Poor Nobama!

[ScotchAndCigar]

Originally Posted by mspeasl

After ScotchAndCigar has called his fellow BMW posters various names in many of his 500 Political posts it occurs to me that the following is the definition that fits him very well:

Merriam-webster:
Political Gadfly: a person who stimulates or annoys especially by persistent criticism

Perfect! You repost my defense, but ignore the original offender, then you do exactly what you accuse me of: call me a name.
You've never contributed a useful post, you just come here to attack. Look up troll in the dictionary.

[ScotchAndCigar]

Originally Posted by OldArmy

Rights without responsibility or contribution is a liberal notion.

Why don't you repost this? Or do you not realize that this is a monumental put-down? Better yet, stop being a referee, and either post on-topic or don't post.

[cssnms]

Originally Posted by mspeasl

After ScotchAndCigar has called his fellow BMW posters various names in many of his 500 Political posts it occurs to me that the following is the definition that fits him very well:

Merriam-webster:
Political Gadfly: a person who stimulates or annoys especially by persistent criticism

[Sidney]

Originally Posted by Michael5155

EXACTLY!



I have to admit, even though I vehemently disagree with many of the conservative rants on this post, I have much more respect for someone (even if they are republican) who has an opinion, is passionate about it, and isn't afraid to defend it than someone who merely bites the tail of the sheep in front of him/her or is apathetic about issues affecting him/herself, family and country.

I would be willing to bet my BMW that if all of us on this thread got together at a bar, had a few brewskies, shot a couple games of pool, told a few dirty jokes and talked politics, we'd agree more than we'd disagree on general political issues and problems.

I'm sure we would all agree that more people need to take control of their lives, stop watching afternoon Oprah reruns, get off their butts, learn a trade or profession, and pound the pavement for a job rather than looking to Uncle Sam for an unemployment check. And I'm sure we'd all agree that far too many families on welfare suck the taxpayers tit by having more kids just to collect more welfare. And I'm sure we'd all agree there's far too much government waste... and that social security and medicaid will be bankrupt soon. Etc, etc. etc.

But I also think (hope?) we'd all agree every American deserves health care regardless of their ability to pay. I think we'd all agree some social institutions like public education play an important role in our democracy. I think we'd all agree that when someone is down on their luck, lost their job, we, as a society, need to help them out. And I think we'd all agree the obesely wealthy because of tax loopholes do not pay their fair share of taxes when compared to the other 99% of us.

We simply disagree on what roads (public or private) to take to arrive at solutions.

This thread is a perfect example of what is wrong with the current political climate in the US. Polarization. Dems think they're right and won't listen to compromise. Repubs think they're right and won't listen to compromise. I'd even say it's worse than that. I think it's become adversarial. Neither side wants the other to appear right. It's become a middle-school playground argument: "I know you are, but what am I."

And someone who wants to run for office who may be a moderate or independent stands absolutely NO CHANCE of winning election because the big, coorporate parties won't give them any money. We need a third party in the country... but it will never happen. Money carries a bigger voice and influence than common sense and doing the right thing.

Whew! I think I'm done.

Pretty good

[ideliver]

Originally Posted by ScotchAndCigar

wherein companies like GE pay no taxes.

Corporations don't pay taxes...their customers do

[ideliver]

Originally Posted by ScotchAndCigar

I'm just giving back what was doled-out to me

an eye for an eye makes the world go blind...your statement reminds me of my kids fighting...."he started it..."

[ideliver]

Originally Posted by ScotchAndCigar

And boy, wouldn't it be great for me, with my kids and mortgage, to pay the same exact tax as a single guy with the same income! Sign me up for that!

Why does that fact that you chose to have children mean that you should pay less taxes than someone doing the exact same job that won't or can't have kids?

Why are kids even a variable in the tax equation?

[EvosM3]

I don't often visit political threads but I'll make some simple points across.
Why is it that the richest people in congress are an overwhelming majority part of the left-wing?
Also, why do Buffet and Obama insist on taxing the wealthy when their Wall Street buddies (I.e. All the democrat donors) never pay taxes? (Buffet reportedly owes millions in unpaid back-taxes). Just look at General Electric, they made tens of billions yet paid $0 in taxes because they have Washington accountants and are one of Obama's biggest donors. They also own MSNBC, this is strange because I thought it was the liberals in the 60s who warned against big corporations also owning or being affiliated with the media, no?

