[RealJustme]

Today she demonstrated poor judgement when she tried to appeal to Clinton's low information supporters. During an interview she was asked what she thought of the arrests of the six police officers in Baltimore and charges and she responded that she felt it was a good thing because that way we'll find out what happened to that poor guy who certainly couldn't have did those injuries to himself, plus the undocumented stop of the van raises real questions. So either she's ignorant or like Hillary willing to wrongfully throw people under the bus to get what she wants.

That's the difference between a conservative and a liberal, we hold those that want our votes to high standards while liberals support Hillary despite all her crimes and deception.

So the big question is...who runs with Rubio now?

[johnforbes]

Interesting theory.

Whenever you are curious about the facts of a situation, just charge everybody with murder and hope the facts come out.

Of course, a trial almost never brings out the facts.

[RealJustme]

That State's Attorney had one goal, step into an elite status among blacks and make her name known. She accomplished that and that's all the matters to her. Either Carly Fiorina couldn't see this or she just agreed with her to try and steal low information votes away from Clinton, screw the rights of police Officers.

Now no matter what those police Officers will always have arrest records and "charged" with felonies. The two I really feel sorry for are the two bike cops who just came to the aid of their LT who was wrestling with the thug, all they did was help get him in cuffs and into the van. They should really be suing the city for unlawful arrest and malicious prosecution.

The State's Attorney has already laid out her case that the thug was injured in the van in the charges, she can't now come back later and say the bike officers caused the injuries. That was a really stupid rookie mistake on her part.

The fact that all Fiorina could say was that the charges will allow us to get all the facts speaks very lowly of her.

[elklindo69]

Today she demonstrated poor judgement when she tried to appeal to Clinton's low information supporters. During an interview she was asked what she thought of the arrests of the six police officers in Baltimore and charges and she responded that she felt it was a good thing because that way we'll find out what happened to that poor guy who certainly couldn't have did those injuries to himself, plus the undocumented stop of the van raises real questions. So either she's ignorant or like Hillary willing to wrongfully throw people under the bus to get what she wants.

That's the difference between a conservative and a liberal, we hold those that want our votes to high standards while liberals support Hillary despite all her crimes and deception.

So the big question is...who runs with Rubio now?

Fiorina crashed HP because of poor judgement and was fired, and now Meg Whitman is trying to clean up the mess. Apparently everybody knew that except for Justme. Talk about uneducated voters....

:lol:

[RealJustme]

Fiorina crashed HP because of poor judgement and was fired, and now Meg Whitman is trying to clean up the mess. Apparently everybody knew that except for Justme. Talk about uneducated voters....

Fiorina built HP up, when the stock market crashed under Obama all companies' stocks went down. Her management and leadership skills put Hillary to shame. Having said that she's proven she lacks moral courage by throwing the officers under the bus trying to appeal to low information voters.

[Clownkicker]

"...when the stock market crashed under Obama all companies' stocks went down."-RealTool

Only the stock market never crashed under Obama, you lying sack of shit.
It crashed under W.Bush.
Why do you dishonest scumbags insist on perpetrating that lie?
The evidence is plain for anyone to see.

One month after Obama took office, the market grew confident and started a stunning bull run, up 10,000 points, or 128%, in 75 months. Try to find a Republican President where that happened.

If you'll lie that blatantly about this, why would anyone listen to your scumbag opinion about Fiorina that's based on that lie?
Since the reverse of what you said about Obama is true, I guess we should also expect the reverse of what you said about Fiorina to be true.

[RealJustme]

Only the stock market never crashed under Obama, you lying sack of shit.

As it became clear the United States was placing a liberal unqualified black man with a chip on his shoulder as our next President the stock market dived. Clown you can try and pretend it didn't happened but you can't change history. The market dived at the end of Oct 2008 because businesses knew Obama would destroy this country and he has to a great degree.

Clown doesn't understand the market responds to the future and Obama becoming our next President influenced the dive. I warned you guys in Sep 2008 and shifted my investments knowing the dive was coming.

[Clownkicker]

I love how RealTool tries to weasel out of his lie by reframing it into another lie that more closely fits the actual time line. Leroy would be proud of you.

"...the market responds to the future and Obama becoming our next President influenced the dive."-RealTool

Of course, you're dead wrong about the cause of the crash being Obama's pending election and not the housing finance bubble and the criminal abuse of the derivatives markets by investment banks. But I expect nothing less from a client of Partisan Hate Retirement Systems.

