not reallyQuote:
Originally Posted by Bojack
Printable View
not reallyQuote:
Originally Posted by Bojack
Why not? Cops keep people from ruining everything and public schools give us cheap ass places to cram our kids so we don't have to deal with them :DQuote:
Originally Posted by buttcheeks
no they don'tQuote:
Originally Posted by Bojack
You honestly think we would be better off with no police force?Quote:
Originally Posted by buttcheeks
I'd like them more if they did a better job of teaching.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bojack
Hell, I don't know. I just know that they like to chap my ass when they could be doing more important things.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bojack
EDIT: FUCK THE POLICE
Gozen, go move to China.
Ow, my head hurts this morning, apparently I managed to type these out really hammered because I don't remember it.
Why, do people there know how to counter a well-presented argument properly?Quote:
Originally Posted by Biff_Pocoroba
Yes, they shoot you.
Not posting this as an image, look at your own risk.
http://www.garypaul.com/Pospies_Page..._execution.jpg
Why? I love America and I've never given any indication otherwise.Quote:
Originally Posted by Biff_Pocoroba
Wow, what an emotive picture that has absolutely no context.Quote:
Originally Posted by Biff_Pocoroba
It's my belief that the police are there to keep the trouble in their designated area. i.e. Blacks stay in the poor neighborhoods and are not allowed to spill over to wealthier areas.Quote:
Originally Posted by buttcheeks
I have eleven penises.
I don't believe I've ever seen a cop do anything like that. I have seen them write me speeding tickets, take my beer away, and take 2 hours to get to a robbery in progress that is a two minute walk away.Quote:
Originally Posted by Razor Ramon
BTW, Biff what do you have to say about beer being illegal? Republicans believe in that. You know, legeslating morality.
Quote:
Originally Posted by buttcheeks
Nooooo, not enforcing public rules?!?!?!! Holy shit, they write you speeding tickets? Oh yeah, and sometimes it takes cops and fire fighters a while to show up because of tons of reasons such as they're already on another call, you might be out in the middle of no where, who knows. Cops don't have an endless supply of cops with teleporters to get there right away.
Beer and alcohol should be illegal because people are too fucking stupid to drink it responsibly.
they are what they are. They are typically only as good as the stupidest and poorest person in the community.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bojack
that's just silly utopian bullshit. I'm not going to talk with you anymore.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bojack
The whole "banning something because people abuse it" reasoning is bullshit. Yes people drink irresponsibly (many from this board, actually) but why punish those who do? We need to adapt an attitude where we let people suffer from doing stupid shit. All these warning labels on products should be removed and let nature weed out the dumbasses.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bojack
It is stupid but living in a college town and seeing what liqour does to people and their lives and it's sad. But truthfully, society if FULL of a handful of people ruining it for every one. I trust I don't need to cite examples.Quote:
Originally Posted by Razor Ramon
People should be allowed to suffer for their own stupidity it just sucks that their suffering causes a LOT of ass ache for the rest of us.
Then again, prohibition and the war on drugs prove that banning shit doesn't stop anyone from doing it. It just wastes tons of man hours trying to keep peeps from doing dumb shit they'll do anyways.
it only causes ass ache to the rest of us IF you let it bother you.
Yeah, our forefathers certainly ruined it for the British.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bojack
Not true,Quote:
Originally Posted by buttcheeks
Some guy gets wasted on heroin, wants another fix, comes and robs/rapes my fiance to get more cash to get more crank............. I'm not supposed to let something like that bother me?
How about drunk drivers? Parents who drink their kids college money away?
nigga please, heroin ain't booze. If you live in a college town, and if people get drunk, and it bothers you, it is because you let it bother you. You can not compare heroin to booze. Apples and Oranges.
