Sssshhhhhh jarman. You aren't supposed to tell anybody.

They have placed cameras in the bedrooms of everyone who blogs here, to listen into any wild plans they talk about in their sleep...sssshhhhhhhh.

Please...last time I checked this was still America and we still have the freedom of speech thing. (at least until Jan. 2009) Then we become socialist and redistribute money from the people who are stupid enough to work, to the people who sit on the couch all day.

The next time you feel a conspiracy theory coming on, take 2 rum runners and call me in the morning.

"...this site (The Citizen.com) was singled out as was a Snellville small paper,stating this site and the other as being located in areas of the country that harbor extremists that would be considered a danger to the next President."

Really? Hey, Cal, you're famous

(is this a joke, jarman?)

AP didn't say the citizen paper was a danger, I'm sure, I think, maybe.

However hust because it is NO danger to a POTUS doesn't mean it isn't a danger to good, clear thinking, and putting humans before business!

I am sure many have read his last blog, but were unable to refute it and decided to just not reply. Except for you and all you can do is make a silly, snide remark. Typical.

The ugly names you have called former Secretary of State General Colin Powell and POTUS elect Barack Obama not withstanding, I'll give Richard's pointless pennings a go so that you don't think we are ignoring him for anything other than his argument's irrelevance.

1. You cannot bring about prosperity by discouraging thrift.

How has Barack discouraged thrift?
This is the guy that told us to check our tire inflation and tune our cars up to get every last bit of efficiency out of them. You don't remember the thousands of tire gages John McCain is stuck with?

2. You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong

If a progressive income tax cerca 2000 weakened the strong, the economy sure didn't reflect it. Remember? That was the end of that interesting period where our federal government had money left over. They called it a surplus. Can you say that? S-u-r-p-l-u-s....

3. You cannot help the poor man by destroying the rich.

Umm... Richard? the office of double redundancy called. You owe them commission on this one. See item "2".

4. You cannot further the brotherhood of man by inciting class hatred.

See? This is where us liberals get frustrated with conservative arguments. Your candidate brings out "Joe the plumber" and "Joe 6 pack" and try to convince the country that the elitist Barack Obama wants to take his money and guns (neither of which are true), yet you suggest that Barack incited "class warfare?" Ridiculous.

5. You cannot build character and courage by taking away man's initiative and independence.

Now this one is just bogus and serves no purpose other than to tell me that these made up commandments aren't even worth addressing further. I mean, the election is over accept for a run off or two and we all know which arguments held more water to the American people. These posts are more or less therapeutic as opposed to informative, but a liberal or two may swing by every now and again to check on Richard's progress in his 6-step therapy

Diva, you obviously think that the majority of people are just plain DUMBA$$ES. Anyone with half a brain knows that the surpluses you speak of were a myth, conjured up by the Democrats to make people think Clinton and his administration was something he was not.

It was a B-U-D-G-E-T surplus. Think about that...B-U-D-G-E-T, that's what you think you will spend vs what you think you have coming in. It was on Paper, never a reality. A real Surplus would be actually having money left over which has never happenned!

Clinton's budget surplus is a well established fact. The debt was being paid down so fast that Alan Greenspan gave a speech to the Federal Reserve Board on April 27, 2001 in which he cautioned against paying the national debt too fast. His main concern was that without the Treasury's ability to issue bonds to cover the debt he would lose a useful tool in affecting inflation since he would have less flexibility to determine interest rates.

Republicans deny there was a surplus because it flies in the face of the myth that Republicans are not the biggest spending Party by far. You will still hear them rhapsodize among themselves that the party should return to Reagan's vision of less government and smaller budgets neither of which Reagan ever tried to even remotely implement.

The Democrats have been the Party of what fiscal responsibility there has been in government for the last 40 years.

Here are excerpts and a link to Greenspan's speech from 2001:

“I have long argued that paying down the national debt is beneficial for the economy: It keeps interest rates lower than they otherwise would be and frees savings to finance increases in the capital stock, thereby boosting productivity and real incomes. But the current budget projections are such that we need to consider what path of debt reduction is best for the economy.”

“Thus, the elimination of Treasury debt does remove something of economic value, and it will require that significant adjustments be made by market participants. Indeed, with marketable Treasury debt held by the public--that is, excluding the Federal Reserve but including foreign central banks--having declined about 20 percent in recent years, to less than $2.5 trillion, some of these adjustments have already begun.”

“However, if the Treasury debt is paid down, as I trust it will be, then the Federal Reserve will have to find alternative assets that still provide substantial liquidity and minimize distortions to the private allocation of capital.”

“While the prospective paydown of Treasury debt presents us with challenges, I am confident that, with your help, the Federal Reserve can make the needed adjustments and will be able to continue to implement monetary policy in the national interest. The benefits of reducing our federal debt make the associated challenges well worth meeting.”

The paydown of federal debt

unless you don't have debt. We will never be debt free, therefore we will never have a true surplus.

Then you're right. The Republicans have doomed us to debt forever. Keep supporting them, maybe we can hit $20 trillion to pass on to the kids.

Regardless of who I support. If you owe more than you are taking in...you don't have a surplus.

Keep supporting them (republicans), maybe we can hit $20 trillion to pass on to the kids. That statement doesn't make a lot of sense. Now that the Messiah, sorry Obama, is the President and the liberals are in control everything will be fine , right? I mean he's going to pay down the debt, provide free health care, pay my mortgage, hell I should quit my job now...he'll take care of me!
Hows that Stock market looking since the election? DJI is down 1200 points! Ya-hoooo, can't you feel the confidence in Obama? I'll bet it goes up to 12000 on January 21,2009.

