Home Non Cigar Related

So, how many.....

jlmartajlmarta 50 miles from ParadisePosts: 7,651 ✭✭✭✭✭
How many of you actually watched O'Bummer give his speech tonite? I did - at least until the batteries in my B.S. detector died! It was actually an amazing performance. Usually, when any other president gives his speech, people in the audience do their required standing ovation at the appropriate times, for at least 30 seconds or so. Did you notice that, tonight, it was like, maybe, 10 seconds? Even his own people seemed like they were in a hurry to sit down.

Another thing I noticed was that in the past, while a standing ovation was going on, the president stopped talking because he couldn't be heard over the crowd noise. Tonight, the head yo-yo in charge kept right on talking because you could still hear him over the crowd.

I finally had to call it quits after almost 50 minutes of his boolshit . I mean, a guy can stand only so much, right? Maybe I should just quit pussyfooting around and say what I really think, ya s'pose?
«1

Comments

  • scarlinscarlin Posts: 1,592
    Hockey>Extended campaign speech.
  • jlmartajlmarta 50 miles from ParadisePosts: 7,651 ✭✭✭✭✭
    You got that right, my man.
  • blurrblurr Posts: 962 ✭✭
    Sure elaborate. I am a younger, college educated upper middle class caucasian, voted for Obama and likely will again so I am always interested in why so many older caucasians criticize and just hate Obama.
  • jlmartajlmarta 50 miles from ParadisePosts: 7,651 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Maybe you should look into who actually owns him and what his hidden agendas are. If he gets another term, it could be the end of this country as we know it.
  • oldsoulrevivaloldsoulrevival Posts: 631 ✭✭
    blurr:
    Sure elaborate. I am a younger, college educated upper middle class caucasian, voted for Obama and likely will again so I am always interested in why so many older caucasians criticize and just hate Obama.
    I am a younger (23) middle class caucasian who hates his policies. Age has nothing to do with it. However, I am not one of those people who think he is the worst of all time. He sucks, but that's just because he is the same ***, different ***.

    The fact is, he and Mitt Romney both have the same financial supporters behind their campaign. And if you are the kind of logical person who thinks that one of the biggest problems with this country is the fact that private interest groups are basically running the show via campaign contributions and lobbying efforts, then you can imagine why people are so pissed off when they see that our current financial *** hole was created by the same people giving said contributions.

    Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, JP Morgan Chase and Co, UBS AB, Citigroup, etc. ALL gave HUGE contributions to Romney and Obama. So, my reason for hating Obama is that he comes of with huge messages about "hope and change" (Whatever the f*** that means), and is actually the exact same thing. Sure, he stirs up the media frenzy with things like health care, or the stimulus package, but at the end of the day, He, along with the rest of the democrats and republicans are all doing the same thing, and are all on the same team.

    /rant
  • scarlinscarlin Posts: 1,592
    He claims that he got the manufacturers and big firms hiring again, but it is not due to any of his policies. Rather it is the normal business cycle of large companies. He hasn't done much to "fix" the economy that hasn't already fixed itself. The economy always fixes itself if untouched it is the gov who seeds up or slows down the process. Economics 101 :P
  • oldsoulrevivaloldsoulrevival Posts: 631 ✭✭
    scarlin:
    He claims that he got the manufacturers and big firms hiring again, but it is not due to any of his policies. Rather it is the normal business cycle of large companies. He hasn't done much to "fix" the economy that hasn't already fixed itself. The economy always fixes itself if untouched it is the gov who seeds up or slows down the process. Economics 101 :P
    Gotta be careful about how you word that. The economy doesn't "fix" itself, per se. Economies are about winning and losing, and when left to their own, the losing happens quickly and the economy moves forward. When the government gets involved it turns what could be a 2 or 3 year depression into a 10 or 15 year recession with side effects like inflated currency, expanded government control, and a whole generation raised during economic struggle.
  • deejmemixxdeejmemixx Posts: 3,084 ✭✭
    the only hope and change created was dependence on govt
  • scarlinscarlin Posts: 1,592
    oldsoulrevival:
    scarlin:
    He claims that he got the manufacturers and big firms hiring again, but it is not due to any of his policies. Rather it is the normal business cycle of large companies. He hasn't done much to "fix" the economy that hasn't already fixed itself. The economy always fixes itself if untouched it is the gov who seeds up or slows down the process. Economics 101 :P
    Gotta be careful about how you word that. The economy doesn't "fix" itself, per se. Economies are about winning and losing, and when left to their own, the losing happens quickly and the economy moves forward. When the government gets involved it turns what could be a 2 or 3 year depression into a 10 or 15 year recession with side effects like inflated currency, expanded government control, and a whole generation raised during economic struggle.
    I was referring to the "invisible hand" where minimal govt. interaction is the best. Bailouts and such aren't exactly good for the economy, but it was minute enough to help avoid a total meltdown. Now if we need another bailout soon..Someone isn't doing something right somewhere.
  • JSaintJSaint Orfordville, WIPosts: 1,879 ✭✭✭
    Im glad I didnt have to watch it. I saw it on tv at work and just walked away. Kind of sad when people are only elected to office because of popularity. I have yet to vote in any campaign and Im 26 going on 27. I may vote this year. And the big word is MAY.
    "Beauty is in the eye when you hold her." -Ricky
  • Amos_UmwhatAmos_Umwhat West TNPosts: 5,678 ✭✭✭✭✭
    oldsoulrevival:
    The fact is, he and Mitt Romney both have the same financial supporters behind their campaign. And if you are the kind of logical person who thinks that one of the biggest problems with this country is the fact that private interest groups are basically running the show via campaign contributions and lobbying efforts, than you can imagine why people are so pissed off when they see that our current financial *** hole was created by the same people giving said contributions.

