POLITICAL THREAD
- Thread starter kybobcat
- Start date
That and he is a conservative christian; that brought him in some votes also
False, your post was misleading pretending that Mitch was the only one receiving then once proven that others were as well you still deflect with "leader". Where were you when Obama gave billions to the Iranians? Biden son received millions, and Hillary's received millions and where did the millions come from for Obama's mansion? Kick back for the billions of dollars given to Iran? Ask plat where his couple of million actually came from and where you can get yours.
After watching the Dems town hall on climate change I'm 100% terrified of Democrats. They're f*cking nuts and if they get control we're all going to take a ride up sh*t creek. It's not about the environment. It never was. It's about the rich taking control of the entire plant and killing the rest of the herd. They no longer care about carbon, fossil fuel pollution, etc. they have surpassed that. They want us all f*cking dead. Their goal is depopulation by any means necessary. F*cking Satanist.
Last edited:
False, he pointed out the hypocrisy from you which was an original point to the post so you are wrong on that point. Plus, you were called out and became butt hurt so you shifted the focus to just Leaders thereby deflecting yourself. Hypocrite much? Yes, yes you do.
Ziiiiiiiiing!!!!!!!!!
At least it wasn’t “derp derp you’re actually the real Bill Cosby” like all the other times. Maybe my post about lefties not being clever hit home.
Wahhhhhh Trump took control and cut my taxes. And appointed moderate justices to the Supreme Court. Wahhhhhhh.
All the hypocrisy aside from practically all of these candidates aside, Castro being pro Fracking up until this presidential run essentially, Mayor Pete racking up more private air miles than Clinton on the Lolita Express, everything Bernie says and so on.
You can find hypocrisy with any politician (of course to different level of extents). Its the amount of control that these politicians are running on, which is truly scary.
They're talking about controlling the amount of kids we can have, what kind of and limits on the amount of food we can eat, what kind of transportation Im allowed to use, my choices in what health coverage I can get, what banks I can choose, what internet I use, how do we drink our drinks and so on.
Honestly progressives, what happened to your independency? Its like you grew up but you still want mommy and daddy to make all your decisions in life, but it would look ridiculous for a 20+ year old getting told how to make every decision in life by the parents, so they're just choosing the government to do it for them instead. Dont you all want to make you're own choices in life? Dont you want to take responsibility for yourselves? If you think eating too much red meat is bad for you, guess what, dont eat too much red meat. You dont need the government to come in and tell you.
I respect classical liberals, I think having a debate on how big of a social net the government should provide can be a healthy debate. I have no respect for progressives who are afraid to make their own decisions therefor want the government to make all their decisions and everyone elses decisions for them. Take some responsibility in your own life and grow some balls. Rant over.
You can find hypocrisy with any politician (of course to different level of extents). Its the amount of control that these politicians are running on, which is truly scary.
They're talking about controlling the amount of kids we can have, what kind of and limits on the amount of food we can eat, what kind of transportation Im allowed to use, my choices in what health coverage I can get, what banks I can choose, what internet I use, how do we drink our drinks and so on.
Honestly progressives, what happened to your independency? Its like you grew up but you still want mommy and daddy to make all your decisions in life, but it would look ridiculous for a 20+ year old getting told how to make every decision in life by the parents, so they're just choosing the government to do it for them instead. Dont you all want to make you're own choices in life? Dont you want to take responsibility for yourselves? If you think eating too much red meat is bad for you, guess what, dont eat too much red meat. You dont need the government to come in and tell you.
I respect classical liberals, I think having a debate on how big of a social net the government should provide can be a healthy debate. I have no respect for progressives who are afraid to make their own decisions therefor want the government to make all their decisions and everyone elses decisions for them. Take some responsibility in your own life and grow some balls. Rant over.
How the hell is this person allowed out of jail? And the other 3 are already out. None of them should ever have seen the light of day again!
https://www.wlky.com/article/master...na-girl-in-1992-released-from-prison/28929012
https://www.wlky.com/article/master...na-girl-in-1992-released-from-prison/28929012
False. You will find that that picture was probably taken last week or so.
Bill do yourself a favor and put Ed on ignore....like I just did. Your day will much happier because of it.
TDS has you by the balls boy.#sharpiegate
Lol if libs claimed the brown suit was Obama's only scandal
Right now ppl like @Platinumdrgn have a hard on over a sharpie
Lolololol
Right now ppl like @Platinumdrgn have a hard on over a sharpie
Lolololol
72% of the world carbon emission comes from electricity and industry. 50% of US carbon emission comes from electricity and industry. If the Dems really only cared about curbing carbon emission, there is an easy solution that could do this. Nuclear is an emission free solution to this that could match the power output needed. With new technology the vast majority of nuclear waste is actually reusable.
