|
|
Post by ptsdthor on Oct 2, 2010 6:48:31 GMT -8
Business cycles of expansion and contraction are normal and not some evil plot by GOP businessmen & capitalists. The real failure now is the response by this Admin. Stifling growth when it is needed most with idiotic policies. No demand, as you put it, is because only a select few have access to the money pushed into the economy and it is not the businessman or entrepreneur (that is to say - job creators) but generally the bureaucrat and the non-productive. Money effectively Rat-holed. "because only a select few have access to the money pushed into the economy. . ." You mean that one percent who controls 42.7% of our wealth? Those rich people? Yes, I agree they have access to the money. Yes, you are right, business cycles and spikes in unemployment are normal. And, because they are normal we should not do anything about them, right? I didn't say to not do anything. But do no harm to be sure. The irrational fear of subsedizing capital investment, giving private business tax credits, generating job in the private sector, etc because someone might be having a bit more economic success than the Union boss and the Government employee is ludacrous. With this guy, it will be 8% unemploymnent at best. Feast on that middle class  . |
|
|
|
Post by waztec on Oct 2, 2010 6:55:11 GMT -8
"because only a select few have access to the money pushed into the economy. . ." You mean that one percent who controls 42.7% of our wealth? Those rich people? Yes, I agree they have access to the money. Yes, you are right, business cycles and spikes in unemployment are normal. And, because they are normal we should not do anything about them, right? I didn't say to not do anything. But do no harm to be sure. The irrational fear of subsedizing capital investment, giving private business tax credits, generating job in the private sector, etc because someone might be having a bit more economic success than the Union boss and the Government employee is ludacrous. With this guy, it will be 8% unemploymnent at best. Feast on that middle class . The Congressional Budget Office reports that the stimulus has created 3.5 million jobs and reduced possible unemployment by a couple of percent. Perhaps you are not listening to me. Business is not generating jobs because there is no demand. It is not the unions fault and it is not the government's fault. If you say that these cycles are normal for capitalism, you are forced to admit that this is a business problem. You cannot have it both ways. |
|
|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Oct 2, 2010 11:08:54 GMT -8
Allow me to add a word about what the rich do with their money. The Left keeps saying that tax cuts do no good because the rich won't spend their extra money. Well, what the hell does anyone think the rich do with their "extra" money? Do they put it into cans and bury those cans in the back yard? Do they stuff it under their mattresses? Please!
Poor people and middle income people will probably spend any extra money to pay bills or perhaps buy some item they had been thinking of for a while. But rich people, and by that I mean those with guaranteed incomes (whether they work or not) of at least several hundred thousand dollars a year (with substantial additional holdings in savings, property, etc.), probably don't have a pressing need to take care of unpaid bills. So what do they do? Well, they put the money in savings accounts, CDs, common stocks, mutual funds, municipal bonds, etc. And their money is put to work in the economy by the managers of those financial instruments to help boost the economy.
The question is this; how much of the economy do you want controlled by politicians and unelected bureaucrats? Why should we assume that the latter can more wisely spend the people's money than private investors and entrepreneurs?
