Good grief. I sincerely hope that Obama lives to a ripe old age. I especially hope that he does not fall victim to political violence. Actual martyrdom would seal the deal with the weak-minded.
I believe there were a few discouraging words around here about Nate Silver.
// (Newser) – The official results from Florida aren’t in yet but it looks like Nate Silver—whose blog accounted for a fifth of the New York Times’ web traffic Monday—correctly called 50 out of 50 states after getting 49 right in 2008. “You know who won the election tonight? Nate Silver,” said Rachel Maddow on MSNBC, a sentiment echoed even by Bret Baier at Fox News, the Huffington Post reports.
But while Silver triumphed, there were plenty who got it wrong, notes Politico, which lists more than a dozen pundits who predicted a Romney win with varying degrees of confidence. Among them are assorted Fox pundits, Sarah Palin, and Peggy Noonan at the Wall Street Journal, who wrote “I think it’s Romney … While everyone is looking at the polls and the storm, Romney’s slipping into the presidency.” Rush Limbaugh was also way off. “All of my thinking says Romney big,” he said Monday. “My thoughts, my intellectual analysis of this—factoring everything I see plus the polling data—it’s not even close. Three hundred-plus electoral votes for Romney.” //
Thanks. I make it thru’ the election results and now, you make my head explode.
This ‘new America’ has been with us since 1960 if not earlier. The whole ‘land of the free’ is more and more mirage.
Just because Romney supporters got it wrong does not make the outcome good, yet that is exactly the logic that some are using.
“Good grief. I sincerely hope that Obama lives to a ripe old age”
So do I,as much as I disapprove of Obama, a Joe Biden Presidency is unthinkable!
Even the MSM couldn’t cover for HIM!
Someone should introduce Nate Silver to Ezra Levant,might help to bring Ezra’s average up.
Shouldn’t that now be spelled Amerika? Or the People’s Republic of the USA?
Now I just puked on my keyboard. Thanks.
It’s easy to understand why America committed suicide when you consider how many dead people voted for Democrats!
So when the Stones play Ottawa, does Margaret take the shiny pony for a supervised parental visit or is he old enough to go on his own?
LAS you are quite right. Especially in 1964 between LBJ and Goldwater. The Democrats were (and still are in my humble opinion) the party of extremists and racists and yet they saw the proverbial writing on the wall. LBJ ever the opportunist saw a way to win the vote of the very people he disdained. Goldwater was more “for” racial integration than LBJ (please feel free to read up on his political record) but his downfall was that he was not “for” using the force (specifically the military might) of the federal government to enact social change. The Democrats had (and still have) no qualms at all about cracking a few skulls to get their way. The party of the rich white racists are still the party of the rich white racists. They arrogantly view themselves outside the scope and reach of any of the “progressive” social policies they embrace to secure voters. It is a means to an end and yet they have many voters hoodwinked into thinking they actually care. Meanwhile the GOP are already defeated because they do not share the “by any means necessary” mentality of the left. Conservatives would not cherish a “win” we were not proud of. How else could it end?
I have no doubt that the Democrats voted lots of dead people, illegal immigrants,and plenty of the drunk and confused; they were doing that 50 years ago when my mother worked at the poll. But they didn’t vote enough of them to actually steal the election. The Corrupt Party did its best to win in its accustomed fashion, but the Stupid Party really did their work for them.
Meanwhile the Debt Ceiling is to be reached at the end of this year…
It should be renamed to the Debt Moonroof.
Some of you may enjoy this,( I do not own a firearm…yet)
… … … Smith & Wesson stock jumps after Obama win
By Tiffany Hsu
November 7, 2012, 10:45 a.m.
While investors moping over President Barack Obama’s reelection sent the Dow spiraling down more than 300 points Wednesday morning, one sector is seeing a surge: gun manufacturing.
Firearms maker Smith & Wesson Holding Corp. surged 10.8% to $10.48 a share in morning trading, more than double its price at the beginning of the year.
Sturm, Ruger & Co. Inc. got a 6.4% boost to $47.48 a share, a 39% increase from early January
The impetus? Gun sales are expected to boom now that Obama, who said during one presidential debate that he’s open to reintroducing an expired ban on civilian purchases of assault weapons, is returning to office. http://www.latimes.com/business/money/la-fi-mo-gun-sales-smith-wesson-obama-20121107,0,5868311.story
Meanwhile the GOP are already defeated because they do not share the “by any means necessary” mentality of the left. Conservatives would not cherish a “win” we were not proud of.
Oh please. GOP/CPC partisans are just has happy to throw in with unprincipled creeps like Bush and Harper. And THAT is why we’re losing.
Figure it won’t matter much by Jan who the president is.
The dems are the party pulling for pleasure, and the republican’s are stuck pushing reason and austerity.
In a contest where it’s a choice between getting and keeping entitlements with a subtext that someone else pays for it, while the opposing option is a fiscal diet, the all you can eat buffet will get the majority.
After jan. the buffet bill comes due.
After four years the question isn’t, “whose fault is it”, it’s what are you doing about it right now Mr President?
I think what has taken place in the US is an economic infrastructural change that has been allowed and encouraged by both the Democrats and the GOP until it has reached a critical threshold where, to retain that structure is politically easier than to change it.
The structure is one where the ratio of people who are not producing wealth is greater than the ratio of those who are producing wealth. Think of wealth as ‘energy’. Imagine a field of wheat, and think about the ratio of wheat stalks where the ratio of seeds produced is LESS than what it takes to grow that field again next year.
What does one do? One ‘borrows’ wheat seeds from another farmer. But the same thing happens with him..and on and on. Eventually, as we know so well, we run out of other people’s seeds. And money.
An economy operates within three phases: Investment, Production and Consumption. Investment removes wealth/seeds/energy from immediate consumption and uses it for long term structures. Production uses wealth/energy to make things, such as paying workers, buying equipment. Consumption just eats up what’s left.