I would respect a Dems climate change proposal a lot more if they included nuclear or at the very minimum be open to the option of nuclear. Instead of the go to answer for every Dem when it comes to nuclear and it being an automatic no and not just no to building more nuclear, but making sure we end and take down all current nuclear power plants.
I would respect a Dems climate change proposal a lot more if they included nuclear or at the very minimum be open to the option of nuclear. Instead of the go to answer for every Dem when it comes to nuclear and it being an automatic no and not just no to building more nuclear, but making sure we end and take down all current nuclear power plants.
That's how you know it's not about the environment. It's about control and power.
Took a 20 trillion deficit to 24? (And I, along with plenty others on here have criticized his spending)
And what allies has he alienated?
And the libs love to get the vapors over Trump's "lies". I would take 1 billion sharpie hurricane maps to avoid 1 "you can keep your doctor".
Proof that this "religion" is a joke.
The US has mostly abandoned nuclear because it's to expensive to build new plants. It costs billions to build a multiple reactor site and 10+ years. You have to spend more billions later for decommissioning and more billions for waste disposal. Utilities don't want to tie up that kind of debt when they can build out natural gas plants and solar farms for fractions of the cost. You have to use massive government welfare to build out nuclear. The Japan debacle ended all nuclear rollout in the West. Most of the US plants are nearing the end of life, only 2 new reactors are under construction. We also have nuclear waste spread all over the country because the ****tards in Congress can't work out disposal plan. When the Gen IV development is finished in a few years maybe we will see some movement in nuclear.
A
anon_l8pbkn96tg3j6
Guest
There are so many dumb pieces to the climate change puzzle. My pet peeve has always been that most of these assholes live in cities.... you know those places where humans literally pave over the environment and run over the few remaining animals with cars? Then you have the nerve to argue that cities are actually more environmentally friendly because mass transit? What a world.
That's the debt not the deficit. Can you imagine if we were running a 20 trillion dollar deficit?
You guys keep talking Sharpies.
Somebody at Yahoo must have been red pilled.
Did the Obama administration commit 'the biggest accounting fraud in history' with student loans? Experts weigh in
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/obama-administration-student-loans-experts-113140861.html
In 2010, Democrats "nationalized the market to help pay for Obama Care," WSJ asserted. "The Congressional Budget Office at the time forecast that eliminating private lenders would save taxpayers $58 billion over 10 years. This estimate was pure fantasy, and now we're seeing how much."
The WSJ op-ed also highlighted the rising number of severely delinquent student loans since then and blamed the Obama administration for expanding plans in 2012 for new borrowers "to reduce defaults, buy off millennial voters and disguise the cost of its student-loan takeover."
The other issue was underwriting.
Previously, the government guaranteed student loans that borrowers took out from private lenders. Today, it controls more than 90% directly.
When the Obama administration "got rid of the guarantee program with the private sector out of the process and made it a direct federal loan, they got rid of all underwriting," Holtz-Eakin noted.
"And so they recreated the worst aspects of the subprime mortgage lending crisis," he stated. "They gave anyone who walked up a loan, without any notion of their capacity to repay."
‘There’s no way around that’
WSJ argued that eliminating private lenders from the student loan market severely hurt Americans and that by using fair-market accounting, it becomes clear that student loans will actually cost taxpayers nearly $307 billion over the next 10 years.
Douglas Holtz-Eakin, former director of the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) during the George W. Bush administration and currently president of the center-right American Action Forum, agreed that the accounting discrepancy manifested because of the “technique” used by the CBO to evaluate the cost of these loan programs.
“A widely known deficiency of the Federal Credit and Reform Act is that it does not allow the CBO to incorporate [market risk] into assessments," Holtz-Eakin told Yahoo Finance. “So the loans, when they're evaluated are evaluated as safer than they truly are, and thus, the losses are smaller than they may truly be. And there's no way around that — the techniques force you to do that.”
He added that “that's why when you when they switched from the private loans to the government loans, it appeared to save money... that is misleading. I don't disagree, but it's not the CBO's fault — those are the rules.”
Student loan debt totals $1.5 trillion, 10% of which is over 90 days past due. So, $150 billion is a significant number, but not housing crisis significant.
Oh, but wait...$900 billion is being paid back by "income-driven" payment plans. My concern is these income-drive plans that, if they were on a traditional payment plan, would otherwise be delinquent.