AzWm
|
|
|
|
Post by waztec on Oct 2, 2010 11:47:22 GMT -8
Allow me to add a word about what the rich do with their money. The Left keeps saying that tax cuts do no good because the rich won't spend their extra money. Well, what the hell does anyone think the rich do with their "extra" money? Do they put it into cans and bury those cans in the back yard? Do they stuff it under their mattresses? Please! Poor people and middle income people will probably spend any extra money to pay bills or perhaps buy some item they had been thinking of for a while. But rich people, and by that I mean those with guaranteed incomes (whether they work or not) of at least several hundred thousand dollars a year (with substantial additional holdings in savings, property, etc.), probably don't have a pressing need to take care of unpaid bills. So what do they do? Well, they put the money in savings accounts, CDs, common stocks, mutual funds, municipal bonds, etc. And their money is put to work in the economy by the managers of those financial instruments to help boost the economy. The question is this; how much of the economy do you want controlled by politicians and unelected bureaucrats? Why should we assume that the latter can more wisely spend the people's money than private investors and entrepreneurs? AzWm Well, you just put your finger on it, didn't you? If you view history objectively, you will find that those bureaucrats you denigrate have to periodically fix the excesses of those vaunted, heroic private investors and entrepreneurs, who, mind you are working hard for the rest of us. The savings and loan scandal The dot com bust The real estate bubble The great depression The panic of 1893 etc. And the hits caused by lax regulation just keep on a coming. . . .And they really do just keep coming don't they? That famous chimpanzee lover said "trust but verify". Well, I feel exactly that way about private investors. Capitalism is OK (if you can call what we have Capitalism-and there would be some argument about that), but there has to be a countervailing force to mitigate its excesses. Investor and entrepreneurs interests are not necessarily parallel to those of the rest of us, don't you know. At least the government's constitutional pledge is to represent its citizens, no matter how imperfectly they do it. We have received no such promise from any private investor, now have we? Please prove to me that investments are made with patriotism in mind. While you are at it, show how the average person's economic condition has improved over the last 30 or 40 years due to anything private investment has done or lobbied to do. |
|
|
|
Post by ptsdthor on Oct 2, 2010 22:18:29 GMT -8
I didn't say to not do anything. But do no harm to be sure. The irrational fear of subsidizing capital investment, giving private business tax credits, generating job in the private sector, etc because someone might be having a bit more economic success than the Union boss and the Government employee is ludicrous. With this guy, it will be 8% unemployment at best. Feast on that middle class . The Congressional Budget Office reports that the stimulus has created 3.5 million jobs and reduced possible unemployment by a couple of percent. Perhaps you are not listening to me. Business is not generating jobs because there is no demand. It is not the unions fault and it is not the government's fault. If you say that these cycles are normal for capitalism, you are forced to admit that this is a business problem. You cannot have it both ways. Never has a lamer claim to economic performance been made till now. Claiming millions of "Saved or Created" jobs while the overall number of jobs fall. What a genius - $150K tax payer money in - 1 Government Job out. Expansion and contraction happens, the Government should figure out ways to speed up the return to expansion when the contraction occurs. The error is Obama's methods. Obama is slowing the return to expansion by putting our money into no-growth activities. His spending is just that, not really investments. They are not a "force multiplier". Make work jobs, bail-outs of State Government union employees, propping up private Union retirement pensions, extending unemployment benefits to multiple years, etc. All we really get a few Government sector jobs (that either go away when the funding is gone or over-commit us later) and a larger deficit. Then, with this enormous deficit, it is like we are trying to compete in a regatta with one of our sails in the water. This guy and his ivy league Econ prof buddies (who are being shown the door btw) are clueless and it shows. |
|
|
|
Post by waztec on Oct 3, 2010 7:11:47 GMT -8
The Congressional Budget Office reports that the stimulus has created 3.5 million jobs and reduced possible unemployment by a couple of percent. Perhaps you are not listening to me. Business is not generating jobs because there is no demand. It is not the unions fault and it is not the government's fault. If you say that these cycles are normal for capitalism, you are forced to admit that this is a business problem. You cannot have it both ways. Never has a lamer claim to economic performance been made till now. Claiming millions of "Saved or Created" jobs while the overall number of jobs fall. What a genius - $150K tax payer money in - 1 Government Job out. Expansion and contraction happens, the Government should figure out ways to speed up the return to expansion when the contraction occurs. The error is Obama's methods. Obama is slowing the return to expansion by putting our money into no-growth activities. His spending is just that, not really investments. They are not a "force multiplier". Make work jobs, bail-outs of State Government union employees, propping up private Union retirement pensions, extending unemployment benefits to multiple years, etc. All we really get a few Government sector jobs (that either go away when the funding is gone or over-commit us later) and a larger deficit. Then, with this enormous deficit, it is like we are trying to compete in a regatta with one of our sails in the water. This guy and his ivy league Econ prof buddies (who are being shown the door btw) are clueless and it shows.
"Expansion and contraction happens, the Government should figure out ways to speed up the return to expansion when the contraction occurs."
