Who will it be?

http://www.thedailyshow.com/full-episod ... n-scorsese

Many have already bit the dust

Telcoman

You back from your stink at Occupy Wall Street?

Cold_Zero wrote:You back from your stink at Occupy Wall Street?

No, just enjoying watching the Republican misfits.

All of them together do not equal one qualified candidate that is better qualified than our current president.
Which misfit is going to be your pick?

Ron Paul. I dont expect you to understand the difference between the two styles of conservatism. But I am sure you are going to bash him...

Edit: I should have said stint.. not stink..sorry about that..

Cold_Zero wrote:Ron Paul. I dont expect you to understand the difference between the two styles of conservatism. But I am sure you are going to bash him...

Edit: I should have said stint.. not stink..sorry about that..

He is another loser

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5m76BOQ_ ... re=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UMddgl0l ... re=related


Not going to get the nomination

Hahahaaa.
You don’t have time for a history lesson? Is that because History is not convenient to prove your point, Bill? To be honest, Bill O'Reilly embodies the problem with Neo-conservatism when it comes to foreign policy. Invade the Middle East and defend Israel at any cost because of a certain religious millennial view. The irony is that the Roman Catholic Church, unlike Bill O’Reilly does not share that same millennial view.

Cold_Zero wrote:Hahahaaa.
You don’t have time for a history lesson? Is that because History is not convenient to prove your point, Bill? To be honest, Bill O'Reilly embodies the problem with Neo-conservatism when it comes to foreign policy. Invade the Middle East and defend Israel at any cost because of a certain religious millennial view. The irony is that the Roman Catholic Church, unlike Bill O’Reilly does not share that same millennial view.

When the history of todays republican party is studied years from now it is going to be very funny and the movie will be a real hoot

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/1 ... 99854.html

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/arc ... nt/248456/

"No matter how much talk you hear about the Gingrich surge and Gingrich as the anti-Romney, the only important fact you need to remember about the former speaker is this: Newt Gingrich will never be president."

What does the Republican Party hate about Mitt Romney? The Individual Mandate.
What did Mitt Romney learn from Newt Gingrich? The Individual Mandate.

Let's watch.

IBCoupe wrote:What does the Republican Party hate about Mitt Romney? The Individual Mandate.
What did Mitt Romney learn from Newt Gingrich? The Individual Mandate.

Let's watch.

The campaign is getting interesting

http://motherjones.com/mojo/2011/11/gin ... gress-2007
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vlLZPo1M ... re=related

Poor Mitt

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/1 ... -employee/

Telcoman

Another loser

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/2 ... 07731.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1OuiuolN1r4

IBCoupe wrote:What does the Republican Party hate about Mitt Romney? The Individual Mandate.
What did Mitt Romney learn from Newt Gingrich? The Individual Mandate.

Let's watch.

Telcoman

telcoman wrote:

Telcoman

This one above was debunked by NPR: http://wap.npr.org/news/Politics/142670549?page=6 and, I believe, also on Politifact.

Z

szh wrote:

telcoman wrote:

Telcoman

This one above was debunked by NPR: http://wap.npr.org/news/Politics/142670549?page=6 and, I believe, also on Politifact.

Z

right, and as far as the "antique rail infrastructure", that's BS too. The majority of the rail lines in use in the US are owned and operated by FREIGHT railroads who get little assistance from the government. And those tracks are not designed for speed, but for weight. AMTRAK leases use of much of that track. Those sleek new European trains are heavily subsized by governments. unfortunately, AMTRAK is using decades old equipment because the US Government gives comparatively very little assistance, and what assistance they do get, has strings attached. Both parties are to blame there too..

Cold_Zero wrote:You back from your stink at Occupy Wall Street?

Just keeping tabs on a party that does nothing

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/20 ... -force/?hp

When was the last time the republican party did anything for people that work?

Telcoman

Bubba1 wrote:right, and as far as the "antique rail infrastructure", that's BS too. The majority of the rail lines in use in the US are owned and operated by FREIGHT railroads who get little assistance from the government. And those tracks are not designed for speed, but for weight. AMTRAK leases use of much of that track. Those sleek new European trains are heavily subsized by governments. unfortunately, AMTRAK is using decades old equipment because the US Government gives comparatively very little assistance, and what assistance they do get, has strings attached. Both parties are to blame there too..

