For all you Wrongpublicans supporting the 'Fair Tax'

[bripat9643]

I don't think you fully understood what I wrote. I'll restate it:
If Amendment XVI is repealed and replaced in one stroke with proper legislation that could not be messed with to favor political cronies and produce the required Federal revenue, fine. Doing it piecemeal would require trust of those legislating, but who in their right mind has that much trust in either of the two corrupt major factions?

These are the same imbeciles and criminals you trust now to implement the income tax.

You obviously enjoy ranting without thinking or paying any attention to another's thoughts written out before you. So I'll parse it for you in small bites to help your understanding. But something tells me you'll still react like the small child in your avatar.

PAY ATTENTION NOW:

So long as the 16th is repealed, where's the "insanity?" It's much smarter to tax consumption that to tax earning. It's also far simpler. The FAIR tax would make all the special exemptions we have in the current code a lot more difficult.

A Fair tax isn't fair at all. The Fair tax bills proposed by the 113th Congress DO NOT PROVIDE FOR THE REPEAL OF AMENDMENT XVI, only the 1986 tax code, WHICH WAS AN AMENDMENT TO THE 1954 TAX CODE IN TITLE 26 OF THE US CODE. That is the insanity that you fail to recognize! Repeal of Amendment XVI would be required, which would nullify Title 26. HOWEVER, the action of repeal of Amendment XVI would reinstate the original enumeration tax and the bar to other taxes per Article I Sec. 9. A whole new can of worms, eh?

I realize your definition of "fair" means looting the wealthy for everything they've got above bare subsistence, but no one gives a shit about your opinion on the subject. Whether it's "fair" or not is purely a matter of opinion. Those of us who aren't two-bit Marxist thugs don't believe people should pay a higher percentage simply because they make more. That's the mentality of a thug, not of a civilized human being.

I also do not fail to recognize that the bill does not repeal the 16th Amendment. I have already pointed out that has to be done in a separate legislation. You don't combine amendments to the Constitution with complex tax legislation. I also am perfectly aware of the fact that repealing the 16th would repeal all the legislation based on it. That's exactly the point. It's not a "can of worms." It's the desired result. Only a congenital retard would want to keep that reeking pile of horseshit.

I have to laugh at your assertion that the Fair tax would make special exemptions "more difficult". Are you so naïve as to believe those devious bastards in Congress couldn't easily find a workaround for their corporate cronies? Laughable!

It's pretty obvious that it would. The FAIR tax would operate just like a state sales tax, and we don't see states creating thousands of exemptions for that. With an income tax, income has to be defined. That means thousands upon thousands of special circumstances have to be considered by necessity. That's an invitation for politicians to do favors in exchange for campaign donations. There is no necessity for any consideration of circumstances with a sales tax. The politicians will not be able to introduce such exemptions in 2000 page tax bills as they would with an income tax. With a consumption tax the voters will be aware of any favors the politicians attempt to grant. The odds of any being approved are much lower. Furthermore, the tax applies only to final consumption goods. It appears only when the consumer makes a purchase, not when a manufacturer buys parts or raw materials. The consumer will always know exactly how much tax he is paying on which items. Why would the consumer approve of an exemption on, say, luxury yachts? They simply won't.

AGAIN, PAY ATTENTION:

These are the same imbeciles and criminals you trust now to implement the income tax.

That is either a figment of your imagination, a demented projection of your own state or some other runaway fantasy of yours. I trust those bastards like I would trust the fabled coyote.

It's not a figment of my imagination. You've made it plain that you are content with the current system. That means you are content to let liars and criminals write the rules of the tax system you must comply with. If not, then what do you propose as an alternative?

 

[ThoughtCrimes]

These are the same imbeciles and criminals you trust now to implement the income tax.

You obviously enjoy ranting without thinking or paying any attention to another's thoughts written out before you. So I'll parse it for you in small bites to help your understanding. But something tells me you'll still react like the small child in your avatar.

