The Obama Years- A GOP love story
 

Thought I'd start a fresh thread where the Independents, Repubs, Libertarians, Green Party, Tea Party, and Democrats duke it out with politics. The current hot topic is the fiscal cliff.

[url=http://news.yahoo.com/gop-fiscal-cliff-plan-echoes-failed-budget-talks-063918865--finance.html]GOP 'fiscal cliff' plan echoes failed budget talks - Yahoo! News[/url]

Can somebody explain to me why the GOP are dead set in raising taxes for the ultra rich? Why can't the rest of the conservative base see who they serve and elect somebody else? Haven't we heard their speil before? Taxes will kill jobs. They said the same thing during Clinton's years and guess what? They were wrong.


My guess is they'll raise the taxes on the rich, only if they add in loopholes that they can avoid this increase, thereby negating it. What is it with these assholes?

It's really simple. Close ALL (and I mean every last one) tax loopholes, let ultra rich who've bypassed taxes all these years pay a higher tax that the middle class had to cover. After about 4 years of this, drop the tax rate so that middle and upper class taxes are equal in percentage. Also, remove all corporate tax loopholes, and lower the corporate tax rate. Cut spending across the board and profit.

**** this, I'm running for President next go around. Even I can get this simple idea down.

Re: The Obama Years- A GOP love story
 

[quote=NC_Skins;970926]Thought I'd start a fresh thread where the Independents, Repubs, Libertarians, Green Party, Tea Party, and Democrats duke it out with politics. The current hot topic is the fiscal cliff.

[URL="http://news.yahoo.com/gop-fiscal-cliff-plan-echoes-failed-budget-talks-063918865--finance.html"]GOP 'fiscal cliff' plan echoes failed budget talks - Yahoo! News[/URL]

[B]Can somebody explain to me why the GOP are dead set in raising taxes for the ultra rich? [/B]Why can't the rest of the conservative base see who they serve and elect somebody else? Haven't we heard their speil before? Taxes will kill jobs. They said the same thing during Clinton's years and guess what? They were wrong.


My guess is they'll raise the taxes on the rich, only if they add in loopholes that they can avoid this increase, thereby negating it. What is it with these assholes?

It's really simple. Close ALL (and I mean every last one) tax loopholes, let ultra rich who've bypassed taxes all these years pay a higher tax that the middle class had to cover. After about 4 years of this, drop the tax rate so that middle and upper class taxes are equal in percentage. Also, remove all corporate tax loopholes, and lower the corporate tax rate. Cut spending across the board and profit.

**** this, I'm running for President next go around. Even I can get this simple idea down.[/quote]

The dems have said they want to raise taxes for anyone making over $250,000 a year and even you have said your against that.

Re: The Obama Years- A GOP love story
 

im not against that. seems like something that should have been done before

Re: The Obama Years- A GOP love story
 

Where's the flat tax I asked for?

Re: The Obama Years- A GOP love story
 

[quote=firstdown;971320]The dems have said they want to raise taxes for anyone making over $250,000 a year and even you have said your against that.[/quote]

No I haven't.

Re: The Obama Years- A GOP love story
 

[quote=dmek25;971322]im not against that. seems like something that should have been done before[/quote]

That's because you don't make that much money or have 33 to 35% of your income going to pay federal taxes. That does not even include the other state, property, or sales taxes. Some making a little over $250,000 per year are paying 40 to 50% of their income into taxes. Not sure how anyone could be for that. I know several people who make over $250,000 per year and they work harder then anyon I know and earn every penny they make.

Re: The Obama Years- A GOP love story
 

[quote=firstdown;971338]That's because you don't make that much money or have 33 to 35% of your income going to pay federal taxes. That does not even include the other state, property, or sales taxes. Some making a little over $250,000 per year are paying 40 to 50% of their income into taxes. Not sure how anyone could be for that. I know several people who make over $250,000 per year and they work harder then anyon I know and earn every penny they make.[/quote]

The problem I mostly have are the tax havens and loopholes the ultra rich use to avoid taxes. You have your guys like Mitt dodging taxes like a mofo and paying some stupid rate like 14% or lower (which is why he didn't show his taxes in length).

