Lucky...

I love that, I am not supporting Joe Wilson for president (as he holds a tall sign stating Joe Wilson for pres)!!!! God, it's an insult to call that irony. Fascism is socialism, as well as communism. http://ask.yahoo.com/20050920.html Like socialism and communism, fascism uses a central authority to maintain control, but "terror and censorship" are common. It results from economic failure in democratic political systems. Interestingly, while socialism and communism are both on the left end of the political spectrum, fascism contains elements of both "left and right ideology" and rises from economic collapse. Neo-Fascism denounces organized labor and advocates corporatism. This is a pretty good explantion, apparently Clem didn't read this. What a good video to express the ignorance of Americans. I've yet to have anyone show me a major federal tax cut and illustrate success for others than teh very rich. BTW, how did you get all those DZCOM members together at one time? It ddin't look like a boogie?

True, consolidate and expand ventures / share ventures. Which is fair, most conservatives want to pin this on Clinton and claim he was solely responsible. This, like NAFTA and so many others are systemic; they would have passed under any admin / congress. Stand alone this is not a bad thing, maybe should have come with some gov oversight. I dunno. How did consolidation and diversity lead to growth and shrinkage? Don't see it. Yea me too, I mean, how many thousands of people died in teh Great Depression? Negligible. Again, the basic environment that was required for the mess to kick off was for interest rates to drop so principle values could takeover that space, if you will. A house payment is PITI, the Principle and Interest are the biggies. They are also inverse of each other and when interest fell, buyers still qualified for X per month and sellers still want the same X for their house that they did before the int rate drop. This started a ponzi scheme. So why did int rates drop? The fed chairman, Greenspan had to drop them due to the lagging economy, he wanted to entice spending. Why did the economy lag? In large part to the massive tax cuts which allows the rich to store away more of their money. Of course you still think tax cuts are a good thing, so you will disagree. Ssow me a major federal tax cut that ended in success.

I don't think we'll get a response from the cut-n-paste cowboy. If we do it will just be sarcasm.

Bullshit - where was the bow to the Queen, then? 12. A first strike weapon as understood by everyone. Defense = first strike? That seems consistent with the 'logic' in your arguments. Mike, your priorities are typical of conservatives, worry about other's customs, yet let the substantive things go; pure misdirection. If you jack up the debt, decimate the country, then worry about silly tradition as tho that's the important thing you feel correct. Speaking of misdirection....where is anything about the debt or the (gasp) 'decimation of the country' in my reply? Point them out for me, will you? Point being, your leaders can fuck teh entire country up and you care if he bows when appropriate. My leaders need to be substantively focused. Obama is FAAAAAAAAAAAAR less offensive than was GWB, in fact, most or all of the world likes him except OBL.....can you say that about your regime?

Rick's a cut-n-paste cowboy. 2 people have addressed all your cut-n-pastings, yet no response

Bullshit - where was the bow to the Queen, then? 12. A first strike weapon as understood by everyone. Defense = first strike? That seems consistent with the 'logic' in your arguments. Mike, your priorities are typical of conservatives, worry about other's customs, yet let the substantive things go; pure misdirection. If you jack up the debt, decimate the country, then worry about silly tradition as tho that's the important thing you feel correct.

Your own source puts Palin in a three way tie. Did you even read your own link? I referred to the poll results, Palin is #4 most desirable and #1 least desireable. It's you who doesn't read and comprehend. Again, your 3rd best candidate is someone else.

Isn't that a racist type comment? Kin or the use of the word doesn't infer race.

That's a bit paranoid. My profession is HEAVILY controlled by the FAA and I welcome it. It s/b heavily controlled, I wish the banks were as controlled. What that is gov controled is a mess? You can say Medicare, but then have to propose another form of organization and control that wouldn't be corrupt and would be more efficient.

No, the post I replied to claimed there are 45M people uninsured, the rest are insured. That's fuzzy math, because I believe 26% of all Americans are on SS, Medicare, Medicaid. IOW's, the number of 45M / 300M don't have insurance and the rest do is blatantly wrong. Employers with horrible insurance - I've worked at places where guys with kids pay $500 premium pay, deductables, co-pays, etc. That's what I call horrible insurance, you could buy it off the street, it's basically that you don't have insurance thru work, just like conservatives want. many want to disallow them - Let's put it in context the way I wrote it: Only a very small % actually have comprehensive insurance but there are many that want to disallow most fromhaveing complete, comprehensive insurance, they people I call COMPASSIONATE CONSERVATIVES. Firstly I didn't write the, "them" on the backside, that was your embellishment. The theme of the statement is that few people have what I call "real insurance" where a person can actually go to the doctor or hospital and walk out well and not have a bill for several thousand dollars. Please, you are the ones who want some to have insurance, the incompassion is yours, I choose not to share by way of wanting a baseline of basic coverage for everyone.

