JerrySeinfeld

Huh? Sandra fluke thinks somebody else should finance her sex life. She is 31 years old. Time to grow up.

The size and scope of this bubble was complex. Pointing the finger at one group betrays either (a) your bias or ( your stupidity. You pick. Is your goal to find the truth or to win an argument? I don't think anyone with any degree of intelligence would say there was just one culpable party. This bubble was arguably started in 1977 with the Community Reinvestment Act. Many missteps have been taken over a period of 30 years to lead the US to the place they got in 2008. To name a few: Relaxed lending standards. Irresponsible borrowers Speculation fuelled by the mistaken belief that real estate doesn't ever go down CDO creation by investment banks Bad credit analysis by Moody's and S&P Willful blindness by politicians who had a vested interest in seeing more homeowners (and yes this includes Bill Clinton, Barney Frank, Many republicans too, including George W Bush) But of course, again to admit this simple truth negates the entire DNC narrative. If it was truly a complex multi-decade build up to a huge credit mess, then "we can't go back to the policies that got us into this mess" rings hollow. So ya better stick to those lies, eh bud? The point is clear, to say the credit crisis was caused by GW Bush policies alone is either based in ignorance or a lie. SO which is it? Are you stupid? Or just a liar?

Ahh yes, the old Dem line that they mysteriously "switched sides" Republicans are the party of the colourless individual. The Dems are the party of racial blocks. Everybody knows this. Which is why from a left wing standpoint any person of colour who is a rising star in the conservative movement must be destroyed. The minute blacks start realizing they aren't a big voting block but individuals with aspirations and the desire to rise above dependency is the minute the Democratic party is over forever. http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/465059.It_s_Ok_to_Leave_the_Plantation

Since when is it society's job to finance a 31 year old's woman's sex life? Nobody's taking away anyone's right to do anything. Wanna be sexually active? Go for it! Just don't make it the state's business.

"I think that the responsibility that the Democrats had may rest more in resisting any efforts by Republicans in the Congress, or by me when I was President, to put some standards and tighten up a little on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.” – Former President Bill Clinton (D-AR), September 25, 2008

wow. 100 million jobs eh? impressive. is that sort of like the 57 states Obama visited? This clown had 2 years of a supermajority and wasted all his capital on a huge tax and spend entitlement at a point in time when the nation is drowning due to tax and spend entitlements. typical liberal orthodoxy and unforgivable. Sure, some on the left could argue health care was an important milestone, but nobody on either side of the spectrum could make the case it was a priority given the state of the economy. If dude really cared that deeply about jobs he wouldn't have waited until it was too late (ie. he lost his supermajority) to get something done. As it stands we're stuck this this:

Here's a question: Just who the hell does Sandra Fluke think she is?

When Syria falls it will be yet another great legacy of GW Bush's vision. You saw the trees, Bush saw the forest. He understood that, in traditional speaking terms about the mid east, the "stability" of the past 50 years needed to be smashed once and for all. Bush's legacy will not be fully realized for years to come, but his vision is slowly playing out. "The true history of my administration will be written 50 years from now, and you and I will not be around to see it." - GW Bush "For too long, many nations, including my own, tolerated, even excused, oppression in the Middle East in the name of stability. Oppression became common, but stability never arrived. We must take a different approach. We must help the reformers of the Middle East as they work for freedom, and strive to build a community of peaceful, democratic nations" - GW Bush "The desire for freedom resides in every human heart. And that desire cannot be contained forever by prison walls, or martial laws, or secret police. Over time, and across the Earth, freedom will find a way" - GW Bush

the neat thing about being left wing is you dont have to accomplish anything. just adopt an ideology and you are automatically "a better person". it's so cool being altruistic with other peoples' money ain't it?

