Does anyone see how the US gov. could have a hard time coming up with $5T if there was a massive meltdown and a run on the banks and had to come up with 50% of insured deposits?

No, because the federal government is not revenue constrained.

The cool part is that with a change in government, there is so much cash on the sidelines, that the economy could be growing like 6-7% by 2014!!!!

Its not about the size of government its resentment that their money is being taken away from them to support people they don't like.* ofc most don't care about throwing those same people in prison.

*helps to explain why they don't care about deficits when in office and don't work with Dems to tighten the deficit; don't restrict military or police spending etc.

jungle survivor,

The government would be revenue constrained. Nobody would send in tax money if they default on their insurance guaranty. They would also have to default on their debt.

The ONLY thing they could do is print it up. Hyperinflation would be a near guaranty at that point. The government as known would not survive.

Last time I checked FDIC had about 175b covering the now 10T in potential liabilities.

Suzzer,

I really do like you regardless of your political leanings.

You should have just wrote under the quote:

" Look at my avatar really hard"

rock on everybody.

I dunno about you guys, but I was stunned that only one of LirvA's Jefferson quotes was fake. (the banking one, natch)

The Mussolini quote isn't real, though, and the definition of "corporatism" to mean "relating to large for-profit companies and their relationship with government" is a relatively recent invention.

lol Herman Cain just announced on CNN that a woman who he "thought was a friend" will claim to have had an affair with him.

http://www.cnn.com/video/?/video/bes...cement-mpg.cnn

Boomstick!

Georgia Woman Claims 13-Year Affair with Herman Cain

I find it disgusting.
She basically "accused" him of being in relationship. I mean, he didn't do anything wrong to her. It's their private life and shouldn't be brought up to public without mutual consent imo. I mean, she can do w/e she wants but it's disgusting behavior.

Then don't run for public office particularly on a platform that marriage is sacrosanct and gays shouldn't be allowed. "A lying philanderer running for POTUS but I'd better keep quiet out of personal duty to him" is f'd up

in b4 Herman Cain touched kids.

DRUDGESIREN.gif

Herman Cain cheats on wife with White woman

I heard Gary Johnson on Fox news today ( the only newtwork to give him time). He wouldn't rule out a third party run.

I'm very interested in what the libertarians would do.

1. Who would a Ron Paul or Gary Johnson supporter vote for without either running in a race between Obama and Newt?

2. Who would vote for Paul or Johnson if they ran as a third party?

3. Would a 3rd party run by Paul/Johnson persuade an Obama supporter to vote libertarian?

as a RP supporter, Newt is better than Obama by a lot

edit: oh you were asking about who would a RP supporter vote for.

IDK about that one.