If the Republicans win in 2014, the economy won't be doing well in 2016, of that I guarantee you.
That said, I don't think the Democrats can pull through with this one. We're just gonna have to buckle down for a long period of trying to impeach the President over and over again, interspersed with attempts to repeal Obamacare that will be vetoed over and over.
We need term limits on senators and representatives. Maybe then instead of worrying about being re elected they would actually try and do something.
Remember, most folks voting the wingnuts in are old people. They'll die soon, then the Dems will start winning again.
No matter what happens, remember, we the Progressives are winning the culture war. The future belongs to us. If the wingnuts take charge, we will not comply. The wingnuts will not go far long.
Remember, most folks voting the wingnuts in are old people. They'll die soon, then the Dems will start winning again.
No matter what happens, remember, we the Progressives are winning the culture war. The future belongs to us. If the wingnuts take charge, we will not comply. The wingnuts will not go far long.
A poll done recently by the Harvard Institute of Politics (http://www.iop.harvard.edu/likely-millennial-voters-grabs-upcoming-midterm-elections-harvard-youth-poll-finds) says their sample of 18-to-29-year-olds who would "definitely vote" in the midterms are 51% in approval of the GOP gaining control of the legislature while only 47% want Democrats to be in charge.
Much as I would like what Spuki says to be true, the generations before us were saying the same thing. I don't think the Baby Boomers as a whole became more conservative as they got older, but the tiny elite that funds politicians certainly gets richer as they get older.
Spuki, are... are you okay?
Right. They probably polled a group of rich spoiled white kids rather than REAL AMERICAN youths of all demographics.
Sorry, shit-troll...but I'm right and you are wrong!
Millenials for the GOP....That's a LAUGH! HA HA HAAA!
Can you tell knock knock jokes, too LYING IRONTROLL SHIT SUCKER FUCKOFF?
You know what? Since this entire board is full of the Pessimistic...the weak & stupid and inferior.....a bunch of pus-bags who'll throw in the towel and mistake the light at the end of the tunnel for a train, I will leave this shit-bag nihilist fuckoff webboard!
YOU ARE ALL DISEASED YOU INFERIOR PESSIMIST TOWEL-THROWERS WHO REFUSE TO FIGHT AND RETAIN HOPE! YOU ARE CHILDREN OF THE LOSERS! SORRY SWEETIES! BUT THERE IS A HIGHER POWER! THERE IS A NEW AGE! THIS IS THE DWAPARA YUGA! THE LEFT WILL RISE AGAIN AND THE SUPERIOR NEVER GIVE UP HOPE AND ALWAYS SEE THE SILVER LINING! THE WORLD BELONGS TO THE LEFT! MOTHER GAIA REIGNS! THE MEEK WILL INHERIT THE EARTH & EVIL WILL BE PUNISHED!!! WE ARE IN THE AGE OF AQUARIUS AND THERE ISN'T NOTHING YOU CAN DO ABOUT IT YOU SONS & DAUGHTERS OF SHIT!!!
I'm sticking with the FSTDTs webpage because the folks on the FQAs site are shit!
GOODBYE, WORTHLESS WEAK PESSIMISTS WHO'LL RATHER GIVE UP, ROLL UP & DIE!!! I REFUSE YOUR PSYCHIC VAMPIRISM!!!!!
WHY DON'T YOU ALL JUST F-F-F-FAAAADE AWAAAAYYY!!!!
SO LONG, LOSERS!!!!
Is this real life?
Spukikitty in a nutshell. When her beliefs and reality disagree, in her mind it's reality that's not only wrong, but has to be e-yelled at until it realises this is "the Age of Aquarias" or whatever other new age woo she's moronic enough to take seriously. Then of course she comes back a few weeks later and the whole cycle begins anew.
I have to say, there are few things more annoying than a new age fundie.
...Sorry, I actually agree with Art on that.
I'm sorry, did you just call her a fundie?Hmm, let me check.