Or if a drunk plows his/her Camry into me.............? Yeah that's it, just let it roll off my back. It's not that they get drunk or stoned or whatever that bothers me (or most people for that matter) it's that they start fights, shoot each other, break shit, crash their cars, spread std's, have illegitamate kids, poison themselves and die off, and other things that bothers most people because it causes incredible hassle.Quote:
Originally Posted by buttcheeks
You're right- booze is worse. There is no substance that you can get that can impair your judgement/competence quite like alcohol can.Quote:
Originally Posted by buttcheeks
Also, you think alcoholics wouldn't rob your ass to avoid the shakes if a 40 was 25 bucks instead of $1.99? The only difference is one is illegal, the other isn't.
Creepy. I paused at the point where Elijah is opening the comic book in the park to go read TNL and went to this thread first.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spo
Wow, that's the most Libertarian thing I've ever read on here. And I'm talking capital "L" by the way.Quote:
Originally Posted by Razor Ramon
EDIT: I forgot to say, Biff is a fool. Typical greedy, selfish "me first" reasons for every opinion, gotta love it. Not sure how I feel about Fair Tax yet, I'll get back to this thread.
You will never be a success if you spend your time taking out everybody elses trash, some times you just have to roll your own.
Just remember libby, when you die, all these "needy" that you helped won't give a shit.
I never said anything about taking out anyone else's trash, just that my opinions aren't formed around myself. Everything you've said has been all about your little world, centered entirely around the fact that you don't like paying X amount of money for Y thing. I don't like taxes at all, I think every man should keep what he's earned, but that's not because I'm whiny that I have to devote a portion of my paycheck to things I need (police, public works, etc.) and people I may or may not have voted for. I can't really think of anything else you were bitching about to cite as an example.Quote:
Originally Posted by Biff_Pocoroba
As long as "libby" is short for libertarian, I don't mind that sentence.Quote:
Just remember libby, when you die, all these "needy" that you helped won't give a shit.
Society is doomed to fail if people keep thinking about themselves. I understand human nature and the fact that people are greedy people but that doesn't stop me from thinking that everyone needs help and they should get it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calliander
No biggie, in politics we'll agree to disagree, no harm no foul.
I don't know if I agree with it put that way. Yeah, everyone needs help. They should be given the means to obtain it, though, not the actual direct help. Let every man be responsible for himself, not dependent on others.Quote:
Originally Posted by Razor Ramon
After skimming the FairTax FAQ, I like the idea quite a bit: taxation based on consumption. A problem I could see is some new agency emerging to screw us over because we can't keep every receipt or something (see Diff's worry about the idea getting to bickering representatives in either house) and the government growing to keep track of everything, much like the current situation with the IRS.
Biff is, like other neoconservative trash, of the belief that if you dont agree with everything Bush and his cronies say you hate America and want the terrorists to "win".Quote:
Originally Posted by g0zen
Stop falling for Biff's straw men. He's talking about nonexistant welfare queens and how they are supposedly the ruin of government. Well, we spend less on welfare queens than we do on foreign aid - combined the two is less than 5% of GDP. Fair tax is about fair tax, not tax raises to pay for more welfare (welfare was cut significantly by Clinton, who guys like Biff still hate). Its not about cutting taxes the government cant afford to cut. So dont fall for his bullshit. Guys like Yoshi and Biff, all they can think about is how much the government supposedly spends on foreign aid, and everyone with a brain laughs at how idiotic they are.Quote:
Originally Posted by Calliander
If he wants to talk about wasteful government, I'm game. What about the billions the government is shoveling to Bechtel, Halliburton, KBR, etc? What about the billions and billions wasted every year on the drug war, criminalizing harmless Americans? What about the time and money Congress wastes every year cycle on flag burning, internet gambling, gay marriage? Remember Terri Schiavo? That's all been going on under the watch of his boyfriends, the neocons. And it costs far, far, FAR FAR FAR FAR FAR more a year than any so-called "welfare queens" do.
No no, its handled like the sales tax now. One of the major problems of the tax code is the time and money it drains out of the economy each year. Its not just the time you do taxes. Its the time every corporation and every person takes studying options and contemplating the affect of taxes on every decision they make. The Fair Tax is designed to get rid of that.Quote:
After skimming the FairTax FAQ, I like the idea quite a bit: taxation based on consumption. A problem I could see is some new agency emerging to screw us over because we can't keep every receipt or something (see Diff's worry about the idea getting to bickering representatives in either house) and the government growing to keep track of everything, much like the current situation with the IRS.
