@Hello59239 Republicans only have a majority in the H of R. Democrats still hold the senate (and without passing a budget for well over one thousand days). So theoretically the Dems still "control congress" because nothing the house passes ever gets through the senate. Obama loves to blame Republicans, but the truth is, his Dems havent passed much of his proposals either (his 2011 budget lost 98-0 last year in the Dem controlled senate).
This ad is absolutely hilarious, both because it has some truths and some lies. Yes democrats tax, but Republicans defense spending is no different. Either way the American people end up screwed. Time to get rid of both parties because neither has the answers.
Sen. Boxer has a perfect voting record of fighting for ave. taxpayers, a 100% rating from the independent not-for-profit public interest research group Citizens for Tax Justice that seeks reduction of the federal debt, adequate funding of key govt services (security, police, fire protection etc) & tax fairness for middle & low-income families vs big corporate tax avoidance, loopholes, & special interest breaks for the ultra wealthy via their powerful lawyers & lobbyists. Elect Boxer on Nov. 2.
@Durwood71 - No kidding! This spot would be considered clairvoyant, except for the fact that the Liberal mindset (high tax, government control, appease enemies) has been consistent for the last 50 years at least, and is entirely predictable.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Zucker is a fool. You shouldn't bite the hand that feeds you. I hope his (former) buddies in Hollywood crucify him without mercy. Considering that his moronic movies can only be appreciated by those whose IQ's fall below 75, it shouldn't be surprising that he would turn out to be a republican.
To me, the message here is that any government (regardless of the party control) is tyrannical if they can take away one's property for the sole purpose of giving it away to someone else. The power of the federal government (under both Republicans and Democrats) is far greater than it ever should be. Ayn Rand was right about the evil of "social justice," and how it becomes the sole focus of government's concern--and in the meantime, they enslave us all.
Congrats on your startup, pimpy. But as usual, youcan't to get beyond your example of war contractors. Aside from the fact that much of that $ is going foreign contractors, it isn't the same as stimulating the larger, ongoing job market. Meanwhile, jobs have disappeared, unemployment overall has only risen, and $ that could have gone into job-creating activities like rebuilding the infrastructure, health care, research, etc. ... disappeared into the Iraq hole.
You have a habit of substituting your opinions for facts, pimpy. The economy had uninterrupted expansion from March 1991 to March 2001. The 8 month dip that occurred at that time was not a recession, which is two successive quarters of a fall in GDP. In case you're not aware, the real recession began in December 2007.
The media here is saying the Governor is only taxing things that are bad for you. This would include Beer, Soap, and the usually items.
But how can itunes and membership to fitness clubs be bad for you???
Also, the state of Oregon is now wanting to tax you to by the mile you drive on top of by the gallon of gas!!!! This will cost the average person about $15 per month (for now)!!
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Was it when Zucker became a conservative that he became fully unfunny? There is parody here. It's the parody of Republican scare tactics. Unfortunately, I don't think David Zucker is in on the joke.
Who was it that first got to Zucker and dragged him to the right? Was it those contrarian South Park rapscallions when they mdae the BASEketball movie together? One would assume that Leslie Nielsen is a fairly liberal person, right? Or was Zucker just really upset with Ja Rule and Charlie Sheen after Scary Movie 3? Ah well, I suppose i can always go back and rewatch the "High Adventure" sketch from Kentucky Fried Movie and giggle apolitically at the microphone scraping the guy's head.
You see, the democrats sees $9.9 billion a month spent on the war in Iraq for about 7 years equals to 2 trillions. 9.9 x 12 = 118.8 billion. 118.8 x 7 = 831.6 billion. That's not even close to 2 trillion.
Obama's plan = 2 billion in spending 5 % will get a tax hike 95 % will get a tax cut ? Universal Healthcare
I'll be completely honest: Republicans seem to think that their candidate will completely eliminate taxes, while their opposing candidate will completely rape everyone with taxes. The former is ridiculous as the government would then have no money. The latter is ridiculous because no democrat has or ever will tax the majority of America more. It's scary to think people just above the poverty line protecting the multi-millionaires who don't give one shit about you.
How is this true at all? Which president spent a trillion dollars on a made up war and now wants to spend almost another trillion for a financial crisis he facilitated? Jingoistic republican propaganda.
personally i think its not about more budget, i think its more about budget management, we are very wasteful, if we spent more wisely, we wouldnt need all these taxes
...but then remember that Clinton also had a Republican Congress during the best times of the economy under his watch... same as Bush. VOTE AGAINT DEMOCRAT CHANGE... IT HURTS
Yep... though the Republicans during the Bush administration needed to get aired out. Brit Hume astutely observed that they could not even agree to put a moratorium on pork spending. The GOP needed (and possibly still needs) more responsible and consistent conservative actions to point to.
Pre-Democrat control of Congress Jan 2007, gasoline was about $2.00 and has since shot up to $4.00. Unemployment was 4.5%. It is now 6.0%. Many more items like this. This is the 'CHANGE' people voted for in 2006. Until then economic indicators that Democrats used to wave the Clinton flag of having a great economy were the same or even better under Bush until the Democrats took control of Congress...
Ya! Right!! The republican had control of the Congress for 12 years and Bush for 8 years...and we can all see what the f*cking republicans have done to our country...and "vihifilms" is telling us not trust the Democrats...and to trust the republicans again. What a joke. Only a total moron would fall for that fear & smear campaign. 8 yrs of Bush or McBush is enough.
from a non political point of view, zucker is a crappy film maker. Bad editing, bad acting direction, bad cinematography. Airplane was fucking funny because of the intentional errors and plot incoherences but really lame as a cinematic piece, and if he doesn´t explores that "intentional mistakes" element his work is boring.
I'm not against drilling. I'm against those who point to the high price of gas and say that drilling will lower the cost. We need petroleum for a variety of applications... Using nearly all of it to create gasoline to fuel our vehicles without actively pursuing an alternative that already exists is idiocy. We need to use wisely what little domestic petroleum we have left. Our country once led the world in technology and ingenuity. Why do we remain shackled to the internal combustion engine?
It's true Hybrid vehicles consume LESS gas, but they still consume gas. We have the technology to build fast, affordable, fully electric vehicles that can travel more than 100 miles on a single charge AND look just like vehicles on the road today. (Search: "Who Killed the Electric Car") Problem is corrupt politicians, whose power is lavishly funded with oil money, prefer to serve the short-term interests of greedy oil executives than the long-term interests of ordinary people like you.
Step away from the pump and look at the bigger picture. Based on current usage levels, by or before 2020 the world's supply of petroleum will fall below the level required to meet international demand. Unless we pursue renewable energy NOW as if it were the Space Race, the United States will reach a point where there is no longer enough oil to sustain civilization in its present form. Clearly, a comprehensive national oil savings strategy is the only real way to ensure America's energy security.
Nothing is safe! Nothing is safe! I am too well bred to respond to this in the language it deserves. We're trillions in the hole and the Republicans spent us there.
WOW. Propaganda sure is comical. Democrats want to tax us... no shit; thats how our government gets its funding. Self-serving conservative Republicans don't really like the idea of getting taxed more (even if they're wealthy and can afford it) because they ARE like spoiled children and what's sad is that they don't realize they are; they should be pittied, although it's hard when they have a strangle hold on ethics.
Wealthy, as defined by the democrats (Obama) is $42,000 a year income. When the AMT ban is lifted, by the democrats, that level income will be paying another $4000 a year in federal income taxes.
If my tax money goes to universal and affordable health coverage, good schools, a chance to attend college, job retraining, and affordable child care... I don't mind the taxes. It's about time we be more selfLESS Bulbo.