So, you agree government has a role to play. Most conservatives would disagree. Hoover certainly did. Well. I would say that government stimulus has worked before. It was government spending got us out of the great depression. (Uh, world war II caused a large deficit, cured the lingering effects of the depression and set up our most prosperous period.) Nevertheless, business has the money to expand, but they are sitting on it. One has to ask themselves why they are not spending and hiring. Well, why? How come the marvelous engine of the private sector is not doing anything? Please explain why they will not spend and hire. It sure isn't over taxation (assuming as most Republicans don't that some taxation is good.) " Expansion and contraction happens. . ." The effects hurt people, badly. Clueless. I don't think so. |
|
|
|
Post by The Great Aztec Joe on Oct 3, 2010 8:52:53 GMT -8
Never has a lamer claim to economic performance been made till now. Claiming millions of "Saved or Created" jobs while the overall number of jobs fall. What a genius - $150K tax payer money in - 1 Government Job out. ... This guy and his ivy league Econ prof buddies (who are being shown the door btw) are clueless and it shows. You are so RIGHT. Bush and his Ivy League friends were the greatest collection of fucktards in the history of the world. Look at what a horrible mess he left this country in. It will take at least TWENTY years for the United States to recover from the Bush legacy. |
|
|
|
Post by The Great Aztec Joe on Oct 3, 2010 8:57:08 GMT -8
Not only did Bush leave the United States totally a shambles, but the fucktard screwed the whole damned world and set off the momentum that will carry everybody into the greatest Depression in world history.
Bush will be looked upon by historians as far more corruptive to global health than Hitler.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Great Aztec Joe on Oct 3, 2010 9:05:50 GMT -8
Allow me to add a word about what the rich do with their money. The Left keeps saying that tax cuts do no good because the rich won't spend their extra money. Well, what the hell does anyone think the rich do with their "extra" money? AzWm That is simple. The Rich, because they are disgustingly greedy, will always try to take any extra money and make more money with it, by any corrupt means possible. That is the reason why we have all of this criminal manipulation of the stock market, and all the phony bankruptcies and perverse $#!+ like that. It is all corrupt as hell! We need to clean house, have trials and execute all of the greedy millions of SOB thieves who have been raping this country and destroying the middle class with all of the corruption that the Republican Party has allowed to become the norm. |
|
|
|
Post by ptsdthor on Oct 3, 2010 12:46:02 GMT -8
Never has a lamer claim to economic performance been made till now. Claiming millions of "Saved or Created" jobs while the overall number of jobs fall. What a genius - $150K tax payer money in - 1 Government Job out. Expansion and contraction happens, the Government should figure out ways to speed up the return to expansion when the contraction occurs. The error is Obama's methods. Obama is slowing the return to expansion by putting our money into no-growth activities. His spending is just that, not really investments. They are not a "force multiplier". Make work jobs, bail-outs of State Government union employees, propping up private Union retirement pensions, extending unemployment benefits to multiple years, etc. All we really get a few Government sector jobs (that either go away when the funding is gone or over-commit us later) and a larger deficit. Then, with this enormous deficit, it is like we are trying to compete in a regatta with one of our sails in the water. This guy and his ivy league Econ prof buddies (who are being shown the door btw) are clueless and it shows.
"Expansion and contraction happens, the Government should figure out ways to speed up the return to expansion when the contraction occurs."
So, you agree government has a role to play. Most conservatives would disagree. Hoover certainly did. Well. I would say that government stimulus has worked before. It was government spending got us out of the great depression. (Uh, world war II caused a large deficit, cured the lingering effects of the depression and set up our most prosperous period.) Nevertheless, business has the money to expand, but they are sitting on it. One has to ask themselves why they are not spending and hiring. Well, why? How come the marvelous engine of the private sector is not doing anything? Please explain why they will not spend and hire. It sure isn't over taxation (assuming as most Republicans don't that some taxation is good.) " Expansion and contraction happens. . ." The effects hurt people, badly. Clueless. I don't think so. There are many reasons why the consumer and business are sitting on the sideline with Obama's policies (as Government rolls swell) and that is because they see medical costs going up, deficits growing, inflation looming, taxes going up (both directly and indirectly through Cap and Tax, etc), teams of IRS agents being hired to pick their bones, state taxes going up, more BS Gov Financial control laws (Sarbanes-Oxley-esque regulations that waste money and time that did nothing to avert the recent collapse), etc., etc.,. No one knows where the next Marxist-light or clueless leftist law will rear its head and threaten their livelihood. Ergo, for the Business - no new exposure to being reamed by the Gov with as little new employees as possible and for the individual - re-fi, pay off some bills and hunker down. As I said earlier, you can't treat people like ants & bees - robots that do as they always have and expect no reaction to bad policy action. |
|
|
|
Post by waztec on Oct 3, 2010 15:58:40 GMT -8
"Expansion and contraction happens, the Government should figure out ways to speed up the return to expansion when the contraction occurs."
