Welcome to ECCIE, become a part of the fastest growing adult community. Take a minute & sign up!

Welcome to ECCIE - Sign up today!

Become a part of one of the fastest growing adult communities online. We have something for you, whether you’re a male member seeking out new friends or a new lady on the scene looking to take advantage of our many opportunities to network, make new friends, or connect with people. Join today & take part in lively discussions, take advantage of all the great features that attract hundreds of new daily members!

Go Premium

Go Back   ECCIE Worldwide > General Interest > The Sandbox - National
test
The Sandbox - National The Sandbox is a collection of off-topic discussions. Humorous threads, Sports talk, and a wide variety of other topics can be found here.

Most Favorited Images
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
Most Liked Images
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
Top Reviewers
cockalatte 649
MoneyManMatt 490
Still Looking 399
samcruz 399
Jon Bon 397
Harley Diablo 377
honest_abe 362
DFW_Ladies_Man 313
Chung Tran 288
lupegarland 287
nicemusic 285
You&Me 281
Starscream66 280
George Spelvin 267
sharkman29 256
Top Posters
DallasRain70799
biomed163414
Yssup Rider61090
gman4453297
LexusLover51038
offshoredrilling48716
WTF48267
pyramider46370
bambino42907
The_Waco_Kid37240
CryptKicker37224
Mokoa36496
Chung Tran36100
Still Looking35944
Mojojo33117

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 07-20-2012, 10:32 PM   #61
icuminpeace
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Jun 29, 2012
Location: Austin
Posts: 874
Encounters: 4
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by joe bloe View Post
If jerking a trillion out of the economy would make it crash, then surely adding another trillion would make it boom. No, actually we tried that. Deficit spending is killing us, the same way it is killing Europe. We need to live within our means. We need to spend less. It's not rocket science. Contrary to Joe Biden's belief, we don't need to spend more to keep from going bankrupt.
Joe - I've said it many times, deficits are not good, debt is not good. I've used the analogy of a household budget - you have income and you have expenses, once your expenses exceed your income, you're looking for trouble. But let's say you lose your job and as a responsible citizen you have 12 months of expenses stashed away. However your credit card company is giving you 12-months 0-percent interest if you write a check to yourself. As a smart person, you borrow as much as you can at 0-percent and you leave your cash in the bank or in an investment that pays a higher-than-0 -percent return. Now you've accrued debt, but that's only because your cash has a better return and you're using someone else's money for free. Now you find a job, well, since you have income you better not rack up any more debt and pay off the loan you took. That's how it's supposed to work. Unfortunately, our politicians kept telling us that deficit spending was good even in good times and we let them get away with increasing the debt. Now times aren't so good any more and debt keeps piling up. Seems to me we need to stop electing lawyers and start electing people that know how to manage a budget (not necessarily Ivy League MBAs, they fucked up Wall Street).
icuminpeace is offline   Quote
Old 07-20-2012, 10:37 PM   #62
fetishfreak
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: May 9, 2012
Location: Dallas
Posts: 453
Encounters: 15
Default

I agree with what you are saying. I would love to see politicians not act like a bunch of babies. However that will not happen until the primaries stop giving us the sniveling little weasels to vote for. I just wondered who you would support since you ruled out democrat republican and libertarian. I will vote libertarian since I can not stand the candidates I have to choose from. I think that Gary Johnson is my second choice. I would have preferred Ron Paul.
fetishfreak is offline   Quote
Old 07-20-2012, 10:39 PM   #63
icuminpeace
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Jun 29, 2012
Location: Austin
Posts: 874
Encounters: 4
Default

I'm seriously considering not voting this year. I can't give my vote to any candidate knowing what they and their party represent. I'll sleep better at night.
icuminpeace is offline   Quote
Old 07-20-2012, 11:33 PM   #64
CuteOldGuy
Valued Poster
 
CuteOldGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 20, 2010
Location: Wichita
Posts: 28,730
Encounters: 20
Default

FF, politicians do not "act" like a bunch of babies, they ARE a bunch of babies. Power hungry, corrupt babies interested more in their own influence and appearance than they are protecting freedom or defending the Constitution. They have learned that if they make the right cute faces, babble the right syllables, and don't make a big mess, the nice owners of the country, the 0.001%, will give them toys, (power), feed them (money) and take them nice places.

I'm sure many have entered Congress determined to right the ship of state, but after a few years, and watching others, and it, oh, looks so good, and it feels nice to have the important people invite you to their parties and say nice things, and it's so much fun to be interviewed on TV, and my, we've never been overseas before - well, you get the picture. They cave, and become part of the system.

