[Doofy]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

So, I want to know what the main dispute is here...

Quite simple really.

It's people with ambition vs lazy bastards wanting to ride the coat-tails of those with ambition.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

Quite simple really.

It's people with ambition vs lazy bastards wanting to ride the coat-tails of those with ambition.

I don't think I even want to try to decipher this, nor your last post, but thanks for sharing your take on this...

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

I don't think I even want to try to decipher this

You don't need to decipher it. It's the most basic form of the discussion you're having, and can't be simplified any further.

[besson3c]

What needs to be deciphered is the inference that the wisdom of the Bush tax cuts has something to do with ambition or laziness. I suppose what you are really saying is that the debate has to do with this philosophy, although I can't wrap my head around how this applies really (nor do I really want to).

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

(nor do I really want to).

And there's the truth of the matter.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

And there's the truth of the matter.

I don't want to because it is completely unreasonable. I'm trying to understand the reasonable argument and position.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

I don't want to because it is completely unreasonable.

There's nothing unreasonable about wanting to keep the money you've earned. All of it.

Did the government do 50% of the arguing with the idiot drummer? Did the government do 50% of the project's decision making? Did the government do 50% of the starving to build up 50% of the capital you needed to go into business in the first place?

[sek929]

You poor rich guys, I feel for you, I really do.

[besson3c]

Okay, so is the dispute over the Bush tax cuts purely on philosophical grounds, or is there anything involving the numbers, funding, connection between the cuts and job growth, or any other sorts of details?

If the dispute relates purely to philosophy, I'd like to understand the logical connection between this and wanting to reduce deficits and eliminate unfunded programs.

[screener]

There we go, the doofus reasoning.

[screener]

Here's some of the doofus reasoning,
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/26/op...d.html?_r=1&hp

Sharron Angle, the Republican Senate candidate from Nevada, suggested that autism — a word she uttered with air quotes — is a phony rubric. She suggested that people are taking advantage of such maladies to get extra health benefits, adding that she doesn’t see why she should have to subsidize maternity benefits for other people either, especially since, as she said, she’s not having any more babies.

[screener]

From the same piece,

In 2007, O’Donnell frantically warned Bill O’Reilly, “American scientific companies are crossbreeding humans and animals and coming up with mice with fully functioning human brains.”

How stupid are these wingnuts and those that support them.

[hyteckit]

Originally Posted by screener 

From the same piece,

How stupid are these wingnuts and those that support them.

Dude. Have you not seen Mickey Mouse, Little Stuart, and Pinky and the Brain?

Pinky and the Brain! Planning to take over the world.

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Yeah, we totally believe you're not the same twit just because you quote your alter ego!

Classic.

[hyteckit]

Originally Posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE 

Yeah, we totally believe you're not the same twit just because you quote your alter ego!

Classic.

CRASH HARDDRIVE (twit) <==> hyteckit (smart one)

Same person, alter ego. I just love quoting myself.

[screener]

Originally Posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE 

Yeah, we totally believe you're not the same twit just because you quote your alter ego!

Classic.

Twit?
Reported.

Twat.

[BadKosh]

Originally Posted by screener 

From the same piece,

How stupid are these wingnuts and those that support them.

Like the congresswoman who asked the MARTIAN rover team to drive it over to where the astronauts put the flag up.

[olePigeon]

Originally Posted by screener 

Twit?
Reported.

Twat.

Twit for twat.

[screener]

Originally Posted by BadKosh 

Like the congresswoman who asked the MARTIAN rover team to drive it over to where the astronauts put the flag up.

Right, a no name congresswoman.

O'Donnell and Angle got elected by their supporters by spouting crap.
So much for the intelligence of those that cast their votes, and those that think these twats will be good for the country.

[BadKosh]

Since googling is beyond screener.......


Sheila Jackson Lee - literally proved that she is no rocket scientist when she was invited to the NASA command center where scientists were driving the Mars Rover. Maxine was impressed by the maneuverability of the Rover and asked if they could drive it to the spot where the astronauts landed.

