New Rules 5/25/07 - The Orange Mane

Hogan11 · 06-01-2007, 01:44 PM

Last one till August. Read....Reflect....Respond:

May 25, 2007

New Rule: "The View" must be renamed, "Morning Cat Fight." Barbara, Joy, get out of the way and let these two have at it! I want to see Rosie introduce the Republican chick to lesbianism, the hard way. [slide of Rosie O'Donnell in dominatrix outfit from film, "Exit to Eden"]

New Rule: Fashion and Wal-Mart don't mix. Wal-Mart's first attempt to sell designer clothing has been a huge flop. I wonder why. Oh, I know, because it's Wal-Mart. If your customers cared about fashion, they'd shop someplace classier, like the Salvation Army. The only fashion question a Wal-Mart shopper has is, "Can I get this in camouflage?" Okay, never mind. It's all right.

New Rule: You don't have to email me the pictures of everything your baby has ever done. The first step, his first sand castle, his first date with Demi Moore... I don't care. I mean, how many times do I have to say it? That's not my baby, Angelina!

New Rule: Rudy Giuliani has to bring the comb-over back. Americans haven't voted for a bald president since Eisenhower. Now, here's Rudy without the comb-over. [image of Nosferatu] And here he is with it! [image of John Edwards]

And finally, New Rule: Jimmy Carter must be shipped off to Guantanamo Bay. Last weekend, former U.S. president and current Al Qaeda operative--Jimmy Carter, launched an unprovoked attack upon democracy itself by telling an Arkansas newspaper that the Bush Administration has been the worst in history. And people were shocked... Arkansas has newspapers?!

But, once again, we were sucked into a phony controversy about who said what and how it hurts George Bush's feelings. Because when you hurt George Bush, you hurt America's feelings; and when you hurt America's feelings, you hurt the troops. And when that happens, Tinker Bell's light goes out and she dies.

Now, as for Carter's assertion, I was up all night on Wikipedia doing an exhaustive study of former presidents. And while other presidents have sucked in their own individual ways, Bush is like a smorgasbord of "suck." He -- he combines the corruption of Warren G. Harding, the war-mongering of James Polk, and the abuse of power of Richard Nixon.

Nixon got in trouble for illegally wiretapping Democratic headquarters. Bush is illegally wiretapping the entire country!

Nixon opened up relations with the Chinese. Bush let them poison your dog.

Herbert Hoover, who was literally named after a machine that sucks--sat on his ass through four years of Depression, but he was an actual engineer. And if someone told him about global warming, he would have understood it before the penguins caught on fire.

Ulysses S. Grant let his cronies loot the republic, but he won his Civil War.

Harding...Harding sucked, but he once said, "I am not fit for this office and never should have been here." So at least he knew he sucked. He never walked offstage like Bush does after one of his embarrassing, language-mangling press conferences--with that smirk on his face like, "Nailed it!" Or maybe that's just the look you get when you have a showdown with the Democrats, and you win. Like he just did with Iraq. You don't get to become the worst president ever without a little help from the other side.

You know, I like Jimmy Carter, but when the -- when the Republican "fake outrage" machine pretended to be so upset at his remarks, Carter did what Democrats do, and backed down. He said his words were careless and misquoted, and the sun was in his eyes, and his hearing aid went out, and he was molested by a clergyman.

Instead of looking them in the eye and saying, "No, I meant what I said because it's true! And speaking as the first citizen of Habitat for Humanity, let me take out my Jimmy Carter toolbox and build you a house where we can meet, and you can kiss me, and tell me that you love me."

Bronco_Beerslug · 06-01-2007, 01:57 PM

Quote:

Because when you hurt George Bush, you hurt America's feelings; and when you hurt America's feelings, you hurt the troops. And when that happens, Tinker Bell's light goes out and she dies.