PAY ATTENTION NOW:


A Fair tax isn't fair at all. The Fair tax bills proposed by the 113th Congress DO NOT PROVIDE FOR THE REPEAL OF AMENDMENT XVI, only the 1986 tax code, WHICH WAS AN AMENDMENT TO THE 1954 TAX CODE IN TITLE 26 OF THE US CODE. That is the insanity that you fail to recognize! Repeal of Amendment XVI would be required, which would nullify Title 26. HOWEVER, the action of repeal of Amendment XVI would reinstate the original enumeration tax and the bar to other taxes per Article I Sec. 9. A whole new can of worms, eh?

I realize your definition of "fair" means looting the wealthy for everything they've got above bare subsistence, but no one gives a shit about your opinion on the subject. Whether it's "fair" or not is purely a matter of opinion. Those of us who aren't two-bit Marxist thugs don't believe people should pay a higher percentage simply because they make more. That's the mentality of a thug, not of a civilized human being.

I also do not fail to recognize that the bill does not repeal the 16th Amendment. I have already pointed out that has to be done in a separate legislation. You don't combine amendments to the Constitution with complex tax legislation. I also am perfectly aware of the fact that repealing the 16th would repeal all the legislation based on it. That's exactly the point. It's not a "can of worms." It's the desired result. Only a congenital retard would want to keep that reeking pile of horseshit.
Those two paragraphs dance around every salient point made to avoid addressing them directly. You refuse to address it because either you don't see or refuse to recognize that reinstatement of the enumeration clause of Article I Sec 9 would render any "fair tax" scheme unconstitutional! The horseshit is part of the can of worms you're pushing in your ignorance.


It's pretty obvious that it would. The FAIR tax would operate just like a state sales tax, and we don't see states creating thousands of exemptions for that. With an income tax, income has to be defined. That means thousands upon thousands of special circumstances have to be considered by necessity. That's an invitation for politicians to do favors in exchange for campaign donations. There is no necessity for any consideration of circumstances with a sales tax. The politicians will not be able to introduce such exemptions in 2000 page tax bills as they would with an income tax. With a consumption tax the voters will be aware of any favors the politicians attempt to grant. The odds of any being approved are much lower. Furthermore, the tax applies only to final consumption goods. It appears only when the consumer makes a purchase, not when a manufacturer buys parts or raw materials. The consumer will always know exactly how much tax he is paying on which items. Why would the consumer approve of an exemption on, say, luxury yachts? They simply won't.
The "Fair tax" would never operate if Amendment XVI were repealed. It would be unconstitutional on its face conflicting with the reinstated enumeration clause. Get that through your head.

AGAIN, PAY ATTENTION:

These are the same imbeciles and criminals you trust now to implement the income tax.

That is either a figment of your imagination, a demented projection of your own state or some other runaway fantasy of yours. I trust those bastards like I would trust the fabled coyote.

It's not a figment of my imagination. You've made it plain that you are content with the current system. That means you are content to let liars and criminals write the rules of the tax system you must comply with. If not, then what do you propose as an alternative?
You don't want to know what I might propose. You've already made up your mind, so it's moot. You're ignorant of the facts, and will likely insist on staying in your state of blissful unawareness. Your ridiculous leaps of logic in your assertions of my political positions are equally as foolish!

...

 

[Stephanie]

who can take anyone serious with a title like that?

 

[bripat9643]

You obviously enjoy ranting without thinking or paying any attention to another's thoughts written out before you. So I'll parse it for you in small bites to help your understanding. But something tells me you'll still react like the small child in your avatar.

PAY ATTENTION NOW:


A Fair tax isn't fair at all. The Fair tax bills proposed by the 113th Congress DO NOT PROVIDE FOR THE REPEAL OF AMENDMENT XVI, only the 1986 tax code, WHICH WAS AN AMENDMENT TO THE 1954 TAX CODE IN TITLE 26 OF THE US CODE. That is the insanity that you fail to recognize! Repeal of Amendment XVI would be required, which would nullify Title 26. HOWEVER, the action of repeal of Amendment XVI would reinstate the original enumeration tax and the bar to other taxes per Article I Sec. 9. A whole new can of worms, eh?

I realize your definition of "fair" means looting the wealthy for everything they've got above bare subsistence, but no one gives a shit about your opinion on the subject. Whether it's "fair" or not is purely a matter of opinion. Those of us who aren't two-bit Marxist thugs don't believe people should pay a higher percentage simply because they make more. That's the mentality of a thug, not of a civilized human being.