But let's say for the sake of argument that your thesis is correct.
That forces you to the conclusion that one month after Obama took office, the markets gained great faith in a future under Obama and kept that faith for the next 6+ years with a record bull run.
You're saying Obama has been the best thing for the economy in our history.

How would you explain that without being just another partisan hypocrite?

[johnforbes]

Only Lewinsky has gone down more times than Clownlicker, and in worse circumstances.

[RealJustme]

But let's say for the sake of argument that your thesis is correct.

It's on a thesis until it's proven correct, now it's a fact!

[Clownkicker]

Wow, RealTool comes out and declares it a fact that Obama is the best thing that has happened to the economy in our history, according to his own assertions.

He's really done a 180 on his usual partisan bullshit.

[RealJustme]

Clown dances on command

[Clownkicker]

^^^^Look, I made RealTool dance. :lol:

When he's forced to stare directly at his hypocrisy, RealTool starts the old "Distraction Shuffle" so popular amongst the reactionary tools and liars.

[elklindo69]

The market is higher now than it was in 2008.

Unemployment rate is lower now than when it was before Obama took office.

The housing market is starting to pick up steam.

Obamacare is working pretty well.

The numbers just don't lie...

:lol:

[tvd]

Elk as always is full of crap.

I will address Obamacare. Affordable care act...working "pretty well" huh?

I live in an economically depressed county in Florida (Brevard), or at least North Brevard is for sure.
Titusville is a dying town. Maybe it will pick back up if the next president appreciates the aerospace industry more than Obama ever did.

But my point.....I frequent the bars, the Moose clubs, I know the locals, I guess, pretty well.
They are a motley crew. All kinds of stories, histories, circumstances that got them where they are now.
Most, and I do mean most, are on government assistance. Either food stamps, or welfare, or Medicaid....
And guess what? They don't have health insurance.
Wait a minute!!! It is required by law for everyone to hit that failure of a website, and get signed up for healthcare, right? Nope. Not here.

Why don't they just get signed on? BECAUSE THEY CAN'T FUCKING AFFORD IT, that's why. Affordable Healthcare Act my ass.

So, I would just about bet it all that the local hospital has not seen one measurable statistic that shows an improvement in healthcare coverage since the magic Obamacare was passed.

One guy I know has a marine upholstery renovation/renewal business. He regularly takes 25 - 30 thousand dollar jobs on, so the business is not completely a bust. But, no health insurance, because he CANT FUCKING AFFORD it.
He got bit by a water moccasin on the hand. Over 100k later, twelve days in ICU, antivenin bags out the ass, he is discharged from the hospital. No insurance.
Same old, same old. He now has heart problems...had a mini attack, and had stents put in. Balloon angioplasty.
I don't know the bill for that one, but no insurance. Same old, same old.

Elk....these are exactly the people the ACA was targeting, right? The uninsured? The same people that are ignoring the lawful requirement to get this crap insurance.

You blind motherfucker. Why the fuck don't you just look around? The ACA failure is everywhere. It has managed to insure a handful of citizens, yes. But nowhere near the numbers touted, and nowhere near enough to sustain the monetary end.

Fucking Elk....says it is "working pretty good". Shit. All it has actually done is made everyone else's insurance go up.

[johnforbes]

Elkin, the market over time trends upward by its very nature. Surely you know that?

As to unemployment, it remains a real puzzle. Sure, it is great to have it tick downward.

But it has done so with agonizing slowness, and the U-6 remains 10.8 percent.

Labor force participation has not been this low since 1978, so an investor has to ask whether this is entirely structural and would exist regardless of any transitory politician.

Probably in part that is true, but Obama's big spending and high taxation have exacerbated all problems, and America remains almost 20 trillion in debt with 46 million on food stamps.

[tvd]

Yeah Elk...and then there's that...^^^^^^

But I will add, not only do I know many many ppl that didn't sign up because IT IS TOO FUCKING EXPENSIVE,
I also know the converse (maybe converse).

I ask everybody, just doing a personal poll, how the healthcare situation is for them. Do they have it, etc....
You know..."we are five years into this new healthcare re-vamping.....how is it working for you?"
I don't lead them, I don't coach them, I just want their honest situation and opinions.