Spukikitty in a nutshell. When her beliefs and reality disagree, in her mind it's reality that's not only wrong, but has to be e-yelled at until it realises this is "the Age of Aquarias" or whatever other new age woo she's moronic enough to take seriously. Then of course she comes back a few weeks later and the whole cycle begins anew.As it turns out, I did in fact call her a fundie. The moar you know.
I have to say, there are few things more annoying than a new age fundie.
I'm sorry, did you just call her a fundie?Hmm, let me check.Spukikitty in a nutshell. When her beliefs and reality disagree, in her mind it's reality that's not only wrong, but has to be e-yelled at until it realises this is "the Age of Aquarias" or whatever other new age woo she's moronic enough to take seriously. Then of course she comes back a few weeks later and the whole cycle begins anew.As it turns out, I did in fact call her a fundie. The moar you know.
I have to say, there are few things more annoying than a new age fundie.
Well then. What reason do you have to do so?Let's see. She believes in objectively false bullshit and when said objectively false bullshit fails to reflect reality, she just clings to it even harder. That alone qualifies her as a fundie. But not only that, she actually gets angry at people and the world in general for failing to see the light and join the One True Faith. Just look at how Ironchew debunked her claim with an actual study from a real university, and she responds by citing some random fuckwit's blog that's not even relevant to what Ironchew said, labels him a troll then goes on to post a ALL CAPS rant in obnoxiously big font about how it's the "Age of Aquarius" or "Dwamaparga Yugara" or whatever bollocks and then ragequits because we all had the audacity to not toe the manic progressive party line. She may have different religion and politics, but she thinks and behaves exactly like the loons over on Rapture Ready.
I'm sorry, did you just call her a fundie?Hmm, let me check.Spukikitty in a nutshell. When her beliefs and reality disagree, in her mind it's reality that's not only wrong, but has to be e-yelled at until it realises this is "the Age of Aquarias" or whatever other new age woo she's moronic enough to take seriously. Then of course she comes back a few weeks later and the whole cycle begins anew.As it turns out, I did in fact call her a fundie. The moar you know.
I have to say, there are few things more annoying than a new age fundie.
Well then. What reason do you have to do so?
1. Religious idealism is the basis for personal and communal identity;
2. Fundamentalists understand truth to be revealed and unified;
3. It is intentionally scandalous (outsiders cannot understand it and will always be outsiders);
4. Fundamentalists envision themselves as part of a cosmic struggle;
5. They seize on historical moments and reinterpret them in light of this cosmic struggle;
6. They demonize their opposition and are reactionary;
7. Fundamentalists are selective in what parts of their tradition and heritage they stress;
8. They are primarily led by a narrow demographic (e.g. white males);
9. They envy modernist cultural hegemony and try to overturn the distribution of power;
10. Their logic is so different from normal logic, they cannot be argued with.
Voted for Wendy Davis and Lettica Van de Putte. Now that the polls are closed I am sure the Texas state is still as red as it has been for the last 20 years and we're confirmed 100% hopeless for anything wonderful. In other words, we've tried and we've failed.
(http://i115.photobucket.com/albums/n290/CSL1/Total%20Trash/emot-smith_zpsaa1863db.gif)
<Spuki rant snipped for length>
Keep in mind that the voter suppression isn't necessarily a deliberate goal of "stop voter fraud" laws. One of the biggest issues that the Republicans have right now is Tea Party candidates who sincerely believe the Fox News propaganda. You never want to have people representing you who believe your questionable propaganda and talking points. And right now, many Republican voters are terrified that the Democrats are (somehow) stealing elections.Voted for Wendy Davis and Lettica Van de Putte. Now that the polls are closed I am sure the Texas state is still as red as it has been for the last 20 years and we're confirmed 100% hopeless for anything wonderful. In other words, we've tried and we've failed.
(http://i115.photobucket.com/albums/n290/CSL1/Total%20Trash/emot-smith_zpsaa1863db.gif)
You guys must be doing something right if the Texas GOP is scared enough to pass voter suppression laws. They won't be able to hold the demographic shift for much longer...
