Cal Club Autocross Forums

TEULIE for PRESIDENT!!

Steve Ekstrand wrote:I find your truth even more disturbing...

haha........Lord Ekstrand

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VgGc9kruiLQ

Best letter to the editor ever:

While witnessing, but not participating in, the home real estate frenzy in 2005 and 2006, I kept asking: Who is the idiot buying up all these mortgages issued on inflated home prices to all these people who have neither the capacity nor the intention to repay the loans?

Now I learn it was me.

TED THACKER

Ann Arbor, Mich.

John Coffey wrote:Best letter to the editor ever:

While witnessing, but not participating in, the home real estate frenzy in 2005 and 2006, I kept asking: Who is the idiot buying up all these mortgages issued on inflated home prices to all these people who have neither the capacity nor the intention to repay the loans?

Now I learn it was me.

TED THACKER

Ann Arbor, Mich.

I like how everybody who got a mortgage in 2005 or 2006 is automatically a deadbeat.

Best letter to the editor ever:

While witnessing, but not participating in, the home real estate frenzy in 2005 and 2006, I kept asking: Who is the idiot buying up all these mortgages issued on inflated home prices to all these people who have neither the capacity nor the intention to repay the loans?

Now I learn it was me.

TED THACKER

Ann Arbor, Mich.

Another good find. I thought the same thing as houses sold in my neighborhood. And it looks like Ted's right, I'll be paying their mortgage lenders back for letting these idiots buy over-priced homes they couldn't afford. Priceless.

Reijo Silvennoinen wrote:So, here's a solution a friend of mine "cooked up":


So divide 200 million adults 18+ into $85 billon that equals $425,000.00.

Reijo

hey Reijo, tell your friend that his math is wrong. 85 billion divided by 200 million is only $425 each.

Marshall doesn't know "Internet Math".

admittadly that story is much less interesting if we only get 425 dollars instead of 425,000.

If we fully funded the UN, could they then come in and "fix" our financial system? Would they paint the Citibank umbrella blue?

Be afraid! The UN's coming! Be very afraid.

Aren't you afraid?

Everyone should be so, so very afraid. Because that's the manly thing to be, afraid.

Yeah, that's the ticket.

Sing with me - 'I'm afraid, he's afraid, wouldn't you like to be a-fraid too? '

FYI... our politicians at work. Please note that a Republican in charge would do the exact same thing.

http://volokh.com/archives/archive_2008 ... 1222499614" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Larry Andrews wrote:Be afraid! The UN's coming! Be very afraid.

Aren't you afraid?

Everyone should be so, so very afraid. Because that's the manly thing to be, afraid.

Yeah, that's the ticket.

Sing with me - 'I'm afraid, he's afraid, wouldn't you like to be a-fraid too? '

Isn't that the refrain from a Monty Python skit?

I don't know about being afraid of the UN.

I just don't understand why the United States of America would have anything to do with a corrupt criminal organization that is squarely against our nations interests.

I'd suggest they look to Voldemar Putin or Huge-o Chavez for funding and a home.

Steve Ekstrand wrote:I don't know about being afraid of the UN.

I just don't understand why the United States of America would have anything to do with a corrupt criminal organization that is squarely against our nations interests.

I'd suggest they look to Voldemar Putin or Huge-o Chavez for funding and a home.

We are founding members. Must be Wilson's fault for coming up with the League of Nations.

Mike Simanyi wrote:

Larry Andrews wrote:Be afraid! The UN's coming! Be very afraid.

Aren't you afraid?

Everyone should be so, so very afraid. Because that's the manly thing to be, afraid.

Yeah, that's the ticket.

Sing with me - 'I'm afraid, he's afraid, wouldn't you like to be a-fraid too? '

Isn't that the refrain from a Monty Python skit?

dr. pepper jingle.

I don't get liberal thinking.

Its like they assume if you're conservative you have no education, no knowledge of history.

