What Will the Next 4 Years Bring? Part 1: If President Obama Wins.
What would a second Obama term mean to the country? We already know he would have to deal with a House with a strong Republican majority and an even a chance of a Republican controlled Senate. Given that he has shown no interest in listening to even many moderates in his own party, there is zero chance of significant new legislation or reform. So clearly we will do nothing to deal with our major issues of saving entitlement programs, deficit reduction, or improving the economy. But the bad news is President Obama can be extremely dangerous without any help from Congress. I will not get in to controversial claims of what he is likely to do, which may be even worse than what we know he will do.(1) I want to focus on what we know he will do with Obamacare, energy, debt, spending, and the economy.
The first most obvious effect of an Obama win would be that Obamacare will stay with little modification. Seniors will be stuck with the changes to Medicare including the advisory board that will eventually decide what services to deny. Obama can talk about the language that declares that board does not have the power to ration healthcare, but it is a hollow promise because the board will set the payment rates for services that will in effect limit the availability of those services.(2) It is like in the former Soviet Union when often people had Rubles, but the stores had nothing on the shelves. For the rest of us it will continue to be a wet blanket on economic growth and within five years at least 30% of us in the private sector will lose or current coverage and be dropped in to exchanges. This will of course explode the deficit. If the debt crisis does not come in his next term, Obama may be able to avoid raising taxes on the “middle class”, but then even the GOP will be forced to support a VAT tax to delay a debt crisis after it becomes clear it is impossible to reverse course on Obamacare.
The EPA has been given approval to regulate carbon dioxide as a pollutant. You can be sure the EPA is set with a plan to put in place to achieve the goals of the Cap & Trade system that was rejected on bipartisan basis in the Senate. President Obama will finish the War on coal. The results will be higher utility rates, more dependence on foreign oil, massive losses of jobs in energy intensive sectors like manufacturing, and much weaker economy resulting in tax revenue coming in below projections. Many predict in the long run this will lead to shortages of energy and rolling blackouts.(3)
The debt will continue to spiral out of control. As we see from the way Democrats reacted to Romney’s suggestion to eliminate subsidies for PBS. They are more interested in saving Big Bird from and imaginary ending, than saving Medicare from a real threat. Given this attitude it is clear President Obama does not take seriously the need to cut non-defense spending. Most of the spending cuts he claims are already in law and the rest do not occur until long after he is out of office. The GOP will likely continue to cave on spending with Obama being a lame duck president with no reason to care if the government is shutdown. He will get his tax increase on job creators because if the GOP does not cave, taxes will go up on everyone. President Obama would prefer ending all the Bush Tax cuts than no tax increase so he will not negotiate. We cannot fix the debt issue if we do not have stronger economic growth, but not only does the President not have any ideas to encourage more economic growth, all of his agenda is like a “wet blanket on the economy”. This weaker economic growth will cost more in tax revenues than he will generate from his tax increase plan in the long run.
President Obama’s agenda will be decidedly negative for jobs and the economy. It is interesting that the Obama campaign keeps whining that Romney needs to give more specifics when they do not even have a reasonable general framework of a plan at all for the same issues. The only ideas he has are increased spending on his supporters like teachers unions and green energy. Neither will get any increase though Congress. Even if congress was dumb enough to approve them they would create no jobs like they did in his first four years. Given his attack on American energy production, increased taxes, and no stopping Obamacare, it is almost certain we will face another recession. We will be on an unstoppable path to a debt crisis like we see in Europe.
In addition to the list above there is much more Obama can and will do without Congress and all of it will be bad for the economy. I have heard economists are forecasting 12 million jobs to be created in the next four years. They must be forecasting a Romney Victory. If Obama wins we will be lucky to maintain the current job growth trajectory which is about what we need to keep the real unemployment rate the same. More likely we will see negative job growth. I like a quote I saw on a commercial last night, “In socialism it is true the rich will be poorer, but the poor will also be poorer also.”(4) President Obama is right on one thing, you know what you are going to get if he wins, an unstoppable path to a government controlling the economy, and all aspects of our society leading to a debt crisis and misery for all.
