Hartmann: Injured vet Scott Olson's roommate speaks out - YouTube
Printable View
I wonder if the Occupy protesters is New York see the irony in protesting against corporations like those in "big Oil" while at the same time using gas powered generators to keep warm.
Probably not.
Assuming you oppose murder, I wonder if you see the irony in using the internet when other people are using the internet to arrange a murder.Quote:
Originally Posted by cockgobbler
Probably not.
LOL! :dancing:Quote:
Originally Posted by BluegrassCat
~BB~
Yeah.Quote:
Originally Posted by BluegrassCat
Cause that's a comparable, logical response.
I'm not protesting against murder or the internet while at the same time using the internet to plan a murder.
These dipshits ARE protesting against corporations like Big Oil while at the same time using products from big oil for their benifit
Last week's Have I Got News For You, a topical news quiz show in the UK, featured a Tory MP who ridiculed the protesters in London for buying coffee in Starbucks and thereby shoring up the capitalist system. She was slammed by all of the other panelists in turn. It's patently ridiculous. We all live, for better or worse, in capitalist societies, where there are no alternatives or where co-operatives have been pushed to the margins.Quote:
Originally Posted by BluegrassCat
Maybe the protesters in New York should be burning Teabaggers to keep warm.....
So you're endorsing murder, then?Quote:
Originally Posted by cockgobbler
Wow, Big Oil sounds like a very important company. Who's their CEO, Big Boss Man?Quote:
Originally Posted by cockgobbler
In certain cases ABSOLUTELY.Quote:
Originally Posted by BluegrassCat
Ghadafi. Sadam. Osama. Taliban. Child molestors. Rapists.
Ask the protestors.Quote:
Originally Posted by BluegrassCat
Big Oil is their vocabulary, not mine.
Do you mean judicial murder for the last two categories or are you advocating vigilanteism?Quote:
Originally Posted by cockgobbler
Blue Grass Cat.....It's clear that neither of us is going to convince the other, so let's attempt a slightly different approach. You, your left wing brethern on HA, and every lib in the country love to parrot the administration's nonsense about the wonderful effects of the billion dollar stimulus, some of us on the hand prefer to deal in mathematic absolutes and maintain its un-provable to quantify a "saved or created" job, and that the vast majority of the money went to bail out states that made bad spending decesions themselves, and that before we embark on stimulus 2, 3, etc. we should have some clear data on the affects of such enormous deficit spending because that money either has to be borrowed or printed. Now read what Senator Toomey asks the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office director, Mr. Elmendorf at a Congressional Hearing. For those who aren't familiar with the CBO, they're essentially the country's accounting firm......This is enormously instructive as you, your idol Paul Krugman and the Dems assure us we can spend our way to prosperity rather than into oblivion.
SEN. TOOMEY: I know it is your view that the recent huge increase in spending and the corresponding big deficits have generated more economic growth and more job creation that we would have had in the absence of those things. But surely you'd agree, that that essentially asks for a comparison to a counterfactual, and as such, it's completely impossible to prove?
DR. DOUGLAS ELMENDORF, director of the CBO: Yes, that's right, senator.
So if the country's top accountant who strangely happens to agree with you about spending can't prove the stimulus worked with any degree of certainty and can't produce any evidence as such.....please explain to us how you can, and why we should double down.
Now the second exchange, but no less important.......get ready for this little nugget............
TOOMEY: The last point I'd just like to ask is, I think it's your view but I like to ask, is it your view that if we were to pursue revenue neutral tax reform, that would have the effect of broadening the base upon which taxes are applied and lowering marginal rates, that it is true both with respect to such corporate reform or individual reform that that would have a pro-growth effect on the economy, which of course would in turn generates more income for the government?
ELMENDORF: Yes, that's right. Again, the amount would depend on the specifics of the proposal.
Of course you remain unconvinced, on both spending and lowering tax rates but now at least you have the facts, and can completely indulge in your own economic fairy tales. Enjoy.
If they are found gulity, let the parents/family flip the switch and fry their ass.Quote:
Originally Posted by robertlouis
google the case of Paul Bernardo here in Toronto.
He and his wife kindapped, raped, tortured and murdered three girls INCLUDING his wifes sister whom the wife drugged and present unconcious as a "present" to Paul Bernardo.
He was also found guilty of dozens of rapes as "the Scarborough Rapist"
He is in jail in"protective custody" for the rest of his life segregated from the rest of the prison. She served 12 years and is already out back into society.
He should have been killed years ago.
