Gay? No worries, Bachmann's clinic can "cure" you :)

[Popcorn Sutton]

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/onpolitics/post/2011/07/michele-bachmann-husband-cure-homosexuality-/1?csp=34news&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+usatoday-NewsTopStories+%28News+-+Top+Stories%29&utm_content=Google+Feedfetcher

:peace::peace::twokisses

[Popcorn Sutton]

Come on in and "pray away the gay."

[W*GS]

Just another sign she's "Presidential".

Right, epicFail?

[epicSocialism4tw]

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/onpolitics/post/2011/07/michele-bachmann-husband-cure-homosexuality-/1?csp=34news&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+usatoday-NewsTopStories+%28News+-+Top+Stories%29&utm_content=Google+Feedfetcher

:peace::peace::twokisses

That's a bit of a misleading thread title, don't you think?

It's about Michele's husband, not Michele.

You might want to try a little honesty.

[Rigs11]

guys quit being sexist and leave bachmann alone!:rofl:

[epicSocialism4tw]

Just another sign she's "Presidential".

Right, epicFail?

She's much more presidential than Barack Obama, that's for sure.

[TheElusiveKyleOrton]

You might want to try a little honesty.

Pot, the kettle is on line 2.

[epicSocialism4tw]

From the linked article above:

"The spotlight is on a clinic run by GOP presidential candidate Michele Bachmann's husband, which reportedly tried to counsel two gay, former patients that prayer would cure them of their sexual orientation."



Nice try, "Independent" Brew Crew. Your red panties are showing.

[Popcorn Sutton]

That's a bit of a misleading thread title, don't you think?

It's about Michele's husband, not Michele.

You might want to try a little honesty.

The thread title is correct.

"Bachmann's clinic can cure you"

Besides, you are the LAST person EVER EVER EVER that should be critical of thread titles. That is a laugher!!!

[epicSocialism4tw]

The thread title is correct.

"Bachmann's clinic can cure you"

Pwned.

Get that ridiculous crap out of here.

You're about as unbiased as Dan Rather.

[Smiling Assassin27]

Odd, Christians in a Christian clinic actually resorting to *gasp* prayer as part of their protocol...

I guess the other option is to go to your local Dept. of Education office and get your free fisting kit.

[Popcorn Sutton]

From the linked article above:

"The spotlight is on a clinic run by GOP presidential candidate Michele Bachmann's husband, which reportedly tried to counsel two gay, former patients that prayer would cure them of their sexual orientation."



Nice try, "Independent" Brew Crew. Your red panties are showing.

The fact that I don't care for Michele Bachmann has nothing to do with my political leanings. That is the difference between you and me. Being "Independent" allows me to see the forest the trees. Besides, I like posting things that show what an idiot you are.

I voted for Ron Paul in 2008 and I'll do it again in 2012. I'm sure as hell not voting for Mitt Romney or Michele Bachmann.

BTW, the thread title is still factually correct. Stop deflecting and comment on it. What are your thoughts? Can you pray away the gay?

[Rigs11]

man i hope she wins the nomination. the comedy would be pure gold.

[epicSocialism4tw]

And far left moonbats like those who flung themselves headlong into this thread to heap mindless zombie criticism on Michele Bachmann despite even reading the article wonder why people think that the media is unfair to conservative women.

These are the same moonbat lunatics who tried to blame Giffords' shooting on Sarah Palin! It would be hilarious if it wasn't so pathetic.

http://www.anunews.net/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/aa-liberal-intolerance-very-good-one.jpg

[Popcorn Sutton]

Odd, Christians in a Christian clinic actually resorting to *gasp* prayer as part of their protocol...

I guess the other option is to go to your local Dept. of Education office and get your free fisting kit.

Hilarious! Hilarious!

That is certainly not odd. But, praying away being gay strikes me as "odd."

[Rigs11]

hey llama you failed to comment on bachmann railing against taxes even though she used to be a tax collector. you are the biggest pussy on this board.

[Popcorn Sutton]

Pwned.

Get that ridiculous crap out of here.

You're about as unbiased as Dan Rather.

Man, you are fired up!

You ok?

Why so defensive on this one?

[epicSocialism4tw]

The fact that I don't care for Michele Bachmann has nothing to do with my political leanings. That is the difference between you and me. Being "Independent" allows me to see the forest the trees. Besides, I like posting things that show what an idiot you are.

You aren't independent, son.

You're just as biased as the rest of these moonbats.

I mean look at what you just posted.

You intentionally lied in the thread title by using a half-truth that you knew would be spun into a criticism of Michele by people who didn't necessarily know the story.

I doubt that a person who is only interested in the truth would be so willing to lie to push their agenda.

Epic self-pwnage.

[Popcorn Sutton]

You aren't independent, son.

You're just as biased as the rest of these moonbats.

I mean look at what you just posted.

You intentionally lied in the thread title by using a half-truth that you knew would be spun into a criticism of Michele by people who didn't necessarily know the story.

I doubt that a person who is only interested in the truth would be so willing to lie to push their agenda.

I didn't lie. I linked the story so everyone can see it's clearly her husbands clinic.

Does it really matter? Do you feel this is not a reflection on her views?

AGAIN, all you ever do is post misleading thread titles so get off your high horse.

[Popcorn Sutton]

<table class="tborder" align="center" border="0" cellpadding="5" cellspacing="1" width="100%"><tbody id="collapseobj_usercp_reputation"><tr><td class="alt2">
</td><td class="alt1Active" width="50%"> Gay? No worries,... (http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showthread.php?p=3215648#post3215648) </td><td class="alt2" nowrap="nowrap">07-12-2011 09:52 AM</td><td class="alt1" nowrap="nowrap"> epicSocialism4tw (http://www.orangemane.com/BB/member.php?u=2331) </td><td class="alt2" width="50%">get the story right</td></tr></tbody></table>

[epicSocialism4tw]

I didn't lie. I linked the story so everyone can see it's clearly her husbands clinic.

Does it really matter? Do you feel this is not a reflection on her views?

LOL

oops!

Caught in a lie! Hilarious!

[TailgateNut]

From the linked article above:

"The spotlight is on a clinic run by GOP presidential candidate Michele Bachmann's husband, which reportedly tried to counsel two gay, former patients that prayer would cure them of their sexual orientation."



Nice try, "Independent" Brew Crew. Your red panties are showing.

See also: co-owned by Michele Bachman AKA crazy ass biaotch!

[epicSocialism4tw]

<table class="tborder" align="center" border="0" cellpadding="5" cellspacing="1" width="100%"><tbody id="collapseobj_usercp_reputation"><tr><td class="alt2">
</td><td class="alt1Active" width="50%"> Gay? No worries,... (http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showthread.php?p=3215648#post3215648) </td><td class="alt2" nowrap="nowrap">07-12-2011 09:52 AM</td><td class="alt1" nowrap="nowrap"> epicSocialism4tw (http://www.orangemane.com/BB/member.php?u=2331) </td><td class="alt2" width="50%">get the story right</td></tr></tbody></table>

I guess that's asking too much! Hilarious!

[TailgateNut]

Odd, Christians in a Christian clinic actually resorting to *gasp* prayer as part of their protocol...

I guess the other option is to go to your local Dept. of Education office and get your free fisting kit.

See "state and federal funding". I don't want my dollars spent on "kooky klinics".

[epicSocialism4tw]

See "state and federal funding". I don't want my dollars spent on "kooky klinics".

People pay into medicare, moonbat. They get to choose where to spend their money. Believe me, most doctors don't want to have to deal with medicare. They only pay you about 20% of what you bill.

If you want to see federal funding spent on kooky clinics, look over at Planned Parenthood.

[Popcorn Sutton]

LOL

oops!

Caught in a lie! Hilarious!

You post stories about Obama's half-brother as if its relevant.... OK.

Then, when someone else posts something that doesn't jive with your political position you freak out.

Sour grapes. I am FAR FAR FAR less biased than you.

[Popcorn Sutton]

I guess that's asking too much! Hilarious!

The title of the thread is correct. Still. I haven't changed it.

I didn't post my take, just linked to the story.

[epicSocialism4tw]

You post stories about Obama's half-brother as if its relevant.... OK.

Then, when someone else posts something that doesn't jive with your political position you freak out.

Sour grapes. I am FAR FAR FAR less biased than you.

Right! Hilarious!

http://listverse.files.wordpress.com/2007/11/liar.jpg

[TailgateNut]

People pay into medicare, moonbat. They get to choose where to spend their money. Believe me, most doctors don't want to have to deal with medicare. They only pay you about 20% of what you bill.

If you want to see federal funding spent on kooky clinics, look over at Planned Parenthood.


They should pay 0% of the bill for any program which uses prayer as a treatment PLAN!Hilarious!

[epicSocialism4tw]

They should pay 0% of the bill for any program which uses prayer as a treatment PLAN!

They should pay whatever the client requires.