Stormontheplains · 06-01-2007, 02:11 PM

If Bush is the worst, Carter is a close second. Inflation @ 23%, gas high, American Agriculture took a huge hit, Maybe jimmy is the democrat version of bushi

Bronco Bob · 06-01-2007, 03:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stormontheplains

If Bush is the worst, Carter is a close second. Inflation @ 23%, gas high, American Agriculture took a huge hit, Maybe jimmy is the democrat version of bushi

Fortunately with Carter people had the brains to limit him to 1 term in office.
I think its time to amend the Constitution to allow a president to serve only
one 6 year term. It seems all that happens now is the first four years is
spent trying to get re-elected and the second four years is spent bogged
down in scandels as a result of all the BS done in the first four years to get
re-elected.

bendog · 06-01-2007, 04:19 PM

but Jimmy left a true monatarist in the Treasury and the DOD stronger than when he came in. Bushii can't even claim that. I'd personally go with Buchanan who was the last person with a chance to avoid the civil war. Harding rivals bushii for corruption

the comparison of "worst" imo just shows a shallow history education. Blaming inflation on Carter is at best a misunderstanding. I think the valid comparison is that both carter and bushii were elected, despite facing obviously more qualified candidates, as a result of the destruction of two pretty successful and competnet potus's over character flaws involving personal ethics.

broncocalijohn · 06-01-2007, 04:42 PM

We can blame the inflation on Carter like we give credit to Reagan for getting it incredibly down. Carter claim to fame is his peace talks with Israel and Egypt. Everything else here sucked. I blame him for expanding disco too!

alkemical · 06-01-2007, 04:49 PM

Prisdential policy takes 7-10years to make a full effect report on what fiscal policy's impact was.

bendog · 06-01-2007, 05:22 PM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Reserve

Attached is a graph showing interest historical fed funds interest rates, and a short description of how the Fed "sets" the prime rate. It's wikpedia ... so I could find a better link for the text, but the graph looks accurate to me.

Also, here are two links that imo are fairly objective. Basically the point is that prior to volker and the fed adopting a monatarist stance, the fed viewed fighting inflation as merely upping rates, causing a recession, increasing unemployment, dropping demand cause people didn't buy, and prices going down.

Volker killed the increase in money supply as well as upping the rates. Neither Carter nor Reagan were too happy about it, nor did either really understand it. But, Volker's policy became effective at the end of the the first two years of Reagan's admin.

http://www.buyandhold.com/bh/en/educ...l_volker1.html

http://www.buyandhold.com/bh/en/educ...l_volker2.html

If you really want to give yourself a headache, Friedman-Phelps (and Volker) may have gotten it as much wrong as they got it right!

http://www.brookesnews.com/061610phelps.html

A personal note: I'm amused when people point back to the terrible inflation days with interest rates in the tens and even twenty. My Dad had paid off the house, and we finally had some money, courtesy of my god-father's finally passing from stress related to WWII. He had a hundred thou earning interest and we all had jobs. More disposible income then than I've had before or since. It wasn't bad for everyone.

gunns · 06-02-2007, 01:31 AM

IMO, Carter looks like a fiscal conservative compared to the money Bush is spending. And I'm not talking "war" money, although he has been fiscally stupid with that too. I guess there is more than one way (the Democrats way) to spend money AND push government into your lives.

Quote:

He never walked offstage like Bush does after one of his embarrassing, language-mangling press conferences--with that smirk on his face like, "Nailed it!

I watched Maher do this and I couldn't breath I was laughing so hard.

broncocalijohn · 06-02-2007, 03:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gunns

IMO, Carter looks like a fiscal conservative compared to the money Bush is spending. And I'm not talking "war" money, although he has been fiscally stupid with that too. I guess there is more than one way (the Democrats way) to spend money AND push government into your lives.

I watched Maher do this and I couldn't breath I was laughing so hard.

There wasnt much "war" money to spend. Carter wouldnt think of going into Iran and getting our hostages out nor did he help keep the military up to date. Nothing like my father's moronic labor union backing Carter even though he stated he was cutting many military projects including the one my Dad worked on. Sure enough, Carter stuck to his word and Pops got laid off. The only "war" going on was two drivers cutting each other off in line trying to get gas.

gunns · 06-02-2007, 03:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by broncocalijohn

There wasnt much "war" money to spend. Carter wouldnt think of going into Iran and getting our hostages out nor did he help keep the military up to date. Nothing like my father's moronic labor union backing Carter even though he stated he was cutting many military projects including the one my Dad worked on. Sure enough, Carter stuck to his word and Pops got laid off. The only "war" going on was two drivers cutting each other off in line trying to get gas.

I was referring to the Iraq "war" and Bush.

Bronco Bob · 06-02-2007, 05:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by broncocalijohn

There wasnt much "war" money to spend. Carter wouldnt think of going into Iran and getting our hostages out nor did he help keep the military up to date.

I guess you are too young to remember the helicopters crashing in the desert.

