POUBELLE - (Projets - Projects)

[MTLskyline]

Wow, you liberals sure are open-minded.

[Cataclaw]

It'll take more than pandering to Canadians to convince me McCain would be better than Obama. An Obama presidency would result in a significantly stronger America which would have positive effects for Canada. McCain... just the opposite.

 

Is that the best you can do? Sarcastically insinuate that i, as a liberal, am closed-minded? I call that formulating an opinion without any basis in fact, and that just so happens to be the Republican Way™... i guess that's fine then!

[JCC-Fromthere]

 

Mccain? Give me a break. You'd think they would have learnt with Iraq...

[MTLskyline]

 

Mccain? Give me a break. You'd think they would have learnt with Iraq...

 

Bombing Iran sounds good to me. YEEE HAWW!!

[MTLskyline]

It'll take more than pandering to Canadians to convince me McCain would be better than Obama. An Obama presidency would result in a significantly stronger America which would have positive effects for Canada. McCain... just the opposite.

 

Is that the best you can do? Sarcastically insinuate that i, as a liberal, am closed-minded? I call that formulating an opinion without any basis in fact, and that just so happens to be the Republican Way™... i guess that's fine then!

 

The U.S. needs a frontiersman at the head of state. A guy who's not afraid to shoot Osama Bin Laden on sight. Barrack Obama would try and negotiate with the terrorists. Surely what the Taliban/Hezbollah/Al-Qaeda is saying must have merit. Let's give them what they want so they leave us alone.

Protectionism and isolationism of this nature did not help America in World War II or prior to 9/11 did it? The USA needs to take a PROACTIVE approach to dealing with threats.

 

BAND-AID SOLUTIONS SUCH AS BRIBERY ARE NOT THE BEST METHOD OF SOLVING SERIOUS THREATS. The terrorists will ask for more and more and Obama will keep payin' em.

 

McCain is a Reaganite, and Reagan was the best President the U.S. has ever had in the 20th century (FDR is #2, and the Liberal-press poster-boy JFK was NO WHERE CLOSE).. Reaganites believe in Reagonomics (Yay! New Word!). Generally this means that you let the rich make their money and it will benefit the GREATER ECONOMY (they will expand their companies and create new jobs, etc, etc).

 

Bush's problem was that he spent like a Liberal. Much of the money going to a war very similar to a war that the Democrats sent troops to in the late 1960s.

 

In fact, it was JFK who originally wanted to send American troops to Vietnam. It was Democratic President Lyndon Baines Johnson who sent them there. And it was the Republican Part's Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford who got the troops out of there.

 

Oh, and the troop surge is working, it will only be a matter of years before the Iraqi insurgency is fully squashed.

[Cataclaw]

The U.S. needs a frontiersman at the head of state. A guy who's not afraid to shoot Osama Bin Laden on sight. Barrack Obama would try and negotiate with the terrorists. Surely what the Taliban/Hezbollah/Al-Qaeda is saying must have merit. Let's give them what they want so they leave us alone.

Protectionism and isolationism of this nature did not help America in World War II or prior to 9/11 did it? The USA needs to take a PROACTIVE approach to dealing with threats.

 

BAND-AID SOLUTIONS SUCH AS BRIBERY ARE NOT THE BEST METHOD OF SOLVING SERIOUS THREATS. The terrorists will ask for more and more and Obama will keep payin' em.

 

McCain is a Reaganite, and Reagan was the best President the U.S. has ever had in the 20th century (FDR is #2, and the Liberal-press poster-boy JFK was NO WHERE CLOSE).. Reaganites believe in Reagonomics (Yay! New Word!). Generally this means that you let the rich make their money and it will benefit the GREATER ECONOMY (they will expand their companies and create new jobs, etc, etc).

 

Bush's problem was that he spent like a Liberal. Much of the money going to a war very similar to a war that the Democrats sent troops to in the late 1960s.

 

In fact, it was JFK who originally wanted to send American troops to Vietnam. It was Democratic President Lyndon Baines Johnson who sent them there. And it was the Republican Part's Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford who got the troops out of there.