They're going to do it anyway, even if they can't convict. Tea party nutjobs.Oh yeah. Like I said: the Tea Party believes their own propaganda, in this case, the idea that President Obama has somehow committed some high crime or misdemeanor. Ironically, I would agree that he has sorta done so by signing the NDAA 2012, as well as various other "war on terror" measures, but even if you could legally impeach him for that, Congress would also have to impeach itself for approving of all that stuff.
Yeah and it'll be the death knell of the Republican party as a whole as the Tea Party nutjobs see that the people they put in Congress can't get the scary brown person out of the White House. Seriously impeachment is suicide as there is nothing, absolutely nothing, they can impeach him over and it'll stick. Thanks the Patriot Act, Obama's Teflon. And when the GOP does this insanely stupid thing and it fails, the Tea Party won't blame the Democrats. I mean, they're a minority after all. They'll go after the GOP because they're not Conservative enough. Sarah Palin will ride that wave like she does her husband's dick, thinking she's a shoe in for a nomination for President. But all it'll do is split the party. And Bob's your Uncle, Hiliary's President, Congress goes Blue, and the GOP is in ruins.
Ironbite-2016 can't come fast enough.
Yeah and it'll be the death knell of the Republican party as a whole as the Tea Party nutjobs see that the people they put in Congress can't get the scary brown person out of the White House. Seriously impeachment is suicide as there is nothing, absolutely nothing, they can impeach him over and it'll stick. Thanks the Patriot Act, Obama's Teflon. And when the GOP does this insanely stupid thing and it fails, the Tea Party won't blame the Democrats. I mean, they're a minority after all. They'll go after the GOP because they're not Conservative enough. Sarah Palin will ride that wave like she does her husband's dick, thinking she's a shoe in for a nomination for President. But all it'll do is split the party. And Bob's your Uncle, Hiliary's President, Congress goes Blue, and the GOP is in ruins.Meh, President Obama didn't sign the Patriot Act, but he chose to extend it. He chose to sign the NDAA. He chose to continue the "War on Terror". His rhetoric is a vast improvement over President Bush, but that's about it.
Ironbite-2016 can't come fast enough.
-Spunki having a stroke-
They're going to do it anyway, even if they can't convict. Tea party nutjobs.
Meh, President Obama didn't sign the Patriot Act, but he chose to extend it. He chose to sign the NDAA. He chose to continue the "War on Terror". His rhetoric is a vast improvement over President Bush, but that's about it.
That said, the Tea Party probably wouldn't be all that opposed to any measures which prosecute foreign sounding people, and I doubt they understand why the NDAA and war on terror is unconstitutional, if they understand that such things are problematic at all. As for 2016, don't brag about how great things are for us and how terrible they are for the Republican Party until Hillary Clinton is actually being sworn in. It all comes down to voter turnout. It is rare for a party to hold the White House for more than eight years, so the Democrats need to run someone who can get people excited to vote. But I honestly don't care too much about 2016. I'm worried about 2020. If the Democrats can win that year (a stretch regardless of how 2016 goes), they can finally undo some of the Republican gerrymandering. What the GOP did to the Democratic districts in my own state of Ohio is almost comedic.
I'm worried about 2020. If the Democrats can win that year (a stretch regardless of how 2016 goes), they can finally undo some of the Republican gerrymandering. What the GOP did to the Democratic districts in my own state of Ohio is almost comedic.
As my mother put it, "Democrats couldn't keep hold of their dicks if they had superglued them to their hands."
-Spuki having a neurotic fit-
As far as I can tell, the only Democrats who won in Virginia were incumbents. And don't think Warner's seat is completely safe; the margin of victory was narrow enough to potentially allow a recount.
Regarding the choice between Republican and Republican-lite, I will remind you that the "Republican-lite" Bill Clinton managed to beat Republicans twice. Not that he managed to avoid government shutdowns and impeachment threats by being a centrist, mind you.
