Opinions/Editorials
See other Opinions/Editorials Articles
Title: Kindly Note the Impending Bankruptcy
Source:
[None]
URL Source: http://www.nationalreview.com/artic ... pending-bankruptcy-mark-steyn#
Published: Dec 2, 2012
Author: Mark Steyn
Post Date: 2012-12-02 07:25:04 by A K A Stone
Keywords: None
Views: 17383
Comments: 46
Previously on The Perils of Pauline: Last year, our plucky heroine, the wholesome apple-cheeked American republic, was trapped in an express elevator hurtling out of control toward the debt ceiling. Would she crash into it? Or would she make some miraculous escape? Yes! At the very last minute of her white-knuckle thrill ride to her rendezvous with destiny, she was rescued by Congress’s decision to set up . . . a Super Committee! Those who can, do. Those who can’t, form a committee. Those who really can’t, form a Super Committee — and then put John Kerry on it for good measure. The bipartisan Super Committee of Super Friends was supposed to find $1.2 trillion dollars of deficit reduction by last Thanksgiving, or plucky little America would wind up trussed like a turkey and carved up by “automatic sequestration.” Sequestration sounds like castration, only more so: It would chop off everything in sight. It would be so savage in its dismemberment of poor helpless America that the Congressional Budget Office estimates that over the course of a decade the sequestration cuts would reduce the federal debt by $153 billion. Sorry, I meant to put on my Dr. Evil voice for that: ONE HUNDRED AND FIFTY THREE BILLION DOLLARS!!! Which is about what the United States government currently borrows every month. No sane person could willingly countenance brutally saving a month’s worth of debt over the course of a decade. Advertisement So now we have the latest cliffhanger: the Fiscal Cliff, below which lies a bottomless abyss of sequestration, tax-cut-extension expiries, Alternative Minimum Tax adjustments, new Obamacare taxes, the expiry of the deferment of the Medicare Sustainable Growth Rate, as well as the expiry of the deferment of the implementation of the adjustment of the correction of the extension of the reduction to the proposed increase of the Alternative Minimum Growth Sustainability Reduction Rate. They don’t call it a yawning chasm for nothing. As America hangs by its fingernails wiggling its toesies over the vertiginous plummet to oblivion, what can save her now? An Even More Super Committee? A bipartisan agreement in which Republicans agree to cave and Democrats agree not to laugh at them too much? That could be just the kind of farsighted reach-across-the-aisle compromise that rescues the nation until next week’s thrill-packed episode when America’s strapped into the driver’s seat of a runaway Chevy Volt careering round the hairpin bends on full charge, or trapped in an abandoned subdivision overrun by foreclosure zombies. I suppose it’s possible to take this recurring melodrama seriously, but there’s no reason to. The problem facing the United States government is that it spends over a trillion dollars a year that it doesn’t have. If you want to make that number go away, you need either to reduce spending or to increase revenue. With the best will in the world, you can’t interpret the election result as a spectacular victory for less spending. Indeed, if nothing else, the unfortunate events of November 6 should have performed the useful task of disabusing us poor conservatives that America is any kind of “center-right nation.” A few months ago, I dined with a (pardon my English) French intellectual who, apropos Mitt Romney’s stump-speech warnings that we were on a one-way ticket to Continental-sized dependency, chortled to me, “Americans love Big Government as much as Europeans. The only difference is that Americans refuse to admit it.” My Gallic charmer is on to something. According to the most recent (2009) OECD statistics: government expenditures per person in France, $18,866.00; in the United States, $19,266.00. That’s adjusted for purchasing-power parity, and yes, no comparison is perfect, but did you ever think the difference between America and the cheese-eating surrender monkeys would come down to quibbling over the fine print? In that sense, the federal debt might be better understood as an American Self-Delusion Index, measuring the ever widening gap between the national mythology (a republic of limited government and self-reliant citizens) and the reality (a 21st-century cradle-to-grave nanny state in which, as the Democrats’ convention boasted, “government is the only thing we do together”). Generally speaking, functioning societies make good-faith efforts to raise what they spend, subject to fluctuations in economic fortune: Government spending in Australia is 33.1 percent of GDP, and tax revenues are 27.1 percent. Likewise, government spending in Norway is 46.4 percent and revenues are 41 percent — a shortfall but in the ballpark. Government spending in the United States is 42.2 percent, but revenues are 24 percent — the widest spending/taxing gulf in any major economy. So all the agonizing over our annual trillion-plus deficits overlooks the obvious solution: Given that we’re spending like Norwegians, why don’t we just pay Norwegian tax rates? No danger of that. If (in Milton Himmelfarb’s famous formulation) Jews earn like Episcopalians but vote like Puerto Ricans, Americans are taxed like Puerto Ricans but vote like Scandinavians. We already have a more severely redistributive taxation system than Europe in which the wealthiest 20 percent of Americans pay 70 percent of income tax while the poorest 20 percent shoulder just three-fifths of one percent. By comparison, the Norwegian tax burden is relatively equitably distributed. Yet Obama now wishes “the rich” to pay their “fair share” — presumably 80 or 90 percent. After all, as Warren Buffett pointed out in the New York Times this week, the Forbes 400 richest Americans have a combined wealth of $1.7 trillion. That sounds a lot, and once upon a time it was. But today, if you confiscated every penny the Forbes 400 have, it would be enough to cover just over one year’s federal deficit. And after that you’re back to square one. It’s not that “the rich” aren’t paying their “fair share,” it’s that America isn’t. A majority of the electorate has voted itself a size of government it’s not willing to pay for. A couple of years back, Andrew Biggs of the American Enterprise Institute calculated that, if Washington were to increase every single tax by 30 percent, it would be enough to balance the books — in 25 years. If you were to raise taxes by 50 percent, it would be enough to fund our entitlement liabilities — just our current ones, not our future liabilities, which would require further increases. This is the scale of course correction needed. If you don’t want that, you need to cut spending — like Harry Reid’s been doing. “Now remember, we’ve already done more than a billion dollars’ worth of cuts,” he bragged the other day. “So we need to get some credit for that.” Wow! A billion dollars’ worth of cuts! Washington borrows $188 million every hour. So, if Reid took over five hours to negotiate those “cuts,” it was a complete waste of time. So are most of the “plans.” Any “debt-reduction plan” that doesn’t address at least $1.3 trillion a year is, in fact, a debt-increase plan. So given that the ruling party will not permit spending cuts, what should Republicans do? If I were John Boehner, I’d say: “Clearly there’s no mandate for small government in the election results. So, if you milquetoast pantywaist sad-sack excuses for the sorriest bunch of so-called Americans who ever lived want to vote for Swede-sized statism, it’s time to pony up.” Okay, he might want to focus-group it first. But that fundamental dishonesty is the heart of the crisis. You cannot simultaneously enjoy American-sized taxes and European-sized government. One or the other has to go.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: A K A Stone (#0)
Military/War Energy/oil Note those four words missing from the above. You cut my entitlements bought and paid for w/o eliminating, addressing those 4 words and the USSA will fly apart.....;}
They need to cut all the people of the Obama race off of welfare. They should also eliminate your welfare check.
Then lets cut people of your race too, since they are the majority of welfare recipients. All the subsidies for tires, oil and agriculture that keep your area afloat, lets get rid of them too. Why should individuals suffer while corps get all the cash. The Constitution doesn't mention anything about We The Corporations. How about free prefrontal lobotomies for Tea Party supporters. That would solve a lot of problems.
Almost every country in the Middle East is awash in oil, and we have to side with the one that has nothing but joos. Goddamn, that was good thinkin'. Esso posted on 2012-01-13 7:37:56 ET
Energy/oil Note those four words missing from the above. You cut my entitlements bought and paid for w/o eliminating, addressing those 4 words and the USSA will fly apart.....;} The term bankruptcy is just the capitalist class trying to have it's way by declaring that everything should be run like a business, when many things are meant to be services. Otherwise the military would have been disbanded years ago.
Almost every country in the Middle East is awash in oil, and we have to side with the one that has nothing but joos. Goddamn, that was good thinkin'. Esso posted on 2012-01-13 7:37:56 ET
Until the three of you warfare/welfare worshipers and those of your ilk are told to go pound sand and a large across the board budget cut happens it is inevitable that the country go bankrupt.
So you think that the government should be totally set up as a profit making venture? Maybe we should start with the bankruptcy of your sacred cow, the military.
Almost every country in the Middle East is awash in oil, and we have to side with the one that has nothing but joos. Goddamn, that was good thinkin'. Esso posted on 2012-01-13 7:37:56 ET
My sacred cow? LOL! Talk about a straw man argument. I specifically stated across the board budget cuts. That would include my supposed sacred cow. By the way, if it were up to me there wouldn't be a standing military so to say that the military is my sacred cow is ridiculous.