1) http://www.dickmorris.com/obamas-second-term-plan-let-the-u-n-tax-americans/
2) http://cjonline.com/opinion/2012-10-09/george-will-romney-danced-around-obama
Michael McClusky
10:49 am on Monday, October 15, 2012
The economy will not improve unless the medium household income average goes up instead of falling. Since most people work in the private sector, the ball is actually in the way businesses treat their employees. The Wall Street Journal says this will not improve as long as unemployment remains high. We are in a bad fix.
Randy1949
11:43 am on Monday, October 15, 2012
Indeed. And has Mitt Romney's business history been one of raising salaries and benefits for his employees?
H.E. Pennypacker
11:48 am on Monday, October 15, 2012
Randall, how many people have you hired in 2012? How many businesses have you started in your many years on this planet? Come on Randall, let's see if you are man enough to start a company, pay benefits that you demand Romney pay for his employees.....come on old man.
Randy1949
12:02 pm on Monday, October 15, 2012
I've started two small businesses. But I'm not the one running on a platform of creating well-paying jobs when that has been the opposite to Mitt Romney's business strategy thus far.
Tell me, Pennypacker, Mr. job-creator, what is the standard of living of your own employees versus your own? Do you enjoy a comfortable income while paying minimum wage? Do you have health insurance while telling your employees it's too expensive?
Unemployment rates have to fall, but the jobs have to pay as well. You can't decry the falling incomes of the middle-class at the same time as creating retail jobs at Staples and calling it good.
Lyle Ruble
12:13 pm on Monday, October 15, 2012
@H.E. Fannypacker...I would suggest that I have more entrepreneurial years under my belt than you have.
Michael McClusky
5:24 pm on Monday, October 15, 2012
@Randy1949 To back you up in what you are saying: economists do not believe that low-paying jobs actually help the economy at all. Since the spending power is minimal, the net affect is also hardly worth noting. This downward spiral has not been noticed by the business community yet; they are too busy looking at their quarterly profit reports to take notice of the big picture.
Randy1949
5:36 pm on Monday, October 15, 2012
@Michel McCluskey -- This is a serious question, then -- what do economists say about fixing the problem? A large pool of available workers exerts a downward pressure on wages. This has been going on much longer than for the last four years. American families responded to lower wages or unemployment by becoming double-income families, and then by relying on credit to live well on inadequate means. But that only makes things worse.
How does our society get out of this mess?
James R Hoffa
6:29 pm on Monday, October 15, 2012
1) Encourage industry to return to America with competitive tax rates and regulations.
2) Reform trade policies to benefit America, using the strength of the American market to exert pressure on the unfair players. After all, they currently have the supply, but we have the demand. And the first rule of economics dictates that demand is a far more powerful force than supply.
Michael McClusky
6:47 pm on Monday, October 15, 2012
@Randy 1949 I saw a business survey a few weeks ago concerning the projected raises for employees for the year 2013. For what it is worth the average turned out to be 2.7%. Let us suppose this actually happens next year. This would be the shot in the arm that the American people have been looking for. It would not be shangri-la, but it is worth noting that it would be the best figure in a very long time.
As for the business community here is a silly anology: It is like someone's house burning down and all of the neighbors come running to steal what they can and leave the rest for ashes. Their selfish focus has brought many people to ruin.
Randy1949
6:54 pm on Monday, October 15, 2012
@Michael McCluskey -- Raises would be good, but what raises? Where? To whom? And is this across the board? I doubt it.
And then we have the practice of hiring part time workers to avoid benefits, along with expecting salaried workers to put in a lot of overtime (not recompensed) rather than hiring more staff.
Michael McClusky
7:23 pm on Monday, October 15, 2012
@Randy 1949 There has to be a change in attitude. You see, the Democrats and Republicans talk about tax cuts for the 'job creators' as if we have a problem with supply. Do not be misled- they are taking cues from their corporate sponsors. The real problem has to do with demand- 70% of our economy has to do with consumer demand. The stupid business world is permanently crippling this market for short term gain. Remember, the average stock is only owned for about 6 months now. They want immediate gratification regardless of the consequences.
What can we do? Be conservative with your money, for unless Corporate America starts caring about their communities again I see no drastic upside.
On another note: the markets are relying on legal immigration to increase demand even if job growth does not grow accordingly. I have nothing against immigrants, but to forever have more and more people live here just as our job market is a joke is not good for our society. Wall Street runs Washington. Decisions are made that are unwise but benefit the very few for the short term. That is what is really going on.
