<embed src="http://services.brightcove.com/services/viewer/federated_f8/1079049304" bgcolor="#FFFFFF" flashVars="videoId=1801288137&continuousPlay=false&playerId=1079049304&viewerSecureGatewayURL=https://console.brightcove.com/services/amfgateway&servicesURL=http://services.brightcove.com/services&cdnURL=http://admin.brightcove.com&domain=embed&autoStart=false&" base="http://admin.brightcove.com" name="flashObj" width="510" height="550" seamlesstabbing="false" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" swLiveConnect="true" pluginspage="http://www.macromedia.com/shockwave/download/index.cgi?P1_Prod_Version=ShockwaveFlash"></embed>
CRAMER doesnt want to invest more, but he wants to FORCE the taxpayer to invest the question is not whether we go to a socialist dictatorship any more, that seems to be a done deal the question is WHO the funds are stolen from, to give to who? and I think stealing from the poor, to give to the rich doesnt make a lot of sense proven failure of 'trickle down' doesnt indicate massive trickle down confiscation to me
Slick Willy wasn't the first guy to push proven failures of economics onto the people. The analogy of forcing the working class to pay for what the rich want to buy is nothing new. In my mind, it's no different than forcing children from the masses to fight wars that have nothing to do with national security but everything to do with enriching a few groups and families. Prove me wrong, anybody.
if i was Cramer(thank god i'm not),i would gently ask that broad if i can stick my hand up her dress or whatever the hell she is wearing. i would con her into thinking that the answers to the credit crisis are actually inside her dress about 6 inches under her belly.
Oh you cad, you masher, you sexist! She does look fuckable, at least from this angle. Tell her you could arrange an anchor trial for her on a news network, and I bet she would let you check for that solution immediately behind her navel.