The guys making 250k aren't dodging taxes, aren't using tax loopholes. (for the most part) Personally, I would move that tax increase to 1 million and then close ALL tax loopholes. It's never going to happen though because the people voting for it are millionaires themselves.

Re: The Obama Years- A GOP love story
 

[url=http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/12/05/jon-stewart-summarizes-gop-budget-plan-jump-off-the-fiscal-cliff-voluntarily/]Jon Stewart summarizes GOP budget plan: Jump off the fiscal cliff voluntarily | The Raw Story[/url]

Jon Stewart brilliant as always.

Re: The Obama Years- A GOP love story
 

[quote=NC_Skins;971369]The problem I mostly have are the tax havens and loopholes the ultra rich use to avoid taxes. You have your guys like Mitt dodging taxes like a mofo and paying some stupid rate like 14% or lower (which is why he didn't show his taxes in length).

The guys making 250k aren't dodging taxes, aren't using tax loopholes. (for the most part) [b]Personally, I would move that tax increase to 1 million and then close ALL tax loopholes. It's never going to happen though because the people voting for it are millionaires themselves[/B].[/quote]

Okay, ignoring the philosophical/ethical issues underpinning the pros and cons on wealth redistribution in this fashion - let's just say we do this. You don't come anwhere near closing the revenue/spending gap. It's barely a start. I haven't googled the numbers but let's just say such a move covers 30% of the revenue/spending deficit (and I think 30% is a huge overstatement).

Where's the other 70% coming from?

Re: The Obama Years- A GOP love story
 

mitt said something like a 50k deduction limit. ending loopholes like farm subsidies for people making over 500k etc wouldn't be a terrible idea either.

Re: The Obama Years- A GOP love story
 

[quote=JoeRedskin;971397]Okay, ignoring the philosophical/ethical issues underpinning the pros and cons on wealth redistribution in this fashion - let's just say we do this. You don't come anwhere near closing the revenue/spending gap. It's barely a start. I haven't googled the numbers but let's just say such a move covers 30% of the revenue/spending deficit (and I think 30% is a huge overstatement).

Where's the other 70% coming from?[/quote]

There really isn't any philosophical debate on "sharing the wealth". Fact is, the rich scumbags have been dodging taxes and paying less PERCENTAGE of taxes as compared to everybody else. That's not equal. So, let those assholes eat cake for a decade(like we have) before moving the the tax rate back down EQUAL for everybody. (above poverty level) That way we can all pay the same rate and nobody has a upper advantage when it comes to taxes being paid.

More ways to save money and increase revenue.

[B]1) [/B]Corporate taxes. No sense in corporations paying 0 taxes on 14 billion in profits. (GE) NO sense of Google paying 2% tax rate back in 2010 when they score billions. (a few examples below)
[url=http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2011/03/ten_giant_us_companies_avoidin.html]Ten giant U.S. companies avoiding income taxes: Sen. Bernie Sanders list - Lynn Sweet[/url]

A nice article here:
[url=http://money.cnn.com/2008/08/12/news/economy/corporate_taxes/]Majority of corporations avoid federal income taxes - study - Aug. 12, 2008[/url]

I also think they should lower the overall corporate tax, and close ALL the loopholes.


[B]2)[/B] Subsidies to oil industry or any other corporation. I think this is self explanatory.


Also, you have to cut spending, and I'm fine with cutting spending across the board. The one interesting point to note though, infrastructure spending helps out the economy.

That's just off the top of my head. I'm sure I can (and will) think of more.

