<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Sign Of The Times? Anti-Obama Billboard In Missouri</title>
	<atom:link href="http://donklephant.com/2008/10/12/sign-of-the-times-anti-obama-billboard-in-missouri/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://donklephant.com/2008/10/12/sign-of-the-times-anti-obama-billboard-in-missouri/</link>
	<description>Big Teeth. Huge Ass. Surprisingly Reasonable.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 14 Feb 2012 14:03:13 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tully</title>
		<link>http://donklephant.com/2008/10/12/sign-of-the-times-anti-obama-billboard-in-missouri/comment-page-3/#comment-716664</link>
		<dc:creator>Tully</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 Oct 2011 17:09:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donklephant.com/?p=9044#comment-716664</guid>
		<description>Thanks, khaki. I catch myself doing it on occasion. Feel free to to slap me around if I do.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks, khaki. I catch myself doing it on occasion. Feel free to to slap me around if I do.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: khaki</title>
		<link>http://donklephant.com/2008/10/12/sign-of-the-times-anti-obama-billboard-in-missouri/comment-page-3/#comment-716656</link>
		<dc:creator>khaki</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 Oct 2011 13:31:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donklephant.com/?p=9044#comment-716656</guid>
		<description>@ Tully: &quot;Aside: It’s somewhat disingenuous to deploy the old “Surely you’re [blank] enough to … ” line. Implying that to disagree once must be the opposite. Surely you’re sober enough to see what I’m saying here. :-)&quot; 

Fair enough. Sorry.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@ Tully: &#8220;Aside: It’s somewhat disingenuous to deploy the old “Surely you’re [blank] enough to … ” line. Implying that to disagree once must be the opposite. Surely you’re sober enough to see what I’m saying here. :-)&#8221; </p>
<p>Fair enough. Sorry.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tully</title>
		<link>http://donklephant.com/2008/10/12/sign-of-the-times-anti-obama-billboard-in-missouri/comment-page-2/#comment-716630</link>
		<dc:creator>Tully</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Oct 2011 19:43:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donklephant.com/?p=9044#comment-716630</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;Tully, surely you’re honest enough to admit that years “controlling Congress” is not equivalent to causality.&lt;/i&gt;

Since Congress is in control of spending, debt, and such, I&#039;d say there is a most reasonable presumption of direct causality present in relation to debt and deficits, &lt;b&gt;where the linkage is direct, established, and &lt;i&gt;definitional&lt;/i&gt;&lt;/b&gt;. Deficit spending and debt go hand in hand and are under Congressional control (they hate to admit it, though). For employment and growth the causality would be much less direct, and no, it&#039;s not unreasonable in the least to call for linking that up before accepting the presentational context as righteously causative. The overall causation factor of the government there is indeed debatable, though that one exists is axiomatic. Everything has SOME degree of direct/indirect causation in relation to everything else, and that&#039;s a two-way street. Maybe voters just like to elect Dems when unemployment is up, for example. Not making that claim, it&#039;s just an example.

Aside: It&#039;s somewhat disingenuous to deploy the old &quot;Surely you&#039;re [blank] enough to ... &quot; line. Implying that to disagree once must be the opposite.  Surely you&#039;re sober enough to see what I&#039;m saying here. :-)

The obviously direct causality of two of the factors won&#039;t keep me from noting that that anyone who thinks the ONLY factor involved in ANY of the (accurate) stats presented was the partisan composition of Congress as the presenting context suggests is at best somewhat underinformed.  

&lt;i&gt;Isn’t it more likely that economic data vs. which party is power is to blame/ gets credit is a lagging indicator.&lt;/i&gt;

Yes and no, and thank you very much for being aware of the lag factor. Spending tends to lag budget approval for the obvious reason that time doesn&#039;t run backwards and spending is not instantaneous with budget passage. This year&#039;s spending was set by last year&#039;s budget. But there are some &lt;i&gt;caveats&lt;/i&gt; there too, as spending relates to control of Congress. When there&#039;s a change in control, there&#039;s a one-time opportunity for the new majority to change the current year&#039;s spending, but unless the newly ascendant party has both houses of Congress and either veto-proof majorities or filibuster-proof ones, it&#039;s a very limited opportunity. 