I also do not fail to recognize that the bill does not repeal the 16th Amendment. I have already pointed out that has to be done in a separate legislation. You don't combine amendments to the Constitution with complex tax legislation. I also am perfectly aware of the fact that repealing the 16th would repeal all the legislation based on it. That's exactly the point. It's not a "can of worms." It's the desired result. Only a congenital retard would want to keep that reeking pile of horseshit.

Those two paragraphs dance around every salient point made to avoid addressing them directly. You refuse to address it because either you don't see or refuse to recognize that reinstatement of the enumeration clause of Article I Sec 9 would render any "fair tax" scheme unconstitutional! The horseshit is part of the can of worms you're pushing in your ignorance.

Wrong, asshole. They "dance around" nothing. Your claims are simply false. They are bald faced lies, pure and simple. The FAIR tax would be just as constitutional as any excise tax. In fact, it is a national sales tax. It doesn't violate article I section 9 in any way. The FAIR tax is a tax on the sale of goods. It's not a capitation tax. You have to be an absolute moron to believe otherwise. You don't like the FAIR tax because it would abolish your cherished means for looting the wealthy, so you invent spurious objections to it. Only other morons like you are fooled.

It's pretty obvious that it would. The FAIR tax would operate just like a state sales tax, and we don't see states creating thousands of exemptions for that. With an income tax, income has to be defined. That means thousands upon thousands of special circumstances have to be considered by necessity. That's an invitation for politicians to do favors in exchange for campaign donations. There is no necessity for any consideration of circumstances with a sales tax. The politicians will not be able to introduce such exemptions in 2000 page tax bills as they would with an income tax. With a consumption tax the voters will be aware of any favors the politicians attempt to grant. The odds of any being approved are much lower. Furthermore, the tax applies only to final consumption goods. It appears only when the consumer makes a purchase, not when a manufacturer buys parts or raw materials. The consumer will always know exactly how much tax he is paying on which items. Why would the consumer approve of an exemption on, say, luxury yachts? They simply won't.

The "Fair tax" would never operate if Amendment XVI were repealed. It would be unconstitutional on its face conflicting with the reinstated enumeration clause. Get that through your head. ]

Wrong again, you ignorant asshole. The FAIR tax is not a capitation tax. It's as legal as a tariff or an excise tax according to Article I section 9.

AGAIN, PAY ATTENTION:

That is either a figment of your imagination, a demented projection of your own state or some other runaway fantasy of yours. I trust those bastards like I would trust the fabled coyote.

It's not a figment of my imagination. You've made it plain that you are content with the current system. That means you are content to let liars and criminals write the rules of the tax system you must comply with. If not, then what do you propose as an alternative?
You don't want to know what I might propose. You've already made up your mind, so it's moot. You're ignorant of the facts, and will likely insist on staying in your state of blissful unawareness. Your ridiculous leaps of logic in your assertions of my political positions are equally as foolish!

...

I really don't give a shit what you would propose. It's obvious you favor the status quo because, like any thug, you support looting the wealthy. You will never surrender the machinery for doing so. You're nothing but an obstacle to be gotten around. Your opinion is of no importance to anyone who can think.

Every objection to the FAIR tax is a lie. I've heard them all, and yours are nothing new. You're just another lying liberal piece of crap.

 

[bripat9643]

who can take anyone serious with a title like that?

I think he was thinking of his own ideas when he name himself "thoughtcrimes." However, a more accurate title would be "idiocies."

 

[g5000]

LiberalMedia, you made so many retarded posts in a row, and my life is too short to address them all right now, so I will just start with this one:

Well would you look at that--it's not a "fair tax" at all, but rather the FairTax™, which would crush the middle class and absolutely slaughter the lower class by introducing a nearly 30% federal sales tax, on top of whatever your state and local sales taxes are.

You complain in this post about a "slaughter" of the lower class with this consumption tax, but in your next post you whine about the PREBATE which eliminates the regressive nature of it!

I can't tell if you are stupid or dishonest, but it is one or the other. Perhaps both.

Keep in mind, Wrongpublicans, that the FairTax™ does not abolish state income taxes, nor does it touch local property taxes.

Keep in mind, retard, the current federal income tax system does not abolish state income taxes, nor does it touch local property taxes.

