|
Post by bunnywailer on Feb 17, 2009 20:44:53 GMT -5
My bad, I made a mistake. It was only 360 million, so you're totally right that is a completely insignificant amount. Let it ride. CONDOMS FOR EVERYONE!!!!! www.politico.com/news/stories/0109/18066.htmlAnd Pelosi, God Bless her, she is the biggest government idiot of all time. She wins the stupidity prize. (last two lines in the linked article) House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said on ABC’s “This Week” on Sunday that she had “no apologies” for the proposal. “The states are in terrible fiscal budget crises now,” she said. “The contraception will reduce costs to the states and to the federal government.”
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 17, 2009 22:22:40 GMT -5
Right. 360 million for condoms. Do you actually believe the stuff you post?
|
|
|
Post by bunnywailer on Feb 18, 2009 2:42:05 GMT -5
Right. 360 million for condoms. Do you actually believe the stuff you post? Yes, I do. I have to dumb down the talking points I make and make simply analogies so that the average volleytalker can understand (since I can't draw it on the chalkboard for them), but nothing I posted in this thread is untrue. Are you denying that the 360 million WASN'T Democratic add-on PORK to the economic stimulus package targeted for special interest dealing with contraception? You might want to call Pelosi and get y'alls story straight.
|
|
|
Post by bunnywailer on Feb 18, 2009 2:57:40 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 18, 2009 7:49:08 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by bigfan on Feb 18, 2009 11:19:29 GMT -5
OBAMA IS A PUPPET FRAUD. IMPEACH AND REMOVE HIM NEXT YEAR. gogopherbill....it is going to be a long 4 years for you.
|
|
|
Post by OverAndUnder on Feb 18, 2009 12:40:22 GMT -5
I don't see why we would care about condom distribution anyway. It's not like anyone will use them, because as we know the inner cities are filled with Welfare Queens popping out babies like a Mattel factory just so they can get a bigger guvmint check.
|
|
|
Post by goGopherBill on Feb 18, 2009 12:45:55 GMT -5
No..It will be a long time for AMERICA.
This guy is a Fraud.
All he does is give speeches.."Promises in the DARK"
He never uses history to show how and who pays for what.
He penalizes all those who worked and never screwed up.
States like Texas who pay no income taxes wil be forced to cover Calif. and the auto loan state MI.
People who never over extended themselves will be forced to pay for those who did.
Greedy people who get bailed out by conservatives.
The Cheers for him are going to get really hollow as everyone realizes there are NO FREE LUNCHES.
He said "common sense is a gore value"
Daaaa?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 18, 2009 14:51:39 GMT -5
"He penalizes all those who worked and never screwed up."
This is EXACTLY what he is not doing. You can blast the bill and Obama all you want, but this comment is just the usual right-wing crap.
|
|
|
Post by JT on Feb 18, 2009 14:56:52 GMT -5
The Cheers for him are going to get really hollow as everyone realizes there are NO FREE LUNCHES. Don't worry... our kids will pick up the tab. We left the bill in their name.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 18, 2009 15:09:40 GMT -5
You and Bill have kids? I never knew. Who do they most resemble?
|
|
|
Post by bunnywailer on Feb 18, 2009 15:38:24 GMT -5
Wrong. Fail. Once again you want to argue semantics. Sure I joked around about 360 million in condoms, but the condoms were just a way to jokingly refer to the actual family planning, STD, and birth control provisions in the bill which were PURE UNADULTERATED PORK. Of course your article doesn't mention the pork. After the Democrats were called on the carpet for their stupidity, the top-dog Democrat (aka OBAMA) had to fish-smack their stupid asses and make them take those provisions out. End of story. Stop arguing semantics. You know you're wrong and you can't defend the PORK that the Democrats tried to get away with in this stimulus package.
|
|
|
Post by goGopherBill on Feb 18, 2009 16:20:46 GMT -5
hhhhay R..
Who gets the bank bailouts? Successful small banks or large ones who are failing.
