It's your Colbert avatar that has them all confused. lol
I have a conservative friend who tries to convince me Colbert is really just PRETENDING to be a satire. I can't tell whether I'm being trolled or not.
You kind of made me wonder which idiots lent the Donald money to buy casinos, if they couldn't make enough to pay back the loans. You have to show a detailed plan for repayment, especially on the kind of money it takes to buy a casino. Plus, there are a whole lot of laws governing gambling, so that nothing funny goes on, except for the nightclub acts. These things are hyperregulated.
Ask
Time. It's an old article, but it's from one of the times he went bankrupt.
When did I mention sketchy things going on in his casinos? I was saying he borrowed too much.
And it isn't as if I am all that familiar with any of the Donald's bankruptcies. Or his divorces.
Divorce, that alone would prohibit his election. Americans just don't vote for single men, or divorcees, as far as presidents are concerned.
And we won't even mention gay men, because a homosexual as a president? Oh, the horror!
Seriously, though, that's why Newt Gingrich will never be elected, and that is the one thing I like about that bias Americans have.
Keynes was a liberal. However there is some value to what he wrote. And it's too bad the "stimulus package" didn't really follow his advice. The plan was too small, and not focused. It didn't "prime the pump" it filled the bilge with and the pump with all kinds of priming fluid. It was also not quick enough. Some of the money has yet to be spent. It was timed to make things good for Democrats this past election. Proof that it wasn't the right kind of stimulus package, right there.
Of course he was a liberal. However, his theories tend to work better than Adam Smith's- See the Great Depression. As for the stimulus package, it was definitely too small and not focused, because in order to pass it the Democrats had to make a lot of sacrifices to the Republicans. They should have been more assertive, but Democrats don't tend to be when they're in office.
Go read some Milton Freidman. Or Joseph Schumpeter, of you want to learn more about how economics actually works.
Or you could explain how I'm fallacious? You haven't brought up anything saying that I am being fallacious in my statements- In fact, you've just been saying that the stimulus wasn't big/focused enough, which I completely agree with. But stimulus packages aren't Republican.
Huckabee at least ran a state as governor, like someone else we know.
Bush wasn't the greatest president in the history of the USA, and that is a statement I think we can all agree on.
Proof she only wants to be president because Bill was.
Okay, let's look at it this way. How likely is it that people outside of New York would have known who she was if she weren't married to a President? And how likely is it that there'd be such a strong push to have her possibly run for the position? Many people (Chan included) like to say that she "ran the country" when Bill was in office. I think it's a bunch of hooey, myself, but either way, she probably never would have been taken seriously as a Presidential candidate if Bill weren't in office.
About as likely as people knowing who a junior senator from Illinois was, and as likely as there being a strong push for a junior senator from Illinois. Maybe more. New York is a larger, dare I say 'more important' state than Illinois, and she was a senator longer than Obama was.
1. Damn, you're right. =\ I guess I didn't read it carefully enough. Still, though, he owed $40 million and he should have been able to pay it back.
I agree, but it sounded like a possible money-making scam, based off of what I read. He's a freakin' billionaire; he could have paid it. However, he did have an interesting (and logically legal) reason not to.
Not paying back your loans hurts the economy, though, especially if it's a sum like $40mil. As for his reason. . Well, it is interesting, you've got that right.
Whoops, I meant run. Sorry, sometimes I type the wrong thing.
Nope, I'm perfectly interested as to why he'd be a good president. If I wasn't, I wouldn't be discussing this with you or jaybug. If I thought a Republican could do the job, I'd vote for hir- The thing is, I doubt I could because I really don't think there's any Republicans who would do what I think needs to be done. I'm a radical progressive, after all.
Most people figure out I'm not a Republican pretty fast.
That's okay. I still say Huckabee would be the BEST option out of the possible candidates that I've heard either entering their names or rumored to be entering their name, party irrelevant.
I haven't been paying as much attention to the possible candidates as I should have been, admittedly. Most of the news I've been reading is to prepare me for a debate tournament in a few days, so I've been reading everything I can find on the Middle East, North Korea, Japan, nuclear power, oil, the economy, etc.
Jaz, noooo. Stephen Colbert for president!