So conversely, I have NEVER asked someone about their healthcare and had ANYONE reply that they took advantage of the ACA. NEVER had anyone state, "yeah, I enrolled in Obamacare, and I am pleased..." NEVER. Not one.

I ask every walk of life. My ex-aerospace compatriots, my biker buddies, my fishing buddies, my outboard motor repair customers, my black friends, my white friends, my green friends. All of them.

No one has picked up Obamacare that should have it. They remain with no insurance at all.

They only thing close is an ex IBM co-worker in Charlotte that stated that the only thing regarding Obamacare that she benefited from was the pre-existing condition changes. And why anyone retired from IBM would even NEED Obamacare is beyond me. IBM took very good care of us.

[elklindo69]

The number of uninsured has dropped by around 15 million. That's truly an incredible number.

TVD comes out as a raving idiot claiming insurance is too expensive. Premiums went up for a reason, which was to include diagnostic and preventative care which was not previously included. Do you know the costs associated with treating diabetes and heart disease? It's around 700 billion dollars....a year.

That's right...700 fucking BILLIONS DOLLARS......A YEAR!!!

That's an absolute fortune to treat a condition which for the most part is preventable through annual screenings and subsequent lifestyle changes.

TVD, you come out with a one sided and misleading screed which completely ignores the fact that there were millions of people who were refused insurance because they had prexisting conditions. Do I have to tell you about the countless disaster stories of people who were bankrupted because they had cheap subpar insurance coverage where insurers routinely denied coverage for certain conditions.

http://www.propublica.org/blog/item/ins ... ing-condit

[elklindo69]

Elkin, the market over time trends upward by its very nature. Surely you know that?

As to unemployment, it remains a real puzzle. Sure, it is great to have it tick downward.

But it has done so with agonizing slowness, and the U-6 remains 10.8 percent.

Labor force participation has not been this low since 1978, so an investor has to ask whether this is entirely structural and would exist regardless of any transitory politician.

Probably in part that is true, but Obama's big spending and high taxation have exacerbated all problems, and America remains almost 20 trillion in debt with 46 million on food stamps.

It may be a really puzzle to you, but it's quite obvious to me.

Demographics...

The labor participation rate increased as the baby boomers hit the workforce in the 70s and started declining as expected around 10 years ago. It's not rocket science. I think even you can intrepret a simple graph. And I do question your critical thinking skills...

You claim Obama has "exacerbated all problems." Trickle down conservative economics is an abysmal failure. It has created the widest wealth gap in generations.

http://data.bls.gov/generated_files/gra ... 2_data.gif

[tvd]

So, Elk....I am wrong huh?

How was Obamacare "sold" to us when first proposed? What were the key points?

1. Healthcare costs are skyrocketing, out of control, and it was due to the huge number of uninsured
presenting at the hospitals. The costs of treating those patients was being passed on to the insured people, written off by the hospitals, whatever financial tricks to be appropriately applied....
But the line was that Obamacare would reduce the rapid rise of skyrocketing healthcare costs by getting these people insured.
They would be paying premiums into the system, and hospital losses would go down.

2. Because everyone was now insured, magically insurance premiums for everyone would go down. Don't even try to tell me that the promise of lowered premiums wasn't dangled.

Ok, obviously Elk's measure od success re: any program is how many ppl get signed up for the free shit being offered.
That would seem very easy to me....offer free shit, when ppl sign up, claim victory.

What about the consequences?

What about the instantaneous step function of premium increase for all the rest of us who don't get the free shit?
What about the fact that healthcare costs have NOT gone down as promised?
What about the fact that ppl are STILL showing up at the hospital doors with no insurance?
What about the consequences that have not even played out yet, like doctors leaving the field, no new doctors coming into the field, etc?

Elk, in his own reply above, states that premiums rose due to the cost of covering pre-existing conditions, et.al.
We were promised that premiums would go down. Weren't we?
We were promised that this shit would be affordable. Weren't we?

So, here is is....my measurement of a program's success is based on medical outcomes, efficiency, measured results, lowered costs, all weighed against the promised benefits of the program. And Obamacare doesn't measure up.

Elk's measure of success is how many ppl he can get signed up for free shit. So if that is your measuring stick, shit, why is the success not greater?