Why Diff, is all the name calling necessary. I great professor told me that once you start name calling, you lose.
Believe whatever you want to believe I stated MY opinion, you want to increase taxes, try it, you'll lose. Everybody pulls for the underdogs.
I like Nixon and Ronnie because neither took any shit btw.
I still like your mom
Also it's probably not just random that Yoshi and I have far better jobs than you either, you either eat or you whine for supper.
Enough of politics, Many of you I have a difference of opinion, and none of us our going to change our minds, and I don't want to be thought of as a troll, so let's let it be.
1. Your opinion is based on lies, bullshit, distortions, and logical fallacies.Quote:
Originally Posted by Biff_Pocoroba
2. I never said I wanted to increase taxes (prove me wrong by finding where I did!).
1. You dont know what I do.Quote:
Originally Posted by Biff
2. Yoshi and you are both far older than I am, so you're just grasping for straws here. I honestly dont know what you do, dont care what you do, a fool is a fool all the same.
To judge a man because you have a different opinion is a sign of youth.
I have seen many friends who were liberal in college until they got out in the real world, they changed their minds. When you own property, and you have mouths to feed, you may yet change your mind.
You are a liar diff
Quote:
You are an idiot. Successful people OWE their success in part to a society that gives them skilled workers, a government that enforces property rights and the rule of law, subsidizes their education, etc. It is not unreasonable to ask them to pay more into that society.
If you talked to someone who said, "the sky is orange, and 1+1 = 3, its my OPINION so we have to agree to disagree", I bet you'd think he's an idiot.Quote:
Originally Posted by Biff_Pocoroba
I am not a liberal, if you think that you haven't been paying attention. At all. Which is not surprising, because I have responded each and every time with facts, numbers, and history and you have brushed it off with snappy one-liners and quips about "liberals" and shit. You just listen to whatever crap Bush, Fox News, et. al. tells you and lets it simmer in your brain without giving it a second thought. It's actually pretty embarrassing. At least Yoshi will challenge someone like myself or g0zen, hell even SpoDaddy does a better job.Quote:
Originally Posted by Biff_Pocoroba
There is a word for that, its called ignorance and thats all there is to it.
That was an argument about progressive taxation, and the merits of it, not about specifically raising taxes for X person or Y person. Stop warping my arguments into something it wasnt.Quote:
You are a liar diff
I am not trying to bicker for amusement.
And I showed you lied, so concede your lie, period.
How does a "successful person" contribute more without taxes diff? Weak, Asshole Coulter defends her lies better than you.
Oh wow.Quote:
Originally Posted by Biff_Pocoroba
Did I say, "I think taxes should be raised?".
No.
What YOU said was everyone should pay the same tax rate.
I said that was BS. I was essentially arguing for the status quo, you were arguing for a fucking tax cut.
Only in planet neocon can the concept of progressive taxes that have existed in this country since ~1916 be considered "raising taxes".
Oh yeah, I am a moderate conservative.
Fiscally? Yes
Rights? Hell no
I don't like Bush, in fact I didn't vote for him, I wrote in Mickey Mouse.
You are trying to side step your quote, fuck off we're done.
Were do you mention equal taxes for rich and poor, all I read is that the successful should have to pay more. So don't interpret this to me like I'm 15, I read it and I know what you meant.Quote:
You are an idiot. Successful people OWE their success in part to a society that gives them skilled workers, a government that enforces property rights and the rule of law, subsidizes their education, etc. It is not unreasonable to ask them to pay more into that society.
