Disqus - Latest Comments for carlk

Re: Kari Lake Speaks Out On BS Stolen Election: "Arizonans Know BS When They See It"

Carl K — Tue, 15 Nov 2022 13:29:22 -0000

Brought to you by your friendly neighborhood FED.

Re: Georgia Elections: Herschel Walker Jumps to 5-Point Lead Over Radical Raphael Warnock – Kemp Up 11 Over Crazy Stacey Abrams

Carl K — Thu, 27 Oct 2022 13:57:24 -0000

When given a choice of the lesser of two evils, you vote against the eviler of the two lessers.

The eviler of the two lessers is clearly Stacy.

Re: VIDEO: Dirtbag Bill Barr Declares President Trump He Lost and His Election Claims were ‘Bullsh*t’

Carl K — Thu, 09 Jun 2022 20:54:10 -0000

Ben Shapiro asked him about 2000 mules. He completely mischaracterized the thesis of the movie, saying that a few hundred thousand people walking within a hundred feet of a dropbox and making "telephone calls" proves nothing. He had no clue what the basic arguments of the movie were, but it didn't matter. It was all B.S. to him, even though he obviously hadn't seen it.

Re: WOW! FOX News Hack Sandra Smith Claims "2000 Mules" Was Debunked - Offers No Evidence - Could Face Hefty Defamation Lawsuit

Carl K — Sun, 29 May 2022 19:49:35 -0000

"Scoffed at" = "Debunked"

A democrat scoffed at it, so that settles it. Debunked

Re: The Polaroid Mystery: Where Is Tara Calico? It’s Been 29 Years Since She Disappeared

Carl K — Sat, 11 Nov 2017 13:38:44 -0000

It was a promotional tee shirt for Egghead Software.

Re: Long nameless, Hollywood Jane Doe revealed as missing South Bay grad

Carl K — Fri, 02 Dec 2016 23:32:28 -0000

The remains of all unidentifieds and indigents found in Los Angeles County are cremated and buried in a county cemetery in the Boyle Heights section of LA. The ashes are buried in a common grave marked only by a small plaque indicating the year. It would be impossible to recover her ashes from the common grave, and even if they could, DNA testing would not be possible.

Re: This shirt being worn in Ferguson is so stupid I’m at a loss for words

Carl K — Fri, 29 Aug 2014 00:32:17 -0000

If he'd rather be picked up by an ISIS terrorist, I'm sure that can be arranged.

Re: Gutting Obamacare is playing with lives

Carl K — Sat, 26 Jul 2014 03:31:44 -0000

The health of the economy is not based ONLY on who runs the presidency. The control of congress is equally influential.

When you factor in which party runs congress (in addition to the party that runs the presidency), the result is just the opposite of what you claim. There is almost a perfect correlation between which party runs at least 2 of the three (House, Senate, and Presidency). The economy does well when R's run at least two of the three, and lousy when D's run at least two of the three.

For all of the Carter presidency with a D-Run House and Senate, the economy sucked.

In Reagan's first six years of his presidency, he had a Democrat-run House and Republican Senate. Republicans ran the Senate and Presidency from 1984-1987, it only took a year or two for the economy to turn around, and the economy ran strong for most of the remainder of his presidency.

In 1986, the Democrats retook both houses and held them for the following 8 years. The stock market crashed in 1987. GHW Bush was elected in 1988, and had a D-Run House and Senate (and a sluggish economy) for his entire 4 years.

In Clinton's first two years, Clinton and the Democrats held the Presidency, the House, and the Senate. the economy was dragging along, just as it was in the previous four, The economy didn't pick up until 1994, when Republicans took over both houses. In the final year of the Clinton presidency, the Republicans were doing badly in the polls and the economy began slowing down. We slipped into a recession just as Clinton was handing the presidency over to GW Bush

Bush started his presidency with a 50-50 Senate, with Cheney being the tiebreaker. A few months after GW Bush took office, Democrats re-took the Senate because Jim Jeffords changed parties. But Republicans continued to hold the House (in addition to the presidency). The recession lasted only one quarter.

The R's took back the Senate in 2002, and the economy (and the stock market) ran strong for most of the first six years of the Bush presidency.

In 1986, the Democrats (run by Nancy and Harry) took over both the House and Senate. What happened in 1987? The stock market crashed, the banking system collapsed, and the economy tanked. Coincidence? Of course not.

With Barack Obama and a Dem-run Senate for his whole presidency (and a Dem-run House for his first two), the economy has sucked (with a nearly flatline GDP) the entire time.

The stock market has soared, but only because the Federal Reserve has been printing 80 billion dollars per month in a futile attempt to prop up the economy. But instead of using the printed money to loan out to consumers, the banks are pumping it into the stock market. The Fed doesn't dare stop printing money because it would tank the economy again. But sooner or later, the Fed is going to have to pull back all that printed money. And it is going to be devastating to the economy regardless of which party runs the presidency, House, and Senate.

Re: Gutting Obamacare is playing with lives

Carl K — Sat, 26 Jul 2014 01:37:59 -0000

No, she lives in New York - a blue state.

Re: Breitbart Texas Witnesses Skeleton of Illegal Migrant, Death Toll Rises

Carl K — Wed, 16 Jul 2014 01:20:35 -0000

"The grizzly scene was a pointed reminder of just how dangerous this journey is and how desperate the illegal immigrants must be."

That's "GRISLY". "Grizzly" is a type of bear.