So, you agree government has a role to play. Most conservatives would disagree. Hoover certainly did. Well. I would say that government stimulus has worked before. It was government spending got us out of the great depression. (Uh, world war II caused a large deficit, cured the lingering effects of the depression and set up our most prosperous period.) Nevertheless, business has the money to expand, but they are sitting on it. One has to ask themselves why they are not spending and hiring. Well, why? How come the marvelous engine of the private sector is not doing anything? Please explain why they will not spend and hire. It sure isn't over taxation (assuming as most Republicans don't that some taxation is good.) " Expansion and contraction happens. . ." The effects hurt people, badly. Clueless. I don't think so. There are many reasons why the consumer and business are sitting on the sideline with Obama's policies (as Government rolls swell) and that is because they see medical costs going up, deficits growing, inflation looming, taxes going up (both directly and indirectly through Cap and Tax, etc), teams of IRS agents being hired to pick their bones, state taxes going up, more BS Gov Financial control laws (Sarbanes-Oxley-esque regulations that waste money and time that did nothing to avert the recent collapse), etc., etc.,. No one knows where the next Marxist-light or clueless leftist law will rear its head and threaten their livelihood. Ergo, for the Business - no new exposure to being reamed by the Gov with as little new employees as possible and for the individual - re-fi, pay off some bills and hunker down. As I said earlier, you can't treat people like ants & bees - robots that do as they always have and expect no reaction to bad policy action. I disagree with your premise and your conclusions. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Oct 4, 2010 15:11:20 GMT -8
There are many reasons why the consumer and business are sitting on the sideline with Obama's policies (as Government rolls swell) and that is because they see medical costs going up, deficits growing, inflation looming, taxes going up (both directly and indirectly through Cap and Tax, etc), teams of IRS agents being hired to pick their bones, state taxes going up, more BS Gov Financial control laws (Sarbanes-Oxley-esque regulations that waste money and time that did nothing to avert the recent collapse), etc., etc.,. No one knows where the next Marxist-light or clueless leftist law will rear its head and threaten their livelihood. Ergo, for the Business - no new exposure to being reamed by the Gov with as little new employees as possible and for the individual - re-fi, pay off some bills and hunker down. As I said earlier, you can't treat people like ants & bees - robots that do as they always have and expect no reaction to bad policy action. I disagree with your premise and your conclusions. Make a case if you can. He is pretty close to right on. |
|
|
|
Post by waztec on Oct 4, 2010 16:35:35 GMT -8
I disagree with your premise and your conclusions. Make a case if you can. He is pretty close to right on. I have been offering facts. I was tired of typing with my arthritic right index finger at that point. The deficit grew tremendously under bush. The cost of health care went up tremendously under bush. Inflation was worse under bush than Obama. The IRS was well funded and told to collect assertively under bush. You cannot argue against what you previously supported. You cannot argue what has not yet happened. Give me a break. |
|
|
|
Post by The Great Aztec Joe on Oct 4, 2010 18:24:40 GMT -8
Make work jobs, bail-outs of State Government union employees, propping up private Union retirement pensions, extending unemployment benefits to multiple years, etc. All we really get a few Government sector jobs (that either go away when the funding is gone or over-commit us later) and a larger deficit. Then, with this enormous deficit, it is like we are trying to compete in a regatta with one of our sails in the water. This guy and his ivy league Econ prof buddies (who are being shown the door btw) are clueless and it shows. Kenesian Economics is as flawed as the Austrian School of Economics. Just like Cultural Anthropology, none of these studies are a science. They are all theory that sometimes works and sometimes comes up short. The reality is the past two presidential administrations tried to do SOMETHING rather than NOTHING. And for that they both need to be lightly applauded. Sadly their efforts are not doing much good. We have created false GDP with the Federal Spending but a lot of investors are too smart to be duped by that crap, and the volume of stock trades is way down. (Sadly, that allows corrupt companies like Goldman Sachs to manipulate the market at will with their machine trading program which should be outlawed. But GS greases the palms of both democrats and republicans, so nothing is ever done about it.) Corruption runs manifest in Washington. I for one believe we should try every congressman and put them on trial for treason if they have taken a bribe from GS. We could have a mass execution of congressmen and GS officers as soon as we amend the constitution to allow for hanging as a normal (not cruel or unusual) means of execution. |