Examples: Budget lag does not apply so well to things like the Porkulus bill, which is self-contained within the current administration and the Dem control of Congress. And the bailouts were under a Dem-controlled Congress with near-veto-proof majorities. Those aren&#039;t lagging indicators. 

Oh wait! this year&#039;s spending was NOT set by last year&#039;s budget, because the Dems still in control of the Senate have FAILED TO PASS A BUDGET the last three years. THEY HAVEN&#039;T EVEN SUBMITTED ONE. IN THREE YEARS. Obama&#039;s own budgets were DOA in same Senate, despite his party&#039;s control and without regard to potential filibuster. None of them rose to the level of even simple majority, which is why they never came to the floor.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>Tully, surely you’re honest enough to admit that years “controlling Congress” is not equivalent to causality.</i></p>
<p>Since Congress is in control of spending, debt, and such, I&#8217;d say there is a most reasonable presumption of direct causality present in relation to debt and deficits, <b>where the linkage is direct, established, and <i>definitional</i></b>. Deficit spending and debt go hand in hand and are under Congressional control (they hate to admit it, though). For employment and growth the causality would be much less direct, and no, it&#8217;s not unreasonable in the least to call for linking that up before accepting the presentational context as righteously causative. The overall causation factor of the government there is indeed debatable, though that one exists is axiomatic. Everything has SOME degree of direct/indirect causation in relation to everything else, and that&#8217;s a two-way street. Maybe voters just like to elect Dems when unemployment is up, for example. Not making that claim, it&#8217;s just an example.</p>
<p>Aside: It&#8217;s somewhat disingenuous to deploy the old &#8220;Surely you&#8217;re [blank] enough to &#8230; &#8221; line. Implying that to disagree once must be the opposite.  Surely you&#8217;re sober enough to see what I&#8217;m saying here. :-)</p>
<p>The obviously direct causality of two of the factors won&#8217;t keep me from noting that that anyone who thinks the ONLY factor involved in ANY of the (accurate) stats presented was the partisan composition of Congress as the presenting context suggests is at best somewhat underinformed.  </p>
<p><i>Isn’t it more likely that economic data vs. which party is power is to blame/ gets credit is a lagging indicator.</i></p>
<p>Yes and no, and thank you very much for being aware of the lag factor. Spending tends to lag budget approval for the obvious reason that time doesn&#8217;t run backwards and spending is not instantaneous with budget passage. This year&#8217;s spending was set by last year&#8217;s budget. But there are some <i>caveats</i> there too, as spending relates to control of Congress. When there&#8217;s a change in control, there&#8217;s a one-time opportunity for the new majority to change the current year&#8217;s spending, but unless the newly ascendant party has both houses of Congress and either veto-proof majorities or filibuster-proof ones, it&#8217;s a very limited opportunity. </p>
<p>Examples: Budget lag does not apply so well to things like the Porkulus bill, which is self-contained within the current administration and the Dem control of Congress. And the bailouts were under a Dem-controlled Congress with near-veto-proof majorities. Those aren&#8217;t lagging indicators. </p>
<p>Oh wait! this year&#8217;s spending was NOT set by last year&#8217;s budget, because the Dems still in control of the Senate have FAILED TO PASS A BUDGET the last three years. THEY HAVEN&#8217;T EVEN SUBMITTED ONE. IN THREE YEARS. Obama&#8217;s own budgets were DOA in same Senate, despite his party&#8217;s control and without regard to potential filibuster. None of them rose to the level of even simple majority, which is why they never came to the floor.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: khaki</title>
		<link>http://donklephant.com/2008/10/12/sign-of-the-times-anti-obama-billboard-in-missouri/comment-page-2/#comment-716628</link>
		<dc:creator>khaki</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Oct 2011 18:34:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donklephant.com/?p=9044#comment-716628</guid>
		<description>One more thought: Isn&#039;t it more likely that economic data vs. which party is power is to blame/ gets credit is a lagging indicator.  Doesn&#039;t the political pendulum swing AFTER policies start taking effect.  It certainly did this last go around.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>One more thought: Isn&#8217;t it more likely that economic data vs. which party is power is to blame/ gets credit is a lagging indicator.  Doesn&#8217;t the political pendulum swing AFTER policies start taking effect.  It certainly did this last go around.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: khaki</title>
		<link>http://donklephant.com/2008/10/12/sign-of-the-times-anti-obama-billboard-in-missouri/comment-page-2/#comment-716626</link>
		<dc:creator>khaki</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Oct 2011 18:16:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donklephant.com/?p=9044#comment-716626</guid>
		<description>Tully, surely you&#039;re honest enough to admit that years &quot;controlling Congress&quot; is not equivalent to causality.   I&#039;m not making a case one way or the other here regarding who is really to blame or to take credit.  But to look at statistical results that occur during a given time frame and attach all the blame or credit to whatever group had a majority in office at the time is intellectually dishonest.   Republican pundits still try that slight of hand by noting that the country lost X number of jobs during Obama&#039;s time in office compared to under Bush and attaching the causality to Obama&#039;s policy.  That nonsense is about as obvious as it gets and yet you still hear in in GOP talking points to this day.   What the GOP is good at, is repeating the nonsense so often that it starts to sound plausible.  As another poster once said, they&#039;ll shit in their hand and tell you it&#039;s chocolate.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Tully, surely you&#8217;re honest enough to admit that years &#8220;controlling Congress&#8221; is not equivalent to causality.   I&#8217;m not making a case one way or the other here regarding who is really to blame or to take credit.  But to look at statistical results that occur during a given time frame and attach all the blame or credit to whatever group had a majority in office at the time is intellectually dishonest.   Republican pundits still try that slight of hand by noting that the country lost X number of jobs during Obama&#8217;s time in office compared to under Bush and attaching the causality to Obama&#8217;s policy.  That nonsense is about as obvious as it gets and yet you still hear in in GOP talking points to this day.   What the GOP is good at, is repeating the nonsense so often that it starts to sound plausible.  As another poster once said, they&#8217;ll shit in their hand and tell you it&#8217;s chocolate.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tully</title>
		<link>http://donklephant.com/2008/10/12/sign-of-the-times-anti-obama-billboard-in-missouri/comment-page-2/#comment-716623</link>
		<dc:creator>Tully</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Oct 2011 17:59:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donklephant.com/?p=9044#comment-716623</guid>
		<description>You&#039;ve gotta admit Terry manages to poison the dialogue in his opening paragraph before he gets to numbers. Not that khaki doesn&#039;t rise directly to the bait. But once you get past the habitual and reflexive &lt;i&gt;ad hominem&lt;/i&gt; I don&#039;t see how the reasoning (or rather, the math) is terribly selective, at least not in any cherry-picking distortionary way. Data NEEDS to be selective to have any real meaning. After a decade of listening to the Dems and the left blaming everything on Bush it&#039;s downright refreshing to see the data from a broader perspective that includes the partisan weightings in Congress.

