The Col: "This part of the world enjoyed it, and found it refreshing ..I don't think anyone considered it an "apology tour" other than Republicans"

Who are you referring to when you say "This part of the world"?

Of course only Republicans would call it an apology tour... and only Democrats would see it as something that can improve relations between the US and people who regard the US as their enemies. After all, when has a policy of appeasement ever NOT worked?

Iamon lyme: reWho are you referring to when you say "This part of the world"?

I can't speak for the rest of the world, only the section I inhabit.The opinions here were positive when he toured during the election.I guess you have a different perspective.

The Col: Obama is a showman and everyone likes a good show.

(V): I'd know the difference. But give me some examples of his statements.

Artful Dodger: nooo.... I'll pick some sentences and put one or two of his in the mix.

Iamon lyme: Depends on who the appeased are. The Nazi's, Iranians, Egyptians, various South American governments who are supported and placed despite being nasty bully killer types.

"He criticised the police for being racist, then held a news meeting with both sides for the purpose of repairing his own image."

So.. stating something that has been seen to be true in many cases. .... .... The Met police in the UK was found to be institutionally racist.... it's being "robustly" dealt with, but that word "robustly" seems to be the in word at the moment for meaning jack.

(V): Hey did ya watch the hippo fart?

(V): "So.. stating something that has been seen to be true in many cases"

But in this case (the one I was talking about) a charge of racism is leveled by someone wielding power and influence to attack a police officer, who did nothing wrong. No politician in his right mind would try pulling a stunt like this, but this is who we have had as president for 4 years and will have for another four.

But at least he's not hiding under his desk, and has learned how to hide in plain sight. He's been running around complaining that Republicans won't work with him, but refuses to sit down to actually meet with them... to work with him. (?) And when Republicans submit a budget or anything they've authored Harry Reed just sits on it... like a hen sitting on an egg.

Maybe it's a game, and the Republicans are supposed to chase after Obama... and if we catch him, then he'll sit down and pretend to seriously negotiate in good faith. Yeah, that must be it... he's playing the 'catch me if you can' game.

Artful Dodger: "Hey did ya watch the hippo fart?"

Yep... watched AND heard him.

Iamon lyme: It shook my computer!

Artful Dodger: Did you see what his tail was doing? It looked like a propeller!

Ego pedere ergo sum

Iamon lyme: fertilizer spreader

Artful Dodger: No... the link was a mobile version...didna work.

Iamon lyme: I like what the daily show said about the recent deadline... everyone was on holiday.

"a charge of racism is leveled by someone wielding power and influence to attack a police officer, who did nothing wrong. No politician in his right mind would try pulling a stunt like this."

Don't know the case. Usually politicians don't make public statements like that unless they have some idea.

... Then again..... ..... No, usually that's when they skip around the subject. UK politics is a case of reading between the lines.

And slagging each other off, blaming each other, part histories...

.... .... Does one have the ability to watch old UK TV shows such as "Yes Minister" or "Yes Prime Minister"??

Artful Dodger: Reminds me of this incident. It was a live TV children's show :P

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N_Cj2TtFd_E

(V): [ No... the link was a mobile version...didna work. ]

Didn't work for me either, so I copied and pasted the title... World's Biggest Fart - The Hippo ...into the youtube search engine and it took me to the video.

(V): [ Does one have the ability to watch old UK TV shows such as "Yes Minister" or "Yes Prime Minister"?? ]

Probably, if I had cable or satellite, but I don't watch much television so any UK programing I get is whatever is shown on the Public Broadcasting System (PBS).

World's Biggest Fart - The Hippo: http://youtu.be/PSKQ3ZNQ_O8 via @youtube

Biden's self-defense advice to the women of America - "Buy a shotgun!" J...: http://youtu.be/Gj-WcafGjbM via @youtube

Iamon lyme: Just put Yes Minister or Yes Prime Minister in on youtube. Plenty there :P

Artful Dodger: A double barrelled one... scare the poop out of most as they do tend to cut you to pieces if hit by one. More effective than a pistol for home defence, less need to be 'accurate'.

(V): the video demonstrates they are not easy to use. If you know how to use one yes. Biden is still an idiot.

Artful Dodger: The video demonstrates alot of wrong techniques, including cherry picking video moments.

Come on.. I expect better evidence off you!! ;)

(V): They clearly show that using a shotgun isn't "easy" as Biden suggest. He's an idiot.

