Palin Quayle, the 2012 GOP ticket

page: 2
3
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 05:42 PM
link   
reply to post by poet1b
 


Wow, so you admit that these systems HAVE NOT BEEN free markets.

You are the FIRST to admit it.

Now, what was the cause of THIS depression?

The bubble of unrealized inflation, or the inability of the market controllers to manipulate the market close enough?

Well since there are only two choices that the communist controllers of the money supply give you, let me ask you the third option.

Was it the communist controllers of the market?

C'mon, I have read some of your posts. You believe in COMPLETE COMMUNISM of the economy. At least admit that to the readers. That way they can UNDERSTAND your position.

Or are you going to DENY that you espouse Communist rhetoric?

[edit on 12-8-2010 by Tyrannyispeace]




posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 05:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by centurion1211

Originally posted by Aggie Man

Originally posted by intrepid
That ticket would end the GOP for decades. Secondly I thought George HW Bush was a pretty good president.


Unless they get a couple of democrats to run on their ticket, the GOP is gonna be dead for some time to come. They got nothing.




Let's all bookmark this very post and then check back in November of this year and again in 2012.

You might want to put some crow on ice, because surely you will be eating it.



I saw that you had commented and immediately knew you would be responding to one of my post....intuition is a funny thing...

mine tells me you will be eating crow along with your pride.



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 05:58 PM
link   
reply to post by Tyrannyispeace
 


You just don't get it.

Free Market economics is communism, repackage and sold to the suckers.

What created our current economic downturn.

The GW admin failed to do its job and go after fraudulent business practices that are the direct result of attempt to put into place a communist/free market system that is somehow supposed to function without government doing its job of preventing fraud.

Fraudulent business practices at the highest end of the financial markets then engage in wide scale fraud, creating our current economic mess in a repeat of the twenties. No doubt you will spout the usual rhetoric about government response to the stock market crash. Closing the door after the cows have all escaped serve nothing.

It is pretty easy to see once you let go of your foolish idealism about free markets.

Guess what, Clinton's third way economic did work. Government works with business to prevent fraud. In fact there are huge swaths of law where the government needs to start acting like the servants of the public, not the overlords, like say traffic law.



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 05:59 PM
link   
reply to post by centurion1211
 


Hmmm, I found this tasty dish here at ATS.

Maybe you could give it for a dessert?




posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 06:04 PM
link   
reply to post by poet1b
 


Free markets are communism.

MY GOD, do you EVEN understand what the HELL you are saying?

Oh well.

I am DONE even attempting to understand your thesis.

I am sure EVERYONE will understand your agenda. LOL, accusing free marketers that they are communists. Why do you not answer ONE question, what kept the Soviet Stalinism from collapsing, was it the Black Markets or the Communism?

You know, I usually call people like you a disparaging label, I will just call you Stalin reincarnated. Ignorance personified!



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 06:08 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 06:20 PM
link   
Between Palin and Quayle they have 1/2 a governorship... and 0/2 of an IQ.

Quick, to the speak-and-spell - P-O-T-A-T-O-E... wait, is that right? In Ben Quayle's case he might want to learn to spell P-O-R-N-O-E

The Beauty Queen and Mr. Brock Landers, gotta love it.



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 06:20 PM
link   
reply to post by David9176
 


I will reply to myself because I'm still laughing..haha.





[edit on 12-8-2010 by David9176]



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 06:23 PM
link   
This is America anyone can criticize the President, even Brock Landers.

If I see Mr. "Moral Majority" Newt Gingrich stumping for 'ol Brock then we can decidedly say he is a hypocrite representing a party of hypocrites.



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 06:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Tyrannyispeace
 


Go read Marx's theories on Communism, if you dare.

Eliminate government, allow the nature fluctuation of the markets to control everything. That was Marx idea.

The free market concept is pure communist ideology through and through.

What kept the USSR from totally collapsing? They ran a military police state just like Reagan and the two Bushes. R and the B's simply used the excuses of the war on drugs, communism, and terrorism to gain support for their police state policies.



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 06:42 PM
link   
reply to post by poet1b
 





The free market concept is pure communist ideology through and through.


Prove it.

And what does this have to do with the topic? Start another thread with this drivel.



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 06:50 PM
link   
[edit on 12-8-2010 by LadySkadi]



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 08:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by poet1b
Considering the modern day GOP is the party that elected the Bush/Quayle ticket, which many consider to be possibly the worst presidency in U.S. history,


That is a strange comment to me. Aside from a natural recession immediately following the end of the first Gulf War, Bush's presidency is widely considered a fairly decent one. Most presidential scholar rankings place him in the upper half of presidential rankings. In fact, virtually all of the non-partisan driven scholar polls have him ranked well above Nixon, Ford, and Carter and within a just a couple of positions of Reagan and Clinton (who are both close to or in the top quarter of the rankings.)

