American Politics during the Bush Presidency

[QUOTE=Jackson]It figures, I've been asking liberals this question for years, and I've never received a straight answer.

The answer to the same question, which you failed to answer while simultaneously bouncing it back to me is: [b]We should all pay the same percentage![/b]

Right now, 51% of the voters (not 51% of the taxpayers) are telling the other 49% of the voters how much they have to pay.

"Democracy is not nine wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner."

Thanks,

Jackson.

BTW, Reagan's tax cuts are what made the US economy so strong during the Clinton terms, although Clinton had no compulsion against claiming the credit.[/QUOTE]Jackson, I never expected you were one of those flat earthers.

America stands for a progressive tax system. The more you make, the more benefits you have gained from the system, and the more ability you have to pay. The Ron Paul, Nibu Raphael-type flat tax loonies will never carry the day.

It puzzles me why Reagan's policies didn't help during George H. W. Bush's term, which contained two more years of recession in addition to the earlier Reagan's recession.

We are to believe that all the benefits just skipped over Bush's four years and waited to take affect until the Clinton presidency? What a dirty trick on all of us!

Damn that tricky prosperity that keeps trying to fool all of us by only showing up during Democratic administrations!

I wish I was in Argentina to see you smiling (among many other reasons to be there) because I know that you are far too smart of a man to say any of that with a straight face.

DB

You're right.

I think they (the wolves) call it capitalism.

Regards,

BM.

[QUOTE=Jackson]"Democracy is not nine wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner."

Thanks,

Jackson.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Jackson]We were attacked, remember?

We're in a war, remember?

Every war-time administration has run up huge deficits, remember?

Thanks,

Jackson[/QUOTE]Nice try, but so wrong.

The money was gone by June when he sent us all $300 checks. We weren't attacked until several months later. Well before September 11 the money was long gone.

Of course, by then Bush had already squandered Clinton's rainy day fund.

Conservatives used to believe in balanced budget, but they now hold every single record for setting a new record deficit: Bush, the other Bush, Reagan, Ford and Nixon.

Missing from the list of presidents who set a record deficit in their day are Clinton (surplus) Carter (he only needed one more year to reach a surplus) Johnson (surplus, and a war-time president to boot!)

You can look it up.

But I bet you won't.

DB

[QUOTE=Dodger Bulldog]Nice try, but so wrong.

The money was gone by June when he sent us all $300 checks. We weren't attacked until several months later. Well before September 11 the money was long gone.

Of course, by then Bush had already squandered Clinton's rainy day fund.

Conservatives used to believe in balanced budget, but they hold every single record for setting a new record deficit: Bush, the other Bush, Reagan, Ford and Nixon.

Missing from the lst of presidents who set a record deficit n there day are Clinton (surplus) Carter (he only needed one more year to reach a surplus) Johnson (surplus, and a war-time president to boot!

You can look it up.

But I bet you won't.

DB[/QUOTE]Johnson's got his surplus from Ike, it skipped Kennedy, likewise Carters was from Nixon. Clinton? Don't get me started, Ronnie handed that to him. Zebra woman in the jungles of Africa knows that you only come to America when Democrats are in power because they will mail checks to anybody. Fucking tax and spend, tax and spend that's all they do. Spend the surplus that good Republican Presidents have set the economy up for them (Dems) to look good with.

But what can you expect from a neo hippy fag California baseball team loving commie pinko cocksucker! You and that disgusting pervert Stowe probably IM each other to coauthor this garbage. And Stormy! Fucking limo liberal from Chicago, he probably worked on "The One's" first campaign.

Liberal pinko commie faggots.

Syd can I in the will now? Exon (another pinko faggot cocksucker) won't write me in, so I'm changing horses.

[QUOTE=Daddy Rulz]Johnson's got his surplus from Ike, it skipped Kennedy, likewise Carters was from Nixon. Clinton? Don't get me started, Ronnie handed that to him. Zebra woman in the jungles of Africa knows that you only come to America when Democrats are in power because they will mail checks to anybody. Fucking tax and spend, tax and spend that's all they do. Spend the surplus that good Republican Presidents have set the economy up for them (Dems) to look good with.