"Gaffes

In 2010, Jackson Lee stated that, "...victory had been achieved" by the United States in Vietnam. She went on to state, "Today, we have two Vietnams; side-by-side, North and South, exchanging and working. We may not agree with all that North Vietnam is doing, but they are living in peace. I would look for a better human rights record for North Vietnam, but they are living side by side. Because that was a civil war, and because the leadership of this nation did not listen to the mothers and fathers who beared...bore the burden of 58,000 dead and did not declare victory; the mounting deaths; the violence continued going up and up, rather than understanding the political nature of the war in Vietnam, we did not listen to those families."[13][14][15] In fact, the territories of North and South Vietnam were united under communist rule after the withdrawal of the United States in the 1970s.

In 2009, Jackson Lee reintroduced a proposal to amend the Constitution to guarantee the rights of women. "Twenty-seven other countries, including Rwanda, Afghanistan, Algeria and China have equality provisions," Lee said.[16] It is generally recognized that countries such as Afghanistan refuse to respect the rights of women.[17]

In 1997, during a subcommittee briefing, Jackson Lee asked a NASA scientist if the Mars Pathfinder had photographed the flag that Neil Armstrong had left on the moon."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sheila_Jackson_Lee

AND THIS: (so what do we really know?) Google "Mars Rover , Congresswoman" and it gives to of them! Maxine Waters and Lee. So much for verification of who said it. Lee has the better chance as she was on the house committees.

[screener]

Originally Posted by BadKosh 

Since googling is beyond screener.......


Maxine Waters - literally proved that she is no rocket scientist when she was invited to the NASA command center where scientists were driving the Mars Rover. Maxine was impressed by the maneuverability of the Rover and asked if they could drive it to the spot where the astronauts landed.

I see, on this forum you throw something out there, without links, and it's up to others to try and figure out WTF you're on about.

I guess pasting a link is beyond you.

[sek929]

Originally Posted by BadKosh 

Maxine Waters - literally proved that she is no rocket scientist when she was invited to the NASA command center where scientists were driving the Mars Rover. Maxine was impressed by the maneuverability of the Rover and asked if they could drive it to the spot where the astronauts landed.

What on Earth does this have to do with anything?

[Uncle Skeleton]

Originally Posted by sek929 

What on Earth does this have to do with anything?

It's another "twit for twat?"

[screener]

Originally Posted by Uncle Skeleton 

It's another "twit for twat?"

Twat for twat.

[BadKosh]

Originally Posted by screener 

Right, a no name congresswoman.

O'Donnell and Angle got elected by their supporters by spouting crap.
So much for the intelligence of those that cast their votes, and those that think these twats will be good for the country.

And then I added in an idiot lib to illustrate that being stupid isn't the realm of left or right. You asked for a name. You got it.

[olePigeon]

Originally Posted by BadKosh 

Derp derp Derp derp derp derp derp liberals derp derp derp derp stupid derp derp derp derp derp derp derp. Derp derp derp derp derp. Derp derp derp.

I ran it through the BadKosh filter, this'll help get his point across.

[screener]

Originally Posted by BadKosh 

And then I added in an idiot lib to illustrate that being stupid isn't the realm of left or right. You asked for a name. You got it.

Without a name it could have most probably been another idiot repub.

Angle and O'Donnlell ran and were elected for their idiocy by other idiots.
Waters' gaffe isn't a platform she's running on.
You're gonna have to do better, with links.

[Laminar]

Originally Posted by olePigeon 

I ran it through the BadKosh filter, this'll help get his point across.

Ba hahaha.

[screener]

Originally Posted by olePigeon 

I ran it through the BadKosh filter, this'll help get his point across.

[OAW]

So BadKosh ...

Is it Maxine Waters or Sheila Jackson-Lee? Your story (and your post) seem to keep changing on this.