And you know nothing about this guy's "treatment plan".

[Popcorn Sutton]

Right! Hilarious!

http://listverse.files.wordpress.com/2007/11/liar.jpg

Doesn't change the fact that posting a thread title:

"Gay? No worries, Bachmann's clinic can "cure" you :)"

is not a lie.

[epicSocialism4tw]

Doesn't change the fact that posting a thread title:

"Gay? No worries, Bachmann's clinic can "cure" you :)"

is not a lie.

You keep telling yourself that an intentionally insidious half-truth is not a lie.

If you repeat it enough, the moonbat friends you're trying so hard to impress will probably believe it.

[DenverBrit]

That's a bit of a misleading thread title, don't you think?

It's about Michele's husband, not Michele.

You might want to try a little honesty.

LOL

Ha!

[Popcorn Sutton]

LOL

Ha!

I know, I'm practically beside myself.

[alkemical]

this thread contains:

hypocrisy, irony, artificial and natural douchiness.

[DenverBrit]

Pwned.

Get that ridiculous crap out of here.

You're about as unbiased as Dan Rather.

The thread title is correct and Bachmann's clinic does claim to cure homosexuality. Can't you read??

[DenverBrit]

You aren't independent, son.

You're just as biased as the rest of these moonbats.

I mean look at what you just posted.

You intentionally lied in the thread title by using a half-truth that you knew would be spun into a criticism of Michele by people who didn't necessarily know the story.

I doubt that a person who is only interested in the truth would be so willing to lie to push their agenda.

Epic self-pwnage.

LOL

Will the irony and your hypocrisy never end?? Ha!

[Popcorn Sutton]

You keep telling yourself that an intentionally insidious half-truth is not a lie.

If you repeat it enough, the moonbat friends you're trying so hard to impress will probably believe it.

Maybe you should write the Minnesota Independent to let them know it's her husbands clinic... NOT HER CLINIC. :welcome:

http://minnesotaindependent.com/83372/bachmanns-counseling-clinic-takes-medicaid-payments

The Christian counseling clinic started by Rep. Michele Bachmann and her husband Marcus has taken in $137,000 in Medicaid payments over the last several years, despite the congresswoman’s public opposition to government involvement in health care, NBC News reported Tuesday. That’s in addition to the $30,000 in state funds that the Minnesota Independent first reported last summer.

Bachmann and Associates, Inc., the family’s clinic, uses overtly conservative Christian counseling, an issue which raised questions about the clinic possibly violating the separation of church and state with the money it receives from the Minnesota taxpayers.

“[W]e would like to think that Bachmann, as a member of Congress, knows better than to take state funds to run a sectarian organization,” said Sandhya Bathija of Americans United for the Separation of Church and State following the Minnesota Independent’s report last summer. “Catholic Charities and other groups may receive government funding, but they must keep their religious activities separate from their social services.”

NBC News reported yesterday that Bachmann’s clinic has also taken in $137,000 in Medicaid payments. Half is comprised of federal taxpayer money, and the other half is state taxpayer money. Bachmann did not respond to NBC’s requests for comment.

[epicSocialism4tw]

The thread title is correct and Bachmann's clinic does claim to cure homosexuality. Can't you read??

Are you really this stupid?

Or are you just as willing yourself to get behind the use of a deceptive half-truth (a lie) to promote your little moonbat agenda?

Your little moonbat zombie army didnt ascend on this thread because they wanted to criticize Marcus Bachmann.

[Popcorn Sutton]

this thread contains:

hypocrisy, irony, artificial and natural douchiness.

Sorry if I offended you with my "lies." :spit:

[Popcorn Sutton]

Man, this is getting good:

<table class="tborder" align="center" border="0" cellpadding="5" cellspacing="1" width="100%"><tbody id="collapseobj_usercp_reputation"><tr><td class="alt2">http://www.orangemane.com/BB/images/reputation/reputation_neg.gif</td> <td class="alt1Active" width="50%"> Gay? No worries,... (http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showthread.php?p=3215685#post3215685) </td> <td class="alt2" nowrap="nowrap">07-12-2011 10:07 AM</td> <td class="alt1" nowrap="nowrap"> epicSocialism4tw (http://www.orangemane.com/BB/member.php?u=2331) </td> <td class="alt2" width="50%">I dont know that I have ever seen anyone outside of MacGruber pwn themself so thoroughly without anyone else's help</td></tr></tbody></table>

[epicSocialism4tw]

Sorry if I offended you with my "lies." :spit:

Yeah, I'm sure that you were providing an analysis of Marcus Bachmann's clinic with that post. Ha! ROFL!

[TailgateNut]

A Tea-bagette using federal funds for questional treatment practices which croos the church and state barrier. Who would have thunk it?

This bitch is as FOS as Palin!

[epicSocialism4tw]

Man, this is getting good:

<table class="tborder" align="center" border="0" cellpadding="5" cellspacing="1" width="100%"><tbody id="collapseobj_usercp_reputation"><tr><td class="alt2">http://www.orangemane.com/BB/images/reputation/reputation_neg.gif</td> <td class="alt1Active" width="50%"> Gay? No worries,... (http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showthread.php?p=3215685#post3215685) </td> <td class="alt2" nowrap="nowrap">07-12-2011 10:07 AM</td> <td class="alt1" nowrap="nowrap"> epicSocialism4tw (http://www.orangemane.com/BB/member.php?u=2331) </td> <td class="alt2" width="50%">I dont know that I have ever seen anyone outside of MacGruber pwn themself so thoroughly without anyone else's help</td></tr></tbody></table>

Keep rollin', MacGrubes! Ha!

You're doing a great job drumming up criticism from the nodding heads from the far left by lying! Great stuff.

[DenverBrit]

The Bachmann's are liars and the clinic is using taxpayers money for voodoo treatments. But because they are evangelical right wing wacko's, EpicDeflector will defend them beyond all reason.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_aYKtyoNWQ0

[BroncoInferno]

LOL

Will the irony and your hypocrisy never end?? Ha!

It really is hilarious to watch EpicDramaLlama call someone else for lying.

Hey, Llama....tell us again about how you're down with the Kurds and have about 17 different degrees? ROFL!

[DenverBrit]

Are you really this stupid?

Or are you just as willing yourself to get behind the use of a deceptive half-truth (a lie) to promote your little moonbat agenda?

Your little moonbat zombie army didnt ascend on this thread because they wanted to criticize Marcus Bachmann.

The headline is correct, numbnuts.

[Popcorn Sutton]

Yeah, I'm sure that you were providing an analysis of Marcus Bachmann's clinic with that post. Ha! ROFL!

I didn't provide any analysis. That's what's amazing. I just linked to the story!!!

[epicSocialism4tw]

The Bachmann's are liars and the clinic is using taxpayers money for voodoo treatments. But because they are evangelical right wing wacko's, EpicDeflector will defend them beyond any reason.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_aYKtyoNWQ0

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_gcA0ZuKGkI8/SeX6XrEydTI/AAAAAAAAAeE/HHTKcxQ1nDI/s400/looney_left1_1.jpg

[DenverBrit]

Dance, Epic, Dance!! Ha!

[Popcorn Sutton]

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_gcA0ZuKGkI8/SeX6XrEydTI/AAAAAAAAAeE/HHTKcxQ1nDI/s400/looney_left1_1.jpg

Man, you really make yourself look bad. You getting all twisted around the axle at LABF but you are worse!

[epicSocialism4tw]

Mention a conservative woman and the liberal zombies flock like rats.
http://scottystarnes.files.wordpress.com/2010/09/300_955979.jpg?w=300&h=240

[epicSocialism4tw]

Man, you really make yourself look bad. You getting all twisted around the axle at LABF but you are worse!

I'm sure you think so since I called you out on a lie.

Keep rollin' MacGrubeCrew!

[TailgateNut]

The Bachmann's are liars and the clinic is using taxpayers money for voodoo treatments. But because they are evangelical right wing wacko's, EpicDeflector will defend them beyond all reason.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_aYKtyoNWQ0


"God CREATED us all to be heterosexual".:spit:

[Popcorn Sutton]

I'm sure you think so since I called you out on a lie.

Keep rollin' MacGrubeCrew!

Still doesn't make anything I said in this thread a lie....

Keep rollin' epicHypocrite4tw!

[epicSocialism4tw]

"God CREATED us all to be heterosexual"

No, natural selection created us to be heterosexual.

[BroncoInferno]

I'm sure you think so since I called you out on a lie.

Keep rollin' MacGrubeCrew!

He didn't lie. As has been pointed out to you already, the thread title is 100% accurate. The fact that you continue to claim otherwise proves, once again, what a despicable liar YOU are.

[TailgateNut]

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_gcA0ZuKGkI8/SeX6XrEydTI/AAAAAAAAAeE/HHTKcxQ1nDI/s400/looney_left1_1.jpg


We're not the ones trooting out the crazies as presidentail contenders.

