Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
The ODS is strong in the OP.
OMG!
Another no-effort, no IQ Liberal.
Back to the dumb row.
Oh...so to br considered "intelligent" I need to cut and paste someone else's opinion?
Yup I was right...ODS.
Errors? I am still looking for relevance?
You are a fool.
1. Va is in the United States
2. Barack Obama is the President of the United States.
3. This President has done an atrocious job at managing the economy.
4.The OP explains why: he is an ideologue.
5. On the off-chance that you didn't understand the meaning of the vocabulary you chose,
rel·e·vance (rl-vns)
n.
1. Pertinence to the matter at hand.
Dunce.
Who's afraid of the Big Bad Wolf..oh..that would be you..Red Riding Hood.
1. Bwuh?
2. Yes he is..and by winning both the Electoral college and the popular vote.
3. By "atrocious" I suppose you are using Bush's economy as a benchmark. I'll take atrocious over that.
4. As are you.
5. Physician heal thy self.
And you do know what happens to Red Riding Hood in the end..don't ya? And I mean the real Grimm's Brother ending..not the "cleaned up" version..
Scary!
So, to sum up your inflammatory rhetorical drivel:
Taxation "without" economic basis = A Religious belief
Oh wow.. I mean really.. Oh, wow..
Just when I think you can not get any more stupid, you proceed to blow my mind. What an amazing "woman".
I think I am in love.
Can someone remind me why we should favor money placed in financial capital over money placed in people?
My father was an industrial chemist - I am not.
Your post, sweet darling, is crap.
I note that you didn't specify any specific errors....
...was that so that I couldn't take you to the woodshed?
Errors? I am still looking for relevance?
You are a fool.
1. Va is in the United States
2. Barack Obama is the President of the United States.
3. This President has done an atrocious job at managing the economy.
4.The OP explains why: he is an ideologue.
5. On the off-chance that you didn't understand the meaning of the vocabulary you chose,
rel·e·vance (rl-vns)
n.
1. Pertinence to the matter at hand.
Dunce.
Who's afraid of the Big Bad Wolf..oh..that would be you..Red Riding Hood.
1. Bwuh?
2. Yes he is..and by winning both the Electoral college and the popular vote.
3. By "atrocious" I suppose you are using Bush's economy as a benchmark. I'll take atrocious over that.
4. As are you.
5. Physician heal thy self.
And you do know what happens to Red Riding Hood in the end..don't ya? And I mean the real Grimm's Brother ending..not the "cleaned up" version..
Scary!
My father was an industrial chemist - I am not.
Your post, sweet darling, is crap.
Assuming a fact not in evidence.
My father was an industrial chemist - I am not.
Your post, sweet darling, is crap.
Can someone remind me why we should favor money placed in financial capital over money placed in people?
Shouldn't you first be reminded that it was a mistake to cease your education at the fifth grade level?
My father was an industrial chemist - I am not.
Your post, sweet darling, is crap.
I note that you didn't specify any specific errors....
...was that so that I couldn't take you to the woodshed?
He pointed out the specific error that you cited a bunch of history about Obama's father and then magically applied it to the president.
By that premise, since Mitt Romney's father grew up as a Mormon, in a church that was for most of that man's life officially racist,
then we can fairly conclude that Mitt Romney's real religion is the racist Mormonism of the past.
Now find the errors in that.
My father was an industrial chemist - I am not.
Your post, sweet darling, is crap.
Your father was a no good terrorist, jew-hating cock-sucker and you are, well, the same! PC's post hold's water! You are talking apples to oranges. It's about a political philosophy getting handed down, not a career path.
Many times the political philosophy (like religion) of the father (parents) is inherited by the son. Not all the time, but many times. Anyone with half a brain (I don't include you there), can easily see Obama is pushing an agenda that his father would be proud of!
I note that you didn't specify any specific errors....
...was that so that I couldn't take you to the woodshed?
He pointed out the specific error that you cited a bunch of history about Obama's father and then magically applied it to the president.
By that premise, since Mitt Romney's father grew up as a Mormon, in a church that was for most of that man's life officially racist,
then we can fairly conclude that Mitt Romney's real religion is the racist Mormonism of the past.
Now find the errors in that.
1. In 1965, Barack Obama, Sr. wrote in the East Africa Journal the following: We need to eliminate power structures that have been built through excessive accumulation so that not only a few individuals shall control a vast magnitude of resources as is the case now. How? Well, the state can take over large segments of the commercial or private sector. And, he said, there is no reason to worry about economic freedom or individual rights We have to look at priorities in terms of what is good for society and on this basis we may find it necessary to force people to do things they would not do otherwise.
2. In an article from 1965 entitled Problems Facing Our Socialism, Barack Obamas father stated: Theoretically, there is nothing that can stop the government from taxing 100% of income so long as the people get benefits from the government commensurate with their income which is taxed. . . It is a fallacy to say there is a limit (to tax rates), and it is a fallacy to rely mainly on individual free enterprise to get the savings. Barack Obama Sr. "Tax 100% of income." Like Father, Like Son? | Peace . Gold . Liberty | Revolution
3. Lets examine the kind of thinking of the Left, the kind that supports there is nothing that can stop the government from taxing 100% of income Economist Arthur Laffer states that there are two levels of taxation that produce identical levels of revenue, both producing zero. The first case is obvious: a government tax rate of zero it takes no money. A 100% tax rate produces the same result: taking everything gives absolutely no incentive to work.
a. Is it possible that there is a gene for Leftist thinking???? And our President inherited it???