And what's your alternative, more trickle-down nonsense. No thanks. The rich stimulate themselves; not the economy. I'll be honest though; BOTH sides financially pander to the wealthy. A better solution would be a 50% marginal tax rate on those earning over $500,000 a year. Plus an annual wealth tax of a tenth of 1% on the net worth of people holding more than $5 million in total assets.
Job and GDP growth are always higher during democratic administrations. Republicans don't know how to manage the economy. All they can do is complain about taxes, as if we would have the quality of life we have in this country without a robust governmental sector.
Republicans have to keep telling themselves lies in order to continue to subscribe to a political ideology that justifies their own selfishness.
LOOK AT THE LAST TWO YEARS. Unemployment, foreclosures, credit woes, few are better off since The Democrats tookover congress.
In only 2 years GAS PRICES have doubled - and yet Democrats continue their 40 year collusion with the insane Environmental Lobby, to block supply and infrastructure increases that would otherwise reduce high prices.
the same way we paid for the debts raised during world war 2, ass hole. By becoming an even stronger industrial power house. How you gonna take money from everyone's employer to pay for social programs, but keep paychecks flowing to workers?
pimp, you better do a little homework before shooting off your cyber-mouth.
First of all, taxes were RAISED to pay for the costs of World War II.
Second, the fact is we are STILL paying on the costs of that war, even if you only consider veterans' benefits. (In fact, those payments were at their highest in 1993, nearly 50 years after the war ended).
WWII was also the single largest factor in ending the depression. hte military build up provided jobs and stimulated the economy to grow again. Don't you think stopping the Nazi's was worth the cost?
Not a very artful attempt to change the subject, pimpy.
The $3 trillion cost of this war is not the type of military spending that "stimulates the economy." Or do you think the billions we're paying to foreign contractors are going into American pockets? Do you think spending billions on long term health care and disability payments to injured vets lays the foundations for long-term growth the way investing in research, education or infrastructure would?
And BTW, the war was NOT the "biggest single factor in ending the depression." At least not in the way you mean. During the war, real gross private domestic investment tanked and real consumer well-being declined. However, unemployment rates declined dramatically because-guess what?- 22% of the prewar labor force was in the armed forces.
It was after the war, when market controls were loosened and investment began again, that the wartime investment in industrialization paid off.
Now you tell me whether that $3 trillion is being invested in upgrading our manufacturing capabilities, training a skilled workforce, subsidizing research and boosting science and technology, or providing a direct long-term benefit to the economic well-being of our citizens.
Why, it's been five years. Surely the economy has improved by this war, right? Lots of jobs have been created by this war, right?
And sure, invading Iraq was JUST like stopping the Nazis.
You brought up WWII, not me. Yet you still didn't answer if it was worth it or not.
You did however note that the war solved the unemployment problems of the era, giving all those soldiers training and all.
The global war on terror is every bit as important as stopping the Nazi's. Along the way, we freed a country from a ruthless dictator. You would have us abandon them to be oppressed yet again by the Iran insurgency. Which most likely would mean another Iraq war for our next generation.
Yes, lots of people were "employed" in the military during WWII. And how has our unemployment rate been affected by the war in Iraq? Hint: it hasn't.
About 40% of the troops in Iraq are Nat'l Guard or reserve, meaning that far from being trained for job skills, they were PULLED OUT of the workforce. And many of those formerly productive workers and their families will be living on taxpayer-funded disability for the rest of their lives.
For the last time you ignorant fuck: No one got pulled out of anywhere, it's a VOLUNTEER ARMY!! Get it through your skull! And less workers means more job OPENINGS to be filled=less unemployment. Unless you have a democrat congress to fuck up everything.
Seems YOU are too ignorant to use the "reply" function properly, pimpy. Otherwise, I would've been able to respond to your nonsense months ago. And I don't have to resort to obscenity to do it.
The question wasn't whether it's a volunteer Army, the question was whether people are getting job training that benefits them and the economy. I've already explained that isn't true when a Nat'l Guard member must leave his or her job to go to war for years at a time.
Oh, and as to that "more job openings" because workers are being sent to war, that wasn't the question.
And aside from the fact that federal law requires an employer to re-hire an employee who has left for military service for a period of up to five years, filling existing jobs, even temporarily, is NOT the same thing as creating jobs.
Those were all responses to your first ignorant post. Youtube only alerts you to the first one.
"question was whether people are getting job training that benefits them and the economy."
The military teaches leadership skills, and operational technical knowledge in a multitude of trades. I learned how to use infrared optical equipment that I now use in my own small business, with over 20employees!
Say, why is the predictive stock market crashing now that Bush is out of office?
Pimpy sez: "Those were all responses to your first ignorant post. Youtube only alerts you to the first one. "
Yep, that must be why they don't show up in the threaded responses. Uh huh.
When you couldn't show the war actually created jobs, you retreated to a silly claim that soldiers get great job training. The point was that people are leaving jobs they're trained for to fight a war for years at a time. Your response: "Hey, it's a volunteer Army! And plus, I learned how to use a machine!"
You have to look further, moron, you only get to reply to one post at a time, look at your other posts!
Again, your question was: "whether people are getting job training that benefits them and the economy."
Which I answered. As far as war creating jobs, uh, grab a history book and look up how we really got out of the great depression (it wasn't the New Deal!)
So machine operators are what? Too low class for you, not a glamorous enough way to support a family for you?
I wouldn't be so quick to call other people morons.
If you sign up for it, you will be notified when someone uses the "reply" button on your comment to respond. No matter how many replies they make to the comment.
That's YouTube 101. You could look it up, but I know you won't bother. Too easy to blame your mistakes on everybody else.
And I've already answered your simplistic claim about WWII and the Depression. You could look that one up, too, but you probably won't.
For one, no that's not how You tube works. You replied to me at least twice in in one visit to this page and I was only notified of one. But that of course is just getting off the topic you have wondered away from. I wonder why..........
"Too easy to blame your mistakes on everybody else."
Uh, blaming your problems on somebody else is the religion of liberals.
The only "misunderstanding" was whether someone is being notified on the YouTube page or via e-mail. As I said, if you had used the reply function properly, I would have been able to respond at the time. As it was, your comments appeared at random much later on the page...really helpful to all the other readers, pimpy.
I've responded to every one of your silly, pointless claims. You just don't seem able to back them up.
Actually, you haven't responded to what I said last. I informed you about how your beliefs regarding the economy are wrong, by illustrating how Clinton merely rode on Bush and Reagan's coattails, and you dove into 2 days worth of ranting about Youtube's reply button.
So I'll ask one last time; do you have anything more to add to the topic at hand?
It seems you have nothing to add to the topic at hand, pimpy. You merely change the subject when you're unable to prove a point.
For example, you have never explained exactly how the Iraq war created jobs. Nor have you explained exactly how 9/11 affected business investment, real estate investment, and savings as shares of the GDP.
And if you want to talk about coattails, you have yet to explain how GWB managed to squander the surplus Clinton left him.
I was on topic, you went off on a tangent about the reply function.
The subject of economic benefits to war was more focused on WWII, and how everyone got put back to work building equipment for the effort. The Iraq war has seen numerous start up companies given contracts to develop software, unmanned vehicles, and protection equipment. I wouldn't expect you to know that though, I'm sure you believe war is all about sending kids to get killed or something retarded like that.
Your comment is a real mess. You tried to defend your ideas about Iraq by bringing up WWII, and of course your points on that score were and are simplistic and just plain wrong. Go back and read my detailed responses.
Numerous start up companies? Links please. Be specific.
WWII ended the great depression, anyone who knows their ass from a hole in the ground understands this.
