Announcement PH Beta → Check it out! Click Me! (you might be see "unsafe", but it is safe)
4PackGirl
14 years ago

Tell your mother that a conservative is nothing more than a liberal 10 years behind, and see what happens.

"Nonstopdrivel" wrote:



:thumbleft: i'll try that some time - when she's in a good mood & nothing sharp can be thrown at me. lol.
Formo
14 years ago

Do you think that Bush's 'War on Terror' and 911 had anything to do with the federal budget increase while he was the Commander in-Chief?

"Nonstopdrivel" wrote:



Of course it did -- and creating the Department of Homeland Security, among other things. Heck, I was the beneficiary of a lot of those spending increases, as my pay went up almost every year under the Bush Administration (though Bush did press for the abolishment of combat pays, which Congress shot down).

That is beside the point. The point is that Republicans squawk at Democrats for proposed spending increases, despite the fact that the federal budget tripled under a Republican administration and Republican Congress. Regardless of what the proximate causes of the increased spending may have been, the fact remains that Republicans are no more fiscally responsible than Democrats. Their protests of indignation are simply political posturing.

"Formo" wrote:



I wasn't trying to imply anything, just FYI. Just wanted to know. I assumed it had alot to do with the budget increasing, but didn't know for sure.
UserPostedImage
Thanks to TheViking88 for the sig!!
porky88
14 years ago

I always laugh when i hear that democrats want a "distribution of wealth".
I can understand why rich people don't like what the dems are trying to do. Kind of a "Robin Hood" approach. They always make it sound like rich people are "E-VIL!!!"
If it wasn't for rich people, there would be no companies for the rest of us to work for. Most of the rich people worked hard to earn what they have. What right does the government have to grab into their pockets? Just because they have more money then the average person?
It's NOT fair or right to punish the rich because they have more, is it?
I mean, they should pay their fair share, but ONLY their fair share.

And believe me, i'm NOT a rich guy. I have to sweat week to week to pay bills.

"DakotaT" wrote:



I don't think this question can be answered without looking at history and how that wealth was acquired. Upon on who's backs was that wealth made and were those people compensated properly. I know the popular approach to this is that we just need to move forward and forget the past, but don't sign me up for that.

With all the glory and wonderful things this country has and has done for others, we have some real ugliness in our short history as a country, wounds exist that have never been cleansed.

So when there is talk about "redistribution of wealth", the biggest opponents to it are those that don't know shit about their own country's history, yet alone how the kingdom they get to enjoy was created and who was stepped on to acquire it.

"Cheesey" wrote:



I think what he's getting at is the Dems letting the Bush tax cuts expire on the wealthy, which means they''ll pay the same rates they paid under Bill Clinton. While they say the money they bring in will help balance the budget, I'm sure they'll find something to spend it on.

Though I hardly call it redistributing of wealth or socialism. As pointed out, there are tons of programs in existence already and none of them will be going away anytime soon regardless of the party in power.
doddpower
14 years ago

Yes, the federal government expanded more under Bush than at any time since the Johnson Administration implemented the Great Society programs, which represented the largest expansion of the federal government since the New Deal programs.

Incredibly, there are some New Deal programs that are still in place. Old bureaucracies never die -- they simply get buried under new layers of bureaucracy.

"Nonstopdrivel" wrote:



But yet we are supposed to believe that the Republicans / Tea Party are going to totally go against the proof on the table of 8 years of significant power and "stop big government??" What a joke. How could anyone possibly buy that? It wasn't that long ago.

It's just political posturing. Nothing else.

You all should check out this site. I have no idea how correct or valid all of its points are, but it's certainly worth looking into. To this point, they state that the Obama administration has kept 121 campaign promises and broken 22. Of course there are many stalled or still in the works, as well. I hope to verify more of their claims when I get time.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/ 
Porforis
Cheesey
14 years ago
The truth is, either party will say what it thinks the people want to hear. But when they get in power, you see the REAL things they plan to do.
Obama ran on "Change". Yet it's the same old same old. That's the truth.

I WISH that SOMEONE would get in that would make government ACCOUNTABLE for the (our) money they take in and spend. Again, if the government was a company, they would have gone out of business long ago based on their "spend spend spend" tactics.
Someday, they will have it come back and bite them (AND us) in the butt.
UserPostedImage
Wade
  • Wade
  • Veteran Member
14 years ago
I'm always amazed when people think "private sector rich" always means evil and nefarious, as if every rich person was somehow Gordon Gekko.

Especially when they hold up for example Congressmen, Senators, and the like. WHo have not done anything in their life except drink at the public trough...
...and yet find ways to accumulate wealth in amazing quantities.

I don't know whether Koch bankrolled the Tea Party or not. And frankly I don't care. Its his money. He can spend it as he wishes. And given the way the pinheads of the media act whenever people spend money on something they don't like, I see no reason he should be expected to reveal what he's doing.

If it's a dumb political investment, he'll go the route of John Connally. And if it's a good political investment, good for him.

Every day I wonder more why people pay so much attention to the pinheads of the media and the intelligentsia. The last 50 years of public and higher education in this country has a lot to answer for -- I sometimes think we are a nation of ignorant boobs.

In need of a radical mastectomy.
And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
Romans 12:2 (NKJV)
Formo
14 years ago
I love boobs.
UserPostedImage
Thanks to TheViking88 for the sig!!
Nonstopdrivel
14 years ago
UserPostedImage
UserPostedImage
zombieslayer
14 years ago

I love boobs.

"Formo" wrote:



I do too, but I realized in an unhealthy way. I have carried on relationships much longer than they should have been carried on because the other party had a nice pair. I have done this on more than one occasion.