Re: The Obama Years- A GOP love story
 

[quote=firstdown;971338]That's because you don't make that much money or have 33 to 35% of your income going to pay federal taxes. That does not even include the other state, property, or sales taxes. Some making a little over $250,000 per year are paying 40 to 50% of their income into taxes. Not sure how anyone could be for that. I know several people who make over $250,000 per year and they work harder then anyon I know and earn every penny they make.[/quote]
not sure what you call good money, but i make around 100 grand a year. thats plenty for me

Re: The Obama Years- A GOP love story
 

[quote=NC_Skins;971369]The problem I mostly have are the tax havens and loopholes the ultra rich use to avoid taxes. You have your guys like Mitt dodging taxes like a mofo and paying some stupid rate like 14% or lower (which is why he didn't show his taxes in length).

The guys making 250k aren't dodging taxes, aren't using tax loopholes. (for the most part) Personally, I would move that tax increase to 1 million and then close ALL tax loopholes. It's never going to happen though because the people voting for it are millionaires themselves.[/quote]

First off Mitts not dodging taxes he is paying what he owes and he did not make the tax laws. You think that Obama and other Dems don't also take the deductions or pay the tax rate they owe and nothing more? I'm sure you also know that the reason people know how much Obama donated to charity last year was because it was on his taxes as a write off (your terms he was dodging paying taxes on that money). You also say people making 250k aren't taking tax deductions and I'd say your crazy. You don't take tax dedections? They are not loopholes they are tax code and anyone using them is not dodging taxes. Even the poor take tax deductions on money they didn't even pay to get a tax credit and refund even if they didn't pay taxes.

Re: The Obama Years- A GOP love story
 

[quote=dmek25;971444]not sure what you call good money, but i make around 100 grand a year. thats plenty for me[/quote]

My point was most people that say people making $250,000 should pay more taxes are not in their shoes paying 35 to 50% of their income to taxes.

Re: The Obama Years- A GOP love story
 

[quote=NC_Skins;971426]There really isn't any philosophical debate on "sharing the wealth". Fact is, [B]the rich scumbags have been dodging taxes and paying less PERCENTAGE of taxes as compared to everybody else.[/B] That's not equal. So, let those assholes eat cake for a decade(like we have) before moving the the tax rate back down EQUAL for everybody. (above poverty level) That way we can all pay the same rate and nobody has a upper advantage when it comes to taxes being paid.

More ways to save money and increase revenue.

[B]1) [/B]Corporate taxes. No sense in corporations paying 0 taxes on 14 billion in profits. (GE) NO sense of Google paying 2% tax rate back in 2010 when they score billions. (a few examples below)
[URL="http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2011/03/ten_giant_us_companies_avoidin.html"]Ten giant U.S. companies avoiding income taxes: Sen. Bernie Sanders list - Lynn Sweet[/URL]

A nice article here:
[URL="http://money.cnn.com/2008/08/12/news/economy/corporate_taxes/"]Majority of corporations avoid federal income taxes - study - Aug. 12, 2008[/URL]

I also think they should lower the overall corporate tax, and close ALL the loopholes.


[B]2)[/B] Subsidies to oil industry or any other corporation. I think this is self explanatory.


Also, you have to cut spending, and I'm fine with cutting spending across the board. The one interesting point to note though, infrastructure spending helps out the economy.

That's just off the top of my head. I'm sure I can (and will) think of more.[/quote]

This is the problem. You call the rich scumbags because they work hard and pay the taxes they legally owe. So what do you call the poor who don't pay any taxes and actually receive a refund after paying nothing into the system?

I guess you also must know those Corp. profits are passed down to the stock holder and they have to pay taxes on the profits.