As for Iraq, they trained me, and contracted with my startup to continue my work examining discovered secret weapons labs in Iraq (that I'm sure you never heard of.) Check UltraElectronics, a company thriving on buying up war contractor startups (hopefully including mine!)
Boy, you sure have a short memory span, pimpy. I've already told you employment went down in WWII because everybody was in the military (it went up after the war), and there were strict price controls, investment limits, and rationing during the war. The war was financed with borrowing. It was only after the war that private investment flourished.
So...UNemployment went down during the war. Right, what I said.
The point is not comparing Iraq and WWII, the point is that war does not drain an economy. And Neither has Iraq. The economy saw nothing but growth during the bulk of operations in Iraq. No we're not seeing any kind postponed effects either. This economic downturn is a result of liberal regulatory practices, plain and simple. Throw Dodd, Frank, and Reines in prison and let businesses fail.
Hint to pimpy: joining the military is not the same as entering the labor force. Your entire point HAS been comparing Iraq to WWII, which I guess you now realize is silly. Very well.
As to the economy seeing "nothing but growth during the bulk of operations," I suggest you take a good look at the economic indicators over the last six years before making such an easily disprovable claim.
First off, my point has been countering yours flawed concept that liberal economic policy is what ended the depression. You then countered with a recycled tired diatribe about Iraq, since you obviously discovered I was right about WWII. The Bush years saw mostly positive growth in GDP, you're plain wrong.
And now you're complaining about $3 Trillion spent in Iraq. How about the failed "war on poverty." Ever bothered to look up how much we have wasted there?! At least Iraq got results!
Let me know how all that "rebuilding" goes now that we know Obama's plan will leave us over 9 trillion in the red for the next decade!
You don't need luck when you have talent. But you wouldn't know that, would you?
And now I suggest you go back and read my original posts about the $3 trillion in TRUE COSTS of this war. You know, the costs of lifetime disability payments and medical care, the loss in earning potential, the $ that could have been spent strengthening the economy by rebuilding infrastructure, funding education and scientific research, etc.
But when I've laid out apples, you've responded with oranges and more oranges .
Every cent of which went back into the free market as paychecks for contractors building war supplies. Unlike Clinton who just kept all of it and let the market starve to death. Let me make this easy on you, liberal thinking has never, NEVER benefitted the economy.
Clinton only had a surplus because he started draining money out of the market and into government stockpiles, doing nothing! We were in a recession when Clinton left office, remember. And Clinton didn't even have a liberal policy timebomb going off in the housing market like Bush did.
We are talking about getting a reply in your "Inbox", in which case you only get one per person, per visit to a page. Here, If there is another post of yours on this page I will reply on it, but you won't get notified in your inbox.
PS to Pimpy, YOU might be talking about your YouTube inbox, but I am talking about e-mail notification.
If you sign up for it, when someone uses the "reply" function to respond to a comment it will show up in your e-mail inbox, no matter how many times that person replies to the same comment.
If you had bothered to use the "reply" function, I would have known about your silly comments and been able to respond months ago. Evidently that's too complicated for ya.
I figured you might be talking about something else.
But, the only reason I wouldn't hit reply on your post is if I was talking to someone else. You probably just assumed everything being said was about you, typical of a self centered liberal.
Was WWII worth the cost? Sure. People thought so at the time, and were willing to sacrifice, and raise taxes and buy war bonds and have strict price controls and ration goods to pay for it. Us? We just put it on the credit card for the grandkids.
The invasion of Iraq is a small part of the greater war against islamic extremism. How are you so ignorant that you don't see that after all this time. It had very little to do with WMD intelligence ( and you can hang more of that fuck up on Clinton than Bush) The islamists have every intention of putting you under there command, or cut off your head, and not becuase of any politcal policy or foreign relations blunder from the 70's. They are every bit a threat to you as the Nazis were, moron.
"Lot's of jobs have been created by this war?" Well, yeah! You have any idea how many people work for military contractors? How many of those volunteers will get a college education along with the training they received form the military?
News flash: Bush inherited a recession and has had 8 years of growth! And unemployment was actually 2 points higher than it is now, Clinton called it "Full employment." Look the facts just don't justify your partisan hatred, get over it.
Guess what pimpy, the highest unemployment rate in 2000 was 4.1%. Today it is 5.7%.
8 years of growth? Right, bigger debt and deficit, higher unemployment, bear market, higher energy costs, median household income lower than in 2000, and oh yeah, how's the housing market doin'?
GDP has had positive growth for the last 8 years dipshit, it's a fact! Apparently you missed the fact that the unemployment rate only started going up after your dumbass democrat congress raised the minimum wage. Or is the fact that the job losses are hitting the entry level and unskilled job markets just too much for you to contemplate? And if everythings going downward, I guess the only explanation for the lowering cost of Oil is Bush lifting the executive drilling ban right? Newb
If you're talking to me with that "GDP positive growth for 8 yrs" business, pimpy, you'd better do better research.
First of all, real GDP increased from 2000 to 2008 at an annual average of only about 2.3% per year. Second, national savings as a share of GDP declined below 2000 levels, and so has business investment overall (despite all those tax breaks) and real estate investment.
And what exactly did any of this have to do with the topic?
"GDP increased from 2000 to 2008 at an annual average of only about 2.3% per year."
Only?!?!!
You think Obama's policy could survive a terrorst attack targetted at our financial system? Even Obama admitted that an economic downturn is not the best time to institute his socialist agenda. What you have to ask yourself is, if it's not beneficial to a downturn, how would it ever spur growth during a recovery?! Oh i know, "fairness" trumps real economic growth, right? Sucker.
Exactly how did September 11 affect business investment, real estate investment, and savings as shares of the GDP, despite massive tax breaks? Be specific.
And by the way, the real GDP average annual increase during the Clinton years was 3.71%.
Google 9/11 effects on economy dork, you should get about 19 million results. My job isn't to educate you, it's debunk your idiotic claims.
If you don't see how the destruction of the "World Trade Center" is an attack on economics, you need to go back to middle school.
Clinton rode along on the Reagan Bush tax plan that created the tech boom. Didn't you notice the bubble burst during Clinton's second term, when he actually reversed the Republican tax policy?
Military contractors? Care to guess how many of those jobs are overseas? College for military volunteers? You get it for being active duty, whether you're in a war or not. Job training? See my earlier post, re workers being PULLED OUT of the workforce by this war.
Ahhh, the failed 'War On Poverty' that President Johnson started 40 some years ago. What a boondoggle! The poverty rate hasn't gone down 1% and still they fund it. Sickening!
Anyone who has gotten their head out of Limbaugh's and Hannity's ass long enough to look around knows that Republicans have LIBERAL fiscal policies. Meaning that they spend money very liberally. They can't conserve our national trust. They are in favor of exporting jobs very liberally. Where as Democrats conserve the public wealth, balance our national debt and improve the quality of life for all for using governmental power intelligently instead of recklessly... Look at FDR! 4 terms mofo!
Yes indeed, look at FDR - a government riddled with communists. The WAR got us out of the depression, despite FDR and the communists that were in his government. He was soooo wonderful for all the people that fell to the Iron Curtain when he and Stalin divided Europe up in Yalta.
As for your "the public wealth" - spoken like a true socialist. I agree the GOP spent like liberal democrats under Bush. Democrats improve the quality of life? How? By making our poor (welfare recipients) fat and lazy?
Screw the liberals and the Democratic views. MCCAIN!!!!!!!!!!!! Horray for tax cuts! Fuck you assholes saying "liek omg tax da rich ppl cuz they hav mor money than me". Well you know what? Maybe you should've tried harder in high school and college and maybe you would've gotten a good job. Whine on your own time. I know people who are rich who already pay 40% taxes and that's totally retarded.