|
|
|
Post by ptsdthor on Oct 5, 2010 7:21:24 GMT -8
Make a case if you can. He is pretty close to right on. I have been offering facts. I was tired of typing with my arthritic right index finger at that point. The deficit grew tremendously under bush. The cost of health care went up tremendously under bush. Inflation was worse under bush than Obama. The IRS was well funded and told to collect assertively under bush. You cannot argue against what you previously supported. You cannot argue what has not yet happened. Give me a break. As discussed on another thread, the plight of California relative to economic growth is a microcosm of what Marxist-light policies do to an economy. Fortunately for them, manufacturers can leave a state that has onerous social engineering regulations, high taxes, no incentives to invest, etc., etc. Since you claim to have paid attention to some Econ Profs (who where most likely liberals), I'm sure you have a pat answer on how California's problems are really the fault of Fat Cat Capitalists and Republicans but alas, everyone else really knows why. www.foxandhoundsdaily.com/blog/joseph-vranich/7892-new-%E2%80%98think-tank-report-californias-business-exodus-uselessAnd then there is the resistance to growth that Obama and crew give us with their Marxist-light plan for the national economy. Example - Startups, which are essential to job growth, are at record lows. Again, I'm sure there is some spin you will offer as to why they are at record lows (its the Wall Street Bankers, etc) but we all know why .... see California. www.mediabistro.com/webnewser/new-startup-activity-hits-record-low_b6243 |
|
|
|
Post by waztec on Oct 5, 2010 17:41:11 GMT -8
I have been offering facts. I was tired of typing with my arthritic right index finger at that point. The deficit grew tremendously under bush. The cost of health care went up tremendously under bush. Inflation was worse under bush than Obama. The IRS was well funded and told to collect assertively under bush. You cannot argue against what you previously supported. You cannot argue what has not yet happened. Give me a break. As discussed on another thread, the plight of California relative to economic growth is a microcosm of what Marxist-light policies do to an economy. Fortunately for them, manufacturers can leave a state that has onerous social engineering regulations, high taxes, no incentives to invest, etc., etc. Since you claim to have paid attention to some Econ Profs (who where most likely liberals), I'm sure you have a pat answer on how California's problems are really the fault of Fat Cat Capitalists and Republicans but alas, everyone else really knows why. www.foxandhoundsdaily.com/blog/joseph-vranich/7892-new-%E2%80%98think-tank-report-californias-business-exodus-uselessAnd then there is the resistance to growth that Obama and crew give us with their Marxist-light plan for the national economy. Example - Startups, which are essential to job growth, are at record lows. Again, I'm sure there is some spin you will offer as to why they are at record lows (its the Wall Street Bankers, etc) but we all know why .... see California. www.mediabistro.com/webnewser/new-startup-activity-hits-record-low_b6243Ok. Please explain just what Marxist policies you mean. Unemployment insurance, Social security, what policies? The problem we have as I see it is that you (conservatives) feel people should be on their own. You feel that they should be totally responsible for what ever happens to them. You believe that each man is an island unto themselves. The old let them rot if they fail social Darwinism thing. Most of all, though, you just don't like taxes. You feel plenty of charity for your fellow man just so long as you don't have to pay anything. The problem is that there are several billion of years of evolution driving us toward cooperation. Human society would not exist if what you ultimately want happens. If you consider your self an American and you are proud of that claim, how can you just disregard Americans? Is America not it's citizens? Is it patriotic to disregard Americans enough to let them be ,uneducated or be placed in extremis? From what does patriotism derive? If we don't help each other, no one will help you when you need it. Your money is no good if society breaks down. To an extent no conservative will admit, the other person's welfare is our own welfare. Now my finger hurts and debating with you about this particular issue is really boring me now, so I am out. |
|
|
|
Post by ptsdthor on Oct 5, 2010 19:22:56 GMT -8
