politics
- Thread starter cwgibson
- Start date
stdreb27
Active Member
Originally Posted by Phixer
Once again, not oil from Iraq. Having a presence in a region rich with with oil is a factor to consider. Have fun over there, that place is a sheet hole I never wish to return too.
I see your point, I do think that is a very viable reason. But You are the only one I've ever spoke with that looked at it that way. Everyone else had taken the pilliaging argument. There only to make haliburton money. We are in there to steal their oil ect.
But I guess unless Bush remembers his spine again all this was for not, now that nancy thinks that she is all that.
Once again, not oil from Iraq. Having a presence in a region rich with with oil is a factor to consider. Have fun over there, that place is a sheet hole I never wish to return too.
I see your point, I do think that is a very viable reason. But You are the only one I've ever spoke with that looked at it that way. Everyone else had taken the pilliaging argument. There only to make haliburton money. We are in there to steal their oil ect.
But I guess unless Bush remembers his spine again all this was for not, now that nancy thinks that she is all that.
mr. guitar
Member
Just a few seals and fish? You just don't get ecology and marine ecosystems. How many is a few? A couple, hundreds, thousands, millions? Those few that you say WILL turn into hundreds, then thousands, and then millions. Their duty is to reproduce and when someone kills them they can't reproduce and then what happens to the population? It goes down. Just like the Ridley Sea Turtles. That's what happened...People started killing a few and those few turned into millions. Shrimper's nets kill them and polution kill them to. Now there are less than 600 of them in the wild. Goes back to the seals and fish. Eventually they will die out.
stdreb27
Active Member
I'd rather kill a bird than a person. So call me harsh, evil mean. I'm not saying that we shouldn't take care of what we have around us. I am just saying that people take priority over birds. I think we should do what we can to protect our environment. But I also feel like most science is supporting that and th big mouthpieces of that movement. Are not intellectually honest. And are supporting a hypothsis with flawed bias science. So it makes me really leary of anything that comes from the treehuggers camp. like how all of alaska will be destroyed if we decided to drill in a wild life preserve. Which you seem to be arguing.
phixer
Active Member
Originally Posted by stdreb27
I see your point, I do think that is a very viable reason. But You are the only one I've ever spoke with that looked at it that way. Everyone else had taken the pilliaging argument. There only to make haliburton money. We are in there to steal their oil ect.
But I guess unless Bush remembers his spine again all this was for not, now that nancy thinks that she is all that.
I get that a lot.
I see your point, I do think that is a very viable reason. But You are the only one I've ever spoke with that looked at it that way. Everyone else had taken the pilliaging argument. There only to make haliburton money. We are in there to steal their oil ect.
But I guess unless Bush remembers his spine again all this was for not, now that nancy thinks that she is all that.
triga22
Active Member
I think bush is doing fine. Yes people screw up but thats nothing compared to the 5 trillion dollar debt mr clinton got us into. And the media dosent show you whats good. People want to hear bad stuff. Would you rather hear about someone planting a tree or a car bomb. I mean bush's patriot act has stopped hundreds of attacks. I belive that he has done some bad things but like i said no one is perfect.
lubeck
Active Member
What you rememeber me as:
Bill Clinton- Happieness;The economy was great and he got luckey in the oval office with an intern(what a convienent scandle to sway the publics knoledge/view of a soon to be stock market crash and terrorist attack.)
OR
creating a substantial debt in relation to war/non-war presidents.
a man that new what was coming with a economy that would reach an all time low (1999) and not dealing with the terrorist threat that was coming.
George W. bush- well.......................... he's a republican and is going to go down in the history books for the one of the least liked presidents from a democratic point of view. he had a big mess and is not well liked
or
didn't have a choice in the matter... bush had to clean up a someone elses mess. and will pay the price.
i truly don't believe presidents of the US have alot of power in makeing national / international decisions. they follow along with the plan that is already inplace by the government that we do not see/know.
if the rich didn't get richer(its life ya know) how are they giong to open/faciliate new businesses to create more jobs?
this is just my opinion.
Bill Clinton- Happieness;The economy was great and he got luckey in the oval office with an intern(what a convienent scandle to sway the publics knoledge/view of a soon to be stock market crash and terrorist attack.)