I suspect that Ross Perot is, if not the reason, at least an explanation, of why the Republicans are further from center. Conservatives proved with Perot that they would be willing to split the vote and screw their party if that's what it took to make the Republicans more ideologically pure. American progressives, by contrast, can get easily excited, but don't often stay committed to making change. Look at the Occupy Wall Street, the Coffee Party, etc.As far as I can tell, the only Democrats who won in Virginia were incumbents. And don't think Warner's seat is completely safe; the margin of victory was narrow enough to potentially allow a recount.
Regarding the choice between Republican and Republican-lite, I will remind you that the "Republican-lite" Bill Clinton managed to beat Republicans twice. Not that he managed to avoid government shutdowns and impeachment threats by being a centrist, mind you.
True, but one has to remember the fact that Bush and Dole both also had to contend with Ross Perot. On the other hand, I think his influence has been overestimated.
Conservatives proved with Perot that they would be willing to split the vote and screw their party if that's what it took to make the Republicans more ideologically pure.
American progressives, by contrast, can get easily excited, but don't often stay committed to making change. Look at the Occupy Wall Street, the Coffee Party, etc.
Conservatives proved with Perot that they would be willing to split the vote and screw their party if that's what it took to make the Republicans more ideologically pure.
Pretty much exactly what I've been saying progressives need to do. If they voted en masse outside the Democratic party and made them lose a few high-profile elections, the Democrats would come crawling to their platform.
Conservatives proved with Perot that they would be willing to split the vote and screw their party if that's what it took to make the Republicans more ideologically pure.
Pretty much exactly what I've been saying progressives need to do. If they voted en masse outside the Democratic party and made them lose a few high-profile elections, the Democrats would come crawling to their platform.
That did happen once when Nader ran in 2000, but I don't recall it getting the Democrats to be more progressive or anything.
Conservatives proved with Perot that they would be willing to split the vote and screw their party if that's what it took to make the Republicans more ideologically pure.
Pretty much exactly what I've been saying progressives need to do. If they voted en masse outside the Democratic party and made them lose a few high-profile elections, the Democrats would come crawling to their platform.
Conservatives proved with Perot that they would be willing to split the vote and screw their party if that's what it took to make the Republicans more ideologically pure.
Pretty much exactly what I've been saying progressives need to do. If they voted en masse outside the Democratic party and made them lose a few high-profile elections, the Democrats would come crawling to their platform.
En masse where? I can't think of a single party that I would actually give enough of a damn to vote for instead of the democratic party. The ones that seem best are quite pretentious.
Either way, I will say this: The pendulum may have swung in the Republicans' favor way too early. They've just bought enough rope to hang themselves, and this may cost them in the 2016 election.
The only thing you can count on the public to do is be fickle.
So, how long until the Republicans try to repeal Obamacare and Obama vetoes it?
I give it 5 hours. With a side bet that by the first of February, they'll have tried to repeal minimum wage laws.
Stay calm, all. Here is your assignment. Come back to me one year from today and tell me what's different about society and the economy. (Hint: nothing.)
Stay calm, all. Here is your assignment. Come back to me one year from today and tell me what's different about society and the economy. (Hint: nothing.)
Stay calm, all. Here is your assignment. Come back to me one year from today and tell me what's different about society and the economy. (Hint: nothing.)
Actually, yeah, that's a fair point.
You know how Republicans have been stonewalling Democratic attempts at progress (and sometimes regress)?
Guess who is also capable of doing that right now.
Stay calm, all. Here is your assignment. Come back to me one year from today and tell me what's different about society and the economy. (Hint: nothing.)
Actually, yeah, that's a fair point.
You know how Republicans have been stonewalling Democratic attempts at progress (and sometimes regress)?
Guess who is also capable of doing that right now.
On the one hand, the cynical side of me says that'll never fucking happen because they're spineless.
The optimist in me is giggling in anticipation of the GOP getting a taste of their own medicine.
Stay calm, all. Here is your assignment. Come back to me one year from today and tell me what's different about society and the economy. (Hint: nothing.)
Yeah, most likely, all that'll happen is more gridlock and more anger in Congress. Maybe somebody will get beaten with a cane again.
