Reply With Quote
too much regulation isn't good, but neither is too little. I'm for discussing regulation and in fact that's what government is for.
So are you unbiased 2cents? What are the final five reasons against McCain?
too much regulation isn't good, but neither is too little. I'm for discussing regulation and in fact that's what government is for.
you're wrong on a few fronts.
03 cuts didn't happen in 01.
why were the tax cuts passed? you speak of coming out of recession, what other theory is there about how government can help?
My point is Sarah Palin is ignorant on all subjects not just history. Google up Palin quotes if you need examples.
He has not stated is the way you are suggesting. Yes it's a good thig. He did not lie.He has not stated it the way you're suggesting. He continues to say a tax cut for 95% of people. It's a welfare check for a large percentage. It's cool that you believe that's a good thing. Mr. Obama shouldn't lie about what he really means.
Bill Clinton.I voted for Bill Clinton so you're not going to get me on women.
That defines the hardcore republican voters this year.However, felons, terrorist and racist do bother me.
translation: I have no response to that.get real. try again.
biggest economic disaster since great depression. it's already here. wake upwhen did we default on our loans?
what are you talking about? If you have been a member of this board longer than a few days my opinion of McCain and Palin are clear. However, we must vote for someone. I have voted in 6 presidential elections and this one has by far been the most difficult.
Why did you start a thread about Obama en led "My Five Final Reasons Against Obama/Biden"? McCain didn't get such a concise list of ideas.
Were there cuts in 01? Yes, 1.35 trillion dollars worth. Federal revenues declined steadily after this until 04.
The Vice President runs the Senate! Of course, THAT'S an excusable gaffe... lmao
because Palin is such a history buff
you're the one making the claims, so you should support them.
so how does he give 95% tax cuts when 40% don't pay income taxes.He has not stated is the way you are suggesting. Yes it's a good thig. He did not lie.
so adultery is an offense and should be considered when voting for president?Bill Clinton.
That defines the hardcore republican voters this year.
let me guess, you're 18 years old?
for childishness, no.translation: I have no response to that.
you know a lot about history too.biggest economic disaster since great depression. it's already here. wake up
Well, then I guess we agree.
the Bush Tax cuts that is at the heart of the discussion occurred in '03. That's when the top 5% saw the tax cut. As far as tax cuts in '01, President Bush was sworn in in '01, and then 9/11, so I don't know what you're talking about.
Well, then I guess we agree.
Apparently your history is a little rusty.
The 01 tax cuts were one of the first priorities of the Bush administration.
http://archives.cnn.com/2001/ALLPOLI...07/bush.taxes/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economi...on_Act_of_2001
I'm voting for McCain, because of this list. McCain is not going to win, so my only reason behind the thread is to vent. Nowhere did I make a pledge to criticize both equally.
That was a return of the tax surplus and is a distraction about the heart of this argument which is the economic growth and jobs act.
stay focused. do tax cuts stimulate growth?
if you need proof that Palin is ignorant on most subjects, then you are in a sadder state than I thought.
95% of Americans who PAY TAXES and not 95% of ALL Americans. You can't cut taxes on persons who make too little to pay taxes or have no income at all. a little logic wouldn't hurt.so how does he give 95% tax cuts when 40% don't pay income taxes.
no, should his wife not being proud of her country be?so adultery is an offense and should be considered when voting for president?
wrong again.let me guess, you're 18 years old?
you're putting words in my mouth. I'm still waiting for you to support your argument though. btw, just in case you forgot, you stated she doesn't know her history.
sounds like you just used a little logic. now got revisit Obama's rhetoric.95% of Americans who PAY TAXES and not 95% of ALL Americans. You can't cut taxes on persons who make too little to pay taxes or have no income at all. use logic.
if he had another woman or she had another man, I could care less. However, not being able to appreciate this country is cause for concern.no, should his wife not being proud of her country be?
sarcasmwrong again.
Sure they can. My point is that they're not the magic wand you seem to think they are. I mentioned the 01 tax cuts to illustrate this point. I'm still amazed you didn't have a clue about a signature piece of legislation during Bush's first year in office. Please try to keep up.
wrong I stated she doesn't know most subject including history. if you beleive Palin knows history more than Obama or Biden then you are in a sadder state than I thought in my previous post.
IT WAS HIS WIFE.if he had another woman or she had another man, I could care less. However, not being able to appreciate this country is cause for concern.
the rationale behind the 01 tax cut was a return of the overpayment in taxes. You're comparing apples and oranges.
pre-911 and I have already explained it to you. To use that piece of legislation is intellectually dishonest IMO, because the question is how to grow this economy. btw, after 911 and all of the corporate scandels why didn't the government increase taxes? are you suggesting that they should have increased taxes?I'm still amazed you didn't have a clue about a signature piece of legislation during Bush's first year in office. Please try to keep up.
History was the point. I don't care if she doesn't know about the ambiguous "Bush Doctrine". Biden is one of the dumbest guys in congress and i would take that bet.
I would say McCain's knowledge of history would put Obama to shame.
that was 20% of the point. I mentioned a lot more than his wife being unpatriotic.IT WAS HIS WIFE.
Bush Doctrine? I am talking about economics, foreign policy, world and national events. you know, things that are necessary to run the country...
as 2centworth would say, prove it.I would say McCain's knowledge of history would put Obama to shame.
I could make a guess that Obama's knowledge of economics would put Mcain to shame. And guess which one is more important for the job at hand?
so you are taking 20% of your point back?that was 20% of the point. I mentioned a lot more than his wife being unpatriotic.
What does the rationale have to do with it? Federal revenue went down after the 01 tax cuts. Ergo, tax cuts do not always necessarily lead to increased federal revenue. What's so hard to understand about that?
I don't know where to start. You aren't even making sense.
But since you mentioned it, intellectual dishonesty is starting a thread ing about Biden's lack of historical knowledge when the VP on the GOP ticket may be the most intellectually and historically clueless person to run for that office in American history (with the possible exception of Dan Quayle).
Last edited by Bartleby; 11-03-2008 at 10:55 PM.
You forgot number 6 - the sexist at ude of homeboy & his followers where all women who don't serve him are defined as either a or a dumb .
you disagree with her politically, big surprise. that's not evidence though.Bush Doctrine? I am talking about economics, foreign policy, world and national events. you know, things that are necessary to run the country...
read first post.as 2centworth would say, prove it.
both have little knowledge, but Obama's is more dangerous.I could make a guess that Obama's knowledge of economics would put Mcain to shame. And guess which one is more important for the job at hand?
nah, because I was talking about being unpatriotic. If you want to say McCain is a womanizer, sobeit.so you are taking 20% of your point back?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
