Printable View
LOL you cant debate that. What you said was ignorant! People use welfare to live off of and they do jsut fine with it. They dont live the high life but they also dont jsut scrape by, they have enough to where they dont need to work!Quote:
Originally Posted by TIGERJC
wow im ignorant, so u telling me half the ppl on welfare just sit on thier ass. just wow, maybe 5%, ok lets go as high as 40%. the govt need to have more measures to cutdown on the abuse. but i know for a fact that most people that are on it are hard workers. i say they should have a limit how long they can be on it, but to say that alot of them are just plain lazy isnt true
NOT TRUE......... :eek: ......Its very dam true. I will grant you some do try to get off of it and so jsut cant help it either way but ALOT use it for free money. I have even known people who use it and literally know their abusing it. The only reason the government hasnt cracked down on it is becuase most usually jsut come up with an excuse, but most dont care if it is enough to get them through the week or month without them having to work they wont even try to get a job. But you are correct they dotn sit on there ass becuase there usually out spending the money elsewere.
Yep, that's what I'm saying.Quote:
Originally Posted by TIGERJC
But don't believe an old guy like me......here you go, young and old saying the same thing I am.....enjoy:
http://forums.importatlanta.com/showthread.php?t=27143
hey lets not support our leaders and try to help them lets just make shit hard on them when it's not even like they can be reelected i can not see how you bush haters think your even patriots even if you dont agree with him support america dont hate and i cant wait to see what dumb fuck hillary can do
If hillary gets elected next election were FUCKED. Just as long as she doesnt do stupid shit like her husband who when he first had the twin towers attacked in 92 he turns around and makes a peace agreement with them. But msot liekyl she will have an assassination atempt on her life if she tries and run, and odds are it will be some texas hick or something along those lines. All i can say if she runs i would cut my nuts off before i voted for her.Quote:
Originally Posted by efman
Explain to me the moral responsibility of the Bush administration when they go from a budget surplus to one of the biggest muti-trillion dollar deficits. Check out this unbiased data on the budget deficit for each of the US presidents and explain to me why the Bush admin. has done what it has even going against many republicans doing such. Now they are talking about cutting student loans and social services to combat Katrina's 200billion dollar cost when the truth is that it incurred only a .2 percent blip of deficit compared to the deficit which the Bush admin. has incured. ???????? Tell why your party is so great and I can show you a 10 things that show they are not. Why do you keep supporting a party that is hell bent on hurting the very supporters of its party????
http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaver...ilo/fedbgt.htm
OH GOD I THOUGHT YOU WHERE GONE. Dam you jsut dont give up. Just for your information the deficit since Clinton has gone out of office and Bush has come in has gone down. But since your blaming the weather on Bush and since he is using all this money to help people (which i dont understand why the persident would want to help people) i would expect the deficit to go back up. BUT if you look at a true data chart you would see that bush has gotten the deficit to go down since he has taken office. But since i am to lazy tonight i will get you the information tommorow.
Also if you want to blame someone on the Deficit do your homework and blame EVERYONE. Every president ha caused the national deficit to go up every presdient be it rep. demo. and since hte Democrats have held the office for 35 years and the Republicans 33 this being since the end of the depression the Democrats are at a cause of 8.9% and the Republicans are at 9.1 OH MY GOD THAT MUST MEAN ITS ALL THE REPUBLICANS FAULT. Just wait until the next Democrat gets office then they will take the lead in the Deficit cause.
Hopefully next time which i hope there isnt you open your mouth to argue you take our advise and come with something better. becuase so far you been shot down at all attempts to argue with something good.
Why is it that all Bush haters attribute everything to Bush? Hurricanes, failed levees, the ENTIRE deficit that was INHERITED, yada yada.
That's so old already. Find something new. Maybe Global warming, Chinese torture, dingleberries, maybe even cavities. :rolleyes: :jerkit:
Your only "research data" comes from Bush hating leftist .coms and it's getting so predictable.
Post something original and enlightening.....thought provoking.....debate worthy. Notice your topics go off on tangents if anywhere at all. Reason? You sound like a propaganda machine. Even the regular Bush haters here aren't so biased and one sided.
Do something different. You really aint that good at what you're doing now.
MUHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHHAQuote:
Originally Posted by Jaimecbr900
God i love when you answer the ignorant posts. LOL :lmfao: :lmfao: :lmfao: :lmfao: You get a +1 :goodjob:
GONE DOWN!!!!!!!!!!!! ????????????? You clearly don't read the news. Its an undisputable fact on both sides Democrat and Republican that the deficit has gone way way up since Bush has taken office. You need to ask your fellow Republicans whats going on because apparently your not in the know. They don't deny that they have turned a budget surplus into the largest deficit since WWII. They just have reasons to justify it. Its fact not opinion. Numbers cannot be disputed as they are fact. And as for my previous statement your party went and did it. Thanks for hurting the American people again. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051026/...ss_budget_cuts
And as for me giving up, just because I stop posting to the ignorant uninformed bamboozled comments doesn't mean I gave up. I just gave up on trying to show how clueless you truely are.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TransAxle
CLUELESS....out of everyone who has poste dhere everyone has called you wrong and proved you wrong. But you keep coming back for more. But once again i would bet that if a Democrat was in office you would be coming up with an excuse to why there deficit is going up...but like a democrat you are you blame even nature on a republican. The national deficit between the demos and reps is only a .2% DIFFERENCE, and that is BECAUSE there has been a republican president in the office for when there is times of wars, and when there has bene some of the baddiest Hurricane Seasons, i would hope the deficit goes up becuase they have to put out all this money to help the insurance companys cover all theys people so they can get back on there feet, and keep them from going under. But from what your saying since democrats are the saviors of this great nation that if a democrat was in office during theys times that they would try and save the deficit and tell theys people who lost everything to hurricane's that they have to fend for themselves?
You my friend are like any other democrat i have ever known or meet, all you see is to blame others and not look at the big picture. Why dont you do yourself a favor and REALLY study the democratic party and see about all the "great" things they have done for there nation. Oh and also i love how you bash bush and promote democrat leadership.....BUT if i am correct it was Jimmy Carter speaking on behalf of bush during his campign, and if i am correct Carter is a Democrat to the end or in his words "I am a democrat hands down and i will never vote Republican no matter what!" So if i am rightone of the highest democratic members in there delagation, spoke on behlf of bush and stands behind him and even agrees that he is doing hte right stuff.
If i am correct i think your nothing more than a Hypocrite!
You read BIASED news if any at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by djmaddmartin
How many wars and deadly hurricanes and leftover deficits did Clinton handle? Not a damn one. His portion of the deficit came straight from pork belly politics and paying for hookers to get his rocks off.Quote:
Its an undisputable fact on both sides Democrat and Republican that the deficit has gone way way up since Bush has taken office.
Typical democrat spouting. Finger pointing, but sweeping under the rug their own involvement. :jerkit:
Funny how all your google quoting either has no references from which they got the data from or they interview only one side, i.e. Democrats. So of course they are going to be biased on their views.
Talk about clueless.
interesting
As usual. Pointless. Oh.. the war. He started it. Oh the huricanes... there have been bad huricaine seasons before. And no one is also considering his tax cuts that mainly target higher income brackets and corporations. So funny. You defend him as companies take away your retirement, benifits and wages facilitated by laws passed by his Republican controlled congress. Too funny. You will get it one day... or maybe not. I can criticize my party when I disagree with what they endorse, but it seems all of you are like horses with blinders on walking gladly into the shit left by the other horses in your team. Rant some more, I clearly see you are not critcal of the decisions being made that directly affect you. I have an idea, how about all those who supported Bush and voted for him fgo fight in Iraq and pay for the ground breaking deficit he will leave behind. If you live long enough. Fair is fair. I can point you to the nearest recuiting office or bank.
LOL.
Pointless to argue against me, yes. Glad you got that.Quote:
Originally Posted by djmaddmartin
You blabbed about the "deficit" and I gave you concrete proof WHY there is one and now you wanna divert to whom started it. YOU sir are a bonafide card carrying liberal Democrat of the first degree.Quote:
Oh.. the war. He started it.
You start a fight, then complain because you lose. Typical Democrat fashion.
Not at the same time as a WAR num nuts. Again, Democrats point the finger and say, "OH, look at all the spending...", yet don't tell the whole story. "Spending" can be traced back to the source easily. Why is it that the liberals only mention it, but don't disclose the disclaimers????? :rolleyes:Quote:
Oh the huricanes... there have been bad huricaine seasons before.
That's actually the only point I agree with you on. So called "tax cuts" aren't really all that good at all. I support the consumption tax idea myself. So, you won't get any arguments from me on this point.Quote:
And no one is also considering his tax cuts that mainly target higher income brackets and corporations. So funny. You defend him as companies take away your retirement, benifits and wages facilitated by laws passed by his Republican controlled congress. Too funny. You will get it one day... or maybe not.