    Ahh, someone gets it!

    .
    WARNING:  The above post may contain thoughts or ideas known to the State of Caliphornia to cause seething rage, confusion, distemper, nausea, perspiration, sphincter release, or cranial implosion to persons who implicitly trust only one news source, or find themselves at either the left or right political extreme.  Proceed at your own risk.  

    "There is nothing so in need of reforming as another person's bad habits."   Mark Twain
  • y2pascoey2pascoe Posts: 1,727 ✭✭
    jlmarta:
    Maybe you should look into who actually owns him and what his hidden agendas are. If he gets another term, it could be the end of this country as we know it.
    And the conservative right NEVER carry any hidden agendas...
  • JDHJDH Posts: 2,107
    I watched it. I enjoyed it.

    I don't know who "Obummer is, but I do know that we have a President of the United States whose last name is Obama. In the military, it is understood that you may not like or even respect your superior officer, but you will damn sure respect the rank. Unfortunately, too many people no longer recognize that regarding our elected "representatives".

    You are entitled to hate anyone you like and to voice that hatred as much as you like, but it is my opinion that the uncivil nature of our political differences has as much to do with the gridlock and ineffectiveness in Congress as anything else. When our political discourse becomes so visceral and shrill that it is impossible for our elected "representatives" to compromise in order to find practical solutions to the very real problems we are facing, then that discourse becomes a very real danger to the well being of our Republic.

    The "liberal" / "conservative" argument is destroying the mechanisms of compromise that are necessary for our deliberative bodies to function, and may well result in the destruction of the Republic itself. Partisian ideology must not take prescedence over the needs of the country, but that's the way things are now. "Conservatives" must quit viewing "liberals" as their enemies (and vice versa). We are not at war withone another, but if things continue on the way they are going, we may well be, because we have not been this badly divided since the 1850's, and we all know how that one worked out.
  • deejmemixxdeejmemixx Posts: 3,084 ✭✭
    well unforgivably, our "Commander and Chief" creates class war fair, and pots the two sides against each other as much as anyone. If he had a backbone he could stop all the bickering and [email protected]#$@# that is going on right now.
  • oldsoulrevivaloldsoulrevival Posts: 631 ✭✭
    JDH:
    I watched it. I enjoyed it.

    I don't know who "Obummer is, but I do know that we have a President of the United States whose last name is Obama. In the military, it is understood that you may not like or even respect your superior officer, but you will damn sure respect the rank. Unfortunately, too many people no longer recognize that regarding our elected "representatives".

    You are entitled to hate anyone you like and to voice that hatred as much as you like, but it is my opinion that the uncivil nature of our political differences has as much to do with the gridlock and ineffectiveness in Congress as anything else. When our political discourse becomes so visceral and shrill that it is impossible for our elected "representatives" to compromise in order to find practical solutions to the very real problems we are facing, then that discourse becomes a very real danger to the well being of our Republic.

