Best line of the night

Page 10 of 11  


I like it. A society run and totally influenced by republicans. No foreign players on baseball, football or basketball teams, no foreign workers (can't have even legal ones because there is too much chance of illegals infiltrating) so there is no fresh fruit or veggies or even beef, pork or poultry and all those Mac Mansions will have brown landscape dominated by weeds. And all the bastards will all be republicans or there will be a great tourist boom for single republican mothers-to-be flying to more enlightened countries for their "touch-ups"
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

but there is a whole passle of repubs that aren't
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

But three do.
http://www.leoslyrics.com/national-lampoon/deteriorata-lyrics /
With all it's hopes, dreams, promises and urban renewal The world continues to deteriorate.
--
People thought cybersex was a safe alternative,
until patients started presenting with sexually
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Jeez, HeyBub. You want your party to lead, but you can't remember to add OT to an Off Topic post subject line. How's your team going to handle the "tough" decisions if adding two letters is too hard for them?
-- Bobby G.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Robert Green wrote:

Light bulbs and the government mandating thereof is a frequent topic on this newsgroup. Several posters here have said things far more hurtful about the government and light bulbs than did the governor of Indiana.
Or haven't you been keeping up?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Robert Green wrote:

Okay, I'll play. Show me ONE off-topic thread I've started that didn't have OT as part of its subject. Just one.
And I will not accept anything about light bulbs as being off-topic.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Nonsense. First of all there are a whole bunch of things that are going to be required to be covered as preventive services that aren't now. As currently written these will mean new policies and that they can't be grandfathered in. Secondly, there are many indications that businesses of all sizes will be jetisoning their insurance because the fines are a lot less than the costs of insurance. An analyst from McKinsey & Company says that something in the range of 80 to 100 million individuals are going to change coverage categories in the two years post-2014. They will lose their employer coverage, move into exchanges, or go on to Medicaid. This would be an extraordinary disruption that will cause widespread outrage. This pretty well established by other studies.
--
People thought cybersex was a safe alternative,
until patients started presenting with sexually
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
This in the land of the free, and home of the brave? No longer as free as we were. More legislation, ordering people how to run thier lives, under penalty of law.
Christopher A. Young Learn more about Jesus www.lds.org .
But the people who don't have health insurance will have to buy some,
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
SecondHoncho wrote:

Not stupid. If my city government shuts down my favorite unsanitary taco stand, the city government has interfered with my choice of tacos. If my employer drops health coverage because of new regulations, I have been denied my choice of health insurance at a price that works for me.

Except that the government has declared (literally) millions of mortgages "wrong."

No. He was probably talking about private schools with vouchers or tax credits.

Whatever. It's still the GOVERNMENT picking, or at least removing one of the choices, on light bulbs.
And WTF does imported oil from Arab countries have to do with light bulbs? We use a miniscule amount of oil - either domestic or imported - to generate electricity.
By the way, we don't RELY on Arab oil for anything. In fact we get not a lot of oil from Arab countries. Our biggest foreign suppliers are Canada, Mexico, and Nigeria. I think Saudi Arabia is number four on the import list.
Since January 2009 'til now, gasoline prices have risen from $1.79 to $3.35 per gallon. What's changed? Canada is still there. Nigeria is still there. The same number of tankers are still at sea and the number of pipelines hasn't diminished. The number of miles driven on the nation's roads has GONE DOWN. No, the only difference between December 2008 and today which could account for the rise in gasoline and diesel prices is the presence of the Obama administration.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 1/26/2012 5:10 PM, HeyBub wrote:

FTFY
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

if only you don't count those pesky chinese and indians, much less all those developing countries that find autos to be imperative.
You've answered your own question. With our demand down and the same number of tankers, the oil must be going somewhere else, which strangely due to that age old law of supply and demand, means that oil prices here have to go up.
But let's not forget those commodity traders who win more than the oil companies when they manipulate the price of oil. But you should be aware of that. Wasn't Houstons Enron great at manipulating the price of electricity and we knew that the demand and supply were the same almost all the time?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

and saved the city from liability issues, the hospital from overcrowding and your insurance company from additional costs

by your employer

not so. it was the choice of GE and other light bulb manufacturers to stop making your energy wasting bulbs and to not make energy saving light bulbs
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Malcom "Mal" Reynolds wrote:

You are correct. And in so doing, they deprived me of a choice. The government forced me to do what's good for me (and others) when all they had to do was mandate a sign: "If you eat these tacos, the state of California will get cancer" or somesuch.
I expect a mandate soon to eat at least three helpings of arugula each week. There will be monitors.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

you seem to be under the impression that you deserve special treatment or that in fact the law offers you freedom of choice...you don't and it doesn't
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
<stuff snipped>