So your point is utterly moot.

A typical North Carolina resident, for example will be paying an 8% state income tax, a sales tax of 7-8% in most places (this depends upon exactly where you live), and a 30% federal sales tax.

For most people living in poverty, that federal sales tax is returned to them in the prebate. In fact, they may get more money from the prebate than they spend in federal sales tax, thus actually coming out ahead financially.

 

[g5000]

If you are poor, your prebate will make up for any Fair Tax you pay each month. You may even come out ahead.

A 30 percent tax on consumption is superior to a 30 percent tax on production (which is what an income tax is). You can pay 30 percent at the register for your purchases, or 30 percent on April 15 on your total income.

However, every economist will tell you that consumption taxes are superior to taxes on production.


The biggest problem I have with the Fair Tax is that it is inevitable it will be corrupted just the same as the income tax has been corrupted. Politicians will receive large campaign contributions for putting carve-outs in the Fair Tax code. The dairy industry will get exemptions for milk, and things will rapidly be destroyed from there. Corruption by increments.

There isn't a tax scheme in the world which will ever succeed so long as politicians have the power to make carve-outs, exemptions, deductions, etc.

So before you reform taxes, you first must reform the power our politicians have.

 

[bripat9643]

If you are poor, your prebate will make up for any Fair Tax you pay each month. You may even come out ahead.

A 30 percent tax on consumption is superior to a 30 percent tax on production (which is what an income tax is). You can pay 30 percent at the register for your purchases, or 30 percent on April 15 on your total income.

However, every economist will tell you that consumption taxes are superior to taxes on production.


The biggest problem I have with the Fair Tax is that it is inevitable it will be corrupted just the same as the income tax has been corrupted. Politicians will receive large campaign contributions for putting carve-outs in the Fair Tax code. The dairy industry will get exemptions for milk, and things will rapidly be destroyed from there. Corruption by increments.

There isn't a tax scheme in the world which will ever succeed so long as politicians have the power to make carve-outs, exemptions, deductions, etc.

So before you reform taxes, you first must reform the power our politicians have.

The evidence that you're wrong is the fact that virtually every state in the union has a sales tax, but state governments haven't engaged in the kind of "carve outs" that you describe. A few have exceptions for food, but that's about it. the voters simply aren't going to tolerate granting exemptions to every retail product under the sun.

 

[Youch]

Hey I can see that you are new to posting on this site. But I also noticed you've been drinking the Repub cool aid for some time now.

Hey was it the poor people that wrote the tax code so they qualify for the Earned Income Tax credit? Who wrote that law and why did they do it?

No, the federal income tax was first introduced by progressives. Liberalism has been infecting all aspects of our society since the 19teens. First Wilson, then Roosevelt, then Johnson, and now the most dangerous man that has ever held the Office. Libs (of either political party) use it to confiscate private property to fund their increasing power base (over all of us). The most dangerous part of that is, they are just getting started.

Excellent first post. Welcome to the forum.

The only obstacle is showing the dependency class that they actually pay a shit ton of taxes in the end product of what they're buying even if it's with someone else's money. There are so many taxes unseen that take place before a commodity even hits the shelves that increase the price of that product. Wipe those out and the price of the product is reduced.
[/COLOR]

Agreed.

I look forward to debating the dude with the Madow avatar....

 

[ThoughtCrimes]

I realize your definition of "fair" means looting the wealthy for everything they've got above bare subsistence, but no one gives a shit about your opinion on the subject. Whether it's "fair" or not is purely a matter of opinion. Those of us who aren't two-bit Marxist thugs don't believe people should pay a higher percentage simply because they make more. That's the mentality of a thug, not of a civilized human being.

I also do not fail to recognize that the bill does not repeal the 16th Amendment. I have already pointed out that has to be done in a separate legislation. You don't combine amendments to the Constitution with complex tax legislation. I also am perfectly aware of the fact that repealing the 16th would repeal all the legislation based on it. That's exactly the point. It's not a "can of worms." It's the desired result. Only a congenital retard would want to keep that reeking pile of horseshit.

Those two paragraphs dance around every salient point made to avoid addressing them directly. You refuse to address it because either you don't see or refuse to recognize that reinstatement of the enumeration clause of Article I Sec 9 would render any "fair tax" scheme unconstitutional! The horseshit is part of the can of worms you're pushing in your ignorance.

