Warning: Constant ABSPATH already defined in /home/public/wp-config.php on line 27
I Get Mail — Why Now?
On-line Opinion Magazine…OK, it's a blog
Random header image... Refresh for more!

I Get Mail

This is from an actual, real, ‘I didn’t write this’, e-mail I received today:

Lyndon Larouche has now confirmed an extraordinary warning from Prophet Linda Newkirk. In an interview with Alex Jones on Monday Larouche stated that Obama was receiving orders from England to push the US into an economic collapse. Larouche also stated in the interview, that if the debt limit deal was passed, according to the provisions contained within that agreement, America would be under a state of Martial Law.

Linda has an impressive track record for exposing the plans of the New World Order. On September 11, 2001 Linda received a prophecy identifying the Illuminati as the culprits behind the destruction of the Twin Towers while the world was about to be fed the Bin Laden fairy tales.

Just days after the 08 election, while the world was ‘head over heels’ in love with Obama, Linda revealed that he was put into power by Illuminati ‘ringleader’ Evelyn David de Rothschild, to put the ‘final nails in the coffin’ of the USA.

I think that Ms Newkirk’s prophetic abilities would carry a bit more weight if she actually knew Sir Evelyn de Rothschild’s real middle name. Hint: it isn’t David.

As Sir Evelyn is an acquaintance of Bill Clinton, I think it highly unlikely that he would be an Obama supporter. He has been Queen Elizabeth’s financial advisor forever, and that is the primary reason for his knighthood. The most objectionable thing he seems to have done, other than being born a Rothschild, was serving on the board for the development of Milton Keynes [you need to read Good Omens if you aren’t British to get the joke].

8 comments

1 Bryan { 08.04.11 at 3:40 pm }

Have you looked at any stock market in the world today? John Maynard Keynes is not to be messed with if you want to save your economy.

2 Steve Bates { 08.04.11 at 6:58 pm }

It does my heart good to see that the Nobel committee has, quite properly, awarded a Nobel Prize in Economics to Duffer and not to Krugman. That is why Duffer is internationally known, and his opinions on economics, universally noted and acted upon.

Oh, wait…

===

When J. M. Keynes showed us the way, and when FDR verified it experimentally in both directions, Obama must have been elsewhere, exercising all that audacity of hope. And Duffer? well, he just sat with his thumb in his assets…

3 Bryan { 08.04.11 at 8:01 pm }

The thing about reality is that it couldn’t care less whether you believe in it, it just is. I don’t believe in chairs, but they are still around to sit on.

Obama may not believe in Keynes, but the US economy does.

4 Badtux { 08.05.11 at 9:57 am }

Keynes would have certainly shuddered at Obama’s latest trick, which is to basically say “we’re gonna contract government spending in the middle of a depression”. Because, y’know, if you look at the big picture, that works *really* well, right?

– Badtux the Snarky Penguin

5 Steve Bates { 08.05.11 at 12:47 pm }

Sold all your shares in what, Duffer? Human compassion? Common sense? I never had an impression that you had much invested in either of those in the first place, so it must have been easy for you to sell out. Let me rephrase that… nah, it’s correct as it stands.

And Duffer, if you haven’t figured out that ALL of us who hang around here shudder at what Obama has done, then you are (quite incredibly) even more of a damned fool than I initially thought. But I do understand: you feel a need to score points against us, even if you have to make shit up about our opinions to do so. Otherwise, you’d be stuck with (gasp!) agreeing with us on something…

6 Bryan { 08.05.11 at 3:03 pm }

First off, yes, Keynes would be appalled by what Obama and the rest of the Republicans have done, reverting to the policies that caused the original Depression, and then using the same failed policies of Republican President Hoover to deal with them. The so-called stimulus bill was too small to do anything worthwhile, and those who understood economics, the same people who told anyone who would listen that there was going to be a meltdown, all said so when it was introduced.

The bail out of Wall Street was a Bush ‘stimulus’ package. Obama was still a US Senator when it was passed. Obama may have voted for it, but he did it in a Senate that had a Republican majority.

What’s the matter, Mr Duff, didn’t you believe that Conservative economic policy was going to ‘make the markets boom’? Don’t you believe that the great conservative of ideas of Cameron, Sarkozy, and Merkel would cause the markets to bloom with new growth? No faith in the so-called ‘free market’?

As for timing, it is important in medications, too …

7 Badtux { 08.05.11 at 3:11 pm }

As I point out at my own site (linked above), Obama’s spending increases appear similar in scale to those of Herbert Hoover. Not anywhere near FDR’s spending increases, which quadrupled the federal budget within three years and resulted in a 25% gain in GDP within three years, until FDR cut back and had a *MILD* recession year in 1938 (but the economy in 1938 was still *far* above the abyss into which Herbert Hoover had led it, and FDR quit doing that when it was proven not to work).

Obama’s “deficit reduction” plan will result in an almost immediate 5% decrease in U.S. GDP once it is implemented. Just the numbers. We will have official 15% unemployment and unofficial 25% unemployment by the time this “deal” fully gets implemented by 2014. That’s not just me, that’s everybody who was right about everything so far (which, I might add, I have been too — I correctly stated that the Obama stimulus was less than 1/3rd as big as it needed to be in order to offset the asset values lost to the housing crash, and time has proven me right). It is appalling, but I suppose enormous structural unemployment is necessary if our looter elite are to continue looting the wealth of the nation for their own benefit, for only keeping people desperate for any job at all will allow them to drive wages down to the 3rd World levels that our looter elite so greatly desire.

– Badtux the Apocalyptic Penguin

8 Bryan { 08.05.11 at 3:29 pm }

Bush bailed out the banks and Obama loaned money to two car companies.

Obama’s ‘stimulus’ was never going to work, and relied too heavily on taxes to even get the maximum effect for the money spent.

The construction industry was devastated, so infrastructure construction and repair was an obvious choice for government spending, but they went with ‘shovel ready’ projects, many of which hadn’t been funded because they were bad ideas.

A real Keynesian stimulus package was never even considered by Obama, because he’s a conservative, and would rather attempt to use the failed policies of Hoover, than the proven policies of FDR.