See: Palin
See: Bachman

[DenverBrit]

Mention a conservative woman and the liberal zombies flock like rats.
http://scottystarnes.files.wordpress.com/2010/09/300_955979.jpg?w=300&h=240

Idiot. She owns that clinic with her husband.

They take taxpayers money, tell gays they can be cured with prayer like it's a faith healing event.

They lie about their activities to preserve their money grubbing activities.......and that's all ok with you??

If it's all above board, why are they lying about it??

[epicSocialism4tw]

Still doesn't make anything I said in this thread a lie....

Keep rollin' epicHypocrite4tw!

Nah, only a propagandic half-truth.

Those are obviously okay in your book as long as it propagates the moonbat agenda. Nice one MacGrubeCrew. You're just proving further beyond a doubt that leftists do not have any standards of behavior.

[epicSocialism4tw]

Idiot. She owns that clinic with her husband.

They take taxpayers money, tell gays they can be cured with prayer like it's a faith healing event.

They lie about their activities to preserve their money grubbing activities.......and that's all ok with you??

If it's all above board, why are they lying about it??

You understand so little about taxpayer money that it makes me think that you must be from another country.

[Popcorn Sutton]

Michele Bachmann's crew should be PISSED. ABC News refers to it as "the business she and her husband own in Minnesota."<object classid="clsid<img src=" images="" smilies="" cheesy.gif"="" alt="" title="03Cheesy" smilieid="14" class="inlineimg" border="0">
<embed src="http://abcnews.go.com/assets/player/walt2.6/flash/SFP_Walt_2_65.swf" quality="high" allowscriptaccess="always" allownetworking="all" allowfullscreen="true" pluginspage="http://www.adobe.com/shockwave/download/download.cgi?P1_Prod_Version=ShockwaveFlash" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" flashvars="configUrl=http://abcnews.go.com/video/sfp/embedPlayerConfig&configId=406732&clipId=14049522&gig_lt=1310496218500&gig_pt=1310496221843&gig_g=2" name="ABCESNWID" height="278" width="344"></object>

[epicSocialism4tw]

Michele Bachmann's crew should be PISSED. ABC News refers to it as "the business she and her husband own in Minnesota."

You mean a wife has an interest in a husband's clinic? No way! Ha!

Thanks for elucidating that for us, MacGrubeCrew.

[DenverBrit]

You understand so little about taxpayer money that it makes me think that you must be from another country.

Still deflecting.

Why are you ok with a pair of liars and con artists taking taxpayers money??

[W*GS]

She's much more presidential than Barack Obama, that's for sure.

Yep, epicFail.

Between this and her ag suckage, just how much does Bachmann feed at the trough?

[Popcorn Sutton]

You mean a wife has an interest in a husband's clinic? No way! Ha!

Thanks for elucidating that for us, MacGrubeCrew.

But, but, but, it's HER HUSBAND's clinic right?

The fact that you can post threads about Obama's half brother and pass them off (at least in your own mind) as somehow being relevant to Obama and then turn around and act like this is disturbing.

[W*GS]

LOL

Will the irony and your hypocrisy never end?? Ha!

Never. We're talking epicFail...

[DenverBrit]

Bachmann wants to cut back medicare, but not before she gets her share of the money.

<iframe width="640" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/6Q2HGeRG3vg?rel=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[Rigs11]

wow,llama has finally lost it. i dont even think his righte friends can save him from this one.

[Popcorn Sutton]

Nah, only a propagandic half-truth.

Oh, the irony!

[cutthemdown]

I didn't lie. I linked the story so everyone can see it's clearly her husbands clinic.

Does it really matter? Do you feel this is not a reflection on her views?

AGAIN, all you ever do is post misleading thread titles so get off your high horse.

When people get mad at epic I always say that thread titles that don't tell the whole story, or are misleading are very common on the Mane. Of course it is a reflection of her views though IMO. She is way to religious IMO to be true Tea Party. The Tea Party should not be about pushing your religion on someone else. Besides More gay people mean more women for the straight guys. It's the lesbians we need to worry about. Some of them tasty and losing them is tough! :)

[alkemical]

http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRmBVzJAZUE7VYW94_W88mC4cbyVBLY-UHHqe2l8Yr-Cojrq325qA

[cutthemdown]

Still though a main goal of nature is to reproduce. Being gay makes you an abnormal human. Not saying that is bad, only saying I don't see it as "normal" animal or human behavoir. Many will say they have found gay animals, I would say fine they have found 2 headed snakes also but that doesn't make a human with 2 heads normal. It's all good though there shouldn't be any laws saying you have to be normal.

[Popcorn Sutton]

You mean a wife has an interest in a husband's clinic? No way! Ha!

Thanks for elucidating that for us, MacGrubeCrew.

Interesting wording...

"an interest"

vs.

"co-ownership"

On the campaign trail she's been touting her and her husband's businesses! But now, of course, it's her husbands business.

Convenient.

[Popcorn Sutton]

Still though a main goal of nature is to reproduce. Being gay makes you an abnormal human. Not saying that is bad, only saying I don't see it as "normal" animal or human behavoir. Many will say they have found gay animals, I would say fine they have found 2 headed snakes also but that doesn't make a human with 2 heads normal. It's all good though there shouldn't be any laws saying you have to be normal.

....this closer represents where I thought this thread might go. :approve:

I.E. the notion of "curing" someone of being gay.

[ghwk]

Still though a main goal of nature is to reproduce. Being gay makes you an abnormal human. Not saying that is bad, only saying I don't see it as "normal" animal or human behavoir. Many will say they have found gay animals, I would say fine they have found 2 headed snakes also but that doesn't make a human with 2 heads normal. It's all good though there shouldn't be any laws saying you have to be normal.

I don't hate Christians, but I hate epicfail for claiming to be a christian. Can you imagine this guy as a member of your church, or any church for that matter? And around your kids? I think they let him have a computer so he can keep himself happy here at the Bartonsville insane asylum:

[cutthemdown]

Yeah I can't get into any candidate who bothers to worry about saving gay people. That's just stupid and not at all important to the country. Gay people don't have kids, rarely adopt, so are not a big impact on families anyways as far as I can see, Plus according to stats they seem to make a higher income then other groups, so I doubt they are a drain on govt services either. Plus the kids they don't have don't clog up school system. Nope it's official I think, gay is probably good for the economy. Also if we legalized gay marriage everywhere that would create jobs in the sectors that service weddings, DJ's, Bands, catering, hotels, limos a lot of which are small local business that would benefit. Any true Tea Party libertarian would not be for caring about gays IMO. Bauchman a fraud, she is no small govt, she is her govt and get rid of all of yours small govt. I don't like her and I won't vote for her. Repubs will have to do better or my goal will be to hope Obama wins, Repubs gain in Senate and keep house. Go for a stalemate where neither side can do much damage. Maybe be then we will get a sane person to vote for?

[cutthemdown]

How many more flowers would get sold if half the gay couples in the country had a wedding? I wish I was smart enough in math, and had enough info, to figure things like that out. I mean it would have to be a lot of flowers right? Meh I'm probably just crazy.

ok I looked it up wikipedia says 72 billion a yr spent on wedding is the USA. By letting gays marry I bet they would add at least another 30 billion as they all married. It would be like a free 30 billion dollar stimulus as most gays have money and would be spending, plus they haven't been able to marry and there is a huge backlog of them waiting. Man this is a no brainer. Legalize gay marriage and move on to more important issues.

[cutthemdown]

Why even care about Bauchman. She is spending a ton in Iowa where ROmney isnt even trying and she is barley neck and neck with him. She isn't going to win the nomination. More surprising is Ron Paul saying he is retiring from Congress, I thought his goal was to just raise money and stay in Congress, but he says he wants to go full time after the nomination. Makes me wonder if he is angling for VP or something?

[Popcorn Sutton]

How many more flowers would get sold if half the gay couples in the country had a wedding? I wish I was smart enough in math, and had enough info, to figure things like that out. I mean it would have to be a lot of flowers right? Meh I'm probably just crazy.

ok I looked it up wikipedia says 72 billion a yr spent on wedding is the USA. By letting gays marry I bet they would add at least another 30 billion as they all married. It would be like a free 30 billion dollar stimulus as most gays have money and would be spending, plus they haven't been able to marry and there is a huge backlog of them waiting. Man this is a no brainer. Legalize gay marriage and move on to more important issues.

Ha, gay stimulus. ROFL!

[elsid13]

That's a bit of a misleading thread title, don't you think?

It's about Michele's husband, not Michele.

You might want to try a little honesty.

ABC News reported Monday on the controversial therapy used by Bachmann & Associates, a Christian-based counseling clinic run by Marcus Bachmann, on Monday night. The clinic is co-owned by the Minnesota congresswoman.

[TheElusiveKyleOrton]

ABC News reported Monday on the controversial therapy used by Bachmann & Associates, a Christian-based counseling clinic run by Marcus Bachmann, on Monday night. The clinic is co-owned by the Minnesota congresswoman.