Re: The Obama Years- A GOP love story
 

[quote=firstdown;971619]First off Mitts not dodging taxes he is paying what he owes and he did not make the tax laws. You think that Obama and other Dems don't also take the deductions or pay the tax rate they owe and nothing more? I'm sure you also know that the reason people know how much Obama donated to charity last year was because it was on his taxes as a write off (your terms he was dodging paying taxes on that money). You also say people making 250k aren't taking tax deductions and I'd say your crazy. You don't take tax dedections? They are not loopholes they are tax code and anyone using them is not dodging taxes. Even the poor take tax deductions on money they didn't even pay to get a tax credit and refund even if they didn't pay taxes.[/quote]


Hiding money in offshore accounts and using loopholes is dodging taxes. I didn't say they were doing anything illegal, I simply said they were dodging taxes.....and they are.

The loopholes I'm referring to are the ones not offered or afforded to the peasants.

Re: The Obama Years- A GOP love story
 

[quote=firstdown;971630]This is the problem. You call the rich scumbags because they work hard and pay the taxes they legally owe. So what do you call the poor who don't pay any taxes and actually receive a refund after paying nothing into the system?

I guess you also must know those Corp. profits are passed down to the stock holder and they have to pay taxes on the profits.[/quote]


Why do you think that the ultra rich work hard? The majority of the Walton family didn't work hard, yet there they are ranking in the top 10 of richest people in the world. They inherited money. That dumb cunt Gina Rineheart (aussie) inherited her money. You know who does work hard? The employees that build their businesses up that make them ultra rich. I'm sick and tired of hearing how "hard" these billionaires work. It's a fallacy. Sure some may have worked their asses off to the top, but by in large it simply isn't true. They either lucked out, or inherited money.

Not all corps do dividends. The profits are need to be taxed. End of story. Are you ****ing really sitting up here saying that a company should get 14 billion in profits and not pay taxes? That's exactly what you are arguing with the point you are making when you retort with a "they give out dividends, which those people pay taxes on". Also, who cares if the dividends are taxed. If I get income, it's taxed. If I share my income with you as a gift, that money is now income for you and it's taxed. Welcome to the world of the same income being taxed multiple times. Should work the same for corporations. After all, ARE THEY NOT PEOPLE? The SCOTUS thinks so.


Wait, you want some guy who's living below the poverty level to pay taxes? Are you shitting me? I think you need to find out what living below the poverty level means and get back with me.

Re: The Obama Years- A GOP love story
 

[quote=NC_Skins;971704]Why do you think that the ultra rich work hard? The majority of the Walton family didn't work hard, yet there they are ranking in the top 10 of richest people in the world. They inherited money. That dumb cunt Gina Rineheart (aussie) inherited her money. You know who does work hard? The employees that build their businesses up that make them ultra rich. I'm sick and tired of hearing how "hard" these billionaires work. It's a fallacy. Sure some may have worked their asses off to the top, but by in large it simply isn't true. They either lucked out, or inherited money.

Not all corps do dividends. The profits are need to be taxed. End of story. Are you ****ing really sitting up here saying that a company should get 14 billion in profits and not pay taxes? That's exactly what you are arguing and the point you are making when you retort with a "they give out dividends, which those people pay taxes on". That's probably one of the stupidest things I've seen you say to date. Also, who cares if the dividends are taxed. If I get income, it's taxed. If I share my income with you as a gift, that money is now income for you and it's taxed. Welcome to the world of the same income being taxed multiple times. Should work the same for corporations. After all, ARE THEY NOT PEOPLE? The SCOTUS thinks so.


Wait, you want some guy who's living below the poverty level to pay taxes? Are you shitting me? I think you need to find out what living below the poverty level means and get back with me.[/quote]

So now the rich do nothing but the none working poor are the hard workers. I guess we should wait around for them to turn the economy around. LMAO

Re: The Obama Years- A GOP love story
 

[quote=firstdown;971715]So now the rich do nothing but the none working poor are the hard workers. I guess we should wait around for them to turn the economy around. LMAO[/quote]


I didn't say they didn't do anything. I said I think there is this huge misconception that the ultra rich busted their asses off for their wealth. You think that Hostess CEO busted his ass to earn that 1.9 million dollar bonus he got from his company being liquidated? All the while stealing the employees pensions and not giving it back to them?


