| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Diger
Forum Member
|
 Posted - 11/20/2010 : 9:42:44 PM
|
I don't think people choose to get appendicitis like they choose to buy a house instead of renting, or buy a new car intstead of driving a clunker that they can afford. Then maybe they can afford insurance.
Diger
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 1385 |
 |
|
|
NaturistDoc
Forum Member
|
Posted - 11/23/2010 : 2:26:15 PM
|
David Brooks, a generally conservative pundit, makes a good case for bi-partisanship by pissing all over both parties in today's column. Sadly, most people will read it and think "He's absolutely right about those lousy [Democrats/Republicans] but totally wrong in his criticism of the [Republicans/Democrats]." That's just how polarized American politics are these days, and we are the worse for it.
www.nytimes.com/2010/11/23/opinion/23brooks.html?hp
Methinks I shall adopt as my political avatar neither Beck nor Olberman, neither Madow nor Coulter, but rather Mercutio from Shakespeare's "Romeo and Juliet", with his immortal line "A plague on both your houses!"
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 1054 |
|
|
|
jbsnc
Forum Member
|
Posted - 11/24/2010 : 1:04:25 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by NaturistDoc
David Brooks, a generally conservative pundit, makes a good case for bi-partisanship by pissing all over both parties in today's column. Sadly, most people will read it and think "He's absolutely right about those lousy [Democrats/Republicans] but totally wrong in his criticism of the [Republicans/Democrats]." That's just how polarized American politics are these days, and we are the worse for it.
www.nytimes.com/2010/11/23/opinion/23brooks.html?hp
Methinks I shall adopt as my political avatar neither Beck nor Olberman, neither Madow nor Coulter, but rather Mercutio from Shakespeare's "Romeo and Juliet", with his immortal line "A plague on both your houses!"
A substantial issue with some Tea Partiers is the results of legislation, not the estimated-projected results.
Brooks wrote: “Some Republicans have been talking honestly about cutting entitlement spending, but almost no Republican seems willing to accept tax increases as part of a bipartisan budget deal. You could offer Republicans a deal that was 80 percent spending cuts and 20 percent tax increases and they’d say no. They’d say no to 90-10, too.”
Two economists at Ohio University researched the results of tax increases at State and Federal levels and concluded that subsequent spending invariably exceeded the increase in tax revenues with the excesses, as I recall, from 11% to 57%.
Many of us recall the Reagan – George Mitchell (Senate Majority Leader, D-ME) compromise in the 80s wherein a Reagan tax cut would be enacted and Mitchell would cut spending. Mitchell did not cut spending and apparently had no plan to do so.
It is amusing. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) claimed we had to pass the HealthCare Bill to find out what was in it. At the same time Democrat Congressmen such as David Price (D-NC) claimed passage would decrease the deficit. So, we don’t know what’s in it but it will save money. Sophisticated economics of the Voodoo School?
Happy Nuding.
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 153 |
|
|
|
sailawaybob
Forum Member
|
Posted - 11/25/2010 : 02:34:08 AM
|
we also had pelosi say that entitlements boost the economy..
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 1268 |
|
|
|
hernandocpl
Forum Member
|
Posted - 11/26/2010 : 09:53:50 AM
|
and we had Bush say there were WMD's allover the place, and that the tax cut for the rich would stimulate the economy
Live love and have fun
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 247 |
|
|
|
FlCpl4NewdFun
Forum Member
|
Posted - 11/26/2010 : 4:41:31 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by hernandocpl
and we had Bush say there were WMD's allover the place, and that the tax cut for the rich would stimulate the economy
Live love and have fun
Let's see, pretty long list of Democrats below that were on the WMD bandwagon.
Don't want to start a lengthy back and forth here, but many people have been led to believe that Bush made up lies about WMDs to start the Iraq war. Without regard to why we went to war, or if one was for or against it, the undeniable truth is most of the free world believed Iraq had WMDs.
"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
- President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998
"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
- President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998
"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
- Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998
"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983." S
- Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998
"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
- Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998
"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
- Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998
"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
- Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999
"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has invigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."
- Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others, December 5, 2001
"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandated of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them."
- Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002
"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002
"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002
"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002
"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
- Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002
"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force-- if necessary-- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002
"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002
"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do" Rep.
- Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002
"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weap ons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members .. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002
"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002
"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ..."
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003
|
|
Country:
| Posts: 219 |
|
|
|
hernandocpl
Forum Member
|
Posted - 11/27/2010 : 09:55:08 AM
|
yep got it right there Bush's lie was believed by nearly all
Live love and have fun
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 247 |
|
|
|
FlCpl4NewdFun
Forum Member
|
Posted - 11/27/2010 : 9:04:18 PM
|
Ha Ha, Good one. Must admit, that made me laugh. You're nothing if not consistent my friend. Cheers!
|
|
Country:
| Posts: 219 |
|
|
|
balataf
Forum Member
|
Posted - 11/27/2010 : 10:29:17 PM
|
H, You seem to have been duped by one of the most stupid and pathetic lies of the decade. Yes, there was a massive lie about Sasddam's WMD, but Bush, too, was duped. Saddam put up a grand false front to show that he still had the weapons that he had used against Iran and on the Kurds. The best intellegence of many nations got snookered. At the timer, it lookede quite logical and correct, given that he'd PUBLICLY USED THEM.