[ideliver]

Originally Posted by EvosM3

I don't often visit political threads but I'll make some simple points across.
Why is it that the richest people in congress are an overwhelming majority part of the left-wing?
Also, why do Buffet and Obama insist on taxing the wealthy when their Wall Street buddies (I.e. All the democrat donors) never pay taxes? (Buffet reportedly owes millions in unpaid back-taxes). Just look at General Electric, they made tens of billions yet paid $0 in taxes because they have Washington accountants and are one of Obama's biggest donors. They also own MSNBC, this is strange because I thought it was the liberals in the 60s who warned against big corporations also owning or being affiliated with the media, no?

because the progressive minded politicians prefer to pick the winners and losers...the free market minded would prefer the public pick....

[ScotchAndCigar]

Originally Posted by ideliver

Why does that fact that you chose to have children mean that you should pay less taxes than someone doing the exact same job that won't or can't have kids?

Why are kids even a variable in the tax equation?

You're kidding, right? Deductions for children, marriage, mortgage interest, college, child care, and property tax are part of the foundation of the American tax system. But you're tasking ME with defending it.

Rather than making silly demands of me, I'm sure you're smart enough to answer it yourself, and see how our tax system is based upon determining one's capacity to pay taxes.

[mspeasl]

Originally Posted by ideliver

Corporations don't pay taxes...their customers do

And their suppliers.and their employees.......

[MiddleAgedAl]

Originally Posted by ScotchAndCigar

Rather than making silly demands of me, I'm sure you're smart enough to answer it yourself, and see how our tax system is based upon determining one's capacity to pay taxes.

Are you sure capacity to pay is what the system is based on ?

Everyone makes choices that affect their capacity to pay taxes, but the effect that has on the taxes they are actually asked to pay is not consistently or fairly applied.

You make a choice to have children, which is your right, and thus your tax bill is relieved by X dollars because your capacity to pay is diminished due to diapers, or tricycles, or whatever.

I might make the EXACT same salary as you. I might choose to not have children. I might instead choose to buy a house with a bigger yard, construct a kennel, and foster abused dogs or something like that. Depending on their vet bills, etc. in any one tax year it is not at all inconceivable that I might spend about the same on that as you do on your child, and thus my capacity to pay taxes is diminished as much as yours, but somehow my tax bill is not the same as yours.

If someone can explain to be how that represents a fair assessment of taxes based on capacity to pay, I would be grateful.

[EvosM3]

I believe that if we simply cut spending across the board (including military) and lowered taxes, we could get this country headed back in the right direction. Cutting taxes would stimulate the economy and make it easier for people to do business and cutting spending would stop our national debt from rising further and probably get our credit rating back up. Not only that, but other countries usually look up to America and if we do these things and show they work, we could be models to the struggling countries and they would improve their economies as well.

[mspeasl]

Originally Posted by ScotchAndCigar

Look up troll in the dictionary.

****************************************
Merriam-webster:
Definition of TROLL

transitive verb
1
: to cause to move round and round : roll
2
a : to sing the parts of (as a round or catch) in succession
b : to sing loudly
c : to celebrate in song
3
a : to fish for by trolling
b : to fish by trolling in <troll lakes>
c : to pull through the water in trolling <troll a lure>
d : to search in or at <troll s flea markets for bargains> ; also : prowl <troll nightclubs>

intransitive verb
1
: to move around : ramble
2
a : to fish by trailing a lure or baited hook from a moving boat
b : search, look <troll ing for sponsors> ; also : prowl
3
: to sing or play in a jovial manner
4
: to speak rapidly
**************************************

Boy am I glad that you had me look up Troll. You are so correct in your assessment that I am indeed what you say.

Especially:
transitive verb: #3
intransitive verb: #2 a,b

I thought about intransitive verb: #4. But after further consideration I decided that that fit you much better.

Of course several others on this section of the forum, under the above definition, would probably be considered Trolls also. Because they too throw out bait and you are very quick to accept the hook. When they set that hook its time for the rest of us to just sit back and just watch the entertainment. The sorry part of the whole thing is as a smart democrat, ("we all know that democrats are better educated") you're really easy.

Now back to the OP

Originally Posted by OldArmy

It's been a tough time for the princeling, seems if he's not getting dissed he's dicking up. Just in the last few days:

-Turned a tragic killing into a major racial flap with his pandering, whining and inappropriate remarks.

-Sent the wrong guy to see the supremes. Of course that constitution thing, as inconvenient as it may be, presented a problem too. But he was a constitutional law professor, right?

-Promised the Russians that he would deceive the American peeps until he could give away the farm after the election. They're such good buddies of ours.