LOLQuote:
Originally Posted by Biff_Pocoroba
Diff, don't bother. This one has graduated from the FOX News punditry school of debate. He's convinced himself he 'nailed' you and nothing as paltry and insignificant as the facts are going to change that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Biff_Pocoroba
LOL, like when you were blanket red baiting by calling anyone who favored social insitutions as Marxists? Atleast when Diff insults you he's got facts to back it up.Quote:
Originally Posted by Biff_Pocoroba
Wow, what an enlightened political opinion. I mean you say they 'didn't take any shit' and that's it!Quote:
Originally Posted by Biff_Pocoroba
Don't worry, there's no chance of that. Trolls either have to be funnier and / or smarter than their target audience. You're neither.Quote:
Originally Posted by Biff_Pocoroba
Your words hurt me gozen, your shift starts in 10 minutes, don't be late, taco bell takes no shit.
To label all conservatives as socially conservative "Bushite" Fox News groupies is silly. Most conservatives don't want to legislate morality or personal taste (unlike the socialist athiest "intellectual elite" ideologues that have hijacked the democratic party), they just want to keep their own money and protect their families. Most people don't care if two dudes want to cornhole each other, aside from the vocal evangelical minority.
Gozen is just a little man who jacks off to insulting conservatives with his superior intelligence (TM) I promise you all he does is sit on his little computer and talk, he is a man of many words and no action, just like Clinton and Kerry, he's useless, let him go.
IBTN
lawl
He would change the world, except the simpsons start in 10 minutes, then he'll kick some conservative ass on teh interweb. Screw the man Gozen, you keep on keepin' on playa.
Remember when Gozen posted facts to back his arguments?
Yeah that was pretty sweet.
See, that's the problem I could post 1000 facts about how fair tax sucks, and how VAT tax can't control supply and demand, and how liberals would tax us to death, but you idiots would say "ARGGGHHH, Fox news" it's like telling a six year old to stop picking his nose, he isn't going to stop.
And stop the Me to bullshit, you haven't posted one useful sentence since we started this, get off Gozen's nuts bro.
And Diff's too.
No we wouldn't, we'd read your facts and acknowledge them as such and see that they validate your claims.
that's how it works.
Again, no use for you.
Go get some lube and bend over bro, I see diff's looking on.
lawl you're hilarious.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Biff_Pocoroba
No, generally on political threads we use facts and information to back up what we said. You havent and until you do we will assume you are just a shit talker.
Okay Hot shot me too idiot, I'll use your sources
Fair Tax
http://money.cnn.com/2005/09/06/pf/t...ptiontax_0510/
VAT Tax
http://www.heritage.org/research/taxes/bg1852.cfm
And i guy I really like
http://wizbangblog.com/2006/07/09/ta...ds-explode.php
Read his first post on tax decreases spiking revenue
Now go somewhere else, I like Diff, you suck.
You see, it's wrong and unfair for me to generalize conservatives, yet in his next sentence SpoDaddy does the EXACT SAME THING but it's okay because he's talking about liberals;Quote:
Originally Posted by SpoDaddy
This is what I'm talking about when I say the 'FOX News punditry school of debate'.Quote:
Originally Posted by SpoDaddy
See, this is why no one takes you seriously. Virtually every one of your posts in this thread have been riddled with insults against people who think differently than you do.Quote:
Originally Posted by Biff_Pocoroba
You lost like, on page 1.
Now Gozen, i have posted articles defending my points, but internet politics, is dumb, because you post some counter points and then I will, etc.
let's just agree that firstblood is a douche, I'm a conservative, and you're not, fair enough.
Wizbang is a blatantly partisan right-wing idiot. And besides, the tax cuts havent paid for themselves... I mean, Bush was bragging about a deficit that was lowered from $500 billion to $300 billion. Thats like a kid coming home bragging that he got an F+ instead of an F--. You forget that the evil Bill Clinton had a projected 10 year surplus of $5 trillion when he left office.
And nobody said the FairTax didnt have potential pitfalls. In fact, I said that very thing! That link you provided said that one problem with the FairTax is it is potentially not progressive enough. Kind of funny, considering you were talking shit about the very concept of progressive taxes.
I joke, they take it serious.Quote:
Originally Posted by Melf
Well see now, I took this light hearted at first, now if you would have READ my links on the last page, professor, you would have noticed that I am now defending my points.
However I love you website.
