hmm, im an extrememist ? ...Sorry i'm no supporter of the green party buddy, Neither do I go to rally's for social justice, im just a regular dedicated liberal, not extremeist, thats a term I would use for someone who is willing to die for the cause. Funny part is im just commenting on your statemnt, yet you take it as flaming. YOu then go on telling me to go up pyro's ass and compare me to a pedophile, Yet i've yet to really flame you. I simply state my opinion on an internet forum and it is as if I am (to you) ready to bomb your house or kick your family members in the head. Calm down boy, im not going to attack you only state "what i think needs to be said and what is wrong with America itself. Beleive it or not im only trying to help you guyz out from leading yourselves into a path of destruction. ed: Becasue the wya America is going now, you can bet it is not going to last to much more. Seems no one on this board can have a civilized arguement. ffs.

[quote="Short Hand":aa62f]hmm, im an extrememist ? ...Sorry i'm no supporter of the green party buddy, Neither do I go to rally's for social justice, im just a regular dedicated liberal, not extremeist, thats a term I would use for someone who is willing to die for the cause. Funny part is im just commenting on your statemnt, yet you take it as flaming. YOu then go on telling me to go up pyro's ass and compare me to a pedophile, Yet i've yet to really flame you. I simply state my opinion on an internet forum and it is as if I am (to you) ready to bomb your house or kick your family members in the head. Calm down boy, im not going to attack you only state "what i think needs to be said and what is wrong with America itself. Beleive it or not im only trying to help you guyz out from leading yourselves into a path of destruction. ed: Becasue the wya America is going now, you can bet it is not going to last to much more. Seems no one on this board can have a civilized arguement. ffs.[/quote:aa62f]

Maybe I over reacted and I apologize, but it I'm just tired of you calling me out on petty shit. I feel confident that I fully understand how a president is elected. Help us out? No sir. You like to needle and needle to get a rise out of someone. What other purpose would you have by quoting me to be a smart ass?I f you had all the answers that you think you have, I would vote for you to be president . The bold portion above seems pretty obnoxous. No I didn't compare you to a pedophile, just a figure of speech. We obviously don't see eye to eye on much and that's fine. We can have a civilized argument, but It shouldn't start with some lame ass quote and calling me fool. No hard feelings though beer:

[quote=MrLevinstein]I didnt insult your spelling one bit you fucking putz, now hop in your POS riced out cav and think you can take a camaro, or have anything fucking close to speed. "WELL THE Z24 has 150 MIGHTY HORSEPOWER, AND SINCE WEVE GOT NOTHING CLOSE TO FUCKING POWER UP HEAR, I THINK THAT 150 HORSES IS A LOT, ANYONE KNOW WHERE I CAN GET SOME HYPODERMIC NEEDLES?!!?!?!"

You know about cars like you know about American politics, which isnt very much isnt it, cock fucker.[/quote:0cf15]


eek:

[quote=Snuff]okee sounds good.

Maybe I over reacted and I apologize, but it I'm just tired of you calling me out on petty shit. I feel confident that I fully understand how a president is elected. Help us out? No sir. You like to needle and needle to get a rise out of someone. What other purpose would you have by quoting me to be a smart ass?I f you had all the answers that you think you have, I would vote for you to be president . The bold portion above seems pretty obnoxous. No I didn't compare you to a pedophile, just a figure of speech. We obviously don't see eye to eye on much and that's fine. We can have a civilized argument, but It shouldn't start with some lame ass quote and calling me fool. No hard feelings though beer:[/quote:667a3]

Of course the wealthy pay more taxes because they have a higher income. 10% of $100 is $10, 10% of $100,00 is $1,000. Whats wrong with that? Under Bush's tax cut, the top 2% earners were taxed at a lower percentage than the poorest people, thats what I'm getting at. Should the poorest people in America pay more than the richest? Why do I think the poorer people need more of a tax break? Because generally they spend the rebate immediately, while the top earners in the country are able to save it for later, thats why its called a stimulus. It makes sense to give the spenders the money, rather than the wealthier people who save it. This is the trend used in the 50's and 60's I believe. It was also used by Bill Clinton. It was in these periods where our country had a nice budget surplus. When Reagan, Bush Sr and now Bush Jr used it with a combination of massive spending, we have a large defecit. Another point that I would like to make is how liberals are blamed for spending all the money away in useless programs. Clinton was able to spend money and produce this surplus at the same time, while his predeccesors spended and created a defecit. I dont like criticizing where I dont need to, but I think we should learn from examples that work.

