BellGab.com Archive

Quote from: Juan on April 27, 2015, 06:16:11 PM
Don't forget that the three guys wearing the suits will make 90% of the money.

Not anymore. Wearing a shirt & tie is a dead sign these days of some idiot being paid 12$ hour but hey he wears a suit so he must be educated and paid well. Take Enterprise Rent-A-Car, the #1 recruiter of college graduates in the US, requires a degree to work there. The uniform is a shirt and tie and slacks. Starting pay, $11.50.

Southern Wine & Spirits, #1 distributor of wine and spirits in the US. They handle almost 70% of all booze sold. Required uniform, shirt, tie, slacks. Starting pay, $13, and you drive your own car, pay for your own insurance, and get reimbursed less than enough to pay for your gas.

Bartenders and waitresses crush most college graduates these days in take home pay. And their student loans equal nothing because you don't need $100k in BS higher education loans to do either. Starbucks employees make more than college grads as well. The system, the economy, is a pile thanks to Democrat's mandatory health benefits for full time employees law, and thanks to Obamacare. Full-time jobs have been killed. Companies will not hire full-time employees anymore they hire part-timers and set up employees as private contractors.

This is the game corporations play these days to survive. Pay people jackshit while making them dress professional to fool them into thinking they're part of "corporate America". Tell them they're receiving "management training". In reality they've been taken. And $11.50hr will never pay off their $100k in student loans.

Quote from: 136 or 142 on April 26, 2015, 09:07:58 PM
When I used to watch Conan O'Brien I first found Brian Williams to be oily and then I turned away whenever he came on.  I have no idea where the idea has come from that he is supposedly a liberal.

Agreed. There's no reason to assume the chief news anchor of the most liberal news network of the big 3 networks would be a liberal. Mind you this same network owns MSNBC and its 3 viewers. Considering long track of the big 3 networks hiring 1 conservative in their history, (George Will, a personal who appeared with 4 liberals on a political roundtable talk show on Sunday mornings This Week with David Brinkley) It would be safe to assume Williams isn't a left-winger.

Quote from: 136 or 142 on April 26, 2015, 09:10:50 PM
Actually I don't know it, because it isn't.  It's the municipalities that are in charge of their police forces (along with the police board usually chaired by the mayor) and they decide what they will focus on charging.

The CA legislature has been a Democrat a super majority since 2000 when they jermandered redistricted under Gray Davis. Yes the same governor who was removed from office a few years later. 2000 was a huge election at the time because everyone on both sides knew whoever won was going to be able to rig redistrict the state in their favor. The Dems won, they control the state. Mind you both of our noble Democrat Senators Boxer/Feinstein have been in 23 years since 1992, you know the "year of the woman". Before that Dem Alan Cranston was Senator for 23yrs. See any consistencies?

The governor in CA has very little power because of the Democrat super majority (veto proof). Its all the legislature which is owned by the unions. The other way CA continuously gets asinine spending through is by propositions. Like the 100 billion thats been set aside for speed trains that will never be built. At least not for anywhere near 100 billion. The 1st I recall was in 2005, 20 billion for a speed train from LA to Vegas. How's that coming?

Or the billions in bonds that pass every year for schools and prisons. Who does't want better schools and prisons? (fartnoise) As though the money every goes to those. How bout those California schools and prisons!

The way they get this garbage though is by slipping the props in on the June primary ballots when no one votes, so its very easy to get a majority to pass something. Propositions are a great way to get garbage spending passed and in the rare case the prop cuts something, it goes to court until they find a liberal judge to declare it unconstitutional. For example, in an effort to cut spending, Prop 187 passed in 1994 58% to 41%. It was tied up in courts 6 years until Grey Davis was elected and withdrew court appeals to get it passed.

The state really is going down the toilet. Unions do extremely well. Example, in 2003 the longshoreman in the Port of LA made 120k a year, to work 3 weeks a month. And guess what, every 5-10 years, they go on strike. Since everything goes through the port of LA and Oak, it shuts down the entire economy and affects the national economy. Like in 2003 when the port was closed for over a month and 100's of ships were parked off the coast of Long Beach. Good times! Everything great about California has zero to do with the idiots running it.

Sounds like an interesting read. Its funny how cause after cause put forward by the left for decades never solves a thing. Never finds the cure. Just perpetuates an endless battle. Endless political debates with no cure possible. Causes with no real solutions, no end, no answer, no finish line. Only higher taxes and more government controls. And when their causes fail time after time after time, it's always because taxes aren't high enough, and regulations aren't vast enough.

