Campaign 2008

[snuffbox 0]

After listening to a dismal McCain attack on the subject of Bill Ayers, Letterman asked him if he had a relationship with Gordon Liddy. The best defense McCain could muster was that Liddy had paid his dues, or something. It was Letterman's last jab. McCain went along with it well.

[BruteSquad_BRODY 0]

Watching Racheal Marrow drunk has been the highlight of my day.

 

Wonderful Roasts.

[BruteSquad_BRODY 0]

Who knew McCain had better comedy writers than Barack

 

My vote may have to change.

 

 

[MarvinisaLunatic 0]

FDR was such a bad president that he got elected 4 times, reshaped American politics for the next half-century, and was ranked by historians as our 3rd best president. So, yeah, he was pretty horrible

[Glenn Beck]But he was a Socialist!!![/Glenn Beck]

 

FDR was directly responsible for the Depression lasting longer in the United States than any other country in the world. While the rest of the world was out of the Depression, we were still stuck in it and it took entering WWII to finally get out of it.

 

But hey, don't take my word for it!

 

"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."

 

Source

 

I like the last paragraph:

 

"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."

 

Id like to know where the hell these two guys are now.

 

I can throw more against FDR if you want, like the fact that his 9 Supreme Court Justices Appointees would go on to uphold the Internment of Japanese Americans during WW2. Or the fact that he tried make the case that the America First Committe, an anti intervention group was being paid off by the Nazi Party to support not interfering in Europe.

 

Or his previously mentioned Economic Bill of Rights which he wanted added to the US Constitution:

The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation.

 

The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment.

 

The right of every family to a decent home.

 

The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation.

 

Just imagine if he had gotten his way with that. We'd all have a job (in the mines, yay!),a decent home, retirement money, health insurance, food, clothing and FUN TIME, guaranteed by the government! Doesn't that sound just like the greatest nation ever?

[RHR 0]

Man. I was soooo saving my 300th post to make a grand statement.

 

But, after reading Marvin's last post, I really must find the time to raise money for charity. Thus ending my desire for an historic 300th post.

 

The charity I will devote my time to?

 

THE EDUCATION OF INTERNET MORONS

 

So that Marvin will finally wise the fuck up.

 

Constitution? Really? Those words are from the State of the Union address in 1944 and were addressing the future Post-War world, and post World War II America.

 

Guess what, there were LOTS of miners and connected jobs (Steel workers, Foundry workers, etc.) in that day and age. At the time, it was part of your generational pride to (thanks Bruce Springsteen) "like your daddy done". So, FDR is saying that every man is entitled to a job they find pride in, one that provides for his family, allowing the nation to prosper.

 

In today's America, you could change the "mines" to the "cubicles". The meaning is the same. And I think we are all entitled and must strive for a country that stays true to FDR's concept of prosperity, freedom, and security. And yet, you are somehow against this? With sarcasm that is not funny to boot?

 

I am ashamed to be part of the same race as you. And by that, I mean human. If you even qualify for that.

 

To quote Plato : "You sir, are a fucking moron."

 

I have never, not once, read anything "original" in your own words. You just find the worst possible quote you can, and style your entire viewpoint around it. And then you add to it with your own rhetoric and B.S. My friend, you do not apply shit to shit to remove said shit.

 

For the love of all that is holy, please read your posts as a rational human being before posting them. If you cannot do that, please send them to me. I will proofread and fact check them. I am all for dissenting opinions. But, an opinion must have some rationality and truth behind it, or it is just complete bullshit. For example: "My opinion is that the best way to remove yard weeds is to cover myself in bacon grease and roll in my yard."

 

Sure. It is an opinion. But it's a fucking stupid one. And it should be called as such.

 

So. For the sake of you. For the sake of me. For the sake of America. For the sake of North America. For the sake of the Western Hemisphere. For the sake of all mankind.

 

Stay in the Sports Forum. Where delusional, stupid thought is accepted.

 

Trust me. I know stupid, delusional, irrational thought is okay for a sports fan only.

 

I should know.

 

I am a Cubs fan.

 

[Dobbs 3K 0]

Marvin also failed to mention that we were one of the last major nations to enter World War II. That was part of the reason other countries had gotten out of it sooner.

[Nightwing 0]

FDR was such a bad president that he got elected 4 times, reshaped American politics for the next half-century, and was ranked by historians as our 3rd best president. So, yeah, he was pretty horrible

[Glenn Beck]But he was a Socialist!!![/Glenn Beck]

 

FDR was directly responsible for the Depression lasting longer in the United States than any other country in the world. While the rest of the world was out of the Depression, we were still stuck in it and it took entering WWII to finally get out of it.