The dollar has declined in value 40% since 01. Republicans had a 6 YEAR MAJORITY in the Senate AND House AND had a sitting President that named anyone who wouldn't bow traitorous. What happened under their reign? Free trade is dead. Republican deregulation failed. And the middle class tax payer is picking up the bill and bailing out CORPORATIONS that cheated themselves into failure!?! Please don't talk to me about naivety and arrogance there is nothing conservative about conservatives anymore.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
If this video's intended audience is intended to cater to the sensibility wealthiest 1%, like all RNC programs & propaganda, then in its true.
But if you're in the majority, the 99% large majority, you'd do yourself a benefit by doing research.
It is Barack Obama that wants to give the largest tax cuts to us. All while wants to balance the budget - how? By not spending a trillion $ on a war/instigating war with Iran and by ending subsidies to corporations who outsource our jobs overseas.
long live liberal Ideals..let people live there lives the way they want and keep your nose out of others buisiness..oh yea and to hell with big government and new laws.. GO OBAMA!!!!get use to it yuppies and rednecks because obama is coming to town..
David, as a Republican, I'm no Bush-fan but his tax cuts did stimulate growth. Bush is screwing us with increasing the size of government, the wars our draining our resources and the Congress keeps overtaxing us. It's not just Bush and the neo-cons, it's the Democrats and their liberal agenda as well. Both of them are screwing all of us.
@Hello59239 Republicans only have a majority in the H of R. Democrats still hold the senate (and without passing a budget for well over one thousand days). So theoretically the Dems still "control congress" because nothing the house passes ever gets through the senate. Obama loves to blame Republicans, but the truth is, his Dems havent passed much of his proposals either (his 2011 budget lost 98-0 last year in the Dem controlled senate).
Brianpcooney 3 weeks ago
This ad is absolutely hilarious, both because it has some truths and some lies. Yes democrats tax, but Republicans defense spending is no different. Either way the American people end up screwed. Time to get rid of both parties because neither has the answers.
xblackstallionx 8 months ago
zucker saw the light. too bad the other left elitists in hollywood never will
zillsburyy 1 year ago 3
Sen. Boxer has a perfect voting record of fighting for ave. taxpayers, a 100% rating from the independent not-for-profit public interest research group Citizens for Tax Justice that seeks reduction of the federal debt, adequate funding of key govt services (security, police, fire protection etc) & tax fairness for middle & low-income families vs big corporate tax avoidance, loopholes, & special interest breaks for the ultra wealthy via their powerful lawyers & lobbyists. Elect Boxer on Nov. 2.
WALRU11 1 year ago
Dang, this was posted in 2006? I assumed it was recent ad about Obama and his cronies.
Durwood71 1 year ago 2
@Durwood71 - No kidding! This spot would be considered clairvoyant, except for the fact that the Liberal mindset (high tax, government control, appease enemies) has been consistent for the last 50 years at least, and is entirely predictable.
Very well done, Zucker!
jmprov356 1 year ago 3
Lol thats how you feel when you go to Camden NJ.
ManMadeLego 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Zucker is a fool. You shouldn't bite the hand that feeds you. I hope his (former) buddies in Hollywood crucify him without mercy. Considering that his moronic movies can only be appreciated by those whose IQ's fall below 75, it shouldn't be surprising that he would turn out to be a republican.
bedpanX 1 year ago
was that Ted from scrubs?
TheHeadCasey 2 years ago
I can't believe that since Obama took office that my taxes at my 7.50 an hour job were raised! Oh wait.
CabinetSquirrel 2 years ago
I saw this a year ago and it only got popular when everything started to fall apart.
TheyHearUsNow 2 years ago 5
To me, the message here is that any government (regardless of the party control) is tyrannical if they can take away one's property for the sole purpose of giving it away to someone else. The power of the federal government (under both Republicans and Democrats) is far greater than it ever should be. Ayn Rand was right about the evil of "social justice," and how it becomes the sole focus of government's concern--and in the meantime, they enslave us all.
yohannbiimu 2 years ago 10
"Give me... the death of liberty!" Obama
JackJ1957 2 years ago 7
Get ready for the health care tax. It's all a scam. OBama is fucking up this country with Pelosi.
borbonic 2 years ago 27
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Average american family in GOP language THE EXTREMLY WEALTHY
Abridgedfan134 2 years ago
Funny, but all too true. Laugh till I cried.
NikeChillemi 2 years ago 5
Ohh Eee oh!! OOOOO-Oh!!!
tuttt99 2 years ago
Comment removed
GrammyEm50 3 years ago
Cont'd
Congrats on your startup, pimpy. But as usual, youcan't to get beyond your example of war contractors. Aside from the fact that much of that $ is going foreign contractors, it isn't the same as stimulating the larger, ongoing job market. Meanwhile, jobs have disappeared, unemployment overall has only risen, and $ that could have gone into job-creating activities like rebuilding the infrastructure, health care, research, etc. ... disappeared into the Iraq hole.
zuzukachoo 3 years ago
You have a habit of substituting your opinions for facts, pimpy. The economy had uninterrupted expansion from March 1991 to March 2001. The 8 month dip that occurred at that time was not a recession, which is two successive quarters of a fall in GDP. In case you're not aware, the real recession began in December 2007.
zuzukachoo 3 years ago
Not only is this ad a complete exaggeration, but the republicans would be telling the first guy which hole he can put his dick into.
Talk about government control.
keyboardplaya 3 years ago
Of course I heard about taxing non-diet soda. (When the state wants more money they will then include all soda.)
I joked at work if the great state of New York had a way of taxing sex they would do it!!! My boss replied that he gets a refund.
b5kalad 3 years ago
scary its exactly whats happening now
jonkauffman 3 years ago
Tell me about it. I live in New York.
b5kalad 3 years ago
Yeah I heard NY taxes on itunes downloads.
dingorex 3 years ago
The media here is saying the Governor is only taxing things that are bad for you. This would include Beer, Soap, and the usually items.
But how can itunes and membership to fitness clubs be bad for you???
Also, the state of Oregon is now wanting to tax you to by the mile you drive on top of by the gallon of gas!!!! This will cost the average person about $15 per month (for now)!!
b5kalad 3 years ago
Does the idea of cutting spending, even just wasteful spending, ever enter Big Government's Little minds???
If the Federals increase taxes on natural gas and petroleum, I say we march on Washington.
This spending spree has gone on long enough.
dingorex 3 years ago 2
but you, citizens of United Stated, stay supporting the war.
i am costarican and we don't have any army since 1949. we have better indexes of education that U.S. and we are only 4 million people.
Those excessive taxes you pay are been used in the war.
guapiles 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Was it when Zucker became a conservative that he became fully unfunny? There is parody here. It's the parody of Republican scare tactics. Unfortunately, I don't think David Zucker is in on the joke.
ToInternetsWithAngst 3 years ago
Yet, if you live in New York like me this is now real!! Our Governor (a democrat) has 88 new taxes.
This will include:
a) cable tv
b) soap (15%)
c) increase in drive licenses
d) itunes (yes itunes!!!)
e) membership to a gym or fitness center
f) of course, an increase to gas (another 8 to 10 cents)
etc, etc, etc
What not cut spending first!!!!
b5kalad 3 years ago
Who was it that first got to Zucker and dragged him to the right? Was it those contrarian South Park rapscallions when they mdae the BASEketball movie together? One would assume that Leslie Nielsen is a fairly liberal person, right? Or was Zucker just really upset with Ja Rule and Charlie Sheen after Scary Movie 3? Ah well, I suppose i can always go back and rewatch the "High Adventure" sketch from Kentucky Fried Movie and giggle apolitically at the microphone scraping the guy's head.
