[SBR_John]

I'm from Texas and we better hope this Perry fad fades. Guy is a pretty boy extreme right on social issues and not nearly as smart as Bush. Kind of scary.

[Tully Mars 63]

I'd wouldn't worry about Perry, he's looking more and more like a Giuliani or Thompson everyday. Most of the time the people leading the pack at this stage are rarely the nominee. I'm really hoping someone we've not heard of will emerge or someone like Huntsman or Romney will start making better progress. But really looking at the deadlines to get on the ballots time is running out for a new comer to enter. I think Sept. or Oct. is the latest you can file in several states.

[JosephPavs]

What is this a debate class, I said my point I'm done I don't see anyone agreeing with you...

[JosephPavs]

What is this a debate class, I said my point I'm done I don't see anyone agreeing with you...

Btw my post was about the economy and unions and you posted a graph about income and unions that has nothing to do with each other

[Tully Mars 63]

Really you don't see anyone agreeing with me? So you just see the posts where people agree with your side? Might be part of your problem, you're only seeing things from one side.

And you made a blanket statement about union having a negative affect on economies and I posted a graph showing that correlation between union membership and income levels in US states. You asked me for the dates of the data and I gave you the dates and supplied you with a link to where the data came from. In that link the data is gone through with data for unions, income levels and state economies and how they are related to each other.

And no this isn't a debate class. But you really can't expect to make blanket statements, offer no credible proof for what you're saying then think it's odd that people would challenge your statements.

[JosephPavs]

I just think it's funny that you take most statements on here and post the other side just to argue.

Glad my forum poped your cherry on here now you have over 80 post

[Tully Mars 63]

I've agreed with post in this thread and other threads. Why would you assume I make posts "just to argue?"

I don't quite understand "Glad my forum poped your cherry on here now you have over 80 post." It's your forum? And do I get some prize for having 80 posts? Plus I have no idea what you mean by "poped your (my) cherry. Do you think this is the only internet forum I frequent?

[The Madcap]

I've repeatedly stated I'm not a fan of Obama. I think my last reference to him stated if he were a football coach he'd punt on every 1st down. Why you'd think I'd be the kind to have his balls on my chin, which I assume would mean his dick was in my mouth, is beyond me.

I never said you were a fan of Obama, I was merely implying that you were acting like one. But I'm glad you also agree he's a pansy.

As for "don't be a douche bag" and "It would also help if you didn't go around making asinine proclamations about shit you don't fully understand." Just hold those comments up to a mirror.

Good. Recognizing when these things happen to you is the first step in being mindful not to do them to others. But can you apply what you've learned?

You wrote...

First I make a point to try and not make comments about other specific members on here, if I did my bad. But I don't recall calling any member on here names or telling them things like they are "ready to get down on your (their) knees..."

Well if you make it a point, you make it poorly.

Say we were having a conversation about football, and during this conversation it became apparent that you were an Eagles fan, and I were to say, "Eagles fans are homos." By implication, I am then also calling you a homo, even though I might not have called you out specifically. If it doesn't make sense in those terms, I suppose you could treat it like the transitive property in a math equation, IE: If A=B, and B=C, then A=C. As in, If (A)Tully is an (B)Eagles fan, and all Eagles fans are (C)homos, then then Tully is a homo. A=B=C.

So while you might not have made unflattering remarks about a specific poster, certainly you can see how your negative comments about the tea party or conservatives can be interpreted as derogatory slights by posters in this thread who might self-identify with those groups.

If you can't see the difference between making a joke or referring to a group or political party in negative terms and basically telling a member on here they're ready to suck out someone a$$hole. Then I don't know what to tell you.

There is a difference. I'm colorful and funny when I'm a dick, and you're just a dick.

