• Invisible Man's Avatar
    Today, 11:05 AM
    Yeah, you keep saying that like it matters.
    66 replies | 1520 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    Today, 10:38 AM
    I definitely do remember that. That happened at a point in my life when I was much more in line with your Limbaugh-esque partisan views. And I agree that this combination of Republican control of Congress with Democrat control of the WH did hamper the usual steady increases in spending both parties are addicted to. This all changed in 2001 when a Republican president was inaugurated and Republican control of both Congress and the WH resulted in runaway spending again.
    66 replies | 1520 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    Today, 09:09 AM
    "You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to acptulsa again."
    66 replies | 1520 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    Today, 09:09 AM
    That's true. Republican congresses never do that to Republican presidents. Therefore, we are better off with Democrat presidents and Republican congresses than we are with Republicans controlling both, regardless of whether this result is intended. This is completely false. If you honestly believe this, that's surprising. And again, it doesn't matter anyway. So what if they used a crisis as the pretext for their big spending? They followed Rahm Emanuel's dictum and didn't let the crisis go to waste. That's not what we want. We want them to let the crisis go to waste. There will always be some crisis that politicians can use as a pretext for the additional money they want to spend and power they want to grab, and if there isn't one handy, they will come up with one. Some crises like drugs, Muslims, drag queens, immigrants, and unemployed teenage communist arsonists, aren't even crises at all, they're just always sitting there ready and waiting for someone (usually Republicans in those examples) to treat like one. The chart doesn't show any stagnating. But your basic point does hold. Republican presidents historically prove more ready to reach across the aisle and team up with Democrat congresses to pass big spending bills than Republican congresses tend to do with Democrat presidents. The moral of the story would be that Democrat presidents are historically preferable to Republican ones, since at least then we have a chance at gridlock (and in fact, historically, it usually does work out that if Democrat presidents start out with Congresses of their own party, that doesn't last long) again, regardless of whether this be the intended result or not. Edit: Also, Republicans controlled the Senate for the entirety of Trump's tenure in office. And when Trump pushed through first a $2.2 Trillion "economic stimulus" spending bill in 2020 and then another $900 Billion after that, he did it with the overwhelming support of Republicans in Congress. Don't pretend those bills wouldn't have passed if they had the majority of the House of Representatives.
    66 replies | 1520 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    Today, 07:54 AM
    I agree with you about the Dems' policy. I think you are mistaken if you think it isn't also the Republicans' policy. Trump, Bush, and Reagan all openly and explicitly advocated policies of deficit spending, not as some kind of compromise with opponents, but as their own favored policy. And if it is true that the Dems are still more pro-spending, pro-taxation, and pro-deficit than Republicans in word, that still doesn't change the fact about the actual results. It seems to me that having the President's party (whichever party it is) not control Congress proves to hamper the spending increases that both parties tend to pursue much better than having Republicans decisively control both branches does.
    66 replies | 1520 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    Today, 07:10 AM
    Exactly. It rose dramatically after COVID hit, and this not only happened while Trump was in office, but he zealously demanded the dramatic spending increases that led to that increase in debt (which exceeded debt and spending increases under Obama or Biden), and even demanded removal of Thomas Massie from the Republican party for his daring to even so much as ask for a Congressional vote on that spending. You don't get to put an asterisk next to all that and pretend it doesn't count. When the debt goes from 14 trillion to 22 trillion in 4 years (using the chart you provided), that's not staying stagnant. It is fact, proven by the numbers, including your own chart, that the answer to the question, "Under which recent president did US national debt increase the most in one term?" is Trump. And it is a fact that Trump did not put up any resistance to this, but rather actively demanded it. Edit: But again, lest I be misunderstood, I object to making debt the metric to judge by. Spending is more important than debt, and paying for increased spending with increased taxation isn't any better than deficit spending just because it results in less debt.
    66 replies | 1520 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    Today, 06:16 AM
    Not that I took AJ seriously before this. But how does someone who has followed politics for very long keep a straight face and say something like this?
    8 replies | 180 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    Today, 05:52 AM
    Just by the numbers, abstainers did overwhelm whatever fraud there was in 2020. If more of those abstainers had voted, then the margin by which abstainers would have overwhelmed the fraud would only have been smaller. Edit: Looks like I was wrong. Although it was very close, using eligible voter numbers, 2020 was the first time in my life that the official tally showed more voters voting for one of the candidates than those who voted for none of the above (i.e. abstainers). We need to do better next time and have more people abstain so we can overwhelm the fraud. None of the above could still claim a win in 2020 based on voting age population numbers, but we should be able to do better than that.
    190 replies | 6346 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    Yesterday, 01:42 PM
    The debt shouldn't be anyone's main concern. But that chart doesn't support your claim. On the contrary, it shows that Trump was worse than Biden on that score. Yes, it's true that the Dems would have spent a lot more if they had enough of a majority to pass things like that. But that illustrates the value of not having a Congress of the same party as the president. When it was Trump pushing for big spending bills, almost all of the Republicans voted for them. When it's Biden in the WH, at least then we can count on most Republicans to vote against those bills.