I referred to a radical faction of the Democratic party, not all liberals. Try again. I don't need to resort to stupid gimmicks like calling you a "clintonista" to own you.Quote:
Originally Posted by g0zen
No the point is that there are flaws any time money and people are involved. It's the system of capitalism people put on trial. The grass is always greener effect I say.
My stance is this;
A) VAT tax will not work in the US, I stated supply and demand as the problem.
B) FAIR Tax is this generations pet rock
C) Liberal Taxation will ruin the common man, not help him. If you are already paying 32% on your $32,000, and Billary gets in office and raises the taxes 6% that is going to hurt you. This country will not let you tax the rich and leave the middle class alone, they are the backbone of this country, by FAR.
You want to fix this mess, our government needs to learn how to fix problems the way they did before throwing money at the issue was en vogue.
D) Conservatives are being attacked because the current leadership is full of flaws and corruption, hell I KNOW THAT. However I won't change the fact that I like smaller government as a rule.
You forget that Bill Clinton neutered the CIA and gutted the military while completely ignoring the escalating terrorist attacks on his country to put up that "projected" surplus, which was promptly wiped out by 9/11 (a direct result of Clinton's inactions). If only Clinton's biggest sin was getting a BJ.......Quote:
Originally Posted by Diff-chan
Clinton raised taxes nominally because the government couldn't do its job without it. Reagan tried to cut taxes massively - it didn't work. He had to raise them later. Bush had to raise them later. Clinton raised them. Supply side economics dont work. That is a fact.Quote:
Originally Posted by Biff_Pocoroba
So am I. But the way to make smaller government is not to implement massive tax cuts without a sufficient cut in spending. Bush didnt do that. Hell Bush expanded the federal government more than any president since LBJ. Far more than Clinton ever did. It's not responsible, it's not good government, it's not good policy. We will end up paying for these tax cuts eventually.Quote:
Originally Posted by Biff_Pocoroba
If you still think Bush has done jack shit to protect this country, you are just blind. DHS is incompetent, FEMA is shit now (compared to as it was under Clinton), the CIA is undermined and embarrassed by Negroponte and friends, our ports aren't secure, our airports aren't secure (making us take off our shoes is a fucking joke), our nuclear plants aren't secure, the government is wasting time and effort checking grandmas' phone records, I could go on.Quote:
Originally Posted by SpoDaddy
I don't think anybody here is arguing that Bush has been fiscally responsible.Quote:
Originally Posted by Diff-chan
Quote:
Originally Posted by Biff_Pocoroba
Notice something wrong here, fellas? None of the people you have been arguing against (and getting owned by, btw) have this strange need to label themselves as either a 'conservative' or a 'liberal'.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spodaddy
The reason why is because that shit is stupid and pretty much invalidates any credibility your argument has to anybody with an intelligence level higher than your average Fox News viewer. The preoccupation with having to tow the 'conservative' party line, regardless of how moronic and blatantly false some parts of it might be, is the hallmark of a mental limpdick.
Again, nobody is arguing that Bush has done a perfect job. Far from it. He's not ignoring terrorism completely though, which by itself is an improvement over Clinton.Quote:
Originally Posted by Diff-chan
Bush had a reason to expand the government diff. Katrina, Iraq, and 911 proved that.
You are an educated man, don't fucking tell me Clinton wasn't riding the wave started by Bush Sr and Reagan.
Point blank, government doesn't need any more money right now, they need to fix the system, then we'll talk.
Yea but people ARE arguing like tax cuts are the be-all end-all. I agree that taxes shouldn't be excessive. But guess what, most people want government to be a positive force in their lives. People want government to make sure the infrastructure is up to date, the borders are secure, the country is protected, the rule of law is inforce. That costs money. A lot of money. I have no problem paying for taxes provided it is being used wisely and to actually make the country stronger. We should be demanding accountability and wise use of our tax dollars, not for more tax cuts.Quote:
Originally Posted by SpoDaddy
The economy went into fucking overdrive after Clinton raised taxes. I know republicans like to say that was because of Reagan and Bush Sr. but that dog won't hunt.Quote:
Originally Posted by Biff
Medicare Part D, NCLB, etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by Biff
This thread sucks. Someone start a nonsense thread... cvc style.