EpicFAIL.

Watch: now he'll claim that he's got you on ignore.

[TonyR]

Wow, the level of suckage coming from epicfaildramaskillet's keyboard in this thread has to be a new high point. Let's review, shall we?

One of the biggest liars on this forum calls the OP a liar despite the fact that he didn't lie.

One of the most biased people on this forum accuses those who have an opposing viewpoint of being biased.

He shows strong support for Michelle Bachmann.

He says the clinic is owned by Bachmann's husband and not her, as if this would be a good argument even if it were true.

He claims the OP is getting "pwned" despite himself being beaten into the ground by almost every other post on the thread.

He fails to admit he's wrong when it is shown for a fact that Bachmann is an owner and is involved with the clinic.

None of his righty buddies come to defense because there is no helping him.

Finally, he runs and hides when he sees there is no win for him here.

Sad. Pathetic. And, most of all, hilarious!

epicfail, the depths of your delusion and lack of self awareness are troubling. Seek help.

[Mr.Meanie]

The funniest thing about this forum is drama llama's hysterics. He posts grand sweeping statements, ridicules anyone who has a different opinion than him, says they are all getting "pwned", then proceeds to contradict himself repeatedly while acting like everyone else is crazy. Then he abruptly disappears from the thread, never to return again.

...and then does it all over again in the next thread.

[TonyR]

The funniest thing about this forum is drama llama's hysterics. He posts grand sweeping statements, ridicules anyone who has a different opinion than him, says they are all getting "pwned", then proceeds to contradict himself repeatedly while acting like everyone else is crazy. Then he abruptly disappears from the thread, never to return again.

...and then does it all over again in the next thread.

LOL Yup. And you know he's in trouble when he goes the neg rep route.

[Requiem]

Epic is a ****ing moron.

All of us have gotten that by now.

He had no problem smothering Obama in regards to his "associates" for the past two to three years, yet he goes off the deep end on this one and even has the audacity to assert she is more Presidential than Barack.

What a fatass.

[Popcorn Sutton]

Wow, the level of suckage coming from epicfaildramaskillet's keyboard in this thread has to be a new high point. Let's review, shall we?

One of the biggest liars on this forum calls the OP a liar despite the fact that he didn't lie.

One of the most biased people on this forum accuses those who have an opposing viewpoint of being biased.

He shows strong support for Michelle Bachmann.

He says the clinic is owned by Bachmann's husband and not her, as if this would be a good argument even if it were true.

He claims the OP is getting "pwned" despite himself being beaten into the ground by almost every other post on the thread.

He fails to admit he's wrong when it is shown for a fact that Bachmann is an owner and is involved with the clinic.

None of his righty buddies come to defense because there is no helping him.

Finally, he runs and hides when he sees there is no win for him here.

Sad. Pathetic. And, most of all, hilarious!

epicfail, the depths of your delusion and lack of self awareness are troubling. Seek help.

Yeah, we may need to bump this one from time to time. Dude lost it today.

[DivineBronco]

Wow, the level of suckage coming from epicfaildramaskillet's keyboard in this thread has to be a new high point. Let's review, shall we?

One of the biggest liars on this forum calls the OP a liar despite the fact that he didn't lie.

One of the most biased people on this forum accuses those who have an opposing viewpoint of being biased.

He shows strong support for Michelle Bachmann.

He says the clinic is owned by Bachmann's husband and not her, as if this would be a good argument even if it were true.

He claims the OP is getting "pwned" despite himself being beaten into the ground by almost every other post on the thread.

He fails to admit he's wrong when it is shown for a fact that Bachmann is an owner and is involved with the clinic.

None of his righty buddies come to defense because there is no helping him.

Finally, he runs and hides when he sees there is no win for him here.

Sad. Pathetic. And, most of all, hilarious!

epicfail, the depths of your delusion and lack of self awareness are troubling. Seek help.
buuuump

[cherish]

She's much more presidential than Barack Obama, that's for sure.

really?:wiggle:

[DivineBronco]

http://gawker.com/5820706/michele-bachmann-in-her-own-words-gays-are-part-of-satan

[epicSocialism4tw]

But, but, but, it's HER HUSBAND's clinic right?

The fact that you can post threads about Obama's half brother and pass them off (at least in your own mind) as somehow being relevant to Obama and then turn around and act like this is disturbing.

Yes, liar.

It is her husbands clinic.

She isnt the person in there providing care, and she isnt the person whose character you awould be trying to assassinate if you were being truthful.

Keep on lyin' though, MacGrubeCrew.

http://www.portlandmercury.com/images/blogimages/2010/06/02/1275496488-liar.jpg

[Requiem]

buuuump

It bears repeating.

I'm still flabbergasted that he continues on posting here when (A) a lot of people have him on ignore (B) don't like them and (C) he has little or no ability to socialize with others without acting like a snob or condescending douche.

It's quite shameful and moreover, extremely reflective of the lack of social ability or connections he has in real life -- but hey, he almost won an award one time -- he is a pretty big deal.

[alkemical]

Wow, the level of suckage coming from epicfaildramaskillet's keyboard in this thread has to be a new high point. Let's review, shall we?

One of the biggest liars on this forum calls the OP a liar despite the fact that he didn't lie.

One of the most biased people on this forum accuses those who have an opposing viewpoint of being biased.

He shows strong support for Michelle Bachmann.

He says the clinic is owned by Bachmann's husband and not her, as if this would be a good argument even if it were true.

He claims the OP is getting "pwned" despite himself being beaten into the ground by almost every other post on the thread.

He fails to admit he's wrong when it is shown for a fact that Bachmann is an owner and is involved with the clinic.

None of his righty buddies come to defense because there is no helping him.

Finally, he runs and hides when he sees there is no win for him here.

Sad. Pathetic. And, most of all, hilarious!

epicfail, the depths of your delusion and lack of self awareness are troubling. Seek help.

Or the fact he knows Bubbles from The trailer park boys, he speaks 17 languages, i mean - he'd have to be in his 80's then, right? he'd have no time for the OM if he's THAT busy.

[ghwk]

Or the fact he knows Bubbles from The trailer park boys, he speaks 17 languages, i mean - he'd have to be in his 80's then, right? he'd have no time for the OM if he's THAT busy.

Well he does weigh 500 lbs so it's not like he's moving around all that much.....

[Popcorn Sutton]

Yes, liar.

It is her husbands clinic.

She isnt the person in there providing care, and she isnt the person whose character you awould be trying to assassinate if you were being truthful.

Keep on lyin' though, MacGrubeCrew.

http://www.portlandmercury.com/images/blogimages/2010/06/02/1275496488-liar.jpg

You embarrass yourself... :spit:

[DenverBrit]

<iframe width="480" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/FbwkkXGmFrI?rel=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[Popcorn Sutton]

She isnt the person in there providing care, and she isnt the person whose character you awould be trying to assassinate if you were being truthful.


Tell us about Obama's half-brother again... Hypocrite.

This is her husband whom she co-owns the business with. You need a definition of ownership?

It means she has partial ownership of everything that happens in that business. If she wanted to distance herself from this practice of "pray away the gay" she could easily do so.

Bottom line. Still no lie. Do you ask yourself why nobody has come in here to rescue you on this thread? Instead they left you to sink.... why?

[TheElusiveKyleOrton]

Do you ask yourself why nobody has come in here to rescue you on this thread? Instead they left you to sink.... why?

You're asking epicFAIL to have an inquisitive mind and actually desire answers to these questions. That is asking too much.

[Popcorn Sutton]

I love this thread. Sums up Llama's hypocrisy on one neat and tidy little package.

[Popcorn Sutton]

Don’t misunderstand. I am not here bashing people who are homosexuals, who are lesbians, who are bisexual, who are transgender. We need to have profound compassion for people who are dealing with the very real issue of sexual dysfunction in their life and sexual identity disorders.” — Senator Michele Bachmann, on homosexuality as a mental disorder, speaking at EdWatch National Education Conference, November 6, 2004.

[TheElusiveKyleOrton]

Don’t misunderstand. I am not here bashing people who are homosexuals, who are lesbians, who are bisexual, who are transgender. We need to have profound compassion for people who are dealing with the very real issue of sexual dysfunction in their life and sexual identity disorders.” — Senator Michele Bachmann, on homosexuality as a mental disorder, speaking at EdWatch National Education Conference, November 6, 2004.

http://static.quickmeme.com/media/social/qm.gif
Presidential.

[Popcorn Sutton]

Marcus Bachmann, who in March was described by former Minnesota Republican Party Chairman Ron Carey as part of Michele's "brain trust," was a guest on the Christian-based "Point of View" radio talk show on May 12, 2010, where he came out strongly against the LGBT community.