Wrong, asshole. They "dance around" nothing. Your claims are simply false. They are bald faced lies, pure and simple. The FAIR tax would be just as constitutional as any excise tax. In fact, it is a national sales tax. It doesn't violate article I section 9 in any way. The FAIR tax is a tax on the sale of goods. It's not a capitation tax. You have to be an absolute moron to believe otherwise. You don't like the FAIR tax because it would abolish your cherished means for looting the wealthy, so you invent spurious objections to it. Only other morons like you are fooled.



Wrong again, you ignorant asshole. The FAIR tax is not a capitation tax. It's as legal as a tariff or an excise tax according to Article I section 9.

It's not a figment of my imagination. You've made it plain that you are content with the current system. That means you are content to let liars and criminals write the rules of the tax system you must comply with. If not, then what do you propose as an alternative?
You don't want to know what I might propose. You've already made up your mind, so it's moot. You're ignorant of the facts, and will likely insist on staying in your state of blissful unawareness. Your ridiculous leaps of logic in your assertions of my political positions are equally as foolish!

...

I really don't give a shit what you would propose. It's obvious you favor the status quo because, like any thug, you support looting the wealthy. You will never surrender the machinery for doing so. You're nothing but an obstacle to be gotten around. Your opinion is of no importance to anyone who can think.

Every objection to the FAIR tax is a lie. I've heard them all, and yours are nothing new. You're just another lying liberal piece of crap.

To repeat so it may again fall on obstinately deaf ears as you've proven time and again you will not substantively respond to the points I've made:
You've already made up your mind, so it's moot. You're ignorant of the facts, and will likely insist on staying in your state of blissful unawareness. Your ridiculous leaps of logic in your assertions of my political positions are equally as foolish!

Your closing statements make my point!

 

[ThoughtCrimes]

who can take anyone serious with a title like that?

I think he was thinking of his own ideas when he name himself "thoughtcrimes." However, a more accurate title would be "idiocies."

It appears you and Steph don't read much!

 

[bripat9643]

Those two paragraphs dance around every salient point made to avoid addressing them directly. You refuse to address it because either you don't see or refuse to recognize that reinstatement of the enumeration clause of Article I Sec 9 would render any "fair tax" scheme unconstitutional! The horseshit is part of the can of worms you're pushing in your ignorance.

Wrong, asshole. They "dance around" nothing. Your claims are simply false. They are bald faced lies, pure and simple. The FAIR tax would be just as constitutional as any excise tax. In fact, it is a national sales tax. It doesn't violate article I section 9 in any way. The FAIR tax is a tax on the sale of goods. It's not a capitation tax. You have to be an absolute moron to believe otherwise. You don't like the FAIR tax because it would abolish your cherished means for looting the wealthy, so you invent spurious objections to it. Only other morons like you are fooled.



Wrong again, you ignorant asshole. The FAIR tax is not a capitation tax. It's as legal as a tariff or an excise tax according to Article I section 9.

...

I really don't give a shit what you would propose. It's obvious you favor the status quo because, like any thug, you support looting the wealthy. You will never surrender the machinery for doing so. You're nothing but an obstacle to be gotten around. Your opinion is of no importance to anyone who can think.

Every objection to the FAIR tax is a lie. I've heard them all, and yours are nothing new. You're just another lying liberal piece of crap.

To repeat so it may again fall on obstinately deaf ears as you've proven time and again you will not substantively respond to the points I've made:
You've already made up your mind, so it's moot. You're ignorant of the facts, and will likely insist on staying in your state of blissful unawareness. Your ridiculous leaps of logic in your assertions of my political positions are equally as foolish!

Your closing statements make my point!

I'll take that as an admission that you know you've been thoroughly whipped.

 

[turtledude]

The only fair tax is a flat tax: whatever percent applied to gross, no deductions for anything.

So then you'll love it when you get a federal income tax levied at a flat rate of 100%, with no deductions, no credits, and no money in your pay checks, right?