Bren
11:58 am on Tuesday, October 16, 2012
Don't forget that a lot of people also took out "bridge" loans while on furlough, and/or were impacted by higher minimum credit card payments during the worst of the recession. Prices have jumped. Disposable income is much less than what it was for many people. Less spending among working folks and even less among the unemployed--not good. And then there's "the new normal," the employment model rolled back to the good 'ole pre-union days of 10-12 hour workdays, 5/6 days/week as the workers not downsized try to cover two and even three lost positions-with no increase in pay.
On the other hand, people form businesses to make money. Right now the playing field is tipped their way. Not so long ago these people understood that you have to give a little to get--paying your employees decently increases loyalty and productivity, etc. Now they are getting without giving and loyalty no longer exists. Seems like the mindset needs to change first. What are the chances of that happening?
Michael McClusky
1:47 pm on Tuesday, October 16, 2012
@Bren Some time ago I read a book by a federal judge that was about the American economy. In it he stated a blunt truth: businesses do not care at all about the state of the economy- that is what government is for. The 'I got mine- the hell with everyone else' mentality is the root cause of the protracted problems we have been having.
Combine this with the inflationary policies of the Federal Reserve, then there is no wonder that the poor and middle class are on a downward slope. My contention is that the business community is too dense to realize that there will come a day when their customers will have no money. Then what?
Bren
2:24 pm on Tuesday, October 16, 2012
I've thought about that, and I think we have already been seeing some of it--rats in a cage. Mergers and acquisitions. The corporatists will feed upon each other and global unemployment will increase. An ultimate oligarchic plutocracy, fed by resources and taxes. Customers would no longer be necessary.
Something's got to give. Companies that aren't selling can't hire. And what about outsourcing/offshoring? That can only work as long as it's cheaper to exploit foreign workers. Tariffs on imported goods worked in stemming the tide of cheap imports from England in the early days of this country and its nascent manufacturing base, but commerce is too sophisticated for that now. But there has to be a solution.
H.E. Pennypacker
10:55 am on Monday, October 15, 2012
Obongo and the rest of the Keynsian Klowns will bankrupt this nation, by design, take more from the productive, hand to the moochers. The USA will soon resemble Russia in 1917, better make room in your stair well and couch for the squatters that will be coming.
Lyle Ruble
12:11 pm on Monday, October 15, 2012
@H.E. Fannypacker...LMAO with your fairy tale.
Bernard Forand
10:35 am on Tuesday, October 16, 2012
H.E. Pennypacker
. Fannypacker your assertions on Keynesian as a failure. Hmm interesting do you have proof of this? Source? That said this is but one component that Obama is illustrating with his policies. A significant portion of his economic plans come from Mirramer Eccles economics. FDR tested that economic system and proved beyond a shadow of a doubt its success. Go and see how FDR tested the Eccles economic theories.
Actually take some time and read a book on it. You will be amazed how much it will affect your financial outlook after viewing it through the eyes of geniuses. Much better than the nickel dime paper back comic books.
Lyle Ruble
12:10 pm on Monday, October 15, 2012
As usual, Divelbiss is fantasying and there isn't any evidence of what he writes will come to pass. This is nothing more than right wing scare tactics without any supporting facts.
Jay Sykes
1:15 pm on Monday, October 15, 2012
@Lyle Ruble... What will come to pass if Obama is re-elected;you should write-up a counter, point-by-point, article**. Actually, all the 'regular' bloggers, as they are all quite partisan, should do this too. Also,a separate specific point-by-point projection of a Romney term should be presented by all bloggers(who knows which way this election will turn).
Mirror mirror on the wall, who is the most prescient blogger of them all??
**It would be very appropriate to include numerical predictions and a timeline: un-employment rate; deficit;national debt; government spending as a percent of GDP;# of filibusters;et. al ...
Nuitari
6:51 pm on Monday, October 15, 2012
Ruble, what ever happened to your usual bloviating? Your shallow comments are becoming routine.
Luke
1:04 am on Wednesday, October 17, 2012
Lyle,
Name one time you've blogged an not speculated about the future.
Bernard Forand
10:13 am on Tuesday, October 16, 2012
Concerns about what produces this volatility in laborers productivity distributions? Economics has exposed the forces that support this cycle. Boils down to INEQUALITY of distributions.
America’s inequality;
“Rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer.”