OR
creating a substantial debt in relation to war/non-war presidents.
a man that new what was coming with a economy that would reach an all time low (1999) and not dealing with the terrorist threat that was coming.
George W. bush- well.......................... he's a republican and is going to go down in the history books for the one of the least liked presidents from a democratic point of view. he had a big mess and is not well liked
or
didn't have a choice in the matter... bush had to clean up a someone elses mess. and will pay the price.
i truly don't believe presidents of the US have alot of power in makeing national / international decisions. they follow along with the plan that is already inplace by the government that we do not see/know.
if the rich didn't get richer(its life ya know) how are they giong to open/faciliate new businesses to create more jobs?
this is just my opinion.
oscardeuce
Active Member
It seems the USA is turning into the USSA.
We've gone from the Constitution stating "We the people" to "We the Government ( who know better than the people)".
We've gone from the small weak Federal Government with strong State Governments to weak Sate Gov't with a huge strong fed Gov't.
We have gone from "provide for the common defense and promote the general welfare" to "provide general welfare and promote the common defense"
Politicians forget they work for us. They think we serve them.
About 50% of the US population is on some form of gov't assistance, and we wonder why we are split down the middle, and there is a class war going on.
Get out your dusty copy of the Declaration of Independance, Constitution and Bill of rights. Read it now, the ACLU is out to have it erased, as there is "God" in it.
This is not a D or R thing, but a trend in the country that the Gov't gets bigger and the people demand $$$ from the gov't. We are getting very close to "from each according to his means... to each according to his needs". I do not recall those words in our founding documents. Remember the Gov't at no level has money, except that which they pry out of your pocket. Spend wisely.
We've gone from the Constitution stating "We the people" to "We the Government ( who know better than the people)".
We've gone from the small weak Federal Government with strong State Governments to weak Sate Gov't with a huge strong fed Gov't.
We have gone from "provide for the common defense and promote the general welfare" to "provide general welfare and promote the common defense"
Politicians forget they work for us. They think we serve them.
About 50% of the US population is on some form of gov't assistance, and we wonder why we are split down the middle, and there is a class war going on.
Get out your dusty copy of the Declaration of Independance, Constitution and Bill of rights. Read it now, the ACLU is out to have it erased, as there is "God" in it.
This is not a D or R thing, but a trend in the country that the Gov't gets bigger and the people demand $$$ from the gov't. We are getting very close to "from each according to his means... to each according to his needs". I do not recall those words in our founding documents. Remember the Gov't at no level has money, except that which they pry out of your pocket. Spend wisely.
dogstar
Active Member
Originally Posted by TriGa22
compared to the 5 trillion dollar debt mr clinton got us into.
I have always been amused by the different ways people explain reallity.....
But could you please explain that statement ?
I think you may have your Presidents confused.....
Dureing the Reagan/Bush1 years the Fed. Gov. operated with an average of a 250 billion deficit that grow the National dept from around 2 trillion to nearly 5 over those 12 years.
Dureing Clinton, it was able to turn that around and begin running a ''surplus'' of around 250 billion and also pay down some of the dept that in turn reduced the amount of intrest haveing to be payed. This is not much compared to the totals but it is was what it was, a surplus. When Clinton left office, the dept was around 5.5 trilion.
Now as I said, explaining those realities is intresting because the Administration and the Republican controlled Congress ''both'' claimed credit for that.....
Now the intresting part to me is that that same Congress seems to have lost their ability or desire to countiue that because now under Bush2, We are again, now up to around a 350 billion deficit and around an 8 trillion dept in just 6 years.....
Now I know that there can be many explinations depending on what ones bias are...but maybe you meant to say Clinton inherited a 5 trillion dollar dept and left office with it around the same amount after 8 years.... Im just not sure.
compared to the 5 trillion dollar debt mr clinton got us into.
I have always been amused by the different ways people explain reallity.....
But could you please explain that statement ?
I think you may have your Presidents confused.....
Dureing the Reagan/Bush1 years the Fed. Gov. operated with an average of a 250 billion deficit that grow the National dept from around 2 trillion to nearly 5 over those 12 years.
Dureing Clinton, it was able to turn that around and begin running a ''surplus'' of around 250 billion and also pay down some of the dept that in turn reduced the amount of intrest haveing to be payed. This is not much compared to the totals but it is was what it was, a surplus. When Clinton left office, the dept was around 5.5 trilion.
Now as I said, explaining those realities is intresting because the Administration and the Republican controlled Congress ''both'' claimed credit for that.....
Now the intresting part to me is that that same Congress seems to have lost their ability or desire to countiue that because now under Bush2, We are again, now up to around a 350 billion deficit and around an 8 trillion dept in just 6 years.....
Now I know that there can be many explinations depending on what ones bias are...but maybe you meant to say Clinton inherited a 5 trillion dollar dept and left office with it around the same amount after 8 years.... Im just not sure.
stdreb27
Active Member
HMMM the reason why the republicans lost last week. They forgot that they were republicans and began spending like they were liberals. And lets not forget with clinton raised taxes like there was no tomorrow. While bush cut them and had the highest actual Govt income on record. To bad he hung out to much with Ted and forgot why people elected him into office. We would be in some awesome shape economically even though we are doing pretty good.
Dang baseline accounting. Cuts my ---. He is danged if he didn't cut them danged if he did. Wish he had actually made budget cuts. Instead of the jokes that both sides pulled the last time around. I really liked what Delay said sarcastically. You know I don't see any fat in this budget. It is really efficiant.
Dang baseline accounting. Cuts my ---. He is danged if he didn't cut them danged if he did. Wish he had actually made budget cuts. Instead of the jokes that both sides pulled the last time around. I really liked what Delay said sarcastically. You know I don't see any fat in this budget. It is really efficiant.
tangman99
Active Member
I'm a Republican at heart and I'll be the first to point out that I think Bush has made some mistakes. Especially around the Iraq war. I still have no idea how we are going to get of there and I salute our military for what they must do. That being said, both sides are as bad as the other with their own agendas. No matter who is in control, corruption occurs and it always will. It's the result of this human need for power and greed and both parties have their own special interest groups pouring money into the system. It's just corruption for a different cause. That being said, I'll take the Republican side of it any day.
Now those of you that claim people that make money get all the tax breaks need to review the facts. I'm not in the top 1%, but I'm not hurting either. Let me peak into the future of how my tax return will play out for this year:
The child tax credit: I have a daughter so that will be a nice break. Oh heck. I don't get to take advantage of that. I made too much money.
Write off for child care: My daughter is in daycare so that will be a nice write off. Oh crap. I don't get to take advantage of that one either. I made too much money.
Well there is all that
[hr]
interest and other write offs that I get to deduct because I itemize my taxes. What do mean I have to reduce my total deductions by a certain percentage? Because I made over a certain amount I get penalized? Well, there goes another huge chuck of change out the window.
I guess Mr. Bush forgot to take care of me and make sure I was included in all these tax breaks. Now I take advantage of every possible tax break that is available and I have one of the best accountants around that does some pretty creative things all within the legal limits. So I'll be thinking about all these wonderful tax breaks I get while I look at my total taxes of $40,000+ dollars I'll be paying Uncle Sam this year.
My 2 cents (Hey, is that a tax deduction if I give it?)
Now those of you that claim people that make money get all the tax breaks need to review the facts. I'm not in the top 1%, but I'm not hurting either. Let me peak into the future of how my tax return will play out for this year:
The child tax credit: I have a daughter so that will be a nice break. Oh heck. I don't get to take advantage of that. I made too much money.
Write off for child care: My daughter is in daycare so that will be a nice write off. Oh crap. I don't get to take advantage of that one either. I made too much money.
Well there is all that
[hr]
interest and other write offs that I get to deduct because I itemize my taxes. What do mean I have to reduce my total deductions by a certain percentage? Because I made over a certain amount I get penalized? Well, there goes another huge chuck of change out the window.
I guess Mr. Bush forgot to take care of me and make sure I was included in all these tax breaks. Now I take advantage of every possible tax break that is available and I have one of the best accountants around that does some pretty creative things all within the legal limits. So I'll be thinking about all these wonderful tax breaks I get while I look at my total taxes of $40,000+ dollars I'll be paying Uncle Sam this year.
My 2 cents (Hey, is that a tax deduction if I give it?)
1journeyman
Active Member
Originally Posted by TangMan99
My 2 cents (Hey, is that a tax deduction if I give it?)
My 2 cents (Hey, is that a tax deduction if I give it?)