Cgroupman likes to prance around this site pretending to be a centrist, while he throws out pot shots at conervatives like his definition of liberals and conservatives that he threw out earlier in this thread..... AAA just rolled over his ass with a fucking mack truck, and now cgroupman is on tilt...... Funny how quickly he dropped the "centrist" crap after AAAinthebeltway embarassed him......
It still confounds me how the 'left' got so much power that they can control everything in the world the right doesn't like. I recently read this about the Rothchild family history and their estimated wealth of between $1.7 TRillion and $17 Trillion. Might explain a lot about using the puppets of power, left and right, to just keep control to themselves. Make the right feel good, make the left feel good, and crush whichever side, country, power-broker, that they like, in whatever method they like. Studied some of this in school, more after becoming a market researcher, here are a couple of easy reads. Take 10 minutes, both sides guys, I would like to hear comments. http://69.42.71.167/Rothschild.htm http://elitistdeception.blogspot.com/2008/01/history-of-rothscilds.html Something for the right and for the left, and for the rest of us IMO. c
but jerry brown just got here. It has been the legislature in Ca that has been corrupt and anti sanity.
Or as quoted on Fox But pressed on his own views about birth control and confronted with the fact that 99 percent of sexually active women have used it at some point, Santorum defensively acknowledged that he believes it's morally wrong and that employers should be able to opt out of covering it. And, this site is full of strawman arguments, but usually it even gets worse and the childish name calling starts for pages upon pages. I know Santorum is just playing to his base I know how I play both sides at times. I like to think there are valid points on both sides, but it's hard to get some sort of intellectual conversation, at times, because of all this. I prefer to be open minded instead of 'having' to believe one way or another just to keep a label of conservative or liberal. And, I was simply pointing out the definitions as sort of a smile type of thing. I just like to keep things from getting out of hand if possible. I think you, Mr. Maverick, as mentioned before, are one of the good guys. Curious as to your thoughts on the Rothchilds and their financial controls. Some of the guys here really need to lighten up a bit. c
WTF does this have to do with the thread??? This is Another underhanded shot at the right..... why dont you just come out and call me or one of the other righties on this site an asshole, instead of playing these games.....
I wouldn't call it 'prancing' - although that does conjure up quite a visual. The definitions were sort of tongue in cheek to just slow down the bashing a bit, and I didn't really think I would hit a nerve with something like that. Liberals do not control the world. Obama is not a Muslim. Everything is NOT BUSH's fault. Dick Cheney is not Darth Vader, well, hmm. Anyway, the absolutist type name calling and conspiracy is just plain funny at times. The term 'as if' comes to mind when I hear how Obama caused this or that, or Bush caused everything to go to hell. Is there something wrong with being a moderate? Fiscal conservative and social liberal, if we must use labels? If we just reversed the names on some of the irrational claims made, then each side would likely switch over their thinking. Enjoy the day, Mr. Max. Getting ready for a heavy heavy expiration day. Above 140 SPY or below tomorrow, after dividend? Making me crazy (ier). c
The line of reasoning that the left was totally responsible for the problems in California. I don't like calling people names, seems rather counter-productive. Not a big deal, just personal choice. And personal choice, is that a right or left wing deal? j/k c
Did you read Max's first post? It's not like he started a thread and said liberals destroyed CA. He posted an article that actually broke down the two states side by side and compared the two. What conclusion would you come to being that liberals run CA and conservatives and moderate democrats run TX? The entire state legislature in CA is democratic. And I'm sure Hollywood puts a lot of money into who gets elected in that state.
I understand. And I know that TX is one of the most restrictive for traders in the Country, worse than Massachusetts even. I love California, but wouldn't live there due to the high taxation. And, you're absolutely correct, we have red states and blue states. Again, it boils down to what you feel makes you more comfortable in your choice of residence. For some, who need jobs, all this is moot. For those of us who are traders, and can live pretty much where we like, then we can weigh all the factors involved. Nice. c
I am the first to say that with respect to the feds, the republican neo cons were just as bad as the democrats. And I am not the only conservative worried that we have not cleaned house enough. It is why the race is so split up. We basically have 3 reformed neo cons running. The base despised what neo cons did to us. The created the opportunity for the left to destroy our economic future. The way they have destroyed CA's economic future... (absent a huge change) The left and the democrats have destroyed CA by spending us into oblivion. Some school principals make 150 k. many teachers cops and fireman make six figures with multi million dollar retirements. Tax and regulatory policies drive out jobs. Tax policy which is so screwed only 1/3 of the people pay income taxes and we pay a lot. Only democrats can purposely screw things up that bad.