Turning back the clock to the spending levels of a few years ago would be eminently affordable, by definition.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You&#8217;ve gotta admit Terry manages to poison the dialogue in his opening paragraph before he gets to numbers. Not that khaki doesn&#8217;t rise directly to the bait. But once you get past the habitual and reflexive <i>ad hominem</i> I don&#8217;t see how the reasoning (or rather, the math) is terribly selective, at least not in any cherry-picking distortionary way. Data NEEDS to be selective to have any real meaning. After a decade of listening to the Dems and the left blaming everything on Bush it&#8217;s downright refreshing to see the data from a broader perspective that includes the partisan weightings in Congress.</p>
<p>Turning back the clock to the spending levels of a few years ago would be eminently affordable, by definition.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: cranky critter</title>
		<link>http://donklephant.com/2008/10/12/sign-of-the-times-anti-obama-billboard-in-missouri/comment-page-2/#comment-716611</link>
		<dc:creator>cranky critter</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Oct 2011 04:29:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donklephant.com/?p=9044#comment-716611</guid>
		<description>No, it&#039;s can we afford either set of nitwits to be in charge.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>No, it&#8217;s can we afford either set of nitwits to be in charge.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: khaki</title>
		<link>http://donklephant.com/2008/10/12/sign-of-the-times-anti-obama-billboard-in-missouri/comment-page-2/#comment-716541</link>
		<dc:creator>khaki</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 24 Oct 2011 14:44:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donklephant.com/?p=9044#comment-716541</guid>
		<description>Terry Weston @: &quot;Here is a little info for all you libtards out there...&quot; 