But what can you expect from a neo hippy fag California baseball team loving commie pinko cocksucker! You and that disgusting pervert Stowe probably I'm each other to coauthor this garbage. And Stormy! Fucking limo liberal from Chicago, he probably worked on "The One's" first campaign.

Liberal pinko commie faggots.

Syd can I in the will now? Exon (another pinko faggot cocksucker) won't write me in, so I'm changing horses.[/QUOTE]I think Daddy is loseing it.

"Syd can I in the will now? Exon (another pinko faggot cocksucker) won't write me in, so I'm changing horses.[/ QUOTE"

I'm voting with my "Wallet" on November 4th, I'm voting for "Freedom" on the 4th of Novemeber.

For the first time in history a "Black man is going to Live in the White House" and its going to send a message to the entire world that America is a Democracy and things are about to change.

I'm proud to be: "Exon (another pinko faggot cocksucker)" and I hope and pray these Republicans don't get another look at the White House for the next 40 years.

The MotherFuckers.

Exon

[QUOTE=Exon123]I'm voting with my "Wallet" on November 4th, I'm voting for "Freedom" on the 4th of Novemeber.

For the first time in history a "Black man is going to Live in the White House" and its going to send a message to the entire world that America is a Democracy and things are about to change.

I'm proud to be: "Exon (another pinko faggot cocksucker)" and I hope and pray these Republican MotherFucker CockSuckers don't get another look at the White House for the next 40 years.

The MotherFuckers.

Exon[/QUOTE]As H. L. Mencken said, "The people should get what they voted for, and they should get it good and hard."

If you get your wish I will smirk with glee as you write those big checks from your bank account to pay for all the "spreading wealth around." Just don't whine when the big dick of government gets shoved deep in your ass, amigo! (The Democrats aren't going to use vaseline on you, my friend.)

[QUOTE=Daddy Rulz]But what can you expect from a neo hippy fag California baseball team loving commie pinko cocksucker![/QUOTE]Unfortunately, I am not a cocksucking "fag."

I agree with their right to marry and all that, but I am a flaming heterosexual.

If sexual orientation was a choice I would certainly choose gay. It is so much easier to understand men than women.

But I can't help it that I need chicas. I was born this way and I can't change. Not even prayer helped me.

DB.

P. S. I am pretty cool with everything else you said about me, though.

[QUOTE=Hunt99]As H. L. Mencken said, "The people should get what they voted for, and they should get it good and hard."[/QUOTE]It sure seems that is exactly what happened the past eight years!

It's ok in my book to be a fag. Be proud. I am!

[QUOTE=Dodger Bulldog]Well Tiny, that is because there were two links in my original post, and you clicked on the WRONG one. [/QUOTE]No, DB, I read the correct link before your first response. You said only the wealthiest 440 families in the US are subject to estate tax. Your link said nothing of the sort.

[QUOTE=Jackson]It figures, I've been asking liberals this question for years, and I've never received a straight answer.[/QUOTE]And you never will get a straight answer. About 40% of the U. S. Population pays no income tax. And many more pay very little income tax. Liberals from that group would like to milk the wealthy for as much as possible. If 1% of the population pays 60% of the income tax that's fine with them. Ideally, they'd like for government to rob as much as possible from the top 1% , 5% , 10% or whatever -- they want a free ride. Then, you've got wealthy people in favor of higher taxes. Of course, though, there should be loopholes in the tax code so that they don't have to pay. Like Teresa Heinze Kerry, John Kerry's wife, who pays very little federal income tax because her money is invested in municipal bonds. Or Warren Buffet, who pays very little individual income tax because all his assets are in a corporation that doesn't pay dividends.