My my you are a good republican, the GOP is proud of you. I have two personal invitations for Bill Clinton's inaugrual ball (no kidding). Does that make me a good little democrat?

Wow. As soon as money starts making itself and paying my bills without my help then your claim may be valid. So if you earn 0 then you are taxed? If you earn 100k/yr you are taxed at X, then go back to earning 50k/yr and get taxed x. So the taxes assigned to you have 100% to do with what you earn and how much of that you can write off. I realize you want to play the victim, so it has to be you being victimized by the government, buy poor people, etc, but your taxes assigned have 100% to do with your income minus your writeoffs according to that year's tax table. The government just taxes movement of money, conservatives love the game, but then hate the ugly side of it when they get charged a fee for moving money. Go buy a car, most states have sales tax, go earn money, there are employment taxes. Go ahead and provide evidence that cutting taxes helps the country. Not theory, had enough of that, shown me empirical evidence. In science we make observations and draw conclusions, please, show me your evidence and draw your conclusion that the country does better with low taxes. That is, if you feel that way, not trying to put concepts into your mind.

Rick, I realize your 15 second cut-n-patse job was quick, I spent an hour addressing all of your points, do you return the courtesy? Esp when you chide someone for not being able to make it thru 20; did you make it thru 20 on my respose or is it off to the next plagiaristic cut-n-paste job?

Even tho all the data I've seen forcasts doom for the country in several areas, esp the debt, you still say cut taxes? Even the info you posted that I briefed seemed to say that tax cutting leads to trouble, you still say cut taxes? The ideology of cutting taxes my friends is a cult, rather than a logic of sound reasoning. Cut taxes fuck the outcome, just cut taxes.

where do the other 40% think babies come from? Oops, my bad!!! Creationism, not procreation. I think the other 40% believe in the stork

"Kin" brings it all home Now, someone else is your 3rd best candidate behind a moralist nut and the person brought down your campaign last general election is 4th. As well, your worst candidate is also your 4th best, according to the poll; why the anger?

Jesus fuckin H. Christ. We just went thru 2 yrs. of this shit. Can we have a break? 2 years of what shit, polls that show the Republicans out of gas and out of viable candidates? Seems longer to me.

Then you better take the GPS transmitter they have hidden within your brain cavity or the helicopters will keep following you.

If she did it would be lined out like GWB's DD214.

Is the o in bolface like that on your birth certificate certificate of live birth, also? One semantic correction deserves another

Sorry Bordsen . The missed analogy was about you bringing the troops in, it was supposed to compare the concept that the people have no control over military spending or social spending, why pick on one and not the other. You say once the gov takes over it's curtains. This mess is a product of corporate America, the gov is the savior here. If the gov is the devil it's only that they failed to control the corporations enough. More gov in this situation is a good thing, not to the point of Communism of course, butlet's get off this corporate control.

I think that data is in the article you didn't click. Thx, but I want to read arguments on both sides, esp the side that wants tax cuts, but I'd like to read a person's position that is accompanied by a reasonable citation that supports their position. I did scan thru it and it totally supports an opposing position to that of what you believe. But this is not about you or me, it's about taxation and what is better for the US; cut or increase.

It doesn't work that way, people who advocate tax cuts want to proliferate their programs (military) and cut their opponent's programs (social).

And there inlies the ridiculus nature of this concept that raising taxes is punishment. People aren't taxed, money is. There is no way that the gov is going to tax you until you move money. If taxes were 1% you would still find people calling it punnishment. Taxes are the lowest here than in most indust countries, yet people cry more here than anywhere. You can argue theory, heard it till my balls fell off so I decided to see how the experiment worked and realized a few anomolies with taxation processes and outcomes. OK, I hear ya, cut taxes, people have more to spend, tax revenues increase with a lower tax rate, bla, bla, bla,...... now, how has it worked out? The data is abundant, support your point. The point in the vacuum here is you, you are arguing theory w/o any supporting data. Also, not that you read the entire OP, but I asked not to argue fairness, not partisan agenda, just process and outcome. I think it's taxation and spending and I would love to hear substantive and supported arguments with some kind of objective, primary data on major tax cuts and spending. Let's hear both sides of the argument.

http://news.aol.com/article/mitt-romney-defends-record-as-mike/677734?icid=webmail|wbml-aol|dl2|link3|http%3A%2F%2Fnews.aol.com%2Farticle%2Fmitt-romney-defends-record-as-mike%2F677734 If "Someone else" is your 3rd best candidate and Palin is your worst, well, Obama for 8 - mail it in