Understand I don't care if you're a dick. I've got no problems with any negative comments or insults you've lobbed at the GOP, conservatives, neo-cons, or the tea-party. I'm just saying don't pull out some hypocritical bullshit about being "civil" when you've already gone and antagonized people with uncivil language. Like I stated earlier, it makes you come off as one of those self-righteous liberal Obama supporters who dishes it out all day but can never take it in return without going and crying to mommy.

And for the record, I don't remember writing anything about a rim job. I wish I had. That would have been fukking hilarious.

As for the the rest of your post, I don't completely disagree with everything you said. But I do think there's some value in looking at historical events and how they effected things. But it's also valid to understand the entire world has change dramatically and at times what happened then doesn't apply to whats happening now.

I also agree there is some value in looking at historical events. I also agree the world has changed dramatically, and thus as you stated, "at times what happened then doesn't apply to what's happening now." This is a crucial point in understanding economics, and why much of contemporary economic theory is a load of bullshit. Unfortunately, the men who have their reputations staked on forming these theories are stubborn prideful jackasses unwilling to concede they may have over-emphasized some things or under-emphasized others.

Another problem is that many of today's most prominent economists, (or NOTED economists as you put it) are overboard Darwinists who think they are more evolved than the rest of our species and thus have developed a serious superiority complex. As a result, they believe they should be in charge of how civilization operates, as they see themselves as the most civilized, and therefore, the very definition of what this civilization is. Which put another way, they see themselves much in the way of "divine right" monarchs of the past who declared they were put in charge of the people by God. The only difference is they don't believe in God, but rather evolution. So they don't see their power as derived by heavenly authority, but that their power is derived through the process of natural selection, and that the process of their specific selection made them the smartest and wisest, and most capable and deserving of determining the course of man. These people are bat-shit crazy yahoos completely overrun with grand delusions of their own intellect and self-worth. They actually believe six chalk-toting dipsticks holed up in a classroom studying 30 year old pie charts are better suited to determine the current price of corn than the farmer selling it and the rancher buying it. It's a complete fukking scam. The only reason they haven't been found out is because they don't teach economics in school anymore.

It's the same reason it took so damn long to figure out the Catholic Church was scamming everybody back in the middle ages. They controlled the educational system. They controlled everybody who had the power and knowledge to disrupt the Church. And anyone who came out against them was declared a heretic and burned at the stake. Millions of fukking people man. Millions. They don't have to worry about millions today though, because most people can't even balance their own damn checkbook, much less understand global finance or tax laws. So they only have to worry about the few guys brave enough to risk their standing in the field to go against the "church." And that's what modern academia is now. It's just like the Catholic Church in the goddam dark ages. And if you don't pay your dues, and you don't kiss the pope's ring, and you don't go along with everything you're told, then BAM, you get ex-communicated. The Catholics denied you entry to heaven, the academics deny you publication. And then they cast you in the media as being a fringe looney. That's why it's so important you read from other sources other than the "noted" guys---that's just what they fukking want you to do. They want you to obey. They don't want you to ask questions. They don't want you to challenge authority. They want you to sit in your seat and kiss the pope's ring, meanwhile they're busy stealing all your damn money. And then when they can't steal anymore of your money without you noticing, they'll come and sell you entry into heaven. All it will cost is your soul. Ready to sell it?

I hope not. Keep your money. Keep your freedom. Tell these scumbags to fukk off. Vote Perry 2012. (Just kidding)

[Tully Mars 63]

I think you make your points poorly as well and frankly, no you're not funny when you're being a dick.

Maybe I'll go through your post and respond more tomorrow, right now I have dinner plans and she's much more interesting then you.

[res1122]

The Tea Party's most noted national figures include Republican politicians such as Michele Bachmann, Sarah Palin, Dick Armey, Herman Cain, and Ron Paul, with Paul described by some as the "intellectual godfather" of the movement. Though the Tea Party movement is not, as of 2011, a national political party, polls show that most Tea Partiers consider themselves to be Republicans and it has tended to endorse Republican candidates. Commentators including Gallup editor-in-chief Frank Newport have suggested that the movement is not a new political group, but simply a rebranding of traditional Republican candidates and policies. An October 2010 Washington Post canvass of local Tea Party organizers found 87% saying "dissatisfaction with mainstream Republican Party leaders" was "an important factor in the support the group has received so far".