Illumination of this can be viewed within our USA. Increasing wealth, disproportional to the impoverished who are unable to maintain an
equitable ratio in gains. Impoverished, at their best, stagnation of their share in laborers productivity. Increasingly eroding of their portions of share to their labors productivity. Increasing to the inequality and accelerating negatively to the impoverished.
Three decades of low wages, to the 90%, with a growth of 15%. Earnings increase to the 1% have been cruising at 150% increases as to the 0.1% are racing at 300% Greater acceleration of wealth accumulation has affected the wealth at the bottom.
These are the facts that Romney ignores. NOT going to raise the Tax on the rich or their corporations that have paid zero taxes {2010 Top Ten Oil Co.} and received $Multimillions each in tax refunds. DEMAND Welfare payments into the $Multibillions or they will shut down our Main Street USA. Guess who owns these corporations? Little low on budgets? Raise prices at the pump.. Have much more on this subject. Find most people do not like economics. It controls so much of all aspects of your lives and many choose to ignore it. Ignore it at your peril ..
Bernard Forand
10:17 am on Tuesday, October 16, 2012
Ever hear my story of the truck?
2 Guys buy a truck to serve their business. Each have their own business. {A} uses the truck, with wear / tare and fuel added , 10% of the time. {B} uses it the other 90%. Now time to add up cost and who pays what. {A} says he owes 10% {B} disagrees. He claims that 85% is what {A} owes. For {B} at 15% is paying more in wealth than {A} is paying with his 10%. Now if{A} don’t pay, {B} will SHUTDOWN the truck. The rest I’ll leave for you to figure it out. Now if you decide that {A} should pay the 85% then contact me immediately. Baby do I have a deal for you.
H.E. Pennypacker
11:21 am on Tuesday, October 16, 2012
Yes, Bain Capital owns a 51.8 percent share of stock in Sensata Technologies, a company that’s closing an Illinois plant and outsourcing production to China. Bain bought out Sensata for $3 billion — years after Romney left the company — and despite what you might have read scrawled on a cardboard sign at an Occupy protest, Mitt Romney is not Bain. He and his wife reportedly own, through a blind trust, $7.8 million worth of eight Bain funds, which combined have a controlling stake in Sensata. Bain’s controlling share, however, comprises $2.6 billion worth of Sensata’s stock. So no, Romney does not own 51 percent of Sensata — not by a long shot.
In liberal math, though, two plus two equals giraffe
Bren
2:35 pm on Tuesday, October 16, 2012
This isn't "liberal math." Romney, according to documentation, left Bain in 2002 (he claims 1999 but press releases, signed documents, etc., strongly suggest otherwise). He still profits from Bain investments. As former CEO his words would carry great weight with current leadership. As an investor in companies such as ASIMCO (http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20101001006306/en/Bain-Capital-Completes-Acquisition-ASIMCO-Technologies-Limited), a Chinese firm that imports the same parts that two Michigan companies that Bain Capital acquired and closed by 2007 did; and Global Tech, a Chinese company currently being sued by Microsoft for pirating software, Romney in essence is decrying Chinese business practices that he himself directly receives benefit.
A well researched/reasoned article conjecturing why we aren't seeing the Romney tax returns: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/mitt-romney-s-tax-dodge-20121012
In Mitt Romney's world, perhaps two plus two has different answers for different audiences?
Bren
2:36 pm on Tuesday, October 16, 2012
Here's a link to another article about ASIMCO and Global Tech: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/10/us/politics/as-romney-repeats-trade-message-bain-maintains-china-ties.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
James R Hoffa
3:06 pm on Tuesday, October 16, 2012
@Bren -
Bottom line - if you want Sensata to stay in IL, then you have to provide them with the incentive to stay here.
Currently, Romney is in no position to be able to negotiate with Bain, as he doesn't have the power to offer anything substantive.
Obama, however, is in the position to offer things to Bain, such as subsidies, tax breaks, credits, etc.
Obama was also going to renegotiate NAFTA and implement fair trade agreements with foreign nations, to protect American jobs, remember? Never happened. Meanwhile, Obama was out supporting a Canadian bus manufacturer with our tax-dollars instead of buying American made like he said he wants the rest of the world to do. Don't you think that Obama should be leading by example?