And Gozen, one more thing.
Try to tell the 50,000 dollar family with 2 kids going to college that they need to pay more to help out the country, they don't give a fuck. That's the inherent flaw in the taxation system, it going to hurt Billy the mechanic more than it's going to hurt me. Maybe I sounded as if I was defending myself (I did) but I really think this nation will implode if we raise taxes 6,10,15 percent, hell they can't sell houses now.
Diff, Ronnie invented the cold war to spike our industry, and Bush kept the factory's open. Bill came up with Nafta and we lost more of our US workforce in his 8 years than EVER before.
Lol, Lol, LOL! This is such right-wing spiel that has been disproven so many times. Or maybe Dick Cheney was lying when he told the American Society of News Editors on April 9, 2003 that the force we sent into Iraq was vastly superior in speed, technology, and training to the one used in 1991?Quote:
Originally Posted by Spodaddy
Of course, The Republicans have done such a stellar job against terrorism, like completely forgetting to capture the guy responsible for 9/11, invading a country that had zero to do with it, and leaking the identities of CIA agents!Quote:
Originally Posted by VP Dick Cheney
And we continue to lose blue collars every day, hell my fiance works at National Instruments and they have decided because of NAFTA that Colombia is a better place to build IC's. End result 2,500 tax payers out of work.
Two things:Quote:
Originally Posted by Vasteel
A) They don't label themselves because they don't have the balls to stand up to the scrutiny a label produces and don't want to be tied to the past actions of their party.
B) There is no conservative party line. There's a Republican party line, which neither Biff or myself tow. I'm actually working on Joe Lieberman's re-election campaign this fall. There's a difference between conservative ideals and the Republican party (as evidenced by Bush's failures).
And a vast improvement over Reagan who armed and trained Islamic fundamentalists on the taxpayer's dime.Quote:
Originally Posted by SpoDaddy
The right likes to try and put everything in Clinton's lap, but intelligence experts almost unanimously agree that the failure to see al-Queda and the rise of anti-Western Islamism spans several administrations (all but one of which are Republican, I might add). For more information see the 9/11 Commission Report.
Professor Melf, SPEED And TRAINING does not put men on the ground. You need a man on the ground to win a war, Clinton sent all of them home. Your concession would be appreciated.
Melf: boilerplate political statements and Daily Show gimmicks don't erase history. Again, nobody is arguing that Republicans have done a stellar job.
Before any of your guys say NAFTA was TEH EVIL CONSERVATIVES PUSH
http://senate.ontheissues.org/Celeb/...Free_Trade.htm
Owned.
Did you even read what I posted? Those are the VP's words fella, not mine. He's talking about everything he inherited. That includes, man power, technology...everything. Read his speech, for crying out loud.Quote:
Originally Posted by Biff_Pocoroba
Taking the time to read my post before responding would be appreciated.
Again, read the link. That's not Jon Stewart talking, that's Dick Cheney.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spodaddy
I am the first one in my family to graduate college. I know what the blue collar/workign poor experience is like. Guess what, you're right. NAFTA sucked ass but its what (generally) right wing free trade wonks wanted. Bush expanded it with CAFTA and he has done nothing to stop outsourcing. He hasn't closed loopholes that let companies like Ingersoll-Rand put dummy headquartersi n Bermuda to dodge taxes. It's bullshit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Biff_Pocoroba
The economy was fucking great under Clinton. A lot of rich people were made in places like SoHo and Silicon Valley. He generally ignored the widening gap between rich and poor and thats a legit criticism of his policies IMO (but lower middle class were doing better in the 1990s than now). But at the same time, Bush has done a lot to make it worse. A LOT.
To Melf.
I don't care about your post, I care about your point, fella.
You are attacking Bush when he played his hand, I didn't want this war, but I want to win.
Go study military logistics as well fella.
Lol, then unless you're a Jedi, I'd say you need to do one to see the other. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Biff_Pocoroba
"Played his hand?" That screams damage control, "fella."