OAW

[screener]

Originally Posted by OAW 

So BadKosh ...

Is it Maxine Waters or Sheila Jackson-Lee? Your story (and your post) seem to keep changing on this.

OAW

Libs, they're all the same, Right?

[BadKosh]

Originally Posted by OAW 

So BadKosh ...

Is it Maxine Waters or Sheila Jackson-Lee? Your story (and your post) seem to keep changing on this.

OAW

Your guess is as good as mine. Google has the 'semi-quote' attributed to each of them.

[BadKosh]

Originally Posted by screener 

Libs, they're all the same, Right?

No, the ones in Canada are even worse.

[screener]

Originally Posted by BadKosh 

No, the ones in Canada are even worse.

I'm so glad I live in Canada, we eat repubtards for breakfast and settle the reverberations with our version of Alka-Seltzer, more bang for the buck, like our beer.

[andi*pandi]

It's interesting, google can't give a real source for Sheila Jackson and the Mars Pathfinder quote. It also changes dates. The most common references are in the comments of blogs.

Unfortunately, snopes hasn't weighed in.

[The Final Dakar]

Do you ever get tired of being the voice of reason?

[SpaceMonkey]

I don't know. The people behind Snopes live in the San Fernando Valley, CA. I bet they're Libs.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by BadKosh 

Google has the 'semi-quote' attributed to each of them.

Which lends *so much* of credence to the claim.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by BadKosh 

Sheila Jackson Lee - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Interesting how *now* Wikipedia is a reliable source.

[andi*pandi]

Check wiki's source.

[andi*pandi]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

Do you ever get tired of being the voice of reason?

It's a burden, yes.

[hyteckit]

Originally Posted by screener 

Libs, they're all the same, Right?

You can't blame badkosh.

I mean Sheila Jackson Lee and Maxine Waters are both black and they are both woman.

How the hell do you expect him to know the difference between the two?

For all we know, it's just the same black woman with two different names.


Sheila Jackson Lee or Maxine Waters
Katrina or Catrina
Norfolk or Nofolk

[besson3c]

0bama Nobama

[CreepDogg]

Originally Posted by SpaceMonkey 

I bet they're Libs.

Except the ones that are Dems!

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

YouTube - Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee on North and South Vietnam!

Jackson Lee's 'North/South Vietnam' bit is far funnier than the Mars rover quote for its breathtaking stupidity. Gee, I wonder did she really say it? She has a history of saying the most blatantly stupid shit, and never knowing what the hell she's talking about, so the Mars/moon quote is no big surprise from her.

Is it really so hard for some people to face up to the fact that congress is mostly a bunch of total dolts, not to be trusted to be able to keep from drowning themselves in the rain, let alone be given even more money and power than they already abuse and mismanage?

[olePigeon]

Originally Posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE 

Jackson Lee's 'North/South Vietnam' bit is far funnier than the Mars rover quote for its breathtaking stupidity. Gee, I wonder did she really say it? She has a history of saying the most blatantly stupid shit, and never knowing what the hell she's talking about, so the Mars/moon quote is no big surprise from her.

I bet she's Christine O'Donnell Democratic alter ego. I would dearly love to see a debate between the two.

O'Donnell: We didn't go to the moon! It was fake!
Jackson Lee: You idiot! What's next, you're gonna tell me we didn't land on Mars, either!?

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Originally Posted by olePigeon 

I bet she's Christine O'Donnell Democratic alter ego. I would dearly love to see a debate between the two.

O'Donnell: We didn't go to the moon! It was fake!
Jackson Lee: You idiot! What's next, you're gonna tell me we didn't land on Mars, either!?

I'd love to see a debate between dolts who want any of these clowns having authority over their healthcare or wealth.

Actually, no I wouldn't. One can already read a lot of the 'arguments' and peanut gallery chatter on here to get the general idea.