The package is quite neatly tied. We have Democrats and Republicans, seemingly diametrically opposed, but the 0.001% know better. They can all be bought, and their arguments are entertaining, but if they get out of line, well, it's time out for them! No TV, no trips, no parties, no funding . . . and soon they return. Promising to not get out of line, and assuring that they only say those things to pacify the suckers, er, that is, voters, back home. As long as nothing substantial changes, it will be fine. Say what you want, but do what I say, respond the 0.001%.

To which Congress responds: Yes, sir.
CuteOldGuy is offline   Quote
Old 07-21-2012, 03:44 AM   #65
waverunner234
Valued Poster
 
waverunner234's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 7, 2010
Location: United States of California
Posts: 1,706
Encounters: 10
Default

I haven't read this whole thread, that's to much work, so I'll just answer the question on the top of this thread: Can Romney win?

Answer: NO

Short and simple
waverunner234 is offline   Quote
Old 07-21-2012, 03:54 AM   #66
theaustinescorts
Pending Age Verification
 
Join Date: Jan 10, 2010
Location: Austin
Posts: 1,249
My ECCIE Reviews
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Laz View Post
I just want someone to point out that when Obama says we do not want to go back to the Bush policies that he has in most cases followed Bush policies on steroids.

Gitmo - Same
Iraq - Same
Afghanistan - Probably the same but Bush would not have advertised the exit timeline
Spending - Bush tripled
Deficits - Bush tripled
Unpaid for health care - Bush, prescription drugs; Obama, Obamacare
Big business bailout - same
Regulations - Bush +
Taxes - Bush reduced for all, Obama is increasing for all

Where is the big shift in policy other than increased taxes.
I agree with all this except that Obama isn't increasing taxes. This is why Obama will be hard to defeat. He's given everyone what they want and hasn't governed as a socialist. He cannot be tagged as even a liberal. He talks like a liberal but hasn't made any substantial liberal policies except for supporting gay marraige, which will gain him more votes than it costs him.

For Romney to win he's going to have to rely on PACs to smear Obama's character. They need to make a "Willy Horton moment" and "Swift Boat" the guy. They need to bring out all the films of him saying totally stupid lies about how he was going to shut down Gitmo, talk to the Iranians, and how he had an uncle who liberated Auschwitz [which was another total lie].

Ya gotta smear this guy bad.

Otherwise Romney will go down in flames.
theaustinescorts is offline   Quote
Old 07-21-2012, 04:05 AM   #67
waverunner234
Valued Poster
 
waverunner234's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 7, 2010
Location: United States of California
Posts: 1,706
Encounters: 10
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by theaustinescorts View Post
I agree with all this except that Obama isn't increasing taxes. This is why Obama will be hard to defeat. He's given everyone what they want and hasn't governed as a socialist. He cannot be tagged as even a liberal. He talks like a liberal but hasn't made any substantial liberal policies except for supporting gay marraige, which will gain him more votes than it costs him.

For Romney to win he's going to have to rely on PACs to smear Obama's character. They need to make a "Willy Horton moment" and "Swift Boat" the guy. They need to bring out all the films of him saying totally stupid lies about how he was going to shut down Gitmo, talk to the Iranians, and how he had an uncle who liberated Auschwitz [which was another total lie].

Ya gotta smear this guy bad.

Otherwise Romney will go down in flames.
Agree, Romney go down in flames. He has to, because I don't want him to be president. Why? Simple reason, his La Jolla summer beach mansion in San Diego is almost in my backyard and I don't want the traffic jams that he already caused with his security detail.
waverunner234 is offline   Quote
Old 07-21-2012, 04:06 AM   #68
JohnnyFarangly
Poke Her Face
 
JohnnyFarangly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 29, 2009
Location: Houston
Posts: 504
Encounters: 2
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by icuminpeace View Post
I'm seriously considering not voting this year.
Voting for President in Texas is pretty much a waste of time regardless.

We are one of the brainless states.
JohnnyFarangly is offline   Quote
Old 07-21-2012, 04:09 AM   #69
theaustinescorts
Pending Age Verification
 
Join Date: Jan 10, 2010
Location: Austin
Posts: 1,249
My ECCIE Reviews
Default Romney has the better hair

Romney's one advantage is his magnificantly youthful hair.

History shows that the one with the better hair wins, unless he's much shorter than his opponant.

Hair is why Reagan won.

no joke
theaustinescorts is offline   Quote
Old 07-21-2012, 04:59 AM   #70
waverunner234
Valued Poster
 
waverunner234's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 7, 2010
Location: United States of California
Posts: 1,706
Encounters: 10
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyFarangly View Post
Voting for President in Texas is pretty much a waste of time regardless.