Open mouth, insert foot, repeat. It's getting to be a theme with you.Quote:
I can criticize my party when I disagree with what they endorse, but it seems all of you are like horses with blinders on walking gladly into the shit left by the other horses in your team. Rant some more, I clearly see you are not critcal of the decisions being made that directly affect you.
I just proved your little theory all wrong with my statement above. I don't follow anything with "blinders" on as proved above. So once again, you're wrong.
I got yet another idea for YOU.......if you don't like it, buy a one-way ticket to France where you'll fit right in....... :rolleyes:Quote:
I have an idea, how about all those who supported Bush and voted for him fgo fight in Iraq and pay for the ground breaking deficit he will leave behind. If you live long enough. Fair is fair. I can point you to the nearest recuiting office or bank.
LOL.
That idea sounds pretty stupid, doesn't it? Not any different than yours though. Love it or leave it. Don't you have more brain power to come up with a different rebuttal? That's a tired one. Come up with something original.
I'm going to leave the rest of your babbling aside to just point out a few things about this statement:Quote:
Originally Posted by djmaddmartin
1) The reason tax cuts mainly target higher income brackets is because the lower income brackets pay virtually no income tax at all. The top 10% pays a massively disporportionate part of their income in taxes, when compared against how much % of total income they earn. This is both the democrats and republican's fault, they have been constantly shifting the tax burden to the smallest percentage of income earners as they can. By doing this, it becomes essentially impossible to pass any meaningful tax reform.
2) Thanks to those tax cuts, the projected defecit for the next few years (before Katrina, at least, I'm not sure what that's done to it) was significantly lower than expected, because cutting taxes invigorates the economy.
3) I will say this very slowly and in all caps, so you can understand it from an economics perspective: CORPORATIONS DO NOT PAY TAXES.
That's right, you heard me. Even if when the are 'paying taxes', they're not paying taxes. You cannot tax entities, you can only tax people. Taxes on corporations have to be paid for somehow, so they are integrated into the cost of everything you buy or use. So, a tax on corporations is just another tax piled on top of the consumer.
Further research into corporate income taxation shows that the US has some of the most draconian corporate income tax structures on the planet that make it very difficult for companies based in the US to compete internationally.
For example, if a company were based in Germany, they would pay income taxes to German government on money they generated in Germany. If they had a branch in the US, they would pay income tax to the US government for the money that branch made.
If a company is based in the US, and has a branch in Germany it pays income taxes on ALL MONEY earned OUTSIDE of the country. So not only is Generic American Company paying income tax to the US government for money earned in the US and the German government for money earned in Germany, but ALSO has to pay income tax to the US government on money earned IN GERMANY.
THIS is why the company is called Daimler-Chrysler and not Chrysler-Daimler.
Who the fuck cares about making complete sentences on a message board. I don't see English 101 written on the thread title. The thread was about Bush and how your a cocksmoker and don't like him. I can agree with some aspects of how he's done a poor job but being ignorant and biased just because "he" beat out your pot smoking democrat Kerry doesn't mean you need to kill him for Katrina. That shit was Fema's fault and he just was man enough to take the shit people gave him for it. Pretty much everyone here would rather read information then Yahoo type bitching amongst children.Quote:
Originally Posted by djmaddmartin
Wow!!!!
I'm glad to see I'm not the only one that thinks this guy is off his rocker. :goodjob:
I wonder whom he'll blame next now that the house of cards has tumbled???? ;)
LOL least hes not alwasy coming back against your post. i think he likes me i bash him then you guys rape his ass with bashes and he turns around and argues against me.