"Now the advocates of this bill, when you try to oppose it, challenge you on an emotional basis. They say “What would you do, throw these poor old people out to die with no medical attention?” - Ronald Reagan regarding the left's push for national healthcare when? 1961! It was a sham then, its a sham now, and the 25 million killed full time jobs are proof. The 7 years and counting of recession. The 50 million less insured. It was sold as free healthcare for all. To provide for the 30, no 40, no 50 million uninsured. It's not free for anyone. It's not healthcare for anyone. It's mandated insurance, that costs 500% more than when the cause started, and it simply forces people to buy it weather they want to or not. Just higher taxes and more regulations. The only people who like it are the ones not forced to use it. The ones who can avoid the higher taxes and more regulations.

Or how about global warming/cooling/disruption. Whats the solution? When will it be achieved? When will we know? The truth is there is no solution, no finish line, no way to know when the disruption has ended. It's the perfect left winger cause, the disruption can't be measured so there can be no finish line. Only endless higher taxes, and more regulations.

Cause after cause after cause, their solution is always the same.

Found the hacker.

Quote from: chinaclipper on April 25, 2015, 10:26:09 AM
WOW!!!! just look at this place!  looks like a knock down drag out fight occurred here last night!  I hope nobody was hurt too badly.....sure sorry to have missed it, but appreciate the blow by blow.  (and why does that stuffed koala in the corner have knives and forks sticking in it?)

Seeing the "recent posts" page totally blown up because of Noory farting on here was pathetic. It's sad with almost no effort he can lead people around here like helpless puppies. Everytime Art or George  or their so called screen names makes a post people here go into a tizzy fit. It's frightening, the entire place appears to be made up of falkies.

Quote from: VtaGeezer on April 24, 2015, 02:16:20 PM
Here we go again...
4 dead Americans in Benghazi...3 years of half-truth driven conservative hysteria.
5,000 dead Americans in Iraq from proven conservative lies and criminal orders...yawn.

"Earlier today, I ordered America's armed forces to strike military and security targets in Iraq. They are joined by British forces. Their mission is to attack Iraq's nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs and its military capacity to threaten its neighbors." Bill Clinton - 1998

Quote from: FightTheFuture on April 24, 2015, 12:42:06 PM
Thank your President for that little nugget. Obama sicked the NSA on the good general and uncovered a few dirty little secrets, which he promptly placed in his hip pocket for a rainy day. Well, that rainy came along and surprise surprise, Obama called his buddy at Justice and next thing ya know, Petraeus is cutting a sweetheart deal to keep his mouth shut about what he knows regarding Benghazi.

This is how our government works. Throw some parties, have some good looking women there, a few photos of men being men. And boom, you get conservatives raising spending, and liberals voting to reform welfare etc. Some may not need money, or may even not be able to be bought, but any man with a reputation, a family, will do anything to keep it. Including voting in ways that make so sense to those who elected them.

As for the sweetheart deal, thats everyone in Washington. Their whole lives are a sweetheart deal, hence why we need to limit time in any government office 10 years max. Once you serve 10 years at any level federal or state, you're out, bye bye. Get lost. And take your idiot law school friends with you. Enough career politicians.

Quote from: Eddie Coyle on April 23, 2015, 11:16:04 PM
A Hilliary supporting acquaintance(cough, ex-mother in law, cough) imformed me recently that Jim Webb (DOB 2/9/46) was "too old" for the nomination. I found this rather curious since he's roughly 20 months older than HRC. As she denigrated Webb, it became apparent she thinks Jim Webb is Chuck Robb.

Also amused by the "too old" designation coming from a woman born in 1950.

Candidates under 60 are too emotional, too quick to judge, too quick to act, too concerned with being "cool", a "rockstar", getting laid, using the right smartphone, too concerned with not having sex with interns, and most importantly, too inexperienced to hold the highest office in the land. If the last under 3 under qualified children (Clinton, Bush, Obama) to hold the office were so great, they'd have been greater after 60.

There really is nothing presidential about a candidate in their 40's. Late 50's maybe but they can wait too.

Quote from: DrCarl on April 12, 2015, 06:40:08 PM
today those who would have American be taxed by the UN so that those funds can be misappropriated and bring America down refer to it as "climate change", as if the climate hasn't always changed and as if that weren't simply a natural process, but admit it Art. You really bought into it.

This is totally outrageous and a complete falsehood. Today those who would have Americans be taxed by the UN so that those funds can be misappropriated and bring America down refer to it as "climate disruption", not "climate change". A blatant miscarriage of facts. If only there were 1 word that could represent warming/cooling/change/stagnation the global whatever crowd could finally name their flavor of the week fake cause.