Romney would have addressed the debt. But some people preferred to let some African that isn't even an American stay in office. Romney probably wouldn't have gone as far as I would like. But further then shit face.
So you are not only a murderer at heart like your master Satan but you also want to give people brain damage. Your a real sicko. Seriously you are.
Of course not. Which is why I could care less if the post office is losing money. Give them more money to fix the problem. It is a service we all use. But we should cut all of the Obama races welfare. All White people should also lose their welfare payments. Your land should be given to the Mexicans. Since you are squatting on Indian land.
Anyone but an ignorant Tea Bagger knows that is not murder. And why are you always calling for Satan to help you carry out your demonic thoughts?
Almost every country in the Middle East is awash in oil, and we have to side with the one that has nothing but joos. Goddamn, that was good thinkin'. Esso posted on 2012-01-13 7:37:56 ET
Bullshit. He would no more have did anything about the debt or government spending than Bush did. The budget he and Ryan discussed was considered a joke by everyone outside of partisan Republican circles. At most he would have transferred spending from one part of government in order to increase spending in defense and the police state. That's called smoke and mirrors. He isn't and never was a small government conservative, as his record as Governor clearly proves. You cannot balance a budget or decrease spending by advocating perpetual war and a larger, more invasive police state. While his talk of decreasing taxes was nice, decreasing taxes while increasing spending does nothing but pass the burden on to my children and grandchildren.
By the way, if it were up to me there wouldn't be a standing military so to say that the military is my sacred cow is ridiculous. Let each dept live or die on it's own ability to finance itself. You will then get the fascism of your dreams.
Almost every country in the Middle East is awash in oil, and we have to side with the one that has nothing but joos. Goddamn, that was good thinkin'. Esso posted on 2012-01-13 7:37:56 ET
You're nuts. Romney is known for cutting. He may not have gone as far as you would like but he would have addressed the issue better the fly face.
At most he would have transferred spending from one part of government in order to increase spending in defense and the police state. That's called smoke and mirrors. He isn't and never was a small government conservatiev, as his record as Governor clearly proves. You cannot balance a budget or decrease spending by advocating perpetual war and a larger, more invasive police state. While his talk of decreasing taxes was nice, decreasing taxes while increasing spending does nothing but pass the burden on to my children and grandchildren. Stone as a borderline sees the world in opposites. If Obama is bad then Romney is good.
Almost every country in the Middle East is awash in oil, and we have to side with the one that has nothing but joos. Goddamn, that was good thinkin'. Esso posted on 2012-01-13 7:37:56 ET
He and Ryan didn't create any budget. Ryan had a proposal that wasn't perfect but better then anything the magic negoro has put on the table.
He is also known for loading corporations up with debt.
Almost every country in the Middle East is awash in oil, and we have to side with the one that has nothing but joos. Goddamn, that was good thinkin'. Esso posted on 2012-01-13 7:37:56 ET
There you go, they were unable to offer a viable alternative.
Almost every country in the Middle East is awash in oil, and we have to side with the one that has nothing but joos. Goddamn, that was good thinkin'. Esso posted on 2012-01-13 7:37:56 ET
You should be honest. Romney never advocated perpetual war. And he did balance the budget in his home state. Unlike the negro you didn't vote against. Sorry Fibr but you are never going to be able to vote for the mirror image of yourself.
I really wish you would stop talking shit and back up your beliefs with actions. Move to Israel so the Muslims can blow your puny little brain up. Fucking dumb ass.
Sorry Fibr but you are never going to be able to vote for the mirror image of yourself. Who was the last candidate who advocated perpetual war while campaigning for president?
Almost every country in the Middle East is awash in oil, and we have to side with the one that has nothing but joos. Goddamn, that was good thinkin'. Esso posted on 2012-01-13 7:37:56 ET
Actually since you are the Israel firster here, that's your job.
Almost every country in the Middle East is awash in oil, and we have to side with the one that has nothing but joos. Goddamn, that was good thinkin'. Esso posted on 2012-01-13 7:37:56 ET
So first the military is my sacred cow after I clearly stated we need across the board cuts and now I'm a fascist because I believe in across the board budget cuts. LOL! You are not a serious person. Nothing in my years of posting would give anyone the indication that I believe in fascism. I do not believe in authoritarianism nor am I a nationalist. Neither do I believe in a corporatist government in which the government and business collude to make decisions based on what is better for business and government.
