Who is stupider: Palin, Bush, or Bachmann?

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by MrXYZ

 

3 years of obama and the lefts control and looky looky patriot act still here and obama and the left expanded its power.

nice try.

oh yeah what about all those minorites in the tea parties ? guess they must be bigoted racists too.

"All those minorities"....suuuuuuure

How about you bother checking the FACTS before making blatantly wrong statements?

- 79% of TP members are white - ABOVE the national average
- 50% are above 50 years old - ABOVE the national average
- 84% are above 30 years old - ABOVE the national average

Another interesting stat: Only 31% of them have a college education, which explains why they follow people like Bachmann who DEMONSTRABLY have no clue about economics

reply to post by Alien Abduct

I'm still waiting for that list of our allies and enemy's that you know so much about. Or do you not want to discuss your OP?

Am I the one running for president? I'm not the one you should worry about, it's the person that could be our next president who might accidentally order some bombing runs on our allies and start another war.

I don't know every one of our allies and enemies, but I'm not the one who might have command of our armed forces. I'm just some dude on the internet, not the next commander in chief, I think an American citizen has the right to question the intelligence and leadership abilities of a person who mixes up North and South Korea. Is that hypocritical of me? Sure, but if I was campaigning for presidency rather than studying other subjects, I can tell you that I would know a lot more about that stuff than I do now.

Besides, I'm on the internet, I could just Google it and pretend like it's my own knowledge, so how would you really know if it's my knowledge or something I just read up about on google?

The post that you addressed:

Right, people make mistakes, but I don't want somebody who doesn't know our allies from our enemies, harmful versus harmless, or reality versus religious ignorance running this country.

I'm not running this country, and I don't plan to.

Originally posted by SeventhSeal

Originally posted by MrOysterhead
reply to post by SeventhSeal

 

I can't believe what I just read.........."Republican are responsible for 8 years of endless spending"......is this the twilight zone?

Maybe? Maybe this is another world. Were the Republicans not in charge from 2000 to 2008? Maybe this is your Twilight Zone

Or you're just in a world of denial.

maybe you are....

"How do Bush and Obama compare on closer inspection? Just about like they do on an initial glance. According to the White House's Office of Management and Budget, during his eight fiscal years, Bush ran up a total of $3.283 trillion in deficit spending (p. 22). In his first two fiscal years, Obama will run up a total of $2.826 trillion in deficit spending ($1.294 trillion in 2010, an estimated $1.267 trillion in 2011 (p. 23), and the $265 billion in "stimulus" money that was spent in 2009). Thus, Bush ran up an average of $410 billion in deficit spending per year, while Obama is running up an average of $1.413 trillion in deficit spending per year — or $1.003 trillion a year more than Bush."

www.npr.org...

Originally posted by Alien Abduct

Originally posted by TupacShakur
reply to post by Alien Abduct

 

Also, is it just me or do I smell a bias here?(sarcasm). Why not point out some "stupid" democrats?

I have a bias against stupidity, not left versus right.

As much as these people (politicians) talk all day day in and day out, and as much of what they say is recorded, the fact that they will make grammar mistakes that will be recorded is inevitable. And as some people have pointed out which you have failed to do so either out of bias or ignorance all people make mistakes

Right, people make mistakes, but I don't want somebody who doesn't know our allies from our enemies, harmful versus harmless, or reality versus religious ignorance running this country.

Please run off a list for me our allies and our enemy's. I'll have the long list if you don't mind. I would really like to read your list guy maybe it will give a better perspective of your non-bias because its obvious that your political views aren't bias. Your list will also reflect this non-bias nature of yours I'm sure.

You should know that list if you want to be able to point out mistakes of someone else's list right? I mean how can a teacher grade the tests if she doesn't know what she is grading?

-Alien

I'm still waiting for that list of our allies and enemy's that you know so much about. Or do you not want to discuss your OP?