    66 replies | 1520 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    Yesterday, 06:09 AM
    Yeah! They are sick and tired of being ruled by turd sandwiches with D after their name! They won't rest until they can be ruled by giant douches with R after their name! There is another sea change coming! Just like what happened in 1994 and 2010! That'll show 'em!
    66 replies | 1520 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    08-16-2022, 07:06 PM
    Can you please quote me saying anything indicating I had a statist paradigm? At no point in this conversation has anybody suggested that a president doesn't have that authority. The question is whether or not it is a fact that Trump had actually declassified all of the classified documents that he had at his house. If he had not declassified them when he was president, then it's not something he would still have the authority to do at a later point when he no longer is.
    381 replies | 12376 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    08-16-2022, 06:21 PM
    Can you quote the part you are referring to?
    381 replies | 12376 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    08-16-2022, 05:05 PM
    White people?
    381 replies | 12376 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    08-16-2022, 04:17 PM
    That is a really damning list of numbers for the deplorables.
    190 replies | 6346 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    08-16-2022, 03:57 PM
    Why do you believe this?
    381 replies | 12376 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    08-16-2022, 03:54 PM
    Are you saying that the mere act of a president treating the documents as if they are not classified is the same as declassifying them? You can't honestly believe this. Does Trump himself even claim that he declassified the documents?
    381 replies | 12376 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    08-16-2022, 03:05 PM
    Here you go. https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/executive-order-classified-national-security-information Declassifying documents involves a lot more than just somebody who has the authority to declassify them deciding to treat them like they're not classified anymore without telling anyone they're going to do that. Unless Trump himself ever overrode this executive order. I'm pretty sure he didn't, or that fact would be an important aspect of this story. And if he chose not to, then that's on him.
    381 replies | 12376 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    08-16-2022, 01:57 PM
    Apparently the same applied to Trump.
    381 replies | 12376 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    08-16-2022, 01:03 PM
    I don't know if any of that is the case. But whether that be his reason for reneging on his campaign promise or something else was, he should have thought of it before making the promise.
    381 replies | 12376 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    08-16-2022, 11:54 AM
    Thanks for that summary! Now I know what line I need to use so that I can fit in with the team I want to be on!
    381 replies | 12376 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    08-16-2022, 07:34 AM
    Let's not talk about the decision not to prosecute Hillary like it was made by some anonymous powers that be. That decision was made by Trump. After months of gleefully leading his hypnotized minions in hearty chants of, "Lock her up!!!", once he had the election locked up, he openly and unabashedly flip-flopped on that central promise of his campaign, and went out of his way to rub his supporters' faces in the fact that he could do anything he wanted and they'd never hold him accountable. Now we have a mumbling dotard in the WH who, in spite of frailty of mind and body, is proving more capable than Trump was of overseeing an administration that will do to Trump what he was too chicken to do to Hillary. So if Trump and his mouthpieces want to ask us, "Why the double standard?", the question should instead be posed to them.
    381 replies | 12376 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    08-15-2022, 10:14 PM
    Invisible Man replied to a thread Rudy G in U.S. Political News
    None of the above. He was an opportunistic politician who had the world’s biggest crisis drop into his lap and tried not to let it go to waste, but failed.
    4 replies | 213 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    08-15-2022, 03:39 PM
    From the grave?
    30 replies | 728 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    08-15-2022, 03:12 PM
    ..
    30 replies | 728 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    08-15-2022, 11:49 AM
    Is DeSantis a protectionist too? If so, that's disappointing.
    30 replies | 728 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    08-09-2022, 09:56 AM
    Interesting. I take it you’re suggesting that his indirect connection to Trump via their mutual associates in the Epstein circle might have made him biased in Trump’s favor.
    13 replies | 536 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    08-06-2022, 08:15 PM
    "We shouldn't judge Trump by how he governed when he was in office. We should support him because next time he will be different." I have a different view. Every moderately good Trump did in his first term was done to satisfy conservatives at the expense of his own personal policy views. As a lame duck he will no longer have any incentive to pander to conservatives.
    190 replies | 6346 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    08-05-2022, 12:15 PM
    Indeed. And also a difference between "a burden" and "unrealistic." When I was a youngster in the Boy Scouts I went on a high adventure canoe camping trip at about 5-foot tall and 90 lbs., and on our portages I had to carry either a 90-lb. canoe or a 90-lb. backpack. For me at that time, to call that a burden would be an understatement. Admittedly, I could barely do either. But Lanza was a 150-lb., 5'9", 20 year old, carrying what I'm pretty sure was much less weight than that.
    109 replies | 3176 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    08-05-2022, 11:16 AM
    Can you find anything that contradicts what I said, specifically the text you bolded? There's no need to trust my opinion. If you really think it's unrealistic, let's actually add up the weight. But before we do, when it turns out to be not unrealistic, I'd like to hear what excuse you are going to come up with ahead of time.
    109 replies | 3176 view(s)
More Activity
About Invisible Man