Artful Dodger: No.... they clearly show people who've never fired one before or have not heard that they kick.

Woooppeeee.

Farmers mums can handle them as this video demonstrates..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ka5pedLmLs

Or as this police training video shows..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cun-LZvOTdw

(V): Biden is telling women who have never owned a shotgun to buy one. He's telling people who've never shot one how easy they are to use. We're not talking about experienced users, we're talking about rookies. He's telling rookies they are easier than the AR15. He's an idiot.

Artful Dodger: stand correctly, point, squeeze trigger.

... Aim big, hit big.

I was allowed to shoot them as a scout of 14.... they are easy.... and at short range far better than a AR15. Which, was designed for the battlefield.

"He's telling rookies they are easier than the AR15. He's an idiot."

Yes they are. One video does not make Biden an idiot.... ... ... that takes years of practice!! ;P

(V): [ One video does not make Biden an idiot.... ... ... that takes years of practice !! ]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HWlSX9TT2eo

(V): One video does not make Biden an idiot.... ... ... that takes years of practice!!

(V): Obama and Biden are a team, and it's Joes job to make his boss look good by comparison. Good luck with that, Joe.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t4-AKcH3eC8

Iamon lyme: we have to remember that Biden told people that the way to pay off the US debt is to spend more money.

To spend more we have to borrow, thus putting us in more debt.

So to summarise, to get out of debt we have to get more debt.

Artful Dodger: "To spend more we have to borrow, thus putting us in more debt. So to summarise, to get out of debt we have to get more debt."

That might make some sense if we were borrowing to pay down the debt, but as you say they are doing it so they will have more to spend. The powers that be don't seem concerned about paying off any of that debt right now.

I tried something like that a long time ago. I borrowed against my next allowance, but then got less allowance on my next 'payday'. I didn't like that at all, but I was only eight or nine years old at the time.

Iamon lyme: if the average man tried to get out of debt and borrowed say, 100,000 to pay off his 100,000 debt, he'd still be in debt for 100,000 dollars. I did that once to lower the interest rate an to go from a 30 to a 15. But when you lower the interest you pay you are lowering your debt. Biden had something else in mind.

Artful Dodger: "Biden had something else in mind."

They always have something else in mind. That's why politicians like him end up becoming confused. The problem is that as they get older the machinations of their own minds become harder to manage... they can literally lose control of their own mental processes. My mental processes on the other hand are quite simple, so there is very little that can go wrong.

I came, I saw, I farted... how hard can that be?

Artful Dodger: I hoped you would get it!! lol

Iamon lyme: Don't worry, there will be plenty of candidates to fill that roll for the Republicans next election.... no need for jealousy that the Democrats can find a better idiot.

... maybe the Republicans need to change from good idiot and bad idiot to 'thinker/idiot'

What do you think??

(V): "What do you think??"

I think regardless of candidates or party, the US will be involved in damage control for at least the next 20 to 30 years.

It takes far less time to tear something down than it does to build it up. We've always managed to reverse or at least slow down our own self destruction, but we may have gone too far in the wrong direction this time.

Iamon lyme: .... there is no quick fix that is a fact. Not for any country.

This has been building for decades. No-one challenging the bosses.....

.... .... demonstrations are getting more common in Europe though. The people want less talk and more action on those who created this mess and allowed it to happen.

N' yes we see America possibly going 'broke'.... Not able to come together as one people and act in the common good.... divide and conquer. :/

(V): There is only one circumstance I can see that could turn things around in the US, and do it relatively fast... like within 10 years. But I also know it's a pipe dream and won't happen.

In order to correct (just one of) the problems we are creating for ourselves, half of the population of this country would need to change its mind about taxation, and insist on limiting government according to the constitution. Some people think the constitution is outdated, but that's nonsense. In order for it to no longer be relevant people would have had to become fundamentally different, and last time I checked people have not evolved into some other species. They still need the same things they've always needed, and still do things in the same way.The only thing that has changed in over 200 years is technology... people are still fundamentally the same.

So here are a few suggestions for the powers that be to ignore: Empower the politicians (all of them) to reject government funded health care, and institute tort reform to correct the REAL problems with health care. Defund unnecessary government programs (to reduce spending) and stop discouraging businesses from growing and hiring new people.