Any scientific theory that requires one to have faith to believe in it, is indeed not science, it's religion.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scooby-Doo#/media/File:Scooby-gang-1969.jpg

Even funnier, in order for him to have not had standard income tax deductions he must have been a private contractor. Why would MSNBC set up his employment this way? So they don't have to provide "mandatory benefits for full time employees" a law created in the early 90s. Which party shoved this wonderful law trough and thus created the economic and health care disaster we now all enjoy? Hint: it's the same law that's killed well over 40 million full time jobs, and caused health insurance costs to go up 500%. Hint 2: the law passed just after Hillary failed at the democrats 1st major attempt at government enforced health insurance.

So now we not only benefit from a 7 year recession thanks to Obamacare, we now get a gun put to our heads mandating we pay for the 500% increase in insurance costs. Free health care for all is the best! Thanks Dems!

[attachment=1][/attachment]

Quote from: 136 or 142 on April 20, 2015, 01:25:57 AM
Thanks. Clinton lost Georgia, Colorado and Montana in 1996 (but won Florida after losing it in 1992) so it is possible.  However, even had he lost those three states  (I doubt he would have lost Ohio) and even had he lost Ohio, Clinton still would have won the electoral college.

That said, as I said earlier, before Republicans decided to get into revisionist history over this, it was generally agreed by pollsters on both the left and the right that the only state Perot helped Clinton win that he likely would have lost is Montana.

No revisionist history is needed, those who followed politics at the time know Perot's support was clearly made up of conservatives. The reason the buffoon from Arkansas was even a nominee was because the old guard in the Democrat party knew they had no chance of beating Bush, so none of their big wigs ran in the primaries. By the time Perot came along, Clinton was their candidate and they were stuck with him. Then sure enough Bubba slid in with 43% and the rest was history.

The best part was the media calling the 43% a landslide. They'd been so eager to have a landslide of their own after Reagan's 59% landslide in '84, they'd say anything to make themselves feel good. Those lucky enough to be attending institutions of higher education at the time were blessed with professors running around celebrating, in tears, holding up newspapers. It was hysterical. 

Chris Rock, hero, gives back with this public service announcement. 


http://youtu.be/9gCCjFbFXn8

The majority of posts on the 147 Republican presidential candidates are from left wingers. Must be their overwhelming excitement  to vote in the Republican primary. The political insight is equal to that of the Falkie thread.

And then you have the plethora of exciting candidates on the Democrat ballot:
"Candidates For 2016 President of the United States"
A: Hillary Rodham Walker Jefferson Millhouse Obama Washington Oprah Roosevelt Clinton
B: A
C: All of the above

At least maybe this time their voters won't "get confused" and "accidentally select the wrong candidate".

Quote from: 136 or 142 on April 17, 2015, 02:05:31 PM

Jon Stewart: http://www.mnn.com/lifestyle/arts-culture/blogs/jon-stewart-offers-daily-show-guest-spot-for-charity

Props to Stewart for donating 5 minutes of his show so someone could raise money. And how did you come across this info? Oh a press release, got it. 

Quote from: VtaGeezer on April 17, 2015, 12:18:32 PM
You can't put any numbers by the evil lefties' names because they don't use it as self-promotion like Limbagh, O'Reilly and the rest of the stars of the braying right.

Hard to raise money when someone doesn't use their media power via their program to actually raise money. Yes I'm sure they all do it behind closed doors. Just like the rest of the left who lags far behind the right in charitable donations. It must be be hard to be you when reality is so far from your ignorance. Please keep posting, keep the belly laughs coming. 

Quote from: VtaGeezer on April 17, 2015, 10:42:25 AM
Am I supposed to be impressed by that display of gross sycophancy?

Thank you for putting your ignorance on display for all to see. Like most on your side charity is a word you are unfamiliar with. I'm sure it's nothing compared to the jack squat you do for anyone but yourself. It's true 600k this year alone for 1 charity is nothing really. Plus the fact he dedicates an entire program every year to the cause. In the interest of fairness and to help educate you, lets compare this to some others you're very familiar with:

Rachell Maddow - oh sorry she and her program do nothing.
Chris Mathews - Whoops I guess his 40 years in media and having his own programs haven't afforded him this same charitable   ability.
Anderson Cooper - Well he does do the new years eve ball drop with Kathy Griffen which raises a whopping zero dollars for charity.
John Stewart. - Yes the #1 source for pretend news for all liberals, every year for the last 16 years he's dedicated a total of no programs to raising money for charity.
Bill O'Reilly - 7 million books sold, all profits, proceeds donated to charity.
Hillary Clinton - 14 million dollar book advance, 1st week to break even it had to sell 300k copies. In 10 months, it's sold less than 200k copies. How much donated to charity? Zero.

