PDS Posted December 14, 2016 Share Posted December 14, 2016 16 hours ago, Jules Troy said: http://fineartamerica.com/featured/the-crow-glaring-jestephotography-ltd.html I just wondering how many naysayers enjoyed their crow dinners after Trump won. ? Mine was excellent, Jules. I had to choke it down with a stern glass of white wine, but hey, that's how these things go. I must say I am finding DT's cabinet choices fascinating. Lotsa Alpha males in that crew. It's a good sign that DT is comfortable being around such folk. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted December 14, 2016 Share Posted December 14, 2016 25 minutes ago, Roger Bissell said: ... the 1 "faithless" Republican elector who already said he will not vote for Trump. Roger, This is from The Gateway Pundit which isn't reliable at times, but still, if you're going to attack someone in public the way Suprun did and act like being the paragon of virtue is your motive, ya's takes what ya' gets. EXPOSED: Faithless Elector Chris Suprun Paid for Ashley Madison While Bankrupt & Married With 3 Kids From the article: Quote Eyebrows were raised and suspicions grew over what Mr. Suprun’s intentions really are after he penned an op-ed in the New York Times over his decision to be a ‘faithless elector’. Shockingly, his Twitter bio directs media inquiries to P.R. firm, Megaphone Strategies. This P.R. firm represents radical left wing organizations like Black Lives Matter and even reps CNN’s ultra left wing radical, Van Jones. . . . Got News’ research has revealed that Chris Suprun filed Bankruptcy and 6 months later joined Ashley Madison, which is a ‘dating site’ for married people looking to have an affair. Mr. Suprun had 3 children under the age of 10 at the time! It is also alleged that he was unemployed during this time while his wife worked full time! Is this the type of person who should be allowed to be an elector? If he can’t even be faithful to his wife and family, how do we expect him to be faithful and uphold his pledge as an elector? A man who is as compromised as Chris Suprun is ripe for blackmail or bribery and must be removed and replaced immediately. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Bissell Posted December 14, 2016 Share Posted December 14, 2016 On 12/13/2016 at 10:50 AM, Backlighting said: Looks like Trump might have 2 fans of AR on his cabinet: "Like Trump’s nominee for labor secretary, fast-food CEO Andy Puzder, Tillerson is reportedly a fan of libertarian writer Ayn Rand. He “once listed his favorite book as Atlas Shrugged,” http://finance.yahoo.com/news/10-things-know-rex-tillerson-224100479.html 1 Oh, yeah - at least two. Here's this morning's Federalist essay from Robert Tracinski: "Inside Donald Trump's Secret Ayn Rand Conspiracy." Don't you just love it? ;-) http://thefederalist.com/2016/12/14/inside-donald-trumps-secret-ayn-rand-conspiracy/?utm_source=The+Federalist+List&utm_campaign=618f8a9b2e-RSS_The_Federalist_Daily_Updates_w_Transom&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_cfcb868ceb-618f8a9b2e-83770993 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Bissell Posted December 14, 2016 Share Posted December 14, 2016 1 hour ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said: Roger, This is from The Gateway Pundit which isn't reliable at times, but still, if you're going to attack someone in public the way Suprun did and act like being the paragon of virtue is your motive, ya's takes what ya' gets. EXPOSED: Faithless Elector Chris Suprun Paid for Ashley Madison While Bankrupt & Married With 3 Kids From the article: Michael Michael, this guy sounds a lot like a radical leftist Democrat, both in his associations and in his lifestyle. ;-) Seriously, how could someone *this* far left-leaning just months ago have qualified as a *Republican* (Trump) elector? I suspect he was, from the very outset, a "plant," as part of a contingency plan to show "bipartisan" Electoral College opposition to Trump, if he won the Electoral Vote in November. Otherwise, it makes no freakin' sense. (Does it? Any other less paranoid explanations for this?) REB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