Subprime mortgages were $1.7 trillion at their peak. The nearly $1 trillion of student debt on an income-driven payment plan is probably not too different than a sub-prime loan. Oh, and all of those are federal loans.
Anyone wonder why two of the most screwed up industries are healthcare and higher education? Thank your federal government!
The only way they could get it to be deficit neutral by the CBO was to take over student loans.
Somebody at Yahoo must have been red pilled.
Did the Obama administration commit 'the biggest accounting fraud in history' with student loans? Experts weigh in
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/obama-administration-student-loans-experts-113140861.html
In 2010, Democrats "nationalized the market to help pay for Obama Care," WSJ asserted. "The Congressional Budget Office at the time forecast that eliminating private lenders would save taxpayers $58 billion over 10 years. This estimate was pure fantasy, and now we're seeing how much."
The WSJ op-ed also highlighted the rising number of severely delinquent student loans since then and blamed the Obama administration for expanding plans in 2012 for new borrowers "to reduce defaults, buy off millennial voters and disguise the cost of its student-loan takeover."
The other issue was underwriting.
Previously, the government guaranteed student loans that borrowers took out from private lenders. Today, it controls more than 90% directly.
When the Obama administration "got rid of the guarantee program with the private sector out of the process and made it a direct federal loan, they got rid of all underwriting," Holtz-Eakin noted.
"And so they recreated the worst aspects of the subprime mortgage lending crisis," he stated. "They gave anyone who walked up a loan, without any notion of their capacity to repay."
‘There’s no way around that’
WSJ argued that eliminating private lenders from the student loan market severely hurt Americans and that by using fair-market accounting, it becomes clear that student loans will actually cost taxpayers nearly $307 billion over the next 10 years.
Douglas Holtz-Eakin, former director of the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) during the George W. Bush administration and currently president of the center-right American Action Forum, agreed that the accounting discrepancy manifested because of the “technique” used by the CBO to evaluate the cost of these loan programs.
“A widely known deficiency of the Federal Credit and Reform Act is that it does not allow the CBO to incorporate [market risk] into assessments," Holtz-Eakin told Yahoo Finance. “So the loans, when they're evaluated are evaluated as safer than they truly are, and thus, the losses are smaller than they may truly be. And there's no way around that — the techniques force you to do that.”
He added that “that's why when you when they switched from the private loans to the government loans, it appeared to save money... that is misleading. I don't disagree, but it's not the CBO's fault — those are the rules.”
Student loan debt totals $1.5 trillion, 10% of which is over 90 days past due. So, $150 billion is a significant number, but not housing crisis significant.
Oh, but wait...$900 billion is being paid back by "income-driven" payment plans. My concern is these income-drive plans that, if they were on a traditional payment plan, would otherwise be delinquent.
Subprime mortgages were $1.7 trillion at their peak. The nearly $1 trillion of student debt on an income-driven payment plan is probably not too different than a sub-prime loan. Oh, and all of those are federal loans.
Anyone wonder why two of the most screwed up industries are healthcare and higher education? Thank your federal government!
The only way they could get it to be deficit neutral by the CBO was to take over student loans.
Liberals screaming and hollering about a map and forecast...as if actual weather people never get a forecast wrong...
today's lesson in liberal logic:
Trump getting it wrong about how bad a storm could be = national outrage
Obama getting it wrong about how bad JV isis won't be = moving on to other news
today's lesson in liberal logic:
Trump getting it wrong about how bad a storm could be = national outrage
Obama getting it wrong about how bad JV isis won't be = moving on to other news
This would be a good time to remind everyone that Obama is a complete POSYou guys keep talking Sharpies.
Somebody at Yahoo must have been red pilled.
Did the Obama administration commit 'the biggest accounting fraud in history' with student loans? Experts weigh in
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/obama-administration-student-loans-experts-113140861.html
In 2010, Democrats "nationalized the market to help pay for Obama Care," WSJ asserted. "The Congressional Budget Office at the time forecast that eliminating private lenders would save taxpayers $58 billion over 10 years. This estimate was pure fantasy, and now we're seeing how much."
The WSJ op-ed also highlighted the rising number of severely delinquent student loans since then and blamed the Obama administration for expanding plans in 2012 for new borrowers "to reduce defaults, buy off millennial voters and disguise the cost of its student-loan takeover."
The other issue was underwriting.
Previously, the government guaranteed student loans that borrowers took out from private lenders. Today, it controls more than 90% directly.