I can't get a straight answer either. Under Bush's plan, the wealthiest 1% pay 39.1% of the income tax. Under Clinton's plan the wealthiest 1% would pay 37.4%. And that's straight off a liberal web site. So why would you want to revert to the Clinton plan, if it means the wealthy will pay a smaller percentage of the income tax?

[QUOTE=Tiny12]And you never will get a straight answer. About 40% of the U. S. Population pays no income tax. And many more pay very little income tax. Liberals from that group would like to milk the wealthy for as much as possible. If 1% of the population pays 60% of the income tax that's fine with them. Ideally, they'd like for government to rob as much as possible from the top 1% , 5% , 10% or whatever -- they want a free ride. Then, you've got wealthy people in favor of higher taxes. Of course, though, there should be loopholes in the tax code so that they don't have to pay. Like Teresa Heinze Kerry, John Kerry's wife, who pays very little federal income tax because her money is invested in municipal bonds. Or Warren Buffet, who pays very little individual income tax because all his assets are in a corporation that doesn't pay dividends.

I can't get a straight answer either. Under Bush's plan, the wealthiest 1% pay 39.1% of the income tax. Under Clinton's plan the wealthiest 1% would pay 37.4%. And that's straight off a liberal web site. So why would you want to revert to the Clinton plan, if it means the wealthy will pay a smaller percentage of the income tax?[/QUOTE]First Clinton's not running, maybe you havent heard but Oboma got the nomination.

Second if You can prove you make a taxable income of over $250,000 a year I'll Suck Cock in front of the statute in Plaza San Martian Plaza and give you two days to draw a crowd to watch.

I know its a safe bet because no one making $250,000 a year is stupid enough to say some like that.

Exon

Time to pour on the coal. I just made a donation at the Obama website and encourage you to do the same. For the love of our country, don't give the dark side another chance. Every day of the week they demonstrate vividly how empty of good governance ideas they are and the slime they traffic in to stir up the white racist vote. Do what you can to turn the page. Here's the website -

[url]http://www.barackobama.com/index.php[/url]

[QUOTE=Bacchus9]Time to pour on the coal. I just made a donation at the Obama website and encourage you to do the same. For the love of our country, don't give the dark side another chance. Every day of the week they demonstrate vividly how empty of good governance ideas they are and the slime they traffic in to stir up the white racist vote. Do what you can to turn the page. Here's the website -

[url]http://www.barackobama.com/index.php[/url][/QUOTE]Absolutely. Join Bacchus9 and the Hamas boys from the Gaza Strip supporting The Messiah. It's better than spending it on hookers! :D

[QUOTE=Exon123]First Clinton's not running, maybe you havent heard but Oboma got the nomination. Exon[/QUOTE]That's Bill Clinton. The taxes someone would pay if tax rates were the same now as they were under BILL Clinton. And you're offering to perform fellatio in public depending on the level of my income. I give up, this is like something out of Idiocracy, the movie.

[QUOTE=Dodger Bulldog]Unfortunately, I am not a cocksucking "fag."

P. S. I am pretty cool with everything else you said about me, though.[/QUOTE]LMAO!

Yuh know, in the end, we're all dead anyways.

What do you say we all take a deep breath, back off and turn down the volume?

Berkley Breathed, the Pulitzer Prize winning comic strip artist is retiring his current nationally syndicated "Opus" because of the decline of civility in the "National Discourse".

A recent favorite:

[url]http://www.salon.com/comics/opus/2008/10/05/opus/[/url]

Is this going to be the last one?:

[url]http://www.salon.com/comics/opus/2008/10/19/opus/index.html?source=newsletter[/url]

[QUOTE=Hunt99]Absolutely. Join Bacchus9 and the Hamas boys from the Gaza Strip supporting The Messiah. It's better than spending it on hookers!:D[/QUOTE]Thanks for making my point. You guys have got nothing but bogeyman taunts. No positive ideas, plenty of race baiting, Red menace socialism and fear mongering. Nothing, an empty hand. It must be intoxicating because otherwise it's like waving a big sign saying "I'm an idiot, let me show you why".