If government can defer its greed for a few years and stop interfering with our lives and businesses, reduce the tax burdon instead of increasing it, then government coffers would beginning filling up again. Increasing a tax burdon insures there will be fewer sources to tax, but reducing tax burdon means more sources spring up for the government to tax. Grocery stores understand how low price / high volume will net greater profits than simply charging as much as they can get away with. Less is more, but many of the geniuses in Washington can't seem to grasp this simple concept. Taxing less encourages growth, and growth means more taxable income. How hard can this be for anyone to understand?

I remember when there were so many jobs to chose from it was an employees market, and businesses were bending over backwards trying to entice people to work for them... we won't see that happening again anytime soon.

Iamon lyme: It would be fair to say that there are some things that were never imagined of when it was written.

"In order for it to no longer be relevant people would have had to become fundamentally different, and last time I checked people have not evolved into some other species."

Our world has though, especially the way we do business. As you mention technology has changed greatly, transferring funds takes seconds... with little or no paper trail.

"Empower the politicians (all of them) to reject government funded health care,"

Then empower the people to have good access, not just high cost ER.

"and institute tort reform to correct the REAL problems with health care."

Tell that to the lawyers... the same ones that are at the heart of much of the tort problems in the USA.

"Defund unnecessary government programs (to reduce spending) and stop discouraging businesses from growing and hiring new people."

In the UK it has been seen recently that even if the Government gives money for banks to help businesses they won't. Even when they have said they will.

"If government can defer its greed for a few years and stop interfering with our lives and businesses, reduce the tax burdon instead of increasing it"

Same with private enterprises. The UK contracted out to a private company the roll of getting people back to work who've been out of work for a long time because of health problems....... The company made several promises, but it turned out that they were just interested in making a profit. In the end it's gonna cost the UK more.

"Grocery stores understand how low price / high volume will net greater profits than simply charging as much as they can get away with."

Right..... lol... ... ... No. In theory, yes... in reality... it depends. If the store knows it can charge more due to the likes of position... it will. Now adays loss leaders are more used.

"Taxing less encourages growth, and growth means more taxable income. How hard can this be for anyone to understand?"

If the taxation collected was properly collected. Greece got screwed up because no one was paying what they were supposed to and no one was standing up and making sure it was paid.

"I remember when there were so many jobs to chose from it was an employees market, and businesses were bending over backwards trying to entice people to work for them"

Yep.... and then other countries started up factories who's employees would work for a pittance.

China... India... and many others.

Can't expect Americans to work for nothing can you... unless they are prisoners, the only form of '''slavery''' left.

(V): "and institute tort reform to correct the REAL problems with health care."

[ Tell that to the lawyers... the same ones that are at the heart of much of the tort problems in the USA. ]


It's not enough to tell them. If the law says you can file frivolous lawsuits and sue for exorbitant claims then why wouldn't they? It's not just McDonalds that can be forced to pay someone for spilling coffee on themselves. Doctors and hospitals are also forced to pay out more than they should have to, and so the cost of health care naturally rises to cover those costs.

It's not the lawyers who are at fault, it's the fault of lawmakers who have steadfastly refused to fix this problem. Instead, they want to take control of healthcare and completely change how it is payed for and administered. This is what they have wanted to do for a long time, so it's no wonder why they have refused to fix any of the real problems that drive health care costs up.

(V): "In the UK it has been seen recently that even if the Government gives money for banks to help businesses they won't. Even when they have said they will."

Well, you have to understand that our government knows better than anyone else how to run healthcare, and your government knows better than the banking industry how they should be doing business. I mean seriously, is there nothing government can't do better than you or me?

Iamon lyme: Oops, I meant to say --- Is there anything government can't do better than you or me?

"Some people think the constitution is outdated, but that's nonsense"

[ It would be fair to say that there are some things that were never imagined of when it was written. ]


Of course, but no one needed to imagine a fundamental change in people... why would they? What worked then works now, and what didn't work then still doesn't work. This isn't news, we have thousands of years of history proving out what works and what doesn't, and why.

(V): "Empower the politicians (all of them) to reject government funded health care,"

[ Then empower the people to have good access, not just high cost ER. ]


The people are already empowered, but maybe many of them don't know that. Real reform hasn't happened for a few reasons... lack of awareness of the problem, push back from legislators who would rather take over health care for themselves to control, and not enough people who know they are already empowered to pressure reluctant lawmakers. What I meant by "empower the politicians" is by putting pressure on the reluctant ones and encourage those who have been trying to get tort reform off the ground and passed into law. In spite of this being the most practical way to lower costs and increase availability, it never gets enough traction in either house of representatives to come to a vote... there are too many who either don't understand the need for it, or want there to be problems with healthcare so they will have an excuse to step in and take over.