I never claimed he created a budget. I said the budget they discussed. Ryan's proposal was an insult. He wanted to block grant Medicare and Medicaid to the states which is great, however the cuts did not take place until 2022 - in other words, they were never going to happen. No spending cuts took place until 2021 - in other words there were no spending cuts. Ryan did propose to do away with Obamacare but Romney spoke out against that part of his bill. Why? because Romney was the father of Obamacare. He still to this day defends Romneycare. If a Democrat had made the same budget proposal you would have laughed at it. There is no way you would have bought into the promise of spending cuts in ten years. It amazes me that you would buy into it just because they were Republicans.
Romney advocated invading both Iran and Syria. His foreign policy advisers consisted of many of the same people that advised Bush. These people basically advised that we invade the entire Middle East one country at a time. I see no indication that he was not on board 100%. To me, that is perpetual war because it will take decades to do. Romney and Ryan are both on record as agreeing with all of the police state infrastructure created by both Bush and Obama. For that matter, in one of the debates he basically stated that the laws pass so far do not go far enough. Sorry Fibr but you are never going to be able to vote for the mirror image of yourself. I'm not demanding that. However, if the Republican party wants my vote then they are going to have to run anti-authoritarian, non-war mongering conservative candidates, not candidates who are just a little to the right of their Democrat counterparts and believe it is our job to send our men and women to die for reasons other than protecting this country.
You sound like the liberals who said Reagan was going to start WWIII. Romney made it clear war with Iran was not a necessity. We should go in and destroy Irans Muslims and Muslims everywhere. I didn't used to think that but it is the only way to deal with savages that are brainwashed into the Muslim cult. They have declared war on you and me. So I could care less for Muslims. They are a sick and degenerate people. I mean they worship a pedophile. That should be a clue.
That is preferable to propping up the Muslim scum like this pretend President we have does.
There is only one way to get out of the mess we are in. We have to freeze ALL spending, period. Then we have to make across the board cuts, to include the sacred cows of Republicans and Democrats - defense, the police state, and entitlements. Not because we are "soft on terrorists" (republican accusations) or "want to starve old people" (democrat accusations) but because the economy is going to collapse if we do not. Economics is economics and governments have to live within their means just like families do. The unlimited printing of money does not fix the problem it only adds to the problem and makes matters worse.
I voted against both niggaz, but you voted for one.
Obama's watch stopped on 24 May 2008, but he's been too busy smoking crack to notice.
Unfortunately for you, the terms liberal and conservative have clear definitions and refusing to advocate that the US declare war on more than one billion people does not meet the definition of being a liberal. As matter of fact, since government has historically increased and civil liberties historically decreased during war, it is you who sound like a liberal not me. I advocate small government and am against the police state both parties have created and which you voted for. We should go in and destroy Irans Muslims and Muslims everywhere. I didn't used to think that but it is the only way to deal with savages that are brainwashed into the Muslim cult. They have declared war on you and me. So I could care less for Muslims. They are a sick and degenerate people. I mean they worship a pedophile. That should be a clue. I'm sorry but I cannot take that statement seriously. If you actually believed what you are saying you would not be sitting on your ass typing on a keyboard. You would be in the military or working as a civilian in a combat zone putting your life on the line to protect this country from the danger you claim it is in. The fact that you are not means that you either really don't believe we are in the danger you claim (i.e. you want to kill Muslims for reasons other than what you claim) or you believe it but are a coward who wants others to die for him and are therefore a despicable person. Also, your knowledge of Islam is wanting. Muslims do not worship the pedophile Mohammad. They believe he is the last Messenger of God. They put him in the same category as they do Noah, Abraham, Moses and Jesus.
Once again, I cannot take you seriously because your partisanship prevents you from seeing reality, just like the Democrats partisanship prevented them from seeing the reality that Bush was the greatest Democrat President (from the point of view of growing government) since Johnson. Obama has expanded the WOT into Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, Libya, and Syria. He has destabilized Egypt, Mali, Tunisia, and Jordon whose governments either have been or likely will be replaced by Islamic fundynuts, giving the US an excuse to invade or drone attack them as well. If he were a Republican you would be calling him a hero. Both parties are on the same sheet of music.
You see, this is why you can't be trusted to think rationally or clearly. President Obama for all his graces and faults is a Christian, and always will be one. His two daughters will marry Christians like they are and have Christian families while you ae in the loony bin still ranting nonsense about the president's religion. If you can't get a clue, buttercup; buy a vowel.
I thought that is what you fuckers wanted all along? A total collapse of the USA so you could rebuilt it 'in your own image'... Bankrupt and broken American, I thought was your 'wet dream'?