[QUOTE=Sidney]I am awaiting your substantial contribution. You definitely deserve to be on the Board of Directors.[/QUOTE]For a guy who's supposed to be handy with numbers Syd, you really make me wonder. So how was the weekend partridge shooting in England with the boys from A. I. G. ?

So Sid I was driving home tonight and I thought of a good group of unfortunates. How about a college fund for the children of posthumous recipients of the DSC, Navy Cross, or Air force Cross?

Children of Medal of Honor winners are automatically accepted on a non-competitive basis to the service academy of their choice, but I don't think that privilege is extended to DSC winners.

I don't have much but I would contribute to something like this if you were serious about managing the fund and willing to help capitalize it. We could contribute money on a percentage of income basis. I would give 5% of a years income to something like that. My money is now where my mouth is.

Dodger my post was tongue in cheek, since I'm such a vocal commie pinko fag Democrat I thought you would recognize that. Apologies if I offended you. Stowe on the other hand is a disgusting pervert so gets no sorrys.

[QUOTE=Bacchus9]Thanks for making my point. You guys have got nothing but bogeyman taunts. No positive ideas, plenty of race baiting, Red menace socialism and fear mongering. Nothing, an empty hand. It must be intoxicating because otherwise it's like waving a big sign saying "I'm an idiot, let me show you why".[/QUOTE][I][b]Bogeymen[/i][/b]? Obama's [i][b]moneymen[/i][/b] from Palestine are well known. At least to people who care to look beyond the New York Times. You will not likely find their story there.

The Messiah promised that he would participate in the public financing system for the general election. Of course, he forgot all about that promise the same way he'll forget about not raising taxes on people earning less than $250,000 a year. If you read the fine print, that's 250K per married couple - if you make 125K as a single he's going to raise your taxes too. Truth be told, if you have a job you will pay more under The Messiah. If you can get a job, because they will get scarce when he starts punishing businesses for making a profit.

[QUOTE=Exon123]First Clinton's not running, maybe you havent heard but Oboma got the nomination.

Second if You can prove you make a taxable income of over $250,000 a year I'll Suck Cock in front of the statute in Plaza San Martian Plaza and give you two days to draw a crowd to watch.

I know its a safe bet because no one making $250,000 a year is stupid enough to say some like that.

Exon[/QUOTE]Congratulations Exon. You've just espoused a disincentive to earn more that's even more powerful than higher taxes.

Way better the Messiah than the ignorant and corrupt devils we have in the White House now.

[QUOTE=Jackson]Congratulations Exon. You've just espoused a disincentive to earn more that's even more powerful than higher taxes.[/QUOTE]Sorta like maybe "Joe The Plumber" Jackson?

Exon

[QUOTE=Stormy]Way better the Messiah than the ignorant and corrupt devils we have in the White House now.[/QUOTE] Stormy old Buddy, if I see those Rascals on the ballot next time I vote, I promise I ’ll vote against them, no matter what state I'm voting in!

(Thanks again Acorn!) ;)

[QUOTE=Jackson]Afghanistan wasn't a sufficiently large enough prize to motivate Al Qaeda into committing "suicide by US military confrontation".

Thanks,

Jackson[/QUOTE]Are you claiming to know what Al Qaeda thinks? How in the shit do you know what Al Qaeda is / was thinking? You just make things up to justify your position. Or provide the documentation from a non-Fox medium that supports your claim that Al Qaeda stated that Afghanistan wasn't a sufficiently large enough prize.

If there were enough Americans there it would have been sufficient reason for them but we decided to invade Iraq instead of fighting those in Afghanistan that really attacked us.

Living on a fantasy planet must be nice. Wish I could be there but I must live in reality.

Suerte.

Stowe

[QUOTE=Tiny12]No, YOU missed the point. I guess Cuba has one of the highest standards of living anywhere, as in terms of life expectancy, education and literacy it stacks up better than about 90% of the rest of the world. Scandinavian countries have a higher "standard of living" by your definition because they've done something right in education and health care, even though we throw more money at those problems than they do. Attributing the difference to taxes makes absolutely no sense.