Some of what you saying has merit but, the rich still pay a vast majority of the taxes even even at a lower percentage. The non-rich still recieved tax cuts in proportion to their incomes. I by no means fall in the 2% that you cited but I still have a problem being penalized for going through 8 years of college to make a good living and paying enough taxes for 10 other people who didn't apply themselves. The %'s you quoted adds up. I pay in excess of 5k per month in taxes. Why should I pay 60k annually when some only pay 6k. I desreve a tax cut as much as that person. We already have enough avenues in this country to allow people to sit in their asses or not strive to be successful. Whether it be poor choices or a lack of responsobility. I'm sure that when FDR created welfare, that he had no intention of it being the parasite program that it is today. To be honest, I don't have as much of a problem paying more taxes to support defense, schools etc. but much of my tax dollar goes to pay for irresponsible people who leach off the system. That is why I feel the rich should get tax breaks also.

Everyone should get tax breaks, its just that under Reagan and the two Bush's admin, the 2%ers (just for names sake) get alot more breaks than they should so that it doesnt turn into a tax break, its just straight out more income for them. They arent even paying taxes. As for people leeching off welfare, the two largest pots of money in our country are for Social Security and Medicare. Are you going to cut these? These are almost necessities for the baby boomers who cant take care of themselves. Third is the Pentagon. No one seems willing to debate cutting the money for these three so the next to hit are domestic programs, which only make up 1/5 of the total budget. The problem isnt with these domestic programs, we need to completely re-evaluate the big 3 spenders.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy ... st08z8.xls

But another aspect of this problem lies with spending. Even though each specific part of our system has a budget, some go over it, or some dont use all of it. Clinton got all kinds of flak for spending money on programs and is said to have created the defecit we have now because of his spending. If you look at the White House's own budget chart, you see that Bush is spending more than Clinton ever did, in fact he increased domestic spending by nearly 25%. If you have a defecit, you dont start spending MORE money. Clinton had a surplus, so he could afford the budget he had in his term.

The solution is simple, reverse what Bush is doing and go back to what worked in Clintons term. But it doesnt look like Bush will do that, so that is why its ironic when he says Republicans are for fiscal responsibility.

That sucks that you pay so much and I know it can be hard to see all that money disappear out of your check, but why should the people who make even more than you not have to pay anything because they get breaks on dividends, estates and the tax breaks given to them directly? I think it would be better for everyone to pay a flate rate percentage, but I dont know if any administration has ever done that before. How well were you doing under the Clinton admin? Is it better now or was it better then?

Im sorry, I believe the oppisite is true. Under bush's tax cut, the lowest income brackets got a larger cut.

[img]http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/reports/images/taxplan-chart2.gif[/img]

[quote:6328a]Of course the wealthy pay more taxes because they have a higher income. 10% of $100 is $10, 10% of $100,00 is $1,000. Whats wrong with that?[/quote:6328a]

Acctually, we have a graduated income tax. The more you make the more you are taxed. The old categories for percent taxed are, 15%, 28%, 31%, 36%, and 39.6%, respectivly, by income. The new categories, under Bush's new plan are; 10%, 15%, 25%, and 33%. I pulled these numbers from
[url:6328a]http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/reports/taxplan.html[/url:6328a]

Wow, you suprise me, TGB!!!! rock:

I did enough back in the Reagen thread I had the exact same debate about tax cuts as madmartagen is getting at with Colonel.

WHy did Bush oppose the 9/11 commisions at first ? He bummed out the one made by congress then opposed the public commision itself. The white house support of the commision as well has been lacking a lot, deadlones for documents to be submitted to the commision were late and osme never delivred at all. Not to mention the fact that they asked the 9/11 commision to Censor 28 pages of their report. "ever wonder what is on those pages". + as stated in the movie relating to the Bin Laden family, when you investigate any crime such as murder for say, you always question the family. They can give you insight into the crime and person themselves. Valuble information, lost. "Just not to make their lives less complicated, I don't give a fuck who you are 3k + people were just killed by one of your relatives, you better sit you ass in my country and answer some of my questions.

While the whole stole theory isn't exactly 100 % sound, it still has fantastic merit. The state is goverened by Jeff Bush, -The chairmen of Bush Campeign (Katherine Harris) was also the Vote counter for Florida and and hired a company to knock voters off the list that would most likely not vote for Bush (aka such as African Americans.) More backup and proof to this clause of African Americans getting knocked off the list was in joint session of congress and the Senate, African American Congress men and women both stood up to argue and call mis conduct in Florida. They needed backup from a senator but didn't get any. So they were told to shut up and sit down. One of the Congress Women who came up for this stated that in one of the sections alone 16000 blacks were disin franchised (lost right to vote) in Florida. Also numerous independent counts point out the Gore won the state.

http://democrats.com/view.cfm?id=5111

http://slate.msn.com/?id=2058631 (more mainstream news media for your liking)

[quote:60049]
And the controversy has not been confined to the issue of recounts. Gore supporters say that in Palm Beach County many voters were confused by the design of the ballot. As a result, they may have mistakenly voted for Reform Party candidate Pat Buchanan when they meant to vote for Gore. To support its position, the Gore campaign pointed to the results in Palm Beach County and similar counties in southeast Florida[/quote:60049]

+ doens't mattter if Clark takes the wrap, such high profile people being allowed to leave is to much of a fuck up. Ever hear the term used in the army, that a commander is responsible for his/her soldiers ? This in comparsion is the same thing. (Of course someone will take the fall or Bush him not taking the hit would mean almost certain thathe would lose this next election or have a huge blow to his poll numbers.