But if you set up a population focused on Consumption and having no role to play in contributing to the wealth needed for Investment and Production..ahh…you are in trouble. Such economies or wheat fields last less than a generation or a year or two.
The Democrats and particularly Obama have deliberately increased the ratio of Consumers to Producers; have increased the ratio of the electorate dependent on the government for their consumer needs.
This is unsustainable. BUT, to change it, as Romney tried to do, frightens that mass of people dependent on the government. And Obama has increased this proportion of the electorate; millions on food stamps, increased unemployment, increased definition of ‘disabled’ to get government money, illegal welfare support and so on. This keeps the Democrats in power. But it is destroying the US economy.
Raising taxes on the amorphous rich won’t solve the problem; it not only won’t support all those dependents, not for a second, but, it starves the economy of its two most vital phases: Investment and Production. There’s no money for either phase! So..no industries are built, no jobs are created…
Romney tried to explain to the people that this mode is unsustainable, but, Americans are frozen in fear. They’ve been removed from these two vital phases of Investment and Production – by the false security of unions, by the false security of government largesse, that they’ve lost touch with reality. They voted out of fear.
What’s next? Such an economy can’t sustain itself. Capital will leave the US, production will leave the US. Then what? Eventually, they’ll wake up – will there be riots in the street as there are in Greece?
Canada is lucky in that we also have a population of dependents, but, we’ve confined them more or less to one province: Quebec. And have encouraged the rest of the country to Invest and Produce. Canada has the West. And it has Harper, who has reduced corporate taxes, reduced the ratio of debt to GDP to 14% (in the US it’s 25%); and busies himself seeking new export outlets for Canada. We are lucky.
The Gospel according to Justin book would only be two pages long, one for young women to doodle pics of hearts, arrows & initials of theirs and JT and a second empty page for them to write down anything Justin might say that shows some sign of intelligence…ya I know page two will remain empty.
Stuff like this reminds me of the sort of rubbish Ceausescu had printed about himself, and Kim Jong Un still has printed about himself, his father and his grandfather. They’ll be calling Obama the Genius of the Hawaiian Islands next. Good grief. I sincerely hope that Obama lives to a ripe old age. I especially hope that he does not fall victim to political violence. Actual martyrdom would seal the deal with the weak-minded.
You’d be surprised. Once Obama finally goes, there’ll be as few people in polite society willing to admit they ever voted for him as are willing to admit they ever supported Nicolae Ceausescu. Maybe some unrepentant, forcibly retired community organizers will continue to tell the other Havana or Caracas barflies that Obama was the best thing since sliced bread, as might a few uneducated, ignorant, increasingly senile black women trapped in the slums of Chicago. Nobody else will.
Ripe old age? My god, why? So he can spend his retirement grooming his two pups for succession, like Bill and Hillary are doing with Chelsea? Pray rather that the plain people of America see him off before he sees off the plain people of America.
If you must pray for an Obama, pray that when the luck of their sire and dam runs out the girls have a way of getting themselves to Kenya, where the girls will have a better chance than even of dying in bed.
and liberals call real christians nutbars!
Robw With the single female vote He does not need page two. That was all Obama needed to win.
And it has Harper, who has reduced corporate taxes, reduced the ratio of debt to GDP to 14% (in the US it’s 25%)
…
The US GDP is a little above 15 trillion and the debt is a little above 15 trillion, that is 100% and not 25 %
to compare, in 2088 when Bush left office it was at almost 10 trillion or 65 % of GDP
If I am wrong I will admit it but I have googled all of the above and I seem to be right
It’s the right time for this poem (always a conservative favorite.)
Do people know about 2016 — the film? http://2016themovie.com/ (Obama’s America: 2016). I am concerned about what the film tells us about Obama’s agenda. I am deeply troubled that when WWIII breaks out (probably soon), the free world will be lead by the Traitor-in-Chief. A major ad on Nov.5, by 500 generals and admirals, makes it clear that the Military does not trust him. What next?
While I agree completely with ET’s comments, I think there were a few other important things beside fear that played a role. The American media acted like the old Soviet Pravda in promoting propaganda instead of actual reporting and the Marxist technic of intimadating voters was in full force in certain centres. Finally no one knows how many illegal votes took place – dead people, non citizens and rejecting the ID requirement.
Yup, god told her to write the book. The god of this World. America is officially a dead Nation now. With 2 Trillion a year in debt, it can’t last long. Alberta taught me just how far people have sunk in depths of personnel greed, with no thought of the future but themselves in this age.
Hey where reaching 30 Billion with the Human rights UN shill in power.
Canadian Friend, yes you are absolutely right; I was quoting different numbers for tax rates rather than debt to GDP ratio. My apologies for such a messy post.
The US current debt to GDP ratio is 101.5%. Unsustainable. Obama, of course, doesn’t see it that way. As he said on one of his pop TV interviews, ‘it’s not a problem now; it might be in the future’. But heck, he’s only in this for power, not the future of America.
The Canadian combined federal and provincial debt to GDP is 57.9 and the federal alone is 34%. To my knowledge, Harper’s goal is that 24%.
The 14% I referred to is actually Harper’s goal for corporate income tax rates; he’s reduced it from 21% under the Liberals before 2008, gradually, to its current 15%. If you add in provincial tax rates, you get an additional 2 to 14%. Even so, with the largest combined amount of 29%, it’s still far lower than the US.
Alberta, by the way, has no provincial corporate tax rate.
In comparison, the US combined tax rate is the highest in the world: 39.2%. Effectively this means that the government is removing the capacity for both Investment and Production, from the economy…and using that money instead for immediate use Consumption.
Consumption does NOT produce a surplus to be put back into Investment and Production if the government keeps removing that surplus!
Result? The economy not merely stalls, it implodes.
Alain, yes, I agree with your concerns about the liberal media in the US, and Canada as well, we must acknowledge. I would guess that a fair percentage of illegals and other voting frauds took place but I don’t think that these were causal of Obama’s win.
