At one of her campaign stops someone asked if that included the women that accused Bill. Her response..."Everyone should be believed at first until they are disbelieved based on evidence."
0
To remove first post, remove entire topic.
She said rape victims need to be believed.
At one of her campaign stops someone asked if that included the women that accused Bill. Her response..."Everyone should be believed at first until they are disbelieved based on evidence."
She is another one with the worthless Ivy League education. Drudge brought up a great point on the Alex Jones show a few weeks ago. How is the media able to suppress news on all of her lesbian lovers?
0
She is another one with the worthless Ivy League education. Drudge brought up a great point on the Alex Jones show a few weeks ago. How is the media able to suppress news on all of her lesbian lovers?
Not only is she an idiot but she's also a pathological liar. I hope the American people the voters will not let her and her goofball sex crazed husband live in the White House again!
0
Not only is she an idiot but she's also a pathological liar. I hope the American people the voters will not let her and her goofball sex crazed husband live in the White House again!
[Quote: Originally Posted by sundance] She is another one with the worthless Ivy League education. Drudge brought up a great point on the Alex Jones show a few weeks ago. How is the media able to suppress news on all of her lesbian
Worthless ? She & Bill will be enjoying all the comforts of home in the White House in 13 months! .....Just Curious, Who Do You Republicans Blame For 2008 ? Or 1987 ?
0
[Quote: Originally Posted by sundance] She is another one with the worthless Ivy League education. Drudge brought up a great point on the Alex Jones show a few weeks ago. How is the media able to suppress news on all of her lesbian
Worthless ? She & Bill will be enjoying all the comforts of home in the White House in 13 months! .....Just Curious, Who Do You Republicans Blame For 2008 ? Or 1987 ?
She is another one with the worthless Ivy League education. Drudge brought up a great point on the Alex Jones show a few weeks ago. How is the media able to suppress news on all of her lesbian
Worthless ? She & Bill will be enjoying all the comforts of home in the White House in 13 months! .....Just Curious, Who Do You Republicans Blame For 2008 ? Or 1987 ?
Duh, 2008... Do you think it was Republicans that wanted banks to relax underwriting guidelines so that minorities could purchase a home to live in and a home to rent out regardless of income?
Pull your head out!
https://youtu.be/Yga7TlsA-1A
Watch the whole video so that you never embarrass yourself again like that in a political forum.
0
Quote Originally Posted by joe pockets:
Quote Originally Posted by sundance:
She is another one with the worthless Ivy League education. Drudge brought up a great point on the Alex Jones show a few weeks ago. How is the media able to suppress news on all of her lesbian
Worthless ? She & Bill will be enjoying all the comforts of home in the White House in 13 months! .....Just Curious, Who Do You Republicans Blame For 2008 ? Or 1987 ?
Duh, 2008... Do you think it was Republicans that wanted banks to relax underwriting guidelines so that minorities could purchase a home to live in and a home to rent out regardless of income?
Pull your head out!
https://youtu.be/Yga7TlsA-1A
Watch the whole video so that you never embarrass yourself again like that in a political forum.
Duh, 2008... Do you think it was Republicans that wanted banks to relax underwriting guidelines so that minorities could purchase a home to live in and a home to rent out regardless of income?
Pull your head out!
https://youtu.be/Yga7TlsA-1A
Watch the whole video so that you never embarrass yourself again like that in a political forum.
Oh,,,Ok so the way it go's is the democratic backed well to do folks or the Rich in 2000s saw continued dramatic increases in income. An between 1989 and 2006, the Democratic backed wealthiest 10 percent got more than 90 percent of all income growth. The democratic backed richest 1 percent saw their income increase 200 percent, while the wealthiest 0.1 percent saw an increase of 425 percent.
By contrast, if republican backed workers wanted to maintain, let alone improve, their standard of living, they had to take on debt. Personal debt increasd by 150 percent since 1997, from about $5.5 trillion to $14.4 trillion. In that same period, the ratio of debt to disposable income increased from 90 percent to 139 percent. And the democratic backing billionaire Koch brothers In one of the worst economic downturns since the Great Depression who 24 hours a day rail against government’s unfair burden on the wealthy, had almost doubled their net worth to a combined $68 billion. Now I get it ! Thanx
0
Quote Originally Posted by bowlslit:
Duh, 2008... Do you think it was Republicans that wanted banks to relax underwriting guidelines so that minorities could purchase a home to live in and a home to rent out regardless of income?
Pull your head out!
https://youtu.be/Yga7TlsA-1A
Watch the whole video so that you never embarrass yourself again like that in a political forum.
Oh,,,Ok so the way it go's is the democratic backed well to do folks or the Rich in 2000s saw continued dramatic increases in income. An between 1989 and 2006, the Democratic backed wealthiest 10 percent got more than 90 percent of all income growth. The democratic backed richest 1 percent saw their income increase 200 percent, while the wealthiest 0.1 percent saw an increase of 425 percent.