[smacintush]

Originally Posted by OldManMac 

When people who have worked their entire lives, and who have negotiated a pension and other benefits at retirement, have that taken away by their employer, while the main executives who took these benefits away get raises and bonuses for doing so, that is taking something away against someone's will. That is also morally wrong.

I don't completely disagree. If there is an agreement in place it should be honored. However, part of this agreement is also the understanding that future business concerns, changes in company leadership, the state of the industry and the economy may all have a positive or negative effect on the company and thus its policies on wages and benefits.

The problem is that you are generalizing. These things aren't the norm, and none of this has anything to do with "rich people." It has to do with the decisions made by certain individuals. Suggesting that they are immoral and need to be treated a certain way by the tax code, regulations etc. is like saying that all poor people are bad because some rob and steal.

The working class of this country is seeing the benefits decline rapidly, while a select few at the top are seeing their income and benefits rise meteorically. No one earns tens of millions of dollars annually, often for dismissing employees, simply to move numbers around to benefit a select few. If you don't care when that happens to you, there is something wrong with both you and your employer.

It's not a matter of caring when things like this happen. I have had some of these issues over the years I have worked for a large corporation and I do care.

It is a matter of understanding that I am not entitled to anything from them. It's not my money and I have no "right" to it. They created my job, not because it is their duty, or because it is morally right to do so. They created it to help THEM make money. When they desire to make more money or spend less, and they take steps that affect me that is their right. I don't expect them to run their company for the sake of my benefit any more than I would be expected to run my household for the benefit of them, or anyone else outside my family.

They need apologizing for being ruthless, greedy, moral criminals, who prey on others, especially when they are often deemed as pillars of their community by various civic and religious institutions. The hypocrisy of these individuals and groups reeks to high heaven.

Again with the baseless generalizations. Do you really think that you are describing all…or even most…rich people? Do you have any evidence at all that this describes all or most? No. You don't.

Those who keep trying to practice this so-called trickle down economics know that they're simply trying to find innumerable ways to fool the less educated and gullible into supporting policies that are against the welfare of the working class, but they never cease trying, because they are morally bankrupt, and aren't concerned with anyone's well being except their own. The rich don't need any more tax cuts.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/26/bu...e&ref=business

It's not a matter of what they "need." It's a matter of what right you or anyone else has to their money or to make judgements about how they manage it. It's not yours and it's not mine. They are not obligated to use it to benefit anyone, morally or otherwise, anymore than you are your money.

Having said all that, you are stating all these opinions in the context of a discussion of a tax cut for people who make $250,000 or more. These aren't just the 1%ers with three private jets, yachts, and 20 homes. These are small business people who ARE the ones who create jobs. THEY create them, with their own money and by the merit of their own minds and their own efforts. To argue that they don't "need" or "deserve" to keep their own money is baseless, irrational and morally wrong.

[BadKosh]

If you started a business, which then grew and you hired more folks, built a bigger place to do business and, as the years went by, you had a few thousand folks working for you and your business product was in demand, what would you be doing? Would you still be paying yourself 25K a year? Of course not. probably more like a million a year and full benefits. After all you earned it. The "Punish the successful" attitude is unfair. That is why the Liberal JERKS think it's OK. They will never be successful, but only jealous. Class warfare. The current Dem leaders don't understand this at all. Of course unsuccessful lawyers and car dealers fill the House, so it's no wonder.

[torsoboy]

I don't understand why someone making $250k a year is now labeled as "rich." It is totally dependent on the area in which they live. In some places you can't even buy a small home on that salary, and to label those people as "rich" is ridiculous.

I agree with Doofy 100% on this thread's topic. The people earning higher wages should not pay a higher tax rate. Heck, I would even support a tax cap for individuals... everyone pays xx% of their salary up to $yyyyyy per year. Having top earners paying everyone else's salaries (by creating jobs/businesses), and having them paying half of all their employees' taxes (which they already do), and paying a significantly higher percentage of their income to taxes is not something I support. And I am not "rich" by any definition of the word.