TheArtOfTheComment 3 years ago
fuck dems and their god obama
dvfball33 3 years ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Fuck Zuckerman. He only ever made one good movie anyway.
strangeman32 3 years ago
8 years Clinton-D, US = $200 Billion surplus
8 years Bush-R, US = $ 438 Billion deficit
derklim 3 years ago
8 years Clinton, US = $200 Billion surplus
8 years Bush-R, US = $ 438 Billion deficit
derklim 3 years ago
Great post very true
cdman12345 3 years ago
You see, the democrats sees $9.9 billion a month spent on the war in Iraq for about 7 years equals to 2 trillions. 9.9 x 12 = 118.8 billion. 118.8 x 7 = 831.6 billion. That's not even close to 2 trillion.
Obama's plan = 2 billion in spending 5 % will get a tax hike 95 % will get a tax cut ? Universal Healthcare
elitenova 3 years ago
Democrats say they won't tax the poor. Tell that to the people of Obamas home state. Over 10 perent sales tax in some places.
mainebay 3 years ago 2
Considering that sales tax is state regulated, that 'piece of evidence' is in fact, a POS. :D
metaleggman18 3 years ago
Democrats control the state. If Obama wins this country will see more taxes then you have ever seen. Obama wants a "world tax" .
nesnman 3 years ago 5
I'll be completely honest: Republicans seem to think that their candidate will completely eliminate taxes, while their opposing candidate will completely rape everyone with taxes. The former is ridiculous as the government would then have no money. The latter is ridiculous because no democrat has or ever will tax the majority of America more. It's scary to think people just above the poverty line protecting the multi-millionaires who don't give one shit about you.
metaleggman18 3 years ago
How is this true at all? Which president spent a trillion dollars on a made up war and now wants to spend almost another trillion for a financial crisis he facilitated? Jingoistic republican propaganda.
martyyu 3 years ago
The democrats caused this latest financial crisis, you liar.
observer75 3 years ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
haha. Maybe if you keep telling yourself that it will become true.
MrMuskOx 3 years ago
democrats responsible for reckless spending...that really is funny
drlorax 3 years ago 2
well... it was funny
Riverdante 3 years ago 4
how dare they try to "recklessly spend" on stuff with real money and not debt and credit!
SFrostee 3 years ago 3
hahaha i fucking love it good vid post
xman6918 3 years ago
I don't usually advocate new bureaucracy, but I think Zucker should be appointed as National Czar of Comedy and Minister of Democrat Oversight.
patriotfront 3 years ago 3
crazy, but very true
sellblock1138 3 years ago
hahaha congress has a 11% approval rating and Bush has a 33%....wow, stupid democratic congress!
ramblinhaze 3 years ago 15
Amazing stuff.....
mrstickball 3 years ago
@ramblinhaze how do u compare approval ratings of one person to an entire group? quantam leap much?
xis10ce 1 year ago
@ramblinhaze
Now Obama has a 46% approval rating, Republican Congress at about 10%.
Hello59239 8 months ago 2
personally i think its not about more budget, i think its more about budget management, we are very wasteful, if we spent more wisely, we wouldnt need all these taxes
imaoldkidnow 3 years ago 2
The Democrats are the most vicious enemy this country has, just that they hide it well under their sense of "compassion".
DoubleGauss 3 years ago 4
Ironically their compassionate policies have resulted in the destruction of whole demographics of people and an unmanageable bureaucratic machine :(
chukmaty 3 years ago 3
great vid! thanks a lot
fuxutoo 3 years ago 3
...but then remember that Clinton also had a Republican Congress during the best times of the economy under his watch... same as Bush. VOTE AGAINT DEMOCRAT CHANGE... IT HURTS
johnsomebody1 3 years ago 2
Yep... though the Republicans during the Bush administration needed to get aired out. Brit Hume astutely observed that they could not even agree to put a moratorium on pork spending. The GOP needed (and possibly still needs) more responsible and consistent conservative actions to point to.
chukmaty 3 years ago 2
Pre-Democrat control of Congress Jan 2007, gasoline was about $2.00 and has since shot up to $4.00. Unemployment was 4.5%. It is now 6.0%. Many more items like this. This is the 'CHANGE' people voted for in 2006. Until then economic indicators that Democrats used to wave the Clinton flag of having a great economy were the same or even better under Bush until the Democrats took control of Congress...
johnsomebody1 3 years ago
Ya! Right!! The republican had control of the Congress for 12 years and Bush for 8 years...and we can all see what the f*cking republicans have done to our country...and "vihifilms" is telling us not trust the Democrats...and to trust the republicans again. What a joke. Only a total moron would fall for that fear & smear campaign. 8 yrs of Bush or McBush is enough.
Barack HOPE Obama/Joe Biden 08
librophile 3 years ago
from a non political point of view, zucker is a crappy film maker. Bad editing, bad acting direction, bad cinematography. Airplane was fucking funny because of the intentional errors and plot incoherences but really lame as a cinematic piece, and if he doesn´t explores that "intentional mistakes" element his work is boring.
badseed136 3 years ago
he has already endorsed Obama though , "I like my coffee black just like my men"
bundy5000 3 years ago
The United States of America is so sick that it is coughing up blood and any chance of a cure is going to be costly.
Reckless spending and screwing over the average American is exactly why the country is failing, only just not through taxes...
Anyone like Zucker or supporting Zucker's view is speeding his own nation to either bankruptcy or the grave...
Don't check the facts, don't think for yourself, just bites the helping hand that wants to pull you out of this crisis
NeoApocalypse 3 years ago
yawn
brickell4brickell4 3 years ago
Masterful reply
Did it take you much time to produce?
NeoApocalypse 3 years ago
LOL!!!
antodav 3 years ago
Democrats are basically insane-- if Barack gets elected I'm getting out of this country!
unholywood07 3 years ago
I'm going with you
yossarian112 3 years ago 2
George Bush likes to joke that he was a C student in college.
Senator McCain admits he graduated 5th to the bottom in his class of 899 students.
Can we afford 4 more years of another president who couldn't make the grade?
Search YouTube for: "McCain Smart to be Dumb"
Teriyaki07 3 years ago
there isn't a country in the world that's strong enough to "afford" BARACK OBAMA
brickell4brickell4 3 years ago
America IS strong enough. Perhaps it is you who is too weak-minded.
Teriyaki07 3 years ago
This isn't that different from what actually happens. Protect your money, vote McCain!
gransasso22 3 years ago
Say what you want, but if played right, women in labor can be comedy gold!
WildmanWoodie 3 years ago
I'm not against drilling. I'm against those who point to the high price of gas and say that drilling will lower the cost. We need petroleum for a variety of applications... Using nearly all of it to create gasoline to fuel our vehicles without actively pursuing an alternative that already exists is idiocy. We need to use wisely what little domestic petroleum we have left. Our country once led the world in technology and ingenuity. Why do we remain shackled to the internal combustion engine?
Teriyaki07 3 years ago
It's true Hybrid vehicles consume LESS gas, but they still consume gas. We have the technology to build fast, affordable, fully electric vehicles that can travel more than 100 miles on a single charge AND look just like vehicles on the road today. (Search: "Who Killed the Electric Car") Problem is corrupt politicians, whose power is lavishly funded with oil money, prefer to serve the short-term interests of greedy oil executives than the long-term interests of ordinary people like you.
Teriyaki07 3 years ago
Step away from the pump and look at the bigger picture. Based on current usage levels, by or before 2020 the world's supply of petroleum will fall below the level required to meet international demand. Unless we pursue renewable energy NOW as if it were the Space Race, the United States will reach a point where there is no longer enough oil to sustain civilization in its present form. Clearly, a comprehensive national oil savings strategy is the only real way to ensure America's energy security.