Take a guess which of the above is not a left-winger? I'll give you a hint, its the one who donated over 10 million to charity. It's not one of the 5 who did nothing but yap. Clearly they're in touch with the lefts strategy of doing nothing to help others. Lockstep with their foreign policy philosophy.

Quote from: VtaGeezer on April 16, 2015, 05:43:05 PM
The shame is that they didn't used to be...not until Limbagh put his ass-print on American conservatism.  The GOP today is full rightwing radical, and headed for the other f-word.  Reagan today would repeating his famous line "...my party left me!"

The shame is you actually seem to believe this. Fortunately there are very few posses your level of ignorance so we can all laugh about it. The right consistently out donates to charity by miles over the left. It's not even comparable. The left is great at helping others as long as the money is taken from anyone but themselves. They're great at regulating other people as long as the rules don't apply to themselves. If Obama had only been elected in 2000 we could be enjoying our 15th year of recession instead of 7th. Oh well maybe Hillary will win, she's probably got a great plan. maybe shell double down on the Obama doctrine and kill another 25 million full time jobs.

Note: last Friday was Rush Limbaughs 25th annual cure a thon. An annual event in which he uses his program to raise money for cancer research. The host kicked off this year by donating $600,000 of his own money to the Leukemia and Lymphoma Society. By Monday he and his listeners had raised millions for the cause this year alone. In the 25 years Rush and his greedy heartless Republican listeners have donated over $40,000,000 (that's million) to the Leukimia & Lymphoma Society.

Quote from: PaulAtreides on April 16, 2015, 02:47:48 PM
But I'm certain you can find a way to steal from widows and orphans - it's the Republican way.

You forgot to mention how they take school lunches away from starving kids living in mud holes and want to feed old people cat food. Those evil Republicans!

Quote from: Georgie For President 2216 on April 16, 2015, 01:26:02 PM
In general, no one will want to pay 23% taxes even if they can afford it. 

This cracks me up. No one wines when they pay 10% sales tax, but 23% is just way too much! People pay 80% in taxes now over the lifetimes, but since it's hidden its ok. God forbid they know they're paying taxes, they might actually try to avoid paying them.

This really is the key to taxes, as long as the government can keep taxes hidden they're fine. By deducting ones income tax before they're paid, and the payroll tax the business pays, and healthcare costs and taxes, and medicare, and medical, and social security, and unemployment, and sales tax, and business tax, and hotel tax, and gas tax, and taxi tax, and snack tax, and property tax, and alcohol tax, and the lottery which is 90% tax, and the alcohol tax, and tax tax, and yada yada yada.

Again the flat tax would crush government's power to manipulate the ignorant, and that alone makes it worth exploring.

The consumption tax will never happen because it would literally cost the country millions of jobs in accountants and lawyers and other tax related careers. The tax is code is also where our noble saviors get their power by changing it, directing money to different parts of the economy without warning, and thus causing different sectors to crash, real estate bubbles etc...Congress will never give up this power.

The idea of a consumption tax is good in that it taxes everyone from top to bottom more equally based on how much they spend. Right now those in the top few % make no income. They're either trust funders or they own the company etc...and pay themselves 1 cent per year. Both may pay some taxes via capital gains but no where near their income tax bracket. Those in the bottom also need to pay something, otherwise they vote to screw everyone else because they don't have to pay for any of it. Thanks to the Bush tax cuts those in the lowest brackets pay zero income tax. The government does tax them though and quite heavily, go to any convenience store on a Friday afternoon and you'll see how, cigarettes, booze, lottery.

So what ends up happening is those in the shrinking middle class who do the most the work, and receive the least benefits, can't afford to pay someone to help them walk the IRS mine field to avoid taxes so they carry the load.

Add to it the stranglehold Obamacare has placed on business and individuals and you see the middle class shrinking and their wages going down the crapper. Hence the 25 million less full time jobs, and the overwhelming majority knowing the economy is still in recession 6 years into Obama's presidency.

Welcome to new members to Bellgab.
[attachment=0][/attachment]

Quote from: Juan on April 14, 2015, 12:11:39 PM
but it meant that there are few blacks outside those districts, so the other districts have gone Republican, and without blacks living in the districts, the Republicans have little interest in them.