When the Obama administration "got rid of the guarantee program with the private sector out of the process and made it a direct federal loan, they got rid of all underwriting," Holtz-Eakin noted.
"And so they recreated the worst aspects of the subprime mortgage lending crisis," he stated. "They gave anyone who walked up a loan, without any notion of their capacity to repay."
‘There’s no way around that’
WSJ argued that eliminating private lenders from the student loan market severely hurt Americans and that by using fair-market accounting, it becomes clear that student loans will actually cost taxpayers nearly $307 billion over the next 10 years.
Douglas Holtz-Eakin, former director of the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) during the George W. Bush administration and currently president of the center-right American Action Forum, agreed that the accounting discrepancy manifested because of the “technique” used by the CBO to evaluate the cost of these loan programs.
“A widely known deficiency of the Federal Credit and Reform Act is that it does not allow the CBO to incorporate [market risk] into assessments," Holtz-Eakin told Yahoo Finance. “So the loans, when they're evaluated are evaluated as safer than they truly are, and thus, the losses are smaller than they may truly be. And there's no way around that — the techniques force you to do that.”
He added that “that's why when you when they switched from the private loans to the government loans, it appeared to save money... that is misleading. I don't disagree, but it's not the CBO's fault — those are the rules.”
Student loan debt totals $1.5 trillion, 10% of which is over 90 days past due. So, $150 billion is a significant number, but not housing crisis significant.
Oh, but wait...$900 billion is being paid back by "income-driven" payment plans. My concern is these income-drive plans that, if they were on a traditional payment plan, would otherwise be delinquent.
Subprime mortgages were $1.7 trillion at their peak. The nearly $1 trillion of student debt on an income-driven payment plan is probably not too different than a sub-prime loan. Oh, and all of those are federal loans.
Anyone wonder why two of the most screwed up industries are healthcare and higher education? Thank your federal government!
The only way they could get it to be deficit neutral by the CBO was to take over student loans.
So true, liberals freak out about a weather map, but have no problem with minorities that would probably vote for them being aborted or gunned down in gang violence.
Are you saying the Christian religion should put those who commit adultery to death? I get it, so you want his religion to follow the laws of Islam? .
Great point and solid comment. Actually Trump didn't get anything wrong. When Dorian is hundreds of miles away no one can tell where it is going. I live on the Gulf Coast and our local weather people were screaming it would slam into Cape Canaveral as a Cat 5 and then come across Florida right through the little town I live in and head on out into the Gulf. They were so certain every store in town ran out of bottled water and all gasoline stations ran out of gas.
We got zero rain and winds were about 10 mph with a few gusts Normal. But no one should blame the weather people. They were forecasting the worst case scenario. Had their projection held there is no doubt the storm would have hit Alabama and maybe the Florida panhandle. Katrina came through Florida before it slammed into Louisiana. You never know
During the climate marathon it's so obvious these ppl have zero solutions. Of course no one can say, you have no plan bc they resort to their talking point that you are climate denier.
They went with everything from cows are the apocalypse mammal, we need to sign a French paper full of feelings, to Bernie supporting eugenics, but none of them seemed to address China at all. I wonder if they know we are under the same atmosphere? Are they going to go to war with china? How are they going to make sure they comply with environmental regulations?
Of course they arent serious about any of this and will do nothing bc they have no answers on how to address it, they are just spreading fear. But if they were, it would be hilarious watching how hypocritical they all are when their solution to China would be to punish them by tariffs to comply. Then all the lib sheep would jump for joy and support tariffs bc feelings bc they'd be told they are saving the environment.
All you have to do to satisfy a lib is happy lollipop language then they dig no deeper. This of course after the dem gloom and doom of how we were all in the gutter and doomed and only a Democrat can save us.
They went with everything from cows are the apocalypse mammal, we need to sign a French paper full of feelings, to Bernie supporting eugenics, but none of them seemed to address China at all. I wonder if they know we are under the same atmosphere? Are they going to go to war with china? How are they going to make sure they comply with environmental regulations?
Of course they arent serious about any of this and will do nothing bc they have no answers on how to address it, they are just spreading fear. But if they were, it would be hilarious watching how hypocritical they all are when their solution to China would be to punish them by tariffs to comply. Then all the lib sheep would jump for joy and support tariffs bc feelings bc they'd be told they are saving the environment.
All you have to do to satisfy a lib is happy lollipop language then they dig no deeper. This of course after the dem gloom and doom of how we were all in the gutter and doomed and only a Democrat can save us.
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
I find it harder to sleep in hotel rooms these days- Latest: WildcatFan1982
-