Well if you are in favor of our government taking over and improving our rail transportation system then I agree with you. Should provide many much needed jobs to improve the economy

Telcoman

Another myth of the Republican party is the 1% create jobs and their taxes should not be raised

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-12-0 ... nauer.html

Thank President Reagan for the US going downhill for thirty years

"We’ve had it backward for the last 30 years. Rich businesspeople like me don’t create jobs. Middle-class consumers do, and when they thrive, U.S. businesses grow and profit. That’s why taxing the rich to pay for investments that benefit all is a great deal for both the middle class and the rich."

telcoman wrote:
Well if you are in favor of our government taking over and improving our rail transportation system then I agree with you. Should provide many much needed jobs to improve the economy

Telcoman

No, I am not in favor of the government taking over our railroads in general, but I do favor more government investment in rail infrastructure. It would give a huge bang for the buck and represent a tiny fraction of what the government already spends annually on airports and highways.

AMTRAK is a complete mess because of our government's involvement with it.

AMTrak is a complete mess because people don't take the train.

IBCoupe wrote:AMTrak is a complete mess because people don't take the train.

Yes and no. AMTRAK is actually very popular and a great deal in the northeast corridor and in parts of California, and gets plenty of riders. The prices are reasonable and the service is as fast, if not faster and considerably less hassle than airlines. It's outside those two areas, where the distances are longer and competition stiffer, is where AMTRAK has big problems. The only way AMTRAK can get what little funding they get from Congress is by maintaining a national network. Unfortunately their longer distance service is not fast enough for most folks, plus the prices are not as competitive with air so they don't get enough long distance riders to maintain a national network without government subsidies. And the little subsidies they do get are not remotely enough to support/maintain a national network. Any profits made in California or the northeast corridor are more than swallowed by the rest of the system. There has also been some dreadful management decisions in recent years made by AMTRAK including that debacle called ACELA.

Howie, you're still clueless.

But you're not clueless because of what you believe - You're clueless because you can't support your position with anything more than blind, reckless, regurgitated rhetoric that you don't fully understand.

Frankly, you bore me (as do most people with a double-digit IQ).

By the way, check my other thread - Your beloved POTUS is laying people off left and right, while the 1% hired 140,000 people last month. "Mother Jones"?

AZhitman wrote:Howie, you're still clueless.

But you're not clueless because of what you believe - You're clueless because you can't support your position with anything more than blind, reckless, regurgitated rhetoric that you don't fully understand.

Frankly, you bore me (as do most people with a double-digit IQ).

By the way, check my other thread - Your beloved POTUS is laying people off left and right, while the 1% hired 140,000 people last month. "Mother Jones"?

No, sorry Greg you are the one who is clueless.
You were clueless during the previous presidential campaign supporting two inferior republican candidates.
I hope you won't be too surprised when Obama is reelected next year because the republican party can no longer fool the 99%

Reading this earlier reminded me of you. The clueless one
Send in the Clueless
By PAUL KRUGMAN


“Think about what it takes to be a viable Republican candidate today. You have to denounce Big Government and high taxes without alienating the older voters who were the key to G.O.P. victories last year — and who, even as they declare their hatred of government, will balk at any hint of cuts to Social Security and Medicare (death panels!).
And you also have to denounce President Obama, who enacted a Republican-designed health reform and killed Osama bin Laden, as a radical socialist who is undermining American security.
So what kind of politician can meet these basic G.O.P. requirements? There are only two ways to make the cut: to be totally cynical or to be totally clueless. “

AZhitman wrote:... - Your beloved POTUS is laying people off left and right, while the 1% hired 140,000 people last month. "Mother Jones"?

Not sure where you got that from. The link doesn't work so I'll just assume it was just another false statement circulated by right wing extremists.



Telcoman

telcoman wrote:No, sorry Greg you are the one who is clueless.

When you contribute something useful, interesting, unique or even relevant to this section of the forum, I'm sure it'll be cause for celebration.

Even your fellow liberals here don't back you up. That should be a pretty strong indicator.

Aren't there some kids on your lawn you need to shake your cane at?

telcoman wrote:You were clueless during the previous presidential campaign supporting two inferior republican candidates.

Any idea who I voted for? Didn't think so.

telcoman wrote:Not sure where you got that from. The link doesn't work so I'll just assume it was just another false statement circulated by right wing extremists.

Don't blame me if you're too dumb to use Google. Your ASSumptions are no substitute for critical thinking skills.

I didn't POST a link - do you just surf around, clicking on words and hoping something good will happen?

But, since you like your information to be pureed and spoon-fed to you (don't forget your bib!), here you go:

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/us-eco ... 2011-12-02

The Labor Department released those numbers. You know, the same Labor Department that reports to your beloved Clown-in-Chief?