I hear what you're saying. But Republicans simply have interest in everyone having the most opportunity to be successful and pursue the dream. They encourage this by having lower taxes, less burden on people and business, thus drawing in business and jobs. As well as having stronger law enforcement, and forcing out crime.

This is why when people from the inner city districts get an education and career they get the hell out of the inner city. Inner cities are not the place for anyone to live. They've been consistently run by Democrats for over 100 years and are perpetual cesspools. The people trapped in them are enslaved by Democrat policies and sold false promises by inner city politicians like the great Los Angeles Mayor of 25 years Tom Bradley who did nothing for LA but piss away Hollywoods greatness and turn it into a homeless dump. Or how about the honorable Maxine Waters whos overseen south central LA for decades as it remains a war zone and place for gangs and drug dealers to thrive. Kids deserve the opportunity to go to school everyday without fear of being killed. This is truly a place in need of marshall law, even the black folk who try to survive there will tell you. The sooner one can get out the better.

The beauty is despite Democrat efforts to keep these people enslaved more black people are getting educated and getting out. This generation of black people are so much is better than the last, and their kids will have more opportunity than the last. As these people acquire education and success they move away from Democrat lies, forcing Dems to find new slaves. Hence erasing as many voting regulations as possible and letting all illegals in so they can be the next poor bastards who are enslaved by Democrat policies and false promises.

Quote from: VtaGeezer on April 13, 2015, 07:27:43 PM
I understand that any such economic projection beyond five years out is economists' nonsense.  That one goes out like 80 years.  A projection for 2090?  Seriously?

Amen brother geezer. It's like when Clinton projected the 3 trillion dollar budget surplus in June 2000. Then in July 2000 it was 4 trillion. Then in August 2000 it was 5 trillion. The projected budget surpluses topped the 5.5 trillion mark. All after the stock market had been tanking for nearly 6 months. The media ate it up and praised Clinton and his claims that we'd never have another economic slow down. Boy those were the days.

And of course, Bush was elected in November, declared the winner in December, and by the end of December the media was in overdrive with claims the economy was in recession, it was Bush's fault, and we couldn't possibly afford 100 billion dollar tax cut. 100 billion being less than 2% of of Clintons 5.5 trillion dollar lie surplus.

Glad Geezer and I agree that the absurd Clinton projections were highly mythological and mostly based on Clinton lies and media fantasy.

Quote from: Quick Karl on April 13, 2015, 03:34:06 PM
I love Texas but I have no clue how all those queers infected Austin.

Don't worry once they redraw the stateliness based on the population map they'll all be rushing to the "Tule" state.

Quote from: 136 or 142 on April 13, 2015, 03:42:03 AM
2.California has an independent redistricting commission.

good one!

Quote from: LW on April 13, 2015, 10:58:16 AM
My sisters life was destroyed by vaccinations so i know a little of what I talk about.

The mandatory vaccine laws being shoved through are such a huge money grab for pharmaceutical companies it's outrageous. When was the last time a pharmaceutical company cured something? Hint, its been 80 years or so. Everything now is lifetime treatments, I wonder why.

The new designer pain killers are so much worse than good old morphine. They're much less effective, much more addictive and destructive. And how about those antidepressants. Every single mass murder suicide in the last 30 years was by some idiot on antidepressants. The French airline suicide in the Alps being the latest.

Just a matter of time before the media/gov find a reason to make ADD drugs mandatory as well. "Those kids are a distraction to my kids and they shouldn't be allowed in class!" Just a matter of time before we hear that argument. Then we can all be a bunch of robotic zombies, yay!

These mandatory treatments are all about benefitting drug companies. And the Dems love these laws because the more mandatory drugs, the easier it is to sell Obamacare. Because people need the governments help getting all the mandatory drugs they need so badly to make them all better.  :

The best part, the wealthy will just find doctors to sign off their kids as having the vaccines and will stop doing it. The wealthy on the left and the right. There is so much evidence on the dangers of modern vaccines its outrageous, and there go our noble saviors pushing laws through to make them mandatory. Yippie!

Heull Howser did a really funny "California's Gold" on the State of Jefferson. He could't stop laughing the entire episode when he went to visit the State of Jefferson.

By remaining 1 state CA completely screws itself having just 2 Senators. But it'll never change, the media and Dems love that auto 55 votes for president they get that require 0$ spending. Nice to start out with a 20% lead every 4 years. God bless the 2000 gerrymandering redistricting.