The way I see it, and I do think his win is a disaster, is that the US has over the past 60 years – and this is both Democratic and GOP governance – moved into a socialist or redistributive rather than market economic infrastructure.
This happened, not because it, as an economy or even as a people, required socialist redistribution for both the economy or the welfare of the people. They did it as a means of developing a loyal voter base.
Loyalty transformed from ideological commitment to economic dependence. You were loyal to a political party because you economically depended on their redistribution of money.
The problem, of course, is that a redistributive economy removes the capacity of that economy for wealth production. That’s because it disables the Investment and Production capacities of the economy. It does this by taking all the money, in taxes, which should be put back into private business investment and production.
It takes this wealth and, via its expanding and enormously costly bureaucracy, distributes (what’s left after those salaries and benefits!) to the people, who become totally dependent on this source of funds.
By removing this wealth, no jobs are created, no new businesses are set up, and people become alienated from participating in the vital economic activities of Investment and Production. They simply wait for the monthly government cheque.
This is unsustainable. Economically and even, psychologically. This is what has taken place not only in Europe, where riots are the norm because there is simply no money to distribute, but, it has led to fascism in the Islamic nations, which are also distributive economies..that can’t sustain their populations.
So what is the process for impeachment? Taking out Biden as well….
TJ at 1:50: Rush said this: “We’re outnumbered.”
It’s that simple. It’s why all the conservative pundits hoping for and predicting a huge Romney landslide, Rush included, were wrong. We’re outnumbered. We all hoped that America (and Canada and the West in general) had enough of the old guard to pull in the votes. But we don’t have enough people any more. 20 years ago Romney would have had that landslide. America is now too full of people who don’t love the country they’re occupying, who just want “Santa Claus”, as Rush put it, to do the work for them. “[Romney] put forth a great vision of traditional America, and it was rejected. — It was rejected in favor of a guy who thinks that those who are working aren’t doing enough to help those who aren’t. — And that resonated.” (Rush)
Outnumbered. Hunker down, love God, family and neighbours, and endure it as best we can as we’re all robbed to support the takers. There’s no getting the majority back.
Posted by: ann at November 7, 2012 4:36 PM
While I agree with much of what you say early in your commnet, I refuse to go along with your idea of curling up in a foetal position to wait for God. I plan to keep working at finding ways to attract more people to our cause. The US is awakening today to a change in demographics that has been slowly emerging for a long time and fortunately some are already thinking about what needs to be done to keep pace with that change. I plan to do likewise. To simply give up is not an option.
I don’t agree with Rush on this one. The democrats knew exactly what they were doing this time. They stole Rove’s strategy. Microtarget different groups and you’ll win. Single women who only care about abortion and free pills and are scared Romney will take away their “right” to kill their baby, homosexuals, college students, latinos with illegal family members. These people were all basically told that hey your pet issue is safe with Obama and the republicans will take away your XYZ. They don’t care about the deficit and all that. That was Bush’s fault and congress it’s ok anyway the money will just come from the rich.
Had the same thought about Justin. The playbook is now written for him.
Young, charismatic, inexperienced gadfly runs on a Hope and Change type campaign, sweeps to power aided by a media that will find he can do no wrong.
Once there, ensure he remains there through the destruction of any coherent alternative and willful suppression of anything that might damage him.
This is the state of politics/journalism in 2012. Journalism is dead; the “journalists” of today are mere PR agents for their party of choice (this includes Sun/Fox/Drudge by the way), and neither side will listen to the other side’s PR.
The funny thing is, all those groups that voted Obama in again are the same ones that will get hurt most if/when he tanks the US economy: low-earning immigrants, low-skilled workers, single moms, inner city blacks, young college graduates.
And I don’t have one iota of sympathy for any of them.
I don’t think Justin could do it. Harper is not stupid, he knows how to get around the lamestream media. He can plant the seed in people’s heads with attack ads. Make no mistake Obama used that tactic VERY effectively too.
Ellie in To – exactly right; the people who voted Obama in, are the ones to suffer from the disastrous results of a redistributive economy.
After all, they don’t participate in any activities in the Investment and Production phases of the economy; they just live in the Consumption phase. When the first two phases are starved by the government taking all their ability to produce wealth..heh..nothing to distribute.
The thing about such an economy is that it is unsustainable. Never mind talking about it and kicking the can down the road, as Obama does, with his ‘it’s not a problem now but it will be’. It is operationally unsustainable.
Instead of spending stimulus money on infrastructure, such as burying hydro cables in the New England coastal areas which would have kept the hydro on during the storm, Obama’s govt spent stimulus money on..ensuring public service unionized workers in state governments kept their jobs. That’s not infrastructure. That’s what I mean by unsustainable. More disasters are in store since the economy goes for Consumption rather than Investment and Production.
In Canada, as I said, we are extremely lucky to have Harper, who has gradually steered Canada away from the Chretien and Liberal redistribution economic mode. That includes multiculturalism which sets up faithful ‘voter blocs’ just as Obama did in the USA.
And, the Liberal setting up the Maritimes as economically dependent; Harper ended the long gun registry, a make-work project in the Maritimes, and instead, enabled them to get contracts for ship building.
We’ve isolated Quebec, which has indeed set itself up as a totally redistributionist economy, and is one of the worst debt ratios in the world, but is kept afloat by ‘external’, ie, Canadian federal money. But, unlike in the US, this distributionist economic mode remains in large part confined to Quebec.
bluetech, I agree that Obama should be impeached, for Benghazi as well as other issues. The problem is the Senate is held by the Democrats and I doubt if impeachment could take place without the Senate.
ET: Jews and Asian are the 2 most successful ethnic groups in the USA in term of education and salary.
They massively voted for Obama… explain?
ET, talk about voting frauds is largely rubbish as affecting this election. Obama dropped 10.5 million votes from his total in 2008, from 69.5 to 59.2. Of the 60 million votes McCain had in 2008, Romney managed only 57.2 million.