You are trying to twist what I say into it being that way in all cases. It's not. I've said as much but you choose to ignore what I'm saying. It's getting tiring having to keep explaining this to you.


It's the middle class and poor people that drive this economy, not the rich. It's the middle class and poor who buy most of the goods that cause these billionaires to get richer. (and stockholders) So yes, we do need to give back to those groups so they can in fact turn the economy around. Shows you don't grasp the fact that having few people own all the wealth isn't going to do shit for the economy. Salaries need to go up, even if that means telling some jackwagon billionaire that he can't have a second yacht.

Re: The Obama Years- A GOP love story
 

[quote=NC_Skins;971720]I didn't say they didn't do anything. I said I think there is this huge misconception that the ultra rich busted their asses off for their wealth. You think that Hostess CEO busted his ass to earn that 1.9 million dollar bonus he got from his company being liquidated? All the while stealing the employees pensions and not giving it back to them?


You are trying to twist what I say into it being that way in all cases. It's not. I've said as much but you choose to ignore what I'm saying. It's getting tiring having to keep explaining this to you.


It's the middle class and poor people that drive this economy, not the rich. It's the middle class and poor who buy most of the goods that cause these billionaires to get richer. (and stockholders) So yes, we do need to give back to those groups so they can in fact turn the economy around. Shows you don't grasp the fact that having few people own all the wealth isn't going to do shit for the economy. Salaries need to go up, even if that means telling some jackwagon billionaire that he can't have a second yacht.[/quote]
This conversation started with people making $250000 up and you have now changed it to the ultra rich billionaire to make your points. Sorry but the poor don't drive the economy. If they did we would have poor nations.LOL

Actually the CEO for Hostess Probably worked very hard last year if he earned that bonus is hard to say. His pay is voted on by the stock holders and I'll agree I think most are over paid.

Re: The Obama Years- A GOP love story
 

[quote=firstdown;971727]This conversation started with people making $250000 up and you have now changed it to the ultra rich billionaire to make your points. Sorry but the poor don't drive the economy. If they did we would have poor nations.LOL

Actually the CEO for Hostess Probably worked very hard last year if he earned that bonus is hard to say. His pay is voted on by the stock holders and I'll agree I think most are over paid.[/quote]


So are you saying the very few wealthy people consume more products and goods than middle class/poor people?

So what you are saying is that 1% of the US population consumes/purchases more goods and products than 99% of the people?



[url]http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/uploads/consumer_report_embargo.pdf[/url]



[quote]Consumer spending makes up roughly 70 percent of the American economy, as measured by Gross Domestic Product.[/quote]


edit: I went on record saying that I though most people making that 250K were paying their taxes and not using a bunch of tax havens and loopholes to avoid taxes. I even mentioned moving that tax hike up to people who's income hit 1 million.

Re: The Obama Years- A GOP love story
 

[quote=NC_Skins;971771]So are you saying the very few wealthy people consume more products and goods than middle class/poor people?

So what you are saying is that 1% of the US population consumes/purchases more goods and products than 99% of the people?



[URL]http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/uploads/consumer_report_embargo.pdf[/URL]






[B]edit: I went on record saying that I though most people making that 250K were paying their taxes and not using a bunch of tax havens and loopholes to avoid taxes. I even mentioned moving that tax hike up to people who's income hit 1 million[/B].[/quote]

You have actually said that before and I could agree that people making over a million a year could pay more. That's not what the President is asking and its your thread saying the right is wrong on this issue when you agree with them in part.

Why didn't you start a thread saying Obama was crazy and only should raise taxes on people making 1 mil or more?