And again, that Rolling Stone article is not something that a true independent would look twice at - it's filled with unsupported assumptions, speculations, conjectures, etc as opposed to hard objective and supported facts. It's nothing but a biased political smear/hit piece from a publication that is politically as left as Mother Jones. Remember, Rolling Stone said that is was appropriate for Biden to laugh and act hysterical at Ryan because Ryan wasn't saying anything worth listening to.
Clearly, the fact that you and your fellow lefties won't even respect or listen to Republicans is proof positive that you guys and the Democrats are the obstructionists that are being divisive!
And the people are starting to wake up to this FACT!
Bren
3:16 pm on Tuesday, October 16, 2012
I'd disagree about the level of influence a former CEO has, especially one that is still heavily invested in the company. What is the likelihood that Bain would negotiate with Barack Obama to save Sensata, especially right now? It is difficult to imagine that happening this late in the game--the plant is intended to close by the end of 2012 as I understand it.
Staying on topic, what Bain is doing isn't illegal. They can't be forcibly stopped. The only answer to this type of "behavior" is to boycott. In a recession people look for the best price and that often means buying a Chinese-made product or knock-off. It's a multi-tiered problem.
James R Hoffa
3:41 pm on Tuesday, October 16, 2012
@Bren -
Bain Capital's 2012 financial disclosure shows about $66B in assets. Romney's current investment in Bain is valued at about $7.8M.
So, Romney's current .01% interest in Bain qualifies him as someone who is "still heavily invested in the company?"
Bren - you truly do live in your own world, don't you?
Has Obama reached out to Bain to save those jobs? Has Obama asked Bain what would be required to keep those jobs here? Can you link to any stories wherein Obama has done anything to try to save those jobs?
Of course not - because the Sensata plant in Freeport is an open (non-union) shop. Obama only cares about helping his cronies in big labor, as the auto bailouts proved.
Boycott?!?!
Perhaps if people made patriotic purchases in the first place, unlike your right-to-work-for-less-state non-union assembled Toyota, we wouldn't be facing such situations.
If you really want to blame someone, blame the American consumer for valuing low priced products over quality products that support values that Americans supposedly believe in.
Until you start walking your talk Bren, you have little room to talk with any kind of authority.
Right now, you're little more than a hypocrite!
Bernard Forand
8:07 pm on Wednesday, October 17, 2012
Just in early polls of people who have already voted from Illinoisand Ohio
Obama and Republican Mitt Romney are neck and neck in opinion polls, but there is one area in which the incumbent appears to have a big advantage: those who have already cast their ballots.
Obama leads Romney by 59 percent to 31 percent among early voters, according to Reuters/Ipsos polling data compiled in recent weeks.
Ohio Early Voting Cleared by High Court
The U.S. Supreme Court sealed a legal victory for President Barack Obama’s campaign in the pivotal state of Ohio, leaving intact a ruling that restored early voting rights for the weekend before the Nov. 6 election.
Ohio Republicans had sought to cancel early voting that weekend for everyone except members of the military. A U.S. appeals court blocked the plan last week, saying it probably violated the constitutional rights of non-military voters. In a one-sentence order, the Supreme Court today rejected a challenge to that ruling, filed by Ohio’s Republican secretary of state and attorney general.
Obama pulling ahead. After a lackluster performance in the first debate of his re-election campaign, President Barack Obama scored a victory over Republican nominee Mitt Romney in their second encounter, according to post-debate network polling.
An instant poll of undecided voters by CBS after the contentious town hall session ended found Obama beat Romney 37 percent to 30 percent, with 33 percent calling it a tie.
WEACHATER
3:22 pm on Tuesday, October 16, 2012
Here is the typical Obama voter. This is what we will have if he is reelected. Actually we will have them even if he isnt, but they wont be in power, Thanks God (Or Allah, or whatever you worship).
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=469538456400235
Mafia Mike
1:45 am on Wednesday, October 17, 2012
Hahahahaha!!!!! That idiot actually thinks you can teach deer to cross in a safer zone! LMAO!!!!!!!!!!
Randy1949
10:04 am on Wednesday, October 17, 2012
I listened to the transcript of her call on Youtube and laughed myself silly. But where did she mention her politics?
