Leader

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Things McCain and Palin Won't Have to Do

Collapse

300x250 Mobile

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by djack16 View Post
    Conservatives don't have to ever explain ANYTHING. It's only after they have been indicted that they have to and sometimes, even then, they LIE.
    Hell, you say it like their the only politicians who do.

    Comment


    • #17
      [QUOTE=mjhoyt27;1389400]If you were Black and growing up 30-40 years ago, I would say that America was a downright mean country also.

      QUOTE]

      Nobody wants to hear that anymore. You've milked that for all its worth a long time ago.
      The liberal politician has the only job where they go to the office to work for everyone but those who pay their salary.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by mjhoyt27 View Post
        I would like to know of John McCain really didn't use drugs. After all, his wife is an admitted drug user, who walked away from criminal charges. George Bush had a severe alcohol problem, I would like to remind you before you talk about a democrats former substance abuse. Finally, your taxes will only be raised if you make more than 250k, so stop pretending (?) to be stupid! If you make under 75k (I'm guessing a lot of people on this forum do), you will even get a tax break.

        Q: Can you make an absolute, read-my-lips pledge that there will be no tax increases of any kind for anyone earning under $200,000 a year?

        CLINTON: I will let the taxes on people making more than $250,000 a year go back to the rates that they were paying in the 1990s.

        Q: Senator Obama, would you take the same pledge? No tax increases on people under $250,000?

        OBAMA: I not only have pledged not to raise their taxes, I've been the first candidate in this race to specifically say I would cut their taxes. We are going to offset the payroll tax, the most regressive of our taxes, so that families who are middle-income individuals making $75,000 a year or less, that they would get a tax break so that families would see up to $1,000 worth of relief.
        The whole tax system is broken and so distorted by politicians that no one knows the truth. Democrats keep spouting that "the rich" should pay more than "the poor" and the "middle class." They do. They always have. Say the tax rate is 10%. A person making $500,000 a year pays $50,000 in taxes; a person making $40,000 a year pays $4,000 in taxes. The rich pay more...at least in theory. In reality, they pay much more in income tax percentage than anyone else. Additionally, tax cuts SHOULD benefit the rich more that the poor...THEY PAY THE TAXES! As of 6 years ago, 5% of Americans paid 67% of the income taxes.

        The reality is that the income tax rate for the poor is ZERO; many qualify for a rebate even though they pay no taxes. That doesn't include any government benefits (SSI, Food Stamps, Medicaid, etc.). That's called redistribution of wealth. Or, the government playing Robin Hood...steal from the rich and give to the poor. But what is rich? By most definitions from the Democrats, rich would include a well-paid cop and an experienced RN. Making $80,000 or $100,000 a year isn't that rare anymore with two-income families. But they are "rich" according to many Democrats.

        I have no problem paying taxes...I know they are a necessary evil of modern society. I do have a problem with how my tax dollars are spent. The federal government has so much income that it has created THOUSANDS of jobs to determine how to give it away, and to whom it should be given. Income isn't the problem...spending is. Go to the IRS website and you will see that tax income in all categories has gone up EVERY year, except 2001-2002, which obviously is the impact of the Sept. 11th attacks.

        Yes, the Republican party lost focus over the past 5 years, spending like a drunk sailor (no offense to our Naval brothers and sisters). They need to regain their focus...leaving the Democrats to believe that government can never have enough money to spend.
        Last edited by firemanjb; 08-31-2008, 11:32 AM.
        My posts are sometimes educated, sometimes informed, and sometimes blowing smoke...but they are mine and mine alone and do not reflect on anyone else (especially my employer).

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by BigPat View Post
          We have no business interfering in this matter. Have you researched the history? There are two provinces that are ethnically different from the Georgians who have sought independence. Their independence movement was brutally suppressed by the Georgian Army. All sides behaved badly in the situation. The two provinces asked teh Russians for help, and the Russians had military peacekeepers in teh two provinces when Georgia attack.

          Many of teh residents of South Ossettia are Russian citizens with Russian passports. They want to be independent or part of Russia. This is not our fight, and we especially should not be trying to interfere with a situation that is right on teh Russian Border. How would we react
          if the Russians were interfering in a conflict in Mexico?
          Since when does Russia have the right to attack a country (recognized by the UN) with a lawfully, elected government? Now they're threatening Poland and the Ukraine. Is this justified? Hitler invaded Austria under the pretense of "rescuing" ethnic Germans and had no problem moving on either.

          How would we react to Russia's interference with Mexico? You need to ask this considering their past history with Cuba, Nicaragua, Peru, Columbia and now Venezuela?

          It's a "small" world and the U.S. cannot afford to just shrug off it's responsibilities to developing democracies. Even Clinton must have believed that or he wouldn't have gotten us involved in the countries that used to be Yugoslavia (where we still happen to have peace keeper stationed)!

          Words alone mean nothing without political resolve to back them up. The Chinese understand this and that's why the genocide that is occurring in Ruwanda will continue as long as it's in their best interest, UN protests to the contrary.
          "I'm not fluent in the language of violence, but I know enough to get around in places where it's spoken."