Sorry Stowe, I know we're about to be out in the wilderness after this election, and I'm taking it all out on you. That's a lot safer than taking it out on somebody you know in real life that can beat the shit out of you.[/QUOTE]Sorry but I have to clarify once more-and finally.

You continue to state it is MY definition. Is it that difficult to understand these are NOT my numbers, my points-of-view, but that of the governments of the world-how they all calculate standards-of-living? Cuba ranks 51st based on the HDI. Not sure how else I can explain that these are NOT my definitions so, since you seem to be incapable of grasping that and continue to, I will cease to respond to or add to your confusion.

Perhaps your read somewhere in my prior post that I was making up the numbers or taking credit for them?

Suerte.

Stowe

[Quote] "Remember I said it standing here. We ’re gonna have an international crisis, a generated crisis, to test the mettle of this guy. "

Mr Biden cited Russia and the Middle East as possible places that may cause problems, as well as the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan – "crawling with al-Qaeda " – as being of concern.

"He ’s gonna need help, " the senator added, "Because it ’s not gonna be apparent, initially, that we ’re right. "

He added: "I probably shouldn ’t have said all this because it dawned on me that the press is here. " [/quote]Unfortunately that fear mongering Biden is probably right for once!

[QUOTE=Stowe]Are you claiming to know what Al Qaeda thinks? How in the shit do you know what Al Qaeda is / was thinking? You just make things up to justify your position. Or provide the documentation from a non-Fox medium that supports your claim that Al Qaeda stated that Afghanistan wasn't a sufficiently large enough prize.

If there were enough Americans there it would have been sufficient reason for them but we decided to invade Iraq instead of fighting those in Afghanistan that really attacked us.

Living on a fantasy planet must be nice. Wish I could be there but I must live in reality.

Suerte.

Stowe[/QUOTE]Ahh! Stowe, I see you have not been fully briefed on the Wizard of Libido's cunning strategy of ze Desert Fox Bush. You see, you put a big mouse trap in the sand dune and put in it some tanks and planes and leeetle soldiers, so tiny you can hardly see them and then cover it up with date palm leaves and wait for the Al Qaida band of brothers in their best French accent to say "Awf! Those filthy Americans, look they are desecrating Allah." "Let us go then to the Euphrates, all of us together at the same time and martyr ourselves for Allah in the sands of Iraq until we are all dead".

And then the Lion of the Desert Donald Rumsfeld would say "Awf! Afghanistan, there's nothing to bomb there, no matter they attacked us from Afghanistan, we must create a monster someplace else where we can bomb something. So he put a big mouse trap in the sand dune and put in some tanks and planes and leeetle soldiers and.".

The Kirchners are proposing to seize all the private pension funds in Argentina.

Interesting, as something similar may well happen with a Democrat government in Washington. Leading Congressional Democrats are already proposing abolishing 401(k) s. Good! Only rich people have those things, better for the government to take it away from them and "spread the wealth around" to those less fortunate and more likely to vote Democratic.

Argentina is indeed setting the example that America can follow if the election goes the Democrats' way.

[QUOTE=Stowe]Are you claiming to know what Al Qaeda thinks? How in the shit do you know what Al Qaeda is / was thinking? You just make things up to justify your position.[/QUOTE]Hi,

I assume that you remember how quickly Al Qaeda abandoned their positions in Afghanistan when we came looking for them?

Thanks,

Jackson

[QUOTE=Sidney]I am always eager to learn from a really smart guy. Please explain your methodology and the sources of your data.[/QUOTE]Methodology - I go on line in the morning and read a Nobel Prize winner of Economics.

Source of Data - Paul Krugman.

Syd, old sport,

Prepare to receive your new, dark overlord who will liberate you from your childish fixation on pointless symbolisms.