John Taxthepoor
7:49 am on Wednesday, October 17, 2012
I know 4 years equals, a split country in financial chaos. There will be break up the country, debtor states can go under, conservative states will hang together exporting the welfare or shipping out all the entitled obese americans to california. With the added weight of thar debted biomass, california will fall into the ocean. Then consrvative miltitary forces will take the nukes. We will allow those that believe Providing for common defence to live in the work zones and prosper, those believe in the promoting of welfare shall pass to those zones of laziness. We will wall off the debtor states from the rest of us. Eventually as darwin predicts, only the strong will survive. Democrats become the ELOI and us the Morlochs. And feast we shall.
Bernard Forand
12:14 pm on Wednesday, October 17, 2012
Just in early polls of people who have already voted from Illinoisand Ohio
President Barack Obama and Republican challenger Mitt Romney are neck and neck in opinion polls, but there is one area in which the incumbent appears to have a big advantage: those who have already cast their ballots.
Obama leads Romney by 59 percent to 31 percent among early voters, according to Reuters/Ipsos polling data compiled in recent weeks.
On the debates Obama pulling ahead. After a lackluster performance in the first debate of his re-election campaign, President Barack Obama scored a victory over Republican nominee Mitt Romney in their second encounter, according to post-debate network polling.
An instant poll of undecided voters by CBS after the contentious town hall session ended found Obama beat Romney 37 percent to 30 percent, with 33 percent calling it a tie.
Bernard Forand
12:20 pm on Wednesday, October 17, 2012
Romney was weak on alternative energies. Strong on us building an oily toxic pipeline for the oil companies thou. Haven’t we have enough spills from our Mountains, Rivers, Out on the Plains, our Oceans and right on down to the Gulf Of Mexico. After 3 decades Alaska still is plagued with oily spilled issues to there fisheries. How long for the Tropical Gulf of Mexico? Romney had issues with this $ 90 Billion for alternative energies just as Ryan mimicking their myths and fables. Ryan just recently demonstrates their lack of knowledge on Green issues and their finacing. {“The vice president was in charge of overseeing this. $90 billion in green pork to campaign contributors and special interest groups.”}
Multiple reviews, including an independent review of all Department Of Energy loan programs by Herb Allison –- finance chair for McCain for President 2008 –- have found no “pork” in the stimulus’ funding of green projects, concluding that the loans were not steered to friends or family, as Ryan claims.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/oct/05/mitt-romney/mitt-romney-says-barack-obama-provided-90-billion/ Pulitzer Awarded site. Now how about the elite kicking in their share of the taxes. Mitt says they pay enough! After all the welfare they get and all they want to pay is 15% or less! Don’t leave much to cover that pipeline. Guess Romney figures the 47% can handle it
Bernard Forand
12:31 pm on Wednesday, October 17, 2012
By ERIC LIPTON
Published: October 1, 2012
By ERIC LIPTON
Attorneys who represent whistle-blowers have made millions as the Obama administration cracks down on corporate fraud, and are now donating heavily to the president's re-election campaign.
WASHINGTON — As the Obama administration has cracked down on corporate fraud, lawyers representing whistle-blowers have reaped multimillion-dollar rewards. Now, as they seek to sustain these historic payouts, they are serving as generous donors to the president’s re-election campaign.
Bill Crandall fo The New York Times
John R. Philli A Legal Circle Reaches Deep to Aid Obama
Top whistle-blower lawyers, has raised more than $200,000 for Mr. Obama’s re-election from colleagues.
Lawyers in the tight circle who specialize in filing fraud claims with the federal government on behalf of clients with evidence of wrongdoing have raised more than $3 million so far for President Obama.
Their support comes as Mitt Romney, the Republican presidential nominee, has called for repeal of the Dodd-Frank Act, which imposed new oversight of the financial services industry and expanded the government’s whistle-blower program to the Securities and Exchange Commission, which has set aside $430 million for payouts. Business groups pushed for legislation imposing a cap on payments to whistle-blowers, arguing that rewards reaching as high as $104 million, have turned anti-fraud efforts into a lottery.
Johnny Blade
12:51 pm on Wednesday, October 17, 2012
Free LED TV's, to go with my free food, free phone, free healthcare .... Woooo more free stuff
Bernard Forand
8:16 pm on Wednesday, October 17, 2012
Notice the right wing nuts are reduced to their usual spittle. They are deflating. Observe the Hoffas; Take all of their comments and place them on a slide. Put it under an electron microscope and poof nothing there. The Hoffas are but the shadows of a non substance. Merely a void within a void, where light can not reach.