[Rhodes22-list] The "Unifier" finally delivers, so Peter L this means ...

[Tootle]

Peter,

Then this means you are supporting John Locks former congressman, Bob Barr,
the Libertarian?

BTW, did you notice this:

Obama Linked To Another Controversial Minister – Rev James Meeks
Posted on March 20, 2008 by politicalnighttrain 
An Obama Delegate’s Preaching, On Par With Jeremiah WrightSo, the spin goes,
Jeremiah Wright may have said some controversial things. So, maybe Obama has
described him as “his mentor”, and maybe they’ve had a close relationship
for the past twenty-three years. But Wright has left his largely ceremonial
post, and it’s not like he has any direct relationship with Obama’s
presidential campaign. I mean, it’s not like we’re hearing this from a
Democratic elected official. It’s not like we’re hearing this from an Obama
delegate to the Democratic convention or something.It’s not like we’re
hearing an Obama delegate from Chicago in a church pulpit saying, “We don’t
have slave masters, we got mayors! But they are still the same white people
who are presiding over systems where black people are not able to be
educated. You got some preachers that are house n———! You got some elected
officials that are house n———! Rather than them try and break this up,
they’re gonna fight you to protect that white man!”Oh, wait, now we are
hearing this. What’s fascinating in the video that Confederate Yankee dug up
is the state senator, Reverend James Meeks of the South Side Baptist Church,
declaring that the N-word is a “term of endearment.” I kid you not.So…
apparently Wright’s not a one-time deal, huh? How many other members of
Obama’s crew from Chicago sound like this on Sunday mornings?

Ed K
Greenville, SC, USA




petelargo wrote:
> 
> PS: Pay no attention to the 4 billion dollars a month Iraq war effort when
> your mom needs her meds. Re-framing and justifying the "debt" is not the
> conservatism I believe in. The 'detractors' now include 81% of all women
> and men, republican and democrat, that no longer believe the country is
> headed in the right direction. Mr. W finally unified the country. The
> choice couldn't be clearer.  If you think we are on the right path, you
> certainly know who to vote for. 
> 
> 
> 
> Brad Haslett-2 wrote:
>> 
>> Rob,
>> 
>> Let's run through this again, and I'll type s-l-o-w-l-y this time.
>> Comparing national debt numbers without using inflation adjusted dollars
>> is
>> meaningless.  Using debt as a percentage of GDP is more rational. 
>> Example -
>> I probably owe ten times more debt than my father did at my age.  Should
>> this be of concern?  No, 2008 dollars are not the same as 1972 dollars,
>> and
>> besides, my income is more than ten times my father's in 1972.  The
>> federal
>> budget is a joint responsibility between the Congress and the President.
>> Trying to pin any one group of numbers on one branch without looking at
>> the
>> other branches actions is foolish.  The largest component of the federal
>> budget is entitlement spending with Social Security and Medicare being
>> the
>> largest  by a wide margin.  Defense spending follows.  Bush 43 did
>> nothing
>> to reign-in entitlement spending, in fact, he expanded it.  Expanding the
>> military and homeland defense after 9/11 also added immensely to
>> spending.
>> The detractors of the current administration would like to spin the
>> narrative that higher taxes and less defense spending would substantially
>> reduce the national debt.  Maybe, maybe not.  There is a "sweet spot" for
>> taxation rates where higher marginal rates slows down the economy and has
>> a
>> negative effect on GDP.  Where is that "sweet spot"?  I don't know and
>> neither did JFK but he understood that 90% was too high and Ronald Reagan
>> thought 70% was too high.  Both were proven correct.  The "elephant in
>> the
>> room" is entitlement spending, and if or until we recognize that issue
>> and
>> deal with it, this is an exercise in mental masturbation.
>> 
>> BTW, I really like Bill and have a great deal of respect for he and
>> Diane.
>> That doesn't mean he's beyond playing games with numbers  just for fun.
>> 
>> Brad
>> 
>> On Wed, Apr 9, 2008 at 12:44 PM, Rob Lowe <rlowe at vt.edu> wrote:
>> 
>>> Since Bill Effros dropped off the list, we've been without our periodic
>>> Quote without Comments.  For anyone new, see:
>>>
>>> http://www.quotewithoutcomment.com/
>>>
>>> this is paraphrased from Sunday's Doonesbury.  I have not checked the
>>> accuracy.
>>>
>>>
>>> Since 1776, the US has accumulated a national debt of over $9 trillion,
>>> over 1/2 or which was incurred when a Bush was on watch.
>>> If you included Ronald Regan, fully 70% of the debt was created under
>>> just
>>> these three Republican presidents.
>>>
>>> - rob
>>> __________________________________________________
>>> Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>
>> __________________________________________________
>> Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
>> 
>> 
> 
> 

-- 
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Quote-without-comment-tp16592619p16619121.html
Sent from the Rhodes 22 mailing list archive at Nabble.com.