Stay calm, all. Here is your assignment. Come back to me one year from today and tell me what's different about society and the economy. (Hint: nothing.)
Actually, yeah, that's a fair point.
You know how Republicans have been stonewalling Democratic attempts at progress (and sometimes regress)?
Guess who is also capable of doing that right now.
Stay calm, all. Here is your assignment. Come back to me one year from today and tell me what's different about society and the economy. (Hint: nothing.)
Actually, yeah, that's a fair point.
You know how Republicans have been stonewalling Democratic attempts at progress (and sometimes regress)?
Guess who is also capable of doing that right now.
That's a possibility. It's perhaps even the most likely outcome.
But I just can't shake the idea of Obama "compromising" with the Republicans and signing their attempts to, say, cut Social Security and steamroll through the Keystone XL pipeline. He agrees with 98% of everything the GOP wants anyway; he just wants the excuse of "the Republicans made me do it."
Stay calm, all. Here is your assignment. Come back to me one year from today and tell me what's different about society and the economy. (Hint: nothing.)
They're going to do it anyway, even if they can't convict. Tea party nutjobs.
I suspect that Ross Perot is, if not the reason, at least an explanation, of why the Republicans are further from center. Conservatives proved with Perot that they would be willing to split the vote and screw their party if that's what it took to make the Republicans more ideologically pure. American progressives, by contrast, can get easily excited, but don't often stay committed to making change. Look at the Occupy Wall Street, the Coffee Party, etc.As far as I can tell, the only Democrats who won in Virginia were incumbents. And don't think Warner's seat is completely safe; the margin of victory was narrow enough to potentially allow a recount.
Regarding the choice between Republican and Republican-lite, I will remind you that the "Republican-lite" Bill Clinton managed to beat Republicans twice. Not that he managed to avoid government shutdowns and impeachment threats by being a centrist, mind you.
True, but one has to remember the fact that Bush and Dole both also had to contend with Ross Perot. On the other hand, I think his influence has been overestimated.
Stay calm, all. Here is your assignment. Come back to me one year from today and tell me what's different about society and the economy. (Hint: nothing.)
Yeah, most likely, all that'll happen is more gridlock and more anger in Congress. Maybe somebody will get beaten with a cane again.
There is actually pretty good research showing that it is easier to govern when congress is controlled by one party than when it is split, even when the president is of a different party. Basically, since 2008 the Republicans have done nothing but throw spitballs from the back of the class. Now they will be expected to actually govern if they hope to be taken seriously in 2016. They are going to be forced to come to the negotiating table, I'm sure with a great deal of kicking and screaming from the Tea Party.
Stay calm, all. Here is your assignment. Come back to me one year from today and tell me what's different about society and the economy. (Hint: nothing.)
Actually, yeah, that's a fair point.
You know how Republicans have been stonewalling Democratic attempts at progress (and sometimes regress)?
Guess who is also capable of doing that right now.
On the one hand, the cynical side of me says that'll never fucking happen because they're spineless.
The optimist in me is giggling in anticipation of the GOP getting a taste of their own medicine.
Democrats love their stonewalling tactics almost as much as the Republicans do. It's basically a political pastime.
Fred, sometimes I like you, but today is not one of those days.
Let's face it, the democrats... sorry, the democratic party, since you blow up whenever anyone says the former, is made up of politicians. Politicians that will do whatever it takes to get ahead. They have been quite heavy with the filibustering in the past, and heaven help us, they will continue to filibuster.
However, I did say "almost." They have an unfortunate tendency to lose their spines at the worst opportunity. Such as when Obama spent the first years of his presidency catering to the Republican base, or the fact that "blue dog democrats" even exist.
Let's face it, the democrats... sorry, the democratic party, since you blow up whenever anyone says the former, is made up of politicians.
The cute part of this Republican 'victory' is that it may well be the victory that costs them the war.