The government cannot do anything right. Bottom line. It is inefficient, full of fraud and waste.
The government has no business being in the medical industry, being in the insurance industry, being in the student loan industry, being in the home loan industry, and on and on.

[johnforbes]

It is something to think about that Boomers are many, but the sad reality is that most Boomers find themselves poorly prepared to retire.

So ascribing the daunting U-6 to Boomers leaving the workforce, well, that isn't a very penetrating analysis.

Why, really, are 93 million Americans out of the workforce?

[RealJustme]

Why, really, are 93 million Americans out of the workforce?

it started in 2008 and for those able to find a job, real wages have fallen for the majority...except for the super rich. Hmmmm what happened in 2008 that brought about this negative change?

[Clownkicker]

" Hmmmm what happened in 2008 that brought about this negative change?"-RealTool

As you morons have been told many times before, W. Bush crashed the economy, of course.

That tends to cause unemployment and lower wages.

After you're told 20 or 30 more times you dimwits may begin to remember that unfortunate historical fact.

[tvd]

Yeah Clown,
You just keep on spewing out what your handlers tell you to say...(shit, did I say that?) :o

Bush did NOT crash the economy. The economy crashed at the end of his admin, but not due to the policies he implemented.

Policies implemented years, decades, before "came to roost", matured, formed the perfect storm, so to speak.
In particular, the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac housing market collapse were a direct result of policies implemented during the Clinton administration where government pushed lenders to make bad loans.
Secondly, the practice of allowing these unstable derivatives to be marketed.

You know damn well those was the major factors. Bush didn't do it, he was just there when it happened.
Probably absolutely should have paid more attention, and tried to ward it off, but didn't. No one did.

This is exactly why I harp on my beliefs that government should stay out of the mortgage business. No need for them to be there. Government has no business making loans. Leave that to private sector moneybags.

Have a good day and quit spewing your twisted views.

[Clownkicker]

Great, tvd, you're half way to reality.

I've told these clowns several times that that is partly what happened, but they can only think in simplistic terms of "blame this or that President" for anything that happens when they usually have little to do with it. Another example is johnforbes(who should know better) blaming Obama for the number of illegals in this country when the number hasn't increased on his watch, or for our massive debt just because it is going up, when in fact the rate of growth under Obama has, thankfully, slowed tremendously. But as we all know, Congress decides on the debt and deficit.
In the case of W. Bush, he started a $1.5 trillion dollar war knowingly under false pretenses without raising taxes to pay for it, so THAT money added to the debt can actually be blamed on him. The rest of the debt under any President, not so much, unless they pressured Congress for tax cuts. Then they can be personally blamed for some of the rising debt.

Now, to the economic meltdown.
The collapse was not caused by Fannie and Freddie. They were just the trigger of the collapse, and they shouldn't have been able to precipitate such a problem in the first place.
The bad mortgages made up about around 1.5% of all mortgages. A sound financial system should be able to take a hit of 1.5% losses without batting an eye. Ours couldn't. Why was that?

The problem was in the corrupt derivatives markets run by investment banks that had bundled those bad mortgages and leveraged that debt at 80- or 100-to-1 with no reserves to cover losses. Basically, they sold the same debt over and over to many investors. A million dollars in debt had backed around 80 to 100 million in financial instruments sold to cities and countries. So when $10 million of debt went bad, $1 billion in 'paper' went bad and the investment banks couldn't cover their nut.

The same thing is still going on now, only more so. The rules were never changed significantly. The next time it happens will be much worse.


Anyway, you have finally started to get upset about someone holding a simplistic view of such problems as being caused by one party or the other. They are both to blame, as I have tried to explain in the past.
I never understand this rabid partisanship, claiming 'MY' criminals are better than 'YOUR' criminals.

Now call out the reactionaries here in the same way, tvd. You had a chance with your last post but for some reason directed it only at me instead of including The Tool in your righteous indignation over this. That he is completely wrong about this isn't even a matter of opinion.
But so far you let RealJustme and johnforbes get away with all their ignorance and simple-mindedness. I've tried to explain things to them but they are immune to rational thought. Lately I have just been using the only language they understand, but at least I use actual facts like actual dates on the calendar to stop blame from being attributed to one guy they don't happen to like.
If one sees the economy in such simple terms as those clowns, at least they shouldn't get away with claiming Obama caused the collapse of 2008 when he wasn't President yet and when the markets started doing staggeringly well as soon as he was sworn in.