Typical right wing line of attack: insults coupled with selective reasoning.   The real question is can we afford to turn the clock back to more of this?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Terry Weston @: &#8220;Here is a little info for all you libtards out there&#8230;&#8221; </p>
<p>Typical right wing line of attack: insults coupled with selective reasoning.   The real question is can we afford to turn the clock back to more of this?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Terry Weston</title>
		<link>http://donklephant.com/2008/10/12/sign-of-the-times-anti-obama-billboard-in-missouri/comment-page-2/#comment-716516</link>
		<dc:creator>Terry Weston</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 23 Oct 2011 15:02:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donklephant.com/?p=9044#comment-716516</guid>
		<description>Bet all those who had negative things to say about this billboard are feeling very foolish. How many scandals does it take to show the left for what they are ? How many underhanded acts does it take to see that the liberals are nothing but socialists communists liers and political terrorists. Here is a little info for all you libtards out there from government sources so they may be a little light when it comes to the bad info for the democrates. Remember the Federal civil servents vote heavilly democratic.


 Jobs 39,761,000 net new Jobs

Jobs created when Democrates controlled congress (12years) =8,100,000 net new jobs
Jobs created when Republicans controlled congress (10years) = 21,773,000 net new Jobs
Jobs created when congress was split                      (8years) =9,888,000 net new Jobs

Defeicits ($7.304 Trillion)

Total when Democrates controlled congress (12 years) = $5.022 Trillion
Total when Republicans controlled congress (10 years) = $1.219 Trillion
Total when congress was split                     (8 years) = $1.063 Trillion

National Debt. (12.878 Trillion = 93.4% of all debt in our history)

Total new debt when democrates controlled congress (12 years) = $7.859 Trillion.
Total new debt when Republicans controlled congress (10 years) = $3.238 Trillion
Total new debt when congress was split                     (8 years) =$1.781 Trillion.


Economic Growth ($11.873 Trillion of GDP growth)

Total Growth when Democrates controlled congress (12 years) = $3.887 Trillion
Total growth when Republicans controlled congress (10 years) = $5.623 Trillion
Total Growth when congress was split                     ( 8 years) = $2.383 Trillion

Draw your own conclusions, but these are undiputed facts from Government sources.

Sources - 
Democrates controllec congress from 1987 - 1994 and from 2007 to now
Republicans controlled congress from 1995 - 200 and from 2003 - 2006 
There was split congress at 1980 -1986 and 2001 &amp; 2002

Links

Jobs http://www.bis.gov/cps/cpsaat1.pdf

Deficits http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/historicals see table 1.1

Natinal Debt- http://www.treasurydirect.gov/np/bpdlogin?application=np



There is your democratic party and Obama!!