    The "liberal" / "conservative" argument is destroying the mechanisms of compromise that are necessary for our deliberative bodies to function, and may well result in the destruction of the Republic itself. Partisian ideology must not take prescedence over the needs of the country, but that's the way things are now. "Conservatives" must quit viewing "liberals" as their enemies (and vice versa). We are not at war withone another, but if things continue on the way they are going, we may well be, because we have not been this badly divided since the 1850's, and we all know how that one worked out.
    I partially agree.

    Frankly, I think the only people making those arguments and being serious about them are the voters. I really cannot believe that 99% of politicians care at all about fixing issues. They are all caught up in making millions of dollars from private interest groups, and they know that so long as they keep bickering over stupid stuff time and time again, then things won't change too quickly, and they can all continue making that money. Both parties expand government, both increase spending, both increase our militarism, both suck up to corporate lobbyists, both take away our liberties, etc. etc. etc. There really isn't a "right" or "left" anymore, when it comes to the politicians. We've got a one party system.

    Fox and CNN bicker over the "right vs left" nonsense, while the politicians get away with murder.

  • clearlysuspectclearlysuspect Jacksonville, FloridaPosts: 2,124 ✭✭✭✭
    I didn't watch it. I'm not interested in anything any of them have to say anymore! All any politician speaks of any more is smoke and mirror minor issues that keep us all arguing amongst ourselves while the biggest crime in the history of the world unfolds right in front of us: the theft of american wealth! Until someone actually starts talking about the currupt centralized bank this country has, and someone earlier did come close to speaking of it, then I could really give a **** less what any of their "stances, ideologies, convictions, and opinions" are!

    If their not vowing to undo the absolute corruption there, they are of absolutely no use to me or the greater good of this country! If you look back through history you'll find that this same strain of bankers and financiers financed both sides of the wars between England and France, both sides of the Revolutionary War, both sides of the Civil War, and continue to finance both sides of political opinion today which may very well end in CWII someday as JDH so adequately stated.

    The Fed is not our friend! Our founders knew this and so did the citizens of this country who were still alive who knew who these people were and what they did to England, what they're still doing to England! They finally slithered their way into power in 1913 and thus began the end. We never stood a chance and we never will until we rid ourselves of them.
  • JDHJDH Posts: 2,107
    clearlysuspect:
    I didn't watch it. I'm not interested in anything any of them have to say anymore! All any politician speaks of any more is smoke and mirror minor issues that keep us all arguing amongst ourselves while the biggest crime in the history of the world unfolds right in front of us: the theft of american wealth! Until someone actually starts talking about the currupt centralized bank this country has, and someone earlier did come close to speaking of it, then I could really give a **** less what any of their "stances, ideologies, convictions, and opinions" are!

    If their not vowing to undo the absolute corruption there, they are of absolutely no use to me or the greater good of this country! If you look back through history you'll find that this same strain of bankers and financiers financed both sides of the wars between England and France, both sides of the Revolutionary War, both sides of the Civil War, and continue to finance both sides of political opinion today which may very well end in CWII someday as JDH so adequately stated.

    The Fed is not our friend! Our founders knew this and so did the citizens of this country who were still alive who knew who these people were and what they did to England, what they're still doing to England! They finally slithered their way into power in 1913 and thus began the end. We never stood a chance and we never will until we rid ourselves of them.
    Alexander Hamilton was a Founder, and he would not agree with you on this issue, as his writings and actions clearly indicate.
  • Amos_UmwhatAmos_Umwhat West TNPosts: 5,678 ✭✭✭✭✭
    deejmemixx:
    well unforgivably, our "Commander and Chief" creates class war fair, and pots the two sides against each other as much as anyone. If he had a backbone he could stop all the bickering and [email protected]#$@# that is going on right now.
    So when under President Bush taxes were raised on 95% of Americans, lowered taxes on 1 or 2 % at the very top, and took the tax money most of us hoped would be spent on infrastructre and used it on nation-building overseas, this wasn't class warfare? But when, under President Obama the situation is reversed, that is class warfare? I guess I'll never understand conservative "logic".
    WARNING:  The above post may contain thoughts or ideas known to the State of Caliphornia to cause seething rage, confusion, distemper, nausea, perspiration, sphincter release, or cranial implosion to persons who implicitly trust only one news source, or find themselves at either the left or right political extreme.  Proceed at your own risk.  