And the lower voting turnout was true across all states.
The long and the short of it is that a lot of Democrats didn’t come out to vote this time, presumably disenchanted with their boy. But a truckload of conservatives didn’t come out to vote either, despite supposedly being so upset with Obama’s regime.
Conservatives have no one but themselves to blame. They had their chance and they whiffed. So some of those here please stop wasting our time about “the media is crooked/biased/commie-pinkos” or other such irrelevancies. Even with one in six Obama voters not showing up to support him this time around, conservatives still couldn’t get off their couches to support the guy they put through in the primaries.
Now a lot of you here sniveled that McCain was a RINO, yadda, yadda. Do tell. Explain why it is that McCain got nearly five per cent more support than Romney. Explain why it is that when one in six former Obama voters stayed home that the Republicans lost ground in the Senate. Why the Tea Party which was so effective in 2010 had seemingly little effect in 2012.
For the last, here’s a provocative thought. The TP started out as a libertarian movement. It’s been taken over to a large extent by the SoCons. Perhaps the lesson here is that the SoCons are the death of a right wing electoral victory.
TrueNorthist, I admire your determination. You’re right.
quebecois, that’s easy, since many in these two groups are leftist college grads, and in government funded jobs, whether in government bureaucracy, in academia, in other service agencies.
Like all cocooned sets of a population, they are not involved in the two most vital aspects of an economy: Investment and Production. They are involved only in Consumption, either as bureaucrats or service agents moving tax money into government programs or as, themselves, easy consumers of goods and services.
As cocooned within the government, they haven’t a clue about how an economy functions, and don’t, themselves, operate in Investment or Production. Those that DO function in these two areas, will vote for the GOP.
And, it’s a basic mantra, that these leftists operate in the sanctimonious Not In My BackYard mentality, and consider that funding the impoverished to ‘keep them calm’ also self-defines themselves as ‘benevolent and kind’. Heh. As long as it doesn’t touch their pensions and benefits. But, then, you, quebecois, know all about that, don’t you.
Welcome to the USSA
ET. I think it is a mistake to assume that PM Harper has single handedly stemmed the tide of leftism in Canada and that what there is is confined only to Quebec. I assure you what you call the “distributionist economic model” is alive and well and waiting to follow Obama’s example. The same demographics that buried the repubicans is right here in Canada, just waiting for a charismatic leader. We need to start getting ready for it now.
cgh – yes, I agree, voter fraud is minor in this election.
And you’ve got some vital points. Why did the GOP not gain the Senate? Essentially, this election left the governance in the same mode: the Democrats control the Executive and Senate, and the GOP have the House and many State Governors. Oh, and that bright light in the House, Allen West, lost his re-election.
I still maintain that what Obama has done, is to have enlarged, enormously, a dependent voter base and frightened them out of their wits that a GOP win would deprive them of the only phase of the economic triad in which they participate: Consumption. They’ve long ago been shut out of the other two phases of Investment and Production.
The Democratic election campaign was based on fear-of-loss. Just as in 2008, the Democratic election campaign was based on yet another emotion: hope and change. The GOP tried to use facts and reason. Didn’t work. What has to happen is that the Democratic economy has to reach a critical state when it, as a redistributionist method, implodes. Then, we’ll see that Democratic base really scared.
TrueNorthist – one can never totally remove the desire for dependency among a population. The strategy is to keep it at a low enough ratio that its demands for Consumer goods don’t destabilize the capacity of the economy to engage in Investment and Production. I agree that a charistmatic leader who promises, in Canada, that, let’s say, never mind the oceans not rising (tell that to the people affected by the Sandy storm)…but no more ice storms..well, such a leader might be cheered as is Obama. As was Trudeau. Both disasters.
Four more Years! Four more Years!
The very thought makes me vomit.
ET: I think you are over-analyzing (as usual)
The reason Obama won is simple: he won the Hispanics vote by 70%. Hispanics are the largest growing group in the USA. Obama won the Hispanics group because Obama is a minority like them. People vote for people their consider part of their group.
“I am a minority, he is a minority,hence I like this guy and so I vote for him.”
Just like Quebecois voted for Levesque and Trudeau simultaneously because they both were francophone even if the 2 had different politics.
quebecois – I think you are, as a mere collection of molecules and utterly determined by these molecules, doing your usual and not thinking.
Obama did not win because he won the hispanic vote, but because he won among blacks, youths, women, and, and, and…the enormous number of people regardless of ethnicity, skin colour or gender, who are dependent on government largesse. This collective group of government dependents, which you totally ignore, but which has been carefully increased and honed by the Democrats, gave Obama his victory.
Furthermore, you insult all people who refuse to self-define themselves only by the tribal narrowness of skin colour, ethnicity, language, religion, and instead define themselves by the civic categories of citizenship and commonality in a nation.
Perhaps you are someone who only, as a molecular particle, bonds to a similar molecule, but real live thinking human beings, living in a modern not tribal society, are able to bond with others because of common humanity and citizenship. Not blood type or molecular composition.
ET:
1. 70% of Latinos voted Obama.
2. Latinos are the fastest growing group in USA.
Do you failed math at high school?
quebecois, no, Obama did not win because he won the hispanic vote. He won because he took the black, hispanic, youth, women and the 47% of the population who are economically dependent on government largesse. Heh – ring a bell, quebecois?
Who cares that hispanics are the ‘fastest growing group in the USA. That doesn’t mean that they vote for a ‘black person’, ie, a ‘minority like them’. You are insulting them to insist that they vote in a tribal manner, ie, for someone who ‘belongs to a minority tribe’.
People vote for their benefit, and the Democrats promised them economic and political benefits as a group. They didn’t vote for Obama just because he’s black. Move out of tribalism.
70% of Latinos voted Obama
But what percentage of those people were voting to get more welfare and food stamps? Seems that being a parasite crosses all racial boundaries.