"We have to understand: Barbarians need to be educated. They need to be disciplined. Just because someone feels it or thinks it doesn’t mean that we are supposed to go down that road. That’s what is called the sinful nature. We have a responsibility as parents and as authority figures not to encourage such thoughts and feelings from moving into the action steps," Marcus Bachmann said.

But does Marcus Bachmann, besides being Michele Bachmann's husband, really have any political influence on his wife? Carey, who served as the congresswoman's chief of staff in 2010, said yes in March.

"The only person she talks to as an insider is her husband, Marcus, who's a wonderful man, and her son Lucas," Carey told the Minnesota Star-Tribune. "That's really her brain trust."

"Yes, I'm her strategist," Marcus Bachmann told the Star-Trib.

[Spider]

That's a bit of a misleading thread title, don't you think?

It's about Michele's husband, not Michele.

You might want to try a little honesty.

:rofl::rofl::rofl: coming from you of all people Hilarious!Hilarious!Hilarious!

[Garcia Bronco]

Why are you people so threatened by Gay's Disease and people wanting to cure themselves through prayer and God?

[Spider]

Why are you people so threatened by Gay's Disease and people wanting to cure themselves through prayer and God?

Ha! shoot low sheriff garcia is on a shetland

[MplsBronco]

Still though a main goal of nature is to reproduce. Being gay makes you an abnormal human. Not saying that is bad, only saying I don't see it as "normal" animal or human behavoir. Many will say they have found gay animals, I would say fine they have found 2 headed snakes also but that doesn't make a human with 2 heads normal. It's all good though there shouldn't be any laws saying you have to be normal.

Hate to break it to you.....but gays can reproduce! Oh the horror! Wouldn't someone who is sterile or that has sperm that swim in circles the abnormal one? Think before you speak.

[Mr.Meanie]

Hate to break it to you.....but gays can reproduce! Oh the horror! Wouldn't someone who is sterile or that has sperm that swim in circles the abnormal one? Think before you speak.

The sterile (i.e. unbreeders) just need to pray about it, it will go away.

[Popcorn Sutton]

Why are you people so threatened by Gay's Disease and people wanting to cure themselves through prayer and God?

I'm not threatened by prayer one bit. But calling gay people barbarians and telling them they can pray away being gay is a bit extreme to me.

If Bachmann thought it was ok to practice reparative therapy then why does he deny they do it?

<iframe width="560" height="349" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/sUwRWDjcLs8" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Also, EpicDingDong, @ 7:23 Michele Bachmann touts how she's proud of the business "we" created.

[Popcorn Sutton]

Epic is a ****ing moron.

All of us have gotten that by now.

He had no problem smothering Obama in regards to his "associates" for the past two to three years, yet he goes off the deep end on this one and even has the audacity to assert she is more Presidential than Barack.

What a fatass.

"The only person she talks to as an insider is her husband, Marcus, who's a wonderful man, and her son Lucas," Carey told the Minnesota Star-Tribune. "That's really her brain trust."

"Yes, I'm her strategist," Marcus Bachmann told the Star-Trib.



Enough said.

[Requiem]

Good quotes. Good research.

Still waiting on Sir Tubs A Lot to tell us how Bachmann is Presidential. . .

[DivineBronco]

Good quotes. Good research.

Still waiting on Sir Tubs A Lot to tell us how Bachmann is Presidential. . .

it is amazing he is going to every other thread.......but he acts like this one no longer exists
he really needs to be studied in some sort of lab setting

[Popcorn Sutton]

Just checked through my reps and the only neg reps I have are from Llama. I must be doing something right.

[cutthemdown]

Hate to break it to you.....but gays can reproduce! Oh the horror! Wouldn't someone who is sterile or that has sperm that swim in circles the abnormal one? Think before you speak.

Sorry but 2 gay people can not reproduce. You knew what i meant. Sure they can find someone of the opposite sex and still reproduce, together though they can't. If we all went gay the country would not survive. Therefore being gay has to be considered abnormal behavior because it goes against natures instincts to reproduce. Not a big deal though because in America you don't have to be normal. I still support the right of gays to marry, I just don't see it as normal human behavior. I could be wrong though, maybe it is normal in nature for a certain number of the animals to be gay. Either way though it doesn't matter they should not be banned from marriage.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Last Year A Majority Of Minnesotans Surveyed Said They Think Michele Bachmann Is ‘Embarrassing’

Republican Congresswoman Michele Bachmann represents Minnesota’s 6th District in the United States House of Representatives, and recently announced her candidacy to be the Republican nominee for President in 2012.

Since announcing her candidacy the media has been focusing on inaccuracies in statements she has made, as well as statements she has made in the past that sound bigoted.

One thing the media doesn’t seem to be focusing on is what the people of Minnesota think of Michele Bachmann. According to a survey taken last year, a majority of Minnesotans said they think Congresswoman Bachmann is ‘embarrassing’.

Via The Minnesota Independent, from February 2012;

A new survey of Minnesotans shows that a majority of residents — 56 percent — are embarrassed by Rep. Michele Bachmann. The release of the survey, commissioned by the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, Democracy for America and Credo Action, follows recent high-profile statements by Bachmann that she believes President Barack Obama wants to “annihilate” conservatives, that the U.S. faces a “curse” – and extinction — if it fails to support Israel, and that government must “wean” Americans off of social safety net programs like Medicare and Social Security.

The Bachmann survey results, released exclusively to the Minnesota Independent, measure responses to the question, “Do you think Congresswoman Michele Bachmann does Minnesota proud in Congress or embarrasses Minnesota?” While 56 percent of respondents statewide said they were embarrassed by Bachmann, 29 percent answered that they were “proud” of the Sixth Congressional District Republican, and 15 percent were “not sure.”

Predictably, 87 percent of Democrats polled said they were embarrassed, while only 12 percent of Republicans agreed (58 percent of Republican respondents said they were proud of Bachmann).

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2011/07/14/last-year-a-majority-of-minnesotans-surveyed-said/

[cutthemdown]

Hopefully Bauchman gets trounced early and drops out. She may do well in Iowa though, but hopefully Romney beats her.

[Requiem]

Iowa? Lol.

[Requiem]

it is amazing he is going to every other thread.......but he acts like this one no longer exists
he really needs to be studied in some sort of lab setting

Yes,

You see the threads. In another one I just read how he believes Palin and Bachmann are both indeed, based on everything, better served to lead than Obama. Baffling.

[El Minion]

The sterile (i.e. unbreeders) just need to pray about it, it will go away.

You know what they really should do is pray for hetero's to stop having gay babies, hetero's are the one who are creating the problem if you really think about it. Gay's can't reproduce as Cut explained to everyone, so the only way to stop the gay abnormality from occurring in nature is for everyone to stop having sex, and since religious conservatives keep reminding us that no sex should occur outside of marriage, then to solve the gay issue we should stop marrying. :wiggle:

[cutthemdown]

You know what they really should do is pray for hetero's to stop having gay babies, hetero's are the one who are creating the problem if you really think about it. Gay's can't reproduce as Cut explained to everyone, so the only way to stop the gay abnormality from occurring in nature is for everyone to stop having sex, and since religious conservatives keep reminding us that no sex should occur outside of marriage, then to solve the gay issue we should stop marrying. :wiggle:

This isn't even clever. You don't cut off your nose to spite your face.

[El Minion]

This isn't even clever. You don't cut off your nose to spite your face.

What's clever is equating gay marriage with eventual inter-species marriages being allowed, and all the conservative republicans lapping it up. Their reasoning reminded me of this post (http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20100815142847AA2IlH0):

10 Reasons Why Gay Marriage is Wrong

01) Being gay is not natural. Real Americans always reject unnatural things like eyeglasses, polyester, and air conditioning.

02) Gay marriage will encourage people to be gay, in the same way that hanging around tall people will make you tall.

03) Legalizing gay marriage will open the door to all kinds of crazy behavior. People may even wish to marry their pets because a dog has legal standing and can sign a marriage contract.

04) Straight marriage has been around a long time and hasn't changed at all; women are still property, blacks still can't marry whites, and divorce is still illegal.

05) Straight marriage will be less meaningful if gay marriage were allowed; the sanctity of Britany Spears' 55-hour just-for-fun marriage would be destroyed.

06) Straight marriages are valid because they produce children. Gay couples, infertile couples, and old people shouldn't be allowed to marry because our orphanages aren't full yet, and the world needs more children.

07) Obviously gay parents will raise gay children, since straight parents only raise straight children.

08) Gay marriage is not supported by religion. In a theocracy like ours, the values of one religion are imposed on the entire country. That's why we have only one religion in America.

09) Children can never succeed without a male and a female role model at home. That's why we as a society expressly forbid single parents to raise children.

10) Gay marriage will change the foundation of society; we could never adapt to new social norms. Just like we haven't adapted to cars, the service-sector economy, or longer life spans.

[TheElusiveKyleOrton]

This isn't even clever. You don't cut off your nose to spite your face.