    "There is nothing so in need of reforming as another person's bad habits."   Mark Twain
  • stephen_hannibalstephen_hannibal Posts: 4,317
    JDH:
    I watched it. I enjoyed it.

    I don't know who "Obummer is, but I do know that we have a President of the United States whose last name is Obama. In the military, it is understood that you may not like or even respect your superior officer, but you will damn sure respect the rank. Unfortunately, too many people no longer recognize that regarding our elected "representatives".

    You are entitled to hate anyone you like and to voice that hatred as much as you like, but it is my opinion that the uncivil nature of our political differences has as much to do with the gridlock and ineffectiveness in Congress as anything else. When our political discourse becomes so visceral and shrill that it is impossible for our elected "representatives" to compromise in order to find practical solutions to the very real problems we are facing, then that discourse becomes a very real danger to the well being of our Republic.

    The "liberal" / "conservative" argument is destroying the mechanisms of compromise that are necessary for our deliberative bodies to function, and may well result in the destruction of the Republic itself. Partisian ideology must not take prescedence over the needs of the country, but that's the way things are now. "Conservatives" must quit viewing "liberals" as their enemies (and vice versa). We are not at war withone another, but if things continue on the way they are going, we may well be, because we have not been this badly divided since the 1850's, and we all know how that one worked out.

    While I respect the meaning of your message it is also important to note that elected "representatives" are here to serve the needs of the people.
    We do not live in a top down despotism where the rank encourages a certain approbation.

    It is only natural for people to voice discontent at feelings of betrayal.
    And in doing so attach names and comparisons that are fitting.

    To other ends I think we need find ways to encourage personal freedoms as to let people live their liberal or conservative lives without feeling that one is detracting from the other.

  • Amos_UmwhatAmos_Umwhat West TNPosts: 5,678 ✭✭✭✭✭
    stephen_hannibal:
    I think we need find ways to encourage personal freedoms as to let people live their liberal or conservative lives without feeling that one is detracting from the other.


    God bless you, Stephen. I think the only way for this to happen is to focus on ourselves, our problems here at home, and how we can work together for the betterment of all, which means not following the distractions that both sides keep throwing up to keep US, the people, at odds with one another.

    The things I say must seem a little crazy (OK, maybe a lot) sometimes, in that I support Ron Paul, but defend President Obama. My thing is that both these men, though seemingly at opposite ends of the political spectrum, seem to be interested in the good of the American People, as a whole, and not just in line with whoever has the most $, or other leverage.

    What bothers me most about the Status Quo as it's stood for a long time now can be paralled to the Romans; The Romans rose, and during the rise the State spent time, energy and money on things like clean water for everyone, rule of law, transportation of goods and services under safe conditions, and works of art and social structure. As Rome expanded, however, the focus became increasingly on the political goings on and nation building efforts in distant lands, while the center was left to crumble. Also, Romans learned that they could vote for someone else to do the work, and for that work to support the voters.
    So, two problems we need to avoid, and Liberals see one, the Conservatives see the other, and we need for everyone to see both, and put a stop to it. If we continue to focus all our money and resources on things happening on the other side of the planet, we cannot help but crumble. It seemed to me that the main point of President Obama's speech was to focus on our problems here, and that sounds right to me. If plan A doesn't work, let's try plan B, but let's keep the focus here, we need it.
    WARNING:  The above post may contain thoughts or ideas known to the State of Caliphornia to cause seething rage, confusion, distemper, nausea, perspiration, sphincter release, or cranial implosion to persons who implicitly trust only one news source, or find themselves at either the left or right political extreme.  Proceed at your own risk.  

    "There is nothing so in need of reforming as another person's bad habits."   Mark Twain
  • jj20030jj20030 galveston islandPosts: 5,779 ✭✭✭✭✭
    the highlight of his job's growth part of the speech was how masterlocks manufacturing is booming, that should tell you all you need to know how things are in this country,lol
  • DirewolfDirewolf Posts: 3,493
    The recycling industry is booming.. all the copper thefts in homes, the bronze thefts in graveyards. stautes being stolen.. and all this scrap is being exported.
  • phobicsquirrelphobicsquirrel Posts: 7,349
    I don't know why these threads are even started any more. Always leads to an attack on others. It's always the same crap. If you hated the SOTU last night then I really feel sorry for you. The whole thing was about putting Americans in charge of their own future. Not overseas.