Steamrolling and obstructing the democrats at every turn is remarkably easy, but now they are in a position of accountability with a bunch of uncompromising radicals in their ranks. If they swing hard to the right to accommodate the tea party, they loose the center and loose power. If they don't swing to the right they splinter the party and loose power through vote splitting.
I don't remember my government class 100%, but isn't there something that, if congress tries to pass a bill but the president rejects it, they can somehow bypass him? Considering the GOP controls both parts of Congress, this wouldn't be difficult, and if it's true, then they can pass and reject anything they want. Which means they'd have ZERO excuses if things don't imrpove by 2016.
I don't remember my government class 100%, but isn't there something that, if congress tries to pass a bill but the president rejects it, they can somehow bypass him? Considering the GOP controls both parts of Congress, this wouldn't be difficult, and if it's true, then they can pass and reject anything they want. Which means they'd have ZERO excuses if things don't imrpove by 2016.
They have to get a super majority vote to bypass a veto. Even though the republicans control the senate, I don't believe they have enough for a 2/3rds super majority vote.
They have to get a super majority vote to bypass a veto. Even though the republicans control the senate, I don't believe they have enough for a 2/3rds super majority vote.
They'd need about 45 Democratic Representatives to defect in the House, and at a bare minimum 13 Democratic Senators (if every outstanding race goes to the Republicans) to defect, in order to override a veto. That's not going to happen.
They have to get a super majority vote to bypass a veto. Even though the republicans control the senate, I don't believe they have enough for a 2/3rds super majority vote.
They'd need about 45 Democratic Representatives to defect in the House, and at a bare minimum 13 Democratic Senators (if every outstanding race goes to the Republicans) to defect, in order to override a veto. That's not going to happen.
It's very rare throughout our history that presidential vetoes are successfully overriden. The most recent that comes to mind is the 80th Congress overriding Harry Truman's veto of a 1947 Right-To-Work law called the Taft-Hartley Act.
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY--H.R. 6331:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 154 (2008):
June 24, considered and passed House.
July 9, considered and passed Senate.
WEEKLY COMPILATION OF PRESIDENTIAL DOCUMENTS, Vol. 44 (2008):
July 15, Presidential veto message.
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 154 (2008):
July 15, House and Senate overrode veto.
They have to get a super majority vote to bypass a veto. Even though the republicans control the senate, I don't believe they have enough for a 2/3rds super majority vote.
They'd need about 45 Democratic Representatives to defect in the House, and at a bare minimum 13 Democratic Senators (if every outstanding race goes to the Republicans) to defect, in order to override a veto. That's not going to happen.
They have to get a super majority vote to bypass a veto. Even though the republicans control the senate, I don't believe they have enough for a 2/3rds super majority vote.
They'd need about 45 Democratic Representatives to defect in the House, and at a bare minimum 13 Democratic Senators (if every outstanding race goes to the Republicans) to defect, in order to override a veto. That's not going to happen.
Alternatively, they need a sympathetic president that won't veto most of their ideas in the first place. Soon we'll see just how right-wing Obama really is.
I'm starting to wonder if elections are rigged by the comedians to ensure that they'll have material for the following years.
I'm starting to wonder if elections are rigged by the comedians to ensure that they'll have material for the following years.
What would you even call a government run by comedians?
I'm starting to wonder if elections are rigged by the comedians to ensure that they'll have material for the following years.
Damn it, he's onto us.
What would you even call a government run by comedians?
An improvement.
They have to get a super majority vote to bypass a veto. Even though the republicans control the senate, I don't believe they have enough for a 2/3rds super majority vote.
They'd need about 45 Democratic Representatives to defect in the House, and at a bare minimum 13 Democratic Senators (if every outstanding race goes to the Republicans) to defect, in order to override a veto. That's not going to happen.
They have to get a super majority vote to bypass a veto. Even though the republicans control the senate, I don't believe they have enough for a 2/3rds super majority vote.
They'd need about 45 Democratic Representatives to defect in the House, and at a bare minimum 13 Democratic Senators (if every outstanding race goes to the Republicans) to defect, in order to override a veto. That's not going to happen.