:ignore: *SMH*Quote:
Originally Posted by cockgobbler
Nah, if you want heat you gotta burn something substantial.Quote:
Originally Posted by robertlouis
Quote:
Originally Posted by MdR Dave
True, but it would be fun to watch all those pointy heads explode. :)
Not familiar with what SMH means :confused:.Quote:
Originally Posted by robertlouis
Sorry, I'll make myself clear. I don't support the death penalty under any circumstances - that's why I described it as "judicial murder".Quote:
Originally Posted by cockgobbler
SMH = Shake my head.
But where it does exist it should be carried out dispassionately. Giving the responsibility to the victim's family disfigures the process and corrupts the family. They may not consider themselves to be murderers, but they have to carry the knowledge that they have killed another human being.
Justice is about being appropriate, not revenge.
Hey, listen.Quote:
Originally Posted by robertlouis
I completely respect your views, beliefs and opinions. I just disagree with them is all.
I guess I'm more along the line of "the hanging judge". Kill someone, you deserve to die. In the Bernardo case I mentioned above there was video evidence of the rape torture and murder of the three girls.
Both he and his wife should be 6 feet under.
Again, my opinion.
But we have both kind of gone off topic of the thread,
OMK- your understanding of taxes and the macroeconomy is dim.
For the record, the nation's top accountant does not work at the CBO- those guys are flacks and hacks, just like most everyone in gvt. without decision power. (Those with decision power are worse- at some level they are just politicians. )
OK, briefly, I respect your views too without agreeing with them. What made me "SMH" was your assertion that the family of the victim should be actively involved in the execution. That can never be right.Quote:
Originally Posted by cockgobbler
Again, repsecting your opinion, I really think that if someone killed a member of my family I would want to be the one to flip the switch.Quote:
Originally Posted by robertlouis
If that situation ever actually materalized would my opinion differ?
I can honestly say I don'r know for sure, but I THINK not.
Quote:
Originally Posted by onmyknees
Dear God, does your intellectual dishonesty know no bounds??? You claim you want to deal in facts, please start, I've been waiting. The entire economics profession has countless charts, graphs and models that all point to the effectiveness of the stimulus and the need for more. Here's one based on the model by conservative Douglas Holtz-Eakin:
http://i74.photobucket.com/albums/i2...ltz_eakin2.png
Where's your evidence? If what you claim is so obviously true it would show up in the data. You can only point to dishonest Heritage Foundation graphs which I've already debunked in the Politics section. The balance of evidence completely vindicates Keynesianism and refutes your austerity approach.
As for your testimony, first of all the CBO director says he believes according to the evidence that the stimulus worked and more stimulus is needed so case basically closed. But you're taken in by a deceptive and meaningless question by the radical extremist Toomey. Let me illustrate how useless this question by posing another.Quote:
Originally Posted by onmyknees
SEN TOOMEY: I know it is your view that the recent failure to drop atomic weapons on Chicago has saved millions of lives that would have been lost if we had dropped nuclear bombs on the city. But surely you'd agree, that that essentially asks for a comparison to a counterfactual, and as such, it's completely impossible to prove?
DR. DOUGLAS ELMENDORF, director of the CBO: Yes, that's right, senator.
You see this? Every counterfactual is impossible to prove! And since time only appears to go in one direction we can't go back to do experiments to see what would have happened. But this does not mean we have no idea how the world works because we can track different policies across locations and over time. And the evidence from all this research says, as the CBO director says, the stimulus worked and we need more.
This is basically a red herring. I've never said that tax-cuts are not stimulative, just that they're far less stimulative than fiscal policy and hence a waste of money. It's up to you to defend why you think tax cuts are stimulative but fiscal policy is not, because all the evidence and the experts contradict that claim. In a previous post in this thread I already outlined the case for infrastructure spending now.Quote:
Originally Posted by onmyknees
You haven't provided a single shred of evidence for your point of view, just misdirection, character assassination and wildly incorrect claims. Btw I'm still waiting for all those examples of when Krugman was "flat out wrong." But I'm not holding my breath.
If there's one thing we can all agree on...if we hadn't wasted $1 Trillion in Iraq (thanks Bush supporters you know who you were), we would probably be $1 Trillion (+interest) wealthier as a nation. We would probably also be working on getting to Mars, building the fastest supercolliders and the world's fastest computer instead. We're way behind in education and it's starting to show on our trajectory to 2nd world status (thanks crappy educational system, bad parents, rap music and restrictions on smart immigrants from scaaary countries coming here).
Serious question from a non Amrerican:
Is there a chance the Democrats will put someone up against Obama for the Dem nomination?
There was a report on a poll i heard on the local news here in Toronto Canada that Hilary Clinton would destroy any republican candidate by something like 20 points.
