Lucky...

- I like his reference to the post-911 airline bailout that didn't require the fascist gov or corps to continue to employ the folks, just fuck em. - +But violence is not only the answer, it is the only answer." Wrong. MLK established that it is the wrong answer and achieved change w/o it. Other than the violence part, he is exactly right, just as Timothy McVeigh was right in his words, 100% wrong in his actions. I expected a teabagger clone before i read this, but after reading, he is right in his beliefs, but over the edge with his act. America is a fascist toilet, the rich have it mae, the poor are fucked. It is what it is, it won't change so accept it or leave; I hoe to leave.

You infer it's due to Obama / Dems. Pathetic thing is, 2/3 of teh debt was accrued under Reagan, Bush, Bush, far larger % if you factor in that Clinton accrued 1.6T fixing the mess and left it stable and very +, the nutters somehow think it was the Dems who are spending too much. Really pathetic.

Yes, Billy Joel will hack this site, or pay someone millions to do it and remove this thread, as we are the only ones who know the truth and we must be silenced.

Nope. Never have. Maybe. Not sure what that has to do with you thinking you work harder than anyone. Just cause you're full of shit doesn't mean you work harder. Congrats on working hard. I don't mean to shock you with eye opening news, but you're not the only one who works hard. So you, being covered in shit, are the hardest working person you know. Me, a guy on the internet you've never met, must be a white collar cubicle dweller that doesn't work enough to meet your stadards? You're really digging yourself a hole here. The tank was draped in shit, not me. Nice PA tho.

Your typical partial quoting: I'm not sure what I can get with teh VA as a 1-term vet, What the entire passage reads: I'm not sure what I can get with teh VA as a 1-term vet, but I think it's sketchy, they don't cover everything and if you make toomuch they cut you. If you were actually an honest person, you could quote the entire passage and embolden the part you want for clarity. But as a dishonest person as you are, you throw and partial and dont even, "..." So your grand point is what? Nothing. I basically know what I get as a 1-term vet, but do I know every aspect, every benefit? No. I am a 1-term, non-war vet during that time between VN and the Gulf War, so my benefits are limited. Now what was your worthless point here? I'd rather leave you guessing which branch I served in than tell you. I am proud of the year I gave, the vet benefits I have, but ashamed of the trash that controls the brave and loyal troops. I realize this is baby steps, but you now have to point out the contrast. I'm used to having to baby you along here, so it's ok, but a reasonable person would finish their thought and at least establish a contradiction with their lame attempts. Accused you if not being a vet? Is not being a vet an accusation? I rendered an opinion before that I was unsure whether you were a vet or not, not that I give a shit, but is that an accusation? Look, you're hung up on this, apparently due to your injury, but it really doesn't matter to me either way. I guess your English usage is different than mine or many people's by saying, "You've accused me twice falsely,..." Now accusing someone of lying about being a vet is more legitimate, but accusing someone of not being a vet is grammatically weird, there is no duty to be a vet. What you're trying to say is that I accused you of lying about your vet status, for which I don't recall accusing you of lying about. Again, this is your hang-up, not mine. I don't give a shit what your service was, you guys tend to be the specialists in Ad himinem, not me. Do I understand why? Of course I do; addressing your party's horrid record of fiscal irresponsibility is no fun for you, as well as other issues. I see, if you manufacture some non-difference on my part, it's a blatant lie, but if you, uh, screw up, it's just a biiiiig misunderstanding. Furthermore, the issues you bring up are so irrelevant on both sides, yet you spend the afternoon reasearching it for an issue that is non-substantive. For the record, I HAVE NEVER WRITTEN/THOUGHT WE SHOULD TAX SMALL BUSINESS. Again, just a mistake. Oh brother, do you ever stop and read your BS? Two so-called mistakes over non-substantive issues. I realize you generalize me as some Jane Fonda VN Vet hating SOB, but it's just BS. I get it tho, when I talk to 1 RW maggot, I generalize that they are all a bunch of RW trash who want lower taxes, cut all social benefits and want to mass proliferate teh military, or sustain the already mass proliferated military. So I understand your generalizations, but just as mine are sometimes wrong, so are yours. Write a sticky note: I: - Think vets and GI's are great - Think the US military is greatly misused - Think virtually all Republicans are absolute garbage - Love guns but think the 2nd doesn't reasonably give us the right to own them as non-militia members. Etc, etc. I don't waver in my beliefs and you can find nothing to substantiate that I do. You have illustrated no lies of mine, just, err, mistakes of yours. If you can, try to enumerate a list of so-called lies of mine and provide a reasonable explanation of how thyey're lies. Don't strain yourself. Yes you do, you dislike libs dissenting the ways of the conservative gov. People dissenting againts the Iraq War, Bushes tax cuts or general fiscal policy, etc. So your character assassinations are justified as counter-attacks, whereas my so-called attacks are the instigators. See, this is teh narrow view that America has that makes many countries hate us. 911 was a counter-attack, not an original. PH was an original attack, of course we killed 300k women/children to get the men to stop fighting; clear terrorism. Oh wait, that will piss you off and you would like to disallow me to have the right to peacefully dissent the bombing of 300k women/children, right? Case in point. You lack the ability to look at matters globally, just as an American nationalist. Is there a point in that, or just anointing yourself a martyr? I consider some friends too. I really like enlightening discourse on issues of substance rather than ad homien-based pissing matches, but I can't help myself there either. W/o going back to see who said what, the general point was that I was a lazy, unemployed sucker of social benefits. To what degree you piggybacked on that I don't know/care. As for data, you, like most connies will and do run from it - I can't blame ya.