....i think he likes me.....! :eek:
:lmfao: :lmfao: :lmfao:
man he can kiss my azzQuote:
Originally Posted by PD code 805D
actually no of yall have proved him wrong,and he is right you cat dispute pure numbers and fact. One we always go to war when republicans are in office but that not the point, when repblicans enter office the always do what they say they arent going to do. and democrats arent any better, but if you paid attention to facts when clition was in office we didnt go to war, and the economy was a hell of a lot better,we didnt go to war because we tried to avoid the stupid shit, unlike bush which actually was the same when his father was in office, clinton cleaned his shit up. and beside the point that when clintion let office he was one of the highest rated president ever, we wnet to war with bush for weapons of mass destruction which we never found and now the war has been switched to different reasons for us going about 20 times. basically you can disputed we went for the oil again and we have friend dying and we still dont know the real reason we went to war, al we know that we are still their now fight the war of terror which we didnt go there for in the first place. Now bush did go to the no and he could have went sooner, its fema job,but it is the president to evaluate the damage, he shot to flordia quick as hell when his brothers state got hit by the hurricane, and bush ratings has shot down to hell, even people who voted for him dissaprove of what hes doing,because its not making sense anymore.Quote:
Originally Posted by TransAxle
[B]but if you paid attention to facts when clition was in office we didnt go to war[/B
WOW you must be a relative to djmaddmartin, you talk just like him, low IQ and ignorant as hell. Now let me help you with what you said.
I agree with you even though you dont know what you are talking about. yes we did not go to war. in 1992 when terroist first attacked the Trade Towers with a car bomb, which they tried running into the lobby of the building....we didnt go to war. Clinton turned around and wanted a peace treaty with the man who attacked us. BUT when Bush came into office they tried again but since we have a "smart" person in office, he said FUCk a treaty lets go to war. Which I agree with. But if your a democrat and would be reading this you WILL disagree becuase you owuld rather be attacked roll over and make a peace treaty....hince why everyone calls democrat's Left wing Liberal Cocksuckers...becuase they rather roll over and get tea bagged.
the point that when clintion let office he was one of the highest rated president
Now on the second part no agrument there i bet everyone would love the president that fucked someone in the oval office....even more so a married man. If you believe him to be a great preisdent i fell sorry fro who ever you marry becuase you wont see anything wrong in cheating on him/her!
we wnet to war with bush for weapons of mass destruction which we never found and now the war has been switched to different reasons for us going about 20 times.
LOL you didnt watch the news much during this time becuase yes we didnt find any weapons of mass destruction but we had good satelite videos of all theys mass hauling vechicles leaving facilites during the nights and do that every few days. Watch the news then watch behind the news you learn more that way!
[B]basically you can disputed we went for the oil again [/B
HAHAHAHAHAH Part about Oil!!!!!! That is the most ignorant thing i HAVE EVER SEEN. WE NEVER WENT FOR OIL. If we did why are prices so high................OH THATS RIGHT Its still high becuase the US gets most if not all of its oil from the oil fields in the guild where all those hurricans went over and shut most down. Most people dont now but the US mines most of its oil from the Gulf and from Alaska. Read dubass it helps!
And i am bored of arguing with dumbasses and ignorant fucks. Read some and come back and then talk!
one name calling isnt ness.,and dumbass you actually believe the bullshit that you are typing, and second off they said they were going to attcak the towers if bush was elected in office.he was and the attacked. He was warned and did nothing, you idiot they wanted that oil over there if we get that oils there plenty in the ground compared to over here there not much so if you think we could supply a lot of oil the us cant., thats why we needed that oil and if bush could get it fisrt he would be richer, there reasons for all, and trucks leaving with bombs of mass destruction and we cant track them by this sat. that so called seen them leaving you sound like a dumb bitch just making that statment. And you fucking idiot. I am pretty much older than you so since you think you know so much why as the war changed 10x for all these different reasons, maybe we can met on day because i'll do to you what i would do to bush if i seen his ass. yor shit needs to get straight before you take sides from someone who could give two shit about your ass.He could even answer the question if he had a son would he send him to war he couldnt even answer that, he a damn coward.Quote:
Originally Posted by TransAxle
OH YM GOD YOUR A DUMBASS!!!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by stikiller
Why dont you do some research and find out that the words LARGEST oil supply is in the US!!!!! Under Arizona where the oil portection act follows to keep people form drilling is the worlds largest oil reserve. If it ever came down to where we neede doil badly its all under arizona, instead we get out 20-30% from the gulf, and about 10-20% from Alaska, and then the rest is bought from over seas. Do some research dumbshit. ALSO they did say that but they did say anything about when they attacked the towers when Clinton was in office. Whats your justification to that? Instead i am glad they attacked the US becuase we got them back 10 fold. Also i love how you say this war is pointless, but yet Alot of democrats and republicans voted to go to war and rid the terriorist of the world. I guess if you dont want to stop terrorist that must make you one. You would rather see people of our great nation get killed and not attack them. Go to fucking France where they dont fight for shit....YOU WILL fit right in there. Also about the satalite thing i guess your jsut not that smart....unless theres satelites that can see through the world from the other side of space to follow theys truck. If you were smart you would know that satelites can only be over certains areas for a certain amount of time. Now do like DJ and SHUT THE FUCK UP!
calm down on the name calling, debate not fight. one thing about this prz he has split this country in half. u must agree to that.
