Barney Frank is a stain... I don't know how he sleeps at night...? The people of Massachussetts are absolute fools to vote this hypocritical moron into office...over and over again... Everyone else in the country is on to this douchebag.... he can't even get through interviews anymore because people are calling him on his bullshit...
http://pawpawshouse.blogspot.com/2009/0 … crite.html /////////////////// September 11, 2003 New Agency Proposed to Oversee Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae By STEPHEN LABATON The Bush administration today recommended the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago. ///// ''These two entities -- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- are not facing any kind of financial crisis,'' said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. ''The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.''
I like futurama's suicide booth's. Why let people slowly kill themselves over years taking up so much space and human resources when a machine could do it in half of a second with no mess.
Hmmm Cancer or Obesity? that is the question.. There's no reason Cigs should be legal?
Fuck that this is America and we can smoke if we want to, it only cause harm to the user..
I guess you never heard of second hand smoke eh genius?
nicotine is a poisonous and highly addictive substance that cigarette manufacturers are peddling to young impressionable kids with flavored tobacco. how the fuck can you not understand this? a six year old can understand this.
The US economy is a giant Ponzi scheme. And 'to big to fail' is code speak for 'niahnahniahniahnah 99 percenters'
The Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act gives the FDA power to ban candy-flavored and fruit-flavored cigarettes, widely considered appealing to first-time smokers, including youths. It also prohibits tobacco companies from using terms such as "low tar," "light" or "mild," requires larger warning labels on packages, and restricts advertising of tobacco products.
It also requires tobacco companies to reduce levels of nicotine in cigarettes.
Good news.
Those tobacco companies do anything to attract the first time smokers, terms like milk and light plus candy flavoured cigarettes is evidence enough.
Your point? I don't see many complaining that most hard alcohol is marketed to the 20-30something crowd.
Actually, you do see a lot of people complaining about alcohol marketted to children, and as a result alco-pops and lollywater flavoured alcohol has been heavily taxed in Australia to bring up the prices and force young people to have less buying power of those type of drinks.
So feel free to show me where nobody is complaining. Are you living under a rock?
irrelevant. i have a choice to pay Orly (by watching or not), i cant do shit about frank who gets my tax money. apples and oranges turq.
And the people of Massachusetts get to choose who gets that tax money. They chose to vote for him, time after time.
I know very little about him, but after a brief glance at his policies he sounds pretty good to me.
surprised. no rly
But it's not apples and oranges - that's the whole point. O'Reily's salary gets paid because he is popular with a large audience. Frank's salary gets paid because he is popular with a large number of voters.
Where is the difference there? Each gets their money from being popular. Their salary is dependant on public opinion. You personally don't have any control over either of their salaries, but the public at large do, in both cases. So your point is moot.
And the people of Massachusetts get to choose who gets that tax money. They chose to vote for him, time after time.
I know very little about him, but after a brief glance at his policies he sounds pretty good to me.
surprised. no rly
But it's not apples and oranges - that's the whole point. O'Reily's salary gets paid because he is popular with a large audience. Frank's salary gets paid because he is popular with a large number of voters.
Where is the difference there? Each gets their money from being popular. Their salary is dependant on public opinion. You personally don't have any control over either of their salaries, but the public at large do, in both cases. So your point is moot.
no Bert, one works for the govt. One is a talk show host. god you will argue over the stupidest shit.
But it's not apples and oranges - that's the whole point. O'Reily's salary gets paid because he is popular with a large audience. Frank's salary gets paid because he is popular with a large number of voters.
Where is the difference there? Each gets their money from being popular. Their salary is dependant on public opinion. You personally don't have any control over either of their salaries, but the public at large do, in both cases. So your point is moot.
no Bert, one works for the govt. One is a talk show host. god you will argue over the stupidest shit.
You said:
usmarine wrote:
irrelevant. i have a choice to pay Orly (by watching or not), i cant do shit about frank who gets my tax money. apples and oranges turq.
Those tobacco companies do anything to attract the first time smokers, terms like milk and light plus candy flavoured cigarettes is evidence enough.
Your point? I don't see many complaining that most hard alcohol is marketed to the 20-30something crowd.
Actually, you do see a lot of people complaining about alcohol marketted to children, and as a result alco-pops and lollywater flavoured alcohol has been heavily taxed in Australia to bring up the prices and force young people to have less buying power of those type of drinks.
So feel free to show me where nobody is complaining. Are you living under a rock?
Perhaps I am living under a rock. I have never seen any such products in stores around here, although I did grow up before Cigarette shaped candy was too non-PC. They tasted good, and I don't smoke.
And the people of Massachusetts get to choose who gets that tax money. They chose to vote for him, time after time.
I know very little about him, but after a brief glance at his policies he sounds pretty good to me.
surprised. no rly
But it's not apples and oranges - that's the whole point. O'Reily's salary gets paid because he is popular with a large audience. Frank's salary gets paid because he is popular with a large number of voters.
Where is the difference there? Each gets their money from being popular. Their salary is dependant on public opinion. You personally don't have any control over either of their salaries, but the public at large do, in both cases. So your point is moot.
Thanks for the defense. Although I would correct one thing... Frank is popular with a large number of idiots who happen to live in Massachusetts.
Frank is like the Democratic equivalent of Tom DeLay.
are you telling me you agree that someone who is a govt official paid by tax payer money who was a huge part of the financial collapse is the same "cunt level" as a talk show host? come on dude. i know you know better.
are you telling me you agree that someone who is a govt official paid by tax payer money who was a huge part of the financial collapse is the same "cunt level" as a talk show host? come on dude. i know you know better.
Same cunt level, different power level.
In other words, I don't care that O'Reilly's a cunt as much as I care that Frank is one. So, if it's any consolation, I'd like to see Frank leave office as soon as possible, but Massachusetts is apparently too stupid to let him go.
little tip here, the economy isn't really anyones singular fault. and you know how it's a global problem? and globalisation is rife? well one man can't fix it.
Small hourglass island Always raining and foggy Use an umbrella