Clinton is only a liberal in this country by the way, the rest of the world considers him a mid-conservative.
I read your post Melf, unless my education is failing me, you are saying the US failed in Iraq. I feel safer now, do you?
Draw them to fight there, and we are safe. We would have smashed them if Billary would not have tried to appease the world (yuck, France) by decreasing our standing military,
This is faulty logic. The lower to middle income families aren't being crippled by income tax as much payroll, state, and local taxes. You want to know what they will give a fuck about? When someone finally shows them that Bush and Co. have been diehard about reducing Social Security benefits which is essentially a payroll tax hike.Quote:
Originally Posted by Biff_Pocoroba
That's ridiculous logic. Ronald Reagan didn't 'invent' the Cold War. About the most he invented was Star Wars which was a boon to the defense industry, not to the workers who had their unions hamstrung and their safety standards and the office designed to insure them (OSHA) downsized to the point they became completely ineffective.Quote:
Originally Posted by Biff_Pocoroba
We are winning by the way. Don't believe the liberal hype.
First blood, I see you lurking, don't bother.
Gozen, Reagan had other ways to combat Russia, he wanted to puff the US's chest out and outbuild Russia, we needed a boost.
Taxes in General, who gives a shit what you label a tax.
Taxes kill the middle class, you can't fight this with your fancy verbage.
Gozen
here's how it works
Billy's dad works at GM. He makes 60,000 a year, Billy gets no free education and dad or Billy has to take out about 55,000 dollars in loans to pay for school, why? Because Billy's dad can't pay out of pocket because 20,000 of his sixty large goes to the state, town, and country to control those god damn potholes.
John's dad works at Target, he makes 25,000 a year, John get's grants, John gets money, john get's government support John doesn't pay nearly as much as billy, who is going to be nearly 65K in debt by the time he's 24 compared to John's 25K.
Tell me this is fair and I'll buy you a sucker.
The left likes to equate Reagan supporting Afghanistan against the Soviet Union with Reagan building Al Qaeda. It's like saying Wilson built the Nazis after World War I; at the time communism was our biggest threat and Al Qaeda did not exist. You can talk about the rise of jihadism as an ideology all you like (anti-Western Islamic Jihadism can be traced back a thousand years) but the bottom line is that an escalating series of jihadist attacks against America occured on Clinton's watch, not Bush Sr's or Reagan's, and Clinton ignored it (which even Dick Morris readily admits). Clinton was offered Bin Laden on a plate and set him free because he refused to recognize intergovernmental organizations as sovereign entities; he was a complete failure as a modern president in the most important respect.Quote:
Originally Posted by g0zen
[Sigh] You obviously haven't read anything I've posted, so there's nothing that can be done about that. I said we shouldn't be in Iraq in the first place, not that we've failed there. Now that we're stuck with this quagmire, we have no choice but to win, but I still don't see that day coming any time soon.Quote:
Originally Posted by Biff_Pocoroba
Again, Clinton did not cut the military. Cheney, Rumsfield, and others have gone on record saying that they owe the successes we've had in Afghanistan and Iraq to the military they inherited. Heck, I just linked to Cheney's speech and quoted his words. If that doesn't get through, then nothing I say will. But just to appease you and Spodaddy, who thinks that all links are controlled by the left wing press, here's that same Cheney speech as posted on the White House website. Unless Comedy Central has control of the WH site, I'd say it's legit. ;)
I also like how conservatives adopt a "well, we have to win NOW" attitude with the shithole we've created in Iraq, but conveniently forget that the man that "Clinton let get away" has been running around free for almost five years. Are they going to blame Bush when 2009 comes around and Bin Laden is still free? I doubt it.
Just believe the fact that there are now currently 5 wars occuring in Iraq and the government we installed there has already vocally supported Hezbollah, joining Iran and Syria, and strongly condemning Israel. Oh yeah, we're just doing gangbusters over there.Quote:
Originally Posted by Biff_Pocoroba
I'm sure once the Islamic Revolutionary Republic of Iraq is up and running the mullah al-Sadr will send us a 'thank you' card and a box of dates.