As discussed on another thread, the plight of California relative to economic growth is a microcosm of what Marxist-light policies do to an economy. Fortunately for them, manufacturers can leave a state that has onerous social engineering regulations, high taxes, no incentives to invest, etc., etc. Since you claim to have paid attention to some Econ Profs (who where most likely liberals), I'm sure you have a pat answer on how California's problems are really the fault of Fat Cat Capitalists and Republicans but alas, everyone else really knows why. www.foxandhoundsdaily.com/blog/joseph-vranich/7892-new-%E2%80%98think-tank-report-californias-business-exodus-uselessAnd then there is the resistance to growth that Obama and crew give us with their Marxist-light plan for the national economy. Example - Startups, which are essential to job growth, are at record lows. Again, I'm sure there is some spin you will offer as to why they are at record lows (its the Wall Street Bankers, etc) but we all know why .... see California. www.mediabistro.com/webnewser/new-startup-activity-hits-record-low_b6243Ok. Please explain just what Marxist policies you mean. Unemployment insurance, Social security, what policies? The problem we have as I see it is that you (conservatives) feel people should be on their own. You feel that they should be totally responsible for what ever happens to them. You believe that each man is an island unto themselves. The old let them rot if they fail social Darwinism thing. Most of all, though, you just don't like taxes. You feel plenty of charity for your fellow man just so long as you don't have to pay anything. The problem is that there are several billion of years of evolution driving us toward cooperation. Human society would not exist if what you ultimately want happens. If you consider your self an American and you are proud of that claim, how can you just disregard Americans? Is America not it's citizens? Is it patriotic to disregard Americans enough to let them be ,uneducated or be placed in extremis? From what does patriotism derive? If we don't help each other, no one will help you when you need it. Your money is no good if society breaks down. To an extent no conservative will admit, the other person's welfare is our own welfare. Now my finger hurts and debating with you about this particular issue is really boring me now, so I am out. So what is it? Are you saying "Yes, socialist policies kill an economy...So what?". Well, I agree with you. I couldn't argue myself out of the example of California either. As far as some specific issues with the current progressive and their policies - its the absolutely preferential treatment given by many State Govs and the Fed to Unions and the extra costs that it brings. The "do nothing" approach regarding illegal immigration and the extra costs that that brings. And the giving out Social Security benefits with the recipient never having paid a penny into the program? And Medicare - the same question? And what about the pure corruption that is Cap and Trade? I mean, if it is all about compassion versus selfishness, why aren't you proposing that we take care of all the 3rd world living in poverty too? And please spare me the crap about Patriotism and how that somehow equates to the US needing to usher in an expanded nanny state and make sure all UAW Union retirement funds are funded to the hilt. I have no problem for a safety net but why don't we give everyone who wants one, a car and pay their auto insurance? And throw in a plasma TV to boot. Rich and middle class people have them and they are virtual necessities, why doesn't everybody get them if they can't afford them? If you acknowledge that our responsibility for our fellow man has it limits - then welcome to the real world, if not the GOP. And lastly - I'm sure you are going to say the GOP are full of monsters because we don't embrace the new American NHS given to us by Obama, Reid and Pelosi. The time was ripe and they (The Dems) could have obtained something much more reasonable out of the GOP but they went for the full monty which will destroy private health care in America - which was their plan in the first place. |
|
|
|
Post by The Great Aztec Joe on Oct 5, 2010 19:37:35 GMT -8
I am calling for a revolution. The corruption of the Republican party can not be denied. They are evil, Pure Evil! and dedicated to the worship of Satan and mammon.
We need to destroy the evil that has totally corrupted the United States. We need to start with everybody who has registered as a Republican in the past six years. Get their addresses and round them up and treat them in accordance with the degree of their satanic moral corruption.
These people are satanically evil and need to be removed from the populace. Case closed!
|
|
|
|
Post by The Great Aztec Joe on Oct 5, 2010 19:46:45 GMT -8
Hanging is not a cruel and unusual punishment. Just like the guillotine, it is quick and effective. The guillotine can also be brought back. We need to hang or behead all the greedy bastards who call themselves Republicans. Greed is greed and needs to be totally eliminated from our modern society.Get the lists and remove them as necessary.
There are going to be a lot of rolling heads in the future. The Republicans just do not get it. corruption will no longer be tolerated. Kill the money worshiping pieces of sheet. Off with their heads!
When all of the Republicans are gone, the world will be a better place.
|
|
|
|
Post by ptsdthor on Oct 5, 2010 19:49:13 GMT -8
Lt. Col. Charles R. Codman: You know General, sometimes the men don't know when you're acting.
Patton: It's not important for them to know. It's only important for me to know.
|
|
.