I agree with that to an extent but jsut pisses me off when people argue with teh dumbest dam reasons and have no proof to back it up and it they do they use biased proof. No one realizes its all about what is behind the facts to get the truth!Quote:
Originally Posted by TIGERJC
Quote:
Originally Posted by stikiller
I stopped reading this shit after this: but if you paid attention to facts when clition was in office we didnt go to war,
Are you a fucking retard or just don't bother to do your homework?
During the clinton administration one of our many outings was to a small, militarily weak country with no weapons of mass destruction and who wasn't a direct threat to us.
5,000-10,000 civilians died and it cost over $75 billion dollars.
Where were all the protestors?
Oh right, they were either ok with it because it was a Democrat president, or they were abysmally, terminally stupid like you and didn't even know it happened.
God, sometimes I can't even believe the shit that comes out of people's mouths. And I bet you VOTE. Christ, we are FUCKED.
Actually we did find weapons of mass destruction.Quote:
Originally Posted by TransAxle
An IED was created from a canister of sarin gas and set to explode near an airport. The amt of sarin inside it could have killed 50-70k people.
We found a small amount of shells filled with mustard gas. I believe they were expired past their shelf life, but show that Hussein was only paying lip service to the inspections and requirements of his surrender in the first gulf war.
Then there's the matter of the several tons of partially enriched uranium we just recently carted out of Iraq (with no small amount of protest from the UN's Nuclear watchdog).
What leftists say when they say 'no WMD's' is 'No massive stockpiles of WMD's.'
There is still a significant amount of intelligence that points to collusion with Syria on the matter, in regards to carting it there for safekeeping.
But, that's neither here nor there. We DID find WMD's, anyone who says otherwise is either a) Willfully ignorant b) massively uninformed or c) Intentionally duplicitous.
I have no patience for any of those.
what. this is why i dont debate on forums, most ppl dont know what thier talking about. we knew he had chemical weapons, who doesnt. anybody can get chemical weapons like that, but we were worried about nuclear weapons. and no nuclear weapons were found. show me the reports of enrich uranium, not one time have i heard that and i would like to know
LOL i know we did i jsut meant it as that we did find "stockpiles" of WMD.Quote:
Originally Posted by malfeas99
I think we should let the President speak for himself straight from the elephants mouth about how much he loves our children. So Mr. President, what do you think about your party's 50 billion dollar cut taken out of (student loan subsidies, child support enforcement and aid to firms hurt by unfair trade practices) ?http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051026/...ss_budget_cutshttp://imagecache2.allposters.com/im...TA/23445GB.jpg
It's not my job to find basic information for you that is readily available. Do your own homework.Quote:
Originally Posted by TIGERJC
Not to mention you are completely wrong about the definition of WMD's to begin with.
all i have to say is back it up, but do u know how many countries have chemical weapons. wow, nuclear is what the usa made a case for. yes saddam was bad man, but thier are atleast 30 dictators like him in the world, and nuclear weapons was the only way the prez could get ppl on to iraq, not once have i heard they foung these moving chemical factories or any hard evidence of nuclear weapons
thank you, but you friend up above said we saw them taking them away by sat. but our sat couldnt track where they took the weapons.Quote:
Originally Posted by TIGERJC
Sat. can only watch a certain area for a certain amount of time!Quote:
Originally Posted by stikiller
u have been watching to much 24 on fox.
Dam really so we do have sat. that can see through the earth!!!! WOW i have been not heard of that yet!
Look, I can post pics tooQuote:
Originally Posted by djmaddmartin
http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1998/...in/clinton.jpg
"I did not have sexual relations with that woman"
And here's the defeinition of WMD's from Wikipedia (not once did they say they were looking specifically for nuclear weapons)Quote:
Originally Posted by TIGERJC
Weapons of mass destruction (WMD) generally include nuclear, biological, chemical and, increasingly, radiological weapons. The term first arose in 1937 in reference to the mass destruction of Guernica, Spain, by aerial bombardment. Following the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and progressing through the Cold War, the term came to refer more to non-conventional weapons.
my point did we find any nuclear weapons, uuuhhhh no. thats why powel resign, b/c he was made to look like a fool