You should hire yourself out for kids' birthday parties. You could make balloon animals and tell jokes.

Isaac, I think I accidently deleted your last post. Sorry about that. I thought I hit quote, and I must have accidently hit edit.

As far as railroads, it's clear you are not a rider, but there are literally millions of folks that do ride it and prefer it to driving. I used to make regular day trips between Philly and WashDC. If you're travelling in the northeast intercity to a city like NY or WashDC, driving/parking a car in those cities not as cheap or easy as you think.

That's okay. I'll just restate the main theme of my post: there are far more convenient ways to travel, even along the northeast corridor. AMTRAK is incredibly expensive, and bus travel is so incredibly cheap. Driving isn't that painful, and there are alternatives other than the train. The MetroNorth Railway is convenient to and from NYC, but it only runs to New Haven, and even that I think is part of NY Transit, not Amtrak.

Again, bottom line: in the northeast corridor, Amtrak sucks because there are better alternatives to waiting for a train. MegaBus, Peter Pan, and Fung Wah all come to mind.

Where I'm from, this is a train:



Who'd want to ride that? Besides, public transit is icky.

IBCoupe wrote:That's okay. I'll just restate the main theme of my post: there are far more convenient ways to travel, even along the northeast corridor. AMTRAK is incredibly expensive, and bus travel is so incredibly cheap. Driving isn't that painful, and there are alternatives other than the train. The MetroNorth Railway is convenient to and from NYC, but it only runs to New Haven, and even that I think is part of NY Transit, not Amtrak.

Again, bottom line: in the northeast corridor, Amtrak sucks because there are better alternatives to waiting for a train. MegaBus, Peter Pan, and Fung Wah all come to mind.

There about 10 million people in the northeast that disagree with your assessment, buddy. Though I can see AMTRAK's northeast corridor being inconvenient if you are travelling to OUTSIDE the major northeast corridor cities, where cars offer more convenience for the final miles, but if you're travelling TO a major northeast corridor city, like NYC, Philly, WashDC which have excellent local mass transit systems, you need to change your brand of cigarettes if you think driving a car or riding a bus to those cities is the best way to go.

With trains , not only is there hourly service on the NE corridor, there are no tolls, no airline like security checks, no parking fees (which can be as expensive as the entire fare by itself in NYC) no traffic/construction delays, no BMW drivers, no potholes, no speed traps, no bad weather to contend with, no stopping for gas/bathroom, you can nap the whole way (without stopping), in a reclining seat with double the leg legroom of a bus or car, you can plug in your computer or whatever, have a meal in the dining car without stopping, have a drink in the bar car (certain trains) without stopping. Oh yeah, trains really suck . Buses might be a little cheaper, but they do not have the flexibility and advantages of trains, fewer amenities, fewer options. for example Fung Wah offers just one service:
Chinatown NY to Chinatown Boston, that's it. no intermediate stops. Have you ever actually done an intercity trip by bus? I have. They suck.

I will concede that AMTRAK is pricey for local train service, like Trenton to Philly
(35 MILES) or Trenton to NYC (70 miles). For those short hops, SEPTA or NJ Transit trains are cheaper and an even bigger bargain. just because you don;t use trains doesn't mean they are not great deal.

<long time rail industry employee


Greg: nice shot of a BNSF freight train. There's just not enough graffiti to be the northeast corridor.

If Gregs train ever made it to New York it would look something like this

Dodging the misinformation again, I see.

That's OK, I'm sure you learned it from your beloved POTUS, who can't seem to keep HIS facts straight, either: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fac ... ml?hpid=z1

Thanks Bubba - I like me some BNSF. When I was a kid, I built a really cool model RR set with BNSF and Chessie System engines (I liked the colors / logos).

The Bush tax cuts were not paid for and neither were his two wars.
Lets not forget neither was his gift to the drug companies with his Medicare Part D. More deficit spending with no negotiation of drug prices.
Our budget surplus when Bush came into office was quickly squandered into huge deficits and an economic meltdown that we still have not fully recovered from.
Huge outsourcing, loss of manufacturing occurred on Bushs watch
The eight years of Bush did nothing on the job front and a majority of the American electorate will remember when they enter the voting booth next November.

Telcoman

Blah, blah, blah. More ranting and misguided "rocking chair quarterbacking".

You still have some answering to do from before - No waving of the cane until you explain how it is that you couldn't find readily-available Labor Department statistics from your beloved Administration.

Even "The Great Barack" would be ashamed of you.