Historically speaking, most analysts blame the fact that he wasn't re-elected on a combination of withdrawing from Iraq prior to ousting Hussein and the recession (which the scholars largely admit is an unpreventable post-warfare result of any major military action.) Much like his son, Bush's popularity rating rose appreciably in the years immediately following him leaving the White House, as people watched his predecessor experience failures and falterings.



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 08:23 PM
link   
reply to post by burdman30ott6
 


burdman thats like pulling a nail with a spoon you can never get the other side to ever admit any republican president did anything right.



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 08:32 PM
link   
reply to post by poet1b
 


While I know that gives you a tingly feeling running down your leg, that ticket won't ever materialize. Have your fun time..........November is coming............

[edit on 12-8-2010 by pavil]



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 08:52 PM
link   
Bush Sr. was a fair president, I voted for him and don't regret it. Quayle was a non-entity in his administration, he was too ivy-league and out of touch with mainstream America, and for lack of a better word, was harmless

I can see however, that Bush Sr. was more steeped in the clandestine world of CIA, NWO regime making in foreign nations and a continuation of Reagan's Neocon cabinet, but it wasn't until Bush Jr. got into office that these same neo-con's really went hardcore NWO. Why do you think we wen't back to Iraq on false pretenses?

Back to the topic, I can't help but feel that the Palin/Quayle ticket is only meant to distract the populace from the GOP's real runners, Huckabee or Romney. Rove and Ayers will dangle Palin out there to let her take all the punches, and she is too dense to see she is being used, while the GOP really aligns behind Huckabee or Romney.



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 09:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sherlock Holmes

Originally posted by drwizardphd
If the GOP did run Palin/Quayle, I would be absolutely convinced that the entire election process is just a sham and the candidates were picked because they would obviously lose. There would simply be no other explanation.


LOL.
Didn't Presidential candidates such as Michael Dukakis and John Kerry already convince you of this fact ?


[edit on 12-8-2010 by Sherlock Holmes]


Don't forget about Algore.


Here we have the most incompetent, inexperienced, and most radical President of all times, yet people complain about Palin? She would be a 100% improvement over the chump we have in office now.



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 09:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Smack
 


I already did, go back and read my post. While the two claim to be opposites, they are both unrealistic ideologies which do not exist in the real world. The role of both is to get rid of or eliminate government, and both make government much bigger.

Here is more info on Marx version of communism.

rationalrevolution.net...


Contrary to popular misconception, the goal of Communists was ultimately to abolish the State altogether. Basic Communist ideology holds that the purpose of "the State" is to enforce social and economic disparity. According to Marxist thinking the State developed as a tool for a minority of people to oppress other people. Marxists contend that we are all naturally relatively equal, and that significant inequality among people can only exist through the use of State force. Historically the State has always been used as a means to support a wealthy and powerful minority. From the Sumerians and Egyptians to the British Empire and beyond, the traditional role of the State has been to protect the interests of the wealthy and facilitate wealth transfer from the working masses to the wealthy property owners, as Adam Smith noted:


Sounds to me like what you free market people preach.

A bunch of ideological nonsense.

Markets are only efficient if they are competitive, and they are only competitive when there is an evenly enforced fair set of rules. Try watching football, professional football is a perfect example. It is not easy, and often not pretty, but it makes the game better, because it makes the game more competitive.

Smoke that in your pipe, and see what you come up with.



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 09:55 PM
link   
reply to post by burdman30ott6
 


GH Bush was elbows deep in the Iran Contra affair, and funny how quickly people forgot the fiasco with Noriega.

In the war on drugs he did everything in his power to strip us of our liberties, and that should not be forgiven or forgotten. Because if this alone I rate him second to worst, GW holding the bottom spot.

The twelve years of Reagan Bush brought the U.S. from a net creditor nation to a net debtor nations, and saw a constant decline in earning power of wages and standards of living.

GH encouraged Hussain to invade Kuwait. It was an easily avoidable war, encouraged in an attempt to raise GH's poll numbers.



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 10:06 PM
link   
reply to post by poet1b
 


I don't know what you're smoking, but I want some.

The football analogy was very amusing.
I really don't care to debate you on the niceties of Marx's schizophrenic ideology on this thread - perhaps even never.
Suffice to say, your knowledge on the subject is somewhat shallow.
As I subtly alluded to earlier - what does any of this have to do with the topic of this thread?





top topics
 
3
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join