All of this is true except the final question. I didn't think much of that was going to happen, so no I don't feel like a dumbass. I only have my guns because the Republicans have blocked him at every turn. I didn't know he was planning to implant anything or put me in a FEMA camp. I have no idea why Sharia law is mentioned, though I get the feeling Obama seems to like the concept because he's scared to death of Muslims, the death panels may come into existence later as the government runs out of money and can't fund healthcare, gay marriage was never going to ruin the country, the birth certificate was a ridiculous discussion point (and there's still some question as to its validity, though I couldn't give a rat's ass about it, and who said he was the Anti-Christ?
Yeah, these people think they're funny. But in reality, they're just stupid - dumber than the person they are calling a dumbass.
Yup, that's true. But um, if I increase my costs from 1 to 2.9 that's a 190% increase, whereas if I increase it from 100 to 172, that's a 72% increase. It seems to me the 1.9 increase is relatively small in comparison to the increase of 72. Percentages are funny that way. As your base grows, you need to spend more to get the percentage impact you seek.
I oppose Keynesian economics, so any deficit spending is by its very nature abhorrent, whether it's 1.9 or 72. But if you were to ask me who was more footloose with the purse strings.....um, there's no comparison really. Obama is the most drunken of all drunken sailors.
The last one, which I continue to search for, stipulates that Obama has lowered gas prices (yes, they are lower), reduced unemployment (yup, it's down) and increased the stock market (yeah, it hit new highs recently). Again, more 'facts'.
Bothersome facts, really. Because, it assumes the president is responsible for all these things, rather than business and consumers (who I think play a bigger role). He happens to be the guy in the White House. Correlation is not causation. That said, even the facts themselves are bothersome because gas prices are down due to overall decreases in usage worldwide (hardly Obama's doing), and that's indicative of worldwide slowdown in economic activity. Reduced unemployment is almost entirely due to workers leaving the workforce. Labor non-participation has hit 40 year highs, an unfortunate and disturbing fact. Yes, some more people are working now than when Obama came to office, but almost none of that is due to the spending spree he engaged. The stock market is up, too. But interest rates are being artificially held at zero....so if you want to make money, you need to put it somewhere to get a return. Obama put all that money into the stock market? I think not.
These are stupid claims. But here is one which is absolutely nuts, and it doesn't involve Obama.
Fox News aside, the Clinton Foundation is NOT a charity. It has always been a corporate concern, but has lately become an election tool. It has non-profit status, but that doesn't make it a charity. So technically, while the other posts he sent me are 'true' this one is not. But almost nothing about the Clintons is ever true. If ever there is a made-for-TV consumption political family, it is Bill and Hillary.