-Managed to get dissed by a unanimous vote with his myopically liberal budget proposal. Didn't this happen before?

Can it get any more amateurish, ham-handed, partisan, or just plain stupid?

Out of his depth, running out of time. Of course, based on his comments to the Russians, if he gets reelected we'll get to see the REAL nobama.

p.s. No, I don't care what Bush did. That was then, this fool is now.

BTW: I believe that it was a democrat that had a sign on his desk in the Oval office that stated "The Buck Stops here". I guess that you and your guy just does not understand that.

Have a nice day..............

[ScotchAndCigar]

Originally Posted by mspeasl

****************************************
Merriam-webster:
Definition of TROLL

transitive verb
1
: to cause to move round and round : roll
2
a : to sing the parts of (as a round or catch) in succession
b : to sing loudly
c : to celebrate in song
3
a : to fish for by trolling
b : to fish by trolling in <troll lakes>
c : to pull through the water in trolling <troll a lure>
d : to search in or at <troll s flea markets for bargains> ; also : prowl <troll nightclubs>

intransitive verb
1
: to move around : ramble
2
a : to fish by trailing a lure or baited hook from a moving boat
b : search, look <troll ing for sponsors> ; also : prowl
3
: to sing or play in a jovial manner
4
: to speak rapidly
**************************************

Boy am I glad that you had me look up Troll. You are so correct in your assessment that I am indeed what you say.

Especially:
transitive verb: #3
intransitive verb: #2 a,b

I thought about intransitive verb: #4. But after further consideration I decided that that fit you much better.

Of course several others on this section of the forum, under the above definition, would probably be considered Trolls also. Because they too throw out bait and you are very quick to accept the hook. When they set that hook its time for the rest of us to just sit back and just watch the entertainment. The sorry part of the whole thing is as a smart democrat, ("we all know that democrats are better educated") you're really easy.

Now back to the OP


BTW: I believe that it was a democrat that had a sign on his desk in the Oval office that stated "The Buck Stops here". I guess that you and your guy just does not understand that.

Have a nice day..............

^^^ Definition of troll ^^^

[mspeasl]

Originally Posted by ScotchAndCigar

^^^ Definition of troll ^^^

Oh come on you can do better........

[Team Plutonium]

What is the point of arguing here? No post or comment will ever change anybodies mind... everybody is trenched in / dug-in and will not give an inch. I seriously wonder what's the motivation... on both sides.

I live in the US, but I'm German, and I find it absolutely amazing how the country is divided... even if one party has a valid point/idea, etc... it will be dismissed by the other party - bipartisanship doesn't exist in this country - it's all about c@ckblocking. So f@ckign weird.

Anyway... carry on.

[EvosM3]

Cockblocking is exactly what makes a democracy a democracy. I sure as hell wouldn't love parties passing anything and everything they wanted. I would say make things even harder to pass, we already have more than enough regulation in this country.

[128vertinnoho]

Originally Posted by SehrSchnell

What is the point of arguing here? No post or comment will ever change anybodies mind... everybody is trenched in / dug-in and will not give an inch. I seriously wonder what's the motivation... on both sides.

I live in the US, but I'm German, and I find it absolutely amazing how the country is divided... even if one party has a valid point/idea, etc... it will be dismissed by the other party - bipartisanship doesn't exist in this country - it's all about c@ckblocking. So f@ckign weird.

Anyway... carry on.

Yep. Wecome to 'Merica! We deserve to go down the toilet!

[128vertinnoho]

Originally Posted by EvosM3

Cockblocking is exactly what makes a democracy a democracy. I sure as hell wouldn't love parties passing anything and everything they wanted. I would say make things even harder to pass, we already have more than enough regulation in this country.

What a bunch of bullshit. You really don't want the two parties to work together to solve our nation's many problems? Come up with solutions that are a compromise to each side's radical positions? Great! Now nothing will ever get better in your definition of a 'democracy'.

[EvosM3]

If half of an elected congress doesn't agree on a bill, then it doesn't deserve to get passed.

[OldArmy]

Originally Posted by 128vertinnoho

What a bunch of bullshit. You really don't want the two parties to work together to solve our nation's many problems? Come up with solutions that are a compromise to each side's radical positions? Great! Now nothing will ever get better in your definition of a 'democracy'.

Sounds good in principle but isn't long term compromising what got us here? Sometimes it makes the best sense to have winners and losers. In these intractable, high emotion times there isn't any other choice. That said, our congress cuts deals every single day. I would not support your thesis that compromise will make things better.