Never swear "allegiance" to anything other than the 'right to change your mind'!
He did no such thing. Romney advocated tougher economic sanctions and also arming resistance forces in those countries.
Please... 93% of what shows up in your mailbox is SPAM. The Post Office has become the largest nuisance in the country. And they lose $20 BILLION a year. The Post Office should be sold, just like Germany sold their post office.
Let's have a little dose of reality here... Post WWII Federal Spending and Taxes as a percentage of GDP: Obama's spending levels are very different than any President since WWII. Romney would have taken us back at historic Post WWII norms, with federal spending under 20% of GDP. You and I may believe that average Post WWII spending was too much. However, Obama's 4 year average is more than 20% higher than the average. There was a real difference in this election. You were just too stubborn to see it.
I have no doubt that Obama is spending more than Bush II. He's a Democrat. However, there is no reason to believe that Romney and the republicans wouldn't have spent even more than Obama. I do not understand your numbers. They don't seem to match up with Forbe's numbers. How it is that Clinton's numbers are worse than Bush II's? I received the following information from the Cato Institute via McClatchy Newspaper. During Bush's first term discretionary spending increased 48.5%, not adjusted for inflation, while Clinton's only grew 21.6% over two terms. Defense spending (including the cost of the WOT) increased 86% between 2001 - 2007. He invented a whole new agency and consolidated existing agencies, eating up $31 billion, more than 3x what these agencies were spending prior to 9/11. Adjusted for inflation, education under Bush increased 18% annually due to No Child Left behind. The 2002 Farm Bill doubled spending from 1990 levels. Then there is the cost of the 2003 Medicare prescription drug benefit. I'm no fan of Clinton but it seems to me that he was a hard core fiscal conservative in comparison to GWB. By the way, this will be my last post until next week. I have to drive back to Columbia tonight and I won't have the time to discuss the issues until next weekend. I'm telling you this so you don't think I've run away. I hope you have a good week.
They come from the White House Office of Management and Budget. During Bush's first term discretionary spending increased 48.5%, not adjusted for inflation, while Clinton's only grew 21.6% over two terms. The 8 year averages don't show a direction. Clinton started by spending 21.4% of GDP in 1993. When he left, he was spending 18.2% of GDP. Conversely, Bush started out spending 18.2% of GDP, but it rose to 21.4% when he left. Spending decreased under Clinton and increased under Bush, but their 8 year averages were almost the same. Spending leaped during Obama's first year because of the stimulus, but it hasn't come down. Obama has been consistently spending more than 24% of GDP each year. That's a whopping a 35% annual spending increase as a percentage of GDP from when Clinton left office.
I've never been linked with A K A before. And You.....;} Speaking of Political Spectrums. If us three are bunched up, and fibr dog is elsewhere, that's one huge Spectrum.....;} #994. To: nolu chan (#987) (Edited) In the complete absence of evidence that there has been any attempt at a coup d'etat, i.e., a sudden, violent, and illegal seizure of power from the government; a political move to overthrow existing government by force, mcgowan claims that a navy commander (O-5) is a flag officer and cites his laundry list of names as proof that such an attempt to overthrow the American government, by force, was thwarted. You need to get the story right if you're not just doing a smear disinfo ad hominem, nolu. ;} And the List has expanded, no thanx to anyone here.....;} It's now: Williams, Darlak, Sinclair, Gaouette, O'Reilly, Ward, Ham, Petraeus, Allen But NOW we need your Political Spectrum, nolu. We need it desperately, because you INSIST on calling me a RIGHT WING NUT JOB Scalia, and now Fibr Dog (LULZ) is to my right or to my left on your Political Spectrum. Hurry, nolu, Hurry. This is critical.....;}
Which is what this BS fiscal Cliff is all about. Cutting everything but the sacred cows of Military/Finance. They try this and the USSA is over.
Comments (41 - 46) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#2. To: mcgowanjm (#1)
#3. To: A K A Stone (#2)
(Edited)
They need to cut all the people of the Obama race off of welfare. They should also eliminate your welfare check.
#4. To: mcgowanjm (#1)
Military/War
#5. To: A K A Stone, mininggold, mcgowanjm (#0)
#6. To: Fibr Dog (#5)
(Edited)
Until the three of you warfare/welfare worshipers and those of your ilk are told to go pound sand and a large across the board budget cut happens it is inevitable that the country go bankrupt.
#7. To: mininggold (#6)
Maybe we should start with the bankruptcy of your sacred cow, the military.