4. No? Well, then how does Mr. Obama, junior justify doubling the capital gains and dividend tax rate to 30 percent from 15 percent today? The motivation, it seems, is the basic issue of tax fairness: This is a recurrent theme for Obama. In a 2008 debate between Obama and Hillary Clinton, ABCs Charles Gibson asked Obama why he would support raising capital-gains taxes given the historical record of governments losing net revenue as a result. Well, Charlie, what Ive said is that I would look at raising the capital-gains tax for purposes of fairness, Obama replied. This moment revealed that Obama isnt simply or even primarily interested in raising taxes for economic reasons (e.g., raising revenues or spurring growth). He sees taxes through a moral prism, as an instrument to advance fairness, which he takes to mean leveling higher taxes on wealthy Americans in order to decrease income inequality. Liberals, Conservatives and Tax Fairness « Commentary Magazine
a. Liberal folks regularly complain about religion in the public arena, carping about turning our nation into a theocracy .but without an economic basis for taxation, it is no more than a religious belief to set policy on such a basis.
But Obama, sr and jr represent the socialist religion that is undergoing a 'reformation' elsewhere....
5. "The EU's welfare states are going broke, and the knives are out for their budgets and the politicians who have supported the EU project. Voters to the north are electing anti-EU candidates who are lecturing about "responsibility" and "thriftiness" to profligate neighbors such as the "lazy" Greeks, Spanish and Portuguese, as German Chancellor Angela Merkel described her southern partners in May.
European Council President Herman Van Rompuy summed up Europe's situation: "We can't finance our social model anymore."
In Europe, economic meltdown tears at unity
Our President is not smart enough to catch what is blowin' in the wind.
Assuming a fact not in evidence.
You need evidence to believe a statment?
Cool, let's use that same brush and paint it all over your OP.
Care to copy/paste another hit piece, in reply? Maybe delete a few words here and there to make it seem like it is "yours"?
Neo-nitwit.
Can someone remind me why we should favor money placed in financial capital over money placed in people?
Shouldn't you first be reminded that it was a mistake to cease your education at the fifth grade level?
...Oh the irony. Let it be noted that you completely avoided answering my question.
Let's try this: Answer the question for a change. Why should our tax code favor financial capital over human capital?
1. In 1965, Barack Obama, Sr. wrote in the East Africa Journal the following: We need to eliminate power structures that have been built through excessive accumulation so that not only a few individuals shall control a vast magnitude of resources as is the case now. How? Well, the state can take over large segments of the commercial or private sector. And, he said, there is no reason to worry about economic freedom or individual rights We have to look at priorities in terms of what is good for society and on this basis we may find it necessary to force people to do things they would not do otherwise.
2. In an article from 1965 entitled Problems Facing Our Socialism, Barack Obamas father stated: Theoretically, there is nothing that can stop the government from taxing 100% of income so long as the people get benefits from the government commensurate with their income which is taxed. . . It is a fallacy to say there is a limit (to tax rates), and it is a fallacy to rely mainly on individual free enterprise to get the savings. Barack Obama Sr. "Tax 100% of income." Like Father, Like Son? | Peace . Gold . Liberty | Revolution
3. Lets examine the kind of thinking of the Left, the kind that supports there is nothing that can stop the government from taxing 100% of income Economist Arthur Laffer states that there are two levels of taxation that produce identical levels of revenue, both producing zero. The first case is obvious: a government tax rate of zero it takes no money. A 100% tax rate produces the same result: taking everything gives absolutely no incentive to work.
a. Is it possible that there is a gene for Leftist thinking???? And our President inherited it???
4. No? Well, then how does Mr. Obama, junior justify doubling the capital gains and dividend tax rate to 30 percent from 15 percent today? The motivation, it seems, is the basic issue of tax fairness: This is a recurrent theme for Obama. In a 2008 debate between Obama and Hillary Clinton, ABCs Charles Gibson asked Obama why he would support raising capital-gains taxes given the historical record of governments losing net revenue as a result. Well, Charlie, what Ive said is that I would look at raising the capital-gains tax for purposes of fairness, Obama replied. This moment revealed that Obama isnt simply or even primarily interested in raising taxes for economic reasons (e.g., raising revenues or spurring growth). He sees taxes through a moral prism, as an instrument to advance fairness, which he takes to mean leveling higher taxes on wealthy Americans in order to decrease income inequality. Liberals, Conservatives and Tax Fairness « Commentary Magazine
a. Liberal folks regularly complain about religion in the public arena, carping about turning our nation into a theocracy .but without an economic basis for taxation, it is no more than a religious belief to set policy on such a basis.
But Obama, sr and jr represent the socialist religion that is undergoing a 'reformation' elsewhere....
5. "The EU's welfare states are going broke, and the knives are out for their budgets and the politicians who have supported the EU project. Voters to the north are electing anti-EU candidates who are lecturing about "responsibility" and "thriftiness" to profligate neighbors such as the "lazy" Greeks, Spanish and Portuguese, as German Chancellor Angela Merkel described her southern partners in May.
European Council President Herman Van Rompuy summed up Europe's situation: "We can't finance our social model anymore."
In Europe, economic meltdown tears at unity
Our President is not smart enough to catch what is blowin' in the wind.
Wow....All this for a man President Obama met once in his life