[rkelly110]

Talked to a business owner who was a tea bagger. After what he saw with the debt ceiling
fiasco and saw they were only for the rich, he dropped them like a hot potato.

Sometimes you can tell someone something until you're blue in the face, in the end, they
have to figure it out themselves.

[JosephPavs]

I've agreed with post in this thread and other threads. Why would you assume I make posts "just to argue?"

I don't quite understand "Glad my forum poped your cherry on here now you have over 80 post." It's your forum? And do I get some prize for having 80 posts? Plus I have no idea what you mean by "poped your (my) cherry. Do you think this is the only internet forum I frequent?

Your first post under this user name was in my thread not my forum I mis-spoke


IMO you are always posting the opposite side of what someone else post


If I posted my favorite color is white you would have a post 5 min later that said why I am wrong for liking white and a study that people that like black are 5x smarter for liking black

Just my opinion I am guessing you are north of Kansas or west of Colorodo?

[Tully Mars 63]

Your first post under this user name was in my thread not my forum I mis-spoke


IMO you are always posting the opposite side of what someone else post


If I posted my favorite color is white you would have a post 5 min later that said why I am wrong for liking white and a study that people that like black are 5x smarter for liking black

Just my opinion I am guessing you are north of Kansas or west of Colorodo?

I live in Mexico currently. Moved here after Bush was elected his second term. If you read through the thread you'd know that.

But I was in the military for a while and lived in several states and countries. I lived and worked in San Diego for a number of years. My most recent US address was in Houston Tx.

I really have no opinion on your favorite color. I think what you're seeing in my posts is I don't agree with either party or any group currently.

[Tully Mars 63]

Talked to a business owner who was a tea bagger. After what he saw with the debt ceiling
fiasco and saw they were only for the rich, he dropped them like a hot potato.

Sometimes you can tell someone something until you're blue in the face, in the end, they
have to figure it out themselves.

Sometimes even after they've been screwed by the very policy's they fought so hard to enact they still don't see it. I think there's a just a ton of people in the world who refuse to admit they're wrong. That's not something the right suffers from alone. I've known lefties that fought for ecological issues only to find out after the measures passed they couldn't, build, fish, hunt, work where they wanted to... but "it was still right, do you know where the food bank is?"

[JosephPavs]

Tully have a good rest of the day! Sorry for my rants! Have a good one!

[Tully Mars 63]

No need to apologize, rant away it's the internet. I plan of having a great day. The lady I had dinner with is still here and we're going to float around the pool. You have a good day too.

[marcojuiceman]

If you guys dont vote for Ron Paul To win the whole tea bag movement is over. and im not a tea bagger at all. If this video isnt common and sense and dont know what is????????????

[SBR_John]

If you guys dont vote for Ron Paul To win the whole tea bag movement is over. and im not a tea bagger at all. If this video isnt common and sense and dont know what is????????????

Good interview.

Great man period. He is basically a constitutional fundamentalists if there even is such a thing. The founding fathers wanted nothing to do with income taxes, Federal socialism and war machines. They were all about personal freedom and states rights.

[Tully Mars 63]

Paul doesn't stand a chance. The powers that be will never stand for it. Which should be a sign of just how far off the edge the country has gone. I think if he were elected there's a serious chance the country would collapse. But who knows, maybe if he enacted his ideas/policy's carefully and intelligently, might just be what the nation needs. But looking at the way the media and GOP elite have treated him I'm pretty sure we'll never find out.

Maybe he can gain enough followers to have the $ to pull a Perot. The country is pretty fed up with both parties right now he might just win. Of course if he did he'd probably have an "accident" in the 1st six months.