Re: The Obama Years- A GOP love story
 

If anyone wants the wealthiest to just pay their fair share , you would need to tax their total wealth / assets . Most of the wealthy make under 1 million in salary .... business , real estate , inh. an estate ,ect . Under the Presidents plan, guys like Warren Buffett would not see an increase in taxes , but many small bus. owners , police ( OT ) and a number of dual income families would. taxing people on their net worth would probably work , as would a simple tax code with limited loopholes .

Re: The Obama Years- A GOP love story
 

[url=http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/28/obama-pay-raise-congress_n_2377714.html?utm_hp_ref=politics]Obama Orders Pay Raise For Congress, Federal Workers, Joe Biden[/url]



So pitiful you have to laugh at this stage. It would be nice if America got together and marched onto DC to cast out all these bums. Things like this is why I didn't vote for him.


I'm going to have to ask my dad to borrow his t-shirt he got for Christmas.

[IMG]http://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/533834_10151296984691380_684381811_n.jpg[/IMG]

Re: The Obama Years- A GOP love story
 

Seriously, **** Obama. Hope he stumps his toe and hurts him the next 4 years. Fiscal cliff coming and this asshole is giving Congress and the feds a raise. A congress that has a 9% approval rating.


[IMG]http://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/548174_445325908854913_637918416_n.jpg[/IMG]

Re: The Obama Years- A GOP love story
 

[URL="http://www.disinfo.com/2013/01/king-i-have-a-dream-obama-i-have-a-drone/http://"][B]King:[/B] I Have a Dream. [B]Obama:[/B] I Have a Drone[/URL]

[I]A simple twist of fate has set President Obama’s second Inaugural Address for January 21, the same day as the Martin Luther King Jr. national holiday.

Obama made no mention of King during the Inauguration four years ago — but since then, in word and deed, the president has done much to distinguish himself from the man who said “I have a dream.”

After his speech at the March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom in August 1963, King went on to take great risks as a passionate advocate for peace.

After his Inaugural speech in January 2009, Obama has pursued policies that epitomize King’s grim warning in 1967: “When scientific power outruns moral power, we end up with guided missiles and misguided men.”

But Obama has not ignored King’s anti-war legacy. On the contrary, the president has gone out of his way to distort and belittle it.

In his eleventh month as president — while escalating the U.S. war effort in Afghanistan, a process that tripled the American troop levels there — Obama traveled to Oslo to accept the Nobel Peace Prize. In his speech, he cast aspersions on the peace advocacy of another Nobel Peace laureate: Martin Luther King Jr.

The president struck a respectful tone as he whetted the rhetorical knife before twisting. “I know there’s nothing weak — nothing passive — nothing naive — in the creed and lives of Gandhi and King,” he said, just before swiftly implying that those two advocates of nonviolent direct action were, in fact, passive and naive. “I face the world as it is, and cannot stand idle in the face of threats to the American people,” Obama added.

Moments later, he was straining to justify American warfare: past, present, future. “To say that force may sometimes be necessary is not a call to cynicism — it is a recognition of history; the imperfections of man and the limits of reason,” Obama said. “I raise this point, I begin with this point because in many countries there is a deep ambivalence about military action today, no matter what the cause. And at times, this is joined by a reflexive suspicion of America, the world’s sole military superpower.”

Then came the jingo pitch: “Whatever mistakes we have made, the plain fact is this: The United States of America has helped underwrite global security for more than six decades with the blood of our citizens and the strength of our arms.”

Crowing about the moral virtues of making war while accepting a peace prize might seem a bit odd, but Obama’s rhetoric was in sync with a key dictum from Orwell: “Who controls the past controls the future; who controls the present controls the past.”

Laboring to denigrate King’s anti-war past while boasting about Uncle Sam’s past (albeit acknowledging “mistakes,” a classic retrospective euphemism for carnage from the vantage point of perpetrators), Obama marshaled his oratory to foreshadow and justify the killing yet to come under his authority.

Two weeks before the start of Obama’s second term, the British daily The Guardian noted that “U.S. use of drones has soared during Obama’s time in office, with the White House authorizing attacks in at least four countries: Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia. It is estimated that the CIA and the U.S. military have undertaken more than 300 drone strikes and killed about 2,500 people.”

The newspaper reported that a former member of Obama’s “counter-terrorism group” during the 2008 campaign, Michael Boyle, says the White House is now understating the number of civilian deaths due to the drone strikes, with loosened standards for when and where to attack: “The consequences can be seen in the targeting of mosques or funeral processions that kill non-combatants and tear at the social fabric of the regions where they occur. No one really knows the number of deaths caused by drones in these distant, sometimes ungoverned, lands.”

Although Obama criticized the Bush-era “war on terror” several years ago, Boyle points out, President Obama “has been just as ruthless and indifferent to the rule of law as his predecessor.”

Boyle’s assessment — consistent with the conclusions of many other policy analysts — found the Obama administration’s use of drones is “encouraging a new arms race that will empower current and future rivals and lay the foundations for an international system that is increasingly violent.”

In recent weeks, more than 50,000 Americans have signed a petition to Ban Weaponized Drones from the World. The petition says that “weaponized drones are no more acceptable than land mines, cluster bombs or chemical weapons.” It calls for President Obama “to abandon the use of weaponized drones, and to abandon his ‘kill list’ program regardless of the technology employed.”

Count on lofty rhetoric from the Inaugural podium. The spirit of Dr. King will be elsewhere.
[/I]

Re: The Obama Years- A GOP love story
 

[url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/sen-paul-to-sec-clinton-i-would-have-relieved-you-of-your-post/2013/01/23/e691e5bc-6578-11e2-b84d-21c7b65985ee_video.html]Sen. Paul to Sec. Clinton: I would have relieved you of your post - The Washington Post[/url]


Senator Paul (the other one) drills Clinton pretty good about Benghazi. I agree with him totally. I like how she played coy about the gun shipping question.

Re: The Obama Years- A GOP love story
 

[IMG]http://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash4/391214_213745252084034_64904759_n.jpg[/IMG]

Re: The Obama Years- A GOP love story
 

[quote=NC_Skins;991004][URL="http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/sen-paul-to-sec-clinton-i-would-have-relieved-you-of-your-post/2013/01/23/e691e5bc-6578-11e2-b84d-21c7b65985ee_video.html"]Sen. Paul to Sec. Clinton: I would have relieved you of your post - The Washington Post[/URL]


Senator Paul (the other one) drills Clinton pretty good about Benghazi. I agree with him totally. I like how she played coy about the gun shipping question.[/quote]

BS, Hilary did one hell of a job!



[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aQebj7lXdIg]"Hillary Kicked Republican Buttocks Today" - YouTube[/ame]

Re: The Obama Years- A GOP love story
 

[url=http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/28/roxanne-rubin_n_2566297.html]Roxanne Rubin, Nevada Republican, Accepts Plea Deal After Committing Voter Fraud[/url]

Her voting rights should be stripped from her as well.

Re: The Obama Years- A GOP love story
 

Wanted to share this rant by Dr. Cornell West. Very powerful and amazingly accurate.

[YT]96d_CzrfxsM[/YT]

Re: The Obama Years- A GOP love story
 

[quote=Giantone;991226]BS, Hilary did one hell of a job!



[url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aQebj7lXdIg]"Hillary Kicked Republican Buttocks Today" - YouTube[/url][/quote]LOL. After such biased commentary I never want to hear than ANY other news outlet is so biased ever again... in the first clip Hillary says in the same breath that it's not her fault not calling it a terrorist attack because it doesn't matter why the terrorist action happened, but it is vital that we get down to the bottom of why it happened so it never happens again.

