USA - Cannot pay it PS wages ... again

[Bart]

Other than Obama, who knows the name of an Australian politician, past or present this article applies to?


http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/ins ... socialism/

Must be the same misandrist who had her weeping interview with that lesbian femo nutcase about how all the boys were big bullies and made her upset as PM
If she wants equality then why doesnt she act equally like all other ex-PMs and disappear for a lengthy term!!!

[Chard]

Perhaps, though plenty of Americans feel the same, red-neck or not...and seem to be taking considerable steps to bring about impeachment.

Plenty of misguided assholes that have no idea how the fucking impeachment process actually works. You'd be absolutely shocked at the number of Americans that know absolutely nothing about our Constitution, yet are happy to tell you all about the document. Let me put it this way...

You've probably learned more about how our system of government works just by me correcting you in this thread than the average American knows.

It seems even his more devout supporters aren’t at all impressed with his socialist UNtopian ideals.

That's more a function of how divided the Democrats are. Has nothing to do with utopian ideals or stupid shit, it's just intraparty politics at work.

Do you think an impeachment is on the horizon?

Not a chance. The GOP simply does not have the numbers in the House and Senate to force an impeachment, nor do they have anything actually impeachable to charge Obama with. Even the arms shipments to Libyan rebels is a non-starter as it was congress that authorized and funded that. They'd be even more guilty than Obama if they tired that tactic, and given that Reagan did the exact same thing multiple times (for example, do you remember the Iran-Contra Affair?).

Or do you think an outspoken capitalist America will happily stand by and let socialist Obama destroy their nations economy?

This word "socialist", you keep saying it, but it does not mean what you think it means. For fuck's sake, you live in a country that has much better social welfare services than America, does that mean you live in some sort of communist worker's paradise?

[IQS.RLOW]

It was headed that way under the previous govt.

[mellie]

Chard, what are your thoughts on the following?

http://pro.stansberryresearch.com/1304P ... 50/?h=true

Of course, Stansberry has an agenda, though do you think there’s a reasonable degree of truth to what he's predicted?

He has been right on the money in the past... do you think the US are headed for trouble?

Not only cant the US pay it's wages, but in borrowing $200 million on the hour every hour it seems to be unable to pay it's debts also.


I dare say Obama and co would dismiss Stansberry as an opportunistic self-interested financial alarmist, though he makes a number of points I think are rather concerning to say the least, especially now in light of what he said would happen 5 years ago, has happened, despite his critics dismissing his research 5 years ago when he first raised the alarm.
Now, I wouldn’t be inclined to race off and buy his book, but I think all considering the US are in serious financial strife.

[Chard]

Chard, what are your thoughts on the following?

I think bit's a seriously bad idea to believe anything that someone who's been convicted of securities fraud at their word. The man's a liar and a thief, what possible reason is there to lend him credibility?

[mellie]

Chard, what are your thoughts on the following?

I think bit's a seriously bad idea to believe anything that someone who's been convicted of securities fraud at their word. The man's a liar and a thief, what possible reason is there to lend him credibility?

The fact that he's been right in the past.

In 2003, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission brought a claim against Stansberry for a "scheme to defraud public investors by disseminating false information in several Internet newsletters." The SEC alleged that Stansberry had sent out a newsletter to subscribers, predicting one company's stock was about to soar. Stansberry maintains that his information came from a company executive; the SEC claimed that he fabricated the source. The company's stock price did increase for the reasons Stansberry had pinpointed, but about a month later than Stansberry had predicted.

In 2007, he and his investment firm, then called "Pirate Investor," were ordered by a U.S. District Court to pay $1.5 million in restitution and civil penalties. The court rejected Stansberry’s argument that his speech was protected by the 1st Amendment, stating "Stansberry's conduct undoubtedly involved deliberate fraud, making statements that he knew to be false."

It's clear, Stansberry is deemed a threat to the US's SEC.

And it's clear the US SEC felt in necessary to violate their 1st Amendment in a bid to shut him up.

Next, they'll charge him with acts of economical/financial terror and will be stuffing him in Guantanamo Bay.

[mellie]

Chard, what are your thoughts on the following?

I think bit's a seriously bad idea to believe anything that someone who's been convicted of securities fraud at their word. The man's a liar and a thief, what possible reason is there to lend him credibility?

Why is he a liar and a thief?

Because he divulged too much information and in doing so, challenged the US SEC?

Call him what you like, but he was right on the mark.

Obama is the fraud and liar.

[mellie]

And this article Chard?

http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-obamac ... d-medicine

[Chard]

Chard, what are your thoughts on the following?

I think bit's a seriously bad idea to believe anything that someone who's been convicted of securities fraud at their word. The man's a liar and a thief, what possible reason is there to lend him credibility?

The fact that he's been right in the past.

That does not negate the fact he is a convicted criminal who was found guilty of securities fraud. Or are you telling me that you routinely go about trust the word of thieves and liars as a matter of course?

It's clear, Stansberry is deemed a threat to the US's SEC.

Or more likely he's guilty of securities fraud and is exaggerating his own importance in order to lure in the gullible. Let's put it another way...

Would you allow this man to manage your money? If not, then why the fuck are you taking his word at all seriously?

[Chard]

Mellie, are you just googling "President Obama Conspiracy Theories" and posting random shit to troll me or something?