Teriyaki07 3 years ago
Nothing is safe! Nothing is safe! I am too well bred to respond to this in the language it deserves. We're trillions in the hole and the Republicans spent us there.
regisgoat 3 years ago
this is such shit
TheThirdRevelation 3 years ago
WOW. Propaganda sure is comical. Democrats want to tax us... no shit; thats how our government gets its funding. Self-serving conservative Republicans don't really like the idea of getting taxed more (even if they're wealthy and can afford it) because they ARE like spoiled children and what's sad is that they don't realize they are; they should be pittied, although it's hard when they have a strangle hold on ethics.
TheGlassPriest 3 years ago
Wealthy, as defined by the democrats (Obama) is $42,000 a year income. When the AMT ban is lifted, by the democrats, that level income will be paying another $4000 a year in federal income taxes.
BulboLives 3 years ago
If my tax money goes to universal and affordable health coverage, good schools, a chance to attend college, job retraining, and affordable child care... I don't mind the taxes. It's about time we be more selfLESS Bulbo.
TheGlassPriest 3 years ago
And what's your alternative, more trickle-down nonsense. No thanks. The rich stimulate themselves; not the economy. I'll be honest though; BOTH sides financially pander to the wealthy. A better solution would be a 50% marginal tax rate on those earning over $500,000 a year. Plus an annual wealth tax of a tenth of 1% on the net worth of people holding more than $5 million in total assets.
TheGlassPriest 3 years ago
Job and GDP growth are always higher during democratic administrations. Republicans don't know how to manage the economy. All they can do is complain about taxes, as if we would have the quality of life we have in this country without a robust governmental sector.
Republicans have to keep telling themselves lies in order to continue to subscribe to a political ideology that justifies their own selfishness.
cominginsecond 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Ronald "Fiscal Conservative" Regan = $200 Billion Deficit
George "Fiscal Conservative" Bush (41) = $300 Billion Deficit
Bill "Tax & Spend Liberal" Clinton = $200 Billion SURPLUS!
George "Fiscal Conservative" Bush (43) = $482 Billion Deficit
John "Fiscal Conservative" McCain = Do the math!!
Say NO to JOHN "MR. MAGOO" AKA "LIL'HALF DEAD" McCAIN!
OBAMA '08!
NoMagoo08 3 years ago
LOOK AT THE LAST TWO YEARS. Unemployment, foreclosures, credit woes, few are better off since The Democrats tookover congress.
In only 2 years GAS PRICES have doubled - and yet Democrats continue their 40 year collusion with the insane Environmental Lobby, to block supply and infrastructure increases that would otherwise reduce high prices.
85Scott 3 years ago 2
Say Zucker, how do you propose paying for that THREE TRILLION DOLLAR war?
zuzukachoo 3 years ago
the same way we paid for the debts raised during world war 2, ass hole. By becoming an even stronger industrial power house. How you gonna take money from everyone's employer to pay for social programs, but keep paychecks flowing to workers?
pimpdalyrical 3 years ago
pimp, you better do a little homework before shooting off your cyber-mouth.
First of all, taxes were RAISED to pay for the costs of World War II.
Second, the fact is we are STILL paying on the costs of that war, even if you only consider veterans' benefits. (In fact, those payments were at their highest in 1993, nearly 50 years after the war ended).
zuzukachoo 3 years ago
WWII was also the single largest factor in ending the depression. hte military build up provided jobs and stimulated the economy to grow again. Don't you think stopping the Nazi's was worth the cost?
pimpdalyrical 3 years ago
Not a very artful attempt to change the subject, pimpy.
The $3 trillion cost of this war is not the type of military spending that "stimulates the economy." Or do you think the billions we're paying to foreign contractors are going into American pockets? Do you think spending billions on long term health care and disability payments to injured vets lays the foundations for long-term growth the way investing in research, education or infrastructure would?
cont'd below
zuzukachoo 3 years ago
And BTW, the war was NOT the "biggest single factor in ending the depression." At least not in the way you mean. During the war, real gross private domestic investment tanked and real consumer well-being declined. However, unemployment rates declined dramatically because-guess what?- 22% of the prewar labor force was in the armed forces.
It was after the war, when market controls were loosened and investment began again, that the wartime investment in industrialization paid off.
cont'd
zuzukachoo 3 years ago
Now you tell me whether that $3 trillion is being invested in upgrading our manufacturing capabilities, training a skilled workforce, subsidizing research and boosting science and technology, or providing a direct long-term benefit to the economic well-being of our citizens.
Why, it's been five years. Surely the economy has improved by this war, right? Lots of jobs have been created by this war, right?
And sure, invading Iraq was JUST like stopping the Nazis.
zuzukachoo 3 years ago
You brought up WWII, not me. Yet you still didn't answer if it was worth it or not.
You did however note that the war solved the unemployment problems of the era, giving all those soldiers training and all.
The global war on terror is every bit as important as stopping the Nazi's. Along the way, we freed a country from a ruthless dictator. You would have us abandon them to be oppressed yet again by the Iran insurgency. Which most likely would mean another Iraq war for our next generation.
pimpdalyrical 3 years ago
No pimpy, YOU brought up WWII. Oops.
Yes, lots of people were "employed" in the military during WWII. And how has our unemployment rate been affected by the war in Iraq? Hint: it hasn't.
About 40% of the troops in Iraq are Nat'l Guard or reserve, meaning that far from being trained for job skills, they were PULLED OUT of the workforce. And many of those formerly productive workers and their families will be living on taxpayer-funded disability for the rest of their lives.
cont'd
zuzukachoo 3 years ago
For the last time you ignorant fuck: No one got pulled out of anywhere, it's a VOLUNTEER ARMY!! Get it through your skull! And less workers means more job OPENINGS to be filled=less unemployment. Unless you have a democrat congress to fuck up everything.
pimpdalyrical 3 years ago
Seems YOU are too ignorant to use the "reply" function properly, pimpy. Otherwise, I would've been able to respond to your nonsense months ago. And I don't have to resort to obscenity to do it.
The question wasn't whether it's a volunteer Army, the question was whether people are getting job training that benefits them and the economy. I've already explained that isn't true when a Nat'l Guard member must leave his or her job to go to war for years at a time.
cont'd below
zuzukachoo 3 years ago
Oh, and as to that "more job openings" because workers are being sent to war, that wasn't the question.
And aside from the fact that federal law requires an employer to re-hire an employee who has left for military service for a period of up to five years, filling existing jobs, even temporarily, is NOT the same thing as creating jobs.
zuzukachoo 3 years ago
Those were all responses to your first ignorant post. Youtube only alerts you to the first one.
"question was whether people are getting job training that benefits them and the economy."
The military teaches leadership skills, and operational technical knowledge in a multitude of trades. I learned how to use infrared optical equipment that I now use in my own small business, with over 20employees!
Say, why is the predictive stock market crashing now that Bush is out of office?
pimpdalyrical 3 years ago
Pimpy sez: "Those were all responses to your first ignorant post. Youtube only alerts you to the first one. "
Yep, that must be why they don't show up in the threaded responses. Uh huh.
When you couldn't show the war actually created jobs, you retreated to a silly claim that soldiers get great job training. The point was that people are leaving jobs they're trained for to fight a war for years at a time. Your response: "Hey, it's a volunteer Army! And plus, I learned how to use a machine!"
zuzukachoo 3 years ago
You have to look further, moron, you only get to reply to one post at a time, look at your other posts!
Again, your question was: "whether people are getting job training that benefits them and the economy."
Which I answered. As far as war creating jobs, uh, grab a history book and look up how we really got out of the great depression (it wasn't the New Deal!)