As usual, Limbaugh adds good insight:
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2012/11/07/in_a_nation_of_children_santa_claus_wins
Good grief. I sincerely hope that Obama lives to a ripe old age. I especially hope that he does not fall victim to political violence. Actual martyrdom would seal the deal with the weak-minded.
I believe there were a few discouraging words around here about Nate Silver.
// (Newser) – The official results from Florida aren’t in yet but it looks like Nate Silver—whose blog accounted for a fifth of the New York Times’ web traffic Monday—correctly called 50 out of 50 states after getting 49 right in 2008. “You know who won the election tonight? Nate Silver,” said Rachel Maddow on MSNBC, a sentiment echoed even by Bret Baier at Fox News, the Huffington Post reports.
But while Silver triumphed, there were plenty who got it wrong, notes Politico, which lists more than a dozen pundits who predicted a Romney win with varying degrees of confidence. Among them are assorted Fox pundits, Sarah Palin, and Peggy Noonan at the Wall Street Journal, who wrote “I think it’s Romney … While everyone is looking at the polls and the storm, Romney’s slipping into the presidency.” Rush Limbaugh was also way off. “All of my thinking says Romney big,” he said Monday. “My thoughts, my intellectual analysis of this—factoring everything I see plus the polling data—it’s not even close. Three hundred-plus electoral votes for Romney.” //
Thanks. I make it thru’ the election results and now, you make my head explode.
This ‘new America’ has been with us since 1960 if not earlier. The whole ‘land of the free’ is more and more mirage.
Just because Romney supporters got it wrong does not make the outcome good, yet that is exactly the logic that some are using.
“Good grief. I sincerely hope that Obama lives to a ripe old age”
So do I,as much as I disapprove of Obama, a Joe Biden Presidency is unthinkable!
Even the MSM couldn’t cover for HIM!
Someone should introduce Nate Silver to Ezra Levant,might help to bring Ezra’s average up.
Shouldn’t that now be spelled Amerika? Or the People’s Republic of the USA?
Now I just puked on my keyboard. Thanks.
It’s easy to understand why America committed suicide when you consider how many dead people voted for Democrats!
So when the Stones play Ottawa, does Margaret take the shiny pony for a supervised parental visit or is he old enough to go on his own?
LAS you are quite right. Especially in 1964 between LBJ and Goldwater. The Democrats were (and still are in my humble opinion) the party of extremists and racists and yet they saw the proverbial writing on the wall. LBJ ever the opportunist saw a way to win the vote of the very people he disdained. Goldwater was more “for” racial integration than LBJ (please feel free to read up on his political record) but his downfall was that he was not “for” using the force (specifically the military might) of the federal government to enact social change. The Democrats had (and still have) no qualms at all about cracking a few skulls to get their way. The party of the rich white racists are still the party of the rich white racists. They arrogantly view themselves outside the scope and reach of any of the “progressive” social policies they embrace to secure voters. It is a means to an end and yet they have many voters hoodwinked into thinking they actually care. Meanwhile the GOP are already defeated because they do not share the “by any means necessary” mentality of the left. Conservatives would not cherish a “win” we were not proud of. How else could it end?
I have no doubt that the Democrats voted lots of dead people, illegal immigrants,and plenty of the drunk and confused; they were doing that 50 years ago when my mother worked at the poll. But they didn’t vote enough of them to actually steal the election. The Corrupt Party did its best to win in its accustomed fashion, but the Stupid Party really did their work for them.
Meanwhile the Debt Ceiling is to be reached at the end of this year…
It should be renamed to the Debt Moonroof.
Some of you may enjoy this,( I do not own a firearm…yet)
… … …
Smith & Wesson stock jumps after Obama win
By Tiffany Hsu
November 7, 2012, 10:45 a.m.
While investors moping over President Barack Obama’s reelection sent the Dow spiraling down more than 300 points Wednesday morning, one sector is seeing a surge: gun manufacturing.
Firearms maker Smith & Wesson Holding Corp. surged 10.8% to $10.48 a share in morning trading, more than double its price at the beginning of the year.
Sturm, Ruger & Co. Inc. got a 6.4% boost to $47.48 a share, a 39% increase from early January
The impetus? Gun sales are expected to boom now that Obama, who said during one presidential debate that he’s open to reintroducing an expired ban on civilian purchases of assault weapons, is returning to office.
http://www.latimes.com/business/money/la-fi-mo-gun-sales-smith-wesson-obama-20121107,0,5868311.story
Meanwhile the GOP are already defeated because they do not share the “by any means necessary” mentality of the left. Conservatives would not cherish a “win” we were not proud of.
Oh please. GOP/CPC partisans are just has happy to throw in with unprincipled creeps like Bush and Harper. And THAT is why we’re losing.
Figure it won’t matter much by Jan who the president is.
The dems are the party pulling for pleasure, and the republican’s are stuck pushing reason and austerity.
In a contest where it’s a choice between getting and keeping entitlements with a subtext that someone else pays for it, while the opposing option is a fiscal diet, the all you can eat buffet will get the majority.
After jan. the buffet bill comes due.
After four years the question isn’t, “whose fault is it”, it’s what are you doing about it right now Mr President?
I think what has taken place in the US is an economic infrastructural change that has been allowed and encouraged by both the Democrats and the GOP until it has reached a critical threshold where, to retain that structure is politically easier than to change it.
The structure is one where the ratio of people who are not producing wealth is greater than the ratio of those who are producing wealth. Think of wealth as ‘energy’. Imagine a field of wheat, and think about the ratio of wheat stalks where the ratio of seeds produced is LESS than what it takes to grow that field again next year.
What does one do? One ‘borrows’ wheat seeds from another farmer. But the same thing happens with him..and on and on. Eventually, as we know so well, we run out of other people’s seeds. And money.
An economy operates within three phases: Investment, Production and Consumption. Investment removes wealth/seeds/energy from immediate consumption and uses it for long term structures. Production uses wealth/energy to make things, such as paying workers, buying equipment. Consumption just eats up what’s left.
