Libya
mikeya02
Yeah, I know. This site is about endless variations of dealing with strippers, whores, clubs, etc. But this latest news about what happened in Libya puts me in a crap mood. Former presidents would have surrounded the area with gunships and rain holy hell on the creeps who killed American citizens. Now we don't want to offend the world with our military? Fuck that shit!
43 comments
It really annoys me that you Americans suck up to the miserable Saudis for their oil and screw us Canadians over pipelines at the same time. Don't you realize that it was Saudi assholes that did the 9/11 atrocity? You guys should have nuked Riyadh and Mecca in immediate retaliation.
If we want to have embassies and consuls in war torn nations they should be heavily protected by both our military and the country they're in. Otherwise we're throwing away lives.
As long as the other countries know who the fucking conductor is, that'll work great. Unfortunately, all those other dumbfuck countries they think the orchestra would be nothing without them, and that their own instrument should be the loudest one playing.
Only the U.S. is qualified to lead the world.
Ok, maybe not with dipshits like Obama and Romney in charge. Hell, *I* could do a better job than both of them put together...
1. gmd
2. Dougster
3. jerikson40
4. Che
5. VH_KICKS
You get my drift. Hmm....
Simplify tax code. Decrease spending on everything and I mean everything. Let the post office fend for itself. Kick dead-weight contractors to the curb. Tell the U.N. to go fuck themselves. Stop giving money to countries that don't make it clear they're on our side.
You forgot to add yourself to that list.
(Are you freezing your ass off in the North 40 yet? Keep that oil coming!)
Just because you have the world's biggest hammer doesn't mean you should be hammering in the screws instead of using a screwdriver.
I'm a little divided on who I want to see president (so much about both of them I don't like, but both also have their pluses) but I am leaning more and more toward Romney as we close in on election day.
Looks like it's going to be really close, and down to the wire. "47%" didn't sink Romney like I thought it would.
Dubya killed the markets for his 8 years. Obama has brought the markets back nicely. Dubya's dad did his best to create a recession and the markets reacted as expected. Clinton restored competence and optimism such that the 1990s were just superb in the markets. Reagan gave us 20% interest rates and the market meltdown of 1987. Nixon gave us the 570 point Dow in 1974 (the single best buying moment in my lifetime).
If an investor has the stones to stomach the Republican economic mismanagement great buying opportunities are created. Take a look at the big equity positions in Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway. Many of those positions were established on during 1973/1974 when Nixon slaughtered the stock market. Buffett was absolutely shitting himself in unbounded glee at the bargains available in the market that the idiot Nixon cratered.
I had little cash back then but I did buy a few shares of Philip Morris and still hold the position. Stock splits, reinvested divvys, and capital appreciation has turned my original $4k into something approaching $200k. Many thank to idiot Nixon (and all you smokers).
I think that if Romney does get in farmerart's prediction would be filled with a vegence. Romney has made it pretty clear that he is looking to fire Bernanke (the market's sugar daddy)'s ass as soon as he gets the chance.
I am anti government spending so, I want a new POTUS. I also think the health care situation was ridiculous.
In my overblown language the real point of my argument seems to have missed you. I am not arguing about the reasons why things happen in markets just the fact that things DO happen. What is irrefutable is the observable, bare, stark numbers. The level of the various stock indices (S&P 500, NASDAQ Composite, Dow 30, Wilshire 5000) on one particular presidential inauguration day and the level of the same indices on a different inauguration day. No person can logically deny the effect of a change in party on events in the USA. Therefore, the correlation between those numbers and the party of the sitting president simply cannot be denied and must be one of the facts upon which investment decisions will be based.
Successful investing winnows all the chaff of emotion and bias from the pure grains of data, logic, and simple arithmetic.
@Che:
The shot at Canada's health care system is exactly what I am describing, a debating point based on anecdotal fantasy. I can fire just as many anecdotes back to you of Americans crossing the border to access Canadian medical services. Referrals from USA to neurosurgeons in Edmonton and Montreal. Vain American actresses coming to a Vancouver plastic surgeon. Thousands of American citizens crossing the border for pharmaceuticals. Princess Margaret Hospital in Toronto draws cancer sufferers from USA (and from all over the world) for treatment not available elsewhere. American women flood into Canada for abortions.
All these have no use in a logical debate.
How about these data points of hard numbers for a more serious debate:
Life expectancy - about 2-3 years longer in Canada vs. USA
Infant mortality - measurably lower in Canada (deaths per 100k live births about one third lower)
GDP allocation to health care - ~11% in Canada vs. ~18% in USA
I'll happily take my chances with the Canadian medical care system, thank you very much.
Watch hockey? They have to LIVE hockey! :)
I used to hold Panther season tickets till they moved north. Love hockey, but it is not watchable on TV, IMHO.
Yes, last I heard the games are cancelled through November.