This should start people thinking about 2012. Can we afford four more years of the democrates and Obama ??</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Bet all those who had negative things to say about this billboard are feeling very foolish. How many scandals does it take to show the left for what they are ? How many underhanded acts does it take to see that the liberals are nothing but socialists communists liers and political terrorists. Here is a little info for all you libtards out there from government sources so they may be a little light when it comes to the bad info for the democrates. Remember the Federal civil servents vote heavilly democratic.</p>
<p> Jobs 39,761,000 net new Jobs</p>
<p>Jobs created when Democrates controlled congress (12years) =8,100,000 net new jobs<br />
Jobs created when Republicans controlled congress (10years) = 21,773,000 net new Jobs<br />
Jobs created when congress was split                      (8years) =9,888,000 net new Jobs</p>
<p>Defeicits ($7.304 Trillion)</p>
<p>Total when Democrates controlled congress (12 years) = $5.022 Trillion<br />
Total when Republicans controlled congress (10 years) = $1.219 Trillion<br />
Total when congress was split                     (8 years) = $1.063 Trillion</p>
<p>National Debt. (12.878 Trillion = 93.4% of all debt in our history)</p>
<p>Total new debt when democrates controlled congress (12 years) = $7.859 Trillion.<br />
Total new debt when Republicans controlled congress (10 years) = $3.238 Trillion<br />
Total new debt when congress was split                     (8 years) =$1.781 Trillion.</p>
<p>Economic Growth ($11.873 Trillion of GDP growth)</p>
<p>Total Growth when Democrates controlled congress (12 years) = $3.887 Trillion<br />
Total growth when Republicans controlled congress (10 years) = $5.623 Trillion<br />
Total Growth when congress was split                     ( 8 years) = $2.383 Trillion</p>
<p>Draw your own conclusions, but these are undiputed facts from Government sources.</p>
<p>Sources &#8211;<br />
Democrates controllec congress from 1987 &#8211; 1994 and from 2007 to now<br />
Republicans controlled congress from 1995 &#8211; 200 and from 2003 &#8211; 2006<br />
There was split congress at 1980 -1986 and 2001 &amp; 2002</p>
<p>Links</p>
<p>Jobs <a href="http://www.bis.gov/cps/cpsaat1.pdf" >http://www.bis.gov/cps/cpsaat1.pdf</a></p>
<p>Deficits <a href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/historicals" >http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/historicals</a> see table 1.1</p>
<p>Natinal Debt- <a href="http://www.treasurydirect.gov/np/bpdlogin?application=np" >http://www.treasurydirect.gov/np/bpdlogin?application=np</a></p>
<p>There is your democratic party and Obama!!</p>
<p>This should start people thinking about 2012. Can we afford four more years of the democrates and Obama ??</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Holly</title>
		<link>http://donklephant.com/2008/10/12/sign-of-the-times-anti-obama-billboard-in-missouri/comment-page-2/#comment-582204</link>
		<dc:creator>Holly</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Dec 2009 17:28:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donklephant.com/?p=9044#comment-582204</guid>
		<description>I grew up in West Plains and my family did too, when I come home to see this hate filled, ignorant crap, it makes me literally face-palm. I couldn&#039;t believe it when I drove past it.

There&#039;s nothing wrong with the first amendment.

But, there is a problem when people think that Obama is a muslim and want to project that false image to the rest of their ignorant friends.

It&#039;s just like if someone but a big sign up with a black man that says the &quot;N&quot; word with chains on. It&#039;s racist and ignorant.

My faith in my town&#039;s intelligence has significantly dropped a few more points.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I grew up in West Plains and my family did too, when I come home to see this hate filled, ignorant crap, it makes me literally face-palm. I couldn&#8217;t believe it when I drove past it.</p>
<p>There&#8217;s nothing wrong with the first amendment.</p>
<p>But, there is a problem when people think that Obama is a muslim and want to project that false image to the rest of their ignorant friends.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s just like if someone but a big sign up with a black man that says the &#8220;N&#8221; word with chains on. It&#8217;s racist and ignorant.</p>
<p>My faith in my town&#8217;s intelligence has significantly dropped a few more points.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nick Benjamin</title>
		<link>http://donklephant.com/2008/10/12/sign-of-the-times-anti-obama-billboard-in-missouri/comment-page-2/#comment-560594</link>
		<dc:creator>Nick Benjamin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 05 Oct 2009 01:16:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donklephant.com/?p=9044#comment-560594</guid>
		<description>Necromancy is bad man.