Yet the Republicans are willing to let the nation default in order to settle a political score. Sure sounds like "cutting off your nose to spite your face" to me.

[Odysseus]

The thread title is correct.

"Bachmann's clinic can cure you"

Besides, you are the LAST person EVER EVER EVER that should be critical of thread titles. That is a laugher!!!

:angel:

[cutthemdown]

Yet the Republicans are willing to let the nation default in order to settle a political score. Sure sounds like "cutting off your nose to spite your face" to me.

Obama could have gotten it raised already if he would just let go of the tax raising. More scare tactics. First it was let us do a 700 billion dollar stimulus or unemployment will go up and up. Before that it was the healthcare bs. Now its raise taxes or the debt limit will get reached and we will go into default, not soc sec checks, no payment of vet bennies etc etc. Total utter close the Washington Monument type political hyperbole.

[cutthemdown]

What's clever is equating gay marriage with eventual inter-species marriages being allowed, and all the conservative republicans lapping it up. Their reasoning reminded me of this post (http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20100815142847AA2IlH0):

I have no problem with Gays marrying, being in military. I used to sort of but realize now all Americans should be have same chances. The only issue I sort of see as the same is if adults want to be polygamous. I think if we are going to say gay is ok to marry, why not? But anything with animals is ridiculous until someone can show me an animal who can say I do. :) Right now any animal sex would be non consensual IMO!

[cutthemdown]

Also El Minion I agree that the religious wing of the country uses scare tactics just like the politicians do. Its all about trying to get people so worried they just vote against it. God forbid my neighbor **** a cow! so lets not let gay people marry. I agree that is the most insane argument one could make. The only rational argument is that gay could lead to a negative population growth, but even that seems highly unlikely. Women just too attractive to not get some!

[TheElusiveKyleOrton]

Obama could have gotten it raised already if he would just let go of the tax raising. More scare tactics. First it was let us do a 700 billion dollar stimulus or unemployment will go up and up. Before that it was the healthcare bs. Now its raise taxes or the debt limit will get reached and we will go into default, not soc sec checks, no payment of vet bennies etc etc. Total utter close the Washington Monument type political hyperbole.

Economists roundly agree that the recession would have been worse without the stimulus. You're no economist.

As for taxation, WE NEED TO BRING IN MORE REVENUE IF WE WANT TO SOLVE THE PROBLEM. Are you really too ****ing stupid to realize that more $$$ = lower deficit?

The Republicans just want cuts. I want cuts IN ADDITION TO more revenue. One plan -- the Republican plan -- does NOTHING for the deficit reduction. The other plan -- the Democratic plan -- actually addresses the problem by cutting government services AND raising revenue. This is a chance to actually fix the problem.

The Republicans are not interested in fixing the problem. The Republicans are interested in saving their own hides.

[cutthemdown]

Economists roundly agree that the recession would have been worse without the stimulus. You're no economist.

As for taxation, WE NEED TO BRING IN MORE REVENUE IF WE WANT TO SOLVE THE PROBLEM. Are you really too ****ing stupid to realize that more $$$ = lower deficit?

The Republicans just want cuts. I want cuts IN ADDITION TO more revenue. One plan -- the Republican plan -- does NOTHING for the deficit reduction. The other plan -- the Democratic plan -- actually addresses the problem by cutting government services AND raising revenue. This is a chance to actually fix the problem.

The Republicans are not interested in fixing the problem. The Republicans are interested in saving their own hides.

Not true. Economists testified before congress that the stimulus was inneffective because they didn't spend it on infrastructure.

[Spider]

Not true. Economists testified before congress that the stimulus was inneffective because they didn't spend it on infrastructure.

load of horse crap , every freaking road construction sign i have seen any where , says funded by the get america back to work fund

[cutthemdown]

load of horse crap , every freaking road construction sign i have seen any where , says funded by the get america back to work fund

Sorry spidey only 20% went to infrastructure. Sure that still was enough to put up a lot of signs doing work but not enough to help unemployment. They are by my house as well.

[TheElusiveKyleOrton]

Not true. Economists testified before congress that the stimulus was inneffective because they didn't spend it on infrastructure.

Actually, they said the stimulus would have been more successful had it been BIGGER.

Don't let those pesky facts get in the way of your argument. After all, we all know that facts have a liberal bias.

[cutthemdown]

Actually, they said the stimulus would have been more successful had it been BIGGER.

Don't let those pesky facts get in the way of your argument. After all, we all know that facts have a liberal bias.



The reason some said it would not stimulate employment unless bigger was because of how they saw it being spent. Too much went to states who used it to just keep services going. They didn't want to lay off teachers, fireman, police etc. Hence why Obama changed it to jobs saved instead of created. Economists roundly agree that you don't create jobs or stimulate by doing that. You need to create infrastructure jobs, or give the money to people who will spend it into the economy. All they did was replace lost tax revenue with stimulus money, to keep govt debts, pensions, payrolls flowing.

So yeah some said bigger may work but read

http://www.johnbtaylor.com/

Go look on his page for his testimony about the stimulus to congress. This dude knows his stuff and quite honestly rips the stimulus. So no I am not an economist but he is.

[cutthemdown]

load of horse crap , every freaking road construction sign i have seen any where , says funded by the get america back to work fund

dude it was 1 trillion dollars. They could spend 10-20% on infrastructure and that is enough for us to see signs about the work on roadsides. They are by my house as well. The problem is that isn't enough. They spent most of the stimulus on non infrastructure. Its a proven fact.

[alkemical]

dude it was 1 trillion dollars. They could spend 10-20% on infrastructure and that is enough for us to see signs about the work on roadsides. They are by my house as well. The problem is that isn't enough. They spent most of the stimulus on non infrastructure. Its a proven fact.

Did you see the articles about how there is a ton of Nat'l Gas leaking due to failing infrastructure?

Did you see the oil pipelines degrading to the point of "wasted" oil/leaks?

Yet, there is this trumpet to "drill our own oil/nat'l gas" - yet those very same companies we gave socialism too (Big Energy) - has been failing to maintain their infrastructure.

Why would, or should we give them more $ to keep the systems in disrepair? Why should we invest in THESE energy options, when the infrastructure is failing?

Why not invest in other options?

[cutthemdown]

Did you see the articles about how there is a ton of Nat'l Gas leaking due to failing infrastructure?

Did you see the oil pipelines degrading to the point of "wasted" oil/leaks?

Yet, there is this trumpet to "drill our own oil/nat'l gas" - yet those very same companies we gave socialism too (Big Energy) - has been failing to maintain their infrastructure.

Why would, or should we give them more $ to keep the systems in disrepair? Why should we invest in THESE energy options, when the infrastructure is failing?

Why not invest in other options?

It's not a stimulus unless you invest in things were the money flows into the economy quickly. Sorry but Obama's did not do that. Read up on it. The vast majority when to pay down debt. That does not stimulate jobs, and its why it didn't work. China did there's the right way. 90% for big infrastructure projects.

[cutthemdown]

Did you see the articles about how there is a ton of Nat'l Gas leaking due to failing infrastructure?

Did you see the oil pipelines degrading to the point of "wasted" oil/leaks?

Yet, there is this trumpet to "drill our own oil/nat'l gas" - yet those very same companies we gave socialism too (Big Energy) - has been failing to maintain their infrastructure.

Why would, or should we give them more $ to keep the systems in disrepair? Why should we invest in THESE energy options, when the infrastructure is failing?

Why not invest in other options?

Also you do realize liberal environmentalists fighting virtually every alternative energy project from wind turbines to solar power, to wave generators? It's like they are never happy.

[alkemical]

Also you do realize liberal environmentalists fighting virtually every alternative energy project from wind turbines to solar power, to wave generators? It's like they are never happy.

Funny how they have so much power to stop a solar panel, but can't stop other things, eh?

[cutthemdown]

Funny how they have so much power to stop a solar panel, but can't stop other things, eh?

It's not even like they stop it. They just force millions extra to be spent fighting them, doing stupid impact studies on a desert tortoise etc etc. Funny thing is they are wrong half the time.

[alkemical]

It's not even like they stop it. They just force millions extra to be spent fighting them, doing stupid impact studies on a desert tortoise etc etc. Funny thing is they are wrong half the time.

Funny how they stop a solar panel, but not say... "fracking", or other things.

I just find that interesting.

But hey, I don't want to invest in "carbon" solutions, since the companies took their WELFARE and didn't so **** with it to keep the infrastructure updated.

I never heard of anyone getting sick from a broken solar panel.

[cutthemdown]

Hey lets use oil, nope thats dirty, hey lets use nuclear, nope thats dangerous, ok let's do solar, nope it ruins the desert, how about wind, nope it kills birds.....

Ok how about we kill all the humans? YES!!!!!!!!!!

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Economists roundly agree that the recession would have been worse without the stimulus. You're no economist.

As for taxation, WE NEED TO BRING IN MORE REVENUE IF WE WANT TO SOLVE THE PROBLEM. Are you really too ****ing stupid to realize that more $$$ = lower deficit?