          Comment


          • #20
            :
            Originally Posted by BigPat View Post
            We have no business interfering in this matter. Have you researched the history? There are two provinces that are ethnically different from the Georgians who have sought independence. Their independence movement was brutally suppressed by the Georgian Army. All sides behaved badly in the situation. The two provinces asked teh Russians for help, and the Russians had military peacekeepers in teh two provinces when Georgia attack.

            Many of teh residents of South Ossettia are Russian citizens with Russian passports. They want to be independent or part of Russia. This is not our fight, and we especially should not be trying to interfere with a situation that is right on teh Russian Border. How would we react
            if the Russians were interfering in a conflict in Mexico?
            Originally posted by pulicords View Post
            Since when does Russia have the right to attack a country (recognized by the UN) with a lawfully, elected government? Now they're threatening Poland and the Ukraine. Is this justified? Hitler invaded Austria under the pretense of "rescuing" ethnic Germans and had no problem moving on either.


            "Now they're threatening Poland and the Ukraine. Is this justified?" (Note; Ukraine is the name of a country. 'The Ukraine' is not a name of a country. Drop 'the' next time.) Is it justified? What would we do if they were located next to our borders? As BigPat says; let's mind our own business, and pull our noses out of someone elses problems.

            How would we react to Russia's interference with Mexico? You need to ask this considering their past history with Cuba, Nicaragua, Peru, Columbia and now Venezuela?

            Even Clinton must have believed that or he wouldn't have gotten us involved in the countries that used to be Yugoslavia (where we still happen to have peace keeper stationed)!

            Words alone mean nothing without political resolve to back them up. contrary.
            "It's a small world".....?!?!?! Sorry. You're obviously not a student of world politics; Too many assumptions backed by a distorted main stream media. By opposing Georgia's attack against South Ossetia, Putin kicked sand into the face of the beach bully (US and Israeli military advisors working with Georgian military). Why didn't we help our allie? Did we drop the ball on the 1 yard line.....again???
            Last edited by Stormy; 11-02-2008, 01:11 AM.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by pulicords View Post
              Since when does Russia have the right to attack a country (recognized by the UN) with a lawfully, elected government? Now they're threatening Poland and the Ukraine. Is this justified? Hitler invaded Austria under the pretense of "rescuing" ethnic Germans and had no problem moving on either.
              Are you forgetting that the Georgians attacked first in this situation? The Hitler example is a poor one, because in this case the two regions in question fought to be independent, ran themselves independently, and had Russian peacekeepers there as part of the cease-fire arrangement.

              How would we react to Russia's interference with Mexico? You need to ask this considering their past history with Cuba, Nicaragua, Peru, Columbia and now Venezuela?
              Yep, if history is any judge we would react swiftly and angrily. Now we want to put misles in Poland right near Russia's southern border. How should we expect them to react?

              It's a "small" world and the U.S. cannot afford to just shrug off it's responsibilities to developing democracies. Even Clinton must have believed that or he wouldn't have gotten us involved in the countries that used to be Yugoslavia (where we still happen to have peace keeper stationed)!
              In the Georgia situation the Georgians are atleast as much at fault as teh Russians if not more to blame. We should sit out of this one.

              Words alone mean nothing without political resolve to back them up. The Chinese understand this and that's why the genocide that is occurring in Ruwanda will continue as long as it's in their best interest, UN protests to the contrary.
              Thais is true. That is why all of our bluster on teh Georgia issue coupled with no action makes us look pretty bad.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Stormy View Post
                If you want to survive, vote Obama. Most Americans complain about U.S. foreign policy. McCain is even a more aggressive hawk than Bush. He jokes about "bomb bomb bomb Iran". His first reaction to the Russia Georgia conflict is to immediately engage them in aggressive, confrontational rhetoric. McCain has a loose cannon for a mouth and would just escalate all international tensions with his unbending approach to foreign policy. John McCain is dangerous. For the survival of the world, vote for Obama.

                What we will get if mccain gets in is a war that will shut off our oil supply before we've had a chance to move over to a sustainable base.
                This war he will instigate could easily escalate into cities being nuked as things heat up.

                Though both Mccain and Obama are both socialists from the point of view of libertarians, Obama's choice of how he invests the tax dollars is somewhat less harmful (to my eyes) than McCains choice of how he will p*iss the tax dollars away in senseless wars to profit his oil buddies and keep us on the hook at the gas pump for another couple of years.

                As bad as Obama is, he's the lesser of two evils.
                Wow - even more clueless than I suspected you were.
                For every one hundred men you send us,
                Ten should not even be here.
                Eighty are nothing but targets.
                Nine of them are real fighters;
                We are lucky to have them, they the battle make.
                Ah, but the one. One of them is a warrior.
                And he will bring the others back.

                Comment

                MR300x250 Tablet

                Collapse

                What's Going On

                Collapse

                There are currently 3831 users online. 262 members and 3569 guests.

                Most users ever online was 26,947 at 08:36 PM on 12-29-2019.

                Welcome Ad

                Collapse
                Working...
                X