But it is even less defensible to PRETEND that Bush fomented Saddam's lie. To say this requires a totally STRANGE outlook that willfully denies any rational look at the facts. It is on the level with believing that 2 + 2 can sometimes be eleven. Take a good look at the obvious public record of the time!
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 661 |
|
|
|
openess
Forum Member
|
Posted - 11/28/2010 : 06:36:16 AM
|
I'd also like to bring a little perspective to the "tax cuts for the rich" rhetoric. Before the Bush tax cuts, the top one percent of wage earners paid 38.4 percent of the income taxes. After the tax cuts, they paid 39.1 percent. From the same cuts, the bottom fifty percent of wage earners saw their share of the tax burden go from 3.4 to 3.1 percent. Describing the Bush tax cuts as "tax cuts for the rich" is a political slogan. It's not an accurate characterization of what occurred.
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 83 |
|
|
|
Warmskin
Forum Member
|
Posted - 12/02/2010 : 05:04:32 AM
|
The fallacy of increasing taxes to balance the budget is that for each dollar brought in as taxes, about $1.40 is spent. The end result of that ploy is that the people end up with less of a paycheck, and the tax money is largely wasted. Also, there is a distortion of the free market caused by channeling hard-earned money into government activities for which there is no natural demand.
Unfortunately, the actions of both major parties has been to spend fantastic amounts of money on warfare and welfare. We are stuck with more than $3 trillion budgets as far as the eye can see, most of which is unconstitutional spending. The whole of government is bankrupt, and it depends on 1) other countries which are willing to loan us money 2) the Federal Reserve creating inflationary money 3) taxing the workers of America.
Since the days of Woodrow Wilson and FDR, government spending has taken on an aura of respect, and enough people actually have been duped into thinking that more and more government is always necessary, no matter what the cost.
Do either the Democrats or Republicans care about deficits, debt, fiscal policy, taxes, spending, etc.? So far, no. There is always talk about all these things, and just talk.
I wish that Reagan had been correct when he said that our best days were ahead of us. Instead, we now have to live off the dwindling willingness of other countries to loan us money. That will come to s halt at some point when we can no longer pay these countries back. Printing more money will only fan the flames of inflation, and taxing the people will push us into a recessionary direction.
There is no choice other than trimming back, quite radically, government spending of all types. We need to learn that we are not the world's police, and that we are not the world's charity, writ large. Failing to recognize these things dooms the USA.
"If tyranny and oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy."
James Madison
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 1964 |
|
|
|
hernandocpl
Forum Member
|
Posted - 12/02/2010 : 08:53:56 AM
|
people on low wages tend to spend ALL of their money, the top % dont, at least the GOP are cinsistent and suck up to the npeople that pay for their campaigns and screw the workers and middle class. Well done the GOP
Live love and have fun
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 247 |
|
|
|
jbsnc
Forum Member
|
Posted - 12/02/2010 : 1:17:42 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by hernandocpl
people on low wages tend to spend ALL of their money, the top % dont, at least the GOP are cinsistent and suck up to the npeople that pay for their campaigns and screw the workers and middle class. Well done the GOP
Live love and have fun
‘people on low wages tend to spend ALL of their money’
So true and in many cases a fair amount of someone else’s money. A study done by two members of the Dallas Federal Reserve Bank found that family workers at the poverty level spent 1.7 times their income. The additional expenditures coming from Section 8, Earned Income Tax Credits (a form of negative income tax), food stamps and other local, state and federal charity programs.
‘at least the GOP are cinsistent and suck up to the npeople that pay for their campaigns and screw the workers and middle class’
The economic experts that proposed The FairTax found that about 23% of the cost of goods and services were taxes passed on to all consumers, poor and rich and all between.
The VAT seems to be gathering support. This too will increase the tax burden of the poor and middle classes.
Happy Nuding.
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 153 |
|
|
|
sailawaybob
Forum Member
|
Posted - 12/08/2010 : 10:30:35 PM
|
it amazes me how congress is against the bush tax cuts being extended for all saying it will add to the deficit but tonight the house approved the dream act for illegals, so this will not add to the deficit ? maybe we can take some more dollars from the wealthy to fund this !
the government is just a redistribution machine robinhood take from the people that work hard for their $$$ and give to those sitting on the couch. hmmm more votes in 2012 for one party or the other.
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 1268 |
|
|
|
hernandocpl
Forum Member
|
Posted - 12/09/2010 : 09:39:32 AM
|
The newest lie from the gop........"The American people have spoken"......usually said just b4 the gop ram thru their programme that only 30% of the public agree on, ie the tax cut fiasco.
Live love and have fun
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 247 |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Nudist-Resorts.Org Discussion Forum Bulletin Board Nudism Clothing Optional Resort Naturism Nude Beaches |
© 2002-2020 SUN |
|
|
|
General Political Discourse