 

I'd debate that. They're ignoring the social upheveal at the time and the general distrust of the market. It's not comparable to any Depression we've had before; people saw this as the downfall of Capitalism. If we didn't have the New Deal, we we're about one minute away from midnight and a social revolution. The country would have fallen apart long before the market would have had a chance to recover. The New Deal didn't solve the Depression, but I don't think it lengthened it like they are suggesting.

 

I'd also point out that countries such as Germany and Britain both had socialistic policies implimented which helped them work through the Depression (ESPECIALLY Germany), so faulting our socialistic policies when their socialistic policies got them out is hypocrasy or ignorance. It should also be pointed out that Britain's actual recovery from the Depression occurs because of their early rearmanment and mobilization in the face of Nazi Germany, as well as their early jump off the Gold Standard.

 

Really, the lateness of our entry in World War II, combined with our later (but not by much) jump off the Gold Standard held us back longer than FDR's policies. In fact, I'd say it's downright stupid to suggest that's the reason why we were slower.

 

But hey, don't take my word for it!

 

Who actually does?

 

"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."

 

Source

 

I like the last paragraph:

 

"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."

 

Id like to know where the hell these two guys are now.

 

Probably still there? Criticizing the New Deal isn't a big thing nowadays, even if I disagree somewhat with it. I still don't think they understand the social implications at the time (There was a very real belief that Captialism had "failed" on a large scale, which would distinguish it from modern economic crises, as there just wasn't the hope of market recovery), and the fact that we wouldn't have made it to 1936 in one piece without New Deal policies giving people confidence back in the government and the workplace.

 

I can throw more against FDR if you want, like the fact that his 9 Supreme Court Justices Appointees would go on to uphold the Internment of Japanese Americans during WW2. Or the fact that he tried make the case that the America First Committe, an anti intervention group was being paid off by the Nazi Party to support not interfering in Europe.

 

The Supreme Court thing was necessary, though, and any historian can tell you that. The Supreme Court was playing "Superlegislature" by going around and ruling against many of Roosevelt's policies, due to the fact that most of them were Republican appointees. They were grossly overstretching their power (This is the same Supreme Court that was denying Labor Rights on the concept of a "Right to Contract" in the Constitution, which is up there with the Right to Privacy in "Horriblely Abused Made-up Rights"). While it may have been a governmental faux pas, it put the Supreme Court back in their place, which was absolutely necessary.

 

Japanese internment is unsupportable, but relatively minor in comparison to so many other Presidents' actions.

 

And you're talking about the America First Committee? Seriously? Well, those "Non-interventionist" policies sure helped us in the long run... didn't they?

 

Or his previously mentioned Economic Bill of Rights which he wanted added to the US Constitution:

The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation.

 

The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment.

 

The right of every family to a decent home.

 

The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation.

 

Just imagine if he had gotten his way with that. We'd all have a job (in the mines, yay!),a decent home, retirement money, health insurance, food, clothing and FUN TIME, guaranteed by the government! Doesn't that sound just like the greatest nation ever?

 

Beyond your own retarded interpretation (We'd all work in mines!... Or shops, or industries, or... well, shit, he doesn't really restrict where we work, since he said "jobs like". But far be it for me to understand the meaning of the word "like"...), I don't see a problem with proposing these. They are certainly part of America's ideological belief structure ("Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness"), and they actually focus on helping the American people. You deride him for this, but I'm sure your fine with an "Abortion" amendment or a "Marriage" amendment, right?

 

At the very least, FDR has a much greater basis for these proposals. Your little retarded spiel really doesn't change the fact that he's hitting on the ideals of America; a better life for its citizens. I can't fault him for that.

[EricMM 0]

This is why Marvin was banned before.

 

Ugh.

 

Also the Great Depression was not helped at all by the Dust Bowl thing.

[Guest]

Everyone needs to quit talking about getting rid of Marvin. If we re-ban him from the folder, it surely won't be because you guys keep complaining about it, but rather because I want to back down from my stance on doing it. You guys complaining = I want to keep him around.

 

I'm getting tired of this shit.

 

Obama and McCain did some comedy schticks at a roast last night, and they were both hilarious. Maybe you all should watch them and lighten up, I don't know.

[MarvinisaLunatic 0]

I think it should be a new Presidential Campaign Tradition to do what they did last night.