Real bad.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Necromancy is bad man.</p>
<p>Real bad.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Scott</title>
		<link>http://donklephant.com/2008/10/12/sign-of-the-times-anti-obama-billboard-in-missouri/comment-page-2/#comment-560227</link>
		<dc:creator>Scott</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 03 Oct 2009 22:25:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donklephant.com/?p=9044#comment-560227</guid>
		<description>I love it!  The liberal fools are so upset over this billboard!  They want to pull the tax records of the guy who owns the land on which the billboard is situated.  They want his name so they can publicly excoriate him.

The real problem with the billboard is that it is 100% accurate by Obama&#039;s own admission.  Gun regulations?  How about trying to require a license so Americans can do their own re-loads?  How about trying to but a serial number on each individual bullet?  Is any of that going to have an impact on crime?  Of course not.  It will only limit the rights of the law abiding.

But wait...there&#039;s more.  A vote for Obama also equals a middle class tax increase, socialized medicine, health care rationing, mandatory end-of-life-counseling every 5 years  (more frequently if the person of the targeted age group experiences a deterioration of their health), Federally funded abortions and health care for illegal aliens.  Oh, some of you liberal ding bats will say that there is nothing in the bill that allows illegal aliens to have free health care but THEY ALREADY GET FREE EMERGENCY ROOM CARE.  The point is that there is nothing in the bill that requires a person to prove citizenship (not even showing a driver&#039;s license) thus there is nothing in the bill that PREVENTS illegal aliens from getting free medical care.  Here&#039;s a question to the liberals; after adding 100 million or so people to medicare and further reducing what doctors earn, where will we get the next 500,000 or more doctors to treat that 100 more million?  Where will we get the next 10,000 hospitals?  Where will we get the next 3 million nurses?  You people had better start thinking.  People don&#039;t go through medical school to earn $70,000.00 per year and nurses don&#039;t become nurses to earn $25,000.00 per year.  After nationalizing medicine, might YOUR profession be next?????

That is too much information for a billboard but wait....there&#039;s more. :)  

Obama also equals a sharp increase in EVERY AMERICAN&#039;S utility bills through cap and trade, a complete pre-emption of the student loan system in this country (which has already happened), government ownership of GM (very much to the detriment of GM&#039;s bond holders, I might add), Bank of America and AIG.

But wait...there&#039;s more.

Obama also equals a quadrupling of our national debt and inflation by the end of 2011 that will equal what we lived through under the Carter Administration.  

