try to push your radical agenda through. Which one of you was that that called in?! Bruce isn't smart enough to try something like that, so I'm going to say it was Joey.
Wow, here's some more brilliant government waste. I can't wait until these dipshits are running medicine for me and my loved ones:
ReplyDeleteRunning on (Almost) Empty
A Minnesota truck driver is miffed at the Post Office for sending him 300 miles with nothing in his trailer but a post card.
Roy Combs says he arrived in Louisville expecting to haul mail back to Chicago but was told another truck had picked up his load. So he was instead given a work order card and told to deliver that to the Windy City.
Because Combs’ trucking company signed a contract with the Postal Service, he couldn’t pick up another load despite the empty space. Combs says: “It’s just a waste of time, a waste of money, a waste of fuel.”
The Louisville Post Office branch says the mistake was an isolated incident and has nothing to do with the cuts in hours or cost-saving measures the Postal Service has been forced to make.
Bruce You dont mind KILLING BABIES what in the HELL are you Talking About! Maybe some Evil KKK person did it!
ReplyDeletePHONE call COULD have come from ANYBODY including you BRUCE,anythings Possible! Could be and Might be are NOT Reliable Sources to Conservatives BUT evidently it DOES pass the SMELL test for LIBS!!
Getting back to the Original Topic Where was C SPAN showing us ALL that TRANSPARENTSY?
Public Health Care in Hawaii,Massacuettes and Tennessee, Howd that work out?
If before Nobama Care lets say, 47 MILLION(LIB Figure) is correct on Uninsured. When and IF Nobama Care takes effect Estimated 25 Million still Dont have Coverage! What the Hell is this Bill doing Other than taking MORE Freedom from Citizens and Giving MORE Power to Government. NOT a GOOD Tradeoff!
With all the Bribery going on with Tax Payers Money I DO believe the LIBS forgot that Little 10th Amendment thingy in OUR Constitution LIBS you know the one about STATES Rights.
I found a good quote that sums up conservatives' disgust at the liberals:
ReplyDelete"Unlike cruel liberty that requires you to stand and take responsibility for your choices, kind tyranny requires only that you kneel and surrender your choices."
Absolutely anonymous. Big business doesn't, CANNOT, force me to buy their product. But now the government is going to FORCE me to buy private insurance.
ReplyDeleteJoe you wont join a church because you wont put a dime in the basket when it comes around. I know your type. All talk and no give.
ReplyDeleteBoy Joey, you're right, how could home sales NOT be up with prices like these in the liberal heartland of Detroit, MI:
ReplyDeletehttp://mjperry.blogspot.com/2009/12/detroit-homes-for-less-than-100.html
More brilliant Hypocrat leadership no doubt.
Anon, I won't give to churches because I don't believe in them. funny you my type but i went through the Lutheran education system grade and high school so i must not have donated any money to the church.
ReplyDeleteBesides, when is a church a charity? most of the money goes to the church not the needed people. I'm not paying to support a parish house, a pastor, a lay minister, the building...etc.
Hey, the main thing is that you give Joey. If you do, good for you.
ReplyDeleteJohn, i do my part when i can brother and thats all i will say.
ReplyDeleteAs for the transperancy, it hasn't been what it should. Thats a fact. Not going to argue that.
as for home sales thats not just Detroit. Overall it seems that unemployment is going to stabilize and we've already had GDP growth and now housing is picking back up.
Remember at this time of Reagan's term (he was in a horrible recession too) the Dems thought for sure with the economy he'd be a one term president too. Things pikced back up by 83 and you know what happened. So lets figure your side gains seats, maybe enough to control the house maybe not. I don't have an issue with a split congress or even a democrat exec and a republican legislative. Checks and balances.
Watch out though. Get in, run a hard line, the economy picks up and appear obstructionist and there goes the chance at Obama.
Good for you on the giving Joey. Same here. We do what we can, and it's more than most like Bruce.
ReplyDeleteI was thinking the same thing about the parallels between Obummer and Reagan the other day. Definitely would be nice to have some checks and balances, as even Chris has said on several occasions.
So Joey, I don't know that I've seen your opinion on this health care debacle. What are your thoughts? Let's have them. I hope they are more thought out than Bruce's opinions (aka MoveOn.org's opinions). Of course that isn't a tall order; ANY thought you put into it makes it more thought out than FAILk's "ideas".
Did you ever read that full article that I told you about quite a while ago? Check it out here if you didn't: http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200909/health-care
Sorry I didn't post much todqay as I was doing my part serving the community thru a Church. It was really nice to sing with the kids at some nursing homes. I know it wasn't giving the big bucks but the kids learned something and it made our most valued elderly feel great. Joe I think it is a great thing that you give so much and so freely of your time and/or money. We could use more people like you in this country. Joe you might like serving at MCREST. I put in one week helping them and I'm sure you would find it rewarding and helpful. You would also notice that these homeless men,women and children all have health insurance. It's too bad you project so much anger on the Church. It sounds to me like you like your distance from God and the Church. Maybe you should read a little about forgiveness. Forgiving yourself and asking to be forgiven is very cathartic if you believe in it. And since no one and no church on earth is perfect you can see why forgiveness is so valuable. Joe it would be nice to see you at Church even though there is sinning going on in it and outside of it. But the good thing is most Churches I know only take sinners so you and I are always welcome. I'm sure Jesus would love to see you there on his birthday. And try looking at the good in the Church and her people for a change.
ReplyDeleteChris, i actually thought of going tonite. Not to a Lutheran church but to the local small town methodist church. I met the pastor and they charter the local cub scouts my son is in so i am softening up a little on the church.
ReplyDeleteThats does sound rewarding and maybe one day i'll take you up on it.
Thanks Joe for giving your kids the same oportunity you were given. To know God. I left the Lutheran Church also for quit a while and then I came back. I was in your shoes exactly. And Joe I still question the pastors on everything and I demand Bible verses to back up what they say. The Bible is purfect but if we can mess it up we will. I pray for you all and your families as we can all use them. Joe you would like a writer called Emmett Fox. The Book that I like best of his is Making Your Life Worth While and The Sermon On The Mount. He is long dead but his writings might be of interest to you. Thanks again Joe for making my day and your families by even just thinking about going back to Church.
ReplyDeletei looked him and i admit i will give him a shot. I always like when they call preachers mystics. they called dom Helder a mystic too.
ReplyDeletei talked with my wife and becuase both of our boys have been sick the last few days we're passing on tonight, but will aim for this Sunday. So you wore me down and finally got me going back into a church, lets see if you get me into church again.
Joe I didn't do anything. It's between you and the Holy Spirit. I remember giving the Christian Church again. I was very garded for a long time. I like the Bible studies because I can ask questions and get answers. I have to admit that I asked questions that didn't make me look good but I got answers. My favorite answers from a pastor is "I don't know" or "I must look into that and get back with you". I do have to say it took me a while to make my way back to the Lutheran MS school and Church I was raised in but I knew I had to find a good school and Church for me to raise my family in. My journey to learn other religions and other sects of Christian made me a stonger more humble Christian. Joe I'm sure you have more people then you know praying for you and others on this blog. Hopefully I have some praying for me too.
ReplyDeleteJoe I hope your family feels better before tomorrow.
ReplyDeleteChris, thank you. Have a safe holidays.
ReplyDeleteYou too my friend. Have fun with the kids as I'm sure you will.
ReplyDeletedont do it joec. dont go back to the church. the church is evil like you have always said.
ReplyDelete