Horse hockey. Feel free to believe it though. I guess even after an Al Queda group took responsibility for the attack within hours, we were supposed to ignore that too.

It's not that the emperor walks around with no clothes, it's that rubes continue to compliment him on his threads while the media describes the exciting new trend.

That is an obvious misrepresentation with the use of Congress. Certain members of the Congressional Intelligence panels would have been informed, but not all of Congress.

So, which members of that committee or panel that were informed specifically attacked Obama and his administration for his refusal to acknowledge that spontaneous mobs don't bring mortars and RPGs with them to a protest/riot?

Bush did it.

a major cluster
 

This whole deal was a major cluster fluck. We all deserve to know:

a) Who decided NOT to send in air or ground troops to save the ambassador and his people.

b) Who gave the orders to LIE to the American people for many weeks about the reason for attack?

I've got LOTS of other questions, such as why were classified documents left to sit on the embassy grounds for WEEKS after the attack, only to be picked up by ABC news employees and God knows who else?

The sad truth is that we all know where the responsibility lies, and yet we also know that the media does not have the will and that those in power now have all the power needed to sweep this under the rug. Another win for BIG government.

that's racist

Obama bin Ladden

Cicero is not an expert on monetary policy, aiight.

In his defense, he did operate on a totally different monetary system than the one we currently use in the USA. :)

U-s-a. U-s-a!

I'm really excited about the next four years:

Senate bill rewrite lets feds read your e-mail without warrants | Politics and Law - CNET News

"Buy JGBs, get bitches."

https://www.miataturbo.net/attachmen...ine=1353443613

And here I thought "Gangnam Style" would win the ladies:idea:

I want a nice, solid .25% return on my two year US Bond, especially when we're downgraded again in the next couple of months. I had some California muni's last year but the junk status scared me out of them.

What was the duration on those Cali munis? :) The worst performing [edit: California municipal bond] open-end mutual fund I can find for the past 3 years was a PIMCO short duration fund which was a step up from a money market fund. 0.35% [edit: per year for the past 3 years].

The best performers were up between 10 and 12% per year for the past 3 years.

The numbers are even better if you had bought 12 months ago: Nuveen's CA high yield munis are up over 20% in a year.


US Treasury securities? S&P downgraded the USA's credit rating on 2011-08-05. Imagine you had bought some 3-7 year (aka intermediate term) Treasury bonds via the IEI ETF the day before. It closed at 119.78 on 2011-08-04.


As of yesterday's close, including dividends, you would have a gain of about 4.5% in a little over a year. Not as good as the SPY which is up over 15% on price alone since 2011-08-04...

So, hopefully, you sold your CA Munis and bought some US stocks or something else with the possibility of productivity (e.g. used it to fund the Catfish project) and didn't just let the cash sit in the bank.

WelcometoUSA.gov | Government Benefits


"Official website with information on all available federal benefit programs. (English Version- Spanish Version)"


Oddly, neither of the links work for the "official website"

More proof the government doesnt work!

Great returns aren't so great if they default. I've had AWESOME luck with investing for the past couple of years. Lost a year's salary on a Ponzi scheme that was rated 5 stars by Morning Star. Then I lost the same amount to our good friend and former governor Jon Corzine and MF Global.

Don't worry, you'll all have a similar feeling when you're bailing out California. :vash:

Government works, just not well. Why people think that they can add regulations AND add a governmental middle man, and THEN have more efficient and lower-cost health care is beyond me, and most rational beings.

Now "they" are deciding the extent of our internet freedoms at the UN, and in the next round of the fiscal cliff saga "they" will decide if charitable deductions should be capped or not. Those with a memory will recall that this was tried early in Obama's first term as well. How do you think that will affect the true on-the-ground charities that truly help the needy? I'm thinking not well.

Big government = Shit