• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

US presidents' economic progress

NWO Sentryman

Proud NWO Gatekeeper
N
Joined
Jun 16, 2009
Messages
6,994
I saw this quote by Len Hart with rgard to economics:

Plenty! EVERY Dem prez since WWII haws presided over better job growth, GDP growth and greater income EQUALITY!

Secondly, EVERY GOP Prez has begun wars when there were none! EVERY GOP Prez since 1900 has presided over an ECONOMIC DEPRESSION!

EVERY GOP Prez had presided over the transfer of wealth to the increasingly tiny group of elites which --in fact --OWN the country and dictate policy to WHOEVER is in Washington.

EVERY GOP PREZ has OPPOSED the Bill of Rights, indeed, the SEPARATION OF POWERS.

I have an article in the works with regard to R. Reagan. It will CURL YOUR HAIR. And there is NOTHING comparable to be found in the DEMS' record.

The difference are qualitative; my problem with DEMS are 1) they are NOT sufficiently liberal 20 THEY WILL NOT KICK THE GOP'S ASS AND SHUT THEM THE **** UP!

The MEME that there is no difference between the two most probably originated with the GOP.

It certainly works to the GOP advantage and given their moral paucity it may be the only advantage they would have --IF ONLY people would think rationally about it.

IF the GOP had not dominated the subject matter and the rules of debate since 1900, progressives might have created a multi-party system --BUT THAT WON'T HAPPEN AS A RESULT OF ANYTHING DEMS MIGHT DO IN CONGRESS.

The SYSTEM dictates that you should choose between two choices in which NEITHER is precisely what you want and the other is only slightly better.

Until that changes --vote DEM while working to TAKE OVER the party from within.

Revolution talk is too often just unrealistic.

If you want to FOMENT a REAL REVOLUTION do it from WITHIN the DEMS !! TAKE THEM OVER !!

CHANGE THE PARADIGM!

It is -in fact --out last hope!

A final shot: INCOME EQUALITY/INEQUALITY is a CRUCIAL issue in this debate.

Clearly --it is the GOP which has transferred ENORMOUS WEALTH to its base, a mere 1 percent of the total US population.

It is on behalf of this 'BASE' that the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and numerous others fought for OIL --a resource without which the US is finito!

Hitler invaded Poland for the coal.

Hitler was STUPID! Rommel was already in South Africa. Rommel MIGHT HAVE SEIZED EVERY OIL FIELD IN THE MIDDLE EAST. End of war! End of freedom anywhere in the world.
Click to expand...

Is any of it true?
 
Where is the link?

As for Rommel he had to go via Egypt first. He failed in doing this.

Also he was in Libya which has a lot of oil, so why were they short of oil?
 
it's on the Existentialist Cowboy, with Who wants obama to fail and why beign the story, and that was a combination of two fo the comments.
 
link: existentialistcowboy.blogspot.com/2009/08/who-wants-obama-to-fail-and-why.html

And it was one of Len Hart's Comments.
 
When you get to line #2:

"Secondly, EVERY GOP Prez has begun wars when there were none! EVERY GOP Prez since 1900 has presided over an ECONOMIC DEPRESSION!"

...you know it's total crap.
 
timhau said:
Did they know the oil was there? Was the infrastructure in place to get it out of the ground and into the Reich's refineries?
Click to expand...
Rommel was in Libya specifcally to contest the possession of North Africa with the British. He was never entirely successful, and throughout that entire period was too busy fighting to develop any Libyan oil fields.

At the same time, the Nazi war machine as a whole was contesting control of the Mediterranean with the British. At no time was there a safe corridor from Africa to Europe along which to build an oil pipeline.

North African, Central Asian, and Sub-Saharan oil fields might have been highly anticipated by the German high command as future spoils of war, but to fuel its efforts in the present, it needed a supply that was already developed, close at hand, and easily secured against all but the most dire threats: Poland's coal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom