marks2065
-
Content
2,903 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Feedback
0%
Posts posted by marks2065
-
-
QuoteQuoteBut remember that the Irac was the good war, like any war is good.
What?? In terms of what we historically refer to as "good wars", I don't think Iraq-II was ever widely seen as a "good war".
sorry I meant to say the afgan war, not the iraq war. when Obama was running for pres it was said that the afgan war was the good war. -
QuoteQuoteI think most "liberals" will agree the biggest failure of Obama's presidency has been the continuation and expansion of Bush's Orwellian policies, but examples like this demonstrate there really is very little difference politically between the two parties.
Example: "In his first three years, Obama has unleashed 268 covert drone strikes, five times the total George W. Bush ordered during his eight years in office."
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-rise-of-the-killer-drones-how-america-goes-to-war-in-secret-20120416#ixzz1sV8MnpgF
But remember that the Irac was the good war, like any war is good. They may be needed and necesary but never are they good, unless you are Obama trying to get elected. -
QuoteI think most "liberals" will agree the biggest failure of Obama's presidency has been the continuation and expansion of Bush's Orwellian policies, but examples like this demonstrate there really is very little difference politically between the two parties.
Both parties are basically corporate owned entities with slightly different strategies for placating the masses. It's all a dog & pony show designed to divide and distract the populace. Those with their hands on the levers of power love that we idiots are down here bickering about Obama vs Bush.
Political Science 101. I'm here all week folks.
I just want fair and balanced reports to make an inteligent decision, and I want people to be consistant with their positions. The media is supposed to work for us, not the political party they like. -
QuoteQuote
California is better now? I don't think they have adjusted yet, just looking at their financial numbers, I think they got caught unprepared and still haven't figured it out.
Which numbers are you referring to? On a GDP basis, it would still be one of the top 10 in the world. Deficits? That's entirely explained by the difference between federal taxes paid and those returned to the state.
I guess you get what you vote for don't you. -
QuoteI thought only Boehner cried...
https://www.google.com/search?q=boehner+crying&hl=en&sa=X&rls=com.microsoft:en-us:IE-Address&rlz=1I7ADRA_enUS414&prmd=imvns&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&ei=uCqQT9vsOMaltwfC9PHVBA&ved=0CFYQsAQ&biw=1600&bih=721&sei=xSqQT5X6CpKE8QSW0pnwAw
maybe no one is crying because liberals are just trying ot get the job done, instead of crying about it....
Then why was it not ok when the right "wanted to get the job done?" -
QuoteYou know how you didn't care when it happened under Bush, or maybe even supported such activities, but oppose them now that it's under Obama? Obviously there are folks on the other side of the aisle who mirror your level of concern.
Blues,
Dave
I didn't say I opposed this, I do support some torture for some reasons, and I feel that sometimes they go to far. This may have been one that I approve of. What my statement was about is that the left is not beating the drums and crying fowl that it is happening under Obama's watch. Does that mean it is ok to do under a democrat but not a republican, or does the left really think it is ok but needed a tool to run the republicans out of office? -
***
QuoteQuoteAnd don't forget the 77 virgins...
killler....
OH... I'd rather have 3 or 4 strippers.... Or a red headed sky chic.....
nowhere in the Koran does it say you receive 77 virgins upon entering heaven.
interesting video about the 1 person reading the koran
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Y2Or0LlO6g
I personally like the allen west video when a guy tries to defend islam, saying it is a peacefull religion and the koran doesn't say to kill americans.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2CVK4c2qu3M -
QuoteQuote>just wondering why the left hasn't made this a headline story.
Probably the same reason the conservative media said absolutely nothing when Romney claimed that mothers didn't work - but went into hysterics when a democrat said it. It's the "other guy."
Torture of US Citizen /= comments made by presidential candidate.
I think if it was relevant because it happened under Bush it is relevant now. Is it to much for the media to treat stories as stories, not good or bad based on political views? It is hard to trust we are getting the actual and relevant news when it gets filtered through a political strainer. -
http://news.yahoo.com/us-muslim-tortured-fbis-behest-uae-153507891.html
If this had happened 4 years ago the liberal media would have crucified the right for months and a congressional investigation would be starting in congress, but all I have heard is crickets in the dark.
I am not saying this is right or wrong since I don't know the details, just wondering why the left hasn't made this a headline story. Is it because it is under Obama's watch and we can't have negative stories in an election year? -
Quoteas his ratings in March increased by 60%
Good stuff huh
the more that listen, even the ones that dissagree is good. -
QuoteQuoteJust as relevant to my vote as Ted Nugent.
You voted as Ted Nugent?
maybe they need an ID to vote and this wouldn't happen :-) -
Quote>Every one in the country benefits from the GOV's "work", every one should
>contribute to its funding, that includes income taxes.
Nice in theory, unworkable in practice. You could tax everyone in the country about $30,000 a year; that would pay our expenses and start to pay down our deficit.
You would then have to put roughly 32% of the taxpayers in the US in jail for nonpayment of taxes. At about $30,000 a year for keeping people in jail your taxes would rise to around $45,000 a year to support all the people now in jail.
So instead we have a progressive system in which everyone pays a percentage. Lowest percentage is around 10% which seems reasonable. Some people then pay nothing at all because of all the deductions that are allowed nowadays. That seems like the issue to go after, rather than changing a system that's taxing everyone at least 10%.
Wrong, 45-50% pay no federal income tax after tax day -
QuoteGood. The less they do the better. We don't need a slew of new laws.
It would be nice if they did one thing, pass a balanced budget. -
QuoteOK, some 70+ % of respondents here have healthcare and think freeloaders should pay up.
So what should be done about freeloaders.
Assume a hypothetical woman in her 50s, let's call her "Mary Brown". She is well off and runs a small business and doesn't think she should be forced to have health insurance - so much so that she sues to overturn a mandate.
Now "Mary" gets sick and stiffs her doctor for her medical bills. The cost of "Mary"'s expensive treatment gets passed on to others in the community.
What should happen?
the doctor should sue her and garnish her wages until the bill is paid, just like other non paid debts are collected. -
Quote>no the right says work and pay your own bills the left says gimme some
>of what you have . . .
Both raise government spending - and that means "gimme some of what you have" at the end of the day.
But you were talking about radio personalities. Both say "I want what the other guy has" about equally.
Ever hear a right winger say they want the same coverage from the media than the left has? No? Then you haven't been listening.
wanting to be treated fairly and honestly are completely different than saying gimme what the other guy has. the discussion here is about tantrums and wanting from others what they themselves have not earned causing hatred, no fair media coverage from the press. -
QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuotehttp://www.zerohedge.com/news/buffett-rule-perspective
An interesting perspective on the Buffet Rule
No it isn't.
Yes it is. It shows that this is a feel-good measure with a negligible effect on the bottom line and .
Nope. A tax system like the one we have in the USA depends for its effectiveness on a sense of fairness. The Buffett rule is a way of eliminating the perception and reality of UNfairness that allows billionaires to pay tax at a lower rate than middle class workers.
Using examples from this thread
65,000 AGI, 6.9% due in income tax
100,000 AGI, 10.6% due in income tax
and Mitt Romney
20,900,000 AGI, 15.4% due in income tax
.
Another example:
I paid 21% in federal income tax for 2011. Mitt Romney pays 13.9% and makes more than 100x what I make.
yep you are correct it is unfair, they paid millions more than you and employ many people, you need to start paying more and or hire more people to make it fair. -
QuoteQuoteQuoteI like 'flat tax (obviously fair...make more / pay more), no deductions (spend your money how you want), and eliminate the IRS (huge cost savings)'
Simple. Fair. Efficient. Unlikely.
yep, unlikely because everyone has to pay something, and we all know from what we have seen the last 3 years is that everybody paying something is not fair.
How much do you think the homeless people living in cardboard boxes on the grates on Wacker Drive will be able to contribute?
Or 90 year old widows with Alzheimers?
the 90 year old has already paid before retirement and the bum there is no hope for but could pick up trash. -
Quote>very rarely do you ever hear a right leaning radio personality screaming "i
>want what the other guy has"
About as often as you hear left leaning radio personalities screaming "I want what the other guy has."
Although overall I suspect you hear that more from right wingers than from left wingers. Not because neither side ever says it, but because right wingers tend to scream more.
no the right says work and pay your own bills the left says gimme some of what you have, that is the difference -
QuoteQuotevery rarely do you ever hear a right leaning radio personality screaming "i want what the other guy has", matter of fact show me one example of one throwing a tantrum because he didn't get what someone else has.
With my kids I don't tolerate any tantrums, regardles of what the tantrum is about. Guess you are ok with tantrums, as long as you agree with them.
if you don't tolerate them then why do you tolerate the from the oval office? -
QuoteI like 'flat tax (obviously fair...make more / pay more), no deductions (spend your money how you want), and eliminate the IRS (huge cost savings)'
Simple. Fair. Efficient. Unlikely.
yep, unlikely because everyone has to pay something, and we all know from what we have seen the last 3 years is that everybody paying something is not fair. -
QuoteQuoteQuoteWell, that was a bit of a surprise.
The first time I took a test of that sort and discovered I was Libertarian, I had to look the term up. Same thing happened to my father when I sent him the test. But it all made perfect sense.
What happened that surprised you?
I had taken a similar one before and also scored Libertarian. This time I was slightly into the Authoritarian Left quadrant.
I was authoritarian left also, just means that we don't care what you do in your house just support yourself , don't suck off others, and don't hurt anyone else. -
QuoteQuotejust because you don't have the same views doesn't mean we can't get along.
Really? Couple a years ago you weren't a patriot unless you agreed with the government.Quoteto bad the leberal parents didn't teach their kids better about public tantrums when they were younger.
Yeah those tantrums are like radio personalities who can't get their drugs.
very rarely do you ever hear a right leaning radio personality screaming "i want what the other guy has", matter of fact show me one example of one throwing a tantrum because he didn't get what someone else has. -
QuoteQuoteQuoteQuotehttp://www.zerohedge.com/news/buffett-rule-perspective
An interesting perspective on the Buffet Rule
No it isn't.
Yes it is. It shows that this is a feel-good measure with a negligible effect on the bottom line and .
Nope. A tax system like the one we have in the USA depends for its effectiveness on a sense of fairness. The Buffett rule is a way of eliminating the perception and reality of UNfairness that allows billionaires to pay tax at a lower rate than middle class workers.
What would " BE FAIR " would be if everyone paid the same amount of tax, but we know that to many don't earn enough for that to happen. So we built a system that had different tiers so the more you made the higher dollar amount you paid. Then congress , in order to buy your vote, said we will help those less fortunate by eliminating your obligation to help this country financially, so now 49 million don't even contribute. Now we have the left bitching that those left paying are not paying their fair share need to pay more even though thay are paying almost all.
I know I do not have a masters degree but last I heard is that "fair share" means you need to contribute something. The only ones that are not paying their Fair share are the 49 million that pay no fed income tax.
Tell me if I am wrong and need further liberal training in a college of your choice. But just remember that if I do get a college eduacation it should be free because I need to get my "fair share of that whichI am entitled to". -
QuoteQuoteQuoteQuotesorry but I will not change my beliefs because the left will hate me if I don't.
Actually, that was a favoured Bush Era slogan.
just because you don't have the same views doesn't mean we can't get along. what I see happening is that when the majority of the people don't like what the left is doing, the left starts things like race and discrimination rants to the degree of a 2 year old get what they want. I'v seen 2 year olds do the same thing. to bad the leberal parents didn't teach their kids better about public tantrums when they were younger.
You know, that's actually a pretty good point. Liberal friends of mine are more likely to let their kids get away with screaming and carrying on when out in public than the Conservatives I know.
And they continue laying on the floor in the store screaming, kicking and saying things like "I want that thing like Bobby has" all the way to the white house.
Why is there no liberal crying for this?
in Speakers Corner
start voting for those that work for us and keep their word, not the ones that by our votes and keep building our debt would be a good start.