airdisaster.info

Who else believes - apart from me - that the current unbelievable stubborness of those tea party clowns is based mainly on Obama not being their exact skin color?

Who else believes - apart from me - that the current unbelievable stubborness of those tea party clowns is based mainly on Obama not being their exact skin color?

You're likely joined by the same people who when asked about, say, atheism quickly reply that "Hitler was an atheist" (which he wasn't) as well as by those who whenever the issue of immigration reform is brought up quickly resort to "You just don't like Pedro!" In other words, rather than using solid arguments, they prefer distractions ("You just don't like a colored President!").

The problem with Obama is not that he's black, but that he's desperately out of his league on this whole debt deal. This is a situation in which his many minders and handlers and even the best of teleprompters won't help.

So what do you think, Ike?
Will there be some sort of a compromise to avoid state bankruptcy a few seconds before the US gov'nt runs out of money?
Or will they let the sh** hit the fan?

DER SPIEGEL has identified the real reason for the current situation btw: its name is Grover Norquist. According to Der Spiegel, that is.
Link in German: http://www.spiegel.de/wirtschaft/sozial ... 11,00.html

Who else believes - apart from me - that the current unbelievable stubborness of those tea party clowns is based mainly on Obama not being their exact skin color?

You're likely joined by the same people who when asked about, say, atheism quickly reply that "Hitler was an atheist" (which he wasn't) as well as by those who whenever the issue of immigration reform is brought up quickly resort to "You just don't like Pedro!" In other words, rather than using solid arguments, they prefer distractions ("You just don't like a colored President!").

The problem with Obama is not that he's black, but that he's desperately out of his league on this whole debt deal. This is a situation in which his many minders and handlers and even the best of teleprompters won't help.

Well I wouldn't want to be thrown into one pot with the people you mention I guess.
It's just that I believe that the tea party may be slightly on the reactionary side, and while they may not openly say so, they still dislike people who are not their color.
I can't really say anything about Obama's professional abilities or disabilities - he's just vastly popular in Europe, but we over here have our own governments to be angry at and that keep us busy all day.

It's just that I believe that the tea party may be slightly on the reactionary side, and while they may not openly say so, they still dislike people who are not their color.
I can't really say anything about Obama's professional abilities or disabilities - he's just vastly popular in Europe, but we over here have our own governments to be angry at and that keep us busy all day.

I think they're more than slightly on the reactionary side, the reaction being to the continuous irresponsible fiscal policy. This administration appears to have outspent the last one (no easy task) and, what's worse, has no real intentions of reversing that trend. There may well be racists in the Tea Party (like everywhere else), but it seems dishonest to me to dismiss their concerns out if hand by just labeling the whole movement as "anti-black".

As for Obama's popularity in Europe, that's no surprise, seeing as he's the only candidate in recent memory to go as far as to actually campaign in Europe. In that regard he reminds of another leader from about a quarter of a century ago who was also tremendously popular abroad and whose books were best-sellers in the West even as his own country fell apart around him, politically, economically and literally. Ring any bells?

... In that regard he reminds of another leader from about a quarter of a century ago who was also tremendously popular abroad and whose books were best-sellers in the West even as his own country fell apart around him, politically, economically and literally. Ring any bells?

Were peanuts an issue?

... In that regard he reminds of another leader from about a quarter of a century ago who was also tremendously popular abroad and whose books were best-sellers in the West even as his own country fell apart around him, politically, economically and literally. Ring any bells?

Were peanuts an issue?

No, you're going too far back. The one I'm talking about had an issue with birthmarks, not peanuts.

Gorbachev!
Did I win something?

Gorbachev!
Did I win something?

Yes, you won my respect.

I think they're more than slightly on the reactionary side, the reaction being to the continuous irresponsible fiscal policy.

I wouldn't go too far in ascribing a thought-through economic analysis. A rather well publicized poll had 70% of Tea Partiers opposed to Medicare/Medicaid spending cuts. The Cato Institute they ain't.

Gorbachev!
Did I win something?

Birthmark?

Damn! I thought it was bird shit.

It's just that I believe that the tea party may be slightly on the reactionary side, and while they may not openly say so, they still dislike people who are not their color.
I can't really say anything about Obama's professional abilities or disabilities - he's just vastly popular in Europe, but we over here have our own governments to be angry at and that keep us busy all day.

I think they're more than slightly on the reactionary side, the reaction being to the continuous irresponsible fiscal policy. This administration appears to have outspent the last one (no easy task) and, what's worse, has no real intentions of reversing that trend. There may well be racists in the Tea Party (like everywhere else), but it seems dishonest to me to dismiss their concerns out if hand by just labeling the whole movement as "anti-black".