The Republicans just want cuts. I want cuts IN ADDITION TO more revenue. One plan -- the Republican plan -- does NOTHING for the deficit reduction. The other plan -- the Democratic plan -- actually addresses the problem by cutting government services AND raising revenue. This is a chance to actually fix the problem.

The Republicans are not interested in fixing the problem. The Republicans are interested in saving their own hides.

Ding ding ding! Winner.

Too bad you're arguing with a guy who couldn't care less about facts or the truth - only ideology and party loyalty.

[El Minion]

The reason some said it would not stimulate employment unless bigger was because of how they saw it being spent. Too much went to states who used it to just keep services going. They didn't want to lay off teachers, fireman, police etc. Hence why Obama changed it to jobs saved instead of created. Economists roundly agree that you don't create jobs or stimulate by doing that. You need to create infrastructure jobs, or give the money to people who will spend it into the economy. All they did was replace lost tax revenue with stimulus money, to keep govt debts, pensions, payrolls flowing.

So yeah some said bigger may work but read

http://www.johnbtaylor.com/

Go look on his page for his testimony about the stimulus to congress. This dude knows his stuff and quite honestly rips the stimulus. So no I am not an economist but he is.

This John Taylor? (http://www.orangemane.com/BB/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=3211978)

(Hat tip: Paul Krugman (http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/07/03/bad-tayloring/) and Brad DeLong (http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2011/07/john-taylors-claim-that-fiscal-policy-would-be-ineffective-in-curing-a-deep-depression-for-the-virtual-green-room.html))

Taylor seems to agree with the Keynesians, but claims he doesn't (http://noahpinionblog.blogspot.com/2011/07/taylor-seems-to-agree-with-keynesians.html)


http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-iS9KByQ-zrg/Tg9bn6Jmt6I/AAAAAAAAA48/29mLdS1kLF0/s400/collapse2.600..jpg (http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-iS9KByQ-zrg/Tg9bn6Jmt6I/AAAAAAAAA48/29mLdS1kLF0/s1600/collapse2.600..jpg)


John Taylor has what I consider to be a pretty good post about the stimulus (http://johnbtaylorsblog.blogspot.com/2011/06/how-to-resolve-stimulus-debate-use-data.html). He points out that if we evaluate the stimulus' impact using the same models that we used to predict its impact, we don't gain a lot of added value from the backward-looking part of the analysis. That is very true. He then points out the extreme difficulty of evaluating the stimulus (or other policy interventions) without basically assuming your conclusion through the choice of the model used to construct the counterfactual. This is also true.


He then presents a paper that he has written (http://www.stanford.edu/%7Ejohntayl/JEL_taylor%20revised.pdf) that attempts to evaluate the ARRA. According to Taylor, he has clear evidence that the stimulus didn't work.


This, of course, sent alarm bells ringing through my head. According to my Efficient Marketplace-of-Ideas Hypothesis, if there were an easy way to show convincingly that the stimulus failed, somebody would already have shown it. Previous studies purporting to show the failure of stimulus have been less than convincing (http://noahpinionblog.blogspot.com/2011/05/conley-and-dupor-revised.html). So I went into this paper expecting to find serious problems.


But instead I found Taylor pretty much agreeing with the Keynesians...


Taylor evaluates the ARRA by looking at changes in specific components of output - federal government purchases, state government purchases, and private consumption. According to Keynesian theory, if stimulus works it should work by raising either G (in the case of a rise in government purchases) or C (in the case of tax refunds or increased transfers). So Taylor just looks to see the degree to which this actually happened.


First, he shows that personal consumption doesn't appear to have been much affected by the tax rebates and transfer payments that made up a big chunk of the stimulus:
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-x-3DGaZP16U/Tg9TVskMG_I/AAAAAAAAA44/kgBPubsTPUU/s400/Taylor1.png (http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-x-3DGaZP16U/Tg9TVskMG_I/AAAAAAAAA44/kgBPubsTPUU/s1600/Taylor1.png)


This graph looks convincing; you see bumps in stimulus income, but no bumps in consumption. Of course, Taylor is assuming a particular lag structure for his model; it's quite possible that the rise in spending due to tax rebates and transfers didn't occur immediately, but were spread out over the next few quarters, so that you wouldn't expect to see contemporaneous bumps. Similarly, when Taylor generates counterfactuals to show that consumption didn't rise, he picks a specific lag structure. Maybe he tried alternate specifications and didn't report them because they showed the same thing? Or maybe not.


Anyway, the arbitrary lag specification means that this model is not in any way conclusive. But it is still suggestive. And what it suggests is that tax rebates and transfer payments don't make for particularly good stimulus, because in a balance-sheet recession people will just use the money to pay down their debts. Helping people pay down debts may be good in its own right (http://economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2010/06/why-i-changed-my-mind-about-tax-cuts.html); but this is a reason why Keynesians often argue that government spending is a better approach to stimulus than tax rebates.


On that note, Taylor notes that federal expenditures didn't rise by very much due to the ARRA:
The most striking finding in Figure 3 is that only a small part of ARRA went to purchases of goods and services by the federal government. Measured as a percentage of GDP the amounts were immaterial: At the maximum effect, which occurred in the third quarter of 2010, federal government purchases due to ARRA reached only 0.21 percent of GDP and federal infrastructure only 0.05 percent of GDP.

These amounts are too small for the stimulus package to have had a significant effect on the overall economy. In this case the debate over the size of the government purchases multiplier is largely moot because the government purchases multiplier had virtually nothing to multiply at the federal level.This precisely echoes the complaints that Keynesians had about the ARRA: not enough federal government purchases, not enough infrastructure spending.


Finally, Taylor looks at state-level spending, and concludes that the ARRA grants mainly replaced state borrowing with federal borrowing:
Figure 6 shows that in the absence of the 2009 stimulus grants, net borrowing by state and local governments would have been greater than it was with the grants. This is consistent with the view that state and local governments tried to smooth their expenditures in the face of temporary changes in income, much as households without borrowing constraints did...State and local governments used the stimulus grants to reduce their net borrowing (largely by acquiring more financial assets) rather than to increase expenditures[.]This analysis is subject to the same caveat about lag structure as the earlier consumption analysis. But it also seems basically plausible to me, and highly suggestive that states mainly pocketed their ARRA grants instead of spending them on building roads and such.


Finally, Taylor presents a hypothesis that ARRA grants actually made states shift their spending from purchases to transfer payments, which (if this indeed happened) would have actually reduced GDP.


So to sum up, Taylor's paper says that ARRA didn't increase GDP because it didn't increase government purchases, and even hurt GDP to the extent that it reduced government purchases. This sounds exactly like a Keynesian critique of the stimulus bill - government purchases are good medicine for recessions, and we didn't do nearly enough of them! But somehow Taylor interprets his pro-Keynesian assumptions as an anti-Keynesian conclusion:
More generally, the results from the 2000s experience raise considerable doubts about the efficacy of temporary discretionary countercyclical fiscal policy in practice. In this regard the experience with the stimulus packages of the 2000s adds more weight to the position reached more than 30 years ago by Lucas and Sargent (1978) and Gramlich (1978, 1979).What? But Lucas, Sargent, etc. thought that government purchases wouldn't raise GDP. That runs counter to Taylor's entire critique, which is that ARRA didn't raise government purchases enough!


Readers may go through this paper with a finer-toothed comb than I used, and may find significant methodological flaws that I overlooked. Please be my guest. But that won't change the larger point that Taylor is being a lot more Keynesian than he seems to think he's being.


So this makes two prominent conservative economists who have criticized Democrats for not being Keynesian enough (the other being Martin Feldstein (http://noahpinionblog.blogspot.com/2011/06/martin-feldstein-confuses-both-me-and.html)). Is it possible that what these guys don't like is really just...well...Democrats?

Update: Mark Thoma points out that this is not the first time John Taylor has criticized the ARRA for not including enough government purchases (http://johnbtaylorsblog.blogspot.com/2011/03/why-stimulus-failed-to-boost.html).

Update 2: Paul Krugman concurs (http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/07/03/bad-tayloring/). John Taylor responds (http://johnbtaylorsblog.blogspot.com/2011/07/no-bigger-stimulus-would-not-have.html):
Now, I know that Krugman...would like a stimulus package with higher proportions going to...government purchases...But experiences from the 1970s raise serious doubts about the political and operational feasibility of such discretionary fiscal policy. So do recent experiences in many other countries...In a simple Keynesian model, all the government has to do to combat a recession is quickly increase government purchases, but the difficulty with doing so in practice is one of the classic arguments against discretionary fiscal policy.So Taylor is arguing that the type of Keynesian policy that Keynes himself suggested, and which modern-day Keynesians want, is simply politically infeasible. Fine. I myself am quite receptive to that argument (http://noahpinionblog.blogspot.com/2011/06/when-has-stimulus-ever-been-politically.html), actually. But then there's the China example, which Taylor himself cites (http://johnbtaylorsblog.blogspot.com/2011/03/why-stimulus-failed-to-boost.html) as an example of a rapid increase in government purchases in response to a recession. How does Taylor explain that? Is it autocracy, or maybe some kind of central planning, that is supposed to make real stimulus politically feasible in China but not here? And then there's another question: even if (real) stimulus turns out not to be politically feasible, does that mean that economists shouldn't recommend it, if it would be the best policy? I mean, the fact that Medicare privatization is politically infeasible hasn't stopped John Taylor from urging us to do it (http://johnbtaylorsblog.blogspot.com/2010/08/ryan-roadmap-versus-road-to-ruin.html).