merjet Posted December 14, 2016 Share Posted December 14, 2016 John Allison was on Trump's short list for Treasury Secretary. Trump picked Steven Mnuchin instead. I believe Allison is still under consideration for another position. I didn't see any recent news about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jules Troy Posted December 14, 2016 Share Posted December 14, 2016 I am enjoying how much the Dem party is falling. I see them falling so far that they never recover. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaalChatzaf Posted December 14, 2016 Share Posted December 14, 2016 1 hour ago, Jules Troy said: I am enjoying how much the Dem party is falling. I see them falling so far that they never recover. I am not so sure that will happen but if it does one of my objectives will have been attained. I voted for Trump, not because I like him, but because his election will derange the current political alignment. If it takes the Democrat party down, all the better. I would dearly like to see the liberal progressive elite taken down several steps. I am hoping the Republicans will learn something constructive from the election of Trump. Perhaps if they (The Republicans) did something to help the much put upon Middle Class the Republicans would be well served. Maybe the next time one of those fancy Wall St. banks collapsed the Republicans could let them die instead of picking the pockets of the Middle Class to bail the bastards out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted December 15, 2016 Share Posted December 15, 2016 5 hours ago, Roger Bissell said: Otherwise, it makes no freakin' sense. (Does it? Any other less paranoid explanations for this?) Roger, It's not a popular thought, but this could be a leftover (and unintended consequence) from Ted Cruz's futzing around with electoral delegates during the primaries. I haven't dug enough to be sure, but this is Texas where he is from. And if so, how was Ted to know the guy was bonkers? But that's part of the risk you get when you chase immoral people to do sneaky shit. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted December 15, 2016 Share Posted December 15, 2016 My respect for Alan Greenspan just cracked wide open. How can a man like him make a mistake this obvious? He says there's no way for growth to solve our debt problems. Good God! What's worse, here is a passage I just transcribed: Quote ... we're also finding that the labor force is running out of extra workers. The unemployment rate is now under five percent. You can't go very much lower, which means that the hundred and fifty to two hundred thousand increase in payrolls a month is not going to continue on because we are running out of people. So if you have a situation where the issue is getting to be an ever tighter labor market, than wages begin to move, and indeed they are already beginning to move. Good double dog God! Greenspan just said the problem with the American economy is that there are too many jobs and too much pay! He's swallowing President Obama's fiddling with the employment numbers whole. Dayaamm! He should get out of his bubble more. People are hurting, not sitting in the lap of luxury. How about this? People stopped looking for work because they can't find any that pays enough to live on. And if wages are increasing, didn't I read that the government mandated a minimum wage increase recently? It was the government, not the job market that did that increase. And the government is not counting people who stopped looking for work. We aren't running out of people who want to work. The actual number of people out of work is increasing and most of them want to work, even if they stopped wasting their time banging on doors in a rigged system. Greenspan is blanking them out. Greenspan used to be Ayn Rand-friendly. Now he is nothing but a Clinton toady. I used to think that the only reason the Clinton economy grew is because Greenspan was the watchdog of the economy back then. There might have been some of that, but there has been another outcome, too. The Clinton moral rot has eaten into Greenspan's soul so much, he sits and tells a bare-faced lie he knows is a lie simply because he doesn't want the Trump economy to work, thus making Obama and the Clintons (and the Bushes for that matter) look bad. (That's the reason I'm putting this in the Trump thread.) Man, is he in for a surprise. Newt Gingrich just mentioned on Hannity tonight that the Wollman Rink project is the model and metaphor of what is going to happen under Trump. The New York City government budgeted $4.7 to $9.1 million (depending on who you read) and two years to renovate it. The government spent $13 million over six years and had nothing but a big unfinished construction yard to show for it. This was an eyesore for Trump's office view, so he and Mayor Ed Koch started taunting each other in public. Koch gave him the project with a budget of $2.5 million and four months to get it done. Trump brought it in for $2.25 million and one month ahead of schedule. Newt said there is no way the Congressional Budget Office can estimate something like that. He laughed as he considered the possibility. There is no way for Greenspan to calculate it either. He no longer knows the value of a dollar. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted December 15, 2016 Share Posted December 15, 2016 On 12/13/2016 at 6:17 PM, Jules Troy said: I just wondering how many naysayers enjoyed their crow dinners after Trump won. ? Jules, Let's not forget what we went through regarding the polls. It's easy to forget until you see it again. Here are some notoriously left-wing Bernie supporters a few days ago having great fun about sanctimonious polling (which I affectionately call crow-bait ). They're lefties, but they're entertaining. There's even some raunch at the beginning. That lady in particular should have her mouth stuffed full of crow feathers. She needs to eat it raw, not cooked. (Man, that sounds awful.) Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