But if you set up a population focused on Consumption and having no role to play in contributing to the wealth needed for Investment and Production..ahh…you are in trouble. Such economies or wheat fields last less than a generation or a year or two.
The Democrats and particularly Obama have deliberately increased the ratio of Consumers to Producers; have increased the ratio of the electorate dependent on the government for their consumer needs.
This is unsustainable. BUT, to change it, as Romney tried to do, frightens that mass of people dependent on the government. And Obama has increased this proportion of the electorate; millions on food stamps, increased unemployment, increased definition of ‘disabled’ to get government money, illegal welfare support and so on. This keeps the Democrats in power. But it is destroying the US economy.
Raising taxes on the amorphous rich won’t solve the problem; it not only won’t support all those dependents, not for a second, but, it starves the economy of its two most vital phases: Investment and Production. There’s no money for either phase! So..no industries are built, no jobs are created…
Romney tried to explain to the people that this mode is unsustainable, but, Americans are frozen in fear. They’ve been removed from these two vital phases of Investment and Production – by the false security of unions, by the false security of government largesse, that they’ve lost touch with reality. They voted out of fear.
What’s next? Such an economy can’t sustain itself. Capital will leave the US, production will leave the US. Then what? Eventually, they’ll wake up – will there be riots in the street as there are in Greece?
Canada is lucky in that we also have a population of dependents, but, we’ve confined them more or less to one province: Quebec. And have encouraged the rest of the country to Invest and Produce. Canada has the West. And it has Harper, who has reduced corporate taxes, reduced the ratio of debt to GDP to 14% (in the US it’s 25%); and busies himself seeking new export outlets for Canada. We are lucky.
The Gospel according to Justin book would only be two pages long, one for young women to doodle pics of hearts, arrows & initials of theirs and JT and a second empty page for them to write down anything Justin might say that shows some sign of intelligence…ya I know page two will remain empty.
Stuff like this reminds me of the sort of rubbish Ceausescu had printed about himself, and Kim Jong Un still has printed about himself, his father and his grandfather. They’ll be calling Obama the Genius of the Hawaiian Islands next.
Good grief. I sincerely hope that Obama lives to a ripe old age. I especially hope that he does not fall victim to political violence. Actual martyrdom would seal the deal with the weak-minded.
You’d be surprised. Once Obama finally goes, there’ll be as few people in polite society willing to admit they ever voted for him as are willing to admit they ever supported Nicolae Ceausescu. Maybe some unrepentant, forcibly retired community organizers will continue to tell the other Havana or Caracas barflies that Obama was the best thing since sliced bread, as might a few uneducated, ignorant, increasingly senile black women trapped in the slums of Chicago. Nobody else will.
Ripe old age? My god, why? So he can spend his retirement grooming his two pups for succession, like Bill and Hillary are doing with Chelsea? Pray rather that the plain people of America see him off before he sees off the plain people of America.
If you must pray for an Obama, pray that when the luck of their sire and dam runs out the girls have a way of getting themselves to Kenya, where the girls will have a better chance than even of dying in bed.
and liberals call real christians nutbars!
Robw With the single female vote He does not need page two. That was all Obama needed to win.
And it has Harper, who has reduced corporate taxes, reduced the ratio of debt to GDP to 14% (in the US it’s 25%)
…
The US GDP is a little above 15 trillion and the debt is a little above 15 trillion, that is 100% and not 25 %
to compare, in 2088 when Bush left office it was at almost 10 trillion or 65 % of GDP
If I am wrong I will admit it but I have googled all of the above and I seem to be right
It’s the right time for this poem (always a conservative favorite.)
Do people know about 2016 — the film? http://2016themovie.com/ (Obama’s America: 2016). I am concerned about what the film tells us about Obama’s agenda. I am deeply troubled that when WWIII breaks out (probably soon), the free world will be lead by the Traitor-in-Chief. A major ad on Nov.5, by 500 generals and admirals, makes it clear that the Military does not trust him. What next?
While I agree completely with ET’s comments, I think there were a few other important things beside fear that played a role. The American media acted like the old Soviet Pravda in promoting propaganda instead of actual reporting and the Marxist technic of intimadating voters was in full force in certain centres. Finally no one knows how many illegal votes took place – dead people, non citizens and rejecting the ID requirement.
Yup, god told her to write the book. The god of this World. America is officially a dead Nation now. With 2 Trillion a year in debt, it can’t last long. Alberta taught me just how far people have sunk in depths of personnel greed, with no thought of the future but themselves in this age.
Hey where reaching 30 Billion with the Human rights UN shill in power.
Canadian Friend, yes you are absolutely right; I was quoting different numbers for tax rates rather than debt to GDP ratio. My apologies for such a messy post.
The US current debt to GDP ratio is 101.5%. Unsustainable. Obama, of course, doesn’t see it that way. As he said on one of his pop TV interviews, ‘it’s not a problem now; it might be in the future’. But heck, he’s only in this for power, not the future of America.
The Canadian combined federal and provincial debt to GDP is 57.9 and the federal alone is 34%. To my knowledge, Harper’s goal is that 24%.
The 14% I referred to is actually Harper’s goal for corporate income tax rates; he’s reduced it from 21% under the Liberals before 2008, gradually, to its current 15%. If you add in provincial tax rates, you get an additional 2 to 14%. Even so, with the largest combined amount of 29%, it’s still far lower than the US.
Alberta, by the way, has no provincial corporate tax rate.
In comparison, the US combined tax rate is the highest in the world: 39.2%. Effectively this means that the government is removing the capacity for both Investment and Production, from the economy…and using that money instead for immediate use Consumption.
Consumption does NOT produce a surplus to be put back into Investment and Production if the government keeps removing that surplus!
Result? The economy not merely stalls, it implodes.
Alain, yes, I agree with your concerns about the liberal media in the US, and Canada as well, we must acknowledge. I would guess that a fair percentage of illegals and other voting frauds took place but I don’t think that these were causal of Obama’s win.