 

 

[panthermatt7 0]

This is why Marvin was banned before.

 

Ugh.

 

Also the Great Depression was not helped at all by the Dust Bowl thing.

 

Agreed, 909. I wish people would stop assuming that all opposing viewpoints are evidence of retardation.

 

Said Obama: "Contrary to the rumors you have heard, I was not born in a manger. I was actually born on Krypton and sent here by my father, Jor-el, to save the planet Earth," a reference to Superman.

 

Love it!

[panthermatt7 0]

I think it should be a new Presidential Campaign Tradition to do what they did last night.

 

It is already, actually.

[BruteSquad_BRODY 0]

I think it should be a new Presidential Campaign Tradition to do what they did last night.

 

It is already, actually.

 

Racheal marrow on MSNBC said they skipped it 4 years ago cause Kerry was banned or some shit. i was hammered, so details are fuzzy

 

[snuffbox 0]

Just ignore a third of the posts on every page, guys.

[The Niggardly King 0]

[The Niggardly King 0]

I guess this is just how a Senator Government works

[At Home 0]

This is why Marvin was banned before.

 

Ugh.

 

Also the Great Depression was not helped at all by the Dust Bowl thing.

 

Agreed, 909. I wish people would stop assuming that all opposing viewpoints are evidence of retardation.

 

 

Come on, Matt. This isn't what happened. Everyone backed up their arguments with a lengthy set of points.

[bob_barron 0]

Wahhh I hate Marvin

 

Seriously, pbone- we get it. You hate Marvin and his posts. But the mods aren't going to ban him, nor should they. Why don't you just use the ignore button, or learn to scroll down when you see a post, if you think he's so awful? As stupid as Marvin is, the people who constantly call for his banning are much worse.

 

I can't believe North Dakota is considered a toss-up, that's just nuts.

[Nightwing 0]

Agreed, 909. I wish people would stop assuming that all opposing viewpoints are evidence of retardation.

 

But it's not that it's an opposing viewpoint, it's more the inanity which the view is expressed. Most of the time he posts stuff, it's often unsubstantiated crap (Birth Certificates, ACORN, "Criminals for Obama"), not a thought-out and articulate viewpoint. If that continues, he should be banned for trolling, as he isn't actually presenting anything real for discussion, only crap to debunk.

 

Secondly, it's not "all opposing viewpoints". Again, I defended conservatism earlier until I just couldn't support McCain from moving away from his moderate base. It's not like anyone is calling for Bob or 909 to leave, either, because they can properly express a conservative viewpoint without resorting to the crap Marvin posts. The only reason people want Marvin to leave is that he posts unintellectual crap that often times is off-topic or is easily torn down.

 

Can someone explain to me the difference between "trolling" and "expressing a viewpoint" in the CE folder? Because I think we need to reevaluate the standards.

[Guest]

Trolling is when someone leaves after saying something really stupid and doesn't actually try to debate the point. At least to me.

[bob_barron 0]

Trolling is posting just to get a negative reaction.

[PUT THAT DICK IN MY MOUTH! 0]

Nobody's forcing you dudes to read Marvin's posts. When he posts something retarded either debunk it and move on or just ignore it. These stupid meta-debates over Marvin's idiocy are far more tedious to scroll through than his actual posts, especially since they almost always result in panthermatt7 strolling in here to whine about ideological persecution or whatever.

[Nightwing 0]

Hey, I was just asking for a clarification "trolling" and debunking panthermatt's usual response.

[At Home 0]

But the mods aren't ban him, nor should they.

 

[snuffbox 0]

Obama will be in Madison next Thursday. No word on if Bruce Springsteen will join him.

[At Home 0]

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/17/opinion/...amp;oref=slogin

 

Paul Krugman: Fuck the deficit, if you want to help the economy, spend, baby, spend.

[2GOLD 0]

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/17/opinion/...amp;oref=slogin

 

Paul Krugman: Fuck the deficit, if you want to help the economy, spend, baby, spend.

 

That's also what CNN told me on Wednesday. Apparently not buying over the top expensive things and putting ourselves in debt to the point we cannot handle it or pay our bills is bad for the country. Course this is the exact OPPOSITE of what they were telling me last week so I guess the wind changed near the studio on Monday or Tuesday.

[At Home 0]

The Krugman article is talking about federal spending, on projects like infrastructure repair, not over personal finances.

[Timmy8271 0]

Obama is coming here to the Arena on Monday. I wonder if the rally will be free cause I really want to go.

[Gary Floyd 0]

Obama joins Church of NO MA'AM