It sickens me that all you can do is spew out a mantra without knowing any of the economics behind it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Biff_Pocoroba
For people who talk about how Clinton shitted on the military: what about Bush? Ever hear of stop-loss? How they lowered entry standards? How there are skinheads in Iraq right now? How recruiters have resorted to thug tactics and ignoring criminal pasts? How the administration undermines and ignores the advice of respected generals? How there is Aryan Nation graffiti in Baghdad right now? How the government is currently funnelling billions of defense money into Halliburton, Bechtel, KBR, Blackwater, etc. with no accountability?
blah blah blah blah
lawlQuote:
Originally Posted by Biff_Pocoroba
*briefly reads points made but immediately disregards them due to complete doucheyness*
Quote:
Originally Posted by g0zen
Sigh, you believe way too much of the bullshit Gozen.
We are allies with Isreal, and they are at war with Lebanon, who we also side with, so the world is fucked up, what's new.
One man in Iraq does not speak for the nation.
Of course Iraq will be out of control for a while, if Russia kicked our ass, would you just stand by and kiss Stalin's picture?
Right, the boilerplate political statement was obviously the Dick Cheney part.Quote:
Originally Posted by Melf
That's the silly Jon Stewart gimmick part.Quote:
Originally Posted by Melf
I get my link discredited, but then you use the Heritage Foundation. LOL.
So then, I guess you're saying that Dick Cheney is a flat-out liar? Which is it then?
Spo: Have we caught Bin Laden? No. Didn't Bush himself say that he "wasn't a priority?" Didn't Bob Novak reveal that Rove and Libby leaked Plume's name? Stewart has nothing to do with it.
Clinton inherited a military that was prepped and built for a war with the Soviets... after the Soviets were defeated.I dont see why it was such a horrible crime to trim it down. Honestly I think the amount of money the gubment spends on defense is horrifying. Even after his cuts we were spending more than every other nation on Earth combined.
I have NO LOVE for Cheney, he lies more that I did trying to get some ass at prom. I suppose you thought I liked his crooked ass?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diff-chan
A blind deaf idiot savant would have know that the problems in the middle east were far from over diff.
Fair enough... so Bush has greatly increased military spending... and his military can't defeat an "insurgency in its last throes".Quote:
Originally Posted by Biff_Pocoroba
Hmm.
We are asked by every god damn two bit country to police the world Diff. That's the problem.
You think we should maybe send France or Italy to Isreal to calm down the situation?
Someone get Almaci in here!
Let's see, Killed #2, Killed #3, Killed the religious leader, no attacks on our country, and we are gradually rebuilding a VASTLY under educated infrastructure, we are doing okay in my book.Quote:
Originally Posted by Diff-chan
Quote:
Originally Posted by FirstBlood
Ban Pls.
Because that's exactly what happened.Quote:
Originally Posted by SpoDaddy
Not in the least. I don't remember reading in history books how after the Treaty of Versailles the Wilson administration sent millions of taxpayer's dollars in both weapons and straight-up cash to proto-fascists like Reagan did the mujahideen fighters who we KNEW were extremely fundamentalist adherents of the Saudis wahhabist doctrine that eventually became al-Queda.Quote:
Originally Posted by SpoDaddy
Nor did Wilson leave Germany with a gapping power vaccum right after the war ended, they established the Weimar Republic. By contrast, when Reagan left Afghanistan he left it to years of civil strife in which moderate Muslims were slaughtered and any hopes of a democracy taking root in the region were quashed.
Actually, the rise of Islamism as an ideology of anti-modernization and anti-West is recognized pretty well as starting with the Iranian Revolution. You know, those plucky little fellows who Reagan decided it was best to sell WEAPONS to after they'd taken American diplomats hostage.Quote:
Originally Posted by SpoDaddy
SO what? Money is Money.
Russia sold weapons to the terrorists that attacked them as well.
Can you justify this again, please?Quote:
Originally Posted by Biff_Pocoroba
You suck, btw.
Gozen, the Byzantines say your wrong.
http://www.historyofjihad.org/byzantine.html