Get a rug and find out where the sun rises. The rest will be revealed to you by a mysterious bearded man, with a turbined head.

[QUOTE=Jackson]Congratulations Exon. You've just espoused a disincentive to earn more that's even more powerful than higher taxes.[/QUOTE][QUOTE=Exon123]Sorta like maybe "Joe The Plumber" Jackson?

Exon[/QUOTE]Exon,

What does that mean?

Thanks,

Jackson

[QUOTE=Jackson]Exon,

What does that mean?

Thanks,

Jackson[/QUOTE]Well the latest from up here in sex prison is a bunch of Republican fascist MotherFuckers, (You know who they are Jackson) want to run "Joe The Plumber" for Congress.

Exon

[QUOTE=Jackson]Hi,

I assume that you remember how quickly Al Qaeda abandoned their positions in Afghanistan when we came looking for them?

Thanks,

Jackson[/QUOTE]Drumroll, Pakistan, well not really Pakistan, I guess on a map it was Pakistan but the border between Paki and Afgi. So where do we go? Iraq of course and lay a big mousetrap in zee desert with planes and tanks and leetle soldiers. Because obviously fighting Al and his band of Qaedas where they are wouldn't make sense.

I know, I know you're going to write something like.

"For the 50th time we invaded Iraq to make all the terrorist come there so we could fight them in another country and keep the US safe. Do you finally get it now?"

Something like that anyway.

We were already fighting them in another country, a country with less cities for them to hide in. Though more mountains, but not much collateral damage when a bomb misses a cave mouth, not like when you're off a house in a city.

What was the first thing secured? Oil fields. First government building secured? Whatever they call the "ministry of where the oil maps are."

Call it what it was, I can live with invading Iraq to have more ready access to the oil, though if we were going to do that we coulda left Saddam in power, but then there goes the justification for being there, because really, honestly, at the end of the day. It was about liberating all those poor Iraqi people from a mean, mean, man. Meanwhile Al Qaeda has less pressure, Bin Ladin is free to move around. They recruit like a 100,000 new people and operate with impunity in the mountains between Paki and Afgi for 5 years.

Where does it end with you bubba?

They (Iraq) attacked us, they didn't.

But that guy Al Qaeda did. Yes but they were not in Iraq.

It was the WMD's. Still none found but I'm sure Saddam got them out of the country before we invaded. But strangely just like Bin Ladin never found.

Well we liberated those poor Iraqi. More Iraqi's have died since we invaded than Saddam killed.

It was for the oil, which is a strategic need of the US. So Iraq can sell a billion dollars worth of oil to freaking China? What is UP with that! We kick their ass, get rid of their dictator, still have boots on the ground and are selling oil to our biggest competitor (who routinely sends us poisoned dolls to sell in Walmart) what the fuck is up with that?

Come on Jax just say it, you'll feel better after you do. Embrace reason and reality. The invasion in Iraq was stupid, one of the worst foreign policy mistakes the US has ever made. KBR, Blackwater, and Haliburton got rich off it but everybody else including the taxpayer and the troops fighting it got hosed.

It doesn't make conservatives as a whole bad, I'm glad we have parties that play off each other. This wasn't a conservative act, we didn't "kick anybodies ass" or "show them not to mess with the US." It was a fiasco from day one, will cost us for generations, and absolutely ruined the worldwide goodwill we had after 911.

Admit it, move on, be a conservative but one that embraces reality. Make more money buy some property and evict some poor helpless widow for not paying rent. Go back to doing what Conservatives have always done well, making money, avoiding paying taxes, and be mean to poor people.

Daddy's out of this discussion about the war from now on. Continued justification with twisted reality just pisses me off, so I'm done with it. I would rather bait Sid and Hunt about Obama.

If anybody has any experience with having their identity stolen PM me. Some idiot is using my birth certificate. Why they would steal my identity and not somebody with money or credit like Sid or Exon is beyond me. I probably shouldn't do anything about it, they can only improve my credit.