That's actually not too far off from something I was thinking of. Great mynds think alike, fellow lybyryl.

the only "Fair" tax is one where you pay for what you get and if you get the same from government as another citizen, you pay the same amount

 

[ThoughtCrimes]

Wrong, asshole. They "dance around" nothing. Your claims are simply false. They are bald faced lies, pure and simple. The FAIR tax would be just as constitutional as any excise tax. In fact, it is a national sales tax. It doesn't violate article I section 9 in any way. The FAIR tax is a tax on the sale of goods. It's not a capitation tax. You have to be an absolute moron to believe otherwise. You don't like the FAIR tax because it would abolish your cherished means for looting the wealthy, so you invent spurious objections to it. Only other morons like you are fooled.



Wrong again, you ignorant asshole. The FAIR tax is not a capitation tax. It's as legal as a tariff or an excise tax according to Article I section 9.



I really don't give a shit what you would propose. It's obvious you favor the status quo because, like any thug, you support looting the wealthy. You will never surrender the machinery for doing so. You're nothing but an obstacle to be gotten around. Your opinion is of no importance to anyone who can think.

Every objection to the FAIR tax is a lie. I've heard them all, and yours are nothing new. You're just another lying liberal piece of crap.

To repeat so it may again fall on obstinately deaf ears as you've proven time and again you will not substantively respond to the points I've made:
You've already made up your mind, so it's moot. You're ignorant of the facts, and will likely insist on staying in your state of blissful unawareness. Your ridiculous leaps of logic in your assertions of my political positions are equally as foolish!

Your closing statements make my point!

I'll take that as an admission that you know you've been thoroughly whipped.

Of course you would. Completely illogical to look at it that way, but if it sooths your shallow mind, take your refuge there. To belabor your deceit, takes me down to your level in any case.

EDIT: Your editing of my responses to do whatever you hoped for to change the thrust of the exchange puts you in the light of someone with dishonest intent. And you tried to tar me with that brush, ya phony!

 

[auditor0007]

Part I: The FairTax™

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FairTax

The FairTax is a proposal to reform the federal tax code of the United States. It would replace all federal income taxes (including the alternative minimum tax, corporate income taxes, and capital gains taxes), payroll taxes (including Social Security and Medicare taxes), gift taxes, and estate taxes with a single broad national consumption tax on retail sales. The Fair Tax Act (H.R. 25/S. 122) would apply a tax, once, at the point of purchase on all new goods and services for personal consumption.

The proposal also calls for a monthly payment to all family households of lawful U.S. residents as an advance rebate, or "prebate", of tax on purchases up to the poverty level.

As defined in the proposed legislation, the tax rate is 23% for the first year. This percentage is based on the total amount paid including the tax ($23 out of every $100 spent in total). This would be equivalent to a 30% traditional U.S. sales tax ($23 on top of every $77 spent—$100 total).[4] The rate would then be automatically adjusted annually based on federal receipts in the previous fiscal year.[5] With the rebate taken into consideration, the FairTax would be progressive on consumption,[2] but would also be regressive on income at higher income levels (as consumption falls as a percentage of income).[6][7] Opponents argue this would accordingly decrease the tax burden on high-income earners and increase it on the middle class.[4][8]

Well would you look at that--it's not a "fair tax" at all, but rather the FairTax™, which would crush the middle class and absolutely slaughter the lower class by introducing a nearly 30% federal sales tax, on top of whatever your state and local sales taxes are.

Keep in mind, Wrongpublicans, that the FairTax™ does not abolish state income taxes, nor does it touch local property taxes. A typical North Carolina resident, for example will be paying an 8% state income tax, a sales tax of 7-8% in most places (this depends upon exactly where you live), and a 30% federal sales tax. If you happen to buy something that's a bit too nice for your plebeian hands to touch, your local government will levy a property tax on that, too--meaning that the car you just paid 30% extra for will still be subject to addition taxation.

In order for it to be a "fair tax", they would need to place the sales tax on everything including personal property. That suggestion alone would put a quick stop to this stupid idea.

 

[Papageorgio]

READ. THE. BILL.

Bill Text - 113th Congress (2013-2014) - THOMAS (Library of Congress)

CTRL+F "exclusive": Zero results.

CTRL+F "inclusive": Multiple results. They even define what "tax inclusive fair market value" is, since they refer to the concept so much in the text of the bill.