The "only" difference? That's a HeyBub HooBoy! Even *you* can't believe (or support) that.
There's a little theory you might have heard of. It's called "supply and demand." The simple truth is that with India and China putting millions of new cars on the road each year, demand for oil is skyrocketing. That causes prices to rise as well. The only good news is that the economic downturn has tamped some of the growth by limiting demand. Growing demand is acknowledged by most economists to be the main force driving oil prices higher. But there are numerous other causes as well.
http://research.stlouisfed.org/wp/more/2011-027
<<. . . a new St. Louis Federal Reserve Bank working paper concludes. Fed economist Luciana Juvenal, along with Ivan Petrella of Belgium's Catholic University Leuven, looks at oil price movements and concludes that some -- but not nearly all -- of the rise between 2004 and 2008 was financially driven. Specifically, they estimate that 15 percent of the runup could be blamed on financial factors, such as investors' growing appetite for commodity-fund investments. Here's part of the paper's conclusion:
We find that the increase in oil prices in the last decade is **mainly due to the strength of global demand, consistent with previous studies.** >> (Emphasis mine)
<<However, financial speculation significantly contributed to the oil price increase between 2004 and 2008. Our analysis pins down the start of speculative forces driving oil prices in 2004, which is the time when significant investment started to flow into commodity markets.>>
Yes, I know, those were the Bush years, but economists often take time to fully analyze the data. Speculation has only increased since then.
http://www.forbes.com/2009/08/28/oil-market-speculation-markets-commodities-cftc.html
<<A new study by Rice University says that yes, indeed, unchecked short-term price speculation is to blame for excessive price volatility over the past two years and that traders drive up prices that eventually reach U.S. consumers while driving down the value of the dollar.>>
Hmm. So in the face of dozens of studies you want to blame Obama for growth of world oil demand and the excesses of Wall St. speculators? Is that Obama Derangement Syndrome? He just doesn't wield that sort of power, although I am sure he would like to. Oil prices have been steadily rising since Bush was president. The Forbes article goes on to say:
<< . . . the Rice researchers say that the government allows unfettered trading at its peril. When oil prices more than doubled year-over-year to a record $147 a barrel in 2008, calls for greater market oversight surfaced. At the time, speculators' presence in the market was at its peak with short-term trades holding 55% of total open interest.>>
So, we have economic evidence that when oil prices skyrocket, speculators are at their most active. The taxes the rich were "excused from" during the Bush years apparently goes into these mass speculations that hurt the middle class and the country profoundly.
<<According to Rice's Baker Institute Energy fellows Kenneth Medlock, an economics professor, and Amy Myers Jaffe, who also serves as associate director of the Rice Energy Program, speculators still account for half of the outstanding positions in the U.S. oil futures market. They were just 20% of the market before regulations were loosened in 2000.>>
From a fifth to one half of the entire US futures market. Isn't in far more likely that an investment change of that magnitude caused the rise in prices and not some as yet unexplained mystical action or magical spell cast by Obama?
<< But the real threat stems from the correlation between oil's price and the dollar's value. Rising oil prices increase the U.S. trade deficit, which weakens the dollar and drives oil prices, and the currencies of oil producing nations, even higher.>>
Speculators with all that money that they didn't have to pay in taxes thanks to the Bush tax cut are looking to make even more oodles of money gaming the crude oil market and screwing over every car owning American. Wall Street is at it again. But hell, why not try to blame Obama if you can find people unaware enough to believe you?
FWIW, demand growth and speculation are only two parts of the picture. Piracy, unrest in Libya and other oil-producing nations, UN sanctions against some oil producing nations and many, many other events cause the price of oil to rise. One largely ineffectual President is not very likely to be the cause of a world-wide economic reaction.
Except in the cartoon world of Republican "blame" politics.
-- Bobby G.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote in message news:c7udnYR-4-

Well stated - FACTS do determine the veracity of an off-the-wall statement.
The Republicans just can't stand it that they were defeated in 2008 and by a man of color and there is nothing the President can say or do to reverse that thinking.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

I will, considering allthe potential Republicans he will be facing.
I say the same thing I said when The two Bush's nominated Supreme Court Jusyices - is this the best you can offer?
I believe that the White House resident has less to do with our domestic economic woes than who is on Capitol Hill.
Who really does the spending? According to thge Constitution of the United States, Section 9 Limitationsof Congress: No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law; and a regular Statement and Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of all public Money shall be published from time to time.
NO money can be spent unless Appropriations made by Law - who makes the laws: Congress. I am tired of listening to the Republican congess bellyaching about the deficit Obama has created. Dems cannot blame Bush for the way he funded the Iraq war: Emergency funding Legislated and aoorived by CONGRESS.
Look thru the "erudite verbal haze" and see who is really to blame here.
Never have representatives elected by the people done less for them that brung them than for those who lobbied them. And that's why we are getting closer to the corporate America.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

At last! A candidate who will admit it!!!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Man of which color? His Dad's, or his Mom's? Me, well, I don't care if he's half pink. I don't like socialists.
Christopher A. Young Learn more about Jesus www.lds.org .
The Republicans just can't stand it that they were defeated in 2008 and by a man of color and there is nothing the President can say or do to reverse that thinking.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.