-Alien

reply to post by MrXYZ


yep all those stupid teapartiers dont spend $100k on an education that pays them $35k

this is too funny

do you really want to talk statistics?

how many people in the democratic party are employed?
how many people in the democratic party ever went to college and graduated?
how many people in the democratic party live on welfare?

and you are calling 21% if those numbers are indeed accurate racist bigots.

and noone can beat the left who has no clue about econmics when over 100 million people get government checks and over 75 million americans pay no taxes whatsoever and create 3 half assed programs that serve noone.

but since we are judging everyone by the actions of a few




everyone in the democratic party is like this dude.

reply to post by TupacShakur


Meh.......I thought your argument would be as such. Weak. Oh well, this thread is really just a moot view/point anyways. I'll ask you one more thing then before I leave. Will you show a democrat that is "stupid" that you might put in this "contest"? Maybe show a few youtube vids and quotes that would help with your argument?????

Surly you can find just one? I mean you said....

I have a bias against stupidity, not left versus right.

So surly out of all the democrats you can find just one?

-Alien

reply to post by MrOysterhead


You can't look at the deficit spending in isolation. The reason we have such a huge spending now is because the economy's on life support. It is on life support because of reckless deregulation of the financial industry that caused the housing market to take everyone down. Who allowed that deregulation? Well, it started with Regean, but the most drastic changes that allowed the current crisis to happen were introduced by BUSH:



"Let's remove the fine print and make sure EVERYONE can get loans, no matter their financial situation."

That pretty much summarizes his speech and explains why the economy's now tanking.

The reason we are now spending so much is because of this crisis (military spending didn't increase by the same proportion as overall spending). It's not as if Obama wants to spend more, and it's not as if social security or teacher salaries suddenly cost more, it's simply a result of this crisis.

If you want to blame Obama, you can blame him for a lot of things, but most certainly not the crisis or spending, as he's not the one at falt...at least not primarily.

You can blame him for:

- Not fixing the deregulation of the financial industry...guess what, thanks to that, another crisis could happen at any time.

- Not fixing tax loop holes. So while you're paying your fair share, Exxon, the most profitable company in the world (!!!) pays ZERO taxes. To Obama's credit, he actually tried to close that loophole and use the funding to care for 9/11 first responders...but the GOP killed that plan BECAUSE of the loophole. At least the 9/11 first responders got their much deserved care anyway in the end

- Patriot Act...'nough said.

- Guantanamo...'nough said.

- Ending the wars...'nough said.

- Being THE worst political poker player in history.

I'm not even a fan of Obama, but people who say the massive spending is all because of him are just uninformed or uneducated about economics.

I was against the bailouts from the start. In my opinion, those bailouts just delayed the issue and made sure it'll happen all over again in the future. But before you cheer me on, listen to what have happened if we hadn't bailed out those banks.

1) Banks would have collapsed, most of them. People would have lost their entire savings.
2) Without banks and lending, economic growth is impossible (which is why the economy isn't picking up right now)...so many companies would have defaulted. Waaaaaay more than now...
3) People would have lost jobs. I'm not talking about a 9-10% unemployment rate, I'm talking about 30%+.
4) Without jobs, people couldn't have afforded to buy stuff...ergo, more companies would have died off.

Now, eventually, after everything would have been burned to the ground like that, people and companies could have started fresh, from the ground up. The road to recovery would have been long, at least 10 years, AT LEAST.

But the government (Bush) decided to intervene and throw money at the problem. This served as a bandaid, but not a cure. Then Obama came along, and given the enormous sum already spent, and the fact that most experts said "we need to spend more to finish the job" (not doing so would have forced those experts to admit they were wrong), Obama threw more money at that black hole. And you know what, it COULD have worked!

But ONLY if they had fixed the core issue (deregulation & separation of the stock market and real business) at the same time. Instead, Obama & Co. were paid off by lobbyists just like Bush was. And THIS is were the core issue lies.