Basic Information

Profile Sidebar Configuration

Profile Sidebar Configuration

Activist Reputation (Self-Rated):
11
Activist Reputation (Staff Rated):
1
Select if you support the site's Mission.:
I support the site Mission. (This will change your user title to "Supporting Member".)
Display site reputation bars.:
Display site reputation bars.
Select if you "Stand with Rand":
I Stand with Rand (This will add a "Stand with Rand" badge by your name badge by yourr name in all posts.)
Select if you do not support Trump or Hillary.:
No Trump. No Hillary. (This will add a "None of the Above" badge by your name in all posts.)
Political Campaign Skills
Computer and Technical:
Scientists and Engineer

Signature


There is nothing to fear from globalism, free trade and a single worldwide currency, but a globalism where free trade is competitively subsidized by each nation, a continuous trade war is dictated by the WTO, and the single currency is pure fiat, fear is justified. That type of globalism is destined to collapse into economic despair, inflationism and protectionism and managed by resurgent militant nationalism.
Ron Paul
Congressional Record (March 13, 2001)

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
2,508
Posts Per Day
2.55
General Information
Last Activity
Today 11:05 AM
Join Date
12-09-2019
Referrals
0

1 Friend

  1. tfurrh tfurrh is offline

    Member

    tfurrh
Showing Friends 1 to 1 of 1

07-27-2022

  • 07:43 AM - Deleted Posts

04-23-2022


03-30-2022


09-29-2021


09-27-2021


09-15-2021


09-14-2021


08-19-2021


05-18-2021


05-14-2021


04-29-2021


02-28-2021


02-20-2021


02-10-2021


01-11-2021


12-27-2020


No results to display...
Page 1 of 101 1231151 ... LastLast

08-18-2022


08-16-2022


08-15-2022



Page 1 of 101 1231151 ... LastLast