Spider · 06-02-2007, 09:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by broncocalijohn

There wasnt much "war" money to spend. Carter wouldnt think of going into Iran and getting our hostages out nor did he help keep the military up to date.

Do you make this shít up as you go along ?

broncocalijohn · 06-02-2007, 04:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by §Pide®

Do you make this shít up as you go along ?

Show me where he increased military spending. He wasnt military's friend. Bob, yes I remember the helicopter incident. Were we going to treat that like the Bay of Pigs with our own citizens? Carter was weak on defense. Gunns, I was comparing the two as I knew what you were referring to Bush.

Spider · 06-02-2007, 05:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by broncocalijohn

Show me where he increased military spending. He wasnt military's friend. Bob, yes I remember the helicopter incident. Were we going to treat that like the Bay of Pigs with our own citizens? Carter was weak on defense. Gunns, I was comparing the two as I knew what you were referring to Bush.

you stated Carter never went in or wanted to go in after our Guys in Iran , thats just flat out Bullshít , I dont like Carter for alot better reason then you can imagine , but I dont have ot make shít up as I go along

cutthemdown · 06-02-2007, 06:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by §Pide®

you stated Carter never went in or wanted to go in after our Guys in Iran , thats just flat out Bullshít , I dont like Carter for alot better reason then you can imagine , but I dont have ot make shít up as I go along

Carter did try to pull off a rescue. It was really bad the helicopters had a midair collision and it was scrapped obviously. The main problem was the military was ill equipped to do anything back then. They were poorly trained and equipped. Thinking back it was no surprise the attempt failed as bad as it did. People have to remember though that Carter was President during a time where America was really sick of war because Vietnam was so fresh in peoples minds. The next President may face a similar problem. He/She may have to make military decisions based on public opinion and that's never a good thing.

TailgateNut · 06-03-2007, 09:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cutthemdown

The next President may face a similar problem. He/She may have to make military decisions based on public opinion and that's never a good thing.

No WE should never allow the public to have input on sending our troops to die. We should just let the "idiot in charge" make all the "decisions". You know: we elect a decider and the "DECIDER" decides.

The real problem with your statement lies in the removal of the american public from the process!

gunns · 06-03-2007, 11:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by broncocalijohn

Show me where he increased military spending. He wasnt military's friend. Bob, yes I remember the helicopter incident. Were we going to treat that like the Bay of Pigs with our own citizens? Carter was weak on defense. Gunns, I was comparing the two as I knew what you were referring to Bush.

Ok, but it still doesn't counter the fact that Carter looked like a fiscal conservative compared to Bush. And can you really say that Bush is the military's friend? Yes he has pulled out tons of money to supposedly go to the military but a lot of it isn't.

gunns · 06-03-2007, 11:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TailgateNut

No WE should never allow the public to have input on sending our troops to die. We should just let the "idiot in charge" make all the "decisions". You know: we elect a decider and the "DECIDER" decides.

The real problem with your statement lies in the removal of the american public from the process!

Wull of course cuz were the dum idiots!

I guess that statement isn't too far from the truth as there are those that put THAT idiot in charge.

Spider · 06-03-2007, 12:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cutthemdown

Carter did try to pull off a rescue. It was really bad the helicopters had a midair collision and it was scrapped obviously. The main problem was the military was ill equipped to do anything back then. They were poorly trained and equipped. Thinking back it was no surprise the attempt failed as bad as it did. People have to remember though that Carter was President during a time where America was really sick of war because Vietnam was so fresh in peoples minds. The next President may face a similar problem. He/She may have to make military decisions based on public opinion and that's never a good thing.

Carters peoples plan failed miserably ........
I will tell you why i dislike carter , he deregulated trucking , anyone can get a job now , with 6 weeks training ....... I started in the 80's at the tender age of 16 , going with my Dad , didnt get my own rig until I was 18 , went OTR at 25 , became a O/O @ 38 .......
The next president will get the bill for all of Bush's spending .....

L.A. BRONCOS FAN · 06-04-2007, 06:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bendog

but Jimmy left a true monatarist in the Treasury and the DOD stronger than when he came in. Bushii can't even claim that.

And, thirty years before the fact, Carter, with chilling accuracy, anticipated the energy predicament we would find ourselves in today if we refused to change our ways - and he took steps to address the issues.

Red Ink Reagan, upon taking office, promptly rolled back everything Carter did on that front.