Spending up 25% can't help you out anymore. GW Bush 2007 2.7 Trillion Obama 2010 3.6 Trillion

Yes because US education spending hasnt risen steadily for 20 years, nor has medicare, medicaid or social security Exactly how much is enough for you lefties? I've said it before - the Dem slogan could've been the same for forty years: "MORE!l

You know what's funny. Actually, not funny, sa. Actually not sad, sort of creepy? I'm not sure whats worse, that you would actually buy into the Democrat talking points hook line and sinker, or that you have such a warped view of how capitalism actually works, that you trust a man who's never built or run anything in his life over a man who's made creation, innovation, entrepreneurship and fixing problems his life's work. Actually, there's a third possibly, or, knowing what I've heard you say so far, probability: That you would actually intentionally destroy the character and reputation of a man who has given $25 million to charity. WHo started a foundation to ensure the top 25% of high school kids in Massachussetts get a four year college scholarship. WHo start companies that now employ more than 100,000 people. Who gives his time to those in need and reaches out to the community. Who turned around a failed, bankrupt Olympics into a great success. Yes, I'm certain that a guy who has lived his life this way wants to do what you say: destroy and kill economic growth. Mitt Romney made $20 million dollars last year. I'm sure that's his plan. To stop hanging around his La Jolla beach house, take a 98% pay cut an long, gruelling hours so that he can systematically dismantle and destroy companies and the middle class. It's sad, really, that you would view the world in such a warped way. That you actually believe Obama killed 3,000 Auto dealers out of the goodness of his heart, but a man who has created more jobs in his sleep than Obama has in his entire life is out to kill jobs? Man, you be freakin' delusional. So you wanna have a talk about track record? BRING IT ON. I don't only hope you do. I dare you. I freaking DARE you to have a debate with me about the two track records. I can WAIT to have this conversation. You started it, so let's go "Wally the commie entrepreneurship hater" You know how I know you have no money? Because nobody who has ever made anything of themselves would talk about Mitt Romney's accomplishments with such disdain. You don't have a freaking cent to your name. You are angry at success, and you're sitting in your mommies basement waiting for BHO or Tommy Mulcair to sign your dependency cheque so you can afford to go to Starbucks and talk about how much smarter you are than people who actually build companies and wealth. Or wait - I know - you're a union guy. One of those union guys who thinks it's someone else's job to give you a job. AHA! lol

Please do. Let's talk about Mitt R

In a word, up. In two words, WAY UP. Adding to debt at a clip twice that of GW Bush. Oh wait, I get it now (actually I always got your horribly weak point, but it was fun watching you fail again and again at trying)! Did you take calculus? Maybe you should have expressed it in those terms then. Your point isn't so much that Obama hasn't added debt at twice the clip of GW Bush did (how could you make that claim? the math is too basic for even you to try to parse), rather your point is that the slope of the line (the rate of change of the rate of change, as they say in calculus) flattened for about 8 months, and then steepened upward again in the first six months of this year. Wow - riveting stuff. THAT'S your bombshell? THAT'S your big revelation? THAT'S your sales pitch? "Ladies and gentlemen, we just tacked on the same amount of debt as George W Bush did in 8 years, but we did it in 3.5...BUT WORRY NOT, BECAUSE FOR THE LAST 8 MONTHS, THE INSANE RATE OF SPENDING AS SLOWED A BIT AND THEN PICKED BACK UP AGAIN!!!" But let's look at your little chart closer even still. The last number on it - 4.8% is only a six month period. Annualizing that gives us an 8.4% clip. So of excluding 2008 crisis, Each of Obama's four years if debt addition rates of growth (15.1%, 13.9%, 7.8% and 8.4%) are only eclipsed by three other years since 1993. Again, riveting stuff. Now you've convinced me. Where do I pull the lever? I'm ready to absentee vote for BHO right now. Frothingly excited Truthfully, your argument is looking weaker by the second, bordering on pathetic. Better juice up some more of those sarcastic remarks of yours there, Wally . After all, it's what you lefties do best. When in doubt, throw around some sarcastic one line name calling. A la - Jon Stewart. Hey if you're a one trick pony, better know how to do the trick, right?

Ann Romney is a likeable person. Michelle Obama is a hardass ideologue who is doing Barack with a strap on bi-weekly, guaranteed. Then they lay in bed, smoking a cigarette, looking at the ceiling and say to each other "someday, we're gone change this country into what Karl Marx dream so many years ago"

Gee, when 2 of the 3 the worst debt growth years on the chart belong to Obama's first two years (and the 3rd was Bush's final year), the only place to go was down. Bush 2007: 2.7 Trillion Obama 2010: 3.5 Trillion (roughly) Obama 2011: 3.5 Trillion (roughly) Obama 2012: 3.5 Trillion (roughly) Did Obama rapidly expand the size of government by 25%? Yes he did. Did it stay roughly the same after he did that? Again, the answer is yes, which is where you get your little "trending" spin from. Correcting for 2008 and 2009, this President has exploded he size of government. You still haven't answered the same basic easy questions. I'd hate to accuse you of dodging: 1. How long did it take George Walker Bush to add $5 Trillion dollars to the national debt? 2. How long did it take Barack Hussein Obama to add $5 Trillion dollars to the national debt? Still waiting, Einstein.

A woman with MS, cancer survivor, mother of five and wife of a man who built Staples, Sealy, Sports Authority and turned around a failing Olympics is "Marie Antoinette"? I usually don't like to resort to namecalling, but, wow - you really are a commie, aren't you?

Really? It's me who doesn't understand economics? Then why did you refer to "the The US is buying bonds at the lowest price it ever has really, there is plenty of room to borrow". If you knew anything abbout economics, you would not have said such a stupid thing, because when the US borrows money, it SELLS bonds. Not only that, but when interest rates on US Treasuries (ie. the cost of borroring) drop, that means the price of bonds has gone UP. Bond prices and interest rates have an inverse relationship - when rates drop, bond prices rise, and vise versa. So in fact THE EXACT OPPOSITE of what you said is happening: THE US IS SELLING BONDS AT THE HIGHEST PRICE IT EVER HAS. I know what you meant, you meant the cost of borrowing for the USA is low right now. But to articulate in such a way illustrates your complete and utter lack of economic understanding. Now that I have schooled you on how the bond market works, why don't we answer a couple of questions: First, why are US debt costs low? Pretty much everyone on the planet who knows anything about economics agrees that the US treasury rally is on the backs not of confidence in the greenback but on fear of the Euro (it's somewhat of a teeter totter). There is only RELATIVE confidence in the US treasury. Don't believe me? Why don't you reference Bill Gross, manager of the world's largest bond fund as to the risks of the Treasury bubble: http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/05/31/us-pimco-debt-idUSBRE84U15320120531 Or better yet, ask yourself this question: with the fed printing more and more money, thereby devaluing the US dollar, how long do you expect China to stay in a trade that pays them 0% yield and a falling currency value? They haven't pulled the plug yet, but don't kid yourself, when they do it will be uglier than SPanish bonds times 100. Don't believ me? Ask the world's largets bond rating agency, Moody's. As for spain, if you have any intelligence on the subject at all, read thouroughly again the Bill Gross piece. US corporate balance sheets are fine. There is no deleveraging occuring there. Large US corpos are flush with cash. The risk is sovereign debt. The US has spent itself to a point where investors fear the sovereign debt more than they do deleveraging, which is why there is $2 trillion sitting on the sidelines in the US corporate sector. Show some fiscal discipline, create a more competitive (ie. lower) corporate tax structure stateside, and watch the power of the free market become, once again, unleashed.

There is certainly a difference of opinion in how each views government. Obama's party sells "benefits" - you need us. Romney's sells "freedom" - we will leave you alone.

Like what, gun violence? The US has a much different socioeconomic history than most of the rest of the western world.

America is just a bigger more diverse place. Canadians, you're right, are all pretty much the same. We are homogeneous, urban country, for the most part. Sometimes this makes Canadians see rural folks as "bumpkins" as you put it. But really, what you have is a larger group of people who could care less about government and usually rely on their own devices from day to day. It's kind of nice to see, in a way - people with more of a self reliant, pioneering spirit. Some of it has to do with climate, too. People can live in an uninsulated rural Louisiana or Florida shed year round on catfish and beans without dying from exposure. Most of the 5 million people in greater Toronto wouldn't survive north of the city in the woods for more than about 5 hours in January!

This video pretty much sums up how Democrats see the country.

Yep - had someone from another planet watched the Dem speeches so far, he would have thought Mitt Romney had been President for the past four years and Obama was some newcomer to the scene ready to change things for the better.

Spain's in trouble because the bond market took them out behind the barn and shot them - because they took on way too much debt. Seriously, do you even understand what's going on in the world economy right now? As for the graph, Obama grew government from 20% of the economy to 25%. Look at the math bud - $2.7 Trillion in spending (bush) to $3.55 Trillion = a 25% increase.

Why don't you have a look at an updated graph. http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/outlays-GDP.png Hey why believe your lyin' eyes when you can keep those blinders on and keep spewing Democrat talking points.