Which means they can screw up everything Obama has done and still blame him. What are the chances that we could enter yet another recession soon?
Just remember, the last time Republicans controlled this many state governments was 1928. Hmmm, anything happen shortly after that?
Just remember, the last time Republicans controlled this many state governments was 1928. Hmmm, anything happen shortly after that?
Yes. Joseph Stalin launched the first five year plan. A British court declared that Canadian women are technically "persons" and therefore allowed to be in the senate. And Martin Luther King was born soon after that.
Black Tuesday, the 1929 Stock Market Crash. It took a World War to get the US out of that Great Depression...
You know, I've always had an idea brewing in the back of my head, kind of a game story sort-of based on real world events, where the Next Great War isn't, as most think, individual countries fighting amongst one another, but a massive, global civil war sparked by resentment against megacorporations essentially taking over the world, one dollar at a time. The fact its at all possible is kinda scary...How is it possible? Who would lead the lower classes? Who would supply them? And why would the lower classes of, say, India, join forces with the lower classes of Pakistan? The traditional Marxist model of people being divided by class more than by national identity is a nice dream, but it I fear it won't be actualized within my own lifetime.
You know, I've always had an idea brewing in the back of my head, kind of a game story sort-of based on real world events, where the Next Great War isn't, as most think, individual countries fighting amongst one another, but a massive, global civil war sparked by resentment against megacorporations essentially taking over the world, one dollar at a time. The fact its at all possible is kinda scary...How is it possible? Who would lead the lower classes? Who would supply them? And why would the lower classes of, say, India, join forces with the lower classes of Pakistan? The traditional Marxist model of people being divided by class more than by national identity is a nice dream, but it I fear it won't be actualized within my own lifetime.
I take it that none of you head about this 65 percent possibility that we'll be in another Republican Recession by the end of 2015? Worth a read anyhow. http://www.newsmax.com/Finance/Predictors-1929-Stock-Market-Crash-Recession-Economy/2014/11/11/id/606657/
Even if it does not happen, and there is a good chance it won't, Republicans are nothing but bad news. You never hear of Republicans recovering this country from depressions and recessions, because they are the cause of them.
I take it that none of you head about this 65 percent possibility that we'll be in another Republican Recession by the end of 2015? Worth a read anyhow. http://www.newsmax.com/Finance/Predictors-1929-Stock-Market-Crash-Recession-Economy/2014/11/11/id/606657/
Even if it does not happen, and there is a good chance it won't, Republicans are nothing but bad news. You never hear of Republicans recovering this country from depressions and recessions, because they are the cause of them.
NewsMax has been saying that "next year the REAL Great Recession will begin" for several years now. That "65% chance" is extracted directly out of some Gold Bug's ass. NewsMax deserves to be taken seriously as much as Glenn Beck.
I take it that none of you head about this 65 percent possibility that we'll be in another Republican Recession by the end of 2015? Worth a read anyhow. http://www.newsmax.com/Finance/Predictors-1929-Stock-Market-Crash-Recession-Economy/2014/11/11/id/606657/
Even if it does not happen, and there is a good chance it won't, Republicans are nothing but bad news. You never hear of Republicans recovering this country from depressions and recessions, because they are the cause of them.
NewsMax has been saying that "next year the REAL Great Recession will begin" for several years now. That "65% chance" is extracted directly out of some Gold Bug's ass. NewsMax deserves to be taken seriously as much as Glenn Beck.
I wonder if the GOP's recent win has made this closer to a reality though.
...it will destroy the pillars of American Exceptionalism
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/11/13/john-boehner-government-shutdown_n_6154770.html?icid=maing-grid7%7Chtmlws-main-bb%7Cdl1%7Csec3_lnk3%26pLid%3D563419 (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/11/13/john-boehner-government-shutdown_n_6154770.html?icid=maing-grid7%7Chtmlws-main-bb%7Cdl1%7Csec3_lnk3%26pLid%3D563419)
So the GOP, back in power, are going to show the country how to run the country correctly . . . by threatening to shutdown the government yet again?