The way I see it, and I do think his win is a disaster, is that the US has over the past 60 years – and this is both Democratic and GOP governance – moved into a socialist or redistributive rather than market economic infrastructure.
This happened, not because it, as an economy or even as a people, required socialist redistribution for both the economy or the welfare of the people. They did it as a means of developing a loyal voter base.
Loyalty transformed from ideological commitment to economic dependence. You were loyal to a political party because you economically depended on their redistribution of money.
The problem, of course, is that a redistributive economy removes the capacity of that economy for wealth production. That’s because it disables the Investment and Production capacities of the economy. It does this by taking all the money, in taxes, which should be put back into private business investment and production.
It takes this wealth and, via its expanding and enormously costly bureaucracy, distributes (what’s left after those salaries and benefits!) to the people, who become totally dependent on this source of funds.
By removing this wealth, no jobs are created, no new businesses are set up, and people become alienated from participating in the vital economic activities of Investment and Production. They simply wait for the monthly government cheque.
This is unsustainable. Economically and even, psychologically. This is what has taken place not only in Europe, where riots are the norm because there is simply no money to distribute, but, it has led to fascism in the Islamic nations, which are also distributive economies..that can’t sustain their populations.
So what is the process for impeachment? Taking out Biden as well….
TJ at 1:50: Rush said this: “We’re outnumbered.”
It’s that simple. It’s why all the conservative pundits hoping for and predicting a huge Romney landslide, Rush included, were wrong. We’re outnumbered. We all hoped that America (and Canada and the West in general) had enough of the old guard to pull in the votes. But we don’t have enough people any more. 20 years ago Romney would have had that landslide. America is now too full of people who don’t love the country they’re occupying, who just want “Santa Claus”, as Rush put it, to do the work for them. “[Romney] put forth a great vision of traditional America, and it was rejected. — It was rejected in favor of a guy who thinks that those who are working aren’t doing enough to help those who aren’t. — And that resonated.” (Rush)
Outnumbered. Hunker down, love God, family and neighbours, and endure it as best we can as we’re all robbed to support the takers. There’s no getting the majority back.
Posted by: ann at November 7, 2012 4:36 PM
While I agree with much of what you say early in your commnet, I refuse to go along with your idea of curling up in a foetal position to wait for God. I plan to keep working at finding ways to attract more people to our cause. The US is awakening today to a change in demographics that has been slowly emerging for a long time and fortunately some are already thinking about what needs to be done to keep pace with that change. I plan to do likewise. To simply give up is not an option.
I don’t agree with Rush on this one. The democrats knew exactly what they were doing this time. They stole Rove’s strategy. Microtarget different groups and you’ll win. Single women who only care about abortion and free pills and are scared Romney will take away their “right” to kill their baby, homosexuals, college students, latinos with illegal family members. These people were all basically told that hey your pet issue is safe with Obama and the republicans will take away your XYZ. They don’t care about the deficit and all that. That was Bush’s fault and congress it’s ok anyway the money will just come from the rich.
Had the same thought about Justin. The playbook is now written for him.
Young, charismatic, inexperienced gadfly runs on a Hope and Change type campaign, sweeps to power aided by a media that will find he can do no wrong.
Once there, ensure he remains there through the destruction of any coherent alternative and willful suppression of anything that might damage him.
This is the state of politics/journalism in 2012. Journalism is dead; the “journalists” of today are mere PR agents for their party of choice (this includes Sun/Fox/Drudge by the way), and neither side will listen to the other side’s PR.
The funny thing is, all those groups that voted Obama in again are the same ones that will get hurt most if/when he tanks the US economy: low-earning immigrants, low-skilled workers, single moms, inner city blacks, young college graduates.
And I don’t have one iota of sympathy for any of them.
I don’t think Justin could do it. Harper is not stupid, he knows how to get around the lamestream media. He can plant the seed in people’s heads with attack ads. Make no mistake Obama used that tactic VERY effectively too.
Ellie in To – exactly right; the people who voted Obama in, are the ones to suffer from the disastrous results of a redistributive economy.
After all, they don’t participate in any activities in the Investment and Production phases of the economy; they just live in the Consumption phase. When the first two phases are starved by the government taking all their ability to produce wealth..heh..nothing to distribute.
The thing about such an economy is that it is unsustainable. Never mind talking about it and kicking the can down the road, as Obama does, with his ‘it’s not a problem now but it will be’. It is operationally unsustainable.
Instead of spending stimulus money on infrastructure, such as burying hydro cables in the New England coastal areas which would have kept the hydro on during the storm, Obama’s govt spent stimulus money on..ensuring public service unionized workers in state governments kept their jobs. That’s not infrastructure. That’s what I mean by unsustainable. More disasters are in store since the economy goes for Consumption rather than Investment and Production.
In Canada, as I said, we are extremely lucky to have Harper, who has gradually steered Canada away from the Chretien and Liberal redistribution economic mode. That includes multiculturalism which sets up faithful ‘voter blocs’ just as Obama did in the USA.
And, the Liberal setting up the Maritimes as economically dependent; Harper ended the long gun registry, a make-work project in the Maritimes, and instead, enabled them to get contracts for ship building.
We’ve isolated Quebec, which has indeed set itself up as a totally redistributionist economy, and is one of the worst debt ratios in the world, but is kept afloat by ‘external’, ie, Canadian federal money. But, unlike in the US, this distributionist economic mode remains in large part confined to Quebec.
bluetech, I agree that Obama should be impeached, for Benghazi as well as other issues. The problem is the Senate is held by the Democrats and I doubt if impeachment could take place without the Senate.
ET: Jews and Asian are the 2 most successful ethnic groups in the USA in term of education and salary.
They massively voted for Obama… explain?
ET, talk about voting frauds is largely rubbish as affecting this election. Obama dropped 10.5 million votes from his total in 2008, from 69.5 to 59.2. Of the 60 million votes McCain had in 2008, Romney managed only 57.2 million.