    BTW Obama should get a lot of credit for bringing back a lot of manufacturing, especially the Auto industry which he fought to keep. Giving them a loan to restructure and now it has paid off hugely. Now on the other hand, the GOP pushed for a 800B, bailout to the financial institutions which didn't do anything but keep things as usual. Sure the Dems should have fought it but they didn't as usual. I find it really odd that some of the same people here defend anything that is anti-obama. The new GOP has nothing to offer. Sure Obama and even the dems don't have all the answers but at least they are trying to get things set straight.
  • phobicsquirrelphobicsquirrel Posts: 7,349
    Amos Umwhat:
    stephen_hannibal:
    I think we need find ways to encourage personal freedoms as to let people live their liberal or conservative lives without feeling that one is detracting from the other.


    God bless you, Stephen. I think the only way for this to happen is to focus on ourselves, our problems here at home, and how we can work together for the betterment of all, which means not following the distractions that both sides keep throwing up to keep US, the people, at odds with one another.

    The things I say must seem a little crazy (OK, maybe a lot) sometimes, in that I support Ron Paul, but defend President Obama. My thing is that both these men, though seemingly at opposite ends of the political spectrum, seem to be interested in the good of the American People, as a whole, and not just in line with whoever has the most $, or other leverage.

    What bothers me most about the Status Quo as it's stood for a long time now can be paralled to the Romans; The Romans rose, and during the rise the State spent time, energy and money on things like clean water for everyone, rule of law, transportation of goods and services under safe conditions, and works of art and social structure. As Rome expanded, however, the focus became increasingly on the political goings on and nation building efforts in distant lands, while the center was left to crumble. Also, Romans learned that they could vote for someone else to do the work, and for that work to support the voters.
    So, two problems we need to avoid, and Liberals see one, the Conservatives see the other, and we need for everyone to see both, and put a stop to it. If we continue to focus all our money and resources on things happening on the other side of the planet, we cannot help but crumble. It seemed to me that the main point of President Obama's speech was to focus on our problems here, and that sounds right to me. If plan A doesn't work, let's try plan B, but let's keep the focus here, we need it.
    That's why I think we need a new concept, parties! Have many parties run, and the percentage of votes is what percentage the party gets.
  • phobicsquirrelphobicsquirrel Posts: 7,349
    clearlysuspect:
    I didn't watch it. I'm not interested in anything any of them have to say anymore! All any politician speaks of any more is smoke and mirror minor issues that keep us all arguing amongst ourselves while the biggest crime in the history of the world unfolds right in front of us: the theft of american wealth! Until someone actually starts talking about the currupt centralized bank this country has, and someone earlier did come close to speaking of it, then I could really give a **** less what any of their "stances, ideologies, convictions, and opinions" are!

    If their not vowing to undo the absolute corruption there, they are of absolutely no use to me or the greater good of this country! If you look back through history you'll find that this same strain of bankers and financiers financed both sides of the wars between England and France, both sides of the Revolutionary War, both sides of the Civil War, and continue to finance both sides of political opinion today which may very well end in CWII someday as JDH so adequately stated.

    The Fed is not our friend! Our founders knew this and so did the citizens of this country who were still alive who knew who these people were and what they did to England, what they're still doing to England! They finally slithered their way into power in 1913 and thus began the end. We never stood a chance and we never will until we rid ourselves of them.
    Yes I do agree with you on the FED. They need to go. Absolutely. Bernie sanders couldn't even get a full audit of them. I mean WTF!
  • clearlysuspectclearlysuspect Jacksonville, FloridaPosts: 2,124 ✭✭✭✭
    JDH:
    clearlysuspect:
    I didn't watch it. I'm not interested in anything any of them have to say anymore! All any politician speaks of any more is smoke and mirror minor issues that keep us all arguing amongst ourselves while the biggest crime in the history of the world unfolds right in front of us: the theft of american wealth! Until someone actually starts talking about the currupt centralized bank this country has, and someone earlier did come close to speaking of it, then I could really give a **** less what any of their "stances, ideologies, convictions, and opinions" are!