Rohirrim · 06-04-2007, 09:36 AM

Bush is president because of Ralph Nader. Don't forget that.

alkemical · 06-04-2007, 09:55 AM

Bush is president because we had the illusion of choice. (Since '88 IMO)

Garcia Bronco · 06-04-2007, 11:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bronco Bob

Fortunately with Carter people had the brains to limit him to 1 term in office.
I think its time to amend the Constitution to allow a president to serve only
one 6 year term. It seems all that happens now is the first four years is
spent trying to get re-elected and the second four years is spent bogged
down in scandels as a result of all the BS done in the first four years to get
re-elected.

I'd like to leave it at 4 years...or maybe go to 5...but I agree

Garcia Bronco · 06-04-2007, 11:18 AM

The President does not spend money so to say...Congress does....repeat that to yourself. Congress spends the money...it's not the President. Before a President signs a bill into law...Congress must send it to him first. The are basically two committees that spend money: Ways and Means and Appropriations.

06-01-2007, 01:44 PM	#1
Hogan11 Rock-N-Roll Historian Let's take these SOB's out!!!!!! Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: W.NY.B.C. Posts: 21,300 Adopt-a-Bronco: Floyd Little	New Rules 5/25/07 Last one till August. Read....Reflect....Respond: May 25, 2007 New Rule: "The View" must be renamed, "Morning Cat Fight." Barbara, Joy, get out of the way and let these two have at it! I want to see Rosie introduce the Republican chick to lesbianism, the hard way. [slide of Rosie O'Donnell in dominatrix outfit from film, "Exit to Eden"] New Rule: Fashion and Wal-Mart don't mix. Wal-Mart's first attempt to sell designer clothing has been a huge flop. I wonder why. Oh, I know, because it's Wal-Mart. If your customers cared about fashion, they'd shop someplace classier, like the Salvation Army. The only fashion question a Wal-Mart shopper has is, "Can I get this in camouflage?" Okay, never mind. It's all right. New Rule: You don't have to email me the pictures of everything your baby has ever done. The first step, his first sand castle, his first date with Demi Moore... I don't care. I mean, how many times do I have to say it? That's not my baby, Angelina! New Rule: Rudy Giuliani has to bring the comb-over back. Americans haven't voted for a bald president since Eisenhower. Now, here's Rudy without the comb-over. [image of Nosferatu] And here he is with it! [image of John Edwards] And finally, New Rule: Jimmy Carter must be shipped off to Guantanamo Bay. Last weekend, former U.S. president and current Al Qaeda operative--Jimmy Carter, launched an unprovoked attack upon democracy itself by telling an Arkansas newspaper that the Bush Administration has been the worst in history. And people were shocked... Arkansas has newspapers?! But, once again, we were sucked into a phony controversy about who said what and how it hurts George Bush's feelings. Because when you hurt George Bush, you hurt America's feelings; and when you hurt America's feelings, you hurt the troops. And when that happens, Tinker Bell's light goes out and she dies. Now, as for Carter's assertion, I was up all night on Wikipedia doing an exhaustive study of former presidents. And while other presidents have sucked in their own individual ways, Bush is like a smorgasbord of "suck." He -- he combines the corruption of Warren G. Harding, the war-mongering of James Polk, and the abuse of power of Richard Nixon. Nixon got in trouble for illegally wiretapping Democratic headquarters. Bush is illegally wiretapping the entire country! Nixon opened up relations with the Chinese. Bush let them poison your dog. Herbert Hoover, who was literally named after a machine that sucks--sat on his ass through four years of Depression, but he was an actual engineer. And if someone told him about global warming, he would have understood it before the penguins caught on fire. Ulysses S. Grant let his cronies loot the republic, but he won his Civil War. Harding...Harding sucked, but he once said, "I am not fit for this office and never should have been here." So at least he knew he sucked. He never walked offstage like Bush does after one of his embarrassing, language-mangling press conferences--with that smirk on his face like, "Nailed it!" Or maybe that's just the look you get when you have a showdown with the Democrats, and you win. Like he just did with Iraq. You don't get to become the worst president ever without a little help from the other side. You know, I like Jimmy Carter, but when the -- when the Republican "fake outrage" machine pretended to be so upset at his remarks, Carter did what Democrats do, and backed down. He said his words were careless and misquoted, and the sun was in his eyes, and his hearing aid went out, and he was molested by a clergyman. Instead of looking them in the eye and saying, "No, I meant what I said because it's true! And speaking as the first citizen of Habitat for Humanity, let me take out my Jimmy Carter toolbox and build you a house where we can meet, and you can kiss me, and tell me that you love me."