Lets see some examples of terrorists being harbored in Iraq after Spet 11th ? Thats right their were no links of AL queda to Iraq. If you use these weak statemetns to justify the invasion of Iraq and the killing of men women and children, then maybe you should review your own ethics. People do die you know from those bombs that hit citys. There was even use of Napalm in Iraq which of hit Women and Children. Seeing pictures of that kinda gets you to think...

And in closure, yes there is Liberal Bias in Moore's film's , because it is a liberal peice of media, but a conservative media peice would be bias as well, Moore admits his bias in public and states this is his opinion. In all honest respects i think Moore did this one better then the BFC because he tended to keep himself and his interviews out of the picture more often, instead he presented the viewer with a lot more cold harded facts.

You only say this becaue of my Liberal views. More slander on behalf and based on the fact to you that all of Moore's documentarys are Bullshit and that right winged conservatism is always right. I've got news for you.. its not. Get over it. Neither are. It is a good mix of both that keeps things afloat (although i tend to take as Liberalism is more the answer in today's day and age.) We could also take to fact back in the reagen thread you did little as well to fight ay claims made by the article, you simply told me in the end to go write my own report and go make my own internet article. As many of conservatives tend to do here.

-In the end all it seems to me is that you don't see how valuble life is maybe one day if you ever are so unlucky to live threw the hell that is "war" then you might understand. Life is to valueble to be wasting on such falsities such as the War in Iraq. Now commence calling me a retard, it seems to be the main source of ammunition around here to me.

-end rant. nag:

nag: nag:

nice sig static.

[quote:d8cae] Why did Bush oppose the 9/11 commisions at first ?[/quote:d8cae]

I dont know. And neither do you. To say you do is presumptous.

[quote:d8cae] Not to mention the fact that they asked the 9/11 commision to Censor 28 pages of their report. "ever wonder what is on those pages".[/quote:d8cae]

Theres a reason we call certain bits of information classified. This isnt “what library books did so and so check out”, this is information that no doubt compromises, or relates to ongoing investigations. But again thats presumptious to think I know whats on there and you know whats on there. This is not the first, and last, time this will happen.

[quote:d8cae] + as stated in the movie relating to the Bin Laden family, when you investigate any crime such as murder for say, you always question the family.[/quote:d8cae]

You understand dont you, that the FBI reviewed the crew manifest. They KNEW who was on this plane. You understand that dont you.

[quote:d8cae] The state is goverened by Jeff Bush[/quote:d8cae]

Jeb

[quote:d8cae] -The chairmen of Bush Campeign (Katherine Harris) was also the Vote counter for Florida[/quote:d8cae]

No she actually is the secretary of State. She certifies the results, the State Registrars offifce sets up polling places. You do realize that in most of these polling places where votes were “lost” that they were run by democrats.

[quote:d8cae] and and hired a company to knock voters off the list that would most likely not vote for Bush (aka such as African Americans.)[/quote:d8cae]

This “company” is the ChoicePoint corporation. There task was to take the large registered voter list, and to REMOVE CONVICTED FELONS who do not have the right to vote. It is true that 97% were felons and the other 3% of these (which amounts to 3000) were wrongfully excised. HALF of those were minorities (not simply blacks, although I know to some minority is just another term for “blacks”). So you have 1500 people who may or may not have actually gone to the polls, and voted for Al Gore. Funny thing is Al Gore neither protested the so-called “disenfranchisement” nor supported the felons right to regain their vote.

[quote:d8cae] More backup and proof to this clause of African Americans getting knocked off the list was in joint session of congress and the Senate[/quote:d8cae]

First things, congress is the Senate and The House Of Representatives. “Congress” is not a single legislative house.

[quote:d8cae]African American Congress men and women both stood up to argue and call mis conduct in Florida. They needed backup from a senator but didn't get any.[/quote:d8cae]

Perhaps because the Senators respected the decision of the Supreme Court? You realize the Senate ALSO has minorities in it as well, correct? And you do realize that if the Representatives (these are the guys who conduct business in The House, and serve smaller districts than the Senate) had NOT “stood up” for their constituents, they no doubt would have been removed from office? See Reps serve only two years in office, so they are under the gun to serve the constituents whether they want to or not. Again this is conjecture to their motives, but not bringing their constituents “complaints” to the floor of the Senate would have been career suicide.