In case you forgot what you addressed: Limbaugh; there's a great standard of a worthless, non-productive POS. IS that your standard of a productive American? Now I get it. - FAA A&P lic - FAA Insp Auth - FCC GROL - FAA pilot's lic - BS Justice My oh my, another one with all their facts in order. What the benes for being a 1-term GI are thru the VA? Uh, I do and I use some. Brillaint assertion. I look for reference and data, these are obviously not good sources. Vindication, do you even know what they means? What am I allegedly vindicating myself from? If you finish a thought, accused you of what? The fact that it is now closed means nothing, see how pathetic your arguments are? The temp base set up on Tinian are now just rotting remanants, does that "undrop" the bombs? Silly argument. It got < -50 degrees, is that weak? It would constantly be -20 to -30 with 12-20 foot snow drifts. We would tow acft in near whiteout conditions with 40+ knot winds. I would almost always work grave shift, unless we had ORI's or the sort, then it was 7-12's for 3 weeks on end and I would work 6pm to 6 am. So you have some kind of argument here as to how easy life was? Just finish your lame argument and call Air Force guys pussies. Really sad. Not all people, just most self-riteous RWers who collecct some form of gov welfare and denounce other's forms of it. OK, and???? Show whee I've stated that or is that just another delluded guess on your part? Nice try at a lie, show where I have done that. I'm critical of this country, which is the design of it. It's called peaceful dissent, you snarl when libs do it, cheer when your beloved teabaggers do it, so your dislike at me doing it is merely your bias showing it's ugly head. Sad that you cannot see this. No, this is typical RWer rallying the troops. Instead of addressing issues, you rely on rhetoric to try to envoke emotion to get a following. I seek and post data and draw a conclusion - you never seem to want to talk about that substantive stuff, do you? I guess I give you credit for running from data, it's only bad news for you.

An unlicensed plumber and registered Republican; his life was already fucked up long before teh 2008 election. Yeah... a man working hard to provide a living for his family and not wanting a politician to take it from him... No surprise you think he was on the wrong track. If he just sat on his ass collecting unemployment then you'd support him and vote to increase his gov'ment paycheck. I can bet I work harder than you, so I assume you are not comparing the two of us. I haven't collected unemp for > a decade, again, not knowing what you're talking about is your trademark. You wanna bet that you work harder than me.... and then you brag about how long it's been since you collected unemployment? What a joke. I'm not bragging that it has been > a decade since I collected unemp. I'm sure you're a closeted unemp collector, or, err, you deserve it and no on else does. I bet many so-called conservatives here have collected since I have. As fro me working harder, I took the shit tank out of an Airbus this weekend, graped in shit. I'm constantly getting skydrol in my eyes, very painfull. I come home at the end of the day dirty, fucking greasy and tired. My hands are always getting banged, I have a myriad of scars to prove it. Now go back to your cubicle, I think I hear the gals telling you the water jug needs installing.