As for Obama's popularity in Europe, that's no surprise, seeing as he's the only candidate in recent memory to go as far as to actually campaign in Europe.

I love this post. Very well said and explained.

The media has done a great job in demonizing the Tea Party. Have you ever read their principles and what they stand for? I bet most people haven't. And I would also bet most Americans would agree with the majority of those principles.

The media has done a great job in demonizing the Tea Party.

Perhaps you should qualify that. Fox has been generally positive in the coverage that I've seen, and Fox is the most watched news network in the country.

The media has done a great job in demonizing the Tea Party.

Perhaps you should qualify that. Fox has been generally positive in the coverage that I've seen, and Fox is the most watched news network in the country.

Fox? Oh, Fox! The network that kept claiming that Islamic terrorist were responsible for the Oslo bombing days after an Arian true-blood Norskie was jailed and pictures of same was seen in every media except...................Fox.
Most watched in the country, same country deep in dept. Any connection one wonders.
Did I mention that Norway has no foreign dept? I did!
Per

Did I mention that Norway has no foreign dept? I did!
Per

All things in due time, Per, no worries.

Did I mention that Norway has no foreign dept? I did!
Per

All things in due time, Per, no worries.

Per,

You must be having a laugh, surely.
Norway total external debt (in essence everything owned to people , corporations and other organizations of non-Norwegian origin) (Eurostat numbers)
=

wait for it

2,323,000,000,000 US$
or no less than 454,768$ per capita.

Per,

You must be having a laugh, surely.
Norway total external debt (in essence everything owned to people , corporations and other organizations of non-Norwegian origin) (Eurostat numbers)
=

wait for it

2,323,000,000,000 US$
or no less than 454,768$ per capita.

Per will celebrate his newly found indebtedness with a stiff drink.

As I think we all know, the US debt deal this week solves nothing. America faces a moral crisis as much as economic one. We can't get $10 of government services by paying in just $6. It cannot go on. A wise man once told me that if something cannot go on, it will stop.

Didn't it prevent a short-term 'unmanaged' spending crunch?

Did I mention that Norway has no foreign dept? I did!
Per

All things in due time, Per, no worries.

Per,

You must be having a laugh, surely.
Norway total external debt (in essence everything owned to people , corporations and other organizations of non-Norwegian origin) (Eurostat numbers)
=

wait for it

2,323,000,000,000 US$
or no less than 454,768$ per capita.

Government foreign debt is 600,000,000,000 NOK, total is 3,500,000,000,000 NOK, i.e. nothing.
http://www.ssb.no/english/subjects/09/04/brutgjeld_en/
Per

Government foreign debt is 600,000,000,000 NOK, total is 3,500,000,000,000 NOK, i.e. nothing.
http://www.ssb.no/english/subjects/09/04/brutgjeld_en/
Per

Per, that's a bit disengenuos, no?
You originally stated that;

Did I mention that Norway has no foreign dept? I did!
Per

You're singeling out only government debt, which is only part of the equation.
Combined the government and all other things Norwegian have massive foreign debt.
Only the likes Ireland and Liberia have more foreign debt as a percentage of its GDP.
538% is nothing to be proud of, it basically means that you are very dependent of intrest rates set by
markets outside of Norway and since Norway doesn't have any direct influence on them it is in an ever present risk
of escalating (certainly in todays markets).

Not all is doom and gloom for Norway though,
The government itself indeed has a very manageable debt (below50% of GDP), the economy itself is very big and has tremendous earning power
The citizens have considerable savings and a lot of external debt is artificially inflated because of the way the monetary system is
melted together within the EU.
Basically most of this foreign debt is owned to fellow EU institutions , same as with almost all of the other EU nations.
However this means that countries , like Norway, are even more dependent of monetary trends within the EU and the way that is going now
isn't looking very promissing.
If you would compare Norway with the US it is therefor better to compare The EU with the US.
In that case foreign debt levels are fairly equal.
The US has a foreign debt level of about 95% of its GDP while the EU has a foreign debt level (anything owned to non EU organizations) of about 85% of its
combined GDP.
Eurostat numbers again (end of 2010);
-EU ; 13.7 trillion US$ or 27,800US$ per capita or 85% of GDP
-US ; 14.3 trillion US$ or 45,000US$ per capita or 95% of GDP

All these numbers are freely available on the Eurostat website btw.
http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal ... ics/themes

We can't get $10 of government services by paying in just $6.

Are you suggesting budget cuts? What about my entitlements?

A wise man once told me that if something cannot go on, it will stop.

I wonder if he had heard of viagra?