Yes, they define the "tax inclusive fair market value." However, nowhere does the bill say the 23% rate will be defined this way. The only line where the 23% rate is mentioned says this:

"(1) FOR 2015- In the calendar year 2015, the rate of tax is 23 percent of the gross payments for the taxable property or service."

That would be EXCLUSIVE, not inclusive, moron.

This thread illustrates the painfully large gap in intelligence and intellectual honesty between enlightened lybyryls like mysylf and backwards, uncivilized conservatards. Whereas I speak from a position of authority, given my research into the subject and use of primary source materials (which include things like the actual bill and don't include things like Sean Hannity psychobabble), conservatards can only foam at the mouth and parrot the same talking points their corporatist overlords taught them on the mind-rotting television they worship as their god--in between bouts of proclaiming "America's Christian heritage" and "In God We Trust".

True enough, it does illustrate the painfully large gap in intelligence and intellectual honesty between you and normal people. You have lied about what the bill says, plus you're too stupid to know it.

BTW. I'm an atheist, not a Christian, so your rant about Christians is a complete non sequitur. OH, and note how I used quotes from the actual bill that refer to the parts being discussed. You, on the other hand, quoted stuff that was irrelevant.

**** this and **** that. Nah dude, you are a ******* asshole. Plain and simple. No doubt about it. ******* punk assed little ***** is what you are and you can shove your ******* fair tax idea up your ass.

Another zeke meltdown. He loses arguments, goes on a personal attack.

His MO is getting rather tedious.


Sent from my iPad using an Android.

 

[bripat9643]

To repeat so it may again fall on obstinately deaf ears as you've proven time and again you will not substantively respond to the points I've made:
You've already made up your mind, so it's moot. You're ignorant of the facts, and will likely insist on staying in your state of blissful unawareness. Your ridiculous leaps of logic in your assertions of my political positions are equally as foolish!

Your closing statements make my point!

I'll take that as an admission that you know you've been thoroughly whipped.

Of course you would. Completely illogical to look at it that way, but if it sooths your shallow mind, take your refuge there. To belabor your deceit, takes me down to your level in any case.

EDIT: Your editing of my responses to do whatever you hoped for to change the thrust of the exchange puts you in the light of someone with dishonest intent. And you tried to tar me with that brush, ya phony!

I haven't edited a single word you posted, you lying piece of crap.

 

[ThoughtCrimes]

I'll take that as an admission that you know you've been thoroughly whipped.

Of course you would. Completely illogical to look at it that way, but if it sooths your shallow mind, take your refuge there. To belabor your deceit, takes me down to your level in any case.

EDIT: Your editing of my responses to do whatever you hoped for to change the thrust of the exchange puts you in the light of someone with dishonest intent. And you tried to tar me with that brush, ya phony!

I haven't edited a single word you posted, you lying piece of crap.

Anyone looking closely at your post #72 can see your redactions. Just more of the same from you with your disregard of decent conduct, ya phony! If you'll just shut up I'll stop embarrassing you.

 

[bripat9643]

Of course you would. Completely illogical to look at it that way, but if it sooths your shallow mind, take your refuge there. To belabor your deceit, takes me down to your level in any case.

EDIT: Your editing of my responses to do whatever you hoped for to change the thrust of the exchange puts you in the light of someone with dishonest intent. And you tried to tar me with that brush, ya phony!

I haven't edited a single word you posted, you lying piece of crap.

Anyone looking closely at your post #72 can see your redactions. Just more of the same from you with your disregard of decent conduct, ya phony! If you'll just shut up I'll stop embarrassing you.

The quote feature "redacted" your comments, moron. It only goes back three posts.

 

[AvgGuyIA]

I think you mean "African-American," bigot.

You really are one stupid ****. You don't even know what the "black market" is, do you? Here's a hint, it's not a grocery store where black people shop, you witless dung heap.

They're called African-Americans, bigot.

And of course I know what that term means. It's a racist euphemism used to refer to a place where stolen or illegal goods are sold, so named because African-Americans were alleged to be the sellers and main buyers at such places.

And you conservatards thought my degree in African-American History was useless. No, bigots, I'm wise to your discriminatory ways. I don't let even the most subtle racism slide.

Another libtard who thinks Africa is a Country.