Is that that bad? It wasn't a Bork-type matter. And the Jocelyn Elder flap, truely a bad decsion, was handled with grace. Or was that congress that flopped by never sending him a bill of any type? I guess Obama is flopping too, even tho exec priv doesn't allow for a president to unilatterally appoint HC reform, just jabber about it hoping congress picks it up. Fortunatley for corporations, bad for common people, GWB's 1st term was a smashing success as he drove his turds in congress to write and pass the Overtime Bill to him so some people could be ripped of their OT pay. What a success. Was don't ask / don't tell later? I don't recall. Wasn't that later, not his 1st year? http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Clinton_approval_rating.png It dropped from 55% to 47% at a year, I don't see that as a huge drop.

He could not collect unemployment if he wanted too as he never paid taxes, never had a contractors licsense, or buisness licsense. Limbaugh on the other hand did sit on his ass and collect unemployment. Limbaugh; there's a great standard of a worthless, non-productive POS. IS that your standard of a productive American? Now I get it. - FAA A&P lic - FAA Insp Auth - FCC GROL - FAA pilot's lic - BS Justice My oh my, another one with all their facts in order. Don't forget your VA Benefits...your FULL VA benefits... Full VA benefits as a 1-term enlistee, yea. How is that an incorrect way to state that? I see you and the ilk who responded have no comeback to my response of your silly assertions. Hell, even a rare poster said he saw none of your ridiculous claims of me being lazy or embracing laziness - sad to watch you guys struggle.

That would be a futile effort. There is absolutely no way Obama doesn't get the nomination. Nobody in his right mind would attempt to oppose him from the Democrat side. Ted Kenedy ran against Jimmy and JC had better numbers at this time in his presidency. OTOH Clinton looked week at this point and made a big comeback. After a yeat in Clinton looked weak? Not sure I saw that. He had just raised taxes, which were the seeds that made him. But I think he ws OK after a year.

Nah, I don't think so. I don't see anyone winning the 2012 Dem nomination other than Obama; let it go.....

He could not collect unemployment if he wanted too as he never paid taxes, never had a contractors licsense, or buisness licsense. Limbaugh on the other hand did sit on his ass and collect unemployment. Limbaugh; there's a great standard of a worthless, non-productive POS. IS that your standard of a productive American? Now I get it. - FAA A&P lic - FAA Insp Auth - FCC GROL - FAA pilot's lic - BS Justice My oh my, another one with all their facts in order.

Thx for noticing, I'm too crazy to be lazy; I don't have the rep as a lazy fuck at work, just a bit eccentric perhaps. These guys can't seperate anything, it's either ALL one way or ALL the other.

An unlicensed plumber and registered Republican; his life was already fucked up long before teh 2008 election. Yeah... a man working hard to provide a living for his family and not wanting a politician to take it from him... No surprise you think he was on the wrong track. If he just sat on his ass collecting unemployment then you'd support him and vote to increase his gov'ment paycheck. I can bet I work harder than you, so I assume you are not comparing the two of us. I haven't collected unemp for > a decade, again, not knowing what you're talking about is your trademark.

An unlicensed plumber and registered Republican; his life was already fucked up long before teh 2008 election.

As opposed to union demands driving companies into bankruptcy (hello, GM) and growing the government. Of course, you think this as normal and decent. When wages get obscene then unions have too much power, when wages get too low, benefits gone, corporations have too much power; where do ya think we're at now, Mikey? I'm thinking wages are low, exec comp massively sick and unions are disempowered via fascist presidents that you happen to vote for and think this is good. Both fascist Ronnie and GWB misused executive privs by interfering with unions; a fundamental right of Americans to collectively bargain as protected by federal law. So I guess if we bow down to corporations and work for cheap w/o benefots or protections then we're good little workers, anything else is just leveraging those poor massive corporations.

You missed the point. Bill. For people below the top 35% threshold who are on the edge of the next lowest brkt, it can be an advantage to save money. For corps it ALSO has a political factor as I pointed out in post #46 a day ago in this thread and corporate-loving Kelp agreed. I wrote: Also, some donation is done for political reasons, esp when corporations do it. But it still is a donation fueled by a tax writeoff. It's a different world between me and a huge corporation.