[Intrepid]

Well, Loser Lucky is back once again claiming (as the ministry of disinformation has instructed all Useful Idiots to do) that, GEORGE BUSH WAS THE ONLY ONE WHO THOUGHT THERE WERE WMDs IN IRAQ! Looks like I once again have to grab the delusional pothead junkie stoner by the cute little stoner ponytail and smash him face first into the cold, hard anvil of reality, as I have had to do so many times in the past. Loser Lucky, must I once again post the list of EVERY FUCKING PROMINENT SHIT SUCKING DONKEY-RAT WHO LOUDLY PROCLAIMED THAT, "EVEDYONE KNOWS SADDAM HUSSEIN HAS WMDs AND HE MUST BE REMOVED FROM POWER!"
Go hit your bong and STF up you junkie loser. Nobody cares what you think.

Here Loser Lucky will once again demonstrate how completely I own his punk bitch stoner ass.

[RealJustme]

they shouldn't get away with claiming Obama caused the collapse of 2008 when he wasn't President yet and when the markets started doing staggeringly well as soon as he was sworn in.

Once again, Markets operate based upon predictions of what will happen based upon current events. It became clear Obama, a affirmative action racist with a chip on his shoulder who promised fundamental changes to the United States was going to be our next President. The markets reacted, they DIVED end of Oct 2008. I was part of that dive for the same reason, I sold and transferred weeks before that event, then I got to tell the rest of you, I told you so!

[Clownkicker]

^^^^See tvd?

Get on that right away.

[Intrepid]

The brain dead left wants to blame Bush for everything, and hold Obozo responsible for nothing, in fact they continue to blame Bush to this day anytime Obozo fucks up. This is very telling.

[Clownkicker]

Here's one that ought to fry your pea brain, RealTool:

Did you ever think that maybe the markets crashed before the election because they were afraid McCain might be elected and we would have another four years of a Republican President?
Then, when Obama was sworn in, the markets breathed a collective sigh of relief and started cranking it up for a record bull market.

This theory more closely fits the facts than your silly idea that the markets were so afraid of Obama that they started rising as soon as he was sworn in.
Your ridiculous opinion makes no sense whatsoever.
Why would the markets rise spectacularly when the very thing they supposedly feared had just come true?

[RealJustme]

when Obama was sworn in, the markets breathed a collective sigh of relief and started cranking it up for a record bull market.

The Market always makes a small correction after a huge dive and that's all it was, a very small correction, it's taken years to dig out from Obama's election. The only reason it has went up is artificial dumping of Fed money into the system that we don't have, once that stops there will be huge correction, that's the way socialist operate, instant gratification let someone else worry about the bills.

Obama has caused massive destruction to the middle class and added million on the poverty list. The only ones to make out under Obama have been his cronies and those ultra rich supporters of his.

[Clownkicker]

RealTool calls the Dow climbing 10,000 points (128%) to record highs a "very small correction".

And now he's going to pretend that Obama is running the Fed?

Sorry, but that's a six emoticon stupidity, Tool. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:


And no comment on my "McCain" theory of the crash, huh Tool? (One more emoticon just to rub it in.) :lol:

[RealJustme]

And now he's going to pretend that Obama is running the Fed?

Nah that Czar appointed over the Fed is there to look out after our interests, not Obama's. :lol: :lol: :lol:

[RealJustme]

Told ya Clown

As business investment languishes and manufacturing has hit the skids, and with America's annual growth rate coming to a near halt at 0.2 percent for this year's first quarter, our monetary authorities seem clueless about the impact of their own policies. Indeed, the Fed's instinctive position is to call for more government intervention in the economy. Don't expect any initiatives to scale back regulatory burdens or liberate market forces to spur real economic growth.

Instead, you can expect increasing calls from Fed officials to give themselves more room to maneuver by raising their target rate of inflation to 4 percent or higher — never mind that such monetary mischief utterly confounds business planning and leads to the misallocation of investment resources. And you can expect further demands for massive government spending on "public infrastructure development" to create jobs. It's what Bernanke recommends in his blog post, insinuating that some other part of government needs to join the Fed's stimulus party to attain economic growth.

[Clownkicker]

Told me WHAT?

You mean the Fed has been dumping money into the economy?

Say it isn't so!