    If their not vowing to undo the absolute corruption there, they are of absolutely no use to me or the greater good of this country! If you look back through history you'll find that this same strain of bankers and financiers financed both sides of the wars between England and France, both sides of the Revolutionary War, both sides of the Civil War, and continue to finance both sides of political opinion today which may very well end in CWII someday as JDH so adequately stated.

    The Fed is not our friend! Our founders knew this and so did the citizens of this country who were still alive who knew who these people were and what they did to England, what they're still doing to England! They finally slithered their way into power in 1913 and thus began the end. We never stood a chance and we never will until we rid ourselves of them.
    Alexander Hamilton was a Founder, and he would not agree with you on this issue, as his writings and actions clearly indicate.
    Fvck Alexander Hamilton! Just because one of the founders didn't agree doesn't make the above statement false! There were plenty of founders that didn't want to rebel against England either, but in the end they supported it. But there were certainly enough people alive to remember what the Bank of England did and rejected any notion of a centralized bank in the USA.
  • JDHJDH Posts: 2,107
    clearlysuspect:
    JDH:
    clearlysuspect:
    I didn't watch it. I'm not interested in anything any of them have to say anymore! All any politician speaks of any more is smoke and mirror minor issues that keep us all arguing amongst ourselves while the biggest crime in the history of the world unfolds right in front of us: the theft of american wealth! Until someone actually starts talking about the currupt centralized bank this country has, and someone earlier did come close to speaking of it, then I could really give a **** less what any of their "stances, ideologies, convictions, and opinions" are!

    If their not vowing to undo the absolute corruption there, they are of absolutely no use to me or the greater good of this country! If you look back through history you'll find that this same strain of bankers and financiers financed both sides of the wars between England and France, both sides of the Revolutionary War, both sides of the Civil War, and continue to finance both sides of political opinion today which may very well end in CWII someday as JDH so adequately stated.

    The Fed is not our friend! Our founders knew this and so did the citizens of this country who were still alive who knew who these people were and what they did to England, what they're still doing to England! They finally slithered their way into power in 1913 and thus began the end. We never stood a chance and we never will until we rid ourselves of them.
    Alexander Hamilton was a Founder, and he would not agree with you on this issue, as his writings and actions clearly indicate.
    Fvck Alexander Hamilton! Just because one of the founders didn't agree doesn't make the above statement false! There were plenty of founders that didn't want to rebel against England either, but in the end they supported it. But there were certainly enough people alive to remember what the Bank of England did and rejected any notion of a centralized bank in the USA.
    Just as the Articles of Confederation were rejected because the Founders realized and understood that no confederation in the history of human government has ever been sucessful (and that is still true today), so did they finally come to understand that in order for capital markets to be sustainable and sucessful, there must be a central banking authority, especially in a Nation with seperate United States with a common currency. The two conclusions are linked, and they were both correct.

    The EU is coming to the same unavoidable conclusion; you cannot have a common currency among "United States" without common laws, a central governing authority, a central banking authority, and regulations governing the currency as well as the inter-state commerce, all of which are equally applicable to all member states.
  • stephen_hannibalstephen_hannibal Posts: 4,317
    JDH:
    clearlysuspect:
    JDH:
    clearlysuspect:
    I didn't watch it. I'm not interested in anything any of them have to say anymore! All any politician speaks of any more is smoke and mirror minor issues that keep us all arguing amongst ourselves while the biggest crime in the history of the world unfolds right in front of us: the theft of american wealth! Until someone actually starts talking about the currupt centralized bank this country has, and someone earlier did come close to speaking of it, then I could really give a **** less what any of their "stances, ideologies, convictions, and opinions" are!

    If their not vowing to undo the absolute corruption there, they are of absolutely no use to me or the greater good of this country! If you look back through history you'll find that this same strain of bankers and financiers financed both sides of the wars between England and France, both sides of the Revolutionary War, both sides of the Civil War, and continue to finance both sides of political opinion today which may very well end in CWII someday as JDH so adequately stated.