And there's no point in me trying to explain the fact that if you're teetering on the ege of the next lowest brkt, it is beneficial. If you only want to understand your scenatio then you are thinking as narrow as any conservative. Right, in your narrow scenario. Yes, it benefits the charities as it motivates donors to donate, so it's symbiotic. Again, the thread title, your beloved greasy corporations want to look human as they dole out 100's of millions to do-nothing trash up top, so they donate and $1M to some slimy charity where that exec of that non-profit earns a 6 or 7 digit salary and the donating corp gets a dedution for attempting to look human. So once again, there is a huge benefit to their PR. I realize you behold these greasy corps as human to no end, but donations to charities are just PR and / or the pet project of some top-end exec, but either way, TAKE AWAY THE WRITEOFF AND THE DONATIONS GO AWAY TOO. Now you want us to believe the tax writeoff has no bearing on donations; good luck convicing the intelligent people of that.

Oh, I don't doubt that possibility. But Lucky continues to be confused by progressive tax brackets- there's no net savings that results from making donations to drop down to the next bracket. Even if one's marginal tax rate is at 50%, the cost of the donation is still the other 50%. Apparently you feel it's best to address me thru other parties. I explained that the donation gets the corps a big tax benefit while creating the PR neccessary to attempt to offset the bad press tehy get for hooking up the top execs with massive bonuses, even as the corporation is tanking. You do recall the thread title, right? Is it dollar for dollar? No, but it allows them to offload cash to charities as if it's out of the goodness of the heart they want to pretend they have. Is that too difficult for you to grasp?

Basically, where would donations be of there was no tax incentive attached?

Not at all, and many times it's a hybrid reason to donate, as with PR for corporations. True, unless you're 1 or 2 thou over the threshold. Collectively amongst all taxpayers who are just barely over the next higher threshold, that's a huge amount of money. Again, depends where you are in regard to the next higher brkt, but if a person wanted to doante anyway, they might only spend a fraction to get it done. With corps, it can be a dual reason. Greed, but as I said, corps are known to be impersonal trash much of teh time, so they spend or divert some advertising money for donations and tax breaks fascilitate that. Absent tax writeoffs, donation s would be starkly lower, I'm sure you can agree to that.

Unless you can give away enough to fall below that point, or, if you're in the 80%, 70%, etc when they have that brkt, or whatever brkt you're in, you can give away enough to fall into a lower brkt. Either way, tax writeoffs for the rich are the key to life. How is Also, some donation is done for political reasons, esp when corporations do it. a vague assertion? Corporations donate to all kinds of charities and make it VERY publicly known for PR to the community. So glad you live your life from Seinfeld cliches, now a lot of things you state seem more understandable.

Phone records generally refers to number history as in a list of numbers dialed and recceived. As for law, it all revolves around EXPECTATION OF PRIVACY and would a reasonable person feel they had that in a given situation.

The reasonable expectation of privacy question is the core of this debate. Here are my thoughts... If the law enforcement officers ware going around with their own radio receivers and homing in on the location of someone who has a cellphone on them that is transmitting, I would agree with the "no reasonable expectation of privacy" argument. The fact that cell phones emit radio signals can be considered common knowledge, and I'd liken the use of equipment to track these signals to holding your hand up to your ear, listening for a distinctive exhaust note of a suspect's vehicle, and concluding, "hey, I think he's over there!" But communication between your cell phone and the phone companies' infrastructure, and derivatives of that communication (like phone location) are conducted for the purposes of providing you a service under a private contract with the phone company. Use of any information collected by the phone company for a purpose other than fulfilling your contract should be considered an infringement on your privacy and require a warrant. Drawing the line of privacy between the location of your phone calls and the contents of them is asinine, and would be like saying you can pull all bank transactions a person has made without a warrant, so long as you don't get the dollar amounts. Katz v Ohio talks of people having privacy, not places. This was the 1960's and revolved around booky bets being placed at a payphone. The cops were ok to bug the phone booth, but then it wasn't ok as soon as a person was near. SO we could use the same reasoning of a case that is considered stare decisis and I guess it would then be ok for law to research phone records afterthe call is made. Again, the privacy falls subordinate once the person leaves and no conversation was recorded, just numbers dialed. If a conversation was recorded then I see this as intrusive as the evidence was memorialized, so privacy transfers. My personal take on this is taht it sucks, but I don't see it as intrusive as per SCOTUS that I know of. This is what happens when you have a fascist nation: the gov and corps jump in bed. We can see examples of this with the bank bailout from the gov to the corps, mandatory insurance with communication between ins corps and DMV agencies and many, many more examples.

Just as with fluid, in any orifice the medium must speed up as it's passing thru the restriction to maintain volume.