It DOESN'T MATTER which "side" is in power. In the end, LOBBYISTS control Washington. Politicians now work for big business instead of the people. So until the system is fixed, nothing will ever change. Bush was paid off by lobbyists (weapons lobby > wars), Obama's paid off by lobbyists (weapons lobby > wars), and so will every single one you could possibly vote into office.

And the hilarious part is, people talk about Palin & Bachmann as if they were any different. A woman who ditched her governor role to become a better paid reality starlet, and a woman who lied 27 times out of 28 whenever she made a relevant statement (LINK). ARE YOU KIDDING ME???

reply to post by Alien Abduct


Funny you should mention that

Is Obama a pathological liar?
www.washingtontimes.com...

Originally posted by Alien Abduct
reply to post by TupacShakur

 

So surly out of all the democrats you can find just one?

Obama, lots of members posted YouTube videos of him saying stupid things, and just outright lying.

reply to post by neo96

how many people in the democratic party are employed?
how many people in the democratic party ever went to college and graduated?
how many people in the democratic party live on welfare?

Well, you seem to have the answer to those questions since you ask...and can obviously clearly show that democrats are worse than Republicans/TP. When I made claims, I backed them up with cold hard stats...how about you do the same instead of merely asking open ended questions?

reply to post by TupacShakur


I rather like Bachmann. She's the only one of those three to not say something incorrect from a purely objective stance in my opinion. Maybe I'm wrong, but she certainly seems more intelligent.

Originally posted by TexasTea

Originally posted by Janky Red

Originally posted by TexasTea
reply to post by VitriolAndAngst

 

You expect this clear attack on conservatives to be taken seriously? Admitted Bush isn't the sharpest, but Palin and Bachman?, nice try. I would like to suggest that those who voted for obama are dumber than those who didn't .

Was Bush a conservative?

Did Conservatives vote for Bush 2 Times???

I think we have found our winner!

Will you vote for obama again? lol

You would vote for Bush again!

Or

Perry

Texas needs to *succeed already

reply to post by MrXYZ


Funny how you skipped right over Clinton's role in housing.

reply to post by MrXYZ


Every president has one major F-up. The question is, can the president after him fix it?

All I see is one long long long of miserable failures, with little exception, going all the way back to FDR. I'd say the only president since then to have actually improved things is that sexual deviant Clinton, that short-lived JFK, and that racist retard Nixon. Ironic, but they're the only ones I can think of. 2 dems and 1 repub. The rest have just been people who continued the failures of the president before them.

So I really cannot accept the blame for Bush when the current president has basically continued Bush policies and extending the worse of his party.

So in the end, I really don't see many people as good anywhere. Maybe Ron Paul, but I'll admit that's a pipe dream for now.

reply to post by Gorman91


I really need to read up more on Ron Paul but from what I have read and heard he sounds like my kinda guy.

reply to post by MrXYZ


blah i love when posters say stuff like that.

link something then pass it off as fact i use to do links but why bother way too many people cherrypick what matters and what doesnt.

do what every other posters does on here all anyone has to do is let your fingers find out whats real or whats not.

50 million people living on welfare i can guarantee dont have "college educations" because if they did they wouldnt be living off of it.

thats a freebie want to know more find out for yourself instead of pushing an agenda on someone else.

Originally posted by SeventhSeal

Originally posted by MrOysterhead
reply to post by SeventhSeal

 

I can't believe what I just read.........."Republican are responsible for 8 years of endless spending"......is this the twilight zone?

Maybe? Maybe this is another world. Were the Republicans not in charge from 2000 to 2008? Maybe this is your Twilight Zone

Or you're just in a world of denial.

Actually the Democrats held a majority in the House and the Senate from 2006 to 2010.

I would have to say Carter was the dumest and Bo is running a close second.

Originally posted by Stormdancer777
reply to post by Alien Abduct

 

Funny you should mention that

Is Obama a pathological liar?
www.washingtontimes.com...

Nice find. Yes I would not argue with someone if they made that statement.

-Alien