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

06-01-2007, 02:11 PM	#3
Stormontheplains Ring of Famer Join Date: May 2006 Location: Bronco Nation Posts: 1,001 Adopt-a-Bronco: Andre Hall	If Bush is the worst, Carter is a close second. Inflation @ 23%, gas high, American Agriculture took a huge hit, Maybe jimmy is the democrat version of bushi

06-01-2007, 04:19 PM	#5
bendog Marginally Continent David Bowens, he'd be an upgrade Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: Folsom Prison Posts: 19,935 Adopt-a-Bronco: David Bowens	but Jimmy left a true monatarist in the Treasury and the DOD stronger than when he came in. Bushii can't even claim that. I'd personally go with Buchanan who was the last person with a chance to avoid the civil war. Harding rivals bushii for corruption the comparison of "worst" imo just shows a shallow history education. Blaming inflation on Carter is at best a misunderstanding. I think the valid comparison is that both carter and bushii were elected, despite facing obviously more qualified candidates, as a result of the destruction of two pretty successful and competnet potus's over character flaws involving personal ethics.

06-01-2007, 04:42 PM	#6
broncocalijohn Famer of Rings My Dog Richard Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Lake Forest, Orange County, Calif. Posts: 18,466 Adopt-a-Bronco: Simon Fletcher	We can blame the inflation on Carter like we give credit to Reagan for getting it incredibly down. Carter claim to fame is his peace talks with Israel and Egypt. Everything else here sucked. I blame him for expanding disco too!

06-01-2007, 04:49 PM	#7
alkemical Guerrilla Ontologist rorrim\|mirror Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: Future Posts: 42,696 Adopt-a-Bronco: Prima Materia	Prisdential policy takes 7-10years to make a full effect report on what fiscal policy's impact was.

06-01-2007, 05:22 PM	#8
bendog Marginally Continent David Bowens, he'd be an upgrade Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: Folsom Prison Posts: 19,935 Adopt-a-Bronco: David Bowens	http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Reserve Attached is a graph showing interest historical fed funds interest rates, and a short description of how the Fed "sets" the prime rate. It's wikpedia ... so I could find a better link for the text, but the graph looks accurate to me. Also, here are two links that imo are fairly objective. Basically the point is that prior to volker and the fed adopting a monatarist stance, the fed viewed fighting inflation as merely upping rates, causing a recession, increasing unemployment, dropping demand cause people didn't buy, and prices going down. Volker killed the increase in money supply as well as upping the rates. Neither Carter nor Reagan were too happy about it, nor did either really understand it. But, Volker's policy became effective at the end of the the first two years of Reagan's admin. http://www.buyandhold.com/bh/en/educ...l_volker1.html http://www.buyandhold.com/bh/en/educ...l_volker2.html If you really want to give yourself a headache, Friedman-Phelps (and Volker) may have gotten it as much wrong as they got it right! http://www.brookesnews.com/061610phelps.html A personal note: I'm amused when people point back to the terrible inflation days with interest rates in the tens and even twenty. My Dad had paid off the house, and we finally had some money, courtesy of my god-father's finally passing from stress related to WWII. He had a hundred thou earning interest and we all had jobs. More disposible income then than I've had before or since. It wasn't bad for everyone.

06-04-2007, 09:36 AM	#22
Rohirrim Partisan Human Cannonball Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Twixt Hell & Highwater Posts: 48,841	Bush is president because of Ralph Nader. Don't forget that.

06-04-2007, 09:55 AM	#23
alkemical Guerrilla Ontologist rorrim\|mirror Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: Future Posts: 42,696 Adopt-a-Bronco: Prima Materia	Bush is president because we had the illusion of choice. (Since '88 IMO)

06-04-2007, 11:18 AM	#25
Garcia Bronco Hokie since 1993 Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: Denver, CO Posts: 45,991 Adopt-a-Bronco: Tom Jackson	The President does not spend money so to say...Congress does....repeat that to yourself. Congress spends the money...it's not the President. Before a President signs a bill into law...Congress must send it to him first. The are basically two committees that spend money: Ways and Means and Appropriations.