By contrast, if republican backed workers wanted to maintain, let alone improve, their standard of living, they had to take on debt. Personal debt increasd by 150 percent since 1997, from about $5.5 trillion to $14.4 trillion. In that same period, the ratio of debt to disposable income increased from 90 percent to 139 percent. And the democratic backing billionaire Koch brothers In one of the worst economic downturns since the Great Depression who 24 hours a day rail against government’s unfair burden on the wealthy, had almost doubled their net worth to a combined $68 billion. Now I get it ! Thanx
There is not an easy answer to that. Republicans and Democrats are both owned by the banks that used predatory lending to hook these poor schmucks to mortgages they could not afford.
Relaxing lending standards because of race etc. That was only one facet of the plan.
Another could be the easy loans that building companies were getting.
They also needed low interest rates via the FED.
Whether you want to cry about the Koch brothers, or sorros. Goldman or JP Morgan, The rich, or the disaffected poor, you have to some day wake up and realize that Republicans and Democrats are about as real as WWE. They are both working against the interests of middle America.
0
There is not an easy answer to that. Republicans and Democrats are both owned by the banks that used predatory lending to hook these poor schmucks to mortgages they could not afford.
Relaxing lending standards because of race etc. That was only one facet of the plan.
Another could be the easy loans that building companies were getting.
They also needed low interest rates via the FED.
Whether you want to cry about the Koch brothers, or sorros. Goldman or JP Morgan, The rich, or the disaffected poor, you have to some day wake up and realize that Republicans and Democrats are about as real as WWE. They are both working against the interests of middle America.
There is not an easy answer to that. Republicans and Democrats are both owned by the banks that used predatory lending to hook these poor schmucks to mortgages they could not afford.
Relaxing lending standards because of race etc. That was only one facet of the plan.
Another could be the easy loans that building companies were getting.
They also needed low interest rates via the FED.
Whether you want to cry about the Koch brothers, or sorros. Goldman or JP Morgan, The rich, or the disaffected poor, you have to some day wake up and realize that Republicans and Democrats are about as real as WWE. They are both working against the interests of middle America. Rick, when comparing Koch to sorros it's heads and shoulders difference and there 6 to 1 billionaires that are devout GOP so when you start to pull out the wallet you know who has the do re mi and it isn't the unions either.
0
Quote Originally Posted by rick3117:
There is not an easy answer to that. Republicans and Democrats are both owned by the banks that used predatory lending to hook these poor schmucks to mortgages they could not afford.
Relaxing lending standards because of race etc. That was only one facet of the plan.
Another could be the easy loans that building companies were getting.
They also needed low interest rates via the FED.
Whether you want to cry about the Koch brothers, or sorros. Goldman or JP Morgan, The rich, or the disaffected poor, you have to some day wake up and realize that Republicans and Democrats are about as real as WWE. They are both working against the interests of middle America. Rick, when comparing Koch to sorros it's heads and shoulders difference and there 6 to 1 billionaires that are devout GOP so when you start to pull out the wallet you know who has the do re mi and it isn't the unions either.
Oh,,,Ok so the way it go's is the democratic backed well to do folks or the Rich in 2000s saw continued dramatic increases in income. An between 1989 and 2006, the Democratic backed wealthiest 10 percent got more than 90 percent of all income growth. The democratic backed richest 1 percent saw their income increase 200 percent, while the wealthiest 0.1 percent saw an increase of 425 percent.
By contrast, if republican backed workers wanted to maintain, let alone improve, their standard of living, they had to take on debt. Personal debt increasd by 150 percent since 1997, from about $5.5 trillion to $14.4 trillion. In that same period, the ratio of debt to disposable income increased from 90 percent to 139 percent. And the democratic backing billionaire Koch brothers In one of the worst economic downturns since the Great Depression who 24 hours a day rail against government’s unfair burden on the wealthy, had almost doubled their net worth to a combined $68 billion. Now I get it ! Thanx
Sorry, I'm late responding, kinda busy lately. What does the income increase of the top 1% have to do with the recession of 08?
Remember, you are crying over 1% of the populations wealth.
I'm assuming based on your previous posts that you would like to see at least 200% increase in income of both lower classes NO?
0
Quote Originally Posted by joe pockets:
Oh,,,Ok so the way it go's is the democratic backed well to do folks or the Rich in 2000s saw continued dramatic increases in income. An between 1989 and 2006, the Democratic backed wealthiest 10 percent got more than 90 percent of all income growth. The democratic backed richest 1 percent saw their income increase 200 percent, while the wealthiest 0.1 percent saw an increase of 425 percent.
By contrast, if republican backed workers wanted to maintain, let alone improve, their standard of living, they had to take on debt. Personal debt increasd by 150 percent since 1997, from about $5.5 trillion to $14.4 trillion. In that same period, the ratio of debt to disposable income increased from 90 percent to 139 percent. And the democratic backing billionaire Koch brothers In one of the worst economic downturns since the Great Depression who 24 hours a day rail against government’s unfair burden on the wealthy, had almost doubled their net worth to a combined $68 billion. Now I get it ! Thanx
Sorry, I'm late responding, kinda busy lately. What does the income increase of the top 1% have to do with the recession of 08?
Remember, you are crying over 1% of the populations wealth.
I'm assuming based on your previous posts that you would like to see at least 200% increase in income of both lower classes NO?
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on
this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide
any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in
your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner
of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.
Hot Forum Topics