[cutthemdown]

Yep that is the one. He is basically saying that "if" you are going to do a Keynesian type stimulus it won't work if the money goes to just paying down debt and tax cuts.

[cutthemdown]

I disagree though that Taylor contradicts himself.

[El Minion]

Yep that is the one. He is basically saying that "if" you are going to do a Keynesian type stimulus it won't work if the money goes to just paying down debt and tax cuts.

That's what the left have been screaming about, that the stimulus needed to be bigger and more spending on infrastructure for job creation. Krugman puts it best (http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/07/03/bad-tayloring/)

July 3, 2011, 12:51 pm
Bad Tayloring

Noah Smith (http://noahpinionblog.blogspot.com/2011/07/taylor-seems-to-agree-with-keynesians.html) says something I’d been meaning to say about John Taylor’s recent work (http://johnbtaylorsblog.blogspot.com/2011/06/how-to-resolve-stimulus-debate-use-data.html). Taylor actually has a pretty good point: it’s far from clear that the ARRA actually led to much of a rise in government spending, while the tax cuts that made up much of the stimulus were probably largely saved.

But Taylor then presents this as an argument against Keynesian economics — whereas it seems to be an argument that Obama wasn’t Keynesian enough.

But wait, there’s more. I remember what Taylor was saying early on (http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/11/25/conservative-crisis-desperation/): he was dead set against any rise in spending, and called for permanent tax cuts (in response to a temporary crisis?) instead.

So the position Taylor is taking now seems to be:

1. Keynesian economics doesn’t work, as evidenced by the fact that Obama didn’t try it.

2. Obama failed utterly by not following the policies I (Taylor) specifically demanded that he not follow.

Oh, Kay.

[El Minion]

I disagree though that Taylor contradicts himself.

Taylor:"Keynesian spending doesn't work (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122757149157954723.html),

Fourth, construct a government spending plan that meets long-term objectives, puts the economy on a path to budget balance, and is expedited to the degree possible without causing waste and inefficiency.

[...]

The theory that a short-run government spending stimulus will jump-start the economy is based on old-fashioned, largely static Keynesian theories. These approaches do not adequately account for the complex dynamics of a modern international economy, or for expectations of the future that are now built into decisions in virtually every market.

unless your China" (http://johnbtaylorsblog.blogspot.com/2011/03/why-stimulus-failed-to-boost.html):

To better understand this explanation one can look at other countries, and in particular at China’s recent stimulus package. This week I went to China and explored the question.

Local governments in China apparently did increase infrastructure spending in 2009 following the stimulus package. Why didn’t these governments simply reduce borrowing as did U.S local governments? Professor Chong-en Bai of Tsinghua University gave me the best answer using simple economic reasoning: the local governments appeared to behave more like liquidity constrained households than permanent income households. In China, local governments do not have much access to capital markets. They get their funding mainly from the central government, including loans from the central bank, and of course only for projects that are approved by the central government. At any point in time local governments are submitting new infrastructure projects for approval; some are being rejected and some are being accepted. If the central government wants to increase infrastructure spending by the local governments all it has to do is lower the acceptance criterion, instruct the central bank to provide the funds, and the volume of projects increases. This is apparently how the stimulus worked in China.

[cutthemdown]

He's only say spending doesn't work unless its done right and in conjunction with cuts. But the notion it needed to be bigger is laughable. No they needed to not give it away to public unions and unemployment. It was the biggest ever really. Especially factoring in all the stuff the fed has done to increase the money in the system.

Obama blew it face it and move on. The proof is the fact you can see the results are not there. Taylor even lays out where the GDP grew, and it wasn't in any areas the stimulus was spent at.

[ghwk]

Why do I keep reading about economics in the the Bachman is Presidential with Gay Curing Clinics thread?

[TheElusiveKyleOrton]

Why do I keep reading about economics in the the Bachman is Presidential with Gay Curing Clinics thread?

And why does anyone -- myself included -- keep arguing with cutthemdown about economics when he has absolutely no idea how economics work?

I'm out of here for a while. Someone PM me when lower taxes somehow creates a job.

[cutthemdown]

And why does anyone -- myself included -- keep arguing with cutthemdown about economics when he has absolutely no idea how economics work?

I'm out of here for a while. Someone PM me when lower taxes somehow creates a job.

Then pay more tax. You know the govt will take whatever you give them right?

[TonyR]

Michele Bachmann's momentum continues to build and she's taken first place by the smallest of margins on PPP's newest national Presidential poll. 21% of Republican primary voters say she's their top choice to 20% for Mitt Romney, 12% for Rick Perry, 11% for Herman Cain, 9% for Ron Paul, 7% for Newt Gingrich, 5% for Tim Pawlenty, and 3% for Jon Huntsman.
http://publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com/2011/07/bachmann-continues-to-surge.html


In other Bachmann news, her migranes have become a subject of debate, Alex Pareene takes on her end times beliefs, and David Graham profiles some of Bachmann's most dogged critics. The fact that a congresswoman with no legislative record, with a husband whose business is involved with "curing" gays, and who believes that US government default is no big deal is suddenly the front-runner for the GOP nomination tells you everything you could conceivably want to know about the sheer degeneracy and derangement of the current GOP - and the profound weakness of the Romney candidacy.

The party deserves her candidacy - because she so perfectly represents its core nature.

http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com/2011/07/bachmanns-surge.html

[cutthemdown]

I think Romney beats her and will soon open up a lead.

[TheElusiveKyleOrton]

Then pay more tax. You know the govt will take whatever you give them right?

You really don't want to go down this road with me.

I'd love to pay more tax. If it would mean continuing to support our seniors, schoolchildren and military families, I'd happily pay more in taxes.

The problem is I DON'T HAVE MORE TO GIVE. People in the top 1% of the country, who are NOT paying their full tax rate (Ahem, I pay my full tax rate, with a bare minimum of deductions), have more to give. They've seen a remarkable movement of wealth in the last 30 years from the middle class directly to their Cayman bank accounts... and they refuse to give more in taxes? Are you ****ing kidding me?

Welcome to the age of the Robber Barons. Enjoy your stay.

[DenverBrit]

Back to Bachmann.

Now in her third House term, Bachmann has never had a bill or resolution she’s sponsored signed into law, and she’s never wielded a committee gavel, either at the full or subcommittee level. Bachmann’s amendments and bills have rarely been considered by any committee, even with the House under GOP control. In a chamber that rewards substantive policy work and insider maneuvering, Bachmann has shunned the inside game, choosing to be more of a bomb thrower than a legislator.



And a classic reach by the desperate. :spit:

“I think she’s had a profound effect on debate,” said Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas). “It doesn’t mean you always win. In fact, as we know, [Winston] Churchill lost and lost and was a voice of reason in Great Britain for a long time before people finally realized he was right.”

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0611/57885.html

[TonyR]

[A]s sex researcher Michael Bailey puts it: Not all gay men are sissies, but nearly all sissies are gay men. So it's entirely possible—it seems highly likely to me—that Marcus Bachmann is one of those guys who insists that sexual orientation is a choice because he choose to be straight. Or choose to identify as straight.

Gay people who point out how fruity Bachmann is aren't saying there's something wrong with being fruity, or gay, or with guys who look, speak, walk, or dance the way Bachmann does. A lot of us look, speak, walk, and dance that way. And we don't think there's anything wrong with us for looking, speaking, walking, or dancing that way—I've never met a gay man who objected to Modern Family's Cam. And we certainly don't think there's anything wrong with being gay. But Marcus Bachmann sure does. He thinks there's a whole lot wrong with being gay. When we point out that this same Marcus Bachmann acts like a huge homo—like a messy, married, dishonest, closeted version of Cam—we're hoisting that pansy on his own hateful petard.

http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archives/2011/07/18/queen-for-a-day

[Popcorn Sutton]

epicDramaLlama is a hypocrite thread bump...

[alkemical]

http://s.buzzfeed.com//static/imagebuzz/terminal01/2011/7/20/17/steve-martin-asks-a-great-question-13334-1311196138-3.jpg

[DivineBronco]

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/bachmann-misses-nearly-40-percent-votes-200208873.html


now with 40% more presidential goodness

come on back epictubb