Thanks for nothing, Tool, as always. :lol:

[johnforbes]

I'm crossing Clownhicker off the list of rational people.

[RealJustme]

Yep, I'm bumping this threat just because clown wishes it would go away. He tried to divert from Rubio and Fiorina and dug a hole he can't get out of.

[Clownkicker]

"Yep, I'm bumping this threat ..."-RealTool

At least RealTool realizes his incredible illiteracy is dangerous to us all. :lol:

[RealJustme]

The clown keeps getting easier.

[Clownkicker]

Naw, RealTool isn't really an illiterate moron.

He just spends his time trying to make people BELIEVE he's an illiterate moron.
It's what really smart people do.




Boy, he sure showed ME. :lol:

[johnforbes]

If you take the average fish, in the typical pond, it has not been exposed to more bait than Clownhooker.

[Clownkicker]

johnforbes is so stupid he falls for the old "Ha ha, I made that stupid mistake on purpose" ploy.

It has never occurred to him that someone might try to mask their quite proven illiteracy by simply claiming they are acting stupid intentionally.



But wait, maybe that explains why johnforbes' posts appear to be so stupid all the time.
Acting stupid all the time is plainly what highly intelligent people do.
In fact, it's what everyone on the Right, here and in Washington, seems to be doing every day.

Finally, we have an explanation for the incredible stupidity of conservatives!
They're just pretending to be stupid to fool everybody.

Thanks for clearing that up for us, boys.

[johnforbes]

Sure, I could read Clowntoker's long posting.

But, while art is long, vita is brevis, so I didn't.

In the fullness of time, I shall assign a staffer to go through Clownhacker's post and let me know if it contains a kernel of truth or simply the husk of leftist lunacy in most of his posts.

[Clownkicker]

^^^^Case in point.

Thank you for the validation of my thesis.

[johnforbes]

Carly Simon was never on the VP list.

You're so vain to think that.

[elklindo69]

they shouldn't get away with claiming Obama caused the collapse of 2008 when he wasn't President yet and when the markets started doing staggeringly well as soon as he was sworn in.

Once again, Markets operate based upon predictions of what will happen based upon current events.

OH really....Is that what they taught you in the "MBA" program? So is it a "market" or a market of stocks? You do know one way of valuing a business is though DCF. And DCF is predicated upon the future prospects of a business. I don't care what's happening now, I only care what will happen in the future. Because we all know the present...right?

I have a copy of the intelligent investor, it's a great book. Perhaps you should read it... :lol:

In the short run, the market is like a voting machine–tallying up which firms are popular and unpopular. But in the long run, the market is like a weighing machine–assessing the substance of a company.

[RealJustme]

You do know one way of valuing a business is though DCF. And DCF is predicated upon the future prospects of a business.

Are you talking about Department of Children & Families or are you talking about Discounted Cash Flow? If you were listening to me you would have heard that investments are made based upon future prospects of a business, that's why the market reacted to Obama about to become President, they knew the destruction he would do to our government and economy. DCF that!

[elklindo69]

You do know one way of valuing a business is though DCF. And DCF is predicated upon the future prospects of a business.

Are you talking about Department of Children & Families or are you talking about Discounted Cash Flow? If you were listening to me you would have heard that investments are made based upon future prospects of a business, that's why the market reacted to Obama about to become President, they knew the destruction he would do to our government and economy. DCF that!

That's a revisionist history version of hoax events.

In reality the market tanked because the GOP refused to sign off on the TARP legislation. I remember the market went down some 700 points in one day right after the GOP rejected the legislation. That was just pure idiocy. I suppose they used the old go to argument "let's not throw any money this."

I give credit to Bush for simply saying "this sucker could go down." He realized that ironically the private sector didn't have the resources to prop up the banking system. So did the GOP really believe that the private sector could come up with the 700 billion dollars to prop up the banking system? Romney claimed that the private sector could have financed the GM bailout. Really? During a credit crunch?

I suppose Romney and Justme received the same MBA...

LMAO

[johnforbes]

Well, bailing out corporations and all the money wasted on TARP, how has it helped GDP growth today?

The economy is crawling along now, pallid and weak.

[elklindo69]

Well, bailing out corporations and all the money wasted on TARP, how has it helped GDP growth today?

The economy is crawling along now, pallid and weak.

I thought the govt made a profit on TARP?