[quote:d8cae] So they were told to shut up and sit down.[/quote:d8cae]

No, they were told to respect the rules of the Senate floor which do not allow debate. Moore took that to mean “shut up and sit down”, cause what sounds “jucier”.

[quote:d8cae] One of the Congress Women who came up for this stated that in one of the sections alone 16000 blacks were disin franchised (lost right to vote) in Florida.[/quote:d8cae]

Thats a patently false number. I dont even know how to respond to that except to say power of persuasion is a great thing. “Hey they say some folks voted for the wrong person, you think maybe you voted for the wrong person – yea I think I voted wrong too! Damnit I lost my vote”

[quote:d8cae] Also numerous independent counts point out the Gore won the state.[/quote:d8cae]

I already covered this. Depending on the “rules” used, either Gore or Bush would take FL.

[quote:d8cae] doens't mattter if Clark takes the wrap, such high profile people being allowed to leave is to much of a fuck up.[/quote:d8cae]

Already addressed this. I will say though, that theres a real underlying sense of racism going on to assume that all Saudis are by virtue of the nation of birth are “suspect”.

[quote:d8cae] Lets see some examples of terrorists being harbored in Iraq after Spet 11th ?[/quote:d8cae]

You know they werent there? “Oh hey Saddam we know some of Osamas men have been here in the past, training on your soil for various activities, but since they arent here right now we’re gonna go ahead and let you off the hook”. Yea, real good plan. You’re willing to hold the Bin Ladens w/o them having any involvement in 9/11 but dont give a shit that Hussein has a very real history with terrorist groups INCLUDING Al Qaeda? Sweet.

[quote:d8cae] Thats right their were no links of AL queda to Iraq.[/quote:d8cae]

IN regards to 9/11, no there werent.

[quote:d8cae] If you use these weak statemetns to justify the invasion of Iraq and the killing of men women and children, then maybe you should review your own ethics.[/quote:d8cae]

No, I’d like the left to review the “ethics” that allows dictators to murder their own people, and then “stand up for their rights” when we remove these murderers. Where was your righteous indignation then Short Hand when this was happening? Where were the protest when Hussein invaded Kuwait, when the Baath party systematically murdered Kurds? Where were you then?

[quote:d8cae] And in closure, yes there is Liberal Bias in Moore's film's , because it is a liberal peice of media, but a conservative media peice would be bias as well, Moore admits his bias in public and states this is his opinion.[/quote:d8cae]

Moore has a “fact checker team” – hired by him of course – to check his “facts”. This is not an “opinion” piece. Moore is presenting this as “fact”.

[quote:d8cae] In the end all it seems to me is that you don't see how valuble life is maybe one day if you ever are so unlucky to live threw the hell that is "war" then you might understand.[/quote:d8cae]

No I lived through 10 years of “the ghetto” under a democrat and quite frankly didnt see much of the “liberals love education, minorities, and blah blah blah”. I did however see more than a few people close to me get shuffled on off to the afterlife and did see more than a few people get “disenfranchised” by government in general. This is in the most liberal state in the United States also – California.

[quote:d8cae]Life is to valueble to be wasting on such falsities such as the War in Iraq.[/quote:d8cae]

Tell that to Saddam Hussein.

[quote="Pick Axe":40570][quote=Madmartagen][b] Under Bush's tax cut, the top 2% earners were taxed at a lower percentage than the poorest people[/b], thats what I'm getting at. Should the poorest people in America pay more than the richest? Why do I think the poorer people need more of a tax break? Because generally they spend the rebate immediately, while the top earners in the country are able to save it for later, thats why its called a stimulus. It makes sense to give the spenders the money, rather than the wealthier people who save it.[/quote]


Im sorry, I believe the oppisite is true. Under bush's tax cut, the lowest income brackets got a larger cut.

[img]http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/reports/images/taxplan-chart2.gif[/img]

[quote:40570]Of course the wealthy pay more taxes because they have a higher income. 10% of $100 is $10, 10% of $100,00 is $1,000. Whats wrong with that?[/quote:40570]

Acctually, we have a graduated income tax. The more you make the more you are taxed. The old categories for percent taxed are, 15%, 28%, 31%, 36%, and 39.6%, respectivly, by income. The new categories, under Bush's new plan are; 10%, 15%, 25%, and 33%. I pulled these numbers from
[url:40570]http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/reports/taxplan.html[/url:40570][/quote:40570]

You have that graph, I have this one so we have a difference of opinion.
[url="http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docid=145"]http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docid=145[/url]
"Taxpayers making more than $1 million a year get an average cut of nearly $113,000 this year. Such huge cuts at the top tend to pull up the numerical average that the President is fond of citing."

I know we have a graduated income tax, it was just an example i was using. I wish we did have a flat tax rate, but for whatever reason, we dont and no other admin i can think of has every implemented one.