How's the stock market looking? Retail sales have dropped by their biggest margins in 30 years, banks are being nationalized by the Republican administration, the big three auto makers are headed for bankruptcy or tax payer funded bailouts, stock brokerages are being nationalized, the national debt has almost doubled to 10 trillion dollars under the Republican administration and we're headed into probably the deepest recession since the 30's; all on the Republican's watch and you're blaming Obama, who won't take office for two more months, for the stock market decline?

Preposterously ridiculous.

Rush might have convinced you but y'all ain't gonna convince the vast majority of rational people.

Retail sales have dropped by their biggest margins in 30 yearsRetail sales have dropped because of all the other problems, peopl eare keeping what money they have.

banks are being nationalized by the Republican administrationGee the wall street / Bank bailout was voted in vis 39 Democrats and 34 Republicans. Looks like the Democrats had as much to do with the bailout as did the Republicans.

the big three auto makers are headed for bankruptcy or tax payer funded bailouts And Why is that? Because the Unions (gee and who supports them...DEMOCRATS) have forced the automakers into a cost structure that isn't favorable to them making money. The average Big 3 UAW worker with a high school degree earns 57.6% more compensation than the average university professor with a Ph.D. and 52.6% more than the average worker at Toyota, Honda or Nissan. That's why the Automakers are asking for a Bailout...I say SCREW EM...Let em fail and there will be better companies and cars to take their place.

you're blaming Obama, who won't take office for two more months, for the stock market decline? The threat of huge tax increases by the socialist Obama, has everyone holding on to their money. People that have money aren't spending, companies aren't making money so they are laying off people, people then don't have jobs so they can't spend, so the companies don't make money...and so on. We are in a vicious circle.

You say it all happenned "on the Republican Watch", obviously you forgot that the DUMBOCRATS have had the majority in Congress the past few years. So exactly Who's watch is it?

Like I said, you will not be able to convince rational people. That's why y'all lost the election.

friends. You think YOU are rational.

No the reason we lost the election is because of the brain dead losers that voted for OBAMA, becasue he promised to give them something. Yeah he's gonna give them something alright..I just hope they don't expect to get kissed while they are getting SCRE--D!

Everybody is brain dead except you and Rush.

Obama won because of the economy. Denying that doesn't change the fact it just categorizes you as someone who cannot recognize or be influenced by facts.

Obviously the overwhelming majority of the country disagrees with you and my guy won the election because of it. I'm satisfied with that. In fact, I'm delighted! Believe whatever you want, it makes no difference.

53% to 46% of the popular vote is hardly an overwhelming majority.

So those 46% of the people deserve to have their voices silenced? They don't matter now, huh. Just think where the African Americans in this country would be now had they just been silenced and no one cared about what they thought. After all, there are more caucasions in the US than Blacks...and Majority Rules...Doesn't it?

Your concern for the silenced African Americans has touched my heart.

The majority does not rule; the majority elects representatives. You are free to express your opinion and sway anyone within your power to do so. I would suggest that you come up with more rational and less silly argument than blaming the state of the economy and the stock market decline on Obama but if that's your position then go for it.

The market had been on a steady increase since March of 2003, the Dems won the majority in Nov 2006 and by Oct 2007 the market started on its steady decline. The DJI was at 14K in October 2007 and has been sinking ever since.

Look it up...that's the facts.

Obviously our confidence is tanking. All we know for sure is that our taxes will go up. There is no reason for any of us to spend a dime on anything other than necessities. Don't keep your money in a mattress, buy a fire/water proof safe.

My fathers pension fund has already informed him that his check will go down if the dems put the extra, or larger tax on peoples retirement.

How long will it take the dems to turn us into a third world welfare country? They have a big start with the CRA and subprime loans.

Barry managed to do just as much damage in less than a month by refusing to answer the question about tax increases on the 5% who don't get tax break.

That 5% and a lot of others correctly assume the capital gain tax rate will be doubled next tax year (which begins in 6 weeks) under the dubious leadership of Barry, Harry and Harried (that be Nancy) so they are taking their money out of the stock market. Look for a DJ of 5,000 by January.

Keep the faith - it takes a Carter to get a Reagan and do we ever have a Carter.

but I'm afraid I might not make it to see the next Reagan. If I do, I probably will have to listen to him on the radio, because I won't be able to afford a Television in order to see him.

AIG, GM, Wall Street and et al only started ripping off the American taxpayer in the last year or so?

"AIG, GM, Wall Street and et al only started ripping off the American taxpayer in the last year or so?"

Yes, those 3 bloggers above your post really do believe that.

I read...and agree. The paltry attempts at rebuttal are just that..."paltry" and typical of the Obama groupies.

Lawdawga

You see what conservatives did to Barack when he used it. Pretty taboo word. At any rate, since you and brat, being the judges of the substantive nature of arguments, have determined "our" arguments are "paltry," perhaps you and or brat might do something novel: Support your arguments. Go down the list of "commandments" and offer non-paltry support for how Barack, por ejemplo, "discourages thrift" and "harms the big guy." Now, keep in mind, if you say raising taxes on the rich to balance the budget is "hurting the big guys," you'll have to explain how a 10 trillion dollar deficit helps them.

Cheers

As is usual with you, a two-step reply. One, attack the messenger and two, deny the truth. And, please tell me what "ugly" names that I have called Powell? Wait a minute, did I forget to call him "sell-out"? You can add that to the list!

I guess you missed 1 through 5 right? You said we couldn't answer. I answered. You no like? Me no care.

Just not with anything substantial.

Lame???? Did you not read anything about Hussein before the election???

These all out of his play book.