merjet Posted December 15, 2016 Share Posted December 15, 2016 9 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said: My respect for Alan Greenspan just cracked wide open. How can a man like him make a mistake this obvious? ............. Greenspan just said the problem with the American economy is that there are too many jobs and too much pay! You don't listen very well. His answer was based on worker output per hour growth being 0.5% (and real GDP growth 2%, I believe) and the federal government continuing to run deficits -- mainly due to entitlements -- that eat domestic savings. He didn't say $500 billion per year, but that's the amount recent deficits have been. It's common sense that continuing to run deficits isn't going to "solve our debt problems". He didn't say why "we are running out of people". But I will be charitable and assume he meant something like running out of people that have the job skills sought by employers looking for workers. I'm getting the picture. If somebody doesn't see things the way you do, he/she must be an idiot. I hope you will be as sharp as he is when 90.5 years old. Edit: In 2015 federal government revenue was $3.25 trillion. Do some simple math. Assume GDP and federal government revenue are both 4% higher. 0.04 x $3.25 trillion = $130 billion. Recent deficits have been about $500 billion. So $130 billion more revenue cuts the deficit 26%. There is still a deficit, which increases the national debt. (GDP and revenue would need to be about 15% higher to erase the deficit.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted December 15, 2016 Share Posted December 15, 2016 3 hours ago, merjet said: You don't listen very well. Merlin, Is this the Mr. Snarky you talk about showing up? I listened and understood just fine. 3 hours ago, merjet said: His answer was based on worker output per hour growth being 0.5% (and real GDP growth 2%, I believe) and the federal government continuing to run deficits -- mainly due to entitlements -- that eat domestic savings. He didn't say $500 billion per year, but that's the amount recent deficits have been. It's common sense that continuing to run deficits isn't going to "solve our debt problems". He didn't say why "we are running out of people". But I will be charitable and assume he meant something like running out of people that have the job skills sought by employers looking for workers. Blah blah blah. People are out of work except economists and math folks, and they don't give a crap about the people out of work. They do give a crap about their own sinecures... 3 hours ago, merjet said: I'm getting the picture. If somebody doesn't see things the way you do, he/she must be an idiot. You don't read very well. This isn't accurate. In Greenspan's case, I don't think he's an idiot. I think he's a sellout (infected by Clinton moral rot) and a Clinton toady. I thought I said that. Hmmm... Let me look... I did, I did, I did say that! Maybe you need a refresher course in plain English? Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted December 15, 2016 Share Posted December 15, 2016 4 hours ago, merjet said: I hope you will be as sharp as he is when 90.5 years old. I hope so, too. And I hope I have not become a sellout like Robert Stadler or Alan Greenspan... (I've been denying Greenspan's corrupt Clinton-serving nature for years despite growing misgivings. Jeez, look who he's been closest to all his life professionally... look who he's married to... It's been all there all along, I just haven't allowed myself to see it...) Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
merjet Posted December 15, 2016 Share Posted December 15, 2016 18 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said: My respect for Alan Greenspan just cracked wide open. How can a man like him make a mistake this obvious? He says there's no way for growth to solve our debt problems. ......... He should get out of his bubble more. People are hurting, not sitting in the lap of luxury. How about this? People stopped looking for work because they can't find any that pays enough to live on. Please tell us how and to what extent you believe reducing unemployment, plus whatever else, are going to create all the growth and "solve our debt problems." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
merjet Posted December 15, 2016 Share Posted December 15, 2016 On 12/12/2016 at 6:18 AM, merjet said: This link shows the companies with a lot of that money overseas that might be repatriated. It's pretty obvious that Apple, Google, Microsoft, Pfizer, Merck, and Abbott Labs aren't in the business of doing things like repair roads and bridges, or upgrade water/sewer systems. Allowing said companies to repatriate money and have it taxed at only, say, 10% would obviously add to federal government revenue, up to maybe $250 billion. I've heard on a couple of business shows that any repatriated money is more likely to go toward mergers and acquisitions and stock buybacks, which do not create jobs. On the other hand, Apple might expand its retail stores, which could add jobs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted December 15, 2016 Share Posted December 15, 2016 4 hours ago, merjet said: Please tell us how and to what extent you believe reducing unemployment, plus whatever else, are going create all the growth and "solve our debt problems." Come on, Merlin. Work with me, now. It's not hard. Creating jobs is not a cause. Where have I have said that a job is a primary? In creating wealth, jobs are part of the process. (May I recommend the works of Ayn Rand? ) My beef is when math gets divorced from reality. No economist-like math on earth explains the Wollman Rink affair. But the morality of the businessman does. I've said it before and I'll say it again. Donald Trump is one of the most moral men ever to run for the presidency. I find it psychologically telling how we phrase things differently, anyway. I talk about creating period. You talk about reducing a negative (like unemployment) as a cause for creating. We see the world from vastly different perspectives. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted December 16, 2016 Share Posted December 16, 2016 5 hours ago, merjet said: I've heard on a couple of business shows that any repatriated money is more likely to go toward mergers and acquisitions and stock buybacks, which do not create jobs. There's an old Arabic saying I learned in Brazil. The dogs bark as the caravan passes by. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaalChatzaf Posted December 16, 2016 Share Posted December 16, 2016 1 hour ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said: There's an old Arabic saying I learned in Brazil. The dogs bark as the caravan passes by. Michael Given that, what makes the dog raise a hind leg and pee on a fire hydrant? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Backlighting Posted December 16, 2016 Share Posted December 16, 2016 20 minutes ago, BaalChatzaf said: Given that, what makes the dog raise a hind leg and pee on a fire hydrant? To cover up the scent, with his own, of the previous donor... but what made my dog pee on my brother-in-law's leg? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted December 16, 2016 Share Posted December 16, 2016 6 minutes ago, Backlighting said: To cover up the scent, with his own, of the previous donor... Joe, Ha! That sounds like TV pundits and economists. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaalChatzaf Posted December 16, 2016 Share Posted December 16, 2016 23 minutes ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said: Joe, Ha! That sounds like TV pundits and economists. Michael What a Cynical remark. (PS. Look up the root of Cynic). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brant Gaede Posted December 16, 2016 Share Posted December 16, 2016 The problem with Alan Greenspan is he never had the knowledge and/or the guts to take away the punchbowl. --Brant an economist, no; a politician, yes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaalChatzaf Posted December 16, 2016 Share Posted December 16, 2016 12 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said: I hope so, too. And I hope I have not become a sellout like Robert Stadler or Alan Greenspan... (I've been denying Greenspan's corrupt Clinton-serving nature for years despite growing misgivings. Jeez, look who he's been closest to all his life professionally... look who he's married to... It's been all there all along, I just haven't allowed myself to see it...) Michael He dated Baba Wawa (that is Woo Wawa's dawtah). Married to Andrea Mitchell since 1997. Anything significant about that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Backlighting Posted December 16, 2016 Share Posted December 16, 2016 2 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said: Joe, Ha! That sounds like TV pundits and economists. Michael Sure does Michael. Gotta love it. -J Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted December 16, 2016 Share Posted December 16, 2016 1 hour ago, BaalChatzaf said: Married to Andrea Mitchell since 1997. Anything significant about that? Yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now