I'm a conservative voter (granted Conservative in Canada is somewhat different than the US, here in Canada the Conservative Prime Minister has no intrest in opening the gay marriage or abortion (both legal) debates)) but from the numbers I've seen Obama has added to the debt in 3 1/2 years as much as Bush added in 8 years.Quote:
Originally Posted by asic600
Am I wrong?
We'll have to agree to disagree. I only hope that if the event actually occurred, you would refuse.Quote:
Originally Posted by cockgobbler
Just wait to see what the Republican hate machine would do to a Hillary candidacy. Although Hillary against Bachmann would be fun...Quote:
Originally Posted by cockgobbler
Well, it's a moot point anyway since Canada doesn't have the death peanality.:)Quote:
Originally Posted by robertlouis
Good repsectful healthy debate though.:Bowdown:
Respect is something that is unfortunately missing in political debate on both sides of the border.
CAT FIGHT!!!!!!! :jerkoffQuote:
Originally Posted by robertlouis
I actually like Hilary.Quote:
Originally Posted by cockgobbler
Strong women are sexy.
See...there ya go again. Outta your league. Stick to the never ending complimentary responses to the girls...it keeps threads going, and they seem to like it, ( yawn) and you're simply better at it. And for better or worse...we have to go with what we're better at. :dancing:Quote:
Originally Posted by robertlouis
Thanks. I was born and brought up in Glasgow, where wimps don't prosper, so I can handle myself in a fight ok, but I have never had any interest in firearms, and I have always opposed the death penalty.Quote:
Originally Posted by cockgobbler
I suspect that once it's been abolished, very few countries have the real practical appetite to re-establish it. I'm not talking about tabloid frenzies and rabid right-wingers, but governments and those authorities charged with organising it. We got rid of it in the mid-1960s. It won't be coming back.
If you go by debt by year this is true, if you go by debt from policy it isn't.Quote:
Originally Posted by cockgobbler
Aww, and I thought we were getting on so well, omk. LOL.Quote:
Originally Posted by onmyknees
So protest is only legitimate where there's no compromise?
So how come teabaggers still pay taxes and use services provided by social programmes, oh, and collect their welfare checks too? The argument cuts both ways, you know.
By the way, when you find what you're good at, please let us all know...... :dancing:
At some point I just have to throw down and say you're a fool...Quote:
Originally Posted by BluegrassCat
that's not a character assassination, just an informed opinion. Both Houses and both parties of Congress use the CBO and its thousands of staff accountants . Their reputation and integrity are beyond reproach, yet under oath when their director cannot provide proof the stimulus actually worked, in fact agrees there is no proof...only supposition..... Blue Grass Cat comes up with some chart that can. He's a miracle man. A liberal secret weapon. Somebody get this man a job in Washington.
Yesterday you dismissed the former Chairman of the Senate finance committe, today the CBO director....tomorrow? You believe what you wanna believe.....Ignorance is Bliss, and thankfully your position is irrelevant, because they'll be no more spending...it didn't pass the Senate, won't pass the House, and it's DOA.
Somebody seems to be getting a agitated now.
That's our RL!Quote:
Originally Posted by robertlouis
Good show- but you'll never get anywhere with fact and insight- better to make blanket statements with an air of authority, regardless of veracity- you know, fire with fire?
Another post entirely free of evidence, but chock full of invective; a perfect example of the modern conservative movement.Quote:
Originally Posted by onmyknees
I didn't dismiss the CBO director, I agreed with his assessment that the stimulus worked and more stimulus is needed. If you disagree with that then YOU'RE dismissing him. He simply acknowledged what anyone who's taken basic science or statistics understands: you can't prove any counterfactual. And in the same breath you have the chutzpah (or just cluelessness) to herald his counterfactual assertion about cutting corporate tax rates being stimulative. You don't have a leg to stand on here, so hop on home.
If omk is a parody profile, it's a work of genius. If not, it's just embarrassing.
Look...some people are ideologues, some are pragmatists...you're the former, and so is Obama. No matter what the cost....you and he stay tied to your failed assertions and ideology. Unlike Clinton....In the wake of a resounding, historical rebuke in the mid term elections, it phased him not....he did not readjust, adapt, or amend, just hardened his unpopular, ineffective positions. So why could anyone expect you to change or reconsider? But you stay with that belief...if nothing else you're determined. Stay with the ship Captain...even as it descends to the ocean floor . It's entirely probable that even if he did win re-election, and after 8 years and a country crippled in debt and unemployment, bitterly divided between race and class, you'd still be showing us your charts and graphs and telling us not to believe our lying eyes...what a success it's really been.