And like it or not access to healthcare is not a God given right, even though we are constantly being led to believe that it is. Do you believe access to healthcare is a God given right?

(V): "If government can defer its greed for a few years and stop interfering with our lives and businesses, reduce the tax burdon instead of increasing it"

[ Same with private enterprises. The UK contracted out to a private company the roll of getting people back to work who've been out of work for a long time because of health problems....... The company made several promises, but it turned out that they were just interested in making a profit. In the end it's gonna cost the UK more. ]


You are proving my point. The key statement in your reply was "The UK contracted out to a private company..."

Most private companies aren't so gullible when contracting out to other companies, and will take great pains to insure they won't get screwed. If they didn't they wouldn't be able to stay in business very long. On the other hand, a governing body such as the UK can afford to make mistakes with money collected from taxes. It's the same over here... our beloved president can make bone headed business decisions without suffering any long term consequences for himself or his beloved political party.

(V): "Grocery stores understand how low price / high volume will net greater profits than simply charging as much as they can get away with."

[ Right..... lol... ... ... No. In theory, yes... in reality... it depends. If the store knows it can charge more due to the likes of position... it will. Now adays loss leaders are more used. ]


Loss leaders can spice up the deal, but I think most people consider what the total cost of buying groceries will come to. It's all driven by competition, which btw is something governments don't have to contend with... they don't spend their own money, they spend yours.

Competition forces businesses to offer better deals than someone else, and what better way to drum up business than to charge less for the same thing? The higher volume comes into play when more people choose to buy from you instead of someone else. A lower profit per item can add up to the point where you end up with more overall profit than if you were to charge more per item. I'm not sure what you mean by "In theory, yes"... it's done all the time, and has been going on for a long time. Some people weren't happy about losing mom and pop stores to the larger chains, but so what? I don't know anyone who intentionally pays more for the same product they could get for a lot less somewhere else. Do you know anyone like that?

That wasn't my point though, I assumed it was a given how that works. My point was that anyone who understands how lowering a profit per item can translate into more overall profit in a business should also be able to understand how lowering taxes can have the effect of generating more taxable income.

Iamon lyme: The law doesn't make them do it though does it.

"It's not just McDonalds that can be forced to pay someone for spilling coffee on themselves. Doctors and hospitals are also forced to pay out more than they should have to, and so the cost of health care naturally rises to cover those costs."

That is just one of the factors, an easy one to use to distract you from the rest of the ways health care providers and others in the health care business inflate prices.

"it's the fault of lawmakers who have steadfastly refused to fix this problem."

Why... who's interests are affected if tort reform is made?

"and your government knows better than the banking industry how they should be doing business."

lol... we've had to bail out the banks here. Our government owns substantial shares in a number of UK based banks.
.......... The reason, stupidity by the banks, fraud resulting in billions of refunds to business and private customers.

Why... regulations keeping the 'merchant' and 'high street' sides of the businesses separate were dropped as the banks said they didn't need them. Seemingly common sense principles and morals have no part of modern 'merchant' banking.

"You are proving my point. The key statement in your reply was "The UK contracted out to a private company...""

Am I...... That private companies are more efficient.... except when they are liars??

"Competition forces businesses to offer better deals than someone else, and what better way to drum up business than to charge less for the same thing?"

The UK is a registered corporate entity. I (as is every UK citizen) am a share holder in such as stated on my Birth Certificate... I think the same applies to US citizens.

My name as registered on my birth certificate is crown copyrighted, not to be used as identification and as such, a legal fiction. All acts and statutes passed as 'legal' laws are by consent in the UK. If we do not consent, they cannot enforce.

To show you do not consent is a process in some cases. But even the police cannot enforce consent in many cases.

"My point was that anyone who understands how lowering a profit per item can translate into more overall profit in a business should also be able to understand how lowering taxes can have the effect of generating more taxable income."

I understand the principle easily. But in reality we do not have a taxation system where it could be said to be true. While blatant fraud and evasion happens, your point is pointless. Not because taxes are high, but because they just like to not pay tax period.