So machine operators are what? Too low class for you, not a glamorous enough way to support a family for you?
pimpdalyrical 3 years ago
Dear pimpy -
I wouldn't be so quick to call other people morons.
If you sign up for it, you will be notified when someone uses the "reply" button on your comment to respond. No matter how many replies they make to the comment.
That's YouTube 101. You could look it up, but I know you won't bother. Too easy to blame your mistakes on everybody else.
And I've already answered your simplistic claim about WWII and the Depression. You could look that one up, too, but you probably won't.
zuzukachoo 3 years ago
For one, no that's not how You tube works. You replied to me at least twice in in one visit to this page and I was only notified of one. But that of course is just getting off the topic you have wondered away from. I wonder why..........
"Too easy to blame your mistakes on everybody else."
Uh, blaming your problems on somebody else is the religion of liberals.
Hello kettle, this is pot, you're black too!
pimpdalyrical 3 years ago
Yeah, I knew you wouldn't bother to find out. Thanks for proving my point for me.
zuzukachoo 3 years ago
So, I take it you have no further arguments of substance on the topic at hand?
Thanks for proving my point as well.
Consider yourself owned.
pimpdalyrical 3 years ago
I consider myself slightly amused by your utter lack of a sense of self-irony.
zuzukachoo 3 years ago
You ready to get back on topic, or you still clinging to this stupid Reply function misunderstanding? Don't be scared, i'll be gentle.
pimpdalyrical 3 years ago
The only "misunderstanding" was whether someone is being notified on the YouTube page or via e-mail. As I said, if you had used the reply function properly, I would have been able to respond at the time. As it was, your comments appeared at random much later on the page...really helpful to all the other readers, pimpy.
I've responded to every one of your silly, pointless claims. You just don't seem able to back them up.
zuzukachoo 3 years ago
Actually, you haven't responded to what I said last. I informed you about how your beliefs regarding the economy are wrong, by illustrating how Clinton merely rode on Bush and Reagan's coattails, and you dove into 2 days worth of ranting about Youtube's reply button.
So I'll ask one last time; do you have anything more to add to the topic at hand?
pimpdalyrical 3 years ago
It seems you have nothing to add to the topic at hand, pimpy. You merely change the subject when you're unable to prove a point.
For example, you have never explained exactly how the Iraq war created jobs. Nor have you explained exactly how 9/11 affected business investment, real estate investment, and savings as shares of the GDP.
And if you want to talk about coattails, you have yet to explain how GWB managed to squander the surplus Clinton left him.
zuzukachoo 3 years ago
I was on topic, you went off on a tangent about the reply function.
The subject of economic benefits to war was more focused on WWII, and how everyone got put back to work building equipment for the effort. The Iraq war has seen numerous start up companies given contracts to develop software, unmanned vehicles, and protection equipment. I wouldn't expect you to know that though, I'm sure you believe war is all about sending kids to get killed or something retarded like that.
pimpdalyrical 3 years ago
Your comment is a real mess. You tried to defend your ideas about Iraq by bringing up WWII, and of course your points on that score were and are simplistic and just plain wrong. Go back and read my detailed responses.
Numerous start up companies? Links please. Be specific.
zuzukachoo 3 years ago
WWII ended the great depression, anyone who knows their ass from a hole in the ground understands this.
As for Iraq, they trained me, and contracted with my startup to continue my work examining discovered secret weapons labs in Iraq (that I'm sure you never heard of.) Check UltraElectronics, a company thriving on buying up war contractor startups (hopefully including mine!)
pimpdalyrical 3 years ago
Boy, you sure have a short memory span, pimpy. I've already told you employment went down in WWII because everybody was in the military (it went up after the war), and there were strict price controls, investment limits, and rationing during the war. The war was financed with borrowing. It was only after the war that private investment flourished.
cont'd
zuzukachoo 3 years ago
correction: UNemployment went down
zuzukachoo 3 years ago
So...UNemployment went down during the war. Right, what I said.
The point is not comparing Iraq and WWII, the point is that war does not drain an economy. And Neither has Iraq. The economy saw nothing but growth during the bulk of operations in Iraq. No we're not seeing any kind postponed effects either. This economic downturn is a result of liberal regulatory practices, plain and simple. Throw Dodd, Frank, and Reines in prison and let businesses fail.
pimpdalyrical 3 years ago 4
Comment removed
GrammyEm50 3 years ago
Hint to pimpy: joining the military is not the same as entering the labor force. Your entire point HAS been comparing Iraq to WWII, which I guess you now realize is silly. Very well.
As to the economy seeing "nothing but growth during the bulk of operations," I suggest you take a good look at the economic indicators over the last six years before making such an easily disprovable claim.
cont'd
zuzukachoo 3 years ago
First off, my point has been countering yours flawed concept that liberal economic policy is what ended the depression. You then countered with a recycled tired diatribe about Iraq, since you obviously discovered I was right about WWII. The Bush years saw mostly positive growth in GDP, you're plain wrong.
pimpdalyrical 3 years ago 4
And now you're complaining about $3 Trillion spent in Iraq. How about the failed "war on poverty." Ever bothered to look up how much we have wasted there?! At least Iraq got results!
Let me know how all that "rebuilding" goes now that we know Obama's plan will leave us over 9 trillion in the red for the next decade!
You don't need luck when you have talent. But you wouldn't know that, would you?
pimpdalyrical 3 years ago 4
Comment removed
GrammyEm50 3 years ago
cont'd to pimpy:
And now I suggest you go back and read my original posts about the $3 trillion in TRUE COSTS of this war. You know, the costs of lifetime disability payments and medical care, the loss in earning potential, the $ that could have been spent strengthening the economy by rebuilding infrastructure, funding education and scientific research, etc.
But when I've laid out apples, you've responded with oranges and more oranges .
So good luck to you. I suspect you need it.
Buh bye.
zuzukachoo 3 years ago
Comment removed
GrammyEm50 3 years ago
Every cent of which went back into the free market as paychecks for contractors building war supplies. Unlike Clinton who just kept all of it and let the market starve to death. Let me make this easy on you, liberal thinking has never, NEVER benefitted the economy.
pimpdalyrical 3 years ago 3
Clinton only had a surplus because he started draining money out of the market and into government stockpiles, doing nothing! We were in a recession when Clinton left office, remember. And Clinton didn't even have a liberal policy timebomb going off in the housing market like Bush did.
pimpdalyrical 3 years ago
Comment removed
GrammyEm50 3 years ago
We are talking about getting a reply in your "Inbox", in which case you only get one per person, per visit to a page. Here, If there is another post of yours on this page I will reply on it, but you won't get notified in your inbox.
pimpdalyrical 3 years ago
Second reply in same thread.
zuzukachoo 3 years ago
PS to Pimpy, YOU might be talking about your YouTube inbox, but I am talking about e-mail notification.
If you sign up for it, when someone uses the "reply" function to respond to a comment it will show up in your e-mail inbox, no matter how many times that person replies to the same comment.
If you had bothered to use the "reply" function, I would have known about your silly comments and been able to respond months ago. Evidently that's too complicated for ya.
zuzukachoo 3 years ago
I figured you might be talking about something else.
But, the only reason I wouldn't hit reply on your post is if I was talking to someone else. You probably just assumed everything being said was about you, typical of a self centered liberal.
pimpdalyrical 3 years ago
Right, because posting a reply so that it follows the thread and readers can follow it just wouldn't cross your mind.