    The Fed is not our friend! Our founders knew this and so did the citizens of this country who were still alive who knew who these people were and what they did to England, what they're still doing to England! They finally slithered their way into power in 1913 and thus began the end. We never stood a chance and we never will until we rid ourselves of them.
    Alexander Hamilton was a Founder, and he would not agree with you on this issue, as his writings and actions clearly indicate.
    Fvck Alexander Hamilton! Just because one of the founders didn't agree doesn't make the above statement false! There were plenty of founders that didn't want to rebel against England either, but in the end they supported it. But there were certainly enough people alive to remember what the Bank of England did and rejected any notion of a centralized bank in the USA.
    Just as the Articles of Confederation were rejected because the Founders realized and understood that no confederation in the history of human government has ever been sucessful (and that is still true today), so did they finally come to understand that in order for capital markets to be sustainable and sucessful, there must be a central banking authority, especially in a Nation with seperate United States with a common currency. The two conclusions are linked, and they were both correct.

    The EU is coming to the same unavoidable conclusion; you cannot have a common currency among "United States" without common laws, a central governing authority, a central banking authority, and regulations governing the currency as well as the inter-state commerce, all of which are equally applicable to all member states.
    I'm not sure I understand the correlation between the two pieces of your argument, and before I jump to conclusions, would you please break it down?

  • JDHJDH Posts: 2,107
    stephen_hannibal:
    JDH:
    clearlysuspect:
    JDH:
    clearlysuspect:
    I didn't watch it. I'm not interested in anything any of them have to say anymore! All any politician speaks of any more is smoke and mirror minor issues that keep us all arguing amongst ourselves while the biggest crime in the history of the world unfolds right in front of us: the theft of american wealth! Until someone actually starts talking about the currupt centralized bank this country has, and someone earlier did come close to speaking of it, then I could really give a **** less what any of their "stances, ideologies, convictions, and opinions" are!

    If their not vowing to undo the absolute corruption there, they are of absolutely no use to me or the greater good of this country! If you look back through history you'll find that this same strain of bankers and financiers financed both sides of the wars between England and France, both sides of the Revolutionary War, both sides of the Civil War, and continue to finance both sides of political opinion today which may very well end in CWII someday as JDH so adequately stated.

    The Fed is not our friend! Our founders knew this and so did the citizens of this country who were still alive who knew who these people were and what they did to England, what they're still doing to England! They finally slithered their way into power in 1913 and thus began the end. We never stood a chance and we never will until we rid ourselves of them.
    Alexander Hamilton was a Founder, and he would not agree with you on this issue, as his writings and actions clearly indicate.
    Fvck Alexander Hamilton! Just because one of the founders didn't agree doesn't make the above statement false! There were plenty of founders that didn't want to rebel against England either, but in the end they supported it. But there were certainly enough people alive to remember what the Bank of England did and rejected any notion of a centralized bank in the USA.
    Just as the Articles of Confederation were rejected because the Founders realized and understood that no confederation in the history of human government has ever been sucessful (and that is still true today), so did they finally come to understand that in order for capital markets to be sustainable and sucessful, there must be a central banking authority, especially in a Nation with seperate United States with a common currency. The two conclusions are linked, and they were both correct.

    The EU is coming to the same unavoidable conclusion; you cannot have a common currency among "United States" without common laws, a central governing authority, a central banking authority, and regulations governing the currency as well as the inter-state commerce, all of which are equally applicable to all member states.
    I'm not sure I understand the correlation between the two pieces of your argument, and before I jump to conclusions, would you please break it down?

    There are three components in my last statement;

    1) The Articles of Confederation were rejected in favor of a more central government over the States,

    2) The central bank was adopted because the Founders realized that without a centralized banking authority capital markets in the fledgling country would never be strong.

    3) The EU is a contemporary Confederation of independent Nation States, and they are learning that a Confederation with no central government that can provide economic regulatory powers along with a central bank that can influence and regulate monetary policy for all members equally will fail. In short, the EU is at about the same place the US was when the Articles of Confederation were rejected, and our central bank was estblished in conjunction with our central government.
  • clearlysuspectclearlysuspect Jacksonville, FloridaPosts: 2,124 ✭✭✭✭
    Perhaps I was a little unclear JDH. I'm not saying that a centralized bank is a bad idea. I'm saying that the one we currently have is horribly corrupt, too powerful, and needs to be removed and overhauled! I simply cannot believe that the Federal Reserve Bank is the best solution to this issue that we are capable of coming up with. If it was in the best interest of this country and it's people then it wouldn't have been created in absolute secrecy. If it was ever a good thing, it would have been established in broad daylight for everyone to see and praise!
Sign In or Register to comment.