I gotta say, you Liberals are sooo freakin stupid!  See if you can cogitate this concept; liberalism is antithetical to liberty.  Got it?  When government owns the mechanisms that generate money it means that the private sector DOES NOT!  All you liberal geniuses out there who aren&#039;t already working for the government ARE PART OF THE PRIVATE SECTOR!!!!!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I love it!  The liberal fools are so upset over this billboard!  They want to pull the tax records of the guy who owns the land on which the billboard is situated.  They want his name so they can publicly excoriate him.</p>
<p>The real problem with the billboard is that it is 100% accurate by Obama&#8217;s own admission.  Gun regulations?  How about trying to require a license so Americans can do their own re-loads?  How about trying to but a serial number on each individual bullet?  Is any of that going to have an impact on crime?  Of course not.  It will only limit the rights of the law abiding.</p>
<p>But wait&#8230;there&#8217;s more.  A vote for Obama also equals a middle class tax increase, socialized medicine, health care rationing, mandatory end-of-life-counseling every 5 years  (more frequently if the person of the targeted age group experiences a deterioration of their health), Federally funded abortions and health care for illegal aliens.  Oh, some of you liberal ding bats will say that there is nothing in the bill that allows illegal aliens to have free health care but THEY ALREADY GET FREE EMERGENCY ROOM CARE.  The point is that there is nothing in the bill that requires a person to prove citizenship (not even showing a driver&#8217;s license) thus there is nothing in the bill that PREVENTS illegal aliens from getting free medical care.  Here&#8217;s a question to the liberals; after adding 100 million or so people to medicare and further reducing what doctors earn, where will we get the next 500,000 or more doctors to treat that 100 more million?  Where will we get the next 10,000 hospitals?  Where will we get the next 3 million nurses?  You people had better start thinking.  People don&#8217;t go through medical school to earn $70,000.00 per year and nurses don&#8217;t become nurses to earn $25,000.00 per year.  After nationalizing medicine, might YOUR profession be next?????</p>
<p>That is too much information for a billboard but wait&#8230;.there&#8217;s more. :)  </p>
<p>Obama also equals a sharp increase in EVERY AMERICAN&#8217;S utility bills through cap and trade, a complete pre-emption of the student loan system in this country (which has already happened), government ownership of GM (very much to the detriment of GM&#8217;s bond holders, I might add), Bank of America and AIG.</p>
<p>But wait&#8230;there&#8217;s more.</p>
<p>Obama also equals a quadrupling of our national debt and inflation by the end of 2011 that will equal what we lived through under the Carter Administration.  </p>
<p>I gotta say, you Liberals are sooo freakin stupid!  See if you can cogitate this concept; liberalism is antithetical to liberty.  Got it?  When government owns the mechanisms that generate money it means that the private sector DOES NOT!  All you liberal geniuses out there who aren&#8217;t already working for the government ARE PART OF THE PRIVATE SECTOR!!!!!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rabblechev</title>
		<link>http://donklephant.com/2008/10/12/sign-of-the-times-anti-obama-billboard-in-missouri/comment-page-2/#comment-435012</link>
		<dc:creator>Rabblechev</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 Jan 2009 09:24:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donklephant.com/?p=9044#comment-435012</guid>
		<description>Gary, conservatives hate the idea of giving money to failing companies. If they say otherwise they are not conservatives. The rest of you, listen to Fuzzy Happy Bunny.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Gary, conservatives hate the idea of giving money to failing companies. If they say otherwise they are not conservatives. The rest of you, listen to Fuzzy Happy Bunny.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gary</title>
		<link>http://donklephant.com/2008/10/12/sign-of-the-times-anti-obama-billboard-in-missouri/comment-page-2/#comment-421205</link>
		<dc:creator>Gary</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 25 Oct 2008 04:11:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donklephant.com/?p=9044#comment-421205</guid>
		<description>Carl, why is it &quot;free enterprise&quot; to give tax money to companies that made bad investments, but &quot;socialism&quot; to raise taxes on multi-millionaires, but lower taxes on the middle class? Because your Republican brain-washers told you so?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Carl, why is it &#8220;free enterprise&#8221; to give tax money to companies that made bad investments, but &#8220;socialism&#8221; to raise taxes on multi-millionaires, but lower taxes on the middle class? Because your Republican brain-washers told you so?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Edward</title>
		<link>http://donklephant.com/2008/10/12/sign-of-the-times-anti-obama-billboard-in-missouri/comment-page-2/#comment-420948</link>
		<dc:creator>Edward</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Oct 2008 23:36:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donklephant.com/?p=9044#comment-420948</guid>
		<description>Shows what &quot;Real America&quot; is like.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Shows what &#8220;Real America&#8221; is like.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: JayDee</title>
		<link>http://donklephant.com/2008/10/12/sign-of-the-times-anti-obama-billboard-in-missouri/comment-page-2/#comment-420701</link>
		<dc:creator>JayDee</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 21 Oct 2008 03:06:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donklephant.com/?p=9044#comment-420701</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m a 45 year old white man who has lived in Missouri most of my life and it never fails to amaze me the number of lame-brained, redneck, uneducated, backward-ass, inbred, moronic country bumkins there are here.

If this ass is so  proud of his opinion, then he should put his name on the sign. 