The rest of your comment makes no sense whatsoever, typically.
zuzukachoo 3 years ago
Wrong, pimpy. I'll prove it by replying twice in this thread. Doubt it will make a difference in your attitude though.
zuzukachoo 3 years ago
cont'd
Was WWII worth the cost? Sure. People thought so at the time, and were willing to sacrifice, and raise taxes and buy war bonds and have strict price controls and ration goods to pay for it. Us? We just put it on the credit card for the grandkids.
zuzukachoo 3 years ago
The invasion of Iraq is a small part of the greater war against islamic extremism. How are you so ignorant that you don't see that after all this time. It had very little to do with WMD intelligence ( and you can hang more of that fuck up on Clinton than Bush) The islamists have every intention of putting you under there command, or cut off your head, and not becuase of any politcal policy or foreign relations blunder from the 70's. They are every bit a threat to you as the Nazis were, moron.
pimpdalyrical 3 years ago
"Lot's of jobs have been created by this war?" Well, yeah! You have any idea how many people work for military contractors? How many of those volunteers will get a college education along with the training they received form the military?
News flash: Bush inherited a recession and has had 8 years of growth! And unemployment was actually 2 points higher than it is now, Clinton called it "Full employment." Look the facts just don't justify your partisan hatred, get over it.
pimpdalyrical 3 years ago
Guess what pimpy, the highest unemployment rate in 2000 was 4.1%. Today it is 5.7%.
8 years of growth? Right, bigger debt and deficit, higher unemployment, bear market, higher energy costs, median household income lower than in 2000, and oh yeah, how's the housing market doin'?
cont'd
zuzukachoo 3 years ago
GDP has had positive growth for the last 8 years dipshit, it's a fact! Apparently you missed the fact that the unemployment rate only started going up after your dumbass democrat congress raised the minimum wage. Or is the fact that the job losses are hitting the entry level and unskilled job markets just too much for you to contemplate? And if everythings going downward, I guess the only explanation for the lowering cost of Oil is Bush lifting the executive drilling ban right? Newb
pimpdalyrical 3 years ago
If you're talking to me with that "GDP positive growth for 8 yrs" business, pimpy, you'd better do better research.
First of all, real GDP increased from 2000 to 2008 at an annual average of only about 2.3% per year. Second, national savings as a share of GDP declined below 2000 levels, and so has business investment overall (despite all those tax breaks) and real estate investment.
And what exactly did any of this have to do with the topic?
zuzukachoo 3 years ago
"GDP increased from 2000 to 2008 at an annual average of only about 2.3% per year."
Only?!?!!
You think Obama's policy could survive a terrorst attack targetted at our financial system? Even Obama admitted that an economic downturn is not the best time to institute his socialist agenda. What you have to ask yourself is, if it's not beneficial to a downturn, how would it ever spur growth during a recovery?! Oh i know, "fairness" trumps real economic growth, right? Sucker.
pimpdalyrical 3 years ago
Exactly how did September 11 affect business investment, real estate investment, and savings as shares of the GDP, despite massive tax breaks? Be specific.
And by the way, the real GDP average annual increase during the Clinton years was 3.71%.
zuzukachoo 3 years ago
Google 9/11 effects on economy dork, you should get about 19 million results. My job isn't to educate you, it's debunk your idiotic claims.
If you don't see how the destruction of the "World Trade Center" is an attack on economics, you need to go back to middle school.
Clinton rode along on the Reagan Bush tax plan that created the tech boom. Didn't you notice the bubble burst during Clinton's second term, when he actually reversed the Republican tax policy?
pimpdalyrical 3 years ago
In other words, you can't back up your claim.
Figures.
zuzukachoo 3 years ago
cont'd
Military contractors? Care to guess how many of those jobs are overseas? College for military volunteers? You get it for being active duty, whether you're in a war or not. Job training? See my earlier post, re workers being PULLED OUT of the workforce by this war.
zuzukachoo 3 years ago
Ahhh, the failed 'War On Poverty' that President Johnson started 40 some years ago. What a boondoggle! The poverty rate hasn't gone down 1% and still they fund it. Sickening!
BulboLives 3 years ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
My God that was awful.
btcubs 3 years ago
I guess Jim Abrams was responsible for most of the funny stuff.
JackRackem 3 years ago
Anyone who has gotten their head out of Limbaugh's and Hannity's ass long enough to look around knows that Republicans have LIBERAL fiscal policies. Meaning that they spend money very liberally. They can't conserve our national trust. They are in favor of exporting jobs very liberally. Where as Democrats conserve the public wealth, balance our national debt and improve the quality of life for all for using governmental power intelligently instead of recklessly... Look at FDR! 4 terms mofo!
thewritt 3 years ago
Yes indeed, look at FDR - a government riddled with communists. The WAR got us out of the depression, despite FDR and the communists that were in his government. He was soooo wonderful for all the people that fell to the Iron Curtain when he and Stalin divided Europe up in Yalta.
As for your "the public wealth" - spoken like a true socialist. I agree the GOP spent like liberal democrats under Bush. Democrats improve the quality of life? How? By making our poor (welfare recipients) fat and lazy?
BoilerT 3 years ago
You are right. That's only because the last batch of republicans have not been CONSERVATIVES. Which is what we really need.
pimpdalyrical 3 years ago 4
Awesome. Really looking forward to An American Carol. FINALLY we get conservative spin in Hollywood. Let's make it a hit.
CowboyArtist 3 years ago
Too late. It's already happened....
tuttt99 3 years ago
Haha..... 1:20 is so awesome.
fortinbras47 3 years ago
Screw the liberals and the Democratic views. MCCAIN!!!!!!!!!!!! Horray for tax cuts! Fuck you assholes saying "liek omg tax da rich ppl cuz they hav mor money than me". Well you know what? Maybe you should've tried harder in high school and college and maybe you would've gotten a good job. Whine on your own time. I know people who are rich who already pay 40% taxes and that's totally retarded.
Mcaliber38 3 years ago 4
I take it you make over $250,000. That's the only way your their kind of republican.
thewritt 3 years ago
I take it you're still under the age of 25. That's the only way you're that arrogant and naive.
ultrahumanite 3 years ago
The dollar has declined in value 40% since 01. Republicans had a 6 YEAR MAJORITY in the Senate AND House AND had a sitting President that named anyone who wouldn't bow traitorous. What happened under their reign? Free trade is dead. Republican deregulation failed. And the middle class tax payer is picking up the bill and bailing out CORPORATIONS that cheated themselves into failure!?! Please don't talk to me about naivety and arrogance there is nothing conservative about conservatives anymore.
thewritt 3 years ago
GOP = bad
Democrats = worse
takerdust 3 years ago 2
No.
"Grand Old Party" = Perverse
Democratic Party = Restitution
thewritt 3 years ago
Your faith must be strong
takerdust 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
If this video's intended audience is intended to cater to the sensibility wealthiest 1%, like all RNC programs & propaganda, then in its true.
But if you're in the majority, the 99% large majority, you'd do yourself a benefit by doing research.
It is Barack Obama that wants to give the largest tax cuts to us. All while wants to balance the budget - how? By not spending a trillion $ on a war/instigating war with Iran and by ending subsidies to corporations who outsource our jobs overseas.
theblakelvis 3 years ago
long live liberal Ideals..let people live there lives the way they want and keep your nose out of others buisiness..oh yea and to hell with big government and new laws.. GO OBAMA!!!!get use to it yuppies and rednecks because obama is coming to town..
peace
Dave
davidwaters69 3 years ago
We better run away from the garden State
HAVANAJUSTICE 3 years ago
HAHAH! All-right!
gabbagool21 3 years ago
David, as a Republican, I'm no Bush-fan but his tax cuts did stimulate growth. Bush is screwing us with increasing the size of government, the wars our draining our resources and the Congress keeps overtaxing us. It's not just Bush and the neo-cons, it's the Democrats and their liberal agenda as well. Both of them are screwing all of us.
ejseabury 3 years ago 3