We are one of the brainless states.
You are sooooooooooo right
waverunner234 is offline   Quote
Old 07-21-2012, 06:57 AM   #71
SpeedRacerXXX
Valued Poster
 
SpeedRacerXXX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 31, 2009
Location: Georgetown, Texas
Posts: 9,330
Encounters: 2
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn View Post
You really don't get it do you speed racer. That 2% is your money and it always was your money. You didn't get a pay raise you deferred your SSN payments. 30 years from now that 2% will be more like a 10% deduction in your SSN payouts. Obama saw you coming and you still don't know you got fucked.
Sorry man -- YOU don't get it. I am receiving Social Security benefits of $30,000 a year right now. With a 3% raise coming next year. And now I am paying $2500 less to get them. Let's not try to predict 30 years into the future. The question is am I better off TODAY than I was 4 years ago.
SpeedRacerXXX is offline   Quote
Old 07-21-2012, 07:33 AM   #72
i'va biggen
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Jan 20, 2011
Location: kansas
Posts: 28,773
Encounters: 17
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy View Post
Ok. Then let's just not add to the deficit. That would work, too.

The consequences of not controlling spending far exceed the consequences of controlling spending. But as an Obamaton, I don't expect you to be able to see that.

I don't think anyone there wants to cut anything that will effect their area.They pay airlines in small towns (like Wichita) for all the empty seats on flights.It started in the "70s and costs twenty mil a year.It was brought up in a bill in the house to discontinue it was defeated.Our reps from Ks voted yes.
i'va biggen is offline   Quote
Old 07-21-2012, 08:41 AM   #73
I B Hankering
Valued Poster
 
I B Hankering's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 3, 2010
Location: South of Chicago
Posts: 31,214
Encounters: 9
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by theaustinescorts View Post
I agree with all this except that Obama isn't increasing taxes. This is why Obama will be hard to defeat. He's given everyone what they want and hasn't governed as a socialist. He cannot be tagged as even a liberal. He talks like a liberal but hasn't made any substantial liberal policies except for supporting gay marraige, which will gain him more votes than it costs him.
Inflation is a hidden tax. Deficit spending for widening social programs is a hidden tax obligation. It may be true that he hasn't increased taxes via legislative means, but Odumbo has increased taxes. (BTW, that little gimmick he is running with SS with-holdings actually raised taxes on millions of Americans.)
I B Hankering is offline   Quote
Old 07-21-2012, 09:09 AM   #74
joe bloe
Valued Poster
 
joe bloe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 10, 2010
Location: Houston
Posts: 5,740
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by theaustinescorts View Post
I agree with all this except that Obama isn't increasing taxes. This is why Obama will be hard to defeat. He's given everyone what they want and hasn't governed as a socialist. He cannot be tagged as even a liberal. He talks like a liberal but hasn't made any substantial liberal policies except for supporting gay marraige, which will gain him more votes than it costs him.

For Romney to win he's going to have to rely on PACs to smear Obama's character. They need to make a "Willy Horton moment" and "Swift Boat" the guy. They need to bring out all the films of him saying totally stupid lies about how he was going to shut down Gitmo, talk to the Iranians, and how he had an uncle who liberated Auschwitz [which was another total lie].

Ya gotta smear this guy bad.

Otherwise Romney will go down in flames.
Aggressively campaigning against Obama doesn't require "smearing." Telling the truth isn't smearing. A series of ads showing Obama lieing would probably be effective.

One of the biggest Obama lies, is that he has never been in favor of single payer health insurance. There's a video of Obama addressing a union group, telling them he's in favor of single payer, and that you can't get there over night; you have to do it in stages. An ad that contrasts the two positions would be effective.
joe bloe is offline   Quote
Old 07-24-2012, 04:17 PM   #75
Whirlaway
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Jan 3, 2010
Location: Here.
Posts: 13,781
Encounters: 28
Default A VERY GOOD SIGN...........TICK, TICK, TICK

The recent Obama attacks on Romney aren't working according to recent polling results....

"As for independents, 26 percent viewed Romney less favorably and 13 percent more favorably after hearing attacks on his Bain record. In other words, 74 percent of independents either view Romney more favorably after the attacks, or simply don’t care. That’s the problem for Obama. If independent voters just yawn at his Bain attacks and move on, that’s almost as bad as if the attacks backfire altogether. He’s still sinking tons of money into messaging that isn’t helping him."

http://www.commentarymagazine.com/20...s-not-working/
Whirlaway is offline   Quote
Reply



AMPReviews.net
Find Ladies
Hot Women

Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright © 2009 - 2016, ECCIE Worldwide, All Rights Reserved