Great job! :doh:

Re: The Obama Years- A GOP love story
 

[quote=Giantone;991226]BS, Hilary did one hell of a job![/quote]


Is that why cable requests for additional security were ignored? I wouldn't call that "one hell of a job!" If anything, I'd call it a failure to do her job. My post with the Rand Paul article wasn't about how she fared versus the opposite party. I could care less how she "fared" in the political arena, and she is right that a good amount of the questions are politically motivated. I mean, who really gives a **** if the American people were told it was a spontaneous attack or a terrorist act at first? An attack is an attack. The primary issue here is that requests for additional security were ignored, in a place that was a hotbed for potential terrorist activity.

Going to LOL at the MSNBC link. You can do better bro.

Re: The Obama Years- A GOP love story
 

[url=http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archives/2013/02/04/former-head-of-south-carolina-gop-does-a-little-freelance-outreach-to-the-african-american-community]Former Head of South Carolina GOP Does a Little Freelance Outreach to the African American Community | Slog[/url]


So yeah.....there is this guy

Re: The Obama Years- A GOP love story
 

[quote=NC_Skins;993050][URL="http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archives/2013/02/04/former-head-of-south-carolina-gop-does-a-little-freelance-outreach-to-the-african-american-community"]Former Head of South Carolina GOP Does a Little Freelance Outreach to the African American Community | Slog[/URL]


So yeah.....there is this guy[/quote]

You need to stay away from these wacko sites you use. They met at the Kings Mill Resort which is in James City County also home of Bushgardens.

[url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingsmill]Kingsmill - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/url]

Re: The Obama Years- A GOP love story
 

ok FD, what about what he tweeted?

Re: The Obama Years- A GOP love story
 

[quote=dmek25;993095]ok FD, what about what he tweeted?[/quote]

Not very smart if you ask me. I know he is well known for making stupid tweets but that does not excuse the fact that the kid is dead and its just not funny.

Re: The Obama Years- A GOP love story
 

[quote=NC_Skins;980815][URL="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/28/obama-pay-raise-congress_n_2377714.html?utm_hp_ref=politics"]Obama Orders Pay Raise For Congress, Federal Workers, Joe Biden[/URL]



So pitiful you have to laugh at this stage. It would be nice if America got together and marched onto DC to cast out all these bums. Things like this is why I didn't vote for him.


I'm going to have to ask my dad to borrow his t-shirt he got for Christmas.

[IMG]http://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/533834_10151296984691380_684381811_n.jpg[/IMG][/quote]

I like the "no cash" comment, especially in the context of Reagan. What is with the bizarre amnesia this country has with the Reagan administration? Does anyone recall the massive amount of debt he put our country in? I'm just dumbfounded that conservative deficit hawks so often deify Reagan. I've got no problem with deficit hawks in theory (I'd like a balance budget as much as anyone) but ignoring the fact that Reagan is the grandfather of massive deficit spending in our country is a terrible example of revistionist history. He did do one really good thing though: he ended the Cold War. Or wait, was that because the USSR went bankrupt funding a war in Afghnistan? Wait a minute......

Re: The Obama Years- A GOP love story
 

laughing at coff...how dare you talk abou the GOPs greatest president that way. a lot of people do have a very selective memory, especially when talking about the gipper

Re: The Obama Years- A GOP love story
 

[quote=firstdown;993094]You need to stay away from these wacko sites you use. They met at the Kings Mill Resort which is in James City County also home of Bushgardens.

[url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingsmill]Kingsmill - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/url][/quote]

First off, I don't read that site and have no idea what kind of site it is. I merely posted it because it showed the idiotic tweets that Todd Kincannon posted. The story provided no commentary or slant, just showed us the tweets, which is why I posted. That and to show that the GOP thinking really hasn't changed and probably never will. As far as your other stuff, I have no idea why you are bringing up Kings Mill or anything else related.


Which leads me to this....

[url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2013/02/05/gops-makeover-is-purely-cosmetic/]GOP’s “makeover” is purely cosmetic[/url]