#8. To: Fibr Dog (#5)
#9. To: mininggold (#3)
How about free prefrontal lobotomies for Tea Party supporters. That would solve a lot of problems.
#10. To: mininggold (#6)
So you think that the government should be totally set up as a profit making venture?
#11. To: A K A Stone (#9)
(Edited)
So you are not only a murderer at heart like your master Satan but you also want to give people brain damage. Your a real sicko. Seriously you are.
#12. To: A K A Stone (#8)
(Edited)
Romney would have addressed the debt.
#13. To: Fibr Dog (#7)
My sacred cow? LOL! Talk about a straw man argument. I specifically stated across the board budget cuts. That would include my supposed sacred cow.
#14. To: Fibr Dog (#12)
Bullshit. He would no more have did anything about the debt or government spending than Bush did.
#15. To: Fibr Dog. A K A Stone (#12)
Bullshit. He would no more have did anything about the debt or government spending than Bush did. The budget he and Ryan discussed was considered a joke by everyone outside of partisan Republican circles.
#16. To: Fibr Dog (#12)
The budget he and Ryan discussed was considered a joke by everyone outside of partisan Republican circles.
#17. To: A K A Stone (#14)
(Edited)
You're nuts. Romney is known for cutting. He may not have gone as far as you would like but he would have addressed the issue better the fly face.
#18. To: A K A Stone (#16)
He and Ryan didn't create any budget. Ryan had a proposal that wasn't perfect but better then anything the magic negoro has put on the table.
#19. To: Fibr Dog (#12)
He isn't and never was a small government conservative, as his record as Governor clearly proves. You cannot balance a budget or decrease spending by advocating perpetual war and a larger, more invasive police state.
#20. To: mininggold (#15)
Stone as a borderline sees the world in opposites. If Obama is bad then Romney is good.
#21. To: A K A Stone (#19)
You should be honest. Romney never advocated perpetual war. And he did balance the budget in his home state. Unlike the negro you didn't vote against.
#22. To: A K A Stone (#20)
really wish you would stop talking shit and back up your beliefs with actions. Move to Israel so the Muslims can blow your puny little brain up. Fucking dumb ass.
#23. To: mininggold (#13)
Let each dept live or die on it's own ability to finance itself. You will then get the fascism of your dreams.
#24. To: A K A Stone (#16)
He and Ryan didn't create any budget.
#25. To: A K A Stone (#19)
You should be honest. Romney never advocated perpetual war. And he did balance the budget in his home state.
#26. To: Fibr Dog (#25)
Romney advocated invading both Iran and Syria.
#27. To: Fibr Dog (#25)
These people basically advised that we invade the entire Middle East one country at a time. I see no indication that he was not on board 100%.
#28. To: mininggold (#18)
here you go, they were unable to offer a viable alternative.
#29. To: A K A Stone (#19)
Unlike the negro you didn't vote against
"We (government) need to do a lot less, a lot sooner" ~Ron Paul
#30. To: A K A Stone (#26)
You sound like the liberals who said Reagan was going to start WWIII.
#31. To: A K A Stone (#27)
That is preferable to propping up the Muslim scum like this pretend President we have does.
#32. To: A K A Stone (#27)
#33. To: A K A Stone (#0)
#34. To: Fibr Dog (#25)
Romney advocated invading both Iran and Syria.
"we must as a species go into a period of shrinkage that we have not experienced since the Dark Ages and the Black Plague" -- lucysmom
#35. To: A K A Stone (#10)
(Edited)
Of course not. Which is why I could care less if the post office is losing money. Give them more money to fix the problem. It is a service we all use.
"we must as a species go into a period of shrinkage that we have not experienced since the Dark Ages and the Black Plague" -- lucysmom
#36. To: Fibr Dog (#12)
(Edited)
President(s) Spending Taxes Truman through Bush I 19.5% 17.7% Clinton 19.8% 19.0% Bush II 19.6% 17.6% Obama 24.4% 15.4%
"we must as a species go into a period of shrinkage that we have not experienced since the Dark Ages and the Black Plague" -- lucysmom
#37. To: jwpegler (#36)
#38. To: Fibr Dog (#37)
(Edited)
I do not understand your numbers. They don't seem to match up with Forbe's numbers.
"we must as a species go into a period of shrinkage that we have not experienced since the Dark Ages and the Black Plague" -- lucysmom
#39. To: mininggold (#6)
#40. To: mininggold (#4)
.
.
.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]