I do agree that he has the right to his point of view. No matter how ignorant it is.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m a 45 year old white man who has lived in Missouri most of my life and it never fails to amaze me the number of lame-brained, redneck, uneducated, backward-ass, inbred, moronic country bumkins there are here.</p>
<p>If this ass is so  proud of his opinion, then he should put his name on the sign. </p>
<p>I do agree that he has the right to his point of view. No matter how ignorant it is.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Carl</title>
		<link>http://donklephant.com/2008/10/12/sign-of-the-times-anti-obama-billboard-in-missouri/comment-page-2/#comment-420620</link>
		<dc:creator>Carl</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 Oct 2008 16:06:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donklephant.com/?p=9044#comment-420620</guid>
		<description>They want this election to be a referendum on race, thatâ€™s why they are calling white people racist (Lewis, Murtha et al) so they people will for vote Barack Obama to prove themselves not a racist. Thus overlooking the fact that he is a Marxist.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>They want this election to be a referendum on race, thatâ€™s why they are calling white people racist (Lewis, Murtha et al) so they people will for vote Barack Obama to prove themselves not a racist. Thus overlooking the fact that he is a Marxist.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Here&#8217;s Proof! Obama IS an Arab! &#187; Don't Cry Over Spilt Water</title>
		<link>http://donklephant.com/2008/10/12/sign-of-the-times-anti-obama-billboard-in-missouri/comment-page-2/#comment-420479</link>
		<dc:creator>Here&#8217;s Proof! Obama IS an Arab! &#187; Don't Cry Over Spilt Water</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 18 Oct 2008 23:27:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donklephant.com/?p=9044#comment-420479</guid>
		<description>[...] Sign Of The Times? Anti-Obama Billboard In Missouri [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Sign Of The Times? Anti-Obama Billboard In Missouri [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Daryl</title>
		<link>http://donklephant.com/2008/10/12/sign-of-the-times-anti-obama-billboard-in-missouri/comment-page-2/#comment-420467</link>
		<dc:creator>Daryl</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 18 Oct 2008 21:50:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donklephant.com/?p=9044#comment-420467</guid>
		<description>My wife and I moved to Missouri a couple of weeks ago from Memphis. I saw this exact billboard driving up Highway 63 heading into West Plains. I just shook my head and wondered what we were getting into moving into an area (Waynesville) not too far from there.

In defense of West Plains though I must say that everyone we have ever come into contact with there has been nothing but nice. We always pit stop there on the way to and from Memphis because it&#039;s roughly halfway. The folks there seem really nice but I have to admit that as an African-American seeing that sign on the day we were making our final move to Missouri made me a bit nervous.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>My wife and I moved to Missouri a couple of weeks ago from Memphis. I saw this exact billboard driving up Highway 63 heading into West Plains. I just shook my head and wondered what we were getting into moving into an area (Waynesville) not too far from there.</p>
<p>In defense of West Plains though I must say that everyone we have ever come into contact with there has been nothing but nice. We always pit stop there on the way to and from Memphis because it&#8217;s roughly halfway. The folks there seem really nice but I have to admit that as an African-American seeing that sign on the day we were making our final move to Missouri made me a bit nervous.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Harmless Fuzzy Bunny</title>
		<link>http://donklephant.com/2008/10/12/sign-of-the-times-anti-obama-billboard-in-missouri/comment-page-2/#comment-419723</link>
		<dc:creator>Harmless Fuzzy Bunny</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 13 Oct 2008 23:45:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donklephant.com/?p=9044#comment-419723</guid>
		<description>You Democans and Republicrats are hilarious.  You actually think either side has your best interests in mind.  But hey, you also think it&#039;s a free country - so go ahead and argue on and on over all the trivial peanuts the two-party system and their bought-and-paid-for media throw at you.

Enjoy your shackles.

HFB</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You Democans and Republicrats are hilarious.  You actually think either side has your best interests in mind.  But hey, you also think it&#8217;s a free country &#8211; so go ahead and argue on and on over all the trivial peanuts the two-party system and their bought-and-paid-for media throw at you.</p>
<p>Enjoy your shackles.</p>
<p>HFB</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