And the lower voting turnout was true across all states.
The long and the short of it is that a lot of Democrats didn’t come out to vote this time, presumably disenchanted with their boy. But a truckload of conservatives didn’t come out to vote either, despite supposedly being so upset with Obama’s regime.
Conservatives have no one but themselves to blame. They had their chance and they whiffed. So some of those here please stop wasting our time about “the media is crooked/biased/commie-pinkos” or other such irrelevancies. Even with one in six Obama voters not showing up to support him this time around, conservatives still couldn’t get off their couches to support the guy they put through in the primaries.
Now a lot of you here sniveled that McCain was a RINO, yadda, yadda. Do tell. Explain why it is that McCain got nearly five per cent more support than Romney. Explain why it is that when one in six former Obama voters stayed home that the Republicans lost ground in the Senate. Why the Tea Party which was so effective in 2010 had seemingly little effect in 2012.
For the last, here’s a provocative thought. The TP started out as a libertarian movement. It’s been taken over to a large extent by the SoCons. Perhaps the lesson here is that the SoCons are the death of a right wing electoral victory.
TrueNorthist, I admire your determination. You’re right.
quebecois, that’s easy, since many in these two groups are leftist college grads, and in government funded jobs, whether in government bureaucracy, in academia, in other service agencies.
Like all cocooned sets of a population, they are not involved in the two most vital aspects of an economy: Investment and Production. They are involved only in Consumption, either as bureaucrats or service agents moving tax money into government programs or as, themselves, easy consumers of goods and services.
As cocooned within the government, they haven’t a clue about how an economy functions, and don’t, themselves, operate in Investment or Production. Those that DO function in these two areas, will vote for the GOP.
And, it’s a basic mantra, that these leftists operate in the sanctimonious Not In My BackYard mentality, and consider that funding the impoverished to ‘keep them calm’ also self-defines themselves as ‘benevolent and kind’. Heh. As long as it doesn’t touch their pensions and benefits. But, then, you, quebecois, know all about that, don’t you.
Welcome to the USSA
ET. I think it is a mistake to assume that PM Harper has single handedly stemmed the tide of leftism in Canada and that what there is is confined only to Quebec. I assure you what you call the “distributionist economic model” is alive and well and waiting to follow Obama’s example. The same demographics that buried the repubicans is right here in Canada, just waiting for a charismatic leader. We need to start getting ready for it now.
cgh – yes, I agree, voter fraud is minor in this election.
And you’ve got some vital points. Why did the GOP not gain the Senate? Essentially, this election left the governance in the same mode: the Democrats control the Executive and Senate, and the GOP have the House and many State Governors. Oh, and that bright light in the House, Allen West, lost his re-election.
I still maintain that what Obama has done, is to have enlarged, enormously, a dependent voter base and frightened them out of their wits that a GOP win would deprive them of the only phase of the economic triad in which they participate: Consumption. They’ve long ago been shut out of the other two phases of Investment and Production.
The Democratic election campaign was based on fear-of-loss. Just as in 2008, the Democratic election campaign was based on yet another emotion: hope and change. The GOP tried to use facts and reason. Didn’t work. What has to happen is that the Democratic economy has to reach a critical state when it, as a redistributionist method, implodes. Then, we’ll see that Democratic base really scared.
TrueNorthist – one can never totally remove the desire for dependency among a population. The strategy is to keep it at a low enough ratio that its demands for Consumer goods don’t destabilize the capacity of the economy to engage in Investment and Production. I agree that a charistmatic leader who promises, in Canada, that, let’s say, never mind the oceans not rising (tell that to the people affected by the Sandy storm)…but no more ice storms..well, such a leader might be cheered as is Obama. As was Trudeau. Both disasters.
Four more Years! Four more Years!
The very thought makes me vomit.
ET: I think you are over-analyzing (as usual)
The reason Obama won is simple: he won the Hispanics vote by 70%. Hispanics are the largest growing group in the USA. Obama won the Hispanics group because Obama is a minority like them. People vote for people their consider part of their group.
“I am a minority, he is a minority,hence I like this guy and so I vote for him.”
Just like Quebecois voted for Levesque and Trudeau simultaneously because they both were francophone even if the 2 had different politics.
quebecois – I think you are, as a mere collection of molecules and utterly determined by these molecules, doing your usual and not thinking.
Obama did not win because he won the hispanic vote, but because he won among blacks, youths, women, and, and, and…the enormous number of people regardless of ethnicity, skin colour or gender, who are dependent on government largesse. This collective group of government dependents, which you totally ignore, but which has been carefully increased and honed by the Democrats, gave Obama his victory.
Furthermore, you insult all people who refuse to self-define themselves only by the tribal narrowness of skin colour, ethnicity, language, religion, and instead define themselves by the civic categories of citizenship and commonality in a nation.
Perhaps you are someone who only, as a molecular particle, bonds to a similar molecule, but real live thinking human beings, living in a modern not tribal society, are able to bond with others because of common humanity and citizenship. Not blood type or molecular composition.
ET:
1. 70% of Latinos voted Obama.
2. Latinos are the fastest growing group in USA.
Do you failed math at high school?
quebecois, no, Obama did not win because he won the hispanic vote. He won because he took the black, hispanic, youth, women and the 47% of the population who are economically dependent on government largesse. Heh – ring a bell, quebecois?
Who cares that hispanics are the ‘fastest growing group in the USA. That doesn’t mean that they vote for a ‘black person’, ie, a ‘minority like them’. You are insulting them to insist that they vote in a tribal manner, ie, for someone who ‘belongs to a minority tribe’.
People vote for their benefit, and the Democrats promised them economic and political benefits as a group. They didn’t vote for Obama just because he’s black. Move out of tribalism.
70% of Latinos voted Obama
But what percentage of those people were voting to get more welfare and food stamps? Seems that being a parasite crosses all racial boundaries.