Pt me.
Who gets the auto bailouts. ? Companies that are thriving or ones that are failing.
Pt me..as usual.
Who is getting home loan bailouts?
Those who worked and paid off loans and stayed within budgets for 20-30- years?
Or those who couldn't afford housing anyway because they are clueless?
Or those who GAMBLED or played the market and should lose?
Pt Me..as always.
Who is getting tax relief...? Those who pay 80% of the nations bills..or those at the bottom 20 % who pay nothing.
Those DARN bottom feeders who contribute little or Nothing are getting more than those paying for this garbage.
Debate...you?
It's like debating a brick wall...you fail to see any opposition point. You would rather attack on a personal level..spellin' etc.
Facts? We give you dozens.
You ignore reality and DREAM of utopia.
FACT..we are closer to all out economic breakdown and structural failure of government.
TRY WATCHING BECK...then watch MNBC..
The worst station in the woooorrrllllldd.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 18, 2009 17:21:41 GMT -5
Wrong. Fail. Once again you want to argue semantics. Sure I joked around about 360 million in condoms, but the condoms were just a way to jokingly refer to the actual family planning, STD, and birth control provisions in the bill which were PURE UNADULTERATED PORK. Of course your article doesn't mention the pork. After the Democrats were called on the carpet for their stupidity, the top-dog Democrat (aka OBAMA) had to fish-smack their stupid asses and make them take those provisions out. End of story. Stop arguing semantics. You know you're wrong and you can't defend the PORK that the Democrats tried to get away with in this stimulus package. 1) Semantics? Hardly. There is a huge difference between spending that much money on condoms or spending it on a much broader area. By calling it "spending on condoms" you reduce it to the level of the other obfuscators on right-wing radio and FOX, and confuse the issue. 2) I can find no documentation that any of this is in the actual bill. This could be a failing on my part (although you wouldn't think it would be that hard to find a list of what the bill encompasses). 3) I'm still waiting for a definition of pork. Even if this were in the bill, I'm not sure it qualifies IF one can show that it saves money in the long run. I'd make the same argument about JT's post: it's not left for our kids to pay if spending the money now is less than spending it later (for infrastructure and schools, for instance). I'm not defending the bill. I'd need more info than I can find to do that. But I can tell you that prominent economists say the bill spends too LITTLE. I'm also not defending the Dems. But I sure as hell am not supporting the cowards in the GOP who got their bleeping tax cuts included and still didn't vote for the bill. Obstructionists, pure and simple. And it would appear Pelosi managed to lead the ants to the picnic. You owe her an apology.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 18, 2009 17:34:45 GMT -5
hhhhay R.. Who gets the bank bailouts? Successful small banks or large ones who are failing. Both. All they need to do is apply for them. It's my understanding Ford is passing on the money for now. Correct? Not sure what that proves. You are such a joke. Do you honestly think this was the problem? What about all the bigshots who were mortgaging and remortgaging properties as they flipped them? What about the clowns who created and traded the financial "assets" they didn't even understand? Typical rightwing BS. Blame it on the poor. That's fine, unless you weren't gambling at all but lost all your money because some other putz was. Not true. But if you want to give tax relief to the rich you need to hop in your time machine. W's waiting for you. Those policies sure worked, didn't they? Bottom feeders? You mean, like me? Someone who was laid off after 28 years at a company? This is your problem: you equate wealth with success. This has always been your problem. Guess what? You can work your ass off and still get laid off. You always debate at that level. That's a fact how? Because you say so? You never present facts. Ever. I assume, if this is even true, you blame Obama and the Dems for this? And this is something you've concluded on the day after the stim bill was signed? Beck?? You mean the guy who was such a JOKE he had to leave CNN for FOX?? Right. I'll watch Beck. Here's a suggestion: Watch the NEWS!! Better yet, READ. Don't just accept everything some rightwing pundit/entertainer says as gospel. Open your mind and see what flies in. You might be surprised.
|
|