It still amazes me the power of a nice pair. Trumps both brains and brawn.
My man Donald Driver
UserPostedImage
(thanks to Pack93z for the pic)
2010 will be seen as the beginning of the new Packers dynasty. 🇹🇹 🇲🇲 🇦🇷
Fan Shout
Mucky Tundra (22m) : Kanata, seek help! lol
beast (2h) : I was rooting for the Bears to win and hurt their draft pick status
Zero2Cool (2h) : Forgot there was even a game last night haha
TheKanataThrilla (2h) : That was terrible.
TheKanataThrilla (2h) : Watching that game in its entirety yesterday is proof positive that I am a football addict.
beast (3h) : And horrible time management multiple times... and not being able to score more than 3 points on a team with talent
beast (3h) : Realizing the Bears didn't fix it from the previous week and do the same thing, getting the game to overtime
beast (3h) : They probably are not tanking, but they've absolutely mismanagement some things, such as Vikings seeing the Packers blocked FG and realizing
Zero2Cool (4h) : Crazy of Bears to have that mindset that is
Zero2Cool (4h) : Hail Mary stop away from 5 - 2. Not sure how that flips to tanking. Crazy mindset if true
beast (5h) : I've quietly questioned if Bears are tanking on purpose... they suddenly got a lot worse with some simple concepts like 101 clock management
wpr (7h) : Watching bares fans melt down over how putrid their team is, so enjoyable. It's the gift that keeps on giving.
Mucky Tundra (14h) : The Seattle Seahawks defeat the Chicago Bears 6-3. Jason Myers had 6 RBIs for Seattle while Cairo Santos had 3 RBI for Chicago
beast (15h) : Not nessarily, he might of been injured either way. He's playing about 50% of the games the last 4 years
Zero2Cool (21h) : If they'd been more patient with him, he'd be back already. Putting him out there vs Bears caused him to tweak it and here we are.
packerfanoutwest (21h) : well this is his last season with the PAck, book it
beast (23h) : Sounds like no Alexander (again), I'm wondering if his time with the Packers is done
Zero2Cool (26-Dec) : Could ban beast and I still don't think anyone catches him.
Mucky Tundra (26-Dec) : Houston getting dog walked by Baltimore
packerfanoutwest (25-Dec) : Feliz Navidad!
Zero2Cool (25-Dec) : Merry Christmas!
beast (25-Dec) : Merry Christmas 🎄🎁
beast (24-Dec) : Sounds like no serious injuries from the Saints game and Jacobs and Watson should play in the Vikings game
packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : both games Watson missed, Packers won
Martha Careful (24-Dec) : I hope all of you have a Merry Christmas!
Mucky Tundra (24-Dec) : Oh I know about Jacobs, I just couldn't pass up an opportunity to mimic Zero lol
buckeyepackfan (24-Dec) : Jacobs was just sat down, Watson re-injured that knee that kept him out 1 game earlier
buckeyepackfan (24-Dec) : I needed .14 that's. .14 points for the whole 4th quarter to win and go to the SB. Lol
Mucky Tundra (24-Dec) : Jacobs gonna be OK???
Zero2Cool (24-Dec) : Watson gonna be OK???
packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : Inactives tonight for the Pack: Alexander- knee Bullard - ankle Williams - quad Walker -ankle Monk Heath
packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : No Jaire, but hopefully the front 7 destroys the line of scrimmage & forces Rattler into a few passes to McKinney.
packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : minny could be #1 seed and the Lions #5 seed
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : We'd have same Division and Conference records. Strength of schedule we edge them
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I just checked. What tie breaker?
bboystyle (23-Dec) : yes its possible but unlikely. If we do get the 5th, we face the NFCS winner
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Ahh, ok.
bboystyle (23-Dec) : yes due to tie breaker
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I mean, unlikely, yes, but mathematically, 5th is possible by what I'm reading.
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : If Vikings lose out, Packers win out, Packers get 5th, right?
bboystyle (23-Dec) : Minny isnt going to lose out so 5th seed is out of the equation. We are playing for the 6th or 7th seed which makes no difference
Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : beast, the ad revenue goes to the broadcast company but they gotta pay to air the game on their channel/network
beast (23-Dec) : If we win tonight the game is still relative in terms of 5th, 6th or 7th seed... win and it's 5th or 6th, lose and it's 6th or 7th
beast (23-Dec) : Mucky, I thought the ad revenue went to the broadcasting companies or the NFL, at least not directly
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I think the revenue share is moot, isn't it? That's the CBA an Salary Cap handling that.
bboystyle (23-Dec) : i mean game becomes irrelevant if we win tonight. Just a game where we are trying to play spoilers to Vikings chance at the #1 seed
Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : beast, I would guess ad revenue from more eyes watching tv
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I would think it would hurt the home team because people would have to cancel last minute maybe? i dunno
beast (23-Dec) : I agree that it's BS for fans planning on going to the game. But how does it bring in more money? I'm guessing indirectly?
packerfanoutwest (23-Dec) : bs on flexing the game....they do it for the $$league$$, not the hometown fans
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2024 Packers Schedule
Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM
Eagles
Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM
COLTS
Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM
Titans
Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM
Rams
Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM
CARDINALS
Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM
TEXANS
Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM
Jaguars
Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM
LIONS
Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM
Bears
Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM
49ERS
Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM
DOLPHINS
Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM
Seahawks
Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM
SAINTS
Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM
Vikings
Saturday, Jan 4 @ 11:00 PM
BEARS
Recent Topics
23m / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

41m / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

43m / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

1h / Random Babble / Martha Careful

1h / Around The NFL / Martha Careful

4h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

11h / Random Babble / Mucky Tundra

17h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

25-Dec / Featured Content / Zero2Cool

25-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

25-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

25-Dec / GameDay Threads / bboystyle

24-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

24-Dec / Random Babble / beast

24-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2024 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.