Yeah we're founding members of the UN. Yeah that conservative jackass woodrow do nothing wilson had some grand idea of world government.

So????

The UN is a corrupt criminal organization that I have no desire to fund. Sorry I feel no obligation to continue support because we founded the thing. I'd evict them and turn the UN into a museum to document the crimes and abuses that happen to any organization that deals with hundreds of billions of dollars in handouts without oversight or accountability.

Hmm. I'm trying to remember who it was that brought the UN into this discussion.

Riiiiiggghhhttttt. I'm going to need that stapler.

Steve Ekstrand wrote:I don't get liberal thinking.

Its like they assume if you're conservative you have no education, no knowledge of history.

I assumed nothing of the kind. I do find that many conservatives have a fondness of ignoring history, regardless of whether they know any of it or not.

Merely pointing out that we were not dragged at gunpoint into the UN.

Speaking confusing logic, if W's role in this economy is to be downplayed because of the generality that the president doesn't have that much direct influence, then why is Carter's role in a poor economy he inherited from his two predecessors a relevant argument. During Carter's tenure, job growth was triple that of Ford. In fact, no president has matched it since, not even Reagan or Clinton. The two Bushes show the worst numbers in the past 30 years.

Luck of the draw? Genius? Ineptitude? No relation at all becaue the Fed sets monetary policy?

The two Bushes show the worst numbers in the past 30 years.

Putting dad and son in the same boat is a serious slap in the face to HW. I actually liked him a lot...if nothing else, he did Iraq the right way.

Kurt Rahn wrote:

The two Bushes show the worst numbers in the past 30 years.

Putting dad and son in the same boat is a serious slap in the face to HW. I actually liked him a lot...if nothing else, he did Iraq the right way.

I'll grant that HW smartly put the right war plan in place. But employment growth numbers weren't so hot.

Now, I raise those not with the idea that any given four- or eight-year period's employment growth is some sort of vacuum. In fact, quite the reverse to point out that claiming one president fills your pockets while another doesn't isn't that relevant an argument. Interestingly, there is a claim that under the GOP, going back I don't know how far, that government never got smaller, it got bigger. I'm convinced that governmental growth is only controllable to a certain extent given unexpected events, ie, terror attacks, wars, natural disasters and financial market pot boilers. And that was some of what happened in a little more than 30 years, starting just before the 20th century. We've had all of those in only 8 years of this century.

Bob Beamesderfer wrote: Interestingly, there is a claim that under the GOP, going back I don't know how far, that government never got smaller, it got bigger.

Bacevich does a pretty good job of explaining the growth of government over the last thirty or so years, IMO.

Raw size of gov't is a pretty meaningless statistic. You want to look at gov't spending as a percentage of GDP. But you can't look at that in a vacuum as strong economic growth or lack there of obviously can dwarf trends in gov't spending. And you targets change given the growth of the economy if you have any respect for Mr. Keynes which you should regardless of how Birchy you are or aren't. Conservatives who immediately attack Keynes are idiots. The target of the attack should be the idiot socialist Harvard professors. Keynes had it right. It was the Keynesians who screwed it up.

Steve Ekstrand wrote:Raw size of gov't is a pretty meaningless statistic. You want to look at gov't spending as a percentage of GDP. But you can't look at that in a vacuum as strong economic growth or lack there of obviously can dwarf trends in gov't spending. And you targets change given the growth of the economy if you have any respect for Mr. Keynes which you should regardless of how Birchy you are or aren't. Conservatives who immediately attack Keynes are idiots. The target of the attack should be the idiot socialist Harvard professors. Keynes had it right. It was the Keynesians who screwed it up.

Meaning, primarily Galbriath.

A Treasury spokeswoman even told Forbes.com that it was essentially picked out of thin air because officials needed “a really large number.”

search on forbes.com didn't show any direct link results, but the same quote seems to be floating around everywhere.

this is definitely reassuring.. :gpower: