Empire of the Iguanadons

So it is done. The ticket for the Republican party has been decided at last: Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan will be the team to lead us to victory in November.

There were a number of people up for contention for the spot, all of whom would have made a good choice: Paul Ryan, Marco Rubio, Tim Pawlenty, Chris Christie, Bobby Jindal, Rob Portman, and even General David Petraeus. In the end, Romney has made a wise choice by picking someone with solid experience, the qualifications to fill the office should the need arise, and someone who has proven fiscal discipline and the ONLY worthwhile budget plan to have been floated in the Senate in decades. Combining this with Romney's executive experience as both a governor and a CEO, the ticket is as solid as it could get at this point. Now it's on to dealing with the menace that is Obama-Biden.

Ryan wasted no time in coming out fighting and slamming Obama for the mess he's made over the last 4 years. It would be damn near impossible for anyone to dispute that things have been bad, and that Obama has done nothing whatsoever to improve the situation. Instead, he's simply made it WORSE that it could have been. Unemployment figures published by the government are woefully understated, even at 8.3% currently. Look around you, I'm sure you know at least 3 people who are out of work right now and can't find any. One of those people has probably resorted to collecting welfare just to survive. One probably found a way to get on disability, and the 3rd one - if they were lucky - managed to collect unemployment. Guess who the only one actually being counted is? Double your statistic and you'll have a much clearer picture of the problem. It's far more likely the real numbers are around 15%. Not 8%.

Of course, the Obama campaign retaliated almost immediately against Ryan's accusations, but had nothing of substance to offer up for it other than calling Ryan's budget plan a sham and a return to the "Failures of Bush." Seriously guys. It's time to get a new line of rhetoric. Bush has been gone for 4 years now. Take some damn responsibility for the catastrophe you've helped cause. Plus, the notion that Ryan is attempting to end Medicare seems a bit disingenuous when it was Obamacare that signed Medicare's death warrant and Ryan has been against that all along.

Whatever you may think, it's time to get ready for full on campaign season to begin. Both sides are going to be at each other's throats between now and November. I for one am looking forward to seeing who shows up to speak at the Republican convention, and then to watch as Romney and Ryan wipe the floor with Obama and Biden during the upcoming debates. Though, as I'm sure everyone has noticed, the TV ads are going to get brutal. Very brutal.

Oh, and for those wondering, no, this isn't the 500th post yet. A number of posts were sacrificed as software tests in early days. This is actually only #477.
.........................
RIP United States of America

July 1776 - November 2012.

LOL, its ok, I have talked a lot about beer of late. Its been 4 or more years since i drank, not that i was much of a drinker either. The arthritis meds i take work by slowing down how cells regrow. So anything that destroys cells, like drinking does to liver cells, makes you much more suitable to secondary illnesses, also, the meds themselves can long term cause liver problems, hence why i do not drink, even socially, its just not worth the risk. I like life, so i see no need to cause myself an early death.



I guess you do not remember all the other recessions that were much worse than the current one, let the Aussie give Vladaar (I am assuming the anon is vladdaar) a history lession. I will only list the main ones from the 20th century, not things like the Panic of 1798 or the 1815-1821 depression or the Panic of 1873 and the Long Depression, all of which lasted 5 years or more.


The Great Depression and the recession of 1937 both has unemployment topping 25 and 20% respectivly and also do not forget the recession of 1945 with its 12% decline in gdp

Considering that at the peak of the GFC, the USA had only 12% unemployment and -5% decline in gdp, the economy is hardly been worse than living memory.



Maybe a good thing, you have plenty to fix at home rather than worrying about what someone else is doing.



The real power is not in guns and bombs, it is in dollars and cents. While you have been making the great global police force, other nations have taken over in what was the US powerhouse, manufacturing, in all things that count, China has you in every aspect.

If you're old enough to have been alive AND cared in 1945 perhaps, but otherwise Anon is right. This recession is the worst in OUR lifetimes, and that's not something open for dispute.


Until that someone starts threatening to fling bombs around. And make no mistake, that's exactly what Iran is doing now, and what Iraq said they were going to do 9 years ago, and what Al-Qaeda actually DID 11 years ago. It very much becomes our business in that case and something we have every right to worry about whether a bunch of bleeding hearts like it or not.

As for China, bring it. Our bombs and guns will cut them to ribbons and then they'll have nobody left at home to man their factories.

The great depression was 80 years - a human life time - ago. 1939 - 1945 may have been an awful time for much the old world, for the Americas times were good. The economy took an enormous flight in productivity and innovation, and the US came out of that period dominating the entire world in almost every category that matters.

As for Assange, it will be hard to actually charge him with a crime. Since he's not a member of the US military like Manning, he's not under any kind of oath, or military jurisdiction. A treason charge is entirely out of the question, as he's not a citizen. If he had been in US territory when he posted those files to Wikileaks, there's a good change the 1st amendment might have applied.Charges of espionage would require stretching the definition of 'espionage' to include posting information that you were given by someone else on a non profit website, for the entire world to see, not for the benefit of any foreign entity. There's currently one favored limbo for those foreigners who can't be charged with a crime, but also can't be allowed to be free: the Gitmo solution. While Assange, being white, non-violent and somewhat famous, won't be actually be held in Gitmo, unless he can be charged with something that will certainly lead to a conviction and lengthy jail sentence, he will likely be held for many years without charge.

Better tell that to my grandmother who is 85, the Queen of England who is 90 something and a lot of other old people who are still alive, kicking and living in their own homes and doing their own thing.



You are kidding me right? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_recessions_in_the_United_States#Great_Depression_onward take a read, do you understand what GDP means, especially what -12% GDP actually means?

The USA in that recession had -12% GDP, compared to -5% GDP in the gfc, and you say everything was rosy. LOL



This is true for you perhaps, the 1980's recession was much worse for Ausies, but that is an aside, the statement used was "in a human lifetime", could have been any human life time or 80 year period, not just ours, but i took it to mean in living memory, which is most often used to mean what the Anon was attempting to say and there are people living who lived the great depression.

Your grandmother was also 5 years old in 1945 and thus doesn't qualify for the "and cared" part.

By my math, she was born in 1927, sure she was young in the great depression, but would have cared a lot, going hungry will do that to you. She fought in WW2, which ended in 1945, she must be older than 85, going to have to fund out.

Holy crap, she is 94, just looked up her service records online, so she would have felt the full effects of the great depression.

Er, ok. 1945 is 67 years ago. So she'd be old enough to care. But check your chart you linked. 5.2% unemployment? I'm sorry, but that's just not a recession by any stretch of the imagination. Even the entry's description says "technically" it was one, but Anon is correct, in 1945 America was having nothing but good times economically. Whoever put that chart together, you can smell the bias rolling off of it.

Anywho, i got a question for you before i go to bed.

What country was the first to introduce hanging as a punishment for crime?

No googleing this, have a guess or two first, the answer is quite ironic in a way and kind of obvious.

I so know what you mean. Thankfully I am not on meds like that currently, but I have no need to accelerate the destruction of cells whether in my liver, brain, or otherwise. There is no drink worth risking your life.



My father, who died last month, was born in December of 1928. He didn't have many memories that he'd shared from The Great Depression, but there were a few and I suspect he had at least as many that he didn't share, and he definitely cared. With average human lifespan on the rise, 80 years is hardly "a human life time" anymore. I know of several of my elders who were there for the Great Depression and not a one of them didn't care, even in 1945, about what was going on in their world at the times in question. My step-mother bears a numeric tattoo, ask her anytime you're feeling brave, or stupid, enough about whether or not she cared about what was going on in 1945. I assure you that concentration camps did exist and were not pleasant places to live as a prisoner in 1945, and that's not something open for dispute.


I hate to point out what ought to be obvious, but it's been put forth before that, in a traditional war involving guns and bombs and troops, China's population could produce enough soldiers to win any war against us from sheer attrition, despite our best efforts, training, and weapons.


While I'm not certain that you're correct about him not being subject to treason nor espionage, you may very well be correct about this particular assertion.


You know, my first instinct would be to respond England, but I vaguely think I recall that the Romans also used to hang folks and they would certainly qualify as older, but either way, I'll bite, who was it?

Well obvious would indicate the US, but that's not right because England hung people long before we even existed. The Romans I think were more fond of crucifixions than anything else.

I think it's a reference to a recent publication about a remarkably well preserved 27 centuries old human brain found in a disembodied head preserved in a bog in England. Damage to the vertebrae indicated the man was killed by hanging.

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2012/08/19/uk-wikileaks-assange-speech-idUKBRE87I04H20120819

Yes, Obama, please do the right thing. Make sure this thug gets brought to the US to face espionage charges.

Also, snipers, you missed your chance. Try harder.

That may not be the body I'm thinking of, but there is certainly one remarkably well preserved bog body that came out with the noose still around its neck.

Actually, hanging has been used for over 4000 years, it was first used in Persia, which is modern day Iran. Who would have thunk it, crazy Islamists inventing a new way to kill people.

Romans invented crucifixion , which is still a punishment being used in Sudan, while the UK was responsible for the industrial revolution, and we are still being punished with low wages and long work hours today. LOL

http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2012/08/19/niall-ferguson-on-why-barack-obama-needs-to-go.html



"Oh, Samson, you're so full of shit about this deception." Uh huh. So why is a Newsweek columnist agreeing with me then?

It is only a deception if one team is doing it to score points on the other team. The fact remains, both teams use the exact same system, so there is no political gain to be had for one team over the other.

Maybe the question you should be asking Samson is: "Why is my team lying to me" more so than, "Why is Obama lying to me" You had 8 years of Dubbelya lying about the unemployment scale, and you only want to complain about Obama's, Please.


Lets not forget this Paul Ryan guy ether, he voted for all but 1 of Obamas stimulus packages, and in the one he did not vote for, he applied for funding under those laws. Or how about, how he votes for pro union movement bills and the like. Ryan associates with the tea party, yet flip flops every chance he gets on his ideology.

I could not vote for the gey, he stands for nothing, at least Romney stands by his ideology, as is a man of principle, Ryan is a joke candidate, has the Rep's given up already. Gaaa i lose the ruters link about Ryan.

Put the kool-aid down, for the love of God. Bush wasn't lying about the unemployment scale. There would have been no reason to in the middle of a massive economic growth period.

This is why I don't like trying to debate this shit with you btw. Even when I spend time digging up sources or stumbling over links to stuff like this after the fact, you just throw a bomb out of left field that has literally NOTHING to do with the subject along with tossing out things that are outright lies.

You probably wouldn't vote for God himself if he was running for office, insisting that he'd supported Satan's policies in the last election cycle.

What snipers? The CIA isn't being allowed to do anything like that because Obama won't let us look bad to the internationals...


You're right, I wouldn't have guessed that. While I know that the Romans were know for their crucifixions, they were also known to use hanging from time to time as well. I can't say that it is surprising that the Persians were the first to come up with hanging, most of the rest of the known world in, and before, their time lived in the desert where hanging wasn't very feasible. Going by what my own kid tells me about the worth of his time compared to the "low wages" he's been paid (something like $10.25/hr) for doing jobs I used to willingly do for $3.35/hour, I'm not so sure I agree with you that we're still being punished with low wages and, historically, your long hours are absolutely nothing comparatively, assuming you're only talking about what the law directly allows for a single job under normal conditions.


That's just asinine, Fury. It's deception, by definition, if it's being used to conceal truth from someone, in this case the public. Deception has nothing to do with scoring points, politically or otherwise.


That's priceless, Samson, you should toss that one into the revolving quotes at the header.


I suppose, following Christian dogma since Jews don't believe in Hell or Satan, one could argue that a god who was all-knowing who created Lucifer and then cast him down and created Hell for him is rather responsible for Satan's every act in a sense...

I hear, and I obey


There is a huge difference between being responsible for creating Satan and openly approving of his evil ways. Besides, I think you know what I was getting at there

LOL I agree.

But the fact remains, the methods used to determine the unemployment rate have not changed since 1994, acoprding to this blog, http://usawatchdog.com/9-unemployment-rate-is-a-statistical-lie/



1994, well that was Clinton, but, as i said, Bush continued with this method of calculation, so, as much as you do not like to admit it, Bush lied to you just as much as anyone else has. Bush's 4.5% unemployment was more likley to be 9% as much as Obama's 10% is closer to 20%.

You are being lied to at all angels but only blame 1 side.

So....

Where's my apology then after you practically called me a liar for making up bullshit if even you can find sources to verify what I've said?

Also, had I cited this you'd almost certainly have told me I was citing a biased source. Oh, the double standards. They burn.

I blame the side that's at fault for this deception to begin with. Clinton and the libs did this on purpose, and I've said as much for years. You also seem to be missing where I've told you that Bush was no conservative except on national security issues. That said, he still had no motivation to lie during the largest economic growth period in 30 years. The stats backed him up in ever way except the government, who was probably manipulating things to make them look WORSE than they were because the libs actually running those departments hated him.

Now that a Marxist is in office, they're lying by trying to pretend things are better than we all know they are. This stuff isn't hard to see, you just want to twist it to troll me on it. Well it ain't working

Practically and what i did are too different things, but i am sure that my point has always been, that this his how the numbers are calculated and its been like that for a long time.



Its a republican blog is it not? I do not know how accurate it is, but it was the only source that i could find fast that showed how long the current calculating method has been used.



But he did lie, by your definition, and he did use a method which hides up to 50% of the real unemployment problem. And guess what, If Romney gets in, he too will use the exact same method of calculating the unemployment method.

Which is to say, that the entire argument against Obama is moot, he did not change the method, he continued to use the same method as his predecessor and his successor is going to use that same method as well, and is quoting these figures as being accurate.



No, im not trolling you on it, but i am showing you that there are other ways to look at this problem than the way that you currently do.

And i do not disagree that the unemployment stats as reported and used by all sides of politics are totally shit and bogus, but the real figure is there to see to anyone who has the time to look it up and understand the meaning of the U1-U6 data. But to say Obama has misled here means you have to also say that Bush misled as well, because both used data that excluded the hidden unemployment problem.

you do not have to be a Marxist to to do this, I think Politician would have been a better work to use, they all have no idea what truth and reality are.

Yes, there is a difference between creating him and openly approving of his ways, but omniscience kind of implies that before he created him in the first place he'd have already known how he'd turned out, and when you consider we hold bartenders legally liable for someone's actions once they leave the bar because the bartender should have cut them off sooner.. and for awhile they were talking about holding manufacturers of ammunition responsible for people who used guns to kill.. with that sort of social thinking, why shouldn't God be liable for Lucifer's actions at least as much as a parent is considered responsible for the child's actions? Probably more so since creating Lucifer was a conscious decision made knowing the full extent of the outcome.
(And, yes, I did know where you were going with it, but this sort of hypothetical theological debate is more fun.)

Btw, on a totally separate note, while I know the quote button on QFPS still doesn't quite work entirely correctly, it sure would be nice to have even that much functionality in a quote button for comments on here too.. even if as a blog it's not the most appropriate thing, the way the discussions run here it'd be awfully handy.


See, even Lucifer is lying to poor Samson now.


You're just full of amusing quips today.