 

Oh, and the troop surge is working, it will only be a matter of years before the Iraqi insurgency is fully squashed.

 

Obama would employ diplomacy before using force, but there is no reason to doubt he would use force when necessary. Negotiate with terrorists? Typical GOP strategory of suggesting liberals are in some way weak on terror. Misconceptions.. just like some that believe liberals aren't religious.

 

The USA does need to adopt a proactive approach in dealing with terrorism. However the line between a proactive approach and overzealous warmongering is anything but "fine"; it's more like an enormous chasm... and we are firmly on the wrong side of that chasm.

 

Bush III's economic agenda is more of the same - cut taxes cut taxes cut taxes and everything will be okay. It sounds so lovely and noble, hoo-ray for lower taxes, but there's a bell curve of efficiency and profitability when it comes to taxes, and i regret to inform you but the United States is on the left of that curve, hence the catastrophic budget deficits. The USA was on a road to recovery, and now it's on a road to hell thanks to ballooning entitlement program spending speeding past revenue. Here's a link:

 

http://www.perotcharts.com

 

YEE-HAW let's just remove taxes all together, surely they cannot serve any useful purpose! That'll get the people to like us! GET OUT THE VOTE!

 

Right.

 

You go on believing the rich drive the country. When those same rich show up to vote in november, they'll be met with a hundred thousandfold regular Americans demanding change.

 

Winning in Iraq? Uh huh. When the violence ends, i'll believe it. Until then, a blunder over 5 years old... and counting.

 

OBAMA/CLARK (or) OBAMA/RICHARDSON (or) OBAMA/SEBELIUS '08

[JCC-Fromthere]

Bombing Iran sounds good to me. YEEE HAWW!!

 

Yeah, that would solve everything.... right, right, right.

 

The world was in support of the U.S.A. after 9-11 (in Ottawa, you should have seen the line-up of people wanting to give blood. We were actually turned down because there were too many and we were told that that's not what they need most)

 

Bush and his hawks single-handledly destroyed years of foreign-policy mending with his stupid Iraq war that achieved nothing that Afghanistan wouldn't have, killed innocents, relieved Iraq from a mostly powerless dictator (reminder that the gasing of the kurds happened before the first invasion, when Rumsfeld was all too happy to shake Saddam's hand), costed billions that could have essentially been used to rake major foreign-policy points or, become independant from the real terrorist state, sponsor of world Wahabism, Saudi-Arabia.

 

Well, that is, unless you drink the Bush/FOx News coolaid and Reaganian empty-speaches.

[MTLskyline]

http://lcn.canoe.ca/cgi-bin/player/video.cgi?file=20080624-174207&alt=1

 

http://watch.ctv.ca/news/latest/harper-in-quebec/

 

Harper à Greenfield Park

[jesseps]

 

As we've mentioned on this blog many times, the number of ultra wealthy people is growing at an unheard-of rate. Even as we struggle with rising gas and food costs more and more billionaires are being created all the time. In 1985, there were only 13 billionaires in the U.S.; today there are more than 1,000 as well as a whole host of people with hundreds of millions in their coffers. A new CNBC special "Untold Wealth: The Rise of the Super Rich" explores a world where multiple homes, personal staffs, fleets of cars and multi million dollar art collections are the norm. Think of it as the television version of "Richistan."

 

The one-hour special on CNBC had its premiere on Thursday and will air tonight at 10pm ET as well as several more times in July. At times it's tough to watch the stories of the ultra wealthy but what is really interesting is the segment on "middleclass millionaires" in which Laurel Touby, who sold Media Bistro for 23 million in 2007 says that her remaining $10 million won't even buy her the apartment she wants in New York City. She goes on to discuss her conversations with the "really rich" (over $100 million or more) about shares in private jets and other services far over her price level. For every person you see and think they are rich and have it all, there is probably someone they look at as being rich and think they really have it all.

 

(Courtesy of Luxist)

 

Preview

 

one of the people they interviewed has like 70 cars or so.

[Cataclaw]

Peu importe vos opinions politiques, vous allez trouver ca drole!